Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Indian population is estimated about 1.28 billion as of 2015 and India has become
second most populous country in the world. Vertical growth of built environment is
ineviTable for providing shelter and workspace for growing population. Dynamic analysis of
tall buildings with all considered safety factors has become a challenge for Civil Engineers.
Earthquake resistant tall buildings behaving well in all type of soil conditions, especially in
soft soils are necessary to be constructed. Wind analysis is also important in case of tall
buildings. Earthquakes are frequent and of larger magnitude in the Himalayan and sub
Himalayan region, Gujarat, Cutch, Assam, Bihar and other regions in the Northern India.
Peninsular India is also not free from earthquakes although the magnitude and frequency is
low.

Referring to the Cutch Earthquake of 1819 in India, which killed around 20,000 people,
Kramer made a statement of Mac Murdo that “Buildings situated on rock soil were not by any
means so much affected as those whose foundations did not reach the bottom of the soil”.

For earthquake resistant design, the effect of local soil conditions and safety evaluation
of tall buildings is needed. Linear dynamic analysis of structures considering soil-structure
interaction (SSI) is essential. When a structure founded on rock is subjected to ground
motion, the extremely high stiffness of the rock constrains the rock motion. The structure can
be assumed have a fixed base and the response matches well with the actual one. The same
structure would respond differently if supported on a soft soil. The dynamic characteristics of
a structural system changes when the supporting medium i.e. soil is also considered as an
integral part of the structure. This is reflected in significant modification of response of the
structure in storey drift, stress components, etc., when compared to that of structure on rigid
foundation.

There has been a significant amount of debate over the perceived effects of soil -
structure interaction on the overall performance of structures, especially on soft soils.
Conventionally, it has been a common practice in earthquake engineering, to study the force
imposed by ground motion on a structure during an earthquake, when analysing its seismic
capacity. During this type of analysis, Soil Structure Interaction consistently appears to be

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 1
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

beneficial for seismic response. The Non-inclusion of Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) leads to
conservative results particularly under soft soil conditions while simplifying the analysis.
This practice is suggested even in a number of seismic codes. Soil Structure Interaction
occurs mainly in two inter-related stages,

1) Inertia interaction
2) Kinematic interaction

1.2 INERTIA INTERACTION

This interaction is due to inertial and elastic properties of the super structure,
foundation and the soil media which is supporting the structure as shown in Fig. 1.1.

Fig. 1.1 Schematic of Inertia interaction

The building and foundation mass develops the inertial force to resist the deflections.
As per the Newton’s first law of motion, they tend to be at rest. Every soil will have its own
damping capacity, until the vibrations are damped; the building and foundations are safe
without any deflection.
If the motions are strong enough to break the damping capacity of the soil, then
foundation and structures may damage. The extent of damage depends on the amplitude and

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 2
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

frequency of motions. Here the displacement is due to pure inertia forces developed in the
structure during an earthquake motion.

1.3 KINEMATIC INTERACTION

This theory assumes the structure as mass less and the foundation to be considered as
completely rigid. The schematic of kinematic interaction is shown in Fig. 1.2.

SOIL

Seismic waves (reflecting & refracting)

Fig. 1.2 Schematic of Kinematic interaction

Seismic waves traverse through the soil media and after reaching the surface of rigid
foundation these waves reflect and refract back and putting the foundation in motion and this
in turn puts the structure in free vibration. The motion of rigid foundation changes as the
motion of seismic waves changes with amplitude and frequency. Kinematic interaction may
occur due to Vertical, Horizontal, incoherent ground motion or rocking motion.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 3
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 2

SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION

2.1 GENERAL
As waves from an earthquake epicentre reach a structure, they produce non periodic
motions in the structure. These oscillating motions depend on the structure’s vibration
characteristics and the geometry of structure. For the structure to react to the motion, it needs
to overcome its own inertia force, which results in an interaction between the structure and
the soil. The system of structure and soil foundation is shown in Fig. 2.1.

Fig. 2.1 Schematic diagram of Soil and Structure

The dynamic equation of motion of the soil and structure system,

Mut   Cu t   Kut   f t 

ut  -Nodal acceleration
u t  - Velocity
u(t)- Displacement

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 4
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

M, C, K and f(t) are system’s mass matrix, damping matrix, and stiffness matrix and load
vector respectively.

2.2 PROCEDURES
Presently, linear dynamic analysis procedures are mainly being used for earthquake
resistant design and safety evaluation of structures. The linear dynamic analysis can be
carried out using,
1. Response spectrum
2. Time-history analysis
3. Quasi-static method
4. Modal analysis

2.2.1 RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS

The maximum response of the structure to the seismic excitation is found by adding
the maximum responses from the individual modes and multi component input. The accuracy
of results of analysis depends on the number of modes considered and the methodology used
for combination and multi component earthquake responses. The computed result represents
the maximum magnitude.

2.2.2 TIME-HISTORY ANALYSIS

Linear time history analysis is a method of computing the complete response history of
the structure to earthquake in addition to the maximum response values. The output results of
this method describe the general behaviour of the seismic response. Combined with rational
interpretation and judgment, this can provide a reasonable estimate of the expected inelastic
behaviour of the structure.

2.2.3 QUASI-STATIC METHOD

It is the simplest and most common procedure in dynamic analysis, as it just uses the
static analysis for estimating the response of structure for earthquakes. It is mainly comprised
of linear static analysis. In this method the whole system is considered as single degree of
system and trivial solutions will be found by force dependent approach to analyse the
nonlinear characteristics and energy dissipation.

2.2.4 MODAL ANALYSIS

In Modal analysis, the structure is considered as a continuous system in which it is
considered to be having infinite number of degrees of freedom and infinite number of natural

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 5
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

modes of vibration. The response in each mode of natural vibration can be computed
independently with respect to the other modes. Here each mode shows its own deformation
pattern with its own frequency range.

The structure can be modelled as a discrete or continuous system and depending on

this ordinary differential equations or partial differential equations can be used as governing
equations respectively. Modal analysis is a complex phenomenon as it produces large amount
of output information. But still it has advantages over the earthquake analysis for providing
accurate results with less computation time.

Summary
For highly nonlinear systems, the actual response that could occur during major
earthquakes can be evaluated by using the complicated nonlinear analysis, but an
approximate evaluation can be made by using the analysis methods discussed above.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 6
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

3.1 GENERAL
The structural behaviour with respect to earthquake waves is mainly depends on three
systems, the structure, foundation and the soil media and the interaction between these
systems can be defined by two methods, Direct method and Multistep method (Jonathan P
Stewart et al.,1998 and M Jawad Arefi., 2008). Multistep methods use the principle of
superposition to combine the effects of kinematic and inertial interaction, and are limited to
the analysis of linear or equivalent linear systems. Direct methods model the entire soil–
foundation–structure system in a single step and are more robust than multistep methods.

3.2 DIRECT METHOD

In the direct method, the entire soil-foundation- super structure system is modelled
and analysed in a single step as shown in Fig. 3.1.

Fig. 3.1 Schematic representation of soil structure interaction and transmission

of seismic waves through Soil media

The free field motions are specified along the base and sides of the model and the
resulting response of the interacting system is computed for a finite element model from the

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 7
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

equations of motion. Here the kinematic interaction is considered to be insignificant and the
free field motion is a parameter to find the motion of foundation and super structure. The
inertia force acts on the structure sets the super structure, foundation and the soil at interface
in to vibration. The equation of motion is given by,

+kx = -M×I× ̈

m - Mass matrix of the total system includes structure, foundation and soil
, , x – acceleration, velocity and displacement with respect to the base or foundation
c- Damping matrix of the structure and soil
̈ - Free field ground acceleration
k- Stiffness matrix of the structure and soil
M – Mass matrix of the structure having non zero masses
I - Mass matrix having non zero masses for the structural DOF

The RHS of the above equation is inertia force of the super structure which produces the
shear force and momentum which in turn produces the deformation at soil structure interface.
The inertia forces initiates and propagates in the form waves through the structure and
foundation soil interface.

3.3 MULTI STEP METHOD

In the Multistep or Substructure Method, the soil–structure system is divided into two
substructures, a structure, which may include a portion of non-linear soil or soil with an
irregular boundary and the unbounded soil as shown in Fig. 3.2.

Fig. 3.2 Schematic of Multistep method (substructure method)

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 8
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

These substructures are connected by the general soil–structure interface. Here the total
motions produced are the sum of free field motions without considering the motion of
structure.

Usually, a dynamic soil structure interaction analysis by the multistep method can be
performed in three steps as follows,

i) Determination of seismic free-field input motion along the general soil-structure

interface.
ii) Determination of the reaction of the unbounded soil on the general soil-structure
interface in the form of a displacement-force relationship.
iii) Analysis of the bounded soil-structure system under the action of the externally
applied transient loading and the ground interaction force determined by steps (i) and
(ii).
Summary
In the present study the direct method to analyze the Soil Structure Interaction is
adopted, as it is a single step method and is robust compared to multistep method.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 9
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 4
OBJECTIVES
4.1 GENERAL
Usually conventional analysis procedures involve the application of seismic excitation
at the base of the structures, but current studies and safety concerns suggests that this would
not be a correct procedure in case where the structure rest on a compressible soil, where the
foundation properties would change the response of structure. The objective of the present
work is to study the soil structure interaction of tall building founded on clayey soils.

4.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE PRESENT STUDY

The objectives of the present work are enlisted below.
1. Defining the problem and selecting the parameters for the study.
2. Studying the insitu soil properties (provided by the design office).
3. Finite Element modelling of the Structure and foundation.
4. Performing finite element analysis for seismic response of the tall building with
fixed base on various types of soils as per I.S. 1893-2002 (Part I).
5. Performing finite element analysis of the building considering SSI.
6. Comparing the responses in the two cases.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 10
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 5
LITERATURE REVIEW

The effect of local soil conditions on ground motions have been illustrated by
many earthquakes around the world. The response of a structure to earthquake motion
founded on a deformable soil will be different from the response of the structure that is
supported on a rigid foundation. Significant progress has been made in the last three decades
in developing methods to analyze the interaction between structure and its foundation
[Link]-Structure Interaction (SSI) sometimes plays an important role, especially for
massive structures constructed on the relatively soft soil, which may alter the dynamic
characteristics of the structure and its response. Following research papers from 2014 latest
have been studied and abstracts are brought in;

Jinu Mary Mathew et al (2014)[10] : A nine storey R.C.. building frame analysed for
different soil conditions and with SSI considered. It is observed that stress strain relations
were not linear in both confined and unconfined concrete due to a significant variation in
strength and strain. The nonlinear static analysis was carried out using SAP2000 and the
results showed that SSI affect as a major factor to the seismic response of building on soft
soil. This study showed that deformations of the components are also strongly affected by the
SSI and it can be a detrimental factor for safety and geometry of buildings.

Halkude et al (2014)[11]: Showed that SSI is more dominant in soft soil, as the natural
period of structure increases SSI. Natural time period is main parameter which affects the
seismic response of structures. If soil flexibility increases, the base shear also increases. So it
is faster in rate for soft soil conditions. The moment in beam and columns also found to be
affected by SSI and again it is much effective in soft soil conditions with a range of about
2.5-3 increased moment compared to stiff soil which has about 1.5 -2 times increase moment.
This study also showed that finite element method is most accurate than other methods for
studying SSI and suggested to use at least the Winkler method for considering SSI instead of
fixed base to reduce the complexity.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 11
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

B.R. Jayalekshmi and H.K. Chinmayi (2014)[6]: Analysed a multi storey reinforced
concrete building frame with centred shear wall and flexibility of supporting soil at all four
corners of buildings showed that natural time periods are more than the standard values in
flexible base compared to a fixed one and it increases with flexibility of soil and height of the
structures. Natural time period effects can be decreased by placing shear walls. If shear wall
placement is at core, effect of natural time periods are less than those structures in which the
shear walls placed at exterior corners. This study also showed that base shear increases with
soil flexibility in conventional fixed base and it decreases in actual soil structure interaction
conditions.

Magade S. B and Patankar J. P. (2014)[12]: Showed that the time period,

displacement and base shear of building frame depends on several important factors like Soil
Structure Interaction, type of soil, stiffness of infill wall and location of shear walls. If the
shear walls placed at core gave less displacement compared to the shear walls placed at other
locations of the structure.

A.D. Pandey et al., (2012)[3]: Showed that vertical displacements of structures in

flexible soil conditions are always greater than the fixed type base displacements and the
columns which are placed at exterior corners of buildings attracts more shear forces
compared to the centred frame columns in flexible soil conditions but it is constant for both
exterior and centred frame columns in fixed base conditions.

Jenifer Priyanka et al., (2012)[9]: Studied ten storied building frames with different
column spacing and with different irregularities in mass, stiffness and vertical geometry for
analysing the lateral forces in different soil conditions. STAAD Pro software was used for the
analysis, the study showed that lateral deflection of these irregular buildings due to seismic
loads is more than that of regular buildings with different soil conditions considered. It was
also found that soft soil conditions shows more deflections compared to the medium and hard
soil for both regular and irregular buildings. And irregularity in stiffness would be a major
cause for deflection.

Yasuhiro Hayashi and Ikuo Takahashi (2004)[17]: A parametric study and analysis
on a slender building using 2-D FEM model considering the up lift motion of base showed
that horizontal resisting capacity, number of stories and ground motion characteristics
strongly affects the SSI with respect to the frequency and intensity of seismic waves. To

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 12
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

reduce the damage of slender buildings an appropriate evaluation of SSI and performance
characteristics are very important.

Xilin Lu et al., (2003)[16]: Showed that increase in dynamic shear modulus of soil
causes increase in Natural frequency of SSI. SSI is a very complicated for varying shear
modulus of soil, hence shear modulus has to be constant and below the critical level. SSI
effect also increases with increase in structural rigidity. The study also showed that buried
depth and long piles adopted doesn’t have much effect on Seismic response.

Summary
The literature survey carried out has shown that investigations have been carried out by
many researchers on the structural behaviour of tall buildings with SSI by considering many
parameters like foundation type, soil conditions, lateral forces, ratio of flexural stiffness of
beam and column etc.
It is well established in literature that soft soils in the foundations alter the seismic
response of buildings. Very few investigations have been carried out on soil-structure
interaction of tall buildings under clayey soil conditions, particularly in Indian seismic
zones. Therefore, the present study is proposed on a tall building with fixed and with raft
foundation on Clayey soil and study the difference in their behavior and response for a given
Earthquake ground motion.
Normally, in the design offices, modelling of multi-storey buildings for Earthquake
resistant design is carried out assuming the base of the building as fixed or hinged at the
foundation level. The influence of soil type in the foundation on seismic response of
structures is obtained from response spectra given in 6.4.4 of IS 1893: 2002.
The above approach is conservative as the structure extends up to the bottom of the
foundation and the surrounding soil influences the seismic response of structure through the
foundation. Different kinds of soil strata exist around the foundation and below it and
becomes complex further.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 13
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 6
PROJECT DETAILS OF THE CASE STUDY

6.1 GENERAL
In the present work a real-time structure is taken as a case study. The building is New
Haven Ribbon-Walk, apartments, is a 13-storey residential apartment in Chennai which is
under construction. It is located in South Chennai on Vandalur, Kelambakkam Road,
Kilkottayur village, Mambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India and is coming up on a 15.28
acres site.

6.1.1 ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Chennai falls under Seismic Zone-III of IS 1893-2002 is located in a coastal region and
structures are exposed to coastal environment and surfaces of buildings are protected by
plastering and painting coats. As per IS 456-2000 (Table 3), moderate exposure condition
shall be considered in design. Basic wind speed for Chennai Vb is 50 m/sec. When the
earthquake forces are considered along with other normal loads, in the elastic method of
design, the permissible stresses in the materials are increased by 33%. Also when Earthquake
forces are included, the allowable bearing pressure in soils shall be increased as per
Table 1 of IS 1893 (part 1):2002, depending upon type of foundation of the structure and
type of soil.

6.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING

A G+12 Storey R.C. building, a real time structure which is under construction near
Mambakkam, Chennai is considered for the present study to investigate SSI effects on tall
buildings. The plan dimension of the building is 28.20 m x 16.10 m and the height of the
building is 40.15 m from the ground level. The structure is symmetrical and the floor
dimension details at different portions are tabulated in Table 6.1. Elevation and storey details
are shown in Table 6.2. The stilt and first storey height is 4 m and 3.15 m respectively from
the base level and all other stories are 3 m and replicas of the first storey. Following is the
scope of the work envisaged in the present work.

1) F.E Modelling and analysis of structure for fixed base condition.

2) F.E Modelling and analysis of Tall building with Raft foundation and clayey soil in
foundation.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 14
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 6.1 Floor Dimensions

Floor Height
Basement Floor below Tower 4.00 m
Basement Floor beyond Tower 3.75 m
Stilt Floor 4.00 m
Typical Floor 3.00 m

Table 6.2 Height and Elevation of Stories

Height Elevation
Level Similar to
(in m) (in m)
Terrace 3.00 40.15
Storey 11 3.00 37.15
Storey 10 3.00 34.15
Storey 09 3.00 31.15
Storey 08 3.00 28.15
Storey 07 3.00 25.15 Storey 1
Storey 06 3.00 22.15
Storey 05 3.00 19.15
Storey 04 3.00 16.15
Storey 03 3.00 13.15
Storey 02 3.00 10.15
Storey 01 3.15 7.15 Master Storey
Stilt floor 4.00 4.00
Base 0 0

TERRACE
STOREY11

STOREY10
STOREY9
STOREY8
STOREY7
STOREY6
STOREY 5
STOREY 4
STOREY 3
STOREY 2

STOREY 1
STILT

Fig. 6.1 Schematic representation of the building

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 15
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

As this is a multi-storey structure of G+12 stories all utilities and parking facility to be
made inside the building. The basement and stilt floors are meant for parking. The utility
structures such as domestic and fire underground sump and pump house, sewage treatment
plants have been planned in the basement floor. The purpose is explained to clarify the need
of the stilt floor.

17.7 m

29.8 m

Fig. 6.2 Column & Footing plan dimensions, Columns and Shear walls (AutoCAD snap shot)

The layout of the base plan dimensions and the positions of shear walls and columns
are shown in the Fig.6.2. The construction is an ordinary beam, slab, column and shears wall
construction with conventional shuttering and form works. In present study the wind load has
been neglected to reduce the complexity and to concentrate more on seismic response.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 16
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 7
FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

7.1 GENERAL
The 13-storey building has been modelled as 3-Dimensional R.C. frame. The beams
and columns are modelled using R.C. 3-D beam elements with six degrees of freedom at each
node as shown in Fig. 7.1. The slab is modelled as membrane infinitely rigid in its own plane
to offer diaphragm action for transferring horizontal loads to columns and shear walls. Shear
walls are modelled using R.C. 3-D Shell elements as shown in Fig. 7.4. Fixity is provided to
the base of all columns.

7.2 SAP2000 - FINITE ELEMENT SOFTWARE

The first user friendly earthquake engineering software was produced by Computers
and Structures Inc. (CSI) in 1975. CSI produces the special modelling and analysis tools like
SAP2000, CSI Bridge, ETABS, SAFE, PERFROM-3D.

In the present work, SAP2000 Ver.17 is used; SAP2000 was initially produced in 1996
and was mostly integrated with Microsoft windows. It is now a most powerful tool with
sophistication and user friendly options.

A single FE model can be analysed for different type of conditions. This program is
preloaded with many elements like Frame, Shells, and Springs etc. Due to its 3-D based
graphical interfacing capability basic and complex models can be created and easily analysed.
The world-wide design and construction codes have been updated for the analysis of real
structures at different locations.

7.3 IS 1893(Part 1): 2002

Precise seismic simulation and analysis of the structures is highly complex. To
overcome this problem, research is going on to reduce complex dynamic problems in seismic
analysis of the tall buildings. Continuous research has resulted in the Indian Standards being
re-examined and revised five times in 1962,1970,1975,1984 and 2002 as Criteria for
Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures by Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New
Delhi. Highly developed countries like USA will revise the Standards for every three years;
hence their sophistication level of structures is high. In the same way the Indian Standards
also to be revised frequently for the research and development of sophisticated buildings with
high level of safety.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 17
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

7.4 MATERIALS USED

Materials used in the design and construction of the building have been adopted in the
model whose grades are as shown in Table 7.1 as per IS [Link] modelling in the
property data area, name of the material, mass per unit volume, weight per unit volume,
modulus of elasticity, Poisson’s ratio should be specified for each type of material defined.

Table 7.1 Grades of materials used in modelling

Structural Member Grade of Materials
Slabs M25
Beams M25
Columns M40
Retaining walls M25
Reinforcement Steel Fe 500 for all elements except floor slabs
Floor slabs Fe 415

7.4.1 BEAMS
3-Dimensional R.C. beam elements are used for modelling the frame of the structure.
A General 3-D beam element is depicted in Fig.7.1. It has 6 degrees of freedom at each node,
three translational and three rotational. A 3-D R.C. beam with steel reinforcement is shown in
Fig. 7.2 below. Steel is modelled as a bar element and concrete as a beam element and perfect
bond is assumed between the two materials.

Fig. 7.1 A 3-D Beam element

Fig. 7.2 3-D R.C. beam element

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 18
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Frame sections in modelling process include beams and columns. Details of beams
sections used in modelling are shown in Table 7.2. Various beam sections of different lengths
has been used in modelling of the structure. While modelling Frame section like beams,
columns are to be defined by their width and depth and reinforcement details.

Table 7.2 Beams sections and Grades

Designation Grade Shape
B-100x100
B-125x125
B-150x200
B-200x215
B-200x265 M25 Rectangular
B-200x450
B-200x600
B-200x750
B-300x1050

Quantity of Beam sections used and total number of length of respective sections has
been tabulated in Table 7.3. All beam sections are of M25 grade with rectangular cross
section. But the beam elements used to model the columns are of M40. Total length of beam
section includes length of all respective beams used in stories and stilt.

Table 7.3 Quantity of Beam sections and total length

Section Element Type Pieces Total Length (m)
B-200x450 267 715.4039
B-200x600 735 2789.3737
B-200x750 10 33.0624
B-100x100 593 1041.2557
B-200x265 3-D Beam 48 57.6
B-150x200 168 129.6101
B-200x215 24 31.8
B-300x1050 12 43.7751
B-125x125 687 560.8995

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 19
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

7.4.2 COLUMNS
Different columns sections used in modelling are shown in Table 7.4 below. All
columns are made of M40 grade concrete and of Fe 500 grade steel.

Table 7.4 Details of Columns

Designation Grade of Concrete Grade of Steel
C-300x900
C-300x2750
C-200x1250X1800
C-300x1800 M40 Fe 500
C-900x300
C-300x1200
C-300x2700
C-200x450X1800

7.4.3 Slabs and Shear Wall

Slabs and Shear walls are modelled with R.C. Shell elements. Shell element is a stack
of single layer membranes with different thickness and eccentricities. Shell elements can
withstand bending, shear and membrane forces. The geometrical shape of shell elements can
be quadrilateral or triangular. Formation of flat R.C. shell element is shown in Fig. 7.3.

Fig. 7.3 Formation of Flat R.C. Shell element and its DOFs

Two types of shell elements are available based on assumed behaviour, viz., Shell
type and Membrane type. In the Shell type, both in-plane membrane stiffness and out-of
plane plate bending stiffness can be provided. In Membrane type, only in-plane membrane
stiffness can be provided.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 20
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Fig. 7.4 Schematic of R.C. Shell element

The floor slabs are assumed as rigid diaphragms and hence are modelled using
membrane elements. The Shear walls are modelled using 3-D Shell elements. Designation,
thickness and material grade used for Slabs and Walls as shell sections are shown in Table
7.5.

Table 7.5 Shell sections

Total Thickness
Designation Design Type Element Type Material (mm)
S115 Slab Membrane 115
S125 Slab Shell-Thin 125
S125S Slab Shell-Thin 125
S150 Slab Membrane 150
S150S Slab Shell-Thin M25 150
Stair Slab Membrane 225
W200 Wall Shell-Thin 200
W250 Wall Shell 250
W300 Wall Shell 300

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 21
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

7.5 SEISMIC LOADS

The parameter that have been taken in the seismic analysis of the tall building in the
present study as per IS1893-2002 (Part I) are shown in Table 7.6.

Table 7.6 Soil type and Seismic details

Soil Type Hard soil, medium soil and soft soil for
fixed base. Flexible base (Clayey soil)
Response Reduction Factor 5
Fundamental Natural Period (TA) in Seconds 0.075(h)0.75 [H= height of the building]
Zone Factor 0.16
Importance Factor 1.00
Damping 5%

7.6 LIMIT STATE OF COLLAPSE

Safety and Serviceability are two important factors in the design and construction of
any tall building. Limit state method of Design, adopts safety and serviceability criteria in the
design of structures. Limit state of collapse is the critical state of the structural element, in
which ultimate or yield stress levels are reached. In seismic response of tall buildings the
limiting the inter-storey drift levels constitutes the serviceability criteria.

The following load combinations shall be accounted for as per IS 1893 (Part 1),

 1.5(DL+LL)
 1.2(DL+LL±EL)
 1.5(DL ± EL)
 0.9(DL±1.5EL)
Where, DL- Dead load, LL- Live load and EL- Earthquake load
When the earthquake forces are considered along with other normal forces, the
permissible stresses in the material, in the elastic method of design, may be increased by
33%. Also, when earthquake forces are included, the allowable bearing pressure in soils shall
be increased as per Table 1 of IS 1893 (part 1):2002, depending upon type of foundation.
The different load combinations taken for the analysis, design and investigations are
to be considered as per IS 1893, are shown in Table 7.7.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 22
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 7.7 Load combinations for the investigations

Sl. Load Load Factors
No. Combination DL LL EL
1 LC1 1.5 1.5 -
2 LC2 1.2 1.2 1.2 (X)
3 LC3 1.2 1.2 -1.2 (X)
4 LC4 1.2 1.2 1.2 (Y)
5 LC5 1.2 1.2 -1.2 (Y)
6 LC6 1.5 - 1.5 (X)
7 LC7 1.5 - -1.5 (X)
8 LC8 1.5 - 1.5 (Y)
9 LC9 1.5 - -1.5 (Y)
10 LC10 0.9 - +1.5 (X)
11 LC11 0.9 - -1.5 (X)
12 LC12 0.9 - +1.5 (Y)
13 LC13 0.9 - -1.5 (Y)

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 23
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 8

CONVENTIONAL ANALYSIS OF TALL BUILDING

8.1 MODELLING PROCEDURE

The tall building under consideration is modelled as a fixed base structure, being fixed
at the ground level and is modelled using ETAB ver.9.7.4 software.

Fig.8.1.1 Dimensional view of Base co-ordinate points

The co-ordinate points shown in Fig.8.1.1 are the placements of columns according to
the base plan layout of the structure. All the points will be constrained with ux, uy, uz, rx, ry
and rz co-ordinates for fixed base condition, meaning that no linear and rotational
displacements are allowed.

Fig. 8.1.2 Plan view of columns

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 24
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Stilt floor has beams of B150X210, B200X215, B200X265, B200X600, B200X750 and
[Link] plan view of the stilt is shown in Fig. 8.1.3.

Fig. 8.1.3 Plan view of the stilt section

The yellow portion indicates the floor, red line indicates the shear walls and the saffron
lines indicate the beams. The basement and stilt are meant for parking and utility structures.

Fig. 8.1.4 3-Dimensional View of Fixed Basement and Stilt

The first storey has beams of B150X200, B200X215, B200X265, B200X450,

B200X600, B200X750 and B300X1050 as shown in the Fig. 8.1.5.

Fig. 8.1.5 2-D Plan view of storey 1 (Master Storey)

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 25
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Fig.8.1.6 3-Dimensional view of Storey 1

Storey 1 being a Master storey, remaining stories is modelled according to it. The
complete building has been modelled using appropriate elements of beams, columns, slabs
and shear walls in each storey and the 3-Dimensional view of the tall building is as shown
Fig.8.1.7 and Fig. 8.1.8 shows the building model in Y-Z plane.

Fig. 8.1.7 - 3-Dimensional view of the G+12 building

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 26
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Fig. 8.1.8 - A view of the building model in Y-Z plane

8.2 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Seismic response has been studied with respect to storey drift, storey shear, base shear,
roof displacement and natural periods of the building with fixed base without considering the
SSI, for all load cases, given in Table 7.7. for Hard (Soil type 1), Medium (soil type 2) and
Soft soil (soil type 3).

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 27
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

8.2.1 STOREY DRIFT

Storey Drift is the relative displacement of one storey with respect to the other,
immediately above or below. Drift of the building can be affected by the structural rigidity
and soil conditions. Drifts obtained from the analysis for different soils are shown in Table
8.1. It is observed that, the drift in case of soft soil is maximum and has increased much when
compared to hard soil.

Table 8.1 Storey Drift with respect to different Soil conditions (mm)
Storey label Storey names Hard soil (Soil Medium soil Soft soil
type 1) (Soil type 2) (Soil type 3)
13 Terracen 1.7 2.2 2.8
12 Storey 11 2.2 2.9 3.6
11 Storey 10 2.7 3.7 4.5
10 Storey 9 3.2 4.4 5.4
09 Storey 8 3.7 5.0 6.1
08 Storey 7 4.0 5.4 6.7
07 Storey 6 4.2 5.7 7.0
06 Storey 5 4.3 5.9 7.2
05 Storey 4 4.3 5.8 7.1
04 Storey 3 4.2 5.7 7.0
03 Storey 2 3.8 5.2 6.4
02 Storey 1 3.2 4.3 5.3
01 Stilt 1.8 2.5 3.1
00 Base 0 0 0

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 28
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

13
12
11
10
9
STOREY 8
7 HARD
6
MEDIUM
5
SOFT
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8
DRIFT IN mm

Fig. 8.2.1. Comparison of storey drift for hard, medium and soft soil.

Comparison of storey drift for the hard, medium and soft soil cases is shown in Fig.
8.2.1. The storey drift is minimum for hard soil and maximum in soft soil case. In all three
cases, variation of the drift is parabolic and observed that the values do not differ much at
terrace, while they are considerable in middle storeys showing increase for soft soil.
Maximum storey drift occurred in storey 5 in all the three cases.

8.2.2 LATERAL DISPLACEMENT

Maximum lateral displacement in a tall building is an important response to Earthquake
ground motion and it needs to be controlled to reduce the damages to structural and non-
structural elements such as facades, equipment, other interiors and also it causes uneasiness
to occupants. The maximum displacement of the structure for different soils in foundations is
shown in Table 8.2.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 29
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 8.2 Lateral Displacement in the Building under different Soils conditions
Max. Displacement in mm
Storey Name Hard soil Medium soil Soft soil
ghmkhgjmg
(Soil type 1) (Soil type 2) (Soil type 3)
Terrace 44.1 60.0 73.7
Storey 11 42.4 57.7 70.9
Storey 10 40.2 54.7 67.2
Storey 9 37.5 51.0 62.6
Storey 8 34.2 46.5 57.1
Storey 7 30.5 41.4 50.9
Storey 6 26.4 35.9 44.1
Storey 5 22.1 30.0 36.9
Storey 4 17.7 24.0 29.5
Storey 3 13.3 18.1 22.2
Storey 2 9.0 12.3 15.1
Storey 1 5.1 6.9 8.5
Stilt 1.9 2.5 3.1
Base 0 0 0

Storey wise displacement plots for all cases is shown in Fig. 8.2.2. The lateral
displacement of the structure in case of soft soil is more compared to both hard and medium
soils for fixed base model. The building has behaved like a vertical cantilever showing
maximum displacement at the terrace level. Reversal of curvature is observed between storey
4, 5 and 6 in different in soft, medium and hard cases respectively.

13
12
11
10
9
8
7
HARD
STOREY

6
5 MEDIUM
4 SOFT
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80

DISPLACEMENT IN mm

Fig. 8.2.2 Comparison of displacements at different storey levels for different soil conditions

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 30
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

8.2.3 STOREY SHEAR

Seismic ground motion sets up non-harmonic vibrations in the buildings and large
incoherent forces are setup at all levels depending on stiffness, mass and acceleration. Every
storey will be subjected to storey shear which accumulates to produce very large base shear
in the ground floor which the columns and shear walls have to resist. The storey shear results
from the analysis for different soil conditions are shown in Table 8.3.

Table 8.3 Storey shear with respect to different soil conditions

Storey shear in kN
Storey
Name Hard soil (Soil Medium soil Soft soil (Soil
type 1) (Soil type 2) type 3)
Terrace 200.50 272.68 334.84
Storey 11 395.20 537.48 659.99
Storey 10 559.73 761.24 934.76
Storey 9 696.62 947.41 1163.36
Storey 8 808.42 1099.45 1350.06
Storey 7 897.65 1220.81 1499.08
Storey 6 966.87 1314.94 1614.67
Storey 5 1018.60 1385.30 1701.07
Storey 4 1055.49 1435.46 1762.67
Storey 3 1080.03 1468.85 1803.66
Storey 2 1094.66 1488.73 1828.08
Storey 1 1102.15 1498.92 1840.59
Stilt 1105.23 1503.12 1845.74

Storey shear is maximum for soft soil compared to hard and medium soil conditions as
shown in the Fig. 8.2.3. The storey shear increases quadratically and becomes almost
constant in lower floors. Storey shear values are close to one another in top floors and
magnification of story shear towards middle stories for soft soil case.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 31
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

13
12
11
10
9
8

STOREY
7
HARD
6
5 MEDIUM
4 SOFT
3
2
1
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
STOREY SHEAR (kN)

Fig. 8.2.3 Comparison of storey shear for hard, medium & soft soil

8.2.4 BASE SHEAR

Storey shears accumulate towards the stilt and the Base shear becomes critical for
columns and shear walls in this floor. Base shear is found to increase for soft soil
considerably when compared to hard soil which is evident in Table 8.4.
Table 8.4 Base Shear for different Soil conditions
Soil Type Base Shear (kN)
Hard 1105.23
Medium 1503.12
Soft 1845.74

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 32
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

2000
1800
1600
1400
BASE SHEAR (kN) 1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
HARD MEDIUM SOFT

SOIL TYPE

Fig. 8.2.4 Comparison of Base Shear for different Soil conditions

Comparison of base shear for hard, medium and soft soil conditions are shown in Fig.
8.2.4. Soft soil transmits maximum ground motion to the structure than hard and medium
soils. Hence the maximum base shear at the base of the structure for soft soil condition.

8.2.5 MODAL BEHAVIOUR

The Modal analysis has been explained in section 2.2.4., accordingly the building is
analysed as a continuous model with infinite number degrees of freedom and natural
frequencies. The Natural time periods are the important factors, which affect the seismic
behaviour of the structure. Natural time periods obtained from the analysis for fixed base are
shown in Table 8.5.

Variation of Natural time period for different modes of vibration of fixed base structure
are shown in Fig. 8.2.5. Natural time period is highest in first mode and drops sharply up to
mode 5 and remains constant thereon up to the 10th mode where it is the least.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 33
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 8.5 Modal time period for

fixed base building
Time Period
Mode No.
(sec)
1 2.551
2 1.744
3 1.602
4 0.819
5 0.523
6 0.462
7 0.452
8 0.297
9 0.274
10 0.226

10
9
8
7
6
MODE NO.

5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
TIME PERIOD (Sec)

Fig. 8.2.5 Variation of Natural time period for fixed base building

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 34
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 9
SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF THE BUILDING CONSIDERING SOIL
STRUCTURE INTERACTION

9.1 IN SITU SOIL CONDITIONS AT THE SITE IN MAMBAKKAM

In situ soil conditions are very important to be considered for the analysis for
Earthquake ground motions. The Soil profile and its depth or thickness affects the structural
behaviour. Geotechnical investigation has been carried out by M/s Geotechnical Solutions,
Chennai. The soil properties are obtained from the design office.

Fourteen exploratory bore holes have been dug for geotechnical investigation by the
firm. Four types of clayey soils are present in the building site as shown in the profile of
Fig 9.1. First layer at GL to 0.6 m of sandy clayey, second layer 0.6 m to 1.4 m of Yellowish
grey clayey cementitious sand, third layer 1.4 m to 2.4 m of dark Yellowish grey clayey silty
fines and the fourth layer 2.4 m to 4m of very dense clayey sand. For the present study these
clayey soils are divided in to two types based on density. Sandy clay with unit weight of 16
KN/m3 and Yellowish Grey clayey with unit weight of 18 KN/m3.

Fig. 9.1 Depth Extent of different Soils

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 35
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

9.2 MODELLING OF RAFT FOUNDATION

Raft foundation of 0.5 m thickness has been modelled using thick R.C. Shell elements.
The building with raft foundation model is as shown in the Fig. 9.5. The properties of clayey
soil adopted and spring values are calculated are shown in Table 9.1. The spring stiffness
values for vertical, horizontal, rocking and twisting displacements are calculated according to
the formulae as shown in the Table 9.2.

Fig. 9.2 Plan view of the raft foundation

Raft foundation is modelled for 0.5 m thickness. The whole area is meshed with quad
shell elements and soil springs are applied. 3-Dimensional view of the raft foundation without
soil springs is shown in Fig.9.3.

Fig.9.3 A 3-Dimensional view of the Raft foundation

The present study is mainly deals with clayey soil. The important parameters for the
yellowish grey clayey soil is listed and shown in Table 9.1.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 36
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 9.1 Yellowish grey clayey soil parameters and calculated values
Clayey soil parameters Calculated values
SPT No. N 6
Shear wave Velocity Vs 100xN1/3 181.71 m/s
Unit weight Γ By soil test 1800 Kg/m3
Mass density ρ 183.48 N/m3
Shear modulus G ρVs2 6058.23 KN/m2
Poisson’s Ratio µ 0.4-0.5 0.4

Table 9.2 Spring Values of Soil

Soil Spring Values as per Richart and Lysmer (1970)
Direction Spring Values Equivalent Radius

Vertical rz =√
Kz =

Horizontal rx =√
Kx= Ky=

K x= rØx= √
Rocking

K y= rØy= √

Twisting
K z=
rØz= √

Fig. 9.4 Schematic of soil spring stiffness with DOFs

The Fig. 9.4 shows the soil stiffness along 6 degrees of freedom, in which Kx , Ky and
Kz are translational stiffness values and Kφx, Kφy and Kφz are the rotational stiffness values
of soil springs along x, y and z axis respectively.
[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 37
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

9.3 Calculation of clayey Soil spring values

According to the formulae tabulated in Table 9.2, the spring values for yellowish grey
clayey soil have been calculated and tabulated are shown in Table 9.3. The clayey soil spring
values are calculated and applied to the raft foundation to facilitate soil structure interaction.

Table 9.3 Yellowish grey clayey Soil spring values

Direction Notation Spring Values (KN/m)
Vertical Kz 523027.19
Horizontal Kx= Ky 396399.55
Rocking K x= K y 40950269.12
Twisting K z 80204821.80

Raft foundation
with soil springs

Fig. 9.5 Finite element Model of the Building with Raft foundation & Soil springs

The 3- Dimensional finite element model with raft foundation and soil springs is shown
in Fig. 9.5.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 38
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

9.4 DISCUSSION OF SEISMIC RESPONSE

The results of seismic response of the building with yellowish grey clayey soil in
foundation are discussed. Important responses like drift, storey shear, base shear, roof
displacement and natural periods of the building are tabulated and their variation is plotted.

9.4.1 STOREY DRIFT

The storey drift of the building with raft foundation on yellowish grey clayey soil is is
tabulated in Table 9.4. and its variation is plotted in Fig. 9.6. Maximum drift is observed in
storey 5 and 4 and it reduces to zero at the base parabolicaly. The storey drift reduces as we
move towards the terrace.
Table 9.4. Storey Drift with respect to yellowish grey
clayey soil
Drift in mm
Storey Name Yellowish grey
clayey soil
Terrace 5.20
Storey 11 6.80
Storey 10 8.60
Storey 9 10.30
Storey 8 11.60
Storey 7 12.70
Storey 6 13.50
Storey 5 13.70
Storey 4 13.70
Storey 3 13.30
Storey 2 12.20
Storey 1 10.20
Stilt 5.80
Base 0.00

13
12
11
10
9
8
STOREY

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
DRIFT IN mm

Fig. 9.6 Storey Drift for Yellowish grey Clayey Soil

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 39
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

9.4.2 LATERAL DISPLACEMENT

Deformed shape of the building is obtained after the analysis of the finite element
model of tall building with raft foundation (with SSI). Fig. 9.7. is a snapshot of the building
analysed using SAP2000 software.

Fig. 9.7. Deformed shape of the building with respect to seismic load in x- direction
The lateral displacement of the building with respect to the Yellowish grey clayey soil
is shown in Table 9.5.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 40
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 9.5 Lateral displacement for Yellowish

grey clayey soil
Max. Displacement
in mm
Storey Name
Yellowish grey clayey
soil
Terrace 137.60
Storey 11 132.40
Storey 10 125.60
Storey 9 117.00
Storey 8 106.70
Storey 7 95.10
Storey 6 82.40
Storey 5 68.90
Storey 4 55.20
Storey 3 41.50
Storey 2 28.20
Storey 1 16.00
Stilt 5.80

Storey displacement of the structure with raft foundation for the Yellowish grey clayey
soil condition is shown in Fig. 9.8. Lateral displacement is maximum at the terrace and
minimum at stilt level. The curvature is observed to reverse at storey 6.
13
12
11
10
9
8
STOREY

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 50 100 150
DISPLACEMENT IN mm

Fig. 9.8 Storey Displacement for Yellowish grey clayey soil

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 41
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

9.4.3 STOREY SHEAR

Story shear values for building on yellowish grey clayey soil obtained from the analysis
is shown in Table 9.6.
Table 9.6. Storey shear for Yellowish grey
clayey soil
Storey shear in
(kN)
Storey Name
Yellowish grey
Clayey soil
Terrace 636.072
Storey 11 1247.224
Storey 10 1763.656
Storey 9 2193.338
Storey 8 2544.243
Storey 7 2824.339
Storey 6 3041.599
Storey 5 3203.993
Storey 4 3319.787
Storey 3 3396.867
Storey 2 3442.789
Storey 1 3466.376
Stilt 3475.907

13
12
11
10
9
8
STOREY

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
STOREY SHEAR (kN)

Fig. 9.9 Storey shear for Yellowish grey clayey soil

The variation of storey shear in the building with raft foundation for yellowish grey soil
condition is shown in Fig.9.9. The shear is found to be least in the terrace and maximum in
lower storeys as it accumulates towards the stilt floor. It is observed that the variation is
[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 42
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

almost linear in the top 5 storeys then becomes curvilinear up to storey 4 and remains almost
constant from there towards stilt floor.

9.4.4 BASE SHEAR

The maximum lateral force at the base of the structure with respect to yellowish grey
clayey soil is shown in Table 9.7.

Table 9.7 Base shear for Yellowish grey clayey soil

Soil Type Base Shear (kN)
Yellowish grey Clayey 3475.90

9.4.5 MODAL BEHAVIOUR

In the present study to understand the modal behaviour and their periods 10 modes are
considered. The modal time periods obtained from the analysis are shown in Table 9.8.

Table 9.8. Modal time period

Time
Mode No.
Period
1 3.505
2 2.399
3 2.205
4 1.125
5 0.72
6 0.635
7 0.621
8 0.408
9 0.377
10 0.311

Plot of natural time periods of the structure with raft foundation on yellowish grey soil
condition is shown in Fig. 9.10. Mode 1 shows maximum time period and mode 10 being
least. The time period has shown sharp increase in both the cases with and without SSI from
mode 1 to 5 and decreases gradually there along up to mode 10.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 43
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

12

10

MODE NO
6

0
0 1 2 3 4
TIME PERIOD (Sec)

Fig. 9.10 Natural time period for Yellowish grey clayey soil

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 44
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 10
COMPARISON OF RESPONSES IN TALL BUILDING WITH
FIXED BASE ON SOFT SOIL
AND BUILDING WITH SSI ON CLAYEY SOIL
10.1 GENERAL
Comparative study is carried out with respect to seismic responses of the tall building
with fixed base on soft soil and building founded on clayey soil.

10.2 STOREY DIRFT

Storey drift values obtained from the analysis for cases without SSI and with SSI are
shown in Table 10.1. The increase in the drift, storey wise, is also shown in Table.

Table 10.1 Storey Drift with respect to fixed and flexible base
Drift (mm) Increase
Storey Name Soft Soil Yellowish grey (%)
(without SSI) Clayey (with SSI)
Terrace 2.80 5.2 85.7
Storey 11 3.60 6.8 88.8
Storey 10 4.50 8.6 91.1
Storey 9 5.40 10.3 90.7
Storey 8 6.10 11.6 90.1
Storey 7 6.70 12.7 89.5
Storey 6 7.00 13.5 92.8
Storey 5 7.20 13.7 90.2
Storey 4 7.10 13.6 91.5
Storey 3 7.00 13.3 90.0
Storey 2 6.40 12.2 90.6
Storey 1 5.30 10.2 92.4
Stilt 3.10 5.8 87.0

Storey drift of the structure with SSI and without SSI are compared and shown in
Fig.10.1. The variation is parabolic in both cases and the storey drift has increased by 92.8%
at storey 6 in comparison to fixed base on soft soil. It is seen that the structural response with
respect to drift has shown a marked increase from top up to the storey 7 and has shown
constancy up to storey 4, reduces sharply from there on, towards stilt.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 45
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

COMPARISION OF STOREY DRIFT

13
12
11
10
9
8
STOREY

7
6 without SSI
5
4 with SSI
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
DRIFT IN mm

Fig. 10.1 Comparison of storey drift of the structure with and without SSI

The pattern is similar in both the cases of with SSI and without SSI, in case of with SSI
the drift values are much larger particularly between storeys 2 and 10.

10.3 LATERAL DISPLACEMENT

Lateral displacement of the structure for soft soil (without SSI) and yellowish grey
clayey soil (with SSI) conditions and the percentage increase are shown in Table 10.2. The
lateral deflection has increased consistently by about 87% over the entire height of the
building.
Table 10.2 Lateral displacements in buildings with fixed and flexible base
Lateral displacement in mm
Storey Increase
Name Soft Soil Yellowish grey (%)
(without SSI) Clayey (with SSI)
Terrace 73.70 137.60 86.7
Storey 11 70.90 132.40 86.7
Storey 10 67.20 125.60 86.9
Storey 9 62.60 117.00 86.9
Storey 8 57.10 106.70 86.8
Storey 7 50.90 95.10 86.8
Storey 6 44.10 82.40 86.8
Storey 5 36.90 68.90 86.7
Storey 4 29.50 55.20 87.1
Storey 3 22.20 41.50 86.9
Storey 2 15.10 28.20 86.7
Storey 1 8.50 16.00 88.2
Stilt 3.10 5.80 87.0

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 46
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

COMPARISION OF MAX. LATERAL DISPLACEMENT

13
12
11
10
9
8
STOREY

7
6 without SSI
5
4 with SSI
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

MAX. DISPLACEMENT IN mm

Fig.10.2 Comparison of Lateral displacements

Comparison of lateral displacement for fixed and flexible base conditions is shown in
Fig. 10.2. Significant rotation can be observed at the base for the building with SSI due to
flexibility introduced by soil springs.

10.4 STOREY SHEAR

Storey shear for fixed and flexible conditions and the percentage increase are shown
in the Table 10.3. Comparison of storey shear with and without SSI is shown in Fig. 10.3.
The storey shear in both fixed and flexible cases varies in a linear manner from top up to
storey 10. After that it becomes curvilinear towards base and falls vertically almost from
storey 5 onwards showing constancy.
The storey shear has increased from the top gradually up to storey 6 and is almost
constant there on towards stilt in case of fixed base condition. It shows that flexible results
maximum base shear compared to fixed base. The storey shear has consistently increased by
about 88% in in building with flexible.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 47
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

Table 10.3 Storey Shear with respect to fixed and flexible base

Storey Shear (kN)

Increase
Storey Name Soft Soil Yellowish grey (%)
(without SSI) Clayey (with SSI)
Terrace 334.84 636.07 89.9
Storey 11 659.99 1247.22 88.9
Storey 10 934.76 1763.65 88.6
Storey 9 1163.36 2193.33 88.5
Storey 8 1350.06 2544.24 88.4
Storey 7 1499.08 2824.33 88.4
Storey 6 1614.67 3041.59 88.3
Storey 5 1701.07 3203.99 88.3
Storey 4 1762.67 3319.78 88.3
Storey 3 1803.66 3396.86 88.3
Storey 2 1828.08 3442.78 88.3
Storey 1 1840.59 3466.37 88.3
Stilt 1845.74 3475.90 88.3

COMPARISION OF STOREY SHEAR

13
12
11
10
9
8
STOREY

7
6 without SSI
5
4 with SSI
3
2
1
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

STOREY SHEAR (KN)

Fig. 10.3 Comparison of storey shear with and without SSI

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 48
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

10.5 BASE SHEAR

It is the maximum lateral force that can occur at the base of the structure due to seismic
ground motion. Base shear for building with SSI and without SSI are shown in Table 10.4. It
is very critical that the column and shear wall have to resist base shear produced due to
inertia during strong ground motion.

Table 10.4 Base Shear with respect to fixed and flexible base
SOIL TYPE BASE SHEAR (kN)
Soft Soil (without SSI) 1845.74
Yellowish grey Clayey
3475.90
(with SSI)

4000

3500

3000
BASE SHEAR (KN)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0
Without SSI With SSI

Fig. 10.4 Comparison of base shear with and without SSI

Comparison of Base shear in the building with SSI and without SSI is shown in
Fig. 10.4. The base shear for flexible base condition has increased significantly compared to
fixed base condition. Base shear has almost doubled when SSI is considered in the analysis
compared to the conventional analysis assuming fixed base on soft soil. This is alarming and
needs consideration.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 49
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

CHAPTER 11

CONCLUSIONS

11.1 GENERAL

Tall building of G+12 storeys with fixed base has been analysed for hard, medium and
soft soils. Same building is also analysed for flexible base simulating clayey soil condition.
SSI has been incorporated by using soil springs taking into consideration the insitu clayey
soil properties of Mambakkam, while Raft foundation has been modelled as a thick slab.
Analysis is made with the help of response spectrum of IS 1893 (Part-I) 2002. Seismic
response results of flexible base in terms of storey drift, lateral displacement, base shear and
modal behaviour are compared with those of fixed base building founded on soft soil in
foundation.

The following conclusions are drawn after comparing the responses of fixed base and
flexible base buildings for earthquake ground motion.

a) Storey Drift
The variation of storey drift in both the cases is parabolic with middle storeys
showing maximum drift. When SSI is considered there is a magnification of storey
drift in the middle storeys. There is an increase in storey drift in the upper and lower
storey while middle storey shows marked increase.
Maximum storey drift of 7.2mm occurs in storey 5 in the building with fixed
base while it is 13.7mm in the building founded on yellowish grey clayey soil and is
found to occur in the same storey. There is an increase of 90.2% in storey drift
compared to conventional analysis. The storey drifts are within the limits conforming
to clause 7.11.1 of IS 1893 (Part I) 2002.

b) Lateral displacement
The building has shown significant amount of rotation at the base due to
introduction of flexibility by incorporating of SSI. Maximum lateral displacement is
observed at the terrace level in both cases i.e. with and without SSI.

Maximum lateral displacement of 73.70 mm is observed in the case of fixed

base on soft soil while in the case of yellowish grey clayey soil it increases to

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 50
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

137.6mm, which is an increase of 86.7%. The maximum lateral displacements are

within the limits prescribed in IS 1893 (Part I)-2002 (clause [Link]).

c) Storey shear
The Storey Shear varies from 334 KN at the top to 1845 KN at base in case of
fixed base on soft soil. In case of clayey soil in foundation, it has increased from 636
KN at the top to 3475KN. The increase in storey shear is 90% at the top and 88% at the
base due to incorporation of SSI.

The storey shear has increased from the top gradually up to story 6 in fixed
base building on soft soil. It is almost constant thereon towards stilt floor, whereas in
case building with flexible base there is sharp increase in storey shear from terrace up
to storey 5 and remains almost constant thereon towards stilt floor.

c) Base shear
The base shear for flexible base condition is maximum compared to fixed base
conditions. It is found to have almost doubled when SSI effects are considered from
1845.74 KN to 3475.90 KN, which is an increase of 88.32% and is quite substantial and
needs to be considered in the design of columns and shear walls.

d) Natural time period

The natural time period in case of building with fixed base on soft soil in first
mode is 2.551 secs and increases to 3.505 secs in case of flexible base on clayey soil
which is an increase of 37.39%. Similar amount of increase in the natural time period is
found in all 10 modes.

To summarize
 The response of the tall building founded on clayey soil has shown significant increase
compared to conventional approach of assuming fixed base and founded on soft soil.
 Significant increase in response of tall building when SSI is considered is because of
flexibility induced to the base by the softness of clayey soil.
 It is therefore absolutely necessary that the clayey soil in foundation needs to be
included in the FE model of the tall building for determining realistic seismic
responses.
 The conventional analysis carried out in design offices by assuming the base as fixed
on soft soil is conservative as it is found that the responses have almost doubled in the
present work.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 51
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

REFERENCES

[1] Anand N. and Mightraj C. “Seismic behavior of RCC shear wall under different soil
conditions” GEO trendz, Indian Geotechnical Conference, IGC-2010, IIT Bombay,
December 16-18, 2010.

[2] A. Boominathan, G. R. Dodagoudar, A. Suganthi and R. Uma Maheswari “Seismic

Hazard Assessment Considering Local Site Effects for Microzonation Studies of
Chennai city” A Workshop on Microzonation ©Interline Publishing, Bangalore

[3] A.D. Pandey, Prabhat Kumar and Sharad Sharma “Seismic soil-structure interaction
of buildings on hill slopes” Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, 2011.

[4] A.D. Shirhatti and Dr. S.S. Quadri “Seismic response analysis of RC frames
considering soil structure interaction” Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical
Conference December 22-24, 2013, Roorkee.

[5] Bhattacharya, K., Dutta, S.C., and Dasgupta, S. (2004). “Effect of soil-flexibility on
dynamic behaviour of building frames on raft foundation” Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 274, pp. 111–135.

[6] B.R. Jayalekshmi and H.K. Chinmayi (2014). “Effect of Soil Flexibility on Seismic
Force Evaluation of RC Framed Buildings with Shear Wall: A Comparative Study of
IS 1893 and EUROCODE8” Journal of Structures.

[7] Dutta, S.C., Maiti, A., Moitra, D. (1999). “Effect of soil-structure interaction on
column moment of building frames” Journal of Institution of Engineers (India).

[8] Hamid Reza Tabatabaiefar, Bijan Samali, and Behzad Fatahi, “Effects of Dynamic
Soil-Structure Interaction on Inelastic Behaviour of Mid-Rise Moment Resisting
Buildings on Soft Soils” Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2010
Conference, Perth, Western Australia.

[9] Jenifer Priyanka, R.M. and Anand, N. (2012). “Effect of lateral force on tall buildings
with different type of irregularities” Proceedings of the INCACMA Conference on
Advances in Construction, Manufacturing and Automation Research.

[10] Jinu Mary Mathew, Cinitha A, Umesha P K, Nagesh R Iyer and Eapen Sakaria
(2014). “Seismic response of RC Building by considering Soil Structure Interaction”
ISSN 2319 – 6009 Vol. 3, No. 1, February 2014.
[11] Halkude S. A, Kalyanshetti M.G and Barelikar S.M (2014) “Seismic Response of
R.C. Frames with Raft Footing Considering Soil Structure Interaction” International
Journal of Current Engineering and Technology E-ISSN 2277 – 4106, P-ISSN 2347 -
-5161

[12] Magade S B and Patankar J.P (2009), “Effect of Soil Structure Interaction On The
Dynamic Behaviour of Buildings”, IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering(IOSR-JMCE) ISSN: 2278-1684, pp. 09-14.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 52
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

[13] M. Jawad Arefi (2008) “Effects of Soil-Structure Interaction on the Seismic

Response of Existing R.C. Frame Buildings” Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori
di Pavia Università degli Studi di Pavia.

[14] M. H. T. Rayhani, and M. H. El Naggar, “Numerical Modelling of Seismic

Response of Rigid Foundation on Soft Soil” International journal of geomechanics ©
asce /november/december 2008.

[15] Tavakoli H R, Naeej M and Salari A (2011), “Response of RC structures subjected

to near-fault and far-fault earthquake motions considering soilstructure interaction”,
International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering,Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 881-896

[17] Xilin Lu, Bo Chen, Peizhen Li and Yueqing Chen (2003) “Numerical Analysis of
Tall Buildings Considering Dynamic Soil Structure Interaction” Journal of Asian
Architecture and Building Engineering / May 2003/8

[18] Yasuhiro Hayashi and Ikuo Takahashi “Soil-Structure Interaction Effects on

Building Response in Recent Earthquakes” Proceedings Third UJNR Workshop on
Soil-Structure Interaction, March 29-30, 2004 , Menlo Park, California, USA.

[19] IS 1893(Part 1): 2002, “Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures, Bureau of Indian Standards”, New Delhi 110002

[20] IS 456:2000 “Indian Standard Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced
Concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards”, New Delhi, India.

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 53
Analytical Approach to Soil Structure Interaction of Tall Buildings under Clayey Soil Conditions

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Hamid Reza Tabatabaiefar, Bijan Samali, and Behzad Fatahi (2010) “Effects of
Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction on Inelastic Behaviour of Mid-Rise Moment
Resisting Buildings on Soft Soils” Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2010
Conference, Perth, Western Australia.

[2] Ketan Bajaj, JiteshT Chavda, Bhavik M Vyas “Seismic behaviour of buildings on
different types of soil” Indian Geotechnical Conference December 22-24, 2013,
Roorkee.

[3] Pallavi Ravishankar (2013) “Numerical Modelling to Study Soil Structure Interaction
for Tall Asymmetrical Building” International Conference on Earthquake
Geotechnical Engineering Istanbul, Turkey

[4] P.C. Vasani “Interactive Analysis Models for Soil and Structures” Applied Mechanics
department, L.D. College of Engineering, Ahmedabad.

[5] P. E. Kavitha, K. P. Narayanan, K. S. Beena “A review of soil constitutive models for

soil structure interaction analysis” Indian Geotechnical Conference December
15-17, 2011, Kochi.

[6] Siddharth G. Shah, Solanki C.H, Desai J.A (2011) “Soil structure interaction analysis
methods - State of art-Review” International Journal of Civil and Structural
Engineering Volume 2, No 1, 2011

[7] Wolf.J.P.(1985) “Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction” Prentice- Hall. Inc,

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

[Link].,(CADS), Department of Studies in Civil Engineering University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere. 54