SEISMIC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF G+2 STOREY RC BUILDING

(EQUIVALNT LATERAL FORCES)

USING ETABS ULTIMATE V21.0.0

(NBC 105:2020)

A STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN REPORT FOR G+2 STOREY RESIDENTIAL

BUILDING OF Mr. Tirtha Bhandari
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 3

1.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 3

1.2. STRUCTURAL MODELLING ........................................................................................................................ 4

1.3. STRUCTURAL SYSTEM OF THE BUILDING .................................................................................................. 4

2.0. GENERAL DATA FOR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ....................................................... 5

2.1. GRADE OF CONCRETE ............................................................................................................................... 5

2.2. REINFORCEMENT STEEL ........................................................................................................................... 5

2.3. CLEAR COVER ........................................................................................................................................... 7

2.4. REFERENCE CODES ................................................................................................................................... 7

2.5. GENERAL BUILDING LAYOUT: ................................................................................................................... 9

2.6. LOAD CALCULATIONS ..............................................................................................................................10

2.6.1. Gravity Loads ..................................................................................................................................... 10
2.6.2. Live Loads ........................................................................................................................................... 10
2.6.3. Dead Load .......................................................................................................................................... 10
2.6.4. Seismic Load ...................................................................................................................................... 11
2.6.5. Wind Loads ......................................................................................................................................... 17

2.7. Soft Storey ..............................................................................................................................................17

2.8. LOAD COMBINATIONS ............................................................................................................................18

2.8.1. Static Load Combinations for Non-Parallel Systems ..................................................................... 18

3.0. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PROCEDURE ...................................................................... 19

4.0. MODELING IN ETABS V21.0.0 ...................................................................................... 20

4.1. 3D VIEW OF THE BUILDING .....................................................................................................................20

4.2. LOAD APPLICATION .................................................................................................................................22

4.2.1. Live Load and Floor Finish................................................................................................................ 22
4.2.2. Wall Load ............................................................................................................................................ 23

5.0. DESIGN OUTPUT AND STRUCTURAL CHECKS...................................................... 24

5.1. AUTO SESMIC LOAD ................................................................................................................................24

5.1.1. Ultimate Limit State & Serviceability Limit State ........................................................................... 24

5.1 AXIAL FORCE DIAGRAM ...............................................................................................................................25

5.2. SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAM .........................................................................................................................25

5.3. BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM ................................................................................................................26

1|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.4. MODEL MASS PARTICIPATION RATIO ......................................................................................................26

5.5. MAXIMUM STOREY DISPLACEMENT .......................................................................................................27

5.5.1. Ultimate Limit State ........................................................................................................................... 27
5.5.2. Serviceability Limit State .................................................................................................................. 28

5.6. MAXIMUM STOREY DRIFT .......................................................................................................................29

5.6.1. Ultimate Limit State ........................................................................................................................... 29
5.6.1. Serviceability Limit State .................................................................................................................. 30

5.7. TORSONAL IRREGULARITY CHECK ...........................................................................................................31

5.8. DEFORMED MODEL SHAPE OF THE BUILDING .........................................................................................31

5.9. BASE REACTION ......................................................................................................................................32

5.10. SECTION VERIFICATION ...........................................................................................................................32

5.11. BASE REACTION ......................................................................................................................................33

6.0. DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS ....................................................................... 34

6.1. DESIGN OF COLUMN ...............................................................................................................................34

6.1.1. ETABS Definition ................................................................................................................................ 34
6.1.2. Design Summary of Column ............................................................................................................ 35
6.1.3. Design of Link (By RCDC Connect Edition V4 + Manual Calculation) ........................................ 37
6.1.4. Longitudinal Rebar Percentage of Column .................................................................................... 38
6.1.5. Longitudinal Reinforcement by ETABS v21.0.0 ............................................................................. 38

6.2. DESIGN OF BEAM ....................................................................................................................................39

6.2.1. ETABS Definition ................................................................................................................................ 39
6.2.2. Design Summary of Beam (ETABS v21.0.0) .................................................................................. 39
6.2.3. BEAM DESIGN PARAMETERS (BY RCDC Connect Edition V11) .................................................. 41
6.2.4. Shear Design of Beam (ETABS v21.0.0 + RCDC Connect Edition V11) .................................... 41
6.2.5. Beam Schedule (ETABS v21.0.0 + RCDC Connect Edition V11) ................................................ 42
6.2.6. Anchorage of Longitudinal Bars of Beam (NBC 105:2020, ANNEX A, CL.4.4.2) ...................... 43
6.2.7. Beam Column Capacity (BCC) Ratio (NBC 105:2020, ANNEX A, CL.4.4.4) ............................... 43

6.3. DESIGN OF SLAB ......................................................................................................................................44

6.4. DESIGN OF FOOTING ...............................................................................................................................46

6.4.1. Soil Subgrade Modulus ..................................................................................................................... 47
6.4.2. Analysis Output .................................................................................................................................. 47

6.5. DESIGN OF STAIRCASE .............................................................................................................................52

ANNEX .................................................................................................................................................... 54

2|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

1.0. INTRODUCTION

1.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report has been prepared as a part of the structural engineering analysis and design of the
G+2 Story in Baglung District as a partial requirement of application for permit to construct
building. This Report describes in brief the Structural Aspects and Design Report of the proposed
building. The analysis and design have been carried out using finite element software ETABS
v21.0.0. This software provides the Structural Engineer with all the tools necessary to create,
modify, analyze, design, and optimize the structural elements in a building model. The structure
design is intended to be based primarily on the current National Building Code of Practice of India
taking account of relevant British Codes for the provisions not covered in this and is generally in
conformance with NBC of Nepal.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

 
 

1.2. STRUCTURAL MODELLING

ETABS Software, produced by CSI, has made structural analysis of this building California Berkeley
and the Foundation System has been made by the SAFE Software, produced by CSI California
Berkeley. 3-Dimensional models have been prepared for each part with the dimension shown in
the drawings. Concrete Grade M20 has been used for Column, Footing, Beam and Slab. Centre-
line dimensions are followed for analysis and design. Preliminary sizes of structural components
are assumed by experience. For analysis purpose, the beams are assumed to be rectangular so
as to distribute slightly larger moment in columns and also to consider the reversibility of seismic
load. Seismic loads will be considered acting in the horizontal direction (along either of the two
principal directions) and not along the vertical direction, since it is not considered to be significant.
The design seismic force has been applied and automatically distributed by the software at various
floor level Analysis of the structure were adhered to Indian Standard 456:2000. Specifically, Static
and Dynamic Linear Analysis Method (Response Spectrum) was performed to understand the
lateral load response of the building with use of ETABS v21.0.0. The design loads considered as
per the relevant codes of practice comprise dead load due to permanent structures, live load due
to occupancy of the structure and seismic load due to anticipated earthquake possible at the
proposed location. A number of load combinations are considered to obtain the maximum values
of design stresses.

