DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF BUILDING BY COMPARING SOLID

BLOCK WITH AERATED CONCRETE BLOCK

CAPSTONE PROJECT

REVIEW REPORT

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY

IN

CIVIL ENGINEERING

By

Harsh Singh (15BCL1048)

Pallavit Bisht (15BCL1057)

MD. Faiz Akram (15BCL1069)

Under the Guidance of

Dr. Muthumani K.

SCHOOL OF MECHANICAL AND BUILDING SCIENCES

VIT University

CHENNAI (TN) 600127

2018-19

UNDERTAKING
i|Page
We declare that the work presented in this project titled “DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF BUILDING BY

COMPARING SOLID BLOCK WITH AERATED CONCRETE BLOCK”, submitted to Prof. Muthumani,

Faculty of VIT University Chennai for the award of the Bachelor of Technology degree in Civil, is our original

work. We have not plagiarized or submitted the same work for the award of any other degree. In case this

undertaking is found incorrect, I accept that my degree may be unconditionally withdrawn.

Month, Year

Place

________________________________

(Student Name)

Certificate

i|Page
Certified that the work contained in the project titled “The Title of Project”, by Student Name, has been carried

out under my supervision and that this work has not been submitted elsewhere for a degree.

Prof. Muthumani K.

SMBS

Professor, VIT Chennai

Acknowledgement

We have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been
possible without the kind support and help of many individuals and
organizations. We would like to extend our sincere thanks to all of them.
i|Page
 We are highly indebted to Dr. Ramesh Kannan for his guidance and constant
supervision as well as for providing necessary information regarding the
project & also for his support in completing the project.
We would like to express our gratitude towards members of Vellore
Institute of Technology, Chennai Campus for their kind co-operation and
encouragement which help me in completion of this project.
Our thanks and appreciations also go to our friends for their help in
developing the project and people who have willingly helped us out with
their abilities.

Thank you!

Contents

Preface iv

Acknowledgements v

i|Page
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Motivation....................…………..……………………………………. 1
1.1.1 Some Important Remarks .…..……………………................. 1

2 Related work 2

3 Conclusions 3

Some Complex Results and their Proofs 4

References 5

Abstract
The research paper includes design and analysis of Plinth+G+4 storied building by comparing solid block with
aerated concrete block at Vadodara, Gujarat. The work is completed in three stages. First stage was the
modeling and analysis of proposed building. Second stage was the design of different structural components and
final stage was the analysis of the structure for static loads and seismic loads. The structure was modeled using
Autocad and Sweet Home 3D and analyzed using STAAD.Pro.V8i. During analysis, dead loads and live loads
and earthquake loads were calculated using IS:875 (Part I)-1987, IS:875 (Part II)-1987, IS:1911-1967, IS 1893 (

i|Page
Part 1 ) :2002, IS : 2185 ( Part 3 ) – 1984, ), IS 2185 (Part 1) :2005 respectively. Design of structural
components like beam, column and slab, is done according to Indian Standard Codes manually.

1. INTRODUCTION

The objective of the project is to compare “solid concrete block” with “aerated concrete block” and find the
percentage weight reduction, compare it with the percentage reduction in overall cost of the building. As the
density of aerated concrete block is less than solid concrete block. A two-dimensional plan of the building will
be made using AutoCAD and quantity surveying will be carried out to calculate the total weight of the two types
of blocks considered. Using STAADPro V8i, the analysis of the performance characteristics of the structure in
terms of stress, deflection and support reactions will be carried out. Followed by the design of different parts of
the structure considering various loads such as dead load, live load and earthquake load as per Indian Standard.
The structure will be designed initially considering solid concrete blocks and then replacing it with aerated
concrete block, studying the changes in the load design and calculation of different structural elements. By using
RCC Design we will design and fix the quantity of materials required for the stability of the structure and compare
the material requirement in both the cases and find the percentage reduction in overall cost of the building. The
structure would be designed considering the load and geographical data for Vadodara, Gujarat.

2. LITERATURE SURVEY

1. Analysis and Design of an Apartment building

( Sreeshna K.S Department of Civil Engineering, SCMS School of Engineering and Technology, Ernakulum, Kerala, India )

The training work includes structural analysis and design of B+G+4 storied apartment building at Warriam
road, Ernakulum. The work is completed in three stages. First stage was the modeling and analysis of proposed
building. Second stage was the design of different structural components and final stage was the detailing of
different structural components. The structure was modeled, analyzed using STAAD.Pro.V8i. During analysis,
dead loads and live loads were calculated using IS:875 (Part I)- 1987, IS:875 (Part II)-1987 respectively. Design
of structural components like beam, column, slab, staircase, shear wall, retaining wall, pile foundation is done
according to Indian Standard Codes manually. In addition to analysis and design, as a part of developing an
awareness of on-site situation and general workplace behavior, three construction sites were visited.

2. Design Example of a Six Storey Building .

i|Page
(Dr. Sudhir K Jain , Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur Kanpur )

This document has been developed under the project on Building Codes sponsored by Gujarat State Disaster
Management Authority, Gandhinagar at Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. The views and opinions
expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily of the GSDMA, the World Bank, IIT Kanpur, or the
Bureau of Indian Standards. A six storey building for a commercial complex has plan . The building is located
in seismic zone III on a site with medium soil. Design the building for seismic loads as per IS 1893 (Part 1):
2002. The building will be used for exhibitions, as an art gallery or show room, etc., so that there are no walls
inside the building. Only external walls 230 mm thick with 12 mm plaster on both sides are considered. For
simplicity in analysis, no balconies are used in the building. Preliminary sizes of structural components are
assumed by experience. All dimensions used are in mm, unless specified otherwise. The work is completed in
three stages. First stage was the modeling and analysis of proposed building. Second stage was the design of
different structural components and final stage was the detailing of different structural components. The
structure was modeled, analyzed using STAAD.Pro.V8i. During analysis, dead loads and live loads were
calculated. Design of structural components like beam, column, slab, staircase, shear wall, retaining wall, pile
foundation is done.

3. Seismic Analysis of RC Frame Structure with and without Masonry Infill Walls.

( Haroon Rasheed Tamboli and Umesh.N.Karadi , Department of Civil Engineering,B.L.D.E.A’S College of Engineering and
Technology, Bijapur, Karnataka, India. )

Masonry infills are normally considered as non-structural elements and their stiffness contributions are
generally ignored in practice, such an approach can lead to an unsafe design. The masonry infill walls though
constructed as secondary elements behaves as a constituent part of the structural system and determine the
overall behaviour of the structure especially when it is subjected to seismic loads. In this paper seismic analysis
has been performed using Equivalent Lateral Force Method for different reinforced concrete (RC) frame
building models that include bare frame, infilled frame and open first storey frame. The results of bare frame,
infilled frame and open first storey frame are discussed and conclusions are made. In modelling the masonry
infill panels the Equivalent diagonal Strut method is used and the software ETABS is used for the analysis of all
the frame models.

4. BENEFICIAL INFLUENCE OF MASONRY INFILL WALLS ON SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF

RC FRAME BUILDINGS .

(C V R MURTY And Sudhir K JAIN)

Masonry infills in reinforced concrete buildings cause several undesirable effects under seismic loading: short-
i|Page
column effect, soft-storey effect, torsion, and out-of-plane collapse. Hence, seismic codes tend to discourage
such constructions in high seismic regions. However, in several moderate earthquakes, such buildings have
shown excellent performance even though many such buildings were not designed and detailed for earthquake
forces. This paper presents some experimental results on cyclic tests of RC frames with masonry infills. It is
seen that the masonry infills contribute significant lateral stiffness, strength, overall ductility and energy
dissipation capacity. With suitable arrangements to provide reinforcement in the masonry that is well anchored
into the frame columns, it should be possible to also improve the out-of-plane response of such infills.
Considering that such masonry infill RC frames are the most common type of structures used for multistorey
constructions in the developing countries, there is need to develop robust seismic design procedures for such
buildings.

5. Brick masonry infills in seismic design of RC framed buildings: Cost implications .

(Diptesh Das and C.V.R. Murty )

Five reinforced concrete (RC) framed buildings with brick masonry infills were designed for the same seismic
hazard in accordance with the applicable provisions given in Eurocode 8, Nepal Building Code 201 and Indian
seismic code (with and without ductile detailing), and the equivalent braced frame method given in the
literature. The buildings designed by the Nepal Building Code 201 and the equivalent braced frame method
were found to be more economical.

Reinforced concrete (RC) framed buildings with infill walls are usually analysed and designed as bare frames,
without considering the strength and stiffness contributions of the infills. However, during earthquakes, these
infill walls contribute to the response of the structure and the behaviour of infilled framed buildings is different
from that predicted for bare frame structures. Therefore, based on the understanding of the actual response,
design provisions need to be developed. Fortunately, a few countries already have codal provisions for seismic
design of RC framed buildings with brick masonry infills. The present study evaluates these available
provisions with a view to identify design methodologies that exploit the benefits of infills in a rational manner,
for improving the contribution of these infills and for reducing the detrimental effects.

6. SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF MASONRY INFILLED R/C FRAMES .

(Luis DECANINI, Fabrizio MOLLAIOLI, Andrea MURA, Rodolfo SARAGONI)

It is well known that masonry infills, although non-engineered and considered as non-structural, may provide

i|Page
most of the earthquake resistance and prevent collapse of relatively flexible and weak RC structures. The
objective of this study is to investigate the effect of masonry infills on the performance of reinforced concrete
frames subjected to earthquake ground motions. To this purpose an equivalent discrete shear-type model with
and without infills was used for the evaluation of elastic and inelastic response of multi-story frame structures.
The masonry-infilled modeled by means of equivalent strut elements, which can only carry compressive loads,
characterized by an idealized degrading hysteretic behavior. The adopted mathematical models was validated by
comparing numerical and test results. To investigate the influence of the mechanical characteristics of the
infills, three different idealized type of masonry infills were considered, defined as weak, intermediate and
strong. The performance of a large number of different reinforced concrete two bay-frames, bare and infilled,
subjected to ten ground motion was investigated. The wide range of natural periods taken into account allowed
to establish response spectra for several significant parameters characterizing the behavior of bare and infilled
frames. The results of the investigation suggest that the global non-linear seismic response of reinforced
concrete frames with masonry infill can be simulated by a relatively simple mathematical model, which
combines a shear-type model with equivalent strut elements representing the infill walls, provided that the infill
does not fail out of plane. Moreover, infills, if present in all storeys, give a significant contribution to the energy
dissipation capacity, reducing the dissipation energy demands in frame elements and decreasing significantly
the maximum displacements. Therefore the contribution of masonry is of great importance, even though
strongly depending on the characteristics of the ground motion, especially for non-seismic frames, which have a
lower capacity of dissipating energy than the seismic ones.

7. The Effect of Masonry Infill Walls on the Seismic Response of Reinforced Concrete Frames.

(Adel Ziada, Mohamed Laid Samai, Abdelhadi Tekkouk, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Technology Sciences,
University of Constantine , Algeria )

In the last few years, the scientific community has been hardly involved in the investigation about the
interaction between infill masonry walls and Reinforced Concrete (RC) frames in the seismic structural
behaviour, and thus for both new and existing buildings. Despite significant research effort dedicated to such
buildings, the understanding of seismic behaviour of infilled frames is still not mastered and guidelines for their
modeling and analysis are lacking in the design codes. The present paper presents a numerical study using the
software computer package SAP 2000 to investigate the effects of masonry infill on the seismic performance of
RC framed buildings located in a moderate seismic risk area in Algeria. For this purpose, a number of non-
i|Page
linear static (pushover) analyses have been performed on spatial bare structures, fully and partially infilled
structures. The infills have been modeled with two crossed diagonal struts able to represent the contribution
under compression of the panels subjected to dynamic loading along two main directions. The results of the
analyses indicate that the infills can have a beneficial effect on the structural response, provided that they are
placed regularly throughout the structure. Furthermore, the probability of failure of the infilled frames with
regularly distributed infill is smaller than that of the bare frames. Finallay, it has been concluded that some of
the provisions of Algerian seismic code RPA99 seem too conservative especially when structures are not very
high.

8. A STUDY ON DESIGN OF MULTI-STOREY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING - A REVIEW .

(Mr. K. Prabin kumar , R. Sanjaynath , Assistant professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Saveetha University, Chennai -
602105, Tamil Nadu, India)


The main objective of the project is to design and analyse a multi-storey building using STAAD.Pro. Because
of the growing population and less availability of land, construction of multi-storey buildings is coming into
play to serve many people in limited area. Manual load calculations are tedious and consumes more time.
Because of this structural engineer uses STAAD.Pro software to save time. First of all, the planning was done
using AutoCAD. Load calculations were done manually and then the structure was analysed using STAAD.Pro.
STAAD.Pro is user friendly in order that the frame will be drawn, and load values and dimensions are given.
Dead load, imposed load and wind load are calculated and applied to the structure. The technique used in
STAAD.Pro analysis is limit state method.

i|Page
3. CONCLUSIONS FROM THE LITERATURE SURVEY

STAAD.Pro has the ability to calculate the reinforcement needed for any concrete section. Various structural
action is considered on members such as axial, flexure, torsion etc. Shear reinforcement is deliberate to
withstand each shear forces and torsional moments. Beams are designed flexure, shear and torsion. Pillar are
delineated for axial forces and biaxial ends at the ends. During analysis, dead loads and live loads were
calculated using different code book. The seismic analysis of RC frames should be done by considering the
infill walls in the analysis. For modelling the infill wall the equivalent diagonal strut method can be effectively
used. Infilled frames should be preferred in seismic regions than the open first storey frame, because the storey
drift of first storey of open first storey frame is very large than the upper storeys, this may probably cause the
collapse of structure. The presence of infill wall can affect the seismic behaviour of frame structure to large
extent, and the infill wall increases the strength and stiffness of the structure. The seismic analysis of RC (Bare
frame) structure leads to under estimation of base shear. Therefore other response quantities such as time
period, natural frequency, and storey drift are not significant. The underestimation of base shear may lead to the
collapse of structure during earthquake shaking. Therefore it is important to consider the infill walls in the
seismic analysis of structure. In case of an open first storey frame structure, the storey drift is very large than the
upper storeys, which may cause the collapse of structure during strong earthquake shaking. Therefore the
infilled frame structures will be the better option to prefer in the seismic regions. The distribution of the
masonry infill walls throughout the story has insignificant effect on seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete
buildings provided that symmetric plan layout of a building and symmetric arrangement of the infill walls are
satisfied. The behaviour of an infilled frame is dependent on the properties of frame and infill; hence, the
response of such frames should be based on overall frame to infill composite action rather than on isolated bare
frame behaviour. The collapse mechanisms of the three models of six stories clearly show that the presence of
the infills affect in negative way the ductility of the whole structure. The results of the study demonstrate that
masonry infill highly increases the stiffness and strength of a structure as long as the seismic demand does not
exceed the deformation capacity of the infills. After that, both the global stiffness and the global strength
strongly deteriorate. Finally, the performance of the infilled frames, for a given type of infills, can be improved
increasing the strength capacity of the bare frame rather than increasing its ductility capacity, as far as for
limited ductility demand the infills may undergo to significant inelastic deformation demands.

4. PROBLEM DEFINITION

The major focus of our project is to reduce the overall expenditure on construction of a building using AAC and
Solid Concrete Blocks over the use of conventional clay bricks. Furthermore keeping in mind that the stability of
the structure not be compromised. The design and analysis of a building will be done using conventional AAC

i|Page
blocks and Solid Concerete blocks. Two different cases are being chosen to demonstrate the changes in the
economical and design aspects of the structure, ultimately leading to a direct comparison between the use of
aforementioned blocks and how it aids in the reduction of direct/indirect expenditure of the project.

5. METHODOLOGY

The structure was modeled, analyzed using STAAD.Pro.V8i. During analysis, dead loads and live loads were
calculated respectively. Building Design for seismic loads as per IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002. Design of structural
components like beam, column, slab, staircase, shear wall, retaining wall, pile foundation is done according to
Indian Standard Codes by using limit sate method .

A two-dimensional plan of the building was made using AutoCAD and quantity surveying is carried out to
calculate the total weight of the two types of blocks considered. Using STAADPro V8i, the analysis of the
performance characteristics of the structure in terms of stress, deflection and support reactions will be carried out.
Followed by the design of different parts of the structure considering various loads such as dead load, live load,
wind load and earthquake load as per Indian Standard. The structure will be designed initially considering solid
concrete blocks and then replacing it with aerated concrete block, studying the changes in the load design and
calculation of different structural elements. By using RCC Design we will design and fix the quantity of materials
required for the stability of the structure and compare the material requirement in both the cases and find the
percentage reduction in overall cost of the building. The structure would be designed considering the load and
geographical data for Vadodara, Gujarat.

6. DESIGN STANDARDS & REALISTIC CONSTRAINTS

i. For all structural elements, M25 grade concrete will be used. However, higher M30 grade concrete is
used for central columns up to plinth, in ground floor and in the first floor.
ii. HYSD reinforcement of grade Fe 415 confirming to IS: 1786 is used throughout.
iii. The floor diaphragms are assumed to be rigid.
iv. Centre-line dimensions are followed for analysis and design. In practice, it is advisable to consider finite
size joint width.
i|Page
 v. For analysis purpose, the beams are assumed to be rectangular so as to distribute slightly larger moment
in columns.
vi. For Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Blocks we use: Indian Standard Specification for Concrete Masonry
Units.
IS: 2185(Part 3)- 1984
Part 3- Autoclaved Cellular(Aerated) Concrete Blocks
vii. For Solid Concrete Block we use: Indian Standard Specification for Concrete Masonry Units.
IS: 2185(Part 1)- 2005
Part 1- Hollow and Solid Concrete Blocks
viii. All dimensions are in mm,

7. WORK DONE

I. SELECTION OF PLAN

A six storey building for a commercial complex has been considered from:
Document No. :: IITK-GSDMA-EQ26-V3.0
Final Report:: A - Earthquake Codes
IITK-GSDMA Project on Building Codes.
The building is located in seismic zone III on a site with medium soil.

The building will be used for exhibitions, as an art gallery or show room, etc., so that there are no walls inside
the building. Only external walls 230 mm thick with 12 mm plaster on both sides are considered. For
simplicity in analysis, no balconies are used in the building. At ground floor, slabs are not provided and the

i|Page
 floor will directly rest on ground. Therefore, only ground beams passing through columns are provided as tie
beams. The floor beams are thus absent in the ground floor.
Secondary floor beams are so arranged that they act as simply supported beams and that maximum number
of main beams get flanged beam effect. The main beams rest centrally on columns to avoid local eccentricity.
For all structural elements, M25 grade concrete will be used. However, higher M30 grade concrete is used for
central columns up to plinth, in ground floor and in the first floor. Sizes of all columns in upper floors are
kept the same; however, for columns up to plinth, sizes are increased.
The floor diaphragms are assumed to be rigid. For analysis purpose, the beams are assumed to be rectangular
so as to distribute slightly larger moment in columns. In practice a beam that fulfils requirement of flanged
section in design, behaves in between a rectangular and a flanged section for moment distribution.
Seismic loads will be considered acting in the horizontal direction (along either of the two principal directions)
and not along the vertical direction, since it is not considered to be significant.

II. PLAN LAYOUT OF THE SELECTED STRUCTURE

2D PLAN ON AUTOCAD:

i|Page
 Fig1- Part Frame Section Fig2- Part Section A-A

i|Page
 Fig3- Typical Floor Plan

3D PLAN ON SWEET HOME 3D:

i|Page
 Fig4- Overall View of Structure

Fig5- Side View of the Structure

i|Page
 Fig 6- Rendered View on StaadPro

III. AAC BLOCKS

Autoclaved Aerated Concrete is a Lightweight, Load-bearing, High-insulating, Durable building product, which
is produced in a wide range of sizes and strengths. that simultaneously provides structure, insulation, and fire-
and mold-resistance. AAC Blocks is lightweight and compare to the red bricks AAC blocks are three times
lighter.

Indian Standard Code: Indian Standard Specification for Concrete Masonry Units

IS: 2185(Part 3)- 1984

Part 3- Autoclaved Cellular(Aerated) Concrete Block

i|Page
RAW MATERIALS:

 Cement
 Fly ash or sand
 Limestone powder
 Gypsum
 Aluminium powder

SIZE: The nominal dimensions of concrete block shall be as follows

Length: 400, 500 or 600 mm

Height: 200 or 100 mm

Width: 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 250 or 300 mm

Full length or half length U-blocks mayalso be manufactured for the purposes of band and lintels.

IV. SOLID CONCRETE BLOCKS

Solid concrete blocks are commonly used, which are heavy in weight and manufactured from dense aggregate.
They are very strong and provides good stability to the structures. So for large work of masonry like for load
bearing walls these solid blocks are preferable. They are available in large sizes compared to bricks. So, it takes
less time to construct concrete masonry than brick masonry.

Indian Standard Code: Indian Standard Specification for Concrete Masonry Units

IS: 2185(Part 1)- 2005

Part 1- Hollow and Solid Concrete Blocks

RAW MATERIALS: Cement, aggregate, water is used to prepare concrete blocks. The cement-aggregate ratio
in concrete blocks is 1:6. Aggregate used is of 60% fine aggregate and 40% coarse aggregate. Their Minimum
strength is about 4N/mm2. specifies the compressive strength requirements of concrete masonry units.
Sand: M-Sand
Coarse Aggregate: 6mm metals(chips)
Other replacable material: Lightweight concrete blocks are made by replacing the sand and gravel with
expanded clay, shale, or slate. Expanded clay, shale, and slate are produced by crushing the raw materials and
heating them to about 2000°F (1093°C). At this temperature the material bloats, or puffs up, because of the
rapid generation of gases caused by the combustion of small quantities of organic material trapped inside. A
typical light-weight block weighs 22-28 lb (10.0-12.7 kg) and is used to build non-load-bearing walls and
partitions. Expanded blast furnace slag, as well as natural volcanic materials such as pumice and scoria, are also
used to make lightweight blocks.

i|Page
In addition to the basic components, the concrete mixture used to make blocks may also contain various
chemicals, called admixtures, to alter curing time, increase compressive strength, or improve workability. The
mixture may have pigments added to give the blocks a uniform color throughout, or the surface of the blocks
may be coated with a baked-on glaze to give a decorative effect or to provide protection against chemical
attack. The glazes are usually made with a thermosetting resinous binder, silica sand, and color pigments.

SIZE: The common size of concrete blocks is 400mm x 200mm x (200mm or 150mm or 100mm)

The nominal dimensions of concrete block shall be as follows

Length: 400, 500 or 600 mm

Height: 200 or 100 mm

Width: 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 250 or 300 mm

Full length or half length U-blocks mayalso be manufactured for the purposes of band and lintels.

V. QUANTITY SURVEYING OF BRICKS

QUANTITY SURVEYING OF DIFFERENT FLOORS:

i|Page
i|Page
i|Page
 SOLID CONCRETE BLOCK:

AERATED CONCRETE BLOCK:

i|Page
VI. OBSERVATIONS

DL+LL DESIGN

Load Case=1.5(DL+LL)
Columns from 1st Floor=0.5m*0.5m
Columns Ground Floor=0.6m*0.6m
Beams=0.4m*0.3m

Difference in quantity of steel= 44545kg

Percentage reduction of steel=14.49%

SEISMIC DESIGN

Load Case=1.2(DL+LL+EQ)
Columns=0.6m*0.6m
Beams=0.6m*0.3m

Difference in quantity of steel= 57225kg

Percentage reduction of steel=9.93%

i|Page
i|Page
i|Page
Advantages:

SOLID CONCRETE BLOCK AAC BLOCK

The design of solid concrete blocks is flexible Earthquake forces are proportional to the
and easy to construct. weight of the building and hence it ultimately
reduces the dead load on buildings and hence
less steel in case of RCC structures.

Solid concrete blocks are ideal for foundation Saves steel and concrete due to the reduction in
and basement wall. dead weight.

Solid concrete blocks are unaffected by Increase in floor area due to the reduction in
termites. the size of columns and thickness of the wall.

Solid concrete blocks provide insulation AAC blocks are very easy to handle and
against cold and hot weather. ordinary tools are used for cutting.

The solid concrete blocks wall is long lasting, AAC blocks are available in large sizes and
durable and requires less maintenance. hence less no of joints. This ultimately results
in faster construction on site and less
consumption of cement.

i|Page
 The Solid concrete blocks are highly resistant
to extreme weather conditions such as storms,
floods and high winds.
The Solid concrete blocks are highly resistant
to cracking and crumbling in extreme
temperatures, unlike poured concrete.
The Solid concrete blocks have a smooth finish
and have more decorative surface.
The Solid concrete blocks are virtually
soundproof.
Disadvantages:
SOLID CONCRETE BLOCK
The cost of building with solid concrete blocks
can be higher than traditional framed
construction. Weight of solid concrete block is
more than AAC Block
Due to the heavy weight, concrete structural
cost is high.
It is difficult to make arrangements for
concealed work for wiring, plumbing &
conduit.
i|Page
Easy to transport.
Time-saving in construction. There is minimal
wastage in case of AAC blocks.
AAC blocks reduce the energy cost of air-
conditioning to a great extent due to its thermal
property.(LOW THERMAL
CONDUCTIVITY)
AAC blocks are appropriate for fire rating
application for desired safety.
AAC BLOCK
The production cost per unit for AAC Block is
higher.
Plaster sometimes does not stick properly
because of its smooth surface.
Needs care during it production itself, so that
surface is not very smooth.
Bending Moments and Shear Forces

The finish moments and end shears for basic load cases obtained from analysis are given in Tables…………..
Since earthquake load on Z-direction (EZTP and EZTN) induces very small moments and shears in these beams
minded on the X-direction, same can be neglected from load mixtures. Also, the effect of positive torsion (due
to accidental eccentricity) for these beams will be more than that of negative torsion.
Software used for analysis will however check all the combinations for design moment and shear for these
load combinations. The end moment and end shear for these load combinations are given in
table…………(no.s). To get an overall idea of design moments in beams at various floors, the design moments
and shears for all beams in frame A-A are given in Tables………..and ………...(no.s).

For Beams (Z Direction)

Load Case Beam Solid(Z) Beam Solid(Z) Beam Aerated(Z) Beam Aerated(Z)
Detail Bending Shear Bending Shear
Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right
EQX -118.987 125.509 -0.326 0.412 -97.023 104.746 -0.558 0.698
EQZ -0.029 0.030 -0.268 0.220 -0.043 0.044 -0.562 0.486
DL 162.854 141.503 0.047 -0.051 87.461 72.714 -0.006 0.006
LL 44.914 40.436 -0.031 0.034 45.520 38.560 -0.030 0.033
DL+LL 207.766 181.947 0.015 -0.017 132.992 111.277 -0.034 0.037
1.5(DL+LL) 311.649 272.920 0.023 -0.025 199.488 166.915 -0.051 0.056
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) 106.537 368.937 -0.372 0.475 43.150 259.224 -0.712 0.885
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) 392.105 67.716 0.410 -0.515 276.005 7.833 0.627 -0.791
1.2(DL+LL+EQZ) 249.286 218.363 -0.303 0.244 159.526 133.582 -0.717 0.630
1.2(DL+LL-EQZ) 249.356 218.291 0.340 -0.285 159.629 133.476 0.632 -0.536
Table………

For Column (Z Direction)

Load Case Beam Solid(Z) Beam Solid(Z) Beam Aerated(Z) Beam Aerated(Z)
Detail Bending Shear Bending Shear
Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right
EQX 178.972 -31.587 0.012 -0.011 120.628 -38.186 0.015 -0.016
EQZ 0.012 -0.011 178.972 -31.587 0.015 -0.016 120.628 -38.186
DL 29.725 -59.244 29.725 -59.244 15.158 -30.306 15.158 -30.306
LL 8.648 -17.225 8.648 -17.225 8.179 -16.348 8.179 -16.348
DL+LL 38.364 -76.448 38.364 -76.448 23.314 -46.605 23.314 -46.605
1.5(DL+LL) 57.547 -114.673 57.547 -114.673 34.971 -69.908 34.971 -69.908-
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) 260.814 -129.667 46.062 -91.776 172.759 -101.808 28.022 -56.004
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) -168.718 -53.858 46.034 -91.749 -116.749 -10.161 27.987 -55.965
1.2(DL+LL+EQZ) 46.062 -91.776 260.814 -129.667 28.022 -56.004 172.759 -101.808
1.2(DL+LL-EQZ) 46.034 -91.749 -168.718 -53.858 27.987 -55.965 -116.749 -10.161
Table……….

i|Page
For Beam (Y Direction)
Load Case Beam Solid(Y) Beam Solid(Y) Beam Aerated(Y) Beam Aerated(Y)
Detail Bending Shear Bending Shear
Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right
EQX -0.326 0.412 -118.987 125.509 -0.558 0.698 37.490 104.746
EQZ -0.268 0.220 -0.029 0.030 -0.562 0.486 -0.043 0.044
DL 0.047 -0.051 162.854 141.503 -0.006 0.006 87.461 72.714
LL -0.031 0.034 44.914 40.436 -0.030 0.033 45.520 38.560
DL+LL 0.015 -0.017 207.766 181.947 -0.034 0.037 132.992 111.277
1.5(DL+LL) 0.023 -0.025 311.649 272.920 -0.051 0.056 199.488 166.915
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) -0.372 0.475 106.537 368.937 -0.712 0.885 43.150 259.224
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) 0.410 -0.515 392.105 67.716 0.627 -0.791 276.005 7.833
1.2(DL+LL+EQZ) -0.303 0.244 249.286 218.363 -0.717 0.630 159.526 133.582
1.2(DL+LL-EQZ) 0.340 -0.285 249.356 218.291 0.632 -0.536 159.629 133.476
Table…………

For Column (Y Direction)

Load Case Beam Solid(Y) Beam Solid(Y) Beam Aerated(Y) Beam Aerated(Y)
Detail Bending Shear Bending Shear
Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right
EQX 0.012 -0.011 178.972 -31.587 0.015 -0.016 120.628 -38.186
EQZ 178.972 -31.587 0.012 -0.011 120.628 -38.186 0.015 -0.016
DL 29.725 -59.244 29.725 -59.244 15.158 -30.306 15.158 -30.306
LL 8.648 -17.225 -8.600 -17.225 8.179 -16.348 8.179 -16.348
DL+LL 38.364 -76.448 38.364 -76.448 23.314 -46.605 23.314 -46.605
1.5(DL+LL) 57.547 -114.673 57.547 -114.673 34.971 -69.908 34.971 -69.908
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) 46.062 -91.776 260.814 -129.667 28.022 -56.004 172.759 -101.808
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) 46.034 -91.749 -168.718 -53.858 27.987 -55.965 -116.749 -10.161
1.2(DL+LL+EQZ) 260.814 -129.667 46.062 -91.776 172.759 -101.808 28.022 -56.004
1.2(DL+LL-EQZ) -168.718 -53.858 46.034 -91.749 -116.749 -10.161 27.987 -55.965
Table………..

i|Page
Shear force and Bending Moment Diagram:
EARTHQUAKE (DL+LL+EQ)

Factor:- 1.2(DL+LL+EQ) Z

SOLID AERATED
BENDING Z BENDING Z

SHEAR Z SHEAR Z

Factor:-1.2(DL +LL +EQ)Y

BENDING Y BENDING Y

SHEAR Y SHEAR Y

i|Page
DL+LL ONLY
Factor:-1.5(DL+LL) Z

SOLID AERATED
BENDING Z BENDING Z

SHEAR Z

Factor:-1.5(DL +LL ) Y

BENDING Y BENDING Y

SHEAR Y SHEAR Y

i|Page
Beam and Column Design:-
Solid Column(DL+LL)

Design load Design parameter

Load 4 Fy(Mpa) 415
Location End 2 Fc(Mpa) 25
Pu(Kns) 2628.98 As Reqd(mm2) 2452
Mz(Kns-Mt) 114.67 As (%) 1.00
My(Kns-Mt) 114.67 Bar Size 20
Bar No 8

Fig…………..

Aerated Column(DL+LL)

Design load Design parameter

Load 4 Fy(Mpa) 415
Location End 1 Fc(Mpa) 25
Pu(Kns) 1716.94 As Reqd(mm2) 1232
Mz(Kns-Mt) 34.97 As (%) 0.67
My(Kns-Mt) 34.97 Bar Size 12
Bar No 12

Fig…………….

Solid Beam(DL+LL)

Design load Design parameter

Mz Dist. Load Fy(Mpa) 415
Kn Met Met Fc(Mpa) 25
160.24 4.4 4 Depth(m) 0.449999988
Width(m) 0.300000011
-311.65 0 4
Length(m) 7.5
-27.92 7.5 4
Fig………………

i|Page
 Aerated Beam(DL+LL)

Design load Design parameter

Mz Dist. Load Fy(Mpa) 415
Kn Met Met Fc(Mpa) 25
-116.6 0.6 4 Depth(m) 0.449999988
-199.49 0 4 Width(m) 0.300000011
-166.92 7.5 4 Length(m) 7.5

Fig……………

Solid Column(DL+LL+EQ)

Design load Design parameter

Load 5 Fy(Mpa) 415
Location End 1 Fc(Mpa) 25
Pu(Kns) 2332.67 As Reqd(mm2) 4017
Mz(Kns-Mt) 260.81 As (%) 1.60
My(Kns-Mt) 46.06 Bar Size 16
Bar No 20

Fig……………..

i|Page
 Aerated Column(DL+LL+EQ)

Design parameter
Design load Fy(Mpa) 415
Load 5 Fc(Mpa) 25
Location End 1 As Reqd(mm2) 2082
Pu(Kns) 2332.67 As (%) 1.11
Mz(Kns-Mt) 260.81 Bar Size 12
My(Kns-Mt) 46.06 Bar No 20

Fig……………

Solid Beam(DL+LL+EQ)

Design load
Design parameter
Mz Dist. Load
Fy(Mpa) 415
Kn Met Met
Fc(Mpa) 25
156.56 4.4 6
Depth(m) 0.449999988
-392.11 0 6 Width(m) 0.300000011
-368.94 7.5 5 Length(m) 7.5
Fig………………

i|Page
 Aerated Beam(DL+LL+EQ)

Design load
Design parameter
Fy(Mpa) 415
Mz Dist. Load Fc(Mpa) 25
Kn Met Met Depth(m) 0.449999988
110.23 5 6 Width(m) 0.300000011
-276 0 6 Length(m) 7.5
-259.22 7.5 5

Fig……….....

Tables and Graphs

REINFORCEMENT EXPENSE CALCULATION

**DETAILS OF SOURCE TO BE MENTIONED**

1). SOLID BLOCK

Load Case: Dead Load+ Live Load

BAR DIAMETER RATE WEIGHT COST

REQUIREMENT
(in mm) (in Rs./tonne) (in tonne) (in Rs.)
8 47685.28 4.16 198370.7648
10 46055.94 0.861 39654.16434
12 46490.43 7.217 335521.4333
16 46490.43 7.34 341239.7562
20 46490.43 8.144 378618.0619
25 46055.94 2.718 125180.0449
TOTAL 30.44 1418584.225
Table- REINFORCEMENT COST ANALYSIS FOR SOLID BLOCK UNDER DL+LL

i|Page
Load Case: Dead Load+ Live Load+ Earthquake Load

BAR DIAMETER RATE WEIGHT COST

REQUIREMENT
(in mm) (in Rs./tonne) (in tonne) (in Rs.)
8 47685.28 4.885 232942.5928
10 46055.94 0.508 23396.41752
12 46490.43 8.502 395261.6359
16 46490.43 7.899 367227.9066
20 46490.43 8.281 384987.2508
25 46055.94 7.612 350577.8153
TOTAL 37.687 1754393.619
Table- REINFORCEMENT COST ANALYSIS FOR SOLID BLOCK UNDER DL+LL+EQ

2). AERATED BLOCK

Load Case: Dead Load+ Live Load

BAR DIAMETER RATE WEIGHT COST

REQUIREMENT
(in mm) (in Rs./tonne) (in tonne) (in Rs.)
8 47685.28 4.068 193983.719
10 46055.94 1.2 55267.128
12 46490.43 6.414 298189.618
16 46490.43 4.615 214553.3345
20 46490.43 6.927 322039.2086
25 46055.94 2.979 137200.6453
TOTAL 26.203 1221233.653
Table- REINFORCEMENT COST ANALYSIS FOR AERATED CONCRETE BLOCK UNDER DL+LL

Load Case: Dead Load+ Live Load+ Earthquake Load

BAR DIAMETER RATE WEIGHT COST

REQUIREMENT
(in mm) (in Rs./tonne) (in tonne) (in Rs.)
8 47685.28 4.659 222165.7195
10 46055.94 1.518 69912.91692
12 46490.43 7.437 345749.3279
16 46490.43 7.433 345563.3662
20 46490.43 8.572 398515.966
25 46055.94 2.081 95842.41114
TOTAL 31.7 1477749.708
Table- REINFORCEMENT COST ANALYSIS FOR AERATED CONCRETE BLOCK UNDER DL+LL+EQ

i|Page
PERCENTAGE REDUCTION IN COST of STEEL

LOAD CASE: Dead load + Live load

TOTAL TOTAL WEIGHT TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF COST
WEIGH WEIGHT SAVING STEEL USING STEEL USING SAVINGS % WEIGHT % COST
T OF OF S SOLID BLOCK AERATED BLOCK (In Rs) REDUCTION REDUCTIO
STEEL STEEL (In (In Rs) (In Rs) N
USING USING tonne)
SOLID AERATE
BLOCK D
(in tonne) BLOCK
(in tonne)
30.44 26.20 4.237 1418584.22 1221233.65 197350.5 13.91 13.91
3 5 3 72

Table………..

LOAD CASE: Dead load + Live load +Earthquake

TOTAL TOTAL WEIGHT TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF COST

WEIGH WEIGHT SAVING STEEL USING STEEL USING SAVINGS % WEIGHT % COST
T OF OF S SOLID BLOCK AERATED BLOCK (In Rs) REDUCTION REDUCTIO
STEEL STEEL (In (In Rs) (In Rs) N
USING USING tonne)
SOLID AERATE
BLOCK D
(in tonne) BLOCK
(in tonne)
37.68 31.7 5.987 1754393.61 1477749.70 276643.9 15.89 15.77
7 9 8 11

Table………….

Percentage reduction in cost of concrete

(data collected from india mart)

1). FOR STATIC DESIGN

LOAD CASE: Dead load + Live load
TOTAL TOTAL WEIGH TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF COST
WEIGHT WEIGHT T concrete USING concrete USING SAVINGS % % COST
OF OF SAVIN SOLID BLOCK AERATED BLOCK (In Rs) WEIGHT REDUCTIO
CONCR CONCRE GS (In Rs) (In Rs) REDUCTIO N
ETE TE (In m^3) N
USING USING
SOLID AERATE
BLOCK D BLOCK
(in m^3) (in m^3)
266.6 244.6 22 1119720 1027320 92400 8.24 8.24

Table………….
i|Page
LOAD CASE: Dead load + Live load +Earthquake
TOTAL TOTAL WEIGH TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF COST
WEIGHT WEIGHT T concrete USING concrete USING SAVINGS % % COST
OF OF SAVIN SOLID BLOCK AERATED BLOCK (In Rs) WEIGHT REDUCTIO
CONCR CONCRE GS (In Rs) (In Rs) REDUCTIO N
ETE TE (In m^3) N
USING USING
SOLID AERATE
BLOCK D BLOCK
(in m^3) (in m^3)
266.6 243.7 22.9 1119720 1023540 96180 8.59 8.59

Table………….

OVERALL COMPARISON

1). DL+LL COMBINATION

COST OF COST OF COST OF CONCRETE TOTAL

BLOCK REINFORCEMENT COST
BARS
(in Rs.) (in Rs.) (in Rs.)
SOLID BLOCKS 1204650 1418584.225 1119720 3742954.23
AERATED BLOCKS 1287866 1221233.653 1027320 3536419.65

2) DL+LL+EQ COMBINATION

COST OF COST OF COST OF CONCRETE TOTAL

BLOCK REINFORCEMENT COST
BARS
(in Rs.) (in Rs.) (in Rs.)
SOLID BLOCKS 1204650 1754393.619 1119720 4078763.62
AERATED BLOCKS 1287866 1477749.708 1023540 3789155.71

i|Page
Total cost of project

LOAD CASE; (DL+LL)

TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST % COST SAVING

PROJECT USING PROJECT USING SAVING FOR
FOR PROJECT
SOLID BLOCK AERATED BLOCK PROJECT

3742954.23 3536419.65 206534.58 5.52

Table…………..

LOAD CASE; (DL+LL+EQ)

TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST % COST SAVING

PROJECT USING PROJECT USING SAVING FOR
FOR PROJECT
SOLID BLOCK AERATED BLOCK PROJECT

4078763.62 3789155.71 289607.91 7.10

Table………….

Solid Block (DL+LL)

35

30
Weight requirement

25

20

15

10

0
Solid Block Aerated Block
Type of Block

Chart……..Type of Block V/s weight requirement(DL+LL)

i|Page
 Solid Block (DL+LL+EQ)

40

35
Weight requirement

30
25

20

15

10

0
Solid Block Aerated Block
Type of Block

Chart……. Type of Block V/s weight requirement(DL+LL+EQ)

Steel (DL+LL)

35

30
TOTAL WEIGHT OF STEEL

25
in tonne

20

15

10

0
Solid Block Aerated Block
Type of Block

Chart…….Type of Block V/s total weight of steel(DL+LL)

i|Page
Steel (DL+LL+EQ)

40

35

30
TOTAL WEIGHT OF STEEL

25
in tonne

20

15

10

0
Solid Block Aerated Block
Type of Block

Chart…….. Type of Block V/s total weight of steel(DL+LL+EQ)

Concrete (DL+LL)

300

250
TOTAL WEIGHT OF CONCRETE

200

150

100

50

0
Solid Block Aerated Block
Type of Block

Chart……….Type of block V/s total weight of concrete(DL+LL)

i|Page
Concrete (DL+LL+EQ)

300

TOTAL WEIGHT OF CONCRETE 250

200

150

100

50

0
Solid Block Aerated Block
Type of Block

Chart……. Type of block V/s total weight of concrete(DL+LL+EQ)

i|Page
8. TIME LINE

9. REFERENCES

 Analysis and Design of an Apartment building

( Sreeshna K.S Department of Civil Engineering, SCMS School of Engineering and Technology,
Ernakulum, Kerala, India ) IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering &
Technology, Vol. 3 Issue 3, March 2016.

 Design Example of a Six Storey Building .

(Dr. Sudhir K Jain , Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur Kanpur )
Document No. :: IITK-GSDMA-EQ26-V3.0
Final Report :: A - Earthquake Codes

IITK-GSDMA Project on Building Codes

i|Page
  Seismic Analysis of RC Frame Structure with and without Masonry Infill Walls.

( Haroon Rasheed Tamboli and Umesh.N.Karadi , Department of Civil Engineering,B.L.D.E.A’S

College of Engineering and Technology, Bijapur, Karnataka, India. ) Indian Journal Of Natural
Sciences International Bimonthly ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Vol.3 / Issue 14/ October2012

 BENEFICIAL INFLUENCE OF MASONRY INFILL WALLS ON SEISMIC PERFORMANCE

OF RC FRAME BUILDINGS .

(C V R MURTY And Sudhir K JAIN)

 Brick masonry infills in seismic design of RC framed buildings: Cost implications .

(Diptesh Das and C.V.R. Murty )

 SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF MASONRY INFILLED R/C FRAMES .

(Luis DECANINI, Fabrizio MOLLAIOLI, Andrea MURA, Rodolfo SARAGONI) 13th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
August 1-6, 2004
Paper No. 165

 The Effect of Masonry Infill Walls on the Seismic Response of Reinforced Concrete Frames.

(Adel Ziada, Mohamed Laid Samai, Abdelhadi Tekkouk, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of
Technology Sciences, University of Constantine , Algeria ) ISBN 978-93-84422-22-6
Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Innovations in Civil and Structural Engineering
(ICICSE'15)
Istanbul (Turkey), June 3-4, 2015 pp. 264-271

 A STUDY ON DESIGN OF MULTI-STOREY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING - A REVIEW.

i|Page
 (Mr. K. Prabin kumar , R. Sanjaynath , Assistant professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Saveetha
University, Chennai - 602105, Tamil Nadu, India)
 International Journal of Pure and Applied
Mathematics
Volume 119 No. 17 2018, 2797-2802

i|Page