SHEAR WALL DESIGN FOR HIGH RISE BUILDINGS

THESIS
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree

of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
CIVIL ENGINEERING
Under the supervision

of

Prof. Dr. Ashish Kumar

(Professor)
And

Dr. Tanmay Gupta

(Assistant Professor)
by
Shourabh Maanju (161673)
to

JAYPEE UNIVERSITY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

WAKNAGHAT, SOLAN – 173234
HIMACHAL PRADESH, INDIA
MAY, 2020
 STUDENT' S DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work presented in the Project thesis entitled “SHEAR WALL DESIGN
FOR HIGH RISE BUILDINGS” submitted for partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Bachelor of Technology in Civil Engineering at the Ja yp ee University of
Information Technology, Waknaghat is an authentic record of my work carried out
under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Ashish Kumar and Dr. Tanmay Gupta. This work has not
been submitted elsewhere for the reward of any other degree/diploma. I am fully responsible for
the contents of my project report.

Signature of Student

Shourabh Maanju

161673

Department of Civil engineering

Jaypee University of Information Technology, Waknaghat, Solan, India

Date: 25-05-20

ii
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the work which is being presented in the project report titled “SHEAR
WALL DESIGN FOR HIGH BUILDINGS” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
award of the degree of Bachelor of Technology in Civil Engineering and submitted to the
Department of Civil Engineering, Jaypee University of Information Technology, Waknaghat
is an authentic record of work carried out by Shourabh Maanju (161673) during a period from
July 2019 to May 2020 under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Ashish Kumar and Dr. Tanmay
Gupta, Department of Civil Engineering, Jaypee University of Information Technology,
Waknaghat.

The above statement made is correct to the best of our knowledge.

Date: - 25-05-20

Signature of Supervisor Signature of HOD Signature of Co Guide

Dr. Ashok Kumar Gupta Dr. Tanmay Gupta

Dr. Ashish Kumar
Professor and Head Assistant Professor
Professor
Department of Civil Department of Civil
Department of Civil engineering engineering
engineering
JUIT, Waknaghat JUIT, Waknaghat
JUIT, Waknaghat

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I extend my hearty gratitude to my project guide Prof. Dr. Ashish Kumar and co-guide Dr.
Tanmay Gupta for their continued guidance and support in the pursuit of this project. They have
been a true motivation throughout and helped me in exploring various horizons of this project.
Without their guidance, this project wouldn’t have been possible. I would also like to thanks my
parents for their constant support.

Date: 25-05-20

Shourabh Maanju

B. Tech – Civil Engineering

iv
 ABSTRACT

Shear walls are one of the most appropriate and important structural components in multi-storied
buildings. Therefore, it would be very interesting to study the structural response and their
systems in multi-storied structures. Shear walls improve the strength and stiffness during
earthquakes which is often neglected during the construction and design of the structure. This
study has shown the effect of shear walls which significantly affect the vulnerability of structures.
In order to test this hypothesis, a G+11 story building was considered with and without shear
walls and analyzed for various parameters like base shear, story drift ratio, lateral displacement,
bending moment and shear force. The significance of the shear wall has been studied with the
help of two models. The first model is without shear wall i.e. bare frame and another model is
with shear walls.

Currently, the simple design methods are available for greater heights in the respective design
codes. Hence, the objective of this study is to thoroughly compare the high rise buildings using
different codal provisions and under various combinations of design load using STAAD Pro.
software. Firstly, making the structure at its normal conditions so that it can withstand the forces
and does not collapse under its own weight and secondly, making it cost-effective.

The main advantage of shear walls is its merging in the wall which helps to reduce the cost of
normal wall designing as compared to the other high rise structures in that particular area. Also if
a shear wall is used it will automatically reduce the overall cost of installation as well as the
future maintenance cost is significantly reduced.

Keywords: STAAD Pro., High Rise Buildings, Shear Wall

v
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Page
number

STUDENT’S DECLARATION ii

CERTIFICATE iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRACT v

LIST OF TABLES viii

LIST OF FIGURES ix

LIST OF SYMBOLS xiv

CHAPTER - 1

INTRODUCTION 1-5

1.1. Background 1
1.1.1. Classification of Shear Walls 2
1.1.2. Based on Material 2
1.1.3. Based on Geometry 3
1.2. Importance of Shear Walls 4
1.3. Problem Statement 5
1.4. Scope of the study 5
1.5. Significance of the study 5

vi
CHAPTER - 2
LITERATURE REVIEW 6-10
2.1 INTRODUCTION

2.2 PREVIOUS STUDIES 6-10

2.3 LITERATURE SUMMARY 10

CHAPTER - 3
METHODOLOGY 11-24
3.1 STAAD Pro. 11

3.2 STAAD RCDC 12

3.3 Modelling Considerations 12

3.4 Work Plan 24

CHAPTER - 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 25-45

4.1 Staad Pro. Analysis 25

4.2 Analysis of the structure (H5 Hostel) in Staad Pro 26

4.3 Comparing various parameters of the structure with

and without Shear Walls 35

CHAPTER - 5

CONCLUSIONS 46
5.1 Conclusions 46

REFERENCE 47

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table number Caption Page number

4.1 Percentage Steel for columns 28

A15,A16,A18,A20,B15,B16,C18

Percentage Steel for columns 29

4.2
C20,D15,D16,D18,D20,F15,F16

4.3 Percentage Steel for columns 30

E18,E19,E20,L15,L16,L18,L19,L20

4.4 Failed Column Report 31

4.5 Percentage Steel for columns 34

A15,A16,A18,A20,B15,B16,C18
4.6 Percentage Steel for columns 35
C20,D15,D16,D18,D20,F15,F16
4.7 Percentage Steel for columns 36
E18,E19,E20,L15,L16,L18,L19,L20
4.8
Lateral Displacement without shear walls 38

4.9
Lateral Displacement with shear walls 39

4.10 40
Story Drift without shear walls

4.11 Story Drift with shear walls 41

4.12 Lateral Displacement with shear walls at 43

corner

4.13 Lateral Displacement with shear walls at 45

center

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure number Figure name Page number

