1

Technical specifications for foundations calculation.
Campus Bhopal, Ahmedabad

TELSTAR TECHNOLOGIES
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1
2. SOFTWARE USED.................................................................................................... 1
3. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ....................................................................................... 3
3.1. APPLICABLE STANDARDS .......................................................................................................... 3
3.2. MAIN DIMENSIONS ....................................................................................................................... 4
4. COMMENTS ON THE FOUNDATION DESIGN ........................................................ 7
4.1. SECOND FICTITIOUS FLOOR...................................................................................................... 7
4.2. PROVIDE DEFLECTED SHAPE DUE TO DIFFERENT LOAD CASES...................................... 11
5. LOADS......................................................................................................................11
5.1. CALCULATION ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................................. 11
5.2. GRAVITY LOADS......................................................................................................................... 12
5.3. WEATHER LOADS....................................................................................................................... 12
5.4. DESIGN HORIZONTAL EARTHQUAKE LOAD........................................................................... 12
5.5. DESIGN VERTICAL EARTHQUAKE LOAD ................................................................................ 16
5.6. NOMINAL COVER TO MEET SPECIFIED PERIOD OF FIRE RESISTANCE ............................ 16
6. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION .........................................................................17
7. RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF THESE ..............................................................17
7.1. FOUNDATION CHECKS .............................................................................................................. 17
7.2. BEAMS ENVELOPED ................................................................................................................. 18
7.3. FORCES IN COLUMNS BY LOADCASE .................................................................................... 19
7.4. COLUMNS DISPLACEMENTS .................................................................................................... 20
ANNEX N1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION......................................................................
ANNEX N2 STRUCTURAL CALCULATION............................................................................
PARAGRAPH: JOB DATA REPORT .................................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: COMBINATIONS USED IN THE ALALYSIS ...............................................................................
PARAGRAPH: FOUNDATION REPORT............................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: BEAM REINFORCEMENT REPORT ...........................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: BEAM TAKEOFF REPORT ........................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: SURFACE AND VOLUME TAKEOFF .........................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: JOB TAKEOFF TABLES............................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: FORCES AND REINFORCEMENT OF COLUMNS, SHEAR WALLS AND WALLS ........................
PARAGRAPH: COLUMNS DISPLACEMENTS ..................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: COLUMNS DISTORTIONS .......................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: JUSTIFICATION OF SEISMIC ACTION.....................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: U.L.S. CHECKS OF BEAM AND COLUMNS ............................................................................
CHECKS OF COLUMN C1 ........................................................................................................................
PARAGRAPH: FIRE RESISTANCE CHECK REPORT.........................................................................................
PLANS .................................................................................................................................
Technical specifications for foundations calculation. Campus of Bopal, Ahmedabad
1. INTRODUCTION
TELSTAR TECHNOLOGIES a leading player in the pharmaceutical, medical-hospital

and biotechnological sectors, as well as in laboratories, research and development
centers and advanced industries based on innovation and development with a
considerable scientific and technological component was commissioned to install a
machine simulation conditions of pressure and temperature of outer space on the
campus of Bhopal, Ahmedabad (India).
This machine needs a support structure, the calculation of which is the subject of this
document, with particular emphasis on the area where it is located in the country and the
technical requirements for earthquake derived from this.
The objective of this report is to establish the calculation bases for the foundations of
chamber (6500x7500) shall be fitted at the New Campus Bhopal, Ahmedabad (India).
2. SOFTWARE USED
This study presents a series of requirements involving the structural design that requires
the use of a computer program capable of performing the calculation of reinforced
concrete structures by matrix method.
For this reason, we proceeded to perform the

calculation of the support structure and
foundation by CYPECAD program, which was
brought about to carry out the analysis and
design of reinforced concrete and steel
structures, subject to horizontal and vertical
forces, for houses, buildings and civil work
projects.
The analysis of the structure is carried out by means of a 3D spatial analysis using
stiffness matrix methods, making up all the elements defining the structure: columns,
reinforced concrete shear walls, walls, beams and slabs. Having finished the analysis,
the various elements may be checked for errors.
Its use guarantees maximum reliability of calculation and design better planes at once
that you can apply the rules of India.
It therefore has been used program discussed to ensure compliance with the regulations
applicable to the structure in the place of its location while ensuring that future use will
receive the structure it will not be hindered by the geometry of design.
CYPE programs have a wide range of national and international codes available which
are applied to carry out the analysis, design and check of reinforced concrete, rolled
steel, welded steel, cold-formed steel, composite, aluminium and timber structures for
gravitational, wind, seismic and snow loads.
Page 1
CYPECAD was brought about to carry out the analysis and design of reinforced
concrete and steel structures, subject to horizontal and vertical forces, for houses,
buildings and civil work projects.
CYPE programs allow users to analyze and design surface and deep foundations:
footings and pile caps with strap and tie beams, mat foundations and foundation beams.
The analysis and design of footings and pile caps form part of the modules which are
common to CYPECAD. Mat foundations and foundation beams are exclusive to
CYPECAD. This program also analyze and design steel column baseplates bearing on
the foundations that are being designed. The elements related to the foundations of a
structure resolved with CYPE software are:
Footings
Using the Footings module, CYPECAD can design foundations resolved using
rigid reinforced concrete footings or rigid mass concrete footings. These may be
single column or shear wall footings or combined footings with several columns
and/or shear walls bearing on them, their arrangement left to the users choice.
This module also designs strip footings below walls as well as any strap and tie
beams that have been defined.
Piles
Using the Pile caps module, CYPECAD and CYPE 3D allow for users to choose
from a wide range of pile cap types (linear, triangular, rectangular, pentagonal
and hexagonal) and provide their design, as well as having the option to provide
strap and tie beams.
Advanced design of surface foundations

This module complements the Footings and Pile caps modules. It allows for the
design of foundations composed of footings or pile caps with special intersections
(strap and tie beam intersections) and geometrical trimming of the footings.
Mat foundations and foundation beams

The mat foundations and foundation beams module is exclusive to CYPECAD
and allows this program to design foundations containing mat foundations and
foundation beams.
When CYPECAD carries out a seismic analysis, the program takes into account the
capacity design criteria for concrete beams and columns of some specific design codes.
The seismic analysis is undertaken by means of a complete modal spectral analysis

which resolves each mode as a loadcase and carries out the modal expansion and the
modal combination to obtain the forces.
Page 2
3. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
The following sections are intended to give an overview of the rules that apply to the
dimensioning of foundations and overall dimensions of these and various considerations
to take into account when making the necessary calculations.
Figure 1: Layout general (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)
3.1. APPLICABLE STANDARDS
The rules applicable for the calculation are as follows:
Code for the calculation of loads

Concrete IS 456: 2000
Rolled steel IS 800:2007
Criteria of reinforcement by ductility IS 13920
Page 3
IS 1983 (Part 1): 2002

Seismic action
- Ahmedabad: Zone III -
Fire resistance IS 456:2000
Drift Limitations IS 1983 (Part 1)
3.2. MAIN DIMENSIONS
The structure that has to be designed has as a final requirement to support the
simulation machine in the space conditions.
The height at which the machine is located relative to ground level, the number of
columns that support or the location of these are determined by the machine itself and
its location.
The camera is located on level 64. The height between the surface of the ground to the
camera on level 62.9 will be completed by structural steel columns HEB (the structural
analysis is not the object of this study).
Figure 2: Camera location (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)
Page 4
Figure 3: Machine geometry: Front (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)
Figure 4: Machine geometry: Profile (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)
Page 5
The use of the structure requires minimum dimensions must be observed to maintain
their usefulness:
- Height of the supporting columns: 2.90 m.
- N columns: 6 with a rectangular distribution 3 x 2 (X x Y)
- Separation between columns: Sx: 1.80 m Sy: 5.50 m
- Machine support beams in X
- Minimum width upper beam: 0.60 m
- Free area level 60.0: Foundations with free inner space 4.0 x 6.5 m
These requirements are the starting points from which will start the design and
subsequent calculation of the structure, modifying the dimensioning of the columns, the
thickness of the support beams and the dimensions of the foundation according to the
obtained results.
The materials from which is designed support structure are:
- Concrete M-25 for foundations, columns and beams

- Steel bars Fe 415 for the whole structure
Finally, the geometry of the structure is as follows:
x Rectangular of 60 cm of side
- Columns:
x Height: 2.90 m.
x Off-centre continuous concrete brake shoes
- Foundations:
Dimension of track Depth of the

Reference
shoes (m) footing (m)
Track shoe n 1 8,40x2,70 1,55
Track shoe n 2 7,25x3,25 1,10
x 2 Tie beam: 100x40cm
x Drooped beam
- Beams:
x Width: 60 cm.
x Depth of the beams: 70 cm.
x Seismic zone III (Ahmedabad)

- Soils:
Page 6
x Type II Medium Soils: All soils with N between 10 and 30, and poorly
graded sands or gravelly sands with little or no fines ( SP1)) with N> 15
1)
The allowable bearing pressure shall be determined in accordance with IS 6403 or IS
1888.
- Location: Inside the main building (without wind loads)
Figura 2: Geometry of the support structure
To simulate de effects of the machine structure, its going to be built a second fictitious
floor with a metal frames in order to take into account the moments that the machine will
transmit to the foundations in case of earthquake; and the stiffening effect between the
two concrete reinforced substructures.
4. COMMENTS ON THE FOUNDATION DESIGN
4.1. SECOND FICTITIOUS FLOOR
To simulate the effects of the machine in the structure, its going to be built a second
fictitious floor with a metal frames in order to take into account the moments that the
Page 7
machine will transmit to the foundations in case of earthquake; and the stiffening effect
between the two concrete reinforced substructures.
The name of this floor is Simulated floor.
Figure 1: Schematic drawing of calculated structure
The height of this floor its given by the machines radius and the height of its supports;
assuming that the loads are originated in the center of the machines masses, and since
the machine is symmetrical, they are located at a distance from the base equal as its
radius.
This metal structure can be seen in the following series of images:
Page 8
Figure 2: Layouts of calculated structure
Columns n 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 start on the foundation with a rectangular concrete section

and reach the support beam of the machine, modify the section to simulate the actions
caused by the weight of the machine, choosing by simulating the element 2 HEB 400
steel columns with lateral plates with continuous welding (thickness of plates = 10.0mm).
Figure 3: Layouts of metallic columns
Page 9
These metal columns are located at the points of actual support of the machine and
have a height of 4,65m.
The heads of the metal columns are joined together by beams forming a grid with metal
profiles MB100.
Figure 4: Layouts of metallic beams
Schematically, the simulated plant is made according to the following distribution of

beams and pillars.
Page 10
4.2. PROVIDE DEFLECTED SHAPE DUE TO DIFFERENT LOAD CASES
5. LOADS
5.1. CALCULATION ASSUMPTIONS
It is assumed as a parameters for calculating (calculation hypothesis) the machines

rigidity and that the machine does not transfer dynamic loads to its support during
operation.
Rigidity provided by the machine to the system by a fictitious top floor (simulated plant
floor) with pillars and beams metal structure and height equal to the radius of the
machine plus the support of the machine is simulated.
This structure will be the one that will transmit the loads to the calculus structure, the
results being the resistance offered by this structure devoid of importance to the final
sizing of the concrete structure.
This simulation will bring in the earthquake simulation in the X and Y axis the moments
caused by the machine to the foundation.
The simulation of the vertical loads resulting in an earthquake are calculated using two-
thirds of the design horizontal acceleration spectrum introduced as accidental loads on
each of the pillars.
Different cases for the vertical earthquake is assumed:
Page 11
x
x
Vertical load positive in 1 track shoe
x
Vertical load positive in 2 track shoes
x
Vertical load negative in 1 track shoe
Vertical load negative in 2 track shoes
5.2. GRAVITY LOADS
Super imposed dead loads (SIDL): Industrial structures contain several equipment and
associated auxiliaries and accessories that are permanently mounted on the structures.
These loads shall be taken as per equipment specifications. The weight of the machine
according to data provided by the customer is 130T, divided into 8 points of supports
equally.
The weight of the structure is considered.
LL: Overload use 0,30T/m2 is assumed on the Chamber
5.3. WEATHER LOADS
No structure dimensioned to withstand loads resulting from the wind and snow to
consider - is that the structure was inside a ship.
5.4. DESIGN HORIZONTAL EARTHQUAKE LOAD
When the lateral load resisting elements are oriented along orthogonal horizontal
direction, the structure shall be designed for the effects due to full design earthquake
load in one horizontal direction at time.
For the purpose of determining seismic forces, the country is classified into four seismic
zones as shown in next figure.
Ahmedabad is in the Zone III.
Page 12
Figure 6: Map of India -Seismic zones of India
The total design lateral force or design seismic base shear (VB) along any principal
direction shall be determined by the following expression:
VB = AhW
For seismic calculation should apply a horizontal force VB at the top of the pillars in the
two directions (X and Y).
Under current seismic regulations in India (IS893 Part 1), the design horizontal seismic
coefficient Ah for a structure shall be determined by the following expression:

=
2
Page 13
Where:
Z: Zone factor given in Table 2, is for the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) and
service life of structure in a zone. The factor 2 in the denominator of Z is used so as
to reduce the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) zone factor to the factor for
Design Basis Earthquake (DBE).
Table 2 Zone Factor, Z

(Clause 6.4.2)
Seismic Zone II III IV V
Seismic Intensity Low Moderate Severe Very Severe
Z 0,10 0,16 0,24 0,36
I: Importance factor, depending upon the functional use of the structures, characterized
by hazardous consequences of its failure, post-earthquake functional needs,
historical value, or economic importance (Table 6).
Table 6 Importance Factors, I

(Clause 6.4.2)
SI. No. Structure Importance Factor
(1) (2) (3)
Important service and community
buildings, such as hospitals; schools;
monumental structures; emergency
buildings like telephone exchange,
i) television stations, radio stations, railway 1,5
stations, fire station buildings; large
community halls like cinemas,
assembly halls and subway stations,
power stations
ii) All other buildings 1,0
The criterion of technical, take 1,5.
R: Response reduction factor, depending on the perceived seismic damage

performance of the structure, characterized by ductile or brittle deformations.

