International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Behaviour of Multi-Storey R.C.C Structure with Different Types of

Bracing against Earthquake Forces
K N Jeevan Kumar1, Sabyath P Shetty2
1Post-Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, N.M.A.M Institute of Technology, Nitte, India
2Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, N.M.A.M Institute of Technology, Nitte, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - Nowadays, the construction of the high-rise added weight, and so it is very effective for existing structure
multi-storey buildings has been increased due to the for which the poor lateral stiffness is the main problem.
increasing population. Earthquake is one of the main
phenomena causing damage to the structure. As the height of 1.1 Different types of Bracings
the structure increases, it undergoes larger seismic forces. So,
it is important to improve the resistance of multi-storey Bracings are mostly a diagonal member which connects
building to lateral loads. There are many structural systems either beam-column junction or mid-point of beam or column
which resist lateral loads by the addition of different span or length. On basis of that there are two types of bracing
structural systems. In this project work, Steel Bracing systems. First is Eccentric and another is Concentric.
structural system is considered and compared to their results  Diagonal Bracing: These are compression as well as
against lateral forces. Here, seven structural systems are tension type bracings. It consists of a single brace
considered in which one is Unbraced framed structure and instead of two as in case of X - bracing.
others are Braced frame structure. For the purpose G+15
 V–Bracing: Also called as chevron bracings. Here the
storey multi-storey R.C.C structure with rectangular plan of
braces intersect at the midpoint of the beam.
dimension 30mx20m uniform throughout the height is
considered and analyzed for gravity and lateral loads using  Inverted V–Bracing: These are also inverted chevron
ETABS 18 software. Its intention is to obtain the functioning or have the shape of alphabet V.
characteristics like Storey displacements, Storey drift, Natural  X–Bracing: These are the commonly used bracing
time period, and Base shear to evaluated and compare with systems. Here the diagonals intersect each other to form
unbraced frame structure. The use of Mega X-Bracing shows alphabet X.
good performance in resisting lateral loads since Storey
displacements and Storey drifts are found to be less than that  K–Bracing: K-braces connect to the columns at mid-
of other bracing system. height. K-bracing is generally discouraged in seismic
regions because of the potential for column failure if the
compression brace buckles.
Key Words: Bracing, Earthquake Force, Storey
displacements, Storey drift, Natural time period, and Base 2. OBJECTIVE
shear, ETABS etc
In this project G+15 Storey R.C.C structure is analyzed to
1. INTRODUCTION study the effect of lateral forces such as Earthquake forces for
Zone III considering different bracing system.
Bracing is one of the most widely used lateral load
resisting systems in multi-storied buildings. Bracing is a Type of Structure Analyzed:
highly efficient and economical method of resisting  RCC bare frame without bracing system.
horizontal force in a frame structure. Braced frame is a  RCC Bare frame with bracing system.
structural system, which is designed primarily to resist wind
loads and earthquake forces. Braced frames can be an Types of bracing system used are as follows:
effective system for seismic retrofit due to their high
stiffness. Braced frames are almost always composed of steel  Diagonal Bracing
members.  V-Bracing
 X-Bracing
The beams and columns that form the frame carry  Mega Diagonal bracing
vertical loads, and the bracing system carries the lateral  Mega V-Bracing
loads. Braced frames reduce lateral displacement, as well as  Mega X-Bracing
the bending moment in columns. Steel bracing is economical,
easy to erect, occupies less space and has flexibility to design The software to be used for the analysis is ETABS 18. The
for meeting the required strength and stiffness. It allows comparison of structural behavior is observed such as Storey
obtaining a great increase of lateral stiffness with a minimal Displacement of building, storey Drift, Natural Time Period,

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 982
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Base shear and Conclusions are drawn based on the IV. Loads Considered:
observations and better structural system is found out with
this study.  Dead Load : Auto
 Live Load : 3 kN/m2
 Floor Finish : 1.5 kN/m2
3. METHODOLOGY
 Wall Load : 13 kN/m (9” Thick)
 Other Loads : Seismic Load
To achieve the above objective following step-by-step
procedures are followed; V. Seismic Load:
 Carried out literature study to find out the objectives of Seismic design shall be done in accordance with
the project work. IS: 1893:2016. The building is situated in earthquake
 In the present investigation a G+15 storied building is zone III (Mangaluru). The parameters to be used for
considered, having general arrangement measurement analysis and design are given below (As per IS:
of 30 m x 20 m along X and Y Direction with a bay size of 1893:2016 (Part I)).
5 m in both the direction.  Zone : III
 Seven Structural systems is adopted in this work i.e.,  Zone Factor : 0.16 (IS 1893 (Part 1)
One Unbraced frame structure and others are Braced  Importance factor : 1.2
frame structure with different types of braces.  Response Reduction : 5.0 Special RC Moment
Factor Resisting Frame (SMRF)
 Analyze all selected models using ETABS 18 Software  Structure Type : RC Frame Structure.
by applying Design Loads as per IS 875.
 Evaluate the analysis results and verify the 4. MODELING OF THE STRUCTURE
requirement of the geometrical limitations.

3.1 Problem Statement

Following types of structural arrangement is studied;
 Reinforced concrete multi-storey building without
Bracing system.
 Reinforced concrete multi-storey building with Diagonal
Bracing, V– Bracing, X–Bracing, Mega Diagonal Bracing,
Fig -1: Plan of the Models
Mega V-Bracing, and Mega X-Bracing.
I. Geometrical Data:
 No of Stories : G+15
 No. of Bay in X-Direction :6
 No. of Bay in Y-Direction :4
 Type of Building Use : Residential
 Plan Dimension : 30m X 20 m
 Typical Storey Height : 3.0 m
 Bottom Storey Height : 3.0 m
 Height of Structure : 51 m

II. Materials:
 Concrete Grade : M20, M25, M30
 Steel (Rebar) : Fe500
 Steel (Bracing) : Fe250 Fig -2: Unbraced Building (3D View)

III. Member Properties:

 Thickness of Slab : 150 mm
 Column Size : 600 mm X 600 mm
 Beam Size : 450 mm X 230 mm
 Bracing : ISNB 175H

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 983
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Fig -3: Diagonal Bracing Fig -4: V-Bracing 5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
(3D View) (3D View)
 Response Spectrum Analysis and Time History Analysis
is carried out for Regular building without and with
Bracing.
 The models are checked for Storey displacement, Storey
drift, Natural Time Period, and Base Shear.

Fig -3: Diagonal Bracing Fig -4: V-Bracing

(3D View) (3D View)

Fig -9: Displacement Fig -10: Axial Force Diagram

(3D View) (3D View)

Fig -5: X-Bracing Fig -6: Mega Diagonal Bracing

(3D View) (3D View)

Fig -11: Shear Force Fig -12: Bending Moment

(3D View) (3D View)

5.1 Max. Storey Displacement

 It is total displacement of the Top Storey with respect

to ground.
Fig -7: Mega V-Bracing Fig -8: Mega X-Bracing
(3D View) (3D View)

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 984
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

I. Diagonal Bracing: 12th Floor 74.001 73.39

11th Floor 70.44 69.765
Diagonal Bracing 10th Floor 66.349 65.632
Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction 9th Floor 61.779 61.06
15h Floor 82.693 82.768 8th Floor 56.794 56.232
14th Floor 81.214 81.192 7th Floor 51.576 51.088
13th Floor 79.076 78.994 6th Floor 46.12 45.669
12th Floor 76.268 76.147 5th Floor 40.408 40.016
11th Floor 72.842 72.698 4th Floor 34.484 34.171
10th Floor 68.86 68.708 3rd Floor 28.398 28.175
9th Floor 64.388 64.242 2nd Floor 22.204 22.072
8th Floor 59.488 59.358 1st Floor 15.959 15.907
7th Floor 54.214 54.106 Ground Floor 9.724 9.727
6th Floor 48.609 48.529 Plinth Level 4.077 4.203
5th Floor 42.717 42.664 Footing Level 0 0
4th Floor 36.574 36.549 Table -2: Max Storey Displacement (mm) of V-Braced
3rd Floor 30.247 30.223 Building.
2nd Floor 23.794 23.775
1st Floor 17.172 17.18
Ground Floor 10.464 10.476
Plinth Level 4.3 4.33
Footing Level 0 0
Table -1: Max. Storey Displacement (mm) of Diagonally
Bracing Building.

Fig -14: Max. Storey Displacement of V-Braced Building.

II. X-Bracing:

X-Braced Building
Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction
15h Floor 78.229 74.236
Fig -13: Max. Storey Displacement of Diagonally Braced 14th Floor 76.397 72.376
Building. 13th Floor 73.949 69.951
12th Floor 70.925 66.992
I. V-Bracing:
11th Floor 67.366 63.541
V-Braced Building 10th Floor 63.323 59.65
Floor Level 9th Floor 58.853 55.378
X-Direction Y-Direction
8th Floor 54.017 50.784
15h Floor 81.14 80.829 7th Floor 48.873 45.925
14th Floor 79.377 78.943 6th Floor 43.477 40.852
13th Floor 76.99 76.459 5th Floor 37.883 35.803

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 985
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

4th Floor 32.198 30.578

3rd Floor 26.471 25.198
2nd Floor 20.638 19.713
1st Floor 14.774 14.178
Ground Floor 8.969 8.649
Plinth Level 3.597 3.575
Footing Level 0 0
Table -3: Max Storey Displacement (mm) of X-Braced
Building

Fig -16: Max. Storey Displacement of Megs Diagonally

Braced Building.

V. Mega V-Bracing:

Mega V-Braced Building

Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction
15h Floor 56.352 71.894
14th Floor 55.622 70.261
13th Floor 54.563 68.157
Fig -15: Max. Storey Displacement of X-Braced Building. 12th Floor 53.064 65.701
11th Floor 51.03 62.737
III. Mega Diagonal Bracing: 10th Floor 48.397 59.116
9th Floor 45.386 55.1
Mega Diagonal Bracing
Floor Level 8th Floor 42.222 50.958
X-Direction Y-Direction 7th Floor 38.844 46.516
15h Floor 80.235 82.667 6th Floor 35.183 41.823
14th Floor 79.16 81.022 5th Floor 31.27 36.831
13th Floor 77.507 78.81 4th Floor 26.984 31.795
12th Floor 75.153 76.098 3rd Floor 22.439 26.538
11th Floor 72.043 72.774 2nd Floor 17.832 20.898
10th Floor 68.471 68.743 1st Floor 13.094 15.113
9th Floor 64.347 64.223 Ground Floor 8.176 9.346
8th Floor 59.889 59.447 Plinth Level 3.686 4.357
7th Floor 55.06 54.307 Footing Level 0 0
6th Floor 49.813 48.67
Table -5: Max Storey Displacement (mm) of Mega V-
5th Floor 44.102 42.719 Braced Building.
4th Floor 37.887 36.695
3rd Floor 31.351 30.556
2nd Floor 24.711 24.039
1st Floor 17.917 17.278
Ground Floor 10.977 10.504
Plinth Level 4.38 4.217
Footing Level 0 0
Table -4: Max. Storey Displacement (mm) of Mega
Diagonally Braced Building.
© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 986
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Fig -17: Max. Storey Displacement of Mega V-Braced Fig -18: Max. Storey Displacement of Mega X-Braced
Building. Building.
5.2 Comparison of Max. Storey Displacement:
VI. Mega X-Bracing:
% Reduction in Max. Storey Displacement
Mega X-Braced Building Storey % Reduction in
Floor Level Displacement Max. Storey
X-Direction Y-Direction Floor Level Displacement
15h Floor 49.854 59.275 X-Dir. Y-Dir. X-Dir. Y-Dir.
14th Floor 49.155 57.922 Unbraced
13th Floor 48.142 56.215 Building 105.92 117.17 - -
12th Floor 46.763 54.268 Diagonal
11th Floor 45.138 51.922 Bracing 82.69 82.77 21.93 29.36
10th Floor 42.971 49.015 V-Bracing 81.14 80.83 23.40 31.01
9th Floor 40.454 45.772 X-Bracing 78.23 26.14
74.24 36.64
8th Floor 37.791 42.431
Mega Diagonal
7th Floor 34.906 38.818
Bracing 80.24 82.67 24.25 29.44
6th Floor 31.728 34.743
Mega V- 56.35 46.80
5th Floor 28.187 30.463 71.89 38.64
Bracing
4th Floor 24.218 26.272
Mega X- 49.85 52.93
3rd Floor 20.057 21.983 59.28 49.41
Bracing
2nd Floor 15.902 17.335
Table -7: % Reduction in Max. Storey Displacement.
1st Floor 11.664 12.552
Ground Floor 7.299 7.784
Plinth Level 3.305 3.718
Footing Level 0 0
Table -6: Max Storey Displacement (mm) of Mega X-
Braced Building.

Fig -19: % Reduction in Max. Storey Displacement.

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 987
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

5.3 Max. Storey Drift II. V-Bracing:

I. Diagonal Bracing: V-Braced Building

Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction
Diagonal Bracing
Floor Level 15h Floor 0.000589 0.000631
X-Direction Y-Direction
14th Floor 0.000796 0.000829
15h Floor 0.000495 0.000527 13th Floor 0.000996 0.001023
14th Floor 0.000714 0.000734 12th Floor 0.001187 0.001208
13th Floor 0.000936 0.00095 11th Floor 0.001364 0.001378
12th Floor 0.001142 0.001159 10th Floor 0.001523 0.001529
11th Floor 0.001327 0.001351 9th Floor 0.001662 0.001658
10th Floor 0.001491 0.001521 8th Floor 0.001778 0.001766
9th Floor 0.001638 0.001668 7th Floor 0.001871 0.001851
8th Floor 0.001769 0.00179 6th Floor 0.001944 0.001916
7th Floor 0.001878 0.001891 5th Floor 0.001997 0.001963
6th Floor 0.001966 0.001972 4th Floor 0.002032 0.001999
5th Floor 0.002047 0.002038 3rd Floor 0.002065 0.002034
4th Floor 0.002117 0.002109 2nd Floor 0.002082 0.002055
3rd Floor 0.002173 0.002166 1st Floor 0.002078 0.002063
2nd Floor 0.002212 0.002209 Ground Floor 0.002056 0.002057
1st Floor 0.002236 0.002235 Plinth Level 0.001284 0.001318
Ground Floor 0.002212 0.002218 Footing Level 0 0
Plinth Level 0.001433 0.001443
Footing Level 0 0 Table -9: Max. Storey Drift of V-Braced Building.

Table -8: Max. Storey Drift of Diagonally Bracing Building.

Fig -21: Max. Storey Drift of V-Braced Building.

II. X-Bracing:
Fig -20: Max. Storey Drift of Diagonally Braced Building.
X-Braced Building
Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction
15h Floor 0.000612 0.000622
14th Floor 0.000817 0.000809
13th Floor 0.001008 0.000986
12th Floor 0.001186 0.00115
11th Floor 0.001348 0.001297

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 988
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

10th Floor 0.00149 0.001424 1st Floor 0.002314 0.002258

9th Floor 0.001612 0.001531 Ground Floor 0.002317 0.002226
8th Floor 0.001715 0.00162 Plinth Level 0.00146 0.001406
7th Floor 0.001799 0.001691 Footing Level 0 0
6th Floor 0.001865 0.001746 Table -11: Max. Storey Displacement (mm) of Mega
5th Floor 0.001914 0.001787 Diagonally Braced Building.
4th Floor 0.001945 0.001814
3rd Floor 0.001958 0.001828
2nd Floor 0.001954 0.001845
1st Floor 0.001935 0.001843
Ground Floor 0.001898 0.001831
Plinth Level 0.001199 0.001192
Footing Level 0 0
Table -10: Max. Storey Drift of X-Braced Building

Fig -23: Max. Storey Drift of Mega Diagonally Braced

Building.

X. Mega V-Bracing:

Mega V-Braced Building

Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction
15h Floor 0.000257 0.000544
14th Floor 0.00038 0.000702
Fig -22: Max. Storey Drift of X-Braced Building. 13th Floor 0.000537 0.000819
12th Floor 0.000717 0.000988
VI. Mega Diagonal Bracing:
11th Floor 0.000912 0.001207
10th Floor 0.001026 0.001339
Mega Diagonal Bracing
Floor Level 9th Floor 0.001062 0.001381
X-Direction Y-Direction 8th Floor 0.001126 0.001481
15h Floor 0.000358 0.000548 7th Floor 0.00122 0.001645
14th Floor 0.000551 0.000738 6th Floor 0.001338 0.001718
13th Floor 0.000785 0.000904 5th Floor 0.001477 0.001704
12th Floor 0.001037 0.001108 4th Floor 0.001539 0.001756
11th Floor 0.001294 0.001344 3rd Floor 0.001536 0.00188
10th Floor 0.001468 0.001507 2nd Floor 0.00158 0.001928
9th Floor 0.001557 0.001595 1st Floor 0.001639 0.001922
8th Floor 0.001656 0.001719 Ground Floor 0.001723 0.00197
7th Floor 0.001771 0.001881 Plinth Level 0.001193 0.001432
6th Floor 0.001904 0.001984 Footing Level 0 0
5th Floor 0.002072 0.002012
Table -12: Max. Storey Drift of Mega V-Braced Building.
4th Floor 0.002178 0.00208
3rd Floor 0.002214 0.002188
2nd Floor 0.002265 0.002254

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 989
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Fig -24: Max. Storey Drift of Mega V-Braced Building. Fig -25: Max. Storey Drift of Mega X-Braced Building.

XII. Mega X-Bracing: 5.4 Comparison of Max. Storey Drift:

% Reduction in Max. Storey Drift
Mega X-Braced Building Storey Drift % Reduction in
Floor Level
X-Direction Y-Direction Max. Storey
Floor Level Drift
15h Floor 0.000233 0.000464
X-Dir. Y-Dir. X-Dir. Y-Dir.
14th Floor 0.000338 0.000591
13th Floor 0.000476 0.000678 Unbraced
0.0033 0.0037 - -
12th Floor 0.000642 0.000816 Building
11th Floor 0.000828 0.001006 Diagonal
0.0022 0.0022 32.99 38.95
10th Floor 0.000932 0.001114 Bracing
9th Floor 0.000956 0.001137 V-Bracing 0.0021 0.0021 37.61 43.65
8th Floor 0.001002 0.001216 X-Bracing 0.0020 0.0018 41.32 49.60
7th Floor 0.001074 0.001359 Mega Diagonal
0.0023 0.0023 30.57 38.32
6th Floor 0.00118 0.001427 Bracing
5th Floor 0.001323 0.001413 Mega V-
0.0017 0.0020 48.37 46.19
4th Floor 0.001387 0.00146 Bracing
3rd Floor 0.001385 0.001564 Mega X-
0.0015 0.0016 53.88 55.23
2nd Floor 0.001413 0.001595 Bracing
1st Floor 0.001458 0.001589
Table -14: % Reduction in Max. Storey Drift.
Ground Floor 0.001539 0.001639
Plinth Level 0.001102 0.001239
Footing Level 0 0

Table -13: Max. Storey Drift of Mega X-Braced Building.

Fig -26: % Reduction in Max. Storey Drift.

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 990
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

5.5 Natural Time Period: Seismic Base Shear

Base Shear
 The Natural time periods are the important factors, Different Braced (kN)
which affect the seismic behaviour of the structure. Buildings X-Dir. Y-Dir.
 So, study has been made and it shows, the variation Unbraced Building 3225.14 3100.57
in fundamental time period for different braced Diagonal Bracing 3319.63 3292.81
structure as shown in figure.
V-Bracing 3452.48 3466.25
X-Bracing 3546.64 3580.87
Peak Time Period (Sec.)
Mega Diagonal Bracing 3474.58 3331.25
Different Braced Buildings Time Period
(Sec.) Mega V-Bracing 3781.83 3598.46
Unbraced Building 2.94 Mega X-Bracing 3948.42 3750.44
Diagonal Bracing 2.46 Table -16: Seismic Base Shear for different Braced
V-Bracing 2.35 Building.
X-Bracing 2.28
Mega Diagonal Bracing 2.43
Mega V-Bracing 2.25
Mega X-Bracing 2.16

Table -15: Peak Time Period for different Braced Building.

Fig -28: Seismic Base Shear for different Braced Building.

6. CONCLUSIONS

From the results discussed with respect to the building

models considered, leads to the following conclusions;

 After the analysis of the structure with different types

Fig -27: Peak Time Period for different Braced Building. of Bracing, it has been concluded that the Storey
Displacement and Storey Drift and Natural Time Period
5.6 Seismic Base Shear: of the structure decreases after the application of
bracing system.
 Seismic Base Shear reflects the seismic lateral
vulnerability and is considered as one of the primary  The maximum reduction in the storey displacement
input for seismic design. The variation in Base shear occurs after the application of Mega X-Bracing system.
for structure resting different type of soil is as shown
in figure.  The displacement of the structure is reduced by
52.93% in X direction and 49.41% in Y direction with
the use of Mega X-bracing when compared with
Unbraced Building.

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 991
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 07 Issue: 07 | July 2020 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

 The drift of the structure is reduced by 53.88% in X [9] IS 875 (Part 2): Code of Practice for Design Loads for
direction and 55.23% in Y direction with the use of Buildings and Structures, Part 2: Imposed Loads.
Mega X-bracing when compared with Unbraced
Building. [10] IS 1893-1 (2016): Criteria for Earthquake Resistant
Design of Structures, General provisions and Buildings,
 Bracing increases the Seismic Base Shear of the Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
building when compared with Unbraced Building along
X and Y-Direction respectively. [11] IS1161:1998 Steel Tubes for Structural Purposes –
Specification.
 Building with bracing leads to minimum Displacement,
maximum Base Shear and minimum Storey Drift BIOGRAPHIES
compared to building without bracing.
Mr. K N Jeevan Kumar (M. Tech)
REFERENCES Department of Civil Engineering
N.M.A.M Institute of Technology,
[1] Abbas Shamivand and Jalal Akbari [2019]1
Nitte, Udupi, Karnataka.
“Ring‑ Shaped Lateral Bracing System for Steel
Structures”, International Journal of Steel Structures
(2019), ISSN 1598-2351.

[2] Moosa Mazloom, Mohammadreza Gholipour et.al Mr. Sabyath P Shetty

[2019]2 “Evaluating inelastic performance Assistant Professor
of mega‑ scale bracing systems in low‑ Department of Civil Engineering
and medium‑ rise structures”, Asian Journal of Civil N.M.A.M Institute of Technology,
Engineering Vol. 20, Pages 383–393(2019). Nitte, Udupi, Karnataka.

[3] Maryam Boostani, Omid Rezaifar, Majid Gholhaki

[2018]3 “Introduction and seismic performance
investigation of the proposed lateral bracing system
called ‘‘OGrid". archives of civil and mechanical
engineering Vol. 18, Pages 1024-1041(2018).

[4] A Rahimi, Mahmoud R. Maheri [2018]4 “The effects of

retrofitting RC frames by X-bracing on the seismic
performance of columns”. Engineering Structures Vol.
173, Pages 813-830(2018).

[5] Hossein Mohammadi, Vahab Toufigh, Ali Akbar

Golafshani, Ali Arzeytoon [2017]5 “Performance-
based assessment of an innovative braced tube system
for tall buildings”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering
Vol. 16, pp 731–752(2017).

[6] Dia Eddin Nassani, Ali Khalid Hussein, Abbas Haraj

Mohammed [2017]6 “Comparative Response
Assessment of Steel Frames with Different Bracing
Systems Under Seismic Effect”. Structures Vol. 11, Pages
229-242(2017).

[7] IS 456: 2000 Indian Standard Plain and Reinforced

Concrete -Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi, India.

[8] IS 875 (Part 1): Code of Practice for Design Loads for
Buildings and Structures, Part 1: Dead Loads.

© 2020, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 992