Modelling Underground Storyes

Hello future colleagues,

I have a problem with modelling 20 story concrete frame building in ETABS. Can please someone tell me how to make 5 of those storyes to
be under ground. I suppose i have to give it some sort of restrains...

I'm sorry for my newbie question, but i'm hitting the wall, and i don't know if anything i do is on right track...

Thank you for your time...

02-10-2012, 03:35 AM (Print Post)

Unread post Post: #2

gulilero
Semi Senior Engineer User ID: 14057
Registration Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 116
Threads: 18
Thanked: 642 in 111 posts
Points: 4,447.8 [Donate]

RE: Modelling Underground Storyes

Kryptonite,

I will assume that your lateral forces are taken by shear walls not moment frames.

Then you have two options:

1. Include your underground stories as part of the entire building structure including your basement perimeter walls which I assume you'll
have. Restrain your building at the foundation level (the lowest underground level). Your slabs at ground level and on any basement level
will transfer loads to the perimeter basement walls. You may want to remove the diaphram contraint at the ground floor level,in order to
soften the transfer of lateral forces to the perimeter walls otherwiser you'll get a huge shear at the level on your shear walls.

2. Represent your building as before and use a lateral restraint at the ground level. ETABS will allow you to define this when you define the
lateral forces (EQ or Wind).

In any case I hope that the analysis and design of your building for lateral forces does not become what your username has been to

superman .[*]

Hope it helps.

[*] For those who did not understand the joke; Kryptonite is the weakness of superman, the only thing that can hurt him, cheers .

Yours truly, gulilero

 The following 6 users say Thanks/Agree You to gulilero for this post:
alexbv, RANA WASEEM, kryptonite, noel, student71, erimajus

02-13-2012, 03:26 AM (Print Post)

Unread post Post: #3

User ID: 15937

kryptonite Registration Date: Mar 2010
Newcomers Posts: 2
Threads: 1
Thanked: 0 in 0 posts
Points: 101.0 [Donate]

RE: Modelling Underground Storyes

Hey gulilero, thank you for reply.

The way i solved my problem with modelling undergorund storyes was little different, because i have a framed structure, no walls. I placed
restrains (in horizontal direction, for x and y) on every point (on underground levels) on my frame, so now i have fixed undergorund storyes.
Don't know if this is good modelling, but i can't think of anything else...

02-13-2012, 11:53 AM (Print Post)

Unread post Post: #4

student71 User ID: 28793

Semi Senior Engineer
Registration Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 59
Threads: 1
Thanked: 138 in 53 posts
Points: 824.0 [Donate]

RE: Modelling Underground Storyes

I think you should use 1 option gulilero pointed, and dont restrain anything except foundation level. In 5 underground stories you will have
walls attleast on sides of your structure that way, underground of your structure will have greater stiffness then rest of building and
deflection of underground stories is going to be little, almost no diference from model you maked allready.

02-14-2012, 03:57 AM (Print Post)

Unread post Post: #5

 gulilero
Semi Senior Engineer User ID: 14057
Registration Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 116
Threads: 18
Thanked: 642 in 111 posts
Points: 4,447.8 [Donate]

RE: Modelling Underground Storyes

Kryptonite,

The basic question you need to ask yourself when modeling is:
What is the model going to be used for? For what purpose?
That means;
1. Is it for analyzing the distribution of lateral loads only?
2. Is it for calculating internal forces due to gravity loads + lateral loads?
3. Is it for calculating lateral drifts?
4. Is it for EQ analysis?
5. Is it for Wind analysis?
6. Is it for foundation design?
etc.
Now days, with the abundant availability of "sophisticated" software, there is a wrong perception that accurate geometrical representation is
equivalent to modeling and this is certainly not the case. Modeling is much more than that; is not an end on itself but a means to an end
and that end is to find a good enough representation of the building (model) which will allow us to design a safe, economical and practical
structure.
This means that you might have to create first a good enough model which could be adjusted depending on the particular purpose of the
analysis we pursue. I believe, there is a tendency to spend too much time in representing every little detail of the structure, in getting the
geometry “right” and imputing hundreds of load combinations that very little time is left for understanding how the structure responds
(behaves) and which load combination are relevant and the validity of the many implied assumptions these models / software make in the
process , e.g., beam/column connections, wall to slab connections, link beams, boundary/support conditions, stiffness of different members
for service conditions (fully uncracked or partially cracked stages) and ultimate conditions (fully cracked states),. Also the importance of
“accurate” loading representation is taken too far when loads are by all simplified schemes of a much more complex reality. It is more useful
to simplify the loading and load cases in order to be able to do quick hand checks than to try to capture every little nuance on the building.
My motto is do a simple model that is good (accurate) enough but that is easy to understand and which can be checked and in which the
assumptions made have been tested with the pass of time.
Anyhow, you get the idea.

A good reference for your question is:

Modeling of Support Conditions at the Bases of Tall

Buildings
R. SHANKAR NAIR
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / FIRST QUARTER / 2000
http://www.4shared.com/get/px4BAb9f/Modeling_of_support_conditions.html

Yours truly, gulilero