Abstract
This paper focuses on the comparison of seismic design provisions in Bangladesh (BNBC-1993), India (IS-1893), and the U.S. (ASCE 7-10) in relation to analysis, design, and seismic performance of reinforced concrete buildings on the basis of the type of allowable analysis procedures, zoning system, site classification, fundamental vibration period of the structure, response reduction factor, importance factor, minimum design lateral force, allowable story drifts, and design response spectra.Three geometrically similar commercial reinforced concrete buildings in high seismic regions of Bangladesh, India, and U.S. were designed and detailed per the respective codes. Three-dimensional nonlinear dynamic analyses of the designed structures were conducted. Each structure was subjected to a pair of orthogonally applied artificial ground motions compatible with the design response spectrum for each building code. The structural performance of each building was compared in terms of roof displacements, inter-story drifts, load-carrying capacity of beams and columns, and overall energy dissipation characteristics. The comparisons allowed an in-depth evaluation of the differences in the seismic performance of buildings designed according to ASCE 7-10, BNBC-1993, and IS-1893 codes. The Indian code performed better when subjected to the ground motion that is intended to represent the Indian design response spectrum.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
