Torsional Irregularity in Multi

TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY IN
MULTI-STORY STRUCTURES
Günay Özmen Konuralp Girgin Yavuz Durgun
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
ABSTRACT
In contemporary earthquake-regulations, effects of torsional irregularity are represented by augmenting

accidental lateral load eccentricities by a factor which depends on the so called torsional irregularity coefficient.
The purpose of this study is first to determine the conditions for excessive torsional irregularity and then to
discuss the validity of code provisions. In order to achieve this aim, a parametric investigation is performed on
six groups of typical structures with varying structural wall positions and story numbers. It is found that
torsional irregularity coefficients increase as the story numbers decrease, i.e. maximum irregularity coefficients
occur for single-story structures. They reach maximum values when the asymmetrical structural walls are placed
as close as possible to the gravity centers. On the other hand, floor rotations increase in proportion to the story
numbers i.e. maximum floor rotations occur for highest story numbers. They attain their maximum values for
the structures where the walls are in farthest positions from the gravity centers. It is found that the results
obtained for torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations are quite contradictory. A provisional new
definition for torsional irregularity coefficient based on floor rotations is proposed.
Keywords: Earthquake regulations, torsional irregularity, parametric investigation, floor rotations.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
CONTENTS
Page No.
1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………… 1
2. CODE PROVISIONS FOR TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY ……………………. 2
3. TYPICAL STRUCTURES ....................................................................................... .............. 3
4. INVESTIGATION OF TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY COEFFICIENT ………….. 7

4.1. STRUCTURE GROUP WİTH FIVE AXES ...........................................………. 7
4.1.1. Structures Type A with Five Axes ..................................................………. 10
4.1.2. All Structure Types with Five Axes ...............................................………. 11
4.2. STRUCTURE GROUP WİTH SIX AXES ..............................................………. 13
4.2.1. Structures Type A with Six Axes ....................................................………. 15
4.2.2. All Structure Types with Six Axes .................................................………. 17
4.3. STRUCTURE GROUP WİTH SEVEN AXES .......................................………. 18
4.3.1. Structures Type A with Seven Axes ...............................................………. 20
4.3.2. All Structure Types with Seven Axes ............................................………. 22
4.4 GENERAL EVALUATION .................................................................................. 22
5. INVESTIGATION OF FLOOR ROTATIONS ................................................ .............. 25

5.1. STRUCTURE GROUP WİTH FIVE AXES ...........................................………. 25
5.1.1. All Structure Types with Five Axes ...............................................………. 26
5.2. STRUCTURE GROUP WİTH SIX AXES ..............................................………. 28
5.2.1. All Structure Types with Six Axes .................................................………. 29
5.3. STRUCTURE GROUP WİTH SEVEN AXES .......................................………. 31
5.3.1. All Structure Types with Seven Axes ............................................………. 32
5.4 GENERAL EVALUATION .................................................................................. 34
6. A NEW TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY DEFINITION PROPOSAL ..................... 36
7. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... .............. 36
8. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 37
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
1. INTRODUCTION
Earthquake field investigations repeatedly confirm that irregular structures suffer more damage than
their regular counterparts. Torsional irregularity is one of the most important factors, which produces
severe damage (even collapse) for the structures. A large number of studies exist which investigate
various aspects of torsional irregularity including
• Geometric asymmetry, [1], [2], [3],

• Stiffness distribution, [2], [4], [5],
• Analysis methods, (static, dynamic, non-linear, pushover, capacity analyses etc.),
[6], [7], [8], [9],
• Comparison and discussion of code provisions, [10], [11], [12], [13]
• Experimental studies, [14], [15].
Regarding the torsional irregularities, most of the codes have similar provisions which are basically
based on principles of the well known standard of IBC09 (UBC97, ASCE7), [16], [17], [18]. A certain
number of studies are devoted to the discussion and interpretation of the provisions in UBC97, IBC09
and other seismic codes.
Duan and Chandler have proposed an optimized procedure for seismic design of torsionally
unbalanced structures, [1]. Ozmen (2002) has investigated geometric and structural aspects of
torsional irregularity according to Turkish Earthquake Code (TEC), [2]. Demir et al. have investigated
torsional irregularity factors which effect multi storey shear wall-frame systems according to TEC, [3].
Six type structures which have different story numbers, plan views and shear wall locations were
analyzed. Ozmen (2004) has determined the structural wall positions which cause excessive torsional
irregularity according to TEC and discussed the related code provisions, [4]. Tezcan and Alhan have
proposed an increase in the calculated eccentricity in order to ensure an added and inherent safety for
the flexible side elements, [5]. Penelis and Kappos have presented a methodology for modeling the
inelastic torsional response of buildings in nonlinear static (pushover) analysis, aiming to reproduce
the results of inelastic dynamic time history analysis, [6]. Dogangun and Livaoglu have examined the
differences in results obtained by Equivalent Seismic Load Method, Mode-Superposition Method and
Analysis Method in Time Domain, [7]. They presented some recommendations related to the usage of
seismic analysis methods. Jinjie et al. developed a torsion angle capacity spectrum method for the
performance-based seismic evaluation of irregular framed structures, [8]. Mahdi and Gharaie have
evaluated the seismic behavior of three intermediate moment-resisting concrete space frames with
unsymmetrical plan by using pushover analysis, [9]. Cosenza et al. have compared most of the results
existing in the literature, suggested proposals of modification and underlined the importance of further
studies in order to evaluate a condition of minimum torsional stiffness, [10].
Bosco et al. described a study devoted to define the application limits of an approximated design
method about non-regularly asymmetric systems, [11]. They anticipated that to define clear limits is
possible in seismic codes for the simplified approaches on irregular structures. Zheng et al. studied the
criterion and relative regulations for torsional irregularity in UBC97 and EC8, [12]. The results
obtained from the codes were compared and analyzed from the theoretical and practical aspects.
Ozhendekci and Polat have introduced a parameter Q which is a ratio of the effective modal masses to
be used to define the torsional irregularity of buildings, [13]. The code proposed ratio for the definition
of the torsional irregularities is compared with the modified Q ratio. Jeong and Elnashai (2004) have
proposed a layering technique, termed Planar Decomposition which furnishes detailed information on
the demand and capacity of critical members, [14]. Jeong and Elnashai (2006) have described a local
damage index that is sensitive to out-of-plane responses is and presented a method to combine local
damage indices, [15].
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
1
Torsional irregularity which is recognized in most of the seismic design codes, varies depending on a
number of factors including
• Plan geometry,
• Dimensions and positions of structural elements,
• Story numbers.
The purpose of this study is first to determine the conditions for excessive torsional irregularity and
then to discuss the validity of code provisions. In order to achieve this aim, a parametric investigation is
performed on six groups of “Typical structures” with varying structural wall positions and story
numbers. Number of axes of typical structure groups is varied between 5, 6 and 7 while story numbers
are chosen as 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10. All the structures are chosen as symmetrical in plan with respect to
horizontal axis X. Hence, the behavior of structures will be examined only for the lateral loading in
vertical Y direction only.
2. CODE PROVISIONS FOR TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY
The provisions of IBC09 regarding the torsional irregularities are summarized in the following, [15].
Here the accidental lateral load eccentricities of ±5% are amplified by the amplification factor
2
 δ 
A x =  max  (2.1)
 1.2δ avg 
 
where
δmax = the maximum displacement at Level x computed assuming Ax = 1,
δavg = the average of the displacements at the extreme points of the structure at Level x computed
assuming Ax = 1.
Extreme and average displacements at Level x are shown in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: Extreme and average displacements
The torsional amplification factor (Ax) shall not be less than 1 and is not required to exceed 3.0.
These provisions may be expressed alternatively as follows:
Torsional irregularity coefficient ηt is defined by
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2
δ max
ηt = . (2.2)
δ avg
Then
a) If η t ≤ 1.2 then torsional irregularity does not exist, i.e. Ax = 1;
b) If 1.2 < η t ≤ 2.083 then torsional irregularity exists and eccentricity amplification factor is
computed by
2
η 
Ax =  t  ; (2.3)
 1.2 
c) If η t > 2.083 then ηt = 2.083 (Ax = 3.0).
In the following investigations the torsional irregularity coefficient ηt is considered as the main
parameter.
3. TYPICAL STRUCTURES
The 6 groups of “Typical Structures”, which are selected to carry out the parametric study, are chosen
as multi-story buildings composed of frames and walls. It has been shown previously that in terms of
torsional irregularity, structural stiffness distribution is more effective than geometrical asymmetry, [2].
Hence the typical structures are chosen as having asymmetric walls in a rectangular plan. All structures
are composed of 3.50×5.00 m2 modules. Schematic floor plans of typical structures having 6 axes in
direction X, which are designated as types A, B, C, D, E and F, are shown in Figure 3.1.
As can be seen in the figure, all the typical structures are symmetrical about axis X. The structural walls
in direction Y are on the left edge of the floor plan for structure type A. Structure types B, C, D, E and
F are obtained by shifting the centers of gravity of walls by ½, 1, 1½, 2 and 2½ modules, respectively,
in direction X. All the wall thicknesses are 25 cm and beam cross sections are 25×50 cm2. Column
dimensions vary between 30×30 cm2 and 45× 70 cm2.
Schematic floor plans of typical structure type A with 5, 6 and 7 axes in Y direction are shown in
Figure 3.2. Floor plans of structure types B, C, D, E and F with the same number of axes are organized
similarly.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
3
Figure 3.1: Schematic Floor Plans of Typical Structures with 6 Axes
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
4
Figure 3.2: Schematic floor plans of structure type A with 5, 6 and 7 axes
The parametric studies of this study are independent of the magnitude of seismic forces that affect the
structure. However, since it is aimed to obtain realistic results, the dimensions of the structural elements
are determined by using a preliminary design process. Seismic parameters used in the analyses and
designs of typical structures are as follows:
MCE Spectral Acceleration Parameters SMS = 0.75g SM1 = 0.33g

Site Coefficients Fa = 1 Fv = 1
Importance Factor I=1
Response Modification Coefficient R=7
Schematic elevation of typical structures is shown in Figure 3.3. Story heights for all the typical
structures are 4.00 m for lowermost story and 3.00 m for upper stories.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
5
Figure 3.3: Schematic elevation of typical structures
It is assumed that centers of gravity of stories are at the geometric centers of floor plans. Since all the
typical structures are symmetrical with respect to axes X, investigations will be carried out only for
loadings in direction Y. In lateral load analyses the unfavorable accidental eccentricity of +5% will be
considered.
Typical structures groups consist of structures with 5, 6 and 7 axes in Y direction. Structure types
included in these groups are shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Included structure types
Number of axes Types included

5 A, B, C, D
6 A, B, C, D, E, F
7 A, B, C, D, E, F
Each group comprises of structures with 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 stories. Thus the total number of
investigated structures becomes 96. In the following, the structure groups with 5, 6 and 7 axes will be
considered in turn and torsional irregularity properties will be investigated.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
6
4. INVESTIGATION OF TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY COEFFICIENT
In this section, the structure groups with 5, 6 and 7 axes will be considered, the maximum torsional
irregularity coefficient for each typical structure will be determined and the results will be discussed.
4.1. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH FIVE AXES
In this section seismic analysis of typical structures with 5 axes will be performed and the maximum
torsional irregularity coefficients will be determined. Above given seismic parameters will be used in
the analyses. Weights of uppermost, intermediate and lowermost stories are 1600 kN, 2120 kN and
2760 kN, respectively. Fundamental period in direction Y and corresponding equivalent lateral forces
are computed only for typical structure type A. Lateral loads of same magnitude are used in the
analyses of other types in order to obtain a sound comparison.
Column, beam and wall dimensions are selected similarly for all typical structures. Floor plans of
structure types A, B, C and D with 5 axes are shown in Figures 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4, respectively.
Figure 4.1: Floor plan of structure type A with 5 axes
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
7
Figure 4.2: Floor plan of structure type B with 5 axes
Figure 4.3: Floor plan of structure type C with 5 axes
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
8
Figure 4.4: Floor plan of structure type D with 5 axes
Since the types E and F do not give unfavorable results of torsional irregularity, seismic analyses for
these types are not included in the investigation. Cross sections of the columns which are denoted by
C1, C2 and C3 in the floor plans are shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Column cross sections (cm×cm)
Total
Story
number of C1 C2 C3
No.
stories
10-9 30×30 30×30 30×30
8-7 30×30 30×40 40×40
10 6-5 30×40 30×45 45×45
4-3 30×45 30×55 45×60
2-1 30×55 30×70 45×70
8-7 30×30 30×30 30×30
6-5 30×30 30×40 40×40
8
4-3 30×40 30×45 45×45
2-1 30×45 30×55 45×60
6-5 30×30 30×30 30×30
6 4-3 30×30 30×40 40×40
2-1 30×40 30×45 45×45
4-3 30×30 30×30 30×30
4
2-1 30×30 30×40 40×40
2 2-1 30×30 30×30 30×30
1 1 30×30 30×30 30×30
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
9
4.1.1. Structures Type A with Five Axes
The details of the seismic analyses performed by using the above given parameters are not shown
herein for the sake of brevity. Lateral loads, minimum, average and maximum story displacements,
(δmin, δavg and δmax) together with torsional irregularity coefficients ηt are shown in Tables 4.2 ~ 4.7 for
structures with story numbers 1 ~ 10, respectively.
Table 4.2: Story displacements and torsional irregularity coefficient for single story structure
Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

load (kN) (cm) (cm) (cm) (δmax/δavg)
197 0.009 0.115 0.221 1.918
Table 4.3: Story displacements and torsional irregularity coefficients for 2-story structure

Story No.
2 157 0.041 0.309 0.578 1.867
1 155 0.019 0.175 0.330 1.891
Max 1.891

Story No.
4 188 0.271 1.104 1.938 1.755
3 192 0.192 0.901 1.609 1.787
2 134 0.114 0.623 1.133 1.818
1 100 0.046 0.319 0.592 1.855
Max 1.855

Story No.
6 199 0.789 2.332 3.876 1.662
5 222 0.641 2.073 3.505 1.691
4 180 0.487 1.721 2.955 1.717
3 139 0.334 1.318 2.301 1.747
2 97 0.191 0.866 1.542 1.780
1 72 0.075 0.426 0.776 1.824
Max 1.824
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
10

Story No.
8 169 1.329 3.222 5.115 1.587
7 196 1.151 2.965 4.778 1.612
6 169 0.963 2.622 4.280 1.633
5 142 0.768 2.225 3.682 1.655
4 115 0.571 1.770 2.969 1.677
3 88 0.381 1.300 2.218 1.707
2 61 0.212 0.816 1.421 1.741
1 45 0.081 0.384 0.687 1.790
Max 1.790

