1

SEISMIC RESPONSE OF VERTICALLY

GEOMETRICAL IRREGULAR BUILDINGS

PRESENTED BY
ABDUL AJEEJ -17MST0002
KSC SEKHARENDRA-17MST0022
STM. SIDDIQ-17MST0024
B. PRAJWAL-17MST0050
 2
Introduction

 The setback irregularity is one of the

most common types of irregularity in the
modern buildings.
 The functional and aesthetic
requirements are the main reasons for
preference of these structures.
 These buildings are very useful in urban
areas, where the buildings are closely
spaced. In such areas, these buildings
provide the adequate sunlight and
ventilation for the bottom stories

3/25/2018
 3
Introduction

 The presence of a setback in the building results in abrupt reductions of the floor
area, which in turn results in change of mass and stiffness along the building
height.
 The past earthquake records indicate that, the buildings with setbacks
experience greater damage as compared to the regular buildings.
 The change of mass and stiffness of the stepped building along its height results in
the difference in their dynamic characteristics, as compared to the regular
buildings

3/25/2018
 4
VERTICAL IRREGULARITY ACCORDING TO IS 1893 : 2016

 Vertical geometrical irregularity shall

be consider to be exist when the
horizontal dimension of the lateral
force resisting system in any storey is
more than 125% of the storey below

3/25/2018
 5
Literature review

Seismic behavior of multistory RC building frames with vertical setback

irregularity
 S. Varadharajan, V. K. Sehgal and Babita Saini et. al, done the work on seismic behavior of
multistory building frames with vertical setback irregularity. In this work the authors consider
the 27 ground motions and generate 21060 non linear dynamic analysis results. These results
are compiled to create a seismic response database consisting of parameters such as
maximum roof displacement, maximum inter story drift ratio. Furthermore, nonlinear regression
analysis is conducted on this database to propose simple equations to estimate the seismic
response parameters. Finally, the proposed equations are validated for two-dimensional and
three-dimensional building models

3/25/2018
 6
 In this work, the authors checked the irregularity indices given by Karavasilis and compared it
with their work and with different codal provisions. And the authors proved the Karavasilis
approach is failed.
 The observations on the fundamental time period are as follows:
1. The fundamental period is greater when the setback irregularity is present at the bottom story,
and it decreases with an increase in the height of the location of setbacks.
2. The fundamental period increases with an increase in the setback dimensions
3. The fundamental period is insensitive to variation in the bay width.
 The time history analysis was done on 200 models and the following equation was proposed
to find the time period for irregular structure

q= displacement ductilty.
3/25/2018
 7
Literature review

Fundamental time period of RC Setback Buildings

 S. Varadharajan, V. K. Sehgal and Babita Saini et. al, done the work to find the correction
factor for the fundamental time period provided by the code. In this work, authors
considered 1525 models with different degree of setback irregularity.11 ground motions was
considered in the analysis. Based on the result obtained, the correction factor for time period
was proposed as follows:

3/25/2018
 8
Literature review

SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF RC BUILDINGS WITH VERTICAL

IRREGULARITY
 C.M. Ravi Kumar, K.S. Babu Narayan, M.H. Prashanth, H.B Manjunatha and D. Venkat Reddy
et. al, done the work on seismic performance evaluation of RC buildings with vertical
irregularities. The authors did the analysis on 4 vertically geometrically irregular models in all 4
earthquake zones and in all 3 soil types. The observations are the time period for the model is
not changed with the zone. The base shear is increasing from zone II to V. and the soil types
from III to I. Maximum story displacement will increase for individual model as the zone
increase from II to V as well as soil type from I to III. Maximum story drift will increase for
individual model as the zone increase from II to V as well as soil type from I to III. Maximum
story drift and story displacement will increase as the vertical irregularities increase in models
respectively

3/25/2018
 9
Literature review

Study of the Vertical Irregularities in Tall RC Structures under Lateral Load

 Sawsan Yaseenl Khudhair , D. Chandra Mouli et. al, done the analysis on 9 vertically
geometrically irregular models. The analysis was done in the zone V with soil type III. The
parameters like storey drift, storey shear, storey stiffness and displacement was considered.
The analysis shows that the setback is increasing, the building is more vulnerable to the lateral
loads. Story shear is maximum for the regular building compared to irregular buildings.

