COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL SLAB AND FLAT SLAB STRUCTURE WITH AND WITHOUT SHEAR WALL USING ETABS

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 09 Issue: 05 | May 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 3566
COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL SLAB
AND FLAT SLAB STRUCTURE WITH AND WITHOUT SHEAR WALL USING
ETABS
Pooja B K1, Naveen Kumar S2
1M-tech student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, P.E.S College of Engineering, Mandya, Karnataka, India
2Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, P.E.S College of Engineering, Mandya, Karnataka, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - In recent construction activity, Flatslabbuilding
has many privilege over conventional slab building interms of
Architectural flexibility, Easier formwork, use of space, less
construction time and Better quality control. But, flat slab
structures are significantly more flexible than the
conventional slab structures, thus becoming more vulnerable
to seismic loading. Therefore in order to upgrade the
performance, flat slab are usually provided with drops. The
flat slab has less stiffness and less shear strength with more
flexibility feature than the conventional slab. In the present
work a G+12 commercial multistoried building having
conventional slab and flat slab having drop with and without
shear wall. The buildings are modeled and Analyzed by using
ETABS software. The seismic analysis is done as per
IS 1893(Par 1). The behavior of Conventional slab and Flat
slab structure with and without shear wall in seismic zone II,
III, IV and V with type II (medium) soil are taken for all
instances. Analysis of buildings is done by Equivalent static
method and Response spectrum method. The seismic
evaluation result can be done based on the parameters like
Storey displacement, Storey drift, Storey stiffness and Natural
time period.
Key Words: Conventional slab, Flat slab, Shear wall, Storey
displacement, Storey drift, Storey stiffness, Natural time
period
1. INTRODUCTION
These days, the structures are being built quickly because of
the expansion in population. At present India is the quickest
developing country in economy this leads to demand in
infrastructure facilities along with the growth of population.
The demand for high rise building in urban areas is
increasing day by day than the past decades. Due to
urbanization, the desires of the people have been upgraded
with respect to less construction time, flexibility in theroom
layout, aesthetic appearance, better quality control, fire
resistant, better diffusion of light and so on. To meet the
demand of people different type of construction technique
has been adopted these days. Among these flat slab (i.e.,
beam less slab) is one.
Generally, the multistory structuresareconstructedwith the
conventional reinforced concrete slab which proves it to
have high storey stiffness and strength. But, due to the
several advantages of beamless slab the old style
construction i.e., conventional slabarebeingslowlyreplaced
by flat slabs.
The flat slab directly rest on the column and transfer the
loads to the columns without beams. Flat slab buildings are
prominent floor construction systems in commercial
buildings, residential buildings and other multi storey
buildings. Flat slab structures are favored by both
architecture and client. In the conventional slab structures
the slab is resting on the beams, the slab load is transferred
to beams and then beams to columns. But in flat slab
structure load is transferred from slab to columns directly.
1.1 Conventional slab system
Conventional slab system is routine method of construction
consists of columns, beams and slab. This system utilised in
the development of private structures and compact
construction. Here all the four edges of the slab are
supported on beams where the loads are transferred from
slab to beams and then to columns. Hence weight of the
structure increases and formwork is alsocostlycompared to
flat slab. In this type, the thickness of slab is small whereas
the depth of beam is large. It requires more formwork
compared with the flat slab.
1.2 Flat slab system
Flat slab usually does not have beams is supported directly
by the reinforced columns. It is also called as beamless slab.
The projection below the slab i.e., the thickened portion is
called as Drop. Flat slab is preferred by both architect and
client because of its aesthetic view and economic
advantages. The drawback of beamless slab is their lack of
resistance to lateral loads.
1.3 Shear wall
Shear wall is a vertical structural element designed to resist
the lateral loads in high rise buildings. It provides the
stability against lateral force due to its lateral strength and
stiffness which can be used to resist the wind loads and

seismic loads. The position of the Shear walls is usually
provided at corners or middle of the structures. The shear
wall forms an efficient lateral force resisting system when it
is situated at advantageous positions of the structure.
2. OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
1. To obtain the highly effective structure to resist the
horizontal lateral loads.
2. To study the effect of conventional slab and flatslab
structure with and without shear wall.
3. Comparative study on various seismic parameters
like storey displacement, storey drift, storey
stiffness and Time period.
4. The various models thus generated parametrically
are compared and suitable conclusions are drawn.
3. METHODOLOGY
The structure considered for an analysis is RC building. A
G+12 story building geometry are considered such as
Conventional slab structure and Flat slab with and without
shear wall. The buildings are modeled andanalyzed byusing
software ETABS for different seismic zones. Models are
considered for zone factor II, III, IV and V and soil type is II
(medium) as per IS: 1893 (Part 1) code of practice.
4. MODELLING
The models of G+12 storey building are analyzed in both
Equivalent static method and Response spectrum method.
The analysis results are obtained for seismic zone II, III, IV
and V.
4.1 Types of models
1. Conventional slab structure (Zone II, III, IV, V)
2. Flat slab structure without shear wall (Zone II,
III, IV and V)
3. Flat slab structure with shear wall at corner
(Zone II, III, IV and V)
4.2 Model details
Table-1 Structural and Seismic details of 13 storey
conventional and flat slab structure
PARAMETERS
Plan dimension 36 x 25 m
No. of stories G+12
Height of the structure 39 m
Bottom storey height 3 m
Grade of concrete M30
Grade of steel HYSD 500
Floor to floor height 3 m
Slab thickness 150 mm
Drop size 2 x 2 m
Drop thickness 200 mm
Shear wall size 200 mm
Size of column (600 x 600)mm
Size of Beam (300 x 600)mm
Live load on floors 4 kN/m2
Terrace load 1.5 kN/m2
Floor finish load 1.5 kN/m2
Zone considered II, III, IV and V
Zone factor 0.10, 0.16, 0.24 and 0.36
Importance factor 1.2
Type of soil II (medium)
Reduction factor (SMRF) 5
Plan and 3D view
Fig-1: Conventional slab structure

Fig-2: Flat slab structure without shear wall
Fig -3: Flat slab structure with shear wall at corner
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The results of each building model are presented in this
chapter. The analysis is carried out by Equivalent static
method and Response spectrum method. The results are
obtained for 13 storey building for the zone factor II, III, IV
and V for the parameters Story Displacement, Story Drift,
Story Stiffness and Natural time period.
5.1 EQUIVALENT STATIC METHOD
Chart-1: Storey displacement of building for Zone II
Chart-2: Storey drift of building for Zone II
Chart-3: Storey stiffness of building for Zone II
Chart-4: Storey displacement of building for Zone III
Chart-5: Storey drift of building for Zone III

Chart-6: Storey displacement of building for Zone IV
Chart-7: Storey drift of building for Zone IV
Chart-8: Storey displacement of building for Zone V
Chart-9: Storey drift of building for Zone V
5.2 RESPONSE SPECTRUM METHOD
Chart-10: Storey displacement of building for Zone II
Chart-11: Storey drift of building for Zone II
Chart-12: Storey stiffness of building for Zone II
Chart-13: Storey displacement of building for Zone III

Chart-14: Storey drift of building for Zone III
Chart-15: Storey displacement of building for Zone IV
Chart-16: Storey drift of building for Zone IV
Chart-17: Storey displacement of building for Zone V
Chart-18: Storey drift of building for Zone V
Chart-19: Natural Time period of building
5.3 COMPARISION OF STRUCTURES FOR DIFFERENT
SEISMIC ZONES BY EQUIVALENT STATIC ANALYSIS
Chart-20: Displacement vs Zone for structures
Chart-21: Drift vs Zone for structures

Chart-22: stiffness vs Zone for structures
Chart-23: Time vs Zone for structures
5.4 COMPARISION OF STRUCTURES FOR DIFFERENT
SEISMIC ZONES BY RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS
Chart-24: Displacement vs Zone for structures
Chart-25: Drift vs Zone for structures
Chart-26: stiffness vs Zone for structures
6. CONCLUSIONS
1. The storey displacement is high at the top storey
and less at the base. With the increase in the height
of the structure the displacement goesonincreases.
Storey displacement of flat slab structure without
shear wall shows maximum value.
2. The storey drift follows a parabolic path along the
storey height. Storey drift of flat slab structure
without shear wall is maximum.
3. The storey stiffness is more at base and it decreases
as the height of the structure increases. Storey
stiffness of flat slab structure with shear wall at
corner is maximum.
4. The time period of flat slab structure without shear
wall is maximum.
5. It is observed that as the seismic zone increases
from zone II to V, the storey displacement and
storey drift increases and storey stiffness and time
period remains same.
6. Flat slab structure with shear wall at corner gives
the best results, because the Time period, Storey
displacement, story drift is lessandStorystiffnessis
more than other two structures.
REFERENCES
[1] Sandesh D. Bothara,Dr.ValssonVarghese.(July-
August 2012)-“Dynamic analysisofspecial moment
resisting frame building with flat slab and grid slab”
, Vol. 2, Issue 4, pp.275-280, ISSN: 2248-9622.
[2] M A Rahman (2012)-“Effects of openings in
shear wall on seismic response of structures”, Vol
2 ,issue 10 july 2012.

[3] R.S.More, V. S. Sawant, Y. R.Suryawanshi.(2013)
–“Analytical study of different types of flat slab
subjected to dynamic loading”, IJSR, ISSN (Online):
2319-7064.
[4] Sharad P. Desai, Swapnil B. Cholekar (2013)
“Seismic performance of reinforced Concrete
building with flat slab”; Volume 2, Number 10;
April-June, 2013.
[5] Lakshmi K O (2014), “Effect of shear wall
location in buildingssubjectedtoseismic loads”,ISOI
Journal EngineeringandComputerScience,Volume
01,December 2014.
[6] Salman I Khan and Ashok R Mundhada.
(February 2015)-“Comparative study of seismic
performance of multistoried rcc buildings with flat
slab and grid slab”, Vol. 4, No. 1, , ISSN 2319 – 6009.
[7] N KRISHNA RAJU Book of advanced reinforced
concrete design”.
[8] Government of Bureau of Indian Standards: IS
875, part 2 (1987), Live Loads on Buildings and
Structures, New Delhi, India.
[9] Plain & Reinforced Concrete Code of Practice”
Fourth Revision IS: 456:2000.
[10] IS 1893 (Part-I) : Criteria for Earthquake
Resistant Design of Structures, Part-I General
Provisions and Buildings, Fifth Revision, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL SLAB AND FLAT SLAB STRUCTURE WITH AND WITHOUT SHEAR WALL USING ETABS

More Related Content

Similar to COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL SLAB AND FLAT SLAB STRUCTURE WITH AND WITHOUT SHEAR WALL USING ETABS (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL SLAB AND FLAT SLAB STRUCTURE WITH AND WITHOUT SHEAR WALL USING ETABS