1.1 Design of Shear wall 2

1.2 Different types of shear wall 4

3.1 Cross sectional view of Hostel no. 05 13

3.2 Plan of Hostel no. 05 14

3.3 Top view of Hostel no. 05 14

3.4 Front view of Hostel no. 05 15

3.5 Plan of G+3 Building for Seismic Design 17

3.6 Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 18

3.7 Side view of Hostel no. 05 18

3.8 Front view of Hostel no. 05 19

3.9 Top view of Hostel no. 05 19

xiv
Figure number Figure name Page number

3.10 L shaped column 20

3.11 T shaped column 20

3.12 Supports of the Building 21

3.13 Properties assigned to the members 21

4.1 Layout of columns 27

4.2 Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls 33

4.3 Side view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls 33

4.4 Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at 42

corner

4.5 Front view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at 42

corner

4.6 Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at 44

center

4.7 Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at 44

center

xv
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

Abbreviation Name Page number

Ah Design horizontal seismic coefficient 18

Z Zone factor 18

I Importance factor 18

Sa/g Structural response factor 18

R Response reduction factor 18

Vb Base shear 18

W Lumped weight 18

xvi
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background:

In the 21st century, there has been a huge growth in infrastructure development in most of the
developing countries, especially India, in terms of the construction of bridges, buildings, and
industries, etc. Due to the growing population and to fulfill their demands infrastructure
development is undertaken. The land is scarce in urban cities, due to which the land is limited. To
overcome this problem, tall and slender multi-storied buildings are often constructed. There is a
high possibility that such structures are often subjected to huge lateral loads. These lateral loads
are generated either due to wind blowing against the building or due to inertia forces induced by
ground shaking (excitation) which tends to snap the building in shear and push it over in bending.
In the framed buildings, the vertical loads are resisted by frames only, however, the lateral
resistance is provided by the infill wall panels. For the framed buildings taller than 10-stories,
frame action obtained by the interaction of slabs and columns is not adequate to give required
lateral stiffness and hence the framed structures become an uneconomical solution for tall
buildings. The lateral forces due to wind and earthquake are generally resisted by the use of a
shear wall system, which is one of the most efficient methods of maintaining the lateral stability
of tall buildings. In practice, shear walls are provided in most of the commercial and residential
buildings up to thirty stories beyond which tubular structures are recommended. Shear walls can
be provided in one plane or in both planes of the structure. Sometimes shear walls are provided
with openings to improve functionality as well as the architectural requirement of the building.
The present study is not concerned with the openings, but only with the position of the shear wall.

1
 Fig 1.1: Design of shear wall

1.2. Classification of Shear Walls:

Based on experiments conducted, shear walls are mainly classified according to (i) Material (ii)
Geometry.

1.2.1. Based on Material

Based on the material shear wall are of the following types (i) RC Shear Wall (ii) Plywood
Shear Wall (iii) Steel plate Shear Wall (iv) RC Hollow Concrete Block Masonry Wall

RC shear wall usually has a thickness varying from 140 to 500mm. Usually, these walls are
continuous throughout the height of the building. RC shear walls are used in common
buildings and complexes. Plywood Shear walls are not recommended for high rise buildings
due to their limited strength. They can, however, be used in cold regions effectively. Steel
Shear walls have high strength as compared to other types of shear walls but their use is also
limited to high initial cost.

2
1.2.2. Based on Geometry

Based on geometry shear walls are classified as (i) Rectangular Shear wall (ii) Flanged Shear
wall (iii) Coupled Shear wall (iv) Framed Shear Wall (v) Barbell Shear wall.

Rectangular shear is the simplest type of shear wall consisting of only vertical and horizontal
reinforcement. Vertical reinforcement helps in controlling shear cracking and improves the
ductility. Partial shear strength is due to horizontal reinforcement. When the shear wall is
provided with extra reinforcement at the ends then it is a Rectangular shear wall with
boundary elements, this helps in increasing the strength of shear walls. When the
reinforcement to be provided at the boundary becomes large, the need for increasing the ends
arises and this is done by shaping the shear wall in Bar Bell shape. This type of shear wall is
stronger than a rectangular type of shear wall. Barbell Shear walls are frequently used in high
rise buildings.

For use in nuclear power plants, Flanged Shear walls are used. They have been found better in
resisting bending stresses as compared to rectangular shear walls.

R C Shear wall Timber shear wall

3
 Reinforced masonry shear wall Steel shear wall

Fig 1.2: Different configurations of shear wall

1.3. Importance of Shear Walls:

When the structure is subjected to seismic loading or wind load, it leads the structure to deflect
laterally and this deflection or deformation is usually significant to cause heavy damage or in
some cases collapse of the structure. This not only puts the lives of many inside the building in
danger but also its surrounding. To resist these large horizontal forces, the common elements used
are shear walls. Shear walls are vertical members that transfer the lateral forces from roof, floors
or external walls to the ground. Shear walls are placed where it will lead to least deflection.
Usually it is at the center of external walls but this may not be possible every time. Other places
include shear walls at the corner of a building. Shear walls can also be used at the core of a
structure.
Shear Core: Shear walls provided in a type of box is known as a shear core. Shear core is usually
provided at the core of structure. Shear core has made the construction of high rise
buildings simple. Before the concept of shear core high rise buildings were designed
with lots of columns and beams to stop it from deflecting significantly. This led to
space restrictions inside the building. Also earlier buildings were designed with
smaller windows. This led to minimum lighting inside the building. But with shear
core, there is plenty of space inside the building as well as plenty of natural lighting.
Shear core has led to cutting down of cost significantly as panels can be used on the

4
 periphery of elevators. This has made possible the construction of high rise
buildings with complex design

1.4. Problem Statement:

Looking at the past records of earthquakes, the demand for earthquake resisting buildings has
increased, which can be fulfilled by providing the shear wall systems within the building.
Providing shear walls at adequate location results in a lesser displacement. More weightage has
been given to the earthquake design of the structure.

1.5. Scope of the study:

• Verification of G+3 Building with Seismic Loading.

• Comparison of displacement of G+11 building with and without shear wall under seismic
loading.

• Check and compare the seismic response of the G+11 building for different locations of the
shear wall.

1.6. Significance of the study

The major significance for carrying out this analysis is to see how the shear walls affect the
building with the increase in height, as the height of the building increases, the deflection goes on
increasing due to either the wind load or seismic loading. The main advantage of the shear wall is
the lateral force sustaining factor which helps it to keep the structure stable and reduce the
deflection which increases the serviceability life of the structure.