Story No.
10 150 1.971 4.177 6.382 1.528
9 178 1.769 3.915 6.060 1.548
8 158 1.555 3.573 5.592 1.565
7 138 1.331 3.180 5.029 1.581
6 118 1.097 2.726 4.354 1.597
5 98 0.861 2.247 3.633 1.617
4 78 0.629 1.739 2.850 1.638
3 59 0.414 1.252 2.089 1.669
2 40 0.227 0.770 1.312 1.705
1 29 0.085 0.346 0.608 1.756
Max 1.756
It must be noted that maximum irregularity coefficient for all story numbers occur at lowermost stories.
Variation of torsional irregularity coefficient will be discussed after the inspection of other structure
types.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
11
4.1.2. All Structure Types with Five Axes
Similar analyses are performed for types B, C and D with 5 axes and torsional irregularity coefficients
are computed. As have been mentioned above, lateral loads used in these analyses are the same as those
used for structures type A. Maximum torsional irregularity coefficients for all types with 5 axes are
shown in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8: Maximum torsional irregularity coefficients for structures with 5 axes
Number of Structure type

stories A B C D
1 1.918 2.076 2.551 2.487
2 1.891 2.024 2.420 2.262
4 1.855 1.962 2.279 2.073
6 1.824 1.917 2.163 1.963
8 1.790 1.873 2.056 1.875
10 1.756 1.830 1.955 1.804
Maximum values at each row are shown with bold numerals. Interpretation of the results will be
presented in a separate section.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
12
4.2. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH SIX AXES
torsional irregularity coefficients will be determined. Here again, above given seismic parameters will
be used and equivalent lateral forces are computed only for typical structure type A. Weights of
uppermost, intermediate and lowermost stories are 1920 kN, 2780 kN and 3310 kN, respectively.
structure types A, B, C, D, E and F with 6 axes are shown in Figures 4.5 ~ 4.10, respectively.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
13
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
14
Figure 4.9: Floor plan of structure type E with 6 axes
Figure 4.10: Floor plan of structure type F with 6 axes
Cross sections of the columns which are denoted by C1, C2 and C3 in the floor plans are again as
shown in Table 4.1.
4.2.1. Structures Type A with Six Axes
(δmin, δavg and δmax) together with torsional irregularity coefficients ηt are shown in Tables 4.9 ~ 4.14 for
structures with story numbers 1 ~ 10, respectively.

236 0.010 0.134 0.258 1.924
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
15
Table 4.10: Story displacements and torsional irregularity coefficient for 2-story structure

Story No.
2 188 0.044 0.349 0.654 1.875
1 185 0.021 0.201 0.381 1.898
Max 1.898

Story No.
4 225 0.290 1.226 2.163 1.763
3 251 0.207 1.007 1.808 1.795
2 175 0.122 0.699 1.275 1.825
1 119 0.050 0.364 0.677 1.862
Max 1.862

Story No. load (kN) (cm) (cm) (cm) (δmax/δavg)
6 238 0.843 2.562 4.282 1.671
5 290 0.687 2.286 3.885 1.700
4 236 0.522 1.899 3.275 1.725
3 181 0.359 1.460 2.561 1.754
2 127 0.206 0.966 1.725 1.787
1 86 0.081 0.482 0.882 1.831
Max 1.831

Story No.
8 202 1.413 3.500 5.587 1.596
7 257 1.225 3.227 5.228 1.620
6 221 1.026 2.852 4.679 1.640
5 185 0.820 2.424 4.027 1.662
4 150 0.611 1.929 3.247 1.683
3 115 0.409 1.418 2.427 1.712
2 80 0.227 0.891 1.554 1.745
1 53 0.087 0.422 0.757 1.794
Max 1.794
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
16

Story No.
10 179 2.083 4.506 6.929 1.538
9 233 1.872 4.229 6.587 1.557
8 206 1.647 3.859 6.071 1.573
7 180 1.411 3.435 5.459 1.589
6 154 1.165 2.943 4.721 1.604
5 128 0.916 2.426 3.937 1.623
4 102 0.670 1.875 3.081 1.643
3 77 0.442 1.351 2.260 1.673
2 53 0.243 0.831 1.419 1.708
1 35 0.091 0.375 0.659 1.757
Max 1.757
Here again maximum irregularity coefficient for all story numbers occur at lowermost stories. Variation
of torsional irregularity coefficient will be discussed after the inspection of other structure types.
4.2.2. All Structure Types with Six Axes
Similar analyses are performed for types B, C, D, E and F with 6 axes and torsional irregularity
coefficients are computed. As have been mentioned above, lateral loads used in these analyses are the
same as those used for structures type A. Maximum torsional irregularity coefficients for all types with
6 axes are shown in Table 4.15.

stories A B C D E F
1 1.924 2.111 2.394 2.565 3.164 1.754
2 1.898 2.022 2.309 2.403 2.767 1.524
4 1.862 1.967 2.201 2.240 2.409 1.498
6 1.831 1.925 2.112 2.128 2.180 1.473
8 1.794 1.877 1.996 2.016 2.019 1.452
10 1.757 1.837 1.887 1.925 1.927 1.448
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
17
4.3. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH SEVEN AXES
torsional irregularity coefficients will be determined. Here again, above given seismic parameters will
be used and equivalent lateral forces are computed only for typical structure type A. Weights of
uppermost, intermediate and lowermost stories are 2240 kN, 3240 kN and 3860 kN, respectively.
structure types A, B, C, D, E and F with 7 axes are shown in Figures 4.11 ~ 4.16, respectively.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
18
Figure 4.15: Floor plan of structure type E with 7 axes
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
19
Figure 4.16: Floor plan of structure type F with 7 axes
Cross sections of the columns which are denoted by C1, C2 and C3 in the floor plans are again as
shown in Table 4.1.
4.3.1. Structures Type A with Seven Axes
(δmin, δavg and δmax) together with torsional irregularity coefficients ηt are shown in Tables 4.16 ~ 4.21
for structures with story numbers 1 ~ 10, respectively.

