PSI - Issue 70

Rishi B. Mathur et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 70 (2025) 372–379

379

5. Conclusion The seismic behavior of a G+4 steel building was studied with different structural system incorporated to identify the best suited case as per new IS code 18168:2023. The structural integrity of all the system under seismic activity was analyzed. The following conclusions were obtained from the study: i. EBFs have the maximum base shear value in X-direction, indicating they are stiffer than other structural system. ii. The base shear value of SCBF is greater in X-direction than Y-direction, as braces are available in X-direction only and not resisting lateral forces from Y-direction. iii. The storey drift of SMRF system is greater in X-direction indicating the system is most flexible among others. iv. It is observed in X- Direction due to presence of braces and links the lateral displacement is reduced by 61% in SCBF and by 83% in EBF when compared with SMRF. v. The displacement of SMRF (19.47mm) is more in X direction than other structural system and least in the Y-direction with 21.47mm. vi. SMRFs have the highest participation in both lower and higher mode, suggesting they are stiffer and more resistant to dynamic forces. On other hand SCBFs and EBFs, have lower participation in higher mode, making them flexible making them good option in more seismic prone areas. References Fang, C. et al. 2022. Seismic resilient steel structures: A review of research, practice, challenges and opportunities, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 191, 107172. Fardis, M.N. 2018. Capacity design: Early history’, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 47(14), 2887–2896. Gupta, M. and Reader, M.G. 2005.Additional Sectional Properties of Indian Standard Parallel, 1–16. IS:800:2007. Indian standard code of practice for general construction in steel, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi. IS 18168:2023. Earthquake Resistant Design and Construction of Buildings Code Of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, 1993, pp. 1457–1470. Jani, K. and Patel, P. V. 2013.Analysis and design of diagrid structural system for high rise steel buildings, Procedia Engineering, 51, pp. 92–100. Marino, E.M., Nakashima, M. and Mosalam, K.M. 2005. Comparison of European and Japanese seismic design of steel building structures, Engineering Structures, 27(6), pp. 827–840. Naderian, H. et al. 2019. Stability of stiffened cruciform steel columns under shear and compression by the complex finite strip method, Thin Walled Structures, 136, pp. 221–234. IS 808 2021. Hot Rolled Steel Beam, Column, Channel and Angle Sections — Dimensions and Properties, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi Singh Prajapati, Y. and Kapoor, K. 2023. Comparative study of seismic analysis and design of residential structure using Indian and British standards, Materials Today: Proceedings, 93, pp. 137–142. Standard, I. 2016. ‘IS 1983 (Part 1):2016 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures’, 1893 (December 2016). Tahir, M.M. et al. 2009. Experimental investigation of short cruciform columns using universal beam sections, Construction and Building Materials, 23(3), 1354–1364.