The present research work involves the development of a high rise building and subjecting it to
seismic loading using STAAD Pro with shear walls and comparing the deflection of building
with and without the shear walls. Also, the location of the shear walls plays a key role in keeping
the deflection of the building under control so shear walls in this study are placed in different
locations and then deflection is checked.
5
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction:

This chapter presents a summary of different studies on the design and analysis of the shear
walls. It includes procedures and guidelines for the design of shear walls by different authors
along with recently completed experimental and computational studies available in the published
literature.

2.2 Previous Research:

 Ms. Priyanka Soni, Mr. Purushottam Lal Tamrakar, Vikky Kumhar, 2016

In this research paper, the authors have analyzed 3 buildings i.e. G+10, G+20, G+26. These
buildings were analyzed with shear walls at different locations. In the end, it was concluded that
G+10 generated less deformation. This is due to the increasing height of the building, as the height
increases there is an increase in the deformation. Also, the optimum location that was found is at
the corners of a building.
Also is was concluded that less obstruction will be there because of the reduced size of the column
and provision of the shear wall. Building with a shear wall is constructed at a lower cost as
compared to the structure without a shear wall.

6
 Er. Raman Kumar, Er. Shagunveer Singh Sidhu, Er. Shweta Sidhu, Er. Harjot Singh Gill, 2014

In this study, two reinforced concrete framed buildings with shear walls at different locations
situated in seismic zone V have been analyzed, with four different locations of shear-walls i.e. at
the central frame, external frame, internal frame, and combined external and internal frames. The
size of the building in the plan is 31.5 m x 22 m. Story Height = 3m, Column Size = 600mm x
400mm, Beam Size = 500mm x 350mm, Slab Thickness = 120mm, Shear wall thickness =
230mm, Thickness of Floor Finish = 40mm, Concrete Mix Used = M30, All the supports are
assumed to be fixed in nature. It was concluded that the story drift increases with an increase in
the number of stories. Story drift decreases with the provision of shear walls. Story drift is
minimum when shear walls are provided at the internal frame. A maximum decrease of 58% in
story drift for ten storied building and 60% for fifteen storied building is observed when shear
walls are provided at internal frames.

 Sonali Pandey, Dr. Krishna Murari, Ashish Pathak, Chandan Kumar, 2017

In this study, it can be concluded that providing shear walls at adequate locations reduces the
displacement due to earthquake and shear wall along the periphery is most efficient among all the
shear walls considered. By using shear walls, damages due to the effect of lateral forces due to an
earthquake and high winds can be optimized. Story drift of building provided with openings in a
shear wall is greater than shear wall without openings and also arrangement of shear walls
influences material consumption and concrete consumption and steel. The shear wall is effective
in reducing the soft story effect. The use of shear walls is more effective in high rise buildings
than in low rise buildings.

7
 Vivek Pal, Gaikwad Yogesh, Pawar Chetan, Vishwajeet Kadlag. Nikhil Maske, 2018

In this research paper, the authors analyzed the G+15 building with Seismic loading in STAAD
Pro. The building plan size is 24m × 24m. The building is in zone III. The seismic zone
coefficient is taken as 0.16 as per IS code. There’s more reduction in axial forces and bending
moment in columns for a shear wall in opposite sides as compared to without shear wall, also for
the center of the building. It was concluded that Shear wall construction will provide large
stiffness to the building by reducing the damage to the structure. The location of the shear-wall on
opposite sides has a significant effect on the seismic response than shear wall placed on any other
location of the building. The seismic response of regular structure gives better in comparison with
that of irregular structure, because of the discontinuities along with the height of the building.

 Kanchan Rana, Vikas Mehta, 2017

In this research paper, the authors analyzed the G+5 building. In total three models were generated i.e
one having no shear wall, one having shear walls at the edges and one with shear walls at the center. It was
concluded that Shear walls at the center of sides most effective as compared to corners

 Prof. N. K. Meshram, Gauravi M. Munde, 2018

In this research paper, the authors have thrown some light on the different types of shear walls,
their function The authors have also analyzed a G+9 building with Seismic Loading. The height of
the building is 30m. The spacing of frame along length and width is 4m. The materials used were
of grades M35& Fe500 were used for the design. It was concluded that the time period decreases
as the mode frequency increases for all models. Maximum lateral displacement increases as story
height increases for all models.

8
 Rajat Bongilwar, V R Harne and Aditya Chopade, 2018

In this research paper, the authors have analyzed a G+8 Residential Building. It was concluded
that
In multi-story buildings, the provision of shear walls is found to be effective in increasing the
overall seismic response and characteristics of the structure. Shear walls are considered for
analysis of the RC frame in which an equivalent static method can be effectively used. Shear wall
ultimately increases the stiffness and strength of the structure and affects the seismic behaviour of
the structure. From the analytical result, it is observed that base shear increases in the model with
the shear wall when compared to the model without a shear wall. This is due to the increase in the
stiffness of the building.

 Ashwini A. Gadling, Dr. P. S. Pajgade, 2016

In this study, RC shear walls with and without openings are analyzed. The dimension of the shear
wall affects the load taken by them. When reinforcement is provided around openings, it highly
affects the ductility and shear strength of the shear wall. It’s necessary to demonstrate work on the
analysis, design and post effects of shear walls when seismic forces are applied. In this paper, a
review is taken out over the analysis and design of RC shear walls with and without openings to
study more detailed conclusions and results.

 Mr. Ankur Vaidya, Mr. Shahayajali Sayyed, 2018

In this study, Seismic Effect was compared on building with and Without- Shear wall. In this study, models
are generated and shear walls are located at different positions in the building to find the least displacement
of the elements due to shear walls.

9
 Manjeet Dua, Er. Sumit Rana & Nitin Verma, 2018

In this Study, the Effect on Deformation by using the Shear Wall in high rise Building with the Help of
STAAD Pro is analyzed. By providing shear walls to the high rise buildings, Structural seismic behaviour
will be affected to a great extent and also the stiffness and the strength of the buildings will be increased.

Literature Summary

In the above research papers, all the research has been carried out, focusing on the optimum location of the
shear wall and also that how shear walls help in the minimization of the story drift due to earthquakes. the
authors have analyzed 3 buildings i.e. G+10, G+20, G+26. These buildings were analyzed with shear walls
at different locations. In the end, it was concluded that G+10 generated less deformation. The authors have
also analyzed a G+9 building with Seismic Loading. The height of the building is 30m. The spacing of
frame along length and width is 4m. The materials used were of grades M35& Fe500 for the design.
It was concluded that the time period decreases as the mode frequency increases for all models. Maximum
lateral displacement increases as story height increases for all models.

A maximum decrease of 58% in story drift for ten storied building and 60% for fifteen storied building is
observed when shear walls are provided at internal frames. By providing shear walls to the high rise
buildings, Structural seismic behaviour will be affected to a great extent and also the stiffness and the
strength of the buildings will be increased. In this paper, a review is taken out over the analysis and design
of RCC shear walls with and without openings to study more detailed conclusions and results. Our study is
only constricted to the optimum location of the shear walls that leads to minimum deformation of the
building and not whether openings are more efficient.

10
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 STAAD Pro.

STAAD Pro software can be used for a vast variety of work like to design structures and
buildings, as well as to create simulations that test a structure's service life, load calculations, max
absolute stresses, displacements, etc.

For the analysis of the shear wall, many analytical methods have been proposed by numerous
researchers which range from a simplified standard approach to the subtle finite element
approach. Due to the complexity of numerous factors that influence the overall behavior of RC
shear walls, the validity of modeling and analysis techniques might solely be established by
comparing the same with experimental results. In this chapter several experimental and analytical
investigations are presented about the assessment of the shear walls of different aspect ratios with
and without openings and subjected to different loading conditions. Furthermore, various codal
provisions have also been reviewed to make a comparative study on design guidelines of shear
walls with and without openings. In the end, the damping characteristics and the mathematical
models are also discussed in detail.

During the past few decades, efforts have been directed towards the development of effective
analytical techniques that can model the behavior of shear walls adequately. Simplified methods
have been proposed by various researchers in the past: simplified methods such as equivalent
column model, lumped plasticity models, equivalent frame model, Rosman - approach, method of
relaxation, etc. are quite popular among the engineering fraternity. However, these simplified
models apply only to shear walls with regular geometry and with linear elastic behavior. On the
other hand, the finite element method is capable of analyzing shear walls of irregular geometry
subjected to loads varying with time in the linear as well as non-linear regimes. The current
section explains the various simplified methods and finite element methods.
11
3.2 STAAD RCDC

Staad RCDC is a software which is a part of Staad Pro Connect Edition. It can be used for the
design of Pile cap, Footing, Column and Walls, Beams and Slab. This software requires the
analysis file from Staad Pro. The model should be formed by using beams, columns or plate
elements. Staad RCDC makes use of the latest codes for the design of Pile cap, Footing, Columns
and Walls. By making use of Staad RCDC, the detailed drawings of the reinforcement design can
be readily generated and it gives detailed information about the failed elements. There is option for
changing the diameter of the reinforcement as per the requirement. After the design is complete,
the software gives you the option to change the member sizes to let the user increase the
reinforcement in the member. At last Staad RCDC is a powerful software that provides seamless
design, drawing, detailing and estimation. RCDC is used for residential, high rise buildings,
industrial projects.

3.3 Modeling considerations

For the dynamic response of shear walls, rectangular shear walls were considered under simulated
earthquake ground motion applied at the base of the shear wall. The rectangular shear wall is of
slender type. The shear wall was used at different locations as well as; it was used as a core for the
elevator. It was found that the maximum displacement response, as well as the profile of time
history response, was found to be satisfactory.

The focus of the present study is to investigate the influence of RC shear walls on the deflection of
the G+11 Building with seismic loading. To determine the load-carrying capacity and ductility, the
non-linear static analysis of shear wall was carried out considering material non-linearity. Since the
ductility is an important parameter in the earthquake-resistant design, the present analyses focused
on the comparison of the ductile response of the shear wall. Also after the frame was generated of
the building, the percentage reinforcement was matched to what had been designed at the time of
construction to see if any of the members would fail under seismic loading. The members that were
used consisted of many shapes i.e. L shaped column, T shaped column, slender columns and
rectangular columns.
12
To determine the displacement response of the shear wall under dynamic ground motions, the shear
walls were subjected to the El Centro earthquake applied at the base of the shear wall. The
maximum displacement response and base shear demand were computed for the structure with and
without shear wall and also for different locations of the shear wall.

Fig 3.1: Cross-sectional view of Hostel no. 05

13
 Fig 3.2: Plan of Hostel no. 05

Fig 3.3: Top view of Hostel no. 05

14
Fig 3.4: Front view of Hostel no. 05

15
3.4 Work Plan

The tasks undertaken to complete the stated objectives:

Task-1: Literature review

Task-2: Learning expertise of STAAD Pro.

Task-3: Basic model creation and analysis in STAAD pro.

Task-4: Modeling of live high rise buildings in STAAD Pro (H5 Hostel)

Task-5: Load Calculations

Task-6: Calculation of reinforcement using RCDC with and without shear walls

Task-7: Comparing various parameters of the structure with and without shear

Walls

Task-8: Using shear walls at different locations to obtain optimum results

A brief description of the work done in each task is as follows:

Task-1: Literature Review

The research activities require a thorough understanding of the literature work done so far to
understand the problem so that previous research will not be duplicated. All the objectives were
formed based on the research conducted, to solve a few problems.

Task-2: Learning expertise of STAAD Pro.

Learning some important tools and commands of the software, to properly model the shear wall
and analyze the structure to get the appropriate results.

16
Task-3: Basic model creation and analysis in STAAD pro

 Explanatory Examples on Indian Seismic Code IS 1893 (Part I)

Fig 3.5: Plan of G+3 Building for Seismic Design

Task-4: Modeling of live high rise buildings in STAAD

A single unit of the structure is made by assigning the nodes and then each levels are separately
designed to construct the whole structure. The structure is generated by using the plans of the
building to figure out the dimensions. Firstly, the structure without the shear wall is prepared and
then a structure with the shear wall is prepared.

17
Step 1: Modeling the frame of the building

Fig 3.6: Isometric view of Hostel no. 05

Fig 3.7: Side view of Hostel no. 05

18
Fig 3.8: Front view of Hostel no. 05

Fig 3.9: Top view of Hostel no. 05

19
 Different types of concrete sections

Fig 3.10: L shaped column

Fig 3.11: T shaped column

20
Step 2: Assigning supports:

 Twenty fixed supports are assigned, four at each end section of the structure and all
twenty are attached to the ground.

Fig 3.12: Supports of the Building

Step 3: Assigning members:

• Seven types of sections are implemented for the structure.

Fig 3.13: Properties assigned to the members

21
Step 4: Adding specification to the members

 Concrete grade shall be M25; unless noted otherwise.

 Clear cover to the main bar shall be as follows:

o Footings- 50mm
o Columns- 40mm
o Slab- 15mm
o Beam- 25mm

 At any section not more than 50% bars shall be lapped and lap length shall be 50 * dia. of
smaller bar lapped.

 Net soil safe bearing capacity has been taken as 20T/sq. mtr.

Task-5: Load Calculations

According to IS:875-1987 various types of loads were considered in the seismic design of the
building. Loads acting on the building are Dead Loads, Live Loads, Earthquake Loads.

 Dead Loads

First Load considered is the dead load. Dead load is due to the self-weight of the structural
elements, boundary walls, partition walls, and different materials.
Self-weight of the slab = 0.15 x 25 = 3.75 kN/m2
External wall (2.9m) = 0.23 x 2.35 x 20 = 10.8 kN/m
Internal wall (2.9m) = 0.15 x 2.35 x 20 = 7 kN/m
External wall (3.85m) = 0.23 x 3.3 x 20 = 15.2 kN/m
Plaster (Both Sides) = 0.02 x18 x 2 = 0.7 kN/m2
Due to openings present in the building the load will reduce, so Final Loads are

22
 Dead Load due to external wall of 2.9m height = 10 kN/m
Dead Load due to external wall of 3.85m height = 12 kN/m
Dead Load due to internal wall of 2.9m height = 5 kN/m

 Live Load

Live load can be described for different levels, so

For 2.9m to 17.4m Live Load = 4 kN/m2
For 17.4m to 24.15m Live Load = 3 kN/m2
For 24.15m to 32.85m Live Load = 4 kN/m2

The loads considered above are in accordance with IS:875-1987

 Seismic Load

The Lumped weight due to dead and live load with act in the form of member weight and
floor weight.

Member Weight:

Member weight will simply be the dead load considered above,

External wall (2.9m) = 10 kN/m
Internal wall (2.9m) = 5 kN/m
External wall (3.85m) = 12 kN/m

Floor Weight:

Floor weight will consist of the self-weight of slab, and 0.5LL or 0.25LL
It is taken as 0.5LL if the live load is 4 kN/m or above, whereas it is taken as 0.25LL if the
live load is 3 kN/m or below.
For 2.9m to 17.4m, Floor weight = 0.5LL = 0.5 x 4 = 2 kN/m2

23
 For 17.4m to 24.15m, Floor weight = 0.25LL = 0.25 x 3 = 0.75 kN/m2
For 24.15m to 32.85m, Floor weight = 0.5LL = 0.5 x 4 = 2 kN/m2
Task-6: Calculation of reinforcement using RCDC with and without shear walls

After load calculation, the structure is analyzed using Staad RCDC, this software is used for the
calculation of percentage steel and to see if any of the members fail under seismic loading. It will
also help in comparing the reinforcement of the structure with and without shear walls.

Task-7: Comparing various parameters of the structure with and without shear
Walls

After reinforcement design, the structure is analyzed in Staad Pro. and various parameters such as
design base shear, lateral displacement and story drift are determined. These parameters are
determined for both structures with and without shear walls.

Design Base Shear: Design Base shear is the total lateral force at the base of the structure. The
value of design base shear increases as the structure becomes heavy i.e. with
the use of shear walls. The structure becomes stiff with the use of shear wall
and it is expected that this value will be higher for structure with shear walls.

Lateral Displacement: It is the average displacement for each story in both directions i.e. X and
Y.

Story Drift: Story drift can be defined as the difference of lateral displacement between two
successive stories divided by the height of the story.

Task-8: Using shear walls at different locations to obtain optimum results

After the comparison of the above parameters, the structure is again analyzed in Staad Pro by using
shear walls at different locations i.e. shear walls at corners of the structure, shear walls at center of
external walls.

24
 CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 STAAD Pro Analysis of Explanatory Example:

Ah = ZISa/2Rg

= 0.36x1x2.5/2x5

= 0.09

Design base shear

VB = AhW

= 0.09x15600

= 1440 kN

Design Base shear is the total lateral force at the base of the structure. The above example was just to
get an idea about how the seismic loading is to be applied and to obtain the desired results as obtained
by manual calculations. For the above example, the displacement of each node is also shown below
with the help of table. Some of the terms used above are also explained below.

Zone factor (Z): It is a factor for seismic risk which will be maximum based on the zone in which the
building is located.
Response Reduction factor (R): If the building remains elastic during earthquake then there is a
reduction in the base shear.
Structural Response factor (Sa/g): Denotes the acceleration response of the building due to seismic
response.

25
Importance factor (I): It is a factor which is used to calculate the design seismic force depending on
the use of the structure.
4.2 Analysis of the structure (H5 Hostel) in Staad Pro:

4.2.1 . Reinforcement design without shear walls:

Firstly, the structure (H5 Hostel) was analyzed without the shear walls and columns were
designed using “Staad Pro Advance Concrete Design” to see if any of the members failed
under the loading used and to compare the reinforcement design between structure without
shear walls and with shear walls.
The design was carried out using IS:456 + IS:13920-1993. The following design settings were
used for the reinforcement design:
Load Combination
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 4: L.L)
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) +1.2 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) +1.2 (LOAD 2: EQZ
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) -1.2 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) -1.2 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)

Ductile Design – Yes

Shear Walls with boundary elements – No
Columns Braced – No
Column % Reinforcement
Minimum – 0.8

26
Maximum – 4
Longitudinal Bar Spacing
Minimum – 75mm
Maximum – 250mm
Link Spacing
Minimum – 100mm
Maximum – 300mm
Available Rebar
Rebar used – 8,10,16,20,25
Column Rebar
Minimum – 16
Maximum – 25

Fig 4.1: Layout of Columns

27
 Table 4.1: Percentage Steel for columns A15,A16,A18,A20,B15,B16,C18

COLUMN MARK A15 A16 A18 A20 B15 B16 C18

0m to 2.9m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.44% 1.26% 1.44% 1.44% 1.17% 2.42% 1.85%
2.9m to 5.8m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.85% 1.97% 1.85% 1.64% 1.49% 2.42% 2.05%
5.8m to 8.7m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.77% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 2.16% 1.85%
8.7m to 11.6m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08& 1.26% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.43% 2.57%
11.6m to 14.5m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.85% 2.76% 2.48% 2.16% 1.17% 1.17% 2.25%
14.5m to 17.4m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 600
1.64% 1.77% 1.64% 1.64% 1.17% 1.17% 3.30%
17.4m to 21.25m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
3.52% 3.33% FAILED 3.13% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
21.25m to 24.15m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.64% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
24.15m to 27.05m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
27.05m to 29.95m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
29.95m to 32.85m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
32.85m to 35.75 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%

28
 Table 4.2: Percentage Steel for columns C20,D15,D16,D18,D20,F15,F16

COLUMN MARK C20 D15 D16 D18 D20 F15 F16

0m to 2.9m T 600 X 600 - - - - - -
1.26% - - - - - -
2.9m to 5.8m T 600 X 600 FAILED FAILED L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 - -
2.76% 2.89% 3.08% - -
5.8m to 8.7m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 750 X 750
2.76% 1.17% 1.17% 2.05% 2.76% 3.33% 2.88%
8.7m to 11.6m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 750 X 750
1.77% 1.17% 1.43% 1.85% 2.76% 2.76% 1.69%
11.6m to 14.5m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 750 X 750
2.09% 1.17% 1.17% 2.48% 2.76% 2.76% 2.64%
14.5m to 17.4m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 FAILED
1.46% 1.17% 1.17% 1.64% 1.17% 1.77%
17.4m to 21.25m T 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 FAILED
2.09% 1.17% 1.17% 2.79% 3.64% 3.33%
21.25m to 24.15m 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600
2.79% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.64%
24.15m to 27.05m 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08%
27.05m to 29.95m 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 230 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17%
29.95m to 32.85m 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 230 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17%
32.85m to 35.75 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 230 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17%

29
 Table 4.3: Percentage Steel for columns E18,E19,E20,L15,L16,L18,L19,L20

COLUMN MARK E18 E19 E20 L15 L16 L18 L19 L20
0m to 2.9m - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
2.9m to 5.8m - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
5.8m to 8.7m FAILED - FAILED - - - - -
- - - - - -
8.7m to 11.6m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 750 X 750 L 750 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
2.09% 2.11% 2.76% 1.85% 1.69% 1.84% 1.17% 2.89%
11.6m to 14.5m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.59% 1.17% 1.77% 2.37% 1.43% 1.17% 1.17% 2.89%
14.5m to 17.4m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.37% 1.49% 1.26% 1.85% 1.49% 1.17% 1.49% 1.85%
17.4m to 21.25m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.77% 3.45% 1.49% 1.17% 1.17% 3.13%
21.25m to 24.15m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.64% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
24.15m to 27.05m 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 450 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
27.05m to 29.95m 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 450 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
29.95m to 32.85m 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 450 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
32.85m to 35.75 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 450 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%

30
As the maximum percentage of steel allowed was 4%, the columns shown below failed. Due
to the frame being a “sway” type of frame, the effective length factor had a range from 0.1 to
5. To design the failed columns, either the percentage steel should be increased or the cross
section of the column is modified.

Table 4.4: Failed Column Report

Column No. Level Location Pt(%) Failure Type

A18 21.25m TOP 5.77% Detailing

D15 5.8m TOP 6.53% Detailing
D16 5.8m - 6.53% Detailing
E18 8.7m TOP 5.36% Detailing
E20 8.7m - 5.05% Detailing
F16 17.4m - 5.77% Detailing
F16 21.25m - 5.77% Detailing

4.2.2 . Reinforcement design with shear walls:

For the reinforcement design of structure with shear wall, the effective length factor becomes
“1” as the frame becomes a “non-sway” type of structure. The design was carried out using
IS:456 + IS:13920-1993. The following design settings were used for the reinforcement
design:
Load Combination
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 4: L.L)
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) +1.2 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) +1.2 (LOAD 2: EQZ
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) -1.2 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.2 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.2 (LOAD 4: L.L) -1.2 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)

31
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
1.5 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) +1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 1: EQX)
0.9 (LOAD 3: D.L) -1.5 (LOAD 2: EQZ)

Ductile Design – Yes

Effective length factor - 1
Shear Walls with boundary elements – Yes
Columns Braced – No
Column % Reinforcement
Minimum – 0.8
Maximum – 4
Longitudinal Bar Spacing
Minimum – 75mm
Maximum – 250mm
Link Spacing
Minimum – 100mm
Maximum – 300mm
Available Rebar
Rebar used – 8,10,16,20,25

Column Rebar
Minimum – 16
Maximum – 25

32
Fig 4.2: Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls

Fig 4.3: Side view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls

33
 Table 4.5: Percentage steel for columns A15,A16,A18,A20,B15,B16,C18

COLUMN MARK A15 A16 A18 A20 B15 B16 C18

0m to 2.9m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 2.42% 1.85%
2.9m to 5.8m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.66% 1.64%
5.8m to 8.7m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.43% 1.08%
8.7m to 11.6m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
11.6m to 14.5m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
14.5m to 17.4m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.49%
17.4m to 21.25m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
21.25m to 24.15m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
24.15m to 27.05m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
27.05m to 29.95m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
29.95m to 32.85m L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%
32.85m to 35.75 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600
1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17%

34
 Table 4.6: Percentage steel for columns C20,D15,D16,D18,D20,F15,F16

COLUMN MARK C20 D15 D16 D18 D20 F15 F16

0m to 2.9m T 600 X 600 - - - - - -
1.08% - - - - - -
2.9m to 5.8m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 - -
1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% - -
5.8m to 8.7m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 750 X 750
1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.53%
8.7m to 11.6m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 750 X 750
1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.10%
11.6m to 14.5m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 750 X 750
1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.10%
14.5m to 17.4m T 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 L 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08%
17.4m to 21.25m T 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08%
21.25m to 24.15m L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08%
24.15m to 27.05m L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.08%
27.05m to 29.95m L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 230 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17%
29.95m to 32.85m L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 230 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17%
32.85m to 35.75 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 T 600 X 600 230 X 600
1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17%

35
 Table 4.7: Percentage Steel for columns E18,E19,E20,L15,L16,L18,L19,L20

COLUMN MARK E18 E19 E20 L15 L16 L18 L19 L20
0m to 2.9m - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
2.9m to 5.8m - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
5.8m to 8.7m 300 X 600 - T 600 X 600 - - - - -
2.49% - 1.08% - - - - -
8.7m to 11.6m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 L 750 X 750 L 750 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.59% 1.78% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
11.6m to 14.5m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.49% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.49% 1.08%
14.5m to 17.4m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.49% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.78% 1.08%
17.4m to 21.25m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 750 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.49% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.49% 1.08%
21.25m to 24.15m 300 X 600 230 X 600 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.49% 1.08%
24.15m to 27.05m 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
27.05m to 29.95m 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
29.95m to 32.85m 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%
32.85m to 35.75 300 X 600 230 X 450 T 600 X 600 L 600 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 230 X 600 L 600 X 600
1.12% 1.17% 1.08% 1.08% 1.17% 1.17% 1.17% 1.08%

It can be seen that none of the columns failed with the use of shear walls. Percentage steel for the
columns is also less than the percentage steel for columns without shear walls.

36
4.3 Comparing various parameters of the structure with and without Shear
Walls:

4.3.1. Design Base Shear

• Without Shear Walls

TIME PERIOD FOR X 1893 LOADING = 1.09652 SEC

Sa/G PER 1893 = 0.912,
LOAD FACTOR = 1.000
VB PER 1893 = 0.0219 X 26666.71 = 583.66 KN
TIME PERIOD FOR Z 1893 LOADING = 1.09652 SEC
Sa/G PER 1893 = 0.912,
LOAD FACTOR = 1.000
VB PER 1893 = 0219 X 26666.71 = 583.66 KN

• With Shear Walls

TIME PERIOD FOR X 1893 LOADING = 1.09652 SEC

Sa/G PER 1893 = 0.912,
LOAD FACTOR = 1.000
VB PER 1893 = 0.0219 X 27745.11 = 607.27 KN
TIME PERIOD FOR Z 1893 LOADING = 1.09652 SEC
Sa/G PER 1893 = 0.912,
LOAD FACTOR = 1.000
VB PER 1893 = 0219 X 27745.11 = 607.27 KN

Design Base shear is the total lateral force at the base of the structure. If the building is
provided with shear walls, the building becomes stiff. A flexible structure will experience
lower acceleration. Since the flexible building will be hard to excite, that’s why it will have a

37
 lower base shear value as compared to a stiff building.

4.3.2. Lateral Displacement

Table 4.8: Lateral Displacement without Shear walls

Without Shear Walls

Story Height(m) Load Average Displacement(cm)

X Z
1 0 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0000 0.0000
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0000 0.0000
2 2.9 0.9DL+1.5EQX -0.0012 0.0014
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0001 0.1428
3 5.8 0.9DL+1.5EQX -0.0024 -0.0016
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0002 0.3824
4 8.7 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0372 -0.0005
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0025 0.6322
5 11.6 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.3365 -0.0086
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0110 1.1546
6 14.5 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.7799 -0.0238
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0276 1.7915
7 17.4 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.2812 -0.0382
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0460 2.4928
8 21.25 0.9DL+1.5EQX 2.0574 -0.0587
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0687 3.5134
9 24.15 0.9DL+1.5EQX 2.5380 -0.0657
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0846 4.1488
10 27.05 0.9DL+1.5EQX 2.9324 -0.0694
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1008 4.6921
11 29.95 0.9DL+1.5EQX 3.2397 -0.0741
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1172 5.1467
12 32.85 0.9DL+1.5EQX 3.4537 -0.0780
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1336 5.4811
13 35.75 0.9DL+1.5EQX 3.5792 -0.0811
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1497 5.6928

38
 Table 4.9: Lateral Displacement with Shear walls

With Shear Walls

Story Height(m) Load Average Displacement(cm)

X Z
1 0 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0000 0.0000
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0000 0.0000
2 2.9 0.9DL+1.5EQX -0.0007 -0.0335
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0001 0.1122
3 5.8 0.9DL+1.5EQX -0.0013 -0.0870
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0002 0.3003
4 8.7 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0091 -0.0618
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0228 0.3051
5 11.6 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.1068 -0.1618
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0900 0.6606
6 14.5 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.2566 -0.2484
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1633 1.0662
7 17.4 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4369 -0.3219
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.2324 1.5020
8 21.25 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.7251 -0.4155
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.3187 2.1178
9 24.15 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.9222 -0.4633
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.3717 2.5545
10 27.05 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.0983 -0.5075
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.4182 2.9656
11 29.95 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.2510 -0.5485
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.4594 3.3460
12 32.85 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.3762 -0.5854
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.4957 3.6861
13 35.75 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.4727 -0.6177
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.5276 3.9836

The lateral displacement due to the application of seismic load is shown above. The lateral
displacement is calculated for structure without shear walls and structure with shear walls.
For the calculation of lateral displacement and story drift, load combination of 0.9DL+1.5EQ
is used. Due to the use of shear walls, the lateral stiffness of the building increases. It can be
39
 seen above that lateral displacement of building with shear is lesser than building without
shear wall.
4.3.3. Story Drift

Table 4.10: Story Drift without Shear walls

Without Shear Walls

Story Height(m) Load Drift(cm)

X Z
1 0 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0000 0.0000
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0000 0.0000
2 2.9 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0012 0.0014
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0001 0.1428
3 5.8 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0012 0.0002
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0003 0.2395
4 8.7 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0396 0.0011
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0027 0.2499
5 11.6 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.2992 0.0090
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0085 0.5224
6 14.5 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4434 0.0153
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0166 0.6369
7 17.4 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.5013 0.0144
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0184 0.7013
8 21.25 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.7762 0.0205
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0227 1.0206
9 24.15 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4806 0.0070
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0159 0.6354
10 27.05 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.3944 0.0037
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0162 0.5433
11 29.95 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.3073 0.0047
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0164 0.4546
12 32.85 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.2140 0.0039
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0163 0.3344
13 35.75 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.1255 0.0031
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0161 0.2118

40
 Table 4.11: Story Drift with Shear walls

With Shear Walls

Story Height(m) Load Drift(cm)

X Z
1 0 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0000 0.0000
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0000 0.0000
2 2.9 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0007 0.0335
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0001 0.1122
3 5.8 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0006 0.0535
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0001 0.1880
4 8.7 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0104 0.0252
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0230 0.0048
5 11.6 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0615 0.0685
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0049 0.2285
6 14.5 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.1356 0.0832
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0240 0.2613
7 17.4 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.2135 0.1047
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0480 0.2910
8 21.25 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.3408 0.1472
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0847 0.3542
9 24.15 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4013 0.1706
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1037 0.3578
10 27.05 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4486 0.1906
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1181 0.3655
11 29.95 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4795 0.2069
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1277 0.3638
12 32.85 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4919 0.2173
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1334 0.3448
13 35.75 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4858 0.2214
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1360 0.3018

Story drift can be defined as the difference of lateral displacement between two successive
stories divided by the height of the story. IS:1893-2002 puts a limitation on story drift, it is
given by L/40. For the calculation of lateral displacement and story drift, load combination of
0.9DL+1.5EQ is used. Both the buildings with and without shear walls are well below the
allowable drift i.e. L/40.

41
4.4 Using shear walls at different locations to obtain optimum results:

4.3.1. Shear Walls at corner

Fig 4.4: Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at corner

Fig 4.5: Front view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at corner

42
  Design Base Shear

VB PER 1893 = 0219 X 29232.9 = 639.83 KN

 Average Lateral Displacement

 Table 4.12: Lateral Displacement with Shear walls at corner

Shear Walls at corner

Story Height(m) Load Average Displacement(cm)

X Z
1 0 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0000 0.0000
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0000 0.0000
2 2.9 0.9DL+1.5EQX -0.0005 -0.0027
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0017 0.0391
3 5.8 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0282 -0.0089
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0025 0.1133
4 8.7 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0943 -0.0168
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0019 0.2217
5 11.6 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.2622 -0.0309
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0001 0.4056
6 14.5 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4841 -0.0488
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0056 0.6401
7 17.4 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.7358 -0.0685
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0147 0.9074
8 21.25 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.1201 -0.0981
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0334 1.3005
9 24.15 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.4042 -0.1173
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0530 1.5751
10 27.05 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.6800 -0.1356
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0769 1.8310
11 29.95 0.9DL+1.5EQX 1.9429 -0.1546
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1046 2.0678
12 32.85 0.9DL+1.5EQX 2.1861 -0.1732
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1353 2.2726
13 35.75 0.9DL+1.5EQX 2.4041 -0.1908
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.1687 2.4403

43
4.3.2. Shear Walls at center of the external walls

Fig 4.6: Isometric view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at center

Fig 4.7: Side view of Hostel no. 05 with Shear Walls at center

44
 Design Base Shear

VB PER 1893 = 0219 X 29340.53 = 642.19 KN

 Average Lateral Displacement

 Table 4.13: Lateral Displacement with Shear walls at center

Shear Walls at center of external walls

Story Height(m) Load Average Displacement(cm)

X Z
1 0 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0000 0.0000
0.9DL+1.5EQZ 0.0000 0.0000
2 2.9 0.9DL+1.5EQX -0.0075 0.0003
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0032 0.0424
3 5.8 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0066 -0.0011
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0126 0.1306
4 8.7 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0145 -0.0035
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0270 0.3307
5 11.6 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.0727 -0.0092
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0517 0.6453
6 14.5 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.1583 -0.0159
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.0773 1.0276
7 17.4 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.2624 -0.0215
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1013 1.4549
8 21.25 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.4292 -0.0325
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1310 2.0760
9 24.15 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.5543 -0.0336
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1483 2.4914
10 27.05 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.6750 -0.0315
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1629 2.8663
11 29.95 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.7883 -0.0297
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1751 3.1983
12 32.85 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.8903 -0.0278
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1847 3.4601
13 35.75 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.9802 -0.0247
0.9DL+1.5EQZ -0.1914 3.6480

45
 CHAPTER - 5

CONCLUSION

5.1 Conclusions

The main objective of this study has been the Comparison of displacement of G+11 building with
and without shear wall under seismic loading and to check and compare the seismic response of the
G+11 building for different locations of the shear wall. To achieve this objective, the structure was
analyzed using Staad Pro. and various parameters such as Design Base Shear, Lateral Displacement
and Story Drift were determined and compared for structure with and without shear walls. Since
the behavior of RC shear walls is highly complex under the influence of severe lateral loads arising
due to wind and earthquake, the response of shear walls no longer remains elastic and therefore,
Staad Pro. was needed to predict the behavior of shear walls under static and dynamic loading
conditions. After performing the analysis on the structure, the following conclusions are drawn:

• Reinforcement required for structure with shear walls is considerably less than for structure
without shear walls.
• Design Base Shear for structure with shear walls is higher than that for structure without shear
walls.
• Lateral Displacement for structure with shear walls is considerably less than for structure
without shear walls.
• Story Drift of structure with shear walls also decreased as compared to structure without shear
walls.
• Design Base Shear for structure with shear walls at center of external walls is greater than
design base shear for structure with shear walls at corner.
• Average lateral displacement for structure with shear walls at center of external walls is less
than that for structure with shear walls at corner.

46
 REFERENCE

• Soni, M. P., Tamrakar, M. P. L., & Kumhar, V. (2016). Structural Analysis of Multistory
Building of Different shear Walls Location and Heights. International Journal of Engineering
Trends and Technology.

• Kumar, R., Sidhu, S.S, Sidhu, S., Gill, H.S. (2014). Seismic BehaviorOf Shear Wall Framed
Buildings. International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and Applied
Sciences.

• Pandey, S., Murari, K., Pathak, A., Kumar, C. (2017). A Review on Shear wall in High Rise
Buildings. International Journal of Engineering Inventions.

• Pal, V., Yogesh, G., Chetan, P., Kadlag, V., Maske, N.(2018). Seismic Analysis of rcc
building with shear walls using Staad pro. International Journal of Advance Research and
Innovative Ideas in Education.

• Rana, K., Mehta, V.(2017). Seismic Analysis of RCC Building with Shear Wall at Different
Locations Using STAAD Pro. International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Research.

• Meshram, N.K., Munde, G.M.(2018). Seismic Analysis of Shear Wall at Different Location on
Multi-storey RCC Building. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Innovative Research &
Development.

• Bongilwar, R., Harne, V.R, Chopade, A.(2018). Significance of Shear Wall in Multi-Storey
Structure With Seismic Analysis. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering.

• Gadling, A.A., Pajgade, P.S.(2016). Review on Analysis and Design of RCC Shear Walls with
and Without Openings. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Application.

• Vaidya, A., Sayyed, S.(2018). Comparing the Seismic Effect on Shear wall building and
Without- Shear Wall Building – A Review. International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology.

• Dua, M., Rana, S., Verma, N.(2018). Study the Effect on Deflection by using the Shear Wall in
Multi Storey Building with the Help of STAAD Pro. SSRG International Journal of Civil
Engineering.

47
48