ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF SHEAR-WALL IN CASE OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING USING ETABS by IRJET Journal

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF SHEAR-WALL IN CASE OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING USING ETABS

ZIMIT SUKHADIYA1 , AKASH SUTHAR2

1MTech student L.J University, Ahmedabad, India. 2 Assistant Professor, civil engineering department, L.J University, Ahmedabad, India ***

Abstract Shear walls are ordinarily used in excessive earthquake susceptible areas, as they are tremendously inexperienced in taking the masses, and in excessive upward thrust homes in which massive column length isnotviableand the consignment is additional. Steel concrete composite,steel, and R.C.C. choices are taken into thought for the comparative study. AN equal static approach of analysis was applied. For modeling of composite, steel, and R.C.C. structures, the ETABS software system program is utilized, and also the outcomes are compared. The analysis is the methodology of decidingthe conduct of the form below distinct load mixtures. style is the system, that demands the proper specification of the form. mistreatment software package program analysis and layout system are completed. If there is any surprising shift, it'sgoing to cause constructing stiffness/ torsionalinstabilityiftheform is stricken with the help of employing a sturdy seismic fore or with the help of employing a few completely different a lot of less horizontal forces. The improvement methodology is employed and during this, it's initially taken into the thought that the scale of the shear wall square measure identical withinside the development when that the analysis is dead, and since that, the failing shear wall dimensions square measure changed to overcome the full form, thereby optimizing for no. of instances until the full structure is powerful to resist the force. There square measure many structural parameters that have a bearing on the general performance of the structure as story drift, base shear, and story displacement that affected the behavior of the structure towards the wind and seismic masses. The optimized shear wall is also determined by the outcomes of shear force, Bending Moment, story shear, story displacement, story drift, and quantity of concrete and steel.

Key Words: Shear wall, ETABS, Earthquake loads, Load combination, Base shear

1.INTRODUCTION

The layout of tall homes basically includes a conceptual layout,approximateanalysis,initiallayout,andoptimization, to securely convey the gravity and lateral masses. The primary motive of all sorts of structural structures used withinside the constructing sort of systems is to transfer gravitymasseseffectively.

Themaximumnotunusualplacemassesasaconsequenceof theimpactofgravityareuselessload,stayload,andsnow

load.Besidesthoseverticalmasses,homesalsoaresubjected tolateralmassesbecauseofwind,earthquakeforces.Lateral masses can broaden excessive stresses, produce sway movement, or cause vibration. Therefore, it's miles very criticalfortheshapetohaveenoughpoweragainstvertical massescollectivelywithgoodenoughstiffnesstofaceupto lateralforces.

The static and dynamic structural responses of excessive upward thrust homes are ruled with the aid of using the distributions of transverse shear stiffness and bending stiffness consistent with storey. “Making changes to the structureswithinsidetheconstructingormaybetheshape itselfsoonerorlaterafteritsinitialcreationandoccupation.”

1..1 FUNCTION OF SHEAR WALL

Providing Lateral Strength to the building: Shear Wall must provide lateral shear strength to the buildingtoresistthehorizontalearthquakeforces, wind forces and transfer these forces to the foundation.

Providing Lateral Stiffness to the building: Shear Walls provide large stiffness to building in the directionoftheirorientation,whichreduceslateral swayofthebuildingandthusreducesdamagetothe structure.

SHEAR WALL

Certified Journal | Page608

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008



1.2 TYPE OF

1.ConcreteShearWall 2.SteelPlateShearWall 1. 3.PlywoodShearWall 2. 4.RHCBM(RCHollowConcreteWallMasonry.) 1.3

 Fastconstructiontime.  Significantlyreduceslateralsway.  Theshearwall

 Shear

 Easy

ADVANTAGES

isveryLight weight.

wallisonetypeofthinnerwall.

constructionandimplementation.

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e ISSN: 2395 0056

Enoughwell distributedreinforcements. 



ShearwallCost effectivenessrespectofearthquake. 

Minimized damages to structural and Non structural elements.

1.7 IMPORTANT POINT

Ratioofbreadth/width>0.4 

Finishedcornersarepossible. 

Clearsurfacewithoutanyoffsetispossible. 

Normallylessconsumptionofbricks/blocks. 

Shearwallsrunalongthefulllengthofwalls. 

Thelateralloadisresistedbysheardeformation. 

The shear wall system is more efficient for high rise structures. 

Shearwallcross sectionislikeaverticallyorientedwide beam. 

Morecarpetareaisavailableascomparedtothecolumn beamsystem.

2. Literature Review

B.

[1] BuildingR.C.C.isbeingmodeled,studied,anddeliberated in this report. Shear wall structure through the state of affairs is a call for Vs functionality ratio evaluation accompaniedtothetraitsofsegmentshearwall.Considering the earthquake and wind forces, this may be advanced throughthepreciseversionproducedatEtabs.Theprimary intention of this plan is to look at and examine diverse fashions of Shear partitions the usage of ETABS is now practicedinthedirectionofreachingthemostadvantageous placement of approximately Shear partitions within the shape.

The constructing is effectively built using ETABS with the havealookatofreactionspectrumturnedintoappliedinthe directionofdegreeconstructing'sperformance.Thegadget labored admirably additionally the effects have been mentionedbelow.

1.Storeyflowapproximatelyshapebewithintheboundary inthevicinityofclauseno7.11.1ofIS 1893(Part 1):2002.

2. Storey Rigidity approximately shape be within the boundaryofclauseno4.20ofIS 1893(Part 1):2002.

3.Duetothelifeofshearpartitionsoneachcapacitybend location,theharmthatcouldshowupbecauseofwindand earthquakeforcesmaybemonitoredinthisproject.

L. Rahul, M.Akbar, M.Sriraman [2] Shear partitions are vertical factors of a pressure resisting machine that is horizontal. They are built to behave in opposition to the consequencesoflateralhundredswhichcanbeperforming attheshape.Inresidentialconstruction,shearpartitionsare immediatelyoutsidepartitionsthatshapeafieldthatgives lateralassistancetotheconstruction.Lateralhelpisdueto wind,earthquakes,theburdenoftheshape,andoccupants. These hundreds can tear or shear a construction apart. Reinforcing a body with the aid of using attaching an inflexiblewallinteriorcontinuestheformofthebodyand forestallsrotationonthejoints.Especiallyinhigh upward thrusthomesthataresubjectedtoseismicforcesandlateral windforces.Shearwallhomesareforresidentialfunctions to deal with 100 500 populations consistent with construction.

Dynamic linear evaluation of the usage of the reaction spectrumtechniqueisfinishedandlateralloadevaluationis completedforshapewithRCshearwallandSteelplateshear wall.Resultsareascomparedfortheearthquakeforcesand abendingsecondofeachcase.Itislikewisedeterminedthat lateralforcesaredecreasingwhiletheshearpartitionsare introduced atthe proper placesofframeshaving minimal lateral forces. Therefore, it's far inferred that Steel plate shearpartitions(t=6mm)aregreaterproofagainstlateral hundredsinanabnormalshape.

Authors: M. Pavani, G. Nagesh Kumar, Dr. Sandeep Pingale [3] Thebuildingspresentontheslopingfloorare veryexceptionalfromtheonesontheplainground,inthe sloping ground, the buildings are very abnormal and unsymmetrical in horizontal and vertical planes. The buildings in the sloping ground motive extra harm in the course of earthquakes because, in the sloping ground, the shapeisbuiltwithuniquecolumnheights.Inthisexamine the3 Danalyticalversionof10storiedbuildings,theplanof every configuration consists of four bays withinside the Y courseandsixbayswithinsidetheXcoursethat'ssavedthe identicalforallconfigurationsoftheconstructingframe,the slope became selected in among zero to 30 degrees. The shapewasefficientlyconstructedthroughtheuseofETABS andtheresponsespectrumevaluationwasusedtomeasure thebehavioroftheshape.Theshapeisexecutedadmirably andtheeffectsarementionedbelow. 

Theshapenownolongerbetheidenticalformallround hasmodifiedthedisplacementoftheshapeinXandY course. 

DisplacementisextrainXcoursethaninYcourse. 

The tale waft is likewise very excessive whilst in comparisontotheYcourse.



Vamsi Krishna, A.V. Prasanna Kumar, E. Rakesh Reddy

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e ISSN: 2395 0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 06 | June 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072

 Thequalitymannertolessenwaftanddisplacementfor thedurationoflateralloadingistocontainashearwall inanunevenconfigurationineachdirection.

