New ICAVE Container Terminal in the New Port of Veracruz

Design Review Comments

Document Title:

Originator: Document Number: Rev. No.: DRC-

Prepared by Organization Received Date Completed Date Reference No. Revision

(name & department)
CCCC-SUB-D-
Review: Ernesto Mora (Structural) WSP 01
0138

REVIEW COMMENTS:

Comment Submittal Originator

Reviewer Comment (Reviewer initials) Status
No. Reference Response

Design Dwgs for Structure

1. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN
2018-
0155D The longitudinal and shear reinforcement designs made by the program are not equal to the calculation
memory

2. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN

2018-
0155D Page 13
The seismic parameters SDS of the calculation memory are not the same as those of the structural
model

3. GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN
CCCC-GJ-

Page 1 of 5
 New ICAVE Container Terminal in the New Port of Veracruz
Design Review Comments

2018- Page 13
0155D 1. The Leeward Coefficient Cq,lee should be negative, according to Figure 27.4-1 of the ASCE 7-
10
2. The Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient equation, Kz, is not equal to the equation shown in
Table 27.3-1
3. Explain in detail, how they concluded that the value of Topographical Factor Kzt = 1. Since the
standard indicates that in case the site does not comply with the conditions of sec. 26.8.1, then
Kzt = 1, but the calculation memory does not indicate why these conditions are not met.

4. GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN
CCCC-GJ-
2018-
Page 16.
0155D
The memory indicates that the formula qz = 0.00256KzKztKdV2 is used for calculating the velocity
pressure, however, this is for the English system, when in all the calculation memory SI is used, so the
formula used would be the qz = 0.613KzKztKdV2

5. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN

2018-
0155D Page 20.
In the DIS-ES and DIS-EY load combinations, the distortions in the calculation memory are not the
same as in the structural model

6. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN

2018-
0155D Page 14 and 16.
Indicate why basic wind speed is calculated with the ASCE 26.5.1 standard, when in the CFE MDOC-
DV manual it calculates the regional speeds for localities located in Mexico.

7. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN

2018-
0155D Page 21
1) (INFO) I suggest that in the distortion diagrams of the WINDX and WINDY case, write
"Displacement WINDX case" and "Displacement WINDY case", because it is confused, and it is
not understood what is WX and WY

Page 2 of 5
 New ICAVE Container Terminal in the New Port of Veracruz
Design Review Comments

2) (INFO) In the same displacement graph, in the X and Y direction, the word "displacement" is
misspelled.

8. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN

2018-
0155D Page 16.
In the case when the wind is applied to 90° of the structure, the leeward coefficient is not very clear its
value since the structure is very regular, so it should be supported.

9. GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN
CCCC-GJ-
2018-
From page 31 to 38.
0155D
There are discrepancies between the structural model and the calculation memory in the following
tables:
 Base reactions
 Diaphragm Center of Mass Displacements
 Story Max/Avg Displacements
 Story drifts
 Story forces
 Joint reactions
 Modal participating mass ratios
Some boxes values there is no coincidence with the model.
Please, check it in detail.

10. OPEN
CCCC-GJ-
2018-
0155D- The construction details are not distinguished, please make them more readable.
IDF#21-
CS005

Page 3 of 5
 New ICAVE Container Terminal in the New Port of Veracruz
Design Review Comments

11. OPEN
CCCC-GJ- (TEXTO AQUÍ) -(TEXTO AQUÍ) -(TEXTO AQUÍ) -
2018- (TEXTO AQUÍ) -(TEXTO AQUÍ) -(TEXTO AQUÍ) -
0155D- (TEXTO AQUÍ) -(TEXTO AQUÍ) -(TEXTO AQUÍ) -
IDF#21-
CS005

Page 4 of 5
 New ICAVE Container Terminal in the New Port of Veracruz
Design Review Comments

12. OPEN
CCCC-GJ-
2018-
0155D-
IDF#21-
CS005

1) The height of the column is not

equal to that of the structural model
2) Section 250x600 mm of frame A does not
match the model

13. CCCC-GJ- GJ-2018-0155D-IDF-CAL001 OPEN

2018-
0155D Page 40
1) The calculation of the foundation area is not clear.
2) Within the calculation of P and P0, it is not known what the numbers 20, 1.35 and 168 are.
3) The value of Mmax and Mmin, it is not clear from where they are calculated, because they do
not correspond to the value of ec. (W * L2)/2

Page 5 of 5