3/25/2018
 10
Literature review

Seismic performance of reinforced concrete moment resisting

frames with setback based on Iranian seismic code
A.R. Habibi, K. Asadi et. al, done the work on the 35 two dimensional vertically irregular
frames along the height. The study is done for 30 earthquake motions. The frames are
initially designed using the Iranian code and later checked for safety by using non linear
dynamic analysis. The performance of the frames is evaluated by using storey drift and
plastic rotation of members. The observations showed that, the frames without irregularities
are satisfying the performance criteria. All the irregular frames are not satisfying the criteria
for all 30 earthquake motions.

3/25/2018
 11
Literature review

Comparision of Seismic Behaviour of Regular and Vertical Irregular

Structure by using Pushover Analysis
 Patil Sadhana M, D.N.Shinde et. al, done the comparative study on Seismic behavior of
regular and irregular buildings by using pushover analysis and considering base shear,
displacement performance point, storey displacement, story drift, spectral acceleration
and spectral displacement as the main criteria. The analysis results showed that, the
buildings with vertical irregularities undergo maximum story displacement, increase in
story drift. The performance of vertical irregular building is less compared to regular
building.

3/25/2018
 12
Literature review

Analysis and design of Earthquake resistant RC building

with Vertical irregularity
 P. Sudharshanamurthy, B. Balachandran. Et. al, did the analysis using the three methods
namely Equivalent static method, Response spectrum and time history analysis on the 10
storey rc buildings with mass, stiffness and vertical geometry irregularities. Story shear was
found to be maximum in first storey in all cases. Displacements at respective nodes in
geometrically irregular building is more compared with regular building in upper stories
up to the set back, after the displacement is converging towards the displacement of
regular building.

3/25/2018
 13
Literature review

Static Linear and Non-Linear (Pushover) Analysis of Multi

Storey RC Frame with and without Vertical Irregularities
 Nuthan L Pathi, Guruprasad T N, Dharmesh N, Madhusudhana Y.B et. al, done the study
on the 7storey 6 RC buildings with irregularities such as mass, stiffness, vertical geometry,
inplane discontinuity irregularities. Equivalent static method and pushover analysis was
used to analyse the models. Compared to other irregularities, vertical geometrical
irregular building have the minimum base shear, minimum lateral displacement.

3/25/2018
 14
Literature review

Seismic performance of R/C plane frames irregular in elevation

 C.J. Athanassiadou; The seismic performance of the studied multistorey reinforced concrete
frame buildings with setbacks in the upper storeys, designed to the final (EN) version of
Eurocode 8 for the high (DCH) and the medium (DCM) ductility level, can be considered
satisfactory, not inferior and in some cases even superior to that of the regular ones, even for
motions twice as strong as the design earthquake. Interstorey drift ratios of irregular frames
were found to remain quite low even in the case of the ‘collapse prevention’ earthquake
with an intensity double that of the ‘design’ one. Irregular structures seem to be stronger –
due to the decreased values of the behaviour factors and less ductile than the
corresponding regular ones. As far as the effect of ductility class is concerned, buildings of
both ductility classes seem to perform equally satisfactorily during the design earthquake.
However, a potential weakness in the shear capacity of DCH beams has been detected.

3/25/2018
 15
Literature review

Vertical Irregularity of Buildings: Regularity Index versus Seismic Risk

 A. S. Bhosale; Robin Davis; and Pradip Sarkar; The present study shows that the first mode
participation factor(Γ1) and effective modal mass (M1) of the irregular frames, ST and SB, are
lesser than that of R frame. However, Γ1 and M1 for OGS and FC frames are found to be
higher than that of R, which is contrary to the conventional understanding. As per both the
existing irregularity indicators (Sarkar et al.2010; Varadharajan et al. 2013), the ST frame is
found to be the most irregular, which implies that the ST frame must be the most vulnerable.
However, the seismic risk assessment shows that ST is the least vulnerable frame. Similarly
(with regard to FC frame), the existing irregularity indicator (Sarkar et al. 2010). classifies this
frame as the least irregular frame (expected to be least vulnerable). However, the seismic
risk assessment shows that it is the most vulnerable type of frame. The irregularity in a building
quantified based on first mode properties by existing indicators does not reflect their seismic
risk appropriately.
3/25/2018
 16
Literature review

Seismic loading for buildings with setbacks

 C.M. WONG AND W.K. TSO; The period of a building with a setback is in general less than that
of a similar building without any setback. Therefore, applying the current codified period
formula 0.1N to buildings with setbacks tends to overestimate the period and, consequently,
underestimate the seismic base shear. A period modification factor, T*, which takes into
account the difference in fundamental period between buildings with and without setbacks
is presented in this paper. Modifying the current code period formula with T* gives a better
estimation of the periods for MRF buildings with setbacks. It is recommended that (Ts)be used
as the "code period" for calibration of results obtained using dynamic analysis. In such
situations, the static code procedure may lead to excessively conservative estimates of
storey shears and overturning moments. Therefore, the response spectrum technique is not
only an alternative, but a superior alternative to obtain the seismic load distribution.

3/25/2018
 17
Literature review

Effects Of Vertical Geometric And Mass Irregularities In Structure

 Kevin Shah and Prutha Vyas; Base shear is more for case 1 than other two cases because of
it has symmetric infill with masonry walls on all levels. Abrupt change in story drift in case 2 at
story level 1, due to sudden change of stiffness. Story drift for case 3 is having uniform
pattern from ground to 10th story level and 12 to 15 story level. But there is fast variation in 10
to 12 due to sudden vertical irregularity. Top story displacement is maximum for vertically
irregular of structure and minimum for symmetric infill wall structure.

3/25/2018
 18
Literature review

EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE OF STEEL-FRAMED MULTISTOREY BUILDINGS WITH

SET-BACKS
 J. L. HUMAR,E. W. WRIGHT; all the frame models investigated were derived from the single-
bay fifteen storey frame of Figure 1, termed the ‘Basic Frame’. A frame termed the ‘Related
Uniform Frame’ is a three-bay fifteen storey frame with the member properties the same as
for the Basic Frame, except that the internal columns are twice as strong as the columns of
the Basic Frame. For buildings with set-backs, the relative contributions of the higher modes
to the base shear in general increase with decreasing tower-base-plan-area ratio. In some
cases the contribution of the second or the third mode may be higher than the contribution
of the fundamental mode.

3/25/2018
 19
Literature review

Pushover Analysis of Medium Rise Multi-Story RCC Frame With and

Without Vertical Irregularity

 Mohommed Anwaruddin Md. Akberuddin(et.al); The lateral displacement of the building is

reduced as the percentage of irregularity increase. As the percentage of vertical irregularity
increases, the story drift reduces and go on within permissible limit. Also conclude that as the
no of bays reduces vertically the lateral load carrying capacity increases with reduction in
lateral displacement. From above discussion, the seismic performance of irregular building is
reduced by 11 to 12.5% for 200% vertical irregularity and 28 to 30 % for 300% vertical
irregularity as compare to symmetric base model.

3/25/2018
 20

S.NO. Title Author Description

1 Seismic Response of Set- Aashish Kumar, Aman • They observed Lateral

Back Structure Malik, Neeraj Mehta storey displacement
(2015) of different three
types of models with
constant bay length
and with change in
storey height.
• They considered
Nodal displacements
criteria for the best
value of critical set-
back ratio.

3/25/2018
 21

2 Seismic Dileshwar • Focussed on performance & behaviour of regular

Analysis of Rana, Prof. and vertical geometric irregular RCC framed
Regular & Juned structure under seismic motion.
Vertical Raheem • Five types of building geometry are considered one
Geometric (2015) regular frame & four irregular frames and
Irregular comparative study is made for all configurations in
RCC height and bay wise.
Framed • As the amount of setback increases the shear force
Building also increases.
• Regular building frames possess very low shear force
compared to setback irregular frames.
• Critical bending moment of irregular frames is more
than the regular frame due to decrease in stiffness
of building frames due to setbacks.