However, the ratio () shall not be greater than 1.0 (Table 7). The values of R for
buildings are given in Table 7.
Page 14
Table 7 Response Reduction Factor1), R, for Building Systems
(Clause 6.4.2)
SI. No. Lateral Load Resisting System R R
(1) (2) (3)
Building Frame Systems
i) Ordinary RC moment-resisting frame ( OMRF ) 2) 3.0
ii) Special RC moment-resisting frame (SMRF ) 3) 5.0
iii) Steel frame with
a) Concentric braces 4.0
b) Eccentric braces 5.0
iv) Steel moment resisting frame designed as per SP 6 ( 6 ) 5.0
Building with Shear Walls4)
v) Load bearing masonry wall buildings 5)
a) Unreinforced 1.5
b) Reinforced with horizontal RC bands 2.5
c) Reinforced with horizontal RC bands and vertical bars
3.0
at corners of rooms and jambs of openings
vi) Ordinary reinforced concrete shear walls 6) 3.0
vii) Ductile shear walls 7) 4.0
Buildings with Dual Systems 8)
viii) Ordinary shear wall with OMRF 3.0
ix) Ordinary shear wall with SMRF 4.4
x) Ductile shear wall with OMRF 4.5
xi) Ductile shear wall with SMRF 5.0
1)
The va]ues of response riduction fact&s are to be used for buildings with lateral load resisting elements,
and not just for the lateral load resisting elements built in isolation.
2)
OMRF are those designed and detailed as per IS 456 or Is 800 but not meeting ductile detailing
requirement as per IS 13920 or SP 6 (6) respectively.
3)
SMRF defined in 4.15.2.
4)
Buildings with shear walls also include buildings having shear walls and frames, but where:
a) frames are not designed to carry lateral loads, or
b) frames are designed to carry lateral loads but do not fulfil the requirements of dual systems.
5)
Reinforcement should be as per IS 4326.
6)
Prohibited in zones IV and V.
7)
Ductile shear walls are those designed and detailed as per IS 13920.
8)
Buildings with dual systems consist of shear walls ( or braced frames ) and moment resisting frames
such that:
a) the two systems are designed to resist the total design force in proportion to their lateral stiffness
considering the interaction of the dual system at all floor levels,; and
b) the moment resisting frames are designed to independently resist at least 25 percent of the design
seismic base shear,
: Average response acceleration coefficient for rock or soil sites as given by Fig. 2 and
Table 3 based on appropriate natural periods and damping of the structure. These
curves represent free field ground motion.
For medium soil sites:

1 + 15 0.00 0.10
= 2,5 0.10 0.55

1,36 0.55 4.00
Page 15
0.16 1.5
= = 2.5 = 0.10
2 23

VB = AhW =0.10
= 1.625 1.65
5.5. DESIGN VERTICAL EARTHQUAKE LOAD
Earthquake-generated vertical inertia forces are to be considered in design unless

checked and proven by specimen calculations to be not significant.
Vertical acceleration should be considered in structures with large spans, those in which
stability is a criterion for design, or for overall stability analysis of structures.
When effects due to vertical earthquake loads are to be considered, the design vertical
force shall be calculated in accordance with 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002.
The design acceleration spectrum for vertical motions, when required, may be taken as
two-thirds of the design horizontal acceleration spectrum specified in 6.4.2.
0.16 1.5 2
= = 2.5 = 0.0667 0.07
2 23 3

VS = AsW =0.07
= 1.137 1.14
5.6. NOMINAL COVER TO MEET SPECIFIED PERIOD OF FIRE RESISTANCE
Minimum values of nominal cover of normal-weight aggregate concrete to be provided to

all reinforcement including links to meet specified period of fire resistance shall be given
in Table 16A.
Fire resistance: R-90
Table 16A
Nominal Cover to Meet Specified Period of Fire Resistance
(Clauses 21.4-and 26.4.3 and Fig. 1)
Fire
Nominal Cover
Resistance
Beams Slabs Ribs Columns
Simply Simply Simply
H Continuous Continuous Continuous
supported supported supported
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
0.5 20 20 20 20 20 20 40
1 20 20 20 20 20 20 40
1.5 20 20 25 20 35 20 40
2 40 30 35 25 45 35 40
3 60 40 45 35 55 45 40
4 70 50 55 45 65 55 40
Page 16
6. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
For dimensioning of the foundation we have been used data provided by the client soil
characteristics in the area where the structure is located.
They take the geotechnical study the following data for correct dimensioning of the
foundation:
Tensin admisible en situaciones persistentes 1,70 kp/cm

Tensin admisible en situaciones accidentales: 2,30 kp/cm
Seismic zone III
SPT >15
This information provided by the customer is in Annex N 1.
7. RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF THESE
During de calculation of the structure has been proven the national legislation
compliance, ensuring the strength of the structure facing the different load combinations,
including those caused by earthquake.
At the time of dimensioning the structure, it try to simplify the construction work and
facilitate the work of operators.
7.1. FOUNDATION CHECKS
x
@3
Pressures on the soil:
@3
- Mean stress in persistent situations
@3
- Mean bearing pressure in accidental seismic situations
@3
- Mean stress in accidental situations
@3
- Maximum stress in persistent situations
@3
- Maximum bearing pressure in accidental seismic situations
- Maximum stress in accidental situations
x Overturning of footing: @3
x @3
x
Bending in the pad footing:
@3
x
Shear in the footing
@3
x
Oblique compression in the footing
@3
x
Tangential stress in the critical punching shear perimeter
@3
x
Minimum depth
@3
x
Space to anchor starter bars in foundation
Minimum geometric ratio @3
Page 17
7.2. BEAMS ENVELOPED
Figure 7: Envelope: Moments Top reinforcement and bottom reinforcement in seismic situation
Figure 8: Envelope: Moments Top reinforcement and bottom reinforcement In persistent and transient
situations
Page 18
7.3. FORCES IN COLUMNS BY LOADCASE
The forces refer to the local axes of the column.
Summary of code checks

Worst case forces
Span Use
Columns Floor Dimension Position N Mxx Myy Qx Qy Worst case Status
(m) Nature (%)
(t) (tm) (tm) (t) (t)
Base DL, E 24.66 6.64 16.63 3.73 -1.53 NMzMy 82.0 Verified
Base DL, E 25.88 -2.28 -16.89 -3.80 0.52 NMzMy 74.0 Verified
Simulated floor 2.90/7.55 HB400*|I|
Base DL, E 10.80 3.27 25.19 3.03 -2.42 N,M 75.5 Verified
Head DL, E 4.02 -5.19 -0.16 -0.20 -6.45 Q 41.5 Verified
C1 Chamber 0.00/2.90 60x60
Base DL, LL 26.02 3.22 -0.03 -0.01 -2.53 Q 15.2 Verified
Head DL 22.94 -2.35 -0.02 -0.01 -2.53 Q 15.3 Verified
Base DL, LL 26.02 3.22 -0.03 -0.01 -2.53 N,M 8.2 Verified
Foundation -0.77/0.00 60x60
Base DL, E 6.99 8.99 -0.60 -0.20 -6.44 N,M 24.7 Verified
Base DL 25.91 3.21 -0.03 -0.01 -2.53 N,M 8.1 Verified
Base DL, E 24.66 6.64 -16.63 -3.73 -1.53 NMzMy 82.0 Verified
Base DL, E 25.88 -2.28 16.89 3.80 0.52 NMzMy 74.0 Verified
C2 Head DL, E 4.05 -5.15 0.15 0.20 -6.41 Q 37.6 Verified
Chamber 0.00/2.90 60x60
Base DL, LL 26.02 3.22 0.03 0.01 -2.53 Q 13.8 Verified
Head DL 22.94 -2.35 0.02 0.01 -2.53 Q 14.0 Verified
Base DL, LL 26.02 3.22 0.03 0.01 -2.53 N,M 7.7 Verified
Base DL 25.91 3.21 0.03 0.01 -2.53 N,M 7.7 Verified
Simulated floor 2.90/7.55 HB400*|I| Base DL, E 25.50 16.07 0.12 0.02 -3.90 NMzMy 41.6 Verified
C3
Chamber 0.00/2.90 60x60 Head DL, E 6.48 -14.02 0.14 0.03 -12.88 Q 82.3 Verified
Head DL, LL 12.30 -5.71 -0.02 -0.01 -4.98 Q 31.2 Verified
Foundation -0.77/0.00 60x60 Base DL, E 9.45 14.32 0.21 0.03 -12.88 N,M 40.3 Verified
Base DL, LL 15.27 5.25 -0.05 -0.01 -4.98 N,M 10.7 Verified
Simulated floor 2.90/7.55 HB400*|I| Base DL, E 25.50 16.07 -0.12 -0.02 -3.90 NMzMy 41.6 Verified
C4
Chamber 0.00/2.90 60x60 Head DL, E 6.48 -14.00 -0.17 -0.04 -12.86 Q 74.8 Verified
Head DL, LL 12.30 -5.71 0.02 0.01 -4.98 Q 28.4 Verified
Page 19
Summary of code checks
Worst case forces
Span Use
Columns Floor Dimension Position N Mxx Myy Qx Qy Worst case Status
(m) Nature (%)
(t) (tm) (tm) (t) (t)
Base DL, LL 15.27 5.25 0.05 0.01 -4.98 N,M 9.7 Verified
Base DL, E 37.15 -4.58 -33.05 -4.94 5.01 N,M 84.6 Verified
C5
Chamber 0.00/2.90 60x60 Head DL, E 65.54 10.97 -22.84 -5.08 8.00 Q 50.9 Verified
Head DL, LL 76.50 11.43 -0.02 -0.02 7.51 Q 39.2 Verified
Base DL, E 37.15 -4.58 -33.05 -4.94 5.01 N,M 84.6 Verified
Foundation -0.77/0.00 60x60 Base DL, E 68.51 -6.64 -34.03 -5.08 8.00 N,M 70.8 Verified
Base DL, LL 79.47 -5.09 -0.07 -0.02 7.51 N,M 19.7 Verified
Base DL, E 37.08 -4.57 33.09 4.95 4.98 N,M 69.5 Verified
C6
Chamber 0.00/2.90 60x60 Head DL, E 65.47 10.94 22.85 5.10 7.98 Q 46.3 Verified
Head DL, LL 76.50 11.43 0.02 0.02 7.51 Q 35.7 Verified
Base DL, E 37.08 -4.57 33.09 4.95 4.98 N,M 69.5 Verified
Foundation -0.77/0.00 60x60 Base DL, E 68.44 -6.62 34.07 5.10 7.98 N,M 61.2 Verified
Base DL, LL 79.47 -5.09 0.07 0.02 7.51 N,M 18.5 Verified
C7 Simulated floor 0.00/4.65 HB400*|I|
C8 Simulated floor 0.00/4.65 HB400*|I|
Notes:
N,M: Limit state at failure under normal stresses (non-seismic combinations)
Q: Ultimate shear resistance (non-seismic combinations)
NMzMy: Resistance to axial force and bending
7.4. COLUMNS DISPLACEMENTS
Persistent or transient situations

Elevation X Disp. Y Disp. Z Disp.
Column Floor
(m) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Simulated floor 7.50 0.00 0.94 0.12
C1 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.11 0.02
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C2 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.11 0.02
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C3 Simulated floor 7.50 0.00 0.94 0.11
Page 20
Persistent or transient situations
Column Floor
(m) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.11 0.01
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C4 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.11 0.01
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C5 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.11 0.06
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C6 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.11 0.06
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C7
Chamber 2.90 0.01 0.11 0.83
C8
Chamber 2.90 0.01 0.11 0.83
Seismic situations(1)
Column Floor
(m) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Simulated floor 7.50 115.14 26.82 0.18
C1 Chamber 2.55 6.49 0.81 0.06
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Simulated floor 7.50 115.14 26.82 0.18
C2 Chamber 2.55 6.50 0.81 0.06
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Simulated floor 7.50 119.36 26.82 0.13
C3 Chamber 2.55 7.37 0.81 0.02
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Simulated floor 7.50 119.36 26.82 0.13
C4 Chamber 2.55 7.37 0.81 0.02
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Simulated floor 7.50 123.64 26.82 0.22
C5 Chamber 2.55 8.29 0.81 0.12
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Simulated floor 7.50 123.64 26.82 0.22
C6 Chamber 2.55 8.28 0.81 0.12
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Simulated floor 7.50 127.99 26.82 2.24
C7
Chamber 2.90 9.23 0.81 2.13
Simulated floor 7.50 127.99 26.82 2.24
C8
Chamber 2.90 9.23 0.81 2.13
Notes:
(1)
The displacements have an applied safety factor due to the ductility.
Accidental situations
Page 21
Column Floor
(m) (mm) (mm) (mm)
C1 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C2 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C3 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C4 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C5 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C6 Chamber 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C7
Chamber 2.90 0.00 0.00 0.00
C8
Chamber 2.90 0.00 0.00 0.00
The indicated values take into account the defined displacement factors due to the multiplying second
order effects.
Figura 3: Displacements SW+DL+Qa
A calculation includes the various loads and their combinations, adopting the rules of
India, for both materials and special actions like the earthquake.
Page 22
The dimensions of the structure with his armed can be observed at different plans at the
end of this document.
Calculation engineer Study coordinator
illem Hidalgo Rabasseda

Guillem Joaquim Subirana Volt
Civil engineer Industrial Technical Engineer
Barcelona, January 2015
Page 23
ANNEX N1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

ST/06/12/3138
ISRO
TECHNICAL REPORT
OF
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
FOR
PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF NEW SAC CAMPUS AT

BOPAL, AHMEDABAD
By:
Prof. (Dr.) K.C.Thaker

Ph.D. (Geotech) (I.I.T., Bombay);
F.I.E.(India); F.I.G.S.
K.K.Thaker
M.E (Geotech); M.B.A.(Finance);
M.I.E(India); M.I.G.S; M.G.I.C.E.A.
K.C.T. Consultancy Services

KCT House, Sayona Silver Estate-Part II,
Behind Silver Oak College of Engineering,
Beside Auda Water Tank, Opp. Sarjan Rmc Plant,
Gota, Ahmedabad 382 481
Phone :- 65103088/89/90, 9825064378
e-mail : kctconser@yahoo.com
June-2012
KCT Consultancy Services, Ahmedabad

ST/06/12/3138
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF

NEW SAC CAMPUS AT BOPAL, AHMEDABAD
1.0 Introduction
For foundation analysis of the structure on the site, It is necessary
1. To determine the soil profile of the site
2. To know physical properties and strength characteristics of soil at various depths.
For this purpose, the geotechnical investigation was entrusted to us by ISRO. The
following points were decided.
1. No. Bore hole 4
2. Depth of Borehole 15.0m
3. Undisturbed samples at regular interval.
4. Standard penetration tests are conducted at regular interval.
5. Collection of disturbed samples.
6. To find physical properties and strength characteristics of undisturbed samples.
7. To find physical properties of disturbed samples.
8. To locate ground water table, if any.
9. Interpretation of results, Analysis.
9.Recommendations.
Based on the above points the detailed Geotechnical Investigation Program
included the following :
(A) Field Investigation
1. Drilling of bore hole.
2. Collection of soil samples ( Disturbed and Undisturbed )
3. Conducting Standard Penetration Test.
(B) Laboratory Investigation
1. Bulk Density and moisture content
2. Grain size analysis
3. Index properties
4. Shear tests ( Triaxial shear test)
Page no.1 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
5. Consolidation tests.
6. Unconfined Compression Test.
(c) Recommendations
Based on above investigations, the results are to be obtained. The findings would be
based on interpretation of Results, Analysis and computations as per relevant Indian
standards.
2.0 Field Investigation

