International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 8, Issue 4, April 2017, pp. 265–277 Article ID: IJCIET_08_04_033

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=4
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

BEHAVIOUR OF SOFT STOREY RC FRAMED

BUILDING UNDER SEISMIC LOADING
B. Lalitha Chandrahas
PG Student, K L University, Department of Civil Engineering,
Vaddeswaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

P. Polu Raju
Associate Professor, K L University, Department of Civil Engineering,
Vaddeswaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT
Indian urbanization has led to increase in demand for construction of commercial
floors, parking facilities in the lower stories of building. The location of open storey at
different levels in a building is most vulnerable to seismic forces which may lead to
either partial damage or collapse of the building above that floor. The conventional
design methods are not accountable for such failures in past earthquakes. In this
article attempts are made to explain the factors that impact the soft storey failure in a
building. Pushover analysis has been carried out for a G+9 multistoried building to
study the soft storey effect at different floor levels using SAP 2000 software. The
behavior of RC framed building with soft storey under seismic loading has been
observed in terms of hinge formation patterns, total lateral drift, storey shear,
overturning moment, and time period for considered structure. It is observed that
infill wall has significant effect in the stiffness and lateral resistance of frame.
Key words: Soft storey, Hinge formation, Infill wall, Storey Drift, SAP 2000.
Cite this Article: B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju, Behaviour of Soft Storey
RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading. International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology, 8(4), 2017, pp. 265–277.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=4

1. INTRODUCTION
A soft storey is one in which the lateral stiffness is less than 70 percent of that in the storey
above or less than 80 percent of average stiffness of three storeys above as shown in Fig. 1
[1]. In urban locations, many of the moment resisting frames inmulti-storey buildings are
constructed with an adopted open storey in order to accommodate parking facilities, office
receptions and other large open areas for multiple purposes and are considered as unavoidable
features.
The open floor consists of a little or no infill walls so it has less frame-infill interaction
and may significantly decreases both stiffness and strength of the floor. Such multi-storey
reinforced concrete buildings are often called buildings with soft storey, which fails during

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 265 editor@iaeme.com

 B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju

seismic lateral loads. In this paper, the performance and behaviour of multi storey RC
building with soft storey at different levels is analysed.
The soft storey failure during earthquake occurs due to the following factors:
 Presence of wide openings in bottom storey like offices, shops and hotels which may not
present in upper storeys.
 Slender column in the particular storey.
 Lower storey weakens first, creates the weak storey and leads to the collapse of structures.
Behaviour of structure with and without infill walls is entirely different. During the
earthquake the infill walls contribute 80% to structural strength and 85%to stiffness of the
structure. The relative increase in impact of earthquake force is small when compared to the
increase in strength of masonry infill [2]. The presence of infill walls in upper storeys, the
stiffness is generally higher compared to lower storey. The storeys with infill walls act as a
single block and move together increasing lateral displacement of building in soft storey. In
such buildings the upper storeys above soft storey, swing like an inverted pendulum during
earth quake shakes. During earth quake amount of earthquake force increases with increase in
mass. As mass increases inertia force increasing and as inertia force increases lateral loads on
the structure increases. The bricks and concrete blocks are treated as non-structural members
and their stiffness and strength contribution is neglected during earthquake resistance design.
However, the effect of such structural elements under seismic action has been proved to have
a considerable effect on building, by increasing both structural stiffness and strength when
compared to bare frame (without infill walls) building [2].The significant evidences from
damage in RC buildings with soft storey, which located in active seismic zones showed that
many buildings failed at soft storey leads to potential economic loss. During a strong
earthquake motion a building is subjected to a large storey shear, deflections and inter-storey
drift which causes the instability of structure. It is observed that damage is due to local stress
concentration accompanied by large plastic deformations at ends of columns, i.e. (when a
hinge is formed there is a redistribution of forces causing the increase in number of hinges
leading to the formation of soft-storey mechanism) creates weak storey and cause failure of
columns. Such failure mechanism is called column sway mechanism or soft storey
mechanism [3].

1.1. Infill Walls

Modelling of infills is classified into two types; they are macro modelling and micro
modelling [4, 5]. In macro modelling infill walls are simulated as equivalent single strut or
multi-struts whichever is more suitable for the study. Some past papers suggested that single
strut model is incapable for detailed analysis like infill structures interactions [5, 6].To obtain
an accurate and detailed analysis report micro modelling method can be used. The micro
modelling analysis is carried out using FEM which can precisely predict the infill walls
interaction with structure. FEM is very complex and time consuming process, due to this
reason the macro modelling process can be used. In addition, the macro modelling process is
widely acceptable and preferable method for high rise structures. In this study single strut
model is used in place of masonry infill wall, representing the stiffness and structural strength
[7, 8, and 9].

1.2. Push Overloading

It is acknowledged that compared to other types of analysis the time-history analysis is more
accurate method of analysis. However, pushover analysis is most preferable and accepted
method because of its conceptuality and computational simplicity. Also, it gives capacity

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 266 editor@iaeme.com

 Behaviour of Soft Storey RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading

spectrum along with performance point during seismic performance based analysis of
structures. Using pushover analysis can be determine the capacity of the structure. If the
performance point lies within the collapsible range, the structure performs well during earth
quake. In pushover analysis, prescribed loading is applied incrementally until the structure
reaches its limiting state. Push over analysis is also called as non-linear static. The static
approximation in non-linear static analysis indicates the vertical distribution of lateral modes
that captures the material nonlinearity of an existing structure and by monotonically
increasing those loads until peak response of structure is obtained [10].
Factors effecting static lateral load using mode superposition method are:
 Seismic demand of structure based on base shear vs. roof displacement.
 The maximum ductility capacity and rotation of members.
 Plastic hinge distribution for ultimate load at each step of loading.
 Distribution of localized damage at ultimate load condition.

1.3. Description of Hinges

Generally plastic hinges will form at the ends of beams and columns under earthquake
loading. Studying the formation of hinges helps in describing the structural behavior. It is
observed that the user-define hinges perform well in capturing the hinging mechanism in
structural model when compared to default hinges. In beams, plastic hinges are formed due to
uni-axial bending moments but in columns plastic hinges are formed due to both axial loads
and biaxial bending moments. Different hinges are applied to both columns and beams
separately. In SAP 2000, Flexural default hinges (M3) and shear hinges (V2) were assigned
to beams at two ends. The interacting (P-M2-M3) a coupled frame hinges property was also
assigned for all the columns at upper and lower ends.M3 hinge is used to simulate the plastic
hinge caused by uni-axial moment as user defined hinges to beams and similarly in columns,
PMM hinges are used to simulate the plastic hinge due to axial load and biaxial bending
moments. Masonry infill walls were modeled as equivalent diagonal strut using two nodded
beam element. Moments at both ends of the strut are released to prevent the transfer of
bending moment [11].

1.4. Lateral Load Patterns

Lateral load pattern represents the inertia force distribution under seismic design. As the
severity of earthquake changes with duration of earthquake, the distribution of inertia force
also changes (i.e., based on inelastic deformation) [1, 11].None of the single load pattern is
sufficient to determine the variation in local demand in a design based earthquake. So two
lateral load patterns are taken and blended to find the inertia force distribution using pushover
load case.
The methods for mode blending are:
 Inverted triangular lateral load pattern is calculated by using base shear method with
fundamental modes.
 The design lateral load pattern is calculated using SAP2000 by including higher mode effects.

2. BACKGROUND
In 1969, Fintel and Khan [12] introduced the concept of soft storey, however during the
1930s, some other researchers focused on some aspects of an open or soft first storey. In 1997
Uniform Building Code (UBC) [12] and several other codes [13, 14] defined the soft storey
as the floor of about 70% less stiff than the floor above it. Habibullah and Stephen [15]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 267 editor@iaeme.com

 B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju

explained about dynamic and static analysis of the multi-storied building, which also include
P-Delta effect (the generation of second order overturning moment because of lateral
movement of mass in a deformed state is known as P-Delta effect). Along with direct
displacement method they considered P-Delta effect for both static and dynamic analysis.
Chopra et al. [16] conducted the extensive study on dynamic analysis along with nonlinear
response analysis with different rules of mode combination. He commented that, peak
estimation of storey shear of building with widely spread natural frequencies is appreciably
accurate using SRSS rule. Vamvatsikos and Cornell [17] concluded that Incremental
Dynamic Analysis (IDA) is more useful tool for seismic engineering because, it considers
both ductility and demand capacity of a structure. Shome and Cornell et al. [18] studied on
collapse state seismic demand analysis and concluded that nonlinear time history analysis is a
most accurate method for seismic demand computation. Ghosh and Fanella [19, 20] showed a
step by step complete dynamic design procedure and explained detailed static and dynamic
computation method using Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF). It was concluded that, in general
3 modes are sufficient for most buildings having moderate height. It was commented that
modal dynamic analysis method gives fairly accurate results so it is mandatory for every
analysis. Jain et al. [21] explained about damage of RC structure during past Bhuj earth
Quake using push over analysis and showed seismic inadequacies of code methods. The
pattern of failure indicates lack in seismic ductile detailing and structural irregularity which
results in poor structural performance under seismic loads. Chandrasekaran et al. [22] showed
the plan irregularity effect on seismic vulnerability of moment resisting frame structures
(MRFS). The author given more importance to effect of re-entrant corners of MRFS on its
seismic vulnerability of A/L ration reneging 0.15 to 0.2. The study was conducted on
configuration of buildings and base shear values were analysed along the considered direction
of the earthquake. Surya and Agarwal [23] indicates that as Drift value ratio increases the
frequency drops by 40-50%. It is because of widening of cracks and decrease of stiffness.
They also added that in undamaged state strain energy dissipates though intermolecular
friction (elastic viscose damping) which is constant for certain material but if strain energy
exceeds beyond minimum limit structure changes its way of dissipation of energy through
cracks and increases its damping ratio

Table 1 Building Modal Details

Structure SMRF
No of Stories G+9
Storey Height 3m
Bays in x and y directions 5
Type of Soil Medium soil
Seismic Zone V
Importance factor 1
Response Reduction Factor, R 5 (SMRF)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 268 editor@iaeme.com

 Behaviour of Soft Storey RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading

Table 2 Material Properties

Material Property
Grade of Concrete M25
Grade of Steel Fe415
Member Properties
Beam in longitudinal x-
0.3m × 0.6m
direction, size
Beam in transverse y-direction,
0.3m × 0.6m
size
Column Size 0.6m × 0.6m
Thickness of Slab 125mm

Table 3 Loading Details for Design

Live or imposed load 3.5 kN/m2 (According to IS

Floor finishes loading
Wall load on beams
Equivalent lateral loads
875-1987 (part:2)[24]
1.75 kN/m2(According to IS 875-
1987 (part:2) [24]
19 kN/m(According to IS 875-
1987 (part:2) [24]
According to IS
1893:2002(part:1) [1]

Figure 3 Equivalent diagonal compressive strut model (Genidy et al., 1959)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 269 editor@iaeme.com

 B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju

3D Modal Plan

Figure 2 Modelling of Masonry- Infill Walls

3. DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING MODEL

In this study a typical reinforced concrete (RC) framed building is designed according to the
Indian code. A building model with 5 bays each of 3m is considered in both X and Y
directions and each floor height is 3m as shown in Fig. 2. The building was modelled as
moment-resisting frame having soft storeys at base, third storey, fifth storey, seventh, and
ninth storey. A symmetric building is considered in both X and Y directions to avoid torsion
effect [25, 26]. Table 1 shows the building model details such like number of stories, each
storey height and type of soil etc. Material properties and cross sectional details of structural
elements are shown in Table 2. Loading details for the design was shown in Table 3. SAP
2000 17is well-known software package used for developing the model. Moreover, the SAP
2000 is used for both static and dynamic analysis as per Indian codes. Hysterious loop is
considered to study the amount of energy dissipated for both elastic and in-elastic design of a
structure. The energy dissipated for in-elastic design is higher than the elastic design so, to
make design safer and efficient. The study of inelastic behaviour of structure is preferred. On
comparing the energy curves the performance based design methods are more superior to the
elastic design method for its optimum utilization of structural capacity.
There are two proposed methods in simulating the behaviour of masonry-infill walls, the
micro model method (Morbiducci [5]) and macro model method (Polyakov [8]).Though
micro model method is producing best results in understanding the local and global
responses, it is rarely used because of its complex, computational nature and simulation
difficulty. Macro modelling is widely used method but the disadvantage in equivalent
diagonal strut method (macro modelling method) is in its inaccurate modelling of openings.
However, effect of opening can be created using less number of struts in less infills storeys
(Asteris 2003, Puglisi and Uzcategui 2008)[6]. In the present study Infill wall is modelled as
equivalent diagonal compression strut of suitable width based on empirical equation Eq.(1).
The strut is modelled using two noded frame or beam elements. Transfer of bending moments
from structural member to masonry wall was prevented by specifying the moment releases at
both the ends of strut. Shear hinges were provided to beams and axial moment interaction
hinges to columns. The thickness and modulus of elasticity of the strut are equivalent to the

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 270 editor@iaeme.com

 Behaviour of Soft Storey RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading

existing infill panel. The thickness of the strut can be written in terms of the column height
between centrelines of beams and the length of the panel using Eq. (1).

a  0 .1 7 5 (  1 h c o l )  0 .4 rin f Eq. (1)

The diagonal length of infill panel can be calculated as shown in Eq. (2).

rinf  ( L in f ) 2  ( hin f ) 2 Eq. (2)

The coefficient λi which is used to compute the width of infill strut and can be calculated
as a function of infill panel height hinge, modules of elasticity of frame material Efe. Similarly
the material of infill is simulated using its modules as Eme. The column has a moment of
inertia Icol, the length of infill panel length is taken as Linf and thickness tinf as shown in Eq. (3).
Fig. 3 shows, Equivalent diagonal compressive strut model.
1/ 4
 E t s in 2 
 i   m e in f  Eq. (3)
 4 E f e I c o l h i n f 
Eq.1 represents the effective width of strut, Eq. 2 represents diagonal length of strut and
Eq.3 represents material constant.

Table 4 Maximum joint displacements along X-direction

Storey
BF(m) GF(m) 3rd(m) 5th(m) 7th(m) 9th(m) Full(m)
No
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0.048193 0.055784 0.00306 0.003407 0.003316 0.004228 0.006065
2 0.097341 0.060998 0.007283 0.007109 0.006913 0.011092 0.012369
3 0.134273 0.06474 0.069744 0.010476 0.010189 0.017606 0.018088
4 0.159886 0.068209 0.073818 0.014035 0.01316 0.023457 0.02323
5 0.175617 0.071374 0.076872 0.076881 0.015817 0.028663 0.027794
6 0.184456 0.074275 0.079696 0.080052 0.018409 0.033214 0.031798
7 0.191308 0.076905 0.082254 0.082615 0.025065 0.03714 0.035301
8 0.19735 0.079256 0.084539 0.084893 0.027108 0.04071 0.038394
9 0.202768 0.081327 0.086546 0.086876 0.028691 0.044996 0.041071
10 0.207622 0.083132 0.088292 0.08858 0.029998 0.047654 0.043351

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 271 editor@iaeme.com

 B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju

11
10
9
8
7
6
Storey No.

5
4 BF GF
3 3RD 5TH
2 7TH 9TH
1 FULL
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Drift(m)

Figure 4 Maximum Joint displacements along X-direction

BF, bare frame; GF, ground floor; 3rd, third floor; 5th, fifth floor; 7th, seventh floor; 9th,
ninth floor; FULL, full strut model;
0.7
full struct
0.6 9th floor
7th floor
0.5 5th floor
Time Period(sec)

3rd floor
0.4 ground floor
bare frame
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
1 2 3 4
Modal5Step number
6 7 push
8 over9 load10case11 12

Figure 5 Comparative Study of Time Periods

25
Full struct
9th floor
20 7th floor
5th floor
3rd floor
Frequency(Cycles/Sec)

15 ground floor
Bare frame

10

0
1 2 3 4
Modal5Step number
6 7 in push
8 over
9 load
10 case
11 12

Figure 6 Comparative study of Cyclic Frequency

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 272 editor@iaeme.com

 Behaviour of Soft Storey RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading

Base Shear (kN)

8738.361 8601.294 8792.707
8254.84
7400.466
6748.132

5233.818

Bare frame Ground Floor 3rd Floor 5th Floor 7th floor 9th Floor Full struct

Figure 7 Variation of Base shear with type of Structure

Bare Frame Ground floor Soft story 3rd Floor Soft story 5th Floor Soft Story

Elastic state
Immediate
Occupancy
Life Safety
Collapse
Prevention
Ultimate Capacity
Residual strength
Complete Collapse

Nature of Hinges as Per

7th Floor Soft story 9th Floor Soft Story Complete Infill walls Push Over loading Case
with colour coding

Figure 8 Hinge formations for different Structures

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 273 editor@iaeme.com

 B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Drift is defined as lateral displacement and inter storey drift is the difference between the roof
and floor displacements of that storey in a building if it normalized with height of the storey it
is known as Drift ratio. Drift ratio is maximum at middle floor levels It can be observed on
considering infill action there is a significant reduction in the drift values but at the location
of soft-storey , storey drift value exceed the allowable limit. This can be seen in values of
Table.4 and Fig. 4.
By comparing the plotted curves for infill frame with soft storey, it was observed that all
curves show similar trend at starting stage and start to deviate with significant increase in
displacement from the location of soft storey as shown in Fig. 4. The sudden increase in peak
displacement is due to absence of masonry infill action at the soft storey level. It is worth
noting that the soft storey does not affect the obtained displacement value of storeys located
below it. The presence of soft storey at the base or at any other level generally decreases the
amount of shear force that transferred to the next floor. The Storey displacement values of the
bare frame model is very high when compared to the infill wall model. The frequency of
structure decreases as time period increases due to the development and widening of cracks.
If the structural displacement increase beyond the yield point displacement the stiffness of
structure decreases due to the formation of cracks therefore stain energy dissipated is
quantified and changes the damping ratio of the model. As damping ratio changes it changes
the period and frequency of the model [23]. From the above discussion we can conclude that
as the Drift ratio increases the frequency decreases.
The state of stress in infill masonry is different along the height (infill action of masonry
wall is different at different storey height) as the column and beams in upper floors try to
transfer certain amount of force to the infill by strut action as we move to the upper floors the
weight above the storey reduces and the amount of force transferred to strut also reduces. So,
infill action of walls in top floors is very less when compared to below floors. Form the plot,
as long as the location of soft storey is below the middle floor level maximum lateral drift is
height, if the soft storey height above middle floor the maximum lateral drift values
decreases. It can be seen in the maximum storey displacement values of 7th& 9th soft-storey.
As the soft storey moves up in a building diaphragm drift decreases.
In structural system vibrational properties like Natural frequency (ω), Time Period and
mode –shapes (φ) has a considerable impact over the failure patterns of structure [27].The
bare frame model give a higher time period value, compared to the other structural models in
analysis. From the data it can conclude that there is a significant effect of in fill walls on the
time period and frequency of the structure. Therefore bare frame analysis of structure will not
give accurate values and it over estimates the drift, displacement and Time period values.
As the time period, frequency and drift values depends on the weight (force) and modules
of elasticity (which impacts stiffness of a material) of the structure on reducing the weight of
the infill material, it can be reduce drift values of the structure There is significant increase in
base shear as the location of soft-storey varies along the height as observed from Fig.7 Stress
concentration increases at the location of soft storey during earthquakes because of sudden
reduction of stiffness (location soft storey) which increase concentration of the stress in
columns. The columns in the soft storey floor reach plastic state even though other storey
columns are still in elastic state. This is caused due to ignoring the stiffness contribution of
infill wall in the analysis and design. As soft-storey fails, it leads to total collapse of structure
even though other floors of the structure are in elastic state. On observing Hinge formation
patterns as shown in Fig.8. As the push over load steps increases the number of hinges
forming also increase showing the locations where stiffness is reducing plastic hinge rotation
is concentrated at the top and bottom ends of the columns and it represents typical failure

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 274 editor@iaeme.com

 Behaviour of Soft Storey RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading

mechanism of soft-storey frames. Maximum yielding of material in columns and beams occur
in soft storey due to concentration of stress. So if a column fails it causes partial failure or
sometimes complete collapse of structure whereas if beam fails the failure is localized and
gets distributed to other structural components. By adopting strong column weak beam
concept we can localize the failure mode As the location soft-storey shifts to upper floors the
yielding of material is less so lower intensity hinges are formed after maximum number of
steps in push over analysis. The parameters that impacts the poor performance of the structure
during earth quakes are type of reinforcement, % of reinforcement, ductile detailing of
reinforcement and confinement of reinforcement etc., it is observed that effect of concrete
grade and steel grade has no significance in failure modes as modules of elasticity is
independent of grade of cement and steel. Formation of hinges in a structure determines the
load transfer mechanism, extent of damage and amount of rehabilitation work it requires. As
the force is directly proportional to the stiffness, on increasing stiffness in members of floors,
load it can resist also increases so stiffness of the structure is to be increased.
Stiffness ratio of the structure is important factor for successful strengthening of building
with soft storey. Some possible solutions for soft storey problem is increase stiffness of
columns by providing lateral stiffeners (braces of stiffeners), shear walls, or by providing a
solid lift inner core [28].After Bhuj earth quake Indian seismic code IS: 1893(part1)-2002
suggested that forces in beams and column in open storey buildings is approximated by
multiplying the bare frame design forces with a multiplication factor 2.5 under the action of
earth quake loads so that the column and beams can be designed to the new design force
values [1, 29, and30].

5. CONCLUSIONS
From the soft storey analysis the following conclusions are drawn:
 There is significant effect of infill walls in the stiffness and lateral resistance of frame. The
uneven distribution of in fills should be regular to avoid soft storey formation.
 As the location of soft storey shifts to upper floors the maximum lateral drift value decreases.
In case of unavoidable conditions, soft storey should be provided in upper floor levels above
middle floor heights to decrease the impact of soft-story.
 In order to prevent the soft-story collapse of the structure. The maximum lateral drift values of
the story should be limited and the stiffness of the column should be increased.

REFERENCES
[1] IS 1893-2002 (Part-1), “Criteria for Earthquake resistant design of structures”, General
provisions and buildings, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[2] H.S.Lee and S.W.Woo, “Effect of masonry infills on seismic performance of A 3 story
R.C frame with non-seismic detailing”, Earthquake Eng., Struct, Dyn, vol.31,pp-353-
378,2002.
[3] C. Repapis, C.Zeris, and E. Vintzileou, (2008) “Evaluation of the seismic performance of
existing RC Building”, A case study for regular and irregular building”, Journal of
Engineering, 10:3, p.p. 429-452.
[4] J.Asteris, I.P. Giannopoulos, and C. Z. Chrysoustomou, (2012) “Modelling of in filled
frames with openings”, the open construction and building technology journal, 6,
supplementary (1-M6), pp.81-91.
[5] R. Morbiducci, “Non-linear parameters of models for masonry”, International Journal of
Solids and Structures, Vol.40 (15), 4071-4090, 2003

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 275 editor@iaeme.com

 B. Lalitha Chandrahas and P. Polu Raju

[6] T.Paulay and M.J.N. Priestley, “Seismic Design of concrete and Masonry Buildings”,
John Wiley &Sons Inc., New York, USA, 1992
[7] B.S. Smith, “Lateral stiffness of in filled Frames”, Journal of Structural Division, and
Proc. of ASCE, 114, 1962.183-199.
[8] S. Polyakov, “On the interaction between masonry filler walls and enclosing frame when
loading in plane of the wall”, Translation in earthquake engineers, earthquake
engineering, Earthquake engineering research institute, San Francisco, 36-42(1960)
[9] Applied Technology Council (ATC-40), “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete
Buildings”, Vol. 1 and 2, Redwood City, California, 1996.
[10] H. Shashikumar and Sayed Ahamed Raza, “Capacity based modal dynamic analysis with
soft story and masonry core wall as infill” International Journal of modern Engineering
Research(IJMER) Vol.5(6), June 2015, ISSN:2249-6645.
[11] SAP 2000 manual, “Three Dimensional Static and Dynamic Analysis and Design
ofBuilding”, 2000 IBC, ASCE 7-98, and ACI 318-99” ISBN: 58001-112-8, June 2013.
[12] M. Fintel and F. Khan, “Shock-absorbing soft storey concept for multi-storey earthquake
structures", ACI Journal, Vol. 66, pp. 381-390, 1969.
[13] UBC, “Uniform Building Code”, International Conference of Building 1997.
[14] IBC, “International Building Code”, USA: International Code Council Inc., 2009.
[15] A. Habibullah and S. Pyle, “Practical three dimensional non-linear static pushover
analysis”, Structures Magazine, winter, 1998.
[16] A.K. Chopra and R. K. A. Goel “Model push over analysis procedure to estimate seismic
demand for buildings: theory and preliminary evaluation”, Pacific Earthquake
Engineering Research Centre, Collage of Engineering University of Berkeley, Berkeley;
2001.
[17] D. Vamvatsikos and C.A. Cornell “Incremental Dynamic Analysis and Its Application to
Performance-Based Earth quake engineering”, 12th European Conference on Earthquake
Engineering Paper Reference-479.
[18] N. Shome and C.A. Cornell, Stranford University, “Structural Seismic Demand Analysis”
8thACSE Speciality Conference on Pubabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability,
PMC2000-119.
[19] S.K.Ghosh and D.A. Fanella “Seismic and Wind Design of Concrete Building” (2000
IBC, ASCE 7-98,and ACI 318-99” ISBN: 58001-112-8. June 2013.
[20] W. W. El- Dakhankhni, M. Elgaaly, and J.F. Abel, “A six-strut model for Non-linear
Dynamic analysis of steel in filled Frames”, International Journal of Structural Stability
and Dynamics, 2(3), 2002, 335-353..
[21] S.K. Jain, K. Mitra, Manish, and M. Shah (2010) “Seismic Evaluation of RC-Frame
Building in India Earth quake” A Proposed Rapid Visual Screening Procedure for Seismic
Evaluation of RC-Frame Buildings in India. Earthquake Spectra: August 2010, Vol. 26,
No. 3, pp. 709-729.
[22] S. Chandrasekaran, U.K. Tripathi, and M. Srivastava, “Study of plan irregularity effect on
seismic vulnerability of MRFS” Conference on shock & Impact loads on Structures,
2003, pp.125-136.
[23] V.V.S .Surya Kumar Dadi and Pankaj Agarwal “Updating the nonlinear analytical
modelling of soft story RC framed building models based on cyclic test results” Springer
Science and Business Media Bull Earthquake Engineering(2013) 11:1493-1515.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 276 editor@iaeme.com

 Behaviour of Soft Storey RC Framed Building Under Seismic Loading

[24] IS: 875 (part 1and 2) -1987Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for
buildings and structures.
[25] S. Ahamed and J.G. Kori, “Performance Based Seismic Analysis of an Unsymmetrical
Building Using Pushover Analysis”, International Journal of Engineering Research, vol.
1, no .2, pp.100-110, 2013.
[26] C.Athanassiadou, “Seismic Performance of RC Panel Frames Irregular in Elevation”
Engineering Structures, vol. 30, pp.1250-1261.
[27] P.S.Dande and P.B.Kondag (2013) “Influence of Provision of Soft story in RC framed
building for earthquake resistance design”. International Journal of Engineering
Research applications 3(2):461-468.
[28] A. Kadid and A. Boumrkik, “Pushover Analysis of Reinforced Concert Frame Structure”,
Asian Journal of Civil engineering, vol.9 no.1, pp. 75-83, 2008.
[29] Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA-356), “Pre standard and Commentary
for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, Washington DC, U.S.A., 2000.
[30] “Seismic Response of Moment Resisting Frame with Open Ground Story Designed as per
code Provisions RC building” Architecture Research, pp.20-26, 2012.
[31] Prerna Nautiyal, Saurabh Singh and Geeta Batham. A Comparative Study of the Effect of
Infill Walls on Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Buildings. International
Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 4(4), 2013, pp. 208–218
[32] Dr. Suchita Hirde and Ms. Dhanshri Bhoite. Effect of Modeling of Infill Walls on
Performance of Multi Story RC Building. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 4(4), 2013, pp. 243–250

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 277 editor@iaeme.com