1.3. STRUCTURAL SYSTEM OF THE BUILDING

The structural system chosen is Building with SMRFs. Columns and beams have been laid out
in plan in coordination with architectural and services planning that acts jointly support and
transmit to the ground those forces arising from earthquake motions, gravity and live load. Its
role becomes increasingly important with the increase in building height. Thus, the vital criteria
for structural systems are an adequate reserve of strength against failure, adequate lateral
stiffness, and an efficient performance during the service life of the building. The determination
of the structural forms of a building involves the selection and arrangement of the major structural
elements to resist most efficiently the various combinations of gravity and horizontal loadings.
The choice of structural form is strongly influenced by the internal planning, the material and
method of construction, the external architectural treatment, the location and routing of service
systems, the nature and magnitude of the horizontal loading, and the height and proportion of
the building.

4|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.0. GENERAL DATA FOR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Grade of Concrete and Cover to the Reinforcement is provided according to the provisions of the
Indian Code. The appropriate grade of concrete and nominal cover to reinforcement is governed by
the following main considerations:

i. Durability of Concrete include Fire Resistance rating

ii. Corrosion Protection of the Reinforcement
iii. Bar Size
iv. Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size

2.1. GRADE OF CONCRETE

The Indian Code IS: 456-2000, permits a minimum grade of concrete for reinforced concrete
members as M20 and the following concrete grades shall be used for “Normal” conditions:
Foundation: M20
Column: M20
Beam: M20
Secondary Beam: M20
Slab: M20
Plinth Beam/Tie Beam/Strap Beam: M20

Table 1: Concrete Material Properties

MATERIAL PROPERTIES DATA

Grade fck, [MPa] 20
Youngs Modulus E, [Mpa] = 5000*sqrt(fck) 22360.68
Co-efficient of Thermal Expansion 0.000055 per 0C
Basic Shrinkage Strain Refer IS 456:2000
Basic Creep Factor Refer IS 456:2000
Poisson's Ratio 0.2
Density 24 kN/m3 (Plain Concrete)
25 kN/m3 (Reinforced Concrete)

2.2. REINFORCEMENT STEEL

All reinforcing steel to be used in the structural elements shall have a yield stress of 500 MPa,
(Thermo-Mechanically Treated Bars), confirming to IS: 1786-1985.

Table 2: Reinforcement Properties

REINFORCEMENT PROPERTIES DATA

Yield Strength fy, [MPa]:
Longitudinal Bar (HYSD) 500 Mpa
Stirrups and Ties (HYSD) 500 MPa
Elastic Modulus, [MPa]:
Longitudinal Bar 200 Mpa
Stirrups and Ties 200 MPa

5|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 1: Hook’s Law

Figure 2: Beam and Column Sections

6|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.3. CLEAR COVER

Clear cover to the Main Reinforcement in the various structural elements shall be as follows:

a. Footings (Bottom): 50 mm
b. Footings (Top and Sides): 50 mm
c. Secondary Beam: 25 mm
d. Columns: 40 mm
e. Beams: 25 mm or bar diameter whichever is greater
f. Slabs: 20 mm or bar diameter whichever is greater

2.4. REFERENCE CODES

Many International Standard Codes of practices were adopted for the creation of mathematical
model, its analysis and design. As per the requirement, National Building Code was used for the
load combination in order to check for the worse case during analysis.
Some of the codes used are enlisted below:

A. LOADING
CODE DESCRIPTIONS
IS 875: 1987 Part I Dead Loads
IS 875: 1987 Part II Imposed Loads
IS 875: 1987 Part V Special Loads and Combinations

B. DESIGN OF EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE

CODE DESCRIPTIONS
NBC 105:2020 Nepal National Building Code – Seismic Design of Building in Nepal
IS 1893:2016 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures
Code of practice for Earthquake Resistant Design and Construction of
IS 4326:2013
Buildings

C. DESIGN OF CONCRETE ELEMENTS

CODE DESCRIPTIONS
IS 456:2000 Code of practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete (Reaffirmed in 2016)
Specification for High Strength deformed Steel Bars and Wires for Concrete
IS 1786:2008
Reinforcement
SP-16 Design aids for Reinforced Concrete
SP-34 Handbook on Concrete Reinforcement and Detailing

7|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

D. DESIGN OF FOUNDATION
CODE DESCRIPTIONS
Indian Standard Code of practice for Design and Construction of Foundations in
IS 1904
Soil - General requirements
Indian Standard Code of practice for Design and Construction of Raft Foundation
IS 2950
(Part - I)
Indian Standard Code of practice for Design and Construction of Pile
IS 2911
Foundations
IS 2974 Code of practice for Design and Construction of Machine Foundation

E. DETAILING OF STRUCTURE
CODE DESCRIPTIONS
Nepal National Building Code – Seismic Design of Building
NBC 105:2020
in Nepal
Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures subjected
IS 13920:2016
to Lateral Forces (Reaffirmed in 2017)

8|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.5. GENERAL BUILDING LAYOUT:

The proposed building consists of G + 2 Story. The Architectural Plan is as shown:

Figure 3: General Layout of the Proposed Building (Ground & First Floor Plan)

Figure 4: General Layout of the Proposed Building (Second & Roof Floor Plan)

9|Page
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.6. LOAD CALCULATIONS

2.6.1. Gravity Loads

Gravity loading is primarily due to the self-weight of the structure, superimposed dead load and
occupancy of the building. Following loads have been considered for the analysis and design of
the building based on the relevant Indian Standards.

