Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF CHARTS
Contents
CHAPTER-1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
1.1. GENERAL ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. The structural systems of tall buildings............................................................................ 2
1.3. Outriggered Frame Systems ............................................................................................. 2
1.3.1. The behavior of outriggered frame systems.............................................................. 4
1.3.2. Advantages of outriggers .......................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER-2:LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................... 8
2.1 GENERAL ......................................................................................................................................................8
2.2 Previous research work on outrigger and Belt trusses ........................................................................8
CHAPTER-3:OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ...................................................................... 12
3.1 OBJECTIVES...............................................................................................................................................12
i
6.2.1 Lateral displacement ..................................................................................................... 47
6.2.2 Storey drift .................................................................................................................... 63
6.2.3 Base shear ..................................................................................................................... 78
6.2.4 Fundamental time period .............................................................................................. 92
CHAPTER-7CONCLUSION .................................................................................................. 100
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 101
ii
List of figures
Fig.1. 1:Outriggered frame system ............................................................................................................... 3
Fig.1. 2: Outrigger to perimeter column connections: (a) rigid connection, (b) hinged connection ............ 5
Fig.1. 3: Outriggered frame system under lateral loads and analytical model ............................................. 5
Fig.1. 4: Superposition of analytical model ................................................................................................... 6
Fig.1. 5: Diagram of the effect of the outrigger on the moment .................................................................. 6
Fig.1. 6: Axial deformation of the perimeter columns on two facades perpendicular to the bending
direction ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
iii
Fig.6. 4: Mode 1, Mode 2, Mode 3 for Model 4 .......................................................................................... 96
Fig.6. 5: Mode 1, Mode 2, Mode 3 for Model 5 .......................................................................................... 97
Fig.6. 6: Mode 1, Mode 2, Mode 3 for Model 6 .......................................................................................... 98
Fig.6. 7: Mode 1, Mode 2, Mode 3 for Model 7 .......................................................................................... 99
iv
List of tables
Table 5. 1 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in Longitudinal
direction for Model 1 .................................................................................................................................. 33
Table 5. 2 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors inTransverse
direction for Model 1 .................................................................................................................................. 34
Table 5. 3 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in Longitudinal
direction for Model 2 .................................................................................................................................. 35
Table 5. 4 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in Transverse
direction for Model 2 .................................................................................................................................. 36
Table 5. 5 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in longitudinal
direction for Model 3. ................................................................................................................................. 37
Table 5. 6 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in transverse
direction for Model 3 .................................................................................................................................. 38
Table 5. 7 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in longitudinal
direction for Model 4. ................................................................................................................................. 39
Table 5. 8 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in transverse
direction for Model 4 .................................................................................................................................. 40
Table 5. 9 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in longitudinal
direction for Model 5. ................................................................................................................................. 41
Table 5. 10 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in transverse
direction for Model 5 .................................................................................................................................. 42
Table 5. 11 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in longitudinal
direction for Model 6. ................................................................................................................................. 43
Table 5. 12 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in transverse
direction for Model 6. ................................................................................................................................. 44
Table 5. 13 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in longitudinal
direction for Model 7. ................................................................................................................................. 45
Table 5. 14 Details of wind load calculations as per IS: 875 (Part-3) 1987 with gust factors in transverse
direction for Model 7 .................................................................................................................................. 46
Table 6. 1: Lateral displacements for Load case (G-X) for various models ................................................. 48
Table 6. 2: Lateral displacements for Load case (G-Y) for various models ................................................. 49
Table 6. 3: Lateral Displacements for RSA along longitudinal Direction for Zone V ................................... 51
Table 6. 4: Lateral Displacements for RSA along transverse direction for Zone V ..................................... 52
Table 6. 5: Lateral Displacements for wind along longitudinal direction ................................................... 54
Table 6. 6: Lateral Displacements for wind along transverse direction...................................................... 55
Table 6. 7: Lateral Displacements for EQ along longitudinal direction....................................................... 56
Table 6. 8: Lateral Displacements for EQ along transverse direction ......................................................... 58
Table 6. 9: Maximum Displacement by Response Spectrum Analysis and Dynamic Wind ........................ 62
Table 6. 10: Story drift for Load case (G-X) for various models .................................................................. 64
v
Table 6. 11: Story drift for Load case (G-Y) for various models .................................................................. 65
Table 6. 12: Story drift for Response spectrum analysis along longitudinal direction for Zone V ............. 67
Table 6. 13: Lateral Displacements for Response spectrum analysis along transverse direction for Zone V
.................................................................................................................................................................... 68
Table 6. 14: Storey drift for wind along longitudinal direction ................................................................... 70
Table 6. 15: Storey drift for wind along transverse direction ..................................................................... 71
Table 6. 16: Storey drift for EQ along longitudinal direction ...................................................................... 73
Table 6. 17: Storey drift for EQ along transverse direction ........................................................................ 74
Table 6. 18: Maximum Storey Drifts by Response Spectrum Analysis and Dynamic Wind ........................ 77
Table 6. 19: Base shear for Load case (G-X) for various models ................................................................. 79
Table 6. 20: Base shear for Load case (G-Y) for various models ................................................................. 80
Table 6. 21: Story drift for Response spectrum analysis along longitudinal direction for Zone V ............. 82
Table 6. 22: Story drift for Response spectrum analysis along transverse direction for ZoneV ................. 83
Table 6. 23: Base shear for wind along longitudinal direction ................................................................... 85
Table 6. 24: Base shear for wind along transverse direction ...................................................................... 86
Table 6. 25: Base shear for EQ along longitudinal direction ....................................................................... 88
Table 6. 26: Base shear for EQ along transverse direction ......................................................................... 89
Table 6. 27: Base Shear by Response Spectrum Analysis and Dynamic Wind Analysis along .................... 90
Table 6. 28: Fundamental period and participation for Model 1 ............................................................... 93
Table 6. 29: Fundamental period and participation for Model 2 ............................................................... 94
Table 6. 30: Fundamental period and participation for Model 3 ............................................................... 95
Table 6. 31: Fundamental period and participation for Model 4 ............................................................... 96
Table 6. 32: Fundamental period and participation for Model 5 ............................................................... 97
Table 6. 33: Fundamental period and participation for Model 6 ............................................................... 98
Table 6. 34: Fundamental period and participation for Model 7 ............................................................... 99
vi
List of Charts
Chart 6. 1: Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Load case (GUST-X) for Models. .............................. 50
Chart 6. 2: Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Load case (GUST-Y) for Models. .............................. 50
Chart 6. 3: Lateral Displacement for Load case (RSA-Y) for various Models .............................................. 53
Chart 6. 4: Lateral Displacement for Load case (RSA-X) for various Models. ............................................. 53
Chart 6. 5: Lateral Displacement for Load case (WIND-Y) for various Models ........................................... 56
Chart 6. 6: Lateral Displacement for Load case (WIND-X) for various Models ........................................... 56
Chart 6. 7: Lateral Displacement for Load case (EQ-X) for various Models ................................................ 59
Chart 6. 8: Lateral Displacement for Load case (EQ-Y) for various Models ................................................ 59
Chart 6. 9: Comparison of Top Storey Displacement by Response Spectrum Analysis .............................. 62
Chart 6. 10: Comparison of maximum storey displacement for all Models ............................................... 63
Chart 6. 11: Story drift for Load case (GUST-X) for various Models. .......................................................... 66
Chart 6. 12: Story drift for Load case (GUST-Y) for various Models............................................................ 66
Chart 6. 13: Story drift for Load case (RSA-X) for various Models. ............................................................. 69
Chart 6. 14: Storey drift for Load case (RSA-Y) for various Models. ........................................................... 69
Chart 6. 15: Storey drift for Load case (WIND-X) for various Models ......................................................... 72
Chart 6. 16: Storey drift for Load case (WIND-Y) for various Models ......................................................... 72
Chart 6. 17: Storey drifts for Load case (EQ-X) for various Models ............................................................ 75
Chart 6. 18: Storey drifts for Load case (EQ-Y) for various Models ............................................................ 75
Chart 6. 19: Comparison of Maximum Storey Drifts by Response Spectrum Analysis and Dynamic ......... 77
Chart 6. 20: Comparison of maximum storey drifts for all Models ............................................................ 78
Chart 6. 21: Base shear for Load case (GUST-Y) for various Models. ......................................................... 81
Chart 6. 22: Base shear for Load case (GUST-X) for various Models. ......................................................... 81
Chart 6. 23: Base shear for Load case (RSA-Y) for various Models. ............................................................ 84
Chart 6. 24: Base shear for Load case (RSA-X) for various Models. ............................................................ 84
Chart 6. 25: Base shear for Load case (WIND-Y) for various Models .......................................................... 87
Chart 6. 26: Base shear for Load case (WIND-X) for various Models.......................................................... 87
Chart 6. 27: Base shear for Load case (EQ-X) for various Models .............................................................. 90
Chart 6. 28: Base shear for Load case (EQ-Y) for various Models............................................................... 90
Chart 6. 29: Comparison of Base shear by Response Spectrum Analysis and Dynamic ............................. 91
Chart 6. 30: Comparison of Base shear for all Models ............................................................................... 92
7
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1.GENERAL
Today it is almost impossible to visualize a major city without tall buildings. As the most
vital signs of today’s cities, high rise building has become a source of faith in knowledge and
nationwide pleasure, and has changed the concept of the contemporary city along with its scale
and appearance. In the past, the forms used in design were restricted but currently freedom in
propose of tall buildings has significantly increased, along with a contemporary widening of the
form spectrum in design. Tall buildings today, calculated through the support of highly
developed computer technologies, are built through exceptionally audacious architectural and
structural designs that are more or less not at all bring into being in their predecessors. The
mainly significant factors enabling the creation of high rise buildings are developments and
innovations in the subsequent areas: resources, building techniques, working (mechanical)
systems, structural system and investigation, but by the side of the identical time, the raise in the
elevation of buildings makes them vulnerable to wind speed and seismic activity induce lateral
loads.
When it comes to structural point of view height-rise buildings, the unexpected elevation
is an issue wind-seismic loads will affect easily when compared to low-rise building. Calculating
the lateral loads more difficult than the gravity loads.
Earthquake masses is direct proportional to structure mass, on the other hand wind loads
depend on the height of building as the height increases the wind forces will increase, in height
rise buildings wind loads are dominant while mid & low rise buildings wind loads are generally
an unimportant issue. Consequently, the residence reassure takes eminence in the design of
structural system in high building, & it is essential to control the structure lean. In high building,
this is able to be described as perpendicular cantilever beam, According to the government
department of IS 875:1987 Part III, satisfactory boundary for peak deflection in elevated
structure for wind study is 1/500 of structure altitude
To defeat lateral load owed to seismic activity & wind speed, core wall have been
provide by the side of middle of structure.
Core wall (steel or concrete) is a incredibly efficient & realistic structural scheme which is
cooperative in plummeting the deflection owed to earthquake and wind loads. Though, as
Steel
Reinforced concrete
Composite
Tall building structural systems:
Rigid frame systems
Flat plate/slab systems
Core systems
Shear wall systems
Shear-frame systems
Shear trussed frame (braced frame) systems
Shear walled frame systems
Mega column (mega frame, space truss) systems
Mega core systems
Outrigger frame systems
Tube systems
Framed-tube systems
Trussed-tube systems
Bundled-tube systems
At the level of the outriggers, connecting the boundary columns to all other with belts,
improve the effectiveness of the structure by equalizing the axial column loads along the
perimeter. In this manner, the column, which is linked to the middle by the outrigger, distributes
the axial weight consequence of the outrigger to further column via belt. A belt is made up of a
horizontal shear truss and of equal depth to the outrigger (Fig.1.1).
In this way, all outside columns are joined collectively to participate in supporting the
outriggers. Belts are used not only in the aforementioned conservative outrigger systems, but
also used in the “virtual” outrigger systems. Virtual outriggers idea takes benefit of base
diaphragms to get rid of straight link of center and boundary column through outriggers. A
virtual outrigger consists of strap, & story slab occupied by strap. In this manner, the problem
associated with the gap engaged by the conventional outriggers is avoided. Efficiency of the V.O
depends on the inflexibility of the girdle and story slab at belt levels.
outriggers cantilevered starting the middle are allied unbendingly to the outer limits
column (Fig.1.2a), these columns are subject to additional twisting moment & axial loads
transferred from the outriggers, & the structure cannot completely benefit from the moment
hauling ability of the shear core. In additional, as soon as outriggers are linked by hinge to the
boundary column (Figure 1.2b), by overcrowding the shift of the twisting moment preliminary
the outriggers to the columns, the column axial weight ability is improved and the structure
totally benefits from the moment carrying capability of the shear core. For this reason, hinged
connections between outriggers and perimeter columns increase the effectiveness of the
construction by maximizing the utilization of not only the moment resisting ability of the shear
core but also the axial capability of the columns.
