Jr.

of Industrial Pollution Control 33(S3)(2017) pp 1405-1413

www.icontrolpollution.com
Review Article

DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF MULTI-STOREY BUILDING

UDAYA BALA K1*, MANISH KUMAR GUPTA2 AND SENTHIL PANDIAN M3
1
P.G. student, School of Mechanical and Building Sciences, VIT University, Chennai, India
2
Structural Engineer, Manish Consultants, Gurgaon, India
3
Assistant professor, School of Mechanical and Building Sciences, VIT University, Chennai, India

(Received 17 June, 2017; accepted 24 November, 2017)

Key words: Response spectrum method, Time history method, Multi-storey building

ABSTRACT

In this paper, for the dynamic analysis, a plan of a multi-storey building is taken and it has been
modelled with different structural elements for minimum story displacement. The dynamic
analysis of multi-storey buildings is done using Etabs 2015 by IS and SP codal provisions (ETABS
User’s Manual, 2015). The multi-storey building is R.C.C. structure with 3 basements + ground
floor + 14 upper floors in zone IV with a maximum earth fill of 750 mm on the ground floor for
landscape requirements. By comparing the results of dynamic analysis, the performance of the
structural system can be evaluated.

INTRODUCTION the grid of 10.4 × 10.4 m having square and rectangle

sizes. In basement areas, columns are at 8 × 8 m grid
The one of the most sensitive issues that the Structural
(approx.) and columns with beam-slab system is
Engineers face is the selection of proper procedure for
provided.
estimating the seismic performance of the structure.
This is very important when they are dealing with LITERATURE REVIEW
high rise structures as the improper selection of the Bahador, et al., 2011 has modelled a multi-storey
method ultimately leads to the results which are far
irregular building with 20 storeys using Etabs and
away from the correct results. Dynamic analysis is
deled how the height of the building will affect the
one of the effective procedures for evaluating the
structural response of the building which has shear
seismic performance of the building. The damage
walls and also dynamic responses of building is
control is one of important design considerations
investigated under actual earthquakes, EL-CENTRO
which is increasing its influence and can be achieved
only by introducing dynamic analysis in the design. 1949 and CHI-CHI Taiwan 1999. (Mohammed and
The dynamic analysis can be done by soft wares like Gouse, 2015) has taken a 15 storey high building with
Etabs, Staad Pro, and SAP. Etabs is one of the leading different shapes like rectangular, L-shape, H-shape,
software which is presently using by many companies C-shape for comparison and dynamic analysis
and Structural Engineers for their projects. In this has been done to evaluate the deformation of the
paper Etabs is used for the dynamic analysis of the structure. (Dubey, et al., 2015) has modelled multi-
multi-storey building. The methodology followed in story irregular buildings with 20 stories and has
Etabs for the analysis is as follows modelling of the been investigated dynamic responses of the building
multi-storey building, static analysis, designing and under actual earthquake, DELINA (ALASKA) 2002
dynamic analysis. For the study, the multi-storey to compare time history and response spectrum
building is being designed to resist almost all the methods. (Mohit and Savita, 2014) has taken a
lateral forces. The tower-area columns are located in problem on G+30 storied regular building for static

*Corresponding authors email: kesarlaudaya.bala2015@vit.ac.in

1406 BALA ET AL.
and dynamic analysis as per the IS-1893- 2002-Part-1
for the zones- 2, 3 and summarized the post processing
results. (Yousuf and Shimpale, 2013) has taken four
models of G+5 building with one symmetric plan
and remaining irregular plan for dynamic analysis
with plan irregularities to minimize the damage to
the structure and its structural components during
an earthquake. (Ni and Kyaw, 2014) has taken a 12
storied building for comparative study of static,
dynamic analysis under load consideration of
Uniformed Building Code (UBC-1997) and compared
displacement, storey shear, storey moment and
storey drift. (Arvindreddy and Fernandes, 2015)
has taken a 15 storey regular, irregular building for
static, dynamic analysis and shown the behaviour
of irregular structure in comparison with regular Fig. 1 Basement plan.
structure.
DATA TO BE USED
A. Initialization of grid system
As mentioned, the study is on multi-storey building,
the grid system is initialized for the building with
the dimensions as per the plan with 3 basements +
ground floor + 14 upper floors. The irregular multi-
storey building modelled is for office purpose Table
1 and (Fig. 1-3).
By taking the plan of multi-storey building, four
building models are modelled with different
structural elements which are as follows:
1) Building with flat slabs
2) Building with floor slabs Fig. 2 Ground floor plan.
3) Building with flat slabs & shear walls
4) Building with floor slabs & shear walls.
B. Material properties
As the structure is the reinforced concrete one, the
materials are concrete and steel.
• Density of reinforced concrete shall be 25 kN/m3.
• The min. Grade of Concrete in all RCC structural
members shall be as follows:

Table 1. Data to be used

Plan Height (m)
Fig. 3 Typical floor plan.
Total height of the building
61.5
(From plinth To terrace)
RCC columns, shear walls
Basement- 3 3.6
Basement- 2 3.6 • From foundation to ground floor: M55
Basement- 1 5.2 • From ground floor to third floor: M45
Ground floor 4.8
Typical floors 4.05 on each • From third Floor to sixth floor : M40
 TEMPERATURE TREND ANALYSIS USING NONPARAMETRIC TEST: A CASE STUDY OF
COIMBATORE CITY
1407

• Above sixth floor : M35 750 × 1050 mm

RCC beams at basements: M25 900 × 900 mm
RCC beams at ground floor-tower area: M25 900 × 1050 mm
RCC Beams at ground floor- Non-tower area: M35 900 × 1200 mm
RCC slabs at basements and ground floor: M25 1050 × 1050 mm
• Flat slab with drops: M35 1050 × 1200 mm
RCC beams and slabs at typical floors 1200 × 1200 mm
(Superstructure): M35
1200 × 1350 mm
• High yield strength deformed bars Fe 500
1250 × 1400 mm
conforming to IS 1786:2008 with Fy= 500 N/mm2
is used. 1400 × 1250 mm
C. Section properties 1400 × 1400 mm
The sections required for the building are frame The typical flat slab sections used is of thickness 250
sections and slab sections. As the building is of mm with a drop of 150 mm and typical floor slab
multi-storey one, the sections have to be meeting sections used is of thickness 150 mm. The shear walls
the requirements of loads. The frame sections are used are of thickness 300 mm, 350 mm, 400 mm, 450
beams and columns. A set of dimensions are taken mm and 900 mm.
for beams and columns. D. Modelling of frame and slab elements
The beam dimensions are as follows, The modelling of frame and slab elements is done
230 × 750 mm with the dimensions as mentioned above in the
section properties. The floor slabs are modelled as
300 × 525 mm
membrane elements and flat slabs are modelled as
300 × 600 mm thin-shell elements (Fig. 4-7).
300 × 1350 mm E. Loading parameters
300 × 1850 mm Self weights of materials
350 × 600 mm • Density of reinforced concrete- 25.0 kN/m3
450 × 600 mm • Density of structural steel- 78.5 kN/m3
450 × 1850 mm • Density of plain concrete- 24.0 kN/m3
600 × 600 mm
600 × 750 mm
600 × 1850 mm
700 × 675 mm
750 × 750 mm
The column dimensions are as follows,
300 × 525 mm
300 × 600 mm
450 × 900 mm
600 × 600 mm
600 × 1050 mm
750 × 750 mm
750 × 900 mm
Fig. 4 Building with flat slabs.
1408 BALA ET AL.
Dead loads
• Self-weight of slab (Typical flat slab=0.250 × 25) -
6.25 kN/m2
• Self-weight of slab (Typical 250+150 thick drop
near columns= 0.400 × 25) - 10 kN/m2
• Self-weight of typical floor slab (0.150 × 25) - 3.75
kN/m2
• Self-weight of slab (1st and 2nd basement floor)
(=0.15 × 25) - 3.75 kN/m2
• Self-weight of Slab (Ground Floor) (=0.200 × 25) -
5.00 kN/m2
• Floor Finish (1st and 2nd basement floor) (Including
services) (=2 kN/m2 + 0.5 kN/m2 for services) -
2.50 kN/m2
• Floor finish on ground and typical floor- 2.0 kN/
Fig. 5 Building with floor slabs. m2
• False ceiling and services on ground and typical
floor- 0.25 kN/m2
• Partition wall on ground & typical floor- 1.0 kN/
m2
• Floor finish on terrace
• Brick Bat Coba (avg. 175 mm thick) - 3.50 kN/m2
• Flooring + Insulation- 1.50 kN/m2
• False Ceiling- 0.25 kN/m2
• Suspended services below slab- 0.25 kN/m2
• Concrete pedestals for placing and erecting
services on top of slab- 3.75 kN/m2
• Facade Load on periphery- 5.0 kN/m

Fig. 6 Building with flat slabs and shear walls.

• Density of floor finishes/plasters- 20.0 kN/m3

• Density of soil (Saturated) - 20.0 kN/m3
Imposed (live) loads
• Typical Floor- 4.0 kN/m2
• 1st basement floor- Stack parking- 7.5 kN/m2
• Ground Floor-Fire tender access region- 12.0 kN/
m2
• All basement floors- 5.0 kN/m2
• Terrace- 5.0 kN/m2
Fig. 7 Building with floor slabs and shear walls.
 TEMPERATURE TREND ANALYSIS USING NONPARAMETRIC TEST: A CASE STUDY OF
COIMBATORE CITY
1409

Self-weight of different walls close agreement will not be achieved between the
response spectrum of the record and target (SP-16-
Dynamic analysis of multi-storey building:
1980; IS: 13920, 1993).
200 mm thick block wall of (4.05 m - 0.6 m) height =
(4.05-0.6) × (0.200 × 8 + 0.040) METHODOLOGY

• 20) = 8.28 kN/m The multi-storey building is modelled with 14 stories,

2 basements and dynamic analysis has been done by
Dynamic analysis of multi-storey building: response spectrum and time history analysis.
100 mm thick block wall of (4.05 m - 0.6 m) height = RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
(4.05-0.6) × (0.100 × 8 + 0.040)
The maximum storey displacement of the buildings
• 20) = 5.52 kN/m in different stories in both X and Y direction for
Dynamic analysis of multi-storey building: response spectrum analysis is shown in (Fig. 8
and 9). The maximum storey drift of the buildings
150 mm thick Parapet wall of 1m height on terrace =
1 × (0.150 × 8 + 0.040)
• 20) = 2.0 kN/m
ANALYSIS
A. Response spectrum analysis
Under earthquake ground motions, it’s a maximum
response representation of idealized single degree
freedom system which is having certain period and
damping. The terms maximum relative displacement,
maximum absolute acceleration or maxmimum
relative velocity are expressed for various damping
values by plotting maximum response against
undamped natural frequency. For this purpose,
according to (IS 1893(Part 1):2002, 2002), response
spectrum analysis case is performed (IS: 875 (Part 1),
1987; IS: 875 (Part 2), 1987; IS: 456-2000, 2000).
B. Time history analysis
When structure’s base is subjected to a specific
time history ground motion, the dynamic response Fig. 8 Max. storey displacement in X-direction.
analysis of it, at each time increment is called
‘time history analysis’. From past natural events
alternatively recorded ground motions database is
time histories reliable source but all seismological
characterstics for the site suitability aren’t recorded
in any given site. In time history generation, the
three main parameters are recorded ground motions
from analogous magnitude, distance and soil
condition category(bin). To make site characterstics
more definite and similar, we have to add more
constraints to characterstics of the bin. But in the bin,
there may be serious avilability limit for real records.
The target response spectrum will be determined
from seismic hazard analysis which can be different
from response spectrum of selected ground motions
around fundamental period of the structure. To
comply mean spectral accelerations with target
spectrum records are scaled by single factor scales.
Simply with a single factor scaling of the record, Fig. 9 Max. storey displacement in Y-direction.
1410 BALA ET AL.
in different stories in both X and Y direction for
response spectrum analysis is shown in (Fig. 10 and
11). The maximum centre of mass displacement of
the buildings in different stories in both X and Y
direction for response spectrum analysis is shown
in (Fig. 12 and 13). The spectral displacement of the
buildings in both X and Y direction for time history
analysis is shown from (Fig. 14-21) and Tables 2-5.
In response spectrum analysis, displacement is
higher in Y-direction, whereas, in time history
analysis, displacement is higher in X-direction.
From the maximum displacement values of all the
buildings (with different structural elements), time
history analysis has given the high variation between
the values of X and Y directions when compared with
response spectrum analysis X and Y directions values.
Fig. 12 Max. centre of mass displacement in X-direction.

Fig. 10 Max. storey drift in X-direction.

Fig. 13 Max. centre of mass displacement in Y-direction.

Fig. 14 Spectral displacement of flat slab building in

Fig. 11 Max. storey drift in Y-direction. X-direction.
 TEMPERATURE TREND ANALYSIS USING NONPARAMETRIC TEST: A CASE STUDY OF
COIMBATORE CITY
1411

Fig. 15 Spectral displacement of flat slab building in Fig. 18 Spectral displacement of flat slab & shear wall
Y-direction. building in X-direction.

Fig. 16 Spectral displacement of floor slab building in Fig. 19 Spectral displacement of flat slab & shear wall
X-direction. building in Y-direction.

Fig. 20 Spectral displacement of floor slab & shear wall

Fig. 17 Spectral displacement of floor slab building in building in X-direction
Y-direction.
1412 BALA ET AL.
graphs in Y-direction for the buildings with shear
walls has given more fluctuations when compared
with the graphs for the buildings without shear walls.
The maximum storey drift values of all the buildings
(with different structural elements) are under storey
drift limitation of IS: 1893-2002, Part-1.
CONCLUSION
• The maximum storey displacement, maximum
storey drift and maximum centre of mass
displacement values obtained from response
spectrum analysis at lower stories are lesser when
compared with the values at higher stories.
• By comparing results of two mentioned analysis,
it is observed that the displacements of time history
analysis are higher than response spectrum analysis.
Fig. 21 Spectral displacement of floor slab & shear wall • To visualize performance of a building under a
building in Y-direction. given earthquake, time history analysis is an elegant
tool.
Table 2. Max. storey displacement (mm) (Response
spectrum analysis) • For high rise buildings, response spectrum analysis
Structural elements X-direction Y-direction is not sufficient, we have to analyse through time
Flat slabs 374.97 718.09 history analysis.
Floor slabs 146.82 235.67
Flat slabs and shear walls 57.95 55.94
• For important structures, when compared with
Floor slabs and shear walls 47.54 45.82 response spectrum analysis, time history analysis has
to be performed as it predicts the structural response
Table 3. Max. storey drift (unit less) (Response spectrum more accurately.
analysis)
• From the results, it is clear that, shear walls are
Structural elements X-direction Y-direction
to be present in the high rise buildings to control
Flat slabs 0.008042 0.015574
storey displacement, storey drift and centre of mass
Floor slabs 0.003039 0.00488
displacement.
Flat slabs and shear walls 0.001128 0.001108
Floor slabs and shear walls 0.000915 0.000904 • When the high rise building is constructing with
the structural elements like flat slabs and floor slabs,
Table 4. Max. centre of mass displacement (mm) (Response shear wall combination is to be adopted to control
spectrum analysis) lateral deflections.
Structural elements X-direction Y-direction
Flat slabs 344.00 367.32 • Usage of flat slabs in the high rise building reduces
Floor slabs 119.33 119.34 no. of beams and gives aesthetical appearance by
Flat slabs and shear walls 38.46 39.53 increasing clear height of the room, but, floor slabs
Floor slabs and shear walls 31.53 33.26 are good in controlling storey displacement.
REFERENCES
Table 5. Max. spectral displacement (mm) (Time history
analysis) Arvindreddy. and Fernandes, R.J. (2015). Seismic
analysis of RC regular and irregular frame
Structural elements X-direction Y-direction
structures. International Research Journal of
Flat slabs 682.54 100.69
Engineering and Technology (IRJET). 2 : 44-47.
Floor slabs 158.19 17.05
Flat slabs and shear walls 138.14 1.45 Bahador, B., Ehsan, S.F. and Mohammadreza, Y.
Floor slabs and shear walls 133.74 1.68 (2011). Comparitive study of the static and dynamic
analysis of multi-storey irregular building.
International Journal of Civil, Environmental,
The maximum displacement values of time history
Structural, Construction and Architectural
analysis in Y-direction are very less when compared Engineering. 6 : 1045-1049.
with response spectrum analysis Y-direction values.
In time history analysis, maximum displacement Dubey, S.K., Prakash, S. and Ankit, A. (2015).
 TEMPERATURE TREND ANALYSIS USING NONPARAMETRIC TEST: A CASE STUDY OF
COIMBATORE CITY
1413

Dynamics analysis of structures subjected to structures, live loads, Bureau of Indian Standards,
earthquake load. International Journal of Advance New Delhi.
Engineering and Research Development. 2 : 1-9.
Mohammed, R.S. and Gouse, D.P. (2015). Dynamic
ETABS User’s Manual. (2015). Integrated Building analysis of multi-story building for different
Design Software. Computer and Structures Inc. shapes. International Journal of Innovative Research
Berkeley, USA. in Advanced Engineering (IJIRAE). 2 : 85-91.
IS 1893(Part1):2002. (2002). Criteria for earthquake Mohit, S. and Savita, M. (2014). Dynamic analysis
resistant design of structures, Part 1 General of multi-storied regular building. IOSR Journal of
provisions and buildings, Bureau of Indian Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE). 11
Standard. : 37-42.
IS: 13920. (1993). Ductile detailing of reinforced Ni, W. and Kyaw, L.H. (2014). Comparative study of
structures subjected to seismic force. code of static and dynamic analysis of irregular reinforced
practice Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi. concrete building due to earthquake. International
IS: 456-2000. (2000). Indian standard of code and Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology
practice for plain and reinforced concrete" Bureau Research. 3 : 1205-1209.
of Indian Standards, New Delhi. SP-16-1980. Design Aids for Reinforced concrete to
IS: 875 (Part 1). (1987). Code of practice for design IS-456-1978-Bureau of Indian Standards, New
loads (other than earthquake) for buildings Delhi.
and structures, dead loads, Bureau of Indian Yousuf, M. and Shimpale, P.M. (2013). Dynamic
Standards, New Delhi. analysis of reinforced concrete building with plan
IS: 875 (Part 2). (1987). Code of practice for design irregularities. International Journal of Emerging
loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and Technology and Advanced Engineering. 3 : 110-116.