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

net/publication/307457587

An innovative approximate method for analysis of multi-storey building

frames for vertical loads

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 2,338

2 authors:

Dipak Varia Harshvadan Patel

Government Engineering college,Patan,India L. D. College of Engineering
18 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    14 PUBLICATIONS   13 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

INVESTIGATIONS ON FLEXURAL CAPACITY OF STEEL CONCRETE COMPOSITE DECK WITH DIVERSE BOND PATTERNS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Harshvadan Patel on 03 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Structural Engineering
Vol. 43, No. 2, June - July 2016  pp. 227-232 No. 43-T3

An innovative approximate method for analysis of multi-storey building frames

for vertical loads
Dipak J. Varia* , and Harshvadan S. Patel*
 Email: djvaria@gmail.com

*Applied Mechanics Department, Government Engineering College, Patan, Gujarat - 384 265, India.

Received: 21 November 2014; Accepted: 27 March 2015

The approximate location of inflection points are
presented in the literature1.The approximate analysis of
building frames for vertical loads is covered in several
textbooks. Behr et.al2 alert to structural engineers in
their paper to the potential errors in textbook methods
of approximate structural analysis. They conclude that
inappropriate assumptions in the approximate analysis
of vertically loaded rectangular frames can lead to
significant errors. After studying inflection point patterns
in many fully loaded rectangular frames the new set
of assumptions produced in approximate solutions. A
reliable, reasonably accurate approximate method of
structural analysis for symmetric, rectangular frames
under symmetric vertical loadings has been developed
by Behr et.al3. The existing/prevailing storey wise
summation method may be summarized as (1) divide
a building frame into many single-storey frames whose
number equals the number of stories of the building
frame (2) analyzing each single-storey frame by the
moment distribution method and (3) sum the single-
storey frames. The existing storey wise summation
method is complicated in computations concluded by
Xu4, Jinghai Wu5 presented the simplified storey wise
summation method. He concluded that the simplified
storey wise summation method is almost as accurate
as the existing storey wise summation method and may
provide better accuracy than the other approximate
methods. The simplified storey wise summation method
is proposed for the approximate analysis of building
frames for vertical loads. Hoenderkamp6 present
approximate deflection analysis of non-symmetric high
– rise structures. Hoenderkamp and Snijder7 present
an approximate hand method for estimating horizontal
loading. They conclude that the information obtained
from this method should give the design engineer an
easy means of comparing the suitability of alternative
structural proposals, in addition to providing initial
structural data for a more accurate analysis, or allowing
a check on the reasonableness of the final output of a
computer analysis. Bozdogan and Ozturk8 presented an
approximate method for free vibration analysis of multi
bay coupled shear wall. Okonkwo et.al9 Developed the
mathematical model for the evaluation of the internal
support moments of a uniformly loaded continuous
beam of equal span and the number of spans, taking
the uniformly distributed load on the beam to be equal
for all spans. Manickaselvam and Bidhu10 proposed
approximate method named as split frame method
for lateral load analysis of short frames. The various
approximate methods of structural analysis for analysis
of framed structures subjected to vertical and horizontal
loads have been presented in their paper by Life John
and Rajendran11.
In recent time there is huge rise in construction of
High-rise buildings in the metro and big cities. In multi-
storey building design lots of iteration involves. A multi-
storey building frame is actually three dimensional
space frame. Multi – bay and multi – storey rectangular
frames are considered as highly redundant structural
system. In the frame consider “B” as bays and “S” as
stories and fixed supports assumed then the structure
3*B*S degree indeterminate. To make this structure

