STAAD.

Pro CE – Seismic
Analysis Using IS 1893
(Part 1):2016

Sanjib Das

Exton, Pennsylvania, USA

About the Author

Sanjib Das

Sanjib Das is a Manager at Bentley Systems, Kolkata, India. He holds a master’s degree in structural engineering. He has more than 15
years of experience in dealing with critical issues in STAAD.Pro software. He is involved in providing solutions to critical structural
engineering problems.

His research area includes earthquake engineering, earthquake-resistant design of RCC and steel structures, and application of software
in the field of earthquake engineering. He has many national and internal publications. He has been the technical lead for the
implementation of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 in STAAD.Pro CONNECT Edition.
STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis Using IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
First Edition

Copyright © 2019 Bentley Systems, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.

Bentley Systems, Incorporated
685 Stockton Drive
Exton, PA 19341, United States of America

www.bentley.com/books

Printed in the United States of America

Bentley, “B” Bentley logo, Bentley Institute Press and MicroStation are either registered or unregistered trademarks or servicemarks of Bentley Systems, Incorporated or one of its
direct or indirect wholly owned subsidiaries. Other brands and product names are trademarks of their respective owners.

The publisher does not warrant or guarantee any of the products described herein or perform any independent analysis in connection with any of the product information contained
herein. The publisher does not assume, and expressly disclaims, any obligation to obtain and include information other than that provided to it by the manufacturer.

The reader is expressly warned to consider and adopt all safety precautions that might be indicated by the activities herein and to avoid all potential hazards. By following the
instructions contained herein, the reader willingly assumes all risks in connection with such instructions.

The publisher makes no representation or warranties of any kind, including but not limited to, the warranties of fitness for particular purpose of merchantability, nor are any such
representations implied with respect to the material set forth herein, and the publisher takes no responsibility with respect to such material. The publisher shall not be liable for any
special, consequential or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or part, from the readers’ use of, or reliance upon, this material.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2019947064

ISBN: 978-1-934493-58-8
Published by:
Bentley Institute Press
Bentley Systems, Incorporated
685 Stockton Drive
Exton, PA 19341, United States of
America
Acknowledgement
This book is dedicated to all the users of STAAD.Pro who have used it for their projects over the years. The feedback and support of
our users over the years have driven this project. Fundamentally what we love to do is create, so it is wonderful watching the product
and its users grow!
Last year we had an idea of helping our users get a better understanding of STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis. To accomplish this, we
planned to write a text to cover seismic design criteria as per Indian standard, the process of using different parameters required for
equivalent static and dynamic analyses. Our problem was tractable because recent earthquakes in India indicate that many of collapses
of buildings were due to lack of considerations of the basic concepts of earthquake behaviour in design.
STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis using IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 was the fruit of months of effort of multiple Bentley colleagues and of
course our users. Firstly, we would like to thank our author Sanjib Das who made it happen. Information about the author is provided in
the section ‘About the Author’. We would also like to thank Shreyanka Bhattacharjee and Aritra Lodh for their commitment to
collaborate and help the author with the manuscript. Many engineers, technical support representatives and product specialists at
Bentley Systems reviewed the chapters and accompanying examples to provide valuable inputs and to shape the text into its current
form.
Vikash Pandey
Manager at Bentley Institute Press
Foreword
Global urbanization, concentrating populations in large coastal cities, has resulted in more than half the world’s population who are now
susceptible to one or more natural hazards. In India, three of the four largest cities lie in seismic zone IV subject to some of the highest
earthquake loading and risk. The risk to life and limb is just one consideration, with so many people concentrated in such close
proximity in large cities. The importance of ensuring resilience in their infrastructure is greater than ever. Over the last couple of
decades, more than 200,000 lives and 4,000,000,000,000 in USD direct and indirect economic losses can be attributed to earthquakes
(Munich RE). The ability of our communities and society to react and recover for earthquakes has become as much of consideration in
our design codes as the need to keep the population safe.
Structural seismic design codes evolve with lessons learned in each major earthquake experience. Early codes adapted to the poor
performance of irregular and discontinuous structures adding higher strength and ductility requirements. More recent events have
highlighted the need to consider vertical accelerations and the secondary loading impacts that result from structure weight acting on a
deformed structure. Minimum design forces and ductility factors have been adjusted as we learn more about near- and far-field seismic
loading characteristics along with increasing resilience requirements as more buildings need to be designed not just to ensure life safety
but also with intent to return to operation soon after seismic events.
The design codes have also adapted to technological advancements, allowing us to continuously improve the way we idealize and
simulate the behaviour and performance of our buildings subject to seismic forces. When Amit Das started Research Engineers
International in 1981, wrote STAAD, one of the first STructural Analysis And Design software solutions for the PC, he created the
foundation for improving the productivity of engineers and our ability to more accurately simulate the performance on thousands of
structures analysed and designed with STAAD in the last four decades. STAAD.Pro CONNECT Edition today has continued to stay up
to date in the implementation of the myriad of the latest IS 1893 analysis and design code requirements, and the need to understand the
application of code requirements in the software engineers’ use is more important than ever.
It is with this purpose that Sanjib Das has written this formative book on the basis of the evolution and application of the latest IS 1893
design code in STAAD.Pro. The book provides an overview of science of earthquake engineering from source causes to measurement
standards. Sanjib takes readers through a short history of the origins and organization of structural design standards and identifies the
latest changes made in the IS 1893 Seismic Standard. In the core, Sanjib does an exceptional job describing the various analysis
techniques, static, dynamic, linear, nonlinear prescribed by the code, providing an excellent balance of the technical with the practical
application in STAAD.Pro CONNECT Edition. It is clear that Sanjib’s extensive engineering and STAAD experience have provided a
practical guide and filter to present and interpret the design code intent gained though his close interaction with members of the design
code committee.
Sanjib has uniquely written this book that describes the source, intent and the practical application of the code provisions in STAAD. It
is a must-read book for anyone looking for understanding the IS 1893 code provisions and its applications in the most widely used
structural analysis and design product, STAAD.Pro. I hope you enjoy the book as much as I have.
Raoul Karp, PE, SE – VP, Bentley Systems
Reviews
Based on the data available from different massive earthquakes, Indian code for earthquake resistant design (IS 1893 Part 1) is totally
revised including several parameters to make the building structure safe in all respect. There are several new clauses regarding
earthquake analysis and design aspect.
In the present scenario, all the structural engineers should have the capability of handling specialized structural analysis software such
as STAAD.Pro CE over and above a thorough knowledge in structural engineering.
Starting from a detailed discussion on earthquake and its propagation, measurement procedure, etc., this book will create a bridge
between structural engineering theory and software application procedure, with excellent explanation on different clauses of IS 1893
(Part 1):2016 along with its application procedure in software, which really claims appreciation.
Moreover verification problems will help to understand the accuracy of result obtained from STAAD.Pro CE software. This book that is
enriched with the vast experience of author Sri Sanjib Das will help structural engineers’ fraternity for using latest STAAD.Pro CE
software for seismic analysis of building as per IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Dr Arundeb Gupta
PhD (Engg), M ASCE (United States), C Eng (I), FIE, FIAStruct E
Skematic Consultants
Computer software has become the de facto tool of choice for engineers for analysing and designing all types of structures. Today,
engineers need to know not only the theory behind the procedures used in analysis and design, but also they have to possess the skills to
use the specialized software to perform those numerous calculations in the limited time available.
Designing structures to withstand seismic loads has become an important and necessary component of the analysis and design. The
complexity and vastness of this subject makes it imperative that engineers understand the capabilities of software in order to correctly
perform such analysis.
Readers of this book will greatly benefit from the author’s more than 15 years of experience as a technical support engineer for
STAAD.Pro along with his extensive knowledge of seismic analysis and earthquake-resistant design using the IS 1893 code. Besides
having advised thousands of users on the correct way to create computer models of various types of structures during his career with
STAAD.Pro, he has also published papers and spoken at numerous forums educating users about the Indian code’s requirements and the
correct way to consider those when creating the analysis models using STAAD.Pro. He is the ideal candidate to write such a book.
The 2016 edition of the IS 1893 code mandates a number of additional requirements compared to the previous editions of the code, and
rightly so because of the vast number of lives that were lost in the earthquakes that occurred in Bhuj, Gujarat, and Nepal. The
parameters and input commands to use to ensure compliance with the old as well as new editions of the code have been covered very
well in this book. The author has provided numerous examples to illustrate the correct way to specify the various input parameters,
along with the results that are produced by the programme and the methods to interpret and validate the output.
The organization of the book into various sections, such as rigid diaphragms, torsion and irregularity checks, static and response
spectrum methods of analysis, is particularly useful to an engineer who wants to easily identify and explore such topics of interest.
By writing this book, Sanjib Das has produced a valuable tool for the engineering community that uses STAAD.Pro as its software for
the analysis of design of structures in India.
Kris Sathia
Director, Product Management
Structural Director, Product Management Bentley Systems
There has always been a demand among practicing engineers for a guide that can bridge the gap between the specifications given in a
code and commercially available software. Different users of a software end up adopting whatever they feel is the correct representation
of the code clauses into a software.
This book clarifies the correct approach to be followed and how it can be properly implemented in STAAD.Pro. It serves as an
informative tool for both the novice and the expert, imparting knowledge on the different code clauses and their actual intent.
Some of the clauses in the code have been backed up with useful hand calculations to prove that the program results match with the
hand calculations. The diagrams, formulas and illustrations make the difficult concepts simple to understand and highlight the
functionality in STAAD.Pro in a very practical manner.
The book is extremely well written, and I believe that it will serve as a good resource for practicing engineers trying to design buildings
with complete code compliance.
H.E. Sriprakash Shastry
 Partner
Aswathanarayana & Eswara
Projects and Consultancy LLP
Excellent book. One of its kind, in a sense that it combines theoretical aspects of codal provisions (IS 1893:2016) with computer
modelling (STAAD.Pro CE) with parameters and their implications. Appendix section explains the missing links in the parameters
adequately and is equivalent to hands-on training. The inclusion of modelling of walls with equivalent struts and the varying moment of
inertia of columns and beams as per codal provisions have made the book invaluable.
Avijit Ghosh
Proprietor and Structural Engineer
Siliguri, West Bengal
Contents

STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis Using IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

Acknowledgement

Foreword

Reviews

Chapter 1: Overview of Earthquake Engineering

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Earthquake Engineering Problems and Prospects

Problem
Solution

1.3 Seismology
The Earth and Its Interiors
Plate Tectonics
Seismic Waves
Earthquake Measurement Parameters
Measuring Instruments
Magnitude
Intensity

Chapter 2: Introduction to IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Importance of Seismic Design Codes

2.3 IS 1893 Code History

2.4 Seismic Zone Map

2.5 Peak Ground Acceleration

2.6 Maximum Considered Earthquake and Design Basis Earthquake

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Design Philosophy

Chapter 3: Modelling Aspects Using a Software

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Load Paths

 3.3 Importance of Load Path

3.4 Earthquake Force Flow Path in Buildings

3.5 Load-Path Consideration in STAAD.Pro

3.6 Diaphragm Modelling – A Special Case of Mass and Stiffness Modelling

3.7 General Format

Chapter 4: Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016 Equivalent Static Method

4.1 Equivalent Static Method of Analysis

Determination of Base Shear
Design Vertical Earthquake Effects
Minimum Design Earthquake Horizontal Lateral Force [Table-7 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016]
Consideration of Underground Structure
Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different Floor Levels
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Seismic Parameter
Parameters used in IS 1893 (Part-1): 2016 Seismic Definition
Parameters used in Seismic Load Cases

4.2 Equivalent Static Analysis with Different Structure Type

RC MRF Building
RC–Steel Composite MRF Building
Steel MRF Building
Buildings with RC Structural Walls
All Other Buildings

Chapter 5: Application of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Seismic Parameters

5.1 Introduction

5.2 DX and DZ Parameters

5.3 HT Parameter

5.4 PX and PZ Parameters

5.5 DM Parameter

5.6 DF Parameter

Chapter 6: Buildings With Fundamental Time Period Greater Than 4 s

Chapter 7: Consideration of Vertical Motion in Seismic Analysis

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Design Vertical Acceleration Spectrum

Chapter 8: Consideration of Minimum Base Shear Criteria

Chapter 9: Seismic Analysis of Structures Having Structural Components Below the Ground Level

9.1 Analysis of the Underground Structure by Using Equivalent Static Method

Chapter 10: Analysis of Structure Considering Torsional Provision

Chapter 11: Soft Storey

Chapter 12: Dynamic Analysis

12.1 Introduction

12.2 Response Spectrum

Response Spectrum Methodology

12.3 Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016 Seismic Parameter for Response Spectrum Analysis

12.4 Miscellaneous Commands for Dynamic Analysis

CUT OFF MODE SHAPE, CUT OFF FREQUENCY
Individual Modal Response
Mode Select
SET Commands

Appendix

A.1 Solution of Problem Statement 4.1: RC MRF Building

A.2 Solution of Problem Statement 4.2: RC–Steel Composite MRF Building

A.3 Solution of Problem Statement 4.3: Steel MRF Building

A.4 Solution of Problem Statement 4.4: Computation of Base Shear of a Building with RC Structural Wall having time period
greater than that of All Other Buildings

A.5 Solution of Problem Statement 4.5: Computation of Time Period of a Building with RC Structural Wall having time period
less than that of All Other Buildings

A.6 Solution of Problem Statement 4.6: All Other Buildings

A.7 Solution of Problem Statement 5.1: DX DZ Parameter

A.8 Solution of Problem Statement 5.2: HT Parameter

A.9 Solution of Problem Statement 5.3: PX and PZ Parameter

A.10 Solution of Problem Statement 5.4: DM Parameter

A.11 Solution of Problem Statement 5.5: DF Parameter

A.12 Solution of Problem Statement 6.1: Buildings with Fundamental Time Period Greater Than 4s
 A.13 Solution of Problem Statement 7.1: Consideration of Vertical Motion in Seismic Analysis

A.14 Solution of Problem Statement 8.1: Consideration of Minimum Base Shear Criteria

A.15 Solution of Problem Statement 9.1: Seismic Analysis of Structures Having Structural Components Below the Ground Level

A.16 Solution of Problem Statement 10.1: Analysis of Structure Considering Torsional Provision

A.17 Solution of Problem Statement 12.4: Verification Example of General Response Spectrum Analysis

Bibliography

Index
 Overview of Earthquake Engineering
1

1.1 Introduction

An earthquake is a sudden and transient motion of the earth’s surface. According to geologists, the earth has suffered earthquakes for
hundreds of millions of years, even before humans came into existence. Seismological data from many earthquakes were collected and
analysed to map and understand the phenomena of earthquakes. These data were even used to resolve the earth’s internal structure to a
remarkable degree, which helped towards the development of different theories to explain the causes of earthquakes. Both seismologists
and earthquake engineers use the seismological data for the understanding of an earthquake and its effects, but their aims are different.
Seismologists focus their attention on the global issues of earthquakes and are more concerned with the geological aspects, including
the prediction of earthquakes, whereas earthquake engineers, on the other hand, are concerned mainly with the local effects of
earthquakes, which can cause significant damage to structures.
During an earthquake, seismic waves arise from sudden movements in a rupture zone (active fault) in the earth’s crust. Waves of
different types and velocities travel different paths before reaching a building’s site and subjecting the local ground to various motions.
The ground moves rapidly back and forth in all directions.
If the ground moves rapidly back and forth, the foundations of the building are forced to follow these movements. The upper part of the
building remains stagnant because of its inertia effect. These developed inertia forces cause strong vibrations of the structure, causing
severe damage to it.
The effects of an earthquake on a building are primarily determined by the time histories of the three ground motion parameters: ground
acceleration (ag), velocity (vg) and displacement (dg), with their specific frequency contents. The ground motion parameters and other
characteristic values at a location due to an earthquake of a given magnitude may vary strongly. They depend on numerous factors, such
as distance, direction, depth and mechanism of the fault zone in the earth’s crust (epicentre).
In comparison with rock, softer soil is particularly prone to substantial local amplification of the seismic waves. As for the response of a
building to the ground motion, it depends on important structural characteristics (eigen-frequency, type of structure, ductility, etc.).
Buildings must, therefore, be designed to account for considerable uncertainties and variations.

1.2 Earthquake Engineering Problems and Prospects

In the task of earthquake-disaster mitigation, acquiring the state-of-the-knowledge is only the first step; the most important and perhaps
the more difficult step is to translate that knowledge into state-of-the-practice. Indians have been adapting best practices and hence their
standards of earthquake-resistant design are revised to adapt to the latest state-of-the-art of earthquake engineering.
Earthquake engineering philosophies are adapted thoroughly so that the professional engineers themselves can carry out good aseismic
construction. Earthquake-resistant construction requires seismic considerations at all stages: from architectural planning to structural
design to actual construction and quality control.
Seismic design codes are important tools by which the knowledge in earthquake engineering is transferred to the practice and we cannot
afford to be complacent with regard to seismic codes. Indian seismic codes have been improving since 1985, but we have more to
achieve.
While we work towards transferring the knowledge to the practice, we also need to absorb in the country the latest developments in the
fast-changing field of earthquake engineering, in areas such as the active and passive control of structures, nonlinear analysis, soil–
structure interaction studies and seismic risk assessment. There are also several research problems we need to tackle which are unique to
our country and for which solutions cannot be sought from research being conducted in the developed world. Some such problems are
strong motion characterization of Indian earthquakes, low-cost earthquake-resistant houses, seismic behaviour of masonry buildings and
the seismic design of framed buildings with brick infills.

Problem
Most earthquakes are predicted based on seismic activity that is detected in the ground look for movements in the earth’s crust. But we
know from many recent earthquakes, such as in Sumatra 2004 and Japan 2011, that this method provides people very little advance
notice to evacuate. Both earthquakes hit with a large surprise factor. The Japan 2011 earthquake gave residents just a few minutes’
warning, and the size and location of the Sumatra 2004 earthquake was surprising, even to geologists. As a result, the damage to both
life and property was extensive.
Earthquake predictions can be made over small-time and large-time scales. The short-term warnings are only helpful to save lives if
people have sufficient time to escape the epicentre. But these have not been very successful in recent history. The better way to escape
earthquake damage is long-term planning.

Solution
The key is to identify areas that have the potential for major damage from earthquakes based on the history of earthquakes in that region
over thousands of years. This is important because it provides information to make a long-term planning decision about large population
centres and infrastructure locations. Any region where major earthquakes occur with a frequency of between 200 and 500 years is a
dangerous area for major population centres and large infrastructure investments.
We have information about many recent major earthquakes in the last century, but that does not help unless we are able to predict the
frequency of earthquakes in a specific location over the long run. For that, we need the earthquake data over thousands of years as we
know that earthquakes usually occur along fault lines.

1.3 Seismology

It is a big subject and mainly deals with earthquake as a geological process. Both seismologists and earthquake engineers use the
seismological data for understanding an earthquake and its effects, but their aims are different. Seismologists focus their attention on the
global issues of earthquakes and are more concerned with the geological aspects, including the prediction of earthquakes. Earthquake
engineers, on the other hand, are concerned mainly with the local effects of earthquakes, which can cause significant damage to
structures. They transform seismological data into a form which is more appropriate for the prediction of damage to structures or,
alternatively, the safe design of structures.

The Earth and Its Interiors

A long time ago, due to the fusion of masses, large amount of heat was generated. Slowly as the earth cooled, the heavier and denser
materials sank to the centre and the lighter ones rose to the top. Geological investigations with seismological data revealed that the earth
primarily consists of four distinct layers: the inner core (radius ~ 1290 km), the outer core (thickness ~ 2200 km), the mantle (thickness
~ 2900 km) and the crust (thickness ~ 5–40 km) as shown in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1: Inside the earth.

Figure 1.2: Local convective currents in the mantle.

The inner core is solid and consists of heavy metals (e.g., nickel and iron), while the crust consists of light materials (e.g., basalts and
granites). The outer core is liquid in form and the mantle can flow.

Plate Tectonics
The convective flows of mantle material cause the crust and some portion of the mantle to slide on the hot molten outer core. This
sliding of earth’s mass takes place in pieces called tectonic plates. The concept of tectonics plate developed from the ideas on
continental drift.
At mid-oceanic ridges, two continents (large land masses) initially joined together, and then due to convective circulation of the earth’s
mantle, continents drift apart because of the flow of hot mantle upwards to the surface of the earth at the ridges, as shown in Figure 1.2.
When the hot material reaches the surface and then cools down, it forms an additional crust. The newly formed crust spreads outwards
due to the continuous upwelling of molten rock, and it sinks beneath the surface of the sea as it cools down and the outwards spreading
continues. These phenomena gave rise to the concept of sea-floor spreading.
The continental motions are associated with a variety of circulation patterns. There are seven such major tectonic plates and many
smaller ones as shown in Figure 1.3. These plates move in different directions and at different speeds from those of the neighbouring
ones. Sometimes, the plate in the front is slower, then the plate behind it comes and collides (and mountains are formed). On the other
hand, sometimes two plates move away from one another (and rifts are created). In another case, two plates move side-by-side, along
the same or in opposite directions. These three types of inter-plate interactions are the convergent, divergent and transform boundaries
(Figure 1.4). Convergent boundaries exist in orogenic zones, while divergent boundaries exist where a rift between the plates is created,
as shown in Figure 1.4.

Figure 1.3: Major tectonic plates on the earth’s surface.

Figure 1.4: Types of inter-plate boundaries.

When earthquakes occur in faults at the plate boundaries, these earthquakes are termed as inter-plate earthquakes. Sometimes,
earthquakes also occur within the plate away from the faults. These types of earthquakes are known as intraplate earthquakes in which a
sudden release of energy takes place due to the mutual slip of the rock beds. This slip creates new faults called earthquake faults. These
faults, which have been undergoing deformation for the past several thousand years and will continue to do so in future, are termed
active faults. At the faults (new or old), two different types of slippages are observed: dip slip and strike slip. Dip slip takes place in the
vertical direction while strike slip takes place in the horizontal direction, as shown in Figure 1.5.
Faults created by dip slip are termed normal faults when the upper rock bed moves down and reverse faults when the upper rock bed
moves up, as shown in Figure 1.5. Similarly, faults created by strike slip are referred to as left lateral faults and right lateral faults
depending on the direction of relative slip.
Figure 1.5: Type of faults.

Seismic Waves
The large strain energy released during an earthquake causes radial propagation of waves in all directions within the earth as an elastic
mass. These elastic waves are called seismic waves. Seismic waves transmit energy from one point of the earth to another through
different layers and finally carry the energy to the surface, which causes destruction. Within the earth, waves travel in an almost
homogenous elastic unbounded medium as body waves. On the surface, they move as surface waves. Reflection and refraction of waves
take place near the earth’s surface and at every layer within the earth. The body waves are of two types: P and S waves. P waves are
longitudinal waves in which the direction of particle motion is in the same or the opposite direction to that of wave propagation shown
at the top of Figure 1.6. S waves are transverse waves in which the direction of particle motion is at right angles to the direction of wave
propagation. Wave’s propagation velocities are given by:

where E, G, ρ and ν are the Young’s modulus, the shear modulus, the mass density and the Poisson ratio of the soil mass, respectively.
As the Poisson ratio is always less than a half, P waves arrive ahead of S waves. Near the surface of the earth, vp = 5–7 km/s and vs = 3-
4 km/s.
Figure 1.6: Motions caused by body and surface waves.

The time interval between the arrival of the P and S waves at a station is called the duration of primary tremor. This duration can be
obtained by:

where Δ is the distance of the station from the focus.

Polarized transverse waves are polarization of particles either in vertical (SV) or in horizontal (SH) plane.
Surface waves propagate on the earth’s surface. They are better detected in shallow earthquakes. They are classified as L waves (Love
waves) and R waves (Rayleigh waves). In L waves, particles move in a horizontal plane perpendicular to the direction of wave
propagation as shown in Figure 1.6. In R waves, particles move in vertical plane and they trace a retrogate elliptical path as shown in
Figure 1.6. For oceanic waves, water particles undergo similar elliptical motion in ellipsoid surface as waves pass by. L waves move
faster than R waves on the surface (R wave velocitŷ 0.9vs).

The earthquake energy travels to a station in the form of waves after reflection and refraction at various boundaries within the earth. The
P and S waves that arrive at the earth’s surface after reflection and refraction at these boundaries, including the earth’s surface, are
denoted by phases of the wave such as PP, PPP, SS, and PPS, as shown in Figure 1.7. PP and PPP are longitudinal waves reflected once
and twice, respectively. PS and PPS are phases that have undergone a change in the character on reflection.
Earthquake waves that are recorded on the surface of the earth are generally irregular in nature. A record of a fairly strong earthquake
shows a trace of the types of waves, as shown in Figure 1.8.
Strong earthquakes can generally be classified into four groups:

1. Practically single shock: Near source, on firm ground, for example, shallow earthquake.
 2. Moderately long irregular: Moderate distance from source, on firm ground, for example, El Centro earthquake.

3. A long ground motion with prevailing period: Filtered ground motion through soft soil, medium – Loma, for example, Prieta
earthquake.

4. Ground motion involving large scale ground deformation: Landslides, soil liquefaction, for example, Chilean and Alaska
earthquakes.

Earthquake Measurement Parameters

Seismic intensity parameters refer to quantities by which the size and energy of earthquakes are described. Some of these parameters are
measured directly, while others are derived indirectly from the measured ones with the help of empirical relationships. Thus, many
empirical relationships have been developed to relate one intensity parameter to another. In the following, intensity parameters along
with some of the terminologies associated with earthquake are described next.
Here, mainly the two most important parameters, magnitude and intensity, of earthquake are described along with some terminologies.

Figure 1.7: Reflections at the earth’s surface.

Figure 1.8: Typical strong motion record.

The focus or hypocentre is the point on the fault where the slip starts. The point just vertically above this on the surface of the earth is
the epicentre, as shown in Figure 1.9.
The depth of the focus from the epicentre is called focal depth and is an important parameter in determining the damaging potential of
an earthquake. Most of the damaging earthquakes have a shallow focus with a focal depth of less than 70 km. Focal depth greater than
70 km is classified as intermediate or deep, depending on their distances. Distances from the focus and the epicentre to the point of
observed ground motion are called the focal distance and epicentral distance, respectively. The limited region of the earth that is
influenced by the focus of earthquake is called the focal region. The larger the earthquake, the greater is the focal region. Foreshocks are
defined as those which occur before the main shock. Similarly, aftershocks are those which occur after the main shock.

Measuring Instruments
The instrument that measures earthquake shaking, a seismograph, has three components – the sensor, the recorder and the timer. The
principle on which it works is simple and is explicitly reflected in the early seismograph (Figure 1.10A) – a pen attached at the tip of an
oscillating simple pendulum (a mass hung by a string from a support) marks on a chart paper that is held on a drum rotating at a
constant speed. A magnet around the string provides required damping to control the amplitude of oscillations. The pendulum mass,
string, magnet and support together constitute the sensor; the drum, pen and chart paper constitute the recorder and the motor that
rotates the drum at constant speed forms the timer. One such instrument is required in each of the two orthogonal horizontal directions.
Of course, for measuring vertical oscillations, the string pendulum (Figure 1.10A) is replaced with a spring pendulum oscillating about
a fulcrum. Some instruments do not have a timer device (i.e., the drum holding the chart paper does not rotate). Such instruments
provide only the maximum extent (or scope) of motion during the earthquake; for this reason, they are called seismoscopes. The
analogue instruments have evolved over time, but today, digital instruments using modern computer technology are more commonly
used (Figure 1.10B). The digital instrument records the ground motion on the memory of the microprocessor that is in-built in the
instrument.
Figure 1.9: Earthquake observation.

Magnitude
A quantitative measure of the actual size of the earthquake is known as magnitude. It is determined from measurements on
seismographs. The magnitude of an earthquake is a number that allows earthquakes to be compared with each other in terms of their
relative power. Several decades ago, earthquake magnitudes were calculated based on a method developed by Charles Richter.

Figure 1.10A: Seismograph setup.

Figure 1.10B: Typical seismograph.

There are two main criteria related to determine the Richter magnitude of an earthquake:

1. the amplitude of the largest waves recorded on a seismogram of the earthquake and
 2. the distance to the epicentre of the earthquake.

The maximum amplitude seismic wave = the height of the tallest one is measured in mm on a seismogram.
The distance to the epicentre must also be taken into account because the greater the distance from the earthquake, the smaller the
waves get.
The Richter magnitude scale measures the amount of seismic energy released by an earthquake.
The most commonly used magnitude scale is the Richter scale. There are other magnitude scales, such as the body wave magnitude,
surface wave magnitude and wave energy magnitude.

Intensity
Intensity is a qualitative measure of the strength of shaking produced by the earthquake at a location during an earthquake. Intensity is
determined from effects on people, human structures and the natural environment.
Earthquake intensity is a ranking based on the observed effects of an earthquake in each particular place. Therefore, each earthquake
produces a range of intensity values, ranging from highest in the epicentre area to zero at a distance from the epicentre.
Two commonly used ones are the modified Mercalli intensity scale and The Medvedev–Sponheuer–Karnik (MSK) scale.
 Introduction to IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
2

2.1 Introduction

In the past few decades, some of the world’s largest earthquakes have occurred in and around India. The entire Himalayan belt is
considered prone to great earthquakes of magnitude exceeding 8.0, and in a short span of about 70 years, four such earthquakes have
occurred: 1897 Assam (M8.7), 1905 Kangra (M8.6), 1934 Bihar–Nepal (M8.4) and 1950 Assam–Tibet (M8.7). Development of the first
seismic zone map and of the earthquake-resistant features for masonry buildings took place in the 1930s. Formal teaching and research
in earthquake engineering started in the late 1950s. Five moderate earthquakes in the last few years (1988 Bihar–Nepal: M6.6, about
1004 dead; 1991 Uttarkashi: M6.6, about 768 dead; 1993 Latur: M6.4, about 8000 dead; 1997 Jabalpur: M6.0, about 38 dead and 1999
Chamoli: M6.5, about 100 dead) have clearly underlined the inadequate preparedness of the country to face damaging earthquakes. In
2015, the Nepal earthquake (also known as the Gorkha earthquake) killed nearly 9000 people and injured nearly 22,000. It occurred at
Nepal Standard with a magnitude of 8.1M. It is important to review the historical developments of Indian earthquake engineering, the
status of seismic codes, status of code compliance, professional and academic environment for seismic engineering.

2.2 Importance of Seismic Design Codes

Earthquakes cause forces and deformations in structures due to ground vibration. Structures need to be designed to withstand such
forces and deformations. Seismic codes help to improve the behaviour of structures so that they may withstand the earthquake effects
without significant loss of life and property. Countries around the world have procedures outlined in seismic codes to help design
engineers in the planning, designing, detailing and constructing of structures. An earthquake-resistant building has four virtues in it:

1. Good structural configuration: Its size, shape and structural system carrying loads are such that they ensure a direct and
smooth flow of the inertia forces to the ground.

2. Lateral strength: The maximum lateral (horizontal) force that it can resist is such that the damage induced in it does not result in
collapse.

3. Adequate stiffness: Its lateral load-resisting system is such that the earthquake-induced deformations in it do not damage its
contents under low-to-moderate shaking.

4. Good ductility: Its capacity to undergo large deformations under severe earthquake shaking even after yielding is improved
by favourable design and detailing strategies. Seismic codes cover all these aspects.

Seismic codes are unique to a particular region or country. They take into account the local seismology, accepted level of seismic risk,
building typologies, materials and methods used in construction.

2.3 IS 1893 Code History

Dr Thomas Oldham, the first Director of the Geological Survey of India, is credited the foundation of the scientific studies of
earthquakes in India in 1937. He compiled the well-known catalogue of Indian earthquakes and carried out investigations of the Cachar
earthquake of 1869. His son, R.D. Oldham, also went on to contribute substantially to earthquake studies. His memoir of the 1897
Assam earthquake was considered by Richter (1958) as one of the most valuable source books in seismology. In this volume, R.D.
Oldham, for the first time, scientifically interpreted a seismogram and laid the foundation of modern seismology.
After the Quetta earthquake in 1935, a building code was developed, but its application was perhaps limited to the reconstruction
project in Baluchistan, and there is no evidence that it was seriously applied elsewhere in the country. The first formal seismic code in
India was published in 1962 (IS 1893:1962). It was further revised in 1966, 1970, 1975, 1984, 2002 and in 2016. In the year 2002, this
standard for earthquake-resistant design is being split into the following five parts:
Part 1: General provisions and buildings
Part 2: Liquid retaining tanks – Elevated and ground supported
Part 3: Bridges and retaining walls
Part 4: Industrial structures, including stack-like structures
Part 5: Dams and embankments (to be formulated)
This standard primarily deals with earthquake hazard assessment for earthquake-resistant design of Part 1 – buildings; Part 2 – liquid-
retaining structures; Part 3 – bridges; Part 4 – embankments and retaining walls; Part 5 – industrial and stack-like structures and Part 6 –
concrete, masonry and earth dams.
Recently, Indian Standard (Part 1) (Sixth Revision) was adopted by the Bureau of Indian Standards, after the draft finalized by the
Earthquake Engineering Sectional Committee had been approved by the Civil Engineering Division Council.
This standard (Part 1) contains provisions specific to earthquake-resistant design of buildings. In this revision, the following changes
have been included:

1. Design spectra are defined for natural period up to 6 s.

2. Same design–response spectra are specified for all buildings, irrespective of the material of construction.

3. Bases of various load combinations to be considered have been made consistent for earthquake effects, with those specified in
the other codes.

4. Temporary structures are brought under the purview of this standard.

5. Importance factor provisions have been modified to introduce intermediate importance category of buildings to acknowledge
the density of occupancy of buildings.

6. A provision is introduced to ensure that all buildings are designed for at least a minimum lateral force.

7. Buildings with flat slabs are brought under the purview of this standard.

8. Additional clarity is brought in on how to handle different types of irregularity of structural system.

9. Effect of masonry infill walls has been included in analysis and design of frame buildings.

10. Method is introduced for arriving at the approximate natural period of buildings with basements, step-back buildings and
buildings on hill slopes.

11. Provisions on torsion have been simplified.

12. Simplified method is introduced for liquefaction potential analysis.

All structures, such as parking structures, security cabins and ancillary structures, need to be designed for appropriate earthquake effects
as per this standard.
Temporary elements, such as scaffolding and temporary excavations, need to be designed as per this standard.
This standard does not deal with construction features relating to earthquake-resistant buildings and other structures. For guidance on
earthquake-resistant construction of buildings, reference may be made to the latest revisions of the following Indian Standards: IS 4326,
IS 13827, IS 13828, IS 13920, IS 13935 and IS 15988.
The provisions of this standard are applicable even to critical and special structures, such as nuclear power plants, petroleum refinery
plants and large dams. For such structures, additional requirements may be imposed based on special studies, such as site-specific
hazard assessment. In such cases, the earthquake effects specified by this standard shall be taken as at least the minimum.

2.4 Seismic Zone Map

Seismic zoning may be termed as the geographic delineation of areas having different potentials for hazardous effects from future
earthquakes. Seismic zonation can be done at any scale – national, regional, local or site. It characterizes the hazard having a constant
value in each zone.
In the 1962 edition of IS 1893, the seismic zone map was developed based on the epicentral distribution of past earthquakes (M > 5) and
the isoseismals of such events.
The map demarcated areas of potential ground shaking with intensity (modified Mercalli (MM) scale) of less than V, V, VI, VII, VIII,
IX and X (and above) and termed these as Seismic Zones 0, I, II, III, IV, V and VI, respectively. Based on geological and geophysical
data obtained from tectonic maps and aeromagnetic and gravity surveys, the zonation map was revised in the 1966 and 1970 editions of
the Indian seismic code.
The 1966 version of the code also provided seven seismic zones. The Koyna earthquake of 1967 (M6.5, maximum intensity of shaking
VIII, about 200 dead) occurred within Seismic Zone I and caused major revision of the seismic zone map in the 1970 edition. The
number of zones was reduced from seven to five by dropping the Zones 0 and VI. Zone 0 was merged into Zone I, and Zone VI was
merged with Zone V. The five seismic zones of the 1970 edition correspond to areas liable to shaking intensity of V (or less), VI, VII,
VIII and IX (and above), respectively. This zone map has remained unchanged ever since.
The Latur earthquake of 1993 (M6.4; about 8000 dead; maximum intensity of shaking VIIIIX on MM scale) occurred in Seismic Zone I
and again underlined the need to review and revise the seismic zone map. A revision of the seismic zone map was undertaken, and the
new zone map has been included in the latest version of IS 1893. Seismic Zone I has been dropped by merging it with Zone II and some
parts of the peninsular India have now been brought into Zone III. Post–earthquake reconstruction in the Latur region was undertaken
corresponding to Zone IV provisions of Indian codes. The Latur area is now classified in Zone III.
The basic seismic coefficient (αo) used in the seismic coefficient method is 0.01, 0.02, 0.04, 0.05 and 0.08, respectively, for the five
zones. The seismic zone factor (Fo) used in the response spectrum method is simply five times αo.

Figure 2.1: Seismic zone map of India.

In 2002 edition, Zone I has been merged upwards into Zone II. In the peninsular India, some parts of Zones I and II are now in Zone III.
At present, there are only four zones: II, III, IV and V (Figure 2.1).

2.5 Peak Ground Acceleration

Figure 2.2 shows a typical ground motion record where ground motion acceleration is shown on vertical axis and time on horizontal
axis. The largest value of ground acceleration is termed as peak ground acceleration (PGA). Usually, ground motion is recorded in two
mutually perpendicular horizontal direction and the vertical direction. Hence, PGA value can be different in different directions.
Vertical PGA value is generally taken as a fraction of the horizontal PGA.
The term zero period acceleration (ZPA) indicates the maximum acceleration experienced by a rigid structure (zero natural period, i.e.,
T = 0). An infinitely rigid structure has zero natural period and does not deform, which means that there is no relative motion between
its mass and its base, and the mass has some acceleration as of the ground. Therefore, ZPA is the same as the PGA.
Figure 2.2: Horizontal ground motion at El Centro during Imperial Valley earthquake.

2.6 Maximum Considered Earthquake and Design Basis Earthquake

Maximum credible earthquake is the largest reasonably conceivable earthquake that appears possible along a recognized fault or within
a tectonic province. It is generally an upper bound of the expected magnitude on a fault or in a tectonic province, irrespective of the
return period of the earthquake which may range from say 100 to 10,000 years. It is usually evaluated on the basis of geological
evidence. Other terms used in the literature that are somewhat similar to maximum considered earthquake (MCE) are ‘maximum
possible earthquake’, ‘maximum expectable earthquake’ and ‘maximum probable earthquake’.
MCE is defined in the International Building Code 2000 (USA) corresponding to an earthquake having a 2% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years, that is, 2500-year return period. In the Uniform Building Code 1997 (USA), MCE is defined as an earthquake
having 10% probability of being exceeded in 100 years, that is, 1000-year return period. For a given area, MCE based on 2500-year
return period will be larger than the MCE based on 1000-year return period.
Design basis earthquake (DBE) is the earthquake motion for which the structure is to be designed in general, considering inherent
conservatism in the design process. In the UBC 1997 and IBC 2000, it corresponds to an earthquake having 10% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years, that is, 475-year return period.
In IS 1893, the zone map is not probabilistic, and the acceleration values for MCE and DBE do not correspond to any specific
probability of occurrence (or return period). As an empirical approach, DBE motion has been assumed as one half of MCE, and this is
reflected by factor 2 in the denominator of equation for Ah (clause 6.4.2).

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Design Philosophy

Structural design of buildings for seismic loading is primarily concerned with structural safety during major earthquakes. Seismic
loading requires an understanding of the structural behaviour under large inelastic and cyclic deformations. Behaviour under this
loading is fundamentally different from wind or gravity loading, requiring much more detailed analysis. Application of several stringent
detailing is required to assure an acceptable seismic performance beyond the elastic range. Some structural damage can be expected
when the building experiences design ground motions because building standard allows inelastic energy dissipation in structural
systems.
In general, most earthquake code provisions implicitly require that structures be able to resist the following:

1. Minor earthquakes without any damage.

2. Moderate earthquakes with negligible structural damage and some non-structural damage.

3. Major earthquakes with some structural and non-structural damage without collapse. The structure is expected to undergo
large deformations by yielding in some structural members.

Earthquake forces result directly from the distortions induced by the motion of the ground on which the structure rests. The magnitude
and distribution of forces and displacements resulting from ground motion is influenced by the mass of the structure and its foundation,
as well as the character of the ground motion. There are few things that we must keep in mind while working with IS 1893 (Part 1):
2016 response spectrum:

1. It is a generalized response spectrum that corresponds to MCE.

2. It is an elastic response spectrum.

3. PGA of the response spectrum in 1.0(g).

 4. It is not dependent on the building category.

While designing a structure, the elastic response spectrum needs to be converted from MCE level to DBE inelastic response spectrum.
Indian Standard stipulated the following two methods for seismic analysis:

1. equivalent static method and

2. dynamic method.

Dynamic analysis can be performed either by linear dynamic analysis or by non-linear dynamic analysis. Structural non-linearity can be
solved using a non-linear dynamic analysis.

Time history method must be adopted depending on the requirement on the designer.
Equivalent static method: In this method, the code has specified a factor Ah (clause 6.4.2) which is termed as design horizontal seismic
coefficient. It is (Z/2)*(I/R)*(Sa/g). A user who is using this code must have a clear understanding why these factors are considered.
The (Sa/g) values obtained from the elastic response spectrum depend on the time period obtained from empirical equations. This value
must be scaled down to DBE by taking the average of the values obtained from MCE. That is how the half factor comes into picture.
The spectrum provided in the code is based on the elastic behaviour of the structure. One needs to consider ductility of the steel into
consideration. By ductility, we understand the ability of structure to undergo inelastic deformation without losing its strength. That is
the reason why R comes into the equation. R is known as response-reduction factor. It is dependent on

1. over strength,

2. ductility and

3. redundancy.

While designing a member in limit state design (LSD) method, we take into consideration the partial safety factor on material
(specifically on steel) and loading. So, we are always overestimating the force. We are not considering the ductility of the material – it
allows the structure to dissipate the energy imparted on a structure by allowing the members to undergo inelastic deformation but
ensuring that the members will not collapse. In such case, the failure mechanism is governed by the formation of plastic hinges; even if
this concept is accepted, it is very difficult to achieve in the case of a concrete member. More redundant is the structure, more plastic
hinge formation is required to come to the failure condition. Thus, the factor R is such a factor with which the MCE level response
spectrum has to be scaled – it will come in the denominator.
The generalized response spectrum has a value of 1.0(g) as PGA which indicates a catastrophe in real-life structure. It must be scaled
with the site condition which is why the Z-zone factor comes into play. We can consider the highest seismic zone – Zone V. Here the
zone factor is 0.36. It invariably indicates the PGA of that zone is 0.36(g). Thus, zone factor is such a factor with which the response
spectrum has to be multiplied with.
While designing a structure, the designer wants to be in a safer side. Depending on how important the structure is, the designer would
like to design the building with higher force. Thus, there comes another factor known as I – importance factor. It has a value of 1, 1.2 or
1.5 for IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Response spectrum method: Response spectrum analysis is a more elaborate type of seismic analysis. Response spectra are plots of
maximum response of single degree of freedom (SDOF) systems subjected to a specific excitation. These peak response values are
calculated for various values of frequency (or period), and for various damping ratios of the SDOF system. Response may be
deformation, pseudo-velocity and pseudo-acceleration which are most important and can be used for the seismic analysis of structures.
The values may be normalized or un-normalized. So the ‘input spectral data’ table is the primary data for an response spectrum analysis
(RSA).
If a load case contains input spectral data and other parameters used in RSA, it is called a response spectrum load case. The analysis that
is done on that load case is called response spectrum analysis.
Since any real structure has multiple DOF, the response spectrum analysis of a real structure having ‘n’ DOF involves reducing it to ‘n’
independent SDOF systems. The modal superposition method is used to accomplish this, and then the maximum modal responses can
be combined using statistical methods such as the square root of the sum of the squares and complete quadratic combination. These and
other combination methods are available in STAAD.Pro CE.
In this method, the code has specified a factor Ak (clause 7.7.4.5-C) which is termed as design horizontal acceleration spectrum – it is
the same as Ah. The philosophy of bringing the elastic response spectrum which corresponds to MCE level to DBE inelastic response
spectrum remains the same.
Now, coming to STAAD.Pro CE, the programme calculates the time period for different mode and (Sa/g) value is found out. It must be
scaled down to DBE inelastic spectrum. For this reason, the direction factor should be equal to (Z/2)*(I/R).
 Modelling Aspects Using a Software
3

3.1 Introduction

Buildings are composed of vertical and horizontal structural elements. Shear walls, braced frames and moment-resisting frames are
commonly used as lateral load–resisting system. The horizontal elements that distribute lateral forces to the vertical elements are
diaphragms, such as floor and roof slabs and horizontal bracing that transfers large shears from discontinuous walls or braces. The
seismic forces are considered to act at their centres of mass of diaphragm. All the inertia forces originating from the masses on and off
the structure must be transmitted to the lateral force–resisting elements, and then to the base of the structure and into the ground.
A complete load path is a basic requirement for all buildings. There must be a complete lateral force–resisting system that forms a
continuous load path between the foundation, all diaphragm levels and all portions of the building for proper seismic performance. The
general load path is as follows: seismic forces originating throughout the building, mostly in the heavier mass elements such as
diaphragms, are delivered through connections to horizontal diaphragms; the diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical force–
resisting elements such as shear walls and frames; the vertical elements transfer the forces into the foundation and then the foundation
transfers the forces into the supporting soil.
If there is a discontinuity in the load path, the building is unable to resist seismic forces regardless of the strength of the elements.
Interconnecting the elements needed to complete the load path is necessary to achieve good seismic performance. Examples of gaps in
the load path would include a shear wall that does not extend to the foundation, a missing shear transfer connection between a
diaphragm and vertical elements, a discontinuous chord at a diaphragm’s notch, or a reentrant corner, or a missing collector. A good
way to remember this important design strategy is to ask yourself the question, ‘How does the inertia load get from here (meaning the
point at which it is generated) to there (meaning the shear base of the structure, typically the foundations)?’

3.2 Load Paths

The shaking that takes place due to earthquake induces inertia forces in a building where mass is present. These inertia forces are
transferred downwards through horizontally and vertically aligned structural elements to foundations. The paths along which these
inertia forces are transferred through building are load paths. Buildings may have multiple load paths running between locations of mass
and foundations. Load paths are as much a concern for transmitting vertical loads (e.g. self-weight and occupancy load) as for
horizontal loads (e.g. earthquake and wind) (Figure 3.1).

Figure 3.1: Structural elements in buildings constituting load paths include (1) horizontal diaphragm elements laid in horizontal plane,
that is, roof slabs, floor slabs or trussed roofs and bracings; (2) vertical elements spanning in vertical plane along height of building, that
is, planar frames (beams and columns interconnected at different levels), walls (usually made of RC or masonry) and planar trusses; (3)
foundations and soils, that is isolated and combined footings, mats, piles, wells, soil layers and rock and (4) connections between the
previous elements.
3.3 Importance of Load Path

A continuous load path, or preferably more than one path, with adequate strength and stiffness should be provided from the origin of the
load to the final lateral load–resisting elements. The path for load transfer is described in the following.
Inertia forces generated in an element, such as a segment of exterior curtain wall, are delivered through structural connections to a
horizontal diaphragm (i.e. floor slab or roof); the diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical components, such as moment frames,
braces and shear walls, and finally, the vertical elements transfer the forces into the foundations. Discontinuity in load path is not
desirable in structures.

3.4 Earthquake Force Flow Path in Buildings

Earthquake causes shaking of the ground in all three directions – along the two horizontal directions (X and Z, say) and the vertical
direction (Y, say) (Figure 3.2). Also, during the earthquake, the ground shakes randomly back and forth (− and +) along each of these X,
Y and Z directions. All structures are primarily designed to carry the gravity loads, that is, they are designed for a force equal to the
mass M (this includes mass due to own weight and imposed loads) times the acceleration due to gravity g acting in the vertical
downward direction (−Y ). The downward force Mg is called the gravity load. The vertical acceleration during ground shaking either
adds to or subtracts from the acceleration due to gravity. As factors of safety are used in the design of structures to resist the gravity
loads, usually most structures tend to be adequate against vertical shaking. However, horizontal shaking along X and Z directions (both
+ and − directions of each) remains a concern. Structures designed for gravity loads, in general, may not be able to safely sustain the
effects of horizontal earthquake shaking. Hence, it is necessary to ensure adequacy of the structures against horizontal earthquake
effects.
Under horizontal shaking of the ground, horizontal inertia forces are generated at level of the mass of the structure (usually situated at
the floor levels). These lateral inertia forces are transferred by the floor slab to the walls or columns, to the foundations, and finally to
the soil system underneath. So, each of these structural elements (floor slabs, walls, columns and foundations) and the connections
between them must be designed to safely transfer these inertia forces through them (Figure 3.3).

Figure 3.2: Principal directions of a building.

Figure 3.3: Flow of seismic inertia forces through all the structural components.

Walls or columns are the most critical elements in transferring the inertia forces. But, in traditional construction, floor slabs and beams
receive more care and attention during design and construction, than walls and columns. Walls are relatively thin and often made of
brittle material like masonry. The walls are very poor in carrying horizontal earthquake inertia forces along the direction of their
thickness. Failures of masonry walls have been observed in many earthquakes in the past. Similarly, poorly designed and constructed
reinforced concrete columns can be disastrous.

3.5 Load-Path Consideration in STAAD.Pro

Generally, floor slabs are not modelled in STAAD.Pro CE. Floor slabs can effectively be modelled using plate elements. But, having
plates in the models induces a lot of other problems. Discretization of larger elements into the smaller parts is also required in this
process, and the adjoining beams are also divided. The analysis time gets increased as you have higher numbers of elements present in
the model. The interpretation of analysis and design results from STAAD.Pro CE for the broken beams becomes difficult. It can be
understood that if floor slabs are not modelled using plates, the stiffness of the slabs is ignored in the analysis. There are two distinct
load paths in a structure – vertical and lateral (Figure 3.4).

Figure 3.4: Different load paths in structures.

There is no major problem in applying floor loads in the model. It gets transferred to floor beams, and then it is transferred to the
columns. Columns transfer that to the footings. It can be seen that the vertical load path is being maintained. In the case of lateral load
path, the slabs play the role of diaphragm and get displaced against the lateral loads. Slab moment–resisting frame connections get the
forces from the diaphragm (Figure 3.5). We can somehow maintain the vertical load path, but lateral load path gets hampered if we do
not model any diaphragm in the model. Generally, the internal forces, that is, the seismic loads, are applied at the centre of mass; and if
there is any difference in between the centre of mass and centre of rigidity, the floor will experience torsional forces that simply affect
the corner columns. In order to have a realistic model, diaphragm can be modelled. In STAAD.Pro, we have the option of rigid
diaphragm; and on using this, the requirement is being followed by the program.
Figure 3.5: Lateral load transfer mechanism.

3.6 Diaphragm Modelling – A Special Case of Mass and Stiffness Modelling

FLOOR DIAPHRAGM command:

This command is used to create RIGID FLOOR DIAPHRAGMS without the need to specify a master joint at each. When specified, this
command directs the engine to perform the following:
• Calculate the centre of mass for each rigid diaphragm (where master joint is to be located) considering the mass model of the
structure. The mass must be modelled using mass reference load.
• Create, internally, an analytical node at the centre of mass location to be included during analysis (unless a master node is
specified); if an existing analytical node exists at this point, then the existing joint is used in lieu of creating a new joint.
• Search all nodes available within a diaphragm and add them as slave nodes with the master node located at the centre of mass for
the diaphragm (or at the specified master node).

3.7 General Format

Parameter Description

DIAPHRAGM i1 diaphragm identification number

BASE b1 Base/ground floor level of the structure when not at the minimum Y coordinate defined in the model

HEIGHT f1 Global coordinate value, in the Y direction, to specify the floor level

Global coordinate values to specify a Y range, where f 2 is the lower bound and f 3 is the upper bound. The diaphragm is
YRANGE f2 f3
considered to be located at the floor height

Global coordinate values to specify an X range. The diaphragm is considered to be located between this X range. If full floor is to
XRANGE f4 f5
be considered as only one diaphragm, there is no need to define X range

Global coordinate values to specify a Z range. The diaphragm is considered to be located between this Z range. If full floor is to be
ZRANGE f6 f7
considered as only one diaphragm, there is no need to define Z range

User-specified master joint number at the specified floor level. If not defined, the program will automatically calculate this joint as
MASTER i2
the diaphragm centre of mass
Figure 3.6: RIGID DIAPHRAGM from GUI.

Instead of providing height or Y range, joint lists can be provided to indicate the number of joints present at a particular floor level
which will be connected to a master joint (either specified or calculated by the program).
Notes:

1. One full diaphragm definition should be provided per line. However, if there is joint list, the list can extend to the second line
with a continuation sign ‘−’,

Where f1, f11 and f12 are three rigid diaphragms located at floor height ranging between f2 and f3, f21 and f31 and the joints
lying in the plane as indicated by their global Y coordinates, respectively.

2. Diaphragms should be specified in ascending order (i.e. diaphragms at first floor level should be specified first before specifying
that on second floor level and so on).

3. If a user-defined master joint is specified in one diaphragm, then user-defined master joints should be specified for all
diaphragms. The combination of user-defined master joint for one diaphragm and program calculated master joint for another
diaphragm is not supported.

4. The mass model (in terms of reference load) must be specified before specifying floor diaphragm.

5. Floor diaphragms can be specified only once in an input file.

6. Floor diaphragm cannot be specified along with the FLOOR HEIGHT command.

7. Floor diaphragm cannot be specified along with the MASTER-SLAVE command.

8. Floor diaphragm cannot be specified with the SET Z UP command.

9. Sloped diaphragms are not supported.

10. Base level (or ground floor level or support level) is taken as the minimum of Y coordinates defined. Different base levels can be
specified using the BASE b1 option in the command. If used, this option must be the last line of the floor diaphragm system.

11. The maximum number of diaphragms allowed by the program (default value) is 150. If more than 150 diaphragms need to be
specified, then SET RIGID DIAPHRAGM n must be specified before specifying joint incidence, where n=total number of
diaphragms in the structure.
 Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016 Equivalent Static Method
4

The behaviour of a building during an earthquake is a vibration problem. The damage of its structural component is caused by internally
generated inertial force arising from oscillations of the building mass. The inertia forces (F ) are equal to the product of the mass (m) of
the structure times acceleration (a), that is, F = ma (m is equal to weight divided by the acceleration of gravity, that is, m = w/g).
Two ways of performing seismic analysis of a structure are as follows:
• Equivalent static method
• Dynamic analysis method

STAAD.Pro CE requires a Load Definition prior to the creation of the actual load case for certain load types. Seismic load cases for
equivalent static analysis fall in this category. Seismic definition requires two types of inputs – definition of seismic parameters and
seismic weights. If a mass reference load case is provided in the model, the programme can compute seismic weights internally. In such
a condition, there is no requirement of seismic weight definition. In case both mass reference load cases and seismic weights are present
in the model, the programme will consider weights defined in the seismic weight definition.

4.1 Equivalent Static Method of Analysis

Equivalent static method of seismic analysis assumes that the fundamental mode of vibration is predominant, and there are no mass and
stiffness irregularities in the structure. These assumptions of static analysis do not hold good for the irregular and/or tall structures. In
such structures, dynamic analysis is required. Response spectrum analysis is preferred as it provides an easy solution compared to time-
history analysis. Equivalent static method is applicable for regular buildings located in seismic zone II with height less than 15 m, and
approximate natural time period, Ta, less than 0.4 s. This process is the simplest method of analysis and requires less computation
efforts.
Seismic forces are commutated based on empirical equations of approximate natural fundamental time period. The design base shear is
distributed along the height of the buildings based on simple formulas appropriate for buildings with regular distribution of mass and
stiffness. The design lateral forces obtained at each floor level are distributed to individual lateral load resisting elements depending
upon the floor diaphragm action. In the case of a rigid diaphragm (categorized in Clause 7.6.4) action, total storey shear in the floors is
distributed to various lateral load resisting elements on the basis of relative stiffness. The following steps are used for determination of
forces by equivalent static procedure.

Determination of Base Shear

The design base shear is computed by the following expression, Clause 7.6.1

VB = Ah × W

where
Ah = design horizontal seismic coefficient for a structure (Clause 6.4.2 )

Z = seismic zone factor [Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]

I = importance factor [Table 8 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]
R = response reduction factor [Table 9 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]

design acceleration coefficient for different soil type

The fundamental natural period for building can be computed from the following empirical expression depending on the types of lateral
load resisting system present in the building [Clause 7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]

1.

2.

3.

where
h = height of the building, in m
Awi = effective cross-sectional area of wall i in first storey of the building, in m2
Lwi = length of structural wall i in the first storey in the considered direction of lateral forces, in m
d = base dimension of the plinth level along the considered direction of earthquake shaking, in m
Nw = number of walls in the considered direction of earthquake shaking

Design Vertical Earthquake Effects

When the effects due to vertical earthquake shaking are to be considered, the vertical design seismic coefficient Av will be (Clause
6.4.6)

Minimum Design Earthquake Horizontal Lateral Force [Table-7 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016]

Seismic zone ρ (%)

II 0.7
III 1.1
IV 1.6
V 2.4

If the design base shear computed from VB = Ah × W is less than VB min, VB min shall be used as design base shear for the building.

Consideration of Underground Structure

This topic is covered in Chapter 9.

Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different Floor Levels

The computed base shear is distributed along the height of building. In equivalent static procedure, the magnitude of lateral forces is
based on the fundamental period of vibration. This standard uses a parabolic distribution of lateral force along the height of building as
per the following expression (Clause 7.6.3a):

where
Qi = design lateral force at floor i

Wi = seismic weight of floor i

hi = height of floor i measured from base

n = number of storeys in a building

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Seismic Parameter

These parameters are provided to calculate the design horizontal and vertical earthquake acceleration coefficient. Parameters are
provided in the definition box and load generation box in STAAD.Pro CE. The parameters are discussed next.

Parameters used in IS 1893 (Part-1): 2016 Seismic Definition

Zone, Z: Zone factor (Z) accounts for the expected intensity of shaking in different seismic zones [Table 3, IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]. The
value defined in zone factor (Z) represents a reasonable estimate of peak ground acceleration (PGA) in the respective zone. Seismic
zone factor can be defined in two ways, either by selecting the city name or by selecting the zone. This method is automated from the
‘Generate’ Tab present in IS 1893 (Part-1):2016 seismic definition. If generate option is not used, the value for this factor can be
defined from the generic seismic definition which allows to provide the value for zone factor.
Response reduction factor ( R), RF: The structure is designed for seismic force much less than what is expected under strong shaking,
if the structure were to remain linearly elastic. Indian standard provides for realistic force for elastic nature and then divides that force
by (2R). The external imparted energy to the building in earthquake is absorbed by the structure in the form of inelastic deformation,
and ductility of the structure plays a major role in this. Overstrength, ductility and redundancy are the main factors for which response
reduction factor is considered to compute the design seismic force on a structure. The user interface includes a list of response reduction
factors taken from Table 9 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Importance factor, I: Critical and important structures must respond better in an earthquake than ordinary structures. This factor is
meant to account for this by increasing the design seismic force. As per Table 8 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, importance factor 1.2 for
residential or commercial buildings with occupancy more than 200 persons has been added.
Rock and soil site factor, SS: This parameter is required to calculate the design acceleration coefficient value (Sa/g) for horizontal
motion. The response spectrum shape obtained from recorded earthquake motion varies with the soil type at different location [refer to
Table 4 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]. Soil site factor in STAAD.Pro is given as
SS 1: Hard soil
SS 2: Medium soil
SS 3: Soft soil
Type of structure, ST: This parameter is used to calculate approximate natural fundamental time period of the structure depending on
the type of lateral load resisting elements used to transfer the lateral load in the building [refer to Clause 7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016].
Time period obtained is further required to calculate design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) value. There are five types of structures as
per IS 1893 (Part 1):2016. These structure types are defined in STAAD. Pro CE using different ST parameters mentioned as follows:
ST 1: Reinforced Concrete (RC) bare Moment Resisting Frame (MRF) buildings
ST 2: RC–Steel composite MRF buildings
ST 3: Steel MRF buildings
ST 4: Buildings with RC structural walls
ST 5: All other buildings
Damping ratio, DM: This factor is used to define damping ratio of structure. All the spectral acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) values will
be multiplied with a factor corresponding to the specified damping (refer to Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2002). As per Clause 7.2.4 of IS
1893 (Part 1):2016, the value of damping to be considered is 5% of critical damping for the purpose of design lateral force computation
of a building irrespective of the construction material used in the lateral load resisting system. It is due to the fact that buildings
experience inelastic deformations under design level earthquake, resulting in much higher energy dissipation than due to initial
structural damping in buildings. The default value considered by the programme for DM parameter corresponds to 5% of the critical
damping which represents the value of DM parameter as 0.05.

Period in X direction, PX: It is a user-defined time period in structure along the X direction in seconds. The value of PX should be
provided, if the supports at the bottom-most level of the structure in the X direction are at different Y coordinates. The value provided in
this parameter will be used to calculate Sa/g in the X direction.

Period in Z direction, PZ: It is a user-defined time period of structure along the Z direction in seconds. The value of PZ should be
provided, if the supports at the bottom-most level of the structure in the Z direction are at different Y coordinates. The value provided in
this parameter will be used to calculate Sa/g in the Z direction.

Depth of foundation, DT: It is used to define the foundation level of a structure which is located below the ground level. The value
provided in this parameter defines the depth of foundation below ground level.

Ground level, GL: It is the Y coordinate of the ground level. A reduced lateral force gets applied to the level below this height. If the
depth of foundation is 30m or more, below GL, the value of Ah is taken as half the value obtained, and if the foundation is placed
between the ground level and 30m depth, the value is linearly interpolated between Ah and 0.5Ah [refer to Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016]. The current implementation of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016 is based on GL parameter.

Spectral acceleration coefficient, SA: It is user-specified design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) value corresponding to site specific
response spectrum. It allows the user to provide design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) value to compute horizontal design base shear.

Multiplying factor for SA, DF: DF is the user-provided value for different damping ratio as per Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002. It is
multiplied with all the spectral value.

Height of the building, HT: This parameter is to define actual height of the building to be used for time period calculation. It is a user-
defined value [refer to Clause 7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]. The default height of the structure computed by the programme is the
difference in Y coordinates’ value of the nodes having the lowest and the highest Y coordinates in the model.

Base dimension in X direction, DX: It is the base dimension of the building in the X direction at the plinth level for calculating
approximate natural time period along the X direction [refer to Clause 7.6.2(b) or (c) of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016].

Base dimension in Z direction, DZ: It is the base dimension of the building in the Z direction at the plinth level for calculating natural
approximate time period along the Z direction [refer to Clause 7.6.2(b) or (c) of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016].

Parameters used in Seismic Load Cases

Direction X/Y/Z: There are three directions in which the seismic loads can be assigned.

Factor: It is the factor multiplied with the total seismic weight. Default factor is 1.

Multiplying factor for accidental torsion moment, ACC: Accidental torsion accounts for the additional torsional moment on a floor
due to a shift in the centre of mass from its actual location to either side by a distance equal to 5% of the building dimension orthogonal
to the direction of the earthquake. Ground rotation about vertical axis of a structure also plays a major role in inducing torsion. These
factors are specified as (0.05) and (−0.05) in Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 for calculating design eccentricity.

Multiplying factor for natural torsion moment, DEC: Natural torsion or inherent torsion accounts for torsional moment induced in a
floor resulting from eccentricity between the centres of mass and stiffness. To calculate design eccentricity as per Clause 7.8.2 of IS
1893 (Part 1):2016, the factors are (1.5) and (1).

Note:
A. ‘Accidental Load’ shall not be included from IS 1893(Part 1):2016 seismic parameter dialogue box to calculate torsion
moment when rigid floor diaphragm is provided.
B. ST is to be provided with DX, DZ, and HT, else the STAAD.Pro CE will calculate Rayleigh time period.
C. Either DM or DF parameter should be provided to obtain scaled spectral value.
 D. The parameter DT should not be used for underground structure to reduce Ah. Instead only GL is used.
E. Either SA can be inserted directly, or SS should be provided to calculate the design acceleration coefficient.
F. Along with GL parameter, HT parameter should be used for calculating natural time period of building.
G. When vertical motion is considered, (2/3) factor [refer to 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016] will be considered internally by the
programme.
H. Design acceleration coefficient for vertical motion is taken as 2.5 irrespective of natural time period of the structure [refer to
6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016].
I. In STAAD.Pro, natural torsion is automatically included in analysis for DEC ≤ 1.0, that is, no additional inherent torsion is
applied. If DEC > 1.0, a twisting moment with modified eccentricity of DEC−1 will act at CM.
J. Refer to Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

X and Z directional seismic load cases need to be generated considering the torsional provisions with the proper use of DEC and ACC
parameters. In first case, the value DEC parameter will be 1.5 along with the ACC value 0.05. The values of DEC and ACC parameter
will be 1 and −0.05 in the other case. These conditions need to be satisfied in the X and Z directions.

4.2 Equivalent Static Analysis with Different Structure Type

This standard provides empirical formula for time period computation for the structure having lateral load resisting elements classified
in the aforementioned category. A few examples are covered in this chapter covering these categories. The detailed workflow is
explained under each problem statement.
IS 1893(Part 1):2016 considers following types of building structure as per Clause 7.6.2:

1. Bare MRF buildings without any masonry infill: (a) RC MRF building, (b) RC–steel composite MRF building and (c) steel
MRF building.

2. Buildings with RC structural wall.

3. All other buildings.

RC MRF Building
Reinforced concrete moment resisting bare frame is an assembly of beams and columns with rigid connection. It is capable of resisting
induced and externally applied forces through flexural strength (bending) of members and continuity of columns and beams through
rigid connections. Moments are transferred from one element to other through the rigid connections. Most of the concrete frames can be
idealized as MRF due to the inherent continuity of monolithic construction. In STAAD.Pro CE RC MRF buildings are denoted by ST 1.
Problem Statement 4.1: Section used for beams and columns: 500 mm × 500 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF building
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figure 4.1A and 4.1B
Compute design base shear (Vb) and design lateral force (Qi) for the given data.
Figure 4.1A: Building plan.

Figure 4.1B: Building elevation.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1. A model is prepared considering dimensions, properties and support condition given in the problem statement.

2. Loads are assigned as ‘Mass Reference Load’ (refer to Chapter 3: mass reference load). Loads should be assigned along three
orthogonal directions with positive multiplying factor. (For the following problem statement, multiplying factor 1 is considered.)

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 2 kN/m2 is applied at all floor levels (Figure 4.2).

3. Seismic parameters are assigned under ‘Seismic Definition’.

Figure 4.2: Mass defined under reference load case.

4. Indian IS 1893:2016 code is chosen.

 5. Following seismic parameters are inserted in Figure 4.3:
A. Zone: 0.1
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I ): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
The parameter can be inserted from ‘Generate’ box also (Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.3: Static seismic parameters.

Figure 4.4: Seismic load generation under load case details.

Figure 4.5: Generation of loads.

6. A ‘Seismic’ primary load case ‘SEISMIC STATIC X ’ is created under ‘Load Cases Details’.

7. Seismic load under ‘SEISMIC STATIC X ’ is assigned in the X direction with a multiplying factor 1 (Figure 4.4).
 8. In a similar way, load cases in Z (SEISMIC STATIC Z ) and in the Y (SEISMIC STATIC Y ) direction with multiplying
factor 1 are created (Figure 4.5).

9. ‘Perform Analysis’ is selected for linear type of analysis.

10. Further ‘Load Data’ option is provided to view vertical distribution of base shear to different floor levels in the output file.

11. The STAAD.Pro CE Input File is shown in Figure 4.6A and 4.6B.

Figure 4.6A: STAAD.Pro CE input editor.

Figure 4.6B: Seismic parameter and generation of seismic load in STAAD.Pro CE input editor.

12. After analysing the structure to get the output, select the ‘view output option’. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures
4.7–4.12.

Output file: The output file generated by STAAD.Pro CE includes design base shear (VB) and its vertical distribution (Qi) in the
X, Z and Y directions.

Figure 4.7: Design base shear in X direction.

Figure 4.8: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.9: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Figure 4.10: Design lateral force at floor level in the X direction.
Figure 4.11: Design lateral force at floor level in the Z direction.
Figure 4.12: Design lateral force at floor level in the Y direction.

RC–Steel Composite MRF Building

In real life, there are structures composed of moment resisting frames built by different materials. Most common type of this MRF is
RC–Steel composite ones. This frame shows similar load path mechanism of RC or steel MRF.
Problem Statement 4.2: Refer to Problem Statement 4.1 for modelling of the structure and consider type of structure as RC–steel
composite MRF building.
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro CE:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic
Parameters’.

Loading: The same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: The same as Problem Statement 4.1 with Structure Type 2 (Figure 4.13).

2. Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
Figure 4.13: Static seismic parameters.

3. To analyse the model and to view output, the output steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4. Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

5. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.14–4.16.

Figure 4.14: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.15: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.16: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Steel MRF Building

In industrial structures, including industrial buildings, steel MRF is very popular. In high-rise building, steel MRF is often used.
Problem Statement 4.3: Refer to Problem Statement 4.1 for modelling of the structure and consider type of structure as steel MRF
building.
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro CE:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic
Parameters’

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with Structure Type 3 (Figure 4.17).

Figure 4.17: Static seismic parameters.

2. Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

3. To analyse the model and to view output, the output steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

4. Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

5. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.18–4.20.

Figure 4.18: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.19: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.20: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Buildings with RC Structural Walls

This standard has provided empirical equations for computation of approximate natural fundamental time period of structures where
infill walls and structural walls are also the part of lateral load resisting system along with moment resisting frame.
Natural time period of the buildings with ‘RC structural wall’ and ‘all other buildings’ (buildings with masonry infill wall/building
having diagonal bracings) is computed with equations and , respectively. Time period of buildings with RC
structural wall should not exceed the time period of all other buildings computed as per Clause 7.6.2(b) of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

Aw is total effective area of walls in the first storey of the building in m2.

where
h = height of the building, in m
Awi = effective cross-sectional area of wall i in first storey of the building, in m2
Lwi = length of structural wall i in the first storey in the considered direction of lateral forces, in m
d = base dimension of the plinth level along the considered direction of earthquake shaking, in m
Nw = number of walls in the considered direction of earthquake shaking

Computation of Base Shear of a Building with RC Structural Wall Having Time Period greater than that of All Other Buildings
Problem Statement 4.4: Section used for beams and columns: 500 mm × 500 mm
Wall width along the X direction: 250 mm
Wall width along the Z direction: 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Buildings with RC structural walls
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figure 4.21A and 4.21B
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic Parameters’ from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1. Plates are used for modelling Wall.

Loading: same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with Structure Type 4 (Figure 4.22).
Figure 4.21A: Building plan.

Figure 4.21B: Building elevation.

Figure 4.22: Static seismic parameters.

2. Wall area of first floor is required to calculate approximate natural time period of the structure. Width and length of the walls
are provided along required horizontal axis in the ‘Wall Area’ box (Figure 4.23).

Figure 4.23: Wall area information of first storey.

3. Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
 4. To analyse the model and to view output, the output steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

5. Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from STAAD Editor.

6. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.24–4.26.

Figure 4.24: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.25: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.26: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Computation of Time Period of a Building With RC Structural Wall Having Time Period less than that of All Other Buildings
Problem Statement 4.5: Section used for beams and columns: 400 mm × 400 mm
Wall width along the X direction: 600 mm
Wall width along the Z direction: 650 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Buildings with RC structural walls
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Floor to floor height of the building is 5 m
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figure 4.27A and 4.27B
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic Parameters’ from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1. Plates are used for modelling wall.

2. Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with Structure Type 4 and Zone V (Figure 4.28).
Figure 4.27A: Building plan.

Figure 4.27B: Building elevation.

Figure 4.28: Static seismic parameters.

3. Width and length of the walls are provided along required horizontal axis in the ‘Wall Area’ box (Figure 4.29).

4. Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
Figure 4.29: Wall area information of first storey.

5. To analyse the model and to view output, the output steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

6. Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

7. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.30–4.32.

Figure 4.30: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.31: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.32: Design base shear in the Y direction.

All Other Buildings

Buildings with masonry infill and bracings come under all other buildings.
Problem Statement 4.6: Refer to Problem Statement 4.1 for modelling of the Structure and consider type of structure as all other
building.
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic Parameters’ from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1.

2. Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

3. Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with Structure Type 5 (Figure 4.33).

4. Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

5. To analyse the model and to view output, the output steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

6. Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

7. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figure 4.34 to 4.36.

Figure 4.33: Static seismic parameters.

Figure 4.34: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.35: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.36: Design base shear in the Y direction.
 Application of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Seismic Parameters
5

5.1 Introduction

Models created in STAAD.Pro CE do not contain any information related to the actual site conditions. For an example, the ground level
of the structure cannot be mentioned in the programme. IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 has specifically provided some situations where some
specific information is required, such as ground level, presence of basement in the structure. Figure 5 of IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 specifies
conditions on consideration of height and base dimensions of the structure for seismic analysis. These considerations can be
implemented in STAAD.Pro CE using some parameters. There may be conditions when approximate fundamental natural time period
needs to be entered in the programme by using some seismic parameter. These parameters are discussed in this chapter.

5.2 DX and DZ Parameters

DX and DZ parameters are used to provide the base dimensions of a structure along the X and Z directions. Base dimensions used to
compute approximate fundamental natural time period using empirical equations require some special consideration as explained in
Figure 5 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016. DX and DZ parameters are used to define the base dimensions along the X and Z directions to cater
the requirements (Figure 5.1).
Problem Statement 5.1: Section used for beams and columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other building
The base dimensions along the X and Z directions and the height to be considered are shown in Figures 5.2A–C.
Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for the given data.

Figure 5.1: Base dimensions to be considered according to IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.

Figure 5.2A: Building plan.

Figure 5.2B: Building elevation.

Figure 5.2C: Isometric view with dimensions.

Figure 5.3: HT, DX and DZ parameters in Seismic Parameters dialogue box.

Solution:
Steps followed by the programme:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 3 kN/m2 is applied at all floor levels
 IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.3):
A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
G. Height of the building (HT): 7
H. Base dimension in the X direction (DX): 15
I. Base dimension in the Z direction (DZ): 4

2. Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem Statement 4.1.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

Figure 5.4: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 5.5: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 5.6: Design base shear in the Y direction.

4. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

5. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 5.4–5.6.

5.3 HT Parameter

HT parameter is used to define the height of the building required for calculating the natural time period of the building as per Clause
7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016. If the height of the building is not specified, STAAD.Pro CE calculates the natural time period
considering the entire height of the building but for structures shown in Figure 5.7, the entire height should not be considered. In such
cases, HT parameter is used to define the height of the building.
Figure 5.7: Different height to be considered for different buildings.

Problem Statement 5.2: Section used for beams and columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 5.8A and B.
Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps followed by the programme:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 10 kN/m2 is applied at all floor levels

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.9):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
G. Height of building (HT): 7 m

Figure 5.8A: Building plan.

Figure 5.8B: Building elevation.

2. Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem Statement 4.1.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is shown below:

5. The STAAD.Pro CE output file is shown in Figures 5.10–5.12.

Figure 5.9: HT parameter in Seismic Parameters dialogue box.

Figure 5.10: Base shear and time period in the X direction.

Figure 5.11: Base shear in the Y direction.

Figure 5.12: Base shear and time period in the Z direction.

5.4 PX and PZ Parameters

PX and PZ parameters are the natural time period of structure in the X and Z directions, respectively. It is a user-defined value. PX and
PZ parameters are used when the lower base supports of the structure are at a different Y coordinate. These parameters override ST
(structure type) parameter for calculating natural time period of the structure (Figure 5.13).

Figure 5.13: PX and PZ parameters should be provided for the structure whose supports are at different elevation.

Problem Statement 5.3: Section used for beams and columns: 300mm × 300mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at height 20, 25 and 30 m
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 5.14A–C.
Compute design base shear (VB) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 2 kN/m2 is applied at all floor levels

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.15):

A. Zone: 0.36
 B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
F. Period in the X direction (PX): 0.348568 s
G. Period in the Z direction (PZ): 0.426907 s

Figure 5.14A: Building plan.

Figure 5.14B: Building elevation.

Figure 5.14C: Isometric view.

2. Seismic loads are assigned by following Steps 6–8 from Problem Statement 4.1.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output, the output Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4. Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from the STAAD Editor

5. Output file reported by STAAD.Pro CE for this Problem Statement (Figures 5.16–5.18).

Figure 5.15: Static seismic parameter under load definition.

Figure 5.16: Design base shear and time period in the X direction.

Figure 5.17: Design base shear and time period in the Z direction.

Figure 5.18: Design base shear in the Y direction.

5.5 DM Parameter

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 states that the value of damping shall be taken as 5% of the critical damping for the purposes of estimating Ah in
the design lateral force VB of a building as per Clause 7.2.4 irrespective of the material of construction (namely steel, reinforced
concrete, masonry or a combination thereof of these three basic materials) of its lateral load resisting system, considering that buildings
experience inelastic deformations under design level earthquake effects, resulting in much higher energy dissipation than that due to
initial structural damping in buildings. This value of damping shall be used, irrespective of the method of the structural analysis
employed, namely equivalent static method or dynamic analysis method. The damping factor value to the corresponding damping ratio
is multiplied with the design acceleration coefficient value (Sa/g). In STAAD.Pro CE, other percentage of damping can be provided; in
such cases the damping factor will be interpolated.
Multiplying factors for corresponding damping percentages as per Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002 (Clause 6.4.2).
The following formula is adopted for interpolation between damping values as given in Table 5.1. Interpolation and/or extrapolation of
ground response acceleration for a mode has been made for determining the spectrum ordinates corresponding to the modal damping
value for use in response spectrum analysis. The relationship that shall be used for this purpose is defined by

Sa = Ae−ξ + B/ξ

where
Sa = spectrum ordinate

ξ = damping ratio
Constants A and B are determined using two known spectrum ordinates

Table 5.1 Multiplying factors for obtaining values for other Damping
where
ξ 1 < ξ < ξ 2.

Problem Statement 5.4: Section used for beams and columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC frame building
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 5.19A and B.
Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for the given data.

Figure 5.19A: Building plan.

Figure 5.19B: Building elevation.

Figure 5.20: DM parameter under seismic definition.

Solution:
1. Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Self-weight.

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.20):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.02

2. Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem Statement 4.1.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output, Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is shown below:

5. The STAAD.Pro output file of this model (Figures 5.21–5.23).

Figure 5.21: Design base shear and time period in the X direction.
Figure 5.22: Design base shear and time period in the Z direction.

Figure 5.23: Design base shear in the Y direction.

5.6 DF Parameter

In STAAD.Pro CE, the damping factor value can be provided with the help of DF parameter in the Seismic Parameters dialogue box.
Though for IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 the damping ratio value has been restricted to 5% but different values of damping can be provided for
the purposes of estimating the design acceleration spectrum (Ah). The damping factors corresponding to different damping ratios are
provided in Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002, which is shown in Table 5.1.
Problem Statement 5.5: Section used for beams and columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC frame building
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 5.24A and B. Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for given data.

Solution:
1. Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Self-weight.

2. IS 1893-2016 seismic parameters are (Figure 5.25):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Multiplying factor for SA(DF): 1.40

3. Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem Statement 4.1.
Figure 5.24A: Building plan.

Figure 5.24B: Building elevation.

4. To analyse the model and to view the output, Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

5. The STAAD.Pro input file of this model:

6. The STAAD.Pro output file of this model (Figures 5.26–5.28).

Figure 5.25: DF parameter in static seismic load definition.

Figure 5.26: Design base shear and time period in the X direction.

Figure 5.27: Design base shear and time period in the Z direction.

Figure 5.28: Design base shear in the Y direction.

 Buildings With Fundamental Time Period Greater Than 4s
6

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 provides two response spectrum data to be used in equivalent static method and response spectrum method of
analysis. There has been an addition in the response spectrum data to consider seismic effect on tall and flexible structures. Response
spectrum data has been extended for the structures with natural period greater than 4 s. The response spectrum curve has been provided
for hard, medium and soft soils.
Design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) for different soil types as per clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 is used in equivalent static
method of analysis.
For rocky or hard soil sites,

For medium stiff soil sites,

For soft soil sites,

Design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) for different soil types as per clause 6.4.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 is used in response spectrum
method of analysis.

Figure 6.1: Spectra for hard soil to be used for equivalent static analysis.
For rocky or hard soil sites (Figure 6.1),

For medium stiff soil sites,

For soft soil sites,

Problem Statement 6.1: Section used for beams and columns are 250 mm × 250 mm

Material used: Concrete with density 25 kN/m3

Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are shown in Figures 6.2 and 6.3.
Compute the design Base Shear (VB) for the given data.

Figure 6.2: Building plan.

Figure 6.3: Building elevation.

Solution:
Steps to instruct the programme

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters (Figure 6.4).

Loading: Self-Weight is assigned in X, Z and Y direction

IS 1893:2016 Seismic parameter:

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS):1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal directions by following Steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1
(Figure 6.5).
Figure 6.4: Seismic parameters in seismic load definition.

Figure 6.5: Load cases in three orthogonal directions.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output, Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given next:

The output file is shown in Figures 6.6–6.8.

Figure 6.6: Design base shear and time period in X direction.

Figure 6.7: Design base shear in Y direction.

Figure 6.8: Design base shear and time period in Z direction.
 Consideration of Vertical Motion in Seismic Analysis
7

7.1 Introduction

Various observations show that the failure of several structures results from the induced vertical earthquake forces. Vertical motion may
induce shear and flexural failure in addition to the possibility of compressive overstressing or failure due to direct tension. The main
effect of the vertical motion consists of the variation of axial force in the columns. The high values of compression, or even tension,
induced by the vertical excitation could produce damage in the structure which leads to a decrease of structural capacity to withstand the
horizontal seismic motion, resulting in an increase of horizontal displacements. Usually, the vertical motion is weaker than the
horizontal motion. On an average, peak vertical acceleration is one-half to two-thirds of the peak horizontal acceleration. The vertical
acceleration responses are taken about two-thirds of the horizontal acceleration responses.

7.2 Design Vertical Acceleration Spectrum

In Clause 6.3.3.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design vertical acceleration spectrum check is being made mandatory for the following
conditions:
A. Structure situated in seismic zone IV or V.
B. Structure has vertical or plan irregularities.
C. Structure is rested on soft soil.
E. Bridges.
D. Structure has long spans.
F. Or structure has long horizontal overhangs of structural members or sub-systems.

The design seismic acceleration spectral value (Av) is taken as two-thirds of the value of design horizontal acceleration coefficient. The
value of design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) is specified as 2.5.

The design seismic acceleration spectral value Av or vertical motions shall be taken as (as per clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016)

Here the first formula is used since it is for buildings governed by IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Problem Statement 7.1: Section used for beams and columns are 300 mm × 450 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF building
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 7.1A and B.
Compute design Base Shear (Vb) for given set of data.
Figure 7.1A: Building plan.

Figure 7.1B: Building elevation.

Figure 7.1C: Load diagram.

Solution:
Steps to instruct the programme

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: In all three orthogonal direction both selfweight and member load of intensity 10 kN/m is applied as shown in Figure
7.1C

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 7.2):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
 E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. Seismic loads are assigned in the Y direction by following Steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output, steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

Figure 7.2: Seismic parameters in seismic load definition.

4. STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

The output file is shown in Figure 7.3.

Figure 7.3: Design base shear in Y direction.

 Consideration of Minimum Base Shear Criteria
8

The minimum base shear is based on expected seismic performance of buildings which have lateral strength based on expected
percentage of weight of the structure. Such a level of lateral strength has been observed to provide adequate strength for a long period
structure under far-field motions. Recent studies have confirmed that such a level of minimum lateral strength is necessary to develop
yielding mechanism for energy dissipation.
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 specifies in Clause 7.2.2 that buildings and portions shall be designed and constructed to resist the least effects of
design lateral force (VB). Regardless of design earthquake forces computed using Clause-7.3.1, buildings shall have lateral load
resisting systems capable of resisting horizontal forces not less than minimum lateral force (VB min). But if any of the values of VBX
and VBZ is less than VB min, the value of VB min should be considered as design base shear value (VB). In Table 8.1, ρ values are
provided with their respective zone.
Table 8.1: Minimum Design Earthquake Horizontal Lateral Force for Buildings (Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016

Sl No. Seismic zone ρ (%)

(i) II 0.7
(ii) III 1.1
(iii) IV 1.6
(iv) V 2.4

Problem Statement 8.1: The section used for beams are 250 mm × 250 mm and for columns are 400 mm × 250 mm.

Material used: Concrete density 25 kN/m3

Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 8.1A and B.
Compute the Design Base Shear (VB) for the given data.

Figure 8.1A: Building plan.

Figure 8.1B: Building elevation.

Solution:
The steps followed by the programme:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters (Figure 8.2).

Loading: Self-weight in three orthogonal directions.

IS 1893(Part 1):2016 seismic parameter (Figure 8.2):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I ): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

Figure 8.2: Seismic parameter under seismic definition.

6. Seismic loads are assigned in two orthogonal directions by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
 9. To analyse the model and to view the output, the output steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

10. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

The output model is as given in Figures 8.3 and 8.4.

Figure 8.3: Design base shear and time period in the X direction.

Figure 8.4: Design base shear and time period in the Z direction.
 Seismic Analysis of Structures Having Structural Components Below the
9 Ground Level

When seismic waves hit the ground surface, these are reflected back into the ground. The reflection mechanics is such that the
amplitude of vibration at the free surface is much higher (almost double) than that under the ground. This mechanism allows the design
spectrum to be one half in case the structure is at a depth of 30 m or below. Linear interpolation is resorted for structures with a depth
less than 30 m. The word ‘underground structures and foundations’ has been mentioned in this clause because the clause is also
applicable for the calculation of seismic inertia force on foundation under the ground.
Underground structures and buildings the base of which located at depths of 30 m or more computed Ah (design horizontal earthquake
acceleration coefficient) at the base have taken half the value of Ah as mentioned in Clause 6.4.5, IS1893(part I):2016. This reduced
value is used only for estimating the inertia effects due to masses at the corresponding levels below the ground. The effects of inertia for
the above-ground portion of the building are estimated based on the unreduced value of Ah. For estimating the effects of inertia due to
masses of structures and foundations placed between the ground level and 30 m depth, the design horizontal acceleration spectrum
value is linearly interpolated between Ah and 0.5Ah (Figure 9.1).

