A Systematic Review of Performance Evaluation of Composite High-Rise Structures Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loads: Analytical Methods, Key Findings, and Research Gaps

References

[1] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 – Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. New Delhi: BIS, 2016. Available: https://law.resource.org/pub/in/bis/S06/is.1893.1.2016.pdf

[2] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 875 (Part 3): 2015 – Design Loads – Wind Loads. New Delhi: BIS, 2015. Available: https://law.resource.org/pub/in/bis/S06/is.875.3.2015.pdf

[3] B. S. Taranath, Structural Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings: Steel and Composite Construction. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b12299

[4] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 11384: 2022 – Composite Construction – Code of Practice. New Delhi: BIS, 2022. Available: https://bis.gov.in/

[5] Z. Tao, B. Uy, L. H. Han, and Z. B. Wang, “Analysis and design of concrete-filled stiffened thin-walled steel tubular columns,” Thin-Walled Structures, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 1544–1556, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2009.05.006

[6] D. U. Soni, J. A. Bhatt, and A. K. Desai, “Comparative study on seismic performance of multistoreyed RCC, steel and composite structures,” VSRD Technical Journal, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 44–52, 2010. Available: https://www.vsrdjournals.com/vsrd/Issue/2010_01_January/

[7] A. N. Shah and P. S. Pajgade, “Comparison of RCC and composite multistoried buildings,” International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA), vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 534–539, 2013. Available: https://www.ijera.com/papers/Vol3_issue2/CE32534539.pdf

[8] N. Netravathi and M. Suma, “Comparison of analysis of composite and RCC multistorey buildings,” IJIRSET, vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 17312–17320, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0608031

[9] A. V. Renavikar et al., “Comparative study on analysis and cost of RCC and composite structure,” IJCIET, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1–9, 2016. Available: https://iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/Journal_uploads/IJCIET/VOLUME_7_ISSUE_4/

[10] S. Li, Z. Kou, and D. Wang, “Seismic performance of composite frames with CFST columns under near-fault ground motions,” Engineering Structures, vol. 199, p. 109671, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109671

[11] C. Dong, H. Li, and S. Cao, “Coupled wind-seismic interaction analysis of composite high-rise structures,” Wind and Structures, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 305–318, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2019.28.5.305

[12] X. Qin, C. Chen, and Y. Wang, “Performance of composite frame–shear wall systems under multi-hazard loading,” Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 35, p. 101990, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101990

[13] Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), ETABS v21 – User Manual. Berkeley, CA: CSI, 2023. Available: https://www.csiamerica.com/products/etabs

[14] P. Asha and R. N. Sinha, “Seismic performance of composite vs. reinforced concrete frames,” IJAERS, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1–6, 2012. Available: https://www.technicaljournalsonline.com/ijaers/vol1issue3.htm

[15] M. S. Aainawala, “Seismic analysis of multistoreyed RCC and composite buildings,” IJETR, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 2320–2335, 2016. Available: https://www.erpublication.org/published_paper/IJETR042740.pdf

[16] L. Jingbo et al., “Seismic behaviour of composite frames with steel beams and RC columns,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 64, pp. 1498–1509, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.01.008

[17] W. Xilin, L. Yiyi, and Z. Yan, “Seismic behavior of CFST rectangular and square columns,” in Proc. 12th WCEE, Auckland, 2011. Available: https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/wcee2011_p2540.pdf

[18] C. Campian, M. Pop, and D. Nagy, “Behaviour of fully encased steel-concrete composite columns under cyclic loading,” Procedia Engineering, vol. 117, pp. 439–451, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.192

[19] H. Zhang, Y. Liu, and J. Li, “Comparative seismic performance of circular and rectangular CFST column frames,” Structures, vol. 28, pp. 920–932, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.09.052

[20] F. Ding, Z. Liu, X. Liu, and C. Zhang, “Mechanical behaviour of concrete-filled square steel tube under uniaxial loading,” Steel and Composite Structures, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 31–51, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2012.13.1.031

[21] L. H. Han, W. Li, and R. Bjorhovde, “Developments and advanced applications of CFST structures: Members,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 100, pp. 211–228, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.04.016

[22] H. Asl, D. Nweke, and F. McKenna, “Performance-based seismic assessment of composite frames using FEMA P-58,” Earthquake Spectra, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 1423–1449, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293019898715

[23] Y. Wang, Q. Wu, and J. Li, “Seismic resilience assessment of high-rise composite buildings using CFST columns,” Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 42, p. 102540, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102540

[24] P. Agrawal and M. Shrikhande, Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. New Delhi: PHI Learning, 2006. ISBN: 978-8120328921.

[25] Y. Desai, M. Chavda, and S. Joshi, “Seismic performance evaluation of soft story building with composite columns,” IJAERD, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 121–127, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21090/IJAERD.026033

@article{1719405,
      author = {Sakesh, Murlidhar Chourasia, Dr. Rahul Kumar Satbhaiya},
      title = {A Systematic Review of Performance Evaluation of Composite High-Rise Structures Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loads: Analytical Methods, Key Findings, and Research Gaps},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {1},
      pages = {69-81},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1719405.pdf},
      abstract = {Recent years have seen the structural engineering community increasingly embrace the use of a steel–concrete composite system, especially Concrete-Filled Steel Tube (CFST) columns, in the design of high-rise buildings. However, there is no literature that has reviewed their performance as per the combined wind and seismic requirements specified in Indian Standards (IS 875:2015 & IS 1893:2016) yet. A systematic review of 32 peer-reviewed studies published from 2008 to 2024 was used to summarize evidence of analytical methodologies, structural performance parameters, computer programs, and trends in design. The review shows that the maximum storey displacement of CFST columns is 49–55% lower at equivalent section size, the lateral stiffness is 61–65% higher, base shear is reduced by 17–19% with optimised section size and the area of column cross sections can be reduced by 52%, the net floor area gained by which would be around 66 m² in a typical G+10 building. The state of the practice method for Zone V seismic assessment in ETABS is called Non-linear Dynamic time-history analysis. Six key research needs are identified and a structured research roadmap is suggested covering the development of material databases for Zone V; development of a coupled wind–earthquake performance framework; and optimisation of lifecycle costs for composite systems.},
      keywords = {CFST, Composite Columns, High-Rise Structures, Systematical Review, Non-Linear Dynamic Analysis, Seismic Analysis, Wind Loading, IS 1893:2016, Structural Performance.},
      month = {July},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I1-1719405}
  }