TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES

938 Aurora Boulevard., Cubao, Quezon City

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECHTURE

CE511 – STEEL DESIGN

“Design of Bus Terminal with Five-Storey Commercial Building in Sorsogon City”

SUBMITTED BY:

Gentolia, Rose Ann A.

Satojeto, John Cedric F.

SUBMITTED TO:

Engr. Jerome Tadiosa

February 27, 2020

 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The proposed project is a bus terminal with 5-storey commercial building that will be used to promote
tourist spots in Sorsogon City. The project is intentionally put into a location near the tourist spots in Sorsogon,
so that the target customers, which are the tourists, of the project will have the ease to navigate the beauty
of the province. With that being said the, this project may also help the economy of the province and the
locals living nearby since our project will also have a commercial building where they can start to invest.

The proposed building has a dimension of 66 meters long and 15 meters wide. The building has a
total lot area of 990 square meters and a total height of 16 meters. The project is composed of passenger’s
waiting area and ticketing area on its first floor while the succeeding floors are made for commercial areas
where locals can start their businesses. There will be 3 access stairs.

The project is located in Barangay Pangpang, Sorsogon City. Pangpang is one of the leading
barangay in the city of Sorsogon because it is accessible in all establishments such as hospitals, malls,
supermarkets and city hall. The location is three kilometers away from the downtown and it is near in some
famous tourist spots in the City. Some of the famous tourist destinations near the location of the project are:

 Paguriran Island and Lagoon

 Buhatan River Eco Adventure
 Halabang Baybay Beach
 Mt. Pulog and Lake Pulog
 Pagol Beach Resort
 Malawmawan White Sand Beach and Resort
 Lebanon Beach
 Bagatao Island
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The project is a Bus terminal with five-storey commercial building that is intended to be built in Sorsogon City,
Region V. As a city with a lot of tourist spots and destinations. Sorsogon City is included in seismic zone 4.

Location of Brgy. Hall of Pangpang, Sorsogon City (Source: Google Earth)

 Location of the project (Source: Google Earth)

1.3 PROJECT CLIENT

The design project entitled “Proposed bus terminal with 5 storey commercial building in Sorsogon
City” is proposed to Ms. Emma Dela Tore, a businesswoman by profession and also a traveller. She wants
to travel the Philippines with ease that’s why our terminal is composed of busses that can go both north and
south of Luzon.

1.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

1.4.1 GENERAL

The general objective of this study is to design a hotel building by designing a structure based on
engineering methods and applications, evaluating and comparing alternatives considering the constraints
with the help of the National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015).

1.4.2 SPECIFIC

1. To assess which is the most effective and efficient trade-off to satisfy the client’s need.
2. To analyze different effects caused by different loads to the structure.
3. To design a cost-effective bus terminal with five-storey commercial building.
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATION

The design project will only focus on the following:

 Architectural plans such as floor plans and elevations of the project were provided
 Analyze the structure using STAAD PRO
 Project was designed in accordance to National Building Code of the Philippines and National
Structural Code of the Philippines
 Cost estimates of structural elements

While the limitations of the project are as follows:

 Plumbing, mechanical and electrical plans were not included.

 Plumbing, mechanical and electrical cost estimates were not included
 Interior design of the structure was not included

1.6 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

For the completion of this project, it must undergo series of phases. The first process is identification
of the problem, in this stage the designers must know the existing problems first for them to generate ideas
and formulate solutions on how they will address the problem

Second stage is the design conceptualization. In this stage, the identification of client was the most
important so as to know the structure to be build. In this case, the structure requested by the client was a
hotel building.
The next stage is data gathering. The data gathered will be utilized for the standard and constraints
and as a basis and validation in the need of the construction of hotel building and in the determination of the
adequacy of the design in terms of durability, sustainability and serviceability.
The fourth stage is determination of constraints and trade-offs. In order to achieve the best solution
that possesses the best qualities prescribe in criteria. The designer defines and presents the trade-offs from
the client and from the environment. The identification of essential constraints is economic, sustainability and
constructability.
Lastly, Final design. It is based on the most efficient and most effective result evaluated by the
designer. This output will be recommended to be able to provide designs of the hotel building in accordance
to the constraints.
 CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS & REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 LOCATION
2.1.1 VICINITY

The project is located along the national road in province of Sorsogon, specifically in Barangay Pangpang,
Sorsogon City.

Location of the project (Source: Google Earth)

2.1.2 DEMOGRAPHY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA

Barangay Pangpang is part of Sorsogon City in the province of Sorsogon. It is one of the leading
barangay in the municipality of Sorsogon City. It is situated at approximately 12.9986, 123.9781 in the island
of Luzon. The elevation at these coordinates is estimated at 153.1 meters or 502.3 feet above mean sea
level. Based on 2015 census, the age group with the highest population in Pangpang is 15 to 19, with 1,190
individuals. Conversely, the age group with the lowest population is 75 to 79, with 68 individuals. The
population grew from 3,464 individuals in 1990 to 9,230 individuals in 2015, it has an increase of 5,766
individuals.
 CENSUS DATE POPULATION GROWTH RATE

May 1,1990 3,464 ---

September 1,1995 5,363 8.53%

May 1, 2000 7,002 5.88%

August 1, 2007 7,818 1.53%

May 1, 2010 8,224 1.86%

August 1, 2015 9,230 2.22%

GROWTH OF POPULATION IN PANGPANG, SORSOGON CITY

(According to Census 2015)

The total land area of barangay Pangpang is 932.32 hectares. Major soil is a loam-type soil. Its strategic
location three kilometers from the downtown area places it in an overwhelming position to attract growth and
development. Pangpang is the meeting point of the old highway leading to the town proper and the diversion
road that skirts the populous area. The following are the Purok or Zone of Barangay Pangpang, Sorsogon
City:

 Ilawod, Ladas, Tangnan

 Saint Raphael Subdivision
 El Refugio Subdivision
 Red Palm Subdivision
 Imperial Homes Subdivision
 Mangga (Right), Sitio Lantik
 Farmer's Village, Centro, Iraya
  1st Street to 7th Street Our Lady's Village
 8th Street to 14th Street Our Lady's Village
 15th Street to 21st Street Our Lady's Village

No. of Household (approx.) 1,991

No. of Population (approx.) 9,230

Means of transportation (approx.):

Motorbike 10

Tricycle 80

Van 10

No. of Daycare Center 2

Barangay Satellite Market 1

Barangay Health Center 1

Barangay ALS Center 1

Barangay Multipurpose Hall 1

Private Business Establishments 19

2.1.3 TOPOGRAPHY
Pangpang shares a common border with the following barangays:

 San Juan (from the municipality of Bacon) Sorsogon City, Sorsogon

 Pamurayan, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon
 Guinlajon, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon
 Macabog, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon
  Peñafrancia, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon
 Tugos, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon

Elevation Map of Sorsogon City-12°58’46.22”N 123°59’00.02”E (source:http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/)

Topographic Map of Sorsogon City (source: http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/)

1.4 HAZARDS

Sorsogon City Tsunami Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)

Sorsogon City Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)

 Sorsogon City Flood Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)
EXPLANATION AND RECOMMENDATION

 All hazard assessments are based on the available susceptibility maps and the coordinates of the
user’s selected location. Flood
 Areas with low susceptibility to floods are likely to experience flood heights of less than 0.5 meters
and/or flood duration of less than 1 day. These include low hills and gentle slopes that have sparse
to moderate drainage density.
 Areas with moderate susceptibility to floods are likely to experience flood heights of 0.5 meters up to
1 meter and/or flood duration of 1 to 3 days. These are subject to widespread inundation during
prolonged and extensive heavy rainfall or extreme weather conditions. Fluvial terraces, alluvial fans,
and infilled valleys are also moderately subjected to flooding. A
 reas with high susceptibility to floods are likely to experience flood heights of 1 meter up to 2 meters
and/or flood duration of more than 3 days. Sites including active river channels, abandoned river
channels, and areas along riverbanks, are immediately flooded during heavy rains of several hours
and are prone to flash floods. These may be considered not suitable for permanent habitation but
 may be developed for alternative uses subject to the implementation of appropriate mitigation
measures after conducting site-specific geotechnical studies as deemed necessary by project
engineers and LGU building officials.
 Areas with very high susceptibility to floods are likely to experience flood heights of greater than 2
meters and/or flood duration of more than 3 days. These include active river channels, abandoned
river channels, and areas along riverbanks, which are immediately flooded during heavy rains of
several hours and are prone to flash floods. These are considered critical geohazard areas and are
not suitable for development. It is recommended that these be declared as “No Habitation/No Build
Zones” by the LGU, and that affected households/communities be relocated.
 The implementation of appropriate mitigation measures as deemed necessary by project engineers
and LGU building officials is recommended for areas that are susceptible to various flood depths.
Site-specific studies including the assessment for other types of hazards should also be conducted
to address potential foundation problems.

