Subject: Prepared by:

Engineering Practice Report Reza Lotfi , Aug. - Oct. 2009

This report reflects a brief of nine of many projects accomplished by the author between years 2002 and 2009. The report has been reviewed to address the units and elements outlined by Engineers Australia to obtain chartered status (CPEng).

Contents:

Career Episode 1 Sattar Khan Complex Career Episode 2 Warmington Lodge Career Episode 3 Greenway Office Building Career Episode 4 111 Alinga Street Career Episode 5 The Cedar Career Episode 6 Kangara Waters Career Episode 7 Mitchell Office Building Career Episode 8 Quantum Career Episode 9 RGP5 Units and Elements addressed Appendix A - Summary of CPD activities

1 4 6 8 11 13 15 17 18 20 21

Page ii Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

1) Sattar Khan Complex Tabriz, Iran 2002 - 2004

Competency Element Claimed

The project was a residential complex design. West of Tabriz, specially the area of this project, was generally industrial area. This project was one of the first ones where city council started the scheme of moving the industries and factories to recently developed industrial towns and replace them with residential developments. The area of development introduced at that stage was 12000 square meter of land. At that time, I was working with Beton Kaveh Azerbaijan Company. The company was one of the largest developers and construction companies in North-West of Iran. One of my responsibilities in main technical office was to observe the outsourced designs to implement the companys interests in construction methods and/or alternative design approaches. The project came to company when it was at its design development stage. It had consisted of series of 4 and 5-story buildings with narrow streets between them. The company and city council had one common interest and it was to make the project more unique and elegant rather than ordinary development. I realized that city council was mainly after being successful in their scheme and our company was closely monitoring the cost plans and market demands. I understood that the existing design was not the most satisfactory option for both parties. The designers stated that the poor soil condition was the main driver of the maximum levels/height of buildings. My reputation and strength was to follow scientific and engineering principles to find the alternative and innovative structural systems and define the cost effective construction practises to get practicality out of new alternative design. I suggested that I could investigate the issue so I was asked to do so and was given the preferred alternative as fewer 10-story buildings instead of the existing design. The piles option for foundation was also suggested to be considered if necessary. I reviewed the project documents and found out that the allowable soil pressure was limited to 100kPa for dead and live loads and to 125kPa for 1:500 years events governed by earthquake design. There was a bridge just nearby and I decided to review the documents for the bridge and other developments in the area. I requested the documents from city council and Engineering Organization who keep the records of design documents and plans for all developments. I started from allowable soil pressures and all was around 100kPa marks. There was a very credible and intense geotechnical investigation for the bridge project. I reviewed the reports and design documents carefully. I classified my findings as following: The footing was originally introduced as piles to rock in the concept design of the bridge. Then it was changed to big pad footings on 100kPa material. The bedrock was at about 50m below ground and above that, there was a layer of sandy gravel for about 10m then next 30m was layers of silt and sandy silt. Sandy gravel layer was not very dense and water table was above that layer. There are a couple of drilling refusals for boreholes at sandy gravel layer. I, then, put together my conclusion as following: The pile option was omitted at detail design stage of the bridge due to relatively low strength of submerged sandy gravel layer. The sandy gravel layer was also hard to drill through to get to the bedrock. The soil capacity was limited mainly due to deflection and settlement criteria. I discussed my findings and conclusions with a geotechnical team who had done many investigations in the area and they confirmed my findings and conclusions. Later on, I hired them to do the geotechnical investigation for the project. Then I reviewed a couple of footing design reference books and discovered that in terms of deflections what governs is the relative settlement. This fact led me to
Page 1 Engineering Practice Report

