International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Deflection Control in High Rise Building Using Belt Truss and Outrigger Systems
MOHD ABDUS SATTAR 1, SANJEEV RAO2, MADAN MOHAN3, DR. SREENATHA REDDY4
1
M. Tech Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Guru Nanak Institute of Technology,
JNTU, Hyderabad.
2
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Guru Nanak Institute of Technology, JNTU, Hyderabad.
3
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Guru Nanak Institute of Technology, JNTU, Hyderabad.
4
Principal, Guru Nanak Institute of Technology, JNTU, Hyderabad.
Abstract: Structures that dont rely on shear wall-frame interaction to resist lateral loads, in which girders are
essentially pin-connected to the columns, a substantial increase in stiffness and subsequent decrease in lateral drift
can result from tying the exterior columns to the core at one or several levels with one or two storey stiff
horizontal outriggers trusses. Outriggers trusses are usually located for architectural purposes at mechanical levels
near the middle or top of building. In order to mobilize the additional axial stiffness of several columns and
provide for torsional stiffness. A belt truss can be used at the outrigger levels. An outrigger-braced high rise
structure consists of reinforced concrete or braced steel frame main core connected to exterior columns by flexural
stiff horizontal cantilevers. The core may be located between column lines without 1outriggers extending on both
sides or it may be located on the side of building with cantilevers connecting to the columns on the other side.
When the horizontal load acting on the building, columns-restrained outriggers resist rotation of the core.
Causing lateral deflections and moments in the core to be smaller than if free-standing core alone resisted the
loading. The result is to increase the effective depth of the structure when it flexes as a vertical cantilever, by
inducing tension in the windward columns and compression in the leeward columns. The study is to find the effect
of building displacements in lateral direction with shear core, outrigger and belt truss.
Keywords : Outrigger, Belt truss system, Wind, Earthquake, Lateral displacement.
Introduction
High rise building is defined as a building 35
b) Proportion: Again, a tall building is not just
meters or more in height, which is divided at
about height but also about proportion. There are
regular intervals in to occupiable levels. To be
numerous buildings which are not particularly high,
considered a high rise building a structure must be
but are slender enough to give the appearance of a
based on solid ground and fabricated along its full
tall
height through deliberate process. Cut off between
backgrounds. Conversely, there are numerous
high rise and low rise building is 35 meters. This
big/large footprint buildings which are quite tall but
height as chosen based on an original 12 floor
their size/floor area rules them out as being classed
cut-off. There is no absolute definition of what
as a tall building.
constitutes a tall building. It is a building that
c) Tall Building Technologies: Number of floors is
exhibits some element of tallness in one or more
a poor indicator of defining a tall building due to
of the following categories:
the changing floor to floor height between differing
a) Height relative to context: It is not just about
buildings
height, but about the context in which it exists.
residential usage), a building of perhaps 14 or more
Thus whereas a 14-storey building may not be
stories (or over 50 meters/165 feet in height) could
considered a tall building in a high-rise city such as
perhaps be used as a threshold for considering it a
Chicago or Hong Kong, in a provincial European
tall building.
building,
and
especially
functions
city or a suburb this may be distinctly taller than
the urban norm.
IJAEM 030606 Copyright @ 2014 SRC. All rights reserved.
against
(e.g.
low
office
urban
versus
Mohd Abdus Sattar , Sanjeev Rao, Madan Mohan, Dr. Sreenatha Reddy
vi) Framed-tube systems
Structural Systems
In the early structures at the beginning of the 20
th
vii) Braced-tube systems
century, structural members were assumed to carry
viii) Bundled-tube systems
primarily the gravity loads. Today, however, by the
Structural systems of tall buildings can be divided
advances
and
into two broad categories: interior structures and
high-strength materials, building weight is reduced,
exterior structures. This classification is based on
and slenderness is increased, which necessitates
the distribution of the components of the primary
taking into consideration mainly the lateral loads
lateral load-resisting
such as wind and earthquake. Understandably,
system over the building. A system is categorized as
especially for the tall buildings, as the Currently
an interior structure when the major part of the
there are many structural systems that can be used
lateral load resisting system is located within the
for the lateral resistance of tall buildings. In this
interior of the building. Likewise, if the major part
context, authors classify these systems based on the
of the lateral load-resisting system is located at the
basic reaction mechanism/structural behavior for
building perimeter, a system is categorized as an
resisting the lateral loads.
exterior structure. It should be noted, however, that
Structural Systems for Tall Buildings
any interior structure is likely to have some minor
i.) Rigid frame systems
components of the lateral load-resisting system at
ii.) Braced frame and shear-walled frame systems
the building perimeter, and any exterior structure
iii) Braced frame systems
may have some minor components within the
iv) Shear-walled frame systems
interior of the building.
in
structural
design/systems
v) Outrigger systems
Interior Structures
Efficient
Material/
Category
Sub-Category
Height
Advantages
Disadvantages
Provide flexibility in floor
Expensive form work. Slow
planning. Easily moldable
construction.
Configuration
Limit
Rigid
-
Concrete
20
Frames
Shear
Interior planning limitations
Wall/
Concrete Shear wall +
-
Effectively resists lateral shear
35
Hinged
Steel Hinged Frame
due to shear trusses.
by concrete shear walls.
Frames
Shear Wall
Concrete Shear wall +
(or Shear
Steel Rigid frame
60
Effectively resists lateral loads
Interior planning limitations
by producing shear wall frame
due to shear walls.
interacting system.
Truss
Shear wall /
Frame
Rigid Frame
Interaction
Concrete Shear wall +
System
concrete frame
70
Effectively resists lateral loads
Interior planning limitations
by shear wall frame interacting
due to shear walls.
system.
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Deflection Control in High Rise Building Using Belt Truss and Outrigger Systems
Shear Cores(Steel
Trusses or Concrete
shear walls) +
Effectively resists bending by
Outriggers (Steel
Outrigger
-
Trusses or Concrete
exterior columns connected to
Outrigger structure does not
outriggers extended from the
add shear resistance.
150
Structure-s
walls) +Belt Trusses)
core.
+Steel or Concrete
Composite (Super)
Columns
Exterior Structures
Category
Material/
Efficient
Configuration
Height Limit
Sub-Category
Advantages
Disadvantages
Shear lag hinders true
Effectively resists lateral loads
tubular behavior. Narrow
Framed Tube
Concrete
60
by locating lateral systems at the
column spacing obstructs the
building perimeter.
view.
Effectively resists lateral shear
by axial forces in the diagonal
Braced Tube
Concrete
100
members. Wider column spacing
Bracing obstructs the view.
possible compared with framed
Tube
tubes. Reduced shear lag.
Interior planning limitations
Bundled Tube
Concrete
110
Reduced shear lag.
due to the bundled tube
configuration.
Ext. Frame
Effectively resists lateral loads
tube(Steel or
Interior planning limitations
by producing interior shear core
Tube in Tube
Concrete) +Int. Core
80
due to shear core.
exterior framed tube
Tube( Steel or
interacting system.
Concrete)
Diagrid
Concrete
60
Effectively resists lateral shear
Expensive form work. Slow
by axial forces in the diagonal
construction.
members.
Building form depends to a
Super
Could produce super tall
-
Concrete
100
frames
great degree on the
buildings.
structural system.
Introduction to Outrigger
Although
outriggers
have
been
used
for
wind. The outriggers are like the spreaders and the
approximately four decades, their existence as a
exterior columns are like the shrouds or stays.
structural member has a much longer history.
Innovative structural schemes are continuously
Outriggers have been used in the sailing ship
being sought in the field. Structural Design of High
industry for many years. They are used to resist
Rise Structures with the intention of limiting the
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Mohd Abdus Sattar , Sanjeev Rao, Madan Mohan, Dr. Sreenatha Reddy
Drift due to Lateral Loads to acceptable limits
the
outer
columns.
without paying a high premium in steel tonnage.
One such is an Outrigger System, in which the axial
stiffness of the peripheral columns is invoked for
increasing the resistance to overturning moments.
This efficient structural form consists of a central
core, comprising either Braced Frames or Shear
Walls, with horizontal cantilever trusses or girders
known as outrigger Trusses, connecting the core to
Fig 2: Outrigger system with offset core
deformation of the frame should be considered
especially for tall and/or slender buildings. The
proposed method is found to be simple and
efficient provides reasonably accurate results in
early design stage of tall building structures.
An analytical model was developed to study the
deflection of wall-frame structures. The model is
capable of predicting accurate deflection for
various configuration including core types and
aspect ratios of the structures. To formulate the
problem, a one-dimensional displacement-based
Fig 1: Outrigger system with central core
finite element method is employed.
2. Tolga Aki S Lateral Load Analysis Of
Literature Review
Shear Wall-Frame Structures
1. Minsik Bang And Jaehong Lee An Analytical
The purpose of this study is to model and analyze
Model
the nonplanar shear wall assemblies of shear
for
High-Rise
Wall-Frame
Building
Structures
wall-frame structures. Two three dimensional
In this paper, the governing equations of a
models, for open and closed section shear wall
wall-frame building are formulated through the
assemblies, are developed. These models are based
continuum approach and the whole structure is
on conventional wide column analogy, in which a
idealized as a shearflexural cantilever. The effect
planar shear wall is replaced by an idealized frame
of shear deformation of the wall and flexural
structure consisting of a column and rigid beams
deformation of the frame are considered and
located at floor levels. The rigid diaphragm floor
incorporated in the formulation of the governing
assumption, which is widely used in the analysis of
equations. A displacement-based one-dimensional
multistorey building structures, is also taken into
finite element model is developed to predict lateral
consideration. The connections of the rigid beams
drift of wall-frame structures under horizontal
are released against torsion in the model proposed
loads. Numerical results are obtained and compared
for open section shear walls. For modeling closed
with previously available results and the values
section shear walls, in addition to this the torsional
obtained from the finite element package MIDAS.
stiffness of the wide columns are adjusted by using
The study indicates that the effect of shear
a series of equations. The results of these analyses
deformation of the wall as well as the flexural
are compared with the results obtained by using
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Deflection Control in High Rise Building Using Belt Truss and Outrigger Systems
common shear wall modeling techniques.
Bear in mind that just 25 years ago very few
3 P. Jayachandran, Design Of Tall Buildings
engineers had access to any sort of computing
Preliminary Design And Optimization
capability. When dealing with concrete frames and
The design of tall buildings essentially involves a
shear walls the estimation of such properties
conceptual
analysis,
dictates that all resulting deflections and forces
preliminary design and optimization, to safely carry
should be regarded as best estimates and engineers
gravity and lateral loads. The design criteria are
should consider the use of alternative runs to assess
strength,
sensitivity to design assumptions.
design,
serviceability,
approximate
stability
and
human
comfort. The strength is satisfied by limit stresses,
5. Hou Guangyu, Et Al. Design And Research
while serviceability is satisfied by drift limits in the
On Composite Steel And Concrete Frame-Core
range of H/500 to H/1000. Stability is satisfied by
Wall Structure This paper presents the design,
sufficient factor of safety against buckling and
research and related joints details of a 31-storey
P-Delta effects. The factor of safety is around 1.67
composite frame-core wall structure, which is
to 1.92. The aim of the structural engineer is to
located in Beijing City, a region of seismic
arrive at suitable structural schemes, to satisfy these
fortification of 8 degree. In order to improve the
criteria, and assess their structural weights in
ductility bearing capacity of the core walls and to
weight/unit area in square feet or square meters.
ensure inelastic deformation capacity of the
This initiates structural drawings and specifications
longitudinal coupling beams carried steel trusses,
to enable construction engineers to proceed with
proper steel frames were embedded within the
fabrication and erection operations. The weight of
longitudinal core walls. Experimental results show
steel in lbs/sq ft or in kg/sq m is often a parameter
that there are no obvious cracks in the core walls,
the architects and construction managers are looking
spelling of concrete and local buckling of
for from the structural engineer. This includes the
reinforcement at the bottom of the core walls
weights of floor system, girders, braces and
boundary elements and the composite columns at
columns. The premium for wind , is optimized to
the perimeter have not been observed, even the
yield drifts in the range of H/500, where H is the
elasto-plastic storey drift angle has reached 1/101,
height of the tall building.
the whole structure has better seismic performance.
4. Kenneth Arnott, Shear Wall Analysis New
Structural Behaviour
Modelling, Same Answers. Engineers now
The multistorey building systems analyzed in this
routinely have access to highly capable 3D analysis
study are considered to be rigid frame structures. In
packages often including the ability to use finite
such systems, all structural elements of the system
elements (FE shell elements). More and more
are assumed to have infinitely rigid moment
structures are being analyzed in 3D, and as suppliers
resistant connections at both ends. Another
of such software we at CSC are certainly being
assumption about the structural system is the linear
faced with increasingly frequently asked questions
elastic structural system behavior, in which the
relating to the modeling of shear and core wall
deformations are proportional to the loads. One of
systems using shell elements within the context of a
the most important assumptions in this study is the
3D model. Personally it had not identified any
rigid diaphragm floor assumption, a common
useful text until the recently published Finite
assumption
Element Design of Concrete Structures which it
significantly and reduces computing time. This
would thoroughly recommend to anyone seeking a
results in three displacement degrees of freedom at
more pragmatic engineering view of the issues
each floor level (translations in two orthogonal
together with a very realistic review of the options
directions and rotation about vertical direction),
which should be considered.
and in-plane displacements of the diaphragm can
which
simplifies
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
the
problem
Mohd Abdus Sattar , Sanjeev Rao, Madan Mohan, Dr. Sreenatha Reddy
be expressed in terms of these displacements. All
building drift and core moments can be obtained.
the other nodes on that floor are called slaved
The ETABS software program is selected to
nodes and their three displacement components
perform analysis. The present study is limited to
(translation in x-direction, translation in y-direction
reinforced concrete (RC) multi-storied symmetrical
and rotation about z-direction) can be represented
building. All the building models analyzed in the
using the displacements of the master node and the
study have 15,20,25
distance to the master node as in the following
height of 3 meters. This building does not
equations:
represent a particular real structure that has been
storeys with constant storey
u (i) x = u(m)
built or proposed. However, the dimensions,
x y(i)u(m) z
general layout and other characteristics have been
u(i) y = u(m)
selected to be representative of a building for
y + x(i)u(m) z
which the use of outriggers would be a plausible
u (i) z = u(m)
solution.
In the above equations, u (i) x , u(i) y and u(i) z
The model considered for this study is a 45,60,75
are the three displacement components of the
mts high rise reinforced concrete building frame.
slaved node,
The building represents a 15,20,25
u(m) x , u(m) y and u(m) z are the displacement
building. The Plan area of the Structure is 40x40m
components of the master node and x(i) and y(i) are
with columns spaced at 5m from center to center.
the components of distance between master and
The height of each storey is 3.00m and all the
slaved node at that floor. This method is called the
floors are considered as Typical Floors. The
masterslave technique.
location of the building is assumed to be at
Problems with Outriggers
Hyderabad. An elevation and plan view of a typical
1. The space occupied by the outrigger trusses
structure is shown in fig.
storied office
(especially the diagonals) places constraints on the
use of the floors at which the outriggers are located
2. Architectural and functional constraints may
prevent placement of large outrigger columns
where they could most conveniently be engaged by
outrigger trusses extending out from the core.
3. The connections of the outrigger trusses to the
core can be very complicated, especially when a
Fig 3: Building plan dimensions &
concrete shear wall core is used.
column centre spacing
4. In most instances, the core and the outrigger
columns will not shorten equally under gravity load.
The outrigger trusses, which need to be very stiff to
be effective as outriggers
Objectives and Details of the Present Study
The objective of the present work is to study the
use of outrigger and belt truss placed at different
location subjected to wind or earthquake load. The
Fig 4: Building elevation view with central core
design of wind load was calculated based on IS 875
portion
(Part 3) and the earthquake load obtained using IS
The analysis is carried out for study of rigid core
1893 (Part-1): 2002. The location of outrigger and
and floor rigidity of 15,20 & 25 storey L-shape
belt truss for reducing lateral displacement,
Building
for the following structures of different
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Deflection Control in High Rise Building Using Belt Truss and Outrigger Systems
locations of outrigger beams and belt truss as
with IS 875(part 3-Wind loads). The location
shown in fig.
selected is Hyderabad. The basic wind speed as per
Structure 1: Building frame outrigger beam
the code is Vb =44m/s. The coefficients K1 and K2
locations as shown in fig
are taken as 1.0.
Structure
2:
Building
frame
same
as
The terrain category is taken as
Category 4 with structure class C.
structure-1with belt truss.
Taking internal pressure coefficient as 0.2 the net
Structure 3: Building frame outrigger beam
pressure coefficient Cp (windward) works out as
locations as shown in fig
+0.8 and Cp (leeward) as -0.5 based on h/w and l/w
Structure 4: Building frame same as structure-3
ratio of table 4 of IS 875 (part3). Using the above
with belt truss.
data the ETABS automatically interpolates the
Structure 5: Building frame without any outrigger
coefficient K3 and eventually calculates lateral
beams as well as belt truss.
wind load at each storey.
The analysis is carried with all the load
Earthquake load in this study is established in
combinations. But the wind load is governing. Out
accordance with IS 1893(part 1)-2002.The city of
of that, the load case (0.9 DL + 1.5 WL Y) is giving
Hyderabad falls in zone 2 (Z=0.10). The
maximum values. Hence the above load case is
importance factor (I) of the building is taken as 1.0.
considered for taking the values of forces, moments
The site is assumed to be hard/rocky site (Type I).
and the load case (D.L+0.8(LL+WLX) considered
The response reduction factor R is taken as 3.0 for
for taking the values of Displacement and drift.
all frames. The fundamental time period (Ta) of all
Columns considered for comparison of analysis are
frames was calculated as per clause 7.6.1 of the
C21, C23, C30, C38, C40, C43,C53 & C57.
aforementioned code.
All wall piers are identical with a uniform wall
Ta = 0.075*h0.75
thickness of 350mm over the entire height. The
Based on the above data the ETABS calculates the
Bracing beams (outriggers) and all other beams are
design horizontal seismic coefficient (Ah) using the
230mm wide and 600mm deep, Grade 40 (Mix
Sa/g value from the appropriate response spectrum.
M40) concrete is considered (Compressive strength
The Ah value calculated is utilized in calculating
40 N/mm) throughout the height of the building.
the design seismic base shear (VB) as,
The outer and inner columns sizes are considered
VB =
as 800 x 800 mm and shear wall thickness is
Ah * W
Where, W = seismic weight of the building.
considered as 350 mm. The Outrigger Beams are
Qi = VB * (Wi*hi2)*(W j*hj2)-1
flexurally rigid and induce only axial forces in the
Where, Qi = Design lateral force at floor i.
columns; The lateral resistance is provided only by
Wi = seismic weight of the floor i
the bending resistance of the core and the tie down
hi = height of the floor I measured from base
action of the exterior columns connected to the
j = 1 to n, n being no. of floors in the building
outrigger;
The structure is analyzed as per the loading
Since the building is assumed to be a office
combinations provided in IS: 456-2000. The
building live load is considered as 3 kn/m. A floor
following load combinations are used to determine
load of 1.5 kN/m is applied on all the slab panels
the maximum lateral deflection in the structure.
on all the floors for the floor finishes and the other
i) DL+LL
things. A member load as u.d.l. of 6 kn /m is
ii)DL+LLWL(x or y)
considered on all beams for the wall load
iii)DL+LLEL(x or y)
considering the wall to be made of Light Weight
iv) DLWL(x or y)
Bricks.
v) DLEL(x or y)
Wind load in this study is established in accordance
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Mohd Abdus Sattar , Sanjeev Rao, Madan Mohan, Dr. Sreenatha Reddy
Fig 5: Plan view of the model with central core
Fig 9: elevation view with central core &
and extended outriggers on three sides
outriggers in different stories
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
1. Storey axial forces:
Fig 6: 3D view of structure without any
Outrigger & Belt Truss
2. Diaphragm CM Displacement:
Fig 7: 3D view of structure with Belt truss
3. Storey Drift:
Fig 8: Sectional elevational view of 25 storey
structure with Outriggers
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Deflection Control in High Rise Building Using Belt Truss and Outrigger Systems
4. Natural time period:
Comparison of results of Structure 4 with Structure
3: will give the effect of floor rigidity. Comparison
of results of structure 4: with structure: 2 will give
the effect of double core shear wall.
From the analysis of the Data the following
conclusions have been made.
i) Due to presence of the additional stiffness in
terms of double core shear wall + stringer beam +
floor rigidity, structure 4 is a stiffer structure.
ii) It can be concluded that floor rigidity is not
Moments
required to be increased beyond that required for
Another very important factor that is monitored is
the load carrying of Dead load and Live load on
the moments along the height of the concrete core.
floors.
The moments that were monitored as shown in
iii) Column forces and moments are minimum in
figure.
case of Building frame with Double Core
1. The moments below the first outrigger (cap
arrangement of shear wall and Stringer beams for
truss).
which
2. The moments above the second outrigger.
comparatively less.
3. The moment below the second outrigger.
iv) Moments in Corner column are less compared
4. The core base moments.
to the middle column.
drift
and
displacement
are
also
v) Moments in outer periphery columns are less
compared to the moments in interior columns.
References
[1] Chopra
A.K.
(2005):-Dynamics
of
structures Theory and applications to
Earthquake Engineering, Second edition.
[2] Hou Guangyu, et al., Design and
research on composite steel and concrete
Fig 10: The typical behaviour of moments
Conclusions
frame-core wall structures, for 14th world
conference on Earth quack Engineering,
The study has been carried out to find the effect of
[3] Minsik bang and Jaehong Lee An
Building displacements in Lateral direction with
Analytical model for high-rise wall frame
shear core, stringer beam and floor rigidity. The
building structures, Page No.1003-1009,
following four structures are considered for study
for CTBUH 2004, October 10-13, Seoul,
for 25 Storey L Shape building.
Korea.
Structure 1: Building frame without shear wall and
[4] P.Jayachandran , Design of tall buildings
with stringer beams.
preliminary design and optimization for
Structure 2 : Building frame without shear wall
National work shop on High rise & Tall
and with stringer beams & floor rigidity.
buildings, University of Hyderabad, India,
Structure 3: Building frame with Double Core
May, 2009, Keynote Lecture.
arrangement of shear wall and stringer beams.
Structure 4: Building frame with Double Core
arrangement of shear wall, Stringer beams and
floor rigidity.
[5] Tolga Aki, S, Lateral load analysis of
shear wall frame structures.
[6] IS-1893-2002 (part 1),, Criteria for
Earthquake
Resistant
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53
Design
of
Mohd Abdus Sattar , Sanjeev Rao, Madan Mohan, Dr. Sreenatha Reddy
Structures Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi, 2002.
for
[7] IS: 456 - 2000 - Code of practice for
plain and Rein forced concrete.
design loads (Other than
earthquake)
for buildings and structures - Dead loads.
[9] IS: 875 (part 2)1987: Code of practice
design
loads
(Other
design
loads
(Other
than
earthquake) for buildings and structures
Imposed loads.
[8] IS: 875(part 1)1987: Code of practice for
for
[10] IS: 875 (part 2)1987: Code of practice
[11] IS: 875(part 3) - 1987: Code of practice
for
design
loads
(Other
than
Earthquake) for buildings and structures Wind loads.
than
earthquake) for buildings and structures
Imposed loads.
International Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Management
ISSN 2320 3439, Vol. 03, No. 06, November 2014, pp. 44 53