PABNA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY.
Department of Civil Engineering
“Structural analysis of a Residential Multistoried
(10 Storied) building by BNBC 2006 and BNBC 2020.”
Supervised by Presented by
Dr. Tahmina Tasnim Nahar Md.Jahirul Islam
Associate Professor Roll No: 171122
Department of Civil Engineering Session: 2016-2017
Pabna University of Science and Mithun Mondal
Technology Roll No: 171134
Pabna, Bangladesh. Session: 2016-2017
Md.Adnan Shahriar Seum
Roll No: 171137
Session: 2016-2017
PABNA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
• Myanmar indeed is earthquake-prone as it lies in one of the two main
earthquake belts of the world. Myanmar has had frequent earthquakes and all
earthquakes in Myanmar are of shallow focus types which can cause great
damages and causalities. So, regions in moderate seismic risk level can be
affected by the magnitude of high seismic risk level. That’s why Bangladesh
is situated on seismically active zone. Earthquake disasters are not limited to
structural damage and injury/death of people under collapsed structures.
• Bangladesh is extremely vulnerable to seismic activity, the nature and the
level of this activity is yet to be defined. In Bangladesh, complete earthquake
monitoring facilities are not available. The dynamic effects of wind and
earthquake loads are usually analyzed as an equivalent static load in most
small and moderate-sized buildings.
• The main parameters that were taken into considerations in the present study
in the seismic performance of model are story drift, base shear, story
deflection and time period. In some cases, the wind load is dominant than
earthquake load which depends on area and zone factor defined by codes.
• The Finite Element Method (FEM) is a numerical technique to find
approximate solutions of partial differential equations. In a structural
simulation, FEM helps in producing stiffness and strength visualizations. It
also helps to minimize material weight and its cost of the structures. The use
of FEM has significantly decreased the time to take products from concept to
the production line. One must take the advantage of the advent of faster
generation of personal computers for the analysis and design of engineering
product with precision level of accuracy.
OBJECTIVES
• The main objective of the current study is to analyze and design a reinforced
concrete 10 multi-storey building twice, once with taking BNBC2006 code for
seismic loads ,wind loads, traditional gravity self-weight, finishing additional
dead load, and live load into consideration, and second, with taking BNBC 2020
for seismic loads, wind loads, traditional gravity self-weight, finishing
additional dead load, and live load into considerations. The goal is finding and
discussing the differences between the two cases from the safety and
economical points of view.
METHODOLOGY
BUILDING MODELLING
• Two regular structures of same shape and height stability building were built
at the same location (Pabna). In this structures, Simply frame structure system
with shear wall (Lift core) and stair case has been introduced and analyzed.
Design considerations and applied loading were applied according to BNBC
2006 and BNBC 2020 to obtain floor (2-D) geometry against the lateral
loading (Earthquake and Wind). Different dimention of columns and beams
were provided. Slabs which were provided can be defined as shell i.e. slabs
can take membrane and bending both. Both the positive and negative
moments were obtained by ETABS.
MODEL ANALYZED
• The frame (Superstructure) were analyzed by using Computer Aided Software
(CAD), Extended 3-D Analysis of Building Structure usually known as
ETABS. This buildings were analyzed by following provisions and
specifications which were given by Bangladesh National Building Code
BNBC 2006 and BNBC 2020 edition for load definition and combinations.
UBC-94 and ASCE-705 were used for respective building for earthquake and
wind loading. And the sub-structures (Foundation) were analyzed by using
SAFE-2016 software.
DATA ANALYZED
• From the ETABS result, the data were analyzed by using Excel file and
checked P-Δ effect, story drift, soft story and torsion irregularity.
FLOW CHART
DATA
COLLECTION INPUT ANALYZED THE
FROM BNBC COLLECTING SUPERSTRUCTU
2020 AND BNBC DATA. RE BY ETABS.
2006.
ANALYZED
ANALYZED THE
DATA FROM
SUB-
RESULT. ETABS RESULT
STRUCTURE BY
BY EXCEL
SAFE.
SHEET.
COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS
BASED ON THE
RESULT.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
EARTHQUAKE AND WIND FORCE
• According to BNBC 2020 and BNBC 2006 modelling , imposed maximum
earthquake force in the building in X-direction are 66.52 kip (story-10) and 27.686
kip (story-13) and in Y-direction are 66.52 kip (story-10) and 27.686 kip (story-13).
• And according to BNBC 2020 and BNBC 2006 imposed maximum wind force in
the building in X-direction are 31.619 kip (story-10) and 47.433 kip (story-10) and
in Y-direction are 20.45 kip (story-10) and 36.014 kip (story-10).
• Between earthquake and wind force, the governing lateral force is earthquake force
for the BNBC 2020 and the force is 66.52 kip, on the other hand the governing
lateral force is wind force for the BNBC 2006 and the force is 47.433 kip.
MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT
• Maximum displacement according to BNBC 2020 and BNBC 2006 for
earthquake force in the building in X-direction are 99 mm (story-11) and 66.55
mm (story-13) in Y-direction are 94 mm (story-11) and 71.4 mm (story-13).
• Maximum displacement according to BNBC 2020 and BNBC 2006 for wind
force in the building in X-direction are 52.9 mm (story-13) and 102.9 mm (story-
13) and in Y-direction are 39.3 mm (story-11) and 91.6 mm (story-11).
• Between earthquake and wind force, the maximum displacement occur for the
earthquake force in the BNBC 2020 and the value is 99 mm in X-direction and
94 mm in Y-direction , on the other hand the maximum displacement occur for
wind force in the BNBC 2006 and the value are 102.9 mm in X-direction and
91.6 mm in Y-direction.
GRAPH
Figure 12 : Displacement due to earthquake force in X-direction. Figure 13 : Displacement due to earthquake force in Y-direction.
GRAPH
Figure 14 : Displacement due to wind force in X-direction. Figure 15 : Displacement due to wind force in Y-direction.
TABLE
BNBC 2020 BNBC 2006 Comparisons
%
Reinforcig Concrete Reinforcing Concrete %
Member Increase
Steel wet Steel wet Increase
type in
Amount Volume Amount Volume in steel
Concrete
(ton) (cft) (ton) (cft) reinf.
volume.
Columns 34 10,305 26.5 7,515 28.3 37.1
Beams 25 7,260 22 6,270 13.6 15.8
Shear wall 6 2,150 5.5 2,000 9.1 7.5
Foundation 50 18,563 47 14,585 6.4 27.27
Total 115 38,278 101 30,370 13.9 26
amount
DISCUSSION
• In the current study, two types of code (BNBC 2020, BNBC2006) were used
on the structure. Based on the lateral forces, volumetric differences and safety
analysis, earthquake force act as a governing force in BNBC 2020 while wind
force act as a governing force in BNBC 2006 and the volumetric differences of
concrete and rebar are 38278 cft. (BNBC 2020), 30370 cft. (BNBC 2006) and
115 ton (BNBC 2020), 101 ton (BNBC 2006).
• BNBC 2020 modelling structure is more safe with respect to BNBC 2006
modelling structure, As it takes more lateral force (earthquake).
• As the structure with BNBC 2020 modelling required more concrete and rebar
for both super structure and sub-structure, it is more expensive with respect to
BNBC 2006.
CONCLUSION
•A comparative study of the analysis and design provisions in respect of
various structural elements was performed. The emphasis here however, has
almost exclusively been on columns, beams and foundation.
• Total cost of all the elements (superstructure, sub-structure, wall, tiles,
finishing, electrical, plumbing, paint, etc.) of the residential building have to
calculate, so that the actual differences (cost) have to known.
• This study may be continue in different locations (Bangladesh). Cause, value
of wind speed and Seismic Zone Coefficient is different in different location.
REFERENCES
1. Channappagoudar, P., R.J.I.R.J.o.E. Hiremath, and Technology, Parametric Comparison Study on
the Performance of Building under Lateral Loads as per IS 875 (Part3): 1987 And Revised Code of IS
875 (Part 3): 2015. 2018. 5.
2. Hamma-Adama, M. and T.J.A.j.o.e.r. Kouider, Causes of building failure and collapse in Nigeria:
professionals' view. 2017. 6(12).
3. Ranja, A.K., A.P. Singh, and H.N. Pandey, Analysis and Design of G+21 Building using ETABS: A
Review. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 2022.
10(3): p. 1104-1106.
4. Kadhum, A.K. and K.S. Abdul-Razzaq. Effect of seismic load on steel frame multistory building
from economical point of view. in AIP Conference Proceedings. 2020. AIP Publishing LLC.
5. Mallikarjun, M., D.P.S.J.I.J.o.S.E. Prakash, and I. Advance Technology, ISSN - FEBRUARY,
Analysis and Design of a Multi Storied Residential Building of (Ung-2+ G+ 10) By Using Most
Economical Column Method. 2016. 4(2).
6. Caterino, N., et al. A comparative analysis of decision making methods for the seismic
retrofit of RC buildings. in The 14th world conference on earthquake engineering. 2008.
7. Aung, T., T.K.J.I.J.o.S.-E. Dr, and T.R. IJSETR, Parametric Study on Foundation of
Regular High-Rise RC Building under Seismic Load. 2012. 1(1): p. 4-6.
8. Harasimowicz, A.P., R.K.J.E.e. Goel, and s. dynamics, Seismic code analysis of multi‐storey
asymmetric buildings. 1998. 27(2): p. 173-185.
9. Mendis, P., et al., Wind loading on tall buildings. 2007.
10. Sadh, A., A.J.I.l.J.o.A.E.R. Pal, and Science, A Literature Study of Wind Analysis on High
Rise Building. 2018. 5(11): p. 263-265.
11. Mahzuz, H., et al., Effect of material streng
THANKS TO ALL.
