International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF VERTICAL IRREGULAR RC FRAMES WITH SHEAR

WALL AT DIFFERENT POSITIONS USING STAAD-Pro
Pushpendra Singh kushwah1, Sachin Kumar Dangi2, Dr. Aslam Hussain3
1PG Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, UIT-RGPV Bhopal
2,3 Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, UIT-RGPV Bhopal
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - The greatest challenge for any structural engineer and rigidity. Vertically irregular buildings such as stepped
in today’s scenario is to design seismic-resistant structures. A buildings are having discontinuities with respect to
regular building, i.e. having mass and stiffness uniformly geometry.
distributed through its height behaves normally. The presence
of vertical irregular frame subject to devastating earthquakes Different types of vertical irregularities are as follows-
is a matter of concern. Points of sudden change in stiffness, 1.1.1 Stiffness Irregularity
mass and strength in buildings are known as weak points. It is
essential to study the consequence of irregularity on the a) Soft Storey
response of structure to lateral loads for the safety and design
of irregular building. Here we study the proportional A soft storey is one in which the lateral stiffness is less than
distribution of lateral forces evolved through seismic action in 70 percent of that in the storey above or less than 80 percent
each storey level due to changes in mass and stiffness of frame of the average lateral stiffness of the three storey above.
on vertically irregular structures. The effect of mass and
b) Extreme Soft Storey
stiffness irregularity of G + 11-storeyed vertical geometric
irregular building with shear wall are studied in zone IV in A extreme soft storey is one in which the lateral stiffness is
accordance with IS 1893:2002 part (1) using STAAD-PRO V8i less than 60 percent of that in the storey above or less than
software. Method of linear static analysis is used to evaluate 70 percent of the average stiffness of the three storey above.
response of the structure in the form of bending moment, base
shear, lateral displacement and storey drift. Responses are 1.1.2 Mass Irregularity
plotted and compared; discussions and conclusions have been
made from the results. Mass irregularity shall be considered to exist where the
seismic weight of any storey is more than 200 percent of that
Key Words: Vertical Geometric1, irregular buildings2, of its adjacent storey. The irregularity need not be
Seismic response parameters3, Shear Wall4, STAAD-Pro5, considered in case of roofs.
etc.
1.1.3 Vertical Geometric irregularity
1. INTRODUCTION
Vertical geometric irregularity shall be considered to exist
A natural disaster is a major adverse incident resulting from where the horizontal dimension of the lateral force resisting
natural processes of the Earth which includes floods, system in any storey is more than 150 percent of that in its
hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, adjacent storey.
tsunamis, and other geologic processes. In which earthquake
1.1.4 Discontinuity in Capacity - Weak Storey
is the most terrible and unpredictable phenomenon of
nature. Earthquake is the vibration of earth’s surface caused A weak storey is one in which the storey lateral strength is
by waves coming from a source of disturbance inside the less than 80 percent of that in the storey above. The storey
earth. As the waves radiate from the fault, they undergo lateral strength is the total strength of all seismic force
geometric scattering and reduction due to loss of energy in resisting elements sharing the storey shear in the considered
the rocks. Since the interior of the earth consists of direction.
heterogeneous formations, the waves undergo multiple
reflections, retraction, dispersion and reduction as they 1.3 SHEAR WALL
travel. The seismic waves arriving at a site on the surface of
the earth are a result of complex superposition giving rise to Shear wall is a lateral load resisting system. A shear wall is a
irregular motion and shaking of ground. structural member which is designed to resist shear, the
lateral force acting on the structure that causes the bulk of
1.1 Concept of vertical irregular geometric structure damage in earthquakes. Shear walls have very high in plane
stiffness and strength, which can be used to simultaneously
It is seen that irregular structural configurations either in resist large horizontal loads and support gravity loads,
plan or in elevation were often recognized as one of the making them quite advantageous. Many building codes
major causes of collapse during precedent earthquakes. In mandate the use of such walls to make homes safer and
this study we are consider vertical irregularities in elevation. more stable, and learning about them is an important part of
Vertical irregularities are described by vertical geometric an architectural education.
discontinuity in the structure, distribution of mass, strength
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2498
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Reinforced concrete (RC) buildings often have vertical with mass irregularities at third & seventh floor. To response
plate-like RC walls called Shear Walls shown in Figure 6 in parameters like story drift, story deflection and story shear of
addition to slabs, beams and columns. These walls generally structure under seismic force under the linear static &
start at foundation level and are continuous throughout the dynamic analysis is studied. This analysis shows focuses on
building height. Their thickness can be as low as 150mm, or the base shear carrying capacity of a structure and
as high as 400mm in high rise buildings. Shear walls are performance level of structure under sever zone of India. The
usually provided along both length and width of buildings. result remarks the conclusion that, a building structure with
Shear walls are like vertically-oriented wide beams that mass irregularity provides instability and attracts huge
carry earthquake loads downwards to the foundation. storey shear. A proportionate amount of mass is
advantageous to control over the storey and base shear.
1.4 NEED OF THE STUDY
T Berhanu (2016)
India is a developing country. Due to the economic and
population growth in India, residential requirement is very In this study, the importance of different bracing systems in
high. Because of this reason construction of multistory the multistory RC frame structure a linear analysis of
buildings is increasing on plain as well as sloping ground. different story buildings are considered i.e., 4story (G+3),
Irregular buildings behave different from those in plains 6story (G+5), 9story (G+8), and 13story (G+12) of three bays
when subjected to lateral loads due to earthquake. So we by five bays RC building for seismic zone IV have been
required the seismic analysis of the irregular building analyzed with four different types of steel bracing at the
constructed on the hilly areas and also required to make this exterior of the frame in the same location and the same
building earthquake resistant for safety purpose. Reinforced pattern. The bracings studied are diagonal brace, X-brace, V-
concrete framed buildings are adequate for resisting both brace and inverted V-brace (chevron brace) and performance
the vertical and horizontal load acting on them. Vertical of each frame has been carried out using linear static analysis.
geometric irregularities mainly affect the height and Two types of arrangements has been used;3x1braced (3bays
configuration of building. By this comparative study we find out of 5 and 1bay out of 3 are braced) and corner braced
out best configuration in seismic zone IV. (corners are braced in all direction) and all frames are
analyzed without bracing and with all types of bracing, a total
This study has been described to determine best of 40 different models are analyzed and compared using
configuration of building based on its linear behavior. A RC nonlinear finite element software ETAB
building (G+11 stories) with proper plan and elevation has
been considered to carry out this study. Rana, D. and Raheem, J., (2015)