For the portion of the structure above the ground:

Wi = seismic weight of ith floor above the ground
hi = height of ith floor above the ground
VBs = horizontal base shear above the ground

= Ah · Ws

Ws = seismic weight of the portion which is above the ground

Qi = design lateral force at ith floor above the ground

Figure 9.1: Generation of seismic forces for a building frame having portions below the ground.

For the portion of the structure below the ground:

Wj = seismic weight of jth floor below the ground
hj = height of jth floor below the ground from base
VBu = horizontal base shear below the ground

= Ahu · Wu
Wu = seismic weight of the portion which is below the ground

Qj = design lateral force at jth floor

A structure modelled in STAAD.Pro CE does not contain any information regarding the ground level of the structure. This
methodology requires information related to the Y coordinate of the ground level. IS 1893(Part 1):2016 implementation in STAAD.Pro
CE allows to define the ground level of the structure by using GL and DT parameters. The current implementation of this methodology
deals with GL parameter. The Y coordinate of the ground level needs to be defined using GL parameter. HT parameter should be added
along with GL parameter for calculation of natural fundamental time period of the structure.

9.1 Analysis of the Underground Structure by Using Equivalent Static Method

Problem Statement 9.1: Section used for beams and columns: 350mm × 450mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Reinforced concrete (RC) moment resisting frame (MRF) building
Ground Level is at 6 m from the base

Figure 9.2: Building plan.

Figure 9.3: Building elevation.

Base dimensions and floor heights of the buildings are given in Figures 9.2 and 9.3.
 Solution:
Steps to instruct the programme

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Figure 9.4: Seismic parameters under load definition.

Loading: UDL of intensity 10 kN/m is applied to all beams

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 9.4):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS):1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
G. Ground level (GL): 6
H. Height of building (HT): 6

6. Seismic loads are assigned in two orthogonal directions by following Steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1
(Figure 9.5).

Figure 9.5: Load case details in three orthogonal directions.

9. To analyse the model and to view the output, the output Steps 9–10 are followed.

10. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

The output file of the model is given in Figures 9.6–9.13.

Figure 9.6: Design base shear and time period above the ground level in X direction.

Figure 9.7: Design base shear and time period below the ground level in X direction.

Figure 9.8: Mass and base shear summary in X direction.

Figure 9.9: Design base shear both above and below the ground level in Y direction.

Figure 9.10: Mass and base shear summary in Y direction.

Figure 9.11: Design base shear and time period above the ground level in Z direction.

Figure 9.12: Design base shear and time period below ground level in Z direction.

Figure 9.13: Mass and base shear summary in Z direction.

 Analysis of Structure Considering Torsional Provision
10

The seismic forces that act on a structure during an earthquake are related to inertia and act through centres of mass. These inertia forces
are resisted by elastic forces in the lateral load resisting elements whose resultants pass through centres of resistance. If the resisting
elements in a building are so distributed that centres of resistance (CR) do not coincide with centres of mass (CM), lateral seismic forces
cause torsional motion in the structure. Structures with non-coincident centre of mass and centre of resistance are referred to as
asymmetric structures and the torsional motion induced in them is referred to as natural torsion.
Torsional motion may also result due to a variety of factors other than known asymmetry. One such factor is the asymmetry that may
exist in a nominally symmetric structure because of uncertainty in the evaluation of centres of mass and centres of stiffness. For
example, the actual distribution of mass may be different from the one assumed in computations. The estimation of the stiffness of
resisting elements may be inaccurate because of lack of precise data on the modulus of elasticity, extent of cracking in concrete,
inaccuracy in measuring the dimensions, etc. The torsion resulting from such asymmetry belongs to the category of natural torsion, but
its magnitude cannot be defined in a deterministic manner and it can only be assessed in a statistical sense. Another factor is the torsion
of structure caused by ground rotation about a vertical axis. No measurements are available for ground rotational motion and therefore
its effect can be assessed only in an indirect manner.
Accidental torsion is always present in buildings. It results from uncertainty in the distribution of mass and stiffness as well as the
rotational component of ground motion. Previous studies have shown that the effect of accidental torsion can be estimated from a pair
of dynamic analyses in which the static eccentricity is increased or decreased by 0.05b.
As per Clause 7.8 of IS1893-2016 code, provision shall be made in all buildings for the increase in shear forces on the lateral force
resisting elements resulting from twisting about the vertical axis of the building.
The design eccentricity is taken as a combination of static and accidental eccentricities and is given by the following equations.

edi = Design eccentricity at the ith floor

esi = Static eccentricity at the ith floor or the projected distance between the centre of mass and centre of rigidity at the ith floor
bi = plan dimension of the ith floor normal to the direction of ground motion
α, β, δ = specified constants in the codes
IS:1893(Part-1)-2016, as in Clause 7.8.2 has specified the following values of constants:

α = 1.5
β = 0.05
δ=1

If the design static eccentricity component of the design eccentricity is greater than the natural static eccentricity (α > 1), then an
additional torsional moment of the value of (α − 1)esi × Fi is introduced at the centre of mass to achieve the full torsional condition.
Please refer to Figure 10.1. The value of β × bi × Fi is added or subtracted to the additional natural torsion to incorporate the effect of
accidental torsion.
If α = 1.5, δ = 1.0 and β = 0.05, then STAAD.Pro CE parameters to be defined are DEC = 1.5 and ACC = 0.05 in one load case and
DEC = 1.0 and ACC = −0.05 in another load case to include both natural and accidental torsion.
Figure 10.1: Generation of torsional moment.

Natural torsion is automatically included in analysis for DEC ≤ 1.0, that is no additional inherent torsion is applied. However, if DEC >
1.0, a twisting moment with modified eccentricity of DEC − 1 will act at CM.
In dynamic analysis, physically adjusting mass to account for the torsional response inadvertently changes the dynamics of the structure
with each mass shift. Therefore the safe method is to calculate the effect of accidental eccentricity by static means (using equivalent
static vertical force distribution for this purpose) and then to combine it with dynamic analysis results.

Problem Statement 10.1:

Section used for beams and columns: 300 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 10.2A and B

Figure 10.2A: Building plan.

Figure 10.2B: Building elevation.

Compute design base shear (Vb), design lateral force (Qi) and torsional moment (MY) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1.

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1

Seismic parameter (Figure 10.3):

A. Zone: 0.36
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1

Figure 10.3: Static seismic parameter.

E. Type of structure (ST): 5

 F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. A Seismic primary load case STATIC TORSION X1 is created under Load Cases Details.

3. Seismic load under SEISMIC STATIC X1 is assigned in the X direction with a multiplying factor 1, and torsional parameters
are provided as shown in Figure 10.4.

These values under torsional parameters are provided to calculate design eccentricity as per equation (10.1).

4. Another seismic load is assigned under load case STATIC TORSION X2 in the X direction with a multiplying factor 1 and
torsional parameters are provided as shown in Figure 10.5.

These values under torsional parameter are provided to calculate the design eccentricity as per equation (10.2).

Figure 10.4: Seismic load generation in the X direction with torsional parameters as per equation (10.1).

5. In a similar way, another two load cases are provided in the Z direction. Those are STATIC TORSION Z 1, STATIC
TORSION Z 2 (Figure 10.6).

6. Perform Analysis is selected for the linear type of analysis.

7. Further Load Data option is provided to view the vertical distribution of base shear to different floor levels in the output file.

8. Centre of stiffness of a floor is reported in STAAD.Pro CE output file on using PRINT DIA CR command.

Note: Centre of mass of a floor gets reported in the output file on using Rigid Diaphragm command.
Figure 10.5: Seismic load generation in the X direction with torsional parameters as per equation (10.2).

Figure 10.6: Static seismic load generation in the two horizontal directions with torsional parameters.

9. STAAD editor/input file (Figure 10.7).

10. Output file: The output file generated by STAAD.Pro CE includes design base shear (Vb) and design lateral force at floor level
(Qi). The output file also contains a table of design eccentricity for individual loading and distribution of torsional moment (MY)
(Figures 10.8–10.19).

Figure 10.7: Seismic load definition and load generation with torsional parameters in STAAD.Pro CE input editor.
Figure 10.8: Table of centre of mass of floor.

Figure 10.9: Table of centre of rigidity of floor.

Figure 10.10: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 10.11: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 10.12: Table of design eccentricity calculated using equation (10.1) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION X1’.
Figure 10.13: Design lateral force in the X direction and vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case ‘STATIC TORSION
X1’.

Figure 10.14: Table of design eccentricity calculated using equation (10.2) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION X2’.
Figure 10.15: Design lateral force in the X direction and vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case ‘STATIC TORSION
X2’.

Figure 10.16: Table of design eccentricity calculated using equation (10.1) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION Z1’.
Figure 10.17: Design lateral force in the Z direction and vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case ‘STATIC TORSION
Z1’.

Figure 10.18: Table of design eccentricity calculated using equation (10.2) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION Z2’.
Figure 10.19: Design lateral force in the Z direction and vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case ‘STATIC TORSION
Z2’.

Figure 10.19: Design lateral force in the Z direction and vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case ‘STATIC TORSION
Z2’.
 Soft Storey
11

Soft storey buildings are known for their poor performance during earthquakes. Typical examples for such irregularity are the buildings
on stilts. In the 2001 Bhuj earthquake, most of the multistorey buildings that collapsed had soft ground storey. According to the
definition of soft storey defined in IS 1893(Part-1):2016, a soft storey is a storey whose lateral stiffness is less than the storey above. In
general, multistorey buildings in metropolitan cities require open taller first storey for parking of vehicles and/or for retail shopping,
large space for meeting room or a banking hall. Due to this functional requirement, the first storey has lesser lateral stiffness as
compared to upper storey, which are stiffened by masonry infill walls which has good strength in compression. This characteristic of
building construction creates ‘soft’ storey problems in multistorey buildings. It is one of the vertical irregularities as per Table 6 of IS
1893(Part-1):2016. Increased flexibility of first storey results in extreme deflection, which in turn leads to concentration of forces at the
second storey connections accompanied by large plastic deformation. In addition, most of the energy developed during earthquake is
dissipated by the columns of the soft storey. In this process the plastic hinges are formed at the end of the columns, which transform the
soft storey into a mechanism. In such cases the collapse is unavoidable. It is recognized that this type of failure results from the
combination of several other unfavourable reasons such as torsion, excessive mass on upper floors, P − Δ effects and lack of ductility in
the bottom storey. Therefore, the soft storey deserve a special consideration.
In STAAD.Pro CE soft storey checking is a process by which designers check lateral stiffness of a storey with that of the storey above.
This command is applicable only when rigid floor diaphragm is provided.
The software is currently equipped with the facility to consider the in-plane stiffness of slabs as rigid diaphragm. Lateral stiffness of a
floor is calculated by the program only when the floor is modelled as rigid diaphragm since it functions as transferring storey shears and
torsional moments to lateral force-resisting members during earthquake.
Consider a multistorey building:

The points are master nodes. The storey stiffness is defined as the inverse of inter-storey drift when a unit load is applied at that storey
only.
The unit load applied is along X, Z and θY.

Consider the displacements and rotations up to 2nd floor.

• Storey 1: ΔX1, ΔZ1 and θY1;
• Storey 2: ΔX2, ΔZ2 and θY2.

Relative displacement for storey 2 is

The rest is the same for all the other storey.

Problem Statement 11.1:

The section used for beams and columns: 300 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Reinforced concrete (RC) moment resisting frame (MRF) building
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 11.1A and B.

Figure 11.1A: Building Plan.

Figure 11.1B: Building Elevation.

Instructing the program to check for Soft Storey

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic Parameters from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1.

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

2. Seismic load are assigned by following Steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
3. ‘Perform Analysis’ is selected for linear type of analysis.

4. Lateral storey stiffness is reported on STAAD.Pro CE output file on using ‘Storey Stiffness’ command from the ‘Post-Analysis
Commands’ (Figure 11.2).

5. ‘Check Soft Storey’ command is selected from the ‘Miscellaneous Commands’ with code ‘IS 1893 2016’ (Figures 11.3 and
11.4).

6. Output file reported by STAAD.Pro CE for this Problem Statement (Figures 11.5 and 11.6).

Figure 11.2: Storey Stiffness command in Graphical User Interface (GUI).

Figure 11.3: Check Soft Storey command in GUI.

Figure 11.4: STAAD.Pro CE input editor file.

Figure 11.5: Lateral storey stiffness at each floor.

Figure 11.6: Soft storey detection.

 Dynamic Analysis
12

12.1 Introduction

The assumption of equivalent static analysis is based on the following:

1. Fundamental mode dominates the response.

2. Mass and stiffness are evenly distributed with building height, thus giving a regular mode shape.

Mode shapes depend on the distribution of mass and stiffness in the building. In tall buildings, higher modes can be quite significant,
and in irregular buildings, mode shapes may be somewhat irregular. Hence, for tall and irregular buildings, dynamic analysis is
required. Industrial buildings may also require dynamic analysis because they may have large spans, large heights and considerable
irregularities. Dynamic analysis can be performed in three ways, namely:

1. response spectrum method,

2. modal time response history method and

3. nonlinear time response history method.

Response spectrum of an earthquake is considered as a very useful input for the seismic analysis of structures and is directly used for
the response spectrum method of analysis of structures, which is favoured by earthquake engineers for several reasons. This method
allows a clear understanding of the contributions of different modes of vibration to the overall seismic response of structures. It offers a
simplified method for finding the design forces for the members of structures for earthquake forces. It is also useful in the approximate
evaluation of the reliability and safety of structures under earthquake forces. IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 clearly provides guideline on
response spectrum analysis (RSA), which is discussed in this chapter.
Time history method consists of the analysis of linear mathematical model of structures to determine its response to a set of ground
motion acceleration histories compatible with the design acceleration spectrum for the site specified by Indian Standard (Clause 6.4.2)
or by a site-specific study (Clause 6.4.7).

12.2 Response Spectrum

The structural response to a particular earthquake can be summarized using a response spectrum, which provides valuable information
on the potential effects of ground motion on the structure. A response spectrum shows the peak response of an SDOF structure to a
particular earthquake, as a function of the natural period and damping ratio of the structure. The main advantage of response spectrum
approach is that earthquakes that look quite different when represented in the time domain may actually contain similar frequency
contents and result in broadly similar response spectra. This uniqueness of response spectra makes it useful for a future earthquake. The
El Centro, California, earthquake response spectrum is used worldwide as a reference because of two reasons. One, it contains
exhaustive data of ground motion, and two, the data acquisition systems were located very near to the epicentre of the earthquake.

Response Spectrum Methodology

In each mode, Design Lateral Force (Qik) and Storey Shear Force (Vik) at each floor in each mode is computed as following Clauses
7.7.5.4c and 7.7.5.4d of IS1893 (Part 1): 2016

Qik = Akφik PkWi

Qik = peak lateral force at floor i in the mode k

Ak = design horizontal acceleration spectrum value using natural period of oscillation and Tk of mode k obtained from dynamic
analysis
 ϕik = mode shape coefficient at ith floor for mode k
Wi = seismic weight of ith floor
Pk = mode participation factor of mode k

and

Vik = peak shear force acting at floor i in the mode k.

STAAD.Pro CE utilizes the following procedure to generate the lateral seismic loads:

1. Direction factor ((Z/2)×(I/R)) is provided for input spectrum.

2. The programme calculates time periods for first six modes or as specified.

3. The programme calculates Sa/g for each mode utilizing time period and damping for each mode.

4. The programme calculates the design horizontal acceleration spectrum value Ak for each mode.

5. The programme then calculates mode participation factor and mass participation factor for each mode.

Mass participation factor as per Clause 7.7.5.4a of IS1893 (Part 1): 2016

Mode participation factor as per Clause 7.7.5.4b of IS1893 (Part 1): 2016

6. The peak lateral seismic force and storey shear force at each floor in each mode is calculated.

7. All response quantities for each mode are calculated.

8. The peak response quantities are then combined as per the specified method (square root of summation of squares (SRSS),
complete quadratic combination (CQC), absolute sum method (ABS), closely spaced method (CSM) or TEN) to get the final
results.

This process is rigorously followed for each mode, and any mode can be a torsional mode. The implication of having a torsional mode
in first few modes is an indication of the fact that your floors may be torsionally weak, and you need to take precaution for that.
The programme can calculate centre of mass (CM) and centre of resistance (CR) if rigid diaphragm is defined in the model in
conjunction with mass reference load cases. The programme forcefully applies the lateral seismic loading at the CM. Thus, inherent
torsional effect coming for static eccentricity (esi, i.e., difference between CM and CR) is automatically considered at the analysis itself
as the programme is forcefully applying seismic load at CM instead of CR.
The design base shear computed from RSA should be compared with the base shear obtained from equivalent static analysis.
The design base shear, VB_RS, calculated from the RSA in STAAD.Pro CE, is compared with the base shear, VB_SS, calculated by
the empirical formula for the fundamental time period based on Clause 7.2.1 (equivalent static analysis). If VB_RS is less than VB_SS,
all of the response quantities are amplified by (VB_SS/VB_RS) as per Clause 7.7.3(a) for each of the orthogonal plan directions and by
maximum of [(VB_SS/VB_RS)X,(VB_SS/VB_RS)Z. when considering response spectrum load in the vertical direction based on
Clause 7.7.3(b).
12.3 Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016 Seismic Parameter for Response Spectrum Analysis

Combination method: The following methods are available for combining the responses from each mode into a total response.
SRSS (Square Root of Summation of Squares Method):
If building does not have closely spaced modes, then net peak response quantity λ due to all modes shall be estimated as

where
λk = peak response quantity in mode k
Nm is the number of modes considered

CQC (Complete Quadratic Combination Method): This method is recommended for closely spaced modes instead of SRSS.
Peak response quantities (member forces, displacements, storey forces, storey shears and base reactions) can be combined as per CQC
as given in the following equation:

where
λ = estimate of peak response quantity
λi = response quantity in mode i (with sign)
λj = response quantity in mode j (with sign)
ρij = cross-modal correlation coefficient

Nm = number of modes considered

ζ = modal damping coefficient ratio which shall be taken as 0.05
β = natural frequency ratio = ωj/ωi
ωj = circular natural frequency in mode j
ωi = circular natural frequency in mode i

CSM (Closely Spaced Method): CSM as per IS:1893 (Part 1): 2016 procedures.

If building has a few closely spaced modes, then net peak response quantity λ* due to these closely space modes alone shall be obtained
as

where λc = peak response quantity in closely spaced mode c. The summation is for closely spaced modes only. Then this peak response
quantity λ* due to closely spaced modes is combined with those of remaining well-separated modes by method described previously.
ABS (Absolute Sum Method): This method is very conservative and represents a worst-case combination.
GRP: Closely spaced modes grouping method.
TEN: Ten per cent method of combining closely spaced modes [NRC Reg. Guide 1.92 (Rev. 1.2.2, 1976)].
Subsoil class: STAAD.Pro CE uses this parameter to generate response spectrum curve. The curve (time period vs acceleration) is
plotted automatically by the programme for the soil type mentioned in Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016. The site-specific
response spectral data can also be provided for generation of response spectrum curve by selecting Subsoil Class as Custom. This
spectral data pair is considered as lookup table for finding spectral acceleration corresponding to the modal time period considered in
the RSA.
Spectrum type: STAAD.Pro CE provides two spectrum types: acceleration and displacement. This should be provided along with site-
specific spectral data.
Interpolation type: Two types of interpolation are available in STAAD.Pro CE – linear and logarithmic. Time periods of the structure
are obtained for each mode by solving characteristic equation. These modal time periods may not exactly match with the periods
specified in the spectrum input; in this case, interpolation is required between available spectral values.
Damping type: There are three ways to specify damping in RSA:
Damping: This parameter is used when the damping ratio is same for all modes. As discussed in Chapter 4 (Section 4.1), for IS
1893 (Part 1):2016 the damping considered in the analysis should be 5% of the critical damping. STAAD.Pro CE allows the
following damping method to be considered in the analysis.
CDAMP: Composite damping is denoted by CDAMP. Composite damping is a weighted average damping ratio, which is based
on the strain energy and damping ratio of the various materials used in the structure, and also the spring supports of the structure
if spring damping is specified.
MDAMP: The MDAMP method is used when the dynamic analysis is performed using a known set of modal damping ratios or
ones calculated by the programme based on damping ratios that are known for two specific modes.
Direction factor: The direction indicates along which the spectrum load is applied, and the factor is the fraction of the spectral value
which is inserted as shown in Figure 12.1. The direction factor in X, Z and Y is ((Zone factor/2) × (Importance factor/Response
Reduction factor)) = ((Z/2) × (I/R)). After the spectral value is obtained for each mode from the lookup table, it is multiplied by the
direction factor.
Torsion parameter: To consider torsional effects in the analysis, the following parameters are to be used with values pertaining to
Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Accidental Eccentricity, ECC: Accidental torsion accounts for the additional torsional moment on a floor due to a shift in the CM
from its actual location to either side by a distance equal to 5% of the building dimension orthogonal to the direction of the earthquake.
Ground rotation about vertical axis of a structure also plays a major role in inducing torsion. These factors are specified as (0.05) and
(−0.05) in Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 for calculating design eccentricity.

Figure 12.1: IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum parameters.

Dynamic eccentricity, DEC: Natural torsion or inherent torsion accounts for torsional moment induced in a floor resulting from
eccentricity between the centre of mass (CM) and centre of stiffness (CR). To calculate design eccentricity as per Clause 7.8.2 of IS
1893 (Part 1):2016, the factors are (1.5) and (1).
Signed response spectrum results options: Sign of responses obtained from RSA becomes unsigned as the modal responses from
modal analysis are combined using SRSS, CQC or CSM method. Because of that displacement, member forces, support reactions, etc.
are of absolute values. To make the results more useful in design situations, STAAD.Pro CE has implemented following methods of
‘artificially’ determining an algebraic sign to responses.
Dominant: If dominant mode is specified as 0 (i.e., DOMINANT 0 parameter), the programme determines the mode with the
highest mass participation factor in the excitation direction, and the final results will have the same sign obtained from the
modal analysis result of that mode.
 The programme also allows user to define a mode in the DOMINANT parameter. If it is used, the sign of the responses obtained
from the analysis of this mode will be used in the final result.
Signed: SIGN option results in the creation of signed values for all results. The sum of squares of positive values from the
modes is compared to sum of squares of negative values from the modes. Suppose, if the negative values are larger, the result is
given a negative sign.

Individual modal response load case generation options:

STAAD.Pro CE allows to work with individual modal load cases generated in RSA. In RSA, the modal responses are combined using
the modal combination method opted in the analysis. The responses from the individual modes are of prime importance. Individual
modal load cases can be extracted separately by the programme, and their responses can be viewed separately. On requesting for modal
response load cases, the programme generates them. The input from the users for this action is the number of modal response load cases
that to be generated and the starting load number for them. It is to be noted that the programme by default considers six modes, and the
number of modes considered in the analysis can be increased by using CUT OFF MODE SHAPE command. A check needs to be
applied in this process so that the number of mode cases to be generated in individual modal response (IMR) load cases does not exceed
the number of modes considered in RSA.

Other:
Scale: This is the normalization factor by which the second number set of spectral data pair will be multiplied if the spectrum
data are normalized set. Default value for this parameter is 1. If the spectral data are generated by the programme as per Clause
6.4.2.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 based on the specified soil type, then the programme automatically multiplies the generated
spectral acceleration value by (g) because the generated data have the form (Sa/g). Therefore, in that case the user does not need
to specify a SCALE FACTOR.
Missing mass: For RSA, STAAD.Pro CE uses only as many modes as defined by the CUT OFF MODE SHAPE command, or a
lesser number in case it cannot calculate as many as specified through that command. Most design codes require 90% or more
than 90% cumulative mass participation (SUMM value reports in output) in considered direction. MISSING MASS command
is required when the programme is unable to achieve that percentage of mass participation in considered direction using CUT
OFF MODE SHAPE and/or CUT OFF FREQUENCY command. Those modes that are left out of the dynamic solution can be
accounted for using this facility. Initially the modal combination results are calculated without the missing mass mode, and then
the result is combined via modal combination method with the missing mass result. Alongside the missing mass term, there is a
box in which the spectral acceleration (in the current units) can be specified for the missing mass mode. This will not be factored
by SCALE.
ZPA: This is applicable only if the MISSING MASS correction is used in the response. If the spectral acceleration is not entered
with the MIS parameter (MISSING MASS command) the ZPA = Zero Period Acceleration value (default 33 Hz) is used to
look up the spectral acceleration (of the missing mass mode) from the input curve (spectral displacement or acceleration vs time
period). If nothing is specified for ZPA, STAAD.Pro uses a frequency of 33 Hz.

Note:
A. If the subsoil class is selected as hard soil or medium soil or soft soil, spectrum type and interpolation type parameter should not
be included.
B. The spectrum type options, that is acceleration (ACC parameter) or displacement (DISP parameter), and interpolation type
options, that is linear (LIN parameter) and logarithmic (LOG parameter), should only be used when sub soil type is set to
“Custom”.
C. STAAD.Pro CE generates mass matrix only once, and it is applicable for all other response spectrum load cases. The
programme ignores the masses defined under other response spectrum load cases.
Note: G, H, I and J from Section 4.1 are applicable for response spectrum load case also.

Discussion on results from response spectrum load cases:

There are two categories of output produced by STAAD.Pro:

1. intermediate terms generated during the spectrum analysis and

2. response of the structure to the loading – reaction, member forces, displacement, etc.
Intermediate terms generated during the spectrum analysis reported:
Reports in the output file:
Eigen solution: In modal analysis (eigen solution), the following equation is solved:
where i =1,…, n

λ = ω2 and {xi} = mode shape vector. On doing a modal analysis, we get frequency of a mode and corresponding mode shape. In
STAAD.Pro CE output file, time period and corresponding frequencies are reported for each considered mode.

Dynamic weight, missing weight and modal weight: Dynamic weight contains the total potential weight for base shear calculation.
Modal weight is the total weight actually used in the considered modes. Only a part of the dynamic weight is actually used in the
solution. The part that does not get considered for the solution is the Missing weight, and it is reported as negative number. Algebraic
summation of dynamic weight and missing weight gives modal weight.
Generalized Weight and Generalized Mass: Each eigenvector {xi} has an associated generalized, mass defined by

Mass participation factor: The modal mass of a mode as a percentage of the total mass vibrating in that direction is listed under
heading X, Y and Z under PARTICIPATION FACTORS. A cumulative sum for all modes is given under the headings SUM-X,
SUM-Z and SUM-Y. So, the cumulative value signifies the percentage of the base shear that can be represented by the modes
calculated. Mass participation factor in percentage is very much important because code requires us to consider enough modes to
represent at least 90% participation.
Table of acceleration evaluated: The mode number, the spectral acceleration evaluated from the lookup table of spectral data and
damping used for the corresponding mode are reported in a tabular form.
Damping ratio used in the individual modes: If composite or modal damping specified, damping ratio used in each mode will also be
reported.
Modal base action: STAAD.Pro CE reports modal base shear in the response spectrum output for given modes, calculated by taking
the translational mass times the corresponding calculated acceleration at each node and global direction to get a force. These forces are
accumulated over all the nodes for each of the three directions. In addition, these nodal forces are used to calculate and accumulate
moments about the origin of the coordinate system (0,0,0).
If SET PRINT 17 command is used, then this calculation is further broken down into the contributions to the base summation from
each floor for each mode.
Base shear: STAAD.Pro CE reports the base shear in the output file in a tabular form alongside the mass participation factor.
Mode shape: PRINT MODE SHAPES command has to be chosen from Analysis Commands to print the Mode Shapes for different
modes in the output file.

Design Eccentricity (edi) and Peak additional torsion: If torsion parameters (DEC and ECC) are provided, the output file also reports
design eccentricity (edi) and peak additional torsion.

Postprocessing Reports:
By clicking on Dynamics tab from the Postprocessing mode, Time period (in seconds), Frequency (in Hz), Mass Participation
Factor (in percentage) in three orthogonal direction and Mode Shapes for each mode are reported at the right-hand side of the window
as shown in Figure 12.2. Both tables are given in Microsoft Excel format.
The animated mode shape can be viewed from the Animation option under Results tab as shown in Figure 12.3A. The scale of the
MODE SHAPES can be adjusted from the Scales tab under the same window as shown in Figure 12.3B.
The animated mode shapes for different modes can be viewed from the drop-down list of the Mode option under the Results tab and
the active mode shape can be seen too at the extreme right corner as shown in Figure 12.4.

Figure 12.2: Frequency, Mass Participation and Mode Shape in GUI.

Figure 12.3A: Steps to view the animated mode shape in GUI.

Figure 12.3B: Steps to adjust the scale of mode shapes.

Figure 12.4: Animated mode shapes for different modes.

12.4 Miscellaneous Commands for Dynamic Analysis

This section deals with discussion on different commands that can be used in RSA.

CUT OFF MODE SHAPE, CUT OFF FREQUENCY

These commands are used in conjunction with dynamic analysis. STAAD. Pro CE computes the larger number of modes with the help
of these commands. CUT OFF MODE SHAPE and CUT OFF FREQUENCY commands specify the highest number of mode shapes
and frequency that need to be considered. These commands should be provided prior to the loading specification.
General format:
CUT OFF MODE SHAPE i1

CUT OFF FREQUENCY f1

where
i1 is the number of mode shapes to be considered for dynamic analysis, and f1 is the highest frequency (cycle/second) to be
 considered for dynamic analysis. If cut off frequency command is not provided, cut off frequency defaults to 108 cps. If cut off
mode shape command is not provided, the first six modes will be considered by default. A maximum of i1 mode shapes will be
computed regardless of f1. If the CUT OFF FREQ f1 and CUT OFF MODE i1 commands are both entered, the programme will
report only those modes that lie within f1 frequency.

These commands can be specified from the dropdown list available under Miscellaneous Commands, in Figure 12.5, steps are
provided to include CUT OFF commands from GUI. CUT OFF commands should be specified after SUPPORT specification (Figure
12.6), if those are provided from input editor.
CUT OFF MODE SHAPE is specified as 10 for a model (Figure 12.6), and corresponding STAAD.Pro CE output file is shown in
Figures 12.7A and B.

Figure 12.5: CUT OFF command from GUI.

Figure 12.6: CUT OFF command is provided from input editor.

Figure 12.7A: Eigen solution for first 10 modes.

Figure 12.7B: Mass Participation Factor Table for 10 modes.

Individual Modal Response

The IMR load cases are simply the mode shape scaled to the magnitude that the mode has in this spectrum analysis case before it is
combined with other modes. If the IMR parameter is entered, then STAAD will create load cases for the first specified number of
modes for this response spectrum case. Each case will be created in a form like any other primary load case.
From the GUI, it can be assigned under the Response Spectrum Load case as shown in Figure 12.8.

Figure 12.8: Individual Modal Response Load case generation.

If IMR 3 along with Start load case 100 is used, the program will generate first three modal response load cases with a starting load 100.
The input editor looks like
PRINT ANALYSIS RESULTS command is provided from the Post-Analysis Commands to print Member end forces, Support
Reaction and Joint displacement in the output file.
From Figures 12.9–12.11 it is seen that STAAD.Pro CE output reports responses for response spectrum load case (load case number 1)
along with IMR load cases (load case numbers 100, 101 and 102).

Figure 12.9: Joint displacement report.

Figure 12.10: Support reaction report.

Figure 12.11: Member end forces report.

Mode Select
The structural response obtained from a spectrum analysis is the one resulting from all the considered modes calculated by the
programme. This command allows specification of a reduced set of active dynamic modes. All modes selected by this command remain
selected until a new MODE SELECT is specified. This command is used to limit the modes used in dynamic analysis to the modes
listed in this command and deactivate all other modes that were calculated but not listed in this command. If this command is not
entered, then all modes calculated are used in the dynamic analysis.
General format:
MODE SELECT mode-list
This command instructs the programme to calculate the response of the structure only using modes 1, 2, 3 and 4. Rest of the mode will
have no contribution in the analysis.
Note: If the structural response is required for combination of only modes 2, 4 and 6, then it should be specified as

MODE SELECT command should be provided after SUPPORT specification or after CUT OFF MODE SHAPE command.
Note: This command is not available in GUI.
In the output file from Figure 12.12, it is seen that time period of the structure is calculated for all six modes (default number of mode
shape), but the results are obtained using only first four modes as specified (Figures 12.13–12.16).

Figure 12.12: Time period of the structure for all six modes.

Figure 12.13: Calculation of modal weight considering only first four modes.

Figure 12.14: Spectral Acceleration value for first four modes.

Figure 12.15: Calculation of modal base action for first four modes.

Figure 12.16: Base shear in the X direction is the SRSS combination of first four modes.
SET Commands
SET command should be used in the input file after UNIT command and before the first JOINT command.
SET PARICIPATION FACTOR: SET PARICIPATION FACTOR or SET PART FACT command is used to print mode participation
factor along three global directions for each considered mode.
Modal participation factor, Pk in mode k of a structure is defined in the code IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 as the amount by which natural
mode ‘k’ contributes to overall oscillation of the structure during horizontal and vertical earthquake ground motion.
As per Clause 7.7.5.4b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, Modal participation factor, Pk of mode k is given by

where
ϕik = mode shape coefficient at floor i in mode k
Wi = seismic weight of floor i of the structure
n = number of floors of the structure

SET PART FACT command is not available in the GUI. It can be inserted from the STAAD.Pro CE input editor before the first JOINT
Command (Figure 12.17).
Mode participation factor reports in the STAAD.Pro CE output file as (Figure 12.18)

Figure 12.17: SET PART FACT command in input editor.

Figure 12.18: Mode participation factor.

SET PRINT 17: If the SET PRINT 17 command is used, then this calculation of modal base action is broken down into the
contributions to the base summation from each floor for each mode. This command is also not available in the GUI, in the following
figure this command is provided in input editor:

In Figure 12.19, Floor Modal Base Action is reported on using SET PRINT 17 command.
In Table 12.1, a sample example is shown to calculate modal base action.
Figure 12.19: Floor Modal Base Action and Modal Base Action in STAAD.Pro CE output.

Table 12.1 Calculation of Modal Base Action

Height (m) Floor Modal Base Action for Mode 2

25 60.05
20 70.14
15 56.82
10 38.32
5 16.86
 0 0
Modal Base Action ∑ 242.19

The detailed workflow for IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum Analysis can be understood on exercising the following problem
sets.
Problem Statement 12.1: General Response Spectrum Analysis
Section used for beams and columns: 400 mm × 400 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Rigid Diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 12.20 and 12.21
Compute design base shear (Vb) and storey shear force at each floor level (Vi) for the given data and compare the base shears obtained
from dynamic analysis and static analysis.
Solution:
The following steps are to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters.

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with Structure Type 5 and Zone V (Figures 12.22).

Figure 12.20: Building plan.

Figure 12.21: Building elevation.

Figure 12.22: Static seismic parameter.

Figure 12.23: IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum parameters.

2. A Seismic primary load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X is created under Load Cases Details.

3. SRSS combination method is used for the analysis.

4. Subsoil Class is selected as same as defined in the seismic load definition box. In this model, soil type is hard soil. A response
spectrum curve will generate using the spectral data (time period and spectral acceleration) for the specified soil type.

5. Five per cent damping (0.05) is used for all modes.

6. The response spectrum load is generated in the X direction with direction factor 0.072(((Z × I)/(2 × R)) = ((0.36 × 1.2)/(2 × 3)))
(Refer Figure 12.23).

7. Two other response spectrum loads are generated in Z (Title RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z) and the Y direction (RESPONSE
SPECTRUM Y) with same direction factor. All other parameters are same as defined in previous load case (Figure 12.24).

Figure 12.24: Generation of response spectrum load in three directions.

Figure 12.25: STAAD.Pro CE input editor showing response spectrum load cases.
8. Linear analysis is performed by PERFORM ANALYSIS command.

9. CUT OFF MODE SHAPE is specified as 40.

10. STAAD.Pro CE input editor looks like (Figure 12.25)

11. STAAD.Pro CE output is given in Figures 12.26–12.45:

Analysis in the X direction:

Figure 12.26: Frequency and time period for each mode.

Figure 12.27: Table of modal weight and generalized weight for each mode.

Figure 12.28: Dynamic weight, missing weight and modal weight in X, Z and Y directions.

Figure 12.29: Table contains Sa/g value and design horizontal acceleration spectrum (Ak) for each mode in the X direction for 5%
damping.

Figure 12.30: Peak storey shear in the X direction.

Figure 12.31: Modal base action–base shear in the X direction for each mode.

Figure 12.32: Mass participation factor and base shear in the X direction.

Figure 12.33: Design horizontal seismic coefficient Ah, base shear and minimum design lateral force calculation by static method in the
X direction.

Figure 12.34: Multiplying factor Response quantities in X direction.

Figure 12.35: Table contains Sa/g value and design horizontal acceleration spectrum for each mode in the Z direction for 5% damping.
Figure 12.36: Peak storey shear in the Z direction.

Figure 12.37: Modal base action – base shear in the Z direction for each mode.

Figure 12.38: Mass participation factor and base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 12.39: Design horizontal seismic coefficient Ah, base shear and minimum design lateral force calculation by static method in the
Z direction.

Figure 12.40: Multiplying factor Response quantities in Z direction.

Figure 12.41: Table contains Sa/g value and design vertical acceleration spectrum for each mode for 5% damping.

Figure 12.42: Peak storey shear in the Y direction.

Figure 12.43: Modal base action – base shear in the Y direction for each mode.
Figure 12.44: Mass participation factor and base shear in the Y direction.

Figure 12.45: Multiplying factor Response quantities in Y direction.

Problem Statement 12.2: Site-Specific Response Spectrum Analysis

Section used for beams and columns: 500 mm × 500 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF building
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figures 12.46 and 12.47.
Compute design base shear (Vb) and storey shear force at floor level (Vi) for the given data compare the base shears obtained from
dynamic analysis and static analysis.
Solution:
The following steps are to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: Self-weight is applied in three directions.

Seismic parameter (Figure 12.48):

A. Zone: 0.24
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 5
Figure 12.46: Building plan.

Figure 12.47: Building elevation.

C. Importance factor (I): 1

D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 2
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. A Seismic primary load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X is created under Load Cases Details.

3. SRSS combination method is used for the analysis.

4. Subsoil Class and Spectrum Type are selected as custom and Acceleration respectively. Time period and acceleration data pair
is provided. Here the input spectral data set is normalized set. A response spectrum curve is generated using the provided spectral
data (time period and spectral acceleration).
Figure 12.48: Static seismic parameter.

Spectral data pair is given Table 12.2.

5. In this model, Interpolation Type is selected as Linear.

6. SCALE is provided as 9.81 which is the value of acceleration due to gravity (g)

7. Five per cent damping is used for all modes.

8. The response spectrum load is generated in the X direction with direction factor 0.024(((Z × I )/(2 × R)) = ((0.24 × 1)/(2 × 5)))
(Refer Figure 12.49).

9. Two other response spectrum loads are generated in Z (Title RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z) and Y directions (RESPONSE
SPECTRUM Y) direction with same direction factor. All other seismic parameters are same as defined in previous load case
(Figure 12.50).
Table 12.2 Site-Specific Response Spectrum Data

Time Period Sa/g

0 1.013

0.03 1.44

0.04 1.6

0.05 1.76

0.058 1.867

0.059 1.867

0.06 1.92

0.061 1.92

0.062 1.92

0.065 1.973
0.07 2.027

0.071 2.08

0.074 2.133

0.084 2.24

0.094 2.4

0.104 2.56

0.114 2.507

0.12 2.507

0.121 2.507

0.124 2.507

0.126 2.507

0.133 2.507

0.601 2.507

0.604 2.507

0.617 2.507

0.622 2.507

0.632 2.507

0.667 2.507

0.767 2.187

0.867 1.92

0.967 1.707

1.067 1.547

1.167 1.44

1.267 1.333

1.367 1.227

1.467 1.12

1.567 1.067

1.667 1.013

1.767 0.96

1.867 0.907

1.967 0.853

2.067 0.8

2.167 0.747

2.267 0.747

2.367 0.693

2.467 0.693
2.567 0.64

2.667 0.64

2.767 0.587

2.867 0.587

2.967 0.587

3.067 0.533

3.167 0.533

3.267 0.533

3.367 0.48

3.467 0.48

3.544 0.48

3.559 0.48

3.666 0.48

3.765 0.427

3.865 0.427

3.965 0.427

4.017 0.427

Figure 12.49: IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum parameters.

Figure 12.50: Generation of response spectrum load in three directions.

10. Linear analysis is performed by PERFORM ANALYSIS command.

11. STAAD.Pro CE input editor looks like (Figure 12.51).

Figure 12.51: Generation of response spectrum load for site-specific spectrum data in STAAD.Pro CE input editor.

12. STAAD.Pro CE output includes frequency and time period of the structure, mass participation in percentage along three
directions, base shear and multiplying factor (Figures 12.52–12.54).

Analysis in the X direction:

Figure 12.52: Table contains Sa/g value and design horizontal acceleration spectrum for each mode in the X direction for 5% damping.

Figure 12.53: Table containing spectral acceleration value multiplied by g (acceleration due to gravity-provided SCALE parameter).

Figure 12.54: Design horizontal seismic coefficient Ah, base shear and minimum design lateral force calculation by static method in the
X direction.

Problem Statement 12.3: General Response Spectrum Analysis Considering Torsional Provision
Section used for beams and columns: 400 mm × 400 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in Figure 12.55 and 12.56.
Figure 12.55: Building plan.

Figure 12.56: Building elevation.

Compute design base shear (Vb) and storey shear force at floor level (Vi) and torsion moment for the given data and compare the base
shears obtained from dynamic analysis and static analysis (Figure 12.56).
Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: Only self-weight is applied in three directions

Seismic parameter (Figure 12.57):

A. Zone: 0.36
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
Figure 12.57: Static seismic parameter.

D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1

E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. A Seismic primary load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X1 is created under Load Cases Details.

3. SRSS combination method is used for the analysis.

4. Subsoil Class is selected as same as defined in the seismic load definition box. In this model, soil type is hard soil. A response
spectrum curve is generated using the spectral data (time period and spectral acceleration) for the specified soil type.

5. Five per cent damping is used for all modes.

Figure 12.58: Torsional Parameter to calculate design eccentricities as per Equation (10.1).

6. The response spectrum load is generated in the X direction with direction factor 0.072(((Z × I )/(2 × R)) = ((0.36 × 1.2)/(2 × 3))).

7. Torsion parameters DEC and ECC values are provided as 1.5 and 0.05 for calculating design eccentricity as per equation (10.1)
(Figure 12.58).
 Another response spectrum load is generated (RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2) along previous direction with same seismic
8.
parameters, but DEC and ECC values are provided as 1 and −0.05 for calculating design eccentricity as per equation (10.2)
(Figure 12.59).

9. Two other response spectrum loads are generated in the Z direction (Title RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1, RESPONSE
SPECTRUM Z2) with same direction factor. Provided torsion parameter in load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1 is as same
as in load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X1 and provided torsion parameter in load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2 is as
same as in load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2 (Figure 12.60).

Figure 12.59: Torsional Parameter to calculate design eccentricities as per Equation (10.2).

10. Linear analysis is performed by PERFORM ANALYSIS command.

11. CUT OFF MODE SHAPE is specified as 40.

12. STAAD.Pro CE input editor looks like (Figure 12.61).

Figure 12.60: Generation of Response Spectrum load in three directions.

Figure 12.61: STAAD.Pro CE input editor for IS 1893 Response Spectrum Load case.

13. STAAD.Pro CE output includes frequency and time period of the structure, mass participation in percentage along three
direction, base shear, design eccentricity, peak additional torsional moment and multiplying factor (Figures 12.62–12.69).
Analysis in the X direction:

Figure 12.62: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X1 calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.1).

Figure 12.63: Peak additional torsion in the X direction for load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X1.
Figure 12.64: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2 calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.2).

Figure 12.65: Peak additional torsion in the X direction for load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2.

Analysis in the Z direction:

Figure 12.66: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1 calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.1).

Figure 12.67: Peak additional torsion in the Z direction for load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1.
Figure 12.68: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2 calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.2).

Figure 12.69: Peak additional torsion in the Z direction for load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2.

Problem Statement 12.4: Verification Example of Response Spectrum Analysis

Section used for beams and columns: 300 mm × 300 mm for member number 1, 2, 3, 4
250 mm × 250 mm for member number 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
200 mm × 200 mm for member number 5, 6, 7, 8
Material used: Concrete
Support Condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF Building
Base Dimensions and floor heights of the building are given in the Figure 12.70A and Figure 12.70B
IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 Seismic parameter:
Zone: V; Zone Factor: 0.36
Response Reduction Factor (RF): 0.5
Importance Factor (I): 1

Figure 12.70A: Building plan.

Figure 12.70B: Building elevation.

Figure 12.70C: Loads used for mass modeling.

Type of the Structure (ST): RC MRF Building

Soil Type: Hard Soil
Damping: 5%
Loading: Nodal Load of intensity 10 kN at node 1 to 8 along X, Y and Z direction as shown in Figure 12.70C
Compute Design Base Shear in three orthogonal direction by Dynamic Analysis and compare the base shears obtained from dynamic
analysis and static analysis.
Figure 12.70D: IS 1893 2016 response spectrum load commands.
Appendix

A.1 Solution of Problem Statement 4.1: RC MRF Building

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: Hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 1, RC MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 11 m × 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period in X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Calculation of total seismic weight:

Self-weight of the structure

Density of concrete 23.5616 kN/m3

 Dimension of beam 0.5 m × 0.5 m
Total weight of the beam = density × sectional dimension of the beam × number of floor × length of the beam at one floor

Dimension of column 0.5 m × 0.5 m

Total weight of the column = density × sectional dimension of the column × number of columns at each floor × length of the
column × number of floor

Total floor weight of the structure = floor load intensity × area of each floor × number of floors

Total seismic weight of the structure, W = (1413.696 + 1060.272 + 792) kN

= 3265.968 kN
Calculation of base shear along X and Z axes:
As per Clause 7.6.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design base shear:

Calculation of minimum design lateral force along both X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.2.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, minimum design lateral force:

VBmin = ρ% × W

From Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, ρ for Zone II is 0.7%.

Design base shear in X and Z directions:

Since, VBmin < VB

Design base shear, VB = 92.067 kN

Calculation of design base shear along Y axes:

As per Clause 7.6.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design lateral force at floor level:

As per Clause 7.6.3a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Wi = seismic weight of ith floor

hi = height of ith floor measured from the base
VB = design base shear
Qi = design lateral force at ith floor
n = number of stories in building

Seismic weight at each floor:

As per Clause 7.4.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, total Seismic weight at first, second, third floor:
 Self-weight of the beam = 23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × [{3 × (5 + 6)} + {3 × (4 + 5)}] kN
= 353.424 kN
Self-weight of the column = (23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × 9 × 5) kN
= 265.068 kN
Floor weight of the structure = (2 × 11 × 9) kN
= 198 kN
Total seismic weight at first, second, third floor = (353.424 + 265.068 + 198) kN
= 816.492 kN

Total seismic weight at roof

Self-weight of the beam = 23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × [{3 × (5 + 6)} + {3 × (4 + 5)}] kN
= 353.424 kN
Self-weight of the column = {23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × 9 × (5/2)} kN
= 132.534 kN
Floor weight of the structure = (2 × 11 × 9) kN
= 198 kN
Total seismic weight at roof = (353.424 + 132.534 + 198) kN
= 683.958 kN

Using the equation from Clause 7.6.3a Design lateral force along three orthogonal directions,

VB_x, VB_z, VB_y = design base shear in X, Z, Y directions, respectively

Qi_x, Qi_z, Qi_y = design lateral force at floor i in X, Z, Y directions, respectively

A.2 Solution of Problem Statement 4.2: RC–Steel Composite MRF Building

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 2, RC–Steel composite MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 11 m × 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.3 Solution of Problem Statement 4.3: Steel MRF Building

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 3, Steel MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 11 m × 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in X and Z directions:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.4 Solution of Problem Statement 4.4: Computation of Base Shear of a Building with RC Structural Wall
having time period greater than that of All Other Buildings

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 4, buildings with RC structural walls
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building, h: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 21 m × 14 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

where
h = height of the building, in m

Awi = effective cross-sectional area of wall i in first storey of the building, in m2

Lwi = length of structural wall i in the first storey in the considered direction of lateral forces, in m

d = base dimension of the plinth level along the considered direction of earthquake shaking, in m
Nw = number of walls in the considered direction of earthquake shaking

Along X and Z axes approximate natural time period of the structure:

where wi = width of the ith wall.

Since, Ta_x for ST 4 > Ta_x for ST 5 and Ta_z for ST 4 > Ta_z for ST 5

So, time period in X = Ta_x for ST 5 = 0.39279 s

Time period in Z = Ta_z for ST 5 = 0.48107 s

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:
As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient: Along X,
For hard soil and for range 0 s < Ta < 0.4 s

(SA/g) = 2.5

Along Z,
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X,

Along Z,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.5 Solution of Problem Statement 4.5: Computation of Time Period of a Building with RC Structural Wall
having time period less than that of All Other Buildings

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.36

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 4, buildings with RC structural walls
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building, h: 25 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 16 m × 13 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure along X and Z axes:
Since Ta_x for ST 4 < Ta_x for ST 5 and Ta_z for ST 4 < Ta_z for ST 5

So, time period in X = Ta_x for ST 4 = 0.522773 s

Time period in Z = Ta_z for ST 4 = 0.542642 s

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:
Along X:
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Along Z,
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X:

Along Z,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.6 Solution of Problem Statement 4.6: All Other Buildings

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 5, all other buildings
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building, h: 20 m
Base dimension in X direction, dx: 11 m
Base dimension in Z direction, dz: 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:
Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:
Along X axis,
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Along Z axis,
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X,
Along Z,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.7 Solution of Problem Statement 5.1: DX DZ Parameter

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 5, all other buildings
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Base dimension in X direction, dx: 15 m
Base dimension in Z direction, dz: 4 m
Height of the building, h: 7 m

Calculation of height of the building:

hi = height of the floor i measured from the base

Ai = floor area at floor i

h = effective height of the building

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:
Along X direction,

Along Z direction,
Calculation of design acceleration coefficient in X and Z directions:
As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0 s < Ta < 0.4 s

(SA/g) = 2.5

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.8 Solution of Problem Statement 5.2: HT Parameter

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 5
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of building (HT): 7 m

Calculation of effective height of the building, approximate natural time period (Ta), design acceleration coefficient (SA/g), design
horizontal seismic coefficient (Ah) and design vertical seismic coefficient (Av) can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 5.1.
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.9 Solution of Problem Statement 5.3: PX and PZ Parameter

Zone: 0.36
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Period in X direction (PX): 0.348568 s
Period in Z direction (PZ): 0.426907 s
Base dimension along X direction, dx: 15 m
 Base dimension along X direction, dz: 10 m
Height of the building, h: 15 m

Approximate natural time period of the structure:

Along X direction,
As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Along Z direction,

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:
Along X direction:
For hard soil and for range 0 s < Ta < 0.4 s

(SA/g) = 2.5

Along Z direction:
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X direction:

Along Z direction:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.10 Solution of Problem Statement 5.4: DM Parameter

 Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 1
Damping ratio (DM): 0.02 (2%)
Height of the building (h): 12 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the approximate fundamental natural time period Ta of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design acceleration coefficient:
For hard soil and for Tax /Taz 0.4 s < T < 4.00 s

Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

As per Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002, for 2% damping multiplying factor will be 1.4.

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Calculation for the design seismic acceleration spectral value Av:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.11 Solution of Problem Statement 5.5: DF Parameter

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 1, RC MRF building
Multiplying factor for SA (DF): 1.4
Base dimension, dx × dz : 5 m × 5 m
Height of the building: 12 m
Calculation of approximate natural time period in X and Z directions:
As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

DF = multiplying factor for SA is 1.4

Design acceleration coefficient = 2.0679 × 1.4 = 2.895193

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in X and Z directions:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.12 Solution of Problem Statement 6.1: Buildings with Fundamental Time Period Greater Than 4 s

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
 Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 5
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Base dimension, dx × dz: 3 m × 5 m
Height of the building : 80 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the approximate fundamental natural time period Ta of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design acceleration coefficient:
For hard soil and for Tax > 4.00 s

Along X direction,

SA/gx = 0.25

Along Z direction,
For hard soil and for 0.40 s < Taz < 4.00 s

Calculation of horizontal seismic coefficient:

Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

Calculation for the design seismic acceleration spectral value Av:

Calculation for minimum design lateral force:

As per Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, percentage of minimum design horizontal lateral force for Zone III is 1.1%, that is, 0.011
Since the value of percentage of minimum design lateral force is greater than and , that is,

we will consider the greater value of horizontal acceleration coefficient (0.011) for calculating the base shear (VB).
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.13 Solution of Problem Statement 7.1: Consideration of Vertical Motion in Seismic Analysis

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 1
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Calculation for the design seismic acceleration spectral value Av:

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the value of SA/g is fixed to 2.5 for the calculation of Av:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.14 Solution of Problem Statement 8.1: Consideration of Minimum Base Shear Criteria

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 5
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Base dimension, dx × dz: 3 m × 3 m

Height of the building: 50 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:
As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the approximate fundamental natural time period Ta of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design acceleration coefficient:
For hard soil and for
Along X direction,

Along Z direction,
For hard soil and for

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

Calculation for minimum design lateral force:

As per Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, percentage of minimum design horizontal lateral force for Zone III is 1.1%, that is, 0.011.
Since the value of percentage of minimum design lateral force is greater than and , that is,

we will consider the greater value of horizontal acceleration coefficient (0.011) for calculating the base shear (VB).
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation can be done using the process explained in Solution of Problem Statement
4.1.

A.15 Solution of Problem Statement 9.1: Seismic Analysis of Structures Having Structural Components Below
the Ground Level

Zone: 0.16
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): RC MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Ground level (GL): 6
Height of building (HT): 6
Solution:
Calculation of approximate natural time period in X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0 s < Ta < 0.4 s,

(SA/g) = 2.5

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in X and Z axes:

Above ground level,

Below ground level,

As per Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of unreduced design vertical seismic coefficient:

Above ground level,

As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Below ground level,

As per Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Calculation of total seismic weight:

10 kN/m loading is applied in all beams
As per Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016:

Above ground level,

Total seismic weight of the structure above ground level, Ws = UDL × total length of the beam × number of floors above ground level

Below ground level,

Total seismic weight of the structure below ground level, Wu = UDL × total length of the beam × number of floors below ground level

Calculation of base shear along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design base shear:

Above ground level,

Below ground level,

Calculation of unreduced design base shear along Y axis:

As per Clause 7.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Above ground level,

Below ground level,

Calculation of minimum design lateral force along both X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.2.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

VBmin = ρ% × W

From Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, ρ for Zone III is 1.1%.

Above ground level,

Below ground level,

Design base shear in X and Z directions:

Above ground level,
Since VBmin < VBsx; VBmin < VBsz

Design base shear along X direction = VBsx

Design base shear along Z direction = VBsz

Below ground level,

Since VBminu < VBux; VBminu < VBuz

Design base shear along X direction = VBux

Design base shear along Z direction = VBuz

Seismic weight at each floor:

As per Clause 7.6.3a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Total seismic weight of the structure above ground level, Wi, Wj = UDL × total length of the beam

Calculation of design lateral force at floor level:

Meanings of Qi, Qj, Wi, Wj, hi, hi, VBs, VBu have already been explained in Chapter 9. Using Equation (9.1) table of design lateral
force along three orthogonal directions

Using Equation (9.2) table of design lateral force along three orthogonal directions

A.16 Solution of Problem Statement 10.1: Analysis of Structure Considering Torsional Provision

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.36

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): all other buildings
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 15 m
Base dimension, d: 15 m × 15 m
Calculation of approximate natural time period in X and Z directions:
As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient in X and Z directions:

As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration coefficient:
For hard soil and for range 0 s < Ta < 0.4 s

(SA/g) = 2.5

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in X and Z directions:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of total seismic weight:

Self-weight of the structure,

Density of concrete 25 kN/m3

Dimension of beam 0.3 m × 0.3 m
Total weight of the beam = density × sectional dimension of the beam × number of floor × length of the beam at one floor

Dimension of column 0.3 m × 0.3 m

Total weight of the column = density × sectional dimension of the column × number of columns at each floor × length of the column ×
number of floor

Total floor weight of the structure = area of each floor × load intensity × number of floor

Total seismic weight of the structure, W = (560.25 + 337.5 + 990) kN

= 1887.75 kN

Calculation of base shear along X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design base shear:

Calculation of minimum design lateral force along both X and Z axes:

As per Clause 7.2.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

VBmin = ρ% × W

From Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, ρ for Zone V is 2.4%.

Design base shear in X and Z directions:

Since, VBmin < VBx ; VBmin < VBz

Design base shear in X direction = VBx

Design base shear in Z direction = VBz

Seismic weight at each floor:

As per Clause 7.4.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, total seismic weight at first and second floor,
Calculation of torsion moment:

MYi = Qi × edi

MYi = torsion moment at floor i

Qi = design lateral force at floor i

edi = design eccentricity at floor i

Table of design lateral force using equation given in Clause 7.6.3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

where
QXi = design lateral force in X direction

QZi = design lateral force in Z direction

Calculation of design eccentricity:

CM = centre of mass
CR = centre of rigidity or centre of stiffness
esi = static eccentricity of floor i, distance between centre of mass and centre of resistance = CM-CR

bi = floor plan dimension of floor i, perpendicular to the direction of force

* Note : Natural torsion is automatically included in analysis.

That is why in the first case a twisting moment with modified eccentricity of (DEC-1) = (1.5-1) = 0.5 and in the second case a twisting
moment with modified eccentricity of (DEC-1) = (1-1) = 0 will act at CM. So, the value of design eccentricity in the first case will be
(0.5esi + 0.05bi) and in the second case will be (-0.05bi).

Table of torsional moment at floor level

 Torsion moment (Qi × edi) (kN m)

Floor level For load in X direction

h (m) MYi (kN m) when edi = (0.5esi + 0.05bi) MYi (kN m) when edi = -0.05bi

15 211.0405943 × 1.124 = 237.20962804444 211.0405943 × (-0.75) = -158.280445759191

10 103.0035245 × 1.057 = 108.874725421371 103.0035245 × (-0.75) = -77.2526433926475

5 25.75088113 × 0.94 = 24.2058282630295 25.75088113 × (-0.75) = -19.3131608481619

Torsion moment (Qi × edi) (kN m)

Floor level For load in Z direction

h (m) MYi (kN m) when edi = (0.5esi + 0.05bi) MYi (kN m) when edi = -0.05bi

15 211.0405943 × 0.888 = 187.404047778882 211.0405943 × (-0.75) = -158.280445759191

10 103.0035245 × 0.8915 = 91.8276421127269 103.0035245 × (-0.75) = -77.2526433926475

5 25.75088113 × 0.9495 = 24.4504616337729 25.75088113 × (-0.75) = -19.3131608481619

A.17 Solution of Problem Statement 12.4: Verification Example of General Response Spectrum Analysis

Zone V, Zone factor: 0.36

Importance factor: 1
Building type: All other building, structure type is 5
Response reduction factor: 5
Direction factor: (((Z × I)/(2 × R)) = ((0.36×1)/(2×5))) = 0.036
Soil type: Hard soil

Mode shape obtained from output:

Time period and frequency of each mode obtained from the output:

Mode number Frequency (cps) Time period (s)

1 1.635 0.61163
2 1.795 0.55702
3 2.288 0.43713
4 4.662 0.21448
5 6.094 0.16409
6 6.167 0.16214
7 7.373 0.13564
8 9.059 0.11038
9 40.697 0.02457
10 40.861 0.02447
11 60.967 0.0164

Calculation of SA / g and Ak, along X direction:

As per Clause 6.4.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design acceleration coefficient (SA/g) of the structure for hard type of soil:
Design horizontal acceleration spectrum value, Ak = direction factor × (SA/g)
Each node has 6 degree of freedom
Total number of joints = 12
Total number of restrained joints = 4
Total number of joints that are not restrained = 8
Total number of degree of freedom = 12 × 6 = 72
Total number of restrained degree of freedom = 4 × 6 = 24
Total number of degree of freedom that are not restrained = 8 × 6 = 48

Calculation of modal mass multiplied by g (acceleration due to gravity):

MK = modal mass of kth mode

Φik = mode shape coefficient along i degree of freedom for kth mode

Wi = applied load at ith degree of freedom

Applied Wx-translational, Wz-translational, Wy-translational at nodes 1–8 = 10 kN

For Mode 1,
Along X direction,

MX1 = modal mass in X direction

n = total number of nodes(joints) that are not restrained
Wxn = load applied at nth node in X translational direction
Wx1, Wx2, …, Wx8 = 10 kN
Xn = mode Shape coefficient at nth node in X translation direction
Wi = applied load at ith degree of freedom
ϕi1 = for Mode 1, mode shape coefficient at ith degree of freedom

Along Y direction,

MY1 = modal mass in Y direction

Wyn = load applied at nth node in Y translational direction
Wy1, Wy2, …, Wy8 = 10 kN
Yn = mode shape coefficient at nth node in Y translation direction

Along Z direction,

MZ1 = modal mass in Z direction

 Wzn = load applied at nth node in Z translational direction
Wz1, Wz2, …, Wz8 = 10 kN
Zn = mode shape coefficient at nth node in Z translation direction

Modal mass (multiplied by g) for all considered mode at X, Y and Z translational directions:

Calculation of mode participating factor:

Pk = mode participation factor of kth mode

For Mode 1,
Along X direction,

PX1 = mode participation factor in X direction

Modal mass along Y direction,

PY1 = mode participation factor in X direction

Modal mass along Z direction,

PZ1 = mode participation factor in X direction

Mode participation factor for all considered mode at X, Y and Z translational directions

Calculation of Modal Mass and Mode Participation factor for all modes in X, Y and Z direction
Mass participation factor in X, Z and Y directions:
Total applied load in X direction = 80 kN
Total applied load in Z direction = 80 kN
Total applied load in Y direction = 80 kN
Mass participation factor in % = (Modal mass/Total applied load) × 100%

For Mode 1, mass participation in % in X direction = (53.092/80) × 100% = 66.365 × %

Calculation of design lateral force at each floor at each mode:

Design lateral force at each floor in each mode: peak lateral force ϕik at floor i in mode k is given by

where
AK = design horizontal acceleration spectrum value using natural period of oscillation TK of mode k obtained from dynamic analysis.

For Mode 1 at Node 1 design lateral force in X direction = Ak × mode shape coefficient (X1) × mode participation factor (PX1) × Wx1

Design lateral force for each mode

Storey shear force at floor level for each mode,

For Mode 1 in X direction, storey shear at second floor = (0.239 + 0.293 + 0.745 + 0.745) = 2.076 kN
Storey shear at first floor = (0.134 + 0.134 + 0.392 + 0.392) = 1.052 kN
Storey shear along X direction for each considered mode

Base shear for each mode in X direction

For Mode 1 base shear = (2.075 + 1.052) kN = 3.127 kN
Base shear for each considered mode

Base shear along X direction after SRSS direction,

Base shear obtained by equivalent static method, VBx = 0.0854 × 80 kN = 6.832 kN

As, VBx>Vbx

As per Clause 7.7.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 multiplying

factor = (VBx / Vbx) = (6.832 / 3.498) = 1.9526

Along Z direction,
The above calculations can be repeated for computation of response spectrum base shear.
Base shear obtained from response spectrum analysis after SRSS combination, Vbz = 4.619 kN

Base shear obtained by equivalent static method, VBz = 0.0854 × 80 kN = 6.832 kN

As, VBz>Vbz

As per Clause 7.7.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 multiplying factor = (VBz / Vbz) = (6.832 / 4.619) = 1.479

Along Y direction,
The calculations performed to find out base shear in X direction can be repeated
Multiplying factor as per Clause 7.7.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 = maximum of ((VBx/Vbx),(VBz/Vbz)) = (1.9526,1.479) = 1.9526
Bibliography

Agarwal, P. and M. Shrikhande 2006, Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Prentice Hall, New Delhi.

Aki, K. 1988, ‘Local site effects on strong ground motion’, Proceedings of the Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II – Recent
Advances in Ground Motion Evaluation, ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 20, Mexico, pp. 103–55.

American Concrete Institute 1971, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-71), ACI Standard, pp. 318–71.

Amrhein, J.E. 1972, Reinforced Masonry Engineering Handbook, Masonry Institute of America, Los Angeles, CA.

Anderson, J.C. 2001, ‘Dynamic response of structures’, In F. Naeim (Ed.), The Seismic Design Handbook, 2nd ed., Kluwer Academic
Publisher, The Netherlands.

Arias, A. 1970, ‘A measure of earthquake intensity’, In R.J. Hansen (Ed.), Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, pp. 438–69.

Armstrong, I.E. 1972, ‘Capacity design of reinforced concrete frames for ductile earthquake performance’, Bulletin of the New Zealand
Society for Earthquake Engineering, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 64–71.

Arnold, C. 1991, ‘The seismic response of nonstructural elements in building’, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for
Earthquake Engineering, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 167–172.

Arnold, C. 1998, ‘Architectural aspects of seismic resistant design’, 11th V World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

Bath, M. 1966, ‘Earthquake energy and magnitude’, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, L.H. Press, Ahren, India, pp. 115–65.

Benero, V.V., J.E. Anderson, H. Krawinkler, E. Miranda et al. 1991, ‘Design guidelines or ductility and drift limits’, Report No.
UCB/EERC-91/15, Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of California.

Berg, G.V. 1989, Elements of Structural Dynamics, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 268 pp.

Blume, J.A. 1970, ‘The motion and damping of buildings relative to seismic response spectra’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, vol. 60, no. l, pp. 231–59.

Bolt, B.A. 1970, ‘Chap. 2, Causes of earthquakes’, In R.L. Wiegel (Ed.), Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Bolt, B.A. 1988, Earthquakes, W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, 282 pp.

Bolt, B.A. 1989, ‘The nature of earthquake ground motion’, In F. Naeim (Ed.), The Seismic Design Handbook, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York.

Booth, E. 1994, Concrete Structures in Earthquake Regions, Longman Scientific and Technical, Longman Group UK Limited.

Bruce, A.B. 2004, Earthquakes, 5th ed., W.H. Freeman and Company, New York.

BSSC 1994A, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for New Buildings, Part I: Provisions,
Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.

BSSC 1994B, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for Wind Buildings, Part 11:
Complimentary, Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.

Buckle, I.G. 2000, ‘Passive control of structures for seismic loads’, 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand.

Casagrande, A. 1976, ‘Liquefaction and cyclic mobility of sands: a critical review’, Harvard Soil Mechanics Series, vol. 88, Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA.

Castro, G. 1991, ‘On the behaviour of soils during earthquakes-liquefaction’, Proceedings of the NSF/EPRI Workshop on Dynamic Soil
Properties and Site Characterization, EPRI NP-7337, vol. 2, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 1–36.

Castro, G. and S.J. Poijlos 1977, ‘Factors affecting liquefaction and cyclic mobility’, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,
ASCE, vol. 106, no. GT6, pp. 501–6.
Chopra, A.K. 1995, Dynamics of Structures, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 729 pp.

Chopra, A.K. 2005, Earthquake Dynamics of Structures: A Primer, 2nd ed., Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, NICEE, IIT
Kanpur, pp. 128.

Chopra, A.K. 2007, Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, 3rd ed., Pearson Education
Publishing, New York, pp. 912.

Chopra, A.K., D.P. Clough, and R. W. Clough 1973, ‘Earthquake resistance of buildings with a “soft” first storey’, Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, India, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 347–55.

Chowdhury, R.N. 1978. Slope Analysis, Elsevier, New York, 423 pp.

Christian, J.T., J.M. Roesset, and C.S. Desai 1977, ‘Two- and three-dimensional dynamic analyses’, In C.S. Desai and J.T. Christian
(Eds.), Numerical Methods in Geotechnical Engineering, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, pp. 683–718.

Clough, R.W. 1970, ‘Chap. 12, Earthquake response of structures’, In R.L. Wiegel (Ed.), Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 307–34.

Clough, R.W. and J. Penzien 1975, Dynamics of Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York, 634 pp.

Colaco, J.P. 1971, ‘Preliminary design of shear walls for tall buildings’, ACI Journal, vol. 5, pp. 156–176.

Craig, R.R. Jr. 1990, Structural Dynamics, John Wiley, New York, 1981.

DeMets et al. 2002–03, ‘Ductile detailing of reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic forces’, Current Plate Motions, vol. 101,
Edition 1.2, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, pp. 425–78, 1990.13920.

DEQ 2000, A Report on Chamoli Earthquake of March 29, 1999, Department of Earthquake Engineering, University of Roorkee,
Roorkee.

Dutta, T.K. 2010, Seismic Analysis of Structures, John Wiley & Sons, 454 pp.

EERI 2002, ‘Bhuj, India Earthquake of January 26, 2001: reconnaissance report’, Earthquake Spectra, Supplement to vol. 18, pp. 216–
224.

Emilio, R., Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures, Pentech Press, London.

Endo, T. et al. 1984, ‘Practices of seismic retrofit of existing concrete structures in Japan’, Eighth World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, San Francisco, CA.

FEMA-306, ‘Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings’, ATC-43 Project, Applied Technology Council,
California, CA.

Fintel, M. 1985, ‘Multi-storey structures (ch. 10) by M. Fintel, Earthquake resistant structures (ch. 12), by Aranaldo T. Derecho and
Mark Fintel’, Handbook of Concrete Engineering, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

Florin, V.A. and P.L. Ivanov 1961, ‘Liquefaction of saturated sand soil’, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Paris.

Gioncu, V. and P.M. Mazzolani 2002, Ductility of Seismic Resistant Steel Structures, Spon Press, New York.

Goel, R.K., ‘Performance of buildings during the January 26, 2001’, Bhuj Earthquake, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,
Oakland, CA.

Gould, P.L. 1965, ‘Interaction of shear wall-frame system in multistorey buildings ’, Journal of MCI, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 45–70.

Goyal, A., R. Sinha, M. Chaudhari, and K. Jaiswal 2004, ‘Performance of reinforced concrete buildings in Ahmedabad during Bhuj
earthquake January 26, 2001’, Workshop on Recent Earthquakes of Chamoli and Bhuj, vol. I, Roorkee, India.

GSI 1992, Uttarkashi Earthquake, October 20, 1991, Geological Survey of India, Special Publication No. 30.

GSI 1995, Uttarkashi Earthquake, Geological Survey of India.

Gutenberg, B. and C.F. Richter 1945, Seismicity of Earth and Related Phenomenon, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Guevara, L. T. and L.E. Garcia 2005, ‘The captive and short column effect earthquake’, Spectra, vol. 21, no. l, pp. 141–60.
Housner, G.W. 1947, ‘Characteristics of strong motion earthquakes’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, vol. 37, no. 1,
pp. 19–31.

Housner, G.W. 1952, ‘Spectrum intensities of strong motion earthquakes’, Proceedings of the Symposium of Earthquake and Blast
Effects on Structures, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 21–36.

IS-456 2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete-Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-1893 2016, Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part 1, BIS, New Delhi.

IS-1905 1985, Code of Practice for Structural Use of Unreinforced Masonry, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-3935 1993, Repair and Seismic Strengthening of Buildings-Guidelines, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-4326 1993, Earthquake Resistant Design and Construction of Buildings Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-13827 1993, Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving Earthquake Resistance of Earthen Buildings, BIS, New Delhi.

IS-13828 1993, Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving Earthquake Resistance of Low Strength Masonry Buildings, New Delhi.

IS-13920 2016, Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces-Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.

IS-13935 1993, Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.

Kramer, S.L. 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, NJ.

Kramer, S.L. 2003, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Pentice-Hall, International Series, New Jersey, NJ.

Krawinkler, H. and B. Alavi 1998, ‘Development of improved design procedures for near-fault ground motions’, SMIP98, Seminar on
Utilization of Strong Motion Data, Oakland, CA.

Mallick, D.V. and R.J. Severn 1968, ‘Dynamic characteristics of infilled frames’, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers,
Mexico, vol. 39, pp. 261–87.

Martin, G.R., W.D.L. Finn, and H.B. Seed 1975, ‘Fundamentals of liquefaction under cyclic loading’, Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering Division, ASCE, vol. WI, no. GTS, pp. 423–38.

Matthiesen, J. 1982, ‘Recommendations concerning seismic design of zonation’, Critical Aspects of Earthquake Ground Motion and
Building Damage Potential, ATC 10-1, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, pp. 213–46.

Mcguire, R.K. 1977, ‘Seismic design spectra and mapping procedures using hazard analysis based directly on oscillator response’,
Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, vol. 5, pp. 211–34.

Mcguire, R.K. 1978, ‘Seismic ground motion parameter relations’, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, vol. 104,
no. GT4, pp. 481–90.

Medhekar, M.S. and S.K. Jain 1993, ‘Seismic behaviour design and detailing of RC shear walls, Part 1: Behaviour and strength’, Indian
Concrete Journal, vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 311–8.

Murty, C.V.R and A.W. Charleson 2010, Earthquake Design Concepts, NICEE, India, pp. 684–37.

NEHRP 1997, ‘Recommended provisions for seismic regulation for new buildings and other structures’, Technical Report, Building
Safety Council for Federal Emergency: Management Agency, Washington, DC.

Richter, C.E. 1935, ‘An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, vol. 25, pp. 1–32.

Richter, C.F. 1958, Elementary Seismology, Freeman, San Francisco, CA.

Richart, F.E., J.R. Hall, and R.O. Woods 1970, Vibrations of Soils and Foundations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Riddell, R. and J.E.D.L. Llera 1996, ‘Seismic analysis and design: current practice and future trends’, 11th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Mexico.

Robinson, W.H. 1996, ‘Latest advances in seismic isolation’, 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico.
Rodriguez, M. and R. Park 1991, ‘Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete building for seismic resistance’, Earthquake Spectra,
vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 138–142.

Salse, E.A.B. and M. Fintel 1973, ‘Strength, stiffness and ductility properties of slender shear walls’, Proceedings of the 51th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol. 1, Rome, pp. 919–28.

Satake, K. 2002, In Lee et al. (Eds.), Tsunamis, International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology – Part B,
ELSEVIER Journal, Published Date: 12th September 2002, pp. 437–51.

Savarensky, Y.F. and D.P. Klrnos 1955, Elements of Seismology and Seismometry, State Press of Technical-Theoretical Literature,
Moscow, 543 pp.

Seed, H.B. and I.M. Idriss 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute, Berkeley, CA, 134 pp.

Shrikhande, M., J.D. Das, M.K. Bansal, A. Kumar, S. Basu, and B. Chandra 2001, ‘Strong motion characteristics of Uttarkashi
earthquake of October 20, 1991 and its engineering significance’, In O.P. Varma (Ed.), Research Highlights in Earth System-
Science: Seismicity, vol. 2, Indian Geological Congress, Roorkee, India, pp. 337–42.

Shepherd, R. 1967, ‘Determination of seismic design loads in a framed structure’, New Zealand Engineering, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 56–61.

Silva, W.J. 1988, Soil Response to Earthquake Ground Motion, EPRI Report NP-5747, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto,
CA.

Singhal, A. 1971, ‘Elastic earthquake resistance of multi-storey buildings’, The Structural Engineer, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 397–412.

Singhal, A., P.R. Bose, A. Bose, and V. Prakash 2001, ‘Destruction of multistoreyed buildings in Kutch earthquake of January 26,
2001’, Workshop on Recent Earthquakes of Chamoli and Bhuj, vol. II, Roorkee, India.

Smith, S.W. 1976, ‘Determination of maximum earthquake magnitude’, Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 351–4.

SP-34 1987, Handbook on Concrete Reinforcement and Detailing, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

SP-20 (S&T) 1991, Handbook on Masonry Design and Construction, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

Stafford-Smith, B. 1996, ‘Behaviour of square infilled frames’, Journal of the Structural Division, Proceedings of ASCE, Mexico, vol.
91, no. ST, pp. 381–403.

Sugano, S. 1981, ‘Seismic strengthening of existing reinforced concrete buildings in Japan’, Bulletin of the New Zealand National
Society for Earthquake Engineering, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 232–240.

Surtees, J.O. and A.P. Mann 1970, ‘End plate connections in plastically designed structures’, Conference on Joints in Structures,
Institution of Structural Engineers and the University of Sheffield.

Tally, N. 2001, Design of Reinforced Masonry Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Taranath, S.B. 2005, Wind and Earthquake Resistant Buildings, Marcel Dekker, Los Angeles, CA, 731 pp.

Teran, A. and J. Ruiz 1992, ‘Reinforced concrete jacketing of existing structures’, 10th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Madrid, Spain.

Teal, E.J. 1968, ‘Structural steel seismic frames-drift ductility requirements’, Proceedings of the 37th Annual Convention Structural
Engineers Association of California, Mexico.

Thakkar, S.K., R.N. Dubey, and P. Agarwal 1996, ‘Damages and lessons learnt from recent Indian earthquakes’, Symposium on
Earthquake Effects on Structures, Plant and Machinery, New Delhi.

Thomson, W.T. 1988, Theory of Vibration, 3rd ed., CBS Publishers, New Delhi.

Wiegel, R.L., Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Index

A
Absolute sum method (ABS), 12-3, 12-5
Acceleration, 12-9
peak ground acceleration (PGA), 2-5–2-6
spectral acceleration coefficient, 4-6
spectrum, 2-9, 7-1–7-4
zero period acceleration (ZPA), 2-5–2-6
Accidental eccentricity, 12-6
Accidental torsion, 4-7, 10-1
Assam earthquake of 1897, 2-2

B
Base
dimensions, 4-6
shear, 5-4, 5-7, 5-8, 12-10
BASE, 3-7
Buildings
base shear with RC Structural wall, A-5–A-7
DF parameter, A-15
DM parameter, A-13–A-15
DX DZ parameter, A-10–A-12
earthquake-resistant, 2-1–2-3
elevation, 5-2, 5-6
force flow path in, 3-3–3-4
fundamental time period greater than 4 s, 6-1–6-6, A-16–A-17
height, 4-6
HT parameter, A-12
PX and PZ parameter, A-12–A-13
RC MRF, 4-8–4-16, A-1–A-4
RC-steel composite MRF, 4-17–4-18, A-4
with RC structural walls, 4-20–4-27
steel MRF, 4-18–4-20, A-5
time period, A-7–A-9

C
Centre of mass (CM), 10-1, 12-3
Centres of resistance (CR), 10-1
Closely spaced method (CSM), 12-3, 12-5
Complete quadratic combination (CQC), 12-3, 12-4
CUT OFF FREQUENCY, 12-13–12-15
CUT OFF MODE SHAPE, 12-13–12-15

D
Damping
ratio, 4-5–4-6, 12-9
type, 12-5–12-6
Depth of foundation, 4-6
Design basis earthquake (DBE), 2-6–2-9
Design eccentricity, 10-2, 12-10
Design horizontal acceleration spectrum, 2-9
Design seismic acceleration spectral value, 7-1–7-2
DIAPHRAGM, 3-7
Diaphragm modelling, 3-6
Dip slip, 1-5–1-6
Direction factor, 12-6
Ductility, earthquake-resistant building, 2-2
Duration of primary tremor, 1-7.
See also Earthquakes
Dynamic analysis
commands for, 12-13–12-52
IS 1893 (Part I):2016
seismic parameter for response spectrum analysis, 12-4–12-12
response spectrum, 12-2–12-4
Dynamic eccentricity, 12-7
Dynamic weight, 12-9

E
Earth and interiors, 1-3–1-4
Earthquakes. See also Specific earthquakes effects, 1-1
energy, 1-8
engineering problems and prospects, 1-2–1-3
faults, 1-5
force flow path in buildings, 3-3–3-4
measurement parameters, 1-8–1-9
observation, 1-10
predictions, 1-3
seismology, 1-3–1-12
Earthquake-disaster mitigation, 1-2
Earthquake-resistant building, 2-1–2-3
Eccentricities, 10-2
accidental, 12-6
design, 12-10
dynamic, 12-7
Epicentral distance, 1-9
Equivalent static method, 2-8–2-9
base shear determination, 4-2–4-3
base shear vertical distribution, 4-4
buildings with RC structural walls, 4-20–4-27
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 seismic parameter, 4-4–4-8
minimum design earthquake horizontal lateral force, 4-3–4-4
RC MRF building, 4-8–4-16
RC–steel composite MRF building, 4-17–4-18
seismic load cases, parameters used in, 4-7–4-8
steel MRF building, 4-18–4-20
structure type, 4-8–4-28
underground structure, 4-4
vertical earthquake effects, design, 4-3

I-2F
Faults and dip slip, 1-5–1-6
Focal depth, 1-9
Focal region, 1-9
Foundation, depth of, 4-6

G
Geographic delineation, 2-4
Gorkha earthquake of 2015, 2-1
Graphical User Interface (GUI), 11-4
Gravity load, 3-3
Ground level, 4-6, 9-2

H
Hazard assessment, 2-2
HEIGHT, 3-7
Height of building, 4-6

I
Importance factor, 4-5
Individual modal response, 12-15–12-17
Inertia forces, 3-2, 3-3
Intensity, 1-12
International Building Code 2000 (USA), 2-6
Inter-plate earthquakes, 1-5
Inter-plate interactions, 1-4
Interpolation type, 12-5
Inherent torsion, 4-7
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
design philosophy
design horizontal acceleration spectrum, 2-9
dynamic analysis, 2-8
equivalent static method, 2-8–2-9
limit state design (LSD) method, 2-8
response reduction factor, 2-8
response spectrum analysis (RSA), 2-9
response spectrum load case, 2-9
response spectrum method, 2-9
single degree of freedom (DOF) (SDOF) systems, 2-9
structural non-linearity, 2-8
history, 2-2–2-4

K
Koyna earthquake of 1967, 2-4

L
Lateral force–resisting system, 3-1, 12-7
Lateral load–resisting system, 3-1
Lateral load transfer mechanism, 3-5–3-6
Lateral seismic forces, 10-1
Lateral seismic loads, 12-2–12-3
Latur earthquake of 1993, 2-4
Limit state design (LSD) method, 2-8
Linear interpolation, 9-1
Load paths, 3-2–3-3
in structures, 3-5
Load transfer, 3-2–3-3

M
Magnitude, 1-10–1-12
Mass participation factor, 12-9
Mass reference load, 5-3
MASTER, 3-7
Maximum considered earthquake (MCE), 2-6–2-9
Measuring instruments, 1-9–1-10
Medvedev–Sponheuer–Karnik (MSK) scale, 1-12
Mercalli intensity scale, 1-12
Minimum base shear criteria, 8-1–8-4, A-17–A-18
Missing mass, 12-8
Missing weight, 12-9
Modal base action, 12-9–12-10
Modal weight, 12-9
Modelling aspects
diaphragm modelling, 3-6
earthquake force flow path in buildings, 3-3–3-4
general format, 3-7–3-8
 load paths, 3-2–3-3
STAAD.Pro, load-path consideration in, 3-4–3-6
Mode select, 12-17–12-19
Mode shape, 12-1, 12-10–12-12
Modified Mercalli (MM) scale, 2-4
Multiplying factor for accidental torsion moment, 4-7
for natural torsion moment, 4-7
for spectrum analysis, 4-6
N
Natural torsion, 4-7, 10-1
O
Oceanic waves, 1-8

P
Peak additional torsion, 12-10
Peak ground acceleration (PGA), 2-5–2-6
Period
in X direction, 4-6
in Z direction, 4-6
Plate tectonics, 1-4–1-6
Polarized transverse waves, 1-8

Q
Quetta earthquake of 1935, 2-2

R
Rayleigh waves, 1-8
Reinforced concrete (RC) bare moment resisting frame (MRF) buildings, 4-5, 4-8–4-16
Response reduction factor, 2-8, 4-5
Response spectrum analysis (RSA), 2-9, 4-1, 12-2–12-4
Response spectrum load cases, 2-9, 12-8
Richter magnitude scale, 1-12
Rigid diaphragm, 11-1
Rock and soil site factor, 4-5

S
Scale, 12-7–12-8
Sea-floor spreading, 1-4
Seismic analysis
structural components below the ground level, A-19–A-22
vertical motion in, A-17
Seismic coefficient, 2-4
Seismic design codes, 1-2, 2-1–2-2
Seismic inertia forces, 3-4
Seismic parameters, 5-3
DF parameter, 5-15–5-18
DM parameter, 5-12–5-15
DX and DZ parameters, 5-1–5-4
HT parameter, 5-4–5-8
PX and PZ parameter, 5-8–5-12
Seismic waves, 1-1, 1-6–1-8
Seismic zone
factor, 2-4
map, 2-4–2-5
Seismograph, 1-9–1-11
Seismology
earth and its interiors, 1-3–1-4
earthquake measurement parameters, 1-8–1-9
intensity, 1-12
magnitude, 1-10–1-12
 measuring instruments, 1-9–1-10
plate tectonics, 1-4–1-6
seismic waves, 1-6–1-8
Seismoscopes, 1-10
SET Commands, 12-19–12-52
Signed response spectrum results options, 12-7
Single degree of freedom (DOF) (SDOF) systems, 2-9
Site-specific hazard assessment, 2-4
Soft storey, 11-1–11-6
Spectral acceleration coefficient, 4-6
Spectrum analysis, A-25–A-37
Spectrum type, 12-5
Square root of summation of squares (SRSS), 12-3, 12-4
STAAD.Pro
CE input editor file, 11-5
load-path consideration in, 3-4–3-6
Static seismic parameter under load definition, 5-11
Stiffness, earthquake-resistant building, 2-2
Storey
soft storey, 11-1–11-6
stiffness, 11-2, 11-4
Strength, earthquake-resistant building, 2-2
Structural configuration, earthquake-resistant building, 2-1
Structural non-linearity, 2-8
Structures
considering torsional provision, 10-1–10-15
structural components below the ground level, 9-1–9-7
torsional provision, A-22–A-25
type of, 4-5
underground structure analysis, 9-2–9-7
Subsoil class, 12-5
Surface waves, 1-8

T
Tectonic plates, 1-4–1-5
Time history method, 12-1
Torsion
accidental torsion, 4-7, 10-1
natural torsion, 4-7, 10-1
parameter, 12-6
peak additional torsion, 12-10
structure considering torsional provision, 10-1–10-15
Tremor, primary, 1-7

V
Vertical motion, acceleration spectrum, 7-1–7-4

W
Wave’s propagation velocities, 1-6

X
XRANGE, 3-7

Y
YRANGE, 3-7

Z
Zero period acceleration (ZPA), 2-5–2-6
Zone factor, 4-4
ZRANGE, 3-7