Sorsogon City Storm Surge Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)

Storm Surge

 The storm surge hazard maps identify coastal areas where flooding may happen if a storm surge is
predicted.
 A storm surge (“daluyong ng bagyo”) is the abnormal rise in sea level that occurs during tropical
cyclones or “bagyo”. It happens when a very strong tropical cyclone blows-off excessive amounts of
seawater toward low-lying coastal communities.
 It is catastrophic and life-threatening because a storm surge can cause massive inland flooding,
sometimes in unimaginable heights. It is even more dangerous when the storm surge coincides with
a high tide.
 Areas susceptible to storm surge inundation of 0.5 to 1 meter are categorized as “low to moderate
risk” zones. Low-lying communities are advised to prepare to evacuate, stay away from the coast or
beach, remind household members of disaster preparedness and communication/coordination
plans, emergency and evacuation kits, and listen/follow PAGASA for the latest weather update.
 Areas susceptible to storm surge inundation of 1.1 to 4 meters are categorized as “high to very high
risk” zones. Communities may anticipate a life-threatening scenario, follow evacuation guidelines
from local authorities, expect damage to community and infrastructures, cancel all marine/coastal
activities, and listen/follow PAGASA for the latest weather update.
 Areas susceptible to storm surge inundation of above 4 meters are zones with “highest risk” to storm
surge inundation. Storm surge is catastrophic. Significant threat to life, so mandatory evacuation is
enforced. Storm surge will severely damage communities and coastal/marine facilities. For storm
surge-prone communities, the most important considerations are
1) the strength of the tropical cyclone,
2) the height of the surge, and
3) if the community is located in a low-lying area.
Sorsogon City Sea Level Rise Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)

Sorsogon City Multi Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)

 Sorsogon City Landslide Hazard Map (http://sorsogoncity.gov.ph/?map=hazards-map)
Rain-Induced Landslide

 Areas with low susceptibility to rain-induced landslides are gently sloping areas with no identified
landslides.
 Areas with moderate susceptibility to rain-induced landslides are those with moderately steep slopes
where soil creep and other indications of possible landslide occurrence are present.
 Areas with high susceptibility to rain-induced landslides usually have steep to very steep slopes that
are underlain by weak materials, with the presence of numerous old/inactive landslides. These sites
may be considered not suitable for permanent habitation but may be developed for alternative uses
subject to the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures after performing site-specific
geotechnical studies.
 Areas with very high susceptibility to rain-induced landslides usually have steep to very steep slopes
that are underlain by weak materials, and have recent landslides, escarpments, and tension cracks
present. These could be aggravated by human-initiated effects. These are considered as critical
geohazard areas and are not suitable for development. Thus, it is recommended that these be
 declared as “No Habitation/No Build Zones” by the LGU, and that affected households/communities
be relocated.
 Areas along the debris flow path or accumulation zone could be affected by landslide debris
materials. These are usually found at the base of slopes with manifestations of mass movement.
These are considered as critical geohazard areas and may not be suitable for development. It is
recommended that permanent habitation/development be avoided as remobilization of debris from
previous landslide events may occur. In addition, relocation of settlements along debris flow paths is
suggested.
 Implementation of appropriate mitigation measures as deemed necessary by project engineers and
LGU building officials is recommended for landslide-susceptible areas. This includes performing site-
specific studies to address potential foundation/slope stability problems.
 Monitoring of signs/evidences of ground movement such as tension cracks, tilted trees and fences,
and bulging road sections in areas that are moderately to critically susceptible to landslides should
be done regularly and reported to local authorities and/or the MGB.

Nearest fault line in Sorsogon City (Source: PHIVOLCS FaultFinder)

2.1.5 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Borehole Data
After the results of Standard Penetration Test and laboratory test, it indicates that sedimentary
deposits consisting of sands and silts characterize the upper layers of the site subsoil.

SAMPLE BORE DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION NMC% LL PL PI q

NO. HOLE (m) (psf)

SS–1 BH-1 0.00-0.5 Grayish brown clay sand 35 46 17 15 1500

0 with little fines & Gravels,
soft, stiff, filling materials

SS–2 BH-1 0.55-1.5 Grayish brown clay sand 33 44 17 15 2500

0 with little fines soft, stiff,
NGL

SS–3 BH-1 1.55-3.0 Brown sandy clay with 32 42 15 19 3000

0 gravels, medium dense,
hard

CS–4 BH-1 3.05-5.0 Yellowish brown sandy 30 NP NP NP 4000

0 clay with tuff fragments,
hard, tuff, firm

CS–5 BH-1 5.05-6.5 Yellowish brown siltstone, 28 NP NP NP 5000

0 hard, highly weathered

CS–6 BH-1 6.55-8.0 Light brown claystone; 27 NP NP NP 6000

0 hard, highly weathered

CS–7 BH-1 8.05-10. Brown sandstone, hard, 25 NP NP NP 7000

0 highly weathered
2.2 DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURE & BUILDING PLAN
2.2.1 DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURE
The project is a bus terminal with five-storey commercial building. It composes of 3 main stairs. The ground
floor has a passenger’s waiting area, 2 comfort rooms and a ticketing area. It has a food court located at the
second floor of the building and commercial spaces.

2.2.2 BUILDING PLAN

2.2.2.1 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
2.2.2.2 PERSPECTIVE
2.2.2.3 FLOOR PLANS
2.2.2.4 CEILING PLANS
2.2.2.5 ELEVATIONS
2.2.2.6 SECTIONS
2.2.2.7 SCHEDULE OF FINISHES
FLOOR
CEILING FLOOR FINISHES FRAME PARTITIONS
FILL
wood or steel studs,
FIRST FLOOR Acoustic normal terrazzo 38 mm 13mm gypsum board
Fiber Board conrete directly on slab each side
 wood or steel studs,
SECOND FLOOR Acoustic normal terrazzo 38 mm 13mm gypsum board
Fiber Board conrete directly on slab each side
wood or steel studs,
THIRD FLOOR Acoustic normal terrazzo 38 mm 13mm gypsum board
Fiber Board conrete directly on slab each side
wood or steel studs,
FOURTH FLOOR Acoustic normal terrazzo 38 mm 13mm gypsum board
Fiber Board conrete directly on slab each side
wood or steel studs,
FIFTH FLOOR Acoustic normal terrazzo 38 mm 13mm gypsum board
Fiber Board conrete directly on slab each side

2.3 LOADS
2.3.1 DEAD LOADS
Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 204 that consists of the lists of weight of
the materials used in the construction of the structure. The following table provides the components
and its minimum design load for each function of the said room descriptions.

DEAD LOADS

Slab 3.54 kPa

Corrugated Asbestos Cement Roofing 0.19 kPa

Ceiling 0.05 Kpa

(Acoustic Fiber Board)
Floor Fill 0.015 kPa/mm
(Lightweight Concrete)
Floor and floor finishes 0.91 kPa
(Terrazzo 38mm directly on slab)
Frame Partitions 0.38 kPa
(Wood or Steel studs, 13 mm gypsum
board each side)
 Wall 3.11 kPa
𝑘𝑁
(Concrete, Masonry Units 16.5 𝑚3 full

grout, wythe thickness 150 mm

Dead Loads Parameters

2.3.2 LIVE LOADS

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 205 that consists of the maximum loads
expected by the intended use or occupancy. The following table provides the occupancy descriptions
and the equivalent design live loads.

LIVE LOAD

Category: Standard Occupancy

Basic Floor Area 1.0 kPa

Office use 2.4 kPa

Live Loads Parameters

2.3.3 SEISMIC LOADS

Seismic loading is one of the basic concepts of earthquake engineering which means application of
an earthquake-generated agitation to a structure. It happens at contact surfaces of a structure either
with the ground, or with adjacent structures, or with gravity waves from tsunami.

Seismic loading depends, primarily, on:

 Anticipated earthquake's parameters at the site - known as seismic hazard

 Geotechnical parameters of the site

 Structure's parameters

 Characteristics of the anticipated gravity waves from tsunami (if applicable).

 Occupancy Category Seismic Importance Factor I Seismic Importance Factor Ip
I. Essential facilities 1.5 1.5
II. Hazardous facilities 1.25 1.5
III. Special Occupancy Structures 1 1
IV. Standard Occupancy Strutures 1 1
V. Miscellaneous Structures 1 1
Seismic Importance Factor

Soil Profile Soil Profile Name Ave. Properties for Top 30 m Soil Profile
Shear Wave Velocity SPT Undrained Shear
Strength
SA Hard Rock >1500
SB Rock 760 to 1500
Sc Very Dense Soil 360 to 760 >50 >100
SD Stiff Soil Profile 180 to 360 15 to 50 50 to 100
SE Soft Soil Profile <180 <15 <50
SF Soil Requiring Site-Specific Evaluation See Section 208.4.3.1
Soil Profile Types

Zone 2 4
Z 0.2 0.4
Seismic Zone Factor Z

Seismic Map of the Philippines from NSCP 2015

Seismic Source Type Closest Distance to Known
Seismic Source
≤ 5 Km ≥10 Km
A 1.2 1
B 1 1
C 1 1
Near Source Factor, Nv

Seismic Source Closest Distance to Known

Type
Seismic Source
≤ 5 Km 10 Km ≥15 Km
A 1.6 1.2 1
B 1.2 1 1
C 1 1 1

Near Source Factor, Na

Nearest fault line in Sorsogon City (Source: PHIVOLCS FaultFinder)

 Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type
2 4
Z=0.2 Z=0.4
SA 0.16 .32NV

SB 0.20 .40NV

Sc 0.32 .56NV

SD 0.40 .64NV

SE 0.64 .96NV

SF See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8

Seismic Coefficient, Cv

2.3.4 OTHER LOADS

Wind Loads

Wind is moving mass of air. Wind loads results from the forces exerted by the kinetic energy of
the moving mass of air, which can produce a combination of direct pressure, negative pressure or
suction, and drag forces on the building and other obstacles in its paths. Wind forces are typically
assumed to be applied normal, or perpendicular, to the affected surfaces of the building. Wind
pressure increases as a function of wind velocity.

Wind parameters:

ZONE CLASSIFICATION
(Basic Wind Speed) PROVINCE

V = 290 km per hour (kph) Sorsogon City

Wind Zone from different Provinces of the Philippines

 Basic Wind Speed from NSCP 2015 for Occupancy III, IV, V Buildings
OCCUPANCY DESCRIPTION Iw
CATEGORY
I Essential 1.5
II Hazardous 1.15
III Special Occupancy 1.15
IV Standard Occupancy 1
V Miscellaneous 0.87
Importance Factor, Iw

EXPOSURE (NOTE 1)
HEIGHT ABOVE A B C
GROUND LEVEL CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 1 CASE 2
6 0.7 0.62 0.9 1.08
7.5 0.7 0.66 0.94 1.12
9 0.7 0.7 0.98 1.16
12 0.7 0.76 1.04 1.22
15 0.81 0.81 1.09 1.27
18 0.85 0.85 1.13 1.31
Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficients\
2.3.5 LOAD DISTRIBUTION MAP/ LOAD MAPPING

2.4 OTHER RELEVANT DATA

Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs mostly in medium to fine-grained sands wherein a
mass of soil loses a large percentage of its shear resistance when subjected to monotonic, cyclic or shock
loading, and flows a manner resembling a liquid. Much of the damage on substructures and foundation during
earthquake is attributed to this phenomenon.

The parameter which approximates the liquefaction potential of a soil layer is the liquefaction
resistance factor 𝐹𝐿 , which is defined by the equation:

𝑅
𝐹𝐿 =
𝐿

Where,

𝐹𝐿 = liquefaction resistance factor

𝑅= resistance of soil elements to dynamic loads

𝐿= dynamic load to soil elements induced by earthquake motion

2.5 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

FOR FRAMES

(Sabelli, Roeder, & Hajjar, 2013) stated that Special Concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF) is an
economical system use for low-rise buildings in areas of high seismicity and SCBF can be effective system
for seismic retrofit due to their high stiffness and because they can be assembled from pieces of relatively
small size and weight. Up to the present, SCBFs have been used more extensively than Buckling-Restrained
Braced Frames (BRBFs) that is generally offer cost and performance advantage for buildings three stories
and higher but SCBFs continue to be popular because of the level of experience designers and fabricators
have with the system. SCBFs are designed using capacity design procedures, with the braces serving as the
fuses of the system. Optimal design of SCBFs entails careful selection and proportioning of braces so as to
provide limited overstrength and avoid a concentration of inelastic demands. Overstrength can be beneficial,
but care should be taken to maintain a well-proportioned design in order to avoid concentration of ductility
demands.
 SCBFs economically develop the lateral strength and stiffness needed to assure serviceable
structural performance during smaller, frequent earthquakes, but the inelastic deformation needed to ensure
life safety through collapse prevention during extreme earthquakes is dominated by tensile yielding of the
brace, brace buckling, and post-buckling deformation of the brace. Ductile detailing and proportioning
requirements are needed to ensure that SCBFs can achieve the required inelastic deformations.
Corresponding inelastic flexural deformation in beams, columns, and connections will occur during these
large inelastic excursions. The inelastic deformations in the beams and columns are not primary effects
because they are not specific goals of the design process. Nevertheless, they influence the seismic
performance of SCBFs and contribute to the cost of repair.

There are several types of braced frame system configurations, some of those are the Cross Bracing
and Diagonal Bracing. The configuration of braces also affects system performance. Braces buckle in
compression and yield in tension. The initial compressive buckling capacity is smaller than the tensile yield
force, and for subsequent buckling cycles, the buckling capacity is further reduced by the prior inelastic
excursion. Therefore, bracing systems must be balanced so that the lateral resistance in tension and
compression is similar in both directions. This means that diagonal bracing must be used in opposing pairs
to achieve this required balance. Other bracing configurations, such as the X-brace, which is most commonly
used with light bracing on shorter structures. Research shows that the buckling capacity of X-bracing is best
estimated by using one half the brace length when the braces intersect and connect at mid-section (Palmer
2012). However, the inelastic deformation capacity of the X-braced system is somewhat reduced from that
achievable with many other braced frame systems because the inelastic deformation is concentrated in one-
half the brace length because the other half of the brace cannot fully develop its capacity as the more
damaged half deteriorates.

FOR CONNECTION

According to the study of (Krumpen III & Carrato, 2016) about comparative study of bolted and welded Special
Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF), many large industrial projects located in remote areas usually lacks
significant number of skilled welder and thus bolted connections are adopted over welded connection.
 CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS AND TRADE-OFFS

3.1 DESIGN CONSTRAINTS

Constraint is defined as the parameter that a designer should consider in evaluating the tradeoffs
provided in order to achieve the most efficient project. It is a limiting factor to the design solutions that must
be manage accordingly to have more effective design.

The design limitations in this project are classified as quantitative constraint and qualitative
constraint. Quantitative constraint refers to limitations that is measurable using engineering method such as
estimates. However, qualitative constraint are those constraints that is immeasurable and can only be ranked
through the designer’s experience and individual’s perception.

3.1.1 QUANTITATIVE CONSTRAINTS

1. Economic
- This type of constraint is the most limiting factor in all design project. The client wants the
designer to design the terminal that the cost will not exceed his allotted budget. Because of
that, the designer provides a various number of alternatives to came up with the most
economical design and at the same time can give an adequate strength to the structure to
become an earthquake resistant.
2. Constructability
- Constructability constraint refers to the number of workers needed to finish the construction
of the terminal with respect to the period of time that it takes to be built. The designer laid
numbers of configurations to address the client’s desired completion date. The total duration
of the project may affect the total cost of the project, and so, a delayed project can cause an
addition of cost to the original total cost of the project. Because of that, the designer
evaluated each structural member individually and the designer will choose then of what will
be the final structural elements from the initial configurations to be added to the final
configuration that will greatly reduce the total cost of the project.
3. Safety/Risk
- This constraint is the process on how to evaluate and assess risks for worker’s safety and
health assurance from workplace hazard. Risk assessment considers risk control and risk
analysis. Once uncertain events may happen, it may affect the project and that refer to as
risk. Uncertain events can be a natural hazard or damages caused by humans. Risk
 constraint helps the designer to evaluate risks and to manage these risks to minimize its
impact to the project.

3.1.2 QUALITATIVE CONSTRAINTS

1. Political
- Political constraint is relevant to legal issues that may affect the project. The designer should
always follow legal procedures and standards given by the government and also the
gathering of data is within the area of Brgy. Pangpang, Sorsogon City.

2. Public Safety
- This constraint pertains to the safety and security of the community especially the workers
during the operation of project. It is important to ranked this constraint to avoid problems and
not to harm individuals.

3. Aesthetic
- Aesthetic constraint is based on someone’s perception whichever is more presentable. It is
considered as a qualitative constraint because it lies upon the final touch of the structure
and it depends on the owner’s taste of exterior design.

3.2 TRADE-OFFS
Design trade-off is part of the design process. In this section, the designer will provide several
number of configurations to be evaluated that might be the best solution to address those constraints
mentioned above. Trade-off assessment is based on various textbooks, websites and case studies that give
relevant ideas related in designing a bus terminal.

In design analysis, it is a process of assessing possible design. The designer came up with 8 trade-
offs to be analyze, which are, the Composite Beam, Steel Built-Up Beam, rolled shape wide flange Column,
Concrete filled tube HSS Column, Cross Bracing, Diagonal Bracing, Welded Connection and Bolted
Connection. The results will be evaluated based on its cost, duration of construction and its safety assurance
to the public.

