F.Y. M.Tech.

Sem II
(Structural Engineering)
Activity Based Lab

Seismic design of multi-storeyed building(G+3)

(5ST575)

Submitted By

Sharikmaslat Abuturab Shamshoddin

(PRN-21151006)

Under the guidance of

Dr. V. S. Patil

Walchand College of Engineering

(Government Aided Autonomous Institute)
Vishrambag, Sangli.

Academic Year 2021-22

 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the report work entitled “Seismic Design of multi -storeyed
building(G+3)” submitted by “Sharikmaslat Abuturab Shamshoddin (21151006)” in
partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of “Master of Technology (Civil-
Structural Engineering)” is a record of his own work carried out under my supervision
during the year 2021-22.

Date: 17/07/2022 Dr. V.S. Patil

Course Incharge
 INDEX

Sr.no. Contents Page no.

1. Problem Statement 4

2. Typical plan, Grid of building 5

3. Calculation of Seismic Weights 6

4. Calculation of seismic dynamic forces by static analysis method 8

5. Calculation of seismic dynamic forces by dynamic analysis 9

method

6. SAP2000 Results 12

7. Comparison Between Manual Calculations and Software Results 14

8. Outcome 15
Problem statement
Perform response spectrum analysis of multistorey RC building with the following
specification manually first and then the results are checked in relevant software.

1) No. of story- more than 3

2) Seismic zone- except II
3) SMRF
4) Wall thickness- 230 ex. and 150 Int
5) Parapet- 1.2 m height
6) Loads- assume all loads on residential building as per IS875. 7) Assume suitable
data if required Building details are as follows:

1. Number of storeys – Ground + 3

2. Grade of concrete – M25
3. Grade of steel – Fe 415
4. Floor to floor height – 3.3m
5. Parapet height – 1.20 m
6. Slab thickness – 150 mm 7. External wall – 230 mm thk.
8. Internal wall – 150 mm thk.
9. Column size – 230 x 450 mm & Beam size 230 x 450 mm
10. Live load on floor – 2 Kn/m2
11. Floor finish – 1KN/m2
12. Seismic zone – V
13. Building resting on medium soil
14. Importance factor – 1
15. Frame type – SMRF R-5
16. Density of concrete -25KN/M2 & Density of masonry -20KN/M2
 ELEVATION
*Calculation of Seismic Weights
Dead Load Calculation
1. Weight of slab
= 25 x 0.15 x 88
= 330 kN

2. Weight of Column
Wt of 1 column = 25x0.23x0.45x(3.3-0.45)
= 7.37 kN
No. of column 15
Weight of columns = 15x7.37
= 110.55 kN

3. Weight of Beams
Length of beam = 65m

Weight of Beams = 25x65x0.23x0.45 = 168.18 kN

4. Weight of Parapet walls
= 20 x1.2 x 0.15 x ((8x2) + (11x2))
= 214 kN

5. Weight of exterior walls Length of exterior wall = 38m

Weight = 20 x 38x 0.23 x 2.85

= 498.18 kN

6. Weight of internal walls Length of interior wall = 27m

Weight = 20 x 27 x 0.15 x 2.85

=230.85 kN

Total Dead Load = 330+110.55+168.18+214+498.18+230.85

= 1551.76 kN

Live Load ( Imposed load)

Acc. to IS 1893 (1) – 2002,
Imposed load on roof need not be considered. ( Cl. 7.3.2)

1. LL on roof = 0
2. LL on each floor
LL < 3 kN/m2 …. (25% of the LL to be considered)
LL = 2 x 0.25= 0.50 kN/m2
LL on each floor = 0.50 x 88
= 44 kN
Floor Finish = 1 x 88
= 88 kN

For Typical floor

= 1551.76 + 44 + 88
= 1683.76 kN

W1 = W2 = W3 = 1683.76 kN
Roof Weight
DL of Parapit = 214 kN
DL of Slab = 230 kN
Weight Beam = 168.15 kN
Weight of Column = 110.55 / 2 = 55.27 kN

Weight of Interior wall = 230.85 / 2 = 115.42 kN

Weight of Exterior wall = 498.18/ 2 = 249.09 kN

Total Roof Weight = 1031.93 kN

Total seismic weight = (1031.93+ 1683.76x 3)

= 6083.21 kN
Ta = 0.09h/ (d)1/2 H = 4 x 3.3 = 13.2m

d(X) = 8m ,

d(Y) =11m

Fundamental Period in X : Fundamental Period in Y :

T = 0.09 x 13.2 / (8)1/2 T = 0.09 x 13.2 / (11) 1/2

T = 0.42 sec T = 0.35 sec

Seismic Base Shear

Vb = Ah . W
Ah = (Z I ) / 2R * Sa / g
Z = 0.36 ( zone V)
I=1
Sa/g = 2.5
R=5
Ah = 0.09
Vb = 0.09 x 6083.21 Vb = 516.46kN
Table no 01 - Lateral Load Distribution With Height By Static Method

Lateral force at ith

Storey Wihi^2 / level for EL in
Wi (kN) hi(m) Wihi^2/(ƩWihi^2) direction
level (1000)

X Y

4 1031.93 13.2 179.80 0.411 226.486 226.486

3 1683.76 9.9 165.02 0.378 184.486 184.486

2 1683.76 6.6 73.34 0.168 81.589 81.589

1 1683.76 3.3 18.33 0.0419 20.187 20.187

436.49 1.000 512.748 512.748

Design Seismic Force on building for X-Direction & Y-Direction

In X- direction

Mode 1 Mode 2

0.726 0.2389
Natural period (sec)
Mode shape

Roof 1.0000 1.0000

3rd floor 0.8848 0.1939

2nd floor 0.6349 -0.7598

1st floor 0.2886 -0.7279

Table No 02 - Calculation of Modal Mass and Modal Participation factor

Storey level Weight Mode 1 Mode 2

Roof 1031.93 1.0000 1031.93 1031.93 1.0000 1031.93 103193
3 1683.76 0.8847 1378.984 1221.990 0.1959 304.9586 60.0186
2 1683.76 0.6348 989.489 628.978 -0.7599 -1176.48 887.485
-
1 1683.76 447.0123 127.982 1134.012 824.658
0.2849 -0.7248
Ʃ 6083.21 3885.698 3049.482 -936.981 2849.154

Mk = [Ʃwi Øik]^2/gƩwi Øik^2 4949.934 305.987

% of total weight 86.14 5.20%

Pk = Ʃwi Øik/Ʃwi Øik^2 1.270 -0.324

Free Vibration Properties of the building for vibration in the X-Direction

In Y- direction
Mode 1 Mode 2

Natural period (sec) 0.73 0.2389

Mode shape

Roof 1.0000 1.0000

3rd floor 0.9010 0.2501
2nd floor 0.6498 -0.7414
1st floor 0.3124 -0.7865
Table No 03 - Calculation of Modal Mass and Modal Participation factor

Storey level Weight Mode 1 Mode 2

Roof 1031.93 1.0000 1031.93 1031.93 1.0000 1031.93 1031.93
3 1683.76 0.8814 1388.145 1241.0148 0.2485 387.489 95.997
- -
2 1683.76 1011.245 657.987 851.879
0.6498 0.7398 1151.962
- -
1 1683.76 485.0123 151.0156 966.198
0.3125 0.7865 1224.986
Ʃ 6083.21 395.987 3120.098 -919.227 2985.0149

Mk = [Ʃwi Øik]^2/gƩwi
5015.498 284.698
Øik^2

% of total weight 87.30% 4.93 %

Pk = Ʃwi Øik/Ʃwi Øik^2 1.260 -0.306

Mode 1

T= 0.726
(s/g) = 1/0.726 = 1.377
Ah = (Z/2) X(I/R) X(Sa/g) = (0.36/2) X (1/5) X 1.377 = 0.049
Q = AH X Ø X P X W = 0.049 X Ø X 1.270 X W

Mode 2

T= 0.2389
(s/g) = 1/0.2389 = 4.185
Ah = (Z/2) X(I/R) X(Sa/g) = (0.36/2) X (1/5) X 4.18 = 0.150
Q = AH X Ø X P X W=0.150 X Ø X (-
0.324) X W
Table No 04 – Lateral load calculation by modal analysis method in X- direction

Storey W Mode1 Mode2

level (kN) Øi1 Q V Øi2 Q V
Roof 1031.93 1.0000 65.93 65.134 1.0000 -53.08 -51.34
3 1683.76 0.8854 85.98 153.012 0.1950 -14.36 -66.37
2 1683.76 0.6412 60.16 215.164 -0.74983 58.01 -9.43
1 1683.76 0.2799 28.14 241.976 -0.74572 54.36 46.34

Since all modes are well separated, contribution of all modes is obtained by
SRSS

V4= [(65.93)2+(-53.08)2]1/2 =84.64 V3= [(153.012)2+(-66.37)2]1/2 =166.88

V2= [ (215.164)2+(-9.43)2]1/2 =215.37 V1= [(241.976)2+(46.34)2]1/2 =246.37

The externally applied design loads are then obtained as:

Q4 = V4 = 84.64, Q3 = V3 -V4 = 82.24, Q2 = V2 -V3 = 48.49, Q1 = V1 -V2 = 31

Vb(Static)/Vb(Dynamic) = 512.784/246.37 = 2.08

Seismic force obtained by dynamic analysis should be scaled up as follows:

Q4 = 84.64 X 2.08 =176.05 Q3 = 82.24 X 2.08 = 171.05
Q2 = 48.49 X 2.08 = 100.85 Q1 = 31.00 X 2.08 = 64.48

Table No 05 – Base shear at different storeys

Storey Q(Static) Q V(Static) V

(Dynamic (Dynamic
scaled) scaled)

4 226.486 176.05 226.486 176.05

3 184.486 171.05 410.972 347.10

2 81.589 100.85 492.561 447.95

1 20.187 64.48 512.748 512.43

Table No 06 - SAP RESULTS:

TABLE: Base Reactions

OutputCase CaseType GlobalFX GlobalFY GlobalFZ GlobalMX GlobalMY GlobalMZ
Text Text KN KN KN KN-m KN-m KN-m
GRAVITY LinStatic 2.258E-12 -3.26E-11 5860.356 -19853.538 62492.290 8 3.224E-10
Table No 07 - MODAL MASS PARTICIPATION RATIO
TABLE: Base Reactions
CaseType StepTy pe m
e StepNu GlobalFX GlobalFY GlobalFZ

Text OutputCas Text KN KN KN

Unitle ss
Text

DEAD LinStatic 1.818E-12 -3.075E-11

MODAL LinModal Mode 1 123.142 -1646.2

MODAL LinModal Mode 2 -1633.114 -125.677

MODAL LinModal Mode 3 237.515 -11.932

-
MODAL LinModal Mode 4 -17.538 4902.64

MODAL LinModal Mode 5 5236.192 20.242

MODAL LinModal Mode 6 -755.412 31.711

-
MODAL LinModal Mode 7 7.333 -6315.279

MODAL LinModal Mode 8 7764.295 9.967

-
MODAL LinModal Mode 9 9.181 -4079.647 -

MODAL LinModal Mode 10 -1203.534 3.875

MODAL LinModal Mode 11 -6144.517 -3.117

-
MODAL LinModal Mode 12 -684.93 12.188
-
LIVE LinStatic 3.221E-13 -4.555E-12

FF LinStatic 1.61E-13 -2.278E-12

EQ X LinStatic -504.
1.321E-10 5.542E-13 -

EQ Y LinStatic 9.982 -11 -504.956 -3624E-12

LinRespSpec Max 475.567 51.019 -3624E-13

RSPX

RSPY LinRespSpec Max 51.019 483.785 1.473

 TABLE: Modal Participating Mass Ratios
Output Case Step Type Step Per iod UX UY UZ
Num ess
Te T Uni S ec Unitl ess Unitl ess Unitl
xt ext tless
MODAL Mode 1 0. 7308 0. 0048 0. 8455 0.0000 0239
2 5 7 E-08
MODAL Mode 2 0.72 967 0. 8236 0. 0050 8.86 E-
1 4 2 09
MODAL Mode 3 0. 5942 0. 0078 0.0000 199 2.083 240
6 9 1
4
MODAL Mode 4 0.24 598 0.00000 126 0. 0967 0.0000
2 3 1 E-
07
MODAL Mode 5 0.23 948 0. 1098 0.00000 151 4.771
3 7 1 E-
MODAL Mode 6 0.19 582 0. 0009 0.00000 165 1.501 08
3 4 8 179
MODAL Mode 7 0 .153 3.373 E- 0. 0250 0.0000 5
8 08 2
E-
MODAL Mod e 8 0.14 519 0. 0300 4.95 1 E- 4.148
9 4 08 07
MODAL Mode 9 0.12 438 2.262 E- 0. 0044 0.0000 292
2 08 7 3
MODAL Mode 10 0.11 950 0. 0003 3.434 E- 6.463 E-
3 3 09 09
MODAL Mode 11 0.11 332 0. 0069 1.797 E- 7.657 E-07
9 8 09
E-07
MODAL Mode 0.09 342 0.0000 400 1.269E- 1.025
1 6 08

Deformed shapes at mode1,2 respectively in Y Direction.

Deformed shapes at mode1,2 respectively in Y Direction.

Table No 08 – Comparison Between Manual Calculations and Software

Result.
 Sr.no. Parameter By Manual calculation By SAP2000 Result
1. Seismic weights 6083.21 kN 5860.35 kN
2. Base shear 516.46 kN 504.956kN
3. Modal mass
participation
Mode 1 86.30 % 82.36 %
Mode2 4.93 % 10.98 %

Outcomes:
 The following project helped us to get acquainted with the essential understanding of
seismic analysis of multi-storeyed structure in SAP2000, the specifics of which are:

Basics about SAP2000 and its interface.

Modelling of G+3 building.
Assignment of load.
Defining load cases (including seismic load case).
Analysing the structure for various load cases.
Obtaining filtered outputs.
As a part of requirement of this project we also brushed up on the seismic analysis of
multistoreyed structure including determinations of base shear, story shear, Modal
participation and Modal Mass participation.
At the end of the project, we can conclude that software has an edge over the manual
calculation as it

considers each and every factor that contributes towards attaining solution to a problem
which might be neglected in case of manual calculation.
On the contrast it is also essential to appreciate the fact that it is very much important to
always the reliability of software when used for structural analysis since there are always
instances that a software may not be able to take into consideration certain aspects that need
industrial exposure and experience.