Effect of Groundmotion Characterstics on the

Response of Mid-rise Buliding.

Hem Narayan Mandal1, JitendraYadav2 Ranjan Sharma3

Department of Structural Department of Structural Department of Structural
Engineering, ‘School of Civil Engineering,‘School of Civil Engineering,‘School of Civil
Engineering, ‘Vellore Institute of Engineering,‘Vellore Institute of Engineering,‘Vellore Institute of
Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu

for a period of time.This shaking is caused by the

ABSTRACT
Nepal is a country situated between the two
plates i.e. the Eurasian Plate and the Indian Plate
so earthquakes are very much frequent in the
region. The earthquake of the 2015 devastated
the country and caused 10,000 deaths and many
casualties. The earthquake is dependent on the
groundmotion parameters so the groundmotion
parameters of the earthquake are studied here.
Since earthquake forces are random in nature
and unpredictable, the engineering aspects such
as softwares need to be thorough for analyzing
structures under the action of earthquake forces.
Earthquake loads are required to be carefully
modeled so as to assess the real behavior of
structure with utmost understanding that damage
is expected but it should be regulated.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
An Earthquake is a natural phenomenon that
results in the shaking of the surface of the earth
passage of seismic waves of low frequency sound
waves that are originated from the Earth’s
interior where a sudden rapid motion has
taken place. The moving masses release
shockwaves which are even strong to cause direct
effect such as to modify the earths surface,
plunge up cliffs and cause enormous cracks to
appear on the ground. They can cause the
collapse of the buildings damaging power and
gas lines.Also natural calamities such as
landslides, avalanches and tsunami’s can
occur.
It is necessary to design an earthquake
resistance RC framed building considering the
intensities of the particular magnitude of an
earthquake. These intensities causes damage to
the structure depending on the region too.
Therefore, it is necessary to understand the
seismic behavior of buildings having similar
layout under different intensities of earthquake
and study the various responses.
The estimation of the groundmotion
parameters for the planning and designing of the
RC framed building is mandatory. The
groundmotion parametrs include the amplitude
parameters, frequency parameters and time
duration. Here in our study there is the study of
the acceleration vs the frequency parameters.
1.2 Objective of the project
The objectives of the project are:
1. To perform the modal analysis and
determine time period of the RC framed
building.
2. To perform linear dynamic(Response
Spectrum) analysis and nonlinear
dyaminc(non-linear time history)
analysis of the RC framed building to
determine the seismic responses of the
building.
3. To check the serviceability limits of
building.
4. To perform and determine frequency and
storey drift of the building corresponding
to the time history of the earthquake
taken into account.
2.LITERATURE REVIEW
[1]The study done by Rishi Ram Parajuli and
Junji Kiyono on the Nepal Earthqake has taken
nine earthquakes into account and has specified
the near end distance to be 18.5Km and far end
distance to be 83.90km. The Frequency range is
in the 0.3–10 Hz. range and the velocity of 380
cm/s and 500 cm/s2 as acceleration. The
characteristics of ground motion have an impact
on damage scenarios all over the affected area.
Low-rise masonry and reinforced concrete
buildings in the Kathmandu valley have high
natural frequency. Super high-rise, base isolated
buildings could have suffered severe damage if
they had been built in the affected area.
The Nepal earthquake had
low-frequency ground motion with accelerations
of <200 cm/s2, but the velocity was relatively
high which caused damage.One of the reasons
behind the collapse of many historical structures,
a tower structure monument, in comparison with
general buildings, is likely to be lower frequency
dominant ground motion. We should consider the
epicentral distance and rupture line during the
interpretation of ground motion frequency
components. Rural areas in Nepal have a large
stock of stone masonry structures used for shelter
and other purposes. These need to be reinforced
using locally available materials to make them
more resilient. Ridge structures are at a higher
risk of earthquake damage relative to structures
on slopes. Local construction methods should be
improved technically, by providing longitudinal
and transverse bonding during construction.
[2] The second study done by Mohd. Irshad Iqbal
Ansari M. A. Baig Faiyaz Azam describes the
time history analysis of Chi- Chi Earthquake, El-
Centro Earthquake and kobe Earthquake and
takes the near filed as less than 50km and far field
as greater than 50km.The study states that the
acceleration, velocity, displacement and base
shear for the near field earthquake are higher for
the near field earthquake than the far field
earthquake.Near field earthquake have longer
frequency range, axial forces, moment and force
in a critical column in a near-field earthquake is this analysis, there is the use of IS-456-2000,
more so that as per structural engineering aspect IS-875-Part3 and IS-1893-2016.The ground
building frame in near-field earthquake having motion parameters correlating with the frequency
more critical behavior. of the RC framed building are used for the
[3] The study done by Reeves Whitney analysis.
Anil Agrawal describes the ground motion of the Here, the acceleration used is greater
uireinforced buildings and it shows that than 0.2g and the modal time period of the
Nonlinear time history analysis of a building was analyzed from the modal analysis.
well-designed unreinforced masonry building The nonlinear time history analysis was
shows that the initial acceleration causes yielding performed using the earthquake time history data
in the structure and the subsequent long period of the same frequency. The earthquake data was
motions led to the failure of the building. Poor taken from the Peer Berkeley database. The near
construction and material quality led to the end field and the far end field data was taken
failure of the structure. using the 18km and 85km as near field and far
[4] The study done by Rohit Kumar field data.
Adhikari and Dina D’Ayala specifies Mw7.8, The earthquake data for the analysis
occurred in the central region of Nepal on April from Hollister and NorthenCalif were taken into
25, 2015 with the epicentre located in Barpak acoount.
village, Gorkha district, approximately 78 km Near
northwest of Kathmandu with a focal depth of 15 Field 15km
Far Field 85km
km .Hundreds of aftershocks with Mw ≥ 4.0 were S Duration Year Mag Hozaccelration
recorded.It is found that the seismic capacity of N nitu
the PRE-SMM typology is very low in both de
principal directions, theshorter direction being 1 18.5 1961 5.6 RSN26_HOLLIS
the weakest. Performancelevel for the PRE-SMM TR_B-HCH181.
AT2
typology is low at about 0.17 g, against the PGA
distributionof 0.25 g to 0.35 g in the mountainous
district. 2 19.4 1954 6.5 RSN20_NCALIF
.FH_H-FRN044
[5] The study proposed by Michael W.
.AT2
Salmon describes different groundmotion
relationship and describes the Near Field as 15km
3 19.4 1954 6.5 "Northern
and the far field greater than 15km. Calif-03"
3. METHODOLOGY
The finite element analysis software SAP 2000 is
used for modeling and running all the analysis. In
Fig 1(a): Plan of the Bulding
Fig 2(a): Plan of the Bulding

Fig1(b): 3D model Fig2(b): 3D model

 Fig3: Acceleration velocity adiscplacement values

4.RESULTS:
Results obtained from the analysis are tabulated
in Tables 1 to 3. Graphical representations of the
models analyzed as per mid-rise are shown in
Figures 1 to 3. The variations in seismic
responses can be observed in these tables.
The storey drift was within limit of 0.004
as specified in IS code. The storey displacement
and base shear where within limits.

Fig 3(a): Plan of the Bulding

Fig3(b): 3D model
 Table 1(a) : Base Reaction for the Model 1.

Table 1(b) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 1 performing Linear Dynamic Analysis.

Table 1(c) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 1 performing NonLinear Dynamic Analysis.
 Table 2(a) : Base Reaction for the Model 2.

Table 2(b) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 2 performing Linear Dynamic Analysis.

Table 2(c) : Storey Displacement and Storey Drift for Model 2 performing NonLinear Dynamic Analysis.
 Table 3(a) : Base Reaction for the Model 3.

Table 3(b) : Storey Drift for Model 3 performing Linear Dynamic Analysis.
5. CONCLUSION: multistory office building subjected to near &

1. The seismic responses base shear, storey far field earthquake.

3.
displacements and storey drifts in both the
directions are found to vary in similar pattern for
the models considered for the study.
2. The values of seismic responses i.e. base shear,
storey displacement and storey drifts were
determined for the time histories considered.
3. The frequency of the mid-rise building 4.
modelled tends to match with the time history
Whitney, Reeves & Agrawal, Anil. (2016).
Ground Motion Characteristics of the 2015
Gorkha, Nepal, Earthquake and Its Effects on a
Prototype Unreinforced Masonry Building.
Journal of Structural Engineering.
143.04016220.1061/%28ASCE%29ST.1943-5
41X.0001717.
Adhikari, Rohit&D'Ayala, Dina. (2019). 2015
Nepal Earthquake: Seismic Performance and

data taken into account. Post-Earthquake Reconstruction of Stone

4. As time history is realistic method, used for MasonryBuildings.10.13140/RG.2.2.25288.47

361.
seismic analysis, it provides a better check to the
5. Robert P. Kennedy Michael W. Salmon Strong
safety of structures analyzed and designed by
Motion Duration and Earthquake Magnitude
method specified by IS code.
Relationships june 1992.
6. References: 6. Chopra AK, Dynamics of structures Prentice
1. Parajuli, Rishi Ram &Kiyono, Junji. (2015). hall,2002.
Ground Motion Characteristics of the 2015
Gorkha Earthquake, Survey of Damage to
Stone Masonry Structures and Structural Field
Tests. Frontiers in Built Environment. 1.
10.3389/fbuil.2015.00023.
2. Mohd. Irshad Iqbal, Ansari M.
A.,BaigFaiyazAzam 2018,Analysis of