Supervised by- Submitted by-

Prof . Veerendra Kumar Sourabh, Shreyas,

Deptt of Civil Engineering Madhu, Renu & Amrita
IIT (BHU) Varanasi IDD – Part IV
CONTENTS
 INTRODUCTION
 WHAT IS FLOATING COLUMN?
 PRELIMINARY DATA
 LOADING CONSIDERATIONS
 LOADING CALCULATIONS
 MODELLING OF THE STRUCTURE
 METHODOLOGY
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
 In a hotel or commercial building, where the lower
floor contains banquet halls, conference room, lobbies,
showrooms or parking areas, large un-interrupted
space is required for the movement of people or
vehicles.
 Closely spaced columns based on the layout of upper
floors, are not desirable in lower floors.
 A common method to overcome this problem is the
introduction of “transfer girders”. Some columns from
the upper stories are terminated at the first floor or
higher level. These floating columns are supported on
deep beams called transfer girders.
WHAT IS FLOATING COLUMN ?
 A column is supposed to be a vertical member starting
from foundation level and transferring the load to the
ground.
 The term floating column is also a vertical element
which (due to architectural design/ site situation) at
its lower level (termination Level) rests on a beam
which is a horizontal member.
 The beams in turn transfer the load to other columns
below it.
EXAMPLES OF STRUCTURES WITH
FLOATING COLUMNS
 240 Park Avenue South in New  Palestra in London, United
York, United States (1) Kingdom (1)
PRELIMINARY DATA FOR DESIGN
CALCULATIONS
Location of the building
Wind Load
Earthquake load
Depth of foundation below ground
Zone V
As per IS: 875-Not designed for wind
load, since earthquake loads exceed
the wind loads.
As per IS-1893 (Part 1) - 2002
2.5 m

Type of soil Type II, Medium as per IS:1893

Storey height Typical floor = 3.5 m; Ground floor =
4.5 m
Plinth Level -0.5 m
Walls 230 mm thick brick masonry walls
only at periphery; parapet walls 150
mm thick
MODELLING OF THE BUILDING
 The entire work consists of three models: Model X, Model Y,
and Model Z. And these models were modeled and analyzed
for seismic zone V for medium soil condition.
 Model X: is the structure with no floating column. 4 rows of
5 columns are provided which run from top storey to bottom.
 Model Y: is the structure in which floating columns are
provided on the ground floor for the application of banquet
halls. So 6 columns from the middle of the structure are
discontinued on the first floor and then again provided at
the foundation.
 Model Z: is the structure in which floating columns are
provided in the basement and ground floor to provide good
parking spaces. The alternate columns were removed for the
basement and ground floor.
MODEL X

PLAN
ELEVATION
MODEL Y

PLAN
ELEVATION
MODEL Z

PLAN
ELEVATION
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
 Comparison of maximum axial forces occurring in
the model Y in zone 5 is as shown below.
MAX AXIAL COLUMN MAX AXIAL COLUMN
FORCE POSITION FORCE POSITION
NON FLOATING FLOATING
FLOOR COLUMN COLUMN
BASE 2147.481 1R-3C 3141.936 1R-3C
GF 1807.108 1R-3C 2796.168 1R-3C
F1 1650.455 2R-3C 2138.456 1R-3C
F2 1199.169 2R-3C 1540.481 1R-3C
F3 750.864 2R-3C 957.997 1R-3C
F4 304.66 2R-3C 379.547 1R-3C
 variation in maximum axial loads
3500

3000

2500

2000
loads

1500

1000

500

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Floor

NFC FC

In case of columns, the maximum axial load is coming in the middle

columns of the second and third rows when the structure is non-floating
type. In the floating type structure when the specific columns are removed
the maximum loads gets redistributed and the middle columns of the first
and fourth row experiences the max load.
•Comparison of max bending moments obtained in
model Y for zone 5:-
COLUM COLUM
N N
POSITI POSITI
ON ON
FLOOR MY-NFC MY-FC %
BASE -296.288 2R-3C -381.658 2R-3C 28.81318
GF -355.424 2R-1C -867.616 1R-3C 144.1073
F1 -329.273 2R-3C -736.527 2R-3C 123.6828
F2 -293.847 2R-3C -455.609 2R-3C 55.04974
F3 -227.162 2R-3C -396.807 2R-3C 74.68018
F4 -121.389 2R-3C -404.472 2R-3C 233.2032
•Comparison of max flexural forces in beams for zone 5
in floating and non-floating column case for model Y

Max flexural Max flexural

force force %
FLOOR NFC FC Variation
BASE 221.234 258.046 16.6394
GF 255.123 489.935 92.03874
F1 232.891 -343.503 47.49518
F2 202.156 -235.597 16.54218
F3 158.115 -209.261 32.34734
F4 81.196 -160.135 97.22031
•Comparison of max bending moments in beams for
zone 5 in floating and non-floating column case for
model Y

FLOOR MZ-NFC MZ-FC % VARIATION

BASE -341.709 -440.709 28.97202

GF -434.115 -1034.46 138.2917

F1 -389.058 -774.797 99.14691

F2 -323.593 -720.867 122.7697

F3 -217.76 -623.357 186.2587

F4 -102.715 -415.158 304.1844

 Comparison of maximum axial forces occurring in
the model Z in zone 5 is as shown below.

MAX AXIAL COLUMN MAX AXIAL COLUMN

FORCE POSITION FORCE POSITION
NON FLOATING FLOATING
FLOOR COLUMN COLUMN
BASE 2117.047 2R-3C 2668.387 2R-2C
GF 2048.169 2R-3C 2678.881 2R-2C
F1 1644.27 2R-3C 2028.2 2R-3C
F2 1194.61 2R-3C 1428.026 2R-3C
F3 747.969 2R-3C 867.897 2R-3C
F4 303.528 2R-3C 329.565 2R-3C
•Comparison of max bending moments obtained in
model Z for zone 5:-
COLUM COLUM
N N
POSITI POSITI
ON ON
FLOOR MY-NFC MY-FC %
BASE 135.969 2R-3C 152.789 2R-2C 12.37047
GF 183.047 2R-3C 211.772 2R-2C 15.69269
F1 152.657 2R-2C 195.936 2R-2C 28.35049
F2 134.977 2R-2C 154.016 2R-1C 14.10537
F3 105.865 2R-2C 145.546 2R-1C 37.48264
F4 66.152 2R-3C 186.731 2R-1C 182.2757
•Comparison of max flexural forces in beams for zone 5
in floating and non-floating column case for model Z

Max flexural Max flexural

force force %
FLOOR NFC FC Variation
BASE 157.165 137.574 -12.4652
GF 164.756 246.658 49.71109
F1 151.319 224.106 48.10169
F2 137.813 208.807 51.51473
F3 117.57 203.351 72.96164
F4 64.363 138.782 115.6239
•Comparison of max bending moments in beams for
zone 5 in floating and non-floating column case for
model Y

FLOOR MZ-NFC MZ-FC % VARIATION

BASE 191.683 170.345 -11.1319

GF 232.416 401.376 72.69723
F1 206.317 348.187 68.76312

F2 178.287 310.017 73.88649

F3 133.772 290.892 117.4536
F4 66.197 239.995 262.5466
CONCLUSION
 As we move to the upper floors, the variation in moment
for a normal structure and the one with floating columns,
increases.
 This happens because the entire beam moment is
transferred to the single connecting column. Whereas in
intermediate beams, the moment is distributed by the
two connecting columns.
 Effect of Earthquake
 There is not much change in axial load because the
maximum load or design load occurs due to dead and live
load
 But in case of moment and flexure, it is observed that the
maximum load occurs due to the dead, live and earthquake
load.
 We can see that there is a haphazard change in moment for
a structure with floating column, hence it is important that
we design the structure properly after studying the effects
of earthquake load.
 Whenever we remove a column, the stiffness of the beam
changes as the span of the beam changes. Hence it is
necessary that we change it’s moment of inertia accordingly
so that deflection should be minimum
 The values of moment and storey shear are greater for
higher zone, because the magnitude of intensity will be
more for higher zones.
 As the stiffness reduces, the beam tends to bend more
inducing axial loads

 In normal structures, central columns have greater

dimensions because most of the slab weight is taken by
them. Whereas, in floating column structures as depicted
by Model Y and Z, the central columns are absent. Thus, the
overall load is taken by the external columns and they have
larger dimension.
 Load carried by corner columns does not vary greatly as it
gets loading from both sides, but in case of other columns,
unilateral loading occurs. Thus, their sizes are not affected
much.
 Axial forces increase largely in transfer girders.
Thus, they must be designed carefully for
combined bending and axial forces.
Under the application of load, bottom beam will be in high
tension, and beams at higher floors will be in compression. And
the beams lying closer to neutral axis have normal forces.
REFERENCES
 Behera, S., “Seismic Analysis of Multi-storey building with
Floating Column”, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT
Rourkela, May 2012
 Srikanth.M.K., Yogeendra R. Holebagilu, Seismic Response
of complex buildings with floating column for zone II and
zone V, International Journal of Engineering Research, Vol
2, Issue 4, 2014
 Sabah Farheen, Babu S. Munda and Amlan K. Sengupta,
Seismic forces in members supporting floating columns in
a typical reinforced concrete multi-storeyed building; The
Indian Concrete Journal, March 2014
 Shah H.J., Jain S.K., Design Example of a Six Storey
Building, IITK-GSDMA-EQ 26-V3.0