A

TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES
938 Aurora Boulevard Cubao, Quezon City
A Project in Partial Fulfilment for the Requirements in
CE473
(REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN)
Entitled as
A DESIGN OF A FIVE STOREY REINFORCED CONCRETE

SEMINARY MAIN BUILDING
Submitted by
LAZO, EMMANUEL M.
Submitted to
Engr. Rhonnie C. Estores
October, 2015
1
APPROVAL SHEET
The design project entitled “A Design of a Reinforced Concrete Seminary Main Building” prepared by
Emmanuel M. Lazo of the Civil Engineering Department was examined and evaluated by designer himself,
and is hereby recommended for approval.
Engr. Rhonnie Estores

Adviser
2
Advantages of reinforced concrete can be summarized as follows (Hassoun, 1998).
1. It has a relatively high compressive strength.
2. It has better resistance to fire than steel or wood
3. It has a long service life with low maintenance cost.
4. In some types of structures, such as dams, piers, and footing, it is the most economical structural
material.
5. It can be cast to take any shape required, making it widely used in precast structural components.
Disadvantages of reinforced concrete can be summarized as follows:

1. It has a low tensile strength (zero strength after cracks develop).
2. It needs mixing, casting, and curing, all of which affect the final strength of concrete.
3. The cost of the forms used to cast concrete is relatively high. The cost of form material and artisanry may
equal the cost of concrete placed in the forms.
4. It has a lower compressive strength than steel (about 1/10, depending on material), which requires large
sections in columns of multi-storey buildings.
5. Cracks develop in concrete due to shrinkage and the application of live loads.
1.2 The Project
The project is a seminary constituted of five-storeys containing all the necessary rooms for the
residents of the building. It is intended to be built in Antipolo, Rizal. As a city with many public and private
schools, constructing a seminary is appropriate. This will be very important for the Antipoleneos since the
city contains the National Shrine of the Philippines and thus needs training areas for students who want to
become priests someday.
3
Figure 1. Perspective of the Proposed Seminary
The building is rectangular shaped and has a total area of 700 m 2 with dimensions of 50 m x 14 m.
The structure to be constructed will be the main building of a seminary. The first floor contains the refectory
(dining), chapel, lobby, infirmary (clinic), recreation area, kitchen and staff room. The second and third
floors contain class rooms, laboratories, library, and offices. The fourth and fifth floor contain the study area
4
and dormitories. It has a main stair, fire exit, ramps, and an elevator. The height of each floor is 3 m having
a total of 15 m. The covering of the building will be a roof deck.
1.3 Project Location
The project area is located in Antipolo, Rizal, which is included in the areas under seismic zone 4.
The figure below shows the distance of the planned structure from the nearest fault line which is the Makati
Valley Fault System.
Figure 2. Distance of the Nearest Fault Line to the Structure
5
Figure 3. Vicinity Map of the Seminary
Address: Lot 6 Blk.1, Sampaguita St. Bermuda Hts. Subd., Brgy. San Luis, Antipolo City
Nearest Fault Line Distance: 16.3 km
1.4 Project Objectives
The main objective of this project is to analyse and design a reinforced concrete structure in
accordance with the principles written in NSCP 2010. Other objectives of the project are as follows:
a. To design a seminary that will have an acceptable probability of performing satisfactorily during
its intended life time.
b. To provide all the necessary architectural plans, structural plans, and the estimate of the
building cost.
c. To plan the structure considering balanced constraints, trade-offs and standards on the design.
1.5 The Client
The client of this structure is a set of religious people lead by Mrs. Sharon Umayam. She is a
businesswoman and at the same time the president of the lectors in Our Lady of Peace and Good Voyage
Church (National Shrine of the Philippines).
1.6 Project Scope and Limitation
The following were the scope covered by the design project:
6
1.) The project was designed in accordance to the National Building Code of The Philippines and the
National Structural Code of the Philippines.
2.) Analysis of the loads and moments was done using STAAD Pro.
3.) All architectural plans such as floor plan and perspective of the apartment were provided.
The following were the limitations of the design project:
1.) Only beams, slabs, and columns were considered in the design.
2.) The cost estimates for the mechanical, plumbing and architectural plan were not included.
3.) The plumbing and electrical plans are not included in this design.
4.) The interior design of the structure was not considered.
1.7 Project Development
PLANNING/CONCEPTUALIZATION
IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS

AND PARAMETERS
PRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND

STRUCTURAL PLANS WITH INITIAL ESTIMATE
IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN CONSTRAINTS,

TRADE-OFF
LOAD IDENTIFICATION, STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS,

AND FINAL DESIGN
Figure 4. Project Development Process

7
The project development process started with the planning/conceptualization. In this stage, the
identification of client was the most important so as to know the structure to be build. In this case, the
structure requested by the client was a seminary. It also included the identification of the location where the
structure was intended to be built.
The next stage was the identification of design standards. Knowing the structure to be constructed,
the next part was to know the specific design standards that are required before coming up to the design
(i.e., minimum dimension of a classroom, minimum size of an elevator shaft, etc.). These will set the
parameters in the creation of the architectural and floor plans which is the next stage in the process.
In the third stage, the plans will be presented to the client so that alterations could be made. After
all has been settled, constraints can now be identified, which is the next stage. In this, the constraints that
were projected will then be classified as either qualitative or quantitative. Knowing the quantitative trade-
offs will pave the way to the determination of the trade-offs for the structure.
In the last stage, geometric design, computation, and final estimation for each trade-offs will be
made. Then, all of these will be presented to the client. The client will then rate each trade-off. The one
which has the most favorable rating among all will then be chosen for the design of the structure.
8
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS
2.1 Description of the Structure

As what was said, the structure will be a seminary. The structure contains five floors with each floor
having different function from the other. The structure has two access stairs, set of ramps, and an elevator.
The structure contains five floors with each floor having different functions. The structure has special
moment reinforced concrete frames both in longitudinal and transverse axes. The figure below shows the
model of the structure.
Figure 5. Structural Model of the Structure
9
This model shows the structural members of the structure. The blue members are the beams and
columns while the violet members are the slabs that form the building. The table below shows the total floor
area and the different areas of the rooms contained in each floor.
Table 1. Total Floor Areas and Functions per Floor
FUNCTION AREA (m2)

1ST Floor
Ramps and Elevator 49
Stairs 25
C.R. 22.5
Chapel 168
Refectory 168
Staff Room 63
Clinic 49
Lobby 70
Kitchen 63
Hallway 22.5
TOTAL 700
2nd Floor
Stairs 25
C.R. 22.5
Offices 3(45)
Class Rooms & Laboratories 4(63)
Other Rooms 32.5
Lounge 35
10
Hallway 79
TOTAL 700
3rd Floor
Stairs 25
C.R. 22.5
Offices 45
Class Room 2(63)
Other Rooms 133
Faculty Room 65
Library 94.5
Hallway 73.5
Sisters’ Room 66.5
TOTAL 700
4th Floor
Stairs 12.5
C.R. 22.5
Study Area 178.5
Dormitory 255.5
Vice Rector’s and Prefect’s Room 66.5
Toilet & Bath 59.5
Laundry 28
Hallway 28
TOTAL 700
5th Floor
Stairs 25
Hallway 28
11
Dormitory (1) 201
Dormitory (2) 196
Toilet & Bath 2(59.5)
Laundry 28
Rector’s Room 66.5
TOTAL 700
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 3500
2.2 Classification of the Structure
Using the National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2010, the designer was able to
classify the structure. With respect to the occupancy category, the building is classified as an Essential
Facility. With respect to the structural members, the building will have special moment resisting frames.
These data will help in designing the structure especially in the determination of the seismic forces acting
on the structure.
2.3 Architectural Plans
Height is 3 m per floor, for a total of 15 m.
12
13
14
Figure 6. Floor Plans of the Building
15
16
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS
3.1 Design Constraints
Constraint based design takes the parameters associated with a design problem and links them to
the attributes of the formal components and relationships of a solution. The forms that compose a building
are defined by a set of attributes. Constraints have to be managed effectively throughout the decision
making process, and also could be reduced or eliminated.
In this project, the design constraints were divided into two types, namely, quantitative and
qualitative. Quantitative constraints are those constraints that can be measured using engineering methods
(estimation). The qualitative constraints are those which cannot be measured but are ranked through the
designer’s perception and experience. The following are the constraints that are considered in the design of
the structure.
3.1.1 Quantitative Constraints
1. Economic. Cost is always an integral part of marketing and livelihood even in ancient times.
Thus, this constraint is considered in this design. The cost of the structure is highly significant
both to the designer and the client.
2. Constructability. This constraint refers to the ratio of the number of workers that will be hired for
the construction, to period of time for the structure to be built. One of these two will be
considered as a constant so as to measure an accurate difference between them.
3. Safety/Serviceability. Structures always meet some limitations but sometimes some part of it
could be accidentally damaged. The safety of a structure is the one which must have the most
outstanding consideration among all. Safety makes a structure function effectively overtime.
3.1.2 Qualitative Constraints
1. Aesthetics. The beauty of the structure lies upon its final output. This constraint depends on
the taste of a person therefore it is considered as a qualitative constraint. It depends on a
person’s perception which design is more presentable.
17
2. Sustainability. In civil engineering, sustainability refers to the conditions under which a building
is still considered useful. Should these limit states be exceeded, a structure that may still be
structurally sound would nevertheless be considered unfit.
In the process, only the quantitative constraints was focused by the designer. Tradeoffs were
enumerated next in this section which will then be ranked and assessed.
3.2 Tradeoffs
Design trade-off strategies are always present in the design process. Considering design
constraints, trade-offs that have a significant effect on the structural design of the structure were provided
by the designer. As a trade-off, the designer will have to evaluate which of the two is more effective
considering each constraint. The following are the tradeoffs that were chosen by the designer because they
are the most fitted to the said constraints.
3.2.1 One Way Slab
Figure 7. One Way Slab System
One-way slabs are those slabs with an aspect ratio in plan of 2:1 or greater, in which bending is
primarily about the long axis. In heavily loaded slabs, the thickness is often governed by shear or flexure,
while in lightly-loaded slabs, the thickness is generally chosen based on deflection limitations. Both lightly
and heavily loaded slabs are typically dimensioned so that no shear reinforcement is required, as placing
18
stirrups in slabs is perceived to be difficult and costly. One-way slabs are designed for flexure and shear on
a per meter width basis, assuming that they act as a series of independent strips. Thus one-way shear in
slabs is often referred to as beam shear, and design for flexure and shear is carried out using a beam
analogy
3.2.2 Two Way Slab
Figure 8. Two Way Slab System
When a rectangular slab is supported on all the sides and the length-to-breadth ratio is less than
two, it is considered to be a two-way slab. The slab spans in both the orthogonal directions. In general, a
slab which is not falling in the category of one-way slab is considered to be a two-way slab.
3.3 Significance of Chosen Tradeoffs to the Quantitative Design Constraints
In this section, the constraints enlisted in the beginning of the chapter will be related to the
tradeoffs chosen by the designer. The final decision of choosing the tradeoff that will be used for the
structure lies on the client. Thus, the significance of the tradeoffs to the constraints is needed.
Economic. For the cost effectiveness of the structure, the tradeoffs chosen will be designed to be
compared whether of the two will be more economical. Clients do not have the same state of living and
19
thus might give priority to this constraint. Some might choose the tradeoff that have lower price but might
not give way to the positivity of other tradeoffs.
Constructability. Time measures is significant in the construction of the structure. Knowing which of
the difference in the period of construction two tradeoffs might be significant for a client. Some clients need
shorter period of time and thus give priority to this constraint.
Safety/Serviceability. The magnitudes of deflection for concrete members are also important. Any
structure used by the people should be quite rigid and relatively-vibration free so as to provide security.
Designing these two tradeoffs will give different results. Thus, one tradeoff might be safer than the other. A
safer structure known to a client might be given priority.
Through the consideration of multiple constraints, the designer will have to choose what particular
design among the tradeoffs will be used. The tradeoff is very significant in the design for it will solve the
problem regarding the concern of client considering the constraints.
3.4 Method of Measurements for Quantitative Constraints
The main method of measurement that will be used in this design is estimation. For the economic
constraint, the cost of the whole building. This includes the materials that will be used for the construction of
the beams, slabs, and columns. It also includes the cost of the reinforcements that will be used for the
structure. For the constructability of the structure, the period of time that will be utilized to construct the
building will be estimated, together with the number of workers that will work on that period of time. The
number of workers will be constant for both tradeoffs. The difference between the days will give the result
for each tradeoff. For the last constraint, the deflection of the most critical beam will be computed for each
tradeoff and will then be compared.
20
3.5 Ranking Scale
The ranking scale that will be used in this design is based on the model on tradeoff strategies
formulated by Otto and Antonsson (1991). The importance factors in each constraint is scaled from 0 to 5,
while the ability to satisfy the constraint is scaled from -5 to 5, 5 being the highest for both. After obtaining
the results, the product of the importance and ability to satisfy the criteria will be summed of from each
constraint. The result will then be the overall ranking of the tradeoff.
Figure 9. Ranking Scale for Importance Factor
Figure 10. Ranking Scale for Satisfactory Factor
Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:
Higher value−Lower value

