Report Mohan Kumar P 1ga19cse08

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL:
Inatoday’saworld, aascenarioathatacannotabeaunnoticedaisathe “Revitalization” of

constructionaofahighariseabuildingsahappeningaglobally. The increasing state of employment
onafinancialaservicesaisaoneaof the major reasons for increase in thearural-to-urban
migration. Thisamigration has led to a hugearise in theademand on land use in urban
metropolitanacities. Consequently, more high rise structures are beingaconstructed now than a
decade or twoaago. However, a keen observation brings to notice thatalittle work has been
undertaken on the economics of wholeabuildings and theirabehavior under earthquake
loading. It has beenafigured out that theadesign of tall buildingsain seismically active regions
varies dramatically from regionato region where in rigorous performanceabased assessments
are requiredain some countries; whileamany to other countriesado not require anything
beyond aatraditional design based on forceareduction factors.
Moving forward, everyaCountry has developedaits own guidelines on how to
constructasafe buildings/houses/structuresain its own ways sinceatimes immemorial based on
its own experiencesawith materials, construction practicesaand nature. The buildings
constructedaare based on the design andaseismic codes adapted by thearespective countries. It
is essential foraall these design and seismic codes related to structural engineering to be based
on theaideal principles of mechanics. Theseafundamental codes areato be experimentally
verifiedaand should be logical, rational andaefficient. It is most essentialathat these codes are
revisedaas frequently as necessary.
1.2 STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOURS OF OUTRIGGER SYSTEM:

Theaoutrigger and belt truss framework actsavital role to oppose the lateral loads in
theastructure. In this design the externalacolumns are attached to the centeracore wall with
stiffened outriggers and belt truss at one or various levels. The outrigger and belt truss
actually control the over the top floors because of lateral loadaand reduce the risk of structural
andanon-structural damage. Outriggers areastiff components associated withaa structure core
to outer columns. At this pointawhen a lateral load is acting up on anaoutrigger structure,
column-restrainedaoutrigger offers barrier to theacenter from rotation. It inducesatensile force
1
andacompressiveaforce in windward andaleeward of huge columns resulting in the increased
effectiveadepth of the structure.
1.3 OUTRIGGER STRUCTURES:
Figure 1.1: Outrigger System
Outriggers are deep and stiff beam/truss which joins the valuable centre to the
external most columns in a casing. This reduces the deflection of the building by utilizing
protecting every column in their capability and making the construction as a single unit. This
indeed reduces the horizontal movement of centre and makes the construction stiffer.
Outriggers and belt trusses are independently utilized in structures in special way and
consequently named differently. These are selected on the basic requirement of the design.
These likewise can be utilized in mixture for a single structure.
1.4 PRINCIPLE OF OUTRIGGER SYSTEM:

All high-rise buildings undergo lateral deformation either due to wind load or due to
the seismic loads. The shear wall present in the center core of the buildings undergoes portal
type of deformation which in turn causes high drift and over turning of the buildings.
So, with the help of outrigger, it helps to resists high drift from lateral loads which in
turn prevents damaging of the structures and also helps in reducing the shear wall moments at
the core both at top and bottom due to lateral loads.
2
In the high-rise Buildings, the tension, compression and couple moments are very high
due to external lateral load as building fails or due to horizontal load or by the overturning
moment if not provided by any lateral resistance.
Outrigger provides high stiffness to the structure, by holding the building as a belt
truss. If any external or internal moments or any forces acts additional to the building these
belt truss resist them as a braced member.
Figure 1.2: Behaviour of Outrigger against lateral loading
1.5 TYPES OF OUTRIGGER STRUCTURAL SYSTEM:

1.5.1. Belt wall:
Belt walls eliminate a large number of the obstacles that emerges while working with
the outrigger framework. They are given to work on the pivotal and torsional solidness of the
sections.
Figure 1.3: Belt wall
3
1.5.2. Conventional Outrigger:
In the Conventional outriggerathought, the outriggeratrusses or girders arearelated
directly to shearawalls or braced frames at the middle and to segments viewed as separable of
the middle. The outrigger bracings, which are related with the middle and to segments
separable of, as far as possible turn of the middle and convert part existing, separated from all
the other things in the middle into a vertical couple at the segments.
Figure 1.4: Conventional Outrigger
1.5.3. Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss:

Outriggers and belt trussaare two lateralaload resisting systemsaused in high-rise
buildings. Both effectively improve the stiffness and strength of the structure. Outriggers
associate the center design of the structure to the edge portions, while belt support tie up the
border sections around the center construction.
Figure 1.5: Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss
4
1.5.4. Offset Outrigger:
In this kind of frameworks outriggers are arranged at the opposite side instead of that
of present in the center design because of this it gives a preferred parallel obstruction over the
ordinary outrigger framework.
The outrigger arm, floor section and center wall should have high unbending nature
on the grounds that to move the shear in the piece between the outrigger and to the center
wall. At the point when structures are subjected to the lateral loads, slab produces the couple
moments these outrigger structures overcomes these overturning moments along the
periphery of the column.
Figure 1.6: Offset Outrigger
1.5.5. Outrigger Wall:

Outriggers are typically horizontal structures (generally trusses or reinforced concrete
walls) inserted into structures at different levels to attach the substantial center to the external
(or edge) primary system.
Figure 1.7: Outrigger Wall
5
1.5.6. Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss):
In the virtual outrigger idea, a similar exchange of disturbing second from the center
to components detachable of the center is accomplished, yet without an immediate
association between the outrigger supports and the center. The end of an immediate
association between the supports and the center avoids a significant number of the issues
related with the utilization of outriggers.
Figure 1.8: Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss)
1.6 BRACING SYSTEM:
Bracingaisaaahighlyaefficientaandaeconomicalamethodatoalaterallyastiffenathe frame
structuresaagainst windaand otheralateral loads. A braced bent comprises of normal sections
and supports whose main role is to help the gravity stacking, and inclining supporting
individuals that are associated so that all out set of individuals frames an upward cantilever
bracket to oppose the flat powers. Propping is effective on the grounds that the diagonals
work in hub stress and subsequently call for least part estimates in giving the solidness and
strength against even shear.
1.7 TYPES OF BRACINGS:
1.7.1. Concentrically Braced Frames (CBFs):
ConcentricallyaBraced Frames (CBFs) (Fig.1.9) having straightforward associations,

it is expected that the centroid axis of the individuals meet at a typical point at each joint thus
the individuals convey basically pivotal burdens.
6
1.7.2. X-Bracing:
Thisaisatheamostaeconomicalaandaefficient forms of bracing. At the point when the

cross bracing (Fig.1.9 (a)) is utilized, lateral from one heading prompts pressure in one part
while the other support is in strain when the power is switched. Accordingly, assuming two
diagonals are utilized, as cross-bracing, they just have to oppose pressure. At the point when
one support is in pressure, pressure is prompted in the other.
1.7.3. Diagonal Bracing:
In diagonal only a singleadiagonalamember is used. This part is intended to oppose

