International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET)

Volume 11, Issue 3, March 2020, pp. 360-370, Article ID: IJARET_11_03_031
Available online athttp://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/issues.asp?JType=IJARET&VType=11&IType=3
ISSN Print: 0976-6480 and ISSN Online: 0976-6499

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

ANALYSIS OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING WITH OUTRIGGER

USING NON-DIMENSIONAL PARAMETER
Varsha Virde
Department of Civil Engineering
M. E. Student
Ujjain Engineering College, Ujjain, M.P, India

Dr. R. Singh
Department of Civil Engineering
Professor
Ujjain Engineering College, Ujjain, M.P, India

Alok Rathore
Department of Bridge Engineering and Structure
Research Scholar
AcSIR, CSIR-CRRI, New Delhi, India

ABSTRACT
As lack of land and increase in population density, new challenge in infrastructure
is to attain the height of building by maintaining the stability of structure. The
outrigger structural system is an appropriate structural system to improve the
performance of super high-rise buildings because the wind loads govern more effect
than the earthquake loads. The optimum position of the outrigger beam is necessary to
increase the stiffness of the structure and to make structure more proficient under the
action of lateral forces. Two non-dimensional parameter α (core-to-column rigidity)
having constant value and β (core-to-outrigger rigidity) having different value are
used observe the behaviour of outrigger structural building.
Key parameter discussed in this paper includes the overturning moment due to
rotation of the core, story drift, and lateral deflection.
Key words: Belt truss, Central core, Non-dimensional parameter, Tall building, Wind
analysis.
Cite this Article: Varsha Virde, Dr. R. Singh and Alok Rathore, Analysis of High-
Rise Building with Outrigger Using Non-Dimensional Parameter, International
Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), 11(3), 2020,
pp 360-370.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/issues.asp?JType=IJARET&VType=11&IType=3

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 360 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Varsha Virde, Dr. R. Singh and Alok Rathore

1. INTRODUCTION
In India, Mumbai has been the high-rise capital with buildings rising over 150 meters.
According to Council of Tall Building and Urban Habited (CTBUH) in India, 37 buildings
above 150 meters were completed while 71 buildings are at various stages of construction.
Creating any high-rise structure is about modern technology. When higher you want the
structure to rise, then the more sturdiness foundation and the depth required to stable
structure. Once the structure rises, it needs to be scientifically designed so as to successfully
meet wind-shear and such weather-related challenges which a high-rise structure entail. In
modern residential tall buildings, lateral loads induced by wind or earthquake are often
resisted by a system of coupled shear walls. A relatively new concept in lateral reinforcement
that has evolved over the past decades is the technique of using an outrigger–belt truss
system. A central core shear wall frame with outrigger trusses is one of the most efficient and
economical structures in tall buildings. At the outer ends, outriggers are connected to the
foundation through the exterior columns. When the structure is subjected to horizontal
loading, the central core shear wall and outrigger trusses will rotate and causing compression
in the downwind column and tension in the column on the upwind side (Fig. 1). These axial
forces will resist the rotation in the central core shear wall. The lateral stiffness of outrigger
structural system increases up to 25% to 30% compared with a system lacking such trusses
[8]. A simplified analytical method for outrigger structure has been presented earlier by [7]
and [8]. The optimum location of single outrigger, when subjected to the uniform distributed
load, is obtained approximately at 0.5H (H is the height of building) [8]. A compatible
equation to account for both core-to-column and core-to-outrigger flexural rigidity in the
performance evaluation of outrigger derived by [5]. The optimal location for two outriggers at
0.312 and 0.685 of total height from the top of building determined by (MC Nabb and Muvdi
1975). Some examples of buildings with outrigger and core wall include bracing system are
Jin Mao (88 stories, 420 meters), Taipai 101 (101 stories, 508 meters) and Burj Khalifa (162
stories, 829.8 meters).

Figure 1. Outrigger structure deformed shape, (b) Deflection of structure, (c) Total core base bending
moment diagram [5]

2. MODELING
A detailed description of the model such as properties of structural elements, material and
loading conditions given in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3 respectively.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 361 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Analysis of High-Rise Building with Outrigger Using Non-Dimensional Parameter

Table 1 Properties of Structural elements in models

Name of parameter Value Unit
No. of storey G+39 Nos.
Plan Dimension 25x25 m
Frame 5m c/c in both direction m
Floor height 3.2 m
Height of building 128 m
Beam size 300x450 mm
Column size 700x700, 800x800 mm
Outrigger beam 300x3200, 300x4800, 300x6400 mm
Outrigger column 1000x1000 mm
Slab thickness 150 mm
Shear wall thickness 300 mm
Belt truss ISA200x200x15 mm

Table 2 Material property

Name of parameter Value
Grade of concrete M25, M30, M35, M40
Rebar HYSD500
Steel Fe345

Table 3 Loading condition

Name of parameter Value
Dead load Self- weight multiplier (1)
Live load 3 KN/m2
Floor finish 1 KN/m2
Wind load As per IS 875 (Part-3):2015
A typical 3D view with elevation and plan with structural elements of the model is shown
in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 respectively.

Figure 2. 3D view and elevation of the model (all dimension in m.)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 362 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Varsha Virde, Dr. R. Singh and Alok Rathore

Figure 3. Structural elements and plan of the model

3. ANALYTICAL APPROACH
Before developing the mathematical model, a brief review of the analytical method is
appropriate. Assumptions used for analysis:
 The structure is linearly elastic.
 Only axial forces are induced in the outrigger column.
 The outriggers are rigidly attached to the core.
 The core is rigidly attached to the foundation.
 The sectional properties of the core, column, and outriggers are uniform
throughout height.
 The stiffness provided by the typical floor slab connecting the core and the
perimeter columns is ignored [7].
In this section, the existing method is followed by the derivation of the proposed enhanced
formulae, in which the rigidity of the outrigger is normally expressed by a numerical index
proposed by [7]. The proportion of the width of the core wall and the distance between core
wall and the exterior outrigger-braced column measured from centre of core. This is known as
wide-column effect and is illustrated and shown in Fig. 4. The generalized non-dimensional
parameters α and β, which represent the core-to-column rigidity and core-to-outrigger rigidity,
respectively as follows:

( )
and

( )
where
 d = Breadth of the building
 H = Total height of the core
 EI = Flexural rigidity of the core
 (EA)C = Axial rigidity of the external column
 (EI)O = Effective flexural rigidity of the outrigger beam
 Outriggers flexural rigidity (EI)o can be expressed as:
( ) ( ) ( )

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 363 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Analysis of High-Rise Building with Outrigger Using Non-Dimensional Parameter

where
 (EI')O = Actual flexural rigidity of outrigger beam
 a = Horizontal distance from the centroid of the core to edge
 b = Net length of the outrigger beam

Figure 4. (a) Outrigger connected to edge of core, (b) Equivalent outrigger beam attached to the
centroid of core [5]

Table 4 Non-dimensional parameter along with models

Model Details Outrigger beam α β
Model A 300x3200 mm 0.167 6.358
Model B 300x4800 mm 0.167 1.884
Model C 300x6400 mm 0.167 0.795
Model D Nil Nil Nil

4. DYNAMIC WIND RESPONSE (GUST FACTOR METHOD)

Wind loading is complex that varies both in space and time. Wind effects on structures can be
classified as static and dynamic. A static wind effect causes twisting and elastic bending of
structure. The major dynamic effect of wind on the structure induce large dynamic motion and
oscillations by wind gust factor. Gust response factor or gust loading factor is a very common
term in wind engineering and it is applied in worldwide standards. This method recently
updated in IS 875(Part 3):2015. Dynamic wind effect on the high-rise buildings can be
divided into two components: Along wind effect and Across wind effect [1].

4.1 Along wind effect

The gust factor or gust effectiveness factor method used for calculating along wind load or
drag load on flexible slender structures which includes on the tall buildings. The procedure
makes use of hourly mean wind speed to arrive at the Gust Factor. The design peak along
wind base bending moment (Ma) obtained by summing the moments resulting from design
peak along wind loads acting at different heights z, along the height of the building as:
∑
The along wind load Fz, on a structure on a strip area at any height z is given by:
̅
Where
 Cf,z = Drag force coefficient of the structure corresponding to area Az
 Az = Effective frontal area of the structure at any height z, in m2
 ̅ = Design hourly mean wind pressure corresponding to Vz,d, obtained as 0.6
(N/m2)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 364 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Varsha Virde, Dr. R. Singh and Alok Rathore

 = Design hourly wind speed at height z, in m/s

 G = Gust factor is given by:

√[ ( ) ]

