Study and Comparison of Structure Having

Different Infill Materials using ETABS

Dissertation
Submitted to
Rajiv Gandhi Prodyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal, M.P.
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for award of the Degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
With specialization in
(STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING)
By

TUSHAR RAJU
Enrollment No. – 0186CE16MT29

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

Dr. Rakesh Patel

Department of Civil Engineering
SIRT-S, Bhopal

Department Of Civil Engineering

SAGAR INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCE
June, 2020

1|Page
 SAGAR INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY &
SCIENCE Bhopal, M.P

Department of Civil Engineering

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the work embodies in this dissertation entitled " Study and Comparison of
Structure Having Different Infill Materials using ETABS " being submitted by Tushar Raju
Enrolment No. 0186CE16MT29 for fulfilment of the requirement for the award of " Master of
Technology in Structural Engineering " discipline to Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki
Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal (M.P.) during the academic year 2016-18 is a record of bonafide piece of
work, undertaken by him under the supervision of the undersigned.

Dr. Rakesh Patel

Dr. Vikas S Pagey
Guide
Director
Department of Civil Engineering
SIRT-S, BHOPAL
SIRT-S, Bhopal
 SAGAR INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY &
SCIENCE Bhopal, M.P

Department of Civil Engineering

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

The dissertation entitled " Study and Comparison of Structure Having Different Infill Materials
using ETABS " being submitted by Tushar Raju Enrolment No. 0186CE16MT29 has been
examined by us and is hereby approved for the award of ‘"Master of Technology in Structural
Engineering", for which it has been submitted. It is understood that by this approval the
undersigned do not necessarily endorse or approve any statement made, opinion expressed or
conclusion drawn there in, but approve the dissertation only for the purpose for which it has been
submitted.

(Internal Examiner) (External Examiner)

 Declaration

I hereby declare that the work. which is being presented in the dissertation, entitled “Study and
Comparison of Structure Having Different Infill Materials using ETABS” in the fulfilment of
the requirements for the award of degree of Master of Technology in structural Engineering
submitted in the department of Civil Engineering in Sagar Institute of research technology and
science is an authentic record of my own work carried under the guidance of

Dr. Rakesh Patel. I have not submitted the matter embodied in this report for award of any other
degree.

I also declare that' "A check for plagiarism has been carried out on the dissertation and is found
within the acceptable limit and report of which is enclosed here with."

Tushar Raju

(0186CE16MT29)

Dr. Rakesh Patel Dr. Vikas S Pagey

Guide Director
Department of Civil Engineering SIRT-S, BHOPAL

SIRT-S, Bhopal
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to may supervisors Dr. Rakesh Patel
Department of Civil Engineering, SIRT-S Bhopal who encouraged me all throughout the course of
the project. Their careful support and motivation were the prime factors contributing to the timely
and successful completion of this project.

I owe an enormous debt of gratitude to my thesis guide, Dr. Rakesh Patel for guiding and
inspiring me from the beginning through the end of this thesis with his intellectual advices and
insightful suggestions. I truly appreciate and value his consistent feedback on my progress, which
was always constructive and encouraging, and ultimately drove me to the right direction.

I also owe a great deal of thanks to several people who have helped and motivated me
throughout my thesis work as well as throughout my postgraduate course at SIRTS, Bhopal, in
particular, Dr. Ashish Dutta (Group Coordinator Projects), Dr. V.P. Saxena (Advisor
Research, SIRT-S), Dr. Navin Chand(Group Advisor R&D And Projects) ,Dr. Vikas S Pagey
(Director, SIRT-S, Bhopal), and all teaching and non-teaching staff of Civil Engineering
department for their valuable assistances they offered me generously.

Tushar Raju

(0186CE16MT29)
Index

Abstract....................................................................................................................................11
1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................12
1.1 Overview….....................................................................................................................12
1.2 Infill Wall.........................................................................................................................12
1.3 Diagonal Strut Member Method.....................................................................................14
1.4 Design Criteria of High Rish Building............................................................................15
1.4.1 Design Philosophy: General Design Philosophy...................................................15

1.4.2 Lateral Load Design Philosophy............................................................................15

1.5 SeismicAnalysis.............................................................................................................16
1.6 Application of Response Spectrum................................................................................21
1.7 Objectives.......................................................................................................................22
1.8 Scope & Need of the Study............................................................................................22
1.9 Layout of the Study........................................................................................................23
2. Literature Review................................................................................................................24
2.1 General...........................................................................................................................24
3. Methodology.......................................................................................................................29
3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................29
3.2 Flow Chart......................................................................................................................29
3.3 General Discription........................................................................................................30
3.4 Load Calculation............................................................................................................34
3.4.1 Dead Load.............................................................................................................34
3.4.2 Live Load..............................................................................................................34
3.4.3 Siesmic load..........................................................................................................35
3.5 Different Vies of Structure..............................................................................................35

4. Analysis & Result...............................................................................................................41

4.1 Intoduction...................................................................................................................41
4.1.1 Deflection of all the Models in mm.....................................................................41
4.1.2 Shear Force of all the Models in KN...................................................................44
 4.1.3 Bending Moment of all the Models in KN-M......................................................47
4.2 Maximum Story Drifts In Different Stories.................................................................51
4.3 Auto Lateral Load In Different Stories........................................................................52
4.4 Shear Force In Different Stories..................................................................................53
5. Conclusion and future scope...............................................................................................55
5.1 General.........................................................................................................................55

References................................................................................................................................57

Paper published

Plagiarism Report
List of Figures

Fig. 1.1: Infill Wall

13 Fig. 1.2: Seismic Zone Distribution Map

18 Fig. 1.3: Response Specta for 5% damping condition

21 Fig. 3.1: Material Property Data

31 Fig. 3.2: Wall Loading

34 Fig. 3.3: 3d View Of Building

35 Fig. 3.4: 3D View Of Building With Infill Wall Property

36 Fig. 3.5: Etabs Modal With Strut Member

37 Fig. 3.6: Side View Of Strut Member

37 Fig. 3.7: Plan & Geometry

38 Fig. 3.8: Support Conditions: Fixed

38 Fig. 3.9: Defining Load Patterns

39 Fig. 3.10: Defining Seismic Load Patterns

39 Fig. 3.11: Defining Response Spectrum

40 Fig. 4.1: Response of the Structure

50 Fig. 4.2: Displacement Response of the Structure

50 Fig. 4.3: Storey Drift Data Of The Structure

51 Fig. 4.4: Auto Lateral Load In The Stories

52 Fig. 4.5: Storey Shear Data Of The Structure

53 Fig. 5.1: Shear Force in each Storey of different models in KN

54
List of Tables

Table no. 1.1: Seismic zones and their intensity 19

Table no. 1.2: Importance factor for different structures

20

Table no. 1.3: Response reduction factor for different R.C.C building systems

20

Table no. 3.1: Material Description

30

Table no. 3.2: Material Properties

31

Table no. 3.3: Building Geometry

32

Table no. 3.4: Load assignment as per I.S.Code

32

Table no. 3.5: Types of modal formation in ETABS

33

Table no. 3.6: Earthquake Parameters

33

Table no. 4.1: Deflection in Flyash wall models

41

Table no. 4.2: Deflection in AAC block wall models

42

Table no. 4.3: Deflection in Hollow Concrete block wall models

43
Table no. 4.4: Shear in Flyash wall models

44

Table no. 4.5: Shear in AAC block wall models

45

Table no. 4.6: Shear in Hollow Concrete blocks wall models

46

Table no. 4.7: Bending Moment in Flyash wall models

47

Table no. 4.8: Bending Moment in AAC block wall models

48

Table no. 4.9: Bending Moment in Hollow Concrete block wall models

49
 ABSTRACT

Reinforcement concrete structure frame system widely used around the world. In building
structure, structure element is generally taken as Beam, column, foundation. The dead & live load
is transferred from beam to column, column to footing then ultimately load distributed into the soil.
The wall load is taken by beam. In building design, we mentioned the whole wall on the beam is
possible, if it is not possible, we taken concealed beam into the slab below the wall. During the
analysis of frame structure, we consider wall as non-structural element. But including walls in the
structure analysis is play important role. This study deals with the examination of the impact of
infill in structure and their behaviour in structure. In present situation high rise building
constructed with the various type of infill wall materials. Some of them generally use for example
Red brick, AAC wall, Hollow concrete block, lightweight Aluminium & Steel panels. So three
types of models are created on ETABS software. In this study 9 storey high rise building is
designed in ETABS with taking 3 infill materials like Fly Ash brick ,AAC block and Hollow
concrete block taken for study which on the most critical earthquake zone IV analysis (Dynamic)
is done using ETABS, soil properties assumed medium and importance factor is taken 1.2 . The all
three infill wall models compare with the basic design parameter like moment, shear force,
displacement.

The all three models that I passed under seismic loading helped me to reach the conclusion on how
all three models perform in the case of seismic loading. And by comparing the percentage growth
in the displacement and storey drift we can decide the most efficient building.

Because the AAC block has the lowest density hence it should have the least moment generated
compared to other bricks almost 20-30 percent difference is expected.

And the model with Strut member should have least deflection compared to other models. The
difference of 15-20 percent is expected atleast.

Keywords: ETABS, Structural Analysis, masonry infill, RC frame, earthquake, displacement, drift,
base shear, AAC blocks, Hollow concrete block, Bending moment, Diagonal Strut
 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 : OVERVIEW:

A tall structure is a multi-story structure in which most tenants rely upon lifts [lifts] to arrive at
their goals. Now a days due to growth of the population Housing has developed into an economy
generating industry. Because of this high rise buildings have become a solution in large cities. The
increasing frequency of the earthquakes in the world and building of tall structures, over the last
few 10-20 years forces for the development of tremor safe structures. A considerable lot of the tall
structures had fell in ongoing tremors and the reasons credited were poor plan and development
rehearses. The goal of this work is to talk about the potential outcomes of demonstrating support
itemizing of strengthened solid models in common sense use considering different type of infill
walls. To carry out the analytical investigations, the structure is modelled and analysis is done in
ETABS software.

1.2 : INFILL WALL:

The infill wall is the supported wall that works as separator in buildings used to define shape of a
room or outer boundary of a building constructed with a three-dimensional framework structure
generally made of steel or reinforced concrete. Therefore, the basic edge guarantees the bearing
capacity, though the infill divider serves to isolate inward and space, topping off the crates of the
external casings. The walls has one of a kind static capacity to shoulder its very own load. Infill
walls are outside vertical misty kind of conclusion. As for different types of separators, the infill-
walls contrasts from the parcel that divides two inside spaces. The last plays out similar elements
of the infill-wall, hydro-thermally and acoustically, however performs static capacities as well..
The use of masonry infill walls, and to some extent veneer walls, especially in reinforced
concrete frame structures, is regular in numerous nations. Indeed, the utilization of stone work
infill dividers offers a prudent and tough arrangement. They are anything but difficult to fabricate,
appealing for engineering and has a productive cost-execution.

Infill walling is the conventional name of a board that is worked in the middle of the floors of the
essential auxiliary casing of a working as such Infill board dividers are a type of cladding worked
between the basic individuals from a building.
The auxiliary edge offers help for the cladding framework, and the cladding gives division of the
inner and outside environments. Infill dividers are viewed as non-load bearing, yet they oppose
wind loads. Useful prerequisites for infill board dividers include: They are self-supporting between
basic surrounding individuals. They give climate obstruction.

They give warm and sound protection. The give imperviousness to fire. They give adequate
openings to common ventilation and coating.

Fig. 1.1: Infill Wall

Above figure shows a section of Infill wall built between supporting columns and beams.
1.3 : DIAGONAL STRUT MEMBER METHOD:

For the presence of infill in our building frame modal, we can create a diagonal (strut) member in
frame structure, the width of strut depends on the length of contact between the wall & the columns
(αh) and between the wall & the beams (αL). Stafford Smith formulated method of calculating αh
and αL by assuming beam on an elastic foundation in the year 1966. Hendry in the year 1998 gave
the given equation to calculate the strut width w which can replace structural properties of an infill-
wall, where the strut is under uniform compressive stress.

Where, ‘Em’ is elastic modulus of wall, ‘Ef’ is elastic modulus of what the frame is made of, t is
thickness of wall(infill), ‘h’ is height of wall(infill) and L is length of infill, ‘Ic’ is moment of
inertia of the column, ‘Ib’ is moment of inertia of the beam and θ = tan-1 (h/L).
1.4 : DESIGN CRITERIA OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING:

In this section, the points of importance to be considered for the design of any high-rise building
structure are described. The points which may cause particular consequence in any high rise
building and are based on above-mentioned literature are mentioned below.

1.4.1 : Design Philosophy: General Design Philosophy

The Limit State method of designing is accepted worldwide and based on semi-probabilistic for
load and geometric conditions. One of the two fundamental types of limit state designing is
ultimate limit state and it is usually taken under consideration in the design of high-rise structure.
Due to tendency of instantly getting ultimate limit state it is a critical issue in high rise buildings
and is given special consideration. An appropriate safety factor should be considered for the safe
designing. The Limit State design mainly deals with the limit of collapse and limit of flexure. Limit
State of serviceability deals with the appearance, efficiency and durability of the building
throughout its design life. This can be accomplished by controlling unnecessary avoidance and
break width. As it is notable, the above plan standards apply additionally to low-ascent structures.

1.4.2 : Lateral Load Design Philosophy

As opposed to vertical burden that might be accepted to increment directly with stature, parallel
burdens are very factor and increment quickly with tallness. For example, under a regular wind
load the moment (overturning) at the base differs in proportion with respect to the square of
building height, while the lateral deflection differs as the fourth power.

As for their lower brethren, there are four factors to consider in the design of the tall buildings:
strength, rigidity, stability and now-a-days legality. The quality necessity is the prevailing role, and
often control the design. There are two ways to fulfil rigidity and stability requirements.
[1]. Increase the size of members above and beyond the strength requirements. However, this
methodology has its very own points of confinement, past which it turns out to be either
unreasonable or uneconomical.

[2]. The second and the more elegant approach is to change the configuration of the structure into
something that is inherently more rigid and stable. It is of significant to note that there are no
reports of completed tall buildings having collapsed because of wind loads.

Analytically, , it very well may be demonstrated that a tall working under the activity of wind will
achieve a condition of breakdown by the purported p-d impact, in which the unconventionality of
the gravity load increments to such a size, that it realizes pounding of sections because of
substantial hub loads. In this manner, a vital security paradigm is to guarantee that anticipated
breeze burdens will be underneath the heap comparing to stability limit. The second thought is to
restrict the parallel redirection to a dimension that will guarantee that the compositional completes
and parcels are not harmed. albeit less serious than the breakdown of the fundamental structure, the
floor to floor avoidance typically alluded to as the inter-story drift nevertheless has to be limited
because of the cost of relaxing the windows and the hazard to pedestrians of falling glass.

Large deflections and accelerations of the building’s top floor should be considered from the
standpoint of service-ability and occupant comfort. Peak acceleration at the top floors of the
building resulting from frequent windstorm should be limited to minimize possible perception of
motion by the occupants. In earthquake resisting plan it is important to avoid out and out
breakdown of working under serious quakes while restricting the non-auxiliary harm to a base
amid incessant earth tremors. The building should be designed to have a reserve of ductility to
sustain gravity loads under large inelastic deformations during severe seismic activity.

1.5 : SEISMIC ANALYSIS:

It has been seen in past seismic tremors that the structures on inclined plane give more overlay.
Shivers make substantial damage to structures, for case, loss of people in the building and if the
intensity of vibration is high then it can cause collapse of the structure. In past years people has
been produced irrefutably and as a result of which cities and towns started expanding out. In light
of this reason distinctive structures are being inalienable inclined zones. India sports a wide
shoreline forefront which is anchored with mountains and plateau. The structures in these zones are
made on inclining grounds. A tremendous piece of the unforgiving ranges in India go under the
seismic zone II, III and IV zones in such case working in context of slanting grounds are
exceedingly slight against seismic tremor. This is a possible result of the way that the bits in the
ground floor differentiate in their statures as showed up by the tendency of the ground. Segments
toward one side are short and on flip side are long, by righteousness of which they are exceedingly
delicate. Seismic forces acts more separate in inclining zones due to the assistant inconsistency.
Moreover it has been examined that the seismic tremor exercises are slanted in inclining ranges. In
India, for example, the north-east states. The deficiency of plain ground in inclining ranges powers
advancement development on inclining ground realizing diverse imperative structures, for instance,
reinforced concrete encompassed specialist's offices, colleges, motels and work environments
laying on uneven inclinations. The lead of structures in the midst of tremor depends on the
dispersal of mass and immovability in both even and vertical planes of the structures. In slanting
district both these properties varies with irregularity and asymmetry. Such improvements in
seismically slanted regions make them exhibited to more unmistakable shears and torsion.

Poor conduct of short portions is a consequence of how short area is stiffer when showed up
distinctively in connection to the long piece, and it draws in more noteworthy earthquake
control. Solidness of a zone is the invulnerability to natural disasters – the more prominent is the
steadfastness, more noteworthy is the power required to turn it. On the off chance that a short
region isn't attractively proposed for such a liberal oblige, it can endure through essential
insidiousness amidst a seismic tremor. The immediate static arrangement of building is
appeared with their straightly versatile strength of the building. Course of regular shake
demands for the straight static framework related to static sidelong powers whose aggregate is
corresponding to the parallel weight. When it is joined with the straightly adaptable model of
the building it will accomplish graph development amplitudes approximating most vital
relocations that are normal amidst the course of action shiver. To mastermind the earth tremor
weights to figure the internal forces will be sensible evaluated of predicted that amidst would
design earth shudder.
 Fig. 1.2: Seismic Zone Distribution Map

This Map shows the different Seismic zones into which India is divided. Each zone is displayed
in different color and the legend is given at the bottom of the Map.
 The force and vibration because of seismic waves are ascertained according to IS 1893:2016
where the configuration seismic level coefficient Ah can be figured by the expression: -

Vb = Ah x W

Vb = Seismic base shear (Design)

Ah = Horizontal seismic coefficient

W = Weight of the building (Seismic)

Z .I
Ah = x Sa/g
2. R

Where Z = zone factor given in table 2 in IS 1893:2016.

Table No. 1.1: Seismic Zones and Their Intensity

SEISMIC ZONE II III IV V

INTENSITY Low Moderate Severe Very Severe

Z 0.10 0.16 0.24 0.36

This table gives the average Intensity of Earthquake in different Seismic Zones. In our study we
are focusing on the structure situated in the Zone IV Seismic Zone which has severe intensity
 Table No. 1.2: Importance Factor for Different Structures

S. No. Structure Importance Factor

1 Important service and community 1.5

buildings, such as hospitals; schools; monumental

structures; telephone exchange, power grid, court, etc.

2 All other buildings 1

Different types of buildings have different Importance factor based upon there usage it is defined
as per I.S. code. The Importance factor is the governing factor which helps deciding the
precautionary measures taken while designing a building in a certain earthquake zone. I =
Importance factor as given in the table no. 6 of I.S. code 1893:2016 (Part-1)

Table No.1.3: Response Reduction Factor for different R.C.C. building systems
Building Frame System Response Reduction Factor Remark

O.M.R.F. (Ordinary moment 3 Ordinary detailing

resisting frame)

S.M.R.F. (Special moment 5 Ductile detailing

resisting frame)

Response reduction factor is the factor by which the actual base shear force should be reduced, to
obtain the design lateral force during design basic earthquake (DBE) shaking.

R = Response reduction factor as given in the table no. 7 of I.S. code 1893: 2016 (part-1)
 Fig: 1.3: Response spectra for 5% damping condition
Here Sa/g is the Average response acceleration coefficient.

This table shows the spectrum of change in the Average Response Acceleration coefficient
with the periods.

1.6 : APPLICATION OF RESPONSE SPECTRUM:

After defining the seismic parameters, dynamic analysis is performed using ETABS’17 software
by applying response spectrum method in accordance with IS-1893:2016. It is done by providing
acceleration in X-direction using SRSS (Square root sum of the squares) for different types of soil
condition.

Acceleration in X-direction is calculated using formula = Z/2 x I/R x Sa/g,

Where Z = 0.24 (For Zone IV),

The design base shear VB (calculated from the Response Spectrum method) is contrasted and the
base shear Vb (determined by observational recipe for the major time period).
On the off chance that VB is not exactly Vb, the majority of the reaction amounts are increased by
Vb/VB according to Condition 7.8.2. The ratio Vb / VB is known as multiplication factor (MF)
and this process is repeated until MF≤ 1. The same process is applied to other load cases.

1.7 : OBJECTIVES:

The goals of this study are as follows:-

 To Determine the Analysis of a Building structure with various types of infill walls
 To determine performance of building structure with infill walls in zones IV.
 To analyze the implementation of SRSS Method in tall structure using ETABS.
 To compare normal conventional building with building with different infill wall building
with behavior in loading and other structure parameter.

1.8 : SCOPE & NEED OF THE STUDY:

The analysis is done on the seismic behaviour of a symmetrical/regular shaped building having Fly

Ash, AAC Block & Red Brick:

a. In future studies will can analyze the different infill walls effect in the irregular building under

the seismic loading dynamic analysis.

b. We can also analyze infill wall effect in large span building (like Flat or PT Slab).

The present study attempts to provide a study of the behaviour of a regular structure with under

seismic dynamic loading considering different infill materials.

1.9 : LAYOUT OF THE STUDY:

Chapter 1: Introduction

This chapter presents details study of behaviour of reinforced cement concrete structure under
lateral loads on the basis of different infill materials used. It defines the research problem adopted
and the scope, states the aims and objectives adopted for the project work.

Chapter 2: Literature review

This chapter presents the review of previously published literature in the field of reinforced
concrete framed structures with different infill materials and loading considerations. It also reviews
the behaviour of buildings under lateral forces and infill walls during earthquake/lateral loading,
methods of modelling of infill walls.

Chapter 3: Methodology

This chapter presents the proper procedure and step wise process for completion of research with
proper flow chart. In this chapter modelling of all cases in ETABS has also been described.

Chapter 4: Analysis & Results

In this chapter results in terms of Shear Force, Maximum Storey Drift and Deflection in all stories
has been shown. This chapter includes detailed description regarding analysis procedure and
outcome behaviour is provided using tool ETABS.

Chapter 5: Conclusion & Future scope

In the last chapter conclusion as per results observed in chapter 5 is explained with possible future
scope of the study.
 CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 : GENERAL:

As seismic analysis is very important in regions prone to earthquake, up-gradation in seismic

provisions may lead to more stability in structure for present conditions. Writing survey goes
past the quest for data and incorporates the recognizable proof and explanation of connection
between the writing and field of research. While the form of literature review might be varying
with various types of studies. Different literature review from papers, journals, websites and
dissertation related to our research area has been taken. Infill masonry work, bracings effect,
software analysis and dynamic analysis have been included.

 Omprakash, Netula et al (2017), investigated the effect of infill in building and their
behavior in structure for this the have considered different types of infill materials like
brick infill, AAC block infill and Hollow concrete blocks infill. four different types of
model used: RCC frame taking infill masonry weight, neglecting effect of stiffness,
Effect of stiffness is considered in addition to taking weight of infill, Effect of stiffness
is considered in addition to weight of infill excluding soft ground storey and Effect of
stiffness is considered in addition to weight of infill including soft ground storey effect.
For each infill four cases studied. Overall 12 models have been prepared in ETABS 15
storey building is considered for analysis which is located in zone 4 earth quake region.
Static analysis is done using ETABS software, soil conditions is to be medium and
importance factor is to be taken as 1.2. various parameter studied like lateral
displacement of building, axial load in column, storey drift, storey shear, base shear,
moments diagrams for a particular beam for all three types of material and for all four
cases. Results are represented in graphical as well as in tabular form.. They concluded
that AAC blocks masonry and hollow concrete masonry perform superior to that of brick
masonry therefore AAC blocks and hollow concrete masonry can be used to replace the
conventional brick masonry which is usually used in India in seismic prone area. It also
concluded that seismic analysis should be performed by considering the infill walls in
analysis. Due to presence of infill wall, stiffness of the reinforced concrete frame
increases and decrease in displacement, storey drift will occur.

 Irfanullah and B. Patil (2013), studied the behaviour of RC frames with various
arrangement of infill when subjected to earthquake loading. To observe the effect of
masonry infill panel, it is modelled as an equivalent diagonal strut. In order to study
these six RC framed buildings with brick masonry infill were designed. The results of
bare frame, frame with infill, soft ground floor, soft basement and infill in swastika
pattern in ground floor are compared and conclusions are made. It is observed that,
 providing infill below plinth and in swastika pattern in the ground floor improves
earthquake resistant behaviour of the structure when compared to soft basement.
 Pujol and Fick (2010), conducted tests on a three-story full-scale flat plate structure
which was designed to resist gravity loads only. The purpose of the study was to
investigate the possible positive and negative effects of the partition walls. Therefore,
the study was concentrated on the response of full-scale RC frame with and without
partition walls. In this report response was assessed by strength, stiffness and
displacement capacity of the system. It was concluded that partition walls can be
expected to help control inter-story drift, provided that measures are taken to prevent
out-of-plane failure of the infill and the shear failure of the columns.

 Neves and Cavaco et al (2018), studied one full scale RC frame designed according to
Eurocode is statically tested to investigate the behaviour of the frame with and without
masonry infill wall. The obtained results show that infill wall can significantly increase
the load carrying capacity of RC frame and thus serve as an important robustness reserve
in the case of unpredictable extreme events (i.e. local impact, blast or earthquake). They
concluded that When the failure is governed by formation of plastic hinges at the beams
the high percentage of reinforcement of column does not have effect on the load
carrying capacity of the frame, while high percent of longitudinal reinforcement of
beams can significantly increase of the load carrying capacity of the frame, The frame
reinforcement details have a pronounced effect on the frame performance.

 Patil1 and Kulkarni, Many urban multistory buildings in India today have open first
storey as an unavoidable feature. This is primarily being adopted to accommodate
parking or reception lobbies in the first stories. Also for offices or for any other purpose
such as communication hall etc. The construction of reinforced concrete structures with
infill wall is a common method of providing shelter to the ever increasing population,
where there is seismic activity. In the present work, the effect of different infill materials
on the seismic behaviour of high rise building with soft stories is studied. For that, G+11
RCC model is selected. To study the effect of different infill material on high rise
structure, linear dynamic analysis (Response spectrum analysis) in software ETABs is
carried out. Seismic parameters like time period, base shear, storey displacement and
storey drift are checked out.

 Ioana and Olteanu et al (2014), studied influence of the infill material on the overall
behavior of the structure. Numerical simulation in two different computer software i.e.
Axis VM and SAP2000. The different infill bricks made of clay tile, aerated light weight
concrete (A.A.C) and Flexy Brick. They that the behavior of reinforced concrete frame
structures can be improved by changing the material characteristics of the infill. The
proposed polyurethane brick has a flexible behavior, with good properties for thermal
insulation and mechanical ones. The main advantage is the low unit weight, respectively
the low load that is transmitted to the structural system.
 Das and Murty, Five reinforced concrete (RC) framed buildings with brick masonry
infill were designed for the same seismic hazard in accordance with the applicable
provisions given in Eurocode 8 , Nepal Building Code 201 and Indian seismic code
(with and without ductile detailing), and the equivalent braced frame method given in
the literature. The buildings designed by the Nepal Building Code 201 and the
equivalent braced frame method were found to be more economical.

 Patel and B. Patel, Earthquakes are natural hazards under which disasters are mainly
caused by damage or collapse of buildings and other man-made structures. Due to
accommodation of vehicles and their movements at ground levels infill walls are
generally avoided, which creates soft storey effect. It should be noted that 70 to 80 % of
buildings of urban areas in India fall under the classification of soft storey according to
IS 1893 (2002) Part-I. In analysis and design of the high rise building generally we do
not consider the effect of the brick masonry infill panel and design it by considering bare
frame. Here to observe the effect of brick masonry infill panel and without infill panel in
analysis of plane frame. Brick infill panel is modelled as diagonal strut and they are
placed at all above the ground plus level. also check out stiffness of building.

 Baghi, Oliveira et al, The effectiveness of masonry infill wall on behavior of a

Reinforced Concrete (RC) frame subjected to a column failure is studied experimentally.
For this reason, one full scale RC frame designed according to Eurocode is statically
tested to investigate the behavior of the frame with and without masonry infill wall. The
obtained results show that infill wall can significantly increase the load carrying capacity
of RC frame and thus serve as an important robustness reserve in the case of
unpredictable extreme events (i.e. local impact, blast or earthquake). A photogrammetry
analysis is carried out to study the behavior of the structure. Results give valuable
information about the alternative load path, transfer of the applied load to the column
and beams, and interaction forces between RC frame and infill wall. At the end, the
experimental program is simulated by the OpenSees software to study the behavior of
the frame. After having demonstrated that this model can predict the load deflection with
good accuracy, a parametric study is conducted to evaluate the effect of the percentage
of longitudinal reinforcement ratio of beams and columns on the load carrying capacity
of the infilled RC frame.

 Kumbhar and Rajguru, In India, masonry infilled reinforced concrete frame is one of
the most common structural system. The simplicity of construction and highly
developed expertise have made the infilled frame one of the most rapid and economical
structural form for reinforced concrete buildings. Masonry infills are functioning mostly
as partitions and exterior walls. There are two different approaches for designing
masonry infilled concrete frames depending on local construction site. In the first
approach, masonry infill is taken as a part of structural system and they are assumed to
brace the frame against horizontal loading. In the second approach, the frame is designed
26 | P a g e
 to carry the total vertical and horizontal loading. Moreover, masonry infill is uncoupled
to avoid load being transferred to them. In earthquake prone regions like India, masonry
infill walls are counted as non-structural elements. They are not taken into account at
design stage.

 Tamboli and Karadi, Masonry infills are normally considered as non-structural

elements and their stiffness contributions are generally ignored in practice, such an
approach can lead to an unsafe design. The masonry infill walls though constructed as
secondary elements behaves as a constituent part of the structural system and determine
the overall behaviour of the structure especially when it is subjected to seismic loads. In
this paper seismic analysis has been performed using Equivalent Lateral Force Method
for different reinforced concrete (RC) frame building models that include bare frame,
infilled frame and open first storey frame. The results of bare frame, infilled frame and
open first storey frame are discussed and conclusions are made. In modelling the
masonry infill panels the Equivalent diagonal Strut method is used and the software
ETABS is used for the analysis of all the frame models.

 Jadhao and Pajgade, The construction of reinforced concrete buildings with

unreinforced infill is common practice in India. Infill panels have traditionally been
made of heavy rigid materials, such as clay bricks or concrete blocks. However, more
lightweight and flexible infill options Such as AAC (aerated light weight concrete)
blocks are now available in India to be used as masonry infill (MI) material in
reinforced concrete (RC) framed buildings. The behavior of in-filled reinforced
concrete (R/C) frames has been studied experimentally and analytically by a
number of researchers. It has been recognized that infill materials give significant
effect to the performance of the resulting in-filled frame structures. Most of the
researches carried out in this area are focused on parameters such as the
distribution of MI, variation of geometry, the strength of infill materials and the
relative stiffness of infill to frame elements. The study of the effect of types of infill
materials used (lightweight versus conventional brick masonry) on the behavior of in-
filled R/C frames is however still limited. Previous experimental study has concluded
that the R/C frame in-filled with AAC blocks exhibited better performance under
lateral loads than that in-filled with conventional clay bricks. In the present paper
an investigation has been made to study the behavior of RC frames with both
AAC block and conventional clay bricks infill when subjected to seismic loads.