In a easy analytical model, the behavior of an outrigger frame system under lateral loads
(Fig.1.3 can be divided into 2 as a perpendicular beam core beneath lateral load & as the similar
core by way of restoring moment shaped by the outrigger’s lever outcome (Fig.1.4).
The outrigger transfer the restoring instant to the center, performing as a hinge, with the lever
result controlled by the outer limits column and resist the turning round of the center underneath
sideways.
Fig.1. 3: Outriggered frame system under lateral loads and analytical model
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 GENERAL
Various research works and experiments have been approved out since a long era all in
excess of the globe to appreciate or to estimate the end product of earth quake loads on presented
R.C.C building in sky-scraping earthquake zone and in hilly terrains. The concept of modeling
and analysis techniques used for this purpose has also been getting improved with advancement
of engineering and technology as well as with past experience.
A study carried by Po SengKian, Frits TorangSiahaan on ''The use of outrigger and belt
truss system for high-rise concrete buildings'' This paper studies the use of outrigger and belt
truss system for high-rise concrete building subjected to wind or earthquake load. Eight
40−storey two dimensional models of outrigger and belt truss system are subjected to wind load;
and five 60−storey three dimensional models are subjected to earthquake load, analyzed and
compared to find the lateral displacement reduction related to the outrigger and belt system
location. There are some factors affecting the effectiveness of outrigger system. They are the
stiffness and location of the outrigger and belt truss system, the geometry, the core, and floor to-
floor height of the building. This paper proposed to study the use of diagonal outrigger and belt
truss placed at different location subjected to wind or earthquake load, The design of wind load
was calculated based on CP 3, British Standard and the earthquake load obtained using was
Indonesian response spectra zone 4. With computer analysis program, the locations of outrigger
and belt truss for reducing lateral displacement, building drift, and core moment, can be
obtained. The GT-Strudl package program is used to analyze the structure subjected to wind load
in two-dimensional analysis, while ETABS software program is selected to perform three-
dimensional structure subjected to earthquake load in static and dynamic analysis (modal
analysis). The results found shows that the use of outrigger and belt truss system in high-rise
buildings increase the stiffness and makes the structural form efficient under lateral load. For
two-dimensional model, single outrigger provided at the middle of the structure height reduces
the maximum displacement by 56 %, while providing first outrigger at the top and second
outrigger at the middle of the structure height reduces displacement by 65%. For three
A study carried by P.M.B.Raj Kiran, on ''Optimum Position of Outrigger System for High-
Rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings Under Wind And Earthquake Loadings'' The reason of
the current effort is to revise the application of outrigger and belt truss located at diverse position
applied to wind or Seismic forces. The design of wind force was premeditated base on I.
Standard 87.5 (Part--3) & the earthquake load obtained using IS 1893 (Part-1): 2002. The place
where outrigger and restraint tie up for dropping displacement, construction drifts and center
moments is able to be obtained. The ETABS software program is preferred to carry out study.
The current revision is restricted to (RC) multi-storied equal structure. All the construction
models analyze in the revision have 30storeys with steady storey elevation of 3m.
The final results show that the exercise of outrigger and belt tie scheme in tall buildings increases
the rigidity and makes the structural shape well-organized beneath sideways forces. The highest
drift at the peak of constitution once only middle is working is approximately 70.63 mm and this
is condensed by correctly selecting the side scheme. The preface of outrigger at peak storey as a
restrict bind is 4.8.20 mm and 407.63 mm with and with no strap tie up correspondingly. In this
reason there are not numerous reductions in float with belt up tie. In terms of the following
outrigger by limit tie up gives the decrease of 18.55% and 23.01% by means of and not including
belt up bind.
A study carried by Syed RizwanNasir, Amaresh S. Patel on ''Lateral Stability Analysis of High
Rise Building with the Effect of Outrigger and Belt Truss System''The outrigger and belt truss
system is one of the most efficient systems used to effectively control the excessive drift due to
lateral load, so that, during small or medium lateral load due to either wind or earthquake load,
the risk of structural and non-structural damage can be minimized. This paper studies the
efficient use of outrigger and belt truss system for high-rise concrete building subjected to wind
or earthquake load.
