Seismic Mitigation and Vibration Control of Multi Storey RCC Building with “Aqua- Damp” Concept

DOI : 10.17577/IJERTV13IS060141

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

Seismic Mitigation and Vibration Control of Multi Storey RCC Building with “Aqua- Damp” Concept

Waseem Abdul Wahab

Post Graduate Student Department of Civil Engineering

Sree Narayana Guru College of Engineering & Technology Payyannur, Kannur, Kerala, India

Mrs Saritha Sasindran

Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering

Sree Narayana Guru College of Engineering & Technology Payyannur, Kannur, Kerala, India

Abstract- Aqua damper is a type of tuned mass damper (TMD) where the mass is supplement by a liquid (usually water). It is also referred to as tuned liquid dampers (TLD) and is a passive damping device which utilizes the motion of liquid in a container for dissipating the vibration energy from seismic activity. As the sloshing frequency of the water is tuned to the natural frequency of the structure, resonance will occur and this will cause large amount of sloshing and wave breaking hence dissipating a significant

amount of energy. The natural frequency is controlled by adjusting water depth and tank dimensions. Implementing aqua dampers enhances the performance of the structures. The main aim of this project is to study the efficiency of aqua dampers when employed as seismic mitigation measures in a RCC multi storey building.

Keywords:- Tuned Liquid Damper (TLD), Aqua Damp concept, sloshing frequency

  1. INTRODUCTION

    The evolving landscape of urban architecture continually challenges engineers and researchers to develop innovative solutions to enhance the resilience and safety of multistory RCC buildings against seismic activities and structural vibrations. Earthquakes pose a significant threat to multi- storey buildings, particularly in regions with high seismic activity. The dynamic forces generated during an earthquake can lead to severe structural damage or even catastrophic failure, making seismic mitigation a critical concern in civil engineering. Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) buildings, widely used for their durability and load-bearing capacity, are no exception to these challenges. However, their rigid nature can result in substantial inertial forces during seismic events, necessitating effective strategies to enhance their resilience. Traditionally, seismic mitigation in buildings has relied on methods such as base isolation, which decouples the building from ground motion, and the use of various forms of damping systems that absorb and dissipate energy. While these methods have proven effective, they often involve significant alterations to the building's structure and can be costly or impractical, especially for retrofitting existing buildings.

    Fig. 1 Working of aqua damper

    The Aqua Damping concept in seismic mitigation refers to the use of water-based damping systems, particularly Tuned Liquid Dampers (TLDs), to reduce seismic vibrations in structures such as multi-storey Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) buildings. This method leverages the dynamic properties of liquid to counteract the forces induced by seismic activity, thereby enhancing the stability and integrity of the building during an earthquake. Aqua damping operates on the fundamental principles of fluid dynamics and resonance tuning. The core idea is to use a container filled with liquid, usually water, whose movement (sloshing) can be harnessed to generate counteracting forces against the building's motion. This sloshing action

    provides a passive and adaptable method of damping that can significantly reduce the amplitude of vibrations. The natural frequency of the liquid sloshing within the tank is tuned to match the buildings primary vibrational frequency. When the building oscillates due to seismic forces, the liquid inside the damper also oscillates at the tuned frequency, creating a phase difference that counteracts the building's motion. As the liquid sloshes, it converts kinetic energy into potential energy and then dissipates it through friction and turbulence within the tank. This process reduces the overall energy of the system, dampening the vibrations and minimizing the buildings sway.

  2. OBJECTIVES

    • Implementation of water tank as tuned liquid damper on a multi storey RCC building (G+12) using ETABS SOFTWARE.

    • To study the effect of TLD on regular structure in different conditions by varying water depth, tuning ratio and location of tank.

    • To analyze structures in terms of different parameters like storey displacement, storey drift, storey acceleration, base shear and time period.

  3. SCOPE OF THE WORK

    The scope of this study is to enhance the performance of RCC multi storey structure implementing aqua damper concept.

  4. PARAMETRIC STUDY

    Multiple aspects were taken into consideration when conducting the investigation on the effect of implementing aqua damp concept in a multi storey RCC building. the horizontal ground motion records of the El Centro have been selected for performing the nonlinear dynamic Time History analysis. The Characteristics of the selected earthquake motion in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA), moment magnitude (M) are 0.34g and 7.2 respectively. The effect of TLD on regular structure in different conditions by varying water depth, tuning ratio and location of tank are studied. Seismic parameters such as

    base shear, storey displacement and top storey acceleration are studied and compared with conventional structure.

    Code of references: Indian Standard codes IS 1893 (Part 2) (2014)

  5. SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

    Various literatures have been reviewed including the base journal Use of Water Tank as Tuned Liquid Damper (TLD) for Reinforced Concrete (RC) Structures Muhammad Jamil Ahmad, Qaiser uz Zaman Khan, Syed Muhammad Ali (2021), SPRINGER

    Installing water tanks in buildings in accordance with the Aqua- damping concept will help create an inbuilt and cost effective system for the structure to mitigate seismic shocks to the building. New researches in this field promise the development of more efficient and cost effective seismic mitigation techniques for improved efficiency of the buildings.

  6. MODELLING

    Thirteen storey reinforced concrete moment-resisting frame building is considered. The considered building has a width of 16 m divided into 4 bays and length of 36 m divided into six bays as well. The associated storey height considered is of 3 m. The designed reinforced concrete beams have been set to be of 300 mm × 600 mm. The designed reinforced concrete columns have been set to be of cross sections 300 mm × 900 mm. The dimension of water tank has been set as 12 m × 8 m.

    The water tank has been designed as a spring mass model for analysis in ETABS. The calculations for parameters like convective mass, impulsive mass, height of convective mass, height of impulsive mass and stiffness of spring was done in accordance to data from IS 1893 (part 2).

    Modelling was done for three conditions:

    1. Single tank condition

    2. Two tanks condition

    3. Three tanks condition

    Fig. 2 Spring mass model for water tank from IS 1893 (Part 2)

    Fig. 3 Graph data No.1 from IS 1893 (Part 2)

    Fig. 4 Graph data No.2 from IS 1893 (Part 2)

    Fig. 5 Plan of building model in Etabs

    Fig. 6 Beam details of model in Etas

    Fig. 7 Water tank model for analysis

    Fig. 8 Building elevation model with 1 tank

    Fig. 9 Building elevation model with 2 tank

    Fig. 10 Building elevation model with 3 tanks

  7. TEST RESULT AND DISCUSSION

    The results obtained from analysis of single tank, two tank and three tank conditions with 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% capacity of water tank filled for each condition has been discussed. The values have been tabulated and trends of parameters in different conditions have been plotted in graphs using values obtained.

    Table 1 Tabulated values of parameters considered

    The values of parameters have been compared and comparison in changes in values of parameters has been tabulated in terms of percentage.

    Table 2 Comparison of parameter values for Displacement and Base shear

    Table 3 Comparison of parameter values

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    0 50 100 150 200

    DISPLACEMENT

    STOREY

    Drift, time period and acceleration

    15

    10

    5

    0

    0

    0.005

    DRIFT

    0.01

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    STOREY

    Table 4 – Displacement and Drift values for different stories from Etabs analysis with no water tank

    15

    10

    5

    0

    0

    0.005

    DRIFT

    0.01

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    STOREY

    Fig. 11 Storey drift in x-axis 1 tank condition

    Fig. 12 Storey drift in y-axis 1 tank condition

    Fig. 13 Storey displacement in x-axis 1 tank condition

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    0

    100

    DISPLACEMENT

    200

    STOREY

    Fig. 14 Storey displacement in y-axis 1 tank condition

    15

    10

    5

    0

    0

    0.002 0.004 0.006

    DRIFT

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    0

    100

    DISPLACEMENT

    200

    80%

    STOREY

    STOREY

    For 2 tank condtiton,

    15

    10

    5

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    0

    0.005

    DRIFT

    0.01

    80%

    STOREY

    Fig. 15 Storey drift in x-axis 2 tank condition

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    0

    100

    DISPLACEMENT

    200

    80%

    STOREY

    Fig. 16 Storey drift in x-axis 2 tank condition

    STOREY

    Fig. 17 Storey displacement in x-axis 2 tank condition

    Fig.18 Storey displacement in y-axis 2 tank condition

    15

    10

    5

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    0

    0

    0.002 0.004 0.006

    DRIFT

    80%

    STOREY

    Fig. 19 Storey drift in x-axis 3 tank condition

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    0

    0.005

    DRIFT

    0.01

    Fig. 20 Storey drift in y-axis 3 tank condition

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    0

    100

    DISPLACEMENT

    200

    160

    140

    120

    100

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS

    80

    THREE TANKS

    20%

    70%

    120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    STOREY

    DISPLACEMENT

    Fig. 24 Displacement trends along y-axis

    14000

    13000

    12000

    11000

    10000

    9000

    8000

    7000

    6000

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS THREE TANKS

    20% 70% 120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    BASE SHEAR

    Fig. 21 Storey displacement in x-axis 3 tank condition

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0

    NO TANK

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    0

    100

    DISPLACEMENT

    200

    STOREY

    Fig. 25 Base shear trends along x-axis

    16000

    15000

    14000

    13000

    12000

    11000

    10000

    9000

    8000

    7000

    6000

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS THREE TANKS

    20% 70% 120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    BASE SHEAR

    Fig. 22 Storey displacement in y-axis 3 tank condition

    160

    140

    120

    SINGLE TANK

    100

    TWO TANKS

    80

    THREE TANKS

    20%

    70%

    120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    DISPLACEMENT

    Fig. 26 Base shear trends along y-axis

    Fig. 23 Displacement trends along x-axis

    0.006

    0.0055

    0.005

    0.0045

    0.004

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS

    0.0035

    THREE TANKS

    0.003

    20% 70% 120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    2.4

    2.2

    2

    1.8

    1.6

    1.4

    1.2

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS THREE TANKS

    20% 70% 120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    DRIFT

    DRIFT

    TIME PERIOD

    Fig. 27 Drift trends along x-axis

    2.4

    2.2

    2

    1.8

    1.6

    1.4

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS

    THREE TANKS

    1.2

    20%

    70%

    120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    TIME PERIOD

    Fig. 28 Drift trends along y-axis

    Fig. 29 Time period trends along x-axis

    Fig. 30 Time period trends along y-axis

    0.006

    0.0055

    0.005

    0.0045

    0.004

    0.0035

    0.003

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS

    THREE TANKS

    20% 70% 120%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    7000

    6500

    6000

    5500

    5000

    SINGLE TANK

    TWO TANKS THREE TANKS

    4500

    20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    PERCENTAGE OF WATER FILLED INSIDE TANK

    ACCELERATION

    Fig. 31 Acceleration trends

  8. CONCLUSION

From the results, it can be seen that for single tank condition,

  • On observing the displacement values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least displacement with 17.46% reduction in x-direction and 21.42% reduction in y-direction while compared to the displacement happening in condition of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the base shear values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least base shear value with 18.01% reduction in x-direction and 18.34% reduction in y-direction while compared to the base shear values of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the drift values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least drift values with 18.29% reduction in x-direction and 19.99% reduction in y-direction while compared to the drift values of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the time period values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least time period value with 3.76% increment in x-direction and 4.68% increment in y-direction while compared to the time period value of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the acceleration values, providing a water depth ratio of 40% gives the least acceleration with 23.1 increment in x-direction while compared with acceleration value of bare frame without water tank.

    From the results, it can be seen that for two tank condition,

  • On observing the displacement values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least displacement with 25.7% reduction in x-direction and 32.15% reduction in y-direction while compared to the displacement happening in condition of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the base shear values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least base shear value with 29.24% reduction in x-direction and 30.65% reduction in y-direction while compared to the base shear values of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the drift values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least drift values with 29.2% reduction in x- direction and 31.76% reduction in y-direction while compared to the drift values of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the time period values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least time period value with 7.51% increment in x-direction and 8.59% increment in y-direction while compared to the time period value of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the acceleration values, providing a water depth ratio of 60% gives the least acceleration with 5.56% increment in x-direction while compared with acceleration value of bare frame without water tank.

    From the results, it can be seen that for three tank condition,

  • On observing the displacement values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least displacement with 29.48% reduction in x-direction and 37.82% reduction in y-direction while compared to the displacement happening in condition of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the base shear values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least base shear value with 34.39% reduction in x-direction and 32.93% reduction in y-direction while compared to the base shear values of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the drift values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least drift values with 34.49% reduction in x-direction and 37.74% reduction in y-direction while compared to the drift values of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the time period values, providing a water depth ratio of 20% gives the least time period value with 10.52% increment in x-direction and 11.71% increment in y-direction while compared to the time period value of bare frame without water tank.

  • On observing the acceleration values, providing a water depth ratio of 40% gives the least acceleration with 4.15% reduction in x-direction while compared with acceleration value of bare frame without water tank.

  • On analysis of all the conditions, it has been found that the building gives its best seismic mitigation response on placing of three tanks as done in the model with the water tanks filled with 20% of their total capacity with water.

REFERENCES

  1. Muhammad Jamil Ahmad, Qaiser uz Zaman Khan, Syed Muhammad Ali(2021) Use of Water Tank as Tuned Liquid Damper (TLD) for Reinforced Concrete (RC) Structures SPRINGER

  2. Ali Ashasi-Sorkhabi, Hadi Malekghasemi and Oya Mercan(2013) Implementation and verification of real-time hybrid simulation (RTHS) using a shake table for research and education Journal of Vibration and Control

  3. Yanhui Liu, Jinbiao Wu , Marco Donà (2018) Effectiveness of fluid viscous dampers for improved seismic performance of inter-storey isolated buildings Engineering Structures

  4. Crowley, S. and Porter, R., (2011) Optimal Screen Arrangements for a Tuned Liquid Damper, School of Mathematics, University of Bristol

  5. Chakraborty, S., Debbarma, R., and Marano, G. C., (2012) Performance of Tuned Liquid Column Dampers Considering Maximum Liquid Motion in Seismic Vibration Control of Structures, Journal of Sound and Vibration

  6. Lotfollahi-Yaghin,M.,A., Ahmadi, H., and Tafakhor, H., (2016) Seismic Responses of an Offshore Jacket-Type Incorporated with Tuned Platform Liquid Dampers, Advances in Structural Engineering

  7. Asma Belbachir, Abdelkader Benanane, Abderrahmane Ouazir, Zouaoui R. Harrat, Marijana Hadzima-Nyarko, Dorin Radu, Ercan Ik, Zouhir S. M. Louhibi, Sofiane Amziane., (2023) Enhancing the Seismic Response of Residential RC Buildings with an Innovative Base Isolation Technique Special issue Concrete structure design and health monitoring: enhancing resilience in face of disasters.

  8. Luca Zuccolini, Eleanora Bruschi, Sara Cattaneo, Virginio Quaglini (2023) Current trends in Fluid viscous dampers with semi-active and adaptive behaviour Appl. Sci. 2023

  9. Kamgar, R., Gholami, F., Sanayei, H. R. Z., and Heidarzadeh, H., (2019) Modified Tuned Liquid Dampers for Seismic Protection of Buildings Considering SoilStructure Interaction Effects, Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

  10. Bhattacharjee, E., Halder, L., Sharma R.P.(2013) An Experimental Study on Tuned Liquid Damper for Mitigation of Structural Response, Int. J. Adv. Struct. Eng. 5(3)

  11. Das, S. and Choudhury, S., (2017) Seismic Response Control by Tuned Liquid Dampers for Low-Rise RC Frame Buildings, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, ISSN: 1328-7982, 2017.

  12. Chang, Y., Noormohamed, A., and Mercan, O., (2018) Analytical and Experimental Investigations of Modified Tuned Liquid Dampers (MTLDs), Journal of Sound and Vibration.

  13. S. Javadinasab Hormozabad, SM Zahrai., (2019) Innovative adaptive viscous damper to improve seismic control of structures Journal of Vibration and Control.

  14. Francisco J Martinez Martin, Victor Yepes, Fernando gonzalez Vidosa, Antonio Hospitaler, Julian Alcala., (2022) Optimisation design of RC elevated water tanks under seismic loads Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(11)

  15. Rigoberto Nava Gonzalez, Adrian Pozos Estrada, Roberto Gomez Martinez, Oscar Pozos Estrada., (2024) Experimental investigation to evaluate the dynamic properties of a scaled rectangular tuned liquid damper using high speed videos Buildings 2024

  16. Ayman Mohammad Mansour, Moustafa Moufid Kassem, Fadzli Mohamed Nazri., (2021) Seismic vulnerability assessment of elevated water tanks with variable staging pattern incorporating the fluid- structure interaction

    Elsevier

  17. Tanmoy Konar, Aparna Dey Gosh., (2020) Flow Damping Devices in Tuned Liquid Damper for Structural Vibration Control: A Review Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering.

  18. Yonghui An, Zhongzheng Wang, Ge Ou, Shengshan Pan, and Jinping Ou., (2019) Vibration Mitigation of Suspension Bridge Suspender Cables Using a Ring-Shaped Tuned Liquid Damper 2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.

  19. J.S. Love, T.C. Haskett, B.Morava, (2018) Effectiveness of dynamic vibration absorbers implemented in tall buildings Elsevier-Engineering Structures

  20. Andrew S Ross, Ashraf El Damatty, Ayman M. El Ansary., (2015) Application of tuned liquid dampers in controlling the torsional vibration of high rise buildings Wind and Structures

  21. Marius Tarpo, Christos Georgakis, Anders Brandt, Rune Brinker., (2021) Experimental determination of structural damping of a fullscale building with and without tuned liquid dampers Structural Control and Health Monitoring

  22. JiuRong Wu, WenKun Zhong, JiYang Fu, Ching Tai Ng, LianYang Sun,

    Peng Huang (2021) Investigation on the damping of rectangular water tank

    with bottom- mounted vertical baffles: Hydrodynamic interaction and

    frequency reduction effect Elsevier – Engineering Structures

  23. Ali Pabarja, Moahmmadreza Vafaei, Sophia C. Alih, Mohd Yazmil Md Yatim, Siti Aminah Osman., (2019) Experimental study on the efficiency of tuned liquid dampers for vibration mitigation of a vertically irregular structure Elsevier – Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

  24. Fengwei Shi, Haipeng Wang, Liang Zong, Yang Ding, Junsheng Su., (2020) Seismic behavior of high- rise modular steel constructions with various module layouts Elsevier Journal of Building Engineering.

  25. Amirahmad Fathieh, Oya Mercan (2016) Seismic evaluation of modular steel buildings. Elsevier Engineering Structures