International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)

ISSN (Online): 2319-7064

Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391

Seismic Evaluation of RC Framed Building With

and Without Shear Walls (Performance Based
Design
J. Muralidhara Rao1, Dr. K. Rajasekhar2
1
PG Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Siddartha Educational Academy Group of Institutions/Integrated Campus, Tirupati (Rural)/
, Affiliated to /JNTUA Ananthapuramu, (India)
2
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Siddartha Educational Academy Group of Institutions/Integrated Campus,
Tirupati (Rural) ,Affiliated to /JNTUA Ananthapuramu, (India)

Abstract: About 60% of Indian land is in zone III,IV and V. Major cities like Mumbai, Chennai, Delhi etc are in seismic prone zones.
Buildings in these cities are vulnerable to earthquakes and most of the old buildings in these areas are designed and constructed
without considering seismic effect. So evaluating the performance and strengthening of these structures, if necessary is essential. There
are linear static methods namely code compliance method and nonlinear static methods which are also called as pushover methods
namely capacity spectrum method and displacement coefficient method are available. Procedure for evaluating the structures using
these methods were studied in this work and a case study on a structure were done using above methods.

Keywords: MDOF multi degree of freedom, SDOF single degree of freedom

1. Introduction mechanisms, etc. Krawinkler and Seneviratna conducted a

detailed study that discusses the advantages, disadvantages
Pushover analysis is mainly to evaluate existing buildings and the applicability of pushover analysis by considering
and retrofit them. It can also be applied for new structures. various aspects of the procedure. The basic concepts and
RC framed buildings would become massive if they were to main assumptions on which the pushover analysis is based,
be designed to behave elastically during earthquakes without target displacement estimation of MDOF structure through
damage, also they become uneconomical. Therefore, the equivalent
structures must undergo damage to dissipate seismic energy.
To design such a structure, it is necessary to know its SDOF domain and the applied modification factors,
performance and collapse pattern. To know the performance importance of lateral load pattern on pushover predictions,
and collapse pattern, nonlinear static procedures are helpful. the conditions under which pushover predictions are
adequate or not and the information obtained from pushover
Nonlinear static analysis, or pushover analysis has been analysis were identified. The accuracy of pushover
developed over the past twenty years and has become the predictions was evaluated on a 4-story steel perimeter frame
preferred analysis procedure for design and seismic damaged in 1994 Northridge earthquake. The frame was
performance evaluation purposes as the procedure is subjected to nine ground motion records. Local and global
relatively simple and considers post-elastic behaviour. seismic demands were calculated from pushover analysis
However, the procedure involves certain approximations and results at the target displacement associated with the
simplifications that some amount of variation is always individual records. The comparison of pushover and
expected to exist in seismic demand prediction of pushover nonlinear dynamic analysis results showed that pushover
analysis. analysis provides good predictions of seismic demands for
low-rise structures having uniform distribution of inelastic
2. Literature Review on Pushover Analysis behaviour over the height. It was also recommended to
implement pushover analysis with caution and judgment
2.1 Past studies on pushover analysis considering its many limitations since the method is
approximate in nature and it contains many unresolved issues
Most of the simplified nonlinear analysis procedures utilized that need to be investigated.
for seismic performance evaluation make use of pushover
analysis and/or equivalent SDOF representation of actual 2.2 Description of Pushover Analysis
structure. However, pushover analysis involves certain
approximations that the reliability and the accuracy of the The pushover analysis of a structure is a static non-linear
procedure should be identified. For this purpose, researchers analysis under permanent vertical loads and gradually
investigated various aspects of pushover analysis to identify increasing lateral loads. The equivalent static lateral loads
the limitations and weaknesses of the procedure and approximately represent earthquake induced forces. A plot of
proposed improved pushover procedures that consider the the total base shear versus top displacement in a structure is
effects of lateral load patterns, higher modes, failure obtained by this analysis that would indicate any premature
failure or weakness. The analysis is carried out up to failure,
Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 261
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
thus it enables determination of collapse load and ductility 2.3 Purpose of Non-linear Static Push-over Analysis
capacity. On a building frame, and plastic rotation is