Difference(%)= × 100(%) Equation 1
Lower value
% difference
Subordinate rank =Governing rank −( ) Equation 2
10
The above equations will be used for the manipulation of the rankings of each constraint given to
the tradeoffs. The governing rank is the highest possible value set by the designer. The subordinate rank in
second equation is a variable that corresponds to its percentage difference from the governing rank along
the ranking scale.
21
3.6 Initial Estimate and Ranking Computation
To determine the difference between the two tradeoffs, certain methods were used by the
designer. For the economic constraint, a cost estimate was provided. For the constructability constraint, an
estimate of the number of working days was provided, given that there will be 50 workers. For the
safety/serviceability constraint, the deflection of the most critical beam was considered.
In this part, a rough computation of the estimates was utilized. The values written in the table below
were just assumed by the designer whose basis came from experience.
Table 2. Summary of Initial Estimate of Values
Estimated Value
Constraint
One-Way Slab Two-Way Slab
Economic Php 9,000,000 Php 8,000,000
Constructability 500 days 450 days
Safety/Serviceability 4 % of allowable 5 % of allowable
Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint

higher value−lower value
% difference= ×100
higher value
9000000−8000000
% difference= ×100
9000000
%difference=11.11
% difference
Subordinate rank =Governing rank −( )
10
Subordinate rank =5−1.11
Subordinaterank =3.89
22
Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint

% difference= ×10
higher value
500−400
% difference= × 100
500
%difference=20
% difference
Subordinaterank =Governing rank −
10
Subordinate rank =5−2
Subordinate rank =3
Computation of ranking for Safety/Serviceability Constraint

% difference= ×10
higher value
5−4
% difference= ×10
5
%difference=20
% difference
Subordinate rank =Governing rank −
10
Subordinate rank =5−2
Subordinate rank =3
3.7 Raw Designer’s Ranking and Assessment
23
After making an initial estimate of the structure considering the constraints, the design came up
with the raw rankings on the one-way slab and two-way slab. The values computed in the latter section is
tabulated.
Table 1. Raw Designer’s Ranking
ABILITY TO SATISFY THE CRITERION

CONSTRAINT
IMPORTANCE
(CRITERIA) One-Way Slab Two-Way Slab
1. Economic 5 4 5
2. Constructability 4 3 5
3. Maintenance 2 5 3
Over All Ranking 42 51
These tabulated values are just subjective, especially the importance factors. This values will still
go on with the validation after making a final estimate and final ranking. Knowing the significance of the
constraints to the tradeoffs, the ranks in its importance are given as 5, for economic, 4, for constructability,
and 2, for maintenance.
As for economic constraint, it turned out that the initial cost for the two-way slab is cheaper than the
one-way slab, considering only the volume of concrete that will be used. As for the constructability
constraint, it turned out that the labor constituting of 50 workers will have to work for longer time for the
construction of the one way slab. As for the safety/serviceability constraint, the deflection of the critical
member in the two-way slab is quite greater than that of the one-way slab.
Overall, it turned out that the two-way slab tradeoff outranked the one-way slab tradeoff for the raw
designer’s ranking.
24
3.8 Design Standards
To come up with the final design of the structure, the designer utilized the codes and standards
written in the following:
1. National Building Code of the Philippines
2. National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2010
The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096). The National Building Code of the
Philippines, also known as Presidential Decree No. 1096 was formulated and adopted as a uniform building
code to embody up-to-date and modern technical knowledge on building design, construction, use,
occupancy and maintenance. The Code provides for all buildings and structures, a framework of minimum
standards and requirements to regulate and control location, site, design, and quality of materials,
construction, use, occupancy, and maintenance.
The National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010. This code provides minimum standards to
safeguard life or limb, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction,
quality of materials pertaining to the structural aspects of all buildings and structures within its jurisdiction.
The provision of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration, moving, demolition, repair,
maintenance and use of any building or structure within its jurisdiction, except work located primarily in a
public way, public utility towers and poles, hydraulic flood control structures, and indigenous family
dwellings.
25
CHAPTER IV: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
4.1 Design Methodology

The design was done in accordance with the codes and standards appropriate for a reinforced
concrete structure. The figure below shows the step by step process of the design of the building.
STRUCTURAL PLANS FRAMING PLANS
NSCP
DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS NBCP
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
MATERIAL PROPERTIES MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
STRUTURAL MEMBER DIMENSIONS
STRUCTURAL MODEL GEOMETRIC MODELLING
DEAD AND LIVE LOAD

LOAD MODELS SEISMIC AND WIND LOAD
LOAD COMBINATIONS
SHEAR DIAGRAMS
MOMENT DIAGRAMS
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
REACTIONS AND DEFLECTIONS
DESIGN SCHEDULES
STRUCTURAL DESIGN DETAILING
Figure 11. Design Methodology
26
The first process in design methodology was the creation of structural plans. The structural plans
included the framing plans of the two trade-offs. The next step was to know the design specifications.
These specifications are the codes and standards needed for the structure’s classification and description.
The National Building Code and National Structural Code of the Philippines are the main books used for
design specifications.
The third step in the process was the identification of the material properties. The compressive
stresses and modulus of elasticity of the concrete and steel to be used were determined. Also, the
structural member dimensions (b, d, etc.) were assumed. The fourth step was the creation of the structural
model. These models included geometric modelling, which showed the positioning of the structural
members (beams, columns, slabs) in 3D form.
The fifth step was the presentation of load models. In this part, the loads acting on the structure
were computed. These loads were the dead load, live load, wind load, and seismic (earthquake) load,
applying also the load combinations. After computing for these loads, load models was presented also in
3D form. The sixth step was the structural analysis. In structural analysis, member (beams and columns)
forces and reactions were determined. The member forces included were the axial force, shear force, and
moment acting on the member.
The last part was the structural design. The structural design did not include the design of footings.
The values from the structural analysis was utilized to design the structural members of the structures,
mainly the beams and columns. The maximum moment acting on a beam was used to design the beam,
and the maximum value of the axial force acting on a column was used to design the column. To design the
slab, the total load on the floors was utilized.
4.1.1 Structural Plans
27
Figure 12. One Way Slab Framing Plan

28
4.1.2 Figure 18a. Axial Forces and Shear Forces
Maximum Value of Bending Moments (Z) in

Beams
+M = 198.802 kN-m
-M = 103.972 kN-m
Figure 18b. Moment along Z and Y axes.
Figure 14. Result of Structural Analysis for One-Way Slab
29
Maximum Value of Axial Force in Columns
F = 2424.714 kN
Figure 19a. Axial and Shear Forces
Maximum Value of Bending Moments (Z) in

Beams
+M = 310.203 kN-m
30
-M = 164.303 kN-m
Figure 19b. Moments along Z and Y axes
Figure 15. Result of Structural Analysis for Two-Way

Slab
4.1.7 Structural Design

In this section, the beams, columns, and slabs were designed. The main goal of the structural
design of the members is to know the number of bars and their spacing, and check if the assumed
dimensions are adequate for the structure
. For beams and columns, only the most critical parts were designed. For one-way slab, only one
slab was considered both in longitudinal and transverse directions was designed. For two-way slab, only
one strip was designed also considering both longitudinal and transverse directions. For convenience, a
sample procedure of computation for a structural member will be shown. The manual computations of the
members is shown in the appendices.
4.1.7.1 Design of Beams

Due to forces acting on the beam, the whole structure experiences flexure, and thus the whole
length of the beam have moments within them. Also due to these forces, the beam experiences a shearing
stress, which makes a part of the beam to be compressed (top), and another part to be tensed (bottom)
. To design the beams of the entire

structure, the beam which had the
highest moment was picked and the
resulting design for that beam will be
31
Figure 16. Stress-Strain Diagram for Singly Reinforced Beam
applied to all other beams in the structure. The dimensions of the beam (b,t) and the stresses (f’c,fy) were
provided by the designer.
The parts of the beam to be designer are the supports, which experience negative moment, and
the midspan, which experience positive moment. Moreover, the stress-strain diagram of the cross-sectional
of the beam was used for the design. The following flow charts present the step by step process of
designing a beam.
32
Given b, d, f’c, fy, and Mu
ρmin = Ru = ρb =
ρ= ρmax = 0.75ρb
ρ < ρmax NO
YES
DOUBLY
As = ρminbd YES ρ > ρmin REINFORCED
N=
NO
As = ρbd
N=
eams Figure 17. Design of Singly Reinforced Beam
33
= =
= =
As = As1 + As2
=
Y
=
N
N
34
Given Vu and Figure 18. Design of Doubly Reinforced Beam
other properties Vc =
N N
NO NEED FOR Vu < 0.5ΦVc Vu > ΦVc
STIRRUPS
Y
Vs = Vn - Vc Vn = Vu/Φ
N Y
REDESIGN Vs < S=
N
Smax = d/4 or 300 Vs <
(get smaller)
Use the smaller value Smax = d/2 or 600

between S and Smax (get smaller)
35
Figure 19. Design for Spacing of Stirrups for Beams

4.1.7.2 Design of Slabs
To design a slab, we always consider the longer and
shorter span of the slab since the bending is experience by the
whole. For One-way slabs, the process is quite the same in
designing a singly reinforced concrete beam. The only difference is
that we assume that we get a strip from the whole length of the
slab. The width of that strip is 1 meter with thickness provided by
the designer.
Following the procedure of solving for the reinforcement of

singly reinforced beams, the desired number of bars for one-way
slab was computed. For the spacing of bars, the width, b (1 m)
was divided by the diameter of the bar times the quantity of bars.
Since the two-way slab transmits the load to the supports Figure 20.Beindg of Slab
in trapezoidal form, the method used for one-way slab is not
applicable. For the two-way slab, the equivalent frame method was used. The two-way slab was designed
considering the positive and negative moments passed through the column strip and middle strip. The flow
chart below shows the procedure of equivalent frame method.
36
Figure 21. Two Way Slab Strips Considered in EFM
Given E and L1, L2, t as Given E and a, b, lcolumn as

dimensions of slab dimensions of column
PROCEED WITH THE MDM TO

OBTAIN THE MOMENTS
37
DESIGN THE SLAB AS SINGLY

MOMENTS OBTAINED
Figure 22. Two Way Slab Design (EFM)
4.1.7.3 Design of Columns

From the structural analysis, the column that experienced the greatest axial forces was designed.
The designer started the design of the column in determining the number of bars and its positioning within
the gross area of the column. Knowing the position of bars in the column, the designer then computed for
the axial force capacity column due to the eccentric load. The flow chart below shows the step by step
process done by the designer. The second flow chart is applicable only in this design (eccentricity on one
side only).
Assume a value of ρg between

