Sunday, October 30, 2011

HCAAP (NIA) the UNFINISHED PROJECTS

UNFINISHED PROJECTS (HCAAP)... HANJIN Industries and Construction Ltd., the Korean contractor.

Timely, the NIA-HCAAP projects (Help for Catubig Agricultural Advancement Projects) in Catubig and Las Navas, Northern Samar, link map, Philippines. These projects are being funded through LOANS from Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA-JBIC) and government of the Philippines;


View Larger Map

A Glimpse of the projects:

First, the Catubig diversion dam and the Canals (completed sometime in June 2010 or May 2011) and the Canals and minor structures are not yet completed as of May 2011, the dam was discovered to have cracks due to flooding last December 2010 as Mr. Deodito Tejero was telling story about the cracks, while drinking beer at the office of JD Legaspi Const., and had undergone repair works undertaken by HANJIN. On the time while I was there the HANJIN was still constructing the CANALS and some minor structures even the contract was already finished because actually it was not really finished even the consultant the Japanese Mr. Toku was there always visiting and walking on the site as of May 2011;

The construction of Bulao diversion dam and Hagbay diversion dam under contract with HANJIN Industries and Construction Ltd., were terminated, the Bulao diversion Dam was rebid; and then;

Second, the Hagbay diversion Dam project at Sta. Fe, Catubig town, 10 kilometers away from town proper of Las Navas with poor, muddy and inaccessible road to reach the site, had been awarded last July 2, 2010 to Jesusito Legaspi Construction, wherein as of April 18, 2011 having a negative slippage (-16.6%) as per letter of the NIA Administrator and was subject for termination already, because the sub-contractor and the engineers (Mr. Danilo Maderazo, magna cum laude, former Professor of civil engineering at Divine Word University, former reviewer of Salazar engineering review center, first placer in the Geodetic engineers licensure exam, my professor) from Tacloban City and Enzo construction from Catbalogan Western Samar, had abandoned and left the Hagbay dam project, because when they made their "EVALUATION daw" they marked him as having No sufficient experiences in dam construction, and inadequate qualifications.

Hence, the main contractor Jesusito D. Legaspi construction has resorted to get a new sub-contractor from Catarman Northern Samar, henceforth, a protégé of Politicians or (we don't KNOW who are their back-ups?), had accepted the sub-con contract from Jesusito D. Legaspi construction, this sub-contractor did not make a clearer view, thorough study and did not make detailed estimates of the contract design plans, the works to be done, namely; major structures (DAM structures), bridge structure, minor structures (drainage canals, irrigation canals with access road and/or service road with the same length of the irrigation canals length (14.2 km.), intake boxes, crossing pipes, the length of drainage canals, etc. The sub-contractor is not a civil engineer but unlicensed mechanical graduate, bully, prideful and CRAFTY person, a new contractor one and 1/2 (1.5 year), Mr. Rikki Rubenecia. Unfortunately, he accepted the sub-con contract amount of (47.62%) out of ph231 Millions total contract amount by the main contractor, which is very obvious by a simple mind and layman analysis and understanding, that the sub-contract amount is only 47.62% of the total contract amount. hence, the projects would be finished using sub-standard materials and low quality project with the amount accepted by the sub-contractor.

Here are the crucial parts of my study and OBSERVATIONS:


I was too inquisitive and become curious, enquiring, why they were very prideful of their design, so I used my time to delve into details, in my in depth study of the design plans of the said projects, I discovered that the reinforced concrete design of the DAM Structures and Bridge Structures were not accurate as being bragged by the NIA engineers. If you read this blogpost it's a big question mark why?"a civil engineer also had worked there from year 2007 to June 2010 as one of the engineers and CAD operator". Accordingly, I was able to retrieve the Excel files of Danilo De Asis containing the Spreadsheets for DAM structures and Bridge Structures, namely; Catubig dam, Pinipisakan Bridge Flume, Hagbay dam and service Bridge, Bulao dam structural analysis and design computations. I reviewed and checked the spreadsheets calculations and the results are not good as being show off and pridefully bragged by Mr. Danilo de Asis, Prisco O. Boco III and Dennis Lozano. I discovered when I checked that the Chief designer Prisco O. Boco III and Amadeo Montejo had made mistakes in the applications of formulas and assumptions for Bridge Columns, Barrages piers, Sluice piers, T-Beams, R-Beams, Slabs; These are not altered copies all of these are authentic.

Hagbay Bridge Design using Spreadsheet, with Omega, w= 0.18, an Old Standard

Side Elevation of Bridge - 20 meters long

Section Detail of Hagbay Bridge included in the Hagbay Dam construction

Bridge Beam Rebars Details, adopted an OLD methods, using 45 degrees bent -up at L/4, the splice points were not considered to conform with new detailing method

Side view Detail of Rebars, using 45 degrees bent -up of main bars clearly an OLD Method of Detailing

They used Old standard, omega, w =0.18 and rho =0.18f'c/fy for control of deflection, clearly an old standard ACI 318-1963 Code provision, Chapter 15, section 1507-Control of Deflections, used until 1970 as midrange percentage reinforcement, rho=As/bd =0.18f'c/fy (although it is not distinctly advantageous value as per Prof. Phil M. Ferguson, Prof. John Breen and Prof. James O. Jirsa commented in their book reinforced concrete fundamentals, Prof. J. Jirsa- ACI 318 Code committee member, and Professor of University of Texas), which was evidently DISCARDED from the Code, ACI 318-1971 Code, also discarded in all publications of ACI 318 Code from 1977 to 2011, obviously more than 40 years time had elapsed already. The ACI 435-Control of Deflections in Concrete Structures, has recommended a limiting values of steel ratio, rho (0.25*rhobal to 0.35*rhobal), also recommended the Minimum thickness of Beams and One-Way in Roof and Floor construction.

