Seismic Performance of G+7 RCC Buildings with Setbacks and Floating Columns Using Non-Linear Pushover Analysis

Seismic Performance of G+7 RCC Buildings with Setbacks and Floating Columns Using Non-Linear Pushover Analysis | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Seismic Performance of G+7 RCC Buildings with Setbacks and Floating Columns Using Non-Linear Pushover Analysis Astha Maratha, Vivek Garg, Anurag Saraogi This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6774786/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Setbacks and floating columns are common architectural features used to optimize space and enhance the aesthetics of buildings. However, their presence introduces irregularities that affect the seismic performance of structures. Floating columns transfer loads through beams instead of directly to the foundation, while setbacks create discontinuities in the vertical load path. This study focuses on analyzing the combined impact of setbacks and floating column placement on a G + 7 building using nonlinear pushover analysis. Four models were analysed using ETABS v22.3.0: Model-1 (M 1 ) is a regular building without setbacks; Model-2 (M 2 ) has a stepped setback; Model-3 (M 3 ) has a setback with floating columns at the 2nd floor; and Model-4 (M 4 ) has a setback with floating columns at the 6th floor. The analytical findings are presented in terms of storey displacement, storey drift, target displacement, performance point, and plastic hinge formation. The study showed that M 4 exhibited higher storey displacement and drift, while M 3 had the highest target displacement and performance point in the pushover curve. These findings highlight the influence of setback configuration and floating column position on the seismic response of RC buildings. Floating Column Pushover Analysis Plastic Hinge Seismic Loading Setback Irregularity Storey Drift Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 1. Introduction Earthquakes are among the most destructive natural disasters, causing significant damage to buildings and posing serious risks to human lives. Past earthquakes have shown that even buildings designed according to modern building codes can suffer heavy damage. This highlights the importance of evaluating a building's ability to withstand earthquakes before they occur, to improve safety and strength. One method for doing this is called Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD), which uses advanced analysis techniques to study how buildings respond to earthquakes. Seismic analysis methods are categorized into static and dynamic approaches to evaluate how structures respond to earthquake forces. The Equivalent Static Method simplifies seismic loading by applying uniform lateral forces, offering a conservative estimate suitable for regular, low-rise buildings. Dynamic methods, such as the Response Spectrum Method, offer greater accuracy which assumes linear elastic behavior. Pushover Analysis provides a practical nonlinear static approach, capturing the progressive failure and identifying weak zones, thus aiding in seismic vulnerability assessment and retrofitting decisions. Buildings with irregular features, such as setbacks and floating columns, are common in modern construction. However, their effects on a building’s performance during an earthquake are not always fully understood. Setbacks change how forces are distributed across the building, and floating columns create weak spots in the structure by interrupting the natural flow of forces. These irregularities can make buildings more vulnerable during strong earthquakes. While setbacks and floating columns have been studied separately, their combined impact on a building's ability to resist earthquakes is still not fully explored. Understanding how these features work together is important for making buildings safer during seismic events. This study aims to explore how setbacks and floating columns affect the seismic performance of G + 7 reinforced concrete (RCC) buildings when they are exposed to lateral forces. The study analyzes different building configurations, including regular buildings, buildings with setbacks, and buildings with floating columns placed at different floors. The Uniform and Single-Mode Pushover Analysis methods are used to evaluate the building’s response to earthquakes. The goal is to understand how the combination of setbacks and floating columns impacts the overall strength and stability of buildings during an earthquake. 2. Literature Review The seismic performance of buildings with irregularities, such as setbacks and floating columns, has been a subject of extensive research, with various studies focusing on different analysis methods and structural configurations. A key aspect of these studies is understanding how these irregularities impact a building’s behavior during an earthquake and evaluating the best approaches to improve structural performance. Chopra & Goel [ 1 ] introduced a pushover analysis procedure that reformulates standard response spectrum analysis (RSA) into a Model Pushover Analysis (MPA). Their study demonstrated that MPA provides a more accurate estimation of floor displacements and story drifts compared to traditional FEMA force distributions. The method was found to be particularly effective for estimating the seismic demand of multi-story buildings subjected to lateral forces, showing its strength in identifying structural weaknesses and predicting inelastic behavior. Sung et al. [ 2 ] focused on the pushover analysis of reinforced concrete (RC) columns and their plastic hinge formation under axial load conditions. They identified three common failure modes and performed a detailed comparison between analytical results and experimental cyclic loading tests. The study proposed a simplified approach for considering the variation of axial force in RC columns, which improved the accuracy of pushover analysis results, particularly for buildings with column irregularities. Ambrisi et al. [ 3 ] studied the seismic response of a school building with both vertical and plan irregularities using a modified pushover analysis. They found that traditional 2D pushover methods were not always accurate for buildings with significant irregularities. However, their modified pushover approach showed strong correlation with dynamic analysis results, particularly in predicting inter-storey drifts and plastic rotations. The study highlighted the method's ability to provide conservative estimates of performance up to failure. Tripathy et al. [ 4 ] introduced an improved method for estimating the target displacement of setback buildings through a modification of the displacement coefficient method. The study found that the mass proportional uniform load pattern yielded the best results in terms of accuracy for setback buildings, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of pushover analysis when assessing buildings with setback irregularities. Neethu et al. [ 5 ] conducted a nonlinear pushover analysis of an asymmetric building to evaluate its seismic capacity and performance point. The study confirmed the usefulness of pushover analysis in understanding the building’s behavior under lateral forces and assessed its ability to predict potential failure modes. Cimellaro et al. [ 6 ] introduced a bidirectional pushover analysis (BPA) method to overcome the limitations of traditional pushover analysis for evaluating buildings subjected to bidirectional ground motions. Their study found that BPA produced results highly correlated with nonlinear response history analysis (NRHA), particularly for irregular buildings under simultaneous seismic forces in two orthogonal directions. Azaz et al. [ 7 ] performed pushover analysis on a G + 10 RC building located in seismic zones II and III. The study revealed that although the building showed acceptable performance in terms of base shear and displacement, some structural elements reached the life safety (LS) and collapse prevention (CP) performance levels, indicating potential weaknesses under strong seismic events. Akshara et al. [ 8 ] carried out a performance-based seismic evaluation of a five-storey RC building using nonlinear static pushover analysis. The study highlighted that while the building meet strength requirements at the design basis earthquake (DBE) level, its overall seismic performance was unsatisfactory. The findings emphasized the need for retrofitting to enhance stability during severe earthquakes. Shinde et al. [ 9 ] focused on the effect of vertical geometric irregularities on the seismic performance of a G + 7 RCC building. Their analysis indicated that irregular frames exhibited increased lateral displacements, storey drifts, and reduced load-carrying capacity compared to regular buildings. The study demonstrated the importance of considering geometric irregularities in structural design to ensure adequate seismic performance. Ahamed et al. [ 10 ]studied the impact of floating columns on multistorey buildings in seismic zones using ETABS. The study revealed that floating columns negatively affected the building’s seismic performance by increasing lateral displacement and storey drift, while reducing overall base shear. The study concluded that careful placement of floating columns is crucial to maintaining the stability of buildings during earthquakes. Ulasala et al. [ 11 ] reviewed various pushover analysis methods, including N2, Extended N2, Bidirectional Pushover, and multimode pushover analysis, highlighting their applicability for different types of irregular structures. The study provided guidance on selecting the appropriate analysis method based on the type of irregularity present in a structure. Yurizka et al. [ 12 ] studied the seismic performance of setback buildings with soft first stories using pushover analysis. Their findings showed that buildings with smaller setback ratios experienced greater displacements and higher storey drifts. The study emphasized the significant influence of setback irregularity on the seismic response of buildings. Ravichandra et al. [ 13 ] investigated the seismic behavior of a G + 5 storey RC building under sudden column removal conditions, using pushover analysis and progressive collapse analysis. The study found that removal of a corner column increased the load on nearby elements, which could lead to structural failure. The findings highlighted the vulnerability of buildings to progressive collapse when subjected to such extreme conditions. Eldar et al. [ 14 ] explored the seismic behavior of irregular buildings with floating columns. The study found that floating columns increased lateral displacements and storey drifts, reducing seismic resistance. Their results emphasized the importance of carefully considering the placement of floating columns to enhance building stability during seismic events. Chudasama et al. [ 15 ] conducted a pushover analysis on setback and step-frame buildings with and without shear walls. Their results demonstrated that buildings with shear walls had better seismic resistance, exhibiting higher base shear and lower displacements compared to those without shear walls. The study underscored the importance of strategic shear wall placement in improving seismic performance. 