Abdul KarimMulla and Shrinivas B.N (2015) had carried out research on ‘’Outrigger System
in a Tall R.C Structure with Steel Bracing’’ Objectives of the study was the following:
1. The use of outriggers in a regular and vertical irregular building under earthquake forces.
2. The buildings with and without outrigger are compared.
3. The outriggers are introduced at two levels in buildings.
4. The behavior of outriggers introduced as a steel bracing in a R.C tall structure.
5. The outrigger location in building is obtained for reducing lateral displacements.
6. To compare the effect of outriggers by both Equivalent static method and Dynamic Analysis
method (Response spectrum method).
7. The results of base shear, storey drift are studied.
According to author the major reason of earthquake was vertical irregularities though it
can be avoided by providing outrigger to increase lateral stiffness. In this article researchers have
performed the comparative analysis of 3 dimensional regular and vertically irregular shaped
symmetrical plan 20 storey structures with and without providing outrigger beam subjected to
Thejaswini R. M. and Rashmi A. R. have carried out a comparative study and analysis of
different lateral load resisting structural systems to understand the realistic performance of
the building during earthquake and under the excessive wind pressure as well as to select
structural system of tall building to stay in good condition with effect of gravity, live load and
external lateral load, moment, shear force and torque with acceptable strength and stiffness. For
this research work they have modelled a geometrically irregular RCC high rise building with
different forms of structural system, such as Rigid frame structure, Core wall structure, and
Shear wall structure with different configurations of shear
wall location, Tube structure and outrigger structure. Results of the analysis reveal that the
values of displacement were less in tube structure and outrigger structural system. The authors
have also stated that in geometrically irregular structure; stability of structure
will boost and the columns sway can be reduced by implementing L-shaped shear wall along the
corners of the structure. One important conclusion that the researchers have drawn from this
study is that when outrigger structural system is provided at a story which has maximum drift, it
can perform as a maximum drift controller (Thejaswini & Rashmi, 2015).
Models geometry
No of No. of bays Bay width No. of bays Bay width Bottom Storey
Storey in in X in in Y storey height
X direction direction Y direction direction height
36 5 4 7 5 3.5 3
`
Fig.5. 18: Perspective view of a storey showing outrigger
(steel) and Brace core wall (Model 6)
Risk coefficient (K1): suggested life period to be assumed and the corresponding K1 factor for
different class of structures as per IS: 875 (Part 3).
Terrain and height factor (K2): Selection of terrain categories shall be made with due regard to
the effect of obstruction, which constitute the ground surface.
Design Wind Pressure: The design wind pressure at any height above mean level shall be
obtained by the following relationship between wind pressure and wind velocity:
PZ=0.6 VZ2
Where, PZ= Design wind pressure in N/m2 at height ‘z’ m
VZ = design wind velocity in m/s at height ‘z’ m
Gust Factor
A gust factor, defined as the ratio between a peak wind gust and mean wind speed over a
period of time can be used along with other statistics to examine the structure of the wind. Gust
factors are heavily dependent on upstream terrain conditions.
Constants and Parameters:
(1) Force coefficient for Clad Building
a=35m b=20m h=108.5m
ℎ 108.5
Ratio 𝑏= = 5.43
20
𝑎 35
= = 1.75
𝑏 20
As per IS 875 (Part 3) 1987 (Fig. 4, Page 39), Cf=1.4
Cy.b
λ = Cz.h(From Fig. 9, Page 50)
Damping coefficient of the structure- As per Table 34 of IS 875 Part 3, For R.C.C. β=0.016
Ø is to be accounted only for the buildings less than 75m high in terrain category 4 and for
buildings less than 25m high in terrain category 3, and is to be taken as zero in all other cases.
Therefore Ø =0.
Along wind load on the structure on a strip area Ae, at any height z is given by
Fz = Cf Ae Pz G
Where,
Fz = along wind load on the structure at any height ‘z’ corresponding to strip Ae.
Pz = design pressure at height z due to hourly mean wind obtained as 0.6 Vz2 (N/m2)
TOTAL 21981.88
STORY LOAD
MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7
LEVEL CASE
STORY LOAD
MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7
LEVEL CASE
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 50 100 150 200 250
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 1: Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Load case (GUST-X) for Models.
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 2: Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Load case (GUST-Y) for Models.
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 4: Lateral Displacement for Load case (RSA-X) for various Models.
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 3: Lateral Displacement for Load case (RSA-Y) for various Models
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 6: Lateral Displacement for Load case (WIND-X) for various Models
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8
7 M-7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart
Table 6. 6.
7: 5: LateralDisplacements
Lateral Displacement for
for Load case (WIND-Y)
EQ along fordirection
longitudinal various Models
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8
7 M-7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 7: Lateral Displacement for Load case (EQ-X) for various Models
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8
7 M-7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
DISPLACEMENTS IN MM
Chart 6. 8: Lateral Displacement for Load case (EQ-Y) for various Models
The lateral displacement is maximum at the roof level and minimum at the base.
Response Spectrum and Dynamic wind analysis
The Concrete Outrigger with belt truss Model shows minimum lateral displacement than
the Steel Outrigger with belt truss Model.
By providing concrete outriggers with concrete core wall (M-1), the lateral displacement
of building is reduced up to 8.27% & 22.08% in longitudinal and in transverse direction
respectively in case of RSA and reduced up to 28.57% & 53.72% in longitudinal and in
transverse direction respectively in case of DWA.
By providing concrete outriggers and belt truss with concrete core wall (M-2), the lateral
displacement of building is reduced up to 8.27% & 22.08% in longitudinal and in
transverse direction respectively in case of RSA and reduced up to 9.15% & 22.41% in
longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of DWA.
Using Box section steel outrigger with concrete core wall (M-3), it shows that the lateral
displacement of the building is reduced up to 6.46%&16.33% in longitudinal and in
transverse direction respectively in case of RSA and reduced up to 23.26%&44.76% in
longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of DWA.
By providing Box section steel outrigger and belt truss with concrete core wall(M-4), it
shows that the lateral displacement of the building is reduced up to 7.69%&18.13% in
longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of RSA and reduced up to
25.53%&45.30% in longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of DWA.
Using Box section steel outrigger with Steel core wall (M-5), it shows that the lateral
displacement of the building is reduced up to 4.11%&10.24% in longitudinal and in
transverse direction respectively in case of RSA and reduced up to 10.73%&27.17% in
longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of DWA
By providing Box section steel outrigger and belt truss with steel core wall, it shows that
the lateral displacement of the building is reduced up to 5.09%&11.37% in longitudinal
and in transverse direction respectively in case of RSA and reduced up to
14.44%&27.87% in longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of DWA
Static wind and earthquake
The Concrete Outrigger with belt truss Model shows minimum lateral displacement than
the Steel Outrigger with belt truss Model.
By providing concrete outriggers with concrete core wall (M-1), the lateral displacement
of building is reduced up to 5.829% & 19.84% in longitudinal and in transverse direction
respectively in Case of Static Earthquake and reduced up to 25.68% & 47.46% in
longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of Static Wind.
By providing concrete outriggers and belt truss with concrete core wall (M-2), the lateral
displacement of building is reduced up to 7.02% & 20.50% in longitudinal and in
transverse direction respectively in Case of Static Earthquake and reduced up to 29.46%
& 49.67% in longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of Static Wind.
Using Box section steel outrigger with concrete core wall (M-3), it shows that the lateral
displacement of the building is reduced up to 4.15%&13.38% in longitudinal and in
transverse direction respectively in case of Static Earthquake and reduced up to
20.16%&37.27% in longitudinal and in transverse direction respectively in case of Static
Wind.
350
300
TOP STOREY DISPLACEMENT
250
200
RSA-X
RSA-Y
150
GUST-X
100 GUST-Y
50
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MODEL NO.
300
STOREY DISPLACEMENTS
250
M-1
200 M-2
M-3
150 M-4
M-5
100
M-6
50 M-7
0
RSA-X RSA-Y GUST-X GUSTY
ANALYSIS
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8
7 M-7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025
DIRFT
Chart 6. 11: Story drift for Load case (GUST-X) for various Models.
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
STOREY LEVEL
23 M-1
22
21
20 M-2
19
18 M-3
17
16
15 M-4
14
13
12 M-5
11
10
9 M-6
8
7
6 M-7
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003 0.0035 0.004 0.0045
DIRFT
Chart 6. 12: Story drift for Load case (GUST-Y) for various Models.
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006 0.0007 0.0008 0.0009
DIRFT
Chart 6. 13: Story drift for Load case (RSA-X) for various Models.
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25 M-1
24
STOREY LEVEL
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006 0.0007 0.0008 0.0009 0.001
DIRFT
Chart 6. 14: Storey drift for Load case (RSA-Y) for various Models.
24
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8
7 M-7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014
DIRFT
Chart 6. 15: Storey drift for Load case (WIND-X) for various Models
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006 0.0007 0.0008 0.0009
DIRFT
Chart 6. 16: Storey drift for Load case (WIND-Y) for various Models
23
22
21 M-2
20
19
18 M-3
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014
DIRFT
Chart 6. 17: Storey drifts for Load case (EQ-X) for various Models
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014
DIRFT
Chart 6. 18: Storey drifts for Load case (EQ-Y) for various Models
0.0045
0.004
0.0035
MAX STOREY DRIFT
0.003
0.0025 RSA-X
0.002 RSA-Y
0.0015
GUST-X
GUST-Y
0.001
0.0005
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MODEL NO.
Chart 6. 19: Comparison of Maximum Storey Drifts by Response Spectrum Analysis and
Dynamic
Wind Analysis along Longitudinal and Transverse direction.
0.004
0.0035
MAX STOREY DRIFT
0.003 M-1
M-2
0.0025
M-3
0.002 M-4
0.0015 M-5
M-6
0.001
M-7
0.0005
0
RSA-X RSA-Y GUST-X GUST-Y
ANALYSIS
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14 M-5
13
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 22: Base shear for Load case (GUST-X) for various Models.
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14 M-5
13
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 21: Base shear for Load case (GUST-Y) for various Models.
23
22
21 M-2
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14 M-5
13
12
11 M-6
10
9 M-7
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 24: Base shear for Load case (RSA-X) for various Models.
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11 M-6
10
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 23: Base shear for Load case (RSA-Y) for various Models.
35
30
STOREY LEVEL
25
20
M-1,M-2,M-3,M-4,M-5,M-
6,M-7
15
10
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 26: Base shear for Load case (WIND-X) for various Models
40
35
30
STOREY LEVEL
25
20
M-1,M-2,M-3,M-4,M-5,M-
15 6,M-7
10
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 25: Base shear for Load case (WIND-Y) for various Models
23
22 M-2
21
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8 M-7
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
BASE SHEAR
Chart 6. 27: Base shear for Load case (EQ-X) for various Models
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25 M-1
STOREY LEVEL
24
23
22
21
M-2
20
19 M-3
18
17
16 M-4
15
14
13 M-5
12
11
10 M-6
9
8
7 M-7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
BASE SHEAR
Chart
Table 6. 6.
27:28: Base
Base shear
Shear byfor Load case
Response (EQ-Y)Analysis
Spectrum for various
andModels
Dynamic Wind Analysis along
Longitudinal and Transverse direction
30000
25000
20000
BASE SHEAR
RSA-X
15000
RSA-Y
GUST-X
10000
GUST-Y
5000
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MODEL NO.
Chart 6. 29: Comparison of Base shear by Response Spectrum Analysis and Dynamic
Wind Analysis along Longitudinal and Transverse direction.
25000
20000 M-1
BASE SHEAR
M-2
15000 M-3
M-4
10000 M-5
M-6
5000 M-7
0
RSA-X RSA-Y GUST-X GUST-Y
ANALYSIS
The table shows the comparison of base shear for different models by response spectrum analysis
and dynamic wind analysis in longitudinal and transverse direction. It is observed from the table
that base shear reading noted from dynamic wind analysis has the larger values compared to the
base shear reading noted by response spectrum analysis. From the graph it is also observed that
model 1 has less base shear compared to different models in longitudinal and transverse direction
for RSA and for DWA it is highest amongst all.
After the provision of bracings the frequency increases and time period goes on decreasing. By
the provision of the bracings there will be increase in stiffness of the member. The natural period
decreases as the stiffness of the building increases and thereby leading to increase in frequency