The tie truss

Hameen has completed the model for Tie Truss 1 and Tie Truss 2. It was then combined with the main truss. As a result, it was found that the coordinate of the tie truss does not match the main truss.

As for tday, most of the time was spent on rectifying the problem arise. Finally, we found the culprit of the problem. We noticed that the provided architect's drawing on tie truss does not match the main truss. As a reason, the section of tie truss is larger compare to main truss. Hence, tie truss does not match main truss.

The drawing of tie truss was overlapped on main truss, it was found that tie truss has larger section.

The first step

The coordinate of Main Truss A, Main Truss B and Main Truss C was obtained by using autocad. First, the line of top chord, bottom chord, vertical member and diagonal member was offset. After that, the coordinate was obtained based on the intersection.

As for today, the model of Main Truss A, Main Truss B and Main Truss C was completed.

The coordinate of Main Truss A

Grand hall comes grand effort

Today, I was assigned a task to design UTAR Grand Hall. I have seen the incomplete model and analysis did by Mr. Lim himself. Instantly, it makes me thinks that this time around model and analysis of roof truss is not going to be simple as before.

The latest architect drawings with insufficient information and the passed yet incomplete model and analysis did by Mr. Lim was provided. Part of the project was delegated to Mr. Hameen one of the recently employed trainee from University Malaya. he will be modeling and designing the tie truss. Hence I will be modeling and designing the main truss.

As for today, I studied the drawings and passed analysis provided. After that, proper planing of the project takes place in order to reduce potential mistakes.

The plan view of UTAR grand hall

The cross section view of UTAR grand hall

The mansion

I was assigned by Mr. Lim to design the steel truss of Hajeedar bugalow. Loads were assigned as follow:

Main beam: Dead load = 18.55kN/m^2, Live load = 1.5kN/m^2
Secondary beam: Dead load = 4kN/m^2, Live load = 1.5kN/m^2
Wall: Dead load = 8kN/m

The second story was assigned with only uniform distributed roof load. Deflection was adequate. Lateral torsional buckling and plane flexural buckling was adequate as well.

An overview of Hajeedar bungalow's steel truss

The assigned dead load and live load

The deflected shape of Hajeedar bungalow's steel truss

Architects rule the game

Based on architect's request, verandah method was used to model the previously designed pedestrian bridge 2. Verandah method was meant by replacing the existing diagonal member with additional horizontal member.

After conducting the analysis based on verandah method, it was found that the section used was too huge. Therefore, the diagonal members were retained with the introduction of horizontal member to strengthen the pedestrian bridge.

Additional horizontal member was assigned with the absence of diagonal member

Verandah method was adopted with the existance of diagonal member to reduce the size of section used

A brand new approach

I offered my help to Ms. Aisyah to design and analyse the chalet that is located at Pulau Pangkor. It is a good opportunity to get myself expose and familiarise with ETABS. Architect drawings on plan view of ground floor, first floor, roof plan and elevation of the chalet was provided. As for today, only the grids and columns of the chalet was assigned, the beams for ground floor were also assigned there after.

The model and analysis of Pulau Pangkor's chalet continues today. The beam section, column section and slab thickness was assigned to the model. Based on British standard manual, the dead load of 9.3kN/m was assigned to the beam. On the other hand, the dead load assigned to the slab was 2.0kN/m^2, due to existance of Rendering, while cantilever slab has a dead load of 1.5kN/m^2. The live load that acts on the slab varries based on the usage, range between 2kN/m^2 to 4kN/m^2.

Today is the last day of 7th week, the model and analysis of Pulau Pangkor's chalet continues today. The third story which resembles the roof plan was assigned. The beam section was assigned. The column section was assigned. The slab thickness was assigned.

The model and analysis of Pulau Pangkor's chalet continues today. The previously assigned load was changed to:

Roof beam: Dead load = 1.5kN/m^2, Live load = 0.25kN/m^2

Roof slab: Dead load = 1.5kN/m^2, Live load = 1.5kN/m^2

Ground floor and first floor: Dead load = 1.5kN/m^2, Live load = 2.5kN/m^2

After conducting the analysis, errors were indicated at the angle columns and a few other beams located at the cantilever slab. Angle columns were changed to rectangular columns and larger beam section was assigned to failed beams.

The 3D view and plan view of Pangkor Chalet

The deflected shape of Pangkor Chalet

Pile cap design 2P400 and 7P300

Today, I was taught to design pile cap using truss method. There are limitation for truss method, where the number of pile used should not exceed 6 piles. Example and equation was provided to ease my learning process. Pile cap design for 2P400 was completed on the day.

Beam bending theory was taught to analyse pile cap that has more than 6 piles. Two examples were provided as reference. The first example was on pilecap design 7P300. The second example was on pilecap design 6P300. Both design and analysis was completed on the day.

An example of pilecap