Introduction

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1

1.1 GENERAL:
The earthquake forces are most destructive forces among all natural
hazards. The behavior of earthquake forces are random in nature and
unpredictable, so design processes for making structure seismic resistant
needs to be clear, definite and better.
The tradition of designing structures to resist externally applied loads
has led to earthquake resistant design approaches in which ductility demands
are derived based on calculated force demand-capacity ratios. These
approaches have focused design attention away from the importance of
structural deformation as a main determinant of damage in structures
subjected to earthquake.
Actual seismic codes are generally based on force-based design
procedures, which are characterized by check that strength of structural
members is larger than seismic induced force determined by applying a force
reduction factor. This factor depends on ductility of the structure, which for
new buildings is implicitly assured by design rules.
The emphasis is made out that; the structure should able to resist
Design Base Shear. For Design calculations of seismic resistance, strength
and performance should be compatible to each other. Over last two decade
Researchers and professionals has realized that increasing strength may not
actually increase the safety, neither necessarily reduce damage. This leads to
a new design approach called Performance Based Seismic Design, which is
expressed in terms of achieving stated performance objectives.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FORCE BASED DESIGN AND DIRECT DISPLACEMENT BASED

DESIN FOR R.C. BUILDINGS
Page 1

Introduction

1.2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:

Traditionally, seismic structural design has been based primarily on
forces. The reason that seismic design is currently based on force (and hence
acceleration) rather than displacement, is based largely on historical
considerations. Prior to the 1930s, few structures were specifically designed
for seismic actions.
In the 1920s and early 1930s several major earthquakes occurred (Japan:
1925 Kanto earthquake, USA: 1933 Long Beach earthquake, New Zealand: 1932
Napier earthquake).It was clearly noted that structures that was designed for

lateral wind forces performed well in these earthquakes than those without
specified lateral force design.
As a consequence, design codes started to specify that structures in
seismic regions be designed for lateral inertia forces. Typically, a value of
about 10% of the building weight, regardless of building period, applied as a
vertically distributed lateral force vector, proportional to the mass vector, was
specified.
During the 1940s and 1950s, the significance of structural dynamic
characteristics became better understood, leading to period-dependent
design lateral force levels in most seismic design codes, by the 1960s.
Also in the 1960s with increased understanding of seismic response,
and the development of inelastic time-history analysis, came awareness that
many structures had survived earthquakes capable of inducing inertia forces
many times larger than those corresponding to the structural strength. This
lead to development of the concept of ductility to reconcile the apparent
anomaly of survival with apparently inadequate strength.
During the 1970s and 1980s much research effort was directed to
determining the available ductility capacity of different structural systems.
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FORCE BASED DESIGN AND DIRECT DISPLACEMENT BASED
DESIN FOR R.C. BUILDINGS
Page 2

Introduction

In the 1990s, textbooks with further emphasis on displacement

considerations and capacity design became widely used for seismic design of
concrete and masonry structures [e.g. Paulay and Priestley, 1992; Priestley et
al, 1996].
Over last two decades there has been a gradual shift from this position
with the realization that increasing strength may not enhance safety, nor
necessarily reduce damage, and the concept of performance-based seismic
design, based largely on displacement considerations, became the subject of
intense research attention.
It may be seen from this brief description of the history of seismic
design, that initially design was purely based on strength, or force
considerations using assumed rather than valid estimates of elastic stiffness.
As the importance of displacement has come to be better appreciated
in recent years, the approach has been to attempt to modify the existing
force-based approach to include consideration of displacement, rather than to
rework the procedure to be based on a more rational displacement basis.
One of those methods is Direct Displacement Based Design (DDBD)
which is developed by M.J.N. Priestley and co-researchers appear to be very
promising and viable alternative to the conventional methods.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FORCE BASED DESIGN AND DIRECT DISPLACEMENT BASED

DESIN FOR R.C. BUILDINGS
Page 3

Introduction

1.3 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE OF WORK:

Aim of work is an economic comparison of R.C. Moment Resisting Frames
Using Displacement Based Design Method and Force Based Design for same
IO performance level.
Scope of work:
Define Design Procedure for Direct Displacement Design proposed by
Priestley et al (2007).
Identification of seismic design criteria which are required to perform
DDBD as per IS 1893:2002 (Part I).
RC moment resisting frames for 8-storey, 10-storey, 12-storey, 14storey, 16-storey building has been considered for parametric study.
Obtain the design base shear and lateral forces for RC moment
resisting frames using Force Based Design as per Indian code
provisions and using Direct displacement based design.
Analysis and Design of Reinforced Concrete Building Frames as per
present Indian code provisions.
.
Performance based evaluation of both the methods has been carried
out by Non-linear Static Push-over Analysis using ETABS 2015 software.
To compare applied base shear and its distribution to various floor level
between FBD and DDBD building model.
To compare steel and concrete quantity required for IO performance
level in both frame buildings which are designed by FBD and DDBD.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FORCE BASED DESIGN AND DIRECT DISPLACEMENT BASED

DESIN FOR R.C. BUILDINGS
Page 4

Introduction
1.4 OUTLINE OF THESIS:
Chapter 1, contains introduction, historical background and scope and
objective of proposed work.
Chapter 2, Literature in form of research papers, books and guidelines
regarding various aspects of performance based design are referred and
review is presented in this chapter and also brief review of Force based
design and its limitation and brief review of Direct displacement based design
are presented in this chapter.
Chapter 3 and 4, Describe performance based engineering and defining
static nonlinear pushover parameters respectively.
Chapter 5, provides insight of direct displacement design method and
current force based seismic method and its step by step procedure to perform
both the methods.
Chapter 6, includes describing of mathematical modeling in ETABS for
different building models.
Chapter 7, In this chapter, analysis and design results of all building models
for both methods (FBD and DDBD) discussed and comparison of both
methods in such type of parameters like, Applied base shear and its
distribution to each storey, storey drift at performance point, Pushover
results, seismic performance in terms of hinge results, Consumption of steel
and concrete for achieving same performance level in IO state have been
given.
Chapter 8, The derived conclusions and scope for future work is presented.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FORCE BASED DESIGN AND DIRECT DISPLACEMENT BASED

DESIN FOR R.C. BUILDINGS
Page 5