Dea Report

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 56

Turbo Engineering Limited

…………..For better future through innovation

Detailed Engineering Assessment (DEA)


OF
Existing Single storied Boiler, Sub-station & Generator Building
At Golakandail, Bhulta, Rupganj, Narayanganj, Bangladesh.

Factory Name: HARUN COMPOSITE MILLS LTD.

Name of the Submitting Engineer Submitted By:


Engr. Abdul Jabber Miah Turbo Engineering Limited
DMINB/CE-0460; MIEB-31825 Road #04, House-#43, Block-E, Banasree, Rampura,
Sr. Structural Engineer Dhaka-1219,
Mobile: +8801743681607,
Turbo Engineering Limited E-mail:ajabbersa@gmail.com,
turboengineeringltd@gmail.com

March, 2024
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Report On Existing Single storied Boiler, Sub-station &


Generator Building At Golakandail, Bhulta, Rupganj,
Narayanganj, Bangladesh.
Assessment carried out by Engr. Abdul Jabber Miah
B.Sc.Engr. (Civil), (DUET)-2010
Member of IEB-31825,
DMINB-0460
Sr Structural Engineer

Engr. Ronok Islam


B.Sc. Engr. (Civil, DUET)

Engr. Md. Al-Mamun


B.Sc. Engr. (Civil, SUB)
Date of submission of report: March 21, 2024

1|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Contents
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER I .................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 About this Report..................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Present Conditions and Basic Information of the Buildings ........................................ 5
CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................................................................................. 6
DESIGN CRITERIA.................................................................................................................................................................. 6
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Building Classification................................................................................................. 6
2.3 Code and Standard ....................................................................................................... 6
2.4 Type of Foundation ...................................................................................................... 6
2.5 Structural Form ............................................................................................................ 6
2.6 Material and other properties ....................................................................................... 7
2.7 Loads ............................................................................................................................ 7
2.8 Story Drifts................................................................................................................. 12
2.9 Maximum Lateral displacement: ............................................................................... 14
2.10 Torsional Irregularity ............................................................................................... 17
2.11 Design Method ......................................................................................................... 17
2.12 Software and Computer Program............................................................................. 17
CHAPTER III .............................................................................................................................................................................. 18
FINITE ELEMENT COMPUTER MODELING ........................................................................................................................... 18
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 18
3.2 Finite Element Model ................................................................................................ 18
CHAPTER IV.............................................................................................................................................................................. 22
Feasibility Check of structural member................................................................................................................................ 22
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 22
4.2 Feasibility check of Foundation ................................................................................. 22
4.2.1 Existing Foundation Adequacy Check.................................................................... 22
4.3 Column Adequacy check ........................................................................................... 26
4.4 Adequacy check of beam ........................................................................................... 30
4.6 Flexural Adequacy check of slab: .............................................................................. 33
CHAPTER V............................................................................................................................................................................... 35
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................................................................. 35
5.1 Conclusion & Recommendation: ............................................................................... 35

2|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

ABSTRACT

The Factory building for Harun Composite Mills Limited is a single storied structure. RCC roof is available
with two slab in Sub-station and Generator portion. But light weight non engineering steel shed is available
on boiler portion. So it is proposed to replace the non-engineering shed by RCC slab. Assessment of this
structure is ensured considering BNBC-2006.
At the end of the report we have the followings-

 Lateral displacement limit of this structure is within allowable limit.


 In as built condition some columns does not have adequate strength. So few more column need to
be strengthen. For details see retrofitting drawing.
 In As built condition flexural reinforcement of all grade beams & floor beams are sufficient to carry
proposed load. Proposed load should be posted in all story maintained by factory authority.
 Floor slab are capable to carry applied live load.

Detailed calculation and analysis has been described in the rest of the report.

3|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 About this Report

This report presents the structural evaluation of the building; including overall structural behavior of the building as
well as code based design review of the building. The first chapter describes introduction of the project. The second
chapter presents the design review criteria. The third chapter describes the finite element analysis of the structure.
The fourth chapter discusses the feasibility check of the structural member. The fifth chapter includes conclusions
and recommendations.

4|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

1.2 Present Conditions and Basic Information of the Buildings

The consultant team visited the building and took notes on its structural features. The visual appearance of the
structure was found good. There is no significant sign of distress on the visible portion of the structural members.
The basic information of the building-is as follows:
 Building Usage Type : Generator, RMS, Substation and Boiler.
 Structural System : RC Beam-Column frame.
 Floor System : RC beam slab & non engineering shed.
 Floor Area : 3346 sft (Approx.)
 No. of Stories : Single storied
 Floor Load : Floor finish 25psf, live load of roof 33psf
 Foundation Type : Shallow foundation.
 Geotechnical Report : Available.
 Construction Materials : Reinforced Concrete (brick)
 Occupancy

5|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

CHAPTER II
DESIGN CRITERIA

2.1 Introduction
A structure shall ordinarily be described as an assemblage of framing members and components arranged to support
both gravity and lateral force. Structure may be classified as building structure and non-building structure. Structure
that enclose a space and are used for various occupancies shall be called building structure (BNBC). The chapter
deals with the analysis and design criteria of the building.

2.2 Building Classification


Occupancy Classification:
Occupancy G: Industrial Building.
According to Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC 2.1.7), 2006, the building is lightly loaded industrial
building (occupancy G).

2.3 Code and Standard


 Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), 2006
 Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-99)
 American Society for Testing & Materials (ASTM)
 “Structural Welding code –Reinforcing Steel’’ (AWS D1.4) of the American Welding Society.
 Uniform Building Code (UBC), 1994
 United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNDO), 1983
 ACCORD, 2013 Standard

2.4 Type of Foundation


The foundation system consists of individual column footing and combined footing. Depth of foundation from EGL
= 6’-0”

2.5 Structural Form


This structure is a beam column connected RCC moment resisting frame structure without shear wall. According to
detailing of existing structure it has been adopted that this structure is an Ordinary Moment Resisting Frame (OMRF)
structure.

6|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.6 Material and other properties


The material strength plays a vital role in design of building structure. And the strength-deformation characteristics
of the building structures depend largely on the stress strain characteristics of the materials. The materials strengths
are considered in the design of the building structure are as follows:

Strength of concrete: Compressive strength of concrete is 2040 psi.(Minimum strength according to NTPA Guideline)

2.7 Loads
The following loads are considered to review the building design:

2.7.1 Dead Loads


Dead load is the gravitational load due to the self-weight of structural and non-structural components of a building
e.g., Columns, beams, structural walls, floors, ceilings, floor finishing, permanent partitions and fixed service
equipment etc.
Permanent dead loads are:

a) Self-weight of structural members


b) Floor finish = 25psf
c) Permanent Partition wall = as per architectural drawings
d) Outer beam line load (wall load) =as per architectural drawings
Unit weight of materials and the calculation of design dead load shall be according to Section 2.2, Chapter- 2, and
Part – 6 of BNBC 2006.

