Page |1

Adoptability of Euro code 8, Australian/New Zealand code and Indian

standards for seismic analysis in Sri Lankan buildings.

Final year research project

BY:
K.Akila Nadishan Perera (3529278)

Supervised by:
A.A.Hafeel Ahamed
MBA, BSc (Eng.) (Hons) (1st Class)
MSc (Stru. Eng.)
Structural Design Engineer

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BRITISH COLLEGE OF APPLIED STUDIES
AFFLIATED WITH LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY
SRI LANKA
DECEMBER 2016
 Page |2

Declaration

I declared that this is my own work dissertation does not incorporate

without acknowledgement any material previously submitted for a
degree or diploma in other university or institute of higher learning and
to the best of my knowledge and believe it does not contain any material
previously published or written by another person where the
acknowledgement is made in the text.

Also I hereby grant to university of London South Bank the

nonexclusive right to reproduce and distribute my thesis/dissertation, in
whole or part in print, electronic or other medium. I retain the right to
use this content in whole or part in future work.
 Page |3

Adoptability of Euro code 8, Australian/New Zealand code and Indian

standards for seismic analysis in Sri Lankan buildings.

Abstract

According to the virtual library first earthquake recorded in Sri Lanka in 16th Century.
(Magnitude 6.4). I caused major damaged western part of the island. They mentioned
around 200 houses are collapse in the Colombo area and 2000 people were killed. After
this record there was not any earthquakes are recoded in the past history. In 2004 tsunami
hits Indian Ocean it damaged most of the coastal areas in Sri Lanka and around 60,000
people were died. However these damaged are not occurred direct shaking of the ground.
After the 2004 earthquake, there were few tremors were reported within the island. The
last mild tremor was reported in Galle district it was felt in Galle, rathgama, kalegana,
beddegama, nugaduwa, bussa and other area. In addition, it has been recorded that series
of earthquakes are occurred in the Indian Ocean off the cost of Indonesia within 24 hours.
So, Sri Lanka can no longer be considered a safe country from the seismic actions due to
this in and around events.
This study aimed to check the adoptability of seismic code for analysis buildings in Sri
Lanka. Study mainly focused on Colombo area since government has decided develop
Colombo city as commercial hub. Lot of high rise buildings will be constructed therefore
seismic resist analysis codes will be played a major role & it will highly demandable.
In this study 11 story proposed multistoried car park building will be analyzed in Euro
Code 8 (EN 1998-1:2004), Australian standards (AS 1170.4:2007) and Indian standards
(IS 1893-1:2002) using computer aided software CSI SAP 2000 19th version. Final
judgment of the study based on the most conservative analysis method among these three
in the presence of horizontal movement and drifting.

Both three code drift values are under the perception level of performance criteria.
Among these three code (AS 1170.4:2007) are given the lowest drifting values in the
approximately similar soil types.

Key words: Inter plate earthquake, Adoptability of codes, approximately equal soil
types
 Page |4

Acknowledgement

I would like to express my deepest graduation to my supervisor

Eng. A.A.Hafeel Ahamed and civil Engineering Department for their support
and encouragement during this study. This research experience and the
understanding of the subject were of great importance for results achieved
through this study.
 Page |5

Contents
1. Background ................................................................................................................................. 6
1.1Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 6
1.2 Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Scope & objective ................................................................................................................. 7
2. Literature Review........................................................................................................................ 8
2.1 Review on existing design standards .................................................................................... 8
2.2 Selection of codes for the research ....................................................................................... 8
2.3 Ground Motion.................................................................................................................... 10
2.4 Seismic waves ..................................................................................................................... 10
2.4.1Body waves ................................................................................................................... 10
2.4.2 Surface wave ................................................................................................................ 12
2.5 Characteristics of earthquake resistant buildings ................................................................ 15
2.6 Importance classes and importance factors......................................................................... 18
2.7 Concrete building design .................................................................................................... 18
2.8 Main elements detailing according to the Euro code .......................................................... 20
2.9 Target performance level .................................................................................................... 22
2.10 Specification of hazard and defining seismic action......................................................... 25
2. 11 Structural analysis and design criteria. ............................................................................ 27
3.0 Description of the building ..................................................................................................... 30
4.0 Load Determination ................................................................................................................ 35
5.0 Results of free vibration (Modal) Analysis ............................................................................. 51
5.1 Modal shapes and direction of free vibration analysis........................................................ 53
6.0 Analysis of force vibration...................................................................................................... 56
6.1 Euro code 8 ......................................................................................................................... 56
6.2 Australian/New Zealand code ............................................................................................. 59
6.3 Indian code .......................................................................................................................... 62
7.0 Assignment of Response spectrum ......................................................................................... 64
8.0 Results related to dynamic analysis load combination. .......................................................... 67
9.0 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 75
References ..................................................................................................................................... 76
 Page |6

1. Background

1.1Introduction

Basically earth crust has divided to the tectonic plates. Sri Lanka has located in Indo-Australian
tectonic plate. Sri Lanka has located around 1000 km away from the plate boundaries (see Figure
1) so, Sri Lanka has rare chance to undergo with interplate earthquakes.

Figure 1- Tectonic plate boundaries

However there is a possible to undergo with intraplate earthquakes. So Sri Lanka cannot be
ignored from that risk. Intraplate type earthquakes can be occurred any location without a
warning. (See figure-2 Phenomenon of intraplate earthquake) Few intraplate type examples,
Mineral, Virginia in 2011 (magnitude 5.8), Indian Ocean earthquake 2012, devastating Gujarat
earthquake in 2001.it killed over 20,000 people, injuring 66,000 and destroyed nearly 400,000
homes and new castle earthquake in Australia. This region considered as non-risk area it damage
caused 4 billion Australian dollars.

Figure 2- Phenomenon of intraplate earthquake

Sri Lanka may not be undergo with seismic action very recently. However I may happen after 10
years, 25 years or more than that. Therefore, adoptability of codes should be identified the design
the buildings in Sri Lanka for possible seismic hazards. There is no any available conventional
code to analysis Sri Lankan buildings for the Seismic action. The only available document is
detailing manual it has published by society of structural engineers Sri Lanka.
So, the strong need to adopt conventional code for design Sri Lankan buildings against the
seismic action.
 Page |7

1.2 Methodology

11 story car park building is selected for this analysis. Most of upcoming new buildings will be
more than 10 stories in the Colombo area. Building will be designed by using BS 8110-1:1997
Structural use of concrete and analysis seismic loading using Euro Code 8 (EN 1998-1:2004),
Australian standards (AS 1170.4:2007) and Indian standards (IS 1893-1:2002). Plot the response
spectrums for each code and discussed the adoptability of the code.
3D computer modal prepared for the building using SAP2000 structural analysis software and
analysis under earthquake load is carried out using modal.

1.3 Scope & objective

Check the adoptability for among Euro Code 8 (EN 1998-1:2004), Australian standards (AS
1170.4:2007) and Indian standards (IS 1893-1:2002). Select most conservative analyzing method
for Sri Lanka.
 Page |8

2. Literature Review

2.1 Review on existing design standards

The development of the seismic design practice can be categorized for the study in three main
stages (Durgesh C. Rai, 2000). History method was to undertake the design seismic forces
proportionate to the seismic mass of the structure wherever so in the conventional code methods
these design seismic forces are calculated as inertial forces persuaded by the ground acceleration.
Both these approaches are mainly based on the force based design concept. On the other hand,
the future development is to adopt a displacement based design method where the non-linear
response of the structure is taken in to account by way of a great deal. The modern seismic codes
systematically implement new design theories such as performance based design methods,
nonlinear analysis methods and onwards. Even so, they still extensively use force based design
methods whereas some of the codes are now annoying to implement displacement based design
methods.

2.2 Selection of codes for the research

Basically seismic actions are occurred all around the world. Many countries design their
buildings resist to earthquakes, they have their own code or national annexes for the seismic
analysis. This review mainly based on three codes as such Euro Code 8 (EN 1998-1:2004),
Australian standards (AS 1170.4:2007) and Indian standards (IS 1893-1:2002) for check
adoptability for Sri Lanka. There were few critical factors for select these three codes for the
analysis. Euro code 8, theoretically proved code for the seismic analysis among the European
Union. Its approved by the European committee of standardization. All the British codes are
changed to the euro codes. Furthermore euro code 8 is given provision for the national choice for
define the parameters of local characteristics and design buildings for local seismic action. As
well as ongoing researches are available to nation guideline for Sri Lanka based on the euro code
8. Australian standards, Australia and Sri Lanka are located in same tectonic plate and regular
improvements are taken in to account. Indian standards, Sri Lanka and India are located in very
closely so, Indian conditions are quite similar to Sri Lanka. Basically all these codes are
following similar steps. However seismicity, soil condition and other factors unique to the
region.
 Page |9

.
Define target performance level
How building perform during and after earthquake, Building classification

Specification of hazard and define seismic action

Ground motion for which buildings are designed

Structural analysis and design criteria

Structural type, shape and configuration, structural analysis methods, design and detailing

Figure 3 - General seismic design procedure common to seismic code (figure from An Approach
to seismic analysis of (Engineered) Buildings in Sri Lanka)

Basically Frequency, intensity and distribution of the earthquake in the given area known as
seismicity of the region.

Underlying ground condition and ground characteristics are strong factors for surface vibration
under the earthquake. As same as those are very much influence the seismic response of the
structure. Either in situ or in the laboratory investigation must be carried out determine the
condition of ground.
EN 1998-5 given guide line for ground investigation. It has two main objectives, other
codes also describe ground investigation parameters with different terms however main content
is same.

Allowing the classification of the soil profile, in view of describing the ground
motion suitable to the site.
Identifying the potential incidence of a soil behavior during an earthquake, damaging
to the response of the structure.

Relative to the latter aspect, the construction site and the nature of the supporting ground should
usually be unrestricted from risks of ground rupture, slope instability and permanent settlements
caused by liquefaction or densification in the event of an earthquake.
If the ground investigation show that such risks do exist, measures should be taken to alleviate its
negative effects on the structure or the location should be reassessed.
 P a g e | 10

2.3 Ground Motion

The appearances (intensity, duration, etc.) of seismic ground vibrations supposed at several
location be contingent upon the magnitude of earthquake, its depth of focus, distance from the
epicenter, characteristics of the way across which the seismic waves travel, and the soil strata on
which the structure stand. The arbitrary earthquake ground motions, which cause the structure to
vibrate, can be determined in three mutually perpendicular directions. The main direction of
ground vibration is usually horizontal. Earthquake-generated vertical inertia forces are to be
considered in design unless checked and proven by specimen calculations to be not significant.
Vertical acceleration should be considered in structures with large spans, those in which stability
is a criterion for design, or for overall stability analysis of structures. Reduction in gravity force
due to vertical component of ground motions can be particularly detrimental in cases of
prestressed horizontal members and of cantilevered members. Hence, special attention should be
paid to the effect of vertical component of the ground motion on prestressed or cantilevered
beams, girder sand slabs.

2.4 Seismic waves

Seismic waves divided main two categories, body waves and surface waves. Body waves are
travel earths inner layers however surface waves are travel along the surface of the panel like
ripples on water. Earthquakes radiate seismic energy as both body and surface waves.

2.4.1Body waves

Traveling across the inside of the earth, body waves reach earlier the surface waves emitted by
an earthquake. These waves are of a higher frequency than surface waves.

First type of body wave is the primary wave. This is fastest seismic wave and accordingly, the
first to 'arrive' at a seismic station. The primary waves can be moved through solid rock and
fluids, like water or the liquid layers of the earth. It pushes and pulls the rock it moves through
just like sound waves push and pull the air. Sometimes animals can hear the P waves of an
earthquake. Dogs, for instance, commonly begin barking hysterically just before an earthquake
'hits' (or more specifically, before the surface waves arrive). Usually people can only feel the
bump and rattle of these waves.

Primary waves also known as compressional waves, owing to the pushing and pulling they do.
Exposed to a Primary wave, particles move in the same way that the wave is moving in, which is
the way that the energy is traveling in, and is sometimes known as the 'direction of wave
propagation'.
 P a g e | 11

Figure 4- Primary wave travels through a medium by means of compression and dilation.

Other type of body wave is the secondary wave, which is the second wave felt in an earthquake.
Secondary wave are slower than primary waves. Secondary wave can be moved only within
solid rock, not within any liquid medium. It is this property of Secondary waves that led
seismologists to conclude that the Earth's outer core is a liquid. Secondary waves move rock
particles up and down, or side-to-side--perpendicular to the direction that the wave is traveling in
(the direction of wave propagation).
 P a g e | 12

Figure 5 Secondary wave travels through a medium

2.4.2 Surface wave

Surface wave are travelling only through the earth crust, surface waves are of a lower frequency
than body waves, and are easily differentiated on a seismogram as a result. Though they arrive
after body waves, it is surface waves that are almost entirely responsible for the damage and
obliteration related with earthquakes. This damage and the strength of the surface waves are
decreased in deeper earthquakes.

First type of surface wave is known as Love wave, named after A.E.H. Love, a British
mathematician who worked out the mathematical model for this kind of wave in 1911. Love
waves are fastest surface wave and moves the ground from side-to-side. Confined to the surface
of the crust, it is produced entirely horizontal motion
 P a g e | 13

Figure 6 - Love wave travels through a medium

Next type of surface wave is the Rayleigh wave, named for John William Strutt, Lord Rayleigh,
who mathematically predicted this type of waves in 1885. A Rayleigh wave rolls along the
ground as wave rolls across an ocean. Because it rolls, it moves the ground up and down, and
side-to-side in the same direction that the wave is moving. Rayleigh waves are much larger than
other waves so, most of shaking felt from an earthquake due to this type.
 P a g e | 14

Figure 7 - Rayleigh wave travels through a medium

 P a g e | 15

2.5 Characteristics of earthquake resistant buildings

Fundamental principles of theoretical design

In seismic regions the aspect of seismic hazard shall be taken into account in the early stages of
the conceptual design of a building, thus enabling the achievement of a structural system which,
within acceptable costs, satisfies the fundamental requirements

The guiding principles governing this conceptual design are:

structural simplicity;
uniformity, symmetry and redundancy;
bi-directional resistance and stiffness;
Torsional resistance and stiffness.
Diaphragmatic behavior at story level;
Adequate foundation.
These principles are further elaborated in the below

Structural simplicity

Structural simplicity, described by the presence of clear and direct paths for the spread of the
seismic forces, is an significant objective to be practiced, meanwhile the Modeling, analysis,
dimensioning, detailing and construction of simple structures are conditional on far lower
uncertainty and hence the prediction of its seismic behavior is far further reliable.

Uniformity, symmetry and redundancy

Uniformity in plan is categorized by an equal distribution of the structural elements

which permits short and direct transmission of the inertia forces generated in the
allocated masses of the building. If essential, uniformity would be reorganized by
subdividing the entire building by seismic joints into dynamically impartial units,
provided that these joints are designed compared to pounding of the individual units
would be based on the code.

Uniformity in the improvement of the structure along the height of the building is also
critical, because it tends to remove the incidence of sensitive zones where attentions of
stress or large ductility demands might hastily cause collapse.

Intimate relationship among the distribution of masses and the distribution of resistance
and stiffness removes large eccentricities among mass and stiffness.
 P a g e | 16

If the building configuration is symmetrical or quasi- symmetrical, a symmetrical layout

of structural elements, which should be well-distributed in-plan, is suitable for the
achievement of uniformity.

The use of equally distributed structural elements increases redundancy and accepts a
more favorable redistribution of action effects and extensive energy dissipation across the
entire structure.
Bi-directional resistance and stiffness

Horizontal seismic motion is a bi-directional phenomenon and consequently the building

structure will have capacity to withstand horizontal actions in any direction.

Fulfill the above clause the structural elements should be arranged in an orthogonal in
plan structural pattern, ensuring similar resistance and stiffness physiognomies in both
main directions.

The selection of the stiffness physiognomies of the structure, while trying to reduce the
effects of the seismic action (taking in to account its specific features at the site) should
also limit the improvement of excessive displacements that might lead to moreover
instabilities due to second order belongings or extreme harms.
Torsional resistance and stiffness

Moreover lateral resistance and stiffness, building structures should be taken sufficient torsional
resistance and stiffness so as to limit the improvement of torsional motions which be motivated
to stress the different structural elements in a non-uniform way. In this approbation,
arrangements in which the critical elements resisting the seismic action are distributed close to
the margin of the building describes clear benefits.

Diaphragmatic behavior at story level

In buildings, floors (including the roof) are played major role in the overall seismic
behavior of the structure. Floors are acted as horizontal diaphragms that collect and
transmission the inertia forces to the vertical structural systems and make sure that those
systems act composed in resisting the horizontal seismic action. The action of floors as
diaphragms is exclusively pertinent in instances of complicated and non-uniform layouts
of the vertical structural systems, or where systems with dissimilar horizontal
deformability physiognomies are used together (e.g. in dual or mixed systems).

Floor systems and the roof should be used beside in-plane stiffness and resistance and
with applicable connection to the vertical structural systems. Specific care should be
taken in situations of non-compact or very lengthened in-plan shapes and in cases of large
floor openings, exceptionally if the latter are located in the vicinity of the main vertical
 P a g e | 17

structural elen1ents, thus hindering such effective connection between the vertical and
horizontal structure.

Diaphragms must need adequate in-plane stiffness for the sharing of horizontal inertia
forces to the vertical structural systems in line together with the assumptions of the
analysis.

Adequate foundation

Considering the seismic action, the design and construction of the foundations and of the
connection to the superstructure should make certain that the entire building is undergo
with the uniform seismic excitation.

For structures comprised of a separate number of structural walls, likely to differ in width
and stiffness, a rigid, box-type or cellular foundation, covering a foundation slab and a
cover slab should commonly be chosen.

For buildings with individual foundation elements (footings or piles), the use of a
foundation slab or tie beams among these elements in both main directions.

Primary and secondary seismic members

A selected amount of structural members (e.g. beams or columns) are termed as "secondary"
seismic members (or elements), not developing part of the seismic action resisting system of the
building. The strength and stiffness of these elements alongside seismic actions would be
eliminated. These members and their connections would be designed and detailed to maintain
support of gravity loading while subjected to the displacement affected by the maximum
unfavorable seismic design condition. Give the provision to 2nd order effects (P-delta effects)
should be in the design of these members. Secondary beams are providing 15 % of contribution
to lateral stiffness from the total amount. However it should not be exceed that amount.

In storied buildings shear cores, structural walls or frames play a major role to resist the lateral
loads. This frames basically termed as moment resisting frames. Moment resisting frames are
designed developing plastic hinges between beams and the beam column connections.
 P a g e | 18

2.6 Importance classes and importance factors

Basically codes are classified buildings in the sense of importance classes and factors. Classified
Depending on the consequences of collapse for human life, on their importance for public safety
and civil protection in the immediate post-earthquake period, and on the social and economic
consequences of Collapse.

2.7 Concrete building design

Main elements are briefly described below.

Critical region- region of primary seismic elements effect (basically 85% of the lateral loads are
resisted by the primary elements of the structure), most adverse combination of action effects,
mainly plastic hinges formed.

Beams and columns are horizontal and vertical member respectively. Beams are mainly
subjected to transverse loads and to normalized design axial force. Columns support the gravity
loads, compression or design axial force.

Wall
Structural element supporting other elements and having an elongated cross-section with length
to thickness ratio of greater than 4

Ductile wall

Walls fixed at its base so as to the comparative rotation of this base by respect to the rest of the
structural system is disallowed, and that is designed and detailed to dissipate energy in a flexural
plastic hinge zone free of openings or large perforations, fair beyond its base.

Large lightly reinforced walls

Wall with large cross-sectional dimensions, a horizontal dimension at least

Equal to 4 m two-thirds of the height of the wall, either is less, which is
Foreseeable to obtain limited cracking and inelastic behavior under the seismic design state.

Coupled wall

Structural element comprised of two or more single walls, connected in an even prototype
through sufficiently ductile beams ("coupling beams"), able to reduce by at least 25 % of the
base bending moments of the individual walls if working separately.
 P a g e | 19

Wall system

In the Structural systems both vertical and lateral loads are mostly resisted by vertical
Structural walls, whichever coupled or uncoupled, whose shear resistance at the building base
exceeds 65 % of the total shear resistance of the whole structural system. This is highly
affordable at the seismic situation.

Frame system

Structural frame system both the vertical and lateral loads are mostly resisted by spatial frames
whose shear resistance at the building base exceeds 65% of the total shear Resistance of the
whole structural system.

Dual system

Structural dual systems support for the vertical loads is mainly provided by a spatial frame and
resistance to lateral loads is contributed to in part by the frame system and in part by structural
walls, coupled or uncoupled

Frame-equivalent dual system

Frame equivalent dual system in which the shear resistance of the frame system at the building
base is greater than 50% of the total shear resistance of the whole structural system.

Wall-equivalent dual system

Wall equivalent dual system in which the shear resistance of the walls at the building base is
higher than 50% of the total seismic resistance of the whole structural system.

Torsionally flexible system

Dual or wall system not having an ultimate torsional rigidity. As the example of this is a
structural system consisting of flexible frames combined with walls concentrated near the center
of the building in plan.

Inverted pendulum system

System in which 50% or more of the mass is in the upper third of the height of the
Structure, or in which the dissipation of energy takes place mainly at the base of a single building
element
 P a g e | 20

2.8 Main elements detailing according to the Euro code

Figure 8 Transverse reinforcement in critical regions of beams

Figure 9 Confinement of concrete core

 P a g e | 21

Figure 10 Coupling beams with diagonal reinforcement

Figure 11 Additional measures exterior beam- column joints.

 P a g e | 22

2.9 Target performance level

Euro code 8 is described two target performance levels. Its known as No-collapse requirement
and damage limitation requirement. Structures in the seismic region will be designed and
constructed accordance with these two fundamental requirements.

No-collapse requirement

The structure intend to be designed and constructed to resist the design seismic action define in
the code deprived of local or global collapse, therefore retaining its structural integrity and a
residual load bearing capacity after the seismic action.

Damage limitation requirement

The structure intend to be designed and constructed to endure a seismic action having a larger
probability of incidence than the design seismic action, without the occurrence of damage and
the associated limitation of use, the costs of which would be extremely high in comparison with
the costs of the structure itself.

Non-Collapse requirement is associated to the protection of casualties under an exceptional

event, through the anticipation of the local or global collapse of the structure that, after the event,
should remain its integrity and an adequate residual load bearing capacity. After the seismic
action the structure may present considerable damages, including permanent drifts, to the point
that it may be economically unrecoverable, nevertheless it should be capable to safeguard
individuals in the evacuation process or during aftershocks. In the basis of the Euro codes, that
uses the theory of Limit States, this performance requirement is associated with the Ultimate
Limit State (ULS) meanwhile it deals with the protection of the individuals or the complete
structure. Damage limitation requirement is associated with the decrease of economic wounded
in frequent earthquakes, mutually considering structural and non-structural damages. Under this
way of earthquakes, the structure should not have permanent deformations and its elements
should remain its original strength and stiffness and thus should not need structural repair. In
minimizing of the non-structural damage the structure should have adequate stiffness to limit,
under such regular proceedings, its deformation to levels that do not cause significant damage on
such elements. Some damage to nonstructural elements is acceptable although they should not
impose important limitations of use and should be repairable economically.
In view of again the framework of the Euro codes, this performance requirement is related with
the Serviceability Limit State (SLS) subsequently it deals with the use of the building, comfort of
the occupants and economic losses. However as describe above, the two performance levels are
to be ensured compared to two different levels of the seismic action, interrelated by the
seismicity of the region.
 P a g e | 23

Ultimate limit state

As discussed above the no-collapse performance level is taken as the Ultimate Limit State in the
framework of the Euro code design system, in accordance with EN 1990 Basis of Design.
Fulfillment of this limit state requests for the confirmation that the structural system has
concurrently lateral resistance and energy-dissipation capacity.

ULS identifies that the satisfaction of the no-collapse requirement does not necessitate that the
structure remains elastic under the design seismic action. On the conflicting it permits / agrees
the improvement of important inelastic deformations in the structural members, provided that
integrity of the structure is kept. It also depend on the (stable) energy dissipation capacity of the
structure to manage the accumulation of energy in the structure subsequent from the seismic
energy input that, or else , would result in considerable bigger response amplitudes of the
structure.
The essential perception is the possible trade-off between resistance and ductility that is at the
base of the outline of Ductility Classes and the use of performance factors that is a main feature
of EN 1998-1.
In malice of such essential theories, the functioning certifications required in EN 1998-1 to check
the Fulfillment of this limit state by the structure are force-based, basically harmonized with all
the other Euro codes. It should be noted that, precisely to the contrary, the physical character of
the seismic action agrees to the appliance of (rapidly changing) displacements at the base of the
structures and not to the use of forces.
In fully linear systems there may be similarity in illustrating the action as imposed forces or
imposed displacements. However, in nonlinear systems, the use of force controlled or
displacement controlled events may consequence in fairly not similar response of the structure.
Therefore, the competence of structures to survive earthquakes be contingent fundamentally on
its capability to withstand lateral deformations in response to the earthquake, retaining its load
bearing capacity (and not on the simple capacity to provision lateral forces). Anyhow all this, the
use of force-based design is fine formed and, as statement on above, is applied in EN 1998-1 as
the suggestion practice, since majority of activities beside which structural Engineers have to
deal with forces imposed to the structures. Consequently inside the complete design process the
application of a force built methodology, similar for seismic actions, is exceptionally realistic
and fascinating. Moreover, systematic procedures for a displacement based methodology in
seismic design are not completely established and unfamiliar to the regular Engineer.

It would conversely be noticed that EN 1998-1 begins the opportunity to use displacement-based
methodologies as substitute design procedures for which it introducing an Educational Annex
with functional regulations to compute the focus displacements for Nonlinear Static Analysis.
Further the confirmation of the individual structural elements (for resistance and ductility), in
according to specific rules for the dissimilar structural materials, the Ultimate Limit State
verification causes the ensuring of:

Overall stability of the structure (overturning and sliding)

Foundations and the bearing capacity of the soil
impact of second order effects
effect of non-structural elements to evade unfavorable effects
 P a g e | 24

Serviceability limit state (Damage limitation requirement)

As mentioned above performance requirement related beside this Limit State expects the
structure to support a comparatively recurrent earthquake deprived of important damage or loss
of operationally. Damage is only anticipated in non-structural elements and its incidence be
contingent on the deformation that the structure, in response to the seismic activity, imposes on
such elements. The similar principle spread on to the loss of operationally of practices and
systems (while in certain equipments acceleration may also be accordance to cause harm). Hence
a sufficient degree of reliability in contradiction of intolerable damage is necessary and checks
have to be made on the deformation of the structure and its contrast with deformation limits that
based on the appearances of the nonstructural elements. For example, for buildings EN 1998-1
founds the subsequent limits to the inter story drift (relative displacement divided by the inter
story height) because of the Serviceability seismic action:
0.5 % for buildings having non-structural elements of brittle materials devoted to the
structure:
0.75 % for buildings having ductile non-structural elements:
1.0 % for buildings having non-structural elements fixed in a way so as not to interfere
with structural deformations or without non-structural elements
Further requirements would be imposed in structures essential for civil safeguard so that the
purpose of the energetic services in the services is upheld.
 P a g e | 25

2.10 Specification of hazard and defining seismic action

Each code identifies the design seismic action in terms of spectral ordinates with different terms.
Basically seismic action known as design purposes should be based on the estimation of the
ground motion expected at each location in the future. E.g. it should be based on hazards
assessment.
For each country, the seismic hazard is defined by a zonation map expressed by the National
Establishments. For this reason the national provinces should be subdivided into seismic zones,
depending on the local hazard. Basically seismic hazards are signified by hazard curves that
describe the exceedance prospect of a precise seismologic parameter (for example the peak
ground acceleration, velocity or displacement) for a given period of exposure, at a certain
location
It is generally referred that peak values of the ground motion parameters the peak ground
acceleration are bad descriptors of the severity of an earthquake and of its potential
significances on constructions.
Therefore current involvement is to define the seismic hazard by the values of the spectral
ordinates (at certain important periods in the response spectrum). In meanness of this, for the
sake of simplicity,
In Euro code 8 the seismic hazard is described the value of the reference peak ground
acceleration on ground type A (ground type A-Rock site) for 475 year return period earthquake.
For designing the buildings response acceleration values are obtained from an elastic response
spectrum. Australian standards describe the seismic hazard same as the European code, peak
ground acceleration termed as hazard factor (z) for 500 year return period earthquake. Designing
of Australian buildings spectral acceleration values are obtain from response spectrum. Indian
approach also similar to other two approaches, seismic hazard termed as effective peak ground
acceleration and zone factor (z) associate with maximum considered earthquake in zone.
Response acceleration values can be obtained from response spectrum to process the designing
task.

For the Sri Lanka, there were such a zonation map is not available to obtain the ground motion.
However there were proposed important studies available to obtain the ground motion values.

Peiris L.M.N. suggests the best assessment horizontal peak ground acceleration curve with
related confidence intervals. It shows that the peak ground acceleration at rock site for a 10%
probability of exceedance in 50 years or 475 years return period is around 0.026g for Colombo.
It also proposes that this value can be used for the entire island meanwhile the single seismic
source zone used in the PSHA includes Sri Lanka.
 P a g e | 26

Figure 12 Hazards curves for Sri Lanka

(Peiris L.M, Seismic Hazard assessment and seismic risk in Colombo)

Uduweriya presents a reliable seismic hazard assessment in Colombo area based on

probabilistic approach and proposes a value of 0.1g as the peak ground acceleration at rock site
for 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years or 475 years return period. Furthermore, Figure
shows comparison of corresponding response spectrum of 0.1g ground acceleration at the bed
rock as specified in Indian Code.

Figure 13 Calculated Response Spectrum for 475 year return period at bed rock level in
Colombo.
 P a g e | 27

Figure 14 seismic zone map Southern part of the India around Tamil Nadu including Sri Lanka

Uduweriya used this zonation map for his study since Tamil Nadu is geographically very close to
Sri Lanka. Actually this map defines the eleven seismic zones and Sri Lanka located in 9th zone.
This zonation map was identified by Indian scientists A. Menon, T. Ornthammarath, M.
Corigliano, and C. G. Lai.

2. 11 Structural analysis and design criteria.

After selecting the appropriate ground motion for the analysis from the hazards curves, codes are
presented methodical steps to design building against the ground motion. This methods are
mainly based on the structural dynamics and its concept. However involvement of the seismic
design different code to code. Each code specifies a preliminary screening process which decides
basically the need for seismic design for a particular building, suitable structural analysis method
such as linear/non-linear and static/dynamic and onwards.

Equivalent static analysis

This methodology describes a series of forces acting on a building to signify the influence of
earthquake ground motion, usually expressed by using seismic design response spectrum. It
undertakes that the building responds in its basic mode. For this to be accurate, the building must
be low-rise and must not twist considerably when the ground moves. The response is declaim
from a design response spectrum, specified the natural frequency of the building (either
calculated or defined according to the building code). The application of this approach is
comprehensive in many building codes by pertaining effects to account for higher buildings with
 P a g e | 28

some higher modes, and for low levels of twisting. Due to yielding of the structure, most of the
codes are applied modification factors that minimize the design forces.

Model response spectrum analysis

In this approach the structure is divided into a number of single-degree-of-freedom systems, each
degree of freedom system having its individual mode shape and natural period of vibration. The
amount of modes obtain is equivalent to the number of mass degrees of freedom of the structure,
so the amount of modes can be minimized by removing mass degrees of freedom. For case, rigid
diaphragm restraints may be used to minimize the quantity of mass degrees of freedom to per
story for planar models, furthermore three per story (two translations and rotation around the
vertical axis) for three-dimensional structures.
Nevertheless, where the vertical elements of the seismic force resisting procedure have
considerable disagrees in lateral stiffness, rigid diaphragm models should be applied with
attention since relatively small in-plane diaphragm distortions can have a substantial influence on
the distribution of forces. For a specified direction of loading, the displacement in every mode is
strong-minded after the related spectral acceleration, modal participation, and mode shape. As
the sign (positive or negative) and the time of incidence of the maximum acceleration are lost in
making a response spectrum, there is no method to recombine modal responses accurately.
Nevertheless, statistical combination of modal responses creates reasonably correct appraisals of
displacements and component forces. The defeat of signs for computed quantities leads to
problems in understanding force results where seismic effects are combined with gravity
outcomes, create forces that are not in equilibrium, and create it terrible to plot bounced shapes
of the structure.

Nonlinear static analysis

Basically, linear methods are apply when the structure is predictable to endure closely elastic for
the level of ground motion or when the design results outcomes in approximately uniform
distribution of nonlinear response through the structure. By way of the performance impartial of
the structure indicates greater inelastic demands, the uncertainty with linear techniques buildups
to a point that needs a high level of obscurantism in demand suppositions and satisfactoriness
measures to avoid unintentional performance. Hence, methods combining inelastic analysis can
minimized the uncertainty and obscurantism.

This method also refer as "pushover" analysis. Certain design of forces is spread on to a
structural model that incorporates non-linear properties (such as steel yield), and the total force is
drew against a reference displacement to describe the capacity curve. After that this can be
combined with a demand curve (normally a method of an acceleration-displacement response
spectrum). This basically minimized the problem to a single degree of freedom (SDOF) system.

Nonlinear static methods are appropriate to the equivalent SDOF structural models and represent
seismic ground motion with response spectra. Story drifts and component actions are interrelated
 P a g e | 29

successively to the global demand boundary by the pushover or capacity curves that are the
fundamentals of the non-linear static procedures.

Linear dynamic analysis

Usually Static processes are appropriate when higher mode properties are not important. This
mainly useful for short, regular buildings. However, for tall buildings, buildings by way of
torsional irregularities, or non-orthogonal systems, a dynamic approach is needed. In the linear
dynamic analysis, the building is modelled as per the multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) system
together with a linear elastic stiffness matrix and an equal viscous damping matrix.

The seismic data is enter to model using either modal spectral analysis or time history analysis
however in each case, the consistent internal forces and displacements are defined using linear
elastic analysis. The benefit of linear dynamic methods with admiration to linear static methods
is that advanced modes can be addressed. But, they are established on linear elastic response and
consequently the applicability minimizing with growing nonlinear behavior, which is estimated
by global force reduction factors.

In linear dynamic analysis, the response of the structure to ground motion is computed in the
time domain, and each stage information is consequently maintained. Only linear properties are
anticipated. The analytical method can be used modal decay as a means of decreasing the
degrees of freedom in the analysis.

Nonlinear dynamic analysis

Nonlinear dynamic analysis uses the combine of ground motion annals beside the detailed
structural model, so, its able of creating results using comparatively low uncertainty. In
nonlinear dynamic analyses, the detailed structural model exposed to a ground-motion record
creates estimations of constituent deformations for ever degree of freedom in the model and the
modal responses are combined. The non-linear possessions of the structure are taken as part of a
time domain analysis. This method is the most hard, and is necessitated by some building codes
for buildings of unusual outline or of exceptional significance. Nevertheless, the calculated
response can be very subtle to the physiognomies of the individual ground motion taken as
seismic input; so, several analyses are obligatory using different ground motion records to
achieve a dependable approximation of the probabilistic distribution of structural response.
Because the properties of the seismic response vary with the intensity, or severity, of the seismic
shaking, an inclusive evaluation calls for many nonlinear dynamic analyses at different levels of
intensity to describe dissimilar potential earthquake scenarios.
 P a g e | 30

3.0 Description of the building

The investigated building is a multi-storied reinforced concrete structure. Its proposed
multistoried car park for the National Hospital Sri Lanka. Building is consisted of 11 storey.
Total height of the building 31.5 m having 3 m per storey height. Foundation, bored pile up high
weathered rock 20 m depth.
Each floor designed as two levels for maintained the standard ramp size. Ground floor will be
occupied for the pharmacy, canteen and waiting area for the shuttle bus users.

3D view, plan views and elevation views are shown in below.

Figure 15. 3D view.

 P a g e | 31

Figure 16 Typical Plan view

 P a g e | 32

Figure 17 North Elevation of the building.

 P a g e | 33

Figure 18 West Elevation of the building.

 P a g e | 34

Figure 19 East Elevation of the Building.

 P a g e | 35

4.0 Load Determination

Permanent Action

Finishes 1.2 KN/m

External Walls 2.16 KN/m (900mm height 100mm thick RCC wall).

Variable action

Considered as multistoried car park building and live load as 2.5 KN/m. (Imposed load taken
from the BS 6399 Loading on structures)

Wind loads are taken from the BS 6399 part 2. Assuming Colombo zone 3, velocity of the wind
is 38m/s.

Applied wind load for the structure taken as according to the clause 3.1.4.2 of BS 8110 structural
use of concrete. Compared the ultimate wind and Notional Horizontal Load of the structure.

Initial size determination.

Slab

Reference Calculations Results

Istruct E Span of typical floor slab - 4.8 m

Manual By assuming the limitation span/depth ratio as 40 for lighter

loaded slab for two way continuous slab
Table 3
Effective depth of the slab = 4800/40

= 120 mm

So cover requirement

(for durability, fire resistance and bonding)

Minimum assumed 30 mm

Overall depth of the slab = 120 + 10 + 30 = 160 mm

175 mm thick slab spanning in two direction. Slab

thickness
175mm
 P a g e | 36

Span of typical floor slab - 6 m

By assuming the limitation span/depth ratio as 40 for lighter

loaded slab for two way continuous slab

Effective depth of the slab = 6000/40

= 150 mm
So cover requirement

(for durability, fire resistance and bonding)

Minimum assumed 30 mm

Overall depth of the slab = 150 + 10 + 30 = 190 mm Slab

thickness
200mm

Beam

Reference Calculations Results

Istruct E Longer span of the beam around the boundary is 7.2 m

Manual By assuming limiting span/effective depth ratio

Table 3 Effective depth = 7200/15

= 480 mm
Beam size
400mm 600mm beam continuous along the Grid 1, 2,3,4,5 and 400mm
6. 600mm

Shorter span of the beam around the boundary is 6 m

By assuming limiting span/effective depth ratio

Effective depth = 6000/15 Beam size

=400mm 400mm
400mm 400mm beam continuous along the Grid 400mm
A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I, and J.
 P a g e | 37

Columns

Reference Calculations Results

Istruct E Load on critical column along the
Grid 3 using tributary area.
Manual
Dead loads

Self-weight of the slab = 0.175 24 = 4.2 KN/m

Finishes = 1.2 KN/m

Total load due to slab = (5.4) (7.2 2.4) +(5.4)

(7.2 3)
= 209.95 KN

Self-weight of beams =( 7.2 0.6 0.4 )24 2+

(2.4 0.4 0.4)24 + (30.4

0.4)24

= 103.68KN

Total self-weight = 313.63 KN

Live load from slab = 7.22.42.5 + 7.23 2.5

= 97.2 KN

Total factored load due to one floor = 313.631.4 +97.21.6

= 313.631.4 +97.21.6

=285.224KN

Total load acting on column base

= 285.224

+(0.60.62431.5)
Column
size 600
=7877.7 KN mm
600 mm
Required area of column
 P a g e | 38

N= 0.4 fcu Ac + 0.75 fy Asc

= 0.440 Ac + 0.75 460
0.015Ac

Ac= 7877700/ 0.4 40 + 0.75 460

0.015

So, 589 mm squre

Use 600mm 600mm column

towards the top.

Shear wall considered as 400 mm.

Piles and pile caps

From these values SLS 5251.8 KN taken as the maximum axial load applying on the piles.

Modelling parameter definition

Conversion of SPT N values for N'70

P a g e | 39
 P a g e | 40

Borehole 1
 P a g e | 41

At 3 m depth from GL

Effective stress = 16 3 (9.81 0.3) = 45.5 kpa

Cn = (95.76/45.5) = 1.45

1 = 55/70 =0.79

2=0.95 for 6-10 m length 3=1 and 4=1

N'70 = 14 1.45 0.93 0.95 1 1 = 17.93505

So, 15.23 70/60 = 17.76

So friction angle for SPT 17.76 given by

 P a g e | 42

Friction angle from the graph () = 35

Lowest value of SPT for clay soil,

14.94882 Su value for 14.94882 70/60= 17.43

From the graph ksf 4.5 equal to 215KN/m2.

So, undrained shear strength = 107.5 KN/m2.

 P a g e | 43

Calculations

Skin friction,

Modification of the friction angle of the fine sand layer.

=1 -3= 35-3 =32

Critical depth ratio for 32 friction angle

Zc/d = 6
Zc= 6 1.5
=9m

So, critical depth is in the fine sand layer,

Effective overburden pressure at the water table level - 153.2=48Kpa.

Effective overburden pressure at the critical depth level 48+165.8-(5.89.81)

=83.902 Kpa

Below the critical depth level, the effective overburden pressure closer to pile constant with the
depth.

Cast in situ piles, the angle of adhesion (a) is assumed to be equal to the angle of friction of
soil.

So, a==35

factor for fine sand layer = (1-sin 1 )sin a

= (1-sin 35)tan35
=0.3

the angle adhesion for coarse sand, a==39

= (1-sin 39)tan39
=0.3
for clay - factor =0.75

skin friction

from the water table level = v

=0.348 = 14.4Kpa
From the critical depth = 0.3 83.902
= 25.17Kpa

From the coarse sand layer = 0.383.902 =25.17Kpa

 P a g e | 44

From the clay layer =Cu

=0.75107.5=80.625Kpa

Friction up to water water table = 0.514.43.2=23.04 KN/m

Friction from water table to 9.1m = (14.4+25.17)/25.9

=116.73 KN/m

Friction in clay layer = 7.6m80.625

=612.75 KN/m

Friction from the coarse sand layer = 83.9023.3=276.87 KN/m

Total friction due to soil = 1029.393.141.5 =4850.91KN

End bearing

Friction angle correction factor - =39-3=36 Nq=90 from Berezantsev etal 1961

Qend = 9083.902=7551.18KN (effective overburden pressure) sandy so, c=0

End bearing = 7551.18 3.14 0.750.75= 13344KN

Total bearing capacity of the pile = 18194.94KN

Load on the pile 5251.8 + W = 6100KN

So, Factor of safety = 18194.94/6100 = 2.98 so, satisfy the factor of safety.

Hence, single pile 1500mm dia is enough to carry a critical single column load. Pile will be
terminated at the 20m below dense sand layer from the ground level.

Zc/d = 6
Zc= 6 1.2
= 7.2 m

So, critical depth is in the fine sand layer,

Effective overburden pressure at the water table level - 153.2=48Kpa.

Effective overburden pressure at the critical depth level 48+164-(49.81)

=72.76 Kpa
 P a g e | 45

Skin friction

From the water table level = v

=0.348 = 14.4Kpa
From the critical depth = 0.3 72.76
= 21.8Kpa

From the coarse sand layer = 0.372.76 =21.8Kpa

From the clay layer =Cu
=0.75107.5=80.625Kpa

Friction up to water water table = 0.514.43.2=23.04 KN/m

Friction from water table to 9.1m = (14.4+21.8)/25.9

=106.79 KN/m

Friction in clay layer = 7.6m80.625

=612.75 KN/m

Friction from the coarse sand layer = 72.763.3=240.1 KN/m

Total friction due to soil = 986.33.141.2 =3716.4KN

End bearing

Friction angle correction factor - =39-3=36 Nq=90 from Berezantsev etal 1961

Qend = 9072.76=6548.4KN (effective overburden pressure) sandy so, c=0

End bearing = 6548.4 3.14 0.60.6= 7406.06KN

Total bearing capacity of the pile = 11,124.4KN

Load on the pile 2707.1 + W = 3249.96KN

So, Factor of safety = 11,124.4/3249.9 = 3.422 so, satisfy the factor of safety.

Hence, single pile 1200mm dia is enough to carry a critical single column load. Pile will be
terminated at the 20m below dense sand layer from the ground level.
 P a g e | 46

Pile and pile caps

Pile cap should extend 150mm beyond circumference of piles.

1500 mm, 20 m length four number of piles having 1.8 1.8 1.2 pile cap.

1200 mm, 20 m length four number of piles having 1.5 1.5 1.2 pile cap.

Reference Calculation Results

FINITE ELEMENT DISCRETIZATION OF A SINGLE PILE
USING DATA PERTAINING TO BOREHOLE

SPRING MODELS FROM SPT N VALUES

Making use of the correlation by Yoshida and Yoshinaka (1972)

Modulus of Elasticity of Soil Es=650N Kpa

Modulus sub grade reaction Ks=Es b(1-V)

Bowels
Where b is the projected area of the pile

Where b is width of the projected area of the pile

So, b=1.5m & 1.2m

Poisson ratio v =0.3

Bowels

Where BL is bearing area of the element.

 P a g e | 47

Table 1 Sub grade modulus and Spring constants

element Es Ks
Ele length Node Depth SPT N kpa KN/m K K K=K+K
1 1 1 0 7 4550 6210.75 0 4720.586 4720.586
2 1 2 1 3 1950 2644.2 3603.067 5549.102 9152.169
3 1 3 2 14 9100 12421.5 8612.656 11120.2 19732.86
4 1 4 3 12 7800 10647 10564.19 9452.17 20016.36
5 1 5 4 10 6500 8872.5 8896.16 16402.3 25298.46
6 1.5 6 5 39 25350 34602.75 36696.66 48789.88 85486.54
7 1.5 7 6.5 30 25350 34602.75 48789.88 52959.95 101749.8
8 1.5 8 8 49 31850 43475.25 57130.03 47955.86 105085.9
9 1.5 9 9.5 17 11050 15083.25 34611.62 29190.53 63802.15
10 1.5 10 11 36 23400 31941 37113.67 41700.75 78814.42
11 1.5 11 12.5 28 18200 24843 38364.69 33360.6 71725.29
12 1.5 12 14 24 15600 21294 31692.57 35028.63 66721.2
13 1.5 13 15.5 36 23400 31941 40032.72 50874.92 90907.64
14 1.5 14 17 50 32500 44362.5 56713.02 62551.13 119264.1
15 1.5 15 18.5 50 32500 44362.5 62551.13 62551.13 125102.3
1.5 16 20 50 32500 44362.5 62551.13 0

Table 2 Sub grade modulus and Spring constants

element Es Ks
Ele length Node Depth SPT N kpa KN/m K K K=K+K
1 1 1 0 7 4550 4968.6 0 4726.085 4726.085
2 1 2 1 3 1950 2129.4 3614.065 5560.1 9174.165
3 1 3 2 14 9100 9937.2 8618.155 11120.2 19738.36
4 1 4 3 12 7800 8517.6 10564.19 9452.17 20016.36
5 1 5 4 10 6500 7098 8896.16 16402.3 25298.46
6 1.5 6 5 39 25350 27682.2 36436.4 48443.85 84880.25
7 1.5 7 6.5 30 25350 27682.2 48443.85 52584.35 101028.2
8 1.5 8 8 49 31850 34780.2 56724.85 47615.75 104340.6
9 1.5 9 9.5 17 11050 12066.6 34366.15 28983.5 63349.65
10 1.5 10 11 36 23400 25552.8 36850.45 41405 78255.45
11 1.5 11 12.5 28 18200 19874.4 38092.6 33124 71216.6
12 1.5 12 14 24 15600 17035.2 31467.8 34780.2 66248
13 1.5 13 15.5 36 23400 25552.8 39748.8 50514.1 90262.9
14 1.5 14 17 50 32500 35490 56310.8 62107.5 118418.3
15 1.5 15 18.5 50 32500 35490 62107.5 62107.5 124215
16 1.5 16 20 50 32500 35490 62107.5 0
 P a g e | 48

Figure 20. View

 P a g e | 49

Figure 21 Material Define

 P a g e | 50

Figure 22 Define frames, areas and load cases

 P a g e | 51

5.0 Results of free vibration (Modal) Analysis

Mass defined with the combination of all dead load and 30% of the variable load.

Figure 23 Mass Definition (Define Mass Source)

 P a g e | 52

Table 3 period and frequency

 P a g e | 53

5.1 Modal shapes and direction of free vibration analysis

Mode-1

Figure 23 U1 Direction
 P a g e | 54

Mode 2

Figure 24 U 2 Direction
 P a g e | 55

Mode 3

Figure 25 Twisting
 P a g e | 56

6.0 Analysis of force vibration

6.1 Euro code 8

Reference Calculation Results

EN1998:
2004

Importance class 2 since car park building.

So design for a seismic action 475 years return period

Important factor 1 1
k 3

PGA from hazard curve for Colombo, this curve only the rock site
since there are no any PGA values available for other types soils.

PGA 0.1g (Recommended)

ag, 475 1 = ag, 475 PGA

. 0.1g
P a g e | 57

Soil type
B
 P a g e | 58

Response spectrum using EC-8

(Multiplier 9.81)

Elastic Response Spectrum

T Sa
0 1
0< T<0.15
0.1 1.5
0.25 3
0.15<T<0.5
0.5 3
0.75 2.5
1 1.5
1.2
1.25 5
0.5<T<2.0
1.5 1
0.7
1.75 5
2 0.5
0.4
2.25 5
2.5 0.4
2.0< T<4
0.2
2.75 5
3 0.2
 P a g e | 59

6.2 Australian/New Zealand code

Reference Calculations Results

AS/NZ
1170.1

Height of the building 31.5 m is lesser than 50m

Therefore based on Table 2.1 EDC can be adopted. Since the

car parking structure.

Importance
level 2
 P a g e | 60

Probability factor Kp= 1

Hazard Factor Z= 0.08 Annual

probability
Kpz= 0.08 of
exceedance
1/500 years

Very dense sand layer located the underneath of the pile so, Soil class c
Table 6.4 soil class C

Dynamic analysis approach

 P a g e | 61

Where Ch(T) is the value of the spectral shape factor for Sp 0 .77
fundamental natural period of the structure.
- 2
Table horizontal design forces for Each mode of vibration

Periods T Ch(T) SP/ Cd(T)

Mode 1 2.545 0.166 0.38 0.00504
Mode 2 1.82 0.326 0.38 0.00991
Mode 3 1.51 0.375 0.38 0.0114

SP/ value taken from table 6.5 A for ordinary Moment

resisting frame in combination with limited ductile shear
walls.

Proposed values for Response spectrum in AS1170.4

(Multiplier 9.81)

Response spectrum for the structure

Equation T Ch(T) Cd(T)
1.3+23.4T 0 1.3 0.031616
0.1 3.68 0.111872
0.25 3.68 0.111872
0.5 2.5 0.076
0.75 1.675 0.05092
1 1.25 0.038
1.25 1.005 0.030552
1.25/T but<3.68 1.5 0.83 0.025232
1.75 0.5 0.0152
2 0.47 0.014288
2.25 0.39 0.011856
2.5 0.3 0.00912
2.75 0.255 0.007752
1.874/T 3 0.21 0.006384
 P a g e | 62

6.3 Indian code

Reference Calculation Results

IS
1893:2002

Importance
Factor =1

Sri Lanka located in near the south India. So, south India in
zone 2.

Z=0.1 low
 P a g e | 63

Medium
soil

Proposed values for Response spectrum in IS 1893:2002

(Multiplier 9.81

Elastic Response Spectrum

T Sa
0<T<0.1 0 1.5
0.1 1.5
0.25 2.5
0.1<T<0.55
0.5 2.5
1 1.5
1.25 1.25
1.5 1
1.75 0.9
0.55<T<4 2 0.75
2.25 0.6
2.5 0.5
2.75 0.55
3 0.5
 P a g e | 64

7.0 Assignment of Response spectrum

Figure 26. Response spectrum generation for Euro code 8 using SAP 2000
 P a g e | 65

Figure 27.Load case defining on X and Y directions

Figure 28.Load case assignment on X direction

 P a g e | 66

Figure 29 Load case assignment in Y direction

 P a g e | 67

8.0 Results related to dynamic analysis load combination.

Load case definitions as euro code 8

Therefore

EQ COMB 1 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk +Ex

EQ COMB 2- 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk +Ey

European code value

Comb -1 Comb-2
Horizontal Drift Horizontal Drift
Movement Movement
29.3 0.095 15.14 0.046414
28.17 0.10886076 14.59 0.028692
26.88 0.10886076 14.25 0.032911
25.148 0.14616034 13.86 0.037975
22.94 0.18632911 13.41 0.044726
20.31 0.22194093 12.88 0.060338
17.27 0.25654008 12.165 0.089873
13.88 0.28607595 11.1 0.139241
10.24 0.307173 9.45 0.232068
6.6 0.307173 6.7 0.330802

Table 4 horizontal and drifting euro code

Drifting at the each floor level= displacement difference / story height Ductility factor
 P a g e | 68

Figure 30. Response spectrum generation for Australian code using SAP 2000
 P a g e | 69

Figure 31, 32 Load case assignment on X & Y direction

P a g e | 70
 P a g e | 71

Therefore

EQ COMB 1 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk +Ex

EQ COMB 2- 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk +Ey

AS 1170:4
Comb -1 Comb-2
Horizontal Drift Horizontal Drift
Movement Movement
6.82 0.384833 10.2 0.608333
4.511 0.040167 6.55 0.156833
4.27 0.01 5.609 0.059833
4.21 0.025 5.25 0.00833
4.06 0.023333 5.3 0.05917
3.92 0.015 5.655 0.01417
3.83 0.013333 5.74 0.048333
3.75 0.041667 5.45 0.15
3.5 0.195 4.55 0.35
2.33 0.148333 2.45 0.242667

Table 5 horizontal and drifting Australian code

 P a g e | 72

Figure 33 Response spectrum generation for Indian code using SAP 2000
 P a g e | 73

Figure 34, 35 Load case assignment on X & Y direction

 P a g e | 74

Therefore

EQ COMB 1 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk +Ex

EQ COMB 2- 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk +Ey

IS 1893:2002
Comb -1 Comb-2
Horizontal Drift Horizontal Drift
Movement Movement
7.54 0.388333 10.49 0.615
5.21 0.045 6.8 0.163333
4.94 0.016667 5.82 0.016667
4.84 0.036667 5.72 0.036667
4.62 0.036667 5.5 0.061667
4.4 0.03 5.87 0.035
4.22 0.028333 6.08 0.073333
4.05 0.06 5.64 0.156667
3.69 0.06 4.7 0.355
2.43 0.393567 2.57 0.361667

Table 6 horizontal and drifting Indian code

 P a g e | 75

9.0 Conclusion
This study mainly based on the adoptability of three main codes which related to Sri Lanka in
different ways. Proposed multistoried car park for the National hospital of Sri Lanka taken as the
case study of this research. Study carried out by approximately equant soil types. All the results
which obtain from the software is under the perception level of performance criteria. When
comparing the critical drifting values there are no large difference between the values. However
AUS 1170:2004 given the lowest values among other two codes. So, I conclude AUS code most
conservative approach to study building in Colombo Sri Lanka. It can be adopted to the future
projects in Sri Lanka.

Graph 1. response spectra for Euro code 8, Australian Code and Indian code of practice for
approximately similar soil types.

0.3

0.25

0.2

IS 1893:2002
0.15
Aus 1170:4
Eurocode
0.1

0.05

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
 P a g e | 76

References
1. Durgesh, C. Rai (2000), Future Trends in Earthquake-Resistant Design of Structures,
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 79, NO. 9, 10.

2. FEMA 450-1, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings
and other Structures, 2003 Edition.

3. Euro code 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance Part 1: General Rules, Seismic
Actions and rules for Buildings, EN 1998-1: 2004.

4. AS 1170.4 2007, Structural Design Actions, Part 4: Earthquake Action.

5. IS 1893-1: (Part 1): 2002, Criteria for Earthquake

Resistant Design of Structures, Bureau of Indian
Standards.

6. FEMA 450-2, Commentary NEHRP Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings
and other Structures, 2003 Edition.

7.Peiris L.M.N., Seismic Hazard Assessment and Seismic Risk in Colombo, Risk Management
Solutions, London, UK.

8.Uduweriya, S. B., Wijesundara, K. K., Dissanayake, P. B. R., Seismic Risk in Colombo

Probabilistic Approach, SAITM Research symposium on Engineering Advancements 2013
(SAITM RSEA 2013)
P a g e | 77