Seismic Behaviour of RC Building Frame With

Different Bracing System

Mohammed Zakir Mustafa[1], Sharath H P[2].
[1]
Post-Graduate Student, [2]Assistant Professor.
Department of Civil engineering, SJCE.
Mysuru, India
e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract— In multistoried buildings steel braced frames is used in resisting lateral loads. For strengthening or strengthening seismically
inadequate reinforced concrete frame the use of steel bracing is a viable solution for inducing seismic resistance. An analytical study is
required to be performed to gain understanding into the behavior of braced frame under earthquake loading. By using steel bracings
drift is controlled and collapse is prevented. Steel bracings system occupies less space, easy to erect and has flexibility to design for meeting
the required strength and stiffness. In RC buildings strength and stiffness is increased by the use of steel bracings to be safe against
natural forces like Earthquake. In this study G+20 building frame is analyzed with different bracing systems under seismic loading in
seismic zones III, IV, V. as per IS 1893-2002. E-TABS Software is used for the analysis of the building frame. The results of various
bracing systems (X-Bracing, V-Bracing, K-Bracing, Inverted V-Bracing, and Inverted K-Bracing) are compared with bare frame model
analysis. The effectiveness of various types of bracing systems is studied in order to control the lateral displacement, storey drift & member
forces in the frame. It is found that all the bracing systems control the lateral displacement very effectively. Therefore the object of the
study is to determine the degree of effectiveness of different bracing arrangements to increase the sustainability of the RC frame against
the effects of Earthquake.

Keywords—Steel Bracing; Seismic analysis; Moment frame; Strengthening; Seismic zone.

available. The performance of the building is compared for the

I. INTRODUCTION different bracing system arrangements.
Structures are built to facilitate the performance of various
activities, and all the structures should be capable of sustaining
the loads coming on them during the service life of the structure.
Structure should have adequate strength, stiffness and durability. II. METHODS OF BRACING
Strength of the structure depends on the quality of materials used The Different bracing methods fall into two main categories,
for the construction and stiffness depends on the geometrical as namely
well as cross sectional property of the structure. Earthquake
happens when there is a disturbance at some depth below ground  External bracing,
level causing the vibration of ground surface. Concrete and  Internal bracing.
masonry shear walls are commonly used to increase the in-plane
shear resistance of RC-framed buildings subjected to earthquake In the external bracing method, existing buildings are
loading. Steel bracing of RC frames has recently been shown to retrofitted by attaching a local or global steel bracing system to
be a suitable alternative to shear wall. There are many the exterior (and occasionally interior) frames. Architectural
strengthening measures available for reinforced concrete concerns and difficulties encountered while connecting the steel
frames. Using steel bracing the strength of the existing building bracing to the RC frames are two of the main shortcomings of
can be increased efficiently. The steel bracing could be a viable this method.
alternative or supplement to shear wall in concrete framed In the internal bracing method, the buildings are retrofitted
buildings in seismic areas. Diagonal bracings provide an by positioning a bracing system inside the individual bays of the
excellent approach for strengthening and stiffening existing RC frames. The bracing may be attached to the RC frame either
building for lateral forces. Bracing are of different types and indirectly or directly. In the indirect internal bracing, a braced
their behavior during earthquake is different. Steel bracing are steel frame is positioned inside the RC frame. As a result, the
more economical compared to other strengthening methods transfer of load between the steel bracing and the concrete frame
available, easy to erect, occupies less space. The seismic is carried out indirectly through the steel frame. This method of
strength and stiffness of framed structures can be efficiently and internal bracing can be costly and technical difficulties in fixing
economically increased using steel braicngs. the steel frame to the RC frame can be inhibiting.
The study carried out in using the steel bracings for RC The direct internal bracing method, overcomes the
frames is focused on the strengthening aspect of the bracing. In aforementioned shortcomings of the indirect internal bracing
recent years the use of steel bracing to RC frames has attracted system. In this method, steel braces are directly connected to the
more attention since it is more economical and can be adopted RC frames without the use of intermediary steel frame. The
not only for strengthening purposes but also as viable alternative direct internal bracing method was proposed not only as a
to the other strengthening techniques available. retrofit measure for existing buildings, but also as a shear-
The purpose of this study is to present the results of resisting element to be used in the seismic design of new
analytical study carried out on the reinforced concrete frame and buildings. Recent experimental and theoretical studies
to investigate the seismic behavior of reinforced concrete frame conducted by Maheri, Tasnimi and Massomi and Abou- Elfath
with steel bracing systems as one of the Strengthening schemes and Gobarah have shown that by using appropriate forms of
internal bracing, it is possible to increase the lateral resistance of is analyzed for different bracing systems such as X Bracing, V
the concrete frame to the desired level whilst maintaining or, if Bracings, K-Bracings, Inverted V & Inverted K bracings. Both
necessary, enhancing the ductility of the brace / frame system. Equivalent static and Response spectrum method of analysis is
been performed for analysis.
In this study, Analysis using direct internal bracing method
is carried out. Different brace patterns are used in direct
internally braced steel frame. Examples of these patterns include
V-bracing, K-bracing, X-bracing and Y-bracing. Most of these
patterns utilize beam segments as active links. In direct
internally braced frame, forces are transferred to the brace
members through bending and shear forces developed in the
ductile steel link. The link is designed to act as a fuse by yielding
and dissipating energy while preventing buckling of the brace
members. Well-designed links provide a stable source of energy
dissipation. Figure 1 shows the connection between steel bracing
and RCC moment resisting frame.

Gusset
Fig 3. Plan of Proposed Structure

Fig 1. Connection between RC frame and Steel Bracing

Fig 4. Location of Bracings

Fig 2. Types of Bracings

III. MODELLING
E-TABS software is used for the 3D model and analysis of
the building. The software is capable of predicting the behavior
of space frame under different loading conditions, considering
both geometric non linearity and material in elasticity. The
software has the capacity to perform static analysis and as well
as dynamic analysis.

A. Model Description
The building is model as a series of load resist elements.
Based on the Indian standard code lateral loads are apply on the
building. The study is performed for seismic zones III, IV, V as
per IS 1893 (part 1): 2002. The building considered consists of
reinforced concrete and brick masonry element. The building is
assumed to be tightly fixed at the base storey. Twenty storey Fig 5. Elevation in of Building Frame
building is analyzed for gravity loads and seismic forces. Model
 comparability, lateral displacements at each floor level for all
bracings systems bare frame, X, V, K, Inverted V, Inverted K
Bracing systems in seismic zone V is considered in this analysis
is shown in Figure 7 to 10.

TABLE III. MAX DISPLACEMENT IN FRAME IN X DIRECTION

Displacements (mm) Structure in X (Transverse) Direction

Structure Type Zone-III Zone-IV Zone-V
Bare Frame 69.512 104.238 156.32
X Bracing 62.74 94.08 141.084
V Bracing 63.451 95.145 142.684
K Bracing 65.907 98.82 148.212
Inverted V Bracing 62.787 94.146 141.185
Inverted K Bracing
65.132 97.665 146.465

3D View of Structure DISPLACEMENT IN X DIRECTION

Max Displacement (mm) at Top Floor

Fig 6.
180
B. Data of Building 160
140
TABLE I. MATERIAL AND GEOMETRY DATA 120
100
Material and Geometry Data 80
Depth of foundation 2.5m 60
Typical storey height 3.5m 40 Zone-III
No of storeys G+20 20 Zone-IV
Grade of concrete M30 0
Zone-V
Grade of Steel Fe500
Beam Size in X 230x700
Beam Size in Y 230x500
Column Size Varies
Slab Thickness 150mm
Structure Type
TABLE II. LOADING DATA

Loading Data Fig 7. Max lateral displacement in X direction

Live Load 4 kN/sqm
Finishing Load 1 kN/sqm
Wall loads in X-dir 11.8kN/m
Wall loads in Y-dir 12.6kN/m DISPLACEMENT IN X DIRECTION
Seismic Zone III, IV & V
180
Soil Type Hard soil 160 BARE
Importance Factor 1 140 FRAME
Displacement (mm)

Response reduction Factor 5 (SMRF) X-BRACING

120
100 V-BRACING
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 80
60 K-BRACING
The results for displacements, Base shear, storey Drift,
Bending moment & Shear force in Beams and Columns for 40
20 INVERTED
different building models are presented. Based on the results the V-BRACING
most suitable type of bracing is suggested for strengthening of 0 INVERTED
the structure. Hence effect of addition of different types of
ROOF
18th
15th
12th

3rd
9th
6th

GROUND

V-BRACING
bracings systems is studied by performing seismic analysis.

A. Lateral Displacements
The maximum lateral displacements for different bracing Storey Level
systems in zones III, IV, V are presented in tables III & IV for
Equivalent Static Method. On behalf of enhanced Fig 8. Displacement at Storey Level
 TABLE IV. MAX DISPLACEMENT IN FRAME IN Y DIRECTION As per 1893-2002 (Part 1) The maximum lateral
Displacements (mm) Structure in Y (Transverse) Direction displacement in structure should not be more than 0.4% of the
height of structure.
Structure Type Zone-III Zone-IV Zone-V Height of building above G.L.=70m (0.4%of70m=280mm)
Bare Frame Lateral displacement of structure in seismic zone V is 280.48.
124.66 186.992 280.481
Hence lateral strengthening should be provided for
X Bracing 71.047 106.562 159.83 structure to resist the seismic loads.
V Bracing 75.34 113.02 169.492
K Bracing 83.358 125.026 187.52  The lateral displacement is found to be maximum for
Inverted V Bracing 73.857 110.778 166.159 zone V than the building located in zone III, IV. The
Inverted K Bracing seismic intensity of zone V is very severe.
81.567 122.342 183.505  The lateral displacement is maximum for roof level
and decreases gradually at lower storeys.
 The bare frames have greater lateral displacements
than the frames with the different bracings systems in
DISPLACEMENT IN Y DIRECTION
Max Displacement (mm) at Top Floor

all seismic zones considered.

300  The building frames with X-Bracing systems have min
250 probable lateral displacement as compared to other
200 types of bracing systems.
150 B. Base Shear
100 Base shear is the total lateral force on the structure. During
50 Zone-III the earthquake structures do not remain stiff, it deflects, and thus
0 base shear is distributed all along the height of the building. The
Zone-IV
base shear of bare frame and different bracings systems of the
Zone-V frame for seismic zones III, IV, V are found. The values obtained
from the analysis are tabulated in the Table V and in Fig 11.

TABLE V. BASE SHEAR

Structure Type Structure Type Zone-III Zone-IV Zone-V

Bare Frame 2502 3753 5629
X Bracing 2941 4412 6618
Fig 9. Max lateral displacement in Y direction
V Bracing 2883 4324 6486
K Bracing 2694 4041 6062
Inverted V Bracing 2916 4374 6562
DISPLACEMENT IN Y DIRECTION Inverted K Bracing 2725 4087 6131

300
250 BARE Base Shear EQ-X
FRAME
Displacement (mm)

200 X-BRACING 7000

6000
150 V-BRACING 5000
Base Shear EQx (Kn)

4000
100 3000
K-BRACING
2000 Zone-III
50 1000
INVERTED Zone-IV
0 0
V-BRACING
INVERTED Zone-V
ROOF

3rd
18th
15th
12th
9th
6th

GROUND

V-BRACING

Storey Level Structure Type

Fig 10. Displacement at Storey Level Fig 11. Max Base Shear

From Table III & IV the following observations are made From table V following observations are made.
The maximum lateral displacement at roof level of It has been observed that the base shear is least for bare
unbraced structure in seismic zone V, as presented in table IV frames in all zones considered, as compared to different bracings
has Just Exceeded the limiting value of maximum lateral systems. Base shear in Braced frames is increased due to the
displacement, as specified in IS 1893-2002 (Part 1). increased dead weight of bracings.
C. Max B.M. in Columns From the Table VI & VII the following observations are
The maximum SF and BM for Beams and Column are made
obtained in bare frames in seismic zones III, IV, V. and it is  It can be seen that the Bending Moment in corner
compared with all type of bracings considered. It is practical that columns is more in braced frames, due to the transfer
bracings decrease the SF and BM in Beams and Columns. The of member forces to the junction of corner columns.
values thus obtained are presented in the tables VI & VII.
 Bending moments M3, in the outer columns in face
where bracing is provided is significantly reduced by
TABLE VI. MAX BENDING MOMENT M3 IN OUTER COLUMN
the provision of bracings. Moments is minimum for X-
Structure Type Zone-III Zone-IV Zone-V bracings.
Bare Frame 177.5 280.41 434.78  The percentage increase in the moments in corner
X Bracing 143.05 228.97 357.92 columns due to the provision of bracings is nearly equal
to percentage reduction of moments in outer columns.
V Bracing 149.2 238.2 371.71
K Bracing 166.41 264.08 410.39
D. Storey Drift
Inverted V Bracing 145.3 232.3 362.78
It is the displacement of one floor with respect to the other
Inverted K Bracing 161.73 256.87 399.58 floor below or above. Is1893-2002 specifies the storey drift in
any storey due to the min specific design lateral force, shall not
MAX MOMENTS IN OUTER COLUMN go over 0.004 times the storey height. So the minimum damage
would take place during the earthquake. The storey drift at each
floor of different frame models for different bracing systems in
500
seismic zones III, IV, V is presented in Fig 14 & 15.
Max moments M3 (KN-m)

400
300
200
100 Zone-III STOREY DRIFT IN X DIRECTION
0 0.003 BARE
Zone-IV
0.0025 FRAME
Zone-V X-BRACING
0.002
Storey Drift

0.0015 V-BRACING
Structure Type
0.001 K-BRACING
Fig 12. Max Bending Moment M3 in outer Columns 0.0005
INVERTED
0 V-BRACING
TABLE VII. MAX BENDING MOMENT IN CORNER COLUMN
ROOF
18th
15th
12th

3rd
9th
6th

GROUND
Structure Type Zone-III Zone-IV Zone-V
Bare Frame 273.16 415.833 629.832 Storey Level
X Bracing 324.48 498.66 765.55 Fig 14. Storey Drift in X Direction
V Bracing 316.341 486.297 741.233
K Bracing 337.21 502.7 750.95
Inverted V Bracing 320.688 493.047 751.568
Inverted K Bracing 294.69 453.124 690.765 STOREY DRIFT IN Y DIRECTION
0.006 BARE
MAX MOMENTS CORNER IN COLUMNS FRAME
0.005 X-BRACING
1000
0.004
Max moments M3 (KN-m)

800 V-BRACING
Storey Drift

600 0.003
K-BRACING
400
Zone-III 0.002
200 INVERTED
0 Zone-IV 0.001 V-BRACING
INVERTED
Zone-V 0 K-BRACING
ROOF
18th
15th
12th

3rd
9th
6th

GROUND

Structure Type Storey Level

Fig 13. Max Bending Moment M3 in Corner Columns Fig 15. Storey Drift in Y Direction
From the Figure XIV & XV the following observations are  Base shear in building with braced frames is increased
made due to the increased dead weight of bracings.
 It can be seen that the storey drift in X direction is  Though the BM in corner columns increases due to
within limiting value (0.004). Drift is maximum for provision of bracings, Bracings reduce the BM and SF
bare, and reduction of storey drift in braced frames is in Beams and Outer Columns, and the lateral load is
not much significant. transferred axially.
 Storey drift of structure in Y direction substantially  Steel bracings may be used as a strengthening to the
exceeds the limiting value (0.004) in bare frame. By the existing building.
provision of bracings, storey drift is reduced
significantly, well below the limiting value.  By using steel bracings as a force resisting member the
safety against collapse of the structure has been
 The structure with X-Bracing system have minimum increased.
probable storey drift as compared to other types of
bracing systems.  Steel bracings for RC frame are the major lateral load
resisting system for RC structure.
V. CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
In the present work, behavior of braced RC frame has been
studied by performing analytical investigations. A RC building [1] S.K Duggal “Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures”.
frame has been analyzed bare frame model and by providing Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2009.
different bracing systems. The following are the conclusions, [2] IS 1893-2002 (part 1) “ Criteria for Earthquake Resistant
 The conception of using steel bracing is beneficial Design of Structures”, Part-1 General Provisions and
which can be used to resist the seismic forces. buildings, fifth Revision, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi, India.
 By providing steel bracings lateral displacement is
reduced substantially (up to 44%) as compared to bare [3] IS 456-2000, “Code of Practice for plain and Reinforced
frame. Concrete”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
[4] IS 875-1987 (Part 1) Code of Practice for design loads (other
 The X-Bracing system has least lateral displacements
than Earthquake) for building and structures, Bureau of
in all seismic zones considered, as compare to other
Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
type of bracing systems.
[5] IS 875-1987 (Part 2) Code of Practice for design loads (other
 Bracing reduces storey drift more efficiently (up to than Earthquake) for building and structures, Bureau of
48%) as compared to bare frame. Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.