EFFECT OF SLOPING GROUND ON STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE OF RCC BUILDING UNDER SEISMIC LOAD

Transcription

1 EFFECT OF SLOPING GROUND ON STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE OF RCC BUILDING UNDER SEISMIC LOAD 1SUJIT KUMAR, 2 Dr. VIVEK GARG, 3 Dr. ABHAY SHARMA 1 Post Graduate Student, Structural Engineering Department of Civil Engineering, MANIT, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India, sujitkumar475@gmail.com 2 Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, MANIT, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India, vivek_garg5@yahoo.co.in 3 Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Department, MANIT, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India, abhaybpl7@yahoo.co.in ABSTRACT Previous studies emphasize for proper planning and construction practices of multistoried buildings on sloping ground. However, in normal design practice the designers generally ignore the effect of sloping ground on the structural behavior of the building. The seismic analysis of a G+4 storey RCC building on varying slope angles i.e., and 15 0 is studied and compared with the same on the flat ground. The seismic forces are considered as per IS: The structural analysis software STAAD Pro v8i is used to study the effect of sloping ground on building performance during earthquake. Seismic analysis has been done using Linear Static method. The analysis is carried out to evaluate the effect of sloping ground on structural forces. The horizontal reaction, bending moment in footings and axial force, bending moment in columns are critically analyzed to quantify the effects of various sloping ground. It has been observed that the footing columns of shorter height attract more forces, because of a considerable increase in their stiffness, which in turn increases the horizontal force (i.e. shear) and bending moment significantly. Thus, the section of these columns should be designed for modified forces due to the effect of sloping ground. The present study emphasizes the need for proper designing of structure resting on sloping ground. Index Terms: Sloping ground, Seismic forces, RCC Building, Structural analysis, STAAD etc. 1. INTRODUCTION Earthquake is the most disastrous due to its unpredictability and huge power of devastation. Earthquakes themselves do not kill people, rather the colossal loss of human lives and properties occur due to the destruction of structures. Building structures collapse during severe earthquakes, and cause direct loss of human lives. Numerous research works have been directed worldwide in last few decades to investigate the cause of failure of different types of buildings under severe seismic excitations. Massive destruction of high rise as well as lowrise buildings in recent devastating earthquake proves that in developing counties like India, such investigation is the need of the hour. Hence, seismic behavior of asymmetric building structures has become a topic of worldwide active research. Many Investigations have been conducted on elastic and inelastic seismic behavior of asymmetric systems to find out the cause of seismic vulnerability of such structures. The purpose of the paper is to perform linear static analysis of medium height RC buildings and investigate the changes in structural behavior due to consideration of sloping ground. 1.1 SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF BUILDINGS ON SLOPES IN INDIA North and northeastern parts of India have large scales of hilly region, which are categorized under seismic zone IV and V. In this region the construction of multistory RC framed buildings on hill slopes has a popular and pressing demand, due to its economic growth and rapid urbanization. This growth in construction activity is adding increase in population density. While construction, it must be noted that Hill buildings are different from those in plains i.e., they are very irregular and unsymmetrical in horizontal and vertical planes, and torsionally coupled. Since there is scarcity of plain ground in hilly areas, it obligates the construction of buildings on slopes. During past earthquakes, reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings that have columns of different heights within one storey, suffered more damage in the shorter columns as compared to taller columns in the same storey. One example of buildings with short columns in buildings on a sloping ground can be seen in the figure (1) given INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

