TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING

PASHCHIMANCHAL CAMPUS

LAMACHAUR-16, POKHARA

A PROPOSAL ON

SUBMITTED BY: Saksham Paudel (PAS077BCE113)

Roshan Poudel (PAS077BCE104) Sandip Acharya (PAS077BCE118)

Roshan Subedi (PAS077BCE105) SUBMITTED TO:

Roshan Thapa (PAS077BCE106) Department of Civil Engineering

Sagar Banstola (PAS077BCE109) Paschimanchal Campu

i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The comparative seismic analysis of buildings on the plain and slopy land is crucial for
understanding the varying impacts of seismic forces on structures. The main aim of this study is
to identify the distinctive behaviors and vulnerabilities of these structures under seismic loads to
suggest better design and construction practices. In hilly regions, limited flat land and a growing
population require buildings to be constructed on slopes. These buildings often have uneven
shapes, making them more vulnerable to torsion and shearing forces during earthquakes. This
creates major structural challenges which affects the safety and stability. Because of short
columns and soft story on the uphill side, buildings experience stronger sideways forces,
increasing the risk of collapse. On the other hand, buildings on flat land usually experience more
even ground movement. This study involves the modelling, assigning loads, analysis of loads,
and design which is done in different software.

Keywords: Torsion, shearing force, short column, soft story.

ii
 Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................ II

TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................... III

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................................1
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMS..................................................................................................................................2
1.3 OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................................................... 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................................................... 4

3. METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 SITE SELECTION AND EVALUATION.......................................................................................................................8

3.2 STRUCTURAL MODELING...................................................................................................................................8
3.3 SEISMIC LOAD APPLICATION..............................................................................................................................8
3.4 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS.........................................................................................................................................8
3.5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS...................................................................................................................................8
3.6 3.6 DESIGN RECOMMENDATION.........................................................................................................................8
4. WORK PLAN................................................................................................................................................ 9

5. TASKS......................................................................................................................................................... 9

5.1 TASKS COMPLETED TILL DATE.............................................................................................................................9

5.2 TASKS TO BE COMPLETED..................................................................................................................................9
6. CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED..................................................................................................................... 10

REFERENCE....................................................................................................................................................... 10

APPENDICES...................................................................................................................................................... 12

iii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Nepal is located in a seismic zone and is prone to earthquakes. We have experienced several
earthquakes in the past, the most recent one being the Gorkha Earthquake of April 25, 2015
which measured 7.8 on the Richter scale. (Dizhur et al.,2016). As Nepal is a country with diverse
topography where there is change in elevations over short distances. Building differences in
plains and slopes cause significant variations in their earthquake responses. Buildings in plain
regions typically experience more uniform seismic behavior, whereas those in slope regions face
complex seismic behavior due to irregular ground conditions. In the plain area one can focus on
addressing issues such as soft soil and ensuring that buildings are designed to withstand stronger
shaking. Meanwhile, in hilly regions, designer must provide attention towards dealing with
uneven ground and the threat of landslides.

Earthquake is the shaking of the surface of the earth and it is one of the most disaster causing and
unpredictable phenomenon of the nature. Earthquake themselves does not kill people, but unsafe
structure in seismic prone areas can cause loss of human lives and properties due to destruction
of such seismic vulnerable structures. Earthquakes can neither be prevented nor predicted
precisely, but the large-scale destruction can be minimized by sound design according to needs.
Seismic performance of building of Nepal after earthquake and have concluded that Reinforced
concrete (RC) buildings that were not properly designed to resist the seismic forces according to
land condition and suffered extensive damage, including partial or complete collapse, mostly due
to vertical irregularities in their construction that caused stiffness differences and subsequent
soft-story mechanisms, as is often associated with no engineered (Dumaru et al.,2018).

