Comparison of Analytical and Design Results

CHAPTER 4
COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL AND DESIGN RESULTS
4.1. General
In this study, the superstructure of six-story reinforced concrete building is
carried out by using ETABS (Extended Three dimensional Analysis of Building
System) software. Static lateral force procedure is used for static analysis. In this
study, comparisons of analysis and design results due to blast loading effect and
before applying blast loads are considered. From analysis results, story drift, story
shear and story moment for all stories are compared. Axial force, shear force and
bending moment of selected columns and shear force and bending moment of selected
beams are compared. From design results, increasing member size and rebar
percentage are described.
4.2. Comparison of Story Drift, Story Shear, and Story Moment

The comparative results of story drift, story shear, and story moment are
described from Figure4.1 to Figure 4.5. Results of story drift, story shear and story
moment for both directions are taken from due to blast loads and before applying blast
load. The values of story moments due blast load are much greater than that before
applying blast loads for all stories in X- direction. The values of story moments in Y
directions due to blast loads is greater than from story 1 to story 2. But comparison of
values in story 3 to story 6 is not distinctly different.
Story shear values for all stories in X-direction due to blast loads are not
applying. For all stories, story 1 has the greatest values of shear force and story 6 has
the least values of shear force in Y directions.
For story drifts in X-direction, story drift values due to blast loads are less than
before applying blast loads in all stories. In Y-direction, story drift values due to blast
loads in all stories are greater than that values before applying blast loads.
55
Drift X
0
0
0
0
Story drift 0
0
0
0
0
GL STORY1 STORY2 STORY3 STORY4 STORY5 ROOF
Story Level
No blast condition( Combo 16 ) blast condition ( Combo 27 )
Figure 4.1.Comparison of Story Drift in X-direction due to Blast Loads and before
Applying Blast Loads
Drift Y
0.01
0.01
0.01
Story drift
0
Story level
No Blast Condition ( Combo 18 ) Blast condition ( Combo 27 )
Figure 4.2.Comparison of Story Drift in Y-direction due to Blast Loads and before
In comparison of story drift, the maximum values of story drift in X direction
are taken from combo 16 (0.9 DL – 1.02EQX) and that values in Y direction are taken
from combo 18 (0.9DL – 1.02EQY) for no blast condition. For blasting condition,
combo 27 (1.2DL+0.5LL+BLAST LOAD) are used. According to comparison, in X
direction that values due to blast load is about 80% lesser than combo 16 because
blast loads are applied to Y direction and also in Y direction 51 % of that values due
to blast loads are greater than combo 18 in all stories. So, theses structure is failed due
to blast loads.
56
Story shear in Y direction

25000
21810.92 21810.92
20000
14812.52
15000
Story Shear
10178.1
10000
6578.03
5000 3988.84
1702.8
150.07 148.57 137.75 121.57 100.32 74.22 43.07
0
Story Level
No blast condition ( Combo 18 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )
Figure 4.3.Comparison of Story Shear in Y-direction due to Blast Loads and before
In comparison of story shear in X directions, this values due to blast loads is
not found because blast loads are applied in Y direction. According to comparison
chart, story shear values in Y direction due to blast loads is 99% greater than no blast
condition in all stories.
Story moment in X direction

16000000
14000000
12000000
10000000
Story moment
8000000
6000000
4000000
2000000
0
Story Level
No blast condition ( Combo 2 ) Blast condition ( Combo 27 )
Figure 4.4.Comparison of Story Moment in X-direction due to Blast Loads and before
57
Story moment in Y direction

3000000
2500000
Story moment 2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
Story Level
Figure 4.5.Comparison of Story Moment in Y-direction due to Blast Loads and before
In comparison of story moment in both directions, for no blast condition the
maximum values are found in combo 2 (1.4DL+1.7LL) and for blast condition combo
27 (1.2DL+0.5LL+BLAST LOAD) is used. According to comparison results in X
direction, 71% of blast condition exceed than that values before applying blast loads.
But in Y direction, 13% of blast loading condition exceed than combo 2 from story 1
to 3 and from story 4 to 6, 8% of combo 2 is greater than blast loading condition.
4.3. Comparison of Member Forces in Selected Columns

The member forces such as axial force, shear force and bending moment of the
seven selected columns are compared. The selected columns are expressed with each
elevation. Among columns, the column (C2, C5, C11, C14, C28, C18, C22), this
selected column have the greatest value of axial force, shear force and bending
moment according to each elevation line. Results of axial force, shear force and
bending moment of the three selected columns are taken from blast loading condition
and no blast condition. These conditions are the largest in load combinations. Plan of
the seven selected columns of the proposed building can be seen in Figure 4.6. The
comparisons of member forces such as maximum axial force, maximum shear force
58
and maximum bending moment for the seven selected columns are shown in Figure
4.7 to 4.25.
Figure 4.6. Plan of Selected Columns of the Proposed Building
Axial force
1600
1400
1200
Axial force ( kips )
1000
800
600
400
200
0
GL 1F 2F 3F 4F 5F Roof
Story level
Figure 4.7.Comparison of Axial Force for C2 due to Blast Loads and before Applying
Blast Loads
59
In Figure 4.7, from comparison of axial forces, the axial force of C2 due to
blast load is much greater than from story 1 to 5 and for no blast condition, combo 26
(0.79DL-1.02EQY) is taken.
Shear force
70
60
50
Shear force (kips)
40
30
20
10
0
Story level
No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )
Figure 4.8.Comparison of Shear Force for C2 due to Blast Loads and before Applying
Blast Loads
In Figure 4.8, from comparison of shear forces for C2, the values of shear
force in these two condition are much different from story 1 to story 3. From story 4
to story 6, the values are much not different.
Bending moment
10000
9000
8000
Bending moment ( kips-in )
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Story level
Figure 4.9. Comparison of Bending Moment for C2 due to Blast Loads and before
60
In Figure 4.9, for comparison of bending moment for C2, the values of
bending moment are much different between these conditions. But, from story 4 to
story 6 no these values are not much different.
Axial force
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Story level
Figure 4.10.Comparison of Axial Force for C5 due to Blast Loads and before
In Figure 4.10, from comparison of axial forces, the axial force of C5 due to
blast load in story 1 is maximum than other stories.
Shear force
35
30
25
Shear force (kips)
20
15
10
0
Story level
Figure 4.11.Comparison of Shear Force for C5 due to Blast Loads and before
61
In Figure 4.11, from comparison of shear forces for C5, the values of C5 due
to blast loads are much than no blast condition .This chart illustrates significantly the
different between these two conditions. In story 1, the value of blast loading condition
is the largest value of shear force.
Bending moment
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Story level
Figure 4.12. Comparison of Bending Moment for C5 due to Blast Loads and before
In Figure 4.12, for comparison of bending moment for C5, the values of C5
due to blast loads are much than no blast condition .This chart illustrates significantly
the different between these two conditions. In story 1, the value of blast loading
condition is the largest value of bending moment.
62
Axial force
300
250
200
Axial force
150
100
50
0
Story level

Fig
ure 4.13.Comparison of Axial Force for C11 due to Blast Loads and before Applying
Blast Loads
In Figure 4.13, from comparison of axial forces for C11, the axial force of C11
due to blast load are much greater than combo 26 from story 1 to 4 and the maximum
value is found in story 1.
Shear force
14
12
10
Shear force (kips)
0
Story level

Fi
gure 4.14. Comparison of Shear Force for C11 due to Blast Loads and before
In Figure 4.14, from comparison of shear forces for C11, the values of C11
condition is the largest value of shear force.
63
Bending moment
1600
1400
Bending moment ( kips-in)

1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Storyy level
Figure 4.15. Comparison of Bending Moment for C11 due to Blast Loads and
before Applying Blast Loads
In Figure 4.15, for comparison of bending moment for C11, the values of C11
Axial force
800
700
600
500
Axial force (kips)
400
300
200
100
0
Story level
decreases gradually from story 1 to story 6.
64
Shear force
2.5
Shear force ( kips )

1.5
0.5
0
Story level
Figure 4.17.Comparison of Shear Force for C14 due to Blast loads and before
due to blast loads are not much different than no blast condition .This chart illustrates
the different between these two conditions. In story 3 to 5, the value of no blast
loading condition is larger than blast loading condition.
Bending moment
400
350
300
Bending moment (kips-in)
250
200
150
100
50
0
Story level
Figure 4.18.Comparison of Bending Moment for C14 due to Blast Loads and
In Figure 4.18, from comparison of bending moment for C14, the values of
C14 due to blast loads are not much different than no blast condition .This chart
65
illustrates the different between these two conditions. In story 1, the value of no blast
loading condition is the largest value of bending moment.
Axial force
1800
1600
1400
1200
Axial force (kips)
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Story level
Shear force
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Story level
due to blast loads are much different than no blast condition . This chart illustrates the
66
different between these two conditions. In story 1, the value of blast loading condition
is the largest value of shear force.
Bending moment
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Story level
C28 due to blast loads are much different than no blast condition .This chart illustrates
Axial force
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Story level

67
Shear force
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Story level
due to blast loads are much different than no blast condition .But, in story 1 and story
2, these values are much different. This chart illustrates the different between these
two conditions. In story 1, the value of blast loading condition is the largest value of
shear force.
Bending moment
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Story level

68
the different between these two conditions.
Axial force
2500
2000
1500
Axial force
1000
500
0
Story level
Shear force
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
Story level
69
due to blast loads are much different than no blast condition .But, in story 1, this value
are much different. This chart illustrates the different between these two conditions. In
story 1, the value of blast loading condition is the largest value of shear force.
Bending moment
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Story level
the different between these two conditions. In story 1, the value of no blast loading
4.4 Comparisons of Member Forces in Selected Beams
The member forces such as shear force and bending moment of the five
selected beams are compared. The selected beams are expressed with each elevation.
Among beams, the beams (B39, B23, B34, B32, B51), these selected beams have the
greatest value of shear force and bending moment according to each elevation.
Results of shear force and bending moment of the five selected beams are taken from
blast loading condition and no blast condition. These conditions are the largest in load
combinations. Plan of the five selected beams of the proposed building can be seen in
Figure 4.28. The comparisons of member forces such as maximum shear force and
maximum bending moment for the five selected beams are shown in Figure 4.29 to
4.38.
70
Figure 4.28. Plan of Selected Beams of the Proposed Building
Shear force
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Story level

71
Figure 4.29.Comparison of Shear Force for B39 due to Blast Loads and before
In Figure 4.29, from comparison of shear forces for B39, the values of B39
are much more different. This chart illustrates the different between these two
conditions. In story 1, the value of blast loading condition is the largest value of shear
force.
Bending moment
45000
40000
35000
Bending moment ( kips-in)
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Story level
Figure 4.30.Comparison of Bending Moment for B39 due to Blast Loads and
In Figure 4.30, from comparison of bending moment for B39, the values of
B39 due to blast loads are much different than no blast condition .This chart illustrates
72
Shear force
700
600
500
Shear force (kips)
400
300
200
100
0
Story level
Figure 4.31.Comparison of Shear Force for B23 due to Blast loads and before
force.
Bending moment
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Story level
73
Shear force
800
700
600
Shear force (kips)
500
400
300
200
100
0
Story level
force.
Bending moment
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Story level

74
Figure 4.34.Comparison of Bending Moment for B34 due to Blast Loads and before
Shear force
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Story level
force.
75
Bending moment
45000
40000
35000

30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Story level
Shear force
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Story level
76
force.
Bending moment
70000
Bending moment ( kips-in ) 60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Story level
4.5. Comparison of Column Size and Rebar Percentage

After applying blast loads, all members of the structure are almost failed. Blast
loading condition controls these building. So these failed members are redesigned to
stable the structure. After redesigning, member size and rebar percentage are much
more than no blast loading condition. Maximum size of column is 48x48 and
minimum size is 24x24. Maximum rebar percentage is 7.4%. According to ACI 318-
99, the ratio of column steel area to gross sectional area is 0.01 to 0.08. So, these
column steel ratio are within limits.
Table 4.1. Increasing Column Size and Rebar Percentage
Column
Story
Leve Column Labels No blast Blast loading
l condition condition
77
Rebar Rebar
Size perce Size perce
ntage ntage
C1,C2,C3,C4,C6,C7,C8,C15,C26,C16,C28,C19
14x14 1.00% 36x42 7.40%
,C21,C22,C23,C24
1st C5,C9,C10,C11,C12,C14,C18, 14x14 1.00% 36x48 6.58%
C9,C27,C17, 14x14 1.00% 48x48 6.88%
C5,C6,C7,C8,C9,C10,C11,C12,C18,C19 14x14 1.00% 36x42 5.30%
2nd C1,C2,C3,C4,C14,C15,C16,C26,C28,C21,C22,
14x14 1.00% 36x36 5.76%
C23,C24
C17,C20,C27 14x14 1.19% 36x48 4.10%
C1,C2,C3,C4,C5,C6,C9,C10,C11,C12,C14,C15
14x14 1.00% 30x36 5.52%
,C16,C26,C28,C21,C22,C23,C24
C18,C19,C27 14x14 1.00% 36x36 3.55%

3rd
C17,C20 14x14 1.00% 36x42 2.89%
C7,C8 14x14 1.00% 24x36 4.94%

Table 4.1. (Continued-)
C1,C2,C3,C4,C5,C6,C10,C11,C12,C14,C15,C1
12x12 1.00% 24x36 4.39%
6,C26,C21,C22,C23,C24,C28
C7,C8 12x12 1.00% 24x30 4.43%

4th
C9,C27,C18,C19 12x12 1.00% 30x36 3.88%
C17,C20 12x12 1.00% 36x36 2.49%
C1,C2,C3,C4,C5,C6,C10,C11,C12,C14,C15,C1
12x12 1.00% 24x30 3.06%
6,C26,C21,C22,C23,C24,C28
C7,C8 12x12 1.00% 24x24 2.60%

5th
C17,C20 12x12 1.00% 30x36 1.69%
C9,C27,C18,C19 12x12 1.00% 24x36 2.39%
C1,C2,C3,C4,C5,C6,C10,C11,C12,C14,C15,C1
12x12 1.00% 24x24 3.36%
6,C26,C21,C22,C23,C24,C28,C7,C8
6th C9,C27,C18,C19 12x12 1.05% 24x30 1.00%
C17,C20 12x12 1.56% 24x36 1.00%

78
4.6. Comparison of Beam Size

After applying blast loads, beams of the structure are almost failed. So these
beams are redesigned to stable the structure. This table shows the cross sectional area
of increasing beam size.
Table 4.2. Increasing beam size
Beam size
Story Beam Label Blast loading
No blast condition
condition
B50,B56,B59,B60 10x12 12x14
B1,B2,B3,B7,B8,B9,B10,B12,B102,B103 10x14 14x20
B4,B5,B6,B17,B18,B19 10x14 14x36

Story 1
B25,B26,B27,B97,B98,B35,B36,B37,B70 10x12 24x36
B23,B24,B100,B39,B64,B65,B66,B30,B71,B51 10x12 30x40
B101,B20 10x12 36x40

Table 4.2. (Continued-)
B56,B59,B49,B60,B50,B7,B8,B9,B10,B11,B12 10x12 12x14
B1,B2,B3,B17,B18,B19,B13,B14,B102,B103,B4,
Story 2 10x14 14x20
B5,B6
B20,B23,B24,B100,B101,B33,B34,B38,B39,B53,
B31,B32,B35,B36,B37,B25,B26,B27,B97,B98,B5 10x12 24x36
1
B56,B59,B49,B60,B105,B106,B7,B8,B9,B10,B11,
10x14 12x14
B12,
B4,B5,B6,B102,B103,B1,B2,B3,B17,B18,B19 10x14 14x20

Story 3
B33,B34,B53,B72,B73,B74,B51 10x12 20x30
B58,B61,B62,B110,B111,B38,B39,B32,B35,B36,
10x12 24x36
B37,B71,
B1,B2,B3,B7,B8,B9,B10,B11,B12,B13,B14,B102,
10x14 12x14
B103,B49,B50,B56,B59,B60
Story 4 B4,B5,B6,B17,B18,B19 10x14 12x18
B67,B68,B69,B72,B73,B74,B51 10x12 14x30

79
B58,B61,B62,B111,B110,B30,B33,B34,B38,B39,
10x12 14x36
B71
B1,B2,B3,B49,B59,B13,B14,B102,B103,B56,B4,
B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10,B11,B12,B50,B60,B105,B1 10x14 12x14
06
B17,B18,B19 10x14 12x18
Story 5
B72,B73,B74,B51,B108,B109 10x12 14x20
B58,B61,B62,B110,B111,B30,B33,B34,B38,B39,
10x12 14x30
B31,B32,B35,B36,B37
B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10,B11,B12,B13,
10x14 12x14
B14,B17,B18,B19,B102,B103,B105,B106
Story 6 B30,B31,B32,B33,B34,B35,B36,B37,B38,B39,B5
8,B61,B62,B111,B110,B58,B108,B109,B72,B73, 10x12 14x20
B74
4.7. Summary
In this chapter, comparisons of analytical results and design result have been
described. Story drift, story shear, story moment and member forces of selected
columns and selected beams are compared due to blast loads. And comparison of
column size and rebar percentage between these two conditions. Then, increasing area
of beam size between these two conditions are described.

Comparison of Analytical and Design Results

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Comparison of Analytical and Design Results

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CHAPTER 4

COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL AND DESIGN RESULTS

4.2. Comparison of Story Drift, Story Shear, and Story Moment

No blast condition( Combo 16 ) blast condition ( Combo 27 )

No Blast Condition ( Combo 18 ) Blast condition ( Combo 27 )

Story shear in Y direction

No blast condition ( Combo 18 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

Story moment in X direction

No blast condition ( Combo 2 ) Blast condition ( Combo 27 )

Story moment in Y direction

Story moment 2000000

No blast condition ( Combo 2 ) Blast condition ( Combo 27 )

4.3. Comparison of Member Forces in Selected Columns

Figure 4.6. Plan of Selected Columns of the Proposed Building

No blast condition ( Combo 26 ) Blast condition ( Combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

Bending moment ( kips-in)

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

Shear force ( kips )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

Figure 4.28. Plan of Selected Beams of the Proposed Building

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

Bending moment (kips-in)

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

Bending moment ( kips-in ) 60000

No blast condition ( combo 26 ) Blast condition ( combo 27 )

4.5. Comparison of Column Size and Rebar Percentage

Table 4.1. Increasing Column Size and Rebar Percentage

C9,C27,C17, 14x14 1.00% 48x48 6.88%

C5,C6,C7,C8,C9,C10,C11,C12,C18,C19 14x14 1.00% 36x42 5.30%

C17,C20,C27 14x14 1.19% 36x48 4.10%

C18,C19,C27 14x14 1.00% 36x36 3.55%

C7,C8 14x14 1.00% 24x36 4.94%

C7,C8 12x12 1.00% 24x30 4.43%

C17,C20 12x12 1.00% 36x36 2.49%

C7,C8 12x12 1.00% 24x24 2.60%

C9,C27,C18,C19 12x12 1.00% 24x36 2.39%

C17,C20 12x12 1.56% 24x36 1.00%