2 Figure 1: Building frame with short columns Poor behavior of short columns is due to the fact that in an earthquake, a talll column and a short column of same cross section move horizontally by same amount which can be seen from the given figure (2) below. Figure 2: Structural behavior of short column under lateral load However, the short column is stiffer as compared to the tall column, and it attracts larger earthquake force. Stiffness of a column means resistance to deformation the larger is the stiffness, larger is the force required to deform it. Several studies have been made to investigate the structural performance of building frame resting on sloping ground. The effect in terms of axial force, shear force, moment support reaction, and displacement are studied for more realistic analysis to quantify the effects of various slope of ground. Chen and Constantinou (1998) studied that the practical system deliberately introduces flexibility to the sloping ground storey of structures was described. The system utilizes Teflon sliders to carry a portion of the superstructure. Energy dissipation is provided by the ground story ductile columns and by the Teflon sliders. Utilizing this concept the seismic response characteristics of a multistory frame are analyzed and discussed. The results show that it is possible to provide safely to the superstructure while maintaining the stability of the ground storey. Chandrasekaran and Rao (2002) investigated analysis and the design of multi storied RCC buildings for seismicity. Reinforced concrete multi storied buildings are very complex to model as structural systems for analysis. Usually, they are modeled as two dimensional or three with dimensional frame systems are in plane and slope different angles 5 o, 10 o, and 15 o. Analyze multistoried buildings in the country for seismic forces and comparing the axial force, shear force, moment, nodal displacement, stress in beam and support reaction compared to current version of the IS: to the last version IS: Birajdar B.G. (2004) presented the results from seismic analyses performed on 24 RC buildings with three different configurations like, Step back building; Step back Set back building and Set back building are presented. 3 D analysis including torsional effect has been carried out by using response spectrum method. The dynamic response properties i.e. fundamental time period, top storey displacement and, the base shear action induced in columns have been studied with reference to the suitability of a building configuration on sloping ground. It is observed that Step back Set back buildings are found to be more suitable on sloping ground. Kadid A. and Boumrkik k A. (2005) studied experimental pushover analysis was carried out with a study the performancee of framed buildings under future expected earthquakes. Sloping ground are consider the three framed buildings with 5, 8 and 12 stories respectively were analyzed. The results obtained in these three buildings and compare the axial force, bending moment, nodal displacement, base shear and shows that properly designed frames will perform well under seismic codes. Some of the conclusions made by the authors are the pushover analysis is a relatively simple way to explore the linear and non linear behavior of Buildings. Abu L. (2010) studied the Analysis of earthquake resistant building using Site Response spectra method. According to the Indian standard for Earthquake resistant design (IS: 1893), the seismic force depends on the zone factor (Z) and the average responsee acceleration coefficient (Sa/g) of the soil types at twenty meter depth with suitable modification depending upon the depth of foundation in plane and sloping ground. In the their studied an attempt has been made to generate response spectra using site specific soil parameters for some sites in seismic zone III and IV, study the variation of top storey displacement with respect to different sloping angle i.e. Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya are the generated response spectra is used to analyze some structures using commercial software STAAD Pro V8i. Saptadip S. (2010) studied the Design of Earthquake resistant multi stories RCC building on a sloping ground which involves the analysis of simple 2 D frames of varying floor heights and varying no of bays using a very popular software tool STAAD Pro. Using the analysis results various graphs were drawn between the maximum axial force, maximum shear force, maximum bending moment, maximum tensile force and maximum compressivee stress being developedd for the frames on plane ground and sloping ground. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

3 Balaji K.V.G.D (2011) studied the non linear analysis of various symmetric and asymmetric structures constructed on plain as well as sloping grounds subjected to various kinds of loads. Different structures constructed on plane ground and inclined ground of 30 o slope is considered in the study. Various structures are considered in plan symmetry and also asymmetry with difference in bay sizes in mutual directions. The analysis has been carried out using SAP 2000 and ETABS software. Mohammed U. and Farooque P. (2012) studied the buildings on hill differ from other buildings. The various floors of such building steps back towards the hill slope and at the same time buildings may have setbacks also. Buildings situated in hilly areas are much more vulnerable to seismic environment. In this study the effect of varying height of columns in ground storey due to sloping ground and the effect of shear wall at different positions during earthquake. Seismic analysis has been done using Linear Static, Linear Dynamic method and evaluated using pushover analysis Eight Storied building. Keyvan Ramin (2013) studied the experimental modeling and numerical modeling for a four story reinforced concrete building that the analysis of simple 3 D frames of varying floor heights and varying number of bays with different slope angles using a very popular software tool STAAD Pro. on both a sloping and a flat lot. Also Sap2000 software had been used to show that the displacement of floors is greater for a flat lot building than a sloping lot building. Pradeep Kumar Ramancharla (2013) studied the behavior of a building on varying slope angles i.e., 15, 30 and 45 is studied using shear wall in different location and compared with the same on the flat ground. Building is designed as per IS 456 and later subjected to earthquake loads. The salient objectives of the present study have been to study the effect of sloping ground on structural forces in critical horizontal reaction, bending moment in footing and critical axial force, bending moment in columns. 2. METHODOLOGY This present work deals with study of behavior of sloping ground building frames considering different inclination (7.5 o, 15 o ) under earthquake forces. The comparison of sloping ground and plane ground building under seismic forces is done. Here G+ 4 storey is taken and same live load is applied in three the buildings for its behavior and comparison. The framed buildings are subjected to vibrations because of earthquake and therefore seismic analysis is essential for these building frames. The fixed base system is analyzed by employing in three building frames in seismic zone IV by means of STAAD Pro. Software. The response of three the building frames is studied for useful interpretation of results. 2.1 STEPS FOR COMPARISON Comparisons of results in terms of horizontal reaction, bending moments, axial force. Following steps are adopted in this study Step 1 Selection of building geometry and Seismic zone: The behavior of three the models is studied for seismic zone IV of India as per IS code 1893 (Part 1):2002 for which zone factor (Z) is Step 2 Formation of load combination Types of Primary Loads and Load Combinations: The structural systems are subjected to Primary Load Cases as per IS 875:1987 and IS 1893:2002.Six primary load case and thirteen load combinations used for analysis. Step 3 Modelling of building frames using STADD Pro. Software Step 4 Analysis of three the building frames are done under seismic zone IV for each load combination. Step 5 Comparative study of results in terms of bending moments and horizontal force in footings, axial force and bending moment in columns. 3. MODELLING STAAD Pro. Software is used in modeling of building frames. STAAD stands for Structural analysis and design Program and it is general purpose software for performing the analysis and design of a wide variety of structures. The basic activities which are to be carried out to achieve this goal: a. Geometry of the structure b. Providing material and member properties c. Applying loads and support conditions 3.1 NOMENCLATURE OF STRUCTURAL MODELS A proper nomenclature for joint and members numbering is very important as it gives the exact idea where the joint/member is located in the entire structure. The nodes, beams and columns numbering is according to the floor number given in tables. Table 1 Numbering of nodes in structure Node No. Location 1 25 Below plinth level plinth level st storey nd storey rd storey th storey Table 2 Numbering of columns in structure Columns No Location Below plinth 1 25 level st storey INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

4 nd storey 3 rd storey 4 th storey Table 3 Numbering of beams in structure Beams No Location plinth level st storey nd storey 3 rd storey 4 th storey Figure 4: Plan of building frame Figure 3: Node numbering in structure 4. STRUCTURAL MODELS Structural models for different sloping ground are shown in plan, elevation and 3D structural model of plane and sloping ground structures in Fig. 4 to 7. Figure 5: Elevation of plane ground building frame Figure.6: 3D structural model of plane ground building frame INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

5 Figure 7: Elevation of sloping ground (15 o ) building frame Description Number of storey s Number of bays in X direction Number of bays in Z direction Storey height Column height below plinth beam Bay width in X direction Bay width in Z direction Plan size Building height Walls thickness exterior, interior Size of beam Size of column Thickness of all slabs Building frame system Value/type G m 1.5m 3m 3m 12 12m 14m 0.20m, 0.10m 0.2 m 0.3 m 0.4 m 0.4 m m Ordinary RC moment resisting frame Figure 8: 3D structural model of sloping ground (15 o building frame Table 4 Material properties considered in the modelling Material properties Values Density of RCC 25 kn/ m 3 Density of Masonry 20 kn/m 3 Young s modulus of concrete, E C 2.17 x 10 4 N/mm Poisson ratio, μ 0.17 Compressive strength, F ck 25 N/mm 2 Steel F e 415 Table 5 Data/parameters for the analysis of problem o ) m LOADING CONDITIONS Following loading are considered for analysis (a) Dead Loads: Considering slab thickness =125mm Self wt. of slab considering 125mm thick Slab = x 25 = kn/m 2 Floor Finish load = 1 kn/ /m 2 Total floor load =4.124kN/m 2 Masonry wall load outer face = ( ) x 0.20 x 20= 12.4kN/m Masonry wall load inner face =3.1 x0.1 x 20 = 6.2 kn/m Parapet walll load =1.25 x 20 x0.2 = 5 kn/m (b) Live Load: Live Load on typical floors = 3 kn/m 2 (c) Earth Quake Loads: All the building frames are analyzed for one seismic zone (IV) The earth quake loads are derived for following seismic parameters as per IS: 1893(2002) Table 6 Seismic parameter in building frame Seismic parameters Data/ Value Earth Quake Zone IV Responsee Reduction Factor 3 Importance Factor 1 Damping 5% Soil Type Medium Soil 5. RESULTSS AND DISCUSSION INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

6 The results of various analyses for different ground slopes (0 o, 7.5 o, 15 o ) are presented and a comparative study between results of different slopes and plane ground is made to analyses the effect of sloping ground on structural forces. In the present work horizontal reaction and bending moment in footing of structure, bending moment in columns are compared for different ground slopes under different seismic loads. The analysis results obtained in Staad Pro. are shown below in the form of tables and graphs. The footing reaction in the building frame system due to various analyses in terms of horizontal reaction, and Comparison of horizontal reaction Fx (kn) in footing for various ground slopes under seismic loads in X direction. 5.1 FOOTING REACTION IN THE BUILDING FRAME Table 7 Comparison of horizontal reaction Fx (kn) in footing for various analyses in X direction Ground slope (in degree) Comparison of various Footing Load case analyses No /1 3/1 1 EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX Table 7 depicts that horizontal reaction in footings varies significantly for various ground slopes under seismic load in X direction. SLOPE provides significant variation of 0.04 to 3.08 times in the footing reaction (Fx) compared to SLOPE 0 o. The maximum increase in ratio 3.08 times is found in footings located at lesser depth (i.e. footing F1, F6, F11, F16 and F21) whereas the maximum decrease in ratio of nearly 0.04 times is found in footings located at higher depth (i.e. footing F5, F10, F15, F20 and F25). The maximum horizontal reaction (Fx) in footing for SLOPE 0 0 is kn is found in footing F12 and F14 whereas the maximum horizontal reaction in footing for SLOPE is kn is found in footing F11. The sloping ground causes increase of footing reaction (Fx) for footings located INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

7 at lesser depth whereas it decreases this value for footing located at higher depth. SLOPE15 o provides significant variation of 0.04 to 4.21 times in the footing horizontal reaction (Fx) compared to SLOPE 0 o. The maximum increase in ratio 4.21 times is found in footings located at lesser depth (i.e. footing F1, F6, F11, F16 and F21) whereas the maximum decrease in ratio of nearly 0.04 times is found in footings located at higher depth (i.e. footing F4, F9, F14, F19 and F24). The maximum footing horizontal reaction (Fx) for SLOPE 0 0 is kn is found in footing F12 and F14 whereas the maximum footing reaction for SLOPE 15 0 is kn is found in footing F11. The sloping ground causes increase of footing reaction (Fx) for footings located at lesser depth whereas it decreases this value for footing located at higher depth. The maximum horizontal reaction (Fx) in footings value increases at lesser depth and maximum deceases value at higher depth. The maximum horizontal reaction (Fx) in footings value significant change in earthquake in Z direction. Comparison of bending moment Mz (kn m) reaction in footings in sloping ground for various analyses is depicted in table 8 Table 8 Comparison of bending moment Mz in footings for various analyses (EQX) Ground slope (in degree) Comparison of various Footing No Load case analyses /1 3/1 1 EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX Table 8 depicts that bending moment reaction in footings varies significantly for various ground slopes under seismic load in X direction. SLOPE provides significant variation of 0.34 to 1.62 times in the footing reaction (Mz) compared to SLOPE 0 o. The maximum increase in ratio 1.62 times is found in footings located at lesser depth (i.e. footing F1, F6, F11, F16 and F21) whereas the maximum decrease in ratio of nearly 0.34 times is found in footings located at higher depth (i.e. footing F5, F10, F15, F20 and F25). The maximum footing moment reaction (Mz) for SLOPE 0 0 is kn m is found in footing F12 and F14 whereas the maximum footing reaction for SLOPE is kn m is found in footing F11. The sloping ground causes increase of footing reaction (Mz) for footings located at lesser depth INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

8 whereas it decreases this value for footing located at higher depth. SLOPE15 o provides significant variation of 0.10 to 2.12 times in the footing reaction (Mz) compared to SLOPE 0 o. The maximum increase in ratio 2.12 times is found in footings located at lesser depth (i.e. footing F1, F6, F11, F16 and F21) whereas the maximum decrease in ratio of nearly 0.10 times is found in footings located at higher depth (i.e. footing F5, F10, F15, F20 and F25). The maximum footing reaction (Mz) for SLOPE 0 0 is kn footing reaction for SLOPE 15 0 is kn m is found in m is found in footing F12 and F14 whereas the maximum footing F11. The sloping ground causes increase of bending moment reaction (Mz) for footings located at lesser depth whereas it decreases this value for footing located at higher depth. Seismic in Z direction significant change in bending moment of footing in sloping ground structures. 5.1 CRITICAL FORCES IN FOOTING OF BUILDING FRAME Comparison of critical horizontal forces, vertical reaction and bending moment in footing for different ground slopes for various analyses Table 9 Comparison of critical forces in footing for different ground slopes for various analyses Forces/ Plane Ground Sloping Ground (7.5 0 ) Sloping Ground (15 0 ) Comparison of various analysis Component Footin g No. 1 Value Footing No. 2 Value Footin g No. 3 Value 2/1 3/1 Horizontal Reaction Fx (kn) Vertical Reaction Fy (kn) Bending Moment Mz (kn m) Table 9 depicts that critical horizontal reaction Fx (kn) and critical bending moment Mz (kn m) reaction in the footing varies significantly with change in ratio of 2.85 and 1.97 times respectively for sloping ground (15 o ) compared to plane ground. However critical value of vertical reaction in footing remain almost same for different ground slopes. 250 Horizontal Reaction (kn) Plane ground Sloping ground 7.5 Sloping ground 15 Figure 13: Comparison of critical horizontal reaction in footing between plane and sloping grounds (7.5 o, 15 o ) buildings Bending Moment (kn m) Plane ground Sloping ground 7.5 Sloping ground 15 Figure 14: Comparison of critical bending moment in footing between plane and sloping grounds (7.5 o, 15 o ) buildings 5.2 BENDING MOMENT IN THE COLUMNS The bending moment in the columns of sloping ground due to various analyses is depicted in Table 10 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

9 Comparison of bending moment Mz (kn m) in columns below plinth level for various ground slopes under seismic loads in X direction. Table 10 Comparison of bending moment Mz (kn m) in footing columns for various analyses (EQX) Column No Load case Nodes Ground slope (in degree) Comparison of various analyses /1 3/1 1 EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX EQX Table 10 depicts that bending moment in columns varies significantly for various ground slopes under seismic load in X direction. SLOPE provides significant variation of 0.11 to 1.75 times in the bending moment in column (Mz) compared to SLOPE 0 o. The maximum increase in ratio 1.75 times is found in columns located at lesser depth (i.e. column C11) below plinth level. Whereas the maximum decrease in ratio 0.11 times is found in columns located at intermediate depth (i.e. column C2, C7 and C12) below plinth level. The maximum bending moment in column (Mz) for SLOPE 0 0 is 92.82kN m is found in column (i.e. C12) whereas the maximum bending moment in column for SLOPE is kN m is found in column C11. The sloping ground causes increase in bending moment for columns located at lesser depth whereas it decreases this value for column located at higher depth below plinth level. SLOPE 15 0 provides significant variation of 0.05 to 2.12 times in the bending moment in column (Mz) compared to SLOPE 0 o. The maximum increase in ratio 2.12 times is found in columns located at lesser depth (i.e. column C11) below plinth level Whereas the maximum decrease in ratio 0.05times is found in columns located at intermediate depth (i.e. column C2, C7 and C12) below plinth level. The maximum bending moment in column (Mz) for SLOPE 0 0 is 92.82kN m is found in column (i.e. C12) whereas the maximum bending moment in column for SLOPE 15 0 is kN m is found in column C11. The sloping ground causes increase of bending moment in column (Mz) for columns located at lesser depth whereas it decreases this value for column located at higher depth in below plinth INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

10 level. Bending moment Mz (kn m) in columns below and above plinth level for various ground slopes under seismic loads in Z direction is minutely affected. Comparison of critical axial forces Fx (kn) and bending moment Mz (kn m) in columns for various ground slopes are discussed for various analyses. 5.2 CRITICAL FORCES IN COLUMN OF BUILDING FRAME Forces/ Component Table 11 Comparison of critical forces in column for different ground slopes for various analyses Plane Ground Sloping Ground (7.5 o ) Sloping Ground (15 o ) Column No Value Column No. Value Column No. Value Comparison of various analysis 2/1 3/1 Axial Force Fx (kn) Bending Moment Mz (kn m) Table 11 depicts that critical bending moment Mz (kn m) in the column increases significantly with change in ratio of 1.97 times for sloping ground (15 o ) compared to plane ground. However critical value of vertical reaction in column remains almost same for different ground slopes Axial Force (kn) Bending moment (kn m) Plane ground Sloping ground 7.5 Sloping ground 15 Figure 16: Comparison of critical axial force in column between plane and sloping grounds (7.5 o, 15 o ) buildings 50 0 Plane ground Sloping ground 7.5 Sloping ground 15 Figure 17 and figure18 shows the bending moment in plane ground and sloping ground (15 o ) building changes accordingly varying depth. Graphs shows clear that higher bending moment in smaller depth side and decreases with increase in depth. Figure 15: Comparison of critical bending moment in column between plane and sloping grounds (7.5 o, 15 o ) buildings INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

11 slopes. Thus, the section of thesee columns is required to contain more steel to provide a greater resistance. REFERENCES Figure17: Bending moment diagram of plane ground building frame Figure18: Bending moment diagram of sloping ground (15 o ) building frame 6. CONCLUSIONS The following conclusions may be drawn from the study: a) The critical horizontal forces and bending moment in footing increases significantly with increase in ground slope. However critical values of vertical reaction in footing remain almost same for different ground slopes. b) The critical bending moment in the column increases significantly for sloping ground (15 o ) compared to plane ground. However critical value of axial force in column remains almost same for different ground 1. Montgomery CJ. Influence of seismic effects on seismic design, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1981; 8: pp IS 875( 1987), Indian Standard Code of practice for Design loads for buildings and structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi. Ashraf Habibullah, Stephen Pyle, Practical three dimensional non linear static and dynamic analysis, Structure Magazine, winter, 1998 FEMA 356(2000), Pre standard and Commentary for the seismic Rehabilitation of buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, USA. 3. Wilson, E.L., Eeri, M. and Habibullah, A. Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multi Story Building Including P Delta Effects, Earthquake spectra, 3, 2 (1987). 4. Paul, D.K. Simplified seismic analysis of framed buildings on hill slopes Bulletin of Indian Society of earthquake technology, Vol 30, No4, paper 335,Dec 1993, ppp Paul, D.K. and Kumar, S. (1997) Stability Analysis of Slope with Building Loads. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 16, pp Kumar, S., and Paul, D.K. (1998). A Simplified Method for Elastic Seismic Analysis of Hill Buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2 :( 2), Satish Kumar and Paul. D.K., Hill buildings configuration from seismic consideration, Journal of structural Engg. Vol. 26, No.3, October 1999, pp Satish Kumar & Paul D.K., Hill buildings configurations from seismic considerations, Journal of Structural engineering, Vol 26,No3, Oct.1999, pp Tagel Din Hatem, Kimiro Meguro., Applied Element Method for simulation of nonlinear materials: Theory and application for RC structures, Structural Eng. /Earthquake Eng., JSCE, Vol 17, No.2, Vamvatsikos D., Cornell C.A. (2002). Incremental Dynamic Analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 31(3): BIS. (2002). IS 1893 (Part 1) Indian Standardd criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of structures, Part 1: General Provisions and buildings (Fifth Revision). New Delhi, Bureau of Indian Standards. 12. IS 1893 (Part I) 2002: Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part I General Provisions and Buildings, Fifth Revision, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi. 13. Nalawade S.S. Seismic Analysis of Buildings on Sloping Ground, M.E. Dissertation, University of Pune, Pune Dec INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

12 14. Bozorgnia Y, Bertero V, "Earthquake Engineering: From Engineering Seismology to Performance Based Engineering" ", CRC Press, Birajdar B.G., Nalawade. S.S., 13WCEE 2004 Seismic analysis of buildings resting on sloping ground. Conference on Our World in Concrete & Structures: August 2002, Singapore. Birajdar B. G., and Nalawade S. S Seismic Analysis of Buildings Resting on Sloping Ground. In Thirteenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (13WCEE). Vancouver, Canada, Paper No Hajra B and Godbole P.N. (2006). Along Seismic Load on Tall Buildings Indian Codal Provisions. 3NCWE06 Kolkata, pp Agarwal P. and Shrikhande M. 2006, Earthquake resistant design of structures (Prentice Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi, India) Applied Technology Council (1996): Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, ATC 40, Vol. 1. C.V.R. Murty, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India Earthquake Tip, Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council, New Delhi, India. Emrah erduran (2008), Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures on the estimation of torsional effects in low rise frame buildings in sloping ground, Engineering Structures 30 (2008): BIOGRAPHY Sujit Kumar, Post Graduate Structural Student, Engineering Department of Civil Engineering MANIT, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India Dr. Vivek Garg, Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department MANIT, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India Dr. Abhay Sharma, Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Department MANIT, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY