Comparative Study on Seismic Behaviour of G+41 Storey Frame with X, K and V Bracings

Thomas, Rosemary K.; Philip, Swetha Elizabeth; Vasugi, V.

doi:10.1007/978-981-16-4617-1_11

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the world's population continues to rise, there is an excellent demand for high-rise construction [48]. All across the globe, these establishments are utilized for residential, commercial, and industrial motivations [49]. Because natural catastrophes such as earthquakes are unexpected, the seismic resilience of these buildings is critical [50].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because natural catastrophes such as earthquakes are unexpected, the seismic resilience of these buildings is critical [50]. Bracings are essential to neutralize lateral loads, which may boost a building's earthquake resistance capability [49]. "Using STAAD Pro V8i and the response spectrum and analogous static methods, this paper investigated the seismic manners of a G+41 story steel frame with concrete slab under X, K, and V bracings" [49].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bracings are essential to neutralize lateral loads, which may boost a building's earthquake resistance capability [49]. "Using STAAD Pro V8i and the response spectrum and analogous static methods, this paper investigated the seismic manners of a G+41 story steel frame with concrete slab under X, K, and V bracings" [49]. All of the frames were tested for story displacement and base shear.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Comparison Analysis of Buildings as per Norwegian and Ethiopia ES-EN1998-1 Seismic Code

Abate,

Evangelista,

Tam

2024

Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An earthquake is one of the most significant and shocking natural disasters ever documented anywhere on the planet. Throughout history, it has claimed millions of lives and wreaked devastation on infrastructure. Because earthquake forces are spontaneous and unpredictable, engineering methods must be honed to investigate buildings under the impact of these forces. The dynamic and static computations of four RC multistory structure prototypes with various elevations in a high seismic zone are compared in this paper. The project under review is modeled as a 3, 6, 12, and 18-story establishment, and it is analyzed employing ETABS vs. 2019. The Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) Procedure is used for static experimentation, while the Response Spectrum (RS) Procedure is employed for dynamic investigation. Both calculations are performed as per the EUROCODE 8-2004 recommendation. The ELF seismic load practice utilized was for the country of Norway, which has similar parameters to the ES-EN 8-15 seismic regulation Type I target RS, with ag/g = 0.1, spectrum type = I, soil factor S = 1.3 ground type, spectrum period (Tb, Tc, and Td) 0.1 s, 0.25 s, and 1.5 s. For the RS investigation, the parameters employed are as per ESEN-2015, ag/g = 0.1, and the spectrum type = I and ground type = B parameters were involved in the same manner for the RS analysis. The soil factor was set to 1.35; the spectrum period was set to (Tb, Tc, and Td) 0.05 s, 0.25 s, and 1.2 s. The behavior factor = 3.8, the lower bound factor = 0.2, and the damping ratio = 0.05. The results are then compared by employing different components such as displacement, story drift, story stiffness, base story shear, and story moment. Ultimately, a comparison of static and dynamic investigations has been carried out. Compared to the RS approach, the ELF technique produces more additional displacement, total drift, and base shear. As per the findings of this paper, for high-rise and tall buildings, dynamic analysis such as RS should be used rather than static analysis (ELF).

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%