International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)

ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887

Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Analysis of Beam-Column Joint subjected to

Seismic Lateral Loading
Mrs. Gitadevi B. Bhaskar1, Mr. Anant S. Vishwakarma2
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, GHRAET, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
2
M-Tech Student (SE), Department of Civil Engineering, GHRAET, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Abstract: In reinforced concrete structures, portions of columns that are common to beams at their intersections are called
Beam-Column Joint. Beam-column joint is an important part of reinforced concrete frames in terms of seismic lateral loading.
The two major failure at joints are, joint shear failure and end anchorage failure. As we know that nature of shear failure is
brittle so the structural performance cannot be accepted especially in seismic conditions. In past decades, shear walls are one of
the most appropriate and important structural component in multi-storied building. Therefore, it would be very interesting to
study the structural response and their systems in multi-storied structure. Shear walls contribute the stiffness and strength
during earthquakes which are often neglected during design of structure and construction. The scope of present work is to study
the effect of seismic loading on placement of shear wall in building at different alternative location. This study presents analysis
of beam-column joint of the structure as well as the effect of shear walls which significantly affect the vulnerability of structures.
In order to test this hypothesis, G+10 storey building is considered with and without shear walls. Equivalent Static Coefficient
Method is used for dynamic analysis and structure was assumed to be situated in zone IV. As the building with shear wall and
without shear wall is analyzed for seismic forces in X and Z direction the following results were found for the load combination
of 1.2 (DL + LL + EQ X) for earthquake forces in X direction and 1.2 (DL + LL + EQ Z) for earthquake forces in Z direction.
Some parameter like node displacements, axial forces, bending moment, shear force and deflection of a structure are determined
by using STAAD Pro software and comparison is made for models with shear wall and without shear wall structures. From the
comparison of results, it has been observed that the bending moment, shear force and deflection in corner column, middle
column and central column are minimum in structure having shear wall as compared to simple frame building. The bending
moment, shear force and deflection in beams at all levels is minimum having shear wall in periphery in comparison to simple
frame building. The max. Bending moment, shear force and deflection of structure having shear wall is less as compared to
simple frame building.
Key words: Beam-Column Joint, Shear Failure, Seismic Action, Moment Resisting Frame Reinforced Concrete Frames, Shear
Reinforcement, Shear Wall, Staddpro.

I. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, it has become important to study the effect of shear walls on earthquake design structure. Structures are subjected to
earthquake shaking at their base oscillate back and forth in all three directions. Under low levels of shaking, their amplitudes of
shaking and directions of shaking are dependent on how they are proportioned geometrically and in terms of stiffness throughout the
building in plan and elevation. Under strong earthquake shaking, buildings undergo damage also. Controlling the damage type and
sequence of damage in various structural elements is the main focus of earthquake-resistant design. It is possible to get a reasonable
understanding of the overall mechanism of failure of the building by suitable nonlinear static analysis. Many deficiencies discussed
in this document can be identified at the design stage itself, and the structural configurations and design and detailing of members
modified to make the building resist the earthquake effects generated in the building during strong earthquake shaking. An
earthquake resistant building is able to accumulate a lot of energy without major failure. It will swing and sway and it might be
damaged. But it would not collapse before giving very visible signs. Therefore, people would be able to leave the building before it
would collapse. An earthquake resistant building, which has been damaged, could most of the time be repaired.

A. Earthquake
Earthquake cause random motion of ground which can be resolved in any three mutually perpendicular direction s. This motion
cause the structure to vibrate. The predominant direction of vibration is horizontal. Since the design vertical forces proposed in the
Code (IS:1893) are small as compared to the acceleration due to gravity, the emphasis has not been given to vertical forces as

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 330

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

compared to horizontal forces. However, the Code emphasizes that in case of structures where stability is a criterion for design,
vertical seismic forces must be considered. The vibration intensity of ground expected at location depends upon the magnitude of
earthquake, the depth of focus, distance from the epicenter and the strata on which the structure stands. The important structures
shall be designed for the maximum vibration intensity expected at the place. The response of the structure to the ground vibration is
a function of the nature of foundation soil, form, size and mode of construction of the structure and the duration and the intensity of
ground motion.