2.7.2 Live Loads


Live load of the roof has been considered 33psf.

7|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.7.3 Wind Loads

The calculation of Wind Load as per Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC) the following equation will be
used to estimate sustained wind pressure on the building:

Sustained Wind pressure, qz = Cc CICzVb2

Where, qz = Sustained Wind Pressure at height z, kN/m2

CI = 1.0 (structural importance coefficient, table 6.2.9 of BNBC)

Cc = Velocity-to-Pressure conversion coefficient = 47.2x10-6

Cz = Combined height and exposure coefficient

Vb = 195 km/h for Narayanganj, basic wind speed in km/h.

The design Wind Pressure, pz = CgCp qz

Where, pz = design wind pressure at height z , kN/m2

Cg = gust coefficient which shall be Gz , Gh, or G

Cp = pressure coefficient for structures or components

qz = sustained wind pressure

Calculation of Wind Load Coefficient


X- Direction Y- Direction
h (ft) 19 h (ft) 19
B (ft) 118 B (ft) 32.00
L (ft) 32.00 L (ft) 118
h/B 0.16 h/B 0.59
L/B 0.27 L/B 3.69
Windward,
1.41 Windward, Cp 1.10
Cp

8|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.7.4 Earthquake Load:


Earth quake Load:
As per specifications of BNBC, Part-6, Chapter-2, section-2.5.51, Equivalent Static Force Method can be applied to
calculate the earthquake force of this structure.
Design Base Shear, V=ZICW/R (Ref. Sec2.5.6.1, Chapter-2, Part-6, BNBC)
Where,
Z (Seismic Zone coefficient factor) =0.15
I (Importance factor) =1.0
C=Numerical Co-efficient,
R (Response Modification factor) =5 (Ordinary Moment Resisting Frame)
Site co-efficient, S=1.5

Base shear check:


V=ZIC/R*W
Where, C=1.25S/T (2/3)
T=Ct*(hn) (3/4)
=0.073*(7.6219)(3/4)=0.334 sec
So, C=1.25*1.5/ (0.334) (2/3)
=3.895, The value of C cannot exceed 2.75, So we have to use 2.75. (BNBC 2006 section-2.5.6)
V=0.15*1.0*2.75/5*W
=0.0825W
Total seismic load, W=DL=1369.748 kip
So, V=0.0825*1369.748 =113.00421 KIP
Program calculated base shear, V (program) =113.004 (From model)

9|Page
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.7.5 Load Combinations


The following Load combinations are considered for structural design

Name Load Case/Combo Scale Factor Type


BNBC(2006)-1 Dead 1.4 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-2 Dead 1.4 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-2 Live 1.7
BNBC(2006)-3 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-3 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-3 Wx (BNBC2006) 1.275
BNBC(2006)-4 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-4 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-4 Wx (BNBC2006) -1.275
BNBC(2006)-5 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-5 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-5 Wy (BNBC2006) 1.275
BNBC(2006)-6 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-6 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-6 Wy (BNBC2006) -1.275
BNBC(2006)-7 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-7 Wx (BNBC2006) 1.275
BNBC(2006)-8 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-8 Wx (BNBC2006) -1.275
BNBC(2006)-9 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-9 Wy (BNBC2006) 1.275
BNBC(2006)-10 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-10 Wy (BNBC2006) -1.275
BNBC(2006)-11 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-11 Wx (BNBC2006) 1.3
BNBC(2006)-12 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-12 Wx (BNBC2006) -1.3
BNBC(2006)-13 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-13 Wy (BNBC2006) 1.3
BNBC(2006)-14 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-14 Wy (BNBC2006) -1.3
BNBC(2006)-15 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-15 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-15 Ex (BNBC2006) 1.4025
BNBC(2006)-16 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-16 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-16 Ex (BNBC2006) -1.4025
BNBC(2006)-17 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-17 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-17 Ey (BNBC2006) 1.4025
BNBC(2006)-18 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-18 Live 1.275
BNBC(2006)-18 Ey (BNBC2006) -1.4025

10 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

BNBC(2006)-19 Dead 1.05 Linear Add


BNBC(2006)-19 Ex (BNBC2006) 1.4025
BNBC(2006)-20 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-20 Ex (BNBC2006) -1.4025
BNBC(2006)-21 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-21 Ey (BNBC2006) 1.4025
BNBC(2006)-22 Dead 1.05 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-22 Ey (BNBC2006) -1.4025
BNBC(2006)-23 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-23 Ex (BNBC2006) 1.43
BNBC(2006)-24 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-24 Ex (BNBC2006) -1.43
BNBC(2006)-25 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-25 Ey (BNBC2006) 1.43
BNBC(2006)-26 Dead 0.9 Linear Add
BNBC(2006)-26 Ey (BNBC2006) -1.43

Where, DL = Dead Load, LL = Live Load, W = Wind Load.

The following Load combinations are considered for serviceability check

Name Load Case/Combo Scale Factor Type


DL+0.5LL+0.7Wx Dead 1 Linear Add
DL+0.5LL+0.7Wx Live 0.5
DL+0.5LL+0.7Wx Wx (BNBC2006) 0.7
DL+0.5LL-0.7Wx Dead 1 Linear Add
DL+0.5LL-0.7Wx Live 0.5
DL+0.5LL-0.7Wx Wx (BNBC2006) -0.7
DL+0.5LL+0.7Wy Dead 1 Linear Add
DL+0.5LL+0.7Wy Live 0.5
DL+0.5LL+0.7Wy Wy (BNBC2006) 0.7
DL+0.5LL-0.7Wy Dead 1 Linear Add
DL+0.5LL-0.7Wy Live 0.5
DL+0.5LL-0.7Wy Wy (BNBC2006) -0.7

11 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.8 Story Drifts


Section 1.5.6 part 6 of BNBC (also UBC 94) will be adapted to calculate drift. Story drift limit, Δ shall be determined
as follows:
0.04ℎ
∆≤ ≤ 0.005ℎ 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇 < 0.70 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑
𝑅
0.03ℎ
∆≤ ≤ 0.004ℎ 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇 ≥ 0.70 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑
𝑅
Where,
H =Height of the building in meter.
Period T is the same as used in calculation of earthquake loads.
T=Ct*(hn) (3/4)
=0.073*(7.6219) (3/4) =0.334 sec<0.70 sec
Allowable drift ratio =0.005

EQX:

Maximum drift=0.003<0.005; Hence okay

12 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

EQY:

Maximum drift=0.005<0.005; Hence okay

13 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.9 Maximum Lateral displacement:

For lateral displacement the following load combination has been considered

Load combination= DL+0.5LL+0.70WL

Allowable displacement=h/500=25*12/500=0.6 in

DL+0.5LL+0.70WX

Maximum displacement=0.2070 in<0.6 in; Hence okay

14 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

DL+0.5LL-0.70WX

Maximum displacement=0.0871 in<0.6 in; Hence okay

15 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

DL+0.5LL+0.70WY

Maximum displacement=0.2070n<0.6n; Hence okay

DL+0.5LL-0.70WY

Maximum displacement=0.0871 in<0.6 in; Hence okay

16 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

2.10 Torsional Irregularity

Torsion irregularity to be considered for rigid floor diaphragms, when the maximum storey drift (Δmax), computed
including accidental torsion, at one end of the structure is more than 1.2 times the average of the storey drifts (Δavg)
at the two ends of the structure (Ref. Table 6.1.4, Chapter-1, Part-6, BNBC 2006)

Table: Torsional irregularity check

Max Avg
Load Directi
Story Displacement Displacement Ratio Comment
Case/Combo on
in in

ROOF Ex (BNBC2006) 1 X 0.907011 0.856184 1.059 Regular

ROOF Ey (BNBC2006) 1 Y 1.287526 1.285652 1.001 Regular

2.11 Design Method

R.C Structure: Ultimate Strength Design (USD) method (Chapter 6, Part 6 of BNBC 2006) will be adopted for design
/check of all R.C structural member/elements.

2.12 Software and Computer Program

ETABS 2016 will be utilized for analysis and design of structure. Moreover, customized programs for Wind using
spread sheets e.g. MS Excel will also be used for analysis and design checking of some elements.

17 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

CHAPTER III
FINITE ELEMENT COMPUTER MODELING

3.1 Introduction

Prior to the finite element computer modeling of the building, the original functional, structure & other drawing
geotechnical reports have reviewed. Full three dimensional finite element computer models are created to investigate
the behavior & response of the structure under applied loads.

3.2 Finite Element Model

Three dimensional (3D) finite elements model with appropriate finite element is created in ETABS 2016. The model
is comprised of frame, shell and plate elements to represent structural components.

Fig.3.1: Three Dimensional Finite Element Model

18 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

3.2.1 Slab Model

All RCC panels are modeled as shell element.

3.2.2 Beam Model

All beams are modeled as beam element connecting the column elements to produce a rigid frame.

Fig.3.2: Roof beam slab in ETABS model

19 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

3.2.3 Column Model

All columns are modeled as column element connecting with the beams at floor level rigidly to produce frame.

Fig.3.3: Column layout in ETABS model

20 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

3.2.4 Foundation Model

The isolated column footings are modeled as pined support.

Fig.3.4: Support points no. in ETABS model

21 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

CHAPTER IV
Feasibility Check of structural member

4.1 Introduction

The design review of primary structural members is performed in accordance with the code based procedure. This
chapter discusses the present condition and safety margin of the structural elements.

4.2 Feasibility check of Foundation

4.2.1 Existing Foundation Adequacy Check

A sub-soil investigation report having eight bore holes (based on SPT) is available for foundation checking. Allowable
Bearing capacity of shallow foundation is 1.612 ksf considering a factor of safety, FS=2.5 From the load calculation
in each supporting points, it is seen that some footing having FS with respect to soil capacity is less than 2.5. So, that
footing required strengthening. For details see retrofitting drawing.

22 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

23 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Table: FOS of footing (Existing condition)

Allowable Bearing Capacity of soil , qa= 1.61 ksf (FOS= 2.50 )


Check factor of safety of footing

Area of Footing (sft)


Gravity load
Joint Label

Footing ID

Remark
Current FOS
DL+LL (kip)
23 F2 42.25 63.2 2.7 ADEQUATE
24 F2 42.25 62.9 2.7 ADEQUATE
20 29.7
CF1 60 2.5 ADEQUATE
21 67.0
22 F3 56.25 75.9 3.0 ADEQUATE
18 F3 56.25 80.7 2.8 ADEQUATE
19 F3 56.25 80.3 2.8 ADEQUATE
13 51.5
CF1 60 2.5 ADEQUATE
16 46.2
14 F2 42.25 55.7 3.1 ADEQUATE
17 F2 42.25 59.1 2.9 ADEQUATE
15 F1 30 34.9 3.5 ADEQUATE
10 F3 56.25 74.8 3.0 ADEQUATE
11 F3 56.25 84.8 2.7 ADEQUATE
12 F3 56.25 72.2 3.2 ADEQUATE
7 F3 56.25 51.2 4.4 ADEQUATE
8 F3 56.25 49.4 4.6 ADEQUATE
9 F3 56.25 46.6 4.9 ADEQUATE
4 F3 56.25 78.8 2.9 ADEQUATE
5 F3 56.25 87.1 2.6 ADEQUATE
6 F3 56.25 78.8 2.9 ADEQUATE
1 F3 56.25 52.9 4.3 ADEQUATE
2 F3 56.25 67.7 3.4 ADEQUATE
3 F3 56.25 53.1 4.3 ADEQUATE

24 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Table: Punching Check (As built Condition)


f’c= 2.045 ksi

Factored
Area of Column Thickness Punching Concrete
Node Footing Column Load
footing size(inch) of Footing load capacity Comment
Point 1.4DL+1.7LL
ID ID sqft (kips) b h (inch) (kips) (kips)
23 F2 RC1 42.25 74.69 15 24.5 14 63.36 208.03 Ok
24 F2 RC1 42.25 96.19 15 24.5 14 81.6 208.03 Ok
20 RC1 74.87 15 24.5 67.91 159.14 Ok
CF1 60 12
21 RC1 111.68 15 24.5 101.29 159.14 Ok
22 F3 RC1 56.25 124.83 15 24.5 16 108.66 261.85 Ok
18 F3 RC1 56.25 111.65 15 24.5 16 97.18 261.85 Ok
19 F3 RC1 56.25 72.79 15 24.5 16 63.36 261.85 Ok
13 C1 71.90 15 18 66.51 141.15 Ok
CF1 60 12
16 RC1 66.25 15 24.5 60.09 159.14 Ok
14 F2 C1 42.25 105.89 15 18 14 92.77 186.05 Ok
17 F2 RC1 42.25 121.48 15 24.5 14 103.06 208.03 Ok
15 F1 C1 30 102.23 15 18 12 86.9 141.15 Ok
10 F3 RC2 56.25 72.47 15 27.5 16 62.32 273.84 Ok
11 F3 RC2 56.25 79.87 15 27.5 16 68.69 273.84 Ok
12 F3 C1 56.25 49.11 15 18 16 43.85 235.86 Ok
7 F3 C1 56.25 66.05 15 18 16 58.97 235.86 Ok
8 F3 C1 56.25 83.69 15 18 16 74.72 235.86 Ok
9 F3 C1 56.25 115.06 15 18 16 102.73 235.86 Ok
4 F3 RC2 56.25 114.47 15 27.5 16 98.45 273.84 Ok
5 F3 RC2 56.25 41.55 15 27.5 16 35.74 273.84 Ok
6 F3 RC2 56.25 96.09 15 27.5 16 82.64 273.84 Ok
1 F3 C1 56.25 108.02 15 18 16 96.45 235.86 Ok
2 F3 RC2 56.25 89.22 15 27.5 16 76.73 273.84 Ok
3 F3 C1 56.25 88.91 15 18 16 79.39 235.86 Ok

