A Seismic Study on Shear Wall Location in a 12-Storey Building Using STAAD.Pro V8i

Abstract

The rapid growth of urban infrastructure in seismically active regions has increased the demand for resilient mid-rise reinforced concrete (RC) buildings, particularly those around twelve storeys where structural response is highly influenced by stiffness, flexibility, and dynamic characteristics. Ensuring adequate seismic performance in such buildings requires an appropriate combination of gravity-resisting and lateral load-resisting elements. Traditional RC moment-resisting frames often exhibit excessive lateral displacement and insufficient stiffness under strong ground motions, making the integration of shear walls essential for improved performance. However, the efficiency of shear walls depends greatly on their location within the structural layout, as improper placement may induce torsion, stress concentration, or stiffness irregularity. This study investigates the seismic behavior of a G+12 RC building with and without shear walls in Seismic Zone III on medium soil using the Response Spectrum Method as per IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016. STAAD.Pro V8i is used to evaluate key response parameters such as natural period, storey displacement, storey drift, storey shear, and lateral load distribution. Three analytical models—bare frame, shear wall at selected locations, and optimally placed shear walls—are compared to determine the most effective configuration. Results show that storey displacement increases with height and is greater in the Y-direction for all models. The inclusion of shear walls significantly reduces displacement, drift, and base shear, with Model III exhibiting superior stiffness and lateral resistance. The findings provide practical insights for optimizing shear wall configuration in mid-rise buildings to enhance seismic performance and structural safety.

Introduction

The increasing demand for vertical urban expansion in seismic regions has highlighted the importance of 12-storey reinforced concrete (RC) buildings, which are highly sensitive to earthquake-induced lateral forces due to their stiffness-flexibility balance. Traditional RC moment-resisting frames (MRFs) often lack adequate stiffness, leading to excessive inter-storey drift under strong ground motions. Shear walls are widely used to enhance lateral resistance, control drift, dissipate seismic energy, and improve global stability, but their effectiveness depends critically on optimal placement. Misplaced walls can cause torsion, stress concentration, or over-stiff regions.

Seismic zoning in India ranges from Zone II (low risk) to Zone V (very high risk), with corresponding zone factors from 0.10 to 0.36, guiding earthquake-resistant design measures. The Response Reduction Factor (R) varies for different lateral-resisting systems, with ductile shear walls and dual systems providing the highest values, indicating better energy dissipation and drift control.

STAAD.Pro V8i is used for advanced seismic modeling, allowing response spectrum, modal, and load-combination analyses. The software supports Indian codes (IS 456:2000, IS 1893:2016) and handles nonlinearities, P-Delta effects, and large displacements, making it ideal for evaluating shear wall configurations.

Methodology

The study models a G+12 RC building on medium soil in Seismic Zone III, examining seismic behavior with and without shear walls. Key steps include:

1. Selecting building configurations.

2. Defining material properties (concrete, steel, masonry).

3. Assigning frame and shear wall properties.

4. Applying fixed base supports.

5. Defining and combining loads (dead, live, wind, seismic).

6. Checking models for correctness.

The study focuses on Response Spectrum Method analysis to evaluate storey displacement, storey shear, and bending moments, aiming to identify the optimal shear wall placement for drift control, stiffness improvement, and compliance with codal limits. The findings provide guidelines for designing cost-effective, earthquake-resistant mid-rise RC buildings.

Conclusion

A. Storey Displacements Storey displacement is zero at the base and maximum at the top storey in both X and Y directions. The maximum displacement occurs in the Y-direction. Model I shows the highest displacement due to the absence of shear walls, while Model III shows the minimum because shear walls improve stiffness. B. Lateral Loads Lateral loads are minimum at lower storeys and maximum at upper storeys, especially in the X-direction. The lateral load increases with building height. Model III experiences the highest lateral load resistance, followed by Model II, and Model I shows the least resistance. Hence, Model III performs best for earthquake resistance due to proper shear wall placement. C. Storey Shear Storey shear is highest at the base and decreases toward the top storeys. Maximum shear occurs in the X-direction. Buildings with shear walls show higher base shear capacity, while the model without shear walls shows the lowest. D. Storey Drift • Model I: Maximum drift occurs between 3rd–5th storey. • Model II: Maximum drift occurs between 8th–10th storey. • Model III: Maximum drift occurs near the 11th storey. Overall, Model III shows the highest drift control due to shear wall provision, while Model I shows the maximum drift due to lack of lateral stiffness.

References

[1] K. B. Anad, N. Mightraj, and P. Arulraj, “Seismic analysis of multistorey RC space-frame buildings with and without shear walls,” Int. J. Civil Struct. Eng., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 612–620, 2010. [2] A. Gaharwal and S. Sharma, “Effect of shear wall location on seismic response of multistorey building,” IRJET, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 239–244, 2016. [3] A. K. Karnale and D. N. Shinde, “Seismic performance of RC building with shear walls at different positions,” IJESRT, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 180–188, 2015. [4] A. Thapa and S. Sarkar, “Seismic analysis of RC frame buildings,” IJERT, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 35–42, 2017. [5] C. Kurma and C. Rathod, “Pushover analysis of RC buildings with shear walls,” IJCIET, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 662–672, 2017. [6] D. Patel and J. A. Amin, “Influence of shear walls on high-rise building frames,” Int. J. Eng. Res., vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 527–533, 2015. [7] G. S. Harsha and H. S. Rao, “Seismic and wind analysis of RC buildings with shear walls,” IJERT, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 110–118, 2015. [8] K. Begum, “Comparative analysis of G+12 RC building with shear wall using STAAD.Pro,” IJRASET, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 289–297, 2018. [9] K. Tikde, R. Patil, and G. R. Gandhe, “Seismic analysis of RC structure with and without shear wall using SAP2000,” IJRET, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 51–56, 2016. [10] M. K. Krishnan and C. J. Jose, “Seismic analysis of G+7 building with shear walls,” IJIRSET, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 14512–14519, 2016. [11] M. K. Akhil and C. J. Jose, “Nonlinear analysis of RC buildings with shear walls,” IJEDR, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 211–218, 2016. [12] M. Haque et al., “Effects of openings on seismic behaviour of multistorey buildings with shear walls,” IJARET, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 35–49, 2018. [13] M. M. Aqail and S. Ali, “Seismic analysis of RC buildings with shear walls,” IJERA, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 79–84, 2014. [14] M. Ahmadi and C. S. Sanghavi, “Analysis of RC building with and without shear wall using STAAD.Pro,” IJIRSET, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 214–222, 2017. [15] M. Hasan and V. Garg, “Seismic analysis of RC buildings on sloping ground,” IJCIET, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 810–821, 2017. [16] N. Keskar and S. Raut, “Comparison of flat slab buildings with and without shear walls,” IJESRT, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 306–314, 2017. [17] N. Meshram and G. Munde, “Seismic performance of G+9 building with shear walls,” Int. J. Eng. Res., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 228–234, 2018. [18] S. Natarajan and S. Veeraragavan, “Seismic analysis of irregular RC buildings using ETABS,” IJCIET, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 164–173, 2016. [19] S. Nagare, R. Jadhav, and S. Patel, “Evaluation of G+30 RC building with shear walls,” IJERT, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 122–129, 2018. [20] S. Mishra and R. Ullah, “Response spectrum analysis of regular and irregular buildings,” IJSER, vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 14–22, 2017. [21] V. Rao and D. Nagaraju, “Comparative study of RC buildings with infill and shear walls,” IJESC, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 17863–17869, 2018.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Bhartesh Vaibhav Jain, Dr. Rahul Kumar Satbhaiya . This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.