both, tensionaasawell asacompressionabrought about by lateral forces acting in the two
directionsaonathe frame. Single straights of inclining supports (Fig. 1.9 (b) and (c)) responds
differentlyaaccordingato theadirectionaofaloading. Setup (b) might be a lot more vulnerable
and adaptable toward the path causing pressure in the supports, while design (c) will be more
fragile and more adaptable in the tales with pressure supports, prompting the chance of
delicate storey development.
1.7.4. V Bracing:
TheaV- braced arrangements of Fig. 1.9 (d) and (e) experience theabuckling capacity
of the compressionabrace is likely to be significantly lessathan the tension yield capacityaof
the tensionabrace. In this manner there is unavoidably an out-of equilibrium load on
horizontal beam when the braces arrive at their ability, which should be opposed in bowing of
the even part. This restricts how much yielding that the braces can create, and consequently
the general malleability.
1.7.5. K Bracing:
The equivalentaout-of-balanceaforce appliesato K- braces (Fig. 1.9 (f)) when the

bracesaarriveaatatheir ability, however this time it is a considerably more perilous even
poweraappliedatoaaasection - risky on the grounds thatasegmentadisappointment can set off a
generalabreakdown. Consequently, K-braces are not allowed in that frame of mind by the
codeaonaaccount of the inelastic disfigurementaand claspingaofaK bracing part may produce
lateral deflection of connected columns, causing breakdown of construction. The K bracing
and diagonal bracing isn’t consideredainathisastudyadueatoaitsainstabilityafor given load
conditions and geometry.
7
Figure 1.9 : Examplesaof bracing schemes foraconcentrically braced frames:
(a) X braced (b) diagonallyabraced (c) alternativeadiagonally braced (d) V braced
(e) Inverted V braced and (f) K braced
8
CHAPTER 2
LITERATUREaREVIEW
2.1 LITERATUREaREVIEW:
S. Fawzia, et.al [2011][1]:
This paperaevocative the investigation of the study of effectiveness of outrigger

systemaforahighariseacompositeabuildings for cyclonic region as they have been examined
about the diversion control and recurrence enhancement for high raised structures utilizing
belt support and outrigger frameworks. A 28-storey, 42-storey and 57-storey structures have
been considered. These designs were essentially tried for stacking (gravity and parallel
burdens), outlining design and component properties of the structure. Improvement is helped
out through normal recurrence examination and various models have been created and
approval is finished for different qualities, in the end result that the inflexibility/solidness of
the tall structure is contrarily relative to its level. The 28-storey building has not much
contrast in the vertical and plan aspects and thus recurrence and avoidances could be
promptly feasible, in the event of 42-storey assembling the upward aspect is multiplied and
consequently recurrence could be accomplished yet to achieve redirection bracket framework
is required and if there should arise an occurrence of 57-storey building vertical aspect is
multiple times its arrangement and subsequently not withstanding support framework shear
walls are expected for extra stiffness.
Kiran Kamath, et.al [2012][2]:
This paper focuses on the Study on Static and Dynamic Behavior of Outrigger
Structural System for Tall Buildings. The examination is done by utilizing Etabs, numerous
boundaries has been concentrated. A variety of bowing minutes, shear force, sidelong
redirection, top speed increase of the centre; between storey floats for static and dynamic
investigation for a 3-layered model for different upsides of relative unbending nature and
relative level. The reaction range technique have been accomplished for the dynamic analysis
and presumed in the event that the Stiffness increases the design of the structure and will be
efficient under lateral load for the utilization of outrigger in the elevated structures.
9
M.M.Parekh, et.al [2016][3]:
This paper represents the study on position of outrigger system in tall structure is been
centred on outrigger propped composite design with RCC outline, shear centre and steel
support outrigger shaft as well as belt truss by thinking about the piece firmness commitment.
Different models are dissected by making limited component model in the SAP2000 having
different viewpoint proportion including different course of action of outrigger and belt truss
frameworks. In the wake of dissecting the 18 F.E.M models in the SAP by concluding that 40
storey is around 50% of the level of the 80 storey model at 120m to look at the advantages of
outriggers on low rise. It's prominent that 40 storey building has no significant decrease in
avoidance is acquired and past concentrate likewise shows outrigger framework is helpful for
exceptionally tall structure. The diversion upsides of static mixes are higher and for dynamic
blend this values are lower similarly.
Nishit Shah, et.al [2018][4]:
In this study investigation on the Comparative Study on Conventional Outrigger and

Virtual Outrigger on RC High Rise Structure under Earthquake Load using ETABS for Zone
IV. From the conclusion they presumed that Virtual outrigger can be utilized than
Conventional Outrigger on the grounds that Virtual outrigger enjoys its own benefit. In the
likewise presumed that the utilization of outrigger in the elevated structures will expand the
firmness and decline the adaptability of the design which makes more effective under the
seismic tremor loads.
Purva Mhatre, et.al [2018][5]:
This paper represents an outrigger structural system- a review and comparison of the
structural systems taking loads in tall structures and among them the Outrigger framework
(an inside load framework) can take higher burdens and furthermore fundamentally stable
with larger number of floors. Momentarily they additionally examined about the various sorts
of Outrigger frameworks viz. Customary, Offset and Virtual framework. The analysis have
additionally gone through different writings on correlation with the different primary
frameworks and with various kinds of Outrigger frameworks in regard to lateral loadings.
10
Also considering various existing designs worked with ordinary and virtual outriggers and the
biggest number of floors that have gone up to certain variations. Additionally it has been
concluded that correlation among ordinary and virtual outriggers and laying out the benefits
of virtual over Conventional outriggers. With the above examinations concludes the reasoned
that customary outriggers being used at present days have a few disadvantages that can be
satisfied and outfitted successfully and effectively by virtual outriggers.
V. Bhargavi, et.al [2020][6]:
This paper emphasis the study of outrigger structural system for high rise building
subjected to earthquake loads. A 40 stories is considered in analyzing. In the center outrigger
framework the primary specialists utilize a "hat" or "cap" bracket to attach center to the
outside sections. This examination will demonstrate benefit of outrigger capability in
firmness of the same spring and extent of revolution of the cantilever at the spring area
because of sidelong loads. In this examination certain suspicions are made, for example, the
center is unbendingly fixed at the base, the outrigger and the belt walls are flexural unbending
and so on. This analysis is done by finding distinction in various underlying design models.
Programming is utilized for estimation of parallel burden. In this manner four outrigger
models shows the best exhibition in popular narrative removal than other underlying
arrangement models. Also concluded that outrigger braced tall buildings is most efficient tall
building design because they are easier to build, save cost and provide massive lateral
stiffness.
G. Ranganayagi, et.al [2020][7]:
This paper aims to identify all buildings with outrigger and belt truss system as the
lateral load resisting system as the exhibition of different elevated structures for wind and
seismic powers under various kinds of outriggers frameworks. There are fundamentally two
sorts of outrigger frameworks are examined viz. Traditional and Virtual outrigger
frameworks. Many exploration papers have been contemplated and the exhibition of tall
structures for different burdens and parallel burdens is dissected through the papers. The
analysis was presumed that the outrigger with belt truss is more compelling not exclusively to
control the lateral displacement caused mainly due to the wind and seismic forces yet in
11
addition will reduce the inter storey drift in tall structures giving extraordinary reference to
the location of placing the outrigger beams in the design.
Jeena Joshua, et.al [2021][8]:
In this paper study on Outrigger Structural System was considered with 45 storey
working with cove outline. The structure outline aspects were 35m*35m with storey level of
3.1m. Study on seismic execution on time history technique utilizing EL-Centro tremor
information was considered. Also study on correlation between seismic execution of the
G+44 working with outrigger at different area (0.2H, 0.4H, 0.6H, and 0.8H) with and without
outrigger underlying framework were considered. From the conclusion outrigger was given at
0.6H location maximum top storey displacement controlled by 34.75% and furthermore the
analysis was presumed that by giving outrigger at 0.6H float and uprooting of the customary
structure has max control. Also outrigger with belt truss will work on the presentation of
working by opposing seismic forces.
B. G. Kavyashree, et.al [2021][9]:
This paper emphasis the evolution of outrigger structural system: a state of the art
review of the outrigger structure conduct, strength and usefulness. The investigation was
done with the Variable Neighbourhood Search (VNS) metaheuristic method was adopted.
Utilization of fuzzy logic controller (FLC) based on Non-dominated Sorting Genetic
Algorithm Version II (NSGA-II) and modelling was done in MATLAB. It was covered the
topic lateral force, belt truss, distribution of force, usage of buckling restrained bracing
members, A MATLAB program was coded and to analyse optimum positioning of outrigger
for a 240m tall and 60 floor building, then the optimal position of outrigger was determined
by the changing the position of the outrigger, it was analysed that the drift of the structure is
reduced as effective as conventional belt and outrigger systems with the correct arrangement
and number of belt codes.
12
Vandana Kushwaha, et.al [2022][10]:
In this paper study on dynamic analysis of outrigger systems in high rise building
against lateral loading is based on correlation of the way of behaving of multi outriggers,
impact of belt support on outriggers and impact of bracings as outriggers were considered.
Vertical and even loads were determined according to the proposals of IS 456[10], IS1893
(part1) [9] and IS 875 (part3) [14].The examination of execution among single and multi-
outrigger was drawn, then investigation was completed on various outriggers, for example, X,
V reversed V and shear wall. ETABS programming was utilized for demonstrating and
investigation purposes. In this analysis the complete of two examinations Response Spectrum
and Static breeze investigation. It reasoned that with the expansion in the quantity of
outriggers execution of the structure likewise increments and utilization of belt supports and
shear twist with outriggers is more compelling than just utilization of outrigger and
furthermore between X, V and upset V sort steel outrigger bracings radiates, rearranged V
joined with four outriggers is best yet shear walls are obviously better than steel bracings.
13
CHAPTER 3
OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 OBJECTIVES:
The following are the main objectives of analysis and comparative of RC structure for
different outrigger system:
 ToastudyatheabehaviouraofaseismicaresponseaofabuildingawhenasubjectedatoaTime
HistoryaFunctioning of El-Centroaby providing Outrigger System.
 Toaperformance-basedaanalysis i.e., Time History isaselected and thearesults are
comparedawith structures with and without different types of Outrigger System.
 ToastudyatheaeffectaofaOutriggerasystemaonavariousaparametersalikeaSpectrala
Acceleration, Base Shear, Storey Displacement and Storey Drift.
 ToadecreaseatheareactionaofatheastructureaviablyautilizingaOutriggerasystemaand
demonstratingaitaasagenerallyaproductiveainatheastrengthaofatheadesign.
14
3.2 FLOW CHART OF METHODOLOGY:
Collection of Required Data
Preparing Plan and Grid System
Determining the Sizes and Properties of components in

the Frame structures
Assigning the Loads
Adopting the Seismic Zone IV
Adding Load Combinations as per IS-1893-2016
Modeling all types of Outrigger System
Carrying analysis by Time History method for El-

Centro
Performing Analysis
Comparing results with Normal Frame and Outrigger

System
15
3.3 MODEL DESCRIPTION:
3.3.1 MODEL TYPES:
Table 1: Different Types of Models Used
Model Number Types of Models

1 Normal Frame
2 Belt wall
3 Conventional Outrigger
4 Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss
5 Offset Outrigger
6 Outrigger Wall
7 Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss)
3.3.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODELS:
Table 2: Model Description
Type of Frame Reinforced Concrete Frame

Number of Storey 20 Storey Building
Storey Height 3m
Foundation Depth 2m
Beam Size 300mm X 600mm
Column Size 400mm X 700mm
Bracing Size 300mm X 300mm (X Bracing)
Slab Thickness 150mm
Shear wall Core 250mm
Shear wall side wall 150mm
Reinforcement FE550
Concrete Grade M35
Typical Live Load 3 kN/m2
Roof Live Load 1.5 kN/m2
Floor Finish 1.5 kN/m2
Wall Material Density 20 kN/m3
16
Seismic Zone Zone IV
Importance Factor 1.0
Response Reduction Factor 5.0
Soil Type 2.0 (Medium)
Method of Analysis Time History Analysis
3.4 TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS:
Time History Function application correctly solved by means of the ETABS

analytical characteristic in diverse methods like linear and non-linear time characteristic
loads.
Linear instances constantly begin from zero, consequently the concerning Time
characteristic need to likewise star from zero.
Nonlinearacases may either startafrom zero or may continue from aaprevious case.
When startingafrom zero, the time function is simplyadefined to start with a zero value.
When analysisacontinues from a previous case, it isaassumed that the time function also
continuesarelative to its startingavalue. A long recordamay be broken intoamultiple
sequentialaanalyses which use a single function withaarrival times. This prevents the need to
create multiple modifiedafunctions.
Linear Analysis:
Linear analysis is implemented under ETABS 2018 using the process below
After the creation of model Define time history function, go to define > function >
time history choose function from file after that add new function. Browse the time history
function which are required to add change header, prefix chart and number of points per line as
per the data choose the require values to be added after that press OK.
Defining the time history earthquake data, go to load case > add new case > add TIME
X for X-Direction and TIME Y for Y-Direction > choose the load case as time history and
linear modal > apply load type by acceleration load name as U1 and U2 for TIME X and
TIME Y choose function as the earthquake data which we have applied. Run analysis after
adding of all the above steps.
17
Time History Traces:
After analysis go to display, select plot function under that choose results which are
required, such as Maximum and Minimum base shear, Displacement at all the stories, Storey
Drifts.
18
CHAPTER 4
MODELLING
4.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
In this design, a building of 20 storey framework is considered, the floor height of 3m

and a plan size is 20m X 20m as a standard dimension in both X and Y directions, under the
seismic of zone IV as per IS 1893:2016.
Figure 4.1: Typical Floor Plan
19
4.2 MATERIAL AND SECTION SPECIFICATION:
Table 3: Material and Section Specification
Concrete Grade M35

Reinforcement FE550
Beam Size 300mm X 600mm
Column Size 400mm X 700mm
Slab Thickness 150mm
Bracing Size 300mm X 300mm (X Bracing)
Shear wall Core 250mm
Shear wall Belt 150mm
4.3 LOADS AND COMBINATIONS:
Any design is comprised of structural components (load conveying, like beams

columns) and non-structural components (like partitions, false ceilings, doors). The primary
components set up areaknown as structuralasystem. This refersato a load resistingasystem of
a structure. Theaload is moved fromaslabs to beams, then toacolumns and then toafoundation.
4.3.1 SEISMICaLOADS:
Seismicadesign shall be done inaaccordance with IS 1893:2016. Theabuilding is
situated inaearthquake zone IV. Theaparameters to be used for analysisaand design areagiven
below.
 Seismic Zone : Zone IV
 Zone factor : 0.24 (Refer Table 2)
 Importance Factor : 1.0 (Refer Table 6)
 Response reduction Factor : 5.0 (SRMF)
 Soil Type : 2.0 (Medium)
 Structural Type :Reinforced Concrete Frame Structure
20
4.3.2 DEAD LOADS:
The dead loads are taken from IS 875 Part 1(Dead Loads)
4.3.3 IMPOSED LOADS:
 Typical Live load (Reducible) : 3 kN/m2

 Typical Floor load :1.5 kN/m2
 Roof Live load (Accessible) : 1.5 kN/m2
 Roof Live load (Inaccessible) : 0.75 kN/m2
4.3.4 LOAD COMBINATIONS:
Before the analysis is carried out the load combinations as to be defined to check the
frame structure for failure. Generally, 9 No’s of load combinations are defined according to
IS-1893:2016 Code.
 1.5 Dead Load + 1.5 Live Load

 1.5 Dead Load + 1.5 Earth Quake Load in X Direction
 1.5 Dead Load – 1.5 Earth Quake Load in X Direction
 1.5 Dead Load + 1.5 Earth Quake Load in Y Direction
 1.5 Dead Load – 1.5 Earth Quake Load in Y Direction
 1.2 Dead Load +1.2 Live Load + 1.2 Earth Quake Load in X Direction
 1.2 Dead Load + 1.2 Live Load – 1.2 Earth Quake Load in X Direction
 1.2 Dead Load + 1.2 Live Load + 1.2 Earth Quake Load in Y Direction
 1.2 Dead Load + 1.2 Live Load – 1.2 Earth Quake Load in Y Direction
4.4 STANDARD DESIGN CODES:
 The design of the RC framed structure is based on the following design codes.
 IS: 875 Part 1 - Unit weight of materials
 IS: 875 Part 2 - Live loads
 IS: 1893:2016 (Part I) - Seismic loads
 IS 13920: 1993 - Ductile detailing of RCC Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces
Code of Practice.
 IS: 456 - Code of practice for plain & reinforced concrete.
 SP: 16 - Design aid for reinforced concrete to IS 456.
21
4.5 MODELLING IN ETABS:
Figure 4.2: Selection of Units and Code
Figure 4.3: Grid Line Data
22
Figure 4.4: Storey Details
4.5.1 DEFINE PROPERTIES OF MATERIAL:
23
Figure 4.5: Defining Material Property
4.5.2 DEFINE FRAME SECTION PROPERTIES:
Figure 4.6: Assigning of Beam Details
24
Figure 4.7: Assigning of Beam and Column Layout
Figure 4.8: Assigning of Column Details
25
4.5.3 DEFINE OF SLAB SECTION:
Figure 4.9: Assigning of Slab Details
Figure 4.10: Assigning of Beam, Column and Slab Layout
26
4.5.4 DEFINE OF SHEAR WALL FOR OUTRIGGER STRUCTURE:
Figure 4.11: Assigning of Shear Wall
Figure 4.12: Shear wall of outrigger wall
27
Figure 4.13: Load Patterns Details
Figure 4.14: Typical Live Load
28
Figure 4.15: Floor Finish
Figure 4.16: Roof Live Load
29
Figure 4.17: Wall Load
Figure 4.18: Lateral Loads in X Direction
30
Figure 4.19: Lateral Loads in Y Direction
4.5.6 MASS SOURCE:
Figure 4.20: Assigning of Mass Source
31
4.5.7 LOAD COMBINATIONS:
Figure 4.21: Assigning of Load Combinations
4.5.8 TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS:
Figure 4.22: Time History Function of El Centro
32
4.5.8.1 TIME HISTORY IN X-DIRECTION:
Figure 4.23: Time History Function of El Centro in X Direction
4.5.8.2 TIME HISTORY IN Y-DIRECTION:
Figure 4.24: Time History Function of El Centro in Y Direction
33
4.5.9 DIAPHRAGM:
Figure 4.25: Defining of Diaphragm
Figure 4.26: Assigning of Diaphragm
34
4.5.10 FLOOR PLAN OF MODELS:
Figure 4.27: Floor Plan of Bare Model
Figure 4.28: Floor Plan of Belt Wall
35
Figure 4.29: Floor Plan of Conventional Outrigger
Figure 4.30: Floor Plan of Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss
36
Figure 4.31: Floor Plan of Offset Outrigger
Figure 4.32: Floor Plan of Outrigger Wall
37
Figure 4.33: Floor Plan of Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss)
4.5.11 3D VIEW OF MODELS:
Figure 4.34: 3D Model of Bare Frame and Belt Wall
38
Figure 4.35: 3D Model of Conventional Outrigger and Conventional Outrigger with
Belt Truss
Figure 4.36: 3D Model of Offset Outrigger and Outrigger Wall
39
Figure 4.37: 3D Model of Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss)
4.5.12 ELEVATIONS OF MODELS:
Figure 4.38: Elevation of Bare Frame, Belt Wall and Conventional Outrigger
40
Figure 4.39: Elevation of Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss and Offset Outrigger
Figure 4.40: Elevation of Outrigger Wall and Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss)
41
4.5.13 ANALYSES AND CHECK MODEL:
Before analysis is carried out, model has to check and Analysis should be carried out.
Figure (a) Figure (b)
Figure (a) and Figure (b) 4.41: Model Checking
4.5.14 ANALYSE  RUN ANALYSIS:
Figure 4.42: Run Analysis
42
CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

TheamodelsaareaobservedaandacalculatedathearesultsausingaDynamicaanalysisainatermsaof
 Response spectrum curves from Time History

 Base Shear
 Storey Displacement
 Storey Drift
The results of all the models are analysed and observations are tabulated.
5.1 RESPONSE SPECTRUM CURVES FROM TIME HISTORY:

The below graphs show the response spectrum plots based on different time
history data.
Figure 5.1: Bare Frame RS Curve Maximum at 12 storey along X Direction
In this figure 5.1 RS curveamaximumaSpectralaAccelerationadeveloped atastorey 12

in TIMEX/X direction.
43
Figure 5.2: Bare Frame RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along X Direction

Figure 5.3: Bare Frame RS Curve Maximum at 5 storey along Y Direction

in TIMEY/Y direction.
44
Figure 5.4: Bare Frame RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along Y Direction