C1.1

C3.6

C1.3

C1.4

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

think if I could limit the relative deflection under the columns by using a relatively stiff and linked foundation, I could get more capacity out of existing soil. Then I thought that a mat footing would give us the answer. Therefore, I started to investigate the criteria of a large mat footing. I did some preliminary calculation on the loads of a 10-storey building per column including earthquake. Then I reviewed the relative stiffness of structure and soil. I determined that the criteria was likely achievable. I needed additional input from an expert to confirm my ideas and calculations. There was also one criterion in regards to rotation limits for footing system and it could be interpreted in different ways. Therefore, I reviewed all possibilities and determined the most critical option. My preliminary calculations showed that the rotation criteria could be satisfied. It, however, required to be addressed by an expert. I reported the progress and my ideas to the project manager. We discussed the cost implications with executive, technical and cost planning offices in meetings and came up with the idea of 4 x 10 to 12-storey buildings on large mat footings. The concept was also discussed with city council and finally I got the go ahead to do further investigations. I hired the geotechnical team, who had helped me in my preliminary investigation, to carry on a new geotechnical investigation on site. I also hired a well-known soil and foundation expert who was a professor at Tabriz University (I had studied the Foundation Engineering courses 1 and 2 with him). We decided to drill 4 test boreholes under each proposed footings. Boreholes had to go through the sandy gravel layer to reach to the bedrock. I supervised the sampling and testing procedures closely. I discussed the outcome of the geotechnical teams report with soil/foundation expert and we conclude an allowable pressure of soil as about 270kPa governed by rotation of the stiff footing. The mat footing had to have about 28m minimum dimension to satisfy the rotation criteria and had to satisfy relative stiffness criteria to limit the relative settlements as well. Based on the outcome of investigation combined with my preliminary load evaluations, I suggested 24m x 40m 12-story buildings with one underground level, which was boxed with shear walls. The footing was about 28m x 42m x 1.2m deep raft slab. Mat footing system with one boxed level satisfied the relative stiffness criteria. The concrete structure appeared to present better outcomes in terms of having more consistent distribution of pressure on soil. Beton Kaveh Azerbaijan hired a team of architects to shape the building and residential units. I worked closely with architects through concept design and detailed design. I carried out the global modelling and earthquake analysis while the architectural plans were being finalized. The structure that I introduced was special moment resisting reinforce concrete frame plus special reinforced concrete shear walls that required high degree of reinforcing detail but the design earthquake loads may be reduced due to high ductility level of structure. During architectural design, there was a principle of having smaller units due to market demand. Dividing the area to relatively small units left the shear walls with shorter lever arm and more reinforcement required on the boundary elements of the shear walls. The amount of reinforcement required larger boundary elements to avoid congestions. Having large elements was not preferred option. Therefore, I reviewed the codes requirements and came up with less congested reinforcement detail with bundled bars. I carried on with detailed design. Then I supervised the drafting and documentation. Next step was to get approval for the design from Engineering Organization. I had no difficulties. There were a couple of comments as the result of the review by Engineering Organization and I addressed them to get the design approved.

C2.6

E1B.1

E1B.8

Page 2 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

After finalizing the documents for construction, I moved on to my next carrier episode and started my own consulting business. I was still providing construction services for the project. The project was built and was a successful one and won a couple of awards as well. The complex, now, is home for 480 families. This project was my first large scale design project and had a fair influence to drive my carrier towards design projects. Having site experience, I have always had a good understanding of the construction sites, their needs and construction methods. This helps me to have approaches that are more realistic in design and to have practical views in providing construction services. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

Page 3 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

2) Warmington Lodge Aged Care Facilities Yass, NSW 2006 - 2007

Competency Element Claimed

The Warmington Lodge is a 30-bed Aged Care facility in Castor Street, Yass, NSW. The architectural concept started where a courtyard theme was selected after exploring several design options. The planning layout was then developed according to best-practice aged care design that embodies a number of distinctive qualities. Warmington Lodge is a Class 9c nursing hostel owned by Yass Valley Council. The structure consist of the followings: Timber framed bedrooms area Steel framed lounge and dining area Steel framed canopies Steel framed glazing in front of bedroom areas to courtyard Steel plus timber framed dining area Concrete framed basement with retaining walls at one side Concrete stairs and lift walls Steel framed terraces plus steel frames for retractable sunshades This project was one of my first projects in Australia. The design started at early 2006 and construction finished by mid 2007. I carried out the design, supervised the documentation and delivered construction phase services. To achieve a reasonable outcome, I researched common construction practices in Australia, common section and material properties used in Australia and reviewed the Australian codes/standards requirements to carry out the design for every single piece of the structure. Therefore, I experienced a challenging career episode. The project was also exciting for me as it had a wide range of different type of elements and different materials utilized to accomplish a fairly common construction. I had designed a timber-framed jetty earlier in my engineering life. However, timber framed residential building was a new concept for me. I studied the AS 1684.4 for connections, details, bracing systems etc. I also investigated common practices and systems used by local contractors. I implemented the outcome of my researches in my design and achieved a reasonable design. The basement of the building was architecturally designed to have walls against soil at the back and sides. The structure system that I used to retain the soil was concrete walls spanning top to bottom. I chose this option because it was superior in terms of cost to the other options like cantilever walls or horizontally spanning retaining walls. As support at bottom, the footing was designed to carry the load and reviewed for sliding as well. I also designed the ground floors slab to act as a diaphragm at top and take the lateral soil pressure exerted on retaining face to perpendicular walls. However, to speed up the construction, I realized that the walls needed to be backfilled before the suspended slab was in place. Therefore, I introduced temporary propping system to enable the contractor to achieve a sensible construction sequences. The lounge was architecturally designed to be a large (about 16m x 12m) column free area with high-pitched roof. I introduced a large steel section to span 16m and support 12m spanning rafters. The problem was to introduce a decent bracing system along the 16m beam as there was a diagonal corridor underneath the beam and the far side of the lounge had glazing parallel to the main beam. I designed the framing along the glazing as steel portal frame. However, that was not sufficient to carry the wind load on large gable end of the building. Then I introduced the L shape block wall of the corridor to be reinforced and core filled with concrete plus a cap plate on top to engage the main steel beam with reinforced block shear wall. The implemented system provided an appropriate bracing for the area. C1.1

