ANALYSIS OF G+5 BUILDING WITH & WITHOUT STORY

DAMPERS

SUBMITTED BY:

RAJVEER THAKUR – 2028928

AYUSH SONY – 2130898

SHAWAN SIKDER – 2027747

SHIV GANESH MAURYA – 2028929

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:

FACULTY MENTOR: Er. VARINDER SINGH

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

GULZAR GROUP OF INSTITUTES (LUDHIANA)

I K GUJRAL PUNJAB TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, JALANDHAR

ਆਈ.ਕੇ. ਗੁ ਜਰਾਲ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਟੈਕਨੀਕਲ ਯੂ ਨੀਵਰਸਿਟੀ

1
 GULZAR GROUP OF INSTITUTES (LUDHIANA)
I.K GUJRAL PUNJAB TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY PUNJAB, INDIA

CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
We hereby certify that the work which is being presented in the report entitled ‘ANALYSIS OF G+5
BUILDING WITH & WITHOUT STORY DAMPERS. In partial fulfilment of requirements for the
award of degree of B. Tech (Civil Engineering) submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering at
Gulzar Group of Institutes, Ludhiana, Punjab under I.K.G. Punjab Technical University,
Jalandhar is an authentic record of our own work carried out during a period from August 2023 to
December 2023 under the supervision of “Guide Er. Virendra Singh” (Faculty of Civil Engineering,
GGI Ludhiana).

The matter presented in this report has not been submitted by me or anyone in any other
University/Institute for the award of B. Tech Degree.

1. RAJVEER THAKUR – 2028928

2. AYUSH SONY – 2130898
3. SHAWAN SIKDER – 2027747
4. SHIV GANESH MAURYA – 2028929

This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is correct to the best of our knowledge.

…………………. ……..…………..

(Supervisor) (Signature of Supervisor)

2
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I am highly grateful to Dr. Honey Sharma, Director, GGI, Ludhiana and Head of Department,
Civil Engineering Department, GGI, Ludhiana for providing this opportunity to carry out the
present major work/project. I would like to express a deep sense of gratitude and thanks
profusely to my supervisor Er. Virendra Singh, Faculty of Civil Engineering Department, GGI,
Ludhiana; without the wise counsel and able guidance of whom it would have been
impossible to complete the project. His constant guidance and encouragement have been of
great help in carrying out the present work and is acknowledged with reverential thanks. I
also express my gratitude to other faculty members of Civil Engineering Department, GGI,
Ludhiana for their intellectual support during experimentation and practical execution of the
present work in the laboratory.

3
 ABSTRACT
During a major earthquake, a large amount of energy is fed into a structure. Seismic waves
are the main reason for the development of vibration in the ground, the impact of this will
cause damage to the building. How this energy is consumed determines the level of damage.
The primary emphasis is on life safety with an expectation of substantial structural damage.
In general reliance for survival is placed on the ductility of the structure to dissipate energy
while undergoing large inelastic deformations causing bending, twisting, and cracking.
Earthquakes have clearly shown that conventional construction even in technologically
advanced industrialized countries is not immune to destruction.

ETABS software has been used to model G+5 tall building structure and dampers, by
considering seismic zone V and medium soil (Type II) as per IS 1893-2016.

The main objective of this study is to analyse the seismic performance of G+5 buildings in
both longitudinal and transverse directions with and without dampers and the difference in
responses of structures like Storey drifts, Storey acceleration, Storey displacement, etc.

The proposed model showed a drastic reduction in the displacement of the building using
FVDs (Fluid viscous damper).

4
S. NO. CONTENTS

CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER-2 METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER-3 MODELING AND ANALYSIS

CHAPTER-4 RESULT

CHAPTER-5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

CHAPTER-6 REFERENCES

5
 CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION

Earthquake in the simplest terms can be defined as Shaking and vibration at the surface of the earth
resulting from underground movement along a fault plane. The vibrations produced by the earthquakes
are due to seismic waves. Of all the factors accounted for, in any building design, seismic waves are the
most disastrous one.
Conventional methods of base widening, (as in the case of pyramids) or providing heavy massive
structure at the bottom has been used in the past, for retaining earthquakes and to combat wind effect.
However, modern high-rise buildings and tall structures cannot conveniently be geared up with these
techniques. The safety and serviceability of any structure are thus endangered with the increasing
elevation. As per the standard codes, a structure that can resist the highest earthquake that could occur in
that particular area can be called an earthquake resistant structure.
However, the most efficient way of designing earthquake-resistant structures would be to minimize the
deaths as well as minimize the destruction of the functionality of the structural element.
The most disastrous thing about an earthquake is its unpredictability of time and place of occurrence.
This poses a great challenge to the economy and safety of the structure. It requires that the elements of
the building, be designed to expiate the energy received by earthquakes to minimize the damage caused.
The energy induced during the vibrations of any earthquake can be broadly classified under two heads,
horizontal forces and gravitational forces.
As for the gravitational pull, which increases during an earthquake, an efficient bracing system needs to
be provided. This bracing will act as a rectifying system to dissipate extra energy imparted during an
earthquake. The horizontal sway of the building can be controlled by providing dampers at optimum and
critical locations. Among various passive energy dissipating devices Fluid viscous dampers are more
widely used in buildings. Fluid viscous dampers enhance the performance of the building.

1.1 Fluid viscous damper

Seismic dampers are used in buildings and other structures to mitigate the vibrations induced by
earthquakes. It is a mechanical device that dissipates the energy of the seismic waves affecting
the structure. The dampers are classified into various types. They are friction dampers, yielding
dampers, viscous dampers, tuned mass dampers and magnetic dampers. Viscous damper was
selected for the study because it is passive device that does not have any sensors or actuators and
does not consume any power, instead, it relies on the damping properties of materials used in its
design.
FVD is a device that can minimize structural damage by absorbing the energy released from
ground shaking due to earthquakes. They dissipate the energy via orifices generating a force
that reduces the earthquake force. The damping force of an FVD is represented as:
𝑭 = 𝑪. 𝑽𝜶
Where, ‘F’ is the Damping force in kN, ‘C’ is the Damping Coefficient in kNm/s, ‘V’ is the Relative
Velocity in m/s and ‘α’ is the Velocity Exponent.
6
Fig 1: Longitudinal section of Fluid viscous damper

7
 CHAPTER-2 METHODOLOGY
In this study, the modeling and analysis are done using the software ETABs. For design
purposes, “IS 456- 2000” and the seismic Coefficient method as per “IS 1893 (Part 1):
2002” is used for seismic load analysis and Gust analysis is used for wind loading as per
“IS 875 (Part 3): 1987”. For FVDs link this study uses 500 kN force with 98 kg weight as
per standard dimensions given by the “Taylor Devices”.

2.1 Building model details

The building structure for this study is taken as a G+5 storey. The dimension of 83ft×44ft is
considered with each story height of 3.96m resulting in the overall elevation of the building as
25.27m. The total number of columns is 24. The dimension of columns, beams and slab are
considered according to the analysis of model. The material used for columns is M25 grade
concrete, and for slab and beam, M25 grade concrete is considered. The materials considered for
rebar are HYSD500 and HYSD415 for longitudinal bar and confinement bar respectively. For this
study, the dead load is taken as 3.6 kN/m2 , live load as 2 kN/m2, and wall load is considered as
7 kN/m on each beam.

ISOMETRIC VIEW

Fig 2: (3D) Etabs Model of G+5 Residencial Building

8
 Figure 3: Ground floor plan Figure 4:First floor plan Figure 5: (2-5) typical floor plan

2.1.1 Story Data

Table 1 - Story Definitions
Height
Tower Name
m
T1 5 3.9624
T1 4 3.9624
T1 3 3.9624
T1 2 3.9624
T1 1 3.9624
T1 GF RF 3.9624
T1 PL 1.5

2.1.2 Load Cases

Table 2 - Load Case Definitions - Summary
Name Type
DEAD Linear Static
LIVE Linear Static
EQX Linear Static
EQY Linear Static
WLX Linear Static
WLY Linear Static

2.1.3 Load Patterns

Table 3 - Load Case Definitions - Summary

Is Auto
Name Type Auto Load
Load

EQX No Seismic IS 1893:2016

EQX(1/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQX(2/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQX(3/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQX(4/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQX(5/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQX(6/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQY No Seismic IS 1893:2016

9
 Is Auto
Name Type Auto Load
Load

EQY(1/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016

EQY(2/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQY(3/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQY(4/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQY(5/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
EQY(6/6) Yes Seismic IS 1893:2016
FINISH No Dead
LIVE No Live
ROOF LIVE No Roof Live
SERVICE No Dead
WALL No Dead
WLX No Wind Indian IS 875:2015
WLX(1/2) Yes Wind Indian IS 875:2015
WLX(2/2) Yes Wind Indian IS 875:2015
WLY No Wind Indian IS 875:2015
WLY(1/2) Yes Wind Indian IS 875:2015
WLY(2/2) Yes Wind Indian IS 875:2015

5TH FLOOR

4TH FLOOR

3RD FLOOR

2ND FLOOR

1ST FLOOR

G.F

Plinth lvl

Elevation in YZ plane

10
 CHAPTER-3 MODELING AND ANALYSIS
G+5 storey building is considered for the analysis and modeling is done in ETABs software.
3.1 Description of building model
Geometric detail
Dimension of building (83×44)ft

Type of building Residencial

Storey height 3.96m

Grade of concrete M25

Grade of steel Fe500

Primary load cases

Live load 2 kN/m2

Dead load 3.6 kN/m2

Wall laod 7 kN/m2

Seismic load in X and Y IS 1893:2016

Seismic properties
Zone factor Z 0.36(ZONE V)

Soil type II (Medium soil)

Dampimg ratio 5%

Response reduction factor R 5

Table 4: Building model detail

3.2 Damper data
The dampers placed with a single diagonal bracing are active in axial direction. Therefore the U1
directional property is chosen and all the other are kept fixed because damper behavior is non linear
.During defining the damper property non linear option is selected ,in that the value of stiffeness,
damping constant and damping exponent values are entered. Rotating properties R1, R2 and R3 are
entered zero because there is no provision for rotation of damper.
For the present study the damper data used are tabulated below, these values are entered in the
ETABs while defining of damper. Dampers data are taken from the Taylor devices Inc US. Dampers
are placed at the exterior corner of the building in all stories.

Damper type FVD 500

Mass in Kg 98 Kg
Weight in KN 500
Table 5: Damper input data

11
 Fig 6: Damper Placement pattern

Fig 7: Damper Etabs detail

Figure 8: FVD at exterior corner Figure 9:Plan of FVD at exterior

Elevation in YZ plane corner

12
3.2 Methods of analysis
There are many methods are available for the seismic analysis of a selected building to find out the
forces developed in structure due to seismic activity. Mainly analysis is done on the basis of model of
structure selected, materials used in the structure and also on the external inputs.
I. Equivalent static method is also called as equivalent lateral force method. Seismic
analysis on a building is done on a assumption of the horizontal force is similar to the
dynamic loading, In the method periods and shape of higher mode of vibration are not
required so the effort for the analysis is less, except for the fundamental period. The base
shear is calculated depends on the mass of structure, its fundamental periods of vibration
and shapes. Firstly the base shear is calculated for a entire structure then along the height
of building distribution is done. At each floor level the lateral force obtained are
distributed to each structural element. This method is usually adopted for a low to
medium height building.
II. Response spectrum method is also called as a modal method or mode superposition
method. This method is used in a structure where the modes will affect the response of
structure other than the fundamental one mainly this method used for a dynamic analysis
of a building which are asymmetrical in plan or irregularity in areas. In case of multi
storied buildings to find the forces and displacements caused due to medium range
earthquake motion this method is used for analysis.

13
 CHAPTER-4 RESULT
Modeling of building is done with the all the defined loads as per the codal provisions. Then
the analysis of the structure is done with Response spectrum method. A storey response
includes storey displacement, required stiffness storey drifts, storey shear and Modal time and
frequencies are considered. After the analysis, the obtained results are compared between
building models with and without FVDs. The obtained result is shown in Table 6 and Table 7.

Table 6: With (W) and without (WO)FVD.

Table 7: Reduction in Displacement using FVD.

According to this study, the model with FVDs can minimize the displacement by about 64%,
53%, 42%, 31%, and 18% in Story6, Story5, Story4, Story3, and Story2 respectively compared
to the model without FVDs. The obtained results may vary in a different system with different
parameters as the study is using some parameters based on an assumption like wall load.

Fig 10: Displacement according to Response spectrum analysis (RS).

14
 Fig 11: Required Stiffness according to Response spectrum analysis (RS).

Fig 12: Storey Drift Ratio according to Response spectrum analysis (RS).

Fig 13 : Storey shear in x direction for

Fig 14: Storey shear in Y direction for Response
Response spectrum analysis
spectrum analysis

4.1 Modal periods and frequencies

During earthquake or wind, all modes are excited in different manner .Depends on the
spatial distribution and frequency content of the load the length of dynamic loading excites
the modes of vibration. In this study 12 modes are considered and their time period and
frequencies.
15
 Fig 15 : Modal periods Fig 16: Modal frequency

The time period for a without damping building is more as compared to the damping
building. The time period is inversely proportional to the frequency of the structure. So the
natural frequency of the damped building is more compared to the building without damper.
As the frequency of the structure increases the stiffeness of structure is also increases because
stiffeness is directly proportional to the frequency. For a higher elevation building the
frequency is more because of more mass.

16
 CHAPTER-5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

5.1 Conclusion
From the analysis conducted, the following conclusions can be made.
• Earthquake is a natural phenomenon that causes numerous losses of lives and damage
to property. Various techniques are available to manage this problem one of which is
using “Fluid viscous dampers (FVDs)” with other damping devices and isolators that
can minimize the seismic demand.
• FVD is a passive device that does not have any sensors or actuators and does not
consume any power. Instead, it relies on the damping properties of materials used in its
design and hence it is more advantageous.
• The main objective of this study is to analyse the seismic performance of buildings with
and without “Fluid Viscous Dampers (FVDs)” using the response spectrum analysis
method.
• This study used “ETABs” software for modelling G+5 story building and analysing.
The proposed model in this study was able to minimize the displacement by about 64
%, 53%, 42%, 31%, and 18% in story6, Story5, Story4, Story3, and Story2 respectively
compared to the model without FVDs.
• If alone bracing are provided it will make structure stiff & if dampers are
provided it will provide passive flexibility i.e. dissipating energy & thus provide
flexibility. As a result there will be reduction in area of steel (5-30%) & thus economy
in design.

5.2 Future scope

It is recommended that further research be undertaken in following areas:
1) Different damper locations or provision of damper in the core of building can also be
studied.
2) Steel Structures can be used along with FVD.
3) Determining effect of dampers on design of structural component like beams and
column.
4) Determining the seismic behavior of tall building structures by using different
arrangements of “Fluid Viscous Dampers (FVDs)” devices in the field of their locations
in the building.
5) The position of the dampers can be changed accordingly with different parameters of
the damper.

17
 CHAPTER-11 REFERENCES

1. [1] Shayza, S., & Narender, B. (2020). Seismic Behaviour of G+ 7 RC Open Ground
Storey Buildings with Fluid Viscous Dampers. In Advances in Structural Engineering
(pp. 205-216). Springer, Singapore.
2. [2] Bisht, Y., & Setia, S. (2014). Seismic behaviour of a soft storey building with &
without viscous dampers. International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications, AET-29th March.
3. [3] Mathew, L., & Prabha, C. (2014). Effect of fluid viscous dampers in multi-storeyed
buildings. IMPACT Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol.(IMPACT IJRET), 2(9), 59-64.
4. [4] Taylor Devices Company. (1956). North Tonawanda, NY, US, Site:
http://taylordevices.com/.
5. [5] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). (2000). IS 456–2000: Code of practice for plain
and reinforced concrete (4th revision).
6. [6] Code, I. S. IS 875-2 (1987): Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other Than
Earthquake) For Buildings And Structures.
7. [7] Standard, I. (1893). Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Bureau of
Indian Standards, Part, 1.
8. Banazadeh Mehdi and Ghanbari Ali 2017 Seismic performance assessment of steel
momentresisting frames equipped with linear and nonlinear fluid viscous dampers with
the same damping ratio Journal of Constructional Steel Research 136 215–228
9. Chukka Naga Dheeraj Kumar Reddy and Muthumani K 2019 Comparison of X‐shaped
metallic dampers with fluid viscous dampers and influence of their placement on seismic
response of the building Asian Journal of Civil Engineering 20 869–882.
10. Chopra Anil K 2012 Earthquake Dynamics of Base-Isolated Buildings Dynamics of
structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering Fourth Edition Pearson
Prentice Hall, United States of America
11. Marko, J., Thambiratnam, D., & Pereira, N. (2004). Influence of damping systems on
building structures subject to seismic effects. Engineering Structures, 26(13), 1939-1956.
Tavel, P. 2007 Modeling and Simulation Design. AK Peters Ltd.
12. Prafful S M, Naveen Kumar S “seismic evaluation of multi-storied rc building with fluid
viscous damper using response spectrum analysis” e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 05
Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072.
13. A. Ravitheja “seismic evaluation of multi storey rc buildings with and without fluid
viscous dampers” Volume 16 Issue 1 Version 1.0 Year 2016 Type: Double Blind Peer
Reviewed International Research Journal Publisher: Global Journals Inc. (USA)
14. C. Rama Krishna Reddy1*, Vaishali G Ghorpade2, H. Sudarsana Rao “Analysis &
Design of a High Rise Unsymmetrical Buildingwith Dampers” ISSN: 0974- 4290, ISSN
(Online):2455-9555 Vol.10 No.15, pp 349- 357, 2017.
15. Nilay Prajapati, Nihil Sorathia, Dr. Vinubhai R Patel “ seismic analysis and performance
of high rise building with damper” e-ISSN (O): 2348-4470 p-ISSN (P): 2348- 6406
Volume 5, Issue 04, April -2018.

18
16. S. lakshmishireenbanu, pathaushasri “ Study of Seismic Energy Dissipation and Effect in
Multistory RCC Building with and Without Fluid Viscous Damper ISSN: 2278-3075,
Volume-8 Issue-7 May, 2019
17. M. S. Landge, Prof. P. K. Joshi “comparative study of various types of dampers used for
multi-story r. c. c. building” www.ijraset.com Volume 5 Issue IV, April 2017 IC Value:
45.98 ISSN: 2321-9653.

19