Challenge

Conceptual design of a building with columns and shear walls

STRUCTURE (a)

This structure is considered as it is asymmetric.
Here cannot be considered as horizontal irregularities and the shear wall shape is like an L.
There is some uncertainty concerning certain features of the seismic response of non-rectangular walls.
It occurs lack of tensile capacity and force configuration.
These walls have high stiffness and strength in both directions, hence are subjected to biaxial bending and bi-directional shears during earthquakes.

STRUCTURE (b)

For this structure frame can be considered symmetric in the shear walls.
The walls of a wall system of this frame could be arranged in two horizontal directions with as much two-way symmetric as possible.
The shear walls are arranged in a similar and symmetric, so it can be considered at every storey to be fairly uniform and resistant to seismic forces and deformation demands, minimizing the uncertainty about the seismic response.

STRUCTURE (c)

This structure can be considered asymmetric because the shear walls provided are not arranged in two orthogonal horizontal directions.
The center of mass and center of gravity of such structure will not lie far away from each other enabling transitional modes in the first two principles modes.
The foundation, shear wall and columns are arranged in different arrangements, so here take up a huge amount moments in case of earthquakes,
This type of shear wall system will not carry the load equally in either direction. So this structure has a lack of redundancy.
On the left-hand side, the wall provides more eccentricity, and lateral stiffness is more. Therefore it occurs then the damage or failure will be less.

ANSWER

In this structural frame, there is a two-way eccentricity of the centre of mass by the centre of stiffness, which means the eccentricity of the x-direction is larger than the y-direction.
In this structure, beams are provided at stronger than the column, so it can be considered as Weak column strong beam design in nature.
Therefore this structure needs some shear wall to resist column failure when the lateral forces act on the structure.
The combination of the shear wall and column tends to prevent the failure of the structure during the seismic forces.
As per the frame plan, we can see that the alignment of the beam is uniformly continuous of B1 and B2 at X- X-direction, and B11 & B12, B9 & B10 at Y-direction.
But all beams are provided at discontinuous of the structural frame, so here causes to difficulty of transmission of the load evenly at the entire structure due to action of lateral forces.
Beams with long spans may have their top reinforcement at the supports governed by factored gravity load, rather than by the seismic design situations.
Therefore, this structure will alternate to the better portal of better offset at symmetric.
The column beam connections should be in proper cross-section area, then it achieves lateral stiffness, mass regularity, and moment-resisting factor.
As we consider, the beam-sway mechanism in strong column/ weak beam design frames is better, because it achieves a uniformly spread, global inelastic displacement demand at roof level, to all storeys.

For here, we changed the columns of C5 & C8 to be considered as a combined footing, because of their need to avoid the loss of centre of stiffness due to lateral forces about the structure.
And more we add one more column of C10 is cover the boundary of the plan, which should maintain the centre of mass and the centre of stiffness about the structure during lateral horizontal force action.

ANSWER

This plan is unsuitable for heavy seismic zone areas.
In this plan, the interior columns are unsymmetric.
The partition wall is provided through the base of the beam, which should support the lateral deformation due to the structure.
The interior beams will support the slab, and then the lateral load resist failure due to earthquakes.
For this irregular column in the plan, there we provided the flat slabs because they directly stay in a column centroidal axis.
For here, the beams at different locations are irregular in plan and are continuous and are disallowed to resist the seismic load in the region.
In this plan, the flat slab is more appropriate than a regular beam-column junction, because it provides support to the columns without any provision of the beam, which reduces the weight of the building and also helps in the ductility of the structure indirectly.
for the solution of this structure, we provide the shear wall from the foundation of the structure through vertical components, which should minimize the loss of sudden failure occurring due to lateral force acting on the structure.

Ship work like this
in your own course.