Comparative Study on Seismic and Wind forces on RCC Structure

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 07 | July 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072

Comparative Study on Seismic and Wind forces on RCC Structure

1Assistant Professor, TKR Engineering College, Hyderabad, 2Assistant Professor, TKR Engineering College, Hyderabad, 3Student, TKR Engineering College Hyderabad, 4Student, TKR Engineering College Hyderabad, ***

Abstract This paper gives the comparative study on seismic and wind forces on G+10 RCC Residentialbuilding. The results are taken from the Major Project done by the students. The Seismic and wind forces parameters are selected for Hyderabad city, Telangana state. Planning is done by AutoCAD software. Analysis and Design is done by STAADPRO Software. The footing is designed as Mat Footing usingSTAAD PRO Foundation. The parameterslikedesignofcornerandmid columns are compared. Maximum nodal displacement is compared. Footing soil pressure, reinforcement and base pressure is compared.

Key Words: Seismic force, Wind Force, Base shear, deflection, Bending Moment.

1. INTRODUCTION

InthisstudytheanalysisanddesignhasbeendoneforG+10 Residentialbuilding.Theplanofthebuildingiskeptsame for both the studies. For distinguishing two studies the followingcaseswillbereferred:

Case I: For seismic forces with load combination of 1.2(DL+LL±EQ).

Case II: For wind forces with load combination of 1.2(DL+LL±WL)

DL:DeadLoadsIS875Part I

LL:LiveLoadsIS875Part II

WL:WindLoadsIS875Part III

EQ:EarthquakeLoadsIS1893

BothWindloadandEarthquakeloadsarelateralloads.Wind isaconstantforceandEarthquakeisaninstantaneousforce.

ThemagnitudeofWindloaddependsonheightofbuilding, Velocityof wind and the amount ofSurface area the wind attacks.

The magnitude of earthquake load depends on mass of structure, stiffness of the structural system and the accelerationofsurfaceofearth.

Dampingwillbeconsideredinseismicforcescalculations. UndernormalconditionsdampingisnotconsideredinWind forcecalculations.

ThesoiltypehaseffectonSeismicforcesbutnotonWind forces.

2. ARCHITECTURAL PLAN (Case I & II)

3. COLUMN CENTRELINE (Case I & II)

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 07 | July 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072

4. STAAD PRO MODELLING (Case I & II)

6. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PARAMETERS

Table -1 CASE I(DL+LL+EQ)

GENERAL DATA

PlotArea 900m2

BuiltupArea 552m2

Numberofstoreys G+10 Foundationdepth 3m

TypicalFloorHeight 3m GradeofConcrete M25 GradeofSteel Fe550 SizeofColumn 400x1000mm SizeofBeams 230x500mm

Footingtype MatFooting

FloorFinishLoad 1Kn/m2 Memberloads(Wallloads) 12Kn/m2(Exterior) 6Kn/m2 (Interior) 3Kn/m2 (Parapet)

LiveLoad 2Kn/m2

SEISMIC PARAMETERS

SeismicZone II

ZoneFactor 0.1 ResponseReductionFactor 3 ImportanceFactor 1 DampingRatio 0.05

5. STAAD PRO 3D MODEL (Case I & II)

Table 2 CASE II(DL+LL+WL)

GENERAL DATA

PlotArea 900m2

BuiltupArea 552m2

Numberofstoreys G+10 Foundationdepth 3m TypicalFloorHeight 3m GradeofConcrete M25 GradeofSteel Fe550 SizeofColumn 400x1000mm SizeofBeams 230x500mm

Footingtype MatFooting

FloorFinishLoad 1Kn/m2 Memberloads(Wallloads) 12Kn/m2(Exterior) 6Kn/m2 (Interior) 3Kn/m2 (Parapet)

LiveLoad 2Kn/m2

WIND PARAMETERS

VbBasicwindspeed 44m/s

VzDesignwindspeed =Vb*K1*K2*K3

K1Riskcoefficient 1

K2Terrainheightfactor (Category 2) 1.12

K3Topographyfactor 1

PzDesignWindPressure 0.6*Vz2

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

7. CORNER COLUMNS COMPARISION

8. MID COLUMNS COMPARISION

Corner Column GF for Case I

Mid Column GF for Case I

Corner Column 10th floor Case I

Mid Column 10th floor for Case I

Corner Column GF for Case II

Mid Column GF for Case II

Corner Column 10th floor Case II

Mid Column 10th floor for Case II

Volume: 09 Issue: 07 | July 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072 © 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 07 | July 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072

12. FOOTING BASE PRESSURE CASE I CASE-II

11. FOOTING

CASE I CASE II

REINFORCEMENT

3. CONCLUSIONS

1) AreaofreinforcementismoreinCornercolumns, comparingthanmidcolumnsforboththecases.

2) NodaldisplacementinCase IIishigher.

3) There is variation in pattern of Soil Pressure for Case IandCase II.

4) Matfootingreinforcementrequirementishigherin Case II.

5) FootingBasepressureismoreinCase II.

REFERENCES

[1] IS:456 2000,CodeofPracticeforconcretedesign.

[2] IS:875 1987(Part1) 1987,CodeofPracticeforDesign Loadsforbuildingsandstructures Deadloads.

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

[3] IS:875 1987(Part2) 1987,CodeofPracticeforDesign Loadsforbuildingsandstructures Imposedloads.

[4] IS:875 1987(Part3) 1987,CodeofPracticeforDesign Windloadsforbuildingsandstructures.

[5] IS 1893 Code of Practice for Earthquake resistant design.

BIOGRAPHIES

Volume: 09 Issue: 07 | July 2022 www.irjet.net p ISSN: 2395 0072 © 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal