STAAD.

Pro CE – Seismic
Analysis Using IS 1893
(Part 1):2016

Sanjib Das

Exton, Pennsylvania, USA

About the Author

Sanjib Das

Sanjib Das is a Manager at Bentley Systems, Kolkata, India.

He holds a master’s degree in structural engineering. He
has more than 15 years of experience in dealing with critical
issues in STAAD.Pro software. He is involved in providing
solutions to critical structural engineering problems.

His research area includes earthquake engineering,

earthquake-resistant design of RCC and steel structures, and
application of software in the field of earthquake
engineering. He has many national and internal
publications. He has been the technical lead for the
implementation of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 in STAAD.Pro
CONNECT Edition.
STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis Using IS 1893
(Part 1):2016
First Edition

Copyright © 2019 Bentley Systems, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.

Bentley Systems, Incorporated

685 Stockton Drive

Exton, PA 19341, United States of America www.bentley.com/books

Printed in the United States of America Bentley, “B” Bentley logo, Bentley
Institute Press and MicroStation are either registered or unregistered trademarks
or servicemarks of Bentley Systems, Incorporated or one of its direct or indirect
wholly owned subsidiaries. Other brands and product names are trademarks of
their respective owners.

The publisher does not warrant or guarantee any of the products described
herein or perform any independent analysis in connection with any of the
product information contained herein. The publisher does not assume, and
expressly disclaims, any obligation to obtain and include information other than
that provided to it by the manufacturer.

The reader is expressly warned to consider and adopt all safety precautions that
might be indicated by the activities herein and to avoid all potential hazards. By
following the instructions contained herein, the reader willingly assumes all risks
in connection with such instructions.

The publisher makes no representation or warranties of any kind, including but

not limited to, the warranties of fitness for particular purpose of merchantability,
nor are any such representations implied with respect to the material set forth
herein, and the publisher takes no responsibility with respect to such material.
The publisher shall not be liable for any special, consequential or exemplary
damages resulting, in whole or part, from the readers’ use of, or reliance upon,
this material.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2019947064
ISBN: 978-1-934493-58-8
Published by:
Bentley Institute Press
Bentley Systems, Incorporated

685 Stockton
Drive
Exton, PA 19341, United States of
America
Acknowledgement
This book is dedicated to all the users of STAAD.Pro who
have used it for their projects over the years. The feedback
and support of our users over the years have driven this
project. Fundamentally what we love to do is create, so it is
wonderful watching the product and its users grow!
Last year we had an idea of helping our users get a better
understanding of STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis. To
accomplish this, we planned to write a text to cover seismic
design criteria as per Indian standard, the process of using
different parameters required for equivalent static and
dynamic analyses. Our problem was tractable because
recent earthquakes in India indicate that many of collapses
of buildings were due to lack of considerations of the basic
concepts of earthquake behaviour in design.
STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis using IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
was the fruit of months of effort of multiple Bentley
colleagues and of course our users. Firstly, we would like to
thank our author Sanjib Das who made it happen.
Information about the author is provided in the section
‘About the Author’. We would also like to thank Shreyanka
Bhattacharjee and Aritra Lodh for their commitment to
collaborate and help the author with the manuscript. Many
engineers, technical support representatives and product
specialists at Bentley Systems reviewed the chapters and
accompanying examples to provide valuable inputs and to
shape the text into its current form.
Vikash Pandey
Manager at Bentley Institute Press
Foreword
Global urbanization, concentrating populations in large
coastal cities, has resulted in more than half the world’s
population who are now susceptible to one or more natural
hazards. In India, three of the four largest cities lie in
seismic zone IV subject to some of the highest earthquake
loading and risk. The risk to life and limb is just one
consideration, with so many people concentrated in such
close proximity in large cities. The importance of ensuring
resilience in their infrastructure is greater than ever. Over
the last couple of decades, more than 200,000 lives and
4,000,000,000,000 in USD direct and indirect economic
losses can be attributed to earthquakes (Munich RE). The
ability of our communities and society to react and recover
for earthquakes has become as much of consideration in our
design codes as the need to keep the population safe.
Structural seismic design codes evolve with lessons learned
in each major earthquake experience. Early codes adapted
to the poor performance of irregular and discontinuous
structures adding higher strength and ductility
requirements. More recent events have highlighted the need
to consider vertical accelerations and the secondary loading
impacts that result from structure weight acting on a
deformed structure. Minimum design forces and ductility
factors have been adjusted as we learn more about near-
and far-field seismic loading characteristics along with
increasing resilience requirements as more buildings need
to be designed not just to ensure life safety but also with
intent to return to operation soon after seismic events.
The design codes have also adapted to technological
advancements, allowing us to continuously improve the way
we idealize and simulate the behaviour and performance of
our buildings subject to seismic forces. When Amit Das
started Research Engineers International in 1981, wrote
STAAD, one of the first STructural Analysis And Design
software solutions for the PC, he created the foundation for
improving the productivity of engineers and our ability to
more accurately simulate the performance on thousands of
structures analysed and designed with STAAD in the last
four decades. STAAD.Pro CONNECT Edition today has
continued to stay up to date in the implementation of the
myriad of the latest IS 1893 analysis and design code
requirements, and the need to understand the application of
code requirements in the software engineers’ use is more
important than ever.
It is with this purpose that Sanjib Das has written this
formative book on the basis of the evolution and application
of the latest IS 1893 design code in STAAD.Pro. The book
provides an overview of science of earthquake engineering
from source causes to measurement standards. Sanjib takes
readers through a short history of the origins and
organization of structural design standards and identifies
the latest changes made in the IS 1893 Seismic Standard. In
the core, Sanjib does an exceptional job describing the
various analysis techniques, static, dynamic, linear,
nonlinear prescribed by the code, providing an excellent
balance of the technical with the practical application in
STAAD.Pro CONNECT Edition. It is clear that Sanjib’s
extensive engineering and STAAD experience have provided
a practical guide and filter to present and interpret the
design code intent gained though his close interaction with
members of the design code committee.
Sanjib has uniquely written this book that describes the
source, intent and the practical application of the code
provisions in STAAD. It is a must-read book for anyone
looking for understanding the IS 1893 code provisions and
its applications in the most widely used structural analysis
and design product, STAAD.Pro. I hope you enjoy the book
as much as I have.
Raoul Karp, PE, SE – VP, Bentley Systems
Reviews
Based on the data available from different massive
earthquakes, Indian code for earthquake resistant design (IS
1893 Part 1) is totally revised including several parameters
to make the building structure safe in all respect. There are
several new clauses regarding earthquake analysis and
design aspect.
In the present scenario, all the structural engineers should
have the capability of handling specialized structural
analysis software such as STAAD.Pro CE over and above a
thorough knowledge in structural engineering.
Starting from a detailed discussion on earthquake and its
propagation, measurement procedure, etc., this book will
create a bridge between structural engineering theory and
software application procedure, with excellent explanation
on different clauses of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 along with its
application procedure in software, which really claims
appreciation.
Moreover verification problems will help to understand the
accuracy of result obtained from STAAD.Pro CE software.
This book that is enriched with the vast experience of
author Sri Sanjib Das will help structural engineers’
fraternity for using latest STAAD.Pro CE software for seismic
analysis of building as per IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Dr Arundeb Gupta
PhD (Engg), M ASCE (United States), C Eng (I), FIE, FIAStruct
E
Skematic Consultants
Computer software has become the de facto tool of choice
for engineers for analysing and designing all types of
structures. Today, engineers need to know not only the
theory behind the procedures used in analysis and design,
but also they have to possess the skills to use the
specialized software to perform those numerous calculations
in the limited time available.
Designing structures to withstand seismic loads has become
an important and necessary component of the analysis and
design. The complexity and vastness of this subject makes it
imperative that engineers understand the capabilities of
software in order to correctly perform such analysis.
Readers of this book will greatly benefit from the author’s
more than 15 years of experience as a technical support
engineer for STAAD.Pro along with his extensive knowledge
of seismic analysis and earthquake-resistant design using
the IS 1893 code. Besides having advised thousands of
users on the correct way to create computer models of
various types of structures during his career with STAAD.Pro,
he has also published papers and spoken at numerous
forums educating users about the Indian code’s
requirements and the correct way to consider those when
creating the analysis models using STAAD.Pro. He is the
ideal candidate to write such a book.
The 2016 edition of the IS 1893 code mandates a number of
additional requirements compared to the previous editions
of the code, and rightly so because of the vast number of
lives that were lost in the earthquakes that occurred in Bhuj,
Gujarat, and Nepal. The parameters and input commands to
use to ensure compliance with the old as well as new
editions of the code have been covered very well in this
book. The author has provided numerous examples to
illustrate the correct way to specify the various input
parameters, along with the results that are produced by the
programme and the methods to interpret and validate the
output.
The organization of the book into various sections, such as
rigid diaphragms, torsion and irregularity checks, static and
response spectrum methods of analysis, is particularly
useful to an engineer who wants to easily identify and
explore such topics of interest.
By writing this book, Sanjib Das has produced a valuable
tool for the engineering community that uses STAAD.Pro as
its software for the analysis of design of structures in India.
Kris Sathia
Director, Product Management
Structural Director, Product Management Bentley Systems
There has always been a demand among practicing
engineers for a guide that can bridge the gap between the
specifications given in a code and commercially available
software. Different users of a software end up adopting
whatever they feel is the correct representation of the code
clauses into a software.
This book clarifies the correct approach to be followed and
how it can be properly implemented in STAAD.Pro. It serves
as an informative tool for both the novice and the expert,
imparting knowledge on the different code clauses and their
actual intent.
Some of the clauses in the code have been backed up with
useful hand calculations to prove that the program results
match with the hand calculations. The diagrams, formulas
and illustrations make the difficult concepts simple to
understand and highlight the functionality in STAAD.Pro in a
very practical manner.
The book is extremely well written, and I believe that it will
serve as a good resource for practicing engineers trying to
design buildings with complete code compliance.
H.E. Sriprakash Shastry
Partner
Aswathanarayana & Eswara
Projects and Consultancy LLP
Excellent book. One of its kind, in a sense that it combines
theoretical aspects of codal provisions (IS 1893:2016) with
computer modelling (STAAD.Pro CE) with parameters and
their implications. Appendix section explains the missing
links in the parameters adequately and is equivalent to
hands-on training. The inclusion of modelling of walls with
equivalent struts and the varying moment of inertia of
columns and beams as per codal provisions have made the
book invaluable.
Avijit Ghosh
Proprietor and Structural Engineer
Siliguri, West Bengal
Contents

STAAD.Pro CE – Seismic Analysis Using IS 1893 (Part

1):2016

Acknowledgement

Foreword

Reviews

Chapter 1: Overview of Earthquake Engineering

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Earthquake Engineering Problems and Prospects

Problem
Solution

1.3 Seismology
The Earth and Its Interiors
Plate Tectonics
Seismic Waves
Earthquake Measurement Parameters
Measuring Instruments
 Magnitude
Intensity

Chapter 2: Introduction to IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Importance of Seismic Design Codes

2.3 IS 1893 Code History

2.4 Seismic Zone Map

2.5 Peak Ground Acceleration

2.6 Maximum Considered Earthquake and Design Basis

Earthquake
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Design Philosophy

Chapter 3: Modelling Aspects Using a Software

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Load Paths

3.3 Importance of Load Path

3.4 Earthquake Force Flow Path in Buildings

3.5 Load-Path Consideration in STAAD.Pro

 3.6 Diaphragm Modelling – A Special Case of Mass and
Stiffness Modelling

3.7 General Format

Chapter 4: Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016

Equivalent Static Method

4.1 Equivalent Static Method of Analysis

Determination of Base Shear
Design Vertical Earthquake Effects
Minimum Design Earthquake Horizontal Lateral Force
[Table-7 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016]
Consideration of Underground Structure
Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different Floor
Levels
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Seismic Parameter
Parameters used in IS 1893 (Part-1): 2016 Seismic
Definition
Parameters used in Seismic Load Cases

4.2 Equivalent Static Analysis with Different Structure

Type
RC MRF Building
RC–Steel Composite MRF Building
Steel MRF Building
Buildings with RC Structural Walls
All Other Buildings
Chapter 5: Application of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
Seismic Parameters

5.1 Introduction

5.2 DX and DZ Parameters

5.3 HT Parameter

5.4 PX and PZ Parameters

5.5 DM Parameter

5.6 DF Parameter

Chapter 6: Buildings With Fundamental Time Period

Greater Than 4 s

Chapter 7: Consideration of Vertical Motion in

Seismic Analysis

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Design Vertical Acceleration Spectrum

Chapter 8: Consideration of Minimum Base Shear

Criteria
Chapter 9: Seismic Analysis of Structures Having
Structural Components Below the Ground Level

9.1 Analysis of the Underground Structure by Using

Equivalent Static Method

Chapter 10: Analysis of Structure Considering

Torsional Provision

Chapter 11: Soft Storey

Chapter 12: Dynamic Analysis

12.1Introduction

12.2Response Spectrum
Response Spectrum Methodology

12.3Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016 Seismic Parameter

for Response Spectrum Analysis

12.4Miscellaneous Commands for Dynamic Analysis

CUT OFF MODE SHAPE, CUT OFF FREQUENCY
Individual Modal Response
Mode Select
SET Commands

Appendix
A.1 Solution of Problem Statement 4.1: RC MRF Building

A.2 Solution of Problem Statement 4.2: RC–Steel

Composite MRF Building

A.3 Solution of Problem Statement 4.3: Steel MRF

Building

A.4 Solution of Problem Statement 4.4: Computation of

Base Shear of a Building with RC Structural Wall having
time period greater than that of All Other Buildings

A.5 Solution of Problem Statement 4.5: Computation of

Time Period of a Building with RC Structural Wall having
time period less than that of All Other Buildings

A.6 Solution of Problem Statement 4.6: All Other

Buildings

A.7 Solution of Problem Statement 5.1: DX DZ

Parameter

A.8 Solution of Problem Statement 5.2: HT Parameter

A.9 Solution of Problem Statement 5.3: PX and PZ

Parameter

A.10 Solution of Problem Statement 5.4: DM Parameter

A.11 Solution of Problem Statement 5.5: DF Parameter

A.12 Solution of Problem Statement 6.1: Buildings with

Fundamental Time Period Greater Than 4s
 A.13 Solution of Problem Statement 7.1: Consideration
of Vertical Motion in Seismic Analysis

A.14 Solution of Problem Statement 8.1: Consideration

of Minimum Base Shear Criteria

A.15 Solution of Problem Statement 9.1: Seismic

Analysis of Structures Having Structural Components
Below the Ground Level

A.16 Solution of Problem Statement 10.1: Analysis of

Structure Considering Torsional Provision

A.17 Solution of Problem Statement 12.4: Verification

Example of General Response Spectrum Analysis

Bibliography

Index
 Overview of Earthquake
1 Engineering

1.1 Introduction

An earthquake is a sudden and transient motion of the

earth’s surface. According to geologists, the earth has
suffered earthquakes for hundreds of millions of years, even
before humans came into existence. Seismological data
from many earthquakes were collected and analysed to map
and understand the phenomena of earthquakes. These data
were even used to resolve the earth’s internal structure to a
remarkable degree, which helped towards the development
of different theories to explain the causes of earthquakes.
Both seismologists and earthquake engineers use the
seismological data for the understanding of an earthquake
and its effects, but their aims are different. Seismologists
focus their attention on the global issues of earthquakes and
are more concerned with the geological aspects, including
the prediction of earthquakes, whereas earthquake
engineers, on the other hand, are concerned mainly with the
local effects of earthquakes, which can cause significant
damage to structures.
During an earthquake, seismic waves arise from sudden
movements in a rupture zone (active fault) in the earth’s
crust. Waves of different types and velocities travel different
paths before reaching a building’s site and subjecting the
local ground to various motions. The ground moves rapidly
back and forth in all directions.
If the ground moves rapidly back and forth, the foundations
of the building are forced to follow these movements. The
upper part of the building remains stagnant because of its
inertia effect. These developed inertia forces cause strong
vibrations of the structure, causing severe damage to it.
The effects of an earthquake on a building are primarily
determined by the time histories of the three ground motion
parameters: ground acceleration (ag), velocity (vg) and
displacement (dg), with their specific frequency contents.
The ground motion parameters and other characteristic
values at a location due to an earthquake of a given
magnitude may vary strongly. They depend on numerous
factors, such as distance, direction, depth and mechanism
of the fault zone in the earth’s crust (epicentre).
In comparison with rock, softer soil is particularly prone to
substantial local amplification of the seismic waves. As for
the response of a building to the ground motion, it depends
on important structural characteristics (eigen-frequency,
type of structure, ductility, etc.).
Buildings must, therefore, be designed to account for
considerable uncertainties and variations.

1.2 Earthquake Engineering Problems and

Prospects
In the task of earthquake-disaster mitigation, acquiring the
state-of-the-knowledge is only the first step; the most
important and perhaps the more difficult step is to translate
that knowledge into state-of-the-practice. Indians have been
adapting best practices and hence their standards of
earthquake-resistant design are revised to adapt to the
latest state-of-the-art of earthquake engineering.
Earthquake engineering philosophies are adapted
thoroughly so that the professional engineers themselves
can carry out good aseismic construction. Earthquake-
resistant construction requires seismic considerations at all
stages: from architectural planning to structural design to
actual construction and quality control.
Seismic design codes are important tools by which the
knowledge in earthquake engineering is transferred to the
practice and we cannot afford to be complacent with regard
to seismic codes. Indian seismic codes have been improving
since 1985, but we have more to achieve.
While we work towards transferring the knowledge to the
practice, we also need to absorb in the country the latest
developments in the fast-changing field of earthquake
engineering, in areas such as the active and passive control
of structures, nonlinear analysis, soil–structure interaction
studies and seismic risk assessment. There are also several
research problems we need to tackle which are unique to
our country and for which solutions cannot be sought from
research being conducted in the developed world. Some
such problems are strong motion characterization of Indian
earthquakes, low-cost earthquake-resistant houses, seismic
behaviour of masonry buildings and the seismic design of
framed buildings with brick infills.

Problem
Most earthquakes are predicted based on seismic activity
that is detected in the ground look for movements in the
earth’s crust. But we know from many recent earthquakes,
such as in Sumatra 2004 and Japan 2011, that this method
provides people very little advance notice to evacuate. Both
earthquakes hit with a large surprise factor. The Japan 2011
earthquake gave residents just a few minutes’ warning, and
the size and location of the Sumatra 2004 earthquake was
surprising, even to geologists. As a result, the damage to
both life and property was extensive.
Earthquake predictions can be made over small-time and
large-time scales. The short-term warnings are only helpful
to save lives if people have sufficient time to escape the
epicentre. But these have not been very successful in recent
history. The better way to escape earthquake damage is
long-term planning.

Solution
The key is to identify areas that have the potential for major
damage from earthquakes based on the history of
earthquakes in that region over thousands of years. This is
important because it provides information to make a long-
term planning decision about large population centres and
infrastructure locations. Any region where major
earthquakes occur with a frequency of between 200 and
500 years is a dangerous area for major population centres
and large infrastructure investments.
We have information about many recent major earthquakes
in the last century, but that does not help unless we are
able to predict the frequency of earthquakes in a specific
location over the long run. For that, we need the earthquake
data over thousands of years as we know that earthquakes
usually occur along fault lines.
1.3 Seismology

It is a big subject and mainly deals with earthquake as a

geological process. Both seismologists and earthquake
engineers use the seismological data for understanding an
earthquake and its effects, but their aims are different.
Seismologists focus their attention on the global issues of
earthquakes and are more concerned with the geological
aspects, including the prediction of earthquakes. Earthquake
engineers, on the other hand, are concerned mainly with the
local effects of earthquakes, which can cause significant
damage to structures. They transform seismological data
into a form which is more appropriate for the prediction of
damage to structures or, alternatively, the safe design of
structures.

The Earth and Its Interiors

A long time ago, due to the fusion of masses, large amount
of heat was generated. Slowly as the earth cooled, the
heavier and denser materials sank to the centre and the
lighter ones rose to the top. Geological investigations with
seismological data revealed that the earth primarily consists
of four distinct layers: the inner core (radius ~ 1290 km),
the outer core (thickness ~ 2200 km), the mantle (thickness
~ 2900 km) and the crust (thickness ~ 5–40 km) as shown
in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Inside the earth.

Figure 1.2: Local convective currents in the mantle.

The inner core is solid and consists of heavy metals (e.g.,

nickel and iron), while the crust consists of light materials
(e.g., basalts and granites). The outer core is liquid in form
and the mantle can flow.

Plate Tectonics
The convective flows of mantle material cause the crust and
some portion of the mantle to slide on the hot molten outer
core. This sliding of earth’s mass takes place in pieces called
tectonic plates. The concept of tectonics plate developed
from the ideas on continental drift.
At mid-oceanic ridges, two continents (large land masses)
initially joined together, and then due to convective
circulation of the earth’s mantle, continents drift apart
because of the flow of hot mantle upwards to the surface of
the earth at the ridges, as shown in Figure 1.2. When the
hot material reaches the surface and then cools down, it
forms an additional crust. The newly formed crust spreads
outwards due to the continuous upwelling of molten rock,
and it sinks beneath the surface of the sea as it cools down
and the outwards spreading continues. These phenomena
gave rise to the concept of sea-floor spreading.
The continental motions are associated with a variety of
circulation patterns. There are seven such major tectonic
plates and many smaller ones as shown in Figure 1.3. These
plates move in different directions and at different speeds
from those of the neighbouring ones. Sometimes, the plate
in the front is slower, then the plate behind it comes and
collides (and mountains are formed). On the other hand,
sometimes two plates move away from one another (and
rifts are created). In another case, two plates move side-by-
side, along the same or in opposite directions. These three
types of inter-plate interactions are the convergent,
divergent and transform boundaries (Figure 1.4).
Convergent boundaries exist in orogenic zones, while
divergent boundaries exist where a rift between the plates is
created, as shown in Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.3: Major tectonic plates on the earth’s surface.

Figure 1.4: Types of inter-plate boundaries.

When earthquakes occur in faults at the plate boundaries,

these earthquakes are termed as inter-plate earthquakes.
Sometimes, earthquakes also occur within the plate away
from the faults. These types of earthquakes are known as
intraplate earthquakes in which a sudden release of energy
takes place due to the mutual slip of the rock beds. This slip
creates new faults called earthquake faults. These faults,
which have been undergoing deformation for the past
several thousand years and will continue to do so in future,
are termed active faults. At the faults (new or old), two
different types of slippages are observed: dip slip and strike
slip. Dip slip takes place in the vertical direction while strike
slip takes place in the horizontal direction, as shown in
Figure 1.5.
Faults created by dip slip are termed normal faults when the
upper rock bed moves down and reverse faults when the
upper rock bed moves up, as shown in Figure 1.5. Similarly,
faults created by strike slip are referred to as left lateral
faults and right lateral faults depending on the direction of
relative slip.

Figure 1.5: Type of faults.

Seismic Waves
The large strain energy released during an earthquake
causes radial propagation of waves in all directions within
the earth as an elastic mass. These elastic waves are called
seismic waves. Seismic waves transmit energy from one
point of the earth to another through different layers and
finally carry the energy to the surface, which causes
destruction. Within the earth, waves travel in an almost
homogenous elastic unbounded medium as body waves. On
the surface, they move as surface waves. Reflection and
refraction of waves take place near the earth’s surface and
at every layer within the earth. The body waves are of two
types: P and S waves. P waves are longitudinal waves in
which the direction of particle motion is in the same or the
opposite direction to that of wave propagation shown at the
top of Figure 1.6. S waves are transverse waves in which the
direction of particle motion is at right angles to the direction
of wave propagation. Wave’s propagation velocities are
given by:

where E, G, ρ and ν are the Young’s modulus, the shear

modulus, the mass density and the Poisson ratio of the soil
mass, respectively. As the Poisson ratio is always less than a
half, P waves arrive ahead of S waves. Near the surface of
the earth, vp = 5–7 km/s and vs = 3-4 km/s.
Figure 1.6: Motions caused by body and surface waves.
The time interval between the arrival of the P and S waves
at a station is called the duration of primary tremor. This
duration can be obtained by:

where Δ is the distance of the station from the focus.

Polarized transverse waves are polarization of particles
either in vertical (SV) or in horizontal (SH) plane.
Surface waves propagate on the earth’s surface. They are
better detected in shallow earthquakes. They are classified
as L waves (Love waves) and R waves (Rayleigh waves). In L
waves, particles move in a horizontal plane perpendicular to
the direction of wave propagation as shown in Figure 1.6. In
R waves, particles move in vertical plane and they trace a
retrogate elliptical path as shown in Figure 1.6. For oceanic
waves, water particles undergo similar elliptical motion in
ellipsoid surface as waves pass by. L waves move faster
than R waves on the surface (R wave velocitŷ 0.9vs).

The earthquake energy travels to a station in the form of

waves after reflection and refraction at various boundaries
within the earth. The P and S waves that arrive at the
earth’s surface after reflection and refraction at these
boundaries, including the earth’s surface, are denoted by
phases of the wave such as PP, PPP, SS, and PPS, as shown
in Figure 1.7. PP and PPP are longitudinal waves reflected
once and twice, respectively. PS and PPS are phases that
have undergone a change in the character on reflection.
Earthquake waves that are recorded on the surface of the
earth are generally irregular in nature. A record of a fairly
strong earthquake shows a trace of the types of waves, as
shown in Figure 1.8.
Strong earthquakes can generally be classified into four
groups:

1 Practically single shock: Near source, on firm ground,

. for example, shallow earthquake.

2 Moderately long irregular: Moderate distance from

. source, on firm ground, for example, El Centro
earthquake.

3 A long ground motion with prevailing period: Filtered

. ground motion through soft soil, medium – Loma, for
example, Prieta earthquake.

4 Ground motion involving large scale ground

. deformation: Landslides, soil liquefaction, for example,
Chilean and Alaska earthquakes.

Earthquake Measurement Parameters

Seismic intensity parameters refer to quantities by which
the size and energy of earthquakes are described. Some of
these parameters are measured directly, while others are
derived indirectly from the measured ones with the help of
empirical relationships. Thus, many empirical relationships
have been developed to relate one intensity parameter to
another. In the following, intensity parameters along with
some of the terminologies associated with earthquake are
described next.
Here, mainly the two most important parameters,
magnitude and intensity, of earthquake are described along
with some terminologies.
Figure 1.7: Reflections at the earth’s surface.

Figure 1.8: Typical strong motion record.

The focus or hypocentre is the point on the fault where the

slip starts. The point just vertically above this on the surface
of the earth is the epicentre, as shown in Figure 1.9.
The depth of the focus from the epicentre is called focal
depth and is an important parameter in determining the
damaging potential of an earthquake. Most of the damaging
earthquakes have a shallow focus with a focal depth of less
than 70 km. Focal depth greater than 70 km is classified as
intermediate or deep, depending on their distances.
Distances from the focus and the epicentre to the point of
observed ground motion are called the focal distance and
epicentral distance, respectively. The limited region of the
earth that is influenced by the focus of earthquake is called
the focal region. The larger the earthquake, the greater is
the focal region. Foreshocks are defined as those which
occur before the main shock. Similarly, aftershocks are
those which occur after the main shock.

Measuring Instruments
The instrument that measures earthquake shaking, a
seismograph, has three components – the sensor, the
recorder and the timer. The principle on which it works is
simple and is explicitly reflected in the early seismograph
(Figure 1.10A) – a pen attached at the tip of an oscillating
simple pendulum (a mass hung by a string from a support)
marks on a chart paper that is held on a drum rotating at a
constant speed. A magnet around the string provides
required damping to control the amplitude of oscillations.
The pendulum mass, string, magnet and support together
constitute the sensor; the drum, pen and chart paper
constitute the recorder and the motor that rotates the drum
at constant speed forms the timer. One such instrument is
required in each of the two orthogonal horizontal directions.
Of course, for measuring vertical oscillations, the string
pendulum (Figure 1.10A) is replaced with a spring pendulum
oscillating about a fulcrum. Some instruments do not have a
timer device (i.e., the drum holding the chart paper does
not rotate). Such instruments provide only the maximum
extent (or scope) of motion during the earthquake; for this
reason, they are called seismoscopes. The analogue
instruments have evolved over time, but today, digital
instruments using modern computer technology are more
commonly used (Figure 1.10B). The digital instrument
records the ground motion on the memory of the
microprocessor that is in-built in the instrument.
Figure 1.9: Earthquake observation.

Magnitude
A quantitative measure of the actual size of the earthquake
is known as magnitude. It is determined from
measurements on seismographs. The magnitude of an
earthquake is a number that allows earthquakes to be
compared with each other in terms of their relative power.
Several decades ago, earthquake magnitudes were
calculated based on a method developed by Charles Richter.
Figure 1.10A: Seismograph setup.
Figure 1.10B: Typical seismograph.

There are two main criteria related to determine the Richter

magnitude of an earthquake:

1 the amplitude of the largest waves recorded on a

. seismogram of the earthquake and

2 the distance to the epicentre of the earthquake.

.
The maximum amplitude seismic wave = the height of the
tallest one is measured in mm on a seismogram.
The distance to the epicentre must also be taken into
account because the greater the distance from the
earthquake, the smaller the waves get.
The Richter magnitude scale measures the amount of
seismic energy released by an earthquake.
The most commonly used magnitude scale is the Richter
scale. There are other magnitude scales, such as the body
wave magnitude, surface wave magnitude and wave energy
magnitude.

Intensity
Intensity is a qualitative measure of the strength of shaking
produced by the earthquake at a location during an
earthquake. Intensity is determined from effects on people,
human structures and the natural environment.
Earthquake intensity is a ranking based on the observed
effects of an earthquake in each particular place. Therefore,
each earthquake produces a range of intensity values,
ranging from highest in the epicentre area to zero at a
distance from the epicentre.
Two commonly used ones are the modified Mercalli intensity
scale and The Medvedev–Sponheuer–Karnik (MSK) scale.
 Introduction to IS 1893 (Part
2 1):2016

2.1 Introduction

In the past few decades, some of the world’s largest

earthquakes have occurred in and around India. The entire
Himalayan belt is considered prone to great earthquakes of
magnitude exceeding 8.0, and in a short span of about 70
years, four such earthquakes have occurred: 1897 Assam
(M8.7), 1905 Kangra (M8.6), 1934 Bihar–Nepal (M8.4) and
1950 Assam–Tibet (M8.7). Development of the first seismic
zone map and of the earthquake-resistant features for
masonry buildings took place in the 1930s. Formal teaching
and research in earthquake engineering started in the late
1950s. Five moderate earthquakes in the last few years
(1988 Bihar–Nepal: M6.6, about 1004 dead; 1991
Uttarkashi: M6.6, about 768 dead; 1993 Latur: M6.4, about
8000 dead; 1997 Jabalpur: M6.0, about 38 dead and 1999
Chamoli: M6.5, about 100 dead) have clearly underlined the
inadequate preparedness of the country to face damaging
earthquakes. In 2015, the Nepal earthquake (also known as
the Gorkha earthquake) killed nearly 9000 people and
injured nearly 22,000. It occurred at Nepal Standard with a
magnitude of 8.1M. It is important to review the historical
developments of Indian earthquake engineering, the status
of seismic codes, status of code compliance, professional
and academic environment for seismic engineering.

2.2 Importance of Seismic Design Codes

Earthquakes cause forces and deformations in structures

due to ground vibration. Structures need to be designed to
withstand such forces and deformations. Seismic codes help
to improve the behaviour of structures so that they may
withstand the earthquake effects without significant loss of
life and property. Countries around the world have
procedures outlined in seismic codes to help design
engineers in the planning, designing, detailing and
constructing of structures. An earthquake-resistant building
has four virtues in it:

1 Good structural configuration: Its size, shape and

. structural system carrying loads are such that they
ensure a direct and smooth flow of the inertia forces to
the ground.

2. Lateral strength: The maximum lateral (horizontal)

force that it can resist is such that the damage induced
in it does not result in collapse.

3 Adequate stiffness: Its lateral load-resisting system is

. such that the earthquake-induced deformations in it do
not damage its contents under low-to-moderate
shaking.

4 Good ductility: Its capacity to undergo large

. deformations under severe earthquake shaking even
after yielding is improved by favourable design and
 detailing strategies. Seismic codes cover all these
aspects.

Seismic codes are unique to a particular region or country.

They take into account the local seismology, accepted level
of seismic risk, building typologies, materials and methods
used in construction.

2.3 IS 1893 Code History

Dr Thomas Oldham, the first Director of the Geological

Survey of India, is credited the foundation of the scientific
studies of earthquakes in India in 1937. He compiled the
well-known catalogue of Indian earthquakes and carried out
investigations of the Cachar earthquake of 1869. His son,
R.D. Oldham, also went on to contribute substantially to
earthquake studies. His memoir of the 1897 Assam
earthquake was considered by Richter (1958) as one of the
most valuable source books in seismology. In this volume,
R.D. Oldham, for the first time, scientifically interpreted a
seismogram and laid the foundation of modern seismology.
After the Quetta earthquake in 1935, a building code was
developed, but its application was perhaps limited to the
reconstruction project in Baluchistan, and there is no
evidence that it was seriously applied elsewhere in the
country. The first formal seismic code in India was published
in 1962 (IS 1893:1962). It was further revised in 1966, 1970,
1975, 1984, 2002 and in 2016. In the year 2002, this
standard for earthquake-resistant design is being split into
the following five parts:
Part 1: General provisions and buildings
Part 2: Liquid retaining tanks – Elevated and ground
supported
Part 3: Bridges and retaining walls
Part 4: Industrial structures, including stack-like structures
Part 5: Dams and embankments (to be formulated)
This standard primarily deals with earthquake hazard
assessment for earthquake-resistant design of Part 1 –
buildings; Part 2 – liquid-retaining structures; Part 3 –
bridges; Part 4 – embankments and retaining walls; Part 5 –
industrial and stack-like structures and Part 6 – concrete,
masonry and earth dams.
Recently, Indian Standard (Part 1) (Sixth Revision) was
adopted by the Bureau of Indian Standards, after the draft
finalized by the Earthquake Engineering Sectional
Committee had been approved by the Civil Engineering
Division Council.
This standard (Part 1) contains provisions specific to
earthquake-resistant design of buildings. In this revision, the
following changes have been included:

1 Design spectra are defined for natural period up to 6

. s.

2 Same design–response spectra are specified for all

. buildings, irrespective of the material of construction.

3 Bases of various load combinations to be considered

. have been made consistent for earthquake effects,
with those specified in the other codes.

4 Temporary structures are brought under the purview

. of this standard.

5 Importance factor provisions have been modified to

. introduce intermediate importance category of
 buildings to acknowledge the density of occupancy of
buildings.

6 A provision is introduced to ensure that all buildings

. are designed for at least a minimum lateral force.

7 Buildings with flat slabs are brought under the

. purview of this standard.

8 Additional clarity is brought in on how to handle

. different types of irregularity of structural system.

9 Effect of masonry infill walls has been included in

. analysis and design of frame buildings.

10. Method is introduced for arriving at the approximate

natural period of buildings with basements, step-back
buildings and buildings on hill slopes.

11. Provisions on torsion have been simplified.

12. Simplified method is introduced for liquefaction

potential analysis.

All structures, such as parking structures, security cabins

and ancillary structures, need to be designed for
appropriate earthquake effects as per this standard.
Temporary elements, such as scaffolding and temporary
excavations, need to be designed as per this standard.
This standard does not deal with construction features
relating to earthquake-resistant buildings and other
structures. For guidance on earthquake-resistant
construction of buildings, reference may be made to the
latest revisions of the following Indian Standards: IS 4326, IS
13827, IS 13828, IS 13920, IS 13935 and IS 15988.
The provisions of this standard are applicable even to
critical and special structures, such as nuclear power plants,
petroleum refinery plants and large dams. For such
structures, additional requirements may be imposed based
on special studies, such as site-specific hazard assessment.
In such cases, the earthquake effects specified by this
standard shall be taken as at least the minimum.

2.4 Seismic Zone Map

Seismic zoning may be termed as the geographic

delineation of areas having different potentials for
hazardous effects from future earthquakes. Seismic zonation
can be done at any scale – national, regional, local or site. It
characterizes the hazard having a constant value in each
zone.
In the 1962 edition of IS 1893, the seismic zone map was
developed based on the epicentral distribution of past
earthquakes (M > 5) and the isoseismals of such events.
The map demarcated areas of potential ground shaking with
intensity (modified Mercalli (MM) scale) of less than V, V, VI,
VII, VIII, IX and X (and above) and termed these as Seismic
Zones 0, I, II, III, IV, V and VI, respectively. Based on
geological and geophysical data obtained from tectonic
maps and aeromagnetic and gravity surveys, the zonation
map was revised in the 1966 and 1970 editions of the Indian
seismic code.
The 1966 version of the code also provided seven seismic
zones. The Koyna earthquake of 1967 (M6.5, maximum
intensity of shaking VIII, about 200 dead) occurred within
Seismic Zone I and caused major revision of the seismic
zone map in the 1970 edition. The number of zones was
reduced from seven to five by dropping the Zones 0 and VI.
Zone 0 was merged into Zone I, and Zone VI was merged
with Zone V. The five seismic zones of the 1970 edition
correspond to areas liable to shaking intensity of V (or less),
VI, VII, VIII and IX (and above), respectively. This zone map
has remained unchanged ever since.
The Latur earthquake of 1993 (M6.4; about 8000 dead;
maximum intensity of shaking VIIIIX on MM scale) occurred
in Seismic Zone I and again underlined the need to review
and revise the seismic zone map. A revision of the seismic
zone map was undertaken, and the new zone map has been
included in the latest version of IS 1893. Seismic Zone I has
been dropped by merging it with Zone II and some parts of
the peninsular India have now been brought into Zone III.
Post–earthquake reconstruction in the Latur region was
undertaken corresponding to Zone IV provisions of Indian
codes. The Latur area is now classified in Zone III.
The basic seismic coefficient (αo) used in the seismic
coefficient method is 0.01, 0.02, 0.04, 0.05 and 0.08,
respectively, for the five zones. The seismic zone factor (Fo)
used in the response spectrum method is simply five times
αo.
Figure 2.1: Seismic zone map of India.

In 2002 edition, Zone I has been merged upwards into Zone

II. In the peninsular India, some parts of Zones I and II are
now in Zone III. At present, there are only four zones: II, III,
IV and V (Figure 2.1).

2.5 Peak Ground Acceleration

Figure 2.2 shows a typical ground motion record where
ground motion acceleration is shown on vertical axis and
time on horizontal axis. The largest value of ground
acceleration is termed as peak ground acceleration (PGA).
Usually, ground motion is recorded in two mutually
perpendicular horizontal direction and the vertical direction.
Hence, PGA value can be different in different directions.
Vertical PGA value is generally taken as a fraction of the
horizontal PGA.
The term zero period acceleration (ZPA) indicates the
maximum acceleration experienced by a rigid structure
(zero natural period, i.e., T = 0). An infinitely rigid structure
has zero natural period and does not deform, which means
that there is no relative motion between its mass and its
base, and the mass has some acceleration as of the ground.
Therefore, ZPA is the same as the PGA.

Figure 2.2: Horizontal ground motion at El Centro during

Imperial Valley earthquake.

2.6 Maximum Considered Earthquake and

Design Basis Earthquake
Maximum credible earthquake is the largest reasonably
conceivable earthquake that appears possible along a
recognized fault or within a tectonic province. It is generally
an upper bound of the expected magnitude on a fault or in a
tectonic province, irrespective of the return period of the
earthquake which may range from say 100 to 10,000 years.
It is usually evaluated on the basis of geological evidence.
Other terms used in the literature that are somewhat similar
to maximum considered earthquake (MCE) are ‘maximum
possible earthquake’, ‘maximum expectable earthquake’
and ‘maximum probable earthquake’.
MCE is defined in the International Building Code 2000
(USA) corresponding to an earthquake having a 2%
probability of being exceeded in 50 years, that is, 2500-year
return period. In the Uniform Building Code 1997 (USA), MCE
is defined as an earthquake having 10% probability of being
exceeded in 100 years, that is, 1000-year return period. For
a given area, MCE based on 2500-year return period will be
larger than the MCE based on 1000-year return period.
Design basis earthquake (DBE) is the earthquake motion for
which the structure is to be designed in general, considering
inherent conservatism in the design process. In the UBC
1997 and IBC 2000, it corresponds to an earthquake having
10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years, that is, 475-
year return period.
In IS 1893, the zone map is not probabilistic, and the
acceleration values for MCE and DBE do not correspond to
any specific probability of occurrence (or return period). As
an empirical approach, DBE motion has been assumed as
one half of MCE, and this is reflected by factor 2 in the
denominator of equation for Ah (clause 6.4.2).

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Design Philosophy

Structural design of buildings for seismic loading is primarily
concerned with structural safety during major earthquakes.
Seismic loading requires an understanding of the structural
behaviour under large inelastic and cyclic deformations.
Behaviour under this loading is fundamentally different from
wind or gravity loading, requiring much more detailed
analysis. Application of several stringent detailing is
required to assure an acceptable seismic performance
beyond the elastic range. Some structural damage can be
expected when the building experiences design ground
motions because building standard allows inelastic energy
dissipation in structural systems.
In general, most earthquake code provisions implicitly
require that structures be able to resist the following:

1 Minor earthquakes without any damage.

.
2 Moderate earthquakes with negligible structural
. damage and some non-structural damage.

3 Major earthquakes with some structural and non-

. structural damage without collapse. The structure is
expected to undergo large deformations by yielding in
some structural members.

Earthquake forces result directly from the distortions

induced by the motion of the ground on which the structure
rests. The magnitude and distribution of forces and
displacements resulting from ground motion is influenced by
the mass of the structure and its foundation, as well as the
character of the ground motion. There are few things that
we must keep in mind while working with IS 1893 (Part 1):
2016 response spectrum:
 It is a generalized response spectrum that
corresponds to MCE.
1
.2 It is an elastic response spectrum.
.
3 PGA of the response spectrum in 1.0(g).
.
4 It is not dependent on the building category.
.
While designing a structure, the elastic response spectrum
needs to be converted from MCE level to DBE inelastic
response spectrum. Indian Standard stipulated the following
two methods for seismic analysis:

1 equivalent static method and

.
2 dynamic method.
.
Dynamic analysis can be performed either by linear
dynamic analysis or by non-linear dynamic analysis.
Structural non-linearity can be solved using a non-linear
dynamic analysis.

Time history method must be adopted depending on the

requirement on the designer.
Equivalent static method: In this method, the code has
specified a factor Ah (clause 6.4.2) which is termed as
design horizontal seismic coefficient. It is (Z/2)*(I/R)*(Sa/g).
A user who is using this code must have a clear
understanding why these factors are considered. The (Sa/g)
values obtained from the elastic response spectrum depend
on the time period obtained from empirical equations. This
value must be scaled down to DBE by taking the average of
the values obtained from MCE. That is how the half factor
comes into picture. The spectrum provided in the code is
based on the elastic behaviour of the structure. One needs
to consider ductility of the steel into consideration. By
ductility, we understand the ability of structure to undergo
inelastic deformation without losing its strength. That is the
reason why R comes into the equation. R is known as
response-reduction factor. It is dependent on

1 over strength,
.
2 ductility and
.
3 redundancy.
.
While designing a member in limit state design (LSD)
method, we take into consideration the partial safety factor
on material (specifically on steel) and loading. So, we are
always overestimating the force. We are not considering the
ductility of the material – it allows the structure to dissipate
the energy imparted on a structure by allowing the
members to undergo inelastic deformation but ensuring that
the members will not collapse. In such case, the failure
mechanism is governed by the formation of plastic hinges;
even if this concept is accepted, it is very difficult to achieve
in the case of a concrete member. More redundant is the
structure, more plastic hinge formation is required to come
to the failure condition. Thus, the factor R is such a factor
with which the MCE level response spectrum has to be
scaled – it will come in the denominator.
The generalized response spectrum has a value of 1.0(g) as
PGA which indicates a catastrophe in real-life structure. It
must be scaled with the site condition which is why the Z-
zone factor comes into play. We can consider the highest
seismic zone – Zone V. Here the zone factor is 0.36. It
invariably indicates the PGA of that zone is 0.36(g). Thus,
zone factor is such a factor with which the response
spectrum has to be multiplied with.
While designing a structure, the designer wants to be in a
safer side. Depending on how important the structure is, the
designer would like to design the building with higher force.
Thus, there comes another factor known as I – importance
factor. It has a value of 1, 1.2 or 1.5 for IS 1893 (Part
1):2016.
Response spectrum method: Response spectrum analysis is
a more elaborate type of seismic analysis. Response spectra
are plots of maximum response of single degree of freedom
(SDOF) systems subjected to a specific excitation. These
peak response values are calculated for various values of
frequency (or period), and for various damping ratios of the
SDOF system. Response may be deformation, pseudo-
velocity and pseudo-acceleration which are most important
and can be used for the seismic analysis of structures. The
values may be normalized or un-normalized. So the ‘input
spectral data’ table is the primary data for an response
spectrum analysis (RSA).
If a load case contains input spectral data and other
parameters used in RSA, it is called a response spectrum
load case. The analysis that is done on that load case is
called response spectrum analysis.
Since any real structure has multiple DOF, the response
spectrum analysis of a real structure having ‘n’ DOF
involves reducing it to ‘n’ independent SDOF systems. The
modal superposition method is used to accomplish this, and
then the maximum modal responses can be combined using
statistical methods such as the square root of the sum of
the squares and complete quadratic combination. These and
other combination methods are available in STAAD.Pro CE.
In this method, the code has specified a factor Ak (clause
7.7.4.5-C) which is termed as design horizontal acceleration
spectrum – it is the same as Ah. The philosophy of bringing
the elastic response spectrum which corresponds to MCE
level to DBE inelastic response spectrum remains the same.
Now, coming to STAAD.Pro CE, the programme calculates
the time period for different mode and (Sa/g) value is found
out. It must be scaled down to DBE inelastic spectrum. For
this reason, the direction factor should be equal to (Z/2)*
(I/R).
 Modelling Aspects Using a
3 Software

3.1 Introduction

Buildings are composed of vertical and horizontal structural

elements. Shear walls, braced frames and moment-resisting
frames are commonly used as lateral load–resisting system.
The horizontal elements that distribute lateral forces to the
vertical elements are diaphragms, such as floor and roof
slabs and horizontal bracing that transfers large shears from
discontinuous walls or braces. The seismic forces are
considered to act at their centres of mass of diaphragm. All
the inertia forces originating from the masses on and off the
structure must be transmitted to the lateral force–resisting
elements, and then to the base of the structure and into the
ground.
A complete load path is a basic requirement for all buildings.
There must be a complete lateral force–resisting system that
forms a continuous load path between the foundation, all
diaphragm levels and all portions of the building for proper
seismic performance. The general load path is as follows:
seismic forces originating throughout the building, mostly in
the heavier mass elements such as diaphragms, are
delivered through connections to horizontal diaphragms; the
diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical force–resisting
elements such as shear walls and frames; the vertical
elements transfer the forces into the foundation and then the
foundation transfers the forces into the supporting soil.
If there is a discontinuity in the load path, the building is
unable to resist seismic forces regardless of the strength of
the elements. Interconnecting the elements needed to
complete the load path is necessary to achieve good seismic
performance. Examples of gaps in the load path would
include a shear wall that does not extend to the foundation,
a missing shear transfer connection between a diaphragm
and vertical elements, a discontinuous chord at a
diaphragm’s notch, or a reentrant corner, or a missing
collector. A good way to remember this important design
strategy is to ask yourself the question, ‘How does the
inertia load get from here (meaning the point at which it is
generated) to there (meaning the shear base of the
structure, typically the foundations)?’

3.2 Load Paths

The shaking that takes place due to earthquake induces

inertia forces in a building where mass is present. These
inertia forces are transferred downwards through horizontally
and vertically aligned structural elements to foundations.
The paths along which these inertia forces are transferred
through building are load paths. Buildings may have multiple
load paths running between locations of mass and
foundations. Load paths are as much a concern for
transmitting vertical loads (e.g. self-weight and occupancy
load) as for horizontal loads (e.g. earthquake and wind)
(Figure 3.1).
Figure 3.1: Structural elements in buildings constituting
load paths include (1) horizontal diaphragm elements laid in
horizontal plane, that is, roof slabs, floor slabs or trussed
roofs and bracings; (2) vertical elements spanning in vertical
plane along height of building, that is, planar frames (beams
and columns interconnected at different levels), walls
(usually made of RC or masonry) and planar trusses; (3)
foundations and soils, that is isolated and combined footings,
mats, piles, wells, soil layers and rock and (4) connections
between the previous elements.

3.3 Importance of Load Path

A continuous load path, or preferably more than one path,

with adequate strength and stiffness should be provided
from the origin of the load to the final lateral load–resisting
elements. The path for load transfer is described in the
following.
Inertia forces generated in an element, such as a segment of
exterior curtain wall, are delivered through structural
connections to a horizontal diaphragm (i.e. floor slab or roof);
the diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical
components, such as moment frames, braces and shear
walls, and finally, the vertical elements transfer the forces
into the foundations. Discontinuity in load path is not
desirable in structures.

3.4 Earthquake Force Flow Path in Buildings

Earthquake causes shaking of the ground in all three

directions – along the two horizontal directions (X and Z, say)
and the vertical direction (Y, say) (Figure 3.2). Also, during
the earthquake, the ground shakes randomly back and forth
(− and +) along each of these X, Y and Z directions. All
structures are primarily designed to carry the gravity loads,
that is, they are designed for a force equal to the mass M
(this includes mass due to own weight and imposed loads)
times the acceleration due to gravity g acting in the vertical
downward direction (−Y ). The downward force Mg is called
the gravity load. The vertical acceleration during ground
shaking either adds to or subtracts from the acceleration due
to gravity. As factors of safety are used in the design of
structures to resist the gravity loads, usually most structures
tend to be adequate against vertical shaking. However,
horizontal shaking along X and Z directions (both + and −
directions of each) remains a concern. Structures designed
for gravity loads, in general, may not be able to safely
sustain the effects of horizontal earthquake shaking. Hence,
it is necessary to ensure adequacy of the structures against
horizontal earthquake effects.
Under horizontal shaking of the ground, horizontal inertia
forces are generated at level of the mass of the structure
(usually situated at the floor levels). These lateral inertia
forces are transferred by the floor slab to the walls or
columns, to the foundations, and finally to the soil system
underneath. So, each of these structural elements (floor
slabs, walls, columns and foundations) and the connections
between them must be designed to safely transfer these
inertia forces through them (Figure 3.3).

Figure 3.2: Principal directions of a building.

Figure 3.3: Flow of seismic inertia forces through all the
structural components.

Walls or columns are the most critical elements in

transferring the inertia forces. But, in traditional
construction, floor slabs and beams receive more care and
attention during design and construction, than walls and
columns. Walls are relatively thin and often made of brittle
material like masonry. The walls are very poor in carrying
horizontal earthquake inertia forces along the direction of
their thickness. Failures of masonry walls have been
observed in many earthquakes in the past. Similarly, poorly
designed and constructed reinforced concrete columns can
be disastrous.
3.5 Load-Path Consideration in STAAD.Pro

Generally, floor slabs are not modelled in STAAD.Pro CE.

Floor slabs can effectively be modelled using plate elements.
But, having plates in the models induces a lot of other
problems. Discretization of larger elements into the smaller
parts is also required in this process, and the adjoining
beams are also divided. The analysis time gets increased as
you have higher numbers of elements present in the model.
The interpretation of analysis and design results from
STAAD.Pro CE for the broken beams becomes difficult. It can
be understood that if floor slabs are not modelled using
plates, the stiffness of the slabs is ignored in the analysis.
There are two distinct load paths in a structure – vertical and
lateral (Figure 3.4).
Figure 3.4: Different load paths in structures.

There is no major problem in applying floor loads in the

model. It gets transferred to floor beams, and then it is
transferred to the columns. Columns transfer that to the
footings. It can be seen that the vertical load path is being
maintained. In the case of lateral load path, the slabs play
the role of diaphragm and get displaced against the lateral
loads. Slab moment–resisting frame connections get the
forces from the diaphragm (Figure 3.5). We can somehow
maintain the vertical load path, but lateral load path gets
hampered if we do not model any diaphragm in the model.
Generally, the internal forces, that is, the seismic loads, are
applied at the centre of mass; and if there is any difference
in between the centre of mass and centre of rigidity, the
floor will experience torsional forces that simply affect the
corner columns. In order to have a realistic model,
diaphragm can be modelled. In STAAD.Pro, we have the
option of rigid diaphragm; and on using this, the requirement
is being followed by the program.

Figure 3.5: Lateral load transfer mechanism.

3.6 Diaphragm Modelling – A Special Case of

Mass and Stiffness Modelling

FLOOR DIAPHRAGM command:

This command is used to create RIGID FLOOR DIAPHRAGMS
without the need to specify a master joint at each. When
specified, this command directs the engine to perform the
following:
• Calculate the centre of mass for each rigid diaphragm
(where master joint is to be located) considering the mass
 model of the structure. The mass must be modelled using
mass reference load.
• Create, internally, an analytical node at the centre of
mass location to be included during analysis (unless a
master node is specified); if an existing analytical node
exists at this point, then the existing joint is used in lieu of
creating a new joint.
• Search all nodes available within a diaphragm and add
them as slave nodes with the master node located at the
centre of mass for the diaphragm (or at the specified
master node).

3.7 General Format

Parameter Description

DIAPHRAGM
diaphragm identification number
i1

Base/ground floor level of the structure when not at

BASE b1
the minimum Y coordinate defined in the model

Global coordinate value, in the Y direction, to specify

HEIGHT f1
the floor level

YRANGE f2 Global coordinate values to specify a Y range, where f

f3 2 is the lower bound and f 3 is the upper bound. The
 diaphragm is considered to be located at the floor
height

Global coordinate values to specify an X range. The

XRANGE f4 diaphragm is considered to be located between this X
f5 range. If full floor is to be considered as only one
diaphragm, there is no need to define X range

Global coordinate values to specify a Z range. The

ZRANGE f6 diaphragm is considered to be located between this Z
f7 range. If full floor is to be considered as only one
diaphragm, there is no need to define Z range

User-specified master joint number at the specified

floor level. If not defined, the program will
MASTER i2
automatically calculate this joint as the diaphragm
centre of mass

Figure 3.6: RIGID DIAPHRAGM from GUI.

Instead of providing height or Y range, joint lists can be
provided to indicate the number of joints present at a
particular floor level which will be connected to a master
joint (either specified or calculated by the program).
Notes:

1 One full diaphragm definition should be provided per

. line. However, if there is joint list, the list can extend to
the second line with a continuation sign ‘−’,

Where f1, f11 and f12 are three rigid diaphragms

located at floor height ranging between f2 and f3, f21
and f31 and the joints lying in the plane as indicated by
their global Y coordinates, respectively.

2. Diaphragms should be specified in ascending order (i.e.

diaphragms at first floor level should be specified first
before specifying that on second floor level and so on).

3 If a user-defined master joint is specified in one

. diaphragm, then user-defined master joints should be
specified for all diaphragms. The combination of user-
defined master joint for one diaphragm and program
calculated master joint for another diaphragm is not
supported.

4 The mass model (in terms of reference load) must be

. specified before specifying floor diaphragm.

5 Floor diaphragms can be specified only once in an

. input file.
6 Floor diaphragm cannot be specified along with the
. FLOOR HEIGHT command.

7 Floor diaphragm cannot be specified along with the

. MASTER-SLAVE command.

8 Floor diaphragm cannot be specified with the SET Z

. UP command.

9 Sloped diaphragms are not supported.

.
10. Base level (or ground floor level or support level) is
taken as the minimum of Y coordinates defined.
Different base levels can be specified using the BASE b1
option in the command. If used, this option must be the
last line of the floor diaphragm system.

11. The maximum number of diaphragms allowed by the

program (default value) is 150. If more than 150
diaphragms need to be specified, then SET RIGID
DIAPHRAGM n must be specified before specifying joint
incidence, where n=total number of diaphragms in the
structure.
 Discussion on IS 1893 (Part
4 I):2016 Equivalent Static
Method

The behaviour of a building during an earthquake is a

vibration problem. The damage of its structural component is
caused by internally generated inertial force arising from
oscillations of the building mass. The inertia forces (F ) are
equal to the product of the mass (m) of the structure times
acceleration (a), that is, F = ma (m is equal to weight divided
by the acceleration of gravity, that is, m = w/g).
Two ways of performing seismic analysis of a structure are as
follows:
• Equivalent static method
• Dynamic analysis method

STAAD.Pro CE requires a Load Definition prior to the creation

of the actual load case for certain load types. Seismic load
cases for equivalent static analysis fall in this category.
Seismic definition requires two types of inputs – definition of
seismic parameters and seismic weights. If a mass reference
load case is provided in the model, the programme can
compute seismic weights internally. In such a condition,
there is no requirement of seismic weight definition. In case
both mass reference load cases and seismic weights are
present in the model, the programme will consider weights
defined in the seismic weight definition.

4.1 Equivalent Static Method of Analysis

Equivalent static method of seismic analysis assumes that

the fundamental mode of vibration is predominant, and there
are no mass and stiffness irregularities in the structure.
These assumptions of static analysis do not hold good for the
irregular and/or tall structures. In such structures, dynamic
analysis is required. Response spectrum analysis is preferred
as it provides an easy solution compared to time-history
analysis. Equivalent static method is applicable for regular
buildings located in seismic zone II with height less than 15
m, and approximate natural time period, Ta, less than 0.4 s.
This process is the simplest method of analysis and requires
less computation efforts.
Seismic forces are commutated based on empirical
equations of approximate natural fundamental time period.
The design base shear is distributed along the height of the
buildings based on simple formulas appropriate for buildings
with regular distribution of mass and stiffness. The design
lateral forces obtained at each floor level are distributed to
individual lateral load resisting elements depending upon the
floor diaphragm action. In the case of a rigid diaphragm
(categorized in Clause 7.6.4) action, total storey shear in the
floors is distributed to various lateral load resisting elements
on the basis of relative stiffness. The following steps are
used for determination of forces by equivalent static
procedure.

Determination of Base Shear

The design base shear is computed by the following
expression, Clause 7.6.1

VB = Ah × W

where
Ah = design horizontal seismic coefficient for a structure
(Clause 6.4.2 )

Z = seismic zone factor [Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]

I = importance factor [Table 8 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]
R = response reduction factor [Table 9 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016]

design acceleration coefficient for different soil type

The fundamental natural period for building can be

computed from the following empirical expression depending
on the types of lateral load resisting system present in the
building [Clause 7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]

1
.
2
.

3.

where
h = height of the building, in m
Awi = effective cross-sectional area of wall i in first
storey of the building, in m2
Lwi = length of structural wall i in the first storey in the
considered direction of lateral forces, in m
d = base dimension of the plinth level along the
considered direction of earthquake shaking, in m
Nw = number of walls in the considered direction of
earthquake shaking

Design Vertical Earthquake Effects

When the effects due to vertical earthquake shaking are to
be considered, the vertical design seismic coefficient Av will
be (Clause 6.4.6)
Minimum Design Earthquake Horizontal Lateral
Force [Table-7 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016]

Seismic zone ρ (%)

II 0.7
III 1.1
IV 1.6
V 2.4

If the design base shear computed from VB = Ah × W is less

than VB min, VB min shall be used as design base shear for
the building.

Consideration of Underground Structure

This topic is covered in Chapter 9.

Vertical Distribution of Base Shear to Different

Floor Levels
The computed base shear is distributed along the height of
building. In equivalent static procedure, the magnitude of
lateral forces is based on the fundamental period of
vibration. This standard uses a parabolic distribution of
lateral force along the height of building as per the following
expression (Clause 7.6.3a):

where
Qi = design lateral force at floor i

Wi = seismic weight of floor i

hi = height of floor i measured from base

n = number of storeys in a building

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Seismic Parameter

These parameters are provided to calculate the design
horizontal and vertical earthquake acceleration coefficient.
Parameters are provided in the definition box and load
generation box in STAAD.Pro CE. The parameters are
discussed next.

Parameters used in IS 1893 (Part-1): 2016

Seismic Definition
Zone, Z: Zone factor (Z) accounts for the expected intensity
of shaking in different seismic zones [Table 3, IS 1893 (Part
1):2016]. The value defined in zone factor (Z) represents a
reasonable estimate of peak ground acceleration (PGA) in
the respective zone. Seismic zone factor can be defined in
two ways, either by selecting the city name or by selecting
the zone. This method is automated from the ‘Generate’ Tab
present in IS 1893 (Part-1):2016 seismic definition. If
generate option is not used, the value for this factor can be
defined from the generic seismic definition which allows to
provide the value for zone factor.
Response reduction factor ( R), RF: The structure is
designed for seismic force much less than what is expected
under strong shaking, if the structure were to remain linearly
elastic. Indian standard provides for realistic force for elastic
nature and then divides that force by (2R). The external
imparted energy to the building in earthquake is absorbed by
the structure in the form of inelastic deformation, and
ductility of the structure plays a major role in this.
Overstrength, ductility and redundancy are the main factors
for which response reduction factor is considered to compute
the design seismic force on a structure. The user interface
includes a list of response reduction factors taken from Table
9 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Importance factor, I: Critical and important structures
must respond better in an earthquake than ordinary
structures. This factor is meant to account for this by
increasing the design seismic force. As per Table 8 of IS 1893
(Part 1):2016, importance factor 1.2 for residential or
commercial buildings with occupancy more than 200 persons
has been added.
Rock and soil site factor, SS: This parameter is required
to calculate the design acceleration coefficient value (Sa/g)
for horizontal motion. The response spectrum shape
obtained from recorded earthquake motion varies with the
soil type at different location [refer to Table 4 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016]. Soil site factor in STAAD.Pro is given as
 SS 1: Hard soil
SS 2: Medium soil
SS 3: Soft soil
Type of structure, ST: This parameter is used to calculate
approximate natural fundamental time period of the
structure depending on the type of lateral load resisting
elements used to transfer the lateral load in the building
[refer to Clause 7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]. Time period
obtained is further required to calculate design acceleration
coefficient (Sa/g) value. There are five types of structures as
per IS 1893 (Part 1):2016. These structure types are defined
in STAAD. Pro CE using different ST parameters mentioned as
follows:
ST 1: Reinforced Concrete (RC) bare Moment Resisting
Frame (MRF) buildings
ST 2: RC–Steel composite MRF buildings
ST 3: Steel MRF buildings
ST 4: Buildings with RC structural walls
ST 5: All other buildings
Damping ratio, DM: This factor is used to define damping
ratio of structure. All the spectral acceleration coefficient
(Sa/g) values will be multiplied with a factor corresponding to
the specified damping (refer to Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part-
1):2002). As per Clause 7.2.4 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the
value of damping to be considered is 5% of critical damping
for the purpose of design lateral force computation of a
building irrespective of the construction material used in the
lateral load resisting system. It is due to the fact that
buildings experience inelastic deformations under design
level earthquake, resulting in much higher energy dissipation
than due to initial structural damping in buildings. The
default value considered by the programme for DM
parameter corresponds to 5% of the critical damping which
represents the value of DM parameter as 0.05.
Period in X direction, PX: It is a user-defined time period
in structure along the X direction in seconds. The value of PX
should be provided, if the supports at the bottom-most level
of the structure in the X direction are at different Y
coordinates. The value provided in this parameter will be
used to calculate Sa/g in the X direction.

Period in Z direction, PZ: It is a user-defined time period

of structure along the Z direction in seconds. The value of PZ
should be provided, if the supports at the bottom-most level
of the structure in the Z direction are at different Y
coordinates. The value provided in this parameter will be
used to calculate Sa/g in the Z direction.

Depth of foundation, DT: It is used to define the

foundation level of a structure which is located below the
ground level. The value provided in this parameter defines
the depth of foundation below ground level.

Ground level, GL: It is the Y coordinate of the ground level.

A reduced lateral force gets applied to the level below this
height. If the depth of foundation is 30m or more, below GL,
the value of Ah is taken as half the value obtained, and if the
foundation is placed between the ground level and 30m
depth, the value is linearly interpolated between Ah and
0.5Ah [refer to Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]. The
current implementation of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016 is based on
GL parameter.

Spectral acceleration coefficient, SA: It is user-specified

design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) value corresponding to
site specific response spectrum. It allows the user to provide
design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) value to compute
horizontal design base shear.

Multiplying factor for SA, DF: DF is the user-provided

value for different damping ratio as per Table 3 of IS 1893
(Part 1):2002. It is multiplied with all the spectral value.

Height of the building, HT: This parameter is to define

actual height of the building to be used for time period
calculation. It is a user-defined value [refer to Clause 7.6.2 of
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016]. The default height of the structure
computed by the programme is the difference in Y
coordinates’ value of the nodes having the lowest and the
highest Y coordinates in the model.

Base dimension in X direction, DX: It is the base

dimension of the building in the X direction at the plinth level
for calculating approximate natural time period along the X
direction [refer to Clause 7.6.2(b) or (c) of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016].

Base dimension in Z direction, DZ: It is the base

dimension of the building in the Z direction at the plinth level
for calculating natural approximate time period along the Z
direction [refer to Clause 7.6.2(b) or (c) of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016].

Parameters used in Seismic Load Cases

Direction X/Y/Z: There are three directions in which the
seismic loads can be assigned.

Factor: It is the factor multiplied with the total seismic

weight. Default factor is 1.
Multiplying factor for accidental torsion moment, ACC:
Accidental torsion accounts for the additional torsional
moment on a floor due to a shift in the centre of mass from
its actual location to either side by a distance equal to 5% of
the building dimension orthogonal to the direction of the
earthquake. Ground rotation about vertical axis of a
structure also plays a major role in inducing torsion. These
factors are specified as (0.05) and (−0.05) in Clause 7.8.2 of
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 for calculating design eccentricity.

Multiplying factor for natural torsion moment, DEC:

Natural torsion or inherent torsion accounts for torsional
moment induced in a floor resulting from eccentricity
between the centres of mass and stiffness. To calculate
design eccentricity as per Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, the factors are (1.5) and (1).

Note:
A. ‘Accidental Load’ shall not be included from IS
1893(Part 1):2016 seismic parameter dialogue box to
calculate torsion moment when rigid floor diaphragm is
provided.
B. ST is to be provided with DX, DZ, and HT, else the
STAAD.Pro CE will calculate Rayleigh time period.
C. Either DM or DF parameter should be provided to
obtain scaled spectral value.
D. The parameter DT should not be used for underground
structure to reduce Ah. Instead only GL is used.
E. Either SA can be inserted directly, or SS should be
provided to calculate the design acceleration
coefficient.
F. Along with GL parameter, HT parameter should be
used for calculating natural time period of building.
 G. When vertical motion is considered, (2/3) factor [refer
to 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016] will be considered
internally by the programme.
H. Design acceleration coefficient for vertical motion is
taken as 2.5 irrespective of natural time period of the
structure [refer to 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016].
I. In STAAD.Pro, natural torsion is automatically included
in analysis for DEC ≤ 1.0, that is, no additional
inherent torsion is applied. If DEC > 1.0, a twisting
moment with modified eccentricity of DEC−1 will act at
CM.
J. Refer to Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

X and Z directional seismic load cases need to be generated

considering the torsional provisions with the proper use of
DEC and ACC parameters. In first case, the value DEC
parameter will be 1.5 along with the ACC value 0.05. The
values of DEC and ACC parameter will be 1 and −0.05 in the
other case. These conditions need to be satisfied in the X
and Z directions.

4.2 Equivalent Static Analysis with Different

Structure Type

This standard provides empirical formula for time period

computation for the structure having lateral load resisting
elements classified in the aforementioned category. A few
examples are covered in this chapter covering these
categories. The detailed workflow is explained under each
problem statement.
IS 1893(Part 1):2016 considers following types of building
structure as per Clause 7.6.2:

1 Bare MRF buildings without any masonry infill: (a) RC

. MRF building, (b) RC–steel composite MRF building and
(c) steel MRF building.

2 Buildings with RC structural wall.

.
3 All other buildings.
.
RC MRF Building
Reinforced concrete moment resisting bare frame is an
assembly of beams and columns with rigid connection. It is
capable of resisting induced and externally applied forces
through flexural strength (bending) of members and
continuity of columns and beams through rigid connections.
Moments are transferred from one element to other through
the rigid connections. Most of the concrete frames can be
idealized as MRF due to the inherent continuity of monolithic
construction. In STAAD.Pro CE RC MRF buildings are denoted
by ST 1.
Problem Statement 4.1: Section used for beams and
columns: 500 mm × 500 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF building
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figure 4.1A and 4.1B
Compute design base shear (Vb) and design lateral force (Qi)
for the given data.
Figure 4.1A: Building plan.

Figure 4.1B: Building elevation.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1 A model is prepared considering dimensions, properties

. and support condition given in the problem statement.

2 Loads are assigned as ‘Mass Reference Load’ (refer

. to Chapter 3: mass reference load). Loads should be
assigned along three orthogonal directions with positive
multiplying factor. (For the following problem statement,
multiplying factor 1 is considered.)

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 2 kN/m2 is applied

at all floor levels (Figure 4.2).

3 Seismic parameters are assigned under ‘Seismic

. Definition’.

Figure 4.2: Mass defined under reference load case.

4 Indian IS 1893:2016 code is chosen.

.
5 Following seismic parameters are inserted in Figure
. 4.3:
A. Zone: 0.1
 B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I ): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
The parameter can be inserted from ‘Generate’ box also
(Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.3: Static seismic parameters.

Figure 4.4: Seismic load generation under load case details.

Figure 4.5: Generation of loads.

6 A ‘Seismic’ primary load case ‘SEISMIC STATIC X ’ is

. created under ‘Load Cases Details’.

7 Seismic load under ‘SEISMIC STATIC X ’ is assigned in

. the X direction with a multiplying factor 1 (Figure 4.4).
 In a similar way, load cases in Z (SEISMIC STATIC Z )
8 and in the Y (SEISMIC STATIC Y ) direction with
. multiplying factor 1 are created (Figure 4.5).

9 ‘Perform Analysis’ is selected for linear type of

. analysis.

10. Further ‘Load Data’ option is provided to view vertical

distribution of base shear to different floor levels in the
output file.

11. The STAAD.Pro CE Input File is shown in Figure 4.6A and

4.6B.
Figure 4.6A: STAAD.Pro CE input editor.
Figure 4.6B: Seismic parameter and generation of seismic
load in STAAD.Pro CE input editor.

12. After analysing the structure to get the output, select

the ‘view output option’. The output of STAAD.Pro CE is
shown in Figures 4.7–4.12.

Output file: The output file generated by STAAD.Pro CE

includes design base shear (VB) and its vertical
distribution (Qi) in the X, Z and Y directions.
Figure 4.7: Design base shear in X direction.

Figure 4.8: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.9: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Figure 4.10: Design lateral force at floor level in the X
direction.
Figure 4.11: Design lateral force at floor level in the Z
direction.
Figure 4.12: Design lateral force at floor level in the Y
direction.

RC–Steel Composite MRF Building

In real life, there are structures composed of moment
resisting frames built by different materials. Most common
type of this MRF is RC–Steel composite ones. This frame
shows similar load path mechanism of RC or steel MRF.
Problem Statement 4.2: Refer to Problem Statement 4.1
for modelling of the structure and consider type of structure
as RC–steel composite MRF building.
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro CE:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

. Statement 4.1 to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to
insert ‘Seismic Parameters’.

Loading: The same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: The same as Problem Statement 4.1

with Structure Type 2 (Figure 4.13).

2 Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from

. the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
Figure 4.13: Static seismic parameters.

3. To analyse the model and to view output, the output

steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4 Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from

. STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

5 The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.14–

. 4.16.

Figure 4.14: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.15: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.16: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Steel MRF Building

In industrial structures, including industrial buildings, steel
MRF is very popular. In high-rise building, steel MRF is often
used.
Problem Statement 4.3: Refer to Problem Statement 4.1
for modelling of the structure and consider type of structure
as steel MRF building.
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro CE:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

. Statement 4.1 to assign ‘Mass Reference Load’ and to
insert ‘Seismic Parameters’

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

 Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with
Structure Type 3 (Figure 4.17).

Figure 4.17: Static seismic parameters.

2 Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from

. the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

3 To analyse the model and to view output, the output

. steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

4 Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from

. STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

5 The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.18–

. 4.20.
Figure 4.18: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.19: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.20: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Buildings with RC Structural Walls

This standard has provided empirical equations for
computation of approximate natural fundamental time
period of structures where infill walls and structural walls are
also the part of lateral load resisting system along with
moment resisting frame.
Natural time period of the buildings with ‘RC structural wall’
and ‘all other buildings’ (buildings with masonry infill
wall/building having diagonal bracings) is computed with
equations and , respectively. Time period
of buildings with RC structural wall should not exceed the
time period of all other buildings computed as per Clause
7.6.2(b) of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016

Aw is total effective area of walls in the first storey of the

building in m2.

where
h = height of the building, in m
Awi = effective cross-sectional area of wall i in first storey of
the building, in m2
Lwi = length of structural wall i in the first storey in the
considered direction of lateral forces, in m
d = base dimension of the plinth level along the considered
direction of earthquake shaking, in m
Nw = number of walls in the considered direction of
earthquake shaking

Computation of Base Shear of a Building with RC

Structural Wall Having Time Period greater than that
of All Other Buildings
Problem Statement 4.4: Section used for beams and
columns: 500 mm × 500 mm
 Wall width along the X direction: 250 mm
Wall width along the Z direction: 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Buildings with RC structural walls
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figure 4.21A and 4.21B
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed to assign ‘Mass Reference

. Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic Parameters’ from the
solution of Problem Statement 4.1. Plates are used for
modelling Wall.

Loading: same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with

Structure Type 4 (Figure 4.22).
Figure 4.21A: Building plan.

Figure 4.21B: Building elevation.

Figure 4.22: Static seismic parameters.

2 Wall area of first floor is required to calculate

. approximate natural time period of the structure. Width
and length of the walls are provided along required
horizontal axis in the ‘Wall Area’ box (Figure 4.23).
Figure 4.23: Wall area information of first storey.

3 Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from

. the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

4 To analyse the model and to view output, the output

. steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

5 Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from

. STAAD Editor.

6 The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.24–

. 4.26.
Figure 4.24: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.25: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.26: Design base shear in the Y direction.

Computation of Time Period of a Building With RC

Structural Wall Having Time Period less than that of
All Other Buildings
Problem Statement 4.5: Section used for beams and
columns: 400 mm × 400 mm
Wall width along the X direction: 600 mm
Wall width along the Z direction: 650 mm
 Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Buildings with RC structural walls
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Floor to floor height of the building is 5 m
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figure 4.27A and 4.27B
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed to assign ‘Mass Reference

. Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic Parameters’ from the
solution of Problem Statement 4.1. Plates are used for
modelling wall.

2 Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

.
Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1 with
Structure Type 4 and Zone V (Figure 4.28).
Figure 4.27A: Building plan.

Figure 4.27B: Building elevation.

Figure 4.28: Static seismic parameters.

3. Width and length of the walls are provided along

required horizontal axis in the ‘Wall Area’ box (Figure
4.29).

4 Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from

. the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.
Figure 4.29: Wall area information of first storey.

5 To analyse the model and to view output, the output

. steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

6 Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from

. STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

7 The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 4.30–

. 4.32.
Figure 4.30: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.31: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.32: Design base shear in the Y direction.

All Other Buildings

Buildings with masonry infill and bracings come under all
other buildings.
Problem Statement 4.6: Refer to Problem Statement 4.1
for modelling of the Structure and consider type of structure
as all other building.
Compute design base shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed to assign ‘Mass Reference

. Load’ and to insert ‘Seismic Parameters’ from the
solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

2 Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

.
3 Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1
. with Structure Type 5 (Figure 4.33).

4 Seismic loads are assigned by following steps 6–8 from

. the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

5 To analyse the model and to view output, the output

. steps 9–10 are followed from the Problem Statement 4.1.

6 Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from

. STAAD.Pro CE Editor.

7 The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figure 4.34 to

. 4.36.
Figure 4.33: Static seismic parameters.

Figure 4.34: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 4.35: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 4.36: Design base shear in the Y direction.
 Application of IS 1893 (Part
5 1):2016 Seismic Parameters

5.1 Introduction

Models created in STAAD.Pro CE do not contain any

information related to the actual site conditions. For an
example, the ground level of the structure cannot be
mentioned in the programme. IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 has
specifically provided some situations where some specific
information is required, such as ground level, presence of
basement in the structure. Figure 5 of IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016
specifies conditions on consideration of height and base
dimensions of the structure for seismic analysis. These
considerations can be implemented in STAAD.Pro CE using
some parameters. There may be conditions when
approximate fundamental natural time period needs to be
entered in the programme by using some seismic parameter.
These parameters are discussed in this chapter.

5.2 DX and DZ Parameters

DX and DZ parameters are used to provide the base

dimensions of a structure along the X and Z directions. Base
dimensions used to compute approximate fundamental
natural time period using empirical equations require some
special consideration as explained in Figure 5 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016. DX and DZ parameters are used to define the base
dimensions along the X and Z directions to cater the
requirements (Figure 5.1).
Problem Statement 5.1: Section used for beams and
columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other building
The base dimensions along the X and Z directions and the
height to be considered are shown in Figures 5.2A–C.
Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for the given data.

Figure 5.1: Base dimensions to be considered according to

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Figure 5.2A: Building plan.

Figure 5.2B: Building elevation.

Figure 5.2C: Isometric view with dimensions.
Figure 5.3: HT, DX and DZ parameters in Seismic
Parameters dialogue box.

Solution:
Steps followed by the programme:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to

. assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 3 kN/m2 is applied

at all floor levels

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.3):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
 C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
G. Height of the building (HT): 7
H. Base dimension in the X direction (DX): 15
I. Base dimension in the Z direction (DZ): 4

2 Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal

. directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem
Statement 4.1.

3 To analyse the model and to view the output Steps 9–

. 10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

Figure 5.4: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 5.5: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 5.6: Design base shear in the Y direction.

4 The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

.

5 The output of STAAD.Pro CE is shown in Figures 5.4–

. 5.6.

5.3 HT Parameter

HT parameter is used to define the height of the building

required for calculating the natural time period of the
building as per Clause 7.6.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016. If the
height of the building is not specified, STAAD.Pro CE
calculates the natural time period considering the entire
height of the building but for structures shown in Figure 5.7,
the entire height should not be considered. In such cases, HT
parameter is used to define the height of the building.
Figure 5.7: Different height to be considered for different
buildings.

Problem Statement 5.2: Section used for beams and

columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given
in Figures 5.8A and B.
Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps followed by the programme:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to

. assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 10 kN/m2 is

applied at all floor levels

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.9):

 A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
G. Height of building (HT): 7 m

Figure 5.8A: Building plan.

Figure 5.8B: Building elevation.

2 Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal

. directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem
Statement 4.1.

3 To analyse the model and to view the output Steps 9–

. 10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4 The STAAD.Pro CE input file is shown below:

.

5 The STAAD.Pro CE output file is shown in Figures 5.10–

. 5.12.
Figure 5.9: HT parameter in Seismic Parameters dialogue
box.

Figure 5.10: Base shear and time period in the X direction.

Figure 5.11: Base shear in the Y direction.

Figure 5.12: Base shear and time period in the Z direction.

5.4 PX and PZ Parameters

PX and PZ parameters are the natural time period of

structure in the X and Z directions, respectively. It is a user-
defined value. PX and PZ parameters are used when the
lower base supports of the structure are at a different Y
coordinate. These parameters override ST (structure type)
parameter for calculating natural time period of the structure
(Figure 5.13).
Figure 5.13: PX and PZ parameters should be provided for
the structure whose supports are at different elevation.

Problem Statement 5.3: Section used for beams and

columns: 300mm × 300mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at height 20, 25 and 30 m
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given
in Figures 5.14A–C.
Compute design base shear (VB) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to

. assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters
 Loading: Self-weight and floor load at 2 kN/m2 is applied
at all floor levels

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.15):

A. Zone: 0.36
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
F. Period in the X direction (PX): 0.348568 s
G. Period in the Z direction (PZ): 0.426907 s

Figure 5.14A: Building plan.

Figure 5.14B:Building elevation.
Figure 5.14C: Isometric view.

2 Seismic loads are assigned by following Steps 6–8 from

. Problem Statement 4.1.

3 To analyse the model and to view the output, the

. output Steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement
4.1.

4 Seismic parameter for this Problem Statement from the

. STAAD Editor
5 Output file reported by STAAD.Pro CE for this Problem
. Statement (Figures 5.16–5.18).

Figure 5.15: Static seismic parameter under load definition.

Figure 5.16: Design base shear and time period in the X

direction.
Figure 5.17: Design base shear and time period in the Z
direction.

Figure 5.18: Design base shear in the Y direction.

5.5 DM Parameter

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 states that the value of damping shall

be taken as 5% of the critical damping for the purposes of
estimating Ah in the design lateral force VB of a building as
per Clause 7.2.4 irrespective of the material of construction
(namely steel, reinforced concrete, masonry or a
combination thereof of these three basic materials) of its
lateral load resisting system, considering that buildings
experience inelastic deformations under design level
earthquake effects, resulting in much higher energy
dissipation than that due to initial structural damping in
buildings. This value of damping shall be used, irrespective
of the method of the structural analysis employed, namely
equivalent static method or dynamic analysis method. The
damping factor value to the corresponding damping ratio is
multiplied with the design acceleration coefficient value
(Sa/g). In STAAD.Pro CE, other percentage of damping can be
provided; in such cases the damping factor will be
interpolated.
Multiplying factors for corresponding damping percentages
as per Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002 (Clause 6.4.2).
The following formula is adopted for interpolation between
damping values as given in Table 5.1. Interpolation and/or
extrapolation of ground response acceleration for a mode
has been made for determining the spectrum ordinates
corresponding to the modal damping value for use in
response spectrum analysis. The relationship that shall be
used for this purpose is defined by

Sa = Ae−ξ + B/ξ

where
Sa = spectrum ordinate

ξ = damping ratio
Constants A and B are determined using two known
spectrum ordinates

Table 5.1 Multiplying factors for obtaining values for other

Damping
where
ξ1 < ξ < ξ2.

Problem Statement 5.4: Section used for beams and

columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC frame building
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given
in Figures 5.19A and B.
Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for the given data.

Figure 5.19A: Building plan.

Figure 5.19B: Building elevation.
Figure 5.20: DM parameter under seismic definition.

Solution:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to

. assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: Self-weight.

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 5.20):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
 E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.02

2 Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal

. directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem
Statement 4.1.

3 To analyse the model and to view the output, Steps 9–

. 10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4 The STAAD.Pro CE input file is shown below:

.

5 The STAAD.Pro output file of this model (Figures 5.21–

. 5.23).

Figure 5.21: Design base shear and time period in the X

direction.
Figure 5.22: Design base shear and time period in the Z
direction.

Figure 5.23: Design base shear in the Y direction.

5.6 DF Parameter

In STAAD.Pro CE, the damping factor value can be provided

with the help of DF parameter in the Seismic Parameters
dialogue box. Though for IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 the damping
ratio value has been restricted to 5% but different values of
damping can be provided for the purposes of estimating the
design acceleration spectrum (Ah). The damping factors
corresponding to different damping ratios are provided in
Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002, which is shown in Table 5.1.
Problem Statement 5.5: Section used for beams and
columns are 250 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
 Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC frame building
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given
in Figures 5.24A and B. Compute Design Base Shear (Vb) for
given data.

Solution:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1 to

. assign Mass Reference Load and to insert Seismic
Parameters

Loading: Self-weight.

2 IS 1893-2016 seismic parameters are (Figure 5.25):

. A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Multiplying factor for SA(DF): 1.40

3 Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal

. directions by following Steps 6–8 from Problem
Statement 4.1.
Figure 5.24A: Building plan.

Figure 5.24B: Building elevation.

4. To analyse the model and to view the output, Steps 9–10

are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.
5 The STAAD.Pro input file of this model:
.

6 The STAAD.Pro output file of this model (Figures 5.26–

. 5.28).

Figure 5.25: DF parameter in static seismic load definition.

Figure 5.26: Design base shear and time period in the X

direction.
Figure 5.27: Design base shear and time period in the Z
direction.

Figure 5.28: Design base shear in the Y direction.

 Buildings With Fundamental
6 Time Period Greater Than 4s

IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 provides two response spectrum data

to be used in equivalent static method and response
spectrum method of analysis. There has been an addition in
the response spectrum data to consider seismic effect on
tall and flexible structures. Response spectrum data has
been extended for the structures with natural period greater
than 4 s. The response spectrum curve has been provided
for hard, medium and soft soils.
Design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) for different soil types
as per clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 is used in
equivalent static method of analysis.
For rocky or hard soil sites,

For medium stiff soil sites,

For soft soil sites,

Design acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) for different soil types

as per clause 6.4.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 is used in
response spectrum method of analysis.

Figure 6.1: Spectra for hard soil to be used for equivalent

static analysis.
For rocky or hard soil sites (Figure 6.1),

For medium stiff soil sites,

For soft soil sites,

Problem Statement 6.1: Section used for beams and

columns are 250 mm × 250 mm

Material used: Concrete with density 25 kN/m3

Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are shown
in Figures 6.2 and 6.3.
Compute the design Base Shear (VB) for the given data.
Figure 6.2: Building plan.
Figure 6.3: Building elevation.

Solution:
Steps to instruct the programme
1 Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem
. Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters (Figure 6.4).

Loading: Self-Weight is assigned in X, Z and Y direction

IS 1893:2016 Seismic parameter:

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS):1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2 Seismic loads are assigned in three orthogonal

. directions by following Steps 6–8 from the solution of
Problem Statement 4.1 (Figure 6.5).

Figure 6.4: Seismic parameters in seismic load definition.

Figure 6.5: Load cases in three orthogonal directions.

3. To analyse the model and to view the output, Steps 9–10

are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.

4 The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given next:

.

The output file is shown in Figures 6.6–6.8.

Figure 6.6: Design base shear and time period in X
direction.

Figure 6.7: Design base shear in Y direction.

Figure 6.8: Design base shear and time period in Z

direction.
 Consideration of Vertical
7 Motion in Seismic Analysis

7.1 Introduction

Various observations show that the failure of several

structures results from the induced vertical earthquake
forces. Vertical motion may induce shear and flexural failure
in addition to the possibility of compressive overstressing or
failure due to direct tension. The main effect of the vertical
motion consists of the variation of axial force in the columns.
The high values of compression, or even tension, induced by
the vertical excitation could produce damage in the structure
which leads to a decrease of structural capacity to withstand
the horizontal seismic motion, resulting in an increase of
horizontal displacements. Usually, the vertical motion is
weaker than the horizontal motion. On an average, peak
vertical acceleration is one-half to two-thirds of the peak
horizontal acceleration. The vertical acceleration responses
are taken about two-thirds of the horizontal acceleration
responses.

7.2 Design Vertical Acceleration Spectrum

In Clause 6.3.3.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design vertical
acceleration spectrum check is being made mandatory for
the following conditions:
A. Structure situated in seismic zone IV or V.
B. Structure has vertical or plan irregularities.
C. Structure is rested on soft soil.
E. Bridges.
D. Structure has long spans.
F. Or structure has long horizontal overhangs of
structural members or sub-systems.

The design seismic acceleration spectral value (Av) is taken

as two-thirds of the value of design horizontal acceleration
coefficient. The value of design acceleration coefficient
(Sa/g) is specified as 2.5.

The design seismic acceleration spectral value Av or vertical

motions shall be taken as (as per clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893(Part
1):2016)

Here the first formula is used since it is for buildings

governed by IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Problem Statement 7.1: Section used for beams and
columns are 300 mm × 450 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF building
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are given
in Figures 7.1A and B.
Compute design Base Shear (Vb) for given set of data.

Figure 7.1A: Building plan.

Figure 7.1B: Building elevation.

Figure 7.1C: Load diagram.

Solution:
Steps to instruct the programme

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

. Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: In all three orthogonal direction both selfweight

and member load of intensity 10 kN/m is applied as
shown in Figure 7.1C

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 7.2):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2 Seismic loads are assigned in the Y direction by

. following Steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1.

3 To analyse the model and to view the output, steps 9–

. 10 are followed from Problem Statement 4.1.
Figure 7.2: Seismic parameters in seismic load definition.

4 STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

.

The output file is shown in Figure 7.3.

Figure 7.3: Design base shear in Y direction.
 Consideration of Minimum
8 Base Shear Criteria

The minimum base shear is based on expected seismic

performance of buildings which have lateral strength based
on expected percentage of weight of the structure. Such a
level of lateral strength has been observed to provide
adequate strength for a long period structure under far-field
motions. Recent studies have confirmed that such a level of
minimum lateral strength is necessary to develop yielding
mechanism for energy dissipation.
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 specifies in Clause 7.2.2 that buildings
and portions shall be designed and constructed to resist the
least effects of design lateral force (VB). Regardless of
design earthquake forces computed using Clause-7.3.1,
buildings shall have lateral load resisting systems capable of
resisting horizontal forces not less than minimum lateral
force (VB min). But if any of the values of VBX and VBZ is
less than VB min, the value of VB min should be considered
as design base shear value (VB). In Table 8.1, ρ values are
provided with their respective zone.
Table 8.1: Minimum Design Earthquake Horizontal Lateral
Force for Buildings (Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part-1):2016
 Sl No. Seismic zone ρ (%)
(i) II 0.7
(ii) III 1.1
(iii) IV 1.6
(iv) V 2.4

Problem Statement 8.1: The section used for beams are

250 mm × 250 mm and for columns are 400 mm × 250 mm.

Material used: Concrete density 25 kN/m3

Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figures 8.1A and B.
Compute the Design Base Shear (VB) for the given data.

Figure 8.1A: Building plan.

Figure 8.1B: Building elevation.

Solution:
The steps followed by the programme:

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

. Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters (Figure 8.2).

Loading: Self-weight in three orthogonal directions.

 IS 1893(Part 1):2016 seismic parameter (Figure 8.2):
A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I ): 1
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

Figure 8.2: Seismic parameter under seismic definition.

6 Seismic loads are assigned in two orthogonal directions

. by following steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1.
9 To analyse the model and to view the output, the
. output steps 9–10 are followed from Problem Statement
4.1.

10. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

The output model is as given in Figures 8.3 and 8.4.

Figure 8.3: Design base shear and time period in the X

direction.
Figure 8.4: Design base shear and time period in the Z
direction.
 Seismic Analysis of
9 Structures Having Structural
Components Below the
Ground Level

When seismic waves hit the ground surface, these are

reflected back into the ground. The reflection mechanics is
such that the amplitude of vibration at the free surface is
much higher (almost double) than that under the ground.
This mechanism allows the design spectrum to be one half in
case the structure is at a depth of 30 m or below. Linear
interpolation is resorted for structures with a depth less than
30 m. The word ‘underground structures and foundations’
has been mentioned in this clause because the clause is also
applicable for the calculation of seismic inertia force on
foundation under the ground.
Underground structures and buildings the base of which
located at depths of 30 m or more computed Ah (design
horizontal earthquake acceleration coefficient) at the base
have taken half the value of Ah as mentioned in Clause
6.4.5, IS1893(part I):2016. This reduced value is used only
for estimating the inertia effects due to masses at the
corresponding levels below the ground. The effects of inertia
for the above-ground portion of the building are estimated
based on the unreduced value of Ah. For estimating the
effects of inertia due to masses of structures and
foundations placed between the ground level and 30 m
depth, the design horizontal acceleration spectrum value is
linearly interpolated between Ah and 0.5Ah (Figure 9.1).

For the portion of the structure above the ground:

Wi = seismic weight of ith floor above the ground hi = height
of ith floor above the ground VBs = horizontal base shear
above the ground = Ah · Ws

Ws = seismic weight of the portion which is above the

ground Qi = design lateral force at ith floor above the ground

Figure 9.1: Generation of seismic forces for a building

frame having portions below the ground.

For the portion of the structure below the ground:

Wj = seismic weight of jth floor below the ground hj = height
of jth floor below the ground from base VBu = horizontal
base shear below the ground = Ahu · Wu

Wu = seismic weight of the portion which is below the

ground Qj = design lateral force at jth floor

A structure modelled in STAAD.Pro CE does not contain any

information regarding the ground level of the structure. This
methodology requires information related to the Y coordinate
of the ground level. IS 1893(Part 1):2016 implementation in
STAAD.Pro CE allows to define the ground level of the
structure by using GL and DT parameters. The current
implementation of this methodology deals with GL
parameter. The Y coordinate of the ground level needs to be
defined using GL parameter. HT parameter should be added
along with GL parameter for calculation of natural
fundamental time period of the structure.