276 0.011 0.153 0.294 1.925

Story No.
2 220 0.019 0.269 0.519 1.888
1 216 0.010 0.168 0.327 1.895
Max 1.895

Story No. load (kN) (cm) (cm) (cm) (δmax/δavg)
4 263 0.302 1.279 2.256 1.764
3 292 0.215 1.052 1.889 1.795
2 205 0.128 0.730 1.332 1.825
1 139 0.053 0.384 0.716 1.863
Max 1.863
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
20

Story No.
6 277 0.865 2.627 4.390 1.671
5 338 0.705 2.344 3.983 1.699
4 274 0.537 1.943 3.349 1.724
3 211 0.370 1.497 2.624 1.753
2 148 0.212 0.994 1.775 1.786
1 101 0.085 0.501 0.918 1.831
Max 1.831

Story No.
8 236 1.433 3.543 5.653 1.595
7 299 1.244 3.266 5.287 1.619
6 257 1.043 2.880 4.718 1.638
5 216 0.834 2.447 4.059 1.659
4 175 0.622 1.945 3.269 1.680
3 134 0.417 1.431 2.445 1.708
2 93 0.232 0.898 1.564 1.741
1 62 0.089 0.428 0.766 1.791
Max 1.791

Story No.
10 209 2.094 4.528 6.961 1.537
9 271 1.882 4.248 6.613 1.557
8 240 1.657 3.869 6.080 1.572
7 210 1.422 3.442 5.463 1.587
6 179 1.175 2.946 4.717 1.601
5 149 0.925 2.427 3.929 1.619
4 119 0.677 1.873 3.068 1.638
3 90 0.448 1.350 2.251 1.668
2 62 0.247 0.830 1.414 1.703
1 40 0.093 0.375 0.657 1.752
Max 1.752
Here again maximum irregularity coefficient for all story numbers occur at lowermost stories. Variation
of torsional irregularity coefficient will be discussed after the inspection of other structure types.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
21
4.3.2. All Structure Types with Seven Axes
Similar analyses are performed for types B, C, D, E and F with 7 axes and torsional irregularity
coefficients are computed. As have been mentioned above, lateral loads used in these analyses are the
same as those used for structures type A. Maximum torsional irregularity coefficients for all types with
7 axes are shown in Table 4.22.

stories A B C D E F
1 1.925 2.050 2.295 2.475 2.954 2.793
2 1.895 2.012 2.230 2.363 2.716 2.452
4 1.863 1.959 2.136 2.228 2.443 2.171
6 1.831 1.919 2.061 2.131 2.256 2.013
8 1.791 1.868 1.971 2.023 2.073 1.871
10 1.752 1.828 1.888 1.929 1.931 1.770
presented in the following section.
4.4. GENERAL EVALUATION
In the preceding sections, seismic analyses of 96 typical structures with varying story numbers and
structural wall positions have been performed. Maximum irregularity coefficients shown in Tables 4.8,
4.15 and 4.22 are represented graphically in Figures 4.17, 4.18 and 4.19, respectively.
Figure 4.17: Variation of maximum irregularity coefficient for structures with 5 axes
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
22
It is observed that
• Maximum irregularity for all types occurs for single stories,

