American Journal of Civil Engineering

2018; 6(2): 55-59

http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ajce
doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20180602.11
ISSN: 2330-8729 (Print); ISSN: 2330-8737 (Online)

Evaluation of Seismic Performance of Floating Column

Building
Kishalay Maitra*, N. H. M. Kamrujjaman Serker
Department of Civil Engineering, Rajshahi University of Engineering & Technology, Rajshahi, Bangladesh

Email address:
*
Corresponding author

To cite this article:

Kishalay Maitra, N. H. M. Kamrujjaman Serker. Evaluation of Seismic Performance of Floating Column Building. American Journal of Civil
Engineering. Vol. 6, No. 2, 2018, pp. 55-59. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20180602.11

Received: February 15, 2018; Accepted: March 9, 2018; Published: April 2, 2018

Abstract: In the modern multi-story construction, floating column is an unavoidable feature of buildings. Such features are
highly undesirable in building built in seismic prone areas. This study highlights the performance of floating column building
and compared with normal building under seismic load. In this study, static and dynamic analyses using response spectrum
method have been carried out for multi-story building with and without floating columns. Different cases of the building have
been studied by varying the location of floating column and increasing the column size. The results showed that story
displacement increased by 56.96% in floating column building compared to normal building. Torsional irregularity was found
when floating column was introduced unsymmetrically. It was also found that fundamental time period was increasing in
floating column building and lateral stiffness was decreasing in floating column building. When the lost cross sectional area
due to floating columns were distributed among ground floor columns then it was found that story displacement as well as
fundamental time period decreased and lateral stiffness increased.
Keywords: Floating Column, Seismic Analysis, Static Analysis, Dynamic Analysis, Irregular Building

1. Introduction
At present for better parking facilities, open first story column at ground floor have most adverse effect of
is a common feature in commercial and residential earthquake. This paper explains the behaviour of multi-story
building. During earthquake, the behaviour of building floating column building and comparison between floating as
depends on its geometrical shape, size and how the well as without floating column structure and values of
earthquake force carried to the ground. Usually in every various parameters like story drift, story displacement etc. on
building load is transferred from horizontal members the basis of seismic load.
(beams and slabs) to vertical members (walls and
columns) and then to the foundation. 1.1. Floating Column
A structure having floating column can be classified as A column is a vertical compressive member. It transfers
vertically irregular as it causes irregular distribution of mass, superstructure load to the foundation then to the ground. The
strength and stiffness along the building height [11]. Absence floating column also a vertical member but its lower end is
of any column at any level of structure changes the load not connected to the foundation. Its lower end rest on beam
transfer path and load of this floating column is transferred which is a horizontal member, this beam transfer the load of
through the horizontal beams below it, known as transfer floating column to other columns below it.
girders [10].
Previous research showed the building which have floating
56 Kishalay Maitra and N. H. M. Kamrujjaman Serker: Evaluation of Seismic Performance of Floating Column Building

2.3. Case 3

In this case ground floor column size is increased. Left

side column size is sorted out. Exterior column size is
considered 14” x 12”. And interior column is considered as
16” x 12”.
2.4. Case 4

Here all edge side column of ground floor is sorted out.

The location and properties of other column and beam are
kept same.
2.5. Case 5

In this case all edge side column of ground floor is sorted

out and ground floor column size is increased. Column size
considered as 20” x 15”.

3. Methods of Analysis
Figure 1. Floating column.
Seismic analysis is a major tool in earthquake engineering.
1.2. Objectives It is usually used to determine the response of buildings in a
simple manner due to earthquake forces. It is a part of
The main objectives of this study is to evaluate the structural analysis and a part of structural design where
performance of floating column building. Followings are the earthquake is common phenomenon.
specific objectives of this study. The seismic study methods used in the study are-
i. To study the behaviour of multi-story floating column i. Equivalent Static Analysis
building under earthquake load. ii. Response Spectrum Analysis
ii. To compare the performance of the floating column iii. Modal Analysis
building with usual building.
4. Results and Discussions
2. Methodology
4.1. Story Displacement
A 10 story arbitrary building with plan area 13440 sq. ft. is
considered for study. Bay span in x-direction 16’ and bay Maximum story displacement profile for all cases obtained
span in y-direction 14’. Dimension of beams and columns as from equivalent static method. Load combination used for
well as other properties of the building is specified in table 1. the analysis is 1.2 DL + 1.0 LL + 1.0 (Eqy-e).

Table 1. Geometrical dimensions of the building and material properties.

Member properties
Slab Thickness 6”
Normal building 18” x 12”
Beams
Floating column building 18” x 12”
Exterior 12” x 12”
Column
Interior 15” x 12”
Concrete Grade of concrete 3 ksi
Steel Grade of steel 60 ksi

2.1. Case 1

In this case usual building is considered as specified in

above. Beams size is considered 18” x 12” for both X and Y
direction. Column size considered for exterior 12” x 12” and
for interior 15” x 12”.

2.2. Case 2

Here left side edge column of ground floor of the building

is sorted out. Other columns properties and their location are
same. Figure 2. Variation of story displacement with respect to story height.
 American Journal of Civil Engineering 2018; 6(2): 55-59 57

Here introducing floating column increase story

displacement. In case-2 floating column is introduced in left
side edge and in case-4 floating column is introduced in all
edge side, displacement increase respectively 6.96% and
56.96%. In case-3 and case-5 column size increased on
ground floor, displacement decreases for those cases
respectively 1.6% and 8.03% compared with Case 2 and
Case 4.
4.2. Story Drift

Story drift profile for all cases obtained from Response

Spectrum Analysis (RSA). Response spectrum function
graph used as specified in BNBC 2015.
Here in case 1 which is analyzed considering without
floating column, maximum story drift at 2nd story, but in
case 2 and case 4 where floating column is introduced,
maximum story drift found at 1st story. Maximum Story drift Figure 3. Variation of story drift with respect to story height.
increased in case 2 and case 4 respectively 15.96% and
22.57%. In case 3 as well as case 5 maximum story drift 4.3. Torsional Irregularity Check
decreases for increasing column size and maximum story
drift observed at 2nd story. According to BNBC code 2015, if Dmax / Davg is greater
than 1.2 torsional irregularity exist in the building and if Dmax
/ Davg is greater than 1.4 extreme torsional irregularity exist.
In this study 1.2 DL + 1.0 LL + 1.0 (Eqy-e) is considered for
checking torsional irregularity.

Figure 4. Deformed shape of top story.

Here, Dmax 2.46

= 2.46+1.52 = 1.24 < 1.2, Torsional irregularity exist.
Davg
D1 and D2 are displacement of corner point of top floor. 2
Dmax = maximum displacement between Case 3:
Dmax 2.42
D1 and D2 = 2.42+1.51 = 1.23 < 1.2, Torsional irregularity exist.
Davg
Davg = Average of D1 and D2 2

Case 1: Case 4:
Dmax 3.6
Dmax 2.29
= 2.29+1.55 = 1.19 < 1.2, Torsional irregularity does not = 3.6+2.59 = 1.16 < 1.2, Torsional irregularity does not
Davg
Davg 2
2
exist. exist.
Case 2: Case 5:
58 Kishalay Maitra and N. H. M. Kamrujjaman Serker: Evaluation of Seismic Performance of Floating Column Building

Dmax 3.32
= 3.32+2.41 = 1.158 < 1.2, Torsional irregularity does not
Davg
2
exist.
In this study it was observed that when floating column is
introduced unsymmetrically then torsional irregularity exist.
In Case 2 and Case 3 floating is only at left side, so those
case exhibit torsional irregularity. On the other hand in Case
4 and Case 5 floating column is introduced symmetrically.
This case don’t show torsional irregularity. Here also
observed that column size or maximum story displacement is
not the main fact on torsional irregularity. Here in Case 4
maximum story displacement 3.6 inch which is greater than
the maximum story displacement of Case 2. So position of
the floating column is main determining fact of torsional Figure 6. Variation of fundamental time period of various cases.
irregularity.
It is observed that fundamental time period is increasing
4.4. Story Stiffness
due to introduction of floating column. As fundamental time
In this study story stiffness observed from static analysis period increase, it decreases the overall stiffness of the
and load case Eqy is considered for determining story building. On the other hand fundamental time period
stiffness. decrease some extent due to increase ground floor column.

4.6. Modal Frequencies

Mode frequencies is observed using modal analysis by

Eigen.

Figure 5. Variation of story stiffness of various cases.

According to BNBC code 2015, A soft story is one in

which the lateral stiffness is less than 70% of that in the story
above or less than 80% of the average lateral stiffness of the
three story above irregularity. An extreme soft story is
defined where its lateral stiffness is less than 60% of that in Figure 7. Variation of frequency of various cases.
the story above or less than 70% of the average lateral
From the modal frequency, it is found that frequency is
stiffness of the three story above irregularity. In this study,
lower for each mode in floating column building. So that
there is no soft story cases but lateral stiffness decreases for
floating column building tends to more flexible than usual. In
introducing floating column as well as lateral stiffness
Case 3 and Case 5 frequency is higher because ground floor
increases due to increase of column size.
column size is increased and building become stiffer.
4.5. Fundamental Time Period

Fundamental time period is the time taken by the building

5. Conclusions and Recommendations
to undergo a cycle of to and fro movement. In this study In this study, the behaviour of the buildings with and
fundamental time period determined from modal analysis. without floating columns are analyzed under seismic load.
Analysis is carried out on a building by comparing five cases.
Following are some of the conclusions which are drawn on
the basis of the study.
i. Maximum story displacement and story drift is more in
floating column building compared to normal building.
 American Journal of Civil Engineering 2018; 6(2): 55-59 59

ii. Torsional irregularity exist in floating column building [3] BANGLADESH NATIONAL BUILDING CODE (Final
in Case 2 and Case 3 where floating column is Draft, 2015)
introduced only left side column but in Case 4 and [4] Kavya N., Manjunatha k. and Dyavappanavar S. P. (2015),
Case 5 where all edge side is removed but torsional “Seismic Evaluation of Multistory RC Building With and
irregularity does not exist. So, it can be concluded that Without Floating Columns”, IEEE Trans. Power System, vol.
torsional irregularity does not depend on floating 19, no. 1, pp. 356–365.
column number or ground floor column size, its [5] Malaviya P. and Saurav K. (2014), “Comparative Study of
mainly depend on floating column location. Effect of Floating Columns on The Cost Analysis of A
iii. Story stiffness is less in floating column building Structure Designed on Staad Pro V8i”, IEEE Trans. Power
compared to normal building but when ground floor System, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 356–365.
column size increases then story stiffness increase in [6] Maison B. F. and Ventura C. E. (1991), “Dynamic Analysis of
floating column building. Thirteen Story Building”, Journal of Structural Engineering,
iv. Fundamental time period of floating column building Vol. 117, No. 12, Page no: 3783-3803.
is greater than normal building. [7] Nanabala S. G., Ramancharla P. K. and Arunakanthi E.
v. From mode shape it is observed that when floating (2014), “Seismic Analysis of A Normal Building and Floating
column is provided unsymmetrically then torsional Column Building”, International Journal of Engineering
mode is found early compared to normal and Research & Technology (IJERT), Vol. 3 Issue 9.
symmetrical floating column building. [8] Nautiyal P., Akhtar S. and Batham G. (2014), “Seismic
Hence, from the study it can be concluded that as far as Response Evaluation of RC Frame Building With Floating
possible, the floating columns are to be avoided especially in Column Considering Different Soil Conditions”, IEEE Trans.
the seismic prone areas and if not possible then floating Power System, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 356–365.
column should be provided symmetrically to avoid torsional [9] Singla S. and Rahman E. A. (2015), “Effect of Floating
irregularity as well as column size should be increased to get Columns on Seismic Response of Multi-Storeyed RC Framed
rid of from soft story effect. Building”, International Journal of Engineering Research &
Technology, vol. 4 Issue 06.
[10] Srikanth. M. K, Yogeendra. R. H. (2014), “Seismic Response
References of Complex Buildings With Floating Column For Zone II And
Zone V”, International journal of Engineering Research-
[1] Awkar J. C. and Lui E. M. (1997), “Seismic Analysis and Online, vol. 02, pp. 01-11.
Response of Multistory Semi-Rigid Frames”, Journal of
Engineering Structures, Volume 21, Issue 5, Page no: 425- [11] Susnato B. and Patro S. K. (2014), “Estimation of The Park-
442. Ang Damage Index For Floating Column Building With Infill
Wall”, International Journal of Civil, Architectural, Structural
[2] Brodericka B. M., Elghazouli A. Y. and Goggins J. (2008), and Construction Engineering, Vol. 08, pp. 760-763.
“Earthquake Testing and Response Analysis of
Concentrically-Braced and Sub-Frames”, Journal of
constructional Steel Research, volume 64, Issue 9, Page no:
997-1007.