! 
   

"

#     $ %&'()*+%, - )%.

    

   
    
  
   


  
 

!   

  

  /
 
  

 
   $ %&'(0 $ 






 
 

!   
 
#  
   
    ! 0 " 
 



 1  
0





 

20    3   420- 
  .4"

 
5

4  
  6 43  7    $

 
84"  9:;3    4:7)4#   4
 
  
 
)%'4" 5 
4$ 0


    

 !" 






 


  







 


  



 


!

"#"  "#$

%








 



 



 











 
 



















 









 


 






 

 





 





 







 



























 
 

 

 






 


 

 

 





!"#$








%
 
" 
!

&







' &

( 
)*
!

&


"

"
*)+,-
!










  

.
/
 


0
123
0
45,)6

 
7
&
0
0  

 


0
!
 
7
5,)6
%
 
" 
!

&







' &

( 






"

"
5,)6
 A BOOK ON

================================================================================

Linear Time History Behavior Of

RC Framed Structures
EFFECT OF SEISMICITY AND SOIL TYPE

Asst. Prof. Mr. Sivakiran Kollimarla, M. Tech

Ms. K. Mani, B. Tech
Mr. Ch. Lakshma Reddy, B. Tech
 Linear Time History Behavior Of
RC Framed Structures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
Effect Of Seismicity And Soil Type

Mr. Sivakiran Kollimarla, M. Tech

Assistant Professor
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is with immense pleasure, we take this opportunity to express our deep sense of
gratitude and whole hearted thanks to our project supervisor Mr. K. SIVA KIRAN, M.
Tech, Asst. Professor, in Department of Civil Engineering, Kallam Haranadhareddy
Institute of Technology for his valuable guidance and involvement in all phases of this work
till its completion. He has been a source of inspiration to us and has given us constant
encouragement throughout the duration of the work.

III
 ABSTRACT

In view of structural engineering, the in assessment of seismic vulnerability of

structure plays an important role in the analysis and design of structure. A variety of methods
are in practice to carry out lateral load analysis on structure due to earthquakes. In this
respect, time history analysis is a method to analyze a structure subjected to a specific
earthquake ground motion. The seismic response of a structure majorly depends on type of
soil and seismicity of location of structure.

In this context an attempt is made to study the Linear Time History behavior of a G+5
RC framed building subjected to bhuj earthquake ground motion considering the effect of soil
type and seismic zone factor in accordance with IS-1893-2016 (part -1). A G+5 RC framed
residential apartment building is modeled in ETABS 2015 software and analysis is carried
out using time history function subjecting to bhuj earthquake ground motion data for different
values of seismic zone factor and soil types. Responses such as base shear storey shear
distribution and peak roof displacement are reported for different zone factors and soil type
and tabulated

The analytical study depicts that, with increase in seismicity of location of the
structure, both base shear and peak roof displacement are been increased. Also, with increase
in flexibility of soil, both base shear and peak roof displacement are been increased.

IV
 LIST OF CONTENTS

Chapter Title Page No

1. Introduction
1.1. General 9
1.2. Time history method 10
1.3. Bhuj earthquake 11
1.4. IS code provisions for Time history analysis 11
1.5. Introduction on Etabs 13
2. Literature Review 15
3. Methodology
3.1. Methodology carried out in Etabs 18
3.2. Time history analysis 20
4. Aim and scope 23
5. Modeling in Etabs 24
6. Analysis Results
6.1. Model analysis results 33
6.2. Spectral response of the structure to bhuj earthquake 33
6.3. Design acceleration spectrum for bhuj earthquake 34
6.4. Storey shear distribution due to time history analysis 36
6.5. Variation of base shear and roof displacement 44
7. Conclusions 48
References 49

V
 LIST OF TABLES

Table no Title Page no

1 Seismic zone factor 12
2 Percentage of imposed load to be considered in calculation of 13
seismic weight
3 Response reduction factor R for building systems 13
4 Sectional properties of different structural elements 18
5 Properties of construction materials 19
6 Load particulars on different structural elements 19
7 Variation of structural base shear and roof displacement in X- 44
direction
8 Variation of structural base shear and roof displacement in Y- 46
direction

