IRJET- Comparative Study of Usage of Outrigger and B-ELT Truss System for High-Rise Concrete Buildin

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF USAGE OF OUTRIGGER AND B-ELT TRUSS SYSTEM FOR HIGH-RISE CONCRETE BUILDINGS B Putlaiah1, P Hanuma2 1M.Tech,

Structural Engineering, Sri Sunflower College of Engineering and Technology, Lankapalli, Andhra Pradesh 2Assistant Professor, Sri Sunflower College of Engineering and Technology, Lankapalli, Andhra Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------Abstract: Tall building development has been rapidly increasing worldwide introducing new challenges that need to be met through engineering judgment. In Metro cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Bangalore, Kolkata, Hyderabad etc multistoried buildings are common and in spite of that people are willing to stay in high rise buildings. The lateral stability of tall building plays an important role in safe analysis and design. 3D model is generated in ETAB 2016. A relatively new concept of Virtual Outrigger is introduced in this paper. In which, using only the belt truss in the building in order to increase the performance of the building under the dynamic loads is studied. Emphasis is given to the various benefits of employing Virtual Outriggers instead of Conventional ones. The building is strengthened in lateral direction by providing Outrigger and Belt truss system at every 9 to 10 storey level. Two methods of analysis have been taken into account for lateral stability analysis viz linear static and linear dynamic for both seismic and wind. The various parameters like (1) Lateral displacement, (2) Maximum storey drift, (3) Storey shear forces, (4) storey moments and (5) Storey overturning moments are considered for better understanding of Tall building when it is subjected to large seismic and wind forces.

Keywords: Outrigger, Belt truss system, Lateral stability, Maximum storey, Lateral displacement, Storey shear, storey moments, Storey stiffness.

1. INTRODUCTION Earthquake-resistant construction requires that the building be properly grounded and connected through its foundation to the earth. Building on loose sands or clays is to be avoided, since those surfaces can cause excessive movement and nonuniform stresses to develop during an earthquake.

Rapid growth of infrastructure to accommodate modern civilization is demanding tall structures in cities. As the buildings are becoming taller the problem of their lateral stability and sway has to be tackled by engineering judgment. Structural system development has evolved continuously to overcome the problems related to lateral stability and sway, one such structural system is outrigger and belt truss structural system. The outrigger and belt truss structural system has proved to be most promising structural system in resisting problem related to lateral stability and sway.

The outrigger and belt truss system is commonly used as one of the structural system to effectively control the excessive drift due to lateral load, so that, during small or medium lateral load due to either wind or earthquake load, the risk of structural and nonstructural damage can be minimized. For high-rise buildings, particularly in seismic active zone or wind load dominant, this system can be chosen as an appropriate structure.

The outrigger and belt truss system is one of the lateral loads resisting system in which the external columns are tied to the central core wall with very stiff outriggers and belt truss at one or more levels. The belt

© 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|

truss tied the peripheral column of building while the outriggers engage them with main or central shear wall.

The aim of this method is to reduce obstructed space compared to the conventional method.

II. METHODOLOGY Adequate and economical tall buildings cannot be designed without taking into account the factors that affect for the selection of structural system for tall buildings. In modern tall buildings, lateral loads induced by wind or earthquake are often resisted by a system of coupled shear walls. The lateral load resisting system effectively control the excessive drift due to lateral load, so that, during small or medium lateral load due to either wind or earthquake load, the risk of structural and nonstructural damage can be minimized. For high-rise buildings, particularly in seismic active zone like northeast states of India and west India particularly north part of Gujarat, the system that can be used to developed the tall building.

Lateral Load Resisting System: Following are the lateral load resisting system which can be used in tall building: 

Rigid frame system



Braced frame system



Shear wall frame system



Outrigger system



Tube system

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 864

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

a. Frame tube system b. Braced tube system c. Bundled tube system d. Trussed tube 

Dia-grid Frame

Rigid Frame System: Rigid frame construction provides many benefits, such as decreased deflections, decreased internal bending moments, and increased rigidity. However, the columns are experiencing some degree of internal bending themselves as the beams stay rigid.

Figure 2: Shear Wall Frame System Outrigger System: Today, all the tall buildings even Shanghai tower has shear walls and the forces on such buildings are magnanimous. So in order to take them under control all the buildings have outriggers located at not just one but 2 or 3 different levels. Let me share a picture showing the greater advantage of using an outrigger and how it can help in reducing the thickness of core wall.

Figure 1: Frame Systems Braced Frame System: Braced frames are a very common form of construction, being economic to construct and simple to analyse. Economy comes from the inexpensive, nominally pinned connections between beams and columns. Bracing, which provides stability and resists lateral loads, may be from diagonal steel members or, from a concrete 'core'. In braced construction, beams and columns are designed under vertical load only, assuming the bracing system carries all lateral loads.

Shear Wall Frame System: In this system RCC frame is braced with Concrete Shear wall. The main reason to brace a shear wall with RCC frame is to counter the effects of lateral loads acting on a structures due to earthquake, wind etc. Shear wall in its plane has tremendous load carrying capacity but for out of its plane loads its capacity decreases i.e. its moment resistance capacity decreases. Moments that are resisted by wall are ultimately transferred to foundation and as a large amount of moment has to be resisted by shear wall, foundation of shear wall becomes heavy.

Š 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|

Figure 1: Outrigger Systems Tube System: In structural engineering, the tube is a system where, to resist lateral loads (wind, seismic, impact), a building is designed to act like a hollow cylinder, cantilevered perpendicular to the ground. Willis Tower, finished in 1973, introduced the bundled tube structural design and was the world's tallest building until 1998.

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 865

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

11

Loads considered building

Dead load , Live load , Wind load, Earthquake

in

12

50 m/s ( Bhuj wind speed)

Wind Speed 13

Seismic Zone

14

Method Analysis

15

Zone – V (Bhuj) RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS EQUIVALENT STATIC ANALYSIS

of

NON Ductile properties STATIC COMBINATION USED

16

17

5 (Response reduction factor ) 1.2(Dead load + Live load + Earthquake in X direction) IS456 :2000,IS1893:2002, IS 16700:2017,IS 875:1987 (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

IS codes used

Figure 2: Tube Structural Design Tower PROBLEM STATEMENT:

7

0.0025

G+85

Geometric Details Ground Floor Story to story height Beam Columns (outer)

storey

4 mts 3.0 mts 0.75X0.75 mts

Story8

Types of Walls

Rectangle, Y shaped, C shaped building SHEAR Wall -130 mm thickness Masonry wall – 230 mm thickness

Story16

the

0.0015 s d t 0.001 r o i 0.0005 r f e t 0 y

259 mts

Story24

of

Story32

0.002

2304 sq.mts

Story40

6

Storey Drift in X direction in Zone 2

Story48

5

Office Building

Story56

4

Area Height Building Shape of Building

ZONE II RESULTS:

Story64

3

of



Story72

2

Type of location

Story80

1

Anatomical details Utility Edifices No of Storey

Story86

S No

III. RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS

Drift in Rectangle shaped in X Direction Drift in Y shaped building in X Direction Drift in C shaped building in X Direction

Graph 1: Storey Drift in X direction in Zone 2

0.80X0.80 mts

Columns (Inner) Slab 8 9 10

Material Details Concrete Grade All Steel Grades Type Of Construction Place of construction

© 2019, IRJET

|

0.60X0.60 mts 0.150 mts M50 (All structural elements) FE 500 (All structural elements) R.C.C FRAMED STRUCTURE Bhuj - Gujurat.

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 866

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

0.002 0.0018 0.0016 0.0014 0.0012 0.001 0.0008 0.0006 0.0004 0.0002 0

WWW.IRJET.NET

Storey Drift in Y Direction in Zone 2

Drift in Rectangl e shaped in Y Directio n Drift in Y shaped building in Y Directio n Drift in C shaped building in Y Directio n

Building Moment in X Direction in Zone 2 Building Moment 9000000 in X Direction in 8000000 Rectangle shaped 7000000 building(MX) kN6000000 m 5000000 Building Moment in X Direction in Y 4000000 shaped 3000000 building(MX) kN2000000 m 1000000 Building Moment 0 in X Direction in C shaped building(MX) kNm

Graph 2: Storey Drift in Y direction in Zone 2

Graph 5: Building Moment in X direction in Zone 2 Building Moment in Y direction in zone 2 9000000 Building Moment 8000000 in Y Direction in Rectangle shaped 7000000 building(My) kN6000000 m 5000000 Building Moment 4000000 in Y Direction in Y shaped 3000000 building(MY) kN2000000 m 1000000 Building Moment 0 in Y Direction in C shaped building(MY) kNm Graph 3: Shear Force in X direction in Zone 2 Graph 6: Building Moment in Y direction in Zone 2 Shear Force in Y direction in Zone 2 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0

2500000

Shear Force in Y Direction in rectangle shaped building kN Shear Force in Y Direction in Y shaped building kN Shear Force in Y Direction in C shaped building KN

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

Building Torsion in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building Torsion in Y shaped building kN-m

2000000 1500000 1000000 500000

Building Torsion in C shaped building kN-m

0

Graph 4: Shear Force in Y direction in Zone 2

© 2019, IRJET

Building Torsion in Zone 2

Graph 7: Building Torsion in Zone 2

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 867



INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

ZONE III:

120000

0.003

100000

Drift in X direction in rectangle shaped building Drift in X direction in C shaped building

0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001 0.0005

80000 60000 40000 20000 0

Drift in X direction in Y shaped building

0

14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0

Drift in Y direction in rectangle shaped building Drift in Y direction in C shaped building

0.003 0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0

100000 80000 60000 40000 20000

Building moment in Y direction in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building moment in Y direction in Y shaped building kN-m Building moment in Y direction in C shaped building kN-m

shear force in X direction in Rectangle shaped building kN shear force in X direction in C shaped building kN

120000

Building moment in X direction in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building moment in X direction in Y shaped building kN-m Building moment in X direction in C shaped building kN-m

14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0

Graph 9: Storey Drift in Y direction in Zone 3 140000

shear force in Y direction in Y shaped building kN

Graph 12: Bending Moment in X direction in Zone 3

Drift in Y direction in Y shaped building

0.0005

direction in C shaped building kN

Graph 11: Shear Force in Y direction in Zone 3

Graph 8: Storey Drift in X direction in Zone 3 0.0035

shear force in Y direction in Rectangle shaped building kN shear force in Y

Graph 13: Bending Moment in Y direction in Zone 3

shear force in X direction in Y shaped building kN

0

Graph 10: Shear Force in X direction in Zone 3

© 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 868

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

Building Torsion in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building Torsion in Y shaped building kN-m

4000000 3500000 3000000 2500000 2000000 1500000 1000000 500000 0

200000 180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000 0

Building Torsion inC shaped building kN-m

Shear force in X direction in rectangle shaped building kN Shear force in X direction in Y shaped building kN

Graph 14: Building Torsion in Zone 3 

ZONE IV

Graph 17: Shear Force in X direction in Zone 4

0.0045 0.004 0.0035 0.003 0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001 0.0005 0

180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000 0

Drift in X direction in Y saped building

Drift in X direction in C saped building

Drift in X direction in rectangle saped building

Graph 15: Storey Drift in X direction in Zone 4

Graph 18: Shear Force in Y direction in Zone 4

Drift in Y direction in rectangle saped building Drift in Y direction in Y saped building

0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001

20000000 18000000 16000000 14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0

Drift in Y direction in C saped building

0

Graph 16: Storey Drift in Y direction in Zone 4

© 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

Shear force in Y direction in rectangle shaped building kN Shear force in Y direction in Y shaped building kN Shear force in Y direction in C shaped building kN

Building moment X direction in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building moment in X Direction in Y shaped building kN-m Building moment in X direction in C shaped building kN-m

Graph 19: Bending Moment in X direction in Zone 4

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 869

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET Building moment in Y Direction Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building

20000000 15000000 10000000

0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0

moment in Y shaped building kN-m

5000000

Drift in Y direction in Y shaped building

Drift in Y direction in C shaped building

Story86 Story80 Story72 Story64 Story56 Story48 Story40 Story32 Story24 Story16 Story8

Building moment in C shaped building kN-m

0

Drift in Y direction in Rectangle shaped building

Graph 20: Bending Moment in Y direction in Zone 4

Graph 23: Storey Drift in Y direction in Zone 5 300000

6000000 5000000 4000000 3000000 2000000

Building Torsion in rectangle shaped building kN-m

250000

Building Torsion in Y shaped building kN-m

100000

200000 150000 50000 0 Story86 Story80 Story72 Story64 Story56 Story48 Story40 Story32 Story24 Story16 Story8

1000000 Building Torsion in C shaped building kN-m

0

Shear force in X direction in Rectangle shaped building kN Shear force in X direction in Y shaped building kN

Graph 24: Shear Force in X direction in Zone 5 250000

Graph 21: Building Torsion in Zone 4

Shear force in Y direction in Rectangle shaped building kN Shear force in Y direction in Y shaped building kN

200000

ZONE V

150000 100000

0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0

Drift in X direction in Rectangle shaped building

50000 0 Story86 Story80 Story72 Story64 Story56 Story48 Story40 Story32 Story24 Story16 Story8



Shear force in X direction in C shaped building kN

Drift in X direction in Y shaped building

Shear force in Y direction in C shaped building kN

Graph 25: Shear Force in Y direction in Zone 5 Drift in X direction in C shaped building

30000000 25000000 20000000 15000000 10000000 5000000 0

Graph 22: Storey Drift in X direction in Zone 5

Building Moment in X direction in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building Moment in X direction in Y shaped building kN-m Building Moment in X direction in C shaped building kN-m

Graph 26: Bending Moment in X direction in Zone 5

© 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 870

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

outrigger at the top and second outrigger at the middle of the structure height reduces displacement by 65%.

For three dimensional structural model subjected to the earthquake load, reduction in lateral displacement can be achieved with optimum location of the outrigger truss at the top and 40TH level. (In order to improve the performance of the structural aspect, the maximum displacement at the top floor becomes one of the most important factors affecting the occupant’s comfort) For the second optimum position of outrigger base shear is significantly high compared to first optimum position and bare frame with shear wall. Shear wall stress and axial load in the columns to the opposite side of the earthquake direction.

Using second outrigger with 0.68h gives the reduction of 16.65% and 13% for drift and deflection. The optimum location of second outrigger is middle height of the building.

The use of outrigger and belt truss system in high rise buildings increase the stiffness and make the structural form efficient under lateral load.

The lateral bracing system consisting of core with outriggers is one of the most efficient systems used for high rise construction to resist lateral forces caused by wind and earthquakes.

Outrigger beams connected to the core and external columns are relatively more complicated and it is understood that the performance of such coupled wall systems depends primarily on adequate stiffness and strength of the outrigger beam.

30000000 Building Moment in Y direction in Rectangle shaped building kN-m

25000000 20000000 15000000

Building Moment in Y direction in Y shaped building kN-m

10000000 5000000 0

Building Moment in Y direction in C shaped building kN-m

Graph 27: Bending Moment in Y direction in Zone 5 9000000 8000000 7000000 6000000 5000000 4000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 0

Building Torsion in Rectangle shaped building kN-m Building Torsion in Y shaped building kN-m Building Torsion in C shaped building kN-m

Graph 28: Building Torsion in Zone 5 BASE SHEAR: 1600000 1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 0

V. CONCLUSIONS After performing analysis and studying the results we can come to the below conclusions:

BASE SHEAR BASE SHEAR BASE SHEAR IN RECTANGLE IN Y SHAPED IN C SHAPED SHAPED BUILDING BUILDING BUILDING Graph 29:Base Shear IV. DISCUSSIONS The use of outrigger and belt truss system in high-rise buildings increase the stiffness and makes the structural form efficient under lateral load.

Single outrigger provided at the middle of the structure height reduces the maximum displacement by 56 %, while providing first

Š 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|

The behavior of a formation under earthquake freight is different from earthquake to Earthquake. This well known phenomenon is well presented in the tangential displacement results obtained for both of the options.

The location of the outrigger beam has a critical influence on the tangential behavior of the formation under earthquake freight and the optimum outrigger locations of the edifice have to be carefully selected in the edifice design.

Comparison drift values both in the equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis the drift values show the less values in Rectangle shaped edifice (symmetrical) in static analysis. The response spectrum analysis shows much higher values due to the combination of all forces including static and dynamic freight.

Considering the shear force in the both static and response spectrum analysis the static analysis is

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 871

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IRJET)

E-ISSN: 2395-0056

VOLUME: 06 ISSUE: 09 | SEP 2019

P-ISSN: 2395-0072

WWW.IRJET.NET

having the least values in negative as compared to the response spectrum analysis.

The edifice minute demonstrates that the minute in response spectrum having less quality as compared to the static analysis.

Considering all the above results and graphs the best reasonable formation is C formed edifice for the unsymmetrical shapes as compared to other edifice Y molded edifice both in static and response spectrum technique.

The utilization of outrigger and belt truss scheme in elevated formations increase the stiffness and make the anatomical form efficient under tangential burdens.

Outrigger scheme is observed to be efficient in controlling the tangential freight s and has proved to be Economical.

Considering all the above buildings the most advantage building when compared to the other buildings types are Y shaped building shows the least displacements, least building moments so the most advantages building is Y shaped building. When compared in all seismic zones of India.











VI. REFERENCES IS CODE BOOKS: 

 

IS456:2000 Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice is an Indian Standard code of practice for general structural use of plain and reinforced concrete.

IS800:2007 Indian Standard.

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION IN. STEEL — CODE OF PRACTICE. (Third Revision). ICS 77.140.01. Q BIS 2007.

IS16700:2017 ‘Criteria for Structural Safety of Tall Concrete Buildings’





OTHER REFERENCES: 



 



Shruti Badami and M.R. Suresh: “A Study on Behavior of Structural Systems for Tall Buildings Subjected To Lateral Loads”, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 3 Issue 7, July – 2014 Thejaswini R.M. And Rashmi A.R.: “Analysis and Comparison of different Lateral load resisting structural Forms” International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 4 Issue 7, July – 2015 Po Seng Kian, Frits Torang Siahaan: “The use of outrigger and belt truss system for high-rise concrete buildings” N. Herath, N. Haritos, T. Ngo & P. Mendis: “Behaviour of Outrigger Beams in High rise Buildings under Earthquake Loads”, Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2009 Kiran Kamath, N. Divya, Asha U Rao: “A Study on Static and Dynamic Behavior of Outrigger Structural System for Tall Buildings”, Bonfiring International

© 2019, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 7.34

|





Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Vol2, No 4, December 2012 Alpana L. Gawate J.P. Bhusari: “Behaviour of outrigger structural system for high-rise building”, International Journal of Modern Trends in Engineering & Research, e-ISSN No.:2349-9745, Date: 2-4 July, 2015 Vijaya Kumari Gowda M R and Manohar B C: “A Study on Dynamic Analysis of Tall Structure with Belt Truss Systems for Different Seismic Zones”, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 4 Issue 8, August – 2015 Kiran Kamath, Shashikumar Rao and Shruthi : “Optimum Positioning of Outriggers to Reduce Differential Column Shortening Due to Long Term Effects in Tall Buildings”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Science and Technology, Volume 4, Issue 3, 2015, pp.353-357.

Abbas Haghollahi, Mohsen Besharat Ferdous and Mehdi Kasiri: “Optimization of outrigger locations in steel tall buildings subjected to earthquake loads”, 15th world conference of earthquake engineering 2012. rateek N. Biradar, Mallikarjun S. Bhandiwad:“A performance based study on static and dynamic behaviour of outrigger structural system for tall buildings”, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), Volume: 02 Issue: 05 | Aug-2015 Shivacharan K, Chandrakala S , Karthik N M: “Optimum Position of Outrigger System for Tall Vertical Irregularity Structures”, IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, Volume 12, Issue 2 Ver. II (Mar - Apr. 2015), PP 54-63 Abdul Karim Mulla and Shrinivas B.N: “A Study on Outrigger System in a Tall R.C. Structure with Steel Bracing”, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 4 Issue 7, July – 2015 Dr. S. A. Halkude, Mr. C. G. Konapure and Ms. C. A. Madgundi: “Effect of Seismicity on Irregular Shape Structure” International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 3 Issue 6, June – 2014 Mr.Gururaj B. Katti and Dr. Basavraj Baapgol: “Seismic Analysis of Multistoried RCC Buildings Due to Mass Irregularity by Time History Analysis”, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 3 Issue 6, June – 2014.

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 872