The following are the list of trade-offs to be evaluated by the designer to have the most effective and
efficient design of bus terminal.
3.2.1 BEAMS
3.2.1.1 W Shape
Wide flange beam is a type of building material used to construct homes, bridges, and other
structures. Those flanges in a wide beam are much broader than the standard beam, and may be equal in
length of the height of the web.

3.2.1.2 S Shape
S Shape beam is also known as American standard beam. S shape is a rolled section with two
parallel flanges connected by a web. S shapes have relatively narrow flanges. The designation of the S shape
gives information about the width and weight per unit length.
3.2.2 COLUMNS
3.2.2.1 HP Shape
Also known as bearing piles. HP shapes are similar to W shapes except their webs and flanges are of equal
thickness and the depth and flange width are normally equal for a given designation.

3.2.2.2 HSS Rectangle

HSS means hollow structural section. Rectangular and square HSS are also commonly called tube
steel or box section. Circular HSS are sometimes mistakenly called steel pipe, although true steel pipe is
actually dimensioned and classed differently from HSS.
3.2.3 TENSION MEMBERS
3.2.3.1 Cross Bracing
Cross bracing is a system utilized to reinforce building structures in which diagonal supports intersect. Cross
bracing can increase a building’s capability to withstand seismic activity from an earthquake. Bracing is
important for an earthquake resistant building because it helps keep a structure standing. Cross bracing is
usually seen with two diagonal supports placed in an X shaped manner; these support compression and
tension forces.

3.2.3.2 Diagonal Bracing

An inclined structural member in compression and/or tension; usually employed to stabilize a frame
against horizontal forces, such as wind.
3.2.4 CONNECTIONS
3.2.4.1 Bolted Connection
A connection between structural members made with plates and bolts, as opposed to a riveted or
welded construction. Bolted connection is more frequently used than other connection methods.

3.2.4.2 Welded Connection

3.2.5 FRAMES

3.2.5.1 SMRF

3.2.5.2 SCBF
3.2.5 TRADE-OFF SUMMARY
TRADE-OFF CONFIGURATIONS
framing beams columns connection bracing
SCBF S-shape HP shape bolting cross
SCBF S-shape HP shape bolting diagonal
SCBF S-shape HP shape welding cross
SCBF S-shape HP shape welding diagonal
SCBF S-shape HSS rectangle bolting cross
SCBF S-shape HSS rectangle bolting diagonal
SCBF S-shape HSS rectangle welding cross
SCBF S-shape HSS rectangle welding diagonal
SCBF W-shape HP shape bolting cross
SCBF W-shape HP shape bolting diagonal
SCBF W-shape HP shape welding cross
SCBF W-shape HP shape welding diagonal
SCBF W-shape HSS rectangle bolting cross
SCBF W-shape HSS rectangle bolting diagonal
SCBF W-shape HSS rectangle welding cross
SCBF W-shape HSS rectangle welding diagonal
SMRF S-shape HP shape bolting cross
SMRF S-shape HP shape bolting diagonal
SMRF S-shape HP shape welding cross
SMRF S-shape HP shape welding diagonal
SMRF S-shape HSS rectangle bolting cross
SMRF S-shape HSS rectangle bolting diagonal
SMRF S-shape HSS rectangle welding cross
SMRF S-shape HSS rectangle welding diagonal
SMRF W-shape HP shape bolting cross
SMRF W-shape HP shape bolting diagonal
SMRF W-shape HP shape welding cross
SMRF W-shape HP shape welding diagonal
SMRF W-shape HSS rectangle bolting cross
SMRF W-shape HSS rectangle bolting diagonal
SMRF W-shape HSS rectangle welding cross
SMRF W-shape HSS rectangle welding diagonal
3.3 DESIGNER’S RAW RANKING
The designer will use the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design introduced by Otto and
Antonsson in 1991 to provide the proper analysis and comparison of results of between each tradeoffs
presented to the client based on the given constraints. From the scale of 1-10, the designer can now rank
the importance of each tradeoff and can identify its ability to satisfy the constraints.

The following are the formulas to be used in computing the ranking for the ability of tradeoffs to satisfy
the criterion of materials:

𝐻𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 − 𝐿𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 (%) = × 100(%)
𝐿𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

% 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
𝑆𝑢𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘 = 𝐺𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘 − ( )
10

The designer assigned a governing rank not to exceed a value of 10 that will respond to the
importance factor of constraints that determined by the referrals of the client and designer’s perspective on
each constraint. The subordinate rank is the rank of tradeoffs which corresponds to the percentage distance
along the ranking scale shown below.

Otto and Antonsson’s ranking Scale for Satisfactory Factor

3.3.1 BEAMS INITIAL RANKING

Decision Criteria Criterion’s Importance Ability to satisfy the criterion
S-Shape W-shape
Safety/Risk 10 6.1 10
Economic 9 10 7.9
Constructability 8 10 6.6
Over-all Rank 231 223.9
Economic Assessment

The initial cost estimation of each trade-off were performed by the designer based on the cost of materials
that will make up the system. The S-shape beam ranked at the top. This was because the designer
considered the weight of beam sections and it is found that S-shape beams weigh more than W-shape beams
and thus have a higher value.

Constructability Assessment

The duration of the construction of each trade-offs was based on the required materials that are needed to
install and erect to construct each system. The S-shape section ranked at top because the material is more
lightweight and thus easy to install.

Safety/Risk Assessment

The maximum compressive stress produced by each trade-offs was based on the loads induced by gravity
and earthquake loads. The approximate maximum compressive stress was acquired through modelling and
structural analysis using computer software (specifically, STAAD software). The result of the assessment
showed that the W-shape beams will have a relatively low stress compared to S-shape beam.

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint:

W Shape vs. S Shape
Constraint Trade-off

S-shape W-shape

Economic (Cost) Php 983,791.76 Php 1,241,407.64

Material cost for S-shape beam: 983,791.76

Material cost for W-shape beam: 1,241,407.64

1,241,407.64 − 983,791.76
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
1,241,407.64

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.21) x 10 = 7.9

Ranking of s-shape beam = 10
Ranking of W-shape beam = 7.9

Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint:

W Shape vs. S Shape
Constraint Trade-off
S-shape Beam W-shape Beam
Constructability (Man- 685 hours 1045 hours
hour duration)

Man-hour duration of S-shape beam: 685 hrs

Man-hour duration of W-shape beam: 1045 hrs

1045 − 685
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
1045

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.34) x 10 = 6.6

Ranking of S-shape beam = 10

Ranking of W-shape beam = 6.6

Computation of ranking for Safety/Risk Constraint:

W Shape vs. S Shape
 Constraint Trade-off
S-shape W-shape
Safety (Beam Deflection) 30 mm 19.5 mm

Max. Compressive stress for S-shape beam: 30mm

Max Compressive stress for W-shape beam: 19.5mm

30 − 19.5
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = = 0.39
30

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.39) x 10 = 6.1

Ranking of S-shape = 6.1

Ranking of W-shape = 10

3.3.2 COLUMNS INITIAL RANKING

Decision Criteria Criterion’s Ability to satisfy the criterion
Importance
HSS rectangle HP-shape

Safety/Risk 10 10 9
Economic 9 7.5 10
Constructability 8 7.9 10
Over-all Rank 230.7 260

Economic Assessment
The initial cost estimation of each trade-off were performed by the designer based on the cost of materials
that will make up the system. The HP-shape ranked at top because the section has only steel as the main
material while the HSS requires concrete to fill the hollow steel section and thus, additional material cost is
needed.

Constructability Assessment

The duration of the construction of each trade-offs was based on the required materials that are needed to
install and erect to construct each system. The HP-shape won over the HSS because the latter requires
additional time to harden the concrete before proceeding to the next phase of construction.

Safety/Risk Assessment

The process for the assessment of the column member is identical to the process done into the beam member
with small differences. The results were very close but in the end, the concrete-filled HSS won over the HP-
shape. This was because the concrete in HSS helps to reduce the compressive force induced in the column.

