Approval Code Response Summary

Item Title √ Tick Remark

which
Applicable
To be Filled
by
Approver
Code
1 2 3
1 PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2 x
ESC2 Precast Concrete Structure System Design Report

Total x

Date: 23 Oct 2019

Reviewer Signature:

Alvin Leong
(DDC3)

Approver Signature:

James Stabler David Parks

(DDC3) (LDC)

Note: Code 1 – Accepted

Code 2 – Accepted with comments
Code 3 – Rejected

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 1 of 10
 DOCUMENT / DRAWING REVIEW REQUEST SHEET

Submission / Doc. / Dwg. Title* : ESC2 Precast Concrete Structure System Design Report
Doc. / Dwg. Reference No.* : PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2 Previous DRR No. : -
Doc. / Dwg. Rev.* : 00 TRM / LET Ref. No.* : SSP-MGKT-TRANSMIT-xx
Submission Date* : 23 Oct 2019 Discipline : Structure
DRR Ref.* : SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx DRR Rev. No.* : 00
Reviewer(s)* : DDC3 Head of Department* :
Review Date* : 23 Oct 2019
*Compulsory

Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
a. Refer to Attachment 1a, revise the title of a. Kindly refer the attached revised report a) Typo error in title of the report
General comments for report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
1 b. Please make sure the design brief for the b. Noted b) No comments
Design
report is as per ESC2 info not ESC3 c. Most of our spreadsheets are using RCC,
proposed location. Refer markups We will submit Validation calculation for the c) validation calculation for the in-
c. Please provide manual calculation In–house spreadsheet. house spreadsheet to be submitted
validation to all in-house spreadsheet. d. Kindly refer the attached revised report in this submission
Review and approval of the precast PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
component design calculation can only be e. Yes, we have considered some installation d) No comments
carried with the validation check. Tolerance in the Design (Eg. We have
d. Please label all the appendix title cover allowed 25mm Tolerance in Ring wall e) No comments
e. Please clarify on the required design connection to Slab).
tolerance for installation considered and to f. All our precast surface receiving fresh f) To include mentioned table in
be adopted in actual construction concrete will be “As Cast or As Extruded” as design report
f. Please elaborate in technical terms the stated in Bs 8110 Part 1 Table 5.5.
surface of precast half slab and precast g. Kindly provide seismic load for checking. g) Alan Yu to review
double wall face to receive concrete. The precast design should be equivalent to
Method of preparation of surface in the original design. h) Alan Yu to review
production shall be stated h. Noted.
g. The precast specialist designer please i. Noted. We have updated the Table 6.2 in i) Alan Yu to review
confirm and acknowledge that ancillary the report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page
structure in KVMRT2 project and for ESC2 20. k) Alan Yu to review
are designed for seismic action. Thus, all j. Noted. We have updated the Table 6.2 in
Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 2 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
the member as well as connections the report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page l) No comments
h. The precast specialist designer shall 20.
ensure all proposed connection and the k. Refer to Table 6.1 & Table 6.2 in the
respective precast system are designed to report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page
the equivalent Detail Design Consultant 19&20
structural capacity and stability. l. Refer to Appendix 11 report PJPT-JPT027-
i. From all the design appendixes, it is not GB-ES2-R3A – Comments from DDC3 &
understood on the capacity of the precast Specialist Designer Response
system in comparison to IFC original
design provision. Please provide a
summary showing the precast connection
capacity compare to original connection
capacity
j. Please provide a summary of capacity on
all the connection/zone in which the
effective depth changed
k. Missing Table 6.1 & 6.2
l. DDC3 Comments and Specialist Designer
Response shall be included as part of
Appendix

2 Section 3.2 a. Please refer to markups, review and revise a. Noted. Will update the drawings a) Alan Yu to review
Precast component the necessary to tally with drawing or vice accordingly.
summary versa

3 Section 4.1 a. Table 4.1 on concrete mix design, please a. Noted. a) to amend 4th column name from
Structural Design refer IFC as well as comment on item 2 in strength to “Cube Strength (N/mm2)
Drawing DRR b. Refer the attached revised Table
Parameters
b. Table 4.2, please state the stud/anchor 4.2 in the report PJPT-JPT027-GB- b) No comment
material properties ES2-R3A
c. Please confirm the properties of Mapei c) to change material of grout to
Patch 128. Please confirm the key feature c. The minimum requirement for the approved non-shrink grout material
of the grout and clarify is the grout non- grout material is non-shrink grout with strength >60 MPa. To take out
shrinkage grout with 60MPa. Mapei patch 128
d. Table 4.4, for concrete cover of continuous
slab as per IFC, minimum cover shall be d. Noted. d) To refer IFC general notes on
35mm internal members of underground
structure. Min cover should be
35mm including staircase
4 Section 5.1 a. Please state and indicate that the design of a. Agreed. a) Alan Yu to review
Precast Half Slab the slab shall be based on normal slab
design without any beneficial contribution b. Agreed. b) Alan Yu to review; please revise
Connection
of axial compression forces. Tension force, Figure 5.2 to follow markup
if any, shall be considered c. Both staircase connections for

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 3 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
b. Please note that all connection and joint landing planks and flights are c) Calculate mid landing in respect
and thus the detailing shall be moment 125mm thick. of 125mm effective depth.
connection as per KVMRT2 Design
requirement and original DDC IFC design d. Staircase flight is FFL; whereas, d) Landing to change as SFL.
intent. Please revise staircase landing could be FFL or
c. Please clarify why the staircase Mid SFL. To be adjust at site. e) Please revise to follow IFC
landing precast plank required to be requirements
125mm that causes major loss of effective e. Shall revise to IFC requirements.
depth at connection. Please revise to
minimum
d. Please refer to comment in drawing DRR
with respect to finish level of staircase
e. Section 5.2.4, proposed detail not
acceptable. Please revise to IFC
requirement
5 Section 5.3 a. Section 5.3.1, please justify the non- a. Refer to Appendix a) not include in appendix
Precast Staircase shrinkage grout is able to adhere to a steel
surface. Please state the defined product b. Refer to concrete cover notes b) include table number in DRR
Connection
with product catalogue.
b. Please note that the structure requires c. Refer to Test Result from Suppliers c) No comment
4hours fire rating and the effective non- to be furnished in future
spalling effective concrete cover thickness d) To submit calculation in this
shall be defined d. The starter bars and U-bars shall submission
c. Please note for item 4a and the grout achieve structural continuation. Will
material please provide test results that the submit the calculation in next report e) Figure 5.10 and 5.11 contradict
material is able to sustain the fire rating. with response given
d. Please clarify how the connection shown in e. Structural continuation is through all
figure 5.9 achieve moment connection the starters bars from Precast
continuity Staircase to Mid Landing Topping.
e. Section 5.3.2 Figure 5.10 & 5.11 shown the
staircase and landing are designed with
seating connection without any structural
continuation. Please justify how is this
proposed connection able to sustain
seismic action
6 Appendix 1 a. Precast specialist designer has been a. Noted. a) Alan Yu to review
Precast half slab design - informed previously that all intermediate
slab be designed as normal slab without b. Noted. Shall update accordingly. b) No comment
permanent stage
any beneficial contribution of axial
compression forces. c. No. It is not advisable. c) Double slab to be precast slab
b. Please revise the design and to note that
d. Shall revise the specification.
DDC design do not group B5 to that of B4 d) Calculation contradict with
to B1. e. We have updated our calculation at response. Still shows ‘R’ type
c. Please clarify is the 250mm double slab
the Plank Joint. Refer to attached
below Level B5 is to propose as precast e) Alan Yu to review

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 4 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
system revised calculation Page 32 in the f) Alan Yu to review
d. Design calculation is showing the use of report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
“R” type mild steel reinforcement and in not g) Page is not include in response.
compliance to original design requirement. f. Rebar’s are orthogonal to the Alan Yu to review
Please revise precast joints.
e. Please clarify is the crack width check is on h) No comment
at connection of precast slab plank. If the g. We have updated our calculation at
check is at this connection. There is no the Plank Joint. Refer to attached i) Alan Yu to review
loss of effective depth capture in the revised calculation Page__ in the
design. Please revise. report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A j) missing drawing
f. Crack width check has no consideration of
orientation as well as the depth position of h. Please Elaborate?. k) Alan Yu to review
reinforcement. Please revise and provide.
g. Missing crack width check nor calculation i. Currently checked for the major l) Alan Yu to review
to provide equivalent IFC capacity at direction bending Noted, we have
connection with loss of effective depth. checked for both directions in the m) Alan Yu to review
h. Connection between ring wall to floor slab latest report.
design check are based on wrong rebar n) Please justify through calculation
orientation & provision and calculation is j. Refer to the picture shown in SSP-
not acceptable. Design shall be revised to H-PJPT-UNGW-ESC2-CNS- STS- o) Alan Yu to review
IFC arrangement and check shall be 000130-H01.
carried out with normal beam/slab design p) Alan Yu to review
formula for integrated capacity at k. Noted. Shall revise accordingly.
connection
i. State and show which direction the l. Lattice girder is only serves in
interface shear is checked. Please note temporary condition, Not necessary
that there are always two direction of to comply 0.75 d spacing
shear/moment thus two shear flow design
check. m. It’s not bent up bar, Shear link in the
j. Please provide actual precast half slab girder are inclined in an angle 82 to
plank pictures to show that the produce planks surface.
precast surface
k. Reinforcement anchorage of intermediate n. Not Necessary
slab as well as its orientation shall be as
per IFC and not as per proposed in o. Refer to the appendix 2, In the
drawing. Refer to IFC and revise latest report we have checked the
accordingly plank for moment due to
l. Lattice girder provision as interface shear Construction stage against the
link spacing is more than 0.75d. Please provided reinforcement.
revise.
m. Interface shear link provision is provided in p. Is that necessary? Because we
form of lattice girder where the links is in have shown, bar in the table with
form of bent-up bar. However, the length.
calculation presented seems to suggest
the design remain carried out as per

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 5 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
normal vertical link. Please provide
validation to demonstrate bent-up bar
design
n. With reference to bent-up bar, please
provide check on anchorage and bearing
as per BS 3.3.5.7 and justify as necessary
the design.
o. Referring to comment on Appendix 2
below, please demonstrate that
construction induced moment has been
captured as part of the check.
p. Please clearly indicate the link hook shape
code to be adopted for horizontal ties
7 Appendix 2 a. The design check has been performed with a. Noted We have check the plank a) No comment
Precast half slab design - Cube strength 40MPa for lifting and based on 25mpa refer the attached
temporary stage construction stage operation. No latest report, As stated in the b) Alan Yu to review
information has been provided on drawing SSP-H-PJPT-UNGW-
demolding handling, ESC2-CNS-GEN-000010-H01 ,De- c) Alan Yu to review
stacking/transportation design check that is molding strength is 15 MPa and
inconsistent with Drawing general notes on d) Alan Yu to review
Minimum Installation Strength is
the minimum strength of handling and
25Mpa
installation. Please provide detail method e) No comment
of statement of handle to justify the design b. We have checked the Construction
intent and it has been stated clearly in f) Alan Yu to review
stage inludes load due to wet
drawings to only demould after 40MPa
concrete, Selfwt, Consturction load ,
strength has been achieved. g) Alan Yu to review
b. No check is performed to demonstrate on Please refer to the Appendix 2 in
the services stresses induced due to the report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-
construction stage (self weight + wet R3A
concrete + construction load)
c. No check is performed to show that no c. The handling load is negligible,
crack will be induced during handling compared to the permanent load.
operation
d. Please clarify how the lock-in forces during d. Please Elaborate?
construction stage has been considered e. Yes.
and combined to full permanent stage
forces. The concept on which component f. The temporary support distance is
are designed to take the construction load 1m between each prop. We have
shall be stated in prior section clearly.
carried out the temporary stage
e. All handling comments applicable to all
deflection check. Refer to the
precast component
f. Please carry out deflection check of the attached latest report.
precast plank during construction stable
g. Please extend us the Crack width
and post construction/permanent stage on
limitation according to KVMRT2
the final deflection value to show

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 6 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
compliance. Compliance.
g. Precast half slab plank shall be checked
for crack width limitation to ensure
KVMRT2 compliance and serviceability
stress taking full wet concrete plus
construction load.
8 Appendix 3 a. Please clarify on how the original IFC a. The starter bars drilled in using a) response contradict with
Precast Staircase Design – design intent on continuity and boundary at HILTI and U bars from the precast calculation at page 63
Permanent stage connection can to be achieved by the plank lapped to the drill in bar is
propose only two single nos of small steel supporting 80% load; whereas the b) Alan Yu to review
corbel. welding plate is supporting 20%.
b. Inconsistent staircase design length “b” to c) Alan Yu to review
drawing and to original IFC design. b. Updated in the latest report PJPT-
c. Clarify what is the tensile capacity of corbel JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A. d) Alan Yu to review
d. Please justify the shear capacity of 50k
adopted with reference to test results in c. Please Elaborate? e) Alan Yu to review
Appendix 9
e. Missing staircase nib design, bearing d. Refer to the Test results in the f) Not updated in drawing, response
check, and shear check Appendix 9, Anchor capacity is contradict
f. SSP-H-PJPT-UNGW-ESC2-CNS-RED- 180kN in Shear. But we adopted
000240 please state the minimum required 50kN in the design with FOS of 3.6 g) Alan Yu to review
contact for bearing and design accordingly.
g. It is apparent that the proposed system is e. Please refer the attached revised
of non-equivalent to capacity of original report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
design intent and all connections Page 64.

f. Noted, Updated in the latest

drawing SSP-H-PJPT-UNGW-
ESC2-CNS-RED-000240-H02

g. Our Precast Flight is supported by

the mid landing, whereas the Mid
Landing Spanning between Double
walls in one way direction. We are
confident that our system is
equivalent to IFC.

9 Appendix 4 a.
Precast Staircase Design –
Temporary stage

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 7 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
10 Appendix 5 a. Missing interface shear check and no a. Refer to the attached report PJPT- a) Alan Yu to review
Precast Double Wall design composite action design check. Please JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 74.
– permanent stage provide b) Alan Yu to review
b. Missing shear capacity check of wall at b. Refer to the attached report PJPT-
vertical ties where effective depth is JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 72. c) To be submitted in this
reduced. Please provide submission
c. Crack width design check shall be provided c. Will be included in the next report.
at all calculation where the specialist d, e & f) To be submitted in this
designer reduced the effective depth of d. (f&e) Please note in the report page submission
structure. 20, We have adopted your IFC
d. Design check was carried out for 1 reinforcement in the Precast Double
reinforcement orientation only. Please wall. We have submitted the
provide the horizontal reinforcement calculation based on DDC3 analysis
capacity design check. The wall are report to show composite action
required to design for moment in two between plank and topping. We will
direction as per original design. submit the Horizontal moment
e. Referring to item 5d, please provide check capacity including corner wall
to show the equivalent capacity provision design in the next report.
across wall to wall parallel panel design
f. Please provide calculation of horizontal ties
at all type of profile (L-shape, T-shape,
parallel). Please label and state clearly on
the calculation page which is design for
which type.
11 Appendix 6 a.
Precast Double Wall design
– temporary stage

12 Precast Solid Wall Design a. Please provide design to demonstrate the a. We have attached the solid wall a) Alan Yu to review
adequacy of proposal. Refer also item 9 & calculation in the page 99 of the latest report.
17 in Drawings DRR for comments and b) Alan Yu to review
requirement b Refer to the attached revised report PJPT-
b. Please note that RCW2 (200mm thick wall) JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 20
is part of structural framing as per IFC.
Please provide equivalent structural
capacity and design requirement as well as
the connection of this wall.
13 Appendix 7 a. Incomplete appendix without test setup (Need to initiate the test again…), we will a &b) To submit in this submission
Anchor Plate Test Results and loading detail. Proprietor detail design submit the report in the next report.
and capacity in both shear, tension c) to include in test report
capacity in both SLS & ULS state is unable
to be verified. Deformation capacity is also
not able to be verified
b. The test also missing all the witness and

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 8 of 10
 Doc. / Dwg.
Item Reference No. and Comments Responses (GIBS) Response (IDET) Code
Rev. / Clause
proper properties detail to shown that it is
relevant to proposed system
c. Please clarify on the test compliance to
which code of practice

14 Appendix 8 a. Please clarify exactly where HILTI post drill a. All staircase landing connections to a) No comment
chemical system is to be adopted for the walls, Slab to Ring wall
review. connection.

15 Accidental Load a. Please advice is accidental load a. Refer to specialist designer. a) To be submitted separately by
considered in design for temporary
precast installer
construction stage if not how is the stability
of the system and accidental impact to the
setup can be ensured.
16 Propping/Bracing/Temporary a. Please note it is contractor/specialist a. Refer to specialist designer. a) To be submitted separately by
Support detail and Handling designer responsibility to ensure, design,
precast installer
Design provision and endorse (if necessary). DDC
is only to ensure the impact due to
temporary works is properly captured as
part of permanent works design
17 Staircase a. State the design intent of the finishing face a. Smooth surface. a) No comment
with respect to architectural requirement

18 Workability, constructability
and integrity of the
constructed precast
components
a. Justify on how the narrow precast double
wall with infill of 160mm with lattice girder
with proposed one-piece wall height of up-
to 6m can be constructed without honey
comb, concrete segregation, and ensure
full reinforcement bonding to the proposed
precast connection system of rebar/ties
without gap to surface of precast plank
inner face.
b. Please justify and demonstrate the
shrinkage as well as differential shrinkage
has been considered in the design and no
trace of shrinkage effect calculation is
identified.
a. The concrete pour rate is advised to a) To removed usage of SCC. To be
control to be less than 1.2m per confirmed later.
hour, without poker.
The preferred concrete is self-
compacting concrete. b) No comment
b. Panels are casted in the controlled
environment, differential Shrinkage
effects are negligible in our precast
panels.

Note: Code 1 – Accepted

Code 2 – Accepted with comments

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 9 of 10
 Code 3 – Rejected

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 10 of 10