BE Structural Eng – Project III

BE in Structural Engineering
Preliminary Design of Building Structures

2007/8

Dr. Colin Caprani

DIT Bolton St.

1 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Contents
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Course Outline ................................................................................................. 5
1.2 Syllabus............................................................................................................ 8
1.3 Programme....................................................................................................... 9
1.4 Studying......................................................................................................... 10
1.5 General Report Advice .................................................................................. 12
1.6 Report Requirements ..................................................................................... 14
1.7 Reading Material ........................................................................................... 16
1.8 Some Introductory Problems ......................................................................... 18
2. Overall Structural Behavior............................................................................. 19
2.1 Primary function of a structure...................................................................... 19
2.2 Structural Members ....................................................................................... 24
2.3 Structural Systems ......................................................................................... 28
2.4 Stability of Buildings..................................................................................... 40
2.5 Allowing for Movement ................................................................................ 53
3. Structural Materials and Structural Form..................................................... 63
3.1 Choice of Structural Material ........................................................................ 64
3.2 Choice of Structural Form ............................................................................. 74
4. Precedence Studies ............................................................................................ 78
4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................... 78
4.2 Dulles Airport ................................................................................................ 79
4.3 Alamillo Bridge ............................................................................................. 80
4.4 Patera Building System ................................................................................. 81
4.5 Sydney Opera House – Podium..................................................................... 83
4.6 Sydney Opera House – General .................................................................... 84
4.7 Robert Maillart – Beam Bridge ..................................................................... 85
4.8 Pompidou – Lateral Stability......................................................................... 86

2 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.9 Pompidou – General ...................................................................................... 88

4.10 Nervi – Some Examples............................................................................. 91
4.11 Peter Rice - La Villette............................................................................... 94
4.12 Torroja – Madrid Racecourse..................................................................... 96
4.13 Torroja – Half-Mile Viaduct, Unbuilt, 1956.............................................. 98
4.14 Torroja – Operating Theatre, Madrid University....................................... 99
4.15 Two Recent Train Stations....................................................................... 100
4.16 Fazlur Kahn and the Evolution of Tall Buildings.................................... 101
5. Preliminary Analysis....................................................................................... 113
5.1 Preliminary Loading .................................................................................... 113
5.2 Preliminary Structural Analysis .................................................................. 121
5.3 Tributary Areas............................................................................................ 132
5.4 Preliminary Analysis of a Grandstand......................................................... 138
6. Preliminary Design.......................................................................................... 141
6.1 Reinforced Concrete .................................................................................... 142
6.2 Prestressed Concrete.................................................................................... 146
6.3 Steel – Non-composite................................................................................. 150
6.4 Composite Construction .............................................................................. 151
7. Car Park Layout Design ................................................................................. 152
7.1 Introduction.................................................................................................. 152
7.2 Car Sizes and Swept Path ............................................................................ 154
7.3 Bay, Aisle and Bin Dimensions................................................................... 156
7.4 Headroom and Ramps ................................................................................. 160
7.5 Ventilation ................................................................................................... 162
7.6 Miscellaneous .............................................................................................. 163
8. Examples .......................................................................................................... 164
8.1 Load Takedown ........................................................................................... 164
8.2 Beams, Slab and Column Example ............................................................. 171
8.3 Flat Slab Example........................................................................................ 183

3 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.4 Sample Scheme Problem 1 .......................................................................... 187

8.5 Sample Scheme Problem 2 .......................................................................... 191
8.6 Sample Scheme Problem 3 .......................................................................... 199
8.7 Sample Scheme Problem 4 .......................................................................... 202
9. References ........................................................................................................ 211

4 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1. Introduction

1.1 Course Outline

Goals

The goal is that you will:

(a) be able to plan an outline scheme design for building structures, and;
(b) be able to verify, through approximate design, that your scheme is viable.

In other words, you will learn to carry out a complete preliminary design of a
structure.

The detailed design of elements is covered in your other modules such as concrete
and steel design.

5 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Preliminary Design

Preliminary design is:

“a rapid, approximate, manual method of designing a structure.”
– T.J. MacGinley

“In the initial stages of the design of a building structure it is necessary, often at
short notice, to produce alterative schemes that can be assessed…”
– ISE Green Book
Therefore, it should be:
• simple;
• quick;
• conservative, and;
• reliable.
Lengthy analytical methods should be avoided.
It is often based upon vague and limited information on matters affecting the
structure such as imposed loads, nature of finishes, dimensions.

It is needed to:
• obtain costs estimates;
• compare alternative schemes for architectural and functional suitability;
• obtain initial estimates for computer analysis, and;
• check a completed detailed design.

Each structural scheme should be:

• suitable for its purpose;
• sensibly economical, and;
• not unduly sensitive to likely changes as the design progresses.

6 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

We will develop methods of analysing and designing structures that meet the above
requirements.

Note that even though detailed design does not feature, it should be clear that
knowledge of it is central to preliminary design.

7 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.2 Syllabus
The topics covered in this subject include the following:
- Relevant Literature
- Economic Structural Scheme Design
- Load Types and Scenarios
- Stability of Structures
- Mechanisms of Load Transfer
- Tributary Lengths, Areas, and Loadwidths
- Analysis of Portal Frame Structures
- Structural Materials
- Movement/Expansion Joints
- Preliminary Loading
- Load Takedown
- Car Park Layout Design
- Preliminary Analysis
- Preliminary Design of Elements
- Example Scheme Designs

8 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.3 Programme
This subject is examined by continuous assessment. Case Study reports are the basis
for marking.

The subject is lectured in Semester 2 only as follows:

• Thursday 10:00 – 13:00
o lecture covering these notes and other material;
o group presentations of reports.

9 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.4 Studying
This subject is different to others. It is simply not possible to “cram” for, due its
nature. Here is some advice to help you achieve your best.

This Subject is Different?

• This subject is unique – there are no “right” answers:

o this is the difference between science & engineering;
o this is why students find the subject difficult;
o this also makes it difficult to teach!

• Teaching:
o Learn from experienced engineers, through discussion and reading;
o Lectures on course material;
o Case-Studies and presentation.

Remember, contrary to what your education to-date may lead you to believe:
o Engineering is not an exact science;
o There are no “right” answers.
This will become apparent in the coming weeks!

10 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

So How Do I Learn?

The three best pieces of advice (and past students agree) are:
1. Attend lectures: simple, but for subjects like this, year-on-year poor results
and attendance show a strong correlation.
2. Take lots of notes: a lot will be said – try not miss important points.
3. Ask lots of questions: both from you lecturers for this subject and from other
lecturers or engineers you have access to.

Other important pieces are:

• Submissions:
o Learn how to sketch – engineers communicate through sketches;
o Do not try avoid the question by showing irrelevant details/information;
o Text is not appreciated;
o Learn how to visualize what you are proposing as a design;
o Learn to understand the global and local behaviour of structures.

• Personally:
o Be prepared to present to the class and speak clearly and loudly;
o Learn to accept criticism in front of the class – in this way, everybody
learns from each other’s mistakes;
o Contribute your fair share to the Case Study groups.

11 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.5 General Report Advice

From previous years’ experience there are a number of common problems that occur
and are given here.

What is expected

Overall:
- Understand structural behaviour (bending, axial, membrane action etc.)
- Appreciate allowances needed for lateral loads and thermal expansion
- Apply preliminary design rules of thumb (span/15, 50N etc.)
- Pay due regard to the ‘Key Principles’

In particular:
- Lots of quick well-annotated sketches (“picture says a 1000 words”)
- Appropriate sections/elevations/details e.g. RC column bar arrangement
- Appreciation of your ‘numbers’ (2T16 in a 500×500 RC Column?!)
- Use an appropriate top-down approach to your scheme, for example:
1. stability/expansion joints
2. column/beam layout
3. approx sizes of important members
4. load takedown
5. prelim design of typical members
- Confidence in your knowledge and an ability to ‘customise’ design
recommendations without compromising on strength requirements

12 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

What is not wanted

- Obvious details, e.g. “typical bolted end-plate connection”, “cross-section

through a masonry wall”. There are no marks available for such details – don’t
waste your time!
- Lots of text – a sketch and a few bullet points will say it better
- ‘Magic’ numbers or formulae that just appear from nowhere – if it’s an unusual
(we haven’t used in class say) formula briefly reference it.
- Overly detailed calculations, e.g. crack-width calculation for a beam.

General Advice

- Make sure your structure is stable in all 3-dimensions before moving on.
- Carry any expansion joints all the way through the structure down to ground level
- remember they are being designed as totally separate structures that are very
close to one another.
- Follow the “advice” in the problem, e.g. “minimum structural intrusion is
expected” means don’t put a column there unless absolutely necessary.
- Try visualising the structure and your solution. Play around with solutions in your
head or on the paper before committing to one in particular.

13 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.6 Report Requirements

The purpose of these guidelines is to help you avoid wasting time on irrelevant
aspects and to prepare you for the workplace in 15 months’ time.

Reports that do no conform to the following may or may not be accepted for
submission, at the discretion of the lecturer.

General
• Submit one report per group;
• Reports should be covered (clear plastic to front) and bound with slide-on
spine binder.
• Clearly identify the group letter on the front cover sheet;
• Each group member is to sign the front cover of the report;
• Each group member should retain a copy of the report for reference.

Content
• The report should consist of annotated sketches;
• In some cases a little text is appropriate: keep it to a minimum;
• In some cases a few calculations are appropriate; again keep to a minimum;
• Answer the question: do not provide irrelevant details!

Format
• Sketches are to be done on lightly squared paper, e.g. calculation pads;
• Any calculations are to be done on lightly squared paper also;
• The use of CAD is not recommended – it is better to improve your sketching;
• Text (excluding annotations) should be typed in the following style: Times
New Roman, size 14 font; Justify alignment, and; double line spacing.

Length
• The report should be between 5 and 10 pages in length.

14 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Submission
• Reports are to be submitted at the time stated on the problem;
• Late submissions will not be accepted – clients in the real world do not accept
tardiness so start preparing for it now!

Presentation
• The report is to be photocopied onto acetate for presentation;
• The group must be ready to present and defend the report in class.

15 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.7 Reading Material

Reading about projects and new techniques will be a major part of your engineering
career (CPD). By reading about the problems and solutions of various buildings
you’ll learn what works. Here is a good starting list – most of it will be in the library.

Institution of Structural Engineers:

• Manual for the design of reinforced concrete (“the Green book”)
• Manual for the design of structural steelwork (“the Grey book”)
• Manual for the design of masonry (“the Red book”)
• Design recommendations for multi-storey and underground car parks (3rd edition)
• Stability of buildings
• The Structural Engineer – fortnightly magazine, in the library
Join the IStructE for free at: http://www.istructe.org/students/.

Codes:
British Standards – BS8110, BS5950, BS5268, BS5628, BS6399
Eurocodes – EC1, EC2, EC3, EC4, EC5, EC6

Magazines:
Journal of the Institution of Engineers of Ireland
Institution of Civil Engineers: The New Civil Engineer (NCE) magazine
Company Magazines, e.g. Arup Journal

Books:
Homebond Manual – don’t underestimate the complexity of a house
Library – some of the best are:
William Addis –
• Structural engineering: the nature of theory and design

16 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

• The art of the structural engineer

Angus J. Macdonald - Structure and architecture
Mario Salvadori – Why buildings stand up
Matthys Levy & Mario Salvadori – Why buildings fall down
J.E. Gordon –
• Structures, or why things don’t fall down
• The new science of strong materials, or why you don’t fall through the
floor
Malcolm Millias – Building Structures, 2nd Edn.
Peter Rice – An Engineer Imagines

Trade Organisations:
Corus, The Concrete Centre, The Brick Development Association (Google them).

Bunf:
Suppliers’ manuals (companies are very happy to send out their stuff to you)
• Kingspan/Tegral – industrial buildings
• Breton/Flood Flooring/Concast etc – precast concrete structures, precast slabs
• Bat – for timber connectors

People:
Your work placement company projects – talk to engineers you worked with.

Web:
Almost everything to be found.

Talks:
Come to the talks organized by the IStructE, IEI etc. – look out for notices.

17 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1.8 Some Introductory Problems

Easy:

1. What is the function of a buttress in a medieval

Cathedral?
2. How does it work?

A bit harder:

1. In a rectangular 2-way spanning structure (be it

slab/wall/steel plate etc), which is subject to a
uniform area load and has simply supported
sides, which side receives most load – the short,
or the long side.
2. Why?

Tricky:

1. What are braced and unbraced frames?

2. Can a structure only have one type, or both?
3. When can you mix, or why can’t you mix, these structures?
Hint: Once, you know what they are; consider the deflected shapes of each type.

18 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

2. Overall Structural Behavior

2.1 Primary function of a structure

Institution of Structural Engineers:
“Structures…must safely resist the forces to which they may be subject.”

In the following structures identify the possible loads that need to be designed for.

19 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

20 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

21 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

22 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

23 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

2.2 Structural Members

We refer to a range of possible structural materials under the following structural
actions.

(i) Cantilever Action

Examples: balconies, canopies over doorways, older bridges

• Carry load by: ______________________________________________________

• Span/depth ratio and/or load is about:____________________________________

• Materials:__________________________________________________________

(ii) Beam Action (bending between 2 or more supports)

• Carry load by: ______________________________________________________

24 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

• ‘Normal’ size beams are good for spans of: _______________________________

• Materials:__________________________________________________________

(iii) Two-way Bending Action

Bending between 2 or more supports in each direction

Flat Slab

Beams Under

Columns Under

Slab
Panel

Beam and Slab

25 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

• Carry load by: ______________________________________________________

• Materials:__________________________________________________________

(iv) One-way Axial Force Action

Examples: columns/struts, ties

• Carry load by: ___________________________________

• Comment on the suitability of the following materials:

Material Tension Compression

Steel

R.C.

P.S.C.

Timber

Masonry

Structural
Glass

26 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

(v) Diaphragm Action (a.k.a Membrane or Deep Beam Behaviour)

Membrane action

By definition, ‘regular beam’ action becomes ‘deep beam’ action when span/depth
ratio goes less than about 2.

• For span/depth > 2, ____________________________ dominates

• For span/depth < 2, _____________________________ dominates

• Carry load by: ______________________________________________________

• Suitable materials include: ____________________________________________

• Because: __________________________________________________________

27 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

2.3 Structural Systems

(i) Trusses

• Individual members undergo:__________________________________________

• But the system overall carries load through:_______________________________

• More economical than beams for:_______________________________________

• Comment on the suitability of the following materials:

Material Comment

Steel

R.C.

P.S.C.

Timber

Masonry

Structural Glass

28 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

(ii) Frames

Frame under lateral load:

All members
contribute

Frame action is what happens in Vierendeel Girders (named after Belgian engineer):

• Consists of groups of beams and/or columns:______________________________

connected together

• Individual members undergo:__________________________________________

• In lateral loading, it does the job of a:____________________________________

• In vertical loading, it does the job of a:___________________________________

• Comment on the suitability of the following materials:

29 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Material Comment

Steel

R.C.

P.S.C.

Timber

Masonry

Structural Glass

(iii) Arches

F×sinθ
F×cosθ

• Predominant action is:________________ but can also undergo_______________

30 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

• Used to span: __________________________distances

• Generates substantial horizontal thrust. This is the dominant limitation to the arch.

Horizontal thrust is equal to the horizontal component of the axial force in the arch at
the point where it meets the support.

It is difficult to design foundations to take significant horizontal force unless they are
in rock. Possible solutions are:
• provide a tie (tied arch);
• use an elliptical or half-circular arch so that θ = 90o.

(iv) Cable Supported Structures

Cable-Stayed Bridge (e.g. William Dargan Bridge, Dundrum)

• A vertical tower is needed;

• Weights must be counterbalanced (otherwise, there will be a massive overturning
moment on the support);
• The beam acts as a continuous beam with supports provided by the cables;
• In addition, the beam must resist some compression generated by the strut-tie
arrangement:

31 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Draw the flow of forces: designate Compression as ( ); conversely for Tension.

Pull from
deck

• Used for bridges in 200 m to 400 m span range.

• Also used for roofs where there must be _________________________________

(v) Catenary Structures

Suspension Bridge

32 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

• More difficult to construct than cable-stayed

• Capable of the longest spans
• Flexible - may need stiffening truss
• Stressed ribbon uses catenary action:

Stressed Ribbon Bridge (e.g. Kilmacannogue)

(vi) Fabric Structures

Fabric (cloth) has no flexural strength, i.e., it has no strength in bending. It buckles in
compression. Its only strength is in tension.

Fabric is subject to 2-way axial force action, i.e., membrane action. However, it is
different from a deep beam in that (a) it takes no compression and (b) the fabric
deforms in response to load into a 2D catenary shape. These deformations are large
compared with the geometry of the structure (think of a 10 m beam deflecting 2 m!).
This change in shape changes the load path further, and hence the shape, and hence
the loadpath… This phenomenon is known as geometric non-linearity.

Fabric roofing material is now available commercially.

Advantages/Disadvantages:
• very light self weight;
• great spans with ease (30 m in Berlin zeppelin hanger);

33 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

• it stretches;
• it has different strengths parallel and perpendicular to the weave;
• it must be stretched (prestressed);
• snow will tend to drift;
• long-term durability is improving as fabric technology improves.

(vii) Air supported structures

It is possible to construct ‘buildings’ from fabric with no compressive members. The

idea is based on maintaining a positive pressure inside the building – like a balloon.
Air locks are provided at all entrances. Leaks will result in collapse if not repaired.

This principle has been used as ‘shuttering’ in buildings made from reinforced
concrete!

(viii) Hyperbolic paraboloid

Roofs can have a hyperbolic paraboloid shape, i.e., parabola in one direction and
hyperbola in the other (saddle shape). This shape is structurally efficient. The load is
carried predominantly by membrane action.

34 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The saddle dome ice hockey stadium in Calgary, Canada is a hyperbolic paraboloid
and is made of prestressed concrete sections 600 mm deep.

(ix) Folded Plate

Compression

Depth of Tension
fold

A folded plate is stronger than a flat plate as it acts like a beam/slab, taking tension in
the lower members and compression in the upper members (if simply supported).
Structurally, the depth of the fold is more important than the depth of the members.
To see this in action make a paper model and load it. Note that it only spans one way
to any extent.

35 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

(x) Space Frames (a misnomer - axial forces only)

It is possible to have trusses in 2-Dimensions, i.e., 2-way spanning trusses. They

come in proprietary forms. As for regular trusses, the systems acts in bending but the
members are in compression or tension. They are structurally efficient (high strength-
to-weight ratio) but expensive relative to more conventional forms.

(xi) Tree structures (Stansted airport)

These are in effect a form of 3D truss system – a series of struts and ties. They are not
particularly efficient although the inclined members do reduce the effective clear
span of the roof truss.

Roof truss

Effective span of
roof truss
Tension

36 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Examples of Structural Members & Systems

Possible Answers: 1 = cantilever, 2 = beam/1-way bending, 3 = 2-way bending, 4 =

1-way axial force action, 5 = membrane/2-way axial force, 6 = truss, 7 = frame or
Vierendeel, 8 = arch, 9 = cable supported, 10 = suspension/catenary.

B
C

D E

1. What is the structural action in transferring vertical load from A to B & C?

__________________________________

2. What is the action in transferring it from B & C to D & E?

__________________________________

37 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

3. What is the structural action in transferring horizontal load to the ground?

______________________________________________________

A B
4m

10 m

4. What is the structural action from the load to A & B?

______________________________________________________

5. and from A & B to the ground? ________________________________________

6. Free standing wall: how is the horizontal wind load transferred to the piers?

_______________________________________________

38 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7. And how is it transferred from the piers to the ground?

_________________________________________________

8. Would you allow a damp proof course? _________________________________

9. Indicate the types of support (fixed, pinned or sliding) you would specify at each
support point on the arch bridge:

39 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

2.4 Stability of Buildings

Introduction

There are loads in all 3-dimensions of a building:

z

Gravity → Columns

Wind → Bracing Wind → Bracing

y
x

Note the following:

- load can act in either direction in each dimension;
- It’s usually safe to ignore uplift of the whole structure, but not in the roof
design or when a basement extends below the water table.

So loads in 5 directions must be resisted:

- Columns for vertical;
- Braced/unbraced frames for horizontal.

Even without loads in the lateral directions, bracing is required due to the
inaccuracies of actual construction: buildings may not be perfectly plumb.

40 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The frame on the left is in equilibrium, but is not stable (try to balance a pen, even on
its ‘fat’ end!). The frame on the right is stable due to the addition of the diagonal
member, even thought this additional member does not contribute to the vertical load
carrying capacity of the structure.

Some ways to stabilize a single-bay frame are:

In this, (a) and (b) are termed ‘braced’ frames whilst (c) is referred to as a ‘sway’, or
unbraced frame. A single braced bay can stabilize a row of bays:

41 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Definitions:
- Braced Frame:
o load resisted through bending of large in-plane elements.
- Unbraced or Sway Frame:
o load resisted through moment connections of framework –
generally not used unless absolutely necessary due to the expense
of the moment connections and the larger deflections.

Taking a 2-storey frame, unless we provide lateral stability we have:

x, y

So we provide bracing similar to:

Shear wall Truss Bracing

infill panels

x, y

42 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Important points to note:

1. Bracing is required at both ends unless the wind load (e.g.) can be transferred
through the floors;
2. Bracing at both ends constrains thermal expansion – this may cause problems
in a long structure;
3. Bracing is required in both dimensions, x and y, and must be able to resist load
in each direction;
4. If there is bracing at both ends, bracing may be designed for a single load
direction.

When considering walls as bracing, remember they can only take in-plane loads:

Just like a piece of card:

43 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Lateral Load Paths

The wind load that needs to be resisted must take the following path:
1. Wind hits façade (glazing or brickwork);
2. Façade spans between floors vertically;
3. Floors transfer load to the braced elements through diaphragm action;
4. Bracing takes load from each floor to ground.

44 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Sketch more of the lateral load path for yourself.

Identify the elements providing the load path in the following structures:

45 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Write notes on the following figures and what they describe.

46 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

47 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Are the following stable? – sketch the various load paths to check.

48 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

In Practice

Actual structures have bracing systems that look along the lines of the following:

Obviously floor space in buildings is at a premium so structural designers try to use

features that must be in the building for the lateral stability of the building. List some:

49 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Mixing Bracing Systems in the Same Direction

What are the following diagrams telling us?

50 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Lateral Stability of Portal Frame Structures

A portal frame structure (usually used in industrial estates etc.) is the most ordinary
of buildings, yet is complex for lateral stability.

Write some notes on why this is, and sketch the required stability elements on the
attached end gable. The end gable is not a portal frame.

51 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

52 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

2.5 Allowing for Movement

Joints are required to allow two parts of a structure move relatively, due to:
• Temperature;
• Moisture;
• Ground movements.
Movement joints are difficult to waterproof and detail – therefore minimize. Joints
need to allow 15-25 mm movement.

Building Control joints:

Required to prevent cracking where a structure:

• or parts of a structure, are large;
• spans different ground conditions;
• changes height considerably;
• has a shape that suggests a point of natural weakness.

Important: Advice on joint spacing can be variable and conflicting, but here goes:

Structure type: IStructE/Corus Cobb Anecdotal

50 m 50 m
Concrete 60 – 70 m
25 m: exposed RC 25 m: exposed RC

Steel – Industrial 125–150 m 100 – 150 m

Simple: 100 m
Steel – commercial 50 – 100 m
Continuous: 50 m

Masonry 40 – 50 m

53 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Extracts

IStructE Green Book (RC)

54 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

IStructE Grey Book (Steel)

Corus

55 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

56 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

57 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Movement joints

Used to divide structural elements into smaller elements due to local effects of
temperature and moisture content.

Material Spacing
Clay bricks On plan: up to 12 m c/c (6 m from corners);
Vertically: 9 m or every 3 storeys if h > (12 m or 4 storeys)
Concrete blocks 3 m – 7 m c/c
Steel roof sheeting 20 m c/c down the slope

Examples

Joint in an RC slab:

Joint in a roof:

58 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Kansai Airport:
The building moves three-dimensionally in repose to potential stress from temperature
shrinkage, earthquakes and uneven setting. In order to make the structure capable of
absorbing deformation, expansion joints have been placed in 11 locations, at
approximate intervals of 150m along the length of the 1.7km structure. The joints are
450-600mm in width.

