10 IX September 2022

https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2022.46651
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 10 Issue IX Sep 2022- Available at www.ijraset.com

Analytical Modelling of T-Shaped Monolithic &

Independent RCC Buildings
Inder Khandelwal1, Dr. A. R. Gupta2
1
M.E Student, Department of Structural Engineering, College of Engineering and Technology Akola, India
2
Guide, Department of Structural Engineering, College of Engineering and Technology Akola, India
Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University

Abstract: During an earthquake the behaviour of the building depends on its overall shape, size & geometry. Now a day’s many
buildings are asymmetric in plan and elevation because everyone wants to win the race of aesthetically beautiful and complex
structures. Due to irregular distribution of mass, stiffness and strength, it may cause serious damage in structural system. There
are various types of irregularities in the buildings depending upon their location and scope. Mainly two types of irregularities as
per IS – 1893 (Part-1)-2002. are a) plan or horizontal irregularities b) vertical irregularities. Irregularity in structure makes
analysis of the seismic behaviour very complicated. The objective of present study is to analyze and compare the behaviour of T
shape monolithic and independent RCC structure under seismic loading. The comparison of both structures is studied by
calculating, finding and tabulating comparative values of displacement, base moments and shear values. The study reflects that
with change in structure i.e. the behaviour of structure towards earthquake changes, nodal displacement, moment, and base
shear values shows drastic changes towards resistivity against seismic forces. The soft computing tool and commercial software
STAAD-Pro is used for modelling and analysis also the study done over here thus helps to understand effect of earthquake on
both structures for achieving stable and safe structure.
Keywords: Seismic, RCC structures, Asymmetric structures, IS – 1893 (Part-1)-2002, Base Shear, Nodal displacement, Support
Reactions, Shear Force
I. INTRODUCTION
Earthquakes are may be the most unpredictable and disturbing of all natural disasters. They not only cause great damage in terms of
human loss in numerical strength through a cause, as a death, but also have a great cost-effective impact on affected vicinity. An
earthquake is a sudden movement of the earth’s crust, which originate naturally at or below the surface, because of release of strain
energy or movement of tectonic plates. Due to development of concentration currents, the plates move apparently towards each
other or away from each other. This movement of the surface develops inertia forces on the structural lines over it. This causes
damage to or collapse of buildings and other man-made structures. Experience has shown that for new constructions, establishing
earthquake resistant regulations and their implementation is the critical safeguar d against earthquake induced damage. As regards
existing structures, it is necessary to evaluate and strengthen them based on evaluation criteria before an earthquake.
Earthquake damage depends on many parameters, including intensity, duration and frequency content of ground motion, geologic
and soil condition, quality of construction, symmetry of structure etc. Out of all the factors asymmetry can be the most important
reason for a building’s poor performance under severe seismic loading. Buildings may be considered as asymmetric in plan or in
elevation based on the distribution of mass and stiffness along each storey, throughout the height of the buildings. Seismic behavior
of asymmetric building may cause interruption of force flow and stress concentration. Due to this, there is produce of torsion in the
building which leads to increase in shear force, lateral deflection and ultimately causes failure. The buildings with vertical setbacks
and L, H, U or T shaped in plans which built as unit are more affected during seismic event. Therefore, building design must be
such as to ensure that the building has adequate strength, high ductility, and will remain as one unit, even while subjected to very
large deformation, so that we need to provide earthquake resistive building.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

Donthireddy Raja Shekar Reddy. et. al. (1), In this study, multi store building with G+14 storey’s are analyzed for storey drift story
displacement and base shear using ETABS software. The analysis of this building is done for seismic loading with all Zones (Zone-
II, III, and IV & V). The analysis of these building is done by using dynamic method (Response spectrum analysis).. Extensive
research has been done in the design and analysis of shear wall in high-rise buildings. However, significance of shear wall in high-
rise irregular or unsymmetrical structures is not much discussed in this literature.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 494
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 10 Issue IX Sep 2022- Available at www.ijraset.com