2.1 Boring
The exploratory boreholes of 150mm diameter were drilled by Percussion and Hand
Augering method. The depth of the test bore at the proposed location is as under:
Bore Hole No. Location Depth Investigated (m)
BH 1 to 4 New Sac Campus at Bopal 15.0
2.2 Sampling
2.2.1 Disturbed samples
Disturbed samples were collected during boring and from the split spoon sampler. The
samples recovered were logged, labeled and placed in polyethylene bags and sent to
laboratory for testing.
2.2.2 Undisturbed samples
Undisturbed soil samples were collected in thin walled Shelby tubes as per IS 2132. The
samples were sealed with wax, labeled and transported to our laboratory at Gota,
Ahmedabad for testing.
2.2.3 Standard penetration test
The standard penetration tests were conduct in accordance with IS:2131-1981 in test
bore at different intervals. The test gives N Value, the blow counts of last 30 cm
penetration of split spoon sampler with 63.5 kg hammer falling from 75 cm height.
3.0 Laboratory investigation
The following laboratory tests were conducted on undisturbed and disturbed soil
samples collected form various depths to find physical properties and strength
characteristics. Measurements of soil properties in the laboratory the following table lists
various laboratory tests, which were conducted in the laboratory.
Page no.2 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
Tests Recomnd procedure Type Samples
1. Sample Preparation IS 2720 Pt I DS / UDS
2. Moisture Content IS 2720 Pt II DS / UDS
3. Dry Unit Weight LAMBE UDS
4. Specific Gravity IS 2720 Pt III DS
5. Liquid Limit IS 2720 DS
6. Plastic Limit IS 2720 Pt V DS
7. Grain Size Analysis IS 2720 Pt IV DS
8. Soil Classification IS 1498 DS / UDS
9. Consolidation IS 2720 Pt XV UDS
10. U.Comp. Strength IS 2720 Pt X UDS
11. Triaxial / Direct shear test IS 2720 Pt XI and Pt XIII UDS

4.0 Results
1) The location plan of Borehole is given in fig no.1
2) The bore log details of Bore hole are shown in fig No. 2 to 6
3) The Permeability test result is given in table no. 1
4) The Laboratory test results of Bore hole are appended in table no. 2 to 6
5.0 General stratification
From existing ground level to a depth varying from 4.80m to 5.80m depth, Yellowish
brown to dark brownish, fine to very fine grained, silty clayey sand with little plastic
fines is found, followed by Greyish to yellowish brown, fine to very fine grained, silts
of low plasticity upto about 11.0m depth. Last layer comprises of Dark brownish, fine
to coarse grained, clayey sand upto the depth of investigation.
6.0 Computation of Safe Bearing Capacity

Isolated footings are recommended. Allowable bearing pressure of isolated footings
of various widths at various depths is recommended in appendix 1 & 2 based on
shear and settlement criteria.
Page no.3 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
7.0 Conclusions
1. The general stratification is as described in 5.0 and as given in respective borelogs.
2. Isolated footings are recommended. Allowable bearing pressure of isolated footings
of various widths at various depths is recommended in appendix 1 and 2 based on
shear and settlement criteria.
3. Drainage property of soil is good in case of silty sand fair in case of silts of low
plasticity and clayey sand.
4. Ground water table is not encountered upto the depth of investigation.
5. The excavated soil can be used for backfilling in the plinths, foundation trenches and
in the sub base of surrounding paved areas.
6. It may please be noted that, suitable support shall be provided and used to prevent,
so far as is reasonably practicable and as early as is practicable in the course of the
foundation work in excavation, which may be danger to any person or adjacent
property or materials from dislodgement of earth or any other material forming the
side of excavation.
7. The comments given in this report and the opinion expressed are based on the
ground conditions encountered during site work and on the results of tests made in
field and in the laboratory. There may however, special conditions prevailing at the
site which have not been disclosed by the investigation and which have not been
taken in to account in the report. Any variation in stratification in any of the
foundation location shall be studied thoroughly before executing the foundation
work.
(K K Thaker) (Dr. K C Thaker)
Page no.4 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

APPENDIX - 1 (Based on BH 1 & 2 )
SUMMARY OF SAFE BEARING CAPACITIES BASED ON DIFFERENT CRITERIA
Project : Proposed structure of ISRO at Bopal, Ahmedabad
Depth of Foundation Length of Foundation Width of Foundation Safe Bearing Capacities Based on Allowable Bearing
Pressure
Shear Criteria Settlement Criteria
2
(m) (m) (m) (t/m ) ( t / m2 ) ( t / m2 )
2.00 2.00 2.00 17 31 17
2.00 3.00 3.00 18 26 18
2.00 4.00 4.00 19 24 19
2.00 5.00 5.00 21 23 21
2.50 2.00 2.00 20 31 20
2.50 3.00 3.00 21 27 21
2.50 4.00 4.00 23 25 23
2.50 5.00 5.00 24 24 24
3.00 2.00 2.00 24 31 24
3.00 3.00 3.00 25 28 25
3.00 4.00 4.00 26 26 26
3.00 5.00 5.00 28 24 24
Page no.5 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

APPENDIX - 1.1 (Based on BH 1 & 2 )
Calculation of net Safe Bearing Capacity Based on Shear Parameters C - I
qu = 1 / FS [ 2 / 3 C Nc dc Sc ic + Jd (Nq - 1) Sq dq iq Wq + 0.5 J B NJ SJ dJiJ WJ]
For Isolated Square Footing
Sr. Size of Foundation Depth of Shear Parameter Bearing Capacity Factors Shape Factors Depth Factors Inclination Factors Unit Weight Water Table Safe
I J 0.5 J
Foundation Correction Bearing
Length Width C Nc Nq - 1 NJ Sc Sq SJ dc dq dJ ic iq iJ Capacity
No. m m m Kg/cm2 degree gm/cc Wq WJ t / m2
1 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.29 1.15 1.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 17
2 3.00 3.00 2.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.19 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 18
3 4.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.15 1.07 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 19
4 5.00 5.00 2.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.12 1.06 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 21
5 2.00 2.00 2.50 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.36 1.18 1.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 20
6 3.00 3.00 2.50 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.24 1.12 1.12 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 21
7 4.00 4.00 2.50 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.18 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 23
8 5.00 5.00 2.50 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.15 1.07 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 24
9 2.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.44 1.22 1.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 24
10 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.29 1.15 1.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 25
11 4.00 4.00 3.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.22 1.11 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 26
12 5.00 5.00 3.00 0.00 30 15.87 6.11 6.24 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.17 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.84 0.92 1.00 1.00 28
Note :-
1) Factor of safety is 2.5
2) Depth of foundation shall be from E G L
Page no.6 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

Calculation of Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on N Value Settlement Criteria
qnu = 1.4 ( N - 3 ) (( B + 0.3 ) / 2B ) 2 WJ CD SP
Sr. No. Depth of Foundation Width of Foundation Corrected S.P.T Water Table Depth Factor CD Permissible Allowable Bearing
N Value Correction WJ Settlement Pressure qnU
(m) (m) (mm) t / m2
1 2.00 2.00 25 1.00 1.20 25 31
2 2.00 3.00 25 1.00 1.13 25 26
3 2.00 4.00 25 1.00 1.10 25 24
4 2.00 5.00 25 1.00 1.08 25 23
5 2.50 2.00 25 1.00 1.20 25 31
6 2.50 3.00 25 1.00 1.17 25 27
7 2.50 4.00 25 1.00 1.13 25 25
8 2.50 5.00 25 1.00 1.10 25 24
9 3.00 2.00 25 1.00 1.20 25 31
10 3.00 3.00 25 1.00 1.20 25 28
11 3.00 4.00 25 1.00 1.15 25 26
12 3.00 5.00 25 1.00 1.12 25 24

* S.P.T N Value corrected for Overburden and Diletancy
Page no.7 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

APPENDIX - 2 (Based on BH 3 & 4 )
SUMMARY OF SAFE BEARING CAPACITIES BASED ON DIFFERENT CRITERIA
Depth of Foundation Length of Foundation Width of Foundation Safe Bearing Capacities Based on Allowable Bearing
Pressure
Shear Criteria Settlement Criteria
2
(m) (m) (m) (t/m ) ( t / m2 ) ( t / m2 )
2.00 2.00 2.00 13 24 13
2.00 3.00 3.00 14 20 14
2.00 4.00 4.00 15 19 15
2.00 5.00 5.00 16 18 16
2.50 2.00 2.00 16 24 16
2.50 3.00 3.00 17 21 17
2.50 4.00 4.00 18 19 18
2.50 5.00 5.00 19 18 18
3.00 2.00 2.00 19 24 19
3.00 3.00 3.00 19 22 19
3.00 4.00 4.00 20 20 20
3.00 5.00 5.00 21 19 19
Page no.8 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

Calculation of net Safe Bearing Capacity Based on Shear Parameters C - I
qu = 1 / FS [ 2 / 3 C Nc dc Sc ic + Jd (Nq - 1) Sq dq iq Wq + 0.5 J B NJ SJ dJiJ WJ]
For Isolated Square Footing
Sr. Size of Foundation Depth of Shear Parameter Bearing Capacity Factors Shape Factors Depth Factors Inclination Factors Unit Weight Water Table Safe
I J 0.5 J
Foundation Correction Bearing
Length Width C Nc Nq - 1 NJ Sc Sq SJ dc dq dJ ic iq iJ Capacity
No. m m m Kg/cm2 degree gm/cc Wq WJ t / m2
1 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.28 1.14 1.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 13
2 3.00 3.00 2.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.19 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 14
3 4.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.14 1.07 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 15
4 5.00 5.00 2.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.11 1.06 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 16
5 2.00 2.00 2.50 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.35 1.18 1.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 16
6 3.00 3.00 2.50 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.24 1.12 1.12 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 17
7 4.00 4.00 2.50 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.18 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 18
8 5.00 5.00 2.50 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.14 1.07 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 19
9 2.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.42 1.21 1.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 19
10 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.28 1.14 1.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 19
11 4.00 4.00 3.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.21 1.11 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 20
12 5.00 5.00 3.00 0.00 28 14.39 5.10 5.03 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.17 1.08 1.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.73 0.87 1.00 1.00 21
Note :-
1) Factor of safety is 2.5
2) Depth of foundation shall be from E G L
Page no.9 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

Calculation of Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on N Value Settlement Criteria
qnu = 1.4 ( N - 3 ) (( B + 0.3 ) / 2B ) 2 WJ CD SP
Sr. No. Depth of Foundation Width of Foundation Corrected S.P.T Water Table Depth Factor CD Permissible Allowable Bearing
N Value Correction WJ Settlement Pressure qnU
(m) (m) (mm) t / m2
1 2.00 2.00 20 1.00 1.20 25 24
2 2.00 3.00 20 1.00 1.13 25 20
3 2.00 4.00 20 1.00 1.10 25 19
4 2.00 5.00 20 1.00 1.08 25 18
5 2.50 2.00 20 1.00 1.20 25 24
6 2.50 3.00 20 1.00 1.17 25 21
7 2.50 4.00 20 1.00 1.13 25 19
8 2.50 5.00 20 1.00 1.10 25 18
9 3.00 2.00 20 1.00 1.20 25 24
10 3.00 3.00 20 1.00 1.20 25 22
11 3.00 4.00 20 1.00 1.15 25 20
12 3.00 5.00 20 1.00 1.12 25 19

* S.P.T N Value corrected for Overburden and Diletancy
Page no.10 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
NOTATIONS
I
C Cohes i on
A n gl e of i nt e r na l f r i c t i o n o f s oi l
DS Dis t urbed Sample
UDS U nd i s t ur b e d S a m pl e
NMC Nat ural Mois t ure Content
NP Non Plastic S oils
G S pecif ic Grav it y
G G r av e l C on t e nt
M S ilt Cont ent
S Sand Content
C Clay Cont ent
LL Li qui d Li m it
PL P l ast ic L imi t
PI P l ast icit y I nd ex
Cc Compres sion I ndex
K Coeffic i ent of Perm eability
UCS Unc onf ined Compression
N SPT Value
BH B o re H o le
S uff i x T he Num ber of B ore Hol es
Nc, Nq, NJ B eari ng Capac it y F actor
J
Sc, S q, SJ S hape Factors
Dens ity of S oil
D Dept h of f oundat i on
FS F act or o f Saf e t y
Cv Coef fic i ent of c ons ol idat i on
UU U nc ons o l i da t ed u nd r ai ne d t r i ax i al t es t
CU Cons olidated undrain ed triax ial test
CD Cons oli dat ed drai n ed t ri ax ia l tes t
GC Clayey Grav els
GP P oor el y G raded G r avel s
GW Wel l G r ad e d G rav e ls
SC Clayey Sand
SM S ilt y S and
SW Wel G r a de d S an d
SP P oorl y G raded S and
CH Clays of High Plast ic it y
CI Cla ys of I nt e r m ediat e P l ast icit y
CL Clays of Low Plas t icity
MH S ilts of Hi gh P l ast ic it y
MI S ilts of I nt er m edi at e P l ast icit y
ML Silts of Low Plasticity
Page no.11 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
REFERENCE
I ndi an St andar ds IS 2720 Pt I I, I II, I V, V, X III ,

XXX I,X XV II, XXV IS 1498,IS 6403,IS 1904
M ur t h y V . N.S . Soil Mec hanics and Foundation

engi n e e ri n g
Dh a np at Rai a nd S o n s D el h i
L am be T . W. S oil t est ing f or E ngi neers

Wi l ey E as t e r Lt d., N ew Del hi
P eck, R.S. Hans on W.E. F ou nd at io n E n gi ne e ri n g

As ia Publ ishing Hous e
Nay ak , N.V. F ou nd at io n E n gi ne e ri n g M a nual

Dh a np at Rai & S o ns .
Kaniraj S.R. Des i gn A id s i n s oi l m ec h a ni c s a nd

F ou nd at io n E n gi ne e ri n g
T at a Mc G ra w Hi l l P u bl is hi n g Co. Lt d .
A l am S i n gh Modern G eot ec hnic al E ng.

