See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/336275395

Seismic Consideration of Soft Story in RC Frame Buildings Using Various

National Codes

Article  in  International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology · September 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 453

3 authors:

Nirajan Khanal Sulok Wagley

Institute of Engineering, Thapathali Campus Khwopa Engineering College
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sujan Kumar Singh

Tribhuvan University
3 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Use of Rubber and Soil mixture as a base isolation technique for the developing countries like Nepal : A review View project

Soil-structure interaction on typical buildings made using Nepal Building Code. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sulok Wagley on 08 November 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 10, Issue 09, September 2019, pp. 343-352, Article ID: IJCIET_10_09_036
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=9
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
© IAEME Publication

SEISMIC CONSIDERATION OF SOFT STORY IN

RC FRAME BUILDINGS USING VARIOUS
NATIONAL CODES
N. Khanal
Department of Civil Engineering, Thapathali Campus, Nepal

S. K. Singh
Department of Civil Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, Nepal

S. Wagley
Department of Civil Engineering, Khwopa College of Engineering, Nepal

ABSTRACT
For seismically active zone like Nepal, designing a structure and considering the
effect on it has been indispensable for the safety of lives and properties. More
specifically, soft story condition is the foremost failure that has been accounted from
the devastating Earthquake of 2015. To deal with the most efficient process of
designing, both linear static and linear dynamic analysis are considered. Moreover,
these analysis approaches are performed for the five bare frames with slab models,
designed by ETABS with change of base story height. Furthermore, to assure the most
viable and safe criteria, these models are checked according to three national codes
viz., Japanese code, Turkish code and IS code on the basis of stiffness and drift ratio.
With further investigation, different codes depict soft story failure at different models
and thus, deals with maintaining the structural integrity and performance at their own
level. Through calculations, it is clear that Japanese and Turkish code portrays soft
story differently according to static and dynamic analysis whereas, IS code is
impartial to the analysis method. Additionally, study shows shear wall in the bare
frame model stiffens the building thereby impeding the collapse from soft story failure.
Keywords: Soft story, Gorkha Earthquake, Time history, Bare frame with slab,
Japanese code, IS code, Turkish code
Cite this Article: N. Khanal, S. K. Singh, S. Wagley, Seismic Consideration of Soft
Story in RC Frame Buildings Using Various National Codes. International Journal of
Civil Engineering and Technology 10(9), 2019, pp. 343-352.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=9

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 343 editor@iaeme.com

 N. Khanal, S. K. Singh, S. Wagley

1. INTRODUCTION
Buildings configured with unobstructed spaces, openings like windows and doors often form
soft story and thus, many of these require shear wall in order to give stability and strength to
sustain the seismic force. Also, the damaging impact is less on simple and regular geometrical
buildings. Along with that, structures having uniformly distributed mass and stiffness in both
elevation and plan plays crucial role to prevent it from soft story collapse.
There are number of possibilities for a story to be a soft story. The height differences
between the stories, elimination of columns in any story, irregular distribution of masonry
infills in the plan of buildings, setbacks structural system along the height of structure,
unanticipated participation of non-structural components, etc. can result in vertical
irregularity.
The most common RC moment resisting frame buildings with monolithic slab casted in
beams and columns were found to have soft story failure, common type of failure during the
Gorkha Earthquake, 2015. So, the study for soft story is contextual in scenario of fulfilling
structural demands of Nepal.
Time period of the building acts as one of the criteria for determining seismic base shear
of the building and the base shear generated is distributed along the story on the basis of
stiffness and mass along its height. Lateral displacement of a story is a function of stiffness,
mass and lateral force distributed on that story. Stiffness of a story is dependent on the height
of the structural components. In buildings with the first story of height greater than other story
have non-uniform distribution of stiffness along its height. The strength demands for columns
in the base story of those buildings is greater than upper stories, as the shear in the base story
is maximum. The inter-story drift in the soft first story is large. However, in the upper stories,
the forces in the columns are reduced and have uneven lateral force distribution along the
height due to the presence of the buildings with abrupt changes in story stiffness. As a result,
locally concentrated stress affects the performance of the buildings during earthquake.
Therefore, dynamic analysis, which considers modal effects and local ductility demands
effectively, is considered as requirement by many codes for accurate distribution of
earthquake forces along building height. If the soft story effect is not considered during
structural design, we might be neglecting the irreversible damages on structural and non-
structural components of the building during seismic phenomenon.
The present study explores the seismic evaluation of a soft story building using various
national building codes and the comparison is made to reveal the differences. Time history
analysis is carried out using the ground motion of Gorkha earthquake-2015.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Bhatt et.al. (2017) studied stiffness irregularity of different RC frame models using time
history analysis method. They came into a conclusion that bottom portion (first and ground
floor) irregularity produces more story displacement than upper portion irregularity. [1]
Jaswant N. Arlekar et.al. (1997) studied different cases of possible soft story cases
considering nine different models in the study using two different analysis procedures,
namely equivalent static analysis and multi-modal dynamic analysis, and concluded that RC
frame buildings with open first story are known to perform poorly during the strong
earthquake shaking. [2]
P.b Lamb et.al. (2012) modelled and analyzed soft first story buildings located in zone IV.
Meanwhile this paper focuses on characteristics such as stiffness, shear force, bending
moment and drift during the performance of building in seismic activity. Furthermore,

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 344 editor@iaeme.com

 Seismic Consideration of Soft Story in RC Frame Buildings Using Various National Codes

inclusion of cross bracings and shear wall reduces bending moment and stiffness irregularity
and drift gets reduced by increasing the column size. [3]
Takai N. et.al. (2016) studied strong ground motion characteristics in the Kathmandu Valley
during Gorkha Earthquake,2015 and also provided the ground motion data from various
stations, namely: KTP station, Kirtipur, TVU station, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, PTN
station, Patan, and THM station, Bhaktapur. For our analysis, data from KTP station, Kirtipur
was used. [4]
Bhatt et.al. (2019) studied effect of mass and stiffness irregularities on the fundamental time
period of RC building. They concluded that stiffness irregularities in the bottom floors causes
more increase in time period of the building than irregularities in top floors. They also
concluded that code specified time period does not matches for irregular buildings. [5]
Gautam et. al (2016) studied and observed failure patterns in the buildings of Nepal after
Gorkha earthquake and found out soft story as common failure causes for the collapse of RC
buildings. [6]

3. ANALYTICAL PART
3.1. Information about Model
For modelling, we took Ordinary moment resisting RC frame of 5 story with each bay length
of 4m along X and Y direction in which total number of bays were 4 along those axes.
Moreover, the base story height varies from 3m to 5m with increment of 0.5m.
For the analysis, the building was considered to be located in Zone V with type II soil,
along with that we took building importance factor as 1 and response reduction factor 5. For
materials, we took M25 grade concrete and rebar of Fe 415.Structural dimensions of columns
and beams were taken as 300*300 mm and 230*400 mm respectively with slab thickness of
150mm. Furthermore, live load of 3kN/𝑚2 and floor finish of 1.5kN/𝑚2 was imposed on slab.

3.2. Model Description

For analysis of the soft story under seismic effect, five models have been selected. The
models selected are basically bare frame with slab but of varying base floor height. The base
floor height was taken as 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5m respectively for different models.

Figure 1 Typical plan and 3D view of the models

3.3. Analyzing the data

The models of the building under study are analyzed under Linear elastic analysis using
ETABS analysis package. For analysis, frame members, walls and floors are modeled with
rigid joints, shell-thin elements and rigid diaphragms respectively. The models of the building
under study are analyzed using both equivalent static method and Time History Analysis.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 345 editor@iaeme.com

 N. Khanal, S. K. Singh, S. Wagley

3.4. Equivalent Static Analysis

For the building without infill wall, natural time period is calculated as, 𝑇𝑎 =0.075 ℎ0.75, where
h= height of building, in m as mentioned in Cl. 7.6.1 in IS 1893:2002.
The lateral load is calculated and distributed along the height as per IS 1893:2002. As
mentioned in (IS 875 Part 2), dead load plus appropriate amount of live load gives seismic
weight of the building. For our model, 25% of live load is considered as we have considered
live load less than 3 KN/𝑚2 as slab load.

3.5. Time History Analysis

The models of the building under study are analyzed for time history function of Gorkha
Earthquake, 2015. For simplicity of study, linear dynamic analysis is considered. The time
history function of Gorkha Earthquake is spectrally matched under time domain. The response
spectrum considered corresponds to seismic zone V and 5% damping as given in IS
1893:2002. The number of modes considered was assumed such that sum total of modal
participating mass ratio was at least 90%. For dynamic analysis, modal time period was
calculated solving Eigen value problem of the model by ETABS. The base shear and shear
force distribution was then calculated by ETABS as per seismic weight and stiffness of the
model.

3.6. Characteristics of Ground motion

For the analysis, Gorkha Earthquake-2015 which was recorded in Kirtipur (KTP) station is
used.

Figure 2 Ground motion acceleration recorded at KTP station

Table 1 Ground motion data

PGA
Magnitude
Name of Earthquake Date (Mw) NS-direction EW-direction
2
Gorkha Earthquake April 25,2015 7.8(USGS) 150 cm/𝑠 241 cm/𝑠2

3.7. Codal Description

Japanese code
To be considered soft story, Japanese code evaluates building on the lateral stiffness ratio.
The following ratio (Rs) should be less than 0.6.
= ̅
Where, 𝑟𝑠 is the lateral stiffness, which is the ratio of story height and story drift and 𝑟𝑠 is
the mean lateral stiffness of all story. [7]

3.8. Turkish Code

TSC 2007 considers soft story when the ratio of average story drift at any story to the average
story drift just above or below it exceeds 2. In another terms, soft story checking can be also
done from rigidity ratio.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 346 editor@iaeme.com

 Seismic Consideration of Soft Story in RC Frame Buildings Using Various National Codes

( )
( ) >2
( )

Where, 𝛥𝑖 is the story drift and ℎ𝑖 is the height of 𝑖𝑡ℎ story [8]

3.9. IS code
The IS code considers soft story by calculating the stiffness of the adjacent floors. Under this,
it considers a building to have a normal soft story when the lateral stiffness of any floor is less
than 70% of the stiffness above it or 80% of the average stiffness of above three stories. In
mathematical terms,

( )
Where, 𝑖+1, 𝑖+3 is the lateral story stiffness of i, i+1, i+2 story respectively. [9]

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1. Codal comparison to determine soft story
Analysis done on basis of Japanese code

Table 2 Analysis done on the basis of Japanese code

Static Analysis Dynamic Analysis
Rigidity ratio Check for soft Rigidity ratio (Rs) Check for soft
Model no. Story ht. (Rs) story story
EQx EQy Rs < 0.6 TDx TDy Rs < 0.6
1 3 0.911 0.911 Safe 0.825 0.635 Safe
2 3.5 0.732 0.732 Safe 0.600 0.501 Unsafe
3 4 0.596 0.596 Unsafe 0.473 0.480 Unsafe
4 4.5 0.492 0.492 Unsafe 0.367 0.426 Unsafe
5 5 0.411 0.411 Unsafe 0.295 0.289 Unsafe
While checking for the soft story in linear static analysis, rigidity ratio for 3.5 m story
height is calculated to be 0.732 which is more than 0.6. Thus, our model is considered safe at
3.5m. Similarly, linear dynamic analysis is carried out and rigidity ratio is tested for all
models. Moreover, the rigidity ratio for TDx and TDy is 0.6 and 0.501 respectively for model
number 2 and it is thereby verified as unsafe. More emphatically, it can be inferred that the
same model which is safe in linear static analysis failed the criteria when we conducted linear
dynamic analysis.
Analysis done on basis of Turkish code
In Turkish code, same models are tested from static and dynamic analyses procedures. From
calculations, we found out that all the models are safe because none of them exceeded the
rigidity ratio of 2. However, in dynamic analysis, model number 5 of first story height 5 m
exceeded its rigidity ratio of 2. Conclusively, this story height of 5 m is unsafe and building
can fail from soft story.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 347 editor@iaeme.com

 N. Khanal, S. K. Singh, S. Wagley

Table 3 Analysis done on the basis of Turkish code

Static Analysis Dynamic Analysis

Model Story Rigidity ratio Rigidity ratio Check for soft story
no. ht. ( ) Check for soft story ( )
EQx EQy ( )> 2 TDx TDy ( )> 2
1 3 0.806 0.806 Safe 0.826 0.873 Safe
2 3.5 1.020 1.020 Safe 1.075 1.188 Safe
3 4 1.259 1.259 Safe 1.349 1.350 Safe
4 4.5 1.523 1.523 Safe 1.347 1.339 Safe
5 5 1.809 1.809 Safe 2.006 2.016 Unsafe
Analysis done on basis of IS code
For analysis,
(Ki/Ki+1) is taken as rigidity ratio 1 and for the structure to be safe on the basis of soft story,
value must be greater than 0.7
(Ki/mean of Ki+1, Ki+2, Ki+3) is taken as rigidity ratio 2 and for structure to be safe on the basis
of soft story, value must be greater than 0.8