At the Introduction page of the ACI code states ACI (1977) and ACI318-2011 was adopted as a standard of the ACI to SUPERSEDE ACI old editions in accordance with the institute's standardization procedure.

References:
Reinforced Concrete Fundamentals, Prof. John Breen, Prof. James O. Jirsa-1987;
Handbook of Concrete Engineering by Mark Fintel, Dan Branson-P.E., Ph.D.- 2nd edition-1985;
ACI Committee 435-Control of Deflections in Concrete Structures-1978;
Design Concrete Structures by Park and Paulay-1974;
Reinforced Concrete Design by Noel Everard, MSCE, Ph.D. and Tanner, University of Texas-1966.

The LOAD COMBINATION THEY USED was Working Stress Design (WSD), Group III and VII of the AASHO 1961-1974 editions and they combined with load factors used by ACI 318;

Group III = 1.4DL + 1.7*( LL + Impact)

Group VII = D + E + B + SF + EQ

The Load factor is equal to 1.3 for dead load NOT Equal to 1.4.

The Load Factor equal to 1.7 for Live Load is not correct, because this is applicable only to Gravity Loads for vertical structures and not applicable to TRUCK MOVING LOADS for bridges, the correct LOAD FACTOR (LF) is equal to =2.2, as per ACI 343R-95-Analysis and Design of RC Bridge structures and NSCP v2-1997, as per AASTHO-1973-Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. 

According to AASHTO 1975 to 1996, Load Factor Design, Group III and VII Load Combination are;

Group III = 1.3D + 2.2*( L +I )n....., and

Group VII =y[ beta(e) *D + beta(e)*E + B + SF +EQ]

References:
AASHTO-1973, 1992, 1996, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2012;
ACI 343- Analysis and Design of Reinforced Concrete Bridge Structures-1995;
NSCP V2- Bridges, 2nd edition-1997

The Strength Reduction factor equal to phi =0.7 for Compression members (columns and also beams which are in compression control) which was applicable up through the ACI 318-99 Code, they have been changed to phi =0.65 for compression control members, beginning with ACI318-2002 Code and continuing with the ACI318-2005 and ACI318-2011 up to present... Let me educate you people there...!!! The standards you are using should be updated..


ACI 318-1963, published on June 1963

First, he used the OLD ACI 1963, 1971 and parts of 1983 ACI 318 codes as per Books by V. Besavilla, Jr., who cited the 1983 ACI Code (with due respect to Besavilla), which are very obvious an obsolete ACI codes, in which undergo major revisions every six (6) years and minor revisions in between.

Fig. 2a Pier Load calculation using 50% of 20 tonnes truck load
Fig. 2b Pier moving load analysis using 50% of  10 tonnes truck loads

Second, they used the AASHTO specifications (american association of state highway and transportation officials), the HS 20-1944 -8,000 lbs for front axle and 32,000 lbs for rear axles load and HS 10-1944 -4000 lbs front axle, 16000 lbs rear axle; in my review of their design they used only 50% of 20 tonnes and 10 tonnes truck load for the piers and columns analysis. Whereas, they used 100% of 20 tonnes and 10 tonnes truck load (HS 20, HS 10) for girders designs, which was a GREAT BLUNDER in design load calculations.

Hence, the Girders are stronger than Piers/columns. Fig. 2a and 2b; Screen shot for their load calculations.

Third, consequently he inadvertently applied erroneous formulas for the variables “C” distances from the neutral axes to the compression concrete fiber, which had resulted a bigger and negative (-) values for the theoretical Strength Design Capacity, ϕPn and ϕMn for the Columns and/or Piers of Dams (Barrages, Sluices) and service Bridges Piers, which he noted DISCARD design. How could a design calculation be discarded if all assumptions of the designs were accurate? I verified the calculations and made my conclusion, viz:
  1. The strain compatibility analysis was not done correctly;
  2. ϕPn is NEGATIVE it means the load is axially upward (tension);
  3. The variable "C" is negative(-), the distance from neutral axis to extreme compression fiber of concrete meaning variable "C" is outside the section diagram.
My comment:

variable 'C" must not be negative value, and never become a negative value!

Why don't they used the NEW ACI CODE PROVISIONS, if they are well experienced engineers with many work experiences as they bragged. As a SUGGESTION to them! USE the NEW ACI CODE provisions to SHOW OFF to others that they are well equipped with new weapons and ammunition (NEW STANDARDS, Codes). So, if they need NEW ACI318 CODE I have a copy of the latest ACI318 Code-2011 edition...! The AASHTO-2010 Bridge Design specifications..! The ACI Manual of Concrete Practice 2008 edition, six (6) volumes.

Therefore, the design is absurd! Why? Because the application of formulas was erroneous. please see the screen shot below.

Fig. 3 value of "C" and "fs" are negative -by PRISCO BOCO III
Fig. 4 value of C , Pny and fs are negative-design by PRISCO BOCO III

Pinipisakan Bridge Profile and  Side Elevation

Pier #3 Design by Prisco Boco, III compared /checked to his Calculation 

Subsequently, I tried to check, correct and rectify the applications of the formulas he used, hence, I have arrived a correct values which I have compared with the examples presented in the books of Venancio Besavilla (author-Reinforced Concrete Design) and Prof. A. H. Nilson, PhD., C. K. Wang, PhD. and C. G. Salmon, PhD. , P. Ferguson and James O. Jirsa (authors -reinforced concrete books), and I have also applied the ACI 318 Code-2005 and ACI 318 Code-2008 Codes, ACI Design Handbook, volume 2 -1997 (American Concrete Institutes) which I have latest copies.