 Agrawal1, Kulkarni et. al, Infilled frame structures are commonly used in buildings.
Masonry infilled RC frames are the most common type of structures used for multi-
storeyed constructions in the developing countries, even in those which are located in
seismically active regions also. Masonry infill walls are mainly used to increase initial
stiffness and strength of reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings. In the present study,
it is attempt to highlights the performance of masonry infilled reinforced concrete (RC)
frames including open first storey of with and without opening. This opening is express
in terms of various percentages here, in this paper, symmetrical frame of college
building (G+5) located in seismic zone-III is considered by modelling of initial frame.
27 | P a g e
 According to FEMA-273, & ATC-40 which contain the provisions of calculation of
stiffness of infilled frames by modelling infill as “Equivalent diagonal strut method”.
This analysis is to be carried out on the models such as bare frame, strut frame, strut
frame with 15% center & corner opening, which is performed by using computer
software STAAD-Pro from which different parameters are computed. In which it shows
that infill panels increase the stiffness of the structure.

 Devipriya and Hariprasad, The paper deals with a seismic study on an irregular G+9
building with and without infill walls and its effect on overall seismic response of this
building. The presence infill wall has a significant impact on the seismic response of a
reinforced concrete frame building, increasing structural strength and stiffness. An
irregular E-shaped building is considered for the analysis. This study is to compare
various parameters such as storey drift, storey shear, storey displacement, and time
period of the building under seismic loads. Different infill materials like brick, AAC
block and GFRG panels are used for the analysis. The results obtained were compared to
find the suitable infill material for the RC frames. Analysis is done by response spectrum
analysis using ETABS.

 Bhargavi, RC frames with brick masonry infill walls are commonly used in many parts
of the country, including high seismic zones in India. Door and window openings are
unavoidable components in in-fills because of functional and ventilation requirements.
Various studies (experimental, analytical and numerical studies) have been carried out to
understand the behavior of in-filled frames but the effect of openings (i.e., Door(s) and
window(s)) and presence of lintel or lintel bands above the openings are not much
studied and are rather neglected in the analysis and design procedures. Though
experimental studies are more realistic, they cost too much for varying parameters and
time taking. Therefore, in this study, a numerical model has been considered which
analyzed keeping mechanical properties constant are and varying opening size and
position, which helps in understanding the failure mechanism of in-fills in RC frames
under seismic loading. This study is on the seismic behavior of brick masonry in-fill
walls without openings, with openings and openings strengthened with lintel and lintel
band. A building can be analyzed under all types of loading, such as monotonic, cyclic
and earthquake loading. This numerical model is capable of showing crack initiation in
the building when loaded till total collapse of the building, as Modelled and analyzed
using Applied Element Method (AEM). This study focuses on understanding behavior
of RC framed brick infill building under monotonic-static loading. A parametric study
has been done in order to understand the effect of various parameters such as openings
in walls, opening sizes, opening position and effect of lintel and lintel bands. Later
damage estimation has been made based on the strength, stiffness and ductility of infill
in RC frame structure. It was observed that performance of lintel band with opening is
better than lintel with opening based on type of opening, opening location and material
properties considered.
 CHAPTER-3
METHODOLOGY

3.1: INTRODUCTION:

In this work, the analysis based on Square-Root-of-Sum-of-Squares (SRSS) method in seismic

analysis is used to investigate “ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF STRUTURE HAVING
DIFFERENT INFILL MATERIAL (RED BRICK, AAC BLOCK, HOLLOW CONCRETE
BLOCK) USING ETABS SOFTWARE” as per IS-standards.

3.2: FLOW CHART:

3.3: GENERAL DESCRIPTION:

Table No.3.1: Material Description

S.NO Description Density Compressive

strength
1. FLY ASH BRICK Y = 19 KN/m3 10-12 N/mm2

2. AAC BLOCKS Y = 8 KN/m3 3-4.5 N/mm2

3. HOLLOW CONCRETE BLOCK Y = 14 KN/m3 5.6 N/mm2

Table 3.1 displays the densities and compressive strength of different Infill Materials used in this
study.
 Table No.3.2: Material Properties

S.NO PROPERTIES VALUES

4. YOUNG’S MODULAS OF ELASTICITY OF STEEL , Es 2.17 × 105 N/mm2

5. ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH OF STEEL 500N/mm2

6. GRADE OF CONCRETE M25

7. POISION RATIO 0.17

This table shows some additional material properties of steel, concrete which are being used in the
analysis.

Fig. 3.1: Material Property Data

Figure shows the procedure of selecting material properties while analysis.

 Table No.3.3: Building Geometry

S.NO Description Value

1 Area 20 X 25 m

2 Number of bays in X direction 4

3 Number of bays in Z direction 5

4 Height of Floors 3.0 m

5 Overall height 27 m

This table shows geometrical extents of the building model considered under this study. The area,
height of the floor etc.

Table No.3.4: Load assignment as per I.S. Code

S. No. Load Type As per I.S. Code

1 Dead Load I.S. 875-PART-1

2 Superimposed Load I.S. 875-PART-2

3 Seismic Load I.S. 1893-PART-1

4 Load Combinations I.S. 875-PART-5

Different types of loads which will be applied on the building in this study in ETABS.
 Table No.3.5: TYPES OF MODEL FORMATION IN ETABS

S.NO TYPES OF MODEL FORMULATION IN ETABS

1. RCC Frame Taking with Infill Wall loading. (Calculated Value)

2. RCC Frame with Assigning Infill-Wall Properties in ETABS

3. RCC Frame with Diagonal Strut Member Method

In this present study we have created 3 types of model: -

In these three types of modal formulation, we modelled three types of infill wall in ETABS
software, totally we modelled 9 types of modals.

Table No.3.6: Earthquake Parameters

S.NO PARAMETER VALUE

1. Zone IV 0.24

2. Damping Ratio 0.05

3. Importance Factor 1.2

4. Response Reduction Factor 5

5 Soil Site Factor Medium

The Earthquake Parameters which are used in this Study for building different models are shown in
this above table.as per the codal provision. The code considered for earthquake parameters is I.S.
code 1893-2016.
3.4: LOAD CALCULATION: -

3.4.1 : DEAD LOAD-

a) Wall Load
1. FLY ASH BRICK = 0.2X 18X (3-0.5) = 9 KN / m2
2. AAC BLOCK = 0.2 X 8 X (3-0.5) = 4 KN / m2

3. HOLLOW CONCRETE = 0.2 X 14 X (3-0.5) = 7 KN / m2

b) Slab Load
1. 0.125 X 25 X 1 +1 = 4.2 KN / m2 (Including floor finish)

3.4.2 : LIVE LOAD –

Assessable Area – 2 KN / m2

Live Load (Seismic calculation) 25% of Live load: - 0.5 kN/m2

Fig. 3.2: Wall Loading

Fig 3.2 is displaying the way the wall loads are applied on the structure. This figure is the
Elevation view from the side A
3.4.3 : SESMIC LOAD-

When a building experiences the ground motion or ground vibration it reacts by shaking. This
random shaking of structure occurs in all directions i.e. in (X) and (Y) and also in (Z) direction i.e.
horizontal and vertical both way shaking is possible and it causes the building to vibrate in all three
directions horizontally, laterally and vertically and this seismic forces can be calculated as per
given in IS: 1893:2016.

3.5: DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE STRUCTURE:

Fig. 3.3: 3d View of Building

The above Figure shows a 3D View of the building with Manually calculated load of the Infill
Walls added to the total applied load and properties of infill walls are not taken into consideration
(Model 1), i.e. walls are treated like non-structural element in this model.
 Fig. 3.4: 3d View of Building With Infill Wall Property

3D View of the building with considering properties of infill wall while analysis. This is second
type of model (Model 2) which is analysed in this study. Here wall properties are also added with
wall loads to see the effect of wall while applying loads to the structure.
 Fig 3.5: Etabs Modal with Strut Member

This above figure shows a 3D View of the building where the infill walls are replaced by
Diagonal struts which Behave exactly like Infill walls in the case of lateral loading (Model 3).

Fig 3.6: Side View of Strut Member

This figure shows the side view of the Model 3 here we can see Diagonal struts used in the place
of walls.
 Fig 3.7: Plan & Geometry

This figure shows the top view of the structure and we can see the bays in X and Y direction
and the shape of the walls provided along the structure height.

Fig. 3.8: Support Conditions: Fixed

In the above figure we can see that the structure has been provided fixed support.
 Fig. 3.9: Defining Load Patterns

In this figure Live and dead loads pattern are shown being selected and defined.

Fig. 3.10: Defining Seismic Load Patterns

In this figure the Seismic loads are being selected and the direction of the load is being defined.
 Fig. 3.11: Defining Response Spectrum

In this figure Response Spectrum parameter is being selected on the basis of Seismic Zone
factor and Damping Ratio.

CHAPTER-4
ANALYSIS & RESULTS
4.1 INTRODUCTION:

Three Types of Infill material namely Fly-ash Bricks, AAC blocks and Hollow Concrete blocks
Properties where used to make 3 Models for each Infill material. Models as mentioned before were
based upon three methods how the infill walls were incorporated in the study. The main motive of
doing this was to observe the effect of infill-walls in withstanding the lateral loads when only loads
of the walls were considered or when the wall properties also taken or when the wall was replaced
by a strut giving the exact structural benefit to the analysis.

The Observations gathered from the analysis is Displayed below. The table shows the comparative
values of Deflection, Shear in all three Models and the conclusion is derived from analysing which
model has the least storey drift and shear.

4.1.1 DEFLECTION OF ALL THE MODELS IN MM:

Table No.4.1: Deflection in Fly-Ash Walls Models

S. No. MODEL NO.1 MODEL NO .2 MODEL NO. 3

Storey 9 12.646 8.25 5.55

Storey 8 10.55 7.5 4.8

Storey 7 10.22 6.5 3.7

Storey 6 8.23 5.5 2.8

Storey 5 7.52 4.2 1.9

Storey 4 5.2 3.2 1.58

Storey 3 4.8 2.8 1.23

Storey 2 4.5 2.5 1.2

Storey 1 3.2 2.2 1.08

This table shows the deflection caused in the Fly-Ash wall model due to lateral loading in mm.
With highest deflection in 9th storey in model 1.
 Table No.4.2: Deflection in AAC Block Walls Models

S. No. MODEL NO.1 MODEL NO .2 MODEL NO. 3

Storey 9 5.44 3.44 2.55

Storey 8 4.44 3.20 2.10

Storey 7 3.25 2.7 2.05

Storey 6 3.10 2.4 1.95

Storey 5 3.05 1.8 1.85

Storey 4 2.9 1.56 1.58

Storey 3 2.5 1.44 1.23

Storey 2 2.1 1.05 0.8

Storey 1 1.8 0.785 0.65

This table shows the deflection caused in the AAC block wall model due to lateral loading in mm.

Here too the displacement is maximum in model no 1 but the magnitude is less than Fly-ash bricks.
 Table No. 4.3: Deflection in Hollow Concrete Block Wall Models

S. No. MODEL NO.1 MODEL NO .2 MODEL NO. 3

Storey 9 8.52 5.25 3.55

Storey 8 7.8 5.02 3.42

Storey 7 6.7 4.8 3.2

Storey 6 6.0 4.3 3.01

Storey 5 3.05 4.0 2.8

Storey 4 2.5 3.8 2.5

Storey 3 2.3 3.5 2.2

Storey 2 1.95 3.15 2

This table shows the deflection caused in the Hollow Concrete block wall model due to lateral
loading in mm. We can see that here too deflection is max in model 1 but the magnitude of
deflection is less than in Fly-Ash brick wall model but Greater than in AAC block wall model.

Model 3 has the lowest deflection in all three models in all three infill materials and among them
AAC block has the lowest deflection.
4.1.2: SHEAR FORCE OF ALL THE MODELS IN KN:

Table No. 4.4: Shear in Fly-Ash Brick Wall Models

S. No. MODAL NO.1 MODAL NO .2 MODAL NO. 3

Storey 9 131 303 415

Storey 8 334 351 500

Storey 7 489 418 580

Storey 6 604 725 655

Storey 5 683 900 822

Storey 4 734 1120 867

Storey 3 762 200 950

Storey 2 775 1350 1050

Storey 1 778 1400 1250

This table shows the Shear Force generated in the Fly-Ash wall model due to lateral loading in KN.
Here we can see that the max Shear is in Model 2 and the Lowest is in Model 1. Model 1 has
lowest Shear force because in Model 1 Stiffness of wall in not taken into consideration.
 Table No. 4.5: Shear in AAC Brick Wall Models

S. No. MODAL NO.1 MODAL NO .2 MODAL NO. 3

Storey 9 150 425 300

Storey 8 222 500 380

Storey 7 275 570 418

Storey 6 300 548 488

Storey 5 352 592 512

Storey 4 400 618 580

Storey 3 462 700 629

Storey 2 555 822 750

Storey 1 625 1020 892

This table shows the Shear Force generated in the AAC Block wall model due to lateral loading in
KN. Here we can see that AAC block wall models has very less Shear force generated in all
models as compared to Fly-ash Brick wall model.
 Table No. 4.6: Shear in Hollow Concrete Block Wall Models

S. No. MODAL NO.1 MODAL NO .2 MODAL NO. 3

Storey 9 200 360 250

Storey 8 260 419 288

Storey 7 325 522 322

Storey 6 360 582 342

Storey 5 412 600 380

Storey 4 465 622 416

Storey 3 550 800 522

Storey 2 600 950 625

Storey 1 750 1050 780

This table shows the Shear Force generated in the Hollow Concrete block wall model due to lateral
loading in KN. Here also we can see the AAC Block wall are coming out as the models with
lowest Shear Force generated in them. And the shear force is highest in the Model 2 because the
stiffness is considered in the model, which shows that the wall stiffness plays an important role in
shear force generation.
4.1.3: BENDING MOMENT OF ALL THE MODELS IN KN-M:

Table No. 4.7: Bending Moment in Fly-Ash Brick Wall Models

S. NO. MODEL NO.1 MODEL NO.2 MODEL NO.3

Storey 9 15305 16607 14808

Storey 8 34585 38801 32681

Storey 7 52761 54223 50555

Storey 6 70367 72945 68428

Storey 5 91348 94567 86302

Storey 4 109800 116247 104175

Storey 3 124987 135795 122049

Storey 2 143673 146834 139923

Storey 1 161856 169260 157796

Here we can see that Model 2 has the maximum bending moment because it has used Wall
properties with the wall loads while making the model. And on the second number we have
Model 1 in which we used manually calculated load of wall only. Model 3 has the lowest
bending moment because in it the wall was replaced by a strut.
 Table No. 4.8: Bending Moment in AAC Block Wall Models

S.NO. MODEL NO. 1 MODEL NO. 2 MODEL NO. 3

STOREY 9 10945 11106 9854

STOREY 8 22557 24511 19793

STOREY 7 30274 37916 28542

STOREY 6 47348 51321 45699

STOREY 5 60371 64726 58411

STOREY 4 73455 78131 70432

STOREY 3 87326 91537 85360

STOREY 2 98732 104942 94765

STOREY 1 109432 118347 99723

We can see here that Model 3 has the lowest bending moment as compared with other. Model 2
is the heaviest hence it has the greatest bending moment. And one more thing we can see here is
that the AAC block wall is the light in weight in general than a Fly-ash Brick wall and also
lighter than Hollow Concrete Block wall hence the less bending moment.
 Table No. 4.9: Bending Moment in Hollow Concrete Block Wall Models

S.NO. MODEL NO. 1 MODEL NO. 2 MODEL NO. 3

STOREY 9 13966 17873 11643

STOREY 8 30632 32681 28422

STOREY 7 45322 50555 40631

STOREY 6 62480 68428 59731

STOREY 5 82450 86302 79838

STOREY 4 99233 107241 95770

STOREY 3 119476 125114 107839

STOREY 2 130322 142988 124567

STOREY 1 156786 160045 134790

Here we can see that the bending moment values are greater than the BM in AAC block models
because these hollow blocks are much heavier. So at last we can finalise that Model 3 of AAC
block had the lowest bending moment of all conditions.
 Fig. 4.1: Response of the Structure

This figure displays the Deformation caused to the structure, we can see the Displacements and
Storey response.

Fig. 4.2: Displacement Response of the Structure

This figure shows the graphical representation of Maximum Storey Displacement in global X
and global Y direction in mm.
4.2: MAXIMUM STORY DRIFTS IN DIFFERENT STORIES

Fig. 4.3: Storey Drift Data of the Structure

Figure 4.3 displays storey drift in every storey in X and Y direction both displayed with
different colour.
4.3: AUTO LATERAL LOAD IN DIFFERENT STORIES

Fig. 4.4: Auto Lateral Load in the Stories

This figure displays Auto lateral load in every Storey due to Seismic Load. Lateral load are caused

Due to Earthquake
4.4: SHEAR FORCE IN DIFFERENT STORIES:

Fig. 4.5: Storey Shear Data of the Structure

This figure displays the Storey Shear Force generated in each storey in Global X and Y
directions.
Fig. 4.6: Shear Force in each Storey of different models in KN
 CHAPTER-5

CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE

5.1 GENERAL:
For this research work following outcomes are observed:

1. From the results, it has been found that displacement of structure with AAC block in all three
modal cases is found less than conventional brick masonry.While comparing the models 1, 2, 3 for
displacements model 3 (infill frame) is having least displacement. In model 3 the strength and
stiffness of material is replaced by an equivalent diagonal strut hence it has got least deflections.

2. It is observed from the results that storey shear with AAC and hollow concrete masonry is
significantly less when compared to brick masonry infill panel. It is due to the light weight of AAC
blocks and hollow concrete.

3. Model M-2 has more storey shear than M-1, and M-3 because Storey shear depend on
stiffness of the frame. The struts in masonry infill resist the lateral seismic forces through axial
compression along the strut. The contribution of infill increases the stiffness of the frame this
resulting increase in seismic forces. Model M-1 has the least value of storey shear with all three
types of infill materials because stiffness has not been considered in case M-1.

4. Following things we can see from the results that the physical properties of the walls has very
significant effect in the ability of the structure to handle Lateral loading. The storey
displacement was least in AAC block wall in Model 3 with the Diagonal strut in the place of
strength and stiffness of the wall material. Storey shear also was seen the lowest in the AAC
block walls And the Bending Moment also was seen the lowest in the AAC blocks. Hence we
can conclude that the AAC blocks are a better replacement for conventional infill materials in
Earthquake prone areas.

5. One more thing that we see from this study that neglecting the structural properties i.e. not
considering walls as a structural element is not beneficial as seen from the Model 1 of every
case. Models with structural properties of walls performed well in earthquake conditions.

6. Future Scope of this study is that by proving that the Walls too play an important role in the
overall stiffness of the structure in the Earthquake conditions we can design structures with
keeping that in mind.

7. In future studies will can analyze the different infill walls effect in the irregular building under
the seismic loading dynamic analysis.

8. We can also analyze infill wall effect in large span building (like Flat or PT Slab).
9. Percentage increase and decrease of deflection between models,

Fly ash bricks, Model 2 has 33% more deflection than Model 3 and Model 1 has 35% more
deflection than Model 2.

AAC bricks, Model 2 has 26% more deflection than Model 3 and Model 1 has 37% more
deflection than Model 2.

Hollow concrete bricks, Model 2 has 33% more deflection than Model 3 and Model 1 has 39%
more deflection than Model 2.

10. Percentage increase and decrease of Shear between models,

Fly ash bricks, Model 2 has 45% more shear than Model 1 and Model 3 has 10% less shear than
Model 2.

AAC bricks, Model 2 has 39% more shear than Model 1 and Model 3 has 12.5% less shear than
Model 2.

Hollow concrete bricks, Model 2 has 28.5% more shear than Model 1 and Model 3 has 25.7%
less shear than Model 2.

11. Percentage increase and decrease of bending moment between models,

Fly ash bricks, Model 2 has 4% more bending moment than Model 1 and Model 3 has 7% less
bending moment than Model 2.

AAC bricks, Model 2 has 7.5% more bending moment than Model 1 and Model 3 has 15.7%
less bending moment than Model 2.

Hollow concrete bricks, Model 2 has 2% more bending moment than Model 1 and Model 3 has
16% less bending moment than Model 2.
 REFERENCES

1. Prakash T M, Naresh kumar B G, Karisiddappa ,Raghunath S “Properties of Aerated

(Foamed) Concrete Blocks” International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research
Volume 4, Issue 1, January-2013 1 ISSN 2229-5518

2. S Bhargavi, Comparison of Seismic Performance of Brick Masonry RC Frames with

Lintel and Lintel Band

3. Omprakash Netula, Study and Comparison of Structure Having Different Infill Material
(Bricks, AAC Blocks and Hollow Concrete Blocks) using ETABS.

4. Ioana Olteanu*, Vlăduţ Iftode and Mihai Budescu, Influence Of Infill Material on the
Overall Behavior of A Reinforced Concrete Frame Structure.

5. S. Pujol ,Damon R. Fick, The test of a full-scale three-story RC structure with masonry
infill walls

6. Eduardo Cavaco, Luis Neves, Eduardo NBS Julio, Mariana Barros, Effect of non-
structural masonry brick infill walls on the robustness of a RC framed building severely
damaged due to a landslide.

7. Supratik Bose and Durgesh C. Rai “Behavior of AAC infilled RC frame under lateral
loading” Tenth U.S.National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers of
Earthquake Engineering July 21-25, 2014Anchorage, Alaska

8. Nikhil Agrawal, Prof.P.B Kulkarni, Pooja Raut “analysis of masonry infilled RC frames
with and without opening open ground storey using equivalent diagonal strut method”
International Journal of Scientific andResearch Publications, Volume 3, Issue 9,
September 2013 1 ISSN 2250-3153

9. Imran, I., Aryanto, “Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Frames In-Filled with Lightweight
Materials under Seismic Loads” Civil Engineering Dimension, Vol. No. 2, September
2009, 69-77 ISSN 1410-9530 print /ISSN 1979-570
10. C V R Murty and Sudhir K Jain “Beneficial Influence of Masonry Infill Walls On
Seismic Performance of RC Frame Buildings” Proceedings of 12th World Conference
on Earthquake Engineering.

11. Prerna Nautiyal, Saurabh Singh and Geeta Batham “A Comparative Study Of The Effect
Of Infill Walls On Seismic Performance Of Reinforced Concrete Buildings”
International Journal Of Civil Engineering And Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 –
6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), Pp.
208-218.

12. T. Elouali “Effect of Infill Masonry Panels on the Seismic Response Of frame
Buildings” Professor, Dept. Of Civil Engineering Mohammadia School Of Engineers,
University Of Mohammed The Fifth Agdal. Rabat Morocco.

13. Shaharban P.S, Manju P.M “Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Frame With In- Fill Walls
Under Seismic Loads Using Etabs” International Journal Of Civil Engineering and
Technology (IJCIET) ISSN 0976 –6308 (Print) ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5,
Issue 12, December (2014), Pp. 181-187.

14. Murthy V. R., Vijayanarayanan A. R., and Mehta V. V., “Some Concepts in Earthquake
Behaviour of Buildings,” IITK-GSDMA Proj. Rev. Seism. Codes, Prep. Comment.
Handbooks, p. 268, 2012.

15. Bureau of Indian Standards, “IS 800:2007 General Construction in Steel - Code of
Practice (Third Revision),” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, no. December, 2007.

16. Bureau of Indian Standards, “IS 456 : 2000 - Plain and reinforced concrete - code and
practice,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, p. 144, 2000.

17. Bureau of Indian Standards, “IS 1893 (Part 1):2002 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant
Design of Structures,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, vol. 1893, no. June, p. 27, 2002.
18. Bureau of Indian Standards, “IS 875 (Part 1):1987 Code of Practice for Design Loads
(Other than Earthquake) For Buildings and Structures,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi,
vol. 875, no. Part 3, 1987.

19. Bureau of Indian Standards, “IS 875 (Part 2): 1987 Code of Practice for Design Loads
(Other Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi,
vol. 875, no. March 1989, 2003.

20. Poonam Patil1 and D.B.Kulkarni, Effect of different infill material on the seismic
behaviour of High rise building with Soft storey.

21. Diptesh Das and C V R Murty, Brick Masonary infills in seismic design of RC framed
buildings Part 1: Cost Implications

22. Sachin R Patel and Sumant B patel, Effect of Brick Infill Panel in Design of High Rise
Building.

23. Hadi Baghi, André Oliveira Hadi Baghia,⁎, André Oliveirab, Eduardo Cavacoc, Luís
Nevesd, Eduardo Júlioc, Behavior of reinforced concrete frame with masonry infill wall
subjected to vertical load.

24. Kumbhar S. S 1 , Rajguru R. S2, Seismic Analysis of Masonry Infill in Multi-Storey RC

Buildings.

25. Rasheed Tamboli* and Umesh.N.Karadi , Seismic Analysis of RC Frame Structure with
and without Masonry Infill Walls. Haroon

26. Vikas P. Jadhao, Prakash S. Pajgade, Influence of Masonry Infill Walls on Seismic
Performance of RCFramed Structures a Comparision of AACand Conventional Brick
Infill.

27. 1Devipriya. J, 2Hariprasad T R, Seismic Study of An E-Shaped building With and

Without Infill Walls.
 APPENDIX-A
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS

Sr.no Title Details of Authors Remark

Journal

Analysis and
1. International Tushar Raju
Comparison of
Journal for
Structure Published
Research in
having
Applied Dr. Rakesh
different Infill
Science & Patel
Material (Red
Engineering
Brick, AAC
Technology
Block,
(IJRASET)
Hollow
Concrete
Block) using
ETABS
Software

2. Comparative International Tushar Raju

Study of Journal for
Bending Published
Research in
Moment
Applied Dr. Rakesh
Generated in
Structure Science & Patel
Having Engineering
Different Infill Technology
Materials using (IJRASET)
ETABS
 Plagiarism Checker X Originality Report

Similarity Found: 10%

Date: Tuesday, February 25, 2020

Statistics: 398 words Plagiarized / 3868 Total
words
Remarks: Low Plagiarism Detected - Your Document needs Optional
Improvement.

ABSTRACT Reinforcement concrete structure frame system widely used around the world. In
building structure, structure element is generally taken as Beam, column, foundation. The dead
& live load is transforming from beam to column, column to footing then ultimately load
distributed into the soil. The wall load is taken by beam.

In building design, we mentioned the whole wall on the beam is possible, if it is not possible, we
taken concealed beam into the slab below the wall. During the analysis of frame structure, we
consider wall as non-structural element. But including walls in the structure analysis is play
important role. This study deals with the examination of the impact of infill in structure and their
behaviour in structure.

In present situation high rise building constructed with the various type of infill wall materials.
Some of them generally use for example Red brick, AAC wall, Hollow concrete block, lightweight
Aluminium & Steel panels. So three types of modal create on ETABS software.

In this study 9 storey high rise building is modal in ETABS with taken 3 infill materials like Red
brick ,AAC block and Hollow concrete block taken for study which on the most critical
earthquake zone IV analysis (Dynamic) is done using ETABS, soil properties assumed medium
and importance factor is taken 1.2 . The all three infill wall models compare with the basic design
parameter like moment, shear force, displacement andas well as earthquake parameter like story
drift, story shear etc.

Keywords: ETABS, Structural Analysis, Soft Storey, masonry infill, RC frame, earthquake,
displacement, drift, base shear, AAC blocks, Hollow concrete block CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION 1.1 OVERVIEW: A tall structure is a multi-story structure in which most
tenants rely upon lifts [lifts] to arrive at their goals. Now a days due to growth of the
population Housing has developed into an economy generating industry.

Because of this high rise buildings have become a solution in large cities. The increasing
frequency of the earthquakes in the world and building of tall structures, over the last few 10-20
years forces for the development of tremor safe structures. A considerable lot of the tall structures
had fell in ongoing tremors and the reasons credited were poor plan and development rehearses.

The goal of this work is to talk about the potential outcomes of demonstrating support itemizing of
strengthened solid models in common sense use considering different type of infill walls. To carry
out the analytical investigations, the structure is modelled and analysis is done in ETABS software.
1.2 INFILL WALL: The infill wall is the
supported wall that works as separator in buildings used to define shape of a room or outer
boundary of a building constructed with a three-dimensional framework structure generally made
of steel or reinforced concrete.

Therefore, the basic edge guarantees the bearing capacity, though the infill divider serves to
isolate inward and space, topping off the crates of the external casings. The walls has one of a
kind static capacity to shoulder its very own load. Infill walls are outside vertical misty kind of
conclusion. As for different types of separators, the infill-walls contrasts from the parcel that
divides two inside spaces.

The last plays out similar elements of the infill-wall, hydro-thermally and acoustically, however
performs static capacities as well.. The use of masonry infill walls, and to some extent veneer
walls, especially in reinforced concrete frame structures, is regular in numerous nations. Indeed,
the utilization of stone work infill dividers offers a prudent and tough arrangement.

They are anything but difficult to fabricate, appealing for engineering and has a productive cost-
execution. Infill walling is the conventional name of a board that is worked in the middle of the
floors of the essential auxiliary casing of a working as such Infill board dividers are a type of
cladding worked between the basic individuals from a building.

The auxiliary edge offers help for the cladding framework, and the cladding gives division of
the inner and outside environments. Infill dividers are viewed as non-load bearing, yet they
oppose wind loads. Useful prerequisites for infill board dividers include: They are self-
supporting between basic surrounding individuals. They give climate obstruction.

66 | P a g e
They give warm and sound protection. The give imperviousness to fire. They give adequate
openings to common ventilation and coating. / Fig. 1.1: Infill Wall 1.3 DIAGONAL STRUT
MEMBER METHOD: For the presence of infill in our building frame modal, we can create a
diagonal (strut) member in frame structure, the width of strut depends on the length of contact
between the wall & the columns (ah) and between the wall & the beams (aL).

Stafford Smith formulated method of calculating ah and aL by assuming beam on an elastic

foundation in the year 1966. Hendry in the year 1998 gave the given equation to calculate the
strut width w which can replace structural properties of an infill-wall, where the strut is under
uniform compressive stress.

/ Where, ‘Em’ is elastic modulus of wall, ‘Ef’ is elastic modulus of what the frame is made of, t is
thickness of wall(infill), ‘h’ is height of wall(infill) and L is length of infill, ‘Ic’ is moment of
inertia of the column, ‘Ib’ is moment of inertia of the beam and ? = tan-1 (h/L). 1.4 DESIGN
CRITERIA OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING: In this section, the points of importance to be
considered for the design of any high-rise building structure are described.

The points which may cause particular consequence in any high rise building and are based on
above-mentioned literature are mentioned below. 1.4.1 Design Philosophy: General Design
Philosophy The Limit State method of designing is accepted worldwide and based on semi-
probabilistic for load and geometric conditions. One of the two fundamental types of limit state
designing is ultimate limit state and it is usually taken under consideration in the design of high-
rise structure.

Due to tendency of instantly getting ultimate limit state it is a critical issue in high rise
buildings and is given special consideration. An appropriate safety factor should be considered
for the safe designing. The Limit State design mainly deals with the limit of collapse and limit
of flexure. Limit State of serviceability deals with the appearance, efficiency and durability of
the building throughout its design life.

This can be accomplished by controlling unnecessary avoidance and break width. As it is notable,
the above plan standards apply additionally to low-ascent structures. 1.4.2 Lateral Load Design
Philosophy As opposed to vertical burden that might be accepted to increment directly with
stature, parallel burdens are very factor and increment quickly with tallness.

For example, under a regular wind load the moment (overturning) at the base differs in
proportion with respect to the square of building height, while the lateral deflection differs as the
fourth power. As for their lower brethren, there are four factors to consider in the design of the tall
buildings: strength, rigidity, stability and now-a-days legality.

The quality necessity is the prevailing role, and often control the design. There are two ways to
fulfil rigidity and stability requirements. [1]. Increase the size of members above and beyond the
strength requirements. However, this methodology has its very own points of confinement, past
which it turns out to be either unreasonable or uneconomical. [2].

The second and the more elegant approach is to change the configuration of the structure into
something that is inherently more rigid and stable. It is of significant to note that there are no
reports of completed tall buildings having collapsed because of wind loads. Analytically, , it very
well may be demonstrated that a tall working under the activity of wind will achieve a condition
of breakdown by the purported p-d impact, in which the unconventionality of the gravity load
increments to such a size, that it realizes pounding of sections because of substantial hub loads.

In this manner, a vital security paradigm is to guarantee that anticipated breeze burdens will be
underneath the heap comparing to stability limit. The second thought is to restrict the parallel
redirection to a dimension that will guarantee that the compositional completes and parcels are
not harmed. albeit less serious than the breakdown of the fundamental structure, the floor to floor
avoidance typically alluded to as the inter-story drift nevertheless has to be limited because of the
cost of relaxing the windows and the hazard to pedestrians of falling glass.

Large deflections and accelerations of the building’s top floor should be considered from the
standpoint of service-ability and occupant comfort. Peak acceleration at the top floors of the
building resulting from frequent windstorm should be limited to minimize possible perception of
motion by the occupants. In earthquake resisting planit is important to avoid out and out
breakdown of working under serious quakes while restricting the non-auxiliary harm to a base
amid incessant earth tremors.

The building should be designed to have a reserve of ductility to sustain gravity loads under large
inelastic deformations during severe seismic activity. 1.5 SEISMIC ANALYSIS: It has been seen
in past seismic tremors that the structures on inclined plane give more overlay. Shivers make
substantial damage to structures, for case, loss of people in the building and if the intensity of
vibration is high then it can cause collapse of the structure. In past years people has been
produced irrefutably and as a result of which cities and towns started expanding out.
In light of this reason distinctive structures are being inalienable inclined zones. India sports a
wide shoreline forefront which is anchored with mountains and plateau. The structures in
these zones are made on inclining grounds. A tremendous piece of the unforgiving ranges in
India go under the seismic zone II, III and IV zones in such case working in context of
slanting grounds are exceedingly slight against seismic tremor.

This is a possible result of the way that the bits in the ground floor differentiate in their statures as
showed up by the tendency of the ground. Segments toward one side are short and on flip side are
long, by righteousness of which they are exceedingly delicate. Seismic forces acts more separate in
inclining zones due to the assistant inconsistency.

Moreover it has been examined that the seismic tremor exercises are slanted in inclining ranges.
In India, for example, the north-east states. The deficiency of plain ground in inclining ranges
powers advancement development on inclining ground realizing diverse imperative structures, for
instance, reinforced concrete encompassed specialist's offices, colleges, motels and work
environments laying on uneven inclinations.

The lead of structures in the midst of tremor depends on the dispersal of mass and immovability
in both even and vertical planes of the structures. In slanting district both these properties varies
with irregularity and asymmetry. Such improvements in seismically slanted regions make them
exhibited to more unmistakable shears and torsion.

Poor conduct of short portions is a consequence of how short area is stiffer when showed up
distinctively in connection to the long piece, and it draws in more noteworthy earthquake
control. Solidness of a zone is the invulnerability to natural disasters – the more prominent is the
steadfastness, more noteworthy is the power required to turn it.

On the off chance that a short region isn't attractively proposed for such a liberal oblige, it can
endure through essential insidiousness amidst a seismic tremor. The immediate static arrangement
of building is appeared with their straightly versatile strength of the building. Course of regular
shake demands for the straight static framework related to static sidelong powers whose aggregate
is corresponding to the parallel weight.

When it is joined with the straightly adaptable model of the building it will accomplish graph
development amplitudes approximating most vital relocations that are normal amidst the course of
action shiver. To mastermind the earth tremor weights to figure the internal forces will be sensible
evaluated of predicted that amidst would design earth
shudder. / Fig 1.2: Seismic Zone Distribution Map The force and vibration because of seismic
waves are ascertained according to IS 1893:2002 where the configuration seismic level
coefficient Ah can be figured by the expression: - Vb = Ah x W Vb = Seismic base
shear(Design) Ah = Horizontal seismic coefficient W = Weight of the building(Seismic) Z .I

Ah = x Sa/g 2. R Where Z = zone factor given in table 2 in IS 1893:2002. Table 1.1: Seismic
zones and their intensity / I = Importance factor as given in the table no. 6 of I.S. code 1893:2002
(Part-1) Table 1.2: Importance factor for different structures S. No.

_Structure _Importance Factor _ _1 _Important service and community buildings, such as

hospitals; schools; monumental structures; telephone exchange, power grid, court, etc _
1.5 _ _2 _All other buildings _1 _ _ R = Response reduction factor as given in the table no. 7 of
I.S. code 1893: 2002 (part-1) Table 1.3 Response Reduction Factor for different
R.C.C. building systems Building Frame System _Response Reduction Factor _Remark _
_O.M.R.F.

(Ordinary moment resisting frame) _3 _Ordinary detailing _ _S.M.R.F. (Special moment resisting
frame) _5 _Ductile detailing _ _ Here Sa/g is the Average response acceleration coefficient. / Fig:
1.3: Response spectra for 5% damping condition 1.6

APPLICATION OF RESPONSE SPECTRUM: After defining the seismic parameters, dynamic

analysis is performed using ETABS’17 software by applying response spectrum method in
accordance with IS-1893:2016. It is done by providing acceleration in X-direction using SRSS
(Square root sum of the squares) for different types of soil condition.
Acceleration in X-direction is calculated using formula = Z/2 x I/R x Sa/g, Where Z =
0.24 (For Zone IV), The design base shear VB (calculated from the Response Spectrum
method) is contrasted and the base shear Vb (determined by observational recipe for the major
timeperiod). On the off chance that VB is not exactly Vb, the majority of the reaction amounts
are increased by Vb/VB according to Condition 7.8.2.

The ratio Vb / VB is known as multiplication factor (MF) and this process is repeated until MF=
1. The same process is applied to other load cases. 1.7 Objectives: The goals of this study are as
follows:- To Determine the Analysis of a Building structure with various types of infill walls To
determine performance of building structure with infill walls in zones v. To analyze the
implementation of SRSS Method in tall structure using ETABS.

To compare normal conventional building with building with different infill wall building with
behavior in loading and other structure parameter. 1.8 Scope & Need of the study:
The analysis is done on the seismic behaviour of a symmetrical/regular shaped building having
Fly Ash, AAC Block & Red Brick: In future studies will can analyze the different infill walls
effect in the irregular building under the seismic loading dynamic analysis.

We can also analyze infill wall effect in large span building (like Flat or PT Slab). The present
study attempts to provide a study of the behaviour of a regular structure with under seismic
dynamic loading considering different infill materials. 1.9

Layout of the study: Chapter 1: Introduction This chapter presents details study of behaviour of
reinforced cement concrete structure under lateral loads on the basis of different infill materials
used. It defines the research problem adopted and the scope, states the aims and objectives
adopted for the project work. Chapter 2: Literature review This chapter presents the review of
previously published literature in the field of reinforced concrete framed structures with different
infill materials and loading considerations.

It also reviews the behaviour of buildings under lateral forces and infill walls during
earthquake/lateral loading, methods of modelling of infill walls. Chapter 3: Methodology This
chapter presents the proper procedure and step wise process for completion of research with
proper flow chart. In this chapter modelling of all cases in ETABS has also been described.

Chapter 4: Analysis & Results In this chapter results in terms of Shear Force, Maximum Storey
Drift and Deflection in all stories has been shown. This chapter includes detailed description
regarding analysis procedure and outcome behaviour is provided using tool ETABS. Chapter 5:
Conclusion & Future scope In the last chapter conclusion as per results observed in chapter 5 is
explained with possible future scope of the study.

CHAPTER-3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 INTRODUCTION: In this work, the analysis based on

Square-Root-of-Sum-of-Squares (SRSS) method in seismic analysis is used to investigate
“ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF STRUTURE HAVING DIFFERENT INFILL
MATERIAL (RED BRICK, AAC BLOCK, HOLLOW CONCRETE BLOCK) USING
ETABS
SOFTWARE” as per IS-standards. 3.2

GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Table 3.1: Material Description / Table 3.2: Building Geometry
S.NO _Description _Value _ _1 _Area _20 X 25 m _ _2 _Number of bays in X direction _4 _
_3 _Number of bays in Z direction _5 _ _4 _Height of Floors _3.0 m _ _5 _Overall height
_33 m _ _ Table 3.3: Load assignment S. No. _Load Type _As per I.S. _ _1 _Dead Load _I.S.
875-PART-1 _ _2 _Superimposed Load _I.S.
875-PART-2 _ _3 _Seismic (dynamic) response reduction _I.S. 1893-PART-1 _ _4 _Load
Combinations _I.S. 875-PART-5 _ _ In this present study we have created 3 types of model: - In
these three types of modal formulation, we modelled three types of infill wall in ETABS
software, totally we modelled 9 types of modals. Table 3.4: TYPES OF MOADL FORMATION
IN ETABS SR NO. _ TYPE OF MODAL FORMULATION IN ETABS _ _ 1.

_ RCC FRAME TAKING WITH INFILL WALL LOADING. (CALCULATED VALUE) _ _

2. _ RCC FRAME WITH ASSIGN INFILL WALL PROPERTIES IN ETABS. _ _ 3. _ RCC
FRAME WITH
DIAGONAL STRUT MEMBER METHOD. _ _ TABLE 3.5 Earthquake Parameters / 3.3
LOAD CALCULATION: - 3.3.1: DEAD LOAD- a) Wall Load FLY ASH BRICK = 0.2X 18X
(3-0.5) = 9 KN / m2 2. AAC BLOCK = 0.2 X 8 X (3-0.5) = 4 KN / m2 HOLLOW CONCRETE
= 0.2 X 14
X (3-0.5) = 7 KN / m2 3.3.2: SLAB LOAD 0.125 X 25 X 1 +1 = 4.2

KN / m2 (Including floor finish) 3.3.3: LIVE LOAD – Assessable Area – 2 KN / m2 Live

Load (Seismic calculation) 25% of Live load: - 0.5 kN/m2 3.3.3: SESMIC LOAD When a
building experiences the ground motion or ground vibration it reacts by shaking. This random
shaking of structure occurs in all directions i.e. in (X) and (Y) and also in (Z) direction i.e.

horizontal and vertical both way shaking is possible and it causes the building to vibrate in all
three directions horizontally, laterally and vertically and this seismic forces can be calculated as
per given in IS: 1893:2002. 3.4 DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE STRUCTURE: / FIG. 3.1: 3D
VIEW OF BUILDING WITH INFILL WALL PROPERTY / FIG. 3.2: 3D VIEW OF
BUILDING / FIG 3.3: ETABS MODAL WITH STRUT MEMBER / FIG 3.4: SIDE VIEW OF
STRUT MEMBER / FIG 3.5: PLAN & GEOMETRY / FIG 3.6: BASE CONDITIONS: FIXED /
FIG 3.7: DEFINING LOAD PATTERNS / FIG 3.8: DEFINING SEISMIC LOAD PATTERNS /
/ FIG
3.9: DEFINING RESPONSE SPECTRUM / FIG 3.10: RESPONSE SPECTRUM FUNCTION /
FIG 3.11: WALL LOADING / FIG 3.12: PROPERTY DATA / FIG 3.13: RESPONSE OF THE
STRUCTURE / FIG 3.14: DISPLACEMENT RESPONSE OF THE STRUCTURE / FIG 3.15:
LOADING DATA OF WALL / FIG 3.16: STORY SHEAR DATA OF THE STRUCTURE /
FIG 3.17: STORY SHEAR DATA OF THE STRUCTURE 3.4 FLOW CHART: / / /
CHAPTER-4 ANALYSIS & RESULTS 4.1 INTRODUCTION: 4.1.1

Deflection of all the models in mm: 4.1.1.1 FLYASH WALLS S. No. _MODAL NO.1
_MODAL NO .2 _MODAL NO. 3 _ _Storey 9 _12.646 _8.25 _5.55 _ _Storey 8 _10.55_7.5
_4.8 _ _Storey 7 _10.22 _6.5 _3.7 _ _Storey 6 _8.23 _5.5 _2.8 _ _Storey 5 _7.52 _4.2 _1.9_
_Storey 4 _5.2 _3.2 _1.58 _ _Storey 3 _4.8 _2.8 _1.23 _ _Storey 2 _4.5 _2.5 _1.2 _ _Storey 1
_3.2 _2.2 _1.08 _ _ 4.1.1.2 AAC BLOCKS WALLS S. No. _MODAL NO.1 _MODAL NO .2
_MODAL NO. 3 _ _Storey 9 _5.44 _3.44 _2.55 _ _Storey 8 _4.44 _3.20 _2.10 _ _Storey 7
_3.25 _2.7 _2.05 _ _Storey 6 _3.10 _2.4 _1.95 _ _Storey 5 _3.05 _1.8 _1.85 _ _Storey 4 _2.9
_1.56 _1.58 _ _Storey 3 _2.5 _1.44 _1.23 _ _Storey 2 _2.1 _1.05 _0.8 _ _Storey 1 _1.8 _0.785
_0.65 _ _ 4.1.1.3 CONCRETE HOLLOW BLOCK WALL S. No. _MODAL NO.1 _MODAL NO
.2
_MODAL NO. 3 _ _Storey 9 _8.52 _5.25 _3.55 _ _Storey 8 _7.8 _5.02 _3.42 _ _Storey 7 _6.7
_4.8 _3.2 _ _Storey 6 _6.0 _4.3 _3.01 _ _Storey 5 _3.05 _4.0 _2.8 _ _Storey 4 _2.5 _3.8 _2.5_
_Storey 3 _2.3

_3.5 _2.2 _ _Storey 2 _1.95 _3.15 _2 _ _ 4.1.2 Shear Force of all the models in kn: 4.1.2.1
FLYASH BRICK WALL S. No. _MODAL NO.1 _MODAL NO .2 _MODAL NO. 3 _ _Storey 9
_200 _415 _518 _ _Storey 8 _250 _500 _550 _ _Storey 7 _418 _580 _620 _ _Storey 6 _725
_655 _680 _ _Storey 5 _900 _822 _777 _ _Storey 4 _1120 _867 _852 _ _Storey 3 _1200 _950
_925 _ _Storey 2 _1350 _1050 _987 _ _Storey 1 _1400 _1250 _1100 _ _ 4.1.2.2 AAC BRICK
WALL S. No. _MODAL NO.1 _MODAL NO .2 _MODAL NO.

3 _ _Storey 9 _150 _300 _425 _ _Storey 8 _222 _380 _500 _ _Storey 7 _275 _418 _570 _
_Storey 6 _300 _488 _548 _ _Storey 5 _352 _512 _592 _ _Storey 4 _400 _580 _618 _ _Storey 3
_462 _629 _700 _ _Storey 2 _555 _750 _822 _ _Storey 1 _625 _892 _1020 _ _ 4.1.2.3
CONCRETE HOLLOW BRICK WALL S. No. _MODAL NO.1 _MODAL NO .2 _MODAL NO.
3
_ _Storey 9 _200 _250 _360 _ _Storey 8 _260 _288 _419 _ _Storey 7 _325 _322 _522 _
_Storey 6 _360 _342 _582 _ _Storey 5 _412 _380 _600 _ _Storey 4 _465 _416 _622 _ _Storey 3
_550 _522 _800 _ _Storey 2 _600 _625 _950 _ _Storey 1 _750 _780 _1050 _ _ 4.1.3 MAXIMUM
STORY DRIFTS IN DIFFERENT STORIES / 4.1.4

AUTO LATERAL LOAD IN DIFFERENT STORIES / 4.1.5 SHEAR FORCE IN DIFFERENT

STORIES / CHAPTER-5 CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE 5.1 GENERAL: For this research
work following outcomes are observed: 1. From the results, it has been found that displacement of
structure with AAC block in all three modal cases is found less than conventional brick masonry.
2.

While comparing the models 1, 2, 3 for displacements model 3 (infill frame) is having least
displacement. In model 3 the strength and stiffness of material is replaced by a equivalent
diagonal strut hence it has got least deflections. 3. It is observed from the results that storey
shear with AAC and hollow concrete masonry is significantly less when compared to brick
masonry infill panel.

It is due to the light weight of AAC blocks and hollow concrete. 4. Model M-2 has more storey
shear than M-1, and M-3 because Storey shear depend on stiffness of the frame. The struts in
masonry infill resist the lateral seismic forces through axial compression along the strut.

The contribution of infill increases the stiffness of the frame this resulting increase in
seismic forces. Model M-1 has the least value of storey shear with all three types of infill materials
because stiffness has not been considered in case M-1.

INTERNET SOURCES:

<1% -
http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/Pertanika%20PAPERS/JSSH%20Vol.%2025%20(3)%20
Sep.%202017/20%20JSSH-1651-2016-4thProof.pdf
<1% -
https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780080441009/advances-in-building-technology
<1% - http://www.ijettjournal.org/2016/volume-41/number-4/IJETT-V41P236.pdf
1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infill_wall
<1% - http://histruct.ro/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/INSYSME_PartB_FIN.pdf
<1% -
http://library.uniteddiversity.coop/Ecological_Building/Earthbag_Building-The_Tools_Tric
ks_and_Techniques.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326781580_ANALYSIS_OF_RC_FRAMED_STRU
CTURES_WITH_CENTRAL_AND_PARTIAL_OPENINGS_IN_MASONRY_INFILL_WALL_
USING
_DIAGONAL_STRUT_METHOD
<1% - https://thefactfactor.com/facts/pure_science/physics/angle-of-contact/5361/
<1% -
https://www.slideshare.net/ijreteditor/seismic-evaluation-of-rc-framed-buildings-with
<1% -
http://docshare.tips/theory-of-vibration-with-applications-thomson_574e1e8eb6d87f6d
218b5f78.html
<1% - https://theconstructor.org/structural-engg/high-rise-structures/5/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266352X99000427
<1% -
https://www.slideshare.net/ce_arafat/basic-design-criteria-for-high-rise-buildings-62473 145
<1% -
https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_id=16290&p_table=FE
DERAL_REGISTER
<1% - https://geekztrainerblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/dss-simple-notes.pdf
<1% - https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=204577
<1% - https://mitratheaters.com/
1% - https://www.ripublication.com/ijaer18/ijaerv13n15_06.pdf
<1% -
https://mafiadoc.com/mitigation-of-motions-of-tall-buildings-with-specific-examples-of
-_59c212771723ddbc5223bcb6.html
<1% - https://www.ukdiss.com/examples/wind-design-high-rise-buildings.php
<1% -
https://www.ijert.org/research/application-of-pushover-analysis-for-evaluating-seismic-
performance-of-rc-building-IJERTV3IS10606.pdf
<1% - https://www.you-books.com/book/J-Ringo/The-Road-to-Damascus
<1% - https://bharatkeveer.gov.in/martyrDetail?braveheartId=232
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V4/i7/IRJET-V4I7442.pdf
<1% - https://www.slideshare.net/Ram1239/i-s-code-18932002
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V3/i1/IRJET-V3I150.pdf
<1% -
https://www.slideshare.net/binay2020/earthquake-load-as-per-nbc-105-and-is-1893
<1% -
http://bsdma.org/images/publication/RC%20WATER%20TOWER%20GUIDELINES.pdf
<1% - https://law.resource.org/pub/bd/bnbc.2012/gov.bd.bnbc.2012.06.01.pdf
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/seismic-analysis
<1% -
https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/abs/10.1680/monmicmaavbeasd.29460.0008
<1% -
https://issuu.com/pedroantoniojimenezsanchez/docs/ductile_design_of_steel_structures
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045794918315876
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V2/i4/Irjet-v2i4205.pdf
<1% -
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/psychology/discuss-and-justify-the-methodology-psy chology-
essay.php
<1% - https://www.nap.edu/read/25582/chapter/4
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297751673_Analysis_Of_Masonry_Infilled_RC_
Frame_Structures_Under_Lateral_Loading
<1% -
https://www.jou.ufl.edu/grad/forms/Guidelines-for-writing-thesis-or-dissertation.pdf 1% -
http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/jspui/bitstream/10539/20038/17/Chapter%203.pdf
<1% -
https://support.ansys.com/staticassets/ANSYS/Conference/Santa%20Clara/downloads/S
hock%20Analysis%20of%20Electronic%20Comonents%20-%20MingYao%20Ding.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301398451_Simplified_Limit_State_Design_Pro
cedure_for_RC_Tall_Buildings_Subjected_to_Earthquake_and_Extreme_Wind_Loads
<1% -
http://rahat.up.nic.in/sdmplan/Earthquake/AnnexureI-V/AnnexureI_Bldg.%20Earthquake.
pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27465905_Study_of_viscoelastic_and_friction_
damper_configurations_in_the_seismic_mitigation_of_medium-rise_structures
<1% - https://theconstructor.org/structural-engg/earthquake-effects-structures/2704/
<1% - https://www.slideshare.net/ifti313/eq-tips-full
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V5/i6/IRJET-V5I6482.pdf
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V6/i2/IRJET-V6I282.pdf
<1% -
http://colincaprani.com/files/notes/SAIV/4%20-%20Matrix%20Stiffness%20Method.pdf
<1% - https://du0tsrdospf80.cloudfront.net/docs/R19088_e.doc
2% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323868477_Study_and_Comparison_of_Struct
ure_Having_Different_Infill_Material_Bricks_AAC_Blocks_and_Hollow_Concrete_Blocks_usi
ng_ETABS
<1% - https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-disadvantages-of-AAC-blocks
1% -
http://www.rroij.com/open-access/dynamic-analysis-of-infills-on-rc-framedstructures-.p
hp?aid=48601

76