Eres 05021 Fu

Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures V 219
The effect of column shape on seismic

performance of 3D RC framed structures with
and without infill walls using pushover analysis
B. Shah1 & P. Patel2
1
Applied Mechanics Department, Faculty of Technology & Engineering,
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India
2
Jacobs Babtie India Ltd., India
Abstract
A ground + six storey RC space frame model with two 3m x 3m panels in each
plan direction and two 3m x 4.5m panels in each principal plan direction are
selected. A comparison is made between the model having the rectangular cross
section of columns and the equivalent square cross section. The same models
were also analyzed considering brick wall elements in the periphery of the frame.
The results obtained from the nonlinear static pushover analysis performance
indicate that the plastic hinges formed in the frame with square shaped columns
are less severe for both of the models. It was also observed that the models with
peripheral brick walls indicate a similar behaviour. It can be concluded that the
square shape of the column cross section improves the seismic response of a
structure as compared to the rectangular shape of an equivalent area.
Keywords: pushover analysis, plastic hinges, seismic evaluation, column shape,
performance based on ATC-40.
1 Introduction
The devastating earthquakes of Bhuj, India in January 2001 and Bam, Iran of
December 2003 has prompted the structural engineers all around the globe to
come together and work towards the understanding of this very complex force of
nature. It has become very clear that some buildings are able to sustain the
effects of quake whereas the others are not. In the Indian context, a large number
of RC framed structures in the semi urban and urban areas of Bhuj and
Ahemdabad were damaged or destroyed. It was observed that the buildings
WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, Vol 81, © 2005 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509 (on-line)
220 Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures V
which were damaged during the earthquake were in the range of ground and six
upper stories. The present work is based on understanding the behavior of these
types of structures under seismic effects. One of the advanced mathematical
techniques for understanding the overall structural behavior is the push over
analysis. A comparison of the influence of the shape of the column on the
seismic response of a building is presented here. The present work also
highlights the effect of brick infill walls in the same buildings by modeling them
as finite elements.
2 Geometry
The problem is studied for a 6m x 6m plan building with a 3m x 3m grid and
having rectangular columns of size 230mm x 450mm at all panel points. All the
columns are oriented such that their longer side is parallel to the global Y
direction and the shorter side is parallel to the global X direction of the building.
The height of the columns in the global Z direction is considered as 3m for each
floor level and the columns extend for 3m below plinth level up to the
foundation. The sizes of columns below plinth level are considered 50mm more
in both the lateral directions. The slab is modeled as a shell element and a rigid
diaphragm action is considered for analysis. The columns are considered to be
fixed at the foundation level. All the beam members are considered rectangular
in cross section of size 230mm x 450mm deep. Four basic types of plastic hinges
are defined at 5% span length from either end of all beams and columns. The
four basic type of hinges defined are Axial (P), Flexural (M), Combined Axial
and Flexural (PMM) and Shear (V). Over and above these, flexural hinges are
also considered at mid-span of all beams. Keeping all the above geometric
features as same, another model was developed with columns having equivalent
square cross section of size 322mm x 322mm.Another set of models with all the
above features as same and with brick infill walls considered in the peripheral
frames as shell elements is considered for analysis. The response of the building
with rectangular columns is compared with that having equivalent square
columns.
One more set of mathematical model was considered with an overall plan
dimensions of 6m x 9m with two panels in each lateral direction of 3m x 4.5m
was considered. Keeping all the geometric parameters same, the model with
rectangular column cross section was compared with equivalent square cross
section. The ground and six storey building with overall plan dimensions of 6m x
9m described above was considered with brick infill walls modeled as shell
elements in the periphery. The seismic response under static push given in the
lateral directions is studied for rectangular columns and equivalent square
columns.
3 Loads
Each of the above eight structural models were subjected to gravity loads in the
form of floor loads considered as dead load of intensity 5 KN/sq.m. on all typical
floors and 6 KN/sq.m. on terrace floor. The live load was considered as 2
KN/sq.m. on all typical floors with 1.5 KN/sq.m. on terrace floor. All external
peripheral beams were subjected to a uniformly distributed load of 13 KN/m on
typical floors and 6 KN/m on the terrace floor to account for parapet walls. The
wall loads for models having brick infill walls modeled as elements were
considered as self-weight generated by the software. The seismic loads in the
two lateral directions were applied as per response spectra method.
Square columns Rectangular columns

Colour coding of hinges
Figure 1a: 3m X 4.5m models deformed shape due to Push in X direction (PX)
at performance point with colour coded hinges.
Family of demand spectra with 5,10,15 and 20 percent damping

Single demand spectra with variable damping
Capacity spectra
Figure 1b: Demand/capacity curves in ADRS format for square and

rectangular columns.
Table 1: Number of hinges developed up to performance point for both

models.
Column Roof Base A-B B- IO- LS- CP- C-D D > TOTA
Type Displ. Force IO LS CP C - E L
in m In KN E
Square 0.175 1346.0 143 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 1440
1
Rectangl *0.096 *185.0 140 0 18 6 0 12 0 0 1440
e 4

Figure 2a: 3m X 4.5m models deformed shape due to Push in X direction (PY)
at performance point with colour coded hinges.
4 Analysis and design

The static analysis is first carried out for the given dead, live and earthquake
loads. The RC design is carried out for the beams and columns and
reinforcement is determined. The static push over analysis is done in the next
step. For all the models, the first push PZ is considered in the gravity direction
due to dead and live loads. The stresses developed in the defined hinges are
monitored stepwise till the full magnitude of gravity loads is applied. Next, the
second push PX is applied in the lateral X direction, which is the weaker
direction for rectangular columns, and its initial condition is considered as the
end of the gravity direction push PZ. The X displacement of the roof level node
is monitored up to the target displacement of 4% of the total height of the
building, when push is given as per mode 1 (the fundamental mode) profile of
the space frame. A third push PY is the push applied in the lateral Y direction
and its initial condition is considered as the end of the gravity direction push PZ.
The Y displacement of the roof level node is monitored when push is given as
per corresponding mode shape in the Y direction. For the 3m x 3m panel models,
the push PY is not compared as it is not critical for rectangular columns which
are stronger in the Y direction for static push. The non-linear static push over
analysis is carried out for all the models as per ATC 40 (1) guidelines
considering building type B and Seismic Zone factor Z as .16 for stiff soil.

Capacity spectra


models.
in m In KN E
Square -0.17 - 143 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 1440
1367.9 3
Rectangl 0.12 886.0 141 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 1440
e 0
5 Results
The results obtained are represented in figures 1a to 4a, figures 1b to 4b and
corresponding tables 1 to 4 in the following pages. Each figure consist of the
final deformed shape of the frame showing colour coded hinges as per ATC 40
categorization for square and rectangular column models. The graphs represent
the demand versus capacity spectra in the ADRS format. The family of demand
spectra is shown for 5, 10, 15 and 20% damping. The single demand with
variable damping is also shown on the graphs. The tables show the comparative
values of roof displacement, base shear force and the number of hinges in
various stress zones as per ATC 40 criteria up to the performance point. In case
of rectangular columns in the 3m x 4.5m case under push in the X direction PX,
the performance point is not achieved. This is indicated in table 1.

Figure 3a: 3m X 4.5m models with external walls deformed shape due to Push
in X direction (PX) at performance point with colour coded hinges.

Capacity spectra


models.
in m In KN E
Square 0.042 2463.5 143 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1440
8
Rectangl -0.055 - 143 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1440
e 2454.1 7

Figure 4a: 3m X 4.5m models with external walls deformed shape due to Push
in Y direction (PY) at performance point with colour coded hinges.
6 Discussions
The results obtained are represented in a graphical representation in figure 5. It is
observed that for 3m x 3m grid, although the total number of hinges formed in
square column model are more, the more severe hinges are developed in the
rectangular column model with external walls modeled. In case of no walls, the
number and intensity of hinges for square and rectangular column models are
almost same.
Figure 6 shows the number of hinges developed for the 3m x 4.5m panel
models with category of hinges color-coded for models with and without walls
having square and rectangular columns. In this case, the push is given in the X as
well as Y lateral directions and the results obtained as per table number 1 to 4 are
presented. It can be clearly seen that the number and severity of hinges in
rectangular columns in models without considering brick infill walls are very
high as compared to square columns.

Capacity spectra


models.
in m In KN E
Square 0.032 2570.7 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1440
9
Rectangl -0.023 - 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1440
e 2533.2 0
PX w ith w all
R EC T
Pu sh d ire ctio n
S Q UARE
R EC T
PX no w all
S Q UARE
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
N u m b e r o f H in g e s c a t e g o r y w is e
Figure 5: Number of hinges with category formed in 3m x 3m grid models.
RECT
w ith
w all
PY
SQUARE
P ush dire ction
RECT
w ith
w all
PX
SQUARE
RECT
PX n o PY n o
w all
SQUARE
RECT
w all
SQUARE
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Num be r of Hinge s ca te gory w ise
Figure 6: Number of hinges with category formed in 3m x 4.5m panel.
Figure 7 represents the effective damping and base shear force resisted by the
3m x 4.5m panel models under push in the X and Y directions for models with
and without brick walls. It is seen from this graphs that the effective damping up
to the performance point in case of square columns without brick walls is quite
less as compared to the rectangular columns and the base shear force resisted is
also high for square shaped columns. This is not seen in case of models with
brick infill walls where there is a marginal difference.
SQUA RE COLUMNS RECTA NGULA R COLUMNS

SQUA RE COLUMNS RECTA NGULA R COLUMNS
35
EFFECTIV E DAM PING IN %
30 3000
25
BASEFORCE IN KN
2500
20
2000
15
1500
10
1000
5
500
0
0
PX no w all PY no w all PX w ith PY w ith
PX no w all PY no w all PX w ith PY w ith
w all w all
w all w all
DIRECTION OF PUSH DIRECTION OF PUSH
Figure 7: Comparison of effective damping and Base Shear Force developed

up to performance point for 3m x 4.5m panel models.
7 Observations
From the observations of a 3mx3m grid with rectangular columns and those with
equivalent square columns, it can be seen that the square columns are performing
slightly better when brick infill walls are considered. This point is clarified in
figure 5.
The second model selected with a grid of 3m X 4.5m is more expressive in

the form of earthquake response. It is to be noted from figure 1 and 2 and the
corresponding tables 1 and 2 that in case of model with square columns, the
number of hinges shown in the category of >E are 6 in number. But, it can be
seen from figure 1 and 2 that the hinges formed up to the performance point are
all in the beams for the square column models as against the column hinges
developing in the rectangular shaped column model. The higher intensity hinges
which are in beams are less dangerous as they indicate local failure. The column
hinges are more alarming as they indicate a general failure of the building. One
more notable point is the fact that the building with rectangular shaped columns
is unable to meet the earthquake demand and performance point is not achieved.
This indicates that the building will not perform well under earthquake forces.
Figure 6 and 7 further indicate that the square shaped columns perform much
better than the rectangular column models especially in absence of a brick infill
walls on the periphery. The performance of the same structure improves
considerably when brick infill walls are modeled. This is indicated by the
formation of very few hinges in cases of buildings with external brick walls. The
nature of capacity curve also indicates that the structure almost remains in the
elastic range up to the performance point.
8 Conclusion
It can be concluded that the square shape of column performs better under
seismic forces than rectangular shaped columns for RC framed structures
without brick infill walls. This improvement in seismic response is less
pronounced in symmetric plan buildings like those having square shaped grid in
plan. The presence of brick infill walls alters the seismic response of RC space
frames considerably.
References
[1] Applied Technology Council document – ATC-40, Seismic Evaluation
and retrofit of concrete buildings Vol.1 and Vol.2 Redwood city, CA,
USA. August 1996.
[2] Mwafy A. M. and Elnashai A. S. “Static pushover versus dynamic
collapse of RC buildings” Engineering Structures, May 2001:407-424.
[3] Kelly T. E. and Chambers J. D. “Analysis Procedures for Performance
Based Design”, Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, Paper ID 2400, 2000.

Eres 05021 Fu

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Eres 05021 Fu

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures V 219

The effect of column shape on seismic

Square columns Rectangular columns

Family of demand spectra with 5,10,15 and 20 percent damping

Figure 1b: Demand/capacity curves in ADRS format for square and

Table 1: Number of hinges developed up to performance point for both

Square columns Rectangular columns

4 Analysis and design

Family of demand spectra with 5,10,15 and 20 percent damping

Figure 2b: Demand/capacity curves in ADRS format for square and

Table 2: Number of hinges developed up to performance point for both

Square columns Rectangular columns

Family of demand spectra with 5,10,15 and 20 percent damping

Figure 3b: Demand/capacity curves in ADRS format for square and

Table 3: Number of hinges developed up to performance point for both

Square columns Rectangular columns

Family of demand spectra with 5,10,15 and 20 percent damping

Figure 4b: Demand/capacity curves in ADRS format for square and

Table 4: Number of hinges developed up to performance point for both

Figure 5: Number of hinges with category formed in 3m x 3m grid models.

Num be r of Hinge s ca te gory w ise

Figure 6: Number of hinges with category formed in 3m x 4.5m panel.

SQUA RE COLUMNS RECTA NGULA R COLUMNS

Figure 7: Comparison of effective damping and Base Shear Force developed

The second model selected with a grid of 3m X 4.5m is more expressive in

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen