ISSN 2319-8885

Vol.05,Issue.36
October-2016,
Pages:7587-7594
www.ijsetr.com

Analysis and Design of a G+10 Residential Building using ETABS

for Different Plane Configurations
GOLAKOTI SURYA KARTEEK1, MEHAR LAVANYA POTHULA2
1
PG Scholar, Dept of Civil Engineering, (Structural Engineering), Kakinada Institute of Engineering & Technology- II,
Corangi, AP, India.
2
Assistant Professor, Dept of Civil Engineering, Kakinada Institute of Engineering & Technology- II, Corangi, AP, India.

Abstract: ETABS stands for Extended Three dimensional Analysis of Building Systems. ETABS is commonly used to analyze:
Skyscrapers, parking garages, steel & concrete structures, low and high rise buildings, and portal frame structures. ETABS was
used to create the mathematical model of the Burj Khalifa, designed by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP (SOM). The input,
output and numerical solution techniques of ETABS are specifically designed to take advantage of the unique physical and
numerical characteristics associated with building type structures. On ETABS we can analyse and design any shape of R.C.C
buildings like rectangular, T, C, L and I-shape. In this project, we mainly emphasizes on structural behaviour of multi-storey
building for different plan configurations like T-shape and L-shape. Modelling of 10- storeys R.C.C. framed building is done on
the ETABS Software for analysis. Post analysis of the structure, maximum shear forces, bending moments, and maximum storey
displacement are computed and then compared for all the analyzed cases.

Keywords: Structure Design, ETABS, High Rise Buildings, Plan Irregularity

I. INTRODUCTION comprehensive software for the analysis and design of

ETABS is a sophisticated, yet easy to use, special
purpose analysis and design program developed specifically
for building systems. ETABS features an intuitive and
powerful graphical interface coupled with unmatched
modeling, analytical, design, and detailing procedures, all
integrated using a common database. Although quick and
easy for simple structures, ETABS can also handle the
largest and most complex building models, including a wide
range of nonlinear behaviors necessary for Performance
based design, making it the tool of choice for structural
engineers in the building industry.
A. History and Advantages of ETABS
Dating back more than 40 years to the original
development of TABS, the predecessor of ETABS, it was
clearly recognized that buildings constituted a very special
class of structures. Early releases of ETABS provided input,
output and numerical solution techniques that took into
consideration the characteristics unique to building type
structures, providing a tool that offered significant savings
in time and increased accuracy over general purpose
programs. As computers and computer interfaces evolved,
ETABS added computationally complex analytical options
such as dynamic nonlinear behavior, and powerful CAD-
like drawing tools in a graphical and object-based interface.
Although ETABS 2015 looks radically different from its
predecessors of 40 years ago, its mission remains the same:
to provide the profession with the most efficient and
buildings. To that end, the current release follows the same
philosophical approach put forward by the original
programs.
II. REVIEW LITERATURE
A. Prashanth.P, Anshuman.S, Pandey.R.K, Arpan
Herbert (2012), may conclude that E-TABS gave lesser
area of required steel as compared to STAAD-PRO. It is
found out from previous studies on comparison of STAAD
results with manual calculations that STAAD-Pro gives
conservative design results which is again proved in this
study by comparing the results of STAAD-Pro, ETABS and
Manual calculations (refer below table). Form the design
results of column; since the required steel for the column
forces in this particular problem is less than the minimum
steel limit of column (i.e., 0.8%), the amount of steel
calculated by both the software is equal. So comparison of
results for this case is not possible.
B. Maison and Neuss(1984), Members of ASCE have
performed the computer analysis of an existing forty four
story steel frame high-rise Building to study the influence of
various modellingaspects on the predicted dynamic
properties and computed seismic response behaviours. The
predicted dynamic properties are compared to the building's
true properties as previously determined from experimental
testing. The seismic response behaviours are computed
using the response spectrum (Newmark and ATC spectra)
and equivalent static load methods.

Copyright @ 2016 IJSETR. All rights reserved.

 GOLAKOTI SURYA KARTEEK, MEHAR LAVANYA POTHULA
C. Maison and Ventura(1991), Members of ASCE
computed dynamic properties and response behaviours OF
THIRTEEN-STORY BUILDING and this result are
compared to the true values as determined from the
recorded motions in the building during two actual
earthquakes and shown that state-of-practice design type
analytical models can predict the actual dynamic properties.
D. Arlekar, Jain &Murty(1997), said that such features
were highly undesirable in buildings built in seismically
active areas; this has been verified in numerous experiences
of strong shaking during the past earthquakes. They
highlighted the importance of explicitly recognizing the
presence of the open first storey in the analysis of the
building, involving stiffness balance of the open first storey factors. The design components in ETABS operate in this
and the storey above, were proposed to reduce the
irregularity introduced by the open first storey.
III. ETABS ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
This chapter provides an overview of some of the analysis
techniques available within ETABS. The types of analyses
described are P-Delta analysis, linear static analysis, modal
analysis, response-spectrum analysis, time-history analysis,
linear buckling analysis and nonlinear analysis. In a given
analysis run, you may request a P-Delta analysis, and multiple
cases of linear static, modal, response spectrum, time history,
and buckling analyses. Multiple nonlinear static and time
history analysis cases may also be defined.
A. Linear Static Analysis
A linear static load case is automatically created for each
load pattern that is defined. The results of different load cases of members in the structure. A nonlinear static load case
can be combined with each other and with other linear load
cases, such as response spectrum analyses. Geometric and
material nonlinearity, except for the P-Delta effect, are not
considered in a linear static analysis.
B. P-Delta Analysis
The P-Delta option accounts for the effect of a large
compressive or tensile load upon the transverse stiffness of
members in the structure. Compression reduces lateral
stiffness, and tension increases it. This type of geometric
nonlinearity is known as the P-Delta effect. This option is
particularly useful for considering the effect of gravity loads
upon the lateral stiffness of building structures.
The P-Delta analysis in ETABS considers the P-Delta effect
of a single loaded state upon the structure. This effect can be
computed in one of two ways:
1. Iterative - Based on Loads:
As a specified combination of static load patterns. For
example, this may be the sum of a dead load pattern plus a
fraction of a live load pattern. This approach requires an
iterative solution to determine the P-Delta effect upon the
structure.
2. Non-iterative - Based on Mass:
As a story-by-story load upon the structure computed
automatically from the mass at each level. This approach is
approximate, but does not require an iterative solution. When
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research
Volume.05, IssueNo.36, October-2016, Pages: 7787-7594
you select a P-Delta option, it is performed before all linear
analyses in the same analysis run. The P-Delta analysis
essentially modifies the characteristics of the structure,
affecting the results of all subsequent analyses performed.
Because the load causing the P-Delta effect is the same for all
linear analysis cases, their results may be superposed in load
combinations. Finally, building codes typically recognize two
types of P-Delta effects: the first due to the overall sway of
the structure and the second due to the deformation of the
member between its ends. ETABS can model both of those
behaviors. It is recommended that the former effect be
accounted for in the analysis by using the initial P-Delta
option, and that the latter effect be accounted for in design by
using the applicable building code moment-magnification
manner.
3. Nonlinear Static Analysis
Nonlinear static analysis can be used for a wide variety of
purposes, including : to analyze a building for material and
geometric nonlinearity; to form the P-delta stiffness for
subsequent linear analyses; to perform static pushover
analysis; to investigate staged construction; and more.
Multiple nonlinear static analysis cases can be defined. Each
analysis case considers a single pattern of loading, specified
as a linear combination of static load cases, acceleration
loads, and vibration mode shapes.
4. P-Delta:
The P-Delta analysis option accounts for the effect of a
large compressive or tensile load upon the transverse stiffness
subjected to gravity loads with P-delta is often an appropriate
choice for determining the initial conditions for other linear
and nonlinear load cases.
5. Large Displacements:
Large displacements analysis considers the equilibrium
equations in the deformed configuration of the structure. This
means that if the position or orientation of an element
changes, its effect upon the structure is accounted for.
6. Static Pushover:
Monitors nonlinear hinge formation as building is pushed
using displacement control.
7. Staged Construction:
Staged construction allows you to define a sequence of
stages wherein you can add or remove portions of the
structure, selectively apply load to portions of the building,
and to consider time-dependent material behavior.
C. Modal Analysis
Modal analysis calculates vibration modes for the structure
based on the stiffnesss of the elements and the masses
present. Those modes can be used to investigate the behavior
of a structure, and are required as a basis for subsequent
response spectrum and time history analyses. Two types of
modal analysis are available: eigenvector analysis and
 Analysis and Design of a G+10 Residential Building using ETABS for different plane configurations
Ritzvector analysis. Only one type can be used in a single spectrum curve of pseudo spectral acceleration response
load case. Modal analysis is always linear. A modal load case versus period of the structure. This approach seeks to
may be based on the stiffness of the full unstressed structure, determine the likely maximum response rather than the full
or upon the stiffness at the end of a nonlinear load case. By time history. ETABS performs response spectrum analysis
using the stiffness at the end of a nonlinear case, you can using mode superposition, and eigenvector or Ritz vectors
evaluate the modes under P-delta conditions. may be used. Ritz vectors are typically recommended because
they give more accurate results for the same number of
D. Eigenvector Analysis modes. Even though input response spectrum curves may be
Eigenvector/ eigen value analysis determines the undammed specified in three directions, only a single, positive result is
free-vibration mode shapes and frequencies of the system. produced for each response quantity. The response quantities
Those natural modes provide an excellent insight into the may be displacements, forces, or stresses. Each computed
behavior of the structure. They can also be used as the basis result represents a statistical measure of the likely maximum
for response spectrum or time history analyses, although Ritz magnitude for that response quantity. Although all results are
vectors are strongly recommended for those purposes. The reported as positive, actual response can be expected to vary
eigenvector modes are identified by numbers from 1 to n in within a range from this positive value to its corresponding
the order the modes are found by the program. Specify the negative value.
number of modes, N, to be found, and the program will seek
the N-lowest frequency (longest period) modes. The eigen G. Linear Time History Analysis
value is the square of the circular frequency. The user Time history analysis is used to determine the dynamic
specifies a cyclic frequency (circular frequency/(2)) range in response of a structure to arbitrary loading. ETABS can
which to seek the modes. Modes are found in order of complete any number of linear time history cases in a single
increasing frequency, and although starting from the default execution of the program. Each case can differ in the load
value of zero is appropriate for most dynamic analyses, applied and in the type of analysis to be performed, and the
ETABS does allow the user to specify a starting shift building may be subjected to a suite of time histories using
frequency; this can be helpful when your building is time history sets. Two types of linear time history analyses
subjected to higher frequency input, such as vibrating are available:
machinery. ETABS also offers an option for calculating 1. Modal:
residual-mass (missing mass) modes for Eigen-analyses. In The standard mode superposition method of response
this way, ETABS tries to approximate high-frequency analysis is used by the program to solve the dynamic
behavior when the mass participation ratio for a given equilibrium equations of motion for the complete structure.
direction of acceleration load is less than 100%. The modes used can be the eigenvector or the load dependent
Ritz vector modes, and the damping in the structure is
E. Ritz-Vector Analysis modeled using modal damping, also known as proportional or
ETABS offers the ability to use the sophisticated Ritz- classical damping. The Ritz vector algorithm is faster than the
vector technique for modal analysis. Research has indicated eigenvector algorithm, and is therefore recommended for time
that the natural free-vibration mode shapes are not the best history analyses.
basis for a mode-superposition analysis of structures
subjected to dynamic loads. It has been demonstrated that 2. Direct Integration:
dynamic analyses based on load-dependent Ritz vectors yield This technique uses the direct integration of the full
more accurate results than the use of the same number of equations of motion. Although modal superposition is often
eigenvalue/eigenvector mode shapes. Ritz vectors yield more accurate and efficient than direct integration, direct
excellent results because they are generated considering the integration provides better response when modes are coupled
spatial distribution of the dynamic loading. The direct use of or blast/impact type loads are involved.
the natural mode shapes neglects this important information.
Each Ritz-vector mode consists of a mode shape and H. Nonlinear Time History Analysis
frequency. When a sufficient number of Ritz-vector modes As with the linear time history analysis, two types of
have been found, some of them may closely approximate nonlinear analyses are available:
natural mode shapes and frequencies. In general, however, 1. Modal:
Ritz-vector modes do not represent the intrinsic The method of nonlinear modal time-history analysis used
characteristics of the structure in the same way the natural in ETABS is an extension of the Fast Nonlinear Analysis
modes do because they are biased by the starting load vectors. (FNA) method. This method is extremely efficient and is
Similar to the natural modes, specify the number of Ritz intended for use with structural systems that are primarily
modes to be found. In addition, specify the starting load linear elastic, but which have a limited number of predefined
vectors, which may be acceleration loads, static load cases, or nonlinear elements, such as buildings with base isolators
nonlinear deformation loads. and/or dampers.

F. Response Spectrum Analysis 2. Direct Integration:

For response spectrum analyses, earthquake ground Nonlinear direct integration provides the same costs and
acceleration in each direction is given as a digitized response benefits as the linear procedure. Direct integration results are
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research
Volume.05, IssueNo.36, October-2016, Pages: 7587-7594
 GOLAKOTI SURYA KARTEEK, MEHAR LAVANYA POTHULA
extremely sensitive to time-step size in a way thatis not true Point Coordinates:
for modal superposition.. The FNA method is highly accurate Table4. Joint Coordinates Data
when used with appropriate Ritzvector modes, and has Label X Y Z Below
advantages over traditional time-stepping methods in terms of mm mm mm
speed, and control over damping and higher mode effects. 1 0 12000 0
2 5000 12000 0
3. Buckling 3 0 8000 0
Linear buckling analysis seeks the instability modes of a 4 5000 8000 0
structure due to the P-delta effect under a specified set of
5 10000 8000 0
loads. Each eigenvalue eigenvector pair is called a buckling
mode of the structure. The eigenvalue is called the buckling 6 15000 8000 0
factor. It is the scale factor that loads must be multiplied by to 7 20000 8000 0
cause buckling in the given mode. 8 10000 12000 0
9 15000 12000 0
4. Structure Data 10 20000 12000 0
This chapter provides model geometry information, 11 0 4000 0
including items such as story levels, point coordinates, and 12 5000 4000 0
element connectivity. 13 10000 4000 0
IV. STORY DATA
14 15000 4000 0
Table1: Story Data
15 20000 4000 0
16 15000 0 0
17 5000 0 0
18 10000 0 0
PropertiesL This chapter provides property information
for materials, frame sections, shell sections, and links.

Materials:
Table5. Material Properties - Summary
Name Type E Unit Design
MPa Weight Strengths
kN/m
A615Gr Rebar 19994 0.3 76.9729 Fy=413.69
60 7.98 MPa,
Fu=620.53
MPa
Grid Data: M25 Concr 25000 0.2 24.9926 Fc=25 MPa
Table2: Grid Systems ete

Frame Sections:
Table6: Frame Sections - Summary
Name Material Shape
B 230*300 M25 Concrete
Table 3. Grid Lines Rectangular
C 230*350 M25 Concrete
Rectangular
Shell Sections:
Table7: Shell Sections - Summary
Name Design Element Material Total
Type Type Thickness
mm
Slab Slab Membrane M25 125
125
Reinforcement Sizes:
Table8: Reinforcing Bar Sizes
Name Diameter Area
mm mm
10 10 79
20 20 314

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research

Volume.05, IssueNo.36, October-2016, Pages: 7787-7594
 Analysis and Design of a G+10 Residential Building using ETABS for different plane configurations
IS1893 2002 Auto Seismic Load Calculation
This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral
seismic loads for load pattern EQ Y according to IS1893
2002, as calculated by ETABS.
Direction and Eccentricity
Direction = Y
Structural Period
Period Calculation Method = Program Calculated
Factors and Coefficients
Seismic Zone Factor, Z [IS Table 2] Z = 0.16
Response Reduction Factor, R [IS Table 7] R=5
Importance Factor, I [IS Table 6] I=1
Site Type [IS Table 1] = II
Seismic Response
Spectral Acceleration S 1.36 Sa Fig.2 Plan view story 10-z=30(m) moment 3-3 diagram
a
Coefficient, Sa /g [IS = = 1.003234 (live)[kn-m]
6.4.5] g T g
Equivalent Lateral Forces
Sa
ZI
Seismic Coefficient, Ah [IS 6.4.2] g
Ah =
2R
Table9 : Calculated Base Shear
Period
W Vb
Direction Used
(kN) (kN)
(sec)
Y 1.356 14840.0447 238.2085
V. DESIGN DATA
This chapter provides design data and results.
Concrete Frame Design
Table10: Concrete Frame Preferences - IS 456-2000
Item Value
Multi-Response Design Step-by-Step - All
# Interaction Curves 24 Fig.3 Plan view story 10-z=30(m) moment 3-3 diagram
# Interaction Points 11 (EQX)[kn-m]
Minimum Eccentricity Yes
Additional Moment Yes
Gamma (Steel) 1.15
Gamma (Concrete) 1.5
Pattern Live Load Factor 0.75
D/C Ratio Limit 1

Fig.1 Plan view story 10-z=30(m) moment 3-3 diagram Fig.4 Plan view story 10-z=30(m) moment 3-3 diagram
(dead)[kn-m] (EQY)[kn-m]

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research

Volume.05, IssueNo.36, October-2016, Pages: 7587-7594
 GOLAKOTI SURYA KARTEEK, MEHAR LAVANYA POTHULA

Fig.5 3-dview moment 3-3 diagram (ff)[kn-m]

Fig.8 Plan view story 10-z=30(m) .

Fig.6 Plan view story 10-z=30(m)

Fig.9.Plan viewstory 10-z=30(m) longitudinal reinforcing

(IS 456:2000).
VI. CONCLUSION
From our results obtained from the analyses outputs, the
elements are in accordance to our objectives of the study
which are:
1. The dead, live and floor finish loads obtained by the
ETABS are similar to the manually calculated values
2. Analysis of the structural integrity of these buildings in
withstanding the design earthquake loadings was
conducted and was judged to be safe.
3. The way forward will be to conduct studies on different
shapes and geometrical configurations and to see the
variations as the study we conducted only included
irregular L shape, and T shape configurations.
4. Various important results like bending moments, shear
force, and deflection results are compared for the
irregular configurations.
5. In this project along with the analysis results, the design
values are included for both the unsymmetrical
Fig.7 3-d view shear force 2-2 diagram (dead)[kn] configurations.
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research
Volume.05, IssueNo.36, October-2016, Pages: 7787-7594
 Analysis and Design of a G+10 Residential Building using ETABS for different plane configurations
6. In design we considered only the flexure, shear, Beam
column capacity ratios for both the irregular L shape,
and T shape configurations.

VII. REFERENCES
[1] ACI Committee 318. (2002) Building code requirements
for reinforced concrete (ACI 318-02). American Concrete
Institute, Detroit, MI.
[2] AISC.(2002) Seismic provisions for structural steel
buildings. (Chicago (IL): American Institute of Steel
Construction. Aristizabal-Ochoa, J.D. (1986). Disposable
knee bracing: improvement in seismic design of steel frames.
Journal of Structural Engineering, 112 (7): 1544-1552.
[3] Abou-Elfath, H. &Ghobarah, A. (2000). Behaviour of
reinforced concrete frames rehabilitated with concentric steel
bracing. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering. 27 433-444.
[4] Balendra, T., Yu, C.Y., & Xiao, Y. (2001). An economical
structural system for wind and earthquake loads. Engineering
Structures, 23: 491-501.
[5] Badoux, M. &Jirsa, O. (1990). Steel bracing of RC frames
for seismic retrofitting. Journal of Structural Enineering.
ASCE, No. 1, 116, 55-74.
[6] Bush, TD, Jones, EA, &Jirsa, JO. (1991). Behaviour of
RC frame strengthened using structural steel bracing. Proc.
ASCE, Journal of Structural Enineering. No. 4, 117, 1115-
1126.

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research

Volume.05, IssueNo.36, October-2016, Pages: 7587-7594