International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017
Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with
Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center
Mahdi Hosseini, N. V. Ramana Rao
Abstract: Shear walls are a type of structural system that provides
lateral resistance to a building or structure. They resist in-
plane loads that are applied along its height. The applied load is
generally transferred to the wall by a diaphragm or collector
or drag member. The seismic motion that reaches a structure on
the surface of the earth is influenced by local soil conditions. The
subsurface soil layers underlying the building foundation may
amplify the response of the building to earthquake motions
originating in the bedrock. Three types soil are considered
here:Hard soil ,Medium soil,soft soil.In this paper, a typical multi
storey building is analyzed using software ETABS by dynamic
(Response Spectrum) analysis. All the analyses has been carried
out as per the Indian Standard code books. Analysis is done on
thirty storey high and provided with box shape Shear Walls at
the center under different type of soil. Seismic performance of
building model is evaluated. This study is done on RC framed
multistory building with RC shear walls with fixed support
conditions In present work, thirty storey buildings for
earthquake zone V in India. This paper aims to study the
behaviour of reinforced concrete building by conducting dynamic
analysis for most suited positions and location of shear wall
under different type of soil . Estimation of structural response
such as; storey displacements, storey moment ,storey shear,
storey drift , Pier Forces, column forces is carried out. Dynamic
responses under zone V earthquake as per IS 1893 (part 1) : 2002
have been carried out. In dynamic analysis; Response Spectrum
method is used.
Keywords: Response Spectrum method, Soft, Medium &Hard
Soil, Box Shape Shear Wall, Structural Response,
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Shear Wall Structure
The usefulness of shear walls in framing of buildings has
long been recognized. Walls situated in advantageous
positions in a building can form an efficient lateral-force-
resisting system, simultaneously fulfilling other functional
requirements. When a permanent and similar subdivision of
floor areas in all stories is required as in the case of hotels or
apartment buildings, numerous shear walls can be utilized
not only for lateral force resistance but also to carry gravity
loads. In such case, the floor by floor repetitive planning
allows the walls to be vertically continuous which may serve
simultaneously as excellent acoustic and fire insulators
between the apartments. Shear walls may be planar but are
often of L-, T-, I-, or U-Box shaped section to better suit the
planning and to increase their flexural stiffness.
The positions of shear walls within a building are
usually dictated by functional requirements. These may or
may not suit structural planning.
Revised Version Manuscript Received on November 17, 2017.
Mahdi Hosseini, Ph.D. Scholar, Student in Structural Engineering,
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University
Hyderabad (JNTUH), Hyderabad, Telengana, India. Email:
civil.mahdi.hosseini@gmail.com
N. V. Ramana Rao, Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Jawaharlal
Nehru Technological University Hyderabad (JNTUH), Hyderabad, &
Director of National Institute of Technology Warangal, Telangana, India.
Email: rao.nvr@gmail.com
50
The purpose of a building and consequent allocation of floor
space may dictate. required arrangements of walls that can
often be readily utilized for lateral force resistance. Building
sites, architectural interests or client’s desire may lead the
positions of walls that are undesirable from a structural point
of view. However, structural designers are often in the
position to advice as to the most desirable locations for
shear walls in order to optimize seismic resistance. The
major structural considerations for individual shear walls
will be aspects of symmetry in stiffness, torsional stability
and available overturning capacity of the foundations
(Paulay and Priestley, 1992).
B. Earthquake Load
The seismic weight of building is the sum of seismic
weight of all the floors. The seismic weight of each floor is
its full dead load plus appropriate amount of imposed load,
the latter being that part of the imposed loads that may
reasonably be expected to be attached to the structure at the
time of earthquake shaking. It includes the weight of
permanent and movable partitions, permanent equipment, a
part of the live load, etc. While computing the seismic
weight of columns and walls in any storey shall be equally
distributed to the floors above and below the storey.
Earthquake forces experienced by a building result from
ground motions (accelerations) which are also fluctuating or
dynamic in nature, in fact they reverse direction some what
chaotically. The magnitude of an earthquake force depends
on the magnitude of an earthquake, distance from the
earthquake source(epicenter), local ground conditions that
may amplify ground shaking (or dampen it), the weight(or
mass) of the structure, and the type of structural system and
its ability to with stand abusive cyclic loading. In theory and
practice, the lateral force that a building experiences from an
earthquake increases in direct proportion with the
acceleration of ground motion at the building site and the
mass of the building (i.e., a doubling in ground motion
acceleration or building mass will double the load).This
theory rests on the simplicity and validity of Newton’s law
of physics: F = m x a, where ‘F’ represents force, ‘m’
represents mass or weight, and ‘a’ represents acceleration.
For example, as a car accelerates forward, a force is
imparted to the driver through the seat to push him forward
with the car(this force is equivalent to the weight of the
driver multiplied by the acceleration or rate of change in
speed of the car). As the brake is applied, the car is
decelerated and a force is imparted to the driver by the seat-
belt to push him back toward the seat. Similarly, as the
ground accelerates back and forth during an earthquake it
imparts back-and-forth (cyclic) forces to a building through
its foundation which is forced to move with the ground.
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center
One can imagine a very light structure such as fabric tent
that will be undamaged in almost any earthquake but it will
not survive high wind.
The reason is the low mass (weight) of the tent. Therefore,
residential buildings generally perform reasonably well in
earthquakes but are more vulnerable in high-wind load
prone areas. Regardless, the proper amount of bracing is
required in both cases.
C. Stiffness and Drift Limitations
The provision of adequate lateral stiffness is a major
consideration in the design of a tall building in seismic zone.
Firstly, deflection must be maintained at a sufficiently low
level for the proper functioning of non-structural
components such as elevators and doors. Secondly, it must
be limited to prevent excessive cracking and consequent loss
of stiffness, and to avoid any redistribution of load to non
structural elements such as partitions, infill, cladding or
glazing. Thirdly, the structure must be sufficiently stiff to
prevent dynamic motions becoming large enough to cause
discomfort to occupants, prevent delicate work being
undertaken or affect the sensitive equipments. One simple
parameter that can be used to estimate the lateral stiffness of
a building is the drift index. It can be defined as the ratio of
the maximum deflection at the top of the building to the
total height. In addition to that, the inter-story drift index
gives a measure of possible localized excessive deformation.
The control of lateral deflections is of particular importance
for modern tall buildings in which the traditional reserves of
stiffness due to heavy internal partitions and outer cladding
have largely disappeared. Smith and Coull (1991) state that
the design drift index limits that have been used on different
countries range from 0.001 to 0.005. Generally, lower
values would be used for hotels or apartment buildings than
for office buildings. Sufficient stiffness must be provided to
ensure that the top deflection does not exceed this value
under extreme load events. As the building height increases,
drift index coefficient should be decreased to the lower end
of the range to keep the story deflection to a suitably low
level. If excessive, the drift of a structure can be reduced by
changing geometric configuration to alter the mode of
lateral load resistance. Increasing the bending stiffness of
the horizontal members, adding additional stiffness by
inclusion of stiffer wall or core members, achieving stiffer
connections and even by sloping the exterior columns are
some of the solutions. As per Indian standard, Criteria for
earthquake resistant design of structures, IS 1893 (Part 1) :
2002, the story drift in any story due to service load shall not
exceed 0.004 times the story height.
D. Site Selection
The seismic motion that reaches a structure on the surface
of the earth is influenced by local soil conditions. The
subsurface soil layers underlying the building foundation
may amplify the response of the building to earthquake
motions originating in the bedrock.
For soft soils the earthquake vibrations can be
significantly amplified and hence the shaking of structures
sited on soft soils can be much greater than for structures
sited on hard soils. Hence the appropriate soil investigation
should be carried out to establish the allowable bearing
capacity and nature of soil. The choice of a site for a
building from the failure prevention point of view is mainly
concerned with the stability of the ground. The very loose
51
sands or sensitive clays are liable to be destroyed by the
earthquake, so much as to lose their original structure and
thereby undergo compaction. This would result in large
unequal settlements and damage the building. If the loose
cohesion less soils are saturated with water they are likely to
lose their shear resistance altogether during ground shaking.
This leads to liquefaction. Although such soils can be
compacted, for small buildings the operation may be too
costly and the sites having these soils are better avoided.
For large building complexes, such as housing
developments, new colonies, etc. this factor should be
thoroughly investigated and the site has to be selected
appropriately. Therefore a site with sufficient bearing
capacity and free from the above defects should be chosen
and its drainage condition improved so that no water
accumulates and saturates the ground especially close to the
footing level.
E. Bearing capacity of foundation soil
Three soil types are considered here:
I. Hard- Those soils, which have an allowable
bearing capacity of more than 10t/m2.
II. Medium - Those soils, which have an allowable
bearing capacity less than or equal to 10t/m2
III. Soft - Those soils, which are liable to large
differential settlement or liquefaction during an
earthquake.
Soils must be avoided or compacted to improve them
so as to qualify them either as firm or stiff. The allowable
bearing pressure shall be determined in accordance with IS:
1888-1982 load test (Revision 1992). It is a common
practice to increase the allowable bearing pressure by one-
third, i.e. 33%, while performing seismic analysis of the
materials like massive crystalline bedrock sedimentary rock,
dense to very dense soil and heavily over consolidated
cohesive soils, such as a stiff to hard clays. For the structure
to react to the motion, it needs to overcome its own inertia,
which results in an interaction between the structure and the
soil. The extent to which the structural response may alter
the characteristics of earthquake motions observed at the
foundation level depends on the relative mass and stiffness
properties of the soil and the structure. Thus the physical
property of the foundation medium is an important factor in
the earthquake response of structures supported on it. There
are two aspects of building foundation interaction during
earthquakes, which are of primary importance to earthquake
engineering. First, the response to earthquake motion of a
structure founded on a deformable soil can be significantly
different from that would occur if the structure is supported
on a rigid foundation. Second, the motion recorded at the
base of a structure or in the immediate vicinity can be
different from that which would have been recorded had
there been no building. Observations of the response of the
buildings during earthquakes have shown that the response
of typical structures can be markedly influenced by the soil
properties if the soils are sufficiently soft. Furthermore, for
relatively rigid structures such as nuclear reactor
containment structures, interaction effects can be important,
even for relatively firm soils because the important
parameter apparently is not the stiffness of the soil, but the
relative stiffness of the
building and its foundation.
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

In terms of the dynamic properties of the building
foundation system, past studies have shown that the
interaction will, in general, reduce the fundamental
frequency of the system from that of the structure on a rigid
base, dissipate part of the vibrational energy of the building
by wave radiation into the foundation medium and modify
Seismic Behaiour of RC Shear Wall
the base motion of the structure in comparison to the free-
field motion. Although all these effects may be present in
some degree for every structure, the important point is to
establish under what conditions the effects are of practical
significance.

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
52
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

II. METHODOLOGY Quite a few methods are available for the earthquake
analysis of buildings; two of them are presented here:
Earthquake motion causes vibration of the structure
1- Equivalent Static Lateral Force Method (pseudo
leading to inertia forces. Thus a structure must be able to
static method).
safely transmit the horizontal and the vertical inertia forces
2- Dynamic analysis.
generated in the super structure through the foundation to
the ground. Hence, for most of the ordinary structures,
earthquake-resistant design requires ensuring that the
structure has adequate lateral load carrying capacity.
Seismic codes will guide a designer to safely design the
structure for its intended purpose.

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
53 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

I. Response spectrum method. Earthquake load must be considered for +X, -X, +Y and –Y
II. Time history method. directions.
Dynamic Analysis Table 1: Details of The Building
Dynamic analysis shall be performed to obtain the design
seismic force, and its distribution in different levels along Building
Details
the height of the building, and in the various lateral load Parameters
resisting element, for the following buildings: Special RC moment resisting
Regular buildings: Those greater than 40m in height in Type of frame
frame fixed at the base
zones IV and V, those greater than 90m in height in zone II
and III. Building plan 38.5m X 35.5m
Irregular buildings: All framed buildings higher than
12m in zones IV and V, and those greater than 40m in Number of storeys 30
height in zones II and III.
The analysis of model for dynamic analysis of buildings Floor height 3.5 m
with unusual configuration should be such that it adequately
models the types of irregularities present in the building Depth of Slab 225 mm
configuration. Buildings with plan irregularities, as defined
in Table 4 of IS code: 1893-2002 cannot be modeled for Size of beam (300 × 600) mm
dynamic analysis.
Dynamic analysis may be performed either by the TIME Size of column
(1250×1250) mm up to story five
HISTORY METHOD or by the RESPONSE SPECTRUM (exterior)
METHOD
Response Spectrum Method Size of column
The word spectrum in engineering conveys the idea that (900×900) mm Above story five
(exterior)
the response of buildings having a broad range of periods is
summarized in a single graph. This method shall be
Size of column
performed using the design spectrum specified in code or by (1250×1250) mm up to story ten
(interior)
a site-specific design spectrum for a structure prepared at a
project site. The values of damping for building may be
Size of column
taken as 2 and 5 percent of the critical, for the purposes of (900×900) mm Above story ten
(interior)
dynamic of steel and reinforce concrete buildings,
respectively. For most buildings, inelastic response can be
expected to occur during a major earthquake, implying that Spacing between 7.5-8.5 m along x - direction
an inelastic analysis is more proper for design. However, in frames 7.5-5.5 m along y - direction
spite of the availability of nonlinear inelastic programs, they
are not used in typical design practice because: Live load on floor 4 KN/m2
1- Their proper use requires knowledge of their inner
Floor finish 2.5 KN/m2
workings and theories. design criteria, and
2- Result produced are difficult to interpret and apply Wall load 25 KN/m
to traditional design criteria , and
3- The necessary computations are expensive. Grade of Concrete M 50 concrete
Therefore, analysis in practice typically use linear elastic
procedures based on the response spectrum method. The Grade of Steel Fe 500
response spectrum analysis is the preferred method because
it is easier to use. Thickness of shear
450 mm
wall
III. MODELING OF BUILDING
Seismic zone V
A. Details of the Building
A symmetrical building of plan 38.5m X 35.5m located with Density of concrete 25 KN/m3
location in zone V, India is considered. Four bays of length
7.5m& one bays of length 8.5m along X - direction and Soft, Medium, Hard
Four bays of length 7.5m& one bays of length 5.5m along Soil Type I=Soft Soil
Y - direction are provided. Shear Wall is provided at the Type of soil
Soil Type II=Medium Soil
center core of building model. Soil Type III= Hard Soil
B. Load Combinations Response spectra As per IS 1893(Part-1):2002
As per IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 Clause no. 6.3.1.2, the Damping of
following load cases have to be considered for analysis: 5 percent
structure
1.5 (DL + IL)
1.2 (DL + IL ± EL)
1.5 (DL ± EL)
0.9 DL ± 1.5 EL

