International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056

Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Seismic Analysis of G+5 Framed Structures with and Without Floating

Columns Using ETABS-2013 Software
Umesh P. Patil1, Shivanand S Hallur2
1. Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engg, KLE Dr .MSSCET, Belagavi – 590008 (Karnataka).
2. M-Tech Student in Dept. of Civil Engg, KLE Dr. MSSCET, Belagavi – 590008(Karnataka).
…………………………………………………………………………………***……………………………………………………………………………………

ABSTRACT
In order to have more area for parking space
and for other amities, concept of floating columns in
multi-storey framed structure is becoming popular
stability used structural integrity of such structures
while resisting earthquake becomes critical. In the
paper G+5 storey RCC structure in considered for
earthquake analysis. For comparison of three models
are used, one with normal structure, second with shear
walls and third with masonry infill walls. All the three
methods Equivalent static method, response spectrum
and time history method were used for analysis ETABS-
Fig 1: Floating Columns
2013 Software was used and structure was assumed to
be situated in earthquake Zone III on a medium The floating columns will be provided above the ground
soil(type II). The parameters evaluated were Base floor, there will be more space is available for parking
shear, Storey drift and Displacement. The multi-storey purpose, auditorium purposes and assembly hall. The
building with shear walls which had performed better column is assumed pinned at the base and it will be acting
than other models(normal building and multi-storey as point load on the beams or girders and all loads will
building with masonry infill walls) in resisting transfer to beam to foundation.
earthquake as per IS 1893:2002.
Shear Wall
Key words: Floating columns, Shear wall, Masonry
infill wall, Equivalent static method, Response A shear wall is vertical structural element that will resist
spectrum and Time history. lateral forces in the plane of the wall through shear and
bending. Such a wall acts as with a beam part of its
1. INTRODUCTION strength derives from its depth. The shear wall provides
large strength and stiffness to buildings in the direction of
Floating Columns their orientation, which way to reduced lateral swing
(sway) of the building and there by reduces damage to
A column is supposed to be a vertical member structure. Shear walls carry large horizontal earthquake
starting from foundation level and transferring the load to force; the overturning effects on them are large. The
the ground. The term floating column is also a vertical opening will be provided in shear walls, but their size must
element which ends at its termination level rests on a be small to ensure least time interval (interruption) to
beam which is a horizontal member. The beams in turn force flow through walls.
transfer the load to other columns below it. Such columns
where the load was considered as point load.

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1482

 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Where,
W= Width of masonry infill wall.
λ= Co-efficient to determined equivalent width
of infill.
t= Thickness of masonry infill wall.
h= Height of masonry infill wall.
H= Height of RC frame.
l= Length of infill.
d= diagonal length of the masonry infill.
Modulus of elasticity of masonry infill.
(
= Modulus of elasticity of concrete.
)
= Moment of inertia of the column.
Fig 2: RC Shear wall
= Moment of inertia of the beam.
Masonry infill wall
2. MODELING AND BUILDING DATA
The infill wall is the supported wall that closes the
perimeter of the building constructed. The infill wall will 2.1 Without floating columns
be provided at inner and outer frames. It will bear its own
weight, infill wall also acts as a non load bearing wall and
also load bearing wall.

Fig 3: RC Effective width of masonry infill wall

The below formulas are used for the masonry infill wall
width calculation.
Fig 4: Plan of the building Without floating columns

Calculation of infill width:

W=0.175 (
d=

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1483

 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Fig 5: Elevation of the building Without floating

Fig 7: Elevation of the building With floating columns
columns.
and shear walls.
2.2 With floating columns

Fig 8: Elevation of the building With floating columns

and masonry infill walls.

Fig 6: Plan of the building with floating columns.

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1484

 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

2.3 Building Data RSY- Response spectrum in Y direction

THX-Time history in X direction
Plan dimension 25m x 25m THY- Time history in Y direction
No of storey’s G+15
Each storey height 3.5m 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Thickness of external 250mm 3.1(Without floating columns)
wall 3.1.1Base shear
Thickness of internal 150mm
wall MODEL Normal multi-storey multi-storey
Thickness of parapet 150mm multi-storey building building
wall building with shear with
Thickness of slab 150mm walls masonry
Floor finish 1kN/m2 infill walls
Base shear 1456.818 1525.49 1479.844
Live load on floors 3kN/m2 in kN (EQ)
Live load on roof 2kN/m2 Base shear 1469.770 1525.490 1482.210
in kN (RS)
Density of concrete 25kN/m3 Base shear 5029.45 10012.55 7404.02
Density of brick 20kN/m3 in kN (TH)
Grade of concrete(fck) M25 Table 2: Base shear

Grade of steel(fy) Fe 415

Without Beam 300mmx400mm
floating
Column 400mmx600mm
columns
400mmx750mm
With Beam
300mmx400mm
floating
columns 400mmx600mm
Column
300mmx400mm
Table 1: Building data and Dimensions

2.4 Analysis of Building

Equivalent static and response spectrum method and time

history are used for the analysis of with and without Chart 1: Base shear without floating column
floating columns having shear walls and masonry infill
walls. In equivalent static analysis single mode of Compared to Equivalent static, response spectrum and
vibrations are considered. Base shear can be determined time history methods, the base shear is reduced in
by multiplying total seismic weight of building to equivalent static analysis at 60% and in response
coefficient of acceleration spectrum value. In response spectrum analysis at 60%.
spectrum method, dynamic characteristics are considered
for analysis. In this method multiple modes of vibrations 3.1.2 Storey drift(Without floating columns)
are considered where base shear of each mode can be
calculated separately. It can be calculated by determining Normal multi- multi-
the modal mass and modal mass participation factor for MODEL multi- storey storey
each mode. storey building building
EQX- Equivalent static in X direction building with with
EQY- Equivalent static in Y direction shear masonry
RSX- Response spectrum in X direction
© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1485
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

walls infill
walls

Storey 2.27 0.27 0.16

drift in
mm (EQ)
Storey 2.5 0.22 0.15
drift in
mm (RS)
Storey 6 1.50 0.57
drift in
mm (TH)
Table 3: Storey drift

Chart 3: Displacement without floating column

Compared to Equivalent static, a response spectrum and

time history method, the displacement is reduced in
equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis.

3.2 With floating column

3.2.1 Base shear

Normal multi-storey multi-storey

MODEL multi-storey building with building with
building shear walls masonry
infill walls
Base shear 1446.45 1502.179 1454.583
Chart 2: Storey drift without floating column
in kN (EQ)
Compared to Equivalent static, response spectrum and
Base shear 1446.45 1502.168 1602.4362
time history methods, the storey drift is reduced in
in kN (RS)
equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis.
Base shear 3121.5948 9632.7283 7091.4605
in kN (TH)
3.1.3 Displacement(Without floating columns)
Normal multi- multi-
Table 5: Base shear
MODEL multi- storey storey
storey building building
building with with
shear masonry
walls infill
walls
Displacement 31.2 4.7 2.6
in mm (EQ)
Displacement 36.1 4.1 2.2
in mm (RS)
Displacement 93 27 8.6
in mm (TH)
Table 4: Displacement

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1486

 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Compared to Equivalent static, response spectrum and

time history methods, the storey drift is reduced in
equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis.

3.2.3 Displacement

Normal multi- multi-

multi- storey storey
MODEL storey building building
building with shear with
walls masonry
infill walls
Displacement in 35.9 7.6 4.7
mm(EQ)
Displacement in 34.6 10.9 8.2
mm(RS)
Chart 4: Base shear Displacement in 93 42.5 29.3
Compared to Equivalent static, a response spectrum and mm(TH)
time history method, the base shear is reduced in
equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis. Table 7: Displacement

3.2.2 Story drift

Normal multi-storey multi-storey

MODEL multi-storey building building with
building with shear masonry
walls infill walls
Story drift 2.6 0.273 0.569
in mm(EQ)
Story drift 2.756 0.23 0.654
in mm(RS)
Story drift 6.97 1.473 2.28
in mm(TH)
Table 6: Story drift

Chart 6: Displacement

Compared to Equivalent static, a response spectrum and

time history method, the displacement is reduced in
equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis.

4. CONCLUSION

Following are the broad conclusions in case of seismic

analysis of RCC G+5 framed structure with floating
columns.

 Out of all the three methods used to evaluate base

Chart 5: Storey drift shear, Multi-storey building with shear walls has

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1487

 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

performed better compared to normal multi- [3] Bardakis V.G., Dritsos S.E. (2007), “Evaluating
storey and masonry infill walls. assumptions for seismic assessment of existing buildings
 Out of all the three methods used to evaluate “.Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 27 (2007)
storey drift, Multi-storey building with shear walls 223–233.
has performed exceedingly well when compared
with normal multi-storey and masonry infill walls. [4] Mortezaei A., Ronagh H.R., Kheyroddin A., (2009),
 Out of all the three methods used to evaluate “Seismic evaluation of FRP strengthened RC buildings
displacement, Multi-storey building with masonry subjected to near-fault ground motions having fling step”.
infill walls has performed exceedingly well when Composite Structures 92 (2010) 1200–1211.
compared with normal multi-storey and shear
walls. [5] K. N. V. Prasada Rao, K. Seetharamulu, and S.
 Time history analysis presents peak value of base Krishnamoorthy, “Frames with staggered panels:
shear for multi-storey building with shear walls. experimental study”, Journal of Structural Engineering,
 Response spectrum analysis presents lowest VOL 110, No. 5, Page no: 1134-1148, 1984.
value of storey drift for multi-storey building with
shear walls. [6] Hartley Gilbert and Abdel-Akher Ahmed, “Analysis of
 Equivalent static method of analysis presents building frames” Journal of Structural Engineering,
lowest value of displacement for multi-storey Vol.119, No. 2, Page no: 468-483, 1993.
building with masonry infill walls.
 All the values (Base shear, Storey drift and [7] Prerna NautiyalA*, Saleem AkhtarA and Geeta
displacement) are within the permissible limit BathamA” Seismic Response Evaluation of RC frame
except the displacement provided by Time history building with Floating Column considering different Soil
analysis for normal multi-storey building(being Conditions” International Journal of Current Engineering
more than 84mm). and Technology, Vol.4, No.1,2014.
 Thus for multi-storey building with shear walls
pre within the permissible limit except the storey [8] IS 1893(Part 1): 2002”Criteria for Earthquake
drift has relatively performed normal multi-storey Resistant Design Of Structures Part 1 General Provisions
building and masonry infill walls in overall and Buildings (Fifth Revision) Bureau of Indian Standards
assessment. New Delhi.

[9] Dr. Vinod Hosur “Earth Quake Resistant Design of

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Building Structures” Wiley India Pvt. Ltd. Publications, first
The authors would like to thank Shri S C Metagud edition 2013
Chairman Governing council and Dr. M. S. Sheshgiri college
of Engineering and Technology, Belgavi for their kind [10] Agarwal Pankaj, Shrikhande Manish (2009),
support and providing good infrastructure. The authors “Earthquake resistant design of structures”, PHI learning
are also grateful to Prof. (Smt) Bharti Chnivalar Head of private limited, New Delhi.
Department for her encouragement and support.
[11] ETABS -2013 software is used to analysis of all
models.
REFERENCES

[1] Arlekar Jaswant N, Jain Sudhir K. and Murty C.V.R,

(1997), “Seismic Response of RC Frame Buildings with Soft
First Storeys”. Proceedings of the CBRI Golden Jubilee
Conference on Natural Hazards in Urban Habitat, 1997,
New Delhi.

[2] Fall H.G (2006), “Direct Stiffness Method For 2D

Frames-Theory of structure”.

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1488

 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 02 Issue: 04 | July-2015 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

BIOGRAPHIES

Shri Umesh P. Patil is working as

a Associate Professor, Civil
Engineering Department in KLE
Dr. M. S. Sheshgiri College of
Engineering and Technology,
Belagavi,590 008 Karnataka.
He has work experience of 20
years. He has published 10
papers in international journals
and presented 3 papers in
international conferences. He
has written a text book entitled
as “Oil Power Hydraulics and
Pneumatics” (1994)

Shivanand S Hallur M-Tech

Student Civil Engineering
Department in KLE Dr. M. S.
Sheshgiri College of Engineering
and Technology, Belagavi, 590
008 Karnataka

© 2015, IRJET.NET- All Rights Reserved Page 1489