Given P, My, f’c, fy, b, and t
0.02 – 0.04
As = ρgAg
N = As/Abar
Redesign
Determine actual As and ρg
P < Pcap Pcap = Φ(0.8)Ag(0.85f’c(1-ρg)+ρgfy)
38
Check If Compression or Tension Figure 23. Determining the Steel Area of a Column
Controls
39
Given e, As and other properties
fy = 600(d-c)/c , solve for c
Pb = 0.85f’cab
Pb(eb+x) = C1(d-.5a) + C2(d-d’), solve

for eb
Compression Controls e > eb Tension Controls
fs = 600(d-c)/c, in terms of c f’s = 600(c-d’)/c, in terms of c
Pcap + T = C11 + C22

Pcap(e+x) = C1(d-.5βc) + C2(d-d’)
Solve for c and Pcap, then check.
Figure 24. Column Check for Compression or Tension Controls
40
4.2 Raw Ranking Validation, Comparison of Results, and Final Ranking Assessments
In this section, the raw designer’s ranking was validated through the gathered results of the design.
The initial and final estimated values was then be compared. With the help of the final designer’s ranking,
the final ranking assessments was concluded.
4.2.1 Final Estimates of Tradeoffs

The table below shows the result of the estimation of construction cost, man days, and cost of
maintenance for each tradeoff.
Table 3. Final Estimate of Tradeoffs
TRADEOFFS
CONSTRAINT
One-Way Slab Two-Way Slab
Economic (Construction Cost) Php 10,778,163.00 Php 8,735,033.00
Constructability 435 days 375 days
Safety/Serviceability 1.6 % 5.7 %
4.2.2 Validation of Raw Designer’s Ranking
Table 4. Comparison of Initial and Final Estimate of Tradeoffs

Initial Estimate Final Estimate
CONSTRAINT
One Way Slab Two Way Slab One Way Slab Two Way Slab
Economic Php 9,000,000 Php 8,000,000 Php 10,778,163 Php 8,735,033
Constructability 500 days 450 days 435 days 375 days
Safety/Serviceabilit
4 % of allowable 5 % of allowable 1.6 % of allowable 5.7 % of allowable
y
Looking at the table, there are large discrepancies between the assumed values and the computed
values. However, the results of the final estimate of values has almost the same outcome with the initial
estimate. It turned out that the two way slab is better than the one way slab in terms of both economic and
constructability constraint, while one way slab is better than two way slab in terms of safety/serviceability
41
constraint. These results are the same as what was said in the raw ranking, which makes raw design to be
quite certain in this project.
4.2.3 Final Designer’s Ranking
Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint

10778163−8735033
% difference= ×100
10778163
%difference=18.9562

Subordinate rank =3.10438
Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint
435−375
% difference= × 100
435
%difference=13.79

Subordinate rank =3.621
Computation of ranking for Safety/Serviceability Constraint
5.7−1.6
% difference= ×10
5.7
%difference=71.93

Subordinate rank =−2.193
42
Table 5. Final Designer’s Ranking
CONSTRAINT Ability to Satisfy the Criterion

Importance
(Criteria) One-Way Slab Two-Way Slab
Economic 5 3.10438 5
Constructability 4 3.621 5
Safety/Serviceability 2 5 -2.193
Overall Rank 40.0059 40.614
4.2.4 Designer’s Final Ranking Assessment

In terms of economic constraints, the two-way slab got the rank of 5 considering both the concrete
works and rebar works. As for the constructability constraints, the number of man hours needed to
construct the structure in one-way slab is larger rather than the two-way slab, thus making the two-way slab
gets the rank of 5. For safety/serviceability constraint, the percentage of deflection from allowable in the
one way slab is smaller than the two way slab making this trade get a rank of 5 in this constraint.
After gathering all data and making the designer’s overall final ranking assessment. Overall, the
two tradeoffs almost had the same rank, but then the two-way slab outranked the one way slab tradeoff
with a nail biting difference. With these information, the designer concluded that the governing tradeoff is
still two-way slab in contrast with the raw designer’s ranking.
43
CHAPTER V: FINAL DESIGN
As what was proven from the previous chapters, the governing tradeoff was the two-way slab. After
going through all the design processes, the designer can now conclude the final design of the structure
which includes the design schedule of the structural members.
5.1 Design Schedules

The design schedule of the structural members included the investigated dimensions and designed
number of bars with spacing. The following tables below show the design schedule of the project.
5.1.1 Design Schedule of Slabs
Table 6. Slab Schedule
SLAB Spacing (mm) Φ tie

t (mm) Φ bar
(2F-Roof) Column Strip Middle Strip
LONGITUDINAL DIRECTION
S-1 150 12 300 300 10
S-2 150 12 300 300 10
TRANSVERSE DIRECTION
S-1 150 12 300 300 10
S-2 150 12 300 300 10
44
5.1.2 Design Schedule of Beams
Table 7. Beam Schedule
2F-Roof Dimensions Number of Bars

Beam b (mm) t (mm) Top (Left) Bottom (Mid) Top (Right)
B1 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B2 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B3 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B4 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B5 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B6 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B7 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B8 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B9 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B10 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B11 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B12 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B13 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B14 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B15 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B16 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B17 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B18 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B19 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B20 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B21 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B22 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B23 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B24 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B25 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B26 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B27 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B28 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B29 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B30 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B31 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B32 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B33 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B34 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B35 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B36 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
45
B37 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B38 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B39 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B40 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B41 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B42 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B43 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B44 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B45 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B46 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B47 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B48 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B49 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B50 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B51 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B52 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B53 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B54 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B55 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
B56 350 500 5 - 25Φ 4 - 25Φ 5 - 25Φ
46
5.1.3 Design Schedule of Columns
Table 8. Column Schedule
2F-Roof Dimensions Tie Wires

# of Bars
Column b (mm) t (mm) Φtie Spacing
C1 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C2 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C3 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C4 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C5 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C6 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C7 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C8 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C9 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C10 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C11 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C12 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C13 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C14 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C15 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C16 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C17 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C18 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C19 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C20 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C21 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C22 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C23 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C24 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C25 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C26 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C27 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C28 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C29 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C30 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C31 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C32 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
C33 550 550 8-32mmΦ 10 mm 480 mm
47
5.1.4 Beam Details
Figure 25. Beam Details
5.1.5 Column Details
48
Figure 27. Beam-Column Interaction Detail
49
50
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: CODES AND STANDARDS
National Building Code of the Philippines (NBC)

The following are the sections and codes that are followed in conceptualizing and designing the structural
plan of the apartment building:
 Section 401. Types of Construction
Type I. The structural elements may be any of the materials permitted by this Code.
 Section 701. Occupancy Classified.

Group B. Residentials, Hotels and Apartments
 Section 805. Ceiling Heights.

Habitable rooms provided with artificial ventilation have\ ceiling heights not less than 2.40 meters
measured from the floor to the ceiling; Provided that for buildings of more than one-storey, the
minimum ceiling height of the first storey shall be 2.70 meters and that for the second storey 2.40
meters and succeeding storeys shall have an unobstructed typical head-room clearance of not less
than 2.10 meters above the finished floor. Above stated rooms with a natural ventilation shall have
ceiling height not less than 2.70 meters.
 Section 806. Size and Dimensions of Rooms.

Minimum sizes of rooms and their least horizontal dimensions shall be as follows:
1. Rooms for Human Habitations. 6.00 square meters with at least dimensions of 2.00
2. Kitchens. 3.00 square meters with at least dimension of 1.50 meters;
3. Bath and toilet. 1.20 square meters with at least dimension of 0.90 meters.
 Section 808. Window Openings.

Every room intended for any use, not provided with artificial ventilation system as herein specified
in this Code, shall be provided with a window or windows with a total free area of openings equal to
at least ten percent of the floor area of room, and such window shall open directly to a court, yard,
public street or alley, or open water courses.
 Section 1207. Stairs, Exits and Occupant Loads.
General. The construction of stairs and exits shall conform to the occupant load requirements of
buildings, reviewing stands, bleachers and grandstands:
51
a. Determinations of Occupant Loads. The Occupant load permitted in any building or portion thereof
shall be determined by dividing the floor area assigned to that use by the unit area allowed per
occupant as determined by the Secretary.
b. Exit Requirements. Exit requirements of a building or portion thereof used for different purposes
shall be determined by the occupant load which gives the largest number of persons. No
obstruction shall be placed in the required width of an exit except projections permitted by this
Code.
National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2010

Notation
A g = gross area of section, mm2.
A s = area of nonprestressed tension reinforcement, mm 2.
A s ,min = minimum amount of flexural reinforcement, mm 2.
A st = total area of nonprestressed longitudinal reinforcement (bars and steel shapes), mm 2.
A v = area of shear reinforcement within a distance s, mm2.
A vf = area of shear-friction reinforcement, mm 2.
A ' s = area of compression reinforcement, mm 2.
b = width of compression face of member, mm.

b w = web width, mm.
c = distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, mm.

c c = clear cover from the nearest surface in tension to the surface of the flexural tension reinforcement,
mm.
C m = a factor relating actual moment diagram to an equivalent uniform moment diagram.
D = dead loads, or related internal moments and forces.

d = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
d ' = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of compression reinforcement, mm.
d b = nominal diameter of bar, wire, or prestressing strand, mm.
d c = thickness of concrete cover measure from extreme tension fiber to center of bar or wire located
closest thereto, mm.
52
d s = distance from extreme tension fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
d t = distance from extreme compression fiber to extreme tension steel, mm.
E = load effects of earthquake, or related internal moments and forces.

Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete, MPa.
E s = modulus of elasticity of reinforcement, MPa.
EI = flexural stiffness of compression member, N-mm 2.

F = loads due to weight and pressures of fluids with well defined densities and controllable maximum
heights, or related internal moments and forces.
f ' c = specified compressive strength of concrete, MPa.
f y = specified yield strength of nonprestressed reinforcement, MPa.
f yt = specified yield strength fy
H = loads due to weight and pressure of soil, water in soil, or other materials, or related internal moments
and forces.
h = overall thickness of member, mm.
I = moment of inertia of section beam about the centroidal axis, mm 4.
I cr = moment of inertia of cracked section transformed to concrete, mm 4.
I e = effective moment of inertia for computation of deflection, mm 4.
I g = moment of inertia of gross concrete section about centroidal axis, neglecting reinforcement, mm 4.
L = live loads, or related internal moments and forces.

Ld = development length, mm.
l n = length of clear span measured face-to-face of supports, mm.
M a = maximum moment in member at stage deflection is computed.
M cr = cracking moment.
Pb = nominal axial load strength at balanced strain conditions
Pn = nominal axial load strength at given eccentricity.
V c = nominal shear strength provided by concrete
W = wind load, or related integral moments and forces.

w c = unit weight of concrete, kN/m 3.
53
w u = factored load per unit length of beam or per unit area of slab.
α f = ratio of flexural stiffness of beam section to flexural stiffness of a width of slab bounded laterally by
center line of adjacent panle, if any on each side of beam.
α fm = average value of α f for all beams on edges of a panel.
β 1 = factor
ε t = net tensile strain in extreme tension steel at nominal strength.
λ = modification factor reflection the reduced mechanical properties of lightweight concrete.

λ Δ = multiplier for additional long-time deflection ρ = ration of nonprestressed tension reinforcement =
A s /bd
ρ ' = ratio of nonprestressed compression reinforcement = A ' s /bd

ρb = reinforcement ratio producing balanced strain conditions
Φ = strength-reduction factor.
The following are the sections and codes that are followed in conceptualizing and designing the structural
plan of the apartment building:
 Section 203 - Combination of Load
a.Minimum densities for design loads from materials
b.Minimum design loads
c. Minimum uniform and concentrated live loads
 Section 206 - Other Minimum Loads

a.206.3 Impact loads
b.206.3.1 Elevators
c. 206.3.2 Machinery
 Section 207 - Wind Load

a. 207.5.10 Velocity Pressure
b. 207.5.6.6 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient
c. 207.5.7.2 Topographic Factor
d. 207.5.4.4 Wind Directionality Factor
e. 207.5.6 Exposure
 Section 208 - Earthquake Loads

a. 208.5.1.1 Earthquake Loads
b. 208.5.2.1 Design Base Shear
54
c. 208.5.2.2 Structure Period
Wind Load
Section 207.5.4 Wind Directionality Factor
The wind directionality factor, K d, shall be determined form Table 207-2. This factor Shall only be applied
when used in conjunction with load combinations specified in Section 203.3 and 203.4.
 Section 207.5.5 Importance factor
An importance factor Iw, for the building or other structure shall be determined from Table 207-3
based on building and structure categories listed in Table 103-1.
 Section 207.5.6 Exposure
For each wind direction considered, the upwind exposure category shall be based on ground
surface roughness that is determined from natural topography, vegetation, and constructed
facilities.
 Section 207.5.7 Topographic factor
The wind speed up effect shall be included in the calculation of design wind loads by using the
factor kzt. If site conditions and locations of structures do not meet all the conditions specified in
Section 207.5.7.1 the kzt= 1.0
 Section 207.5.8 Gust Effect factor
The gust effect factor shall be calculated as permitted in Sections 207.5.8.1 to 207.5.8.5, using
appropriate values for natural frequency and damping ratio as permitted in Section 207.5.8.6.
 Section 207.5.9 Enclosure Classifications
For the purpose of determining internal pressure coefficients, all buildings shall be classified as
enclosed, partially enclosed, or open as defined in Section 207.2.
Section 207.5.10 Velocity Pressure
Velocity pressure, qz, evaluated at height z shall be calculated by the following equation qz=
47.3x10-6 kz kzt kd V2 Iw.
 Section 207.5.11 Pressure and Force Coefficients

Internal Pressure Coefficients, GCpi, shall be determined from fig. 207-5 based on building
enclosure classifications determined from Section 207.5.9
 Section 207.5.12 Rigid Building for all heights

Design wind pressures for the MWFRS of a buildings of all heights shall be determined by the
following equation;
P= qGCP – qi(GCPi)
 Section 207.5.13 Design Wind Loads on Open Buildings with Monoslope, Pitched, or Troughed
Roofs
Plus and minus signs signify pressure acting toward and away from the top surface of the roof,
respectively.
55
 Section 207.5.14 Design Wind Loads on Solid Freestanding Walls and Solid Signs
The design wind force for solid freestanding walls and solid signs shall be determined by the
following formula:
F= qhGCfAs
 Section 207.5.15 Design Wind Loads on other Structures
The design wind force for other structures shall be determined by the following equation:
F=qzGfCfAf
Earthquake Load
 Section 208.5.1 Earthquake Loads and Modeling Requirements

Structures shall be designed for ground motion producing structural response and seismic forces in
any horizontal direction. The following earthquake loads shall be used in the load combinations set
forth in Section 203:
E= ρEh + Eb
 Section 208.5.2 Static Force Procedure
Section 208.5.2.1
The total design base shear in a given direction shall be determined form the following equation:
V= CvI (W)
RT
The total design base shear need not exceed the following:
V= 2.5CaI (W)
R
The Base Shear shall not be less than the following:
V= .11CaIW
 Section 208.5.2.2
The value of T shall be determined using the following method:
Determine the structure period T using Method A
T = Ct (hn)3/4
The following are the tables used in each design computations:
56
Stone Concrete Fill 1.53 Kpa
Gypsum Board 0.2 Kpa
Suspended Steel Channel 0.1 Kpa
Mechanical Duct Allowance 0.2 Kpa
Terrazo 1.53 Kpa
Grout 0.11 Kpa
CHB 1.65 Kpa
Clay Dry 0.6435 Kpa
Water Proofing 0.05 Kpa
Cement Finish 1.53 pa
Table 204-1 Minimum Densities for Design Loads from Materials
Material Density (KN/m3)

Masonry, Concrete 16.5
Table 204-2 Minimum Design Dead Loads
Basic Floor Area 1.9 Kpa

Roof Live Load 1.9 Kpa
Table 205-1 Minimum Uniform Concentrated Live Loads
Occupancy Category Seismic Importance Factor I Seismic Importance Factor Ip

I. Essential facilities 1.5 1.5
II. Hazardous facilities 1.25 1.5
III. Special Occupancy Structures 1 1
IV. Standard Occupancy Strutures 1 1
V. Miscellaneous Structures 1 1
Table 208-1 Seismic Importance Factors
Soil Profile Soil Profile Name Ave. Properties for Top 30 m Soil Profile
57
Shear Wave Velocity SPT Undrained Shear Strenght
SA Hard Rock >1500
SB Rock 760 to 1500
Sc Very Dense Soil 360 to 760 >50 >100
SD Stiff Soil Profile 180 to 360 15 to 50 50 to 100
SE Soft Soil Profile <180 <15 <50
SF Soil Requiring Site-Specific Evaluation See Section 208.4.3.1
Table 208-2 Soil Profile Types
Zone 2 4
Z 0.2 0.4
Table 208-3 Seismic Zone Factor Z
Seismic Source Closest Distance to Known

Type Seismic Source
≤ 5 Km ≥10 Km
A 1.2 1
B 1 1
C 1 1
Table 208-4 Near-Source factor Na
Seismic Source Closest Distance to Known

Type Seismic Source
≤ 5 Km 10 Km ≥15 Km
A 1.6 1.2 1
B 1.2 1 1
C 1 1 1
Table 208-5 Near-Source factor Nv
Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type 2 4
Z=0.2 Z=0.4
58
SA 0.16 .32Na
SB 0.2 .40Na
Sc 0.24 .40Na
SD 0.28 .44Na
SE 0.34 .44Na
SF See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8
Table 208-7 Seismic Coefficient, Ca
Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type 2 4
Z=0.2 Z=0.4
SA 0.16 .32Na
SB 0.20 .40Na
Sc 0.32 .56Na
SD 0.40 .64Na
SE 0.64 .96Na
SF See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8
Table 208-8 Seismic Coefficient, Cv
System Limitation and

Basic Seismic Force Resisting System R Ω0 Building Limitation
Zone 2 Zone 4
C. Moment Resisting Frame
Special reinforced concrete moment 8.5 2.8 NL NL
frames
Table 208-11A Earthquake Force –Resisting Structural Systems of Concrete
Zone Classification Province

(Basic Wind Speed)
Zone 2 National Capital
V=200 kph Region
Table 207-1 Wind Zone for the Different Provinces of the Philippines
Directionality
Structural Type factor Kd
Buildings
59
°Main Wind Force Resisting 0.85
System
°Components and Cladding 0.85
Arched Roof
Chimneys, Tanks, and Similar Structures
°Square 0.9
°Hexagonal 0.95
°Round 0.95
Soild Signs 0.85
Open Signs and Lattice Framework 0.85
Trussed Towers
°Triangular. Square, rectangular 0.85
°All other cross sections 0.95
Table 207-2 Wind Directionality factor
Occupancy Description Iw
Category
I Essential 1.15
II Hazardous 1.15
III Special Occupancy 1.15
IV Standard Occupancy 1
V Miscellaneous 0.87
Table 207-3 Importance factor Iw
Exposure (Note 1)
B C D
Height above Ground Level (m) Case 1 Case 2 Cases 1& 2 Cases 1&2
0-4.5 0.7 0.57 0.85 1.03
6 0.7 0.62 0.9 1.08
7.5 0.7 0.66 0.94 1.12
9 0.7 0.7 0.98 1.16
12 0.76 0.76 1.04 1.22
15 0.81 0.81 1.09 1.27
18 0.85 0.85 1.13 1.31
Table 207-4 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficients
APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
ONE-WAY SLAB - 2ND FLOOR ONLY
60
LOAD COMBINATION 25
M (+) kN-m M (-) kN-m P (axial) kN
B1 126.053 54.173 C1 716.25
B2 106.538 88.807 C2 1167.911
B3 103.758 96.137 C3 901.271
B4 102.465 94.783 C4 659.296
B5 102.459 94.787 C5 648.353
B6 102.417 94.743 C6 650.131
B7 102.384 94.708 C7 650.673
B8 102.354 94.677 C8 650.261
B9 102.328 94.652 C9 648.889
B10 102.305 94.632 C10 646.456
B11 102.283 94.615 C11 642.771
B12 102.291 94.627 C12 637.496
B13 102.501 94.828 C13 640.321
B14 104.659 97.701 C14 782.079
B15 121.689 102.066 C15 655.887
B16 119.788 91.591 C16 909.786
B17 109.518 90.706 C17 1032.503
B18 115.358 102.728 C18 1337.143
B19 113.523 101.024 C19 1223.228
B20 113.553 101.068 C20 1093.274
B21 113.511 101.037 C21 1088.322
B22 113.477 101.011 C22 1088.522
B23 113.753 101.206 C23 1088.536
B24 113.442 100.986 C24 1088.541
B25 113.407 100.963 C25 1088.546
B26 113.371 100.941 C26 1088.552
B27 113.333 100.918 C27 1088.557
B28 113.327 100.924 C28 1088.597
B29 113.753 101.206 C29 1090.155
B30 114.447 103.972 C30 1088.052
B31 104.034 92.472 C31 961.669
B32 94.009 82.678 C32 554.61
B33 94.342 82.949 C33 667.379
B34 100.653 92.696 C34 667.365
B35 99.343 91.73 C35 628.637
B36 99.48 91.775 C36 591.907
B37 99.385 91.727 C37 591.279
B38 99.385 91.73 C38 591.598
B39 99.12 91.504 C39 591.766
B40 99.467 91.77 C40 591.862
61
B41 99.457 91.768 C41 591.893
B42 99.444 91.762 C42 591.861
B43 99.427 91.753 C43 591.804
B44 99.408 91.742 C44 591.766
B45 99.385 91.727 C45 591.635
B46 99.385 91.73 C46 591.793
B47 99.12 91.504 C47 580.226
B48 101.778 95.317 C48 571.052
B49 165.696 94.837
B50 117.879 95.317
B51 116.265 94.837
B52 181.239 95.714
B53 181.084 95.649
B54 181.455 96.15
B55 181.239 95.714
B56 181.641 96.44
B57 181.258 96.118
B58 180.169 95.048
B59 178.283 93.138
B60 175.536 90.324
B61 172.066 86.754
B62 168.38 82.962
B63 96.67 86.754
B64 91.01 82.962
B65 152.202 91.624
B66 195.951 98.32
B67 198.802 92.438
B68 192.389 91.563
B69 186.273 92.486
B70 185.902 92.302
B71 186.265 92.796
B72 186.447 93.079
B73 186.078 92.769
B74 185.027 91.736
B75 183.207 89.892
B76 180.553 87.173
B77 177.195 83.718
B78 173.766 80.155
B79 169.821 75.276
B80 129.274 72.978
MAX 198.802 103.972 1337.143
62
TWO-WAY SLAB 2ND FLOOR ONLY
LOAD COMBINATION 28
M (+) kN-m M (-) kN-m P (axial) kN
B1 172.977 99.608 C1 815.541
B2 171.697 92.002 C2 1327.418
B3 161.936 134.495 C3 1132.805
B4 153.256 130.775 C4 944.5
B5 153.58 130.907 C5 943.541
B6 153.537 130.88 C6 938.319
B7 153.506 130.854 C7 933.722
B8 154.481 130.834 C8 928.783
B9 153.211 130.584 C9 922.857
B10 158.193 135.814 C10 911.476
B11 241.324 107.117 C11 676.922
B12 244.246 98.952 C12 1316.598
B13 192.946 144.63 C13 2424.714
B14 180.034 140.603 C14 2024.74
B15 180.476 140.712 C15 1617.599
B16 180.391 140.653 C16 1628.637
B17 180.326 140.599 C17 1628.645
B18 180.272 140.552 C18 1628.478
B19 179.951 140.263 C19 1628.477
B20 184.834 145.842 C20 1628.981
B21 172.977 99.608 C21 1621.501
B22 171.697 92.002 C22 1051.221
B23 161.936 134.495 C23 730.998
B24 153.256 130.775 C24 1301.163
B25 153.58 130.907 C25 1087.248
B26 153.537 130.88 C26 869.727
B27 153.624 130.873 C27 876.181
B28 153.481 130.834 C28 876.068
B29 153.211 130.584 C29 876.076
B30 153.723 130.862 C30 876.076
B31 153.506 130.854 C31 876.353
B32 153.481 130.834 C32 873.233
B33 153.211 130.584 C33 676.922
B34 158.193 135.814
B35 214.464 154.359
B36 273.728 164.303
B37 261.998 159.855
63
B38 248.799 153.956
B39 243.8 148.97
B40 239.874 145.044
B41 236.372 141.541
B42 232.611 137.78
B43 227.863 133.034
B44 221.372 126.575
B45 171.673 118.885
B46 234.499 154.359
B47 310.203 164.303
B48 296.045 159.855
B49 280.414 153.956
B50 275.41 148.97
B51 271.484 145.044
B52 267.982 141.514
B53 264.221 137.78
B54 259.473 133.034
B55 252.971 126.575
B56 189.269 118.885
MAX 310.203 164.303 2424.714
64
APPENDIX C: DESIGN OF BEAMS
Beam with Maximum Moment was Designed (One-Way Tradeoff)

