DESIGN OF AN ELEVATED

BEACH RESTAURANT

INSTRUCTED BY:
DR. M. T. P. HETTIARACHCHI

GROUP MEMBERS:

150088V D.M.L.T. DAHANAYAKE

150296G I. KARTHIGA GROUP : 18

150385E P.H.S. MADUSANKA DATE OF SUB : 14 / 06 /2018

150530V R.M.A.G.B. RATHNAYAKE

150693V W.M.S.C. WIJAYA BANDARA

 CONTENT

1. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
2. TWO ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
3. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SELECTED STRUCTURE
4. LOAD TRANSFER MECHANISM
5. STABILITY OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE
6. CRITICAL STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS
7. SUITABLE DIMENSIONS
8. WORK BREAKDOWN MATRIX
9. REFERENCES
 1. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

• Elevated beach restaurant

• Built using Timber
• Able to accommodate 60 persons at a time
• At least two alternatives to be considered

2. TWO ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

1st Alternative
• Deck - Deck boards on an elevated floor joist framework
• Walls – Movable timber panels are used as walls and separate areas
• Roof – Flat roof structure with a 10̊ slope. Equally spaced joist beam network supported on
bearer beam network (Shown in the diagram)
• Roof material – Retractable fabric roof
• Load transfer to the ground – Through equally spaced columns
• Foundation - Pile foundation made from treated timber

2nd Alternative
• Deck - Deck boards on an elevated floor joist framework. Timber panels to separate areas
• Walls – Load bearing timber panels. The structure divided into 2 main partitions
• Roof – Flat roof made of timber
• Load transfer to the ground – Mainly through walls
• Foundation - Pile foundation made from treated timber
• Additional – Indoor swimming pool
 3. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SELECTED STRUCTURE

Comparison of the 2 structures

Structure 1 (Selected)
Easy Construction as simple
structure (uniformly distributed
members)
Hollow roof facilitates natural
lighting and ventilation
Simple treatment sufficient
Relatively lesser cost
Doesn’t have an indoor swimming
pool
Structure 2
More time and effort for construction of load bearing timber
walls, indoor swimming pool, and the different types of
elements required etc.
The inside partition requires extra lighting
Extra treatment necessary to reduce the effects of water in
the swimming pool and prevent leaks
Relatively higher cost
Gives the premium experience of an indoor swimming pool

Special features of the selected structure

1. Constructability
• Simple structure. Easy to build. The structure begins with heavy timber log piers and columns
laid out on a regular grid that support an elevated platform and simple roof
• Wall panels are temporary, movable. Therefore, quick installation
• Roof is a retractable one run on rails. It is described below
• Piers and columns and other parts are lightweight. Therefore, easy transportation and
construction

2. Layout
• Flat roof which is hollow most of the time. Therefore, can withstand for strong sea winds.
When compared to a gable or other type of roof, it allows for maximum utilization of space
• More openings which appeal aesthetically, uses less materials, provides natural lighting and
ventilation. However, vertical drapes as shown in the diagrams are used to filter off excess
light
• Elevated platform allows the ocean to seep underneath during high tide
 Vertical
3. Cost Drapes

• There’s almost no cost for lighting during the day time

• Less labour power needed which costs less.

Estimated cost for selected structure (BSR 2017)

Description Unit Qty Rate Amount

Only Materials
3000 mm High 150 mm Diameter Timber
1 Nr 30.00 6,500.00 195,000.00
Column

2 85 mm x 160 mm Timber m 75.00 1,550.00 116,250.00

3 65 mm x 120 mm Timber m 48.00 1,150.00 55,200.00

4 25 mm thick timber planks m2 120.00 8,750.00 1,050,000.00

5 Timber wall panel m2 60.00 8,750.00 525,000.00

6 Timber pile foundation 50mm x 300mm m2 120.00 4,800.00 576,000.00

TOTAL 2,517,450.00

Not Including painting or polishing for

Above rates

Materials with fabrication

3000 mm High 150 mm Diameter Timber
1 Nr 30.00 8,500.00 255,000.00
Column

2 85 mm x 160 mm Timber m 75.00 2,100.00 157,500.00

3 65 mm x 120 mm Timber m 48.00 1,450.00 69,600.00

4 25 mm thick timber planks m2 120.00 10,500.00 1,260,000.00

 5 Timber wall panel m2 60.00 10,500.00 630,000.00

6 Timber pile foundation 50mm x 300mm m2 120.00 4,800.00 576,000.00

TOTAL 2,948,100.00

Not Including painting or polishing for

Above rates

4. Retractable fabric roof

A retractable fabric roof allows the most of outdoor space, while ensuring protection from rain, wind
or even excessive sunshine when it’s needed. In our structure we decided to use fabric sheets hanging
on tension cables fixed to roof frame that will reduce sun rays to an adequate level

• Advantages
1. Light weight
2. Low construction cost
3. Natural lighting
4. Use non-hazardous, recyclable materials (Unlike asbestos)
5. Provides good, attractive appearance
6. Easy to maintain (Can replace the fabric when needed)
• Possible fabric we can use and its properties
Sefar Tenara tensile fabric - 15-year life expectancy in sea areas, fully recyclable

Retractable
Fabric Roof
 5. STABILITY OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE

Structural stability can be informally defined as the capability of a structural system to transmit
various loadings safely to the ground. In addition to the loadings applied, stability depends on the
geometry, material properties, bending strength, compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, shear
modulus, density, moisture content, end conditions, etc. of the elements and the climate conditions.
Some of the main causes of failure of timber structures are:

• Inadequate appreciation of loads

• Inadequate bracing of structural system
• Inadequate behaviour of joints
• Effects of moisture exposure (imposed strains, shrinkage)
• Poor durability performance
• Inadequate performance of material and products
While it was difficult to fully address these issues without detailed calculations or a computer
analysis, different handbooks and other sources of literature were used to obtain sufficient solutions.

Inadequate appreciation of loads

Errors related to load effects are mainly due to not considering certain load components or having a
wrong picture of the force transfer in the structural system

Solution
Permanent and variable actions other than wind were addressed by choosing dimensions of elements
(with redundancy) using the Indian Practical Civil Engineers Handbook by P.N. Khanna. It is to be
mentioned that circular columns were selected because Round Columns/Pillars are theoretically more
stable and better for transferring loads to foundation, than square or rectangle cross-sectional
columns.

Round c/s > Square c/s > Rectangular c/s

As our structure is in coastline, we had to ensure the stability of the structure for heavy sea wind load
and soil erosion.
Wind has 2 major effects on structures: the uplifting effect (on roofs) and the lateral load. The flat
roof which has a ten-degree slope is hollow when it is not raining. Therefore, the uplift due to wind
need not be considered. When it’s raining the retractable fabric is used and it is well connected to the
joist beams to prevent any effect due to wind. The bracing for the lateral load is discussed below.

The piers are also sufficiently designed to withstand the heavy sea wind load. The foundation type
we chose for our structure was pile foundation made from treated timber.

Inadequate bracing of structural system

There are 2 types of bracing that should be considered. The bracing of the beams to prevent lateral
buckling and the bracing of the structure to resist lateral wind load (which can lead to swaying of the
structure).

Solution
The first is achieved by using perpendicular beam systems in the floor joists and the roof. For the
second, bracing is done below the floor joist network as follows,

The movable wall panels used will have spaces/holes to have minimum effect from the winds. If this
is not sufficient they will be braced using weights or connecting to the columns.
Inadequate behaviour of joints
The most common method to connect timber elements today is by mechanical dowel type joints.
Among the failure cases where joints are involved this is also the dominating type. The design of
joints in timber structures is a difficult problem. The stress transfer in dowel type joints is very
complex and cannot be described in detail in normal design situations. An additional complication is
that wood is anisotropic and the risk of creating stresses perpendicular to grain is hard to evaluate.
Eccentricities may develop in the joint area leading to much higher stresses in the wood than those
found from the global analysis of the structure. In the joint region the dowels may also reduce the
wood cross section in a significant way.

Solution
Without detailed calculations it is not possible to decide on the type of connections. But a point of
concern is including the reduction of cross sections due to notches in the design as they are the
origins of failure in most timber members (Otherwise, overestimate the strength)

Effects of moisture exposure (imposed strains, shrinkage)

Many cases are also found where inadequate consideration of climatic effects has led to unacceptable
effects for timber structures. The most common problem is cracks perpendicular to grain in wood
elements due to moisture induced strains in wood elements subject to internal or external restraint.

Solution
A range of different chemical treatment has been developed to enhance the durability and
serviceability of the timber. Such chemical treatment impregnated the wood cells, making them resist
the effects from moisture in addition to those from decaying, insects, weather or fire. An elevated
open foundation is used to protect the structure from sea water actions.

It is also needed to ensure that the structure will be free from any leakages (Especially the flat roof),
over hanging trees and other issues due to poor workmanship.

Poor durability performance

Both timber and certain glue types used to bind timber are susceptible to reduction in strength and
other properties on exposure to humid climates.

Solution
Suitable materials should be taken into consideration when doing a comprehensive design. Also, the
foundation type we chose for our structure was pile foundation made from treated timber (Due to the
design requirement of using timber). However, for durability it is recommended to use a concrete or
another more durable material.

Inadequate performance of material and products

Inadequate performance of wood material and wood products seems to be rather rare as primary
cause for failure or damage. In connection with thorough investigations of damaged structures,
however, deficiencies in quality of wood products have sometimes been observed

Solution
Using certified timber suppliers like the State Timber Corporation
 6. CRITICAL STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

Since the different types of elements are spread uniformly in the structure. The critical elements can
be identified as the ones in the mid region.

1. Columns

2. Bearer and joist beams in the roof

Joist
Bearer

3. Floor joists
4. Floor deck members
5. Foundation piles
6. Bracing Member

Note – Timber walls are not considered critical elements as they are movable temporary elements
 7. SUITABLE DIMENSIONS

The floor area of the restaurant was derived from https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/number-

persons-buildings-d_118.html

For a restaurant with services, area per person = 1.5 m2

Therefore, floor area = 1.5 * 60 = 90 m
Assume a safety factor of 1.33, floor area = 120 m
Dimensions = 15 (length) x 8 (width) m

Indian Practical Civil Engineers Handbook by P.N. Khanna was used to derive the following results,

1. Columns (Section 9/13)

Buildings consists not more than one storey and the height of the post doesn’t exceed 3 m
Therefore, column diameter = 150 mm
Column height = 2.7 m above the deck and 0.3 m below

2. Roof beams (Section 11/5)

Bearer Beams (Clear span = 3 m): 85 x 160 mm
Joist Beams (Clear span = 2 m): 65 x 120 mm

3. Floor joists (Section 9/22)

Maximum clear span = 2.4 m
Therefore, 40 x 125 mm and 38 cm apart

4. Floor boards (Section 9/21)

2400 (length) x 150 (width) x 40 (thickness) mm

5. Driven Timber Piles

Dimensions and the number of piles depend on the soil characteristics
 8. WORK BREAKDOWN MATRIX

150088V Selection and comparison of the 2 structures

150296G Stability of the structure
150385E Drawings
150530V Cost Estimate, Stability of the structure,
Finding critical structural elements and suitable dimensions
150693V Selection and comparison of the 2 structures

9. REFERENCES

• Frühwald, E., Serrano, E., Toratti, T., Emilsson, A. and Thelandersson, S. (2007). Design of
safe timber structures – How can we learn from structural failures in concrete, steel and
timber? [pdf] Available at:
http://www.kstr.lth.se/fileadmin/kstr/pdf_files/Timber_Engineering_2017/TVBK_3053_colla
pse_timberstructures.pdf [Accessed 4 Jun. 2018].

• Khanna, P. (2001). Indian Practical Civil Engineers Handbook.

• Tenarafabric.com. (n.d.). SEFAR® Architecture TENARA® Fabric. [online] Available at:

http://www.tenarafabric.com/ [Accessed 5 Jun. 2018].

• BSR 2017 (Sri Lanka)