Abstract

Shear walls are structural members used to elongate the strength of R.C.C. structures. These
shear walls will be construct in each level of the structure, to form an effective box structure.
Equal length shear walls are placed symmetrically on opposite sides of outer walls of the
building. Shear walls are added to the building interior to provide more strength and stiffness
to the building when the exterior walls cannot provide sufficient strength and stiffness. It is
necessary to provide these shear walls when the tolerable span width ratio for the floor or
roof diaphragm is exceeded. The present work deals with a study on the improvement
location of shear walls in symmetrical high rise building. Position of shear walls in
symmetrical buildings has due considerations. In symmetrical buildings, the center of gravity
and center of rigidity coincide, so that the shear walls are placed symmetrically over the outer
edges or inner edges (like box shape). So, it is very necessary to find the efficient and ideal
location of shear walls in symmetrical buildings to minimize the torsion effect. In this work a
high rise building with different places of shear walls is considered for analysis. The multi
storey building is analyzed for its displacement, strength and stability using ETABS-2016
software.

The shear wall is a structural element which is used to resist earthquake forces. These wall
will consumptives shear forces & will prevent changing location-position of construction &
consequently destruction. On other hand, shear wall arrangement must be absolutely accurate,
if not, we will find negative effect instead. For example if the shear walls make an increase
distance between mass centre and hardness centre, we cannot expect a good tensional
behavior from the structure.

Shear walls are specially designed structural walls which are incorporated in buildings to
resist lateral forces that are produced in the plane of wall due to earthquake, wind and
flexural members. Structural walls provide an efficient bracing system and offer great
potential for lateral load resistance. The properties of these seismic shear walls dominate the
response of the buildings, and therefore, it is important to evaluate the seismic response of the
walls appropriately. In this present study, main focus is to determine the solution for shear
wall location in multi-storey building. Effectiveness of shear wall has been studied with the
help of four different models. Model one is bare frame structural system and other three

1
models are dual type structural system. An earthquake load is applied to a building of 8
stories Parameters like Lateral displacement, story drift and total cost required for ground
floor are calculated in both the cases replacing column with shear wall.

Keywords: Skyscraper, Shear wall , ETABS

2
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION

Shear wall are one of the excellent means of providing earthquake resistance to multistoried
reinforced concrete building. The structure is still damaged due to some or the other reason
during earthquakes. Behavior of structure during earthquake motion depends on distribution
of weight, stiffness and strength in both horizontal and planes of building. To reduce the
effect of earthquake reinforced concrete shear walls are used in the building. These can be
used for improving seismic response of buildings. Structural design of buildings for seismic
loading is primarily concerned with structural safety during major Earthquakes, in tall
buildings, it is very important to ensure adequate lateral stiffness to resist lateral load. The
provision of shear wall in building to achieve rigidity has been found effective and
economical. When buildings are tall,beam, column sizes are quite heavy and steel required is
large. So there is lot of congestion at these joint and it is difficult to place and vibrate
concrete at these place and displacement is quite heavy. Shear walls are usually used in tall
building to avoid collapse of buildings. When shear wall are situated in advantageous
positions in the building, they can form an efficient lateral force resisting system. In this
present paper one model for bare frame type residential building and three models for dual
type structural system are generated with the help of ETAB and effectiveness has been
checked Adequate stiffness is to be ensured in high rise buildings for resistance to lateral
loads induced by wind or seismic events. Reinforced concrete shear walls are designed for
buildings located in seismic areas, because of their high bearing capacity, high ductility and
rigidity. In high rise buildings, beam and column dimensions work out large and
reinforcement at the beam-column joins are quite heavy, so that, there is a lot of clogging at
these joints and it is difficult to place and vibrate concrete at these places which does
notcontribute to the safety of buildings. These practical difficulties call for introduction of
shear walls in High rise buildings.

1.1 GENERAL

A large portion of India is susceptible to damaging levels of seismic hazards. Hence, it is

necessary to take in to account the seismic load for the design of structures. In buildings the

3
lateral loads due to earthquake are a matter of concern. These lateral forces can produce
critical stresses in the structure, induce undesirable stresses in the structure, induce
undesirable vibrations or cause excessive lateral sway of the structure.

Sway or drift is the magnitude of the lateral displacement at the top of the building relative to
its base. Traditionally, seismic design approaches are stated, as the structure should be able to
ensure the minor and frequent shaking intensity without sustaining any damage, thus leaving
the structure serviceable after the event.

The structure should withstand moderate level of earthquake ground motion without
structural damage, but possibly with some structural as well as non-structural damage. This
limit state may correspond to earthquake intensity equal to the strongest either experienced or
forecast at the site. In present study the results are studied for response spectrum method. The
main parameters considered in this study to compare the seismic performance of different
models are base shear and time period.

1.2 Earthquake:

Rocks are made of elastic material, and so elastic strain energy is stored in them during the
deformations that occur due to the gigantic tectonic plate actions that occur in the Earth. But,
the material contained in rocks is also very brittle. Thus, when the rocks along a weak region
in the Earth’s Crust reach their strength, a sudden movement takes place there opposite sides
of the fault (a crack in the rocks where movement has taken place) suddenly slip and release
the large elastic strain energy stored in the interface rocks. The sudden slip at the fault causes
the earthquake - a violent shaking of the Earth when large elastic strain energy released
spreads out through seismic waves that travel through the body and along the surface of the
Earth. And, after the earthquake is over, the process of strain build-up at this modified
interface between the rocks starts all over again. Earth scientists know this as the Elastic

4
Rebound Theory. The material points at the fault over which slip occurs usually constitute an
oblong three-dimensional volume, with its long dimension often running into tens of
kilometers.

1.3 Seismic Zones of India

The varying geology at different locations

in the country implies that the likelihood of
damaging earthquakes taking place at
different locations is different. Thus, a
seismic zone map is required to identify
these regions. Based on the levels of
intensities sustained during damaging past
earthquakes, the 1970 version of the zone
map subdivided India into five zones – I, II,
III, IV and V. The seismic zone maps are
revised from time to time as more
understanding is gained on the geology, the seismotectonics and the seismic activity in the
country. The Indian Standards provided the first seismic zone map in 1962, which was later
revised in1967 and again in 1970. The map has been revised again in 2002, and it now has
only four seismic zones – II, III, IV and V.

1.4 Indian Seismic Codes

Seismic codes are unique to a particular region or country. They take into account the local
seismology, accepted level of seismic risk, building typologies, and materials and methods
used in construction. Further, they are indicative of the level of progress a country has made
in the field of earthquake engineering. The first formal seismic code in India, namely IS
1893, was published in 1962. Today, the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has the following
seismic codes:
 IS 1893 (Part I), 2002, Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures (5th Revision)

5
 IS 4326, 1993, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Earthquake Resistant Design and
Construction of Buildings (2nd Revision) \
 IS 13827, 1993, Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving Earthquake Resistance of
Earthen Buildings.
 IS 13828, 1993, Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving Earthquake Resistance of Low
Strength Masonry Buildings.

 IS 13920, 1993, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Ductile Detailing of Reinforced
Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces

1.5 Seismic Analysis of Structure

In our study of the structure the analysis is being done using the response spectrum method in
SAP 2000 v14 and modal mass analysis.

1.5.1 Response Spectrum Method

In order to perform the seismic analysis and design of a structure to be built at a particular
location, the actual time history record is required. However, it is not possible to have such
records at each and every location. Further, the seismic analysis of structures cannot be
carried out simply based on the peak value of the ground acceleration as the response of the
structure depend upon the frequency content of ground motion and its own dynamic
properties. To overcome the above difficulties, earthquake response spectrum is the most
popular tool in the seismic analysis of structures. There are computational advantages in
using the response spectrum method of seismic analysis for prediction of displacements and
member forces in structural systems. The method involves the calculation of only the
maximum values of the displacements and member forces in each mode of vibration using
smooth design spectra that are the average of several earthquake motions.

It will deal with response spectrum method and its application to various types of the
structures. The codal provisions as per IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2002 code for response spectrum
analysis of multi-story building is also summarized.

6
1.5.2 Modal Analysis Method

Action material wherever it is economical to use it. Steel concrete composite frames use more
steel and prove to be an economic approach to solving the problems faced in medium to
Modal analysis is the study of the dynamic properties of structures under vibration excitation.
Modal analysis is the field of measuring and analyzing the dynamic response of structures
and or fluids when excited by an input. In structural engineering, modal analysis uses the
overall mass and stiffness of a structure to find the various periods at which it will naturally
resonate. These periods of vibration are very important to note in earthquake engineering, as
it is imperative that a building's natural frequency does not match the frequency of expected
earthquakes in the region in which the building is to be constructed. If a structure's natural
frequency matches an earthquake's frequency, the structure may continue to resonate and
experience structural damage.

Although modal analysis is usually carried out by computers, it is possible to hand-calculate

the period of vibration of any high-rise building through idealization as a fixed-ended
cantilever with lumped masses.

In India most of the building structures fall under the category of low rise buildings. So, for
these structures reinforced concrete members are used widely because the construction
becomes quite convenient and economical in nature. But since the population in cities is
growing exponentially and the land is limited, there is a need of vertical growth of buildings
in these cities. So, for the fulfillment of this purpose a large number of medium to high rise
buildings are coming up these days. For these high rise buildings it has been found out that
use of composite members in construction is more effective and economic than using
reinforced concrete members. The popularity of steel-concrete composite construction in
cities can be owed to its advantage over the conventional reinforced concrete construction.
Reinforced concretes frames are used in low rise buildings because loading is nominal. But in
medium and high rise buildings, the conventional reinforced concrete construction cannot be
adopted as there is increased dead load along with span restrictions, less stiffness and
framework which is quite vulnerable to hazards.

In construction industry in India use of steel is very less as compared to other developing
nations like China, Brazil etc. Seeing the development in India, there is a dire need to explore

7
more in the field of construction and devise new improved techniques to use Steel as a
construe high rise building structures.

5.3. Composite Structures

When a steel component, like an I-section beam, is attached to a concrete component such
that there is a transfer of forces and moments between them, such as a bridge or a floor slab,
then a composite member is formed. In such a composite T-beam, as shown in Figure 1.3,
thecomparatively high strength of the concrete in compression complements the high strength
of
the steel in tension. Here it is very important to note that both the materials are used to fullest
of their capabilities and give an efficient and economical construction which is an added
advantage.

Figure1.3 Cross Section of a typical composite member

Composite Steel-Concrete beam:-

A concrete beam is formed when a concrete slabwhich is casted in-situ conditions is placed
overran I-sectionorsteelbeam. Under theinfluence of loading both these elements tend to
behave in an independent way andthere is a relative slippage between them. If there is a
proper connection such thatthere is no relative slip between them, then an I-section steel
beam with a concreteslab will behave like a monolithic beam. The figure is shown in the

8
figure 1.4.Inourpresent study; the beam is composite of concrete and steel and behaves like a
monolithic beam. Concrete is very weak in tension and relatively stronger in tension
whereas steel is prone to buckling under the influence of compression. Hence, both
of them are provided in a composite such they use their attributes to their maximum
advantage. A composite beam can also be made by making connections between steel I-
section with a precast reinforced concrete slab. Keeping the load and the span
of the beam constant, we get a more economic cross section for the composite beam
than for the non-composite tradition beam. Composite beams have lesser values ofdeflection
than the steel beams owing to its larger value of stiffness. Moreover, steel
beam sections are also used in buildings prone to fire as they increase resistance to
fire and corrosion.

Figure 1.4 Composite beam

Steel-Concrete Composite Columns: -

A steel –concretecomposite columnis a compression member comprising of a concrete filled

tubular section of hot-rolled steel or a concrete encased hot-rolled steel section. Figure 1.5(a)
and figure1.5 (b) show concrete filled and concrete encased column sections respectively. In
a composite column, both the concrete and the steel interact together by friction and bond.
Therefore, they resist external loading. Generally, in the composite

9
construction, the initial construction loads are beared and supported by bare steel
columns. Concrete is filled on later inside the tubular steel sections or is later casted
around the I section. The combination of both steel and concrete is in such a way that
both of the materials use their attributes in the most effective way. Due to the lighter
weight and higher strength of steel, smaller and lighter foundations can be used. The
concrete which is casted around the steel sections at later stages in construction help
sinlimiting away the lateral deflections, sway and bucking of the column. It is very
convenient and efficient to erect very high rise buildings if we use steel-concrete
composite frames along with composite decks and beams. The time taken for
erection is also less due to which speedy construction is achieved along better results.

Figure 1.5.a Concrete encased steel column

Figure 1.5.b Steel encased concrete column sections

10
CHAPTER -2

LITERATURE SURVEY

Seismic analysis is a major tool in earthquake engineeringwhich is used to understand the

response of buildings due to seismic excitations in a simpler manner. In the past thebuildings
were designed just for gravity loads and seismic analysis is a recent development. It is a part
of structural analysis and a part of structural design where earthquake is prevalent.

Mayuri D. Bhagwat et.al [1] In this work dynamic analysis of G+12 multistoried practiced
RCC building considering for Koyna and Bhuj earthquake is carried out by time history
analysis and response spectrum analysis and seismic responses of such building are
comparatively studied and modeled with the help of ETABS software. Two time histories
(i.e. Koyna and Bhuj) have been used to develop different acceptable criteria (base shear,
storey displacement, storey drifts).

HimanshuBansal et al [2] in this study the story shear force was found to be maximum for the
first storey and it decreased to a minimum in the top storey in all cases. It was found that
mass irregular building frames experience largerbase shear than similar regular building
frames. irregular building experienced lesser base shear and has larger inter storey drifts.

Mohit Sharma et al [3] In this study a G+30 storied regular building. The static and dynamic
analysis has done on computer with the help of STAAD-Pro software using the parameters
for the design as per the IS-1893- 2002-Part-1for the zones- 2 and 3.

A. B. M. Sinful Islam et al [4] In this study analyses results show that isolation system
considerably reduce earthquake induced load on building. Furthermore, method of analysis
has been found to have considerable effect on the response of low to medium rise buildings.
Time history analysis shows significant less base shear than that from response spectrum
analysis .Also, less isolator displacement is obtained from time history analysis than that
from response spectrum analysis.

A S Patel et al [5] This study shows similar variations pattern in Seismic responses such as
base shear and story displacements with intensities V to X. From the study it is recommended

11
that analysis of multistoried RCC building using Time History method becomes necessary to
ensuresafety against earthquake force.

Md. Arman Chowdhury et al [6] In this study regular andirregular and irregular building with
and without isolator are analyzing. Installation of isolator in buildings which increases the
time period of the structure and due to this it reduces the possibility of resonance of the
structure. By providing isolator in building the cost increases, but reinforcementrequirement
and material cost is reduced

P. P. Chandurkar et al [7] in this study shear walls, is considered as major earthquake

resisting member. Structural wall gives an effective bracing system and offer good potential
for lateral load resistance. So it is important to determine the seismic response of the wall or
shear wall. In this study main focus is to determine the location for the shear wall in multi
storey building.

Prof. S.S. Patel et al [8] This study gives seismic analysis of high rise building using program
in STAAD Pro. With considering different conditions of the lateral stiffness system. Analysis
is carried out by response spectrum method. This analysis gives the effect of higher modes of
vibration and actual distribution of force in elastic range in good way. These results include
base shear, storey drift and storey deflection are presented.

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Literature review conducted as part of the present study is divided into two segments.
The first part deals with the overview on the fragility analysis of existing design provision of
Vertically irregular buildings with regards to the design criteria as per Indian code for various
buildings are discussed. In the second part, it based on the seismic hazard analysis and
reliability analysis by considering different region in India.

2.2 FRAGILITY ANALYSIS

2.2.1 Vertically Irregular Buildings

12
Afarani and Nicknam (2012) observed the behaviour of the vertically irregular building under
seismic loads by Incremental Dynamic Analysis. They have dealing with eight stories regular
building having 2 bays with 4 m width in y direction has and 4 bays with 3 m width in x
direction with 3 m storey height is considered. They considered Dead load as 2 ton/m is
distributed on beams. To avoid torsional effects they considered symmetric building and steel
moment resisting frames which are designed according to IBC 2006 and ANSI/AISC 360-05

Eighteen ground motion records from Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre
(PEER) database are collected from Far-Field with distance more than 10 km from site and
have Richter magnitudes of 5 to 8 on firm soil. The building is modelled in SeismoStruct-V5
software as a nonlinear dynamic analysis .Steel is modelled as ElasticPerfectly Plastic (EPP)
hysteresis without experience of local and lateral buckling and the connections were failure
according to FEMA 440. Maximum inter story drift ratios and first mode spectral
acceleration are calculated by Incremental dynamic analysis and IDA curved are plotted to
get the collapse points. The analysis of the building is focused on the collapse prevention
limit state of the structures. Fragility curves are generated by using Cumulative Distribution
Function through the lognormal distribution through collapse points.

The fragility analysis for an irregular RC building under bidirectional earthquake loading has
studied by Jeong and Elnashai (2006). For the consideration of the irregularities in structure,
the torsion and bidirectional response are utilized as 3D structural response features to
represent the damage states of the building irregularities is presented through a reference
derivation. A three story RC frame is taken with asymmetric in plan with thickness of slab is
150 mm and beam depth is 500 mm to study the damage assessments. The sectional
dimension of C6 is 750×250 mm whereas all other columns are 250×250 mm. Fragility
curves are generated by calculating the damage measure with spatial (3D) damage index by
statistical manipulation methods and lognormal distributions for response variables
Earthquake records consist are of two orthogonal components (Longitudinal and Transverse)
of horizontal accelerations and are modified from the natural records to be compatible with a
smooth code spectrum. PGAs are taken from a range of 0.05 to 0.4g with a step of 0.05g. For
accurate damage assessment of buildings is exhibiting torsion, Planar decomposition method
is used where the building is decomposed into planar frame and analyzed. The parameters
such as top displacement, inter-story drift or a damage index are found out from numerical
simulations results. The total damage index is calculated for the planar frames from the
backbone envelope curve as a combination of damage due to in-plane monotonic

13
displacement and strength reduction. Coefficient of variation (COV) is found be the ratio of
standard deviation to mean value of damage index.