59 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Effect on Stability

“The positions of movement joints should be considered for their effect on the overall
stability of the structure” – Cobb

This has important implications:

• Every part of a structure must be stable in its own right;
• Just as columns are required in each portion separated by a movement joint, each
portion must be capable of resisting horizontal load on its own.

60 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Example

40

110

Architect’s Plan Showing Stair/Lift Cores

(Note: column layout is figurative only)

The Project Engineer decides to pursue an in-situ reinforced concrete option:

balancing the extra cost and potential problems with each expansion joint, they
choose to put one joint in, running N-S, at the mid-line, i.e., 55 m each side. No
expansion joint is required in the E-W direction, as 40 < 50 m.

A B

40

55 55

Engineer’s Movement Joint Plan

61 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Note:
• Double columns at interface – there are now 2 separate structures built very
closely beside each other;
• Stability of each structure – clearly structure A is stable, whilst B is not.

A B

40

55 55

Final Structural Layout

(Note: indicates shear wall)

• Now structure-B is stable in both N-S and E-W directions;

• The shear walls may be RC, or masonry infill panels;
• Shear walls can have limited window opes, if required.

Case Study

Beaumont Hospital car park is an excellent example of lateral stability design, car
park design, and building control joints. Similarly to the two walls that are very close
together in the building just above, two X-braced frames either side of the control
joint are clearly visible.

62 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

3. Structural Materials and Structural Form

“There are always many possible solutions, the search is

for the best – but there is no best – just more or less good”
– Ove Arup
“If the structural shape does not correspond to the
materials of which it is made there can be no aesthetic
satisfaction” – Eduardo Torroja

Every building and structure is unique in every way. The designers’ solution reflects
this, and must also be unique – an optimum balance of pros and cons sympathetic to
the project. This is so both for the materials to be used, and for the type of
construction to be used.

63 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

3.1 Choice of Structural Material

The notes that follow are an extract from Reinforced & Prestressed Concrete Design,
The Complete Process, by E. J. OBrien & A. S. Dixon.

In reading these notes keep in mind:

• Different or extensions of existing materials, for example:
o Reinforced masonry;
o Glulam timber;
o Hollow precast units;
o Water-filled steel elements.
• What priorities do the different members of the design team assign to each of the
criteria given in the notes?
• Industrial disputes also affect choice, most prominently though cost of labour.
• Most importantly, it should be evident that new techniques/methods/systems are
always emerging – keep up to date.

Introduction

The principal criteria which influence the choice of structural material are:
(a) strength;
(b) durability (resistance to corrosion);
(c) architectural requirements;
(d) versatility;
(e) safety;
(f) speed of erection;
(g) maintenance;
(h) cost;
(i) craneage.

64 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The properties of reinforced and prestressed concrete are compared below with the
properties of structural steel, timber and masonry under each of these nine headings.
It should be noted that only one or two structural materials tend to be used in any
given construction project. This is to minimise the diversity of skills required in the
workforce.

Strength

The relative strengths of the six main structural materials have already been discussed
above. However, it should also be noted that the ability of a material to sustain
external loads is dependent on the mechanisms by which the loads are carried in
a member. For example, members which are in pure compression or tension will
carry their loads more efficiently than members in bending since the stress is evenly
distributed across the section (this will be seen in the following section). For this
reason, the available strength of a structural material depends as much on the method
of load transfer as its characteristic strength. Nevertheless, it can in general be stated
that reinforced and prestressed concrete and structural steel are strong materials.
Relative to these, timber and masonry are generally rather weak and are more suitable
for short spans and/or light loads.

Durability

The durability of a material can be defined as its ability to resist deterioration under
the action of the environment for the period of its design life. Of the four raw
materials used in construction, steel has by far the least resistance to such corrosion
(or rusting as it is more commonly known), particularly in aggressive humid
environments. Hence, the durability of a structural material which is wholly or partly
made from steel will largely be governed by how well the steel is protected.

A significant advantage of reinforced and prestressed concrete over other

65 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

structural materials is their superior durability. The durability of the concrete itself
is related to the proportions of its constituents, the methods of curing and the level of
workmanship in the mixing and placing of the wet concrete. The composition of a
concrete mix can be adjusted so that its durability specifically suits the particular
environment. The protection of the steel in reinforced and prestressed concrete
against the external environment is also dependent on the concrete properties,
especially the porosity. However, its resistance to corrosion is also proportional to the
amount of surrounding concrete, known as the cover, and the widths to which cracks
open under day-to-day service loads.

Structural steel, like concrete, is considered to be very durable against the agents of
wear and physical weathering (such as abrasion). However, one of its greatest
drawbacks is its lack of resistance to corrosion. Severe rusting of steel members
will result in a loss in strength and, eventually, to collapse. The detrimental effect of
rusting is found to be negligible when the relative humidity of the atmosphere is less
than approximately 70 per cent and therefore protection is only required in unheated
temperate environments. Where corrosion is likely to be a problem, it can often be
prevented by protective paints. Although protective paints are very effective in
preventing corrosion, they do add significantly to the maintenance costs (unlike
concrete for which maintenance costs ire minimal).

For timber to be sufficiently durable in most environments it must be able to resist

the natural elements, insect infestation, fungal attack (wet and dry rot) and extremes
in temperature. Some timbers, such as cedar and oak, possess natural resistance
against deterioration owing to their density and the presence of natural oils and
resins. However, for the types of timber most commonly used in construction, namely
softwoods, some form of preservative is required to increase their durability. When
suitably treated, timber exhibits excellent properties of durability.

66 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Masonry, like concrete, can also be adapted to suit specific environments by selecting
more resistant types of blocks/bricks for harsh environments. Unreinforced masonry
is particularly durable and can last well beyond the typical 50 year design life.

Architectural requirements

The appearance of a completed structure is the most significant architectural feature

pertinent to material choice since the aesthetic quality of a completed structure is
largely determined by the finish on the external faces.

For concrete, this final appearance is dependent on the standards of placement and
compaction and the quality of the formwork. Badly finished concrete faces, with
little or no variation in colour or texture over large areas, can form the most unsightly
views. Concrete is a versatile material, however, and when properly placed, it is
possible to produce structures with a wide variety of visually appealing finishes In the
case of precast concrete, an excellent finished appearance can usually be assured
since manufacture is carried out in a controlled environment.
Exposed structural steel in buildings is displeasing to the eye in many settings and
must be covered in cladding in order to provide an acceptable finish. An exception to
this is the use of brightly painted closed, hollow, circular or rectangular sections.

Timber and masonry structures will generally have an excellent finished

appearance, providing a high quality of workmanship is achieved. Masonry also
offers a sense of scale and is available in a wide variety of colours, textures and
shapes. In addition to their aesthetic fatalities, concrete and masonry structures also
have the advantage of possessing good sound and thermal insulation properties.

Versatility

The versatility of a material is based as its ability (a) to be fabricated in diverse

67 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

forms and shapes and (b) to undergo substantial last-minute alterations on site
without detriment to the overall design. Steel can easily be worked into many
efficient shapes on fabrication but is only readily available from suppliers in standard
sections. Concrete is far more versatile in this respect as it can readily be formed by
moulds into very complex shapes. Timber is the most limited as it is only available
from suppliers in a limited number of standard sides. Laminated timber, on the
other hand can be profiled and bent into complex shapes. Masonry can be quite
versatile since the dimensions of walls and columns can readily be changed at any
time up to construction. The disadvantage of steel, timber and precast concrete
construction is their lack of versatility on site compared with in situ reinforced
concrete and masonry to which substantial last-minute changes can be made. In situ
prestressed concrete is not very versatile as changes can require substantial
rechecking of stresses.

Safety

The raw material of concrete is very brittle and failure at its ultimate strength can
often occur with little or no warning. Steel, being a very ductile material, will
undergo large plastic deformations before collapse, thus giving adequate warning
of failure. The safety of reinforced concrete structures can be increased by providing
'under-reinforced' concrete members (the concepts of under-reinforced and over-
reinforced concrete are discussed in Chapter 7). In such members, the ductile steel
reinforcement effectively fails in tension before the concrete fails in compression,
and there is considerable deformation of the member before complete failure.
Although timber is a purely elastic material, it has a very low stiffness
(approximately 1/20th that of steel) and hence, like steel, it will generally undergo
considerable defection before collapse.

An equally important aspect of safety is the resistance of structures to fire. Steel

68 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

loses its strength rapidly as its temperature increases and so steel members must be
protected from fire to prevent collapse before the occupants of the structure have time
to escape. For structural steel, protection in the form of intumescent paints, spray-
applied cement-binded fibres or encasing systems, is expensive and can often be
unsightly. Concrete and masonry possess fire-resisting properties far superior to most
materials. In reinforced and prestressed concrete members, the concrete acts as a
protective barrier to the reinforcement, provided there is sufficient cover. Hence,
concrete members can retain their strength in a fire for sufficient time to allow the
occupants to escape safely from a building. Timber, although combustible, does not
ignite spontaneously below a temperature of approximately 500 °C. At lower
temperatures, timber is only charred by direct contact with flames. The charcoal
layer which builds up on the surface of timber during a fire protects the underlying
wood from further deterioration and the structural properties of this 'residual' timber
remain unchanged.

Speed of erection

In many projects, the speed at which the structure can be erected is often of
paramount importance due to restrictions on access to the site or completion
deadlines. In such circumstances, the preparation and fabrication of units offsite
will significantly reduce the erection time. Thus, where precast concrete
(reinforced and/or prestressed) and structural steel are used regularly, the construction
tends to be very fast Complex timber units, such as laminated members and roof
trusses, can also be fabricated offsite and quickly erected.

The construction of in situ concrete structures requires the fixing of reinforcement the
erection of shuttering, and the castings, compaction and curing of the concrete. The
shutters can only be removed or 'struck' when the concrete has achieved sufficient
strength to sustain its self-weight. During the period before the shutters can be struck,

69 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

which can be several days, very little other construction work can take place (on that
part of the structure) and hence the overall erection time of the complete structure
tends to be slow. Masonry construction, though labour intensive, can be erected
very rapidly and the structure can often be built on after as little as a day.

Maintenance

Less durable structural materials such as structural steel and timber require treatment
to prevent deterioration. The fact that the treatment must be repeated at intervals
during the life of the structure means that there is a maintenance requirement
associated with these materials. In fact, for some of the very large exposed steel
structures, protective paints must be applied on a continuous basis. Most concrete and
masonry structures require virtually no maintenance.

An exception to this is structures in particularly harsh environments, such as coastal

regions and areas where do-icing salts are used (bridges supporting roads). In such
cases, regular inspections of reinforced and prestressed concrete members are now
becoming a standard part of many maintenance programmes.

Cost

The cost of structural material is of primary interest when choosing a suitable

material for construction. The relative cost per unit volume of the main construction
materials will vary between countries. However, the overall cost of a construction
project is not solely a function of the unit cost of the material.

For example, although concrete is cheaper per unit volume than structural steel,
reinforced concrete members generally require a greater volume than their equivalent
structural steel members because of the lower strength of concrete.

70 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

As a consequence, reinforced concrete can become the more expensive structural

material. If reinforced concrete members are cast in situ, constructions costs tend to
be greater than for the steel structure because of the longer erection time and the
intensive labour requirements. However, the high cost of structural steel and its
protection from corrosion and are counteract any initial saving with the result that
either material can be more cost effective. In general, it is only by comparing the
complete cost of a project that the most favourable material can be determined. As a
general guide, however, it can be said that reinforced concrete and structural steel
will incur approximately the same costs, masonry will often prove cheaper than both
where it is feasible while the cost of timber is very variable.

Craneage

In certain circumstances, the choice of structural material and construction method

may be determined by the availability of craneage. For example, in a small project,
it may be possible to avoid the need for cranes by the use of load-bearing
masonry walls and timber floors. Depending on their weight and size, structural
steel and precast concrete units may require substantial craneage and it is often the
limit on available craneage that dictates the size of such units.

In general, in situ concrete requires little craneage although cranes, when available,
can be used for moving large shutters.

The table below serves as a summary of the relative advantages and disadvantages of
the four types of structural material under the categories discussed above. At this
stage, it should be appreciated that the choice of any structural material is heavily
dependent on the particular structure and the conditions under which it is constructed.

71 Dr C. Caprani
 Comparison of the structural properties of concrete (reinforced and prestressed), structural steel, timber and masonry.

Concrete Structural Steel Timber Masonry

(RC and PC)
Strength Excellent Excellent Fair Good, except in
tension

Durability Excellent Poor against Poor* Excellent

BE Structural Eng – Project III

corrosion*

Appearance Fair Fair Excellent Excellent

72
Safety Excellent Poor fire resistance* Good Excellent

Speed of Slow for in-situ Very fast Very fast Very fast but labour
erection intensive

Versatility Excellent for in-situ, Poor Fair Very good

poor otherwise

*unless protected

Dr C. Caprani
 Order of priority given to the material evaluation criteria by different design team members.

Building
Structural Quantity
Priority Client Contractor Architect Services
Engineer Surveyor
Engineer

1
BE Structural Eng – Project III

73
3

Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

3.2 Choice of Structural Form

Key Principles in Choosing Structural Form

All of the Case Studies, though on different topics, try to show that there are a
number of factors that contribute, in different measures, to the structural scheme
adopted. Also, it will be clear that there is no perfect answer – simply a weighted
balance of the pros and cons of any given solution. Factors include:

1. Technical Requirements
• Structure Scale:
− Stability in all directions – Vertical and Orthogonal Horizontals
− Accommodation of movement – either by joints or stress design
− Global load paths are identified
• Element Scale:
− Proportional sizes, e.g. span/d ratios or N/20 etc.
− Global actions are allowed for in the element scheme

2. Economic Requirements
• Materials (Refer to the handout):
− Raw cost – can it be locally sourced?
− Placement cost – e.g. block layers are expensive currently
− Transport of fabricated elements – special requirements?
• Constructability
− Is the structure repeatable as possible
− Minimum number of trades on site
− Transport/craneage appropriate for the material considered?

74 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

3. Functional Requirements
• Building Service Integration:
− Expect holes in beams – allow for it early on
− Flat soffits are beneficial in heavily serviced buildings
• Client’s focus:
− Speculative commercial will require clear spans for example
− Landmark headquarters will possibly mean a dramatic structure
• Architecture:
− Complement the architecture if possible
− Get involved as early as possible in the design
• Planning:
− Minimise structural depths if required
− Drainage schemes to be appropriate to site and local drainage
− Environmental considerations

Choice of Form

The span of the structure is the main consideration. For the two usual forms of
construction, the first of the following charts advises what forms of construction are
appropriate for what spans for steel and concrete.

The second chart gives a comparison of the weights of structure required for various
spans and types of construction for single-storey steel buildings. These buildings tend
to be extremely well engineering economically.

75 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

76 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

77 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4. Precedence Studies

4.1 Introduction
In this section we have a look at some interesting structures of the past and see how
they integrate the preceding ideas of stability, material and form to achieve economic
aesthetic and stunning solutions to the design brief.

78 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.2 Dulles Airport

79 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.3 Alamillo Bridge

80 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.4 Patera Building System

81 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

82 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.5 Sydney Opera House – Podium

Utzon wanted to remove the columns and asked the engineers if it would be possible.
The engineers said yes, but it would be more expensive. But why is it necessary to
remove them: the area is for deliveries only, and the columns to not interfere with
that function?

83 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.6 Sydney Opera House – General

Even Candela was brought in to aid the design of the shells but to no avail. Would it
all have been easier if Utzon had an engineer on board from day one?

84 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.7 Robert Maillart – Beam Bridge

The evolution of structural form:

85 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.8 Pompidou – Lateral Stability

86 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

87 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.9 Pompidou – General

Is the form of this building derived from structural or architectural principles?

88 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Rough structural section showing columns & Gerberettes

BMD for Simply-Supported Span

BMD for forces applied to cantilevered ends

89 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

90 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.10 Nervi – Some Examples

91 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

92 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

93 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.11 Peter Rice - La Villette

Two bow-string trusses are provided; one each for positive and negative (suction)
pressures on the glazed elevation.

Of significance though, is that there are no vertical cable elements. By causing the
truss and the glass to roate about different axes (X-X and Y-Y), the glass dead weight
stabilizes the whole structure.

94 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

95 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.12 Torroja – Madrid Racecourse

96 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Evolution of Structural Concept.

Here is an example of the Engineer’s Aesthetic – why was Torroja not satisfied with
event he second scheme which is structurally indistinct from the final scheme?

97 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.13 Torroja – Half-Mile Viaduct, Unbuilt, 1956

The structural concept:

98 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.14 Torroja – Operating Theatre, Madrid University

99 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.15 Two Recent Train Stations

Waterloo International

Lehrter Main Station in Berlin

What are the structural links between these two structures?

What that in mind, is this form functional, structural or architectural?

100 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

4.16 Fazlur Kahn and the Evolution of Tall Buildings

At the start of the 1960s, shear wall or moment frames were used for lateral stability.
These are costly, and it seemed though 40 storeys was about as high as was
economically possible.

By the mid 1970s a number of buildings had broken the trend:

How is this possible, and who is responsible?

Are the resulting buildings the work of an architect, or an engineer, or both?

101 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Typical deflected profiles under lateral loading:

(a) shear-type deformation of a sway frame; (b)
bending-type deformation of the shear wall as a
vertical cantilever; (c) connected together in a
structure, the two forms restrain each other.

102 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Khan now realised that the

most efficient form is to
have the structure around
the perimeter of the building
– maximizing the lever arm
to resist the overturning
moment.

The Chestnut-DeWitt Apartments (1964) uses the

framed tube system.

Evolution of the Framed Tube concept.

103 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The basic structural

action tells us that the
second moment of area
is increasingly hugely
by connecting the four
shear walls, rendering
a much stiffer
structure.

Note that this requires closely spaced exterior

columns and large perimeter beams.

There are some problems with the idea though;

the columns near the centre of the building do not
carry as much load as simple beam theory tells us:

This is called shear lag.

104 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Khan realized that the solution to this was to stiffen the perimeter walls by brining
internal shear walls out to the perimeter:

This is not ideal for the function of the building. But Kahn and Graham (SOM
architect) realized that this full resistance was not required all the way up the
structure, and that these interior walls might be exterior at different levels.

Thus the concept of the bundled tube was born, leading to…

105 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

106 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

107 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Other forms Kahn developed are the trussed tube:

Usual beam/frame structures do not share load well (a).

The ideal distribution of vertical load in (b) can be
simulated by closely spaced columns (c), or by the
integration of beams columns and diagonal elements (d).

108 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

And the tube-in-a-tube idea, where beams link the two stability stuctures:

Note that in this structure, the corners of the cores are

heavily loaded. This is expressed on the exterior of One
Shell Plaza as undulating column sizes.

109 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

And the outrigger truss system – useful in seismic areas:

110 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

111 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

In summary, Khan helped develop the concepts used in the world’s tallest structures.

It is clear that structural considerations play the prime role in final form of the
building.

112 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

5. Preliminary Analysis

5.1 Preliminary Loading

General philosophy: keep it conservative, yet realistic, at preliminary design stage.

Imposed Loading

• Based on BS 6399: Parts 1 & 2;

• Choose the highest where options exist;
• No live load reduction factors should be allowed for.

Some common loads should be remembered:

Use Load (kN/m2)

Commercial speculative offices 5
Light office 2.5
Residential 1.5
Car park 2.5
Plant rooms 7.5

Extract from BS6399: Part 1: 1996:

113 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

114 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

115 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

116 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Dead Load

Dead loads are derived from the densities of materials to be used. However, usually
the dimensions of the elements are not known prior to preliminary sizing.

The ultimate reference is:

• Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures: Part 2: Annex 2: Densities of Building
Materials and Stored Materials

Some common densities are:

Material Density (kN/m3)

Reinforced concrete 24
Structural steel 77
Timber – softwood 4–6
Timber – hardwood 6 – 10
Blocks – solid 21
Blocks – hollow 12
Bricks 22

Designers usually build up a list of the dead loads for common build-ups – two sets
of build-ups are in the following pages.

In deriving dead load, be conservative at preliminary design stage.

After calculation of dead and imposed load, determine the composite gamma factor.
This provides insight into the governing type of load (dead or live) and is also very
useful after the full load takedown when only service loads are to be designed for in
the foundation dedsign.

117 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Remember that: γ G = 1.4; γ Q = 1.6 , and,

wser = Gk + Qk
wult = γ G ⋅ Gk + γ Q ⋅ Qk

So define the composite factor of safety:

wult
γ Comp =
wser

Values of γ Comp nearer 1.4 indicate dead load is governing; those nearer 1.6 indicate

live load is governing. To reduce loads overall if there is a problem, try change the
governing load first.

118 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The Structural Engineer’s Handbook gives the following:

119 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

One more relevant to Irish construction is:

Standard Dead Loads

Build-up kN/m2 Build-up kN/m2
Timber Floor Concrete Floor
Floorboards/plywood deck 0.15 Precast H'core Unit 150 Dp. 2.25
Floor Joists 0.1- 200 Dp. 2.56
Plasterboard Ceiling …or… 0.15 250 Dp. 3.22
…Lath and Plaster 0.5 300 Dp. 3.55
Insulation 0.05 400 Dp. 4.3
Floor

Pugging (plaster/mortar) 0.4 R.C Slab 150 Dp. 3.6

Carpet/finish 0.2 200 Dp. 4.8
Typical Floor Wt (L&P, 1.4 250 Dp. 6
Typical Floor Wt (Plasterbd,
0.75 300 Dp. 7.2
Ins.)
Screed 50 mm 1.2
70 mm 1.68
Masonry Walls Studded Partition
100mm Blockwork 2.2 Timber/Plasterboard 0.5
215mm Solid Blockwork 4.54 Timber/Lath & Plaster 1.1
Walls

215mm Hollow Blockwork 2.5

100mm Brickwork 2.25
Plaster (Gypsum) 0.25
Rendering (pebble dash) 0.5
Industrial Timber
Insulated Profiled Decking 0.12 Slates (Natural) 0.35
Trocal type, built up roof Slates (Asbestos) 0.2
Glazing 0.5 Tiles (Concrete) 0.5
Roof

Pressed Steel Purlins 0.1 Battens 0.03

Steel Frame 0.2 Felt 0.05
Services 0.1 Insulation 0.05
Suspended Ceiling 0.05 Timber Truss 0.2
Plasterboard Ceiling …or… 0.15
…Lath and Plaster 0.5

120 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

5.2 Preliminary Structural Analysis

For preliminary design quick, reasonably accurate, appropriate forms of analysis are
needed to determine load effects that the structure must be capable of resisting.

Statically Determinate Beams

These are the basis of more complicated analyses: the usual cases need to be known.
w
A B
C
L
VA VB

wL wL2 5wL4
VA = VB = , MC = , δC =
2 8 384 EI

A B
C
L
VA VB

P PL PL3
VA = VB = , MC = , δC =
2 4 48 EI

MA B wL2 wL4
A VA = wL , M A = , δB =
2 8 EI
L
V

MA B PL3
A VA = P , M A = PL , δ B =
L 3EI

VA

121 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Statically Indeterminate Beams

w
MA MB
A B

VA L VB
wL4
δC =
wL2 384 EI wL2
MA = MB =
12 12

What is the moment at the centre of the beam?

w
MA B
A
5 L 3
VA = wL VB = wL
8 8
2 wL4
δC =
384 EI
wL2
MA =
8

122 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Again, what is the moment at the centre of the beam?

Continuous Beams

The reactions have been considered previously, so only moments are done here.
w
A C
B
L L

VA VB VC
wL2
MB =
8

What is the moment at mid-span?

123 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

w
A D
B C
L L L
VA VD
VB VC

wL2 wL2
MB = MC =
10 10

What are the mid-span moments of the beam?

w
A E
B C D
L L L L
VA VC VD VE
VB
wL2 wL2 wL2
MB = MC = MD =
10 12 10

124 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

What are the mid-span moments of the beam?

For more spans, the moments over the first interior supports are as shown, and the
wL2
moments over other internal supports are taken as .
12

Determine the mid-span moments for the above beams.

The IStructE Green Book – adapted – gives the following:

At first At middle At interior
Near middle
At outer interior of interior supports
of end span
support support spans
wL2 wL2 wL2 wL2
Moment 0
11.11 9.09 14.3 12.5
wL wL wL
Shear - -
2.22 1.66 1.81

These figures allow for moment redistribution.

125 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Unequal-Span Continuous Beams

Fill in the areas shown:

Estimate MB and MC for:

126 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Workings:

127 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Analysis for Preliminary Design

To get a rough idea of the rebar required for your scheme, it is usual to take the
largest moment in your section:
1. What is your configuration – propped cantilever, 3-span beam etc…
2. Take the maximum value of moment (i.e. smallest value of denominator).
wL2 wL2
So for a 3-span beam take , for a fixed-fixed beam take etc.
10 12

Typical internal span

For more detailed design, or to find the positions of the points of contraflexure, the
following is helpful:

MA w MB

A B
L VB
VA

MA d d MB

b c

Assuming only MA and MB are known, take moments about B to give:

wL ( M A − M B ) V
VA = − ; sum the vertical forces to get VB = wL − VA . Therefore, a = A and
2 L w

VA2 VA2 + 2wM A

so M max = −MA. Defining d = , then the distances to the points of
2w w
contraflexure are, b b = a − d and c = L − a + d .

128 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Load Patterning

For design of any continuous structure, it is necessary to consider load patterning to

determine the design envelope for shear and moment etc:

MIN = 0.9Gk MAX = 1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

This presents problems with our moment formulae previously. A way around this is
to do the following:

MIN + (MAX-MIN)/2; i.e. 1.15Gk + 0.8Qk

(MAX-MIN)/2; i.e. 0.25Gk + 0.8Qk

Why is this better?

129 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Qualitative Assessment for Moments

Consider the beam shown in the figures, should the RC beam (250W×300Dp.) be
designed for moments at support B? And if so, what value would you take?
Remember that large amounts of cracking are not desirable.
Moment
A w B

RC-detailed
pin connection
Structure 1

A w B

Continuity
250×250 RC
Structure 2 Column

A w B

Full steel
250×500 RC
Column
Structure 3

A w B

Full steel
Shear wall
Structure 4

130 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Simply Supported Rectangular Plate

The exact analysis of plates is considerably difficult. Some simplifying assumptions

lead to easier methods of analysis that are reasonably accurate.

Take a rectangular plate, simply supported on all sides, loaded with a uniformly
distributed load, w, and consider two central unit-width strips:
ly

lx

The load on the strip in the x-direction is wx; likewise, wy. Also, w = wx + wy. The
5wx lx4 5wy l y4
deflection of each strip must be identical at the centre point: = . Hence,
384 EI x 384 EI y

ly
assuming I x = I y , and letting r = , then wx = wy r 4 and as r > 1 the load taken in the x-
lx

1 r4
direction is greater than that in the y-direction. Further, wy = w ⋅ and w = w ⋅ .
1+ r4 1+ r4
x

The moments taken in each direction are then:

wx lx2 2⎛1 r4 ⎞ wy lx2 ⎛1 1 ⎞
Mx = = wlx ⎜ ⋅ 4 ⎟
= α x wlx M y =
2
= wl y2 ⎜ ⋅ 4 ⎟
= α y wl y2
8 ⎝ 8 1+ r ⎠ 8 ⎝ 8 1+ r ⎠

where α x and α y correspond to those of BS 8110, Pt. 1: 1997, Tb. 3.13.

Other support conditions can be used, and a similar approach using compatibility of
displacement can be used.

131 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

5.3 Tributary Areas

• Building loads usually originate as uniformly distributed over some area.

• Each structural element supports some of this load
• Therefore, each structural element has an associated area from which its load
originates – its tributary area, tributary length and load width.
• This process is essentially that of tracing the load path through a structure.

Tributary Length (TL)

Consider a simply supported beam:

A B
L
RA RB

wL
As the reactions RA = RB = , they have an TL of L 2 .
2

By extension, for multiple simply supported spans:

T.L. for RA = T.L. for RB = L T.L. for RC =

w
A
B C
L L

RA RB RC

132 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The TLs are different for continuous spans:

3L 10 L 3L
TL for RA = TL for RB = TL for RC =
8 8 8

w
A
B C
L L
3wL 10 wL 3wL
RA = RB = RC =
8 8 8

Therefore, the TL depends on the form of the structure.

For more than two spans, the intermediate spans have a TL of L. The end support has
3L 5L L 9 L
a TL of , whilst the second internal support has a TL of + = :
8 8 2 8

3L 9L
TL for RA = TL for RB = TL for RC = L
8 8

w
A
B C
L L L
3wL
RA = 9 wL RC = wL
8 RB =
8

For spans of uneven length, in preliminary design, it is usual to interpolate based on

the principles above.

133 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Load Width

For beams, the UDL arises from the loads applied to the flooring system.

The simple case is a one-way spanning simply-supported flooring system (say precast
units):

w (kN/m2)

Beam A Beam B Beam C

The load taken by each beam is derived from its load-width:

Beam A Beam B Beam C

1 m strip

Beam A Beam B Beam C

The load-width is the same as the TL for the “beam” of the floor system.

134 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Tributary Area

The combination of the loadwidth (transverse to a beam) and the tributary length
(longitudinal to the beam) result in the tributary area for a beam support. Fill in the
lengths for following floor plate layout:

Note that the lengths indicated depend on the type of spans – continuous or simply
supported, and result from application of the loadwidths and tributary lengths.

135 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

For two-way spans, the load is shared between the supports on all sides:

Beams on
all sides

The tributary areas become more complex as a result:

Beam A

Beam B Beam C

Beam D

But, for the internal columns, the tributary areas remain rectangular.

136 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Sketch the loading applied to Beams A and D; and Beams B and C:

137 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

5.4 Preliminary Analysis of a Grandstand

The main structural problem with these types of structures is the roof cantilever.

Effect of a cantilever on support reactions

The general case is:

w
A C
B
l1 l2
VA VB
L

wL2
Taking ∑ Moments about A : 2
= VB l1 and ∑F Y = 0 : VA = VB − wL .

wL2 ⎛l +l ⎞ l ⎛ r +1⎞ ⎛ r −1 ⎞
So, VB = = wL ⎜ 1 2 ⎟ . Let r = 2 ; hence VB = wL ⎜ ⎟ and VA = wL ⎜ ⎟
2l1 ⎝ 2l1 ⎠ l1 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠

The term in brackets indicates the multiplier to be applied to the total load on the
span which is wL .

Note that when l1 = l2 , r = 1 , so VB = wL and VA = 0 . So for r > 1 the reaction at A is

downwards.

For example, when r = 2 , VB = 1.5wL and VA = −0.5wL . So a 50% increase of the total
load on the span occurs at the prop reaction, due simply to the geometry.

138 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Case Study: Manchester United North Stand

A rough section through this grandstand and its overall structural idealization is:

BMD

Horizontal

The ‘bending moments’ in the frame are resisted by the tension and compression of
the top and bottom chord of the roof truss:

M T

equals lever
arm

A key plan helps to explain the overall structure:

Stair/lift cores

139 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The members that contribute to the roof cantilever are shown below. What are the
structural actions on the members?

Horizontal
Bracing

What importance does the horizontal bracing have?

Stair/lift cores

140 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

6. Preliminary Design

Structural design and analysis is often an iterative process. Section sizes may be
needed before an analysis can be carried out to determine the load effects that
sections must be designed for (which in turn dictates the size of the section).
• Preliminary sizes are obtained from experience and rules of thumb (other people’s
experience). These are used in the preliminary analysis.
• The results of the analysis are used to obtain more refined approximate designs.

In preliminary design, these steps are only carried out once. In detailed design the
process can take many iterations.

For the usual materials and forms of construction we considered both of these stages.

141 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

6.1 Reinforced Concrete

Preliminary sizing

Bending members
Sized through span-effective depth ratios:

Flat
Construction One-way Two-way
slab
Imposed
Simply- Simply-
load Contin. Canti. Contin.
supported supported
(kN/m2)

5 27 31 11 30 40 36
Slab
10 24 28 10 28 39 33

Beam -
any 10 12 6
Rectang.

Beam –
any 12 15 6
flanged

The breadth of a beam is around d/3 but not always. Fire resistance requirements
stipulate minimum widths, but for ease of construction, 200 mm is a rough minimum,
giving about 2 hours fire resistance.

As a rough design check, limit the shear stress to 2 N/mm2:

1000V
b≥ for f cu ≥ 30 N/mm2
2d
where V is the maximum ultimate shear.

142 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Columns
These rules only apply for stocky braced columns for which the minimum horizontal
dimension is clear height/17.5.

Very roughly: Acol = N × 50 (in mm2) where N is the ultimate axial load in kN. Or
assume an average stress across the column of about 25 N/mm2.

A bit better: for fcu = 35 N/mm2 (where N is now in Newtons):

1% steel: Acol = N 15
2% steel: Acol = N 18
3% steel: Acol = N 21
To allow for moments in the columns, multiply the load from the floor immediately
above the column (this allows for patterned loading) by:
1.25 for interior columns;
1.5 for edge columns;
2.0 for corner columns.

Loads from other floors may be considered fully axial; sketch these requirements:

143 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Reinforced Concrete – Approximate Design

Bending members:
Percentage area of steel for a singly reinforced section:
⎛ M ⎞
ρs ≈ ⎜ 2 ⎟ π
⎝ bd ⎠

The π is to make it look fancy! Any number from 3.1 (for a loose design) up to about
ρs
4.3 (for a tight design) can be used. Note that As = bd . Combining these two
100
expressions leads to a very quick estimate of:
M
As =
300d

The 2 N/mm2 limiting shear stress is a sufficient preliminary shear check.

Columns:
Given an area of column, its resistance can be got by considering a mean ‘resistance
stress’ as:
ρ
0.35 f cu +
100
( 0.67 f y − 0.35 f cu )

N Acol − 14
Alternatively, roughly: ρ≈
3
Derive this:

144 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Punching shear:
The column reaction, Vt , is modified as follows to take account of moment transfer:
• Internal Columns: Veff = 1.15Vt ;

• Edge/Corner Columns: Veff = 1.4Vt .

1. Check maximum shear at column face:

Veff
vmax = ≤ 0.8 f cu or 5 N/mm 2
u0 d

where u0 is the perimeter of the column.

2. Shear stress at the critical section, 1.5d from the face of the column:
V
v=
ud
u = 2a + 2b + 8µ d

where a and b are the plan dimensions of a rectangular column and µ is the
perimeter multiplier of d: in this case, µ = 1.5 . If:
v ≤ vc : No shear reinforcement required.
v ≤ 2vc : Link reinforcement may be used.
v > 2vc : Alternative proven system to be used.

For preliminary design, it is sufficient to pass Step 1 and to know that v ≤ 2vc at the
critical perimeter.

A quick vc is obtained by simplifying the BS 8110 and BS 5400 Pt 4 expressions:

1
vc = 0.7 ( ρ s ) 3
N/mm2

Even quicker, but less accurate, use vc = 0.60 N/mm2.

145 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

6.2 Prestressed Concrete

Generic preliminary sizing may be based on a span depth ratio of about 36. Usually,
the manufacturers’ data sheets are used instead. These normally have load versus
span charts.

Sample information from Breton Roecrete data is given:

- Hollowcore slabs only:

- Composite hollowcore slabs:

146 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Hollowcore Slabs

147 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Composite Hollowcore

148 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Example – Design of Hollow Core Slab

Design a PSC hollowcore slab to span 7 m in an office building.

BS6399: Imposed loading, offices = 2.5 kN/m2

Partitions (assume masonry) = 2.5 kN/m2
Total Imposed = 5.0 kN/m2

Table for Composite Hollowcore floors tells us that a 200mm deep slab with a 50 mm
structural screed will carry an imposed (SLS) load of 11.5 kN/m2. Therefore, try a
200 mm deep hollowcore slab.

Self wt including screed = 3.8 kN/m2 (from table)

Ceilings & Services = 0.5
Total DL = 4.3 kN/m2

ULS load,
wu = 1.4(4.3) + 1.6(5) =14.0 kN/m2

ULS moment at centre is

wl2/8 = 1.2×14.0(7)2/8 = 85.8 kNm/m.

The 1.2 m is the width of the precast unit; hence the line load on the unit is 1.2×14
kN/m. The ultimate moment capacity of the composite floor is 188.3 kNm/m hence
the floor has ample ultimate capacity.

149 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

6.3 Steel – Non-composite

Typical span/depth ratios for different forms of construction and elements:

Typical span
Element Span/depth ratio
(m)
Floor UBs 4 – 12 15 – 18
Slimfloor 6–9 25 – 28
Castellated beams 4 – 12 14 – 17
Transfer beams 6 – 30 10
Trusses supporting floors 6 – 30 10
Plate girders 10 – 30 10 – 12
Parallel chord roof truss 10 – 100 12 – 20
Pitched roof truss 8 – 20 5 – 10
Light roof beams 6 – 60 18 – 30
Lattice roof truss 5 – 20 12 – 15
Space frame (w/ pre-camber) 10 – 100 15 – 30
Columns: UC: single storey 2–8 20 – 25
: multi storey 2–4 7 – 18
Columns: hollow sections: single storey 2–8 20 – 35
: multi storey 2–4 7 – 28

Columns:

UC Section No. of storeys

203 UC 3
254 UC 5
305 UC 8
356 UC 12

150 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

6.4 Composite Construction

Layout:
For maximum efficiency, the secondary beams should be longer than the primary
beams. The optimum ratio is 4/3. Sketch this layout:

Slab:
• RC: 125-150 mm thick
• Metal deck: 115-175 mm, spanning 2.5 to 3.6 m.
• Precast units: 75-100 mm with 50-200 mm topping can span 3 to 8 m.

A 150 mm deep overall slab with 60 mm decking spans about 2.8-3.5 m depending
on mesh and concrete density.

Beam:
Initially size as 80% of non-composite.
For a better check, size beam with Z = (non-composite Z)×(1.6 to 2).

151 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7. Car Park Layout Design

7.1 Introduction
Car park layout design usually falls to the structural engineer. This is because the
structural layout and car-park design are integral to one another. Simply put, you
can’t put a column in a driving lane. Balancing the car park and structural layout is
important for the floors overhead. Often two different structural layouts are used for
the car park and for (say) overhead offices. A transfer structure is needed in between
to link these two layouts.

Defintions
Bay: the parking space for a single vehicle.
Aisle: the driving lane adjacent to the parking bays.
Bin: A ‘unit’ comprising bays on both sides of an aisle.

Usage
The layout of a car park depends critically on its foreseen use:
• Short or long stay;
• Regular or irregular users;
• Small or large scale parking.

Some typical examples are:

Apartments and Offices:

Long stays — regular users — small scale parking.
Therefore:
• Allow some delays;
• Allow narrower geometries.

152 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Hospital and Airport visitor car parks:

Short stays — irregular users — large car parks.
Therefore:
• Generous geometries;
• Shorter delays per user required;
• High turnover and less congestion required;
Hence, the flow of traffic and the location of exits must be carefully thought through.

Notes:

153 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7.2 Car Sizes and Swept Path

Car sizes are given in the IStructE’s Design Recommendations(…) as:

Car Type L (m) W (m) H (m)

Small 3.95 1.75 1.75

Standard 4.75 2.06 1.85
Large 5.40 2.24 2.05
MPV 5.10 2.20 1.90
4×4 5.05 2.25 2.05

Note: Width includes wing mirrors, Height excludes roof bars/boxes etc. Taken
from a 1999/2000 UK Review.

The actual design criteria (given later) are governed by the swept path of a large car.
In the case of special design, outside the limits of the recommendations, the figure
below must be used to verify the design’s adequacy. Using CAD software, the figure
below can be superimposed on any part of a proposed layout to verify that there are
no clashes. This is not necessary for usual standard designs, however.

154 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Notes:

155 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7.3 Bay, Aisle and Bin Dimensions

Based on the car sizes and stay requirements, the bay sizes are:
Type L (m) W (m)

Short Stay (≤ 2 hrs.) 4.8 2.5

Long Stay 4.8 2.3

Disabled 4.8 3.6

These dimensions are to be clear of any projections (for example, columns).

Typically we design for 2.4 × 4.8 m to make the structural grid regular, as will be
seen.

For driving lanes we allow for the largest of vehicles. However, the individual
parking bays can be designed for a more reasonable vehicle size. Lanes must also be
designed to allow cars back out of a space. Therefore, 1-way and 2-way lanes are of
similar width. Applying the swept path configuration, the recommendations for
parking dimensions are given as:

Parking Bin width (m)

Aisle Width (m) Bay Width (m)
angle (4.8 m length)
90° 1-way 6.00 2.4 16.55

90° 2-way 6.95 2.4 15.60

60° 4.20 2.4 14.95

45° 3.60 2.4 13.80

156 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The next figure illustrates the implications for the bin layout. For 3 spaces, the 2.4 m
bay width allows for 300 mm extra (over the minimum width of 2.3 m) in which the
column can be placed.

In the figure above, the dimension A is usually about 0.9 m to the column centre line.

Reinforced concrete structures:

This car park structure is normally used in a mixed-use development, e.g. office
block, apartments etc. To keep a regular grid of columns, the transverse dimension
must balance the aisle width and dimension A. The longitudinal dimension is clearly
7.2 m. The layout shown in the following figure is usual.

157 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

A 2×B A
L

Lx = 7.2 m

Ly Ly Ly Ly

By applying the requirements for A and B, we can relate the inset to the spacing Ly:

8.6

8.4
1-way
Column Spacing (m)

8.2
EvenTransverse

2-way
8

7.8

7.6

7.4

7.2
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Inset to Centre Line of Columns (m)

Of course it is not absolutely necessary to have equally spaced columns in the

transverse direction, but it makes the analysis, design, and construction easier.

158 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Precast Concrete or Steel Structures:

When the structure’s main purpose is as a car park, a more efficient structure is to use
long span concrete or steel beams, in conjunction with precast concrete slabs. The
beams and slabs can span in either direction. This is possible due to the relatively
light live load of a car park (2.5 kN/m2). The layout is:

Lines of
1-way

Clear Span = 15.6 m Clear Span = 15.6 m

This layout also works for post-tensioned RC floor-slabs (e.g. Dublin Airport).

159 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7.4 Headroom and Ramps

At changes in level, pinch points occur as shown:

In such cases, transition ramps are used at the start and end of each ramp:

160 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The storey height is related to the headroom required as shown in the next figure. The
minimum headroom is 2.10 m and this will allow for all MPVs and 4×4s. Where
provision is required for high-top converted vehicles for disabled people, the
minimum headroom is 2.60 m.

161 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7.5 Ventilation
Car parks must be adequately ventilated due to noxious fumes. To save on
mechanical ventilation, natural ventilation is used as much as possible. For this,
openings should have an aggregate area of 2.5% of the area of the parking space at
that level and be distributed so as to provide effective cross ventilation.

This requirement often results in ‘planters’ around single-storey basement car parks.
Sketch an example:

162 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

7.6 Miscellaneous
• Durability requirements for car parks are usually more onerous than other
structures as chlorides can be brought in by the vehicles.
• Fire protection of structures needs to be considered, especially for structural steel
elements, though uncased steel elements are usual in car parks.
• Traffic management can be difficult for large car parks; adequate design is
essential.
• The car park surface is usually sloped for drainage: the minimum fall is 1:60, the
maximum, 1:20.
• Expansion joints need to be detailed to avoid water ingress.

163 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8. Examples

8.1 Load Takedown

Problem

Do a load takedown for the following structure and determine the ultimate and
service loads for the pad footings under the columns.
Edge Beams 300×400 Dp.

Cols. 300 Sq.

20 275 Dp. RC Flat

50

Plan
Lightweight roof

4@ No internal columns
3m
c/c 100-100-100 cavity
wall

Section
Use: Speculative offices.
Columns are evenly spaced.
Plant rooms located over lift/stair cores.
Ignore takedown for lift/stair cores – only do it for the columns.

164 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

The problem is vague; some assumptions are needed:

• The roof structure is a one-way spanning roof truss system with some glazing;
• The ground floor walls are supported by strip footings;
• The ground floor slab is ground-bearing;
• Only vertical loads need be considered as they are the critical case for th pad
foundations.
Evenly spaced columns means that:
• E-W spacing is: 50/8 = 6.25 m;
• N-S spacing is: 20/3 ≈ 6.7 m.

Structural Actions
A flat slab is a two-way spanning reinforced concrete slab. Therefore the tributary
areas are derived from those of the ‘continuous’ form of tributary lengths studied
previously. The cladding is non-structural: the masonry is supported on the edge-
beam at each storey level. The edge beams are supported at each level by the
perimeter columns. The roof trusses span N-S onto each perimeter column.
Exercise: you should be able to sketch the actions/load paths just described.

Notes:

165 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Element Loads
The loads upon each element are required:

Floor Gk (kN/m2) Qk (kN/m2)

RC Slab (0.275 × 24) 6.6

Live load
(inc. services partitions etc.) 5.0

Σ= 6.6 5.0

wser = 6.6 + 5.0 = 11.6 kN/m2 wult = 1.4 × 6.6 + 1.6 × 5.0 = 17.24 kN/m2

Composite Load Factor: 17.24/11.6 = 1.486, so dead load governs.

Perimeter Load Gk (kN/m2) Qk (kN/m2)

100 Block 2.2

100 Brick 2.25

Σ= 5.35 0

wser = 4.45 kN/m2 wult = 1.4 × 4.45 = 6.23 kN/m2

Beam downstand (24 × 0.125 × 0.3) = 0.9 kN/m service, 1.26 kN/m ult.

275 Dp. RC Flat

400

Already allowed for

300
To be added

Composite Load Factor: 1.4. The perimeter line load caused by the wall is:
wult = 0.6 (proportion of wall) × 3 m (storey height) × 6.23 kN/m2 + 1.26 = 12.5 kN/m
wser = 12.5/1.4 = 9 kN/m

166 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Roof Gk (kN/m2) Qk (kN/m2)

Truss 0.2
Purlins 0.1
Glazing 0.5
Services 0.1
Imposed (BS 6399: Pt. 3: 1988) 0.6

Σ= 0.9 0.6

wser = 0.9 + 0.6 = 1.5 kN/m2 wult = 1.4 × 0.9 + 1.6 × 0.6 = 2.22 kN/m2

Composite Load Factor: 2.22/1.5 = 1.48, so dead load is slightly more important.

Tributary Areas
3 9
Tributary areas are worked on the basis of the L , L and L formulae for
8 8
continuous spans. As a result, the columns take many different tributary areas:

2.34 7.03 6.25 Trib. Area

Column
(m2)
2.5 A B C
A 5.9
B 17.7
C 15.7
7.5 D E
D 17.6
E 53.0

6.7 F 15.7
F
Typ. Int. 41.9

167 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

It is best to rationalize all of these areas into:

• Worst internal – column E;
• Worst perimeter – column B; because the tributary area is similar, and although
the perimeter length is longer (greater cladding load), Column D only takes
nominal load from the roof, whereas B directly supports it.
• Corner column, A.