VI
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure no Title Page no

1 Movement of tectonic plates per year 9
2 Reaction forces on building subjected to ground motion 10
3 Application of earth ground motion on structures 11
4 Ground Motion Data for Bhuj Earthquake 11
5 Seismic zoning map of India 12
6 Floor plan for residential apartment building 18
7 Initialization of model in ETABS 24
8 Selection of template for new model 24
9 Beam layout for model in ETABS 25
10 Positioning of columns in plan 25
11 Assignment of slab panels in plan 26
12 Elevation view of the model in positive X-direction 26
13 Three dimensional view of the model 27
14 Assignment of beam loads on model 28
15 Creation of Bhuj earthquake function 29
16 Time history function for Bhuj earthquake data 29
17 Assignment of different load cases 30
18 Application of frame loads on beams 30
19 Assignment of joint restraints 31
20 Complete 3D model with sections and support restraints 31
21 Deformed shape after analysis 32
22 Periods of different modes of the structure 33
23 Spectral displacement response spectra 33
24 Spectral velocity response spectra 34
25 Spectral acceleration response spectra 35
26 Pseudo spectral velocity response spectra 35
27 Pseudo spectral acceleration response spectra 36
28 Design acceleration response spectra for Bhuj earthquake 36
29 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone I & II 36
30 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone III 37
31 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone IV 37
32 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone V 38
33 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone I & II 38
34 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone III 38
35 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone IV 39
36 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone V 39

VII
37 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone I & II 39
38 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone III 40
39 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone IV 40
40 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone V 40
41 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone I &II 41
42 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone III 41
43 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone IV 41
44 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone V 42
45 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone I & II 42
46 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone III 42
47 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone IV 43
48 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone V 43
49 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone I & II 43
50 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone III 44
51 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone IIV 44
52 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone V 44
53 Variation of roof displacement in X-direction 45
54 Variation of structural base shear in X-direction 46
55 Variation of roof displacement in Y-direction 47
56 Variation of structural base shear in Y-direction 47

VIII
CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION
1.1. GENERAL

Lateral load analysis on high rise framed buildings is one of the most interesting
areas of structural engineering and grabs the concentration of structural engineer
especially in case of some iconic structures. The lateral load analysis on structures is
majorly carried out for wind and seismic forces. The design lateral forces on building due
to wind increases in magnitude with increase in height of the building, these forces on
building pushes and displaces the storey diaphragms with respect to vertical
centroidalaxis of the building which thereby produces a base shear at the base level.

Unlike wind forces, seismic forces on building are due to occurrence of

earthquake. An Earthquake is a sudden tremor or movement of Earth’s crust, which
originates naturally at or below the surface. The word natural is important here, since it
excludes shock waves caused by nuclear tests, man- made explosions etc. About 90% of
all earthquakes results from tectonic events, primarily movements on the faults. The
remaining is related to volcanism, collapse of subterranean cavities or man- made effects.
Tectonic earthquakes are triggered when the accumulated strain exceeds shearing
strength of rocks. The earthquake waves propagates the strain energy released at the
focus and when reaches the base of a structure vibrates it vigorously inducing amplified
amplitudes in free vibration modes of the structure.

Fig-1 Movement of tectonic plates per year

These amplified modes of the structure corresponding to a critical damping value

together produce design lateral forces at each storey level on the building to which it has
to be analyzed. The design lateral seismic forces on building are the fictitious forces
obtained as mass times the acceleration associated with the base excitation, this includes
the dynamic behavior of the structure. Whereas, in case of static analysis, the design base

9
shear obtained as a function of seismic weight of the structure is distributed to each
storey in proportion to its height from the base.

Fig-2 Reaction forces on building subjected to ground motion

Seismology is the study of the generation, propagation and recording of elastic

waves in the earth and the sources that produce them. Seismology plays an important
role in view of a structural engineer to 1. Study the subsoil behavior at the location of the
structure 2. Know about past earthquake history of the site and predict the seismicity of
the location 3. Evaluate the design forces on building for previous peak ground motion
data based on seismicity and sub soil condition.

Different methods of seismic analysis of structure available in practice are as follows,

1. Equivalent static analysis

2. Non linear static analysis

3. Linear Dynamic analysis

4. Response Spectrum method

5. Non linear dynamic analysis

6. Time History method

1.2. TIME HISTORY METHOD

Analysis of a structure applying data over increments of time steps as a function

of acceleration, momentum or displacement. This method is most useful for very long or
very tall structures (flexible structures). Eigen values generated for the structure based on
response to time history are considered to be more realistic compared to response
spectrum analysis. The solutions based on time history analysis are as accurate as close
the spacing of time steps. The reduction of seismic forces on structures using this method
depends on soil properties, type of structure and available data.