There are three methods in the analysis and design of concrete columns as discussed by Chu-Kia Wang in his book reinforced concrete design, namely;

  1. Principles of statics;
  2. Non-dimensional strength interaction diagram (ACI design handbook, vol.2); and
  3. Approximate method using Whitney formula.

I will not discussed anymore these methods of design calculations but I suggest to them to read these design books. In view of the fact that engineering education in the Philippines is American oriented.

The Engineers are not permanent employees of NIA–HCAAP(PMO), they are all casuals and job orders employees, co-terminus. The engineers are being hired and employed thru politicians (palakasan system or with recommendation) the Politicians (who..?) or PM.

Mr. Danilo de Asis a graduate of BSCE on 2001, at the University of Eastern Philippines (UEP-Catarman Northern Samar) he replaced Mr. Prisco O. Boco III, as chief for operations who was transferred to regional office Tacloban City, although Mr. Danilo De Asis had worked for 9 years in NIA-HCAAP still he is inexperienced in design and construction, Dennis Losano a young engineer also. The Project Engineer Mr. David Irorita (BSCE) he is a good man, a man of few words, Asst. PE Buenaventura Poso (BSCE 2003) a good man also, the project -in charge Deodito Tejero (BSCE) from Biri Northern Samar a good man also (but effeminate-vicious-man engineer he often ask for allowance). Most of the engineers are younger than I am, why because when they enrolled civil engineering in UEP sometime in 1995 and 1996, I was a registered civil engineer already in 1991-1992, and had worked as Assistant Project engineer and Materials engineer in the construction of Catarman Bridge (232 linear meters) and by-pass road (6 kilometers), project cost was 110 millions pesos; and then transferred to LGU engineer (government). I have no resentment to those persons I mentioned, but people inside their ranks who wanted to belittle and degrade others, have questioned the integrity and credibility of others, must be very careful in judging others. As the Bible says! Matthew 7:2 "For with what judgement you are JUDGING, YOU will be judged; and with the MEASURE that YOU are MEASURING out, they will MEASURE out to YOU.

Unfriendly, the Project Manager Mr. Reinerio Irinco an Agricultural Engineering (BSAE) graduate and Mr. Danilo de Asis and others were saying that the contractor’s engineers are still young and inexperienced engineers. Mr. Reinerio Irinco was unaware of the facts that design calculations done by them was erroneous.

When meeting was held, Mr. Reinerio Irinco suggested that the contractor should hire engineers, having age ranging from 50 to 80 years old and having experiences of more than 10 years in dam construction, office engineer, and earthwork supervisor to supervise a project 10 kilometers away from town proper of Las Navas, Philippines, and he urged that the contractor must put funding to expedite the construction, and warned us that within 3 months (starting/beginning June 27, 2011) if there is no substantial accomplishment in major item of works, he will recommend that the contract will be terminated, I quote "You tell your boss (?) to put funds and hire more engineers with experience, surveyors, materials, and then he said! we will consider the experiences and qualifications of the engineers as per submitted RESUME'" Precisely! I agreed to him, he has experienced in managing projects as retirable engineer, but not in Design..! I admire him being an OLD engineer, also, the consultant Mr. Teopilo Malicse an old engineer who were using old standards (as old as their ages). I heard many feed backs from reliable sources (during bidding of some minor works at the HCAAP-PMO Catarman) that engineers included in the Organization Chart by JD Legaspi were inexperienced. Even Pierre Paul Carpio reacted about the words uttered by them, when we had a meeting. He said! I quote "you have the same education, you are all civil engineers." Parehas lang kayo mga engineers in local dialect.

Hence, Pride is more powerful and dangerous than humility, and indeed! we are just hired and being displayed by Mr. Eking Rubinicia, because Mr. Rubinicia is not experienced contractor and not a civil engineer, HE is just a sub-contractor of this project being used by somebody (who?). The problem was on the side of the main contractor who let inexperienced person to handle this multi-million project and then pretended to be experienced and could not defend his engineers from prideful engineers who supervise these simple projects. Nobody could withstand the hardship because the means of transportation is "WALKING" in a muddy, rough road and motorcycle back ride to reach the site, a far flung barangay Sta. Fe, Catubig, we went there on foot for the whole 6 kilometers on June 11, 2011. I am hoping that they could pressure the sub-contractor to do by all means to finish this son of a gun projects, and headache projects, so to speak. "BATO-BATO sa LANGIT ang TAMAAN ay HUWAG MAGALIT", "we are engineers not soldiers". We let our temper burst out like a gun, and then pull the trigger, because your ego, and our pride was hit by somebody..!

The projects were jointly funded by the Government of the Philippines and Government of Japan which involve millions of US Dollar and millions Philippine Pesos only to find out that the DESIGN were not accurate and erroneous application of design formulas. And to find out that the road was not constructed in good conscience. Politics is more powerful than knowledge and experiences.

Moreover, my feet and hands were embedded up to the knee level (nabaon ang paa ko hanggang tuhod) in the muddy road which was also a FMR project of NIA-HCAAP reported 100% completed as of 2008, this BULAO Farm to Market Road (FMR) was implemented by the Provincial engineering office with the supervision of JICA Consultants (JV of CONSULTANTS for HCAAP), this 7.10 kilometers FMR Project was Php 64 millions, but until now it's inaccessible and muddy road, I was surprised why the HCAAP (PMO) accepted 100% completed this Farm to Market Road. Only few people knew the real story behind the acceptance. Why? I met the former Mayor and now the incumbent Vice Mayor of Las Navas, he told me the real story behind, he could not complain to higher authority because he said he does like to quarrel with the gods in the province, and he said! I quote "Karma-gaba will judge them." I inserted PICTURES with dates as of December 3, 2010 to May 20, 2011, to present clear evidence, because they will deny these FACTS.
PH 64 millions 7.1 kilometers BULAO Farm to Market Road, DATE is DECEMBER 03, 2010, YOU can not deny this Mr. Johnny- A CLEAR EVIDENCE PICTURE

7.1 km. BULAO Farm to Market Road -HCAAP reported 100% completed, THIS PICTURE is CLEAR EVIDENCE of POOR construction, the DATE MAY 20, 2011 

7.1 km. BULAO FMR 100% completed reported by HCAAP- THIS PICTURE CLEAR EVIDENCE 
As an advice, I suggested to Mr. Gilbert Frincillo (graduate from Leyte Institute of Technology-Tacloban City), who is also ignorant or maybe he forgot the concrete design, engineer of the main contractor to hire from Harvard University (USA), University of Illinois (USA), Cornell University (USA) to employ engineers good in design, then if they could not find, and hire from Harvard University, Illinois, California University and Cornell University, my advice is to hire elsewhere "JOKE ONLY" "Bato-Bato sa Langit ang tamaan huwag magalit". HIRE from University of Eastern Philippines UEP-Catarman N. Samar) as what the HCAAP (PMO) did! like for instance they hired Mr. Danilo de Asis- BSCE 2001, Dennis Lozano (BSCE) graduated from University of Eastern Philippines (UEP- Catarman, N. Samar) having puffed up with pride and pedantic (in local dialect "nagdunong-dunongan"), with little knowledge or they forgot what they studied in concrete design, bridge analysis or may be they don't research the new ACI Code, or maybe they were absent during their CLASSES, and frankly speaking inexperienced engineer, all of them are protege of Mr. Irinco. Sorry to utter hostile comments to them, I hoped that congressman Daza will be awakened of this observation. THESE ARE NOT SELF SERVING COMMENTS, THIS IS FACTUAL OBSERVATION with EVIDENCE.

To show their design Calculations, I am posting screen shot taken from their protected spreadsheets and photos proof of their mistakes for anyone to review.

Screen shot for DISCARD Design due to Negative "C" or small eccentricity


Discard design by Prisco O. Boco III


Screen shot for Strain diagram and C calculation
Catubig Dam -2 gates only but having errors in design e.g. C distance and Strength Capacity
Screen shot Catubig Dam having errors in Strength Capacity -Pn- calculations
REBID BULAO DAM (LEFT UNFINISHED BY HANJIN Industries and Construction Ltd.)

DESIGNERS for BARRAGE DAMS and SLUICES PIERS, BRIDGE FLUMES, SERVICE BRIDGES, should have undergone training and seminars in structural analysis, concrete designs before become prideful, haughty engineers and eventually become HUMBLE in the eyes of GOD and to men.

Post Script:

They are showing in their reports and blog (Jhonny) some good pictures like the bridge in Las Navas which was designed and implemented by DPWH and supervised by Engineer Manuel "Sam" Uy from BOC-DPWH, Regional Office (R8), construction division, Engr. Uy was my co-worker in Oras Bridge, Oras Eastern Samar, Philippines, because this Las Navas highway bridge was DPWH project component under the HCAAP-NIA. Bid out on December 29, 2005, the bid amount was Php448 Million plus, implemented and supervised by DPWH central office and Construction division Region 8. Hence, Mr. Johnny, and other engineers showed pictures of this bridge, because they wanted to cover up their blunders in designed, failures and supervising these projects and be PRAISED by their administrator, director and the Provincial government.

The recent updates of these projects are good; The Project Manager Mr. Irinco had been transferred to NIA Central Office, then retired from government service, and Mr. Danilo De Asis had resigned from HCAAP.

To inform and speak to the persons who read this blogpost and made COMMENTS:

About the author of this blog..!

He is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE);
He is a member of American Concrete Institute (ACI);

First, He worked as Project Engineer in the Construction of Oras Bridges 1 and 2, Oras Eastern Samar a Bored Pile Bridge (50 meters depth per bored pile, f'c =3000 psi) and Post-Tensioned girders (f'c =5,000 psi, 30 meters long girders), having a total length of 540 meters long (12 spans and 6 spans, 30 meters per span, this bridge was the first of it's kind, a bored piles bridge in region 8 when it was constructed in 1996 to 2000; under the supervision of the Bureau of Construction-BOC-DPWH Central office and DPWH -Regional office, Region VIII (8); under contract with BALM Construction, Co., Inc.

Oras Bridge -12 Spans

Second, he worked as Assistant Project Engineer and Material Engineer in the Construction of Catarman Bridge 232 meters long (8 spans, 28.4 meters long girders, f'c =5,000 psi), in 1992 to 1995 under the supervision of PADAP-SIRDP-Philippine Australian Development Assistance Program-Samar Integrated Rural development projects, this was a foreign assisted project; under Contract with BALM Construction, Co., Inc.

Catarman Bridge 8-spans
Catarman Bridge
Catarman Bridge


Then third, at the same time, he worked as material engineer in the construction of Jubasan bridge, ALLEN N. Samar, under PJHL-Philippine JAPAN Highway Loan- foreign assisted project; under Contract with BALM Construction, Co., Inc.

BALM Construction was the same contractor who constructed the 6-BRIDGES in Mondragon-Pambujan by-pass road (14 kilometers road), viz.; Mondragon Bridge (1984 -1987), Mondragon-Bugko Bridge (1986 -1987), Mondragon-Bagasbas -2 Bridges (1987); Pambujan Bridge (1988 to 1990); 1-bridge in San Roque N. Samar; and then Basiad Bridge in Bicol (1996 to 1998), Sipukot Bridge in Bicol, and more bridges, etc.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

History of Structural Analysis

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS as we know it today evolved over several thousand years. During this time many types of structures such as beams, arches, trusses and frames were used in construction for Hundred or even thousand of years before satisfactory methods of analysis were developed for them.

While ancient engineers showed some understanding of structural behavior (with evidenced of their successful construction of bridges, cathedrals, etc.), real progress with the Theory of Structural Analysis occurred only in the past 150 years.

The EGYPTIANS and other ancient builders surely had some kinds of empirical rules drawn from previous experiences for determining sizes of structural members. There is, However, NO EVIDENCE that they had developed any THEORY of STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS. The Egyptian Imhotep built the great PYRAMID of Saqqara (the Step pyramid of Djoser, Egypt's first pyramid) in circa 2630 B.C. sometimes is referred to as the world's first Structural Engineer and master builder. The Khufu's pyramid at about circa 2550 B. C., height 147 meters built by Egyptian Hemiunu, Pharaoh khufu's master builder; the largest pyramid ever built, it incorporates about 2.3 millions tone blocks. No doubt the Egyptians and other ancient builders had formulated empirical rules on their previous experience to guide them in planning a new structure, but then again there is NO EVIDENCE that they had developed even the beginnings of a Theory of structural behavior.

How did they do it? A question asked by Dr. Smith in the November 2004 issue of Civil Engineering (American Society of Civil Engineers magazine), Craig B. Smith, Ph.D., P.E.

He profoundly explained this as follows:
Unfortunately, no plans, no drawings, or no written records regarding the construction of Khufu's pyramid have ever been discovered; It is clear from surviving records and from examination of structures built at Giza and before the Giza pyramids that the ancient Egyptians understood the principles of the lever and inclined plane; calculate the volumes, slopes, and angles, they knew how to survey, that they devised a sound system of measurements based on cubit, a unit of length equal to approximately half a meter; they had no pulleys. Clearly ramps were employed by the pyramids' builders in some fashion. The ramp is constructed by about 158 m against the base of the pyramid and the ramp construction proceeds hand in hand with pyramid construction Dr. Craig Smith concluded. Only ONE other structure built in the Old kingdom can compete with Khufu's pyramid in terms of size, grandeur, and engineering complexity- the system of ramps that was erected to build the pyramid itself. Regrettably, this remarkable example of Fourth Dynasty ingenuity and skill was obliterated as the final measure before Khufu's stair-steps to the gods was consecrated.
Great Pyramid of Giza (Pharaoh Khufu or Cheops to the Greeks) - circa 2550 B. C.
Aerial View of the Great Pyramids of Giza -circa 2550 B.C.

Diagram of Great Pyramid of Giza -Pharaoh Khufu showing the inside view of structure

First Theory of Ramp Construction, Source: Public Domain via Wikimedia commons
Second Theory of Ramp Construction, Source: Public Domain via Wikimedia commons

The ruined Pyramid of Djedefre at Abu Rawash -wikipedia 

Although the Greeks built some magnificent structures, their contributions to structural theory were few and far between. The Secrets of the Parthenon link to youtube

Ruins of Parthenon- Ancient Greece built by Iktinos in 447 -438 BC

Remains of the west gate Roman Forum, Greece Athens - 146 to 12 BC

Pythagoras (about 582 -500 B.C.), a Greek mathematician, who is said to have originated the word mathematics, is famous for the right angle theorem that bears his name the Pythagorean theorem. Archimedes (287-212 B.C.) Greek mathematician developed some fundamental principles of static and introduced the term center of gravity.

The Romans were outstanding builders and were very competent in using certain structural forms such as semicircular masonry arches. As did the Greeks, they, too had Little KNOWLEDGE of Structural Analysis and made even less Scientific progress in Structural Theory. They probably designed most of their beautiful buildings from an ARTISTIC VIEWPOINT. Perhaps their great bridges and aqueducts were proportioned with some RULES OF THUMBS, however, if these methods of design resulted in proportions that were insufficient, the structures collapsed and no Historical records were kept. Only their successes endured.

Most of the knowledge that the Greeks and Romans accumulated concerning structural engineering was lost during the Middle Ages between A.D. 476 and 1492, and has been recovered only since the Renaissance (beginning of Renaissance period -the fall of Muslim Granada in Spain and the voyage of Christopher Columbus to America).

Roman Bridge, 134 AD

Ponte Pietra Stone Bridge -100 BC

Roman Bridge -Circa 102-106AD

Ruin of Roman Bridge, 30 BC - 14AD

Ruins of Roman Aqueduct, Asia Minor Turkey -Circa 300AD -363AD

Ruins of Roman Bridge -142 BC

One of the greatest and most noteworthy contribution to structural analysis, as well as to all other scientific fields, was the development of the Hindu-Arabic system of numbers. Unknown Hindu mathematician in the second and third centuries B.C. originated numbering system of One to Nine (1 to 9). In about 600 A.D. the Hindus invented the symbol SUNYA (meaning empty). which we call ZERO. (The Mayan Indians of Central America, However, had apparently developed the concept zero about 300 years earlier.)

In the 8th century A.D. the Arabs learned this numbering system from scientific writings of the Hindus. in the following century, a Persian mathematician wrote a book that include the system, his book was translated into Latin some years later and brought to Europe. In around 1000 A.D. Pope Sylvester II decreed that the Hindu- Arabic numbers were to be used by Christians.

In the Renaissance period (14th to 17th century); Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) was not only the leading artist of his time but was also a great scientist and engineer. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) is properly acknowledged to be not only the founder of modern science but also the originator of the mechanics of materials.

In the 17th Century A.D. , Sir Isaac Newton(1642-1727), invented the fundamental principles of Structural Analysis, an English mathematician and physicist, and one of the Greatest Scientists in history who ever lived. His discoveries and theories laid the foundation for much of the progress in the science.

Sir Isaac Newton was one of the inventors of the branch of mathematics called Differential and Integral CALCULUS (The other was German mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz). Newton also formulated 3 laws of motion, and from them the universal law of Gravitation. To develop his Theory of Gravitation, Newton had to develop the Science of FORCES and MOTION called MECHANICS.

Starting about 1665, at the age of 23, newton enunciated (pronounce, speak) the principles of mechanics, formulated the law of Gravitation; viz.
Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation
Newton developed the Laws of Inertia and Motion which become the fundamental principles used in structural analysis.
  1. The first law of motion; an object at rest tends to remain at rest; an object in motion tends to in motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force. The development of physics owes much to Newton's Law of motion, notably the
  2. second law...... "the force acting on an object is equal to the mass of the object multiplied by the acceleration", F = m*a ;
  3. and the third Law of motion; for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Before real advances could be made with structural analysis. It was necessary for the science of mechanics of materials to be developed. By the middle of 19th century, much progress had been made in this area. A French physicist Charles Augustine Coulomb (1736-1806) and a French engineer-mathematician Louis Marie Henri Navier (1785-1836), building upon the work of numerous other investigations over hundreds of years, are said to have founded the Science of Mechanics of Materials, and often considered the founder of modern Structural Analysis. Navier published a textbook in 1826, in which he discussed the strength of and deflections of beams, columns, arches, suspension bridges, and other structures.

Andrea Palladio (1518-1580), an Italian architect, is thought to have been the first person to use modern trusses, although his is not rational. He may have revived some ancient types of Roman structures and their empirical rules for proportioning them and probably sized the members by RULES of THUMB, but after his time trusses were forgotten for 200 years, until they were reintroduced by Swiss designer Ulric Grubermann.

Designed by Andrea Palladio
It was actually in 1847, the first rational method of analyzing jointed trusses was introduced by Squire Whipple (1804 -1888) of United States. Squire Whipple was a Civil Engineer born in Hardwick, Massachusetts USA. This was the first significant American contribution to structural theory. Several excellent methods for calculating deflections were published in the 1860s and 1870s which further accelerated the rate of structural analysis development. He has become known the father of iron Bridge building in America.

Squire Whipple Bridge -Tourist, students on top of bridge
Squire Whipple's Bridge, Normans kill, Schenectady, NY, USA -1867

Among the important investigators and accomplishments were: James Clerk Maxwell(1831-1879) of Scotland, for the Reciprocal Deflection theorem in 1864; Otto Mohr(1835-1918) of Germany for Elastic Weights in 1870; Alberto Castigliano of Italy for Least Work theorem in 1873; Charles E. Green of the United States for the Moment-Area theorems in 1873; B.P.E Clapeyron of France for the Three-Moment theorem in 1857.

In the United States of America two great developments in Statistically Indeterminate Structure Analysis were made by GEORGE A. MANEY (1888-1947) and HARDY CROSS (1885-1959).

Civil Engineer Hardy Cross, P. E.

GEORGE A. MANEY introduced Slope Deflection method in 1915 at University of Minnesota engineering publication. In Germany, BENDIXEN introduced Slope Deflection in 1914. For nearly 15 years, until the introduction of Moment Distribution, Slope Deflection was the popular method used for the Analysis of continuous beams and frames in the United States of America.

A very common method used for the approximate analysis of continuous concrete structures, was the Moment and Shear Coefficient developed by the H. M. Westergaard and W. A. Slater a member of the American Concrete Institute in 1926-1929, particularly method 2 in ACI 318-1963. In 1921 Westergaard and Slater published the "Moments and Stresses in Slab."

In 1929 H. Marcus a German Engineer developed Method 3 of 1963 ACI Code moment coefficient based on elastic analysis, but also account for inelastic redistribution, and widely used in Europe, it was introduced in the United States by P. Rogers in 1944 (Two -way Reinforced concrete Slab).

Another most common approximate method of analyzing building frames for LATERAL LOADS such as winds, earthquake (seismic) is the PORTAL method which was presented by Albert Smith in the Journal of the Western Society of Engineers in 1915. Another simple method of analyzing building frames for Lateral Loads is the Cantilever method presented by A.C. Wilson in engineering record, 1908. These methods are said to be satisfactory for buildings with height not in excess of 25 to 35 stories.

In the first half of the 20th century A.D., many complex structural problems were expressed in mathematical form, but sufficient computing power was not available for practically Solving the resulting EQUATIONS and/or FORMULAS. This situation continued in the 1940s, when much work was done with MATRICES for analyzing aircraft structures. Fortunately, the development of digital computers made practical the use of equations and FORMULAS for these and many other types of Structures, including High rise Buildings.

Jack C. McCormac has stated it eloquently as follows:
All of us, unfortunately, have the weakness of making exasperating mistakes, and the best that can be done is to keep them to the absolute minimum.
The best structural designer is not necessarily the one who makes the fewest mistakes initially, but probably is the one who discovers the largest percentage of his or her mistakes and corrects them.1
Hence, in my research and study for almost two decades, it is seems IRONIC that the COLLEGE Student of TODAY can LEARN in a FEW MONTHS the Theories and Principles of STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS that took HUMANKIND SEVERAL THOUSAND YEARS to DEVELOP.

  • Member: American Concrete Institute (ACI)
  • Member: American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
  • Member: Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers (PICE)


References - All books below are on the shelves in my Personal Library for additional sources of background information:
  1. Structural Analysis by Jack C. McCormac and J. K. Nelson Jr., 1997;
  2. Civil Engineering Magazine of ASCE, Soaring Toward the Heavens (Great Pyramid at Giza) by Craig B. Smith, Ph.D. Volume 74, No. 11, November 2004;  
  3. Design of Concrete Structures by Arthur H. Nilson, 1997;
  4. Structural Design Data and Specifications by Abelardo B. Carrillo 6th edition -1980;
  5. Elementary Structural Analysis by C. H. Norris, J. B.Wilbur and S. Utku, 3rd edition -1976;
  6. Engineering Mechanics by Ferdinand L. Singer, 3rd edition-1975;
  7. Elementary Theory of Structures by Chu-Kia Wang and Clarence l. Eckel -1957;
  8. Theory of Plates and Shells by Professor S. Timoshenko and S. Woinowsky-Krieger, 2nd edition -1959;
  9. Cyclopedia of Civil Engineering -American Technical School by Frederick E. Turneaure, 8 volumes -1928;
  10. Mechanics' and Engineers' -Mechanics, Mathematics and Physics by Chas H. Haswell, 1079 pages-Seventy Eight Edition-1930;
  11. Applied Mechanics for Engineers by J. Duncan -1926;
  12. Applied Mechanics (Strength and Elasticity of Materials, Theory of Structures) by David Allan Low -1909;
  13. Applied Mechanics (general introduction to the theory of Structures and Machines) by James H. Cotterill, 1st edition -1884, 6th edition -1906;
  14. Analytical Mechanics for Engineers by Fred B. Seely and Newton E. Ensign -1921;  
  15. Structural Mechanics by Charles E. Greene, 1st, 2nd, 3rd editions-1897 to 1909;
  16. Graphics for Engineers, Architects, Builders-Trusses and Arches, Part 1, 2 and 3 by Charles E. Greene, 1878;
  17. An Elementary and Practical Treatise on BRIDGE BUILDING by SQUIRE WHIPPLE, C. E. (Inventor of Whipple Bridge) -2nd edition -1872 and 1873;
  18. General Theory of BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION  by Prof. HERMAN HAUPT, C. E., 1st edition-1851, 1865, 1878;
  19. A Treatise on BRIDGE Architecture by Thomas Pope -1811;
  20. Engineering Construction in STEEL and TIMBER by William Henry Warren, 2nd edition -1910;
  21. The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy by ISAAC NEWTON-Translated into English by Andrew Motte, 1st edition -1846;
  22. The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy by ISAAC NEWTON-Andrew Motte, volume 2-1803;
  23. Mechanics of Engineering volume 1, 2 and 3, by Irving P. Church, C.E., 8th edition-1893, 1894, 1895; 9th edition -1905 and 1908 and 1911;
  24. Mechanics of Engineering volume 2 -(The Stresses in Framed Structures, Strength of Materials and Theory of Flexure), by A. Jay Dubois, C.E., PhD, 1st edition -1902;
  25. Mechanics of Materials by George Young, Jr. and Hubert E. Baxter -1927;
  26. Strength of Materials by Arthur Morley, 3rd edition -1913, 4th edition -1916;
  27. The Elements of Mechanics of Materials by Charles E. Houghton, 1st edition -1909, 2nd edition -1915;
  28. Mechanics of Materials by Mansfield Merriman, 10th edition -1910, 11th edition -1914 and 1916;
  29. A text-Book on the Mechanics of Materials (Beams, Columns and Shafts) by Mansfield Merriman, 1st edition -1885, 4th edition -1892, 8th edition -1899, 9th edition -1903;
  30. A text-Book on Roof and Bridges by Mansfield Merriman and Henry S. Jacoby, Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4, 5th edition -1903;
  31. The Principles of Mechanics by William Emerson, 3rd edition -1773;
  32. The Principles of Structural Mechanics by Percy J. Waldram, 1912;
  33. Mechanics of Building Construction by Henry Adams -1912;
  34. The first, second, third and fourthbook of Architecture by Andrea Palladio, 1755;
  35. The elements of Civil Architecture-Andrea Palladio-Vitruvius by Henry Aldrich -1824;
  36. The Builder's Director or Bench Mate -Andrea Palladio, by Batty Langley, July 14, 1746;
  37. History of Architectural Development, volumes 1, 2 and 3, by F. M. Simpson -1913;
  38. Theory of Structures and Strength of Materials by Henry Bovey, 1st edition-1893, second edition-1896, 884 pages-3rd edition-1900;
  39. The Theory of Structures by Charles M. Spofford-1911;
  40. Theory of Structures by Arthur Morley 5th edition -1912;
  41. The Elements of Structures by George A. Hool, 1st edition-1912;
  42. Bridge and Structural Design by W. Chase Thompson -1905; 
  43. Practical Structural Design by Ernest McCullough, 2nd edition -1921;
  44. Manual of Structural Design by Jack Singleton, 3rd edition -1947;
  45. Principles of Structural Engineering C. K. Smoley -1928
  46. Structural Designer's Handbook by William Fry Scott -1904;
  47. Structural Design by Horace R. Thayer, volume 1-1912;
  48. Structural Engineers' Handbook: Data for the Design and Construction of Steel Bridges and Buildings by Milo S. Ketchum, 1st edition -1914; 2nd edition -1918, 3rd edition -1924;
  49. Specification Standards by John Ostrup-1910;
  50. Structural Engineering by A. W. Brightmore -1908;
  51. Structural Engineering by J. Husband and W. Harby-1911;
  52. Structural Engineering by John Edward Kirkham, 1st edition-1914;
  53. Structural Engineering -Steel Designing, Book 3, by Edward Godfrey -1913;
  54. Structural Engineering -Strength of Materials by George F. Swain, volume 1, 1st edition-1924;
  55. Structural Engineering -Fundamental Properties of Materials by George F. Swain, volume 2,1st edition-1924;
  56. Structural Engineering -Stresses, Graphical Statics and Masonry by George F. Swain, volume 3-1924;
Relevant Web Sites: The following external links opens new window, engineer's standpoint is not responsible for their content nor endorses it.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

The Beautiful River Turns to Dangerous Weir Dam

Sooner! I will post about Weir Dam in our beautiful river of  Mondragon..Wait, wait!

This is the Sample for a Weir Dam

Friday, October 14, 2011

HARDY CROSS METHOD- Structural Analysis

My passion for Structural Engineering, I focused my sight to delve into many books for Structural Analysis and Design calculations, so most of the time given to me by God, I used to study and to research the history of this interesting major major (venus raj expression miss universe 4th runner up) subjects in civil engineering, viz.
  1. Structural Reinforced Concrete Design,
  2. Structural Steel Design,
  3. Timber Design;
  4. Foundation Analysis and Design;
  5. Engineering Mechanics;
  6. Strength of Materials (Mechanics of Materials);
  7. Soil Mechanics;
  8. Theory of structures;
  9. Hydraulics;
  10. Differential and Integral CALCULUS;
  11. Physics;
  12. Analytic Geometry;
  13. Trigonometry;
  14. Algebra.


Having a lot of experiences in life, and my passion for structural engineering, I was challenged to make research and study continuously particularly structural engineering. Fortunately, I have collected and acquired many books, design codes for civil engineers valued in USDollar, namely;
  1. ACI-2008- Manual of Concrete Practice,
  2. ACI-2004- ACI Design handbook,
  3. ACI Detailing Manual, 2004;
  4. ACI-318-2008 Building Code Requirements for Structural concrete;
  5. CRSI DESIGN HANDBOOK, 10th edition, 2008;
  6. British Steel Designer's Manual 6th edition,
  7. American Steel Construction manual 13th edition, 2005;
  8. National Structural Code of the Philippines, 2001 edition, 2010 edition, etc.
  9. Numerous Historic Reinforced Concrete Books as early 1903 to 1929.
  10. Numerous Historic Books for Structural Theory and Mechanics of Engineering; e.g. Mechanics of Materials, Newtons Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, An Essay on Bridge Buildings, circa A. D. 1700  to 1929.    
ACI 2008 -MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
ACI Design Handbook, Volume 2
Actually, since 1995, I started collecting books and studied most of the time if no projects to be supervised. In my eagerness to acquire more knowledge, I focused my mind and sight to study and research the structural analysis and design calculation methods to make works easier for civil / structural engineers and structural designers.

I have a friend having utmost desire in structural analysis and design computations, construction and claiming for cleverness and expertise in construction, this friend of mine is not really a recognized Structural Engineer by Profession Regulation Commission or by Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers (PICE), but he is just a practicing engineer; Fabian, he is used to design simple buildings, he constructed some buildings in Catarman town, but I doubted his way of designing concrete columns because he uses balance condition in concrete column design, it should be noted that the actual condition of concrete column must be used to determine the strength capacity; and he has the effrontery of criticizing other design engineers.

I had met a lot of people with different characters and personalities, the SCRUFFY, the CLEAN, the INCOMPLETE, the DEFENSIVE ones, the NONCHALANT and the BRILLIANT ones. As much as there are differences in people's character, so is there, in their works and calculations. Also, to mention, through social networking I have acquired computer software, e.g. Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets software for design, and adopted their procedures, methodology and style with some modification to suit my satisfaction and method of analysis. Further, through social networking I had learned to develop Spreadsheets for my analysis and design since 2006 up to present, I am self taught in Microsoft Excel and had developed frames and beams analysis, concrete beams, concrete columns, footings in metric versions.

I used to think that being a practicing engineer for almost two decades, I surmise myself as a Structural design engineer already, like for instance professor Besavilla who authored reviewer books, and also Gillesania also authored reviewer books, my friend Redeem Legaspi a software programmer who developed steelpro program, they are all considered structural engineer. Accordingly, in my in-depth study and research, I had learned various methods for Structural Analysis in 'Hand' or conventional method with the aid of calculator and also using computer software, namely;
  1. MS-Excel Spreadsheets software,
  2. STAAD software,
  3. PCA software,
  4. ETABS, SAP2000, SAFE design software.
In my almost 20 years of experience as practicing engineer with continuous research, study, practice solving for building frames/beams and bridge structures, I have acquired knowledge and become Structural design engineer. Henceforth, as structural designer or engineer and specialist, I prefer to use the method developed by Professor Hardy Cross the Moment Distribution.

Civil Engineer Hardy Cross, P.E.
HARDY CROSS method (innovation) is the best method (for me) for Structural Analysis and Design Calculation, developed by Professor Hardy Cross in 1924. He published the method in the proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers in May 1930 after having taught the subject to his students at the University of Illinois since 1924. His Paper began a new era in the Analysis of Statically indeterminate frames and gave added impetus to their use. This method can be used in complex building frames, continuous beams and simple beams and or vertical structures.


Formula:
Uniformly Distributed Load:
M = W(L^2)/12 for fixed end moment

Concentrated Load or Point Load:
M = Pa(b^2)/L^2 fixed end moment
M = Pb(a^2)/L^2 fixed end moment

Prof. Hardy Cross method was a popular method and was used for the Analysis of Continuous Beams and Frames and in Structural Engineering as a "Hand Calculations method and/or Conventional Calculations method" from 1930 until 1960. Since the 1960s, however, there has been an ever increasing use of computers for the analysis of all types of structures. Computers are extremely efficient for solving the simultaneous equations that are generated by other methods of analysis. Generally, computers software used is developed from the matrix-analysis procedures. Reference: J. C. McCormac, S.E., Structural Analysis.

I developed a MS Excel spreadsheet for Continuous Span Frame Analysis using Hardy Cross method:

Distribution Factor Formula
FBD of a Beam subjected to uniformly loaded at distance L
FBD of a Beam segment at distance X
Frame diagram of  MS Excel Spreadsheet I developed
Moment distribution table of  MS excel spreadsheet I developed
Shear Diagram of my own MS Excel Spreadsheets
Moment Diagram for my own MS Excel Spreadsheet