monitored, and lateral inelastic forces versus displacement The pushover is expected to provide information on many
response for the complete structure is analytically computed. response characteristics that cannot be obtained from an
This type of analysis enables weakness in the structure to be elastic static or dynamic analysis. The following are the
identified. The decision to retrofit can be taken in such examples of such response characteristics:
studies.  The realistic force demands on potentially brittle elements,
such as axial force demands on columns, force demands on
The seismic design can be viewed as a two step process. The brace connections, moment demands on beam to column
first, and usually most important one, is the conception of an connections, shear force demands in deep reinforced
effective structural system that needs to be configured with concrete spandrel beams, shear force demands in
due regard to all important seismic performance objectives, unreinforced masonry wall piers, etc.
ranging from serviceability considerations. This step  Estimates of the deformations demands for elements that
comprises the art of seismic engineering. The rules of thumb have to form in elastically
for the strength and stiffness targets, based on fundamental in order to dissipate the energy imparted to the structure.
knowledge of ground motion and elastic and inelastic  Consequences of the strength deterioration of individual
dynamic response characteristics, should suffice to configure elements on behavior of structural system.
and rough-size an effective structural system.  Consequences of the strength deterioration of the
individual elements on the
Elaborate mathematical/physical models can only be built behavior of the structural system.
once a structural system has been created. Such models are  Identification of the critical regions in which the
needed to evaluate seismic performance of an existing system deformation demands are expected
and to modify component behavior characteristics (strength, to be high and that have to
stiffness, deformation capacity) to better suit the specified become the focus through detailing.
performance criteria.  Identification of the strength discontinuities in plan
elevation that will lead to
The second step consists of the design process that involves changes in the dynamic characteristics in elastic range.
demand/capacity evaluation at all important capacity  Estimates of the inter storey drifts that account for strength
parameters, as well as the prediction of demands imposed by or stiffness discontinuities and that may be used to control
ground motions. Suitable capacity parameters and their the damages and to evaluate P-Delta effects.
acceptable values, as well as suitable methods for demand  Verification of the completeness and adequacy of load
prediction will depend on the performance level to be path, considering all the elements of the structural system,
evaluated. all the connections, the stiff nonstructural elements
of significant strength, and the foundation system.
However, Pushover analysis consists of a series of sequential
elastic analyses, superimposed to approximate a force- The last item is the most relevant one as the analytical model
displacement curve of the overall structure. A two or three incorporates all elements, whether structural or nonstructural,
dimensional model which includes bilinear or tri-linear load- that contribute significantly to the lateral load distribution.
deformation diagrams of all lateral force resisting elements is Load transfer through across the connections through the
first created and gravity loads are applied initially. A ductile elements can be checked with realistic forces; the
predefined lateral load pattern which is distributed along the effects of stiff partial-height infill walls on shear forces in
building height is then applied. The lateral forces are columns can be evaluated; and the maximum overturning
increased until some member‟s yield. The structural model is moment in walls, which is often limited by the uplift capacity
modified to account for the reduced stiffness of yielded of foundation elements can be estimated.
members and lateral forces are again increased until
additional member‟s yield. The process is continued until a These benefits come at the cost of the additional analysis
control displacement at the top of building reaches a certain effort, associated with incorporating all important elements,
level of deformation or structure becomes unstable. The roof modeling their inelastic load-deformation characteristics, and
displacement is plotted with base shear to get the global executing incremental inelastic analysis, preferably with three
capacity curve (Figure 1). dimensional analytical models.

2.3 Adaptability of computer programs

It is well known fact the distribution of mass and rigidity is

one of the major considerations in the seismic design of
moderate to high rise buildings. Invariably these factors
introduce coupling effects and non-linearity‟s in the system,
hence it is imperative to use non-linear static analysis
approach by using specialized programs viz., ETABS,
STAADPRO2005, IDARC, NISA-CIVIL, etc., for cost-
Figure 1: Global Capacity (pushover) of a structure effective seismic evaluation and retrofitting of buildings.

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 262
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
2.4 Procedure to do pushover analysis descending branch of a load-deformation curve, the residual
strength can be assumed to be 20% of the yield strength.
Nonlinear static pushover analysis is a very powerful feature (v) Point „E‟ corresponds to the maximum deformation
offered in the Nonlinear version of ETABS. Pushover capacity with the residual strength.
analysis can be performed on both two and three dimensional
structural models. A pushover case may start from zero initial
conditions, or it may start from the end of a previous
pushover case. However, ETABS allows plastic hinging
during "Gravity" pushover analysis. ETABS can also
perform pushover analysis as either force-controlled or
displacement-controlled.
1) Create the basic computer model (without the pushover
data) in the usual manual. The graphical interface of
ETABS makes this a quick and easy task.
2) Define hinge properties and acceptance criteria for the
pushover hinges using moment rotation relations as shown
in next topic. The program includes several built-in default
hinge properties that are based on average values from
ATC-40 for concrete members and average values from Figure 2: General Hinge property
FEMA-273 for steel members. These built in properties
can be useful for preliminary analyses, but user-defined 2.4.2 Moment-Curvature relations:
properties are recommended for final analyses. This Moment curvature is representation of behaviour of the
example uses default properties. member. The moment curvature relationship is established
3) Locate the pushover hinges on the model by selecting one using following procedure for a structural element.
or more frame members and assigning them one or more
hinge properties and hinge locations. 2.4.3 Material properties for moment curvature:
4) Define the pushover load cases. In ETABS more than one Stress strain models used for evaluation of moment curvature
pushover load case can be run in the same analysis. Also a relations are Kent and park concrete model and IS 456 steel
pushover load case can start from the final conditions of stress strain model.
another pushover load case that was previously run in the
same analysis. Typically, the first pushover load case is
used to apply gravity load and then subsequent lateral
pushover load cases are specified to start from the final
conditions of the gravity pushover. Pushover load cases
can be force controlled, that is, pushed to a certain defined
force level, or they can be displacement controlled, that is,
pushed to a specified displacement. Typically, a gravity
load pushover is force controlled and lateral pushovers are
displacement controlled. ETABS allows the distribution of Figure 3: Kent and park concrete model
lateral force used in the pushover to be based on a uniform
acceleration in a specified direction, a specified mode
shape, or a user-defined static load case.

2.4.1 User defined Hinge properties

In pushover analysis, it is necessary to model the non-linear
load-deformation behavior of the elements. Beams and
columns should have moment versus rotation and shear force
versus shear deformation hinges. For columns, the rotation of
the moment hinge can be calculated for the axial load
available from the gravity load analysis. All compression
struts have to be modeled with axial load versus axial
deformation hinges. Figure 4: IS 456 stress strain curve for steel

An idealized load-deformation curve is shown in figure 2.4.4 Procedure to determine moment curvature curve:
below. It is a piece-wise linear curve defined by five points 1) Section is divided into elemental strip.
as explained below. 2) Select the extreme compressive fibre strain, ϵcm and neutral
(i)Point „A‟ corresponds to the unloaded condition. axis depth Kd.
(ii)Point „B‟ corresponds to the onset of yielding. 3) The strain and stress at each strip level is calculated for
(iii)Point „C‟ corresponds to the ultimate strength. varying neutral axis from strain profile and stress strain
(iv)Point „D‟ corresponds to the residual strength. For the relationship i.e. ϵsi = ϵcm*(kd-di) / kd. As shown in below
computational stability, it is recommended to specify non- stress block figure.
zero residual strength. In absence of the modeling of the
Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 263
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
4) Determine forces in steel in compression and tension the structure is a regular building with a height less than
regions i.e. Cs or Ts =fsi*Asi 16.50 m, as per Clause 7.8.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, a
5) Calculate compressive force in concrete i.e. Ccon = dynamic analysis need not be carried out. The effect of finite
α*fc‟*b*kd . size of joint width (e.g., rigid offsets at member ends) is not
6) α and ϒ are rectangular stress block parameters. considered in the analysis. However, the effect of shear
7) They can be determined by concrete model in different deformation is considered. Detailed design of the beams
zones. along longitudinal and transverse as per recommendations of
α = ∫ fc dϵcm IS 13920:1993 has been carried out.
γ= ∫ ϵc fc dϵcm
8) Now, actual kd can be determined by doing iterations 3.2 Geometry of the structure:
using force equilibrium eqn.
9) P = Ccon + Cs - Ts
10) For beams it should be equal to zero and for columns it
should be equal to axial force in the column.
11) By using actual kd and ϵcm, M and phi values can be
determined as shown
12) M = (Ccon*L. A) + (Cs*L. A) + (Ts*L. A) andφ =
ϵcm/kd
13) Consider different ϵcm values till the ultimate strain (ϵu)
is reached and get a set of M and φ values and
develop a plot with M along y-axis and φ along x-axis. Figure 6: Plan of the building
14) ϵu= 0.003+0.002(b/z)+0.2.ρs
15) The moment and curvature is noted at this instance. Dimensions of the structural elements:
16) For each extreme compression strain varying from zero Columns : 0.4 x 0.4
to ultimate strain, moment curvature relationship is Beams : 0.3 x 0.4
established. Slab thickness : 0.12
17) The moment curvature curves is converted into idealized (All dimensions are in meters)
bilinear curves
3.3 Material properties and loads:

For this study material property and loads has been used as
follows
Grade of concrete: M20
Grade of steel: Fe 415
Live load on floors = 2 kN/m2
Density of concrete = 25 kN/m3

Figure 7: Stress blocks at different extreme compression 3.4 Modelling in ETABS

fibre strain
Beams and Columns were modelled with concentrated plastic
hinges at the column and beam faces respectively. Beams
have majorly bending moment (M ) and shear force (V ),
3 2
whereas columns have axial load and bending moments in
two directions (P, M2 and M ). The plastic hinge rotation and
3
moment values corresponding to yield and ultimate states
arrived at for each section and used to define the hinge
properties as explained earlier. A brief description of the
hinges is provided.

3.4.1 Beams
Figure 5: Moment curvature curve Beams are modelled as frame members as line elements with
plastic hinges at both ends. Hinge properties were calculated
3. Case Study as per reinforcement and cross section at ends.

3.1 Structure Information 3.4.2 Columns

Columns are also modelled as line element with plastic
A ground plus five storey RC building of plan dimensions hinges at ends. In columns axial force and biaxial bending
23m x 19 m and height of building is 18m located in seismic moments are considered and hinges are modelled as P-M2-M3
zone II on hard soil is considered. It is assumed that there is
no parking floor for this building. Seismic analysis is
performed using the codal seismic coefficient method. Since

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 264
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
3.4.3 Slabs 4.2.2 Stiffness of the frame
Slabs are modelled as area elements (shell). Live loads on Stiffness of the frames is found out by giving unit force at top
slabs are given as uniform to frame shell. joint.
F = K*
3.4.4 Footings Depending on stiffness of frames storey level shears are
Foundations are modelled as fixed footing no moments, distributed to each nodes as follows.
deflections and sinking of supports were allowed.
F1 = Q1*( )
4. Analysis and Design In the present case, center of mass and center of stiffness
coincides each other and no torsional forces are developed.
4.1 Gravity load analysis Hence lateral forces are applied at every floor levels.

Dead loads of beams, columns, slabs and walls are calculated 4.2.3 Application of lateral loads
using member properties and unit weights. Live load of 2
KN/m is applied on slabs. Bending moments and shear forces
are calculated using gravity loads.

4.2 Lateral load analysis

Lateral loads due to earthquake are calculated using

equivalent static analysis as explained in IS 1893.