2.2.2 RC Frame Buildings

Tantala and Deodatis (2002) considered a 25 story of reinforced concrete moment resisting
frame Building having three-bays. They have generated fragility curves for a wide range of
ground motion intensities. They have used time histories are modeled by stochastic processes.
Simulation is done by power spectrum probability and duration of earthquake by conducting
1000 simulation for each parameter. The nonlinear analysis is done by considering the P-
effects and by ignoring soil-structure interaction. They have considered the nonlinearity in
material properties in model with nonlinear rotational springs a bilinear moment-curvature
relationship by considering the stiffness degradation through hysteretic energy dissipation
capacity over successive cycles of the hysteresis. They have used Monte Carlo simulation
approach for simulation of the ground motion. The simulation for the durations of strong
ground motions is done at 2, 7 and 12 seconds labels to observe the effects. They considered
the effects of the assumption of Gaussianity and duration. They have adopted stochastic
process for modeling. The analyses were done by using DRAIN-2D as a dynamic analysis
with inelastic time histories data. The random material strengths were simulated for every
beam and column using Latin Hypercube sampling.

Murat and Zekeria (2006) studied the yielding and collapse behaviour of RC frame buildings
in Istanbul was analyzed through fragility analysis based on numerical emulation. They have
studied number of stories of buildings as 3, 5 & 7 stories designed as per Turkish seismic
design code (1975).The fragility curves were constructed with the help of the results of
regression analysis. They have examined with 12 artificial ground motions for the analysis.
Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) method is used for estimating structural performance
under several ground motions. The Characteristic strength of concrete as 16Mpa and two
different type of steel as 220Mpa & 420Mpa are used. The uncertainty due to scatter of
material as well as the soil structure interaction was ignored in their design mean value of
material strength was taken into consideration which was evaluated experimentally.

Performance limit state: inelastic displacement demand and corresponding deformations for
immediate occupancy and collapse prevention are evaluated. From the fragility curves finally
they have concluded that for the collapse prevention performance level, a good correlation

14
between spectral displacement limit and the number of stories was observed but the same
observation was not valid for the immediate occupancy level.

Rota et al (2010) observed the fragility curves for masonry buildings prototype of a three-
storey masonry building located in Benevento (southern Italy) which has constructed in1952
are analyzed based on stochastic nonlinear analysis. The parameters are found out by Monte
Carlo simulation through a program STAC for the analysis. The building used is made of tuff
masonry several experimental tests have carried out by Faella et al. The program TREMURI,
a frame-type macro-element global analysis program was developed by Gambarotta and
Lagomarsino and further modified by Penna for a nonlinear pushover and time history
analyses on masonry Buildings. In this study different sources of uncertainty are involved in
the problem, by derivation of the probability distributions of both capacity and demand
through 3D nonlinear analyses of entire structure. They have used in-plane cyclic shear-
compression tests carried out on specimens made of cement mortar and tuff units. The
analysis has been done by considering 4 mechanical damages for the structures. Two of them
can be identified from the response of a single masonry pier while the other two are found
from the global response of the building. First damage state is identified by the attainment of
the yield displacement is y of the bilinear approximation to the capacity curve of a single
masonry pier. The second damage state is identified by the drift corresponding to the first
shear cracking of the pier is S which obtained from the experimental test. The third and
fourth damage states have been derived from global pushover curves of the building as the
third state is assumed to correspond to the attainment of the maximum shear resistance while
the fourth state corresponds to the attainment of 80% of that value. All the mechanical
properties of the structure are assumed to be random variables, the mean value and standard
deviations are calculated by normal probability distributions of the building typology.

Erberik (2008) studied the low-rise and mid-rise reinforced concrete (RC) buildings through
Fragility analysis that characteristics in the Duzce Damage database which effected by two
devastating earthquakes in 1999 at Marmara region in turkey. They have considered the
buildings of number of stories ranges between two and six. In the analysis the building
having two and three stories are regarded as low-rise (LR) and buildings having four to six
stories are considered as mid-rise (MR).They have studied with 28 RC buildings extracted
from a building database of around 500 buildings in Duzce. Post-earthquake damage
assessments of the buildings were available. The Duzce damage database has been used
previously by other researchers.100 corrected ground motion records have collected from

15
different parts of the world with a range of magnitude between 5.1 and 7.8 are used for the
analysis. The ground motion set is divided into 20 Groups each of five with PGV intervals of
5 cm/s, the buildings are modelled as bare frame or infill frame. In the study they subdivided
the building as low-rise bare frame type, low-rise infill frame type, mid-rise bare frame type
and mid-rise infill frame type. The low-rise and mid-rise RC structures are analysed as a
single degree of freedom system with the global response statistics of simplified (or
equivalent) analytical models. They have considered three structural Parameters as period,
strength ratio and the post-yield to initial stiffness ratio. First mode parameters are obtained
and the capacity spectra are constructed in acceleration–displacement response spectra
(ADRS) pattern. Then these capacity spectra are identified by the bilinearization method in
FEMA356 and Capacity curves of the structural models were obtained by SAP2000.
Sampling is done by size on the fragility functions, structural simulations using LHS
technique by using MATLAB. The Building damages were observed in four stages as none,
light, moderate and severe or collapsed. The performance limits of building for Serviceability
limit state, Collapse prevention limit and Damage control limit state are studied. Finally
fragility curves are generated for different classes of RC buildings and compared with the
actual field data.

Guneyisi and Altay (2008) observed the behaviour of existing R/C office buildings through
fragility curves considering the conditions as before and after retrofitted by fluid viscous
(VS) dampers. Braced frames are considered at the middle bay of the frame with passive fluid
VS dampers at each brace. A 12-storey office building designed as Turkish seismic design
code version (1975) from Istanbul. VS dampers are used for retrofitting, designed as FEMA
273–274 with different effective damping ratios of 10%, 15%, and 20%. Main structural
system of the building consists of moment resisting R/C frames in two directions with 12-
storey located at moderate seismic zone with relatively stiff soil type as per Turkish seismic
design code has taken. The storey height of the building is 2.75 m with 989 m2 floor area.
240 earthquake ground motions are generated by considering the spectral representation
methodology based on the stochastic engineering Approach with the help of MATLAB
program limited to 1PGA. The R/C building is modeled as a three-dimensional analytical
model of the building was established in ETABS version 7.2 Structural Analysis Program for
the analysis. For the seismic response of the buildings are focused by the nonlinear time
history analyses with push over analysis by IDARC version 6.1 programs. The characteristic
strength and yield strength is considered as of 16 MPa and 220 MPa. The fragility curves are

16
generated for four damage states as slight, moderate, major, and collapse conditions and
Load-deformation relationship for the weak axis (y-axis) and the structural damage limit
values determined for each type of damage. The fragility curve generated for the building are
concluded that with the help of retrofitting the failure chances of building becomes
minimized such that the before retrofitting is more fragile than after retrofitting case.

Samoah (2012) observed the fragility behaviour of non-ductile reinforced concrete (RC)
frame buildings in low - medium seismic areas and they have preferred at Accra which is the
capital of Ghana, West Africa. The structural capacity of the buildings is analyzed by
inelastic pushover analysis and seismic demand is analyzed by inelastic time history analyses.
Then the fragility curves are drawn. They have examined with 3 generic non-ductile RC
frame buildings having symmetrical and regular in both plan and elevation are designed
according to BS 8110 (1985). The buildings taken into consideration are a 3-storey and 3-
bay, a 4-storey and 2-bay and a 6-storey and 3 bay buildings to get an appropriate result. The
structure was modeled using 35 and 60% of the gross sectional areas of beams and columns.
A macro-element program IDARC2D (1996) was developed as the inelastic static and
dynamic analysis of non-ductile RC frames. The analysis for the non-ductile RC frame
buildings, modelling are done adequately based on their structural properties.

Rajeev and Tesfamariam (2012) studied the seismic performance of non-code conforming
RC buildings designed for gravity loads. The analysis highlights the need for reliable
vulnerability assessment and retrofitting. The vulnerability is compounded since the RC
buildings are subject to different irregularities such as weak storey, soft storey, plan
irregularities sand other types Fragility based seismic vulnerability of structures with
consideration of soft storey(SS) and quality of construction(CQ) is demonstrated on three-,
five-, and nine-storey RC frames designed prior to 1970s. Probabilistic seismic demand
model (PSDM) for considered structures is developed, by using the nonlinear finite element
analysis. Further, the fragility curves are developed for the three structures considering SS,
CQ and of their interactions. Finally, confidence bounds on the fragilities are also presented
as a measure of their accuracy for risk-informed decision-making. With the PSDM models
the corresponding fragility curves are generated. in the analysis. They concluded that the
vertical irregularities and construction quality in seismic risk assessment have a significant
influence in the decision making phase. The proposed approach of developing a predictive
tool can enhance regional damage assessment tool, such as HAZUS, to develop enhanced
fragility curves for known SS and CQ.

17
2.2.3 OGS Buildings

Davis and Menon (2004) examined the presence of masonry infill panels modifies the
structural force distribution significantly in an OGS building. They considered verities of
building case studies by increasing the story heights and bays in OGS buildings to study the
change in the behavior of the performance of the buildings with the increase in the number of
story and bays as well as the story heights. They observed that with the total storey shear
force increases as the stiffness of the building increases in the presence of masonry infill at
the upper floor of the building. Also, the bending moments in the ground floor columns
increase and the failure is formed due to soft story mechanism that is the formation of hinges
in ground story columns.

Scarlet (1997) identified the qualification of seismic forces of OGS buildings. A

multiplication factor for base shear for OGS building was proposed. The modelling the
stiffness of the infill walls in the analysis was focused. The effect of in Multiplication factor
with the increase in storey height was studied. He observed the multiplication factor ranging
from 1.86 to 3.28 as the number of storey increases from six to twenty.

Hashmi and Madan (2008) conducted non-linear time history and pushover analysis of OGS
buildings. They concluded that the MF prescribed by IS 1893 2002 for such buildings is
adequate for preventing collapse.Sahoo (2008) observed the behaviour of open-ground-storey
of Reinforced concrete (RC) framed buildings having masonry at above storey by using
Steel-Caging and Aluminum Shear-Yielding Dampers. He has introduced a simple spring-
mass model for the design of braces for adequate strength and stiffness requirements of the
strengthening system. He has taken a 5 storey 4 bay non-ductile RC frame having open
ground- storey for his observation. And also reduced scale 1storey 1 bay RC frame was
analyzed experimentally under constant gravity loads and reversed cyclic gradually
increasing lateral Displacement by Full strengthening technique. For flexural strength and
inelastic rotation at a target yield mechanism the performance-based design method was
developed to withstand the probable seismic demand as the lateral strength, inelastic
deformation and energy dissipation demand on structures. He observed for load transferring
assemblies the steel cage-to-RC footing connection and brace-to-steel cage connection
exhibited excellent performance under lateral cyclic loading without any sign of premature
failures. Whereas the RC frame strengthened with only steel caging exhibited the improved

18
lateral strength, drift capacity and energy dissipation potential as compared to the non-ductile
frame but could not avoid collapse completely.

Patel (2012) proposed both linear as the Equivalent Static Analysis and Response Spectrum
Analysis and the nonlinear analyses as the Pushover Analysis and Time History Analysis for
Low-rise open ground storey framed building with infill wall stiffness as an equivalent
diagonal strut model. The effect of the infill wall is studied considering the Indian standard
code IS 1893 2002 criteria mention for OGS buildings. She observed that the analysis results
shows that a MF of 2.5 is too high to be multiplied to the beam and column forces of the
ground storey of the buildings. Their study conclude that the problem of open ground storey
buildings cannot be identified properly through elastic analysis as the stiffness of open
ground storey building and a similar bare-frame building are almost same.

2.2.4 Stepped Buildings

Sarkar et al (2009) considered the irregularity in stepped framed building by considering

Regularity index.78 building frames with uniform number and bay width of 4 and 6m
respectively with varying degree of stepped irregularity are considered seven numbers of
buildings with different height are also included without considering step.50 modes are
focused for four different cases of building. They observed by histogram that with the
increases in irregularity, the first-mode participation decreases with increased participation on
some higher modes. Delhi Secretariat building ten-storied office building located in New
Delhi (Seismic Zone IV with designed PGA of 0:24g as per IS 1893:2002).The modelling
and analysis were done by using a program SAP2000.

Kim &Shinozuka (2004) studied the fragility analysis of two sample bridges retrofitted by
steel jacketing of bridge columns in southern California. Among the two bridges the first one
bridge was 34m long with three span with two half shells of rolled steel plate and a RC deck
slab 10m width supported by 2pairs of circular columns(each having 3 columns of diameter
as 0.8 m) with abutments. And the second bridge was 242m long with a deck slab dimension
(13m wide &2m deep) which supported by 4 circular columns of 2.4m diameter and height of
21m have an expansion joint at center was taken.60 ground acceleration time histories were
collected from the Los Angeles the historical records and then Adjusted. After that then they
have categorized into 3groups each of having 20data.The bridges were modelled as a two-
dimensional response analysis with a computer program SAP2000 or nonlinear finite method.

19
The fragility curves were developed by considering before and after column retrofit with steel
jackets cases with probabilities of exceedence of 10% in 50 years, 2% in 50 years and 50%
in50 years ,respectively. Nonlinear response characteristics associated with the bridges are
based on moment–curvature curve analysis. They considered two-parameter lognormal
distribution functions by the median and log standard deviation to analysis the fragility
curves. They have done the analysis for different performance levels as no cracking, Slight
Cracking Moderate, Extensive Incipient column collapse Complete. The fragility curves were
generated from the experimental outputs and then compared.

Zentner et al (2008) observed the seismic probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) for seismic risk
evaluation of nuclear plants is studied through fragility analysis in the analysis. They
considered coupled model consisting of a supporting structure that is containment building
modeled as 3D stick model and also the secondary system that represent a reactor coolant
system which is modeled as a beam elements consists of a reactor vessel and four loops
having steam generator. Primary pump and piping in each loop is multi-supported by 36
supports. Four upper lateral supports placed at the top of each steam generator and three
lower lateral supports for guidance and safety of steam generator & reactor vessel. Statically
estimation of parameters through fragility curves for a nuclear power plant was studied by
means of numerical simulation.. They have generated 50 artificial ground motions time
histories and analyzed as a nonlinear dynamic response of the site response spectrum for a
rocky site. The ground motions are modeled by stochastic process from artificial time
histories data. All the numerical computations they have carried out using Code Aster open
source FE-software for the output results. They have considered two configurations in the
analysis. First they have considered the uncertainties related to soil and earthquake in the
analysis and then they considered the uncertainties due to earthquake ground motion as well
as structural and mode in the plant equipment.

Ozel and Guneyisi (2011) studied a mid-rise RC frame building retrofitted with eccentric
steel brace was observed through Fragility analysis. A six storey RC frame building, designed
as per Turkish seismic design code 1975 located in a high-seismicity region of Turkey was
taken in the study. In building typical beam and column was considered without shear wall.
The steel braces (K,V&D type) they have used 4different distribution to observe the
behaviour. The fragility curves were developed from the inter storey drift by means of
nonlinear time history analysis. The fragility curves developed for the original building for
different damage levels.200 earthquake data were considered that generated by using

20
MATLAB program. Modelling was done as a 2D analysis by using a software SAP2000
nonlinear version 11.The median and standard deviation of the ground motion indices for
each damage level were obtained by performing linear regression analysis for different
performance levels. They observed the different damage levels as slight, moderate, major,
and collapse for the building. The fragility curves were developed for before and after
retrofitting with steel braces. They concluded after retrofitting with steel braces were less
fragile compared to those before retrofit. And the distributions of the eccentric steel braces
were slightly affecting the seismic reliability of the braced frames. First distributions (K1,
V1, or D1) gave the greatest and fourth distributions (K4, V4, or D4) gave the least seismic
reliability.
Marano et al (2011) the fragility curves are developed that based on the classification and
structures provided by the Hazus database with the uses of stochastic dynamic analysis.
Types for the buildings are taken as 2 storey’s and 5 storey’s buildings with both low seismic
design and medium seismic design are considered. A displacement based damage index is
adopted for the fragility analysis. The structure considered is a nonlinear single degree of
freedom system (SDOF).Response to seismic action, modeled by means of the modulated
Clough and Penzien process, is achieved by using stochastic linearization technique and
covariance analysis. Fragility curves are obtained by means of an approximate threshold
crossings theory. A sensitivity analysis has been performed with respect to structural
parameters and also considering different soil types. From the sensitivity analysis carried out
considering structural mechanical parameters it can be deduced that all the parameters affect
the fragility curves, except the stiffness ratio α which influences only the fragility curve
which corresponds to the heavy damage state.

Cornell et al (2002) investigated a formal probabilistic framework for seismic design and
assessment of structures and its application to steel moment-resisting frame buildings based
on the 2000 SAC, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) steel moment frame
guidelines. The framework is based on realizing a performance objective expressed as the
probability of exceedence for a specified performance level. That related to demand and
capacities of that are described by nonlinear, dynamic displacements of the structure. One of
the spectral acceleration at the approximate first. Probabilistic models distributions were used
to describe the randomness and uncertainty in the structural demand given the ground motion
level, and the structural capacity. A common probabilistic tool the total probability theorem
was used to convolve the probability distributions for demand, capacity, and ground motion

21
intensity hazard. This provided an analytical expression for the probability of exceeding the
performance level as the primary product of development of framework. Consideration of
uncertainty in the probabilisticmodelling of demand and capacity allowed for the definition of
confidence

statements for the likelihood performance objective being achieved

2.3 SEISMIC HAZARD AND RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

Pallav et al (2012) estimated the spectral acceleration of the Manipur region through the
probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). The area considered for the analysis is divided
into different zones. By consideration of past earthquake data the earthquake recurrence
relations are evaluated for the analysis Seenapati, tamenglong, churachandpur, chandel,
imphal east, Imphal west, Ukhrul, Thoubal and Bishnupur places belongs to that region are
considered for the analysis. Counter maps are considered for the different places of Manipur
region by considering the variation of peak ground acceleration for return periods. These
results may be of use to planners and engineers for selection of site, earthquake resistant
structures designing and, may help the state administration in seismic hazard mitigation.

Ellingwood (2001) estimated the earthquake risk assessment of the building by applying the
probabilistic risk analysis tools for two decades. He focused on the3 probability based
codified designed and reliability based condition asse3ssment of existing structures. The steel
frames weld connected are designed. A nonlinear dynamic analysis is done to study the
behaviour in the importance of inherent randomness and modelling uncertainties in the
performance of the buildings through fragility analysis. The seismic hazard analysis is done
by considering the ground motion from California strong ground motion network.

Dymiotis et al (2012) studied on the probabilistic assessment of reinforced concrete frames in

filled with clay brick walls and subjected to earthquake loading. The adopted methodology
extends that previously developed by the writers for bare RC frames designed with EC8 by
introducing additional random variables to account for the uncertainty in the masonry
properties. Masonry infill walls are modeled as a four-nodded isoperimetric shear panel
elements of complex hysteretic behaviour. Dynamic inelastic time-history analyses of 2D
frame models are carried out using DRAIN-2D/90. The program utilizes the lumped mass
approach and point hinge idealizations for line members.

22
Quantification of the latter is achieved through the use of experimental data describing the
difference in force-displacement behaviour between bare and infill frames. The vulnerability
and seismic reliability of two 10-story, three-bay infill frames (a fully infill one and one with
a soft ground story) are derived and subsequently compared with values corresponding to the
bare frame counterpart. The seismic vulnerability is found out for two limit state levels as
serviceability and ultimate limit state They concluded that failure probabilities, at the ultimate
limit state, are highly sensitive to the structural stiffness; hence, bare frames benefit from
lower spectral ordinates than infill ones. Nonetheless, all structural systems studied appear to
be exposed to a reasonably low seismic risk.

Celik and Ellingwood (2010) observe the seismic performance of the reinforced concrete
frames belongs to low seismic region are designed and analyzed for gravity loads. They
considered the uncertainty in the material properties and structural systems (i.e. structural
damping, concrete strength, and cracking strain in beam–column joints) have the greatest
impact on the fragilities of such frames. Confidence bounds on the fragilities are also
presented as a measure of their accuracy for risk-informed decision-making, for prioritizing
risk mitigation efforts in regions of low-to-moderate seismicity.

Bhattacharya et al (2001) focused on the development of the target reliability of the novel
structures that calibrated to existing structures. They adopted a general risk methodology of
reliability framework is considered for finding out the significant limit state and the
identification of the target reliability for the structures analytically. The methodology is
illustrated with the US Navy's Mobile Offshore Base concept is the unique offshore structure
in terms of function and size, and where no industry standard exists. A survey of reliability
levels in existing design standards and engineered structures, target reliabilities recommended
by experts, and analytical models for establishing acceptable failure probabilities is
presented. The MOB target reliabilities presented here are subject to modification in the
actual acquisition phase when more input becomes available. It is concluded that setting
target reliabilities for high-value novel structures is not an engineering decision alone active
involvement on the part of the owners and policy-makers is also required.

Korma, M., & Holicky, M., (2011) investigated the same target reliability level for the
assessment of existing structures. The variation of the cost as well as the reliability index is
determined by considering the different parameters. By considering the various codes the
target reliability has estimated for the building and based upon this the performance levels are

23
evaluated. The target reliability levels are primarily dependent on the failure consequences
and on the marginal cost per unit of a decision parameter; upgrade costs independent of the
decision parameter; remaining working life and discount ratio are less significant. The design
values are specified on the basis of an appropriate reliability index(β).

Review of analysis methods

The seismic response of the building systems shows a large dependence on the type
ofanalysis method adopted. In past years, the analysis methods were confined to linear static
approach due to its simplicity. Although these methods yielded safe design; but were
observed to be over conservative. The development of sophisticated computers and analysis
programmers enabled the researchers to move forward towards a morerational approach by
stimulating the actual earthquakes on the building models to obtainthe realistic seismic
response; these methods were categorized under dynamic analysis.

Both the static and dynamic analysis was further sub-classified into linear and
nonlinearmethods depending upon the force – deformation relationship of the structural
members.These methods have been briefly described in this section.

Linear approach – In the linear approach, the force is assumed to be constantwith time.
This approach can be further sub-classified into linear static and lineardynamic approach as
discussed in following subsectionslinear static approach.

This approach has been prescribed by most of the design codes for building structures with
smaller storey height. As per this approach, the seismic response can be computed by
applying set of lateral forces to the structure. The linear static approach is a force based and
the design parameters mainly depend on computation of base shear which in turn depends
upon fundamental time period and seismic weight.The factor Rris the response reduction
factor and it intends to account for bothdamping and ductility element in the structural system
at yield and ultimate displacement. Therefore, for a system with light damping made of brittle
material, the parameters would be closer to unity, and for a heavily damped ductile frame it
would range from 2 to 5 (UBC 1997). However, the parameter R r assumes the value of 3 and
5for OMRF and SMRF frames (IS 1893:2002). Likewise, different seismic design codes
prescribe different value of parameter Rr. Nevertheless, the importance factor If “depends on
the required seismic performance of the structure, and assumes different valuesas per

24
different seismic design codes.The fundamental time period is estimated by code expressions
which are slightlydifferent from each other.

Linear dynamic approach:

The linear dynamic approach is similar to the linear static approach and uses thestructural
model linearly elastic in nature. However, this analysis adopts the dynamicforces contrary to
the linear static approach which employs the static forces. Thedynamic forces in this method
are applied in the form of the code specified responsespectrum to the structure. Therefore, it
provides a greater insight into the structuralresponse as compared to the linear static
approach. Furthermore, the representativeground motion is not reduced by the response
modification factor Rr (Chopra 1973).This method requires an eigen-value analysis of the
building analytical model todetermine the natural frequencies and the mode shapes. By use of
the mathematicalprocedures and a response spectrum corresponding to the specified
damping, the modalfrequencies and shapes are further used to compute the spectral demands.
Thesespectral demands are used to calculate the member forces, displacements, storeyshears,
base reactions etc. These modal forces are then combined using an established rule (SRSS,
ABS, and CQC) to calculate the total response quantity to achieve better accuracy.

Equivalent static force method:

Depending on the location of the building site, identify the seismic zone and assign Zone
factor (Z). Compute the seismic weight of the building (W). After that to determine the
natural period of the building (Ta) by using code IS-1893 (2002), Using Ta and soil type (I /
II / III), compute the average spectral acceleration (Sa /g).knowing Z, Sa /g, R and I compute
design horizontal acceleration coefficient (Ah) using the relationship, From that we determine
the seismic base shear(Vb) by the following expression: Vb= Ah *W Where, Ah= Design
horizontal acceleration spectrum value using the fundamental natural period Ta in the
considered direction of vibration. W = Seismic weight of the building the design horizontal

seismic coefficient Ah shall be determined by the following expression:

25
 Where Z = Zone factor as per table 2 of code; I = Importance factor as per table 6 of code :
R = Response reduction factors: R=3 for OMRF[ordinary RC moment-resisting frame]and
R=5 for SMRF[special RC moment-resisting frame] are taken from code

CHAPTER-3
METHODS AND MODELING

A shear wall is a wall that is used to resist the shear,produced due to lateral forces. Many
codes made the shearwall design for high rise buildings a mandatory. Shear walls are
provided when the centre of gravity of building area andloads acted on structure differs by
more than 30%. To bring the centre of gravity and centre of rigidity in range of 30%,concrete
walls are provided i.e. lateral forces may not increase much. These shear walls start at
foundation level and extend throughout the building height. The thickness of the shear wall
may vary from 150mm to 400mm. Shear walls are oriented in vertical direction like wide
beams which carry earthquake loads downwards to the foundation and they are usually
provided along both width and length of the buildings. Shear walls in structures located at
high seismic regions require special detailing. The construction of shear walls is simple,
because reinforcement detailing of walls is relatively straight forward and easy to implement
at the site.

Shear walls are effective both in construction cost and effectiveness in minimizing
earthquake damage to the structural and nonstructural elements also.

3.1Shapes or Geometry of Shear Walls

Shear walls are rectangle in cross section, i.e. one dimension is much larger than the other.
While rectangular cross-section is frequent, L- and U-shaped sections are also used. Thin
walled hollow RC shafts around the elevator core of the structure also act as shear walls, and
should be taken advantage of to resist earthquake forces.

The Shear Wall sections are classified as six types.

(a) Box Section

(b) L – Section

26
(c) U - Section

(d) W – Section

(e) H - Section

(f) T – Section

Figure 3.1: Different shapes or geometries of shear walls

27
 Placement of shear wall:

Following types

1. Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall

2. Concrete Block Shear Wall
3. Steel Shear Wall

28
 4. Plywood Shear Wall
5. Mid-Ply Shear Wall.
6. Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall

Reinforced concrete shear walls are widely used shear walls for residential buildings. The
reinforcement is provided in both horizontal and vertical directions. But at the end of each
wall, bars are closely spaced and anchored. So, the end zones of RC shear wall is called as
boundary elements or barbells.

The wall thickness of RC shear wall is varied depending upon many factors like thermal
insulation requirements of building, age of building, number of floors of building etc. It
varies from 140 mm to 500 mm. In general, the provision of shear wall is continuous
throughout the height of building. But sometimes it is discontinued where there is a building
entrance or parking space etc.

Fig 1: Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall

2. Concrete Block Shear Wall

Concrete block shear walls are constructed using Hollow concrete blocks along with Steel
reinforcement bars. Reinforcement is generally used to maximize the effect of concrete block
masonry against seismic loads.

29
The Reinforcement bars are arranged through spaces of concrete blocks in both vertical and
horizontal directions. After placing bars in concrete block masonry, fresh concrete grout is
poured into the hollow space and is allowed to set.

This type of walls can take both gravity loads and lateral loads. So, they can work like shear
wall as well as load bearing wall.

Fig 2: Reinforced Concrete Block Shear Wall Construction

3. Steel Shear Wall

Steel shear wall consists of a steel plate wall, boundary column and horizontal floor beam.
The action of steel shear wall is more like a plate girder. Steel plate wall acts as web of plate
girder, boundary columns acts as flanges and horizontal beams acts as stiffeners of plate

30
 Fig 3: Steel Plate Shear Wall

4. Plywood Shear Wall

Plywood shear walls are traditional type walls which are also called as timber shear walls. It
consists of plywood sheets and studs. Plywood sheets transfer shear force while studs resists
the tension or compression.

Now a days plywood shear walls are redesigned using new technical advancements. Steel
sheets, sure boards etc. are using in place of plywood.

31
F

FIG:4 PLYWOOD SHE

5. Mid-Ply Shear Wall

Mid-ply shear wall is an improved version of normal plywood shear wall. In this case, extra
plywood sheet is arranged at the center of normal plywood wall and series of pairs of studs
are positioned on the both sides of mid-ply. Studs joint the mid-ply with outer plywood
sheets. Here, Studs are rotated to 90 degreesrelative to those is plywood shear walls.

The mid-ply shear wall eliminates the problems caused in standard shear walls and lateral
load carrying capacity is higher for mid-ply shear walls.

3.2 Classification according to behavior

32
Shear walls can also be classified according to their behavior also, they are as follows:

a) Shear-shear walls in which strength and deflection are controlled by shear. These types of
shear walls are usually constructed in low rise buildings.

b) Ordinary moment shear walls in which deflection and strength are controlled by means of
flexure. These are generally used in high rise buildings to resist high wind sand cyclones.

c) Ductile moment shear walls are special walls meant for seismic regions and which have
good energy dissipation characteristics under reversed cyclic loads.

3.3 Components of Shear Walls

Reinforced concrete and reinforced masonry shear walls are seldom-simple walls which resist
the lateral forces. Whenever a wall has doors, windows, or other openings, the wall must be
considered as an assemblage of relatively flexible components like column segments and wall
piers and relatively stiff elements like wall segments.

a) Column segments: A column segment is a vertical member whose height exceeds

three times its thickness and whose width is less than two and one-half times its
thickness. Its load is usually mainly axial. Although it may contribute little to the
lateral force resistance of the shearwall is rigidity must be considered. When a column
is built integral with a wall, the portion of the column that project from the face the
wall is called a pilaster. Column segments shall be designed according to ACI 318 for
concrete.

b) Wall piers: A wall pier is a segment of a wall whose horizontal length is between two
and one-half and six times its thickness whose clear height is at least two times its
horizontal length.

c) Wall segments: Wall segments are components of shearwall that are longer than wall
piers. They are the primary resisting components in the shear wall.

Important features in planning and design of shear walls: For all high rise buildings, the
problem of providing adequate stiffness and preventing large displacements, are as important

33
as providing adequate strength. Thus shear wall system has two distinct advantages over a
frame system.

Methodology (Design Aspect)

Earthquakes can occur on both land and sea, at any place onthe surface of the earth where
there is a major fault. When earthquake occurs on land it affects the man-made structure
surrounding its origin leading to human lose. When a major earthquake occurs underneath the
ocean or sea, it not only affects the structures near it, but also produces large tidal waves
known as Tsunami, thus affecting the places far away from its origin. All the structures are
designed for the combined effects of gravity loads and seismic loads to verify that sufficient
vertical and lateral strength and stiffness are achieved to satisfy the structural concert and
acceptable deformation levels prescribed in the governing building code.

Because of the innate factor of safety used in the design specifications, most structures tend
to be adequately protected against vertical shaking. Vertical acceleration should also be
considered in structures with large spans, those in which stability for design, or for overall
stability analysis of structures.

1. Serviceability limits state:

The structure undergoes little or no structural damage in thiscase. Important buildings such as
hospitals, atomic power stations, places of assembly etc, which affects a community ,should
be designed for elastic behavior under expected earthquake forces. These types of structures
should be serviceable even after the occurrence of earthquake or cyclones.

2. Damage controlled limit state:

In this case, if an earthquake or cyclone occurs, there can be some damage to the structure but
it can be repaired even after the occurrence of the disaster. Most of the permanent buildings
should come under this category, so, the structure should be designed for limited ductility
response only.

34
 3. Survival limits state:

In this case, the structure is allowed to be damaged in the event of earthquake or cyclone
disasters. But, the supports should stand and support the permanent loads coming on to it so
that there should be no caving in of the structure and no loss of life. Limited ductile response
is cheaper and full ductile response is cheapest. The full ductile detailing isachieved by the
theory of plastic hinge formation and also by careful ductile detailing. The current design
practice is to construct the structures for the first two limit states as the other is under
development stage.

Design approach in IS 1893 (2002)

The title of IS 1893-2002 is “Criteria for earthquake resistdesign of structures” and part 1 of
this code deals withGeneral Provisions and buildings [1]. According to this codewe consider
the following magnitudes of earthquakes:

a)Design basic earthquake (DBE): It is the earthquake whichoccurs reasonably at least once
during the designed life ofthe structure.

b) Maximum considered earthquake (MCE): This is the mostsevere earthquake that can occur
in that region asconsidered by the code. It is divided by factor 2 to getdesign basic
earthquake.

The value of Z, the seismic zone factor given in the coderelates the realistic values of
effective peak groundacceleration considering MCE and the service life of thestructure. The
following principles are the basis for thedesign approach recommended by IS 1893-2002.

1) The structure should have the strength to withstand minorearthquakes less than DBE
without any damage.

2)The structure should able to resist earthquakes equal toDBE without significant damage
though some non-structural damage may occur3)The structure should able to withstand an
earthquake equalto MCE without collapse so that there is no loss of lifeAs, the actual forces
will be much larger than the designforces specified by the code, the ductility arising from
theinelastic material behavior and detailing along with thereserve strength are relied upon to
account for the differencein the actual and the design lateral loads. Conceptualrepresentation
of earthquake resistant design philosophy isdepicted in the following figure 3.2

35
Figure 3.2

CHAPTER 4
ETABS SOFTWARE & CALCULATION

Introduction

ETABS is a sophisticated, yet easy to use, special purpose analysis and design program
developed specifically for building systems. ETABS 2015 features an intuitive and
powerful graphical interface coupled with unmatched modeling, analytical, design, and
detailing procedures, all integrated using a common database. Although quick and easy for
simple structures, ETABS can also handle the largest and most complex building models,
including a wide range of nonlinear behaviors necessary for performance based design,

36
making it the tool of choice for structural engineers in the building industry.

History and Advantages of ETABS

Dating back more than 40 years to the original development of TABS, the predecessor of
ETABS, it was clearly recognized that buildings constituted a very special class of
structures. Early releases of ETABS pro-vided input, output and numerical solution
techniques that took into consideration the characteristics unique to building type
structures, providing a tool that offered significant savings in time and increased accuracy
over general purpose programs.

 As computers and computer interfaces evolved, ETABS added computationally

complex analytical options such as dynamic nonlinear behavior, and powerful
CAD-like drawing tools in a graphical and object-based interface. Although
ETABS 2015 looks radically different from its predecessors of 40 years ago, its
mission remains the same: to provide the profession with the most efficient and
comprehensive software for the analysis and design of buildings. To that end, the
current release follows the same philosophical approach put forward by the
original programs, namely:

 Most buildings are of straightforward geometry with horizontal beams and vertical
columns. Although any building configuration is possible with ETABS, in most
cases, a simple grid system defined by horizontal floors and vertical column lines
can establish building geometry with minimal effort.
 Many of the floor levels in buildings are similar. This commonality can be used to
dramatically reduce modeling and design time.

 The input and output conventions used correspond to common building

terminology. With ETABS, the models are defined logically floor-by-floor,
column-by-column, bay-by-bay and wall-by-wall and not as a stream of non-
descript nodes and elements as in general purpose programs. Thus the structural
definition is simple, concise and meaningful.

 In most buildings, the dimensions of the members are large in re-lation to the bay

37
 widths and story heights. Those dimensions have a significant effect on the
stiffness of the frame. ETABS corrects for such effects in the formulation of the
member stiff-ness, unlike most general-purpose programs that work on center-line-
to-centerline dimensions.
 Explicit panel-zone deformations

 Construction sequence loading analysis

 Multiple linear and nonlinear time history load cases in any direction

 Foundation/support settlement

 Large displacement analyses

 Nonlinear static pushover

 Buildings with base isolators and dampers

 Design optimization for steel and concrete frames

 Design capacity check of steel column base plates

 Floor modeling with rigid or semi-rigid diaphragms

 Automated vertical live load reductions

And much, much more!

An Integrated Approach

ETABS is a completely integrated system. Embedded beneath the simple, intuitive user
interface are very powerful numerical methods, design procedures and international design
codes, all working from a single comprehensive database. This integration means that you

38
create only one model of the floor systems and the vertical and lateral framing systems to
analyze, design, and detail the entire building.

Everything you need is integrated into one versatile analysis and design package with one
Windows-based graphical user interface. No external modules are required. The effects on
one part of the structure from changes in another part are instantaneous and automatic. The
integrated components include:

 Drafting for model generation

 Seismic and wind load generation

 Gravity load distribution for the distribution of vertical loads to columns and beams
when plate bending floor elements are not provided as a part of the floor system

 Finite element-based linear static and dynamic analysis

 Finite element-based nonlinear static and dynamic analysis (available in ETABS

Nonlinear & Ultimate versions only)

 Output display and report generation

 Steel frame design (column, beam and brace)

 Concrete frame design (column and beam)

 Composite beam design

 Composite column design

 Steel joist design

 Shear wall design

39
 Steel connection design including column base plates

 Detail schematic drawing generation

ETABS 2015 is available in three different levels that all share the same graphical
user interface:
[3] ETABS 2015 Plus. Includes all available capabilities except for certain
nonlinear and dynamic analyses (p-delta and tension/compression only frame
members are provided in all versions). Features include unmatched solution
capacity with 64-bit optimized solvers, shear wall modeling, multiple response
spectrum analyses, linear modal time histories, numerous import and export
options, and comprehensive report generation. The steel frame design, concrete
frame design, composite beam design, composite column design, steel joist design,
shear wall design, steel connection design and steel base plate design components
are all present.
ETABS 2015 Nonlinear:
Includes all of the features of ETABS 2015 Plus, with additional nonlinear static
and dynamic capabilities such as pushover, base isolation and dampers using Fast
Nonlinear Analysis (FNA), Staged Construction, and multi-linear P-y springs.
ETABS 2015 Ultimate:
Includes all of the features of ETABS 2015 Nonlinear with additional features such
as nonlinear layered shell elements, dynamic analysis utilizing nonlinear frame and
wall hinges, linear and nonlinear direct integration time his-tory analysis, buckling,
and the modeling of creep and shrinkage behavior. Modeling Features
The ETABS building is idealized as an assemblage of shell, frame, link and joint
objects. Those objects are used to represent wall, floor, column, beam, brace and
link/spring physical members. The basic frame geometry is defined with reference
to a simple three-dimensional grid system. With relatively simple modeling
techniques, very complex framing situations may be considered.

The buildings may be unsymmetrical and non-rectangular in plan. Torsional

behavior of the floors and interstory compatibility of the floors are accurately
reflected in the results. The solution enforces complete three-dimensional
displacement compatibility, making it possible to capture tubular effects associated

40
 with the behavior of tall structures having relatively closely spaced columns.
Semi-rigid floor diaphragms may be modeled to capture the effects of in-plane
floor deformations. Floor objects may span between adjacent levels to create
sloped floors (ramps), which can be useful for modeling parking garage structures.
Modeling of partial diaphragms, such as in mezzanines, setbacks, atriums and floor
openings, is possible without the use of artificial (“dummy”)floors and column
lines. It is also possible to model situations with multiple independent diaphragms
at each level, allowing the modeling of buildings consisting of several towers
rising from a common base.
The column, beam and brace elements may be non-prismatic, and they may have
partial fixity at their end connections. They also may have uniform, partial uniform
and trapezoidal load patterns, and they may have temperature loads. The effects
ofthe finite dimensions of the beams and columns on the stiffness of a frame
system are included using end offsets that can be automatically calculated.
The floors and walls can be modeled as membrane elements with in-plane stiffness
only, plate bending elements with out-of-plane stiffness only or full shell-type
elements, which combine both in-plane and out-of-plane stiffness. Floor and wall
members may have uniform load patterns in-plane or out-of-plane, and they may
have temperature loads. The column, beam, brace, floor and wall members are all
compatible with one another.

Analysis part

Static analyses for user specified vertical and lateral floor or story loads are possible. If
floors with plate bending capability are modeled, vertical uniform loads on the floor are
transferred to the beams and columns through bending of the floor elements. Otherwise,
vertical uniform loads on the floor are automatically converted to span loads on adjoining
beams, or point loads on adjacent columns, thereby automating the tedious task of
transferring floor tributary loads to the floor beams without explicit modeling of the
secondary framing.

The program can automatically generate lateral wind and seismic load patterns to meet the

41
requirements of various building codes. Three-dimensional mode shapes and frequencies,
modal participation factors, direction factors and participating mass percentages are
evaluated using eigenvector or ritz -vector analysis. P-Delta effects may be included with
static or dynamic analysis.

Response spectrum analysis, linear time history analysis, nonlinear time history analysis,
and static nonlinear (pushover) analysis are all possible.

The static nonlinear capabilities also allow you to perform incremental construction
analysis so that forces that arise as a result of the construction sequence are included.
Results from the various static load cases may be combined with each other or with the
results from the dynamic response spectrum or time his-tory analyses.
Output may be viewed graphically, displayed in tabular output, compiled in a report,
exported to a database file, or saved in an ASCII file. Types of output include reactions
and member forces, mode shapes and participation factors, static and dynamic story
displacements and story shears, inter-story drifts and joint displacements, time history
traces, and more.
Import and export of data may occur between third-party applications such as Revit and
AutoCAD from Autodesk, or with other programs that support the CIS/2 or IFC data
models.
ETABS uses the SAPFire™ analysis engine, the state-of-the-art equation solver that
powers all of CSI's software. This proprietary solver exploits the latest in numerical
technology to provide incredibly rapid solution times and virtually limitless model
capacity.

Analysis and design procedure using ETABS:

 Select new model-use building settings-units(metric SI units)-steel section data base

code(Indian) concrete design code (IS-800)-concrete design(IS-456)-OK
 no of grids in X direction(5)-no of grid lines in Y direction(5)-spacing of grid lines in
X direction(8m)-spacing of grid in Y direction(6m)-storey dimensions-no of
stories(8)-typical storey height(4m)-bottom storey height(3m)-select grid only(3m)-
select grid only-ok

42
 Define-material property-add new property-region(India)-material type(concrete)-
standard(Indian)-grade(M50 )-ok-ok
 Add new material-material type(rebar)-grade(HYSD 550)-ok-ok
 Add new material-material type(rebar)-grade(mild 250)-ok-ok-ok
 Define-section properties frame sections-add new property-section shape(concrete
rectangular)-property name(B-500*500)-material (M50)-depth(500)-width(500)-
reinforcement-modify/show rebar-design type(M3 design only-beam)-longitudinal
bars(HYSD 550)-confinement bars(mild- 250)-top bars(25mm)-bottom bars(25mm)-
ok-ok

 Add new property-section shape(concrete rectangular)-property name(C 700*700)-

material(M50)-depth (700)-width (700)-reinforcement-modify/show rebars-design
type(P-M2-M3 design-column)-longitudinal bars(HYSD-550)-confinement
bars(mild- 250)-ok-ok-ok
 Define-section properties-slab section-add new property-property name(slab 180)-slab
material (M50)-thickness 150-ok

43
 Draw -draw beam/column/base objects-quick draw beams/columns-left corner-select
property(b 500*500)-right corner-select all stories-select complete structure-ESC
 Draw-quick draw columns-left corner-select property(C 700*700)-select complete
structure -ESC
 Draw-draw floor/wall objects-select quick draw floors-right corner-select similar
stories-left corner-property(slab180)-select complete structure-ESC
 Select plan-base floor-apply-ok-select complete structure-right corner-one story-
assign-joints-restraints-fixed restraints-apply-ok
 Define-load pattern-add dead load & live load-upward arrow(floor-1)-right corner-
similar stories-select all shells-assign-shell loads-uniform-load pattern name(dead )-
load(2 KN/M2)-options(replace existing loads)-apply-ok

44
 Select-go to previous selection-assign-shell loads-uniform load pattern-(live load)-
load(1 KN/M2)-options(replace existing loads)-apply-ok
 Select complete corner frames-assign-frame loads-distributed-load pattern
name(dead)-load(0.2 KN/M)-apply-ok
 Using arrow key-go to storey(8)-right corner-one storey option-select all shells-
assign-shell loads-uniform-load-pattern name(dead)-load(1KN/M2)-options(replace
existing loads)-apply-ok
 Select- previous selection-assign-shell loads-uniform-load pattern name(live load)-
load(3)-options(replace existing loads)-apply-ok
 Select all the frames-assign-frame loads-select distributed-options(delete existing
loads)-apply-ok
 Define-load patterns-load(seismic)-type(seismic)-auto lateral load(IS-1893:2002)-add
new load-modify lateral load- direction(X&Y)-seismic zone factor-per code(0.1)-site
type(2)-top storey (16)-importance factor(1)-response reduction factor(3)-ok-ok

45
 Define-load combination-add default design combination(concrete frame design)-ok-
ok
 Analysis-check model-select all-analysis-set load cases to run

46
SHEAR WALL:

 Define-section properties-wall section-add new property-property name(shear wall)-

wall material(M55)-thickness(200mm)-select all story option

 Draw-draw floor/wall objects-quick draw wall-left corner-property-shear wall-select

corner frames-elevation-A-apply-ok

47
 Draw-draw floor/wall objects-quick draw rectangle
 Define-load pattern-load(seismic)-type(seismic)-IS-1893:2002-add new load-select
modify lateral load-direction(X&Y)-zone factor(0.1)-site type(2)-importance
factor(1)-response factor(3)-ok
 Right corner-similar stories-define-pier labels-wall piers(P1)-ok
 Assign-shell-pier/label-select P1-apply
 Define-spandrel labels-property name(S1)-ok
 Select corner shear wall shells-elevation-assign-spandrel label-select S1-select 2
shells-apply-plan-select base-apply
 Assign-joint-restraints-fixed restraints-apply-ok
 Design-shear wall design-select view/revise preference-rebar material(HYSD 500)-
rebar shear material(HYSD 500)

 Define-load combinations-add default design combination-concrete shear wall design-

convert to user combinations-apply-ok-ok

48
  Analyze-check model-select all-ok
 Analyze-run analysis
 Design-shear wall design-start design/check
 Design-shear wall design-display design information-design output(pier)-apply-
design output(spandrel)-apply
 Detailing-start detailing

SFD AND BMD DIAGRAMS:

49
Pier Results:

50
Maximum story displacement after providing shear wall:

ETABS 2015 Shear Wall Design

IS 456 Pier Design

51
 Pier Details
Centroid X Centroid Y Length Thickness
Story ID Pier ID LLRF
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Story16 wall 2 0 27000 6000 230 1

Material Properties
Lt Wt. Factor (Unit
Ec (MPa) f'c (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
less)
27386.13 30 1 500 250

Design Code Parameters

ΦT ΦC Φv Φv (Seismic) IPMAX IPMIN PMAX
0.9 0.65 0.75 0.6 0.04 0.0025 0.8

Pier Leg Location, Length and Thickness

Station Left X1 Left Y1 Right X2 Right Y2 Length Thickness
ID
Location mm mm mm mm mm mm
Top Leg 1 0 24000 0 30000 6000 230
Bottom Leg 1 0 24000 0 30000 6000 230

Flexural Design for Pu, Mu2 and Mu3

Required Required Current
Station Flexural Pu Mu2 Mu3 Pier Ag
Rebar Area Reinf Reinf
Location Combo KN KN-m KN-m mm²
(mm²) Ratio Ratio
- -
Top 3450 0.0025 0.0028 DWal10 101.965 1380000
19.2809 358.3641
198.536 -
Bottom 3450 0.0025 0.0028 DWal10 7.5866 1380000
4 144.2214

Shear Design
Station Rebar Pu Mu Vu ΦVc ΦVn
ID Shear Combo
Location mm²/m KN KN-m KN KN KN
254.649 - 352.671
Top Leg 1 575 DWal8 1280.892 1798.392
4 576.2527 5
411.578 352.671
Bottom Leg 1 575 DWal8 534.7851 1304.4313 1821.9313
1 5

Boundary Element Check (Part 1 of 2)

52
 Edge Governin Stress Stress
Station Pu Mu C Depth
ID Length g Comp Limit
Location KN N-m mm
(mm) Combo MPa MPa
317.84 Not
Top–Left Leg 1 0 DWal7 -496.649 0.59 6
82 Required
Not
Top–Right Leg 1 0 DWal7 0 0 0 0
Needed
-
Bottom– 474.77 Not
Leg 1 0 DWal7 312.554 0.57 6
Left 68 Required
7
Bottom– 474.77 305.724 Not
Leg 1 0 DWal7 0.57 6
Right 68 3 Required

Boundary Element Check (Part 2 of 2)

ETABS 2015 Concrete Frame Design

IS456 Beam Section Design

53
 Beam Element Details (Summary)
Elemen Section Combo Station Length
Level LLRF Type
t ID ID Loc (mm)
Story1 Sway
B40 Beam DCon8 5550 6000 1
5 Special

Section Properties
b h
bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)
(mm) (mm)
500 400 500 0 25 25

MaterialProperties
Lt.Wt Factor
Ec (MPa) f'c (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
(Unitless)
27386.13 30 1 500 250

Design Code Parameters

ΦT ΦCTied ΦCSpiral ΦVns ΦVs ΦVjoint
0.9 0.65 0.75 0.75 0.6 0.85

Design Moment and Flexural Reinforcement for Moment, Mu3

54
 Design -
Design +Mome Minimu Require
- Momen
+Mome nt m d
T Momen t
nt Rebar Rebar Rebar
t Rebar
KN-m mm² mm² mm²
KN-m mm²
Top (+2
-4.1186 24 0 33 33
Axis)
Bottom (-2
82.8863 0 504 517 517
Axis)

Shear Force and Reinforcement for Shear, Vu2

Rebar
Shear ΦVc Shear ΦVs Shear Vp
T Av /S
KN KN KN
mm²/m
O/S #45 127.9124 0 76.5958 0

Torsion Force and Torsion Reinforcement for Torsion, Tu

Perimeter, Rebar
Φ*Tu Tth Tcr Area Ao Rebar Al
ph At /s
KN-m KN-m KN-m cm² mm²
Mm mm²/m
29.984
52.7539 7.4962 1087.1 1444.4 1294.07 1130
7

O/S # 45 Shear stress due to shearforceand torsion together exceeds maximum

allowed

ETABS Concrete Frame Design

55
 IS 456: 2000 + IS 13920:2016
Column Section Design

Column Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Unique Length
Level Element Section ID Combo ID Station Loc LLRF
Name (mm)
Story16 C37 1745 column DCon14 3100 3500 1

Section Properties
Cover (Torsion)
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm)
(mm)
600 900 60 30

Material Properties
Lt.Wt Factor (Unit
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
less)
27386.13 30 1 413.69 413.69

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3

Rebar
Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Rebar %
Area
KN KN-m KN-m KN-m KN-m %
mm²
-336.2678 -29.6183 -51.2144 8.8102 12.1729 4320 0.8

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors

56
 Initial Additional Minimum
K Factor Length
Moment Moment Moment
Unitless mm
KN-m KN-m KN-m
Major
0.977954 3100 28.0484 0 12.1729
Bend(M3)
Minor
0.952947 3100 15.1648 0 8.8102
Bend(M2)

Shear Design for Vu2, Vu3

Shear Vu Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s
KN KN KN KN mm²/m
Major, Vu2 62.3924 233.2803 201.6005 62.3924 667.17
Minor, Vu3 62.3924 228.9604 194.4007 62.3924 1000.76

Joint Shear Check/Design

Joint Shear Shear Shear Shear Joint Shear
Force VTop Vu,Tot Vc Area Ratio
KN KN KN KN cm² Unitless
Major Shear, 214.326 2957.701
0 0 5400 0.072
Vu2 2 8
Minor Shear, 214.326 2629.068
0 0 4800 0.082
Vu3 2 3

(1.4) Beam/Column Capacity Ratio

Major Minor
Ratio Ratio
0.226 0.354

Additional Moment Reduction Factor k (IS 39.7.1.1)

Ag Asc Puz Pb Pu k
cm² cm² KN KN KN Unitless
8630.340 3872.500 -
5400 43.2 1
9 4 336.2678

Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1)

Consid Lengt Section KL/Dep KL/Dep KL/Dep Ma
er h Depth th th th Moment
Ma Facto (mm) Ratio Limit Exceede (kN-m)
r d
Major Bending Yes 0.886 900 3.369 12 No 0
(M3 )

57
 Minor Bending Yes 0.886 600 4.924 12 No 0
(M2 )

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION

In the present work the lateral structural system i.e., shear wall system considered for 20 story
structure. Conclusions that can be made from the above study is by comparing the earth
quake zones III&V for hard and soft soil conditions. From software analysis comparing to
hard and soft soil conditions, there is a massive increase in base shear in soft soil condition.
From the study it is clear that (shear wall at corners) gives less displacement values in hard

58
soil condition for moderate and severe seismic zones. Providing shear wall at corners
performing better and more efficient than all other cases. The provision of shear wall position
in an appropriate location is advantageous and the structure performs better for an existing or
a new structure.

CHAPTER-7
REFERENCES

[1] Bush T. D., et al, “Behavior of RC frame strengthened using structural systems”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 117, No.4, April, 1991.

[2] Shahzadjamilsardar, et al, “Effects of change in shear wall location on storey drift of
20 stored multi storey building subjected to lateral loads”, IJIRSET-2013.

59
[3] HimaleeRahangdale, et al, “Design and Analysis of Multi storied Building with Effect
of Shear Wall”, Vol. 3, Issue 3, May-Jun 2013, pp.223- 232. 2.

[4] Patil S.S., et al, “Equivalent static analysis of high rise building with different lateral
load resisting systems”, IJERT-2013.

[5] Kevadkar. M.D. et al, “Lateral Load Analysis of R.C.C. Building”, International
Journal of Modern Engineering Research, IJMER Vol.3, Issue.3, May-June. 2013 pp-
1428-1434 ISSN: 2249- 6645.
[6] Duggal S.K, “Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures”, Oxford University Press,
New Delhi 2010.

[7] IS 13920:1993, “Ductile detailing of reinforced concrete structure subjected to seismic

forces-code of practice”.

[8] IS: 456-2000: “code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete”.

[9] IS: 875(part 1-5): “code of practice for structural safety of building loading standards”.

[10] IS 1893(part-1):2002, “Criteria for earthquake resistance design of structures”.

60