1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General
As a result of plate tectonics, there are movements within the earth’s crust. Due to this, the
frictional stress of gliding plate boundaries increases at points of weakness, and causes the
rocks to deform. The stored energy builds up and when the stress finally exceeds the strength
of the rock, they fracture often along a zone of existing weakness within the rock. This zone
of fractures which allow the relative movement of the blocks is known as fault. The stored
elastic strain energy is suddenly released. This sudden release of enormous amount of energy
causes the seismic waves that spread out from an initial point of rupture called as focus make
the ground shake. These waves can travel large distances in all directions. The point on the
Earth's surface that is directly above the hypocenter or focus on the earth surface is called as
epicenter. Near epicenter, the waves can be very large, making them extremely destructive.
Fig. 1.1 explains the process of strain build up and brittle rupture by elastic rebound theory.

Fig. 1.1- Elastic strain build-up and brittle rupture by elastic rebound theory [1]
1.2 Sources of Earthquake
The various sources of earthquake can be as listed below
a. Natural Sources of Earthquake
i. Tectonic Earthquake iii. Rock falls
ii. Volcanic Earthquake iv. Microseis
b. Man Made Sources of Earthquake
i. Explosives Induced Earthquake
ii. Reservoir Induced Earthquake
iii. Mining Induced Earthquake

1
1.3 Structural Hazards of Earthquake
Buildings resting on ground experience motion at base due to earthquake. According to
Newton’s law of inertia, even though the base of the building moves with the ground, the roof
has a tendency to retain its original position. But the flexible columns will drag the roof along
with them. Due to this flexibility of columns, the motion of roof is different from that of the
ground. As the ground moves the building is thrown backwards and the roof experience
inertia force. Internal forces are developed in the columns as they are forced to bend due to
the relative movement between their ends as shown in Fig. 1.2.

Fig. 1.2- Effect of Inertia in a building when shaken at its base. [1]

Earthquakes are thus a severe structural hazard for structures designed for gravity loads as
they may not sustain the horizontal shaking. Structures like buildings, elevated surface
reservoir, bridges, towers, etc. may experience extreme vibrations during earthquake.

1.4 Performance of Open-ground-storey RC Buildings during Earthquake

Reinforced concrete (RC) is the most commonly used construction material used these days,
primarily owning to its low cost, easy availability of materials, simpler execution without
requirements of any special machineries or labor. Generally, the RC buildings are analyzed
and designed such that, the moment resisting frame actions are developed in each member.
The masonry infill wall are normally considered as non structural elements used to create
partitions or to protect the inside of the building and thus are ignored while analysis and
design. Such construction practices are followed in many countries including India. However,
under the action of lateral forces like the once due to earthquake and wind, these infill wall
panel’s stiffness, strength and mass affect the behavior of RC frame building.
At times due to uneven distribution of mass, strength and stiffness in either plan or in
elevation, irregularities are introduced in RC frame buildings. If the masonry walls are not
symmetrically placed, then in that case, the eccentricity between centre of mass and centre of

2
rigidity may induce torsional effects causing additional stresses. In recent times it has been a
common practice to construct RC buildings with open ground storey i.e. the columns in the
ground storey do not have any infill walls between them. This provision generally kept for the
purpose of parking, garages, and various recreational purposes introduce a vertical
irregularity in the structure.
An open ground storey building is one where columns in the ground storey and both partition
walls and columns in the upper storey have two distinct characteristics, namely:
(a) It is relatively flexible in the ground storey, i.e., the relative horizontal displacement it
undergoes in the ground storey is much larger than what each of the storey above it does.
(b) It is relatively weak in ground storey, i.e., the total horizontal earthquake force it can carry
in the ground storey is significantly smaller than what each of the storey above it can carry.
Thus, there is a requirement of seismic strengthening of such open ground storey RC frame
buildings. Various types of energy dissipating devices based on wide range of concepts have
been explored in the recent past.

1.5 Requirement of Retrofitting

As per IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002, a soft storey is one in which the lateral stiffness of that storey
is less than 70 percent of that in the storey above or less than 80 percent of the average lateral
stiffness of the three stories above. Whereas, the weak storey is one in which the storey lateral
strength is less than 80 percent of that in the storey above, The storey lateral strength is the
total strength of all seismic force resisting elements sharing the storey shear in the considered
direction. Thus an open-ground storey can behave like a soft storey as well as like a weak
storey.
Seismic retrofitting is the modification of existing structures to make them more resistant
to the seismic activity, ground motion, or soil failure due to earthquakes. According to IS
13935:2009, many existing buildings do not meet the seismic strength requirements of
present earthquake codes due to original structural inadequacies and material degradation
over time or alterations carried out during use over the years. Their earthquake resistance can
be upgraded to the level of the present day codes by appropriate seismic retrofitting
techniques.
Following are the Performance Objectives of Retrofit:
1. Safety of its occupants: - The goal is to protect human life, ensuring that the structure will
not collapse upon its occupants or passersby, and that the occupants can safely exit.
2. Primary utility of structures: - A high level of retrofitting should ensure that, he lifeline
structures like bridges, hospitals, elevated service reservoirs, etc., are not damaged
beyond a limit to be utilized for their primary application just after the earthquake.
3
3. Historic Significance: - This level of retrofit is preferred for historic structures of high
cultural significance.
1.6 Retrofitting Strategies for RC Buildings
There are mainly two strategies to retrofit the structure and summarized as shown in
Figure 1.3.
[i]. Local /member level
[ii]. Structural Level (or Global) Retrofit Methods
a. Conventional methods - It is based on increasing the seismic resistance of existing
structure.
b. Non-conventional method - It is based on reduction of seismic demands of the
existing structure.

Fig. 1.3- Classification of retrofitting techniques.

The present study focuses non-conventional method of retrofitting in which supplemental

damping is preferred. Various vibration control methods have been developed in the recent
past either to minimize seismic forces acting on the structure or to absorb these forces which
in turn reduces the damage incurred to the structure. There are primarily three vibration
control systems namely:
1. Passive control system: This system does not require an external power source and utilizes
the structural motion to dissipate seismic energy. For example base isolation and passive
energy dissipating devices. In the present study passive energy dissipating devices such as
metallic dampers are selected to mitigate the blast response of structure.
2. Active control system: This system requires an external source of energy which is used to
activate the control system by providing an analog signal to it. This signal is generated by the

4
computer following a control algorithm that uses measured responses of the structure. For
example active mass damper systems.
3. Hybrid system: This system is a combination of passive and active control devices and
requires less external source of energy. For example semi active devices.
The device by which free vibration steadily diminishes in amplitude is called a damper. It
helps to reduce the seismic response of any structure by diminishing the energy and also
reduces the loads on the members.

Types of Dampers [2]

Dampers are classified on the based on the methodology it uses for energy dissipation. The
effectiveness of a damper depends on factors like amount of energy absorption, ease to install
and replace coordination to other structural members, cost, and maintenance required. The
various types of dampers are:
i. Friction dampers
In Friction Dampers, the seismic energy is dissipated in overcoming the friction between the
surfaces of sliding plates. Friction dampers consist of frictional sliding plate interface and a
clamping mechanism that produces a normal contact force on the interface. The dry, sliding,
solid friction that developed between two interfaces introduces static and dynamic
coefficients, which oppose the motion of the damper. Coulomb’s friction law is the basis of
the theory behind the friction dampers.
ii. Viscous dampers
The energy is dissipated through the viscous fluid dampers by moving a piston that forces a
viscous fluid through orifices in the piston head. The force developed in the damper is
proportional to the velocity of the moving piston.
iii. Visco-elastic dampers
Visco-elastic dampers typically consist of a solid visco-elastic material sandwiched between
steel plates. Energy is dissipated through large shear strains in the visco-elastic material.
iv. Mass dampers
In this type of damper heavy mass is placed on a fulcrum which acts as a roller. And it allows
mass to move as it transfer-lateral movement to the floor. Springs and dampers are placed
between mass and anchor members to the floor and frame and they are placed relative in
opposite phase, so that the motion of the structure and the mass are in opposite direction.

5
v. Metallic dampers
One of the most effective mechanisms available for dissipation of energy, input to a structure
during an earthquake, is through the inelastic deformation of metallic substances. Metallic
damper utilize the deformation of metal element within the damper (energy is absorbed by
metallic component that yield). The simplest models of hysteretic behavior of these kinds of
devices involve algebraic relationship between force and displacement. Hence these devices
are often called displacement dependent.

The present study evaluates the performance of metallic dampers as a supplemental passive
energy absorption device for seismic retrofitting of structures. Figures 1.5a and 1.5b show the
geometric representation of metallic dampers studied in the past by Whittaker et al [3]

Fig.1.5a Two examples of X-plate metallic damper (XPD)

Fig.1.5b Typical metallic plate damper installation and ADAS devices deformation.

