COLLEGE OF

ENGINEERING
PUTRAJAYA
CAMPUS
MINI PROJECT

SEMESTER 1,

2021 / 2022

PROGRAMME : Bachelor of Civil

Engineering (Honours) SUBJECT CODE : CESB 333

& CESB 3014

SUBJECT : Structural

Steel Design 1 SUBMISSION DATE :

13 December 2021

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES:

1. This mini project is an individual work.

2. Replace XX and XXX with the last two and three digits of your student ID.

Page 1 of 6
THIS QUESTION PAPER CONSISTS OF SIX (6) PRINTED PAGES
INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE

Page 2 of 6
 CESB333/CESB3014, Semester 1, 2021/2022

As a civil engineer, your company has been awarded a project to design steel work for
Moonbucks coffee-house. The project requires analysis and design of the structural steel
model using Autodesk Revit and Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis Professional. The
dimensions of the steelwork for the coffee- house are given in the figures below. The
client requested for optimum design of UB and UC sections with grade S275 based on
UK's standard section family. Consider level two and four carrying 225 mm thick RC
flat roof and 3XXX N/m structural load for the signboard on beam C1D1, beam C2D2
and beam C3D3 in level 4.

The client requested to expose the structural steel as part of the architectural design,
therefore require appropriate consideration of public safety and health in the structural
design. Your team of engineers is required to prepare a technical report to the client in a
PDF file for the progress meeting. Use Eurocode standard for the steel design. The
content of the report should include the following:
1. Structural View
2. Load – Cases
3. Load – Values
4. Working calculation to verify beam A2B2 and Column B2.
5. Design and verify any TWO connections.
6. Submit the softcopy of the Revit (i.e. STUDENTID.rvt) and Robot (i.e.
STUDENTID.rtd) project files.
7. Propose design consideration, construction processes or products that can be used in
terms of
health and safety to fulfil the client requirement.

Page 3 of 6
Figure 1: Level 1 and 2 layout plan
Figure 2: Level 3 and 4 layout plan
Figure 3: Right elevation
 SUMMARY:

Structures tare ta tgroup tsuch tas tbeams, tcolumns, tslabs, tfoundations, tgirders, tand ttrusses, tthat twork
tas ta tunit tto tfulfill ta tpurpose. tAn tengineer's tduty tis tto tdesign tstructures tin ta tprofessional, tsafe, tand
teconomical tmanner tin torder tto tfulfill tthe tpurpose tfor twhich tit twas tdesigned tin tthe tfirst tplace.
tStructures tas tclassified tinto teither tbeing tstatically tdeterminate tor tstatically tindeterminate.

Statically tdeterminate tstructures tare tstructures tthat tcan tbe tanalyzed tusing tstatics tequations tonly, t(i.e.,
tequilibrium tin tall tdirections). tOn tthe tother thand, tstatically tindeterminate tstructures tcan't tbe tanalyzed
tusing tstatics tequations tonly; tthey trequire tother tmaterial tproperties, tsuch tas tdeformations, tin torder tto
tanalyze tthem.

When tengineers tconduct tstructural tanalysis, tthey tcalculate tthe treaction tforces tdue tto tthe texternal
tforces tapplied tto tthe tstructure tas twell tas tinternal tforces, tsuch tas tthe tbending tmoment, tshear tforce,
tand tnormal tforce. tStructural tanalysis tis tnecessary tfor tstructural tdesign tin torder tfor tthe tstructural
tengineer tto tchoose tthe tproper tsizes tand tmaterials tso tthe tstructure tcan teconomically tand teffectively
tresist tthe teffects tof tthe tpossible texternal tloads tapplied tto tit.
t
INTRODUCTION
This tproject tcompare tbraced tand tunbraced tframes tapplied tto teuro tcode tEC tand tBritish
tstandard tBS5950.

Method tused tto tcompare tare thand tcalculation, tand tsoftware tsuch tas tstrand7 tand trobot
tanalysis. tAs tan tengineer twe tknow tthat tone tonly ttrial twouldn’t tbe tsatisfactory tto tmake ta
tpoint, tso tit thas tbeen tcreated tbuilding tfor teach tprocedure tand teach tprocedure tcontain
tdesigning tof tEUROCODE tand tBRITISH tSTANDARD twith ttwo tdifferent tdimensions tas
tdimensions tcan taffect tthe tbuckling tand tbending tof tthe tmember, tand tP-delta tfactor thas
tbeen tanalysed.

Drawing tare tbeen tmade ton tRevit t(figure1) tthen ttransferred tto trobot tfor tthe tanalysis.

After teach tmember tdesign, ta ttype tof tcross tsectional tarea tis tbeen tchosen tfrom tthe tBlue
tbook tbased ton ttheir tresistance tformulated ton tthe tcalculation.

LOAD tTYPE
Dead tLoad
Dead tload tas twell tas tknown tas tthe tpermanent tload. tAll tthe tmembers ttaking tpart ton tthe
tstructure tand tkeeping ttogether tthe tstructure tare tcalled tdead tLoads, tas teach thas tits town
tweight tand teffects tthe tstiffens tof tthe tnext tpermanent tmember. tGood texamples tare: tslab,
tbeam tcolumn, troof, tcladding tetc.

In torder tto thave ta tsecure tand tdurable tmember ta tsafety tfactor tis tused. tAs tof tthe tEuro-
code timply ta tfactor tof t1.35, tand tBS tstandard timply t1.4.
Live tload
Live tload tknown tas ta tvariable tLoad. tThis tload tchanges tfrom tsecond tto tseconds tdepending
ton thow tmany tand twhat ttype tof tactivities tare tinduced. tAnything tthat tcan tbe tmoved tout tor
tinto tthe tstructure tduring tits tlife ttime. tGood texample tare: twind tload, ta tperson twalking tby
tor ta tsmall tmachinery tinstalled tfor tcouple thours tor tdays.

Due tto tthe timpossible tprediction tthat tcan’t tbe tmade ton tthe tfuture tloads ta tsafety tfactor tis
tused:

Euro-code timply ta tfactor tequal tto t1.5 tand tBS tStandard tImply t1.6. t
DESIGN FOR THE ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE
Load combinations BRITISH STANDARD t
The tcombination tloads tconsidered tin tthis tproject tare tas tfollow:

1.4 t× tDead tload t+ t1.6 t× tImposed tload t+ t1.0 t× tNotional thorizontal tforces tCombination t1

1.2 t× tDead tload t+ t1.2 t× tImposed tload t+ t1.2 t× tWind tload tCombination t2

1.4 t× tDead tload t+ t1.4 t× tWind tload tCombination t3

The tnotional thorizontal tforces tshould tbe ttaken tas t0.5% tof tthe tfactored tdead tplus timposed
tloads t(BS t5950-1:1990 tClauses t5.6.3, t5.1.2.3).
tLoad tCombinations tEuro tcode
 1.35 tx tGK+1.5 tx tQK

 COMBINATION t1

 1.35 tx tGK+1.5 tx tQK1+1.5 tx t0.5 tx tQK2

 COMBINATION t2

 1.35 tx tGK+1.5 tx tQK1+1.5 tx t0.7 tx tQK2

 COMBINATION t3

 COMBINATION t1

 1.35 tGK=considered tthe tdead tLoad

 1.5 tQK=considered tthe tas tthe tImposed tload

 COMBINATION t2

 1.35 tGK=considered tthe tdead tLoad

 1.5 tx tQK1=considered tthe tas tthe tImposed tload tmain tvariable

 1.5 tx t0.5 tx tQK2=Considered tas tthe twind tload twith tthe tcombination tfactor tof t0.5

 COMBINATION t3

 1.35 tGK=considered tthe tdead tLoad

 1.5 tx tQK1=considered tthe tas tthe tWind tload tmain tvariable

 1.5 tx t0.5 tx tQK2=Considered tas tthe tImposed tLoad twiith tthe tcombination tfactor tof
t0.7

DESIGN
This tdissertation tshow thow tto tdesign tBracing tsystem tfor tnon-sway tframes tand tsway
tframes, tbut tas tan tengineer tis twell tknow tthat tcolumn tand tbeam tare tmembers tof ta tframe
tso tto tstart tdesigning tfirst tit thas tbeen tdetermined ttype tof tbeam tused tand tcolumn, ttherefore
tthe tfollowing ttopics tshow twhat tapproach ttaken tto tdesign: tcolumn, tbeam tand tmainly
tbracing tsystem.
Design tof tbeams
A tbeam tis ta tmember tthat ttakes trole tas tpart tof tthe tframe, tits tbending tand tdeflection tcould
tcause teffect ton tthe tframe tsystem, thence tit thas tto tbe tclassified tand tdesigned tas tfollow:

T he tfloor tsystem tchosen tin tthis tdissertation tis ta tsitu tconcrete tfloor tof t225 tmm tdepth,
twith tan timpose tload tof t5 tKNm2, tone tway tspanning.

 Load tcombination thas tbeen tcalculated tbased ton tEURO-CODE t(3.2.2) tand tBritish
tstandard t(3.2.1)

 Shear tforce thas tbeen tdetermined:

 VED=wL2

 W= tdistributed tload tdue tto tthe tdead tload tand timposed tload tacting ton tthe tbeam.

 L= tlength tof tthe tbeam

 Then tmaximum tmoment twhich tappears tto tbe tin tthe tmiddle:

 Mmax=wL28

 Next tstep tis tto tidentify tweather tthe tbeam tis trestraint tor tunrestraint, ttherefore tan
tadequate tsection tis tchosen tfrom tthe tblue tbook ttable tsection. t

Design tof tcolumns

Colum tis ta tmember tpart tof tthe tframe tas twell. tBuckling ttakes, tplace tso tit tcould taffect tthe
tframe tassisting ton thorizontal tdeflection tor ta tsway tdue tto tthe tvertical tand thorizontal tloads.
tHence tthe tstiffer tand tadequate tsection tthe tless tbuckling tappear.

A tColumn tis tsubjected tto tcompression tdue tto tthat ta tbuckling tresistance tis tneeded tas
tfollow:

 Verified tbuckling tNEDNbRd<1

 Where;
  NED=compration tforce tacting ton tthe tcolumn

 NbRd=Design tBuckling tresistance

 Design tbuckling tresistance tshould tbe ttaken tas:

 NbRd=X tA tfyΥM1

 For tclass t1, t2, t3

 NbRd=X tAeff tfyΥM1

 For tclass t4

 χ t=
o 1ф+ф2-⅄2<1

 ф=0.5[1+α⅄-0.2+⅄2]
 ⅄=Afy tNCr tFor tclass t1, t2, t3
 ⅄=Aefffy tNCr

 For tclass t4

 Where; tχ= tReduction tfactor

 ⅄=non tdimensional tslenderness

 α=Imperfection tfactor

 NCr=is tthe telastic tcritical tforce tfor tthe trelevant tbuckling tmode

Even tthough tthe tcross tsection tchosen tare tadequate, ta tslight tof tdeformation twill tappear tand
tthis twill tlead tas tto tverify tand tdetermine tthe tServiceability tlimit tstate.

DESIGN FOR SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE

tSway tprediction
Once ta tframe tdesigned tfor tthe tultimate tlimit tstate tshould, tthe tnext tstep tshould tbe
tanalysing tthe tframe tas tan telastic trigidly-jointed tto tdetermine tthe tsway tdisplacements.

tThe tmagnitude tof tsway tdisplacements tis tcaused tby ta tnumber tof tfactors:
trelative tmember tstiffnesses, tconnection tcharacteristics, tthe tratio tof
thorizontal tto tvertical tloading, tand tcolumn tbehaviour. tAll tthese tfactors thave
ta tsignificant timpact ton tthe tsway tresponse tof tan tunbraced tframe.
Generally ta tcommon tsway tlimit tis th/300. tFor tframes twith ta twider tspan tbays, tthe tsway
tdisplacement tis tlikely tto tbe tbelow tthe tabove tlimit teven tunder thigh twind tloads. t(MIStrucE,
t2016), t(J tS tHENSMAN tBEng, t2016)
tSway tlimit
It tis timportant tto tcheck tthat tthe tsway ton teach tstorey tis tless tthan th/2000 tcladding
tneglected t(where th tis tthe tstorey theight) tThe tbottom tstorey tsway tis tlikely tto tbe tthe tmost
tcritical.

Redesign tfor tstiffness

If tsway tdeflections tare thigher tthan tthe tlimit, tthe tframe tmay tbe tmodified tto tincrease tits
tstiffness, tby tincreasing tmember tsize, tsuch tas: tthe tbeam tdepth, tthe tcolumn tflange tthickness
tor tthe tconnection tstiffness t(although tthey tmay tnot tnecessarily tincrease tits tmoment
tresistance), tor tredesign tas ta tbraced tframe.

First-order tElastic tAnalysis t(Portal tMethod)

This tmethod tis tused tfor tthe tunbraced tframe.

Every tmember tdesigned tis tassumed tto tbe tunder telastic tphase tin taccordance tto tall tdesign
tloads tfor tlimit tstates. t

Below tmethod tallow tus tto tcalculate tthe tapproximate taxial tshear tand tmoment tin teach
tmember.

 Calculation thas tbeen tcarried ttwice:

 Wind tload ton tX tdirection t(4 tbays)

 Wind tload ton tY tdirection t(3 tbays)

 Please tsee tbelow tfigure t

Figure t3.Plan tview

Portal tmethod tallow tas tto tsolve tindeterminate tstructure. tIn torder tto tsimplify tthe tcalculation,
tthe tstructure tis tchanged tinto tdeterminate tin torder tto tuse tequilibrium tequations tby tadding
tPinned thinges twere taxial tmoment tis tassumed tto tbe tZero tpositioned tat tthe tcentre tof teach
tmember.
Below tfigures tshow tthe tfraction tof tshear tforce tapplied ton tmembers tand tthe tpinned thinges
tknown tas tpoints tof tcontra-flexure.

Figure t3.4.41 tside tview twith tpinned tjoints

On tfigure tthe tload tapplied tin tthe tinterior tcolumns tare tdouble tthat tthe tloads ton tthe texterior
tcolumns. tUsually tinterior tcolumns tare tstiffer tbecause tthe tcarry tmore tgravity tload.
The tLateral tloads tare tdetermined tas tfollow:

w=wind tload tx twidth tbay=kNm tUDL tall talong tthe thieght tof tthe tbuilding

F=w tx th2=KN t( ttotal tshear tacting ton tpoints tof tcontraflaxuere)

Where th= tHeight tof tone tfloor

w= tThe tabove tshear tcalculation twill tbe trepeated tfor teach tfloor ttaking tin tconsideration tthe
tdeference tin theight.

The tnext tstep tis tto tdetermine tthe tmoment ton teach tmember tas tfollow tfor:

Wind tload ton tX tdirection t(4 tbays)

M= tF8xh2=KNm t( tmoment tdue tto tthe tshear ton tthe texternal tcolumn)

M= t2F8xh2=KNm t( tmoment tdue tto tthe tshear ton tthe tinternal tcolumn)

Wind tload ton tY tdirection t(3 tbays)

M= tF6xh2=KNm t( tmoment tdue tto tthe tshear ton tthe texternal tcolumn)

M= t2F6xh2=KNm t( tmoment tdue tto tthe tshear ton tthe tinternal tcolumn)

tMoment ton tthe tbeams:

M= tM1+M2 t=KNm t( tmoment ton tthe tbeam)

Where:

M1=moment tinduced tfrom tthe tupper tfloor

M2=moment tinduced tfrom tthe tlower tfloor

BRACING

General
Using ta ttriangulated tsystem, tall tthe tmembers tof ta tbracing tsystem tneed tto tbe tverified tand
tdesigned tbased ton tthe tdesign tforces tdue tto tdifferent tcombinations tof tactions. tIt tis
trecommended tto tmake tall tdiagonal tmembers tthe tsame tsize, tadequate tto tresist tthe tlargest
tdesign tforce.

