Sie sind auf Seite 1von 168

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
In recent years, Bangladesh has a growing trend towards construction of 15 to 30 storied
buildings, almost all of these are being situated in Dhaka. The taller and more slender a
building is, the more important the structural factors become and the more necessary it is to
choose an appropriate structural form. In addition to satisfy nonstructural requirements, the
principal objectives in choosing a buildings structural form is to arrange to support the
gravity, dead and live load and to resist at all levels the external horizontal load and shear,
moment and torque with adequate strength and stiffness. These requirements should be
achieved as economically as possible. A major step forward in reinforced concrete high-rise
structural form comes with the introduction of shear walls for resisting horizontal load. The
structural form of the tall building is concerned mainly with the arrangement of the primary
vertical components and their interconnections. The column spacing is usually governed by
the car parking requirement at ground level. The columns are connected by rigid beams. 125
mm / 250 mm thick brick walls are used as partition wall between two flats in apartment
buildings. Generally there are no openings in these walls and hence it may be replaced by
reinforced concrete shear wall. A numerical comparative study of different structural system
is done using finite element package program. To calculate the design wind pressure and
earthquake base shear, the loads are taken from method proposed in BNBC. For quick
estimation of design wind pressure and earthquake force for specific criteria some graphs are
presented. Any necessary value or interpolated value is taken from the graph directly.

1.2 Objectives of the Study
A 16-storied building is selected to study the behaviour of different structural models under
lateral loads. For simplicity of 2-D analysis, a typical transverse bay is considered for
analysis. The specified bay is idealized as different models and a comparative performance is
carried out. The main objectives of the research may be stated as follows:
To determine the efficient structural system against lateral loads.
1
To study the effect of different parameters on model frames due to wind pressure and
earthquake forces.
To study different modeling techniques for high rise building structures.
To study the effect of column size, shear wall thickness, coupling beam size etc. on
lateral drift.
To study the stresses in infilled material.
1.3 Scope of the Study
The project work has been aimed to determine the efficient structural system due to lateral
loads on high rise building. The study has been performed through a set of structural models
with the elastic analyses by a professional structural software, STAAD III. This is
performed only on the basis of some limited criteria, these are relative stiffness of model
frames, bending moments in connecting beams and stresses in infill material of different
model frames. For these purpose only, the typical bay of a 16-storied building is modelled by
different alternately adopted structural systems. These are Rigid Frame model, Infill Frame
model, Coupled Wall model (with auxiliary beam connection), Coupled Wall model (without
auxiliary beam connection) and Equivalent Wide Column model.

1.4 Methodology
To study the behaviour of 16-storied high rise building against lateral loads, a typical bay is
studied by alternative structural systems. The following items are executed on the specified
typical bay consideration.
a. A limited parametric study is carried out to control the lateral sway of the high rise
building. The top deflection of the structure and the stresses in the structural members
for various structural forms are presented graphically in detail.
b. A short direction bay of a 16-storied office building is considered for lateral load
analysis. Wind load and Earthquake load are taken as lateral loads.
The specified bay is modeled by three structural systems,
1. Rigid Frame model
2. Infilled Frame model
3. Coupled Wall model
2
The Coupled Wall is modeled into three structural sub models as
i. Coupled Wall model (without auxiliary beam)
ii. Coupled Wall model (with auxiliary beam)
iii. Equivalent Wide Column model
The total five models are then analyzed with the aforesaid software.
c. A shear panel element is used to enable modelling of shear wall. Axial, shear and
bending deformation are considered during the analysis. Modeling of shear wall in 2-D
analysis is done using the concept of rigid end condition between columns and beams.
d. The parameters that are varied in structural system are, coupling beam size, column
size, inclusion of infill material (Brick masonry) in modelling rigid frame structures etc.
3
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
Recently there has been being a considerable increase in the number of tall buildings both
residential and commercial. The modern trend is towards taller and more slender structures.
Thus, the effects of lateral load like wind load and earthquake load etc. are attaining
increasing importance and almost every designer is faced with the problem of providing
adequate strength and stability against lateral loads. This is a new development in
Bangladesh, as the earlier building designers usually designed for the vertical loads only and
as an afterthought checked, the final design for the lateral loads as well.
Tall building is analyzed by idealizing the structure into simple two-dimensional or more
refined three-dimensional continuums. In two-dimensional methods several approximations
are made and particular column line is chosen to analyze the building, in which total
effectiveness of the building is not achieved. On the other hand, in three-dimensional
analysis, the whole building is taken into consideration and thus, the structure is modeled
more realistically.
Several commercial software are available for two and three-dimensional analysis of
structures. Where as software for two-dimensional analysis are usually inexpensive, the same
for the three-dimensional analysis may be very expensive and not quite easy to use. Since
designers of moderately high rise buildings very often adopt two-dimensional analysis
methods in the design office for simplicity and for comprehensive analysis three-dimensional
method is obvious.
In the following section, the details of literature review of followings are stated:
a. Structural Systems
b. Lateral Loads
c. Method of Analysis
d. Modeling Technique
e. Drift
f. P-Delta Effect
4
2.2 Structural System
From the structural engineers point of view, the determination of the structural system of a
high rise building is ideally involved only the selection and arrangement of the major
structural elements to resist most efficiently the various combinations of gravity and
horizontal loads. In reality, however, the choice of structural system is usually strongly
influenced by other than structural considerations. Several factors have to be taken into
account in deciding the structural systems. These include the internal planning, the material
and method of construction, the external architectural treatment, location and routing of the
service systems, the nature and the magnitude of the horizontal loads, the height and the
structural system etc. The taller is the building, it is more critical to choose an appropriate
structural system.
A major consideration affecting the structural system is the function of the building. Modern
office buildings call for large open spaces that can be subdivided with lightweight
partitioning to suit the individual tenants needs. Consequently, main vertical components are
generally arranged, as far as possible, around the perimeter of the plan and, internally, in
group around the elevator, stair, and service lifts. The floor areas between the exterior and
interior components, leaving large column free areas available for office planning. The
services are distributed horizontally in each story above the partitioning and are usually
concealed in a ceiling space. The extra depth required by this space causes typical story
height in an office building to be 3000 mm or more.
A major step forward in reinforced concrete high rise structural system comes with the
introduction of shear walls for resisting horizontal load. This is the first in a series of
significant developments in the structural systems of concrete high rise buildings, freeing
them from the previous 20 to 25 story height limitations of the rigid frame and flat plate
systems. The innovation and refinement of these new systems, together with the development
of higher strength concrete, has allowed the height of concrete buildings to reach within
striking distance of 100 stories.
2.2.1 Rigid Frame
A rigid frame high-rise structure typically comprises parallel or orthogonally arranged bents
consisting of columns and beams with moment resistance joints (Fig. 2.1). The lateral
stiffness of a rigid frame bent depends on the bending stiffness of the columns, beams, and
5
connections in the plane of bent. The rigid frames principal advantage is its open rectangular
arrangement, which allows freedom of planning and easy fitting of doors and windows. If
used as the only source of lateral resistance in a building, in its typical 6m to 9m bay size,
rigid framing is economical only for buildings up to 25 stories. Above that the relatively high
lateral flexibility of the frame calls for uneconomically large members in order to control the
drift.
Rigid frame construction is ideally suited for reinforced concrete buildings because of the
inherent rigidity of reinforced concrete joints. The rigid frame system is also used for steel
buildings, but moment resistant connections in steel tend to be costly. The sizes of the
columns and beams at any level of rigid frame are directly influenced by the magnitude of
the external shear at that level, and they therefore increase toward the base.
Column
Beam
Fig. 2.1 Rigid frame
Gravity load also is resisted by the rigid frame action. Negative moments are induced in the
beams adjacent to the columns reducing the mid-span positive moment significantly
compared to a simply supported span. In structures in where gravity loads dictate the design,
economies in member sizes from this effect tend to be offset by the higher cost of the rigid
joints. While rigid frames of a typical scale that serve alone to resist lateral load have an
economic height limit of about 25 stories. Smaller scale rigid frames in the form of perimeter
tube, or typically scaled rigid frames in combination with shear wall or braced bent, can be
economic up to much greater heights.
2.2.1.1 Behaviour of Rigid Frame Structure under Lateral Load
The horizontal stiffness of a rigid frame is governed mainly by bending resistance of the
beams, the columns, and their connections and in tall frame, by the axial rigidity of the
columns. The accumulated horizontal shear above any story of a rigid frame is resisted by
6
shear in the columns of that story. The shear causes the story height columns to bend in
double curvature with points of contra-flexure at approximately mid story height levels. The
moments applied to a joint from the columns above and below are resisted by the attached
beams, which also bend in double curvature, with points of contra-flexure at approximately
mid span.
The overall moment of the external horizontal load is resisted in each story level by the
couple resulting from the axial tensile and compressive forces in the columns on opposite
sides of the structure. The extension and shortening of the columns cause overall bending and
associated horizontal displacements of the structure. Because of the cumulative rotation up
the height, the story drift due to overall bending increases with height, while that due to
racking tends to decrease.
Consequently the contribution to story drift from overall bending may, in the uppermost
stories, exceed that from racking. The contribution of overall bending to the total drift,
however, will usually not exceed 10% than of that racking, except in very tall, slender, rigid
frames. Therefore the over all deflected shape of a high rise rigid frame usually has a shear
configuration.
2.2.2 Shear Wall
A shear wall structure is considered to one whose resistance to horizontal load is provided
entirely by shear wall (Fig. 2.2). The walls are part of a service core or a stair well, or they
serve as partitions between accommodations. They are usually continuous down to the base
to which they are rigidly attached to form vertical cantilever.
Shear wall
Fig. 2.2 Plan of shear wall
Their high inplane stiffness and strength makes them well suited for bracing buildings up to
about 35 stories, while simultaneously carrying gravity loads. It is usual to locate the walls
on plan, so that, they attract an amount of gravity dead load sufficient to suppress the
maximum tensile bending stresses in the wall caused by lateral load. In this situation, only
7
minimum wall reinforcement is required. The term shear wall is in some way a misnomer
because the walls deform predominately in flexure. Shear walls are planar, but are often of L,
T, I or U shaped section to better suit the planning and to increase their flexural stiffness.
2.2.2.1 Behaviour of Shear Wall Structure under Lateral Load
High rise building typically comprises an assembly of shear walls whose length and
thickness changes or not. It is discontinued or not through the height. The effect of such
variations creates complex redistribution of the moments and shears between the walls, with
associated horizontal interactive forces in the connecting beams and slabs. To understand the
behaviour of shear wall structures, they are classified as proportionate and non-proportionate
systems.
A proportionate system is one in which the ratios of the flexural rigidities of the walls remain
constant through the height. As for example, two walls connected by beams whose lengths do
not change throughout the height, but whose changed walls thickness are same at any level,
is proportionate. Proportionate systems of walls do not cause any redistribution of shears and
moments at the changed levels. The statically determinacy of proportionate systems allows
the analysis is done by consideration of equilibrium. The external moment and shear on non-
twisting structures are distributed between the walls simply in proportion to the flexural
rigidities.
A non-proportionate system is one in which the ratios of the walls flexural rigidities are not
constant through the height. At levels where the rigidities change, redistribution of the wall
shear and moments occur, corresponding horizontal interactions in the connecting beams and
the possibility of very high local shears in the walls. Non proportionate structures are
statically indeterminate. Hence it is more difficult to visualize the behaviour and analyze.
2.2.3 Shear Wall-Frame
A structure whose resistance to horizontal load is provided by a combination of shear walls
and rigid frames may be categorized as a wall-frame structure. The shear walls are often parts
of the elevator and service cores while the frames are arranged in plan, in conjunction with
the walls, to support the floor system.
8
When a wall-frame structure is loaded laterally, the different free deflected forms of the walls
and the frames cause them to interact horizontally, through the floor slabs. Consequently, the
individual distribution of lateral load on the wall and the frames are very different from the
distribution of the external load. The horizontal interaction is effective in contributing to
lateral stiffness to the extent that wall-frame of up to 50 stories or more are economical. If the
wall-frame structures that do not twist and, therefore, that is analyzed as equivalent planar
models which are mainly plan-symmetric structures, subjected to symmetric load. Structures
that are asymmetric about the axis of loading inevitably twist.
The potential advantages of a wall-frame structure depend on the amount of horizontal
interaction, which is governed by the relative stiffness of the walls and frames, and the height
of the structure. The taller the building and, in typically proportioned structures, the stiffer
the frames, the greater is the interaction. It is used to be common practice in the design of
high rise structure to assume that the shear walls or cores resist all lateral loads, and to design
the frames for gravity load only. This assumption would incur little error for buildings of less
than 20 stories with flexible frames.
The principal advantages of accounting for the horizontal interaction in designing a wall-
frame structure are as follows (Coul, 1991):
i. The estimated drift is significantly less than if the walls alone are considered to resist
the horizontal load.
ii. The estimated bending moments in the walls or cores are less.
iii. The columns of the frames are designed as fully braced.
iv. The estimated shear in the frames in many cases is approximately uniform
throughout the height.
2.2.3.1 Behaviour of Shear Wall-Frame under Lateral Load
Considering the separate horizontal stiffness at the top of a typical 10-storied elevator core
and typical rigid frame of the same height, the core is 10 or more times as stiffer as the
frame. If the same core and frame are extended to a height of 20 stories, the core is then only
approximately three times as stiffer as the frame. At 50 stories the core is reduced to being
only half as stiff the frame. The change in the relative top stiffness with the total height,
occurs because of the top flexibility of the core. It behaves as a flexural cantilever, is
proportioned to the cube of the height, where as the flexibility of the frame, which behaves as
9
shear cantilever, is directly proportioned to its height. Consequently, height is a major factor
in determining the influence of the frame on the lateral stiffness of the wall-frame.
A further understanding of the interaction between the wall and the frame in a wall-frame
structure is given by the deflected shapes of the shear wall and a rigid frame subjected
separately to horizontal load, Fig. 2.3 and 2.4.
Flexural shape Shear
shape
Shear shape
Point of contra-
flexure

Flexural shape

(a) (b) (c)
(a) Wall subjected to uniformly distributed horizontal load
(b) Frame subjected to uniformly distributed horizontal load
(c) Wall-frame structure subjected to horizontal load
Fig. 2.3 Deflected shape of wall-frame structure.
Interaction forces
(a) (b) (c)
(a) Rigid frame (b) Shear wall (c) Interconnected Frame and
shear mode bending mode shear wall (Equal deflection at each
deformation deformation story level)
Fig. 2.4 Interaction of forces between wall and frame.
10
The wall deflects in a flexural mode with concavity downward and a maximum slope at the
top, while the frame deflects in a shear mode with concavity upward and a maximum slope at
the base. When the wall and frame are connected together by a pin ended links and subjected
to horizontal load, the deflected shape of the composite structure has a flexural profile in the
lower part and a shear profile in the upper part.
2.2.4 Coupled Shear Wall
In many practical situations, however, walls are connected by moment resisting members.
Walls in residential buildings are perforated by vertical rows of openings that are required for
windows on external gable walls or for doorways or corridors in internal walls.
Wall centroidal axis
Shear wall
Coupling beam
Fig.2.5 Coupled shear wall
The walls are connected by beam or floor slabs serve as connecting beams to produce a shear
interaction between the two in plane cross walls (Fig. 2.5). Such structures, which consist of
walls that are connected by bending resistant elements, are termed Coupled shear wall, in
which the presence of the moment resisting connections greatly increases the stiffness and
efficiency of the wall system.
2.2.4.1 Behaviour of Coupled Shear Wall Structures under Lateral Load
The coupled walls when deflect under the action of the lateral loads, the connecting beams
ends are forced to rotate and displace vertically, so that the beams bend in double curvature
and thus resist the free bending of the walls. The bending action induce shears in the
connecting beams, which exert bending moments on each walls, tensile in the wind ward
wall and compressive in the leeward wall. The wind moment M at any level is then resisted
by the sum of the bending moments M
1
and M
2
in the two walls (Fig. 2.5) at that level. The
moment of the axial force is Nl, where N is the axial force in each wall at that level and l is
the distance between their centroidal axes.
M = M
1
+ M
2
+ Nl (2.1)
11
The last term represents the reverse moment caused by the bending of the connecting beams,
those oppose the free bending of the individual walls. This term is zero in the case of linked
walls, and reaches a maximum when the connecting beams are infinity rigid.
The action of the connecting beams is then to reduce the magnitudes of the moments in the
two walls by causing a proportion of the applied moment to be carried by axial forces.
Because of the relatively larger lever arm l involved, a relatively small axial stress gives rise
to a disproportionally larger moment of resistance. The maximum tensile stress in concrete is
greatly reduced. This makes it easier to suppress the wind or earthquake local tensile stresses
by gravity load compressive stresses.
2.2.5 Infilled-Frame
In many countries infilled frame (Fig.2.6a) is the most usual form of construction for high
rise buildings of up to 30-stories height. Column and beam framing of reinforced concrete, or
sometimes steel, is infilled by panels of brickwork, block work, or cast-in-place concrete.
When an infilled frame is subjected to lateral load, the infill behaves effectively as a strut
along its compression diagonal to brace the frame, Fig. 2.6b.
The infills serve also as an external wall or internal partitions, the system is an economical
way of stiffening and strengthening the structure.
Shear deformation of infill

Leeward column
in compression
Frame bearing on infill
Windward column
in tension Equivalent
diagonal strut
(a) (b)
(a) Interaction between frame and infills (b) Analogous braced frame
Fig. 2.6 Idealization of Frame-Infill interaction behaviour
12
In non-earthquake regions where the wind forces/earthquake forces not severe, the masonry
infilled concrete frame is one of the most common structural forms for high rise construction.
The infilled are presumed to contribute sufficiently to the lateral strength of the structure for
it to withstand the horizontal load. The simplicity of construction with skilled expertise in
building such type of structures have made the infilled frame one of the most rapid and
economical structural forms for tall buildings. Their use in earthquake regions, therefore, is
provided with the additional provision that the walls are reinforced and anchored into the
surrounding frame with sufficient strength to withstand their own transverse infilled forces.
2.2.5.1 Behaviour of Infiled Frames under Lateral Load
Masonry use in infill to brace a frame combines some of the desirable structural
characteristics of each, while overcoming some of their deficiencies. Due to high in-plane
rigidity of the masonry wall, it gives more stiffness to the wall than relatively flexible frame.
The ductile frame contains the brittle masonry and when it cracks up to certain loads and
displacement much larger than it is achieved without the masonry infill. The result is,
therefore, a relatively stiff and tough bracing system. The wall braces the frame partly by its
behaviour as a diagonal bracing strut in the frame (Fig. 2.6). Three potential modes of failure
of the wall arise as a result of its interaction with the frame. The first is a shear failure
stepping down through the joints of the masonry and precipitated by the horizontal shear
stresses in the bed joints. The second is a diagonal crack of the wall through the masonry
along a line, or lines, parallel to the leading diagonal and caused by the tensile stresses
perpendicular the leading diagonal. The perpendicular tensile stresses are caused by the
divergence of the compressive stress trajectories on opposite sides of the load diagonal as
they approach the middle region of the infill. The diagonal crack is initiated at and spreads
from the middle of the infill, where the tensile stresses are a maximum, tending to stop near
the compressive corners, where the tension is suppressed. In the third mode of failure, a
corner of the infill at one of the ends of the diagonal strut some times is crushed against the
frame due to the high compressive stresses in the corner. The nature of the forces in the
frame can be understood by referring to the analogous braced frame Fig. 2.6b. The forward
column is in tension and the leeward column is in compression.
13
2.2.5.2 Stresses in Infill
When the lateral loads are subjected on the Infill frame, stresses are generated in the infill
materials. Mainly three types of stresses are formed. They are shear stress, tensile stress and
compressive stress. Shear stress is related to combination of shear stress and normal stress
and it follows Coulombs Law up to certain normal stress. Diagonal deformation of block
bounded by beam and column produces diagonal tension in the infill that causes failure in
tension. Mortar goes more strain than brick in masonry by compressive force that causes
tensile stress in brick. Ultimately the corner block fails in tension.
a. Shear Failure
Shear failure of the infill is related to the combination of shear and normal stresses induced at
points in the infill when the frame bears on it as the structure is subjected to the external
lateral shear. Lot of series of plane-stress membrane finite element analyses have shown that
the critical values of this combination of stresses occur at the center of the infill and they are
expressed empirically, given by Coull (1991)
Shear stress, (2.2)
Vertical compressive stress, (2.3)
Where, Q is the horizontal shear load applied by the frame to the infill of the length L, height
h, and thickness t.
b. Diagonal Tensile Failure
Consequently, diagonal crack of the infill is related to the maximum value of the diagonal
tensile stress in the infill. It also happens at the center of the infill and based on the results of
the analysis, it is expressed empirically as diagonal tensile stress,
(2.4)
These stresses are governed mainly by the properties of the infill material. They are little
influenced by the stiffness properties of the frame because, it occurs at the center of the infill
away from the region of contact with the frame.
14
Lt
Q
xy
43 . 1

Lt
Q
L
h
y
) 2 . 0
8 . 0
(

Lt
Q
d
58 . 0

c. Compressive Failure of the Corners
Experiment on model infilled frames have shown that the length of bearing of each story-
height column against its adjacent infill is governed by flexural stiffness of the column
relative to the in-plane bearing stiffness of the infill. The stiffer the column, the longer the
length of bearing and the lower the compressive stresses at this interface. The length of
column bearing is estimated by, (2.5a)
(2.5b)
Where,
E
m
is the elastic modulus of the masonry and EI is the flexural rigidity of the column.
The parameter expresses the bearing stiffness of the infill relative to the flexural rigidity
of the column. The stiffer the column, the smaller the value of and the longer the length of
bearing.
It is considered that when the corner of the infill crushes, the masonry bearing against the
column within the length is at the masonry ultimate compressive stress f
m
, then the
corresponding ultimate horizontal shear Q
c
on the infill is given by,
(2.6a)
If the allowable horizontal shear is Qc on the infill, and consider a value for E/E
m
is 3 for
reinforced concrete frame. The allowable horizontal shear Q
c
for a reinforced concrete
framed infill is,
(2.6b)
Where, f
m
is allowable compressive stress of infill.
From above equation it is shown that the masonry compressive strength and the wall
thickness have the most direct influence on the infill strength while the column inertia and
infill height less effect on the infill strength because of their fourth root.
d. Code Provisions for Infilled Material
BNBC (1993),
For clay units,Allowable shear stress, < 0.40 N/ mm
2

15

4
4EIh
t Em

4
4
.
2
. ' '
t E
EIh
t f Q
m
m
c

4 3
9 . 2 lhr f Q m c
m y
f F ' 025 . 0
Allowable compressive stress, axial, N / mm
2
Allowable compressive stress, flexural, F
b
= 0.33 f
m
10 N / mm
2
Direct tensile stress, F
t
= 0.35 N/ mm
2
(51 psi )
Allowable bond shear stress, N / mm
2
(

psi )
Modulus of Elasticity E
m
=750 f
m
15,000 N / mm
2
Shear Modulus G = 0.4 E
m
UBC (1997),

Allowable bond shear stress, N / mm
2
(

psi )
Allowable compressive stress,

N / mm
2

Allowable tensile stress
Normal to bed joint, F
t
=0.17 N/mm
2
(24 psi)
Normal to head joint, F
t
=0.34 N/mm
2
(48 psi)
Modulus of Elasticity, E
m
= N/mm
2
Hendry, A.W. and Davies, S. R. (1981),
Direct tensile stress, F
t
= 0.40 N/ mm
2
(58 psi)
Modulus of Elasticity E
m
= 700 f
m
N / mm
2
Flexural tensile strength F
tb
= 0.80 to 2 N / mm
2
Shear strength F
v
= 0.3 N / mm
2
Compressive strength