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint:

HP Shape vs. HSS Rectangle
Constraint Trade-off

HP-shape HSS rectangle

Economic (Cost) Php 745,108.00 Php 995,030.31

Material cost for HP-shape: 745,108.00

Material cost for HSS: 995,030.31

995,030.31 − 745,108
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
995,030.31

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.25) x 10 = 7.5

Ranking of HP-shape = 10
Ranking of HSS = 7.5
Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint:
HP Shape vs. HSS Rectangle
Constraint Trade-off
HP-shape HSS rectangle
Constructability (Man- 514 hours 654 hours
hour duration)

Man-hour duration of HP-shape: 514 hrs

Man-hour duration of HSS: 654 hrs

654 − 514
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
654

Subordinate Rank = 5 – (0.21) x 10 = 7.9

Ranking of HP-shape = 10
Ranking of HSS = 7.9

Computation of ranking for Safety-Risk Constraint:

HP Shape vs. HSS Rectangle
Constraint Trade-off
HSS rectangle HP-Shape
 Safety/Risk 52.2 48
(Slenderness Ratio)

Max. Compressive Stress of HSS: 52.2

Max. Compressive Stress of HP-shape: 48

52.2 − 48
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
52.2

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.1) x 10 = 9

Ranking of Wide Flange = 9

Ranking of HSS = 10

3.3.3 TENSION MEMBERS INITIAL RANKING

Decision Criteria Criterion’s Ability to satisfy the criterion
Importance
Cross (X) Bracing Chevron (Inverted
K) Bracing
Safety/risk 10 10 8.2
Economic 9 7.6 10
Constructability 8 7.6 10
Over-all Rank 229.2 252

Economic Assessment

The initial cost estimation of each trade-off were performed by the designer based on the cost of materials
that will make up the frame such as the weight of steel sections, number of cement bags and volume of sand
and gravel for slabs and composite members. The result of the performed assessment was that the difference
in cost of the two systems were relatively small because these both systems were proven to be economical
based on similar previous projects. But in the end, diagonal bracings have the lower material cost due to the
relative length of steel section required is shorter compared to the cross bracings.

Constructability Assessment

The duration of the construction of each trade-offs was based on the complexity of the structure and additional
work requirement to the installation and erection of the system. The designer’s raw ranking concluded that
the diagonal bracings has the fastest installation and erection time compared to cross bracings. This is due
to the fact that the components of diagonal bracings are less complex compared to the cross bracings.

Safety Assessment

The maximum lateral deflection produced by each trade-offs was based on the stiffness of the frame. The
approximate maximum lateral deflection was acquired through modelling and structural analysis using
computer software (specifically, STAAD software). The result of the assessment showed that the cross
bracings will produce relatively low maximum lateral deflection compared to diagonal bracings.

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint:

Cross Bracing vs. Diagonal Bracing
Constraint Trade-off

Cross (X) Bracing Diagonal Bracing

Economic (Cost) Php 275,065.73 Php 209,573.89

Material cost of Cross bracing: 275,065.73

Material cost of Chevron bracing: 209,573.89

275,065.73 − 209,573.89
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
275,065.73

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.24) x 10 = 7.6

Ranking of Cross bracing = 7.6
Ranking of Diagonal bracing = 10

Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint:

Cross Bracing vs. Diagonal Bracing
Constraint Trade-off
Cross (X) Bracing Chevron (Inverted
K) Bracing
Constructability (Man- 183 hours 139 hours
hour duration)

Man-hour duration of Cross bracing: 183 hrs

Man-hour duration of Chevron bracing: 139 hrs

183 − 139
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
183

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.24) x 10 = 7.6

Ranking of Cross bracing = 7.6

Ranking of Diagonal bracing = 10

Computation of ranking for Safety-Risk Constraint:

 Cross Bracing vs. Diagonal Bracing
Constraint Trade-off

Cross (X) Bracing Diagonal Bracing

Safety/Risk (Lateral 72.147 mm 88.064 mm

Deflection)

Max. Lateral deflection of Cross bracing: 72.147 mm

Max. Lateral deflection of Diagonal bracing: 88.064 mm

88.064 − 72.147
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
88.064

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.18) x 10 = 8.2

Ranking of Cross bracing = 10

Ranking of Chevron bracing = 8.2

3.3.4 CONNECTIONS INITIAL RANKING

Decision Criteria Criterion’s Ability to satisfy the criterion
Importance
Bolted connection Welding
connection
Economic 10 6.9 10
Constructability 8 10 9.8
Over-all Rank 149 178.4
Economic Assessment

The welded connection won over the bolted connection due to the fact that welding overall will produce lower
material cost over the bolted system. Structural bolts, especially high-strength bolts, are much more
expensive compared to the materials required for welding.

Constructability Assessment

The bolted connection less construction man-hour compared to welded connection. This was because
welding time is much more dependent on the skilled worker who will perform the job. While in the bolting
system, the installation process is relatively easy and fast.

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint:

Bolted Connection vs. Welded Connection
Constraint Trade-off

Bolted Connection (LRF) Welded Connection (LRF)

Economic (Cost) Php 101,520.00 Php 70,200.00

Material cost of Bolted connection: 101,520

Material cost of Welded connection: 70,200

101,520 − 70,200
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
101,520

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.31) x 10 = 6.9

Ranking of Bolted connection = 6.9

Ranking of Welded connection = 10
Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint:
Bolted Connection vs. Welded Connection
Constraint Trade-off
Bolted Double Angle Welded Double Angle
Constructability (Man-hour 136 hours 139 hours
duration)

Man-hour duration of Bolted connection: 136 hrs

Man-hour duration of Welded connection: 139 hrs

139 − 136
% 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 =
139

Subordinate Rank = 10 – (0.02) x 10 = 9.8

Ranking of Bolted connection = 10

Ranking of Welded connection = 9.8

3.4 DESIGN STANDARDS

The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD NO. 1096) provides for all buildings and
structures, a framework of minimum standards and requirements to regulate and control their location, site,
design, quality of materials, construction, alteration, repair, conversion, use, occupancy, maintenance,
moving, demolition of and addition, except traditional indigenous family dwellings.

The National Structural Code of the Philippines (2015) provides minimum requirements for the
design of buildings, towers and other vertical structures. It also provides the minimum standards and
guidelines to safeguard life or limb, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design,
construction, quality of materials pertaining to the structural aspects of all buildings and structures within this
jurisdiction.

The Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines (ASEP) Steel Handbook Volume 1,
3rd Edition. This provide the civil and structural engineering practitioners with a handy reference to locally
availably rolled shapes, built-up shapes, cold-formed steel sections and light-gage steel sections. The
following sections were used in the selection of structural member sections in the design project.

CHAPTER 4: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

4.1 DESIGN METHODOLOGY

4.2 DESIGN OF FRAME CONFIGURATION 1
The following shows the summary of tradeoffs that belong to configuration 1.

CONFIGURATION 1
BEAM
S SHAPE
COLUMN
HP SHAPE

CONNECTION
BOLTED
BRACING
CROSS
FRAME
SCBF

4.3 LOAD MODELS

The following defines the type of load combinations to be used in the structural analysis of
the structure. This governing load combination will then be used to calculate the member forces for
the design.

Load Combinations provided by NSCP 2015:

 U=1.4(D+F)

U=1.2(D+F+T)+1.6(L+H)+0.5(𝐿𝑟 or R)

U=1.2D+1.6(𝐿𝑟 or R)+(𝑓1 L or 0.5W)

U=1.2D+1.0W+𝑓1 L+0.5(𝐿𝑟 or R)

U=1.2D+1.0E+𝑓1 L

U=0.9D+1.0W+1.6H

U=0.9D+1.0E+1.6H

𝑓1 - 1.0 for floors in places of public assembly, for live loads in excess of 4.8 kPa, and for
garage live load, or -0.5 for other live loads

Load Combinations provided by ACI 318:

U = 1.4D

U = 1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5(Lr or S or R)

U = 1.2D + 1.6(Lr or S or R) + (1.0L or 0.5W or 0.8W)

U = 1.2D + (1.0 or 1.6) W + 1.0L + 0.5(Lr or S or R)

U = 1.2D + (1.0 or 1.4) E + 1.0L + 0.2S

U = 0.9D + (1.0 or 1.6) W

U = 0.9D + (1.0 or 1.4) E

4.4 GEOMETRIC MODELLING OF CONFIGURATION 1

4.5 MINIMUM DESIGN LOADS

Dead Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 204 that consists of the lists of weight of
the materials used in the construction of the structure. The following table provides the components
and its minimum design load for each function of the said room descriptions.

DEAD LOADS

Slab 3.54 kPa

Corrugated Asbestos Cement Roofing 0.19 kPa

Ceiling 0.05 Kpa

(Acoustic Fiber Board)
Floor Fill 0.015 kPa/mm
(Lightweight Concrete)
 Floor and floor finishes 0.91 kPa
(Terrazzo 38mm directly on slab)
Frame Partitions 0.38 kPa
(Wood or Steel studs, 13 mm gypsum
board each side)
Wall 3.11 kPa
𝑘𝑁
(Concrete, Masonry Units 16.5 𝑚3 full

grout, wythe thickness 150 mm

Dead Loads Parameters

Live Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 205 that consists of the maximum loads
expected by the intended use or occupancy. The following table provides the occupancy descriptions
and the equivalent design live loads.