 Verification tmust tbe tcarried tout tby tchecking tthe tresistance tof tthe tattachment tcolumn tto
tbeam, tresistance tof t1% tof tthe tvertical tforce ton tthe tcolumn.
 Check tall tthe thorizontal tforces tin tthe tcolumn tif tbeen ttransferred tinto tthe tvertical tbracing
tsystem.

Bracing tdesign
Once tthe twind tload tis tdetermined, tcalculation tas tfollow:

W=wind tload tx theight tof tbuilding t(total twind tload)

w=W2height tof tbuilding tdistributed twind tload

F=w tx tstorey thieght t( tload tacting ton teach tnode)

Once tdetermined tthe tforces, teach tnode thas tto tbe tresolved trelatively tto tthe tforces tapplied,
ttherefore ta tdesign tsize tis tchosen tfrom tthe tblue tbook tdepending ton tthe tforce tacting ton
teach tbracing.

For tconsistency ttwo tsize tare ttaken tinto tconsideration.

Frame tDeflection
Deflection tfor teach tframe thas tbeen tcalculated, tbecause ton tthese tdissertation tthe taim tis tto
tcompare tthe tbehaviour tinto tsway tof tbraced tand tunbraced tframe.

Deflection tcan tbe tdetermined tby t2 tmethods:

-slope tdeflection tmethod

-unit tload tmethod.

In tthis tdissertation tthe tdeflection tof tframe thas tbeen tcarried tout tby tusing tUnit tload tmethod
twhich tpractically way tto tdo tit tby tusing tthe tvolume tintegration ttable, tplease tsee tAppendix
txxx.

Unit tload tMethod

One tof tthe teasiest tand tmore tprecise tway tto tanalyse tdeflection tis tthe tprinciple tof tvirtual
twork, tgreat tanalytical ttool tto tanalyse tdeterminate tand tindeterminate tstructures. tThis
tprinciple tstates tthat tthe tsum tof tthe texternal twork tdone tis tequal tto tthe tsum tof tthe tinternal
tword tdone.

The tUnit tload tmethod tapply tthe tprinciple tof tvirtual twork tto tdetermine tthe tdisplacement tof
tthe tstructure tas tfollow

1. The tdeformation tof tthe tstructure thas tbeen tdetermined tusing tthe texternally tapplied tloads.
2. Virtual tunit tload tapplied tat tthe tpoint tand tinto tthe tdirection twhere tdisplacement tis tassumed
tto tappear.
3. Determine tthe tinternal twork tdue tto tthe tinternally tforce tand tunit tload.
4. Use tthe tprinciple tof tvirtual twork tby tequating tthe tsum tof tthe texternal tequal tto tthe tsum tof
tthe tinternal trelative tto tthe tspecific tpoint tchosen.

1x∆ t= t∑∫0LM0 tM1EIds

EXTERNAL tWORK=INTERNAL tWORK

Where:
∆=diflection

M0=Moment tdue tto tinternal twork tM1=moment tdue tto tunit tload

tVolume tintegration
Volume tintegration ttable tis tused tby tcomparing tthe tbending tdiagram tdue tto tinternal twork tof
teach tmember twith tits tcorrespondent tbending tdiagram tformulate tfrom tthe tunit tload tapplied.
tIf tthe tbending tmoments tdue tto tthe tinternal twork tand tthe tunit tload tare ton tthe tsame tside
tthen tthe tproduct tis tpositive tbut tif tthey tare ton tthe topposite tside tthen tthe tproduct tof tthe
ttwo tis tnegative tPlease tfind tVolume tintegral tTable ton tAppendix txxx.

Frame tStability
Any tframe tstructure tshould tbe texamined tfor tsusceptibility tto tsway tinstability tinto tsecond
torder teffect.

Second torder
P∆ teffect
If tacr> t10 tany tsecond torder teffect tare tgood tenough tto tbe tneglected. tThis tcheck tis tan tUlS
tcheck tthe tcombination tconsidered tis tthe tequation twith twind tas ta tleading taction tas tfollow:

Euro tcode: tCOMBINATION t3 t

Calculation thas tbeen tprocessed tas tfollow:

1. Design tvalue tof twind tload tas tleading taction

2. Design tvalue tof tvertical tLoads tin tcombination twith twind tLoad tas tleading taction.

The tbracing tcarry talso thorizontal tloads tinduced tby tthe timperfections. tThis tloads tare
tequivalent tto t1/200 t(0.5%) tof tthe ttotal tpermanent tand tvariable tfactored tloads tacting ton
teach tfloors tand troof. tEach tbracing tbay twill tbe tdistributed ta tvalue tequivalent tof t½ tof tthe
ttotal thorizontal tload. t

3. Each tload tabove ton tpoint t2 thas tbeen tadded tto tthe tloads ton tpoint t1.
4. Sway tanalysis tis tcarried tin taccordance tto tthe tdeflection tvalues tobtained ton tsection t3.6.
5. Frame tstability tverified tusing tthe tfollowing tformula:
acr=HEdVEd tx th∆ t>10 tCITATION tMEB091 tl t2057 t(

Frame tanalysis tsoftware tmethod

Different tsoftware thas tbeen tused tto tdetermine tthe tbehaviour tof tthe tframe.

3 tbuildings tare tdesigned ton tRevit:

 Unbraced tframe
 K-Braced tframe
 X-Braced tframe.

Each tdrawing tis ttransferred tinto trobot tfor tanalysis tapplying teuro-code tfactors tand tBritish
tstandard tfactors.

Foundation tDesign t

Footing tLoad tCalculations

For ta t6″ tthick twall twith t3 tmeter theight tand t1 tmeter tlength, tthe tload tcan tbe tmeasured tper
trunning tmeter tequivalent tto t0.150 tx t1 tx t3 tx t2000 t= t900 tkg twhich tis tequivalent tto t9
tkN/meter. tThe tload tper trunning tmeter tcan tbe tmeasured tfor tany tbrick ttype tby tfollowing
tthis tmethod.

Garage tSteel tWork tDesign t

Steel tLoad tCalculation

 Size tof tSlab tLength t3 tm tx t2 tm tThickness t0.150 tm

 Concrete tVolume t= t3 tx t2 tx t0.15 t=0.9 tm³
 Concrete tweight t= t0.9 tx t2400 t= t2160 tkg.
 Steel tweight t(1%) tin tConcrete t= t0.9 tx t0.01 tx t7850 t= t70.38 tkg.
 Total tColumn tweight= t2160 t+ t70.38 t= t2230.38 tkg/m t= t21.87 tKN/m.

Main tBeam tDesign t(Rear twall tsupport)

203UC46 tbeam.
Universal tcolumns tare tthe tmost toften tused tsection tfor tstructural tsteel tpurposes. tDue tto ttheir
tsection tshape, tthey tare toften tcalled t“I-sections” tor t“H-sections”. tUnlike ta tuniversal tbeam, tthe
tUC’s twidth tis troughly tequal tto ttheir tdepth. tFor texample, ta t203UC46 tbeam tis t203 tmm twide
tand t203 tmm tdeep. tThe tlast tnumber t(46 tin tthis texample) tis tthe tweight tper tmetre tin tkilograms.
tIt tis ttherefore teasy tto twork tout twhat tis tthe ttotal tweight tof ta tUC tby tsimply tmultiplying tits
tweight tper tmetre tby tthe ttotal tlength tin tmetres. tYou tmay tfind ttwo tnumbers tbefore tthe tUC
tabbreviation, teg. t203 tx t203 tUC t46, thowever tin tmost tcases tone tof tthem tis tomitted tas tthey
tare tboth tthe tsame. t

Main tBeam tColumn tStability t

Beam tLoad tCalculation

 300 tmm tx t600 tmm texcluding tslab tthickness.

 Volume tof tConcrete t= t0.30 tx t0.60 tx t1 t=0.18 tm³
 Weight tof tConcrete t= t0.18 tx t2400 t= t432 tkg
 Weight tof tSteel t(2%) tin tConcrete t= t0.18 tx t2% tx t7850 t= t28.26 tkg
 Total tWeight tof tColumn t= t432 t+ t28.26 t= t460.26 tkg/m t= t4.51 tKN/m

Load tCalculation ton tColumn:

 Volume tof tConcrete t= t0.23 tx t0.60 tx

t3 t=0.414m³
  Weight tof tConcrete t= t0.414 tx t2400 t= t993.6 tkg
 Weight tof tSteel t(1%) tin tConcrete t= t0.414x t0.01 tx t8000 t= t33 tkg
 Total tWeight tof tColumn t= t994 t+ t33 t= t1026 tkg t= t10KN
Wall tLoad tCalculation

1. Density tof tbrick twall twith tmortar tis tabout tranging tbetween t1600-2200 tkg/m3. tSo twe
tconsider tself tweight tof tbrick twall tis t2200 tkg/m3 tin tthis tcalculation.
2. Volume tof tbrick twall: tVolume tof tbrickwall t= tl t× tb t×h, tLength t= t1 tmeter, tWidth
t= t0.152 tmm, tHeight tof twall t= t2.5 tmeter, tVolume t= t1m× t0.152 tm× t2.5 tm, tVolume
tof tbrick twall t= t0.38 tm3
3. Dead tload tof tbrick twall: tWeight t= tvolume t× tdensity, tDead tload t= t0.38 tm3 t×
t2200 tkg/m3, tDead tload t= t836 tkg/m
4. It twill tbe tconverted tinto tkilo tNewton tby tdividing twith t100 twe twill tget t8.36 tkN/m
5. So tdead tload tof ta tbrick twall tis tabout t8.36 tkN/m tacting ton tcolumn.
Column tLoad

A tcolumn tis tan tessential tstructural tmember tof tthe tRCC tstructure tthat thelps ttransfer tthe
tsuperstructure’s tload tto tthe tfoundation. tIt tis ta tvertical tcompression tmember tsubjected tto
tdirect taxial tload tand tits teffective tlength tis tthree ttimes tlarger tthan tits tleast tlateral
tdimension.

Dead tLoad tCalculation tfor ta tBuilding

Dead tload t= tvolume tof tmember tx tunit tweight tof tmaterials.

By tcalculating tthe tvolume tof teach tmember tand tmultiplying tby tthe tunit tweight tof tthe
tmaterials tfrom twhich tit tis tcomposed, tan taccurate tdead tload tcan tbe tdetermined tfor teach
tcomponent.

Column tDesign tCalculations

 Volume tof tConcrete t= t0.23 tx t0.60 tx t3 t=0.414m³

 Weight tof tConcrete t= t0.414 tx t2400 t= t993.6 tkg
 Weight tof tSteel t(1%) tin tConcrete t= t0.414x t0.01 tx t8000 t= t33 tkg
 Total tWeight tof tColumn t= t994 t+ t33 t= t1026 tkg t= t10KN
Concrete tSlab tLoad tCalculations

 Size tof tSlab tLength t3 tm tx t2 tm tThickness t0.150 tm

 Concrete tVolume t= t3 tx t2 tx t0.15 t=0.9 tm³
 Concrete tweight t= t0.9 tx t2400 t= t2160 tkg.
How tto tCalculate tLoad ton tBeam
 1. 300 tmm tx t600 tmm texcluding tslab.
2. Volume tof tConcrete t= t0.30 tx t0.60 tx t1 t=0.18 tm³
3. Weight tof tConcrete t= t0.18 tx t2400 t= t432 tkg
4. Weight tof tSteel t(2%) tin tConcrete t= t0.18 tx t2% tx t7850 t= t28.26 tkg
5. Total tWeight tof tColumn t= t432 t+ t28.26 t= t460.26 tkg/m t= t4.51 tKN/m

CONCLUSION:

According To Eurocodes And British Standard Used In Calculation Of Lateral Stability Of The
Structure All Calculations Represent That Our Structureis Stable And Can Be Passed For Further
Constrction Works Hence
Remarks: (Pass) TBRITISH TSTANDARD TBS5950.
Figure 4: Front elevation