Effect of Ground motion Characteristics on the Response of Mid-rise

Building

By :
Jitendra Yadav (19MST0071)
Ranjan Sharma (19MST0072)
Hem Narayan Mandal (19MST0076)

Guide : Dr. Visuvasam J. Sir

Professor
School of Civil Engineering, VIT, Vellore
Introduction
Building Type : RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
Structural System : RC Framed Building (Special Moment Resisting Frame)
No. of Storey : G+4,G+7
Total Height : 15m, 24.5m
Type of Sub-Soil : Medium Soil (Type II)
Seismic Zone : Zone V
Introduction
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
◦ Using SAP-2000 (Based on Finite Element Method)
◦ Equivalent Static method, Response Spectrum and Non-linear Time History Methods are used for the analysis

Various IS codes are consulted for the analysis and design of the building.
IDENTIFICATION OF LOADS
- Dead loads are calculated as per IS: 875 (Part 1) – 1987
- Imposed loads according to IS : 875 (Part 2) - 1987
- Seismic load according to IS: 1893 (Part 1): 2016 considering Zone V
The following materials are adopted for the design of the elements:
◦ Concrete Grade: M25, M30
◦ M25,M30 for Beam, Column and slab
◦ Reinforcement Steel(Deformed Bars) –Fe415
◦ Fe415 for longitudinal as well as for lateral ties

The structure is designed with due consideration to provide ductile behavior and comply with the requirements given in IS
13920:2016
Literature Survey
S.N. Name of Journal Author Remarks
1. Ground Motion Characteristics Parajuli, Rishi One of the reasons behind the collapse of many historical structures in
of the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake, Ram &Kiyono, comparison with general buildings, is likely to be lower frequency
Survey of Damage to Stone Junji dominant ground motion. We should consider the epicentral distance
Masonry Structures and and rupture line during the interpretation of ground motion frequency
Structural Field Tests. Frontiers components. Rural areas in Nepal have a large stock of stone masonry
in Built Environment structures used for shelter and other purposes. These need to be
reinforced using locally available materials to make them more
resilient. Ridge structures are at a higher risk of earthquake damage
relative to structures on slopes. Local construction methods should be
improved technically, by providing longitudinal and transverse bonding
during construction.
2. Analysis of multistory office Mohd. Irshad The study states that the acceleration, velocity, displacement and base
building subjected to near & far Iqbal, Ansari shear for the near field earthquake are higher for the near field
field earthquake. M. earthquake than the far field earthquake. Near field earthquake have
A.,BaigFaiyazA longer frequency range, axial forces, moment and force in a critical
zam column in a near-field earthquake is more so that as per structural
engineering aspect building frame in near-field earthquake having more
critical behavior.
3. Ground Motion Characteristics Whitney, Nonlinear time history analysis of a well-designed unreinforced
of the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal, Reeves & masonry building shows that the initial acceleration causes yielding in
Earthquake and Its Effects on a Agrawal, Anil) the structure and the subsequent long period motions led to the failure
Prototype Unreinforced of the building. Poor construction and material quality led to the failure
Masonry Building of the structure.
S.
N. Name of Journal Author Remarks

4. Nepal Earthquake: Adhikari, It is found that the seismic capacity of the PRE-SMM typology is very
Seismic Performance and Rohit&D'Ayala, Dina) low in both principal directions, theshorter direction being the weakest.
Post-Earthquake Performancelevel for the PRE-SMM typology is low at about 0.17 g,
Reconstruction of Stone against the PGA distributionof 0.25 g to 0.35 g in the mountainous
MasonryBuildings district.

5. Salmon Strong Motion Robert P. Kennedy The study proposed by Michael W. Salmon describes different
Duration and Earthquake Michael W groundmotion relationship and describes the Near Field as 15km and
Magnitude Relationships the far field greater than 15km.
Objective of the Project

 To perform the modal analysis and determine time period of the RC framed building.
 To perform linear dynamic(Response Spectrum) analysis and nonlinear dyaminc(non-linear
time history) analysis of the RC framed building to determine the seismic responses of the
building.
 To check the serviceability limits of building.
To perform and determine frequency and storey drift of the building corresponding to the time
history of the earthquake taken into account.
Methodology
Literature Review

Preparation of Model

Experimental Study

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Results and Discussion

Earthquake Data(Peer Database)
SN Duration(Sec) Year Magnitude(Richter Hoz.accelration
Scale)
18.5 1961 5.6 RSN26_HOLLISTR_B-HCH181.AT2
1  
     

Near
19.4 1954 Field 15km 6.5 RSN20_NCALIF.FH_H-FRN044.AT2
2 Far
    Field 85km
   

19.4 1954 6.5 "Northern Calif-03"

3        
Modelling

Fig 1(a): Plan of the Building

Modelling

Fig1(b): 3D model
Modelling

Fig 2(a): Plan of the Building

Modelling

Fig2(b): 3D model
Results

Table 1(a) : Base Reaction for the Model 1

Results

Table 1(b) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 1 performing Linear Dynamic
Analysis.
Results

Table 1(c) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 1 performing NonLinear Dynamic Analysis.
Results

Table 2(a) : Base Reaction for the Model 2.

Results

Table 2(b) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 2 performing Linear Dynamic Analysis
Results

Table 2(c) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 2 performing NonLinear Dynamic Analysis
Results

Table 1(d): Modal Mass Participation Ratios

Results

Table 2(d): Modal Mas Participation Ratios

The Modal Mass Participation ratios were above 90%.

Conclusion
1.The seismic responses base shear, storey displacements and storey drifts in both the directions
are found to vary in similar pattern for the models considered for the study.
2. The values of seismic responses i.e. base shear, storey displacement and storey drifts were
determined for the time histories considered.
3. The frequency of the mid-rise building modelled tends to match with the time history data
taken into account.
4. As time history is realistic method, used for seismic analysis, it provides a better check to the
safety of structures analyzed and designed by method specified by IS code.
 References
1. Parajuli, Rishi Ram &Kiyono, Junji. (2015). Ground Motion Characteristics of the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake, Survey of Damage to
Stone Masonry Structures and Structural Field Tests. Frontiers in Built Environment. 1. 10.3389/fbuil.2015.00023.
2. Mohd. Irshad Iqbal, Ansari M. A.,BaigFaiyazAzam 2018,Analysis of multistory office building subjected to near & far field
earthquake.
3. Whitney, Reeves & Agrawal, Anil. (2016). Ground Motion Characteristics of the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal, Earthquake and Its Effects on a
Prototype Unreinforced Masonry Building. Journal of Structural Engineering.
4. Adhikari, Rohit&D'Ayala, Dina. (2019). 2015 Nepal Earthquake: Seismic Performance and Post-Earthquake Reconstruction of Stone
MasonryBuildings.10.13140/RG.2.2.25288.47361.
5. Robert P. Kennedy Michael W. Salmon Strong Motion Duration and Earthquake Magnitude Relationships, June 1992.
6. IS-456-2000 "Indian standard of code and practice for plain and reinforced concrete" Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi -2000.
7. IS-875-1987. (Part-1) for Indian standard code of practice for structural safety loadings standards Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.
8. IS: 875-1987 (part-2) for Live Loads or Imposed Loads, code of practice of Design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and
structures.
9. IS-1893(Part 1):2016, Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures: (Part 1) General provisions and Buildings, New Delhi,
India.
10. IS-13920."Ductile design and detailing of reinforced structures subjected to seismic forces" Code of Practice Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi -12016
THANK YOU