B. Earthquake in India
1) Zone I and II: This region is liable to MSK VI or less and is classified as the load Damaged Risk Zone. The IS code assigns
zone factor of 0.10 for zone I and II. Areas: Rest of the country.
2) Zone III : The Andaman and Nicobar Island, parts of Kashmir, Western Himalayas fall under this zone. This zone is classified
as Moderate Damage Risk Zone which is liable to MSK VII and also 7.8. The IS code assigns zone factor of 0.16 for Zone III.
a) Areas: The Andaman Nicobar Islands, some parts of Kashmir and Western Himalayan plains.
3) Zone IV: This zone is called the High Damage Risk Zone and covers areas liable to MSK VIII. The IS code assigns factor of
0.24 for Zone IV.
4) ZoneV : Zone V covers the areas with the highest risk zone that suffers earthquake of intensity MSK IX or greater. The IS code
assigns zone factor of 0.36 for Zone V.
Areas: Punjab, The state of Kashmir, the North-East Indian region, Rann of Kutch and the western and central Himalayas.

C. Beam-Column Joint
In RC buildings, portions of columns that are common to beams at their intersections are called Beam-Column Joints. Since their
constituent materials have limited strengths, the joints have limited force carrying capacity. When forces larger than these are
applied during earthquakes, joints are severely damaged. Repairing damaged joints is difficult, and so damage must be avoided.
Thus, beam-column joints must be designed to resist earthquake effects.

Fig. 1 Beam-column joints are critical parts of a building- they need to be designed.

As a consequence, seismic moments of opposite signs are develop in columns above and below the joints and at the same time beam
moment reversal across the joints. A horizontal and vertical shear force whose magnitude is many times higher than in the adjacent
beams and columns developed at the joint region. If not design for, joint failure can result.
Under the action of seismic forces, beam-column connections are subjected too large shear stresses in the joint region. These shear
stresses are a result of moments and shear forces of opposite signs on the member ends on either side of the joint core. Typically,
high bond stresses are also imposed on reinforcement bars entering into the joint. The axial compression in the column and joint
shear stresses result in principal tension and compression stresses that lead to diagonal cracking and or crushing of concrete in the
joint core.
D. Types of Joints
The
1) joint is defined as the portion of the column within the depth of the deepest beam that frames into the column.
2) According to loading conditions and structural behavior:
a) Type-I
b) Type-II

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 331

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

E. Interior Joint
When four beams frame into the vertical faces of a column, the joint is called as an interior joint.

Fig. 2 (a) Gravity loading, Fig. 4 (b) Seismic loading

F. Exterior Joint
When one beam frames into a vertical face of the column and two other beams frame from perpendicular directions into the joint,
then the joint is called as an exterior joint.

Fig. 3 T-Joints (a) Forces and strut-and-tie model, Fig. 5 (b) poor detail, Fig. 5 (c)
Satisfactory detail
G. Corner Joint
When a beam each frames into two adjacent vertical faces of a column, then the joint is called as a corner joint.

Fig. 4 Corner Joint

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 332

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

In a moment resisting frame, three types of joints can be identified viz. Interior Joint, Exterior Joint and Corner Joint (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7 Typical Beam-Column Joints