4.2.1 Equivalent static analysis:

The total design lateral force or design seismic base shear
(V ) is calculated according to clause 7.5.3 of IS 1893:2002
B
(IS 1893:2002 is referred to as the Code subsequently). 4.2.4 Load Combinations
The total Base shear is given by Load combinations are considered as per IS 456:
V = Hawk 2000 and are given in table EQX implies earthquake loading
Where A is the design horizontal seismic coefficient in X direction and EQY stands for earthquake loading in Y
h
direction. The emphasis here is on showing typical
calculations for ductile design and detailing of building
elements subjected to earthquakes. In practice, wind load
should also be considered in lieu of earthquake load and the
Here critical of the two load cases should be used for design. This
analysis only three combinations were used as shown in
Z = Zone Factor (as per zone II) Table.
I = Importance Factor (I = 1)
R = Response Reduction Factor (OMRF = 3) Table 2: Load combinations for earthquake loading
The values of Z, I, R are given in IS 1893 (part-1):2002. S. No Load Combination DL LL EQ
S /g = Spectral acceleration coefficient. It is calculated 1 1.5DL+1.5LL 1.5 1.5 -
a
according to Clause 6.4.5 of the Code corresponding to the 2 1.2(DL+LL*+EQX) 1.2 0.25/0.5* +1.2
3 1.2(DL+LL* -EQX) 1.2 0.25/0.5* -1.2
fundamental time period T in seconds is given as follows.
a 4 1.2(DL+LL* +EQY) 1.2 0.25/0.5* +1.2
For a Moment Resisting Frame without brick infill panels
5 1.2(DL+LL* -EQY) 1.2 0.25/0.5* -1.2
6 1.5(DL+EQX) 1.5 - +1.5
Ta = 0.075 h0.75for RC frame building
7 1.5(DL-EQX) 1.5 - -1.5
Here 8 1.5(DL+EQY) 1.5 - 1.5
h = Height of the Building Frame 9 1.5(DL-EQY) 1.5 - -1.5
10 0.9DL+1.5EQX 0.9 - +1.5
Base shear is then distributed to storey levels as storey shears 11 0.9DL-1.5EQX 0.9 - -1.5
Qi = (Ah)* 12 0.9DL+1.5EQY 0.9 - +1.5
13 0.9DL-1.5EQY 0.9 - -1.5
Here *Note: Reduced Live loads are considered as per Clause
Qi = Design lateral force at floor I, 7.3.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1).
Wi = Seismic weight of floor I,
hi = Height of floor I measured from base, and 4.3 Design of frame members

n = Number of storeys in the building is the number of levels Worst cases are considered and bending moments, shear
at which the masses are located. forces and axial forces from these cases are taken for design.
The design of all beam and column based on IS: 456 and IS
13920. Due to symmetry of plan, selected as x-direction and
beam and column members were designed and checking were

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 265
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
done all requirement both IS: 456 and IS 13920. The
longitudinal and transverse reinforcement with spacing for
both beam and column are as shown.

4.3.1 IS 456 Detailing

As per is 456:2000, the design of the structural members is to
be carried out by ordinary detailing by providing
corresponding development lengths of the bar diameters after
curtailment of the bar. By this, a weak section is formed at
the curtailment zone. So, in earthquake prone zones, ductile
detailing is preferred also for important structures. Figure 9: shear reinforcement for ductile detailing

4.3.2 IS: 13920 ductile design details:

The top as well as bottom reinforcement shall consist of at
least two bars throughout the member length. This makes the
member more ductile and resists the loads. Some of the rules
to be followed as per IS13920 for beam and column detailing
are as shown below.

In an external joint, both the top and the bottom bars of the
beam shall be provided with anchorage length, beyond the Figure 10: Lapping for shear reinforcement for ductile
inner face of the column, equal to the development length detailing
intension plus 10 times the bar diameter minus the allowance
for 90-degree bend(s) (see Fig) In an internal joint, both face 4.4 Performance of building with shear walls
bars of the beam shall be taken continuously through the
column.

4.3.3 Ductile Detailing of Beam

Figure 11: Ductile Performance of Building

Figure 7: Anchorage Of Beam Bars In An External Joint 5. Seismic evaluation of building

The longitudinal bars shall be spliced, only if hoops are 5.1 ETabs model
provided over the entire splice length, at a spacing not
exceeding 150 mm (see Fig) The lap length shall not be less A structure with 5 bay- 5 bay six storied is modelled with
than the bar development length in tension. Lap splices shall parameters explained in above chapters.
not be provided
a) within a joint,
b) within a distance of 2d from joint face, and
c) within a quarter length of the member where flexural
yielding may generally occur under the effect of
earthquake forces. Not more than 50 percent of the bars
shall be spliced at one section.

Figure 12: Structure model in ETabs

Figure 8: longitudinal reinforcement for ductile detailing

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 266
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
5.1.1 Moment curvature Immediate occupancy IO = 0.67*LS
Having all the design details, moment curvatures for all Life safety LS = 0.75*deformation @ point C
beams and columns at end cross sections where plastic hinges Collapse prevention CP = deformation @ point C but not >
are assumed to form are determined. This is done by 0.75* deformation @ E
preparing an excel spread sheet. Moment curvature curves
for different beams and columns of the structure are shown
below. 5.1.4 Pushover analysis in ETabs:
Design is carried out as per IS 456-2000 than select all beam
to assign hinge properties from Assign > Frame/Line >

Figure 13: Moment curvature curves for beams with non-

ductile detailing
Figure 17: Frame hinge property for beam in ETabs

Figure 14: Moment curvature curves for columns with non-

ductile detailing

5.1.2 Moment rotation relations and hinge properties:

Obtaining yield and ultimate moments and curvatures from Figure 18: Frame hinge property for column in ETabs
moment curvature curves, moment rotations are derived as
explained in earlier chapter. Defining static nonlinear load cases from Define > Static
Nonlinear/Pushover command.
From moment rotation relations, hinge properties are
assumed as shown below figure with acceptance criteria as For push over analysis first apply the gravity loading as
shown and assigned in ETABS. PUSHDOWN shown in Figure and subsequently use lateral
displacement or lateral force as PUSH 2 in sequence to
derive capacity curve and demand curve as shown in Figure.
Start from previous pushover case as PUSHDOWN for
gravity loads is considered for lateral loading as PUSH 2.

Figure 15: Assumed hinge model

5.1.3 Acceptance criteria:

Member performance levels are assumed as follows
Figure 16: Acceptance criteria of hinges
Figure 19: Assigning pushover case for dead load

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 267
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
hinge forms there. All values needed to define M- θp relation
may be obtained by following FEMA or ATC guidelines. In
this work, values for θp were calculated based on the FEMA
guidelines and corresponding M values were read from the
moment-curvature curves of wall sections, under design
gravity load. Moment-curvature curves of wall sections were
obtained from ETABS section designer module, which uses
stress-strain curve for concrete as suggested by Kent and
Park (Park [15]). Plastic hinge length required for this
calculation was based on FEMA guidelines.

Figure 20: Assigning pushover case for lateral load 5.3.3Shear wall shear hinge
Shear hinge property was entirely defined by nominal shear
5.2.1 ETab model with shear wall: strength without any reduction factor. This was calculated per
at the centre bays along the outer periphery 1997 UBC. Shear hinges in all elements were considered
Wall thickness: 230mm force-controlled with no ductility and development of any
Wall property assigned in ETabs: shell shear hinge was considered undesirable for the design
Wall is designed as per ordinary moment resisting frame and objective.
special moment resisting frame with respect to response
reduction factor “R” factor given in ETabs.
For OMRF, R=3
For SMRF, R=5

Figure 22: Pushover or capacity curve of structure

considered with shear wall

6. Results and Conclusions

Figure 21: Model of the building with shear wall
By the present study, it is concluded that, performance
5.3Nonlinear hinge property calculation evaluation of RC buildings can be done by using nonlinear
static pushover technique. Observing the pushover curves
Nonlinear hinge properties, as assigned in SAP2000 model, comparison, it can be stated that effect of shear wall in
were calculated as described in the following. building has significant effect on capacity.

Shear wall PMM hinge: For any given shear wall, PMM At the left bottom of squat shear wall, more tensile and shear
hinge property was calculated in the following two steps: force develops due to lateral forces, so to avoid cracking and
failure of shear wall, confinement of reinforcement is done. It
5.3.1PMM interaction surface: PMM interaction surface increases the load carrying capacity of the building.
determines the load at which a shear wall section becomes
inelastic and forms a hinge. For a given wall section Ductile detailing of members does not increase the capacity
geometry, material and reinforcement arrangement, PMM much, but it increases the ductility significantly.
interaction surface was calculated using ETABS section
designer module. Several of the wall sections are By using performance evaluation methods, it has been
unsymmetrical, and result in different P-M interaction curves determined that the structures performance will be at
in opposite directions. Immediate Occupancy (IO) state for the considered demand.
Pushover analysis is a useful tool of Performance Based
For these unsymmetrical wall sections, the appropriate P-M Seismic Engineering to study post-yield behavior of a
interaction curve corresponding to the direction of pushover structure. It is more complex than traditional linear analysis,
was used in defining hinge property. but it requires less effort and deals with much less amount of
data than a nonlinear response history analysis. Pushover
5.3.2Moment-plastic rotation (M- θp) relation: analysis was performed on a six story concrete building with
M- θp relation for a shear wall section consists of plastic shear wall lateral system and certain unique design features.
rotation and corresponding moments as ratio of yield Utilizing the results from this analysis, some modifications
moment. This relation affects the behavior of a section once a were made to the original code-based design so that the
Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 268
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
design objective of Life Safety performance is expected to be Siddartha Educational Academy Group of Institutions/Integrated
achieved under design earthquake. Campus, Tirupati., Andhra Pradesh.

Dr. K. Rajasekhar received B.Tech. in Civil Engineering, M.Tech.

References in Structural Engineering and Ph.D in Civil Engineering from
S.V.University , Tirupati and having more than 25 years teaching
[1] Applied Technology Council, (1996). “Recommended experience. Presently working as Professor in Civil Engineering in
methodology for seismic evaluation and retrofitting of Siddartha Educational Academy Group of Instututions/Integrated
buildings.” Report No. ATC-40, Redwood City, Campus, Tirupati., Andhra Pradesh.
California.
[2] A.K Jain., “Limit State Design of Reinforced concrete
structures”, NewChand Publishers, Roorkee.
[3] Chopra, A.K. (2007), “Dynamics of structures: Theory
and application to earthquake engineering”, 2nd edition,
Prentice Hall of India.
[4] C.V.R. Murty, “Seismic strengthening of RC framed
buildings: A formal Quantitative approach”. Journal of
Structural Engineering, Vol.35, No.2 (June-July 2008)
[5] “Evaluation of pushover analysis procedures for frame
structures” a thesis from Middle East technical
University by Sermin Oğuz (2005).
[6] Federal Emergency Management Agency - FEMA 356
“Pre standard and Commentary for Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buildings”, Department of Homeland
Security Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Washington, 2000.
[7] Kent, D.C., and Park, R. (1971). "Flexural members with
confined concrete." Journal of the Structural Division,
Proc. of the American Society of Civil Engineers,
97(ST7), 1969-1990.
[8] Park, R., and Paulay, T. (1971). Reinforced Concrete
Structures, 1st Ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York.
[9] Paulay and Priestley, “Seismic design of reinforced
concrete structures” Copy right(c) 1992 by John Wiley
and Sons.
[10] Pushover experiment and analysis of a full scale non-
seismically detailed RC structure, Engineering
structures, Vol.46, Jan-13.
[11] Neethu K. N, Saji, K.P.”Push over Analysis of RC
Buidling.” IJSR, Vol. 4 Issue 8, August 2015.
[12] Akanshu Sharma, G. R. Reddy, K. K. Vaze, R.
Eligehausen, “Pushover Experiment and Analysis of a
Full Scale Non-seismically Detailed RC Structures”,
Engineering Structures, Vol- 46, pp.218-233, 2014.
[13] IS 456: 2000, “Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Indian
Standard Code of Practice”, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi, India.
[14] IS 13920: 1993, “Ductile Detailing of Reinforced
Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces- Indian
Standard Code of Practice”, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi, India.
[15] Bureau of Indian Standards. (2002). “Criteria for
Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures.” IS 1893
(Part I):2002, New Delhi.
[16] SAP User Manual, version 15, Berkeley (CA, USA):
Computer and Structures, Inc., 2000.

Author Profile
J.Muralidhara Rao received B.Tech. degree in Civil Engineering
from Jawaharlal Nehru Technology University, Anantapur, Andhra
Pradesh. Presently pursing M.Tech. (Structural Engineering ) in

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164112 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164112 269