View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
deepak talluri SEFI Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 am Post subject: Plinth beam requirement for a building |
|
|
Dear Sefians,
I am a practicing engineer from Government of Telangana. I got a critical case where initially we planned a structure with plinth beams and pedestals. But later , the site that was provided for the structure was very sloppy in nature. Hence we planned to convert ground floor as cellar for parking. But columns are executed till roof level without plinth beams. The height of columns from top of pedestal to bottom of roof beams is 4.20 m. The argument by the field staff is, plinth beams are not required if we provide pedestals to column . Can we avoid plinth beams if pedestals are provided. Kindly help me out. Please mention the clause showing these arguments too. Thank you |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Abhishek_Singh Bronze Sponsor
Joined: 18 Nov 2010 Posts: 613
|
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Q1. Is this a steel building or RCC building?
Q2. When you say pedestal and plinth beam, it doesnt make sense, honestly. Could you upload some plans, elevations and sections?
Q3. First you tell me why plinth beams are required in any structure?
Q4. Is retrofitting something your government would be willing to do, if I provide you answers here (for free ).
Q5. Is this the Telengana state PWD project?
Abishek |
|
Back to top |
|
|
deepak talluri SEFI Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Abhishek,
Here are the answers for your questions
Q1. Is this a steel building or RCC building?
Its an RCC building.
Q2. When you say pedestal and plinth beam, it doesnt make sense, honestly. Could you upload some plans, elevations and sections?
I have the same doubt too. I find it to be sensless to copare both pedestals and plinth beams so i asked the same..
Q3. First you tell me why plinth beams are required in any structure?
Plinth beams are required to break the column heights and also to act like a tie . Structure acts like a single member and differential settlements can be avoided.
Q4. Is retrofitting something your government would be willing to do, if I provide you answers here (for free ).
Its not a retrofitting work. Its absolutely a new building
Q5. Is this the Telengana state PWD project?
Yes |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sudhakaran General Sponsor
Joined: 16 Jul 2013 Posts: 240 Location: Kannur
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:36 am Post subject: Re: Plinth beam requirement for a building |
|
|
Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear Sefians,
I am a practicing engineer from Government of Telangana. I got a critical case where initially we planned a structure with plinth beams and pedestals. But later , the site that was provided for the structure was very sloppy in nature. Hence we planned to convert ground floor as cellar for parking. But columns are executed till roof level without plinth beams. The height of columns from top of pedestal to bottom of roof beams is 4.20 m. The argument by the field staff is, plinth beams are not required if we provide pedestals to column . Can we avoid plinth beams if pedestals are provided. Kindly help me out. Please mention the clause showing these arguments too. Thank you |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
deepak talluri SEFI Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
No sir, its on gravel with an SBC of 20 kn/m2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sudhakaran General Sponsor
Joined: 16 Jul 2013 Posts: 240 Location: Kannur
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Er. Deepak,
SBC 200kNm2 ??
If the structure is designed by providing Plinth beam, it is risky, column should be redesigned as per present condition for verification.
Also check the possibility of differential settlement before proceeding further
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
No sir, its on gravel with an SBC of 20 kn/m2 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
deepak talluri SEFI Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry sir,
Its typo. it is 20t/m2.
Yes sir, the columns are to be rechecked incorporating the present status but their argument is plinth beams are not required if we provide Pedestals. I was completely shocked with this argument. So, i posted here in SEFI. Kindly help.
Sudhakaran wrote: | Dear Er. Deepak,
SBC 200kNm2 ??
If the structure is designed by providing Plinth beam, it is risky, column should be redesigned as per present condition for verification.
Also check the possibility of differential settlement before proceeding further
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
No sir, its on gravel with an SBC of 20 kn/m2 |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sudhakaran General Sponsor
Joined: 16 Jul 2013 Posts: 240 Location: Kannur
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Er. Deepak,
The argument will be valid in some cases.
If the plinth beam provided only for the purpose of reducing the Unrestrained length of column and replacing with pedestal will not effect the unrestrained length of the column
deepak talluri wrote: | Sorry sir,
Its typo. it is 20t/m2.
Yes sir, the columns are to be rechecked incorporating the present status but their argument is plinth beams are not required if we provide Pedestals. I was completely shocked with this argument. So, i posted here in SEFI. Kindly help.
Sudhakaran wrote: | Dear Er. Deepak,
SBC 200kNm2 ??
If the structure is designed by providing Plinth beam, it is risky, column should be redesigned as per present condition for verification.
Also check the possibility of differential settlement before proceeding further
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
No sir, its on gravel with an SBC of 20 kn/m2 |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
deepak talluri SEFI Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear sir,
Can u please elaborate your explanation. We have provided both pedestals and plinth beams in the earlier drawings. But they haven't executed them instead brought forward the argument.
Sudhakaran wrote: | Dear Er. Deepak,
The argument will be valid in some cases.
If the plinth beam provided only for the purpose of reducing the Unrestrained length of column and replacing with pedestal will not effect the unrestrained length of the column
deepak talluri wrote: | Sorry sir,
Its typo. it is 20t/m2.
Yes sir, the columns are to be rechecked incorporating the present status but their argument is plinth beams are not required if we provide Pedestals. I was completely shocked with this argument. So, i posted here in SEFI. Kindly help.
Sudhakaran wrote: | Dear Er. Deepak,
SBC 200kNm2 ??
If the structure is designed by providing Plinth beam, it is risky, column should be redesigned as per present condition for verification.
Also check the possibility of differential settlement before proceeding further
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
No sir, its on gravel with an SBC of 20 kn/m2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sudhakaran General Sponsor
Joined: 16 Jul 2013 Posts: 240 Location: Kannur
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Er. Deepak,
Can you please forward the detailed drawing of the particular portion(plinth beam and pedestal) and number of floors proposed.
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear sir,
Can u please elaborate your explanation. We have provided both pedestals and plinth beams in the earlier drawings. But they haven't executed them instead brought forward the argument.
Sudhakaran wrote: | Dear Er. Deepak,
The argument will be valid in some cases.
If the plinth beam provided only for the purpose of reducing the Unrestrained length of column and replacing with pedestal will not effect the unrestrained length of the column
deepak talluri wrote: | Sorry sir,
Its typo. it is 20t/m2.
Yes sir, the columns are to be rechecked incorporating the present status but their argument is plinth beams are not required if we provide Pedestals. I was completely shocked with this argument. So, i posted here in SEFI. Kindly help.
Sudhakaran wrote: | Dear Er. Deepak,
SBC 200kNm2 ??
If the structure is designed by providing Plinth beam, it is risky, column should be redesigned as per present condition for verification.
Also check the possibility of differential settlement before proceeding further
deepak talluri wrote: | Dear Deepak,
Is it in rock?
No sir, its on gravel with an SBC of 20 kn/m2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|
|