C3.6

C2.3

C1.4

Page 4 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

The footings for ground floor had to span over the backfill of the retaining walls around the basement. The backfill was about 4.5m in height and 6m perpendicular to wall in horizontal plane. Spanning the distance between good foundation material and the wall would incorporate an impractical footing system. Therefore, I reviewed the geotechnical conditions and initiated piles to divide the span of the footing beams. The piles option ended up being a more cost efficient, easier to construct and more reliable scheme in terms of settlements. Yass Valley Council, the client, requested us to provide an intense construction services and review most of the structural elements for the building on site. I visited the site almost twice a week and discussed the issues with site manager. During each visit, I reviewed the structural components under construction, prepared written site instructions on site and discussed the work method statements with site manager. I also discussed the upcoming construction stages on site and advised the next site appointment. During construction stage, one of the addressed issues was as following: A penetration through suspended ground floor had originally been designed to be installed through the slab area. However, due to a architectural change to a room layout, the penetration happened to go through reinforced concrete beam close to an intermediate column terminating a couple of top reinforcement. The reinforcement placement was nearly finished and the concrete was on its way. I reviewed the beam as a T beam with narrower compression area (penetration excluded from the web) and came up with a new design on site with bars added on top of T beam in slab. I issued the site instruction for the design and brought my calculations back to the office, document them appropriately and got the as built drawings revised. The facility has been in service since 2007. The design satisfied the performance of the building and architectural design within allocated budget range. I consider it as a successful project. I had significant achievements as I have successfully advanced my familiarity with structural engineering in Australia through this challenging episode of my career. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

C3.4

C2.5

Page 5 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

3) Greenway office building, Haridemos Greenway, ACT 2006 - 2007

Competency Element Claimed

The project was a two-storey office building including ground floor plus first floor with a total office area of about 3000 square meter. I was responsible for structural design, documentation and construction phase services for this project. The proposed structure for the building was in situ reinforced concrete columns up to the first floor plus conventionally reinforced concrete slabs for ground and first floors plus steel roof supported off the steel columns of first floor. The columns were at about 8m x 8m grids. I was requested by the client to investigate the first floor suspended slab as a flat plate slab without drop panels. The justification behind this request was costing. The client was in contact with contractors and it had been determined that a flat soffit slab would significantly reduce the cost of formwork. After the brief, I started to investigate punching shear in slab. I reviewed reinforcing products to deal with the shear problem in slab/column connections. I noted that stud rails have been successfully used in projects. I contacted the manufacturer and investigated some technical information on their product. I reviewed the capacity of the stud rails against the preliminary loads . When I became confident that the design could be achieved, I discussed preliminary design with the client. The flat soffit option was still attractive to them despite the extra cost of the stud rails plus additional reinforcement bars in the slab. The software that I used to analyse the slab was Slabs software by Inducta. For all new softwares that I start using, firstly, I define a simple element then run the software and compare the results with hand calculations to get familiar with the software, interface and the way that the package presents the results. I did the same in here, as this project was my first attempt to use Slabs package. I started with a one-way slab spanning two bays over three walls. Then I reviewed the results comparing to hand calculations. I documented this calibration as a part of project calculations. Then after being confident in using the package, I started to utilize it in the project. As the final stage, I also review the results by doing a quick hand calculation to make sure they are in a reliable range. In this instance, I used AS3600 method for slab analysis then prepared a calculation package including induction, loads, assumptions, codes and criteria, set of prints of software results, calibration calculations and finally results review hand calculations. The comments from internal review were also addressed and documented. The architect wanted perimeter of the building to be glazing. He also wanted open areas as much as possible. I used the lift shaft, a corridor wall and wall to the services as bracing to ground floor. Bracing to the first floor was not sufficient as it had only the lift shaft as bracing element. I suggested continuing some of the columns through first floor up to the roof to be incorporated as part of bracing system. Architect and the client welcomed my suggestion. During this project, I became more familiar with Australian standards especially with steel and concrete codes. The project successfully designed and documented within the specified time and budget. I also provided construction services for this project. Construction services were based on hourly rates. However, an informal limit was discussed with the client and I managed to deliver adequate construction phase services within the budget. I reviewed most of the structural elements during construction and issued site instructions / notes for each visit. The instructions were prepared in a simple and practical way to make contractors aware of critical points or enable them to rectify and address the construction issues.
Page 6 Engineering Practice Report

C2.2

C2.4

C3.3

C1.2

C3.5

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

At construction stage, I managed a respectful relation with the contractors during the site visits. I also developed a very strong relationship with the client and secured future cooperation. The building was finished and it is in service now. I consider this project as a successful one due to following values: My technical and professional growth and achievements I provided satisfactory technical input to achieve the desired results I developed valuable relationships Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

Page 7 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

4) 111 Alinga Street, Bridge Canberra, ACT 2007

Competency Element Claimed

The project was design of two similar walkway bridges between two existing building through the courtyard. My engagement with the refurbishment of these two buildings (111 Alinga St. and 62 Northborne Ave.) started at 2006 when I designed a new stair and penetrations through the existing floor slabs. Then I continued to provide design services and construction advises for opening new doors through the walls, new penetrations, supports for services, new roller doors supports etc. for these buildings. My services were based on hourly rates. During these services, I gained familiarity with the structures of the buildings and developed relationships with architects and the client. Then there was a need to provide access between these two different building. There was a courtyard between two buildings and the brief was to provide two bridges at two different levels for access. My role in this new task was to work closely with architectural team and design the bridges between two buildings. Both buildings had conventionally reinforced framing and floor slabs. Many shear walls incorporated in framing of the structures to provide lateral stability for the buildings. The floors were generally flat slabs with drop panels and edge beams. Floors of these two buildings had different RLs and the walkway had to be on a slope going from one building to another. After series of meetings and discussions between client, architects, BCA advisor and I, the longest distance between two buildings was chosen for the bridge. This option mainly derived by limited slope for the access walkway. It was also decided to provide a design with minimum on site construction to avoid the interruption of buildings usage. I defined the following tasks for myself:

C3.2

C2.1

C3.1 Review existing designs in detail Rationalize the capacity of elements in existing structures Review the services and their existing situation on site Assess the risks and allow for contingencies Estimate the loads Consider connections Design the bridge structure Design the connections Determine the possible relative movements Design bearings Review connections and define adequate keeper plates Define construction procedures and tolerances Design the construction stage Refine the entire design for coordination These tasks became more complicated when I classified the scopes/criteria as following: The bridge is required to be fabricated in shop The installation relies on craning the bridge from the street over the roof of eight story buildings and down to the courtyard. The tolerances during construction are critical as the bridge spans diagonal and longest length of the courtyard The architectural design suggests two buttresses, one each end The span is 16m which represents a fairly large span in relation to the scope and criteria Light structure is desirable The walkway will be fully enclosed and part of the buildings E1B.2

Page 8 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

After defining the tasks and setting the requirement, I realized that my design is highly depended on craning activities. Therefore, I suggested getting advice from a craning specialist. I discussed the issue with our principal and he introduced a trusty craning company who were capable of managing the risk. I invited their specialist to one of our meetings. The meeting was productive one as we discussed the installation and outlined a work method statement. I also discussed the tolerances/limits that I could have in the dimensions of the bridge especially the length and the weight. At this stage, I had enough information and a clear vision about the final product to enable myself to enter to detailed design phase. I picked the full height truss option from three different options that I had suggested in preliminary design stage for the main structure. The three options were: Main load bearing beams plus columns to support the walls and roof Shallow trusses (bottom chord at deck level and top chord at handrail level) plus stub columns to roof Full height truss (bottom chord at deck level and top chord at roof level) I reviewed the architectural requirement for buttresses. I assessed the risks and benefits of having buttresses. I reviewed the existing structures in detail carefully and concluded that eliminating one of the buttresses, which was going to require complex connections to existing structure, would reduce the risk significantly with minor impact on other criteria. I brought up the issue in one of the meetings and discussed the safety risks during the installation and reliability of final product to tackle with abnormal conditions such as fire and relative movements of two buildings under service earthquake. I successfully convinced the client and architects and my proposal to remove the buttress in one end was accepted in the meeting. Two bridges were architecturally identical. However, the structural conditions of existing buildings were not similar, so different type of connections required. During the design, I systematically followed the above tasks, which I had defined before. I also discussed the bearing design with bearing manufacturers and covered my design by sufficient notations on drawings to enable the bearing specialists to design the adequate bearings for the project. It was decided to outsource the review process. I classified the comments from review into two groups. Ones that I agreed and incorporated. I highlighted the second group as the comments that I felt they need a discussion or clarification. I discussed them with one of my experienced colleges to get a second opinion then I addressed them in a meeting with verifier. The mark-ups and comments all agreed on and documented. Clients representative also carried out a review and verification process. Comments from this review addressed and documented as wall. Through this project, I started to use AS5100 series of Australian Standards and got valuable familiarity with Australian bridge standards. The project designed and documented successfully. I practiced a challenging project with many details and criteria involved in it. I gained valuable achievements during this project and improved my technical skills as well. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details