IBT P ubl ishi ng & Distri but ors Del hi.
Page no.12 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
TABLE NO. 1
RESULTS OF LABORATORY PERMEABILITY

Sr. Bore Depth (m ) Permeability (mm/ s)
No. Hol e
No.
1. BH 1 2.00 0.60 x 10-2
2. BH 2 2.00 0.68 x 10-2
3. BH 3 2.00 0.62 x 10-2
4. BH 4 2.00 0.65 x 10-2
Page no.13 of 22
KCT Consultancy Services, Ahmedabad ST/06/12/3138
RESULTS OF LABORATORY TEST
P j t :- Proposed
Project P d structure
t t off ISRO att B l Ah
Bopal, d b d
Ahmedabad
BH No. :- 1
Sr Depth of Type of Field Field Dry Natural Grain Size Analysis Consistancy Shear Parameter Consolidation Parameters
No Sample Sample Bulk Density Moisture limits
UCS by Point Load
hear Test
sion Test
Density Content Cohesion Angle of
Swelling Pressure
sification
olidation
Free Swelll Index
Specific Gravity
e Limit
C Internal
sibility
Plasticity Index
sion
nt of
alue
ality
ock
I
Friction
mit
on
ed
mit
Plastic Lim
Designatio
P
Index in ro
Void Ratio
Typr of Sh
o
G
Liquid Lim
Pre-conso
Compress
Compress
Compress
I
Shrinkage
Unconfine
SPT N Va
Soil Class
Coefficien
Rock Qua
Pressure
Index CC
Porosity
Volume
Gravel
Sand
Clay
Silt
mv
m gm / cc gm / cc % % % % % % % % % Kg/cm2 % Kg/cm2 Degree Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 2
cm /kg kg/cm
2
% %
1 0.00 DS - - - - 0 76 24 18 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 1 00
1.00 SPT - - - - 0 63 37 21 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 14 - - -
3 1.50 SPT - - - - 0 79 21 20 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 17 - - -
4 2.00 UDS 1.84 1.73 6.13 2.63 0 80 20 19 NP NP - - - SM 0.00 30 - - DS - - - - - 0.52 34.1
5 3.00 SPT - - - - 2 69 29 23 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 28 - - -
6 3.50 SPT - - - - 13 47 40 37 24 13 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 31 - - -
7 4.00 SPT - - - - 6 33 36 25 43 16 27 - - - CI - - - - - - - - 32 - - -
8 4.50 SPT - - - - 5 33 41 21 49 27 22 - - - CI - - - - - - - - >100 - - -
9 5.50 UDS 2.03 1.89 7.58 2.62 3 28 56 13 36 26 10 - - - MI 0.10 28 - - DS - - - - - 0.39 28.0
10 6.00 SPT - - - - 10 16 60 14 33 25 8 - - - ML - - - - - - - - >100 - - -
11 7.50 UDS 1.96 1.83 7.34 2.63 16 36 41 7 32 25 7 - - - ML 0.09 29 - - DS - - - - - 0.44 30.6
12 9.00 SPT - - - - 15 37 39 9 34 25 9 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 69 - - -
13 10.50 SPT - - - - 0 35 57 8 33 25 8 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 86 - - -
14 12.00 SPT - - - - 8 58 34 32 23 9 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 56 - - -
15 13 50
13.50 SPT - - - - 9 55 36 34 23 11 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 67 - - -
16 15.00 SPT - - - - 0 7 73 20 37 26 11 - - - MI - - - - - - - - >100 - - -
Page no.14 of 22
P j t :- Proposed
Bopal, d b d
Ahmedabad
BH No. :- 2
UCS by Point Load
hear Test
sion Test
Swelling Pressure
sification
olidation
Free Swelll Index
Specific Gravity
e Limit
C Internal
sibility
Plasticity Index
sion
nt of
alue
ality
ock
I
Friction
mit
on
ed
mit
Plastic Lim
Designatio
P
Index in ro
Void Ratio
Typr of Sh
o
G
Liquid Lim
Pre-conso
Compress
Compress
Compress
I
Shrinkage
Unconfine
SPT N Va
Soil Class
Coefficien
Rock Qua
Pressure
Index CC
Porosity
Volume
Gravel
Sand
Clay
Silt
mv
cm /kg kg/cm
2
% %
1 0.00 DS - - - - 0 76 24 21 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 1 50
1.50 SPT - - - - 0 75 25 20 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 19 - - -
3 2.00 UDS 1.89 1.77 6.54 2.64 0 77 23 23 NP NP - - - SM 0.00 30 - - DS - - - - - 0.49 32.8
4 3.00 SPT - - - - 0 80 20 16 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 33 - - -
5 4.00 UDS 1.97 1.83 7.38 2.65 0 77 23 23 NP NP - - - SM 0.00 33 - - DS - - - - - 0.44 30.8
6 4.50 SPT - - - - 0 75 25 24 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 49 - - -
7 6.00 SPT - - - - 4 35 51 10 37 27 10 - - - MI - - - - - - - - >100 - - -
8 7.50 SPT - - - - 6 29 54 11 40 28 12 - - - MI - - - - - - - - >100 - - -
9 9.00 SPT - - - - 0 29 62 9 34 25 9 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 60 - - -
10 10.50 SPT - - - - 0 36 57 7 32 25 7 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 46 - - -
11 12.00 SPT - - - - 10 53 37 35 23 12 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 38 - - -
12 13.50 SPT - - - - 8 59 33 32 23 9 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 51 - - -
13 15.00 SPT - - - - 17 33 36 14 37 26 11 - - - MI - - - - - - - - 96 - - -
Page no.15 of 22
P j t :- Proposed
Bopal, d b d
Ahmedabad
BH No. :- 3
UCS by Point Load
hear Test
sion Test
Swelling Pressure
sification
olidation
Free Swelll Index
Specific Gravity
e Limit
C Internal
sibility
Plasticity Index
sion
nt of
alue
ality
ock
I
Friction
mit
on
ed
mit
Plastic Lim
Designatio
P
Index in ro
Void Ratio
Typr of Sh
o
G
Liquid Lim
Pre-conso
Compress
Compress
Compress
I
Shrinkage
Unconfine
SPT N Va
Soil Class
Coefficien
Rock Qua
Pressure
Index CC
Porosity
Volume
Gravel
Sand
Clay
Silt
mv
cm /kg kg/cm
2
% %
1 0.00 DS - - - - 0 75 25 20 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 1 50
1.50 SPT - - - - 0 75 25 19 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 11 - - -
3 2.00 UDS 1.73 1.62 6.56 2.64 0 75 25 24 NP NP - - - SM 0.00 28 - - DS - - - - - 0.63 38.5
4 3.00 SPT - - - - 0 77 23 23 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 20 - - -
5 3.50 SPT - - - - 0 78 22 21 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 24 - - -
6 4.00 UDS 1.95 1.82 7.34 2.64 0 76 24 25 NP NP - - - SM 0.00 30 - - DS - - - - - 0.45 31.2
7 4.50 SPT - - - - 4 75 21 24 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 39 - - -
8 6.00 SPT - - - - 3 36 47 14 37 26 11 - - - MI - - - - - - - - 76 - - -
9 7.50 SPT - - - - 4 28 56 12 44 31 13 - - - MI - - - - - - - - 79 - - -
10 9.00 SPT - - - - 5 37 44 14 37 26 11 - - - MI - - - - - - - - 65 - - -
11 10.50 SPT - - - - 0 36 57 7 32 25 7 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 60 - - -
12 12.00 SPT - - - - 5 62 33 32 23 9 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 45 - - -
13 13.50 SPT - - - - 4 63 33 37 24 13 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 60 - - -
14 15.00 SPT - - - - 0 37 39 24 42 16 26 - - - CI - - - - - - - - 52 - - -
Page no.16 of 22
P j t :- Proposed
Bopal, d b d
Ahmedabad
BH No. :- 4
UCS by Point Load
hear Test
sion Test
Swelling Pressure
sification
olidation
Free Swelll Index
Specific Gravity
e Limit
C Internal
sibility
Plasticity Index
sion
nt of
alue
ality
ock
I
Friction
mit
on
ed
mit
Plastic Lim
Designatio
P
Index in ro
Void Ratio
Typr of Sh
o
G
Liquid Lim
Pre-conso
Compress
Compress
Compress
I
Shrinkage
Unconfine
SPT N Va
Soil Class
Coefficien
Rock Qua
Pressure
Index CC
Porosity
Volume
Gravel
Sand
Clay
Silt
mv
cm /kg kg/cm
2
% %
1 0.00 DS - - - - 0 79 21 20 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 1 50
1.50 SPT - - - - 0 80 20 23 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 8 - - -
3 2.00 UDS 1.75 1.63 7.62 2.64 0 76 24 24 NP NP - - - SM 0.00 28 - - DS - - - - - 0.62 38.4
4 3.00 SPT - - - - 5 71 24 21 NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 36 - - -
5 3.50 SPT - - - - 4 75 21 NP NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 42 - - -
6 4.00 UDS 1.94 1.81 7.30 2.65 4 74 22 NP NP NP - - - SM 0.00 34 - - DS - - - - - 0.47 31.8
7 4.50 SPT - - - - 9 34 46 11 40 29 11 - - - MI - - - - - - - - 73 - - -
8 6.00 SPT - - - - 9 34 52 5 30 25 5 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 45 - - -
9 7.50 SPT - - - - 0 31 60 9 34 24 10 - - - ML - - - - - - - - 53 - - -
10 9.00 SPT - - - - 0 76 24 NP NP NP - - - SM - - - - - - - - 80 - - -
11 10.50 SPT - - - - 12 52 36 32 23 9 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 83 - - -
12 12.00 SPT - - - - 11 52 37 32 23 9 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 49 - - -
13 13.50 SPT - - - - 9 54 37 36 24 12 - - - SC - - - - - - - - 50 - - -
14 15.00 SPT - - - - 17 31 25 27 48 19 29 - - - CI - - - - - - - - 50 - - -
Page no.17 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
Page no.18 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
Project : ISRO
Bore Hole No. : 1 Date of Start: 6/8/2012
Location : BOPAL Date of Completion: 6/9/2012
Depth of Termination : 15.0 M
Bit Used : Soil Sawtooth
Diameter of Bore : 150 mm
Depth of Water Table : Not encountered during investigation
BORE LOG DATA SHEET
Drill Run
Notation
Depth of
Casing
Method of Depth Type of SPT N Value/Penetration of S.S.S
Soil Description Sample From To Remarks
Boring Sample
m m m m N1 N2 N3 N
0.00 Dark brownish, fine to very fine grained, silty sand with little plastic 0.00 0.00 1.00 DS - - - -
0.50 fines (SM)0.00 to 0.90m
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 SPT 4 6 8 14
1.50 Yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, silty sand with little plastic
1.50 1.50 2.00 SPT 6 8 9 17
fines (SM)
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 UDS - - - -
2.50 0.90 to 3.20m
3.00
Yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, clayey sand with little to 3.00 3.00 3.50 SPT 6 12 16 28
some gravels (SC) 3.20 to 4.00m
3.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 SPT 6 14 17 31
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.50 SPT 7 14 18 32
Yellowish brown and slightly greyish, fine to coarse grained, sandy
4.50 clays of intermediate plasticity with little gravels (CI) 4.00 to 5.00m
4.50 4.50 5.50 SPT 16 50 28 >100
5.00
Yellowish brown and greyish, fine to medium grained, silt of 5cm
Percussion and hand augering method
intermediate plasticity with occational gravels (MI) 5.00 to 6.00m

5.50 5.50 5.50 6.00 UDS - - - -
6.00 6.00 6.00 7.50 SPT 30 50 40 >100
6.50 3cm
Not Used
7.00
7.50 Greyish, fine to very fine grained, silt of low plasticity with some to 7.50 7.50 9.00 UDS - - - -
8.00 much gravels (ML)
8.50
9.00 9.00 9.00 10.50 SPT 15 28 41 69
9.50
10.00 6.00 to 10.50m
10.50
Yellowish brown and greyish, fine to very fine grained, silt of low
10.50 10.50 12.00 SPT 18 38 48 86
plasticity (ML) 10.50 to 11.00m
11.00
11.50
12.00 Yellowish brown and whitish , fine to coarse grained, clayey sand
12.00 12.00 13.50 SPT 18 23 33 56
with little to some gravels (SC)
12.50
13.00
13.50 11.00 to 14.20m 13.50 13.50 15.00 SPT 20 28 39 67
14.00
Dark brownish, fine to very fine grained, silt of intermediate
14.50 plasticity with very fine sand (MI)
15.00 14.20 to 15.00 m 15.00 15.00 15.33 SPT 20 58 30 >100
3cm
Page no.19 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
Project : ISRO
BORE LOG DATA SHEET
Drill Run
Notation
Depth of
Casing
Boring Sample
m m m m N1 N2 N3 N
0.00 Dark brownish, fine to medium grained, silty sand with little plastic 0.00 0.00 1.50 DS - - - -
0.50 fines (SM) 0.00 to 1.30m
1.00
1.50 1.50 1.50 2.00 SPT 6 9 10 19
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 UDS - - - -
2.50
3.00 Yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, silty sand with little plastic
3.00 3.00 3.50 SPT 8 15 18 33
fines (SM)
3.50
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.50 UDS - - - -
4.50 4.50 4.50 6.00 SPT 11 20 29 49
5.00
1.30 to 5.80m
5.50
6.00 6.00 6.00 7.50 SPT 15 48 30 >100
6.50 Brownish grey, fine to coarse grained, silt of intermediate plasticity
3cm
with little gravels (MI)
Not Used
7.00
7.50 5.80 to 8.20m 7.50 7.50 9.00 SPT 20 52 - >100
8.00 13cm
8.50
9.00 Greyish and slightly brownish, fine to very fine grained, silt of low 9.00 9.00 10.50 SPT 22 26 34 60
9.50 plasticity (ML) 8.20 to 10.50m
10.00
10.50 Greyish, fine to coarse grained, silt of low plasticity with little 10.50 10.50 12.00 SPT 18 22 24 46
11.00 gravels to some gravels(ML) 10.50 to 11.60m
11.50
12.00 Yellowish brown and whitish particles, fine to coarse grained, 12.00 12.00 13.50 SPT 15 17 21 38
12.50 clayey sand with some gravels (SC)
13.00
13.50 11.60 to 14.00m 13.50 13.50 15.00 SPT 18 22 29 51
14.00 Dark brownish, fine to coarse grained, silt of intermediate plasticity
14.50 with much gravels and pebbles (MI)
15.00 14.00 to 15.00m 15.00 15.00 15.45 SPT 28 42 54 96
Page no.20 of 22
ST/06/12/3138

