CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

North and northeast parts of India have large scales of hilly terrain, which are
categorized under seismic zone IV and V. Due to the economic growth and rapid
urbanization in hilly regions, construction of multistory reinforced concrete buildings on
hill slopes has a popular and pressing demand. Buildings on hilly terrain are differ from
those on plain ground i.e., they are very irregular and unsymmetrical in horizontal and
vertical planes, and torsionally coupled as compared to those on plain ground which are
usually regular and symmetrical and thus free from torsional moment. A scarcity of plain
ground in hilly area compels the construction activity on sloping ground. Hill buildings
constructed in masonry with mud mortar/cement mortar without conforming to seismic
code provisions have proved unsafe and, resulted in loss of life and property when
subjected to earthquake ground motions.

1.2 Classification of Hill Side Buildings

Buildings resting on hill slopes can be categorized as Up-slope buildings and Down-
slope buildings.

1.2.1 Up-slope buildings

These buildings are constructed on ground that rises above the road level. The main
level of such buildings is generally built directly on or relatively close to its foundations.

1.2.2 Down-slope buildings

Down-slopes buildings are constructed on ground that drops. Hence the main level of
the building is at or near street level with supports that rise from foundations that are
embedded in the ground that slopes down and away from the main level.

1.3 Configuration of Hill Buildings

Buildings on hill slopes may have following types of configurations:

Figure 1.1 Foundation of the entire building on the same level

Figure 1.2 Building founded on two different levels

Figure 1.3 Step-back configuration

Introduction………………
 Figure 1.4 Step-back & set-back configuration

Out of several such configurations, step back configuration and step back & set back
configuration are commonly observed in hill regions. A step back configuration may be
defined as a configuration whose foundation structure more or less follows the natural
shape of the slope. A step back & set back configuration may be defined as a configuration
whose foundation structure more or less follows the natural shape of the slope and at the
same time there is sudden change in plan dimension or stiffness along the height of the
building.

1.4 Regular and Irregular Structures

According to the IBC, structures are designated as structurally regular or irregular.

A regular structure has no significant discontinuities in plan, vertical configuration, or
lateral force resisting systems. An irregular structure, on the other hand, has significant
discontinuities in plan and vertical configuration. Different types of vertical irregularities
are listed below.
1.4.1 Stiffness irregularity

Stiffness irregularity is observed when there exist soft storey or extreme soft storey
in the building. A soft storey is one in which the lateral stiffness is less than 70 percent of
that in the storey above or less than 80 percent of the average lateral stiffness of the three
storeys above. A extreme soft storey is one in which the lateral stiffness is less than 60
percent of that in the storey above or less than 70 percent of the average stiffness of the three
storeys above. For example, building on stilts will fall under this category.

Figure 1.7 Stiffness irregularities

1.4.2 Mass irregularity

Mass irregularity shall be considered to exist where the seismic weight of any storey
is more than 200 percent of that of its adjacent storeys. The irregularity need not be
considered in case of roofs.

Figure 1.8 Mass irregularity

1.4.3 Vertical geometric irregularity (set-back)

Vertical geometric irregularity shall be considered to exist where the horizontal

dimension of the lateral force resisting system in any storey is more than 150 percent of
that in its adjacent storey.
 Figure 1.9 Vertical geometric irregularity (set-back)

1.4.4 In-plane discontinuity in lateral-force-resisting vertical elements

Figure 1.10 In-plane discontinuity in Vertical elements resisting lateral force when b > a
1.4.5 Discontinuity in capacity (weak story)

A weak storey is one in which the storey lateral strength is less than 80 percent of that
in the storey above. The storey lateral strength is the total strength of all seismic force
resisting elements sharing the storey shear in the considered direction.

1.5 Variation in Column Stiffness

To minimize the cost of construction due to cutting and filling in hilly regions, the
foundation structure more or less follows the natural shape of the slope which results in
unequal column heights and hence variation in column stiffness. It would seem that a short
column would be stronger than longer one of the same cross sectional area but It is observed
from past earthquake studies that the buildings having columns of different heights within one
storey, suffered more damages in shorter columns as compared to taller columns in the same
storey.

Figure 1.11 Building frame with short columns

 Figure 1.12 Building frame with short column

Figure 1.11 and 1.12 shows examples of short columns. The buildings on sloping ground
and buildings with mezzanine floors have short columns.
During an earthquake, a short column and a long column of same cross section
moves horizontally by same amount which can be seen from given figure below.

Figure 1.13 Structural behaviour of short column under lateral load

However, the short column is stiffer as compared to the long column, and it attracts
larger earthquake force. Stiffness of a column means resistance to deformation- the
larger is the stiffness, larger is the force required to deform it.
 Therefore a short column should be design very carefully for large horizontal forces otherwise
it can suffer significant damage during an earthquake. This behaviour is called Short Column
Effect.

A building resting on sloping ground when acted upon by an earthquake, all columns of
bottom storey moves by same amount along with the floor slab (this is called rigid floor
diaphragm action). Since in bottom storey of buildings resting on sloping ground there exist
both short and long columns and hence shorter columns attract several times larger earthquake
force and suffer more damage as compared to longer ones due to short column effect.

In construction of buildings on sloping ground, short column effect should be avoided

to extent possible during architectural design stage itself. However when it is not possible to
avoid short columns due large cost in excavation and filling, these must be design very
carefully. As per Indian Standard IS: 13920-1993 special confining reinforcement should be
provided over the full height of columns that are likely to sustain short column effect.
Confining reinforcement refers to reinforcement that is applied in such a way that it confines
the concrete within it to provide increased strength and deflection capabilities. In columns,
spiral or helix reinforcement is implemented through the column, spiraling from top to bottom,
with vertical longitudinal bars running through the inside of the helix. This prevents the
concrete's diameter becoming larger under the applied load leading to failure. In correct terms
it prevents the Poisson’s effect within the column. The special confining reinforcement (i.e.,
closely spaced closed ties) must extend beyond the short column into the columns vertically
above and below by a certain distance. In existing buildings with short columns, different
retrofit solutions can be employed to avoid damage in future earthquakes.

1.6 Objective

Seismic Response of building frame on sloping ground is influenced by many parameters

such as number of bays, angle of sloping ground and number of stories etc. Present study deals
with seismic analysis of two building configurations namely step back frames and step back &
set back frames on sloping ground. The objective of present study is as follows:
 Perform response spectrum analysis on set back, step back and set back and the building with two
different level of foundations.

 Compare the results of base reaction and maximum top story displacement to find the best
configuration for the building.
Introduction………………
Review of Literature
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 General

Due to the economic growth and rapid urbanization in hilly terrain, construction of
multistory RC framed buildings on hill slopes has a popular and pressing demand. The past
studies of earthquakes in hill regions such as in Uttarkashi (1991), Chamoli (1999), Sikkim
(2011), Doda (2013) etc. shows that the buildings with different height of columns within
same storey were most vulnerable to be damaged by earthquake. It was observed from the
initial results that the columns on the higher side of the slope i.e., short columns were
subjected to large shear forces as compared to long columns on the lower side due to short
column effect. With the development of various structure softwares, this problem attracts the
major attention in analysis and design of buildings on hill slopes.

2.2 Analytical Studies

Birajdar and Nalawade (2004) studied seismic behaviour of buildings resting on

hill slopes. They considered twenty four RC building frames with three different
configurations as Step back building, Step back Set back building and Set back building
situated at a slope of 27 degree with the Horizontal. They studied the seismic response of
buildings with varying storeys ranging from 4 to 11 (15.75m to 40.25m), consist of three
bays along slope direction and one bay across slope, located in seismic zone III. They
carried out 3D analysis including torsional effect by using Response spectrum method. They
observed that there is a linear increase in the value of top storey displacement and
fundamental time period as the height of building increases. From comparison they found
that, this increase in top storey displacement and fundamental time period with increase in
number of storeys is greater for step back building than that for step back set back building.
From their study it is observed that the shear force in the column towards extreme left is
significantly higher as compared to rest of the columns, in case of step back building it is
found to be 55-250% more than step back set back building. Thus they conclude that
extreme left column at ground level, which are short are the worst affected and step back
building could prove more vulnerable during seismic excitation than the step back set back
building. They observed in step back buildings, the uneven distribution of shear force in
the various frames suggests development of torsional moment due to static and accidental
eccentricity.

Y. Singh et al. (2011) carried out study on behaviour of RC frame buildings on hill slopes
under the set of five ground motions. They considered 4 types of configuration of buildings
denoted as ‘Type S-I’, ‘Type S-II’, ‘Type P-III’ and ‘Type P-IV’. ‘Type S-I’ was stepping
back at every floor level on a slope of about 45°, up to six storeys and had three storeys
above the road level. ‘Type S-II’ was stepping back at sixth floor level only and had three
storeys above road level. The 9 and 3 storeyed regular buildings on flat ground were labeled
as ‘Type P-III’ and ‘Type P-IV’, respectively. All buildings were located in seismic zone
IV; consist of seven bays along slope and 3 bays across the slope. The buildings were
analyzed for a set of five ground motions which was taken from strong motion database of
pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre. From their results they observed that all
storeys of ‘Type S-I’ buildings are subjected to torsion whereas in ‘Type S-II’ buildings
only top storeys are subjected to torsion. They conclude that the step back buildings are
subjected to significant torsional effects under cross slope excitation. They also studied the
inter storey drifts in the top three storeys of all buildings from which they observed that the
inter storey drifts in the top three storeys of hill building are quite close to those in the 3
storey regular building and the pattern of inter storey drifts of a storey building differs from
other buildings.

Sable et al. (2012) carried out study on seismic behavior of buildings on hill slopes. They
analyze 3D space frames to study the dynamic response of buildings. The buildings were
located in seismic zone III with 3 different configurations as step back, step back & set back
and set back buildings. The total number of buildings that were analyzed to study the
dynamic response was 36. The study was carried out by considering the storey level ranging
from 4 to 15 (15.2 m to 52.6m). From their results they observed that the maximum base
shear is induced in Step back-Setback building & least in Setback building on leveled
ground. They also found that the top storey displacement of step back building is quiet high
as compared to that in step back & set back buildings on sloping ground. Hence they
conclude that step back and set back buildings are better choice on hill slopes.
Ravikumar C. M et al. (2012) studied seismic performance of RC buildings in which they
consider vertically irregular buildings resting on plain ground and buildings resting on slopes
for which two types of configurations were considered namely buildings resting on sloped
ground in X-direction and buildings resting on sloped ground in Y-direction. The number of
bays in X-direction and Y-direction were kept 5 and 4 respectively, with 3 storey and located
in severe zone V. The performance of these buildings was studied by linear analysis using
code IS 1893 (part-1) 2002 and Nonlinear analysis using ATC 40. They observed that
buildings on sloping ground were highly susceptible to damage caused by earthquake forces.
From their study they observed that base shear of building on hill slope was found to be
6019.2 kN, which was around 25-55% more than other buildings and also displacement was
found to be 83.4 mm which was moderately higher than other buildings. From pushover
analysis they found that the performance goal was not achieved of sloping ground buildings
in X-direction and in Y-directions and this was achieved after collapse point. Thus they
conclude that the buildings resting on sloping ground are more vulnerable to earthquake than
the buildings resting on plain ground.

Rayyan-Ul Hassan and H.S.Vidyadhara (2013) studied the effect of earthquake on six
different models resting on plain and sloping ground which are bare frame model, building
with first soft storey and other storeys with brick infill wall and building with first soft storey
and other storeys with brick infill and also provided with shear wall at corners. The numbers
of bays in horizontal direction were kept four with twelve numbers of stories and all buildings
were situated in seismic zone V. These buildings have been analyzed using Equivalent static,
Response spectrum and Pushover analysis. Based on Equivalent static analysis they found that
building with upper brick infill storeys and building with upper brick infill storeys and shear
wall at corners has almost 79.15% and 89.27% less longitudinal displacement respectively as
compared to simple bare frame on sloping ground and from Response spectrum analysis these
displacements are almost 50.95% and 73.97% less respectively. Hence they conclude that the
presence of brick infill and shear wall reduces lateral displacement considerably. They also
observed that building with upper brick infill storeys and shear wall at corners has more base
shear as compared to bare frame model. From Pushover analysis they found that building with
upper brick infill storeys and shear wall at corners has less spectral displacement and Roof
displacement as compared to bare frame model.
Hence from the results of Equivalent static analysis, Response spectrum analysis and
Pushover analysis they conclude that presence of infill wall and shear wall helps effectively
in reducing the lateral displacement of building.

Halkude et al. (2013) analyzed seismic behaviour of buildings resting on sloping ground
with varying number of bays and hill slopes. They studied the variation of time period, base
shear and top storey displacement with respect to variation in number of bays along slope
direction and hill slope angle. They considered two types of building configurations namely
step back buildings and step back & set back buildings which are in the range of 4 to 11
storey and consist of varying bays of 3 to 6 in X-direction and one bay along Y-direction,
situated at varying slopes of 16.32°, 21.58°, 26.56° and 31.50° with the horizontal located in
seismic zone III. From their study they observed that, in all configurations, base shear
increases with increase in number of storey, increases with increase in number of bay and
decreases from lower angle to higher angle of slope. When compared between different
configurations, base shear of step back building is found to be higher than step set back
building. They observed that the time period increases with increase in number of storey in
all configurations, in step back building time period increases with increase in number of
bays, which is a reverse case in step back set back building in which time period decreases
with increase in number of bay and in all configurations time period decreases with increase
in hill slope. In all configurations it is observed that the top story displacement increases with
increase in number of storey, displacement is nearly alike for 3 bay and 4 bay, but, it
decreases considerably from 4 to 5 bay and further increases for 6 bay. With respective to hill
slope, they found that the top storey displacement decreases with increase in hill slope
showing. Thus they conclude that the step back frames produce higher base shear, higher
value of time period and higher value of top storey displacement as compared to step back set
back frames. Also they conclude that greater no of bays are observed to be better under
seismic excitation, as number of bays increase time period and displacement decreases.

Mohammad Umar Farooque patel et al. (2014) carried out study on eight storey building
which includes a bare frame, building with shear wall at centre and at corner position located
in seismic zone III and situated on hill slopes. To give comparison they considered models on
plane ground also.
 .

All buildings consist of 5 bays in both directions. Seismic analysis of buildings has
been done using Equivalent Static Analysis, Response Spectrum Analysis and Pushover
analysis. By observing results based on Equivalent static analysis they found that
buildings with shear wall at centre and at corner have 41.4%, 61.5% respectively less
displacement and based on Response spectrum analysis, these buildings have 23.6%,
38.1% less displacement as compared to the bare frame model on sloping ground. From
these results they conclude that shear wall reduces the lateral displacement of buildings on
sloping ground considerably. Based on Pushover analysis they observed that the building
on hill slopes have spectral displacement 114%-179% higher than building model on plain
ground in longitudinal direction and also the plastic hinge formation is more in bare frame
model and building with presence of shear wall on sloping ground when compared to the
building on plain ground, which proves that the buildings on hill slopes are more
vulnerable than other buildings.

2.3 Background of ETABS

ETABS is an engineering software product that caters to multi-story building analysis and
design. Modeling tools and templates, code-based load prescriptions, analysis methods and
solution techniques, all coordinate with the grid-like geometry unique to this class of
structure. Basic or advanced systems under static or dynamic conditions may be evaluated
using ETABS. For a sophisticated assessment of seismic performance, modal and direct-
integration time-history analyses may couple with P-Delta and Large Displacement effects.
Nonlinear links and concentrated PMM or fiber hinges may capture material nonlinearity
under monotonic or hysteretic behavior. Intuitive and integrated features make applications
of any complexity practical to implement. Interoperability with a series of design and
documentation platforms makes ETABS a coordinated and productive tool for designs which
range from simple 2D frames to elaborate modern high-rises.