International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

Volume 116 No. 13 2017, 65-70

ISSN: 1311-8080 (printed version); ISSN: 1314-3395 (on-line version)
url: http://www.ijpam.eu
Special Issue
ijpam.eu

PLANNING, ANALYSIS,AND DESIGN OF A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WITH SHEAR WALL

DESIGN OF A STEEL FOOT OVER BRIDGE IN A RAILWAY STATION

1
Anish.C ,2P.Mugilvani
1,2
Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering,
BIST,Bharath Institute of Higher Education and Research
(BIHER), Bharath University, Chennai -600073.
1
anishdavidpaul@gmail.com

1. Introduction instantly during the unpredictable and sudden

❖
earthquakes.
Shear walls are vertical elements of the horizontal force The RCC framed structures are slender, when
resisting system. Shear walls are constructed to counter compared to shear wall concept of box like three-

❖
the effects of lateral load acting on a structure. In
residential construction, shear walls are straight
external walls that typically form a box which provides
all of the lateral support for the building. When shear
walls are designed and constructed properly, and they
dimensional structures.
Though it is possible to design the earthquake
resistant RCC frame, it requires extraordinary skills
at design, detailing and construction levels, which
cannot be anticipated in all types of construction

❖
will have the strength and stiffness to resist the projects.
horizontal forces. Walls have to resist the uplift forces On the other hand even moderately designed shear
caused by the pull of the wind. Walls have to resist the wall structures not only more stable, but also

❖
shear forces that try to push the walls over. Walls have
to resist the lateral force of the wind that tries to push
the walls in and pull them away from the building [1-
4].
2. Objective
• To manually analyze the problem frame, using
Kani’s method under vertical loading conditions.
• To perform the same analysis using standard
comparatively quite ductile.
In safety terms it means that, during very severe
earthquakes they will not suddenly collapse causing
death of people[8-10].
They give enough indicative warnings such as
widening structural cracks, yielding rods, etc.,
offering most precious moments for people to run
out off structures, before they totally collapse.
5. Specification of Building

❖
analysis software Staad Pro

❖
• Perform substitute frame analysis for the loading Plot size :978.96 sq.m
cases
❖
Carpet area :948.86 sq.m
Compare the accuracy of the substitute frame
❖
• Unit area :154.18 sq.m

❖
analysis with manual and Staad Pro analysis and Parking area :402.6 sq.m
check its validity in lateral loading cases.
❖
No of units :22
No of floors : G+6
3. Methodology
5.1 Design of Slab
• Literature Review
• Plan of the Building Dimensions of the Slab (3.9*3.8m)
• Design of Super Structure M30 grade concrete, Fe 415 HYSD bars, Service load
• Design of Sub Structure is 3 kN/ m2
• Design of Shear Wall
• Conclusion 5.2 Check for Slab

4. Comparsion Of Load Bearing Wall And Span ratio = Ly / Lx = 3900 / 3800 = 1.02 < 2
Shear Wall The slab should be designed as two way slab with

❖
provision for torsion at corners.
Load bearing masonry is very brittle material. Due
to different kinds of stresses such as shear, tension,
torsion, etc., caused by the earthquakes[5-10], the
conventional unreinforced brick masonry collapses

65
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

Determine the Effective Depth Using10 mm diameter bars in the long span direction.
Loading class exceeds the value of 3kN/m2, so adopt a Effective depth = 195-10 = 185 mm
depth ratio of 25 Main Reinforcement for Long Span (+ve)
Overall depth (D) = span / (35*0.8) = 3800 / (35*0.8) 6.035 x 106 = 0.87 x 415 x 185 x Ast [1- ((415 x Ast) /
=140 mm (1000 x 185 x 20)], Ast = 149.37 mm2
Determination of Effective Span Adopt 10 mm φ bars at 525.69 mm centers spacing
Effective span = Clear span + effective depth= 3.8+ or 300mm c/c
0.115 = 3.195 m
Load calculation 5.3 Design of the Beam
Self weight of slab = D X 25 = 0.14 X 25 = 3.5
kN/m Dimension
Live load (or) service load Clear span = 3.8 m
= 3 kN/m Width of support = 300 mm
Floor finishes Service load = 3 kN/mm2
= 1 kN/m M20 grade concrete (fck) = 30 kN/mm2
Total load Fe415 HYSD bars (fy) = 415N/mm2
= 7.5 kN/m Determine the Effective Depth
Factored load (Wu) = 1.5 x 7.5 Effective depth = Span/25 = 3800/15 = 253 mm
= 11.25 kN/ m d = 260 mm, Take d=570mm
Ultimate design moments and shear forces Over all depth = 600 mm
Refer Table 7.2 (Table 26 of IS456:2000) and the Effective span = Clear span + effective depth = 3800
moment Co-efficient for αx = 0.0482 for Negative +570 = 4370 mm
Moment αx= 0.0354 for positive Moment and αy = Load calculation
0.047 for Negative moment αy=0.035 for positive Self Weight of the Beam = bxDx25 = 0.4x 0.6x 25 = 6
moment[11-13] KN/m
Shear Force (Vux)= 0.5 Wu Lx = 0.5 *11.25* 3.8 = Live load of slab = wl/3= (7.5*3.8)/3 = 9.5 kN/m
21.375 kN Wall Load = 0.23*2.7*19 = 11.80kN/m
-ve Bending Moment @ Shorter Direction = Total load = 27.3 kN/m
αx*Wu*Lx2 = 0.0482*11.25*3.1952=8.31 kN.m Factored load Wu = (1.5 x27.3) = 40.95 kN/m
+ve Bending Moment @ Shorter Direction = Calculation of Bending moment and shear force
αy*Wu*Lx2 = 0.0354*11.25*3.1952=6.10 kN.m moment
-ve Bending Moment @ Longer Direction = Bending Moment Mu = WuL2/8 = (40.95 *4.032)
αx*Wu*Lx2 = 0.047*11.25*3.1952=8.10 kN.m = 83.13kN/m
+ve Bending Moment @ Longer Direction = Shear force Vu = WuL/2 = (40.95 *4.03)/2
αy*Wu*Lx2 = 0.0354*11.25*3.1952= 6.10 kN.m = 82.5 KN
Check for Depth Limiting Moment of Resistance
d2= (8.311*106) / (0.138 x 30 x 1000) d = 54.87 < = 0.138 x 20 x 400 x 5702
115 mm = 358.68 kNm
Hence the effective depth selected is sufficient to Since Mu < Mulim , Section is under reinforced.
resist the design ultimate moment. Reinforcement Details
Main Reinforcement for Short Span.(-ve) 83.13 *106 = 0.87*415*Ast*305 [1- (Ast*415) /
8.311*106 = 0.87*415*Ast*115 [1- ((Ast*415) / (400*570*20)]
(1000*115*20)], Ast = 207.96 mm2 Ast = 420 mm2
Adopt 10 mm φ bars at 370.66 mm centers spacing Provide 4 no’s of 12 mm diameter bar (Ast = 420
or 300mm c/c in short span direction, mm2) and compressing 2 no’s of 16 mm diameter
Using10 mm diameter bars in the Short span bar at hangers.
direction[11-15]. Check for shear stress
Main Reinforcement for Short Span.(+ve) τv = Vu/bd = (82.5*103)/(400*570)
6.104*106 = 0.87*415*Ast*115 [1- ((Ast*415) / = 0.36 N/mm2
(1000*115*20)], Ast = 150.04 mm2 Pt = 100 Ast/bd = [(100*420) / (400*570)]
Adopt 10 mm φ bars at 516.57mm centers spacing = 0.18 N/mm2
or 300mm c/c Hence τc > τv
Using10 mm diameter bars in the Short span direction. Provide nominal shear reinforcement using 6 mm
Main Reinforcement for Long Span (-ve) diameter two legged stirrups at stirrups at spacing at a
8.104*106 = 0.87*415*Ast*115 [1- ((Ast*415) / spacing of
(1000*115*20)], Ast = 202.58 mm2 Sv = (Ast*0.87*fy)/ (0.4*b) = 362mm
Adopt 10 mm φ bars at 387.69 mm centers spacing Sv = 300 mm
or 300mm c/c Sv > 0.75d = 0.75 x 310 = 232 mm

