Comparative Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Buildings with Different Plan Irregularities Using Response Spectrum Analysis

References

[1] A. K. Chopra, Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, 5th ed., Pearson Education, New York, 2020.

[2] IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016, Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.

[3] IS 456:2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete – Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.

[4] IS 13920:2016, Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.

[5] IS 875 (Part 1):1987, Dead Loads on Buildings and Structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.

[6] IS 875 (Part 2):1987, Imposed Loads on Buildings and Structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.

[7] C. V. R. Murty, Earthquake Tips and Earthquake Resistant Design Concepts, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2019.

[8] T. Paulay and M. J. N. Priestley, Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1992.

[9] S. K. Duggal, Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, 3rd Edition, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2021.

[10] A. K. Jain, Reinforced Concrete Design, Nem Chand & Bros., Roorkee, India, 2020.

[11] R. Park and T. Paulay, Reinforced Concrete Structures, John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.

[12] E. F. Fahmy and M. N. Mahmoud, “Seismic Behavior of Plan Irregular Reinforced Concrete Buildings,” Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 145, no. 8, pp. 1–15, 2019.

[13] M. Humar, Dynamics of Structures, CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, 2012.

[14] K. Tso and D. Dempsey, “Seismic Torsional Provisions for Buildings,” Earthquake Spectra, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1–18, 2010.

[15] S. Goel and A. Chopra, “Evaluation of Torsional Provisions in Seismic Design Codes,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, vol. 120, no. 12, pp. 1–19, 2015.

[16] A. Sharma and R. Gupta, “Comparative Seismic Analysis of Regular and Irregular RC Buildings,” International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 12–24, 2020.

[17] M. Patel and P. Shah, “Effect of Plan Irregularity on Seismic Performance of High Rise Structures,” International Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 55–67, 2021.

[18] CSI ETABS 21 User Manual, Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, California, USA, 2023.

[19] Eurocode 8, Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2022.

[20] FEMA P-1050, NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington D.C., USA, 2020.

[21] M. Willford and J. Whittaker, Performance-Based Seismic Engineering, Taylor & Francis, London, UK, 2018.

[22] S. Rajasekaran and G. Sankarasubramanian, Computational Structural Mechanics, PHI Learning, New Delhi, India, 2017.

[23] R. N. White and T. Gergely, Reinforced Concrete Design, McGraw-Hill Education, New York, USA.

[24] B. S. Taranath, Structural Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings, CRC Press, USA, 2016.

[25] Pankaj Agarwal and Manish Shrikhande, Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, PHI Learning, New Delhi, India.

[26] H. Krawinkler, “Seismic Design Methodologies for Building Structures,” Earthquake Engineering Research Center Report, Stanford University, USA.

[27] A. Ghobarah, “Performance-Based Seismic Design in Structural Engineering,” Engineering Structures, vol. 23, pp. 878–884.

[28] R. Clough and J. Penzien, Dynamics of Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.

[29] S. A. Anagnostopoulos, “Torsional Response of Asymmetric Buildings During Earthquakes,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE.

[30] N. Subramanian, Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, India.

@article{1720250,
      author = {Ashutosh Luhania, Hemant Agarwal, Sunil Kumar, Vijay Saini},
      title = {Comparative Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Buildings with Different Plan Irregularities Using Response Spectrum Analysis},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {1},
      pages = {3337-3356},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1720250.pdf},
      abstract = {The rapid urbanization of metropolitan regions has resulted in increasing demand for architecturally complex structures possessing functional and aesthetic irregularities. Although plan irregular configurations provide flexibility in architectural planning, they significantly influence the seismic response of reinforced concrete structures. Earthquake-induced forces are highly sensitive to structural geometry, stiffness distribution, mass 
irregularity, and torsional characteristics. Numerous post-earthquake investigations have demonstrated that irregular buildings experience substantially higher damage levels compared with geometrically regular structures due to stress concentration and uneven lateral force distribution. The present study investigates the seismic performance of four reinforced concrete building configurations, namely Regular Rectangular, L-Shaped, T-Shaped, and U-Shaped plans. A G+15 reinforced concrete moment-resisting frame is modeled and analyzed using ETABS software in accordance with IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 provisions. Response Spectrum Analysis is adopted to evaluate structural response under earthquake loading. Critical performance parameters including maximum storey displacement, storey drift, fundamental time period, base shear, and torsional response are examined and compared. The results demonstrate that plan irregularity significantly affects seismic behavior. The U-shaped and T-shaped configurations exhibit greater lateral displacement and torsional vulnerability, whereas the regular configuration provides more uniform force distribution and improved seismic stability. The study highlights the importance of considering plan irregularity during the conceptual design stage and recommends suitable structural measures to mitigate adverse seismic effects in irregular buildings.},
      keywords = {Plan Irregularity, Seismic Analysis, Response Spectrum Analysis, ETABS, Storey Drift, Torsional Irregularity, RC Buildings, IS 1893:2016.},
      month = {July},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I1-1720250}
  }