Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Structural Analysis and Design Report for

RCC Residential Building of
Mrs. Gita Siwakoti

Prepared By:
Er. Sandesh Dahal
December, 2024

1|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

2|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Introduction
The basic aim of the structural design is to build a structure, which is safe, fulfilling the
intended purpose during its estimated life span, economical in terms of initial and
maintenance cost, durable and also maintaining a good aesthetic appearance.

A building is considered to be structurally sound, if the individual elements and the

building as a whole satisfy the criteria for strength, stability and serviceability and in
seismic areas additional criteria for ductility and energy absorption capabilities. The
overall building must be strong enough to transfer all loads through the structure to the
ground without collapsing or losing structural integrity by rupture of the material at the
critical sections, by transformation of the whole or parts into mechanisms or by
instability.

Seismic Vulnerability of Nepal

Nepal is located in the boundary of two colliding tectonic plates, namely, the Indian
Plate and the Tibetan Plate. The Indian Plate is constantly moving under the Tibetan
Plate causing many minor and major earthquakes in this region. As a result, Nepal has
witnessed many major as well as minor earthquakes during the past. Thus structures to
be built in Nepal need to be suitably designed and detailed, so as to counteract the
forces due to earthquakes.

Assumptions in Analysis and Design

Various assumptions have been made in analysis and design of the structures, for
consideration of safety and simplicity:

 Tensile strength of concrete is ignored.

 Shrinkage and temperature Strength are negligible.
 Adhesion between concrete and steel is adequate to develop full strength.
 An earthquake is not likely to occur simultaneously with maximum flood, wind,
waves or tides.
 Centre lines of beams, columns and shear walls are concurrent everywhere.
 Construction material, products confirm to the pertinent codes and specifications.
 Resonance as visualized under steady state sinusoidal excitation will not occur.

Further assumptions in analysis and design that are not included here if are considered,
then they are explained at the assumed section itself.

Finite Element Modeling

The FE model of building is developed in ETABS 18, FE analysis and design software.
The size of beams and columns as obtained from preliminary analysis are adjusted
according to architectural need. Beam and columns are modeled as frame element. Slabs
are also modeled as membrane element. Suitable assumptions are made and FE model
as shown in Fig below.

3|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

1. Introduction
This report deals with the methodology of the Structural Analysis and Design of
Building. The Structure is RCC framed Structure and Foundation is as obtained.

2. Geometrical Configuration
a. Nos. of Story = 3 story
b. Floor Height = 3.2 m
c. No of Columns = 12 at G, 1st, & 4 at Top floor
d. No of Lifts =0
e. No. of Staircase =1
f. Total Height of Structure = 9.60 m
g. Height to Width ratio of Building = 1.27
h. Length to Width ratio of Building = 1.51

3. Basic Data
a. Density of Concrete = 25 KN/m3
b. Live Load = 2 KN/m2 for rooms
= 1.5 KN/m2 for balconies
= 3 KN/m2 for staircases and passages
= 1.5 KN/m2 for accessible roof
= 0.75 KN/m2 for non-accessible roof
c. Floor Finishing Load = 1.1, 1.25 KN/m2
d. Density of Brick = 19.2 KN/m3
e. Soil Bearing Capacity = 150 KN/m2
4|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

4. Relevant Code followed

a. IS 456- 2000 Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete.
b. IS 875-1987 Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for
buildings and structures.
c. SP 16 : For Design Aid
d. SP 34 : For Detailing
e. IS 1893-2016: Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures
f. IS 13920-2016 : For Ductile Detailing of Structural Elements
g. NBC Nepal Building Code.

5. Basic Principal of Analysis of the structure Step for earthquake

load
1. Earthquake load with seismic coefficient method (NBC 105:2020.)

6. Software used for Analysis and Design

a. ETABS V18.0
b. AFES Tools
c. Excel Sheets

7. Concrete and Steel Grade

Concrete Grade = M 20 for Columns and Beams
= M 20 for Staircase and Slabs
= M 20 for Footings
Steel Grade = Fe 500, Fe 415
Poisson’s Ratio [U] = 0.2, 0.3

8. Preliminary Design for proportioning of the Structural Elements

For the analysis, dead load is also necessary which depends upon the size of
member itself. So it is necessary to pre-assume logical size of member which will
neither over estimate the load nor under estimate the stiffness of the building.
So, the tentative sizes of the structural elements are determined through the
preliminary design so that the pre-assumed dimensions may not deviate
considerably after analysis thus making the final design both safe and
economical. Tentative sizes of various elements have been determined for:

i) Slab
ii) Beam
iii) Column
iv) Staircase Design
v) Foundation Design
vi) Other design if any required.

5|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

9. Load on Structures
The following Loads were assumed to occur in Structural System.
a. Dead Load
b. Live Load
c. Seismic Load

a) Dead Load:
Dead Load on the structure comprise the self-weight of the member; weight of
the finishes and partition walls. The Wall Load is taken for thickness of either
230 mm or 125 mm as per Architectural Drawing and suitable reduction is made
for Window and Door Opening. Dead loads are as per IS 875: 1987 Part I.

b) Live Loads:
The magnitude of live load depends upon the type of occupancy of the building.
These are to be chosen from code IS875:1987(part II) for various occupancies.
The live load distribution varies with time. Hence each member is designed for
worst combination of dead load and live loads.

c) Seismic Loads
The seismic load is applied to the building with auto lateral load pattern (User
coefficient) in ETABS 2018 as per NBC 105:2020. This load case is assumed static
linear and all the necessary parameters taken are:

Importance Factor, I = 1.0

Zone factor, Z = 0.4
Soil Type = C
Response Reduction Factor = 5 (For SMRF)
Damping = 10%
Ductility Factor, R
 For Ultimate Limit State, Rμ= 4 for SMRF system
 For Serviceability Limit State, Rs= 1.0 for SMRF system
Over strength Factor, W
 For Ultimate Limit State, Ωu = 1.5 for SMRF system
 For Serviceability Limit State, Ωs = 1.25 for SMRF system

The seismic weight is determined based on the following mass source.

S.N Load Type Scale Factor

1 Dead Load 1
2 Live Load (Storage) 0.6
3 Live Load (Other Purpose) 0.3
4 Roof Live Load Nil

6|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

10. Design Methods of Structural Elements

We have followed Indian Standard Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced
Concrete, IS: 456 -2000 for design of Structural Elements. This incorporates the
two methods of Structural Design of RC structures specified as:

a. Working Stress Method.

b. Limit State Method .

We have followed the limit state method which is incorporated in IS: 456-2000.
It is consistent with the new philosophy of design termed limit state approach.

11. Limit State Method

11.1 Load Cases
The following load cases are used for the loading during analysis.

Load Name Load Type Description Unit Remarks

DL Dead Self-weight kN/m2
WL S. Dead Wall Load kN/m2 On beam
FF S. Dead Floor Finish Load kN/m2 On slab
PW S. Dead Partition Wall Load kN/m2 On floor slab
LL Live Imposed Load kN/m2 On floor slab
TLL Live Imposed Load kN/m2 On terrace slab
EQx Quake NBC 105:2020
EQy Quake NBC 105:2020

11.2 Load Combination

The load combinations are based on NBC 105:2020 cl. 3.6. The following load
combinations are specified as per NBC 105:2020.

S.N. Name Type

1 1.2DL + 1.5LL 1.2DL + 1.5LL
2 DL + 0.3LL+EQx DL + 0.3LL+EQx
3 DL + 0.3LL-EQx DL + 0.3LL-EQx
4 DL + 0.3LL+EQy DL + 0.3LL+EQy
5 DL + 0.3LL-EQy DL + 0.3LL-EQy

7|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

12. Calculation & Output details

12.1 Approximate Time Period

T1 =
The approximate fundamental time period is increased by amplification
factor of 1.25.

12.2 Fundamental Time period

Approximate Time Fundamental Time

Height of Building
Period Period
10.8 0.409 0.511

12.3 Rayleigh Method

The fundamental translation period in the direction under consideration, T1,
shall be calculated as:

The time period obtained from empirical equation and Rayleigh method shall be
compared with each other and the lesser value of the two shall be adopted for
determining the design action.

8|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

12.4 Seismic coefficient and Base Shear

Ultimate Limit State Serviceability Limit State

(ULS) (SLS)
Seismic wt.(kN) 2757.5373 2757.5373
Direction X Y X Y
Seismic Coefficient 0.166 0.166 0.16 0.16
V (kN) 457.75 457.75 441.20 441.20

12.5 Storey Drift

As per Cl.5.6.3 of NBC 105:2020, the storey drift to the corresponding storey
shall not exceed:

0.025 at ultimate limit state

0.006 at serviceability limit state

NBC 105:2020 (Ultimate Limit State)

Output
Story Direction Drift Label X Y Z
Case
m m m
RF EQX X 0.002160 97 12.33 -0.90 9.60
RF EQY Y 0.002364 97 12.33 -0.90 9.60
1F EQX X 0.001750 42 12.33 7.57 6.40
1F EQY Y 0.002157 97 12.33 -0.90 6.40
GF EQX X 0.001791 18 7.47 7.57 3.20
GF EQY Y 0.002076 3 11.43 0.00 3.20

NBC 105:2020 (Serviceability Limit State)

Output
Story Direction Drift Label X Y Z
Case
m m m
RF EQX X 0.002082 97 12.33 -0.90 9.60
RF EQY Y 0.002279 97 12.33 -0.90 9.60
1F EQX X 0.001687 42 12.33 7.57 6.40
1F EQY Y 0.002079 97 12.33 -0.90 6.40
GF EQX X 0.001726 18 7.47 7.57 3.20
GF EQY Y 0.002001 3 11.43 0.00 3.20

It is seen that drift does not exceed the code prescribed value of 0.025 and 0.006
times story height. Thus the drift check seems to comply with the safety value
mentioned in the code.

9|Page
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

12.6 Check For Deflection Criteria and Drift Criteria For ULS And SLS

12.7 Check For Eccentricity Criteria

10 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

12.8 Check For Torsion Criteria

TABLE: Story Max Over Avg
Displacements
Story Output Case Case Type Direction Maximum Average Ratio
mm mm
RF EQx ult LinStatic X 17.769 17.579 1.011
1F EQx ult LinStatic X 11.331 10.913 1.038
GF EQx ult LinStatic X 5.731 5.428 1.056
RF EQy ult LinStatic Y 20.871 20.25 1.031
1F EQy ult LinStatic Y 13.445 12.541 1.072
GF EQy ult LinStatic Y 6.642 6.368 1.043
RF EQx ser LinStatic X 17.127 16.943 1.011
1F EQx ser LinStatic X 10.922 10.519 1.038
GF EQx ser LinStatic X 5.524 5.232 1.056
RF EQy ser LinStatic Y 20.117 19.518 1.031
1F EQy ser LinStatic Y 12.959 12.088 1.072
GF EQy ser LinStatic Y 6.402 6.137 1.043

12.9 Check For Mass Irregularity

Mass <50% of above/
Floor Mass in Kg
below storey
RF 26007.27 -
1F 106812.11 OK
GF 148371.16 OK
BF 6166.20 -

12.10 Check For Soft Storey

11 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

13. Seismic Load Calculation

13.1 NBC 105:2020 Seismic Load Calculation

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for
load pattern EQx ult, EQy ult using the user input coefficients, as calculated by
ETABS

Direction and Eccentricity

Direction = X + Eccentricity Y
Direction = Y + Eccentricity X
Eccentricity Ratio = 10% for all diaphragms
Calculated Base Shear

W Vb Story Elevation X-Dir Y-Dir

Direction m kN kN
(kN) (kN)
X + Ecc. Y 2757.5373 457.7512 RF 9.6 81.4428 81.4428
Y + Ecc. X 2757.5373 457.7512 1F 6.4 222.4491 222.4491
GF 3.2 153.8592 153.8592
BF 0 0 0

Applied Story Forces

12 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

13.2 NBC 105:2020 Seismic Load Calculation

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for
load pattern EQx ser, EQy ser using the user input coefficients, as calculated by
ETABS

Direction and Eccentricity

Direction = X + Eccentricity Y
Direction = Y + Eccentricity X
Eccentricity Ratio = 10% for all diaphragms
Calculated Base Shear

W Vb Story Elevation X-Dir Y-Dir

Direction m kN kN
(kN) (kN)
X + Ecc. Y 2757.5373 441.206 RF 9.6 78.4991 78.4991
Y + Ecc. X 2757.5373 441.206 1F 6.4 214.4088 214.4088
GF 3.2 148.298 148.298
BF 0 0 0

Applied Story Forces

13 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

14. Joint Reactions

TABLE: Joint Reactions
Output
Story Label Case FX FY FZ MX MY MZ
kN kN kN kN-m kN-m kN-m
BF 15 1.0(DL+LL) 5.33 4.24 191.92 -4.20 7.78 0.32
BF 1 1.0(DL+LL) 3.43 5.23 247.48 -5.98 5.78 0.32
BF 2 1.0(DL+LL) 10.09 13.10 395.83 -14.17 11.85 0.23
BF 3 1.0(DL+LL) -23.65 42.40 307.21 -27.82 -10.87 -0.30
BF 4 1.0(DL+LL) 4.22 -2.32 240.72 2.71 5.76 0.32
BF 5 1.0(DL+LL) 1.52 -1.58 280.88 1.20 2.91 0.32
BF 6 1.0(DL+LL) 3.04 -0.93 421.87 -0.26 4.52 0.32
BF 13 1.0(DL+LL) -2.06 0.16 370.95 -2.20 -0.86 0.32
BF 14 1.0(DL+LL) 3.58 -3.66 133.27 4.12 4.42 0.32
BF 17 1.0(DL+LL) 0.80 -2.62 170.28 2.29 1.49 0.32
BF 18 1.0(DL+LL) 1.57 -1.86 178.23 0.72 2.30 0.32
BF 19 1.0(DL+LL) -2.75 -0.94 135.73 -1.04 -2.25 0.32
BF 28 1.0(DL+LL) 0.76 9.78 -10.14 -1.19 0.13 -0.08
BF 8 1.0(DL+LL) 6.39 -25.17 26.67 -2.83 -0.27 0.36

14 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

15. Design of Elements

15.1 Column Design

The Column Sizes provided are 350x350 (1'-2"x1'-2") at all the floors wherever
required.

ETABS Concrete Frame Design

IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Column Section Design

Column Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary) (Part 1 of 2)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc
1F C13 15 C 350x350 DL+0.3LL+EQXULS 2775

Column Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary) (Part 2 of 2)

Length (mm) LLRF
3200 1

Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm) Cover (Torsion) (mm)
350 350 55.5 23

Material Properties
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) [Link] Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
22360 20 1 500 500

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3 (Part 1 of 2)
Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Rebar Area
kN kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm²
27.5783 -6.1665 -100.7373 0.5516 0.5516 2132

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3 (Part 2 of 2)
15 | P a g e
 Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Rebar %
%
1.74

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors

K Factor Length Initial Moment Additional Moment Minimum Moment
Unitless mm kN-m kN-m kN-m
Major Bend(M3) 0.810494 2775 -5.7747 0 0.5516
Minor
0.799121 2775 3.0336 0 0.5516
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 62.9608 66.7903 41.2301 62.9608 387.95
Minor, Vu3 31.4804 66.7903 41.2301 31.4804 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 0 0 186.6631 547.8367 1225 0.341
Minor Shear, Vu3 0 0 93.3315 547.8367 1225 0.17

(1.4) Beam/Column Capacity Ratio

Major Ratio Minor Ratio
0.943 0.471

Additional Moment Reduction Factor k (IS [Link])

Ag Asc Puz Pb Pu k
cm² cm² kN kN kN Unitless
1225 21.3 1901.882 462.283 27.5783 1

Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1) (Part 1 of 2)

Consider Length Section KL/Depth KL/Depth KL/Depth
Ma Factor Depth (mm) Ratio Limit Exceeded
Major Bending (M3 ) Yes 0.867 350 6.426 12 No
Minor Bending (M2 ) Yes 0.867 350 6.336 12 No

Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1) (Part 2 of 2)

Ma
Moment (kN-m)
0
0

16 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

15.2 Beam Design

The Beam Sizes provided are 425x250 at GF, FF & TF and 355x250 at plinth
level.

ETABS Concrete Frame Design

IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Beam Section Design

Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary) (Part 1 of 2)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc
GF B12 62 B 250X425 DL+0.3LL-EQYULS 175

Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary) (Part 2 of 2)

Length (mm) LLRF
3327.4 1

Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)
250 425 250 0 25 25

Material Properties
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) [Link] Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
22360 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
-39.3904 0.1295 51.7444 0

17 | P a g e
 Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Design Moments, Mu3 & Mt

Factored Factored Positive Negative
Moment Mt Moment Moment
kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m
-39.3904 0.2057 0 -39.5961

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 Axis) -39.5961 243 0 243 215
Bottom (-2 Axis) 0 121 0 0 121

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
61.2374 0 62.0664 35.9423 429.98

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
0.1295 51.7444 220 395 240.96

18 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

16. Rebar in Columns

Column Size
GF FF TF
(mm)
Grid
B D
Bars Bars Bars
(mm) (mm)
A2 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
A2 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
A3 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
B1 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
B2 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
B3 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
C1 350 350 8-16Ø 8-16Ø 8-16Ø
C2 350 350 8-16Ø 8-16Ø 8-16Ø
C3 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
D1 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø 8-20Ø
D2 350 350 8-16Ø 8-16Ø 8-16Ø
D3 350 350 8-20Ø 8-20Ø

17. Footing Design Summary

Overall
Effective Bottom Bars
Length Breadth Depth,
Footing Grid ID depth, d
in m in m D in
in mm X-dirn Y-dirn
mm
3 A1, B1, 12mmØ@ 12mmØ@
F1 1.50 1.50 - 450
Nos D1 150mmc/c 150mmc/c
1 12mmØ@ 12mmØ@
F2 C1 1.80 1.80 - 450
Nos 150mmc/c 150mmc/c

19 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

20 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

21 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

22 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

23 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

24 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Ground Floor Plan (Longitudinal Reinforcing)

First Floor Plan (Longitudinal Reinforcing)

25 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Top Floor Plan (Longitudinal Reinforcing)

Column Beam Capacity Ratio

26 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Storey Drift due to EQX Serviceability

Storey Drift due to EQX Ultimate

27 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Storey Drift due to EQY Serviceability

Storey Drift due to EQY Ultimate

28 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Storey Displacement due to EQX Serviceability

Storey Displacement due to EQX Ultimate

29 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Storey Displacement due to EQY Serviceability

Storey Displacement due to EQY Ultimate

30 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Axial Force Diagram

Shear Force Diagram

31 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Bending Moment Diagram

Concrete Frames/ Member Design Passed Proof

32 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Column (Longitudinal Reinforcing) 1-1 Gird

Column (Longitudinal Reinforcing) 2-2 Gird

33 | P a g e
Structural Design Report for Mrs. Gita Siwakoti.

Column (Longitudinal Reinforcing) 3-3 Gird

** THE END **

34 | P a g e