G_Farooq

Here is a link. Hope it help https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/seismic-behavior-comparison-infill-wall-strut-models-using-hasılcıo/ or You can use FEMA-356 chapter 7, section 7.5 for linear and nonlinear modelling of infill walls.

Physical properties of glass Fiber https://www.fiberglass-afi.com/fiberglass-properties.htm

I do not have SAP2000 v24, but reviewed your excel file. Your design seems to be ok. I have designed/used these type of stairs in various projects, the recent one in Karachi. But always from an RCC wall. Just make sure that ring spacing provided and anchor bar length in wall is as per seismic detailing rules.

BCP 2021 is now available on PEC website. It has tables for Ss and S1 values. So check there. Remember you have to use ACI 318-14 now as a design code. So lots of changes there also. Here is the link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lqD7QvQ7Auo3yDM3Vd05tmbRnoYD-icm/view

Sit and think about you are doing and saying Arsalan ......... "the designs are just for Municipality purposes". If you need help, you have this forum, the net, your teachers.... Here is a post for you.

No, it is not the amplified shear. It is the shear value calculated as per chapter 21 of ACI code for intermediate(ACI 12.3.3) and special moment(ACI 12.2 frames, i.e. shear capacity based on probable moment strength and by doubling the seismic shear. However, in both Etabs 2016 and 2017, there is a program bug, which reports inflated numbers for shear. I have reported this to CSI and this bug has been removed in the 2018 version of the program.

Agreed @Ayesha

Metal Deck profile P-3623 is Zamil Steel deck. It has an in built shear studs, so yes it is a composite decking, which can the be supported through non-composite steel joists. Hope this an attached file clear the issue ZS-PEB-Steel-Deck.pdf

Yeah, Pakistan Building code is being used, but only for seismic zoning determination, as far as I know. May be someone, somewhere is using it for more. Its mostly based on UBC97 provisions, which is an obsolete code internationally. It was to be updated in 2014-15, I think, but nothing is being done. As, us, as a nation need disasters like oct 2005 to wake up. @Ayesha Etabs is not, not the "best structural software on planet". There are plenty of other software's out there, with way better interfaces, results accuracy and reporting methods then Etabs.

Shell and Joint Diaphragm both serve the same purpose but assigning diaphragms to shell objects is preferable as it will automatically constrain internally created joints. Just make sure that if you are using Joint diaphragm, your floor is manually meshed, fully, because any joints created by additional meshing will not have the constraint. While as explained above, for shell diaphragms, auto mesh can be used.

Just delete/ erase your group assign. Save the model and close file. Import text file of model, the "$et" extension in a new blank model. check if there is any error or warning message. If no, do a relabel all, save and assign groups. Hopefully this will resolve the problem

Use influence line, moving load case for bridge live loads. Multi step case gives lesser value of maximum moments then moving load pattern in Csi Bridge. The number of vesicles and their lateral spacing depends upon the Code and type of loading you are applying.

Do check, what is the type of column SAFE is using to calculate the punching shear. This can be checked by right clicking at column point or punching shear design output. Its a common problem in safe both v8 and v12 that it treats all columns as corner columns, despite their location, thereby reducing the concrete strength. This can be solved by selecting column point and assigning punching shear modifiers to them (corner, edge or interior).

Dear Fawad, Dr Mona Liza of Quaid e Azam University Islamabad has done a lot of work on this. You can also consult Dr Qaiser of Uet Peshwar and Dr Shoaib Ahmad (Zeinth International). He is working on the same thing

Bahria Icon tower is designed for Seismic zone 2B. Actually it has 3 towers, the tallest 70 story, middle one 35 and another smaller one. it has 7 basements. foundation is piled raft, slabs are composite. the main tower is a tublar structures with out riggers at 3 levels. WSP procured wind tunnel test data for the design of building.

Thank you very much for your reply. I have rechecked my Etabs model & tried different shear wall configurations and then checked the raft on safe (flat slab with drop panels, beams were confusing me). My base pressure results remain in the range from 7 to 10 ksf. Then a senior in my office told me to draw a layer of lean concrete under my raft plate, slightly bigger than it, with 6" thick & no design. The draw my raft slab, over it, then my drop panel or thickened sections over it. Select all 3 slab properties & assign soil support to them. Pick up column points, right click & assign column sizes to the loads. And my base pressur comes down to 4.5 ksf. I can understand the logic of assigning soil support to all 3 as they are overlapping each & sfae will take then which is uppermost & thicker, so assign soil support to all. Next by providing column sizes we are ensuring that safe take into account the rigid zone for column in base pressure, punching & bending. But what is the logic of providing the lean layer? How does it control the base pressure? Second can we ignore the reinforcement peaks in slab strips under column & core wall edge points? When I calculate reinforcement from strip moments manually the value is much lower than the one reported. How to resolve this?

I am designing a 2B+G+24 story building. I made the model in Etabs, and ran it, then exported the base reaction to safe for footing design. It has central core walls. When I ran safe (v8), the only version available with the office. It gave me a bearing pressure of about 14 ksf as opposed to allowable of 6 ksf, I increased the thickness from 4 ft to 9 ft gradually but pressure distribution remained same & value only deceased to around 11 ksf. Then I added foundation beams (tied up all columns provided them under all core walls) and assigned line support to them (Kv x width of beam). This run gave me a value of 5.6 ksf bearing pressure which is safe. But I have some questions. I calculated the total area required from total load of the building and its coming out almost equal to the building plot area available. For, punching requirement under single column I at least require a 5.5 ft deep raft thickness. 1. Can I model a raft like this with beams (12" x 72") under all columns (42" x 42") & (36x72") under core walls (24" thick); not inverted beams but beams with top flushed with raft top 3. when we define slab properties do I have to tick the " thick plate" option or not. What is the difference? 4. What is difference between slab types options? slab? footing? mat? 2. Do the slab elements between these beams will have a soil support also assigned to them? 3. Is this type of foundation safe for this high building? or do we have to go for piles or pile/raft interaction? Which would you recommend considering that top of raft is at -19 ft & ground water table is at -11 ft. 4. How to I assign wall supports in safe v8. By placing beams of above property on my raft slab & assigning a wall/line support to them (Kv x width of beam) or Assigning null property to beams and use safe v8 option in which it calculate support stiffness from its size. Kv is the vertical sub-grade modulus. 5. How do we detail thick rafts. Do we provide mid layer of steel. if so can somebody point a reference book or source on how to calculate it. Confused