International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 13, Issue 6, June 2022, pp. 13-22, Article ID: IJCIET_13_06_002
Available online at https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=13&Issue=6
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YU5
© IAEME Publication

THE EFFECT OF BRACING AND SHEAR

WALLS ON R.C. MULTISTORY BUILDING
WITH/WITHOUT FLOATING COLUMN
SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS
AbdulRhman AlAttas1*, Mohammed Tukistani2, Taleb Hakeem3, Mohammed Laissy4
1,2,3
Student, Department of Civil Engineering, UPM, Madinah, KSA
4
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, UPM, Madinah, KSA
*1
Corresponding Author

ABSTRACT
These days many buildings with floating column are being constructed in order to
have wider spaces, but these kinds of buildings are not considered to be safe in seismic
prone areas.
This paper investigates buildings with/without floating columns that is strengthened
by shear wall and bracing system. An analysis was made to a G+10 building with and
without floating column under seismic loads, and then the same building was compared
when the shear wall and the bracing systems were added. Different parameters were
studied using linear spectrum method such as the story drift, displacement, time period
and columns shear forces. The analysis and modeling were made using ETABS program
v18.1.
Key words: Bracing System, ETABS, Floating column, Shear wall, Seismic loads.
Cite this Article: AbdulRhman AlAttas, Mohammed Tukistani, Taleb Hakeem,
Mohammed Laissy, The Effect of Bracing and shear Walls on R.C. Multistory Building
with/without Floating Column Subjected to Seismic Loads, International Journal of
Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET). 13(6), 2022. pp. 13-22.
https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=13&Issue=6

1. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, engineers are trying to find possible solutions to maintain wide spaces inside multi
story buildings by getting rid of some columns without affecting the strength or the stiffness of
the building. Floating columns is one of the solutions that have been used abundantly in the
past years in many countries. However, buildings with floating columns are not considered to
be safe under seismic loads. These floating columns are extremely destructive in seismically
active areas. The earthquake forces established at various floor levels in a building must be
carried down the height to the ground via the shortest path. A deviation or discontinuity in this
load transfer path results in poor building performance. The overall shape, size, and geometry
of a building, as well as how earthquake forces are carried to the ground, provide information

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 13 editor@iaeme.com
 The Effect of Bracing and shear Walls on R.C. Multistory Building with/without Floating Column Subjected
to Seismic Loads

about its behavior during earthquakes. The floating column is a vertical member that does not
have a foundation and is designed to rest on a beam. The floating column acts as a point load
on the beam, which then transfers the load to the columns below it. However, such a column
cannot be easily implemented and is difficult to construct practically because true columns
below the termination level are not built with care, resulting in failure. As a result, structures
already constructed with these types of discontinuous members are at risk in seismic zones.
These structures, however, cannot be destroyed; rather, they can be studied and strengthened,
or some remedial features can be suggested to increase their strength. The stiffness of RC
buildings with these columns can be increased by retrofitting or by providing bracing or shear
walls to decrease lateral deformation, and in this way the building will transfer the lateral loads
directly to the buildings foundation, making the building stable and avoiding collapse when
subjected to wind and earthquakes.

2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The primary goal of this research is to gain a thorough understanding of seismic response by
recording the true behavior of reinforced concrete buildings with floating columns. The
following is a summary of the study's objectives:
• To study the effect of earthquake on RC buildings with and without floating columns.
• To analyze RC buildings with and without floating columns subjected to seismic loads
strengthened by shear wall system.
• To analyze RC buildings with and without floating columns subjected to seismic loads
strengthened by bracing system.
• To analyze RC buildings with and without floating columns subjected to seismic loads
strengthened by shear wall and bracing systems.
• To compare the results and to propose the best system that gives the preferable results.

3. THE METHODOLOGY AND WORK PLAN

The methodology of this research in based on four things:
• Collection of data and information.
• A thorough literature review to understand the seismic evaluation of building structures
and application of equivalent static analysis method.
• Design some structural elements from the building as per prevailing Saudi Standard for
dead load, live load, and earthquake load.
• Evaluate the seismic performance of RC buildings Using Response Spectrum analysis
method with different strengthening systems.

4. LITERATURE REVIEW
Nanabala et al [1] presented a paper dealing with the comparison between building with and
without floating column using SAB2000. They found that the floating column structure is
unsafe to construct because it has large displacement under lateral loads, and it costs more.
Shivam et al. [2] studied a building with floating column and compared it with a building
without floating column using SAP 2000 V20. They concluded that in seismically prone areas,
buildings with floating columns exhibit more story drift and story displacement.
Shrivastav et al [3] studied the behavior of multi-story structures with floating columns when
subjected to seismic loads, and the impact of a shear wall in the same structure. They found that
as shear walls are used in buildings with floating column, the drift and displacement values for

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 14 editor@iaeme.com
 AbdulRhman AlAttas, Mohammed Tukistani, Taleb Hakeem, Mohammed Laissy

all zones are decreased when compared to building with only floating column. Moreover, the
story drift and displacement is greater for floating column structures.
Waykule et al [4] examined the performance of G+5 building with and without floating
columns in a high-seismic zone with SAB2000. They found that a building with a floating
column resulted in an increase in time period, displacement and story drift compared to the
building without floating column.
Ahmed et al [5] presented a paper comparing between building with and without floating
column using SAP2000. They studied base shear, story drift and time period frequency. Their
results shows that in seismically prone areas, buildings with floating columns exhibit more story
drift and story displacement than buildings without floating columns.
Hiba et al [6] conducted a study on the effects of bracing on seismic performance of a multi-
story building frame with floating columns included. The results shows that by adding bracing
the stiffness of the structure increases.
Duduskar Et Al [7] have studied and analyzed a G+20 building with and without floating
columns and shear wall. They concluded that building with shear wall has less displacements
and story drifts when compared with the floating column buildings.
Israa et al [8] studied the impact of alternative shear wall positions on a multi-story structure
(with ten stories) with floating columns that is subjected to seismic loads using ETABS 2015.
They concluded that every corner shear wall, internal shear wall, and side shear wall has a
different displacement in each model. In comparison to floating columns without shear wall,
stiffness increases in the first level with shear wall in corner (L-shape)
Gajbhiye [9] studied a building with and without floating column and the effect of shear wall
on it by using STAAD pro. He found that when a floating column is used, the base shear,
maximum moment, and story shear rises. He concluded that the use of a shear wall provides
the optimal structure behavior.

5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project represent RC high-rise building which consists of 11 floors as shown in figure 1.
This chapter is focusing on the core of this project (modelling and analysis of studied buildings
with and without floating column due to seismic loads according to the (Saudi Building Code)
by adding different strengthen materials). This chapter consists of 8 models under seismic load:
building with and without floating column, building with and without floating column and
bracing system, building with and without floating column and shear wall, and building with
and without floating column with shear wall and bracing system.

Table 1 Types of Models

Building without strengthening systems and with
floating column
Named: W/O strengthening systems W/FL

Figure 1

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 15 editor@iaeme.com
The Effect of Bracing and shear Walls on R.C. Multistory Building with/without Floating Column Subjected
to Seismic Loads

Building without strengthening systems and without

floating column
Named: W/O strengthening systems W/O FL

Figure 2

Building with bracing and floating column

Named: Bracing W/FL

Figure 3

Building with Bracing and without floating column

Named: Bracing W/O FL

Figure 4

Building with shear wall and floating column

Named: Shear wall W/FL

Figure 5

Building with shear wall and without floating column

Named: Shear wall W/O FL

Figure 6

Building with shear wall and bracing and with floating

column
Named: Bracing&Shear wall W/FL

Figure 7

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 16 editor@iaeme.com
 AbdulRhman AlAttas, Mohammed Tukistani, Taleb Hakeem, Mohammed Laissy

Building with shear wall and bracing and without

floating column
Named: Bracing&Shear wall W/O FL

Figure 8

5.1. Materials
In this project, a group of materials has been used, where concrete and reinforcing steel are the
main structural materials.
The compressive strength of concrete cylinders in this project is:
• fc’= 30 Mpa For the Reinforced Concrete Members.
Steel for reinforcement in accordance with ASTM standards:
• Modulus of elasticity, Es= 200 Gpa.
• Yielding strength, fy= 420 Mpa.
• Yielding strenght for stirrups, fy= 180 Mpa.

