International Journal of

Emerging Research in Management &Technology Research Article December

ISSN: 2278-9359 (Volume-5, Issue-12) 2016

Comparative Study of Static and Dynamic Seismic Analysis of

Multistoried RCC Building by ETAB: A Review
Gauri G. Kakpure Ashok R. Mundhada
PG Student, Civil Department, PRMITR, Badnera, Professor, Civil Department, PRMITR, Badnera,
Amravati, Maharashtra, India Amravati, Maharashtra, India

Abstract-

R
einforced Concrete (RC) building frames are most common types of constructions in urban India. These are
subjected to several types of forces during their lifetime, such as static forces due to dead and live loads and
dynamic forces due to earthquake. This paper presents a review of the previous work done on multistoried
buildings vis-à-vis earthquake analysis. It focuses on static and dynamic analysis of buildings.

Keyword- RCC Buildings, Equivalent Static Analysis, Response Spectrum Method

I. INTRODUCTION
A disruptive disturbance, that causes shaking of the surface of the earth due to underground movement
along a fault plane or from volcanic activity is called earthquake. Earthquake, a natural calamity has taken toll of
millions of lives through the ages. The earthquake ranks as one of the most destructive events recorded so far in India
in terms of death toll & damage to infrastructure. The major cities affected by the earthquake are Bhuj, Gandhidham, and
Rajkot etc. Every earthquake leaves a trail of misery because of the loss of life and destruction.
Reinforced concrete multi-storied buildings in India were for the first time subjected to a strong ground motion
shaking in Bhuj earthquake. It has been concluded that the principal reasons of failure may be attributed to soft stories,
floating columns, mass irregularities, poor quality of construction materials and faulty construction practices, inconsistent
earthquake response, soil and foundation, effect of pounding of adjacent structures. All over world, there is high
demand for construction of tall buildings due to increasing urbanization and spiraling population, and earthquakes have
the potential for causing the greatest damages to tall structures. Since earthquake forces are random in nature and
unpredictable, the engineering tools need to be sharpened for analyzing structures under the action of these forces.
Structural analysis is mainly concerned with finding out the behavior of a structure when subjected to some
action. This action can be in the form of load due to weight of things such as people, furniture, snow etc. or some other
kind of excitation such as earthquake , shaking of the ground due to a blast nearby etc. In essence all these loads are
dynamic including the self-weight of the structure because at some point in time these loads were not there. The
distinction is made between the dynamic and static analysis on the basis of whether the applied action has enough
acceleration in comparison to the structure's natural frequency. If a load is applied sufficiently slowly, the inertia forces
(Newton’s second law of motion) can be ignored and the analysis can be simplified as static analysis. Structural
dynamics, therefore, is a type of structural analysis which covers the behavior of structures subjected to dynamic (actions
having high acceleration) loading. Dynamic loads include people, wind, waves, traffic, earthquake and blasts. Any
structure can be subjected to dynamic loading. Dynamic analysis can be used to find dynamic displacements, time
history, and modal analysis.

II. LITERATUR REVIEW

Balaji U & Selvarasan M. E. [1] studied a residential building G+13 storied. The building was analyzed for
earthquake loads using ETABS. Assuming that the material properties were linear, static and dynamic analysis was
performed. These non-linear analyses were carried out by considering severe seismic zones and the behavior was
assessed by taking types II soil condition. Different response like displacement & base shear were calculated and it was
observed that displacement increased with the building height.
Anirudh Gottala, shaik Yajdhani et al [2] studied static and dynamic analysis of G+9 multistoried building.
Linear seismic analysis was done by static method (Seismic Coefficient Method) and dynamic method (Response
Spectrum Method) using STAAD-Pro as per the IS-1893-2002-Part-1. Parameters such as Bending moment, Axial force,
Torsion, Displacement, Nodal displacement, beam and column end forces etc. were calculated. The authors concluded
that,
 The values for Moments are 35 to 45 % higher for Dynamic analysis than the values obtained for Static analysis.
 The values of Torsion of columns are negative for Static analysis and for Dynamic analysis the values of torsion
are positive.
 The values of Nodal Displacements are 50% higher for Dynamic analysis than the values obtained for Static
analysis.
 Nodal Displacements and Bending moments in beams and columns due to seismic excitation showed much
larger values compared to that due to static loads.