C1.3

C1.5

C1.3

C2.4

C1.2

Page 9 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

Page 10 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

5) The Cedar, Fire Report Griffith, ACT October 2007 May 2008

Competency Element Claimed

The project was a fire rating report for a residential complex. Then, the client extended the engagement to include the implementation of the reports outcome. The client was the body corporate of the complex. This job came to me through the body corporate representative. I had done two reports on this complex for a damaged brick wall on top of the retaining wall and corrosion in one of the columns in basement before. The brief was to investigate the fire-rating situation of structural elements for the building in accordance to BCA. I prepared the fee proposal and submitted to the body corporate and owners council of the complex. After the acceptance of the proposal, I requested a set of documents and drawings for the building. I visited the site and reviewed the documents. My observations were: The construction was a four storey residential occupancy above basement car park. The structural system was load bearing masonry construction with concrete floors on top of steel framed transfer level. The area of investigation was the car park. Building approval was granted on November 1995 therefore the applicable BCA was BCA 1990. I reviewed BCA 1990, the outcome was: Class 2 building, type A construction. FRL required for beams and columns are 90/-/The basement car park fits into the open deck car park definition. Therefore, if steel beams and columns could satisfy a certain exposed surface area to mass ratio (ESA/M) then the FRL required was -/-/-. Therefore, the structure satisfied the applicable BCA. I reviewed the BCA 2007 and started from classifications and definitions. Building classified as class 2 with a compartment as class 7a Type A construction Basement as open deck car park Beams require FRL as 60/-/- or ESA/M criteria satisfied Columns require FRL as 60/-/-, no concession applies The outcome was that the columns require an FRL of 60/-/I discussed my readings of BCA with our principal and a BCA certifier and agreed on the outcome. Then I reviewed the columns FRL in accordance to AS4100. The columns did not satisfy the requirement of BCA 2007. I researched the possible ways of improving the fire rating of the columns and found that core filling option as the most suitable option for this building. I finalized the report and submitted. The report was discussed in owners and body corporate meeting and it was decided to improve the fire rating to satisfy the current BCA at the time of report (BCA 2007). I carried out the detailed design, prepared the specifications, and supervised the preparation of drawings for a tender. We have also been proposed to administrate the contract as well. I prepared tender documents. After appointing the contractor, I administrated the contract and visited the site during construction. I also carried out the final inspection. For final inspection at completion of the work, I invited the body corporate representative to inspect the work done as well. To finish, I prepared a certification of compliance.

E4B.1

E4B.2

E4B.3

E4B.1

E4B.4

C2.3

Page 11 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

This was a successful project, with some challenges in reading the BCAs. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

Page 12 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

6) Kangara Waters ACT 2007 - 2008

Competency Element Claimed

The project was the concept and detailed design and construction phase of an aged care facility comprising of apartment blocks including 3 x 5-storey + 1 x 4storey + 1 x 3-storey buildings, community building, hydrotherapy building and 50 units of villas and townhouses. In addition, there was a doughnut shape building in the middle of the village called RCF (residential care facility). External works and many retaining walls were included in the scope as well. This was my first large scale project in Australia and I was the lead structural engineer. I managed through the concept and detailed design and construction phase of this project. I gained a high level of competency in design of steel, timber, masonry and concrete structures utilizing Australian standards and Australian common practices through this project. My tasks to accomplish this project could be classified as following: Concept design Attend the meeting with client, architects and other consultants Negotiate the design in meetings Detail design Documentation Attend value management meetings Review the alternative designs Construction phase services I carried out the concept design for all the buildings and supervised the drafting team of 3 to produce preliminary sketch plans. Our design was based on architectural preliminary plans, which was approved by client. I attend to the meetings with architect and client to discuss the different options for main structures of the buildings. I understood the sensitivity of the issues and asked for our structural principals companionship in some meetings. The preliminary structural design was approved then we moved on to the next stage. I carried on with the design of the structures. I used one of my senior colleges expertness to interpret the geotechnical report. I finalized the design of the main structures and footing systems for all buildings. The main structure for the RCF was concrete slabs and band beams supported off the ground and first floors columns. The top floor framing was a mix of concrete and steel columns to support the timber trussed roof structure. Ground floor of the building was slab on ground for half of the building. In other half, the ground floor was a suspended slab over the basement. The building had three-story parts where the two half of building joined at corners. I introduced a mixed footing system including pads to lower side and piers to higher side. Some retaining walls were essential for the lower side of the building. The top level had many architectural features such as open and column free areas, frame less corners in glazing, lower and higher roofs with full glazing at sides. I worked very closely with architects to design the top floor and roof structure. The community building was a single story building including a large area divided by operable doors and glazing to the perimeter. Architects preference was a very thin roof sandwich. I introduced cranked beams, purlins in between beams and rod bracings to roof to achieve thin roof details. Steel framing with bracings in the walls was the main structure for the building. I carefully reviewed and designed a couple of fine architectural details that needed additional engineering inputs such as finely detailed circular stubs on top of large circular columns and stubs had to disappear in the thin roof to support the main beams. I constantly discussed the details with architects to achieve the desirable details. C2.2

C1.5

C3.5

Page 13 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Hydrotherapy building originally designed as a one-story building with two pools, one indoor and one outdoor. Then during the design development towards the final sketch plans, there was a need to contain large amount of water for the facilities. The water tanks were originally proposed as plastic water tanks outside the buildings. However, during design development, in one of consulting meetings we decided to install the tanks inside the buildings. I had already design the pools to sit on piles to the rock. The water tanks were going to be installed underneath the pools instead of piles to rock. I assessed the option, prepared the sketches and issued them to architects and client prior to the next meeting. I discussed the option in the meeting and it was decided to go ahead with tanks under the pools. This change made the hydrotherapy building an exciting and challenging structure. I developed the design of towers as concrete structures with slabs and band beams for final sketch plans. I also designed the single-storey villas as brick veneer. There were some two-storey townhouses that I designed concrete slabs for first floor. I took charge of documentation for final sketch plans and I supervised the drafting team to complete the drawings for FSP (final sketch plan) issue. In detailed design stage, I had two engineers and four draftees in my team. I managed the group through the detailed design stage. I progressively discussed the details with architects and provided details and guides for the team. I also used my senior colleges expertness in critical area especially our principals skills on detailing the RCF building and villas to achieve better results. I carried out the detail design for many top restrained retaining walls around the buildings and cantilever retaining walls to the roads, backyard etc. I managed the project through tender documentation and then towards construction. I was the construction services manager for the project. I carried out 3 or 4 site visits per week. I issued site instructions / notes on each visit. I followed up an appropriate documentation procedure for site instructions. I handed a hardcopy to project or site manager on site. I kept the site instructions specific to buildings and issued two or three of them on each visit as required making them easy to be followed. Then back in the office, I got them scanned and emailed to architect and client. I also stored an electronic copy in the system and filed the hardcopies. This project is under construction at its final stages now and it has been a successful project. I have developed valuable skills in various areas through this project. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

C2.1

E1B.3

C2.5

Page 14 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

7) Mitchell office building Mitchell, ACT 2008

Competency Element Claimed

The project was a four-story office building in recently developed commercial area in ACT. I was the lead structural engineer for the project. I carried out conceptual design as following: Concrete framing (concrete columns plus reinforced core filled block shear walls) Concrete floors with drop panels and edge beams Precast concrete walls to perimeter of the building for fire rating in some areas and soil retaining in one side Some steel framed architectural features, awnings and glazing The basement was the car park for the building and the first floor was to be designed as a bulky good retailer and storage with high loads. The first floor was also the transfer level for floors above as some columns had to sit on transfer beams. I reviewed the preliminary architectural design, which was endorsed by client. I noticed that there were some critical areas especially in transfer floor with heavily loaded columns sitting on beams span a fair distance between columns. I carried out very preliminary calculations and determined the depth of the beams and all the slabs. I was also aware of the fact that there was restriction on height of the building due to city councils requirement. I reviewed the minimum floor to ceiling space required and the minimum ceiling space needed for mechanical equipments. The height of building pushed the limits. Then I reviewed the post tensioning option to achieve thinner structures. The height of building was just right with thinner post tensioned floors. I prepared the options to present to architect and the client to discuss the issues and finalize the structure. The preliminary structural design and the options were discussed with client and architect. The post tensioned option was chosen. The company policy was to outsource the post tensioning design. By that time, I had a good view to the local engineering market. I analysed the market and past experiences and came to the point that it would be a good idea to start the in house post tensioning design. I discussed the issue with my colleagues and our principal and after some discussions, it was agreed that we should start to carry out the post tensioning designs in house rather than outsourcing them. The post tensioned floors for this project ware the first post tensioning design for the company. As I mentioned before, there was a critical area at transfer floor where a heavily loaded column carrying 3 levels above was supported off the two cross transfer beams with large spans. I assessed the design of these two transfer beams as a risky area to be designed as first post tensioning experience. I discussed the issue with our principal and he introduced one of his friends who was experienced post tensioning designer. I extracted a simple system of two cross beams and the load on them out of the transfer floor to be reviewed and commented by post tensioning expert. He assessed the structure and evaluated it as a doable system with the beam sizes that I proposed based on my preliminary calculation. In the design of precast units, I negotiated with precast manufacturers and assessed the number of panel and their weights as critical areas in costing. I investigated the hollow core precast units and discussed the width of the panels with architect to achieve the optimum design to minimize the cost. I carried out the design phase of the project and supervised the documentation phase towards tender. The project was successfully designed and documented within the specified time frame and budget. E1B.5 C1.4