9.1 Analysis of the Underground Structure by

Using Equivalent Static Method

Problem Statement 9.1: Section used for beams and

columns: 350mm × 450mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Reinforced concrete (RC) moment resisting
frame (MRF) building Ground Level is at 6 m from the base
Figure 9.2: Building plan.
Figure 9.3: Building elevation.

Base dimensions and floor heights of the buildings are given

in Figures 9.2 and 9.3.
Solution:
Steps to instruct the programme

1 Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

. Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters

Figure 9.4: Seismic parameters under load definition.

 Loading: UDL of intensity 10 kN/m is applied to all beams

IS 1893-2016 seismic parameter (Figure 9.4):

A. Zone: 0.16
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS):1
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
G. Ground level (GL): 6
H. Height of building (HT): 6

6 Seismic loads are assigned in two orthogonal directions

. by following Steps 6–8 from the solution of Problem
Statement 4.1 (Figure 9.5).

Figure 9.5: Load case details in three orthogonal directions.

9 To analyse the model and to view the output, the

. output Steps 9–10 are followed.
10. The STAAD.Pro CE input file is given below:

The output file of the model is given in Figures 9.6–9.13.

Figure 9.6: Design base shear and time period above the
ground level in X direction.
Figure 9.7: Design base shear and time period below the
ground level in X direction.

Figure 9.8: Mass and base shear summary in X direction.

Figure 9.9: Design base shear both above and below the
ground level in Y direction.

Figure 9.10: Mass and base shear summary in Y direction.

Figure 9.11: Design base shear and time period above the
ground level in Z direction.

Figure 9.12: Design base shear and time period below

ground level in Z direction.

Figure 9.13: Mass and base shear summary in Z direction.

 Analysis of Structure
10 Considering Torsional
Provision

The seismic forces that act on a structure during an

earthquake are related to inertia and act through centres of
mass. These inertia forces are resisted by elastic forces in
the lateral load resisting elements whose resultants pass
through centres of resistance. If the resisting elements in a
building are so distributed that centres of resistance (CR) do
not coincide with centres of mass (CM), lateral seismic forces
cause torsional motion in the structure. Structures with non-
coincident centre of mass and centre of resistance are
referred to as asymmetric structures and the torsional
motion induced in them is referred to as natural torsion.
Torsional motion may also result due to a variety of factors
other than known asymmetry. One such factor is the
asymmetry that may exist in a nominally symmetric
structure because of uncertainty in the evaluation of centres
of mass and centres of stiffness. For example, the actual
distribution of mass may be different from the one assumed
in computations. The estimation of the stiffness of resisting
elements may be inaccurate because of lack of precise data
on the modulus of elasticity, extent of cracking in concrete,
inaccuracy in measuring the dimensions, etc. The torsion
resulting from such asymmetry belongs to the category of
natural torsion, but its magnitude cannot be defined in a
deterministic manner and it can only be assessed in a
statistical sense. Another factor is the torsion of structure
caused by ground rotation about a vertical axis. No
measurements are available for ground rotational motion
and therefore its effect can be assessed only in an indirect
manner.
Accidental torsion is always present in buildings. It results
from uncertainty in the distribution of mass and stiffness as
well as the rotational component of ground motion. Previous
studies have shown that the effect of accidental torsion can
be estimated from a pair of dynamic analyses in which the
static eccentricity is increased or decreased by 0.05b.
As per Clause 7.8 of IS1893-2016 code, provision shall be
made in all buildings for the increase in shear forces on the
lateral force resisting elements resulting from twisting about
the vertical axis of the building.
The design eccentricity is taken as a combination of static
and accidental eccentricities and is given by the following
equations.

edi = Design eccentricity at the ith floor

esi = Static eccentricity at the ith floor or the projected
distance between the centre of mass and centre of
rigidity at the ith floor
bi = plan dimension of the ith floor normal to the direction of
ground motion
α, β, δ = specified constants in the codes
IS:1893(Part-1)-2016, as in Clause 7.8.2 has specified the
following values of constants:

α = 1.5
β = 0.05
δ=1

If the design static eccentricity component of the design

eccentricity is greater than the natural static eccentricity (α
> 1), then an additional torsional moment of the value of (α
− 1)esi × Fi is introduced at the centre of mass to achieve
the full torsional condition. Please refer to Figure 10.1. The
value of β × bi × Fi is added or subtracted to the additional
natural torsion to incorporate the effect of accidental torsion.
If α = 1.5, δ = 1.0 and β = 0.05, then STAAD.Pro CE
parameters to be defined are DEC = 1.5 and ACC = 0.05 in
one load case and DEC = 1.0 and ACC = −0.05 in another
load case to include both natural and accidental torsion.

Figure 10.1: Generation of torsional moment.

Natural torsion is automatically included in analysis for DEC

≤ 1.0, that is no additional inherent torsion is applied.
However, if DEC > 1.0, a twisting moment with modified
eccentricity of DEC − 1 will act at CM.
In dynamic analysis, physically adjusting mass to account for
the torsional response inadvertently changes the dynamics
of the structure with each mass shift. Therefore the safe
method is to calculate the effect of accidental eccentricity by
static means (using equivalent static vertical force
distribution for this purpose) and then to combine it with
dynamic analysis results.

Problem Statement 10.1:

Section used for beams and columns: 300 mm × 300 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor levels
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figures 10.2A and B
Figure 10.2A: Building plan.
Figure 10.2B: Building elevation.

Compute design base shear (Vb), design lateral force (Qi)

and torsional moment (MY) for the given data.

Solution:
Steps to be instructed to STAAD.Pro CE:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign Mass Reference

Load and to insert Seismic Parameters from the
solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1

Seismic parameter (Figure 10.3):

A. Zone: 0.36
 B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2
D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1

Figure 10.3: Static seismic parameter.

E. Type of structure (ST): 5

F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. A Seismic primary load case STATIC TORSION X1 is

created under Load Cases Details.

3. Seismic load under SEISMIC STATIC X1 is assigned in

the X direction with a multiplying factor 1, and torsional
parameters are provided as shown in Figure 10.4.
 These values under torsional parameters are provided
to calculate design eccentricity as per equation (10.1).

4. Another seismic load is assigned under load case

STATIC TORSION X2 in the X direction with a
multiplying factor 1 and torsional parameters are
provided as shown in Figure 10.5.

These values under torsional parameter are provided to

calculate the design eccentricity as per equation (10.2).
Figure 10.4: Seismic load generation in the X direction with
torsional parameters as per equation (10.1).

5. In a similar way, another two load cases are provided in

the Z direction. Those are STATIC TORSION Z 1,
STATIC TORSION Z 2 (Figure 10.6).

6. Perform Analysis is selected for the linear type of

analysis.

7. Further Load Data option is provided to view the

vertical distribution of base shear to different floor
levels in the output file.

8. Centre of stiffness of a floor is reported in STAAD.Pro CE

output file on using PRINT DIA CR command.

Note: Centre of mass of a floor gets reported in the

output file on using Rigid Diaphragm command.
Figure 10.5: Seismic load generation in the X direction with
torsional parameters as per equation (10.2).
Figure 10.6: Static seismic load generation in the two
horizontal directions with torsional parameters.

9. STAAD editor/input file (Figure 10.7).

10. Output file: The output file generated by STAAD.Pro CE

includes design base shear (Vb) and design lateral force
at floor level (Qi). The output file also contains a table of
design eccentricity for individual loading and
distribution of torsional moment (MY) (Figures 10.8–
10.19).

Figure 10.7: Seismic load definition and load generation

with torsional parameters in STAAD.Pro CE input editor.

Figure 10.8: Table of centre of mass of floor.

Figure 10.9: Table of centre of rigidity of floor.

Figure 10.10: Design base shear in the X direction.

Figure 10.11: Design base shear in the Z direction.

Figure 10.12: Table of design eccentricity calculated using
equation (10.1) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION X1’.
Figure 10.13: Design lateral force in the X direction and
vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case
‘STATIC TORSION X1’.

Figure 10.14: Table of design eccentricity calculated using

equation (10.2) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION X2’.
Figure 10.15: Design lateral force in the X direction and
vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case
‘STATIC TORSION X2’.
Figure 10.16: Table of design eccentricity calculated using
equation (10.1) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION Z1’.
Figure 10.17: Design lateral force in the Z direction and
vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case
‘STATIC TORSION Z1’.

Figure 10.18: Table of design eccentricity calculated using

equation (10.2) for load case ‘STATIC TORSION Z2’.
Figure 10.19: Design lateral force in the Z direction and
vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case
‘STATIC TORSION Z2’.
Figure 10.19: Design lateral force in the Z direction and
vertical distribution of torsional moment for load case
‘STATIC TORSION Z2’.
 Soft Storey
11

Soft storey buildings are known for their poor performance

during earthquakes. Typical examples for such irregularity
are the buildings on stilts. In the 2001 Bhuj earthquake, most
of the multistorey buildings that collapsed had soft ground
storey. According to the definition of soft storey defined in IS
1893(Part-1):2016, a soft storey is a storey whose lateral
stiffness is less than the storey above. In general,
multistorey buildings in metropolitan cities require open
taller first storey for parking of vehicles and/or for retail
shopping, large space for meeting room or a banking hall.
Due to this functional requirement, the first storey has lesser
lateral stiffness as compared to upper storey, which are
stiffened by masonry infill walls which has good strength in
compression. This characteristic of building construction
creates ‘soft’ storey problems in multistorey buildings. It is
one of the vertical irregularities as per Table 6 of IS
1893(Part-1):2016. Increased flexibility of first storey results
in extreme deflection, which in turn leads to concentration of
forces at the second storey connections accompanied by
large plastic deformation. In addition, most of the energy
developed during earthquake is dissipated by the columns of
the soft storey. In this process the plastic hinges are formed
at the end of the columns, which transform the soft storey
into a mechanism. In such cases the collapse is unavoidable.
It is recognized that this type of failure results from the
combination of several other unfavourable reasons such as
torsion, excessive mass on upper floors, P − Δ effects and
lack of ductility in the bottom storey. Therefore, the soft
storey deserve a special consideration.
In STAAD.Pro CE soft storey checking is a process by which
designers check lateral stiffness of a storey with that of the
storey above. This command is applicable only when rigid
floor diaphragm is provided.
The software is currently equipped with the facility to
consider the in-plane stiffness of slabs as rigid diaphragm.
Lateral stiffness of a floor is calculated by the program only
when the floor is modelled as rigid diaphragm since it
functions as transferring storey shears and torsional
moments to lateral force-resisting members during
earthquake.
Consider a multistorey building:

The points are master nodes. The storey stiffness is defined

as the inverse of inter-storey drift when a unit load is applied
at that storey only.
The unit load applied is along X, Z and θY.

Consider the displacements and rotations up to 2nd floor.

• Storey 1: ΔX1, ΔZ1 and θY1; Storey 2: ΔX2, ΔZ2 and θY2.

Relative displacement for storey 2 is

The rest is the same for all the other storey.

Problem Statement 11.1:

The section used for beams and columns: 300 mm × 300
mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: Reinforced concrete (RC) moment
resisting frame (MRF) building Rigid diaphragm:
Provided at all floor levels
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figures 11.1A and B.
Figure 11.1A: Building Plan.

Figure 11.1B: Building Elevation.

Instructing the program to check for Soft Storey
Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed to assign Mass Reference

Load and to insert Seismic Parameters from the
solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

2. Seismic load are assigned by following Steps 6–8 from

the solution of Problem Statement 4.1.

3. ‘Perform Analysis’ is selected for linear type of analysis.

4. Lateral storey stiffness is reported on STAAD.Pro CE

output file on using ‘Storey Stiffness’ command from
the ‘Post-Analysis Commands’ (Figure 11.2).

5. ‘Check Soft Storey’ command is selected from the

‘Miscellaneous Commands’ with code ‘IS 1893 2016’
(Figures 11.3 and 11.4).

6. Output file reported by STAAD.Pro CE for this Problem

Statement (Figures 11.5 and 11.6).
Figure 11.2: Storey Stiffness command in Graphical User
Interface (GUI).

Figure 11.3: Check Soft Storey command in GUI.

Figure 11.4: STAAD.Pro CE input editor file.

Figure 11.5: Lateral storey stiffness at each floor.

Figure 11.6: Soft storey detection.
 Dynamic Analysis
12

12.1 Introduction

The assumption of equivalent static analysis is based on the

following:

1. Fundamental mode dominates the response.

2. Mass and stiffness are evenly distributed with building

height, thus giving a regular mode shape.

Mode shapes depend on the distribution of mass and

stiffness in the building. In tall buildings, higher modes can
be quite significant, and in irregular buildings, mode shapes
may be somewhat irregular. Hence, for tall and irregular
buildings, dynamic analysis is required. Industrial buildings
may also require dynamic analysis because they may have
large spans, large heights and considerable irregularities.
Dynamic analysis can be performed in three ways, namely:

1. response spectrum method,

2. modal time response history method and

3. nonlinear time response history method.

Response spectrum of an earthquake is considered as a very
useful input for the seismic analysis of structures and is
directly used for the response spectrum method of analysis
of structures, which is favoured by earthquake engineers for
several reasons. This method allows a clear understanding of
the contributions of different modes of vibration to the
overall seismic response of structures. It offers a simplified
method for finding the design forces for the members of
structures for earthquake forces. It is also useful in the
approximate evaluation of the reliability and safety of
structures under earthquake forces. IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
clearly provides guideline on response spectrum analysis
(RSA), which is discussed in this chapter.
Time history method consists of the analysis of linear
mathematical model of structures to determine its response
to a set of ground motion acceleration histories compatible
with the design acceleration spectrum for the site specified
by Indian Standard (Clause 6.4.2) or by a site-specific study
(Clause 6.4.7).

12.2 Response Spectrum

The structural response to a particular earthquake can be

summarized using a response spectrum, which provides
valuable information on the potential effects of ground
motion on the structure. A response spectrum shows the
peak response of an SDOF structure to a particular
earthquake, as a function of the natural period and damping
ratio of the structure. The main advantage of response
spectrum approach is that earthquakes that look quite
different when represented in the time domain may actually
contain similar frequency contents and result in broadly
similar response spectra. This uniqueness of response
spectra makes it useful for a future earthquake. The El
Centro, California, earthquake response spectrum is used
worldwide as a reference because of two reasons. One, it
contains exhaustive data of ground motion, and two, the
data acquisition systems were located very near to the
epicentre of the earthquake.

Response Spectrum Methodology

In each mode, Design Lateral Force (Qik) and Storey
Shear Force (Vik) at each floor in each mode is computed
as following Clauses 7.7.5.4c and 7.7.5.4d of IS1893 (Part 1):
2016

Qik = Akφik PkWi

Qik = peak lateral force at floor i in the mode k

Ak = design horizontal acceleration spectrum value
using natural period of oscillation and Tk of mode k
obtained from dynamic analysis

ϕik = mode shape coefficient at ith floor for mode k

Wi = seismic weight of ith floor
Pk = mode participation factor of mode k

and

Vik = peak shear force acting at floor i in the mode k.

STAAD.Pro CE utilizes the following procedure to generate
the lateral seismic loads:

1. Direction factor ((Z/2)×(I/R)) is provided for input

spectrum.

2. The programme calculates time periods for first six

modes or as specified.

3. The programme calculates Sa/g for each mode utilizing

time period and damping for each mode.

4. The programme calculates the design horizontal

acceleration spectrum value Ak for each mode.

5. The programme then calculates mode participation

factor and mass participation factor for each mode.

Mass participation factor as per Clause 7.7.5.4a of

IS1893 (Part 1): 2016

Mode participation factor as per Clause 7.7.5.4b of

IS1893 (Part 1): 2016

6. The peak lateral seismic force and storey shear force at

each floor in each mode is calculated.
7. All response quantities for each mode are calculated.

8. The peak response quantities are then combined as per

the specified method (square root of summation of
squares (SRSS), complete quadratic combination (CQC),
absolute sum method (ABS), closely spaced method
(CSM) or TEN) to get the final results.

This process is rigorously followed for each mode, and any

mode can be a torsional mode. The implication of having a
torsional mode in first few modes is an indication of the fact
that your floors may be torsionally weak, and you need to
take precaution for that.
The programme can calculate centre of mass (CM) and
centre of resistance (CR) if rigid diaphragm is defined in the
model in conjunction with mass reference load cases. The
programme forcefully applies the lateral seismic loading at
the CM. Thus, inherent torsional effect coming for static
eccentricity (esi, i.e., difference between CM and CR) is
automatically considered at the analysis itself as the
programme is forcefully applying seismic load at CM instead
of CR.
The design base shear computed from RSA should be
compared with the base shear obtained from equivalent
static analysis.
The design base shear, VB_RS, calculated from the RSA in
STAAD.Pro CE, is compared with the base shear, VB_SS,
calculated by the empirical formula for the fundamental time
period based on Clause 7.2.1 (equivalent static analysis). If
VB_RS is less than VB_SS, all of the response quantities are
amplified by (VB_SS/VB_RS) as per Clause 7.7.3(a) for each
of the orthogonal plan directions and by maximum of
[(VB_SS/VB_RS)X,(VB_SS/VB_RS)Z. when considering
response spectrum load in the vertical direction based on
Clause 7.7.3(b).

12.3 Discussion on IS 1893 (Part I):2016

Seismic Parameter for Response Spectrum
Analysis

Combination method: The following methods are available

for combining the responses from each mode into a total
response.
SRSS (Square Root of Summation of Squares Method):
If building does not have closely spaced modes, then net
peak response quantity λ due to all modes shall be
estimated as

where
λk = peak response quantity in mode k
Nm is the number of modes considered

CQC (Complete Quadratic Combination Method): This

method is recommended for closely spaced modes instead of
SRSS.
Peak response quantities (member forces, displacements,
storey forces, storey shears and base reactions) can be
combined as per CQC as given in the following equation:

where
 λ = estimate of peak response quantity
λi = response quantity in mode i (with sign)
λj = response quantity in mode j (with sign)
ρij = cross-modal correlation coefficient

Nm = number of modes considered

ζ = modal damping coefficient ratio which shall be taken
as 0.05
β = natural frequency ratio = ωj/ωi
ωj = circular natural frequency in mode j
ωi = circular natural frequency in mode i

CSM (Closely Spaced Method): CSM as per IS:1893 (Part

1): 2016 procedures.
If building has a few closely spaced modes, then net peak
response quantity λ* due to these closely space modes alone
shall be obtained as

where λc = peak response quantity in closely spaced mode

c. The summation is for closely spaced modes only. Then this
peak response quantity λ* due to closely spaced modes is
combined with those of remaining well-separated modes by
method described previously.
ABS (Absolute Sum Method): This method is very
conservative and represents a worst-case combination.
GRP: Closely spaced modes grouping method.
TEN: Ten per cent method of combining closely spaced
modes [NRC Reg. Guide 1.92 (Rev. 1.2.2, 1976)].
Subsoil class: STAAD.Pro CE uses this parameter to
generate response spectrum curve. The curve (time period
vs acceleration) is plotted automatically by the programme
for the soil type mentioned in Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016. The site-specific response spectral data can also be
provided for generation of response spectrum curve by
selecting Subsoil Class as Custom. This spectral data pair
is considered as lookup table for finding spectral acceleration
corresponding to the modal time period considered in the
RSA.
Spectrum type: STAAD.Pro CE provides two spectrum
types: acceleration and displacement. This should be
provided along with site-specific spectral data.
Interpolation type: Two types of interpolation are available
in STAAD.Pro CE – linear and logarithmic. Time periods of the
structure are obtained for each mode by solving
characteristic equation. These modal time periods may not
exactly match with the periods specified in the spectrum
input; in this case, interpolation is required between
available spectral values.
Damping type: There are three ways to specify damping in
RSA:
Damping: This parameter is used when the damping
ratio is same for all modes. As discussed in Chapter 4
(Section 4.1), for IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 the damping
considered in the analysis should be 5% of the critical
damping. STAAD.Pro CE allows the following damping
method to be considered in the analysis.
CDAMP: Composite damping is denoted by CDAMP.
Composite damping is a weighted average damping
 ratio, which is based on the strain energy and damping
ratio of the various materials used in the structure, and
also the spring supports of the structure if spring
damping is specified.
MDAMP: The MDAMP method is used when the
dynamic analysis is performed using a known set of
modal damping ratios or ones calculated by the
programme based on damping ratios that are known
for two specific modes.
Direction factor: The direction indicates along which the
spectrum load is applied, and the factor is the fraction of the
spectral value which is inserted as shown in Figure 12.1. The
direction factor in X, Z and Y is ((Zone factor/2) ×
(Importance factor/Response Reduction factor)) = ((Z/2) ×
(I/R)). After the spectral value is obtained for each mode
from the lookup table, it is multiplied by the direction factor.
Torsion parameter: To consider torsional effects in the
analysis, the following parameters are to be used with values
pertaining to Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016.
Accidental Eccentricity, ECC: Accidental torsion accounts
for the additional torsional moment on a floor due to a shift
in the CM from its actual location to either side by a distance
equal to 5% of the building dimension orthogonal to the
direction of the earthquake. Ground rotation about vertical
axis of a structure also plays a major role in inducing torsion.
These factors are specified as (0.05) and (−0.05) in Clause
7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 for calculating design
eccentricity.
Figure 12.1: IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum
parameters.

Dynamic eccentricity, DEC: Natural torsion or inherent

torsion accounts for torsional moment induced in a floor
resulting from eccentricity between the centre of mass (CM)
and centre of stiffness (CR). To calculate design eccentricity
as per Clause 7.8.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the factors are
(1.5) and (1).
Signed response spectrum results options: Sign of
responses obtained from RSA becomes unsigned as the
modal responses from modal analysis are combined using
SRSS, CQC or CSM method. Because of that displacement,
member forces, support reactions, etc. are of absolute
values. To make the results more useful in design situations,
STAAD.Pro CE has implemented following methods of
‘artificially’ determining an algebraic sign to responses.
Dominant: If dominant mode is specified as 0 (i.e.,
DOMINANT 0 parameter), the programme determines
the mode with the highest mass participation factor in
the excitation direction, and the final results will have
the same sign obtained from the modal analysis result
of that mode.
The programme also allows user to define a mode in
the DOMINANT parameter. If it is used, the sign of the
responses obtained from the analysis of this mode will
be used in the final result.
Signed: SIGN option results in the creation of signed
values for all results. The sum of squares of positive
values from the modes is compared to sum of squares
of negative values from the modes. Suppose, if the
negative values are larger, the result is given a
negative sign.

Individual modal response load case generation

options:
STAAD.Pro CE allows to work with individual modal load
cases generated in RSA. In RSA, the modal responses are
combined using the modal combination method opted in the
analysis. The responses from the individual modes are of
prime importance. Individual modal load cases can be
extracted separately by the programme, and their responses
can be viewed separately. On requesting for modal response
load cases, the programme generates them. The input from
the users for this action is the number of modal response
load cases that to be generated and the starting load
number for them. It is to be noted that the programme by
default considers six modes, and the number of modes
considered in the analysis can be increased by using CUT
OFF MODE SHAPE command. A check needs to be applied in
this process so that the number of mode cases to be
generated in individual modal response (IMR) load cases
does not exceed the number of modes considered in RSA.

Other:
Scale: This is the normalization factor by which the
second number set of spectral data pair will be
multiplied if the spectrum data are normalized set.
Default value for this parameter is 1. If the spectral
data are generated by the programme as per Clause
6.4.2.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 based on the specified
soil type, then the programme automatically multiplies
the generated spectral acceleration value by (g)
because the generated data have the form (Sa/g).
Therefore, in that case the user does not need to
specify a SCALE FACTOR.
Missing mass: For RSA, STAAD.Pro CE uses only as
many modes as defined by the CUT OFF MODE SHAPE
command, or a lesser number in case it cannot
calculate as many as specified through that command.
Most design codes require 90% or more than 90%
cumulative mass participation (SUMM value reports in
output) in considered direction. MISSING MASS
command is required when the programme is unable
to achieve that percentage of mass participation in
considered direction using CUT OFF MODE SHAPE
and/or CUT OFF FREQUENCY command. Those modes
that are left out of the dynamic solution can be
accounted for using this facility. Initially the modal
combination results are calculated without the missing
mass mode, and then the result is combined via modal
combination method with the missing mass result.
 Alongside the missing mass term, there is a box in
which the spectral acceleration (in the current units)
can be specified for the missing mass mode. This will
not be factored by SCALE.
ZPA: This is applicable only if the MISSING MASS
correction is used in the response. If the spectral
acceleration is not entered with the MIS parameter
(MISSING MASS command) the ZPA = Zero Period
Acceleration value (default 33 Hz) is used to look up
the spectral acceleration (of the missing mass mode)
from the input curve (spectral displacement or
acceleration vs time period). If nothing is specified for
ZPA, STAAD.Pro uses a frequency of 33 Hz.

Note:
A. If the subsoil class is selected as hard soil or medium
soil or soft soil, spectrum type and interpolation type
parameter should not be included.
B. The spectrum type options, that is acceleration (ACC
parameter) or displacement (DISP parameter), and
interpolation type options, that is linear (LIN
parameter) and logarithmic (LOG parameter), should
only be used when sub soil type is set to “Custom”.
C. STAAD.Pro CE generates mass matrix only once, and it
is applicable for all other response spectrum load
cases. The programme ignores the masses defined
under other response spectrum load cases.
Note: G, H, I and J from Section 4.1 are applicable for
response spectrum load case also.

Discussion on results from response spectrum load

cases:
There are two categories of output produced by STAAD.Pro:
1. intermediate terms generated during the spectrum
analysis and

2. response of the structure to the loading – reaction,

member forces, displacement, etc.
Intermediate terms generated during the spectrum
analysis reported:
Reports in the output file:
Eigen solution: In modal analysis (eigen solution), the
following equation is solved:

where i =1,…, n

λ = ω2 and {xi} = mode shape vector. On doing a modal

analysis, we get frequency of a mode and corresponding
mode shape. In STAAD.Pro CE output file, time period and
corresponding frequencies are reported for each considered
mode.

Dynamic weight, missing weight and modal weight:

Dynamic weight contains the total potential weight for
base shear calculation. Modal weight is the total weight
actually used in the considered modes. Only a part of the
dynamic weight is actually used in the solution. The part that
does not get considered for the solution is the Missing
weight, and it is reported as negative number. Algebraic
summation of dynamic weight and missing weight gives
modal weight.
Generalized Weight and Generalized Mass: Each
eigenvector {xi} has an associated generalized, mass
defined by
Mass participation factor: The modal mass of a mode as a
percentage of the total mass vibrating in that direction is
listed under heading X, Y and Z under PARTICIPATION
FACTORS. A cumulative sum for all modes is given under
the headings SUM-X, SUM-Z and SUM-Y . So, the
cumulative value signifies the percentage of the base shear
that can be represented by the modes calculated. Mass
participation factor in percentage is very much important
because code requires us to consider enough modes to
represent at least 90% participation.
Table of acceleration evaluated: The mode number, the
spectral acceleration evaluated from the lookup table of
spectral data and damping used for the corresponding mode
are reported in a tabular form.
Damping ratio used in the individual modes: If
composite or modal damping specified, damping ratio used
in each mode will also be reported.
Modal base action: STAAD.Pro CE reports modal base
shear in the response spectrum output for given modes,
calculated by taking the translational mass times the
corresponding calculated acceleration at each node and
global direction to get a force. These forces are accumulated
over all the nodes for each of the three directions. In
addition, these nodal forces are used to calculate and
accumulate moments about the origin of the coordinate
system (0,0,0).
If SET PRINT 17 command is used, then this calculation is
further broken down into the contributions to the base
summation from each floor for each mode.
Base shear: STAAD.Pro CE reports the base shear in the
output file in a tabular form alongside the mass participation
factor.
Mode shape: PRINT MODE SHAPES command has to be
chosen from Analysis Commands to print the Mode Shapes
for different modes in the output file.

Design Eccentricity (edi) and Peak additional torsion: If

torsion parameters (DEC and ECC) are provided, the output
file also reports design eccentricity (edi) and peak additional
torsion.

Postprocessing Reports:
By clicking on Dynamics tab from the Postprocessing
mode, Time period (in seconds), Frequency (in Hz), Mass
Participation Factor (in percentage) in three orthogonal
direction and Mode Shapes for each mode are reported at
the right-hand side of the window as shown in Figure 12.2.
Both tables are given in Microsoft Excel format.
The animated mode shape can be viewed from the
Animation option under Results tab as shown in Figure
12.3A. The scale of the MODE SHAPES can be adjusted from
the Scales tab under the same window as shown in Figure
12.3B.
The animated mode shapes for different modes can be
viewed from the drop-down list of the Mode option under
the Results tab and the active mode shape can be seen too
at the extreme right corner as shown in Figure 12.4.

Figure 12.2: Frequency, Mass Participation and Mode Shape

in GUI.
Figure 12.3A: Steps to view the animated mode shape in
GUI.
Figure 12.3B: Steps to adjust the scale of mode shapes.
Figure 12.4: Animated mode shapes for different modes.

12.4 Miscellaneous Commands for Dynamic

Analysis

This section deals with discussion on different commands

that can be used in RSA.

CUT OFF MODE SHAPE, CUT OFF FREQUENCY

These commands are used in conjunction with dynamic
analysis. STAAD. Pro CE computes the larger number of
modes with the help of these commands. CUT OFF MODE
SHAPE and CUT OFF FREQUENCY commands specify the
highest number of mode shapes and frequency that need to
be considered. These commands should be provided prior to
the loading specification.
General format:
CUT OFF MODE SHAPE i1
 CUT OFF FREQUENCY f1

where
i1 is the number of mode shapes to be considered for
dynamic analysis, and f1 is the highest frequency
(cycle/second) to be considered for dynamic analysis.
If cut off frequency command is not provided, cut off
frequency defaults to 108 cps. If cut off mode shape
command is not provided, the first six modes will be
considered by default. A maximum of i1 mode shapes
will be computed regardless of f1. If the CUT OFF FREQ
f1 and CUT OFF MODE i1 commands are both entered,
the programme will report only those modes that lie
within f1 frequency.

These commands can be specified from the dropdown list

available under Miscellaneous Commands, in Figure 12.5,
steps are provided to include CUT OFF commands from GUI.
CUT OFF commands should be specified after SUPPORT
specification (Figure 12.6), if those are provided from input
editor.
CUT OFF MODE SHAPE is specified as 10 for a model (Figure
12.6), and corresponding STAAD.Pro CE output file is shown
in Figures 12.7A and B.
Figure 12.5: CUT OFF command from GUI.
Figure 12.6: CUT OFF command is provided from input
editor.

Figure 12.7A: Eigen solution for first 10 modes.

Figure 12.7B: Mass Participation Factor Table for 10 modes.

Individual Modal Response
The IMR load cases are simply the mode shape scaled to the
magnitude that the mode has in this spectrum analysis case
before it is combined with other modes. If the IMR parameter
is entered, then STAAD will create load cases for the first
specified number of modes for this response spectrum case.
Each case will be created in a form like any other primary
load case.
From the GUI, it can be assigned under the Response
Spectrum Load case as shown in Figure 12.8.

Figure 12.8: Individual Modal Response Load case

generation.

If IMR 3 along with Start load case 100 is used, the program
will generate first three modal response load cases with a
starting load 100.
The input editor looks like
PRINT ANALYSIS RESULTS command is provided from the
Post-Analysis Commands to print Member end forces,
Support Reaction and Joint displacement in the output file.
From Figures 12.9–12.11 it is seen that STAAD.Pro CE output
reports responses for response spectrum load case (load
case number 1) along with IMR load cases (load case
numbers 100, 101 and 102).

Figure 12.9: Joint displacement report.

Figure 12.10: Support reaction report.

Figure 12.11: Member end forces report.

Mode Select
The structural response obtained from a spectrum analysis is
the one resulting from all the considered modes calculated
by the programme. This command allows specification of a
reduced set of active dynamic modes. All modes selected by
this command remain selected until a new MODE SELECT is
specified. This command is used to limit the modes used in
dynamic analysis to the modes listed in this command and
deactivate all other modes that were calculated but not
listed in this command. If this command is not entered, then
all modes calculated are used in the dynamic analysis.
General format:
MODE SELECT mode-list

This command instructs the programme to calculate the

response of the structure only using modes 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Rest of the mode will have no contribution in the analysis.
Note: If the structural response is required for combination of
only modes 2, 4 and 6, then it should be specified as

MODE SELECT command should be provided after SUPPORT

specification or after CUT OFF MODE SHAPE command.
Note: This command is not available in GUI.
In the output file from Figure 12.12, it is seen that time
period of the structure is calculated for all six modes (default
number of mode shape), but the results are obtained using
only first four modes as specified (Figures 12.13–12.16).

Figure 12.12: Time period of the structure for all six modes.
Figure 12.13: Calculation of modal weight considering only
first four modes.

Figure 12.14: Spectral Acceleration value for first four

modes.

Figure 12.15: Calculation of modal base action for first four

modes.

Figure 12.16: Base shear in the X direction is the SRSS

combination of first four modes.
SET Commands
SET command should be used in the input file after UNIT
command and before the first JOINT command.
SET PARICIPATION FACTOR: SET PARICIPATION FACTOR
or SET PART FACT command is used to print mode
participation factor along three global directions for each
considered mode.
Modal participation factor, Pk in mode k of a structure is
defined in the code IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 as the amount by
which natural mode ‘k’ contributes to overall oscillation of
the structure during horizontal and vertical earthquake
ground motion.
As per Clause 7.7.5.4b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, Modal
participation factor, Pk of mode k is given by

where
ϕik = mode shape coefficient at floor i in mode k
Wi = seismic weight of floor i of the structure
n = number of floors of the structure

SET PART FACT command is not available in the GUI. It can

be inserted from the STAAD.Pro CE input editor before the
first JOINT Command (Figure 12.17).
Mode participation factor reports in the STAAD.Pro CE output
file as (Figure 12.18)
Figure 12.17: SET PART FACT command in input editor.

Figure 12.18: Mode participation factor.

SET PRINT 17: If the SET PRINT 17 command is used, then

this calculation of modal base action is broken down into the
contributions to the base summation from each floor for
each mode. This command is also not available in the GUI, in
the following figure this command is provided in input editor:

In Figure 12.19, Floor Modal Base Action is reported on using

SET PRINT 17 command.
In Table 12.1, a sample example is shown to calculate modal
base action.
Figure 12.19: Floor Modal Base Action and Modal Base
Action in STAAD.Pro CE output.

Table 12.1 Calculation of Modal Base Action

Modal Base Height Floor Modal Base Action for

Action (m) Mode 2
25 60.05
 20 70.14
15 56.82
10 38.32
5 16.86
0 0
∑ 242.19

The detailed workflow for IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response

Spectrum Analysis can be understood on exercising the
following problem sets.
Problem Statement 12.1: General Response Spectrum
Analysis
Section used for beams and columns: 400 mm × 400 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
Rigid Diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figures 12.20 and 12.21
Compute design base shear (Vb) and storey shear force at
each floor level (Vi) for the given data and compare the base
shears obtained from dynamic analysis and static analysis.
Solution:
The following steps are to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters.

Loading: Same as Problem Statement 4.1.

 Seismic parameter: Same as Problem Statement 4.1
with Structure Type 5 and Zone V (Figures 12.22).

Figure 12.20: Building plan.

Figure 12.21: Building elevation.
Figure 12.22: Static seismic parameter.
Figure 12.23: IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum
parameters.

2. A Seismic primary load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM

X is created under Load Cases Details.

3. SRSS combination method is used for the analysis.

4. Subsoil Class is selected as same as defined in the

seismic load definition box. In this model, soil type is
hard soil. A response spectrum curve will generate
using the spectral data (time period and spectral
acceleration) for the specified soil type.

5. Five per cent damping (0.05) is used for all modes.

 The response spectrum load is generated in the X
6. direction with direction factor 0.072(((Z × I)/(2 × R)) =
((0.36 × 1.2)/(2 × 3))) (Refer Figure 12.23).

7. Two other response spectrum loads are generated in Z

(Title RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z) and the Y direction
(RESPONSE SPECTRUM Y) with same direction factor.
All other parameters are same as defined in previous
load case (Figure 12.24).

Figure 12.24: Generation of response spectrum load in

three directions.

Figure 12.25: STAAD.Pro CE input editor showing response

spectrum load cases.
8. Linear analysis is performed by PERFORM ANALYSIS
command.

9. CUT OFF MODE SHAPE is specified as 40.

10. STAAD.Pro CE input editor looks like (Figure 12.25)

11. STAAD.Pro CE output is given in Figures 12.26–12.45:

Analysis in the X direction:

Figure 12.26: Frequency and time period for each mode.

Figure 12.27: Table of modal weight and generalized

weight for each mode.
Figure 12.28: Dynamic weight, missing weight and modal
weight in X, Z and Y directions.

Figure 12.29: Table contains Sa/g value and design

horizontal acceleration spectrum (Ak) for each mode in the X
direction for 5% damping.

Figure 12.30: Peak storey shear in the X direction.

Figure 12.31: Modal base action–base shear in the X
direction for each mode.

Figure 12.32: Mass participation factor and base shear in

the X direction.
Figure 12.33: Design horizontal seismic coefficient Ah, base
shear and minimum design lateral force calculation by static
method in the X direction.

Figure 12.34: Multiplying factor Response quantities in X

direction.

Figure 12.35: Table contains Sa/g value and design

horizontal acceleration spectrum for each mode in the Z
direction for 5% damping.
Figure 12.36: Peak storey shear in the Z direction.

Figure 12.37: Modal base action – base shear in the Z

direction for each mode.
Figure 12.38: Mass participation factor and base shear in
the Z direction.

Figure 12.39: Design horizontal seismic coefficient Ah, base

shear and minimum design lateral force calculation by static
method in the Z direction.

Figure 12.40: Multiplying factor Response quantities in Z

direction.
Figure 12.41: Table contains Sa/g value and design vertical
acceleration spectrum for each mode for 5% damping.

Figure 12.42: Peak storey shear in the Y direction.

Figure 12.43: Modal base action – base shear in the Y
direction for each mode.
Figure 12.44: Mass participation factor and base shear in
the Y direction.

Figure 12.45: Multiplying factor Response quantities in Y

direction.
Problem Statement 12.2: Site-Specific Response
Spectrum Analysis
Section used for beams and columns: 500 mm × 500 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF building
Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figures 12.46 and 12.47.
Compute design base shear (Vb) and storey shear force at
floor level (Vi) for the given data compare the base shears
obtained from dynamic analysis and static analysis.
Solution:
The following steps are to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Self-weight is applied in three directions.

Seismic parameter (Figure 12.48):

A. Zone: 0.24
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 5
Figure 12.46: Building plan.
Figure 12.47: Building elevation.

C. Importance factor (I): 1

D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 2
E. Type of structure (ST): 1
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. A Seismic primary load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM

X is created under Load Cases Details.

3. SRSS combination method is used for the analysis.

4. Subsoil Class and Spectrum Type are selected as
custom and Acceleration respectively. Time period
and acceleration data pair is provided. Here the input
spectral data set is normalized set. A response
spectrum curve is generated using the provided
spectral data (time period and spectral acceleration).

Figure 12.48: Static seismic parameter.

Spectral data pair is given Table 12.2.

 In this model, Interpolation Type is selected as
5. Linear.

6. SCALE is provided as 9.81 which is the value of

acceleration due to gravity (g)

7. Five per cent damping is used for all modes.

8. The response spectrum load is generated in the X

direction with direction factor 0.024(((Z × I )/(2 × R)) =
((0.24 × 1)/(2 × 5))) (Refer Figure 12.49).

9. Two other response spectrum loads are generated in Z

(Title RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z) and Y directions
(RESPONSE SPECTRUM Y) direction with same
direction factor. All other seismic parameters are same
as defined in previous load case (Figure 12.50).
Table 12.2 Site-Specific Response Spectrum Data

Time Period Sa/g

0 1.013

0.03 1.44

0.04 1.6

0.05 1.76

0.058 1.867

0.059 1.867

0.06 1.92

0.061 1.92

0.062 1.92
0.065 1.973

0.07 2.027

0.071 2.08

0.074 2.133

0.084 2.24

0.094 2.4

0.104 2.56

0.114 2.507

0.12 2.507

0.121 2.507

0.124 2.507

0.126 2.507

0.133 2.507

0.601 2.507

0.604 2.507

0.617 2.507

0.622 2.507

0.632 2.507

0.667 2.507

0.767 2.187

0.867 1.92
0.967 1.707

1.067 1.547

1.167 1.44

1.267 1.333

1.367 1.227

1.467 1.12

1.567 1.067

1.667 1.013

1.767 0.96

1.867 0.907

1.967 0.853

2.067 0.8

2.167 0.747

2.267 0.747

2.367 0.693

2.467 0.693

2.567 0.64

2.667 0.64

2.767 0.587

2.867 0.587

2.967 0.587
3.067 0.533

3.167 0.533

3.267 0.533

3.367 0.48

3.467 0.48

3.544 0.48

3.559 0.48

3.666 0.48

3.765 0.427

3.865 0.427

3.965 0.427

4.017 0.427
Figure 12.49: IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 Response Spectrum
parameters.

Figure 12.50: Generation of response spectrum load in

three directions.
 Linear analysis is performed by PERFORM ANALYSIS
10. command.

11. STAAD.Pro CE input editor looks like (Figure 12.51).

Figure 12.51: Generation of response spectrum load for
site-specific spectrum data in STAAD.Pro CE input editor.

12. STAAD.Pro CE output includes frequency and time

period of the structure, mass participation in
percentage along three directions, base shear and
multiplying factor (Figures 12.52–12.54).

Analysis in the X direction:

Figure 12.52: Table contains Sa/g value and design

horizontal acceleration spectrum for each mode in the X
direction for 5% damping.
Figure 12.53: Table containing spectral acceleration value
multiplied by g (acceleration due to gravity-provided SCALE
parameter).

Figure 12.54: Design horizontal seismic coefficient Ah, base

shear and minimum design lateral force calculation by static
method in the X direction.

Problem Statement 12.3: General Response Spectrum

Analysis Considering Torsional Provision
Section used for beams and columns: 400 mm × 400 mm
Material used: Concrete
Support condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: All other buildings
 Rigid diaphragm: Provided at all floor level
Base dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in Figure 12.55 and 12.56.

Figure 12.55: Building plan.

Figure 12.56: Building elevation.

Compute design base shear (Vb) and storey shear force at

floor level (Vi) and torsion moment for the given data and
compare the base shears obtained from dynamic analysis
and static analysis (Figure 12.56).
Solution:
Steps to be instructed to the STAAD.Pro:

1. Steps 1–5 are followed from the solution of Problem

Statement 4.1 to assign Mass Reference Load and to
insert Seismic Parameters

Loading: Only self-weight is applied in three directions

 Seismic parameter (Figure 12.57):
A. Zone: 0.36
B. Response reduction factor (RF): 3
C. Importance factor (I): 1.2

Figure 12.57: Static seismic parameter.

D. Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1

E. Type of structure (ST): 5
F. Damping ratio (DM): 0.05

2. A Seismic primary load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM

X1 is created under Load Cases Details.

3. SRSS combination method is used for the analysis.

4. Subsoil Class is selected as same as defined in the
seismic load definition box. In this model, soil type is
hard soil. A response spectrum curve is generated using
the spectral data (time period and spectral
acceleration) for the specified soil type.

5. Five per cent damping is used for all modes.

Figure 12.58: Torsional Parameter to calculate design

eccentricities as per Equation (10.1).

6. The response spectrum load is generated in the X

direction with direction factor 0.072(((Z × I )/(2 × R)) =
((0.36 × 1.2)/(2 × 3))).

7. Torsion parameters DEC and ECC values are provided as

1.5 and 0.05 for calculating design eccentricity as per
equation (10.1) (Figure 12.58).
8. Another response spectrum load is generated
(RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2) along previous direction
with same seismic parameters, but DEC and ECC values
are provided as 1 and −0.05 for calculating design
eccentricity as per equation (10.2) (Figure 12.59).

9. Two other response spectrum loads are generated in the

Z direction (Title RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1,
RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2) with same direction factor.
Provided torsion parameter in load case RESPONSE
SPECTRUM Z1 is as same as in load case RESPONSE
SPECTRUM X1 and provided torsion parameter in load
case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2 is as same as in load
case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2 (Figure 12.60).
Figure 12.59: Torsional Parameter to calculate design
eccentricities as per Equation (10.2).

10. Linear analysis is performed by PERFORM ANALYSIS

command.

11. CUT OFF MODE SHAPE is specified as 40.

12. STAAD.Pro CE input editor looks like (Figure 12.61).

Figure 12.60: Generation of Response Spectrum load in

three directions.
Figure 12.61: STAAD.Pro CE input editor for IS 1893
Response Spectrum Load case.

13. STAAD.Pro CE output includes frequency and time

period of the structure, mass participation in
percentage along three direction, base shear, design
eccentricity, peak additional torsional moment and
multiplying factor (Figures 12.62–12.69).
Analysis in the X direction:

Figure 12.62: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X1

calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.1).
Figure 12.63: Peak additional torsion in the X direction for
load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X1.

Figure 12.64: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2

calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.2).
Figure 12.65: Peak additional torsion in the X direction for
load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM X2.

Analysis in the Z direction:

Figure 12.66: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1

calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.1).

Figure 12.67: Peak additional torsion in the Z direction for

load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z1.
Figure 12.68: For load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2
calculation of design eccentricity as per equation (10.2).

Figure 12.69: Peak additional torsion in the Z direction for

load case RESPONSE SPECTRUM Z2.

Problem Statement 12.4: Verification Example of

Response Spectrum Analysis
Section used for beams and columns: 300 mm × 300 mm for
member number 1, 2, 3, 4
250 mm × 250 mm for member number 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 16
200 mm × 200 mm for member number 5, 6, 7, 8
Material used: Concrete
Support Condition: All supports are fixed at base
Type of structure: RC MRF Building
Base Dimensions and floor heights of the building are
given in the Figure 12.70A and Figure 12.70B
IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 Seismic parameter:
Zone: V; Zone Factor: 0.36
Response Reduction Factor (RF): 0.5
Importance Factor (I): 1

Figure 12.70A: Building plan.

Figure 12.70B: Building elevation.
Figure 12.70C: Loads used for mass modeling.

Type of the Structure (ST): RC MRF Building

Soil Type: Hard Soil
Damping: 5%
Loading: Nodal Load of intensity 10 kN at node 1 to 8 along
X, Y and Z direction as shown in Figure 12.70C
Compute Design Base Shear in three orthogonal direction by
Dynamic Analysis and compare the base shears obtained
from dynamic analysis and static analysis.

Figure 12.70D: IS 1893 2016 response spectrum load

commands.
Appendix

A.1 Solution of Problem Statement 4.1: RC MRF

Building

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: Hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 1, RC MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 11 m × 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period in X

and Z axes: As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X

and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,
design acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range

0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in

X and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Calculation of total seismic weight: Self-weight of the

structure

Density of concrete 23.5616 kN/m3

Dimension of beam 0.5 m × 0.5 m
Total weight of the beam = density × sectional
dimension of the beam × number of floor × length of
the beam at one floor

Dimension of column 0.5 m × 0.5 m

 Total weight of the column = density × sectional
dimension of the column × number of columns at each
floor × length of the column × number of floor

Total floor weight of the structure = floor load intensity

× area of each floor × number of floors

Total seismic weight of the structure, W = (1413.696 +
1060.272 + 792) kN
= 3265.968 kN
Calculation of base shear along X and Z axes: As per
Clause 7.6.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design base shear:

Calculation of minimum design lateral force along

both X and Z axes: As per Clause 7.2.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, minimum design lateral force: VBmin = ρ% × W

From Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, ρ for Zone II is 0.7%.

Design base shear in X and Z directions: Since, VBmin

< VB
Design base shear, VB = 92.067 kN

Calculation of design base shear along Y axes: As per

Clause 7.6.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Calculation of design lateral force at floor level: As per
Clause 7.6.3a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Wi = seismic weight of ith floor hi = height of ith floor

measured from the base VB = design base shear
Qi = design lateral force at ith floor n = number of
stories in building

Seismic weight at each floor:

As per Clause 7.4.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, total Seismic

weight at first, second, third floor: Self-weight of the beam =
23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × [{3 × (5 + 6)} + {3 × (4 + 5)}] kN
= 353.424 kN
Self-weight of the column = (23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × 9 ×
5) kN
= 265.068 kN
Floor weight of the structure = (2 × 11 × 9) kN
= 198 kN
Total seismic weight at first, second, third floor =
(353.424 + 265.068 + 198) kN
= 816.492 kN

Total seismic weight at roof

Self-weight of the beam = 23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × [{3 ×
(5 + 6)} + {3 × (4 + 5)}] kN
= 353.424 kN
 Self-weight of the column = {23.5616 × 0.5 × 0.5 × 9
× (5/2)} kN
= 132.534 kN
Floor weight of the structure = (2 × 11 × 9) kN
= 198 kN
Total seismic weight at roof = (353.424 + 132.534 +
198) kN
= 683.958 kN

Using the equation from Clause 7.6.3a Design lateral force

along three orthogonal directions,

VB_x, VB_z, VB_y = design base shear in X, Z, Y directions,

respectively Qi_x, Qi_z, Qi_y = design lateral force at floor i
in X, Z, Y directions, respectively

A.2 Solution of Problem Statement 4.2: RC–

Steel Composite MRF Building

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 2, RC–Steel composite MRF
building
 Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 11 m × 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period along

X and Z axes: As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X

and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,

design acceleration coefficient:

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in
X and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.
A.3 Solution of Problem Statement 4.3: Steel
MRF Building

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 3, Steel MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 11 m × 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period along

X and Z axes: As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X

and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,

design acceleration coefficient:

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in
X and Z directions: As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation
can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.4 Solution of Problem Statement 4.4:

Computation of Base Shear of a Building with
RC Structural Wall having time period greater
than that of All Other Buildings

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 4, buildings with RC structural
walls
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building, h: 20 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 21 m × 14 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period: As per

Clause 7.6.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural

time period of the structure:

where
h = height of the building, in m
 Awi = effective cross-sectional area of wall i in first
storey of the building, in m2
Lwi = length of structural wall i in the first storey in the
considered direction of lateral forces, in m d = base
dimension of the plinth level along the considered
direction of earthquake shaking, in m Nw = number of
walls in the considered direction of earthquake shaking
Along X and Z axes approximate natural time period of the
structure:

where wi = width of the ith wall.

Since, Ta_x for ST 4 > Ta_x for ST 5 and Ta_z for ST 4 > Ta_z
for ST 5
So, time period in X = Ta_x for ST 5 = 0.39279 s Time period
in Z = Ta_z for ST 5 = 0.48107 s Calculation of design
acceleration coefficient:
As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design
acceleration coefficient: Along X, For hard soil and for range
0 s < Ta < 0.4 s (SA/g) = 2.5
Along Z, For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X,

Along Z,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.5 Solution of Problem Statement 4.5:

Computation of Time Period of a Building with
RC Structural Wall having time period less than
that of All Other Buildings

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.36

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
 Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 4, buildings with RC structural
walls
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building, h: 25 m
Base dimension, dx × dz: 16 m × 13 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period: As per

Clause 7.6.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate natural
time period of the structure along X and Z axes:

Since Ta_x for ST 4 < Ta_x for ST 5 and Ta_z for ST 4 < Ta_z
for ST 5
So, time period in X = Ta_x for ST 4 = 0.522773 s Time
period in Z = Ta_z for ST 4 = 0.542642 s Calculation of
design acceleration coefficient:
As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design
acceleration coefficient: Along X:
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Along Z,
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X:

Along Z,
Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As
per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.6 Solution of Problem Statement 4.6: All

Other Buildings
 Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.1
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 5, all other buildings
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building, h: 20 m
Base dimension in X direction, dx: 11 m Base dimension
in Z direction, dz: 9 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate
natural time period of the structure: Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient: As per

Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design acceleration
coefficient: Along X axis,
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Along Z axis,

For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X,

Along Z,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.7 Solution of Problem Statement 5.1: DX DZ

Parameter
 Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.16
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 5, all other buildings
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Base dimension in X direction, dx: 15 m Base dimension
in Z direction, dz: 4 m Height of the building, h: 7 m

Calculation of height of the building:

hi = height of the floor i measured from the base Ai = floor

area at floor i h = effective height of the building

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate
natural time period of the structure: Along X direction,
Along Z direction,

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient in X and

Z directions: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,
design acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0
s < Ta < 0.4 s (SA/g) = 2.5

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.8 Solution of Problem Statement 5.2: HT

Parameter

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
 Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 5
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of building (HT): 7 m

Calculation of effective height of the building, approximate

natural time period (Ta), design acceleration coefficient
(SA/g), design horizontal seismic coefficient (Ah) and design
vertical seismic coefficient (Av) can be done using the
process explained in Solution of Problem Statement 5.1.
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation
can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.9 Solution of Problem Statement 5.3: PX and

PZ Parameter

Zone: 0.36
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Period in X direction (PX): 0.348568 s
Period in Z direction (PZ): 0.426907 s
Base dimension along X direction, dx: 15 m
Base dimension along X direction, dz: 10 m
Height of the building, h: 15 m
Approximate natural time period of the structure:
Along X direction,
As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, approximate

natural time period of the structure:

Along Z direction,
Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X
and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,
design acceleration coefficient: Along X direction:
For hard soil and for range 0 s < Ta < 0.4 s (SA/g) = 2.5

Along Z direction:
For hard soil and for range 0.4 s < Ta < 4 s

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Along X direction:

Along Z direction:
Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As
per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.10 Solution of Problem Statement 5.4: DM

Parameter

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 1
Damping ratio (DM): 0.02 (2%)
Height of the building (h): 12 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period: As per

Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the approximate
fundamental natural time period Ta of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design
acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for Tax /Taz 0.4 s <
T < 4.00 s Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

As per Table 3 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002, for 2% damping

multiplying factor will be 1.4.

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

Along X direction,

Along Z direction,

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:
Calculation for the design seismic acceleration spectral value

Av:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.11 Solution of Problem Statement 5.5: DF

Parameter

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): 1, RC MRF building
Multiplying factor for SA (DF): 1.4
Base dimension, dx × dz : 5 m × 5 m Height of the
building: 12 m
Calculation of approximate natural time period in X
and Z directions: As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X

and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,
acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0.4 s <

Ta < 4 s

DF = multiplying factor for SA is 1.4

Design acceleration coefficient = 2.0679 × 1.4 = 2.895193

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in

X and Z directions: As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016:

Calculation of design vertical seismic coefficient: As

per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, for vertical motion:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.12 Solution of Problem Statement 6.1:

Buildings with Fundamental Time Period
Greater Than 4 s

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
 Type of structure (ST): 5
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Base dimension, dx × dz: 3 m × 5 m Height of the
building : 80 m

Calculation of approximate natural time period:

As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the
approximate fundamental natural time period Ta of the

structure:
Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:
As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design
acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for Tax > 4.00 s
Along X direction,

SA/gx = 0.25

Along Z direction,

For hard soil and for 0.40 s < Taz < 4.00 s

Calculation of horizontal seismic coefficient:

Along X direction,
Along Z direction,

Calculation for the design seismic acceleration

spectral value Av:

Calculation for minimum design lateral force:

As per Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, percentage of
minimum design horizontal lateral force for Zone III is 1.1%,
that is, 0.011
Since the value of percentage of minimum design lateral
force is greater than and , that is,
we will consider the greater value of horizontal acceleration
coefficient (0.011) for calculating the base shear (VB).
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation
can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.13 Solution of Problem Statement 7.1:

Consideration of Vertical Motion in Seismic
Analysis

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
 Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 1
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Calculation for the design seismic acceleration
spectral value Av: As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, the value of SA/g is fixed to 2.5 for the calculation

of Av:

Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation

can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.14 Solution of Problem Statement 8.1:

Consideration of Minimum Base Shear Criteria

Seismic parameter: Zone (Z): 0.16

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1
Soil type (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): 5
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Base dimension, dx × dz: 3 m × 3 m Height of the
building: 50 m
Calculation of approximate natural time period: As per
Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the approximate
fundamental natural time period Ta of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient:

As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, the design
acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for
Along X direction,

Along Z direction,
For hard soil and for

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient:

Along X direction,

Along Z direction,
Calculation for minimum design lateral force:
As per Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, percentage of
minimum design horizontal lateral force for Zone III is 1.1%,
that is, 0.011.
Since the value of percentage of minimum design lateral
force is greater than and , that is,
we will consider the greater value of horizontal acceleration
coefficient (0.011) for calculating the base shear (VB).
Seismic weight calculation and design base shear calculation
can be done using the process explained in Solution of
Problem Statement 4.1.

A.15 Solution of Problem Statement 9.1:

Seismic Analysis of Structures Having Structural
Components Below the Ground Level

Zone: 0.16
Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Rock and soil site factor (SS): 1
Type of structure (ST): RC MRF building
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Ground level (GL): 6
Height of building (HT): 6
Solution:
Calculation of approximate natural time period in X
and Z axes: As per Clause 7.6.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,
approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient along X

and Z axes: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
design acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0
s < Ta < 0.4 s, (SA/g) = 2.5

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in

X and Z axes: Above ground level,

Below ground level,

As per Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:

Calculation of unreduced design vertical seismic

coefficient: Above ground level,
As per Clause 6.4.6 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016, for vertical
motion:
Below ground level, As per Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, for vertical motion:

Calculation of total seismic weight:

10 kN/m loading is applied in all beams
As per Clause 6.4.5 of IS 1893(Part 1):2016:

Above ground level,

Total seismic weight of the structure above ground level, Ws
= UDL × total length of the beam × number of floors above

ground level
Below ground level,
Total seismic weight of the structure below ground level, Wu
= UDL × total length of the beam × number of floors below

ground level
Calculation of base shear along X and Z axes: As per
Clause 7.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, design base shear:

Above ground level,

Below ground level,

Calculation of unreduced design base shear along Y
axis: As per Clause 7.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Above ground level,

Below ground level,

Calculation of minimum design lateral force along

both X and Z axes: As per Clause 7.2.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016:

VBmin = ρ% × W

From Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, ρ for Zone III is 1.1%.

Above ground level,

Below ground level,

Design base shear in X and Z directions: Above

ground level,
Since VBmin < VBsx; VBmin < VBsz
Design base shear along X direction = VBsx

Design base shear along Z direction = VBsz

Below ground level,

Since VBminu < VBux; VBminu < VBuz

Design base shear along X direction = VBux

Design base shear along Z direction = VBuz

Seismic weight at each floor:

As per Clause 7.6.3a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016:
Total seismic weight of the structure above ground level, Wi,

Wj = UDL × total length of the beam

Calculation of design lateral force at floor level:

Meanings of Qi, Qj, Wi, Wj, hi, hi, VBs, VBu have already been
explained in Chapter 9. Using Equation (9.1) table of design
lateral force along three orthogonal directions

Using Equation (9.2) table of design lateral force along three

orthogonal directions
A.16 Solution of Problem Statement 10.1:
Analysis of Structure Considering Torsional
Provision

Seismic parameter: Zone, Z = 0.36

Response reduction factor (RF): 3
Importance factor (I): 1.2
Soil type: hard soil
Type of structure (ST): all other buildings
Damping ratio (DM): 0.05
Height of the building: 15 m
Base dimension, d: 15 m × 15 m
Calculation of approximate natural time period in X
and Z directions: As per Clause 7.6.2c of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016, approximate natural time period of the structure:

Calculation of design acceleration coefficient in X and

Z directions: As per Clause 6.4.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016,
design acceleration coefficient: For hard soil and for range 0
s < Ta < 0.4 s (SA/g) = 2.5

Calculation of design horizontal seismic coefficient in

X and Z directions: As per Clause 6.4.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016:
Calculation of total seismic weight:
Self-weight of the structure,

Density of concrete 25 kN/m3

Dimension of beam 0.3 m × 0.3 m
Total weight of the beam = density × sectional dimension of
the beam × number of floor × length of the beam at one

floor
Dimension of column 0.3 m × 0.3 m

Total weight of the column = density × sectional dimension

of the column × number of columns at each floor × length of

the column × number of floor

Total floor weight of the structure = area of each floor × load

intensity × number of floor

Total seismic weight of the structure, W = (560.25 + 337.5 +
990) kN

= 1887.75 kN

Calculation of base shear along X and Z axes: As per

Clause 7.6 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design base shear:
Calculation of minimum design lateral force along
both X and Z axes: As per Clause 7.2.2 of IS 1893 (Part
1):2016:

VBmin = ρ% × W

From Table 7 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, ρ for Zone V is 2.4%.

Design base shear in X and Z directions: Since, VBmin

< VBx ; VBmin < VBz

Design base shear in X direction = VBx

Design base shear in Z direction = VBz

Seismic weight at each floor:

As per Clause 7.4.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, total seismic
weight at first and second floor,
Calculation of torsion moment:

MYi = Qi × edi

MYi = torsion moment at floor i Qi = design lateral force at

floor i edi = design eccentricity at floor i Table of design
lateral force using equation given in Clause 7.6.3 of IS 1893
(Part 1):2016

where
QXi = design lateral force in X direction QZi = design lateral
force in Z direction Calculation of design eccentricity:
CM = centre of mass
CR = centre of rigidity or centre of stiffness
esi = static eccentricity of floor i, distance between centre of
mass and centre of resistance = CM-CR
bi = floor plan dimension of floor i, perpendicular to the
direction of force * Note : Natural torsion is automatically
included in analysis.

That is why in the first case a twisting moment with modified

eccentricity of (DEC-1) = (1.5-1) = 0.5 and in the second
case a twisting moment with modified eccentricity of (DEC-1)
= (1-1) = 0 will act at CM. So, the value of design
eccentricity in the first case will be (0.5esi + 0.05bi) and in
the second case will be (-0.05bi).

Table of torsional moment at floor level

Torsion moment (Qi × edi) (kN m)

Floor
For load in X direction
level

MYi (kN m) when edi = MYi (kN m) when edi =

h (m)
(0.5esi + 0.05bi) -0.05bi

211.0405943 × 1.124 = 211.0405943 × (-0.75) =

15
237.20962804444 -158.280445759191
10 103.0035245 × 1.057 = 103.0035245 × (-0.75) =
108.874725421371 -77.2526433926475

25.75088113 × 0.94 = 25.75088113 × (-0.75) =

5
24.2058282630295 -19.3131608481619

Torsion moment (Qi × edi) (kN m)

Floor
For load in Z direction
level

MYi (kN m) when edi = MYi (kN m) when edi =

h (m)
(0.5esi + 0.05bi) -0.05bi

211.0405943 × 0.888 = 211.0405943 × (-0.75) =

15
187.404047778882 -158.280445759191

103.0035245 × 0.8915 = 103.0035245 × (-0.75) =

10
91.8276421127269 -77.2526433926475

25.75088113 × 0.9495 = 25.75088113 × (-0.75) =

5
24.4504616337729 -19.3131608481619

A.17 Solution of Problem Statement 12.4:

Verification Example of General Response
Spectrum Analysis

Zone V, Zone factor: 0.36

Importance factor: 1
Building type: All other building, structure type is 5
Response reduction factor: 5
Direction factor: (((Z × I)/(2 × R)) = ((0.36×1)/(2×5))) =
0.036
Soil type: Hard soil
Mode shape obtained from output:
Time period and frequency of each mode obtained from the
output:

Mode number Frequency (cps) Time period (s)

1 1.635 0.61163
2 1.795 0.55702
3 2.288 0.43713
4 4.662 0.21448
5 6.094 0.16409
6 6.167 0.16214
7 7.373 0.13564
8 9.059 0.11038
9 40.697 0.02457
10 40.861 0.02447
11 60.967 0.0164

Calculation of SA / g and Ak, along X direction: As per

Clause 6.4.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 design acceleration
coefficient (SA/g) of the structure for hard type of soil:

Design horizontal acceleration spectrum value, Ak =

direction factor × (SA/g)
Each node has 6 degree of freedom Total number of joints =
12
Total number of restrained joints = 4
Total number of joints that are not restrained = 8
Total number of degree of freedom = 12 × 6 = 72
Total number of restrained degree of freedom = 4 × 6 = 24
Total number of degree of freedom that are not restrained =
8 × 6 = 48
Calculation of modal mass multiplied by g

(acceleration due to gravity):

MK = modal mass of kth mode Φik = mode shape
coefficient along i degree of freedom for kth mode Wi =
applied load at ith degree of freedom Applied Wx-
translational, Wz-translational, Wy-translational at nodes
1–8 = 10 kN

For Mode 1,
Along X direction,

MX1 = modal mass in X direction n = total number of

nodes(joints) that are not restrained Wxn = load applied
at nth node in X translational direction Wx1, Wx2, …,
Wx8 = 10 kN
Xn = mode Shape coefficient at nth node in X
translation direction Wi = applied load at ith degree of
freedom ϕi1 = for Mode 1, mode shape coefficient at ith
degree of freedom

Along Y direction,
 MY1 = modal mass in Y direction Wyn = load applied at
nth node in Y translational direction Wy1, Wy2, …, Wy8
= 10 kN
Yn = mode shape coefficient at nth node in Y translation
direction

Along Z direction,

MZ1 = modal mass in Z direction Wzn = load applied at

nth node in Z translational direction Wz1, Wz2, …, Wz8
= 10 kN
Zn = mode shape coefficient at nth node in Z translation
direction

Modal mass (multiplied by g) for all considered mode

at X, Y and Z translational directions:
Calculation of mode participating factor:

Pk = mode participation factor of kth mode For Mode 1,

Along X direction,

PX1 = mode participation factor in X direction Modal mass

along Y direction,
PY1 = mode participation factor in X direction Modal mass
along Z direction,
PZ1 = mode participation factor in X direction Mode
participation factor for all considered mode at X, Y and Z
translational directions

Calculation of Modal Mass and Mode Participation

factor for all modes in X, Y and Z direction
Mass participation factor in X, Z and Y directions: Total
applied load in X direction = 80 kN
Total applied load in Z direction = 80 kN
Total applied load in Y direction = 80 kN
Mass participation factor in % = (Modal mass/Total applied
load) × 100%

For Mode 1, mass participation in % in X direction =

(53.092/80) × 100% = 66.365 × %
Calculation of design lateral force at each floor at
each mode: Design lateral force at each floor in each mode:
peak lateral force ϕik at floor i in mode k is given by
where
AK = design horizontal acceleration spectrum value using
natural period of oscillation TK of mode k obtained from
dynamic analysis.
For Mode 1 at Node 1 design lateral force in X direction = Ak
× mode shape coefficient (X1) × mode participation factor
(PX1) × Wx1

Design lateral force for each mode

Storey shear force at floor level for each mode, For Mode 1 in
X direction, storey shear at second floor = (0.239 + 0.293 +
0.745 + 0.745) = 2.076 kN
Storey shear at first floor = (0.134 + 0.134 + 0.392 + 0.392)
= 1.052 kN
Storey shear along X direction for each considered mode

Base shear for each mode in X direction

For Mode 1 base shear = (2.075 + 1.052) kN = 3.127 kN
Base shear for each considered mode

Base shear along X direction after SRSS direction,

Base shear obtained by equivalent static method, VBx =
0.0854 × 80 kN = 6.832 kN

As, VBx>Vbx

As per Clause 7.7.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 multiplying

factor = (VBx / Vbx) = (6.832 / 3.498) = 1.9526
Along Z direction,
The above calculations can be repeated for computation of
response spectrum base shear.
Base shear obtained from response spectrum analysis after
SRSS combination, Vbz = 4.619 kN

Base shear obtained by equivalent static method, VBz =

0.0854 × 80 kN = 6.832 kN
As, VBz>Vbz

As per Clause 7.7.2a of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 multiplying

factor = (VBz / Vbz) = (6.832 / 4.619) = 1.479

Along Y direction,
The calculations performed to find out base shear in X
direction can be repeated Multiplying factor as per Clause
7.7.2b of IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 = maximum of ((VBx/Vbx),
(VBz/Vbz)) = (1.9526,1.479) = 1.9526
Bibliography

Agarwal, P. and M. Shrikhande 2006, Earthquake Resistant

Design of Structures, Prentice Hall, New Delhi.

Aki, K. 1988, ‘Local site effects on strong ground motion’,

Proceedings of the Earthquake Engineering and Soil
Dynamics II – Recent Advances in Ground Motion
Evaluation, ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication No.
20, Mexico, pp. 103–55.

American Concrete Institute 1971, Building Code

Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-71), ACI
Standard, pp. 318–71.

Amrhein, J.E. 1972, Reinforced Masonry Engineering

Handbook, Masonry Institute of America, Los Angeles,
CA.

Anderson, J.C. 2001, ‘Dynamic response of structures’, In F.

Naeim (Ed.), The Seismic Design Handbook, 2nd ed.,
Kluwer Academic Publisher, The Netherlands.

Arias, A. 1970, ‘A measure of earthquake intensity’, In R.J.

Hansen (Ed.), Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants,
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 438–69.

Armstrong, I.E. 1972, ‘Capacity design of reinforced

concrete frames for ductile earthquake performance’,
Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake
Engineering, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 64–71.
Arnold, C. 1991, ‘The seismic response of nonstructural
elements in building’, Bulletin of the New Zealand
National Society for Earthquake Engineering, vol. 24, no.
4, pp. 167–172.

Arnold, C. 1998, ‘Architectural aspects of seismic resistant

design’, 11th V World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering.

Bath, M. 1966, ‘Earthquake energy and magnitude’, Physics

and Chemistry of the Earth, L.H. Press, Ahren, India, pp.
115–65.

Benero, V.V., J.E. Anderson, H. Krawinkler, E. Miranda et al.

1991, ‘Design guidelines or ductility and drift limits’,
Report No. UCB/EERC-91/15, Earthquake Engineering
Research Centre, University of California.

Berg, G.V. 1989, Elements of Structural Dynamics, Prentice

Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 268 pp.

Blume, J.A. 1970, ‘The motion and damping of buildings

relative to seismic response spectra’, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, vol. 60, no. l, pp. 231–
59.

Bolt, B.A. 1970, ‘Chap. 2, Causes of earthquakes’, In R.L.

Wiegel (Ed.), Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Bolt, B.A. 1988, Earthquakes, W.H. Freeman and Company,

New York, 282 pp.

Bolt, B.A. 1989, ‘The nature of earthquake ground motion’,

In F. Naeim (Ed.), The Seismic Design Handbook, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Booth, E. 1994, Concrete Structures in Earthquake Regions,
Longman Scientific and Technical, Longman Group UK
Limited.

Bruce, A.B. 2004, Earthquakes, 5th ed., W.H. Freeman and

Company, New York.

BSSC 1994A, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the

Development of Seismic Regulations for New Buildings,
Part I: Provisions, Building Seismic Safety Council,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington,
DC.

BSSC 1994B, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the

Development of Seismic Regulations for Wind Buildings,
Part 11: Complimentary, Building Seismic Safety
Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Washington, DC.

Buckle, I.G. 2000, ‘Passive control of structures for seismic

loads’, 12th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, New Zealand.

Casagrande, A. 1976, ‘Liquefaction and cyclic mobility of

sands: a critical review’, Harvard Soil Mechanics Series,
vol. 88, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Castro, G. 1991, ‘On the behaviour of soils during

earthquakes-liquefaction’, Proceedings of the NSF/EPRI
Workshop on Dynamic Soil Properties and Site
Characterization, EPRI NP-7337, vol. 2, Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 1–36.

Castro, G. and S.J. Poijlos 1977, ‘Factors affecting

liquefaction and cyclic mobility’, Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, vol. 106, no.
GT6, pp. 501–6.
Chopra, A.K. 1995, Dynamics of Structures, Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 729 pp.

Chopra, A.K. 2005, Earthquake Dynamics of Structures: A

Primer, 2nd ed., Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute, NICEE, IIT Kanpur, pp. 128.

Chopra, A.K. 2007, Dynamics of Structures: Theory and

Applications to Earthquake Engineering, 3rd ed.,
Pearson Education Publishing, New York, pp. 912.

Chopra, A.K., D.P. Clough, and R. W. Clough 1973,

‘Earthquake resistance of buildings with a “soft” first
storey’, Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, India, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 347–55.

Chowdhury, R.N. 1978. Slope Analysis, Elsevier, New York,

423 pp.

Christian, J.T., J.M. Roesset, and C.S. Desai 1977, ‘Two- and
three-dimensional dynamic analyses’, In C.S. Desai and
J.T. Christian (Eds.), Numerical Methods in Geotechnical
Engineering, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, pp.
683–718.

Clough, R.W. 1970, ‘Chap. 12, Earthquake response of

structures’, In R.L. Wiegel (Ed.), Earthquake Engineering,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 307–34.

Clough, R.W. and J. Penzien 1975, Dynamics of Structures,

McGraw-Hill, New York, 634 pp.

Colaco, J.P. 1971, ‘Preliminary design of shear walls for tall

buildings’, ACI Journal, vol. 5, pp. 156–176.

Craig, R.R. Jr. 1990, Structural Dynamics, John Wiley, New

York, 1981.
DeMets et al. 2002–03, ‘Ductile detailing of reinforced
concrete structures subjected to seismic forces’, Current
Plate Motions, vol. 101, Edition 1.2, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi, pp. 425–78, 1990.13920.

DEQ 2000, A Report on Chamoli Earthquake of March 29,

1999, Department of Earthquake Engineering,
University of Roorkee, Roorkee.

Dutta, T.K. 2010, Seismic Analysis of Structures, John Wiley

& Sons, 454 pp.

EERI 2002, ‘Bhuj, India Earthquake of January 26, 2001:

reconnaissance report’, Earthquake Spectra,
Supplement to vol. 18, pp. 216–224.

Emilio, R., Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures,

Pentech Press, London.

Endo, T. et al. 1984, ‘Practices of seismic retrofit of existing

concrete structures in Japan’, Eighth World Conference
on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA.

FEMA-306, ‘Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and

masonry wall buildings’, ATC-43 Project, Applied
Technology Council, California, CA.

Fintel, M. 1985, ‘Multi-storey structures (ch. 10) by M. Fintel,

Earthquake resistant structures (ch. 12), by Aranaldo T.
Derecho and Mark Fintel’, Handbook of Concrete
Engineering, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

Florin, V.A. and P.L. Ivanov 1961, ‘Liquefaction of saturated

sand soil’, Proceedings of the Fifth International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Paris.
Gioncu, V. and P.M. Mazzolani 2002, Ductility of Seismic
Resistant Steel Structures, Spon Press, New York.

Goel, R.K., ‘Performance of buildings during the January 26,

2001’, Bhuj Earthquake, Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute, Oakland, CA.

Gould, P.L. 1965, ‘Interaction of shear wall-frame system in

multistorey buildings ’, Journal of MCI, vol. 62, no. 1, pp.
45–70.

Goyal, A., R. Sinha, M. Chaudhari, and K. Jaiswal 2004,

‘Performance of reinforced concrete buildings in
Ahmedabad during Bhuj earthquake January 26, 2001’,
Workshop on Recent Earthquakes of Chamoli and Bhuj,
vol. I, Roorkee, India.

GSI 1992, Uttarkashi Earthquake, October 20, 1991,

Geological Survey of India, Special Publication No. 30.

GSI 1995, Uttarkashi Earthquake, Geological Survey of India.

Gutenberg, B. and C.F. Richter 1945, Seismicity of Earth and

Related Phenomenon, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, NJ.

Guevara, L. T. and L.E. Garcia 2005, ‘The captive and short

column effect earthquake’, Spectra, vol. 21, no. l, pp.
141–60.

Housner, G.W. 1947, ‘Characteristics of strong motion

earthquakes’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 19–31.

Housner, G.W. 1952, ‘Spectrum intensities of strong motion

earthquakes’, Proceedings of the Symposium of
Earthquake and Blast Effects on Structures, Earthquake
 Engineering Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 21–
36.

IS-456 2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete-Code of

Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-1893 2016, Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake

Resistant Design of Structures, Part 1, BIS, New Delhi.

IS-1905 1985, Code of Practice for Structural Use of

Unreinforced Masonry, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.

IS-3935 1993, Repair and Seismic Strengthening of

Buildings-Guidelines, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.

IS-4326 1993, Earthquake Resistant Design and

Construction of Buildings Code of Practice, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-13827 1993, Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving

Earthquake Resistance of Earthen Buildings, BIS, New
Delhi.

IS-13828 1993, Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving

Earthquake Resistance of Low Strength Masonry
Buildings, New Delhi.

IS-13920 2016, Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete

Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces-Code of Practice,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

IS-13935 1993, Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete

Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
Kramer, S.L. 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering,
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, NJ.

Kramer, S.L. 2003, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering,

Pentice-Hall, International Series, New Jersey, NJ.

Krawinkler, H. and B. Alavi 1998, ‘Development of improved

design procedures for near-fault ground motions’,
SMIP98, Seminar on Utilization of Strong Motion Data,
Oakland, CA.

Mallick, D.V. and R.J. Severn 1968, ‘Dynamic characteristics

of infilled frames’, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, Mexico, vol. 39, pp. 261–87.

Martin, G.R., W.D.L. Finn, and H.B. Seed 1975,

‘Fundamentals of liquefaction under cyclic loading’,
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE,
vol. WI, no. GTS, pp. 423–38.

Matthiesen, J. 1982, ‘Recommendations concerning seismic

design of zonation’, Critical Aspects of Earthquake
Ground Motion and Building Damage Potential, ATC 10-
1, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, pp.
213–46.

Mcguire, R.K. 1977, ‘Seismic design spectra and mapping

procedures using hazard analysis based directly on
oscillator response’, Journal of Earthquake Engineering
and Structural Dynamics, vol. 5, pp. 211–34.

Mcguire, R.K. 1978, ‘Seismic ground motion parameter

relations’, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering
Division, ASCE, vol. 104, no. GT4, pp. 481–90.

Medhekar, M.S. and S.K. Jain 1993, ‘Seismic behaviour

design and detailing of RC shear walls, Part 1: Behaviour
 and strength’, Indian Concrete Journal, vol. 67, no. 7, pp.
311–8.

Murty, C.V.R and A.W. Charleson 2010, Earthquake Design

Concepts, NICEE, India, pp. 684–37.

NEHRP 1997, ‘Recommended provisions for seismic

regulation for new buildings and other structures’,
Technical Report, Building Safety Council for Federal
Emergency: Management Agency, Washington, DC.

Richter, C.E. 1935, ‘An instrumental earthquake magnitude

scale’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,
vol. 25, pp. 1–32.

Richter, C.F. 1958, Elementary Seismology, Freeman, San

Francisco, CA.

Richart, F.E., J.R. Hall, and R.O. Woods 1970, Vibrations of

Soils and Foundations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ.

Riddell, R. and J.E.D.L. Llera 1996, ‘Seismic analysis and

design: current practice and future trends’, 11th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Mexico.

Robinson, W.H. 1996, ‘Latest advances in seismic isolation’,

11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Acapulco, Mexico.

Rodriguez, M. and R. Park 1991, ‘Repair and strengthening

of reinforced concrete building for seismic resistance’,
Earthquake Spectra, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 138–142.

Salse, E.A.B. and M. Fintel 1973, ‘Strength, stiffness and

ductility properties of slender shear walls’, Proceedings
 of the 51th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, vol. 1, Rome, pp. 919–28.

Satake, K. 2002, In Lee et al. (Eds.), Tsunamis, International

Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology –
Part B, ELSEVIER Journal, Published Date: 12th
September 2002, pp. 437–51.

Savarensky, Y.F. and D.P. Klrnos 1955, Elements of

Seismology and Seismometry, State Press of Technical-
Theoretical Literature, Moscow, 543 pp.

Seed, H.B. and I.M. Idriss 1982, Ground Motions and Soil
Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, CA, 134 pp.

Shrikhande, M., J.D. Das, M.K. Bansal, A. Kumar, S. Basu,

and B. Chandra 2001, ‘Strong motion characteristics of
Uttarkashi earthquake of October 20, 1991 and its
engineering significance’, In O.P. Varma (Ed.), Research
Highlights in Earth System-Science: Seismicity, vol. 2,
Indian Geological Congress, Roorkee, India, pp. 337–42.

Shepherd, R. 1967, ‘Determination of seismic design loads

in a framed structure’, New Zealand Engineering, vol.
22, no. 2, pp. 56–61.

Silva, W.J. 1988, Soil Response to Earthquake Ground

Motion, EPRI Report NP-5747, Electric Power Research
Institute, Palo Alto, CA.

Singhal, A. 1971, ‘Elastic earthquake resistance of multi-

storey buildings’, The Structural Engineer, vol. 49, no. 9,
pp. 397–412.

Singhal, A., P.R. Bose, A. Bose, and V. Prakash 2001,

‘Destruction of multistoreyed buildings in Kutch
 earthquake of January 26, 2001’, Workshop on Recent
Earthquakes of Chamoli and Bhuj, vol. II, Roorkee, India.

Smith, S.W. 1976, ‘Determination of maximum earthquake

magnitude’, Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 3, no. 6,
pp. 351–4.

SP-34 1987, Handbook on Concrete Reinforcement and

Detailing, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

SP-20 (S&T) 1991, Handbook on Masonry Design and

Construction, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

Stafford-Smith, B. 1996, ‘Behaviour of square infilled

frames’, Journal of the Structural Division, Proceedings
of ASCE, Mexico, vol. 91, no. ST, pp. 381–403.

Sugano, S. 1981, ‘Seismic strengthening of existing

reinforced concrete buildings in Japan’, Bulletin of the
New Zealand National Society for Earthquake
Engineering, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 232–240.

Surtees, J.O. and A.P. Mann 1970, ‘End plate connections in

plastically designed structures’, Conference on Joints in
Structures, Institution of Structural Engineers and the
University of Sheffield.

Tally, N. 2001, Design of Reinforced Masonry Structures,

McGraw-Hill, New York.

Taranath, S.B. 2005, Wind and Earthquake Resistant

Buildings, Marcel Dekker, Los Angeles, CA, 731 pp.

Teran, A. and J. Ruiz 1992, ‘Reinforced concrete jacketing of

existing structures’, 10th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain.
Teal, E.J. 1968, ‘Structural steel seismic frames-drift ductility
requirements’, Proceedings of the 37th Annual
Convention Structural Engineers Association of
California, Mexico.

Thakkar, S.K., R.N. Dubey, and P. Agarwal 1996, ‘Damages

and lessons learnt from recent Indian earthquakes’,
Symposium on Earthquake Effects on Structures, Plant
and Machinery, New Delhi.

Thomson, W.T. 1988, Theory of Vibration, 3rd ed., CBS

Publishers, New Delhi.

Wiegel, R.L., Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Index

A
Absolute sum method (ABS), 12-3, 12-5
Acceleration, 12-9
peak ground acceleration (PGA), 2-5–2-6
spectral acceleration coefficient, 4-6
spectrum, 2-9, 7-1–7-4
zero period acceleration (ZPA), 2-5–2-6
Accidental eccentricity, 12-6
Accidental torsion, 4-7, 10-1
Assam earthquake of 1897, 2-2

B
Base
dimensions, 4-6
shear, 5-4, 5-7, 5-8, 12-10
BASE, 3-7
Buildings
base shear with RC Structural wall, A-5–A-7
DF parameter, A-15
DM parameter, A-13–A-15
DX DZ parameter, A-10–A-12
earthquake-resistant, 2-1–2-3
elevation, 5-2, 5-6
force flow path in, 3-3–3-4
fundamental time period greater than 4 s, 6-1–6-6, A-16–
A-17
height, 4-6
HT parameter, A-12
 PX and PZ parameter, A-12–A-13
RC MRF, 4-8–4-16, A-1–A-4
RC-steel composite MRF, 4-17–4-18, A-4
with RC structural walls, 4-20–4-27
steel MRF, 4-18–4-20, A-5
time period, A-7–A-9

C
Centre of mass (CM), 10-1, 12-3
Centres of resistance (CR), 10-1
Closely spaced method (CSM), 12-3, 12-5
Complete quadratic combination (CQC), 12-3, 12-4
CUT OFF FREQUENCY, 12-13–12-15
CUT OFF MODE SHAPE, 12-13–12-15

D
Damping
ratio, 4-5–4-6, 12-9
type, 12-5–12-6
Depth of foundation, 4-6
Design basis earthquake (DBE), 2-6–2-9
Design eccentricity, 10-2, 12-10
Design horizontal acceleration spectrum, 2-9
Design seismic acceleration spectral value, 7-1–7-2
DIAPHRAGM, 3-7
Diaphragm modelling, 3-6
Dip slip, 1-5–1-6
Direction factor, 12-6
Ductility, earthquake-resistant building, 2-2
Duration of primary tremor, 1-7.
See also Earthquakes
Dynamic analysis
commands for, 12-13–12-52
IS 1893 (Part I):2016
 seismic parameter for response spectrum analysis, 12-4–
12-12
response spectrum, 12-2–12-4
Dynamic eccentricity, 12-7
Dynamic weight, 12-9

E
Earth and interiors, 1-3–1-4
Earthquakes. See also Specific earthquakes effects, 1-1
energy, 1-8
engineering problems and prospects, 1-2–1-3
faults, 1-5
force flow path in buildings, 3-3–3-4
measurement parameters, 1-8–1-9
observation, 1-10
predictions, 1-3
seismology, 1-3–1-12
Earthquake-disaster mitigation, 1-2
Earthquake-resistant building, 2-1–2-3
Eccentricities, 10-2
accidental, 12-6
design, 12-10
dynamic, 12-7
Epicentral distance, 1-9
Equivalent static method, 2-8–2-9
base shear determination, 4-2–4-3
base shear vertical distribution, 4-4
buildings with RC structural walls, 4-20–4-27
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016 seismic parameter, 4-4–4-8
minimum design earthquake horizontal lateral force, 4-3–
4-4
RC MRF building, 4-8–4-16
RC–steel composite MRF building, 4-17–4-18
seismic load cases, parameters used in, 4-7–4-8
steel MRF building, 4-18–4-20
 structure type, 4-8–4-28
underground structure, 4-4
vertical earthquake effects, design, 4-3

I-2F
Faults and dip slip, 1-5–1-6
Focal depth, 1-9
Focal region, 1-9
Foundation, depth of, 4-6

G
Geographic delineation, 2-4
Gorkha earthquake of 2015, 2-1
Graphical User Interface (GUI), 11-4
Gravity load, 3-3
Ground level, 4-6, 9-2

H
Hazard assessment, 2-2
HEIGHT, 3-7
Height of building, 4-6

I
Importance factor, 4-5
Individual modal response, 12-15–12-17
Inertia forces, 3-2, 3-3
Intensity, 1-12
International Building Code 2000 (USA), 2-6
Inter-plate earthquakes, 1-5
Inter-plate interactions, 1-4
Interpolation type, 12-5
Inherent torsion, 4-7
IS 1893 (Part 1):2016
 design philosophy
design horizontal acceleration spectrum, 2-9
dynamic analysis, 2-8
equivalent static method, 2-8–2-9
limit state design (LSD) method, 2-8
response reduction factor, 2-8
response spectrum analysis (RSA), 2-9
response spectrum load case, 2-9
response spectrum method, 2-9
single degree of freedom (DOF) (SDOF) systems, 2-9
structural non-linearity, 2-8
history, 2-2–2-4

K
Koyna earthquake of 1967, 2-4

L
Lateral force–resisting system, 3-1, 12-7
Lateral load–resisting system, 3-1
Lateral load transfer mechanism, 3-5–3-6
Lateral seismic forces, 10-1
Lateral seismic loads, 12-2–12-3
Latur earthquake of 1993, 2-4
Limit state design (LSD) method, 2-8
Linear interpolation, 9-1
Load paths, 3-2–3-3
in structures, 3-5
Load transfer, 3-2–3-3

M
Magnitude, 1-10–1-12
Mass participation factor, 12-9
Mass reference load, 5-3
MASTER, 3-7
Maximum considered earthquake (MCE), 2-6–2-9
Measuring instruments, 1-9–1-10
Medvedev–Sponheuer–Karnik (MSK) scale, 1-12
Mercalli intensity scale, 1-12
Minimum base shear criteria, 8-1–8-4, A-17–A-18
Missing mass, 12-8
Missing weight, 12-9
Modal base action, 12-9–12-10
Modal weight, 12-9
Modelling aspects
diaphragm modelling, 3-6
earthquake force flow path in buildings, 3-3–3-4
general format, 3-7–3-8
load paths, 3-2–3-3
STAAD.Pro, load-path consideration in, 3-4–3-6
Mode select, 12-17–12-19
Mode shape, 12-1, 12-10–12-12
Modified Mercalli (MM) scale, 2-4
Multiplying factor for accidental torsion moment, 4-7
for natural torsion moment, 4-7
for spectrum analysis, 4-6
N
Natural torsion, 4-7, 10-1
O
Oceanic waves, 1-8

P
Peak additional torsion, 12-10
Peak ground acceleration (PGA), 2-5–2-6
Period
in X direction, 4-6
in Z direction, 4-6
Plate tectonics, 1-4–1-6
Polarized transverse waves, 1-8
Q
Quetta earthquake of 1935, 2-2

R
Rayleigh waves, 1-8
Reinforced concrete (RC) bare moment resisting frame
(MRF) buildings, 4-5, 4-8–4-16
Response reduction factor, 2-8, 4-5
Response spectrum analysis (RSA), 2-9, 4-1, 12-2–12-4
Response spectrum load cases, 2-9, 12-8
Richter magnitude scale, 1-12
Rigid diaphragm, 11-1
Rock and soil site factor, 4-5

S
Scale, 12-7–12-8
Sea-floor spreading, 1-4
Seismic analysis
structural components below the ground level, A-19–A-22
vertical motion in, A-17
Seismic coefficient, 2-4
Seismic design codes, 1-2, 2-1–2-2
Seismic inertia forces, 3-4
Seismic parameters, 5-3
DF parameter, 5-15–5-18
DM parameter, 5-12–5-15
DX and DZ parameters, 5-1–5-4
HT parameter, 5-4–5-8
PX and PZ parameter, 5-8–5-12
Seismic waves, 1-1, 1-6–1-8
Seismic zone
factor, 2-4
map, 2-4–2-5
Seismograph, 1-9–1-11
Seismology
earth and its interiors, 1-3–1-4
earthquake measurement parameters, 1-8–1-9
intensity, 1-12
magnitude, 1-10–1-12
measuring instruments, 1-9–1-10
plate tectonics, 1-4–1-6
seismic waves, 1-6–1-8
Seismoscopes, 1-10
SET Commands, 12-19–12-52
Signed response spectrum results options, 12-7
Single degree of freedom (DOF) (SDOF) systems, 2-9
Site-specific hazard assessment, 2-4
Soft storey, 11-1–11-6
Spectral acceleration coefficient, 4-6
Spectrum analysis, A-25–A-37
Spectrum type, 12-5
Square root of summation of squares (SRSS), 12-3, 12-4
STAAD.Pro
CE input editor file, 11-5
load-path consideration in, 3-4–3-6
Static seismic parameter under load definition, 5-11
Stiffness, earthquake-resistant building, 2-2
Storey
soft storey, 11-1–11-6
stiffness, 11-2, 11-4
Strength, earthquake-resistant building, 2-2
Structural configuration, earthquake-resistant building, 2-1
Structural non-linearity, 2-8
Structures
considering torsional provision, 10-1–10-15
structural components below the ground level, 9-1–9-7
torsional provision, A-22–A-25
type of, 4-5
underground structure analysis, 9-2–9-7
Subsoil class, 12-5
Surface waves, 1-8

T
Tectonic plates, 1-4–1-5
Time history method, 12-1
Torsion
accidental torsion, 4-7, 10-1
natural torsion, 4-7, 10-1
parameter, 12-6
peak additional torsion, 12-10
structure considering torsional provision, 10-1–10-15
Tremor, primary, 1-7

V
Vertical motion, acceleration spectrum, 7-1–7-4

W
Wave’s propagation velocities, 1-6

X
XRANGE, 3-7

Y
YRANGE, 3-7

Z
Zero period acceleration (ZPA), 2-5–2-6
Zone factor, 4-4
ZRANGE, 3-7