Proposed Access Steel Bridge to Provide Solution to the Accessibility Problem to
the residents of Sitio Bolaran, Poblacion, Albuera, Leyte
A Community Solution Project
presented to the Faculty of the
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
College of Engineering
Visayas State University
Visca, Baybay City, Leyte
In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
CIVIL ENGINEERING PROJECT (CENG156)
BEVVY SHEEN E. ALVARADO
ROY JOSHUA T. EBCAS
CHARA MAE M. MERIN
June 2019
APPROVAL
ABSTRACT
The goal of the project is to help the people in Sitio Bolaran, Brgy. Poblacion,
Albuera, Leyte which is to design a bridge that will serve as a safety access for the
residents living in the area. The current means of access in the barangay is a bridge
made of bamboo and the safety of the residents is not guaranteed because of an unsure
construction. Heavy rains especially floods and typhoons causing the water to rise thus,
the residents can’t cross the bridge because the risk is very high. Due to this event, the
proponents were convinced that a new bridge should be established. The team decided
to design a steel bridge which links Sitio Apolonia to Sitio Bolaran. This will provide
a safe and easy access for the residents living in the area.
The proposed structure is a bridge which is made of steel for the superstructure
while the substructure will be reinforced concrete. The proponents decided steel in their
design because steel is faster to construct, it last longer than other types, and has low
construction cost. The designing of the bridge incorporates the gathering of loads used
for the analysis such as the live load, dead load, wind load, earthquake load that acts on
the bridge, the force that acts on the bridge will be pass to the column down to the
footings and this considers lateral earth pressure, weight of the structure.
TRANSMITTAL
The undergraduate Civil Engineering Project Manuscript attached hereto
entitled “Proposed Access Steel Bridge to Provide Solution to the Accessibility
Problem to the residents in Sitio Bolaran, Poblacion, Albuera, Leyte “prepared and
submitted by BEVVY SHEEN E. ALVARADO, ROY JOSHUA T. EBCAS, and
CHARA MAE M. MERIN, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the course
Civil Engineering Project (CEng 156) of the degree of bachelor of Science in Civil
Engineering is hereby accepted.
ENGR. MARCELO T. ABRERA JR.
Adviser
______________________
Accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERNG
PROF. EPIFANIA G. LORETO
Department Head
______________________
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The proponents of team ACCELERATE would like to thank the Almighty God
for the spiritual guidance that He had bestowed in each of the team members. The team
would like to thank their parents who gave them unending support financially and
emotionally.
The team would acknowledge their project adviser, Engr. Marcelo T. Abrera
Jr. for guiding the students about the needed details in completing the project. The
same gratitude goes to Engr. Andy Phil D. Cortes for introducing the project to the
team and for guiding the students about the relevance of the project and for acting as
the secondary adviser. For the side of the community, the team would like to thank the
support and approval of Albuera’s Mayor Hon. Rosa Meneses, for allowing the team
to work closely with the bridge with the help of the Engr.-in-charge, Engr. Jennifer C.
Enano in achieving the common goal in addressing the issue. The team would also
acknowledge their colleague, Keanu Galgo for guiding the proponents during their
conduct of topographic survey.
