Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
php/iosijecs
2
M.Tech (Structural) M.I.E, Technical Director, Geostructurals (P) Ltd. India
3
P. G. Coordinator, Department of Civil Engineering, M.A. College of Engineering, Kothamangalam, India.
4
HOD, Department of Civil Engineering, M.A. College of Engineering, Kothamangalam, India.
INTRODUCTION
There has been a considerable increase in the they can form an efficient lateral force resisting system
construction of tall buildings both residential and by reducing lateral displacements under earthquake
commercial and the modern trend is towards more tall loads. Therefore it is very necessary to determine
and slender structures. Thus the effects of lateral loads effective, efficient and ideal location of shear wall.
like wind loads, earthquake loads and blast forces are PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
attaining increasing importance and almost every Structural behaviour under seismic loading requires an
designer is faced with the problems of providing understanding of the behaviour under large inelastic
adequate strength and stability against lateral loads. deformations .Nonlinear Static Procedure/ Pushover
Shear wall system is one of the most commonly used analysis can be used to evaluate building loaded
lateral load resisting system in high rise buildings. Shear beyond the elastic range. The capacity spectrum
wall has high in plane stiffness and strength which can method is one of the most established and widely
be used to simultaneously resist large horizontal loads accepted displacement based seismic design method
and support gravity loads, which significantly reduces which is used for performance based seismic design.
lateral sway of the building and thereby reduces II. LITERATURE REVIEW
damage to structure and its contents. Shear walls in Significance of Shear Wall in High rise Buildings
buildings must be symmetrically located in plan to Static linear and nonlinear analysis procedures for
reduce ill-effects of twist in buildings. When shear walls determining structure responses under seismic forces
are situated in advantageous positions in the building, Performance based analysis of structures.
7
Page
Prof. Jayasree Ramanujan, et al. ISOI Journal of Engineering and Computer science
Bozdogan K.B.,Deierlein et.al.,2010 [1] discussed in resistance and flexibility of structure. Building collapse
detail the modeling issues, nonlinear behavior and is caused due to these inertia forces. Because
analysis of the frame – shear wall structural system. An earthquake ground motion is three-dimensional, the
approximate method which is based on the continuum structure, in general, deforms in a three dimensional
approach and one dimensional finite element method manner. Generally inertia forces generated by the
to be used for lateral static and dynamic analyses of horizontal components of ground motion require
wall-frame buildings is presented. Shaik Kamal greater consideration for seismic design since adequate
Mohammed Azam.,2013 [2] presented a study on resistance to vertical seismic loads is usually provided
seismic performance evaluation of multistoried rc by the member capacities required for gravity load
framed buildings with shear wall. A comparison of design. The type of analysis to obtain seismic force, and
structural behavior in terms of strength, stiffness and their distribution to different levels along height of the
damping characteristics is done.The provision of shear building and to various lateral load resisting elements,
wall has significant influence on lateral strength in taller depends on the height of the building, severity of the
buildings while it has less influence on lateral stiffness seismic zone in which the building is located and on the
in taller buildings. The provision of shear wall has classification of the building as regular or irregular.
significant influence on lateral stiffness in buildings of METHODOLOGY
shorter height while it has less influence on lateral Methods for Seismic analysis of buildings may be
strength. The influence of shear walls is significant in classified as follows:
terms of the damping characteristics and period at the 1) Equivalent Static Analysis (Linear Static)
performance point for tall buildings. Provision of shear 2) Response Spectrum Analysis (Linear Dynamic)
walls symmetrically in the outermost moment-resisting 3) Pushover Analysis (Nonlinear Static)
frames and preferably interconnected in mutually 4) Time History Analysis (Nonlinear Dynamic)
perpendicular direction forming the core will have EQUIVALENT STATIC ANALYSIS
better seismic performance in terms of strength and In Equivalent static analysis it is assumed that the
stiffness. Shahabodin ,Zaregarizi;2013 [4] presented a structure responds in its fundamental mode. The
study on Comparative investigation on using shear wall response is read from a design response spectrum,
and concrete infill to improve seismic performance of given the natural frequency of the structure. This
existing buildings in areas with high seismic potential. method work well for low to medium-rise buildings
Results shows that concrete fills have considerable without significant coupled lateral–torsional modes, in
strength than brick in fills. whereas the displacement which only the first mode in each direction is of
acceptance of brick infills is higher than concrete infills. significance.