25 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

4.3 Column Adequacy check

Fig.3.3: Column layout in ETABS model

Table: Column PMM Envelope (as-built condition)

Concrete Column PMM Envelope (As built condition)


Label Story Section Location PMM Combo PMM Ratio or Rebar % Comment
C2 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.625 Ok
C4 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.327 Ok
C6 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.621 Ok
C8 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.52 Ok
C10 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.441 Ok
C12 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.515 Ok
C14 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.321 Ok

26 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

C15 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.671 Ok


C18 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.32 Ok
C20 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.472 Ok
C22 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.403 Ok
C24 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.457 Ok
C26 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-23 0.411 Ok
C28 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.461 Ok
C30 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.503 Ok
C32 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.694 Ok
C34 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.836 Ok
C36 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.581 Ok
C38 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.661 Ok
C40 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.896 Ok
C42 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.932 Ok
C44 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.586 Ok
C46 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 1.063 Not Ok
C48 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 1.046 Ok
C2 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 0.736 Ok
C4 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.989 Ok
C6 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 0.747 Ok
C8 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 1.043 Ok
C10 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 1.569 Not Ok
C12 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 1.059 Not Ok
C14 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.895 Ok
C18 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.895 Ok
C20 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 0.993 Ok
C22 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 1.374 Not Ok
C24 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 1.038 Ok
C26 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-26 0.738 Ok
C28 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.634 Ok
C30 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 0.641 Ok
C32 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-24 1.267 Not Ok
C34 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-19 1.261 Not Ok
C36 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 1.988 Not Ok
C38 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 1.975 Not Ok
C40 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 1.132 Not Ok
C42 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 1.273 Not Ok
C44 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 1.409 Not Ok
C46 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 1.105 Not Ok
C48 TB C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 1.031 Ok
C2 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.293 Ok
C4 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.363 Ok
C6 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.292 Ok
C8 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.419 Ok
C10 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.499 Ok
C12 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.418 Ok
C14 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.283 Ok
C16 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.287 Ok
C18 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.256 Ok
C20 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.393 Ok

27 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

C22 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.47 Ok


C24 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.401 Ok
C26 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.501 Ok
C28 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.34 Ok
C30 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.315 Ok
C32 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 O/S Not Ok
C34 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.361 Ok
C36 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.498 Ok
C38 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.497 Ok
C40 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-23 0.508 Ok
C42 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.698 Ok
C44 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.468 Ok
C46 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.385 Ok
C48 GF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.382 Ok

Comments: Some columns are not adequate. So inadequate column proposed to be retrofitted.

Table: Column PMM Envelope (after retrofitting)

Concrete Column PMM Envelope (Retrofitting Condition)


Label Story Section Location PMM Combo PMM Ratio or Rebar % Comment
C2 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.641 Ok
C4 ROOF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.307 Ok
C6 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.643 Ok
C8 ROOF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.221 Ok
C10 ROOF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.245 Ok
C12 ROOF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.257 Ok
C14 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.29 Ok
C15 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.659 Ok
C18 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.291 Ok
C20 ROOF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-19 0.225 Ok
C22 ROOF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.23 Ok
C24 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.396 Ok
C26 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-23 0.321 Ok
C28 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.326 Ok
C30 ROOF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.414 Ok
C32 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.182 Ok
C34 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.238 Ok
C36 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.362 Ok
C38 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.308 Ok
C40 ROOF C 12X12 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.674 Ok
C42 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.276 Ok
C44 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.306 Ok
C46 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.412 Ok
C48 ROOF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.381 Ok
C2 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 0.72 Ok

28 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

C4 TB RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.5 Ok


C6 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 0.714 Ok
C8 TB RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 0.529 Ok
C10 TB RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.697 Ok
C12 TB RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 0.549 Ok
C14 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.864 Ok
C18 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.847 Ok
C20 TB RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.507 Ok
C22 TB RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.629 Ok
C24 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-22 0.959 Ok
C26 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-26 0.729 Ok
C28 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.607 Ok
C30 TB C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-19 0.622 Ok
C32 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-24 0.447 Ok
C34 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-19 0.444 Ok
C36 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-18 0.562 Ok
C38 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.629 Ok
C40 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.424 Ok
C42 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.483 Ok
C44 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-17 0.503 Ok
C46 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 0.435 Ok
C48 TB RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-21 0.389 Ok
C2 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.293 Ok
C4 GF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.206 Ok
C6 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.294 Ok
C8 GF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.24 Ok
C10 GF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.268 Ok
C12 GF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.239 Ok
C14 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.286 Ok
C16 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.282 Ok
C18 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.26 Ok
C20 GF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.227 Ok
C22 GF RC2 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.261 Ok
C24 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.401 Ok
C26 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.523 Ok
C28 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.313 Ok
C30 GF C12X15 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.32 Ok
C32 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.32 Ok
C34 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-16 0.186 Ok
C36 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.252 Ok
C38 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.248 Ok
C40 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-20 0.262 Ok
C42 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-15 0.334 Ok
C44 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.237 Ok
C46 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.196 Ok
C48 GF RC1 Bottom BNBC(2006)-2 0.195 Ok

29 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

4.4 Adequacy check of beam

Table: Beam adequacy check

Fig: Required Flexural reinforcement (in2) of Grade beam

30 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Fig: Required flexural reinforcement (in2) of Tie beam

31 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Fig: Required Flexural reinforcement (in2) of Roof beam

32 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

4.6 Flexural Adequacy check of slab:


Adequacy of two way beam-slab (Existing):

Calculation for two way slab


Short span(a)=15 feet Long Span(b)=15.42 feet m=0.97
Thickness required=4.5 inch
Thickness provided=6 inch d=4.75 inch
Dead Load=0 psf Floor finish=25 psf Live load=32 psf
Steel strength fy=60 ksi Concrete strength=3 ksi
Type of aggregate used Brickchips
Design method used is USD

Negative Moment Co-efficient in short dirrection Caneg=0.036


Negative Moment Co-efficient in Long dirrection Cbneg=0.058
Positive Dead Load Moment Co-efficient in short dirrection Caposdl=0.021
Positive Dead Load Moment Co-efficient in Long dirrection Cbposdl=0.022
Positive Live Load Moment Co-efficient in short dirrection CaposLL=0.03
Positive Live Load Moment Co-efficient in long dirrection CbposLL=0.028

Negative moment in short dirrection Maneg=1574.64 Pound-feet


Steel area for above moment=0.07 Sq-inch
Dead Load Positive moment in short dirrection Maposdl=472.5 Pound-feet
Live Load Positive moment in short dirrection Maposll=216 Pound-feet
Steel area for positive moment in short dirrection=0.05 Sq-inch
Negative moment in long dirrection Mbneg=2680.97646528 Pound-feet
Steel area for above moment=0.13 Sq-inch
Dead Load Positive moment in long dirrection Mbposdl=523.10808 Pound-feet
Live Load Positive moment in long dirrection Mbposll=213.0476544 Pound-feet
Steel area for positive moment in long dirrection=0.05 Sq-inch

