LATERAL LOAD DISTRIBUTION IN FRAME STRUCTURES

1*
MD.HASIBUL HASAN RAHAT, 2 MD. TANVIRUL HAKIM, 2MD.AMINUZZAMAN
MADANI,2FAHIM RIDWAN NABIL
3
DR. S. REZA CHOWDHURY

1
Lecturer Department of Architecture, Bangladesh University, Dhaka-1207 ,2Department of Civil Engineering, Ahsanullah
University of Science and Technology,Dhaka 1208.
3
Head of the Department, Department of Civil Engineering, Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology,Dhaka 1208.

Email: [email protected],[email protected],2 [email protected] , 2

[email protected],3 [email protected]

Abstract: This analysis aims to the lateral load analysis in frame structures with regular and vertical
irregularity. This study includes the modelling of regular and vertical irregular buildings having area of 45X70
ft2 and height of 66ft, 86ft and 106ft from ground having storey of 6, 8 and 10. The performance of these framed
buildings under lateral loads depend on the distribution of stiffness, strength, and mass in both the horizontal
and vertical planes of the buildings. The main aim of this work is comparative study of the stiffness of the
structure by considering the three models in Regular Structure and three models in Vertical irregular structure
with 6 storeys, 8 storeys and 10 storeys. All models are analyzed with earthquake and wind loadings for the
Zone II. Result found from the ETABS analysis that in irregular shaped building displacements are more than
that of regular shaped building. All building frames are modelled & analyzed in software ETABS 9.6.0. Various
seismic and wind responses like base shear, Bending moment, node displacement, etc. are obtained. The overall
performance of regular building is found better than irregular building. But circumstances sometimes may not
allow the use of regular buildings. In such cases the irregular components should be thoroughly analyzed and
designed.

Index Terms: Frame Structure, Vertical Regularity, Vertical Irregularity, High Rise RCC Building, Soft Storey.

I. INTRODUCTION  To study the displacement of irregular

buildings at top and irregular floor level and
Experience in the past storm and earthquake has compare with the regular structure.
shown that the buildings with simple and uniform "The Present work is focused on the study of
configurations are subjected to less damage. A seismic and wind demand of different
building with discontinuity is subjected to regular and irregular RC buildings. The
concentration of forces and deformations at the point configuration involves vertical irregularities.
of discontinuity which may leads to the failure of The performance is studied in terms of axial
members at the junction and collapse of building. The load, base shear, lateral displacements, and
analysis procedure quantifying the lateral forces and bending moment in Static analysis in
its demand depending on the importance and cost, the ETABS 9.6.0. Also in this study an attempt
method of analyzing the structure varies from linear is made to identify the performance levels.
to nonlinear. The behavior of a building during an The entire modeling, analysis and design is
earthquake or storm depends on several factors, carried out by using ETABS 9.6.0."
stiffness, and adequate lateral strength, and ductility,  Regular and Vertical Irregular Shaped
simple and regular configurations. The buildings with Building are considered for study.
regular geometry and uniformly distributed mass and  Only Vertical Irregularity is considered in
stiffness in plan as well as in elevation suffer much this study
less damage compared to irregular configurations.  Zone II is taken for study
But nowadays need and demand of the latest
generation and growing population has made the
architects or engineers inevitable towards planning of II. LITERATURE REVIEW
irregular configurations.
Islam (2005) carried out a research for seismic loss
The Objective of the study: estimation for Syhlet city. Objective of the study was
 To compare different parameters between improving our understanding of seismic risk and
regular and irregular structures. supporting enforcement of seismic provisions of
 To compare the behaviour of a regular building codes.
building and vertical irregular buildings.

