ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

Study on seismic analysis of high-rise building by

using software
Seismic Analysis in software of STAAD pro v8i (Ground +3 Basements + 50 storeys)
1
Bhalchandra p. Alone, 2Dr. Ganesh Awchat

1
M. Tech (Structural Engineering)Scholar, 2PhD, Associated professor ,
Department of Civil engineering,
Guru Nanak Institutes Of Engineering & Management, Kalmeshwar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 441501 India

ABSTRACT: This paper addresses the Case study on seismic analysis of high rise building system (Ground+
3Basements+50) storey RCC by STAAD pro v8i with application of Indian standard provisions. One of the most
frightening and destructive phenomena of a nature is a severe earthquake and it terrible after effect. It is highly
impossible to prevent an earth quake from occurring, but the damage to the buildings can be controlled through proper
design and detailing. Hence it is mandatory to do the seismic analysis and design to structures against collapse. Designing
a structure in such a way that reducing damage during an earthquake makes the structure quite uneconomical, as the
earth quake might or might not occur in its life time and is a rare phenomenon. This study mainly on to understanding the
results from STAAD Pro v8i software under gravity loads provision made in IS 456:2000, Results shall satisfy the general
criteria from being a failure after analysis Results to improve The accuracy as per IS code 1893 : 2002.

I INTRODUCTION

High-rise buildings are constructed everywhere in the world. The height and Size of high-rise buildings gets larger and larger. The
structural design of high-rise buildings depends on dynamic analysis for winds and earthquakes. Since today performance of
computer progresses remarkably, almost structural designers use the software of computer for the structural design of high-rise
buildings. Hence, after that the structural plane and outline of high-rise buildings are determined, the structural design of high-rise
buildings which checks structural safety for the individual structural members is not necessary outstanding structural ability by
the use of structural software on the market. However, it is not exaggeration to say that the performance of high-rise buildings is
almost determined in the preliminary design stages which work on multifaceted examinations of the structural form and outline.

Traditionally, seismic design approaches are stated, as the structure should be able to ensure the minor and frequent shaking
intensity without sustaining any damage, thus leaving the structure serviceable after the event. The structure should withstand
moderate level of earthquake ground motion without structural damage, but possibly with some structural as well as non-
structural damage. This limit state may correspond to earthquake intensity equal to the strongest either experienced or forecast at
the site. In present study the effect of bare frame, brace frame and shear wall frame is studied under the earthquake loading. The
results are studied for response spectrum method. The main parameters considered in this study to compare the seismic
performance of different models are storey drift, base shear, story deflection and time period.

II OBJECTIVE OF THE WORK

 The main objective of high rise structure:

 To analyze the building as per code IS 1893-2002 part I criteria for earthquake resistant structure.
 Dynamic analysis of the building using response spectrum method.
 Building with different lateral stiffness systems.
 To get economical and efficient lateral stiffness system.
 To control the future population.
 To deal with energy and environmental challenges.
 Development of a city.

III SCOPE OF THE WORK

 Recently there has been a considerable increase in the number of tall buildings, both residential and commercial, and the
modern trend is towards taller structures. Thus the effects of lateral loads like winds loads, earthquake forces are
attaining increasing importance and almost every designer is faced with the problem of providing adequate strength and
stability against lateral loads. For this reason to estimate wind load and earthquake loading on high-rise building design.

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 123
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

 Considering the ever increasing population as well as limited space, horizontal expansion is no more a viable solution
especially in metropolitan cities. There is enough technology to build super-tall buildings today, but in India we are yet
to catch up with the technology which is already established in other parts of the world.
 Many times, wind engineering is being misunderstood as wind energy in India. On the other hand, wind engineering is
unique part of engineering where the impact of wind on structures and its environment being studied. More specifically
related to buildings, wind loads on claddings are required for the selection of the cladding systems and wind loads on the
structural frames are required for the design of beams, columns, lateral bracing and foundations. Wind in general
governs the design

III METHODOLOGY

A. Framing of plan:- Plan that will require in order to analyse the respective structure as for understanding the result
properly as height goes above further practices create complications for that proper biferfication is necessary with proper
practices

