Seismic Study of Diagrid Structure with Brace Frame Structure of Different Arrangement

Abstract

In the current situation, population and industrialization are growing rapidly over time. Architects and engineers want to focus on the growth and vertical development of tall buildings and skyscrapers. However, increasing the height of the building is not easy. Several parameters play an important role in construction, including lateral loads. (Examples of wind and seismic loads). The next task of the designer is to design a type of building that will be more sustainable. In this paper study about 30m X 30m plan of diagrid structure and X-brace frame structure of different arrangement. Seismic zone III, soil type II, analysis done by the response spectrum method on ETAB'S 2017. Result in terms of time period, story drift, story displacement, story stiffness and base shear. After analysis diagrid structure is perform better then X-brace frame.

Full text

Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology
p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 7, Issue 2; April-June 2020, pp. 174-178
© Krishi Sanskriti Publications
http://www.krishisanskriti.org/Publication.html
SEISMIC STUDY OF DIAGRID STRUCTURE
WITH BRACE FRAME AND DAMPER FRAME
SYSTEM OF DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENT
Vikash Yadav1 and Anurag Bajpai2
1PG Student(Structural Engineering), Civil Engineering Department, Institute of Engineering and Technology, Lucknow
2Assistant Professor(Structural Engineering) Civil Engineering Department, Institute of Engineering and Technology, Lucknow
Email: 1vk.141993@gmail.com, 2bajpai.ced.cf@ietlucknow.ac.in
Abstract—In the current situation, population and industrialization
are growing rapidly over time. Architects and engineers want to
focus on the growth and vertical development of tall buildings and
skyscrapers. However, increasing the height of the building is not
easy. Several parameters play an important role in construction,
including lateral loads. (i.e. wind or seismic force). The next task of
the designer is to design a type of building that will be more
sustainable. In this study structural analysis of G+44 story steel
frame, diagrid structure with grid angle 67.32. In other two frame
using x-bracing at all faces, at corner, at centre and damper at
corner, at centre. The plan considered for all models was 30m X 30m
and the method use for analysis was Response spectrum analysis
method. All the member was designed as per IS456:2000, IS800:2007
and load combination for seismic force were considered as per
IS1893(Part-1):2016. The procedure of modelling also analysis was
done on ETABSv17.0.1 software. The performance was evaluated
from various. The result was expressed in forms of graphs, tables and
figures while comparison was done with the limitation as per
IS1893(Part-1):2016.
It was found that maximum story displacement and story drift lies
within the permissible value as per IS1893(Part-1):2016. Comparing
the specified parameters, it was found that the diagrid frame
structure performing better than the x-bracing and damper frame
structure thus can be consider to be more effective for high rise
construction. From all the six-models diagrid gives less value of story
displacement and story stiffness compare to other models. Hence, the
diagrid can be considered as the sustainable solution in terms of
high-rise construction.
Keyword: Diagrid; X-bracing, Damper; Lateral load; Response
spectrum analysis; ETABs software.
1 INTRODUCTION
In the current situation, population and industrialization are
growing rapidly over time. Architects and engineers want to
focus on the growth and vertical development of tall buildings
and skyscrapers. However, increasing the height of the
building is not easy. Several parameters play an important role
in construction, including lateral loads. (i.e. wind or seismic
force). The next task of the designer is to design a type of
building that will be more sustainable. Diagrid is a
construction made of steel, concrete and wooden blocks and
arranged diagonally at the time of constructions of buildings,
roofs. As the height of the building increases, the lateral drag
mechanism from the gravitational system becomes more and
more important. The physical stability of the diagonal
structure has a triangular shape, which resists gravity and
lateral loads due to the axial pressure of its elements. Some of
these systems include pipe designs, gaskets, transverse joints,
cantilever joints, transition walls, and diode structures. The
diagrid system is used as a roof to create a large transparent
area without columns. Use 20%-25% less building material in
comparison to others.
Bracing are a method used to build seismic structures.
Elements in a lattice frame are designed to work with skeletal
or push structures. Braking maintains the lateral load of the
seismic force by terminating the inclined elements. The brake
frame is on the screen; They move along spiral axes and
columns. Since the diagonal buffer operates under axial load,
the amplifier is the most efficient, therefore, the minimum size
of the element gives it greater rigidity and strength in the
horizontal section. Concentric bracing and eccentric bracing
are being used here. Bracing system are very efficient in
resisting lateral load as they provide strength in lateral
direction.
The damper uses lateral force to hold the structure in place. A
damper is a power distribution device that limits evacuation
from a home during an earthquake. This helps the structure to
reduce the bending of columns and supports and increase the
rigidity of the structure.
2: OBJECTIVES OF WORK
1.Study of seismic behaviour of buildings for regular plan
under seismic loads and combinations according to IS
1893: 2016.
2. To assess the report of diagrid and braced frame lateral
resisting force system structure.

Seismic Study Of Diagrid Structure with Brace Frame and Damper Frame System of different Arrangement 175
Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology
p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 7, Issue 2; April-June 2020
3. To stimulate seismic parameter that are base shear, modes
of vibration, time period, story deracination, story drop off
and story constrain.
3: DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING
4: STRUCTURAL MODELLING
Model-1 Diagrid Structure
Model-2 X-Bracing Structure (All faces)
Model-3 X-Bracing Structure (Corner)
Model-4 X-Bracing Structure (Centre)
Model-5 Damper Structure (Corner)
Model-6 Damper Structure (Centre)
Modelling done by the help of ETAB’S 2017 software.
5: ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Time period
When the structure is considered for analysis, it is considered
as lumped mass. General building act as inverted pendulum.
With increase in the storey one lumped mass get increased.
When earthquake occur building start vibrating under forced
vibration. General earthquake lasts for few minutes. After
completion of earthquake building vibrated as free vibration
and it vibrate at natural frequency. Natural time period is the
time required to complete one cycle of oscillation when it was
disturbed and left free i.e. no external force is applied. Natural
time period is inverse of natural frequency. It depends mass
and stiffness of the building.
Tn = 2𝝅√m/k
From the above table and graph, we can see that Diagrid
structure having less time period value then X-Bracing at all
faces and maximum value of time period in all model having
X-Bracing at centre. We can say that Diagrid structure is more
efficient in all six models.

Vikash Yadav and Anurag Bajpai
Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology
p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 7, Issue 2; April-June 2020
176
6: STORY DRIFT
As mentioned before building act as spring mass system.
Every storey’s slab part act as mass and column part provide
stiffness. When building subjected to seismic load each mass
vibrated differently according to its location and value. The
relative displacement between adjacent storey has been termed
as storey drift. Codes have prescribed its value H/250. Where
H represent storey height.
In Eurocode 8:2004 Part 1 specifies allowable maximum story
drift is 1% of story height therefore as per Eurocode
permissible limit of drift will be 0.01 X 3000 = 30 mm.
Graph 6 Story v/s Story Drift of All Models
From the above table and graph, we can see that in begging
Diagrid structure having less story drift value but after 28
story X-Bracing at all faces having less value from the Diagrid
structure. And maximum value of story drift is X-Bracing at
centre.
7: BASE SHEAR
Base shear is the sum of all storey shear acting in lateral
direction. Base shear plays important role in deciding the type
of foundation used. High base shear required strong
foundation as compared to lower value of base shear. Base
shear can be calculated used given formula.
Vb = Ahx W
Where, Ah= Design horizontal seismic coefficient for
structure.
W= Seismic weight of the building
From the above table and graph, we can see that Diagrid
structure having less base shear value and maximum value of
base shear in all model having X-Bracing at all faces. We can
say that Diagrid structure is more efficient in all six models.
8: STORY DISPLACEMENT
When the building is excited with lateral force, it tends to
move from its original position. This displacement with
reference to fixed point that is base is termed as storey
displacement. As per Indian standard code, the storey
displacement is restricted to H/250 where H is storey height
form base. Eurocodes have higher allowable value of storey
displacement i.e. H/100.

Seismic Study Of Diagrid Structure with Brace Frame and Damper Frame System of different Arrangement 177
Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology
p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 7, Issue 2; April-June 2020
Graph 5.4 Story Displacement of All Models
From the above table and graph, we can see that Diagrid
structure having less Story Drift value then X-Bracing at all
faces and maximum value of Story Drift in all model having
X-Bracing at centre. We can say that Diagrid structure is more
efficient in all six models.
9: STORY STIFFNESS
The term story stiffness is defined as capability of resisting
force/load acting on any story. It is depending on material
property, if the story is stiffer it means less flexible.
Graph 9 Story v/s Story stiffness
From the above table and graph, we can see that Diagrid
structure having maximum Story stiffness value then X-
Bracing at all faces in all models. We can say that Diagrid
structure is more efficient in Y-dir. from all six models.
10: CONCLUSION93
1. Time taken in first mode is minimum in diagrid structure
and in other all with respect to diagrid structure, 10.66%
more in X-bracing in all faces, 55.46% more in X-bracing
at corner, 89.27% more in X-bracing in centre.
2. Drift is minimum in X-bracing in all faces after 27 story
before 27 story Diagrid structure having minimum vale but
overall comparisons shows with respect to diagrid
structure, maximum value of drift is 5.16% less in X-
bracing in all faces, 81.5% more in X-bracing at corner,
150.5% more in X-bracing in centre.
3. Displacement is minimum in diagrid structure and in other
all with respect to diagrid structure, 4.49% more in X-
bracing in all faces, 95.69% more in X-bracing at corner,
169.75% more in X-bracing in centre.
4. Base shear is minimum in diagrid structure cause of less
weight of structure and in other all with respect to diagrid
structure, 27.49% more in X-bracing in all faces, 23.29%
more in X-bracing at corner, 20.25% more in X-bracing in
centre.
5. Story stiffness is maximum for Diagrid structure from all
four models.
6. In all four models, model 1 perform best.
From above all I can say, Diagrid structure is much better than
other all considered models. And also, in diagrid structure
using 20-25% less building material by which weight of
building is reduces. For seismic effect one of the major factors
is weight of building.
REFRENCES
[1] Ali, M.M. and Moon, K.S., 2007. Structural developments in tall
buildings: current trends and future prospects. Architectural
science review, 50(3), pp.205-223.
[2] Moon, K.S., 2008. Practical Design Guidelines for Steel Diagrid
Structures. In AEI 2008: Building Integration Solutions (pp. 1-
11).
[3] Kim, J. and Lee, Y.H., 2010. Seismic performance evaluation of
diagrid system buildings. The Structural design of tall and
special buildings, 21(10), pp.736-749.
[4] Eghtesadi, S., Nourzadeh, D. and Bargi, K., 2011. Comparative
Study on Different Types of Bracing Systems in Steel
Structures. World Academy of Science, Engineering and
Technology, 73, p.2011.
[5] Sangle, K.K., Bajoria, K.M. and Mhalungkar, V., 2012. Seismic
analysis of high-rise steel frame building with and without
bracing. 15wcee, Lisboa.
[6] Jani, K. and Patel, P.V., 2013. Analysis and design of diagrid
structural system for high rise steel buildings. Procedia
Engineering, 51, pp.92-100.

Vikash Yadav and Anurag Bajpai
Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology
p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 7, Issue 2; April-June 2020
178
[7] MOON, K., 2013, September. Optimal structural configurations
for tall buildings. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth East Asia-
Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
(EASEC-13) (pp. G-4). The Thirteenth East Asia-Pacific
Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
(EASEC-13).
[8] Yadav, S. and Garg, V., 2015. Advantage of steel diagrid building
over conventional building. International Journal of Civil and
Structural Engineering Research (ISSN), 3(01), pp.394-406.
[9] Pawar, D.S., Phadnis, S.A.U. and Shinde, R.S.,2015. Analysis of
multistoried braced frame subjected to seismic and gravity
loading.
[10] Bhale, P. and Salunke, P.J., 2016. Analytical Study and Design
of Diagrid Building and Comparison with Conventional Frame
Building. International Journal of Advanced Technology in
Engineering and Science, (4).
[11] Shah, M.I., Mevada, S.V. and Patel, V.B., 2016. Comparative
study of diagrid structures with conventional frame
structures. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. (IJERA), 6(5), pp.22-29.
[12] Khaleel, M.T. and Dileep Kumar, U., 2016. Seismic Analysis of
Steel Frames with Different Bracings using ETABS
Software. International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology, 3(08).
[13] Sreeshma. K.K. Nicy Jose (2016). Seismic Performance
Assessment of Different Types of Eccentric Braced System.
IJIRST, ISSN 2349-6010, Volume 3, Issue 4, Sept 2016, pp123-
127.
[14] Joshi R. S. and Dhyani D. J. (2017), A Review on Novel
Structure Development in Tall Building: Diagrid Structure,
IJAERD.
[15] Shankar, B., Dheekshith, K. and Hijaz, S.N., 2017. Study On
Behaviour of Diagrids Under Seismic Loads Compared to
Conventional Moment Resisting Frames.
[16] Jain, S.K., Bhadoria, S.S. and Kushwah, S.S.,2017. Comparative
Study and Seismic Analysis of a Multistorey Steel Building.
[17] Mangalore, S.S.E. and Bangalore, T.O.C.E., 2017. Comparative
Study of Different Types of Bracing Systems by Placing at
Different Locations.
[18] Suyog Sudhakar Shinde, Abhijeet A. Galatage, Dr. Sumant K.
Kulkarni (2017). Evaluation Seismic Efficiency of Combination
of Bracing for Steel Building. IJARIIT, ISSN: 2454-132X
(Volume3, Issue5), pp 46-55.
[19] Asadi, E., Li, Y. and Heo, Y., 2018. Seismic performance
assessment and loss estimation of steel diagrid
structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 144(10),
p.04018179.
[20] Saurabh Kanungo & Komal Bedi (2018). Analysis of a Tall
Structure with X-Type Bracing Considering Seismic Loan Using
Analysis Tool Stadd. Pro. IJESRT, ISSN: 2277-9655, PP 366-
373.
[21] Safvana p, Anila s (2018). Seismic Analysis of Braced System in
RCC, Steel and Composite Structure. IJIRSET, Volume 7 Issue
3, pp 3019-3032.
[22] Abhishek R I, Rajeeva S V2 (2019). Seismic Behaviour of Steel
Bare Frame Building with Outrigger and Bracing with Outrigger
Structure. IRJET, Volume: 06, Issue: 01. Jan 2019, pp161-165.
[23] Vishwakarma A., Rai A. (2019). Seismic Analysis of Steel
Frame with Bracings Using Response Spectrum Method. IRJET,
2019.
[24] Meghna, Singh V. K. (2019) Structural Performance of Four
Storey Diagrid Tall Building. JETIR, 2019 May, Volume 6,
Issue 5 (ISSN-2349-5162)
[25] Radmard Rahmani, H. and Könke, C., 2019. Seismic control of
tall buildings using distributed multiple tuned mass
dampers. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2019.
[26] Dadkhah, H. and Mohebbi, M., 2019. Performance assessment
of an earthquake-based optimally designed fluid viscous damper
under blast loading. Advances in Structural Engineering, 22(14),
pp.3011-3025.
[27] S. Lakshmi Shireen Banu, Kothakonda Ramesh (2019). Seismic
Response Study and Evaluation of Vibration Control of Elevated
RCC Structure using Friction Damper. IJITEE, 2019.
[28] S.lakshmishireenbanu, pathaushasri,(2019). Study of Seismic
Energy Dissipation and Effect in Multistory RCC Building with
and Without Fluid Viscous Dampers. IJITEE, 2019.
[29] De Domenico, D. and Ricciardi, G., 2019. Earthquake protection
of structures with nonlinear viscous dampers optimized through
an energy-based stochastic approach. Engineering
Structures, 179, pp.523-539.
[30] Dadkhah, H. and Mohebbi, M., 2019. Performance assessment
of an earthquake-based optimally designed fluid viscous damper
under blast loading. Advances in Structural Engineering, 22(14),
pp.3011-3025.
[31] De Domenico, D., Ricciardi, G. and Takewaki, I., 2019. Design
strategies of viscous dampers for seismic protection of building
structures: a review. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering, 118, pp.144-165.
[32] Del Gobbo, G.M., 2019, June. Placement of fluid viscous
dampers to improve total-building seismic performance.
In Proceedings of the CSCE Annual Conference, Laval,
Montreal, QC, Canada (pp. 12-15).
[33] Patle, Y.Z., Gajghate, V. and Manchalwar, A., Seismic Response
Control of Adjacent Building Using Fluid Viscous Damper.
[34] Sahu, G. and Sahu, P., 2019. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF
EFFECTS OF BASE ISOLATOR & FLUID VISCOUS
DAMPER ON RESPONSE OF A RCC STRUCTURE.
[35] Koshti, A., Shinde, S., Yamagar, K. and Shegunshi, S., Seismic
Response of Structure with Fluid Viscous Damper (FVD).
[36] IS: 800:2007 General Construction of Steel- Code of Practice.
[37] IS: 456:2000 Plain and Reinforced Concrete- Code of Practice.
[38] IS: 1893(Part-1):2016 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design
of Structures.
[39] IS: 875 (Part 2) - 1987, Code of Practice Design Loads (Other
Than for Earthquake) For Buildings and Structures.
[40] IS: 13920:2016 Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced
Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces- Code of
Practice.
[41] Eurocode 8:2004 Design of structures for earthquake resistance.