Project : ISRO
BORE LOG DATA SHEET
Drill Run
Notation
Depth of
Casing
Boring Sample
m m m m N1 N2 N3 N
0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 DS - - - -
0.50 Dark brownish and slightly greyish, fine to medium grained, silty
sand with little plastic fines (SM) 0.00 to 1.30m
1.00
1.50 1.50 1.50 2.00 SPT 2 5 6 11
2.00 Yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, silty sand with little plastic 2.00 2.00 3.00 UDS - - - -
2.50 fines (SM) 1.30 to 3.80m
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 SPT 5 8 12 20
3.50
Dark brownish and slightly yellowish, fine to medium grained, silty 3.50 3.50 4.00 SPT 6 10 14 24
sand with little plastic fines and little gravels (SM) 3.80 to 4.80m
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.50 UDS - - - -
4.50 4.50 4.50 6.00 SPT 11 17 22 39
5.00
5.50
6.00 6.00 6.00 7.50 SPT 13 28 48 76
6.50
Not Used
7.00 Brownish grey, fine to very fine grained, silt of intermediate

plasticity with occationalg ravels (MI)
7.50 7.50 7.50 9.00 SPT 14 30 49 79
8.00
8.50
9.00 9.00 9.00 10.50 SPT 18 23 42 65
9.50
10.00 4.80 to 10.50m
10.50 Brownish grey, fine to very fine grained, silt of low plasticity (ML) 10.50 10.50 12.00 SPT 19 28 32 60
11.00 10.50 to 11.70m
11.50
12.00 12.00 12.00 13.50 SPT 8 19 26 45
12.50 Yellowish brown and slightly whitish, fine to coarse grained, clayey
sand with little gravels (SC)
13.00
13.50 13.50 13.50 15.00 SPT 17 23 37 60
14.00 11.70 to 14.50m
14.50 Yellowish and pinkish brown, fine to medium grained, sandy clays
of intermediate plasticity (CI)
15.00 14.50 to 15.00m 15.00 15.00 15.45 SPT 15 22 30 52
Page no.21 of 22
ST/06/12/3138
Project : ISRO
BORE LOG DATA SHEET
Drill Run
Notation
Depth of
Casing
Boring Sample
m m m m N1 N2 N3 N
0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 DS - - - -
0.50 Brownish grey, fine to medium grained, silty sand with little plastic
fines (SM) 0.00 to 1.80m
1.00
1.50 Brownish, fine to medium grained, silty sand with little plastic fines 1.50 1.50 2.00 SPT 2 3 5 8
2.00 (SM) 1.80 to 2.60m 2.00 2.00 3.00 UDS - - - -
2.50
3.00 Yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, silty sand with occational
3.00 3.00 3.50 SPT 6 14 22 36
gravels (SM) 2.60 to 4.20m
3.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 SPT 9 17 25 42
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.50 UDS - - - -
4.50 Brownish grey, fine to coarse grianed, silt of intermediate plasticity
4.50 4.50 6.00 SPT 10 32 41 73
with little to some gravels(MI) 4.20 to 5.80m
5.00
5.50
6.00 Brownish grey, fine to very fine grained, silt of low plasticity with
6.00 6.00 7.50 SPT 15 19 25 45
some gravels (ML) 5.80 to 7.00m
6.50
Not Used
7.00
7.50 Yellowish brown, fineto very fine grained, silt of low plasticity (ML)
7.50 7.50 9.00 SPT 18 25 28 53
7.00 to 8.60m
8.00
8.50
9.00 9.00 9.00 10.50 SPT 21 34 46 80
Brownish, fine to very fine grained, silty sand (SM) 8.60 to 10.50m
9.50
10.00
10.50 10.50 10.50 12.00 SPT 25 40 43 83
11.00
11.50 Yellowish brown, fine to coarse grained, clayey sand with some
12.00 gravels (SC) 12.00 12.00 13.50 SPT 14 19 30 49
12.50
13.00
13.50 10.50 to 14.00m 13.50 13.50 15.00 SPT 13 20 30 50
14.00 Yellowish brown, fine to very fine grained, silty clays of
intermediate plasticity with occational gravels and occational
14.50 pebbles (CI)
15.00 15.00 15.00 15.45 SPT 14 18 32 50
Page no.22 of 22
ANNEX N2 STRUCTURAL CALCULATION

The documentation of the calculation program is attached in the following pages.
The documentation that follows corresponds to:
Job data report

- General data of the structure
- Codes considered
x Gravity loads
- Loads considered
x wind
x Seismic
Earthquake general data
x Fire
x Loadcase
x Load report
- Limit states
x Partial safety factors () and combination factors ()

- Project situations
x Combinations
- Geometrical data of groups and floors
x Columns
- Geometrical data of columns, shear walls and walls
- Dimensions, fixity and buckling coefficients for each floor
x Concrete types
- Materials used
x Steel types by element and position

Steel in bars
Steel in sections
Coefficient list
Foundation report
- Description
- Takeoff
- Code checks
Beam reinforcement report
x Frame 1
- Chamber
x Frame 2
Beam takeoff report
Surface and volume takeoff
Takeoff tables
Column, shear wall and wall forces and reinforcement
x Concrete types
- Materials
x Steel types by element and position

Steel in bars
Steel in sections
x Columns
- Columns and shear wall reinforcement
- Forces in columns, shear walls and walls by loadcase

- Stars of columns, shear walls and walls by loadcase
x Columns
- Worst cases of columns, shear walls and walls
- Column takeoff report
x Summarised
- Sum of the forces of the columns, shear walls and walls by loadcase and floor
x Complete
Column displacements
Column distortions
Justification of seismic action

- Earthquake general data
x Elastic acceleration spectrum

- Design spectrum
x Design acceleration spectrum

- Participation coefficients
- Centre of mass, centre of stiffness and eccentricities of each floor
x Dynamic shear CQC

- Correction due to base shear
x Static base shear

x Base shear condition verification
U.L.S. Checks
- Notation (columns)
x C1
- Columns
x C2
x C3
x C4
x C5
x C6
x C7
x C8
x Chamber
- Beams
Check report
- General data
x Chamber
- Checks
Paragraph: Job data report

INDEX
1.- GENERAL DATA OF THE STRUCTURE 2
2.- CODES CONSIDERED 2
3.- LOADS CONSIDERED 2

3.1.- Gravity loads 2
3.2.- Wind 2
3.3.- Seismic 2
3.3.1.- Earthquake general data 2
3.4.- Fire 3
3.5.- Loadcase 3
3.6.- Horizontal loads and at the top of columns introduced by calculation engineer 4
3.6.1.- Not automatic loads at head of column 4
4.- LIMIT STATES 4
5.- PROJECT SITUATIONS 4

5.1.- Partial safety factors (J) and combination factors (\) 5
5.2.- Combinations 9
6.- GEOMETRICAL DATA OF GROUPS AND FLOORS 12
7.- GEOMETRICAL DATA OF COLUMNS, SHEAR WALLS AND WALLS 12

7.1.- Columns 12
8.- DIMENSIONS, FIXITY AND BUCKLING COEFFICIENTS FOR EACH FLOOR 13
9.- SLABS AND FOUNDATION ELEMENTS 13
10.- MATERIALS USED 13

10.1.- Concrete types 13
10.2.- Steel types by element and position 13
10.2.1.- Steel in bars 13
10.2.2.- Steel in sections 13
Job data report
Foundation
1.- GENERAL DATA OF THE STRUCTURE

Project: Foundation
Keyword: Telstar
2.- CODES CONSIDERED

Concrete: IS 456: 2000
Cold-formed steel: AISI
Rolled and welded steel: IS 800:2007
Fire: EN1992-1-2:2004 - Design of concrete structures - Part 1-2: General rules - Structural fire design.
Use category: General
3.- LOADS CONSIDERED

3.1.- Gravity loads
L.L. Dead loads
Floor
(t/m) (t/m)
Simulated floor 0.00 0.00
Chamber 0.30 0.00
Foundation 0.00 0.00
3.2.- Wind
Without wind action
3.3.- Seismic
Design code used: IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002

CRITERIA FOR EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN OF STRUCTURES
Part 1 General Provisions and Buildings
Calculation method: Response spectrum method (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, 7.8.4)
3.3.1.- Earthquake general data
Location characterisation
Seismic zone (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, Annex E and Fig 1): III
Soil type (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, Table 1): Type II Medium Soils
Structural system
RX: Response reduction factor (X) (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, Table 7) RX : 3.00
RY: Response reduction factor (Y) (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, Table 7) RY : 3.00
[: Damping (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, 6.4.2) [ : 5.00 %
Approximate fundamental period

Type of structure (X): I
Type of structure (Y): I
h: Height of building h : 4.10 m
Page 2
Job data report
Foundation
Importance of the job

I: Importance factor (IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, Table 6) I : 1.50
Analysis parameters
Number of vibration modes considered in the analysis: Based on the Code
Fraction of live load : 0.50
Fraction of snow load : 0.50
Spectrum multiplication factor : 1.00
The analysis of 2nd order effects is carried out

Value to multiply displacements 1.00
Reinforcement criteria to apply by ductility: According to IS 13920
Analysis directions
Seismic action in direction X
Seismic action in direction Y
On-plan projection of the job
3.4.- Fire
Data per floor
Coating of concrete elements Coating of steel elements
Floor R. req. F. Comp.
Bottom (floors and beams) Columns and walls Beams Columns
Simulated floor - - - - - -
Without
Without fireproof Without fireproof
Chamber R 90 - Without fireproof coating fireproof
coating coating
coating
Notes:
- R. req.: required resistance, time period during which a structural element must maintain its load bearing capacity, expressed in minutes.
- F. Comp.: indicates whether or not the floor is fire compartmented.
3.5.- Loadcase
Automatic Self weight
Dead load
Live load
Earthquake X
Earthquake Y
Page 3
Job data report
Foundation
Additional Reference Description Nature

Seismic Z + 1 C1-C3-C5-C7 Accidental
Seismic Z + 2 C2-C4-C6-C8 Accidental
Seismic Z - 1 C1-C3-C5-C7 Accidental
Seismic Z - 2 C2-C4-C6-C8 Accidental
3.6.- Horizontal loads and at the top of columns introduced by calculation engineer
3.6.1.- Not automatic loads at head of column

Column reference Loadcase N (t) Mx (tm) My (tm) Qx (t) Qy (t) T (tm)
C1 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 1 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 1 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C2 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 2 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 2 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C3 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 1 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 1 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C5 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 1 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 1 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C6 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 2 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 2 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C4 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 2 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 2 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C7 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 1 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 1 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C8 Dead load 16.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z + 2 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seismic Z - 2 -1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.- LIMIT STATES

Fracture U.L.S. Concrete IS 456: 2000
Fracture U.L.S. Foundation concrete Imposed Floor Loads: Up to and including 3.0 kN/m
Fracture U.L.S. Rolled steel IS 800: 2007
Ground bearing pressures EC
Snow: Altitude less than or equal to 1000 m
Displacements Characteristic loads
5.- PROJECT SITUATIONS

The load combinations will be defined according to the following criteria for the different project situations:
J Gkj J QiQki
- Situations persistent or transient
j t1 it1
Gj
Page 4
Job data report
Foundation
J Gkj J AE A E J QiQki
- Situations seismic loading
j t1 i t1
Gj
J Gkj J A d A d J QiQki
- Accidental situations (Situations vertical seismic)
j t1 i t1
Gj
- Where:
Gk Permanent load
Qk Variable load
AE Seismic load
Ad Accidental action
JG Permanent load partial safety factor
JQ,1 Main variable load partial safety factor
JQ,i Accompanying variable load partial safety factor
JAE Seismic load partial safety factor
JAd Partial safety factor for accidental actions
5.1.- Partial safety factors (J) and combination factors (\)

For each project situation and limit state, the loading coefficients will be determined by:
Fracture U.L.S. Concrete: IS 456: 2000
Fracture U.L.S. Foundation concrete: IS 456: 2000
DL + IL (IS 456: 2000)

Partial safety factors (J)
Favourable Unfavourable
Dead load (G) 1.500 1.500
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.500
DL + WL (IS 456: 2000)

Dead load (G) 0.900 1.500
Live load (Q)
DL + IL + WL (IS 456: 2000)

Dead load (G) 1.200 1.200
Live load (Q) 1.200 1.200
DL + IL, Serviceability (IS 456: 2000)
Page 5
Job data report
Foundation

Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.000
Accidental (A) 1.000 1.000
DL + WL, Serviceability (IS 456: 2000)

Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q)
DL + IL + WL, Serviceability (IS 456: 2000)

Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.800 0.800
DL + IL + EL (IS 456: 2000)

Dead load (G) 1.200 1.200
Live load (Q) 0.000 0.300
Earthquake (E) -1.200 1.200
Notes:
The forces obtained from the analysis results for each orthogonal direction will be combined with the 30
% of the other.
DL + EL (IS 456: 2000)

Dead load (G) 0.900 1.500
Live load (Q)
Notes:
% of the other.
Fracture U.L.S. Rolled steel: IS 800:2007
DL + LL (1) (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.500 1.500
Page 6
Job data report
Foundation
DL + LL (1) (IS 800: 2007)

Live load (Q) 0.000 1.500
DL + LL (2) (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.500 1.500
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.050
DL + LL + WL (1) (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.200 1.200
Live load (Q) 1.200 1.200
DL + LL + WL (2) (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.200 1.200
Live load (Q) 1.050 1.050
DL + LL + EL (1) (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.200 1.200
Live load (Q) 1.200 1.200
Notes:
% of the other.
DL + LL + EL (2) (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.200 1.200
Live load (Q) 1.050 1.050
Notes:
% of the other.
DL + WL (IS 800: 2007)
Page 7
Job data report
Foundation

Dead load (G) 0.900 1.500
Live load (Q)
DL + EL (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 0.900 1.500
Live load (Q)
Notes:
% of the other.
DL + LL + AL (IS 800: 2007)

Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 0.350
Ground bearing pressures
Variable loads without seismic loading

Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.000
Seismic loading
Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.000
Accidental
Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.000
Page 8
Job data report
Foundation
Displacements
Variable loads without seismic loading

Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.000
Seismic loading
Dead load (G) 1.000 1.000
Live load (Q) 0.000 1.000
5.2.- Combinations
Loadcase names
SW Self weight
DL Dead load
Qa Live load
SX Earthquake X
SY Earthquake Y
Seismic Z + 1 C1-C3-C5-C7
Seismic Z - 1 C1-C3-C5-C7
Fracture U.L.S. Concrete

Fracture U.L.S. Foundation concrete
Comb. SW DL Qa SX SY Seismic Z + 1 Seismic Z + 2 Seismic Z - 1 Seismic Z - 2

1 1.500 1.500
2 1.500 1.500 1.500
3 0.900 0.900
4 1.200 1.200 1.200
5 1.000 1.000 1.000
6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
7 1.000 1.000 1.000
8 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
9 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
10 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
11 1.000 1.000 1.000
12 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
13 1.000 1.000 1.000
14 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
15 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
16 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Page 9
Job data report
Foundation

17 1.200 1.200 -0.360 -1.200
18 1.200 1.200 0.300 -0.360 -1.200
19 1.200 1.200 0.360 -1.200
20 1.200 1.200 0.300 0.360 -1.200
21 1.200 1.200 -1.200 -0.360
22 1.200 1.200 0.300 -1.200 -0.360
23 1.200 1.200 -1.200 0.360
24 1.200 1.200 0.300 -1.200 0.360
25 1.200 1.200 0.360 1.200
26 1.200 1.200 0.300 0.360 1.200
27 1.200 1.200 -0.360 1.200
28 1.200 1.200 0.300 -0.360 1.200
29 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.360
30 1.200 1.200 0.300 1.200 0.360
31 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.360
32 1.200 1.200 0.300 1.200 -0.360
33 0.900 0.900 -0.450 -1.500
34 1.500 1.500 -0.450 -1.500
35 0.900 0.900 0.450 -1.500
36 1.500 1.500 0.450 -1.500
37 0.900 0.900 -1.500 -0.450
38 1.500 1.500 -1.500 -0.450
39 0.900 0.900 -1.500 0.450
40 1.500 1.500 -1.500 0.450
41 0.900 0.900 0.450 1.500
42 1.500 1.500 0.450 1.500
43 0.900 0.900 -0.450 1.500
44 1.500 1.500 -0.450 1.500
45 0.900 0.900 1.500 0.450
46 1.500 1.500 1.500 0.450
47 0.900 0.900 1.500 -0.450
48 1.500 1.500 1.500 -0.450
Fracture U.L.S. Rolled steel

1 1.500 1.500
2 1.500 1.500 1.500
3 1.200 1.200 1.200
4 1.200 1.200 1.050
5 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.180 -0.600
6 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.180 -0.600
7 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.600 -0.180
8 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.600 0.180
9 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.180 0.600
10 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.180 0.600
11 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.600 0.180
12 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.600 -0.180
13 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.180 -0.600
Page 10
Job data report
Foundation

14 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.180 -0.600
15 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.600 -0.180
16 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.600 0.180
17 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.180 0.600
18 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.180 0.600
19 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.600 0.180
20 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.600 -0.180
21 0.900 0.900
22 0.900 0.900 -0.450 -1.500
23 1.500 1.500 -0.450 -1.500
24 0.900 0.900 0.450 -1.500
25 1.500 1.500 0.450 -1.500
26 0.900 0.900 -1.500 -0.450
27 1.500 1.500 -1.500 -0.450
28 0.900 0.900 -1.500 0.450
29 1.500 1.500 -1.500 0.450
30 0.900 0.900 0.450 1.500
31 1.500 1.500 0.450 1.500
32 0.900 0.900 -0.450 1.500
33 1.500 1.500 -0.450 1.500
34 0.900 0.900 1.500 0.450
35 1.500 1.500 1.500 0.450
36 0.900 0.900 1.500 -0.450
37 1.500 1.500 1.500 -0.450
38 1.000 1.000 1.000
39 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
40 1.000 1.000 1.000
41 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
42 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
43 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000 1.000
44 1.000 1.000 1.000
45 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
46 1.000 1.000 1.000
47 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
48 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
49 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000 1.000

1 1.000 1.000
2 1.000 1.000 1.000
3 1.000 1.000 -1.000
4 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
5 1.000 1.000 1.000
6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
7 1.000 1.000 -1.000
8 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
9 1.000 1.000 1.000
Page 11
Job data report
Foundation

10 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
11 1.000 1.000 1.000
12 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
13 1.000 1.000 1.000
14 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
15 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
16 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
17 1.000 1.000 1.000
18 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
19 1.000 1.000 1.000
20 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
21 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
22 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Displacements

1 1.000 1.000
2 1.000 1.000 1.000
3 1.000 1.000 -1.000
4 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
5 1.000 1.000 1.000
6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
7 1.000 1.000 -1.000
8 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
9 1.000 1.000 1.000
10 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
6.- GEOMETRICAL DATA OF GROUPS AND FLOORS

Group Group name Floor Floor name Height Elev
2 Simulated floor 2 Simulated floor 4.65 7.55
1 Chamber 1 Chamber 2.90 2.90
0 Foundation 0.00
7.- GEOMETRICAL DATA OF COLUMNS, SHEAR WALLS AND WALLS

7.1.- Columns
IG: initial group
FG: final group
Ang: angle of the column in sexagesimal degrees
Column data
Reference Coord(Fxd.Pt) IG- FG External fixity Ang. Fixed point Depth of support
C1 ( 0.30, 0.30) 0-2 With external fixity 0.0 Centre 1.55
Page 12
Job data report
Foundation
Reference Coord(Fxd.Pt) IG- FG External fixity Ang. Fixed point Depth of support
C7 ( 0.30, 5.70) 1-2 Without external fixity 0.0 Centre
C8 ( 5.95, 5.70) 1-2 Without external fixity 0.0 Centre
8.- DIMENSIONS, FIXITY AND BUCKLING COEFFICIENTS FOR EACH

FLOOR
Dimensions Fixity coefficient Buckling coefficient

Column Floor Axial stiffness coefficient
(cm) Head Base X Y
C1, C2, C3, C5, C6, 2 HB400*|I| 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00
C4 1 60x60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00
C7, C8 2 HB400*|I| 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00
9.- SLABS AND FOUNDATION ELEMENTS

-Allowable bearing pressure in persistent situations: 1.70 kgf/cm
-Allowable bearing pressure in accidental situations: 2.30 kgf/cm
10.- MATERIALS USED

10.1.- Concrete types
Jc
fck Maximum size of the aggregate
Element Concrete
(kgf/cm) (mm)
All M 25 255 1.15 a 1.50 20
10.2.- Steel types by element and position

10.2.1.- Steel in bars
Js
fyk
Element Steel
(kgf/cm)
All Fe 415 4230 1.00 a 1.15
10.2.2.- Steel in sections
Yield Strength Modulus of Elasticity

Type of steel for sections Steel
(kgf/cm) (kgf/cm)
Cold formed steel A-36 2548 2089704
Rolled steel E 250 (Fe 410 W) A 2548 2038736
Page 13
Paragraph: Combinations used in the alalysis

Coeficient list
Foundation
Loadcase names
SW Self weight
DL Dead load
Qa Live load
SX Earthquake X
SY Earthquake Y
Use category
1. General
Fracture U.L.S. Concrete

IS 456: 2000
Imposed Floor Loads: Up to and including 3.0 kN/m
Fracture U.L.S. Foundation concrete
IS 456: 2000
Imposed Floor Loads: Up to and including 3.0 kN/m

1 1.500 1.500
2 1.500 1.500 1.500
3 0.900 0.900
4 1.200 1.200 1.200
5 1.000 1.000 1.000
6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
7 1.000 1.000 1.000
8 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
9 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
10 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
11 1.000 1.000 1.000
12 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
13 1.000 1.000 1.000
14 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
15 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
16 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
17 1.200 1.200 -0.360 -1.200
18 1.200 1.200 0.300 -0.360 -1.200
19 1.200 1.200 0.360 -1.200
20 1.200 1.200 0.300 0.360 -1.200
21 1.200 1.200 -1.200 -0.360
22 1.200 1.200 0.300 -1.200 -0.360
23 1.200 1.200 -1.200 0.360
24 1.200 1.200 0.300 -1.200 0.360
25 1.200 1.200 0.360 1.200
26 1.200 1.200 0.300 0.360 1.200
27 1.200 1.200 -0.360 1.200
28 1.200 1.200 0.300 -0.360 1.200
29 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.360
Page 1
Coeficient list
Foundation

30 1.200 1.200 0.300 1.200 0.360
31 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.360
32 1.200 1.200 0.300 1.200 -0.360
33 0.900 0.900 -0.450 -1.500
34 1.500 1.500 -0.450 -1.500
35 0.900 0.900 0.450 -1.500
36 1.500 1.500 0.450 -1.500
37 0.900 0.900 -1.500 -0.450
38 1.500 1.500 -1.500 -0.450
39 0.900 0.900 -1.500 0.450
40 1.500 1.500 -1.500 0.450
41 0.900 0.900 0.450 1.500
42 1.500 1.500 0.450 1.500
43 0.900 0.900 -0.450 1.500
44 1.500 1.500 -0.450 1.500
45 0.900 0.900 1.500 0.450
46 1.500 1.500 1.500 0.450
47 0.900 0.900 1.500 -0.450
48 1.500 1.500 1.500 -0.450
Cold formed steel

Characteristic loads
EC

1 1.000 1.000
2 1.000 1.000 1.000
3 1.000 1.000 -1.000
4 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
5 1.000 1.000 1.000
6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
7 1.000 1.000 -1.000
8 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
9 1.000 1.000 1.000
10 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
11 1.000 1.000 1.000
12 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
13 1.000 1.000 1.000
14 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
15 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
16 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
17 1.000 1.000 1.000
18 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
19 1.000 1.000 1.000
20 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
21 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
22 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Page 2
Coeficient list
Foundation
Fracture U.L.S. Rolled steel

IS 800: 2007

1 1.500 1.500
2 1.500 1.500 1.500
3 1.200 1.200 1.200
4 1.200 1.200 1.050
5 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.180 -0.600
6 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.180 -0.600
7 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.600 -0.180
8 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.600 0.180
9 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.180 0.600
10 1.200 1.200 1.200 -0.180 0.600
11 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.600 0.180
12 1.200 1.200 1.200 0.600 -0.180
13 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.180 -0.600
14 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.180 -0.600
15 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.600 -0.180
16 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.600 0.180
17 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.180 0.600
18 1.200 1.200 1.050 -0.180 0.600
19 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.600 0.180
20 1.200 1.200 1.050 0.600 -0.180
21 0.900 0.900
22 0.900 0.900 -0.450 -1.500
23 1.500 1.500 -0.450 -1.500
24 0.900 0.900 0.450 -1.500
25 1.500 1.500 0.450 -1.500
26 0.900 0.900 -1.500 -0.450
27 1.500 1.500 -1.500 -0.450
28 0.900 0.900 -1.500 0.450
29 1.500 1.500 -1.500 0.450
30 0.900 0.900 0.450 1.500
31 1.500 1.500 0.450 1.500
32 0.900 0.900 -0.450 1.500
33 1.500 1.500 -0.450 1.500
34 0.900 0.900 1.500 0.450
35 1.500 1.500 1.500 0.450
36 0.900 0.900 1.500 -0.450
37 1.500 1.500 1.500 -0.450
38 1.000 1.000 1.000
39 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
40 1.000 1.000 1.000
41 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
42 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
43 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000 1.000
44 1.000 1.000 1.000
45 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
46 1.000 1.000 1.000
47 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000
Page 3
Coeficient list
Foundation

48 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
49 1.000 1.000 0.350 1.000 1.000
Fracture U.L.S. Timber

EC
1. Coefficients for persistent, transient, seismic and accidental situations

1 1.000 1.000
2 1.350 1.350
3 1.000 1.000 1.500
4 1.350 1.350 1.500
5 1.000 1.000 -0.300 -1.000
6 1.000 1.000 0.300 -0.300 -1.000
7 1.000 1.000 0.300 -1.000
8 1.000 1.000 0.300 0.300 -1.000
9 1.000 1.000 -1.000 -0.300
10 1.000 1.000 0.300 -1.000 -0.300
11 1.000 1.000 -1.000 0.300
12 1.000 1.000 0.300 -1.000 0.300
13 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
14 1.000 1.000 0.300 0.300 1.000
15 1.000 1.000 -0.300 1.000
16 1.000 1.000 0.300 -0.300 1.000
17 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.300
18 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 0.300
19 1.000 1.000 1.000 -0.300
20 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 -0.300
21 1.000 1.000 1.000
22 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
23 1.000 1.000 1.000
24 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
25 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
26 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 1.000
27 1.000 1.000 1.000
28 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
29 1.000 1.000 1.000
30 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
31 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
32 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 1.000
2. Coefficients for accidental fire situations
1 1.000 1.000
2 1.000 1.000 0.300
Aluminium ultimate failure limit state

EC
Page 4
Coeficient list
Foundation

1 1.000 1.000
2 1.350 1.350
3 1.000 1.000 1.500
4 1.350 1.350 1.500
5 1.000 1.000 -0.300 -1.000
6 1.000 1.000 0.300 -0.300 -1.000
7 1.000 1.000 0.300 -1.000
8 1.000 1.000 0.300 0.300 -1.000
9 1.000 1.000 -1.000 -0.300
10 1.000 1.000 0.300 -1.000 -0.300
11 1.000 1.000 -1.000 0.300
12 1.000 1.000 0.300 -1.000 0.300
13 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
14 1.000 1.000 0.300 0.300 1.000
15 1.000 1.000 -0.300 1.000
16 1.000 1.000 0.300 -0.300 1.000
17 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.300
18 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 0.300
19 1.000 1.000 1.000 -0.300
20 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 -0.300
21 1.000 1.000 1.000
22 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
23 1.000 1.000 1.000
24 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
25 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
26 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 1.000
27 1.000 1.000 1.000
28 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
29 1.000 1.000 1.000
30 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000
31 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
32 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 1.000
Displacements
Characteristic loads

1 1.000 1.000
2 1.000 1.000 1.000
3 1.000 1.000 -1.000
4 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
5 1.000 1.000 1.000
6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
7 1.000 1.000 -1.000
8 1.000 1.000 1.000 -1.000
9 1.000 1.000 1.000
10 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Page 5
Paragraph: Foundation report

INDEX
1.- FOUNDATION ELEMENT REPORT 2

1.1.- Description 2
1.2.- Takeoff 2
1.3.- Code checks 4
2.- STRAP BEAM REPORT 8

2.1.- Description 8
2.2.- Takeoff 8
2.3.- Code checks 9
Foundation report
Foundation
1.- FOUNDATION ELEMENT REPORT

1.1.- Description
References Material Geometry Reinforcement

(C1-C3- Allowable bearing pressure in persistent situations: 1.70 Centred rectangular Top X:
C5) kgf/cm footing 2212@12
Allowable bearing pressure in accidental situations: 2.30 Footing width X: 840.0 Top Y:
kgf/cm cm 6912@12
Footing width Y: 270.0 Bott X:
cm 2212@12
Depth: 155.0 cm Bott Y:
6912@12
Perimeter: 512
(C2-C6- Allowable bearing pressure in persistent situations: 1.70 Centred rectangular Top X:
C4) kgf/cm footing 2112@15
Allowable bearing pressure in accidental situations: 2.30 Footing width X: 725.0 Top Y:
kgf/cm cm 4212@17
Footing width Y: 323.0 Bott X:
cm 2112@15
Depth: 110.0 cm Bott Y:
4812@15
Perimeter: 412
1.2.- Takeoff
Reference: (C1-C3-C5) Fe 415 Total
Name of reinf. 8 12 20
Bottom reinforcement mesh - X Reinf. Length (m) 22x9.86 216.92
Weight (kg) 22x8.75 192.59
Bottom reinforcement mesh - Y Reinf. Length (m) 69x4.16 287.04
Weight (kg) 69x3.69 254.84
Top reinforcement mesh - X Reinf. Length (m) 22x9.86 216.92
Weight (kg) 22x8.75 192.59
Top reinforcement mesh - Y Reinf. Length (m) 69x4.16 287.04
Weight (kg) 69x3.69 254.84
Start - Longitudinal reinf. Length (m) 16x3.63 58.08
Weight (kg) 16x3.22 51.57
Start - Stirrups Length (m) 3x2.21 6.63
Weight (kg) 3x0.87 2.62
Weight (kg) 16x3.22 51.57
Weight (kg) 3x0.87 2.62
Weight (kg) 16x3.22 51.57
Weight (kg) 3x0.87 2.62
Perimeter reinf. Length (m) 5x9.29 46.45
Weight (kg) 5x8.25 41.24
Weight (kg) 5x3.19 15.94
Weight (kg) 5x8.25 41.24
Weight (kg) 5x3.19 15.94
Weight (kg) 4x8.95 35.81
Page 2
Foundation report
Foundation

Weight (kg) 4x8.95 35.81
Weight (kg) 4x8.95 35.81
Total Length (m) 19.89 1310.96 43.56
Weight (kg) 7.86 1163.93 107.43 1279.22
Total with loss Length (m) 21.88 1442.06 47.92
(10.00%) Weight (kg) 8.65 1280.32 118.17 1407.14
Bottom reinforcement mesh - X Reinf. Length (m) 21x8.71 182.91
Weight (kg) 21x7.73 162.39
Bottom reinforcement mesh - Y Reinf. Length (m) 48x4.69 225.12
Weight (kg) 48x4.16 199.87
Top reinforcement mesh - X Reinf. Length (m) 21x8.71 182.91
Weight (kg) 21x7.73 162.39
Top reinforcement mesh - Y Reinf. Length (m) 42x4.69 196.98
Weight (kg) 42x4.16 174.89
Weight (kg) 16x2.82 45.17
Weight (kg) 3x0.87 2.62
Weight (kg) 16x2.82 45.17
Weight (kg) 3x0.87 2.62
Weight (kg) 16x2.82 45.17
Weight (kg) 3x0.87 2.62
Weight (kg) 4x3.66 14.63
Weight (kg) 4x7.23 28.91
Weight (kg) 4x3.66 14.63
Weight (kg) 4x7.23 28.91
Weight (kg) 4x7.84 31.37
Weight (kg) 4x7.84 31.37
Weight (kg) 4x7.84 31.37
Total Length (m) 19.89 1038.64 38.16
Weight (kg) 7.86 922.13 94.11 1024.10
(10.00%) Weight (kg) 8.65 1014.34 103.52 1126.51
Takeoff summary (including fabrication loss)
Fe 415 (kg) Concrete (m) Formwork

(m)
Element 8 12 20 Total M 25 Mud slab
Reference: (C1-C3-C5) 8.65 1280.32 118.17 1407.14 35.15 2.27 33.61
Reference: (C2-C6-C4) 8.65 1014.34 103.52 1126.51 25.76 2.34 22.26
Page 3
Foundation report
Foundation

(m)
Total 17.30 2294.66 221.69 2533.65 60.91 4.61 55.87
1.3.- Code checks

Reference: (C1-C3-C5)
Details: 840 x 270 x 155
Reinforcement: Xi:12@12 Yi:12@12 Xs:12@12 Ys:12@12 Perimeter:512
Code checks Values Status
Criteria of CYPE
- Mean stress in persistent situations: Maximum: 1.7 kgf/cm

Calculated: 0.754 kgf/cm Verified
- Mean bearing pressure in accidental seismic situations: Maximum: 2.3 kgf/cm
- Mean stress in accidental situations: Maximum: 2.3 kgf/cm
- Maximum stress in persistent situations: Maximum: 2.125 kgf/cm
- Maximum bearing pressure in accidental seismic situations: Maximum: 2.875 kgf/cm
- Maximum stress in accidental situations: Maximum: 2.875 kgf/cm
Overturning of footing:
If the safety reserve % is greater than zero, then the overturning safety factors are greater than
those strictly required for all equilibrium combinations.
- In X direction: Safety reserve: 123.7 % Verified

- In Y direction: Safety reserve: 138731.2 % Verified
- In X direction: Moment: 38.42 tm Verified
- In Y direction: Moment: 164.13 tm Verified
Shear in the footing:
- In X direction: Shear: 13.37 t Verified
- In Y direction: Shear: 12.11 t Verified
Oblique compression in the footing:
Criteria of CYPE
- Persistent situations: Maximum: 509.68 t/m

Calculated: 25.59 t/m Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Maximum: 662.5 t/m
- Accidental situations: Maximum: 662.5 t/m
Tangential stress in the critial punching shear perimeter:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 31.6.3 Maximum: 127.42 t/m
- Persistent situations: Calculated: 3.64 t/m Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Calculated: 4.43 t/m Verified
- Accidental situations: Calculated: 2.57 t/m Verified
Page 4
Foundation report
Foundation
Details: 840 x 270 x 155
Minimum depth: Minimum: 15 cm
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 34.1.2 Calculated: 155 cm Verified
Space to anchor starter bars in foundation: Calculated: 148 cm
- C1: Minimum: 83 cm Verified
Minimum geometric ratio:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.2.1 Minimum: 0.0012
- In X direction: Calculated: 0.0012 Verified
- In Y direction: Calculated: 0.0012 Verified
Minimum diameter of the bars:
Criteria of CYPE Minimum: 10 mm
- Bottom reinforcement mesh: Calculated: 12 mm Verified
- Top reinforcement mesh: Calculated: 12 mm Verified
Maximum bar spacing:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.3.3 Maximum: 30 cm
- Bottom reinf. X direction: Calculated: 12 cm Verified
- Bottom reinf. Y direction: Calculated: 12 cm Verified
- Top reinf. X direction: Calculated: 12 cm Verified
- Top reinf. Y direction: Calculated: 12 cm Verified
Minimum bar spacing:
Criteria of CYPE Ingenieros Minimum: 10 cm
Anchorage length:
CYPE criteria, based on: 'IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.1'
- Bott. reinf. X direction toward rgt: Minimum: 30 cm

Calculated: 314 cm Verified
- Bott. reinf. X direction toward lft: Minimum: 38 cm
- Bott. reinf. Y direction upwards: Minimum: 30 cm
- Bott. reinf. Y direction downwards: Minimum: 34 cm
- Top reinf. X direction toward rgt: Minimum: 30 cm
- Top reinf. X direction toward lft: Minimum: 30 cm
Page 5
Foundation report
Foundation
Details: 840 x 270 x 155
- Top reinf. Y direction upwards: Minimum: 30 cm
- Top reinf. Y direction downwards: Minimum: 30 cm
Minimum length of the end hooks: Minimum: 19 cm
- Bott. reinf. X direction toward rgt: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Bott. reinf. X direction toward lft: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Bott. reinf. Y direction upwards: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Bott. reinf. Y direction downwards: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Top reinf. X direction toward rgt: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Top reinf. X direction toward lft: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Top reinf. Y direction upwards: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
- Top reinf. Y direction downwards: Calculated: 80 cm Verified
All the checks have been verified
Details: 725 x 323 x 110
Criteria of CYPE
- Mean stress in persistent situations: Maximum: 1.7 kgf/cm

- Mean bearing pressure in accidental seismic situations: Maximum: 2.3 kgf/cm
- Mean stress in accidental situations: Maximum: 2.3 kgf/cm
- Maximum stress in persistent situations: Maximum: 2.125 kgf/cm
- Maximum bearing pressure in accidental seismic situations: Maximum: 2.875 kgf/cm
- Maximum stress in accidental situations: Maximum: 2.875 kgf/cm
Overturning of footing:
If the safety reserve % is greater than zero, then the overturning safety factors are greater than
those strictly required for all equilibrium combinations.
- In X direction: Safety reserve: 46.2 % Verified

- In Y direction: Safety reserve: 131366.2 % Verified
- In X direction: Moment: 42.36 tm Verified
- In Y direction: Moment: 170.91 tm Verified
Shear in the footing:
- In X direction: Shear: 21.39 t Verified
Page 6
Foundation report
Foundation
Details: 725 x 323 x 110
- In Y direction: Shear: 52.60 t Verified
Oblique compression in the footing:
Criteria of CYPE
- Persistent situations: Maximum: 509.68 t/m

- Accidental seismic situations: Maximum: 662.5 t/m
- Accidental situations: Maximum: 662.5 t/m
Tangential stress in the critial punching shear perimeter:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 31.6.3 Maximum: 127.42 t/m
- Persistent situations: Calculated: 12.68 t/m Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Calculated: 16.59 t/m Verified
- Accidental situations: Calculated: 8.97 t/m Verified
Minimum depth: Minimum: 15 cm
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 34.1.2 Calculated: 110 cm Verified
Space to anchor starter bars in foundation: Calculated: 103 cm
Minimum geometric ratio:
- In X direction: Calculated: 0.0014 Verified
- In Y direction: Calculated: 0.0013 Verified
Minimum diameter of the bars:
Criteria of CYPE Minimum: 10 mm
- Bottom reinforcement mesh: Calculated: 12 mm Verified
- Top reinforcement mesh: Calculated: 12 mm Verified
Maximum bar spacing:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.3.3 Maximum: 30 cm
Minimum bar spacing:
Criteria of CYPE Ingenieros Minimum: 10 cm
Page 7
Foundation report
Foundation
Details: 725 x 323 x 110
Anchorage length:
CYPE criteria, based on: 'IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.1' Minimum: 30 cm
Minimum length of the end hooks: Minimum: 19 cm
2.- STRAP BEAM REPORT

2.1.- Description
References Type Geometry Reinforcement

[(C1-C3-C5) - (C2-C6-C4)] VC.S-8.2 Width: 40.0 cm Top: 825
Depth: 100.0 cm Bottom: 825
Skin: 2x212
Stirrups: 1x10@20
[(C1-C3-C5) - (C2-C6-C4)] VC.S-8.2 Width: 40.0 cm Top: 825
Depth: 100.0 cm Bottom: 825
Skin: 2x212
Stirrups: 1x10@20
2.2.- Takeoff
Reference: [(C1-C3-C5) - (C2-C6-C4)] Fe 415 Total
Beam reinf. - Skin reinf. Length (m) 4x7.55 30.20
Weight (kg) 4x6.70 26.81
Beam reinf. - Bottom reinf. Length (m) 8x7.55 60.40
Weight (kg) 8x29.09 232.75
Beam reinf. - Top reinf. Length (m) 8x7.55 60.40
Weight (kg) 8x29.09 232.75
Page 8
Foundation report
Foundation

Beam reinf. - Stirrup Length (m) 22x2.64 58.08
Weight (kg) 22x1.63 35.81
Total Length (m) 58.08 30.20 120.80
Weight (kg) 35.81 26.81 465.50 528.12
(10.00%) Weight (kg) 39.39 29.49 512.05 580.93
Beam reinf. - Skin reinf. Length (m) 4x5.80 23.20
Weight (kg) 4x5.15 20.60
Beam reinf. - Bottom reinf. Length (m) 8x5.80 46.40
Weight (kg) 8x22.35 178.80
Beam reinf. - Top reinf. Length (m) 8x5.80 46.40
Weight (kg) 8x22.35 178.80
Beam reinf. - Stirrup Length (m) 22x2.64 58.08
Weight (kg) 22x1.63 35.81
Total Length (m) 58.08 23.20 92.80
Weight (kg) 35.81 20.60 357.60 414.01
(10.00%) Weight (kg) 39.39 22.66 393.36 455.41
Takeoff summary (including fabrication loss)

(m)
Reference: [(C1-C3-C5) - (C2-C6-C4)] 39.39 29.49 512.05 580.93 1.69 0.17 8.44
Reference: [(C1-C3-C5) - (C2-C6-C4)] 39.39 22.66 393.36 455.41 1.69 0.17 8.44
Total 78.78 52.15 905.41 1036.34 3.38 0.34 16.88
2.3.- Code checks

Reference: VC.S-8.2 [(C1-C3-C5) - (C2-C6-C4)] (Strap beam)
-Dimensions: 40.0 cm x 100.0 cm
-Top reinf.: 825
-Skin reinf.: 2x212
-Bottom reinf.: 825
-Stirrups: 1x10@20
Minimum diameter of stirrups: Minimum: 8 mm
Calculated: 10 mm Verified
Minimum spacing of stirrups: Minimum: 2.5 cm
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.3.2.a Calculated: 19 cm Verified
Minimum spacing longitudinal reinf:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.3.2.a Minimum: 2.5 cm
- Top reinf: Calculated: 3 cm Verified
- Bottom reinf: Calculated: 3 cm Verified
- Skin reinf: Calculated: 23.8 cm Verified
Maximum stirrup spacing:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.1.5 Maximum: 30 cm
- Persistent situations: Calculated: 20 cm Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Calculated: 20 cm Verified
- Accidental situations: Calculated: 20 cm Verified
Page 9
Foundation report
Foundation

-Top reinf.: 825
-Skin reinf.: 2x212
-Bottom reinf.: 825
-Stirrups: 1x10@20
Maximum stirrup separation recommendation for beams resisting
compression due to seismic loads (1) Not applicable
(1) The stirrup separation requirement for bars in compression will not be applied due to
the longitudinal compression reinforcement not being necessary.
Maximum spacing longitudinal reinf: Maximum: 30 cm

- Top reinf:
Criteria of CYPE Ingenieros Calculated: 3 cm Verified
- Bottom reinf:
- Skin reinf:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.1.3 Calculated: 23.8 cm Verified
Minimum stirrup area ratio:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.1.6 Minimum: 4.43 cm/m
- Persistent situations: Calculated: 7.85 cm/m Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Calculated: 7.85 cm/m Verified
- Accidental situations: Calculated: 7.85 cm/m Verified
Minimum geometric ratio tension reinf:
- Bottom reinf. (Persistent situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
- Bottom reinf. (Accidental seismic situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
- Top reinf. (Accidental seismic situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
- Bottom reinf. (Accidental situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
Necessary design reinforcement for tensile load:
Calculated: 83.06 cm
- Persistent situations: Minimum: 0 cm Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Minimum: 2.18 cm Verified
- Accidental situations: Minimum: 0 cm Verified
Necessary design reinforcement for compression load:
- Accidental seismic situations:
Minimum: 0 cm
Calculated: 83.06 cm Verified
Code check of necessary reinforcement for flexure:
- Persistent situations: Bending moment: 50.15 tm
Axial: -0.00 t Verified
See worst case force report in 'Addtional information'.
Verified
- Accidental situations: Bending moment: 35.35 tm
Anchorage length of top bars origin:
The anchorage begins at the axis of the columns Calculated: 70 cm
Page 10
Foundation report
Foundation