KEY PLAN MODEL

LONG WALLS SKELETAL STRUCTURE

B. Input loading:-

Dead load and live loads (AS PER IS 875 PART II , IS 1893:2002)

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 124
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

Load description value/units

Superimposed load on each floor

 Live load 2 KN /M2

 230 mm thickness external wall 13.12KN/M
 115 mm thickness internal wall 6.6 KN/M
Additional service load over
roof top
 Water proofing load 3 KN /M2
 Live load 2 KN/M2
 Service load 5 KN/M2

Material properties

Concrete: - M40 N/MM2 , Steel:- 500 N/MM2

Concrete density: - 25, KN/ M3: brick work - 22 KN/ M3

Load combination will be as per IS 1893:2002 PART 1

For general RCC purpose will be as per IS 456:2000

Site details

Seismic zone: - 4 (as per IS 1893:2002 fifth revision)

City: - Mumbai, Maharashtra region

Floor height = 3m

Load combinations that been considered As per IS 1893:2002 PART 1

1. 1.5 (DL + LL)

2. 1.2 (DL + LL + EQ X)
3. 1.2 (DL + LL - EQ X)
4. 1.2 (DL + LL + EQ Z)
5. 1.2 (DL + LL - EQ Z)
6. 1.5 (DL - EQ X)
7. 1.5 (DL + EQ X)
8. 1.5 (DL + EQ Z)
9. 1.5 (DL - EQ Z)
10. 0.9 DL + 1.5 EQ X
11. 0.9 DL - 1.5 EQ X
12. 0.9 DL +1.5 EQ Z
13. 0.9 DL -1.5 EQ Z

Reaction will be consider for worse load combination in analysis while designing vertical structural member (column /
shear wall)

C. Calculations:- As per clause 7.8.1 Dynamic analysis shall be performed to obtain the design seismic force, and its
distribution to different levels along the height of the building and to the various lateral load resisting elements, for the
following buildings:

In this study, G+3B+50 storied RC Building has been analyzed using the response spectra method in STAAD-Pro. The plan and
elevation of the building taken for analysis is shown in above images . In the earthquake analysis along with earthquake loads,
vertical loads are also applied. For the earthquake analysis, IS 1893-2002 code was used .The total design seismic base shear (Vb)
along any principal direction shall be determined by multiplying the design horizontal acceleration in the considered direction of
vibration (Ah) and the seismic weight of the building.

The Design base shear

(Vb) = Ah x W [IS 1893(Part I):2002, clause 7.5.3]

Ah = design horizontal acceleration in the considered direction of vibration =

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 125
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

(Z/2) x (I/R) x (Sa /g) [IS 1893(Part I):2002, clause 6.4.2]

W = total seismic value of the building

The design base shear (Vb) computed shall be distributed along the height of the building as per the following expression
(BIS1893: 2000)

[IS 1893(Part I):2002, clause 7.1.1]

Where,
Qi is the design lateral forces at floor i,
Wi is the seismic weights of the floor i, and

Hi is the height of the floor i, measured from base

Design seismic load

The approximate fundamental natural period of vibration (Ta), in seconds, of all other buildings,
Including moment-resisting frame buildings with brick infill panels, may be estimated by empirical expression:

Ta = 0.09 h /√d
[IS 1893(Part I):2002, clause 7.6.2]

Calculating value

In X direction for, Ta (d= 53.09 meter)

Ta = 0.09 x 150 / √53.09 = 1.852 seconds

In Z direction for, Ta (d= 20.65 meter)

Ta = 0.09 x 150 / √20.65 = 2.970 seconds

NOW ,

Zone factor, Z = 0.24 for seismic zone IV

[IS 1893(Part):2002, table 2]

Importance factor, I = 1.0 table 6

Response reduction factor, R = 5.0 (SMRF – special moment resisting frame)

Soil type = medium soil

Damping % ratio = 5 % (assume)

For Sa / g value,

1.36 / Ta(X direction)= 1.36 /1.852 = 0.734 seconds

1.36 / Ta(X direction)= 1.36 /2.970 = 0.457 seconds

Value of Ah from above expression could we get,

Ah = 0.0176 (In x direction) ; Ah = 0.0109 (In z direction)

Therefore,

W = 100 % DL + 25 % LL ......... Seismic weight of building

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 126
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

W = 680245.43 KN

Then,

Vb = Ah x W .......... base shear

Vb = (Z/2) x (I/R) x (Sa /g) x W

= 0.0176 x 680245.43

= 11972.31 KN (x direction)

&

Vb = (Z/2) x (I/R) x (Sa /g) x W

= 0.0109 x 680245.4 = 7414.67 KN (z direction)

IV. Results

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 127
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

Table 1.1 (per story shear)

Storey level In meter peak storey

X Z (KN)
50 135.00 2641.02
49 132.00 3022.15
48 129.00 3384.17
47 126.00 3726.52
46 126.00 4048.79
45 120.00 4350.69
44 117.00 4632.07
43 114.00 4892.92
42 111.00 5133.41
41 108.00 5353.86
40 105.00 555.78
39 102.00 5728.22
38 99.00 5877.05
37 96.00 6008.20
36 93.00 6127.74
35 90.00 6241.24
34 87.00 6342.33
33 84.00 6432.74
32 81.00 6514.33
31 78.00 6589.09
30 75.00 6659.11
29 72.00 6726.52
28 69.00 6793.46
27 66.00 6862.03
26 63.00 6934.25
25 60.00 7011.99
24 57.00 7096.92
23 54.00 7190.49
22 51.00 7293.82
21 48.00 7407.75
20 45.00 7532.77
19 42.00 7669.01
18 39.00 7816.30
17 36.00 7971.29
16 33.00 8124.29
15 30.00 82889.90
14 27.00 8459.73
13 24.00 8631.56
12 21.00 8805.92
11 18.00 8988.71
10 15.00 9204.20
9 12.00 9445.12
8 9.00 9660.52
7 6.00 9848.16
6 3.00 10004.57
5 0.00 10176.66
4 -2.80 10242.28
3 -5.20 10288.33
2 -8.40 10316.23
1 --11.20 10326.39
Base -14.20 10326.45

Calculated frequency for first 6 modes that software just calculated as below

Table 1.2

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 128
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

MODE FREQUENCY(CYCLES/SEC) PERIOD(SEC) ACCURACY

1 0.137 7.31097 1.052E-15
2 0.176 5.67043 4.919E-14
3 0.192 5.20709 7.145E-13
4 0.252 3.96507 9.393E-12
5 0.475 2.10445 9.292E-08
6 0.536 1.86628 3.691E-07

Modal mass participation in % (after the iteration of 300)

MASS PARTICIPATION FACTORS IN PERCENT, BASE SHEAR IN KN (table 1.3)

MODE X Y Z SUMM- SUMM- SUMM- X Y Z

X Y Z
1 19.51 0.00 47.34 20.511 0.001 47.343 2598.31 0.00 2160.26
2 48.24 0.00 23.18 70.747 0.002 70.521 8282.11 0.00 6890.74
3 8.49 0.00 0.14 79.237 0.005 70.656 1587.57 0.00 1319.7
4 0.04 0.00 0.12 79.275 0.005 70.777 9.330 0.00 0.00
5 0.05 0.00 0.16 86.324 0.006 70.940 22.70 0.00 0.00
6 10.28 0.00 2.27 90.606 0.007 73.215 5363.64 0.00 4882.47

As per clause 7.8.2 [IS 1893:2002] the base shear (VB) from response spectrum is less than the base shear (vb) calculated using
empirical formula for fundamental time period multiplying factor are :-

(vb/VB) = 11973 / 5363.64 = 2.23 (X direction)

(vb/VB) = 7414 / 4882.47 = 1.51 (Z direction)

Seismic weight of general model in dynamic equilibrium is as follows

MODAL WEIGHT (MODAL MASS TIMES G) IN KN (table:- 1.4)

MODE X Y Z WEIGHT
1 2.7935557E+04 1.246851E+04 6.955578E+04 3.547164E+04
2 6.906343E+04 1.477191E+00 3.405194E+04 5.662841E+04
3 1.215680E+04 4.435340E+00 1.985320E+02 1.762951E+04
4 5.438716E+01 2.710154E-02 1.776414E+02 7.870725E+03
5 7.024110E+01 1.092947E+00 2.394500E+02 9.778552E+03
6 1.472071E+04 1.458399E+00 3.342232E+03 3.559350E+04

Reactions (for the worse condition):- (Table 1.5)

Node no. Horizontal Vertical Horizontal Moments

Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fz (KN) Mx (KNm) My Mz
(KNm) (KNm)
2281 7.961 12304.34 -3.174 -4.583 -2.508 -109.305
2283 18.714 11577.60 -3.242 -4.649 -1.588 -98.865
2284 21.285 6311.45 7.722 9.179 -2.764 -28.69
2286 -18.622 24123.53 24.408 1627.67 -15.563 29.615
2288 17.532 5060.89 -53.261 -85.78 -1.852 -24.785
2289 -2.354 3538.27 3.953 6.163 2.429 -2.980
2290 -51.462 22469.22 133.69 1915.41 3.366 70.053
2292 -13.191 5296.45 -32.64 -48.644 -5.586 19.151
2293 -52.165 25333.32 156.109 2501.09 -0.206 72.573
2294 0.521 4261.33 5.543 8.340 -1.842 -5.756
2295 -140.58 6585.29 -15.231 -21.05 -6.280 148.623
2296 -67.65 6182.57 -16.105 -22.00 -2.109 60.226
2297 5.349 25926.83 1.203 573.703 -6.520 -19.232
2298 3.860 4250.38 0.227 0.573 -0.402 -10.310

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 129
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

2299 31.793 11349.34 -3.686 -5.101 -2.428 -96.835

2300 -52.947 9602.35 -4.357 -5.791 -3.005 84.220
2301 46.21 5741.500 -8.880 -7.262 5.227 -54.238
2302 25.276 26577.57 90.745 4164.70 12.417 -44.681
2303 -9.666 5417.820 -64.271 -95.598 -0.656 15.188
2304 -1.271 11082 -185.99 -219.350 1.027 -7.317
2305 4.686 5040.667 -0.450 2.526 -2.392 -12.208
2303 -9.666 5417.820 -64.271 -95.598 -0.656 15.188
2304 -1.271 11082.055 -185.992 -219.350 1.027 -7.317
2305 4.686 5040.66 -0.450 2.526 -2.392 -12.208
2306 8.773 24881.416 366.932 6866.805 -20.869 -29.261
2307 -12.859 5441.938 -47.312 -71.086 -7.198 15.667
2308 -17.823 6480.8 -41.063 -56.618 -12.406 9.386
2309 6.187 5261.869 -32.329 -48.198 -5.687 -13.777
2312 -7.919 7457.670 -1.2228 1.046 0.365 8.232
2313 218.138 31122.83 2.910 23.048 3.767 -2363.18
2314 -4.723 7731.80 2.892 5.637 0.596 5.470
2315 16.485 5121.85 3.599 5.817 -0.739 -2363.18
2316 13.255 7076.87 1.871 3.686 0.465 -23.658
2317 5.199 6708.70 0.475 2.277 0.505 -15.893
2318 7.588 5860.554 0.882 2.694 0.196 -21.385
2319 26.433 29246.20 58.826 2028.95 -2.131 -57.028
2322 11.811 7217.38 2.112 4.403 0.771 -20.280
2323 -7.993 7956.861 0.682 2.504 0.608 9.422
2324 -7.110 8202.004 0.223 2.017 2.841 10.32
2325 20.186 5543.79 2.537 4.462 0.240 -33.661
2327 15.851 4913.68 0.538 2.367 -0.095 -29.641

Node no. Horizontal Vertical Horizontal Moments

Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fz (KN) Mx (KNm) My Mz
(KNm) (KNm)
2328 4.736 5334.75 1.682 3.600 -0.160 -17.755
2329 4.639 16874.02 42.218 1022.060 -0.733 -17.955
2330 12.425 16366.23 41.274 1578.47 -4.365 -28.332
2331 19.720 4057.91 1.600 3.518 -0.222 -32.776
2334 -2.849 4099.270 -15.525 -22.001 0.854 -1.538
2335 39.225 20338.994 -495.475 -791.29 -5.276 -2619.76
2336 9.629 5303.35 -15.513 -22.163 4.357 -28.854
2337 4.631 1856.959 -41.292 -63.902 -7.125 -8.509
2336 9.629 5303.35 -15.513 -22.163 4.357 -28.854
2337 4.631 1856.95 -41.292 -63.902 -7.125 -5.509
2339 0.000 92.774 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2340 0.000 92.774 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2341 88.542 6179.854 -124.893 -154.720 3.577 -105.563
2342 189.270 11110.483 -139.06 -163.40 7.797 -188.363
2343 64.331 7536.136 -27.630 -34.262 4.469 -45.606
2344 182.418 10841.271 -14.497 -21.245 20.689 -139.380
2347 9.543 17419.24 40.076 1587.234 3.830 -25.619
2350 -3.796 7190.52 53.098 254.632 3.378 8.239
2352 -564.47 47209.07 1201.091 8586.13 -88.975 695.097
2353 -53.966 4582.868 -32.169 -27.931 2.662 58.236
2356 -60.364 10509.024 41.164 246.077 4.185 94.784
2369 -11.887 2911.958 -17.027 -23.290 2.407 16.277
2370 -13.088 21980.48 -55.613 -82.650 3.727 17.487
2371 119.810 15306.870 -113.327 -178.619 17.730 -1551.12
2372 2.495 1818.812 -52.309 -79.131 6.333 -5.529
V. CONCLUSION:- In our Case study we found that in table no.1.3 due to unsymmetrical of building geometry modes are not
resisting 90 % as its satisfying in X direction successfully after carried out 300 iteration of analysis in such case cut off mode
must be add in it & need to check either stiffness of building shall be increase or not. In table no. 1.4 after carried results of 6

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 130
ISSN: 2455-2631 © August 2017 IJSDR | Volume 2, Issue 8

modes the building seismic weight was found to be as 3.559350 x 104 KN. As we can see from table no. 1.1 the maximum story
shear was found to be at the base as 10326.45 KN.

Another important term clause like 7.8.2 from IS 1893:2002 (PART 1) The multiplying factor of static and dynamic equilibrium
in X & Z direction was found to be vb/VB) = 11973 / 5363.64 = 2.23 (X direction) where as in z direction are , (vb/VB) = 7414 /
4882.47 = 1.51 (Z direction). Meaning of adopting tall building for Response spectra analysis is to study the results by using
staad pro software with provision of IS 1893:2002 (PART 1) successfully and it is studied. Seismic analysis with Response
Spectrum Method with CQC method are used for analysis of a 3Basement + Ground + 50 story RCC high rise building as per IS
1893(Part1):2002.

VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT: - I take this opportunity to express our profound gratitude and deep regards to my guide Dr.
Awchat for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement throughout the course of this project. The blessing,
help and guidance given by him time to time me a long way in the journey of life. I am obliged to Dr. S. N. Shelke, Principal of
our college, for providing opportunity to do project work.

References

[1] IS code 1893 (part 1):2002 for understanding the general parameters that must be followed in seismic analysis purposes.
[2] Handbook on seismic analysis & design of structures [Farzad Neaim]
[3] Analysis & design of tall buildings subjected to wind & earthquake loads [K.Ramaraju]
[4] Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures [Pankaj Agarwal, Manish Shrikhande]
[5] Wikipedia
[6] Staad.pro user manual
[7] Staad.pro tutorials

Authorized Affiliations: - meaning of preparing of this journal to publish with the affiliation of Rashtrasanth Tukdoji
Maharaj Nagpur University, Nagpur for the legal data of self righteous information which is made for in discipline of
college project guide and Author of this paper.

1
Bhalchandra p. Alone, 2Dr. Ganesh Awchat

1
M. Tech (Structural Engineering) Scholar, 2PhD, Associated professor, Department of Civil engineering, Guru Nanak Institutes
Of Engineering & Management, Kalmeshwar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 441501 India

IJSDR1708018 International Journal of Scientific Development and Research (IJSDR) www.ijsdr.org 131