3. Problem Under Investigation This study focuses on a G + 7 reinforced concrete (RC) building designed for commercial use. To understand its structural behaviour, the building is analyzed using ETABS V22.3.0 software to evaluate the performance under lateral loads. The building has a setback configuration, meaning that some upper floors are recessed compared to the lower ones, creating an irregular shape. The structural layout consists of eight bays in both the X-direction and Y-direction, with an overall plan dimension of 24 m × 24 m and a total height of 25 m. To study the impact of setbacks and floating columns, four different models, as shown in Fig. 1 , Fig. 2 , Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 are developed and analyzed using Pushover Analysis (POA). These analyses help in understanding how the irregularities affect the building’s response to seismic forces. Model-1 (M 1 ): Regular building frame without setbacks. Model-2 (M 2 ): Building with a stepped setback configuration. Model-3 (M 3 ): Building with a setback and floating columns at the lower storey (2nd storey). Model-4 (M 4 ): Building with a setback and floating columns at the upper storey (6th storey). 3.1. Geometry of Structure The structural geometry was determined based on typical configurations of urban building. The bay spacing, storey heights, and overall dimensions were kept uniform across all models represented in Table 1 , to ensure a fair and consistent comparison when evaluating lateral performance. Loading conditions were applied as per IS 875, while seismic parameters such as zone factor, importance factor, response reduction factor, were kept identical for all models, as detailed in Table 2 . Table 1 Specification of Geometrical Parameters for Structural Modelling. S. No. Description Data/value 1 Plan dimension of building 24 m x 24 m 2 Number of bays in X and Y direction 8 3 Height of ground floor 4 m 4 Floor height ( other than ground floor) 3 m 5 Wall thickness 230 mm 6 column 380 mm x 380 mm 7 Beam 300 mm x 400 mm 8 Grade of concrete M30 9 Grade of reinforcement Fe500 10 Slab thickness 150 mm Table 2 Loading and Seismic Properties for Structural Modelling. S. No. Description Data/value 1 Live Load 3 kN/m² 2 Floor finish Load 1.5 kN/m² 3 Wall Load 13.8 kN/m 4 Seismic Zone V 5 Zone Factor (Z) 0.36 6 Response Reduction Factor (R) 5.0 7 Importance Factor (I) 1.20 8 Type of Soil II (Medium) 3.2. Model of Structures 4. Validation of Software for Research Work For validation, a reference model was taken from the study by Eldar et al. (2022) [ 14 ], which includes a regular RC frame with the same dimensions and loading conditions. The plan and elevation of the model are shown in Fig. 5. Response Spectrum Analysis was done using ETABS, and the results for maximum storey displacement and storey drift were compared with the values from the reference study. The comparison of study focused on the maximum storey displacements and storey drift obtained from models. The results showed a very close match, with a percentage error of less than 3% shown in Table 3 . This minor deviation can be attributed to slight differences in load assumptions and modelling constraints. It was observed that the displacement pattern and values were nearly the same. This similarity confirms that the modelling and analysis procedure used in this study is appropriate and can be reliably applied to the irregular models. Table 3 Comparison of Results for Validation. parameter Present Study Eldar et al (2022) Percentage Variation Storey displacement(mm) 40.68 40.86 0.44% Storey drift 5.56 x 10 − 4 5.43 x 10 − 4 2.33% 5. Results and Discussion 5.1 Nonlinear Pushover Analysis In this study, all four models were analyzed using two types of patterns, uniform lateral load (ULL) and Single Mode lateral load (SMLL), as per FEMA 356. The analysis provided key insights into the structure’s behavior, including story displacement, story drift, target displacement, performance point, and plastic hinge formation. To make the results clearer and easier to interpret, they are presented in the form of tables and graphs. 5.2 Analysis of storey displacement Table 4 Comparison of Maximum Storey Displacement (mm) between various Models under ULL at Different Storey Levels. Storey no Storey Height (m) Storey Displacement (mm) % Reduction with reference to Model-1 M 1 M 2 M 3 M 4 M 2 M 3 M 4 8 3 28.09 30.25 39.19 50.46 7.68 39.51 79.63 7 3 27.28 29.38 38.10 49.04 7.70 39.66 79.79 6 3 25.82 27.83 36.15 46.53 7.77 39.97 80.17 5 3 23.71 25.68 33.45 42.61 8.31 41.08 79.70 4 3 20.94 22.78 29.80 37.85 8.78 42.33 80.79 3 3 17.51 19.14 25.23 31.91 9.26 44.04 82.21 2 3 13.44 14.71 19.65 24.69 9.44 46.16 83.68 1 4 8.61 9.38 12.33 16.03 8.92 43.26 86.29 Table 5 Comparison of Maximum Storey Displacement (mm) between various Models under SMLL at Different Storey Levels . Storey no Storey Height (m) Storey Displacement (mm) % Reduction with reference to Model-1 M 1 M 2 M 3 M 4 M 2 M 3 M 4 8 3 30.78 35.23 47.66 57.27 14.46 54.84 86.09 7 3 29.71 33.96 46.02 55.28 14.32 54.92 86.07 6 3 27.81 31.72 43.09 51.72 14.04 54.94 85.98 5 3 25.12 28.69 39.13 46.36 14.22 55.78 84.56 4 3 21.71 24.78 33.99 40.11 14.13 56.56 84.77 3 3 17.69 20.20 27.96 32.82 14.20 58.08 85.58 2 3 13.18 15.06 21.17 24.65 14.27 60.58 87.04 1 4 8.20 9.31 12.90 15.55 13.53 57.27 89.65 Table 4 and Table 5, along with Figure 6 and Figure 7 presented above, illustrate the story displacements under ULL and SMLL. The maximum top-storey displacement for the regular building without irregularities is 28.09 mm under ULL. However, when structural irregularities such as floating columns and setbacks are considered, the displacement values increase to 30.25 mm, 39.19 mm, and 50.46 mm for M 2 , M 3 , and M 4 respectively. Under the application of SMLL, M 1 shows a maximum storey displacement of 30.78 mm. However, in M 4 , this value increases substantially to 57.27 mm. This marks an increase of approximately 86.1% compared to the regular building. The increased displacement observed in M 4 can be attributed to the presence of structural irregularities at the upper storeys, which adversely influence the building's lateral load-resisting capacity. Additionally, a comparison between the ULL and SMLL patterns indicates that SMLL results in higher displacement across all models. For instance, in M 4 , the displacement increases from 50.46 mm ULL to 57.27 mm, showing a 13.47% increase. Hence, SMLL give a moe realistic representation of structural performance under seismic loading. 5.3 Analysis of storey drift Table 6 Comparison of Maximum Storey Drift at Different Storey Levels under ULL Storey no Storey Height (m) Storey Drift (multiple of 10 -4 ) % Reduction with reference to M 1 M 1 M 2 M 3 M 4 M 2 M 3 M 4 8 3 2.71 2.90 3.64 4.72 6.55 34.32 74.17 7 3 4.84 5.16 6.49 8.37 6.20 34.09 72.93 6 3 7.05 7.17 8.99 13.07 1.67 27.52 85.39 5 3 9.24 9.68 12.16 15.84 4.55 31.60 71.43 4 3 11.41 12.13 15.24 19.80 5.94 33.57 73.53 3 3 13.57 14.74 18.59 24.06 7.94 36.99 77.30 2 3 16.12 17.79 24.40 28.87 9.39 51.36 79.09 1 4 21.52 23.44 30.83 40.09 8.19 43.26 86.29 Table 7 Comparison of Maximum Storey Drift at Different Storey Levels under SMLL Storey no Storey Height (m) Storey Drift (multiple of 10 -4 ) % Reduction with reference to M 1 M 1 M 2 M 3 M 4 M 2 M 3 M 4 8 3 3.60 4.20 5.50 6.70 17.37 52.66 86.55 7 3 6.30 7.50 9.80 11.80 18.04 54.59 87.34 6 3 9.00 10.10 13.20 17.90 12.14 47.10 99.22 5 3 11.40 13.00 17.10 20.80 14.69 50.75 83.20 4 3 13.40 15.30 20.10 24.30 13.81 49.93 81.19 3 3 15.00 17.10 22.70 27.20 13.98 50.80 81.36 2 3 16.60 19.20 27.60 30.30 15.48 65.96 82.71 1 4 20.50 23.30 32.30 38.90 13.76 57.32 89.66 The storey drift ratio represents the displacement between two successive storeys. Increases storey displacement causes increase in storey drift. Table 6 and Table 7 shows that all models exhibit their maximum storey drift at the first storey, indicating significant lateral deformation concentration at the base level. Figure 8 and Figure 9 shows that among the four models, M 3 exhibited a drift ratio of 0.00308 under ULL, representing an increase of 43.25% compred to M 1 . M 4 recorded the highest maximum drift ratio of 0.00401 under ULL. Overall, the storey drift ratio increased by 86.51% due to the irregularities considered. Under SMLL, M 4 demonstrated the highest drift values, significantly exceeding those of the other models, indicating that irregularities have a greater impact on structural response when dynamic loading is considered. 5.4 Results of Pushover Curve The performance point is the point where the capacity curve crosses the demand curve of the structure and the displacement corresponding to the performance point is known as target displacement. The target displacement is an estimation of the top storey displacement of the building when exposed to the design earthquake excitation. Table 8 Results of the Push Over Curve at Target Displacement. Uniform lateral load Single mode lateral load Type of model Displacement (mm) Base shear (kN) Effective time period (sec) Displacement (mm) Base shear (kN) Effective time period (sec) M 1 62 6237 0.814 68 6069 0.867 M 2 100 6241 0.674 106 4647 0.787 M 3 151 6646 0.709 162 5515 0.830 M 4 149 6764 0.703 152 5493 0.818 Table 9 Results of the Push Over Curve at Performance Point. Uniform lateral load Single First mode lateral load Type of model Displacement (mm) Base shear (kN) Effective time period (sec) Displacement (mm) Base shear (kN) Effective time period (sec) M 1 45 5172 0.814 52 5347 0.867 M 2 53 6043 0.674 69 3854 0.787 M 3 103 7052 0.709 105 5052 0.830 M 4 95 6981 0.703 99 4993 0.818 Figure 10, Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13 presents the pushover curves for all four models under ULL and SMLL. M 1 demonstrated the highest base shear capacity of 6237 kN, indicating strong resistance to lateral forces and the greatest initial stiffness, as reflected by steeper curves and lower displacement values. In contrast, the vertical irregularities in M 2 (Stepped Setback) resulted in increased displacement and a slight reduction in stiffness. M 3 and M 4 , featuring floating columns at different storeys, exhibited reduced stiffness and higher target displacements. Among these, M 3 displayed the highest target displacement of 162 mm and a longer effective time period of 0.830 sec, suggesting that the presence of a floating column at a lower level creates a flexible soft storey, thereby reducing the lateral strength of the structure. Table 8 and Table 9 present a comparative analysis of structural responses under ULL and SMLL patterns. The findings indicate that all models exhibit increased storey displacements under SMLL, while corresponding base shear values are consistently lower compared to ULL. This behavior is attributed to the modal distribution of lateral forces in SMLL, which more accurately reflects the dynamic characteristics of the structures, particularly in irregular configurations. Additionally, an increase in the effective time period is observed under SMLL, suggesting a more flexible dynamic response of the structural system. The performance points obtained from pushover analysis under both ULL and SMLL clearly indicate that all models entered the nonlinear range of behavior, rendering elastic methods insufficient for seismic evaluation. 5.5 Diagrammatic Presentation of Hinge Formation at Performance Point From the hinge formation study Figure 14, it was observed that more hinges develop at the bottom storey. Failure initiates with hinge formation at the beam-to-column connections on the bottom storey, then propagates upward to the upper storeys. Among the models, M 1 exhibited the best overall performance, as most hinges remained within the Immediate Occupancy (IO) and Life Safety (LS) stages, indicating well-distributed energy dissipation and good ductility throughout the structure. In contrast, M 2 which included a stepped setback, showed a slight reduction in performance due to stress concentrations near the setback areas. Performance deteriorated further in M 3 and M 4 , where the presence of floating columns resulted in earlier hinge development reaching the Collapse Prevention (CP) stage, particularly near and below the floating column levels. The combined effect of the setback configuration and floating columns disrupts the uniform load transfer mechanism. These findings indicate that the structure has sustained damage and should be retrofitted before re-occupancy. 6. Conclusion This study investigated the seismic behavior of four different structural models with various irregularities using pushover analysis under two lateral load types: Uniform Lateral Load (ULL) and Single Mode Lateral Load (SMLL). The main findings are: I. The combination of setbacks and floating columns leads to higher storey displacement and drift. The location of the floating column greatly affects the building’s response. When placed at higher levels, floating columns cause more flexibility and larger displacements, while lower-level placement helps distribute seismic forces more evenly. II. The seismic response of each model was studied based on parameters like base shear capacity, target displacement, performance point, and hinge formation. Model 1 (M1) had the highest base shear capacity and very few hinges, showing that it can resist earthquakes well. However, it was less flexible during strong ground shaking. Model 2 (M2) showed balanced behavior, with moderate displacement and base shear. Model 3 (M3) had high target displacement and low base shear capacity, which means it was not very effective in handling earthquake forces. Model 4 (M4) performed slightly better than M3, but it still did not perform as well as M1 and M2. This shows that vertical irregularities can reduce a building’s earthquake performance. III. This study highlights the critical influence of setback configurations and floating column placement on the seismic performance of buildings. M4 exhibited increased displacement and drift due to greater flexibility and a disrupted load path at the upper storeys, caused by the higher placement of the floating column in combination with the setback configuration. On the other hand, Model 3, with the floating column positioned lower, showed a higher target displacement and performance point, suggesting a more even spread of seismic forces. This highlights the need for careful design in buildings with vertical irregularities to control movement and improve seismic safety. IV. The models under SMLL showed larger displacements compared to those under ULL. This happens because SMLL considers the dynamic properties of the building, such as natural vibration modes, which focus forces on specific areas. ULL applies uniform forces to all storeys, leading to smaller displacements. 7. Novelty of Work The present study introduces a novel approach to seismic analysis by investigating the combined effect of setback configuration and floating columns, a structural irregularity pairing that is commonly observed in practice but seldom addressed together in research. While most previous studies focus on either setback or floating columns independently, this work uniquely evaluates their interactive impact on seismic performance. Multiple building models with varying locations of floating columns in setback frames are analyzed using Uniform Lateral Load (ULL) and Single-Mode Pushover Analysis (SMPA) to assess critical parameters such as storey displacement, storey drift, pushover curve behavior, and hinge formation. The research highlights how the vertical placement of floating columns within a setback structure significantly influences displacement demand, effective time period, and the progression of plastic hinges under lateral loading. This combined evaluation provides valuable insights into the nonlinear behavior of such irregular structures and contributes to improved design strategies for earthquake-resistant buildings. Declarations Author contributions – The corresponding author led the research design, structural modeling, analysis, and interpretation. Co-authors contributed to data validation, literature review, and refinement of the methodology. All authors participated in reviewing and finalizing the manuscript. Funding The author declares that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript. Data availability Data may be available from the corresponding author through making reasonable requests. Competing interests Authors declare that the manuscript is free from any Conflicts of interest and Competing interests. References A. K. Chopra and R. K. Goel, “A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics , vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 561–582, 2002. Y. C. Sung, K. Y. Liu, C. K. Su, I. C. Tsai, and K. C. Chang, “A study on pushover analyses of reinforced concrete columns,” Structural Engineering and Mechanics , vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 35–52, Sep. 2005, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2005.21.1.035. A. D’Ambrisi, M. De Stefano, and M. Tanganelli, “Use of pushover analysis for predicting seismic response of irregular buildings: A case study,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering , vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1089–1100, Dec. 2009 https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460902898308. R. Tripathy and P. P. Sarkar, “Pushover analysis of R/C setback building frames,” International Academy of Technology , vol. 01, pp. 79–101, 2012. K. N. Neethu and S. P. Saji, “Pushover analysis of RC building,” International Journal of Science and Research , 2013. G. P. Cimellaro, T. Giovine, and D. Lopez-Garcia, “Bidirectional pushover analysis of irregular structures,” Journal of Structural Engineering , vol. 140, no. 9, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001032. M. Azaz, “Pushover analysis on G+10 reinforced concrete structure for Zone II and Zone III as per IS 1893 (2002),” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) , 2015. S. P. Akshara, “Performance based seismic evaluation of multi-storeyed reinforced concrete buildings using pushover analysis,” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) , 2015. D. N. Shinde and P. Sadhana, “Pushover analysis to study seismic performances of vertical irregular structure,” 2016. M. Khadeer Ahamed and U. K. N., “Seismic analysis of multistorey building with different positioning of floating columns,” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) , 2020. U. Mahesh, P. Pandit, and P. G. Scholar, “A review on pushover analysis for irregular structures,” 2020. N. Jakarta, J. Prof, G. A. Siwabessy, H. Yurizka, and A. Rosyidah, “The performance of irregular building structures using pushover analysis,” 2020. G. Ravichandra and T. N. Chandan, “Progressive collapse of irregular RC building,” Materials Today: Proceedings , vol. 56, pp. 6768–6775, Jan. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.04.904. B. Eldar and G. Singh, “Analysis of irregular building with and without floating column under seismic load,” Materials Today: Proceedings , vol. 70, pp. 2849–2854, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.11.214. J. Chudasama and A. Suthar, "Pushover analysis of setback frame and step frame building with and without shear wall by using ETABS," International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) , 2023. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings , Washington, D.C., 2000. Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures General Provisions and Buildings , New Delhi, India. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6774786","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":465921019,"identity":"f242f90e-eaf2-486d-a9db-a3141aee5072","order_by":0,"name":"Astha Maratha","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0471-7541","institution":"Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Astha","middleName":"","lastName":"Maratha","suffix":""},{"id":465921020,"identity":"25b8c5f2-5503-4692-ad31-0b2f0e63bb4d","order_by":1,"name":"Vivek Garg","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vivek","middleName":"","lastName":"Garg","suffix":""},{"id":465921021,"identity":"883d93f3-155d-47bd-b539-c87f677202bf","order_by":2,"name":"Anurag Saraogi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Anurag","middleName":"","lastName":"Saraogi","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-05-29 09:07:37","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6774786/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6774786/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":84038624,"identity":"f5c63eff-e77a-418e-9609-f04b520d0317","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":257324,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e3D and Elevation View of M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/44dd8eb517ac9c6abc7893d1.png"},{"id":84038275,"identity":"b9ff971c-7980-450e-af3a-f66657ffe6e9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":276252,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e3D and Elevation View of M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/02aced006e3f1231fae114db.png"},{"id":84038742,"identity":"d89ed073-8e80-4bd3-acfd-9028f722ace6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 05:07:53","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":85216,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePlan and Elevation View of M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/fb249a988e4b68e6f0f08faa.png"},{"id":84038632,"identity":"b6601945-587f-4059-96df-c84ff6609731","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":77722,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePlan and Elevation View of M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/7939f4c1b25d5357c156219d.png"},{"id":84038743,"identity":"3a37b609-3efe-4028-8afe-034ff72aed11","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 05:07:53","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":225154,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eRegular Building in Eldar et al (2022)[14].\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/c3893977bc54e2f05b7573a4.png"},{"id":84038281,"identity":"8852b41e-66bc-41f9-bb01-32da69cd5caa","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":78301,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDisplacement Comparison of Models under Uniform Lateral Load\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/9480f85c6cd35012c9a60ce5.png"},{"id":84038628,"identity":"d5d6960e-bec7-46b8-9ba4-2302a6af94c6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":89790,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDisplacement Comparison of Models under Modal Lateral Load\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/287f1bcb36f1f2da8aea8892.png"},{"id":84038283,"identity":"f982f2ad-45d4-4592-b5a7-dae6001c09c3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":66607,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDrift Comparison of Models under ULL\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/3ec16a0e8e968420afad2dd4.png"},{"id":84038295,"identity":"b88c5fc1-e423-47cd-b4cf-517b3ac43e33","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":52149,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDrift Comparison of Models under SMLL\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/920aa878f7f29a9817a25cea.png"},{"id":84038629,"identity":"cf4b12b4-7daf-4fe4-be61-3918d6e24a8b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":74195,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePushover Curve Comparison of M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/60d519cf565c39d16b075a8e.png"},{"id":84038294,"identity":"e88d48f6-5590-47c0-acee-be8a0eb66f3f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"Figure 11","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":41052,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePushover Curve Comparison of M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/eb43a6690adaf10087c778a8.png"},{"id":84038296,"identity":"30e59016-7502-4dac-aee3-a76d271c7d80","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":12,"title":"Figure 12","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":48554,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePushover Curve Comparison of M\u003csub\u003e3.\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"12.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/61f6944b79ee35cea21c8418.png"},{"id":84038300,"identity":"616e8e1f-6033-4673-adf8-14d237915663","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":13,"title":"Figure 13","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":60055,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePushover Curve Comparison of M\u003csub\u003e4.\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"13.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/0099027f72953c4cdea57a24.png"},{"id":84038307,"identity":"d31eb947-9f47-4249-9d94-56f0d89568c9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-06 04:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":14,"title":"Figure 14","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":426785,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFormation of Plastic Hinges in Various Models.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"14.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/7e7e654ed2dc72808fa5947b.png"},{"id":85246645,"identity":"4a79b77a-a1e0-4ad1-9e5a-4016840400df","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-23 21:52:23","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2607242,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6774786/v1/65452987-caec-41c2-899d-8f8c9247589a.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Seismic Performance of G+7 RCC Buildings with Setbacks and Floating Columns Using Non-Linear Pushover Analysis","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEarthquakes are among the most destructive natural disasters, causing significant damage to buildings and posing serious risks to human lives. Past earthquakes have shown that even buildings designed according to modern building codes can suffer heavy damage. This highlights the importance of evaluating a building's ability to withstand earthquakes before they occur, to improve safety and strength. One method for doing this is called Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD), which uses advanced analysis techniques to study how buildings respond to earthquakes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeismic analysis methods are categorized into static and dynamic approaches to evaluate how structures respond to earthquake forces. The Equivalent Static Method simplifies seismic loading by applying uniform lateral forces, offering a conservative estimate suitable for regular, low-rise buildings. Dynamic methods, such as the Response Spectrum Method, offer greater accuracy which assumes linear elastic behavior. Pushover Analysis provides a practical nonlinear static approach, capturing the progressive failure and identifying weak zones, thus aiding in seismic vulnerability assessment and retrofitting decisions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuildings with irregular features, such as setbacks and floating columns, are common in modern construction. However, their effects on a building\u0026rsquo;s performance during an earthquake are not always fully understood. Setbacks change how forces are distributed across the building, and floating columns create weak spots in the structure by interrupting the natural flow of forces. These irregularities can make buildings more vulnerable during strong earthquakes. While setbacks and floating columns have been studied separately, their combined impact on a building's ability to resist earthquakes is still not fully explored. Understanding how these features work together is important for making buildings safer during seismic events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aims to explore how setbacks and floating columns affect the seismic performance of G\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;7 reinforced concrete (RCC) buildings when they are exposed to lateral forces. The study analyzes different building configurations, including regular buildings, buildings with setbacks, and buildings with floating columns placed at different floors. The Uniform and Single-Mode Pushover Analysis methods are used to evaluate the building\u0026rsquo;s response to earthquakes. The goal is to understand how the combination of setbacks and floating columns impacts the overall strength and stability of buildings during an earthquake.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe seismic performance of buildings with irregularities, such as setbacks and floating columns, has been a subject of extensive research, with various studies focusing on different analysis methods and structural configurations. A key aspect of these studies is understanding how these irregularities impact a building\u0026rsquo;s behavior during an earthquake and evaluating the best approaches to improve structural performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChopra \u0026amp; Goel [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e] introduced a pushover analysis procedure that reformulates standard response spectrum analysis (RSA) into a Model Pushover Analysis (MPA). Their study demonstrated that MPA provides a more accurate estimation of floor displacements and story drifts compared to traditional FEMA force distributions. The method was found to be particularly effective for estimating the seismic demand of multi-story buildings subjected to lateral forces, showing its strength in identifying structural weaknesses and predicting inelastic behavior.