18-TC5-FD-Potain MD 265-Staitionary Undercarriage - 04-10-2018 PDF

Masri Engineering & Contracting Est.
(MEC) Date: 10/04/2018

P.O Box 45437, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Tel. +971 2 634 6633 Fax +97126346632
TOWER CRANE FOUNDATION DESIGN

Project : AL Falah Residential Complex
Plot No : 1F
Sector : 997
Location : AL Falah, Abu Dhabi
Structural Design Report

Prepared by MEC engineering and contracting EST.
Eng. Bassem Muhanna
TOWER CRANE Potain MD 265 J12
Tower Crane Foundation Design

1 of 28
Masri Engineering & Contracting Est.(MEC) Date: 10/04/2018
1.0.0 GENERAL
1.1.0 Abstract
This report is prepared to address the design calculations for a Tower Crane Foundation.
1.2.0 Brief Structural Description
The tower crane configuration is stationary undercarriage type with a height under the hook
HSC 36.3m, accordingly 4 concrete pads under each corner will be adopted, comprehencive
structural study will be carried on to verify the adequacy of the selected concrete pads
dimensions.
2.0.0 DESIGN DATA
2.1.0 Material Properties
2.1.1 Soil
Bearing capacity of soil is σall ≔ 80
Average Bulk Density γs ≔ 17 ――

3
Friction angle ϕ ≔ 32
(1 − sin (ϕ)))
Active earth pressure coefficient Ka ≔ ――――= 0.307
(1 + sin (ϕ)))
(1 + sin (ϕ)))
Passive earth pressure coefficient Kp ≔ ――――= 3.255
(1 − sin (ϕ)))
Friction Coefficient μ ≔ 0.3
2.1.2 Concrete
Density of the Concrete is: γc ≔ 24.5 ――

3
Characteristic strength of concrete for the foundation is fcu ≔ 45
Cylindrical Concrete strength f'c ≔ 0.8 fcu = 36
2.1.3 Reinforcement Steel
Characteristic strength of reinforcement steel is (Deformed bars) fy ≔ 460
Yield strength of steel for shear calculation fys ≔ 420

2 of 28
2.2.0 Loads
The Tower crane maximum reactions (Working loads) on chassis base Type V60A given by
the crane Instruction manual are as follows.
In-service Out of service
Moment Mi ≔ 0 ⋅ Mo ≔ 0 ⋅
Axial Force Pi ≔ 608 Po ≔ 502

70 135
Horizontal Reaction Hi ≔ ― = 17.5 Ho ≔ ―― = 33.75
4 4
Total Slewing torque Cmax ≔ 276 ⋅
3.0.0 STANDARDS REFERRED
3.1.0 Design codes of practices
BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (ACI 318M-14)

AND COMMENTARY (ACI 318RM-14)
3.2.0 Manuals and Hand books
Structural Foundation Designer's Manual by W.G Curtin, G.Shaw, G.I Parkinson & J.M
Golding.

3 of 28
Case-1 Tower crane in service

4 of 28
4.0.0 SLS Checks
4.1.0 Checks for bearing
The bearing capacity of the soil is σall = 80
Base size B ≔ 3.1 L ≔ 3.1 h ≔ 0.35
Slewing torque is resisted by the dk ≔ h = 0.35

foundation side faces.
Foundation depth df ≔ 1
Weight of the base Wbase ≔ γc ⋅ B ⋅ L ⋅ h = 82.406
Axial Force-P (from the Tower) Pi = 608
Eccentricity of to the Axial Force x direction epx ≔ 0.025
Eccentricity of to the Axial Force y direction epy ≔ 0.025
Moment -M (from the Tower) Mi = 0 ⋅
Horizontal Reaction-H (from the Tower) Hi = 17.5
Total axial load on the footing at SLS T ≔ Pi + Wbase = 690.406
Pi ⋅ epx L
Total Eccentricity of to the Axial Force x eTx ≔ ――― = 0.022 ―= 0.517
direction T 6
Mi + Pi ⋅ epy + Hi ⋅ h B
Total Eccentricity of to the Axial Force eTy ≔ ――――――= 0.031 ―= 0.517
y direction T 6
Hence total Moments on the footing at SLS MTx ≔ T ⋅ eTx = 15.2 ⋅
MTy ≔ T ⋅ eTy = 21.325 ⋅

5 of 28
Figure 4.1 : Extract from Structural Foundation Designer's Manual

As per Figure 4.1,
Maximum pressure beneath the footing can be evaluated as below.
T MTx MTy
σmax ≔ ――+ 6 ―― + 6 ―― = 79.199
B⋅L B⋅L
2
L⋅B
2
Minimum pressure beneath the footing can be evaluated as below.
T MTx MTy
σmin ≔ ――− 6 ―― − 6 ―― = 64.486
B⋅L B⋅L
2
L⋅B
2
The footing is fully in compression and max bearing Pressure on soil is less than the allowable
bearing capacity of the soil.