© 2016, IJERMT All Rights Reserved Page | 16

 Kakpure et al., International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology
ISSN: 2278-9359 (Volume-5, Issue-12)
Mahesh N. Patil, Yogesh N. Sonawane [3] studied seismic analysis of 8 storey building. A 22.5m x 22.5 m, 8
storey multi storey regular structure was considered for the study. Storey height was 3m. Modeling and analysis of the
structure was done on ETABS software. Analysis of the structure was done and then the results generated by the software
were compared with manual analysis of the structure using IS 1893:2002.
Mohammed Rizwan Sultan, D. Gouse Peera [4] studied behavior of the structure in high seismic zone and also
evaluated Storey overturning moment, Storey Drift, Displacement, Design lateral forces etc. For this purpose, a 15
storey-high building of four totally different shapes like Rectangular, L-shape, H-shape, and C-shape were used for
comparison. The complete models were analyzed with the assistance of ETABS 9.7.1 version. In the present study,
Comparative Dynamic Analysis for all four cases had been done to evaluate the deformation of the structure. Authors
indicate that,
 Building with severe irregularity produces more deformation than those with less irregularity particularly in
high seismic zones. And conjointly the storey overturning moment varies inversely with height of the storey.
 The storey base shear for regular building is highest compared to irregular shaped buildings. Storey drift
permitted is 0.004.times the height of storey
 Storey drift increases with increase in height of the storey up to 7th storey reaching to maximum value and
then it again starts decreasing (Fig 1). The maximum storey drift permitted is 0.004 x height of storey.

Fig. 1 Shows variation of Storey Drift with Height of storey

Mohit Sharma, Savita Maru [5] studied static and dynamic analysis with the help of STAAD-Pro software using
the parameters for design as per the IS 1893-2002-part-1for the zones-2 and 3. G+30 storied regular building was
analyzed. These buildings had the plan area of 25m x 45m with a storey height 3.6m each and depth of foundation was
2.4 m and total height of chosen building including depth of foundation was 114 m.

Table I comparison of displacement for vertical member

The authors concluded that,

 For zone 2 and zone 3, the values of torsion at different points in the beam are negative and for Dynamic
Analysis the values for Torsion are positive.
 Moments and Displacement at different points in the beam was 10 to 15% and 17 to 28 % higher for Dynamic
Analysis than the values obtained for Static Analysis for moment and displacement at same point.

S. Mahesh, B. Panduranga Rao [6] studied residential building of (G+11) regular and irregular configuration for
earthquake and wind load using ETABS and STAAD PRO V8i. Assuming the material property to be linear, static and
dynamic analysis was performed. This analysis was carried out by considering different seismic zones and for each zone;
the behaviour was assessed by taking three different types of soils namely Hard, Medium and Soft. Authors compared
both the regular and irregular configurations. Following conclusions were drawn,
 The base shear values and story drift values were more in regular configuration than irregular configuration.
 Base shear value was more in the zone 5 and that in the soft soil in regular configuration.
 Story drift value was more in the story 13 in the regular configuration.