For Support
The following are the given data

Mu 164.303 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
21383.7
Vu 143.83 kN Ec 1 MPa
f'c 20.7 MPa n 10
fy 415 MPa L 7 m
b 350 mm
t 500 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 437.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

Part 1. Computation of Steel Area and Number of Bars
Step 1. Solve for ρmax and Mu(max) RESULTS
ρb = (0.75*0.85*f'c*β1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa β 0.85
0.01597
ρmax = ρ = 0.75ρb ρb 7
0.01198
ω = ρ*fy/f'c ρmax 3
Mu(max) = Φ*f'c*ω*b*(d^2)*(1-.59ω) ω 0.24024
Φ = 0.9 Φ 0.9
* If Mu < Mu(max), design is Singly Reinforced Mu(max) 257.336 kN-m
* If Mu > Mu(max), design is Doubly Reinforced SINGLY

Step 2. Using Singly Reinforcement. Solving As and N bars
1834.90
As1 = ρmax*b*d As 6 mm2
N = As/Abar, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4 N' 4 pcs
65
Part 2. Designing the Vertical Stirrup

Step 1. Calculate the Shear Strength by Concrete (Vc) RESULTS
Vc = sqrt(f'c)*b*d/6
* If Vu > ΦVc, stirrups needed, go to Step II Vc 116.1128 kN
* If Vu < ΦVc, but Vu > .5*ΦVc Stirrups needed ΦVc 104.5015 kN
* If Vu < .5*Φ*Vc, stirrups are not needed .5ΦVc 52.25075 kN
Stirrups Needed
Step 2. Calculate the Shear Strength by Stirrup (Vs)
Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 189.3352 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 73.22246 kN
* If Vs < 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, go to Step 3. parameter 466.7734
* If Vs > 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, redesign.

Step 3. Spacing of Stirrups
Si = Av*fy*d/Vs, Av = pi*(Φtie^2)/4 220 Av 78.53982 mm2
For Smax, 110 Si 200 mm
* If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get smaller) parameter 229.9033 mm
* If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get smaller) Smax1 220 mm
Smax2 600 mm
Epoxy Light Sf 200 mm
Zinc Normal

Uncoated
Part 3. Development Length

The following are the supplementary data.
Cc 40 Mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

Step 1. Determine the Value of the Coefficients (ψt,ψe,ψs,λ) RESULTS
ψt = 1.0 for all other situations
ψe = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or 6d ψt 1
= 1.2 for all other epoxy-coated bars ψe 1.2
66
= 1 for uncoated or zinc coated bars ψs 1
ψt = .8 for 20 mm bars and smaller λ 1
= 1 for 25 mm bars and larger
λ = 1 for normal weight concrete
157.079
Atr 6 mm2
Step 2. Compute for the development Ktr 7.853982
length
1299.611 mm
ld = (fy*ψt*ψe*ψs*d)/(1.1*λ*sqrt(f'c)*((cc+Ktr)/d)) ld
Ktr = 40*Atr/(S*N), Atr = 2*pi*(Φtie^2)/4

67
For Midspan

Mu 103.972 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
21383.7
Vu 89.11886 kN Ec 1 MPa
f'c 20.7 MPa n 10
fy 415 MPa L 7 m
b 350 mm
t 500 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 437.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

ρb = (0.75*0.85*f'c*β1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa β 0.85
0.01597
0.01198
Mu(max) = Φ*f'c*ω*b*(d^2)*(1-.59ω) ω 0.24024
Φ = 0.9 Φ 0.9

1834.90

Step 1. Calculate the Shear Strength by Concrete
(Vc) RESULTS
116.112
* If Vu > ΦVc, stirrups needed, go to Step II Vc 8 kN
104.501
* If Vu < ΦVc, but Vu > .5*ΦVc Stirrups needed ΦVc 5 kN
68
52.2507
* If Vu < .5*Φ*Vc, stirrups are not needed .5ΦVc 5 kN
Stirrups Needed
99.0209
Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 5 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 17.0918 kN
paramete 466.773
* If Vs < 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, go to Step 3. r 4

78.5398
Si = Av*fy*d/Vs, Av = pi*(Φtie^2)/4 220 Av 2 mm2
If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get paramete 229.903
* smaller) r 3 mm
If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get
* smaller) Smax1 220 mm
Smax2 600 mm
Zinc Normal
Uncoated

cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

157.079
Atr 6 mm2
Step 2. Compute for the development Ktr 7.13998
69
length 3
1319.29
ld = (fy*ψt*ψe*ψs*d)/(1.1*λ*sqrt(f'c)*((cc+Ktr)/d)) ld 5 mm

Part 4. Checking the Beam in Deflection

Step 1. Calculate the Gross Moment of Inertia and the Cracking Moment of the Beam
RESULTS
Ig = b(t^3)/12
Mcr = Ig*fr/ϒt, fr = 0.62*λ*sqrt(f'c), yt = t/2 Ig 3645833333 mm4
2.82082966
fr 5 MPa
yt 250 mm
41.1370992
Mcr 8 kN-m
Step 2. Calcualte the Moment of Inertia of
the
Cracked Section
91438412.2
Icr = b*(c^3)/12 + nAs(d-c)+nAs'(c-d') Icr 9 mm4

Step 3. Calculate the Effective Moment of Inertia
Ie = ((Mcr/Mu)^3)*Ig + ((1-(Mcr/Mu)^3)*Icr) Ie 311587799 mm4

Step 4. Determine and Check the
Deflection
16.9750204
Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____ W 1 kN/m
δ = 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie) δ 0.30585036 mm
19.4444444
δmax = L/360 δmax 4 mm
OK

70
Beam with Maximum Moment was Designed (Two-Way Tradeoff)
For Support

Mu 310.203 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
21383.7
f'c 20.7 MPa N 10
fy 415 MPa L 7 M
b 350 mm
t 500 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 437.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

ρb = (0.75*0.85*f'c*β1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa β 0.85
0.01597
0.01198
Mu(max) = Φ*f'c*ω*b*(d^2)*(1-.59ω) ω 0.24024
Φ = 0.9 Φ 0.9
* If Mu > Mu(max), design is Doubly Reinforced DOUBLY

Step 2. Using Doubly Reinforcement. Solving As1, Mu1, Mu2, and
As2
1834.90
As1 = ρmax*b*d As1 6 mm2
Mu1 = Mu(max) Mu1 257.336 kN-m
52.8669
Mu2 = Mu - Mu1 Mu2 6 kN-m
377.452
Mu2 = Φ*As2*fy*(d-d'), Solve for As2 As2 6 mm2
Step 3. Solve for the Stress of the Compression Steel
C=T
71
0.85*f'c*a*b = As1*fy, Solve for a a 123.653 mm
145.474
a = βc, Solve for c c 1 mm
377.452 342.222
f's = 600*(c-d')/c 6 f's 2 MPa
457.722 457.722
* If f's > fy, A's = As2 6 A's 6 mm2
* If f's < fy, A's = As2*fy/f's

Step 4. Determine the Number of Bars
As = As1 + As2
For Tension N 5 pcs
For Compression
N' = A's/Abar, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4


(Vc) RESULTS
116.112
* If Vu > ΦVc, stirrups needed, go to Step II Vc 8 kN
104.501
* If Vu < ΦVc, but Vu > .5*ΦVc Stirrups needed ΦVc 5 kN
52.2507
* If Vu < .5*Φ*Vc, stirrups are not needed .5ΦVc 5 kN
Stirrups Needed
295.433
Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 3 kN
179.320
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 6 kN
paramete 466.773
* If Vs < 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, go to Step 3. r 4

78.5398
Si = Av*fy*d/Vs, Av = pi*(Φtie^2)/4 220 Av 2 mm2
72
If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get paramete 229.903
* smaller) r 3 mm
If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get
* smaller) Smax1 220 mm
Smax2 600 mm
Zinc Normal
Uncoated

Cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

157.079
Atr 6 mm2
Step 2. Compute for the development 78.5398
length Ktr 2
524.647
ld = (fy*ψt*ψe*ψs*d)/(1.1*λ*sqrt(f'c)*((cc+Ktr)/d)) ld 1 mm

73
For Midspan

Mu 164.303 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
21383.7
f'c 20.7 MPa n 10
Fy 415 MPa L 7 M
B 350 mm
T 500 mm
d' 62.5 mm
D 437.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

ρb = (0.75*0.85*f'c*β1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa β 0.85
0.01597
0.01198
Mu(max) = Φ*f'c*ω*b*(d^2)*(1-.59ω) ω 0.24024
Φ = 0.9 Φ 0.9

1834.90
N = As/Abar, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4 N 4 pcs

(Vc) RESULTS
* If Vu > ΦVc, stirrups needed, go to Step II Vc 116.1128 kN
* If Vu < ΦVc, but Vu > .5*ΦVc Stirrups needed ΦVc 104.5015 kN
74
* If Vu < .5*Φ*Vc, stirrups are not needed .5ΦVc 52.25075 kN
Stirrups Needed
Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 159.8111 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 43.69833 kN
* If Vs < 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, go to Step 3. parameter 466.7734

mm
Si = Av*fy*d/Vs, Av = pi*(Φtie^2)/4 220 Av 78.53982 2

* If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get smaller) parameter 229.9033 mm
* If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get smaller) Smax1 220 mm
Smax2 600 mm
Zinc Normal

Cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

ψe = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or 6d Ψt 1
= 1.2 for all other epoxy-coated bars Ψe 1.2
= 1 for uncoated or zinc coated bars Ψs 1
ψt = .8 for 20 mm bars and smaller Λ 1
157.079
Atr 6 mm2
Step 2. Compute for the development
length Ktr 7.13998
ld = (fy*ψt*ψe*ψs*d)/(1.1*λ*sqrt(f'c)*((cc+Ktr)/d)) Ld 1319.3 mm

75
Part 4. Checking the Beam in Deflection
Step 1. Calculate the Gross Moment of Inertia and the Cracking Moment of the Beam
RESULTS
Ig = b(t^3)/12
Mcr = Ig*fr/ϒt, fr = 0.62*λ*sqrt(f'c), yt = t/2 Ig 3645833333 mm4
2.82082966
fr 5 MPa
yt 250 mm
41.1370992
Mcr 8 kN-m
Step 2. Calcualte the Moment of Inertia of
the
Cracked Section
93279189.2
Icr = b*(c^3)/12 + nAs(d-c)+nAs'(c-d') Icr 4 mm4

Step 3. Calculate the Effective Moment of Inertia
149036936.
Ie = ((Mcr/Mu)^3)*Ig + ((1-(Mcr/Mu)^3)*Icr) Ie 7 mm4

Step 4. Determine and Check the
Deflection
26.8249795
Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____ W 9 kN/m
δ = 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie) δ 1.01047278 mm
19.4444444
δmax = L/360 δmax 4 mm
OK
76
APPENDIX D: DESIGN OF ONE-WAY SLAB
Considering Longer Side
Design of S-1
The following are the given data.
Dead Loads (kPa) f'c 20.7 MPa
Weight of Slab 3.537 fy 415 MPa
Stone Concrete
1.53 L 7 m
Fill
Gypsum Board 0.2 t 150 mm
Total 5.267 b 1000 mm
Live Load (kPa) Φbar 12 mm
Basic Floor
1.9 Φtie 10 mm
Area
d 134 mm
Step 1. Calculate the Factored Loads and the Moment in the Slab RESULTS
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan,
W 9.36040 kN/m
M = W*(L^2)/14
For Continuous Edge,
Mmid 32.76140 kN/m
M = W*(L^2)/10
Mc.e. 45.86596 kN/m
Step 2. Calculate the ρ and check for the Midspan

R = Mu/(b*(d^2))

ρ=
(0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.85*f'c))) R 1.82454
)
ρmax =
ρi 0.00465
0.75*0.85*f'c*β*600/(fy*(600+fy))
ρmin = 1.4/fy ρmax 0.01598
If ρ > ρmax,
* ρmin 0.00337
redesign
* If ρmin < ρ < ρmax, ok ρf 0.00465
If ρmin > ρ, use
*
ρmin
77
Step 3. Calculate the Steel Area and Spacing of Bars
As = ρ*b*d As 697.74823 mm2
S = b*Abar/As, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4 Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 162.08903 mm

Step 4. Calculate the ρ and check for the Continuous Edge R 2.55435
Ρi 0.00668
ρmax 0.01598
ρmin 0.00337
Ρf 0.00668

Step 5. Calculate the Steel Area and Spacing of Bars As 1002.23229 mm2
Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 112.84543 mm

Considering Shorter Side

Stone Concrete Fill 1.53 L 3.5 m
Total 5.267 b 1000 mm
Basic Floor Area 1.9 Φtie 10 mm
d 134 mm
Step 1. Calculate the Factored Loads and the Moment in the Slab RESULTS
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan,
W 9.36040 kN/m
M = W*(L^2)/14
For Continuous Edge,
Mmid 8.19035 kN/m
M = W*(L^2)/10
78
Mc.e. 11.46649 kN/m
R = Mu/(b*(d^2))
ρ=
(0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.85 R 0.45613
*f'c))))
ρmax =
ρi 0.00111
0.75*0.85*f'c*β*600/(fy*(600+fy))
ρmin = 1.4/fy ρmax 0.01598
* If ρ > ρmax, redesign ρmin 0.00337
* If ρmin > ρ, use ρmin

As = ρ*b*d As 506.02410 mm2
S = b*Abar/As, Abar =
Abar 113.09734 mm2
pi*(Φbar^2)/4
S 223.50188 mm

ρi 0.00157
ρmax 0.01598
ρmin 0.00337
ρf 0.00337

Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 223.50188 mm
79
Design of S-2

Weight of Slab 3.537 Fy 415 MPa
Stone
Concrete Fill 1.53 L 7 M
Gypsum Board 0.2 T 150 mm
Total 5.267 B 1000 mm
Basic Floor
Area 1.9 Φtie 10 mm
D 134 mm
Step 1. Calculate the Factored Loads and the Moment in the

Slab RESULTS
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan, M =
W*(L^2)/14 W 9.36040 kN/m
For Continuous Edge, M =
W*(L^2)/10 Mmid 32.76140 kN/m
Mc.e. 45.86596 kN/m
R=
Mu/(b*(d^2))
ρ = (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.85*f'c)))) R 1.82454
ρmax =
0.75*0.85*f'c*β*600/(fy*(600+fy)) ρi 0.00465
ρmin = 1.4/fy ρmax 0.01598

As = ρ*b*d As 697.74823 mm2
S = b*Abar/As, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4 Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 162.08903 mm

ρi 0.00668
80
ρmax 0.01598
ρmin 0.00337
ρf 0.00668

Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 112.84543 mm

Considering Shorter Side

Stone Concrete Fill 1.53 L 3 m
Total 5.267 b 1000 mm
Basic Floor Area 1.9 Φtie 10 mm
d 134 mm
Step 1. Calculate the Factored Loads and the Moment in the

Slab RESULTS
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan, M =
W*(L^2)/14 W 9.36040 kN/m
For Continuous Edge, M =
W*(L^2)/10 Mmid 6.01740 kN/m
Mc.e. 8.42436 kN/m
R = Mu/(b*(d^2))
ρ=
(0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.8
5*f'c)))) R 0.33512
ρmax =
0.75*0.85*f'c*β*600/(fy*(600+fy)) ρi 0.00082
ρmin = 1.4/fy ρmax 0.01598
81

As = ρ*b*d As 506.02410 mm2
S = b*Abar/As, Abar =
pi*(Φbar^2)/4 Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 223.50188 mm

ρi 0.00115
ρmax 0.01598
ρmin 0.00337
ρf 0.00337

Abar 113.09734 mm2
S 223.50188 mm
N 5 pcs

82
APPENDIX E: DESIGN OF TWO-WAY SLAB
EQUIVALENT FRAME METHOD
Figure. Design Strips for Equivalent Frame Method
Considering Longitudinal Frame
Slab Column
ts 150 mm c1 550 mm
B 1000 mm c2 550 mm
l1 4.5 m lc 3 m
l2 7 m
General
DL 5.267 kPa
LL 1.9 kPa
W 9.3604
f'c 20.7 MPa
fy 415 MPa
E 21383.7 MPa
83
SAMPLE RESULTS (AB)
Step 1. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of Column
Ic = a*(b^3)/12 Ic 7.6E+09 mm4
Determine lu/lc lc 3 mm
Determine a/b lu 2.85 mm
Find kab in the tables. lu/lc 0.95
Kc = kab*E*Ic/h a/b 1
C = (1-0.63(t/a))*((t^3)(a)/3) kab 4.55
Kt = 9*E*C/(l2*(1-b/l2)^2) Kc 2.5E+11
Kec = 4Kt*Kc/(2*Kt+2*Kc) C 5.1E+08
Kt 1.7E+10
Kec 3.1E+10
Step 2. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of
Slab
Is = b*(t^3)/12 Is 2E+09 mm4
Compute a/l1 & b/l1 a/l1 0.12222
Find ks in the tables. b/l2 0.12222
Find FEM and COF in the tables. ks 4.4
Ks = ks*E*Is/l1 FEM 111.454 kN-m
COF 0.526
Ks 4.1E+10

Figure. Design Strip for Longitudinal Frame
84
Summary of Values for Slabs
Slab l1 l2 c1/l1 c2/l2 k FEM COF K
1 7 7 0.078571 0.078571 4.11 269.6918 0.5086 2.47E+10
2 7 7 0.078571 0.078571 4.11 269.6918 0.5086 2.47E+10
3 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
4 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
5 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
6 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
7 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
8 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
9 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
10 4.5 7 0.122222 0.122222 4.4 111.4543 0.526 4.12E+10
Table. Summary of Coefficients and Stiffness for Slabs in Longitudinal Frame
Step 3. Determine the Distribution Factors

DFxy = Kxy/ΣK
Table. Summary of Distribution Factors and FEM
SUMMARY OF VALUES FOR DF AND FEM

Member K DF FEM Member K DF FEM
AB 2.5E+10 0.28438 -269.69 GF 4.1E+10 0.28481 111.454
BA 2.5E+10 0.22141 269.6918 GH 4.1E+10 0.28481 -111.45
BC 2.5E+10 0.22141 -269.69 HG 4.1E+10 0.28481 111.454
CB 2.5E+10 0.19299 269.6918 HI 4.1E+10 0.28481 -111.45
4.12E+1
CD 0 0.32138 -111.454 IH 4.1E+10 0.28481 111.454
4.12E+1
DC 0 0.28481 111.4543 IJ 4.1E+10 0.28481 -111.45
4.12E+1
DE 0 0.28481 -111.454 JI 4.1E+10 0.28481 111.454
4.12E+1
ED 0 0.28481 111.4543 JK 4.1E+10 0.28481 -111.45
4.12E+1
EF 0 0.28481 -111.454 KJ 4.1E+10 0.39824 111.454
4.12E+1
FE 0 0.28481 111.4543
4.12E+1
FG 0 0.28481 -111.454
85
86
Step 4. Continue with the Moment Distribution Method (MDM)
Table. MDM for Longitudinal Frame
MDM FOR LONGITUDINAL FRAME

A B C D E F G H I J KJ
Member
AB BA BC CB CD DC DE ED EF FE FG GF GH HG HI IH IJ JI JK KJ
DF 0.284 0.22 0.22 0.19 0.32 0.285 0.285 0.28 0.285 0.285 0.285 0.28 0.285 0.285 0.285 0.285 0.285 0.28 0.285 0.4
- - -
FEM -270 270 270 270 111 111.5 -111 111 -111 111.5 -111 111 111.5 111.5 -111 111.5 -111 111 -111 111
COF 0.509 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.53 0.526 0.526 0.53 0.526 0.526 0.526 0.53 0.526 0.526 0.526 0.526 0.526 0.53 0.526 0.53
Balance -76.7 0 0 30.5 50.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44.4
CO1 0 -39 15.5 0 0 26.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23.35 0
Balance 0 -5.2 6.88 0 0 7.619 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.65 13.3 0
CO2 -2.64 0 0 3.5 4.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.498 0 0 7
Balance -0.75 0 0 1.45 2.41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.996 0.996 0 0 2.79
-
CO3 0 0.38 0.74 0 0 1.269 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.524 0 0 0.52 1.465 0
Balance 0 0.08 0.08 0 0 0.361 0.361 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.149 0.149 0 0 0.57 0.567 0
CO4 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.19 0 0 0.19 0 0 0 0 0.078 0 0 0.078 0.298 0 0 0.3
Balance 0.011 0 0 0.04 0.07 0 0 0.05 0.054 0 0 0.02 0.022 0 0 0.107 0.107 0 0 0.12
- - -
TOTAL -350 225 246 305 53.9 147.5 -111 112 -111 111.5 -111 111 111.4 111.6 -111 112.6 -107 119 -72.8 166
Figure.
Result of Moment Distribution Method (Moment Diagram)
87
Table. Summary of Moments for Longitudinal Frame
Summary of Moments
Sla Sla
b W M b W M
- 349.73093 - 111.45428
1 401.3272 + 113.87016 6 165.8546 + 54.389126
- 225.18306 - 111.47664
- 246.46759 - 111.35343
2 401.3272 + 125.4633 7 165.8546 + 54.376115
- 305.26012 - 111.60352
- 53.916191 - 110.78107
3 165.8546 + 65.170221 8 165.8546 + 54.145967
- 147.45254 - 112.63617
- 111.09292 - 106.5553
4 165.8546 + 54.458879 9 165.8546 + 52.979831
- 111.69849 - 119.19421
- 111.40015 - 72.777157
5 165.8546 + 54.427373 10 165.8546 + 46.447589
- 111.45428 - 166.03684
Step 5. Get the Design Moments

For Exterior Slabs
S-1
M(+) 113.8702
M(-) 349.7309
Moments (%)
0.85M(+) 96.78963
0.70M(-) 244.8117
Moment (%) Passed
Middle
Column Strip
Strip
Beam
Slab(15%)
(85%)
(+) 82.27119 14.5184 17.0805
(-) 208.0899 36.7217 104.919
Design Moments
CS MS
(+) 7.259222 8.54026
(-) 18.36087 52.4596
88
Slab-10
M(+) 46.44759
M(-) 166.0368
Moment (%)
0.85M(+) 39.48045
0.70M(-) 116.2258
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Beam Middle
(85%) Slab(15%) Strip
(+) 33.55838 5.92207 6.96714
(-) 98.79192 17.4339 49.8111
Design Moments
CS MS
(+) 2.961034 3.48357
(-) 8.716934 24.9055
For Interior
S-2
M(+) 125.4633
M(-) 305.2601
Moments (%)
0.85M(+) 106.6438
0.70M(-) 213.6821
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Middle
Beam Strip
Slab(15%)
(85%)
(+) 90.64723 15.9966 18.8195
(-) 181.6298 32.0523 91.578
Design Moments
CS MS
(+) 7.998285 9.40975
(-) 16.02616 45.789
89
S-3 to S-9
M(+) 54.38913
M(-) 111.4543
Moments (%)
0.85M(+) 46.23076
0.70M(-) 78.018
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Middle
Beam
Slab(15%) Strip
(85%)
(+) 39.29614 6.93461 8.15837
(-) 66.3153 11.7027 33.4363
Design Moments
CS MS
(+) 3.467307 4.07918
(-) 5.85135 16.7181
90
Step 5. Determine the Steel Areas and Number of Bars per meter of Width
SAMPLE DESIGN
GIVEN DATA
f'c 20.7 MPa
fy 415 MPa
B 1000 mm
T 150 mm
D 114 mm
Φbar 12 mm
Φtie 10 mm
cc 20 mm
Design for Exterior

(S-1)
Column Strip (+) RESULTS
M 7.25922243 kN-m
R = Mu/(Φb*(d^2)) R 0.62064
ρ = (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.85*f'c)))) ρi 0.00152
ρmax = 0.75*0.85*f'c*β*600/(fy*(600+fy)) ρmax 0.01598
ρmin = 1.4/fy ρmin 0.00337
* If ρ > ρmax, redesign ρf 0.00337
* If ρmin < ρ < ρmax, ok

As 384.57831 mm2
As = ρ*b*d Abar 113.09734 mm2
S = b*Abar/As, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4 S 294.08142 mm
91
Table. Summary of Steel Areas and Number of Bars for Two-Way Slabs
Summary of Design for Two-Way Slabs (Longitudinal Frame)
M R ρ(initial) ρ(max) ρ(min) ρ(final As Abar S
+ 7.2592 0.6206 0.0015 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
CS
- 18.3609 1.5698 0.0040 0.0160 0.0034 0.0040 452.3905 113.097 249.9994
Ext S-1
+ 8.5403 0.7302 0.0018 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
MS
- 52.4596 4.4851 0.0127 0.0160 0.0034 0.0127 1449.364 113.097 78.0324
+ 7.9983 0.6838 0.0017 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
CS
- 16.0262 1.3702 0.0001 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
S-2
+ 9.4097 0.8045 0.0020 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
MS
- 45.7890 3.9148 0.0108 0.0160 0.0034 0.0108 1232.545 113.097 91.75918
Int
+ 3.4673 0.2964 0.0007 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
CS
S-(3- - 5.8513 0.5003 0.0012 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
9) + 4.0792 0.3488 0.0000 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
MS
- 16.7181 1.4293 0.0036 0.0160 0.0034 0.0036 410.0305 113.097 275.8267
+ 2.9610 0.2532 0.0006 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
CS
- 8.7169 0.7453 0.0018 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
Ext S-10
+ 3.4836 0.2978 0.0007 0.0160 0.0034 0.0034 384.5783 113.097 294.0814
MS
- 24.9055 2.1293 0.0055 0.0160 0.0034 0.0055 625.3844 113.097 180.8445
92
Considering Transverse Frame
The following data are given. (Slab AB as an Example)

Slab Column
ts 150 mm c1 550 mm
b 1000 mm c2 550 mm
l1 7 m lc 3 m
l2 7 m
General
DL 5.267 kPa
LL 1.9 kPa
W 9.3604
f'c 20.7 MPa
fy 415 MPa
E 21383.7 MPa
SAMPLE RESULTS (AB)

Step 1. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of Column
Ic = a*(b^3)/12 Ic 7.6E+09 mm4
Determine lu/lc lc 3 mm
Determine a/b lu 2.85 mm
Find kab in the tables. lu/lc 0.95
Kc = kab*E*Ic/h a/b 1
C = (1-0.63(t/a))*((t^3)(a)/3) kab 4.55
Kt = 9*E*C/(l2*(1-b/l2)^2) Kc 2.5E+11
Kec = 4Kt*Kc/(2*Kt+2*Kc) C 5.1E+08
Kt 1.7E+10
Kec 3.1E+10
Step 2. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of Slab
Is = b*(t^3)/12 Is 2E+09 mm4
Compute a/l1 & b/l1 a/l1 0.07857
Find ks in the tables. b/l2 0.07857
Find FEM and COF in the tables. ks 4.11
Ks = ks*E*Is/l1 FEM 269.692 kN-m
COF 0.5086
Ks 2.5E+10

93
Figure. Design Strip for Transverse Frame
Step 3. Determine the Distribution Factors

DFxy = Kxy/ΣK
SUMMARY OF VALUES FOR DF

Membe
r K DF FEM
AB 2.5E+10 0.28438 -269.69
269.691
BA 2.5E+10 0.22141 8
BC 2.5E+10 0.22141 -269.69
269.691
CB 2.5E+10 0.28438 8
Step 4. Continue the MDM

To obtain the moments in the midspan of the slabs,
M+ = FEM - (-Mave)
MDM FOR TRANSVERSE FRAME

Membe A B C
r AB BA BC CB
0.22141 0.22141
DF 0.28438 4 4 0.28438
- 269.691 269.691
FEM 269.692 8 -269.692 8
94
COF 0.5086 0.5086 0.5086 0.5086
- 76.6949
Balance 76.6949 0 0 2
39.0070
CO1 0 -39.007 4 0
Balance 0 0 0 0
- 230.684 346.386
TOTAL 346.387 8 -230.685 8
Summary of Moments
Slab W M
- 346.3868
1 401.3272 + 112.7914
- 230.6848
- 230.6848
2 401.3272 + 112.7914
- 346.3868
For Exterior For Interior
M(+) 112.7914 M(+) 112.7914

M(-) 346.3868 M(-) 230.6848
Moments (%) Moments (%)

0.85M(+) 95.87266 0.85M(+) 95.87266
0.70M(-) 242.4707 0.70M(-) 161.4794
Moment (%) Passed Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip Column Strip
Middle Middle
Beam Beam
Slab(15%) Strip Slab(15%) Strip
(85%) (85%)
(+) 81.49176 14.3809 16.9 (+) 81.49176 14.38 16.918705
(-) 206.1001 36.37061 104 (-) 137.2575 24.22 69.205443
Design Moments Design Moments

CS MS CS MS
(+) 7.190449 8.459352 (+) 7.190449 8.459
(-) 18.18531 51.95801 (-) 12.11095 34.6
95
96
Table. Summary of Steel Areas and Number of Bars for Two-Way Slabs
Summary of Design of Two-Way Slab (Transverse Frame)

M R ρ(initial) ρ(max) ρ(min) ρ(final As Abar S
+ 7.19 0.6147575 0.00151 0.015977 0.003 0.00337 385 113.097 294.0814
CS - 18.2 1.554778 0.00393 0.015977 0.003 0.00393 448 113.097 252.5375
+ 8.46 0.7232441 0.00178 0.015977 0.003 0.00337 385 113.097 294.0814
Exterior MS - 52 4.4422228 0.01257 0.015977 0.003 0.01257 1433 113.097 78.94669
+ 7.19 0.6147575 0.00151 0.015977 0.003 0.00337 385 113.097 294.0814
CS - 12.1 1.0354427 0.00257 0.015977 0.003 0.00337 385 113.097 294.0814
+ 8.46 0.7232441 0.00178 0.015977 0.003 0.00337 385 113.097 294.0814
Interior MS - 34.6 2.9584078 0.00786 0.015977 0.003 0.00786 896 113.097 126.2729
97
APPENDIX F: SAMPLE DESIGN OF COLUMNS
One-Way Slab Tradeoff

The column with the maximum axial force was designed.
P 1337.143 kN
My 277.02 kN-m
b 550 mm
t 550 mm
cc 40
d 484
f'c 20.7 MPa
fy 415 MPa
Φbar 32 mm
Φtie 10 mm
Part 1. Determine the Steel Area and Positioning of Bars Results

Step 1. Determine the Steel Area and N bars
ρg = ____, assumed value from 0.02 -
0.04 ρg 0.02
As = ρgAg Ag 302500 mm2
N = As/Abar then determine actual As As 6050 mm2
804.247
Get actual ρg Abar 7 mm2
Pcap = Φ*0.8*Ag(0.85*f'c*(1-ρg)+fy*ρg) N 8 pcs
If Pcap > P, the dimensions are 0.02126
* adequate actual ρg 9
* If Pcap < P, redesign Φ 0.65
Pcap 4097.28 kN
OK
98
Step 2. Determine the position of the bars.

Part 2. Checking of Capacity due to Eccentric Load Results

Step 1. Determine if Tension or Compression Controls
fy = 600*(d-c)/c, Solve for c c 286.1084 mm
a = βc β 0.85
Pb = 0.85*f'c*a*b a 243.1921 mm
Pb*(eb+x) = A's*(d-d')+0.85*f'c*a*b*(d-a/2) Pb 2353431 kN
Solve eb in this equation eb 33.039 mm
ex = My/P ex 207.173 mm
Solve ex in this equation Tension Controls
* If eb > e, Compression Controls, solve for fs
* If eb < e, Tension Controls, solve for f's

Step 2. Solve and check for Pcap
99
Since tension conrtols, f's = 600(c-d')/c c 272.163 mm
Solve for c and Pcap in the following equations Pcap 2247.189 kN
Pcap(ex+(d-c)) = A'sf's(d-d')+0.85f'c(βc)b(d-βc/2)
Pcap + Asfy = A'sf's + 0.85f'c(βc)b
* If Pcap > P, The dimensions are adequate
* If Pcap < P, Redesign
For Two-Way Slab Tradeoff

The column with the maximun axial forces was designed.
P 2424.17 kN
My 363.257 kN-m
b 550 mm
t 550 mm
Cc 40
D 484
f'c 20.7 MPa
Fy 415 MPa
Φbar 32 mm
Φtie 10 mm
Part 1. Determine the Steel Area and Positioning of Bars Results

Step 1. Determine the Steel Area and N bars
ρg = ____, assumed value from 0.02 - 0.04 ρg 0.02
As = ρgAg Ag 302500 mm2
N = As/Abar then determine actual As As 6050 mm2
Get actual ρg Abar 804.2477 mm2
Pcap = Φ*0.8*Ag(0.85*f'c*(1-ρg)+fy*ρg) N 8 pcs
* If Pcap > P, the dimensions are adequate actual ρg 0.021269
* If Pcap < P, redesign Φ 0.65
Pcap 4097.28 kN
OK
100
Step 2. Determine the position of the bars.

Part 2. Checking of Capacity due to Eccentric Load Results

Step 1. Determine if Tension or Compression Controls
fy = 600*(d-c)/c, Solve for c c 286.1084 mm
a = βc β 0.85
Pb = 0.85*f'c*a*b a 243.1921 mm
Pb*(eb+x) = A's*(d-d')+0.85*f'c*a*b*(d-a/2) Pb 2353431 kN
Solve eb in this equation eb 33.039 mm
ex = My/P ex 149.848 mm
Solve ex in this equation Tension Controls
* If eb > e, Compression Controls, solve for fs
* If eb < e, Tension Controls, solve for f's
101

Step 2. Solve and check for Pcap
Since tension conrtols, f's = 600(c-d')/c c 268.6011 mm
Solve for c and Pcap in the following equations Pcap 2873.398 kN
Pcap(ex+(d-c)) = A'sf's(d-d')+0.85f'c(βc)b(d-βc/2)
Pcap + Asfy = A'sf's + 0.85f'c(βc)b
* If Pcap > P, The dimensions are adequate
* If Pcap < P, Redesign
102
APPENDIX G: COST ESTIMATE
COST ESTIMATE - ONE WAY TRADEOFF
CONCRETE WORKS
L b t V CEMENT SAND GRAVEL
Member pcs
(m) (m) (m) (m3) (bags) (m) (m)
B-1 7 0.35 0.5 170 208.25 1874.25 104.125 208.25
B-2 3.5 0.35 0.5 50 30.625 275.625 15.3125 30.625
B-3 3 0.35 0.5 180 94.5 850.5 47.25 94.5
C-1 3 0.55 0.55 260 235.95 2123.55 117.975 235.95
TOTAL 5123.93 284.66 569.325
Slab pcs
(m) (m) (m) (m3) (bags) (m) (m)
S-1 7 3.5 0.15 30 110.25 992.25 55.125 110.25
S-2 7 3 0.15 120 378 3402 189 378
S-3 3.5 3.3 0.15 5 8.6625 77.9625 4.33125 8.6625
S-4 3.3 3 0.15 5 7.425 66.825 3.7125 7.425
252.168
TOTAL 4539.038 504.3375
8
PRICES
ITEM TOTAL
per pc ITEM LABOR
CEMENT 9662.96 bags 250 2415741 966296.3
26841.5
SAND 536.831 m3 50 10736.63 TOTAL
6
GRAVEL 1073.66 m3 800 858930 343572
TOTAL PRICE 3301512 1320605 4622117
REBAR WORKS
BAR Ø As L N- Total W
Member N bars
(mm) (mm )2
(m) members (kg)
B-1 25 490.873 7 6 170 27162.5
B-2 26 530.929 3.5 6 50 4320.436
B-2 25 490.873 3 6 180 12325.84
C-1 32 804.247 3 8 260 38893.42
Slonger 12 113.097 50 224 9816.849
Sshorter 12 113.097 14 500 6135.53
PRICE
ITEM TOTAL
per kg ITEM LABOR TOTAL
513003
Steel 98654.5 52 1026008 6156046
8
TOTAL COST 10778163
103
COST ESTIMATE - TWO WAY TRADEOFF
CONCRETE WORKS
Member pcs
(m) (m) (m) (m3) (bags) (m) (m)
B-1 7 0.35 0.5 140 171.5 1543.5 85.75 171.5
B-2 3.5 0.35 0.5 20 12.25 110.25 6.125 12.25
B-3 4.5 0.35 0.5 120 94.5 850.5 47.25 94.5
C-1 3 0.5 0.5 165 123.75 1113.75 61.875 123.75
TOTAL 3618 201 402
L1 L2 t V CEMENT SAND GRAVEL
Slab pcs
(m) (m) (m) (m3) (bags) (m) (m)
S-1 7 7 0.15 10 73.5 661.5 36.75 73.5
S-2 7 4.5 0.15 80 378 3402 189 378
S-3 3.7 3.5 0.15 5 9.7125 87.4125 4.85625 9.7125
S-4 4.5 3.3 0.15 5 11.1375 100.2375 5.56875 11.1375
S-5 3.7 1 0.15 5 2.775 24.975 1.3875 2.775
237.562
TOTAL 4276.125 5 475.125
PRICES
ITEM TOTAL
per pc ITEM LABOR
CEMEN 7894.12
T 5 bags 250 1973531 789412.5
438.562 21928.1
SAND 5 m3 50 3 8771.25 TOTAL
3
GRAVEL 877.125 m 800 701700 280680
TOTAL PRICE 2697159 1078864 3776023
REBAR WORKS
BAR Ø As L N- Total W
Member N bars
(mm) (mm ) 2
(m) members (kg)
490.873
B-1 25 9 7 7 140 26097.31
530.929
B-2 26 2 3.5 6 20 1728.174
490.873
B-2 25 9 4.5 6 120 12325.84
804.247
8
C-1 32 7 3 165 24682.36
113.097
215
Slonger 12 3 50 9422.422
113.097
Sshorter 12 3 14 425 5215.201
104
PRICE
ITEM TOTAL
per kg ITEM LABOR TOTAL
79471.3 826501.
Steel 1 52 4132508 6 4959010
8735033
TOTAL COST
105
APPENDIX H: ESTIMATE OF MAN HOURS
For Tradeoff 1 (One Way Slab)
b T L Quantity Volume
B-1 350 500 7 170 208.25
B-2 350 500 3 180 94.5
B-3 350 500 3.5 50 30.625
C-1 550 550 3 250 226.875
t S l
S-1 150 3.5 7 25 91.875
S-2 150 3 7 115 362.25
S-3 150 3.3 3.5 5 8.6625
S-4 150 3 3.3 5 7.425
TOTAL VOLUME 1030.463
Assuming that 500% of Total Volume of Concrete Works is equal to Total Man Days,
Adding 200% For Rebar Works and 350% For
Finishing
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 5(1030.463) + 2(1030.463) +

3.5(1030.463)
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 10820
days
Given that there will be 25 workers

TOTAL MAN DAYS = 435 Days
106
For Tradeoff 1 (Two Way Slab)
b t L Quantity Volume
B-1 350 500 7 135 165.375
B-2 350 500 4.5 120 94.5
B-3 350 500 3.5 20 12.25
C-1 550 550 3 165 149.7375
t s l
S-1 150 7 7 10 73.5
S-2 150 4.5 7 80 378
S-3 150 3.3 3.5 5 8.6625
S-4 150 3 3.3 5 7.425
TOTAL VOLUME 889.45
Assuming that 500% of Total Volume of Concrete Works is equal to Total Man Days,
Adding 200% For Rebar Works and 350% For Finishing
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 5(889.45) + 2(889.45) + 3.5(889.45)

TOTAL MAN DAYS = 9940 days
Given that there will be 25 workers

TOTAL MAN DAYS = 375 Days
107
APPENDIX I: PERCENTAGE DEFLECTION FROM ALLOWABLE
Tradeoff 1 (One Way Slab)
(Beam with maximum moment was used)

Beam Deflection at Midspan
0.30585 mm
Allowable Deflection
19.4444
4 mm
Percentage of Computed Deflection from Allowable

% = (LV/HV)*100%
% = 1.5729 %
Tradeoff 2 (Two Way Slab)
(Beam with maximum moment was used)

Beam Deflection at Midspan
1.10473 mm
Allowable Deflection
19.4444
4 mm
Percentage of Computed Deflection from Allowable

% = (LV/HV)*100%
% = 5.68148 %
108
APPENDIX H: REFERENCES
Manuals
 Choi K. K. (2002). Reinforced Concrete Structure Design Assistant Tool. California, USA
 Dahlgren A., & Svensson L. (2013). Guidelines and Rules for Detailong of Reinforcement in
Concrete Structures. Goteborg, Sweden.
 Al-Shamma A. K. (2013). Novel Flowchart for Design of Concrete Rectangular Beams .
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research.
 Manual for Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete to the Code of Practice for Structural Use
of Concrete, 2013
Books
 Everrad & Tanner (1996). Theory and Problems of Reinforced Concrete Design . New York:
Schaum Publishing Company.
 McCormac, J.C., & Brown, R. H. (2014). Design of Reinforced Concrete 9 th Edition. United States:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
 Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines. National Structural Code of the Philippines
2010. Quezon City, Philippines: Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines, Inc.
 National Building Code of the Philippines (1977) . Philippines.
Websites
 www.google.com
 www.wikipedia.com
 http://www.bca.gov.sg/publications/BuildabilitySeries/others/prh_s2.pdf
 http://elearning.vtu.ac.in/P6/enotes/CV61/Beams-GS.pdf
109

A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES

938 Aurora Boulevard Cubao, Quezon City

A Project in Partial Fulfilment for the Requirements in

A DESIGN OF A FIVE STOREY REINFORCED CONCRETE

Engr. Rhonnie Estores

Disadvantages of reinforced concrete can be summarized as follows:

1.2 The Project

1.3 Project Location

Figure 2. Distance of the Nearest Fault Line to the Structure

1.4 Project Objectives

1.5 The Client

1.6 Project Scope and Limitation

The following were the scope covered by the design project:

1.7 Project Development

IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS

PRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND

IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN CONSTRAINTS,

LOAD IDENTIFICATION, STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS,

Figure 4. Project Development Process

2.1 Description of the Structure

Figure 5. Structural Model of the Structure

Table 1. Total Floor Areas and Functions per Floor

FUNCTION AREA (m2)

2.2 Classification of the Structure

2.3 Architectural Plans

Height is 3 m per floor, for a total of 15 m.

3.1 Design Constraints

3.1.1 Quantitative Constraints

3.1.2 Qualitative Constraints

3.2.1 One Way Slab

Figure 7. One Way Slab System

3.2.2 Two Way Slab

Figure 8. Two Way Slab System

3.3 Significance of Chosen Tradeoffs to the Quantitative Design Constraints

3.4 Method of Measurements for Quantitative Constraints

Figure 9. Ranking Scale for Importance Factor

Figure 10. Ranking Scale for Satisfactory Factor

Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:

Higher value−Lower value

Table 2. Summary of Initial Estimate of Values

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint

higher value−lower value

Computation of ranking for Safety/Serviceability Constraint

higher value−lower value

3.7 Raw Designer’s Ranking and Assessment

Table 1. Raw Designer’s Ranking

ABILITY TO SATISFY THE CRITERION

4.1 Design Methodology

STRUCTURAL PLANS FRAMING PLANS

STRUCTURAL MODEL GEOMETRIC MODELLING

DEAD AND LIVE LOAD

Figure 11. Design Methodology

4.1.1 Structural Plans

Figure 12. One Way Slab Framing Plan

Maximum Value of Bending Moments (Z) in

Figure 18b. Moment along Z and Y axes.

Figure 14. Result of Structural Analysis for One-Way Slab

Figure 19a. Axial and Shear Forces

Maximum Value of Bending Moments (Z) in