4.2 Across wind effect

This effect considering the dynamic effects of across wind load on flexible structures, and
gives an empirical formula for determining the equivalent static wind load and the base
overturning moment in the across wind direction for tall enclosed buildings and towers of
rectangular cross-section. The across wind design peak base bending moment Mc for enclosed
buildings and towers shall be determined as follows:

̅ ( )√

The across wind load (Fz,c) linear distribution on the building obtained from Mc and given
by:
[ ]* +
Where
 gh = Peak factor in cross wind direction
 ̅ = Hourly mean wind pressure at height h, in Pa
 b = Breadth of structure normal to the wind, in m
 h = Height of the structure, in m
 Cfs = Across wind force spectrum coefficient generalised for a linear mode
 = Damping coefficient of structure

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this study, models are symmetric about X axis and Y axis, so here results are considered
from X axis wind effect. The parameter (Lateral Displacement, Storey Drift Ratio and
Overturning Moment) are consider for this study under wind loading from X axis, but the
effect is observed in both direction that is wind across and wind along.

Table 5 Value of lateral displacement (in mm) under wind along and wind across
Wind along Wind across
Models st
1 position of nd
2 position of st
1 position of 2nd position of
outrigger outrigger outrigger outrigger
Model A 190.5 125.8 253.5 157.5
Model B 185.0 123.2 245.8 153.9
Model C 182.3 112.0 242.2 152.2
Model D 246.1 149.4 332.3 190.2
From above Table 5. the of lateral displacement at 1st outrigger position is larger than the
2nd outrigger position in each type of models. The value of lateral displacement in Model A,
Model B, and Model C is decrease as the value of β decreases [3]. In Model D the lateral
displacement is large as compare to all other type of models. Model C has the minimum

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 365 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Analysis of High-Rise Building with Outrigger Using Non-Dimensional Parameter

lateral displacement. The value of lateral displacement under Wind-Across is more as

compare with Wind-Along.

Figure 6. Lateral Displacement under load wind across and wind along
Here, lateral displacement of all storey in each type of models represented in Fig. 6.
Model A, Model B and Model C were showing same variation and difference in the value of
storey displacement was very less in both case Wind-Across and Wind-Along. Model D has
larger difference in their value as compare to all other models [6].

Table 6 Value of story drift ratio under wind along and wind across
Wind along Wind across
Models st
1 position of nd
2 position of st
1 position of 2nd position of
outrigger outrigger outrigger outrigger
Model A 0.00062 0.00121 0.00090 0.00168
Model B 0.00059 0.00109 0.00088 0.00153
Model C 0.00056 0.00106 0.00087 0.00147
Model D 0.00119 0.00232 0.00182 0.00322
From above Table 6. the value of storey drift ratio at 1st outrigger position is minimum
than the 2nd outrigger position in each type of models. When compare the storey drift ratio of
Model D to the Model A, Model B and Model C, it was observed that the storey drift ratio
was more in Model D than the other models. The value of storey drift ratio reduces as the
non-dimensional parameter β was introduce in models and when the β value reduces the
storey drift ratio will also reduce [2].

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 366 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Varsha Virde, Dr. R. Singh and Alok Rathore

Figure 7. Storey Drift Ratio under load wind across and wind along
Here, storey drift ratio of all storey in each type of models represented in Fig. 7. Model A,
Model B and Model C were showing same variation and difference in the value of storey drift
ratio was very less in both case Wind-Across and Wind-Along. Model D has larger difference
in their value as compare to all other models [6].

Table 7 Value of overturning moment (in KN-m) at base under wind along and wind across
Models Wind along Wind across
Model A -391659.9 491821.3
Model B -384449.9 481789.1
Model C -380941.5 476909.1
Model D -468222.2 601012.8
The value of overturning moment at base under Wind-Along and Wind-Across given in
Table 7. When compare the overturning moment at base of Model D to the Model A, Model
B and Model C, it was observed that the overturning moment was more in Model D than the
other models because outrigger were introduced in the models. The value of overturning
moment is decrease as the value of β reduce from Model A to Model C as value of β reduce
from 6.358 to 0.795. Model C has minimum overturning moment as β value is smaller for
Model C.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 367 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Analysis of High-Rise Building with Outrigger Using Non-Dimensional Parameter