5.2. Loads
5.2.1 Dead Loads: are defined as loading on a structure that is permanently attached to the
structure.
Super-imposed Dead Load
• Flooring= 1.50 kN/m2
• Roof Flooring = 3.00 kN/m2
5.2.2 Live loads: are defined as loading (moving or stationary) on a structure that is not
permanently attached to the structure itself.
• Horizontal Rigid Roof = 2.00 KN/m2.
• Roof Flooring = 3.00 KN/m2
• Stairs = 5 KN/ m2
• Lobbies and First-Floor Corridors = 5 KN/m2
• Corridors Above First Floor = 4KN/m2

5.2.3. Seismic Loads Parameters

Table 2 Seismic loads parameters

City Madinah
Spectral accelerations for
20%g
short periods (SS)
Spectral accelerations for 1-
second period. (S1) 4%g
Response modifier factor 5
T1 4
Importance factor 1
Soil Type B

Figure 9 Spectral accelerations for 1-second

period. (S1)

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 17 editor@iaeme.com
 The Effect of Bracing and shear Walls on R.C. Multistory Building with/without Floating Column Subjected
to Seismic Loads

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Various parameters have been studied on specific location for all models by using linear
spectrum method. These parameters are the joint displacement, drift, column shear forces, and
time period.

6.1. Displacement of the Studied Models

The visual graph in figure 10 shows the displacement for the eight models. The displacement
is taken on the x-axis at typical point in all stories. From the graph, it is obvious that the building
with floating column has the greatest displacement. This is because of the abolition of some
columns at the ground level. Moreover, the building without floating and with shear wall and
bracing system shows the least displacement. When the bracing and shear wall was added to
the building with floating column, the displacement decreased by 78% at the first floor. This
means it has the best performance under seismic loads for buildings with floating columns than
the rest type of models.

Table 3 Displacement Results

W/O Strengthening
Bracing Shear Wall Bracing&Shear Wall
Story Systems
W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL
Story11 188.623 203.571 58.622 80.178 81.553 84.502 41.297 50.556
Story10 180.831 194.443 53.64 73.773 75.082 77.668 37.598 46.198
Story9 170.061 182.381 48.173 66.829 67.608 69.873 33.59 41.513
Story8 155.954 166.954 42.297 59.421 59.474 61.418 29.342 36.571
Story7 138.739 148.405 36.146 51.676 50.884 52.517 24.941 31.455
Story6 118.866 127.181 29.86 43.711 42.037 43.373 20.483 26.252
Story5 96.916 103.857 23.598 35.658 33.168 34.225 16.077 21.066
Story4 73.594 79.133 17.542 27.653 24.54 25.34 11.851 16.007
Story3 49.858 53.939 11.887 19.834 16.44 17.01 7.94 11.194
Story2 27.249 29.894 6.819 12.314 9.181 9.571 4.493 6.745
Story1 8.658 2.534 3.194 1.67

Displacement
250 W/O Strengthening
Systems W/O FL
W/O Strengthening
200 Systems W/FL
Displacement mm

Bracing W/O FL
150
Bracing W/FL

100 Shear Wall W/O FL

Shear Wall W/FL

50
Bracing and Shear
Wall W/O FL
0 Bracing and Shear
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Wall W/FL

Stories

Figure 10 Displacement for the studied models

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 18 editor@iaeme.com
 AbdulRhman AlAttas, Mohammed Tukistani, Taleb Hakeem, Mohammed Laissy

6.2. Drift of the Studied Models

The story drift on the x-axis for all studied models is displayed in figure 11. Storey drift is the
lateral displacement of a floor with respect to the floor below. The graphs shows that building
with floating column has the greatest story drift, whereas building without floating column and
with bracing and shear wall has the least story drift. The story drift for the all models begins to
increase at lower floors and then reachs its maximum at story 8 ; then , it starts to decrease
again.When strengthing systems are added to the models, the story drift decreases. When the
shear wall and bracing system is added to the model with floating column the drift decreased
by 72% at the 8th floor.

Table 4 Story Drift Results

W/O Strengthening
Bracing Shear Wall Bracing&Shear Wall
Story Systems
W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL
Story11 0.002597 0.003043 0.001661 0.002135 0.002157 0.002278 0.001233 0.001453
Story10 0.00359 0.004021 0.001822 0.002315 0.002491 0.002598 0.001336 0.001562
Story9 0.004702 0.005142 0.001959 0.002469 0.002712 0.002818 0.001416 0.001648
Story8 0.005739 0.006183 0.00205 0.002582 0.002863 0.002967 0.001467 0.001705
Story7 0.006624 0.007075 0.002096 0.002655 0.002949 0.003048 0.001486 0.001734
Story6 0.007317 0.007775 0.002087 0.002685 0.002956 0.003049 0.001468 0.001729
Story5 0.007774 0.008241 0.002019 0.002668 0.002876 0.002961 0.001409 0.001686
Story4 0.007912 0.008398 0.001885 0.002606 0.0027 0.002777 0.001304 0.001604
Story3 0.007536 0.008015 0.001689 0.002507 0.00242 0.00248 0.001149 0.001483
Story2 0.006197 0.006777 0.001428 0.002358 0.001996 0.002074 0.000941 0.001326
Story1 0.002886 0.000845 0.001065 0.000557

Story Drift
0.01
W/O Strengthening
Systems W/O FL
0.008 W/O Strengthening
Systems W/FL
Bracing W/O FL
drift - mm

0.006
Bracing W/FL
0.004
Shear Wall W/O FL

Shear Wall W/FL

0.002
Bracing&Shear Wall
0 W/O FL
Bracing&Shear Wall
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
W/FL
Stories

Figure 11 Story Drift for the studied models

6.3. Column Shear Force of the Studied Models

Figure 12 below represents the column shear force for the eight models. In all stories, the
column shear force is measured on the x-axis because the shear force on the y-axis will be close
to zero. This is because the output case that have been used is earthquake on the x-axis. The
shear force is at its minimum in the lower floors and reaches the maximum at the higher floors.
The model without floating column and with shear wall and bracing has the least shear force,
while the model with floating column only has the highest shear force. The study shows that

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 19 editor@iaeme.com
 The Effect of Bracing and shear Walls on R.C. Multistory Building with/without Floating Column Subjected
to Seismic Loads

when the bracing and shear wall are added to building with floating column the drift decreases
by 6.67%% at the last floor than without using strengthening systems.

Table 5 Column Shear Force Results

W/O Strengthening
Bracing Shear Wall Bracing&Shear Wall
Story Systems
W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL
Story11 1039.914 1042.509 964.3785 1008.431 995.7239 1000.344 912.8747 936.2949
Story10 1986.39 1991.775 1854.863 1930.225 1904.421 1912.232 1767.17 1807.558
Story9 2795.779 2804.017 2623.233 2716.925 2680.255 2689.841 2512.416 2562.916
Story8 3476.301 3487.452 3274.965 3376.263 3330.675 3340.875 3152.222 3207.003
Story7 4036.479 4050.6 3815.923 3916.403 3863.548 3873.458 3690.5 3744.806
Story6 4485.226 4502.366 4252.441 4346.034 4287.241 4296.216 4131.542 4181.75
Story5 4831.909 4852.109 4591.453 4674.488 4610.739 4618.399 4480.126 4523.813
Story4 5086.408 5109.691 4840.684 4911.929 4843.823 4850.049 4741.68 4777.708
Story3 5259.165 5285.513 5008.965 5069.624 4997.33 5002.265 4922.554 4951.168
Story2 5361.269 5390.519 5106.808 5160.382 5083.571 5087.621 5030.518 5053.466
Story1 5404.75 5435.871 5147.243 5198.431 5117.061 5120.653 5075.815 5095.898

Columns Shear Force W/O Strenthening

Systems W/O FL
5000
W/O Strengthening
Systems W/FL

4000 Bracing W/O FL

Shear Force - KN

3000 Bracing W/FL

Shear wall W/O FL

2000

Shear wall W/FL

1000

Bracing and shear

wall W/O FL
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Bracing and shear
Stories wall W/FL

Figure 12 Column Shear Force for the studied models

6.4. Time Period of the Studied Models

In seismic analysis, the amount of time needed for the structure to complete one oscillation is
called time period. In figure 13, the time period with relative to the mode is represented. It's
obvious that the building with floating column has the greatest time period which means that it
needs more time than other models to complete one cycle. The model without floating column
and with bracing and shear wall has the least time period. The study shows for building with
floating columns the best system is bracing and shear wall where drift has been decreased by
56.62% than using without strengthening systems.

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 20 editor@iaeme.com
 AbdulRhman AlAttas, Mohammed Tukistani, Taleb Hakeem, Mohammed Laissy

