Seismic Analysis and Design of a Six-Storey Open-Ground-Storey
RC Building
1.0 Introduction: The Seismic Vulnerability of Open-Storey Buildings
In modern urban architecture, the "open-storey" or "soft-storey" building has become a
prevalent design, driven by the functional need for open spaces at the ground level for
parking, retail storefronts, or expansive lobbies.1 This design is characterized by a ground
floor with significantly lower lateral stiffness and strength compared to the storeys above it,
often due to the absence of the masonry infill walls that are present on upper floors.1 Seismic
design codes formally define this structural vulnerability, classifying a storey as "soft" if its
lateral stiffness is less than 70% of the storey above or less than 80% of the average stiffness
of the three storeys above.1
This architectural choice creates a critical seismic irregularity. The sharp discontinuity in
stiffness between the open ground floor and the rigid superstructure above it concentrates
the entire seismic demand at the building's most flexible level, leading to a predictable and
often catastrophic failure mechanism.1
1.1 Dynamic Behavior and Failure Mechanisms
Under the lateral forces of an earthquake, a building's displacement is inversely proportional
to its stiffness. In a soft-storey structure, the low stiffness of the ground floor causes seismic
deformations to localize almost entirely at this level, resulting in excessive inter-storey drift.1
The stiff, heavy superstructure behaves like a single mass oscillating on top of flexible
ground-floor columns, a dangerous dynamic often described as a "pendulum effect".1
This behavior fundamentally contradicts the "strong-column–weak-beam" philosophy that is
central to modern earthquake-resistant design. This principle is intended to ensure that
during a seismic event, energy is dissipated through controlled, ductile yielding in the beams
across multiple floors, while the columns remain stable to support the building's weight. In a
soft-storey failure, the entire inelastic demand is forced into the ground-floor columns,
overwhelming their capacity and leading to a brittle, non-ductile collapse.1 This concentration
of failure represents a complete breakdown of the intended seismic energy dissipation
strategy.
1.2 Lessons from Historical Earthquakes
The theoretical vulnerabilities of soft-storey buildings have been tragically confirmed by real-
world evidence from numerous major earthquakes. These events have consistently
demonstrated the devastating consequences of this design flaw.
● Gujarat, India Earthquake (2001): A large number of collapsed reinforced concrete
(RC) frame buildings exhibited soft-storey failures. A particularly stark example was
observed in Ahmedabad, where an apartment building with an open ground floor for
parking completely collapsed. An identical, adjacent building, which had its ground floor
infilled with masonry walls, remained standing, providing unequivocal proof of the critical
role of ground-floor stiffness.1
● Izmit, Turkey Earthquake (1999): Post-earthquake reconnaissance reports identified
soft first storeys in commercial and residential buildings as a primary cause of
widespread structural collapses.1
These case studies underscore that the soft-storey failure mode is a recurring and
predictable outcome, highlighting the urgent need for careful analysis and mitigation.
1.3 Principles of Seismic Mitigation
To address this well-documented vulnerability, engineers have developed a range of
retrofitting and design strategies. The primary goal of these interventions is to re-balance the
vertical stiffness profile of the structure, eliminating the abrupt discontinuity at the ground
floor. This forces the building to respond to seismic loads as a cohesive system, distributing
drift more uniformly along its height. Key techniques include 1:
1. Adding Stiffness and Strength: Installing new reinforced concrete (RC) shear walls,
masonry infill panels, or steel bracing systems (e.g., X-braces, V-braces) in the open
bays of the ground floor.
2. Enhancing Local Capacity: Strengthening the vulnerable ground-floor columns
themselves through jacketing with new reinforced concrete, steel plates, or fiber-
reinforced polymer (FRP) composites.
3. Improving Energy Dissipation: Incorporating advanced devices like metallic or
viscoelastic dampers to absorb a significant portion of the seismic energy, thereby
reducing the deformation demand on the structural frame.
2.0 Project Definition
2.1 Problem Statement
This project undertakes the detailed analysis and design of a six-storey (G+5) commercial
building featuring an open ground floor. The building's geometry, material properties, and
loading criteria are adopted from a well-documented and widely used design example
manual. The structure is situated in Seismic Zone III on a site with medium soil conditions.
The analysis and design will be performed using the finite element analysis software ETABS,
with adherence to prevailing Indian Standards for structural and seismic design.1
2.2 Project Objectives
The primary objectives of this project are as follows 1:
● To develop an accurate three-dimensional (3D) analytical model of the six-storey
building in ETABS software.
● To apply and assess gravity loads (per IS 875) and seismic loads (per IS 1893:2002) on
the model.
● To perform a linear static analysis to determine the building's structural response,
including key performance indicators like base shear, storey displacement, and inter-
storey drift.
● To validate the accuracy of the ETABS model by systematically comparing the analysis
results with the values provided in the reference design manual.
● To conduct the detailed design of a representative continuous beam and an exterior
column for combined flexural, shear, and axial forces.
● To prepare ductile reinforcement details for the selected members in accordance with
the provisions of IS 13920 to ensure adequate seismic performance.
2.3 Scope of Work
The scope of this project is confined to the main structural block of the building as
described in the reference manual. The analysis will focus on the behavior of the moment-
resisting frame under the specified load combinations. The design task will be limited to a
selected exterior beam line and an exterior column to demonstrate a comprehensive design
and detailing process.1
3.0 Methodology
3.1 Case Study Building: Structural System
The structure under investigation is a G+5 commercial building with a moment-resisting RC
frame.
● Storey Height: The typical floor-to-floor height is 5.0 m, while the ground floor has a
height of 4.1 m from the plinth level.1
● Material Properties: M25 grade concrete is used for most elements, with a higher M30
grade for central columns in the lower floors. The reinforcing steel is specified as Fe 415
grade HYSD bars.1
● Member Sections: Main beams are 300 mm x 600 mm, and columns are typically 500
mm x 500 mm, enlarged to 600 mm x 600 mm below the ground floor.1
3.2 Analytical Modeling in ETABS
A 3D analytical model of the structure will be created in ETABS 2022. Key modeling
assumptions include 1:
● Supports: Column bases are modeled with fixed supports to represent a rigid
connection to the foundation.
● Diaphragms: A rigid diaphragm constraint is assigned at each floor level, ensuring that
all vertical elements on a given floor translate and rotate together. This standard
practice allows lateral forces to be distributed to columns and walls in proportion to their
relative stiffness.
3.3 Load Assessment and Analysis
The model will be subjected to loads calculated according to Indian Standards.
● Gravity Loads: Dead loads (self-weight, finishes, walls) and live loads (4.0 kN/m² for
typical floors) will be assessed as per IS 875.1
● Seismic Loads: Seismic forces will be calculated using the equivalent static lateral force
method prescribed in IS 1893:2002. The key parameters for this analysis are 1:
○ Seismic Zone (Z): 0.16 (Zone III)
○ Importance Factor (I): 1.5 (Public building)
○ Response Reduction Factor (R): 5.0 (Special RC Moment-Resisting Frame)