Note: Provided steel area is adequate

33 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

Adequacy of two way beam-slab (Proposed portion):

Calculation for two way slab


Short span(a)=16.25 feet Long Span(b)=24.58 feet m=0.66
Thickness required=6.54 inch
Thickness provided=6 inch d=4.75 inch
Dead Load=0 psf Floor finish=25 psf Live load=32 psf
Steel strength fy=60 ksi Concrete strength=3 ksi
Type of aggregate used Brickchips
Design method used is USD

Negative Moment Co-efficient in short dirrection Caneg=0.087


Negative Moment Co-efficient in Long dirrection Cbneg=0
Positive Dead Load Moment Co-efficient in short dirrection Caposdl=0.036
Positive Dead Load Moment Co-efficient in Long dirrection Cbposdl=0.008
Positive Live Load Moment Co-efficient in short dirrection CaposLL=0.054
Positive Live Load Moment Co-efficient in long dirrection CbposLL=0.009

Negative moment in short dirrection Maneg=4466.03625 Pound-feet


Steel area for above moment=0.22 Sq-inch
Dead Load Positive moment in short dirrection Maposdl=950.625 Pound-feet
Live Load Positive moment in short dirrection Maposll=456.3 Pound-feet
Steel area for positive moment in short dirrection=0.1 Sq-inch
Negative moment in long dirrection Mbneg=0 Pound-feet
Steel area for above moment=0 Sq-inch
Dead Load Positive moment in long dirrection Mbposdl=483.34112 Pound-feet
Live Load Positive moment in long dirrection Mbposll=174.0028032 Pound-feet
Steel area for positive moment in long dirrection=0.05 Sq-inch

34 | P a g e
Turbo Engineering Limited
…………..For better future through innovation

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion & Recommendation:

The following conclusions can be drawn from the design review:

 Adequacy of all structural members has been checked considering BNBC-2006 standards.
 Lateral displacement limit of this structure is within allowable limit.
 In as built condition some columns does not have adequate strength. So few more column need to
be strengthen. For details see retrofitting drawing.
 In As built condition flexural reinforcement of all grade beams & floor beams are sufficient to carry
proposed load. Proposed load should be posted in all story maintained by factory authority.
 Floor slab are capable to carry applied live load.

______________
Engr. Abdul Jabber Miah
DMINB/CE-0460; MIEB-31825
Sr. Structural Engineer
Turbo Engineering Limited

Attachment
 Soil test report
 Company profile.

35 | P a g e
CLIENT.
HARUN COMPOSITE MILLS LTDI

SUB - SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT


FOR THE CONSTRUCTTON OF PROPOSED 05 (FrVE)
sToRrED FACTORY BUTLDTNG ON DAG NO-S.A.-4S, 49,
R.S.-21t LOSI LOzt 20, KHATTAN NO-S.A.-1539/ L34t 198,
R.S.-435, zLLt 648, GOLAKANDATL, BHULTA, RUPGANJ,
NARAYANGANJ.

h
.l ,F,h
lllrrrl'rW

FEBRUARY...,.......,,2018

SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT PREPARED BYI.


MIM SOIL TEST
F-L7t D. r. T. ROAD, MTDDLE BADDA/ BADDA, DHAKA-LZLZ.
MOBIL-oL944-435148.
CONTENTS

Page No.

1.0 INTRODUCTION, 1

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK, 1

3,0 FIELD WORKS. 2

04. UBOMTORY WORKS, 3

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF SOIL COMPOSITION

ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE ETC, 3

6.0 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES, 4

7.0 ENGIN EERING PROPERTIES.

B,O EVALUATION OF BEARING CAPACITY, 6-7


ALLOWABLE END BEARTNG AND SKTN FRICTION

9.0 CONCLUSION,

10.0 RECOMMENDATION. 9

APPENDIX FIGURES BORE LOGS AND TEST RESULTS


Page 1

REPORT ON THE SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents
in detail, the geotechnical features of the Proposed Building At
Dag No-5,A,-45,49, R.S,-27/ 703/ 102/ 24 Khatian No-5.A,-7539/ 734/ 79&
R,S,-435/ 277/ 64& Golakandail, Bhulta, Rupganj, Narayanganj. The Sub soil
Investigation Programme Includes Necessary Field and Laboratory tests. MfM SOIL
TEST Consultants was entrusted with the investigation works and all the factual
information together with the comments and the recommendations have been included
in this report, The purpose of investigation is for the safe and economic design for the
proposed foundation of the structure at the site.

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

The main scope of this investigation works were:

Executlon of exploratory Eoring, recording of sub-soil stratiflcation and position


of Ground Water Table.

Execution of standard penetration test (SPT) at an interval of 5 ft. depth with


the collection of disturbed soil samples up to the final depth exploration of each
boring.

Recording the level of Ground Water in each Boring after completion of field
work.

Execution of laboratory tests on soil samples to determine the physical and


m ec ha n ica I ch a ra cteris tics.

Presentation of final report with all works including detailed description of soil
stratification and bearing capacity as well as skin friction values of sub-soil.
Page 2

3.0 FIELD WORKS


The field investigation programme includes execution of 4 Nos. Boring extending
to the maximum Depth of 50ft, The above boring works have been done as per
direction of the owner. The detalls of the field investigation programme are
provided in the following sub-headings.

a. Exploratory Eoring
Drilling was executed by the method of wash boring. A hole was started by
driving vertically a 4 inches dia steel casing into the ground to some depth and
than the formation inside the casing was broken up by the repeated drops of a
chopping bit attach to the lower end of the dritling pipe. The upper end of the
same was fitted to swivel head through which water was forced at high pressure
pipe, Forced water emerges at high velocity through the pores of the chopping
bit and returns to the surfacg carrying with it the broken-up soils. In this way
drilling is advanced up to a level of 6 inches above the depth, where SPT has to
be executed.

Standard Penetration Test


Standard Penetration Tests have been executed in all the bore holes at the 5ft.
interual of depth upto the final depth of boring, In this test, a split spoon
sampler of 2" outer dia and 13/a" inner dia, is made to penetrate 18 inches into
the soil by the drops of hammer weighing 140 Lbs falling freely from a height of
30 inches. Number of blows of hammer required for penetration of each 6 inches
length of the sampler are recorded. The number of blows for last 12 inches
penetration of the totat 18 inches in known as the penetration value (N Value)
as specified by ASTM.
Page 3

c. EXTRACTION OF SOIL SAMPLE

Dlsturbed soil samples were collected at 5 ft interual and at every change of soil
strata by using the split spoon sampler. These soi/ sample were studied visually
and the soil classification were done to prepare strata chart of soils upto the
explored depth.