In general, the team is honored and humbled for the opportunity to be involved
in an opportunity to be involved in an actual and crucial challenge involving civil
engineering. Through this, the team was able to enhance and develop critical thinking
that might help in the future field of profession. And lastly, the team is thankful for each
and every proponent: BEVVY SHEEN E. ALVARADO, ROY JOSHUA T. EBCAS,
and CHARA MAE M. MERIN for all these cannot be accomplish without teamwork.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
Page
APPROVAL
2
ABSTRACT
3
TRANSMITTAL
4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
7
LIST OF FIGURES
8
LIST OF APPENDICES
9
CHAPTER I
10
OBJECTIVES
10
CHAPTER II
11
COMMUNITY AND THE PROBLEM
11
CHAPTER III
14
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
14
3.1 Preliminary Survey
14
3.2 Analysis and Design
16
3.2.1 NSCP 2015
16
3.2.4 Design of Column
18
3.2.5 Design of Footing
18
3.3 Design Interpretation
19
3.3.1 Railings
19
3.3.2 Steel Plate, Girders, and Stiffeners
19
3.3.3 Beam
20
3.3.4 Column
20
3.3.5Footing
21
CHAPTER IV
22
PROPOSED SOLUTION
23
CHAPTER V
24
RECOMMENDATIONS
24
REFERENCES
25
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Current condition of the bamboo bridge ....................................................... 11
Figure 2 Bridge linking Sitio Apolonia to Sitio Bolaran ............................................. 12
Figure 3 Water current and water level during rains ................................................... 12
Figure 4 Soil investigation ........................................................................................... 15
Figure 5 Wide Flange I Beam ...................................................................................... 19
Figure 6 Column Dimension........................................................................................ 21
Figure 7 Footing Dimension ........................................................................................ 22
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
A
SPECIFICATION
B
ENGINEERING DESIGN
C
DESIGN COMPUTATION
D
BILL OF MATERIALS
E
PERTINENT DOCUMENTS
CHAPTER I
OBJECTIVES
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
To propose a steel bridge design plan as a solution to the accessibility problem
of Sitio Apolonia, Brgy. Poblacion, Albuera, Leyte
Specific Objectives
1. To recommend the most suitable bridge type to be constructed in the area
considering the location, structural loading, material availability and project
fund.
2. To provide a detailed plan and specification of the access bridge.
3. To estimate the construction and maintenance cost of the project.
CHAPTER II
COMMUNITY AND THE PROBLEM
The CE Project was conducted in the Municipality of Albuera specifically in
Sitio Bolaran, Brgy. Poblacion. It has an estimated population of 46, 332 as of the 2015
census.
The problem in this Sitio is their access to Municipal Proper due to an unsafe
temporary bridge constructed there. Moreover, residents from about three (3) other
Sitios are crossing and depending on the bridge to go to the Municipal Proper. The
bridge is made of bamboos with high safety risk. Only a few residents attempt to cross
this bridge since they are afraid of the possibility of its collapse. They would rather wet
their feet and pants crossing the river than going through the bridge.
Figure 1 Current condition of the bamboo bridge
Figure 2 Bridge linking Sitio Apolonia to Sitio Bolaran
Figure 3 Water current and water level during rains
If typhoons and heavy rains happen, the residents would gather beforehand the
necessary things such as food, candles, fuel, and more because the river would be
inaccessible due to increased current and level of water. Students also affected if this
incident will happen because they can’t risk their safety to cross the bridge.
If this problem will not be resolved, there would be a possibility that the
residents will be involved in major accidents while crossing and if typhoons or heavy
rains will last longer, the residents might not cross and food supply would be limited.
CHAPTER III
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
3.1 Investigation
The proponents conducted a survey and asked the residents of Sitio Bolaran
what is the primary problem of the community. The team analyzed the data
gathered from the survey and majority of the residents answered that their
bridge is their biggest concern. So, the team concluded with a solution of
proposing a bridge. After, the team conducted an ocular survey to determine
what are the necessary things to be done pertaining to the bridge designing.
Then, conducted a topographic survey to determine the terrain of the area. Soil
testing and analysis is done by the team. Afterwards, is the designing of the
bridge analyze the bridge weather it is safe or not. Finally, the output of the
bridge is obtained.
3.2 Preliminary Survey
A survey was conducted in Sitio Bolaran in which the proponents asked the
residents living in the area about the primary problem in their community and majority
of the residents mentioned their existing bridge which is made of bamboo. So, the team
conducted an ocular survey to determine what are the necessary things to be done.
Afterwards, the team conducted a small survey as to what impact the bridge could be
to the residents living in the area. In order to gather more information about the area
where the project is located, the proponents discussed the matter to the engineering
department of Albuera, Leyte. It was found out that the residents have been using the
bamboo made bridge for 5 years and it is one of their major concern that there should
be a stable bridge for them to cross to. After evaluating the area, the team conducted a
topographic survey to determine the elevations and coordinates to the proposed bridge.
Then, followed by a soil test to determine what type of soil it is, and to estimate the
probable height the footing be located. As for the bearing capacity, the team used 120
kPa based on the soil bearing capacity of the area. After the preliminary surveys are
done, analysis was also done by the team and then the designing proper.
