This document summarizes a thesis analyzing the seismic performance of a 13-story building model with and without shear walls. Two models are considered: a bare frame structure and a shear wall frame structure. Both models are analyzed using ETABS software under wind and earthquake loading conditions in Seismic Zone III. The results show that the shear wall structure performs much better in terms of limiting lateral displacement, storey drift, and increasing stiffness and strength. It is concluded that the shear wall frame structure provides more reliable performance against lateral loads.

1. SUBMITTED BY- SIDDHARTH JAIN (0206CE13MT16)
UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
PROF. VIJAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA
GYAN GANGA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCES , JABALPUR

2. ABSTRACT
 This Thesis present the importance of shear wall frame structures
in multi-storey building over bare frame structures.
 In this work seismic analysis is presented with two cases first one
is bare frame structures and second one is shear wall structure.
 In this work seismic analysis is presented with two cases first one
is bare frame structures and second one is shear wall structure.
 In this work a unsymmetrical plan is selected for seismic analysis in
ZONE-III. This analysis produce the results such as maximum lateral
displacements, storey drift index and time period. The analysis is
completely done by response spectrum method using E-TABS 9.7.4
software packages.

3. LITREATURE REVIEW

 M.S. Aainawala and Dr. P.S.Pajgade (July2014)[1] have described the
earthquake loading on different multi-storey building of different height
such as G+12,G+25,G+38. These building are located in zone-II, zone-III,
zone-IV and zone-V. They have done comparative analysis between lateral
displacement and storey drift index of different models. They have
ovserved that multi-storey R.C.C. buildings with shear wall is economical as
compared to without shear wall.
 M.D. Kevadkar, P.B. Kodag (May-June2013)[2] have discussed RC building
with three models , model-1 is analyzed using simple beam column
structure, model-2 is analyzed using shear wall structure and model-3 is
analyzed using bracing system. Complete analysis is done on E-TABS
software packages. They have taken all the models in the most severe zone
of earthquake. They concluded that X-type bracing system is more efficient
to take inter storey drift and other parameters compare with shear wall
system.

4.  Tarun Shrivastava et al (February-2015) They give shear wall frame
importance in multi-storey building subjected to wind loading. They
discussed different cases with changing different position of shear wall.
They concluded that shear wall providing as wall frame gives maximum
lateral stiffness and rigidness to the structure.
 P.P Chandurkar and Dr. P.S. Pajgade (June 2013) [1] have discussed the
seismic analysis of 10-storey buildings with different models in ZONE-II,
ZONE-III, ZONE-IV, ZONE-V using E-TABS v9.5.0. They have taken 4- models,
bare frame and dual strucutral system. Parameters such as horizontal
displacement, storey drift and total cost reuired for ground floor are
calculated in bvoth the case replacing column with shear Wall.
 Anuj Chandiwala (Dec.2012)[1] has describes the analysis and design the
critical section is suitably done to get economical concrete members sizes
and optimum steel consumption in the member. He also described seismic
analysis of a particular member, by taking different lateral load resisting
system. He also find the most appropriate position of shear wall in multi-
storey building.
 Prof. S.S.Patil et al (March 2013) [2] introduces a seismic analysis of high-
rise building using software packages (staad.pro). He prepared some
different models of different configuration and analyze the structure with
staad.pro software packages. March 2013.

5.  Dipendu Bhunia et al (2011) [3] have presented the elastic and elasto-
plastic behaviors. He considered the fifteen storey problem subjected to
earthquake loading and comparative analysis by staad.pro 2004 and SAP
V10.0.5 (2000), he has also computed shear forces, bending moment and
storey drift in both the above cases.

6. INTRODUCTION
 In this thesis work an analytical study of G+13 storey
building in zone –III is presented with investigations
which is analyzed by taking two different models for
determining the different parameters such as- base shear,
storey shear, storey drift index, time period, frequency by
response spectrum method using E-TABS 9.7.4 .

7. Objective of Studies
 To analyze the building as per Indian standard code IS-
1893-2002 part-1 for earthquake resistant structure, using
E-TABS 9.7.4
 Dynamic analysis of the Building using response spectrum
method .
 To get most efficient lateral load resisting system.

8. Problem formulation
 In this thesis work analysis of G+13 Multistoried unsymmetrical
planned building is considered . In this work two models are
considered which are as follws-
 (i). Bare frame structure.(Beam Column framed structure)
 (ii). Shear wall frame structure
 Analysis of whole problem is completely done E-TABS 9.7.4 and
gives comparative result between different parameters such as
storey drift, lateral displacement, and time period ,frequency and
base shear and storey shear.

 Details of size and geometry of various structural components for
both framing are shown in table no.1.1
 Basic Wind and seismic loading condition for both system are shown
in table.

11. PROPOSED MODEL
Typical floor plan showing BARE FRAME
System.

12. 3D Model of G+13 Storied Conventional
Beam Column System Building.

13. Typical floor plan showing RC Structural
Wall System.

14. 3D Model of G+13 Storied RC Structural
Wall System Building.

15. RESULTS

16. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Beam Column System
RC Structural wall System
Mode Shape
NaturalFrequency(Hz)

18. 0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Beam column system
RC structural wall system
StoreyNo.andMaximumStoreyDisplacement

20. 0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Beam Coloumn
Structural Wall
StoreyShear-
(KN)
Storey No.
Storey No. Storey Shear.

21. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS DUE TO WIND
LOADING

22. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
-0.0002 0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014 0.0016 0.0018
STOREYHEIGHTINm
DRIFT INDEX
STOREY DRIFT INDEX DUE TO WIND FORCES
STOREY DRIFT IN MODEL-1 STOREY DRIFT IN MODEL-2

23. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS DUE TO EARTHQUAKE LOADING

24. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
-0.001 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009
STOREYHEIGHTINm
DRIFT INDEX
STOREY DRIFT INDEX DUE TO EARTHQUAKE FORCES
STOREY DRIFT IN MODEL-1 STOREY DRIFT IN MODEL-2

25. CONCLUSION
 The result showing maximum lateral displacement in
model-2 is 0.5mm and in model-1 it is 39.5mm ,these
results shows that model-2 is more stiff against the lateral
loads.
 In model-2, about 98.% less displacement than model-1.
 In Model-2 the storey drift index is 74% less than model -1
which is very important in multi-storey building
preventing the damage of internal partition.
 It is concluded that shear wall frame structure is more
reliable against lateral displacements and storey drift
index.


26.  The maximum lateral displacement at top in the case of
bare frame structure is about 94% greater than shear wall
structure.
 At top of bare frame structure system is having about 90%
greater storey drift index than shear wall system.
 All the values of storey drift index is in safe limit according
to IS 1893(part-1)-2002.
 The time period for bare frame is greater than to shear wall
structure. Difference in both the system time period is
about 92.22%.
 Natural frequency of shear wall structure is 93% greater
than to bare frame structure.
 From the above results it is obtained that shear wall
structures are more safe compare with bare frame in the
case of worst loading.

27. BIBLOGRAPHY
 IS 1893(part-1) – 2002, “ Indian standard criteria of practice for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi,India.
 Bryan Stafford Smith and Alex Coull “ Tall Building Structures: Analysis and Design” 2011 Reprint
Edition , Wiley India Pvt. Ltd.

 Pankaj Agrawal & Manish Shrikhande “ Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures” 11th Edition ,PHI
Learning Private Limited Delhi-110092 2013.

 Anil k. Chopra “Dynamics of Structures – Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering” 3rd
Edition Pearson Publishers.

 N.B. Baraskar, Prof. U.R. Kawade, “ Strucutral Performance of RC Structural Wall System Over
Conventional Beam Column in G+156 Storey Building.” Interntional Journal of Engineering Research
and General Science Volume3, Issue4, July-August,2015.pp639-654.

 Tarun Shrivastava,Prof. Anubhav rai et.al “Earthquake Analysis of Multi-Storey Structure with
different Location of Shear Wall with Response Spectrum Method Using Hand Method.”
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advance Engineering, Vol-5,Issue1, January2015pp-
309-318.


28.  M.S. Aainawala, Dr. P.S Pajgade,” Design of Multistoried R.C.C. Buildings With
and Without Shear walls” International Journal of engineering Sciences &
Research Technology, [Aainawala, 3(7): July,2014. Pp498-510.


 M.D. Kevadkar, P.B. Kodag “ Lateral Load Analysis of R.C.C Building”
Interntional Journal of Modern Engineering Research, Vol3,Issue-3, May-June
2013 pp-1428-1434.
 Prof. S.S. Patil, Miss. S.A. Ghadge, Prof. C.G. Konapure, Prof. Mrs. C.A. Ghadge
“ Seismic Analysis of High-Rise Building by Response Spectrum Method”
 International Journal of Computational Engineering Research, Vol.3, 2013
Pages 272-279

 Anshuman. S, Dipendu Bhunia, Bhavin Ramjiyani “ Solution of Shear Wall
Location in Multi-Storey Building” International Journal of Civil and Strucutral
Engineering, Vol.2, No,2011 Pages 493-506.

29.  Alfa Rasikan, M.G Rajendran “ Wind Behavior of Building with and without Shear wall”
(IJERA) Vol.3, Issue 2, March-April 2013 page480-485..
 Tarun Shrivastava et al “ Effectiveness of Shear Wall –Frame Structure Subjected to Wind
Loading in Multi-Storey Building” International Journal of Computational Engineering
Research (IJCER) VOl.5 Issue 02, February-2015 page20-28.
 [3] P.P. Chandurkar1, Dr, P.S. Pajgade2,”Seismic Analysis of
 RCC Building with and without Shear Wall” IJMER Vol.3,
 Issue 3 2013 page1805-1810

 [4] IS 875(part-3) – 1987, “ Code of Practice for Design Wind Loads for Buildings and
Structures”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi,India