A PROJECT REPORT

ON
EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN OF
MULTISTORY STRUCTURE
Submitted in fulfillment for the completion of course of

‘RESEARCH PRACTICE’
(BITS G540)

As a part of

MASTERS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

By

NISHANT RATHI
2014H143057P

Under the Guidance of

G.MUTHUKUMAR
Lecturer, Civil Engineering Department

Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani

 CERTIFICATE

nd
This is to Certify that Mr. Nishant Rathi Studying II Semester, of Masters in
Civil Engineering with specialization in Structural Engineering at Birla Institute
of Technology and Science, Pilani Campus has completed the project on
‘EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN OF MULTISTORY STRUCTURE
’ as partial fulfilment for the completion of course on RESEARCH PRACTICE
(BITS G540) for the year 2015.

GUIDE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

G.Muthukumar Dr. Manoj Kumar

Lecturer Professor and Head of Department
Faculty of Civil Engineering Faculty of Civil Engineering
BITS Pilani BITS Pilani

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to firstly thank my guide G.Muthukumar for his valuable and
constant guidance and help in completing my project. I would like to thank my
guide for teaching me how to use the systematic approach for study of behavior
of multi storey structures. I would like to thank my guide for taking time from his
busy schedule and guiding me throughout my project. I would like to thank
Dr.Manoj Kumar Head of Department of Civil Engineering, BITS Pilani .I would
also like to thank the support given by the Faculty of Department of Civil
Engineering, BITS Pilani.

I would also like to thank my friends for their help and support in completing the
project.

3
 ABSTRACT
Reinforced concrete building is very common in India. Recent Seismic activity
have raised the need of Earthquake resistant design of structures. Earthquake results
in lateral forces on structure. Performance of a structure is improved by its ductility,
ductile detailing ensures larger deflections and sufficient warning before collapse of
structure. This paper describes the use of analysis and design of RCC building with
the help of standard software package STAAD Pro and Excel spread sheets
considering earthquake load using Equivalent Static Load method .

Keywords: Reinforced concrete, Limit state design, Analysis of 3D frame,

Ductile Detailing, Design using excel,

4
 CONTENTS

ABSTRACT
1: INTRODUCTION………………………………………...………………1

2: PRELIMINARY DATA…………………………………………………..3

3. LOAD CALCULATIONS……………………………………………..….6

4. MODELLING OF STRUCTURE BY STAAD.PRO………………......10

5. ANALYSIS RESULTS………………………………………………..….14

6. DESIGN OF MEMBERS………………………………………………...16

7. SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION IN BRIEF……………………..34

CONCLUSION
REFERENCES

5
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND
Earthquake induces lateral forces which transfer through Slabs which act as a
deep beam further distributing this forces to columns and beams which form the
lateral load resisting system of structure.
The Action due to earthquake is calculated in accordance with IS 1893. This
standard provides basis for calculating base shear and torsion in structure due to
lateral seismic action. This base shear and torsion is affected by nature of
foundation soil, material form, size shape and type of structure, duration of
seismic activity snd ground motion characteristics.
The design approach adopted in IS 1893 ensures that structures possess at least a
minimum strength to withstand minor earthquakes of intensity less than DBE
(Design Basis Earthquake)without damage; resist moderate earthquakes equal to
DBE without significant structural damage though some non-structural damage
may occur; and aims that structures withstand a major earthquake (Maximum
Considered Earthquake - MCE) without collapse. Capability of a particular
structure to resist lateral forces is incorporated by identifying its redundancy and
ductility features through response modification factor.
Desirable properties of earthquake-resistant design include ductility, deformability
and damageability. Ductility and deformability are interrelated concepts signifying
the ability of a structure to sustain large deformations without collapse.
Damageability is also a desirable quality for construction, and refers to the ability of
a structure to undergo substantial damages, without partial or total collapse.

6
For seismic forces static and dynamic method are available in our case for a
structure less than 40m height in zone 2 static analysis is sufficient.
The collapse of RCC buildings is generally preventable if the following
principles of earthquake resistant design are observed

Failure should be ductile rather than brittle – ductility with large energy
dissipation capacity with less deterioration in stiffness must be ensured.

Flexure failure should precede shear failure

Connections should be stronger than the members which fit into them.

Another major advantage due to ductile detailing is local failure also known as
strong column weak beam theory. This results in localized failure of beams thus
saving total collapse of structure.

1.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Various examples, guidelines and commentary on codes by IIT Kanpur under

sponsorship from Gujrat state disaster management authority(GSDMA) are
helpful so as to understand seismic force calculation, there application and effect
on structure, and design of frame for gravity and seismic loads.
Design Example of a Six Storey Building- IITK-GSDMA-EQ26-V3.0, describes
the detailed procedure for calculation of lateral forces, analysis of frame for
gravity and lateral loads
Explanatory Examples for Ductile Detailing of RC Buildings Document No. ::
IITK-GSDMA-EQ22-V3.0 provides suitable reference for ductile detailing
structural components such as beam column and joints.

7
 CHAPTER 2
PRELIMINARY DATA
2.1. ARCHITECTURAL PLAN OF THE BUILDING

8
2.2 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF BUILDING

9
2.3 PRELIMINARY DETAILS
Live load: 4.0 kN/m2 at typical floor and 1.5 kN/m2 on Roof
Floor finish: 1.0 kN/m2
Water proofing: 2.0 kN/m2
Terrace finish: 1.0 kN/m2
Location: zone 3
Earthquake load: As per IS-1893 (Part 1) - 2002
Depth of foundation below ground: 1.1 m
Type of soil: Type II, Medium as per IS: 1893
Storey height: Typical floor: 5 m, GF: 4.1 m
Floors: G.F. + 5 upper floors.
Walls: 230 mm thick brick masonry walls only at periphery.

MATERIAL PROPERTIES

CONCRETE

All components unless specified in design: M25 grade all

Ec = 5 000 fck N/mm2

= 5 000 fck MN/m2
= 25 000 N/mm2 = 25 000 MN/m2.
For central columns up to plinth, ground floor and first floor: M30 grade

Ec = 5 000 fck N/mm2

= 5 000 fck MN/m2
= 27 386 N/mm2 = 27 386 MN/m2.

STEEL

HYSD reinforcement of grade Fe 415 confirming to IS: 1786 is used throughout.

10
 CHAPTER 3
LOAD CALCULATIONS

3.1 UNIT LOAD CALCULATIONS

Assumed sizes of beam and column sections are:

Columns: 500 x 500 at all typical floors

Area, A = 0.25 m2, I = 0.005208 m4

Columns: 600 x 600 below ground level

Area, A = 0.36 m2, I = 0.0108 m4

Main beams: 300 x 600 at all floors

Area, A = 0.18 m2, I = 0.0054 m4

Ground beams: 300 x 600

Area, A = 0.18 m2, I = 0.0054 m4

3.2 MEMBER SELF WEIGHT

Columns (500 x 500)
0.50 x 0.50 x 25 = 6.3 kN/m

Columns (600 x 600)

0.60 x 0.60 x 25 = 9.0 kN/m

Ground beam (300 x 600)

0.30 x 0.60 x 25 = 4.5 kN/m

Secondary beams rib (200 x 500)

0.20 x 0.50 x 25 = 2.5 kN/m

Main beams (300 x 600)

0.30 x 0.60 x 25 = 4.5 kN/m

11
Slab (100 mm thick)
0.1 x 25 = 2.5 kN/m2

Brick wall (230 mm thick)

0.23 x 19 (wall) +2 x 0.012 x 20 (plaster)
= 4.9 kN/m2
Floor wall (height 4.4 m)
4.4 x 4.9 = 21.6 kN/m

Ground floor wall (height 3.5 m)

3.5 x 4.9 = 17.2 kN/m

Ground floor wall (height 0.7 m)

0.7 x 4.9 = 3.5 kN/m

Terrace parapet (height 1.0 m)

1.0 x 4.9 = 4.9 kN/m

3.3 CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC LOAD (AS PER IS 1893:2002)

STEP 1 DEAD LOAD CALCULATION

1) Weight of Typical Slab = [25*0.1 + 1]*22.5*22.5

= 1772 kN

2) Weight of Roof Slab = [25*0.12 + 1 + 2]*20*20

= 2784 kN

3) Weight of Longitudinal walls = 25*0.25*(5 – 0.6)*2*22.5

= 990 kN

4) Weight of Transverse walls = 25*0.25*(5 - 0.6)*2*22.5

= 990 kN

5) Weight of Parapet Wall / m Height = [0.23*19 + 0.02*21]*22.5*4

= 450 kN/m

6) Weight of Longitudnal Beam = 4*.6*.3*25*22.5

= 405kN

12
7) Weight of transverse beam=4*.6*.3*25*22.5
= 405kN

8) Weight of Columns / m Height = 16*5*.6*.6*25

= 504 kN/m

STEP 2 LIVE LOAD CALCULATION

As per IS: 1893 – 2002,

L.L. on Roof = 0 kN/m2

L.L. on Each Floor = 25 % Consideration if L.L. <= 3 kN/m2
=
50 % Consideration if L.L. > 3 kN/m2
L.L. = 0.5*4 = 2 kN/m2
LL on Each Floor = 22.5*22.5*.5*4
= 1013kN
STEP 3 LUMPED MASS CALCULATION
LUMPED MASS OF FLOOR
= 1772+1013+1944+338+810+504
= 6381 kN

LUMPED MASS OF ROOF

= 2784+441+972+338+810+352
= 5597 kN

LUMPED MASS OF PLINTH LEVEL

= 774+810+206+79+158
= 2027 kN

STEP 4 SEISMIC WEIGHT CALCULATION

SEISMIC WEIGHT OF BUILDING

= Lumped Mass of Roof + 6* Lumped Mass of Typical Floor
= 5597 + 5*6381+2027
= 39709 kN

13
STEP 5 BASE SHEAR

As per IS: 1893-2002, Natural Period of Vibration is given by

Ta = 0.075h0.75 = 0.977 sec (For Longitudinal and Transverse Direction)

Soil Type: - I (MEDIUM)

Corresponding Response Acceleration Coefficient - Sa/g = 1.402

Design horizontal seismic co-efficient Ah for a structure has been determined using
following expression:
Ah = 2 × × = 0.216 × 15 × 1.145 = 0.0336

Base Shear
Vb = Ah × W
= 0.0336 × 39709
= 1334.224 kN

BASE SHEAR OUTPUT FROM STAAD

3.4 LOAD COMBINATIONS

Load cases are as below:

1. Seismic load along X Direction with Torsion positive

2. Seismic load along X direction with torsion negative
3. Seismic load along Z Direction with Torsion positive
4. Seismic load along Z direction with torsion negative
5. DL – Dead Load
6. LL – Live Load
7. 1.5*(DL+LL)
8. 1.2*(DL+LL+EQ X T+)
9. 1.2*(DL+LL+EQ X T-)

14
10.1.2*(DL+LL+EQ Z T+)
11. 1.2*(DL+LL+EQ Z T-)
12. 1.2*(DL+LL-EQ X T+)
13. 1.2*(DL+LL-EQ X T-)
14. 1.2*(DL+LL-EQ Z T+)
15. 1.2*(DL+LL-EQ Z T-)
16. 1.5(DL+ EQ X T+)
17. 1.5(DL+ EQ X T-)
18. 1.5(DL+ EQ Z T+)
19. 1.5(DL+ EQ Z T-)
20. 1.5(DL- EQ X T+)
21. 1.5(DL- EQ X T-)
22. 1.5(DL- EQ Z T+)
23. 1.5(DL- EQ Z T-)
24. 0.9*DL+1.5*EQ X T+
25. 0.9*DL+1.5*EQ X T-
26. 0.9*DL+1.5*EQ Z T+
27. 0.9*DL+1.5*EQ Z T-
28. 0.9*DL-1.5*EQ X T+
29. 0.9*DL-1.5*EQ X T-
30. 0.9*DL-1.5*EQ Z T+
31. 0.9*DL-1.5*EQ Z T-
32. 1.2*(DL+LL)
33.1.5*DL

15
 CHAPTER 4
MODELLING OF STRUCTURE BY STAAD PRO

4.1 BEAM AND COLUMN NUMBERING

16
4.2 SECTION PROPERTIES

17
18
4.3 SECTION MATERIALS

19
4.5 FINAL GEOMETRY

20
 CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS RESULTS
5.1 BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM OF A TYPICAL FRAME

21
5.2 BENDING MOMENT OF A TYPICAL COLUMN

22
 CHAPTER 6
DESIGN USING EXCEL
Values of moment and shear are entered in excel file which performs design according to IS
456 and 13920.

6.1 DESIGN OF TYPICAL BEAM

23
24
25
6.2 DESIGN OF A TYPICAL COLUMN

26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
 CHAPTER 7
SOIL STRUCURE INTERACTION

SSI has been traditionally considered to be beneficial for seismic response the usually
beneficial increase of the period of the structure that would lead to a lower seismic
demand but fails to consider the redistribution of internal member loading. When the
stiffness of foundation soils is included in a global analysis building model it is
important that the probable/expected design values are used there will still be
considerable uncertainty with regard to how a soil will behave. It is for this reason that
it is recommended that when foundation soils are included in an analysis model that an
upper and lower bound approach be adopted
For most typical structures, accommodating soil structure interaction in a structural
analysis will reduce the computed design base shears and plastic hinge demands on
the primary lateral load resisting elements due to the following effects (SEAOC 2008):

Period Lengthening. Increased flexibility of the analysis model increases the
fundamental period of the system and therefore reduces the design base shear.
Increased flexibility could be associated with rocking, soil bearing failure or
pile slip.

Foundation Damping. Foundation damping results from the relative movement
of the foundation and soil, and is associated with radiation of energy away from
the foundation and hysteric damping within the soil.

Kinematic Interaction. Kinematic interaction results from the presence of
relatively stiff foundation elements on or in soil that causes foundation motions
to deviate from free field motion due to base slab averaging and embedment
effects
Including soil structure interaction in the analysis model will typically increase
computed building drifts and therefore lead to higher P-delta effects and seismic
demands on secondary elements such as collectors and continuous gravity beams
As plasticity index increases damping of soil decreases.

36
 CONCLUSION

Design for lateral loads is an important aspect of multistory design. In this project
major emphasis has been given in design of structural members considering
earthquake load according to IS 1893 and then earthquake resistant design using IS
13920 . This paper describes the use of analysis and design of RCC building with the
help of standard software package STAAD Pro and Excel spread sheets considering
earthquake load . It is easy to optimize the sections with the use of software package
and to do the reanalysis and redesign of the whole structure with a greater speed.

37
 REFERENCES

Explanatory Examples for Ductile Detailing of RC Buildings Document No. :: IITK-GSDMA-
EQ22-V3.0 Dr. R. K. Ingle, Dr. Sudhir K Jain


Proposed Draft Provisions and Commentary on Ductile Detailing of RC Structures
Subjected to Seismic Forces

RCC DESIGN- S Unnikrishna Pillai & Devdas Menon

PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE -CODE OF PRACTICE-IS456

Design Example of a Six Storey Building- IITK-GSDMA-EQ26-V3.0-Dr. H J Shah, Dr. Sudhir k
Jain


Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces - Code of
Practice (First Revision of IS 13920)


Magic equations for designing short RCC columns of different shapes with axial, uni-axial,
bi-axial loads-R.G GUPTA


IS- 875 Part1 to 5, “Indian Standard Code of practice for Design Loads (other than earthquake)
for Building and structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

38