N / mm
2
2.3 Review of Lateral Loads
Loads on high rise buildings differs from loads on low rise buildings in its accumulation into
much larger structural forces, in the increased significance of wind load, and in the greater
importance of dynamic effect. The collection of gravity load over a large number of stories in
a high rise building produces column loads of an order higher than low-rise buildings. Wind
load on a high rise building acts not only over a very large building surface, but also with
greater intensity at the greater heights and with a large moment arm about the base than on a
low-rise building. Although wind load over a low-rise building usually insignificant
influence on the design of the structure, wind on a high rise building has a dominant
influence on its structural arrangement and design. In an extreme case of a very slender or
16
5
42
'
1 '
3
1
1
]
1

,
_

t
h
f
F
m
a
3
' m
m
f
f
m bs
f F ' 025 . 0
m
f ' 3 . 0
m bs
f F ' 025 . 0
m
f ' 3 . 0
m
f ' 2000
b b
f F
flexible structure, the motion of the building in the wind is considered in assessing the load
applied by the wind.
In earthquake regions, any internal loads from the shaking of the ground well exceed the load
due to wind, therefore, be dominant in influencing the buildings structural system, design,
and cost. As an internal problem, the buildings dynamic response plays a large part in
influencing, and in estimating, the effective load on the structure.
With the exception of dead load, the loads on a building are not assessed accurately. While
maximum gravity live loads are anticipated approximately from previous field observations,
wind and earthquake loads are random in nature, more difficult to measure from past events,
and even more difficult to predict with confidence. The application of probabilistic theory
has helped to rationalize, if not in every case to simply, the approaches to estimate wind and
earthquake loads.
2.3.1 Wind load
A mass of air moving at a certain velocity has a kinetic energy, equal to MV
2
, where M
and V are the mass and velocity of air in motion. When an obstacle like a building is met in
its path, a part of the kinetic energy of air in motion gets converted to potential energy of
pressure. The actual intensity wind pressure depends on a number of factors like angle of
incidence of the wind, roughness of surrounding area, effects of architectural features, i,e.
shape of the structure etc. and lateral resistance of the structure. Apart from these, the
maximum design wind load pressure depends on the duration and amplitude of the gusts and
the probability of occurrence of an exceptional wind in the lifetime of building. It is possible
to take into account the above factors in determining the wind pressure.
The lateral load due to wind is the major factor that causes the design of high rise buildings
to differ from those of low rise to medium rise buildings. For buildings of up to about 10
storied and of typical properties and the design is rarely affected by the wind loads. Above
this height, however, the increase in size of the structural members, and the possible
rearrangement of the structure to account for wind load, incurs a cost premium that increases
progressively with height. With innovations in architectural treatment, increase in the
strengths of materials, and advances in method of analysis, tall building structures become
more efficient and lighter and, consequently, more prone to deflect and even to sway under
wind load.
17
Along wind
Gust pressure
Mean pressure
Across wind

Wind

Fig. 2.7 Simplified two dimensional flow of wind. Fig. 2.8 Schematic representation of
mean wind and gust velocity
2.3.1.1 Determination of Design Wind Load
Wind is the general word for air naturally in motion, which by virtue of the mass and velocity
possesses kinetic energy. If an obstacle is placed in the path of the wind so that the moving
air is stopped or deflected from its path, then all or part of the kinetic energy of the moving
air is transformed into pressure (Fig. 2.7 & 2.8). The intensity of pressure at any point on an
obstacle depends on the shape of the obstacle, the angle of the incidence of the wind, the
velocity and density of the air, and the lateral stiffness of the engaged structure.
Under the action of a natural wind, a tall building is continually buffeted by gusts and others
aerodynamic forces. The structure deflects about a mean position and will oscillate
continuously.
If the wind energy that is absorbed by the structure is larger than the energy dissipated by the
structural damping, then the amplitude of oscillation continues to increase and finally leads to
destruction and the structure comes aerodynamically unstable.
These factors have increased the importance of wind as a design consideration. For
estimations of the overall stability of a structure and of the local pressure distribution on the
building, knowledge of the maximum steady or time averaged wind loads is usually
sufficient.
2.3.1.2 Methods for Determining Wind Load
Here, two methods are described. The first method is Quasi-Static method (static approach),
in that it assumes the building is fixed rigid body in the wind. Quasi-Static method is
appropriate for tall building, slenderness or susceptibility to vibration in the wind. The
18
second method is Dynamic Method. It is appropriate for exceptionally tall, slender or
vibration-prone building. The two methods are described in UBC.
a. Quasi-Static Method
The quasi-static method has generally proved satisfactory. However, in very tall and slender
buildings, aerodynamics instability may develop. This is because of the fact that during a
windstorm and the building is constantly buffeted by gusts and starts vibrating in its
fundamental mode. If the energy absorbed by the building is more than the energy it can
dissipate by structural damping, the amplitude of the vibration goes on increasing till failure
occurs. A detailed study supported by wind tunnel experiments is often necessary in this
case.
It is representative of modern static methods of estimating wind load in that it accounts for
the effects of gust and for local extreme pressures over the faces of the building. It also
accounts for local differences in exposure between the open country side and a city center, as
well as allowing for vital facilities such as hospitals, state bank, power station, and fire and
police stations, whose safety must be ensured for use after an extreme wind storm.
The determination of wind design forces on a structure is basically a dynamic problem.
However, for reasons of tradition and for simplicity, it has been used practice to use a quasi-
static approach and treat wind as a statically applied pressure, neglecting its dynamic nature.
The wind has calculated as per following section, 2.3.2.
Some of the considerations that enter into the choice of design wind pressure are,
The anticipated life time of the structure and its relation to the return period of maximum
wind velocity
The duration of gusts
The magnitude of gusts
Variation of wind speed with height
Angle of inclination of the wind
Influence of the ground
Influence of the architectural features
Influence of the internal pressure
Lateral resistance of structure
19
b. Dynamic Method
If the building is exceptionally slender or tall, if it is located in extremely severe exposure
condition, the effective wind load on the building is increased by dynamic interaction
between the motion of the building and the gust of the wind. If it is possible to allow for it in
the budget of the building, the best method of assessing such dynamic effects is by wind
tunnel tests. For buildings that are not so extreme as to demand a wind tunnel test, but for
which the simple design procedure is inadequate, alternative dynamic methods of estimating
the wind load by calculation have been developed.
i. Wind Tunnel Experimental Method
Wind tunnel tests to determine load is quasi steady for determining the static pressure
distribution on a building. The pressure coefficients so developed are then used in calculating
the full-scale load through on of the prescribed method. This approach is satisfactory for
building whose motion is negligible and therefore has little effect on the wind load.
If the building slenderness or flexibility is such that its response to excitation by the energy
of the gusts may significantly influence the effective wind load, the wind tunnel test is a fully
dynamic one. In this case, the elastic structural properties and the mass distribution of the
building as well as the relevant characteristics of the wind are modeled.
Building models for wind tunnel test are constructed with a scale of 1:400 being common
(Coull, 1991). Tall buildings typically exhibit a combination of shear and bending behaviour
that has a fundamental sway mode comprising a flexurally shaped lower region and a
relatively linear upper region. This is represented approximately in wind tunnel tests by a
rigid model with flexurally sprung base. It is not necessary in such a model to represent the
distribution of mass in the building, but only its moment of inertia about the base.
The wind characteristics that are generated in the wind tunnel are the vertical profile of the
horizontal velocity, the turbulence intensity and the power spectral density of the longitudinal
component, special boundary layer wind tunnels have been designed to generate those
characteristics. Some use long working sections in which the boundary layer develops
naturally over a rough floor, others shorter ones include grids, fences, or spires at the test
section entrance together with a rough floor, while some activate the boundary layer by jets
or driven flops. The working sections of the tunnel are up to a maximum of about 1.8 sq. m
(20 sq.ft) and it operates at atmospheric pressure.
20
ii. Analytical Method
Wind tunnel testing is a highly specialized, complex, and expensive procedure, and is
justified only for very high cost projects. To bridge up the gap between those buildings that
require only a simple approach to wind load and those that clearly demand a wind tunnel
dynamic test, more detailed analytical methods have been developed that allow the dynamic
wind load. The method described here is based on the pioneering work of Davenport and is
now included in the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC).
The external pressure or suction P on the surface of the building is obtained using the basic
equation.
p = qC
c
C
G
C
p
(2.7)
q = wind dynamic pressure for a minimum basic 50 years wind speed at a height of 10m
above ground
C
c
= exposure factor is based on a mean wind speed vertical profile
C
G
= gust effect factor is the ratio of the expected peak loading to the mean loading effect.
C
p
= external pressure coefficient averaged over the area of the surface considered.
2.3.2 Code Provisions for Wind Load
The minimum design wind load on buildings and components is determined based on the
velocity of the wind, the shape and size of the building and the terrain exposure condition of
the site. Provision to the calculation of design wind loads for the primary framing system and
for the individual structural components of the buildings. Provisions are included for forces
due to along-wind (Fig. 2.7) response of regular shaped building, caused by the common
wind-storms including cyclones, thunder-storms and norwesters.
a. Basic Wind Speed
The basic wind speed for the design is taken from basic wind speed map of Bangladesh
(BNBC,1993), where it is in km/h for any location in Bangladesh, having isotachs
representing the fastest-mile wind speed at 10 meters above the ground with terrain exposure
B for a 50 years recurrence interval. The minimum value of the basic wind speed set in the
map is 130 km / h and maximum is 260 km / h.
21
b. Exposure Category
Exposure A: Urban and sub-urban areas, industrial areas, wooded areas, hilly or other
terrain covering at least 20 percent of the area with obstructions of 6 meters or more in height
and extending from the site at least 500 meters or 10 times the height of the structure, which
ever is greater.
Exposure B: Open terrain with scattered obstruction having heights generally less than 10
m extending 800 m or more from the site in any full quadrant. This category includes
airfields, open park land, sparely built up out skirts of towns, flat open country and grass
land.
Exposure C: Flat and unobstructed open terrain, coastal areas and riversides facing large
bodies of water, over 1.5 km or more in width. Exposure C extends inland from the shoreline
400 m or 10 times the height of structure, whichever greater. The basic wind speed for
selected locations in Bangladesh are given in Appendix A, Table A.4.1
c. Sustained Wind Pressure
The sustained wind pressure, q
z
on a building surface at any height z above the ground can be
calculated from the following relation,
q
z
= C
c
C
I
C
z
V
b
2

(2.8)
q
z
= sustained wind pressure at height z , kN / m
2

C
I
= structural importance coefficient as given in Appendix A, Table A.4.2
C
c
= velocity to pressure conversion coefficient = 47.2 x 10
-6
C
z
= combined height and exposure coefficient, Table 3.2 and Fig. 3.2
V
b
= basic wind speed in km/h obtained from Appendix A, Table A.4.1
d. Design Wind Pressure
The design wind pressure, Pz for a structure or an element of a structure at any height z
above mean ground level is determined from relation,
P
z
= C
G
C
p
q
z
(2.9)
P
z =
design wind pressure at height z, kN / m
2
C
G
= gust coefficient which is either G
z ,
or G
h
to be

from Table 3.3
e. Gust Response Factor, G
h
for Non-slender Buildings (BNBC, 1993)
For the main wind force resisting system of non-slender buildings and structures, the value of
the gust response factor, G
h
is determined from Table 3.3 and Fig. 3.3 evaluated at height h
22
above mean ground level of the building or structure. Height h, is defined as the mean roof
level or the top of the parapet, whichever is greater.
f. Gust Response Factor, G
z
for Building Components
For components and cladding of all buildings and structures, the value of G
z
is determined
from Table 3.3 and Fig. 3.3 evaluated at height z above the ground, where the component or
cladding under consideration is located on the structure.
C
p
= Overall pressure coefficient for structure or component as in Table 3.1 and Fig. 3.1
g. Codes Approach for Wind Load
In Uniform Building Code (1994), building having a height greater than 123 m (400 ft) or a
height greater than five times their width, or with structures sensitive to wind excited
oscillations, dynamic wind load has to be calculated based National Building Code of Canada
(NBCC). Details of Dynamic Wind Load method is described in its supplement.
ANSI standard A58.1 (1982)

contains the most comprehensive provisions concerning wind
load on structure.
The UBC and NBCC both assume that wind and earthquake loads need not are taken to act
simultaneously. The UBC considers the improbability of extreme gravity and wind or
earthquake, loads acting simultaneously allowing for the combination a one-third increase in
stress or 25% reduction in the sum of the gravity and wind load or earthquake load.
The NBCC approach allows for the improbability of the loads acting simultaneously. It
applies a reduction factor to the combined loads rather than to increase in the permissible
stresses, with greater reductions for the greater number of load types combined.
The ACI Code approach allows of a load factor of 1.7 for wind load in USD method and a
reduction factor of 0.75 when gravity and wind load is permitted together.
2.3.3 Earthquake Load
Earthquake load consists of the inertial forces of the building mass that result from the
shaking of its foundation by a seismic disturbance. Two methods are described here. The first
approach, termed the Equivalent Lateral Force method. It is simple estimate of the structures
fundamental period and the anticipated maximum ground acceleration or velocity, together
with relevant factors to determine a maximum base shear. The design forces used in the
equivalent static analysis are less than the actual forces imposed on the buildings by the
corresponding earthquake. The justification for using lower design forces includes the
23
potential for greater strength of the structure provided by the working stress level, the
damping provided by the building components.
The second method is Modal Method. The equivalent static method is suitable for the
majority of high-rise building. If the lateral load resisting elements or the vertical distribution
of mass are significantly irregular over the height of the building, or setbacks, an analysis
that takes greater consideration of the dynamic characteristics of the building is made. In
such cases, a modal method for analysis is appropriate.
a. Equivalent Lateral Force Method
This method is the most common approach, in this, the earthquake forces are treated as static
forces and the resulting stresses are calculated and checked against specified safe values.
This method is used for calculation of seismic lateral forces for all structural system. The
lateral forces specified in BNBC (1993), UBC (1994), ANSI are intended to be used as
equivalent static loads.
Determination of the Minimum Base Shear
This is an approximate method, which has evolved because of the difficulties involved in
carrying out realistic dynamic analysis. Code practices inevitably rely mainly on the simpler
static force approach and incorporate varying degrees of refinement in an attempt to simulate
the real behaviour of the structures. Basically, it gives a crude means of determining the total
horizontal force (base shear) V on a structure.
UBC (1994) uses equivalent horizontal static forces to design the building for maximum
earthquake motion. Using Newtons second law of motion, the total lateral seismic force,
also called the base shear, is determined by the relation (Newtons law),
V = Ma = F
1
+F
2
+ F
3
= m
1
a
1
+ m
2
a
2
+ m
3
a
3
(2.10)
(2.11)

(2.12)
W = building weight
g = acceleration due to gravity
V = total horizontal seismic force over the height of the building
M = mass of the building
a = the maximum acceleration of the building
24
g
W
M
WC
g
Wa
V
(2.13)
C seismic coefficient, which represents the ratio of maximum earthquake acceleration to
the acceleration due to gravity (Taranath, 1988) but in BNBC it refers as Z.
An important feature of equivalent static load requirements in most codes of practice till
2000, is the fact that the calculated seismic forces are considerably less than those which is
actually occur in the large earthquakes in the area concerned.
b. Modal Method
This method is based on linear elastic structural behaviour, employs the superposition of a
number of modal peak responses, as determined from a prescribed response spectrum. In a
modal analysis a lumped mass model of the building with horizontal degrees of freedom at
each floor is analyzed to determine the modal shapes and modal frequencies of vibration. The
results are then used in conjunction with an earthquake design response spectrum and
estimates of the modal damping to determine the probable maximum response of the
structure from the combined effect of its various modes of oscillation.
2.3.4 Code Provisions for Earthquake Load
The UBC states that the structure is designed for a minimum total lateral seismic load V,
which is assumed to act non concurrent in orthogonal directions parallel to the main axes of
the structure, where V is the calculated from the formula, UBC (1994), BNBC (1993) as
(2.14)

(2.15)
T = C
t
h
n
3/4
(2.16)
V = base shear, Z = seismic zone coefficient, I = structural importance coefficient
R

=response modification coefficient for structural systems, C = Numerical coefficient
W = total dead load + 25% live load in storage and warehouse occupancies
S = site coefficient for soil, T = fundamental period of vibration
C
t
= 0.073 for reinforced concrete moment resisting frames and eccentrically braced steel
frames and 0.049 for all other structural systems
25
R
ZICW
V
T
S
C
3 / 2
25 . 1

g
a
C
h
n =
height in meters above the base to level n.
The design base shear equation provides the level of the seismic design loading for a given
structural system, assuming that the structure undergoes inelastic deformation during a major
earthquake.
a. Vertical Distribution of Lateral Forces
The total design base shear V, is distributed over the height of the structure as described
below,
(2.17)
F
t
is the concentrated lateral force applied at the top of the structure,
F
t
= 0.07TV 0.25V (2.18)

= 0 for T 0.7 sec. (2.19)
The remaining portion of the base shear is distributed over the height of the structure,
including the top level n, according to the expression.
(2.20)
W
x
w
i
= portion of W at x, i level, h
x
h
i =
height to x, i level
The design shear at any story, V
x
equals the sum of the forces, F
i
and F
x
above that story. For
a building with a uniform mass distribution over the height, the lateral forces and story shears
are distributed as shown in fig. 2.9

F t F t + F n
F n
hn
Level x


hx

D v
Structure Lateral Load Story shear
Fig. 2.9 Typical distribution of Code specified static forces and story shears
in a building with uniform mass distribution
26

n
i
i i
x x t
x
h W
h W V V
F
1
) (

+
n
i
i t F F V
1
b. Limitation of Height and Fundamental Time Period in Code Provisions for
Earthquake Analysis
The main restriction that has been imposed by different codes to the Quasi-static method is
structural height. In every code regular and irregular structures of certain height is analyzed
by Quasi-static method. The height restriction is given by different codes.
UBC (1994) 73 m (240-0)
IS (1984) 90 m (295- 0)
BSLJ (1987) 60m (197-0)
Table 2.1 Fundamental time period T, in different codes
Code Formula Suggested
UBC
(1994)
T = Cthn
3/4
hn = Height in feet above the base to level n
Ct = 0.035 for steel moment resisting frames
Ct = 0.03 for reinforced concrete moment resisting frames and eccentrically braced frames
Ct = 0.02 for all other buildings
NBCC
(1995)
T = 0.1 N ( lateral force resisting system consists of a moment resisting space frame )
T = 0.09hn / Ds ( other structures)
N = total number of stories above exterior grade to level n
hn = height above the base to level n in meter
Ds = maximum base dimension of building in meter in direction parallel to the applied seismic
force
IS
(1984)
T = 0.1 n ( moment resisting frames without bracing or shear walls for resisting the lateral loads)
T = 0.09H / d ( all others)
n = number of stories including basement stories
H = total height of the main structure of the building in meters
d = maximum base dimension of building in meters in direction parallel to the applied seismic
force
BSLJ
(1987)
T = h ( 0.02 + 0.01 )
T = the fundamental natural period of the building in seconds
h = the height of the building in meters
= the ratio of the total height of stories of steel construction to the height of the building
BNBC
(1993)
T = Ct hn
3/4
hn = Height in meters above the base to level n
Ct = 0.083 for steel moment resisting frames
Ct = 0.073 for reinforced concrete moment resisting frames and eccentrically braced steel frames
Ct = 0.049 for all other structural systems
c. Codes Approach for Earthquake Load
27
The principal design document in the United States for regions of high seismicity is the
Uniform Building Code (1994), which incorporates design criteria developed by the
Structural Engineers Association of California. The UBC (1994) allows structures to be
designed based on either equivalent static lateral loads or time history analysis of the
dynamic response of the structure. The method used to determine the loads depends on the
seismic zone and the type of structure. The simpler of two equivalent static loading method is
specified by the UBC under criteria for minimum design lateral forces, where as the more
complex equivalent static loading method, as well as the time history analyses, are specified
under dynamic lateral force procedures.
The ACI Code approach allows a load factor of 1.87 for earthquake load in USD method and
allowing a reduction factor 0.75 when gravity and earthquake load is permitted
together in USD and WSD method.
2.4 Methods of Analysis
The coupled shear wall structure is analyzed some times by either approximate method or
more accurate techniques. The frames are easy and more flexible to hand calculation, but
tend to be restricted to regular or quasi irregular structures and load systems. It deals with
irregular structures and complex loading, but require the services of a digital computer. The
method employed, generally depends on the structural layout and on the degree of accuracy
required.
The methods of analysis are detailed as follows:
i. Continuous Medium method
ii. Finite Element method
iii. Equivalent Wide Column Frame method
2.4.1 Continuous Medium Method
This is approximate method and it shows a wide understanding the behavior of coupled wall
structure and, at concurrently, gives a better qualitative and quantitative understanding of the
relative influence of the walls and the connecting beams or slab resisting horizontal loads.
The basic assumption made in the analysis are as follows (Coull, 1991):
28
i. The properties of the walls and connecting beams do not change over the height, and
the story heights are constant.
ii. Plane section before bending remains plane after bending for all structural members.
iii. The discrete set of connecting beams, each of flexural rigidity Ei
b
, may be replaced
by an equivalent continuous connecting medium of flexural rigidity Ei
b
/h per unit height,
where h is the story height, the inertia of the top beam should be half of the other beams.


d1 b/2 b/2 d2

Q
q n q
M1 M2
N N
Wall 1 Wall 2

Fig. 2.10 Internal forces in coupled shear walls
iv. The walls deflect equally horizontally, as a result of the high in plane rigidity of the
surrounding floor slabs and the axial stiffness of the connecting beams. It follows that the
slopes of the walls are everywhere equal along the height, and thus, using a straight forward
application of the slope deflection equations. The connecting beams, and hence the
equivalent connecting medium, deforms with a point of contra flexure at mid span. It also
follows from this assumption that the curvature of the walls are equal throughout the height,
and also the bending moment in each wall is proportional to its flexural rigidity
v. The discrete set of axial forces, shear forces, and bending moments in the connecting
beams then is placed by equivalent continuous distributions of intensity n, q and m
respectively, per unit height (Fig. 2.10).
N= qdz (2.21)
(2.22)
29
dz
dN
q
Axial Force in Wall,
(2.23)
Shear in Connecting Members,
(2.24)
Wall Moments,
(2.25)
(2.26)
Deflection,
(2.27)
Significance of Structural Parameter k H,
(2.28)
(2.29)
(2.30)
A = cross sectional area of two walls, I = moment of inertia of two walls
A
1
= cross sectional area of wall w
1,
A
2 =
cross sectional area of wall w
2
L = center distance of walls, h = each floor height
b = width of opening, I
b =
moment of inertia of connecting beam
I
c
= effective moment of inertia of connecting beam
30

'

1
]
1


+
,
_


H k
z H k z k z k
H k
l
H
z
l k
wH
q


cos
) ( cosh sinh
1
2

'

1
]
1

+
+
H k
z H k H k z k
H k H
z
l
k
wH
N


cosh
) ( sinh cosh
1
) (
1
) 1 (
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
]
1

Nl
H
z
H
w
I
I
M
2
2 1
1 ) 1 (
2
1
1
]
1

Nl
H
z
wH
I
I
M
2 2
2
2 ) 1 (
2
1
}
[ ) ]}] ( z H k H k z k H k H k
H k H k
H
z
H
z
H
z
H
z
H k k
H
z
H
z
EI
H
w
Y
+
+ + +

1
1
]
1

,
_

'

1
]
1

'

,
_

,
_

sinh cosh sinh 1


cosh
4
) (
1
1 4
4
1
24
1
2
) (
2
2
) ( 2
1
2
1
1 4
4
1
24
1
4
2
2 1
2
1
l A A
AI
k +
hI b
l I
c
3
2
2
12

( ) ( ) { } + +

1 / 4 . 2 1
3
b d
I
I
b
c
l = distance between centroids of walls 1 and 2
= Poissons ratio (0.15) for concrete
d = total depth of coupling beam

