SYNOPSIS FOR M.

E DISSERTATION
A) Name of College : Govt. College of Engineering, Karad

B) Name of Course

: M.E. Civil (Structures)

C) Name of the Student

: Mr. Ashwin K. Pawar

D) Name of the Guide

: Dr. Yuwaraj M. Ghugal Professor and Head of Applied Mechanics Department Govt. College of Engineering, Karad

E) Recognition of Guide

: SU/PG/AFFI/RECOG/2529 DATED 17 JUNE 2003

F) Date of Registration

: August 2010 : Seismic performance of flat-slab building systems :

G) Title of Dissertation H) Relevance

With increase in demand for a space, construction of multistoried buildings is become a necessary part of our living style. Less availability of space is forcing us to raise the height of buildings as much as possible to accommodate maximum number of people, and also to satisfy the architectural necessities. These multistoried buildings can be constructed using various structural systems. Also with increase in height the need of resisting lateral loads like wind and earthquake also comes in picture. Two main groups according to the arrangement of slabs, beams or girders, and columns are 1) Framed structure and 2) flat slab structure. Flat slab buildings can be broadly divided into RCC and Prestressed buildings. The choice of particular system depends upon the total height of the building, type of building i.e. commercial or residential and finally the total cost of the structure. A popular form of concrete building construction uses a flat concrete slab (without beams) as the floor system. This system is very simple to construct, and is efficient in that it requires the minimum building height for a given number of stories. Since the flat slab system has no beams, it has many advantages such as providing a lower storey height, better lightening and ventilation, easy arrangement of pipes and wires under slabs, more clear spaces, architectural flexibility and easier formwork.
1

The behavior and design of flat slab structures for gravity loads are well established but their seismic behavior is not well understood and generally found to be unsatisfactory. Flat slab is susceptible to progressive brittle punching shear failure under seismic loading. In flat slab building the most vulnerable part is slab column joint. Flat slab with drop panels or column capitals are generally constructed as these extra projections provide safety against punching shear and also reduces the heavy negative moment. If drop panels are not provided then the system is termed as flat plate system. In this project, the lateral behavior of a typical frame building (beam column system) and two types of flat slab building system which are designed according to I.S. 456:2000 is evaluated by means of dynamic analysis. The inadequacies of these flat slab building system are discussed by means of comparing the behavior with that of conventional beam column framing. To study the effect of drop panels on the behavior of flat slab during lateral loads, it is proposed to analyze flat plate system. Software SAP 2000 will be use for this purpose.

I)

Literature Review : 1. Experimental ReviewJohn W. WALLACE, Thomas H. K. KANG, Changsoon RHA [1] carried out research program to investigate the behavior of slab column frames with shear reinforcement subjected to dynamic loads on the EERC/PEER shake table at the UC Berkeley Richmond field station was provided. Two, approximately one third scale, specimens were subjected to increasing intensity shaking to provide detailed response data as well as damage data. Results obtained indicates that the deterioration of the moment capacity at the slab-column connections occurred during the tests; however, the lateral drift ratios of 3% and 4% were achieved for the RC and PT specimens, respectively, with relatively little loss of lateral load capacity. The tests revealed relatively little damage to the slabcolumn connection region compared with tests conducted under slowly varying loads on a specimen of similar scale. The data collected in these tests should help define improved damage states for slab-column connections as a function of the design drift level, which is required to assess design requirements for the lateral force resisting system using current code procedures.

In this paper Ema COELHO et al [2] presents the results of two pseudo-dynamic tests on a full scale flat-slab model of a three storey RC structure, representative of existing flatslab structures in European seismic areas, were carried out at the ELSA laboratory. Important flexural and torsion cracks appeared around the exterior slab-column connections. Considerable damage of these connections, due to the torsion failure of the transversal beam was observed at all floors. Mainly flexural and, to a lesser extent, torsion cracks, developed in the other connections, due to the presence of the stronger transverse beam and to the confinement of the concrete. Failure of the slab-column joints, by separation of the slab above the level of the third floor, owing to the insufficient anchorage length of the column reinforcement into the slab, was also observed. The test results also confirm the findings of recent studies concerning the small slab participation under lateral loads. In this research it is found that these structures exhibit significant higher flexibility compared to traditional frame structures becoming more sensitive to second order effects. In order to limit deformation demands under earthquake excitations, combination with other stiffer structural systems as shear-walls is advisable.

Jack P. Moehle et al [3] designed and detailed a two storey, three-bay reinforced concrete flat frame with spandrel beams to satisfy gravity and seismic requirements by. A test structure was constructed to represent the prototype structure at 30% of ful scale. Materials were a 37MPa concrete and Grade 60 reinforcement. The test structure was loaded to stimulate dead load of the prototype, and subsequently was subjected to low, moderate and high intensity earthquake simulations. Examination and analysis of response data reveal the following: i. Equivalent viscous damping during small amplitude oscillations ranged between 1.5 and 7% of critical, the higher values occurring after earthquake simulations that induced significance cracking, yielding and spalling. ii. Although individual reinforcing bars experienced yield at lower drifts, yield in the overall load-displacement response of the structure was not apparent until drifts reached 1.5% of structure height, this emphasizes the inherent flexibility of flat plate framing and raises questions regarding application of current code seismic design provisions that assume implicitly that displacements well beyond yield will occur.

iii. Lateral drifts exceeded 55 of structure height without collapse. Because it is unlikely that any well proportioned structural system will be subjected to lateral drift of this magnitude, it is concluded that the structural details were adequate. iv. Initial lateral load stiffness was markedly less than uncracked stiffness calculated on the basis of elastic theory, indicating that cracking due to gravity, temperature, and time-dependent loads is significant. v. Lateral load stiffness decreased with increasing drift; so that stiffnesses computed using the effective beam width and the equivalent frame models were too high at working loads. Reduction of slab inertias to one third of the elastic values produced conservative estimates of lateral load stiffness. A rational procedure for estimating stiffness is presented. vi. At times of peak base shear during the earthquake simulation tests, lateral inertial loads were typically distributed uniformly over height, in contrast with the inverted triangular distribution assumed in design. vii. Using conventional limit analysis methods, it was possible to account for 81% of the measured base shear capacity. The unaccounted portion of measured base shear is attributed to inaccuracies in computed member strengths, strain hardening, strain rate effects, membrane action, redistribution, and inaccuracies in lateral load distribution.

Helen M. Santhi, G.M. Samual Knight, K. Muthumani [4] carried test on single-bay, three-storied 1:3 scale models of reinforced concrete frames both with and without infill using a shake table. The dynamic characteristics of the model frame, such as the natural frequency, mode shape and damping were estimated. The shear force, inter-story drift, and stiffness were estimated. The effect of masonry infill on the seismic performance of reinforced concrete frames was also analyzed. The damaged frames were retrofitted and again tested with the same earthquake intensities. From the experiments conducted, the following conclusions are drawn: i. Provision of brick masonry infill into the moment resisting frames of a building with a soft story reduces the fundamental frequency by 30%. After retrofitting, the fundamental frequency of the infilled frame is increased by 20%. ii. The value of the damping ratio for the infilled frame is greater as compared with the bare frame. However, the damping ratio of both frames is greater in the first mode

before and after retrofitting, which shows the first mode domination in energy dissipation. iii. The initial lateral stiffness at different story levels of the infilled frame is about three times the lateral stiffness of the bare frame. In the case of retrofitting of repaired frames, this lateral story stiffness is over four times greater. iv. The interstory drift of the infilled frame is less than that of the bare frame before and after retrofitting. However, the maximum interstory drift in both frames during excitation is less than the allowable drift specified in code. v. The strength demand due to the addition of infills to the bare frame increases on the order of three times. In the case of a retrofitted frame, the increase in the seismic demand is reduced to two times.

2. Analytical Review: Y. H. Luo, A. Durrani and J. Conte [5] carried out non linear dynamic finite element analysis and reliability calculations of two flat slab building of 3 & 10 stories in height. The design dead load considered of the slab self weight, partition load of 0956 kPa and mechanical arrangements of 0.478 kPa which is typical for an office building. Results from previous experimental research on seismic resistance of slab column connections were employed to establish the effective slab widths, unbalanced moment transfer capacity of connections and their punching strength. The member dimensions, material strength and live load were treated as random variables and effect of model uncertainty was included in calculations of reliability indices. Random time histories were generated with the Kanai-Tajimi power spectrum. Based on reliability analysis, the probability of failure of existing building was presented for different soil conditions and peak ground accelerations varying from 0.05g to 0.2g. A sensitive study with respect to basic variables indicates that the reliability indices for punching failure for the gravity load only were most sensitive to the model uncertainty, the splitting strength of concrete, and the effective slab depth. Under seismic loading, the probability of punching failure increased with increasing peak ground acceleration and the number of stories in building. For peak ground acceleration probability of punching failure for a 3 story and 10 story building was 5X10-3 and 1X10-2 respectively for intermediate soil. However when peak ground acceleration raised to .2g probabilities of punching failure increased significantly to 0.1 and 0.32 respectively. The local soil conditions thus have a significant effect on
5

probability punching failure. The study indicates that the probability of failure on soft soil was @ 1.5 times the failure on hard soil. C.S. Garg, Yogendra Singh, U.K. Sharma [6] studied seismic behavior of gravity load designed flat slab buildings with and without shear walls. Nonlinear static pushover analysis was carried out using Sap 2000 software. An effective beam width method with explicit transverse torsional member procedure is used for modeling slab column frame. The following conclusions have been drawn from the study: i. Yield patterns shows that the flat slab behaves as a strong column weak beam mechanism because slab column connections and slab beam members yield much before columns. ii. In 200 mm thick slab with 400 X 400 mm columns, first the connections yield in punching shear. While for 250 mm thick slab with 450 X 450 mm columns, the slab yield first in flexure. iii. Four storey flat slab building, with 1.5% shear wall area, has adequate strength and ductility and performance level is IO for DBE and MCE both. In case of 8 storey building with 3% shear wall area, performance level is IO & LS for DBE & MCE, respectively. R. P. Apostolska, G. S. Necevska-Cvetanovska, J. P.Cvetanovska [7] analysed six types of structural systems for a prototype of a residential building in Skopje for the purpose of defining the seismic behaviour and resistance of flat-slab structural systems. To evaluate the seismic behaviour and resistance of a flat-slab RC system, analyses of a typical prototype of a residential building in Skopje with B +GF +4 + A have been carried out. For the chosen prototype of the residential building six types of structural systems have been analyzed. Geometrical characteristics of each of these structural systems are presented in the table below

Table 1. Geometrical characteristics of structural systems Thickness of slab (cm) 14 20 Size of column (cm) 60 60 60 60 Beams (cm) 40 No 40 Perimeter beams (cm) No No RC walls No No
6

Type of structural system

Frame M1 Purely flat slab M2

Purely flat slab M3 Flat slab strengthened by perimeter beam M4 Flat slab strengthened by RC walls M5 Flat slab strengthened by perimeter beam & R C walls M6

25 20

60 60

60 60

No No 40

No 40 No

20

60

60

No

No

Yes

20

60

60

No

40

40

Yes

To evaluate the seismic behaviour and resistance of the flat-slab structural system, comparative analyses have been made between the models of structural systems M2, M3, M4, M5 and M6 and the referent frame structure model M1. The effects of the designed modifications upon the dynamic characteristics as well as upon the bearing and deformability of the flat-slab structure have been investigated.The analyses have been performed by using the finite element method and the SAP2000v10.0.9Advanced computer programme. The 3D mathematical model of each of the analyzed structures has been formulated by discretisation of the bearing system into finite elements. The vertical loads have been defined in accordance with the valid national technical regulations and the purpose of the structures. Seismic analysis has been carried out in compliance with the regulations for design of high rises in seismically prone areas, [Rulebook on Technical Norms for Construction of High-rises in Seismically Prone Areas, 1981]. The horizontal loads have been defined in the form of a design spectrum of acceleration in accordance with Eurocode 8, [Eurocode 8, 2004] scaled in such a way that it generates the total shear force at the base to the amount of 10% of the weight of the structure. Dynamic analysis has been carried out for selected structural systems (model M1, M2 and M4) exposed to the effect of the El Centro earthquake with amax=0.32g. The results obtained from the analyses of different structural systems are presented in the form of dynamic characteristics (periods and mode shapes), maximal displacements and relative storey drifts in both orthogonal directions, time histories of absolute displacements at the top as well as bearing capacity and deformability of the selected structural systems (model M1 and model M2)

They drawn the Conclusion that the purely flat-slab RC structural system is considerably more flexible for horizontal loads than the traditional RC frame structures which contributes to the increase of its vulnerability to seismic effects. The critical moment in design of these systems is the slab-column connection, i.e., the penetration force in the slab at the connection, which should retain its bearing capacity even at maximal displacements. The ductility of these structural systems is generally limited by the deformability capacity of the column-slab connection. To increase the bearing capacity of the flat-slab structure under horizontal loads, particularly when speaking about seismically prone areas and limitation of deformations, modifications of the system by adding structural elements are necessary.

3. Methods of analysis of flat slabMary Theresa Cano & Richard E. Klinger [8] carried out comparison of analysis procedure of two way slab. They compared three methods of analysis of flat slab viz. 1. Direct design method (DDM) 2. Equivalent frame method (EFM) 3. Finite element method (FEM) Out of this, first two methods are recommended by the I.S code 456:2000 (Cl. 31.3) for determining the bending moments in the slab panel; either method is acceptable if they satisfy the relevant conditions. These methods are applicable only to two way rectangular slabs, and in case of direct design method the recommendations apply to the gravity loading condition alone and not to the lateral load condition. DDM & EFM are based on the equivalent frame concept. The slab panel is defined as the part of the slab bounded on each of its four sides by the column centrelines. Each slab panel is divided into column strips and middle strips. Finite element method- the structure having irregular types of plans with which the EFM has limitations in analysis can be analyzed without any difficulties by the FEM. FEM is a powerful tool used in the analysis of flat slab. Most finite element programs are based on elastic moment distribution and material that obey Hooks law. While using finite element method following considerations are important. a. Choice of proper finite element b. Degree of discretisation. c. Overall computational economy.
8

J.

PROPOSED WORK:

In the dissertation following points will be studied, a. Design of example building according to I.S. 456:2000 i. Frame building system ii. Flat plate building system iii. Flat slab system with infill on periphery b. Dynamic analysis (time history analysis and response spectrum analysis) using SAP 2000 c. Comparison between three building system using various parameters such as i. Lateral load ii. Base shear iii. Natural time period iv. Storey displacement v. Column moments vi. Maximum displacements

K.

Facility Available: For carrying the project work, 1) College Central Library with reference journals and books is available. 2) Library facility from IIT may possible. 3) Literature will be collected from internet with the help of various websites and online journals. 4) Availability of computing softwares like SAP, ETAB, STAAD.PRO, NISA etc.

L.

Expected date of completion: June 2012.

M.

Expected Expenditure of the work: Rs. 15000/-

10

N.

References: 1. John W. WALLACE, Thomas H.-K. KANG, Changsoon RHA, Seismic Performance of Flat Plate Systems. 2. Ema COELHO, Paulo CANDEIAS, Giorgios ANAMATEROS,Raul ZAHARIA, Fabio TAUCER, Artur V. PINTO Assessment of the seismic behaviour of rc flat slab building structures 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver , Paper No. 2630 3. Jack P. Moehle, A.M. ASCE and John W. Diebold Lateral Load Response of Flat plate system 4. Helen M. Santhi, G.M. Samual Knight, K. Muthumani Evaluation of seismic performance of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames Journal of performance of constructed facilities, ASCE/NOV 2005 5. Y. H. Luo, A. Durrani and J. Conte Seismic reliability assessment of exiting R/C flatslab buildings Journal of Structural Engineering,(page no. 1522to 1529) 6. C.S. Garg, Yogendra Singh, U.K. Sharma Seismic performance of flat slab shear wall system Journal of structural Engineering Vol. 37 7. R. P. Apostolska1 , G. S. Necevska-Cvetanovska , J. P. Cvetanovska and N. Mircic, Seismic Performance of Flat-Slab Building Structural Systems. The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China 8. Mary Theresa Cano & Richard E. Klinger, Comparison of analysis procedure of two way slab 9. Dr. V.L. Shah, Dr. S.R. Karve, Limit State Theory & Design of Reinforced Concrete, Structures Publications. 10. Verghese P.C., Advanced Reinforced Concrete Design, Prentice-Hall of (India Private Ltd. New Delhi. 2003 11. Indian standard IS 456:2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete Code of Practice. 12. Indian Standard IS 1893 (Part 1):2000 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures.

11

Mr. Ashwin K. Pawar Student M.E. (Structures) Part-II Govt. College of Engg. Karad.

O.

Undertaking of guide: Information given by the student is correct and the said facilities are available with the college.

Dr. Yuwaraj M. Ghugal

(Guide) Professor & Head of Applied Mechanics Dept. Government College of Engineering, Karad.

12