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSung et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e] focused on the pushover analysis of reinforced concrete (RC) columns and their plastic hinge formation under axial load conditions. They identified three common failure modes and performed a detailed comparison between analytical results and experimental cyclic loading tests. The study proposed a simplified approach for considering the variation of axial force in RC columns, which improved the accuracy of pushover analysis results, particularly for buildings with column irregularities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmbrisi et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e] studied the seismic response of a school building with both vertical and plan irregularities using a modified pushover analysis. They found that traditional 2D pushover methods were not always accurate for buildings with significant irregularities. However, their modified pushover approach showed strong correlation with dynamic analysis results, particularly in predicting inter-storey drifts and plastic rotations. The study highlighted the method's ability to provide conservative estimates of performance up to failure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTripathy et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e] introduced an improved method for estimating the target displacement of setback buildings through a modification of the displacement coefficient method. The study found that the mass proportional uniform load pattern yielded the best results in terms of accuracy for setback buildings, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of pushover analysis when assessing buildings with setback irregularities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeethu et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e] conducted a nonlinear pushover analysis of an asymmetric building to evaluate its seismic capacity and performance point. The study confirmed the usefulness of pushover analysis in understanding the building\u0026rsquo;s behavior under lateral forces and assessed its ability to predict potential failure modes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCimellaro et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e] introduced a bidirectional pushover analysis (BPA) method to overcome the limitations of traditional pushover analysis for evaluating buildings subjected to bidirectional ground motions. Their study found that BPA produced results highly correlated with nonlinear response history analysis (NRHA), particularly for irregular buildings under simultaneous seismic forces in two orthogonal directions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAzaz et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e] performed pushover analysis on a G\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 RC building located in seismic zones II and III. The study revealed that although the building showed acceptable performance in terms of base shear and displacement, some structural elements reached the life safety (LS) and collapse prevention (CP) performance levels, indicating potential weaknesses under strong seismic events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAkshara et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e] carried out a performance-based seismic evaluation of a five-storey RC building using nonlinear static pushover analysis. The study highlighted that while the building meet strength requirements at the design basis earthquake (DBE) level, its overall seismic performance was unsatisfactory. The findings emphasized the need for retrofitting to enhance stability during severe earthquakes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eShinde et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e] focused on the effect of vertical geometric irregularities on the seismic performance of a G\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;7 RCC building. Their analysis indicated that irregular frames exhibited increased lateral displacements, storey drifts, and reduced load-carrying capacity compared to regular buildings. The study demonstrated the importance of considering geometric irregularities in structural design to ensure adequate seismic performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAhamed et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]studied the impact of floating columns on multistorey buildings in seismic zones using ETABS. The study revealed that floating columns negatively affected the building\u0026rsquo;s seismic performance by increasing lateral displacement and storey drift, while reducing overall base shear. The study concluded that careful placement of floating columns is crucial to maintaining the stability of buildings during earthquakes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUlasala et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e] reviewed various pushover analysis methods, including N2, Extended N2, Bidirectional Pushover, and multimode pushover analysis, highlighting their applicability for different types of irregular structures. The study provided guidance on selecting the appropriate analysis method based on the type of irregularity present in a structure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eYurizka et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e] studied the seismic performance of setback buildings with soft first stories using pushover analysis. Their findings showed that buildings with smaller setback ratios experienced greater displacements and higher storey drifts. The study emphasized the significant influence of setback irregularity on the seismic response of buildings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRavichandra et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e] investigated the seismic behavior of a G\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;5 storey RC building under sudden column removal conditions, using pushover analysis and progressive collapse analysis. The study found that removal of a corner column increased the load on nearby elements, which could lead to structural failure. The findings highlighted the vulnerability of buildings to progressive collapse when subjected to such extreme conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEldar et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e] explored the seismic behavior of irregular buildings with floating columns. The study found that floating columns increased lateral displacements and storey drifts, reducing seismic resistance. Their results emphasized the importance of carefully considering the placement of floating columns to enhance building stability during seismic events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChudasama et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e] conducted a pushover analysis on setback and step-frame buildings with and without shear walls. Their results demonstrated that buildings with shear walls had better seismic resistance, exhibiting higher base shear and lower displacements compared to those without shear walls. The study underscored the importance of strategic shear wall placement in improving seismic performance.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Problem Under Investigation","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study focuses on a G\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;7 reinforced concrete (RC) building designed for commercial use. To understand its structural behaviour, the building is analyzed using ETABS V22.3.0 software to evaluate the performance under lateral loads. The building has a setback configuration, meaning that some upper floors are recessed compared to the lower ones, creating an irregular shape. The structural layout consists of eight bays in both the X-direction and Y-direction, with an overall plan dimension of 24 m \u0026times; 24 m and a total height of 25 m. To study the impact of setbacks and floating columns, four different models, as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e and Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e are developed and analyzed using Pushover Analysis (POA). These analyses help in understanding how the irregularities affect the building\u0026rsquo;s response to seismic forces.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel-1 (M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e): Regular building frame without setbacks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel-2 (M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e): Building with a stepped setback configuration.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel-3 (M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e): Building with a setback and floating columns at the lower storey (2nd storey).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel-4 (M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e): Building with a setback and floating columns at the upper storey (6th storey).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Geometry of Structure\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe structural geometry was determined based on typical configurations of urban building. The bay spacing, storey heights, and overall dimensions were kept uniform across all models represented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, to ensure a fair and consistent comparison when evaluating lateral performance. Loading conditions were applied as per IS 875, while seismic parameters such as zone factor, importance factor, response reduction factor, were kept identical for all models, as detailed in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpecification of Geometrical Parameters for Structural Modelling.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eS. No.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData/value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePlan dimension of building\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24 m x 24 m\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of bays in X and Y direction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeight of ground floor\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 m\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFloor height ( other than ground floor)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 m\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWall thickness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e230 mm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ecolumn\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e380 mm x 380 mm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeam\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e300 mm x 400 mm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrade of concrete\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrade of reinforcement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFe500\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSlab thickness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e150 mm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLoading and Seismic Properties for Structural Modelling.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eS. No.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData/value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLive Load\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 kN/m\u0026sup2;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFloor finish Load\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.5 kN/m\u0026sup2;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWall Load\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.8 kN/m\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeismic Zone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eV\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eZone Factor (Z)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResponse Reduction Factor (R)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImportance Factor (I)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of Soil\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eII (Medium)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Model of Structures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Validation of Software for Research Work","content":"\u003cp\u003eFor validation, a reference model was taken from the study by Eldar et al. (2022) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e], which includes a regular RC frame with the same dimensions and loading conditions. The plan and elevation of the model are shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;5. Response Spectrum Analysis was done using ETABS, and the results for maximum storey displacement and storey drift were compared with the values from the reference study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe comparison of study focused on the maximum storey displacements and storey drift obtained from models. The results showed a very close match, with a percentage error of less than 3% shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. This minor deviation can be attributed to slight differences in load assumptions and modelling constraints. It was observed that the displacement pattern and values were nearly the same. This similarity confirms that the modelling and analysis procedure used in this study is appropriate and can be reliably applied to the irregular models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComparison of Results for Validation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eparameter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePresent Study\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEldar et al (2022)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePercentage Variation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStorey displacement(mm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.44%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStorey drift\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.56 x 10\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.43 x 10\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.33%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Results and Discussion","content":"\u003ch2\u003e5.1 Nonlinear Pushover Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, all four models were analyzed using two types of patterns, uniform lateral load (ULL) and Single\u0026nbsp;Mode lateral load (SMLL), as per FEMA 356. The analysis provided key insights into the structure\u0026rsquo;s behavior, including story displacement, story drift, target displacement, performance point, and plastic hinge formation. To make the results clearer and easier to interpret, they are presented in the form of tables and graphs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.2 Analysis of storey displacement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 Comparison of Maximum Storey Displacement (mm) between various Models under ULL at Different Storey Levels.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"595\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey no\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Height (m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" style=\"width: 261px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Displacement (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 214px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% Reduction with reference to\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel-1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;79.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;79.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;80.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;79.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;80.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;82.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;83.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;86.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5 Comparison of Maximum Storey Displacement (mm) between various Models under SMLL at Different Storey Levels\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"586\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey no\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Height (m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 259px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Displacement (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 207px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% Reduction with reference to\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel-1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;86.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;86.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;85.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;84.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;84.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;85.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;87.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 48px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;89.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 and Table 5, along with Figure 6 and Figure 7\u0026nbsp;presented above, illustrate the story displacements under ULL and SMLL. The maximum top-storey displacement for the regular building without irregularities is 28.09 mm under ULL. However, when structural irregularities such as floating columns and setbacks are considered, the displacement values increase to 30.25 mm, 39.19 mm, and 50.46 mm for M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e, and M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUnder the application of SMLL, \u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003eshows a maximum storey displacement of 30.78 mm. However, in M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e, this value increases substantially to 57.27 mm. This marks an increase of approximately 86.1% compared to the regular building. The increased displacement observed in M\u003csub\u003e4\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003ecan be attributed to the presence of structural irregularities at the upper storeys, which adversely influence the building\u0026apos;s lateral load-resisting capacity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, a comparison between the ULL and SMLL patterns indicates that SMLL results in higher displacement across all models. For instance, in\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e, the displacement increases from 50.46 mm ULL to 57.27 mm, showing a 13.47% increase. Hence, SMLL give a moe realistic representation of structural performance under seismic loading.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.3 Analysis of storey drift\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6 \u0026nbsp;Comparison of Maximum Storey Drift at Different Storey Levels under ULL\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"630\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey no\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Height (m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 263px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Drift (multiple of 10\u003csup\u003e-4\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 231px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% Reduction with reference to\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; 74.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e77.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 7 Comparison of Maximum Storey Drift at Different Storey Levels under SMLL\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"625\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey no\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Height (m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 254px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorey Drift (multiple of 10\u003csup\u003e-4\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 227px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; % Reduction with reference to M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e99.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e81.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e81.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 91px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e89.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe storey drift ratio represents the displacement between two successive storeys. Increases storey displacement causes increase in storey drift.\u0026nbsp;Table 6\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;Table 7\u0026nbsp;shows that all models exhibit their maximum storey drift at the first storey, indicating significant lateral deformation concentration at the base level.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 8 and Figure 9 shows that among the four models, M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e exhibited a drift ratio of 0.00308 under ULL, representing an increase of 43.25% compred to M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e.\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e recorded the highest maximum drift ratio of 0.00401 under ULL. Overall, the storey drift ratio increased by 86.51% due to the irregularities considered. Under SMLL, M\u003csub\u003e4\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003edemonstrated the highest drift values, significantly exceeding those of the other models, indicating that irregularities have a greater impact on structural response when dynamic loading is considered.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e5.4 Results of Pushover Curve\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe performance point is the point where the capacity curve crosses the demand curve of the structure and the displacement corresponding to the performance point is known as target displacement. The target displacement is an estimation of the top storey displacement of the building when exposed to the design earthquake excitation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 8 Results of the Push Over Curve at Target Displacement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"633\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 281px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniform lateral load\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 286px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSingle mode lateral load\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType of model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDisplacement (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBase shear (kN)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffective time period (sec)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDisplacement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; (mm) \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBase\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshear (kN)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffective time period (sec)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6237\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.814\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6069\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.867\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6241\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.674\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e106\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4647\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.787\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e151\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6646\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.709\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e162\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5515\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.830\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e149\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6764\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 98px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.703\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e152\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5493\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.818\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 9 Results of the Push Over Curve at Performance Point.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"623\" class=\"fr-table-selection-hover\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 266px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniform lateral load\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSingle First mode lateral load\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType of model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDisplacement (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBase shear (kN)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffective time period (sec)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 109px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDisplacement (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBase\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshear (kN)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffective time period (sec)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5172\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.814\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 109px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5347\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.867\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6043\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.674\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 109px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3854\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.787\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e103\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; 7052\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.709\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 109px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5052\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.830\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; 6981\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.703\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 109px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 78px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4993\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.818\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 10, Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13 presents the pushover curves for all four models under ULL and SMLL.\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003edemonstrated the highest base shear capacity of 6237 kN, indicating strong resistance to lateral forces and the greatest initial stiffness, as reflected by steeper curves and lower displacement values. In contrast, the vertical irregularities in\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e2\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e(Stepped Setback) resulted in increased displacement and a slight reduction in stiffness.\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e3\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003eand\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e, featuring floating columns at different storeys, exhibited reduced stiffness and higher target displacements. Among these,\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e3\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003edisplayed the highest target displacement of 162 mm and a longer effective time period of 0.830 sec, suggesting that the presence of a floating column at a lower level creates a flexible soft storey, thereby reducing the lateral strength of the structure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 8 and Table 9 present a comparative analysis of structural responses under ULL and SMLL patterns. The findings indicate that all models exhibit increased storey displacements under SMLL, while corresponding base shear values are consistently lower compared to ULL. This behavior is attributed to the modal distribution of lateral forces in SMLL, which more accurately reflects the dynamic characteristics of the structures, particularly in irregular configurations. Additionally, an increase in the effective time period is observed under SMLL, suggesting a more flexible dynamic response of the structural system. The performance points obtained from pushover analysis under both ULL and SMLL clearly indicate that all models entered the nonlinear range of behavior, rendering elastic methods insufficient for seismic evaluation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.5\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eDiagrammatic Presentation of Hinge Formation at Performance Point\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the hinge formation study\u0026nbsp;Figure 14, it was observed that more hinges develop at the bottom storey. Failure initiates with hinge formation at the beam-to-column connections on the bottom storey, then propagates upward to the upper storeys. Among the models,\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003eexhibited the best overall performance, as most hinges remained within the Immediate Occupancy (IO) and Life Safety (LS) stages, indicating well-distributed energy dissipation and good ductility throughout the structure. In contrast,\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e which included a stepped setback, showed a slight reduction in performance due to stress concentrations near the setback areas. Performance deteriorated further in M\u003csub\u003e3\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003eand\u0026nbsp;M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e, where the presence of floating columns resulted in earlier hinge development reaching the Collapse Prevention (CP) stage, particularly near and below the floating column levels. The combined effect of the setback configuration and floating columns disrupts the uniform load transfer mechanism. These findings indicate that the structure has sustained damage and should be retrofitted before re-occupancy.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study investigated the seismic behavior of four different structural models with various irregularities using pushover analysis under two lateral load types: Uniform Lateral Load (ULL) and Single Mode Lateral Load (SMLL). The main findings are:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI. The combination of setbacks and floating columns leads to higher storey displacement and drift. The location of the floating column greatly affects the building\u0026rsquo;s response. When placed at higher levels, floating columns cause more flexibility and larger displacements, while lower-level placement helps distribute seismic forces more evenly.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eII. The seismic response of each model was studied based on parameters like base shear capacity, target displacement, performance point, and hinge formation. Model 1 (M1) had the highest base shear capacity and very few hinges, showing that it can resist earthquakes well. However, it was less flexible during strong ground shaking. Model 2 (M2) showed balanced behavior, with moderate displacement and base shear. Model 3 (M3) had high target displacement and low base shear capacity, which means it was not very effective in handling earthquake forces. Model 4 (M4) performed slightly better than M3, but it still did not perform as well as M1 and M2. This shows that vertical irregularities can reduce a building\u0026rsquo;s earthquake performance.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIII. This study highlights the critical influence of setback configurations and floating column placement on the seismic performance of buildings.\u0026nbsp;M4 exhibited increased displacement and drift due to greater flexibility and a disrupted load path at the upper storeys, caused by the higher placement of the floating column in combination with the setback configuration. On the other hand, Model 3, with the floating column positioned lower, showed a higher target displacement and performance point, suggesting a more even spread of seismic forces. This highlights the need for careful design in buildings with vertical irregularities to control movement and improve seismic safety.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIV. The models under SMLL showed larger displacements compared to those under ULL. This happens because SMLL considers the dynamic properties of the building, such as natural vibration modes, which focus forces on specific areas. ULL applies uniform forces to all storeys, leading to smaller displacements.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"7. Novelty of Work","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study introduces a novel approach to seismic analysis by investigating the combined effect of setback configuration and floating columns, a structural irregularity pairing that is commonly observed in practice but seldom addressed together in research. While most previous studies focus on either setback or floating columns independently, this work uniquely evaluates their interactive impact on seismic performance. Multiple building models with varying locations of floating columns in setback frames are analyzed using Uniform Lateral Load (ULL) and Single-Mode Pushover Analysis (SMPA) to assess critical parameters such as storey displacement, storey drift, pushover curve behavior, and hinge formation. The research highlights how the vertical placement of floating columns within a setback structure significantly influences displacement demand, effective time period, and the progression of plastic hinges under lateral loading. This combined evaluation provides valuable insights into the nonlinear behavior of such irregular structures and contributes to improved design strategies for earthquake-resistant buildings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026ndash; The corresponding author led the research design, structural modeling, analysis, and interpretation. Co-authors contributed to data validation, literature review, and refinement of the methodology. All authors participated in reviewing and finalizing the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e The author declares that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u003c/strong\u003e Data may be available from the corresponding author through making reasonable requests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e Authors declare that the manuscript is free from any Conflicts of interest and Competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eA. K. Chopra and R. K. Goel, \u0026ldquo;A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eEarthquake Engineering \u0026amp; Structural Dynamics\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 561\u0026ndash;582, 2002.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eY. C. Sung, K. Y. Liu, C. K. Su, I. C. Tsai, and K. C. Chang, \u0026ldquo;A study on pushover analyses of reinforced concrete columns,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eStructural Engineering and Mechanics\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 35\u0026ndash;52, Sep. 2005, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2005.21.1.035.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eA. D\u0026rsquo;Ambrisi, M. De Stefano, and M. Tanganelli, \u0026ldquo;Use of pushover analysis for predicting seismic response of irregular buildings: A case study,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eJournal of Earthquake Engineering\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1089\u0026ndash;1100, Dec. 2009 https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460902898308.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eR. Tripathy and P. P. Sarkar, \u0026ldquo;Pushover analysis of R/C setback building frames,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Academy of Technology\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 01, pp. 79\u0026ndash;101, 2012.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eK. N. Neethu and S. P. Saji, \u0026ldquo;Pushover analysis of RC building,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science and Research\u003c/em\u003e, 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eG. P. Cimellaro, T. Giovine, and D. Lopez-Garcia, \u0026ldquo;Bidirectional pushover analysis of irregular structures,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eJournal of Structural Engineering\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 140, no. 9, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001032.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eM. Azaz, \u0026ldquo;Pushover analysis on G+10 reinforced concrete structure for Zone II and Zone III as per IS 1893 (2002),\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)\u003c/em\u003e, 2015.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eS. P. Akshara, \u0026ldquo;Performance based seismic evaluation of multi-storeyed reinforced concrete buildings using pushover analysis,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)\u003c/em\u003e, 2015.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD. N. Shinde and P. Sadhana, \u0026ldquo;Pushover analysis to study seismic performances of vertical irregular structure,\u0026rdquo; 2016.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eM. Khadeer Ahamed and U. K. N., \u0026ldquo;Seismic analysis of multistorey building with different positioning of floating columns,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)\u003c/em\u003e, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eU. Mahesh, P. Pandit, and P. G. Scholar, \u0026ldquo;A review on pushover analysis for irregular structures,\u0026rdquo; 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eN. Jakarta, J. Prof, G. A. Siwabessy, H. Yurizka, and A. Rosyidah, \u0026ldquo;The performance of irregular building structures using pushover analysis,\u0026rdquo; 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eG. Ravichandra and T. N. Chandan, \u0026ldquo;Progressive collapse of irregular RC building,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eMaterials Today: Proceedings\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 56, pp. 6768\u0026ndash;6775, Jan. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.04.904.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eB. Eldar and G. Singh, \u0026ldquo;Analysis of irregular building with and without floating column under seismic load,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eMaterials Today: Proceedings\u003c/em\u003e, vol. 70, pp. 2849\u0026ndash;2854, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.11.214.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ. Chudasama and A. Suthar, \u0026quot;Pushover analysis of setback frame and step frame building with and without shear wall by using ETABS,\u0026quot; \u003cem\u003eInternational Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)\u003c/em\u003e, 2023. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFederal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), \u003cem\u003ePrestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings\u003c/em\u003e, Washington, D.C., 2000.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBureau of Indian Standards, \u003cem\u003eIS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures General Provisions and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e, New Delhi, India.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Floating Column, Pushover Analysis, Plastic Hinge, Seismic Loading, Setback Irregularity, Storey Drift","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6774786/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6774786/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eSetbacks and floating columns are common architectural features used to optimize space and enhance the aesthetics of buildings. However, their presence introduces irregularities that affect the seismic performance of structures. Floating columns transfer loads through beams instead of directly to the foundation, while setbacks create discontinuities in the vertical load path. This study focuses on analyzing the combined impact of setbacks and floating column placement on a G + 7 building using nonlinear pushover analysis. Four models were analysed using ETABS v22.3.0: Model-1 (M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e) is a regular building without setbacks; