International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)

Volume V, Issue XI, November 2016 | ISSN 2278-2540

Deflection Analysis of High Rise Concrete Buildings

for Wind and Seismic Loads Using Bracing Systems
for Plan Irregularities Using ETABS
P. V. Srivardhan#, Dr. K. Harikrishna*
#
M.Tech Student, Structural Engineering, VITAM College of Engineering, Visakhapatnam.
* Associate Professor, VITAM College of Engineering, Visakhapatnam.

Abstract--Deflection is the degree of displacement of a structural the effect of changing the position of bracing system in the
element under a load, either by an angle or distance. For a building, effect of combination bracing systems etc.,
structure, such as buildings, dams, etc., deflection plays a major
role in determining the stability of a structure. The more the II. OBJECTIVES
structure is deflected, the higher the structure is susceptible to
risk of damage. So, bracing systems are used to reduce the The main objective of this paper is to
deflections in a structure. A typical 20 and 30 storeyed buildings  To analyse the deflections for different shapes of
are considered with four distinct plan shapes such as square, buildings.
rectangle, plus and a T shape within an area of 40m x 40m
having a span of 4m. Each building is analysed for Wind and  To analyse the effect of different bracing objects on
Earthquake loads using the load combinations provided in IS buildings.
code book. Three bracing types, a concrete shear wall system,  To analyse the effect of positioning of bracing
steel X-bracing system and a combination of both shear wall and
X-bracing for lower and upper half of the structure are used. objects.
These bracings are placed around the building with six different  To predict an approximate cost estimate of materials
placement combinations, such as, bracing provided for lifts and of the buildings considered for selecting optimum
corners of the building, etc., These buildings are analysed using
price to performance ratio of the structures.
ETABS software and the deflections for all the building shapes,
floor, bracings and load combinations are recorded and plotted
in graphs to compare and determine which combination is III. METHODOLOGY
efficient against deflections for the given loads. A deflection for
rectangular building is lesser than square building along shorter The study of deflection analysis for this paper was developed
base dimension and is higher along longer base side. using a determinist methodology, with some probabilistic
elements in its conception. In order to facilitate this study, it
Keywords – Deflection analysis, Plan irregularities, Bracing was divided in four phases of analyses,
systems, Shear wall, X-Bracing, High rise buildings.
1. Analysing the effect of plan shape of the structure,
I. INTRODUCTION
i.e., square, plus, rectangle and T plans.

A building is a structure with a roof and walls standing

more or less permanently in one place, like a house or
manufacturing plant. They are additionally classified based on
height of the structure as Skyscrapers / High rise buildings
(over 66m or 217ft), Supertall (over 300m or 984ft) and
Megatall buildings (over 600m or 1969ft).
Several studies are done for deflection analysis using different
methods and software. Some include determining shape
effects using gust factor approach [9], SAP2000 software [4],
STAAD pro [8]. The effects of bracing systems such as shear
walls and steel bracings are analyzed in some papers such as
analyzing effect of different types of steel bracings [6], effects
of shear wall [7], effect of shear wall and bracings individually
[10]
. Several other studies can also be done such as studying Fig 1 Plan irregularities considered

www.ijltemas.in Page 35
 International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)
Volume V, Issue XI, November 2016 | ISSN 2278-2540

2. Analysing the effect of different types of bracing  Effect of plan irregularities on wind load (G+20):
systems, i.e., concrete shear wall, steel X-Bracing, a
combination bracing of X-bracing and shear wall in a 0.9DL+1.5WL-X - Normal walls
50:50 floor ratio. 150

100

50

Fig 1 Types of bracings considered Square Rectangle Plus T

3. Analysing the effect of bracing placements, i.e.,

normal walled (NW), shear walls at lift position Fig 4 Effect of plan irregularities on wind load (G+20)
(SL), shear walls at outer corners of the edges (SPE),
shear walls at lift and outer corners of the edges  Effect of plan irregularities on wind load (G+30):
(SPEL), shear walls centres of the edges (SPC), shear
walls at lift and centres of the edges (SPCL), shear 0.9DL+1.5WL-X - Normal walls
walls at inner corners of the edges (SPIL), shear 400
walls at lift and inner corners of the edges (SPIL)
300
200
100
0
Roof
S29
S27
S25
S23
S21
S19
S17
S15
S13
S11
S9
S7
S5
S3
S1
Square Rec Plus T

Fig 2 Effect of plan irregularities on wind load (G+30)

 Effect of plan irregularities on seismic load (G+30):

Fig 3 SPCL placement

4. Determining the average estimate of the structure. 0.9DL+1.5EQ-X - Normal walls

5. Combining all those results to find out the optimum 150
structure with bracing placements.

IV. STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES 100

• Columns: 1.2m x 0.3m 50

• Edge columns: 0.3m x 0.3m
• Beams: 0.3m x 0.6m 0
• Slab: 150mm
Roof

S11
S29
S27
S25
S23
S21
S19
S17
S15
S13

S9
S7
S5
S3
S1

• Span: 4m
• Floor height: 3.5m Square Rec Plus T
• Concrete: M30
Fig 5 Effect of plan irregularities on seismic load (G+30)
V. RESULTS
The following results were obtained when analysing the  Effect of bracings on wind load (G+20):
structures in ETABS.

www.ijltemas.in Page 36
 International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)
Volume V, Issue XI, November 2016 | ISSN 2278-2540

Table 1
Bracing comparision (Square % change in deflections for 0.9DL+1.5WL
40 0.9DL+1.5WL) Plan shape Shear X- Combination
S.No
30 (0.9DL+1.5WL) wall Bracing bracing
1 Square 56.5 40 55.3
20 2 Rectangle 72.5 58.6 71.6
3 Plus 72.8 57.7 72
10 4 T 73.5 61 72.8

0
Table 2
% change in deflections for 0.9DL+1.5EQ

NW SPCL XPCL CPCL Plan shape Shear X- Combination

S.No
(0.9DL+1.5EQ) wall Bracing bracing
Fig 6 Effect of bracings on wind load (G+20) 1 Square 19.8 17.3 20.4
2 Rectangle 24.9 25.4 25.6
3 Plus 29.2 27 29.5
 Effect of bracing placements on wind load (G+20): 4 T 30.6 28.2 30.9

0.9DL+1.5WL-X (Square Shear  Material cost estimate

40 walls) Table 3
Square Plan cost estimate
30

20 Price per sq.mtr (in INR)

Square
Shear wall Bracing Combination
10
1600sq.m*21floors=33600 sq.m
0
NW ₹ 5,711 ₹ 5,711 ₹ 5,711

NW SPE SPEL SL ₹ 6,173 ₹ 5,932 ₹ 6,052

SPC SPCL SL SPE ₹ 6,042 ₹ 5,932 ₹ 5,987

Fig 7 Effect of bracing placement on wind load (G+20) SPEL ₹ 6,503 ₹ 6,155 ₹ 6,329
SPC ₹ 6,042 ₹ 5,932 ₹ 5,987
SPCL ₹ 6,503 ₹ 6,155 ₹ 6,329
 Effect of bracing placements on seismic load (G+30)
Table 4
0.9DL+1.5EQ-Y (Plus Shear Rectangle Plan cost estimate
150 walls)
Price per sq.mtr (in INR)
Rectangle
100 Shear wall Bracing Combination
640sq.m*21floors=13440 sq.m

50 NW ₹ 5,990 ₹ 5,990 ₹ 5,990

SL ₹ 7,150 ₹ 6,548 ₹ 6,849
0 SPE ₹ 6,823 ₹ 6,548 ₹ 6,685
Roof
S29
S27
S25
S23
S21
S19
S17
S15
S13
S11
S9
S7
S5
S3
S1

SPEL ₹ 7,961 ₹ 7,031 ₹ 7,496

NW SPI SPIL SPE
SPC ₹ 6,823 ₹ 6,548 ₹ 6,685
SPEL SPC SPCL SL SPCL ₹ 7,961 ₹ 7,031 ₹ 7,496
Fig 8 Effect of bracing placements on seismic load (G+30)

 % change in deflections for 0.9DL+1.5WL &

0.9DL+1.5EQ

www.ijltemas.in Page 37
 International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)
Volume V, Issue XI, November 2016 | ISSN 2278-2540