Abhay Guleria. et. al. (2), This paper shows the case study and mainly emphasizes structural behavior of multi-storey building for
different plan configurations like rectangular, C, L and I-shape. In this paper modeling of 15- storey R.C.C. framed building is done
on the ETABS software for analysis. Post analysis of the structure, maximum shear forces, bending moments, and maximum storey
displacement are computed and then compared for all the analyzed cases.
MANISH KUMAR GUPTA. et.al.(3), In this paper, the dynamic analysis of a multi-storey building is done and it has been modeled
with different structural elements for minimum story displacement. The dynamic analysis of multi-storey buildings is done using
Etabs 2015 by IS and SP codal provisions (ETABS User’s Manual, 2015). The multi-storey building is R.C.C. structure with G+ 14
upper floors in zone IV.
III. DETAIL STUDY
Structures are generally made up of a combination of flexible and stiff parts. This ensures that the seismic energy passed on to the
structure is first absorbed in the flexible part and then gets transferred onto the stiff part. During an earthquake, the columns of the
structures act as primary members which resist the seismic forces, owing to this fact it is seen that the use of corrosion resistant
hybrid columns in Reinforced Concrete (RC) structures can reduce the residual displacement and also have enough energy
dissipation capacity during earthquake excitations. It is also seen that in areas of high seismic risk RC wall frame structures are
constructed as it provides stiffness to the system’s lateral force resistance, and also behave as ductile structures.
A earthquake resistive structure having properties of RCC materials. So, it is necessary to study the structure under the effect of
seismic forces. The study is concerned with the right analysis for the structures and looking after the construction process so that the
longevity of the earthquake resistive structures is guaranteed after construction. Construction technique for structure should also be
satisfactory for the public terms of comfort. The primary design technologies are to control or remediate earthquake effects.

Thus, the various parameters like displacement, storey drift, reactions and shear forces are studied and compared.
1) The present study is limited to RCC framed structure.
2) Framed structure with T shape & G+4 storeys is considered.
3) Soil-structure interaction effects are not considered in the present study.
The various parameters used in the seismic analysis of RCC framed structure, are considered from IS 1893: 2002, “Code for
earthquake resistant design of structures- general provisions for buildings, Part I, Bureau of Indian Standards.

A. Model Formulation
The study is disbursed on a T shape monolithic and independent building. The plan layout of the building is shown within the figure.
The building is taken into account as residential building having G+4. Height of every storey is kept same as other prevalent data.

B. Method Adopted
1) Step 1: Parameters of beam and column sections The codes IS 456-2000 and IS 800-2007 are used for RCC and Steel section.
The RCC beam and column sections provided are 0.23m x 0.45m and 0.23m x 0.6m resp. A structural model is a diagram
which consists of a set of nodes and connections between the nodes. Analysis process of frames is conducted on a model based
on many assumptions including those for the structural model, the geometric behavior of the structure and its members and the
behaviour of the sections and joints.
2) Step 2: Analysis: Each type of frame is analyzed separately by using STAAD.Pro V8i .The analysis is conducted for IS
1893(Part 1), 2002 and IS 800-2007 specified combinations of loadings.
3) Step 3: Comparison of Results: The results will be obtained by seismic analysis and are compared in terms mentioned below for
monolithic T shape RCC framed and independent T shape RCC frame.
 Lateral displacement in longitudinal and transverse direction.
 Storey drift in longitudinal and transverse direction
 Reactions at the bottom supports of edge sections
 Maximum forces i.e. Axial forces, Shear forces and Bending moments in all directions.
 Nodal displacements in edge nodes for RCC section.
 Maximum forces induced in top edge column.
 Maximum forces induced in top edge beam

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 495
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 10 Issue IX Sep 2022- Available at www.ijraset.com

C. List of IS Codes Employed

 IS 456-2000 Plain and concrete
 IS-SP-16:1980 for R.C Column Design
 IS 875-1987 Part-I for load
 IS 875-1987 Part-II for loading
 IS 875-1987 Part-III for Wind Load

IV. CASE CONSIDERATION

A. T-Shape Monolithic RCC Structure

FIG.1WHOLE SRUCTURE –PLAN FIG.2WHOLE STRUCTURE-3D

FIG.3 Whole Structure (Monolithic) FIG.4 Bending Moment

B. T-Shape Independent RCC Structure

FIG.5 Whole Structure –PLAN FIG.6 Whole Structure-3D

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 496
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 10 Issue IX Sep 2022- Available at www.ijraset.com

FIG.7WHOLE STRUCTURE (INDEPENDENT) FIG.5.9 BENDING MOMENT

V. OBSERVATION
A. Nodal Displacement of Column Location at Corner Edge

RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT
NODE NO. MONOLITHIC INDEPENDENT
CASE 1 CASE 2
61 80.22 68.65
51 74.35 63.71
41 64.05 54.61
31 50.82 43.17
21 35.5 30.08
11 4.7 3.98

B. Nodal Displacement of Column Location at Outer Junction

RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT

NODE NO. MONOLITHIC INDEPENDENT

CASE 1 CASE 2
274 79.81 64.8
264 74.11 59.9
254 63.9 51.62
244 50.89 41.02
234 35.84 28.83
224 4.7 3.75

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 497
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 10 Issue IX Sep 2022- Available at www.ijraset.com

C. Nodal Displacement of Column Location at Inner Junction

RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT

NODE NO. MONOLITHIC INDEPENDENT

CASE 1 CASE 2
275 79.6 64.324
265 73.93 59.07
255 63.92 51.56
245 50.87 40.8
235 35.88 28.8
225 4.69 3.72

D. Storey Drift Values at Corner Edge

CASE-I
NODE NO. RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT
61 80.22 -
51 74.35 5.87
41 64.05 10.3
31 50.82 13.23
21 35.5 15.32
11 4.7 30.8

CASE-II
NODE NO. RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT
61 68.65 -
51 63.71 4.94
41 54.61 9.1
31 43.17 11.44
21 30.08 13.09
11 3.98 26.1

E. Storey Drift Values at Outer Edge

CASE-I
NODE NO. RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT

274 79.81 -

264 74.11 5.7

254 63.9 10.21

244 50.89 13.01

234 35.84 15.05

224 4.7 31.14

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 498
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 10 Issue IX Sep 2022- Available at www.ijraset.com

CASE-II
NODE NO. RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT
274 64.8 -
264 59.9 4.9
254 51.62 8.28
244 41.02 10.6
234 28.83 12.19
224 3.75 25.08

F. Storey Drift Values at Inner Edge

CASE-I
NODE NO. RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT
275 79.6 -
265 73.93 5.67
255 63.92 10.01
245 50.87 13.05
235 35.88 14.99
225 4.69 31.19

CASE-II
NODE NO. RESULTANT DISPLACEMENT
275 64.324 -
265 59.07 5.25
255 51.56 7.51
245 40.8 10.76
235 28.8 12
225 3.72 25.08

VI. CONCLUSION
With the aim of comparing the behaviour of both monolithic and independent T shape RCC structure under seismic loading, various
cases are analysed and the comparison is made related to nodal displacement, support reaction and storey drift value. On the basis of
this analysis the observation are made.
It is observed that the nodal displacement, shear values reactions as well as drift values are more for the T shape structure which is
monolithically constructed while the same structure is provided in the form of two rectangles to form T shape. There is drastic fall in
values of forces, reactions, displacement, and drift.
From the study, analysis and comparison it can be handled in good way if it is provided in the independent rectangle arrangement.

REFERENCES
[1] Sabahat J Ansari. “ Comparative study of symmetric and asymmetric L-shape & T shape multi storey frame building subjected to gravity and seismic loads
with varying stiffness”. IJSTE vol.2 April 2016.
[2] Nzapfakumunsi Alexis “ Seismic design evaluation of T shape irregular RC building plans by using pushover analysis”. Published in 2nd International
symposium on Natural Hazards and disaster management 06 May 2018.
[3] Mohd. Abdul Aqib Farhan. “seismic analysis of multi storyed RCC buildings regular and irregular in plan”. IJERT vol 8 November 2019.
[4] Mohit Sharma and Dr. Savita Maru, Performance based seismic design and pushover analysis: a review, IJOER, Vol.2, Issue.5, 2014.
[5] Mohit Sharma, Dr. Savita Maru, “ Dynamic Analysis of Multistoried Regular Building” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-
ISSN: 2278- 1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 11, Issue 1 Ver. II (Jan. 2014), PP 37-42.
[6] Himanshu Bansal, Gagandeep, “Seismic Analysis and Design of Vertically Irregular RC Building Frames” International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064, Impact Factor (2012).
[7] Jack P. Moehle(1983)- “Seismic response of vertically irregular structure” Journalof Structural Engineering, Vol. 110, No. 9, September, 1984. ©ASCE, ISSN
0733- 9445/84/0009-2002. Paper No. 19 to 61.
[8] David vere Jones, Forecasting earthquakes and earthquake risks, International journal of forecasting, 11(1995)503-538.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 499