Critical Internal – Column E Pult (kN) Pser (kN)

Column self weight

= 24 × 0.3 × 0.3 × 3 stories × 3 m per storey 19.4 × 1.4 19.4
Load per floor:
Ult. = 53 m2 × 17.24 kN/m2 914 663
Ser. = 914/1.486 (× 3 stories) (× 3 stories)

Σ= 2770 2009

Perimeter – Column B Pult (kN) Pser (kN)

Column self weight (extra storey) 25.9 × 1.4 25.9

= 4/3 × 19.4
Load per floor: (floor and wall)
Ult. = 17.7 × 17.24 + 7.03 × 12.5 393
Ser. = 17.7 × 11.6 + 7.03 × 9 (× 3 stories) 269
Roof load: (× 3 stories)
Ult. = 10 × 6.25 × 2.22 139
Ser. = 139/1.48 94

Σ= 1355 927

168 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Corner – Column A Pult (kN) Pser (kN)

Column self weight (extra storey) 25.9 × 1.4 25.9

= 4/3 × 19.4
Load per floor: (floor and wall)
Ult. = 5.9 × 17.24 + 4.85 × 12.5 163
Ser. = 5.9 × 11.6 + 4.85 × 9 (× 3 stories) 113
Roof load: (half load width) (× 3 stories)
Ult. = (5/2) × 6.25 × 2.22 70
Ser. = 139/1.48 47

Σ= 596 412

Note: Perimeter line load length: 2.34 + 2.51 = 4.85 m

Notes:

169 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Quicker Solution

• Ignore edge-beam downstand, column self weight and all serviceability

calculations, and just use the composite load factor (1.486) at the end;
• Compensate for these inaccuracies by rounding the ultimate load up to, say,
17.5 kN/m2;
Use equal load widths, i.e.:
3.13 6.25 6.25

3.3 A B

6.7 C

6.7

Note that the calculations that remain unchanged are the ultimate loads for the floor,
perimeter, and roof loadings. Thus:
Column C
Pult = 3 × 6.25 × 6.7 × 17.5 = 2200 kN; Pser = 2200/1.486 = 1480 kN
Column B
Pult = 2200/2 + 6.25 × 11.2 + 10 × 6.25 × 2.22
= 1100 + 70 + 139 = 1310 kN; Pser = 1310/1.486 = 881 kN
Column A
Pult = 2200/4 + 70 + 139/2 = 690 kN; Pser = 690/1.486 = 464 kN

Compare to the previous results, and examine where the inaccuracies come from. The
results are approximate, but this is good enough for many preliminary purposes.

170 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.2 Beams, Slab and Column Example

Problem

Do a complete preliminary design for slabs, beams and columns of this 4-storey
office building. There is no basement car-parking.

30 m PLAN
11 m N

The building is stabilised with shear walls. Assume an in-situ slab spanning onto
beams and (continuous) beams spanning onto columns.
6m

Slab spans NS to beams 4m

E & W edge beams

7m
stiffen the edges

Beams span EW to columns

PLAN
Note:
1. Central line of columns offset to allow for a 3m corridor
2. Take cover to reinforcement to be 20 mm for 1-hour fire protection.
3. Assume in-situ slab, one-way spanning.

171 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

The general procedure is:

1. Determine approximate member sizes;
2. Calculate the loading, both dead (from previous step) and live (from tables);
3. Analyse the structure for bending moments/shear forces and axial loads;
4. Design each of the elements for the bending moments etc.

In the following each element is considered in turn. For each element identify the
four steps just described.

Preliminary Design of Slab

Get slab depth from span/depth ratios:
End span of 1-way continuous → span/depth = 27
⇒ d = 7000/27 = 259 mm
⇒ h = 259 + 20 cover + 16/2 main bar
= 287 mm
In which 16 mm is the assumed maximum bar diameter to be used in a slab. Round
off to nearest 25 mm:
⇒ 300 mm, say.
Hence:
d = 300 - 20 - 16/2 = 272 mm

Dead load:
24×0.3 (slab s.w.) + 0.5 (ceilings + services)
= 7.7 kN/m2
Imposed load:
2.5 (occupancy) + 1 (partitions) = 3.5 kN/m2

172 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Hence, ULS = 1.4(7.7) + 1.6(3.5) = 16.4 kN/m2

w = 16.4 kN/m

A C
B
7 4

76 kNm

The spans are uneven and so we cannot assume that the moment at B is wL2/8
because we don’t know which L to take. Conservatively, we could take the large L
and design for it:
wL2 16.4 × 7 2
( M B ) AB = = = 101 kNm
8 8

which is much bigger than the same moment for the span BC:

wL2 16.4 × 42
( M B ) BC = = = 33 kNm
8 8

We could split the difference (101-33 = 68) evenly:

( M B ) AB + ( M B ) BC
MB = = 67 kNm
2

The smart way is to split the difference in inverse proportion to the lengths (why?):

173 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

1/ 7
( M B ) AB = 101 − 68 × = 76 kNm
1/ 7 + 1/ 4
1/ 4
( M B ) BC = 33 + 68 × = 76 kNm
1/ 7 + 1/ 4

As the answers are the same it means the joint is balanced ( ∑ Moments about B = 0 ).

This is also the exact answer from a ‘fancy’ analysis.

For the reinforcement we use the quick formula:

⎛ M ⎞
ρs ≈ ⎜ 2 ⎟
π
⎝ bd ⎠

⎛ 76 ×106 ⎞
ρs ≈ ⎜ 2 ⎟
π = 0.327
⎝ 1000 × 272 ⎠

ρs
As = bd
100
0.327
= × 1000 × 272
100
= 890 mm 2

Compare this to the quicker formula:

M 76 × 106
As = = = 932 mm 2
300d 300 × 272
T16 bars at 200 mm c/c provide 1005 mm2 per metre. Hence, choose this as our
design is approximate anyway. The ‘proper’ design method gives us As = 838 mm 2 so
our design is conservative, yet approximate.

Preliminary Design of E-W Beams

We will only look at the central ‘spine’ beam as this will be critical. As we saw in the
Load Takedown example, the downstand adds very little weight so for our
approximate design we will ignore it. Hence we can determine the moments etc, first
(which is our preferred route).

174 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Using the load widths we have:

Beam N Spine Beam Beam S

1m

3/8 × 4 = 1.5 5/8 × 4 = 2.5 5/8 × 7 = 4.4 3/8 × 7 = 2.6

4 7

PLAN

Hence the loadwidth on the spine beam is 2.5 + 4.4 = 6.9 m and the load per meter is:
wu = 16.4 × 7 = 115 kN/m

Similarly we can calculate the loads on the other beams.

The load to the N-S beams is appears to be zero as they span in the same direction as
the slab. However they do attract load as they must deflect the same as the adjacent
slab. So we take maybe 0.5 × loadwidth of a 2-span bay. Hence a 45° load-spread
gives a loadwidth of 3 m (for the 6 m column spacing); hence use a 1.5 m loadwidth
giving w = 25 kN/m.

w = 25 kN/m
w = 25 kN/m
w = 115 kN/m

w = 25 kN/m

w = 43 kN/m

175 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The actual values from a full analysis are 14 / 119 / 47 kN/m. The differences are
caused by the uneven spans. Even still though, our values are good enough.

The spans in the spine beam are all even and so the approximate formulae for
moments and shears apply:

wL2 wL2
MB = MC =
10 12 w = 115 kN/m

6
3wL 9 wL
VA = VB = VC = wL
8 8

And the numbers are:

M B = 414 kNm M C = 345 kNm

VA = 259 kN VB = 776 kN VC = 690 kN

If we had carried on the more exact results, allowed for the downstand, and carried
out a full ‘proper’ analysis the moments would be 474 / 354 kNm. Hence our
approximate design is still ‘ballpark’.

Note that to check the worst shear force we do not choose the highest support
reaction value.

176 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Why? Draw the Shear Force Diagram:

The worst shear force is 5wL/8 = 431 kN.

The span/depth ratio for a flanged continuous beam is 15

⇒ d = 6000/15 = 400 mm
⇒ h = 400 + 20 (cover) + 12 (shear link) + 25/2 (main bar) = 435 mm

Rounding to nearest 25 mm gives h = 450 mm

⇒ d = 450 - 20 - 12 - 25/2 = 405 mm

To determine the breadth we will examine the maximum shear stress and limit it to
2.0 N/mm2:
V V 431×103
= 2.0 ⇒ bw = = = 532 mm
bw d 2.0d 2.0 × 405

177 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

This is very wide. We can reduce it by increasing d. A breadth of 300 would fit in
nicely with the preliminary column dimension, hence:

V V 431×103
= 2.0 ⇒ d= = = 716 mm
bw d 2.0bw 2.0 × 300

Therefore say h = 725 mm and so d = 725 – 20 – 12 – 25/2 = 681 mm – detailed

design of the shear reinforcement means that the difference in d won’t be too
important. Also, though this sounds quite deep (and it is), remember that 300 mm of
it is in the slab:
300

725 425

300

This is drawn to scale (more or less!): the important point is that it looks in
proportion and this is usually as good a guide as the numbers.
For the main tension steel we use the quick formula:

M 414 × 106
As = = = 2026 mm 2
300d 300 × 681

3 T32 bars provide 2413 mm2. Choose this to give that extra little bit of ‘room’ in our
design.

178 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Beam N and Beam S will be the same dimensions as this beam but will have different
steel (and probably each have the same) to this beam for ease of construction.

Also note that having the width of the beam the same as that of our column eases the
formwork at the beam/column junctions.

Preliminary Column Design

Using the tributary area notion, the load on the column from each floor is:

3/8×6 5/8×6 1/2×6 6m

3/8×4
4m
5/8×4

5/8×7
7m
3/8×7

PLAN

179 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Tributary area = (5/8×6 + 6/2)(5/8×7 + 5/8×4) = 46.4 m2

Load on column from a typical floor = (16.4 kN/m2)(46.4 m2)
= 761 kN

For the roof load assume steel roof trusses spanning the full 11 m. Hence, use the
same roof loading as per the Load Takedown example:

Hence, roof loading is 2.22 kN/m2.

However, this only applies to exterior (façade) columns

if the trusses span the full width. Hence, total loading on
ground floor interior column is:
Pu = 761 × 3.25 = 2473 kN. Why?

180 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The façade columns will not be critical in this case (Why? Check one).

181 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

The roughest design check is:

Acol = 50 P = 50 × 2473 = 123650 mm 2

Thus a square column is: h = 123650 = 352 mm , which is significantly greater than the
300 square columns. The next level of detail is:
N Acol − 14
ρ≈
3

2473 × 103 3002 − 14

ρ≈ = 4.5%
3
This is still quite high for preliminary design. Try the next level of detail, using 3%
steel and a 350 square column:
⎡ ρ ⎤
⎢⎣ 0.35 f cu + 100 ( 0.67 f y − 0.35 f cu ) ⎥⎦ Acol > P

⎡ 3 ⎤
⎢⎣ 0.35 × 40 + 100 ( 0.67 × 460 − 0.35 × 40 ) ⎥⎦ 350 > 2473 × 10
2 3

[ 22.8] 3502 > 2473 ×103

∴ 2796 > 2473

So the columns are acceptable at this level of design. The area of steel required is:
3
Asc = × 3502 = 3676 mm 2
100

4T32s + 2T25s provides 4199 mm2 which should be

adequate.

182 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.3 Flat Slab Example

Problem

Using the building example from the load takedown Design Exercise:
Edge Beams 300×400 Dp.

Cols. 300 Sq.

20 275 Dp. RC Flat

50

Plan

Lightweight roof

No internal
4@ 100-100-100 cavity wall
3m 40% glazing

Section

Do the following:
1. Check the slab is adequate, without detailed analysis;
2. Check that punching shear is adequate for the slab and columns shown;
3. Check that the columns as shown are adequate.
In all cases propose appropriate design changes as required.

183 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

Assemble the pertinent information first: from the load takedown solution:
• E-W spacing is: 50/8 = 6.25 m;
• N-S spacing is: 20/3 ≈ 6.7 m.
• wult = 17.24 kN/m2;
• Pult = 2770 kN.

Check the slab is adequate, without detailed analysis

It is adequate to check the span/d ratio as the punching shear requirement will be
checked in the second part of the question:
d = 275 - 30 (say) – 20/2 (say) = 237 mm
ly 6700
= = 24.5 ≤ 36 ∴ OK
d 237
As there is lots of ‘room’ in this aspect of the design, the rebar should be fine, as
should the deflection check, which often governs for flat slabs.

Check that punching shear is adequate for the slab and columns shown
• Internal Column:
Vt = 6.25 × 6.7 ×17.24 = 722 kN

∴Veff = 1.15Vt = 830 kN

Maximum shear at face of column:

u0 = 2a + 2b = 4 × 300 = 1200 mm

830 × 103
vmax = = 2.92 N/mm 2
1200 × 237

vmax ≤ 0.8 40 or 5 N/mm 2

≤ 5.06 or 5 ≤ 5 ∴ OK

Shear at critical perimeter, 1.5d from column face:

u1.5 d = 2a + 2b + 8µ d = 4 × 300 + 8 × 1.5 × 237 = 4044 mm

184 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

830 ×103
v1.5 d = = 0.87 N/mm 2
4044 × 237
If we conservatively take vc = 0.5 N/mm 2 , then vc ≤ v1.5d ≤ 2vc and shear
reinforcement is to be provided.
Check next perimeter, 1.5d + 0.75d = 2.25d from column face:
u2.25 d = u1.5 d + 8 × 0.75d = 5466 mm

830 × 103
v1.5 d = = 0.64 N/mm 2
5466 × 237
Again, vc ≤ v1.5d ≤ 2vc and a second perimeter of shear reinforcement is to be
provided. It is not necessary to check the next perimeter as it is clear it will be
below the conservative value vc = 0.6 N/mm 2 , or the actual value, which should
be around vc = 0.65 N/mm 2 .
Result: expect 2 perimeters of shear reinforcement.