• Maximum irregularity for all story numbers occurs when the asymmetric walls are placed as
close as possible to the gravity centers.
40 of the investigated 96 structures (42%) are subjected to excessive torsional irregularity. According to
the code, these structures will be designed as having an irregularity coefficient of ηt = 2.083 (Ax = 3.00)
, [15]. This situation may be considered as being quite peculiar.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
23
For structures with 5, 6 and 7 axes, the structure types i.e. wall positions corresponding to maximum ηt
values are shown in Figure 4.20.
Figure 4.20: Structure types corresponding to maximum ηt values
These wall positions are quite unexpected since they correspond to almost symmetrical arrangements. It
is also observed in the preceding investigations that floor rotation angles are somewhat greater for the
structures with walls near the floor edges as well as structures with higher number of stories. It is
believed that floor rotation angles θ reflect the torsional behavior of the structures more realistically.
Therefore, floor rotations of the typical structures should be investigated in detail. In the following,
floor rotation angles will be examined and compared with the corresponding torsional irregularity
coefficients.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
24
5. INVESTIGATION OF FLOOR ROTATIONS
In the seismic analyses presented in the preceding sections, it is assumed that the floors act as rigid
elements in their own planes and the structures undergo a displacement as shown schematically in
Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1: Schematic displacement diagram
As can be seen in the figure, all stories undergo a rotation as well as displacements in two directions. In
the following, the structure groups with 5, 6 and 7 axes will be considered in turn and these rotations
will be examined.
5.1. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH FIVE AXES
As an illustrative example of structures with five axes, torsional irregularity coefficients ηt and floor
rotations θ of the 10-story Type A structure are shown in Table 5.1. Enlarged δ floor displacements are
also shown schematically in Figure 5.2.
Table 5.1: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations
ηt 103θ
Story No.
(δmax/δort) (radian)
10 1.528 2.206
9 1.548 2.146
8 1.565 2.018
7 1.581 1.849
6 1.597 1.628
5 1.617 1.386
4 1.638 1.110
3 1.669 0.837
2 1.705 0.543
1 1.756 0.262
Max 1.756 2.206
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
25
Figure 5.2: Floor displacement diagrams
As can be seen by inspecting both Table 5.1 and Figure 5.2, floor rotation angles significantly increase
upwards, whereas the torsional irregularity coefficients decrease. It may be concluded that, torsional
irregularity coefficients ηt do not represent the torsional behavior accurately.
5.1.1. All Structure Types with Five Axes
Torsional irregularity coefficients together with maximum rotation angles for all structure types with
five axes are shown in Tables 5.2 ~ 5.5.
Table 5.2: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type A
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 1.918 0.106
2 1.891 0.268
4 1.855 0.834
6 1.824 1.544
8 1.790 1.893
10 1.756 2.206
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
26
Table 5.3: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type B
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.076 0.075
2 2.024 0.211
4 1.962 0.727
6 1.917 1.405
8 1.873 1.782
10 1.830 2.180
Table 5.4: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type C
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.551 0.094
2 2.420 0.237
4 2.279 0.745
6 2.163 1.350
8 2.056 1.626
10 1.955 1.859
Table 5.5: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type D
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.487 0.042
2 2.262 0.121
4 2.073 0.436
6 1.963 0.863
8 1.875 1.130
10 1.804 1.395
Maximum floor rotations for all types with 5 axes are shown in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6: Maximum floor rotations for structures with 5 axes

stories A B C D
1 0.106 0.075 0.094 0.042
2 0.268 0.211 0.237 0.121
4 0.834 0.727 0.745 0.436
6 1.544 1.405 1.350 0.863
8 1.893 1.782 1.626 1.130
10 2.206 2.180 1.859 1.395
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
27
5.2. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH SIX AXES
As an illustrative example of structures with six axes, torsional irregularity coefficients ηt and floor
rotations θ of the 10-story Type A structure are shown in Table 5.7. Floor displacement diagrams are
ηt 103θ
Story No.
10 1.538 1.938
9 1.557 1.886
8 1.573 1.770
7 1.589 1.619
6 1.604 1.422
5 1.623 1.208
4 1.643 0.964
3 1.673 0.727
2 1.708 0.470
1 1.757 0.227
Max 1.757 1.938
It is seen that for this type also, floor rotation angles increase upwards, while the torsional irregularity
coefficients decrease.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
28
5.2.1. All Structure Types with Six Axes
six axes are shown in Tables 5.8 ~ 5.13.
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 1.924 0.099
2 1.898 0.244
4 1.862 0.749
6 1.831 1.375
8 1.794 1.670
10 1.757 1.938
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.111 0.058
2 2.022 0.214
4 1.967 0.705
6 1.925 1.333
8 1.877 1.657
10 1.837 1.910
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.394 0.097
2 2.309 0.238
4 2.201 0.736
6 2.112 1.323
8 1.996 1.573
10 1.887 1.786
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.565 0.063
2 2.403 0.168
4 2.240 0.573
6 2.128 1.084
8 2.016 1.354
10 1.925 1.611
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
29
Table 5.12: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type E
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 3.164 0.061
2 2.767 0.148
4 2.409 0.455
6 2.180 0.818
8 2.019 1.003
10 1.927 1.189
Table 5.13: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type F
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 1.754 0.014
2 1.524 0.032
4 1.498 0.151
6 1.473 0.341
8 1.452 0.511
10 1.448 0.713

stories A B C D E F
1 0.099 0.058 0.097 0.063 0.061 0.014
2 0.244 0.214 0.238 0.168 0.148 0.032
4 0.749 0.705 0.736 0.573 0.455 0.151
6 1.375 1.333 1.323 1.084 0.818 0.341
8 1.670 1.657 1.573 1.354 1.003 0.511
10 1.938 1.910 1.786 1.611 1.189 0.713
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
30
5.3. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH SEVEN AXES
As an illustrative example of structures with seven axes, torsional irregularity coefficients ηt and floor
rotations θ of the 10-story Type A structure are shown in Table 5.15. Floor displacement diagrams are
ηt 103θ
Story No.
10 1.537 1.622
9 1.557 1.577
8 1.572 1.474
7 1.587 1.347
6 1.601 1.181
5 1.619 1.002
4 1.638 0.797
3 1.668 0.601
2 1.703 0.389
1 1.752 0.188
Max 1.752 1.622
It is seen that for this type also, floor rotation angles increase upwards, while the torsional irregularity
coefficients decrease.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
31
5.3.1. All Structure Types with Seven Axes
seven axes are shown in Tables 5.16 ~ 5.21.
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 1.925 0.094
2 1.895 0.226
4 1.863 0.663
6 1.831 1.175
8 1.791 1.430
10 1.752 1.622
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.050 0.082
2 2.012 0.206
4 1.959 0.637
6 1.919 1.173
8 1.868 1.407
10 1.828 1.600
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.295 0.093
2 2.230 0.167
4 2.136 0.651
6 2.061 1.172
8 1.971 1.376
10 1.888 1.553
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.475 0.072
2 2.363 0.185
4 2.228 0.582
6 2.131 1.065
8 2.023 1.293
10 1.929 1.511
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
32
Table 5.20: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type E
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.954 0.077
2 2.716 0.182
4 2.443 0.531
6 2.256 0.923
8 2.073 1.085
10 1.931 1.239
Table 5.21: Torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations for Type F
Number of 103θmax
ηt,max
stories (radian)
1 2.793 0.041
2 2.452 0.106
4 2.171 0.345
6 2.013 0.649
8 1.871 0.825
10 1.770 1.010

stories A B C D E F
1 0.094 0.082 0.093 0.072 0.077 0.041
2 0.226 0.206 0.167 0.185 0.182 0.106
4 0.663 0.637 0.651 0.582 0.531 0.345
6 1.175 1.173 1.172 1.065 0.923 0.649
8 1.430 1.407 1.376 1.293 1.085 0.825
10 1.622 1.600 1.553 1.511 1.239 1.010
presented in the following section.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
33
5.4. GENERAL EVALUATION
In the preceding sections, floor rotations resulting from the seismic analyses of 96 typical structures
have been presented. Maximum floor rotations shown in Tables 5.6, 5.14 and 5.22 are represented
graphically in Figures 5.5, 5.6 and 5.7, respectively.
Figure 5.5: Variation of floor rotations for structures with 5 axes
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
34
It is observed that
• Maximum irregularity for all types occurs for 10-story structures,

• Maximum irregularity occurs for Type A structures.
It is seen that these observations are quite contradictory with those obtained for torsional irregularity
coefficients in Section 4.4. Scattering of floor rotations θ with respect to torsional irregularity
coefficients ηt is shown in Figure 5.8.
Figure 5.8: Scattering of floor rotations with respect to torsional irregularity coefficients
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
35
It is clearly seen that, floor rotations which may be considered as being the real indicator of the
torsional behavior, are far from being compatible with the torsional irregularity coefficients. In fact, it
can be said that these quantities are inversely proportional to each other.
Examination of the above mentioned observations yields the following conclusions:
• Torsional irregularity coefficients as defined in the regulations do not represent the torsional
characteristics of the structures realistically,
• Code definitions of torsional irregularity coefficients should be completely amended.
6. A NEW TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY DEFINITION PROPOSAL
It is asserted in the preceding sections that the torsional behavior of structures is represented more
realistically by rotations θ of rigid floors. Hence, the new definition for torsional irregularity coefficient
is proposed as
η ti = K θ i (6.1)
where θi denotes the rotation of the ith floor in radians. Considering the structures inspected in this study
a preliminary value for the coefficient K may be recommended as
K = 1500. (6.2)
It must be considered natural to impose an upper bound for floor rotations similar to the drift limits
existing in the regulations. An appropriate limitation for floor rotations is proposed as
θi ≤ 1.5 ×10 −3 . (6.3)
It must be noted that this proposal is only provisional. An amendment of the definition for torsional
irregularity coefficient seems to be a necessity but should be determined by using further
comprehensive investigations on the subject.
7. CONCLUSIONS
In this study a parametric investigation is performed on six groups of structures with varying structural
wall positions and story numbers. Findings on lateral load analyses are evaluated and the following
conclusions are derived:
1. For all the investigated structures, torsional irregularity coefficients increase as the story
numbers decrease, i.e. maximum irregularity coefficients occur for single-story structures.
2. Floor rotations increase in proportion to the story numbers i.e. maximum floor rotations occur
for highest story numbers.
3. Torsional irregularity coefficients reach maximum values when the structural walls are placed
as close as possible to the gravity centers without coinciding them.
4. Floor rotations attain their maximum values for the structures where the walls are in farthest
positions from the gravity centers.
5. It is seen that the results obtained for torsional irregularity coefficients and floor rotations are
quite contradictory.
6. Since the floor rotations may be considered as the real representative of the torsional behavior,
torsional irregularity coefficients as defined in the regulations should be completely amended.
7. A provisional new definition for torsional irregularity coefficient is proposed.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
36
8. REFERENCES
[1] Duan, XN., Chandler, AM., An optimized procedure for seismic design of torsionally unbalanced
structures, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 26:7, (1997), pp.737-757.
[2] Ozmen, G., Structural Aspects of Torsional Irregularity, Fifth International Congress on
Advances in Civil Engineering, Istanbul, 2002.
[3] Demir, A., Demir, D.D., Erdem, R.T., Bagci, M., Torsional irregularity effects of local site
classes in multiple storey structures, International journal of research and reviews in applied
sciences, (August 2010), pp.258-262.
[4] Ozmen, G., Excessive Torsional Irregularity in Multi-Storey Structures, İnşaat Mühendisleri
Odası Teknik Dergi Digest, Vol.15, No.1, (2004), pp.3331-3144.
[5] Tezcan, S.S., Alhan, C., Parametric analysis of irregular structures under seismic loading
according to the new Turkish Earthquake Code, Engineering Structures, 23, (2001), pp.600–609.
[6] Penelis, Gr.G., Kappos, A.J., 3D pushover analysis: the issue of torsion, 12th European
Conference on Earthquake Engineering Paper Reference: 015, (2002).
[7] Dogangun, A., Livaoglu, R. Comparison of seismic analysis methods for multistory buildings,
First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 3-
8 September, (2006), Paper No. 1314.
[8] Jinjie, M., Qingxuan, S., Qi, Z, Method of performance based seismic evaluation for irregular
plane reinforced concrete frame structures, The 14th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, October 12-17, Beijing, China, (2008).
[9] Mahdi, T., Gharaie, V.S., Plan irregular RC frames: comparison of pushover with nonlinear
dynamic analysis, Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (Building and Housing) Vol. 12, No. 6,
(2011), pp.679-690.
[10] Cosenza E., Manfredi G., Realfonzo R., Torsional effects and regularity conditions in RC
buildings, 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, 30
January-4 February, (2000).
[11] Bosco, M., Marino, E., Rossi, P.P., Limits of application of simplified design procedures to non-
regularly asymmetric buildings, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, (2004),
Paper No. 886.
[12] Zheng, N., Yang, Z., Shi, C., Chang, Z., Analysis of criterion for torsional irregularity of seismic
structures, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada. August
1-6, (2004), Paper No. 1465.
[13] Ozhendekci, N., Polat, Z., Torsional irregularity of buildings, The 14th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Oct. 12-17, Beijing, China, (2008).
[14] Jeong S.H., Elnashai, A.S., Analytical and experimental seismic assessment of irregular RC
buildings”, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
August 1-6, (2004), Paper No. 113.
[15] Jeong S.H., Elnashai, A.S., New three-dimensional damage index for RC buildings with planar
irregularities, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 132, No. 9, (September 2006).
[16] International Building Code (IBC09), International Code Council (ICC), (2009).
[17] UBC97, Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Vol.2,
Structural Engineering Design Provisions, USA, (1997).
[18] Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures, (ASCE7), American Society of Civil
Engineers, (2010).
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
37

Torsional Irregularity in Multi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torsional Irregularity in Multi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torsional Irregularity in Multi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY IN

Günay Özmen Konuralp Girgin Yavuz Durgun

In contemporary earthquake-regulations, effects of torsional irregularity are represented by augmenting

Keywords: Earthquake regulations, torsional irregularity, parametric investigation, floor rotations.

2. CODE PROVISIONS FOR TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY ……………………. 2

3. TYPICAL STRUCTURES ....................................................................................... .............. 3

4. INVESTIGATION OF TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY COEFFICIENT ………….. 7

5. INVESTIGATION OF FLOOR ROTATIONS ................................................ .............. 25

6. A NEW TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY DEFINITION PROPOSAL ..................... 36

7. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... .............. 36

• Geometric asymmetry, [1], [2], [3],

2. CODE PROVISIONS FOR TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY

Extreme and average displacements at Level x are shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Extreme and average displacements

These provisions may be expressed alternatively as follows:

Torsional irregularity coefficient ηt is defined by

MCE Spectral Acceleration Parameters SMS = 0.75g SM1 = 0.33g

Table 3.1: Included structure types

Number of axes Types included

4.1. STRUCTURE GROUP WITH FIVE AXES

Figure 4.1: Floor plan of structure type A with 5 axes

Figure 4.3: Floor plan of structure type C with 5 axes

Table 4.1: Column cross sections (cm×cm)

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Number of Structure type

Figure 4.5: Floor plan of structure type A with 6 axes

Figure 4.6: Floor plan of structure type B with 6 axes

Figure 4.8: Floor plan of structure type D with 6 axes

Figure 4.10: Floor plan of structure type F with 6 axes

4.2.1. Structures Type A with Six Axes

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

4.2.2. All Structure Types with Six Axes

Number of Structure type

Figure 4.11: Floor plan of structure type A with 7 axes

Figure 4.12: Floor plan of structure type B with 7 axes

Figure 4.14: Floor plan of structure type D with 7 axes

Figure 4.15: Floor plan of structure type E with 7 axes

4.3.1. Structures Type A with Seven Axes

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Lateral δmin δavg δmax ηt

Number of Structure type

4.4. GENERAL EVALUATION

• Maximum irregularity for all types occurs for single stories,

Figure 4.20: Structure types corresponding to maximum ηt values

Figure 5.1: Schematic displacement diagram