OPTIMIZATION OF BALANCE OF PLANT

BUILDINGS THROUGH A DATABSE OF

BUILDING COMPONENTS

By
Bagga Raja I.
(M.Tech Sem IV)

Guide : Shri. Jignesh V. Chokshi

(Manager, Civil-Structural
Dept, L&T-S&L Ltd.)
CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
 Flow of presentation
• Introduction to power plants
• Motivation and Objective of study
• Literature Survey
• Analysis and Design of Balance of Plant Buildings
• Preparation of database and Result interpretation
• Introduction of brick infills in Balance of Plant Buildings
• Introduction of pushover analysis in Balance of Plant Buildings
• Practical application of pushover analysis in Balance of Plant Buildings
• Summary and conclusion
• Future scope of work
• References
Introduction to power plants
 Power Plant Buildings
Covered
Under
Present
Study

Power Block Balance of Plant

Structures Buildings
 Storage Shed
Electrostatic
Fire Water
Precipitator
Pumphouse
Control Room

Fuel Oil
Compressor
Pumping And
House BOP Heating Unit
BUILDINGS
Diesel Fuel Oil
Generator Transfer
Building Pumphouse
Deminerlized
Service
Tank
Building
and
PumpHouse
Motivation of Study

● Balance of buildings are present in each and every power

plant.
● The layout of power plant is generalized.
● If another plant of same capacity is to be constructed, the
change is in bay width, width of building, roof level, depth of
foundation and design seismic horizontal coefficient.
● Here an attempt has been made to prepare a database to obtain
optimum design.
Objective of Study

● To prepare a database for Balance of Plant buildings

● To model brick infills in Balance of Plant buildings as per:-
 Proposed Draft and Commentary on IS: 1893(Part I)
 FEMA-273
● To introduce pushover analysis in Balance of Plant buildings
and its application to a practical problem
Literature Survey
• Black and Veatch [1] describe the basic concept of working of
power plants and the working of different components of
process plant and planning of power plants. The book explains
the various mechanical processes which takes part in the power
plants and also highlights the general requirements for structure
layout.
• Sudhir K Jain et al. [6] propose draft provisions and
commentary on Indian Seismic Code IS 1893 (Part 1) as a part
of ongoing project on building codes sponsored by Gujarat
State Disaster Management Authority, Gandhinagar at Indian
Institute of Technology Kanpur. They suggest the equivalent
single diagonal strut approach for structural modeling of brick
infills. They present an empirical relationship for evaluating the
equivalent width of diagonal strut for solid walls and perforated
walls.
Continued

• ATC-40 [10] provides a wealth of information regarding

concepts, theories and procedures of nonlinear static analysis.
The document also presents the step by step procedure to
determine the capacity and demand.
• Apart from the literature review mentioned above, as this
project is being done at a power plant engineering esteemed
company like L&T-S&L, a thorough study of buildings for
recently executed project was conducted.
No. of buildings considering combinations of
parameters = 150
& No. of factors to be recorded = 67
Bay width Width of Foundation Height Ah
m building Level m %
m m
5 6 3 5 10
6 8 4 6 15
8 10 5 8 20

Example:- 5083610
5 Bay Width

08 Width of building

3 Foundation Level

6 Height

10 A h%
 Analysis and Design of Balance of Plant
Buildings

1 2

Preparation of Visual Basic Tool

1 The Frame Data Generation
2 The *.$2k File Generation
I
M
P
O
R
T
 BENDING
MOMENT
DIAGRAM

SHEAR
FORCE
DIAGRAM
Preparation of database and Result interpretation

Representative Volume = (4× L× B× (Bf/Tf)2× (Bf+Tf)2) m3

Scattered Data
Plinth Beam Vol. x 1e-02 (mm)

5000

4000
Tributary Area

3000

2000

1000

0
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Representative Volume (m3)
10% Ah 15% Ah 20% Ah
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Corner Footing
14000 2500
13000 2300

)
-1
12000

(mm
2100
11000
1900
Footing Area x 1e-04

10000

Tributary Vol.
Tributary Area

Footing Area x 1e-07

9000 1700
8000 1500
7000
1300
6000
1100
5000
4000 900
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e) (m
Re pre se nta tive V olum e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

6000 8000
(mm)

5500
7000
5000

4500 Footing Volume x 1e-05 6000

Tributary Area

Tributary Volume
Footing Volume x 1e-01

4000 5000
3500
4000
3000

2500 3000
2000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 2000
3 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m
3
Re pre se nta tive V olum e )(m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Intermediate Footing
6000
5400
5500
4800

)
-1
5000

(mm
4200 4500
Footing Area x 1e-04

Tributary Volume
3600 4000
Tributary Area

Footing Area x 1e-08

3000 3500
3000
2400
2500
1800
2000
1200
1500
600 1000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m 3
Re pre se n ta tive V olum e ) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

3500
3000
(mm)

3000
2500
2500
Footing Volume x 1e-05
Tributary Area
Footing Volume x 1e-01

2000 Tributary Volume 2000

1500
1500
1000

500 1000

0
500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e) (m 3
Re p re se nta tive V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Gable Footing
3000
3000
2750

)
-1
2600

(mm
2500
Footing Area x 1e-04

2250

Tributary Volume
Tributary Area

2200

Footing Area x 1e-08

2000
1750 1800
1500
1250 1400
1000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
1000
3
Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e) (m 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
3
R e p re se nta tive V o lum e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

1600
14000
(mm)

1400
12500
1200
Footing Volume x 1e-06
Tributary Volume
Tributary Area
Footing Volume x 1e-01

11000
1000
9500
800
8000
600
6500

400
5000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se nta tive V olu m e3) (m
Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Corner Column
6000 5750

5500 5500

5000 5250

Column Area x 1e-09

Column Area x 1e-05

4500 5000

Tributary Area
Tributary Area

4000 4750

3500 4500

3000 4250

2500 4000

2000 3750
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
3500
Re p re se n ta tive V olu m 3e) (m 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% Ah Representative
15%Volume
Ah (cubic meter) 20% Ah

5250 6000
5000 5750
(mm)

4750 5500
4500 Column Volume x 1e-05 5250
4250 Tributary Volume 5000
4750
Column Volume x 1e-01
Tributary Area

4000
3750 4500
3500 4250
4000
3250
3750
3000
3500
2750
3250
2500
3000
2250
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Intermediate Column
2500
2250
2250
2000

-1 )
2000

(mm
1750
Column Area x 1e-05

1750
Tributary Area

Tributary Vol.
1500

Column Area x 1e-09

1500

1250 1250

1000 1000

750 750
500
500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se nta tive V o lu m e3) (m Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

11000
9500
10300
9000
(mm)

9600
8500
8000 8900
Column Volume x 1e-06
7500 Tributary Volume 8200
Column Volume x 1e-02
Tributary Area

7000 7500

6500 6800

6000 6100

5500 5400

5000 4700

4500 4000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e) (m Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Gable Column
1800
2250
1650
2000

-1 )
1500

(mm
1750
Column Area x 1e-05

1350
Tributary Area

Tributary Vol.
1500

Column Area x 1e-09

1200

1050 1250

900 1000

750 750

600 500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m 3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m

10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

11000
9000
10300
8000 9600
(mm)

8900

Column Volume x 1e-06

7000

Tributary Volume
8200
Column Volume x 1e-02
Tributry Area

6000 7500
6800
5000
6100

4000 5400
4700
3000
4000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p r e s e n tative V o lu m 3e) (m
Re pre se nta tive V o lum 3e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Transverse Plinth Beam
700 7000
650

)
6500

-1
(mm
600
6000
550
Plinth Beam Area x 1e-05

5500

Tributary Volume
500
Tributary Area

Plint Beam Area x1e-10

450 5000
400 4500
350
4000
300
3500
250
3000
200
0 8000 16000 24000 3200
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e3)(m 3
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

28500 340
(mm)

27000 320

25500 300
Plinth Beam Vol. x 1e-05 280
Plinth Beam Volume x 1e-10

24000 Tributary Volume

Tributary Area

260
22500
240
21000
220
19500
200
18000
180
16500 160
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re pre se nta tive V olum e3) (m Re pre se nta tive V olu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Longitudinal Plinth Beam
5500 6000
5750

)
-1
5250 5500

(mm
5250
5000
5000
Plinth Beam Area x 1e-06

Tributary Volume
4750

Plinth Beam Area x 1e-10

Tributary Area

4750
4500
4500 4250
4000
4250 3750
3500
4000 3250
3000
3750
0 8000 16000 24000 3200
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

3350 3400
(mm)

3250
3300
3150
3200
3050
3100
Plinth Beam Volume x 1e-02

2950
Tributary Area

3000
Plinth Beam Volume x 1e-05
2850
2900
Tributary Volume

2750
2800
2650
2550 2700

2450 2600
2350 2500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 2400
Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 3500
Re pre se nta tive V olum e3)(m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Transverse Lintel Beam
8000
7500

)
7500

-1
7000

(mm
7000
6500
LintelBeamArx1e-6

6500

Tributary Volume
Tributary Area

Lintel Beam Area x 1e-10

6000
6000
5500
5500
5000
5000

4500 4500

4000 4000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m R e p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

3300
31500
(mm)

30500 3100

29500 2900
Lintel Beam Volume x 1e-06
Tributary Volume
Lintel Beam Volume x 1e-03

28500
Tributary Area

2700
27500
2500
26500

25500 2300

24500 2100

23500 1900
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m 3
Re p re se n ta itve V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Longitudinal Lintel Beam
7000 6500

6500

)
-1
6000

(mm
6000
Lintel Beam Area x 1e-06

5500 5500
Tributary Area

Tributary Volume
Lintel Beam Area x 1e-10
5000
5000
4500
4500
4000

3500 4000

3000
3500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

4250 3500

4000
(mm)

3250
3750
Lintel Beam Volume x 1e-6
Tributary Volume
Tributary Area
Linterl Volume x 1e-02

3500
3000
3250

3000
2750
2750

2500 2500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m Re p re se nta tive V o lu m 3e) (m

10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Gable Roof Beam
700 8000
650 7500

)
-1
7000

(mm
600
6500
550
6000
Roof Beam Area x 1e-05

Tributary Volume
500 5500
Tributary Area

Roof Beam Area x 1e-10

450 5000
4500
400
4000
350
3500
300 3000
250 2500
2000
200
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
3
Re pre se nta tive V olum e3)(m Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% Ah 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

3000 3250
3050
(mm)

2750
2850
2500 2650
Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-06
Tributary Volume
Roof Beam Volume x 1e-02

2450
Tributary Area

2250
2250
2000
2050
1750 1850
1650
1500
1450
1250 1250
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e3) (m Re p re se nta tive V olum e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Longitudinal Roof Beam
9000
8000
8500

)
-1
(mm
8000
7500
7500
Roof Beam Area x1e-06

7000

Tributary Vol.
Tributary Area

7000

Roof Beam Area x 1e-10

6500
6000
6500
5500

6000 5000
4500

5500 4000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
3
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

4700 6000
5750
(mm)

4600 5500
Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-06 5250
4500 Tributary Volume 5000
Tributary Area

4750
Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-02

4400
4500
4250
4300
4000
4200 3750
3500
4100 3250
3000
4000 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 3
Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e ) (m

10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Transverse Roof Beam
8500 9000
8250
8500
8000

(mm -1 )
7750 8000
7500 7500
Roof Beam Area x 1e-06

Tributary Volume
7250
Tributary Area

7000

Roof Beam Ar.x1e-10

7000
6500
6750
6500 6000
6250 5500
6000
5000
5750
5500 4500
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m 3
Re p re se nta tive V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

7000 8000

6750 7500
(mm)

6500 Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-06

7000
Tributary Volume
6250
6500
Tributary Area
Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-02

6000
6000
5750
5500
5500
5000
5250
4500
5000
0 8000 16000 24000 3200
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
3
Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m
R e p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Concrete Quantity for
Secondary Roof Beam
12000
10500

)
11000

-1
10000

(mm
9500 10000
9000
Roof Beam Area x 1e-06

9000

Tributary Volume
Tributary Area

Roof Beam Area x 1e-10

8500
8000
8000
7000
7500

7000 6000

6500 5000
6000 4000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 3200
Re pre se nta tive V olum e3) (m Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 3

10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

10000
10000
9500
9500
(mm)

9000
9000 Roof Beam Volume x 1e-06 8500
Tributary Volume 8000
8500
7500
Roof Beam Volume x 1e-02

8000
Tributary Area

7000
7500 6500
6000
7000
5500
6500 5000
6000 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
R e p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
5500 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

5000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re pre se nta tive V o lum e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Reinforcement Quantity for Columns
11000

3
)
10500

Corner Column x 1e-02 (kg/m

10000

Steel Quanity in
9500

9000

8500

8000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
3
Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

1600
1600
)

1550
3

3
)
1560 1500
1520 1450
Intermediate Column x 1e-01 (kg/m

Gable Column x 1e-01 (kg/m

1480 1400
Steel Quantity in

1350
Steel Quantity in

1440
1300
1400
1250
1360 1200
1320 1150
1280 1100
1240 1050
1000
1200
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e (m 3) 3
Re pre se nta tive V olum e ) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
 Estimation of Reinforcement Quantity
17000
15600
Transverse Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m3)

16000

Longitudinal Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m3)

15000
14800
Steel Quanity in

14000

Steel Quantity in
13000 14000
12000

11000 13200

10000
12400
9000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Representative Volume (m 3)
11600
10% Ah 15% Ah 20% Ah

10800
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Representative Volume (m 3)
10% Ah 15% Ah 20% Ah

Plinth Beam
16000
19000
3)

3
)
15500
18500
15000
18000

Longitudinal Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

Transverse Lintel Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

17500 14500

Steel Quantity in
17000 14000
Steel Quanitity in

16500 13500
16000 13000
15500
12500
15000
12000
14500 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
14000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
13500
13000
0 8000 160 00 24000 3 200 0
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

Lintel Beam
 Estimation of Reinforcement Quantity
for Roof Beam
17000 14000

3
)
3
)

16500 13000

Longitudinal Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

16000
Trans. Gable Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

12000

Steel Quantity in
Steel Quanitity in

15500
11000
15000
10000
14500
9000
14000

13500 8000

13000 7000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000 0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se nta tive V o lum e3) (m Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m

10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

7000
12800
)

6750
3

12200 6500
Steel Quantity in Secondary Roof
3
)
Trans. Interm. Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

6250
11600 Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

6000
Steel Quantity in

11000 5750

5500
10400
5250

9800 5000
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e3) (m
9200
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h

8600
0 8000 16000 24000 32000
Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e3) (m
10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
Introduction of Brick Infills in B.O.P. buildings

Bare frames Infilled Frames

 EQUIVALENT
DIAGONAL
STRUT
APPROACH

Federal
Proposed Draft
Emergency
and Commentary
Management
on IS: 1893 (Part I)
Agency-273
Equivalent Diagonal Strut Approach

Compression Gap

Cracks
 Equivalent Diagonal Strut Approach
Earthquake
force

Earthquake
force

Pin
joints
Proposed Draft Provisions And Commentary On
Indian Seismic Code IS: 1893 (Part I)
Without opening With opening

wdo = ρ w wds wds =

d
3
Federal Emergency Management Agency-273

Without opening

a = 0.175(λl hcol ) −0.4 rinf

1/ 4
 Eme tinf sin 2θ 
λ= 
 4 E fe I col hinf 
 
Modeling of Brick Infill
Through SAP 2000
 Comparison of Bare Frame and Infilled Frame

Model Model Model Parameter

No. Designati
on L (m) B (m) Bf (m) Tf (m) Ah %

1 6083610 6 08 3 6 10

2 5083615 5 08 3 6 15

3 6083515 6 08 3 5 15

4 5085520 5 08 5 5 20

5 6084620 6 08 4 6 20
 1200 1000
900
1000
800
800 700

Axial Force (kN)

Axial Force (kN)

600
600 500
400
400 300
200
200
100
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
M o d e l Nu m b e r M od e l Nu m be r
B are F ram es FE M A 273 S olid Infills B are Fram es FE M A 273 S olid Infills
IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

Corner Intermediate
Column Column
500
450
400
350
Axial Force (kN)

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1 2 3 4 5
M o d e l N um be r
B are F ram es F E M A 273 S olid Infills
IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

Gable Column
 800 600
700
500
600
Base Moment (kN-m)

Base Moment (kN-m)

500 400

400 300
300
200
200
100 100
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
M od e l Num b e r
M od e l Num be r
B are Fram es F E M A 273 S olid Infills B are Fram es F E M A 273 S olid Infills
IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

Corner Intermediate
Column Column
300

250
Base Moment (kN-m)

200

150

100

50

0
1 2 3 4 5
Model Number
Bare Frames FEMA 273 Solid Infills
IS: 1893 Proposed Draft Solid Infills IS: 1893 Proposed Draft Perforated Infills

Gable Column
 Introduction of Pushover Analysis in B.O.P.
buildings
• The Non-Linear Static Procedure of Pushover analysis is defined in
the Federal Emergency Management Agency-273 document as a non–
linear static approximation of the response, that a structure will
undergo when subjected to dynamic earthquake loading.

UN F Vb Push-over Curve
Load vs Deflection

UN
Vb
 F F
O
B C O
B C
R R
D D
ACCEPTANCE C
E
A
DEFORMATION
E
DEFORMATION
C
E
A E

CRITERIA F
O
B C
R
C D
A E
E
DEFORMATION
Intensity
Measure
Joe’s
Joe’s
Beer! Beer!
Food! Food!

Very rare events

(2%/50yrs)

Rare events
(10%/50yrs) Immediate
Occupancy
Occasional events Collapse
(20%/50yrs)
Life Prevention
Frequent events Safety
(50%/50yrs)

Damage Measure
 CAPACITY SPECTRUM METHOD

• The capacity spectrum method provides a graphical

representation of the expected seismic performance
of the existing or retrofitted structure by the
intersection of the structure’s capacity spectrum
with a response spectrum (demand spectrum).
• The intersection is the performance point, and the
displacement coordinate of the performance point is
the estimated displacement demand of the structure.
 CAPACITY SPECTRUM CONVERSION

• Capacity: Capacity is a representation of the structure’s

ability to resist the seismic demand.

Spectral Acceleration - Sa
Base Shear - V

Vi, Δroof Sai , Sdi

Roof Displacement - Δr Spectral Displacement - Sd

Capacity Curve Capacity Spectrum
 RESPONSE SPECTRUM CONVERSION

• Demand (displacement):Demand is a representation of the of

the earthquake ground motion.

Co
Lin nstan
es tP
e ri o
d
arel ecc Al art ce pS

Time Period rel ecc Al art ce pS Spectral Displacement

DESIGN REDUCED RESPONSE
SPECTRUM SPECTRUM
 CAPACITY SPECTRUM METHOD

• Performance: Once a capacity curve and demand displacement are

defined, a performance check can be done.
Application to B.O.P. building

• Model no. – 5083615 and 5083610

• Live Load – 1.5 kN/m2
STEPS TO PERFORM PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
Performing Pushover Analysis
Through SAP 2000
Load Cases 1

3
2
 Interpretation

Roof displ. Base force A-B B-IO IO-LS LS-CP CP-C C-D D-E >E TOTAL
(m) (kN)

.033 1756.7 90 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 150

Summary and Conclusion

• This database and graphs will result in saving of time in future

and also help to complete the proposals for various projects
within the stipulated time.
• For a large company like L&T-S&L, delivering design output in
a stringent time schedule is one of the challenges. This will help
in quick estimation of framing element sizes and accelerate the
design process.
• This database will be kept in company’s repository and will be
enriched by adding data of buildings designed now onwards.
• The modeling of brick infills as per IS: 1893 (Part I) Proposed
Draft is relatively simpler as it requires a definition of fewer
parameters compared to FEMA-273. It is thus suggested that in
order to model brick infills in practical problems, IS: 1893 (Part
I) Proposed Draft method should be adopted.
Continued

• From the results, of the pushover analysis it is learnt that the

power plant buildings be designed for immediate occupancy,
so that during the post earthquake scenario, there is least
possible damage to these buildings.
• It is foreseen that current Indian Codes may incorporate
pushover analysis in the in future, so the pushover analysis is
introduced in current study.
• In order to survive competition in the global market, L&T-
S&L desires that their engineers should be prepared if
pushover analysis is introduced in the next revision of Indian
codes.
Future scope of Work

• The number of buildings can be increased in the database by

varying different parameters like width, roof height, foundation
level, soil bearing capacity and building length.
• The brick infills can be modeled in more number of buildings,
to provide a consistent basis for comparison.
• The nonlinear push over analysis can be performed on more
number of infilled frames as well as bare frames, to study the
behavior of B.O.P. buildings.
• The present visual basic tool may be modified for multistoried
buildings and could thus be used to prepare a database for
multistoried buildings.
• The nonlinear push over analysis can be performed on
multistoried buildings with infilled frames.
References

• Black and Veatch, “Power Plant Engineering”, First Indian Edition,

CBS publishers, 1998.
• G.D. Rai, “An Introductions to Power Plant Technology”, Third Edition,
Khanna Publishers, 1996.
• Diptesh Das and C.V.R. Murty, “Brick masonry infills in seismic design
of RC framed buildings: Part 1- Cost Implications” The Indian Concrete
Journal, July 2005 pp.39-44.
• Mohammad Ailaari and Ali M. Memari, ”Experimental Evaluation of a
Sacrificial Seismic Fuse Device for Masonry Inifll Walls” Journal of
Architectural Engineering © ASCE / June 2007 pp.111-125.
• Hemant B. Kaushik, Durgesh C. Rai and Sudhir K. Jain, “Code
Approaches to Seismic Design of Masonry-Infilled Reinforces Concrete
Frames: A State-of-the-Art Review”, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 22,
No. 4, November 2006, pp.961-983.
Continued

• Sudhir K. Jain and C.V.R. Murty, “Proposed Draft Provisions and

Commentary on Indian Seismic Code IS 1893 (Part 1)”, pp. 84-86.
• Federal Emergency Management Agency-273, “NEHRP Commentary
on the Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, October
1997
• Federal Emergency Management Agency-356, “Prestandard and
Commentary For the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, November
2000.
• Ashraf Habibullah and Stephen Pyle, “Practical Three Dimensional Non
linear Static Pushover Analysis”, Structure Magazine, Winter, 1998.
• Applied Technical Council-40, “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of
Concrete Buidlings”, Volume 1, November 1996.
• Applied Technical Council-33, “NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buidlings”, November 1997.