LIVE LOAD

Category: Residential Building

Basic Floor Area 1.0 kPa

Office use 2.4 kPa

Live Loads Parameters

Seismic Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 208 that provides the seismic load
parameters.
 SEISMIC LOAD

Seismic Zone 4

Near Source Factor 1.0

Importance Factor 1.0

Seismic Coefficient 0.40

Soil Profile 𝑆𝐶 (Very dense soil and soft rock)

Seismic Source Type B (21.3 km from Legaspi

Lineament fault)
Seismic Loads Parameters

Wind Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 207A and 207F stated that buildings and
other vertical structures shall be designed and constructed to resist wind loads.

WIND LOAD

Risk Category of Structure:

IV- Standard Occupancy Structure

Internal Pressure Coefficient ±0.18

Wind Directionality Factor 0.85

 Topographic Factor 1.0

Gust Effect Factor 0.85

Wind Speed 290 kPh

Exposure Category Exposure C

Wind Loads Parameters

4.6 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

4.7 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS RESULT

4.8 DESIGN PROCESS

4.8.1 DESIGN OF BEAM MEMBERS

For Bending Stress of Beams:

𝑴
𝒇𝒃 = 𝑺 < 𝐹𝑏
𝒙

Where: fb = actual bending stress, MPa

M = bending moment of section, N.mm

I = moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm4

C = distance from neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm

𝐼
= is known as the section modulus, mm3
𝐶

Fb = allowable bending stress, MPa

For compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

𝑭𝒃 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟔𝑭𝒚 (Strong axis)

𝑭𝒃 = 𝟎. 𝟕𝟓𝑭𝒚 (Weak axis)

A compact section must satisfy the following conditions:

𝒃𝒇 𝟏𝟕𝟎
≤
𝟐 𝒕𝒇 √𝑭𝒚

𝒅 𝟏𝟔𝟖𝟎
≤
𝒕𝒘 √𝑭𝒚

And when : 𝐿𝑏 < 𝐿𝑐

Where: 𝐿𝑐 is the smaller value and 𝐿𝑢 is the larger of 𝐿1 and 𝐿2

𝟐𝟎𝟎 𝒃𝒇
𝑳𝟏 =
√𝑭𝒚

𝟏𝟑𝟕𝟗𝟎𝟎
𝑳𝟏 = 𝑭𝒚 𝒅
𝒃𝒇 𝒕𝒇

For partially compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

𝒃𝒇
𝑭𝒃 = 𝑭𝒚 [𝟎. 𝟕𝟗 − 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟕𝟔𝟐 𝟐 𝒕𝒇 √𝑭𝒚 ]

𝒃𝒇
𝑭𝒃 = 𝑭𝒚 [𝟏. 𝟎𝟕𝟓 − 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟏𝟗 √𝑭𝒚 ]
𝟐 𝒕𝒇

A partially compact section must satisfy the following condition:

𝟏𝟕𝟎 𝒃𝒇 𝟐𝟓𝟎
< 𝟐 𝒕𝒇 <
√𝑭𝒚 √𝑭𝒚

And when : 𝐿𝑏 > 𝐿𝑐 but 𝐿𝑏 < 𝐿𝑢

For non-compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

When : 𝐿𝑏 > 𝐿𝑐 but 𝐿𝑏 > 𝐿𝑢

Check whether :
 𝟕𝟎𝟑𝟐𝟕𝟎 𝑪𝒃 𝑳 𝟑𝟓𝟏𝟔𝟑𝟑𝟎 𝑪𝒃
A : √ < 𝒓𝒕 < √
𝑭𝒚 𝑭𝒚

Use bigger value of “Fb”from (a) or (b) but < 0.60 Fy

𝟐 𝑭𝒚(𝑳⁄𝒓𝒕)𝟐
(a) . 𝑭𝒃 = 𝑭𝒚 [𝟑 − 𝟏𝟎.𝟓𝟓 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟔 𝑪𝒃]

𝟖𝟐𝟕𝟒𝟎 𝑪𝒃
(b) . 𝑭𝒃 = 𝑳𝒅
𝒃𝒇 𝒕𝒇

𝟕𝟎𝟑𝟐𝟕𝟎 𝑪𝒃 𝑳 𝟑𝟓𝟏𝟔𝟑𝟑𝟎 𝑪𝒃
B : √ < 𝒓𝒕 > √
𝑭𝒚 𝑭𝒚

Use bigger value of “Fb” from (a) or (b) but < 0.60 Fy

𝟏𝟏𝟕𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝑪𝒃
(a) . 𝑭𝒃 = (𝑳⁄𝒓𝒕)𝟐

𝟖𝟐𝟕𝟒𝟎 𝑪𝒃
(b) . 𝑭𝒃 = 𝑳𝒅
𝒃𝒇 𝒕𝒇

𝑀 𝑀 2
Where: 𝐶𝑏 = 1.75 + 1.05 𝑀1 + 0.3 (𝑀1 ) < 2.3
2 2

𝑀1 = smaller bending moment at the ends of the un-braced length taken

about the strong axis of beam

𝑀2 = larger bending moment at the ends of the un-braced length taken

about the strong axis of beam

𝑀1
= ratio of end moments
𝑀2

𝑀1
= is positive when they have the same sign (reverse curvature)
𝑀2

𝑀1
= is negative when they are of opposite signs (single curvature)
𝑀2
For Shearing Stress of Beams:

The allowable shearing stress occurs in cross-sectional area of the beam:

𝒉 𝟗𝟗𝟖
When : ≤
𝒕𝒘 √𝑭𝒚

𝑭𝒗 = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟎 𝑭𝒚

𝒉 𝟗𝟗𝟖
But if : >
𝒕𝒘 √𝑭𝒚

𝑭𝒚 𝑪𝒗
𝑭𝒗 = ≤ 𝟎. 𝟒𝟎 𝑭𝒚
𝟐.𝟖𝟗

310264 𝐾𝑣
Where: 𝐶𝑣 = 𝐹𝑦(ℎ⁄𝑡𝑤)2 When 𝐶𝑣 < 0.80

500 𝐾𝑣
𝐶𝑣 = ℎ⁄𝑡𝑤 √𝐹𝑦 When 𝐶𝑣 > 0.80

5.34
𝐾𝑣 = 4.00 + (𝑎⁄ℎ)2 When 𝑎⁄ℎ < 1.0

4.00
𝐾𝑣 = 5.34 + (𝑎⁄ℎ)2 When 𝑎⁄ℎ > 1.0

For Deflection of Beams:

Maximum deflections of steel beams due to vertical loads can be computed using formula below, but the
𝐿
computed deflection must not exceed 360of span. For the design of the beams, two types of load occurred.

For uniformly loaded beams which are simply supported at both ends, the maximum deflection can be
computed using formula.

𝟓𝑾𝑳𝟒
𝜹 = 𝟑𝟖𝟒 𝑬𝑰

And for two concentrated load acting on fixed end beams, the maximum deflection is computed using.

𝟓𝑷𝑳𝟑
𝜹 = 𝟔𝟒𝟖 𝑬𝑰
4.8.2 DESIGN OF COLUMN MEMBER
At first, the designers classified the columns according to slenderness ratio to determine its allowable
compressive stress using these equations.

𝑲𝑳
When: < 𝑪𝒄 (Intermediate Column)
𝒓

(𝐾𝐿/𝑟)2 𝐹𝑦
𝐹𝑎 = [1 − 2 ] 𝐹.𝑆.
2𝐶𝑐

5 3(𝐾𝐿/𝑟) (𝐾𝐿/𝑟)3
𝐹. 𝑆. = 3 + −
8𝐶𝑐 8𝐶𝑐 3

2𝜋 2 𝐸
Where: 𝐶𝑐 = √ 𝐹𝑦

𝑲𝑳
When: > 𝑪𝒄 (Long Column)
𝒓

12𝜋 2 𝐸
𝐹𝑎 = 23(𝐾𝐿/𝑟)2

Where: 𝐶𝑐 = slenderness ratio which defines the limit between intermediate column
and long column.

E = modulus of elasticity of steel (200 GPa)

Fy = yield stress of steel

K = effective length factor

Fa = allowable compressive stress

Axial Compression and Bending

The members are then subjected to both axial and bending stress acting simultaneously.

𝑃 𝑀𝐶
𝑓 =𝐴± (Bending in one axis only)
𝐼

𝑃 𝑀𝑥 𝐶𝑥 𝑀𝑦 𝐶𝑦
𝑓 =𝐴± ± (Bending in both axis)
𝐼𝑥 𝐼𝑦
 Where: 𝑓 = stress

P = allowable concentrated or axial load, Kn

A = cross sectional area, mm2

C = distance from the neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm

I = moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm4

Axial Compression with Bending

Members subjected to both axial compression and bending stresses shall be proportioned to satisfy the
following requirements:

𝒇𝒂 𝑪𝒎𝒙 𝒇𝒃𝒙 𝑪𝒎𝒚 𝒇𝒃𝒚

+ 𝒇 + 𝒇𝒂 ≤ 𝟏. 𝟎
𝑭𝒂 (𝟏− ′𝒂 )𝑭𝒃𝒙 (𝟏− ′ )𝑭𝒃𝒚
𝑭 𝒆𝒙 𝑭 𝒆𝒚

𝒇𝒂 𝒇 𝒇
+ 𝑭𝒃𝒃𝒙 + 𝑭𝒃𝒚 ≤ 𝟏. 𝟎
𝟎.𝟔𝟎𝑭𝒚 𝒙 𝒃𝒚

𝒇𝒂
When ≤ 𝟎. 𝟏𝟓
𝑭𝒂

𝒇𝒂 𝒇 𝒇
+ 𝑭𝒃𝒃𝒙 + 𝑭𝒃𝒚 ≤ 𝟏. 𝟎
𝑭𝒂 𝒙 𝒃𝒚

𝑷
Where : 𝑓𝑎 = computed axial stress, 𝑭𝒂 = 𝑨

𝑓𝑏 = computed compressive bending stress

𝐹𝑎 = axial compressive stress that would permitted if axial force alone existed

𝐹𝑏 = compressive bending stress that would be permitted if bending moment

alone existed

𝟏𝟐 𝝅 𝑬
𝑭′𝒆 = 𝟐𝟑 (𝑲𝒍⁄𝒓)𝟐

𝐿𝑏 =un-braced length in plane of bending

𝑟𝑏 = radius of gyration in the plane of bending

K = effective length factor in plane of bending

𝑪𝒎 = Coefficient whose value shall be taken as follows:

a. For compression members in frame subjected to joint translation (side sway),

𝑪𝒎 = 0.85

b. For rotationally restrained compression members in frames braced against joints

translation and not subjected to transverse loading between their supports in the plane
of bending,

𝑪𝒎 = 0.6 - 0.4 (𝑴𝟏 ⁄𝑴𝟐 )

Where : 𝑀1 ⁄𝑀2 = is the ratio of the smaller to larger moments at the ends of the
proportion of the members un-braced in the plane of bending under consideration.

c. For compression members in frames braced against joint translation in the plane of
loading and subjected to transverse loading between their supports.

1. For members whose ends are restrained against rotation in the plane of bending.
𝑪𝒎 = 0.85

2. For members whose ends are unrestrained against rotation in the plane of
bending. 𝑪𝒎 = 1.0

4.8.3 DESIGN OF TENSION MEMBERS

 For Yielding Failure,

𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟎𝑭𝒚𝑨𝒈

 For Rupture Failure,

𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝑭𝒖𝑨𝒆

 For Block Shear Failure,

𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟎𝑨𝒗𝑭𝒖 + 𝟎. 𝟓𝑨𝒕𝑭𝒖

Where:

F = design force, kN
Fy = yield stress of the steel, Mpa

Fu = ultimate yield strength of steel, Mpa

Ag = gross area of the connected member (cross-section), sq.mm

Ae = effective area of the connected member (cross-section, sq.mm

Av = net area for shear, sq.mm

At = net area for tension, sq.mm

4.9 DESIGN OF FRAME CONFIGURATION 2

The following shows the summary of tradeoffs that belong to configuration 2.

CONFIGURATION 2
BEAM
S SHAPE
COLUMN
HP SHAPE
CONNECTION
BOLTED
BRACING
DIAGONAL
FRAME
SCBF
4.10 LOAD MODELS
The following defines the type of load combinations to be used in the structural analysis of
the structure. This governing load combination will then be used to calculate the member forces for
the design.

Load Combinations provided by NSCP 2015:

U=1.4(D+F)

U=1.2(D+F+T)+1.6(L+H)+0.5(𝐿𝑟 or R)

U=1.2D+1.6(𝐿𝑟 or R)+(𝑓1 L or 0.5W)

U=1.2D+1.0W+𝑓1 L+0.5(𝐿𝑟 or R)

U=1.2D+1.0E+𝑓1 L

U=0.9D+1.0W+1.6H

U=0.9D+1.0E+1.6H

𝑓1 - 1.0 for floors in places of public assembly, for live loads in excess of 4.8 kPa, and for
garage live load, or -0.5 for other live loads

Load Combinations provided by ACI 318:

U = 1.4D

U = 1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5(Lr or S or R)

U = 1.2D + 1.6(Lr or S or R) + (1.0L or 0.5W or 0.8W)

U = 1.2D + (1.0 or 1.6) W + 1.0L + 0.5(Lr or S or R)

U = 1.2D + (1.0 or 1.4) E + 1.0L + 0.2S

U = 0.9D + (1.0 or 1.6) W

U = 0.9D + (1.0 or 1.4) E

4.11 GEOMETRIC MODELLING OF CONFIGURATION 2

4.12 MINIMUM DESIGN LOADS

Dead Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 204 that consists of the lists of weight of
the materials used in the construction of the structure. The following table provides the components
and its minimum design load for each function of the said room descriptions.

DEAD LOADS

Slab 3.54 kPa

Corrugated Asbestos Cement Roofing 0.19 kPa

Ceiling 0.05 Kpa

(Acoustic Fiber Board)
Floor Fill 0.015 kPa/mm
(Lightweight Concrete)
 Floor and floor finishes 0.91 kPa
(Terrazzo 38mm directly on slab)
Frame Partitions 0.38 kPa
(Wood or Steel studs, 13 mm gypsum
board each side)
Wall 3.11 kPa
𝑘𝑁
(Concrete, Masonry Units 16.5 𝑚3 full

grout, wythe thickness 150 mm

Dead Loads Parameters

Live Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 205 that consists of the maximum loads
expected by the intended use or occupancy. The following table provides the occupancy descriptions
and the equivalent design live loads.

LIVE LOAD

Category: Residential Building

Basic Floor Area 1.0 kPa

Office use 2.4 kPa

Live Loads Parameters

Seismic Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 208 that provides the seismic load
parameters.
 SEISMIC LOAD

Seismic Zone 4

Near Source Factor 1.0

Importance Factor 1.0

Seismic Coefficient 0.40

Soil Profile 𝑆𝐶 (Very dense soil and soft rock)

Seismic Source Type B (21.3 km from Legaspi

Lineament fault)
Seismic Loads Parameters

Wind Loads

Based on the NSCP 2015 Code Chapter 2 Section 207A and 207F stated that buildings and
other vertical structures shall be designed and constructed to resist wind loads.

WIND LOAD

Risk Category of Structure:

IV- Standard Occupancy Structure

Internal Pressure Coefficient ±0.18

Wind Directionality Factor 0.85

 Topographic Factor 1.0

Gust Effect Factor 0.85

Wind Speed 290 kPh

Exposure Category Exposure C

Wind Loads Parameters

4.13 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

4.14 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS RESULT

4.15 DESIGN PROCESS

4.15.1 DESIGN OF BEAM MEMBERS

For Bending Stress of Beams:

𝑴
𝒇𝒃 = 𝑺 < 𝐹𝑏
𝒙

Where: fb = actual bending stress, MPa

M = bending moment of section, N.mm

I = moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm4

C = distance from neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm

𝐼
= is known as the section modulus, mm3
𝐶

Fb = allowable bending stress, MPa

For compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

𝑭𝒃 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟔𝑭𝒚 (Strong axis)

 𝑭𝒃 = 𝟎. 𝟕𝟓𝑭𝒚 (Weak axis)

A compact section must satisfy the following conditions:

𝒃𝒇 𝟏𝟕𝟎
≤
𝟐 𝒕𝒇 √𝑭𝒚

𝒅 𝟏𝟔𝟖𝟎
≤
𝒕𝒘 √𝑭𝒚

And when : 𝐿𝑏 < 𝐿𝑐

Where: 𝐿𝑐 is the smaller value and 𝐿𝑢 is the larger of 𝐿1 and 𝐿2

𝟐𝟎𝟎 𝒃𝒇
𝑳𝟏 =
√𝑭𝒚

𝟏𝟑𝟕𝟗𝟎𝟎
𝑳𝟏 = 𝑭𝒚 𝒅
𝒃𝒇 𝒕𝒇

For partially compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

𝒃𝒇
𝑭𝒃 = 𝑭𝒚 [𝟎. 𝟕𝟗 − 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟕𝟔𝟐 𝟐 𝒕𝒇 √𝑭𝒚 ]

𝒃𝒇
𝑭𝒃 = 𝑭𝒚 [𝟏. 𝟎𝟕𝟓 − 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟏𝟗 √𝑭𝒚 ]
𝟐 𝒕𝒇

A partially compact section must satisfy the following condition:

