CE6323

Computer Aided Analysis

and Design of Structures

Engr. Prof. Dr. Majid Ali

Introduction:

Teacher:
• Education: Civil Engg. (BSc, Taxila 2004; MSc, Taxila 2006; PhD, Auckland 2013)
• Experience: Total 17.5 years (11.5 years teaching/research, 6 years professional)
• Publications: 116 (including 30 impact factor journal papers with cumm. IF >159)
• Awards: Gold Medal, HEC Approved Supervisor, Acad.& Professi. Honorariums etc

Students:
• Education:
BSc Civil Engg, MSc
• Experience:
Total years = NIL – 10 years
Nature = Contractor, Client, Academics, Consultancy/Design/Site
Misc Information:
Credit hr: 3
Class hr: 3
Reference Codes / Books:
1. ACI 371R-08 / ACI 371R-98
2. ACI 350.3R
3. ASCE 7-05 / ASCE-7-95
4. UBC-1997
5. BCP-2007
6. ACI-318-05

Expected time to study at home: 9-12 hrs

 FOR MS STUDENTS
Course Learning Outcomes:
At the end of course, the student will be able:
CLO-1: to recognize different advanced
perspective (functions) of SAP,
SAFE and AUTOCAD. (C1) - 15%
CLO-2: to create (i) finite element models
of structures [i.e. shell structures
e.g. water tanks etc] using SAP,
SAFE and (ii) relevant structural
drawings using AUTOCAD and
manually for complete analysis and
design. (C6) PLO-1 60%

CLO-3: to discuss as well as clarify

analysis and design of structures. (A2) PLO-4 25%
 FOR PhD STUDENTS
Course Learning Outcomes:
At the end of course, the student will be able:
CLO-1: to explain different advanced
perspective (functions) of SAP,
SAFE and AUTOCAD. (C2) - 15%
CLO-2: to create (i) finite element models
of structures [i.e. shell structures
e.g. water tanks etc] using SAP,
SAFE and (ii) relevant structural
drawings using AUTOCAD and
manually for complete analysis and
economical design in limited time. (C6) PLO-1 60%

CLO-3: to criticize as well as defend

analysis and design of structures. (A4) PLO-4 25%
Course plan (16 weeks teaching):
Quizzes/
Week Course outline Presentation
BACKGROUND – SUPERSTRUCTURE DESIGN
Concepts of architectural dwgs; coordinate / grid system; structural layout;
1
earthquake- resistant design; water tower; sloshing effect; code references.
SAP
SAP introduction; grids layout; material properties; member sizes, modifiers and
other details; Geometry layout (beams, columns, shear walls, slabs); replication
(linear, mirror, story); supports.
2 Basic load cases (Dead, superimposed dead, live, roof live, soil (if any) and
earthquake); mass-source.
Factored load combinations (considering eccentricities in all directions and using
all code clauses)
Applying basic loads (point, uniformly distributed, varying lateral and area loads).
3
Checking model errors; analysis options; model analysis.
4 Evaluation of analysis; performing concrete design. Quiz 1
SUPERSTRUCTURE DETAILING
AUTOCAD introduction.
5
Structural drawings – I. Quiz 2
6 Structural drawings – II. P1 due
7 Structural drawings – III.
8 REVISION
Midterm.
 BACKGROUND – FOUNDATION DESIGN
Concepts of allowable bearing capacity (net, gross and effective) including
9
design examples .
SAFE
SAFE introduction; Exporting SAP file for SAFE foundation model; Importing
SAP data/analysis; material and soil properties; foundation type and thickness;
10 applying additional loads (if required); Preliminary foundation layout. Quiz 3
Service and Factored load combinations (considering eccentricities in all
directions and using all code clauses).
Evaluation of analysis and design; checking bearing pressures and satisfying
11
foundation sizes.
SUBSTRUCTURE DETAILING
Structural drawings – IV.
12
ALTERNATE CONDITIONS FO RPROJECT
13 Structural drawings – V. P2 due
PRACTICING APPROACH
14 Project Presentations Quiz 4
15 Alternate options for economical design
16 REVISION
Exam Preparation
Final Exam
Marking criteria
CLOs CLO:1 CLO:2 CLO:3
(Recognize) (Create) (Discuss &
Clarify)
Assessment
CLO:1 CLO:2 CLO:3
Modules (Explain) (Create – (Criticize &
in limited time) Defend)
P1=10%
Project (20%) - -
P2=10%
Quizzes (20%) Q2=5% Q1=5%, Q3=5% Q4=5%
Midterm Exam (20%) - 10% 10%
Final Exam (40%) 10% 20% 10%
Total (100%) 15% 60% 25%
Grading shall be as per rules in prospectus.
 BACKGROUND –
SUPERSTRUCTURE DESIGN
Architectural Drawings
• important in order to imagine the structure
• help for precise structural FE models
• consist of
•Plans
• Elevations
• Sections

• Its better that the main structural

features can be seen in arch. dwgs

For detailed understanding, refer to related UG courses.

Coordinate / Grid System
• basically the reference lines
• primarily available in arch. dwgs
• is basically for layout
• may be improved by str. engr. during design
phase
• helps in FEM geometry
• available in soft wares SAP, ETABS etc

For detailed understanding, refer to related UG courses.

Structural Layout
• preliminary working of str. members on arch.
dwgs to support structure i.e. to resist
loadings
• should give proper consideration to types of
loading to be resisted
• should preferably visible in arch. dwgs
• consists of
• Framing plans
• Reinforcement details (plans, sections etc)

For detailed understanding, refer to related UG courses.

Earthquake-resistant Design
• considers lateral loads due to strong ground
motions
• Mainly two types of analysis:
• Dynamic
• Equivalent static force procedure
(used in this course)
• considers special reinforcement detailing
• requires some special material properties

For detailed understanding, refer to related UG courses.

Water Towers
• important structures, even available after
major disasters
• thus have high importance factor in analysis
• have different types depending
• on shapes (circular, square, rectangle,
mushroom-type, etc)
• on supporting structures (column-beam,
shear walls, col.-beam with shear wall etc)
• on fluid type

Shear wall supported mushroom-type water tower

Sloshing Effect
• oscillation of water surface
• additional loading effect because of
movement of water due to strong ground
motion
• considered in analysis by few international
codes
• still needs improvement
• needs proper free-board
• generates two components; convective and
impulsive
T=0 T=t1 T=t2

T=t3 T=t4 T=t5

T=t6 T=t7 T=t8

Figure 1: Sloshing effect in elevated water tank (one complete cycle)

Figure 2: Idealization of convective and impulsive components
Code References
ACI 371R-08 / ACI 371R-98
Water tank design
ACI 350.3R
Water tank seismic design
ASCE 7-05 / ASCE-7-95
Seismic design (site specific acceleration)
UBC-1997
Seismic design
BCP-2007
Seismic design
ACI-318-05
Concrete design and detailing
Report on “Seismic analysis and design
of water tower”
1. Introduction
Elevated water tanks are commonly used for storing
water in public water distribution system and it
should be competent of keeping the expected
performance during and after earthquake. It has
large mass concentrated at the top of slender
supporting structure and hence extremely
vulnerable against horizontal forces due to
earthquake. They must be functional even after
earthquakes to ensure water supply is available in
earthquake-affected regions.
Keeping in view the above stated importance of
elevated water tanks, seismic analysis and design of
elevated water tank need much attention to cater all
types of forces generated due to strong ground
motions. In case of elevated water tank or even
ground water tanks, sloshing effect (Figure 01) of
water must be considered in addition to the lateral
seismic forces. The sloshing effect generates due
to ground motions and it represents the oscillation
of water surface. The stored water can be divided
into two parts, the upper oscillating part known as
convective component and the lower so-called solid
part known as impulsive component.
These two components along with tank structure
create three objects (three degree of freedom
system) to be considered for seismic analysis. Many
researchers have suggested to combine the
impulsive component with tank structure, making it
two degree of freedom system (Figure 2) which is
relatively easy to handle in calculations of dynamic
analysis. Whereas, in equivalent static force
procedure, only seismic mass including the mass of
sloshing water is considered.
Seismic analysis can be performed by two methods:
i. equivalent static analysis and ii. dynamic analysis.
Equivalent static analysis is easy and quick whereas
dynamic analysis is difficult, and time consuming.
Equivalent static procedure is outlined in ACI 371R
and ASCE 7-05 but these codes suggest site
specific acceleration amplification which make it
difficult to use ACI 371R strictly for Pakistan
region. Therefore the concept of equivalent static
force procedure is taken from ACI 371R and the
stepwise procedure to be adopted for Pakistan
region is outlined in this report (section 2).
On the other hand, there are many models available
by which the dynamic analysis can be performed
which make it difficult to select a more accurate
model for designing. However, in absence of a more
rigorous method of dynamic analysis, ACI 350.3 in
its Appendix A suggests GENERAL PROCEDURE for
dynamic lateral forces, pressure distribution,
overturning moments, vertical accelerations and
stresses for water tank. There are many researches
still going on (even in 2021) for understanding the
real dynamic behavior of water tanks under strong
ground motions. Therefore it is recommended to use
equiv. static force procedure (outlined in section 2)
for design of water tanks to be on safe side.
2. Equivalent Static Force Procedure
The sloshing, horizontal and vertical eccentricities
effects (5.1.2.4.1, G in 5.1.2.2 and 5.1.2.9,
respectively of ACI 371), must be considered in
equivalent static analysis. Effective seismic weight
(used in calculating base shear) should include all
dead load of tank structure, convective and
impulsive weight of water, 25% of live load and 20%
of snow load where flat roof snow load exceeds30
psf (ACI 371R). The weight of convective and
impulsive component can be calculated using ACI
350.3 (Figure 9.6 for circular tanks and Figure 9.2
for rectangular tanks).
A close approximation for convective and impulsive
masses of axisymmetric, other than cylindrical,
tanks may be obtained from an equivalent cylindrical
tank that has same free surface diameter as the
axisymmetric tank and a depth that results in the
same volume as the axisymmetric tank. The rest
procedure may be adopted in a same manner as that
in analysis of buildings with the exception that
i. the response modification factor R (2.2) and importance
factor I (1.25) should be taken for tanks.
ii. the load combinations as per PBC should also consider the
additional parameters (if governing) mentioned in load
combinations as per ACI 371R (e.g. G=eccentric load effect
due of dead and water load, S=snow load and T= temperature
and shrinkage effects) for analysis of tanks.
For external stability checks, the in-house built
excel sheet can be used whereas for internal
analysis, FEM using STAADPRO, ETABS or SAP
should be adopted. Free board should also be
checked using clause 15.6.5.1 of ASCE 7-05. The
time period of the empty and full tank should
preferably be calculated using Method B,
particularly for internal analysis.
Snap shots
from
referred
codes

5.1.2.4.1 from
ACI 371R-08
5.1.2.2 from
ACI 371R-08
5.1.2.9 from
ACI 371R-08
Figure 9.6
from
ACI 350.3
Figure 9.2
from
ACI 350.3
15.6.5.1
from
ASCE 7-05
1630.1.1
from
UBC 1997

1633.1
from
UBC 1997
1612.2
from
UBC 1997
1630.2.1
from
UBC 1997
Method B
from UBC
1997
Table data from UBC 1997
Computer Aided Analysis and Design
of Structures
(Elevated Water Tank – 50,000 Gallons)
A mashroom-type elevated water tank
(EWT) of 50,000 gallons capacity is to be
designed. A minimum hydraulic head of
60'-0" was required by the Services
Engineer to cover the area/buildings. The
structural analysis and design was
started based on concrete outline with
60'-0" minimum hydraulic head. SAP /
SAFE softwares were used to analyze
and the design the EWT.
 Final Geo-Technical Recommendations
The recommendations for the site soil by the
Geotechnical Engineer are as under:
-Net allowable bearing capacity = 1.0 TSF at 10'-0"
below N.S.L
-Effective allowable bearing capacity = 0.90 TSF
at 10'-0" below N.S.L
-No increase in allowable bearing capacity due to
seismic loading is permitted
-Soil profile type "SE“
- Sliding coefficient = 0.4
Architectural drawings
LIMITATIONS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS & DESIGN
There is no single reference document available to recommend
analysis and design parameters for such tanks for following
reasons:
- Prevailing code of practice in Pakistan is Building Code of
Pakistan (BCP) - 2007 which refers mainly to UBC-1997 and ACI-
318-05.
- One of available ACI documents for Pedestal-mounted steel
tanks is ACI 371R-98. The revised version of this document was
released in 2008 (ACI 371R-08) with certain modifications and
encompassing the topic in more detailed manner.
- Equivalent static procedure is outlined in ACI 371R-08 and
ASCE 7-05 but these codes suggest site specific acceleration
amplification which make it difficult to use ACI 371R-08 strictly
for regions outside United States. Therefore, the concept of
equivalent static procedure is taken from ACI 371R-98 and the
stepwise procedure to be adopted for Pakistan region is taken
from UBC-1997 (ASCE-7-95) / BCP-2007.
External Stability Checks (Approx. method)
Sliding coefficient, μ (Geo-Tech report) 0.40
Zone Factor, Z (Ref. Table 16-I) 0.20 for Zone 2B
Site Soil Coefficient (Ref. Table 16-J) SE SOFT SOIL
Seismic Importance Factor, I (Ref. Table 16-K) 1.25
Structural System, R Factor (Ref. Table 16-P) 2.20 for Non-building Structure
Ca (Ref. Table 16-Q) 0.34
Cv (Ref. Table 16-R) 0.64
Seismic Source Type (Ref. Table 16-U) B M<7.0
Near Source Factor, Na (Ref. Table 16-S) 1.00 >= 10 km distance
Near Source Factor, Nv (Ref. Table 16-T) 1.00 10 km distance
Time Period, Ta = Ct (hn)^0.75
Where, Ct 0.03 for Concrete Structure
and, hn (height of the structure above the base) 89.00 ft.
So, Ta = Ct (hn)^0.75 0.87 sec
Tb = 1.3x Ta (say) 1.22 sec

Dead Load of Super Structure 1,000 kips From Sap

Dead Load of Water 50,000 Gallons
Dead Load of Water 502 kips
Total Dead Load Above base, P 1,502 kips
Water weight
Ds 36 ft
A 1018 sft
Vr 50000 gallons
Extra 25 %
Vd 62500 gallons
Vd 8375 ft3
Ww 523 kips
He 8.2 ft
Ds/He 4.4
Convective 0.7
Impulsive 0.26 Raft weight
Total 0.96 D 150 pcf
Ww 502 kips
Hmax 5.5 ft
Hmin 2.5 ft
Di 35 ft
Do 55 ft
Ai 962 ft2
Ao 2376 ft2
Av 1414 ft2
Vi 5292 ft3
Vv 5655 ft3
Vt 10946 ft3
W 1642 kips
Case I. When Tank is full
Seismic Weight (W) 1,502 kips
The Base Shear as per UBC 1997 Code is, V = (CvI/RT)xW 449 kips
Max. Base Shear, Max. V = (2.5CaI/R)xW 725 kips
Min. Base Shear, Min. V = (0.11xCaI)xW 70 kips
The Design Base Shear, V 449 kips

Force at Top of the structure, Ft=0.07TV 38 kips

Ft<0.25V 112 kips
Thus, Ft 38 kips
a. Overturning Check
Allowable FOS 2.0
Point of V above base, h 60.0 ft
Overturning Moment, =(V)(h) + (Ft)(hN) 30,330 kip-ft approx.
eo 1.0 in
lg 80.0 ft
eg=e0+hN/400 3.4 in
0.54 % <5% of raft width
Additonal Overturning Moment for full tank = (P) (eg) 425.57 kip-ft.
Total Overturning Moment, Mo 30,756 kip-ft approx.
Raft weight 1,642 kips
Stablizing load, Ps 3,144 kips
Raft width, w 52 ft
Stablizing Moment, Ms = Ps x w / 2 81,743 kip-ft
Factor of Safety (FOS) = Ms / Mo 2.66 kips OK
Note: This is OK even overburden is not considered.
b. Sliding Check
Allowable FOS 1.5
Sliding Force, Fs 449 kips approx. V
Resisting Force, Fr = μ x Ps 1,258 kips
Factor of Safety (FOS) = FsFr/ /FrFs 2.80 kips OK
Note: This is OK even overburden is not considered.
c. Bearing Pressure Check
Effective allowable bearing capacity 0.9 TSF
Effective allowable bearing capacity, qe-gravity 1.98 Ksf
Increased qe for Seismic Load, qe-seismic 1.98 ksf 0% more
Total Vertical Load, P 1,502 kips
Raft area, A 2,376 sft
Raft section modulus, S = pi() D3 / 32 16,334 ft3
c1. Bearing Pressure Check under gravity loading
Bearing Pressure, δ = P / A 0.63 ksf <qe-gravity Ok
c2. Bearing Pressure Check under seismic loading
Bearing Pressure, δ = 0.75(P / A + Mo / S) 1.89 ksf <qe.SEISMIC Ok
Bearing Pressure, δ = 0.75(P / A - Mo / S) -0.94 ksf <qe.SEISMIC Ok
The negative pressure would be countered by the overburden pressure.
Case I. When Tank is empty
Seismic Weight (W) 1,000 kips
The Base Shear as per UBC 1997 Code is, V = (CvI/RT)xW 299 kips
Max. Base Shear, Max. V = (2.5CaI/R)xW 483 kips
Min. Base Shear, Min. V = (0.11xCaI)xW 47 kips
The Design Base Shear, V 299 kips

Force at Top of the structure, Ft=0.07TV 25 kips

Ft<0.25V 75 kips
Thus, Ft 25 kips
a. Overturning Check
Allowable FOS 2.0
Point of V above base, h 60.0 ft
Overturning Moment, =(V)(h) + (Ft)(hN) 20,193 kip-ft approx.
eo 1.0 in
lg 80.0 ft
eg=e0+lg/400 3.4 in
0.54 % <5% of raft width
Additonal Overturning Moment for full tank = (P) (eg) 426 kip-ft.
Total Overturning Moment, Mo 20,619 kip-ft approx.
Raft weight 1,642 kips
Stablizing load, Ps 2,642 kips
Raft width, w 52 ft
Stablizing Moment, Ms = Ps x w / 2 68,691 kip-ft
Factor of Safety (FOS) = Ms / Mo 3.33 kips OK
Note: This is OK even overburden is not considered.
b. Sliding Check
Allowable FOS 1.5
Sliding Force, Fs 299 kips approx. V
Resisting Force, Fr = μ x Ps 1,057 kips
Factor of Safety (FOS) = Fs / Fr 3.54 kips OK
Note: This is OK even overburden is not considered.
c. Bearing Pressure Check
Effective allowable bearing capacity 0.9 TSF
Effective allowable bearing capacity, qe-gravity 1.98 Ksf
Increased qe for Seismic Load, qe-seismic 1.98 ksf 0% more
Total Vertical Load, P 1,000 kips
Raft area, A 2,376 sft
Raft section modulus, S = pi() D3 / 32 16,334 ft3
c1. Bearing Pressure Check under gravity loading
Bearing Pressure, δ = P / A 0.42 ksf <qe-gravity Ok
c2. Bearing Pressure Check under seismic loading
Bearing Pressure, δ = 0.75(P / A + Mo / S) 1.26 ksf <qe.SEISMIC Ok
Bearing Pressure, δ = 0.75(P / A - Mo / S) -0.63 ksf <qe.SEISMIC Ok
The negative pressure would be countered by the overburden pressure.
CLASS PROJECT
 PART-1: Design the same tank for following parameters:
-Net allowable bearing capacity = 1.5 TSF at 12'-0" below N.S.L
-Effective allowable bearing capacity = 1.3 TSF at 12'-0" below N.S.L
-No increase in allowable bearing capacity due to seismicity is permitted
- Sliding coefficient = 0.4
For MS students
 PART-2: Drawings have been issued at site and the contractor had
started the project for its execution. During the excavation for
foundation, certain facts were revealed. How will you respond with
minimum changes in design output within minimum time? Certain facts
will be conveyed in week 12.
For MS students

Marks:
P1 (superstructure): 10% and P2 (substructure): 10%

REQUIREMENTS:
• Develop models in SAP and SAFE (soft copy)
• Create structural drawings (soft and hard copy, A3 size)

• Analysis and design report, internal & external checks (soft and hard copy, A4 size)

• Analysis and design summary (soft and hard copy, A4 size)

• Justify analysis and design (Presentation)

• Alternate design approach for varying site conditions (Presentation along with drawings and report)
 PART-1: Design the tank with 60,000 gallons capacity for
following parameters:
-Net allowable bearing capacity = 1.5 TSF at 12'-0" below N.S.L
-Effective allowable bearing capacity = 1.3 TSF at 12'-0" below N.S.L
-No increase in allowable bearing capacity due to seismicity is permitted
For PhD students

- Sliding coefficient = 0.4

 PART-2: Drawings have been issued at site and the contractor had
started the project for its execution. During the excavation for
foundation, certain facts were revealed. How will you respond with
minimum changes in design output within minimum time? Certain facts
will be conveyed in week 12.
For PhD students

Marks:
P1 (superstructure): 10% and P2 (substructure): 10%

REQUIREMENTS:
• Develop models in SAP and SAFE (soft copy)
• Create structural drawings (soft and hard copy, A3 size)

• Analysis and design report, internal & external checks (soft and hard copy, A4 size)

• Analysis and design summary (soft and hard copy, A4 size)

• Justify analysis and design (Presentation)

• Alternate design approach for varying site conditions (Presentation along with drawings and report)
SAP MODELLING
Any question !