Table 6 Time Period Results

W/O Strengthening
Bracing Shear Wall Bracing&Shear Wall
Mode Systems
W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL W/O FL W/FL
1 3.212 3.308 1.401 1.832 2.449 2.486 1.222 1.435
2 2.504 2.594 1.343 1.572 1.809 1.828 1.119 1.245
3 2.47 2.506 0.8 0.91 1.563 1.588 0.781 0.891
4 1.006 1.013 0.394 0.54 0.746 0.753 0.347 0.407
5 0.758 0.767 0.384 0.406 0.556 0.558 0.305 0.323
6 0.751 0.758 0.237 0.303 0.436 0.438 0.227 0.295
7 0.582 0.585 0.206 0.249 0.404 0.408 0.181 0.203
8 0.413 0.417 0.196 0.206 0.303 0.304 0.155 0.162
9 0.399 0.401 0.145 0.162 0.263 0.265 0.127 0.139
10 0.395 0.398 0.135 0.14 0.221 0.222 0.12 0.137
11 0.297 0.299 0.123 0.139 0.21 0.211 0.106 0.11
12 0.263 0.266 0.115 0.123 0.19 0.191 0.1 0.105
13 0.244 0.245 0.102 0.104 0.159 0.16 0.085 0.093
14 0.233 0.234 0.098 0.103 0.149 0.15 0.085 0.088
15 0.19 0.191 0.088 0.094 0.148 0.148 0.081 0.084
16 0.183 0.185 0.087 0.09 0.127 0.127 0.075 0.077
17 0.164 0.165 0.082 0.084 0.123 0.124 0.068 0.072
18 0.16 0.161 0.079 0.081 0.11 0.111 0.068 0.07
19 0.14 0.141 0.074 0.076 0.109 0.11 0.066 0.068
20 0.135 0.137 0.07 0.073 0.1 0.1 0.064 0.065
21 0.127 0.127 0.07 0.072 0.099 0.1 0.061 0.062

Time Period
4
W/O Strengthening
3.5 Systems
W/O Strengthening
3 Systems
Bracing
2.5
Bracing
Sec

2
Shear Wall
1.5
Case Shear Wall
1
Bracing&Shear Wall
0.5
Case Bracing&Shear
0
Wall
0 5 10 15 20 25
Mode
Figure 13 Time period for the studied models

7. CONCLUSION
After analysing the data from ETABS, it is observed that:
• Building with floating column shows more displacement, story drift, shear force and
time period.
• When compared to building with floating column, building without floating column has
a better performance in seismically prone areas.

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 21 editor@iaeme.com
 The Effect of Bracing and shear Walls on R.C. Multistory Building with/without Floating Column Subjected
to Seismic Loads

• When strengthening systems are added to building with floating column, the
displacement decreased by 78%, the shear force decreased by 6.67%, the time period
decreased by 56.62% and the story drift decreased by 72%.
• Bracing system and shear wall makes the building stiffer.
• For building with floating column, adding shear wall and bracing system is best solution
to improve its performance.

REFERENCES
[1] Nanabala, et al. (2014)- Seismic Analysis of A Normal Building and Floating Column
Building, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), Vol. 3, Issue
9, September- 2014 ISSN: 2278-0181

[2] Shivam, Tyagi, (2018)- Seismic Analysis of Multistorey Building with Floating Column,
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), Vol.5, Issue: 05 May-
2018 e-ISSN: 2395-0056

[3] Shrivastav, et al. (2018)- Seismic Analysis of Multistorey Buildings having Floating Columns,
SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 5, Issue: 5, May-2018 ISSN: 2348 – 8352

[4] Waykule, et al. (2016)- Study of Behaviour of Floating column for Seismic Analysis of
Multistorey Building, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET),
Volume 7, Issue 6, November-December 2016, ISSN: 0976-6316

[5] Ahmed, Singhai (2021)- Seismic Analysis of Multistorey Building with Floating Column,
International Journal of Scientific Research & Engineering Trends, Vol. 7,Issue 5,Sept- Oct-
2021, ISSN: 2395-566X

[6] Hiba, et al. (2021)- Effect of Bracing on Seismic Performance of Multi-storeyed Building
Frames with Floating Columns, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology
(IJERT), Vol. 9, Issue 6, ISSN: 2278-0181

[7] Duduskar, et al. (2021)- Seismic Analysis of Multi-Storey Building with and without Floating
Column and Shear Wall, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT),
Vol. 10 Issue 07, July-2021, ISSN: 2278-0181

[8] Israa, et al. (2018)- The Effect of Shear Wall Locations in Rc Multistorey Building with Floating
Column Subjected to Seismic Load, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology
(IJCIET), Vol. 9, Issue 7, July 2018, ISSN Online: 0976-6316

[9] Gajbhiye, et al. (2021)- The Effect of Floating Column Locations in RC Multistorey Building
with Shear Wall Subjected to Seismic Load, - International Journal for Scientific Research &
Development| Vol. 9, Issue 3, 2021, ISSN: 2321-0613

https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET 22 editor@iaeme.com