Figure 5.5: Belt Wall RS Curve Maximum at 9 storey along X Direction

45
Figure 5.6: Belt Wall RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along X Direction

Figure 5.7: Belt Wall RS Curve Maximum at 9 storey along Y Direction

46
Figure 5.8: Belt Wall RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along Y Direction

Figure 5.9: Conventional Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 8 storey along X Direction

47
Figure 5.10: Conventional Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along X
Direction
In this figure 5.10 RS curveamaximumaSpectralaAccelerationadeveloped atastorey

20 in TIMEX/X direction.
Figure 5.11: Conventional Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 10 storey along Y

Direction

10 in TIMEY/Y direction.
48
Figure 5.12: Conventional Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along Y
Direction

Figure 5.13: Conventional Outrigger with Belt Wall RS Curve Maximum at 3 storey
along X Direction
In this figure 5.13 curveamaximumaSpectralaAccelerationadeveloped atastorey 3 in

TIMEX/X direction.
49
along X Direction

along Y Direction

50
along Y Direction

20 in TIMEY/Y direction..
Figure 5.17:Offset Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 3 storey along X Direction

51
Figure 5.18:Offset Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along X Direction

Figure 5.19:Offset Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 4 storey along Y Direction

52
Figure 5.20: Offset Outrigger RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along Y Direction

Figure 5.21: Outrigger Wall RS Curve Maximum at 11 storey along X Direction

53
Figure 5.22: Outrigger Wall RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along X Direction

Figure 5.23: Outrigger Wall RS Curve Maximum at 1 storey along Y Direction

54
Figure 5.24: Outrigger Wall RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along Y Direction

Figure 5.25: Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss) RS Curve Maximum at 4 storey along X
Direction

55
Figure 5.26: Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss) RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along X
Direction

Figure 5.27: Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss) RS Curve Maximum at 4 storey along Y
Direction

56
Figure 5.28: Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss) RS Curve Maximum at 20 storey along Y
Direction

Table 4: Maximum SA for EL-CENTRO Data for THX/X
Maximum Load Case/ Direction

Value
Time History EL-CENTRO
Function
THX/X
st
Building 1 Maximum 2nd Maximum
Model Storey Period SA Storey Period SA
Number (sec) mm/sec2 Number (sec) mm/sec2
Normal 20 0.75 6389 12 0.44 6142
Frame
Belt Wall 20 0.32 2988 9 0.3 2832
Conventional 20 0.38 8273 8 0.37 7037

Outrigger
Conventional
Outrigger 20 0.22 4055 3 0.2 3959
with Belt
Truss
Offset 3 0.32 3482 20 0.36 3233
Outrigger
Outrigger 20 0.4 5870 11 0.31 4198
Wall
Virtual 20 0.35 3816 4 0.36 3612
Outrigger
(Belt Truss)
57
The maximum spectral acceleration for El Centro time history data for Bare Frame and
outrigger structures along X Directions.
 In bare frame structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of 6389mm/sec2

having time period of 0.75sec for 20th Storey, and 2nd maximum spectral acceleration
of 6142mm/sec2 having time period of 0.44sec for 12th Storey.
 In Belt wall structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of 2988mm/sec2
 In Conventional Outrigger structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of
8273mm/sec2 having time period of 0.38sec for 20th Storey, and 2nd maximum spectral
acceleration of 7037mm/sec2 having time period of 0.37sec for 8th Storey.
 In Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss structure shows 1st maximum spectral
acceleration of 4055mm/sec2 having time period of 0.22sec for 20th Storey, and 2nd
maximum spectral acceleration of 3959mm/sec2 having time period of 0.2sec for 3rd
Storey.
 In Offset Outrigger structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of
3482mm/sec2 having time period of 0.32sec for 3rd Storey, and 2nd maximum spectral
 In Outrigger wall structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of 5870mm/sec2
 In Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss) structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration
of 3816mm/sec2 having time period of 0.35sec for 20th Storey, and 2nd maximum
spectral acceleration of 3612mm/sec2 having time period of 0.36sec for 4th Storey.
58
Table 5: Maximum SA for EL-CENTRO Data for THY/Y
Maximum Load Case/ Direction

Value
Time History EL-CENTRO
Function
THY/Y
Building
1st Maximum 2nd Maximum
Model
Storey Period SA Storey Period SA
Number (sec) mm/sec2 Number (sec) mm/sec2
Normal 5 0.49 6127 20 0.49 6005
Frame
Belt Wall 20 0.33 2985 9 0.33 2829
Conventional 20 0.36 9677 10 0.37 7109
Outrigger
Conventional
Outrigger 20 0.19 3005 3 0.18 2829
with Belt
Truss
Offset 20 0.4 4680 4 0.39 4247
Outrigger
Outrigger 20 0.4 5856 1 0.32 4335
Wall
Virtual 20 0.38 4162 4 0.36 3921
Outrigger
(Belt Truss)
The maximum spectral acceleration for El Centro time history data for Bare Frame and
outrigger structures along Y Directions.
 In bare frame structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of 6127mm/sec2

having time period of 0.49sec for 5th Storey, and 2nd maximum spectral acceleration of
6005mm/sec2 having time period of 0.49sec for 20th Storey.
 In Belt wall structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of 2985mm/sec2
 In Conventional Outrigger structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of
59
 In Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss structure shows 1st maximum spectral
acceleration of 3005mm/sec2 having time period of 0.19sec for 20th Storey, and 2nd
maximum spectral acceleration of 2829mm/sec2 having time period of 0.18sec for 3rd
Storey.
 In Offset Outrigger structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of
 In Outrigger wall structure shows 1st maximum spectral acceleration of 5856mm/sec2
of 4335mm/sec2 having time period of 0.32sec for 1st Storey.
st
 In Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss) structure shows 1 maximum spectral acceleration
of 4162mm/sec2 having time period of 0.38sec for 20th Storey, and 2nd maximum
spectral acceleration of 3921mm/sec2 having time period of 0.36sec for 4th Storey.
60
5.2 BASE SHEAR:
Table 6: Base Shear
BASE SHEAR EARTH QUAKE IN X- EARTH QUAKE IN Y-

DIRECTION DIRECTION
NORMAL FRAME 3722 3722
BELT WALL 3368 3368
CONVENTIONAL 3966 3966

OUTRIGGER
CONVENTIONAL 4224 4224
OUTRIGGER WITH BELT
TRUSS
OFFSET OUTRIGGER 3888 3888
OUTRIGGER WALL 3638 3638
VIRTUAL OUTRIGGER 4017 4017

(BELT TRUSS)
EARTH QUAKE IN X-DIRECTION

4500 4224
3966 3888 4017
4000 3722 3638
BASE SHEAR IN KN
3368
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
BASE SHEAR IN X-DIRECTION
Figure 5.29: Base Shear in X - Direction
61
As per the bar graph and values of base shear as shown in above figure the belt wall
type of outrigger shows very less values compare to other systems which leads to reduce the
size footing and quantity of steel for the foundation works. The conventional outrigger belt
truss system shows higher values compare to all others which may lead in increase of steel
quantity and footing size.
EARTH QUAKE IN Y-DIRECTION

4500 4224
3966 3888 4017
4000 3722 3638
BASE SHEAR IN KN
3368
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
BASE SHEAR IN Y-DIRECTION
Figure 5.30: Base Shear in Y - Direction
As per the bar graph and values of base shear as shown in above figure the belt wall
type of outrigger shows very less values compare to other systems which leads to reduce the
size footing and quantity of steel for the foundation works. The conventional outrigger belt
truss system shows higher values compare to all others which may lead in increase of steel
quantity and footing size.
62
5.3 STOREY DISPLACEMENT:
Table 7: Storey Displacement in X- Direction (mm)
Conventional Conventional
Storey Bare Frame Belt Wall Outrigger Outrigger with
Belt Truss
BASE 0 0 0 0
STOREY 1 0.849 0.44 0.282 0.171
STOREY 2 3.773 0.125 0.728 0.368
STOREY 3 7.186 0.22 1.29 0.61
STOREY 4 10.671 0.33 1.997 0.897
STOREY 5 14.112 0.451 2.812 1.217
STOREY 6 17.452 0.575 3.717 1.566
STOREY 7 20.657 0.7 4.696 1.94
STOREY 8 23.699 0.824 5.731 2.336
STOREY 9 26.558 0.97 6.806 2.749
STOREY 10 29.216 1.152 7.903 3.176
STOREY 11 31.661 1.346 9.101 3.613
STOREY12 33.882 1.549 10.349 4.111
STOREY 13 35.873 1.759 11.684 4.627
STOREY 14 37.636 1.974 13.043 5.148
STOREY 15 39.175 2.191 14.406 5.67
STOREY 16 40.505 2.408 15.759 6.187
STOREY 17 41.644 2.62 17.088 6.697
STOREY 18 42.684 2.828 18.383 7.194
STOREY 19 43.772 3.03 19.632 7.678
STOREY 20 44.66 3.225 20.784 8.146
Storey Offset Outrigger Outrigger Wall Virtual Outrigger

BASE 0 0 0
STOREY 1 0.027 0.086 0.233
STOREY 2 0.13 0.268 0.514
STOREY 3 0.296 0.517 0.867
STOREY 4 0.522 0.829 1.294
STOREY 5 0.809 1.197 1.773
STOREY 6 1.156 1.614 2.291
STOREY 7 1.56 2.071 2.839
STOREY 8 2.018 2.563 3.41
STOREY 9 2.523 3.082 3.994
STOREY 10 3.068 3.624 4.585
STOREY 11 3.64 4.181 5.177
STOREY12 4.227 4.749 5.766
63
STOREY 13 4.815 5.322 6.346
STOREY 14 5.389 5.897 6.915
STOREY 15 5.939 6.469 7.467
STOREY 16 6.456 7.037 8.002
STOREY 17 6.934 7.598 8.518
STOREY 18 7.373 8.151 9.014
STOREY 19 7.776 8.697 9.493
STOREY 20 8.142 9.219 9.958
STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN X-DIRECTION

50
DISPLACEMENT IN mm
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 50 53 56 59
ELEVATION in m
NORMAL FRAME
BELT WALL
CONVENTIONAL OUTRIGGER
CONVENTIONAL OUTRIGGER + BELT TRUSS
OFFSET OUTRIGGER
OUTRIGGER WALL
OUTRIGGER WALL
Figure 5.31: Storey Displacement In X - Direction
Normal frame and conventional outrigger system has higher lateral displacement
compare to other system and belt wall system shows very less values compare to all other
system
64
Table 8: Storey Displacement in Y- Direction (mm)
Belt Truss
BASE 0 0 0 0
STOREY 1 1.318 0.045 0.313 0.243
STOREY 2 5.715 0.128 0.735 0.439
STOREY 3 10.434 0.225 1.296 0.695
STOREY 4 15.098 0.338 1.982 1.003
STOREY 5 19.615 0.461 2.766 1.345
STOREY 6 23.924 0.588 3.632 1.717
STOREY 7 27.981 0.716 4.564 2.112
STOREY 8 31.76 0.844 5.544 2.525
STOREY 9 35.252 1.006 6.559 2.951
STOREY 10 38.463 1.193 7.589 3.386
STOREY 11 41.446 1.391 8.616 3.827
STOREY12 44.788 1.597 9.72 4.335
STOREY 13 47.879 1.81 10.935 4.88
STOREY 14 50.695 2.028 12.168 5.431
STOREY 15 53.221 2.248 13.404 5.983
STOREY 16 55.444 2.466 14.63 6.531
STOREY 17 57.357 2.682 15.834 7.071
STOREY 18 58.956 2.892 17.005 7.599
STOREY 19 60.24 3.096 18.135 8.111
STOREY 20 61.23 3.295 19.137 8.605

BASE 0 0 0
STOREY 1 0.244 0.087 0.316
STOREY 2 0.543 0.27 0.601
STOREY 3 0.934 0.52 0.972
STOREY 4 1.394 0.835 1.41
STOREY 5 1.902 1.206 1.891
STOREY 6 2.443 1.627 2.402
STOREY 7 3.008 2.089 2.928
STOREY 8 3.587 2.587 3.462
STOREY 9 4.176 3.113 4.002
STOREY 10 4.768 3.662 4.544
STOREY 11 5.362 4.229 5.087
STOREY12 5.953 4.807 5.63
STOREY 13 6.538 5.391 6.169
65
STOREY 14 7.116 5.977 6.705
STOREY 15 7.683 6.561 7.232
STOREY 16 8.236 7.141 7.749
STOREY 17 8.773 7.714 8.252
STOREY 18 9.292 8.278 8.738
STOREY 19 9.791 8.835 9.207
STOREY 20 10.271 9.373 9.661
STOREY DISPLACEMENT IN Y-DIRECTION

70
DISPLACEMENT IN mm
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 50 53 56 59
ELEVATION IN m
NORMAL FRAME
BELT WALL
OFFSET OUTRIGGER
OUTRIGGER WALL
VIRTUAL OUTRIGGER
Figure 5.32: Storey Displacement In Y - Direction
Normal frame and conventional outrigger system has higher lateral displacement
compare to other system and belt wall system shows very less values compare to all other
system
66
5.4 STOREY DRIFT:
Table 9: Storey Drift in X- Direction (mm)
Belt Truss
STOREY 20 0.000312 0.000065 0.000397 0.000157
STOREY 19 0.000392 0.000067 0.000417 0.000161
STOREY 18 0.00048 0.000069 0.000431 0.000166
STOREY 17 0.000565 0.000071 0.000443 0.00017
STOREY 16 0.000645 0.000072 0.000451 0.000173
STOREY 15 0.000715 0.000072 0.000454 0.000174
STOREY 14 0.000774 0.000072 0.000453 0.000174
STOREY 13 0.000819 0.00007 0.000447 0.000173
STOREY 12 0.000847 0.000068 0.000436 0.000169
STOREY 11 0.000858 0.000065 0.00042 0.000164
STOREY 10 0.000886 0.000061 0.000401 0.000157
STOREY 9 0.000953 0.000057 0.000379 0.000148
STOREY 8 0.001014 0.000053 0.000353 0.000138
STOREY 7 0.001068 0.000048 0.000328 0.000127
STOREY 6 0.001113 0.000043 0.000303 0.000117
STOREY5 0.001147 0.00004 0.000273 0.000107
STOREY 4 0.001162 0.000038 0.000237 0.000096
STOREY 3 0.001138 0.000034 0.000197 0.000084
STOREY 2 0.000975 0.000028 0.000168 0.000071
STOREY 1 0.000425 0.000022 0.000141 0.000086
BASE 0 0 0 0

STOREY 20 0.000124 0.000179 0.000156
STOREY 19 0.000134 0.000183 0.00016
STOREY 18 0.000146 0.000185 0.000166
STOREY 17 0.000159 0.000188 0.000172
STOREY 16 0.000172 0.000189 0.000179
STOREY 15 0.000183 0.000191 0.000185
STOREY 14 0.000192 0.000191 0.00019
STOREY 13 0.000196 0.000191 0.000194
STOREY 12 0.000196 0.000189 0.000196
STOREY 11 0.000191 0.000186 0.000198
STOREY 10 0.000182 0.000181 0.000197
STOREY 9 0.000169 0.000174 0.000195
STOREY 8 0.000153 0.000165 0.00019
67
STOREY 7 0.000135 0.000153 0.000183
STOREY 6 0.000115 0.00014 0.000174
STOREY5 0.000096 0.000124 0.000163
STOREY 4 0.000076 0.000105 0.000148
STOREY 3 0.000055 0.000084 0.000129
STOREY 2 0.000035 0.000062 0.000105
STOREY 1 0.000013 0.000043 0.000117
BASE 0 0 0
STOREY DRIFT IN X-DIRECTION

0.0014
0.0012
STOREY DRIFT
0.001
0.0008
0.0006
0.0004
0.0002
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
ELEVATIONS IN M
NORMAL FRAME
BELT WALL
OFFSET OUTRIGGER
OUTRIGGER WALL
VIRTUAL OUTRIGGER
Figure 5.33: Storey Drift In X - Direction
 Normal frame shows highest values compare to other system and it reaches peak at
the elevation of 11m.
 Compare to normal frame storey drift is less but as comparing to other structural
system and it reaches peak values at the elevation of 45mts.
 Belt wall and other structural system shows less storey drift compare to normal frame
and conventional outrigger system.
68
Table 10: Storey Drift in Y- Direction (mm)
Belt Truss
STOREY 20 0.00037 0.000066 0.000366 0.000166
STOREY 19 0.0005 0.000068 0.000383 0.000171
STOREY 18 0.000631 0.00007 0.000398 0.000176
STOREY 17 0.000752 0.000072 0.00041 0.00018
STOREY 16 0.00086 0.000073 0.000418 0.000183
STOREY 15 0.000953 0.000073 0.000423 0.000185
STOREY 14 0.001053 0.000073 0.000422 0.000184
STOREY 13 0.001149 0.000071 0.000417 0.000182
STOREY 12 0.001229 0.000069 0.000407 0.000178
STOREY 11 0.001289 0.000066 0.000392 0.000173
STOREY 10 0.001327 0.000062 0.000373 0.000165
STOREY 9 0.001343 0.000059 0.00035 0.000156
STOREY 8 0.001354 0.000054 0.000329 0.000145
STOREY 7 0.001387 0.00005 0.000312 0.000133
STOREY 6 0.001436 0.000045 0.00029 0.000124
STOREY5 0.001506 0.000041 0.000263 0.000115
STOREY 4 0.001555 0.000039 0.00023 0.000103
STOREY 3 0.001573 0.000035 0.000192 0.000091
STOREY 2 0.001466 0.000028 0.000158 0.000079
STOREY 1 0.000659 0.000023 0.000156 0.000122
BASE 0 0 0 0

STOREY 20 0.000161 0.000183 0.000152
STOREY 19 0.000166 0.000185 0.000156
STOREY 18 0.000173 0.000188 0.000162
STOREY 17 0.000179 0.000191 0.000168
STOREY 16 0.000184 0.000193 0.000172
STOREY 15 0.000189 0.000195 0.000176
STOREY 14 0.000193 0.000195 0.000179
STOREY 13 0.000196 0.000195 0.00018
STOREY 12 0.000197 0.000193 0.000181
STOREY 11 0.000198 0.000189 0.000182
STOREY 10 0.000198 0.000184 0.000181
STOREY 9 0.000197 0.000176 0.00018
STOREY 8 0.000194 0.000167 0.000178
STOREY 7 0.000189 0.000155 0.000175
69
STOREY 6 0.000181 0.000141 0.000171
STOREY5 0.000171 0.000125 0.000163
STOREY 4 0.000156 0.000106 0.000153
STOREY 3 0.000135 0.000084 0.000138
STOREY 2 0.00011 0.000062 0.000116
STOREY 1 0.000122 0.000043 0.000158
BASE 0 0 0
STOREY DRIFT IN Y DIRECTION

0.0018
0.0016
0.0014
0.0012
0.001
STOREY DRIFT
0.0008
0.0006
0.0004
0.0002
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
ELEVATION IN M
NORMAL FRAME
BELT WALL
OFFSET OUTRIGGER
OUTRIGGER WALL
VIRTUAL OUTRIGGER
Figure 5.34: Storey Drift In Y - Direction
 Normal frame shows highest values compare to other system and it reaches peak at
the elevation of 11m.
 Compare to normal frame storey drift is less but as comparing to other structural
system and it reaches peak values at the elevation of 45mts.
 Belt wall and other structural system shows less storey drift compare to normal frame
and conventional outrigger system.
70
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS AND SCOPE FOR THE FUTURE

STUDY
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The base shear of conventional outrigger with belt truss and virtual outrigger shows
higher base shear values compare to other outrigger systems, it is uneconomical for
footing works which may increase footing size and amount of steel. But rest of the
outrigger system shows less value compare to above two and also belt wall system
shows very lesser values compare to all but also reinforcement will be increased due
to similarity of Maven Technology.
2. Storey Displacement of Belt Wall shows very less compare to normal and other
outrigger system, virtual outrigger, outrigger wall, offset outrigger, conventional
outrigger with belt truss has similar values but conventional outrigger little higher
displacement compare to other outrigger system but reduces displacement thrice
compare to normal frame.
3. Similar to the storey displacement, storey drift of belt wall shows lesser value
compare to normal frame, virtual outrigger, outrigger wall, offset outrigger and
conventional outrigger with belt truss has very less and similar values, conventional
outrigger has litter higher values compare to other outrigger systems.
4. As per the consideration all above points belt wall shows good results compare to all
other outrigger system but it is quite uneconomical because the material used, the
concrete and steel required more in the belt wall but in case of offset outrigger shows
good results and also its economical compare to others.
71
SCOPE FOR THE FUTURE STUDY:
 The present study is based upon Time History linear dynamic analysis it can be
extended up to Time History Nonlinear dynamic analysis and also can be performed
using Response spectrum with linear and nonlinear analysis.
 Incorporating different angles and placing them at different locations can be
performed using different shapes of braced Outriggers.
 Soil structure interaction for different types can be considered.
 As the present study is intended for Zone IⅤ, the same structure can be carried out for
different zones and different soil types.
 The behavioural of Braced Outrigger structure can be easily extended to Setback and
Step-up building and Irregular building.
72
REFERENCE
1. S. Fawzia, A. Nasir and T. Fatima. “Study of the effectiveness of Outrigger system for
high-rise composite buildings for Cyclonic Region”, Published by: ICECECE 2011:
International Conference on Electrical, Computer, Electronics and Communication
Engineering, pp. 937-945, 11 January 2016.
2. Kiran Kamath, N. Divya, Asha U Rao, “A Study on Static and Dynamic Behavior of
Outrigger Structural System for Tall Buildings”, Published by: Bonfring International Journal
of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Vol. 2, No. 4, December 2012, Page No:
15-20.
3. M.M.Parekh, K.J.Dhandha, “Study on position of outrigger system in tall structure”,

Published by: Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (ISSN-2349-
5162), JETIR1605042, May 2016, Volume 3, Issue 5, Page No: 236-242.
4. Nishit Shah, Prof. N.G.Gore, “Comparative Study on Conventional Outrigger and Virtual
Outrigger on RC High Rise Structure under Earthquake Load”, Published by: International
Journal of Engineering and Techniques, Volume 4, Issue 5, Sept - Oct 2018, Page No: 97-
104.
5. Prof. N. G. Gore, Miss Purva Mhatre, “Outrigger Structural System – A Review and
Comparison of the Structural System”, Published by: International Journal of Engineering
Trends and Technology, Volume 64 Number 1 – October 2018, Page No: 31-35.
6. V. Bhargavi, Muppidi Santhi Devi, “Analysis of Outrigger Structural System for high-rise
Building Subjected to Earthquake Loads”, Published By: Novateur Publications International
Journal of Innovations in Engineering Research and Technology ISSN: 2394-3696 Website:
ijiert.org, VOLUME 7, ISSUE 8, Aug.-2020, Page No: 20-32.
7. G. Ranganayagi and J. Premalatha, “Tall Buildings with Outrigger and Belt Truss System
as the Lateral Load Resisting System- A Review”, Published by: International Journal of
Advanced Research in Science, Communication and Technology, Volume 11, Issue 2,
November 2020, Page No: 150-154.
73
8. Jeena Joshua, Adithya Vishwambharan, “Study On Outrigger Structural System”,
Published by: International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology ISSN: 2278-
0181, ICART - 2021 Conference Proceedings, Volume 9, Issue 9, Page No: 40-44.
9. B. G. Kavyashree, Shantharam Patil, Vidya S. Rao, “Evolution of Outrigger Structural

System: A State-of-the-Art Review”, Published by: Arabian Journal for Science and
Engineering (2021) 46:10313–10331, Page No: 10313 – 10331.
10. Vandana Kushwaha, Neeti Mishra, “A Review on Dynamic Analysis of Outrigger

Systems in High Rise Building against Lateral Loading”, Published by: International Journal
for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value:
45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538, Volume 10 Issue IV Apr 2022 Page No: 564 – 568.
74
CODE BOOKS:
 IS 456 (2018): Plain and Reinforced Concrete – Code of Practice.

 IS 800 (2007): General Construction in Steel – Code of Practice.
 IS 1893-2016 – Part 1 and Part 2: Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures,General Provisions and Buildings.
 IS 13920: 1993 - Ductile detailing of RCC Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces
Code of Practice.
 SP: 16 - Design aid for reinforced concrete to IS 456.
75

Report Mohan Kumar P 1ga19cse08

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Report Mohan Kumar P 1ga19cse08

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 1

Inatoday’saworld, aascenarioathatacannotabeaunnoticedaisathe “Revitalization” of

1.2 STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOURS OF OUTRIGGER SYSTEM:

1.3 OUTRIGGER STRUCTURES:

Figure 1.1: Outrigger System

1.4 PRINCIPLE OF OUTRIGGER SYSTEM:

Figure 1.2: Behaviour of Outrigger against lateral loading

1.5 TYPES OF OUTRIGGER STRUCTURAL SYSTEM:

Figure 1.3: Belt wall

Figure 1.4: Conventional Outrigger

1.5.3. Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss:

Figure 1.5: Conventional Outrigger with Belt Truss

Figure 1.6: Offset Outrigger

1.5.5. Outrigger Wall:

Figure 1.7: Outrigger Wall

Figure 1.8: Virtual Outrigger (Belt Truss)

1.6 BRACING SYSTEM:

1.7 TYPES OF BRACINGS:

1.7.1. Concentrically Braced Frames (CBFs):

ConcentricallyaBraced Frames (CBFs) (Fig.1.9) having straightforward associations,

Thisaisatheamostaeconomicalaandaefficient forms of bracing. At the point when the

1.7.3. Diagonal Bracing:

In diagonal only a singleadiagonalamember is used. This part is intended to oppose

The equivalentaout-of-balanceaforce appliesato K- braces (Fig. 1.9 (f)) when the

S. Fawzia, et.al [2011][1]:

This paperaevocative the investigation of the study of effectiveness of outrigger

Kiran Kamath, et.al [2012][2]:

Nishit Shah, et.al [2018][4]:

In this study investigation on the Comparative Study on Conventional Outrigger and

Purva Mhatre, et.al [2018][5]:

V. Bhargavi, et.al [2020][6]:

G. Ranganayagi, et.al [2020][7]:

Jeena Joshua, et.al [2021][8]:

B. G. Kavyashree, et.al [2021][9]:

OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

Collection of Required Data

Preparing Plan and Grid System

Determining the Sizes and Properties of components in

Assigning the Loads

Adopting the Seismic Zone IV

Adding Load Combinations as per IS-1893-2016

Modeling all types of Outrigger System

Carrying analysis by Time History method for El-

Comparing results with Normal Frame and Outrigger

3.3.1 MODEL TYPES:

Table 1: Different Types of Models Used

Model Number Types of Models

3.3.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODELS:

Table 2: Model Description

Type of Frame Reinforced Concrete Frame

3.4 TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS:

Time History Function application correctly solved by means of the ETABS

4.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:

In this design, a building of 20 storey framework is considered, the floor height of 3m

Figure 4.1: Typical Floor Plan

Table 3: Material and Section Specification

Concrete Grade M35

4.3 LOADS AND COMBINATIONS:

Any design is comprised of structural components (load conveying, like beams

4.3.3 IMPOSED LOADS:

 Typical Live load (Reducible) : 3 kN/m2

4.3.4 LOAD COMBINATIONS:

 1.5 Dead Load + 1.5 Live Load