H. Introduction of Shear Wall

Shearwall is a structural member positioned at different places in a building from foundation level to top parapet level, used to resist
lateral forces i.e. parallel to the plane of the wall. When lateral displacement is large in a building with moment frames only,
structural walls, often commonly called shear walls, can be introduced to help reduce overall displacement of buildings, because
these vertical plate-like structural elements have large in-plane stiffness and strength.
Shear walls resist lateral forces through combined axial-flexure-shear action. Earthquake resistant buildings should possess, at least
a minimum lateral stiffness, so that they do no swing too much during small levels of shaking. Moment frame buildings may not be
able to offer this always. Also, structural walls help reduce shear and moment demands on beams and columns in the moment
frames of the building, when provided along with moment frames as lateral load resisting system. Shear walls should be provided
throughout the height of buildings for best earthquake performance. Also, shear walls offer best performance when rested on hard
soil strata. Properly designed and detailed buildings with shear walls have shown very good performance in past earthquakes.
Well-designed shear walls not only provide adequate safety but also provide great measure of protection against costly nonstructural
damage during moderate seismic damages. Shear walls provide large strength and stiffness to buildings in the direction of their
orientation, which significantly reduces lateral sway of the building and thereby reduces damage to structure and its contents. Since
shear walls carry large horizontal earthquake forces, the overturning effects on them are large. Thus, design of their foundations
requires special attention. Shear walls in buildings must be symmetrically located in plan to reduce ill-effects of twist in buildings.
Under the large overturning effects caused by horizontal earthquake forces, edges of shear walls experience high compressive and
tensile stresses. To ensure that shear walls behave in a ductile way, concrete in the wall end regions must be reinforced in a special
manner to sustain these load reversals without losing strength.

I. Purpose of Constructing Shear Walls

Shear walls are not only designed to resist gravity i.e. due to its self-weight and other living / moving loads, but they are also
designed for lateral loads of earthquakes and wind. Shear wall systems are more stable as their supporting area with reference to
total area of building, is comparatively more, as compare to RCC framed structures. Shear walls should resist the uplift forces
caused by the pull of the wind. It should resist the shear forces that try to push the walls over. Shear walls are very much quick in
construction, as the method adopted to construct is concreting the members using formwork. Shear walls does not need any extra
plastering or finishing as the wall itself gives such a high level of precision.

J. Objectives of Project
1) To analyse beam-column joint for seismic forces.
2) To do critical analysis of beam-column joint primarily considering three positions which are interior joint, exterior joint,
corner joint.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 333

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

3) To find out nodal displacements at beam-column joint for all three joint.
4) To compare axial force, shear force and bending moments for different types of beam-column joints with and without shear
wall.
II. METHODOLOGY
Analysis of any structure for resisting earthquake is the basic need of this study. In this project analysis of a seismic resistant structure
is a need of concern, and thereby establishing a comparison between structures without shear wall and with shear wall. There are
many methods for analysis and design such as equivalent static method, response spectrum method and time history method. Among
all these methods in this study only equivalent static method is adopted. In this study STADDPro.v8i is used for analysis.
The structure selected for this project is a simple residential building with the following description as stated below.

A. Overview of STAADPro V8i Software

STAADPro V8i is a comprehensive and integrated finite element analysis and design offering, including a state-of-the-art user
interface, visualization tools, and international design codes. It is capable of analyzing any structure exposed to static loading, a
dynamic response, wind, earthquake, and moving loads. STAADPro V8i is the premier FEM analysis and design tool for any type
of project including towers, culverts, plants, bridges, stadiums, and marine structures. The program hence consists of the following
facilities to enable this task. Graphical model generation utilities as well as text editor based commands for creating the
mathematical model. Beam and column members are represented using lines. Walls, slabs and panel type entities are represented
using triangular and quadrilateral finite elements. Analysis engines for performing linear elastic and p-delta analysis, finite element
analysis, frequency extraction, and dynamic response (spectrum, time history, steady state, etc.). Result viewing, result verification
and report generation tools for examining displacement diagrams, bending moment and shear force diagrams, beam, plate and solid
stress contours, etc.

