International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD)

Volume 4 Issue 6, September-October 2020 Available Online: www.ijtsrd.com e-ISSN: 2456 – 6470

Soil Structure Interaction Analysis of Multi Storey

Building Frame for Seismic Load using SAP2000
Shristee Saxena1, Prof. Juhi Nigam2
1Research
Scholar, 2Assistant Professor,
1,2Department of Civil Engineering, Lakshmi Narain College of Technology, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT How to cite this paper: Shristee Saxena |

Presently a day the human life and the climate have often been jeopardized by Prof. Juhi Nigam "Soil Structure
the characteristic perils like seismic tremor, torrent, flood, twister and Interaction Analysis of Multi Storey
avalanches. As an outcome of which the human culture and the country's Building Frame for Seismic Load using
economy get hampered following the event of a catastrophic event. In SAP2000" Published
agricultural nations like India, where the populace is huge and is expanding in International
step by step, the social and financial components power individuals to live in Journal of Trend in
weak territories, because of which the impacts of these cataclysmic events are Scientific Research
disastrous. Among every one of these dangers, liquefaction of soil can be and Development
brought up as one of the most appalling seismic perils. Consequently (ijtsrd), ISSN: 2456-
assessment of liquefaction helplessness is a significant part of geotechnical 6470, Volume-4 | IJTSRD33689
designing. Soil-structure connection impact in the examination and plan of RC Issue-6, October
outline structures is progressively perceived yet not infiltrated to the grass 2020, pp.1361-1366, URL:
root level attributable to different complexities included. It is settled reality www.ijtsrd.com/papers/ijtsrd33689.pdf
that the dirt structure collaboration impact significantly impact the plan of
multi-story structures exposed to parallel seismic burdens. In this Copyright © 2020 by author(s) and
examination we are performing seismic appraisal utilizing Analytical International Journal of Trend in Scientific
apparatus SAP2000 over a midrise building outline where we will give Research and Development Journal. This
sidelong load to zone V (0.36) to decide soil structure communication for is an Open Access article distributed
parallel burdens, for this investigation a midrise even structure of G+7 storey under the terms of
is considered. the Creative
Commons Attribution
License (CC BY 4.0)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

1. INTRODUCTION
The traditional basic examination of a RC space casing is adaptable and along these lines, expanding the common time
done expecting establishment laying on fixed end underpins. of the structure contrasted with the comparing unbendingly
The investigation is completed by considering base part of bolstered structure. In addition, considering the SSI impact
the arrangement fixed and ignoring the impact of soil expands the viable damping proportion of the framework.
distortions. In all actuality, any building casing lays on The smooth glorification of design range recommends littler
deformable soil bringing about redistribution of powers and seismic reaction with the expanded normal time frames and
minutes because of soil-structure interaction. In this manner, successful damping proportion due to SSI, which is the
traditional examination is ridiculous and might be principle defense of the seismic design codes to diminish the
dangerous. The interaction impact is increasingly articulated design base shear when the SSI impact is considered.
if there should be an occurrence of multi-storeyed buildings
because of overwhelming burdens and may turn out to be In this study we are comparing a high rise unsymmetrical
additionally disturbed when such buildings are exposed to structure of G+7 storey considering seismic zone V with two
seismic burdens. different soil conditions i.e. soft soil (black cotton soil) and
medium soil (loamy soil), In this study we are interacting
It is ordinarily accepted that SSI is a simply useful impact, structure and soil using analysis tool SAP2000.
and it can advantageously be dismissed for traditionalist
design. SSI arrangements of seismic design codes are 2. Soil Structure Interaction
discretionary and enable designers to diminish the design Soil-structure interaction examination assesses the
base shear of structures by considering soil-structure aggregate reaction of these frameworks to a predefined
interaction (SSI) as a gainful impact. The fundamental ground movement. The terms Soil-Structure Interaction
thought behind the arrangements is that the soil-structure (SSI) and Soil-Foundation-Structure Interaction (SFSI) are
framework can be supplanted with a proportionate fixed- both used to portray this impact in the writing. In this report,
base model with a more drawn out period and typically a the establishment is viewed as a major aspect of the
bigger damping proportion. A large portion of the design structure, and the term SSI has been received. A seismic soil-
codes use distorted design spectra, which achieve consistent structure interaction examination assesses the aggregate
increasing speed up to a specific period, and from that point reaction of the structure, the establishment, and the geologic
diminishes monotonically with period. Considering soil- media basic and encompassing the establishment, to a
structure interaction makes a structure progressively predetermined free-field ground movement. The term free-

@ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD33689 | Volume – 4 | Issue – 6 | September-October 2020 Page 1361
 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
field alludes to movements that are not influenced by basic considerable difference. The analysis was predicting that
vibrations or the dissipating of waves at, and around, the percentage difference in bending moment in beam, column
establishment. SSI impacts are missing for the hypothetical and footings was at lower EFS value i.e 0.010N/mm3 at
state of an inflexible establishment bolstered on unbending lower footing size 1mX1m was greater than when compared
soil. In like manner, SSI represents the distinction between to higher EFS value i.e 0.050N/mm3 at higher footing size
the genuine reaction of the structure and the reaction of the 4.5mX4.5m which considers soil interaction. But in case of
hypothetical, unbending base condition. the footings they undergo some settlement the percentage
difference of settlement was 14.41% and 6.72% at lower EFS
value i.e 0.010N/mm3 at lower footing size 1mx1m when
compared to higher EFS value i.e 0.050N/mm3 at higher
footing size 4.5mx4.5m respectively, which considers soil
interaction.

Magade S. B and Prof. Patankar J. P (2018)this research

paper presented different parameter such as soil structure
interaction, types of soil, stiffness of infill walls, and location
of walls influences time period, displacement and base shear
of building frame considerably. Hence it was important to
consider to all these parameters in the analysis of structures.
Shear walls located in the central part of the multistoried
building gives lesser displacement and more base shear
compared to other locations.
Fig 1: Soil Structure Interaction
HailuGetachewKabtamu et al. (2018)this research
paperdynamic analysis of Soil Structure Interaction (SSI)
3. SAP2000
effect on multi story reinforced concrete (RC) frame founded
SAP2000 information, including model data, investigation
on soft soil (flexible base) and comparison was made with
results, and configuration results, can be gotten to utilizing a
fixed base. Two model 2D RC frames with 7 and 12 story are
forbidden information structure. Forbidden information can
selected for analysis. Winkler Spring and half space direct
be altered and showed in the interface, or traded to a
method models are used for flexible base for the frames
Microsoft Access database document, a Microsoft Excel
founded on two types of soft soils with shear velocity Vs<
spreadsheet record, or a straightforward book document.
150 m/s Asper Seismic Codes of Chinese GB50011-2010 Soil
You can utilize traded information to make reports or to
IV and Ethiopian ES8-2015 soil D. The frames are subjected
perform specific computations. This equivalent unthinkable
to strong ground motion matched to response spectrums of
information can be brought into SAP2000, empowering you
soft soil of Chinese GB50011-2010 and Ethiopian ES8-2015
to produce or alter models outside SAP2000. Import and fare
for linear time history analysis. The dynamic analysis result
abilities additionally exist for other prevalent drafting and
showcased Spring and Fixed base mass participation 90%
configuration programs.
reaches in 2 or 3 modes but in direct method 11 to 30 modes
for story 12 and 7 respectively.
4. Objectives
A. To check the stability of soil - structure interaction in
The results led to the conclusion that SSI effect may not be
Seismic hazard.
always beneficial in multi-story RC frame compared to fixed
B. To determine the effect of lateral load over two different
base. Because the beneficial effect reduction in base shear
soil type i.e. Loamy & Black cotton soil.
may be smaller than detrimental effect of P-delta increment
C. To determine the Utilization of Analytical tool SAP2000
on vertical load carrying members. The results obtained in
in soil & Structure Interaction.
this study is limited to linear time history analysis regular 2D
D. To determine the variation in forces, stability,
RC frame; however it is good indicator of SSI effect.
displacement and other important criteria or safe
structure.
6. METHODOLOGY
Following steps are required in a sequence for proper
5. LITERATYRE REVIEW
completion:
Supriya and Reddy (2019) this research paper presented
the effects of soil interaction on building frame design
Step-1 Select Geometrical data and modelling of
parameters as change of modulus of sub-grade reaction from
structure using SAP2000.
0.010 to 0.050 N/mm3 the analysis was done on parameters
An RCC Structure is rigid to get together of Beams, Columns,
namely shear force, bending moment and settlements for
Slabs, and establishment between associated with one
different footing sizes of 1mx1m to 4.5mx4.5m the effect of
another as a solitary unit. For the most part, the uniform load
SSI was quantified using finite element analysis. The
in these structures is from chunk to bar, from shaft to the
conclusion derived from the research paper stated that the
segment lastly section to the establishment which thus
shear force and axial force value in the beam and column is
exchanges the whole load to the soil.
constant from finite element analysis was not having

@ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD33689 | Volume – 4 | Issue – 6 | September-October 2020 Page 1362
 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
Step-2: Defining material and soil property for study.

Fig 2: Material & Soil Property

Step-3: Creating Soil Mass below the structure:

SAP2000 give us a development alternative to give material properties in a particular way to dole out in structure. In SAP2000
we are allowed to dole out any sort of material as it gives a practical altering device to make the material

Step-4: Assigning Boundary Conditions

In SAP2000 we are allowed to assign out any sort of help either settled, stick or roller for which we have to tap on dole out
instrument on the menu bar > then we will choose joint > after that we have select the kind of help we have to assign it.

Step-5: Interacting RCC Structure over the soil

In this study we are assigning G +7 Structure above soil which is fixed 1.5 m below the soil to have interaction and load
distribution.

Step-6: Load Combinations

The accompanying burden blends will be accounted as given in I.S. 1893 (Part I): 2016 (Sec. 6.3.1.2).

Step-7: Interacting Soil and structure

Soil mass and structure is done by fixing structure 1.5 meter below the soil for proper distribution of support reaction to the
soil mass. Which is effected to 18 m beneath the soil as observed after analysis.

Step-8: Analysis of soil structure

Finite element analysis is performed using SAP2000 software, for this analysis soil mass is meshed in elements to determine
the minute variation in different elements of the soil.

Step-9: Comparative Analysis

This step we will compare results of both type of soil to determine the variation in reactions, forces and moment.

7. PROBLEM FORMULATION
7.1. Modelling of Building Frame
SAP2000 is a multipurpose program for investigation of structure. The accompanying three exercises must be performed to
accomplish that objective.
Modeling of the diverse cases in SAP2000
Calculation and Provisions according to Indian principles can be connected.
Analysis of structure to decide forces, reactions and moment producing in a casing.

8. ANALYSIS RESULT
The fundamental standards hidden the FEM are generally straightforward. Consider a body or designing part through which
the conveyance of a field variable, for example relocation or stress, is required. Models could be a part under load,
temperatures subject to a warmth input, and so forth. The body, for example a one-, a few dimensional strong, is demonstrated
as being speculatively subdivided into a gathering of little parts called elements – 'finite elements'. The word 'finite' is utilized
to portray the constrained, or finite, number of degrees of opportunity used to display the conduct of every element. The
elements are thought to be associated with each other, yet just at interconnected joints, known as hubs. Note that the elements
are notionally little districts, not separate substances like blocks, and there are no breaks or surfaces between them.

@ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD33689 | Volume – 4 | Issue – 6 | September-October 2020 Page 1363
 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
8.1. Soil Mass at Top of the soil:
Table 1: Soil Stress in X Direction
Soil Stress in X Direction kN/m2
Black Cotton Soil Loamy Soil
S11 S11
KN/m2 KN/m2
-3.37 -13.37
-3.37 -13.36
-4.48 -13.68
-4.48 -13.68
-6.11 -15.19
-6.11 -15.19
-7.27 -15.57
-7.27 -15.57

Fig 3: Soil Stress in X Direction

A. Shear Force:
Table 2 Shear Force
Shear Force KN
Black Cotton Soil Loamy Soil
7th -18.406 49.721
6th 10.579 -17.017
5th 0.372 -4.211
4th -1.232 -13.971
3rd -4.153 -0.637
2nd -0.45 9.005
1st -0.649 -1.626
0th -1.908 -0.976

Fig 4: Shear Force in Column C1

@ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD33689 | Volume – 4 | Issue – 6 | September-October 2020 Page 1364
 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
B. Bending Moment:
Table 3 Bending Moment kN-m
Bending Moment KN-m
Black Cotton Soil Loamy Soil
7th 834.3382 1114.696
6th 834.3382 1114.696
5th 1273.4892 1372.6329
4th 1273.4892 1372.6329
3rd 1193.0957 1086.2582
2nd 1193.0957 1086.2582
1st 149.4738 -41.2863
0th 0.03709 0.07276

Fig 5: Bending moment in Column C1

9. Conclusion: 10. REFERENCES

This study explores the SSI effect on the overall risk of a mid [1] A Supriya and R Reddy, Soil Interaction of Building
rise building structure with respect to two failure modes: Frame Resting on Clayey Soil: Effect of Change of
strength in terms of plate and joint forces, moment, Footing Size], International Journal of Recent
Displacement and Support reaction at the base of the Technology and Engineering (IJRTE), ISSN: 2277-
structure 3878, Volume-8 Issue-2, July 2019
A. It is observed in the above analysis that loamy soil is [2] A Bogdanovic, K Edip, Marta, and Simulation of soil
18.50 % more stable in resisting forces. structure interaction problems considering material
properties], Journal of Scientific and Engineering
B. It is observed that effect of lateral forces is more in black
Research, 2016, 3(2):132-139.
cotton soil as compared to loamy soil.
[3] Ghalimath A.G, More Sheetal. A, HattiMantesh. A,
C. It is observed that soil mass is meshed finitely in
JamadarChaitrali. A [Analytical Approaches for Soil
SAP2000 which provide accurate and linear results.
Structure Interaction] International Research Journal
D. It can be concluded that there is variation in both the of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), Volume: 02
cases i.e. structure under black cotton soil and loamy Issue: 05 | Aug-2015
soil, as forces and moment are varying by 16% and 14 %
[4] G. Saad, F. Saddik& S. Najjar[ Impact of Soil Structure
respectively.
Interaction on the Seismic Design of Reinforced
E. The consideration of SSI shows a complete conflicting Concrete Buildings with Underground Stories], Soil
effect on the seismic fragility and risk depending on the Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 33, 2012, pp.
two different soil failure modes. This has a positive 958-967.
effect regarding the strength failure mode, but this
[5] HailuGetachewKabtamu, Gang Peng, Denghong Chen.
brings a negative effect regarding the displacement
[Dynamic Analysis of Soil Structure Interaction Effect
failure mode.

@ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD33689 | Volume – 4 | Issue – 6 | September-October 2020 Page 1365
 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
on Multi Story RC Frame] Open Journal of Civil Earthquake Caused Agitation], International Journal
Engineering, 2018, 8, 426-446. of Civil and Structural Engineering Research, Vol. 4,
Issue 1, pp.: (95-102), Month: April 2016 - September
[6] Magade S. B and Prof. Patankar J. P. [Effect of Soil
2016
Structure Interaction on the Dynamic Behavior of
Buildings] IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil [9] Peizhen Li, Xilin Lu, Bo Chen and Yueqing Chen
Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) ISSN: 2278-1684, PP: 09-14 [COMPUTER SIMULATION ON DYNAMIC SOIL-
STRUCTURE INTERACTION SYSTEM] 13th World
[7] Nimisha Ann Sunny Dr. Alice Mathai [Soil Structure
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, August 1-6,
Interaction Analysis of Multi Storey Building], IJSTE -
2004 Paper No. 3233
International Journal of Science Technology &
Engineering | Volume 3 | Issue 11 | May 2017. [10] Prakash M. Yesane, Y. M. Ghugal, R. L. Wankhade
[Study on Soil-Structure Interaction: A Review]
[8] Nitish Kumar S and Praveen J V [Study of Soil
International Journal of Engineering Research ISSN:
Structure Interaction Effect on Multi-Storey RC Frame
2319-6890), 2347-
Structures Resting Over Raft Foundation under

@ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD33689 | Volume – 4 | Issue – 6 | September-October 2020 Page 1366