Table 4 Linear static analysis from IS code

Model Story Rigidity Check for soft Rigidity ratio 2 Check for soft
no. ht. Ratio 1 story story
EQx EQy EQx EQy
1 3 1.269 1.269 Safe 1.279 1.279 Safe
2 3.5 0.865 0.865 Safe 0.861 0.861 Safe
3 4 0.616 0.616 Unsafe 0.607 0.607 Unsafe
4 4.5 0.456 0.456 Unsafe 0.444 0.444 Unsafe
5 5 0.347 0.347 Unsafe 0.334 0.334 Unsafe

Table 5 Linear Dynamic analysis from IS code

Model Story Rigidity ratio 1 Check for soft Rigidity ratio 2 Check for soft story
no. height story
TDx TDy TDx TDy
1 3 1.274 1.277 Safe 1.287 1.299 Safe
2 3.5 0.868 0.873 Safe 0.870 0.875 Safe
3 4 0.620 0.620 Unsafe 0.614 0.614 Unsafe
4 4.5 0.460 0.457 Unsafe 0.451 0.444 Unsafe
5 5 0.352 0.353 Unsafe 0.341 0.340 Unsafe
In IS code, the rigidity ratio obtained from dividing stiffness of base story to the first story
is identical from both static and dynamic analysis. When checking for soft story, both
analyses conclusively figured out that story height of 4 m fails from soft story, while the other
models of story heights 3 and 3.5 m are safe. Therefore, it is evident from the analysis process
that IS code deals with soft story in same aspect irrespective of the analysis methods.
In larger terms, the most proficient approach to conduct soft story check is by adopting the
Japanese code procedures because it deals with this effect in a paramount way. In Japanese
code, soft story is obtained at 3.5 m while in Turkish and IS code, building is unsafe at 5 m
and 4 m respectively. Hence, Japanese code deals with soft story issue much more seriously.
Since, model 5 is most affected by soft story, it was modified with lift shear wall in the upper
central part along Y-axis. The lift shear wall is of rectangular size of 3m along X-axis and 2m
along Y-axis. The thickness of the shear wall was taken as 150mm.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 348 editor@iaeme.com

 Seismic Consideration of Soft Story in RC Frame Buildings Using Various National Codes

The soft story criteria for the model with shear wall was checked and is provided in the
table below.

Table 6 Analyses of model with shear wall

Analysis story ht. Load Rigidity Check for Rigidity ratio 2 Check for soft story
cases ratio 1 soft story

linear 5m EQx 1.093 Safe 1.276 Safe

static EQy 1.211 Safe 1.414 Safe
Linear 5m TDx 1.002 Safe 1.171 Safe
Dynamic TDy 1.225 Safe 1.471 Safe
The inclusion of shear wall in the model increases the stiffness of the overall structure and
mainly assures safety for soft ground story.

4.2. Displacements comparison between static and dynamic analysis

Figure 3 Displacement under different analysis

From graph, while undertaking the two analyses approach, displacement observed for
model 5 is more than other models. With increase in floor height, there is no significant
differences in displacement along Y-axis for different analyses. On the other hand, for
different analyses, there is no obvious differences in displacement along X-axis.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 349 editor@iaeme.com

 N. Khanal, S. K. Singh, S. Wagley

4.3. Drift comparison between static and dynamic analysis

Figure 4 Drifts under different analysis

On average the first story drift for model 1 is seen as 34.861% of first story drift for model
5 for both static and dynamic analysis.
From the graph height differences in the base story affects only immediate upper story and
rest of the structure drifts as if there was no effect of soft ground story.

4.4. Comparing Natural Time Period between ETABS and IS code

Table 7 Time period by ETABS and IS code

Base ht. of model Time Period (s)

Model
ETABS IS code
1 3 0.942 0.572
2 3.5 1.016 0.586
3 4 1.108 0.6
4 4.5 1.216 0.614
5 5 1.342 0.628
Above table shows comparison of time period for buildings under study as per IS
1893:2002 and ETABS analysis. The time period calculated from the ETABS does not match
with those calculated from the IS code. In fact, the generated time period from ETABS is
significantly greater than those from IS code.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 350 editor@iaeme.com

 Seismic Consideration of Soft Story in RC Frame Buildings Using Various National Codes

4.5. Comparing Story shear between Linear Static and Linear Dynamic analysis
Table 8 Story shear forces from different analysis
Model Story shear forces
no. Story
EQx/EQy TDx TDy
5 153.3563 86.1391 90.84975
4 263.0587 173.5637 174.2943
5 3 332.3101 255.5879 249.1732
2 371.0082 328.5069 322.3151
1 389.7694 389.0105 388.8731
It is seen that there is decrease in base shear for the model with increase in base floor
height. In model 5 with base story height 5m, there is distribution of 39%, 22% and 23% base
shear at the top floor for static analysis, time history analysis in x-direction and y-direction
respectively. The same pattern was observed for rest of the models.
Therefore, when there is same base shear, story shear for upper stories is greater for linear
static analysis than linear dynamic analysis, hence design on the basis of dynamic analysis is
economical than static analysis.

5. CONCLUSIONS
 Soft story condition arises due to significant differences in stiffness of adjacent stories in
which differences in stiffness is created by forming different models with various base story
height.
 It is observed that Japanese Seismic Code handles soft story phenomenon much more
carefully than other national codes, namely IS code and Turkish code and hence analysis from
Japanese code is done being on much safer side.
 The models under study are safe from the perspective of story drift criteria from IS code but
does fails from soft story criteria. So, drift cannot be sole criteria in determining safety of
structure.
 From observation, dynamic analysis produces better check for soft story than linear static
method.
 Design done from static analysis is uneconomical than dynamic analysis as story shear is
greater in static case even when base shear is same. The differences in story shear is because
of the method of distribution used by both methods. Static method performs distribution based
on the stiffness and the height of the structure while dynamic analysis uses modal distribution
method.
 Time period generated from ETABS is greater than that from IS code as time period generated
from code neglects stiffness of the column as a factor for generating time period. Also,
consideration of P-∆ effect has increased the time period on the buildings modeled from
ETABS as it affects the stiffness of the structure but the time period increased by P-∆
effect is not significant as in our model the vertical loading is not significant and hence, does
not create enough moment to reduce the stiffness.

 From the analysis of drift graph, height differences in the base story affects only the
immediate upper story and no significant effect is observed for rest of the structure.
 The addition of shear wall (Lift) in the story with soft story condition increases the stiffness of
base floor and hence, ensures safety of the structure from the basis of soft story condition.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 351 editor@iaeme.com

 N. Khanal, S. K. Singh, S. Wagley

REFERENCES
[1] Bhatt, M. R., Pradhan, P. M. and Jha, S., "Study on The Effect of Soft Story on Infill RC
Frames Under Seismic Effect," Kathmandu University Journal of Science,Engineering
and Technology , pp. 79-91, 2017.
[2] Arlekar, J. N., Jain, S. K. and Murty, C. V. R. "Seismic Response of RC Frame Buildings
with Soft First Storeys," in Proceedings of the CBRI Golden Jubilee Conference on
Natural Hazards in Urban Habitat, New Delhi, 1997.
[3] Lamb, P. B. and Dr Londhe, R. S. "Seismic Behavior of Soft First Storey," IOSR Journal
of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, pp. 28-33, 2012.
[4] Takai, N., Shigefuji, M., Rajaure, S., Bijukchhen, S., Ichiyanagi, M., Dhital, M. R. and
Sasatani, T., "Strong ground motion in the Kathmandu Valley during the 2015 Gorkha,
Nepal,Earthquake," Earth, Planets and Space, 2016.
[5] Bhatt, M. R., Pradhan, P. M. and Jha, S. "Study on the Effect of Mass and Stiffness
Irregularities on Fundamental Period of Infilled RC Framed Buildings," in 2nd
International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Post Disaster Reconstruction
Planning, Bhaktapur, Nepal, 2019.
[6] Gautam, D., Rodrigues, H., Bhetwal, K. K., Neupane, P. and Sanada, Y. "Common
structural and construction deficiencies of Nepalese buildings," Innov. Infrastruct. Solut,
2016.
[7] Ishiyama, Y. Introduction to Earthquake Engineering and Seismic codes in the world,
Hokkaido, 2011.
[8] TSC 2007, Specification for structures to be built in disaster areas, Ankara: The Turkish
Ministry of Public Works and Settlements.
[9] IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002 Criteria For Earthquake Resistant design of structures- Part 1:
General Provisions and buildings, New Delhi.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 352 editor@iaeme.com

View publication stats