2.6.2. Live Loads

The Live Load for building has been adopted as given IS 875 - Part II Section I Loads for
Residential buildings.
The following value has been adopted:

OCCUPANCY INTENSITY UNIT

Bed Room 2 kN/sq.m
Master Bed Room 2 kN/sq.m
Balcony 3 kN/sq.m
Toilet 2 kN/sq.m
Terrace/Roof 1.5 kN/sq.m
Corridors/ Passage 3 kN/sq.m
Staircase 3 kN/sq.m

2.6.3. Dead Load

The Dead Load for building has been adopted as given IS 875 - Part I and the following value
has been adopted:
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

 
  

 
  

 
  

 
  

10 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023


  

 

  

  
  
  

  
  

  

2.6.4. Seismic Load

2.6.4.1. Seismic Coefficient Method

The basic seismic input shall be determined from NBC 105:2020 based earthquake is used as
Design Basis Earthquake in code-based design.

Inertial loads due to earthquake will be applied at the mass centres of each level. These forces
would be either calculated manually or auto generated by using the Auto Seismic Loads function
of the software ETABS v21.0.0 and used for analysis. For all structures, the seismic base will be
considered at foundation level.

The Lateral loads for the all building would be resisted by special moment resisting frames.

Equivalent Seismic coefficient method shall be used depending on the building height and
geometric configuration as specified in clause 3.2.1 of NBC 105:2020. Appropriate actions
would be taken as recommended by NBC Code for Structural irregularities. Appropriate
percentage of imposed load will be considered in seismic weight calculations as per clause 5.2
of NBC 105:2020.

2.6.4.1.1. Seismic Zoning Factor (Z)

The country is subdivided into different seismic zones based on local seismic hazard. The seismic
hazard within zone is assumed to be constant. The value of Z can be obtained from the Table 4-
5 (NBC 105:2020) for selected Municipalities.

2.6.4.1.2. Importance classes and Importance Factor (I)

Structures are categorized into three classes depending on the consequences of their loss of
function. The importance classes are characterized by an importance factor I which is given in
Table 4-6 (NBC 105:2020)

2.6.4.1.3. The Ductility Factor

The ductility factor (Rμ) shall be chosen to be consistent with the structural system and the
structural member connection detailing. The value of Rμ for various type of structures are taken
from Table 5-2 (NBC 105:2020, Cl- 5.3.1).

11 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.6.4.1.4. Over Strength Factor

The over-strength factor Ω for Ultimate limit state is adopted from Table 5-2 for appropriate
structural system. Similarly, the Over –Strength Factor Ω for Serviceability Limit State is also taken
from Table 5-2, NBC 105:2020 (Cl-5.4.1, 5.4.2).
Table 3: Seismic Loading Parameter

PARAMETER VALUE
Zone Factor, Z 0.30 (Baglung)
Importance Factor 1
Soil Type B
Ductility Factor 4 (SMRF)
Over Strength Factor
Ultimate Limit State 1.5
Serviceability Limit State 1.25

2.6.4.1.5. Period of Vibration

As per NBC 105:2020, Clause 5.1 the periods of vibration, Ti, shall be established from properly
substantiated data, or computation, or both. The fundamental translation period shall be
determined using following methods:
• Rayleigh Method
• Empirical Equations
The fundamental translation period of a building shall be estimated using the appropriate empirical
equations listed in section 5.1.2. The approximate time period calculated in section 5.1.2 shall
be modified as per section 5.1.3. The time period so modified shall be compared with the
translation period computed from section 5.1.1 and the lesser value of the two shall be adopted
for determining the design action.
Rayleigh Method
The fundamental translation period in the direction under consideration, T1, shall be calculated
as:

Where, di = elastic horizontal displacement of centre of mass at level i

Fi = lateral force acting at level i
g = acceleration due to gravity
i = level under consideration
n = number of levels in the structure
Wi = seismic weight at level i

12 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Base Shear from ETABS (V)= 340.9905 kN

Exponent related to the Structural Period (k)= 0.98
Seismic Weight (W)= 2727.9237 kN
Shear Force
Level Wi (Kg) hi hi^(k) Wi*hi^(k) ULS (Fi) (kN)
(kN)
3F 44796.86 8.53 8.25 3620.77 95.86 95.86
2F 106663.34 5.69 5.53 5784.75 153.15 249.01
1F 126710.59 2.84 2.80 3474.17 91.98 340.99
Base 8449.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 340.99

TOTAL= 286620.38 Kg 12879.69

Rayleigh Method:
i) Along X- Direction (ULS-X):
dxi dxi ULS (Fi)
Level Wi (kN) dxi^2 Fi*dxi Wi*dxi^2
(mm) (m) (kN)
3F 439.01 18.727 0.02 0.00 95.86 1.80 0.15
2F 1045.30 13.061 0.01 0.00 153.15 2.00 0.18
1F 1241.76 5.45 0.01 0.00 91.98 0.50 0.04
Base 82.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL= 4.30 0.37

Hence, Tx = 0.588 (ULS-X)

ii) Along Y- Direction (ULS-Y):

Wi dyi ULS (Fi)
Level dyi (mm) dyi^2 Fi*dyi Wi*dyi^2
(kN) (m) (kN)
3F 439.01 22.319 0.02 0.00 95.86 2.14 0.22
2F 1045.30 15.553 0.02 0.00 153.15 2.38 0.25
1F 1241.76 6.686 0.01 0.00 91.98 0.61 0.06
Base 82.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TOTAL= 5.14 0.53

Hence, Ty = 0.642 (ULS-Y)

Empirical Equations:
The approximate fundamental period of vibration, T1, in seconds is determined from following
empirical equation:
T1 = kt H^0.75
Where, kt = 0.075 for Moment resisting concrete frame
= 0.085 for Moment resisting structural steel frame
= 0.075 for eccentrically braced structural steel frame
= 0.05 for all other structural systems
Where, H = Height of the building from foundation or from top of a rigid
basement.

Amplification of Approximate Period:

The approximate fundamental time period calculated using empirical equation in section 5.1.2 shall
be increased by a factor of 1.25.

