CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.

1 GENERAL In a number of building structures, the centers of rigidity do not coincide with the centre of mass. As a consequence, during an earthquake, lateral base motion induces torsional vibrations in the structure. Field observations of earthquake damage have provided numerous examples of serious structural distress or failure due to torsional motion. In such cases Shear Walls are provided in buildings which are used to resist the lateral earthquake loads.

Figure 1.1: Shear Wall in RC Building Shear walls are vertical elements of the horizontal force resisting system. Shear walls are constructed to counter the effects of lateral load acting on a structure. In residential construction, shear walls are straight external walls that typically form a box which provides all of the lateral support for the building.
1

When shear walls are designed and constructed properly, and they will have the strength and stiffness to resist the horizontal forces. In building construction, a rigid vertical diaphragm capable of transferring lateral forces from exterior walls, floors, and roofs to the ground foundation in a direction parallel to their planes. Examples are the reinforced-concrete wall or vertical truss. Lateral forces caused by wind, earthquake, and uneven settlement loads, in addition to the weight of structure and occupants; create powerful twisting (torsion) forces. These forces can literally tear (shear) a building apart. Reinforcing a frame by attaching or placing a rigid wall inside it maintains the shape of the frame and prevents rotation at the joints. Shear walls are especially important in high-rise buildings subjected to lateral wind and seismic forces. In the last two decades, shear walls became an important part of mid and high-rise residential buildings. As part of an earthquake resistant building design, these walls are placed in building plans reducing lateral displacements under earthquake loads. So shear-wall frame structures are obtained. Shear walls are not only designed to resist gravity / vertical loads (due to its self-weight and other living / moving loads), but they are also designed for lateral loads of earthquakes / wind. The walls are structurally integrated with roofs / floors (diaphragms) and other lateral walls running across at right angles, thereby giving the three dimensional stability for the building structures. Shear wall structural systems are more stable. Because, their supporting area (total cross-sectional area of all shear walls) with reference to total plans area of building, is comparatively more, unlike in the case of RCC framed structures.

1.1.2 ADVANTAGES OF SHEAR WALLS IN BUILDINGS Properly designed and detailed buildings with shear walls have shown very good performance in past earthquakes. Shear walls in high seismic regions require special detailing. However, in past earthquakes, even buildings with sufficient amount of walls that were not specially detailed for seismic performance (but had enough well-distributed reinforcement) were saved from collapse. Shear wall buildings are a popular choice in many earthquake prone countries, like Chile, New Zealand and USA. Shear walls are easy to construct, because reinforcement detailing of walls is relatively straight forward and therefore easily implemented at site. Shear walls are efficient, both interims of construction cost and effectiveness in minimizing earthquake damage in structural and nonstructural elements like glass windows and building contents. 1.2 OBJECTIVE OF PROJECT

The objective of the project is to fully design and optimize a R.C.C framed building and to track the behavior of various structural components of the same for different loadings.

1.3 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT

To achieve the above objectives the project is scheduled as below: To establish the geometry of the structure based on the various criteria. To determine the characteristic loadings and their occurrences. Analysis of structure taking into account vertical and lateral loadings. Design of various structural components using IS-456 (2000) and IS-13920 (1993). Optimization of various structural components. 1.4 Introduction about Shear Wall Reinforced concrete (RC) buildings often have vertical plate-like RC walls called Shear Walls in addition to slabs, beams and columns. These walls generally start at foundation level and are continuous throughout the building height. Their thickness can be as low as 150mm, or as high as 400mm in high rise buildings. Shear walls are usually provided along both length and width of buildings Shear walls are like vertically-oriented wide beams that carry earthquake loads downwards to the foundation. Shear walls in high seismic regions require special detailing. However, in past earthquakes, even buildings with sufficient amount of walls that were not specially detailed for seismic performance (but had enough well-distributed reinforcement) were saved from collapse. Shear wall buildings are a popular choice in many earthquake prone countries, like Chile, New Zealand and USA. Shear walls are easy to construct, because reinforcement detailing of walls is relatively straight-forward and therefore easily implemented at site. Shear walls are efficient, both in terms of construction cost and effectiveness in minimizing

earthquake damage in structural and nonstructural elements (like glass windows and building contents). 1.4.1 Shear Wall A shear wall (or braced frame) building is normally more rigid than a framed structure. With low design stress limits in shear walls, deflection due to shear forces is relatively small. Shear wall construction is an economical method of bracing buildings to limit damage, and this type of construction is normally economically feasible up to about 5 stories. Notable exceptions to the excellent performance of shear walls occur when the height-to-width ratio becomes great enough to make overturning a problem and when there are excessive openings in the shear walls. Also, if the soil beneath its footings is relatively soft, the entire shear wall may rotate, causing localized damage around the wall. The structural systems just mentioned may be used singly or in combination with each other. When frames and shear walls interact, the system is called a dual system if the frame alone can resist 25% of the lateral load. Otherwise, it is referred to as a combined system. The type of structural system and the details related to the ductility and energy-absorbing capacity of its components will establish the Response reduction factor R, used for calculating the total base shear.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The survey includes earthquake response of multi storey building frames. Some of the literatures emphasized on strengthening of the existing buildings in seismic prone regions. Maison and Neuss, (1984), Members of ASCE have preformed the computer analysis of an existing forty four story steel frame high-rise Building to study the influence of various modeling aspects on the predicted dynamic properties and computed seismic response behaviors. The predicted dynamic properties are compared to the building's true properties as previously determined from experimental testing. The seismic response behaviors are computed using the response spectrum (Newmark and ATC spectra) and equivalent static load methods. Also, Maison and Ventura, (1991), Members of ASCE computed dynamic properties and response behaviors OF THIRTEEN-STORY BUILDING and this result are compared to the true values as determined from the recorded motions in the building during two actual earthquakes and shown that state-of-practice design type analytical models can predict the actual dynamic properties. Arlekar, Jain & Murty, (1997) said that such features were highly undesirable in buildings built in seismically active areas; this has been verified in numerous experiences of strong shaking during the past earthquakes. They highlighted the importance of explicitly recognizing the presence of the open first storey in the analysis of the building, involving stiffness balance of the open first storey and the storey above, were proposed to reduce the irregularity introduced by the open first storey.

