SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017
Study of Torsional Irregularity in Irregular
Structure Provided with Lead Rubber Bearing
Isolator
Nandini K.G1, Pranathi Reddy.B2
1
Post Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, The ACS College of Engineering, Bangalore, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, The ACS College of Engineering, Bangalore, India
Abstract-Structure collapse occurs due to the
torsional motions causing significant damage to the
building. Analysis using the provisions of IS 1893-
2002 and with the aid of time history and response
spectrum given for soft, medium and hard soils in
foundations, the basis of multi-storey buildings are
taken to be fixed. In the seismic response, type of soil
present in and around the foundation affects in the
seismic response of the structure. Comparative study
on the structures with plan irregularity is done. Base
isolation is usually carried out for soft and medium
soil. This study is mainly concentrated on medium soil
conditions. The RC framed building of different
models of storey height G+10 models is considered to
analyze the fixed base condition and base isolation
condition with torsional irregularity. The base
isolation is assigned for the fixed base model
condition by calculating the design procedure for base
isolator and the results are compared for fixed and
base isolation model for earthquake and response
spectrum parameter and torsional irregularity for the
earthquake parameter for fixed and base isolation
results are compared. The analysis of the structural
models is carried out using ETABS 2015 software,
version 0.2
Keywords- Response spectrum analyses, torsion
irregularity, lead rubber bearing isolator
I. Introduction
Earthquake causes great destruction by sudden
violent ground shaking leading to huge loss of life and
property. Sudden release of energy from the lithosphere
is known as earthquake. Interaction between interior of
the crust and the earth is the main cause for earthquake.
Earthquake Ground Motions are the effective
natural hazards which tend to loss of life & property.
Most of the earthquake losses are structure collapse. It
is most considerable step to be considered while
designing the structures to resist against earthquake
ground motion. If the existing building is not designed
for earthquake then some alternative measures should
be consider in terms of retrofitting.
Consequential damages are caused in the non-
uniform structures due to disparate distribution of
mass, strength and stiffness improperly and also leads
to tensional motions. Such buildings may go through
tensional motions. But it’s difficult to attain ideal
ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org
condition because of architectural requirements and
practical needs. The earthquake structures are
designed as per Indian standard code IS1893:2002.
For structures having height less than 40m the seismic
forces are determined by equivalent static force
method. Hence study deals with medium rise
buildings.
Generally the buildings are almost irregular,
absolute regularity is an idealization which occurs
infrequently. In order to identify the torsionally
irregular structures, IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 has given
the clear definitions of irregular buildings in Clause
7.1. An expression for the design eccentricity, which
is very much needed for the analysis of torsionally
unbalanced structures is given in Clause 7.9 of the IS
1893. In the codal provisions, it is also suggested that,
the method of analysis to be used for a structure,
depends on its irregularity, in addition to total height
of the structure and the seismic zone where it is
situated (Clause 7.8.1). To understand the importance
of codal provisions, which are especially meant for
plan asymmetric buildings, an attempt is made in the
present study considering various parameters, which
are contributing torsional irregularity.
The structure configuration has been defined as
uniform or non-uniform in terms of size and shapes of
structures, positioning of structural elements and
mass. Regular building configurations are almost
symmetrical (in plan and elevation) about the axis and
have uniform distribution of the lateral force-resisting
structure. A building that lack in symmetry and has a
lack of continuity in geometry, mass or load resisting
elements is called irregular building. These
irregularities cause interruption of stress
concentrations and force flow. Asymmetrical
arrangement of mass and stiffness of elements may
cause a large torsional force.
Torsion in buildings is caused due to seismic
motion because of non-symmetric distributions of
mass and stiffness. An eccentricity in building leads to
torsional response during earthquake. Modern codes
such as EC8, UBC97and Greek code are referred for
the torsional design in the building.
Page 55
 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017
Fig : Torsion irregularity.
The different buildings with different shaped plans
that are shown below in figure 1.1
Fig 1.1: Plan View of the buildings with different
shapes.
“Asymmetry cause substantial unreliability in
the capacity of the buildings to meet the design
justification of the code” these requirements are
studied only to make “designers aware of the
existence and potential harmful effects of irregularities
and to provide minimum necessity for their
accommodation”.
The type of irregularities considered includes:
i) Vertical mass irregularities.
ii) Vertical stiffness: strength irregularities
for buildings with constant interstorey
heights.
iii) Horizontal stiffness/strength asymmetry
on rigid floor diaphragm buildings which
leads to tensional deformation.
iv) Horizontal floors diaphragm plasticity
which affects the structural behaviour.
1.2 Regular Configuration and Irregular
Configuration.
To resist against earthquake a building should
have simple and systematic configuration, sufficient
lateral strength, stiffness and ductility. Structures
which have systematic regular geometry and uniform
ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org
distribution of mass and stiffness in plan and in
preferment lead to less harmful than irregular
configurations as per Indian Standard IS 1893 (Part 1):
2002
1.3 Base Isolation
Base Isolation concept is introduced in the
USA and New Zealand in 1980.Base isolators are
most often installed at the base level of a building and
it is called base isolation. In order to reduce the
vibrations leading to damage of the building.
Base isolation is defined as an easily bending
without breaking material which is fixed at base of the
structure to reduce earthquake forces. Isolators are
provided at the base of the structure which results in
reduction of earth motion transmitted to the
superstructure above isolator, minimizing the reaction
of a typical structure and corresponding loading. They
are detected between the foundation and the building
structure and are designed to minimize the magnitude
and frequency of seismic shock permitted to enter the
building. They are provided with both spring and
energy absorbing characteristics.
Fig1.2 Fixed base v/s Base-isolated building (Nelson
2010)
1.4 Classification of Base Isolators:
The most common types of base isolator used in
building are
1) Laminated Rubber (Elastomeric) Bearing.
a. Natural rubber bearing (high damping).
b. Natural and synthetic rubber (low
damping).
2) Friction Pendu1um Bearing Isolator.
3) Lead Rubber Bearing (LRB)
1.5 Lead Rubber Bearing Isolator
The LRB was first used in New Zealand in
1995 and later used in large scale in New Zealand,
Page 56
 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017
Japan and United states. LRB are laminated same as
low-damping rubber bearings.
Lead rubber bearing consists of fine layer of low
damping natural rubber and steel plates built in
alternate layers and a lead cylinder plug firmly fitted
in a hole at its centre to deform in pure shear as shown
in figure (E).
Functions of Lead Rubber Bearing Base Isolator are as
follows
 Load Supporting Functions: Structure is
stable by the support of steel plates which is
reinforced by rubber. Single-1ayer rubber
pad construction gives accurate vertical
rigidity for supporting a building.
 Horizonta1-Elasticity Function: By providing
LRB seismic motions are converted to low-
speed motions. The horizontal stiffness of
multi-layer rubber bearing is low, severe
seismic vibrations are controlled and “To and
Fro motion of the building is increased”.
 Restoration function: Horizonta1-e1asticity
of LRB returns the building to its original
state.
Fig1.3: Lead Rubber Bearing
1.6 Design of Lead Rubber Bearing Base-Isolator:
The isolator considered in this work is LRB
base isolator and design follows the Earthquake
Engineering Handbook by W.H Chen and Charles
Scawthorn. The mechanical properties of the LRB
base-isolator system follow the Earthquake handbook.
The design parameters considered are vertical-
stiffness (Kv), horizontal-stiffness (Kh), Pre yield
stiffness (Ku), Yield force of lead plug (Qd) and Post
Yield Stiffness Ratio.
ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org
Fig 1.4 Lead Rubber Bearing
1.7 Advantages of Base Isolation
 Base isolators resists against structural
damage during earthquake
 The base Isolation will protect the building
by preventing plastic deformation of
structural elements.
 Secondary damage and injury like falling of
furniture’s and other materials will be
avoided.
 Even after the earthquake super-structure is
designed to be remaining elastic.
 Evacuation routes and corridors are secured
with base-isolators in building.
 Reduces weight of building & cost of
construction.
 Base isolator reduces cost of repair of
structure after earthquake and reduces loss of
life.
1.8 Limitations of Base Isolation
 It is suitable only for low to medium-rise
buildings on hard soil. As the period of
vibration in building increased with increase
in height.
 Cost involved in constructing a new building
is higher than the cost of conventional
earthquake resistant structural system,
seismic isolation bearings are expensive.
II.AIM AND SCOPE
2.1 Aim of the Study
This thesis work is a comparative study on the
reinforced concrete structure with different types of
irregularities. These different irregular types models are
subjected to dynamic analysis .Dynamic parameters
such as base shear, displacement, storey drifts, mode
shapes and torsional irregularity are obtained and
comparisons are shown and drawn.
The scope of this study is to compare the
performance of an irregular structure with different
types of irregularities to conclude the effectiveness of
“STUDY OF TORSIONAL IRREGULARITY IN
IRREGULAR STRUCTURES PROVIDED WITH
LEAD RUBBER BEARING ISOLATOR”.
Page 57
 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017

2.2 Parametric Study 3.2 Salient Features of the Building

These building models are analyzed for the following The Constant Parameters of Building Model
case is studied using ETABS software of version 2015. The
Using equivalent static lateral force method modal considered for this analysis is G+ 10 storey’s.
as per IS 1893(part 1):2002.
Displacements, Storey-drift, base-shear and
mode shape.
Torsional irregularity.

III. METHODOLOGY
1) A detailed introduction regarding Earthquake,
torsion irregularities, regular and irregular shaped
structures and their configurations plan and vertical
irregularities, and base isolation.
2) A complete literature survey is carried out on study
of torsional irregularities in irregular structures.
3) The RC frame was modelled in software ETABS
2015.
4) The analysis of the prescribed RC frame was
carried out to evaluate the Vibration Parameters
(Natural Frequency, mode shapes and corresponding
model participating mass ratios) of a RC building
frame by carrying out model analysis method using
computer program ETABS 2015.2 Maximum axial
load (P) on column was noted down after modal
analysis for a load combination of 1.5(DL+LL+FF) in
case of fixed base modal. The measured value of axial
load an isolator i.e. Lead Rubber Bearing was
designed as per the formulations provided in
“Earthquake Engineering Handbook by W. F. Chen”.
5) By removing the restraints of fixed base modal 3.3 Other Parameter
LRB parameters are calculated. In this work comparative study is carried out
6) Equivalent static and linear response spectrum on irregular buildings fixed base modal and LRB base
analysis were carried out to compare the performance modal. The buildings consist fixed RC framed
of fixed base model and LRB base isolated model. building with plan irregularities such as (I SHAPE
7) The dynamic analysis of reinforced concrete frame AND L SHAPE) and base isolator has been assigned
is compared to get the displacement, base shears, for the fixed base building.
storey drifts and mode shapes and torsional The study is carried out for G+10 storeys and
irregularities of the structure. The reinforced concrete for zone that is for zone V respectively and typical
frames models are with different plan irregularities are storey height considered is 3m. The column size is
analyzed. 230X450 and Plinth Beam size is 230X450 for
8) Results thus obtained from the dynamic analysis G+10storey building respectively. Types of structure
are tabulated, discussed and graphs plotted for mode considered for the study is
period, disp1acement, storeydrift, and baseshear and
torsional irregularities.

3.1 Objective of the Work

The main objectives are as follows:
1) To evaluate the response spectrum of a
reinforced concrete frame structure (i.e.,
displacement, base shear, storey drift, mode
shapes and torsional irregularities) by
Equivalent static lateral force method using
software ETABS 2015.
2) Response spectrum method is used as per
Indian Standard-1893 Part-1:2002.
3) All the models are studied and analysed using
response spectrum method.

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 58

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017
Fig 3.1: Irregular plan view of I Shape model
Fig 3.2: 3D View of I Shape model
ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org
Fig 3.3: L R B Provided For L&I Shape In 3d View
3.4 Loading of Structure
Structures loads vary from loads of low-
rise0building in to much larger structural forces, with
the increase in the loading in the greater importance of
dynamic0effects.
Three0types of loads are considered for the
analysis of structure and for design purposes. The
loads which is considered as gravity loads they are
dead0load, live load, wind and earthquake0loads.
3.5 Gravity Loads on Structure
Dead0loads are called as gravity0loads
that0will be applied laterally on the structural frame
with consideration of earthquake0motion.
Live0loads are also called as gravity0loads that do not
apply laterally at0the same rate as the structural0frame
when the Structure0undergoes with the consideration
of earthquake motion.
3.6 Lateral Loads
The loads which are applied almost
horizontally and those loads must be taken
consideration for the structural0analysis and0design.
Such loads are defined as lateral0loads. Lateral0loads
are important for0structures are earthquake and wind
loads.
3.7 Earthquake Load
Seismic load contains inertial forces of
structures mass that results in vibration of its
substructure by a seismic interference. Other severe
seismic forces may occur due to land sliding,
collapse, active faulting below the foundation or
liquefaction of the local sub grade as a result of
vibration. Whereas earthquakes occur, their intensity
is inversely proportion to their frequency of
occurrence like severe0earthquakes are rare, moderate
ones are often and minor ones are relatively frequent.
Page 59
 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017

IV.ANALYSIS RESULTS OF FIXED BASE AND

BASE ISOLATOR.
When analysis is completed, the
comparison of the fixed base and base isolation storey
drifts, displacement, base shears and mode shapes
values and torsional irregularities values are taken and
graphs are plotted.

4.1 Torsional Irregularity

Torsional irregularity is one such horizontal
irregularity which has to be taken care while designing
a structure.
A building is certified to be stable during its
design process by inspecting the entire structure for
both vertical and horizonta1 irregularities which is
mentioned according to various international codes.
The ill effects of irregu1arities are mainly experienced
when a building is subjected to seismic motion which
leads to damage and even the collapse of the structure.
Before explaining the term torsional irregularity, one
has to be acquainted with the terms drift, storey drift,
eccentricity and torsion.
Torsional irregularity exists if, dmax/davg >1.2
Recent codes have defined torsional
irregularity as the condition where the maximum
storey drift inc1uding accidental torsion at end of the
structure transverse to an axis is more than 1.2 times
the average of the storey drifts at the two ends of the
structure.
When the earthquake forces occurred in X-dir
then the total drift will be more in the opposite ends of
the structure and in Y-dir also the total drift will be I Shape Fixed Base Deformed Shape for Earthquake
more in the opposite directions. in Both Directions
The below pictures shows that the deformed Calculations:
shape for the earthquake forces occurred in both Earthquake in X-dir: R1 = 31.04mm, R2 = 32.109mm.
directions for the fixed base model. If the earthquake Earthquake in Y-dir: R3 = 47.670mm, R4 =
occurred in the X-dir then the opposite corners of the 47.899mm.
building points has been named as R1 and R2, Permissible Drift = H/250 = 31.5/250 = 126mm
similarly in the Y-dir earthquake occurred, the So our storey is within permissible drift.
opposite corners of the building are named as R3 and Check for Torsional irregularity in X-dir.
R4. But the total drift should not be more than the Dmax = 32.109
permissible drift which is the height of the structure by Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (31.04 + 32.109)/2 = 31.5745
250. To determine the torsional irregularity of the (Dmax/Davg) = (32.109/31.5745) = 1.01 < 1.2
building the column sizes has been reduced and Check for Torsional irregularity in Y-dir.
earthquake forces has been considered for the same Dmax = 47.899
model and the total drifts has been determined and the Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (47.670 + 47.899)/2 = 47.78
cross check of the total drift has been done. (Dmax/Davg) = (47.899/47.78) = 1.0 < 1.2
So the torsional irregularity for the fixed base in both
directions does not exist.
To check the torsional irregularity of the structure
when the column section has been revised for the
same model and the earthquake forces has been
considered and then the comparison has been done.
Earthquake in X-dir: R1 = 46.412mm, R2 =
28.716mm.
Earthquake in Y-dir: R3 = 50.931mm, R4 =
51.108mm.
Check for Torsional irregularity in X-dir.
Dmax = 46.412

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 60

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017

Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (46.412 + 28.716)/2 = 37.564

(Dmax/Davg) = (46.412/37.564) = 1.24 > 1.2.
So torsional irregularity exist. Reconsider the design
of the structure.
Check for Torsional irregularity in Y-dir.
Dmax = 50.931
Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (50.931 + 51.108)/2 = 51.02
(Dmax/Davg) = (50.931/51.02) = 0.99 > 1.2.

I Shape 3d View Fixed Torsion Irregularity

I Shape Plan View of Fixed Torsion Irregularity

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 61

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017

Earthquake in Y-dir: R3 = 44.977mm, R4 =

45.131mm.
Check for Torsional irregularity in X-dir.
Dmax = 40.783
Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (40.783 + 25.780)/2 = 33.2815.
(Dmax/Davg) = (40.783/33.2815) = 1.23 > 1.2.
So torsional irregularity exist. Reconsider the design
of the structure.
Check for Torsional irregularity in Y-dir.
Dmax = 44.977
Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (44.977 + 45.131)/2 = 45.054
(Dmax/Davg) = (44.977/45.054) = 0.99 > 1.2.

I Shape LRB Base Deformed Shape for Earthquake in

Both Directions
Calculations:
Earthquake in X-dir: R1 = 28.055mm, R2 =
28.971mm.
Earthquake in Y-dir: R3 = 42.773mm, R4 =
42.894mm.
Permissible Drift = H/250 = 31.5/250 = 126mm
So our storey is within permissible drift.
Check for Torsional irregularity in X-dir.
Dmax = 28.971
Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (28.971 + 28.055)/2 =
28.513mm. I Shape Plan View LRB Torsion Irregularity
(Dmax/Davg) = (28.971/28.055) = 1.03 < 1.2
Check for Torsional irregularity in Y-dir.
Dmax = 42.894
Davg = (R1+R2)/2 = (42.773 + 42.894)/2 = 42.8335
(Dmax/Davg) = (42.894/42.8335) = 1.0 < 1.2
So the torsional irregularity for the LRB base for both
directions does not exist.
To check the torsional irregularity of the structure
when the column section has been revised for the
same model and the earthquake forces has been
considered and then the comparison has been done.
Earthquake in X-dir: R1 = 40.783mm, R2 =
25.780mm.

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 62

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 7 – July 2017

REFERENCES

I Shape 3d View LRB Torsion Irregularity

V.CONCLUSION
Torsional irregularity exists in the X-dir when the
column size reduces in the fixed and LRB base
model.
So we must increases the lateral stiffness along
the column with maximum storey drift by
increasing the column sizes, retaining walls or
bracings.
So LRB and Torsional irregularity is important
parameters for the design of the tall structures.

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 63