NI NI WIN1, KYAW LIN HTAT [7] studied static and dynamic analysis of irregular reinforced concrete
building due to earthquake. In the study, computer aided analysis of twelve-storied reinforced concrete building was
© 2016, IJERMT All Rights Reserved Page | 17
 Kakpure et al., International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology
ISSN: 2278-9359 (Volume-5, Issue-12)
carried out for static and dynamic analysis by using ETABS (Extended Three dimensional Analysis of Building System)
software. Load consideration was based on Uniformed Building Code (UBC-1997). The structure was designed in
accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI-318-99) design code. Firstly, the proposed building was analyzed
with static analysis. Secondly, dynamic analysis with response spectrum method was used. In this paper, the results of
static and dynamic (response spectrum) analysis such as displacement, storey shear, storey moment and storey drift were
compared. Authors found that,
 In X-direction, displacements obtained static analysis were less than dynamic (response spectrum) analysis from
storey 1 to 4 but were higher than in response spectrum from storey 5 to 12. In Y-direction, displacements
obtained in static analysis were less than dynamic (response spectrum) analysis. (Fig 2)
 The difference of storey moment between static and response spectrum analysis was higher in X-direction than
in Y-direction. In both directions, the difference of storey drift was insignificant. For irregular high-rise
buildings, static analysis was insufficient and it would be prudent to use dynamic analysis.

Fig. 2 Maximum Storey Moment of Stories in Static and Response Spectrum method in X-direction

E. Pavan Kumar, A. Naresh [8] studied the seismic analysis of structure by static and dynamic analysis in
ordinary moment resisting frame and special moment resisting frame. Equivalent static analysis and response spectrum
analysis were the methods used in structural seismic analysis. They considered a residential building of G+ 15 story for
the seismic analysis that was located in zone II. The total structure was analyzed by computer using STAAD.PRO
software (Fig 3).
The static and dynamic analysis of OMRF and SMRF was carried out and it was concluded that,
 The special moment resisting frame structure was good in resisting seismic loads.
 The results of static analysis in OMRF & SMRF values were low when comparing to that of dynamic analysis in
OMRF & SMRF values. Hence the performance of dynamic analysis SMRF structure was quite good in
resisting the earthquake forces compared to that of the static analysis OMRF & SMRF.

Fig. 3 Static & dynamic analysis of Displacement in SMRF

A. S. Patil and P. D. Kumbhar [9] studied nonlinear dynamic analysis of a ten storied RCC building considering
different seismic intensities and seismic response of the building was studied. The building under consideration was
modeled with the help of SAP 2000 Software. Five different time histories had been used considering seismic intensities
V, VI, VII, VIII, IX and X on Modified Mercalli's Intensity scale (MMI) for establishment of relationship between
seismic intensities and seismic responses. Authors concluded that, similar variation patterns were observed in Seismic
responses such as base shear and storey displacements with intensities V to X. From the study it was recommended that
analysis of multistoried RCC buildings using Time History method was necessary to ensure safety against earthquake force.
T. Mahdi, V Soltangharaie [10] studied seismic behavior of three concrete intermediate moment-resisting space
frames with unsymmetrical plan in five, seven and ten stories. In each of these three cases, plan configurations of the
structure contained reentrant corners. Nonlinear static and linear dynamic procedures had been used to analyze these
structures. To measure the accuracy of these two methods, the non-linear dynamic analysis had been used. Although the
differences between the results of these two methods with the nonlinear dynamic procedure were quite wide, the linear
dynamic analysis showed slightly better results than nonlinear static analysis.

© 2016, IJERMT All Rights Reserved Page | 18

 Kakpure et al., International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology
ISSN: 2278-9359 (Volume-5, Issue-12)
Bahador Bagheri, Ehsan Salimi Firoozabad et al [11] studied static and dynamic analysis of Multi-storey
irregular buildings. A 20 storied building had been modeled using software packages ETABS and SAP 2000 v.15 for
seismic zone V in India. Dynamic response of building under actual earthquakes, EL-CENTRO 1949 and CHI-CHI
Taiwan 1999 had been investigated. The storey plan was changing on different floors. The building had been analyzed by
using the equivalent static, response spectrum and time history analysis, based on IS codes.
The authors concluded that,
 The maximum displacement was increasing from first storey to last one as height of building increased.
 The maximum displacement of center of mass, obtained by time history analysis for both earthquakes at 16th
floor was less than 15th floor which was against the general trend line. It was as a result of plan properties in
those stories where the location of center of mass changed in X and Y directions.(Fig.4 and Fig.5)
 Building with severe irregularity produced more deformation than those with less irregularity particularly in
high seismic zones. Conjointly the storey overturning moment varied inversely with height of the storey.
 The storey base shear for regular building is highest compare to irregular shaped buildings.

Fig. 4 Maximum Displacement of Center of Mass in Y- direction

Fig. 5 Maximum Displacement of Center of Mass in X-direction

III. CONCLUSION
This paper presents a review of the comparison of static and dynamic analysis multistoried building. Design
parameters such as Displacement, Bending moment, Base shear, Storey drift, Torsion, Axial Force were the focus of the
study. It was found that,
 The difference of values of displacement between static and dynamic analysis is insignificant for lower stories
but the difference is increased in higher stories and static analysis gives higher values than dynamic analysis.
 Static analysis is not sufficient for high rise buildings and it’s necessary to provide dynamic analysis.
 Building with re-entrant corners experienced more lateral drift and reduction in base shear capacity compared to
regular building
 When compared to irregular configuration the story drift value is more in the regular configuration. Story drift is
increased as height of building increased.
 Base shear value is more in the zone 5 and that in the soft soil in irregular configuration.
 Irregular shapes are severely affected during earthquakes especially in high seismic zones.
 The irregular shape building undergoes more deformation and hence regular shape building must be preferred.
 The results of equivalent static analysis are approximately uneconomical because values of displacement are
higher than dynamic analysis.

REFERENCES
[1] Balaji.U and Selvarasan M.E “Design And Analysis of Multi Storied Building Under Static And Dynamic
Loading Condition Using ETABS.” International Journal of Technical Research and Applications Volume 4,
Issue 4. (July-Aug, 2016)
[2] Anirudh Gottala, Dr.shaik Yajdhani “Comparative Study of Static and Dynamic seismic Analysis of
Multistoried Building.” IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering | Volume 2 | Issue
01 | July 2015.

© 2016, IJERMT All Rights Reserved Page | 19

 Kakpure et al., International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology
ISSN: 2278-9359 (Volume-5, Issue-12)
[3] Mahesh N. Patil, Yogesh N. Sonawane “Seismic Analysis of Multistoried Building”, International Journal of
Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT), Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015.
[4] Mohammed Rizwan Sultan, D. Gouse Peera “Dynamic Analysis Of Multi-storey building for different shapes”,
International Journal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering (IJIRAE), Issue 8, Volume 2 (August
2015).
[5] Mohit Sharma, Dr. Savita Maru “Dynamic Analysis of Multistoried Regular Building.” IOSR Journal of
Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 11, Issue 1
Ver. II (Jan. 2014).
[6] Mr. S.Mahesh, Mr. Dr.B.Panduranga Rao “Comparison of analysis and design of regular and irregular
configuration of multi Story building in various seismic zones and various types of soils using ETABS and
STAAD”,Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE), Volume 11, Issue 6 (Nov- Dec. 2014).
[7] NI NI WIN, KYAM LIN HTAT “Comparative Study of Static and Dynamic Analysis of Irregular Reinforced
Concrete Building due to Earthquake”, International journal of scientific engineering and technology research,
Volume3, Issue7, May-2014.
[8] E.Pavan Kumar,A.Naresh “Earthquake Analysis of Multi Storied Residential Building - A Case Study” E. Pavan
Kumar et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 11( Version
1), November 2014, pp.59-64
[9] A.S patil and P.D kumbar “Time History Analysis of Multistoried RCC Building for Different Seismic
Intensities”, Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg, Vol. 2, No. 3. August 2013.
[10] T.Mahdi, V.Soltangharaie “Static and Dynamic Analyses of Asymmetric Reinforced Concrete Frame”2012.
[11] Bahador Bagheri, Ehsan Salimi Firoozabad and Mohammadreza Yahyaei “Comparative Study of the Static and
Dynamic Analysis of Multi-Storey Irregular Building” International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural,
Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:6, No:11, 2012.

© 2016, IJERMT All Rights Reserved Page | 20