10
 Fig-3 Application of earth ground motion on structures
1.3. .BHUJ EARTHQUAKE

The highest magnitude recorded earthquake in India that took place in the state of
Gujarat on 26th January 2001 is subsequently referred to as bhuj earthquake or kutch
earthquake. The earthquake was named after the epicenter of the earthquake, i.e., a
district in Gujarat called Bhuj. The earthquake ranks as one of the most destructive events
recorded so far in India in terms of death toll, damage to infrastructure and devastation in
the last 50 years .The magnitude of Bhuj earthquake recorded 6.9 on Richter scale and
7.79 on MS scale. The horizontal component of this earthquake is considered in this
present work which is shown in Figure.

Fig-4 Ground Motion Data for Bhuj Earthquake

1.4. IS CODE PROVISIONS FOR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS

Indian standard code IS 1893: 2016 (part-1) “Criteria for earthquake resistant
design of structures”, provides provisions for seismic analysis of structures. According to
the code, the total land scape of India is divided into five seismic zones depending on
11
 seismicity of the region and its previous earthquake history. The map showing different
seismic zones in India are shown in figure-4 and corresponding zone factors are given in
Table-1.

Fig-5 Seismic zoning map of India

Table-1 Seismic zone factor (Clause 6.4.2)

Seismic Zone
I&II III IV V
Factor

Z 0.10 0.16 0.24 0.36

12
 The Seismic weight of the structure as per IS 1893-2016 is considered as the total
dead weight of the structure plus some percentage of imposed live load on the structure.
The code has provided provision for consideration of imposed load fraction on structure
as given in Table-2. IS code provides a reduction factor called Response reduction factor
to reduce the structural response depending upon the type of frame consider for the
building as given in Table-3

Table-2 Percentage of imposed load to be considered in calculation of seismic weight

Imposed uniformity distributed floor loads Percentage of imposed

Sl. no
(kN/mm) load
1 Upto and including 3.0 25
2 Above 3.0 50

Table-3 Response reduction factor R for building systems

S.NO Lateral load resisting system R

1 Ordinary moment resisting RC framed building 3
2 Special moment resisting RC framed building 5

1.5. INTRODUCTION ON ETABS

ETABS is extended three dimensional analysis of building system. ETABS is a

completely integrated system. Embedded beneath the simple intuitive user interface are
very powerful numerical methods, design procedures and international design codes. All
working from a single comprehensive data base. This integration means that to create
only one model of the floor systems and the vertical and lateral framing systems to
analyze, design, and detail entire building. Everything you need integrated into one
versatile analysis and design package with one windows –based graphical user interface.
No external modulus are required. The effects on one part of the structure from changes
in another part are instantaneous and automatic. The integrated components include:

ETABS is a sophisticated, yet easy to use, special purpose analysis and design
program developed specifically for building systems. ETABS features an intuitive and
powerful graphical interface coupled with unmatched modeling, analytical, design, and
detailing procedures, all integrated using a common database. Although quick and easy
for simple structures, ETABS can also handle the largest and most complex building
models, including a wide range of nonlinear behaviors necessary for performance based
design, making it the tool of choice for structural engineers in the building industry.

13
 The following list represents just a portion of the types of systems and analyses
that ETABS can handle easily:

Parking garages with circular and linear ramps

Buildings with curved beams, walls and floors edges
Buildings with steel, concrete, composite or joist floor framing
Projects with multiple towers
Buildings based design utilizing nonlinear dynamic analysis
Capacity check of beam-to-column and beam-to-beam steel connections
Foundation\support settlement
Large displacement analysis
Design optimization for steel and concrete frames
Design capacity check of steel column base plates

The present work deals with seismic behavior of RC framed building by Time
history method using Extended three dimensional analysis of buildings structures
(ETABS) software and considering Indian Standard code 1893 :2016 (part-1).

Chapter-1 Deals about the basic knowledge and general introduction.

Chapter-2 Review of literature available regarding the project.

Chapter-3 Methodology adopted to carry out the present work .

Chapter-4 Aim and scope the the present study .

Chapter-5 Deals of modeling the structure, load assigns, function assigns and resulting
model display.

Chapter-6 Presentation of analysis results of the model for different load cases in the
form of pictures, graphs and tables.

Chapter-7 Discussion on analysis results and assessing the seismic behavior of the model.

14
CHAPTER-2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Matjaz DOLSEK and Peter FAJFAR (1998):- To investigate the seismic response
of infilled RC frames and its modeling. Several variants of a four-storey and a three-
storey reinforced concrete building, tested pseudo dynamically at the European
laboratory for structural assessment in Ispra, have been analyzed.

Hyun KO, Hyun-Su Kim and Joo-Won Kang (1999):- To study the Masonry infill
walls are frequently used as interior partitions or exterior walls for low-rise RC buildings.
These infill walls are usually considered to be non-structural elements, and thus they are
ignored in analytical models, because they are assumed to be beneficial to the structural
behavior.

F.Demir (2002):- In this study, effects of nonstructural masonry on the earthquake

response of reinforced concrete structure are investigated by considering reinforced
concrete structures with different configuration of masonry infills to examine the
effects of irregular infill masonry structural performance.

Diptesh Das and Murthy (2004):- Studied the influence of brick masonry infill in
seismic design of reinforced concrete frame buildings. It was shown that the brick infill
walls present in reinforced concrete frame buildings reduce the structural drift but
increase the strength and stiffness.

Jigme – Dorji (2009):- Examined that the influence of infill on the structural
performance is significant. The structural response such as fundamental period , roof
displacement , inter –storey drift ratio, stresses in infill wall and structural member
forces of beams and columns generally reduce within corporation of in filled walls.

Stuart J Oliver (2010):- This paper provides a brief introduction into buildings and
their seismic behavior. It then outlines a design methodology for the assessment and
retrofit of flexible diaphragms in buildings with an accompanying design.

HimanshuBansaL (2014):- Analyzed vertical irregular building with Response

Spectrum analysis and Time History Analysis. It consists of mass irregularity, stiffness
irregularity and vertical geometry irregularity. The shear force was found maximum for
first storey and it decreases to minimum in the top storey in all classes.

A.R.Habibi:- This paper analyzed four different buildings models which are vertically
irregular and each model is analyzed for without mass regularity, with mass irregularity
increasing from bottom to top, and with mass irregularity decreasing bottom to top.
Combination of four models and three mass irregularities are also then analyzed.

15
OvidiuBolea (2015):- In the present study, non linear analysis was conducted in order to
assess the seismic performance of RC frames with masonry in filled panels, for sets of 3
and 6-storey buildings with different infill configurations. A single struct nonlinear cyclic
model was used for masonry panels to simulate the response of in filled RC frames.

Arvindredddy and R.J.Fernandes (2015):- Investigated the response of regular and

plan irregular structures under zone. Static and dynamic methods were conducted using
ETABS.The displacements of both regular and irregular models were compared for the
different methods and it was compared to dynamic method.

Arvindredddy (2015):- In this paper analytical study is made to find response of

different regular and irregular structures located in survey zone V. Analysis had been
made by taking 15 storey building by static and dynamic methods using ETABS 2013
and IS code 1893-2002(part-1).From time history analysis it was found that for 15 storey
stiffness irregularity shows least base force as compared to all other structures.

HemaMukundan (2015):- It was studied that found shear wall provision in building has
been effective and economical. A 10 storey building zone IV is tested to reduce the effect
of earthquake concrete shear walls in the building. Researches also studied results
varying thickness of shear walls.

Arunava Das and Priyabrata (2016):- In this paper, behavior of four storeyirregular
and regular building subjected to earthquake loads were compared. Time History analysis
and pushover analysis were performed by using SAP2000.

Abdul Vajid (2016):- In this study, ten models of G+RC frame buildings were modeled
and analyzed by linear time history method in ETABS 2015 software. And model-I was
compared with other nine models comprising of open ground storey stiffened with
masonry infill walls, RC shear walls and steel bracings with different patterns.

Poonam et.al. (2012):-Concluded that any storey must not be softer than the stories
above or below. Irregularity in mass distribution contributed to the increased response of
the buildings.

Sadjadi et al.(2007):- Presented an analytical approach for seismic assessment of RC

frames using Non linear Time History analysis and Push Over analysis. The results from
analytical models where validated against available experimental results. He observed
that ductile and less ductile frames behaved very well under the earthquake considered.

Kim and Elnashai(2009):-Observed that buildings for which seismic design was done
using contemporary codes survived the earthquake loads. However the vertical motion
significantly reduced the shear capacity in vertical members.

16
Moehle (2014):- Found that standard limit analysis and static in elastic analysis provide
good measures of strength and deformation characteristics under strong earthquake
motions.

J. Laxmi Reddy (2009):- did earthquake analysis of school buildings.

Baldev D. Prajapati:-Has study that the analysis and design procedure adopted for the
calculation of symmetric high rised multi storey building (G+5) under effect of
earthquake forces. The RCC building is considered is considered to resist lateral forces
resisting system.

Dr.S.SureshBabu(2015):- Study, he performed linear static analysis and dynamic

analysis and multi storied buildings with plan irregularities for the determination of
lateral forces, base shear, storey drift, storey shear. The paper also deals with the effect of
the variation of the building plan on the structural response building. Dynamic responses
under prominent earthquake, related to IS:1893-2002 (Part-1).

K.SivaKiran(2017):- In this study variation in seismic behavior of multi storied RC

building terms of various responses such as peak roof displacement, storey drift, storey
force, storey shear and base shear by using Response Spectrum Method.

17
CHAPTER-3 METHODOLOGY
3.1. METHODOLOGY CARRIED OUT IN ETABS

A G+5 RC framed residential apartment building is modeled in ETABS 2015

software developed based on a floor plan as shown in Fig-6. The sectional properties of
different elements of the model are listed in Table-4. The properties of materials like
concrete and steel used in the project work are listed in Table-5.

Fig-6 Floor plan for residential apartment building

Table-4 Sectional properties of different structural elements

Structural element Sectional property Grade of material

Main beams 300mm x 450mm M25
Secondary beams 250mm x 300mm M25
Column type-1 300mm x 450mm M30
Column type-2 300mm x 300mm M30
Outer wall 230 mm thick M25
Partition wall 150mm thick M25
190mm thick including floor
Slab M25
finish

18
 Table-5 Properties of construction materials

Description of material Grade of material used

Concrete M20, M25
Steel Fe415

Table-6 Load particulars on different structural elements

Sl. No Load particular Description Intensity Reference

1 Dead load
IS 875:1987
Outer wall 20x0.23x2.55 11.73kN/m
(part-1)
Partition wall 20x0.15x2.55 7.65kN/m
2 Live load
Imposed live
3.5 kN/m2
load on floor
slab
IS 875:1987
Imposed live Adopted
(part-2)
load on corridor 2.5 kN/m2
slab
Imposed load on
5 kN/m2
lift slab

The model is prepared with different load assignments on different structural

elements as specified in Table-6 and a mass source of dead load plus 50 percent of
imposed live load is as recommended by IS 1893:2016 is created for lateral load analysis
due to seismic forces. A time history function with Bhuj earthquake ground motion data
is assigned in both X and Y directions of the building initially with a scale factor given
by
ࡵࢍ
ࡿࢉࢇ࢒ࢋࢌࢇࢉ࢚࢕࢘ ൌ  ࡾ Eq-1

Where

I = Importance factor

g = Acceleration due to gravity, i.e., 9.81 m/sec2

R = Response reduction factor

Along with time history function, equivalent static force load case is also assigned
to the structure in both X and Y directions and the model is run for the cases shown in
Fig-10. After the analysis is run, the scale factor obtained by the ratio of average base
shear of the structure due to time history load case to that of equivalent static force case

19
in each direction of the model is calculated and by replacing the scale facto rprovided in
time history analysis, the model is analyzed for the load cases again. This process is
repeated until the base shear due to time history case come in range to that of equivalent
static case

3.2. TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS

Step 1: Calculation of modal matrix

The equation of motion for a multi degree of freedom system in matrix form can be
expressed as

>m@^X ` >C@^X ` >K@^x` x g (t)>m@^I` Eq-2

>m@ =mass matrix

>C@=damping matrix
>K@ = stiffness matrix
I =unit vector

x g (t)
=ground acceleration

^x` >)@^q` Eq-3

Where [ ) ] is a modal matrix,

Time derivatives of {x} are,

^x ` >)@^q ` Eq-4

^x` >)@^q` Eq-5

Substituting the time derivatives in the equation of motion and pre-multiplying by [ɸ]T
gives

>)@T >m@>)@^q` >)@T >C@>)@^q ` >)@T >K@>)@^q` (x g (t)>)@ >m@^I `)

T
Eq-6

More clearly, it can be represented as following

>M@^q` >C@^q ` >K@^q` ^p eff (t)` Eq-7
20
Where

>M@ >Φ @[m]>Φ@

T

>C@ >Φ @[c]>Φ@

T

>K@ >Φ @[k]>Φ@

T

[M], [C] and [K] are the diagonal zed modal mass matrix, modal damping matrix and
modal Stiffness matrix respectively and {Peff (t)} is the effective modal force vector.

Step 2: Calculation of effective force vector

The excitation function is

^peff (t)`  x (t)>)@ >m@^I`

g
T
Eq-8

Step 3: Calculation of displacement response in normal co-ordinate

Considering mode super position technique, ‘N’ number of uncoupled equations of

motion are formed for ‘N’ storied building in normal co-ordinate as
q i  C i q i  K i q i Pi  x g (t)  Eq-9

Step 4: Displacement response in physical co-ordinates

Displacement response in physical co-ordinates can be calculated from the transformation

equation as.
N
^x(t) ` ¦ ^)`i q i )1 q i (t)  ) 2 q 2 (t)  ..............  ) N q N (t ) Eq-10
i 1

Step 5: Calculation of effective earthquake response forces at each storey

When the relative displacements of the masses have been established, the effective
earthquake forces or the elastic restoring forces Fs(t) at each mass mare determined.

^Fs (t)` >k@^x(t) ` Eq-11

Step 6: Calculation of storey shear

The storey shears can be calculated from the following equation

^V(t)` >S@>k@^x(t)` Eq-12

Where,

21
[ S ] is the ( n*n ) upper triangular matrix given as,

ª1 1 1 1º
«0 1 1 1»»
>S@ « Eq-13
«0 0 1 1»
« »
¬0 0 0 1¼
Once after finding the spectral displacement response by solving the governing
differential equation, the pseudo spectral responses are determined by using the following
relations as

୮ୟ ൌ ɘ୬ ୮୴ ൌ ɘଶ୬ ୢ Eq-14

ଶ஠ ଶ஠ ଶ
୮ୟ ൌ ୘ ୮୴ ൌ ቀ୘ ቁ ୢ Eq-15
౤ ౤
Where,

Sd = Spectral displacement

SPv = Pseudo spectral velocity

SPa = Pseudo spectral acceleration

ɘ୬ = Natural frequency

Tn = Natural period

22
CHAPTER-4 AIM AND SCOPE
AIM

In view of structural response to earthquakes, usually structures respond

vigorously when the natural period of structure matches with period of propagation of
earthquake waves. This phenomenon is known as resonance. In resonance state, the
structural responses get amplified and may subject to structural failure. In case of large
structures with higher periods of vibration, low frequency earthquakes cause more
damage than high frequency ground motions where as for low rise buildings, high
frequency earthquakes could be more disastrous than low frequency earthquakes.

Sometimes low magnitude earthquakes have high peak ground acceleration values
than higher magnitude because of their sub soil condition. Hence it is very complex to
assess the seismic response of structures. In this context, this project assesses the time
history behavior of RC framed building to particular ground motion data with different
seismic zones and different soil types.

SCOPE:In this present work the time history behaviour of RC framed building subjected
to bhuj earthquake ground motion is carried out considering the effect of various seismic
zones and soil types as prescribed in IS 1893:2016 (part-1).

The present work can be extended to Non-linear time history Analysis and
dynamic push over analysis.

23
CHAPTER-5 MODELLING IN ETABS

Fig-7 Initialization of model in ETABS

Fig-8 Selection of template for new model

24
Fig-9 Beam layout for model in ETABS

Fig-10 Positioning of columns in plan

25
 Fig-11 Assignment of slab panels in plan

Fig-12 Elevation view of the model in positive X-direction

26
Fig-13 Three dimensional view of the model

27
Fig-14 Assignment of beam loads on model

28
 Fig-15 Creationof Bhuj earthquake function

Fig-16 Time history function for Bhuj earthquake data

29
Fig-17 Assignment of different load cases

Fig-18 Applicationof frame loads on beams

30
 Fig-19 Assignment of joint restraints

Fig-20 Complete 3D model with sections and support restraints

31
Fig-21 Deformed shape after analysis

32
CHAPTER-6 ANALYSIS RESULTS
6.1. MODAL ANALYSIS RESULT
Period (sec)

Mode

Fig-22 Periods of different modes of the structure

6.2. SPECTRAL RESPONSE OF THE STRUCTURE TO BHUJ EARTHQUAKE

Fig-23 Spectral displacement response spectra

33
 Fig-24 Spectral velocity response spectra

Fig-25 Spectral acceleration response spectra

34
 Fig-26 Pseudo spectral velocity response spectra

Fig-27 Pseudo spectral acceleration response spectra

35
6.3. DESIGN ACCELERATION SPECTRUM FOR BHUJ EARTHQUAKE

Fig-28 Design acceleration response spectra for Bhuj earthquake

6.4. STOREY SHEAR DISTRIBUTION DUE TO TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS

6.4.1. Storey shear distribution in X-direction

Fig-29 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone I & II

36
Fig-30 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone III

Fig-31 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone IV

Fig-32 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone V

37
Fig-33 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone I & II

Fig-34 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone III

Fig-35 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone IV

38
 Fig-36 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone V

Fig-37 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone I & II

Fig-38 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone III

39
 Fig-39 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone IV

Fig-40 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone V

6.4.2. Storey shear distribution in Y-direction

Fig-41 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone I & II

40
Fig-42 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone III

Fig-43 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone IV

Fig-44 Storey shear for soil type-I and seismic zone V

41
Fig-45 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone I & II

Fig-46 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone III

Fig-47 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone IV

42
 Fig-48 Storey shear for soil type-II and seismic zone V

Fig-49 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone I & II

Fig-50 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone III

43
 Fig-51 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone IV

Fig-52 Storey shear for soil type-III and seismic zone V

6.5. VARIATION OF BASE SHEAR AND ROOF DISPLACEMENT

6.5.1. Variation in X-direction

Table-7 Variation of structural base shear and roof displacement in X-direction

Roof displacement
Soil type Seismic zone Base shear (kN)
(mm)
I & II 5.26 349.82
III 8.42 559.76
Hard
IV 12.63 839.62
V 18.94 1259.39
I & II 7.15 475.78
III 11.44 761.24
Medium
IV 17.17 1141.85
V 25.76 1712.81
I & II 8.78 584.23
III 14.05 934.74
Soft
IV 21.08 1402.13
V 31.63 2103.22

44
 Variation of Peak Storey Displacement in
X-Direction
Peak Storey Displacement (mm)

Hard Soil
Medium Soil
Soft Soil

Seismic Zone

Fig-53 Variation of roof displacement in X-direction

Variation of Structural Base Shear in

X-Direction
Base Shear (kN)

Soft Soil
Hard Soil
Medium Soil

Seismic Zone

Fig-54 Variationof structural base shear in X-direction

45
6.5.2. Variation in Y-direction

Table-8 Variation of structural base shear and roof displacement in Y-direction

Roof displacement
Soil type Seismic zone Base shear (kN)
(mm)
I & II 5.15 373.49
III 8.24 597.60
Hard
IV 12.36 896.39
V 18.54 1344.57
I & II 7.00 507.97
III 11.21 812.73
Medium
IV 16.81 1219.09
V 25.26 1828.65
I & II 8.61 624.26
III 13.76 998.01
S
IV 20.65 1496.97
V 30.97 2245.46

Variation of Peak Storey Displacement in

Y-Direction
Peak Storey Displacement (mm)

Hard Soil
Medium Soil
Soft Soil

Seismic Zone

Fig-55 Variationof roof displacement in Y-direction

46
 Variation of Structural Base Shear in
Y-Direction
Base Shear (kN)

Soft Soil
Hard Soil
Medium Soil

Seismic Zone

Fig-56 Variation of structural base shear in Y-direction

47
 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The time period of the structure corresponding to its principal mode is found to be
0.822 seconds.

2. The top peak storey (roof) displacement and structural base shear of the building for a
particular zone is increased by about 67% with increase in flexibility of the soil (i.e.,
Hard soil to soft soil).

3. The top storey (roof) displacement and structural base shear of the building is linearly
increased with increase in seismicity (i.e., zone factor) of building location with a
particular soil type.

4. The top storey (roof) displacement and base shear of the building for a particular zone
for soil type 3 is increased by 67% when compared to soil type 1 and found to be constant
at each zone.

5. Both the top storey (roof) displacement and base shear of the building for a particular
zone for soil type 1and 2 is increased by 36% and found to be constant at each zone.

7. Different plots showing the response spectra of Bhuj earthquake obtained in ETABS
are presented in figures

7. The design acceleration spectral curve has an uneven peak between 0.6 second and 1
second band on X-axis. It depicts that, all structures having their natural period between
0.6 to 1.0 second range may Subject to maximum responses.

8. The increase in flexibility of the soil (Hard soil to soft soil) transfers most of the
energy of earthquake wave propagation to the structure and there by increases the
structural base shear.

9. The increase in flexibility of soil increases the period of vibration of the structure and
there by increases the roof displacement response.

48
 REFERENCES
[1]. Pankaj Agarwal, Manish Shrikhande (2007),’Earthquake Resistant Design Of
Structures’ Prentice-Hall of India Limited Private Limited, New Delhi.
[2]. Anil K. Chopra (2002), Dynamics of Structures: theory and Applications to
Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall of India Limited Private Limited, New
Delhi,
[3]. IS 1893 (part1): 2016, “Criteria for earthquake Resistant Design of Structures-
Part1: general Provisions and Buildings”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.
[4]. R. Clough and J. Penzien (2003), ‘Dynamics of Structures’, Second Edition,
Computers & Structures, Inc., University Ave., Berkeley, CA 94704USA.
[5]. Anil .K. Chopra and RakeshK.Goel (2001).’ A Modal Pushover Analysis
Procedure to Estimate Seismic Demands for Buildings: Theory and Preliminary
Evaluation’, peer reports, peer.berkeley.edu publications.
[6]. S. Rajasekaran (2009), ‘Structural Dynamics of Earthquake Engineering Theory
and Application using MATHEMATICA and MATLAB’, CRC Press Publisher.
[7]. RudraPratap (2005), ‘Getting Started with MATLAB: a quick introduction for
Scientists and Engineers’, Oxford University Press.
[8]. T.K.Data (2010), ‘Seismic Analysis of Structures ‘, John Wiley &Sons (Asia) Pte
Ltd.
[9]. Tirupathi, R.Chandrupatla and Ashok D.Belegundu (2002), ’Introduction to
Finite Elements in Engineering’.Prentice HallPublishers.
[10]. Mario Paz and William Leigh (2003), ‘Structural Dynamics: Theory and
Computation’, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[11]. S.Mahesh, B.Panduranga Rao,“Comparision of analysis and design of
regular and irregular configuration of multi storey building in various seismic
zones and various types of soils using ETABS”, an International Journal of
Mechanical and Civil Engineering, volume 11,Issue 6 ver.IPP 45-52,Nov-
Dec.2014.
[12]. P.V.Patel (2003)“Dynamic Analysis of Buildings as per IS:1893”,the
Journal of Engineering and Technology,16(4),PP 10-15.
[13]. Dr.S.SureshBabu (2015)“Study he performed linear static analysis and
dynamic analysis on multistoried buildings with plan irregularities” an
International Journal on Engineering and innovative Technology (IJEIT),volume
3,April 2015.
[14]. Srikanth and V.Ramesh (2013)“Comparatives study of seismic response
for seismic coefficient and response spectrum method”.
[15]. A.K.Chopra “Dynamic of structural theory and Earthquake Engineering”
fourth edition, Prentice Hall, 2012.

49
 [16]. K.SivaKiran (2017)“Study on Effect of seismic zone and soil type on
Dynamic Behavior of RC framed building.
[17]. Awkar J.C. and Lui E.M, “Seismic analysis and response of multi storey
building semi rigid frames”, Journal of Engineering Structures, volume 21, Issue
5,page no:425-442,1997.
[18]. Md.Kabir ,DebasishSen(2015),“Seismic vulnerability and response of
regular and irregular shaped multi storey building of identical weight in context
of Bangladesh” shapes” International journal of Innovative Research in advance
Engineering (IJIRAE)(August 2015).
[19]. Mohammed Rizwan Sultan (2015)’Dynamic analysis of multi storey
building of different shapes’, International Journal Innovative Research in
advanced Engineering(IJIRAE),Issue 8,volume 2(August 2015).
[20]. Kulkarni J.G., Kore P.N., S.B. Tanawade, “Analysis of multi storey
building frames subjected to Gravity and seismic loads with varying Inertia”
,International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT), volume
2,Issue 10,April 2013.

WEBLINKS AND URLS

http://www.pesmos.in

http://www.cosmos.eq.org

http://www.usgs.gov

http://www.sciencedirect.com/sciencejournals/civilengineering

50