Awkar and Lui , (1997) studied responses of multi-story flexibly connected frames subjected to earthquake excitations using a computer model. The model incorporates connection flexibility as well as geometrical and material nonlinearities in the analyses and concluded that the study indicates that connection flexibility tends to increase upper stories' inter-storey drifts but reduce base shears and base overturning moments for multi-story frames. Balsamoa, Colombo, Manfredi, Negro & Prota (2005) performed pseudo dynamic tests on an RC structure repaired with CFRP laminates. The opportunities provided by the use of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) composites for the seismic repair of reinforced concrete (RC) structures were assessed on a fullscale dual system subjected to pseudo dynamic tests in the ELSA laboratory. The aim of the CFRP repair was to recover the structural properties that the frame had before the seismic actions by providing both columns and joints with more deformation capacity. The repair was characterized by a selection of different fiber textures depending on the main mechanism controlling each component. The driving principles in the design of the CFRP repair and the outcomes of the experimental tests are presented in the paper. Comparisons between original and repaired structures are discussed in terms of global and local performance. In addition to the validation of the proposed technique, the experimental results will represent a reference database for the development of design criteria for the seismic repair of RC frames using composite materials. Vasilopoulos and Beskos , (2006) performed rational and efficient seismic design methodology for plane steel frames using advanced methods of analysis in the framework of Euro codes 8 and 3 . This design methodology employs an advanced finite element method of analysis that takes into account geometrical and material nonlinearities and member and frame imperfections. It can sufficiently

capture the limit states of displacements, strength, stability and damage of the structure. Bardakis & Dritsos, (2007) evaluated the American and European procedural assumptions for the assessment of the seismic capacity of existing buildings via pushover analyses. The FEMA and the Euro code-based GRECO procedures have been followed in order to assess a four-storied bare framed building and a comparison has been made with available experimental results. Mortezaei, (2009) recorded data from recent earthquakes which provided evidence that ground motions in the near field of a rupturing fault differ from ordinary ground motions, as they can contain a large energy, or directivity pulse. This pulse can cause considerable damage during an earthquake, especially to structures with natural periods close to those of the pulse. Failures of modern engineered structures observed within the near-fault region in recent earthquakes have revealed the vulnerability of existing RC buildings against pulse-type ground motions. This may be due to the fact that these modern structures had been designed primarily using the design spectra of available standards, which have been developed using stochastic processes with relatively long duration that characterizes more distant ground motions. Many recently designed and constructed buildings may therefore require strengthening in order to perform well when subjected to near-fault ground motions. Fiber Reinforced Polymers are considered to be a viable alternative, due to their relatively easy and quick installation, low life cycle costs and zero maintenance requirements. Ozyigit, (2009) performed free and forced in-plane and out-of-plane vibrations of frames are investigated. The beam has a straight and a curved part and is of circular cross section. A concentrated mass is also located at different points of the frame with different mass ratios. FEM is used to analyze the problem.

Williams, Gardoni & Bracci, (2009) studied the economic benefit of a given retrofit procedure using the framework details. A parametric analysis was conducted to determine how certain parameters affect the feasibility of a seismic retrofit. A case study was performed for the example buildings in Memphis and San Francisco using a modest retrofit procedure. The results of the parametric analysis and case study advocate that, for most situations, a seismic retrofit of an existing building is more financially viable in San Francisco than in Memphis. Garcia, (2010) tested a full-scale two-storey RC building with poor detailing in the beam column joints on a shake table as part of the European research project ECOLEADER. After the initial tests which damaged the structure, the frame was strengthened using carbon fiber reinforced materials (CFRPs) and re-tested. This paper investigates analytically the efficiency of the strengthening technique at improving the seismic behavior of this frame structure. The experimental data from the initial shake table tests are used to calibrate analytical models. To simulate deficient beam column joints, models of steel concrete bond slip and bond-strength degradation under cyclic loading were considered. The analytical models were used to assess the efficiency of the CFRP rehabilitation using a set of medium to strong seismic records. The CFRP strengthening intervention enhanced the behavior of the substandard beam column joints, and resulted in substantial improvement of the seismic performance of the damaged RC frame. It was shown that, after the CFRP intervention, the damaged building would experience on average 65% less global damage compared to the original structure if it was subjected to real earthquake excitations. Niroomandi, Maheri, Maheri & Mahini, (2010) retrofitted an eight-storey frame strengthened previously with a steel bracing system with web- bonded CFRP. Comparing the seismic performance of the FRP retrofitted frame at joints with that of the steel X-braced retrofitting method, it was concluded that both
9

retrofitting schemes have comparable abilities to increase the ductility reduction factor and the over-strength factor; the former comparing better on ductility and the latter on over-strength. The steel bracing of the RC frame can be beneficial if a substantial increase in the stiffness and the lateral load resisting capacity is required. Similarly, FRP retrofitting at joints can be used in conjunction with FRP retrofitting of beams and columns to attain the desired increases.

10

CHAPTER 3 PLANNING AND ANALYSIS 3.1 Layout of the Building The building comprises of 15storeys, each storey with a height of 3.1 meters. Total height of the building comprising of 49.6meters.G + 15 R.C.C building structure with 12x12 square meters building block compartments. With total width of 36 meters. Total area of 720 m2.

Figure 3.1.1: Plan of the Building

Each square block comprising of 9 columns, bringing the total number of columns to 16 columns in all and 4 columns at core wall acting as boundary elements for the shear wall. Though it is not necessary to provide flange it is
11

recommended by IS 13920:1993 (clause 9.4). Boundary element is the portion along the wall edges that is strengthened by longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. Here the boundary element provided is of 750x750mm.

This building is a dual system structure with SMRF (Special Moment Resisting Frame) and Ductile Shear Wall. In buildings where a space frame resists the earthquake forces, the columns and beams act in bending. During a large earthquake, story-to-story deflection (story drift) may be accommodated within the structural system without causing failure of columns or beams. However, the drift may be sufficient to damage elements that are rigidly tied to the structural system such as brittle partitions, stairways, plumbing, exterior walls, and other elements that extend between floors. Therefore, buildings can have substantial interior and exterior nonstructural damage and still be structurally safe. Although there are excellent theoretical and economic reasons for resisting seismic forces by frame action, for particular buildings, this system may be a poor economic risk unless special damage-control measures are taken.

3.2 Building Modeling

The model was first given trial sections for the structural members and was analyzed for the same. After numerous numbers of trials and errors, the dimensions of the structural members were decided. The static and dynamic analysis was carried out on the model with the given sections assigned to it. Column members modeled initially with a cover of 45mm to steel rebar. Beam section members were given 30mm clear cover to the steel rebar. Slab was modeled as a Rigid Diaphragm, since the slab does not contribute in resisting the story shear. Also the rigid diaphragm does not change its plan shape
12

when subjected to lateral loads. It remains the same size, and square corners remain square. There is no flexure; rigid diaphragms are capable of transmitting torsion to the major resisting elements (usually the outer most elements). The lateral story shear is distributed to the resisting elements in proportion to the rigidities of those elements. Shear Wall was modeled as a Shell element, which combines both in-plane and out-of-plane stiffness. Also the shear wall is provided with flange sections at its ends acting as boundary elements to the wall. Boundary elements are portions along the wall edges are strengthened by longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. Furthermore it is recommended by IS 13920:1993 to provide shear walls with flanges with greater dimension than the wall itself as boundary elements. Furthermore, the slab element has been meshed into finer elements of 1x1 meter dimension, for better and accurate load distribution on the beam members. M25 grade concrete was adopted for the horizontal members like slab and beams. M30 grade concrete was adopted for the vertical members like columns and Shear Wall.

3.3 INPUT PARAMETERS

Earthquake Parameters: Seismic zone considered Zone V Soil Type Importance Factor Soft soil High

Response reduction factor 5

Wind Parameters:
13

Terrain Category Structure class Risk co-efficient

3 B 1.08 0.5

Windward Co-efficient 0.8 Leeward Co-efficient

3.4 Modal Analysis Results

The elastic properties and mass of building causes it to develop a vibratory motion when they are subjected to dynamic action. The vibration of a building consists of a fundamental mode of vibration and the additional contribution of various modes, which vibrates at higher frequencies. In low-rise buildings the seismic response depends primarily on the fundamental mode of vibration, the also the period of vibration of this mode expressed in modes is the most representative characteristics of the dynamic response of a building. On the basis of time period, building structures are classified as i) Rigid (T < 0.3 sec). ii) Semi-Rigid (0.3 sec < T < 1.0 sec). iii) Flexible (T > 1.0 sec). Buildings with lower natural frequencies and long natural periods, these buildings will experience lower accelerations but larger displacements. The model is analyzed for 45 numbers of modes. The type of analysis being chosen is Ritz Vector analysis over Eigen Vector analysis. Reason being Ritz vector analysis is that it provides a better participation factor, which enables the analysis to run faster, with the same level of accuracy. Further, missing-mass modes are automatically included, there is no need to determine whether or not there are
14

enough modes, and when determining convergence of localized response with respect to the number of modes, Ritz vectors converge much faster and more uniformly than do Eigen vectors. Ritz vectors are not subject to convergence questions, though strict orthogonality of vectors is maintained, similar to Eigen vectors. The Ritz load vectors assigned are as accelerations in X, Y and Zdirections to the building structure. Table 3.4.1: Modal Analysis data Mode Period T (in sec) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 2.107427 2.107427 2.067215 0.66899 0.562153 0.562153 0.381305 0.261898 0.261898 0.257269 0.187375 0.159323 0.159323 0.143056 0.112865 Frequency (Hz) 0.4745123 0.4745123 0.4837426 1.4947907 1.7788751 1.7788751 2.6225725 3.8182804 3.8182804 3.8869821 5.3368913 6.2765577 6.2765577 6.9902695 8.8601426

15

Table 3.4.2: Modal Participation Data Type Accel Accel Accel Accel RX RY RY StatPercent 100 100 99.9999 DynPercent 100 100 99.8222

3.4.1 STOREY SHEAR The following storey shears were obtained from this method as depicted in table. Table 3.4.3: Storey Shear Floor Peak Storey Shear in KN X 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 149.6 445.4 736.12 1021.82 1302.53 1578.29 1848.99 2112.81 2368.68 2616.65 2854.79 3080.44 3290.17 3488.03 Y 149.6 445.4 736.12 1021.82 1302.53 1578.29 1848.99 2112.81 2368.68 2616.65 2854.79 3080.44 3290.17 3488.03
16

2 1

3684.6 3881.17

3684.6 3881.17

Maximum base shear was observed in X and Y direction with an intensity of 3881.17 KN where X and Y directions are the orthogonal horizontal directions.

3.4.2 STOREY DRIFT Storey drift is the displacement of one level relative to the other level above or below. This is one of the most important parameter of lateral analysis to be studied. As per clause no. 20.5 of IS 456:2000, the lateral sway at the top should not exceed H/500, where H is the total height of the building. = = 0.0992 meters = 99.2 mm.

Table 3.4.4: Storey Drift Storey Level 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 .356 .374 .399 .421 .442 .463 .48 .491 .496 .428 .449 .448 .506 .532 .556 .576 .59 .596 .535 .561 .599 .632 .664 .695 .720 .738 .745
17

1.2(D.L+L.L+

1.5(D.L+

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

.492 .476 .446 .399 .335 .243 .117

.591 .571 .535 .479 .399 .292 .141

.738 .714 .669 .599 .499 .365 .176

Since all the storey drifts are under the limits prescribed by IS 456:2000, the building is safe against storey drift for lateral loading of wind on it.

3.5 LOADINGS

Various Indian Codes like IS 875 (Part-1, 2 and 3), IS 1893(Part-1):2002 have been referred to decide the quantum of loading to be given to the structure.

3.5.1. GRAVITY LOADS Loads on Beams The imposed loading applicable to the beams and slabs are given in IS 875 (Part-1)-1975, The brick wall load on the beam was calculated based on the height per meter length of the wall.

Density of brick wall Cement Plaster Total

= 1805 Kg/m3

(Using sand cement bricks)

= 1040 Kg/ m3 = 2845 Kg/ m3

18

Height of the wall = 3.1 m Weight per meter of Brick-wall = 3.1 x 2.845 = 9 KN/m. Uniformly distributed load of 9 KN/m on the beams from brick-wall acting as dead load on the structure.

Loads on Slab Dead load on slab element has been taken as 2 KN/m and 2KN/m as Live load on the slab element (since the building structure is a residential complex).

Table 3.5.1: Load Intensity Loading Dead Load Live Load Intensity 2KN/m 2KN/m

Wind Loads

The wind speed suggested by IS 875(Part-3):1975 is 50m/s for this location. The wind exposure is from the extents of the rigid diaphragms assigned to the slab elements. Also IS 1893(Part-1):2002 states that wind is not to be considered simultaneously with earthquake or maximum flood or maximum sea waves.The load case combinations adopted are referred from IS 875 (Part-3):1975.

1.2 (D.L + L.L + Wx) 1.2 (D.L + L.L Wx) 1.2 (D.L + L.L+Wy) 1.2 (D.L + L.L Wy)
19

1.5 (D.L + Wx) 1.5 (D.L - Wx) 1.5 (D.L + Wy) 1.5 (D.L - Wy)

Earthquake Loads

Seismic forces are the most decisive and critical loadings for a multi storey building. The structure is seismically loaded using elastic time-history method and load combinations specified by the code are used. The structure is assumed to be with the soil being soft soil. The direction scales are calculated taking the importance factor (I) as 1.5 and reduction factor (R) as 5. The load case combinations adopted are referred from IS 1893 (Part-1):2002.

Table 3.5.2: Load Combinations Static 1.2 (D.L + L.L + EQx) 1.2 (D.L + L.L EQx) 1.2 (D.L + L.L + EQy) 1.2 (D.L + L.L EQy) 1.5 (D.L + EQx) 1.5 (D.L - EQx) 1.5 (D.L + EQy) 1.5 (D.L - EQy) Dynamic 1.2 (D.L + L.L + THx) 1.2 (D.L + L.L THx) 1.2 (D.L + L.L + THy) 1.2 (D.L + L.L THy) 1.5 (D.L + THx) 1.5 (D.L - THx) 1.5 (D.L + THy) 1.5 (D.L - THy)

20

3.6 Assumption of Section and Material The multi-storey building is entirely made of R.C.C members. For analysis of the same in STAADPRO, the following properties shown in table-3 of the materials have been adopted.

Table 3.6.1: Properties of the Materials Concrete (KN/m) M25 fck = 25 N/mm2 Isotropic Material Mass per unit Volume = 2.4 Weight per unit Volume =24 Modulus of Elasticity = 25 x 106 Poissons Ratio = 0.2 fck = 30 N/mm2 Isotropic Material Mass per unit Volume = 2.4 Weight per unit Volume =24 Modulus of Elasticity = 25 x 106 Poissons Ratio = 0.2 M30

Co-eff of Thermal Expansion = 9.9 x Co-eff of Thermal Expansion = 9.9 x 10-6 10-6 Shear Modulus = 10.41 x 106 Shear Modulus = 10.41 x 106

Structural components like beams and columns which constitute the structural frame have been assumed initially and the structure is analyzed taking into account permissible deflections. The following sections shown in table 4 were assumed.

Table 3.6.2: Assumed Sections for Analysis Slab Thickness-150mm Shear Wall Thickness-300mm Beam 400x650 mm Column 750x750 mm

21

CHAPTER 4 DESIGN DETAILS 4.1 Design of Slabs Design Code: IS 456-2000

Common Design Parameters: ly lx fck fy 6m 3m 25 N/mm2 415 N/mm2 200 mm 75 mm 24 KN/m3 x 24=1.8 KN/m2 25 KN/m3 200 mm 150 mm 2

Overall Depth Thickness of Screed Unit Weight of Screed Self wt of Screed Unit Weight of Slab Assume Bearing Wall Thickness (ly/lx)

Since the ratio of long to short span is 2, the slab should be designed as one way slab.

22

Load Calculation: Live load Dead load Partitions Fall Ceiling Internal Pipe Systems Self weight of slab = 25 x 0.200 x 1 = 5 kN/m2 Total load 10.5 KN/m2 2 KN/m2 2 KN/m2 0.5 KN/m2 1

Design load (W) 15.75 KN/m Effective Span: Centre to Center Spacing Clear Span + Effective depth Effective Span of the Section (l) Factored Load: Factored Moment (Mu) (+ve Moment) = = = 13.23 kNm (-ve Moment) = = 3.0 + 0.20 = 3.0 + 0.175 = 3.175 m = 3.20 m = 3.175 m

23

= 15.87 kNm (+ve Moment) = = 9.92 kNm Effective Depth Calculation: Overall depth of the section is 200 mm Let us assume 25 mm cover for the slab Effective depth, d = 175 mm = 0.48 Factored Reaction Ru = 0.36 fck = 3.44 b= 1000 mm dreq = = = 62.01 mm < 175 mm (1)

Hence OK! Hence the section is under reinforced Area of Tensile Steel (Ast): Ast(req) (+ve Moment) Mu = 0.87 fy Ast (d - Ast fy / fck bd)
24

13.23 x 106 = 0.87 x 415 x Ast x 175 (15.99Ast2 63183.75Ast + 13.23 x 106 = 0 Ast = 213.79 mm2 Using 8mm bars A = x 82 = 50.26 mm2 Spacing of 8mm bars = = 235.09 mm2 Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Ast(prov) = = 251.3 mm2

Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Distribution Steel: Distribution Reinforcement = 0.15% of Cross Sectional Area = x 1000 x 200

= 300 mm2 Using 8mm bars Spacing of 8mm bars = = 167.53 mm2 Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c
25

Area of Tensile Steel (Ast): Ast(req) (-ve Moment) Mu = 0.87 fy Ast (d - Ast fy / fck bd) 15.87 x 106 = 0.87 x 415 x Ast x 175 (15.99Ast2 63183.75Ast + 15.87 x 106 = 0 Ast = 257.45 mm2 Using 8mm bars A = x 82 = 50.26 mm2 Spacing of 8mm bars = = 195.22 mm2 Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Ast(prov) = = 251.3 mm2 )

Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Distribution Steel: Distribution Reinforcement = 0.15% of Cross Sectional Area = x 1000 x 200

= 300 mm2
26

Using 8mm bars Spacing of 8mm bars = = 167.53 mm2 Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Area of Tensile Steel (Ast): Ast(req) (+ve Moment) Mu = 0.87 fy Ast (d - Ast fy / fck bd) 9.92 x 106 = 0.87 x 415 x Ast x 175 (15.99Ast2 63183.75Ast + 9.92 x 106 = 0 Ast = 159.41 mm2 Using 8mm bars A = x 82 = 50.26 mm2 Spacing of 8mm bars = = 315.28 mm2 Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Ast(prov) = = 251.3 mm2 )

Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c

27

Distribution Steel: Distribution Reinforcement = 0.15% of Cross Sectional Area = x 1000 x 200

= 300 mm2 Using 8mm bars Spacing of 8mm bars = = 167.53 mm2 Provide 8mm bars @ 200 mm c/c Check for Shear: Nominal Shear Force Vu = WL/2 = 2362 N Nominal Shear Stress
v= v

0.013 N/mm2 =

Percentage of Steel Pt = Pt = 0.1% [From IS 456-2000, Pg. 73] c = 0.29 > Check for Deflection: Pt = 0.1%
v

28

fs = 0.58 fy = 0.58 x 500 x fs = 240 N/mm2 [From Is 456-2000. Pg 38] Modification Factor, kt = 1.70 ( Detailing:
Max

>(

prov

Figure 4.1.1: Slab Detailing

29

4.2 Design of Columns There are 32 columns in total in each storey.

Figure 4.2.1: Column Labels For simplicity, we are considering the similar columns sections in the building structure. Furthermore, since the building is symmetrical in plan dimensions, the columns grouped in the following manner tend to behave in a similar manner.

Design Details of Column C-19 Design Code: IS 456-2000 General design parameters: Given: = 3.100 m = 30 MPa = 415 MPa
30

= 538072 mm2

Figure 4.2.2: Column Reinforcement Assumptions 1. The general conditions of clause 25.1.1 are applicable. 2. The specified design axial loads include the self weight of the column. 3. The design axial loads are taken constant over the height of the column. Design approach: The column is designed using the following procedure: 1. The column design charts are constructed. 2. The design axis and design ultimate moment are determined. 3. The design axial force and moment capacity is checked on the relevant design chart. 4. The procedure is repeated for each load case. 5. The critical load case is identified as the case yielding the lowest safety factor about the design axis. Through inspection: Load case 3(1.5 (D.L + THx)) is critical. Check column slenderness:
31

End fixity and bracing for bending about the Design axis: At the top end: Condition 2 (Partially fixed). At the bottom end: Condition 1 (fully fixed). The column is braced. Effective length factor 0.80 = Eff Effective column height: = Eff = .8 x 3.1 = 2.480 m Column slenderness about weakest axis: = = = 3.341 Where h is an equivalent column depth derived from the radius of gyration square root of 12

32

Figure 4.2.3: Column-19 Minimum Moments for Design Check for minimum eccentricity: Check that the eccentricity exceeds the minimum in the plane of bending: = N

= .0312 x 16532 = 515.798 kNm Check if the column is slender = 3.3 < 12 Therefore the column is short. Initial Moments: The column is bent in double curvature about the X-X axis: M1 = Smaller initial end moment = -1745.0 kNm M2 = Larger initial end moment = 1745.0 kNm The initial moment near mid-height of the column: = 0.4 x + 0.6 x

= 0.4 x .1745 + 0.6 x 1745 = 349.000 kNm = 0.4 x = 0.4 x 1745 = 698.00 kNm Mi 0.4 M2 = 698.0 kNm The column is bent in double curvature about the Y-Y axis: M1 = Smaller initial end moment = -75.3 kNm M2 = Larger initial end moment = 75.3 kNm The initial moment near mid-height of the column:
33

= 0.4 x

+ 0.6 x

= 0.4 x -75.31 + 0.6 x 75.31 = 15.062 kNm = 0.4 x = 0.4 x 75.31 = 30.124 kNm Mi 0.4 M2 = 30.1 kNm Design ultimate load and moment: Design axial load: = 16532.0 kN Design of Column section for ULS: The column is checked for applied moment about the design axis. Through inspection: the critical section lies at the bottom end of the column. The design axis for the critical load case 3 lies at an angle of 2.47 to the X-axis The safety factor for the critical load case 3 is 0.71

Moment distribution along the height of the column for bending about the design axis: The final design moments were calculated as the vector sum of the X- and Ymoments of the critical load case. This also determines the design axis direction At the top, Mx = 1746.6 kNm

Near mid-height, Mx = 698.6 kNm At the bottom, Mx = 1746.6 kNm

34

35

Summary of design calculations: Design table for critical load case:

Moments and reinforcement Mx (kNm) My (kNm) M (kNm) Design axis Safety factor Ast (mm2) Percentage AsNom (mm2) Critical load case: LC 3 -1745.0 -75.3 1746.6 182.47 0.71 24429 4.34% 4.305 698.0 30.1 698.6 2.47 0.80 24429 4.34% 4.305 -1745.0 -75.3 1746.6 2.47 0.71 24429 4.34% 4305

Design results for all load cases: Load case Axi s Pu (kN) M1 (kN m) M2 (kN m) Mi (kN m) Ma (kN m) Desi gn M (kN m) M(kN m) Safe ty facto r Load case 1
1.5(D.L+ L.L)

X-X 9719 -34.0 Y-Y .0 -34.0

34.0 34.0

13.6 13.6

0.0 0.0

Top

34.0 34.0

303.2

1.36 3

36

Load case

Axis

Pu (kN)

M1

M2

Mi (kN m)

Ma (kN m)

Desi gn

M (kN m)

M (kN m)

Safe ty facto r

(kNm) (kN m)

Load case X-X 16335. 2

1.5(D.L+EQ x)

-91.0 -54.0

91.0 54.0

36.4 21.6

0.0 0.0

Top

91.0 54.0

509. 7

0.81 1

Y-Y

Load case X-X 16532. -1745.0 1745. 698.0 2

1.5(D.L+TH x)

0.0 0.0

Bott om

1745 1746 .0 75.3 .6

0.70 8

Y-Y

-75.3

0 75.3

30.1

Load case 3(1.5(D.L + THx)) is critical. Thus increasing the column section size to 1000x1000mm and keeping the rebar percentage the same. The rebar percentage and various design details for the column section after increase in its dimensions are shown below. For Column section C-19 dimension of 1000x1000mm with 24 nos. of 36 diameter bars is safe against the different load cases on it.

37

4.3 DESIGN OF SHEAR WALL Shear Wall Design The design of shear wall in 3-storeyed reinforced concrete building has been presented for illustration .The design forces as per IS1893 (part-1):2002 in the shear wall have already been calculated and summarized in Table 9.1. The sectional and reinforced details fulfilled according to the clauses of IS 13920:1993 are presented as under: Clause as per IS 13920 The Design requirements as per IS 13920:1993 and the details provided in the shear walls are given below: According to Clause 9.1: The General requirements of the Lateral force resisting system in the building is a dual system consisting of SMRF and Shear Wall According to Clause 9.1.1: The design of shear wall is based on the assumption that it will be the part of the lateral force resisting system of the structure consisting of SMRF and shear walls. In general, the shear walls will resist all the lateral force being a relatively stiff element According to Clause 9.1.2: In order to safeguard against premature out-of-plane buckling in the potential plastic hinge region of walls, minimum thickness of shear wall should not be less than 150mm. Assume thickness of shear wall 300mm. According to Clause 9.1.3: Shear wall is subjected to combined flexure and axial load therefore; the ends of the wall will be subjected to high axial load. Therefore,
38

it is necessary to thicken the wall in boundary regions. This is readily achieved by providing flange elements with sufficient dimensions so as to provide of the wall section. This effective flange width to be used in the design of flanged wall sections, shall be assumed to extend beyond the face of the web for a distance which shall be smaller of (a) Half the distance to an adjacent shear wall web (b) 1/10th of the weight. The shear wall is provided in between the middle two columns of the exterior frames. These columns will act as a flange element of the shear wall. Therefore, there is no need for further thickening of shear wall at the end or boundary regions. According to Clause 9.1.4: To control the width of the of the inclined cracks in the wall, the code recommends the direction of walls, i.e.; horizontal and vertical. The minimum reinforcement ratio should be 0.0025 of the gross area in each direction of the wall and should be uniform across the cross section of the wall and the calculated reinforcement in horizontal and vertical direction is greater than the minimum prescribed reinforcement. Provided reinforcement is uniformly distributed in both the directions. According to Clause 9.1.5: To reduce fragmentation and premature deterioration of the concrete under load reversal loading in inelastic range, it is preferred that the longitudinal and transverse reinforcement should be provided in two curtains if (a) factored shear stress in the wall exceeds 0.25 wall thickness >

200mm. Since the thickness of shear wall is 250mm and also the factored shear stress (
v)

is greater than 0.25 fck the reinforcement is provided in two curtains.

According to Clause 9.1.6: To prevent the use of very large diameter of reinforcement, the code restricts diameter of bar up to 1/10 th the thickness part thus

39

diameter of bar used in horizontal and vertical reinforcement is 10mm,which is smaller than 1/10 (300) = 30mm. According to Clause 9.1.7: The maximum spacing of reinforcement in either direction shall not exceed the smallest of 1w/5, 3tw, and 450mm; where 1w is the horizontal length of the wall, and tw is the thickness of the wall .This limitation has been guided by the experience and various tests to confine .Thus the

spacing provided in horizontal and vertical direction of reinforcement is 130mm which is smaller of (a) 1w/5 = 800mm (b) 3tw=900mm and 450 Hence ok Shear Strength Requirements are: The nominal shear stress, (
v c)

shall be calculate as

= Vu/tw1w

Where, Vu =Factored Shear force = thickness of web 1w=Effective depth of wall section This may be takes as 0.81wfor rectangular section Vu = 167.16 / 2 = 59KN = 300 mm

40

1w = 4000 mm

= 0.8

4000 = 3200 mm

The nominal shear stress,

v

= 0.1N/mm

Hence ok. The design strength of concrete ( ) shall be calculated as per Table-13, Clause 9.2.2 of IS 456:2000 Assume, horizontal and vertical (As) is 0.25% and Concrete grade M30, Permissible shear stress in concrete is The nominal shear stress in the wall, Clause 9.2.3 of IS 456:2000 = 3.5 N/mm2 Hence ok. When
v v c

= 0.37 N/mm2. cmax as per Table 14,

shall not exceed

is less than

shear reinforcement shall be provided in accordance with

v

9.1.3, 9.1.4 and 9.1.6 of the code.

(0.1 N/mm2) <

c (0.37

N/mm2).

Horizontal reinforcement to be provided as per 9.1.4 Minimum reinforcement = 0.25% of Ag =0.0025 =0.75

41

Hence, provide 10 mm diameter bar at 130 c/c in 2 curtains as horizontal reinforcement. According to Clause 9.2.6: The vertical reinforcement that is uniformly distributed in the wall shall not be less than the horizontal reinforcement in 9.2.5 Hence, provide 10mm diameter bar at 130 c/c in 2curtain as vertical reinforcement also. Flexural Strength According to Clause 9.3.1: The moment of resistance,
,

of the wall section

shall be calculate as for columns subjected to combined axial load and uniaxial bending as per IS: 456-1978.The moment of resistance that is provided by uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement in a slender rectangular wall section may be calculate as follows: (a)For
/1w

x*u/1w 2(0.168+

= [(1+ ( = [0.15+ (1[0.15+ (1-

2=

= area of uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement =0.516 Where, ES= Elastic modulus of steel
42

Ast / (tw1w); / =

=AS1W/

= 0.75/300=0.002;

=0.31 =0.66

Since
1= [0.36+

= [0.36+0.03 0.3534 = 20,780KN-m The remaining moment Muin boundary element. According to Clause 9.3.2: The cracked flexural strength of the wall should be greater than its un-cracked flexural strength. According to Clause 9.3.3: In walls that do not have boundary elements, vertical reinforcement consisting of at least 4 bars minimum of 12 mm diameter arranged in two layers shall be provided along the edge of the wall and concentrated vertical reinforcement at the edges of the wall is more effective in resisting bending moment.
43

= 3000KN-m shall be resisted by reinforcement

Boundary Elements Boundary elements are portions along the wall edges that are strengthen by longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. Though they may have the same thickness as that of the wall web, it is advantageous to provide them with greater thickness. According to Clause 9.4.1: Where the extreme fiber compressive stress in the wall due to combined axial load and bending is greater than 0.2f ck, boundary elements shall be provided along the vertical boundaries of wall. The boundary elements may be discontinued where the calculate compressive stress become less than 0.15fck Gross Sectional Properties 1w = 4000 mm = 300mm Ag = tw1w3/12= 300 40003/12 =1.6 012 mm4
(
=

=6.6N/mm2 > 4 Therefore, boundary elements are provided.

44

According to Clause 9.4.2: A boundary element shall have adequate axial load carrying capacity, assuming short column action, so as to enable it to carry an axial compression equal to the sum of factored gravity load on it and the additional compressive load induced by the seismic force. The latter may be calculated as ( Where, Moment of resistance provided by distributed vertical reinforcement across the wall section. Centre of centre distance between the boundary elements along of the wall. The adjacent columns of shear wall act as a boundary element .From table 9.1 the maximum compressive axial load on boundary element column is under different loading conditions. Let with existing column size having dimension 750 mm 750 mm and assume longitudinal reinforcement 2% of the gross area. Ag = 750 750 =5.625 AS = 0.02 = 11205 mm2 Axial load capacity of boundary element column acting as short column =0.4 =0.4 Ag + (0.67 -0.4 ) As mm2 mm2 =16096 KN )

+ (0.67
45

7082056 KN > 16096 KN Increasing the column section to 1200mm Ag =1200 =1.4 As = 0.04 =20347 mm2 mm2 mm

Hence ok. According to Clause 9.4.4: The percentage of vertical reinforcement in the boundary elements shall not be less than 0.8 % neither greater than 6%. So, provided vertical reinforcement is 2% of gross area = 20347 mm2 Provide 20 bars of 36 mm diameter equally distributed on the four sides of the section. Hence ok. In order to avoid congestion, the practical upper limit would be 4 % Boundary element shall be provided as per IS13920:1993 and detailing in the adjacent columns of shear wall of boundary element according to IS13920:1993 Hence ok.

46

Figure 4.3.1: Reinforcement details in reinforced concrete Shear Wall

47

4.4 DESIGN OF BEAM Beam Analysis and Design Details

Figure 4.4.1: Critical Beam Location The design of one part of the block at level 8 is illustrated here

48

Figure 4.4.2: Beam Layout Plan General requirements The flexural members shall fulfill the following general requirements. (IS13920; Clause 6.1.2) 0.3 Here = =0.61>0.3

Hence, ok. (IS13920; Clause 6.1.3) b 200 mm Here b = 400 mm 200 mm. Hence, ok. (IS13920; Clause 6.1.4)

49

D D = 650 mm < Hence, ok. mm

Bending Moments and Shear Forces The end moments and end shears for six load cases (3 static and 3 dynamic) are shown in the following tables. Since the moments and shears due to Y-direction for orthogonal beams located parallel to X-direction show negligible shears and moments, they can be neglected from load combinations, also applied for beams in Y-direction.

3-3 Beams

S.N o.

Load case Left

B23 Middle Right Left

B24 Middl Right e

1 2 3 4 5

1.5(D.L+L.L) 1.2(D.L+L.L+EQx) 1.2(D.L+L.L+THx) 1.5(D.L+EQx) 1.5(D.L+THx)

51.748 573.3 972.2 715.1 968.35

70.6

-227.3

62

67.9

-248.2

361.846 -784.679 526.03 334.08 -754.159 561.4 438.33 559.67 -1183.2 -945.14 -1180.52 883 652.9 880 510.3 402.03 -1121.5 -903.75

498.52 -1118.52

Table 4.4.1: End moments (KN-m) for 5 critical load cases 3-3 beams

50

S.N o. 1 2 3 4 5

Load case Left 1.5(D.L+L.L) 1.2(D.L+L.L+EQx) 1.2(D.L+L.L+THx) 1.5(D.L+EQx) 1.5(D.L+THx) 101.65 398.2

B23 Middle 75.43 377.27 Right 127.38 408.5 589.9 462.33 Left 64.25 379.6

B24 Middle 82.29 Right 134.24

369.592 400.869

538.553 538.144 454.6 536.6 427.6 537

494.927 505.487 557.332 432.9 417.445 452.26

582.56 490.456 500.368 559.526

Table 4.4.2: End Shears (KN) for 5 critical load cases for 3-3 beams

Rebar Percentage Start 1.903% 1.906% Middle 0.841% 1.205% End 2.347% 1.514%

Table 4.4.3: Percentage rebar distribution for B23

Figure 4.4.3: Beam Reinforcement Details for B23

51

Rebar Percentage Start 1.716% 1.794% Middle 0.707% 1.100% End 2.234% 1.367%

Table 4.4.4: Percentage rebar distribution for B24

Figure 4.4.4: Beam Reinforcement Details for B24

52

2-2 Beams

S.N o. 1 2 3 4 5

Load case Left 1.5(D.L+L.L) 1.2(D.L+L.L+EQx) 1.2(D.L+L.L+THx) 1.5(D.L+EQx) 1.5(D.L+THx) -210.98 397.2 -971.71 530.755 -970.51

B21 Middle 102.85 Right -180 Left 45.734

B22 Middle 69.9 Right -296.88

300.705 -698.88 462.052 326.355 -788.84 490 371.9 482 -1062.7 -839.95 -837.92 -1059 593 -840 502.05 394.6 500 -1153.7 -934 -1149.5

Table 4.4.5: End moments (KN-m) for 5 critical load cases 2-2 beams

S.N o. 1 2 3 4 5

Load case Left 1.5(D.L+L.L) 1.2(D.L+L.L+EQx) 1.2(D.L+L.L+THx) 1.5(D.L+EQx) 1.5(D.L+THx) 140.25

B21 Middle 84.257 Right Left

B22 Middle Right 207.03

168.149 101.369 123.139

402.579 353.729 371.464 403.372 390.202 434.468 558.83 468 560 491.722 414 487.78 550.56 430.99 548.3 590.98 460 588.67 540.65 441.43 539.62 607.77 488.22 610.467

Table 4.4.6: End Shears (KN) for 5 critical load cases for 2-2 beams

53

Rebar Percentage Start 1.959% 1.591% Middle 0.791% 1.043% End 2.126% 1.350%

Table 4.4.7: Percentage rebar distribution for B21

Figure 4.4.5: Beam Reinforcement Details for B21

Rebar Percentage Start 1.716% 1.676% Middle 0.615% 1.076% End 0.615% 1.076%

Table 4.4.8: Percentage rebar distribution for B22

54

Figure 4.4.6: Reinforcement Details for B22

55

4.5 Design of Staircase: Vertical distance between the floor = 3.0m Riser = 160mm Tread = 250mm Live load = 2000 N/m2 Size of the stair case = 3.35.475m Using M20 concrete & Fe 415 steel Design: General arrangement of stair case: Width of each flight = 1.2m Height of each flight = (3.0/2) =1.5m No of riser required = (1.5/0.16) = 10 in each flight No of treads in each flight = (10-1) = 9 numbers Occupied by treads = 90.250 = 2.25m Keep width of landing = 1.575m Hence space left for passage = 5.475-1.575-2.25 = 1.65m Computation of Design constants: For Fe415 steel, For M20 concrete = 415 N / mm2 = 20 N / mm2
56

Computation of loading and Bending Moment: Let the bearing of the landing slab in the wall be 150 mm. The Effective span (L) = [Going + landing + (bearing / 2)] m L = 2.25 + 1.575 + 0.08 L = 3.905 m Let the thickness of waist slab be equal to 220mm (assumed at the rate of 40 mm to 50 mm per m span) Loads: Dead load on horizontal area: W1 = w2 ( )/T

= (t / 1000 1 1 25000 [t = waist thickness]

= 5750 N/ = 5750 ) /250

= 6826.77 N/m2 Dead load of steps: = [R / (2 = [(160 / 2) = 2000 N/m2

57

1000)] 1 25]

25000

Total Dead weight per m = 6826.77+2000 N/m2 = 8826.77 N / m2 Weight of finishing etc.., =100 N/m2 Live load Total load (W) Ultimate load ( ) =2000 N/m2 =10926.77 N/m2 =1.5 10296.77 N/m2 =15445.15 N/m2 Maximum Bending Moment per meter width of stairs , max = ( L2) /8 Nm

, max = (15445.15 3.902) / 8 , max = 29365 Nm Design of waist slab: d = Mu/0.138 f ck b) d = (29365 1000/2.76 1000) d = 130 mm Adopt 150 mm (D) overall depth, using 20 mm nominal cover and 10 mm diameters bars Effective depth = (150 20 5) mm d= 125 mm
58

Computation of reinforcement: Mu, limit = 0.138 , limit = (0.138 limit > bd2 N/m2
2

, max so, it is an under Reinforcement

Main steel required: = 0.5 ( / ) [1- ] )]

=0.5 (20/415) [1-

= 1504mm2 Using 10 mm diameter bars @ spacing S = ((78.5 = 52 mm Provide 10 mm diameter bars @ spacing 52 mm No. of bars required in 1.5m width = ((1.5 No. of bars required in 1.5m width = 28 nos. Distribution of Steel Required: = 0.12 % of cross sectional area = (0.12 / 100) = 180 mm2
59

1000) / 1504) mm

)/78.57)

mm2

Using 8 mm diameter bars @ spacing S = ((50.3 / 180) mm = 279 mm Provide 8 mm diameter bars @ spacing 279 mm No. of bars required in 1.5m width = 32 nos. The Bending Moment is very much reduced near the loading only half number of bars may be provided. i.e. ((25/2) =13 nos.) 13 number of 10 mm diameter bars are used. Length of each types of bars on either side of cross section least = 47 diametre of bars. = 47 10 mm = 470 mm

60

STAIRCASE PLAN:

Figure 4.5.1: Staircase Plan

61

Cross Section of Staircase

62

4.6 Design of Footing: Safe bearing capacity = 185 KN/mm2 = 20 N/mm2 = 415 N/mm2 Load Calculation: Self weight of column = 25volume = 25 2.40.742.4 = 106.56 KN Self weight of beam = 25volume =25160.400.5 =80 KN Self weight of slab =25volume = 25360.20 =90 KN Other Load: Live load Partitions Fall ceiling Screed load = 2 KN /m2 = 0.5 KN/m2 = 1 KN /m2 = 1.8 KN/m2

Total weight of these loads = 5.379 = 333.9 KN Self weight of footings Total load = 92.88 KN = 703.34 KN
63

(10% of column load)

Ultimate load

=1.5703.34 1055.0 KN

P Footing area

= 928.83 KN = load/p = 2.0 mm2

Proportion the footing area in same proportion as sides of column, Hence, Sides of the footing = 4.50.54 =2.44 m Adopt a square footing of 2.5m2.5m

= 148.61 KN /m2 < (185 KN/m2) Hence footing area is adequate since soil pressure developed at base is less than factored bearing capacity of soil. Factored Bending Moments: Length = 0.5(2.5-0.74) = 0.88 m l2/2 = 57.5 KN m

Bending moment = Depth of Footing:

2 = 0.138 d = 139.01 mm b) From shear stress consideration = 148.6(1025 d) Assume the shear stress strength of = 0.37 N/mm2 for M-30 grade

a) Moment considerations

concrete with nominal percentage of reinforcement,

= 0.25
64

= 0.37 N/mm2 d = 293.70 mm mm

D = 350 mm Reinforcement in footing = 0.87 d (1/ b d) = 665.23 mm2) = 635.54 mm2 Adopt 12 mm Check for shear = 107.73 KN = 0.37 N/mm2 Nominal shear stress = 0.35 N /mm2 Since <( ) Hence safe bars @ 170mm c/c (

65

Cross Section of Footing

Figure 4.6.1: Cross Section of Footing

66

CHAPTER 10 RESULTS AND CONCLUSION The structural design of multi-storey building requires meticulous planning. Proper planning of beams, shear wall, location and spacing of columns etc are important to maximize space usage. While designing the various structural components it is important to note that, the sections provided here were large in section because of the fact that the stresses and forces developed due to the Time-History analysis are very large. Material can be saved extensively by carrying out further optimization of various structural components. Reduction in the dimensions of sections for the upper floors might bring down the total cost of the structure. The effect of wind on the structure is negligible to the seismic effects on it, due to the fact that the chosen accelerogram, i.e.; of Bhuj is a very fluctuating and strong one. Its effects on building structures were witnessed, and they were horrible. Design data of formerly constructed buildings subjected to seismic loading may be used to get an idea of the structural components usage and their sizes and orientation and thus efficiently and productively provide sections. A comparative study should be made by combination of different types of sections. This type of analysis, i.e.; Effect of wind on building structures is more predominant on taller building structures, i.e.; 100 meters and above. Due to the fact that the building has to be in a continuous state of lateral loading of wind, and a low probability of seismic effect, that is if this particular building is located in a windy and high seismic zone. Also it goes without mentioning that the sections provided for this building for the seismic dynamic analysis will be more than safe against wind loading on it.

67

BEAMS: Beams being the horizontal members are not as much affected by the seismic effects as columns are. Nevertheless beams too require intrinsic analysis because of the moments and torsion developing in it due to the ground motion generated because of the accelerogram.

COLUMNS: Sections proved insufficient to transfer the load safely. So increased cross sections were analyzed against the load combinations. Although all the revised columns sections passed the analysis checks, it is worth noting that, the sections of the columns can be further decreased and optimized if more columns are provided at appropriate location for the defined ground motions induced on it.

SHEAR WALLS: Shear walls are the most critical part of the structure acting against the lateral loading on the building structure. Providing the wall with higher grade of concrete is of prime importance, since82this increases the strength of it and provided enhanced stability to the building structure. It should also be noted that, the shear walls acting as the core wall was provided because of the fact that this configuration was adopted from an existing structure. Efficient location of shear wall can greatly help in reducing lateral loads on the frame structure, and better transfer of loads and moments to the wall. Thus increasing the efficiency and use of the shear walls.

68

REFERENCES

PUBLICATIONS AND BOOKS 1. Wind and Earthquake Resistant Building, Structural Analysis and Design, Bungale S. Taranath. 2. Seung-Eock Kim & Huu-Tai Thai for Nonlinear inelastic dynamic analysis Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 38453856. 3. Design Example of a six storey building, by Dr. H.J.Shah and Dr. Sudhir K. Jain. 4. Structural Dynamics ,by Penzine and Clough. 5. Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures Manish Shrikande & Pankaj Agarwal. 6. Explanatory example on Indian Seismic Code IS1893 (Part-I), Dr. Sudhir K. Jain 7. Dynamic of Structures, Anil k. Chopra. 8. Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997, IS456:2000, IS1893:2002 (Part-1), IS 13920:1993 and IS875:1987 (Part-3)

JOURNALS 1. Seismic Analysis of the worlds tallest building by Hong Fan, Q.S. Li, Alex Y Tuan and Lihua Xu. 2. Full scale measurements of wind effects on tall buildings, Q.S Li, J.Q Fang, A.P Jeary and C.K. Kong. 3. Wind engineering challenges of the new generation of super tall buildings, by Peter A. Irwin.
69