B. Building Properties
1) Building Specification
a) Details of Building = G+10 story
b) Plan of building = 24 x 24 m
c) Size of beam = 600 x 300 mm
d) Size of column = 300 x 600 mm
e) No. of storey = 10
f) Height of storey = 3m
g) D.L of slab including finishes = 4 KN/m2
h) Weight of partition on floor = 2 KN/m2
i) Live load on each floor = 3 K/m2
j) Live load on the roof = 1.5 KN/m2
2) Seismic Parameters:
a) Zone Factor, Z = 0.24 (for zone IV, from Table no. 2 of IS code 1893 (Part 1) : 2002 in page No. 16)
b) Importance Factor, I = 1.0 (from Table no. 6 of IS code 1893 (Part 1) : 2002 in page No. 18)
c) Response reduction factor, R = 3.0 (from Table no. 7 of IS code 1893 (Part 1) : 2002 in page No. 23)
d) Type of soil = Hard soil
3) Seismic Weight:
a) Floor Area = 24 x 24 = 576 m2
b) Dead Load = 4 KN/m2
c) Live Load = 3 KN/m2
d) Weight of Partition = 2 KN/m2
e) For Live Load to considered =25%

C. Calculation of Seismic Weight of Structure

Total seismic weight on the floor,
W = ∑Wi
W = W1+W2+W3+W4+W5+W6+W7+W8+W9+10

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 334

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Where ∑ Wi, is the sum of loads from all the floors, which includes dead loads and appropriate percentage of live loads.
Effective Weight at each floor except the roof = 4.0 + 2.0 + 0.25 X 3 = 6.75 KN/m2
And the roof = 4.0 KN/m2
Weight of the beams at each floor and the roof = 3.0 X 0.6 X 240 X 25 = 1080 KN
Weight of the Column at each floor = 3.0 X 0.6 X 2.4 X 25 X 25 = 270 KN
Weight of the column at the roof = 0.5 X 270 =135 KN
Total plan area of the building is 24 m X 24 m= 576 m2
Equivalent load at roof level (W10) = 4 X 576 + 1080 + 135 = 3519 KN
Equivalent load at each floor (W1+W2+W3+W4+W5+W6+W7+W8+W9)
= 6.75 X 576 X 1080 + 270 = 5238 KN
Seismic weight of the building, W = 3519 + 5238 X 9 = 50661 KN

D. Seismic Base Shear Calculation

Fundamental natural period of vibration of a moment-resisting RC frame without infill walls
Ta= 0.075 h 0.75 = 0.075 (30) 0.75 = 0.96 s
Average response acceleration coefficient Sa/g for 5 % damping and Type 1 soil is 1.04.
Design horizontal seismic coefficient,
Ah = ( ZI (Sa/g) ) / 2R = (0.24 x 1.0 x 1.04) / (2 x 3) = 0.0416
Base Shear, VB= AhW = 0.0416 x 50661 = 2107.5 KN
So the base shear for 10 story building is found to be equal to 2107.5 kN
Now the base shear is laterally distributed as per IS-1893-2002.

III. MODELING AND ANALYSIS

This project deals with the comparative study and effect of bare frame (without shear wall) and shear wall frame on seismic
behavior of the structure.
For modeling and analysis G+10 storeys building with a 3-meters height for each story is analyzed by using software STAADPro.
Equivalent static coefficient method is used for dynamic analysis and structure was assumed to be situated in Zone IV as per IS
1893:2002(part1) and the zone factor is 0.24 (Z=0.24). Some parameter like bending moment, shear force, axial forces, node
displacement and deflection of a structure are determined using STAAD Pro software and comparison is made for structure with
shear wall and without shear wall. For modeling and analysis various data was collected and calculated. This chapter describes
about model development and analysis.

A. Plan and Model Generated for Problem Statement

From the values mentioned in the problem definition basically two models are generated to study the 335ehavior seismic forces on
beam-column joint structure. Fig. 8 (a) and Fig. 8 (b) shows plan of the structure generated in STAADPro. Following are the models
generated.
1) Model 1: Simple structure without any shear wall. Fig. 9 illustrates this model. In this model all the parameters are
considered for designing the structure as earthquake proof as per IS1893:2003.
2) Model 2: Structure with symmetrical shear wall on outer walls of structure concentrically located. Fig. 10 illustrates the model.
In this model all the parameters are same as model 1 also parameters of shear wall are added for design of shear wall as per IS
13920:1993.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 335

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fig. 8 (a) Plan of Structure without Shear Wall Fig. 8 (b) Plan of Structure with Shear Wall

Fig. 9 MODEL 1: 3D Rendering of Structure without Shear Wall Fig. 10 MODEL 1: 3D Rendering of Structure without
Shear Wall
B. Loadings and Analysis
1) Load Applied in Structure Without Shear Wall: The following figures show the different loads acting on structure without shear
wall.

Fig. 11 Showing Seismic Load Acting from X-Direction Fig. 12 Showing Seismic Load Acting from Z-Direction

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 336

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Dead Load Live Load Roof Live Load

Fig. 13 Load Distribution for Model 1 (StaadPro Model)

Fig. 14 Load Combination Along X-Direction Fig. 15 Load Combination Along Z-Direction

2) Load Applied in Structure With Shear Wall: The following figures show the different loads acting on structure with shear wall.

Fig. 16 Showing Seismic Load Acting from X-Direction Fig. 17 Showing Seismic Load Acting from Z-Direction

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 337

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Dead Load Live Load Roof Live Load

Fig. 18 Load Distribution for Model 1 (StaadPro Model)

Fig. 19 Load Combination Along X-Direction Fig. 20 Load Combination Along Z-Direction

3) After Run Analysis Structure without Shear Wall

Fig. 21 Structure displacement in X- direction Fig. 22 Structure displacement in Z- direction

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 338

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fig. 23 Axial Forces, Shear Forces and Bending Moment Daigram Along Beam Forces

4) After Run Analysis Structure with Shear Wall

Fig. 24 Structure displacement in X- direction Fig. 25 Structure displacement in Z- direction

Fig. 26 Axial Forces, Shear Forces and Bending Moment Daigram Along Beam Forces

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 339

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The Equivalent Static method is used for the analysis of the building models. The comparison of the results is done for bare frame
i.e. without shear wall and with shear wall. Modeling and analysis are done by STAAD Pro.v8i software. From the results,
comparison is done on the basis of maximum bending moment, maximum shear force, axial force and node displacements for
different types of beam-column joints.
As the building with shear wall and without shear wall is analyzed for seismic forces in X and Z direction the following results were
found for the load combination of 1.2 (DL + LL + EQ X) for earthquake forces in X direction and 1.2 (DL + LL + EQ Z) for
earthquake forces in Z direction.

A. Corner Beam-Column Joint (In X-Direction)

Table 1
Graph showing different forces and moment generated on beam-column joint for normal building and shear wall building

Building Building Building

Simple Simple Simple
Top Corner with Shear with Shear with Shear
building Building Building
Wall Wall Wall
Fx Fx Fy Fy
Beam L/C Node Mz (KNm) Mz (KNm)
(KN) (KN) (KN) (KN)
40 55 33.2 -22.089 25.4 28.046 -36 -53.7
1.2 (DL
90 + LL + 55 -2.24 -55.215 -21.822 -35.585 30.061 54.857
EQ X )
500 55 -7.57 30.723 10.8 27.169 1.67 49.72

Fx in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Fy in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

Joint
40
40
30
30
20 20
10 10
0
1 2 3 0
-10
1 2 3
-20 -10
-30
-20
-40
-30
-50
-60 -40
Shear wall Without Shear wall Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 27 Fx in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint Fig. 28 Fy in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 340

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Mz in KNm at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

50

0
1 2 3

-50

Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 29 Mz in KNm at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

From the above graphs we understand that the bema column connecting at top corner of building provided with shear wall generate
less shear force and bending moment at the beam-column joint as compared to the normal building.