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
54
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

Figure 1. Plan of the Building Figure 2. 3D view showing shear wall location

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Table 2: Lateral Loads of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X –Direction for load cases EQXP
SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
Story Elevation Location X-Dir X-Dir X-Dir
m kN kN kN
30TH 111 Top 788.0822 1071.7918 1316.0973
29TH 107.5 Top 802.651 1091.6053 1340.4271
28TH 104 Top 751.2361 1021.6812 1254.5644
27TH 100.5 Top 701.523 954.0713 1171.5434
26TH 97 Top 653.5115 888.7757 1091.3643
25TH 93.5 Top 607.2018 825.7944 1014.0269
24TH 90 Top 562.5936 765.1273 939.5314
23RD 86.5 Top 519.6872 706.7746 867.8776
22ND 83 Top 478.4824 650.7361 799.0656
21ST 79.5 Top 438.9793 597.0119 733.0955
20TH 76 Top 401.1779 545.6019 669.9671
19TH 72.5 Top 365.0781 496.5062 609.6805
18TH 69 Top 330.68 449.7248 552.2357
17TH 65.5 Top 297.9836 405.2577 497.6326
16TH 62 Top 266.9889 363.1049 445.8714

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
55 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

15TH 58.5 Top 237.6958 323.2663 396.952

14TH 55 Top 210.1044 285.742 350.8744
13TH 51.5 Top 184.2147 250.532 307.6385
12TH 48 Top 160.0266 217.6362 267.2445
11TH 44.5 Top 137.5403 187.0547 229.6922
10TH 41 Top 117.9886 160.4645 197.041
9TH 37.5 Top 99.8447 135.7888 166.7407
8TH 34 Top 82.0768 111.6245 137.0683
7TH 30.5 Top 66.0484 89.8258 110.3008
6TH 27 Top 51.7595 70.3929 86.4384
5TH 23.5 Top 40.255 54.7468 67.2259
4TH 20 Top 29.9683 40.7568 50.047
3RD 16.5 Top 20.3971 27.7401 34.0632
2ND 13 Top 12.6616 17.2198 21.1449
1ST 9.5 Top 6.7616 9.1958 11.2919
PLINTH 6 Top 1.4296 1.9442 2.3874
Base 0 Top 0 0 0
A plot for Lateral Loads of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X –Direction for load cases EQXP has been
shown here

Graph 1: Lateral Loads of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X –Direction
Table 3: Stiffness of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X –Direction for load cases EQXP
SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
Story Elevation Location X-Dir X-Dir X-Dir
m kN/m kN/m kN/m
30TH 111 Top 158381.126 158381.126 158381.126
29TH 107.5 Top 304820.61 304820.61 304820.61
28TH 104 Top 426099.529 426099.529 426099.529
27TH 100.5 Top 521829.67 521829.67 521829.67
26TH 97 Top 596139.507 596139.507 596139.507
25TH 93.5 Top 653296.417 653296.417 653296.417

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
56
Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

24TH 90 Top 697244.731 697244.731 697244.731

23RD 86.5 Top 731243.736 731243.736 731243.736
22ND 83 Top 757866.004 757866.004 757866.004
21ST 79.5 Top 779096.613 779096.613 779096.613
20TH 76 Top 796459.142 796459.142 796459.142
19TH 72.5 Top 811132.376 811132.376 811132.376
18TH 69 Top 824047.802 824047.802 824047.802
17TH 65.5 Top 835968.22 835968.22 835968.22
16TH 62 Top 847551.522 847551.522 847551.522
15TH 58.5 Top 859404.644 859404.644 859404.644
14TH 55 Top 872134.49 872134.49 872134.49
13TH 51.5 Top 886388.491 886388.491 886388.491
12TH 48 Top 903005.62 903005.62 903005.62
11TH 44.5 Top 922254.804 922254.804 922254.804
10TH 41 Top 948997.572 948997.572 948997.572
9TH 37.5 Top 977803.611 977803.611 977803.611
8TH 34 Top 1015463.943 1015463.943 1015463.943
7TH 30.5 Top 1064358.095 1064358.095 1064358.095
6TH 27 Top 1130715.464 1130715.464 1130715.464
5TH 23.5 Top 1226013.876 1226013.876 1226013.876
4TH 20 Top 1339481.13 1339481.13 1339481.13
3RD 16.5 Top 1516467.16 1516467.16 1516467.16
2ND 13 Top 1806840.251 1806840.251 1806840.251
1ST 9.5 Top 2358089.455 2358089.455 2358089.455
PLINTH 6 Top 3044220.373 3044220.373 3044220.373
Base 0 Top 0 0 0
Table 4: Stiffness of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y –Direction for load cases EQYP

SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III

Story Elevation Location Y-Dir Y-Dir Y-Dir
m kN/m kN/m kN/m
30TH 111 Top 114244.812 114244.812 114244.812
29TH 107.5 Top 225651.248 225651.248 225651.248
28TH 104 Top 325183.311 325183.311 325183.311
27TH 100.5 Top 411537.184 411537.184 411537.184
26TH 97 Top 485686.066 485686.066 485686.066
25TH 93.5 Top 548807.058 548807.058 548807.058
24TH 90 Top 602365.639 602365.639 602365.639
23RD 86.5 Top 647862.407 647862.407 647862.407
22ND 83 Top 686736.82 686736.82 686736.82
21ST 79.5 Top 720312.671 720312.671 720312.671
20TH 76 Top 749782.672 749782.672 749782.672
19TH 72.5 Top 776214.996 776214.996 776214.996
18TH 69 Top 800572.833 800572.833 800572.833

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
57 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

17TH 65.5 Top 823741.302 823741.302 823741.302

16TH 62 Top 846559.21 846559.21 846559.21
15TH 58.5 Top 869854.874 869854.874 869854.874
14TH 55 Top 894490.095 894490.095 894490.095
13TH 51.5 Top 921398.569 921398.569 921398.569
12TH 48 Top 951743.906 951743.906 951743.906
11TH 44.5 Top 986339.518 986339.518 986339.518
10TH 41 Top 1029690.263 1029690.263 1029690.263
9TH 37.5 Top 1078251.194 1078251.194 1078251.194
8TH 34 Top 1139475.911 1139475.911 1139475.911
7TH 30.5 Top 1216576.372 1216576.372 1216576.372
6TH 27 Top 1317689.178 1317689.178 1317689.178
5TH 23.5 Top 1457780.887 1457780.887 1457780.887
4TH 20 Top 1633059.784 1633059.784 1633059.784
3RD 16.5 Top 1900437.015 1900437.015 1900437.015
2ND 13 Top 2332077.853 2332077.853 2332077.853
1ST 9.5 Top 3148215.488 3148215.488 3148215.488
PLINTH 6 Top 4184894.988 4184894.988 4184894.988
Base 0 Top 0 0 0
Table 5: Storey Displacment of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load
combination (DL +EQXP)

SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III

Load Story Maximum Story Maximum Story Maximum
Story Case/Combo Direction Displacements Displacements Displacements
mm mm mm
30TH DLEQXP X 250.645 340.877 418.577
29TH DLEQXP X 245.557 333.958 410.08
28TH DLEQXP X 240.192 326.662 401.121
27TH DLEQXP X 234.508 318.93 391.628
26TH DLEQXP X 228.441 310.68 381.497
25TH DLEQXP X 221.961 301.867 370.674
24TH DLEQXP X 215.05 292.468 359.133
23RD DLEQXP X 207.706 282.481 346.87
22ND DLEQXP X 199.938 271.916 333.897
21ST DLEQXP X 191.762 260.796 320.243
20TH DLEQXP X 183.2 249.153 305.945
19TH DLEQXP X 174.281 237.023 291.05
18TH DLEQXP X 165.037 224.451 275.612
17TH DLEQXP X 155.504 211.485 259.691
16TH DLEQXP X 145.719 198.178 243.351
15TH DLEQXP X 135.726 184.587 226.662
14TH DLEQXP X 125.568 170.772 209.698
13TH DLEQXP X 115.293 156.798 192.539
12TH DLEQXP X 104.952 142.734 175.269

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
58
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

11TH DLEQXP X 94.601 128.658 157.984

10TH DLEQXP X 84.297 114.644 140.776
9TH DLEQXP X 74.139 100.829 123.812
8TH DLEQXP X 64.157 87.253 107.141
7TH DLEQXP X 54.439 74.037 90.913
6TH DLEQXP X 45.08 61.309 75.284
5TH DLEQXP X 36.2 49.232 60.454
4TH DLEQXP X 27.959 38.025 46.692
3RD DLEQXP X 20.363 27.693 34.006
2ND DLEQXP X 13.603 18.5 22.717
1ST DLEQXP X 7.883 10.72 13.164
PLINTH DLEQXP X 3.12 4.244 5.211

A plot for Storey Displacement of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load combination
(DL+ EQXP) has been shown here

Graph 2: Storey Displacement of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction
Table 6: Storey Displacment of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y – Direction with load
combination (DL +EQYP)

SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III

Load Story Maximum Story Maximum Story Maximum
Story Case/Combo Direction Displacements Displacements Displacements
mm mm mm
30TH DLEQYP Y 254.404 345.989 424.855
29TH DLEQYP Y 247.374 336.428 413.114
28TH DLEQYP Y 240.153 326.608 401.055
27TH DLEQYP Y 232.729 316.511 388.657
26TH DLEQYP Y 225.058 306.079 375.847
25TH DLEQYP Y 217.118 295.281 362.587
24TH DLEQYP Y 208.896 284.099 348.857

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
59 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

23RD DLEQYP Y 200.389 272.529 334.65

22ND DLEQYP Y 191.602 260.579 319.976
21ST DLEQYP Y 182.547 248.265 304.854
20TH DLEQYP Y 173.243 235.61 289.315
19TH DLEQYP Y 163.711 222.648 273.398
18TH DLEQYP Y 153.982 209.416 257.15
17TH DLEQYP Y 144.088 195.959 240.627
16TH DLEQYP Y 134.065 182.329 223.889
15TH DLEQYP Y 123.956 168.58 207.007
14TH DLEQYP Y 113.805 154.775 190.054
13TH DLEQYP Y 103.66 140.978 173.113
12TH DLEQYP Y 93.575 127.262 156.27
11TH DLEQYP Y 83.607 113.705 139.623
10TH DLEQYP Y 73.813 100.385 123.267
9TH DLEQYP Y 64.283 87.425 107.352
8TH DLEQYP Y 55.052 74.871 91.937
7TH DLEQYP Y 46.203 62.836 77.159
6TH DLEQYP Y 37.817 51.431 63.155
5TH DLEQYP Y 29.992 40.79 50.087
4TH DLEQYP Y 22.857 31.085 38.171
3RD DLEQYP Y 16.416 22.325 27.414
2ND DLEQYP Y 10.81 14.702 18.053
1ST DLEQYP Y 6.174 8.397 10.311
PLINTH DLEQYP Y 2.271 3.088 3.792

A plot for Storey Displacement of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction with load combination
(DL +EQYP) has been shown here

Graph 3: Storey Displacement of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
60
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

For both X and Y directions, the behaviour of the graph is similar for model in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil as
shown. The order of maximum storey displacement in both the directions for the models is same.

Table 7: Storey Drifts of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load combination
(DL +EQXP)
SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
Elevation
Story m Location X-Dir X-Dir X-Dir
30TH 111 Top 0.001454 0.001977 0.002428
29TH 107.5 Top 0.001533 0.002085 0.00256
28TH 104 Top 0.001624 0.002209 0.002713
27TH 100.5 Top 0.001733 0.002357 0.002894
26TH 97 Top 0.001852 0.002518 0.003092
25TH 93.5 Top 0.001975 0.002685 0.003297
24TH 90 Top 0.002098 0.002853 0.003504
23RD 86.5 Top 0.002219 0.003018 0.003706
22ND 83 Top 0.002336 0.003177 0.003901
21ST 79.5 Top 0.002446 0.003327 0.004085
20TH 76 Top 0.002548 0.003466 0.004256
19TH 72.5 Top 0.002641 0.003592 0.004411
18TH 69 Top 0.002724 0.003705 0.004549
17TH 65.5 Top 0.002796 0.003802 0.004669
16TH 62 Top 0.002855 0.003883 0.004768
15TH 58.5 Top 0.002902 0.003947 0.004847
14TH 55 Top 0.002936 0.003993 0.004903
13TH 51.5 Top 0.002955 0.004018 0.004934
12TH 48 Top 0.002957 0.004022 0.004939
11TH 44.5 Top 0.002944 0.004004 0.004917
10TH 41 Top 0.002902 0.003947 0.004847
9TH 37.5 Top 0.002852 0.003879 0.004763
8TH 34 Top 0.002776 0.003776 0.004637
7TH 30.5 Top 0.002674 0.003637 0.004466
6TH 27 Top 0.002537 0.003451 0.004237
5TH 23.5 Top 0.002354 0.003202 0.003932
4TH 20 Top 0.00217 0.002952 0.003625
3RD 16.5 Top 0.001931 0.002627 0.003225
2ND 13 Top 0.001634 0.002223 0.002729
1ST 9.5 Top 0.001275 0.001732 0.002124
PLINTH 6 Top 0.00058 0.000787 0.000966
Base 0 Top 0 0 0

A plot for Storey Drifts of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load combination (DL
+EQXP) has been shown here

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
61 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

Graph 4: Storey Drifts of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction

Table 8: Storey Drifts of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction with load combination
(DL +EQYP)
SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
Elevation
Story m Location Y-Dir Y-Dir Y-Dir
30TH 111 Top 0.002009 0.002732 0.003354
29TH 107.5 Top 0.002063 0.002806 0.003446
28TH 104 Top 0.002121 0.002885 0.003542
27TH 100.5 Top 0.002192 0.002981 0.00366
26TH 97 Top 0.002269 0.003085 0.003789
25TH 93.5 Top 0.002349 0.003195 0.003923
24TH 90 Top 0.002431 0.003306 0.004059
23RD 86.5 Top 0.002511 0.003414 0.004193
22ND 83 Top 0.002587 0.003518 0.00432
21ST 79.5 Top 0.002659 0.003616 0.00444
20TH 76 Top 0.002723 0.003704 0.004548
19TH 72.5 Top 0.00278 0.003781 0.004642
18TH 69 Top 0.002827 0.003845 0.004721
17TH 65.5 Top 0.002864 0.003894 0.004782
16TH 62 Top 0.002888 0.003928 0.004824
15TH 58.5 Top 0.0029 0.003945 0.004844
14TH 55 Top 0.002898 0.003942 0.00484
13TH 51.5 Top 0.002881 0.003919 0.004812
12TH 48 Top 0.002848 0.003873 0.004756
11TH 44.5 Top 0.002798 0.003806 0.004673
10TH 41 Top 0.002723 0.003703 0.004547
9TH 37.5 Top 0.002637 0.003587 0.004404
8TH 34 Top 0.002528 0.003438 0.004222

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
62
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

7TH 30.5 Top 0.002396 0.003259 0.004001

6TH 27 Top 0.002236 0.00304 0.003733
5TH 23.5 Top 0.002039 0.002773 0.003405
4TH 20 Top 0.00184 0.002503 0.003073
3RD 16.5 Top 0.001602 0.002178 0.002675
2ND 13 Top 0.001325 0.001801 0.002212
1ST 9.5 Top 0.00101 0.001371 0.001681
PLINTH 6 Top 0.000449 0.00061 0.000749
Base 0 Top 0 0 0

A plot for Storey Drifts of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction with load combination (DL+
EQYP) has been shown here

Graph 5: Storey Drifts of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction

As per Indian standard, Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002, the story drift in any
story due to service load shall not exceed 0.004 times the story height. The height of the each storey is 3.5 m. So, the drift
limitation as per IS 1893 (part 1) : 2002 is 0.004 X 3.5 m = 14 mm. The model show a similar behaviour for storey drifts as
shown in graph.
Table 9: Storey Moment of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load combination
1.2(DL +EQXP)
SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
Story Elevation Location X-Dir X-Dir X-Dir
m kN-m kN-m kN-m
30TH 111 Top 434291.025 434291.025 434291.025
29TH 107.5 Top 963563.4094 963563.4094 963563.4094
28TH 104 Top 1492836 1492836 1492836
27TH 100.5 Top 2022108 2022108 2022108
26TH 97 Top 2551381 2551381 2551381
25TH 93.5 Top 3080653 3080653 3080653
24TH 90 Top 3609925 3609925 3609925
23RD 86.5 Top 4139198 4139198 4139198

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
63 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

22ND 83 Top 4668470 4668470 4668470

21ST 79.5 Top 5197742 5197742 5197742
20TH 76 Top 5727015 5727015 5727015
19TH 72.5 Top 6256287 6256287 6256287
18TH 69 Top 6785560 6785560 6785560
17TH 65.5 Top 7314832 7314832 7314832
16TH 62 Top 7844104 7844104 7844104
15TH 58.5 Top 8373377 8373377 8373377
14TH 55 Top 8902649 8902649 8902649
13TH 51.5 Top 9431922 9431922 9431922
12TH 48 Top 9961194 9961194 9961194
11TH 44.5 Top 10490466 10490466 10490466
10TH 41 Top 11019068 11019068 11019068
9TH 37.5 Top 11561694 11561694 11561694
8TH 34 Top 12104320 12104320 12104320
7TH 30.5 Top 12646946 12646946 12646946
6TH 27 Top 13189572 13189572 13189572
5TH 23.5 Top 13731024 13731024 13731024
4TH 20 Top 14307538 14307538 14307538
3RD 16.5 Top 14884052 14884052 14884052
2ND 13 Top 15460566 15460566 15460566
1ST 9.5 Top 16037080 16037080 16037080
PLINTH 6 Top 16328040 16328040 16328040
Base 0 Top 16575014 16575014 16575014

A plot for Storey Moment of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load combination
1.2(DL +EXP) has been shown here

Graph 6: Storey Moment of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
64
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

Table 10: Storey Moment of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y – Direction with load
combination 1.2(DL +EQYP)

SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III

Story Elevation Location Y-Dir Y-Dir Y-Dir
m kN-m kN-m kN-m
30TH 111 Top -470992 -470992 -470992
29TH 107.5 Top -1044991 -1044991 -1044991
28TH 104 Top -1618991 -1618991 -1618991
27TH 100.5 Top -2192991 -2192991 -2192991
26TH 97 Top -2766990 -2766990 -2766990
25TH 93.5 Top -3340990 -3340990 -3340990
24TH 90 Top -3914989 -3914989 -3914989
23RD 86.5 Top -4488989 -4488989 -4488989
22ND 83 Top -5062989 -5062989 -5062989
21ST 79.5 Top -5636988 -5636988 -5636988
20TH 76 Top -6210988 -6210988 -6210988
19TH 72.5 Top -6784988 -6784988 -6784988
18TH 69 Top -7358987 -7358987 -7358987
17TH 65.5 Top -7932987 -7932987 -7932987
16TH 62 Top -8506986 -8506986 -8506986
15TH 58.5 Top -9080986 -9080986 -9080986
14TH 55 Top -9654986 -9654986 -9654986
13TH 51.5 Top -10228985 -10228985 -10228985
12TH 48 Top -10802985 -10802985 -10802985
11TH 44.5 Top -11376985 -11376985 -11376985
10TH 41 Top -11950257 -11950257 -11950257
9TH 37.5 Top -12538738 -12538738 -12538738
8TH 34 Top -13127220 -13127220 -13127220
7TH 30.5 Top -13715702 -13715702 -13715702
6TH 27 Top -14304184 -14304184 -14304184
5TH 23.5 Top -14891393 -14891393 -14891393
4TH 20 Top -15516626 -15516626 -15516626
3RD 16.5 Top -16141859 -16141859 -16141859
2ND 13 Top -16767092 -16767092 -16767092
1ST 9.5 Top -17392326 -17392326 -17392326
PLINTH 6 Top -17707875 -17707875 -17707875
Base 0 Top -17975719 -17975719 -17975719