• Perimeter Column:
722
Veff = ×1.4 = 505 kN
2
Maximum shear at face of column:
u0 = 3 × 300 = 900 mm

505 ×103
vmax = = 2.37 N/mm 2
900 × 237

vmax ≤ 0.8 40 or 5 N/mm 2

≤ 5.06 or 5 ≤ 5 ∴ OK
Note that this completely ignores the downstand edge beam – therefore there is
much more capacity in this design.
Also, roughly, we can expect 1 or 2 perimeters of shear reinforcement. This is
based on a caparison of the previous design with its vmax .
Result: expect 2 perimeters of shear reinforcement.

185 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Check that the columns as shown are adequate

Check on minimum column dimension: h > 3000 17.5 = 171∴ OK
The multiplier for the floor loads immediately above is ignored, and a ‘comfortable’
design is therefore required. The roughest design check is:
Acol = 50 P = 50 × 2770 = 138500 mm 2

Thus a square column is: h = 138500 = 372 mm , which is significantly greater than the
300 square columns.

Consider the next level of detail:

N Acol − 14
ρ≈
3

2770 ×103 3002 − 14

ρ≈ = 5.6%
3
This is too close to the maximum permissible, 6%, for preliminary design. Try the
next level of detailed calculation:
⎡ ρ ⎤
⎢⎣ 0.35 f cu + 100 ( 0.67 f y − 0.35 f cu ) ⎥⎦ Acol > P

Using the maximum possible percentage of rebar:

⎡ 6 ⎤
⎢⎣ 0.35 × 40 + 100 ( 0.67 × 460 − 0.35 × 40 ) ⎥⎦ 300 > 2770 × 10
2 3

∴ 2848 > 2770

So again the columns are just acceptable at this level of detailed design. This is too
tight for preliminary design, therefore increase column size. Note that this does not
adversely affect the punching shear calculations. The shear perimeter is now longer,
reducing the shear stresses on all perimeters.

Result: increase column size to 350 square, at least for internal ground floor.

186 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.4 Sample Scheme Problem 1

Problem

An architect has sent you preliminary sketches of a prestigious 5-storey office

building; as shown in Figure Q.2. The atrium, double-height entrance lobby and
lightweight roof structure are important elements of the scheme – minimum structural
intrusion is expected on these features.

The architect informs you that two WC/fire-escape-staircore blocks are required on
each floor, as well as two other fire-escape staircores (as shown in the figure); you
are required to integrate these elements into your scheme and to advise the architect
as to their location. In doing so, you should pay due regard to lateral stability, any
expansion joints and travel distance in deciding your layout.

(a) Propose a structural solution for the building, showing:

i. the provision of lateral stability for the building;
ii. expansion joints, if deemed required;
iii. the layout of the vertical load transfer structure;
iv. the support structure of the proposed glazed roof;
v. the support structure of the double-storey entrance.
(50%)

(b) Assuming a reinforced concrete solution, size the principal members (beam,
slab and column) for a typical floor, choosing the most probable critical
element in each case. For each element, indicate the approximate areas of
reinforcement required.
(50%)

187 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

55000

15000 20000

45000

15000
FULL HEIGHT
ATRIUM

EXTENT OF DOUBLE
15000 STOREY−HEIGHT
ENTRANCE

ENTRANCE
21500 12000

PLAN

ALL DIMENSIONS IN
MILLIMETRES
2500

GLAZED EXTENT OF
ROOF ATRIUM
5 @ 3000

55000

FRONT ELEVATION

PERMISSIBLE SOLID FLOOR AREA

ROOF SUPPORT
15000 15000 POINTS
SYMBOLS
17500
15000

6x7.5m FIRE
WC
ESCAPE/WC BLOCK
6x3m FIRE ESCAPE
STAIRS
45000

SIDE ELEVATION STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

FIGURE Q.2

188 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

Instead of giving answers, this is left to you to try. What is given, however, is the
feedback given to a group of students after reading their answers at the problem.
They made the mistakes so you don’t have to!

General
Overall few got the right balance of text & sketches for Part (a).
Make sure put all of your work in the answer book – even the doodles.
There were a few cases of “magic” numbers.
Lift cores should have been mentioned in the question.

Scheme
Consider expansion joints carefully – make your choice & stick to it.
Having looked at alternative grids, choose one & draw it properly.
There were some very large spans – study the “Economic Span Ranges” carefully.
There was no need for shear walls.
Use rough judgment to size some of Pt. (a) e.g. roof truss member sizes.

Preliminary Design
Errors with basic bending moments, e.g. wL2/8 and PL/4.
Know the design shortcuts, e.g. tributary lengths/areas for beams/columns.
Errors in the use of “quick” formulae (e.g. wL2/10) – make sure you understand
where they come from & their limitations.
Do not confuse “critical” & “typical” – the question asked for “typical”
beams/cols/slab – not the very difficult unusual ones.

Drawings
Sketches and plans were very poor.
The Plan needs to fill as much of a page as possible & drawn to scale (graph paper).

189 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Draw gridlines on your plan.

Show cols as quick square dots (i.e. with a solid hatching).
Roof trusses were very poor –not drawn to scale properly & wrong configuration
There is not need to “assume sizes” for the plan.

190 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.5 Sample Scheme Problem 2

Problem

An architect has sent you preliminary sketches of a prestigious 5-storey office

building; as shown in Figure Q.2. The atrium, double-height entrance lobby, and
glazed elevators are important elements of the scheme – minimum structural intrusion
is expected on these features.

The architect informs you that two WC/fire-escape-staircore blocks are required on
each floor, as well as two other fire-escape staircores (as shown in the figure); you
are required to integrate these elements into your scheme and to advise the architect
as to their location. In doing so, you should pay due regard to lateral stability, any
expansion joints and travel distance in deciding your layout.

(c) Propose a structural solution for the building, showing:

i. the provision of lateral stability for the building;
ii. expansion joints, if deemed required;
iii. the layout of the vertical load transfer structure;
iv. the support structure of the proposed glazed roof;
v. the footbridge structure.
(50%)

(d) Assuming a reinforced concrete solution, size the principal members (beam,
slab and column) for a typical floor, choosing the most probable critical
element in each case. For each element, indicate the approximate areas of
reinforcement required.
(50%)

191 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

192 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

193 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

194 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

195 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

196 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

197 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

198 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.6 Sample Scheme Problem 3

Problem

An architect has sent you preliminary sketches of a 4-storey apartment building over
an open-air car park; as shown in Figure Q.2. You are required to advise the architect
whether or not expansion joints are needed. In addition you need to assess whether
lateral stability is achieved with the proposed layout.

(a) Propose a structural solution for the building, showing:

i. the provision of lateral stability for the building;
ii. expansion joints, if deemed required;
iii. the layout of the vertical load transfer structure;
iv. the car park layout;
v. the integration of the car park layout and the vertical load transfer
structure.
(50%)

(b) Assuming a reinforced and/or precast concrete solution, size the principal
members for a typical floor, and a column at car park level – choosing the
critical element in each case. For each element, indicate the approximate areas
of reinforcement required.
(50%)

199 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

10000
12000
Stair/Lift
A Core A

Entrance
10000
6000
Site Boundary

Corridor
12000

10000
Car Services
Park
Access

12000 6000 6000

2000
PLAN
(All dimensions in mm)
240 3000 3000 3000 3000

Entrance

Car Park

SECTION A-A
(All dimensions in mm)

200 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

As before, you just get the feedback.

General
Overall few got the right balance of text & sketches for Part (a).
Those who used graph paper seemed to provide better sketches.
The term “transfer beam” has a particular meaning.

Scheme
Shear wall overkill – only a few thought of the use of the building.
No need to “assume” preliminary sizes – fill in after prelim design.
Do the service cores go into the car park?
The car park layout should have been first – the “top down approach”.
Parking dimensions not adhered to – narrow driving aisles with columns in them!
Drainage info usually not needed in a structural scheme design.

Preliminary Design
The numbers generally seemed good.
Inappropriate formulae used: e.g. wL2/10 for a simply supported span!
Rebar for slabs is specified at a spacing, not a number of bars, e.g. T16-200 not 4T16.

Drawings
Sketches and plans were very poor.
Every line has a meaning: not enough information on the sketches.
The Plan needs to fill as much of a page as possible & drawn to scale (graph paper).
Draw gridlines on your plan.
Show cols as quick square dots (i.e. with a solid hatching).
Isometric drawings are not needed.

201 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

8.7 Sample Scheme Problem 4

Problem

An architect has sent you preliminary sketches of a 4-storey (3.5 m floor to floor)
development as shown in Figure Q.2. The client wants flexibility in the use of the
building:
• Initially the building is to be used as apartments with the layout shown in Figure
Q.2. Sound and fire isolation of dwellings is important. The building will be
masonry clad with 25% glazing.
• The use may change to open-plan offices with fully glazed elevations.
The client understands that there are cost implications for this and that works would
be necessary to change the use. Also, the Architect understands that some structural
elements may be necessary in the larger apartments.

Part (a)
Propose a structural scheme for the building, giving sufficient information on:
1. The provision of lateral stability when the building is to be used as apartments,
taking any expansion joints into account, if deemed necessary.
2. The layout of the vertical load transfer structure; the floor plate; beams, and;
structural walls, as applicable to your scheme. This should reflect the possible
change of use.
3. The works necessary to achieve lateral stability if in the future the use is to change
to open-plan offices.
(50%)

Part (b)
Important: In Part (b), only consider the loading appropriate when the building is
used as apartments.

202 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Assuming a reinforced and/or precast concrete solution, size the principal members
(beam, floor slab, and column) for a typical floor, choosing the critical element in
each case. For each element, indicate the approximate areas of reinforcement
required.
(50%)

203 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

30000

7500 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000

10000
10000
Stairs and lift

Entrance

27500
6000 6000 6000 6000 6000

7500 Corridor
20000

12000 15000
3000
PLAN
(All dimension in mm)

FIGURE Q.2

204 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

Solution

205 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

206 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

207 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

208 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

209 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

210 Dr C. Caprani
BE Structural Eng – Project III

9. References
• Ivan Margolius, Architects + Engineers = Structures, Wiley Academy, 2002.
• Pier Luigi Nervi, Aesthetics and Technology in Building, Harvard University
Press, 1966.
• Eladio Dieste, La Estructura Ceramica, 1987.
• Bill Addis, Creativity and Innovation; The Structural Engineer’s Contribution
to Design, Architectural Press, 2001.
• H. Seymour Howard, Jr., Structure: An Architect’s Approach, McGraw-Hill,
1966.
• Alan Holgate, The Art in Structural Design, Clarendon Press, 1986.
• Eduardo Torroja, The Structures of Eduardo Torroja, F.W. Dodge
Corporation, 1958.
• Yasmin Sabina Khan, Engineering Architecture; The vision of Fazlur R. Khan,
W.W. Norton, 2004.
• Angus Macdonnald, Structure & Architecture, 2nd edn., Architectural Press,
1997.
• Malcolm Millais, Building Structures; From Concepts to Design, 2nd edn.,
Spon Press, 2005.
• Peter Rice, An Engineer Imagines, Artemis, 1997.
• Christian Menn, Prestressed Concrete Bridges, Birkhauser, 1990.
• David Billignton, The Tower and The Bridge; The New Art of Structural
Engineering, Princeton University Press, 1983.
• David Billington, Robert Maillart and The Art of Reinforced Concrete, MIT
Press, 1989.
• Anthony Hunt, Tony Hunt’s Structures Notebook, 2nd edn., Architectural
Press, 2003.
• Philip Garrison, Basic Structures for Engineers & Architects, Blackwell, 2005.
• Spiro Pollalis, What is a Bridge? The Making of Calatrava’s Bridge in Seville,
MIT Press, 1999.

211 Dr C. Caprani