JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA

JSS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

JSS Technical Institutions’ Campus, Mysuru – 570006

Mini Project Report on

“STUDY OF BEHAVIOUR OF MULTISTOREY
COMMERCIAL BUILDING”
Report submitted in partial fulfillment of curriculum prescribed for

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
INDUSTRIAL STRUCTURES

By

JAYACHANDU HN
(USN: 02JST23PIS005)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

JUNE 2024
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the report titled “STUDY OF BEHAVIOUR OF

MULTISTOREY COMMERCIAL BUILDING” is a bonafied work carried out by

JAYACHANDU HN (02JST23PIS005) in M.Tech. (Industrial Structures), JSS Science

and Technology University, Mysuru during the year 2023-2024. It is certified that all

corrections / suggestions indicated have been incorporated in the report. The seminar

report has been approved as it satisfies the academic requirements in respect of seminar

prescribed for the M.Tech. (Industrial Structures) degree.

Coordinator, Head of the Department

Mahendra Kumar H.M. Dept. of Civil Engineering
Assistant Professor SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru.
Dept. of Civil Engineering,
SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru.

Place: Mysuru

Date : 07/06/2024

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am thankful to Dr. C. Nataraju, Principal, Professor and Head, Department of

Civil Engineering, SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru, for bringing an excellent academic climate
to finish my work successfully.

I am grateful to Sri. Mahendra Kumar H.M., P.G. Co-Ordinator, Assistant

Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru, for his time-to-
time guidance, valuable suggestions and motivation during the course of the seminar.

I would also extend my thanks to Dr. S. Raviraj, Dr. G.P. Chandradhara,

H.P Sharath and Dr. Shivaprasad K.N, shri Uday Kumar Professors,
Department of Civil Engineering, SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru, who helped me
directly or indirectly in completing my seminar.

I’m thank full to all the faculty members, Department of Civil Engineering,
SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru, for their timely suggestions.

JAYACHANDU HN

ii
 LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
Fig no Description Pg no
3.1 Flow chart of methodology 8
4.1 Seismic Zones in India 10
4.2 Drawing in AutoCAD 11
4.3 Plan of Basement 1 12
4.4 Plan of Basement 2 13
4.5 Plan of Ground Floor 14
4.6 Plan of First Floor 15
4.7 Plan of Second Floor 16
4.8 Plan of Third Floor 17
4.9 Defining of the grid data and storey data 18
4.10 Plan (Left) and 3d View (Right) of Grid and Storey Data 18
4.11 Defining of the M30 Grade Steel 19
4.12 Defining of HYSD550 Grade Steel 20
4.13 Defining of the Masonry Material 21
4.14 Defining of Frame Sections 22
4.15 Defining of Beam 230x500 mm 22
4.16 Defining of Column 800x800 mm 23
4.17 Defining of Slab 200mm 23
4.18 Defining of Shear wall 230 mm 24
4.19 Defining of Wall 230 mm 24
4.20 Defining of the load Cases As per IS Provisions 25
4.21 Defining of the load Combinations As per IS 1893-1 25
(2002)
4.22 Defining of the load patterns as per IS Provisions 25
4.23 Assigning of Support Condition to the Base 26
4.24 Drawing the columns to the model 26
4.25 Drawing the beams to the model 27
4.26 Drawing the walls to the model 27
4.27 Drawing the slabs to the model 27
4.28 Checking of the model 28
4.29 Before analysis of the model 29
4.30 After analysis of the model 29
4.31 List of design Load combinations to be run 30
4.32 Starting of the Concrete Frame Design 31
4.33 Design Check in progress 31
4.34 Basement 2 Design Check 32
4.35 Basement 1 Design Check 33
4.36 Ground Floor Design Check 34
4.37 First Floor Design Check 35
4.38 Second Floor Design Check 36
4.39 Third Floor Design Check 37
4.40 Detailing of the Model in progress 43
4.41 Detailing of the Model 44
4.42 Column Detailing 47
 ABSTRACT
The study of the behavior of multi-storey commercial buildings under various loads is
crucial for ensuring structural integrity, safety, and functionality. This study focuses on
analysing how such buildings respond to different types of loads, including dead loads, live
loads, wind loads, seismic loads, and thermal effects. Dead loads consist of the permanent
static forces due to the building's own weight and fixed installations, while live loads are
dynamic forces from occupants, furniture, and equipment. Wind loads introduce lateral
forces that can cause swaying and structural oscillations, necessitating robust lateral
loadresisting systems. Seismic loads, resulting from ground motion during earthquakes,
induce complex, multi-directional stresses that demand careful consideration of building
materials and design flexibility. Thermal loads arise from temperature variations causing
expansion and contraction, which can lead to structural fatigue over time. This study
employs computational modeling and simulations to predict the building’s performance
under these diverse loading conditions, ensuring that the design adheres to safety standards
and codes. The results highlight the importance of integrated structural design and the use
of advanced materials and construction techniques to enhance resilience and sustainability
in multistorey commercial buildings.

i
 CONTENTS
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………………. iii
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1

1.1 PHILOSOPHY OF EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN .................................. 2

1.2 IMPORTANCE OF SEISMIC ANALYSIS .............................................................. 3

1.3 ABOUT E-TABS SOFTWARE ................................................................................ 4

1.3.1 HISTORY AND ADVANTAGES ABOUT E-TABS ....................................... 4

1.4 OBJECTIVE .............................................................................................................. 5

1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ........................................................................ 5

LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................... 6

2.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................. 6

2.2 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................... 6

METHADOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 8

MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF BUILDING ............................................................... 9

4.1 STRUCTURAL DETAILS OF BUILDING ............................................................. 9

4.1.1 Material Properties .............................................................................................. 9

4.1.2 Seismic Data ....................................................................................................... 9

4.2 METHADOLOGY AND ANALYSIS .................................................................... 11

4.2.1 Development of plan in AutoCAD ................................................................... 11

4.2.2 Plans of the model ............................................................................................. 12

4.3 MODELING PROCEDURE ................................................................................... 18

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ...................................................................................... 48

5.1 Base Reactions ......................................................................................................... 48

5.2 Storey Max/Avg Displacements .............................................................................. 50

5.2.1 Basement 2 ........................................................................................................ 50

5.2.2 Ground Floor ..................................................................................................... 52

5.2.3 First Floor.......................................................................................................... 54

iii
 5.2.4 Second Floor ..................................................................................................... 55

5.2.5 Third Floor ........................................................................................................ 57

5.3 Storey Forces ........................................................................................................... 59

5.3.1 Basement 2 ........................................................................................................ 59

5.3.2 Basement 1 ........................................................................................................ 62

5.3.4 Ground Floor ..................................................................................................... 66

5.3.4 First Floor.......................................................................................................... 68

5.3.5 Second Floor ..................................................................................................... 71

5.3.6 Third Floor ........................................................................................................ 73

CONCLUSION. ................................................................................................................. 76

REFRENCES ..................................................................................................................... 77

iv
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
The study of the behavior of multi-storey commercial buildings under various loads is an
essential aspect of civil engineering and architecture. Understanding how these structures
respond to different types of loads is crucial for ensuring their safety, stability, and
functionality. Multi-storey commercial buildings, often located in urban centres, house
businesses, offices, and retail spaces, making their structural integrity paramount to the
safety of occupants and the continuity of economic activities.

Loads acting on a building can be broadly categorized into dead loads, live loads, wind
loads, and seismic loads. Each of these loads has unique characteristics and effects on the
structure, necessitating detailed analysis and design considerations.

Dead loads are the permanent, static forces due to the weight of the building itself and any
permanently attached fixtures. These include the weight of walls, floors, roofs, and other
structural elements. Dead loads are relatively constant and predictable, forming the baseline
for other load considerations.

Live loads are dynamic and variable forces resulting from the occupancy and use of the
building. These include the weight of people, furniture, equipment, and other movable
objects within the structure. Live loads can change in magnitude and location over time,
requiring designs to accommodate fluctuations without compromising structural integrity.

Wind loads are lateral forces exerted by wind pressure on the building's exterior surfaces.
These loads can cause swaying, vibrations, and potential structural damage if not properly
accounted for. Wind loads vary based on the building's height, shape, orientation, and
geographic location. Tall buildings, in particular, are more susceptible to significant wind
forces, necessitating advanced design strategies to mitigate these effects.

Seismic loads are induced by ground motions during earthquakes. These loads are complex
and multi-directional, causing stresses that can lead to severe structural damage or collapse.
Seismic loads are particularly challenging to predict and model, as they depend on various
factors, including the building's location, soil conditions, and the intensity and frequency
of seismic activity. Designing for seismic loads involves ensuring the building's flexibility,
strength, and energy dissipation capabilities to withstand potential earthquakes.

1
The study of multi-storey commercial buildings under these various loads involves a
combination of theoretical analysis, computational modeling, and empirical testing.
Advances in computational tools and software allow engineers to simulate complex loading
scenarios and predict the building's behavior with greater accuracy. Structural analysis
software can model the effects of different loads, helping engineers optimize the design for
safety, performance, and cost-effectiveness.

This study aims to comprehensively analyze the behavior of multi-storey commercial

buildings under different loading conditions. By examining the interactions between
various loads and the structural response, the research seeks to enhance the understanding
of building performance and contribute to the development of more resilient, sustainable,
and efficient building designs. Through a combination of theoretical insights,
computational simulations, and practical applications, this study addresses the critical need
for safe and robust multi-storey commercial buildings in today's dynamic and rapidly
changing built environment.

1.1 PHILOSOPHY OF EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN

Earthquake-resistant design aims to create structures that can withstand the powerful forces
generated by seismic events. The philosophy behind it involves understanding the behavior
of buildings and the ground during earthquakes, and then implementing strategies to
mitigate potential damage.

Structural engineers consider various factors when designing earthquake-resistant

buildings. They analyze the geological characteristics of the site to determine the level of
seismic activity expected. They also assess the building's structural integrity, taking into
account factors like materials used, building height, and the distribution of loads.

One key principle is to ensure flexibility and ductility in building designs. Flexibility allows
structures to absorb and dissipate energy during an earthquake, reducing the impact of
seismic forces. Ductility refers to the ability of materials to deform without breaking,
allowing the building to undergo significant movement without collapsing.

In earthquake analysis using software like E-tabs, engineers input data such as building
dimensions, materials, and expected ground motion parameters. The software then
simulates how the building will respond to seismic forces, providing valuable insights into
potential weak points or areas of concern.

2
Through iterative analysis and design refinement, engineers can optimize structures to
enhance their earthquake resistance. This may involve incorporating features like
reinforced concrete walls, bracing systems, or base isolation techniques.

Ultimately, the goal of earthquake-resistant design is to safeguard lives and property by

reducing the risk of collapse or significant damage during seismic events. By combining
advanced analysis tools with sound engineering principles, engineers can create buildings
that are better equipped to withstand the unpredictable forces of nature.

1.2 IMPORTANCE OF SEISMIC ANALYSIS

Seismic analysis is crucial in structural engineering to ensure the safety and resilience of
buildings and infrastructure during earthquakes. This process assesses how structures
respond to seismic waves, which is vital for minimizing damage, preventing collapse, and
safeguarding human lives.

The primary importance of seismic analysis lies in its ability to predict the behavior of
structures under earthquake loads. Earthquakes generate complex ground motions,
inducing lateral and vertical forces that traditional design methods might not adequately
address. By conducting seismic analysis, engineers can identify potential weaknesses in a
structure’s design and make necessary modifications to enhance its earthquake resistance.

Another key aspect is compliance with building codes and standards, which are
increasingly stringent regarding seismic performance. Adhering to these regulations
ensures that buildings are designed and constructed to withstand seismic events, reducing
the risk of catastrophic failures. Seismic analysis helps in optimizing design parameters,
such as material selection and structural detailing, to meet these requirements.

Seismic analysis also plays a crucial role in retrofitting existing buildings. Many older
structures were designed without adequate consideration for seismic forces. Through
detailed seismic assessment, engineers can devise effective retrofitting strategies, such as
adding shear walls, bracing, or base isolators, to improve the seismic resilience of these
buildings.

seismic analysis contributes to the broader field of disaster risk reduction. By understanding
how different types of buildings and infrastructure respond to earthquakes, urban planners
and policymakers can develop strategies for resilient urban development. This includes

3
zoning regulations, land-use planning, and emergency preparedness measures that mitigate
the impact of earthquakes on communities.

Incorporating seismic analysis into the design and construction process leads to safer, more
resilient structures capable of withstanding seismic forces. This not only protects human
lives and reduces economic losses but also promotes public confidence in the built
environment’s safety and reliability.

1.3 ABOUT E-TABS SOFTWARE

ETABS version 16.0.0 is a specialized analysis and design software tailored for building
systems. It features a user-friendly graphical interface and provides robust modeling,
analytical, and design capabilities. The software integrates these functions using a unified
database. Designed for simplicity in handling basic structures, ETABS also excels at
managing large and complex building models. It supports various non-linear behaviours,
establishing it as a preferred tool among structural engineers in the building industry.
ETABS combines efficiency and versatility, making it suitable for both straightforward
projects and intricate architectural applications.

1.3.1 HISTORY AND ADVANTAGES ABOUT E-TABS

ETABS, a software developed over 30 years ago, was designed to address the unique
structural characteristics of buildings, distinguishing itself early on from general-purpose
programs by focusing on the specific needs of building analysis and design. It originally
provided input, output, and numerical solutions tailored to buildings, leading to significant
time savings and enhanced accuracy.

As technology advanced, ETABS evolved significantly. It now includes features such as

dynamic nonlinear behavior analysis and CAD-like drawing tools within a graphical and
object-based interface. Despite its significant evolution in appearance and capabilities since
its initial release, ETABS has maintained its core mission: to offer the most efficient and
comprehensive solution for building analysis and design. The software is uniquely
equipped to handle the typical configurations found in buildings, which usually involve
straightforward geometries with horizontal beams and vertical columns. Most building
models can be easily configured using a simple grid system of floors and columns,
streamlining the design process.

4
ETABS offers the widest assortment of analysis and design tools available for the structural
engineer working on building structures. The following list represents. just a portion of the
types of systems and analyses that ETABS can handle easily:

 Multi storey commercial, government and health care facilities.

 Parking garages with circular and linear ramps.
 Buildings with steel, concrete, composite floor framing.
 Complex shear walls with arbitrary openings etc.

1.4 OBJECTIVE

 To analyse the multistorey commercial building during seismic forces for safety of
structure.
 To analyse and design multistorey R.C.C. building by using E TABS software as
per IS 1893(Part 1):2002
 Explore the structural performance under Seismic Zone II

1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

 The first chapter is the ‘Introduction’ which gives an idea of the theory involved
and the importance of the present work.
 A ‘Review of Literature’ follows this chapter which gives an understanding of the
various work carried on this field by different authors.
 The third chapter ‘Methodology’ explains all the material properties and methods
used in the experiment.
 The fourth chapter ‘Modelling and Analysis’ deals with the design procedure and
analysis of structure with seismic loads.
 The fifth chapter, ‘Results and Discussion’ deals with the comparative analysis of
the results with the help of tables
 The last chapter, ‘Conclusion’ summarizes the results.

5
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 GENERAL

A literature review is a summary and evaluation of existing research on a specific topic. It

identifies what is already known, highlights key theories, and notes any gaps in the
research. This helps in understanding the current state of knowledge and guides future
studies.

In the context of studying the behavior of multi-storey commercial buildings under seismic
loads using ETABS software, the literature review focuses on how buildings respond to
earthquakes and the effectiveness of ETABS for such analyses. ETABS is a popular
software for structural analysis and design, used by engineers to simulate and evaluate
building performance during seismic events.

The review explores various studies that use ETABS to model and analyze multi-storey
buildings, assessing factors like building height, structural elements, material properties,
and load distributions. It also examines different seismic design codes and their
implementation in ETABS. Key findings show that ETABS is effective for predicting
building behavior under seismic loads, helping in designing safer buildings. Gaps in
research might include specific regional seismic codes or advanced modeling techniques.
Overall, the literature review helps in understanding how multi-storey buildings can be
better designed to withstand earthquakes, ensuring safety and structural integrity.

2.2 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review begins with the coverage of general earthquake engineering topics.

1. S. Mahesh, Dr. B. Panduranga Rao (2014)

Conducted a study on the behavior of a G+11 multi-story residential building under

simultaneous earthquake and wind loads was analyzed using ETABS and STAAD PRO
V8i software. The study assumed linear material properties and conducted both static and
dynamic analyses. These analyses varied by seismic zones and soil types: Hard, Medium,
and Soft. For each seismic zone and soil type, the building's responses, including story drift,
displacements, and base shear, were evaluated and plotted. This comprehensive study helps
in understanding the structural responses under different conditions of seismic activity and
soil stability.

6
2. B. Srikanth and V. Ramesh (2013)

Conducted a comparative study on the seismic responses of a symmetric multi-storied

building using two different methods as outlined by the IS Code. The study employed the
seismic coefficient method and the response spectrum method, which incorporates modal
analysis and a stiffness matrix idealized for a shear building. The comparative analysis
focused on the building's performance under earthquake conditions in two seismic zones,
namely zone II and V. The results, including base shears, lateral forces, and storey
moments, were compared to assess and highlight differences in outcomes derived from the
two methods.

3. Udaya Bala K, Manish Kumar Gupta, Senthil Pandian M (2017)

Conducted Dynamic analysis of multi-storey building using Etabs 2015 and noted that
higher stories experience greater displacements and drifts than lower ones. Time history
analysis yields higher displacement readings than response spectrum analysis and is more
effective for visualizing a building's performance during earthquakes, making it essential
for critical structures. Response spectrum analysis alone is inadequate for tall buildings;
instead, incorporating time history analysis provides a more accurate prediction of
structural responses. Additionally, integrating shear walls with flat and floor slabs is crucial
in controlling lateral deflections, enhancing both the structural integrity and aesthetic
quality of high-rise buildings.

4. Sayed Mahmoud and Waleed Abdallah (2014)

Conducted a study on the seismic performance of a shear wall residential building in Cairo,
Egypt. They employed both dynamic response spectrum (RS) and equivalent static force
(ESF) methods for seismic analysis, in accordance with the Egyptian Code. Using ETABS
software, their research highlighted significant discrepancies between the results from the
two methods. The ESF method produced responses in the direction of the applied load,
while the RS method induced responses in multiple directions. This indicates that dynamic
methods might provide a more comprehensive understanding of a building's seismic
response.

7
 CHAPTER 3

METHADOLOGY
The methodology of the project is initially by assuming a B-2, G+3 R.C.C structure of
67.15Mx43.8m & height of a building 27m. Building plan is drawn using Auto-CAD
software. Then the same building is drawn in E TABS software as given below:

Seismic design of a multi storey commercial building i.e., B-2, G+3.

 Modelling of the B-2, G+3 building in E-Tabs Software

 Designing the above model or the building in the software by assigning the dead
load, live load, and seismic load.
 Analyse the model of building in different seismic zones.
 Concluding the system which provides more efficiency.

ENTER GRID
DRAW SLAB
DATA AND DRAW BEAMS
SECTIONS
STOREY DATA

DEFINE
DRAW WALL DESIGN
DRAW
MATERIAL CONCRETE
COLUMNS SECTIONS
PROPERTY FRAME

DEFINE FRAME DEFINE LOAD ASSIGN ANALYSIS OF

SECTIONS COMBINATION RESTRAINS THE MODEL
S

DEFINE LOAD ASSIGN LIVE

DEFINE SLAB LOAD
CASES LOADS AND
SECTIONS COMBINATIONS
FLOOR FINSH TO
SLABS

Fig 1: Flow Chart of Methodology

The methodology involves creating a structural model by defining geometry, materials, and
loads. Start by drawing the structural components like beams, columns, and slabs. Assign
material properties and load cases. Perform analysis to check the structure's response under
various loads. Use the software's built-in tools for design and optimization based on
relevant codes and standards.

8
 CHAPTER 4

MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF BUILDING

4.1 STRUCTURAL DETAILS OF BUILDING

1. Structure type: RCC framed structure

2. Number of storeys: B-2, G+3
3. Site dimension: 67.15mx43.8m
4. Height of the building: 21m
5. Floor to ceiling height: 3.5m
6. Size of column:
 C1-800x800 mm
 C2- 500x500 mm
7. Size of beam:
 B1- 450x750 mm
 B2- 230x500 mm
8. Thickness of slab 200 mm

4.1.1 Material Properties

1. Steel Grade: HYSD550

2. Concrete Density: 25KN/m2
3. Grade of Concrete: M30

4.1.2 Seismic Data

Mysore falls under seismic zone II as per IS 1893-2016 (Part 1) (Fifth Revision) and has
the following factors to be considered for designs.

 Seismic Zone: II
 Seismic Zone factor(Z): 0.1 (As per Table 2, IS: 1893-2016)
 Soil Type: Medium Soil (Type II)
 Design horizontal seismic coefficient (Ah): (Z/2) * (Sa/g) * (I/R)
 Importance factor: 1.2 (Table 6, IS: 1893-2016)
 Response reduction Factor :3 (SMRF – Table 7 of IS:1893- 2016)
 Sa/g – Average response acceleration coefficient for soil sites as per Fig.2 of IS:
1893- 2016 and it is arrived based on appropriate natural periods as per clause 7.6.1
of IS: 1893-2016.
9
 Design horizontal seismic coefficient (Ah): (Z/2) * (Sa/g) * (I/R)

(0.10/2) * (1.2/3) * (Sa/g)

Ah: 0.012 * (Sa/g)

 Design seismic base shear, Vb= Ah *W;

where, W – seismic weight of building

Table 4.1. Seismic zone Factor as per IS 1893

Fig 4.1. Seismic zones in India (source: IS 1893:2002)

10
4.2 METHADOLOGY AND ANALYSIS

General

The chapter presents the information about the method of analysis and structural systems
selected for a RC multi storied commercial building. The details required while modeling
such as material properties, sectional properties, structural loadings, analysis method,
modeling techniques etc. of the building with the position of shear walls are described under
various sections.

Methodology

 Development of plan in AutoCAD

 Modeling of structures in ETABS
 Applying loads as per respective IS codes
 Analysis for different load combinations
 Concrete design
 Report

4.2.1 Development of plan in AutoCAD

Fig 4.2. Drawing in AutoCAD

11
4.2.2 Plans of the model

Fig 4.3 Plan of Basement 1

12
Fig 4.4 Plan of Basement 2

13
Fig 4.5. Plan of Ground Floor

14
Fig 4.6 Plan of First Floor

15
Fig 4.7 Plan of Second Floor

16
Fig 4.8 Plan of Third Floor

17
4.3 MODELING PROCEDURE

Step 1: Development of geometry

The Building Plan Grid System and Story Data form are used to specify horizontal grid line
spacing, story data. In the form shown in Figure number of grid lines in X and Y direction
and their spacing are entered. The number of storey and height of the storey is specified.

Fig 4.9 Defining of the Grid data and Storey Data

After specifying inputs of model, geometry of the model appears on screen in the main
ETABS window with two view windows tiled vertically, a Plan View on the left and 3D
View on the right, as shown in Figure

Fig 4.10 Plan (Left) and 3d View (Right) of Grid and Storey Data
18
Step 2: Defining material property

Defining material properties is a crucial step for accurate structural analysis and design. To
do this, you need to input the characteristics of the materials you plan to use, like concrete,
steel, or wood. These properties include density, modulus of elasticity, Poisson's ratio,
thermal coefficients, and strengths in tension and compression.

1. M30 grade concrete

Fig 4.11 Defining of the M30 Grade Steel

19
2. HYSD550 grade Steel

Fig 4.12 Defining of HYSD550 Grade Steel

20
3. Masonry Material

Fig 4.13 Defining of the Masonry Material

21
Step 3: Defining frame section, slab and shear wall

Fig 4.14 Defining of Frame Sections

Fig 4.15 Defining of Beam 230x500 mm

22
Fig 4.16 Defining of Column 800x800 mm

Fig 4.17 Defining of Slab 200mm

23
Fig 4.18 Defining of Shear wall 230 mm

Fig 4.19 Defining of Wall 230 mm

24
Step 4: Defining of Load Cases and Load Combinations

Fig 4.20 Defining of the load Cases As per IS Provisions

Fig 4.21 Defining of the load Combinations As per IS 1893-1 (2002)

Fig 4.22 Defining of the load patterns as per IS Provisions

25
Step 5: Assigning of Support Condition to The Base

Fig 4.23 Assigning of Support Condition to the Base

Step 6: Drawing of columns, beams and walls to the model

Fig 4.24 Drawing the columns to the model

26
Fig 4.25 Drawing the beams to the model

Fig 4.26 Drawing the walls to the model

Fig 4.27 Drawing the slabs to the model

27
Step 7: Checking of the model if there are any corrections to be made

Checking the model in Excel tabs involves verifying data accuracy, ensuring formulas are
correct, and validating references across sheets. It includes checking for consistency in data
inputs, reviewing calculations for errors, and confirming that all linked data points are up
to date.

Fig 4.28 Checking of the model

28
Step 7: Analysis of the model

Analysing the model in Excel tabs involves several steps. First, gather and organize the
data in a structured format across different tabs, each representing a specific dataset or stage
of the analysis. Use formulas and functions to perform calculations and generate insights.
Create visualizations like charts and graphs to interpret trends and patterns. Verify the
accuracy of the data and the consistency of formulas to ensure reliable results. Document
each step clearly for easy reference and replication. Finally, review and validate the model
to ensure it meets the analysis objectives and provides actionable insights.

Fig 4.29 Before analysis of the model

Fig 4.30 After analysis of the model

29
Step 7: Designing of the model

Designing a model in ETABS involves creating a structural representation of a building to

analyze and design its components effectively. The process starts with defining the
geometry, including the layout of grids and the placement of structural elements like beams,
columns, and slabs. Material properties and section dimensions are specified to ensure
accurate simulation of real-world behavior. Loads, such as dead, live, wind, and seismic,
are then applied to the model to evaluate its response under various conditions. ETABS
allows for detailed analysis through its advanced features, including dynamic analysis and
performance-based design. The model is refined iteratively to achieve optimal structural
performance and compliance with relevant codes and standards.

Fig 4.31 List of design Load combinations to be run

30
Fig 4.32 Starting of the Concrete Frame Design

Fig 4.33 Design Check in progress

31
Fig 4.34 Basement 2 Design Check

32
Fig 4.35 Basement 1 Design Check

33
Fig 4.36 Ground Floor Design Check

34
Fig 4.37 First Floor Design Check

35
Fig 4.38 Second Floor Design Check

36
 Fig 4.39 Third Floor Design Check

After completing the design check in ETABS, the structural model has been thoroughly
verified and found to be safe. The analysis confirms that all elements meet the necessary
strength and stability criteria. Load combinations were carefully assessed to ensure
compliance with design codes and standards. As a result, the structure is expected to
perform reliably under anticipated loads, providing a high level of safety and durability.

37
 ETABS 2016 Concrete Frame Design
IS 456:2000 Beam Section Design

Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm)

Basement 2 B290 1230 Beam230x500 1.5(DL+LL) 400 4150

Section Properties

b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)

230 500 230 0 25 25

Material Properties

Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) Lt.Wt Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)

27386.13 30 1 550 550

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS

1.5 1.15

Factored Forces and Moments

38
 Factored Factored Factored Factored

Mu3 Tu Vu2 Pu

kN-m kN-m kN kN

-6.6003 4.0541 51.5764 0

Design Moments, Mu3 & Mt

Factored Factored Positive Negative

Moment Mt Moment Moment

kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m

-6.6003 7.569 0.9687 -21.8911

Design Moment and Flexural Reinforcement for Moment, Mu3 & Tu

Design Design -Moment +Moment Minimum Required

-Moment +Moment Rebar Rebar Rebar Rebar

kN-m kN-m mm² mm² mm² mm²

Top (+2 Axis) -21.8911 275 0 98 275

Bottom (-2 Axis) 0.9687 275 4 0 275

Shear Force and Reinforcement for Shear, Vu2 & Tu

Shear Ve Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s

kN kN kN kN mm²/m

51.5764 40.5126 43.7 52.1907 254.94

39
 ETABS 2016 Concrete Frame Design
IS 456:2000 Beam Section Design

Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm)

Third Floor B22 1336 beam 450x750 1.5(DL+LL) 400 15600

Section Properties

b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)

450 750 450 0 25 25

Material Properties

Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) Lt.Wt Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)

27386.13 30 1 550 550

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS

1.5 1.15

40
 Factored Forces and Moments

Factored Factored Factored Factored

Mu3 Tu Vu2 Pu

kN-m kN-m kN kN

-1178.2984 8.6261 465.3247 0

Design Moments, Mu3 & Mt

Factored Factored Positive Negative

Moment Mt Moment Moment

kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m

-1178.2984 13.5312 0 -1191.8296

Design Moment and Flexural Reinforcement for Moment, Mu3 & Tu

Design Design -Moment +Moment Minimum Required

-Moment +Moment Rebar Rebar Rebar Rebar

kN-m kN-m mm² mm² mm² mm²

Top (+2 Axis) -1191.8296 4074 0 4074 1018

Bottom (-2 Axis) 0 2037 0 825 2037

Shear Force and Reinforcement for Shear, Vu2 & Tu

Shear Ve Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s

kN kN kN kN mm²/m

465.3247 231.5498 264.4456 175.7888 1010.76

41
 TABLE: Concrete Column Summary - IS 456-2000
Story Label Design Section PMM Combo As,min As
Third Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Third Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Third Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Second Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Second Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Second Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
First Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
First Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
First Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Ground Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Ground Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Ground Floor C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Basement 1 C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Basement 1 C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Basement 1 C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Basement 2 C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Basement 2 C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
Basement 2 C1 Col800x800 1.5 DL+EQX 5120 5120
TABLE: Concrete Beam Summary - IS 456-2000
As,min As As,min As
Design As Top Top Top As Bottom Bottom Bottom
Story Label Section Combo mm² mm² Combo mm² mm²
Third Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Third Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Third Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Second Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Second Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Second Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
First Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
First Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
First Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Ground Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Ground Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Ground Floor B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Basement 1 B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 110 110 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Basement 1 B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 110 110 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Basement 1 B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Basement 2 B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Basement 2 B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275
Basement 2 B1 Beam230x500 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275 1.5 DL+EQX 275 275

Table 4.2 Ast Design Summary

42
Step 8: Detailing of the Model

The model in the E-tabs software provides a comprehensive solution for structural analysis
and design. It offers advanced modeling capabilities, including the ability to handle
complex geometries and various load conditions. With its intuitive interface, users can
easily create and modify structural models, ensuring accuracy and efficiency in the design
process. The software supports multiple analysis types, such as linear and nonlinear,
dynamic, and static, enabling engineers to simulate real-world scenarios effectively.

Fig 4.40 Detailing of the Model in progress

43
 Fig 4.41 Detailing of the Model

After completing the detailing of the model in ETABS, the structural analysis and design
process becomes more comprehensive and precise. This phase ensures that all structural
elements are accurately defined, incorporating necessary design codes and specifications.

ETABS creates structural drawings that include plans, elevations, sections, and detailing of
reinforcement and connections. These outputs facilitate clear communication with
construction teams, ensuring that the structural design is implemented correctly on site.

44
45
46
Fig 4.42 Column Detailing

47
 CHAPTER 5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Base Reactions

The data indicates how the building distributes seismic forces through its supports,
highlighting areas with potential overstress or underperformance. By examining these
reactions, engineers can verify the adequacy of the foundation design, ensuring it meets
safety standards and performs as expected during an earthquake. This analysis helps in
identifying necessary reinforcements or design adjustments to enhance the structure's
seismic resilience.

Load
FX FY FZ MX MY MZ X Y Z
Case/Combo

kN kN kN kN-m kN-m kN-m m m m

-
Dead 200.3675 0.1774 146739.2 3380614 -4616.2 0 0 0
4876990

-
Live 122.2824 45.5905 65126.62 1510403 -2850.69 0 0 0
2178412

FF 38.5281 10.6605 19857.02 461238.7 -666381 -981.683 0 0 0

EQX 27.878 48.4564 0 -339.195 -55608 -7310.64 0 0 0

-
EQY -17.3534 -9.6697 0 55870.88 2898.297 0 0 0
121.474

-
1.5(DL+LL) 541.767 84.6427 347584.2 8028384 -12672.9 0 0 0
1.2E+07

48
 -
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) 466.8672 125.8618 278067.3 6422301 -18911 0 0 0
9332870

-
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) 399.9601 9.5665 278067.3 6423115 -1365.53 0 0 0
9199411

-
1.2(DL+LL+EQY) 412.5895 56.1105 278067.3 6489753 -6660.33 0 0 0
9266286

-
1.2(DL+LL-EQY) 454.2378 79.3178 278067.3 6355663 -13616.2 0 0 0
9265995

-
0.9DL-1.5EQX 138.5138 -72.5249 132065.2 3043062 6811.371 0 0 0
4305879

-
0.9DL-1.5EQY 206.3609 14.6642 132065.2 2958746 -8502.03 0 0 0
4389109

-
0.9DL+1.5EQX 222.1477 72.8442 132065.2 3042044 -15120.5 0 0 0
4472703

-
0.9DL+1.5EQY 154.3006 -14.3449 132065.2 3126359 192.8639 0 0 0
4389474

-
1.5DL+EQX 342.3682 72.9507 220108.7 5070413 -17890.3 0 0 0
7398898

-
1.5DL+EQY 274.5212 -14.2384 220108.7 5154728 -2576.86 0 0 0
7315668

-
1.5DL-EQX 258.7344 -72.4184 220108.7 5071430 4041.649 0 0 0
7232074

49
 -
1.5DL-EQY 326.5814 14.7707 220108.7 4987115 -11271.7 0 0 0
7315303

5.2 Storey Max/Avg Displacements

Storey Max/Avg Displacements from eTabs seismic analysis reveal structural movement
during earthquakes. They depict the highest and average displacements across building
levels, crucial for assessing seismic performance. These results guide engineers in
optimizing designs to enhance structural resilience and mitigate potential damage, ensuring
safer built environments against seismic forces.
5.2.1 Basement 2

TABLE: Story Max/Avg Displacements

Story Load Case/Combo Direction Maximum Average Ratio

Basement 2 Dead X 0.002 0.002 1.012

Basement 2 Dead Y 0.001 0.001 1.04

Basement 2 Live X 0.001 0.001 1.048

Basement 2 Live Y 0.001 0.001 1.138

Basement 2 FF X 0.0003635 0.0003445 1.055

Basement 2 FF Y 0.0002643 0.0002293 1.153

Basement 2 EQX X 0.009 0.009 1.053

Basement 2 EQY Y 0.008 0.008 1.016

50
Basement 2 1.5(DL+LL) X 0.005 0.005 1.029

Basement 2 1.5(DL+LL) Y 0.003 0.003 1.087

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) X 0.015 0.014 1.03

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Y 0.003 0.003 1.32

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) X 0.007 0.006 1.104

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Y 0.004 0.002 1.527

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) X 0.004 0.004 1.009

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Y 0.007 0.007 1.008

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) X 0.005 0.004 1.045

Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Y 0.013 0.012 1.03

Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQX X 0.012 0.011 1.063

Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQY X 0.002 0.002 1.056

Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQY Y 0.013 0.013 1.017

Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQX X 0.015 0.015 1.046

Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQY X 0.001 0.001 1.069

Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQY Y 0.011 0.011 1.013

51
Basement 2 1.5DL+EQX X 0.017 0.016 1.041

Basement 2 1.5DL+EQX Y 0.003 0.002 1.696

Basement 2 1.5DL+EQY X 0.002 0.002 1.029

Basement 2 1.5DL+EQY Y 0.011 0.011 1.012

Basement 2 1.5DL-EQX X 0.011 0.01 1.071

Basement 2 1.5DL-EQX Y 0.003 0.002 1.891

Basement 2 1.5DL-EQY X 0.003 0.003 1.041

Basement 2 1.5DL-EQY Y 0.014 0.014 1.018

5.2.2 Ground Floor

TABLE: Story Max/Avg Displacements

Story Load Case/Combo Direction Maximum Average Ratio

Ground Floor Dead X 0.125 0.043 2.916

Ground Floor Dead Y 0.153 0.017 8.966

Ground Floor Live X 0.055 0.021 2.657

Ground Floor Live Y 0.065 0.009 7.343

Ground Floor FF X 0.018 0.007 2.76

52
Ground Floor FF Y 0.021 0.002 11.435

Ground Floor EQX X 0.713 0.698 1.022

Ground Floor EQY Y 0.513 0.484 1.06

Ground Floor 1.5(DL+LL) X 0.296 0.105 2.825

Ground Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Y 0.358 0.042 8.608

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) X 1.056 0.921 1.147

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) X 0.925 0.754 1.227

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) X 0.196 0.064 3.064

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Y 0.832 0.614 1.355

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) X 0.278 0.104 2.679

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Y 0.836 0.548 1.526

Ground Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX X 1.105 1.008 1.096

Ground Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Y 0.877 0.711 1.233

Ground Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX X 1.137 1.085 1.047

Ground Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Y 0.82 0.742 1.106

Ground Floor 1.5DL+EQX X 1.212 1.111 1.091

53
Ground Floor 1.5DL+EQY Y 0.912 0.752 1.212

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQX X 1.128 0.983 1.148

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQY X 0.239 0.089 2.677

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQY Y 0.948 0.701 1.353

5.2.3 First Floor

TABLE: Story Max/Avg Displacements

Story Load Case/Combo Direction Maximum Average Ratio

First Floor Dead X 0.207 0.055 3.782

First Floor Live X 0.094 0.032 2.918

First Floor Live Y 0.109 0.007 16.085

First Floor FF X 0.031 0.01 3.206

First Floor EQX X 1.196 1.179 1.014

First Floor EQY Y 0.936 0.906 1.033

First Floor 1.5(DL+LL) X 0.499 0.145 3.437

First Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Y 0.601 0.017 35.007

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) X 1.795 1.531 1.172

54
First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) X 1.602 1.299 1.233

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Y 1.532 1.101 1.392

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) X 0.453 0.148 3.054

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Y 1.576 1.073 1.468

First Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX X 1.882 1.72 1.094

First Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Y 1.626 1.355 1.2

First Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX X 1.931 1.818 1.062

First Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Y 1.546 1.363 1.134

First Floor 1.5DL+EQX X 2.056 1.851 1.11

First Floor 1.5DL+EQY Y 1.7 1.366 1.244

First Floor 1.5DL-EQX X 1.94 1.687 1.15

First Floor 1.5DL-EQY Y 1.774 1.352 1.313

5.2.4 Second Floor

TABLE: Story Max/Avg Displacements

Story Load Case/Combo Direction Maximum Average Ratio

Second Floor Dead X 0.275 0.062 4.442

55
Second Floor Dead Y 0.38 0.028 13.57

Second Floor Live X 0.127 0.04 3.152

Second Floor FF X 0.042 0.012 3.66

Second Floor FF Y 0.056 0.005 11.153

Second Floor EQX X 1.603 1.59 1.008

Second Floor EQY Y 1.335 1.292 1.033

Second Floor 1.5(DL+LL) X 0.666 0.17 3.905

Second Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Y 0.874 0.055 15.759

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) X 2.425 2.044 1.186

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) X 2.183 1.771 1.233

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Y 2.109 1.506 1.4

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) X 0.607 0.18 3.376

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Y 2.301 1.595 1.443

Second Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX X 2.54 2.329 1.091

Second Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Y 2.344 1.963 1.194

Second Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX X 2.612 2.44 1.071

56
Second Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Y 2.165 1.913 1.132

Second Floor 1.5DL+EQX X 2.777 2.477 1.121

Second Floor 1.5DL+EQY Y 2.359 1.896 1.244

Second Floor 1.5DL-EQX X 2.631 2.292 1.148

Second Floor 1.5DL-EQY Y 2.572 1.98 1.299

5.2.5 Third Floor

TABLE: Story Max/Avg Displacements

Story Load Case/Combo Direction Maximum Average Ratio

Third Floor Dead X 0.363 0.081 4.478

Third Floor Dead Y 0.757 0.206 3.68

Third Floor Live X 0.149 0.022 6.685

Third Floor Live Y 0.332 0.085 3.898

Third Floor FF X 0.055 0.009 6.433

Third Floor FF Y 0.126 0.035 3.6

Third Floor EQX X 1.841 1.831 1.005

Third Floor EQY Y 1.79 1.661 1.077

57
Third Floor 1.5(DL+LL) X 0.851 0.168 5.066

Third Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Y 1.824 0.489 3.728

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) X 2.866 2.332 1.229

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Y 1.507 0.462 3.263

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) X 2.621 2.063 1.27

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Y 1.411 0.321 4.399

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Y 2.516 1.602 1.57

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Y 3.606 2.385 1.512

Third Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX X 2.942 2.674 1.1

Third Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Y 3.366 2.677 1.257

Third Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX X 3.059 2.82 1.085

Third Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Y 2.611 2.307 1.132

Third Floor 1.5DL+EQX X 3.277 2.869 1.142

Third Floor 1.5DL+EQX Y 1.196 0.397 3.013

Third Floor 1.5DL+EQY Y 2.818 2.183 1.291

Third Floor 1.5DL-EQX X 3.063 2.625 1.167

58
 Third Floor 1.5DL-EQY Y 3.82 2.801 1.364

5.3 Storey Forces

Storey forces in e-tabs software post-seismic analysis reveal dynamic structural responses.
These forces indicate the distribution of internal loads across building levels, crucial for
assessing structural integrity. By analysing storey forces, engineers gauge potential
weaknesses, ensuring designs withstand seismic events, enhancing safety and resilience in
architectural structures.
5.3.1 Basement 2

TABLE: Story Forces

Load
Story Location P VX VY T MX MY
Case/Combo

-
Basement 2 Dead Top 119066.1 146.7022 15.2883 -2190.98 2982510
4066221

-
Basement 2 Dead Bottom 126707.7 146.7022 15.2883 -2190.98 3179380
4330466

-
Basement 2 Live Top 56641.61 112.4861 30.5372 -2271.73 1413493
1940553

-
Basement 2 Live Bottom 56641.61 112.4861 30.5372 -2271.73 1413386
1940159

Basement 2 FF Top 17385.41 35.3932 9.4062 -736.96 433264.3 -597022

Basement 2 FF Bottom 17385.41 35.3932 9.4062 -736.96 433231.4 -596898

-
Basement 2 EQX Top 16.2318 636.7404 28.7013 -14626.5 344.7005
52199.3

59
 -
Basement 2 EQX Bottom 16.2318 636.7404 28.7013 -14626.5 244.246
49970.7

-
Basement 2 EQY Top 204.4592 -25.4826 350.2802 13230.39 50057.09
6763.38

-
Basement 2 EQY Bottom 204.4592 -25.4826 350.2802 13230.39 48831.11
6852.57

-
Basement 2 1.5(DL+LL) Top 289639.6 441.8723 82.8476 -7799.51 7243900
9905693

Basement 2 1.5(DL+LL) Bottom 301102.1 441.8723 82.8476 -7799.51 7538996 -1E+07

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Top 231731.2 1117.586 100.7196 -23791.4 5795534
7987194

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Bottom 240901.2 1117.586 100.7196 -23791.4 6031490
8300993

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Top 231692.2 -410.591 31.8366 11312.15 5794707
7861916

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Bottom 240862.2 -410.591 31.8366 11312.15 6030904
8181064

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Top 231957 322.9187 486.6143 9636.865 5855189
7932671

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Bottom 241127 322.9187 486.6143 9636.865 6089794
8249252

60
 -
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Top 231466.3 384.077 -354.058 -22116.1 5735052
7916439

-
Basement 2 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Bottom 240636.3 384.077 -354.058 -22116.1 5972600
8232806

-
Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQX Top 107135.1 -823.079 -29.2925 19967.82 2683742
3581300

-
Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQX Bottom 114012.6 -823.079 -29.2925 19967.82 2861076
3822464

-
Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQY Top 106852.8 170.2559 -511.661 -21817.5 2609173
3649453

-
Basement 2 0.9DL-1.5EQY Bottom 113730.3 170.2559 -511.661 -21817.5 2788196
3887141

-
Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQX Top 107183.8 1087.143 56.8114 -23911.6 2684776
3737898

-
Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQX Bottom 114061.3 1087.143 56.8114 -23911.6 2861809
3972376

-
Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQY Top 107466.2 93.8081 539.1797 17873.71 2759344
3669744

-
Basement 2 0.9DL+1.5EQY Bottom 114343.6 93.8081 539.1797 17873.71 2934689
3907699

-
Basement 2 1.5DL+EQX Top 178623.4 1175.164 65.9844 -25226.2 4474281
6177630

61
 -
Basement 2 1.5DL+EQX Bottom 190085.9 1175.164 65.9844 -25226.2 4769437
6570656

-
Basement 2 1.5DL+EQY Top 178905.8 181.8294 548.3527 16559.12 4548850
6109476

-
Basement 2 1.5DL+EQY Bottom 190368.3 181.8294 548.3527 16559.12 4842317
6505978

-
Basement 2 1.5DL-EQX Top 178574.8 -735.057 -20.1195 18653.23 4473247
6021032

-
Basement 2 1.5DL-EQX Bottom 190037.2 -735.057 -20.1195 18653.23 4768704
6420743

-
Basement 2 1.5DL-EQY Top 178292.4 258.2773 -502.488 -23132.1 4398679
6089186

-
Basement 2 1.5DL-EQY Bottom 189754.9 258.2773 -502.488 -23132.1 4695824
6485421

5.3.2 Basement 1

TABLE: Story Forces

Load
Story Location P VX VY T MX MY
Case/Combo

Basement -
Dead Top 97746.54 146.7022 15.2883 -2190.98 2423482
1 3334528

Basement -
Dead Bottom 105134.7 146.7022 15.2883 -2190.98 2618502
1 3583349

62
Basement -
Live Top 44846.63 112.4861 30.5372 -2271.73 1105524
1 1532386

Basement -
Live Bottom 44846.63 112.4861 30.5372 -2271.73 1105417
1 1531993

Basement
FF Top 13846.92 35.3932 9.4062 -736.96 340874.3 -474578
1

Basement
FF Bottom 13846.92 35.3932 9.4062 -736.96 340841.4 -474454
1

Basement -
EQX Top 16.2318 704.0176 28.7013 -16383.4 445.155
1 54663.4

Basement -
EQX Bottom 16.2318 704.0176 28.7013 -16383.4 344.7005
1 52199.3

Basement -
EQY Top 204.4592 -25.4826 417.5574 15554.35 51518.54
1 6674.19

Basement -
EQY Bottom 204.4592 -25.4826 417.5574 15554.35 50057.09
1 6763.38

Basement -
1.5(DL+LL) Top 234660.1 441.8723 82.8476 -7799.51 5804820
1 8012239

Basement -
1.5(DL+LL) Bottom 245742.4 441.8723 82.8476 -7799.51 6097140
1 8384694

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Top 187747.6 1198.319 100.7196 -25899.6 4644390
1 6475388

63
Basement -
1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Bottom 196613.4 1198.319 100.7196 -25899.6 4878126
1 6770394

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Top 187708.6 -491.323 31.8366 13420.42 4643322
1 6344195

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Bottom 196574.4 -491.323 31.8366 13420.42 4877299
1 6645116

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Top 187973.5 322.9187 567.347 12425.61 4705678
1 6417801

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Bottom 196839.2 322.9187 567.347 12425.61 4937781
1 6715871

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Top 187482.8 384.077 -434.791 -24904.8 4582034
1 6401782

Basement -
1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Bottom 196348.5 384.077 -434.791 -24904.8 4817644
1 6699639

Basement -
0.9DL-1.5EQX Top 87947.54 -923.994 -29.2925 22603.15 2180466
1 2919080

Basement -
0.9DL-1.5EQX Bottom 94596.88 -923.994 -29.2925 22603.15 2356135
1 3146715

Basement -
0.9DL-1.5EQY Top 87665.2 170.2559 -612.577 -25303.4 2103856
1 2991064

Basement -
0.9DL-1.5EQY Bottom 94314.54 170.2559 -612.577 -25303.4 2281566
1 3214869

64
Basement -
0.9DL+1.5EQX Top 87996.23 1188.058 56.8114 -26546.9 2181801
1 3083071

Basement -
0.9DL+1.5EQX Bottom 94645.57 1188.058 56.8114 -26546.9 2357169
1 3303313

Basement -
0.9DL+1.5EQY Top 88278.57 93.8081 640.0956 21359.64 2258412
1 3011087

Basement -
0.9DL+1.5EQY Bottom 94927.91 93.8081 640.0956 21359.64 2431737
1 3235159

Basement -
1.5DL+EQX Top 146644.2 1276.08 65.9844 -27861.5 3635891
1 5083788

Basement -
1.5DL+EQX Bottom 157726.4 1276.08 65.9844 -27861.5 3928270
1 5453322

Basement -
1.5DL+EQY Top 146926.5 181.8294 649.2685 20045.06 3712501
1 5011804

Basement -
1.5DL+EQY Bottom 158008.7 181.8294 649.2685 20045.06 4002839
1 5385168

Basement -
1.5DL-EQX Top 146595.5 -835.973 -20.1195 21288.56 3634555
1 4919797

Basement -
1.5DL-EQX Bottom 157677.7 -835.973 -20.1195 21288.56 3927236
1 5296724

Basement -
1.5DL-EQY Top 146313.1 258.2773 -603.404 -26618 3557945
1 4991781

65
Basement -
1.5DL-EQY Bottom 157395.4 258.2773 -603.404 -26618 3852667
1 5364878

5.3.4 Ground Floor

TABLE: Story Forces

Load
Story Location P VX VY T MX MY
Case/Combo

Ground Floor Dead Top 91244.3 0.000023 0 -0.0004 1978779 -3006043

Ground Floor Dead Bottom 104064.8 0.000023 0 -0.0004 2260988 -3412799

Ground Floor Live Top 41798.12 1.08E-05 0 -0.0002 901381 -1378058

Ground Floor Live Bottom 41798.12 1.08E-05 0 -0.0002 901381 -1378058

Ground Floor FF Top 12780.03 3.45E-06 0 -0.0001 276467.6 -421514

Ground Floor FF Bottom 12780.03 3.45E-06 0 -0.0001 276467.6 -421514

Ground Floor EQX Top 0 -5673.75 0 122911.5 6.7E-07 -36213.2

Ground Floor EQX Bottom 0 -5673.75 0 122911.5 6.47E-07 -56071.3

Ground Floor EQY Top 0 -8.2E-06 -5673.75 -187566 36213.21 0

Ground Floor EQY Bottom 0 -8.2E-06 -5673.75 -187566 56071.33 -2.9E-05

Ground Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Top 218733.7 0.0001 0 -0.0011 4734942 -7208422

66
Ground Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Bottom 237964.4 0.0001 0 -0.0011 5158255 -7818557

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Top 174986.9 -6808.5 0 147493.8 3787953 -5810194

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Bottom 190371.6 -6808.5 0 147493.8 4126604 -6322131

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Top 174986.9 6808.496 0 -147494 3787953 -5723282

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Bottom 190371.6 6808.496 0 -147494 4126604 -6187560

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Top 174986.9 3.48E-05 -6808.5 -225080 3831409 -5766738

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Bottom 190371.6 3.48E-05 -6808.5 -225080 4193889 -6254845

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Top 174986.9 0.0001 6808.497 225079.6 3744498 -5766738

Ground Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Bottom 190371.6 0.0001 6808.497 225079.6 4059318 -6254845

Ground Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Top 82119.87 8510.62 0 -184367 1780901 -2651119

Ground Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Bottom 93658.33 8510.62 0 -184367 2034889 -2987412

Ground Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Top 82119.87 3.31E-05 8510.621 281349.5 1726581 -2705439

Ground Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Bottom 93658.33 3.31E-05 8510.621 281349.5 1950782 -3071519

Ground Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Top 82119.87 -8510.62 0 184367.2 1780901 -2759758

Ground Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Bottom 93658.33 -8510.62 0 184367.2 2034889 -3155626

Ground Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Top 82119.87 8.35E-06 -8510.62 -281350 1835221 -2705439

67
Ground Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Bottom 93658.33 8.35E-06 -8510.62 -281350 2118996 -3071519

Ground Floor 1.5DL+EQX Top 136866.5 -8510.62 0 184367.2 2968169 -4563384

Ground Floor 1.5DL+EQX Bottom 156097.2 -8510.62 0 184367.2 3391482 -5203305

Ground Floor 1.5DL+EQY Top 136866.5 2.22E-05 -8510.62 -281350 3022489 -4509064

Ground Floor 1.5DL+EQY Bottom 156097.2 2.22E-05 -8510.62 -281350 3475589 -5119198

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQX Top 136866.5 8510.62 0 -184367 2968169 -4454744

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQX Bottom 156097.2 8510.62 0 -184367 3391482 -5035091

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQY Top 136866.5 4.69E-05 8510.621 281349.5 2913849 -4509064

Ground Floor 1.5DL-EQY Bottom 156097.2 4.69E-05 8510.621 281349.5 3307375 -5119198

5.3.4 First Floor

TABLE: Story Forces

Load
Story Location P VX VY T MX MY
Case/Combo

First Floor Dead Top 63817.33 0 0 0 1382336 -2112138

First Floor Dead Bottom 77596.22 0 0 0 1685570 -2557580

First Floor Live Top 28866.33 0 0 0 622733.6 -951757

First Floor Live Bottom 28866.33 0 0 0 622733.6 -951757

68
First Floor FF Top 9520.943 0 0 0 206124.7 -314061

First Floor FF Bottom 9520.943 0 0 0 206124.7 -314061

First Floor EQX Top 0 -4954.72 0 107312.4 0 -18871.7

First Floor EQX Bottom 0 -4954.72 0 107312.4 0 -36213.2

First Floor EQY Top 0 0 -4954.72 -164133 18871.69 0

First Floor EQY Bottom 0 0 -4954.72 -164133 36213.21 0

First Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Top 153306.9 0 0 0 3316792 -5066934

First Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Bottom 173975.2 0 0 0 3771642 -5735097

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Top 122645.5 -5945.66 0 128774.9 2653434 -4076194

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Bottom 139180.2 -5945.66 0 128774.9 3017314 -4631534

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Top 122645.5 5945.664 0 -128775 2653434 -4030902

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Bottom 139180.2 5945.664 0 -128775 3017314 -4544622

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Top 122645.5 0 -5945.66 -196960 2676080 -4053548

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Bottom 139180.2 0 -5945.66 -196960 3060770 -4588078

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Top 122645.5 0 5945.664 196959.9 2630788 -4053548

First Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Bottom 139180.2 0 5945.664 196959.9 2973858 -4588078

69
First Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Top 57435.6 7432.08 0 -160969 1244103 -1872617

First Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Bottom 69836.6 7432.08 0 -160969 1517013 -2247502

First Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Top 57435.6 0 7432.08 246199.8 1215795 -1900924

First Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Bottom 69836.6 0 7432.08 246199.8 1462693 -2301822

First Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Top 57435.6 -7432.08 0 160968.6 1244103 -1929232

First Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Bottom 69836.6 -7432.08 0 160968.6 1517013 -2356142

First Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Top 57435.6 0 -7432.08 -246200 1272410 -1900924

First Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Bottom 69836.6 0 -7432.08 -246200 1571333 -2301822

First Floor 1.5DL+EQX Top 95726 -7432.08 0 160968.6 2073504 -3196514

First Floor 1.5DL+EQX Bottom 116394.3 -7432.08 0 160968.6 2528355 -3890689

First Floor 1.5DL+EQY Top 95726 0 -7432.08 -246200 2101812 -3168207

First Floor 1.5DL+EQY Bottom 116394.3 0 -7432.08 -246200 2582674 -3836370

First Floor 1.5DL-EQX Top 95726 7432.08 0 -160969 2073504 -3139899

First Floor 1.5DL-EQX Bottom 116394.3 7432.08 0 -160969 2528355 -3782050

First Floor 1.5DL-EQY Top 95726 0 7432.08 246199.8 2045197 -3168207

First Floor 1.5DL-EQY Bottom 116394.3 0 7432.08 246199.8 2474035 -3836370

70
 5.3.5 Second Floor

TABLE: Story Forces

Load
Story Location P VX VY T MX MY
Case/Combo

Second Floor Dead Top 36248.42 0 0 0 781363.2 -1212723

Second Floor Dead Bottom 49950.27 0 0 0 1083096 -1656952

Second Floor Live Top 15934.55 0 0 0 344086.3 -525456

Second Floor Live Bottom 15934.55 0 0 0 344086.3 -525456

Second Floor FF Top 6261.851 0 0 0 135781.8 -206608

Second Floor FF Bottom 6261.851 0 0 0 135781.8 -206608

Second Floor EQX Top 0 -3653.46 0 79030.4 0 -6084.59

Second Floor EQX Bottom 0 -3653.46 0 79030.4 0 -18871.7

Second Floor EQY Top 0 0 -3653.46 -121587 6084.589 0

Second Floor EQY Bottom 0 0 -3653.46 -121587 18871.69 0

Second Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Top 87667.23 0 0 0 1891847 -2917181

Second Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Bottom 108220 0 0 0 2344447 -3583525

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Top 70133.78 -4384.15 0 94836.48 1513478 -2341046

71
Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Bottom 86576 -4384.15 0 94836.48 1875557 -2889466

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Top 70133.78 4384.149 0 -94836.5 1513478 -2326443

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Bottom 86576 4384.149 0 -94836.5 1875557 -2844174

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Top 70133.78 0 -4384.15 -145904 1520779 -2333745

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Bottom 86576 0 -4384.15 -145904 1898203 -2866820

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Top 70133.78 0 4384.149 145904.3 1506176 -2333745

Second Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Bottom 86576 0 4384.149 145904.3 1852911 -2866820

Second Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Top 32623.58 5480.186 0 -118546 703226.9 -1082324

Second Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Bottom 44955.25 5480.186 0 -118546 974786.8 -1462949

Second Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Top 32623.58 0 5480.186 182380.4 694100 -1091450

Second Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Bottom 44955.25 0 5480.186 182380.4 946479.2 -1491257

Second Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Top 32623.58 -5480.19 0 118545.6 703226.9 -1100577

Second Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Bottom 44955.25 -5480.19 0 118545.6 974786.8 -1519564

Second Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Top 32623.58 0 -5480.19 -182380 712353.8 -1091450

Second Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Bottom 44955.25 0 -5480.19 -182380 1003094 -1491257

Second Floor 1.5DL+EQX Top 54372.63 -5480.19 0 118545.6 1172045 -1828211

72
Second Floor 1.5DL+EQX Bottom 74925.41 -5480.19 0 118545.6 1624645 -2513736

Second Floor 1.5DL+EQY Top 54372.63 0 -5480.19 -182380 1181172 -1819084

Second Floor 1.5DL+EQY Bottom 74925.41 0 -5480.19 -182380 1652952 -2485428

Second Floor 1.5DL-EQX Top 54372.63 5480.186 0 -118546 1172045 -1809957

Second Floor 1.5DL-EQX Bottom 74925.41 5480.186 0 -118546 1624645 -2457121

Second Floor 1.5DL-EQY Top 54372.63 0 5480.186 182380.4 1162918 -1819084

Second Floor 1.5DL-EQY Bottom 74925.41 0 5480.186 182380.4 1596337 -2485428

5.3.6 Third Floor

TABLE: Story Forces

Load
Story Location P VX VY T MX MY
Case/Combo

Third Floor Dead Top 12941.35 0 0 0 280192.9 -438448

Third Floor Dead Bottom 22383.83 0 0 0 482433 -756410

Third Floor Live Top 3002.76 0 0 0 65438.88 -99155.5

Third Floor Live Bottom 3002.76 0 0 0 65438.88 -99155.5

Third Floor FF Top 3002.76 0 0 0 65438.88 -99155.5

Third Floor FF Bottom 3002.76 0 0 0 65438.88 -99155.5

73
Third Floor EQX Top 0 -1738.45 0 37606.8 0 0

Third Floor EQX Bottom 0 -1738.45 0 37606.8 0 -6084.59

Third Floor EQY Top 0 0 -1738.45 -58518.3 0 0

Third Floor EQY Bottom 0 0 -1738.45 -58518.3 6084.589 0

Third Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Top 28420.3 0 0 0 616606 -955139

-
Third Floor 1.5(DL+LL) Bottom 42584.02 0 0 0 919966.1
1432081

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Top 22736.24 -2086.14 0 45128.16 493284.8 -764111

-
Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQX) Bottom 34067.22 -2086.14 0 45128.16 735972.9
1152967

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Top 22736.24 2086.145 0 -45128.2 493284.8 -764111

-
Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQX) Bottom 34067.22 2086.145 0 -45128.2 735972.9
1138364

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Top 22736.24 0 -2086.14 -70222 493284.8 -764111

-
Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL+EQY) Bottom 34067.22 0 -2086.14 -70222 743274.4
1145665

Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Top 22736.24 0 2086.145 70221.96 493284.8 -764111

74
 -
Third Floor 1.2(DL+LL-EQY) Bottom 34067.22 0 2086.145 70221.96 728671.4
1145665

Third Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Top 11647.21 2607.681 0 -56410.2 252173.6 -394604

Third Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQX Bottom 20145.45 2607.681 0 -56410.2 434189.7 -671642

Third Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Top 11647.21 0 2607.681 87777.45 252173.6 -394604

Third Floor 0.9DL-1.5EQY Bottom 20145.45 0 2607.681 87777.45 425062.8 -680769

Third Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Top 11647.21 -2607.68 0 56410.2 252173.6 -394604

Third Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQX Bottom 20145.45 -2607.68 0 56410.2 434189.7 -689896

Third Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Top 11647.21 0 -2607.68 -87777.5 252173.6 -394604

Third Floor 0.9DL+1.5EQY Bottom 20145.45 0 -2607.68 -87777.5 443316.6 -680769

Third Floor 1.5DL+EQX Top 19412.02 -2607.68 0 56410.2 420289.3 -657673

-
Third Floor 1.5DL+EQX Bottom 33575.74 -2607.68 0 56410.2 723649.5
1143742

Third Floor 1.5DL+EQY Top 19412.02 0 -2607.68 -87777.5 420289.3 -657673

-
Third Floor 1.5DL+EQY Bottom 33575.74 0 -2607.68 -87777.5 732776.4
1134615

Third Floor 1.5DL-EQX Top 19412.02 2607.681 0 -56410.2 420289.3 -657673

75
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION.
The study of the behavior of multi-storey commercial buildings under seismic loads using
ETABS has yielded significant insights into their structural performance and resilience.
The advanced capabilities of ETABS for modeling, analysis, and simulation have allowed
for a comprehensive understanding of how these buildings respond to seismic events. Key
findings indicate that the design and configuration of structural elements, such as columns,
beams, and shear walls, play a critical role in determining the overall seismic performance.
The incorporation of seismic design principles, such as ductility, energy dissipation, and
redundancy, has been shown to enhance the building's ability to withstand seismic forces.

The study revealed that buildings with a regular configuration and properly designed lateral
load-resisting systems exhibit better performance during earthquakes. Irregularities in mass
distribution, stiffness, and strength were found to significantly impact the seismic behavior,
often leading to increased vulnerability. The analysis highlighted the importance of
adhering to seismic codes and standards, which are designed to ensure that buildings can
endure the anticipated seismic demands without experiencing catastrophic failure.

The study emphasized the effectiveness of retrofitting techniques in improving the seismic
resilience of existing buildings. Techniques such as the addition of shear walls, bracing
systems, and base isolators were found to significantly enhance the structural integrity and
safety of older buildings not originally designed to withstand strong seismic forces. The
use of ETABS facilitated a detailed assessment of various retrofitting options, allowing for
the optimization of design solutions based on performance criteria and cost considerations.

The study underscores the importance of utilizing advanced tools like ETABS for seismic
analysis and design of multi-storey commercial buildings. The insights gained from this
research contribute to the development of safer and more resilient buildings, capable of
protecting lives and property in the event of an earthquake. Continued advancements in
modeling techniques and seismic design practices will further enhance the ability of
engineers to create structures that can effectively resist seismic loads, ensuring the safety
and sustainability of urban environments.

76
 REFRENCES

 (n.d.). Explanatory Examples on Indian Seismic Code IS 1893 (Part 10. Jain, D. S.
(n.d.). Explanatory Examples on Indian Seismic IS 1893 (Part 1). Kanpur: Indian
Institute of Technology Kanpur.

 M. H Janardanachar, P. .. (2017). Seismic Effect of Masonry Infill with Open and

Shear Wall on Flat Slab Structure. International Journal of Advance Research,
Ideas and Innovations in Technology.

 STANDARDS, B. O. (1989, March). IS 875 (Part 2): Code of Practice for Design
Loads (Other Than Earthquake) For Buildings and Structures. Part 2: Imposed
Loads (Second Revision). Retrieved from
https://ponarulyesuraja.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/is-875-2-
1987.pdf

 STANDARDS, B. O. (2002, June). IS 1893-1 (2002): Criteria for Earthquake

Resistant Design of Structures, Part 1: General Provisions and Buildings.
Retrieved from https://law.resource.org/pub/in/bis/S03/is.1893.1.2002.pdf

77