4,0 UBORATORY WORKS :


The following soil tests have been performed in the laboratory for proper evaluation of

soil parameters. These are fo/lowing :

a. Grain size analysis 06 Nos.

b. Specific gravity 06 Nos.

c. Natural moisture content 00 Nos.

d, Atterberg limit 00 Nos.

e. Unit weight (wet & dry) 00 Nos.

f. Direct shear 00 Nos.

g. Consolidation 00 Nos.

5,0 DESCRTPTION OF SOIL COMPOSITION ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE ETC,

a. The following terms are used in this report for description of soil composition;

Trace : 1to10o/o Little : 11 to 200/o


Some : 20 to 35% Sandy : 35 to 50o/o sand
Clayey : 35 to 50% clay Silty : 35 to 50o/o silt
Page 4

On the basis of N-Values the relative density/conslstency of soil formation may


be said to vary as, very loose, medlum, dense, and very dense for non-cohesive
soil and very soft, soft, medium stifi very stiff and hard for cohesive soil
(K.Tarzaghl and R.B Peck).

c. Based on N-values other very useful soil parameters may be obtained from the
correlatlon charts given by different research workers. Two such useful
correlations for cohesive and non-cohesive soils after Prof. K. Terzaghl are given
below:

VALUES OF DR., UNIT WEIGHT AND ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE OF NON COHESSIVE SOILS
BASES ON N.VALUES:

N- Relative density, Angle of internal Moist unit A/lowable soll


Condition
Values Dp. friction, o weight, y pcf pressure, Tsf
0.4 Very loose 0.0-0.2 2y-3d 70-100 0.0-0,4
4-10 Loose 0.2-0.4 3dlY 90-1 15 0.4-0.7
10-30 Medlum 0.4-0.6 3g-4d 1 10-130 0.7-2.5
30-35 Dense 0.6-0.85 4d-4y 110-140 2.5-4.s
Over 50 Very dense 1.00 >4! 130-150 Over 4.5

VALUES OF UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH BASED ON N. VALUES FOR COHESIVE


SOILS.
Uncon fin ed compressive
N-Values Condition Remarks
strenqth, Tsf
Eelow -2 soft
Very Below 0.25
02-04 Soft 0.25-0.50
To be used
04-08 Medium Stiff 0.50-1.00
with extreme
0B-15 stiff 1.00-2.00
Caution
15-30 Very stiff 2.00-4.00
Over 30 Hard Over 4.00

6,0 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

The overall physical properties of the subsoil formation of the prolect area have

been evaluated on the basis of 4 Nos. Boring extending up to the depth of 50ft
as have been selected and pointed out by the owner. The physical properties of
the investigated site may be discussed as follows: (Ref: Bore logs)
Page 5

a, VARTATION OF THE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS,

Name of the Test Range of variation


Natura I moisture content 190/o-23%

Natural Unit WeighA (pcf) 115.45-123.81


Dry density, (pcf) 85.73-98.13
Specific Gravity 2.678-2.683
Liquid limit 44-50
Plastic limit 22-26

b. Ground Water Table (GWT)

The GWT has been measured and found at and around the bore hole were 0.0-

0.0ft value the EGL at 0.00 am.

7.0 ENGINEERINGPROPERTIES

The following engineering properties of the subsoil formation of the project have

been determined by the performance of laboratory test.

a. Cohesion
The values of cohesion c, obtalned from unconfined compresslon tests varies
from 0.00 psi.

b. Compressibility
The compression index C, va/ues varies from 0.00 to 0.00. The natural void
ratios eo varies from 0.00 to 0.00.

c. Angle of Internal Friction


The angle of internal friction as reported by the performance of Direct Shear
Test, varies from 0d to 0d
Page 6

B,O EVALUATION OF BEARING CAPACITY

8.1 Shallow Foundation

a. Bearinq Capacities of the shallow foundatlon from SPT:

The bearing capacities of the shallow foundation particu/arly for top layer of cohesive
soil may be estimated from the SPT va/ues, as suggested by Terzaghl, according to
fol/owing. Table-l

TABLE No-l: BEARING CAPACITIES OF THE SHALLOW FOUNDATION, TSF (F.S=3.0)

flPTr.qngq '. Qqrylqtettqy t" ,!/lqryqQle bearing Capaqi{y


- . -QQ.Q? ', qet i aQQQ,Q??5 '
Verv Q,QQ:Q,IQ
. Q1 i-Q? 5qft i Q,??5:Q,15 .q;q-q'1q
..... .....Ql.qq i Ueitqn 5!!lr ', Q,15:a9Q 1 .Q'1Q-!,?Q
.. .-Qa/5 i $tlf i Q,2Q.t,fQ i 1,Zq-2'1q
. 15.trQ
>30
5liff i: /,?q-J,qA
i| YervHard >3.60 ',:,
2,fl-10q
>4.80

b. Bearing capacity has been determined for shallow foundation particularly strip
footing and isolated column footing only. The evaluated values have been provlded in
table-2.
Page 7

Table No.-2 Allowable bearing capacitv for shallow foundation (F.S=3)

Bore Depth Field Corrected Cohesion Bearing Capacity (Ts!)


Hole inft SPT N Kg/df For Circular or For strip
souare Footinq Footinq
5'-0' 4 4 0.25 0.65 0.55

10'-0" 5 5 0.31 0.87 0.73


BH.1 15'-0" 5 5 0.31 0.95 0.81

20'-0' 5 5 0.31 1.03 0.87

5'-0', 3 3 0.19 0.51 0.43

10'-0' 5 5 0.31 0.87 0.73


BH-2 15',-0" 6 6 0.38 1,09 0.93

20'-0" 3 3 0.19 0,75 0.63

5,_0, 4 .t 0.25 0.65 0.55

10'-0' 4 0.25 0,73 0.61

BH.3 15'-0', 4 4 0.25 0.81 0.69

20'-0" 6 6 0,38 1.17 0.99

5,_0, 3 3 0.19 0.51 0.43

10',-0' 5 5 0.31 0,87 0.73

BH-4 15',-0" 6 6 0,38 1.09 0.93

20'-0" 5 5 0,31 1,03 0.87

Notes:
1. Skempton's relation has been used for evaluation of bearing capacity.
2. :
B/t 0 & I
= 5.0 ft (assumed) for strip footing.
3, B/t 1 & B 8.0 ft (assumed) for isolated column footing.
= =
4. Factor of safetY (F,S = 3)
5, The values of cohesion have been considered on average basls,
6, Depth has been measured form EGL of the bore hole.
:
[B Width of footing, L=Length of footing.
:
EGL Existing Ground Level
Page 7/A

Bearing Capacities of pite from the SPT & Soit parameters,


Table No:'3 The Allowable skin friction & the point bearing capacities of
driven pile foundation (Values in TSF) F.S=2,i,