66
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

Hence safe, Adopt spacing of stirrups as 30s0 mm • Loads are considered as per IS: 875, part 1 and part
centers. 2.
Check for deflection control • Grade of concrete being used M-20. Grade of steel
Pt = 0.18 used is Fe 415.
(L/d) max = (L/d) basic x kt x kc x kf • Unit weight of reinforced concrete is 25 KN/m2.
Kt = 1.7 • And Beams and Columns of cross section is
(L/d) max = 15*1.7*1*1 = 25.5 400x600mm and 400x600mm.
(L/d) actual = 6.6 • Seismic weight of the building:
(L/d) actual = (L/d) max • As per IS code 1893:2002 the percentage of design
Deflection control is satisfactory live load to be considered for the calculation of
earthquake. Force is 25% for the floors and no live
5.4 Design of Staircase load needs to be considered for roof[20-22].
• Hence the effective weight of each floor =
• Vertical distance between floor is 3.6 m 4.0+2.0+0.25x4 =7 KN/m2.
Assumptions • And that of roof = 4 KN/m2.
• Rise of stairs is 0.15m (For Residential • Self weight of 64 columns = 0.3 x 0.23 x 4 x 25 x
building =0.15-0.20 m) 64 x 25 = 1017.6 KN
• Thread of stairs is 0.30m(For Residential building • Weight of columns at roof =1/2 x 1017.6 = 508.8
=0.20-0.30 m) KN
• Width of each flight is 1.2m • Weight of 64 beams =
• Landing width is 1m (0.23x0.23x5x76x25)+(0.4x0.6x5x25x40)
• Thickness of the waist slab is 300mm =1702.55
We found • Plan area of building =
• Effective span = nt + (Width of landing beam) ((2+5.65+3.8)x(3.9+3.6)+(6.19x3.9)+(4.8x12.34))
= (13×300) + 300 = 4200 mm = 169.248
(or) 4.2 m • Equivalent load at roof level = (4 x 169.24) +
• Thickness of Waist slab = (span/20) (1702.55+1017.6) = 3451.11 KN Equivalent load at
= 4200/20 = 210mm each floor = 6.75 x 169.248 + 1702.55 + 1017.6 =
• Over all depth D = 210mm 3862.5 KN Seismic weight of building = 3451.11 +
Effective. depth (d) = 195mm. (3862.52 x 3) = 15038.67 KN
Shear Reinforcement Base shear:
Vu = 1349.94 KN • The fundamental natural period of vibration (T) for
τv = (Vu/bd) = 1349.94x103 / (400x900) the buildings having shear walls is T= 0.09h / √d
= 3.74 N/mm2 = 0.09 x 20 / √40 = 0.28
(100Ast/bd) = 100x3436.11 / (400x900) • Building is situated in Chennai zone III.
= 0.95 • As per zone factor (Z) = 0.10
τc = 0.608 τv > τc • Importance factor (I) = 1.5
Shear reinforcement are to be designed to resist the • Response reduction
balance shear • Ductile shear wall with shear moment resistant
Vs = (Vu - τc bd ) frame (R) = 5
= (1349.94 – (0.608 x 400 x 900)/103) • For 5% damping and type I soil
= 1331.06 KN • Sa/g = 1.81
Use 10 mm dia 4 legged stirrups. • Design horizontal seismic coefficient
Spacing = Sv = (0.87 fy Asv d / Vs) • Ah = ZISa / 2 Rg
= (0.87 x 415 x 314.15 x 900) / = (0.10 x 1.5 x 1.81) / (2x5)
(1331.06 x 106) = 76.67 mm = 0.02715
~ 100 mm. • Base shear VB =Ah x W = 0.02715 x 74713.5 =
2028.47
5.5 Design of Shear Wall • Design lateral force at various floor levels. Design
lateral force at floor i:
Data • Qi = Vb x ( Wihi2) / ( ∑nj=1 Wjhj2)
• The height between floors is 4.0m • Bending moment and shear force
• The dead load per unit area of the floor which • Two shear walls are provided as given in the
consists of floor slab finishes is 4 KN/m2. problem to resist the seismic forces in each
• Weight of partitions on floors is 2 KN/m[16-19] direction
• The intensity of live load acting is 3 KN/m2 on • The shear wall is assumed to be cantilever in
floor and on terrace 1.5 KN/m2. calculations.

67
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

• Maximum shear force at base (V) = 1013.82 KN • Minimum reinforcement is provided in the vertical
• Maximum bending moment at base direction for a length of wall 0.8 lw = 19520 mm.
• M = (21.4 x 4) + (87.95 x 8) (197.75 x 12) + • Minimum area of steel required in the shear wall =
(3510.95 x 16) (354.27 x 20) 0.0025 x 24400 x 300
• = 15878.8 KN. m
• Taking partial safety factor = 1.5 = 18300 m2
• Factored shear force (Vu) = 1.5 X 1013.82 = • Area of minimum reinforcement per meter length
1520.73 of wall = 0.0025 x 1000 x 300
• Factored bending moment (Mu) = 15878.8 x 1.5 = = 750 mm2 [29-30]
23818.2
• Considering axial load acting = 16000 KN 6. Conculsion
• Factored axial load = 1.5 x 16000 = 24000 KN
Flexural strength of shear wall The design and analysis are done with reference of
• fck = 30 N / m2, fy_ = 415 N / m2, Es = 2.0 x 10a N/ various IS specification. The following are some of the
mm2 date associated with the residential building.
• Length of wall (lw) = 24.4 m, Thickness of wall ( Type of building = RESIDENTIAL
tw ) = 0.3 m building
• Providing uniformly distributed vertical Total area of building =1600sq.ft
reinforcement ratio[23-25] Shape of building = rectangular
• δ = 0.25% Purpose of building = Living
• Φ = 0.87 fy x δ / fck = 0.87 x 415 x0.0025 / 30 Slabs used = continuous slab
= 0.030 Thickness of slab = 300mm
• λ = Pu / fck lw tw Beams used = rectangular beam
= 24000 x 1000 / 30x300x24400 = 0.0728 Type of column = Rectangular column
= 0.109 Size of column = 400 x 600mm
• B = 0.87 fy / 0.005 Es Type of footing = Isolated footing &
= 0.87 x 415 / (0.0035 x 2 x 105) Raft Foundation.
= 0.5158 Types of staircase = dog-legged
• xu / lw = (Φ + λ) / (2Φ + 0.36 ) staircase
= (0.030+0.109) / ((2x 0.03) + 0.36)
= 0.3309 Reference
• xu*/lw = 0.0035 / 0.0035 + (0.87fy/ Es)
= 0.0035/ 0.0035 + (0.87x415 / 2x105) [1]. Arun Kumar N., Srinivasan V., Krishna Kumar
= 0.6597 P., Analysing the strength of unidirectional fibre
• xu*/lw < xu / lw orientations under transverse static load, International
Moment Of Resistance Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
• Mu = fck tw lw2 Φ ((1+λ/Φ)(1/2 – 0.416 xu / lw) – 7749-7754, 2014.
(xu*/lw )2 (0.168 + β2/3)) [2]. Srinivasan V., Analysis of static and dynamic
= 30 x 300 x (24400)2x 0.03 ((1 + load on hydrostatic bearing with variable viscosity and
0.109/0.03)(1/2 – 0.416x0.1078)- pressure, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, v-
(0.3309)2 (0.168 + 0.5152/3)) 6, i-SUPPL.6, pp-4777-4782, 2013.
= 2.638694 x 1011 = 67513.8 KNm [3]. Srinivasan V., Optimizing air traffic conflict
• Mu = 263869.4 and congestion using genetic algorithm, Middle - East
• Factored bending moment = 23818.2 Journal of Scientific Research, v-20, i-4, pp-456-461,
• Mu > Mu (factored) 2014.
• 67513.8 > 23818.2 [4]. Praveen R., Achudhan M., Optimization of jute
• Balance moment to be resisted by the edge composite as a noise retardant material, International
reinforcement in each shear wall Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
= (−23818.2 + 67513.8) = 43695.6 7627-7632, 2014.
• Effective depth of wall dw = 0.9 lw = 0.9 x 24400 = [5]. Raja Kumar G., Achudhan M., Srinivasa Rao
21960 G., Studies on corrosion behaviour of borated stainless
• Equal amount of reinforcement is provided on the steel (304B) welds, International Journal of Applied
vertical edges of the wall which will act like the Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-7767-7772, 2014.
flanges of a steel beam[26-28]. [6]. Ganeshram V., Achudhan M., Design and
• Provide 20 numbers. 20 Φ bars in two layers in the moldflow analysis of piston cooling nozzle in
wall at each end. automobiles, Indian Journal of Science and
• AstProvided at ends = 314.15 x 20 = 6283 m2 Technology, v-6, i-SUPPL.6, pp-4808-4813, 2013.

68
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics
[7]. Ganeshram V., Achudhan M., Synthesis and
characterization of phenol formaldehyde resin as a
binder used for coated abrasives, Indian Journal of
Science and Technology, v-6, i-SUPPL.6, pp-4814-
4823, 2013.
[8]. Achudhan M., Prem Jayakumar M.,
Mathematical modeling and control of an electrically-
heated catalyst, International Journal of Applied
Engineering Research, v-9, i-23, pp-23013-, 2014.
[9]. Anbazhagan R., Satheesh B., Gopalakrishnan
K., Mathematical modeling and simulation of modern
cars in the role of stability analysis, Indian Journal of
Science and Technology, v-6, i-SUPPL5, pp-4633-
4641, 2013.
[10]. Udayakumar R., Kaliyamurthie K.P., Khanaa,
Thooyamani K.P., Data mining a boon: Predictive
system for university topper women in academia,
World Applied Sciences Journal, v-29, i-14, pp-86-90,
2014.
[11]. Kaliyamurthie K.P., Parameswari D.,
Udayakumar R., QOS aware privacy preserving
location monitoring in wireless sensor network, Indian
Journal of Science and Technology, v-6, i-SUPPL5, pp-
4648-4652, 2013.
[12]. Kumar J., Sathish Kumar K., Dayakar P.,
Effect of microsilica on high strength concrete,
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
v-9, i-22, pp-5427-5432, 2014.
[13]. Dayakar P., Vijay Ruthrapathi G., Prakesh J.,
Management of bio-medical waste, International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
5518-5526, 2014.
[14]. Iyappan L., Dayakar P., Identification of
landslide prone zone for coonoortalukusing
spatialtechnology, International Journal of Applied
Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-5724-5732, 2014.
[15]. Swaminathan N., Dayakar P., Resource
optimization in construction project, International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
5546-5551, 2014.
[16]. Swaminathan N., Sachithanandam P., Risk
assessment in construction project, International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
5552-5557, 2014.
[17]. Srividya T., Kaviya B., Effect on mesh
reinforcement on the permeablity and strength of
pervious concrete, International Journal of Applied
Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-5530-5532, 2014.
[18]. Sandhiya K., Kaviya B., Safe bus stop location
in Trichy city by using gis, International Journal of
Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-5686-
5691, 2014.
[19]. Ajona M., Kaviya B., An environmental
friendly self-healing microbial concrete, International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
5457-5462, 2014.
[20]. Kumar J., Sachithanandam P., Experimental
investigation on concrete with partial replacement of
69
Special Issue
scrap rubber to granite stones as coarse aggregate,
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
v-9, i-22, pp-5733-5740, 2014.
[21]. Sachithanandam P., Meikandaan T.P., Srividya
T., Steel framed multi storey residential building
analysis and design, International Journal of Applied
Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-5527-5529, 2014.
[22]. Srividya T., Saritha B., Strengthening on RC
beam elements with GFRP under flexure, International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-
5443-5446, 2014.
[23]. Saraswathy R., Saritha B., Planning of
integrated satellite township at Thirumazhisai,
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
v-9, i-22, pp-5558-5560, 2014.
[24]. Saritha B., Rajasekhar K., Removal of
malachite green and methylene blue using low cost
adsorbents from aqueous medium-a review, Middle -
East Journal of Scientific Research, v-17, i-12, pp-
1779-1784, 2013.
[25]. Saritha B., Ilayaraja K., Eqyaabal Z., Geo
textiles and geo synthetics for soil reinforcement,
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
v-9, i-22, pp-5533-5536, 2014.
[26]. Ilayaraja K., Krishnamurthy R.R., Jayaprakash
M., Velmurugan P.M., Muthuraj S., Characterization of
the 26 December 2004 tsunami deposits in Andaman
Islands (Bay of Bengal, India), Environmental Earth
Sciences, v-66, i-8, pp-2459-2476, 2012.
[27]. Ilayaraja K., Ambica A., Spatial distribution of
groundwater quality between injambakkam-
thiruvanmyiur areas, south east coast of India, Nature
Environment and Pollution Technology, v-14, i-4, pp-
771-776, 2015.
[28]. Ilayaraja K., Zafar Eqyaabal M.D., Study of
ground water quality in Cooum belt, Indian Journal of
Science and Technology, v-8, i-32, pp--, 2015.
[29]. Sandhiya K., Ilayaraja K., Application of GIS
for countering nuclear disaster, International Journal of
Applied Engineering Research, v-9, i-22, pp-5561-
5566, 2014.
[30]. Ambica A., Ground water quality
characteristics study by using water quality index in
tambaram area, Chennai, Tamil nadu, Middle - East
Journal of Scientific Research, v-20, i-11, pp-1396-
1401, 2014.
[31] Vainavi.S , Sivasankar.A , Kamal Nataraj.D,
“Investigating Of Delay Factors In Multistorey
Buildings”, International Innovative Research Journal
of Engineering and Technology, vol 02, no 04,pp.80-
88, 2017.
70