(2.31)
For a given set of walls, with fixed dimensions, the value of k H is a measure of the
stiffness of the connecting beams, and it increases if either l, is increased or the clear span b
is decreased. If the connecting beams have negligible stiffness (k H=0) then the applied
moment M is resisted entirely by bending moments in the walls, and the axial force N is
negligible. If the connecting beams are rigid (k H = ), the structure behaves as a single
composite doweled beam, with a linear bending stress distribution across the entire section,
and zero stress at the neutral axis, which is situated at the centroid of the two walls elements.
The value of k H is thus define the degree of composite action and indicates the mode of
resistance to applied moments. If k H is large, say greater than 8, the beams are classed as
stiff and the structure tends to act like a composite cantilever. In between these values the
mode of action varies with the level concerned.
2.4.2 Finite Element Method
In coupled shear wall structures analysis, the most suitable method is equivalent frame
technique and it is the most versatile and accurate analytical method. But sometimes it
becomes difficult to model the structure with any degree of confidence using a frame of
beams and columns where notably with very irregular openings, or with complex support
conditions. The use of membrane finite elements is the only feasible alternative here. In this
technique, the surface concerned is divided into a series of elements, generally rectangular,
triangular, or quadrilateral in shape, connected at a discrete set of nodes on their boundaries.
Explicit or implicit forms of the corresponding stiffness matrices for different element shapes
are presented in the literature, enabling the structure stiffness matrices to be set up and solved
to give all nodal displacements and associates forces. A finite element analysis, rectangular
elements should be as square as possible, triangular elements should be equilateral, and
31
2 / 1
2
2 1
3
2
1
12

'

,
_

+ H
A A
AI
hI b
l I
H k
c

quadrilateral elements should be parallelograms with square sides, to achieve most accurate
results.
In a sense, it is consider the finite elements as pieces of the actual structure if recognizes that
the elements are connected to each other not only at the nodes but also at the sides. It is east
to see that if the pieces are held together only at the nodes, the structure is greatly weakened
because the elements separates along the mesh lines. Clearly, the actual structure does not
perform this way, so a finite element must deform in certain restricted ways. In formulating
this behavior, it is necessary to assure that adjacent elements do not behave as if saw cuts
were placed between them until only wisps of material at the nodes hold the pieces together.
a. The finite element method essentially consists of
i. Idealization of the structure into an assemblage of discrete elements
ii Selection of displacement function
iii Evaluation of stiffness of each element from its geometric and elastic properties
iv Assembly of the overall stiffness matrix from individual element stiffness matrices
v Modification of the stiffness matrix to take into account the boundary conditions
vi Solution of resulting equilibrium equations to obtain nodal displacements.
b. Calculation of Stresses
The method is now well established and documented as software i,e. STAAD III, ANSYS
etc. is used for practical structural analysis .
In analysis by software, Particular problems arise when using the technique for structures
such as coupled walls where relatively slender components such as coupling beams which
are connected to relatively massive components, shear walls. Although it is perfectly
acceptable to model the walls by rectangular membrane finite element with two degree of
freedom at each node, it is inappropriate to use such elements for the connecting beams. This
is required the use of high aspect ratio (length: depth) elements, which might lead to
computational errors. In addition, a minimum of three elements would be required to model
the double curvature form of bending in the connecting beams, which would increase
considerably the size of the structure stiffness matrix and cost of solution. It is sufficiently
accurate, and much more convenient, to model a beam by a standard line element, but in that
case the node at the wall-beam junctions would have to have three degrees of freedom
32
associated with it (two translation and one rotation). It would not then be possible to ensure
compatibility with the adjoining node of a plane stress element with only two degrees of
freedom (two translations). Some other devices are then required to achieve proper
compatibility between beams and walls, and this is achieved in different techniques.
For example, it is possible to use special elements with as additional rotational degree of
freedom at each node. Such special elements are still rarely available in general purpose in
programs, and they increase the number of degrees of freedom by 50%, although they avoid
the necessity of horizontally long thin wall elements.
A easy alternative is to add a fictitious, flexurally rigid, auxiliary beam to the edge wall
element at the beam-wall junctions. The fictitious beam is used connected to two adjacent
wall nodes, either in the direction of or normal to the beam. This allows the rotation of the
wall, as defined by the relative transverse displacements of the ends of the auxiliary beam,
and the moment, to be transferred to the beam. A similar device is used to connect a column
to a wall if the structure is modeled by a combination of a frame and plane stress finite
elements.
2.4.3 Equivalent Wide Column Frame Method
The most suitable approach is, by the use of a frame analogy, which is a very versatile and
economic approach and is used for the most of the practical purposes.
The analysis requires the modeling of the interaction between the vertical shear walls and the
horizontal connecting beams. Over the height of a single story, a wall panel appears a very
broad, but when viewed in the context of the entire height it appears as a slender cantilever
beam. When subjected to lateral forces, the wall is dominated by its flexural behavior, and
shearing effects is generally insignificant.
Flexible column at wall center line
Stiff wide column arm
Flexible beam
Fig. 2.11 Equivalent wide-column model
33
In the easy analogous frame model, the wall presented by an equivalent column. It is located
at the centroidal axis (Fig. 2.11), to which is assigned the axial rigidity EA and the flexural
rigidities EI of the wall. The condition that plane sections remain plane is incorporated by
means of stiff arms located at the connecting beam levels, spanning between the effective
column and the external fibers. The rigid arms ensure that the correct rotations and vertical
displacements are produced at the edges of the walls. The connecting beams is represented as
line elements in the conventional manner, and assigned the correct axial, flexural, and if
necessary, shearing rigidities. Generally, shearing deformations is included if the beams
length/depth ratio is less than about 5.
2.4.4 Analogous Frame Method
In conventional stiffness method, the analogous frame is analyzed most conveniently.
General purpose, frame analysis programs are now widely available to carry out the matrix
operations required on both micro and main frame computers. These require no more of the
engineer than a specification of the geometric and structural data, and the applied load.
Different approaches are possible for modeling the rigid ended connecting beams in the
analytical model, depending on the facilities and options available in the program used. The
most important techniques are as follows,
a. Direct Solution of the Analytical Model
A direct application of the stiffness method will require a series of nodes at the junctions
between the stiff arms and the connecting beams in the wide column model, as well as at the
column story levels. The rigidities of the wide column arms are simulated by assigning very
high numerical values of axial areas and flexural rigidities to the members concerned. In
practice, a value of 1,000 to 10,000 times the corresponding values for the flexible
connecting beams has been found to provide results of accuracy without causing numerical
problems in the solution.
b. Use of Stiffness Matrix for Rigid Ended Beam Element
Because of the rigid connecting elements, simple relationships exist between the actions at a
column node and those at the adjacent wall beam junction node. It is possible to derive a
composite stiffness matrix for the complete beam segment between column nodes that
incorporates the influence of the stiff end segments.
34
The required stiffness matrix for the line element with rigid arms is derived either by
transforming the effects at the wall beam junctions i and j to the nodes at the wall centroidal
axes 1 and 2 by a transformation matrix.
c. Use of Haunched Member Facility
A haunched member option is used to represent the rigid arms if specific large stiffness vales
are given to the cross sectional area and flexural rigidity of the haunched ends. These values
are sufficiently large for the resulting deformations to be negligible, but not sufficiently large
to cause computational problems from ill conditioned equations.
The stiffness of the end segments depends on the length as well as the cross sectional
properties and the choice of the rigidities EA and EI for the stiff segments. It reflects the
effect of the ratio of the length of the arm to the span of the flexible connecting beam. End
values of the order of 10,000 times the connecting beam values are generally found
acceptable.
d. Use of Equivalent Uniform Connecting Beams
In a symmetrical coupled wall structure, in which axial deformations of the connecting
beams are assumed negligible, the rotation of the walls at any level is equal. The rotation of
the stiff ended beams are equal, and, consequently, it possible to replace the stiff ended beam
by an equivalent uniform beam with an effective second moment of inertia I
c
, thereby,
treating the wide column frame as a normal plane frame of beams and columns.

(2.32)
I
b
= real moment of inertia of flexural beam
b= width of connecting beam
l= connecting beam length
The coupled shear wall structure is then, presented by a frame having uniform beams of
length l and flexural rigidities EI
c
.
If the connecting beams are relatively deep, so that the effects of shearing deformation are
significant, the effective second moment of inertia is assigned may be further modified to
include this effect. The values of I
c
must be then replaced I
c
, where,

(2.33)
35
b c
I
b
l
I
3

,
_

b
c
c
I
b
l
r
I
r
I
I
3
1 1
'
,
_

1
]
1

(2.34)
A = cross sectional are of beam
G = modulus of shear rigidity of beam
GA = shear rigidity
= cross sectional shape factor for shear, equal to 1.2 for rectangular section.
2.5 Modelling Technique
The response of a building to horizontal load is governed by the components that are stressed
as the building deflects. Really, for ease and accurate structural analysis, the participating
components includes only the main structural elements such as slabs, beams, girders,
columns, walls, and cores etc. In reality, however, other, nonstructural elements are stressed
and contribute to the buildings behavior; these include, for example, the staircases, partition,
and cladding etc.
To make the problem ideal, it is usual necessary in modeling a building for analysis, to
include only the main structural members and to assume that the effects of the nonstructural
components are small and save guard.
To identify the main structural elements, it is necessary to recognize the dominant modes of
action of the proposed building structure and to assess the extent of the various members
contribution to them. Then, by neglecting consideration of the nonstructural components, and
the less essential structural components, the problem of analyzing a tall building structure is
reduced to a more viable size.
2.5.1 Modelling for Preliminary Analysis
The aim of preliminary analyses, for the early stages of design, to compare the performance
of alternative proposals for the structure, or to determine the deflections and major member
forces in a chosen structure from which the size of structures elements to be properly
proportioned. The formation of the model and the procedure for a preliminary analysis is
rapid and produce results that are dependable approximations. The model and its analysis is
therefore represent fairly well, if not absolutely accurately, the principal modes of action and
interaction of the major structural elements. The most complete approach to satisfying the
36
2
12
GAb
EI
r
b

above requirements is a three dimensional stiffness matrix analysis of a fully detailed finite
element model of the structure. The columns, beams, and bracing members are represented
by beam elements, while shear wall and core components is represented by assemblies of
membrane elements (Coull,1991, P-81).
Sometimes, certain reduction in the size or complexity of the model is acceptable. While
allowing it to still in accuracy as a final analysis; for example, if the structure and load are
symmetrical, a three dimensional analysis of a half structure model, or even a two
dimensional analysis of a fully interactive two-dimensional model, is acceptable.
2.5.2 Modelling for Accurate Analysis
It is important for the intermediate and final stages of design to obtain a reasonably accurate
estimate of the structure deflections and member forces. With the wide availability of the
structural analysis software, it is now possible to solve very large and complex structural
models.
In preliminary analysis, it is necessary some of the more gross approximations. The structural
model for an accurate analysis is represented in a more detailed manner where exist all the
major active components of the prototype structure. The principal elements are columns,
walls, and cores, and their connecting slabs and beams.
The major structural analysis programs typically offer a variety of finite elements for
structural modeling. As an absolute minimum for accurately representing high rise structure,
a three dimensional program with beam element and quadrilateral membrane element is used
to suffice. Beam elements are used to represent beams and columns and by making their
inertias negligibly small or by releasing their end rotations, which are used for shear walls
and wall assemblies, preferably includes an incompatible mode option to better allow for the
characteristic in-plane bending of shear walls.
a. Connection of Beam Element to Membrane Element
When modeled membrane elements, shear walls with in-plane frame connecting beams
require special consideration. Membrane elements do not have a degree of freedom to
represent in-plane rotation of these corners. Therefore, a beam element is connected to node
of a membrane element is effectively connected only by a hinge.
37
Auxiliary beam
Connecting beam
Wall element
Fig. 2.12 Connection of beams to wall element for shear wall
A remedy for this deficiency is to add a fictitious, flexurally rigid, auxiliary beam to the
edge wall element (Fig. 2.12). The adjacent ends of the auxiliary beam and the external beam
are both constrained to rotate with the wall-edge node. Consequently, the rotation of the wall,
as defined by the relative transverse displacements of the ends of auxiliary beam, and a
moment are transferred to the external beam (Coull, 1991).
b. High Rise Behaviour
A more accurate assessment of a proposed high rise structures behaviour is necessary to
form a properly representative model for analysis. A high rise structure is essentially a
vertical cantilever that is subjected to axial load by gravity and to lateral load by wind or
earthquake.
Lateral load exerts at each level of a building a shear, a moment, and some times, a torque,
which have maximum values at base of the structure that increase rapidly with the building
height. The response of a structure to lateral load, in having to carry the external shear,
moment, and torque, is more complex than its first order response to gravity load.
The recognition of the structures behaviour under lateral load and the formation of the
corresponding model are usually the dominant problems of analysis. The principal criterion
of a satisfactory model is that under lateral load it deflects similarly to the prototype
structure.
2.6 Drift of Structure
Drift is the magnitude of displacement at the top of a building relative to its base. The ratio of
the total lateral deflection to the building height, or the story deflection to story height, is
referred to as the Deflection Index. The imposition of a maximum allowable lateral sway
(drift) is based on the need to limit the possible adverse effects of lateral sway on the stability
38
of individual columns as well as the structure as a whole. And also, on the excessive crack
and consequent loss of stiffness and the integrity of nonstructural partitions, glazing and
mechanical elements in the building.
Crack associated with the lateral deflections of nonstructural elements such as partitions,
windows, etc, cause serious maintenance problems. Therefore, a drift limitation is selected to
minimize such crack also second order p-delta effects due to gravity load being of such a
magnitude as to precipitate collapse.
In the absence of code limitation in the past, buildings are designed for wind load with
arbitrary values of drift, ranging from about 1/300 to 1/600 of their height, depending on the
judgement of the Engineer. Deflections based on drift limitation of about 1/300 used several
decades ago and computed, assuming the wind force is resisted by the structural frame alone.
In reality, the heavy masonry partitions and exterior cladding common to buildings of that
period considerably increased the lateral stiffness of such structures.
To date (2000) only the UBC (1994), BOCA and NBCC (1980), among North American
model building codes, specify a maximum value of the deflection index of 1/500,
corresponding to the design wind load. Also, ACI Committee 435 recommends a drift limit
1/500. In recent years many engineering offices, owing to competitive pressures, have
somewhat relaxed the drift criterion by allowing an overall in any one story not to exceed
H/400. Also, in cases where wind tunnel studies indicate wind forces in the building to be
smaller than those specified in the code, designers take the liberty of applying the H/500
criterion to the smaller (wind tunnel) wind forces.
The performance of modern reinforced concrete buildings designed in recent years to meet
this criterion appears to have been satisfactory with respect to the stability of the individual
columns and the structure as a whole, the integrity of nonstructural elements, and the comfort
of the occupants of such buildings.
Most of the modern high rise reinforced concrete buildings containing shear walls have
computed deflections ranging between H/800 and H/1200 due to inherent rigidity of the wall-
frame interaction.
To establish of a drift index limit is a major design decision, but, unfortunately, there are no
unambiguous or widely accepted values, or even, in some of the National Codes concerned,
any firm guidance. As the height of the building increases, drift index coefficients is
39
decreased to the lower end of the range to keep the top story deflection to a suitably low
level.
Excessive drift of a structure is reduced by change the geometric configuration of the
building. That is to alter the mode of lateral load resistance, to increase the bending stiffness
of the horizontal members, to add additional stiffness by the inclusion of stiffer wall or core
members, achieving stiffer connections, and even by sloping the exterior columns.
In dynamic response the minimum tolerable values of acceleration for the typical or normal
person needs further studies. It is obvious that the acceptability of a design with respect to
perception of sway motion. It is assessed by a dynamic analysis of the building under a set of
a probable range of wind exposures. No perceptible motion has been reported in concrete
buildings to date. The supplement to the National Building Code of Canada (1980), contains
expressions by which peak along-wind and across-wind acceleration of buildings is
calculated. According to the supplement, it appears that when the amplitude of acceleration
is in the range of 0.5 % to 1.5 % of the acceleration due to gravity, movement of the building
becomes perceptible to most people. Based on this and other information, a tentative
acceleration limitation of 1 to 3 % of gravity once every 10 years is recommended for use in
conjunction with the expressions for computation of acceleration. The lower value is thought
suitable for apartment buildings, and the higher value for office buildings.
2.7 P-Delta Effect
A first order computer analysis of a building structure for simultaneously applied gravity and
horizontal loading results in deflections and forces that are a direct superposition of the
results for the two types of load considered separately. Any interaction between the effects of
gravity load and horizontal load is not account for by the analysis.
In reality, when horizontal load acts on a building and causes it to drift the resulting
eccentricity of the gravity load from the axes of the walls and columns produces additional
moments to which the structure responds by drifting further. The additional drift induces
additional internal moments sufficient to equilibrate the gravity load moments. The effect of
gravity load P acting on the horizontal displacements is known as the P-Delta effect.
The second order P- Delta additional deflections and moments are small for typical high rise
structure, with a magnitude usually of less than 5% (Coull,1991) of the first order values. If
40
the structure is exceptionally flexible, however, the additional forces is sufficient to require
consideration in the members design, or the additional displacement causes unacceptable
total deflections that require the structure is stiffened. In an extreme case of lateral flexibility
combined with exceptionally heavy gravity load, the additional forces from the P-Delta effect
might cause the strength of some members are exceeded with the possible consequence
collapse. Or, the additional P-Delta external moments is some times exceed the internal
moments and the structure is capable of mobilizing by drift, in which case the structure
collapses through instability. Such failures occur at gravity loads less than the critical overall
buckling load.
2.8 STAAD-III
STAAD-III is a comprehensive Structural Engineering Software that addresses all aspects of
engineering-model development, analysis, design, verification and visualization.
2.8.1 Type of Structures in STAADIII Environment
A Structure is as an assemblage of elements. STAAD-III is capable of analyzing and
designing structures consisting of both frame and plate/shell elements. Almost any type of
structure can be analyzed by STAAD-III. Most general is the SPACE structure, which is
three-dimensional frame and shear wall structure with loads applied in any direction.
a. Plate/Shell Element
The plate/shell finite element is based on the hybrid element formulation. The element can be
3-noded or 4-noded (quadrilateral). If all the four nodes of a quadrilateral element do not lie
on the same plane, it is advisable to model them as triangular elements. Surface structures
such as wall, slabs, plates and shells can be modeled using finite elements. The user may also
use the element for Plane Stress action only. The Element Plane Stress command should
be used for this purpose.
b. Geometric Modelling Considerations
The program automatically generates a fifth node O at the element center. While assigning
nodes to an element in the input data. Element aspect ratio should not excessive. They should
be on the order of 1:1 and preferably less than 4:1.
41
c. Theoretical Basis
The STAAD-III plate finite element is based on hybrid finite element formulations. A
complete quadratic stress distribution is assumed for plane stress action (Fig.2.13) and plate
bending action.
x y Fy
xy yx Fxy
yx xy
y x Fx
(a) (b)
Fig. 2.13 (a) Plane stress distribution, (b) Sign convention of element forces
d. Distinguishing Features of Finite Element
Displacement compatibility between the plane stress component of one element and the plate
bending component of an adjacent element which is at an angle to the first is achieved by the
elements. This compatibility is usually ignored in most flat shell/plate elements. The out of
plane rotational stiffness from the plane stress portion of each element is usefully
incorporated and not treated as a dummy as is usually done in most commonly available
commercial software. These elements are available as triangles and quadrilaterals, with
corner nodes only, with each node having six degrees of freedom. These elements may be
connected to plane /space frame members with full displacement compatibility. No additional
restraints/release are required. The plate bending portion can handle thick and thin plates,
thus extending the usefulness of the plate elements into a multiplicity of problems. The
triangular shell element is very useful in problems with double curvature where the
quadrilateral element may not be suitable.
2.9 Summary
The structural system of high rise building is influenced strongly by its function while having
to satisfy the requirements of strength and serviceability under all probable conditions of
gravity and lateral loads. The taller a building, the more important it is economically to
select an appropriate structural system. The flexural continuity between the members of a
42
structure, enables the structure to resist horizontal load as well as to assist in carrying gravity
load. Lateral load causes rack of the frame due to double bending of the columns and beams,
resulting in an overall shear mode of deformation of the structure. The lateral displacement
of the rigid frames subjected to horizontal load is due to three modes of member deformation,
beam flexure, column flexure, and axial deformation of columns. The lateral displacements
in each story attributable to three components is calculated separately and summed to give
the total drift. If the total drift, or the drift within any story, exceeds the allowable values, an
inspection of the components of drift indicates which members is increased in size to most
effectively control the drift.
Wind load becomes significant for buildings over 10 stories high and progressively more so
with increased height. For buildings that are not very tall or slender, the wind load is
estimated by a static method. The static method depends on location, effects on gust and the
importance of the building. For very tall building, it is recommended that a wind tunnel test
on a model is made.
For structural analysis, the intensity of an earthquake is usually described in terms of the
ground acceleration as a fraction of the acceleration of gravity, i,e. 0.1, 0.2 or 0.3g. Although
peak acceleration is an important analysis parameter, the frequency characteristics and
duration of an earthquake motion is to the natural frequency of a structure and the longer
duration of the earthquake, the greater the potential for damage. The zone coefficient Z in
UBC method corresponds numerically to the effective peak ground acceleration (EPA) of a
region, and is defined for Bangladesh by a map that is divided into three regions which are,
zone 1, zone 2 and zone 3. The places are situated in zone 1, are Barisal, Khulna, Jessore,
Rajshahi etc, in zone 2 are, Chittagong, Commila, Dhaka, Jaypurhat and Phanchaghar etc.
and in zone 3, are Sylhet, Brahmanbaria, Jamalpur and Lalmonirhat (BNBC, 1983) etc. The
values of Z =0.075, 0.15 and 0.25 for zone 1, zone 2 and zone 3 respectively. The coefficient
C represents the response of the particular structure to the earthquake acceleration. A
maximum limit on C=2.75 for any structure and soil condition. The structural system factor
R is a measure of the ability of the structural system to sustain cyclic inelastic deformations
without collapse. The magnitude of R depends on the ductility of the type materials of the
structure. A lower limit of C/R = .075 is prescribed.
43
Continuous medium method is an approximate method for analysis of coupled shear wall. It
is suitable for hand calculation. But the coupled shear wall is analyzed by Equivalent Wide
Column Frame method in which an equivalent column located at the centroidal axis, to
which is assigned the axial rigidity EA and the flexurial rigidities EI of the wall. The
connected beams are represented as line elements in the conventional manner. This method is
the most versatile and accurate analytical method.
Regular frame is analyzed by hand calculation both in Continuous medium method and
Equivalent frame method but irregular frames and walls with varying openings and sizes, it is
difficult to analysis, then the most suitable method of Finite element is alternative. In this
technique, the surface concerned is divided into a series of elements, generally rectangular,
triangular, or quadrilateral in shape, connected at a discrete set of nodes on their boundaries.
Explicit or implicit forms of the corresponding stiffness matrices for different element shapes
are presented in the literature, enabling the structure stiffness matrices to be set up and solved
to give all nodal displacements and associates forces. A finite element analysis, rectangular
elements are as square as possible, triangular elements are equilateral, and quadrilateral
elements are parallelograms with square sides, to achieve most accurate results.
In modeling a structure for analysis it is usually to represent only the main structure members
and to assure that the effects of nonstructural members are small and conservative.
Additional assumptions are made with regard to the linear behavior of the material, the in-
plane rigidity of the floor slabs, and then neglect of certain member stiffness and
deformations, in order to further simplification the model for analysis.
In accurate modeling, the columns and beams of frames are represented individually by beam
finite elements and shear wall is represented by assemblies of membrane finite element.
Drift is the magnitude of displacement at the top of a building relative to its base. In the
absence of code limitation in the past, buildings is used to design for wind load with arbitrary
values of drift, ranging from about 1/300 to 1/600 of their height. To date (2000) only the
UBC (1994), BOCA and NBCC (1980), among North American model building codes,
specify a maximum value of the deflection index of 1/500, corresponding to the design wind
load. Also, ACI Committee 435 recommends a drift limit 1/500. Also, in cases where wind
tunnel studies indicate wind forces in the building is smaller than those specified in the code,
designers take the liberty of applying the H/500 criterion to the smaller (wind tunnel) wind
44
forces. Most of the modern high rise reinforced concrete buildings containing shear walls
have computed deflections ranging between H/800 and H/1200 due to inherent rigidity of the
wall-frame interaction.
When horizontal load acts on a building and causes it to drift the resulting eccentricity of the
gravity load from the axes of the walls and columns produces additional moments to which
the structure responds by drifting further. The additional drift induces additional internal
moments sufficient to equilibrate the gravity load moments. The effect of gravity load P
acting on the horizontal displacements is known as the P-Delta effect.
The second order P- Delta additional deflections and moments are small for typical high rise
structure, with a magnitude usually of less than 5% (Coull,1991) of the first order values. If
the structure is exceptionally flexible, however, the additional forces is sufficient to require
consideration in the members design, or the additional displacement causes unacceptable
total deflections that require the structure to be stiffened.
45
Chapter 3
GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF LATERAL LOADS
3.1 Introduction
The wind and earthquake load design data are presented in BNBC in tabular form. In design
calculation, the required coefficients would be taken from table value (whichever is required
from BNBC) and intermediate value by interpolation from the given data. In graphical form,
the behaviour of data is easy to understand at a glance and their trend is well known by this
form. All of them are not presented in this limited study. Some of them which are generally
required, these are represented in graphical form in this chapter.
3.2 Graphical Presentation of Wind Load
Wind load parameters are taken from BNBC (1993) for load calculation. These values are
presented in tabular form in Code. For easy calculation and to understand the behaviour in
load analysis, tabular values are represented in graphical form here. The graphs are produced
these are,
i. C
p
vs. (Fig. 3.1)
ii. z vs. C
z
(Fig. 3.2)
iii. z vs. G
h ,
G
z
(Fig. 3.3)
iv. z vs. (Fig. 3.4, 3.5 & 3.6)
h = height of building
L = length of building parallel to wind in consideration
B= width of building perpendicular to wind
z= height above ground level
Table 3.1 Overall pressure coefficient, C
p