-Top reinf.: 825
-Skin reinf.: 2x212
-Bottom reinf.: 825
-Stirrups: 1x10@20
- Accidental seismic situations: Minimum: 67 cm Verified
Anchorage length of bottom bars origin:
Skin reinforcement anchor lengths origin:
Anchorage length of top bars end:
Anchorage length of bottom bars end:
Skin reinforcement anchor lengths end:
Code check of shear:
- Persistent situations: Shear: 1.98 t Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Shear: 16.48 t Verified
- Accidental situations: Shear: 1.60 t Verified
-Top reinf.: 825
-Skin reinf.: 2x212
-Bottom reinf.: 825
-Stirrups: 1x10@20
Page 11
Foundation report
Foundation

Minimum diameter of stirrups: Minimum: 8 mm
Calculated: 10 mm Verified
Minimum spacing of stirrups: Minimum: 2.5 cm
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.3.2.a Calculated: 19 cm Verified
Minimum spacing longitudinal reinf:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.3.2.a Minimum: 2.5 cm
- Top reinf: Calculated: 3 cm Verified
- Bottom reinf: Calculated: 3 cm Verified
- Skin reinf: Calculated: 23.8 cm Verified
Maximum stirrup spacing:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.1.5 Maximum: 30 cm
- Persistent situations: Calculated: 20 cm Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Calculated: 20 cm Verified
- Accidental situations: Calculated: 20 cm Verified
Maximum stirrup separation recommendation for beams resisting
compression due to seismic loads (1) Not applicable
(1) The stirrup separation requirement for bars in compression will not be applied due to
the longitudinal compression reinforcement not being necessary.
Maximum spacing longitudinal reinf: Maximum: 30 cm

- Top reinf:
- Bottom reinf:
- Skin reinf:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.1.3 Calculated: 23.8 cm Verified
Minimum stirrup area ratio:
Code IS 456: 2000. Clause 26.5.1.6 Minimum: 4.43 cm/m
- Persistent situations: Calculated: 7.85 cm/m Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Calculated: 7.85 cm/m Verified
- Accidental situations: Calculated: 7.85 cm/m Verified
Minimum geometric ratio tension reinf:
- Bottom reinf. (Persistent situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
- Bottom reinf. (Accidental seismic situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
- Top reinf. (Accidental seismic situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
- Bottom reinf. (Accidental situations): Calculated: 0.0098 Verified
Necessary design reinforcement for tensile load:
Calculated: 83.06 cm
- Accidental seismic situations: Minimum: 2.18 cm Verified
Page 12
Foundation report
Foundation

-Top reinf.: 825
-Skin reinf.: 2x212
-Bottom reinf.: 825
-Stirrups: 1x10@20
Necessary design reinforcement for compression load:
Minimum: 0 cm
Calculated: 83.06 cm Verified
Code check of necessary reinforcement for flexure:
- Persistent situations: Bending moment: 50.15 tm
See worst case force report in 'Addtional information'.
Verified
- Accidental situations: Bending moment: 35.35 tm
Anchorage length of top bars origin:
Anchorage length of bottom bars origin:
Skin reinforcement anchor lengths origin:
Anchorage length of top bars end:
Anchorage length of bottom bars end:
Skin reinforcement anchor lengths end:
Page 13
Foundation report
Foundation

-Top reinf.: 825
-Skin reinf.: 2x212
-Bottom reinf.: 825
-Stirrups: 1x10@20
Code check of shear:
- Persistent situations: Shear: 1.98 t Verified
- Accidental seismic situations: Shear: 16.48 t Verified
- Accidental situations: Shear: 1.60 t Verified
Page 14
Paragraph: Beam reinforcement report

INDEX
1.- CHAMBER 2
1.1.- Frame 1 2
1.2.- Frame 2 3
Foundation
1.- CHAMBER
1.1.- Frame 1
Frame 1 Span: V-101 Span: V-102 Span: V-103

Section 600x700 600x700 600x700
Zone 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L
Min Moment. [tm] -- -- -0.75 -3.66 -11.21 -22.53 -37.26 -19.88 -10.75
x [m] -- -- 1.20 0.30 0.67 1.20 0.00 0.63 0.98
Max Moment [tm] 3.68 2.03 0.61 2.31 -- -- -- -- --
x [m] 0.00 0.53 0.90 0.00 -- -- -- -- --
Min Shear [t] -3.18 -3.82 -4.80 -20.13 -20.81 -21.79 -- -- --
x [m] 0.30 0.67 1.20 0.30 0.67 1.20 -- -- --
Max Shear [t] -- -- -- -- -- -- 28.10 26.93 26.30
x [m] -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.63 0.98
Min Torsion [t] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
x [m] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Max Torsion [t] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
x [m] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Top Reinf. Area [cm] Real 14.73 16.44 23.77 22.63 25.03 23.85 22.77 22.77 21.42
Page 2
Foundation

Section 600x700 600x700 600x700
Zone 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L
Req
13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 16.41 19.78 13.97 13.97
.
Real 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 13.01
Bot. Reinf. Area [cm] Req
13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 11.38 13.97 13.97
.
Real 15.08 15.08 15.08 31.42 31.42 31.42 31.42 31.42 31.42
Transv. Reinf. [cm/m
Area ] Req
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.52 28.29 28.54
.
0.01 mm, L/91775 (L: 0.07 mm, L/18452 (L: 0.93 mm, L/2783 (L:
Active Defl.
1.20 m) 1.20 m) 2.60 m)
0.01 mm, L/83177 (L: 0.04 mm, L/26924 (L: 0.97 mm, L/2692 (L:
Long Term Defl.
1.20 m) 1.20 m) 2.60 m)
1.2.- Frame 2

Section 600x700 600x700 600x700
Page 3
Foundation
Zone 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L 1/3L 2/3L 3/3L
Min Moment. [tm] -- -- -0.75 -3.66 -11.21 -22.53 -37.26 -19.88 -10.75
x [m] -- -- 1.20 0.30 0.67 1.20 0.00 0.63 0.98
Max Moment [tm] 3.68 2.03 0.61 2.31 -- -- -- -- --
x [m] 0.00 0.53 0.90 0.00 -- -- -- -- --
Min Shear [t] -3.18 -3.82 -4.80 -20.13 -20.81 -21.79 -- -- --
x [m] 0.30 0.67 1.20 0.30 0.67 1.20 -- -- --
Max Shear [t] -- -- -- -- -- -- 28.10 26.93 26.30
x [m] -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.63 0.98
Min Torsion [t] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
x [m] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Max Torsion [t] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
x [m] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Real 14.73 16.44 23.77 22.63 25.03 23.85 22.77 22.77 21.42
Top Reinf. Area [cm] Req
13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 16.40 19.78 13.97 13.97
.
Real 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 14.73 13.01
Bot. Reinf. Area [cm] Req
13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 13.97 11.38 13.97 13.97
.
Real 15.08 15.08 15.08 31.42 31.42 31.42 31.42 31.42 31.42
Transv. Reinf. [cm/m
Area ] Req
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.52 28.29 28.54
.
0.01 mm, L/91775 (L: 0.07 mm, L/18452 (L: 0.93 mm, L/2783 (L:
Active Defl.
1.20 m) 1.20 m) 2.60 m)
0.01 mm, L/83177 (L: 0.04 mm, L/26924 (L: 0.97 mm, L/2692 (L:
Long Term Defl.
1.20 m) 1.20 m) 2.60 m)
Page 4
Paragraph: Beam takeoff report

Beam takeoff report
Foundation
Beam takeoff report

Job: Foundation
Materials:
Concrete: M 25
Steel: Fe 415
Steel Sections:
Rolled and welded: E 250 (Fe 410 W) A , 2548.42 kgf/cm
Cold-formed: A-36, 2548.42 kgf/cm
Type R.top. R.bot. R.skin R.stir. Total 8 10 12 16 25 Vol.conc. L.sect. Wt.sect.

kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg m m kg
Chamber
*Frame 1
V-101(C1-C3) Drpd. 40.5 40.5 4.0 16.0 101.0 20.0 81.0 0.882
V-102(C3-C5) Drpd. 55.8 60.7 6.7 42.5 165.7 6.7 42.5 3.8 112.7 0.756
V-103(C5-C7) Drpd. 31.6 46.8 78.4 46.8 31.6 0.840
Total Frame 1 127.9 101.2 10.7 105.3 345.1 26.7 89.3 3.8 31.6 193.7 2.478
*Frame 2
V-104(C2-C4) Drpd. 40.5 40.5 4.0 16.0 101.0 20.0 81.0 0.882
V-105(C4-C6) Drpd. 55.8 60.7 6.7 42.5 165.7 6.7 42.5 3.8 112.7 0.756
V-106(C6-C8) Drpd. 31.6 46.8 78.4 46.8 31.6 0.840
Total Frame 2 127.9 101.2 10.7 105.3 345.1 26.7 89.3 3.8 31.6 193.7 2.478
Total Chamber 255.8 202.4 21.4 210.6 690.2 53.4 178.6 7.6 63.2 387.4 4.956
Simulated floor
*Frame 1
V-201(C7-C8) MB100 5.38 48.15
*Frame 2
V-202(C5-C6) MB100 5.38 48.15
*Frame 3
V-203(C3-C4) MB100 5.38 48.15
*Frame 4
V-204(C1-C2) MB100 5.38 48.15
*Frame 5
V-205(C1-C3) MB100 1.40 12.53
V-206(C3-C5) MB100 1.40 12.53
V-207(C5-C7) MB100 1.40 12.53
Total Frame 5 4.20 37.59
*Frame 6
V-208(C2-C4) MB100 1.40 12.53
V-209(C4-C6) MB100 1.40 12.53
V-210(C6-C8) MB100 1.40 12.53
Total Frame 6 4.20 37.59
Total Simulated floor 29.92 267.78
Total Job 255.8 202.4 21.4 210.6 690.2 53.4 178.6 7.6 63.2 387.4 4.956 29.92 267.78
- R.top.: Top reinforcement
- R.bot.: Bottom reinforcement
- R.skin: Skin reinf.
- R.stir.: Stirrup reinf.
Page 1
Beam takeoff report
Foundation
Beam takeoff report

Job: Foundation
Materials:
Concrete: M 25
Steel: Fe 415
Steel Sections:
Rolled and welded: E 250 (Fe 410 W) A , 2548.42 kgf/cm
Cold-formed: A-36, 2548.42 kgf/cm
Takeoff summary (+10%)
Type Steel 8 10 12 16 25 Total

kg kg kg kg kg kg
Chamber Fe 415 58.7 196.5 8.4 69.5 426.1 759.2
Total Job 58.7 196.5 8.4 69.5 426.1 759.2
Takeoff summary (Sections)
L.sect. Wt.sect.
m kg
Rolled and welded steel ( E 250 (Fe 410 W) A )
MB
MB100 29.92 267.78
Total Rolled and welded steel ( E 250 (Fe 410 W) A ) 29.92 267.78
Total Job 29.92 267.78
Page 2
Paragraph: Surface and volume takeoff

Foundation

Job: Foundation
* Are not measured: Foundation elements and Strap beams.
Group of Floors Number 0: Foundation

Number of Equal Floors: 1
Total surface: 0.00 m2

Total floor surface: 0.00 m2
Surface area of beams, edge beams and walls on plan: 0.00 m2
Total concrete in beams: 0.00 m3
Total floor volume: 0.00 m3
Group of Floors Number 1: Chamber


Lateral surface of beams, edge beams and walls: 11.71 m2
Beams: 4.96 m3
Group of Floors Number 2: Simulated floor


Page 1
Foundation

Job: Foundation
* Are not measured: Foundation elements and Strap beams.
Job total summary

Lateral surface of beams, edge beams and walls: 11.71 m2
Beams: 4.96 m3
Page 2
Paragraph: Job Takeoff tables

1

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Technical specifications for foundations calculation.

Campus Bhopal, Ahmedabad

TELSTAR TECHNOLOGIES a leading player in the pharmaceutical, medical-hospital

For this reason, we proceeded to perform the

Advanced design of surface foundations

Mat foundations and foundation beams

The seismic analysis is undertaken by means of a complete modal spectral analysis

Figure 1: Layout general (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)

3.1. APPLICABLE STANDARDS

The rules applicable for the calculation are as follows:

Code for the calculation of loads

IS 1983 (Part 1): 2002

3.2. MAIN DIMENSIONS

Figure 2: Camera location (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)

Figure 3: Machine geometry: Front (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)

Figure 4: Machine geometry: Profile (previous drawing calculation. No definitive scheme)

- Height of the supporting columns: 2.90 m.

- N columns: 6 with a rectangular distribution 3 x 2 (X x Y)

- Separation between columns: Sx: 1.80 m Sy: 5.50 m

- Machine support beams in X

- Minimum width upper beam: 0.60 m

The materials from which is designed support structure are:

- Concrete M-25 for foundations, columns and beams

Finally, the geometry of the structure is as follows:

Dimension of track Depth of the

x 2 Tie beam: 100x40cm

x Seismic zone III (Ahmedabad)

- Location: Inside the main building (without wind loads)

Figura 2: Geometry of the support structure

4. COMMENTS ON THE FOUNDATION DESIGN

4.1. SECOND FICTITIOUS FLOOR

The name of this floor is Simulated floor.

Figure 1: Schematic drawing of calculated structure

This metal structure can be seen in the following series of images:

Figure 2: Layouts of calculated structure

Columns n 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 start on the foundation with a rectangular concrete section

Figure 3: Layouts of metallic columns

Figure 4: Layouts of metallic beams

Schematically, the simulated plant is made according to the following distribution of

5.1. CALCULATION ASSUMPTIONS

It is assumed as a parameters for calculating (calculation hypothesis) the machines

Different cases for the vertical earthquake is assumed:

5.2. GRAVITY LOADS

The weight of the structure is considered.

LL: Overload use 0,30T/m2 is assumed on the Chamber

5.3. WEATHER LOADS

5.4. DESIGN HORIZONTAL EARTHQUAKE LOAD

Ahmedabad is in the Zone III.

Figure 6: Map of India -Seismic zones of India

Table 2 Zone Factor, Z

Table 6 Importance Factors, I

The criterion of technical, take 1,5.

R: Response reduction factor, depending on the perceived seismic damage

For medium soil sites:

5.5. DESIGN VERTICAL EARTHQUAKE LOAD

Earthquake-generated vertical inertia forces are to be considered in design unless

5.6. NOMINAL COVER TO MEET SPECIFIED PERIOD OF FIRE RESISTANCE

Minimum values of nominal cover of normal-weight aggregate concrete to be provided to

Fire resistance: R-90

Tensin admisible en situaciones persistentes 1,70 kp/cm

Seismic zone III

This information provided by the customer is in Annex N 1.

7. RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF THESE

7.1. FOUNDATION CHECKS