Table 5  Deflections for rectangular building is lesser than

Plus Plan cost estimate square building along shorter base dimension and is
higher along longer base side.
Price per sq.mtr (in INR)
Plus  Shear walls are proved to have best resistance to
Shear wall Bracing Combination
lateral loads whereas X-bracings with least resistance;
960sq.m*21floors=20160 sq.m while combination bracing is on par with shear wall
NW ₹ 6,260 ₹ 6,260 ₹ 6,260 bracing system.
SL ₹ 7,029 ₹ 6,627 ₹ 6,828
REFERENCES
SPE ₹ 7,361 ₹ 6,994 ₹ 7,178
SPEL ₹ 8,135 ₹ 7,738 ₹ 7,937 [1]. IS code books:
[2]. IS 875 - part 1: Dead Loads
SPC ₹ 6,811 ₹ 6,627 ₹ 6,719 [3]. IS 875 – Part 2: Live Loads
SPCL ₹ 7,579 ₹ 6,994 ₹ 7,287 [4]. IS 875 – Part 3: Wind Loads
[5]. IS 875 – Part 5: Load Combinations
SPI ₹ 6,811 ₹ 6,627 ₹ 6,719 [6]. IS 1893 -2002: Earthquake Loadings
SPIL [7]. https://www.csiamerica.com/products/etabs/watch-and-learn- ETABS
₹ 7,579 ₹ 6,994 ₹ 7,287
help guide
[8]. Structural dynamics by A.K.Chopra
[9]. “Influence of Plan Irregularity of Buildings” by Raúl González
Table 6 Herrera and Consuelo Gómez Soberón in “The 14th World Conference
T Plan cost estimate on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China.”
[10]. “Characteristics of wind forces and responses of rectangular tall
Price per sq.mtr (in INR) building” by J. A. Amin • A. K. Ahuja in “Int J AdvStructEng
T
Shear wall Bracing Combination (2014)” with open access in springerlink.com
[11]. “Stability Analysis of Rigid Steel Frames with and Without Bracing
960sq.m*21floors=20160 sq.m Systems under the Effect of Seismic and Wind Loads” by Hussain
NW ₹ 6,260 ₹ 6,260 ₹ 6,260 Imran K.M, Mrs.Sowjanya G.V in “International Journal of Civil and
Structural Engineering Research – Vol-1, issue-2, april-2014”
SL ₹ 7,029 ₹ 6,627 ₹ 6,828 [12]. “Wind Behaviour of Buildings with and without Shear Wall” by Alfa
SPE ₹ 7,639 ₹ 6,811 ₹ 7,225 Rasikan, M G Rajendran in “International Journal of Engineering
Research and Applications - Vol. 3, Issue 2, March -April 2013”
SPEL ₹ 8,408 ₹ 7,183 ₹ 7,795
[13]. “Effect of Shape and Plan Configuration on Seismic Response of
SPC ₹ 7,088 ₹ 6,811 ₹ 6,949 Structure” by Milind V. Mohod in “International Journal of Scientific
& Technology Research Volume 4, Issue 09, September 2015”
SPCL ₹ 7,857 ₹ 7,183 ₹ 7,520
[14]. “Effects of Shape on Wind Forces of High Rise Buildings Using Gust
SPI ₹ 6,533 ₹ 5,724 ₹ 6,128 Factor Approach” by Prof. M. R. Wakchaure, SayaliGawali in
“International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology
SPIL ₹ 7,857 ₹ 7,366 ₹ 7,612
Research (IJSETR), Volume 4, Issue 8, August 2015”
[15]. “Seismic Evaluation with Shear Walls and Braces for Buildings” by
S. K. Madan, R. S. Malik, V. K. in “World Academy of Science,
VI. CONCLUSIONS Engineering and Technology International Journal of Civil,
 Of all the plan irregularities considered, the increasing Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural
Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015”
order of deflections is given by Square < Plus <
[16]. “Analysis of Wind & Earthquake Load For Different Shapes of High
Rectangle < T Rise Building” by AnupamRajmani, Prof PriyabrataGuha in
 Of all the three combinations used, the deflection “International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET),
increased in the order of Shear wall< Combination < Volume 6, Issue 2, February (2015),”
[17]. “Performance Based Seismic Design of R.C.C. Buildings with plan
X-bracings
Irregularities” by Vishwajit. V. Karkhanis&Dr. Y. M. Ghugal in
 The increase in deflections for different placement “Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR), Vol-2, Issue-7,
conditions are given by 2016“
SPCL<SPIL<SPEL<SL<SPC<SPI<SPE<NW

www.ijltemas.in Page 38