13 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

The lateral seismic force (Fi) induced at each level ‘i’ shall be calculated as:
Fi = *V
∑
Where;
Wi = seismic weight of the structure assigned to level ‘i’;
hi= height (m) from the base to level ‘i’;
n= total number of floors/levels
V= horizontal seismic base shear calculated as per Clause 6.2 of NBC 105:2020
k= an exponent related to the structural period as follows:
 for structure having time period T≤0.5sec, k=1
 for structure having time period T≥2.5sec, k=2
 for structure having period between 0.5 sec and 2.5 sec, k shall be determined by
linear interpolation between 1 and 2.

2.6.4.2. Base Shear/ Base Shear Coefficient Calculation (NBC 105:2020)

2.6.4.2.1. Ultimate Limit State (ULS)

   

   

   
  
   
  
  
 
  
   

   

   
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
   
   
   
   
   
   

   
14 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 5: Static Loading Condition (Ultimate Limit state)

2.6.4.2.2. Serviceability Limit State

   

   

   
  
   
  
  
 
  
   

   

   
  
 
  
  
  
  
15 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

  
  
   
   
   
   
   
   

   

Figure 6: Static Loading Condition (Serviceability Limit state)

16 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.6.5. Wind Loads

Wind and seismic loads shall not be taken to act simultaneously. As seismic load is expected to
govern wind load has not been considered in design.
2.7. Soft Storey

A soft storey can be detected by comparing the stiffness of adjacent storeys. Soft storeys are
present in buildings with open fronts on the ground floor or tall storeys.

Figure 7: Open Ground Storey and Bare Frame

There is no Soft Storey in the proposed building since no Storey level has change in mass and
stiffness in considerate amount.

17 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

2.8. LOAD COMBINATIONS

When Seismic load effect is combined with other load effects, the following load combination are
adopted. (CL 3.6.1, NBC 105:2020)

2.8.1. Static Load Combinations for Non-Parallel Systems

The static load condition according to NBC 105:2020, CL 3.6.1 are given in the given below:
 1.2DL+1.5LL
 DL + λ.LL ± (EQx ± 0.3EQy)
 DL + λ.LL ± (0.3EQx ± EQy)

Where;

DL: Dead Load

LL: Live Load
EQX: Earthquake Load along x-axis
EQY: Earthquake Load along y-axis
λ= 0.6 for storage facilities
=0.3 for other facilities

Figure 8: Various Static Load Combinations

18 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

3.0. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PROCEDURE

Space Frame Analysis using ETABS v21.0.0 software has been undertaken to obtain refined
results for all load combinations in accordance with NBC 150:2020.

The RCC design shall be based on IS 456:2000 Code of practice for plain and reinforced
concrete, following Limit state philosophy. Structural design for typical members has been done
for the combination of loads that produces maximum stress in the structural elements, and in turn
requires maximum reinforcing steel provisions.

The analysis of Columns and Beams is done directly using ETABS v21.0.0 software and further
design and detailing by RCDC CONNECT Edition V11 Update 4 based on
IS456:2000+1392:2016. The Foundation is designed by Safe 2016. The design of Floor Slab
and Stair Slab are done by Worksheets in Excel. The size of columns and beams are provided as
per requirement.

GENERAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION OF THE BUILDING:

ELEMENTS DESCRIPTION CONC. GRADE REMARKS
Column 14’x14” M20 -
Main Beam (MB) 9”X14” M20 -
Sec. Beam (SB) 9”X12” M20 -
Fascia Beam 4’X14” M20 -
PLB 9”X12” M20 -
Floor Slab 5” Thk. M20 -
Staircase Waist Slab 6” Thk. M20 -

Isolated and Soil Bearing Capacity

Foundation M20 (SBC=150 kN/sq.m) &
Combined Footing
Settlement=25 mm

19 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

4.0. MODELING IN ETABS v21.0.0

4.1. 3D VIEW OF THE BUILDING

20 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 9: 3D Rendered View of the Building

21 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

4.2. LOAD APPLICATION

4.2.1. Live Load and Floor Finish

Figure 10: Live Load & Floor Finish Load in the Building

Figure 11: Assigning Shell Load in the Building (Live Load and Floor Finish)

22 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

4.2.2. Wall Load

Figure 12: Wall Load in the Building

23 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.0. DESIGN OUTPUT AND STRUCTURAL CHECKS

5.1. AUTO SESMIC LOAD

5.1.1. Ultimate Limit State & Serviceability Limit State

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern EQx &
EQy for both Ultimate & Serviceability Limit State using the user input coefficients, as calculated
by ETABS v21.0.0.

TABLE: Load Pattern Definitions - Auto Seismic - User Coefficient

Ecc Top Bottom
Name C K Weight Used Base Shear
Ratio Story Story
kN kN
EQx (SLS) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98
EQx (SLS)(1/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98 2727.923735 327.3508482
EQx (SLS)(2/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98 2727.923735 327.3508482
EQx (SLS)(3/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98 2727.923735 327.3508482
EQx (ULS) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98
EQx (ULS)(1/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98 2727.923735 340.9904669
EQx (ULS)(2/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98 2727.923735 340.9904669
EQx (ULS)(3/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98 2727.923735 340.9904669
EQy (SLS) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98
EQy (SLS)(1/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98 2727.923735 327.3508482
EQy (SLS)(2/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98 2727.923735 327.3508482
EQy (SLS)(3/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.12 0.98 2727.923735 327.3508482
EQy (ULS) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98
EQy (ULS)(1/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98 2727.923735 340.9904669
EQy (ULS)(2/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98 2727.923735 340.9904669
EQy (ULS)(3/3) 0.1 Story3 Base 0.125 0.98 2727.923735 340.9904669

24 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.1 AXIAL FORCE DIAGRAM

Figure 13: Axial Force Diagram

5.2. SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAM

Figure 14: Shear Force Diagram

25 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.3. BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM

Figure 15: Bending Moment Diagram

5.4. MODEL MASS PARTICIPATION RATIO

A sufficient number of modes shall be included in the analysis at least 90% of the total seismic
weight in the direction of lateral force.

Table 4: Model Mass Participation Ratio

TABLE: Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Case Mode Period UX UY SumUX SumUY RZ SumRZ
sec
Modal 1 0.492207 0.74978 0.05103 0.74978 0.05103 0.000726 0.000726
Modal 2 0.451008 0.041148 0.484847 0.790928 0.535878 0.272208 0.272934
Modal 3 0.437626 0.009759 0.255386 0.800688 0.791264 0.548766 0.8217
Modal 4 0.220942 0.036738 0.047169 0.837425 0.838433 0.019453 0.841153
Modal 5 0.211622 0.099342 0.034538 0.936767 0.872971 0.007896 0.849049
Modal 6 0.194391 0.002618 0.056318 0.939385 0.929288 0.07305 0.922098
Modal 7 0.122582 0.02609 0.0162 0.965475 0.945488 0.040211 0.962309
Modal 8 0.113796 0.019583 0.047429 0.985058 0.992917 0.000231 0.96254
Modal 9 0.111142 0.014942 0.007083 1 1 0.03746 1
Modal 10 0.000296 9.08E-15 1.73E-15 1 1 1.56E-15 1
Modal 11 0.000174 7.73E-17 1.25E-15 1 1 9.79E-16 1
Modal 12 1.78E-05 9.35E-27 1.04E-23 1 1 1.22E-23 1

90% mode participation in exactly 6 modes

Corresponding Time period (T) = 0.194 secs
Corresponding frequency (f) = 1/T = 5.15 Hz
As per NBC 105:2020 Clause 7.3, f<33 Hz, which is OK.

26 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.5. MAXIMUM STOREY DISPLACEMENT

5.5.1. Ultimate Limit State

Figure 16: Response Plot showing Maximum Storey Displacement due to EQx(ULS)

Figure 17: Response Plot showing Maximum Storey Displacement due to EQy(ULS)

Permissible Displacement = (0.025 /4) X 8.5344 X 1000 = 53.34 mm

Actual maximum Displacement = 17.41 mm
Permissible Displacement > Actual Displacement Hence Safe

27 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.5.2. Serviceability Limit State

Figure 18: Response Plot showing Maximum Storey Displacement due to EQx(SLS)

Figure 19: Response Plot showing Maximum Storey Displacement due to EQy(SLS)

Permissible Displacement = 0.006 X 8.5344 X 1000 = 51.20 mm

Actual Maximum Displacement = 16.72 mm
Permissible Displacement > Actual displacement Hence Safe.

28 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.6. MAXIMUM STOREY DRIFT

5.6.1. Ultimate Limit State

Figure 20: Response plot showing Maximum Storey Drift due to EQx(ULS)

Figure 21: Response plot showing Maximum Storey Drift due to EQy (ULS)

Maximum Story Drift Limit based on NBC 105: 2020 is 0.025/4=0.00625 (Clause 5.6.3)
for Ultimate Limit State whereas the maximum Story Drift of the Building is 0.0022.
Maximum Drift Ratio = 0.0022
Permissible Drift > Actual Drift Hence Safe

29 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.6.1. Serviceability Limit State

Figure 22: Response plot showing Maximum Storey Drift due to EQx (SLS)

Figure 23: Response plot showing Maximum Storey Drift due to EQy (SLSSS)

Maximum story drift limit based on NBC 105: 2020 is 0.006 (Clause 5.6.3) Serviceability
Limit State whereas the Maximum Story Drift of the Building is 0.0021.
Maximum drift ratio = 0.0021
Permissible drift > Actual drift Hence Safe

30 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.7. TORSONAL IRREGULARITY CHECK

Torsional Irregularity is considered to exist where the maximum horizontal displacement of

any floor in the direction of lateral force at one end of the Storey is more than 1.5 times its
Minimum horizontal displacement at the far end of the same story in that direction
(CL:5.5.2.1, NBC 105:2020).

Table 4: Torsional Irregularity Check

Storey Dmax Dmin Dmax Dmin Ratio Ratio Check

(EQx) (EQx) (EQy) (EQy) (EQx) (EQy) <1.5
1 5.44 4.93 4.17 3.68 1.10 1.13 Okay
2 12.45 10.90 8.99 8.36 1.14 1.08 Okay
3 17.42 17.17 13.13 12.54 1.01 1.05 Okay
Dmax/max<1.5 (NBC 105:2020) -Clause 5.5.2.1)

5.8. DEFORMED MODEL SHAPE OF THE BUILDING

Figure 24: Deformed Model Shape of the Building

31 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.9. BASE REACTION

Dynamic analysis is performed by the response spectrum method. The design base shear Vb’
estimated shall not be less than the design Base Shear, Vb calculated using a fundamental
time period. (NBC 105:2020, CL.7.5)

Table 7: Base Reaction

TABLE: Base Reactions

Step
Output Case Case Type Step Type Number FX FY FZ
kN kN kN
EQx (ULS) LinStatic Step By Step 1 -340.99 0.00 0.00
EQx (ULS) LinStatic Step By Step 2 -340.99 0.00 0.00
EQx (ULS) LinStatic Step By Step 3 -340.99 0.00 0.00
EQy (ULS) LinStatic Step By Step 1 0.00 -340.99 0.00
EQy (ULS) LinStatic Step By Step 2 0.00 -340.99 0.00
EQy (ULS) LinStatic Step By Step 3 0.00 -340.99 0.00
EQx (SLS) LinStatic Step By Step 1 -327.35 0.00 0.00
EQx (SLS) LinStatic Step By Step 2 -327.35 0.00 0.00
EQx (SLS) LinStatic Step By Step 3 -327.35 0.00 0.00
EQy (SLS) LinStatic Step By Step 1 0.00 -327.35 0.00
EQy (SLS) LinStatic Step By Step 2 0.00 -327.35 0.00
EQy (SLS) LinStatic Step By Step 3 0.00 -327.35 0.00

5.10. SECTION VERIFICATION

Figure 25: Section Verification

32 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

5.11. BASE REACTION

Figure 26: Support Reaction for DL+LL Combination

33 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.0. DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

6.1. DESIGN OF COLUMN

6.1.1. ETABS Definition

Column Section Dimensions: COL 14”X14”

Figure 27: Column Section in ETABS

34 | P a g e
 ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.1.2. Design Summary of Column

ETABS COLUMN GRID: D4

ETABS Concrete Frame Design

IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Column Section Design (Summary)

Column Element Details (Part 1 of 2)

Unique Station Length
Level Element Section ID Combo ID LLRF
Name Loc (mm)
COL:350X35 DL+L.LL-EQx (ULS)+0.3EQy
Story1 C10 40 0 2844.8 0.676
0 (ULS)

Column Element Details (Part 2 of 2)

Type
Ductile Frame

Section Properties
Cover (Torsion)
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm)
(mm)
350 350 56 30

Material Properties
Lt.Wt Factor
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
(Unitless)
22360.68 20 1 500 500

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3

Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Rebar % Capacity Ratio
kN kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m % Unitless
383.5066 13.1922 -46.1037 7.6701 7.6701 1.31 0.557

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors

35 | P a g e
 ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Initial Additional Minimum

K Factor Length
Moment Moment Moment
Unitless mm
kN-m kN-m kN-m
Major
0.668579 2494.8 -18.4415 0 7.6701
Bend(M3)
Minor
0.635951 2494.8 5.2911 0 7.6701
Bend(M2)

Shear Design for Vu2 , Vu3

Shear Vu Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s
kN kN kN kN mm²/m
Major, Vu2 28.6579 84.336 41.1595 24.9024 387.95
Minor, Vu3 20.1844 84.336 41.1595 20.1844 387.95

Joint Shear Check/Design

Joint Shear Shear Shear Shear Joint Shear
Force VTop Vu,Tot Vc Area Ratio
kN kN kN kN cm² Unitless
Major Shear, Vu2 N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N
Minor Shear, Vu3 N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N

(1.4) Beam/Column Capacity Ratio

Major Ratio Minor Ratio
N/N N/N

Additional Moment Reduction Factor k (IS 39.7.1.1)

Ag Asc Puz Pb Pu k
cm² cm² kN kN kN Unitless
1225 16.1 1705.8 447.9931 383.5066 1

Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1)

Ma
Consider Length Section KL/Depth KL/Depth KL/Depth
Moment (kN-
Ma Factor Depth (mm) Ratio Limit Exceeded
m)
Major Bending (M3 ) Yes 0.877 350 4.766 12 No 0
Minor Bending (M2 ) Yes 0.877 350 4.533 12 No 0

Notes:
N/A: Not Applicable

N/C: Not Calculated

N/N: Not Needed

36 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.1.3. Design of Link (By RCDC Connect Edition V4 + Manual Calculation)

 
   
 
   
   
   
   
   
   
  
 
   
   
   
 
   
 

Provided Spacing (Zone - Z2) = 150 mm

 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
 
   
 
   
   
  
 
   

 
   

 
   

37 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

   
  

   
   
  
 
   
   
   
 
   

6.1.4. Longitudinal Rebar Percentage of Column

COLUMN MARK C1
Lateral
Story2 to Story3 350 X 350
1.31%
Story1 to Story2 350 X 350
1.31%
Base to Story1 3550X 350
1.31%

6.1.5. Longitudinal Reinforcement by ETABS v21.0.0

Figure 28: Typical Longitudinal Reinforcement of Column

38 | P a g e
 ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.2. DESIGN OF BEAM

6.2.1. ETABS Definition

Main Beam Section Dimensions: MB 9”X14”

Figure 29: Beam size in ETABS

6.2.2. Design Summary of Beam (ETABS v21.0.0)

ETABS BEAM GRID: D4-E4

ETABS Concrete Frame Design

IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Beam Section Design (Summary)

Beam Element Details (Part 1 of 2)

Unique Section Station Length
Level Element Combo ID LLRF
Name ID Loc (mm)
MB:230X35 DL+L.LL-EQx (ULS)+0.3EQy
Story1 B7 54 175 3810 1
0 (ULS)

Beam Element Details (Part 2 of 2)

Type
Ductile Frame

Section Properties

39 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)

230 350 230 0 45 45

Material Properties
Lt.Wt Factor
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
(Unitless)
22360.68 20 1 500 500

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15

Factored Forces and Moments

Factored Factored Factored Factored
Mu3 Tu Vu2 Pu
kN-m kN-m kN kN
-33.7189 1.3294 58.8952 0

Design Moments, Mu3 & Mt

Factored Factored Positive Negative
Moment Mt Moment Moment
kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m
-33.7189 1.972 0 -35.6909

Design Moment and Flexural Reinforcement for Moment, Mu3 & Tu

Design Design -Moment +Moment Minimum Required
-Moment +Moment Rebar Rebar Rebar Rebar
kN-m kN-m mm² mm² mm² mm²
Top (+2
-35.6909 302 0 302 151
Axis)
Bottom (-2
0 151 0 0 151
Axis)

Shear Force and Reinforcement for Shear, Vu2 & Tu

Shear Ve Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s
kN kN kN kN mm²/m
58.8952 0 68.1431 22.8184 619.12

Torsion Force and Torsion Reinforcement for Torsion, Tu & VU2

Tu Vu Core b1 Core d1 Rebar Asvt /s
kN-m kN mm mm mm²/m
1.3294 58.8952 160 280 334.38

40 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.2.3. BEAM DESIGN PARAMETERS (BY RCDC Connect Edition V11)

i) BEAM DESIGN PARAMETERS (BY RCDC Connect Edition V11):

DESCRIPTION - CALCULATION UNIT
CODE REFERENCES:
IS 456:2000
IS 13920:2016
Group = G3 RCDC ID
Beam No. = B2 RCDC ID
Analysis Reference (Member) = B5 RCDC ID
Beam Length = 3810 mm
Breadth (B) = 230 mm
Depth (D) = 350 mm
Effective Depth (d) = 311 mm
Design Code = IS 456:2000+IS 13920:2016
Beam Type = Ductile Beam
Grade of Concrete (fck) = 20 N/sq.mm
Grade of Steel (Main) = 500 N/sq.mm
Grade of Steel (Shear) = 500 N/sq.mm
Clear Cover (Cmin) = 25 mm
Es = 200000 N/sq.mm

S.N. SYMBOLS DEFINITIONS

1 B Width of Beam in mm
2 D Depth of Beam in mm
3 Ec Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete
4 Es Modulus of Elasticity of Steel
5 Spc1 to Spc6 Max Stirrup Criteria in mm
6 X1 Smaller c/c dimension of outermost Stirrups
7 Y1 Larger c/c dimension of outermost Stirrups

6.2.4. Shear Design of Beam (ETABS v21.0.0 + RCDC Connect Edition V11)

MAXIMUM SPACING CRITERIA:

DESCRIPTION - CALCULATION UNIT
Basic:
Max Stirrup Criteria in mm (Spc)
Spc1= 0.75*d = 233.25 mm
Spc2 = 300 mm
For Torsion:
X1 = 215 mm
Y1 = 320 mm
Spc3= X1 = 215 mm
Spc4= (X1+Y1)/4 133.75 mm
SFR Design:
Beam Width (B) = 230 mm
Beam Depth (D) = 3350 mm
Maximum of B and D = 350 mm

41 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Maximum Web Depth Criteria (<=750)

Thus,
Side Face Reinforcement not required.

All the beams are designed in a similar way. The design results are summarized and tabulated
in the adjacent tables.
 Provide lateral ties 8φ (2L) @100 c/c at both edges and 8φ (2L) @ 150 c/c at mid-
span

6.2.5. Beam Schedule (ETABS v21.0.0 + RCDC Connect Edition V11)

BEAM SCHEDULE (M25:Fe500) (LEVEL: PLINTH LVL)

BEAM
TOP REBAR BOTTOM REBAR SHEAR STIRRUPS SFR
NUMBERS
LEFT MID RIGHT LEFT MID RIGHT LEFT MID RIGHT
c/c c/c c/c
2L-T8 2L-
2L-T8
3- 3- @ T8 @
PLB 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 @ 100 -
T12 T12 100 150
mm
mm mm
2L-T8 2L-
2L-T8
3- 3- @ T8 @
SB 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 @ 100 -
T12 T12 100 150
mm
mm mm

BEAM SCHEDULE (M25:Fe500) (LEVEL: STORY 1 TO STORY 2)

BEAM
TOP REBAR BOTTOM REBAR SHEAR STIRRUPS SFR
NUMBERS
LEFT MID RIGHT LEFT MID RIGHT LEFT MID RIGHT
c/c c/c c/c
2L-
2L-T8
T8 2L-T8
@
FB 2-T8 2-T8 2-T8 2-T8 2-T8 2-T8 @ @ 100 -
100
150 mm
mm
mm
2L-
2L-T8
T8 2L-T8
3- 3- @
SB 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 @ @ 100 -
T12 T12 100
150 mm
mm
mm
2L-
2L-T8
3- 3- T8 2L-T8
3- 3- @
MB T12+3- T12+3- 3-T12 3-T12 @ @ 100 -
T12 T12 100
T12 T12 150 mm
mm
mm

BEAM SCHEDULE (M20:Fe500) (LEVEL: STORY 3)

BEAM
TOP REBAR BOTTOM REBAR SHEAR STIRRUPS SFR
NUMBERS
LEFT MID RIGHT LEFT MID RIGHT LEFT MID RIGHT
c/c c/c c/c
2L-T8
3- 3- 2L-T8 2L-
SB 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 @ 100
T12 T12 @ T8 @
mm -

42 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

100 150
mm mm
2L-T8 2L-
2L-T8
3- 3- @ T8 @
MB 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 3-T12 @ 100
T12 T12 100 150
mm
mm mm -

6.2.6. Anchorage of Longitudinal Bars of Beam (NBC 105:2020, ANNEX A, CL.4.4.2)

DESCRIPTIONS - INPUT REMARKS

Anchorage of Longitudinal Bars of Beam:
Grade of Concrete, fck = 20 Mpa
Yield Strength of Rebar, fy = 500 Mpa
Dia. Of Largest Long. Bar in Beam, db = 12 mm
Dimension of Column, Dc = 350 mm
Concrete Cover = 40 mm

Horizontal Development Length, ldh:

ldh= (fy*db)/(4.85*sqrt.(fck))
Therefore,
ldh = 276.6269663 mm
But,
ldh not< (Dc-Concrete Cover)

(ldh+Concrete Cover) = 316.6269663 mm

Dc = 350 mm

6.2.7. Beam Column Capacity (BCC) Ratio (NBC 105:2020, ANNEX A, CL.4.4.4)

BEAM-COLUMN CAPACITY (BCC) RATIO - CALCULATION UNIT

1. Moment Calculation for Column:
Concrete Grade, Fck = 20 MPa
Steel Grade, Fy = 500 MPa
Width of Column, b = 350 mm
Depth of Column, D = 350 mm
Effective Cover, d' = 56
For Upper Column:
Pu = 218.56 kN
Therefore,
Percentage Reinforcement, pt = 1.31 %
Area of Steel Provided, Ast = 1609 sq.mm
d'/D = 0.16
pt/Fck = 0.07
Pu/(Fck.b.D) = 0.00
From Sp-16 Chart:
Mu/(Fck.b.b.D) = 0.1
Mu = 85.75 kN
For Lower Column:

43 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Pu = 383.5 kN
Therefore,
Percentage Reinforcement, pt = 1.31 %
Area of Steel Provided, Ast = 1609 sq.mm
d'/D = 0.16
pt/Fck = 0.07
Pu/(Fck.b.D) = 0.00
From Sp-16 Chart:
Mu/(Fck.b.b.D) = 0.1
Mu = 85.75 kN

Total Moment (Sum Mc) = 171.50 kN-m

2. Moment Calculation for Beam:

Concrete Grade, Fck = 20 Mpa
Steel Grade, Fy = 500 MPa
Width of Beam, bw = 230 mm
Overall Depth of Beawm, D = 350 mm
Effective Cover, d' = 39 mm
Effective Depth, d = 311 mm
Ast (Top) = 302 sq.mm
Ast (Bottom) = 151 sq.mm
Left Beam (Sagging Moment - Positive):
Depth of Neutral Axis, xu = 39.66 mm
Sagging Moment at Left, M(BL) = 19.33 kN-m
Right Beam (Hogging Moment - Negative):
Limiting Depth of Neutral Axis, Xu(max) = 143.06 mm
Moment due to Balanced Section, Mu1 = 59.17 kN-m
Area of Steel due to Balanced Section, Ast = 542.14 sq.mm
Area of Compression Steel, Asc = 0.00 sq.mm
Moment due to Asc, Mu2 = 0.00 kN-m
Hogging Moment at Right, M(BR) = 59.17 kN-m

Total Moment (Sum Mb) = 78.51 kN-m

3. Check for Strong Column-Weak Beam:

Total Moment (Sum Mc) = 171.50 kN-m

Total Moment (Sum Mb) = 78.51 kN-m

(Sum Mc/Sum Mb): = 2.18 Okay

BCC Ratio Check (Greater than 1.2) = Okay

6.3. DESIGN OF SLAB

44 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Slab Deflection Check from ETABS v21.0.0

According to IS 456:2000, Clause 23.2: Control of Deflection, the deflection including the
effects of temperature, creep and shrinkage occurring after erection of partitions and the
application of finishes should not normally exceed Span/350 or 20 mm whichever is less.

Clause 6.2.5: Creep of Concrete, Creep Coefficient lies within 3.

Creep Coefficient = 3

Figure 30: Third Floor Slab Deflection along z- Axis

Calculation Data:
Load Factor = 1.0*(DL+LL)
Column of Axial Shortening.
Shorter Span should be considered.
Check for Slab Thickness =125 MM

(Max. Deflection – Axial Shortening) * Creep Coefficient < Span/350 or 20 mm whichever is

less
or, (3.124 – 0.191) *3 < 3962.4/350 or 20 mm whichever is less
or, 8.799 < 11.32 or 20 mm whichever is less
or, 8.799 < 11.32 (Okay)
Therefore, Provide Slab Thickness = 125 mm.

SAMPLE OF SLAB DESIGN:

45 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Design Summary of Slab:

Hence,
Main Bar: Provide 8φ bars @ 125 mm c/c.
Distribution Bar: Provide 8φ bars @ 125 mm c/c.
Please Refer Structural Drawings for further details.

6.4. DESIGN OF FOOTING

46 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.4.1. Soil Subgrade Modulus

a) Concrete Grade = 20 MPa

b) Rebar Grade = 500 MPa
c) Footing thickness provided = 14” Thk.
d) Footing Settlement: Isolated and Combined Footing
e) Modulus of Subgrade Reaction:

Based on Bowles, “FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN” Chapter 10.5

Modulus of Subgrade Reaction = Allowable Bearing Capacity
*Factor of Safety/Deflection
= 150*3/ (25/1000) = 18000 KN/m3

6.4.2. Analysis Output

47 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

6.4.2.1. Soil Pressure Diagram for DL+LL Combination

Figure 31: Soil Pressure for DL+LL Combination

Maximum Soil Pressure obtained is 135.00 KN/m2 which is lower than Soil bearing capacity
(150 KN/m2). Hence, soil pressure is satisfied for DL+LL load combination.

6.4.2.2. Deflection Check

48 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 32: Deflection Diagram for DL+LL combination

Maximum Deflection obtained is 7.49 mm which is lower than Mat Foundation Deflection (25
mm). Hence, Deflection is satisfied for DL+LL load combination.

6.4.2.3. Punching Shear Check

49 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 33: Punching Shear Capacity Ratio

Maximum Punching Shear obtained is lower than 1. Hence, Punching Shear is satisfied.

6.4.2.4. Design of Footing Slab:

50 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 34: Reinforcement Intensity in X direction

(Top Bar: 1807.80 sq. mm & Bottom: 629.69 sq. mm)

Please refer structural Drawing for further details.

Figure 35: Reinforcement Intensity in Y direction

(Top Bar: 600.00 sq. mm & Bottom: 600.00 sq. mm)

Please refer structural Drawing for further details.

6.4.2.5. Reinforcement Provided in Mat Foundation (CF3= 14” Thk.)

51 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Figure 36: Reinforcement Provided in Footing

6.5. DESIGN OF STAIRCASE

52 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Staircase Design

Data
Effective Span (l) 3.81 m
Riser (R) 150 mm
Thread (T) 250 mm
Overall Depth (D) 150 mm
Effective Cover 30 mm
Thickness of slab (t) 120 mm

Grade of Concrete (fck) 20 MPa

Grade of Steel (fy) 500 MPa

Loading
Loads on going Loads on waist slab
Self weight of 3.00
Self weight of waist slab 4.37 KN/m landing slab KN/m
3.00
Self weight of steps 1.88 KN/m Live Load KN/m
1.50
Live Load 3.00 KN/m Floor Finish Load KN/m
7.50
Floor Finish Load 1.50 KN/m Total Load KN/m
11.25
Total Load 10.75 KN/m Factored Load KN/m
Factored Load 16.12 KN/m

Bending Moment
Calculate Bending Moment using the equation (W*L*L )/8

Bending Moment = 29
KN-m

Reaction
to be used as UDL = 31
KN

Singly/Doubly Reinforced Check

Mu,lim = 0.36 fck b xu,lim(d-0.42 xu,lim)
For Fe 500,
xu,lim = 0.46d

53 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

Hence, Mu.lim =
0.1336fck*b*d2 38 KN-m

Hence, the section can be designed as singly reinforced.

Area of Main Steel

Ast required 648 sqmm

Spacing
Diameter of bar in mm (ø) 12
Spacing required in mm 174 c/c
Spacing provided in mm 125 c/c
`
12 mm ø 125
Provded Main Steel: bars @ c/c

Area of Distribution Steel

Ast required 180 sqmm

Spacing
Diameter of bar in mm (ø) 10
Spacing in mm 436 c/c
Spacing provided in mm 150 c/c

Provided Distridution 10 mm ø 150

Steel: bars @ c/c

ANNEX

54 | P a g e
ETABS v21.0.0 September 1, 2023

ANNEX 1: Column P-M-M Interaction Ratios

Figure 37: Column P-M-M Interaction Ratios (Value should be less than 1)

55 | P a g e