3/25/2018
 22

3 Seismic Lakshmi • P-Delta effect is considered as the increase in

Behaviour of Subash deflections and bending moments due to P-
Vertically Delta effect is large for tall structures.
Irregular • He observed 30 storey buildings having
Reinforced vertical geometric irregularity are modelled
Concrete and analyzed using ETABS V.16 software.
Buildings with • As the amount of vertical irregularity
P-Delta Effect increases, there is increase in time period,
displacement and storey drift but decreases
in stiffness value due to P-Delta effect.

3/25/2018
 23
4 ANALYSING THE Hema Venkata • They carried out the seismic behaviour of three 8-
SEISMIC Sekhar, T. Venkata Storied buildings with and without setbacks was
BEHAVIOUR OF SET Das studied.
BACK BUILDING BY • They analyzed using Time History Analysis and
USING E-TABS Response Spectrum Method.

5 QUALITATIVE Devesh P. Soni • Most of the Investigations shows the increase in

REVIEW OF SEISMIC and Bharat B. drift demand in the tower portion of set-back
RESPONSE OF Mistry(2006) structures.
VERTICALLY • Made review of previous studies of vertical
IRREGULAR irregularity.
BUILDING FRAMES • For buildings with discontinuous distributions in
mass, stiffness, and strength, the effect of strength
irregularity has been found to be larger than the
effect of stiffness irregularity, and the effect of
combined-stiffness-and strength irregularity has
been found to be the largest.

3/25/2018
 24

6 Seismic T.L. • Presented an extensive parametric study on the

response of Karavasilisa, inelastic seismic response of steel moment
plane steel MRF N. Bazeosa, resisting frames (MRF) with setbacks.
with setbacks: D.E. Beskos • The inter-storey drifts of the tower are larger than
Estimation of those of the corresponding regular structure at
inelastic the same height level, whereas the opposite is
deformation true for the base.
demands • They observed concentration of damage in
members near setbacks or in the tower.
• And studied the elastic response of setback
structures and found that the first mode is
capable to the displacement response.
• And founded the level of inelastic deformation
and geometrical configuration. In general, the
maximum deformation demands are
concentrated in the “tower” for tower-like
structures and in the neighbourhood of the
setbacks for other geometrical configurations.
3/25/2018
 25

7 Hybrid Hongjin Kim • They Investigated the Control of irregular high rise
control of and Hojjat building structures under various seismic excitations
irregular steel Adeli(2005) using a hybrid control system consisting of a passive
high-rise supplementary damping system and a semi-active
building tuned liquid column damper (TLCD) system.
structures • Two pairs of parallel TLCDs placed along two principal
under seismic directions of the structural plan were used to control
excitations the lateral and torsional response of irregular multi-
storey buildings.
• Obtained results idicate the Hybrid damper-TLCD
control system can significantly reduce displacement
as well as acceleration responses of irregular 3D
buildings subjected to various earthquake ground
motions.

3/25/2018
 26

8 Efficient Oren Lavan, • Paper presents an analysis–redesign-type

Seismic Philip J. Wilkinson approach for the efficient seismic design of
Design of 3D three-dimensional (3D) irregular Rc frame
Asymmetric structures for bidirectional ground motions.
and Setback • Minimising the total moment capacity of all
RC Frame members with in interstory drift and ductility
Buildings for demand constraints.
Drift and
Strain
Limitation

3/25/2018
 27
Literature review

Vertical geometric irregularity in stepped building

frames
Pradip Sarkar , A. Meher Prasad , Devdas Menon, has performed Equivalent
static analysis of 78 stepped frames and An empirical formula (modification of the
existing code formula for regular RC framed building) is proposed to calculate the
fundamental time period of stepped building, as a function of regularity index. This
has been validated by free vibration analysis. A case study of an existing stepped
building located at New Delhi demonstrates that the proposed correction to the code
specified empirical formula results in an accurate estimate of the fundamental
period, even for three dimensional building models.

3/25/2018
 28
Literature review

Seismic evaluation of RC stepped building frames using

improved pushover analysis
 Pradip Sarkar , A. Meher Prasad , Devdas Menon, A lateral load profile, appropriate for
stepped building frames, is proposed for use in pushover analysis. This has been validated
by nonlinear time history analysis.
 An empirical formula (modification of existing ASCE/SEI 41-13 displacement coefficient
method for regular RC framed building) is proposed to estimate the ‘target displacement’
in stepped building frames. This has similarly been validated by nonlinear time history
analysis.
 The pushover analysis of RC stepped frames, incorporating the proposed load profile and
‘target displacement’ estimation procedure, show consistently good performance in
comparison with the existing methods of pushover analysis

3/25/2018
 29
Literature review

A Displacement- based pushover algorithm for

assessment of vertically irregular frames
 Rui Pinho, Stelios Antonious, A displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure has
been briefly described and tested and illustrated its potential advantages with respect to
traditional Force-based pushover
 The predictions of displacement-based adaptive pushover were compared to the results
delivered by conventional pushover with different load distributions and rigorous dynamic
time-history analysis,the later being assumed as providing ‘exact’ response prediction

3/25/2018
 30
Literature review

Ductility demands for R/C frames irregular in elevation

 G. Rafael Aranda, The importance of inelastic effects on the seismic analysis of R/C frames
irregular in elevation was shown with the 'exact' step-by-step analyses of two typical cases. They
found that irregularities in elevation increase the ductility factor by a factor of approximately 2,
thereby producing higher ductility demands. This effect was significant where there was a sudden
change in the stiffness distribution of the building.

3/25/2018
 31
Literature review

SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAMES WITH

SETBACKS
Xavier Romão, Aníbal Costa, Raimundo Delgado, the structural behaviour of the
different buildings was seen not to differ much with respect to inelastic demand. In
addition, accounting for the axial force variations and for different contributions of slab
widths to the beams’ bending behaviour was found not to be very relevant for these
structures. This fact seems to be closely related to the rather excessive member
dimensions of the experimentally tested structure that was selected. Nonetheless, the use
of this example shows that an adequate dynamic response can be obtained in irregular
structures. On the other hand, the use of the “PT-Design” structure demonstrates that the
design of this kind of structures based solely in code requirements may not be sufficient
and can lead to structures with inadequate dynamic behaviour

3/25/2018
 32
Literature review

Seismic Evaluation of RC Stepped Building Frames

 Pradip Sarkar , A. Meher Prasad , Devdas Menon, An empirical formula (modification of
existing FEMA 356 displacement coefficient method for regular RC framed building) is proposed to
estimate the ‘target displacement’ in stepped building frames. This has similarly been validated by
nonlinear time history analysis
 A lateral load profile, appropriate for stepped building frames, is proposed for use in pushover
analysis. This has been validated by nonlinear time history analysis on 23 stepped frames for 20
earthquake ground motions

3/25/2018
 33
Literature review

ADAPTIVE MODAL COMBINATION PROCEDURE FOR PREDICTING

SEISMIC RESPONSE OF VERTICALLY IRREGULAR STRUCTURAL
SYSTEMS
E. Kalkan and S. K. Kunnath ,They evaluates the accuracy of the recently developed AMC
procedure in predicting the seismic response of vertically irregular (mass irregularity or
vertical setbacks) steel moment frames subjected to near-fault forward directivity records. By
including the contributions of a sufficient number of modes of vibration (generally two to
three), it is demonstrated that the proposed AMC procedure is able to estimate interstory drift
profiles with acceptable accuracy when compared to results from NTH analyses. The
validation of the AMC procedure has now been applied to both regular and irregular frames
and they suggest that the method is a promising alternative to several advanced pushover
techniques for seismic assessment of moment frame structures

3/25/2018
 34
Objective

 To study the vertical geometrical irregular buildings with different degree

of setback .
 The following parameters are considered
1. Mode participation factor
2. Fundamental time period
3. Storey drifts.

3/25/2018
 35
Data Considered

 Number of bays :8
 Number of stories : 15
 Bay width :6m
 Storey Height :3m

3/25/2018
 36
Data Considered

 Material Properties
1. M30 grade concrete
2. Fe415 Steel
 Seismic Zone : III
 Zone factor Z : 0.24
 Soil Type : II
 Importance Factor : 1.2
 Reduction factor : 5 (Smrf)

3/25/2018
IRREGULARITIES CONSIDERED 37

Set 2 Set 3
Set 1

Set 4 Set 5
3/25/2018
IRREGULARITIES CONSIDERED 38

Set 6 Set 7 Set 8

Total number of models considered - 96

3/25/2018
 39
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

3rd Mode Participation factor

1st Mode Participation factor
6
80
79 5

78
77
Set 1 4

3
76
75 2
74
1
73
72
2nd Mode Participation factor 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
14

12

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 3/25/2018
 40
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

3rd Mode Participation factor

1st Mode Participation factor
6
80
5
79
Set 2
78 4
77
3
76
2
75
74
2nd Mode Participation factor 1
14
73 0
72 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

3/25/2018
 41
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

1st Mode Participation factor 3rd Mode Participation factor

80
8
79
7
78
6
77
76
Set 3 5
75 4
74 3
73 2
72
1
71
70 2nd Mode Participation factor 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
14

12

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 3/25/2018
 42
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

1st Mode Participation factor

80
3rd Mode Participation factor
78 7

76 6
74
72
Set 4 5
4
70
3
68
2
66
1
64
0 2 4 6 8 10 0
0 2 4 6 8 10
2nd Mode Participation factor
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0 3/25/2018
0 2 4 6 8 10
 43
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

1rd mode participation variation 3rd mode participation variation

80
79 7
78
77
Set 5 6

76 5
75 4
74
3
73
2
72
2rd mode participation variation
71
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
12
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

3/25/2018
 44
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

3rd mode participation variation

1rd mode participation variation
6
80
79 5

78 4
77
Set 6 3
76
2
75
74 1
73
0
72 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2rd mode participation variation
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 3/25/2018
 45
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

1rd mode participation variation 3rd mode participation variation

85
9
8
80
7

75 Set 7 6
5
70 4
3
65 2
1
60 2rd mode participation variation 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 3/25/2018
 46
MODE PARTICIPATION FACTOR COMPARISION

1st Mode participation

3rd Mode participation
85
10
9
80
8
Set 8 7
75 6
5
70 4
3
65 2
2nd Mode participation 1
25 0
60
0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15
20

15

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
3/25/2018
 47
TIME PERIOD COMPARISION

time period
time period 2.6
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.1
2
2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Set 1 Set 2

3/25/2018
 48
TIME PERIOD COMPARISION

time period
time period
2.6
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.1
2
2
1.9
1.9
1.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1.8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Set 3 Set 4

3/25/2018
 49
TIME PERIOD COMPARISION

2.5 time period time period

2.55

2.35
2.5

2.45
2.2

2.4

2.05
2.35

1.9 2.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Set 5 Set 6

3/25/2018
 50
TIME PERIOD COMPARISION

time period time period

2.6 2.6

2.5 2.5

2.4 2.4

2.3 2.3

2.2 2.2

2.1 2.1

2 2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Set 7 Set 8

3/25/2018
 51
REGRESSION ANALYSIS

 The factor μ (irregular mode participating factor / regular mode participation factor) is
calculated and regression analysis has been performed for time period and μ. The
following equation is obtained.

t= (3.043948-0.85494µ)*0.075*h0.75

3/25/2018
 52
CONCLUSION

 As irregularity increases, the 1st mode participation factor and time period decreases
 As the irregularity is shifted from bottom floor to top floor, the 1st mode participation
factor shows the trend reducing at first and increasing.
 As the irregularity is shifted from lower storey to upper storey, the time period at first
reducing and then increasing.
 So, as the irregularity is near lower storey or at upper storey, the time period is more and
the structure is more flexible.

3/25/2018