Abstract
Twisting of a building about vertical axis increases the shear force demand on lateral force resisting elements and it is not desirable as increased shear force results in brittle failure. Generally, twisting is induced in a building due to eccentricity between centre of Mass (CM) and centre of Stiffness (CS) at diaghragm level. Eccentricity can be induced in a structure due to mass, strenght and stiffness arising out of various construction and design limitations. Code insists to apply design forces calculated according to equivalent static method or response spectrum method at displaced center of Mass (CM) so as to cause design eccentricity between CM and CS. The displaced center of mass resulting from design eccentricity consists of two terms static eccentricity and accidental eccentricity. Also, earthquake ground motion has the ability to induce torsion in a structure. Hence in order to account for all the eccentricities, code suggests 5% accidental eccentricity to be included in design eccentricity. In current work, an adjustment of mass eccentricity is verified. For this purpose, three one storey models are created with 5 % unidirectional mass eccentricity (CM), 5% unidirectional stiffness eccentricity (CS) and 5% unidirectional Mass-Stiffness eccentricity (CM-CS). Linear Increment Dynamic Analysis is performed by considering chamoli earthquake and edge displacements are obtained. Later, twist is calculated based on edge displacements. It is concluded that the same amount of mass and stiffness eccentricity (i.,e 5%) , the twist incurred in stiffness eccentric model is signifcantly higher whereas no twist about vertical axis is noticed in mass eccentric model unless mass eccentricity has significant impact on torsional response, the torsional response of combined CM-CS eccentric model is approximately equal to CS eccentric model. The results conclude that universal adjustment of center of mass will not provide the assumed conservativeness of safety against torsion. Apart from this, few countries guidelines like New Zealand [NZS, 2004] has revised accidental eccentricity from 5% to 10%. Hence, design eccentricity needs revision considering the statistical evaluation of various paramters inducing accidental eccentricities , without adjusting mass centre for every eccentricity.