Lateral Stability Analysis of High Rise RCC Building Structure

using Outrigger Structural System

Akshay U. Shinde1a, Popat D. Kumbhar*2

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Sangli, India
2
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Sangli, India

(Received , Revised , Accepted )

Abstract. The outrigger and belt truss system is one of the effective systems used to control lateral
displacement occurring due to small or medium lateral forces like wind or earthquake. This system
minimizes the risk of damage to structural and nonstructural members. This paper focuses on effective
use of outriggers and belt truss system for high-rise RCC building structure subjected to seismic forces.
The outriggers are provided at different positions along the height of building with X and V types of
bracing systems. The modeling and analysis of RCC building is performed using finite element based
software (ETABS) following guidelines of revised IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2016. Seven different models were
prepared for different positions of outriggers and responses namely displacement, storey drift and base
shear are compared. The results indicate that lateral displacement and maximum storey drift gets
reduced by 39.44% and 36.33% respectively compared to conventional building when X-type bracing
outriggers are used.
Keywords: response spectrum analysis; outrigger structural system; belt truss; lateral displacement;
storey drift; ETABS.

1. Introduction

The development of high-rise buildings has been rapidly increasing worldwide introducing new
challenges that required being solved using various structural engineering techniques. In modern
high-rise buildings, lateral loads induced due to earthquakes are resisted by a system of coupled
shear walls (Nanduri et al. 2013). But as the height of building increases, the stiffness of the
structure becomes more important and provision of outrigger beams between the central core and
exterior columns is often used to provide sufficient lateral stiffness to the building.
In general, earthquakes can occur anywhere in the world and the risk associated with the tall
buildings, especially under severe earthquake forces, needs to be given special provision as the tall
buildings are accommodate more number of occupants (Herath et al. 2009). While adopting
outrigger structural system in high-rise building design the location of outriggers should be at
optimum position to make the building stiffer.

*Corresponding author, Ph.D., E-mail: popat.kumbhar@ritindia.edu

a
P.G. Student, E-mail: akshayshinde253@gmail.com
Concept of Outrigger:
Generally the ships use wooden outrigger beams to oppose the wind forces in their sails. The
central core in the tall building can be considered as the mast of the ship, outriggers acting like the
spreaders and exterior columns like the shroud of the ship. Outrigger system is capable to resist the
lateral forces induced due to earthquake ground motions and transfer the load to the foundation
through exterior columns (Mohamed et al. 2016).

Fig. 1 Outrigger structural system with central core

Belt trusses are the outrigger bracings provided at outer periphery and connected to foundation
through exterior columns (Brunesi et al. 2016). The outrigger systems can be provided of steel or
concrete material depending on effectiveness of material. Outrigger braces connected between
core and outer column act as stiff beam under action of lateral load. Belt truss connects outer
perimeter column of a building and offer a wider perimeter to resist lateral deflection of building.
This efficient structural form consists of a central core and outrigger braces connecting the central
core to outer columns. The centrally located core with outriggers extending on both side and core
located on one side of the building is shown in above Fig. 1.

2. Methodology

In this study, the analysis of G+40 storey RCC building with outrigger structural system
subjected to seismic forces is carried out. The typical floor plan modelled in software is shown
below in Fig. 2. For the analysis, steel outriggers are used in the form of X and V type bracings
along with belt truss system. The modeling and analysis of work is done by using ETABS software.
ETABS is effective software for analysis of RCC building structure and hence used. The software
use static and dynamic loads to perform linear static and dynamic analysis.
 Fig. 2 Floor plan of G+40 storied RCC building

Model details:
 Type of frame- Ordinary braced frame
 Building plan dimensions- 30 x 30 m
 No. of floors- G+40 (41 storied)
 Seismic zone- V
 Seismic zone factor- 0.36
 Soil type- Medium
 Importance factor- 1.2
 Response reduction factor- 4

Method of analysis:
The analysis of building structure is done for lateral loads using response spectrum analysis
method. The linear dynamic analysis is carried out to calculate the lateral displacement, storey
drift, base shear etc.

3. Modeling and analysis

The FEM analysis is carried out by developing seven different models and providing the
outriggers of X- and V-type bracing systems along the height of the building as shown in figures 3,
4, 5 and 6.
The list of models developed for analysis is as below:
 Model 1- Conventional frame model without outrigger system (Fig. 3)
 Model 2- Model with V-type braced outriggers located at 13th, 27th, 41th storey (Fig. 4)
 Model 3- Model with X-type braced outriggers located at 13th, 27th, 41th storey (Fig. 4)
 Model 4- Model with V-type braced outriggers located at 11th, 21th, 31th, 41th storey (Fig. 5)
 Model 5- Model with X-type braced outriggers located at 11th, 21th, 31th, 41th storey (Fig. 5)
 Model 6- Model with V-type braced outriggers located at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th storey
(Fig. 6)
 Model 7- Model with X-type braced outriggers located at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th storey
(Fig. 6)
 Fig. 3 Model of G+40 building without outrigger system

Fig. 4 Models of G+40 building with outriggers located at 13th, 27th, 41th storey
using V and X type bracings
 Fig. 5 Models of G+40 building with outriggers located at 11th, 21th, 31th, 41th storey
using V and X type bracings

Fig. 6 Models of G+40 building with outriggers located at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th storey
using V and X type bracings
4. Results and discussion

4.1 Lateral displacements

Lateral displacement is the deviation of the whole structure from its neutral position due to
seismic forces. The maximum lateral displacement has occurred at top of the building and the
results for different models are tabulated in Table 1

Table 1: Maximum lateral displacement and percentage reduction

Model No. Maximum displacement at top storey (mm) Percentage reduction (%)
Model 1 674.38 -
Model 2 496.99 26.29%
Model 3 485.09 28.06%
Model 4 458.36 32.03%
Model 5 438.55 34.96%
Model 6 430.5 36.16%
Model 7 408.4 39.44%

Fig. 7 Lateral displacement graph of conventional building in ETABS software

 Fig. 8 Lateral displacement graph of building with outriggers located at 13th, 27th, 41th storey
in ETABS software

Fig. 9 Lateral displacement graph of building with outriggers located at 11th, 21th, 31th, 41th storey
in ETABS software

Fig. 10 Lateral displacement graph of building with outriggers located at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th storey
in ETABS software
The variation of lateral displacement has been graphically represented below in figure 8,

Fig. 11 Comparison of lateral displacement

From this graph, it is observed that using X type outrigger bracing system along with belt
trusses provided at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th stories reduces the lateral displacement by 39.44%
compared to conventional building structure (without outriggers).

4.2 Storey drift

Storey drift is the relative displacement between two adjacent stories of a building caused by
lateral loads. The values of maximum storey drift as obtained from analysis are indicated in Table
2.

Table 2: Maximum storey drift and percentage reduction

Model No. Maximum storey drift value Percentage reduction (%)
Model 1 0.00680 -
Model 2 0.00530 22.05%
Model 3 0.00510 25.00%
Model 4 0.00476 30.03%
Model 5 0.00468 31.17%
Model 6 0.00448 34.11%
Model 7 0.00433 36.33%
 Fig. 12 Storey drift graph of conventional building in ETABS software

Fig. 13 Storey drift graph of building with outriggers located at 13th, 27th, 41th storey in
ETABS software

Fig. 14 Storey drift graph of building with outriggers located at 11th, 21th, 31th, 41th storey in ETABS
software
 Fig. 15 Storey drift graph of building with outriggers located at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th storey in ETABS
software

The variation of lateral displacement has been graphically represented below in Fig. 16,

Fig. 11 Comparison of storey drift

From the graph, it is observed that reduction of storey drift is occurred by using X-type outrigger
bracing system with belt trusses provided at 9th, 17th, 25th, 23th, 41th storey than conventional
building.

4.3 Base shear

Base shear is the maximum lateral force occurred due to earthquake at the base of a building
structure. Base shear is depending on soil conditions, dead weight of structure, seismic ground
motion etc.
Table 3: Maximum base shear
Model No. Maximum base shear (KN)
Model 1 19155
Model 2 19300
Model 3 19383
Model 4 19348
Model 5 19459
Model 6 19396
Model 7 19535

It is observed that increment in base shear is very small by using outriggers and belt trusses than
conventional building. As the structure is RCC building and outriggers are of steel material the
increase in base shear is very less because the dead weight of reinforced concrete is more than steel.

5. Conclusions

From the seismic analysis of G+40 storey RCC building provided with and without outrigger
structural system, following conclusions can be drawn:
 The lateral displacement is reduced by 39.44% and 36.16% compared conventional RCC
building using X-type and V-type bracing outriggers respectively.
 The maximum storey drift is reduced by 36.33% and 34.11% compared to conventional
RCC building using X-type and V-type bracing outriggers respectively.
 The effective location of outriggers for the building structure under seismic force is found
to be between 0.22-0.27 times the height of building from bottom.
 No significant change in the base shear values are observed as weight of outriggers is far
less compared to the building structure.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the support from the Department of Civil Engineering,
Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Sangli, India.

References

Bunesi E., Nascimbene R., Casagrande L. (2016), “Seismic analysis of high-rise mega-braced
frame-core buildings”, Engineering Structures, 115, 1-17.
Dilrukshie I. Samarakkody, Thambiratnam David P., Tommy H. T. Chan, Praveen H. N.
Moragaspitiya. (2017), “Outrigger belt and frame interaction in composite tall buildings under
differential axial shortening”, J. Archit. Eng, 23(3), 1-14.
Dhara Panchal, Sharad Purohit (2013), “Dynamic response control of building model using
bracings”, Procedia Engineering, 51, 266-273.
Herath N., Haritos N., Ngo T., Mendis P. (2009), “Behavior of Outrigger Beams in High rise
Buildings under Earthquake Loads”, Australian Earthquake Engineering Society, Newcastle,
June.
Kadid A., Yahiaoui D. (2011), “Seismic assessment of braced RC frames”, Procedia Engineering,
14, 2899-2905.
Meisam Safari Gorji, J. J. Roger Cheng. (2017), “Steel plate shear walls with outriggers, Part II:
Seismic design and performance”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 37, 127-145.
Mohmed Osama Ahmed, Najm Omar. (2016), “Outrigger systems to mitigate disproportionate
collapse in building structures”, Procedia Engineering, 161, 839-844.
Patil Dhanaraj M., Sangle Keshav K. (2015), “Seismic behaviour of different bracing systems in
high-rise 2-D steel buildings”, Structures, 3, 282-305.
Safarizki Hendramawat A, S.A. Kristiawan, and A. Basuki (2013), “Evaluation of the use of steel
bracing to improve seismic performance of reinforced concrete building”, Procedia Engineering,
54, 447-456.
Willford M. R., Smith R. J. (2008), “Performance based seismic and wind engineering for 60 story
twin towers in manila”, Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Bejing, China, October.