A plot for Storey Moment of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction with load combination
1.2(DL +EYP)has been shown here

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
65 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

Graph 7: Storey Moment of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y - Direction

Table 11: Storey Shear of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X – Direction with load
combination1.2 (DL +EQXP)

SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III

Story Elevation Location X-Dir X-Dir X-Dir
m kN kN kN
30TH 111 Top -1182.1233 -1607.6877 -1974.146
Bottom -1182.1233 -1607.6877 -1974.146
29TH 107.5 Top -2386.0998 -3245.0957 -3984.7866
Bottom -2386.0998 -3245.0957 -3984.7866
28TH 104 Top -3512.954 -4777.6174 -5866.6331
Bottom -3512.954 -4777.6174 -5866.6331
27TH 100.5 Top -4565.2385 -6208.7243 -7623.9483
Bottom -4565.2385 -6208.7243 -7623.9483
26TH 97 Top -5545.5058 -7541.8879 -9260.9947
Bottom -5545.5058 -7541.8879 -9260.9947
25TH 93.5 Top -6456.3084 -8780.5795 -10782.0351
Bottom -6456.3084 -8780.5795 -10782.0351
24TH 90 Top -7300.1989 -9928.2705 -12191.3321
Bottom -7300.1989 -9928.2705 -12191.3321
23RD 86.5 Top -8079.7297 -10988.4323 -13493.1485
Bottom -8079.7297 -10988.4323 -13493.1485
22ND 83 Top -8797.4533 -11964.5365 -14691.747
Bottom -8797.4533 -11964.5365 -14691.747
21ST 79.5 Top -9455.9223 -12860.0543 -15791.3902
Bottom -9455.9223 -12860.0543 -15791.3902
20TH 76 Top -10057.6891 -13678.4571 -16796.3408
Bottom -10057.6891 -13678.4571 -16796.3408

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
66
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

19TH 72.5 Top -10605.3063 -14423.2165 -17710.8614

Bottom -10605.3063 -14423.2165 -17710.8614
18TH 69 Top -11101.3263 -15097.8038 -18539.2149
Bottom -11101.3263 -15097.8038 -18539.2149
17TH 65.5 Top -11548.3017 -15705.6904 -19285.6639
Bottom -11548.3017 -15705.6904 -19285.6639
16TH 62 Top -11948.7851 -16250.3477 -19954.4711
Bottom -11948.7851 -16250.3477 -19954.4711
15TH 58.5 Top -12305.3288 -16735.2471 -20549.8991
Bottom -12305.3288 -16735.2471 -20549.8991
14TH 55 Top -12620.4854 -17163.8601 -21076.2106
Bottom -12620.4854 -17163.8601 -21076.2106
13TH 51.5 Top -12896.8074 -17539.6581 -21537.6684
Bottom -12896.8074 -17539.6581 -21537.6684
12TH 48 Top -13136.8474 -17866.1124 -21938.5351
Bottom -13136.8474 -17866.1124 -21938.5351
11TH 44.5 Top -13343.1578 -18146.6946 -22283.0735
Bottom -13343.1578 -18146.6946 -22283.0735
10TH 41 Top -13520.1407 -18387.3914 -22578.635
Bottom -13520.1407 -18387.3914 -22578.635
9TH 37.5 Top -13669.9078 -18591.0746 -22828.746
Bottom -13669.9078 -18591.0746 -22828.746
8TH 34 Top -13793.023 -18758.5113 -23034.3485
Bottom -13793.023 -18758.5113 -23034.3485
7TH 30.5 Top -13892.0956 -18893.2501 -23199.7997
Bottom -13892.0956 -18893.2501 -23199.7997
6TH 27 Top -13969.7349 -18998.8395 -23329.4573
Bottom -13969.7349 -18998.8395 -23329.4573
5TH 23.5 Top -14030.1174 -19080.9597 -23430.2961
Bottom -14030.1174 -19080.9597 -23430.2961
4TH 20 Top -14075.0698 -19142.095 -23505.3666
Bottom -14075.0698 -19142.095 -23505.3666
3RD 16.5 Top -14105.6656 -19183.7052 -23556.4615
Bottom -14105.6656 -19183.7052 -23556.4615
2ND 13 Top -14124.6579 -19209.5348 -23588.1788
Bottom -14124.6579 -19209.5348 -23588.1788
1ST 9.5 Top -14134.8003 -19223.3284 -23605.1165
Bottom -14134.8003 -19223.3284 -23605.1165
PLINTH 6 Top -14136.9447 -19226.2448 -23608.6976
Bottom -14136.9447 -19226.2448 -23608.6976
Base 0 Top 0 0 0
Bottom 0 0 0

A plot for Storey Shear of Structure in Soft Soil , Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction with load combination
1.2(DL +EXP) has been shown here

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
67 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

Graph 8: Storey Shear of Structure in Soft Soil, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X - Direction
Column Forces

Table 12: column axial force, P for structure with the load combination 1.2 (DL +EQXP) &1.2 (DL +EQYP) in soft,
medium &hard soil
TABLE: Column Forces SOIL TYPE I SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
Unique Load
Story Column Name Case/Combo Station P P P
m kN kN kN
1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQXP) 0 -25355.396 -26400.4216 -27300.3048
1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQXP) 1.45 -25270.435 -26315.4607 -27215.3439
1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQXP) 2.9 -25185.4741 -26230.4998 -27130.383
1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQYP) 0 -24094.2982 -24685.3286 -25194.2715
1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQYP) 1.45 -24009.3372 -24600.3677 -25109.3106
1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQYP) 2.9 -23924.3763 -24515.4068 -25024.3496

Table 13: column Moment, M for structure with the load combination 1.2 (DL +EQXP) &1.2 (DL +EQYP) in soft,
medium &hard soil

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL TYPE SOIL TYPE SOIL TYPE

TABLE: Column Forces
TYPE I TYPE I TYPE II II III III
Unique Load
Story Column Station M2 M3 M2 M3 M2 M3
Name Case/Combo
m kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m

1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQXP) 0 -213.58 1343.434 -269.9707 1844.3479 -318.5293 2275.6905

1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQXP) 1.45 -111.2483 1165.8496 -150.7197 1605.1929 -184.7089 1983.5162

1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQXP) 2.9 -8.9167 988.2653 -31.4687 1366.0378 -50.8885 1691.342

1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQYP) 0 1284.0256 -151.2491 1766.7729 -188.4211 2182.472 -220.4303

1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQYP) 1.45 1111.738 -93.3349 1512.5417 -107.2981 1857.6783 -119.3219