Figure 8. Overturning Moment under load wind across and wind along
The overturning moment varies along storey height in each type of model were
represented in Fig. 8. Model A, Model B and Model C were showing same variation and
difference in the overturning moment was very less in both case Wind-Across and Wind-
Along. Model D has larger difference in their value as compare to all other models. The value
was reduced at 22nd storey due to β parameter thus the overturning moment value get reduce
at base in Model A, Model B and Model C. The reduction of overturning moment depends
upon the value of β [2].
As discuss above β has impact on displacement, storey drift along with overturning
moment at base. Now below Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 show the percentage reduction in outrigger
storey displacement i.e., top storey and 22nd storey under across wind and along wind. Here it
was observed that in case of Wind-Across force, the reduction was 27.1%, 26.1% and 23.7%
in Model C, Model B and Model A respectively. It was also observed that in case of Wind-
Along force, the reduction was 25.9%, 24.8% and 22.6% in Model C, Model B and Model A
respectively [4].

Figure 9. Percentage reduction in displacement using outrigger system under across wind

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 368 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Varsha Virde, Dr. R. Singh and Alok Rathore

Figure 10. Percentage reduction in displacement using outrigger system under along wind
Now below Fig. 11 show the percentage reduction in overturning moment at base when
outrigger was used. Maximum reduction was observed in model C. The maximum
overturning momentum was reduced 18.6% and 20.6 % along wind and across wind
respectively [4].

Figure 11. Percentage reduction in overturning moment at base using outrigger system

6. CONCLUSIONS
 Top storey lateral displacement, storey drift ratio and overturning moment was
reduced when outrigger was introduced in structural system.
 Top storey lateral displacement having smaller value for smaller value of non-
dimensional parameter β.
 The value of β change the value of overturning moment at base. The reduction of
overturning moment was more as the value of β was reduce.
 The value of non-dimensional parameter β depend on size and stiffness of
outrigger beam and central core.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 369 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698

 Analysis of High-Rise Building with Outrigger Using Non-Dimensional Parameter

REFERENCES
[1] Gune Saurabh, Prof. Rathi Vijaykumar, Cross Wind Effect on High Rise Building, Resincap
Journal of Science and Engineering, 2 (2), Feb. 2018, pp. 255-262.
[2] Kamath Kiran, N. Divya, Rao Asha U, A Study on Static and Dynamic Behaviour of
Outrigger Structural System for Tall Buildings, Bonfiring International Journal of Industrial
Engineering and Management Science, 2 (4), December 2012, pp. 15-20.
[3] Mulla Abdul Karim and Shrinivas B. N., A Study on Outrigger System in A Tall R. C.
Structure with Steel Bracing, International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology,
4 (7), July 2015, pp. 551-557.
[4] Nouri Farshid and Ashtari Payam, Investigating Structural Behavior of Outrigger-braced Tall
Structures, The 2013 World Congress on Advances in Structural Engineering and Mechanics
(ASEM13) Jeju, Korea, September 8-12, 2013, pp. 733-743.
[5] Smith B. Stafford and Salim I., A Parameter Study of Outrigger-Braced Tall Building
Structures, Proc. ASCE, Structural Div. ST 10, 1981, pp. 2001-2014.
[6] Sukhdeve Shruti B., Optimum Position of Outrigger in G+40 RC Building, International
Journal of Science Technology & Engineering, 2 (10) April 2016, pp. 1051-1055.
[7] Smith B S and coull A, Tall Building Structure: Analysis and Design, A Wiley-Inter-science
Publication.
[8] Taranath Bungle S, Structural Analysis and Design of Tall Building, McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
[9] IS 1893 (Part I):2016, Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[10] IS 16700:2017, Indian standard criteria for structural safety of tall concrete buildings, Bureau
of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[11] IS 875 (Part III):2015, Indian standard code of practice for design loads (other than
earthquake) for buildings and Structures – wind loads, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.
[12] Pankaj Sharma and Gurpreet Singh, Dynamic Analysis of Outrigger Systems in High Rise
Building against Lateral Loading. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology,
9(8), 2018, pp. 61-70.
[13] P. Nagavenkatasaikumar and D. Sathishchandra. Environmental Conditions Monitoring of
AAC Blocks Usage of High Rise Buildings at Tadepalli, Andhra Pradesh. International
Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp. 189–198.
[14] Ch. Chowdeswari, D. Satish Chandra and SS.Asadi, Optimal Planning and Scheduling of High
Rise Buildings. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp.
312–324.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 370 editor@iaeme.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3567698