1.5 OBJECTIVES This work shows the performance & behavior of regular &
vertical geometric irregular RCC framed structure under
The main objectives of this study are:- seismic motion. Five types of building geometry are taken in
this project: one regular frame & four irregular frames. A
1. To calculate the design lateral forces on irregular
comparative study is made between all these building
buildings using staad pro analysis and to compare the
configurations height wise and bay wise. All building frames
results of different structures.
are modeled & analyzed in software Staad Pro V8i. Various
2. To study three irregularities in structures namely mass, seismic responses like shear force, bending moment, storey
stiffness and vertical geometry irregularities. drift, storey displacement, etc. are obtained. The seismic
analysis is done according to IS 1893:2002 part (1). Seismic
3. To compare the behavior of RC building with shear wall zone IV & medium soil strata are taken for all the cases. The
and without shear wall on sloping ground. change in the different seismic response is observed along
different height. The seismic performance of regular frame is
4. To find the best position of the shear wall. found to be better than corresponding irregular frames in
nearly all the cases. Therefore it should be constructed to
5. To calculate the response of buildings subjected to minimize the seismic effects.
various types of ground motions mainly high frequency
ground motion using staad pro analysis and to compare 3. MODELLING
the results.
STAAD-Pro Software is used for modelling of the building
2. LITERATURE REVIEW frame. For every structure a 3D model is developed. In the
study we have considered a G+11 storey RC building on plan
Shaikh Sameer and S. B. Shinde (September-October 2016) ground and 2 different position of the shear wall are used
The present paper attempts to investigate the proportional with bare frame.
distribution of lateral forces evolved through seismic action Two different positions of shear wall used in this thesis are:-
in each storey level due to changes in mass of frame on
vertically irregular frame. a G+10 vertically irregular building  Shear wall at corner
is modeled as an simplified lump mass model for the analysis  Shear wall at middle
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2499
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

In this thesis, different configurations of building with and 3.2 ELEVATION OF DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION OF THE
without shear wall are analysed in seismic zone IV and BUILDING
different attempt has been made to find the best structure
out of them. There are total 9 cases are modelled and
analysed with the help of STAAD pro.

3.1 MODELLING DESCRIPTION

A rectangular building considered for analysis is

symmetric in plan and elevation. Plan dimension of the
building to be modelled is 18mx18m. It consists of four bays
of 3m each in longer and shorter direction respectively.

Table 3.1 Details and dimension of the building models

Title Specifications
Plan Size 18mX18m
Floor height 3m
Spacing in X direction 3m
Fig. 3.1 Elevation and 3D view of Model 1
Spacing in Y direction 3m
Beam sizes 400 x 250 mm
Column sizes 400 x 400 mm
Slab thickness 150 mm
Live load 3 KN/m²
Floor finish 1 KN/m²
Concrete Grade M25
Poisson ratio 0.17
Compressive strength 25000 KN/m²
Steel Fe 415

Fig. 3.2 Elevation and 3D view of Model 2

Figure-3.1 Common plan for all building frame model

Fig. 3.1 Elevation and 3D view of Model 3

© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2500
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

4. METHODOLOGY For G+11 Masonry wall Load

External Wall = 0.25 m x 2.5 m x 20 kN/m3 = 12.5 kN/m
The growth in computer processing power has made
possible a continuous drive towards increasingly accurate Internal Wall = 0.125 m x 2.5 m x 20 kN/m3 = 6.25 kN/m
but at the same time more complex analysis method. Thus
the state of the art has progressively moved from elastic Live Loads: according to IS code 875 (part-2) 1987
static analysis to dynamic elastic, non-linear static and finally Live Load = 3 kN/m2
nonlinear dynamic analysis.
Live Load on earthquake calculation = 0.75 kN/m2
In the present scenario, because of the wide range of
geometry possible, the accumulated understanding is still 4.2.2 Lateral load
limited, thus there is need of an attempt to investigate the
For the lateral load analysis we use Static Method as per IS
behavior of vertical geometrically RCC building frame.
1893 (Part1):2002
4.1 STEPS INVOLVED IN THE STUDY
Seismic Loads:
This paper includes comparative study of behavior of
Seismic calculation according to IS code 1893 (2002)
structure with 12th storey frames with shear wall and with
shear wall. A comparison in analysis results as displacement, Seismic zone- V
moments, shear forces and storey displacement, base shear
Zone factor: 3.6
has been carried out as a result
Importance Factor: 1
Step-1 Selection of building frame i.e. G+11
Response Reduction Factor: 5
Step-2 Selection of three different types of vertical geometry
irregularities in structure with 3m storey height with same Damping: 5%
bay width 3m in both horizontal directions. Soil Type: Medium Soil (Assumed)
Step-3 Define the position of the shear wall (at corner, and Period in X direction (PX):0.09ℎ/√𝑑x seconds
middle) (Clause 7.6.2)
Step-4 Selection of seismic zone IV
Step-5 Formation of load combinations = = 0.760 seconds
Step-6 Modelling of building frame using STAAD Pro Period in Z direction (PZ): 0.09ℎ/√𝑑z seconds
software (Clause 7.6.2)

Step-7 Analysis of all the cases which are considered in the

study
= = 0.760 seconds
Step-8 Comparative study on basis of these parameters –
Where h is the height of the building in meter
Maximum Displacement
dx= dimension of building along X direction in meter
Maximum bending moment
dz = dimension of building along Z direction in meter
Maximum shear force
4.3 LOAD COMBINATION
Maximum axial force
Load case no. Load cases details
Base shear force
1. E.Q. IN X DIR.
4.2 LOAD CALCULATION 2. E.Q. IN Z DIR.
3. DEAD LOAD
4.2.1 Gravity load
4. LIVE LOAD
For the Gravity loads on the structure include the self-weight 5. 1.5 (DL)
of beams, columns, slabs and other permanent members. The 6. 1.2 (DL + LL)
self-weight of beams, columns (Frame members) and slabs 7. 1.5 (DL + LL)
(Area section) were automatically considered by the program 8. 1.5 (DL + EQX)
itself.
9. 1.5 (DL - EQX)
Dead Loads: according to IS code 875 (part 1) 1987 10. 1.5 (DL + EQZ)
11. 1.5 (DL - EQZ)
Self-weight of structure

© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2501
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

12. 1.2 (DL + LL + EQX)  Axial Force

13. 1.2 (DL + LL - EQX)
 Bending Moment
14. 1.2 (DL + LL + EQZ)
15. 1.2 (DL + LL - EQZ)
 Base shear
16. 0.9 (DL) + 1.5 (EQX) 5.1 MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT
17. 0.9 (DL) + 1.5 (EQZ)
18. 0.9 (DL) - 1.5 (EQX) Maximum displacement of all the models in seismic zone-IV
19. 0.9 (DL) - 1.5 (EQZ) are shown in fig 5.1

4.4 LOADING CASES 140

120
100 BARE MODEL
80
60 SHEAR WALL
40 AT CORNER
20 SHAER WALL
0 AT MIDDLE
Model Model 2Model 3
1

Figure No. 5.1- Maximum Displacement in X direction

 From the results it is observed that maximum

Figure 4.1- Earthquake Forces in X direction displacement is found in Model-3 in bare frame and
minimum in Model-2 with shear wall.

 We can observe that, node displacement is

increased with irregularity of building.

 It is obervered that shear wall reduces

displacement, which is nearly equal in both
locations in all models.

5.2 MAXIMUM SHEAR FORCE

Maximum shear force for all model in seismic zone-IV are

shown in fig 5.2

Figure 4.2- Earthquake Forces in Z direction

5. RESULT
All the irregular building frames with shear wall and without
shear wall are analysed with the help of STAAD Pro software.
All the models are analysed in the seismic zone IV. Using the
analysis results various graphs are plotted and compared for
all the models with different parameters.
For comparison following are the main parameters –
 Displacement
Figure No 5.2- Maximum Shear Forces
 Shear Force

© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2502
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

 From the results it is observed that maximum shear  From the results it is observed that maximum
force found in Model-3 in bare frame and minimum bending moment is found in Model-3 in bare frame
in Model-2 with shear wall. with shear wall at corner and minimum in Model-1
in bare frame.
 It is observed that, shear force is increased with
irregularity of building.  We can observe that, bending moment is increased
with irregularity of building.
 It is observed that shear force is reduced in Model-2
with shear wall at middle.  It is obervered that bending moment increases with
shear wall, maximum bending moment found in
5.3 MAXIMAUM AXIAL FORCES shear wall at corner.
Maximum axial force of all models for seismic zone IV in fig. 5.5 BASE SHEAR

Maximum base shear of all models for seismic zone-IV are

shown in fig 5.6

6000
5800
5600 Bare frame
5400
Shear wall at
5200 corner
5000 Shear wall at
4800 middle
Figure No 5.3- Maximum Axial Forces
4600
 From the results it is observed that maximum axial Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
force is found in Model-3 in bare frame with shear
wall at corner and minimum in Model-1 in bare
frame. Figure No 5.5- Maximum Base Shear

 We can observe that, axial force is increased with  From the results it is observed that maximum shear
irregularity of building. force found in Model-1 in bare frame and minimum
in Model-3
 It is obervered that axial force increases with shear
wall, maximum axial force found in shear wall at  It is observed that, base shear is reduced with
corner. irregularity of building.

5.4 MAXIMUM BENDING MOMENT  It is observed that base shear does not affected by
shear wall.
Maximum bending moment of all models for seismic zone IV
in fig 5.4 6. CONCLUSIONS
Based on static analysis of the different configurations of the
irregular building the following conclusions are drawn-

 In this study, results are decreases with

irregularities in base shear and storey drift and
results are increases with irregularities in
displacement, shear force, axial force, bending
moment.

 In this study, results are decreases with use of shear

wall in displacement, shear force, results are
increases with use of shear wall in axial force and
bending moment and do not affect the base shear.
Figure No 5.4 Maximum Bending moment
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2503
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

 There is significant improvement observed in

seismic performance of the irregular building by
providing shear walls with different configurations
since lateral displacement and member force reduce
considerably in building due to provision of shear
walls.

 It is observed that maximum displacement found in

maximum irregular structure of bare frame hence
we can say that risk increases with irregularities.

 In this study we found that, the position of the shear

wall at corner is the best position for the lateral
resisting system

REFERENCES
[1] Shaikh Sameer, J. and Shinde, S.B., Seismic response of
vertically irregular RC frame with stiffness irregularity at
ground floor.

[2] Berhanu, T., 2016. Comparative Study on the Response

of RC Frame Structure Braced With Different Steel Bracing
Systems (Doctoral dissertation, AAU).

[3] Rana, D. and Raheem, J., 2015. Seismic Analysis of

Regular & Vertical Geometric Irregular RCC Framed Building

[4] Vijayakumar, M., Manivel, M.S. and Arokiaprakash, M.A.,

2015. A Study on Seismic Performance of RCC Frame with
Various Bracing Systems using Base Isolation Technique.
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
11(10), pp.7030-7033

[5] IS 1893 : 2002, Indian Standard criteria for earthquake

resistant design of structures, Part 1General provisions and
buildings, Draft of Fifth Revision, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi, 2002.

[6] IS: 456-2000., “Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced

Concrete”, Bureau of Indian Standard, New Delhi, India.

[7] Indian Standard IS 800:2007, “General Construction in

Steel- Code of Practice (Third Revision)”, BIS New Delhi.

© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2504