1ST C34 67 1.5(DL+EQYP) 2.9 939.4504 -35.4206 1258.3105 -26.175 1532.8845 -18.2135

Pier Forces

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
68
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

Table 14: Pier Axial Force, P for structure with the load combination 1.2 (DL +EQXP) &1.2 (DL +EQYP) in soft,
medium &hard soil

SOIL TYPE SOIL TYPE SOIL TYPE

TABLE: Pier Forces
I II III
Story Pier Load Case/Combo Location P P P
kN kN kN
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Top -34801.725 -38347.936 -41401.618
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Bottom -35126.569 -38672.78 -41726.462
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Top -24951.139 -24951.139 -24951.139
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Bottom -25275.983 -25275.983 -25275.983
Table 15: Pier Moment, M for structure with the load combination 1.2 (DL +EQXP) &1.2 (DL +EQYP) in soft,
medium & hard soil
TABLE: Pier SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL
Forces TYPE I TYPE I TYPE II TYPE II TYPE III TYPE III
Load
Story Pier Case/Combo Location M2 M3 M2 M3 M2 M3
kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Top 67.293 1500.4694 91.3574 2040.6384 112.0796 2505.7839
- - -
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Bottom 553.8033 -456.3434 752.0192 -620.6271 922.7051 -762.0936
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Top 0.4472 23858.164 0.4472 32447.103 0.4472 39843.133
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Bottom -3.2036 34967.344 -3.2036 47555.588 -3.2036 58395.465
Table 16: Pier Shear Force, V for structure with the load combination 1.2 (DL +EQXP) &1.2 (DL +EQYP) in soft,
medium &hard soil
SOIL
TABLE: Pier SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL
TYPE
Forces TYPE I TYPE I TYPE II TYPE II TYPE III
III
Load
Story Pier Location V2 V3 V2 V3 V2 V3
Case/Combo
kN kN kN kN kN kN
- - -
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Top -559.0894 -760.3616 -933.6793
177.4561 240.9648 295.6528
- - -
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Bottom -559.0894 -760.3616 -933.6793
177.4561 240.9648 295.6528
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Top 3174.0515 -1.0431 4316.7101 -1.0431 5300.6661 -1.0431
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Bottom 3174.0515 -1.0431 4316.7101 -1.0431 5300.6661 -1.0431

Table 17: Pier Torsion, T for structure with the load combination 1.2 (DL +EQXP) &1.2 (DL +EQYP) in soft,
medium &hard soil
SOIL TYPE SOIL TYPE SOIL TYPE
TABLE: Pier Forces
I II III
Story Pier Load Case/Combo Location T T T
kN-m kN-m kN-m
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Top -39.7786 -54.0989 -66.4303
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQXP) Bottom -39.7786 -54.0989 -66.4303
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Top 52.394 71.2559 87.498
1ST P3 1.5(DL+EQYP) Bottom 52.394 71.2559 87.498

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
69 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

TABLE 18: Modal Load Participation Ratios

TABLE: Modal Load Participation Ratios

Case Item Type Item Static Dynamic
% %
Modal Acceleration UX 99.99 94.7
Modal Acceleration UY 99.98 91.46
Modal Acceleration UZ 0 0

According to IS-1893:2002 the number of modes to be used in the analysis should be such that the total sum of modal
masses of all modes considered is at least 90 percent of the total seismic mass. Here the minimum modal mass is 91.46
percent.
Table 19: Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Case Mode Period UX UY UZ RX RY RZ

sec
Modal 1 5.785 0.7413 0 0 0 0.2677 0
Modal 2 5.606 0 0.7073 0 0.3033 0 0
Modal 3 4.684 0 0 0 0 0 0.7886
Modal 4 1.701 0.1259 0 0 0 0.4087 0
Modal 5 1.547 0 0 0 0 0 0.1006
Modal 6 1.475 0 0.1458 0 0.3445 0 0
Modal 7 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0.0392
Modal 8 0.838 0.0513 0 0 0 0.0935 0
Modal 9 0.645 0 0.0616 0 0.1184 0 0
Modal 10 0.613 0 0 0 0 0 0.0207
Modal 11 0.5 0.0284 0 0 0 0.0797 0
Modal 12 0.45 0 0 0 0 0 0.0127

Here the minimum modal mass for accelerations Ux and Uy is 94.7 % and 91.46 % respectively.
Table 20: Modal Periods and Frequencies

TABLE: Modal Periods and Frequencies SOIL TYPE

SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE II SOIL TYPE III
SOIL TYPE I III
Case Mode Period Frequency Period Frequency Period Frequency
sec cyc/sec sec cyc/sec sec cyc/sec
Modal 1 5.785 0.173 5.785 0.173 5.785 0.173
Modal 2 5.606 0.178 5.606 0.178 5.606 0.178
Modal 3 4.684 0.213 4.684 0.213 4.684 0.213
Modal 4 1.701 0.588 1.701 0.588 1.701 0.588
Modal 5 1.547 0.646 1.547 0.646 1.547 0.646
Modal 6 1.475 0.678 1.475 0.678 1.475 0.678
Modal 7 0.9 1.112 0.9 1.112 0.9 1.112
Modal 8 0.838 1.193 0.838 1.193 0.838 1.193
Modal 9 0.645 1.551 0.645 1.551 0.645 1.551
Modal 10 0.613 1.632 0.613 1.632 0.613 1.632
Modal 11 0.5 2.002 0.5 2.002 0.5 2.002
Modal 12 0.45 2.222 0.45 2.222 0.45 2.222

Mode 1 is having maximum time period of 5.785 sec and 0.173cyc/sec Frequency which is
same for all three type of soils.

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
70
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center

Mode shapes of shear wall

Figure 6: Mode shape 4 for shear wall

Figure 3: Mode shape 1 for shear wall

Figure 7: Mode shape 5for shear wall

Figure 4: Mode shape 2for shear wall

Figure 8: Mode shape 6 for shear wall

Figure 5: Mode shape 3 for shear wall

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
71 & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

Figure 12: Mode shape 10 for shear wall

Figure 9: Mode shape 7 for shear wall

Figure 13: Mode shape 11 for shear wall

Figure 10: Mode shape 8 for shear wall

Figure 14: Mode shape 12 for shear wall

V. DISCUSSION ON RESULTS
The result obtained from the analysis models will be
discussed and compared as follows:
It is observed that

Figure 11: Mode shape 9 for shear wall

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
72
 Earthquakes Analysis of High Rise Buildings with Effect of Box Shape RC Shear Walls at the Center
The time period is 5.785 Sec for structure and it is
same for different type of soil.
The Frequency is 0.173 cyc/sec and it is same for
different type of soil.
It is observed that
The percentage of displacement in X& Y direction
is more by 36 % of the model in medium soil and
67 % of model in hard soil compared with model
in soft soil.
It is observed that
The maximum storey drift in X-direction occurred
at storey 12 th for the model in hard ,medium and
soft soil.
The percentage of storey drift in X- direction is
decreased by placing shear wall as shown below :-
36 % of model in medium soil compared with
model in soft soil.
67 % of model in hard soil compared with model
in soft soil.
It is observed that
The maximum column axial force is various with
type of soil and placing of the shear wall. column
axial force in soft soil>medium soil>hard soil.
It is observed that
The maximum column moment in Y-direction is
influenced by the type of soil and placing of shear
wall.
The maximum column moment M2 in X-direction
for soft Soil >Medium soil > Hard soil.
The maximum column moment M3 in X-direction
for soft Soil >Medium soil > Hard soil.
The maximum column moment M2 in Y-direction
for soft Soil <Medium soil < Hard soil.
The maximum column moment M3in Y-direction
for soft Soil >Medium soil > Hard soil.
It is observed that
Shear Wall forces (Pier Forces )
Pier axial forces in X direction for soft Soil
>Medium soil > Hard soil Pier Moment M2 in X
direction for soft soil <medium soil < hard soil .
Pier Moment M3 in X direction for soft soil
<medium soil < hard soil .
Pier Moment M2 in Y direction for soft soil
=Medium soil = hard soil .
Pier Moment M3 in Y direction for soft soil
<Medium soil < hard soil .
Pier Shear Forces V2 in X direction for soft soil
>Medium soil > hard soil.
Pier Shear Forces V3 in X direction for soft soil
>Medium soil > hard soil.
Pier Torsion in X direction for soft soil >Medium
soil > hard soil.
Pier Torsion in Y direction for soft soil <Medium
soil < hard soil.
It is observed that
There is considerable difference in storey
shear force in x-direction with a type of soils
and structures.
The value of the storey shear force in x-
direction decreases with increase in storey
level.
The value of the storey shear force in x-
direction for the structure in soft soil is more
73
compared with the structure in hard and
medium soil.
It is observed that
The value of the lateral loads in x-
direction decreases with increase in
storey level.
The value of the lateral loads in x-
direction for the structure in soft soil is
less compared with the structure in
medium soil and hard soil.
lateral loads in X-direction for the
structure in soft soil <Medium soil < hard
soil.
It is observed that
There is not difference in a storey moment in x-
direction with a different type of soils.
There is not difference in a storey moment in y-
direction with a different type of soils.
It is observed that
The value of the Stiffness of Structure in Soft Soil
, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in X – direction for
load cases EQXP is same .
The value of the Stiffness of Structure in Soft Soil
, Medium Soil and Hard Soil in Y – direction for
load cases EQYP is same .
VI. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, reinforced concrete shear wall buildings were
analyzed with the procedures laid out in IS codes. Seismic
performance of building model is evaluated.
From the above results and discussions, following
conclusions can be drawn:
Building with box shape Shear Walls provided at
the center core showed better performance in terms
of maximum storey displacements and storey drifts.
Shear Walls must be coinciding with the centroid
of the building for better performance. It follows
that a centre core Shear wall should be provided.
The shear wall and it is position has a significant
influenced on the time period. The time period is
not influenced by the type of soil..
shear is effected marginally by placing of the shear
wall, grouping of shear wall and type of soil. The
shear is increased by adding shear wall due to
increase the seismic weight of the building.
Provision of the shear wall, generally results in
reducing the displacement because the shear wall
increases the stiffness of the building. The
displacement is influenced by type and location of
the shear wall and also by changing soil condition.
The better performance for model with soft soil
because it has low displacement.
As per code, the actual drift is less than
permissible drift. The parallel arrangement of shear
wall in the center core and outer periphery is giving
very good result in controlling drift in both the
direction. The better performance for model with
soft soil because it has low storey drift.
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-7 Issue-2, December 2017

The shear force resisted by the column frame is 11. Chandurkar, P.P., Dr. Pajgade, P.S., “Seismic analysis of RCC
building with and without shear wall”, International Journal of
decreasing by placing the shear wall and the shear
Modern Engineering Research. Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 1805-1810, 2013.
force resisted by the shear wall is increasing. 12. Rahangdale, H., Satone, S.R., “Design and analysis of multi-storied
This can be concluded indirectly by observing the building with effect of shear wall”, International journal of
maximum column shear force and moment in both engineering research and application", Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 223-232,
2013.
directions.
The moment resisting frame with shear walls are
very good in lateral force such as earthquake and
wind force. The shear walls provide lateral load
distribution by transferring the wind and
earthquake loads to the foundation. And also
impact on the lateral stiffness of the system and
also carries gravity loads.
It is evident that shear walls which are provided
from the foundation to the rooftop, are one of the
excellent mean for providing earthquake resistant
to multistory reinforced building with different
type of soil.
For the columns located away from the shear wall
the Bending Moment is high and shear force is less
when compared with the columns connected to the
shear wall.
Based on the analysis and discussion ,shear wall
are very much suitable for resisting earthquake
induced lateral forces in multistoried structural
systems when compared to multistoried structural
systems whit out shear walls. They can be made to
behave in a ductile manner by adopting proper
detailing techniques.
The vertical reinforcement that is uniformly
distributed in the shear wall shall not be less than
the horizontal reinforcement .This provision is
particularly for squat walls (i.e. Height-to-width
ratio is about 1.0).However ,for walls whit height-
to-width ratio less than 1.0, a major part of the
shear force is resisted by the vertical reinforcement.
Hence ,adequate vertical reinforcement should be
provided for such walls.

REFERENCES
1. Duggal, S.K., “Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures” Oxford
University Press, New Delhi 2010
2. Chopra, A.K., “Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Application to
Earthquake Engineering”, Pearson Education, 4th edition, 2012.
3. Bureau of Indian Standars, IS 456 : 2000, “Plain and Reinforced
Concrete-Code of practice”, New Delhi, India.
4. Bureau of Indian Standards: IS 13920 : 1993, “Ductile detailing of
reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic forces— Code of
Practice”, New Delhi, India.
5. Bureau of Indian Standards: IS 875( part 1) : 1987, “Dead loads on
buildings and Structures”, New Delhi, India.
6. Bureau of Indian Standards: IS 875( part 2 ) : 1987, “Live loads on
buildings and Structures”,New Delhi, India.
7. Bureau of Indian Standards: IS 1893 (part 1) : 2002, “Criteria for
earthquake resistant design of structures: Part 1 General provisions
and buildings”, New Delhi, India.
8. Anand, N. , Mightraj, C. and Prince Arulraj, G. “Seismic behaviour of
RCC shear wall under different soil conditions” Indian geotechnical
conference, Dec – 2010, pp 119-120.
9. Anshuman, S., Dipendu Bhunia, Bhavin Ramjiyani,“Solution of shear
wall location in multistory building”, International journal of civil and
structural engineering, Vol. 4, Issue 5, pp. 22-32 ,2011.
10. Chandiwala, A., “Earthquake Analysis of Building Configuration
withDifferent Position of Shear Wall”, International Journal of
Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering ISSN 2250-2459,
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 2, Issue 12, December
2012

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
74