Analysis Of Frame Structure Subjected To Lateral Load By Using Lateral Load Resisting Elements

When it comes to controlling excessive drift, efficiency, and rigidity when exposed to lateral loads, multi-story constructions are among the most popular choices for the outrigger system. Both structural and non-structural forms may have their damage reduced in the event of an earthquake or wind stress. The purpose of this article is to examine the importance of creating a three-dimensional model of a 32-story building in order to conduct analyses and designs using the ETABS program. The model will be used to analyze the building's frame structure and determine the elements that will resist lateral loads. The purpose of this experiment is to determine the impact of an outrigger system at one, two, three, and four storeys in height. This model study makes use of the Wind Static Method, the Linear Dynamic Method (Response Spectrum Method), and the Linear Static Method (Equivalent Static Method). Determine the lateral displacement, base shear, and tale drift for various kinds of models with and without an outrigger system using the efficiency and stiffness parameters. Therefore, in this scenario, it is necessary to reduce displacement and drift in comparison to the model without the outrigger system.


I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 General
More and more, tall buildings are going constructed all over the globe, which means that engineers will have to use their best judgment to deal with new problems.Modern skyscrapers often use a network of connected shear walls to counteract lateral stresses caused by earthquakes or wind.Nevertheless, a lateral load resisting system is required to provide sufficient lateral stiffness as building height increases, as the structure's stiffness becomes more important with growing building height.Reduced vulnerability to wind and earthquake-related small and medium lateral loads is a direct result of the dynamic load resisting system's ability to regulate excess lateral load drift.For high-rises, this method is the way to go, particularly in places prone to earthquakes or where wind is a major factor.
The development of concrete technology-encompassing new materials, structural systems, analyses, and construction processes-during the 1900s allowed for the possibility of constructing concrete tall buildings.Structural systems address the fundamental requirements of the structure.As a building climbs in height, the impact of lateral loads, such wind and earthquake, becomes more significant.Wind and seismic factors may cause significant damage to tall structures.rise to the level of a crucial factor in any design.It is possible to control the dynamic response of tall buildings by enhancing their structural systems.
Earthquakes and wind loads affect the amount that a building can deflect.The building's central concrete core acts as a barrier against earthquake and wind-induced lateral stresses.One of the most effective and widely utilized structural methods for reducing bending due to wind and seismic forces is the use of a concrete core.Owners are more concerned about the performance and cost savings of the hybrid frame-concrete core wall construction, which has seen a rise in popularity in recent years.
The maximum permissible top deflection for wind studies on tall structures is one-fifth of the building's height, according to Part III of Bureau of Indian Standards 875: 1987.When choosing a structural system for a tall structure, lateral drift at the top is one of the most important factors to consider.The core wall's stiffness is enough to resist wind and seismic stresses at lower building heights, but it becomes inadequate at higher ones.New, state-of-the-art structural solutions are required to address this problem.Each complex form category requires a unique structural system; for example, tall buildings often use many braced tubes, dia-grid, and outrigger systems.

Objectives of Study
 In order to learn how high-rises affected by dynamic loading fare after installing outriggers. Examine four-sided effects of the building's core wall and braced outriggers. Assessing building's total stiffness against lateral load allows researchers to examine how well each structural component performs. For the purpose of researching optimal outrigger placement in tall buildings. With the goal of learning how x-bracing affects outrigger  In order to examine base shear, displacement, and storey drift.

General
Existing RC structures in high seismic zones and hilly terrains were subject of several research studies and tests worldwide in an effort to better understand and evaluate impact of seismic stresses.Idea of modeling & analytical approaches used to achieve this objective has developed over time in response to both new technological developments & accumulation of prior knowledge.

Shivancharan K, Chandrakala S, Narayan G, Karthik , (2015) (IJRET) "Analysis of Outrigger System for
High Vertical Irregularities Structures Subjected to Lateral Load" is the title of their study.For zone V of IS 1893:2002, the author has used E-tabs to examine a G+30 story structure with vertical irregularity in this inquiry.The ground, air, and water pressures exerted by gravity can't break the three-dimensional framework.The next step is to examine the outriggers' drift and deflection after positioning them at a certain height.It all starts with fixing the outrigger position as the first outrigger position.Then, while examining the drift and deflection, you set the second outrigger position by adjusting its location.The author has computed the building's performance for lateral displacement and storey drift after analyzing it using the equivalent static approach for wind and earthquake.
The research found that 0.5H was the most suitable outrigger location, and that 0.67H was the best overall.One position outrigger at 0.67 height controls 36.9percent of drift and 29.8 percent of deflection as compared to the bare frame, respectively.In comparison to the naked frame, outriggers with belt trusses mitigate 45.1% of deflection and 40% of drift.One may regulate the building's deflection by 13% and its drift by 14.64% by comparing the first and second locations of the outrigger systems.Positioning the outrigger between half of its heights is ideal.
M.R Suresh, Pradeep K.M, (2015) (IJSRD) "The Outrigger's Impact on Reinforced Concrete Structures in Various Seismic Zones" was conducted by.An RC-frame structure with 30 stories was the subject of this scholar's investigation.It is possible to think about the outriggers system at intervals of 0.25H, 0.5H, 0.75H, and 1H along the H-axis of the structure.For modeling and analysis, the Outrigger beam depths were raised from 1 to 5 in accordance with the do/d ratio using ETABS finite element software.The study takes into consideration loads in line with Indian requirements and uses the comparable static approach.Part 1 of IS: 875: 1987, Part 2 of IS: 875: 1987, and Part 1 of IS: 1893: 2002 A range of models with different outrigger depths were able to regulate the lateral displacement to within 65% to 60% throughout all seismic zones, as shown in the research.In Zone II, all of the models had drift control of 60% to 65%, while in Zones III, IV, and V, different models had drift control of 62% to 67%.

Abdul Kareem and Srinivas B,(2015) (IJERT) An Investigation on the Use of Outriggers in Steel-Braced
High-Rise Reinforced Concrete Structures The researcher has used analysis approaches such as the Equivalent Static Method and the Response Spectrum Method to examine a G+20 story structure for all the zones specified in the regulation.This research compares two types of structures: regular and irregular.The regular buildings use steel bracings as outriggers, while the irregular buildings use a centrally stiff shear wall.Based on the findings, this study examines base shear and inter story drifts.Researchers found that using the Equivalent Static Method, outriggers decreased lateral displacement by 20% for standard buildings and by 19% for irregular ones.According to the results of the Response Spectrum

Introduction
Most older buildings have reinforced concrete (RC) frames and are either medium-or low-rise, so they can survive earthquakes of varying intensities.These buildings are especially susceptible to earthquake damage because their designs sometimes ignore seismic stresses in favor of gravity loads.The goal is to lessen the impact of big earthquakes.This study aims to study the effects of seismic and wind loads on an RC frame building, specifically its gravity load and lateral load analyses with outriggers supplied in compliance with zone V seismic codes and wind loads.The purpose of this modeling is to assess the building's seismic susceptibility.For both static and dynamic analysis, ETABS is the program of choice.

Method of Modelling
We utilize the ETABS program to build the 3D model and do the analysis.The program can foretell the behavior of space frames by considering the material's elasticity and either static or dynamic loads.ETABS is capable of static and dynamic analysis in addition to handling static load.

General
The outcomes of the selected buildings are presented and discussed in detail in this chapter.The results of shear, laterals displacements, storey drifts, & natural period and overall performance of different building model have presented and compared.In these study, attempt has made to evaluate the seismic performance RC with central core wall both with and without outriggers The outriggers are placed in different positions to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing lateral displacements and other parameters.Also Braced core wall is used in the study, and the efficiency is observed.

Seismic Analysis 4.2.1 Lateral Displacement
Following the study, the displacement values were illustrated in charts using analysis of linear static and linear dynamic systems methods.This method is applicable to the model's Y and X-Directions.The displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.It was discovered that the model outrigger system's displacement values are lower than those of the outrigger system without the outrigger`

Storey Drift
Drift is mostly defined as comparative of lateral displacement of two floors.Drift is absolutely essential for control limit damage to interiors and exteriors part systems.According to INDIAN STANDARD 1893 (part 1) of 2016 consider that the allowable storey drift is measured as 0.0004 times of one storey height of structure.
From the tale drifts motion, the drift is the least at the bottom and top of the storey structure, and the most at the center.As a result of this method .When the outrigger system is at the storey height level, the drift is also minimal, as demonstrated in the graphs below.Method.It shows that the drift is greatest at the mid-level of the structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this, a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.The variation illustrated in Graph 7 shows variation in drift in X-Direction for all building models.

Base Shear
The max laterals forces that will occur as a result of seismic activity at a structure's foundation activity ground motion is known as base shear.During earthquake waves, base shear occurs when parallel planes of the structure deform.When a building is subjected to seismic or wind loads, the highest lateral forces at the building's base are called base shear.

Wind Static Analysis
Designing for wind-induced building motion is increasingly crucial as demand for larger, lighter, and more slender structures grows.Strong winds can cause tall structures to sway even if they comply with the code's lateral drift standards.Recent catastrophes brought on by hurricanes in the United States are more evidence that current structures are not completely wind-resistant.As a result, it is vital to review the computing methods that are currently being used to determine along wind load.Although it is anticipated that in the end, wind load assessment will be done by accounting for the random change in wind speed over time, the theoretical approaches currently available have not developed sufficiently for inclusion in the Indian standard code.For this reason, the current Indian Standard for Wind Loads on Buildings and Structures (IS-875 (part3):2015) uses the static wind technique of load estimate, which assumes a constant wind speed.It shows that the displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.Variation illustrated in graph 9 shows variation displacement in X-Direction for all building model.show that the use of the Outrigger system at 1/2 height of building resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 32.46% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 5 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 24.614 mm, than the other model 2.

Graph 15 : Model 2 and Model 6 Maximum Storey Displacement Comparison
Graph 15 show that the use of the Outrigger system at Top,3/4 and 1/2 height of building resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 50.86% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 6 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 20.305 mm, than the other model 2. Graph 16 show that the use of the Outrigger system at top of building and X-bracing resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 20.89% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 7 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 23.745 mm, than the other model 3.

Graph 17: Model 4 and Model 8 Maximum Storey Displacement Comparison
Graph 17 show that the use of the Outrigger system at 3/4 height of building and X-bracing resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 20.50% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 8 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 21.244 mm, than the other model 4.

Graph 18: Model 5 and Model 9 Maximum Storey Displacement Comparison
Graph18 show that the use of the Outrigger system at 1/2 height of building and X-bracing resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 18.82% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 9 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 20.38 mm, than the other model 5.

2 
The models that were use for this study are listed below; PAGES:30-53 1/15/24 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY(JSRT) VOLUME-2 ISSUE-1 JANUARY Registered under MSME Government of India ISSN: Model 1-A Bare frame  Model 2-A Bare frame with central core wall  Model 3-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at Top  Model 4 A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at 3/4 Height  Model 5-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at Mid  Model 6-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at Top, 3/4 and Mid  Model 7-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at Top + X Bracing  Modell 8-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at 3/4 Height + X Bracing  Model 9-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at Mid + X Bracing  Modell 10-A Bare frame with central core wall & Outrigger at Top, 3/4 and Mid + X Bracing

Graph 1 :Graph 2 :Graph 3 :Graph 4 :
Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along X-Direction by Equivalent PAGES:30-53 1/15/24 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY(JSRT) VOLUME-2 ISSUE-1 JANUARY Registered under MSME Government of India ISSN: 2583-8660 www.jsrtjournal.comISSN: 2583-8660 34 Static Method Graph 1 shows the Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along X-Direction by Equivalent Static Method.It shows that the displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.Variation illustrated in graph 1 shows variation displacement in X-Direction for all building model.Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along Y-Direction by Equivalent Static Method Graph 2 shows the Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along Y-Direction by Equivalent Static Method.It shows that the displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.Variation illustrated in graph 2 shows variation displacement in Y-direction for all building model.Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along X-Direction by Response Spectrum Method Graph 3shows the Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along X-Direction by Response Spectrum Method.It shows that the displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.Variation illustrated in graph 3 shows variation displacement in X-Direction for all building model.Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along Y-Direction by Response Spectrum Method Graph 4 shows the Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along Y-Direction by Response Spectrum Method.It shows that the displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.Variation illustrated in graph 4 shows variation displacement in Y-direction for all building model.

Graph 5 :Graph 6 :Graph 7 :
Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along X-Direction by Equivalent Static Method Graph 5 shows the Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along X-Direction by Equivalent Static Method.It shows that the drift is greatest at the mid-level of the structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this, a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.The variation illustrated in Graph 5 PAGES:30-53 1/15/24 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY(JSRT) VOLUME-2 ISSUE-1 JANUARY Registered under MSME Government of India ISSN: 2583-8660 www.jsrtjournal.comISSN: 2583-8660 37 shows variation in drift in X-Direction for all building models.Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along Y-Direction by Equivalent Static Method Graph 6 shows the Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along Y-Direction by Equivalent Static Method.It shows that the drift is greatest at the mid level of the structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this, a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.The variation illustrated in Graph 6 shows variation in drift in Y-Direction for all building models.Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along X-Direction by Response Spectrum Method .Graph 7 shows the Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along X-Direction by Response Spectrum

Graph 8 :
Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along Y-Direction by Response Spectrum MethodGraph 8 shows the Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along Y-Direction by Response Spectrum Method.It shows that the drift is greatest at the mid-level of the structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this, a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.The variation illustrated in Graph 8 shows variation in drift in Y-Direction for all building models.

4. 3 . 1
Lateral Displacement Graph 9: Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along X-Direction by Wind Static Method Graph 9 shows the Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along X-Direction by Wind Static Method.

Graph 10 :
Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along Y-Direction by Wind Static Method Graph 10 shows the Comparison of Lateral Displacement for Various Models along Y-Direction by Wind Static Method.It shows that the displacement is greatest at the top of the level structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this.When a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.Variation illustrated in graph 10 shows variation displacement in Y-Direction for all building model.

Graph 11 :Graph 12 :Graph 13 : 4 Graph 14 :
Comparison of Top Storey Displacement by Wind Static Method along X and YModel 2 and Model 3 Maximum Storey Displacement ComparisonGraph 12 show that the use of the Outrigger system at Top of building resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 15.35% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 3 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 28.285 mm, than the other model 2. Model 2 and Model 4 Maximum Storey Displacement Comparison Graph 13 show that the use of the Outrigger system at 3/4 height of building resulted in the reduction of displacement in the structure.The displacement is reduced up to 26.744% due to Outrigger.The Outrigger Model 4 showed less displacement in X-direction, which is 26.097 mm, than the other model 2. Model 2 and Model 5 Maximum Storey Displacement Comparison Graph 14

Graph 16 :
Model 3 and Model 7 Maximum Storey Displacement Comparison

Graph 21 :
lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.The variation illustrated in Graph 20 shows variation in drift in X-Direction for all building models.Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along Y-Direction by Wind Static Method Graph 21 shows the Comparison of Storey Drift for Various Models along Y-Direction by Wind Static Method.It shows that the drift is greatest at the mid-level of the structure and lowest at the bottom, according to this, a result, as lateral displacement increases, so does the storey height.The variation illustrated in Graph 21 shows variation in drift in Y-Direction for all building models.

Graph 22 :
Comparison of Top Storey Drift by Wind Static Method along X and Y-Direction Graph 23: Model 2 and Model 3 Maximum Storey Drift Comparison

Table 1 : Maximum Displacements (mm) By Equivalent Static Method and Response Spectrum Method along X and Y-Direction
The above Table1Shows Maximum Displacements (mm) By Equivalent Static Method and Response Spectrum Method along X and Y Direction