C1.3

E1B.8

Page 15 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

Page 16 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

8) Quantum tender design Port Hedland, WA November 2008 February 2009

Competency Element Claimed

The project was a tender design for an iron ore port including wharf, dolphins, jetty, transfer platform and abutment. I was a member of design team. My responsibilities were: Design of piles and headstocks for approach jetty Design of typical precast deck planks Design of deck areas with topping + precast Review of the wharf main girder and fatigue assessment As this was my first maritime project, I had expected various challenges ahead of myself. Therefore, I prepared myself for the challenges. Firstly, I ordered a set of print of construction set of a similar project and started to review the design and objectives carefully. During my review, I started to get familiar with maritime codes (Australian and British) and investigate the requirements and provisions for structures in harsh marine environment. The environmental loads on structures were part of my responsibilities as well. Therefore, I started to learn about the wave loads on structures. I investigated different literatures and discussed the principles with our environment team. In order to design the headstocks and piles for the jetty, I was provided the SpaceGass file to extract the loads from roadway and conveyor trusses and apply them on structure in my design area. My approach was to review and check the sensibility of the reactions. I discussed the loads with truss design team where the loads did not appear to be appropriate then I reviewed the potential area of problem with truss designers and suggested rectification methods as required in some cases. There were other challenges as well. At that stage, the concept design was not finalized yet. In addition, there were different construction methods, which had different loadings on structure. I predicted that there were going to be many options. Therefore, I defined the main structures once then for each change or each different loading system, I duplicated the files and calculations. Then I produced different packages for each case. As a result of this practice, the outcomes were simpler to evaluate the implications and to be presented in meetings. Finally, it was easier for cost estimations and achieving more cost and performance efficient results. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature: C1.2

C2.6

C2.5

Page 17 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Career Episode Title: Location: Dates:

9) RGP5 detail design Port Hedland, WA 2010

Competency Element Claimed

The project is detailed design of two iron ore ship-loading wharves. The project is mainly divided to two stages as Harriet point and Nelson point. Our scope starts from abutment and includes all structures in the sea like approach roadway and trestles, transfer platform, heavy lift pier, wharf and dolphins. My responsibilities are: Design of Abutment for Approach Trestle and Heavy Lift Pier Design of Approach Trestle Design of Take-up Tower Design of Transfer Platform Design of Walkways and Cable Ladders supports for entire project Design of Concrete Decks for entire Project including staged constructions and prestressed planks (pre tensioned) Design of the corbels and joints between different compartments Finite element models Review global modellings Review of Conveyor Support Trestles Main contact in head office for offshore drafting scheme I expected to face many challenges through this project. Due to the relatively high loads, following up the load paths requires special attention to local effects and detailing every single structural piece. There is also an intense documentation requirement in accordance to BHP policies. I started the design by carefully reviewing all specifications and design criteria issued by client. These specification and criteria outlines the design and documentation procedures. There is a set of standard details called BHP standard details that I have to address in my design area and adopt them as required. I continued by assessing the standard details. Then I followed my design procedures by evaluating the concept design provided by clients representative and assessing the feasibility and constructions procedures considering details. Then I present my comments and details to the design manager of the project and discuss the details with him. Then we present our proposals to client and get the revised concept approved by client. My design areas are at their final stages and I am managing through finalizing the design and documentation. Through this project, I have been managing four engineers and five draftees in various times depending on schedules and deliverables provided by project manager and design manager. The technical side of this project requires a lot of efforts and focusing on detail. I consider simplicity as priority in detailing as any complex detail has significant effects on construction of structural components of this project. I constantly prioritized my tasks and updated my agenda to address managements programs and deadlines. This activity also included planning the resources required for each task and discussing them with project management to arrange the needs. I encouraged live communications between team members and between different teams in order to achieve a better performance and improve productivity. Being efficient has been one of my main goals through this project. For example in prestressed deck planks design, there was an in house developed prestressing design spreadsheet. I reviewed the package against principals and compared the results with my hand calculations to make sure that its results are reliable. Then I revised the interface and revised the way that package gets inputs and presents outputs. This revision resulted in having a simple, user friendly and easy to use package. The design time for prestressed plank and staged construction for one plank was about 30 minutes before, then after revision it came down to under 10 minutes. I have also added some extra capabilities to the package such as bursting E1B.1

E1B.3

C3.4

C3.1

Page 18 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

design, development length design for strands and shear evaluation based on Australian codes and American codes. The common practice in abutment design is to provide loadings and pile layout to geotechnical engineers and they carry out a soil / structure interaction analysis to estimate the internal loads on piles. I reviewed the procedure with geotechnical team and realized that their software has limited capabilities in defining the abutment itself. The abutment that I was responsible for the design of it had a crank in plane and a complex pile layout. I discussed the issues with geotechnical team and suggested that I define the structure in structural design package and define spring for soil modelling and use geotechnical input for spring stiffness. It has been agreed that this method would be more efficient and would result in more accurate outcome in this instance. In some instances, during the design, I carefully review the mechanical drawings and carry out the energy analysis to estimate the loads on structures. I am responsible for the deck designs and details for entire project. I also designed the joints between different compartments. To accomplish a reliable design for these areas, I have to negotiate the loads and details with different teams, and then reflect the details and requirements to my team. This procedure dominates my duties towards having efficient teamwork and communication skills. I have been managing through all these challenges in this project and progressing through final stages. The construction of my early designs has already been started. I consider this as a successful project as my achievements are countless. Signature of Candidate: Candidates Verifier/s Details Name: Phone/email: Position: Relationship to Candidate: Engineering Qualifications: (or Engineers Australia Membership Number) I verify that the above narrative is a true account of the candidates own work. Signature:

C3.3

C2.4

C3.2

Page 19 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Unite and Elements addressed:

UNIT C1 ENGINEERING PRACTICE ELEMENTS: C1.1 Presents and Develops a Professional Image C1.2 Pursues Continuing Professional Development C1.3 Integrates Engineering with other Professional Input C1.4 Develops Engineering Solutions C1.5 Identifies constraints on Potential Engineering Solutions UNIT C2 ENGINEERING PLANNING AND DESIGN ELEMENTS: C2.1 Interprets and Scopes Design Requirements C2.2 Prepares Concept Proposal and seeks advice on latest Technology C2.3 Implements Planning and Design Process C2.4 Reviews the Design to Achieve Acceptance C2.5 Prepares and Maintains Documentation during the Design Process C2.6 Validates Design UNIT C3 SELF MANAGEMENT IN THE ENGINEERING WORKPLACE ELEMENTS: C3.1 Manages Self C3.2 Works Effectively with people C3.3 Facilitates and capitalises on change and innovation C3.4 Plans and manages work priorities and resources C3.5 Maintains customer focus and relationships with clients/stakeholders etc C3.6 Manages Information UNIT E1B ENGINEERING PROJECT MANAGEMENT ELEMENTS: AT LEAST FIVE ELEMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED E1B.1 Develops Project Integration E1B.2 Scopes the Project E1B.3 Manages People E1B.4 Manages the Physical Resources within the Project E1B.5 Manages quality, safety, environment and risk E1B.6 Manages cost and procurement E1B.7 Manages time and progress E1B.8 Finalises the Project UNIT E4B INVESTIGATION AND REPORTING ELEMENTS: ALL ELEMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED E4B.1 Responds to/Identifies Problems E4B.2 Plans the Investigation E4B.3 Carries out the Investigation E4B.4 Draws Conclusions and makes Recommendations Career Episode 1,2 3,4,8 1,4,7 1,2,7 4,6 Career Episode 4,6 3,6 2,5 3,4,9 2,6,8 1,8 Career Episode 4,9 4,9 3,9 2,9 3,6 1,2 Career Episode 1,9 4 6,9 7 1,7 Career Episode 5 5 5 5

Page 20 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009

Appendix A Summary of CPD (Continuing Professional Development) activities:

Time (hours) Weight Weighted factor hours 1 0.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 75 75 12 12 2 8 6 7 14 14 3 1 2 30 Total: 261 hrs

Ref No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Date 2006 ~ 09 2006 ~ 09 2006 ~ 08 2007 2007 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009

Type B B C C C C C C C C C C C D

CPD activity / topic / provider On the job Learning - Northrop Private study 6 x BSFA seminars, Canberra Company seminar - Northrop Bridge inspection, Canberra SpaceGass course, Sydney RAPT course, Northrop, Sydney 1170.2 wind loads, SAI GLOBAL RC Buildings course, Sydney ASEC, EA, Melbourne Microsoft Outlook course, ACT ACE Platform, EA, Perth Concrete seminar, CIA, Perth Technical materials for website

Actual Min. 75 Min.150 12 12 2 8 6 7 14 14 3 1 2 Min. 6

NIT E4B INVESTIGATION AND REPORTING Self-Assessment

Page 21 Engineering Practice Report

Prepared by: Reza Lotfi , Aug. Oct. 2009