Depth BH-1 BH-2 BH-3


(ft.) N C f,o 4p, N C .f ,n 4po N C f,o 4to
)
J 4 4 0.024 4.8 3 J 0.018 3.6 4 4 0.024 4.8

t0 5 5 0.03 6 5 5 0.03 6 4 4 0.024 4.8

15 5 5 0.03 6 6 6 0.036 7.2 4 4 0.024 4.8


a
20 5 5 0,03 6 3 J 0.018 3.6 6 6 0.036 7.2

25 3 3 0.018 3.6 4 4 0.024 4.8 4 4 0,024 4,8


)
30 4 4 0.024 4,8 J 3 0.018 3,6 4 4 0.024 4.8

35 5 5 0.03 6 -l 3 0.01 I 3.6 6 6 0.03 6 7.2

40 4 4 0.024 4.8 5 5 0.03 6 3 3 0.018 3,6

45 3 3 0,018 3.6 4 4 0,024 4,8 6 6 0.036 7.2

50 6 6 0.036 7.2 7 7 0.042 8,4 8 8 0.048 9.6

Depth BH-4
(ft.) N C f,o 4po

5 3 3 0.0 18 3.6
10 5 5 0.03 6

15 6 6 0.036 7.2

20 5 5 0.03 6
25 4 4 0.024 4,8
30 2 2 0.012 2.4
J5
1
J 3 0.01 I 3.6
40 3 3 0.018 3.6
45 4 4 0,024 4,8

50 6 6 0,036 7.2

Note:
i, N = Field SPT values ii. C:Cohesion
iii. epa =Allowable point bearing capacity for pile foundation with F.S. = 2.5
iv. fsa = Allowable skin friction with F.S. = 2.5
v. The above bearing capacities should be two third in case of RCC cast-in-situ pile
vii. 1 Kg/cm2= 1 tsf and 1 ton = 2000 Lbs,
Page B

9.0 LOAD CALCUUTION FOR ANY DIAMETER / ANY LENGTH OF PILE:


P:nDLfs+n/4D2fb
a. P = A/lowable working Load.

b. fs = Average allowable value of the skin friction = - tsf.

c. fb = Allowable value of the pile end bearing capacity = - tsf.

d. n: Pi, a constant : 3.146.

e. D:Pllediameter.

f, L = Reguired length of pile = - ft.

1O,O COMPUTATION FOR CONSLIDATION SETTLEMENT:


The veftical downward movement of the base of a structure is called sefflement
and its effect upon the structure depends on its magnitude, its uniformity, the
length of the time over which it takes place, and the nature of the clay soils. The
consolidation settlement can be calculated from test result of unlt weight and
consolidation tests. The approximate average sefflement of structure : 0.78
inch).

1T,O CONCLUSION:
On the basis of above analysis and dlscussions, the fol/owing conclusions may be
drawn regarding the sub-soil condition the project area.

a, The overall soil formatlon of the investigation site are more or less regular in
between the bore hole location.
b.
c. The top layer of the investigated site has been encountered with comprising
brown/gray silt with clay & flne to course sand (Ref. bore logs).
d.
e. The underlying soil is of fine to medium sand and some silt/silty clay
ertending up to the final depth of boring (Ref, bore logs,)
f,
g. Bearing capacities for Pile Foundation as Isolated column footing are sultable
for all borings (Ref. Table-2 & 3).
h.
i. Shallow Foundation & Pile Foundation as isolated column footings may be
provided at the site.
Page 9

RECOMMENDATION
The following recommendations are suggested for the construction of proposed
Building At Dag No-5.A.-45,49 R.S.-27/ 103/ 102, 2O, Khatian No-5.A.-7539,
13+ 198, R.5.-435r 277/ 648/ Golakandail, Bhulta, Rupganj Narayanganj.

PILE FOUNDATION

SAND PILE :
Sand pile may be provided with compaction from the depth 5'-0" and downwards, pile
should be average (8 inch) diameter and the embedment length up to 25'-O" from
the base level of footing at footing area considering spacing of pile (1'-6? center to
center. After sand piling the bearing capacity of should 1.20 tsf. confirming by plate
load test,

Note:
a) 1 Ton : 2000 lbs, I TSF :100 Kpa, EGL : Existing Ground Leve/.
b) The Foundation Engineer or the Designer may select other alternative type, on
the base of depth as well as the Bearing Capacity of the foundation according to
his requirement, in the light of test result provided in this report.

ffi'
n 0 tpLu-
t t'
;ffili'"'nE*Parts
$
.an
N ^J
7l m -ii
^.,(.);
aT-+ ?'=
s
o
r;atB

"i? dE
f€"a9
i ss
v)
\e-A
.;
E

4-rC.l '=
-^t4 ^ =
,vis *
LJ c.l .d: E.
H
vu:a
qi;
.--aY(tr
&

9..iod
:=34 =

z
w)a
iz
gR
J .-.

zo
=:E
vd,
IEA
aY,
z
-1

l-
q
IU
F
JS
HA1
ofr
U)o
tll
Fl
H
= 4
E Q
a
cF
F
o
z
TYPE OF DRILLING : MANUAL DRIVE (HAND WASH)

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST:


STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS HAVE BEEN EXECUTED IN ALL THE BORE
HOLES AT sFT. INTERVAL OF DEPTH UP TO THE FINAL DEPTH OF BORING,
IN THIS TEST, A SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER OF 2" OUT DIAMETER AND 1-3lB''
INNER WEIGHING 14OLBS/63.5KG, FAILING FREELY FOR A HEIGHT OF 30"
LENGTH OF THE SAMPLER IS RECORDED. THE NUMBER OF BLOWS FOR
THE LAST 12'' PENETRATION OF THE TOTAL 18'' IS KNOWN AS THE
STANDARD PENETRATION VALUE (N - VALUES) AS SPECIFIED BY ASTM
AND IS PLOTTED SPT VALUE OF THE PARTICULAR DEPTH.

cRowN SHEAVE (S)


oR PULLEYS (S)
2 INCH DIA STAN

TYPICALLY 1 INCH DIA


MANILA ROPE

DOUGHNUT HAMMER

SLIP OR GUIDE PIPE 30 INCH FALL

ANVIL
DRILL ROD
ROT ATING CATHEAD
1B INCH FALL
LOCATION]: DAG NO-S'A.-45, 49, R.S.'21, 103,102,20,
MIM SOIL TEST KHATIAN NO-s.A.-1539, 134, 198, R.S.-435, 211,648,
DHAKA GOLAKANDAIL, BHULTA. RUPGANJ, NARAYANGANJ.
BORING NO-l
REMARKS
a (c.w.T SOIL)
O STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
L! VANE SHEAR
Z STRATA ENCOUNTERED Blows/fl.
Z
Y
[- Z TEST
t! FF- Lbs./sq in
F o- i') 9 O
!
U r'l
otr :E
F
o
I H+

EGL G.W.T: (-) 0'-0" R.L. = -) 0'-0"

4 5',ml
I

5 W v74l
:]:.:.:.:.

I
.i!::.: i
.:::.::::
:
5 ts'77)1

MJ
5 20'

Grey SILTYEY clay and ,,::,:,:,:,:


v7z
48',-o',
some sand. _) 7s'.

v7z
4 30'

5 35',m

4
vm
40'

J 45'm
48',-0',
Grey rned. dense fine
51'.-0',
03'-0'
SAND some to little silt \ 6 50'm

55',m

60'm

65'.m

7g, %
75'vv,

8o' vz

DISTURBED SAMPLES M
TJNDISTURBEDSAMI'18S....................
f
MIM SOIL TEST LOCATION: DAC NO-S.A.-45, 49, R.S.-21, 103, 102,20,
KHATTAN NO-S.A,-1 539, t34, 198, R.S.-435, 211, 648,
DHAKA
GOLAKANDAI L. I] H U LTA. RUPGANJ, NATTAYANGANJ.
BORING NO-2
REMARKS
0
a (G.w.r.sorL)
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
Z t! STRATA ENCOUNTERED VANE SI.IEAR

t!
z ,.o Blows/tt.
TEST

F Fr- 9 Lbs./sq in
ci! s&
LI E8 F o
J
EGI G.W.I,: (_) 0'_0" R L.- (-) 0'-0"

J 5' ru,
\
\ 5
to'v7z

6
15'v;772
I
I 3
20'
m
Grey SILTYEY clay and
48',-0"
some sand. 4
2s'.
m
) 30'm
J 35'.m

5
v7z
40'

4 4s',
wv
48',-0"

03'-0' Grey med. dense fine


5l'-0' SAND some to little silt. 7 50'm

55'.m

60'm

65',m

wm
75'rm
8o' v7z

DISTURBED SAMPLES M UNDISTURBED SAMPLES E


MIM SOIL TEST LOCATION; DAC NO-S.A.-45, 49, R.S.-21, 103, 102,20,
KHATTAN NO-S.A.-1539, 134, 198, R.S.-435, 2t t, 648,
DHAKA
COLAKANDAIL, BHULTA, RUPCAN.I, NARAYANCANJ.
BORING NO-3
REMARKS
a (G.W.T.SOIL)
0 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
z ll.]
STRATA ENCOUNTERED Blows/ft.
VANE SHEAR

r! FF-
vz -C TEST
Lbs /sq in
F O- i'r Q
O
^Z-
t&
U rrl o
o ^-
l-.1 LL F J Occ
EG G.W.T: (_) 0'_0" R. L.- (-) 0'-0"
4 5',w
4
l0'Wl

4 15',74
v7z
6 20'

Grey SILTYEY clay and


4g'-0'
some sand. 4
va
25'.

4
v77
30'

6 35'.m

3
v7z
I 40'

v77)
6 4s',
4g'-0'
03'-0' Grey med. dense fine
5 l'-0' SAND some to little silt 8 50'm

55',m

60'm

65',m

70,m

75'r7v7

8o'
v7z

DISTURBED SAMPLES M UNDISTURBED SAMPLES f


LOCATION: DAC NO-S.A .'4s, 49, R.S.-21. 103, 102,20'
MIM SOIL TEST KHATTAN NO-S.A.-1539, 134, 198, R.S.-435, 2ll, 648,
DHAKA CbI-RTnNoAIL, Bt.IULTA, RUPCAN.I, NARAYANCANJ
BOzuNG NO-4
REMARKS
a
a STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (0.w.T.solL)
z a STRATA ENCOUNTERED Blorvs/ft.
VANE SHEAR
z TEST

F F r-.
V
U
^/
\Ji Lbs./sq in
o- i'r o
^-
!lJ. F
c Ocr
EG G.W.T: (-) 0'_0" R L.- (-) 0'-0"

J 5',ml
I

5 fi'7Zl
i

6 Ls',VV)1
l

v/4
5 20'

Grey SILTYEY clay and v7z


48',-0',
some sand. 4 2i',

2 JO'
m
J 35'.m

J
vm
40'

4
vm
4i'.
48',-0"
Grey med. dense fine
51',-O',
03'-0'
SAND some to little silt.
i:,.:i::.:

:l:i:::::i
6 50'm

55'.m

60'm

65',w

70'm
75'F772

8o'w'

DISTURBED SAMPLES UNDISTUI1BED SAMPLES E


M
PERCENT RETAINED

c.i
N
co =t
o..
a.l -(6
'. od' !+
U)o,
qQ

&6+ "d
0\6
<f,-ts ci
r)Or-i el
<t c-r i.n
-l -
.-: ;
?<E
sd
A \.vH
b0#
ol)?
(dA -= s z
A -.i -
H -.X d F
.. -::=v - hf

5
-!M=
s+ H :<e
c'l o
U
d14
Hr/v^
coi4
o-r -d
^d ta
U)
U--Le
JNo.rZ .]
O c.l Q
9o J
U)

z
Fr
Fq U)
tI
&
t'r
V) cU
a
H
N ol
a
zti
\o
&
\,
O

c..l
O

F
a
lrl c\

F
J
H
o
q
N

E
l-l
E

o,
ooo
OO f* \O
999
tr) ca
o<>o
c\l
'f,
I

--l
N o.t.-
o
*r ^tr.
s^
H) (c

=d b
Nt.oo-^-7
7?6.j
Ed
^+ b0
O..^ O
.t-i I
(n- o\^d,
vaa
r.il.)! d
4-=
-: r- _-
?<m
aa__:
/t'=

;,9
CEA
A-6
tL

;ido
EV-^
o
QO$^@
E] c.l \o

(n
F
i-l
a
r-l
-t+. !f, I
\o
\? V1 v-)
frts L--l N

o?
*El ?o \o
\? O
tLl c.t N $ \o
<l '-. t
>a .I ca
I
L.l
\o
c.l
co r-
\o
z9
r-
i1 l-l
oo
o
I
ti-
\o
\q
N
cl
s oo
r/.)

$I I
\o t/.)
N (\ ca \o
I $
c.l I
\q
(J ol
<>
cO
o
t--

o Q
F (-)
x(.) q q
o
UJ
>
o \o
g
Cn
F
a.
F () 0)
-l r ed
o
l- -o sf L ,P
=o E
!
'6 .9 () .2 bI
() a
(_)
!
bI a
J o\
E E
0 a
o \o q q r
-CJ

l-l -o .o o\ 0) o E
+ U O
o
vt
() 13 O
a (.)
.d
o
'o
Q E o.
d o
E
h
q
o
0)
q
() a
(J U) a c/) ao q
L d
o "l a LJ a U) z a
E
H
() q
0)
z() 0)
.o
q
.oo L cd
0)
E ci
zo E
L
bJ o0
!
0)
N@ !
I'A
rE9
Cd
(.)
a
a
rE () 0a
o S!
'6 F- ':
6.ts o
C>r Oq
q C))
(.) x
o C rcl cH OEr:i
'r
ca o
6d
(.)
LJ z
0)
cn
!F
<E o
()
('1 (d VdJ
(JP )OE
':o
OJ

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy