CD02-009

SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF SHORT COLUMNS IN RC STRUCTURES

A. Kheyroddin1, A. kargaran2
1
Associate professor, School of Civil Engg. Semnan University, Semnan, Iran
2
M.Sc. of Earthquake Engineering and Instructor of Islamic Azad University-Semnan Branch,
Semnan, Iran

ABSTRACT
Civil engineering structures as well as office or apartment building are affected by
earthquakes. A common cause of failure seems to be shear stress. The earthquake
forces developed at different floor levels in a building need to be brought down
along the height to the ground by the shortest path. Short column phenomenan is
one of the effective causes of buildings failure in past earthquakes. This destructive
phenomenon is due to column heighf difference in a story level that is
predominantly because of localing building on sloppy ground. These buildings
have unequal height columns along the slope, which causes ill effects like twisting
and damage in shorter columns. In some buildings, few or no walls are provided at
the first story (pilot). In the structures with difference in story level, major
problems is due to discontinuity of floor diaphragm that causes significant changes
in period, stiffness distribution of earthquake force and seismic loading of
structures . In this research, at first, seismic behavior of short column phenomenon
is determined, then, nonlinear behavior of reinforced concrete short columns in 4, 8
and 10 story structures with story level difference is investigated. Short columns
and mentioned structures are analysed under the earthquake record of Elcentro with
different peak ground acceleration with IDARC software which is nonlinear
dynamic analysis program. In this investigation, the results of maximum response,
base shear, global damage index and displacement time history and effect of short
column in structural failure is evaluated.

Keywords: building with different floor, reinforced concrete, short column,

damage index, nonlinear dynamic analysis

1. INTRODUCTION
In dublex structures, story floors with level difference relative to each other are
made in two or more different height levels. The effective length of column in
interface of these structures are divided in smaller sizes, that each of them act as a
short column. In structures, the important difficultes are of lake connection
diaphragm. Diaphragms play important role in transfering the lateral forces
between resistant parts against earthquake as each disorder or separationin
diaphragm floor cause stress concentration in their junction with vertical
parts.Their most important role are transferring of intertial force of earthquake to
 288 / Seismic Behavior of Short Columns in RC…. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

columns that regarding to stiffness difference of columns, more parts of these

forces reach to short columns of floor that in the case of lack of suitable designing,
severly damage, when earthquake occurs.(Figure 2).The important point in this
structure is the height difference between two parts of dublex structure, that causes
out standing changes in period and stiffness and distribution of earthquake force
and loading of seismic of structure According to studies and researches ,it has been
recognized that shearing force in column (short columns) that connects two dublex
structures increase 1.5 to 2.5 relative to shear force in two same column in ordinary
structures [1].

Figure 1. Short columns mentioned Figure 2. Compare short column and

dublex reinforced concrete [16] height column [16]

With respect to this subject, many researchers investigated in this field, we can
refer to Moretti and Tassios [2,3] that test 8 specimens of RC short columns under
fixed axial load and cyclic static displacement they measured steel and concrete
strain results of seismic designing with low sheer ratio and seismic behavior of
short column. They have measured and surveyed and suggested one truss model for
stimulating of short columns of failure mechanism and with distribution of forces
in columns. Also experiment studies on nonlinear behavior of different specimens
of short column with decreasing or increasing of stirrup of a when reinforced with
CFRP and GFRP panles (Carbon alyaf), under the effects of latorp cyclic
displacement and wind force fixed. According to loading changes, and ductility by
researchers such as Colomb etal [4] Promis al [5], Galal al [6], Ghobarah and Galal
[7], Ye al [8] and Galal and Ghobarah [9] has been done. Bakhshi and Tabeshpor
[10] analyse nonlinear dynamic, the effect of middle plate and phenomenon of
short column with the help of IDARC. Soft ware and with tabes earthquake with
maximum acceleration of 0.35g. Abbasnia and barghi [11] surveying many kind of
destruction of columns effect cyclic period parameters that physically have effects
on kind of destruction have recognized and using experimental information and
loading results on some specimen, introduced new models for predicting of
column. Kheyroddin and Mirnezami [1] by analyzing three 5, 10 and 15 story
metal building seismic parameters such as period changes. Displacement and also
formation of short column and factor of destruct have surveyed and suggested.
Method for static loading equivalent dublex buildings. Surveying nonlinear
behavior of more than 30 model of steel dublex structure in 6 different detail and
 –––––––––––––––––––––––– 3rd International Conference on Concrete & Development / 289

comparing them in different condition including change, Kheyroddin and

Mirnezami [12] suggested dublex floor level difference, effects if bending connects
strengh thening of web and flange hardening bond foil. The most confining and
stiffness plate suitable method and detail of frames with floor level which have
phenomenon of short column

2. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE AND METHOD

In this research, seismic behavior of short column in 3 dublex structures have been
surveyed that have height level difference 1.6 meter. Plan of all 3 investigated
supposed to be equal and have variable height and include 4,8 and 10 story
structures. Dimension of structures plan are 19.8 ×14.8 which have five 4.95 meter
bay in X direction and four 3.1 meter bay and one 2.4 meter bay in Y direction.
Because this plan is practical, dimensions and bay are real and structures have
been recognized symmetric .Lateral load resisting system in all structures
according to Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings
[13] in respect of ductility have been used medium concrete flexural frame and for
gravitational loading subject of national regulation. Since dublex structures is
measured (counted) on irregular height, seismic loading has been done of
equivalent static and spectra dynamic. Column and beam dimensions in 4 stories
structures in 1 st 2nd and 2 last floors are 45*45,40*40 and 35*35 cm respectively
and beams dimensions 30*40 cm in both 2 floors have been brigade. In 8 story
structures, columns at two 1 st floor 40*40cm and 2 last floor 35*35 cm and for
beams 45*50, 45*45, 35*40 and 30*35cm brigade respectively. In 10 storey
structures, like 8 storey structures expect in 2 first floor, Column dimension is
55*55 and beams dimension is 50*55.

Figure 3. Plan of structures [16]

Damages on structural elements occurs. One progressive process. That causes its
failure. This trend include damage stage in small scales, arising gathering damage
in medium scales includes increasing of crack and their expending and damage at
large scale that structure collapse. To survey actual behavior of structure when
earthquake accrue, it is necessary that structure analyse under one nonlinear,
analyse. For this IDARC v6.0 [14] nonlinear program has been used that been used
 290 / Seismic Behavior of Short Columns in RC…. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

for nonlinear analyses of reinforced concrete structures and has the capability to
make histertis cycle frame geometrician characteristicsintersectiong reinforced
concrete and its damage index is park-ang-wen. One of capabilities IDARC
nonlinear software is modeling and indicating the structure behavior at one time
step during earthquake to structures. In this research at first damage rate in short
column on external frame of 4,8 and 10 storys structures under 0.3g,0.5g and 0.7g
PGAs are surveyed and compared then choosing three elements of external frame
of structures which include the last short column .medium and first column the
following results are surveyd and compared:
- Time history of displacement answer of last short column, medium and first
column.
- Time history of shear force in medium and first short column.
- Damage index at the top, down of medium and first short column.

Figure 4. location short columns end, between, first in out frame of structure [16]

Because Elsentor1940 earthquake known as international earthquake by

researchers and has been many in designing and rehabilitation of structures all over
the world and approximately has complete. Frequency content, intensity time and
frequency contain.In this research it has been used for dynamic analysis. Elsentro
earthquake in 1940 with maximum speed 0.319g and duration of its story shaking
is 30 seconds and have relative long and irregular vibration that one features of
earthquake with medium depth and rock bed [15].
 –––––––––––––––––––––––– 3rd International Conference on Concrete & Development / 291

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1

Figure 5. Record of Elsentro Earthquake [16]

2.1. Results of short column behavior under Elsentro Earthquake

Surveying of damage rate of short column in structures stories survey and
comparison of from diagram indicates that in all structures increase of PGA the
average damage rate in short column indifferent storey increase, Except in 8 floor
structure in 0.3g damage in last short column has the most amount, this is because
of frequency content in of Elsentro earthquake. Seismic Degree Damage of short
column in floor building in all structures increase of structures height especially in
upper storys damage index of short column has been increased. In 8 and 10 story
structures, failure in short column by 4 and 6 storys are 0 and without failure
(Figures 6 and 7).

8
7
6
0.3g
story

5
0.5g
4
0.7g
3
2
1
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
damage index

Figure 6. Damage index of short columns in storys of 4 story structure

16
15
14
13
12
11
10 0.3g
story

9
0.5g
8
7 0.7g
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15
damage index

Figure 7. Damage index of short columns in storys of 8 story structure

 292 / Seismic Behavior of Short Columns in RC…. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
0.3g
ry

11
to

0.5g
s

10
0.7g
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
da ma ge inde x

Figure 8. Damage index of short columns in storys of 10 story structure

2.2. Surveying Increasing of Figures Percent of Short Column in Different PGA

Since increasing PGA failure in short column has increased, comparing diagrams
of Figures 9 indicates that average failure of short column in 0.7g, 0.5g relative to
0.3g in 1 storey structures has the most and in 8 storey structures has the lowest
failure in short column.

12

10
cture

8
0.5g
stru

0.7g
6

2
0 20 40 60 80 100
ce nt

Figure 9. Damage percent average increase of short columns in 0.7g and 0.5g to
compare 0.3g in structures

2.3. Investigation of Short Column Influence in Structural Failure

Investigation of short column share in structures failure comparing diagrams of
Figures 10 deducts that short column of short column of 4 storey in 0.3 g and 0.7
have more influence in total structures for example in 0.3g in 4,8 and 10 structures
21, 19 and 12 percent if total structures failure related to short column failure in
other word in 0.3g and 0.7g increasing the structures height short column from
total structures failure will be decreased and in 0.5g short of short column failure in
10 story structures is more.

Figure 10. Short columns influence in structural failure

2.4. Investigation History of Last Medium and First Short Column

Displacement in 4 Story Structure
By surveying compression of following answer history conclude that for average
 –––––––––––––––––––––––– 3rd International Conference on Concrete & Development / 293

displacement history of last short column in 4, 8 and 10 story structures is more

than first short column in all structures by increasing PGA. Time history of short
column displacement increase except in 3 cases that its 8 and 10 story structures is
approximately 25 to 30 percent and also in 4 story structures the first short column
in 0.3g and 0.5g has the more displacement history then 0.7g.

1.40E+01
1.20E+01
1.00E+01
8.00E+00
6.00E+00 0.3g
4.00E+00
d rift

0.5g
2.00E+00
0.00E+00 0.7g
-2.00E+00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-4.00E+00
-6.00E+00
-8.00E+00
time(sec)

Figure 11. Displacement answer history of first short column at 4 story structure

5.00E+01
4.00E+01
3.00E+01
2.00E+01
1.00E+01
0.3g
0.00E+00
drift

0 10 20 30 0.5g
-1.00E+01
0.7g
-2.00E+01
-3.00E+01
-4.00E+01
-5.00E+01
-6.00E+01
tim e (s e c)

Figure 12. Displacement answer history of first short column at 4 story structure

6.00E+01
5.00E+01
4.00E+01
3.00E+01
2.00E+01 0.3g
drift

1.00E+01 0.5g
0.00E+00 0.7g
-1.00E+01 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-2.00E+01
-3.00E+01
-4.00E+01
time(sec)

Figure 13. Displacement answer history of first short column at 4 story structure
 294 / Seismic Behavior of Short Columns in RC…. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Paying attention to following Figures it can be concluded that displacement time

history of first and medium short column in 4 story structures and last short column
in 10 story. Structures is high relative to other structures. For example
displacement history of last short column in 10 story structures increasing is 26 and
56 percent more than 4 and 8 story structures.

11
10

8
structure

2
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

cent

Figure 14. Displacement answer history increase of first short column at 4 story
structure relation 8 and10 story structures

12

10
structure

2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

cent

Figure 15. Displacement answer history increase of mid short column at 4 story
structure relation 8 and10 story structures

12

10

8
structure

2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

cent

Figure 16. Displacement answer history increase of last short column at 10 story
structure relation 4 and 8 story structures
 –––––––––––––––––––––––– 3rd International Conference on Concrete & Development / 295

2.5. Investigation of Shear Force History of Last, Medium and First Short
Column in 4 Story Structure
Structures by Surveying and comparing of diagrams related to history of shearing
it can be concluded that the average of shear force history in first short column
in4 story structures and medium short column in 8 story structures and last short
column in 10 story structures has the most mount than other column also by this
conclusion we can find the exceptional cases in 4story column and last short
column in 8 story structures and last short column in 10 story structure in .5 g
relative to 0.7g.

2.00E+02

1.50E+02

1.00E+02

5.00E+01

0.00E+00 0.3g
shear

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.5g
-5.00E+01 0.7g
-1.00E+02

-1.50E+02

-2.00E+02

-2.50E+02
time(sec)

Figure 17. Shear force answer history of first short column at 4 story structure

Figure 18. shear force answer history of mid short column at 4 story structure

8.00E+01

6.00E+01

4.00E+01

2.00E+01

0.00E+00 0.3g
shear

0 10 20 30
-2.00E+01 0.5g

-4.00E+01 0.7g

-6.00E+01

-8.00E+01

-1.00E+02

-1.20E+02
tim e (s e c)

Figure 19. Shear force answer history of last short column at 4 story structure
 296 / Seismic Behavior of Short Columns in RC…. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Pay attention following Figures it can be concluded that shear force time history in
first short column in 4 story structures and medium short column in 8 story column
and last short column in 10 story structures has the most among than other
structure. For example in 1 story structures ,the average shear force response in
last short column is about 52 and 80 percent more than 4 and 8 story structure. The
important point is that in last and medium short column in 0.5 g is more than 0.7 g
that this amount is about 35 to 50 percent.

12

10
structure

2
0 10 20 30 40

cent

Figure 20. Shear force answer history increase of first short column at 4 story
structure relation 8 and10 story structures

12

10
structure

2
0 20 40 60 80 100

cent

Figure 21. Shear force answer history increase of mid short column at 8 story
structure relation 4and10 story structures

12

10
structure

2
0 20 40 60 80 100

cent

Figure 22. Shear force answer history increase of last short column at 10 story
structure relation 4 and 8 story structures
 –––––––––––––––––––––––– 3rd International Conference on Concrete & Development / 297

2.6. Damage Index in Upand Down of Last, Medium and First Story
Structures Of Structures
comparing Damage index of following Figures concluded that the most damages in
8 and 10 story structures is related to last story structures, especially in its part
Because the existence of force flagelliform And lack of suitable distribution of
earthquake force in height.In medium short column by increasing of height and
story of structures Damage at up and down of column has decreased. as in 0.3 g
and 0.5g medium short column has the least Damage and even without Damage
and failure rate in its up and down .In approximately equal.In first short column up
and down part of 4 story structures in all PGA. Failure has been made but in 8 and
10 story tructures failure in up and down part, failure is seem only at up for PGA as
in 8 and 10 story structures in 0.3g and 0.5 of first short column in up and down
part is lacke failure the first short column in 8 and 10 story structures in down part.

0.04
the top of first
0.035
column"
global damage index

0.03 the bot of first

0.025 column

0.02 the top of mid

column
0.015
the bot of mid
0.01 column
0.005 the top of top
column
0
the bot of top
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
column
PGA

Figure 23. Damage index at up and down of 4 story structure short column

0.08
the top of first
0.07
column
global damage index

0.06 the bot of first

0.05 column

0.04 the top of mid

column
0.03
the bot of mid
0.02 column
0.01 the top of top
column
0
the bot of top
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
column
PGA

Figure 24. Damage index at up and down of 8 story structure short column
 298 / Seismic Behavior of Short Columns in RC…. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

0.25

0.2
the top of first
column
x

the bot of first

de

column
ein

0.15
the top of mid
g
a

column
am

the bot of mid

ld

column
a
b

0.1
lo

the top of top

g

column
the bot of top
column
0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
PGA

Figure 25. Damage index at up and down of 10 story structure short column

3. CONCLUSION
1. Damagerat in short column in different story increase by height and PGA
increase except in8 story structures that 0.3g of last short column tolerat the
damage 0.5 and 0.7 g.
2. Short column4 story structures in 0.3 g and 0.7g and short columns of 10 story
structures in 0.5 has the most share in total structures failure.
3. The average history of first and medium short column displacement response in
4 story structures and last short column in 10 story structures has the most amount
that other structures.
4. The average history of first short column shearing 4 story structures and
medium short column in 8 story structures and last short columnin 10 story
structureshas the most amount relative other structures in 8 and 10 story structures
The shearing force of last and medium short column in0.5 g in more than 0.7g .
5. The part of last short column and down part of first short column in 8 and 10
story structures has more damage and expriment damage at up and down of
medium short column in all structures has the least amount and is experimentally
equal and is less than 1 st and last column totally under Elsentro earthquake to
upper part of short column in 4 story structure more damage is inserted.

REFRENCES
1. Kheyroddin, A., and Mirnezami, A. R.(2002). "Seismic behavior steel buildings
with different floor." Proc., 3rd National conf. on Code of Practice for Seismic
Resistant Design of Buildings., Tehran, Iran.
2. Moretti, M., and Tassios TP. (2007). "Behaviour of short columns subjected to
cyclic shear displacements: Experimental results." Engineering Structures, 29;
2018-2029.
3. Moretti, M., and Tassios TP. (2006). "Behaviour and ductility of reinforced
concrete short columns using global truss model." ACI Structural Journal.;
103:319-327.
4. Colomb, F., Tobbi, H., Ferrier, E., and Hamelin, P.(2008) "Seismic retrofit of
reinforced concrete short columns by CFRP materials." Composite
 –––––––––––––––––––––––– 3rd International Conference on Concrete & Development / 299

Structures:82: 475-487.
5. Promis, G., Ferrier, E., and Hamelin, P.(2008) "Effect of external FRP
retrofitting on reinforced concrete short columns for seismic strengthening."
Composite Structures: In Press.
6. Galal, K., Arafa, A., and Ghobarah, A. (2005) "Retrofit of RC square short
columns." Engineering Structures.; 27:801-813.
7. Ghobarah, A., and Galal, K.(2004) "Seismic rehabilitation of short rectangular
RC columns." Journal of Earthquake Engineering.; 8:45-68.
8. Lieping, Ye., Qingrui, Yue., shuhong, Zhao., and Quanwang, Li.(2002). "Shear
strength of reinforced concrete columns strengthened with carbon Fiber
Reinforced plastic sheet." Journal of Structural Engineering.;128: 1527-1534.
9. Galal, K., Ghobarah, A.(2003). "Flexural and shear hysteretic behaviour of
reinforced concrete columns with variable axial load." Engineering
Structures.;25:1353-1367.
10. Bakhshi, A., and Tabeshpor, M. R.(2006). "Evaluation of short column fracture
calculation in earthquake." Research Bulletin of Seismology and Earthquake
Engineering., Vol. 8, No. 1, spring.
11. Barghi, M., and Abasnia, R.(2006). "Augury of RC columns destruction type in
cyclic lateral load." Proc,. 7th Int. Conf. on Civil Eng,. Tehran, Iran.
12. Kheyroddin, A., and Mirnezami, A. R.(2004). "Nonlinear behavior of frame
connections in building with different floor." Proc,. 1th National Congress on
Civil Eng,. Tehran, Iran.
13. "Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings." (1384)
Standard No. 2800- 05,. Building and Housing Research Center,. BHRC – PN S
253.
14. Valles, RE., Reinhorn, AM., Kunnath, SK., Li, G., and Madan, A. (1996).
IDARC 2D: A Program for the Inelastic Damage Analysis of Buildings, state
University of New York at Buffalo.
15. Moghaddam, H. (1384) "Earthquake Engineering." PP. 935.
16. Kargaran, A. (2008). Nonlinear seismic performance of short column in RC
structures. M.Sc. Thesis, on Earthquake Eng., Department of Civil Engineering,
Islamic Azad University, Shahr-kord, Iran, PP.135.
17. Kheyroddin, A., Ghodrati Amiri, G. R., and kargaran, A.(2007). "Effect of
resistant system on seismic behavior of short column in RC structures with
different floor." Proc., National Conf. on Seismic Retrofitting, Kerman, Iran.
18. Baji, H., and Hashemi, J. (2005). "Advance methods in modeling, analyzing
and designing of structures using practical projects with Sap2000, Etabs, Safe.
PP. 868.