6 of 28
4.2.0 Checks for sliding
Horizontal reaction from tower crane is resisted by the Footing side face bearing on
the adjacent soil and the friction between the foundation bottom face and the soil:
2
Resisting force to the sliding Hr ≔ B ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ Kp ⋅ γs ⋅ (h) + μ ⋅ T = 217.627
Horizontal Reaction-H (from the Tower) Hi = 17.5

Hr
FOS against sliding ―― = 12.436
Hi
Hence FOS against sliding is adequate.
4.3.0 Checks against overturning

L ⎛L ⎞
Resisting moment Mst ≔ Wbase ⋅ ―+ Pi ⋅ ⎜―− epx⎟ = 1054.929 ⋅
2 ⎝2 ⎠
Overturning moment Mdest ≔ Mi + Hi ⋅ h = 6.125 ⋅
Mst
FOS against overturning ――= 172.233
Mdest
Hence Foundation is safe against overturning.
4.4.0 Checks against Rotation
Slewing torque is resisted by a 2 numbers of a dk = 0.35

Force couple acting on sides of the four footings
as per figure-1
distance between resultant forces at each side lk ≔ 6
available resistance by passive soil pressure
⎛ ⎛ dk ⎞ ⎞
Cr ≔ 2 ⋅ ⎜⎛⎝Kp − Ka⎞⎠ ⎜df − ―⎟ ⋅ γs ⋅ dk ⋅ B⎟ ⋅ lk = 538.199 ⋅
⎝ ⎝ 2⎠ ⎠
Slewing torque Cmax = 276 ⋅
0.5
Torsion Due to eccentricity Ti ≔ Hi ⋅ ⎛⎝epx + epy ⎞⎠
2 2
= 0.619 ⋅
Cr
FOS against rotaion ――――= 1.933
Cmax + 4 ⋅ Ti
Hence Foundation is safe against rotation.

7 of 28
5.0.0 Ultimate Limit State Design
leg base plate FD ≔ 600
Assume a F.O.S of 1.6 at Ultimate Limit State.
The maximum bending moment at tower face can be found as follows.
The Pressure on soil at the base plate side

⎛ σmax ⎛ B F D ⎞⎞
σ1 ≔ ⎜―― ⋅ ⎜―+ epy + ―― ⎟⎟ = 47.902
⎝ B ⎝2 2 ⎠⎠
The Ultimate shear at the base plate side per 1m strip
will be
⎛⎝σ1 + σmax⎞⎠ ⎛ B FD ⎞
Vu ≔ 1.6 ―――― ⋅ ⎜―− epy − ―― ⎟⋅1 = 124.559
2 ⎝2 2 ⎠
the ultimate moment at base plate side
⎛B FD ⎞
⎜―− epy − ―― ⎟
⎝2 2 ⎠
Mu ≔ Vu ⋅ ―――――= 76.292 ⋅
2
(it should be noted that the moment is calculated for a 1m width strip of the footing)

8 of 28
5.1.0 Check the adequacy of the Footing section for flexure:
Design for maximum ultimate bending moment:
Mu = 76.292 ⋅
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Width of strip b ≔ 1000
Depth to tensile reinf dc ≔ 75
Effective depth d ≔ h − dc = 0.275
Depth to comp. reinf d' ≔ 100
Concrete strength f'c ≔ 0.8 fcu = 36
Yield strength of steel fy = 460
Concrete unit weight Wc ≔ 25 ――

3
‾‾‾‾‾
f'c
Modulus of elasticity Ec ≔ 4700 ⋅ ――= 28200
Modulus of elasticity Es ≔ 200000
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
ϕ ≔ 0.9
‖ ⎛ ⎛⎝f'c − 28 ⎞⎠ ⎞ ||
β1 ≔ ‖ if ⎜0.85 − 0.05 ⋅ ――――― ⎟ > 0.85 ||
‖ ⎝ 7 ⎠
||
‖ ‖ β
‖ 1 ← 0.85 ||
‖ ||
⎛ ⎛⎝f'c − 28 ⎞⎠ ⎞
‖ else if 0.85 − 0.05 ⋅ ―――――
⎜ ⎟ < 0.65| |
‖ ⎝ 7 ⎠ ||
‖ ‖ β ← 0.65 ||
‖ ‖
1
||
‖ else ||
‖ ‖⎛ ⎛⎝f'c − 28 ⎞⎠ ⎞ ||
‖ ‖ ⎜0.85 − 0.05 ⋅ ――――― 7
⎟
⎝ ⎠
‖ ‖ ||
β1 = 0.793
0.003
Cmax ≔ ―――――⋅ d = 103.125
(0.003 + 0.005)

9 of 28
amax ≔ β1 ⋅ Cmax = 81.763
Mu = 76.292 ⋅
The depth of the compression block is given by:

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
⎛ 2 2 ⋅ ||Mu|| ⎞
a≔d− ⎜d − ――――― ⎟ = 10.265
⎝ 0.85 ⋅ f'c ⋅ ϕ ⋅ b ⎠
check
a ≤ amax
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is then given by:
Mu 2
Asreq ≔ ――――― = 683
⎛ a⎞
ϕ ⋅ fy ⋅ ⎜d − ―
⎝ 2 ⎟⎠
h 2
Asmin ≔ 0.0025 ⋅ b ⋅ ―= 437.5
2
⎛ ⎛ 4 ⎞⎞ 2
As_req ≔ max ⎜Asreq , min ⎜Asmin , ―⋅ Asreq⎟⎟ = 683
⎝ ⎝ 3 ⎠⎠
2
Used steel: T16@150 As_used ≔ 1353
As_used > As_req

10 of 28
5.2.0 Checks for shear
5.2.1 Check the adequacy of the foundation section for shear:
coefficient of static friction, .

ACI Sec. 11.6.4 defines the coefficient of friction as follows:
For concrete placed monolithically, = 1 4 .

For concrete placed against hardened and deliberately roughened concrete, with surface clean and
roughened to a minimum amplitude of 1/4 in, =1 0 .
For concrete placed against hardened concrete cleaned of laitance, but not roughened, = 0 6 .
For concrete placed against as-rolled, unpainted structural steel, = 0 7 .
The constant is 1.0 for normal weight concrete, 0.85 for sand-lightweight concrete, and 0.75 for
alllightweight concrete.
When shear friction reinforcement with an area of crosses the shear plane at right angles, which
is the usual case, the nominal shear strength is general expression for shear transfer when tensile
shear friction reinforcement crosses the shear plane at an acute angle.
coefficient of static friction: μ ≔ 0.6
shear Strength reduction factor: ϕ ≔ 0.75
Normal weight concrete: λ≔1

2
Area of reinforcement: Av ≔ As_used = 1353
Strip width: b ≔ 1000
section depth: h = 350
Area of concrete section: Ac ≔ b ⋅ h
V1 ≔ λ ⋅ μ ⋅ Av ⋅ fys = 340.956
V2 ≔ 0.2 ⋅ f'c ⋅ Ac = 2520
V3 ≔ (5.5 ) ⋅ Ac = 1925
Vn ≔ min ⎛⎝V1 , V2 , V3⎞⎠
Vn = 340.956
Ultimate shear friction capacity: ϕ ⋅ Vn = 255.717
Ultimate shear Force: Vu = 124.559
Vu < ϕ ⋅ Vn

11 of 28
5.2.2 Check for punching shear:
(Design of punching shear according to ACI318-11)
Material properties:
Concrete compressive strength f'c = 36
Reinforcement yield strength fys ≔ 420
Shear strength reduction factor ϕs ≔ 0.75
Normal weight concrete strength reduction factor: Lm ≔ 1
Applied forces:
Ultimate reaction per leg: Vu ≔ 1.6 ⋅ Pi = 972.8
Ultimate bending moment: Mu1 ≔ 0 ⋅
Section properties:
Footing thickness h = 0.35
Cover to center of steel rebars Cc ≔ 75
Foundation effective depth: d ≔ h − Cc = 0.275
Punching side parallel to bending: b1 ≔ FD + d = 0.875
Punching side perpendicular to bending: b2 ≔ FD + d = 0.875
Punching perimeter of critical section

located at d/2 from Base plate perimeter:b0 ≔ 2 ⎛⎝b1 + b2⎞⎠ = 3500
2
Punching area of critical section Ac ≔ b0 ⋅ d = 962500
⎛b ⋅ d ⋅ ⎛b + 3 b ⎞ + d 3 ⎞
⎝ 1 ⎝ 1 2⎠ ⎠ 3
Modulus of critical section JC ≔ ―――――――― = 287661458.33
3

12 of 28
Applied shear stress:

Portion of unbalanced moment transferred by eccentricity of shear
⎛ 1 ⎞
av ≔ 1 − ⎜――――― = 0.4
⎛ 2⎞⎟
2 ⎛ b ⎞
⎜ ⎜1 + ― ⋅ ⎜―⎟ ⎟ ⎟
1
⎜⎝ ⎝ 3 ⎝ b2 ⎠ ⎠ ⎟⎠
Vu
Direct Shear stress: Vu1 ≔ ―― = 1.011
Ac
Mu1
Indirect shear stress due to unbalanced moment Vu2 ≔ av ⋅ ―― =0
transferred by eccentricity of shear JC
Maximum applied shear stress on critical side of Base plate Vu ≔ Vu1 + Vu2 = 1.011
Check adequacy of foundation effective depth:

‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
vu_max ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ ――⋅ = 2.25
Vu < vu_max
Concrete shear stress for foundation without shear

reinforcement:
FD
pc ≔ ―― =1 ratio of long to short side of Base plate as ≔ 40 interior Base plate
FD
b0
po ≔ ― = 12.727 ratio of punching perimeter to slab effective depth for interior Base plate
d
Concrete shear stress is the minimum of the following three values :
⎛ 2⎞ ‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
Vc1 ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.17 ⋅ ⎜1 + ―⎟ ⋅ Lm ⋅ ――⋅ = 2.295
⎝ pc ⎠
⎛ as ⎞ ‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
Vc2 ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.083 ⋅ ⎜2 + ―⎟ ⋅ Lm ⋅ ――⋅ = 1.921
⎝ po ⎠
‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
Vc3 ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.33 ⋅ Lm ⋅ ――⋅ = 1.485
Vc ≔ min ⎛⎝Vc1 , Vc2 , Vc3⎞⎠ = 1.485
Check Section requirement for shear reinforcement:
Vu = 1.011 Vc = 1.485
Vu < Vc

13 of 28
5.3.0 Check for Crack Width:
Foundation thickness h = 0.35
Width of strip b = 1000
Cover to center of tension reinforcement ct ≔ 75
Cover to center of compression reinforcement cc ≔ 75
Effective depth d ≔ h − ct = 0.275
Concrete strength f'c = 36

‾‾‾‾‾
f'c

Es
Modular ratio n ≔ ― = 7.092
Ec
Mu
Applied service moment Ma ≔ ―― = 47.683 ⋅
1.6
Tension reinforcement:
diameter of tension bars dt ≔ 16
tension bars spacing c/c St ≔ 150

2
dt 2
Area of tension steel per strip width Ast ≔ ⋅ ―― ⋅ 1000 ―― = 1340.413
4 St
Compression reinforcement:
diameter of compression bars dc ≔ 16
Compression bars spacing c/c Sc ≔ 150

2
dt 2
Area of Compression steel per strip width Asc ≔ ⋅ ―― ⋅ 1000 ―― = 1340.413
4 Sc

14 of 28
Section properties at cracking stage

b 1
b1 ≔ ――― = 0.105 ――
⎛⎝n ⋅ Ast⎞⎠
⎛⎝(n − 1) ⋅ Asc⎞⎠
r ≔ ――――― = 0.859
⎛⎝n ⋅ Ast⎞⎠
⎛ ‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
⎛ ⎛ cc ⎞ 2⎞ ⎞
⎜ ⎜2 ⋅ d ⋅ b1 ⋅ ⎜1 + r ⋅ ―⎟ + (1 + r) ⎟ − (1 + r)⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎝ d⎠ ⎠ ⎠
y ≔ ―――――――――――――― = 64.582
b 1
⎛⎝b ⋅ h 3 ⎞⎠ 4
Ig ≔ ――― = 3572916666.67
12
⎛⎝b ⋅ y 3 ⎞⎠ ⎛ 2⎞ 2 4
Icr ≔ ――― + ⎝n ⋅ Ast ⋅ (d − y) ⎠ + (n − 1) ⋅ Asc ⋅ (y − cc) = 511579381.48
3
‾‾‾‾‾
f'c
fr ≔ 0.62 ⋅ ――= 3.72
⎛⎝fr ⋅ Ig⎞⎠
Mcr ≔ ――― = 75.95 ⋅
h
―
2
Stress strain compatibility analysis characteristics
(d − y)
fs ≔ n ⋅ Ma ⋅ ――― = 139.095
Icr
y
fc ≔ Ma ⋅ ― = 6.019
Icr
Calculating crack width
(h − y)
β ≔ ――― = 1.356
(d − y)
⎛ dt ⎞
ctused ≔ min ⎜ct , 50 + ―⎟ = 58 ACI350, clause R10.6.4
⎝ 2⎠
t ≔ 2 ⋅ ⎛⎝ctused⎞⎠ = 116
b t 2
nt ≔ ―= 6.667 ac ≔ b ⋅ ―= 17400
St nt
Gergely-Lutz equation for estimated crack width:

⎛ fs 3 ⎞
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
⎜0.011 ⋅ β ⋅ ―― ⎛⎝ac ⋅ ctused⎞⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Wcrack ≔ ―――――――――― = 0.208 <0.3 mm
1000

15 of 28
Case-2 Tower crane out of service

16 of 28
6.0.0 SLS Checks
6.1.0 Checks for bearing
The bearing capacity of the soil is σall = 80
Base size B = 3.1 L = 3.1 h = 0.35
Slewing torque is resisted by the footing side dk ≔ h = 0.35

faces
Weight of the base Wbase ≔ γc ⋅ B ⋅ L ⋅ h = 82.406
Axial Force-P (from the Tower) Po = 502
Eccentricity of to the Axial Force x direction epx ≔ 0.025
Eccentricity of to the Axial Force y direction epy ≔ 0.025
Moment -M (from the Tower) Mo = 0 ⋅
Horizontal Reaction-H (from the Tower) Ho = 33.75
Hence total axial load on the footing at SLS T ≔ Po + Wbase = 584.406
Po ⋅ epx L
Total Eccentricity of to the Axial Force x eTx ≔ ――― = 0.021 ―= 0.517
direction T 6
Mo + Po ⋅ epy + Ho ⋅ h B
Total Eccentricity of to the Axial Force eTy ≔ ――――――― = 0.042 ―= 0.517
y direction T 6
Hence total Moments on the footing at SLS MTx ≔ T ⋅ eTx = 12.55 ⋅
MTy ≔ T ⋅ eTy = 24.363 ⋅

17 of 28
Figure 4.1 : Extract from Structural Foundation Designer's Manual

As per Figure 4.1,
Maximum pressure beneath the footing can be evaluated as below.
T MTx MTy
σmax ≔ ――+ 6 ―― + 6 ―― = 68.247
B⋅L B⋅L
2
L⋅B
2
Minimum pressure beneath the footing can be evaluated as below.
T MTx MTy
σmin ≔ ――− 6 ―― − 6 ―― = 53.378
B⋅L B⋅L
2
L⋅B
2
The footing is fully in compression and max bearing Pressure on soil is less than the allowable
bearing capacity of the soil .

18 of 28
6.2.0 Checks for sliding
Horizontal reaction from tower crane is resisted by the Footing side face bearing on
the adjacent soil and the friction between the foundation bottom face and the soil:
Hr ≔ B ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ ⎛⎝Kp ⋅ γs ⋅ (h) ⎞⎠ + μ ⋅ T = 361.149

2
Resisting force to the sliding
Horizontal Reaction-H (from the Tower) Ho = 33.75

Hr
FOS against sliding ―― = 10.701
Ho
Hence FOS against sliding is adequate.
4.3.0 Checks against overturning

L ⎛L ⎞
Resisting moment Mst ≔ Wbase ⋅ ―+ Po ⋅ ⎜―− epx⎟ = 893.279 ⋅
2 ⎝2 ⎠
Overturning moment Mdest ≔ Mi + Hi ⋅ h = 6.125 ⋅
Mst
FOS against overturning ――= 145.841
Mdest
Hence Foundation is safe against overturning.
4.4.0 Checks against Rotation
Slewing torque in case of out of service: Cmax ≔ 0 ⋅
no check for rotation is required.

19 of 28
7.0.0 Ultimate Limit State Design
leg base plate width: FD ≔ 0.6
Assume a F.O.S of 1.6 at Ultimate Limit State.
The maximum bending moment at base plate side can be found as follows.
The Pressure on soil at the base plate side

⎛ σmax ⎛ B F D ⎞⎞
σ1 ≔ ⎜―― ⋅ ⎜―+ epy + ―― ⎟⎟ = 41.278
⎝ B ⎝2 2 ⎠⎠
The Ultimate shear at the base plate side per 1m strip will be
⎛⎝σ1 + σmax⎞⎠ ⎛ B FD ⎞
Vu ≔ 1.6 ―――― ⋅ ⎜―− epy − ―― ⎟⋅1 = 107.334
2 ⎝2 2 ⎠
the ultimate moment at base plate side
⎛B FD ⎞
⎜―− epy − ―― ⎟
⎝2 2 ⎠
Mu ≔ Vu ⋅ ―――――= 65.742 ⋅
2
(it should be noted that the moment is calculated for a 1m width strip of the footing)

20 of 28
7.1.0 Check the adequacy of the Footing section for flexure:
Design for maximum ultimate bending moment:
Mu = 65.742 ⋅
Width of strip b ≔ 1000
Depth to tensile reinf dc ≔ 75
Effective depth d ≔ h − dc = 0.275
Depth to comp. reinf d' ≔ 75
Concrete strength f'c ≔ 0.8 fcu = 36
Concrete unit weight Wc ≔ 25 ――

3
‾‾‾‾‾
f'c
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
ϕ ≔ 0.9
‖ ⎛ ⎛⎝f'c − 28 ⎞⎠ ⎞ ||
β1 ≔ ‖ if ⎜0.85 − 0.05 ⋅ ――――― ⎟ > 0.85 ||
‖ ⎝ 7 ⎠
||
‖ ‖ β
‖ 1 ← 0.85 ||
‖ ||
⎛ ⎛⎝f'c − 28 ⎞⎠ ⎞
‖ else if 0.85 − 0.05 ⋅ ―――――
⎜ ⎟ < 0.65| |
‖ ⎝ 7 ⎠ ||
‖ ‖ β ← 0.65 ||
‖ ‖
1
||
‖ else ||
‖ ‖⎛ ⎛⎝f'c − 28 ⎞⎠ ⎞ ||
‖ ‖ ⎜0.85 − 0.05 ⋅ ――――― 7
⎟
⎝ ⎠
‖ ‖ ||
β1 = 0.793
0.003
Cmax ≔ ―――――⋅ d = 103.125
(0.003 + 0.005)

21 of 28
amax ≔ β1 ⋅ Cmax = 81.763
Mu = 65.742 ⋅
The depth of the compression block is given by:

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
⎛ 2 2 ⋅ ||Mu|| ⎞
a≔d− ⎜d − ――――― ⎟ = 8.822
⎝ 0.85 ⋅ f'c ⋅ ϕ ⋅ b ⎠
check
a ≤ amax
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is then given by:
Mu 2
Asreq ≔ ――――― = 587
⎛ a⎞
ϕ ⋅ fy ⋅ ⎜d − ―
⎝ 2 ⎟⎠
h 2
Asmin ≔ 0.0025 ⋅ b ⋅ ―= 437.5
2
⎛ ⎛ 4 ⎞⎞ 2
As_req ≔ max ⎜Asreq , min ⎜Asmin , ―⋅ Asreq⎟⎟ = 587
⎝ ⎝ 3 ⎠⎠
2
Used steel: T16@150 As_used ≔ 1353
As_used > As_req

22 of 28
7.2.0 Checks for shear
7.2.1 Check the adequacy of the foundation section for shear:
coefficient of static friction, .

ACI Sec. 11.6.4 defines the coefficient of friction as follows:
For concrete placed monolithically, = 1 4 .

For concrete placed against hardened and deliberately roughened concrete, with surface clean and
roughened to a minimum amplitude of 1/4 in, =1 0 .
For concrete placed against hardened concrete cleaned of laitance, but not roughened, = 0 6 .
For concrete placed against as-rolled, unpainted structural steel, = 0 7 .
The constant is 1.0 for normal weight concrete, 0.85 for sand-lightweight concrete, and 0.75 for
alllightweight concrete.
When shear friction reinforcement with an area of crosses the shear plane at right angles, which
is the usual case, the nominal shear strength is general expression for shear transfer when tensile
shear friction reinforcement crosses the shear plane at an acute angle.
coefficient of static friction: μ ≔ 0.6
shear Strength reduction factor: ϕ ≔ 0.75
Normal weight concrete: λ≔1

2
Area of reinforcement: Av ≔ As_used = 1353
Strip width: b ≔ 1000
section depth: h = 350
Area of concrete section: Ac ≔ b ⋅ h
V1 ≔ λ ⋅ μ ⋅ Av ⋅ fys = 340.956
V2 ≔ 0.2 ⋅ f'c ⋅ Ac = 2520
V3 ≔ (5.5 ) ⋅ Ac = 1925
Vn ≔ min ⎛⎝V1 , V2 , V3⎞⎠
Vn = 340.956
Ultimate shear friction capacity: ϕ ⋅ Vn = 255.717
Ultimate shear Force: Vu = 107.334
Vu < ϕ ⋅ Vn

23 of 28
7.2.2 Check for punching shear:
(Design of punching shear according to ACI318-11)
Material properties:
Concrete compressive strength f'c = 36
Reinforcement yield strength fys ≔ 420
Shear strength reduction factor ϕs ≔ 0.75
Normal weight concrete strength reduction factor: Lm ≔ 1
Applied forces:
Ultimate reaction per leg: Vu ≔ 1.6 ⋅ Po = 803.2
Ultimate bending moment: Mu1 ≔ 0 ⋅
Section properties:
Footing thickness h = 0.35
Cover to center of steel rebars Cc ≔ 75
Foundation effective depth: d ≔ h − Cc = 0.275
Punching side parallel to bending: b1 ≔ FD + d = 875
Punching side perpendicular to bending: b2 ≔ FD + d = 875
Punching perimeter of critical section

located at d/2 from Base plate perimeter:b0 ≔ 2 ⎛⎝b1 + b2⎞⎠ = 3500
2
Punching area of critical section Ac ≔ b0 ⋅ d = 962500
⎛b ⋅ d ⋅ ⎛b + 3 b ⎞ + d 3 ⎞
⎝ 1 ⎝ 1 2⎠ ⎠ 3
Modulus of critical section JC ≔ ―――――――― = 287661458.33
3

24 of 28
Applied shear stress:

Portion of unbalanced moment transferred by eccentricity of shear
⎛ 1 ⎞
av ≔ 1 − ⎜――――― = 0.4
⎛ 2⎞⎟
2 ⎛ b ⎞
⎜ ⎜1 + ― ⋅ ⎜―⎟ ⎟ ⎟
1
⎜⎝ ⎝ 3 ⎝ b2 ⎠ ⎠ ⎟⎠
Vu
Direct Shear stress: Vu1 ≔ ―― = 0.834
Ac
Mu1
Indirect shear stress due to unbalanced moment Vu2 ≔ av ⋅ ―― =0
transferred by eccentricity of shear JC
Maximum applied shear stress on critical side of Base plate Vu ≔ Vu1 + Vu2 = 0.834
Check adequacy of foundation effective depth:

‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
vu_max ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ ――⋅ = 2.25
Vu < vu_max
Concrete shear stress for foundation without shear

reinforcement:
FD
pc ≔ ―― =1 ratio of long to short side of Base plate as ≔ 40 interior Base plate
FD
b0
po ≔ ― = 12.727 ratio of punching perimeter to slab effective depth for interior Base plate
d
Concrete shear stress is the minimum of the following three values :
⎛ 2⎞ ‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
Vc1 ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.17 ⋅ ⎜1 + ―⎟ ⋅ Lm ⋅ ――⋅ = 2.295
⎝ pc ⎠
⎛ as ⎞ ‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
Vc2 ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.083 ⋅ ⎜2 + ―⎟ ⋅ Lm ⋅ ――⋅ = 1.921
⎝ po ⎠
‾‾‾‾‾
⎛⎝f'c⎞⎠
Vc3 ≔ ϕs ⋅ 0.33 ⋅ Lm ⋅ ――⋅ = 1.485
Vc ≔ min ⎛⎝Vc1 , Vc2 , Vc3⎞⎠ = 1.485
Check section requirement for shear reinforcement:
Vu = 0.834 Vc = 1.485
Vu < Vc

25 of 28
7.3.0 Check for Crack Width:
Foundation thickness h = 0.35
Width of strip b = 1000
Cover to center of tension reinforcement ct ≔ 75
Cover to center of compression reinforcement cc ≔ 75
Effective depth d ≔ h − ct = 0.275
Concrete strength f'c = 36

‾‾‾‾‾
f'c

Es
Modular ratio n ≔ ― = 7.092
Ec
Mu
Applied service moment Ma ≔ ―― = 41.089 ⋅
1.6
Tension reinforcement:
diameter of tension bars dt ≔ 16
tension bars spacing c/c St ≔ 150

2
dt 2
Area of tension steel per strip width Ast ≔ ⋅ ―― ⋅ 1000 ―― = 1340.413
4 St
Compression reinforcement:
diameter of compression bars dc ≔ 16
Compression bars spacing c/c Sc ≔ 150

2
dc 2
Area of Compression steel per strip width Asc ≔ ⋅ ―― ⋅ 1000 ―― = 1340.413
4 St

26 of 28
Section properties at cracking stage

b 1
b1 ≔ ――― = 0.105 ――
⎛⎝n ⋅ Ast⎞⎠
⎛⎝(n − 1) ⋅ Asc⎞⎠
r ≔ ――――― = 0.859
⎛⎝n ⋅ Ast⎞⎠
⎛ ‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
⎛ ⎛ cc ⎞ 2⎞ ⎞
⎜ ⎜2 ⋅ d ⋅ b1 ⋅ ⎜1 + r ⋅ ―⎟ + (1 + r) ⎟ − (1 + r)⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎝ d⎠ ⎠ ⎠
y ≔ ―――――――――――――― = 64.582
b 1
⎛⎝b ⋅ h 3 ⎞⎠ 4
Ig ≔ ――― = 3572916666.67
12
⎛⎝b ⋅ y 3 ⎞⎠ ⎛ 2⎞ 2 4
Icr ≔ ――― + ⎝n ⋅ Ast ⋅ (d − y) ⎠ + (n − 1) ⋅ Asc ⋅ (y − cc) = 511579381.48
3
‾‾‾‾‾
f'c
fr ≔ 0.62 ⋅ ――= 3.72
⎛⎝fr ⋅ Ig⎞⎠
Mcr ≔ ――― = 75.95 ⋅
h
―
2
Stress strain compatibility analysis characteristics
(d − y)
fs ≔ n ⋅ Ma ⋅ ――― = 119.86
Icr
y
fc ≔ Ma ⋅ ― = 5.187
Icr
Calculating crack width
(h − y)
β ≔ ――― = 1.356
(d − y)
⎛ dt ⎞
ctused ≔ min ⎜ct , 50 + ―⎟ = 58 ACI350, clause R10.6.4
⎝ 2⎠
t ≔ 2 ⋅ ⎛⎝ctused⎞⎠ = 116
b t 2
nt ≔ ―= 6.667 ac ≔ b ⋅ ―= 17400
St nt
Gergely-Lutz equation for estimated crack width:

⎛ fs 3 ⎞
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
⎜0.011 ⋅ β ⋅ ―― ⎛⎝ac ⋅ ctused⎞⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Wcrack ≔ ―――――――――― = 0.179 <0.3 mm
1000

27 of 28
8.0.0 Conclusion:
The analysis and design of the crane foundation was carried out as per applicable codes
based on the loads and reactions of the tower crane as provided in the crane
datasheets, accordingly, The tower crane foundation with dimensions B = 3.1 ,
L = 3.1 & h = 0.35 was found to be structural adequate and safe to withstand the
tower crane reactions.

28 of 28
8.0 CHOICE OF SUITABLE TYPE OF FOUNDATION & RECOMMENDATIONS
The suitable type of foundations for a given structure depends mostly on the character of the
soil, the presence of the water at the site and the magnitude of the imposed loads and project
characteristics.
The following site surface and subsurface conditions, project characteristics and the results of
the field and laboratory tests are considered in choosing the appropriate foundations. For this
particular site:
1. It is proposed to construct Al Falah Plaza Residential Complex.

2. Medium dense to dense, sandy layer encountered at a depth of 1.5m to 5.5m below
the existing ground level (made ground).
3. Rock layer was encountered at a depth of 4.5m to 6.0mm and up to the end of boring
20.0m below the existing ground level.
Therefore, the recommended suitable type of foundation to be used for the main structures,
project is deep (pile) foundation. For light weight structures & boundary wall, shallow
foundation could also be used.
* Suspended Slab or Slab on grade could also be used.

* The foundation shall be protected by using water proof membrane or bitumen coating.
8.1. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS FOR LIGHT WEIGHT STRUCTURE (Boundary Wall)
Based on the results of the Standard Penetration Test and the equations presented before, it is
recommended to lay the foundation of the proposed boundary wall at a depth not shallower than
1.0m below the existing ground level considering a factor of safety of three (F.S=3) against shear
failure and total settlement not exceeding 25.0mm. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure
value of 80 kPa could be used for the design of the foundation.
Foundation ground should be compacted to a degree of compaction not less than 95 percent
of its maximum dry density as obtained by modified proctor test (ASTM D-1557).
8.2 DEEP PILE FOUNDATION (PILES ON ROCK)
8.2.1. Pile Bearing Capacity
Based on the results of the unconfined compressive strength for intact rock and the equations
presented before the estimated ultimate unit skin friction and base resistance of ground materials are
presented in Table No.2 and the allowable working loads of piles considering factor of safety 3.0 are
presented in Table No.3.
18
S17.SI.0243

18-TC5-FD-Potain MD 265-Staitionary Undercarriage - 04-10-2018 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

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

18-TC5-FD-Potain MD 265-Staitionary Undercarriage - 04-10-2018 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Masri Engineering & Contracting Est.

(MEC) Date: 10/04/2018

TOWER CRANE FOUNDATION DESIGN

Structural Design Report

TOWER CRANE Potain MD 265 J12

Tower Crane Foundation Design

1.2.0 Brief Structural Description

2.0.0 DESIGN DATA

2.1.0 Material Properties

Bearing capacity of soil is σall ≔ 80

Average Bulk Density γs ≔ 17 ――

Density of the Concrete is: γc ≔ 24.5 ――

Characteristic strength of concrete for the foundation is fcu ≔ 45

Cylindrical Concrete strength f'c ≔ 0.8 fcu = 36

2.1.3 Reinforcement Steel

Characteristic strength of reinforcement steel is (Deformed bars) fy ≔ 460

Yield strength of steel for shear calculation fys ≔ 420

Tower Crane Foundation Design

Axial Force Pi ≔ 608 Po ≔ 502

3.0.0 STANDARDS REFERRED

3.1.0 Design codes of practices

BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (ACI 318M-14)

3.2.0 Manuals and Hand books

Tower Crane Foundation Design

Case-1 Tower crane in service

Tower Crane Foundation Design

4.0.0 SLS Checks

4.1.0 Checks for bearing

The bearing capacity of the soil is σall = 80

Base size B ≔ 3.1 L ≔ 3.1 h ≔ 0.35

Slewing torque is resisted by the dk ≔ h = 0.35

Weight of the base Wbase ≔ γc ⋅ B ⋅ L ⋅ h = 82.406

Axial Force-P (from the Tower) Pi = 608

Eccentricity of to the Axial Force x direction epx ≔ 0.025

Eccentricity of to the Axial Force y direction epy ≔ 0.025

Moment -M (from the Tower) Mi = 0 ⋅

Horizontal Reaction-H (from the Tower) Hi = 17.5

Total axial load on the footing at SLS T ≔ Pi + Wbase = 690.406

Hence total Moments on the footing at SLS MTx ≔ T ⋅ eTx = 15.2 ⋅

MTy ≔ T ⋅ eTy = 21.325 ⋅

Tower Crane Foundation Design

Figure 4.1 : Extract from Structural Foundation Designer's Manual

Maximum pressure beneath the footing can be evaluated as below.

Minimum pressure beneath the footing can be evaluated as below.

Tower Crane Foundation Design

4.2.0 Checks for sliding

Horizontal Reaction-H (from the Tower) Hi = 17.5

4.3.0 Checks against overturning

4.4.0 Checks against Rotation

Slewing torque is resisted by a 2 numbers of a dk = 0.35

Tower Crane Foundation Design

5.0.0 Ultimate Limit State Design

leg base plate FD ≔ 600

Assume a F.O.S of 1.6 at Ultimate Limit State.

The maximum bending moment at tower face can be found as follows.

The Pressure on soil at the base plate side

Tower Crane Foundation Design

5.1.0 Check the adequacy of the Footing section for flexure:

Design for maximum ultimate bending moment:

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Width of strip b ≔ 1000

Depth to tensile reinf dc ≔ 75

Effective depth d ≔ h − dc = 0.275