6
1.7 Aim and Objectives
1. To study and understand the properties and parameters of metallic damper and their
application for modeling purpose in building structure.
2. To study and understand Wen’s standard hysteretic models for elasto-plastic analysis of
metallic damper under dynamic or cyclic loading which is quite prominent for the study
of hysteretic dampers.
3. To develop mathematical model of building with open ground storey with and without
metallic damper in SAP2000 and perform non-linear time history analysis of buildings to
study the seismic response of buildings under real earthquake ground motions.
4. Investigate the response of the building with open ground storey, with and without
metallic damper.

1.8 Scope of Work

1. Consideration of G+4 and G+6; 5 x 4 bay open-ground-storey RC building.
2. Modeling of upper storey masonry infill panels and metallic dampers.
3. Design a metallic damper in, diagonal bracing and inverted V bracing for the building
model.
4. Evaluation of the response using numerical procedure on software such as SAP2000 when
subjected to different time histories.

1.9 Layout of Dissertation

The entire dissertation report is divided in five chapters. The first chapter gives an
introduction to the subject theme of the dissertation, followed by brief review of literature. On
the backdrop of the gaps identified from the literature survey, the problem is defined; and
aims and objectives are deduced. Further, the scope of the present work is outlined.
Chapter 2 deals with the theoretical aspect and detail review of literature. In view of this the
work attempted in the present study, is justified.
Chapter 3 elaborates the detail modeling procedure for different types of metallic dampers
and the modeling of the prototype building.
Chapter 4 deals with the analysis of model by using finite element method based software
SAP2000 for G + 4 storey building.
Chapter 5 deals with the analysis of model by using finite element method based software
SAP2000 for G + 6 storey building.
Conclusions and scope of future work is discussed in chapter 6.

7
 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
In the past it was a common practice to ignore the masonry infill walls in the design of
reinforced concrete frame buildings. Many buildings were constructed with open ground
storey, resulting in a serious threat when struck by a lateral load like earthquake. Thus the
requirement of seismic strengthening of such buildings was felt all over the world. Various
types of energy dissipating devices based on wide range of concepts were explored to
seismically strengthen the structures. Metallic damper as an energy dissipating passive device
can be very effectively used to address this problem. In the present study, the literature
review is divided into two parts. In the first part the seismic behavior of the open ground
storey buildings and the mathematical modeling of infill masonry panels are discussed
whereas the second part reviews the previous work carried out on the metallic dampers.

2.2 Seismic behavior of Open Ground Storey Building and Mathematical

Modeling of Infill Wall

The different failure modes of masonry infilled frames can be categorized into five different
modes as described below
1. Corner crushing mode represents crushing of infill in at least one of its loaded corners, as
in Fig. 2.1.a. This mode is associated with infill of weak masonry blocks surrounded by a
frame with weak joints and strong members.
2. Sliding shear mode represents horizontal sliding shear failure through bed joints of a
masonry infill, as in Fig. 2.1.b. This mode of failure is associated with infill of weak
mortar joints and strong frame.
3. Diagonal compression mode, represents crushing of infill within its central region as in
Fig. 2.1.c. This mode is associated with a relatively slender infill, where failure results
from out-of-plane buckling instability on the infill.
4. Diagonal cracking mode, represents a crack connecting the two loaded corners, as in Fig.
2.1.d. This mode is associated with weak frame or a frame with weak joints and strong
members infilled with a rather strong infill.
5. Frame failure mode, represents the form of plastic hinges in the columns or beam-column
connection, as in Fig. 2.1.e. This mode is also associated with weak frame or frame with
weak joints and strong members infilled with a rather strong infill.

8
 Fig. 2.1 Different failure modes of masonry infill wall.

Arlekar et al.[4] analyzed the seismic response of four storey RC frame building with open
ground storeys using equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis to find the
resultant forces and displacements. They argued for immediate measures to prevent the
haphazard use of soft first storeys in buildings, which are designed without regard to the
increased displacement, ductility and force demands in the first storey columns. Some
alternate measures involving stiffness balance of the open first storey and the stiffness above,
were proposed to reduce the irregularity introduced by the open first storey.

Negro and Verzeletti[5] studied the effects of the infills on the global behavior of the
structure by performing series of pseudo-dynamic tests on the full-scaled four-storey
reinforced concrete frame. The response of structure in three configuration i.e. bare frame,
uniform infilled frame and partial infilled frames has been compared. They plotted time
history curve and base shear for all three structures and concluded that the presence non-
structural masonry infills can change the response of structure to a large extent. Irregularities
in the panels were found to result in unacceptably larger damage to the frame as a result of
high ductility demands. They also found that masonry infill increases stiffness, strength and
energy dissipation capacity.

Al-Chaar[6] in an attempt to determine the seismic vulnerability of masonry-infilled non-

ductile reinforced concrete frames, carried out an experiment to evaluate the behavior of five
half scale, single-storey laboratory models with different number of bays. They concluded
that the masonry infilled RC frames and more number of bays show higher ultimate strength,
residual strength and initial stiffness.

Davis et al.[7] illustrated the influence of masonry infill on the response of multi-storeyed
building under seismic loading by considering two existing buildings in which one building
has soft storey while the other is symmetric. The infill was modeled using equivalent strut
9
approach. The buildings were analyzed using linear static method, response spectrum method
(linear dynamic method) according to IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002, non-linear static method
(pushover analysis) by using the finite element analysis software, SAP 2000. They found that
the presence of masonry infill panels modify the structural force distribution significantly,
increasing the total storey shear force as the stiffness of the building increases. They
described the lateral load resisting mechanism of the masonry infilled frame like a braced
frame resisted by a truss mechanism formed by the compression in the masonry infilled panel
and tension in the column, in contrast to the bare frame that act primarily as moment resisting
frame. They stated that the existing building with open ground storey are deficit and thus
require retrofitting.

2.2.2 Review of Literature on Metallic Dampers

History of Metallic Dampers
Recently, metallic plate dampers have received increasing attention from earthquake
engineering community and their implementation in new building design and retrofitting of
existing buildings were cited in several comprehensive review articles by many researchers.
The idea of utilizing separate metallic dampers within a structure to absorb a large portion of
seismic energy began with theoretical and experimental work of Kelly et al. [8], and this
work was extended by Skinner et al. [9] and Tyler [10]. During the ensuing years,
considerable programs has been made in the development of metallic devices, most of which
are made of mild steel and lead, metallic devices such as flexural plate systems, tensional bars
dampers, yield ring dampers and extrusion devices Skinner et al. [11]. Bergman and Goel
[12] and Whittaker et al. [13]have studied metallic dampers with the help of experiments.
Xia et al. [14] studied the influence of metallic damper parameters on building seismic
response as well as proposed design of supplemental steel damping devices, subsequently,
employed in seismic retrofit projects discussed by Martinez-Romero [15] and Perry et al.
[16]. Tena-Colunga [17] mathematically modeled metallic dampers. Soong and Dargush
[18] was the first to publish a book on passive energy dissipation systems. Later, another
book on seismic design with supplemental energy dissipation devices was again published by
Hanson and Soong [19]. First study in India on passive energy dissipaters was by Kumar et
al. [20]. Kokil and Shrikhande [21] proposed an approach to find the optimal placement
supplemental dampers in structure systems. Recently, Seyed et al. [22], studied the behavior
and performance of structures installed with metallic dampers Climent [23] investigated the
energy based method for seismic retrofit of existing frames using hysteretic dampers. Pujari
and Bakre [24] evaluated the seismic response of multistoried buildings by optimum
placement of X-plate dampers.

10
Review on Metallic Dampers
A.T. Colunga [25] briefed the importance of modeling of energy dissipating devices such as
added damping and added stiffness devices. The study proposed method to evaluate the
properties for the variation of the cross-section using the flexibility method. The study
validated the expressions obtained in the study with the help of direct derivation and
numerical integration solutions. The study compared the closed form expressions obtained in
the study with elastic stiffness and the strength of the ADAS devices available in the
literature. The hysteresis curves obtained in the study were compared with those obtained
experimentally from shaking table tests.
M. Fabio et al. [26] designed a six storey reinforced concrete structure for a medium risk
seismic region and performed nonlinear seismic analysis of framed structures installed with
different types of dampers such as friction, metallic yielding, viscoelastic and viscous
dampers. The study reported the effectiveness of metallic yielding devices designed for
medium risk region and successively performed when retrofitted for high risk seismic region.
H.N. Li and G. Li [27] evaluated the performance of “dual function” metallic dampers as
these dampers show good energy dissipation behavior along with added structural stiffness.
The study investigates the performance of a steel structure equipped with dual function
damper experimentally with the help of shake table under selected earthquake excitations.
Moreover, finite element program such as ANSYS software was also used to model a
building with the selected metallic damper. The study reported that metallic damper improves
the performance of building.
Mariella Diaferio [28] developed an optimal design procedure for an energy dissipation
device made of aluminum and steel. The design is developed such that maximum energy is
dissipated by the device. The study evaluates the performance of a 3D frame building
equipped with damping device and subjected to compatible earthquake ground motions as per
Eurocode 8. The optimal response obtained from the characterization tests exhibits a good
dissipative behavior of the device, highlighted by a wide enough hysteresis cycle.
Saman Bagheri et al. [29] discussed the importance of proper selection of design properties
of metallic dampers. The study reviewed the parameter such as bracing member stiffness to
the damper devise stiffness (B/D) as it governs the distribution of ductility. Two models of 5-
story and 10-story steel frame buildings with V-shaped bracings and ADAS dampers under
three different earthquakes were analyzed in SAP2000 finite element program. The results
showed that in the optimum state a B/D ratio more than 2 is needed in the upper stories,
whereas a ratio less than 2 is needed in the lower stories. However in the previous studies a
constant B/D was considered. It was also observed that the story drifts in the optimum state

11
have become remarkably uniform and the maximum shear story drift has been decreased in
all models and the behavior of the dampers was also improved after optimization procedure.
R. Vargas and M. Bruneau [30] reviewed the general design approach studied in past to
maintain the main structure in elastic region with minor inelastic deformations and allow
damage on structural elements such as structural fuses. The study proposed a new design
technique for multi degree of freedom structures equipped with structural fuse based on the
parametric studies.
N. N. Pujari and S.V.Bakre [31] investigated the seismic effectiveness of an XPD for steel
buildings. The study varied the sizes of XPD whereas the optimal locations of XPD were
fixed. Moreover, the geometrical properties of XPD i.e. height (a), width (b) and thickness (t)
was also studied based on the seismic response of building under uni-directional excitation of
four components of real earthquake ground motion and peak response quantities were plotted
against the geometric properties of the XPD. The study evaluated the damage indices in the
form of peak relative displacement, peak absolute acceleration and base shear. In addition,
percentage energy dissipated (Ed) by the XPD was also noted. The relative displacement and
the absolute acceleration of building were found to be crucial from design point of view of
the XPD and the building. It was also observed that the base shear was directly proportional
to the forces exerted on the building.

2.3 Studies on Metallic Damper (XPD)

An XPD is a device that is capable of sustaining many cycles of stable yielding deformation
resulting in a high level of energy dissipation or damping, its energy dissipation depends
primarily on relative displacement within the device and not on the relative velocities. It
consist of an assembly that holds either single or multiple components of X shape plates, the
number of plate depends on the requisite of system to dissipates the external input seismic
energy. XPD provides additional damping and additional stiffness to the structure hence it is
also known as ADAS (added damping and stiffness). The use of such device has been briefly
explained in the history of metallic dampers.

2.3.1 Mechanism of XPD in Structure

X-plate dampers consist of one or multiple X-shaped steel plates, each plate having a double
curvature and arranged in parallel; this number of plate depends upon required amount of
energy wants to be dissipates in the given system. Material used for manufacturing of X-plate
may possibly be any metal which allow large deformation such as mild steel, although
sometimes lead or more exotic metal alloy are employed. In order to reduce the response of
structure by dissipating the input seismic energy such damper can be used with an appropriate

12
supporting system, essentially in building structure combination of bracing and XPDs can be
used and such an assembly known as device-brace assembly. When such system experiences
the lateral forces like earthquake, high winds, etc., then input seismic energy dissipates
through their flexural yielding deformation of material. They can sustain many cycles of
stable yielding deformation, resulting in high level of energy dissipation or damping. The aim
behind the use of X-shape of damper is it will have a constant strain variation over its height,
thus ensuring that yielding occur simultaneously and uniformly over the full height of the
damper. XPDs allow it to behave nonlinearly but restrict behavior of the structure up to the
linear elastic range. A series of experimental tests were conducted at Bhabha Atomic
Research Center (BARC) and IIT Bombay to study the behavior of these XPDs by Parulekar
et al. [32]. Bakre et al. [33] also studied the behavior of XPDs and observed the subsequent
results (i) it exhibits smoothly nonlinear hysteretic loops under plastic deformation; (ii) it can
sustain a large number of yielding reversals; (iii) there is no significant stiffness or strength
degradation and (iv) it can accurately modeled by Wen‘s hysteretic model or as a bilinear
elasto-plastic material. A typical XPD with holding device used in the present work as shown
in fig. 2.2

Fig. 2.2 Typical XPD with holding devices (Bakre et. al., [33])

Using beam theory the properties of XPD are evaluated using the following equations:

 y bt 2
Fy  n (2.1)
6a

13
 2 y a 2
q (2.2)
Et

Fy
Kd  (2.3)
q

Ebt 3
Kd  n
12a 3

In the above equations, Kd is the initial stiffness, Fy is the yield load and q is the yield
displacement of the XPD. E and σy are elastic modulus and yield stress of the damper
material, respectively; a, b and t are height, width and thickness of the XPD. The generalized
equation of motion for an N-degree of freedom lumped mass system equipped with hysteretic
metallic damper subjected to base motion is given by

𝑀𝑢̈ (𝑡) + 𝐶𝑢̇ (𝑡) + 𝑘𝑢(𝑡) + 𝐹(𝑡) = 𝑀𝑟𝑢̈ 𝑔 (𝑡) (2.4)

where M, C and K are the mass matrix, damping matrix and stiffness matrix of the system, of
size N x N respectively and F (t) is the restoring force vector for the metallic damper as per
Wen [27]; u (t) is the column vector of the story displacements relative to the ground, r is a
column vector of ones and üg (t) is the ground acceleration.
According to Bouc-Wen’s model the restoring force is expressed as

Fy
F(t) = α U u(t) + (1 − α)Fy z(t) (2.5)
y

F(t) = Fe (t) + Fh (t) (2.6)

Where,
Fy
Fe (t) = α U u(t) (2.7)
y

Fh (t) = (1 − α)Fy z(t) (2.8)

Fy
Ke = U (2.9)
y

Kp
α= (2.10)
Ke

Ke and Kp is initial and post-yielding stiffness of system, Fy and Uy is the yield force and
yield displacement of the system and over dots denotes the derivative with respect to time.

14
For small values of ‘n’ the transition from elastic to the post-elastic branch is smooth, while
for large values that transition is abrupt.
Z (t) a non-observable hysteretic parameter (usually called the hysteretic displacement) that
obeys following nonlinear differential equation with zero initial condition z (0) = 0.

ż (t) = Au̇ (t) − β|u̇ (t)||z(t)|(n−1) z(t) − γu̇ (t)|z(t)|n (2.11)

In the above equation, A, , and n are dimensionless quantities controlling the behavior of
model, again and controls the shape and size of hysteretic loop.

2.4 Salient Observations from the Literature Review:

Following observations made from the literature survey are as follows –

i. There is serious threat to the buildings with open ground storey when struck by a lateral
load like earthquake.
ii. It is a common practice in densely populated cities of India to provide buildings with
open ground storey, which need to strengthen to avoid life and economic loss.
iii. The infill-masonry panels can be mathematically modeled as a diagonal strut.
iv. Metallic dampers are one of the most economical passive energy dissipating devices.
v. It is possible to model metallic damper using Bouc-Wen model.
vi. The non-linear computer packages like SAP2000, ETABS, ANSYS, etc. can be used for
modeling metallic dampers using Bouc-Wen model.
vii. Use of economical and effective metallic dampers for strengthening open-ground-storey
RC building is not studied.

2.5 Closure

The detailed review of the research work pursued by the various researchers till date is
presented. Silent observation emerging from the literature survey is discussed and
subsequently, gaps in the literature are cited. Based on this, the significance of the proposed
study is underscored.

15
 3 MATHEMATICAL MODELING

3.1 General

The details of the prototype building, different forces considered for the analysis, various
parameters involved in analytical modeling of the infill walls of RC frame building and the
design criteria for metallic dampers in accordance with the standard guidelines for modeling
them are as discussed below.

3.2 Description of Prototype Building

Typical five-bay five-storey and seven-storey RC building with open-ground-storey as shown

in Fig. 3.1 and Fig. 3.2 are considered as the prototype structures in this study. Overall size of
the building in plan is 30.0 m × 24.0 m with bay width of 6.0 m in each orthogonal direction.

Fig. 3.1- Plan of the prototype building.

The height of ground storey is considered as 3.6 m, whereas the storey height of upper storey
is assumed as 3.0 m. The upper storey of building are fully in filled with unreinforced brick
masonry of 250 mm thickness. The thickness of roof and floor slab is taken as 180 mm. The
building is founded on a rock site in seismic zone-V, the region of highest seismicity as per
IS: 1893 Part 1 [BIS, 2002]. Since the buildings are symmetric in both orthogonal directions
in plan, torsional response under pure lateral forces is avoided, and hence, the present study is
focused only on the weak and soft storey problem due to open-ground-storey. Unit weights of
concrete and masonry infill are considered as 25 kN/m3 and 20 kN/m3, respectively. Dead
load on the beams consisted of self-weight of beam, slab and masonry infill including floor

16
finish of 1.0 kPa. Live loads on the floors and roof are assumed as 3.0 kN/m2 and 1.5 kN/m2,
respectively.

(a)

(b)
Fig. 3.2- Elevation of the prototype building- a) G+4 storey and b) G+6 storey.

3.3 Design of Frame Members

The detailed calculations of various loads acting on the considered prototype building are
summarized in Appendix – B. Analysis was carried out to determine the resultant axial
forces, shear forces and bending moments in the members of the prototype building using
computer package SAP2000. Thirteen different load combinations were considered as per IS
1893:2002 (Part 2) to determine various internal actions at different sections of various frame
members as shown in Table 3.1.

17
 Table 3.1- Force resultants in critical beam members in different load combinations
Sr. No. Load Combination
1. 1.5 (DL + LL)
2. 1.2 (DL + LL + EQX)
3. 1.2 (DL + LL - EQX)
4. 1.2 (DL + LL + EQY)
5. 1.2 (DL + LL - EQY)
6. 1.5 (DL + EQX)
7. 1.5 (DL - EQX)
8. 1.5 (DL + EQY)
9. 1.5 (DL - EQY)
10. 0.9 DL + 1.5 EQX
11. 0.9 DL - 1.5 EQX
12. 0.9 DL + 1.5 EQY
13. 0.9 DL - 1.5 EQY

3.4 Modeling of Infill Masonry Wall

As described earlier, the masonry infill wall modeling techniques can be broadly divided into
two different groups, namely micro-models and simplified macro-models. In this case, a strut
is used to macro-model the effect of this non-structural element on the structural response.
Introduction of masonry infill changes the lateral-load transfer mechanism of the structure
from predominant frame action to predominant truss action, as shown in Fig. 3.3, which is
responsible for reduction in bending moments and increase in axial forces in the frame
members.

Fig. 3.3- Change in lateral-load transfer mechanism due to masonry infills[6]

Experiments have shown that under lateral forces, the frame tends to separate from the infill
near the diagonally opposite corners of the infill panels, causing compressive contact stresses
18
to develop between the frame and the infill at the other diagonally opposite corners.
Recognizing this behavior, the stiffness contribution of the infill can be represented with an
equivalent compression strut connecting diagonally opposite corners of the infilled frame as
shown in Fig. 3.4. In such an analytical model, if the thickness and modulus of elasticity of
the strut are assumed to be the same as those of the infill, the problem is reduced to
determining the effective width of the compression strut.

Fig. 3.4- Equivalent strut model[4]

The properties of the masonry infill wall considered for analysis are as summarized in Table
3.2. The masonry is assumed to satisfy the requirements of good condition masonry as
specified by FEMA 356 (2000). The elastic modulus in compression of the infill wall in
accordance to FEMA 356 can be calculated as:
Elastic modulus in compression Eme (MPa) = 700 √𝑓𝑚
These properties can be used to macro-model the infill panels in the form of two
compression only struts joining the diagonally opposite corners of the infill panel.
Table 3.2- Properties of Infill Masonry Wall[22]

Properties Values

Weight density (kN/m3) 20

Poisson’s ratio 0.2

Thickness of infill (mm) 250

Prism compressive strength , √𝑓𝑚 4.5

Elastic modulus in compression Eme (MPa) 3150

Flexural tensile strength , ftm (MPa) 0.1

Shear strength fvm (MPa) 0.14

The width “a” of equivalent diagonal compression strut can be calculated as below[23]

19
a=0.175 (1 hcol) -0.4 rinf (3.1)
where,
1
𝐸𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑓 𝑠𝑖𝑛2θ 4
λ1 = [ ] (3.2)
4 𝐸𝑓𝑒 𝐼𝑐𝑜𝑙 ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑓

A reduction factor for existing infill panel damage can takes values from 0.7 to 0.4 from
moderate to severe damage. Thus the infill masonry wall can be macro-modeled as an
equivalent compression strut of depth 250 mm and thickness “a” mm as in Fig. 3.5.

Fig. 3.5- Elevation of the Prototype Building with infill wall modeled in SAP2000 as
diagonal compression only struts.

3.6 Hysteresis Loop

In earthquake engineering, hysteresis loop is a plot of forces or loads acting on the structure
and its displacement due to these forces as shown in figure 3.6, these forces are due to the
loading and reloading of structure. The area enclosed by this loop is a measure of the energy
dissipates over a complete cycle. Amount of energy dissipates by metallic dampers can be
evaluated by considering the force-displacement relationship of dampers material, such
relationship known as hysteresis loop. To characterize the hysteretic loop characteristics of
yielding metallic dampers we have number of models like bilinear model, Bouc-Wens model
and Ramberg-Osgood model.

Fig. 3.6 Typical hystereis loop of metallic damper

20
Initially bilinear model is considered primarily to facilitate the identification of the basic
design variables and relationship between them. When performing time history analyses,
however, the numerical complications may arise even in simpler bi-linear models due to the
sharp transitions from the inelastic to elastic states during the loading, unloading, and
reloading cycles. The presence of such abrupt changes in stiffness requires the use of
numerical procedures that can locate these transition points in order to avoid erroneous
results. As the number of devices installed in a building structure increases and as the
different phase or stiffness transition conditions for each device must be taken into account in
the numerical calculations, the bilinear representation of the devices can become
computationally inefficient. Bouc-Wens model and other hysteretic model but most
extensively used models are Ramberg-Osgood model and another one is Bouc-Wens model
and some normalized non Bouc-Wens model after various literature because such a model
behavior was found to be very similar to these metallic dampers like X-plate dampers
(XPD‘s) and accordion metallic damper (AMD‘s). Initially this model was proposed by Bouc
early in 1971 and subsequently generalized by Wens in 1976. Since thus, it was known as
Bouc-Wens model. In last two decades this model has been very extensively used as it shows
smooth and large range of hysteretic loop due to ease of its numerical implementation. Model
essentially consist of first order differential non-linear differential equation having set of
some parameters which can be chosen by using identification procedure to approximate the
behavior of given hysteretic system, this parameters accommodate and represent the response
of model in the form of hysteretic model. The main advantage of model is same equation
governs the behavior in different stages of inelastic cyclic response of the device.

3.7 Modeling of Metallic Dampers

In the present study, the metallic dampers are modeled using the Bouc –Wen model as
proposed by Bouc in 1971 and subsequently generalized by Wen’s in 1976. Since thus, it was
known as Bouc-Wens model. In last two decades this model has been very extensively used
as it shows smooth and large range of hysteretic loop due to ease of its numerical
implementation. Model essentially consist of first order differential non-linear differential
equation having set of some parameters which can be chosen by using identification
procedure to approximate the behavior of given hysteretic system, this parameters
accommodate and represent the response of model in the form of hysteretic model. The main
advantage of model is same equation governs the behavior in different stages of inelastic
cyclic response of the device.

21
3.8 Selection of Ground Motions
Four different ground motions recorded in different parts of the world were selected as
direct-integration time-history analysis in present study. The ground motion are so selected
that, their recorded peak ground acceleration (PGA) value were nearly about 0.36g which
represents the highest seismic zone-V in India as per IS : 1893 [BIS 2000]. The recorded
ground motions represents common site conditions with hypocentral distance from the source
lie within 20km from the site depicting near source-site effect. Table 3.3 summarizes the
earthquake data and site characteristics of selected ground motions. Fig. 3.11 shows the
acceleration time histories of the selected ground motions.

Table 3.3 Selected ground motions

Sr. No Name of Earthquake Station PGA (g)

Imperial Valley
1 El Centro 0.348
(1940)
Loma Prieta Oakland Outer
2 0.276
(1989) Harbor Wharf
Kern County
3 Taft Lincoln Tunnel 0.156
(1952)
Parkfield
4 Cholame, Shandon 0.237
(1966)

22
 3
Acceleration (m/sec )
2

Imperial Valley
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Acceleration (m/sec )
2

1.5
1.0 Kern County
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
3
Acceleration (m/sec )
2

2 Loma Prieta
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0 10 20 30 40
Acceleration (m/sec )

1.5
2

1.0 Parkfield
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
-2.0
-2.5
0 5 10 15 20 25
TIme (sec)

Fig. 3.11- Selected acceleration-time histories

3.10 Closure

The details of the selected open-ground-storey RC building, method of designing the frame
members, modeling of infill masonry wall, and metallic dampers in different types braces is
discussed. The methodology and modeling techniques described in this chapter are executed
in SAP 2000 in the chapters to follow. A structure should have sufficient strength, stiffness,
deformability and energy dissipation capability to satisfy the demand imposed by a designed
earthquake. The seismic performance of buildings can be analyzed using linear static method,
response spectrum method (linear dynamic method) according to IS 1893: 2002 part I, non-
linear static method (pushover analysis) and non-linear dynamic time history analysis. Linear
analysis is carried out to determine the presence of irregularities in the structure and to
identify the magnitude and distribution of inelastic demands on various components of the

23
lateral load resisting system. For buildings with irregularities, such analysis should not be
permitted. In this case nonlinear procedure must be carried out to evaluate capacity of
structural components under static and dynamic loading conditions. Preferably the non-linear
time history analysis should be carried out for a set of ground motions representing source-
site characteristics of the region. In this study the proposed design methodology for
strengthening schemes was verified for the study frame by non-linear direct integration time
history analysis. In direct-integration time-history analysis, seismic performance of the non-
ductile and strengthened frames was evaluated under several recorded ground motions.

24
 4. Analytical Evaluation of G + 4 Prototype Building

4.1 General

This chapter presents the seismic evaluation of typical ductile designed 5–storey RC building
with open ground storey by time history analysis using a computer package SAP2000. A
strengthening scheme involving metallic damper is adopted to enhance the performance of
the ductile prototype buildings considered in this study.

4.2 Design of Frame Members

All columns of the study frame were chosen to be rectangular sections of size 450mm x
550mm, whereas the size of beam sections was considered as 300mm x 450 mm. As stated
earlier, the unreinforced masonry infill in the upper storey of study frame was not designed
for any forces to which it may be subjected to as followed in normal practice. Table 4.1
shows the properties of frame material and the infill masonry macro modeled as compression
only diagonal member.
Table 4.1 Macro-modeling of infill masonry wall for G + 4 storey
Input Data Calculations
Characteristic Cube Expected modulus of
Efe =
Compressive Srength fck (MPa) = 25 Elasticity of Frame 25000
(Mpa)
of Concrete (28 days) material (concrete)
Prism (infill wall) fm' = Expected modulus of Eme =
4.5 3150
compressive strength (MPa) Elasticity of Infill material (MPa)
hinf =
Size of Beam Ht. of Infill 2.70
(m)
width (m) 0.3
Linf =
depth (m) 0.45 Length of Infill 5.55
(m)
Icol =
Size of Column MI of Column 4176.56
(106 mm4)
rinf =
width (m) 0.45 Diagonal Length of Infill 6127
(mm)
depth (m) 0.55
Angle whose tangent is the
θ =
Ht. of Column hcol (m) = 3.0 infill heigth to length 0.456
(radian)
aspect ratio
Coefficient used to
c/c spacing of column L (m) = 6 determine equivalent width λ1 = 8.44E-04
of infill strut
Width of equivalent
Thickness of Infill tinf (mm) = 250 a= 739.31
diagonal compression strut
A reduction factor for Thus the infill masonry width =
495.33
existing infill panel Reduction wall can be macro-modeled (mm)
0.67
damage can take Factor = as an equivalent depth =
250
values from 0.7 to 0.4 compression strut with (mm)
25
Thus the infill wall can be macro-modeled in the form of two compression only struts joining
the diagonally opposite corners of the infill panel with depth 250 mm and thickness 500 mm.

4.3 Evaluation of Strengthened RC Frame Building

Seismic performance of the building was evaluated by linear modal analysis and nonlinear
time-history analysis using SAP2000. The properties of frame members, infill masonry, and
metallic dampers were used as discussed earlier. Fig. 4.1 shows the elevation of G + 4 open
ground storey RC frame building with different types of metallic dampers modeled in
SAP2000 and installed in the selected bays of ground storey.

(a) Bare Frame

(b) Open Ground Storey with infill masonry

26
 (c) Diagonal Braced Metallic Damper

C2 C4 C5 C6
C1 C3

(d) Inverted V- shaped Metallic Damper

Fig. 4.1- Elevation of G + 4 open ground storey buildings strengthened with different types of
metallic dampers as modeled in SAP2000.

27
4.4 Time-History Analysis
The performance of all strengthened frames under dynamic loading was evaluated by non-
linear direct-integration time-history analysis for a set of four recorded ground motions as
described earlier. Various parameters of direct integration time history analysis were kept
same as in the case of analysis of the RC frame. The frame responses are obtained for
different earthquake excitations using non-linear time history analysis. The maximum roof
displacement, storey displacement, storey shear force and storey bending moment have been
investigated for the considered ground motions as shown in Fig.4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5
respectively. These responses have also been compared with the responses obtained for
different cases of installed metallic dampers. It is observed that installation of metallic
dampers improves the performance of buildings plagued with open ground storey.
0.04 0.03
OGS
Diagonal 0.02
Displacement (m)

0.02
0.01

0.00 0.00

-0.01
-0.02
-0.02
Imperial Valley
-0.04
Kern County
-0.03
0 10 20 30 40 0 9 18 27 36 45 54
0.08 0.012
0.06
0.008
Displacement (m)

0.04
0.02 0.004

0.00 0.000
-0.02
-0.004
-0.04
-0.06 -0.008
Loma Prieta Parkfield
-0.08 -0.012
0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Fig. 4.2 Time variation response of top storey displacement under selected earthquake ground
excitations compared with diagonal braced metallic damper for G+4 building.

28
 0.04 0.03
OGS
V Brace 0.02
Displacement (m)

0.02
0.01

0.00 0.00

-0.01
-0.02
-0.02
Imperial Valley Kern County
-0.04 -0.03
0 10 20 30 40 0 9 18 27 36 45 54
0.08 0.012
0.06
0.008
0.04
Displacement (m)

0.004
0.02
0.00 0.000
-0.02
-0.004
-0.04
-0.008
-0.06
Loma Prieta Parkfield
-0.08 -0.012
0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Fig. 4.3 Time variation response of top storey displacement under selected earthquake ground
excitations compared with inverted V-shaped metallic damper for G+4 building.
It is observed from Fig. 4.2 and 4.3 that the top storey responses are reduced by installation of
metallic dampers placed as diagonal braced metallic damper and inverted V-shaped metallic
damper under the selected earthquake motions such as Imperial Valley, Kern County, Loma
Prieta and Parkfield. The study also compares the performance of the selected dampers with
the open ground storey and bare frame case in reducing the storey level displacements under
selected earthquake excitations. It is observed from Fig. 4.4 and Fig 4.5 that the diagonal and
V- shaped dampers are very effective in improving the structural performance of the five
storey building when subjected to seismic excitations. Thus the installation of metallic
dampers in the selected bays of the buildings is an effective technique to improve the
structural performance of the G+4 building. The study also evaluates the forces such as shear
force and bending moment incurred on the buildings under seismic ground motions and
compares the performance due to installation of metallic dampers. Fig. 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9
shows that the shear force and bending moment at each floor level of G+4 building. The
forces are evaluated at the corner column of the building as shown in Fig 4.1.

29
 6 6
Imperial Valley Kern County
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2
Bare Frame
1 OGS
1
Diagonal
0 0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
6 6
Loma Prieta Parkfield
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)
Fig. 4.4 Floor wise Storey displacement responses compared with diagonal braced damper
under selected ground histories (G+4 building).
6 6
Imperial Valley Kern County
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2
Bare Frame
1 OGS
1
V Brace
0 0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
6 6
Loma Prieta Parkfield
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)
Fig. 4.5 Floor wise Storey displacement responses compared with inverted V-shaped damper
under selected ground histories (G+4 building).

30
 6 6
Imperial Valley Bare Frame
Kern County
5 OGS 5
Diagonal
4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 70 140 210 280
6 6
Loma Prieta Parkfield
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Shear Force (kN) Shear Force (kN)
Fig. 4.6 Floor wise Shear Force responses compared with diagonal braced metallic damper
under selected ground histories (G+4 building).

31
 6 6
Imperial Valley Bare Frame Kern County
5 OGS 5
V Brace
4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280
6 6
Loma Prieta Parkfield
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Shear Force (kN) Shear Force (kN)
Fig. 4.7 Floor wise Shear Force responses compared with inverted V-shaped metallic damper
under selected ground histories (G+4 building).

32
 6 6
Imperial Valley Kern County
Bare Frame
5 OGS 5
Diagonal
4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280
6 6
Loma Prieta Parkfield
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 200 400 600 800 0 40 80 120 160
Bending Moment (kNm) Bending Moment (kNm)
Fig. 4.8 Floor wise Bending Moment responses compared with diagonal braced metallic
damper under selected ground histories (G+4 building).

6 6
Imperial Valley Bare Frame Kern County
5 OGS 5
V Brace
4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280
6 6
Loma Prieta Parkfield
5 5

4 4
Floor Level

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Bending Moment (kNm) Bending Moment (kNm)
Fig. 4.9 Floor wise Bending Moment responses compared with inverted V-shaped metallic
damper under selected ground histories (G+4 building).
33
4.5 Hysteretic Loop
The hysteretic loops for the selected types of metallic dampers installed between column C1
and C2 and between column C3 and C4 (as in Fig. 4.1) are as obtained below in Fig. 4.10 and
4.11 respectively for the considered ground motions.

600 300
Imperial Valley Kern County
400
150
200
Force (kN)

0 0

-200
-150
-400

-600 -300
-0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 -0.008 -0.004 0.000 0.004 0.008
800 200
Loma Prieta Parkfield
600 150

400 100
50
Force (kN)

200
0 0

-200 -50

-400 -100

-600 -150

-800 -200
-0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004
Deformation (m) Deformation (m)
Fig. 4.10 Hysteretic loop in diagonal metallic damper subjected to different types of
earthquakes (G+4 building).

34
 400 400
Imperial Valley Kern County
300 300
200 200
100
Force (kN)

100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-400 -400
-0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 -0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006
400 400
Loma Prieta Parkfield
300 300
200 200
Force (kN)

100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-400 -400
-0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 -0.003 -0.002 -0.001 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003
Deformation (m) Deformation (m)
Fig.4.11- Hysteretic loop in inverted V-shaped metallic damper subjected to different types of
earthquakes (G+4 building).

Hysteresis loop of XPD and AMD for all four earthquakes are shown in Fig. 4.11 and 4.12.
The hysteretic loops obtained are fully stable and perfectly rectangular in shape, thus clearly
defining a constant increase in the relative displacement between the plates post yielding i.e.
on attainment of yield load. The area under these loops gives the amount of energy dissipated
by the damper. Thus, a significant reduction in the lateral load demand on primary members
of the RC frame is ensured with the installation of dampers. The area under these loops gives
the amount of energy dissipated by the damper. Thus, a significant reduction in the lateral
load demand on primary members of the ductile open-ground storey RC frame is ensured
with the installation of metallic dampers.

35
4.6 CLOSURE

The results obtained from the on analytical study using software package SAP2000 are
mentioned in this chapter. The various observations incorporated from the results are
described in this chapter. With the installation of metallic dampers considerable reductions
was observed in the displacement of ground storey and inter storey drift of the building. With
the installation of dampers the lateral-load transfer mechanism of the structure changes from
predominant frame action to predominant truss action. The shear force and bending moment
in the columns is also found to reduce with the installation of metallic dampers.

36
 5. Analytical Evaluation of G + 7 Prototype Building

5.1 General
This chapter presents the seismic evaluation of typical ductile designed 8 –storey RC building
with open ground storey by time history analysis using a computer package SAP2000. A
strengthening scheme involving metallic damper is adopted to enhance the performance of
the ductile prototype buildings considered in this study.

5.2 Design of Frame Members

All columns of the study frame were chosen to be rectangular sections of size 450mm x
550mm, whereas the size of beam sections was considered as 300mm x 450 mm. The grade
of concrete considered is M25 and that of steel is Fe415. As stated earlier, the unreinforced
masonry infill in the upper storey of study frame was not designed for any forces to which it
may be subjected to as followed in normal practice. Table 5.1 shows the properties of frame
material and the infill masonry macro modeled as two compression only diagonal members.
Table 5.1 Macro-modeling of infill masonry wall for G + 7 storeys
Input Data Calculations
Characteristic Cube Expected modulus of
Efe =
Compressive Srength fck (MPa) = 25 Elasticity of Frame 25000
(Mpa)
of Concrete (28 days) material (concrete)
Prism (infill wall) fm' = Expected modulus of Eme =
4.5 3150
compressive strength (MPa) Elasticity of Infill material (MPa)
hinf =
Size of Beam Ht. of Infill 2.70
(m)
width (m) 0.3
Linf =
depth (m) 0.45 Length of Infill 5.55
(m)
Icol =
Size of Column MI of Column 4176.56
(106 mm4)
rinf =
width (m) 0.45 Diagonal Length of Infill 6127
(mm)
depth (m) 0.55
Angle whose tangent is the
θ =
Ht. of Column hcol (m) = 3.0 infill heigth to length 0.456
(radian)
aspect ratio
Coefficient used to
c/c spacing of column L (m) = 6 determine equivalent width λ1 = 8.44E-04
of infill strut
Width of equivalent
Thickness of Infill tinf (mm) = 250 a= 739.31
diagonal compression strut
A reduction factor for Thus the infill masonry width =
495.33
existing infill panel Reduction wall can be macro-modeled (mm)
0.67
damage can take Factor = as an equivalent depth =
250
values from 0.7 to 0.4 compression strut with (mm)

37
5.3 Evaluation of Strengthened RC Frame Building
Seismic performance of the building was evaluated by linear modal analysis and nonlinear
time-history analysis using SAP2000. The properties of frame members, infill masonry, and
metallic dampers were used as discussed earlier. Fig. 5.1 shows the elevation of G + 7 open
ground storey RC frame building with different types of metallic dampers modeled in
SAP2000 and installed in the selected bays of ground storey.

(a) Bare Frame

38
 (b) Open Ground Storey

(c) Diagonal Brace Metallic Damper

(d) Inverted V-shaped Metallic Damper

Fig. 5.1- Elevation of G + 7 open ground storey buildings strengthened with different types of
metallic dampers as modeled in SAP2000.

39
5.4 Time-history analysis
The performance of all strengthened frames under dynamic loading was evaluated by non-
linear direct-integration time-history analysis for a set of four recorded ground motions as
described earlier. Various parameters of direct integration time history analysis were kept
same as in the case of analysis of the RC frame. The frame responses are obtained under
different earthquake excitations using non-linear time history analysis. The maximum roof
displacement, storey displacement, maximum base shear and maximum bending moment
have been investigated for the considered ground motions.

0.06 0.02
Imperial Valley OGS Kern County
0.04 Diagonal
0.01
Displacement (m)

0.02

0.00 0.00

-0.02
-0.01
-0.04

-0.06 -0.02
0 10 20 30 40 0 9 18 27 36 45 54
0.04
Loma Prieta 0.010 Parkfield
Displacement (m)

0.02
0.005

0.00 0.000

-0.005
-0.02

-0.010
-0.04
0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Fig. 5.2- Time variation response of top storey displacement under selected earthquake
ground excitations compared with diagonal metallic damper for G+7 building.

40
 0.06 0.02
Imperial Valley OGS Kern County
0.04 V Brace
0.01
Displacement (m)

0.02

0.00 0.00

-0.02
-0.01
-0.04

-0.06 -0.02
0 10 20 30 40 0 9 18 27 36 45 54
0.04
Loma Prieta 0.010 Parkfield
Displacement (m)

0.02
0.005

0.00 0.000

-0.005
-0.02

-0.010
-0.04
0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Fig. 5.3- Time variation response of top storey displacement under selected earthquake
ground excitations compared with V-shaped metallic damper for G+7 building.

It is observed that for a eight storied building also the top storey responses are reduced by
installation of two different types of dampers i.e. diagonal braced metallic damper and
inverted V-shaped metallic damper under the selected earthquake motions such as Imperial
Valley, Kern County, Loma Prieta and Parkfield as shown in Fig 5.2 and 5.3. The study also
compares the performance of the selected dampers with the open ground storey and bare
frame case in reducing the storey level displacements under selected earthquake excitations.
It is observed from Fig. 5.4 and Fig 5.5 that the diagonal and V- shaped dampers are very
effective in improving the structural performance of the five storey building when subjected
to seismic excitations. Thus the installation of metallic dampers in the selected bays of the
buildings is an effective technique to improve the structural performance of the G+7 building.
Thus strengthening of ductile RC frames with metallic damper significantly reduces inter
storey displacement between floors. The study also evaluates the forces such as shear force
and bending moment incurred on the buildings under seismic ground motions and compares
the performance due to installation of metallic dampers. Fig. 5.6, 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9 shows that
the shear force and bending moment at each floor level of G+7 building. The forces are
evaluated at the corner column of the building as shown in Fig 5.1.

41
 8 8
Imperial Valley Kern County
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 Bare Frame 3
2 OGS 2
Diagonal
1 1
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09
8 8
Loma Prieta Parkfield
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)
Fig. 5.4- Floor wise Storey displacement responses compared with diagonal braced metallic
damper under selected ground histories (G+7 building).

8 8
Imperial Valley Kern County
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 Bare Frame 3
2 OGS 2
V Brace
1 1
0 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
8 8
Loma Prieta Parkfield
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)

Fig. 5.5- Floor wise Storey displacement responses compared with inverted V-shaped
metallic damper under selected ground histories (G+7 building).

42
 8 8
7
Imperial Valley Bare Frame Kern County
7
OGS
6 Diagonal 6
5 5
Floor Level

4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
8 8
Loma Prieta Parkfield
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Shear Force (kN) Shear Force (kN)
Fig. 5.6- Floor wise Shear Force responses compared with diagonal braced metallic damper
under selected ground histories (G+7 building).

43
 8 8
Imperial Valley Bare Frame Kern County
7 7
OGS
6 V Brace 6
5 5
Floor Level

4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
8 8
Loma Prieta Parkfield
7 7

6 6

5 5
Floor Level

4 4

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Shear Force (kN) Shear Force (kN)
Fig. 5.7- Floor wise Shear Force responses compared with inverted V-shaped metallic
damper under selected ground histories (G+7 building).

44
 8 8
Imperial Valley Kern County
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
8 8
Loma Prieta Parkfield
7 7
6 6 Bare Frame
Floor Level

OGS
5 5 Diagonal
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Bending Moment (kNm) Bending Moment (kNm)

Fig. 5.8- Floor wise Bending Moment responses compared with diagonal braced metallic
damper under selected ground histories (G+7 building).

45
 8 8
Imperial Valley Kern County
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
8 8
Loma Prieta Parkfield
7 7
6 6
Floor Level

5 5 Bare Frame
OGS
4 4
V Brace
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Bending Moment (kNm) Bending Moment (kNm)

Fig. 5.9- Floor wise Bending Moment responses compared with inverted V-shaped metallic
damper under selected ground histories (G+7 building).

5.5 Hysteretic Loop

The hysteretic loops for the selected types of metallic dampers installed between column C1
and C2 and between column C3 and C4 (as in Fig. 5.1) are as obtained below in Fig. 5.10 and
5.11 respectively for the considered ground motions. Hysteresis loop of XPD for all four
earthquakes are shown in Fig. 5.11 and 5.12. The hysteretic loops obtained are fully stable
and perfectly rectangular in shape, thus clearly defining a constant increase in the relative
displacement between the plates post yielding i.e. on attainment of yield load. The area under
these loops gives the amount of energy dissipated by the damper. Thus, a significant
reduction in the lateral load demand on primary members of the RC frame is ensured with the
installation of dampers. The area under these loops gives the amount of energy dissipated by
the damper. Thus, a significant reduction in the lateral load demand on primary members of
the ductile open-ground storey RC frame is ensured with the installation of metallic dampers.

46
 400 300
300 Imperial Valley Kern County
200 150
Force (kN)

100
0 0
-100
-200 -150
-300
-400 -300
-0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 -0.016 -0.012 -0.008 -0.004 0.000 0.004 0.008 0.012
400 150
Loma Prieta Parkfield
100
200
50
Force (kN)

0
0
-50
-200 -100

-150
-400
-0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 -0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006
Deformation (m) Deformation (m)
Fig.5.10- Hysteretic loop in diagonal damper subjected to different types of earthquakes (G+7
building).

47
 400 400
Imperial Valley Kern County
200 200
Force (kN)

0 0

-200 -200

-400 -400
-0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 -0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006
400 400
Loma Prieta Parkfield
300 300
200 200
Force (kN)

100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-400 -400
-0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 -0.003 -0.002 -0.001 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003
Deformation (m) Deformation (m)
Fig.5.11- Hysteretic loop in inverted V-shaped damper subjected to different types of
earthquakes (G+7 building).

5.6 CLOSURE

The results obtained from the on analytical study using software package SAP2000 v14 are
mentioned in this chapter. The various observations incorporated from the results are
described in this chapter. With the installation of metallic dampers considerable reductions
was observed in the displacement of ground storey and inter storey drift of the building. With
the installation of dampers and consideration of masonry infill wall, the lateral-load transfer
mechanism of the structure changes from predominant frame action to predominant truss
action. The shear force and bending moment in the columns is also found to reduce with the
installation of metallic dampers.

48
 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

6.1 General
In the present study non linear time history analysis is carried out on RCC frame buildings
using software package SAP2000. Through this investigation, the use of metallic dampers as
a tool to strengthen buildings especially with open ground storey is successfully carried out.

It consists of analyzing G + 4 and G + 6 storey RCC building using four time histories
Imperial Valley, Kern County, Loma Prieta and Parkfield acceleration ground motions. Two
different types of metallic dampers are used: Diagonal brace metallic damper and inverted V-
shaped metallic damper. The obtained analytical results were compared.

6.2 Summary of Dissertation

The results of the work in this dissertation show a trend between open ground storey and
metallic damper strengthened RC frame building. The use of metallic dampers has been
proven effective as it reduces the general response of the structure due to any seismic activity.
An attempt through this dissertation certainly emphasizes on the effectiveness of METALLIC
DAMPER as a very good, useful and upcoming tool to strengthen the structures against lateral
loads.

The study of metallic dampers was successfully carried out in obtaining the reduced response
due to the presence of metallic dampers in the selected bays at the ground storey. The results
of the work are as obtained by the analytical work carried out through SAP2000 v14. The
results indicate the increase in the lateral stiffness of the structure at ground level and thus
increase in its lateral strength. Metallic dampers cost less than other types of dampers and
also require less maintenance, thus can be considered as a onetime investment. One cannot be
sure of making the structure earthquake proof, but at least the damages can be delayed so that
people inhabiting in can have enough time to move for safety. This can in turn reduce the
number of lives lost in case such an earthquake occurs. Important structure life public
buildings, hospitals, schools and colleges, buildings of tourist attraction or of historical
significance should be strengthened by using dampers and in this case metallic dampers prove
to be effective in reducing the damage caused due to earthquake

49
6.3 Conclusion
Following conclusions can be drawn based on the work performed in this dissertation.

1. Use of metallic dampers is an effective tool to seismically strengthen the buildings

with open ground storey.
2. Use of passive energy dissipating devices is more predominant than other owing to
their reliable performance during earthquake.

3. The roof storey displacement, inter storey drift, column shear force and column
bending moment are found to reduce with installation of dampers at the ground storey.
4. There is response reduction not just on the ground storey but also for the upper storey.

6.4 Scope of Future Work

The present study reports the effective use of metallic dampers as a tool to strengthen
buildings with open ground storey. However, the present study can be extended further to
account for some of the aspects that are not considered in the present study. Some of such
aspects are as summarized below:

 Comparison of results obtained using metallic dampers with those obtained using
other types of dampers.
 Use of column strengthening techniques along with the installation of metallic
dampers to deal with the problem of increased axial load on column due to
predominant truss action.
 Use of metallic dampers to strengthen structures with different types of vertical or
horizontal irregularities.

50
REFERENCES
1. Murty, C. V. R., “IITK-BMTPC Earthquake Tips: Learning Earthquake Design and
Construction,” National Information Centre of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Kanpur, 2005.
2. Constantinou, M. C., Soong, T. T., & Dargush, G. F., “Passive energy dissipation systems
for structural design and retrofit,” Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering
Research, Buffalo, New York, 1998.
3. Whittaker, A.S., Bertero, V. V., Thompson, C. L., & Alonso, L. J., “Seismic testing of
steel plate energy dissipation devices.” Earthquake Spectra, 7(4), 563-604, 1991.
4. Arlekar, J.N., Jain, S.K., and Murty C.V.R., “Seismic response of RC frame buildings
with soft first storey,” In Proceedings of CBRI Golden Jubilee Conference on Natural
Hazards in Urban Habitat, New Delhi, 1997.
5. Negro, P., and Verzeletti, G., “Effect of infill on the Global Behavior of RC Frame:
Energy Considerations from Pseudodynamic Tests,” Earthquake engineering & structural
dynamics 25 (8), 753-773, 1996.
6. Al-Chaar, G., Issa, M., and Sweeney, S. "Behavior of masonry-infilled nonductile
reinforced concrete frames." Journal of Structural Engineering, 128 (8), 1055-1063,2002.
7. Davis, R., Krishnan, P., Menon, D., & Prasad, A. “Effect of infill stiffness on seismic
performance of multi-storey RC framed buildings in India,” In 13th world conference on
earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada., August 2004.
8. Kelly, J.M., Skinner, R.I., & Heine, A.J. “Mechanisms of energy absorption in special
devices for use in earthquake resistant structures.” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society
for Earthquake Engineering, 5(3), 63–88, 1972.
9. Skinner, R.J., Kelly, J.M., & Heine, A.J. “Hysteresis dampers for earthquake resistant
structures.” Earthquake engineering and structure dynamics, 5(3), 287–96, 1975.
10. Tyler, R.G. “Tapered steel energy dissipators for earthquake resistant structures. Bulletin
of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering, 11(4), 282–94, 1978.
11. Skinner, R.I., Tyler, R.G., Heine, A.J., & Robinson, W.H. “Hysteretic dampers for the
protection of structures from earthquakes.” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for
Earthquake Engineering, 13, 22–36, 1980.
12. Bergman, D.M., & Goel, S.C. “Evaluation of cyclic testing of steel-plate devices for
added damping and stiffness.” Report no. UMCE 87-10, University of Michigan, Ann
Harbor, 1987.
13. Whittaker, A., Bertero, V., Alonso, J., & Thompson C. “Earthquake Simulator Testing of
Steel Plate Added Damping and Stiffness Elements.” Report No. UCB/EERC-89/02,
Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1989.
14. Xia, C., Hanson, R.D. & Su, Y.F. “Design of Supplemental Steel Damping Devices for
Buildings.” Proceedings of 10thWorld Conference of Earthquake Engineering, 4139-
4142. Madrid, Spain, 1992.
15. Martinez-Romero, E. “Experiences on the use of supplemental energy dissipators on
building structures.” Earthquake Spectra, 9, 581–624, 1993.
16. Perry, C.L., Fierro, E.A., Sedarat, H., & Scholl, R.E. “Seismic upgrade in San Francisco
using energy dissipation devices.” Earthquake Spectra, 9, 559–579, 1993.
17. Tena-Colunga, Arturo. "Mathematical modelling of the ADAS energy dissipation
device." Engineering Structures, 19 (10), 811-821, 1997.

51
18. Soong T.T. & Dargush G.F. “Passive Energy Dissipation Systems in Structural
Engineering.” Wiley, Chichester, England, 1997.
19. Hanson, R. D., & Soong, T. T. “Seismic design with supplemental energy dissipation
devices.” Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 2001.
20. Kumar, K. Sathish, K. Muthumani, N. Gopalakrishnan, B. Sivarama Sarma, G. R. Reddy,
and Y. M. Parulekar. "Reduction of Large Seismic Deformations using Elasto-plastic
Passive Energy Dissipaters." Defence Science Journal, 53 (1), 95, 2003.
21. Kokil, A.S. & Shrikhande, M. “Optimal Placement of Supplemental Dampers in Seismic
Design of Structures.” Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 9 (3), 2007.
22. Seyed, M.S.A., Ali, K., & Hassan, P. “Behavior and Performance of Structures Equipped
With ADAS & TADAS Dampers.” Proceedings of 14th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, October 12-17, Beijing, China, 2008.
23. Climent, A.B. "An energy-based method for seismic retrofit of existing frames using
hysteretic dampers." Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31 (10), 1385-1396,
2011.
24. Pujari, N., and Bakre, S. “Optimum placement of X-plate dampers for seismic control of
multistoried buildings.” International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, 4(6),
481-485, 2011.
25. Colunga, A.T. "Mathematical modelling of the ADAS energy dissipation device."
Engineering Structures, 19 (10), 811-821, 1997.
26. Fabio, M., Alfonso, V., Mirko, M., & Giuseppe, M. “Modeling and Nonlinear Seismic
Analysis of Framed Structures Equipped with Damped Braces.” Recent Researches in
Information Science and Applications.
27. Li, H.N., & Li, G. "Experimental study of structure with “dual function” metallic
dampers." Engineering Structures, 29(8), 1917-1928, 2007.
28. Diaferio, M., Foti, D. & Nobile, R. "Hysteretic dissipators made of aluminium and steel:
optimal design and preliminary characterization tests." International Journal of Advanced
Structural Engineering 1(1), 77-92, 2009.
29. Bagheria, S., Hadidi, A. & Alilou, A. "Heightwise distribution of stiffness ratio for
optimum seismic design of steel frames with metallic-yielding dampers." Procedia
Engineering, 14, 2891-2898 2011.
30. Vargas, R., & Bruneau, M. “Analytical Response and Design of Buildings with Metallic
Structural Fuses.” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 2009.
31. Pujari, N. N., & Bakre, S. V. "Optimum Sizing of X-Plate Dampers For Seismic
Response Control Of Multistoried Buildings." Fourth International Conference on
Structural Stability and Dynamics, 4–6 January, 2012, Malaviya National Institute of
Technology, Jaipur & Texas A&M University, USA.
32. Y.M. Parulekar, G.R. Reddy, K.K. Vaze, & H.S. Kushwaha. “Elasto-plastic damper for
passive control of seismic response of piping systems.” BARC Internal Report no.
BARC/2003/E/028, Reactor Safety Division, BARC, Mumbai, 2003.
33. S.V. Bakre, R.S. Jangid and G.R. Reddy. “Optimum X-plate dampers for seismic
response control of piping systems.” International Journal of Pressure Vessels and
Piping, 83, 672 –685, 2006.
34. Wen, Y. K. “Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems,” Journal of Engineering
Mechanics (American Society of Civil Engineers) V.102 No. 2, 1976, pp. 249–263.
35. CSI. (2007a). CSI analysis reference manual for SAP2000, ETABS and SAFE, Computers
and Structures Inc, Berkeley, CA., 2007.

52
 ANNEXURE A

A.1 Bouc–Wen Model of Hysteresis[27][28]

In structural engineering, the Bouc–Wen model of hysteresis is used to describe non-
linear hysteretic systems. It was introduced by Bouc and extended by Wen, who
demonstrated its versatility by producing a variety of hysteretic patterns. It has been
extended and applied to a wide variety of engineering problems, including multi-degree-
of-freedom (MDOF) systems, buildings, frames, bidirectional and torsional response of
hysteretic systems, two- and three-dimensional continua, soil liquefaction and base
isolation systems. This model is able to capture, in analytical form, a range of hysteretic
cycle shapes matching the behavior of a wide class of hysteretical systems. Due to its
versatility and mathematical tractability, the Bouc–Wen model has gained popularity. The
Bouc–Wen model, its variants and extensions have been used in structural control like in
the modeling of behavior of base-isolation devices for buildings and for different kinds
of damping devices.

Equation of motion for SDOF system is given by,

M ü(t) + C ů(t) + F(t) = f(t)
(A1)
where,
M = Mass
C = Linear Viscous Damping coefficient
F(t) = Restoring Force
f(t) = Excitation Force
u(t) = displacement
and the overdot denotes the derivative w.r.t. time.
According to the Bouc–Wen model, the restoring force is expressed as:
F(t) = α ki u(t) + (1- α) Fy z(t)
(A2)
F(t) can be decomposed into Elastic part Fe(t) and Hysteretic part Fh(t)
where
Fe(t) = α ki u(t)
Fh(t) = (1- α) Fy z(t)
thus, the restoring force can be visualized as two springs connected in parallel.
α = (kf / ki ) = Ratio of post yield stiffness kf to the pre yield stiffness ki

53
 Yeild Force
ki = Fy / uy =
Yeild displacement
z(t) = a non-observable hysteretic parameter (usually called the hysteretic displacement)
that obeys the following nonlinear differential equation with zero initial condition (i.e.
z(0) = 0), and that has dimensions of length

ż(t) = A ů(t) – β | ů(t) | | z(t) |(n-1) z(t) – γ ů(t) | z(t) |n

or simply,
ż(t) = ů(t) { A – [β sign(z(t) ů(t)) + γ] | z(t) |n }
(A3)
where,
sign denotes the signum function, and
A, β > 0 , γ and n are dimensionless quantities controlling the behavior of the model.
(n = ∞ retrieves the elastoplastic hysteresis)
again A, β and γ control the shape and size of hysteretic loop.
Equation A3 can be solved by Euler’s or Runge – Kutta method of differential equation
and thus we will get z(t).

Putting the value of z(t) in Equation A2, we get time history data of restoring force F(t).
Because of the hysteretic behavior of the metallic dampers, the governing equation of
motion (Equation A1) are solved in the incremental form using Newmark’s time stepping
method assuming linear variation of acceleration over a small time interval, ∆t. In this
way, we calculate the hysteretic displacement z(t), and the restoring force F(t) by plotting
F(t) versus z(t),we get Force – displacement plot which is nothing but the hysteretic loop
of model.

54
 Properties of Single blade XPD

Height of triangular portion (a) = 40 mm.

Breadth of triangular portion (b) = 60 mm.
Thickness of plate (t) = 4 mm.

Modulus of Elasticity (E) = 1.922E+05 N/mm2

Yield Stress (y) = 235 N/mm2

Strain Hardening Rate (H) = 5 E+03 N/mm2

Number of blades/XPD (n) = 10.

Calculation of Properties of XPD with one blades:

55
 Fy
iii. Effective Stiffness of XPD = K d 
q

Ebt 3
= K d  n

12a3

192 106  60 103  (4 103 ) 3

x10
=
12  (40 103 )3
= 9600 kN/m

iv. Strain hardening rate = 5 x 103 kN/m

v. Post Yield Strength Ratio = 0.025

(Ratio of plastic stiffness to elastic stiffness of X-plate ADAS element)
vi. Yielding Exponent =1
(For smooth Hysteretic curve taking Wen‘s Yielding Exponent =1)

56
ANNEXURE B

B.1. Load Calculations for Building

All the bays of the selected prototype buildings in both the orthogonally perpendicular
directions are of width 6 m. Since all the bays are square shaped, the self weights from slab
and all the other dead loads and live loads carried by the slab are transferred on the beams in
the form of triangular loading as shown on Fig. B.1.

Fig. B.1.- Triangular loading transferred by slab on beams.

The load intensity calculations for different types of loads are as in table B.1.

Table B.1 Load Instensity calculations

Sr. no. Type of load Load Intensity ( kN/m) a (kN/m)

1. Wall load intensity = 0.25 x 1 x (3 - 0.45) x 20 = 12.75

2. Self weight of slab = 0.18 x 1 x 1 x 25 = 4.5 = 38.25

3. Floor finish load =1x1 =1 =3

4. Roof treatment load = 1.5 x 1 = 1.5 = 4.5

5. Live load =3x1 =3 =9

6. Live roof load = 1.5 x 1 = 1.5 = 4.5

57