Journal of Structural Engineering 227

Vol. 43, No. 2, June - july 2016
determinate one would start approximate analysis with
3*B*S assumptions for the frame.
To analyze indeterminate structure, structure
engineers are using different exact methods. These
methods gives a structural analysis which satisfy the
equilibrium of forces and compatibility of deformations
at all joints and supports12-14. For highly indeterminate
structure an exact analysis like consistent deformations
or slope deflection methods can be tedious. The
analysis of such frame is complex, laborious and also
time consuming. The structure contains many joints
and with complex geometry is analyzed with the help
of computer but the solution may take a great deal
of time and effort to complete. The different modern
computer softwares can perform three dimensional
analysis. For this structure model should prepare in
the software. For the generation of structural model
member properties width, depth and moment of inertia
and material properties young’s modulus, poison’s ratio
play important role in analysis software. Prediction
of these properties is entirely dependent on structural
engineer’s expertise and experience. These may result
in restriction of computer use because estimation of
member and material properties will be vary from time
to time and may differ from person to person.
As a structural designer one should understand the
behaviour of a particular structure. An approximate
analysis can useful to estimate closely with few simple
computations, the approximate value of the forces at
various points in the structure. Approximate methods
are useful in predicting preliminary sizes and design. It
is the useful tool for the designer when checking a more
exact analysis or when time, money or compatibility
are not available for performing the more exact
analysis. In general the actual conditions of loading,
material behaviour, geometry and joint resistance at
the supports are never predict exactly, all methods of
structure analysis are more or less approximate.
Need for the study
Approximate method developed for the continuous
and substitute frame now authors intend to advance a
procedure for the non sway plane frame. Particularly
approximate analysis methods are applied to complex
structure in which solution is time consuming.
228 Journal of Structural Engineering
Vol. 43, No. 2, June - july 2016
Development of innovative
approximate method
Basic terminology
The method is dependent on four inter-dependent and new
terms formulated. These terms are explained as under.
Corrected member Stiffness (K)
Corrected member stiffness of a frame member is
multiplication of fixity coefficient (Cf) with relative
flexural stiffness (EI/L) of frame member.
K = Cf X EI / L (1)
Relative Deformation Coefficient (Cr)
Relative deformation coefficient is defined as the
deformation at far end of a frame member due to unit
deformation applied at near end.
If unit rotation is applied to the near end of a fixed
beam then values Cr and Cf at far end are 0 and 1
respectively due to fixed support at far end. But in case
of propped cantilever, If unit rotation is applied to fixed
near end then Cr and Cf are 0.5 and 0.75 respectively
due to hinge support at far end. In frame extreme
supports are generally fixed or hinged type, but if one
intermediate member is considered then far end is
neither fixed nor hinged. At such location value of Cr is
dependent on fixity of far end and it is computed using
following relation.
Cr = K/2∑K (2)
Fixity coefficient (Cf)
Fixity coefficient gives the fixity provided against
rotation by far end. The value of Cf at near end is always
taken as unity while the same at far end is dependent
on relative deformation coefficient Cr at far end. This
is computed using following relation.
Cf = 1 – Cr/2 (3)
Actual Deformation (AD)
Actual deformation of joints is deformation of that joint
due to some deformation applied at any joint. Actual
deformation of a joint is computed by multiplying
actual deformation of preceding joint with relative
deformation coefficient of the joint and it is expressed
in equation form as under.
ADi = - AD(i-1) × Cri (4)
where i is = joint index.
Procedural Steps of approximate analyzed using the software STAAD.PRO. Sample
analysis calculations are depicted for some joints and finally
comparison with exact values are presented in Table 2.
1. Choose suitable sign convention for forces and
deformations. Calculation for support moment M1-2 considering two
2. Identify any one unknown action at a joint. spans
3. Fix up the number of spans adjoin to selected joint Apply rotation at joint 1. Compute corresponding
for contribution in calculation of unknown action. rotations at joints 2, 3 and 8 considering two spans.
For joint at extreme support number of span can Assumed values of Cr and Cf at joints 3 and 8 are as
be one span/two span/more span on one side as per per under:
accuracy desired. For intermediate joint number
Cr3-2 = 1/6 (Three members are meeting at the joint 3)
of span can be one span/two span/more spans as
per accuracy desired. Consideration of more spans Cf3-2 = 11/12
yields highly accurate results. Cr3-2 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint 8)
4. Compute Cr and Cf for all joints except at Cf3-2 = 15/16
joint where unknown action is identified. Start
Cf
Cf12 (( II // L
L))12
computing from extreme support/s and move Cr
Cr2211 
 2[Cf ( I / L)  Cf12 ( I / L)12  Cf ( I / L) ]
towards joint where unknown action is identified. 2[Cf1122 ( I / L)1122  Cf 3322 ( I / L)3322  Cf8822 ( I / L)8822 ]
If far ends of selected joint are not extreme support, 13
1 3 // 3 3
Cr
Cr2211 
 2[1 3 / 3 11 / 12  2 / 3 15 / 16  4 / 5]  18 18 // 85
85
then Cr and Cf will fall between ½ to 0 and ¾ to 2[1 3 / 3 11 / 12  2 / 3 15 / 16  4 / 5]
1 respectively. As approximations Cr and Cf will
be as per following (Table 1). Equation of EJM is wL2/12 is used for the
computations.
Table 1
Number of Cr Cf Joint 1 2 3 8
Member meeting Cr - 18/85 1/6 1/8
at a joint Cf - 76/85 11/12 15/16
Two ¼ 7/8
AD 1 -18/85 3/85 9/340
Three 1/6 11/12
EJM 0 83.3333 62.5 0
Four 1/8 15/16
M1-2 = -15.441176 kN.m (Ref.Ans. -15.724 kN.m)
More (1/2) / n 1- (1/2)/n % Error = -1.79852
where n = number of member meeting at the joint
Calculation for support moment M7-8 considering
5. Take AD equal to unity i.e. deformation two spans:
corresponding to unknown force. Start computing
Apply unit rotation at joint 7. Compute corresponding
AD at each joint from joint where unit deformation
rotations at joints 8, 2, 9 and 14 considering two spans.
is applied.
Assumed values of Cr and Cf at joints 2, 9 and 14 are
6. Compute fixed end actions corresponding to as per under:
deformations.
Cr8-2 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint 8)
7. Compute the sum of multiplication of actual
deformations (AD) with fixed end actions. The Cf8-2 = 15/16
sum yields value of identified unknown action. Cr9-8 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint 9)
Cf9-8 = 15/16
Illustrative example
Cr14-8 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint
To demonstrate the application of innovative 14)
approximate approach three bay multi-storied plane
frame is considered (Fig.1). The selected frame is Cf14-8 = 15/16

Journal of Structural Engineering 229

Vol. 43, No. 2, June - july 2016
 20 kN/m

6 24
2I 12 2I 18 2I

I I I I 3m
30 kN/m
5 23
3I 11 3I 17 3I
3m
2I 2I 2I 2I
30 kN/m
4 22
3I 10 3I 16 3I
3m
2I 2I 2I 2I
30 kN/m
3 21
3I 9 3I 15 3I

3m
2I 2I 2I 2I
40 kN/m
2 20
4I 8 4I 14 4I
3m
3I 3I 3I 3I

7 13 19
1
5m 5m 5m

Fig. 1 A plane frame selected for application

Calculation for support moment M7-8 considering Cf14-8 = 15/16

two spans:
Cf
Cf 78 (( II // L
L))78
Apply unit rotation at joint 7. Compute corresponding Cr
Cr8877 
 2[Cf ( I / L7)8  Cf 78( I / L)
rotations at joints 8, 2, 9 and 14 considering two spans. 2[Cf 7788 ( I / L)7788  Cf8822 ( I / L)8822
Assumed values of Cr and Cf at joints 2, 9 and 14 are Cf
 Cf 98 (( II // L
98 L))98 
98 Cf Cf148 (( II // L
148 L))148 ]]
148
as per under:  33 // 33
11
Cr
Cr8877 
 2[1 3 / 3 15 / 16  4 / 5 12
 12 // 75
75
Cr8-2 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint 8) 2[1 3 / 3 15 / 16  4 / 5
Cf8-2 = 15/16  15 // 16
15  22 // 33 
16  15
15 // 16  44 // 55]]
16 
Cr9-8 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint 9)
Cf9-8 = 15/16
Cr14-8 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint
14)

230 Journal of Structural Engineering

Vol. 43, No. 2, June - july 2016
 Table 2 Calculation for support moment M4-10 considering two
Structure is symmetrical and Hence only joints On spans
left half part is taken
Apply unit rotation at joint 4. Summation rotation of
Joint moment in kN.m % Error
member 4-10 and joint rotation of members 4-3 and
Mem- Joint Soft- 2 spans 4 spans 2 spans 4 spans
ber ware 4-5 is equal to unity. Compute corresponding rotations
1 1 -15.724 -15.4412 -15.521 -1.79852 -1.29102 at joints 3, 5, and 10 considering two spans around
2 -31.705 -31.001 -31.134 -2.22047 -1.80098 joint 4. Assumed values of Cr and Cf at joints 3, 5 and
2 2 -28.988 -29.336 -28.445 1.200497 -1.87319 10 are as per under:
3 -26.398 -26.234 -25.901 -0.62126 -1.88272
Cr3-4 = 1/6 (Three members are meeting at the joint 3)
3 3 -24.18 -23.889 -22.993 -1.20347 -4.90902
4 -24.412 -23.905 -23.372 -2.07685 -4.2602 Cf3-4 = 11/12
4 4 -26.536 -25.112 -25.233 -5.36629 -4.91031 Cr5-4 = 1/6 (Three members are meeting at the joint 5)
5 -28.581 -27.916 -27.013 -2.32672 -5.48616
Cf5-4 = 11/12
5 5 -19.363 -18.11 -18.601 -6.4711 -3.93534
6 -23.563 -22.876 -22.456 -2.91559 -4.69804 Cf10-4 = 1/8 (Four members are meeting at the joint 10)
6 7 1.862 1.6666 1.732 -10.4941 -6.98174 Cf10-4 = 15/16
8 3.77 4.0002 3.8705 6.106101 2.665782
7 8 3.032 3.1371 3.123 3.466359 3.001319 Similar calculations are carried out for all joints and
9 2.268 2.3611 2.202 4.104938 -2.91005 results are compared in following Table 2. Structure is
8 9 1.488 1.5003 1.4421 0.826613 -3.08468 symmetrical and hence only joints on left half part is
10 1.485 1.4012 1.3912 -5.6431 -6.3165 taken.
9 10 1.691 1.7104 1.7002 1.14725 0.544057 Cf104 ( I / L)104
11 1.867 1.8912 1.8821 1.296197 0.808784 410 1
Cf104 ( I / L)104  Cf 34 ( I / L)34
10 11 2.155 2.2801 2.2001 5.805104 2.092807
12 3.298 3.4122 3.3915 3.462705 2.835052
Cf 54 ( I / L)54
21 2 60.693 57.823 60.667 -4.72872 -0.04284 15 / 16  3 / 5
410 1  0.6848249
8 -91.663 -91.075 -93.115 -0.64148 1.584063 15 / 16  3 / 5 11 / 12  2 / 3
22 3 50.574 50.124 48.456 -0.88979 -4.18792 11 / 12  2 / 3
9 -66.712 -68.965 -67.901 3.377204 1.782288
43  45  1 410  0.3151751
23 4 50.947 49.368 49.101 -3.0993 -3.62337
10 -66.129 -67.145 -68.202 1.536391 3.134782 Joint 3 5 4 10
24 5 47.944 45.002 45.78 -6.13633 -4.5136
Cr 1/6 1/6 - - 1/8
11 -67.134 -69.923 -68.891 4.154378 2.617154
Cf 11/12 11/12 - - 15/16
25 6 23.563 23.001 22.876 -2.3851 -2.91559
ф -0.0525291 -0.0525291 0.3151751 0.6848249 -0.0856031
12 -46.745 -46.102 -48.101 -1.37555 2.900845
EJM 62.5 62.5 0 62.5 0
26 8 84.86 83.911 84.674 -1.11831 -0.21918
M4-10 = 49.368 kN.m (Ref.Ans. 50.947 kN.m)
27 9 62.957 63.801 63.001 1.340598 0.069889
% Error = -3.0993
28 10 62.954 63.901 63.001 1.504273 0.074658
29 11 63.112 64.212 63.623 1.742933 0.809672
100
30 12 43.446 44.234 43.623 1.813746 0.407402
50
Software
Joint 7 8 2 9 14 0
1 3 5 7 9 11 Software 2 Spans
Cr - 12/75 1/8 1/8 1/8 -50 13 15 17 1921
23 25 27 29
31 33 35
Cf - 69/75 15/16 15/16 15/16 -100
AD 1 -12/75 3/150 1/400 1/400
EJM 0 0 83.3333 0 0 Fig. 2  Joint moment software and two spans
M7-8 = 1.6666 kN.m (Ref.Ans. 1.862 kN.m)  % Error = -10.4941

Journal of Structural Engineering 231

Vol. 43, No. 2, June - july 2016
 100
50
0 2 Spans
1 3 5 7 9 11
13 15 17 1921
-50 23 25 27 29 31
33 35
-100
Fig. 3  Joint moment software and four spans
Conclusions
• It is found that moments obtained with innovative
approximate method is very close to the values
obtained with software/exact analysis method
(Figs.2 and 3).
• As method is dependent only on structural
properties, analysis of plane frame subjected to
any load case is possible within no time.
• Iteration, equation solving and matrix inversion
is completely eliminated and the method gives
speedy and accurate joint moments by hand
calculations only.
• Computed moment considering two spans
percentage error is approximately 10% but same
is reduced upto 7%, if four spans are considered.
Results reveals that consideration of more spans
yields highly accurate results(Table 2).
• One has to accept that method evolved for
the indeterminate structure like plane frame is
innovative and giving numerically near accurate
results. This method is user friendly, speedy and
more helpful for design offices for the practical
design application because one can quickly
analyze the structure with almost 90 % accuracy
in comparison to exact analysis.
References
1. Epstein, H.I., “Approximate location of inflection
points”, Jl. Struct. Engg., ASCE, Vol. 114 (6),
1988, pp 1403–1413.
2. Behr, R.A., Goodspeed, C.H., and Henry, R.M.,
“Potential errors in approximate methods of
structural analysis”, Jl. of Struct. Engg., Vol.115,
1989, pp 1002–1005.
3. Behr, R.A., Grotton, E.J., and Dwinal, C.A., “Revised
method of approximate structural analysis”, Jl.
232 Journal of Structural Engineering
Vol. 43, No. 2, June - july 2016
View publication stats
of Struct. Engg., ASCE, Vol. 116, No. 11, 1990,
pp 3242–3248.
Software
4. Xu, Z.F., “Design of building structure”, Beijing
Software Sci and Technol. Press, Beijing, China, 1992, pp
228–232.
5. Jinghai, Wu, “Approximate analysis of building
frames for vertical loads”, Jl. of Struct. Engg.,
ASCE, Vol. 121, No. 4, 1995, pp 784–787.
6. Hoenderkamp, J.C.D., “Approximate Deflection
analysis of Non-symmetric high-rise structures”,
Proc. of the fifth world congress on Habitat and
High-rise, amsterdam, 1995, pp 1185–1209.
7. Hoenderkamp, J.C.D., and Snijder, “Approximate
analysis of High-rise frames with flexible
connections”, Struct. Des. of tall Build., 2000,
pp 233–248.
8. Kanat Burak Bozdogan and Duygu Ozturk, “An
approximate method for free vibration analysis of
multi-bay coupled shear walls”, Mathematical and
computational applications, Vol. 12, No.1, 2007,
pp 41–50.
9. Okonkwo, V.O., Aginam, C.H., and Chidolue,
C.A., “Analysis of internal support moments of
continuous beams of equal spans using simplified
mathematical model approach”, Jl. of Sci. and
Multidisciplinary Res., Vol.2, 2010, pp 72–80.
10. Manicka Selvam, V.K. and Bindhu, K.R., “Split
frame method for lateral load analysis of short
frames”, Intl. Jl. of Civil and Struct. Engg., Vol. 1,
No. 4, 2011, pp 835–843.
11. Life John and Rajendran., M.G., “Comparative
studies of exact and approximate methods of
structural analysis”, Intl. Jl. of Engg. Res. and
Appl., Vol.3, No. 2, 2013, pp 764–769.
12. Reddy, C.S “Basic Structural Analysis”, Tata Mc-
Graw Hill, New Delhi.
13. Jacks R. Benjamin, “Statically Indeterminate
structures”, Mc-Graw hill book company, New
York.
14. Wang, C. K., “Intermediate structural analysis”,
Mc-Grow Hill International book company, New
Delhi. (Discussion on this article must
reach the editor before September 30, 2016).
(Discussion on this article must reach the editor before
September 30, 2016)