Kathmandu, Nepal

As per IS
1893:2016(Part I)
whole Nepal can be
considered to be in
highly seismic risk
area, Zone 5
 Building Type : Residential Building
 Specific Service : Residential Units
 Building construction : New
 Plinth area covered : 2127.55 sqft
 No. of Storey : B+ G+6+ Stair cover
 Floor Height : 2.75 m (Basement)
3.05 m ( other)
 Height of building : 2.75+7*3.05=24.1 m
 Length of building : 16.73m( 54’-11”)
 Breadth of building : 14.5m( 47’-7”)
 Number of lift : 1 no of lift
 Number of Staircase : 1 no
 Floor Finishing : Ceramic Tiles, Epoxy flooring
 Structural system : RCC Space frame, ductile moment
resisting frame
 Column size : 550X550 (mm)
 Beam size : 400X600, 400x650, 500X600,
230x350, 300x450 (BxD, mm)
 Slab : 125 mm
 Type of foundation : Mat foundation
 Bearing capacity : 197 KN/m2 ( as per soil test Report)
Dead load of structural member
 (Slab / Beam / Column ) = Program Calculated
by unit wt. given (25 kN/m3)
 Brick Masonry (Unit Wt.) = 19.0 KN/m3
 Floor Finish = 1.5 KN/m2
 Partition & internal walls = 1.0 KN/m2
 Lift Dead Load on cover slab = 10.0 KN/m2
Live Load (AS PER IS NBC 2005)

Stairs = 3 KN/m2
Parking Floor = 5 KN/m2
Residential area= = 2 KN/m2
Roof (with Access) = 1.5 KN/m2
Roof (without Access) = 0.75 KN/m2
Lift Live Load on cover slab = 8.4 KN/m2 (6
Passenger)
At Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient, ko = (1-sinØ)= 0.5
Earth Pressure = γwH + Ko (γs- γw) H
= H (9.81+0.5(18-9.81))
= 14H KN/m2
where H = Back fill height
 Seismic load as per IS 1893:2016 (Part I)
 Seismic Weight:
 100% of Dead load + 25% to 50% of live load is taken into
consideration.
 The design base shear is calculated using the formula
given in IS1893:2016 clause 7.6.1, which is as, follows:
V = Ah W
 Design seismic coefficient is given by:
 Ah= Z/2*Sa/g*I/R
 Different load combinations based on IS 1893:2016 are
developed and used for design purposes.
 1.5(DL + LL)
 1.2(DL + LL ± EL)
 1.5(DL ± EL)
 0.9DL± 1.5EL
 EL is replaced by i) ELx ±0.3Ely±0.3Elz,
ii) 0.3ELx ±Ely±0.3Elz,
iii) 0.3ELx ±0.3Ely±Elz,
 where,
 DL= Dead load
 LL= Live load
 EL= Seismic load (Response spectrum Load case in this case)
Material
 Grade of Concrete : M20 (For all structures)
 Grade of rebar steel) : Fe500 (For longitudinal
and transverse Rebar)
 Analysis
 As per IS1893:2016, the building has been analyzed for
cracked section.
 Cracked moment of inertia has been taken as:
 70% of I gross for Column & 35% of I gross for Beam.
 For Slab: 25% of I gross & for Shear wall : 70% of I gross (from IS
16700-2016 tall building)
 The masonry sections are assumed to be completely
cracked before the structural sections crack, so the
program calculated time period has been used for cracked
section analysis.
 Height considered is from Ground floor only as per IS
1893:2016.
 Modal time period and mass participation
 Time period of first mode=0.864 s
 Time period of second mode = 0.727 s
 Difference= (0.864-0.727)/0.864 = 15.85% > 10%
OK (as per clause 7.1, table 6)

 From table Sum UX (Mass participation factor) up

to first 3 modes= 68.98% > 65%, OK
 From table Sum UY (Mass participation factor)
up to first 3 modes= 67.76% > 65%, OK
Modal mass participation

TABLE: Modal Load Participation

Ratios
Case Item Type Item Static Dynamic
% %

Modal Acceleration UX 100 99.99

Modal Acceleration UY 100 99.99

Modal Acceleration UZ 100 99.3

 Torsional irregularity exist if:
 The ratio of maximum displacement to minimum displacement is
greater than 1.5
 i.e Ratio of maximum to average displacement is greater than 1.2
 Configuration needs to be revised if :
 The ratio of maximum displacement to minimum displacement
should not be greater than 2.0.
 i.e Ratio of maximum to average displacement should not be
greater than 1.33

Δavg = (Δmin+Δmax)/2

Δavg
 For Δmax/Δmin displacement ratio between 1.5 to 2,
dynamic analysis needs to be done.

 The obtained results are checked and found to be between

1.5 to 2 (ie Δmax/Δavg displacement between 1.2 to 1.33)
hence dynamic analysis would fulfill the requirement
 For the initial run scale factor = (g*I)/2R=
(9.81*1.0)/ (2*5) =0.981 is chosen.
 Final scale factor obtained are:
1. In x direction: 1.16


 2. In y direction: 1.15

 3. In z direction: 2/3 of x or y direction whichever is

greater= (2/3)*1.16=0.77 < 0.981
: Adopted 0.981
 Final base shear obtained are:
 1. In x direction: 1014 kN
 2. In y direction : 1213 kN

 3. In z direction : 891 KN
 Drift calculation is shown in report.
 Drift is in the permissible limit below 0.4%
(0.004).
Max : 25.05 mm Max : 19.81mm
Permissible : 24100*0.004 =96.4mm
 Design philosophy : Limit State design
 Concrete Design Code : IS 456:2000
 Detailing code : IS 13920:2016, SP 34
 Design of structural members : from software
 Design model : Uncracked model/sections
 Analysis : Response spectrum analysis
 Height considered is from Ground floor only as per IS
1893:2016.
 Height of the building (H) =21.34 m,
 d (Lx) = 14.5m, d (Ly) = 16.73m
 Time Period for in filled structure (T) = 0.09H/ √d
 TX = 0.504 sec & Ty = 0.469sec
 Spectral Acceleration
 (Sa/g) for X direction = 2.5 (Medium soil)
 (Sa/g) for Y direction = 2.5 (Medium soil)

 Zone Factor (Z) = 0.36 (Zone 5)

 Importance Factor (I) = 1.0
 Response reduction Factor (R) = 5.00
 Design Seismic Coefficient
 (Ah) for X direction = Z/2*Sa/g*I/R = 0.09>0.024
 (Ah) for Y direction = Z/2*Sa/g*I/R = 0.09>0.024
 Total Seismic Weight (W) = 18152.51 KN
 Base shear
 (Vb) X direction= 18152.51 x 0.09 = 1633 KN
(Calculation)
 = 1611KN for X direction (taken from ETABS)

 (Vb) Y direction= 18152.51 x 0.09 = 1633 KN

(Calculation)
 = 1611 KN for Y direction (taken from ETABS)
 For the initial run, scale factor = (g*I)/2R=
(9.81*1.0)/ (2*5) =0.981 is chosen.

 Final scale factor obtained are:

 1. In x direction: 1.4
 2. In y direction: 1.41
 3. In z direction: 2/3 of x or y direction whichever is
greater= (2/3)*1.4=0.94<0.981, adopted value is 0.981
 Final base shear obtained are:
 1. In x direction: 1615 kN
 2. In y direction : 1611 kN
 3. In z direction : 885 KN
 Design result of ETABS 15.2.2 has been adopted
for column, beam and shear wall design.
 Excel sheets are used for slab and stair case
design.
 By manual input of reinforcement in column, the
column beam capacity ratio has been kept greater
than 1.4
 Raft foundation design is finalized after two steps.
 The first step is to determine the area using the allowable
bearing capacity of the soil and the load from super
structure. The area of foundation is chosen in such a way
that the stress below the foundation are within the
allowable limit.
 The second step is the strength design, i.e determination
of thickness and rebar using moment and shear force.
 Design of Raft Foundation has been carried out in SAFE
2016V16.0.1
 Allowable Bearing capacity=197.56KN/m2 at depth of 4.0m
 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction as 23706.68 KN/m3


DL+LL, Unit kN
 

• The maximum soil pressure obtained from SAFE for Service Load=
186.68 KN/m2, which is smaller than the allowable value
(197.56KN/m2).
• Mat is designed for 1.5 (DL+LL)
• Mat is safe in Punching Shear.
• Settlement For Service load 7.787 mm
Thickness of MAT=1000 mm
Rebar= 20 Dia @ 100mm c/c Top/Bottom Bothways