46
B
L
I p h
z
C C G
P
L/B C
p
h/B 0.5 h/B=10 h/B=20 H/B 40
0.1 1.4 1.55 1.8 1.95
0.5 1.45 1.85 2.25 2.5
0.65 1.55 2 2.55 2.8
1 1.4 1.7 2 2.2
2 1.15 1.3 1.4 1.6
3 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25
h = building height in meter
B = building width normal to wind in meter
L = building length parallel to wind in meter
h/B 40
h/B = 20
h/B = 10

h/B 0.5
47
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 3.2
L/B
O
v
e
r
a
l
l
p
r
e
s
u
r
e

c
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

,
C
p
h/B=.5
h/B=10
h/B=20
h/B=40

Fig. 3.1 Evaluation of overall pressure coefficient , C
p

Table 3.2 Combined height and exposure coefficient, C
z

Height above
ground level,
Cz
z (meter) Exposure A Exposure B Exposure C
0 0.368 0.801 1.196
4.5 0.368 0.801 1.196
6 0.415 0.866 1.263
9 0.497 0.972 1.37
12 0.565 1.055 1.451
15 0.624 1.125 1.517
18 0.677 1.185 1.573
21 0.725 1.238 1.623
24 0.769 1.286 1.667
27 0.81 1.33 1.706
30 0.849 1.371 1.743
35 0.909 1.433 1.797
40 0.965 1.488 1.846
45 1.017 1.539 1.89
50 1.065 1.586 1.93
60 1.155 1.671 2.002
70 1.237 1.746 2.065
48
80 1.313 1.814 2.12
90 1.383 1.876 2.171
100 1.45 1.934 2.217
110 1.513 1.987 2.26
120 1.572 2.037 2.299
130 1.629 2.084 2.337
140 1.684 2.129 2.371
150 1.736 2.171 2.404
A B C
49
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3
Combined height and exposure coefficient, Cz
z

=
H
e
i
g
h
t

a
b
o
v
e

g
r
o
u
n
d

l
e
v
e
l

i
n

m
Exposure A
Exposure B
Exposure C

Fig. 3.2 Evaluation of combined height and exposure coefficient , C
z
Table 3.3 Gust response factors, G
h
and G
z

Height above
ground level,
Gh and Gz
z (meter) Exposure A Exposure B Exposure C
0 1.654 1.321 1.154
4.5 1.654 1.321 1.154
6 1.592 1.294 1.14
9 1.511 1.258 1.121
12 1.457 1.233 1.107
15 1.418 1.215 1.097
18 1.388 1.201 1.089
21 1.363 1.189 1.082
24 1.342 1.178 1.077
27 1.324 1.17 1.072
30 1.309 1.162 1.067
35 1.287 1.151 1.061
40 1.268 1.141 1.055
45 1.252 1.133 1.051
50 1.238 1.126 1.046
60 1.215 1.114 1.039
70 1.196 1.103 1.033
80 1.18 1.095 1.028
50
90 1.166 1.087 1.024
100 1.154 1.081 1.02
110 1.144 1.075 1.016
120 1.134 1.07 1.013
130 1.126 1.065 1.01
140 1.118 1.061 1.008
150 1.111 1.057 1.005

A B C
51
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4
Gh and Gz
z

=
H
e
i
g
h
t

a
b
o
v
e

g
r
o
u
n
d

l
e
v
e
l

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
Exposure A
Exposure B
Exposure C
Fig. 3.3 Evaluation of gust response factors, G
h
and G
z

Design Wind Pressure, P
z
is written as,
P
z
= C
G
C
p
C
c
C
I
C
z
V
b
2
(3.1)
From above equation it is written as,

(3.2)
For different exposure conditions and places the value of is calculated in Table 3.4
to 3.6 and then represented in Fig. 3.4 to 3.6
From the figure value of at different height z for different exposure conditions and
places the value of design pressure, P
z is
calculated easily by multiplying the figure value to
G
h
C
p
C
I
For example,
Z = 30 m
Zone =Dhaka
Exposure =B
Then value of

is 2.854 (Table 3.4, Fig. 3.4)
Therefor, P
z
= 2.854G
h
C
p
C
I

Where,
G
h
=

constant for specified building height (Fig. 3.3)
C
p
= pressure coefficient for specified building (Fig. 3.1)
C
I
= importance coefficient for specified building (Table C.2)
52
2
b z c
I p h
z
V C C
C C G
P

I p h
z
C C G
P
I p h
z
C C G
P
I p h
z
C C G
P
Table 3.4 Design pressure component,

for Dhaka
Height above
ground level,
Kpa
z (meter) Exposure :A Exposure: B Exposure: C
0 0.766 1.668 2.49
4.5 0.766 1.668 2.49
6 0.864 1.803 2.63
9 1.035 2.024 2.852
12 1.176 2.197 3.021
15 1.299 2.342 3.158
18 1.411 2.467 3.275
21 1.509 2.578 3.379
24 1.601 2.677 3.471
27 1.686 2.769 3.552
30 1.768 2.854 3.629
35 1.893 2.984 3.741
40 2.009 3.098 3.843
45 2.117 3.204 3.935
50 2.217 3.302 4.018
60 2.405 3.48 4.168
70 2.575 3.635 4.299
80 2.734 3.777 4.414
90 2.879 3.906 4.52
53
I p h
z
C C G
P
2
b
V
z
C
c
C
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P

100 3.019 4.027 4.616


110 3.15 4.137 4.705
120 3.273 4.241 4.787
130 3.392 4.339 4.866
140 3.506 4.433 4.936
150 3.614 4.52 5.005
A B C
54
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Pz/G
h
CpC
I
in kPa

z

=

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m

f
r
o
m

g
r
o
u
n
d

l
e
v
e
l
Exposure :A
Exposure: B
Exposure: C
Fig. 3.4 Value of

for different exposure conditions for Dhaka
Table 3.5 Design pressure component,

for Chittagong
Height above
ground level,
KPa
z (meter)
Exposure :A Exposure: B Exposure: C
0 1.174 2.556 3.816
4.5 1.174 2.556 3.816
6 1.324 2.763 4.03
9 1.586 3.102 4.372
12 1.803 3.367 4.63
15 1.991 3.59 4.841
18 2.16 3.781 5.019
21 2.313 3.95 5.179
24 2.454 4.104 5.319
27 2.585 4.244 5.444
30 2.709 4.375 5.562
35 2.901 4.573 5.734
40 3.079 4.748 5.891
45 3.245 4.911 6.031
50 3.398 5.061 6.159
60 3.686 5.332 6.388
70 3.947 5.571 6.589
80 4.19 5.788 6.765
55
I p h
z
C C G
P
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P
2
b
V
z
C
c
C
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P

90 4.413 5.986 6.928


100 4.627 6.171 7.074
110 4.828 6.341 7.212
120 5.016 6.5 7.336
130 5.198 6.65 7.457
140 5.374 6.794 7.566
150 5.54 6.928 7.671
A B C
Fig. 3.5 Value of

for different exposure conditions for Chittagong
Table 3.6 Design pressure component,

for Khulna
Height above
ground level,
kPa
z (meter)
Exposure :A Exposure: B Exposure: C
0 0.984 2.142 3.198
4.5 0.984 2.142 3.198
6 1.11 2.316 3.377
9 1.329 2.599 3.663
12 1.511 2.821 3.88
15 1.669 3.008 4.056
18 1.81 3.169 4.206
56
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
1 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 3 3.4 3.8 4.2 4.6 5 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7
Pz/G
h
CpC
I
in kPa

z

=

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m

f
r
o
m

g
r
o
u
n
d

l
e
v
e
l
Exposure :A
Exposure: B
Exposure: C
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P
2
b
V
z
C
c
C
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P

21 1.939 3.31 4.34


24 2.056 3.439 4.458
27 2.166 3.556 4.562
30 2.27 3.666 4.661
35 2.431 3.832 4.805
40 2.58 3.979 4.936
45 2.719 4.115 5.054
50 2.848 4.241 5.161
60 3.088 4.468 5.353
70 3.308 4.669 5.522
80 3.511 4.851 5.669
90 3.698 5.016 5.805
100 3.877 5.172 5.928
110 4.046 5.313 6.043
120 4.204 5.447 6.148
130 4.356 5.573 6.249
140 4.503 5.693 6.34
150 4.642 5.805 6.428
A B C
57
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Pz/G
h
CpC
I
in kPa

z

=

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m

f
r
o
m

g
r
o
u
n
d

l
e
v
e
l
Exposure :A
Exposure: B
Exposure: C
Fig. 3.6 Value of

for different exposure conditions for Khulna
3.3 Graphical Presentation of Earthquake Load
Earthquake load parameters are taken from BNBC (1993) for Earthquake load calculation.
These values are presented in tabular form in Code and intermediate value can be calculated
by interpolation. For any height of structure, easy calculation of required values and to
understand the trend of value is found from the presented graphs in load analysis. For this
reason, tabular values have represented in graphical form here. The graphs are produced
these are,
i. h
n
vs. & T (Fig. 3.7 )
ii. h
n
vs. (Fig. 3.8 )
iii. h
n
vs. (Fig. 3.9 )
iv. h
x
vs. (Fig. 3. 10)
58
I
C
p
C
h
G
z
P
S
C
ZISW
V
W
V
%
t
F V
x
F

a. Graphical presentation of fundamental period of vibration, T and ratio of


numerical coefficient, C and site coefficient, S from building height for moment
resisting frame
We know for all buildings the value of fundamental period, T may be approximated by the
following formula
T = C
t
h
n
3/4
, (3.3)
C
t
= 0.073 for reinforced concrete moment resisting frames and eccentrically braced steel
frames and Numerical coefficient given by the following relation
C =

(3.4)
From above equations it can be written for reinforced concrete moment resisting frames and
eccentrically braced steel frames as,
(3.5)
T = 0.073 h
n
3/4
(3.6)
Above values is calculated for different building height as in Table 3.7 and presented in Fig.
3.7
Table 3.7 Evaluation of fundamental period of vibration, T and ratio
of numerical coefficient, C and site coefficient, S from building height for
moment resisting frame (RC)
Building height
above base, hn
(meter)
T in sec
5.5 0.019
3 4.13 0.166
6 2.92 0.28
9 2.39 0.38
12 2.07 0.47
15 1.85 0.556
18 1.69 0.638
21 1.56 0.716
24 1.46 0.792
27 1.38 0.865
59
3 / 2
25 . 1
T
S
2 / 1
156 . 7
n
h
S
C

S
C
30 1.31 0.936
35 1.21 1.05
40 1.13 1.161
50 1.01 1.373
60 0.92 1.574
70 0.86 1.766
80 0.8 1.953
90 0.75 2.133
100 0.72 2.308
110 0.68 2.48
120 0.65 2.647
130 0.63 2.81
140 0.6 2.971
150 0.58 3.129
T
60
0
9
18
27
36
45
54
63
72
81
90
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
C/S and T value in second
h
n
=

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n


m
e
t
e
r
S
C
Fig. 3.7 Variation of ratio and fundamental time period, T with building height for
MRF
b. Graphical Presentation of Base Shear
Design Base Shear, (3.7)

(derived earlier) (3.8)
Putting the value of for MRF in above equation, it is written as,
(3.9)
For different building height and R values the LHS of above equation is calculated in Table
3.8 and presented in Fig. 3.8, from which the base shear is easily calculated.
For example,
Building height = 24 m
R value = 6 (C.6)
Therefore,
61
S
C
R
ZICW
V
2 / 1
156 . 7
n
h
S
C

S
C
R h
n
ZIWS
V
2 / 1
156 . 7

243 . 0
ZIWS
V
V = 0.243ZIWS
Where,
Z = seismic zone coefficient
I = structure importance coefficient
W = seismic dead load
S = site coefficient for soil
Table 3.8 Evaluation of base shear for MRF
Building height
above base, h
n
(meter)
R=5 R=6 R=7 R=8 R=9 R=10
1 1.100 0.917 0.786 0.688 0.611 0.550
3 0.826 0.688 0.590 0.516 0.459 0.413
6 0.584 0.487 0.417 0.365 0.324 0.292
9 0.478 0.398 0.341 0.299 0.266 0.239
12 0.414 0.345 0.296 0.259 0.230 0.207
15 0.370 0.308 0.264 0.231 0.206 0.185
18 0.338 0.282 0.241 0.211 0.188 0.169
21 0.312 0.260 0.223 0.195 0.173 0.156
24 0.292 0.243 0.209 0.183 0.162 0.146
27 0.276 0.230 0.197 0.173 0.153 0.138
62
R h
n
ZIWS
V
2 / 1
156 . 7

30 0.262 0.218 0.187 0.164 0.146 0.131


35 0.242 0.202 0.173 0.151 0.134 0.121
40 0.226 0.188 0.161 0.141 0.126 0.113
50 0.202 0.168 0.144 0.126 0.112 0.101
60 0.184 0.153 0.131 0.115 0.102 0.092
70 0.172 0.143 0.123 0.108 0.096 0.086
80 0.160 0.133 0.114 0.100 0.089 0.080
90 0.150 0.125 0.107 0.094 0.083 0.075
100 0.144 0.120 0.103 0.090 0.080 0.072
110 0.136 0.113 0.097 0.085 0.076 0.068
120 0.130 0.108 0.093 0.081 0.072 0.065
130 0.126 0.105 0.090 0.079 0.070 0.063
140 0.120 0.100 0.086 0.075 0.067 0.060
150 0.116 0.097 0.083 0.073 0.064 0.058
63
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
V / (ZISW)
h
n

=

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
R=5
R=6
R=7
R=8
R=9
R=10

10 9 8 7 6 5
Fig. 3.8 Evaluation of base shear (kN) for MRF
c. Graphical Presentation of Base Shear for Dhaka
(3.10)
Z = 0.15 (C.4)
S = 1.50 (A soil profile 21 meters or more in depth and containing more than 6 meters of soft
to medium stiff clay, C.5)
I = 1.0 (standard occupancy structure, C.3)
Above equation is written as,
(3.11)
For different building height and R values the LHS of above equation is calculated in Table
3.9 and presented in Fig. 3.9, from which the base shear is easily calculated.
For example,
Building height = 24 m
64
R h
n
ZIWS
V
2 / 1
156 . 7

R h
n
W
V
2 / 1
61 . 1

Zone = Dhaka
R value = 6
Therefore,
(Fig. 3.9)
V = 0.055W
Where,
W = weight for specified building as per BNBC
Table 3.9 Evaluation of base shear for MRF for Dhaka city
Building height
above base, h
n
(meter)
R=5 R=6 R=7 R=8 R=9 R=10
1 0.322 0.268 0.192 0.120 0.067 0.033
3 0.186 0.155 0.111 0.069 0.038 0.019
6 0.131 0.109 0.078 0.049 0.027 0.014
9 0.107 0.089 0.064 0.040 0.022 0.011
12 0.093 0.078 0.055 0.035 0.019 0.010
15 0.083 0.069 0.049 0.031 0.017 0.009
18 0.076 0.063 0.045 0.028 0.016 0.008
21 0.070 0.058 0.042 0.026 0.014 0.007
24 0.066 0.055 0.039 0.025 0.014 0.007
27 0.062 0.052 0.037 0.023 0.013 0.006
65
055 . 0
W
V
R h
n
W
V
2 / 1
61 . 1

30 0.059 0.049 0.035 0.022 0.012 0.006


35 0.054 0.045 0.032 0.020 0.011 0.006
40 0.051 0.043 0.030 0.019 0.011 0.005
50 0.046 0.038 0.027 0.017 0.010 0.005
60 0.042 0.035 0.025 0.016 0.009 0.004
70 0.038 0.032 0.023 0.014 0.008 0.004
80 0.036 0.030 0.021 0.013 0.007 0.004
90 0.034 0.028 0.020 0.013 0.007 0.004
100 0.032 0.027 0.019 0.012 0.007 0.003
110 0.031 0.026 0.018 0.012 0.006 0.003
120 0.029 0.024 0.017 0.011 0.006 0.003
130 0.028 0.023 0.017 0.010 0.006 0.003
140 0.027 0.023 0.016 0.010 0.006 0.003
150 0.026 0.022 0.015 0.010 0.005 0.003
66
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
V/W
h
n

=

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
R=5
R=6
R=7
R=8
R=9
R=10
10 9 8 7 6 5
Fig. 3.9 Evaluation of base shear ( kN) of MRF for Dhaka City
d. Vertical Distribution of Lateral Forces
In the absence of a more rigorous procedure, the total lateral forces, which is the base shear
V, can be distributed along the height of the structure as below,
(3.12)
Where,
Fi = Lateral force applied at story level i
F
t
= Concentrated lateral force considered at the top of the building in addition to the force F
n
The concentrated force, Ft acting at the top of the building can be determined as follows,
F
t
= 0.07 TV 0.25V when T > 0.70 second (3.13)
F
t
= 0.0 when T 0.70 second
The remaining portion of the base shear (V-F
t
), is distributed over the height of the building
including level n, according to relation,
(3.14)
67

+
n
i
i t
F F V
1


n
i
i i
x x
t x
h w
h w
F V F
1
) (
At each story level x, the force F
x
is applied over the area of the building in proportion to the
mass distribution at that level.
Considering the equal mass at every level, then the equation can be written as
(3.15)
(3.16)
For different story building the base shear is distributed in Table 3.10 and presented in Fig.
3.10.
For example,
At height = 24 m, Building = 16-storied
F
x
= 0.0588(V-F
t
)
Where, V = base shear
Table 3.10 Distribution of base shear for 15 to 20- storied building
Building height
above base, h
x
(meter)
15-storeied 16-storeied 17-storeied 18-storeied 19-storeied 20-storeied
3 0.830 0.740 0.650 0.580 0.530 0.480
6 1.670 1.470 1.310 1.170 1.050 0.950
9 2.500 2.210 1.960 1.750 1.580 1.430
12 3.330 2.940 2.610 2.390 2.110 1.900
15 4.170 3.660 3.270 2.920 2.630 2.380
18 5.000 4.410 3.920 3.510 3.160 2.850
21 5.830 5.150 4.580 4.090 3.680 3.330
24 6.670 5.880 5.230 4.600 4.210 3.810
68


n
i
i
x
t x
h
h
F V F
1
) (

n
i
i
x
t
x
h
h
F V
F
1
88 . 5 %

t
x
F V
F
%
t
x
F V
F

27 7.500 6.620 5.880 5.260 4.740 4.290


30 8.330 7.350 6.540 5.850 5.260 4.760
33 9.170 8.090 7.190 6.430 5.790 5.240
36 10.000 8.820 7.840 7.020 6.320 5.710
39 10.830 9.560 8.500 7.600 6.840 6.190
42 11.670 10.290 9.150 8.190 7.370 6.670
45 12.500 11.030 9.800 8.770 7.890 7.140
48 11.760 10.460 9.360 8.420 7.620
51 11.110 9.940 8.950 8.090
54 10.530 9.470 8.570
57 10.000 9.050
60 9.520
20 19 18 17 16 15
69
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
0.00 1.60 3.20 4.80 6.40 8.00 9.60 11.20 12.80 14.40
Fx / (V -Ft)%
h
x

=

F
l
o
o
r

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
15-storeied
16-storeied
17-storeied
18-storeied
19-storeied
20-storeied


Fig. 3.10 Distribution of base shear for different storied building
3.4 Summary
In this chapter, generally required data in design calculation for wind and earthquake loads
are presented in graphical form. Any required data or intermediate data are directly taken
from the graph value. To facilitate wind load and earthquake load calculation, generally
required graphs are presented in this chapter as follows:
Wind load,
i. C
p
vs. (Fig. 3.1)
ii. z vs.C
z
(Fig. 3.2)
iii. z vs. G
h
and G
z
(Fig. 3.3)
iv. z vs. (Fig. 3.4 to 3.6)
Earthquake load,
i. h
n
vs. & T (Fig. 3.7)
70
B
L
I p h
z
C C G
P
S
C
ii. h
n
vs. (Fig. 3.8)
iii. h
n
vs. (Fig. 3.9)
iv. h
x
vs. (Fig. 3.10)
Chapter 4
MODELLING OF THE STRUCTURES
4.1 Introduction
The modelling of a high rise building structure for analysis is
dependent to some extent on the approach to analysis, which is
related to the type and size of structure. This section describes
the finite element model for simulating model behaviour of high
rise structure. STAAD-III professional purpose Finite Element
software has been employed for this purpose. The developed
model uses beam elements with two nodes and finite element
model with four nodes for modelling the structure. It is assumed
that the load is such that the stress level of all materials is within
the elastic range.
71
W
V
ZISW
V
%
x
x
F V
F

4.2 Description of Model Building


In order to study the effect of different models, beam sizes, column sizes, auxiliary beam,
and brick masonry on bending moment, deflection, stiffness and stress in brick masonry
hence a 16-storied high rise building is given. Such as a typical floor plan, elevation, and
alternately adopted model plans of the building for this study is shown in Fig. 4.1a and 4.1b.
Coupled-Wall Plan,
Rigid Frame Plan
Typical Floor Plan (16-storied)
Infilled Frame Plan
Fig. 4.1a Model plans of structure
72
Fig. 4.1b Elevation of structure
The columns, beams, shear walls, and infills are kept constant cross section and floor height
throughout the building. The uniformity and symmetry used in this example is adopted
primarily for simplicity. The member dimensions used in this example are within practical
range.
The beam width is kept 300 mm constant and the depth is varied 450 mm, 600 mm, 750 mm,
and 900 mm. The shear wall is taken 300x3650 mm and the thickness of infill is 250 mm.
The variable column sizes considered in this study are 300x450 mm, 300x600 mm, 300x750
and 300x900 mm.
Brick masonry crushing strength is taken, 12.50 MPa, poisons ratio for concrete is, 0.15,
poisons ration of brick masonry is, 0.20.
On this basis of the given data of the building, the lateral forces are presented in appendix,
Table A.1 and A.2. Considering the critical direction of the building, which is transverse
direction and adopted in this study.
4.3 Loads Considered for Analysis
A brief calculation of wind and earthquake load is given here. Location of building is
considered at Dhaka city, where exposure condition is A, and Earthquake zone is 2.
Only three load cases have been considered in this study. Following the cases, the horizontal
concentrated load at top, the wind load and earthquake load calculations have made along
with gravity load.
Load case: 1 D + L + H
73
Load case: 2 0.75(D + L + W)
Load case: 3 0.75(D + L + E)
D = dead load, L = gravity live load, H = horizontal concentrated load at top
W = wind load, E =earthquake load
To calculate the wind load, basic wind velocity of 210 km / h is considered.
The gravity, wind and earthquake loads are calculated and shown in appendix A and
presented in Table A.1 and A.2.
4.4 Modelling used for the Study
In this study, during 2-D analysis, building is idealized as an assemblage of vertical Rigid
frame, Shear wall, Infilled frame systems interconnected by horizontal rigid beams. A shear
panel element (Seraj, 1996, PP.199) is used to enable modelling of shear wall. Axial, shear
and bending deformations are considered during the analysis, modelling of shear wall in 2-D
analysis is done using the concept of rigid end condition between columns and beams.
For the analysis, only one direction, that is, short direction of building has been selected.
Two-dimensional analysis is conducted using the STAAD-III package software.
The analysis is divided into two phases. In the first phase, the relative stiffness of the systems
considered is calculated considering a 100 kN load at the top of model frames.
In the second phase, wind and earthquake loads are applied for the systems, then limited
parametric studies conducted by adopting two-dimensional analysis. Several parameters are
varied in order to determine their effects on moments, stresses, and deflections of model
frames.
Three different structural systems for the same bay are selected alternatively to carry out the
study of the 16-storied reinforced concrete building. The structural systems considered are,
i. Coupled Shear Wall
ii. Rigid Frame
iii. Infilled Frame
Again Coupled Shear Wall is subdivided into three structural models, as
a. Coupled-Shear Wall model with auxiliary beam
b. Coupled-Shear Wall model without auxiliary beam
c. Equivalent Wide Column model
74
4.4.1 Basic Model under Lateral Load Study
The basic models used for the numerical analysis under lateral loads for this study are given
in this article. The total five structural models are given on the following page in STAAD
geometric forms (Fig. 4.2 to 4.6). Member numbers and element numbers are given on
geometry but node numbers are not shown on geometry. Due to column sizes variation in
Rigid Frame model and Infill Frame model, hence four types of dimension are shown on the
top of model frames. Fig. 4.2 is used as Coupled Wall model with finite element, Fig. 4.3 is
used as Coupled Wall model by finite element without auxiliary beam, Fig. 4.4 is used as
Rigid Frame model by beam element, Fig. 4.5 is used as Infilled Frame model by finite
element and beam element. Fig.4.6 is used as Equivalent Wide Column Frame model by
beam element. The different types of input data file are given in appendix B


75
Fig. 4.2 Coupled Wall model , Finite element method (with auxiliary beam)
76
Fig. 4.3 Coupled Wall model , Finite element method (without auxiliary beam)

77
Fig. 4.4 Rigid Frame model
78
Fig. 4.5 Infilled Frame model
79
Fig. 4.6 Equivalent Wide Column Frame model
4.5 Summary
A typical 2-D bay of 16-storied RC building is taken for study problem in which columns,
beams and walls are maintained uniform size over the height for specified set of analysis.
From practical point of view, the gravity loads are taken in association with lateral loads in
the analysis to get real value of stresses. BNBC wind load is adopted where the wind design
parameters are, 210 km/h for basic wind speed, A for exposure condition and Dhaka
City for location.
In earthquake load calculation, BNBC earthquake load is applied where the earthquake
design parameters are, Z =0.15 for earthquake zone 2, S=1.5 for site soil coefficient, I=1.0
(standard occupancy) for importance coefficient, R=5 for structural modification coefficient.
Three structural systems for the same bay are selected alternatively to carry out the study.
80
Chapter 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
5.1 Introduction
Frames are the most widely used structural system in building construction but frames alone
are not always suitable to resist lateral loads. Equivalent static force method is allowed in
design codes to represent earthquake loads for such structures up to certain height. For tall
building structure, other building system should be adopted to resist lateral loads. These are
Frame-Wall, Coupled Wall, Infilled Frame, Tube system etc.
A short direction bay of a 16-storied office building is considered for lateral load analysis
here.
Wind load and Earthquake load are taken as lateral loads.
The specified bay is modeled by three structural systems, as
a. Rigid Frame structure (RF)
81
b. Infilled Frame structure (IF)
c. Coupled Wall structure (CW).
The Coupled Wall structure is idealized as,
i. Wall model without auxiliary beam (CW)
ii. Wall model with auxiliary beam (CWAB) and
iii. Equivalent Wide Column model (EWC).
The total five models are then analyzed by STAAD-III, computer software package program.
Effect of different parameters are studied to assess their influence on the behavior of high
rise structure. For the purpose of analysis, a bisymmetric 16-storied building is considered.
Parameters of study are:
Structural system
Beam size
Column size
All of them are analyzed with STAAD-III, a professional software package program. The
results of different models are presented in tabular and graphical form in this chapter.
The analyses of model frames are done for concentrated load at top end, wind and earthquake
loads. Deflections of model frames, their relative stiffness, moment in connecting beams and
stresses in infill materials are also calculated. These are presented in Tables 5.1 to 5.22 and
Fig. 5.1 to 5.15
5.2 Deflection of Different Structural System for Concentrated Load at Top
The concentrated load is applied at top to assess the relative deflection characteristics of
different model frames. Two types of deflection are associated in model frames. Bending
deflection and shear deflection. The bending mode of deflection is a result of axial
deformation of columns. It is generally neglected in frame structure. As the height to width
ratios of the structure increases, the effect of column axial deformation becomes more
dominant. For relatively short frames with height to width ratios less than 3, the deflection
due to axial shortening of columns can be neglected and the deflection of the frame can be
assumed to be entirely due to shear mode deflection. This mode of deflection occurs in frame
structures due to story sway associated with double bending of columns and beams. The
greater the slenderness of the frame, the more critical it becomes to instability in the flexural
82
deflection as opposed to the shear deflection. The greater the beam stiffness, the frame tends
to less shear deflection (Tables 5.1 to 5.4 and Fig. 5.1 to 5.4). The smaller the beam stiffness
associated, the frame tends to deflect as flexural deflection as a result the rigid frame goes to
largest deflection (Fig. 5.1).
In Fig. 5.1 to 5.4 and Tables 5.1 to 5.4, the Coupled Wall Model Frame without auxiliary
beam (AB) shows free cantilever deflection and the deflection of model can not be reduced
by increasing beam stiffness due to hinge connection of beam element to wall element. In
Table 5.1, the maximum deflection is found due to minimum beam stiffness compared to
others and minimum deflection is achieved by increasing beam stiffness (Table 5.4). Also it
is found that the deflection is decreased by increasing column size (Tables 5.5 to 5.7).
Finally, it is seen that the deflections are decreased with increased beam stiffness and column
stiffness for Infilled Frame, Rigid Frame, Coupled Wall (CW
AB
) and Wide Column model,
but deflection remains unaltered for Coupled Wall model (without auxiliary beam) where it
deflects as a free cantilever.
From maximum to gradual minimum deflections are found in Coupled Wall (without
auxiliary beam), Rigid Frame, Infilled Frame, Coupled Wall (with auxiliary beam) and Wide
Column Model respectively.
Table 5.1 Deflections (mm) of structure for different structural systems due to 100 kN load at
top
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
Wide column
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 1.49 0.46 0.29 0.42 0.22
6 4.31 1.44 0.96 1.51 0.83
9 7.72 2.89 2.02 3.35 1.77
12 11.52 4.79 3.42 5.76 3.00
15 15.65 7.00 5.12 8.62 4.51
18 20.06 9.48 7.09 12.11 6.24
21 24.72 12.28 9.29 16.11 8.17
24 29.60 15.32 11.69 20.52 10.28
27 34.66 18.57 14.28 25.23 12.53
83
30 39.88 21.99 17.00 30.34 14.90
33 45.23 25.55 19.87 35.75 17.38
36 50.68 29.23 22.82 41.37 19.93
39 56.21 32.99 25.86 47.11 22.54
42 61.78 36.81 28.94 53.50 25.19
45 67.31 40.65 32.05 59.16 27.85
48 72.41 44.45 35.16 65.12 30.50
[Beam size: 300 x 450, column size: 300 x 600, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]

EWC
CWAB
IF
CW
RF
Beam size: 300x 450 mm
Column size: 300 x 600 mm
Wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
84
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Deflection in mm
H
=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Auxiliary beam: 300x450 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
Fig. 5.1 Deflected shapes of structure for different structural systems due to
concentrated load at top
Table 5.2 Deflections (mm) of structure for different structural systems due to 100 kN load at top
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
Wide column
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 1.18 0.33 0.21 0.42 0.21
6 2.83 1.02 0.77 1.51 0.65
9 4.84 1.95 1.45 3.35 1.22
12 7.12 3.06 2.37 5.76 2.07
15 9.51 4.34 3.46 8.62 3.06
18 12.12 5.85 4.79 12.11 4.16
21 14.93 7.43 6.12 16.11 5.12
24 17.74 9.22 7.63 20.52 6.75
27 20.73 11.04 9.22 25.23 8.11
30 23.72 12.91 10.91 30.34 9.52
33 26.83 15.02 12.75 35.75 11.03
85
36 30.04 17.05 14.54 41.37 12.67
39 33.23 19.13 16.33 47.11 14.18
42 36.44 21.24 18.21 53.50 15.79
45 39.61 23.32 20.05 59.16 17.22
48 42.62 25.43 21.96 65.12 18.83
[Beam: 300 x 600 mm, column size: 300 x 600 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]
EWC
CWAB
IF
RF
CW
Beam size: 300 x 600 mm
Column size: 300 x 600 mm
Wall size: 300 x3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x600 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
86
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68
Deflection in mm
H
=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Fig. 5.2 Deflections of different structural systems due to concentrated load
at top
Table 5.3 Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to 100 kN load at top
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
Wide Column
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 0.88 0.32 0.18 0.42 0.12
6 2.23 0.90 0.55 1.51 0.43
9 3.82 1.72 1.10 3.35 0.89
12 5.60 2.75 1.80 5.76 1.47
15 7.54 3.86 2.62 8.62 2.15
18 9.61 5.12 3.55 12.11 2.91
21 11.80 6.49 4.57 16.11 3.73
24 14.09 7.94 5.66 20.52 4.60
27 16.45 9.47 6.80 25.23 5.52
30 18.88 11.06 8.00 30.34 6.46
33 21.36 12.69 9.23 35.75 7.44
87
36 23.89 14.36 10.50 41.37 8.42
39 26.44 16.04 11.78 47.11 9.42
42 29.01 17.74 13.08 53.50 10.42
45 31.58 19.43 14.39 59.16 11.41
48 33.98 21.07 15.69 65.12 12.36
[Beam: 300 x 750 mm, column size: 300 x 600 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]
EWC
CWAB
IF
RF
CW
Beam size: 300 x 750 mm
Column size: 300 x 600 mm
Wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x750 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
88
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68
Deflection in mm
H

=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Fig. 5.3 Deflected shape of different structural systems due to concentrated load
at top
Table 5.4 Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to 100 kN load at top
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall Wide Column
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 0.78 0.29 0.16 0.42 0.10
6 1.91 0.78 0.45 1.51 0.34
9 3.23 1.46 0.89 3.35 0.70
12 4.70 2.30 1.43 5.76 1.13
15 6.30 3.19 2.06 8.62 1.64
18 8.00 4.19 2.77 12.11 2.20
21 9.80 5.27 3.54 16.11 2.80
24 11.67 6.41 4.35 20.52 3.44
27 10.61 7.61 5.21 25.23 4.10
30 15.60 8.85 6.09 30.34 4.79
33 17.64 10.12 7.80 35.75 5.49
89
36 19.71 11.42 7.94 41.37 6.20
39 21.80 12.73 8.89 47.11 6.92
42 23.91 14.05 9.85 53.50 7.63
45 26.01 15.35 10.81 59.16 8.34
48 28.00 16.62 11.76 65.12 9.00
[Beam: 300 x 900 mm, column size: 300 x 600 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]
EWC
CWAB
IF
RF
WC
90
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68
Deflection in mm
H
=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Beam size: 300 x 900 mm
Column size: 300 x 600 mm
Wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x900 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
Fig. 5.4 Deflected shape of different structural systems due to concentrated load at
top
Table 5.5 Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to 100 kN load at top
91
[Beam: 300 x 600 mm, column size: 300 x 450 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
Wide
Col
um
n
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 1.82 0.42 0.21 0.42 0.21
6 4.43 1.01 0.77 1.51 0.65
9 7.26 2.05 1.45 3.35 1.22
12 10.37 3.36 2.37 5.76 2.07
15 13.72 4.78 3.46 8.62 3.06
18 17.21 6.35 4.79 12.11 4.16
21 20.85 8.12 6.12 16.11 5.12
24 24.62 10.01 7.63 20.52 6.75
27 28.53 12.15 9.22 25.23 8.11
30 32.56 14.26 10.91 30.34 9.52
33 36.61 16.17 12.75 35.75 11.03
36 40.71 18.69 14.54 41.37 12.67
39 44.92 20.92 16.33 47.11 14.18
42 49.15 23.21 18.21 53.50 15.79
45 53.46 25.63 20.05 59.16 17.22
48 57.32 27.72 21.96 65.12 18.83
92
EWC
CWAB
IF
RF
CW
Beam size: 300 x 600 mm
Column size: 300 x 450 mm
Wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x600 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
93
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68
Deflection in mm
H
=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Fig. 5.5 Deflected shape of different structural systems due to concentrated load
at top
Table 5.6 Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to 100 kN load at top
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
Wide Column
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 0.82 0.35 0.21 0.42 0.21
6 2.25 0.92 0.77 1.51 0.65
9 3.97 1.83 1.45 3.35 1.22
12 5.86 2.91 2.37 5.76 2.07
15 7.94 4.15 3.46 8.62 3.06
18 10.12 5.56 4.79 12.11 4.16
21 12.53 7.01 6.12 16.11 5.12
24 14.95 8.72 7.63 20.52 6.75
27 17.56 10.56 9.22 25.23 8.11
30 20.21 12.33 10.91 30.34 9.52
33 22.92 14.26 12.75 35.75 11.03
36 25.67 16.29 14.54 41.37 12.67
39 28.45 18.25 16.33 47.11 14.18
42 31.32 20.22 18.21 53.50 15.79
45 34.14 22.27 20.05 59.16 17.22
48 36.73 24.25 21.96 65.12 18.83
[Beam: 300 x 600 mm, column size: 300 x 750 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]
94
EWC
CWAB
IF
RF
CW
Beam size: 300 x 600 mm
Column size: 300 x 750 mm
Wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x600 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
Fig. 5.6 Deflected shape of different structural systems due to concentrated load
at top
95
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68
Deflection in mm
H
=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Table 5.7 Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to 100 kN load at top
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
Wide Column
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 0.61 0.32 0.21 0.42 0.21
6 1.83 0.91 0.77 1.51 0.65
9 3.34 1.75 1.45 3.35 1.22
12 5.12 2.82 2.37 5.76 2.07
15 7.05 4.03 3.46 8.62 3.06
18 9.16 5.34 4.79 12.11 4.16
21 11.23 6.87 6.12 16.11 5.12
24 13.52 8.55 7.63 20.52 6.75
27 15.98 10.22 9.22 25.23 8.11
30 18.45 12.01 10.91 30.34 9.52
33 21.01 13.91 12.75 35.75 11.03
36 23.52 15.83 14.54 41.37 12.67
39 26.23 17.80 16.33 47.11 14.18
42 28.82 19.75 18.21 53.50 15.79
45 31.46 21.76 20.05 59.16 17.22
48 33.85 23.73 21.96 65.12 18.83
[Beam: 300 x 600 mm, column size: 300 x 900 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm]
96
EWC
CWAB
IF
RF
CW
Beam size: 300 x 600 mm
Column size: 300 x 900 mm
Wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x600 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Load at top: 100 kN
97
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68
Deflection in mm
H
=

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
Rigid Frame
Infilled Frame
Coupled Wall/AB
Coupled Wall
Wide column
Fig. 5.7 Deflected shape of different structural systems due to concentrated load
at top
5.3 Relative Stiffness of Model Frames for Concentrated Load at Top
The relative stiffness of different model frames is presented in Tables 5.8
to 5.11. The analyses are carried out for 100 kN lateral loads at top of the
model frames. Relative stiffness of the model frames is defined, as the
lateral load required for unit deflection. Here 100 kN is adopted instead of
1 kN load, then the load is divided by total drift to get stiffness of the
model frames.
From Tables 5.8 to 5.11, among five models, the maximum stiffness is
found for Wide Column model. Although the Wide Column and Coupled
Wall (with AB) model are of same configuration, nevertheless the stiffness
is somewhat different. Because in Wide Column model, the coupling beam
acts perfectly rigid joint, so that it gives higher stiffness than Coupled Wall
model. In Coupled Wall model, the coupling beams are connected to nodal
points of shear wall with auxiliary beams which lacks full rigidity, as a
result the stiffness is somewhat lower than Wide Column model.
In Infilled Frame model, the stiffness is considerably higher than Rigid Frame model (Tables
5.8 to 5.11). With respect to the shear configuration of a laterally loaded rigid frame model
without Infill, an Infill deflects in a flexural mode (Fig. 5.1 to 5.7). This difference in
deflected shape occurs in between Infilled Frame and Rigid Frame because the infill greatly
reduces the shear mode deformation which increase the stiffness of the Infilled Frame model.
Without auxiliary beam connection in Coupled wall model, the stiffness becomes lower than
other models because the coupled wall deflects as free cantilever, as a result the stiffness is
considerably less. It is shown in Tables 5.8 to 5.11 that the stiffness of models can be
increased with increased beam or column sizes.
From above discussions it is clear that the stiffness of buildings can be increased by different
modifications of structural systems, by increasing beam or column sizes. Comparing the
relative stiffness of model frames, it can be suggested that which one the structural system is
more efficient. Here, Coupled Wall model (reinforced concrete shear wall) is more efficient
98
than the others in terms of lateral sway of model frames and hence it is the most stiff system.
However, the Infilled Frame gives considerable stiffness than all others except Coupled wall
model. Coupled wall model is expensive in construction. In terms of economy this system is
not always efficient one. Where as the stiffness of Infilled model is close to Coupled Wall
model and construction cost is much less than coupled wall system. If the infill stresses are
within allowable limit due to lateral loads, then Infillled structural system is quite efficient
structural system and economically acceptable too.

Table 5.8 Stiffness of models (N/mm) , column size: 300 x 450 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Beam size, mm Rigid Frame Infilled Frame Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall Wide Column
300 x 450 1204 2444 2844 1536 3279
300 x 600 1745 3593 4415 1536 5371
300 x 750 2158 4794 6373 1536 8091
300 x 900 2456 5907 8503 1536 11111
Table 5.9 Stiffness of models (N/mm), column size: 300 x 600 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Beam size, mm Rigid Frame Infilled Frame Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall Wide Column
300 x 450 1487 2643 2844 1536 3255
300 x 600 2350 3934 4554 1536 5311
300 x 750 3126 5336 6373 1536 8091
300 x 900 3750 6658 8503 1536 11111
Table 5.10 Stiffness of models( N/mm), column size: 300 x 750 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Beam size, mm Rigid Frame
Infilled
Frame
Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall Wide Column
300 x 450 1655 2756 2844 1536 3279
300 x 600 2729 4134 4415 1536 5371
300 x 750 3815 5718 6373 1536 8091
300 x 900 4778 7273 8503 1536 11111
Table 5.11 Stiffness of models( N/mm), column size: 300 x 900 mm, wall size: 300 x 3650 mm
Beam size, mm Rigid Frame
Infilled
Frame
Coupled Wall AB Coupled Wall Wide Column
300 x 450 1762 2811 2844 1536 3279
300 x 600 2957 4228 4415 1536 5371
300 x 750 4270 5949 6373 1536 8091
300 x 900 5528 7716 8503 1536 11111
99

5.4 Deflection of Different Structural System for Lateral Load
The wind and earthquake loads are calculated according to BNBC (1993). The wind load
base shear is found greater than earthquake base shear (Tables A.1 and A.2). Exposure
condition A for wind and zone 2 for earthquake are considered for Dhaka City. The base
shear due to wind load is found 35 % higher than the base shear due to earthquake.
Deflection of the structure, modeled as different structural systems, due to both earthquake
and wind forces are presented in Tables 5.12a, 5.12b and plotted in Fig. 5.8. From the limited
100
study, it is found that the deflections of every system due to wind load are greater than the
deflection due to earthquake load. The differences between top deflections due to lateral
loads are small (not more than 16 %) though the wind load base shear is greater by 35 % than
earthquake load. The greater intensity of load at top and the concentrated load at top of the
model frames due to earthquake makes the difference less. The distinctive feature of wind
and earthquake forces is, that the wind load is external forces the magnitudes of which are
proportional to the exposed surface, while the earthquake force is inertial force depending
primarily on the mass and the stiffness properties of the model structure.
In Fig. 5.8, the Rigid Frame model undergoes combined flexural-shear deflection. Rigid
Frame model and Coupled Wall model without auxiliary undergoes excess deflection than
allowable limit, 96mm (Fig. 5.8) due to less stiffness of beams and columns according to
ACI Committee 435. But generally in rigid frame, the deflection is shear mode deflection.
The shear mode of deflection occurs in rigid frame by the double bending of columns and
beams which occurs in the upper part. The beam-column joint in upper part of the model acts
as rigid joint and stresses are in elastic range. The joint deformations are negligible. But in
lower part of model frame, the flexural mode of deflection takes place (Fig. 5.12). The
flexural mode of deflection happens when the beam undergoes joint deformation. At the
lower part of frame, the stress in beams exceeds the elastic range and it acts as semi rigid or
hinge joint. Hence the frame undergoes flexural mode of deflection at the lower part.
The Wide Column model deflects less than all other models. Coupled Wall model (without
AB) deflects more due to hinge connection between finite membrane element and finite
beam element. As a result, the system deflects as free cantilever as shown in Fig. 5.8. For
this reason it is not possible to lower the deflection values with increased beam size.
Decreased deflection is increasing wall inertia, which is uneconomical.
The deflections of Wide Column model and Coupled Wall model (with AB) are close
although the same configuration between them exists. Because the auxiliary beam connection
to nearest node of element makes the system close to rigid joint. At least the same size of
auxiliary should be connected to get reliable result that is somewhat conservative.
The deflection due to wind of Infill Frame model is found 15 % greater than Coupled Wall
model (with AB) and 34 % less than Rigid Frame model (Fig. 5.8). It is seen that the infill
contributes sufficient stiffness to withstand lateral loads. The stiffening effect of the infill
101
panel on the frame represents fairly well by a diagonal strut having the same thickness as the
panel (Mark Fintel, 1974, PP.358). An effective width depends on many factors. The
effective width of the strut increases with increasing column stiffness and panel height to
length ratio and decreases with increasing value of the load and modulus of elasticity of the
infill material. The effect of infill walls can be well observed on the response of structures
subjected to earthquake motion. Walls filling the space between frame members not only
tend to increase the stiffness, but it altogether alters the mode of response of the frame. The
frame changes into a shear wall and as a result, it changes the entire structure and the
resulting distribution of lateral forces among the frame components (Mark Fintel, 1974).
Virtually the wind and earthquake load is dynamic and reversible one. At one stage an infill
panel acts in one diagonal direction in compression (as a strut) and in other diagonal
direction in tension. The compression and tension diagonals are reversed when the horizontal
load comes from other direction. As a result in severe lateral load, the infill fails out of plane
and makes the infill frame into frame only, which may result greater in deflection under
severe lateral load.
In Fig. 5.9 and 5.10, the deflections are presented for various beam and column sizes. The
lateral deflection caused by lateral force decreases with increased beam or column sizes.
These merely due to increase in flexural stiffness of beams or columns.
In Fig. 5.11, the deflections of Wide Column model are presented for various beam sizes. In
this model, it is shown that the lateral deflection decreases with increased beam sizes. At
certain stiffness of beam, the model frame starts to deflect in flexural mode (for beam,
300x450 mm).
Table 5. 12a Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to wind load.
Height, m Rigid Frame Infilled Frame Wide Column Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 3.50 1.43 0.76 0.89 1.57
6 10.29 4.35 2.69 2.96 5.66
9 18.35 8.25 5.52 6.02 12.05
12 27.03 12.88 9.03 9.82 20.46
15 36.02 18.00 13.04 14.29 30.63
18 45.15 23.52 17.37 19.13 42.31
21 54.24 29.29 21.95 24.25 55.25
102
24 63.18 35.21 26.60 29.51 69.25
27 71.84 41.17 31.25 34.83 84.09
30 80.14 47.09 35.84 40.12 99.60
33 88.00 52.90 40.21 45.83 115.62
36 95.35 58.55 44.61 50.41 131.20
39 102.16 64.00 48.74 55.35 148.61
42 108.39 69.26 52.70 60.14 165.36
45 114.04 74.34 56.52 64.81 182.20
48 119.34 79.31 60.26 69.42 198.98
[Beam size: 300 x 600 mm, Column size: 300 x 750 mm ]
Table 5.12b Deflections (mm) of different structural systems due to EQ load.
Height, m Rigid Frame Infilled Frame Wide Column Coupled WallAB Coupled wall
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 2.56 1.07 0.61 0.74 1.36
6 7.66 3.34 2.20 2.46 4.94
9 13.87 6.45 4.57 5.04 10.58
12 20.71 10.20 7.55 8.32 18.08
15 27.97 14.43 11.00 12.14 27.20
18 35.48 19.04 14.79 16.39 37.77
21 43.13 23.95 18.83 20.93 49.57
24 50.79 29.05 23.00 25.67 62.42
27 58.37 34.27 27.24 30.52 76.14
30 65.77 39.52 31.48 35.52 90.57
33 72.93 44.74 35.67 40.30 105.54
36 79.75 49.89 39.78 45.13 120.94
39 86.20 54.93 43.76 49.88 136.63
42 92.22 59.84 47.63 54.54 152.50
45 97.77 64.63 51.40 59.10 168.45
48 103.00 69.36 55.11 63.62 184.41
[Beam size: 300 x 600 mm, Column size: 300 x 750 mm]
1: EQ load on WC model 6: Wind load on IF model
2: Wind load on WC model 7: EQ load on RF model
3: EQ load on CW/AB model 8: Wind load on RF model
4: EQ load on IF model 9: EQ load on CW model
5: Wind load on CW/AB model 10: Wind load on CW model
103
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Deflection in mm
H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
RF-W
IFR-W
WC-W
CW/AB-W
CW-W
RF-EQ
IFR-EQ
WC-EQ
CW/AB-EQ
CW-EQ
1
2 7 8
3
4 9 10
5
6
allowable limit of Deflection (96 mm)
(ACI Committee 435)
Beam size: 300x 600 mm
Column size: 300x750 mm
Wall size: 300x 3650 mm
Auxiliary beam: 300x600 mm
Floor level height: 3000 mm
Wind and EQ load: BNBC
Fig. 5.8 Deflections of different structural systems due to wind and earthquake load.
Table 5.13 Deflections (mm) of Rigid Frame model due to wind load for variable beam
sizes
Height, m Beam,300x450 Beam,300x600 Beam,300x750 Beam,300x900
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 4.97 3.36 2.57 2.14
6 15.59 9.88 7.17 5.72
9 28.75 17.63 12.53 9.85
104
12 43.07 25.96 18.29 14.29
15 57.91 34.60 24.27 18.90
18 72.87 43.36 30.34 23.59
21 87.70 52.08 36.40 28.27
24 102.2 60.65 42.35 32.86
27 116.20 68.96 48.11 37.30
30 129.58 76.92 53.63 41.55
33 142.20 84.45 58.83 45.56
36 153.98 91.50 63.64 49.30
39 164.84 98.02 68.17 52.76
42 174.73 103.98 72.27 55.92
45 183.69 109.40 75.98 58.78
48 192.05 114.47 79.47 61.43
[Beam size: 300 x 450 mm, 300 x 600, 300 x 750 mm, 300 x 900 mm, Column size: 300 x 900 mm]

1
2
3
105
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Deflection in mm
F
l
o
o
r

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
Beam,300x450
Beam,300x600
Beam,300x750
Beam,300x900
4
4 3 2 1
Column
300x900
mm
Fig. 5.9 Deflections of Rigid Frame model due to wind load
Table 5.14 Deflection (mm) of Rigid Frame model due to wind load for variable column
sizes

106
Height, m Col,300x450 Col,300x600 Col,300x750 Col,300x900
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 10.70 6.16 4.32 3.36
6 25.19 15.89 12.02 9.88
9 40.47 26.56 20.79 17.63
12 56.07 37.65 30.07 25.96
15 71.73 48.92 39.59 34.60
18 87.23 60.19 49.18 43.60
21 102.35 71.30 58.69 52.08
24 116.94 82.00 67.98 60.65
27 130.83 92.47 76.95 68.96
30 143.90 102.32 85.52 76.92
33 156.02 111.53 93.58 84.45
36 167.11 120.05 101.08 91.50
39 177.09 127.83 107.96 98.02
42 185.93 134.83 114.25 103.98
45 193.59 141.02 119.88 109.40
48 200.24 146.62 125.07 114.47
107
[Column size: 300 x 450 mm, 300 x 600, 300 x 750 mm, 300 x 900 mm, Beam size: 300 x 600 mm]
1
2
3
4
4 3 2 1
108
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Deflection in mm
F
l
o
o
r

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
Col,300x450
Col,300x600
Col,300x750
Col,300x900
Beam 300x600 mm
Fig. 5.10 Deflections of Rigid Frame model due to wind load
Table 5.15 Deflections (mm) of Wide Column model due to wind load for
variable beam sizes
Height, m Beam,300x450 Beam,300x600 Beam,300x750 Beam,300x900
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 0.98 0.76 0.62 0.52
6 3.54 2.69 2.13 1.74
9 7.41 5.52 4.29 3.45
12 12.34 9.03 6.91 5.48
15 18.09 13.04 9.83 7.71
18 24.48 17.39 12.95 10.06
109
21 31.33 21.95 16.15 12.44
24 38.49 26.50 19.36 14.81
27 45.49 31.25 22.52 17.11
30 53.26 35.84 25.57 19.33
33 60.67 40.31 28.49 21.43
36 68.01 44.61 31.25 23.40
39 75.23 48.74 33.84 25.23
42 82.33 52.70 36.28 26.93
45 89.32 56.52 38.58 28.53
48 96.24 60.26 40.81 30.06
[Beam size: 300 x 450 mm, 300 x 600, 300 x 750 mm, 300 x 900 mm, Wall size: 300x3650 mm]

2
3

1
4 3 2 1
110
0
3
6
9
1 2
1 5
1 8
2 1
2 4
2 7
3 0
3 3
3 6
3 9
4 2
4 5
4 8
0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 1 0 0
F
lo
o
r
H
e
ig
h
t
in
m
e
t
e
r
D ef lect io n in m m
B eam , 3 0 0 x 4 5 0
B eam , 3 0 0 x 6 0 0
B eam , 3 0 0 x 7 5 0
B eam , 3 0 0 x 9 0 0
Wall
300x3650
mm

Fig. 5.11 Deflections of Wide Column model due to wind load

5.5 Moment in Beams of Different Structural System for Lateral Load
Wind loads are applied on different model frames to observe the model connecting beam
moments at various floor levels. The beam and column sizes are kept constant and then
lateral loads are applied on different model system. The moments of different model frames
due to both wind and earthquake loads are presented in Table 5.16 and 5.17. They are plotted
in Fig. 5.12.

From the limited study, it is found that the moments in beams of every system caused by
wind load are greater than the moments in beams caused by earthquake load. But the
differences between moments caused by these two different types of lateral loads are small
111
(not more than 12 % for max value) though the wind load is greater by 35 % than earthquake
load. The greater intensity of load at top and the top load of earthquake makes the difference
less.
The connecting beam moments in wide column model are less than all other models and
coupled wall model (without AB) gives very less moments due to hinge connection between
membrane element and beam element. As a result the moments linearly decrease as shown in
Fig. 5.12.
It is shown in Fig. 5.12 that the maximum moment is developed in connecting beam for
Rigid frame, Infilled Frame, Wide Column, Coupled Wall (AB) and Coupled Wall system at
a level of (z / H) 0.44, 0.56, 0.56, 0.56 and base level respectively.
The moments in beams in wide column model and coupled model (with AB) are somewhat
different although the same configuration between them exists. Because the beam-column
joints in wide column model are rigid and the auxiliary beam connection in coupled wall
model to nearest node of element makes the system close to rigid joint.
For different beam sizes and fixed column sizes, the variation of beam moment in connecting
beams are studied for rigid frame model (Tables 5.18, Fig. 5.13) and wide column model
(Tables 5.20, Fig. 5.15) due to wind load.
In rigid frame model, the upper parts of all the curves concave downward gradually. The
curve concave downward more due to greater beam size. At a certain height from base level,
the maximum bending moment occurs. Below certain height, the beam goes to higher stress
due to lateral loads and the beam-column joint deformation happens, as a result the joint does
not act fully as a rigid joint, hence the rotation takes place and the bending moment decreases
and the curve concave upward. The greater beam size can take more stress, so that the
maximum bending moment occurs at lower height close to base level (Fig. 5.13). The lower
parts of the same curves (Fig. 5.13 and 5.14) repeat and it happens in another beam.
In wide column model the upper parts of all the curves concave downward gradually. The
concavity is more due to greater beam size. At a certain height from base level, the maximum
bending moment occurs. Below certain height, the beam experiences higher stress due to
lateral loads and the beam-column joint deformation happens, as a result the joint does not
act as a fully rigid joint. The rotation takes place and the bending moment decreases and the
curve tends to go concave upward. The greater beam size can take more stress and the
112
maximum bending moment occurs at lower levels. In Fig. 5.15, the broken line curve shows
the variation of maximum bending moment due to beam size variation, which is
progressively concave upward.
The stiffness of model frame is increased due to increase of beam size, so that the model has
less deflection but the bending moment increases in beams (Tables 5.18 and 5.20) due to
higher stiffness of beam.
In the Infill Frame model, the bending moment in beams are quite less (about 15%) than the
rigid frame model. The infill acts as diagonal bracing for the frame, which reduces bending
moment in beams.
Table 5.16 Bending moment (kN-m) in beams for different structural systems due to wind
load.
Height, m
Rigid Frame Infilled Frame Wide Column Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
3 283 179 143 133 73
6 338 226 197 181 69
9 340 260 238 218 64
12 358 292 268 244 58
15 368 304 288 263 53
18 371 318 300 276 48
21 369 325 306 283 43
24 363 327 307 286 38
27 354 326 303 285 34
30 341 321 296 281 29
33 327 314 287 275 25
36 311 306 277 268 21
39 294 297 266 260 18
42 277 289 256 251 14
45 262 282 248 239 12
48 239 265 243 165 7
[Connecting beam size : 300x600 mm, Column size: 300 x750mm]
113
Table 5.17 Bending moment (kN-m) in beams for different structural systems due to EQ load.
Height, m
Rigid Frame
Infilled
Fra
me
Wide Column Coupled WallAB Coupled Wall
3 214 162 131 122 68.67
6 262 203 176 163 62.46
9 290 233 211 195 56.46
12 309 264 239 218 51.42
15 321 276 258 237 46.59
18 329 290 272 251 42.23
21 332 300 280 260 38.26
24 331 305 284 265 34.58
27 327 307 284 267 31.11
30 321 306 281 266 27.80
33 312 303 275 264 24.60
36 301 298 269 260 21.50
39 288 292 261 254 18.53
42 275 285 254 248 15.75
45 263 280 247 237 13.36
48 238 264 243 164 8.86
[Connecting beam size: 300x600 mm, Column size: 300x750 mm]
1: EQ load on CW model
2: Wind load on CW model Beam size: variable
3: EQ load on CW/AB model Column size: 300x750mm
4: EQ load on WC model Wall size: 300x 3650 mm
5: Wind load on CW/AB model Auxiliary beam: variable
6: EQ load on IF model Floor level height: 3000 mm
7: Wind load on WC model Wind load: BNBC
8: Wind load on IF model
9: EQ load on RF model
10:Wind load on RF model
114
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Bending moment in kN-m in beam
H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
RF-W
IFR-W
WC-W
CW/AB-W
CW-W
RF-EQ
IFR-EQ
WC-EQ
CW/AB-EQ
CW-EQ
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Fig. 5.12 Bending moment in beams for different structural systems due to wind and EQ load.
Table 5.18 Bending moment (kN-m) in beams for Rigid Frame model of different beam
sizes due to wind load.
Height, m Beam,300x450 Beam,300x600 Beam,300x750 Beam,300x900
3 301 340 365 385
6 351 363 371 383
9 348 350 381 414
12 333 358 399 431
15 315 365 406 436
18 315 366 405 432
21 312 362 397 419
24 307 353 384 401
115
27 298 341 366 378
30 288 326 345 351
33 275 309 322 322
36 262 290 297 292
39 247 271 272 262
42 232 252 248 234
45 219 236 228 209
48 196 203 191 171
[Column size: 300x600 mm]
1
2
3
4
116
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Moment in kN-m
F
l
o
o
r

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
Beam,300x450
Beam,300x600
Beam,300x750
Beam,300x900
1 2 3 4
Column: 300x600 mm
Fig. 5.13 Bending moment in beams for Rigid Frame model of different beam sizes due to
wind load.
Table 5.19 Bending moment (kN-m) in beams for Rigid Frame model of different column sizes due
to wind load.
Height, m Col, 300x450 Col, 300x600 Col, 300x750 Col, 300x900
3 375 340 308 278
6 380 363 349 333
9 365 350 341 335
12 355 358 356 352
15 361 365 364 361
18 361 366 366 365
21 355 362 363 363
24 345 353 356 357
117
27 332 341 346 348
30 315 326 332 336
33 296 309 316 321
36 276 290 299 306
39 256 271 281 289
42 235 252 263 272
45 218 236 248 258
48 183 203 221 236
[Beam size: 300x600 mm]
1
1 2 3 4 2
3
4
118
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
150 200 250 300 350 400
Moment in kN-m
F
l
o
o
r

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
e
t
e
r
Col,300x450
Col,300x600
Col,300x750
Col,300x900

Fig. 5.14 Bending moment in beams for Rigid Frame model of different column
sizes due to wind load.
Table 5.20 Bending moment (kN-m) in beams for Wide Column model of different beam sizes due
to wind load.
Height, m Beam,300x450 Beam,300x600 Beam,300x750 Beam,300x900
3 112 143 178 213
6 145 197 251 304
9 172 238 303 362
12 194 268 337 396
15 210 288 356 412
18 222 300 365 415
21 231 306 365 408
119
24 236 307 358 393
27 239 303 346 373
30 239 296 330 349
33 237 287 311 322
36 235 277 292 295
39 232 266 273 269
42 228 256 255 245
45 225 248 241 225
48 223 243 232 212
[Column size: 300x600 mm]
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
120
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
F
l
o
o
r
H
e
i
g
h
t
i
n
m
e
t
e
r
Moment in kN-m
Beam,300x450
Beam,300x600
Beam,300x750
Beam,300x900
Column: 300x600 mm

Fig. 5.15 Bending moment in beams for Wide Column model of
different beam sizes due to wind load.
5.6 Stresses in Infill Material of Infilled Frame (Wind Load)
The infill is brick masonry. The properties of brick masonry are described in art. 2.2.5.2.
Lateral loads are applied to Infilled Frame model and calculated infill stresses due to wind
load for the model frame upto 8
th
story because more stress at lower portion. The stresses are
presented in Tables 5.21 and 5.22. The maximum compressive stress is found in infilled
material is 2332 kN/sq.m which is 4.5% less than allowable limit [2442 kN/sq.m, (BNBC)]
and the maximum tensile stress found in infilled material is 282 kN/sq.m which is 19.5 %
less than allowable limit [350 kN/sq.m, (BNBC)].
The shear strength of brick masonry is represented in Codes of Practice by a static friction
type of equation (Coull, 1991)
f
s
= f
bs
+
c
(5.1)
121
together with a maximum limiting value (0.40 N/mm
2
, BNBC).
Where,
f
bs
= bond shear stress = 0.025 f
m
N/mm
2
(5.2)

c
= compressive force
This relationship holds good up to value of
c
= 2 N/mm
2
(2000 kN/ m
2
)

= 0.40 (average value)
The maximum shear stress found in infilled material is 540 kN/sq.m, which is 35 % greater
than allowable limit [400 kN/sq.m (BNBC)].
From above results, it is found that the shear stress has exceeded the allowable limit. Hence,
the use of infill masonry in high rise building is limited. When it is used as infill to the frame,
the stresses in infill are to be carefully checked against lateral loads. For over stresses in
brick infill, reinforced may be used as infill which allowed by ACI and UBC [The crushing
strength (f
m
) of brick masonry is taken 12.5 kN/sq.m (1813 psi)].

From the analysis of structural models, it is found that if the rigid frame model is filled by
brick masonry then the moments in connecting beam substantially reduces at lower level of
building height (Table 5.16 and 5.17) and the stiffness of Infilled model increases (about
40%). The brick masonry is cheap and easy in construction than RC work. It can be used
economically as structural system if the stresses in infill material do not exceed the allowable
limits.
Table 5.21 Infilled masonry normal stress due to wind load
Floor
F
x
, kN/sq.m, parallel to bed joint Fy, kN/sq.m, normal to bed joint
Level
300x600 mm 300x750 mm 300x900 mm 300x600 mm 300x750 mm
300x90
0
mm
1 98 -355 98 -363 97 -371 70 -2078 260 -2332 163 -2284
2 154 -401 137 -399 124 -399 282 -1490 138 -2106 32 -2053
3 160 -392 132 -390 114 -391 170 -1726 40 -1894 0 -1853
4 132 -390 142 -383 127 -385 32 -1554 0 -1703 0 -1671
5 143 -345 124 -345 112 -348 0 -1374 0 -1502 0 -1479
6 149 -319 132 -321 122 -325 0 -1222 0 -1337 0 -1323
7 147 -297 132 -299 124 -303 0 -1080 0 -1181 0 -1175
122
8 142 -274 130 -276 123 -280 0 -941 0 -1031 0 -1031
[+ve value in tension and ve value in compression, beam size in mm, column size 300x750 mm]
Table 5. 22 Infilled masonry shear stress due to wind load
Floor Shear stress, Fxy in kN / sq.m
Level 300 x 600 mm 300 x 750 mm 300 x 900 mm
1 492 467 450
2 540 497 467
3 518 478 452
4 495 458 436
5 436 404 387
6 405 377 364
7 377 354 344
8 347 328 321
[Column size: 300 x 750 mm, Variable beam size: 300x600, 300x750, 300x900 mm]
5.7 Summary
A short direction bay of a 16-storied office building is considered for lateral load analysis.
Wind load and Earthquake load are considered as lateral loads.
The specified bay is modeled by three structural systems, namely, a. Rigid Frame structure,
b. Infilled Frame structure, c. Coupled Wall structure.
The Coupled Wall Structure is modeled into three structural models as i. Wall Element
model ii. Wall Element model with auxiliary beam iii. Equivalent Wide Column model. The
total five models are then analyzed by STAAD-III, a package program.
The maximum to gradually minimum stiffness is found in Equivalent Wide Column,
Coupled Wall (with auxiliary beam), Infilled Frame, Rigid Frame and Coupled Wall
respectively.
123
When the Coupled wall system is modeled by membrane finite elements, then shear walls
(in-plane frame) connecting beams require a special consideration. Membrane elements do
not have a degree of freedom to represent an in-plane rotation of these corners, therefore, a
beam element connected to node of a membrane element is effective only by a hinge. As a
result the walls deflect as free cantilever.
When the relative stiffness is greater, there exists larger bending moment in the connecting
beams. Maximum bending moment develops in beams along building height at nearly H/3
for Rigid Frame for different beam and column sizes. There is no considerable change in
maximum beam moments due to changes of beam and column sizes (Fig. 5.10 and 5.11). In
Wide Column and Coupled Wall model, the maximum bending moment develops at nearly
H/3 along building height and gradually increases along height with increased beam size
(Fig. 5.12).
For Infilled Frame analyzed under wind load, it is found that the stresses of different types
are close to allowable limit for the frame under consideration. The maximum compressive
stress in infilled material is found to be 4.5% less than allowable limit. The maximum shear
stress, however, found exceed the allowable limit by about 35%. The maximum tensile stress
found in the infilled material is again about 19.5% less than the allowable limit.
Chapter 6
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
6.1 General
The ability to model high rise buildings successfully for analysis requires an understanding
of their behavior under lateral loads. A good grasp of the techniques of modeling serves as an
aid in generally assessing high rise building behaviour and subsequent selection and
development of structural forms for such buildings.
124
In modeling a structure for analysis, only the main structural members are idealized and it is
assumed that the effects of nonstructural members are small and conservative. Additional
assumptions are made with regard to the linear behavior of the materials, and the neglect of
certain member stiffness and deformations, in order to further simplify the model for
analysis. In more accurate modeling, the columns and beams of frames are represented
individually by beam elements. Shear walls are represented by assemblage of membrane
finite elements. Certain reductions of a detailed model are possible while still producing an
acceptable accurate solution. These reductions include halving the model to allow for
symmetrical or anti symmetrical behavior or representing the structure by a planar model and
conducting a two dimensional analysis.
6.2 Conclusions
A typical bay of a high rise building is considered for lateral load analysis. Wind and
earthquake loads are imposed on the model frame as lateral loads. The loads are adopted in
analysis as it is considered in design. The specified bay is modeled by three structural
systems. They are a. Rigid Frame model, b. Infilled Frame model and c. Coupled Wall
model. The Coupled Wall is modeled into three structural sub models, which are i. Wall
Element model ii. Wall Element model with auxiliary beam and iii. Equivalent Wide Column
model.
On the basis of results of analysis the following conclusions are made,
The lateral deflection of the model is found minimum in Equivalent Wide Column
model and the deflection value gradually increases for Coupled Wall model, Infilled
Frame model, Rigid Frame model and Coupled Wall model (without auxiliary beam)
respectively.
Maximum bending moment in connecting beam develops in between H/3 to H/2
along model height from base level for different model with different member sizes.
Stiffness of model increases with increased beam sizes or column sizes or both.
Compressive stress, tensile stress and shear stress decrease in infilled material with
increased beam size.
In finite element method of analysis for Coupled Wall model, the finite membrane
element and finite beam element connection is such that either it is a hinge or rigid joint.
125
In rigid connection (actual case), auxiliary beam must be considered in the connection of
the model. If the auxiliary beam is not considered, the wall behaves as a free cantilever
under lateral load, which is not representative of the real response.
The maximum compressive stress and maximum tensile stress in infill brick masonry
are found somewhat below the allowable limits as per BNBC values. However, the
maximum shear stress is exceeded the allowable limit by 12.5% in infill brick masonry.
Hence, the brick masonry wall may need strengthening with wire mesh (retro-fitting) or
reinforced masonry may be used instead of masonry infilled frame can be used in high
rise buildings of reasoned height as shear wall with proper analysis and design.
Shear stress in infill material is critical in high rise building compared to tension in
lateral load analysis.
For severe lateral loads caused by wind load and or earthquake load, the reinforced
shear wall is obvious. Because, it produces less deflection and less bending moment in
connecting beams under lateral loads than all others structural system.
The stiffness of Rigid Frame model found in the analysis is 42% to 65% of Coupled
Wall and stiffness of Infilled Frame model found in the analysis is 86% to 91% of
Coupled Wall.
The maximum moment in connecting beam of Rigid Frame model found in analysis is
31% greater than Coupled Wall model and the maximum moment in connecting beam of
Infilled Frame is 15.5% greater than Coupled Wall model. The robust construction cost
of RC wall makes the building cost higher. The efficient structural system is infilled
rigid frame structure if the stresses are within the allowable limits, whether it is
reinforced plaster or reinforced masonry.
6.3 Recommendations for Future Study
The following recommendations are made for future study on the basis of
lateral load analysis of a 2-D bay for16-storied high rise building as
follows,
In order to establish the influence of floor height of building, a similar investigation
should be carried out in future.
Three dimensional models study can be carried out for similar investigation.
Dynamic earthquake study can be carried out for similar frames.
126
The study is performed only with uniform beam and column along height but it can be
proposed to further investigations with various sizes along height.
The investigation can be extended for cross bracing for every floor of a rigid frame and in
filled frame in building.
Laboratory investigation for infilled frame can be made, where the column and beam cast
against infill and the column and beam cast prior to infill.
References
Aktan, A. E., Bertero, V. V. and Sakino, K. (1985), Lateral Stiffness Characteristics of RC Frame-
Wall Structures, ACI Pub. SP 86-10, Detroit.
Amanat, K. M. and Enam, B. (1999), Study of the Semi-Rigid Properties of Reinforced Concrete
Beam-Column Joints, JCE (IEB), Vol.CE27, No.1.
Basu, A. K. and Nagpal, A. K. (1980), Frame-Wall Systems with Rigidly Joint Link Beams,
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 106(5).
Coull, A. and Stafford, S. B. (1991), Tall Building Structures, Analysis and Design, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc.
Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J. (1993), Dynamics of Structures, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New
York.
127
Coull, A. and Chowdhury (1967), Analysis of Coupled Shear-Walls, ACI Journal, Proceedings,
Vol.64.
Fintel, M. (1974), Handbook of Concrete Engineering, 2
nd
. Edition, CBS Publishers &
Distributors, India.
Fintel, M. (1975), Deflection of High-Rise Concrete Buildings, ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol.72,
No.7.
Gaiotti, R. and Smith, B. S. (1989), P-Delta Analysis of Building Structures, ASCE, Journal of
Structural Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 4.
Ghos, S.K. and Domel, A.W. (1992), Design of Concrete Buildings for Earthquake and Wind
Forces, International Conference of Building Officials, California, USA.
Hendry, A. W. (1981), Structural Brick work, The Macmillan Press Ltd. London.
Hendry, A. W. and Davies, S. R. (1981), An Introduction to Load Bearing Brick Work Design,
Ellis Horwood Limited, England.
Housing and Building Research Institute, Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (1993),
Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), Dhaka.
ICBO (1995), Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Chapter 23,
Part-III, Earthquake Design, USA.
Jones, S. W., Kirby, P.A. and Nethercot, D.A. (1982), Columns with Semi-Rigid Joints, American
Society of Civil Engineers, (ASCE), Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 108, pp-361-372.
Khan, F.R. and Sbarounis, J.A. (1964), Interaction of Shear Walls and Frames, Proceeding, ASCE,
Vol. 90 (ST3), Part 1.
Kazimi, S. M.A. and Chandra, R. (1976), Analysis of Shear-Walled Buildings, Tor-Steel Research
Foundation, India.
Macleod, I. A. (1970), Shear Wall-Frame Interaction, Portland Cement Association, PCA.
Macleod, I.A.(1969), New Rectangular Finite Element for Shear Wall Analysis, ASCE 95(3), pp.
399-409,
Moudrres, F.R. and Coull, A. (1986), Stiffening of Linked Shear Wall, ASCE
112(3)
Munaj, A. N. and Salek, M. S. (1996), Comparison of Two and Three Dimensional Analysis of
Moderately Sized Tall Buildings under Wind Loads, JCE (IEB), Vol. CE24, No. 2.

Nilson, A. and Darwin, D. (1997), Design of Concrete Structures, 12
th
edition, The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc.
Pauly, T. and Priestly, M.J.N. (1992), Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry
Buildings, John Wiley and Sons, Inc, New York,
128
Pauley, T. (1971), Coupling Beams of Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls, Proceedings, ASCE, V97.
Research Engineers Pvt. Ltd. (1996), STAAD-III, Structural Analysis and Design Software, Rev.
22, Research Engineers, Inc.
Seraj, S. M., Ansary, M. A. and Noor, M.A (1997), Critical Evaluation and Comparison of Different
Seismic Code Provision, JCE (IEB), Vol. CE25.No.1.
Tahur, A. (1984), Simplified Analysis of Wall-Frame Structure with Columns and Girders of
Unequal Lateral Dimension, M. Sc. Engg. (Civil), Thesis, BUET.
Romstad, K. M. and Subramanian, C. V. (1970), Analysis of Frames with Partial Connection
Rigidity, ASCE, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 100.
Smith, C. S. and Carter, C. (1969), A Method of Analysis for Infilled Frame,
Proceedings Inst. of Civil Engg. London, V.44.
Taranath, B. S. (1988), Structural Analysis and Design of Tall Building, McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Wolfgang, S. (1961), High-Rise Building Structures, John Wiley & Sons.
129
Appendix A
CALCULATION OF GRAVITY, WIND AND EARTQUAKE LOADS
A.1 Introduction
The P-delta effect is not considered in analysis. Hence, the gravity load has insignificant
effect on deflection of model frames and moments in vertical members.
Gravity load, Wind load and Earthquake load are calculated for the model frames as follows:
Superimposed load are taken, 5.25 kPa for dead load and 2.85 kPa for live load, 6 kN/m for
facade dead load, 24 kN/m
3
for unit weight of concrete,19 kN /m
3
for unit
weight of masonry, 1 kN / m
2
for floor finish, 0.25 kN / m
2
for ceiling
plaster, 1 kN / m
2
for light weight partition wall, wind load, earthquake load
is taken as per BNBC, ultimate crushing strength of concrete is taken 21
Mpa.
A.2 Gravity Load
Dead load (DL)
i. 125 mm thick slab load = 3 kN / m
2
ii. Floor finish = 1
iii. Ceiling plaster = 0.25
iv. Partition wall = 1
Total = 5.25 kN / m
2
Others load as, Beam, Columns, Infill walls, Facade loads, i.e rise, drop, windows etc. are
calculated as below and converted as kN / m
2
on floor load
a. Beams (Transverse) = 4x6x0.3x0.5x23.60 = 84.56 kN
b. Beams (Along) = 1x6.40x0.3x0.50x23.60 =22.66 kN
c. Columns = 4x0.30x0.60x3.00x23.60 =51.83 kN
d. Infills =2x3.05xx19x0.25 = 70.54 kN
e. Faade = 2 x6 x 6 = 70.20 kN
Total = 300.19 kN
Load per sq.m = 300.19 / 6x 13.7 = 3.65 kN / m
2
Influenced area = 13.7 x 6 = 82.20 sq. m
Total DL = 82.20 x 5.25 = 431.55 kN
130
DL per m = 431.55 / 13.7 = 31.50 kN
Total LL = 82.20 x 2.85 = 234.27 kN
LL per m = 234.27 / 13.70 = 17.10 kN
A.3 Wind Load
Location Dhaka
Exposure A
Basic wind velocity 210 km /h (Table C.1)
For value C
p
,
H = 48 m, B = 30 m, L = 13.70 m
H / B = 48 / 30 = 1.60, L/B= 13.70 / 30 = 0.46
Hence, C
p
(Fig. 3.1) = 1.45
Design wind pressure, P
z

values for different height are calculated from Fig. 3.4 and presented in
Table A.1 G
h
C
p
C
I
is constant for specified building,
G
h
= 1.22 (Fig. 3.3), C
I
= 1 (Table C.2), Hence, G
h
C
p
C
I
= 1.77
P
z
= 1.77 x (Fig. 3.4 values against height), these are presented in Table A.1
Table A.1 Design wind pressure at floor level as follows
H in ( From Graph 2.4 ) Pz in kN/m
2
Pz in kN at floor node
131
I p h
z
C C G
P
I p h
z
C C G
P
meter
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0.76
0.85
1.05
1.20
1.25
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.65
1.80
1.85
1.94
2.00
2.05
2.15
2.20
1.35
1.51
1.86
2.13
2.22
2.49
2.66
2.84
2.93
3.20
3.29
3.45
3.55
3.64
3.82
3.91
24.71
27.63
34.04
38.98
40.63
45.57
48.68
51.97
53.62
58.56
60.21
63.14
64.97
66.61
69.91
71.55
Total = 820.18 kN
A.4 Earthquake Load
Earthquake load has been calculated from the consideration as follows;
Location Dhaka
Zone = 2
Zone coefficient, Z = 0.15
Site Coefficient factor, S = 1.50
Importance Coefficient, I = 1
Response Modification Coefficient, R= 5 (Table C.6)
Building 16-storied
Building height, H = 48 m
Bay width = 6 m
Bay length = 13.7 m
Floor area under bay consideration = 82.20 sq.m
132
Total DL per floor area = 3.65 + 5.25 = 8.90 kN /m
2
Total DL for one floor under bay considered = 8.90 x 6 x 13.70 = 731.58 kN
Total DL for 16 floors under bay considered = 731.58 x 16 = 11705.28 kN
Live Load (LL) = 2.85 kN /m
2
Total LL for one floor = 2.85 x 6 x 13.70 = 234.27 kN
Total LL for 16 floors under bay considered = 234.27 x 16 = 3748.32 kN
Total load, W under bay consideration =Total DL + 25% Gravity LL
= 11705.26 + 0.25 x 3748.32
= 12642.34 kN
V / W (Fig. 3.9) =0.048
V (base shear) = 0.048 x W = 0.048x 12642.34
=606.83 kN
Building height, H = 48 m
Hence, T = 1.35 sec. (Fig. 3.7)
F
t
= 0.07TV 0.25V, T > 0.7 sec.
F
t
= 0 T 0.7 sec.
F
t
= 0.07 x 1.35 x 606.83 = 57.35 kN
V-F
t
= 549.48 kN
w
x
= total floor load at every floor
Considering equal w
x
at every floor
Hence, the floor distribution comes, as (A.2.1)

(A.2.2)
Loads, F
x
are presented in Table A.2
Table A.2 Earthquake load in kN at every floor level
h
x
in m F
x
/ ( V-F
t
) % F
x
in kN
133

n
i
i i
x x x
x
h w
h w F V
F
1
) (

n
i
i
x x
x
h
h F V
F
1
) (
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
0.65
1.52
2.2
3.0
3.60
4.40
5.20
6.00
6.80
7.40
8.20
8.90
9.70
10.40
11.20
11.70
4.04
8.05
12.12
16.16
20.21
24.25
28.29
32.30
36.37
40.41
44.45
48.49
52.53
56.56
60.62
64.66
V - Ft = 549.57 kN
134
Appendix B
STAAD-III SCRIPT FILES
B.1 Introduction
Input data files of 2D analysis for different model frames are appended in
the following sub articles. These are Rigid Frame model, Infill Frame
model, Equivalent Wide Column model, Coupled Wall Frame model
(considering with auxiliary beam) and Coupled Wall Frame model
(considering without auxiliary beam). These frame models are analyzed
with different loads, different beam and column sizes for concentrated
load at top, wind and earthquake load. Only one type of these is written in
each data file. Output results are directly compiled in tables through
chapter 5.
B.2 Input Files
For different model frames only one set of input file of each has been given below through B.2.1 to B.2.10.

B.2.1 STAAD PLANE
RIGID FRAME model
Wind load analysis
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 2744 0 ; 3 10061 0 ; 4 12805 0
REPEAT ALL 16 0 3050
MEMBER INCIDENCE
1 5 6 ; 2 6 7 ; 3 7 8
REPEAT ALL 15 3 4
100 1 5 115 1 4 ; 116 2 6 131 1 4
132 3 7 147 1 4 ; 148 4 8 163 1 4
UNIT MMS
MEMBER PROPERTY
1 TO 48 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
100 to 115 148 to 163 pri yd 900 zd 300
116 TO 147 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
CONSTANT
E CONCRETE
POI CONCRETE
DEN CONCRETE
SUPPORT
1 TO 4 FIXED
135
Unit METRE
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Member load
1 to 48 uni y -16.10
Load 3 : Floor LL
Member load
1 to 48 uni y -8.78
LOAD 4 : Wind LOAD
JOINT LOAD
5 FX 21.94
9 FX 32.26
13 FX 41.96
17 FX 45.17
21 FX 49.04
25 FX 52.91
29 FX 55.49
33 FX 58.07
37 FX 60.03
41 FX 61.94
45 FX 63.90
49 FX 65.19
53 FX 67.77
57 FX 69.69
61 FX 70.98
65 FX 72.94
LOAD COMB 5
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PERFORM ANALYSIS
Load list 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 68
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 5 TO 65 BY 4
Print Member force List 1 to 48
Plot displacement file
FINISH

B.2.2 STAAD PLANE
RIGID FRAME model
Earthquake load analysis
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 2744 0 ; 3 10061 0 ; 4 12805 0
REPEAT ALL 16 0 3050
MEM INCI
1 5 6 ; 2 6 7 ; 3 7 8
REPEAT ALL 15 3 4
136
100 1 5 115 1 4 ; 116 2 6 131 1 4
132 3 7 147 1 4 ; 148 4 8 163 1 4
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
1 TO 48 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
100 to 115 148 to 163 pri yd 900 zd 300
116 TO 147 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
CONSTANT
E CONC
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 TO 4 FIXED

Unit MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
1 to 48 uni y -16.10
Load 3 : Floor LL
Mem load
1 to 48 uni y -8.78
LOAD 4 : Wind LOAD
JOINT LOAD
5 FX 5.12
9 FX 10.19
13 FX 15.31
17 FX 20.38
21 FX 25.37
25 FX 30.57
29 FX 35.69
33 FX 40.76
37 FX 45.92
41 FX 50.95
45 FX 56.07
49 FX 61.19
53 FX 66.26
57 FX 71.33
61 FX 76.50
65 FX 81.57
65 FX 71.73
LOAD COMB 5
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PERFORM ANALYSIS
Load list 4 5
137
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 68
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 5 TO 65 BY 4
Print Mem force List 1 to 48
Plot disp file
FINISH
B.2.3 STAAD PLANE
INFILLED (MASONRY WALL) FRAME model
wind load analysis
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 2744 0 ; 3 10060 0 ; 4 12805 0
REPEAT ALL 16 0 3050
MEM INCI
1 5 6 ; 2 6 7 ; 3 7 8
REPEAT ALL 15 3 4
100 1 5 115 1 4 ; 116 2 6 131 1 4
132 3 7 147 1 4 ; 148 4 8 163 1 4
ELEMENT INCIDENT
536 19 20 24 23
537 23 24 28 27
538 27 28 32 31
539 31 32 36 35
540 35 36 40 39
541 39 40 44 43
542 43 44 48 47
543 47 48 52 51
544 51 52 56 55
545 55 56 60 59
546 59 60 64 63
547 63 64 68 67
DEFINE MESH
A JOINT 1
B JOINT 5
C JOINT 9
D JOINT 13
E JOINT 17
F JOINT 21
G JOINT 25
H JOINT 29
I JOINT 33
J JOINT 37
K JOINT 41
L JOINT 45
M JOINT 49
N JOINT 53
O JOINT 57
138
P JOINT 61
Q JOINT 65
R JOINT 2
S JOINT 6
T JOINT 10
U JOINT 14
V JOINT 18
W JOINT 22
X JOINT 26
Y JOINT 30
Z JOINT 34
a JOINT 38
b JOINT 42
c JOINT 46
d JOINT 50
e JOINT 54
f JOINT 58
g JOINT 62
h JOINT 66
i JOINT 3
j JOINT 7
k JOINT 11
l JOINT 15
m JOINT 19
n JOINT 4
o JOINT 8
p JOINT 12
q JOINT 16
r JOINT 20
GENERATE ELEMENT RECT
MESH ARSB 3 3
MESH BSTC 3 3
MESH CTUD 3 3
MESH DUVE 3 3
MESH EVWF 3 3
MESH FWXG 3 3
MESH GXYH 3 3
MESH HYZI 3 3
MESH IZaJ 3 3
MESH JabK 3 3
MESH KbcL 3 3
MESH LcdM 3 3
MESH MdeN 3 3
MESH NefO 3 3
MESH OfgP 3 3
MESH PghQ 3 3
MESH inoj 3 3
139
MESH jopk 3 3
MESH kpql 3 3
MESH lqrm 3 3
UNIT NEW MMS
MEM PRO
1 TO 48 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
100 TO 115 148 to 163 PRI YD 900 ZD 300
116 TO 147 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
ELEMENT PRO
548 TO 727 536 TO 547 TH 250
CONSTANT
E 24828 MEM 1 TO 48 100 TO 163
POI 0.15 MEM 1 TO 48 100 TO 163
DEN .000024 MEM 1 TO 48 100 TO 163
E 4483 MEM 548 TO 727 536 TO 547
POI .25 MEM 548 TO 727 536 TO 547
DEN .000019 MEM 548 TO 727 536 TO 547
SUPPORT
1 TO 4 69 70 231 232 FIXED
Unit KNS MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
1 to 48 uni y -16.06
Load 3 : Floor DL
Mem load
1 to 48 uni y -8.76
LOAD 4 : Wind LOAD
JOINT LOAD
5 FX 21.94
9 FX 32.26
13 FX 41.96
17 FX 45.17
21 FX 49.04
25 FX 52.91
29 FX 55.49
33 FX 58.07
37 FX 60.03
41 FX 61.94
45 FX 63.90
49 FX 65.19
53 FX 67.77
57 FX 69.69
61 FX 70.98
65 FX 72.94
LOAD COMB 5
140
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
Perform analysis
Load List 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 68
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 5 to 65 by 4
Print mem force list 1 to 48
Print element forces list 548 to 727 536 to 547
FINISH
B.2.4 STAAD PLANE
INFILLED (MASONRY WALL) FRAME model
Earthquake load analysis
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 2744 0 ; 3 10060 0 ; 4 12805 0
REPEAT ALL 16 0 3050
MEM INCI
1 5 6 ; 2 6 7 ; 3 7 8
REPEAT ALL 15 3 4
100 1 5 115 1 4 ; 116 2 6 131 1 4
132 3 7 147 1 4 ; 148 4 8 163 1 4
ELEMENT INCIDENT
536 19 20 24 23
537 23 24 28 27
538 27 28 32 31
539 31 32 36 35
540 35 36 40 39
541 39 40 44 43
542 43 44 48 47
543 47 48 52 51
544 51 52 56 55
545 55 56 60 59
546 59 60 64 63
547 63 64 68 67
DEFINE MESH
A JOINT 1
B JOINT 5
C JOINT 9
D JOINT 13
E JOINT 17
F JOINT 21
G JOINT 25
H JOINT 29
I JOINT 33
J JOINT 37
K JOINT 41
L JOINT 45
141
M JOINT 49
N JOINT 53
O JOINT 57
P JOINT 61
Q JOINT 65
R JOINT 2
S JOINT 6
T JOINT 10
U JOINT 14
V JOINT 18
W JOINT 22
X JOINT 26
Y JOINT 30
Z JOINT 34
a JOINT 38
b JOINT 42
c JOINT 46
d JOINT 50
e JOINT 54
f JOINT 58
g JOINT 62
h JOINT 66
i JOINT 3
j JOINT 7
k JOINT 11
l JOINT 15
m JOINT 19
n JOINT 4
o JOINT 8
p JOINT 12
q JOINT 16
r JOINT 20
GENERATE ELEMENT RECT
MESH ARSB 3 3
MESH BSTC 3 3
MESH CTUD 3 3
MESH DUVE 3 3
MESH EVWF 3 3
MESH FWXG 3 3
MESH GXYH 3 3
MESH HYZI 3 3
MESH IZaJ 3 3
MESH JabK 3 3
MESH KbcL 3 3
MESH LcdM 3 3
MESH MdeN 3 3
MESH NefO 3 3
142
MESH OfgP 3 3
MESH PghQ 3 3
MESH inoj 3 3
MESH jopk 3 3
MESH kpql 3 3
MESH lqrm 3 3
UNIT NEW MMS
MEM PRO
1 TO 48 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
100 TO 115 148 to 163 PRI YD 900 ZD 300
116 TO 147 PRI YD 750 ZD 300
ELEMENT PRO
548 TO 727 536 TO 547 TH 250
CONSTANT
E 24828 MEM 1 TO 48 100 TO 163
POI 0.15 MEM 1 TO 48 100 TO 163
DEN .000024 MEM 1 TO 48 100 TO 163
E 4483 MEM 548 TO 727 536 TO 547
POI .25 MEM 548 TO 727 536 TO 547
DEN .000019 MEM 548 TO 727 536 TO 547
SUPPORT
1 TO 4 69 70 231 232 FIXED
Unit KNS MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
1 to 48 uni y -16.05
Load 3 : Floor DL
Mem load
1 to 48 uni y -8.76
LOAD 4 : Wind LOAD
JOINT LOAD
5 FX 5.12
9 FX 10.19
13 FX 15.27
17 FX 20.38
21 FX 25.37
25 FX 30.57
29 FX 35.69
33 FX 40.76
37 FX 45.92
41 FX 50.95
45 FX 56.07
49 FX 61.19
53 FX 66.26
57 FX 71.33
143
61 FX 76.50
65 FX 81.57
65 FX 71.73
LOAD COMB 5
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
Load List 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 68
PRINT JOINT DISPLACEMENT LIST 5 to 65 by 4
PRINT material pro list 1
Print mem force list 1 to 48
Print element stress list 548 to 727 536 to 547
FINISH
B.2.5 STAAD PLANE
EQUIVALENT WIDE COLUMN model
WIND LOAD ANALYSIS
UNIT KNS MMS
JOIN COOR
1 0 0 ; 2 10061 0
R A 16 0 3050
MEM INCI
1 3 4 16 1 2
50 1 3 65 1 2
70 2 4 85 1 2
MEMB OFFSET
1 TO 16 START 6
1 TO 16 END -6
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
1 TO 16 PRI YD 512 ZD 300
50 TO 65 70 TO 85 PRI YD 3659 ZD 300
CONS
E CONC
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 2 FIXED
UNIT FT
LOAD 1 :
SELF Y -1
LOAD 2 : FLOOR D LOAD
MEM LOAD
1 TO 16 UNI Y -16.10
LOAD 3 : FLOOR L LOAD
MEM LOAD
1 TO 16 UNI Y -8.78
LOAD 4 : WIND LOAD
144
JOINT LOAD
3 FX 21.94
5 FX 32.26
7 FX 41.96
9 FX 45.17
11 FX 49.04
13 FX 52.91
15 FX 55.49
17 FX 58.07
19 FX 60.03
21 FX 61.94
23 FX 63.90
25 FX 65.19
27 FX 67.77
29 FX 69.69
31 FX 70.98
33 FX 72.94
LOAD COMB 5 :
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PER ANA
Load list 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 34
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 3 TO 33 BY 2
Print mem force list 1 to 16
PLOT DISP FIL
FIN

B.2.6 STAAD PLANE
EQUIVALENT WIDE COLUMN model
EARHQUAKE LOAD ANALYSIS
UNIT KNS MMS
JOIN COOR
1 0 0 ; 2 10061 0
R A 16 0 3050
MEM INCI
1 3 4 16 1 2
50 1 3 65 1 2
70 2 4 85 1 2
MEMB OFFSET
1 TO 16 START 6
1 TO 16 END -6
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
1 TO 16 PRI YD 512 ZD 300
50 TO 65 70 TO 85 PRI YD 3659 ZD 300
CONS
E CONC
145
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 2 FIXED
UNIT FT
LOAD 1 :
SELF Y -1
LOAD 2 : FLOOR D LOAD
MEM LOAD
1 TO 16 UNI Y -16.10
LOAD 3 : FLOOR L LOAD
MEM LOAD
1 TO 16 UNI Y -8.78
LOAD 4 : EQ LOAD
JOINT LOAD
3 FX 5.12
5 FX 10.19
7 FX 15.31
9 FX 20.38
11 FX 25.37
13 FX 30.57
15 FX 35.69
17 FX 40.76
19 FX 45.92
21 FX 50.95
23 FX 56.07
25 FX 61.19
27 FX 66.26
29 FX 71.33
31 FX 76.50
33 FX 81.57
33 FX 71.73
LOAD COMB 5 :
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PER ANA
PRINT SUPPORT REACTION
Load list 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 34
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 3 TO 33 BY 2
print mem force list 1 to 16
PLOT DISP FILE
FIN
B.2.7 STAAD PLANE
STAAD PLANE
COUPLED WALL FRAME model (considering auxiliary beam)
Wind load analysis
146
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 1829 0 ; 3 3659 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
200 10061 0 ; 201 11890 0 ; 202 13720 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
MEM INCI
200 9 206 215 1 6
AUXILIARY BEAMS
216 8 9;217 14 15;218 20 21;219 26 27;220 32 33;221 38 39;222 44 45
223 50 51;224 56 57;225 62 63;226 68 69;227 74 75;228 80 81;229 86 87
230 92 93;231 98 99;232 206 207;233 212 213;234 218 219;235 224 225
236 230 231;237 236 237;238 242 243;239 248 249;240 254 255;241 260 261
242 266 267;243 272 273;244 278 279;245 284 285;246 290 291;247 216 217
ELE INCI
1 4 5 2 1 TO 63 2 3 ; 2 5 6 3 2 TO 64 2 3
101 203 204 201 200 TO 163 2 3
102 204 205 202 201 TO 164 2 3
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
200 TO 215 PRI YD 550 ZD 300
AUXILIARY BEAM
216 TO 247 pri yd 550 zd 300
ELE PROPERTY
1 TO 64 101 TO 164 TH 300
CONSTANT
E CONC
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 TO 3 200 TO 202 FIXED
UNIT MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -16.10
Load 3 : Floor LL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -8.78
LOAD 4 : Wind LOAD
JOINT LOAD
7 FX 21.94
13 FX 32.26
19 FX 41.96
25 FX 45.17
31 FX 49.04
147
37 FX 52.91
43 FX 55.49
49 FX 58.07
55 FX 60.03
61 FX 61.94
67 FX 63.90
73 FX 65.19
79 FX 67.77
85 FX 69.69
91 FX 70.98
97 FX 72.94
LOAD COMB 5 :
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PER ANA
LOAD LIST 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 97
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 202 to 298 by 6
PRINT MEM FORCES LIST 200 TO 215
PRINT ELEMENT STRESSES LIST 1 TO 64 101 TO 164
PLOT DISP FILE
FIN
B.2.8 COUPLED WALL FRAME model (considering auxiliary beam)
Earthquake load analysis
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 1829 0 ; 3 3659 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
200 10061 0 ; 201 11890 0 ; 202 13720 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
MEM INCI
200 9 206 215 1 6
AUXILIARY BEAMS
216 8 9;217 14 15;218 20 21;219 26 27;220 32 33;221 38 39;222 44 45
223 50 51;224 56 57;225 62 63;226 68 69;227 74 75;228 80 81;229 86 87
230 92 93;231 98 99;232 206 207;233 212 213;234 218 219;235 224 225
236 230 231;237 236 237;238 242 243;239 248 249;240 254 255;241 260 261
242 266 267;243 272 273;244 278 279;245 284 285;246 290 291;247 216 217
ELE INCI
1 4 5 2 1 TO 63 2 3 ; 2 5 6 3 2 TO 64 2 3
101 203 204 201 200 TO 163 2 3
102 204 205 202 201 TO 164 2 3
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
200 TO 215 PRI YD 550 ZD 300
AUXILIARY BEAM
216 TO 247 pri yd 550 zd 300
148
ELE PROPERTY
1 TO 64 101 TO 164 TH 300
CONSTANT
E CONC
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 TO 3 200 TO 202 FIXED
UNIT MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -16.10
Load 3 : Floor LL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -8.78
LOAD 4 : EQ LOAD
JOINT LOAD
7 FX 5.12
13 FX 10.19
19 FX 15.31
25 FX 20.38
31 FX 25.37
37 FX 30.57
43 FX 35.69
49 FX 40.76
55 FX 45.92
61 FX 50.95
67 FX 56.07
73 FX 61.19
79 FX 66.26
85 FX 71.33
91 FX 76.50
97 FX 81.57
97 FX 71.73
LOAD COMB 5:
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PER ANA
LOAD LIST 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 97
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 202 to 298 by 6
PRINT MEM FORCES LIST 200 TO 215
PRINT ELEMENT STRESSES LIST 1 TO 64 101 TO 164
PLOT DISP FILE
FIN
149
B.2.9 STAAD PLANE
COUPLED WALL FRAME model
WIND LOAD ANALYSIS
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 1829 0 ; 3 3659 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
200 10061 0 ; 201 11890 0 ; 202 13720 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
MEM INCI
200 9 206 215 1 6
ELE INCI
1 4 5 2 1 TO 63 2 3 ; 2 5 6 3 2 TO 64 2 3
101 203 204 201 200 TO 163 2 3
102 204 205 202 201 TO 164 2 3
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
200 TO 215 PRI YD 550 ZD 300
ELE PROPERTY
1 TO 64 101 TO 164 TH 300
CONSTANT
E CONC
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 TO 3 200 TO 202 FIXED
UNIT MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -16.10
Load 3 : Floor LL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -8.78
LOAD 4 : Wind LOAD
JOINT LOAD
7 FX 21.94
13 FX 32.26
19 FX 41.96
25 FX 45.17
31 FX 49.04
37 FX 52.91
43 FX 55.49
49 FX 58.07
55 FX 60.03
150
61 FX 61.94
67 FX 63.90
73 FX 65.19
79 FX 67.77
85 FX 69.69
91 FX 70.98
97 FX 72.94
LOAD COMB 5 :
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PER ANA
LOAD LIST 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 97
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 202 to 298 by 6
PRINT MEM FORCES LIST 200 TO 215
PRINT ELEMENT STRESSES LIST 1 TO 64 101 TO 164
PLOT DISP FILE
FIN
B.2.10 STAAD PLANE
COUPLED WALL FRAME model
Earthquake LOAD ANALYSIS
UNIT KNS MMS
JOINT COORDINATE
1 0 0 ; 2 1829 0 ; 3 3659 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
200 10061 0 ; 201 11890 0 ; 202 13720 0
REPEAT ALL 32 0 1524
MEM INCI
200 9 206 215 1 6
ELE INCI
1 4 5 2 1 TO 63 2 3 ; 2 5 6 3 2 TO 64 2 3
101 203 204 201 200 TO 163 2 3
102 204 205 202 201 TO 164 2 3
UNIT MMS
MEM PRO
200 TO 215 PRI YD 550 ZD 300
ELE PROPERTY
1 TO 64 101 TO 164 TH 300
CONSTANT
E CONC
POI CONC
DEN CONC
SUPPORT
1 TO 3 200 TO 202 FIXED
UNIT MET
LOAD 1 : SELF WT
SELF Y -1
151
Load 2 : Floor DL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -16.10
Load 3 : Floor LL
Mem load
200 to 215 uni y -8.78
LOAD 4 : EQ LOAD
JOINT LOAD
7 FX 5.12
13 FX 10.19
19 FX 15.31
25 FX 20.38
31 FX 25.37
37 FX 30.57
43 FX 35.69
49 FX 40.76
55 FX 45.92
61 FX 50.95
67 FX 56.07
73 FX 61.19
79 FX 66.26
85 FX 71.33
91 FX 76.50
97 FX 81.57
97 FX 71.73
LOAD COMB 5
1 .75 2 .75 3 .75 4 .75
PER ANA
LOAD LIST 4 5
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 97
PRINT JOINT DISP LIST 202 to 298 by 6
PRINT MEM FORCES LIST 200 TO 215
PRINT ELEMENT STRESSES LIST 1 TO 64 101 TO 164
PLOT DISP FILE
FIN
152
Appendix C
TABLES (BNBC, 1993)
C.1 Introduction and Tables
Some tables from Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC) are appended here to
facilitate load calculation. These are Basic Wind Speed V
b
, Structural Importance factor C
I
for wind, Structural Importance factor for Earthquake I, Seismic Zone Coefficient Z, Site
Coefficient S and Response Modification Coefficient R.
Table C.1 Basic wind speed for selected location in Bangladesh, V
b

Location Basic Wind Speed km/h Location Basic Wind Speed km/h
Angarpota
Bagherhat
Bandarban
Barguna
Barisal
Bhola
Bogra
Brahmanbaria
Chandpur
Chapai Nawabgonj
Chittagong
Chuadanga
Comilla
Coxs Bazar
Dahagram
Dhaka
Dinajpur
Faridpur
Feni
Gaibanda
Gazipur
Gopalgonj
Habigonj
Hatiya
Ishurdi
Joypurhat
Jamalpur
Jessore
Jhalakati
Jhenaidah
Khagracharri
Khulna
Kutubdia
Kishoregonj
Kurigram
Kushtia
Lakshmipur
150
252
200
260
256
225
198
180
160
130
260
198
196
260
150
210
130
202
205
210
215
242
172
260
225
180
180
205
260
208
180
238
260
207
210
215
162
Lalmonirhat
Madaripur
Magura
Manikgonj
Meherpur
Moheshkhali
Moulibazar
Munshigonj
Mymensingh
Naogaon
Narail
Narayangonj
Narsinghdi
Natore
Netrokona
Nilphamari
Noakhali
Pabna
Panchagarh
Patuakhali
Pirojpur
Rajbari
Rajshahi
Rangamati
Rangpur
Satkhira
Shariatpur
Sherpur
Sirajganj
Srimangal
St.Martins island
Sunamgonj
Sylhet
Sandwip
Tangail
Teknaf
Thakurgaon
204
220
208
185
185
260
168
184
217
175
222
195
190
198
210
140
184
202
130
260
260
188
155
180
209
183
198
200
160
160
260
195
195
260
160
260
130
153
Table C.2 Structural importance coefficient, C
I
for wind load
Structural Importance Category Structural Importance Coefficient ,C
I
I Essential facilities
II Hazards facilities
III Special occupancy structures
IV Standard occupancy structures
V Low risk structures
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.80
Table C.3 Structural importance coefficient, I for earthquake
Structural Importance Category Structural Importance Coefficient, I
I Essential facilities 1.25
II Hazard Facilities 1.25
III Special Occupancy Structures 1
IV Standard Occupancy Structures 1
V Low Risk Structures 1
Table C.4 Seismic zone coefficient, Z
Selected Seismic Zone
Zone Coefficient
Zone-1 Chapai Nawabganj, Rajshahi, Pabna, Kusthia, Jessore, Faridpur, Khulna, Faridpur, Barisal 0.075
Zone-2 Dhaka, Chittagong, Coxs Bazar, Commila, Tangail, Nagaon, Joypuhat,Rangpur,Panchagar 0.15
Zone-3 Sylhet, Shrimongal, Mymensingh, Bogra, Lalmonirhat,Netrokona,Gibandah,Brahmanbaria 0.25
Table C.5 Site coefficient, S for seismic lateral forces
Type Site Soil Characteristics Coefficient, S
154
S1 A soil profile either :
a) a rock like material characterized by a shear wave
velocity greater than 762 m/s or by other suitable
means of classification, or
b) Stiff or dense soil condition where the soil depth is
less than 61 m
1
S2 A soil profile with dense or stiff soil conditions, where
the soil depth exceeds 61 m
1.2
S3 A soil profile 21 m or more in depth and containing
more than 6 m of soft to medium stiff clay but not more
than 12 m of soft clay
1.5
S4 A soil profile containing more than 12 m of soft clay
characterized by a shear wave velocity less than 152 m/s
2
Table C.6 Response modification coefficient for structural systems, R (BNBC, 1993)
Basic Structural System Description of Lateral Force Resisting System R
a. Bearing Wall System
1. Light framed walls with shear panels
i) Plywood walls for structures, 3 story or less
ii) All others light framed walls
2. Shear walls
8
6
155
i) Concrete
ii) Masonry
3. Light steel framed bearing walls with tension only bracing
4. Braced frames where bracing carries gravity loads
i) Steel
ii) Concrete
iii) Heavy timber
6
6
4
6
4
4
b. Building Frame System
1. Steel eccentric braced frame (EBF)
2. Light framed walls with shear panels
i) Plywood walls for structures 3 stories or less
ii) All others light framed walls
3. Shear walls
i) Concrete
ii) Masonry
4. Concentric braced frames (CBF)
i) Steel
ii) Concrete
iii) Heavy timber
10
9
7
8
8
8
8
8
c. Moment Resisting Frame
system
1. Special moment resisting frame (SMRF)
i) Steel
ii) Concrete
2. Intermediate moment resisting frame (IMRF), concrete
3. Ordinary moment resisting frame (OMRF)
i) Steel
ii) Concrete
12
12
8
6
5
d. Dual System
1. Shear walls
i) Concrete with steel or concrete SMRF
ii) Concrete with steel OMRF
iii) Concrete with concrete IMRF
iv) Masonry with steel or concrete SMRF
v) Masonry with steel OMRF
vi) Masonry with concrete IMRF
2. Steel EBF
i) With steel SMRF
ii) With Steel OMRF
3. Concentric braced frame (CBF)
i) Steel with steel SMRF
ii) Steel with steel OMRF
iii) Concrete with concrete SMRF
iv) Concrete with concrete IMRF
12
6
9
8
6
7
12
6
10
6
9
6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
156
The Author wishes to express his deepest gratitude to Dr. Md. Shafiul Bari, Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering, BUET for his continuous guidance, invaluable suggestions
and affectionate encouragement at every stage of this study.
The author also gratefully appreciate the help in conducting the AutoCAD graphics rendered
by A. Shadat and Tuhin Ahmed, AutoCAD operator, Union Technical Consult Ltd, House
no. G-22, Pallabi extension R/A, Mirpur, Dhaka-1221.
DECLARATION
157
I do hereby declare that the Project work reported therein, has been performed by me and this
work has neither been submitted nor is being concurrently submitted in consideration for any
degree at any other University.
Author
ABSTRACT
158
In recent years Bangladesh has witnessed a growing trend towards
construction of 15-30 storied buildings. All most all of these are being
situated in Dhaka City. The tallest building in Bangladesh to date is the
30-storied (with one basement) Bangladesh Bank Annex Building. No
extensive study has been conducted to compare the different techniques
available for the analysis of tall buildings with different structural system.
A limited parametric study is carried out to search suitable structural
system of the high rise building. A short direction bay of a 16-storied
building is considered for lateral load analysis by 2D. Wind and
earthquake loads are considered as lateral loads. The specified bay is
modeled by three structural systems, namely, i) Rigid Frame structure, ii)
Infilled Frame structure, iii) Coupled Wall structure. The Coupled Wall
structure is again modeled in three forms as, i) Finite Element model
without auxiliary beam, ii) Finite Element model with auxiliary beam, and
iii) Equivalent Wide Column model. The parameters that are varied in
structural system are, beam size, column size, inclusion of infill material
(brick masonry) in modeling rigid frame structures etc. To conduct the
parametric study, professional software (STAAD-III) is employed. To
calculate the design wind pressure and earthquake base shear, the loads
are estimated as per specification of Bangladesh National Code (BNBC-
1993). Any necessary value or interpolated value is taken from the graph
directly. The analysis results are presented in tabular and graphical form
and discussed in detail.
SYMBOLS AND NOTATIONS
a the maximum acceleration of the building
A
1
cross sectional area of wall w
1
A
2
cross sectional area of wall w
2
B width of opening
b width of connecting beam
C seismic
coefficien
t,
structural
159
flexibility
coefficien
t,
numerical
coefficien
t
C
c
velocity to pressure conversion coefficient
C
z
combined height and exposure coefficient
C
G
gust effect factor
C
p
external pressure coefficient averaged over the area of the surface
considered.
C
I
structural importance coefficient
d total depth of coupling beam
E
c
modulus of elasticity of concrete
E
m
modulus of elasticity of brick masonry
f
c
crushing strength of concrete
f
b
crushing strength of brick
F
c
uniaxial cylinder strength of concrete
Fv allowable shear stress of masonry
f
m
crushing strength of Brick masonry
f
m
allowable strength of Brick masonry
f
bc
allowable bond shear stress of masonry
g acceleration due to gravity
G modulus of rigidity
GA modulus of shear rigidity of beam
h
n
height of structure in meter above the base to level n.
h each floor height
H total building height, height from base level to specified level
I
b
moment of inertia of connecting beam
I structural importance coefficient, moment of inertia of two walls
I
c
effective moment of inertia of connecting beam
l distance between centroids of walls 1 and 2
M
1
bending moment in wall W
1
160
M
2
bending moment in wall W
2
N axial force in coupled wall
Q horizontal shear load
Q
c
ultimate horizontal shear on the infill
q uniformly distributed horizontal load on walls, wind dynamic pressure
q
z
sustained wind pressure
R

structural system coefficient
S site coefficient for soil

T fundamental period of vibration
V
b
basic wind speed
V base shear
W building weight
Z seismic zone coefficient
poison ratio of concrete
unit weight of concrete
crushing strength of mortar

d
diagonal tensile stress of brick masonry

y
vertical compressive stress of brick masonry

x
principal stress

m
unit weight of brick masonry

m
poison ratio of brick masonry
cross sectional shape factor for shear, equal to 1.2 for rectangular
section.

xy
shear stress
ABBREVIATIONS
AB Auxiliary Beam
ACI American Concrete Institute
ANSI American National Standard Institute
161
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
ATC Applied Technology Council
BNBC Bangladesh National Building Code
BOCA Building Officials and Code Administration International
BSLJ Building Standard Law of Japan
CW Coupled Wall without auxiliary beam
CW
AB
Coupled Wall with auxiliary beam
EWC Equivalent Wide Column
IEB Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh
IF Infilled Frame
IMRF Intermediate Moment Resisting Frame
IS Indian Standard
JCE Journal of Civil Engineering
LHS Left Hand Side
MRF Moment Resisting Frame
NABC North American Building Code
NBCC National Building Code of Canada
OMRF Ordinary Moment Resisting Frame
RF Rigid Frame
SMRF Special Moment Resisting Frame
UBC Uniform Building Code
WC Wide Column, Equivalent Wide Column
TABLE OF CONTENTS
162
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i
DECLARATION ii
ABSTRACT iii
SYMBOLS & NOTATIONS iv
ABBREVIATIONS vi
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General 1
1.2 Objectives of the Study 1
1.3 Scope of the Study 2
1.4 Methodology 2
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction 4
2.2 Structural System 5
2.2.1 Rigid Frame 5
2.2.1.1 Behaviour of Rigid Frame Structure under Lateral Load 6
2.2.2 Shear Wall 7
2.2.2.1 Behaviour of Shear Wall Structure under Lateral Load 8
2.2.3 Shear Wall-Frame 9
2.2.3.1 Behaviour of Shear Wall-Frame under Lateral Load 9
2.2.4 Coupled Shear Wall 11
2.2.4.1 Behaviour of Coupled Shear Wall Structure under Lateral Load 11
2.2.5 Infilled Frame
12
2.2.5.1 Behaviour of Infilled Frames under Lateral Load 13
2.2.5.2 Stresses in Infill 14
2.3 Review of Lateral Loads 16
2.3.1 Wind Load 17
2.3.1.1 Determination of Design Wind Load 18
2.3.1.2 Methods for Determining Wind Load 18
163
2.3.2 Code Provisions for Wind Load 21
2.3.3 Earthquake Load 23
2.3.4 Code Provisions for Earthquake Load 25
2.4 Method of Analysis 28
2.4.1 Continuous Medium Method 28
2.4.2 Finite Element Method 31
2.4.3 Equivalent Wide Column Frame Method 33
2.4.4 Analogous Frame Method 34
2.5 Modelling Technique 36
2.5.1 Modelling for Preliminary Analysis 36
2.5.2 Modelling for Accurate Analysis 37
2.6 Drift of Structure 39
2.7 P-Delta Effect
40
2.8 STAAD-III 41
2.9 Summary 42
Chapter 3 GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF LATERAL LOADS
3.1 Introduction 46
3.2 Graphical Presentation of Wind load 46
3.3 Graphical Presentation of Earthquake load 59
3.4 Summary 71
Chapter 4 MODELLING OF THE STRUCTURES
4.1 Introduction 72
4.2 Description of Model Building 72
4.3 Loads Considered for Analysis 74
4.4 Modelling used for the Study 74
4.4.1 Basic Model under Lateral Load Study 75
164
4.5 Summary 81
Chapter 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
5.1 Introduction 82
5.2 Deflections of Different Structural System for Concentrated
Load at Top 83
5.3 Relative Stiffness of Model Frames for Concentrated
Load at Top 98
5.4 Deflection of Different Structural System for Lateral Load
100
5.5 Moment in Beams of Different Structural System for Lateral Load
110
5.6 Stresses in Infill Material of Infilled Frame (Wind Load)
120
5.7 Summary
122
Chapter 6 CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
6.1 General
123 6.2 Conclusions
123
6.3 Recommendations for Future Study
125
References
126
Appendix A CALCULATION OF GRAVITY, WIND AND EARTHQUAKE LOADS
A.1 Introduction
128
A.2 Gravity Load
128
A.3 Wind Load
129
165
A.4 Earthquake Load 130
Appendix B STAAD SCRIPT FILES
B.1 Introduction
133 B.2 Input Files
133
Appendix C TABLES (BNBC, 1993)
C.1 Introduction and Tables
151
ANALYSIS ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF HIGH RISE BUILDING
SITUATED ON SMALL AREA
UNDER LATERAL DIFLECTION DUE TO EARTH QUAKE AND WIND
PRESSURE
A Project Work Submitted by
RABBE KHAN

MD. IBRAHIM
S M TANVIR FAYSAL ALAM CHOWDHOURY
166

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of
HOUNERS OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING (Structural)
AHSANULLAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Dhaka 1000.
and
October, 2011
Department of Civil Engineering
CERTIFICATION

The project titled ANALYSIS ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF HIGH RISE BUILDING SITUATED ON SMALL
AREA
UNDER LATERAL DIFLECTION DUE TO EARTH QUAKE AND WIND PRESSURE
Submitted by: RABBE KHAN, MD. IBRAHIM , S M TANVIR FAYSAL ALAM CHOWDHOURY. SESSON-2011-12. has
been accepted by the Examination Committee as satisfactory in partial fulfillment for the requirement of
Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering (Structural) held on AUGUST 25, 2011.
167
Dr. Md. Mahmudur RAhman
Professor (Supervisor)
Department of Civil Engineering
AUST, Dhaka-1000
168