Masonry infills as lateral resisting elements have NONLINEAR STATIC PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
considerable strength which can prevent even collapse Pushover analysis is a simplified, static, nonlinear
in moderate earthquakes. Performance of concrete analysis under a predefined pattern of permanent
infills is dependent on adjacent elements especially vertical loads and gradually increasing lateral loads.
columns, so premature failure in columns due to strong Typically the first pushover load case is used to apply
axial forces must be considered.Misam Abidi, gravity load and then subsequent lateral pushover load
Mangulkar Madhuri. N;2012 [5] presented an cases are specified to start from the final conditions of
assessment to understand the behavior of Reinforced the gravity pushover. Typically a gravity load pushover
Concrete framed structures by pushover analysis and is force controlled and lateral pushovers are
the Comparative study was done for different models in displacement controlled. Load is applied incrementally
terms of base shear, displacement, performance point. to frameworks until a collapse mechanism is reached.
The inelastic behaviour of the example structures are Thus it enables determination of collapse load and
examined by carrying out displacement controlled ductility capacity on a building frame. Plastic rotation is
pushover analysis. monitored, and a lateral inelastic force versus
III. SEISMIC RESISTANT DESIGN OF BUILDINGS displacement response for the complete structure is
No building can remain entirely free of damage during analytically computed. This type of analysis enables
quake, still, all structures, big or small; can be made to weakness in the structure to be identified. The decision
withstand earthquakes of a particular magnitude by to retrofit can be taken in such studies. The ATC-40
taking certain precaution. document have developed modeling procedures,
STRUCTURAL RESPONSE acceptance criteria and analysis procedures for
The behavior of a building during an earthquake is a pushover analysis. As shown in Figure 3, five points
vibration problem. If the base of a structure is suddenly labeled A, B, C, D, and E are used to define the force
moved the lower portion of a building tends to vibrate, deflection behavior of the hinge and three points
but the upper part of the structure will not respond labeled IO, LS and CP are used to define the acceptance
8
instantaneously, but will lag because of inertial criteria for the hinge. The range AB is elastic range ,IO,
Page
Prof. Jayasree Ramanujan, et al. ISOI Journal of Engineering and Computer science
LS and CP stand for Immediate Occupancy, Life Safety point is acceptable, we have a building that satisfies the
and Collapse Prevention respectively. push-over criterion. Depending on the position and
PERFORMANCE POINT state of the performance point the analyst may decide
The intersection of capacity spectrum with appropriate on how safe or vulnerable the structure is and where
demand spectrum in capacity spectrum method. If the possible strengthening should be performed.
performance point exists and damage state at that
MODEL I - (MAC) : The model is symmetric in plan and is calculated and assigned as uniformly distributed loads
modeled with only column elements and no shear walls on beams. Rest is automatically considered by program
in layout. itself.
MODEL II - (MCE) : Model consists of shear wall Live loads have been assigned as uniform area loads on
provided in central core area and columns in all other slab elements as per IS 875(Part 2)
positions . Live load on roof=2kN/ m2
MODEL III - (MX) : Model consists of columns in all 4.5 LOAD COMBINATIONS
positions along with shear walls placed parallel to the X The load combinations considered for the analysis and
(Longitudinal)axis design is as per IS: 1893-2002.
MODEL IV - (MY) : Model consists of columns in all ANALYSIS OF THE STRUCTURE
positions along with shear walls placed parallel to the Y 1) Equivalent Static method
(Transverse)axis 2) Response Spectrum Analysis
MODEL V - (MCO) : Shear wall is provided in all four 3) Pushover Analysis
corners of the building . EQUIVALENT STATIC METHOD
MODEL VI - (MCC) : Model is assigned with shear walls The natural period of the building is calculated by the
at central core area as well as corners . expressions T= 0.075 x h0.75 for bare frame and
MODEL VII - (MCX) : Model is assigned with shear walls T 0.09 h d for in filled frame as given in
at central core area and as well as in direction parallel IS 1893 (Part 1) -2002, wherein h is the height and d is
to the X (Longitudinal)axis. the base dimension of the building in the considered
MODEL VIII - (MCY) : Model is assigned with shear walls direction of vibration. The lateral load calculation and
at central core area and also in direction parallel to the its distribution along the height are done as per IS: 1893
Y (Transverse)axis (part 1)-2002. The seismic weight is calculated using full
MATERIAL AND FRAME ELEMENT PROPERTIES dead load plus 25% of live load.
The mix of concrete used for beams and slabs is M20
Ta = = 0.85sec in x- direction (1)
and that for columns is M40.
Beams of size 200x600 and columns of size 300x1000 Ta = = 0.94 sec in y – direction (2)
have been defined. Slab thickness is provided as RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS
required for the spans as per code. Shear walls Response spectrum analysis of all the models are done
provided are of thickness 200 mm and length 2500 mm .The parameters provided are
except for core area where the central portion consists Z=0.16 ,considering zone factor III
of a shear wall of length 2000 mm. I=1 ,considering residential building.
Fixed supports are provided at base. R=5.0, considering special RC moment resisting
LOADS ASSIGNED frame.(SMRF)
Gravity loads on structure include the weight of beams,
slabs, columns and walls. The wall loads have been
10
Page
Prof. Jayasree Ramanujan, et al. ISOI Journal of Engineering and Computer science
PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
PUSHOVER ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
(FORCE CONTROLLED)
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS times the storey height. Maximum drift permitted =
COMPARISON BETWEN EQUIVALENT STATIC METHOD 0.004 x 3000 = 12mm.By comparing the drift values
AND RESPONSE SPECTRUM METHOD obtained for all models obtained using both methods ,it
From the analysis results obtained following could be seen that in models with shear wall provided
parameters are taken into consideration for the present at core as well as in corners the inter story drift has
study. considerably been reduced when compared to the bare
STOREY DRIFT frame model as well as those models in which shear
Story drift can be defined as the lateral displacement of walls are provided only in longitudinal or transverse
one level relative to the level above or below it: As per directions.
Clause no. 7.11.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, the storey Fig 6 & 7 illustrates the comparison of story drift in X
drift in any storey due to specified design lateral force and Y directions in mm for all models using Equivalent
with partial load factor of 1.0, shall not exceed 0.004 Static Method.
Figure 6: Story Drift comparison of the models Figure 7: Story Drift comparison of the models
(Equivalent Static Method - X direction) (Equivalent Static Method - Y direction
Fig 8 & 9 illustrates the comparison of story drift in X and Y directions in mm for all models using Response Spectrum
Method
11
.
Figure 8: Story Drift comparison of the models Figure 9: Story Drift comparison of the model
Page
Table 1: Percentage variation in maximum Story drift values in X and Y directions using Equivalent static and Response spectrum methods
BASE SHEAR
Base shear is the maximum expected lateral force that will occur due to seismic ground motion at the base of
structure.
Fig 10 & 11 compares the Base shear values of the models in X and Y directions respectively using Equivalent Static
Method.
Figure 10: Base Shear VBx Figure 11: Base Shear VBy
Figure 12: Lateral Displacement in X direction Figure 13: Lateral Displacement in Y direction
(Equivalent static method) (Equivalent static method)
12
Fig 14 & 15 compares the Lateral Displacement values in X and Y directions respectively using Response Spectrum
Method.
Page
Prof. Jayasree Ramanujan, et al. ISOI Journal of Engineering and Computer science
Figure 14: Lateral Displacement in X direction Figure 15: Lateral Displacement in Y direction
(Response Spectrum Method) (Response Spectrum Method)
Table 2: Percentage reduction in maximum Lateral displacement values in X and Y directions using Equivalent static and Response spectrum
methods
Response spectrum
Equivalent static method
method
MODEL X direction Y direction X direction Y direction
MCE 23.68 15.3 19.06 12.4
MX 34.3 -12.46 40.8 -9.2
MY -6.1 16.6 28.8 21.1
MCO 31.5 19.2 28.8 21.1
MCC 42.6 22.6 52.08 28.8
MCX 54.7 7.3 36.7 6.2
MCY 19 24.7 14.6 21.9
From the above results it can be observed that the maximum reduction in displacement value is obtained for Model
M (Frame with Core and corner shear wall).
CC
2
Table 4: Percentage variation in column reinforcement in mm for Column 18
2
Percentage variation in column reinforcement in mm for Column no
18(In comparison with bare frame model)
Story No: M M M M M M M
CE X Y CO CC CX CY
2
Table 5: Percentage variation in column reinforcement in mm for Column 24
2
Percentage variation in column reinforcement in mm for Column no 24
Story No: M M M M M M M
CE X Y CO CC CX CY
From the results obtained it can be observed that ,13.4% and 26.3% respectively in top floors when
though the reinforcement requirement in columns for compared with bare frame model.
top storeys are converging to minimum values ,for PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
bottom storey's the reinforcement requirement in Pushover analysis is carried out for all the models .The
column shows considerable variation when provided results obtained are shown below.
with shear walls as compared to the bare frame model. Pushover curve is a plot of base shear versus roof
In Model M and M ie.models with core shear walls displacement which is also known as the capacity curve.
CO CC
and that with shear wall at core and corners, the This curve gives an assessment of base shear induced at
percentage of steel required in columns in ground floor performance point. The performance point is obtained
has come down by 44%, 18% and 49% and up to 34.7% by superimposing demand spectrum and capacity curve
transformed into spectral coordinates. The capacity
spectrum obtained for model is shown below.
Figure 19: Pushover curve for model M Figure 20: Capacity spectrum for model M
CC CC
Figure 21: Location of Plastic hinges in model M Figure 22: Location of Plastic hinges in model M
Page
CC AC
Prof. Jayasree Ramanujan, et al. ISOI Journal of Engineering and Computer science
Fig 23 shows the plastic hinge formation in frame element 734.Hinge is formed within the immediate occupancy
range. So member is safe within applied load limit.
Figure 23: Plastic hinge formation in Figure 24: Plastic hinge formation in
frame element 734 frame element 2040
17
Page