O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

Final Year Project Presentation

This is the presentation of my final year project of my civil engineering.

  • Entre para ver os comentários

Final Year Project Presentation

  1. 1. Design Cost Comparison 2B without beams & with beams. Group members:GHULAM MUSTAFA VIRA - 136MUHAMMAD ISMAIL YAR - 154 FARHAN JAMEEL - 101 JAMHOOR ALAM - 158 NAJEEBULLAH - 194 TARIQ AMIN - 173 Civil Engineering Dept. 2009 BATCH
  2. 2.  INTRODUCTION EARTHQUAKE REVIEWBUILDING DESCRIPTION DESIGN APPROACH AND INPUTS CONCLUSION
  3. 3. Concrete STRUCTURES are CHEAPER AND HEAVIER than others but SELECTING AN ECONOMICALLateral-Force-Resisting System is difficult!
  4. 4. & not with STRUCTURAL SYSTEMSGOOD ENGINEERING = SAFE/SOUND + Design
  5. 5. To develop ModelsOf anAdvantages:  Reduces Design Time & Iterations  Direct Cost Savings
  6. 6. Importance Factors (P ORTLAND CEMENT ASSOCIATION) Importance Cost Effectiveness 4.53 Construction Time 4.13 Material Availability 3.95 Design Flexibility 3.89 Material Delivery Time 3.83 Fire Resistance 3.78 Seismic Loads 3.66 Wind Loads 3.65 Contractor Availability 3.46 Design Tie 3.36 Appearance 3.31 Ease of Design 3.17 Return on Design Fees 2.87Available Design Software 2.53 Publications 2.48 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Mean Rating (1 = not important at all, 5 = very important)
  7. 7.  INTRODUCTION EARTHQUAKE REVIEWBUILDING DESCRIPTION DESIGN APPROACH AND INPUTS CONCLUSION
  8. 8. FACTORS AFFECTING SHAKING INTENSITY
  9. 9. SEISMICITY IN KARACHI
  10. 10. HAZARD MAP OF PAKISTANGSHAP Hazard map (1999) Revised Hazard map (2006) KARACHI IS ASSIGNED ZONE 2B
  11. 11. LOAD PATH HorizontalDiaphragm (Floor and Roof slabs ) Elements Vertical Shear Walls / Frames Elements Foundation Soil
  12. 12. LATERAL-FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEMS Moment Resisting Frames Frame SystemResistance to Building Frame Shear WallLateral Loads System Frames (25% Lateral Load) Dual System Shear Wall
  13. 13.  INTRODUCTION EARTHQUAKE REVIEW BUILDING DESCRIPTION DESIGN APPROACH AND INPUTS CONCLUSION
  14. 14. 20 Stories11 Residential 6 Podium 3 Basements Stories Stories Indoor Retail Games 4 Parking 2 Parking Stories Stories Lobby
  15. 15. Length = 121‟-4”Width = 120‟-2”4 Shear Walls40 Columns
  16. 16. DUAL SYSTEM without BeamsDrop Panel
  17. 17. BUILDING FRAME SYSTEM with Beams Beam
  18. 18. Typical Beam Size Shear Wall Thickness 18” (Story 1 to 8) 24” 15” (Story 9 to 14) 12” (Story 15 to Roof) 10” Concrete Compressive Strength (f„c ) Story Beam/Slab Column/Shear Wall Story 1 to 6 5 ksi 7 ksi Story 7 to 11 4.5 ksi 6 ksi Story 12 to 16 4 ksi 5 ksi Story 17 to Roof 3 ksi 4 ksi
  19. 19. RAFT FOUNDATION (f’c = 5 ksi) Dual System Building Frame without Beams System with BeamsThickness Area offset Thickness Area offset 72” 18” 72” 24”
  20. 20.  INTRODUCTION EARTHQUAKE REVIEW BUILDING DESCRIPTION DESIGN APPROACH AND INPUTS CONCLUSION
  21. 21. ETABS modelling of Dual System without Beams1st ModelShear Walls and Columns take lateral loads USED TO DESIGN SHEAR WALL2nd ModelShear Walls are replaced by Columns& 25% Earthquake Load is induced COLUMNS ARE DESIGNED USING BOTH MODELS
  22. 22. ETABS modelling of Building Frame System with Beams1st ModelWe use compatibility combos USED TO DESIGN COLUMNS2nd ModelFrames are assigned moment of inertia = 0.01Shear walls resist all the lateral load USED TO DESIGN SHEAR WALLS
  23. 23. LIVE LOADS (UBC 97) Retail 50psf Parking 50psf Lobby 40psf Indoor Games 40psf Residential 40psf Roof 20psf
  24. 24. Seismic Factors (from UBC 97)Ct (Concrete Structure) 0.03Overstrength Factor “R” (Dual system) 6.5Overstrength Factor “R” (Building Frame system) 5.5Soil Profile Type (Very Dense Soil and Soft Rock) ScSeismic Zone Factor “Z” (2B) 0.20Importance Factor “I” 1Omega Factor (System Overstrength Factor) “ΩO” 2.8Seismic Coefficient “Ca” 0.24Seismic Coefficient “Cv” 0.32Dead load Multiplier (0.5 x Ca x I) 0.12
  25. 25.  INTRODUCTION EARTHQUAKE REVIEW BUILDING DESCRIPTION DESIGN APPROACH AND INPUTS CONCLUSION
  26. 26. Cost Percentage of Dual System without Beams Shear wall 14.1% Column 15.6% Slabs 55.4% Foundation 10.5% Beams 4.4%
  27. 27. Cost Percentage of Building Frame System with Beams Slabs Shear wall 12.7% 25.9% Beams 24.5% Column 11.8% Foundation 25.1%
  28. 28. Cost Comparison of Different Elements 70 60Cost (Rupees in millions) 50 40 30 20 10 0 Slabs & Beams Foundation Columns Shear walls Dual System without beams Building Frame System with beams
  29. 29. Cost Comparison of Systems 120 100Cost (Rupees in millions) 80 60 109 40 80 20 0 Dual System without Beams Building Frame System with Beams
  30. 30. Cost Comparison of all six Systems 140 120 Moment Resisting System with BeamsCost (Rupees in millions) 100 Building Frame System with Beams 80 Dual System with Beams Moment Resisting System 60 without Beams Dual System without 40 Beams Building Frame System without Beams 20 0
  31. 31. Comparison in Ratio of all six Systems 1.79 1.69 Moment Resisting System with Beams 1.37 Building Frame System 1.32 1.24 with Beams Dual System with Beams 1Ratios Moment Resisting System without Beams Dual System without Beams Building Frame System without Beams

×