B. Exterior Beam-Column Joint (In X-Direction)

Table 2
Graph showing different forces and moment generated on beam column joint for normal building and shear wall building

Simple Building Simple Building Simple Building

TOP middle Building with Shear Building with Shear Building with Shear
Wall Wall Wall
Fx Fx Fy Fy Mz Mz
Beam L/C Node
(KN) (KN) (KN) (KN) (KNm) (KNm)
38 53 -36.4 36.7 -11.5 -26.8 12.5 41
1.2 (DL
39 53 -47.1 31.5 18.8 10.2 19.6 -2.93
+ LL +
498 EQ X ) 53 91.1 57.4 58.1 37.4 142 80.8
88 53 9.91 74.5 -2.28 27.1 3.78 -43.9

Fx in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column Fy in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column

Joint Joint
100 100
50
0
1 2 3 4 0
-50 1 2 3 4
-100

Shear wall Without Shear wall Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 30 Fx in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint Fig. 31 Fy in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 341

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Mz in KNm at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint

200

150

100

50

0
1 2 3 4
-50

-100

Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 32 Mz in KNm at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint

From the above graphs we understand that the beam column connecting at top middle of building provided with shear wall generate
less shear force and bending moment at the beam column joint as compared to the normal building.

C. Interior Beam-Column Joint (In X-Direction)

Table 3
Graph showing different forces and moment generated on beam column joint for normal building and shear wall building

Simple Building Simple Building Simple

TOP Central Building with
Building with Shear Building with Shear Building
Shear Wall
Wall Wall
Mz
Beam L/C Node Fx (KN) Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fy (KN) Mz (KNm)
(KNm)
218 163 94.1 58 -28.1 -30 34.3 46
1.2 (DL
219 163 91.9 53.2 20 12.3 11.3 -0.921
+ LL +
548 163 154 89.1 -18.1 -17.1 10.2 13.7
EQ X)
598 163 154 89.1 18.1 17.1 10.2 13.7

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 342

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fx in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Fy in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column

Joint Joint
200 40
150 20
100
0
50 1 2 3 4 5
-20
0
1 2 3 4 5 -40
Shear wall Without Shear wall Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 33 Fx in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint Fig. 34 Fy in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

Mz in KNm at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5

-20

-40

-60

Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 35 Mz in KNm at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

From the above graphs we understand that the beam column connecting at Central Beam column of building provided with shear
wall generate less shear force and bending moment at the beam column joint as compared to the normal building.

D. Corner Beam-Column Joint (In Z-Direction)

Table 4
Graph showing different forces and moment generated on beam column joint for normal building and shear wall building
Building Building Building
Simple Simple Simple
Top Corner with Shear with Shear with Shear
Building Building Building
Wall Wall Wall
Mz Mz
Beam L/C Node Fx (KN) Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fy (KN)
(KNm) (KNm)
40 1.2 (DL 55 24.3 28.2 -12.5 -23 4.85 33.3
90 + LL+ 55 44 -55.215 10.9 24.7 -12.5 -34.7
500 EQ Z) 55 14.4 40.6 -1.07 21 -32.6 28.7

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 343

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fx in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint Fy in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column

Joint
50
40
0 20
1 2 3
0
-50 1 2 3
-20

-100 -40

Shear wall Without Shear wall Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 36 Fx in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint Fig. 37 Fy in KN at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

Mz in KNm at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3
-10

-20

-30

-40

Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 38 Mz in KNm at Top Corner Beam-Column Joint

From the above graphs we understand that the beam column connecting at Corner Beam column of building provided with shear
wall generate less shear force and bending moment at the beam column joint as compared to the normal building.

E. Exterior Beam-Column Joint (In Z-Direction)

table 5
Graph Showing Different Forces And Moment Generated On Beam Column Joint For Normal Building And Shear Wall
Building
Simple Building Simple Building Simple Building
TOP Middle Building with Shear Building with Shear Building with Shear
Wall Wall Wall
Mz Mz
Beam L/C Node Fx (KN) Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fy (KN)
(KNm) (KNm)
38 1.2 53 -20.4 40.3 -15.6 -18.6 16.7 19.5
39 (DL + 53 -20.4 40.3 15.6 18.6 16.7 19.5
LL+
498 53 97.7 64.4 52.4 30.8 123 58.1
EQ Z)
88 53 8.68 68 0 0 0 0

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 344

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fx in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column Fy in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column

Joint Joint
150 100
100
50
50

0
0
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
-50 -50
Shear wall Without Shear wall Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 39 Fx in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint Fig. 40 Fy in KN at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint

Mz in KNm at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4

Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 41 Mz in KNm at Top Exterior Beam-Column Joint

From the above graphs we understand that the beam column connecting at top Middle of building provided with shear wall generate
less shear force and bending moment at the beam column joint as compared to the normal building.

F. Interior Beam-Column Joint (In Z-Direction)

Table 6
Graph Showing Different Forces And Moment Generated On Beam Column Joint For Normal Building And Shear Wall
Building
Simple Building Simple Building Simple Building
TOP Middle Building with Shear Building with Shear Building with Shear
Wall Wall Wall
Mz
Beam L/C Node Fx (KN) Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fy (KN) Mz (KNm)
(KNm)
218 1.2 163 93 55.6 -24.1 -21.1 22.8 22.5
219 (DL + 163 93 55.6 24.1 -21.1 22.8 22.5
548 LL+ 163 157 93.8 -25 -28.3 30.5 46
598 EQ Z) 163 152 84.4 11.2 5.58 10.2 -18.6
268 163 84.3 76.4 0 0 0 0

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 345

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fx in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint Fy in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

200 40

150 20
100
0
50 1 2 3 4 5
-20
0
1 2 3 4 5 -40

Shear wall Without Shear wall Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 42 Fx in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint Fig. 43 Fy in KN at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

Mz in KNm at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5
-20

-40

Shear wall Without Shear wall

Fig. 44 Mz in KNm at Top Interior Beam-Column Joint

From the above graphs we understand that the beam column connecting at central beam column of building provided with shear
wall generate less shear force and bending moment at the beam column joint as compared to the normal building.

V. CONCLUSION
Two different models are studied in this present research. STADDPro software is used for analysis and the results obtained were
satisfactory and following are the concluded remarks that can be established from the results.

A. In multi-storey buildings, provision of shear walls is found to be effective in increasing the overall seismic response and
characteristics of the structure.
B. The presence of shear wall can affect the seismic behavior of frame structure to large extent, and the shear wall increases the
strength and stiffness of structure.
C. Shear wall ultimately increases the stiffness and strength of the structure and affect the seismic behavior of the structure.
D. The max. Bending moment, shear force and deflection of structure having shear wall is less as compared to simple frame
building.
E. The bending moment, shear force and deflection in corner column is minimum in structure having shear wall as compared to
simple frame building.
F. The bending moment, shear force and deflection in exterior column is minimum in structure having shear wall as compared to
simple frame building.
G. The bending moment, shear force and deflection in interior column is minimum in structure having shear wall as compared to
simple frame building.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 346

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

H. The bending moment, shear force and deflection in beams at all levels is minimum having shear wall in periphery in
comparison to simple frame building.
Therefore, it is necessary to consider the shear walls in the seismic analysis of the structure which significantly increases the
strength of overall frame and decreases the probability of collapse of the structure.

VI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to put on record, my appreciation and gratitude to all who have rendered their support and helped me in all situations
whenever needed during this paper completion.

REFRENCES
[1] IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 “Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structure”.
[2] EN 1998-1:2003, Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, European
Committee for standardization, Brussels, 2003, 215 pp.
[3] IS 13920:1993, Indian Standard code of Practice- Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces, Edition 1.2, Bureau of
Indian standards, New Delhi, March 2002, 16 pp.
[4] ACI 318-2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, 473 pp.
[5] IS 456:2000, Indian Standard code of Practice- Plain and Reinforced Concrete, Fourth Revision, Bureau of Indian standards, New Delhi, July 2000, 100 pp.
[6] ACI-ASCE Committee 352. (2002), 352R-02: Recommendation for design of beam-column joints in monolithic reinforced concrete structures, American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI., 37 pp.
[7] IS 4326:1993 “Earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings”.
[8] S. R. Uma, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, March 16 2006, New Zealand “Seismic design of beam-column joints in RC moment
resisting frames – Review of codes” Structural Engineering and Mechanics vol. 23, no.5, pg. 579-597.
[9] Dr. N Subramanian, USA (2015), “Design of RC Beam Column Joints”.
[10] Clyde C, Pentelides CP, Reaveley LD. Performance-based evaluation of exterior reinforced concrete building joints for seismic excitation. Report PEER
200/05. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.2000
[11] SUBRAMANIAN. N. and RAO, D.S.P., Seismic design of joints in RC structures. A review, The Indian Concrete Journal, February 2003, Vol. 77, No. 2, pp.
883-892.
[12] S. S. Patil, S. S. Manekari April 2013 “Analysis of Reinforced Beam-Column Joint Subjected to Monotonic Loading” International Journal of Engineering and
Innovative Technology (IJEIT) Volume 2, Issue 10.
[13] P. Rajaram, A. Murugesan and G. S. Thirugnanam, “Experimental Study on behavior of Interior RC Beam Column Joints Subjected to Cyclic Loading”
international journal of applied engineering research (2010).
[14] Kasliwal N. A. and Rajguru R. S. ‘Effect of Numbers and Positions of Shear Walls on Seismic Behaviour of Multistoried Structure’ International Journal of
Science, Engineering and Technology Research (2016) ISSN: 2278 – 7798
[15] N. M. Nikam, L. G. Kalurkar, “Pushover Analysis of Building with Shear Wall”, International Journal of Earth Sciences and Computing, Volume 6 Issue No. 8,
(August 2016), pp-2916-2918.
[16] Kiran Tidke, Rahul Patil, Dr. G. R. Gandhe , “ Seismic Analysis of building with and without Shear wall ”, International Journal of Innovative Research in
Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 5, Issue 10, (October 2016).
[17] Shubham R. Kasat, Sanket R. Patil, Akshay S. Raut and Shrikant R. Bhuskade, ‘Comparative Study of Multi Storey Building Under Action of Shear Wall
Using ETABS Software’ International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, and Optimization Techniques (2016) ISSN: 2348 – 8352
[18] K. Lova Raju, K. V. G. D. Balaji, “Effective location of shear wall on performance of building frame subjected to earthquake load”, International Advanced
Research Journal in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 2, Issue 1, (January 2015), pp-33-36.
[19] Ravikanth Chittiprolu, Ramancharla Pradeep Kumar, “Significance of Shear Wall in High rise Irregular Buildings”, International Journal of Education and
Applied Research, Vol. 4, Issue Spl-2, (Jan - June 2014), pp-35-37.
[20] Lakshmi K. O., Prof. Jayasree Ramanujan, Mrs. Bindu Sunil, Dr. Laju Kottallil and Prof. Mercy Joseph Poweth, ‘Effect of shear wall location in buildings
subjected to seismic loads’ ISOI Journal of Engineering and Computer science(2014) Volume 1 Issue 1; Page No. 07-17
[21] M. S. Aainawala and Dr. P. S. Pajgade, ‘Design of Multistoried R.C.C. Buildings with and without Shear Walls’ International Journal of Engineering Sciences
& Research Technology (2014) ISSN: 2277-965
[22] P. P. Chandurkar, P. S. Pajgade, “Seismic Analysis of RCC Building with and without Shear Wall”, International Journal of Modern Engineering Research,
Vol. 3, Issue. 3, May - June 2013, pp-1805-1810.
[23] P. B. Oni and Dr. S. B. Vanakudre, ‘Performance Based Evaluation of Shear Walled R.C.C. Building by Pushover Analysis’ International Journal of Modern
Engineering Research (2013) Vol. 3, Issue. 4, Jul - Aug. 2013 pp-2522-2525, ISSN: 2249-6645
[24] Romy Mohan and C Prabha, “Dynamic Analysis of RCC Buildings with Shear Wall”, International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, Volume 04,
No 06 SPL, October 2011, pp-659-662.
[25] Anshuman S., Dipendu Bhunia and Bhavin Ramjiyani, ‘Solution of Shear Wall Location in Multi-Storey Building’ International Journal of Civil and Structural
Engineering (2011) ISSN 0976 – 4399
[26] IS 875-1987 - Indian standard- “Code of Practice for design loads for buildings and structures”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 347