Figure 4 Soil investigation
After the team gather all the necessary data needed, the proponents proceed to
designing. The superstructure was computed first by gathering all loads such as the live
load, dead load, wind load, seismic load and more. Combine loads were also
determined. The computations were referred to the National Structural Code of the
Philippines (NSCP 2015) to make sure the data used comply to the standards. Software
was used such as STAAD Pro V8i to verify and confirm that the structure is safe and
accessible.
The superstructure is made of steel. The railings used are steel pipes, and steel
plate is used for the slab. The I beam serves as the girder, connected with stiffeners
perpendicular to the girder. They are connected with bolts. On the other hand, the
substructure is a reinforced concrete since using steel for the substructure is not
economical because the length of the bridge is short.
3.3 Analysis and Design
3.3.1 NSCP 2015
The National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) was used by the
proponents to guide them in designing the steel bridge. This is a basis for a safe design
and to meet the requirement of the government in designing. The updated version of
NSCP was used were there are slight changes such as the factors that should be
multiplied to the loads, this is due to the typhoon Yolanda that was experienced in the
Philippines.
3.3.2 Superstructure
STAAD Pro V8i is a software used to design any structure faster without any
manual calculations. This is almost suitable for any types of materials for designing
such as steel, concrete, and etc. The software shows accuracy in results (i. e. Shear
Force, Bending moment diagram) for each and every beam and column of the structure.
The superstructure of a bridge is the portion from the railings to the girders. The
material used in the superstructure is steel. Steel because of its many advantages such
as it is easy to install, can last longer over 30 years and can be economical.
In the superstructure, the proponents used STAAD Pro V8i in the designing of
the entire superstructure from the railings up to the girder to make sure that the accuracy
of the values is high enough to be safe and can still comply the National Structural Code
of the Philippines.
3.3.3 Design of beam
The design of the beam (APPENDIX B) is computed by summing up all the
deadload which is the railings, checkered plate, and wide flange to the live load which
is the vehicle loads considering the minimum passenger car available. The design was
analyzed and designed by STAAD Pro to determine the number of reinforcements
which is from the bottom beam, a total of 21 pcs – 20 mm diameter bars and for the top
beam it has a total of 33 pcs – 20 mm reinforcement bars.
Figure 5 Vehicle Designation
3.3.4 Design of column
The column carries the load from the vehicle load, railings, checkered plate,
wide flange, weight of the beam, and weight of the column. From the given factored
load (Pu) based on the design computation (APPENDIX C) which is 104.232 KN, the
number of bars and the most suitable dimension for the column is determined. From
the formula
Pu = ф(0.80) [0.85 f’c(𝐴𝑔 − 𝐴𝑠𝑡 ) + 𝑓𝑦𝐴𝑠𝑡
the area of the concrete (Ag) can be computed and the dimensions of the column is
determined. The area of steel bar ( 𝐴𝑠𝑡 ) which is equal to 0.015Ag was used by the
proponents. 𝐴𝑠𝑡 ranges from 0.01 to 0.06. The number of bars was also computed using
the formula N =
𝐴𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑏
, where Ast is the total area of steel bar and 𝐴𝑏 is the area of the
diameter bar used.
3.3.5 Design of Footing
Footing is a structural member used to support the column or walls and transmit
their load to the underlying soils. Reinforced concrete is one most suited material for
footing for reinforced concrete, structural steel buildings, walls, towers, and bridges.
A rectangular isolated footing was designed by the proponents which supports
an individual column.
3.4 Design Interpretation
3.4.1 Railings
Based from the analysis of STAAD Pro considering the wind load, earthquake
load, vehicle and accident load, the design of the railings came up with a diameter of
5” steel pipe. 40 pcs steel pipes vertically spaced at 0.5 meters and 2 horizontal pipes.
This will add more safety in the bridge. The height of the railings is 1.2 meters
3.4.2 Steel Plate, Girders, and Stiffeners
For the flooring of the bridge a 12 mm thick checkered plate was used. For
girders, wide flange I beam with a standard size of W21 x 132 is used based on the
availability of the materials in the market and on the table stated from the NSCP as well
as for the stiffeners both are bolt connected will be utilized as designed by the
proponents.
Figure 6 Wide Flange I Beam
3.4.3 Beam
The designed beam has a dimension of 2.8 m x 1 m x 1 m. Considering the load
of the railings, the steel plate, the girders and stiffeners being computed (see
APPENDIX C for detailed computation).
3.4.4 Column
Based from the design computation (APPENDIX C), the computed dimension
of the column is estimated to 700 mm x 700 mm. Since the design is a two (2) separated
columns in every side of the bridge, the computed dimension is not appropriate because
the width of the bridge is only 2 meters, and there would be a small gap between
columns. So, the proponents decided to combine the two (2) columns and use a 1000
mm x 1000 mm dimensions instead since this dimension can still carry the same loads
without any failure. The number of reinforcements used in the columns are 32 pcs. –
20 mm diameter. 20 mm diameter was also used because this is more economical than
using larger diameter considering the number of reinforcements used.
Figure 7 Column Dimension
3.4.5
Footing
The loads considered in computing the design for the footing are from the live
loads passing on the bridge, dead loads of the checkered plate, wide flange, beam and
column. The computed load is 104.232 kN (see APPENDIX C for detailed
computation). The computed safest minimum designed dimension of the footing is 3
m x 3 m with a depth of 1.250 m considering the design of the column being joined
together and based on the STAAD result which is also more economical. There are 20
pcs. 20 mm- diameter bars spaced at 450 mm center to center, both ways for top bars
and for bottom bars.
.
Figure 8 Footing Dimension
CHAPTER IV
PROPOSED SOLUTION
With thorough investigation and analysis, the team came up with a solution of
proposing a steel bridge design because compared to reinforced concrete and timber
design bridges it is more economical since it can last up to 30 years of service. It is also
convenient because it can be installed easily. And aside from those, the Engineering
department of the Municipality of Albuera suggested a steel bridge design on its
superstructure and the substructure is recommended to be reinforced concrete since the
overall structure is just a typical short span bridge.
From the railings, the designed diameter of steel pipe is 5”. Checkered plate is
used for the flooring because unlike the common steel plate, checkered plate is slip
resistant due to its raised pattern and it can also withstand corrosion. This kind of plate
is used in most bridges. The beam that supports the superstructure has a dimensions of
1 m x 2.8 m x 1 m based from the analysis of STAAD that considers the loading from
the vehicle loads, and the loads from the railings, checkered plate and wide flange. The
final dimension for the column is 1 m x 1 m. this is enough to carry the load of the
superstructure and the beam. Lastly, the footing is designed to be 3 m x 3 m x 1.25 m.
The said dimension is the safest minimum design computed based from STAAD
considering the loads from the superstructure, the beam, the column, and the different
soil pressures.
CHAPTER V
RECOMMENDATIONS
The team would like to recommend to the LGU Albuera to make some signage
before crossing the bridge since it is only a one-lane bridge. There’s only one direction
for the vehicle to cross, therefore, if there’s a vehicle coming from different direction,
the driver should wait for the other vehicle driver to cross. As for the pedestrian, there
are allotted space for the latter to cross to. Make sure that the bridge is only limited to
“pedicab” and tricycle vehicles only to assure the safety of the residents as well as the
structure. Lastly, the team would like to recommend proper maintenance and care of
the bridge.
REFERENCES
Besavilla. (2007).Simplified Steel Design with solution to latest CE Board Exam.
DIT Gillesania. (2006).Fundamentals of Structural Steel Design with Theory of
Structure
(2013). Simplified Reinforced Concrete Design
National Structural Code of the Philippines, 2015
https://www.northern-weldarc.com/advantages-disadvantages-structural steelstructures
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/steel/pubs/if12052/
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
SPECIFICATIONS
SITE CLEARING
a. Clearing shall be limited to areas to be occupied by construction, paving,
landscape work or other designated areas.
b. Everything on or above the site surface shall be removed, including garbage,
scrap, grass, vegetable matter, and organic debris, scrub, trees, timber, stumps,
boulder and rubble. Greased soil should be removed.
c. Stumps and roots will be grubbed out to minimum depth of 500 mm below
sub grade under areas, and 300 mm below the finished surface in unpaved
areas. Holes remaining after grubbing out grinding should be backfilled with
sand material to prevent ponding of water. Fill materials shall be compacted to
the relative density of the existing adjacent ground material.
d. Loose material, debris, organic matter and materials which will prevent
satisfactory placement of fill layers shall be removed before placing fill for
ground slabs or load bearing elements, and ground shall be compacted to
achieve the required density.
e.
EXCAVATION
a. Site surface shall be excavated to give the levels and profiles required for
construction, site services, paving and landscaping. Footing shall be excavated
to the required sizes and depths.
b. Before commencing excavation, existing underground services shall be
marked and located in the areas which will be affected by groundwork
operations including clearing, excavating, and trenching. Flat bearing surfaces
shall be provided for load bearing elements including column footings, tie
beams and wall footing.
c. If excavation exceeds the required depth or deteriorates, it shall be reinstated
with fill to the correct depth, level and bearing value.
CONCRETING
a. Concrete should not be mixed when the outdoor shade temperature on the site
exceeds 38 degrees Celsius unless otherwise approved and then only subject to
such conditions as may be imposed.
b. Precautions must also be taken to prevent premature stiffening of the fresh mix
and to reduce water absorption and evaporation losses. Concrete should be
mixed, transported, placed and compacted as rapidly as possible.
REINFORCEMENTS
a. All reinforcing bars shall be supported and tied together to prevent
displacement by construction loads, or the placing of concrete. Reinforcement
shall be free of loose rust and of any other coating which may adversely affect
the bond.
FORMWORKS
a. Formworks shall be designed, erected, supported by the concrete structure
itself.
b. Forms shall conform to the shape and dimensions of the member shown on
the design drawings. Forms and their support shall be designed so as not to
damage previously placed concrete.
c. Forms shall be true, rigidly constructed, and sufficiently tight to prevent
leakage of cement paste. All forms for exposed work shall be free of
defects likely to cause imperfections on the surface of the concrete.
d. Forms shall be suitable for the work to be performed and shall be made of
dressed coco lumber and plywood.
APPENDIX B
ENGINEERING DESIGN
Project Location
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
3D VIEW
PLAN VIEW
SIDE VIEW
CROSS SECTION
BEAM SECTION
BEAM SCHEDULE
FOOTING FRAMING PLAN
FOOTING DETAIL
SCHEDULE OF FOOTING
COLUMN DETAIL
SCHEDULE OF COLUMN
DETAIL OF APPROACH SLAB
STIFFENER SECTIONS
GIRDER SECTION
APPENDIX C
DESIGN COMPUTATION
DESIGN FOR THE SUPERSTRUCTURE
GIRDER
Description: W 21X132
MEMBERS
General
Beam section: W 21X132
Beam material : A36
Beam to girder alignment : Top
Horizontal angle (deg) : 0
Vertical angle (deg) : 0
Horizontal eccentricity : 0 mm
sb: Beam setback : 10 mm
Coped
dct: Top
cope depth : 40 mm
ct: Top cope length : 150 mm
dcb: Bottom cope depth : 40 mm
cb: Bottom cope length : 150 mm
Girder
General
Support section: W 21X132
Support material: A36
ANGLE
Connector
Angle section: EA100X100X10
Material: A36
Angle short leg on beam : Yes
Consider double angle : Yes
Clearance : 3 mm
L: Angle length : 455 mm
Beam side
Angle position on beam : Center
dtop: Distance to beam top : 49.36 mm
Connection type : Bolted
Bolts : 3/4" A325 N
nc: Bolt columns : 1
nr: Rows of Bolts : 6
s: Pitch - longitudinal center-to-center spacing : 75 mm
Lev: Vertical edge distance : 40 mm
Leh: Horizontal edge distance : 40 mm
Hole type on beam : Standard (STD)
Hole type on angle : Standard (STD)
Support side
Connection type : Bolted
Bolts : 3/4" A325 N
nc: Bolt columns : 1
nr: Rows of Bolts : 6
s: Pitch - longitudinal center-to-center spacing : 75 mm
Lev: Vertical edge distance : 40 mm
Leh: Horizontal edge distance : 40 mm
Hole type on support : Standard (STD)
Hole type on angle : Standard (STD)
STIFFENER
Family: Beam splice (BS)
Type: Shear web plate(s)
Description: W 21X132
MEMBERS
Configuration
Centered members : Yes
sb: Beam setback : 10 mm
Left beam
General
Left side beam section : W 21X132
Left side beam material : A36
Right beam
General
Right side beam section : W 21X132
Right side beam material : A36
SHEAR WEB PLATE(S)
Connector
Section : PL 1.8x45x45 1/2
tp: Plate thickness : 18 mm
Plate material : A36
Symmetrical connection : Yes
Plate position on beam : Center
Double plate : Yes
Left side beam
Bolts : 3/4" A325 N
nc: Bolt columns : 2
nr: Rows of Bolts : 6
g: Gage - transverse center-to-center spacing : 140 mm
s: Pitch - longitudinal center-to-center spacing : 75 mm
Lev: Vertical edge distance : 40 mm
Leh: Horizontal edge distance : 40 mm
Hole type on beam : Standard (STD)
Hole type on plate : Standard (STD)
ef: Longitudinal distance to edge : 40 mm
DESIGN OF BEAM
GIVEN:
Beam Length
1400 mm
Breadth (B)
1000 mm
Depth (D)
1000 mm
Effective Depth (d)
930 mm
Design Code
ACI 318M - 2014
Grade Of Concrete (f'c)
35 N/sqmm
Grade Of Steel
Fy420 N/sqmm
Clear Cover (Cmin)
40 mm
Es
2x10^5 N/sqmm
Mubal
7315.44 kNm
As,min (flex) (B)
3274.97 sqmm
As,nominal (Bn)
1209 sqmm
Ast = Max {B, C+D, A+D} (for Mu > 0)
Ast = Bn (for Mu = 0)
Where,
A = Asc (flex) = Compression reinforcement required for bending moment
B = As,min (flex) = Min area of flexural reinforcement
Bn = As,nominal = Nominal area of reinforcement
C = As (flex) =Total area of longitudinal reinforcementcalculated at a given section
Distributed longitudinal torsional
D = Al (Dist) = reinforcement at section considered
Ast (Dist) (sqmm) =
Max(Al,min (Tor), Al (Tor)) x ((2B) / (2B +2D))
Spacing Criteria
Maximum Permissible Spacing = 280 mm
Provided Spacing = 105 mm Hence OK
DESIGN OF COLUMN
Reaction at the Beam
Height of column
𝑓𝑦
f’c
ˠ𝑐
VALUES
117
4.52
420
35
24
UNIT
Kn
M
MPa
MPa
kN/m^3
Solution:

SOLVING FOR DEAD LOAD
Total dead load, 𝐷𝐿 𝑇𝑂𝑇𝐴𝐿 = reaction at the column + 𝐷𝐿𝐵𝐸𝐴𝑀 + 𝐷𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁
𝐷𝐿𝐵𝐸𝐴𝑀 = ( 24 kN/m^3 ) (2.4 m) (0.8 m) (1 m)
𝐷𝐿𝐵𝐸𝐴𝑀 = 46.08 kN
𝐷𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 = ( 24 kN/m^3 ) (4.52 m) (1 m) (1 m)
𝐷𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 = 108.28 kN
𝑫𝑳𝑻𝑶𝑻𝑨𝑳 = 839.212 KN

AXIAL CAPACITY
Pu = 104.232 kN
Pu = фPn
Pu = ф(0.80) [0.85 f’c(𝐴𝑔 − 𝐴𝑠𝑡 ) + 𝑓𝑦𝐴𝑠𝑡
Where:
𝐴𝑠𝑡 = 0.01𝐴𝑔 - 0.06𝐴𝑔
𝐴𝑠𝑡 = 0.015𝐴𝑔
Pu =ф(0.80) [0.85 f’c(𝐴𝑔 − 𝐴𝑠𝑡 ) + 𝑓𝑦𝐴𝑠𝑡
104.232x10^3 = (0.65)(0.80) [0.85 f’c(𝐴𝑔 − 0.015𝐴𝑔 ) + 𝑓𝑦(0.015𝐴𝑔 )
𝐴𝑔 = 670206.433

Dimensions
bh = 𝐴𝑔
h = 670206.433 /1000
h = b = 670.20 (minimum only) Hence, use 1000mm x 1000 mm

Area of reinforcing steel
𝐴𝑠𝑡 = 0.015 x 𝐴𝑔
𝐴𝑠𝑡 = 0.015 x 10002

No. of 20 mm diameter
N=
N=
𝐴𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑔
10,000
𝜋(202 )
4
N = 31.83 ≈ 32 BARS
DESIGN FOR FOOTING
VALUE
UNIT
Thickness of footing
1.250
m
Allowable soil pressure
121.596
MPa
Unit weight of soil
18
KN/m^3
Unit weight of concrete
24
KN/m^3
Yield strength
420
MPa
Compressive strength
35
MPa
Computation is based on STAAD software:
Load combination used:
NUMBER OF REBARS :
Top bars along L = 22 pcs 20 mm- diameter bars
Bottom bars along L = 22 pcs 20 mm- diameter bars
Top bars along B = 22 pcs 20 mm- diameter bars
Bottom bars along B = 22 pcs 20 mm- diameter bars
APPENDIX D
BILL OF MATERIALS
APPENDIX D
BILL OF MATERIALS
COLUMN CAP
MATERIALS
CONCRETE
cement
sand
gravel
REINFORCEMENT
STEEL
Rebar #12
Rebar #16
Rebar#20
QUANTITY
50 kg
180
3.6
3.6
UNIT
AMOUNT
TOTAL
bag/s
cum
cum
220
700
700
39600
2520
2520
44640
200
140
400
kg
kg
kg
22.7
22.5
22.5
4540
3150
9000
16690
10.08
sq. m
57.2
Sub Total
576.576
576.576
61906.58
FORMWORKS
COLUMN
MATERIALS
CONCRETE
cement
sand
gravel
REINFORCEMENT
STEEL
Rebar #10
Rebar #20
QUANTITY
50 kg
452
9.04
9.04
UNIT
AMOUNT
TOTAL
bag/s
cum
cum
220
700
700
99440
6328
6328
112096
836
922
kg
kg
22.7
22.5
18977.2
20745
39722.2
32.16
sq.m
57.2
1839.552
1839.55
153657.8
FORMWORKS
Sub Total
FOOTING
MATERIALS
CONCRETE = 25 cum
cement
sand
gravel
QUANTITY
50 kg
1250
25
25
UNIT
AMOUNT
TOTAL
bag/s
cum
cum
220
700
700
275000
17500
17500
310000
REINFORCEMENT
STEEL
Rebar#20
1912
kg
22.5
43020
43020
20
sq.m
57.2
Sub Total
1144
1144
354164
FORMWORKS
MATERIALS
I BEAMS
QUANTITY
24
UNIT
tons
AMOUNT
36400
TOTAL
873600
STEEL PLATES
MATERIALS
checkered plate
QUANTITY
5
UNIT
pcs
AMOUNT
7200
TOTAL
36000
CONNECTIONS
MATERIALS
bolts(3/4" dia)
QUANTITY
336
UNIT
pcs
AMOUNT
289.6
TOTAL
97305.6
RAILINGS
Total length
122
Unit
m
Amount
1753.33
Total
213906.26
Total
1790540
SUMMARY OF COST
A
Materials
Mobilization Demobilization
Labor
Equipment
Indirect cost
Miscellaneous/Contingencies
VAT
B
Maintenance per yr
8% of A1
35% of A1
6% of A1
1790540
143243.2
626689.1
107432.4
Subtotal
2667905
12% of A
10% of A
5% of A
Subtotal
320148.6
266790.5
133395.25
720334.35
Total
P 3,388,239.35
APPENDIX E
PERTINENT DOCUMENTS
PARENTAL CONSENT
LETTER TO ADVISER
LETTER TO BORROW EQUIPMENT
ACCEPTANCE NOTE