ISSN: 2277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (JETT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 Seismic Analysis of Multistoried Building Mahesh N. Patil, Yogesh N. Sonawane Abstract—The effective design and the construction of ‘earthquake resistant structures hase mach greater importance in all over the world. In this paper, the earthquake response of symmetrle multistoried building is studied by manual calculation ‘and seth the help of ETABS 9.7.1 software. The method includes seismic cooffcient method as recommended by IS 1893:2002. The responses obtained by manual analysis as ell as by soft ‘computing are compared. This paper provides complete guide line for manual as well $ software analysis of seismic coefficient ‘metiod. Index Terms—earthquake, manual calculation, ETABS 9.7.1, 15 1893:2002 I. INTRODUCTION ETARS is the present day leading design software in the market. Many design company's use this software for their project design purpose. So, this paper mainly deals with the comparative analysis of the results obtained from the analysis of a multi storey building structure when analyzed manually and using ETABS software separately. In this case, a 22.5mx 22.5m, § storey structure is modeled using ETABS software. The height of each storey is taken as 3meter making the total height of the structure 24 meter. Analysis of the structure is done and then the results generated by this software are compared with manual analysis of the structure using IS 1893:2002 I. PROBLEM DEFINATION AL Case A22.5mx 22.5 m, 8 storey multi storey regular strerure is considered for the study. Storey height is 3m. Modeling and analysis of the structure is done on ETABS software. B. Preliminary Data Tength x Width Tsmx io Sm Teh 20 mu x 400 mam Colum 00 mm x 500 mm Slab thiclaiess 150m Support Condition Fixed Thickness Extemal Wall 120mm Grade of Concrete and steel Length of each bay 0 and FeAl ©. Loading Consideration Loads aeting on the structure are dead load (DL), Live ‘Load (IL) and Earthquake Load (EL) DL: Self weight of the structure, Floor load and Wall loads 123 LL: Live load 3KN/mt’ is considered Seismic: Zone: I Zone Factor: 0.16 Soil type: I Response reduetion factor: R= Importanee factor: | Damping: 5% Time period: 0.41 2002) 7 see (calculated as per IS 1893: TI. ACTUAL ANALYSIS. Ds be et Yo om Om he on tle ay Dew oe los wa 18 sc /papaa Danaea +0 5s. WES BBVas B Fig 2: Elevation of structure (ETABS model)ISSN: 2277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (JETT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 A. Dead Load (D. L.) per floor TABS NoninesrvST7a- 2 [Ban View - WA Beaton’ it Ele Est View (Deine Ow Select asign Agahoe Dil Tens] SZE(LBH)as | No] DasiN’ | Dead Do DB Ble metal ropes ms) | Load 4 » | cas Bem | O20n75 | 24 we [as Rg a Column | OS0a3 | 16 a | 2308 x es Teen Eas 5 \ Bipheag. Sib 5 T oy ise sg ous eae wal | soins | 4 2 pee as SUM | Hy Sectonome [150 ik ble Gok View Deine iw Select asxgn — = Dob GS Ble Matera Properties. = x % vate S Wall’Siab/Deck Sections... Berdeg pe & NE tik Properties. ——————— * Frame Noninea Hinge Properties. Sod 6 wets Cae Fig 4: Procedure to model slab (ETABS model) B. UDI due to walt: : Wall is not modulated only UDL is due to wall on beam is considered. one ies on) i wah 23 i=— er) T inmyce tts cas ce Fig 5: Procedure to assign UDL to beam (ETABS model) (Ref.6) eee ei aa ar UDL OF WALL = 0.12thikess) = 3¢height of wall) =20 (bviek density) = 72 kN =— ie © Live toad on floor area As mentioned in ILC, Live load is considered 3KN/m* on each floor. Fach floor ha: dimension 2.5m:x72.5m Live load on each floors | once $322,$502.5= 1518.78 KN | eres | As per 1593:2002(pg.o, 24) Clause no. 73.1 Table no 8 Fig 5: Procedure to model bean sid columas,ETABS model) : ‘rte enly 25% live load is considered in seismic weight calculations 104ISSN: 2277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (JETT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 25% of live load 79.6875 KN, 25x 1918.75 aoe aes receipt ute 742 Tennant OGURA apa psa atee ee Cctdicdtom wepeCamtane ohana pecs pelea tre (comet) ‘Satya oy w ssi — a oo = mata 11 ing pooh a ned shensees hfe tier Gee fa Stee ton Jake aly Dep Dime OeOeS oo al» Heme om 0% ee iT-1a-|P" Nc cngiine. _ Ualrenr Sea dee Fig 7: Procedure to assign live load on floor Fig 8: Applied live load 128 143 Tedngn ra eta ete compaed 1 Hr Darian af feceraiang waa Tas eog merce Fig 9: Live load reduction clause as per 18 18932000 (Ret) 17 Dirt Den Fr} D. Load combination ‘As per IS 1893:2000, the load combination Dead load + Live Load becomes, DL + 25% LL. DL = 3132.9, 25% LL = 379.687 DL+ 25% LL = 3572.5875 KN per each floor. This live load reduction is defined by a command mass, souree in ETABS 7.1 Edt_Wiew | Deine Duow Sdect Assign Doe eh SH Le Meee mmm 2 V'sIsb/Dect Sections I LinkPropetes. re Noninge Hinge Proper Baayen Dispmagme Secon Cute 1 Response Spectrum Function BR) Time Histon Functions 1B suai Load Cave. ‘Add Sequential Construction Cave BR toed Combinations 4801 O04 xwaa7 Aa Spel Simic Loud tet. acd Fig 10; Procedure to define Mass Source (ETABS riodel) (Ref.6)ISSN: 2277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering an Volume 4, Issue 9, M oo Fig 11: Actual Mass Source window in ETABS (Ref.6) E. Seismic weight calculation of building As per IML, C w Lummped ma: W4=WS=W6=W at roof floor 512.5875 kN Inthe calculation of seismie weight, for the terrace floor 50% sd for walls and columns. = (648 2 93.7 EN. Total weight (W) = x7) +2693.7 7281,8125 KN, Now the seismic weisl shown below obtain in ETABS software is a: fk fe it fe dee tm et ir fe iy pe Orie Oe/RBH 0% FB 50 BA fndetioe ee se Feeieareateon. ECE Pre rity ert Fig 12: Procedure to display axial loads in columns (ETABS model) Ret) Technology (IJEIT) Axial load in each colunm of first loor(W1) (ETABS model) Ret.) Now the algebraic sum of all the axial forces seismic weight of the complete building. The same values can be obtained in the table form and facility of exporting these values in excel is available in ETABS that algebraic sum and other any mathematical calculations can be simplifies excel. The procedure of export explained as below in four steps Step L se values in ETABS is TAS hoes -r2- BD Ven WL_ fifo Digan ik fe sa Yon ne Dp Set Sse fede ign Dey Cts ba OF RVG JP fouled sge he hk Se 77 Stow Deformed raze. a ay 1262277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering and Innov ive Technology (JETT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 Step2 ANALYSIS RESULTS (1 of 22 tables selected) © (Displacements 5 Bd Reactions 2 08 Suppo Feactons Sep = - Sa lea age ee et eee ae g- -—---———— i aE ieee a= Sn SS ne ree sete It ae Ve Fa a ~ = Soe ets Font ee de ena Ea SS es | eS es sep ee = |— — Fig 14: Procedure to export axial force of column in excel Seismic weight obtained from ETABS = 27281.8 KN, IV. ANALYSIS FOR BASE SHEAR A. Design Seismic Base Shear ‘As per IS 1893:2002, Page No. 24, The total design lateral force or design seismic base Shear (VB) along any principal direction shall be determined by the following expression Vom Anxw Where (Rei.5) Ah= Design horizontal acceleration spectrum Value as per Clause 6.4.2, using the fundamental natural period T. as per Clause 7.6 in the considered direction of vibration, and w= Seismic weight of the building as per Clause 7.4.2 [As per IS 1893:2002, Clause 6.4.2, Page No. 14 ZI s. Ay =Sxox— 2°R g Where, senedREt) Z0.16, As per IS 1893:2002, Table No.2 and ANNEX E, Zone Factor for I zone, 1, As per IS 1893:2002, Table No.6, Importance factor. It is depends on the functional use of the structure, RE 3, As per IS 1893:2002, Table No.7, Response seduction factor, Salg = Average response acceleration coefficient, ‘The value of average response acceleration coefficient is determined from the graph given on page no.16 of IS 1893:2002, inl Esty a] ies wo sete Pepin Aeomeadcins ~ a= Fig 1S: Graph Saig Vs. Time period. (Ref§) 127ISSN: 2277. ISO 9001:2008 International Journal of Engineering an 3754 Certified \d Innovative Technology (IJEIT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 For determination of average response acceleration coefficient, itis required to calculate time period As per IS 1893:2002, Page No.7, time period T is given by 0.09 va Where, H- Height of the building in meter. ~ 24m Note: As per IS 1893:2002 for the terrace floor, half of the total load is considered for walls and columns. So while modeling in ETABS, top story height is modeled 1.5m while height of other stories is 3m. So in ETABS model H = 22.Sm ‘dBase dimension of the building in meter = 22.4 m T,= 0.455 see. (Rei) T, = 0.427 sec.(In case of ETABS) From the graph as shown in Fig. 12. Sal ‘Now Design horizontal acceleration spectrum Value can be cealeulated. 0.16 1 52.5 = 0.0667 2 RRGRER RRS BRERRERSR [ERRRRRERERURRRER gesebbeeweeseen i le Fig 17: Window of ETABS base shear value Vj (1797.28, I) in ETABS. (Ref.6) B. Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different Floor Levels: The design base shear Vp shall be distributed long the height of the building as per following equation Now base shear oarerelite Va = Ag x w= 0.0667 x 27281.8125 Tham hy ‘VB = 1819.696 KN. (RAS) Where, = Design lateral force at floor &, Vert ad Esti ‘sical W,= Seismic weight of floor i, ex | cYm Sinedeeioe2 «floor i CXOMERAY CVO gee EE sic= Height of floor i measured from base, and CNOeEeaY CY Bram = Number of storeys inthe building is the number ce ‘Number of storeys in the building is the mumbs eos ES of levels at which the masses are located Fetes Salle = Grew fon Oi | gett Floor Hee | Wik @ [Bae (cts Shear Toned fo (es) Chet OF) | | pepaassicin wi 3 [s1eis29_| 9624 | 181909 Rte wr 6 [iaeassas [aes [181007 @ twteiet 12 ws 9 [asesios9 | s602 [7757 fe] wa 12 _[sossiz6 | isaas | 198495 oo 1530.97 poms fa ext | ws 1s [79038219 | 240.6 [155 ae camel We 18 [11380783 | 346.46 [129037 wr ai | tstoos; | araay | 7 ws 24 [assistiz | a7aa4 [7254 Fig 16: Window of ETABS showing IS 1893:2000 inputs Time ; Wim 3977 Period, Zone factor, Soll factor, response reduction faetor. 9774319 (Ret) 128ISSN: 2277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engi ering and Tnnovative Technology (IJEIT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 C. Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different Floor Levels from ETABS ee Thi ue tr te tor et bor te Bay fo So DE DBE PB vi RAs Smisenin ciuseiea ome Fe are decumirtece | Feit Fig 18: Vertical Distribution of Base Shear fo Different Floor Fig 19: Procedure to display base shear of each story (ETABS model) (Ref.6 oe ver mH as = See aie a ea =a = ae a — a — a = 2s ry ss — = sao So aes ae roe == vette I let oe s wor ee a ae eee (eco) Fig 20: Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different Floor Levels (Out put from ETABS) (Ref) V. CONCLUSION From the data revealed by the manual as well as software analysis for the structures with seismic coefficient method using loading combinations tied following conclusions are drawa: 1, Seismic analysis was done by using ETABS software and successfully verified manually as per IS 1893-2002. 2. There is a gradual increase inthe value of lateral forces from bottom floor to top floor in both manual as well as software analysis 3.Calculation of seismic weight by both manual analysis as well as software analysis gives exactly same result, 4.There is slight variation in the values of base manual analysis as well as software analysis 5.Base shear values obtained by mannal analysis are slightly higher than software analysi 6. Results as compared and approximately same mathematical values are objained for §-story building, 7.Complete guideline for the use of ETABS 7.1 for seismic coefficient analysis is made available by this paper. 8.To conclude a complete design involving several parameters so as to result the earthquake has been done and 43D prospective is shown for easy understanding and use. VI. FUTURE ENHANCEMENT 1, Any structural engineer can use this paper as a guide line for seismic analysis of any multistoried building. 2. The results obtained by this method can be compared vith results of Response Spectrum Method and Time History Method. REFERENCES [1] Agarwal Pankaj, Shrikhende Manish, “Earthquake resistant design of stracmares", PHI learning private limited, New Dela 2009 (2). Adlekar Jaswant N, Jain Sudhis K. and Murry CVR, (1997), “Seismic Response of RC Frame Buildings with Soft First Storeys”. Proceedings ofthe CBRI Golden Jubilee Conference con Natural Hnzards in Urban Habitat, 1997, New Delhi (3) Avvkar J.C. and Lui EM, “Seiamic analysis and response of imaltietorey semi rigid ames", Jounal of Engineering Structures, Volume 21, Issue 5, Page no: 425-442, 1997, (4) Kollam 10,, Kore PN, §. B. Tanawade, “Analysis of Multi-tovey Building Frames Subjected to Gravity and Seismic Loads with Varying Inertia", Intemational Journal of Engineering and Inovative Technology (UEIT). Volume 2 Issue 10, April 2013, [5] B. Srikanth, VRamesh, “Comparative Study of Seismic ‘Respoase for Seismic Coefficient ead Response Specwum Methods", Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, ISSN: 2248-9022, Vol. 3, Ise 5, Sep-Oct 2013, pp.1919-1924, [6] 1S: 1893:2000, Part 1, “Critesia for Esrthquke Resistant Design of Structures - General Provisions for Buildings", Bureau of Indina Standards, New Delhi, 2002 [7] ETABS Non linear version 97.1 129ISSN: 2277-3754 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (JETT) Volume 4, Issue 9, March 2015 AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY Makes N. Pai BE Cob, M Tech, (STRUCTURE) SVNIT, Surat MISTE Asta Profesor, RCPIT, Skispur YoushN. Sonawane BE Coin. M.Tech. (STRUCTURE) SVNIT, Suat MISTE Assistant Professor, RCPIT, Shispur 130