You are on page 1of 17


************************************************************* 1.SUMMORY OF 20-11-12: Posted by Er.T.RangaRajan, Raconteur E-Conferenc. 2. Under No title topic Er. Sureshkumar_Kumaresan has commented that Tall building definition shall also consider slenderness ratio not just the height. There is no definite answer to this and diverse definitions/limits all over the place. In my opinion,

we need not worry too much on whether the building is tall or low. Our concern shall be whether any element or the entire structure is wind sensitive or not. For instance, in low buildings such as stadiums/airports, lateral wind force is not an issue, but uplift/down force on the long-span roof is an issue and should be carefully studied. With regard to which load dominates, as madam Alpa rightly said this depends on many parameters. However,typically when number of floors above about 35 and slenderness ratio above 5-6, wind may govern the design. Rule of thumb, as the buildings go higher and slenderness increases, the building becomes more flexible and will interact with wind more than earthquake as there is lot more energy with wind at low frequencies than earthquake does.

3.Welcome to the Econference on Design and Construction of Tall Building: Dr.N.S has informed the availability of Stud rails or Stud reinforcement and it does not have any connection with tall buildings, but has connection with flat plates. They are to be used only when the punching shear strength of the slab is less than the applied punching shear at the column-slab joint. There are other methods of increasing the punching shear strength, though stud reinforcement has been found to be more efficient. Also cited a reference article on the use of studs in Corbels: Birkle,G., Ghali, A. and Schafer, K., Double-Headed Studs Improve Corbel Reinforcement, Concrete International, Vol. 24, No.9, September 1, 2002, pp.

4. A new topic How to optimize tall buildings for wind is posted by Dr.Sureshkumar_Kumaresan

In the above topic he stressed that plan form geometry can play a huge role in the optimization procedure before one would look into the structural aspects. Most of the time the geometry is fixed by the architect and then the building goes into a wind tunnel study mode. But then we have the only option of fixing the issues only structurally which is quite a task for the structural engineer. So structural fix means more concrete (for stiffening and increasing mass, not always sometime reorienting the frames would do the job) and less space. This way of fixing is not a sustainable way as well. He also expressed his views as when we come with tall/slender buildings, geometry should be given considerable importance . He needs more comments and questions in this regard from the participating Sefians. 5. Again Er. SureshKumar has put a new topic as WIND TUNNEL TESTING: As informed in my previous summary he is an expert in Wind engineering and has a good and vast experience in that field. He informs that in my career as a wind engineer, I have used many approaches to calculate wind loads on any wind sensitive structures not just limited to tall buildings. The approaches that I have used are codes/standards, wind tunnel testing, analytical (stochastic) and full-scale measurements. I have to admit that out of all these approaches, wind tunnel testing approach becomes the most sought out approach in the industry considering their accuracy and practicality. He outlined the rule of thumb when to conduct the wind tunnel test for a project as one should be looking into this once the structure is above 35-40 floors and slenderness is above 5-6. The reasons for doing is multifold. The key reason is to obtain accurate loading on the structure and accelerations at the top of the building to evaluate human comfort. Without a wind tunnel test, there is no way of find realistic loading on the building unless the building is boxy and located without any immediate surrounding buildings. Mostly, the wind tunnel test will provide lower loads than an international

code would provide. So here there will be huge saving for the owner. However, this is not the reason to do a tunnel test. He welcomes a deep discussions and comments on this. 6. Dr.Swaminathan Krishnan has given a brief comments on various codes that are applicable for Tall buildings and explained vividly on the US code and Altenate Design Guideline (ADG). The most recent US codes fall into three categories:
1. ASCE 7 (Standard). 2. International Building Code (IBC). 3. Material-specific codes such as ACI-318 for concrete and AISC Manual of Steel

Construction for steel. Under the heading Background to the development of alternate design guidelines for tall buildings he explained that because the prescriptive codes have strict height limits. In particular, ASCE 7 requires a "dual-system" to be employed for all buildings greater than 160 feet (BTW, the IBC classifies any building with an occupied floor located more than 75 feet above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access as a high-rise building; nominally, I think, this would work out to >10 stories). Dual systems can be configured by combining a braced-frame or a shear wall core and a perimeter moment frame; the moment frame should be configured to resist 25% of the prescribed seismic forces. To get around this problem, engineers decided to draft "alternate design guidelines (ADG)"with contributions and input from several prominent academics. The first document was for San Francisco city followed closely by a similar document for Los Angeles by the Los Angeles Tall Building Structural Design Council (LATBSDC). Subsequently, the CTBUH drafted its own guideline (along the lines of the LATBSDC document) which is the document you reference.

Key differences between ADG (alternate design guidelines for Los Angeles) and IBC (prescriptive code): (a) The ADG eliminates height limits on all structural systems. (b) For the code-level check in the ADG, the prescriptive code provisions were adopted, but with certain key exclusions. (i) The code provides a simple formula to determine the time period for various structural systems as a function of the height (termed Method A period, Ta). (ii) The ADG eliminates two other minimum design base shear requirements that were first introduced in the 1997 UBC to account for near-source effects, replacing it with a hard lower bound of 2.5% instead. (iii) ADG eliminates the drift limit imposed by the prescriptive code. The result of these three "relaxing" exceptions is that the ADG makes it possible to conceive buildings that are more flexible than what the prescriptive code would allow. My thoughts about ADG: Under this he listed that: (a) Eliminating the hard lower bound on the fundamental period (1.3Ta)in the base shear computation: (b) Redundancy. (c) Nonlinear analysis software. (d) Ground motion selection. (e) The last point has to do with the "subjectivity" of the design process that is afforded within the ADG. Interested Sefians can browse the link for more details as explained by him. He has placed the questions to Sefians to ponder and reply as (a) Flexible vs stiff (see my original post)? (b) ADG vs Prescriptive? 6. In response to the above comments by Prof.Dr.S.K, engineer Rangarajan has the following questions: a. Dual systems can be configured by combining a braced-frame or a shear wall core and a perimeter moment frame; the moment frame should be configured to resist 25% of the prescribed seismic forces. Can you explain how to model in any software like STAAD etc so that the frame takes at least 25% of base shear? b. FRAME 3D program is only on line use or available separately on price? Also asked why there is no comment on UBC as adopted in US? 7. Accessing construction materials to higher floors: Fast Track Construction of Stories/structural floors: Current practice for general & tall structures-Cast in situ For the above Er.Suraj has listed 16 notes like 1 Cast in situ construction applies to various structures, where required working & material handling area is available on sites. 2 3 Cast in situ also, applies to structures that require complex coordination for Cast in situ is also, helpful for better site controls on line management

allied services & various non regular plan shapes.

level. 4 5 6 7 Site fabricated formwork can be conveniently, used for preparatory works. Thick & massive members can be handled conveniently in all cases . Detected errors or mistakes can be reworked if so required. Construction vertical members & horizontal members do not cause major

issues with exception of site time consumption, stretching schedule bars. Loss Prevention on Buildings/Fire Suppression: 29 notes are given for the above by Er.Suraj. Under the main topic Urbanisation of Metropolis Surrounding AreasGeneral DiscussionHigh Rise Er.Suraj has given more notable points for the Electrical Standby Supply & Distribution: A few out of 14 points are: 1. Cannot depend exclusively, on state board supply & distribution of electrical energy to serve occupancies. 2. Without continuous electricity supplies, vertical movement in buildings stops, which can cause adverse issues. 3. Some persons can trap in elevators at all levels, jeopardizing lives, which situation necessitates requirement of standby emergency electrical supplies. 4. Though all services may not require standby supplies, yet necessary services such as water distribution, lifts, electric LEDs, access card system etc. should be provided operational all times. 5. Such services loads should be calculated for procurement of electrical generators of required capacity, without producing sound & operable at low running cost. For Combination of cast in situ & cast in factory he has given 21 notes out of first few of them are listed below:

High rise or tall buildings are in line to current practice prosecuted on fast

track basis, so that major work is carried out off site in factory & limited volume of work affected on site. 2 Construction method adopted for such combination is cast in situ application for columns & beams, while factory production of precast hollow core slab/panels to be installed on site born over cast in situ columns & beams framework. 3 .Columns as usual are constructed on site by conventional methods of cast in situ procedures. 4 .Supporting beams are located on particular coordinates on plan that respond with wall locations. ***************************************************************** 8. The new topic of to-day is use of structural steel ans other alternative materials: Er. Jignesh V Chokshi has asked the query Can anyone highlight the statistics of Steel buildings and concrete buildings? Since R.C.C preferred materials for almost all Tall building in India. He stated that in order to deal with loads and other services requirement, use of alternative materials or methods is quite extensive. He has few questions/observations for following two points: A. Use of Steel in Building industry. B. Alternative materials. For item A he has listed : 1. Steel has much capacity compared to concrete. I understand that steel construction in general is perceived to be expensive. But this is not always

true. For large loads, stel is always a preferred choice of engineer. Is Steel construction very expensive compared to RCC even for all high rise buildings? 2. Steel construction of high rise building require sections having large sectional area by large flange and web thicknesses. Does our steel producers make such sections? 3. Reduced plan dimensions of sections will give lot of room for floor area and may also be suitable for aesthetic purposes dur to slim sections. 4. Steel construction will require adequate measures for fire safety. Do we have adequate resources in terms of material and contractors who can do it? 5. Steel construction is faster compared to RCC. The sections may be brought directly from shop and very less field work will be required. Do builders give due consideation to time value in their commercial analysis of project? 6. Bolted connections can make building erection much faster. We are yet to adopt this philosophy. Experts can highlight pros and cons of bolted construction use as of today in India. For item (B) he has raised the questions as 1. Why such hollow precast planks not popular in India? Can the same be used with RCC construction also? 2. Light weight partitions are not much seen in India. Is it that the consumer is scared to adopt new material or is it not suitable to our environment? In response to the postings by Er. Jignesh V Chokshi, Er.Suraj has listed 31 items which can be read under the link:
Er.R L DINESH has informed about the choice of RCC & Steel depends on factors like construction cost, less weight of construction, stiffness, flexibility of plan, behavior in fire, construction time and usable area. A general guide lines collected from tall structures references is enclosed. + sign indicate suited. ++ sign indicate more suited

CRITERIA Construction Cost Less Weight of construction Stiffness Flexibility of plan Behavior in Fire Construction time Usable area

RCC Normal + 0 ++ 0 ++ + _

RCC High STEELCOMPOSITE Strength ++ 0 ++ + ++ 0 ++ + + ++ 0 ++ _ ++ ++ + + + + ++ +

9. Pointed discussions on tall buildings - Use of Flat Slab: In response to this earlier posting Er. shekhar at shekharpana... on 2011-12 has quoted that The three basic framing systems to resist lateral loads in high-rise buildings are: (1) Frames, (2)shear walls coupled or acting individually and

(3) frames interacting with shear walls. As an economical form of construction a shear wall structure incorporating a flat plate system is almost ideal. The flat plate system is very efficient in resisting gravity loading while the shear wall provides the resistance to lateral load. In response to the above to-day 21-11-12 Er. Kapildingare has sought more information and get expert opinion on relative extent of damage with respect to these three forms when such structure is exposed to severe earthquake than designed earthquake. To answer to the above question Dr.N.S has offered the followings: The failures that occurred are mostly in flat slab systems without shear walls. He quoted the places of failure of FLAY SLAB construction as: Several failures of flat slab structures have been reported in the literature, which include New York Coliseum on May 9, 1955 (waffle slab), 2000 Commonwealth Avenue: January 5, 1971, Five story Harbour Cay Condominium collapse at Cocoa Beach, Florida, March 27, 1981(11 workers killed and 23 injured), The Tropicana Casino parking garage in Atlantic City, New Jersey: October 30,2003, Four story warehouse at Ontario, Canada: January 4, 1978, five story Sampoong Department store, Seoul, Korea: June 29th 1995 (The collapse is the largest peacetime disaster in South Korean history - 502 people died, 6 missing, and 937 sustained injuries), Pipers Row Car Park, Wolverhampton, UK, 1997, Geneva, Switzerland 1976, Bluche, Switzerland 1981, Cagliari, Italy 2004, and parking garage flat slab at Gretzenbach, Switzerland, 2004. In addition several flat plate systems failed during earthquakes. Many slab column connections in flat-plate structures were damaged and failed after the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, and the 1994 Northridge earthquake.

He suggested that Prof. Murty, the moderator of this conference to conduct some expt. investigations at IITM to provide guidelines on this aspect, and also to provide a overview of the behaviour of such dual systems in case of larger earthquakes- how the walls and flat plates interact, failure mechanisms, how punching shear can be prevented, etc.

He also wanted to do research on Transfer Girder Behavior and he

stated as It is also necessary to do experiments for the so called 'Floating columns' that terminate at a transfer girder. Design Engineers do not know about the behaviour at the beam-column junction where the columns are terminating, under EQ loads. Guidelines are necessary to detail such beam-column junctions, so that failure is prevented. As the transfer girders are usually provided at the first floor level to accommodate column free parking or shopping areas, such a joint assumes at most importance, as the failure at the point will trigger catastrophic failure of the whole building. A study of the combination of flat plate-shear wall-transfer girder system is also desirable. Er.Anandkamath has asked Why are not using steel structures with precast wall for tall buildings? Under this post Er. Mjnasar has requested the clarification on Fire safety & evacuations issue and structural engineers role in it Following are the some points: Standards of Fire rating in Hrs for Various structural elements 1. Role of Concrete covers / concrete encasement in Fire safety 2. Chemicals to improve fire ratings

3. Evacuation issues 4. Progressive collapse issues 5. Blast Resistant construction for certain elements 9. Geotechnical Issues in Tall Buildings - Note from Geotechnical consultant Jaydeep Wa: P.K.Mallick has raised the question on 20-11-12 that How do we define soft rock and hard rock from soil investigation point of view ? To clarify the above Er.Suraj has posted the following information: Rocks/Compressive strength/BS 5930 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Extremely strong/Rocks ring on hammer blows/>200MN/m^2 Very srong/Core chipped only by heavy hammer blows/100-200MN/m^2 Strong/Broken by heavy hammer blows/ 50-100MN/m^2 Moderately strong/Broken by hammer blows while hand held/12.5-50MN/m^2 Moderately weak/Thin slabs or edges broken by heavy hand pressure/512.5MN/m^2 6. Weak/Gravel size lumps broken by heavy hand pressure/1.25-5MN/m^2 7. Very weak/Gravel size lumps crushed between fingers & thumb/<1> 8. RQD 70/75 may be considered hard range Granular 1. # of blows 50/Very dense 2. # of blows 30-50/Dense Cohesive soil 1. Undrained shear strength>300 KN/m^2/Hard 10. Books and References : 1. SP240: Performance-Based Design of Concrete Building for Wind Loads .

2. Proceedings of the Nationa Workshop on HIGH RISE BUILDINGS(NWHRB) -HELD BETWEEN aPRIL 25TH AND 26TH @ Hyderabad. 3. Multi-purpose High-rise Towers and Tall Buildings. H.R. Viswanath (Editor), Jurek Tolloczko (Editor), J.N. Clarke (Editor) The above 3 are added by by Er.T.RangaRajan. 1. Construction Technology for Tall Buildings By Michael Chew Yit Lin is posted by Er. P.K.Mallick. 11. Tall Building design: A new topic is posted by Er. Sriprakash_shastry. In his posting he explained that India is still a developing country we do not find clients who would like to invest this kind of money and even the one of the richest tycoon Mr. Mukesh Ambani has not having a tall building for his office. In this context he has modeled a fictitious model which is a Super Tall Skyscraper with a bundled tube design. Lateral force resisting elements are a combination of outrigger braced trusses and core walls. The structure would be very similar in design to the Sears Tower in Chicago. I have tried to work on it only during my free time as my work keeps me busy during the regular hours. The model has been created using STAADPRO software and he need the comments/views from Sefians. To respond to this Er.Suraj has listed 11 reasons for not building Tall Buidlings in India. 12. In response to the Welcome address in which Madam Alpa listed the topics Er. R L DINESH posted that Elastic compression of columns shall be taken into consideration in the analysis & design. Storey Height of tall buildings at lower level will be kept more than at the upper levels to account for this deformation. 13. New topic: Axial Shortening and Damping Er. vikas.pai has opened up the above new topic and stated that there are two more important issues that need some discussion in design and construction of tall buildings: 1. Axial Shortening of compression members and how to deal with it during the design, detailing and construction 2. Damping systems that are useful for wind damping, seismic damping and which one are available to use in India

Any thoughts from the current designers of tall buildings as well as contractors would be welcome. 14. Time period-Tall Building Design.(New topic) Er. Sukanta.adhikari has asked is there any limitation on time period of structure for tall structures? 15. Tall structure structural arrangement? On the above topic Dr.N.S has replied as: Location of shear walls should be at the extreme boundaries, so that we will get a good leaver arm for resisting the lateral loads, and hence the forces induced will be less. Many engineers adopt core walls, as it is easy to locate them around the stairs and lifts. Also such walls will have box configuration instead of the simple rectangular walls; hence provide much stability- However, much care should be exercised in designing the link beams around openings in the shear walls- Read the book by Smith & Coull, Tall Buildings Structures-Analysis and Design, Wiley, 1991, which still remains as an excellent book on this topic. Are you talking about pre-tensioned slabs in Tall buildings. Most of these slabs are executed by proprietary firms and you need to consult them. However visit the following sites, which may be useful: Er. BMR again asked the question : How effective would be the precast RCC building systems and an guidelines are there for the connection design of elements mentioning the tolerance limits for the connections as the connections would be defining the performance of the building? 16. Er.Rabinder Shekher has a very good suggestion saying that the outcome of the econference if put in CD form can be distributed to those interested on payment basis. For this Er.T.RangaRajan has informed that the day-to-day Summary is being posted in PDF format and interested Sefians can download them. Er.Rabinder Shekher has informed that In his state there is no building more than 10 storeyed and probably Building construction permission authorities have clear

orders to accord the sanction to a building having more than specified storeyes or a particular height. Now should we consider adoption of tall buildings in our state which falls in seismic zone IV and V? 17. Seismic Design of Cast-in-Place Concrete Diaphragms, Chords: The post appeared yesterday has been responded by Dr.N.S as: NIST-NEHRP has published a number of reports useful for practicing engineers which can be downloaded at

I have already given the link to download the previous reports 1-6 in my earlier postings at SEFI-Er Rangarajan once again has given link to Report 4 on Cast-in-Place Concrete Diaphragms, Chords, and Collectors- the latest report is: NIST Report on Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Mat Foundations-A Guide for Practicing Engineers, Other reports available at this site are: Selecting and Scaling Earthquake Ground Motions for Performing Response-History Analyses (NIST GCR 11-917-15) Research Plan for the Study of Seismic Behavior and Design of Deep, Slender Wide Flange Structural Steel Beam-Column Members (NIST GCR 11-917-13) NIST GCR 12-917-21 Soil-Structure Interaction of Building Structures (NIST 2012).

Links to other FEMA, PEER, MCEER reports are also available. In short it is a very useful website for design engineers, researchers and students. NIST is a Govt. Body and hence we can download it free of cost. Hope further lively discussions will continue.

T.RangaRajan. E-Confer. Raconteur