1
S.Sabri (2002) carried out a relationship between displacement determined from the peak deformation
earthquake intensity and attenuation for Bangladesh of the nth-mode elastic SDF system. Combining these
and its surrounding area. The objective of this study peak modal responses by modal combination rule
was to find out re-estimate the earthquake intensity of leads to the MPA procedure. Thus the trend of
major historical earthquake of Bangladesh on EMS comparing computed hinge plastic rotations against
and develop a relationship between intensity - rotation limits established in FEMA-273 to judge
attenuation for Bangladesh and its surrounding area. structural performance should be replaced and
Performance evaluation should be based on story
drifts known to be closely related to damage and can
Sharfuddin (2004) conducted research work on
be estimated to a higher degree of accuracy by
Earthquake hazards analysis for Bangladesh. The
pushover analyses."
objective of the research work was to develop a
homogeneous and complete earthquake catalogue and
seismic hazard map. FEMA-368 (2009) define criteria for the design and
construction of new buildings, additions and
alterations to existing buildings to enable them to
Mohammad Yeasin (2008) conducted a research
resist the effects of earthquake ground motions. These
work on seismic performance assessments for
provisions provide minimum seismic design criteria
concrete frame structure. The objectives of the
of safety for structures by minimizing the earthquake
research were to develop a probabilistic hazard curve
related risk to life and improve the capability of
and make a contour map of PGA for Bangladesh. existing structures to function during and after design
earthquakes. Whereas, FEMA-369 (2001) provides
Rahman (2011) conducted a comparative study on general requirements, background information, and
construction cost for the same structural system in explanations for applying the analysis and design
three seismic zones in Bangladesh, considering criteria in the Provisions of FEMA-368.
different height with different response modification
coefficient.
Hasan (2012) presented a simple computer-based
push-over analysis technique for performance-based
"Habibullah and Pyle (2002) presented simple steps design of building frameworks subject to earthquake
for performing pushover analysis using SAP2000 loading. The technique was based on the conventional
software. The SAP2000 static pushover analysis displacement method of elastic analysis. Through the
capabilities, which are fully integrated into the use of a plasticity-factor that measured the degree of
program, allow quick and easy implementation of the plastification, the standard elastic and geometric
pushover procedures prescribed in the ATC-40 and stiffness matrices for frame elements (beams,
FEMA-273 documents for both two and three- columns, etc.) were progressively modified to
dimensional buildings. account for nonlinear elastic-plastic behavior under
constant gravity loads and incrementally increasing
lateral loads. The method accounted for first-order
Moghadam and Tso (2004) extended pushover elastic and second order geometric stiffness
analysis to cover plan eccentric buildings and took properties, and the influence that combined stresses
the three-dimensional torsional effect into account. have on plastic behavior.
Because of torsional deformation, floor displacements
of the building will consist of both translational and
rotational components. Torsional effect can be After designing and detailing the reinforced concrete
particularly damaging to elements located at or near frame structures, Korkmaz (2014) carried out a
the flexible edge of the building where the nonlinear pushover analysis and nonlinear dynamic
translational and rotational components of the floor time history analysis for evaluating the structural
displacement are additive. In view of the damage seismic response for the acceptance of load
observed in many eccentric buildings in past distribution for inelastic behavior. It was assumed for
earthquakes. pushover analysis that seismic demands at the target
displacement are approximately maximum seismic
demands during the earthquake. First yielding and
Chopra (2008) stated in a PEER report that the shear failure of the columns was experienced at the
standard response spectrum analysis (RSA) for elastic larger story displacements and rectangular
buildings is reformulated as a Modal Pushover distribution always give the higher base shear weight
Analysis (MPA). The peak response of the elastic ratio compared to other load distributions for the
structure due to its nth vibration mode can be exactly corresponding story displacement. The pushover
determined by pushover analysis of the structure analyses results for rectangular load distribution
subjected to lateral forces distributed over the height estimated maximum seismic demands during the
of the building. The structure is pushed to the roof
given earthquakes were more reasonable than the load response of irregular buildings using ETABS
other load distributions. 9.6.0. The knowledge of various types of loads and
their worst combinations to which a structure may be
subjected during its life span is essential for safe
Menjivar and Pinho (2014) extended the pushover
design of structure. Forces acting on structures are
method to assess the performance of 3D irregular RC
called loads. Primary loads acting on the building
structures. The issues of diaphragm effects, loading
have been considered as dead load, live load and
profiles and incremental dynamic analysis were earthquake load. The dead load and live load has been
studied. The modeling based on Displacement Based applied in gravity direction and earthquake load has
and Force Based Pushover was compared.
been applied in lateral direction. Residential buildings
Conventional verses Adaptive Pushover results have
of 6 storey, 8 storey & 10 storey both regular and
been compared and werefound to be close.
irregular having base dimension of plan 70ft X 45ft
with typical floor height 10ft is considered for the
analysis. These buildings were designed in
compliance to the Bangladesh National Building
Code for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings. The
buildings are assumed to be fixed at the base. The
sections of the structure are square and rectangular
and storey heights buildings are assumed to be
constant including the ground storey. The buildings
are modelled using ETABS v 9.6.0 software and six
different models with regular and irregularities were
studied. The typical plans are shown in figure
Fig 2.1: Plan Irregularities (BNBC 1993) respectively.

Fig 2.2: Plan Irregularities (BNBC 1993)

Fig. 3.1: Plan view of regular buildings (Top)

Fig 2.3: Vertical Irregularities (BNBC 1993)

III. METHODOLOGY

The present study is concerned with analyzing lateral

load behavior of regular and irregular buildings. In
such buildings percentage of irregularity and shape of
buildings with same plan area of same heights in
same storey are usually observed. In the present study
Equivalent static method is used to study the lateral
Fig 3.2: Plan view of irregular buildings (Top)
Table 3.1: Column Dimensions
Column Sections Dimension(in)

C1 15X12

C2 18X12

C3 15X15

C4 18X15

Table 3.2: Beam Dimensions

Beam Sections Dimension(in)

FB1 15X12

Fig 3.3 : Elevation View, 6 Storey Regular Building FB2 18X12

FB3 12X10

GB1 18X12

GB2 20X15

The modulus of elasticity of reinforced concrete is

given by,

Ec= 57000fck0.5

For the steel rebar, the necessary information is yield

stress, modulus of elasticity and ultimate strength.
High strength bar is widely used in design and
adopted for present study

Table 3.3: Applied Loading on the Structures.

Types of loads Value Unit

Fig 3.4 : Elevation View, 6 Storey Irregular Building
Floor Finish 5.57 psf
(Super Dead)
There is no change in Elevation plan in 8 & 10 Partition Wall As per plan psf
storied regular & irregular shaped Building.
Live Load 42 psf
Beams and columns were modeled as frame elements. Wind Load As per BNBC
The elements represent the strength, stiffness and Earth Loading As per UBC 94
deformation capacity of the members. While
modeling the beams and columns, the properties to be
The applied loads on the structure are given in the
assigned are cross sectional dimensions,
table 3. Dimensions of Beams & Columns are same
reinforcement details and the type of material used
in all models.
 IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION regular buildings are better in performance in terms
of axial force.
The model analysis is done by comparing various
parameters to determine the better possibility. 4.2 Shear Force of Base Column for Different
Storied Buildings
Analysis and design has been carried out for regular No of Storied
and vertical irregular buildings of 6, 8 & 10 storeys.
The main analysis element was internal frames base Shear Force (Kip)
column and the column two storeys beneath the top Building
levels. Data was acquired for Axial Force, Shear
Force, Displacement, Bending Moment and Drifts. Regular Irregular

After analysis comparison was done to determine 6 Storied 29.38 29.6

which gives the better performance.

8 Storied 40..02 40.12

4.1 Axial Force of Base Column for Different
Storied Buildings
10 Storied 51.88 51.95
No of Storied
Axial Force (Kip)
Building Regular Irregular
Regular Irregular
60
50 51.88 51.95
6 Storied 193.55 237.44
40 40.02 40.12
FORCE(KIP)

30 29.38 29.6
8 Storied 253.38 285.72 20
10
0
10 Storied 308.58 331.57
4 6 8 10 12
STOREYED BUILDING

Fig. 4.2: Shear Force (Kip) of base column with

Regular Irregular different storied buildings

350 331.57 From figure 4.2 it is understood that shear force of

300 308.58 column increases with no of storey for both regular
285.72
250 253.38 and irregular building. But shear force of irregular
FORCE(KIP)

