Performance Point Determination Criteria of Multi-Storeyed Building with Highest Importance Factor

Abstract

Every construction needs various parameters to model it and the most important thing need to assign is how much safe it is under different loading conditions. Due to increase in population, construction in India plays a very important role under the guidance umbrella of Indian Standards with the major safety for human beings. The structure should be strong enough that each element should be economic and strong. To check the structure with more live load present in it, highest importance factor should be selected for the same. In this project a G+18 Storey structure has analysed using shear walls at corners and total seven structural models have been created abbreviated as OSWA1 to OSWA7. Case OSWA5 fails in structural components, hence after modifications Case OSWA5a created. The project concluded that the performance point obtained is 35% with OSWA6 and obtained as efficient Case and will be recommended to reduce the overall cost of the project with highest importance factor taken as 1.5 as per Indian Standards.

Introduction

I. INTRODUCTION

The shear wall will devour shear forces and prevents the location-position of construction from changing and consequently destruction. But one thing must be given importance that the shear wall arrangement must be supremely accurate, if not the resultant will give a negative effect instead. The shear wall is made up of braced panels (shear panels) to counteract the effects of lateral loading acting on a structure.

Cantilever shear walls always act as coupled shear walls consist of openings and have connected with coupling beams. Multi-storeyed buildings may have openings in rows which are essential for doors, ventilations, openings and windows in both internal and external walls. As per architectural point of view, the opening has provided. This opening has to be decided within the limit to secure the structural resisting components by adverse seismic effects

Seismic loads and wind are among the most common loads that shear walls can withstand. When a shear wall is built, it is created in the form of a line of heavily braced, reinforced panels. This is why they are also known as braced wall lines in some region. The wall seamlessly connects two exterior walls and reinforces other shear walls in the structure. Bracing is accomplished with heavy beams and metal brackets or support beams that keep the wall firm and strong. Shear walls are now a vital part of mid and tall buildings. For a building to be an earthquake resistant design, these walls are placed in the planes of the building which reduces lateral displacements under seismic loads. In this way shear wall frame structures are achieved. The shear wall is taken in different forms and types under reinforced materials such as Simple rectangular, Coupled, Rigid frame, Framed walls with infill frame, Column supported, Core type shear wall.

II. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

To check the opening concept in terms of highest importance factor and to determine the minimum shear wall area usage, following objectives have been selected:-

1. To study the various cases of opening in shear wall and comparing them by using Response Spectrum Method of dynamic analysis using Staad.pro software.
2. To calculate Maximum displacement, Base Shear and Drift values and then comparing all the cases.
3. To explore the possibilities of overall structural resistance by minimal use of shear wall area.
4. To determine maximum Axial Forces in columns at ground level for various cases.
5. To study the variation of maximum Bending Moments & Shear Forces in columns of all cases for multi-storeyed buildings.
6. To study and compare maximum Bending Moments & Shear Forces in beams along X and Z direction.
7. To evaluate maximum Torsional Moments in beams along X and Z directions.

The main and foremost objective is to determination of the performance point of opening criteria of shear wall used in the periphery with highest importance factor as prescribed by the Indian Standards.

III. METHODOLOGY AND MODELLING

Various models are framed for analysis and assessment of structure to accomplish the aforesaid objectives of the current study.

Table 1: List of buildings framed with assigned abbreviation for highest importance factor

Table 2: Status of the structural components for highest importance factor

Table 3: List of buildings framed for extension of performance point criteria for highest importance factor

Table 4: Status of the structural components for extension of performance point criteria for highest importance factor

Table 5: Importance factor as per IS 1893:2016

IV.  RESULTS ANALYSIS

The result parameters obtained by the application of loads and their combinations on various cases as per Indian Standard 1893: 2016 code of practice. Result of each parameter has discussed with its representation in graphical form below:-

In last case, members appear to be fail. By using flaring area concept of 0.5m height in case OSWA5 the same case pass with 29.05 % shear wall area deduction used abbreviated as OSWA5a respectively. With 35 % shear wall area deduction used abbreviated as OSWA6 and finally, the case appears to be fail with 36.75 % shear wall area deduction used abbreviated as OSWA7 respectively.

V. SCOPE OF THE FUTURE WORK

The future scope of this research work, the flared area similarly used where the lateral force acting more efficiency in high earthquake zone, with different soil conditions and using the flared area (shear belt) for providing more stiffness that ultimately used for reduction of the concrete area efficiently.

Conclusion

As we analysis about eight diverse cases regarding performance point determination in multistorey building by varying opening area percentage in shear wall used in periphery with earthquake zone III having highest importance factor. This approach gives the variety of outcome regarding every cases in the structure. In term of mentioned cases subsequent outcome are obtained from this comparative analysis. 1) On comparing Case OSWA1 to OSWA5 model it has been concluded that the Case OSWA4 has proved to be better among all cases for the performance point determination in multistory building by varying opening area percentage in shear wall used in periphery with earthquake zone with highest importance factor. 2) Case OSWA5 fails in structural components with the opening of 33.20%, hence for performance point extension, Case OSWA5 has re-modifies as Case OSWA5a with the opening of 29.05% and hence it has seen passed. 3) Case OSWA5a then extended to Case OSWA6 to 35% with structural components safe. 4) With the opening of 36.75%, Case OSWA7 has created but fails in structural components. 5) On comparing result parameters of all 3 cases, finally the performance point obtained as 35% and the case is Case OSWA6 respectively with least of:- a) Base Shear in X direction. b) Shear forces in Beam parallel to X directions. c) Shear forces in Beam parallel to Z directions. d) Shear forces in Columns. e) Axial forces in Columns. In this project a G+18 Storey structure has analyzed using shear walls at corners and total seven structural models have been created abbreviated as OSWA1 to OSWA7. Case OSWA5 fails in structural components, hence after modifications Case OSWA5a created. The project concluded that the performance point obtained is 35% with OSWA6 and obtained as efficient Case and will be recommended to reduce the overall cost of the project for the highest importance factor value of 1.5 as per Indian Standards.

References

[1] Ms. Priyanka Soni, Mr. Purushottam Lal Tamrakar, Vikky Kumhar, (2016), “Structural Analysis of Multistory Building of Different shear Walls Location and Heights”, International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Vol. 32, No. 1. [2] Anirudh Gottala, Kintali Sai Nanda Kishore, Dr. Shaik Yajdhani, (2015), “Comparative Study of Static and Dynamic Seismic Analysis of a Multistoried Building”, IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering, ISSN (online): 2349-784X, Vol. 2, Issue 1. [3] SHEN Yonglin, WU Lixin, LI Zhifeng, LI Xiaojing, (2010), “3D Visualization of Seismic Buildings in Yushu Earthquake for Disaster Management”, The International Conference on Multimedia Technology, ISBN: 978-1-4244-7872-9. [4] Z.T.De?er, U. Gökçeo?lu, (2021), “Effect Of Basement Wall Configuration On Tall Building Design Based On 2018 Turkish Seismic Building Code”, 6th ICEES, Turkey. [5] Shahzad Jamil Sardar and Umesh. N. Karadi, (2013), “Effect Of Change In Shear Wall Location On Storey Drift Of Multistorey Building Subjected To Lateral Loads”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, ISSN: 2319-8753, Vol. 2, Issue 9. [6] S. R. Uma, (2006), “Seismic design of beam-column joints in RC moment resisting frames – Review of codes” Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Vol. 23, Issue 5. [7] Mohammed Qamaruddin, Abdul Wahid Hag, Salim Al-Oraimi, Saleh Hamoud, Al-Hashmi and Salem Juma Al-Waheibi, (1997), “Investigation On The Lateral Stiffness Of Shear Walls With Openings”11th International Brick Block Masonry Conference Tongji University, Shanghai, China. [8] Mohammad Ashrafy, Reza Aghayari, Mehrzad Tahamouli Roudsari, (2018), “The Effect of Structural Height and Geometry on the Base Shear of RC Coupling Beam Systems”, Research Report , Razi University , Kermashah , IRAN. [9] Christian Geiß, Hannes Taubenböck, Sergey Tyagunov, Anita Tisch, Joachim Post, Tobia Lakes (2014), “Assessment of Seismic Building Vulnerability from Space”, Earthquake spectra, Vol. 30, Issue 04. [10] Bahador Bagheri, Ehsan Salimi Firoozabad, and Mohammadreza Yahyaei, (2012), “Comparative Study of the Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multi-Storey Irregular Building”, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol. 6, Issue 11. [11] Jagmohan Humar, Praveen Kumar, (2000), “A New Look At The Torsion Design Provisions In Seismic Building Codes”, 12th World conference on EE, Number 1707. [12] J.K. Whittle, M.S. Williams, T.L. Karavasilis, A. Blakeborough, (2012), “A Comparison of Viscous Damper Placement Methods for Improving Seismic Building Design”, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2011.653864. [13] Kassem, M.M.; Beddu, S. Ooi, J.H. Tan, C.G.; Mohamad El-Maissi, A., Mohamed Nazri, F., (2021), “Assessment of Seismic Building Vulnerability Using Rapid Visual Screening Method through Web-Based Application for Malaysia”, Buildings, Vol. 11, Issue 485. [14] Lang Liu, Qingyang Ren, and Xu Wang, (2020), “Calibration of the Live Load Factor for Highway Bridges with Different Requirements of Loading”, Advances in Civil Engineering, Hindawi, Vol. 2020, Article ID 7347593. [15] Dr. B. Kameshwari, Dr. G. Elangovan, P. Sivabala, G.Vaisakh, (2011), “Dynamic Response Of High Rise Structures Under The Influence Of Discrete Staggered Shear Walls”, International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST), Vol. 3, Issue 10. [16] B. Doran, (2003), “Elastic-plastic analysis of R/C coupled shear walls: The equivalent stiffness ratio of the tie elements”, J. Indian Inst. Sci., paper no. 83. [17] Mirza Aamir Baig, Tanveer Sultan Bhat, (2020), “Seismic Upgradation Of Tall Buildings”, International Journal of Engineering Science Technologies, ISSN: 2456-8651, Vol.4, Issue 5. [18] R. Sulzer, P. Nourian, M. Palmieri, J.C. van Gemert, (2018), “Shape Based Classification Of Seismic Building Structural Types”, The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 13th 3D GeoInfo Conference, Volume 42, Issue 4.

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Mr. Uditnarayane Piplodiya, Mr. Arvind Vishwakarma. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.