Floor Systems

B1 Level Floor System Options

Option 1 – Slab on Grade with Grade Beams

Option 2 – Structural Slab at Grade

1st Floor System Options

Option 1 – Cast In-Situ Conventionally Reinforced Concrete Flat Plate

Option 2 – Cast In-Situ Beams and One-Way Slab

500mm250mm

725mm

Office Floor System Options

Option 1 – Flat Plate Option 2 – Post-Tensioned Concrete

Option 3 – Hybrid Precast / Cast In-Situ Beam and Slab

Option 4 –Beam and One-Way Slab

300mm 240mm

200mm75mm 175mm

425mm

Office Floor Floor System Options Matrix

1 2 3 4

Conventional Cast In-Situ Flat Plate

Cast In-Situ R/C Post-Tensioned Flat Plate

Hybrid Precast R/C Beam and HC Plank

Cast In-Situ R/C Beam and One-Way Slab

Concrete Quantity 0.33 m3/m2 0.26 m3/m2 0.25 m3/m2 0.26 m3/m2

Rebar Quantity 40 kg/m2 25 kg/m2 32 kg/m2 50 kg/m2

PT Tendon Quantity

N/A 6 kg/m2 N/A N/A

Foundation Premium

1.06 1.00 0.99 1.02

System Cost1 91.1 mill AED 96.8 mill AED 85.3 mill AED Not available

Carbon2 17,760 TCO2/m2 13,174 TCO2/m2 11,769 TCO2/m2 Not available

Structural Depth 300 mm 240 mm600 mm(at girder)

600 mm(at girder)

1 – Costs estimated from 08.07.13 Faithful+Gould Report

2 – From 08.06.30 D Carbon 8 Report

Pile FoundationPile Layout

• 1.2 m diameter piles• f’c = 50 MPa (cube)• Piles resisting lateral loads at base• Additional Shear Walls + Lateral piles being coordinated at Undercroft

Corridors• Target capacities: 25m pile = 10,211 kN 20m =7,465 kN

Typical Pile Directly Below Columns Except at Pile Groups

Piles Below Cores Reinforced for Lateral Loads

20m piles 25m piles

Pile FoundationPile Analysis

Idealized Pile

SAP ModelDeflected

ShapeBendingMoment

Bending Moment Resisted withinupper ½ of pile

EL +4.00m (NADD)

EL -2.00m (NADD)

EL -21.00m (NADD)

Springs representLateral resistance of soil

Horiz sub mod: 80,000kN/m

Horiz sub mod: 640,000kN/m

Pile FoundationPile Details

EXTEND SHAFT VERITCAL REINFORCMENT INTO GRADE BEAM

ROUGHNED CLEAN SURFACE

1.2 M DIAM.

1.2 M DIAM. 1.2 M DIAM

20

ME

TE

RS

.

25

ME

TE

RS

.

25

ME

TE

RS

.

REINFORCED FOR LATERAL LOADS

Lateral System

Lateral SystemLocation of Resisting Components

X

YX

Y

Residence Core #1

Residence Core #2

Residence Core #3

Residence Core #4

Residence Core #5

Residence Core #6

Office Core #2

Office Core #3

Office Core #1

Moment Frame

X

Y

Lateral SystemImposed Lateral Forces

X

Y

Comparison of Magnitude of Lateral LoadingWind and Seismic Loading Story Shears on Residence Building

Seismic Load per UBC 97, Wind Load by 0.96 kN/m2 on projected area

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

Story Shear (kN)

Sto

ry

Seismic

Wind X

Wind Y

contribution of trellis seismic shear

Lateral System

Net unbalanced loading equal to 8% of maximum seismic base shear

Sloped Columns Lateral Effects

Idealized slope column Lateral Impact of Sloped Columns

Lateral SystemCore Wall Participation

X

Y

Seismic Story Shear Distribution, X DirectedDistribution of Lateral Loading on Cores of Residence Building

Seismic load per UBC 97

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000

Shear (kN)

Sto

ry

Core 1

Core 2

Core 3

Core 4

Core 5

Core 6

Lateral SystemCore Wall Participation

X

Y

Seismic Story Shear Distribution, Y DirectedDistribution of Lateral Loading on Cores of Residence Building

Seismic load per UBC 97

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000

Shear (kN)

Sto

ry

Core 1

Core 2

Core 3

Core 4

Core 5

Core 6

Lateral SystemCore Wall Participation Example, Residence Building X Direction Lateral Force

X

Y

X

Y

X

Y

5% 35% 5%

5% 35% 5%

Residence Core #2

Residence Core #3

Residence Core #5

Residence Core #6

Residence Core #1

Residence Core #4

Lateral System

X

Y

X

Y

10% 30% 10%

10% 30% 10%

Residence Core #1

Residence Core #2

Residence Core #3

Residence Core #4

Residence Core #5

Residence Core #6

Core Wall Participation Example, Residence Building Y Direction Lateral Force

Lateral System ComponentsCore #5 vs. Typical Cone

Comparison of Cone and Wall DisplacementDisplacement of Residence Core #5 vs. Typical Residene ConeTest Earthquake corresponding to Residence Core #5 Loading

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Displacement (mm)

Sto

ry

Cone

Wall

Residence Core 5

Typical Residence Cone

Lateral System Load SourcesGreen Roof Depth Impact Comparison

Total Base Shears:1500 mm Option: 69170kN300 mm Option: 61090kN

*300 mm option values do not consider economies in slab thickness

Green Roof Option Study-Residence BuildingComparison of Seismic Applied Forces and Story Shears

for 1500mm and 300mm Deep Green Roofs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

Force/Shear (kN)

Sto

ry

1500 mm Soil Depth-Applied Seismic Force

300 mm Soil Depth-Applied Seismic Force

1500 mm Soil Depth-Story Shear

300 mm Soil Depth-Story Shear

Total Base Shears:1500 mm Soil Depth: 69170kN300 mm Soil Depth: 61090kN

*300 mm Soil Depth values do not consider economies in slab thickness

Issues Affecting Piling Permit and Tender:

• Geotechnical Report• Subsurface exploration for voids• Confirmation of pile capacities• Concrete Mix Design for soil chloride and

sulfate content• Wind Tunnel Report• Floor System Decisions• Construction Loading Requirements at Lv1• Green Roof Loading Requirements