𝟏𝟕𝟎 𝒃𝒇 𝟐𝟓𝟎
< 𝟐 𝒕𝒇 <
√𝑭𝒚 √𝑭𝒚

And when : 𝐿𝑏 > 𝐿𝑐 but 𝐿𝑏 < 𝐿𝑢

For non-compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

When : 𝐿𝑏 > 𝐿𝑐 but 𝐿𝑏 > 𝐿𝑢

Check whether :
 𝟕𝟎𝟑𝟐𝟕𝟎 𝑪𝒃 𝑳 𝟑𝟓𝟏𝟔𝟑𝟑𝟎 𝑪𝒃
A : √ < 𝒓𝒕 < √
𝑭𝒚 𝑭𝒚

Use bigger value of “Fb”from (a) or (b) but < 0.60 Fy

𝟐 𝑭𝒚(𝑳⁄𝒓𝒕)𝟐
(a) . 𝑭𝒃 = 𝑭𝒚 [𝟑 − 𝟏𝟎.𝟓𝟓 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟔 𝑪𝒃]

𝟖𝟐𝟕𝟒𝟎 𝑪𝒃
(b) . 𝑭𝒃 = 𝑳𝒅
𝒃𝒇 𝒕𝒇

𝟕𝟎𝟑𝟐𝟕𝟎 𝑪𝒃 𝑳 𝟑𝟓𝟏𝟔𝟑𝟑𝟎 𝑪𝒃
B : √ < 𝒓𝒕 > √
𝑭𝒚 𝑭𝒚

Use bigger value of “Fb” from (a) or (b) but < 0.60 Fy

𝟏𝟏𝟕𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝑪𝒃
(a) . 𝑭𝒃 = (𝑳⁄𝒓𝒕)𝟐

𝟖𝟐𝟕𝟒𝟎 𝑪𝒃
(b) . 𝑭𝒃 = 𝑳𝒅
𝒃𝒇 𝒕𝒇

𝑀 𝑀 2
Where: 𝐶𝑏 = 1.75 + 1.05 𝑀1 + 0.3 (𝑀1 ) < 2.3
2 2

𝑀1 = smaller bending moment at the ends of the un-braced length taken

about the strong axis of beam

𝑀2 = larger bending moment at the ends of the un-braced length taken

about the strong axis of beam

𝑀1
= ratio of end moments
𝑀2

𝑀1
= is positive when they have the same sign (reverse curvature)
𝑀2

𝑀1
= is negative when they are of opposite signs (single curvature)
𝑀2
For Shearing Stress of Beams:

The allowable shearing stress occurs in cross-sectional area of the beam:

𝒉 𝟗𝟗𝟖
When : ≤
𝒕𝒘 √𝑭𝒚

𝑭𝒗 = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟎 𝑭𝒚

𝒉 𝟗𝟗𝟖
But if : >
𝒕𝒘 √𝑭𝒚

𝑭𝒚 𝑪𝒗
𝑭𝒗 = ≤ 𝟎. 𝟒𝟎 𝑭𝒚
𝟐.𝟖𝟗

310264 𝐾𝑣
Where: 𝐶𝑣 = 𝐹𝑦(ℎ⁄𝑡𝑤)2 When 𝐶𝑣 < 0.80

500 𝐾𝑣
𝐶𝑣 = ℎ⁄𝑡𝑤 √𝐹𝑦 When 𝐶𝑣 > 0.80

5.34
𝐾𝑣 = 4.00 + (𝑎⁄ℎ)2 When 𝑎⁄ℎ < 1.0

4.00
𝐾𝑣 = 5.34 + (𝑎⁄ℎ)2 When 𝑎⁄ℎ > 1.0

For Deflection of Beams:

Maximum deflections of steel beams due to vertical loads can be computed using formula below, but the
𝐿
computed deflection must not exceed 360of span. For the design of the beams, two types of load occurred.

For uniformly loaded beams which are simply supported at both ends, the maximum deflection can be
computed using formula.

𝟓𝑾𝑳𝟒
𝜹 = 𝟑𝟖𝟒 𝑬𝑰

And for two concentrated load acting on fixed end beams, the maximum deflection is computed using.

𝟓𝑷𝑳𝟑
𝜹 = 𝟔𝟒𝟖 𝑬𝑰
4.15.2 DESIGN OF COLUMN MEMBER
At first, the designers classified the columns according to slenderness ratio to determine its allowable
compressive stress using these equations.

𝑲𝑳
When: < 𝑪𝒄 (Intermediate Column)
𝒓

(𝐾𝐿/𝑟)2 𝐹𝑦
𝐹𝑎 = [1 − 2 ] 𝐹.𝑆.
2𝐶𝑐

5 3(𝐾𝐿/𝑟) (𝐾𝐿/𝑟)3
𝐹. 𝑆. = 3 + −
8𝐶𝑐 8𝐶𝑐 3

2𝜋 2 𝐸
Where: 𝐶𝑐 = √ 𝐹𝑦

𝑲𝑳
When: > 𝑪𝒄 (Long Column)
𝒓

12𝜋 2 𝐸
𝐹𝑎 = 23(𝐾𝐿/𝑟)2

Where: 𝐶𝑐 = slenderness ratio which defines the limit between intermediate column
and long column.

E = modulus of elasticity of steel (200 GPa)

Fy = yield stress of steel

K = effective length factor

Fa = allowable compressive stress

Axial Compression and Bending

The members are then subjected to both axial and bending stress acting simultaneously.

𝑃 𝑀𝐶
𝑓 =𝐴± (Bending in one axis only)
𝐼

𝑃 𝑀𝑥 𝐶𝑥 𝑀𝑦 𝐶𝑦
𝑓 =𝐴± ± (Bending in both axis)
𝐼𝑥 𝐼𝑦
 Where: 𝑓 = stress

P = allowable concentrated or axial load, Kn

A = cross sectional area, mm2

C = distance from the neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm

I = moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm4

Axial Compression with Bending

Members subjected to both axial compression and bending stresses shall be proportioned to satisfy the
following requirements:

𝒇𝒂 𝑪𝒎𝒙 𝒇𝒃𝒙 𝑪𝒎𝒚 𝒇𝒃𝒚

+ 𝒇 + 𝒇𝒂 ≤ 𝟏. 𝟎
𝑭𝒂 (𝟏− ′𝒂 )𝑭𝒃𝒙 (𝟏− ′ )𝑭𝒃𝒚
𝑭 𝒆𝒙 𝑭 𝒆𝒚

𝒇𝒂 𝒇 𝒇
+ 𝑭𝒃𝒃𝒙 + 𝑭𝒃𝒚 ≤ 𝟏. 𝟎
𝟎.𝟔𝟎𝑭𝒚 𝒙 𝒃𝒚

𝒇𝒂
When ≤ 𝟎. 𝟏𝟓
𝑭𝒂

𝒇𝒂 𝒇 𝒇
+ 𝑭𝒃𝒃𝒙 + 𝑭𝒃𝒚 ≤ 𝟏. 𝟎
𝑭𝒂 𝒙 𝒃𝒚

𝑷
Where : 𝑓𝑎 = computed axial stress, 𝑭𝒂 = 𝑨

𝑓𝑏 = computed compressive bending stress

𝐹𝑎 = axial compressive stress that would permitted if axial force alone existed

𝐹𝑏 = compressive bending stress that would be permitted if bending moment

alone existed

𝟏𝟐 𝝅 𝑬
𝑭′𝒆 = 𝟐𝟑 (𝑲𝒍⁄𝒓)𝟐

𝐿𝑏 =un-braced length in plane of bending

𝑟𝑏 = radius of gyration in the plane of bending

K = effective length factor in plane of bending

𝑪𝒎 = Coefficient whose value shall be taken as follows:

a. For compression members in frame subjected to joint translation (side sway),

𝑪𝒎 = 0.85

b. For rotationally restrained compression members in frames braced against joints

translation and not subjected to transverse loading between their supports in the plane
of bending,

𝑪𝒎 = 0.6 - 0.4 (𝑴𝟏 ⁄𝑴𝟐 )

Where : 𝑀1 ⁄𝑀2 = is the ratio of the smaller to larger moments at the ends of the
proportion of the members un-braced in the plane of bending under consideration.

c. For compression members in frames braced against joint translation in the plane of
loading and subjected to transverse loading between their supports.

1. For members whose ends are restrained against rotation in the plane of bending.
𝑪𝒎 = 0.85

2. For members whose ends are unrestrained against rotation in the plane of
bending. 𝑪𝒎 = 1.0

4.15.3 DESIGN OF TENSION MEMBERS

 For Yielding Failure,

𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟎𝑭𝒚𝑨𝒈

 For Rupture Failure,

𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝑭𝒖𝑨𝒆

 For Block Shear Failure,

𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟎𝑨𝒗𝑭𝒖 + 𝟎. 𝟓𝑨𝒕𝑭𝒖

Where:

F = design force, kN
Fy = yield stress of the steel, Mpa

Fu = ultimate yield strength of steel, Mpa

Ag = gross area of the connected member (cross-section), sq.mm

Ae = effective area of the connected member (cross-section, sq.mm

Av = net area for shear, sq.mm

At = net area for tension, sq.mm