237.44
200 193.55 buildings is more than that of regular buildings. So
150 regular buildings are better in performance in terms
100 of shear force.
50
0 4.3 Bending Moment of Base Column for Different
4 6 8 10 12 Storied Buildings
STOREYED BUILDING
No of Storied Bending Moment
Fig. 4.1: Axial Force (Kip) of base column with (Kip-in)
different storied buildings
Building
From figure 4.1 it is understood that axial force of Regular Irregular
column increases with no of storey for both regular
and irregular building. But axial force of irregular
buildings are more than that of regular buildings. So 6 Storied 1686.94 1697.51
 Regular Irregular
8 Storied 2305.2 2309.25
30 24.4
22.61
20.86

FORCE(KIP)
10 Storied 2995.05 2998.43 20
18.04 19.41
10 16.79

0
Regular Irregular
4 6 8 10 12
4000 STOREYED BUILDING
MOMENT(KIP-IN)

3000 2998.43 2995.05

2309.25 2305.2
2000
1697.51 1686.94 Fig 4.4: Shear Force (Kip) of column two storeys
1000
below the top level with different storied buildings.
0
4 6 8 10 12 From the comparison of graphical figure 4.4 it is seen
STOREYED BUILDING
that regular buildings generate less shear force than
that of irregular buildings.

4.5 Bending Moment of Column Two Storeys

Fig 4.3: Bending Moment (Kip-in) of base column
Below The Top Level for Different Storied
with different storied buildings
Buildings
From figure 4.3 it is understood that bending moment No of Storied Bending Moment
of column increases with no of storey for both regular
(Kip-in)
and irregular building. But bending moment of
irregular buildings are more than that of regular Building
buildings. So regular buildings are better in Regular Irregular
performance in terms of bending moment.

4.4 Shear Force of Column Two Storeys Below 6 Storied 960.61 1121.69
The Top Level for Different Storied Buildings
No of Storied 8 Storied 1028.28 1213.37
Shear Force (Kip) 10 Storied 1104.78 1308.67
Building
Regular Irregular
Regular Irregular
1500
MOMENT(KIP-IN)

1308.67
1213.37
1121.69
6 Storied 16.79 20.86 1000
1028.28 1104.78
960.61
500
8 Storied 18.04 22.61
0
4 6 8 10 12
10 Storied 19.41 24.4
STOREYED BUILDING

Fig 4.5: Bending Moment (Kip-in) of column two

storeys below the top level with different storied
buildings

From comparison of figure 4.5 with regular and

irregular buildings it is observed that regular
buildings generate less moment than that of irregular
ones. So the performance of regular buildings can be
considered better than irregular buildings.
4.6 Displacement vs. Storied Building
DISPLACEMENT-Y VS
STOREYED BUILDING
Displacement-x Top displacement(in)
TOP DISPLACEMENT
Regular Irregular

6
Floor Regular Irregular

DISPLACEMENT(IN)
4.84 4.7
4
3.11 2.97
2 1.84 1.71
6 Storied 2.19 2.34
0
4 6 8 10 12
STOREYED BUILDING
8 Storied 3.99 4.16

Figure 4.7: Displacement-x (in) vs. Storied

10 Storied 6.56 6.74 Building
From the comparison of displacements of figure 4.6
and figure 4.7 it is observed that displacement is less
in regular structures. So regular structure performs
Regular Irregular better than irregular ones in terms of displacement.
8
7 6.74 6.56
DISPLACEMENT(IN)

6 V. CONCLUSIONS
5
4 4.16 3.99 This analysis aims to the lateral load analysis in
3 frame structures with regular and vertical irregularity.
2.34 2.19 This study includes the modelling of regular and
2
vertical irregular buildings having area of 45X70 ft 2
1 and height of 66ft, 86ft and 106ft from ground having
0 storey of 6, 8 and 10. The performance of these
4 6 8 10 12 framed buildings under lateral loads depend on the
STOREYED BUILDING distribution of stiffness, strength, and mass in both
the horizontal and vertical planes of the buildings.
The main aim of this work is comparative study of
Figure 4.6: Displacement-x (in) vs. Storied the stiffness of the structure by considering the three
Building models in Regular Structure and three models in
Vertical irregular structure with 6 storeys, 8 storeys
and 10 storeys. All models are analyzed with
Displacement-y Top displacement(in) earthquake and wind loadings for the Zone II .Result
found from the ETABS analysis that in irregular
shaped building displacements are more than that of
Floor Regular Irregular regular shaped building. All building frames are
modelled & analyzed in software ETABS 9.6.0.
Various seismic and wind responses like base shear,
6 Storied 1.71 1.84 Bending moment, node displacement, etc. are
obtained. The overall performance of regular building
is found better than irregular building.
8 Storied 2.97 3.11

By virtue of observation and examinations carried out

10 Storied 4.7 4.84 during the study, it is estimated that irregular
buildings exhibit a poor performance to resist any
type of lateral load.
 1. In terms of axial force regular buildings  [2]. Sarfuddin (2001), “ Earthquake intensity
generate lesser axial force hence it is better attenuation relationship for Bangladesh and
than irregular ones. its s.
2. The shear force of the irregular buildings is  [3]. Haque, S. (2007) “ Behaviour of multi-
greater than that of regular buildings. storied RC framed buildings with open
3. It has been observed that the deflection of ground floor under seismic loading.” Post
regular buildings are lower than irregular graduate thesis, Department of Civil
buildings. Engineering, BUET.
4. Moment is generated less in regular  [4]. “Bangladesh National Building Code”,
buildings. 1st Edition, City Art Press, Dhaka,
5. Lack of member in irregular buildings Bangladesh, 1993.
causes more load transfer in existing  [5]. Bolt, B.A. (1987) “Sites specifies study
members. of seismic intensity and ground motion
6. When subjected to wind loads regular parameters for proposed jamuna river
buildings perform better than irregular bridge, Bangladesh” Report submitted to
buildings. Jamuna Bridge Authority, Bangladesh.
 [6]. Nilson, Arthur.H, David and Charls
So it can be concluded that when subjected to W.Dolan (2003), “ Design of Concrete
lateral loads regular buildings perform better structure”, Thirteen Edition, McGraw-Hill
than irregular buildings. Companies, Inc, 1221 Avenue of the
Americas, New York,Ny 10020
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS  [7]. FEMA 356, (2000), Pre-standard and
Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation
The following recommendations are suggested for of Buildings, American Society of Civil
future researches which were not covered in the Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
present study  [8]. Oldham, R.D. (1899), Report of the
great Indian earthquake of 12th June, 1987,
The volume of work undertaken in this study is Memoir of Geological Survey of Indian
limited to comparison of seismic response parameters  [9]. Nasim,K.(2013) “ The seismic
in a building with regular and irregular configuration. performance of RC frames by pushover and
time history analysis.” Post graduate thesis,
Department of Civil Engineering, BUET.
 It can be improved also by using linear and
 [10]. Sharif, M. U, (2005) “ The seismic
non-linear analysis and by using
hazards and seismic risk for Dhaka city.”
performance level evaluation by pushover
Post graduate thesis, Department of Civil
analysis.
Engineering, BUET.
 The study could be extended by including
 [11]. Jubair, M. (2006) “GIS based seismic
various other parameters such as torsional
assessment: A case study on Rajshahi city.”
effects, soft storey effects in a building.
Post graduate thesis, Department of Civil
 Nonlinear dynamic analyses can be carried
Engineering, BUET.
out for further study for better and realistic
 [12]. Hossain, K.M (1989), Seismicity and
evaluation of structural response under
Tectonics of Bangladesh”, Department of
seismic forces varying on irregular locations.
Geology Dhaka University, Dhaka-1000,
Bangladesh
Future Scope  [13]. Ahmad, T, (2014) “Randomlyin filled
 Study of shear walls along with irregularity. of RC frames with soft ground subjected to
 Study of braced frame along with seismic loading.” Post graduate thesis,
irregularity. Department of Civil Engineering, BUET.
 Dynamic study of regular and irregular  [14]. Mahmud,Y. (2010) “ The seismic
buildings performance assessment for RC structures
 under different seismic zones in
Bangladesh.” Post graduate thesis,
VII. REFERENCES Department of Civil Engineering, BUET

 [1]. Islam, R. (2005) “ Seismic loss

estimation for Sylhet city.” Post graduate
thesis, Department of Civil Engineering,
BUET.