In the plains, buildings can be affected by stronger shaking during earthquakes because of soft
soil, which can cause a lot of damage if not taken care of. On the slopes, buildings face uneven
ground and the risk of landslides, which can make earthquake effects worse. By comparing the
seismic performance of buildings in plain and hilly regions, we can identify the best strategies to
enhance the safety and resilience of structures across different terrains. This will help ensure that
buildings in both areas are better prepared to withstand future earthquakes, ultimately protecting
lives and reducing economic losses.
1
 1.2 Statement of the Problems
Nepal lying on the active seismic zone is highly prone to frequent major and minor earthquakes,
so it has become an important task for engineers to consider seismic responses in design of
building. The seismic performance of buildings is significantly influenced by their location and
the ground conditions. While structures in plain regions generally exhibit uniform seismic
responses as, buildings on slopes face challenges due to uneven load distribution. (Varum et
al.,2018)

The cost of construction varies significantly based on location, ground conditions, and
construction methods. In sloped areas, expenses rise notably, especially when land flattening
techniques like cutting and filling are employed. (Amanglendy, 2020)

Ensuring residential building stability is not a simple challenge, particularly in sloped areas
where factors like uneven terrain and potential landslide risks complicate construction. Balancing
safety, property value, and profitability within these challenges requires navigating various
factors. (Irfan, 2018)

This study aims to investigate the seismic behavior of differently configurated buildings on hill
slopes, compare them with regular buildings on flat slopes, and provide recommendations to
improve the seismic resilience of hillside structures. Additionally, it seeks to assess the
effectiveness of current seismic design codes and practices for RCC buildings in both regions.
The research seeks to analyze these cost differences and their implications, providing insights to
optimize construction budgets and decision-making processes. And also, to understand these
complexities and propose solutions for fostering safer, more resilient communities, especially in
sloped regions. (Mohammad et al., 2017)

The outcome from the research will benefit building owners and occupants, along with
engineers, designers and policy makers to build safe resident, providing reassurance of structural
integrity, and is crucial for communities and governments, safeguarding public safety and
infrastructure in the face of seismic events.

2
 1.3 Objectives
The main objective of this proposed project proposal is to perform seismic analysis and
comparison of the dynamic responses for buildings in flat and slopy region.

Following are the objectives for present study:

Primary Objective

1. To conduct a comparative seismic performance analysis of residential buildings

constructed in slopy and plain regions, focusing on structural behavior under seismic
loads

Specific Objectives

1. To analyze the seismic performance of the modeled buildings using parameters such as
base shear, inter-story drift, displacement, and fundamental period of vibration.
2. To compare the seismic responses of buildings in slopy and plain regions under identical
seismic conditions.
3. To prepare residential building plans suitable for plain and slopy terrains using AutoCAD
and to develop 3D model using ETABS.

3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Hill buildings are different from those in plains as they are very irregular and unsymmetrical.
Hence it is vulnerable to greater seismic forces and undergo high shear and torsion. Further due
to short column and soft story on uphill side has higher lateral forces causing failure in RCC
construction.

The literature is mainly concerned with the modeling strategy and seismic analysis for RCC
buildings, software used, and code that has been followed during analysis. Few of them are
mentioned below:

1. Nepal is one of the most earthquake-prone countries in the world. On April 25, 2015, a
devastating earthquake measuring 7.8 Mw struck the region, followed by numerous
aftershocks. This disaster resulted in the destruction of half a million buildings, the loss of
9,000 lives, and injuries to 23,000 people. Significant damage was observed in tall and
flexible reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures in the Kathmandu Valley. Reinforced
concrete frames with masonry infills (RCFMI) particularly suffered due to configuration
problems and deficiencies in strength and ductility. A major issue identified was the presence
of soft storeys at ground level, reducing their stiffness and load-bearing capacity compared to
upper storeys. Additionally, poor construction quality was evident during post-earthquake
inspections, further contributing to the extensive damage (Dizhur et. al., 2016)
2. Earthquake of Nepal-Bihar, 1980, Shillong Plateau and the Kangra earthquake killed more
than 375,000 people and over 100,000 of the buildings were collapsed. Dynamic
characteristics of the buildings on flat ground differ to that of buildings on slope ground as
the geometrical configurations of the building differ horizontally as well as vertically. Due to
this irregularity, the center of mass and the center of stiffness does not coincide to each other
and it results in torsional response. The stiffness and mass of the column vary within the
story’s that result in increase of lateral forces on column on uphill side and vulnerable to
damage. In their analysis, they took five G+3 buildings of varying slope angles of 0, 15, 30,
45, and 60° that is design and analyzed using IS-456 and SAP2000 and further the building is
subjected and analyzed for earthquake. They found that short column attracts more forces
due to the increased stiffness. The base reaction for the shorter column increases as the slope
4
 angle increases while for other columns it decreases and then increases. The natural time
period of the building decreases as the slope angle increases and short column resist almost
all the story shear as the long columns are flexible and cannot resist the loads (Sreerama &
Ramancharla, 2013).
3. The study of buildings on hilly ground Birajdar & Nalawade [1] done the analysis of the
different types of configurations and find those torsional moments developed in Step back
buildings are higher than the Step back Set back building configuration and, in both
configurations, it is found that extreme left columns at ground level, which are short, they are
the worst affected. Special attention should be given in these columns in design and detailing.
Singh et al [2] the hill buildings are subjected to large torsional response under cross-slope
ground movement. Under the along-slope ground movement, the changing heights of
columns cause stiffness irregularity, and the short columns resist almost all of the storey
shear.
4. After conducting seismic analysis with ETABS, comprehensive results allow engineers to
evaluate the performance of RCC buildings by examining factors like inter-story drift, base
shear distribution, and displacement profiles to ensure the structure meets seismic design
criteria. ETABS supports iterative design processes, enabling engineers to refine structural
models and design parameters for optimized seismic performance, taking into account
material use, construction costs, and architectural constraints. The software's graphical
representations illustrate the building's behavior during seismic loading, highlighting issues
like the significant deformation in the Y direction due to the lack of shear walls. This
imbalance suggests that adding shear walls could improve structural performance. ETABS
also identifies under-designed members and recommends suitable sections, enhancing
accuracy in analysis and design, particularly with the advanced capabilities of ETABS 2018.
(Fayaz and Singh, 2023)
5. The study highlights how buildings on slopes behave differently during earthquakes
compared to those on flat ground, largely due to variations in weight and stiffness
distribution. As the slope gets steeper, shorter columns in the building take on more seismic
force, causing other columns to move more and creating a vulnerable area prone to early
damage. The fragility curve analysis confirms that buildings on steeper slopes are more likely

5
 to suffer damage. A significant challenge in designing these buildings is managing both
horizontal and vertical irregularities simultaneously (Sreerama and Ramancharla, 2013)
6. Following codes help in designing and analysis of the structures:
i) NBC 105:2020, Seismic design of building in Nepal
ii) IS 456:2000, Indian Standard Plain and Reinforced Concrete- Code of Practice,
Indian Standards Institution
iii) IS 1893(Part 1):2016, Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structure, Part 1- General Provisions and Buildings, Indian Standards Institution
iv) IS 13920:1993, Indian Standard Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete
Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces- Code of Practice, Indian Standards
Institution
v) SP 16: Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete to IS 456-1978
vi) SP 34 Hand Book on Concrete Reinforcement and Detailing
vii) IS 875(Part 1):1987, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other
than earthquake) for Buildings and Structures, Part 1- Dead Loads Indian
Standards Institution
viii) IS 875(Part 2):1987, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other
than earthquake) for Buildings and Structures, Part 2- Imposed Loads, Indian
Standards Institution

6
3. METHODOLOGY

Figure: Flowchart representing methodology

7
 3.1 Site Selection and evaluation
Representative sites in both flat and hilly areas will be selected for detailed study. Site selected in
slopy area is limited to 30o. Since we will be aiming for residential building, the coverage land
area of the sites selected will be in the range of 3-4 aana.

3.2 Structural Modeling

Detailed 3D models of typical buildings for both plain and slopy regions will be developed
following byelaws from NBC guidelines using advanced software like SAP2000. Accurate
representation of geometry, material properties, boundary conditions, and load paths will be
ensured for making it as representation of field condition.

3.3 Seismic Load Application

Earthquake risk data and earthquake loads as per IS 1893:2016 will be used for; the region to
apply seismic loads, for hilly areas, also consider how the local conditions might increase the
effects of an earthquake and the risk of landslides.

3.4 Dynamic Analysis

Modal analysis will be performed to determine natural frequencies and mode shapes. Response
spectrum analysis will be conducted to evaluate overall building response. Time history analysis
will be implemented to study detailed response over time under seismic loading.

3.5 Comparative Analysis

Important factors like movement, floor shifts, base shear, and moments will be compared in
buildings on flat and hilly land. The critical areas in hillside buildings that have higher
earthquake responses will be found out.

3.63.6 Design Recommendation

Strategies to improve earthquake safety in hilly areas will be recommended. Advice on systems
that resist side-to-side forces, and details for earthquake resistance will be suggested. Possible
ways to upgrade existing buildings to make them stronger against earthquakes will be
recommended.

8
4. WORK PLAN
The table below shows the work plan of the proposed project work:

Operations May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
Literature Review
and Preliminary
Research
Site Survey

Research Design and

Methodology
Development
Data Collection and
Model Development

Simulation and
Data Analysis

Recommendations
and Design
Improvements

5. TASKS
5.1 Tasks completed till date.
 Initial literature review has been completed to kick start the project to get familiar with
different software to be used.
 Building plan for plain ground have been prepare in AutoCAD following the guidelines
of NBC codes
 Modelling of the buildings on plain ground have been performed in ETABS
 Loads have been input to go through further processes.

5.2 Tasks to be completed.

 Further literature review is to be done.
 Building plans for different slopes are to be prepared in AutoCAD.
 Modelling of buildings on slopy ground is to be performed.
 Final comparative seismic analysis of buildings on plain and slopy region is to be done
for final submission report

9
6. CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED
Software issues were faced which led to the delay of the project completion.
Limited number of residential buildings on slopy land related our projects hindered in the
progress.

REFERENCE
Gora, S., Thapa, D., & Adhikari, S. Seismic Analysis of RC-Masonry Hybrid Residential
Building.

Singh, A., Tolani, S., Bharti, S. D., & Datta, T. K. (2022, December). Seismic Analysis of Flat
Slab Buildings on Hilly Ground. In ASPS Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 775-779).

Chhetri, S., Adhikari, S. (2021). Seismic performance of step back, step back set back and set
back buildings in sloping ground base. Structural Mechanics of Engineering Constructions and
Buildings. 17. 538-547. 10.22363/1815-5235-2021-17-5-538-547.

Tiwari, S., Adhikari, S., & Thapa, D. (2020). comprehensive seismic performance assessment of
low-rise RC buildings by numerical modelling. International Journal of Advance Research,
Ideas and Innovations in Technology, 6(4), 323-331.

Dizhur, D., Dhakal, R. P., Bothara, J., & Ingham, J. M. (2016). Building typologies and failure
modes observed in the 2015 Gorkha (Nepal) earthquake. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for
Earthquake Engineering, 49(2), 211-232.

Fayaz, U. B., & Singh, B. (2023). A Study of Seismic Analysis of Building Using ETABS.
International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering & Management, 10(6), 11-15.

Sreerama, A. K., & Ramancharla, P. K. (2013, October). Earthquake behavior of reinforced

concrete framed buildings on hill slopes. In International Symposium on New Technologies for
Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia (USMCA 2013).

10
[1] B. . Birajdar and S. . Nalawade, “Seismic Analysis of Buildings Resting on Sloping Ground,”
13 th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., no. 41, pp. 1–12, 2004.

[2] Y. Singh, P. Gade, D. H. Lang, and E. Erduran, “Seismic Behavior of Buildings Located on
Slopes - An Analytical Study and Some Observations From Sikkim Earthquake of September
18 , 2011,” 15th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2012.

Amangeldi, K. T. (2020). BUILDING A HOUSE ON A SLOPE AND DIFFICULT TERRAIN.

In СТУДЕНТ ГОДА 2020 (pp. 128-133).

Varum, H., Dumaru, R., Furtado, A., Barbosa, A. R., Gautam, D., & Rodrigues, H. (2018).
Seismic performance of buildings in Nepal after the Gorkha earthquake. In Impacts and insights
of the Gorkha earthquake (pp. 47-63). Elsevier.

Irfan, A. Z. M., & Patil, V. B. (2018). REVIEW ON SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF MULTISTORIED

BUILDING ON SLOPING GROUND.

Mohammad, Z., Baqi, A., & Arif, M. (2017). Seismic response of RC framed buildings resting on
hill slopes. Procedia engineering, 173, 1792-1799.

www.google.com

11
APPENDICES

12
13
 3D Model in ETABS

14
15
16
17
18