International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2017,, pp. 852–862, Article ID: IJCIET_08_01_101

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET &IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
0976

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

STUDY ON SEISMIC EFFECT

EFFECT OF HIGH RISE
BUILDING SHEAR WALL/WALL
WALL/WALL WITHOUT SHEAR
WALL
K Venkatesh
PG student, Department of Civil Engineering
KL University, Vaddeswaram

T. Venkatdas
Assistant Professor
Profess Department of Civil Engineering,
KL University, Vaddeswaram

ABSTRACT
Objective: In this paper the analytical study on the lateral behaviour of the structure is mainly
concentrated and how it is varying in the different zones of zone II and zone III with
wit different storey
heights of a 6storey, 11storey, and 16storey structure. The study also involves the orientation of
shear wall. Method in this study the behaviour of lateral displacements induced on or after
earthquakes. Concrete shear walls are used to resist the lateral displacement owing to earthquake
vibrations. Shear walls can be placed around the building as periphery walls, around the lift and
beside the staircase. Filing the buildings are modelled with floor area of 32mx28m. with 8 bays
along 32m span and 7 bays along 28m and apiece bay width of 4m .the lateral displacement of the
structure is compared in OMRF &SMRF and the lateral displacement values of current floor level
to another floor level should reach storey drift, the analysis is done in staadprov8i.findingthe
s
lateral displacements of the structure
structure is compared in OMRF & SMRF and it is found that lateral
displacement is less in SMRF compare with OMRF.
Key words: Equivalent Static Method, Shear Wall, Lateral Displacement, Staadprov8
Cite this Article: K Venkatesh and T. Venkatdas, Study On Seismic Effect of High Rise Building
Shear Wall/Wall Without Shear Wall.
Wall International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology,
Technology
8(1), 2017, pp. 852–862.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1

1. INTRODUCTION
A huge serving of India is susceptible to damaging levels of seismic exposures. In future, it is necessary to
take into excuse the seismic load for the design of towering construction. In present study, the earthquake
analysis
alysis of G+5, G+10, G+15 storied building was done by Equivalent static method. The main
constraintspains taking in this revision to relate the seismic enactment of dissimilar Zones i.e. II and III are
lateral displacement. The building frame is modelled with a dimensions of 32m x 28 m having columns &
beams with a slab panel of 4m x 4m the model is made using STAAD.PRO Software. In case of building

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.
IJCIET/index.asp 852 editor@iaeme.com
 Study On Seismic Effect of High Rise Building Shear Wall/Wall Without Shear Wall

with shear wall the building frame is modelled as above dimensions only with alternate shear wall using 4
node plate proposed thickness of 150 mm along the height of the structure. The new zone map places this
area in zone III. The new zone map will currently take individual four seismic zones – II, III, IV and V.
The zones decreasing in seismic zone I in the present map are combined by those of seismic zone II. Also
Madras will come underneath seismic zone III as beside zone II presently consequently, for significant
developments, such as a chief dam or a nuclear power plant, the seismic hazard is assessedexactly for that
place. Also, for the purposes of city design, civicregions. In this paper to analyse a model for earthquake
resisting structure. The model structure is located in both Zone-III&ZONE-II. To calculate the Lateral
Displacement, on buildings using equivalent static method. By using STAAD pro. And make a
comparative analysis between OMRF &SMRF Structure in equivalent static method .Comparison between
G+5, G+10, and G+ 15.Nikhil Agrawal(3)et. al. (2013) present masonry in filled RC frames including soft
storey buildings used in various multi structures in our country. In the present study, masonry in filled
reinforced concrete (RC) frames including soft storey of with and without opening. This opening is express
in terms of various percentages here, in this paper, symmetrical institutional building (G+5) located in
seismic zoneIII is considered by modelling of initial frame. This analysis is to be carried out on the models
such as bare frame, strut frame, strut frame with 15% centre&corner opening, which is performed by using
structure analysis and design software from which different parameters are computed. Sara Swati
Setia(5)et al (2012) has performed a study on 6 storied RC frame building model and is analyzed using the
software STAAD PRO.2006. The static analysis is then performed for the modelled RC frame building
using the computer software STAAD PRO. 2006. Five models are generated with this plan of the building
by introducing different variation and displacement, story drift, base shear and story shear are the various
parameters. Lateral displacement is largest in bare frame with soft storey defect both for earthquake force
in X-direction as well as in Z direction for corner columns as well as for intermediate columns. Buildings
with shear wall in core and shear wall in X direction as well as in Z-direction have uniform displacement
because of shear wall. Which shows a gradual change of stiffness between the lower soft storey and the
upper floors that is essentially required.

2. OBJECTIVE
In this paper the analytical study on the lateral behaviour of the structure is mainly concentrated and how it
is varying in the different zones of zone II and zone III with different storey heights of a 6storey, 11storey,
and 16storey structure. The study also involves the orientation of shear wall.

3. METHODOLOGY
The (OMRF &SMRF) structures of G+5, G+10, G+15, Floor structure is exposed in Fig 1. The seismic
analysis of building is done by Seismic Coefficient with given above procedures for Zone II and III. The
obtained results of both structures are compared with each other.

3.1. ANALYSIS DATA FOR THIS INVESTIGATION

Following data used in the analysis of the RC frame building model
Type of frame : RC frame (OMRF & SMRF)
Seismic zone : II&III
Number of storey : G+5, G+10, G+15
Floor height : 3m
Depth of two-way slab : 0.125m
Materials :M25 concrete, Fe415 steel
Shear wall thickness : 150mm
Type of soil : medium

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 853 editor@iaeme.com

 K Venkatesh and T. Venkatdas

Density of concrete : 25KN/m2

Equivalent static method : IS-1893(part-1)2002
Damping of structure : 5%
Shear wall thickness : 150mm

3.2 SESMIC COEFFIECIENT METHOD

As per IS 1893 (part1)-2002, Seismic Coefficient analysis Procedure is potted in resulting phases
Design Seismic Base Shear:- The whole projecthorizontal force or design seismic base shear (VB)
laterally every primary path of the structure will be resolute by the resulting manifestation
VB= Ah W
Where Ah = Design straight seismic coefficient
W = Seismic weight of the building.
b) Seismic Weight of Building: - The seismic mass of every storey is its complete structural weight plus
suitable quantity of imposed load as indicated. While calculating the seismic mass of every surface, the
mass of pillars and walls in any storey will stay similarly dispersed towards the levels overhead and
underneath the storey. The seismic burden of the entire structure is the amount of the seismic masses of
totally the levels. Any mass resting in among the storey intend to be dispersed to the levels overhead and
underneath in opposite fraction toward its distance from the levels.
c) Fundamental Natural Time Period-: The fundamental natural time period (Ta) computes after the
brick filling, then the essential period of vibration, may be taken as
Ta = . /√
d)Distribution of Design Force: - The design base shear, VB calculated over head shall be dispersed
length ways the tallness of the structure as per the following equation.
The image part with relationship ID rId12 was not found in the file.

The image
part with
relationship

=VB
ID rId10 was
not found in
the file.

i
The total base shear and lateral force is calculation by STAAD Pro

3.3. Ordinary Moment Resisting Frame

It includes the beams & columns along with fixed supports. These columns and beams are created with
beam node elements and connected with beam elements of the software. Here the slab loading at each floor
level is acting vertically on the slab and is calculated for square meter as its applied on the beam and the
wall load is also assigned on the beams only . for horizontal loads , the physically present phenomena that
the floor slab at each floor level is acting as very rigid horizontal beams which ensures that the lateral
deformation of all the nodes at any particular floor level are the same. This is known as diaphragm action
of the horizontal slabs.

3.4. Special R C Moment Resisting Frame

It includes the columns and beams as the framing system but with four sides alternate shear walls on the
structure on all the side instead of columns

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 854 editor@iaeme.com

 Study On Seismic Effect of High Rise Building Shear Wall/Wall Without Shear Wall

4. RESULTS
Zone II
• From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 18th storey of G+5
structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 18th storey of the structure in graph 1.
• From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 33th storey of G+10
structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 33th storey of the structure in graph 2.
• From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 48th storey of G+15
structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 48th storey of the structure in graph 3.

ZONE III
• From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 18th storey of G+5
structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 18th storey of the structure in graph 1.
• From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 33th storey of G+10
structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 33th storey of the structure in graph 2.
• From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 48th storey of G+15
structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 48th storey of the structure in graph 3.

5. CONCLUSION
ZONE III
• When coming to G+5 Storey building the variation of storey drift between OMRF & SMRF structure is
0.15%
• When coming to G+10 Storey building the variation of storey drift between OMRF & SMRF structure is
0.42%
• When coming to G+15 Storey building the variation of storey drift between OMRF & SMRF structure is
0.66%.

ZONE II
• When coming to G+5 Storey building the variation of storey drift between OMRF & SMRF structure is
0.04%
• When coming to G+10 Storey building the variation of storey drift between OMRF & SMRF structure is
0.21%
• When coming to G+15 Storey building the variation of storey drift between OMRF & SMRF structure is
0.41%
• When compared to ZONE II and ZONE III the lateral displacement is less in ZONE II.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 855 editor@iaeme.com

 K Venkatesh and T. Venkatdas

Fig 1 FLOOR PLAN

Fig 2 G+15 OMRF BUILDING Fig 3 G+15 SMRF SHEAR WALL AT CORNER Fig 4 G+15 SMRF AT OUTER PERIPHARY

Table 1

G+5 G+5 G+10 G+10 G+15 G+15

ZONE III
OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
COLUMN
0.45X0.45 0.55X0.50 0.55X0.5 0.65X0.6 0.55X0.5 0.65X0.65
DETAILS
BEAM
0.4X0.3 0.5X0.5 0.6X0.23 0.6X0.55 0.6X0.3 0.65X0.6
DETAILS
Table 2
G+10 G+10 G+15 G+15
ZONE II G+5 OMRF G+5 SMRF
OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
COLUMN
0.45X0.45 0.55X0.5 0.55X0.5 0.65X0.6 0.55X0.5 0.65X0.65
DETAILS
BEAM
0.4X0.3 0.5X0.5 0.6X0.23 0.6X0.55 0.6X0.3 0.65X0.6
DETAILS

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.
IJCIET/index.asp 856 editor@iaeme.com
 Study On Seismic Effect of High Rise Building Shear Wall/Wall Without Shear Wall

ZONE III
Table 1The results of (ordinary moment resisting frame & special moment resisting frame)
STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN CM
S.NO STOREY LEVEL OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
X X Z Z
1 0 0 0.0002 0 0.0002
2 3 0.6475 0.098 0.6531 0.1058
3 6 1.7046 0.2378 1.723 0.2544
4 9 2.7705 0.33872 2.8033 0.4123
5 12 3.7047 0.531 3.7507 0.5642
6 15 4.3996 0.6535 4.4562 0.6932
7 18 4.7867 0.7414 4.8509 0.7848
From above table shows the Storey Displacement Values in Both Longitudinal(X) & Transverses (Z)
Direction in ZONE-III of G+5 Storey building.

Table 2 The results of (OMRF& SMRF)

STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN CM
S.NO STOREY LEVEL OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
X X Z Z
1 0 0 0.0005 0 0.0005
2 3 0.5926 0.1242 0.6435 0.1286
3 6 1.5399 0.3048 1.6424 0.3131
4 9 2.5406 0.5074 2.689 0.5198
5 12 3.536 0.7217 3.7287 0.739
6 15 4.502 0.9406 4.7382 0.9633
7 18 5.4165 1.1569 5.6947 1.1856
8 21 6.254 1.3638 6.5717 1.3989
9 24 6.9852 1.5547 7.3385 1.5963
10 27 7.577 1.723 7.9605 1.7711
11 30 7.9964 1.8621 8.4022 1.9163
12 33 8.2318 1.9683 8.6492 2.0278

From above table shows the Storey Displacement Values in Both Longitudinal(X) & Transverses (Z)
Direction in ZONE-III of G+10 Storey building.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 857 editor@iaeme.com

 K Venkatesh and T. Venkatdas

Table 3The results of (OMRF& SMRF)

STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN CM
S.NO STOREY LEVEL
X X Z Z
1 0 0 0.8 0 0.8
2 3 0.5834 0.2184 0.6138 0.2056
3 6 1.4767 0.5287 1.5274 0.4995
4 9 2.4187 0.878 2.485 0.8316
5 12 3.3714 1.2533 3.4534 1.1892
6 15 4.3243 1.6458 4.4229 1.5693
7 18 5.2695 2.0476 5.3856 1.9483
8 21 6.1982 2.4515 6.3326 2.3356
9 24 7.1007 2.8511 7.2538 2.7196
10 27 7.9658 32402 8.1378 3.0944
11 30 8.7812 3.6129 8.9722 3.4543
12 33 9.5335 3.9639 9.7431 3.7942
13 36 10.208 4.288 10.4357 4.109
14 39 10.7889 4.5803 11.0339 4.3944
15 42 11.2595 4.8366 11.5207 4.6338
16 45 11.604 5.0524 11.8794 4.8594
17 48 11.8203 5.2256 12.1071 5.033
From above table shows the Storey Displacement Values in Both Longitudinal(X) & Transverses (Z)
Direction in ZONE-III of G+15 Storey building.

ZONE II
Table 1 The results of (OMRF& SMRF)
STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN CM
S.NO STOREY LEVEL OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
X X Z Z
1 0 0 0.0001 0 0.0001
2 3 0.2196 0.0613 0.2196 0.0661
3 6 0.5771 0.1487 0.5833 0.1591
4 9 0.9345 0.2421 0.9455 0.2578
5 12 1.241 0.332 1.2563 0.3528
6 15 1.4572 0.4086 1.4758 0.4335
7 18 1.5629 0.4636 1.5837 0.4907
From above table shows the Storey Displacement Values in Both Longitudinal(X) & Transverses (Z)
Direction in ZONE-III of G+5 Storey building.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 858 editor@iaeme.com

 Study On Seismic Effect of High Rise Building Shear Wall/Wall Without Shear Wall

Table 2 The results of (OMRF& SMRF)

Storey Displacement in cm
STOREY
S.NO OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
LEVEL
X X Z Z
1 0 0 0.0005 0 0.0005
2 3 0.3704 0.1354 0.4022 0.1402
3 6 0.9624 0.3324 1.0265 0.3415
4 9 1.5879 0.5536 1.6806 0.5673
5 12 2.21 0.788 2.3304 0.807
6 15 2.8137 1.0277 2.9614 1.0527
7 18 3.3853 1.2651 3.5592 1.2967
8 21 3.9087 1.4929 4.1073 1.5315
9 24 4.3657 1.704 4.5866 1.7498
10 27 4.7356 1.8914 4.9753 1.9444
11 30 4.9978 2.048 5.2514 2.1079
12 33 5.1449 2.169 5.4057 2.235
From above table shows the Storey Displacement Values in Both Longitudinal(X) & Transverses (Z)
Direction in ZONE-III of G+10 Storey building.

Table 3 The results of (OMRF& SMRF)

STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN CM
STOREY
S.NO OMRF SMRF OMRF SMRF
LEVEL
X X Z Z
1 0 0 0.0008 0 0.0006
2 3 0.3647 0.1365 0.3836 0.1319
3 6 0.9229 0.3304 0.9546 0.3122
4 9 1.5117 0.5488 1.5531 0.5197
5 12 2.1071 0.7833 2.1584 0.7432
6 15 2.7027 1.0286 2.7643 0.9774
7 18 3.2934 1.2797 3.366 1.2177
8 21 3.8739 1.5322 3.9579 14598
9 24 4.4379 1.7819 4.5336 1.6998
10 27 4.9786 2.0251 5.0861 1.934
11 30 5.4883 2.2581 5.6076 2.1589
12 33 5.9584 2.4774 6.0894 2.3714
13 36 6.38 2.68 6.5223 2.5682
14 39 6.743 2.8627 6.8962 2.7465
15 42 7.0372 3.0229 7.2004 2.9037
16 45 7.2525 3.1577 7.4274 3.0371
17 48 7.3877 3.266 7.5669 3.1456
From above table shows the Storey Displacement Values in Both Longitudinal(X) & Transverses (Z)
Direction in ZONE-III of G+15 Storey building.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 859 editor@iaeme.com

 K Venkatesh and T. Venkatdas

ZONE II

Comparison between OMRF and SMRF ofG+5TO15 Level Structures

6 OMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT

DEFLECTION IN MM
5 SMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT
4
3
2
1
0
0 3 6 9 12 15 18

STOREY HEIGHT

From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 18th storey of
G+5 structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 18th storey of the structure in
graph 1.
10 OMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT
8 SMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT
6
DEFLECTION IN MM

4
2
0
0 6 12 18 24 30

STOREY HEIGHT

From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 33th storey of
G+10s structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 33th storey of the structure in
graph 2.
15 OMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT
DEFLECTION IN MM

SMRF SYSTEM X- TRANSIT

10

0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48

STOREY HEIGHT

From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 33th storey of
G+15 structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 33th storey of the structure in
graph 3.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 860 editor@iaeme.com

 Study On Seismic Effect of High Rise Building Shear Wall/Wall Without Shear Wall

ZONE III

Comparison between OMRF and SMRF of G+5, TO15levelstructures

2 OMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT

DEFLECTION IN MM
SMRF SYSTEM X-TRANSIT
1.5

0.5

0
0 3 6 9 12 15 18

STOREY HEIGHT

From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 18th storey of
G+5 structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 18th storey of the structure in
graph 1.
6 OMRF SYSTEM X TRANSIT
DEFLECTION IN MM

5 SMRF SYSTEM X TRANSIT

4
3
2
1
0
0 6 12 18 24 30

STOREY HEIGHT

From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 33th storey of
G+10s structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 33th storey of the structure in
graph 2.
8 OMRF SYSTEM X TRANSIT
DEFLECTION IN MM

SMRF SYSTEM X- TRANSIT

6
4
2
0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48

STOREY HEIGHT

From the above graph we can say that Max lateral displacement of OMRF is obtained at 33th storey of
G+15 structure. Similarly for SMRF max lateral displacement obtained at 33th storey of the structure in
graph 3.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 861 editor@iaeme.com

 K Venkatesh and T. Venkatdas

REFERENCES
[1] Is: 875 (part 1) – 1987 code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and
structures
[2] Is: 875 (part 2) – 1987 code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and
structures
[3] Is 1893- 2000 criteria for earth quake design of structures
[4] Duggal, S.K., Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures (Oxford University Press, 2007).
[5] Pankaj Agarwal, Manish Shrikhande, Earthquake Resistant design of Structures (Prentice Hall India
Publication).
[6] S.P.Pawar, Dr.C.P.Pise, Y.P.Pawar, S.S.Kadam, D. D. Mohite, C. M. Deshmukh and N. K. Shelar,
Effect of Positioning of RC Shear Walls of Different Shapes on Seismic Performance of Building
Resting On Sloping Ground. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(3), 2016,
pp.373–384.
[7] Dr. S. B. Shinde and N.B. Raut, Effect of Change in Thicknesses and Height in Shear Wall on
Deflection of Multistoried Buildings. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(6),
2016, pp.587–591.
[8] T. Chrysanidis, V. Panoskaltsis and I. Tegos, Preliminary Design and Analysis of Cost Parameters of a
High-Rise Building: Braced Shear Wall Core System. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 7(5), 2016, pp.137–152.
[9] Clough, R.W., & Penzien, J. 1993. Dynamics of Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York.
[10] A. Asokan, (2006) Modelling of Masonry Infill Walls for Nonlinear Static Analysis of Buildings under
Seismic Loads. M. S. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai.
[11] Seismic analysis of buildings resting on sloping Ground by B.GBirajdar1, S.S.Nalawade2.
[12] Effects of plastic hinge properties in nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete buildings by Mehmet
Intel, HayriBaytanOzmen. Dept of Civil Engineering Pamukkale University.
[13] Pankaj Agarwal –Earthquake Resistant Design Of Structure A.K. Chopra-Dynamics of Structures

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 862 editor@iaeme.com