Assessing Seismic Behavior in RC Buildings with Varied Vertical Aspect Ratios: A Comparative Study

Sulata Dhakal

doi:10.18535/ijsrm/v11i10.ec02

Abstract

Limited space in cities due to urbanization and population growth has given rise to tall and distinctively designed buildings. This study focuses on how a building's vertical aspect ratio (height-to-width ratio) affects the seismic performance of residential concrete buildings. In earthquake-prone Nepal, seismic analysis is crucial for buildings in high-risk areas. We investigated the impact of vertical aspect ratio and the presence of masonry infills and soft stories in reinforced concrete frame buildings. Rectangular base models were analysed at 3, 5, and 7 stories. These models were categorized into bare frames, infill frames, and infill frames with soft stories at the ground level. Linear analysis, non-linear analysis, and design of the building have been performed as per the relevant Indian codes of practice. The effect of infills on dynamic characteristics, yield patterns and capacity has been studied with the help of Non-Linear Analysis. The result of the analysis indicates that the structures have lesser capacity and higher drift with the increase in vertical aspect ratio. It also has been observed that infills contribute to a large increase in the stiffness and strength of the structure, so the deformation capacity of the structure gets reduced.

Keywords

Nonlinear static analysisVertical aspect ratioInfill frames

References

United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2015. [Online]. Available: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us20002926#general_summary. Accessed on: Nov. 2020.Google Scholar ↗
T. A. Awida, "Slenderness Ratio Influence on the Structural Behavior of Residential Concrete Tall Buildings," Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 527-534, 2011.Google Scholar ↗
WSP. (2017) WSP Global inc. [Online]. Available: http://www.wsp-pb.com/en/HighRise/High-Rise-Insights/How-Tall-Is-Tall/. Accessed on: Nov. 2020.Google Scholar ↗
S.K. Duggal, “Earthquake Resistance Design of Structure”. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar ↗
K. Sharma, L. Deng, and C. C. Noguez, "Field investigation on the performance of building structures during the April 25, 2015, Gorkha earthquake in Nepal," Engineering Structures, vol. 121, pp. 61-74, Aug. 2016.Google Scholar ↗
D. R. Thapa and G. Wang, "Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal," Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 577-586, Dec. 2013.Google Scholar ↗
Government of Nepal National Planning Commission, Nepal Earthquake 2015: Post Disaster Needs Assessment, 2015.Google Scholar ↗
ATC-40 Applied Technology Council, "Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings," vol. 1-3, 1996.Google Scholar ↗
Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), "SAP 2000 Integrated Software for Structural Analysis And Design," Berkeley, California, 20.Google Scholar ↗
H. Krawinkler and G. D. P. K. Seneviratna, "Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation," Engineering Structures, vol. 20, no. 4-6, 1998.Google Scholar ↗
A. K. Chopra and R. K. Goel, "A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings," Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 561-582, 2002.Google Scholar ↗
T. S. Jan, M. W. Liu, and Y. C. Kao, "An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of high-rise buildings," Engineering Structures, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 117-128, 2004.Google Scholar ↗
N. I. Doudoumis, C. Kotanidis, and I. N. Doudoumis, "A comparative study on static push-over and time-history analysis methods in base isolated buildings," First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, p. 420, 2006.Google Scholar ↗
M. Causevic and S. Mitrovic, "Comparison between non-linear dynamic and static seismic analysis of structures according to European and US provisions," Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 467-489, 2010.Google Scholar ↗
H. Hastemoglu, "Seismic Performance Evaluation Of Reinforced Concrete Frames," IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 123-131, 2015Google Scholar ↗

[refR-1] United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2015. [Online]. Available: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us20002926#general_summary. Accessed on: Nov. 2020.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-2] T. A. Awida, "Slenderness Ratio Influence on the Structural Behavior of Residential Concrete Tall Buildings," Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 527-534, 2011.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-3] WSP. (2017) WSP Global inc. [Online]. Available: http://www.wsp-pb.com/en/HighRise/High-Rise-Insights/How-Tall-Is-Tall/. Accessed on: Nov. 2020.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-4] S.K. Duggal, “Earthquake Resistance Design of Structure”. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-5] K. Sharma, L. Deng, and C. C. Noguez, "Field investigation on the performance of building structures during the April 25, 2015, Gorkha earthquake in Nepal," Engineering Structures, vol. 121, pp. 61-74, Aug. 2016.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-6] D. R. Thapa and G. Wang, "Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal," Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 577-586, Dec. 2013.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-7] Government of Nepal National Planning Commission, Nepal Earthquake 2015: Post Disaster Needs Assessment, 2015.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-8] ATC-40 Applied Technology Council, "Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings," vol. 1-3, 1996.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-9] Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), "SAP 2000 Integrated Software for Structural Analysis And Design," Berkeley, California, 20.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-10] H. Krawinkler and G. D. P. K. Seneviratna, "Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation," Engineering Structures, vol. 20, no. 4-6, 1998.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-11] A. K. Chopra and R. K. Goel, "A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings," Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 561-582, 2002.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-12] T. S. Jan, M. W. Liu, and Y. C. Kao, "An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of high-rise buildings," Engineering Structures, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 117-128, 2004.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-13] N. I. Doudoumis, C. Kotanidis, and I. N. Doudoumis, "A comparative study on static push-over and time-history analysis methods in base isolated buildings," First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, p. 420, 2006.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-14] M. Causevic and S. Mitrovic, "Comparison between non-linear dynamic and static seismic analysis of structures according to European and US provisions," Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 467-489, 2010.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-15] H. Hastemoglu, "Seismic Performance Evaluation Of Reinforced Concrete Frames," IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 123-131, 2015Google Scholar ↗