3. PROJECT DETAILS

3.1 GENERAL PARAMETERS

Table 3.1 GENERAL DATA

DESCRIPTION DATA

Dimension of the plan : 25x13.5m

No. of stories : 10

Floor to floor height : 3.15m Type of soil : Medium Support condition : Fixed

Table 3.2 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

DESCRIPTION DATA

Grade of Concrete (Beam) : M25

Grade of Concrete (Column) : M25 Grade of Concrete (Slab) : M25 Grade of Steel (Beam & Column)

: Fe500 Grade of Steel (Slab) : Fe500

Table 3.3 EARTHQUAKE PARAMETERS

DESCRIPTION DATA Zone : III Zone factor : 0.16 Importance factor, I :- 1.5 Response reduction, R : 5

Model 1(G+10w/oS.WALL)

Table 3.4 SIZING OF COLUMN & BEAM MEMBERS

DESCRIPTION DATA

Column : 0.45mx0.75m

Beam : TB:0.30mx0.60m MB:0.45mx0.55m(terrace) SB:0.30mx0.45m

3.2 Model 2 (G+10 w S. WALL)

Table 3.5 SIZING OF COLUMN & BEAM MEMBERS

DESCRIPTION DATA

Column : 0.45mx0.75m

Beam : TB:0.30mx0.60m MB:0.45mx0.55m(terrace) SB:0.30mx0.45m

3.3 Model 2 (G+10 w S. WALL) (D.A.1)

Table 3.6 SIZING OF COLUMN & BEAM MEMBERS

DESCRIPTION DATA

Column : 0.45mx0.75m

Beam : TB:0.30mx0.60m MB:0.45mx0.55m(terrace) SB:0.30mx0.45m

Wall : 230mm

3.4 Model 2 (G+10 w S. WALL) (D.A.2)

Table 3.7 SIZING OF MEMBERS

DESCRIPTION DATA

Column : 0.45mx0.75m

Beam : TB:0.30mx0.60m MB:0.45mx0.55m(terrace) SB:0.30mx0.45m

Wall : 230mm

| Page610

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e ISSN: 2395 0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 06 | June 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072

Table 3.8 SIZING OF MEMBERS

DESCRIPTION DATA

Column : 0.45mx0.75m

Beam : TB:0.30mx0.60m MB:0.45mx0.55m(terrace) SB:0.30mx0.45m

Wall : 230mm

Table 3.9 SIZING OF MEMBERS DESCRIPTION DATA

Column : 0.45mx0.75m

Beam : TB:0.30mx0.60m MB:0.45mx0.55m(terrace) SB:0.30mx0.45m Wall : 230mm

3.4 Model 2 (G+10 w S. WALL) (D.A.3)

The results of, story displacement & storey drift are compared 4.1 STORY DISPLACEMENT STORY TERRAC E 9f 8f 7f 6f 5f 4f 3f 2f 1f plinth/g f Base X-Dir (mm) 34.747 33.516 31.613 29 25.75 22.04 18 13.75 9.406 5.136 1.35 0 X-Dir (mm)W S.W. 27.226 26.011 24.344 22.19 19.57 16.62 13.45 10.16 6.887 3.763 0.961 0 X-Dir (mm) D.A.1 22.541 21.133 19.446 17.45 15.14 12.6 9.915 7.209 4.622 2.346 0.61 0 X-Dir (mm) D.A.2 22.387 20.879 19.126 17.08 14.77 12.24 9.589 6.936 4.417 2.214 0.558 0 X-Dir (mm) D.A.3 15.733 14.375 12.811 11.12 9.359 7.564 5.785 4.09 2.558 1.278 0.325 0 X-Dir (mm) (SPSW) 33.998 32.777 30.89 28.33 25.16 21.56 17.65 13.54 9.338 5.188 1.368 0 EQX STORYDISPLACEMENT Figure 4.1 DATA

TERRAC E

f Base

4. RESULTS

STORY

9f 8f 7f 6f 5f 4f 3f 2f 1f plinth/g

Y-Dir (mm) 61.002 58.197 54.332 49.42 43.62 37.15 30.22 23.04 15.82 8.798 2.281 0 Y-Dir (mm)W S.W. 43.582 40.791 37.255 33.15 28.66 23.87 18.92 13.99 9.237 4.905 1.284 0 Y-Dir (mm) D.A.1 42.941 40.248 36.813 32.81 28.4 23.68 18.8 13.91 9.19 4.879 1.285 0 Y-Dir (mm) D.A.2 28.248 26.203 23.828 21.14 18.19 15.06 11.85 8.668 5.641 2.929 0.764 0

EQY

DATA Figure 4.3 STORY STIFFNESS Figure 4.4 STORY STIFFNESS

Y-Dir (mm) D.A.3 21.785 19.53 17.139 14.63 12.13 9.645 7.255 5.038 3.088 1.508 0.446 0 Y-Dir (mm) (SPSW) 62.035 59.352 55.529 50.61 44.78 38.26 31.27 24.01 16.67 9.45 2.56 0

Figure 4.2

Figure 4.8 STORY DRIFT

3. CONCLUSIONS

Similarly,another12modelsofG+15andG+20havebeen analyzedandfromthat,itisconcludedthat

1. Whenincomparisontoabuildingw/oashearwall, thebuildingwiththeshearwalliseffective.

2. Whencomparedtoatypicalbuilding,theweightofa buildingwithashearwallisrelativelymore.

3. When it comes to story stiffness steel plate shear wallhasalittlebitlessstorystiffnesscomparedtoabuilding w/oashearwall.

4. Whenitcomestostorydisplacementbuildingwitha shearwall(D.A.3)hastheleastdisplacementoftheothers.

5. In short, building with a shear wall is more economicalthanbuildingw/oashearwall,andtheeconomy ofashearwalldependsonthematerialsused,arrangement andconvenienceofconstructionofashearwall.

REFERENCES

[1] Institute for steel development & Growth, "B+G+40 Storied Residential Building with Steel Concrete CompositeOption”IndiaDec2007.

[2] M.Nageh,“HowtoModelandDesignHighRiseBuilding UsingETABsProgram”Cairo2007.

[3] M. Willford, A. Whittaker and R. Klemencic, “Recommendations for Seismic Design of High Rise Buildings” Council of Tall building and Urban habitat Feb2008.

[4] J.ZilsandJ.Viis,“AnIntroductiontoHighRiseDesign” StructureMagazineNov2003.

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e ISSN: 2395 0056 Volume: 09 Issue: 06 | June 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072 © 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page612 4.2 STORY DRIFT STORY TERRAC E 9f 8f 7f 6f 5f 4f 3f 2f 1f plinth/g f Base X-Dir (mm) 0.00039 0.0006 0.00083 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 6E-04 0 X-Dir (mm)W S.W. 0.0004 0.0005 0.00062 7E-04 8E-04 9E-04 9E-04 9E-04 9E-04 8E-04 3E-04 0 X-Dir (mm) D.A.1 0.00047 0.00057 0.00066 8E-04 8E-04 9E-04 9E-04 9E-04 8E-04 6E-04 3E-04 0 X-Dir (mm) D.A.2 0.00033 0.00041 0.00049 6E-04 7E-04 7E-04 7E-04 7E-04 7E-04 6E-04 3E-04 0 X-Dir (mm) D.A.3 0.00033 0.00041 0.00049 6E-04 7E-04 7E-04 7E-04 7E-04 7E-04 6E-04 3E-04 0 X-Dir (mm) (SPSW) 0.00039 0.0006 0.00081 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 6E-04 0 Figure 4.5 DATA STORY TERRAC E 9f 8f 7f 6f 5f 4f 3f 2f 1f plinth/g f Base Y-Dir (mm) 0.00091 0.00123 0.00156 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 9E-04 0 Y-Dir (mm)W S.W. 0.00082 0.00095 0.00111 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 1E-03 5E-04 0 Y-Dir (mm) D.A.1 0.00089 0.00106 0.00125 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 5E-04 0 Y-Dir (mm) D.A.2 0.00067 0.00078 0.00089 1E-03 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 9E-04 8E-04 4E-04 0 Y-Dir (mm) D.A.3 0.00067 0.00078 0.00089 1E-03 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 9E-04 8E-04 4E-04 0 Y-Dir (mm) (SPSW) 0.00086 0.00121 0.00156 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0

Figure 4.6 DATA Figure 4.7 STORY DRIFT

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e ISSN: 2395 0056

[5] IS: 456, Code of practice for plain and reinforced concretecodeofpractice,BureauofIndianStandards, NewDelhi,2000.

[6] IS: 1893, Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures general provisions for buildings, Part 1, BureauofIndianStandards,NewDelhi,2002.

[7] IS: 875, “code of practice for design load (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures” Bureau of IndianStandards,NewDelhi,2002.

[8] IS: 800, Code of practice for general construction in steel,BureauofIndianStandards,NewDelhi,2007.

[9] AISC360 05,Specificationofstructuralsteel building, An American national standard, American Institute of SteelConstruction,Inc.,2005

[10] IS:11384,Codeofpracticeforcompositeconstructionin structural steel and concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards,NewDelhi,1985.

[11] Esmails.epackachim.samadzadands.r.mirdhaderi― studyofRCshearwallsystemina56 storeytallbuilding (14WCEE 2008).

[12] Abiffazlshamsai,loghmanrahemi,kamalrahemi,saber peroti―arangementofshearwallsincontroloflateral displacement of 16 and 32 storey concrete frames (WASJ 2012).

[13] Peter K. Dean1 and Harry W. Shenton (2005), “Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Vertical LoadontheCapacityofWoodShearWalls”,Journalof StructuralEngineering;ASCE,pp1104 1113.

Links of the photos of the models https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_cPPWc7gYtarDM vNHWlGJpMN7TlfC0yD?usp=sharing

Page613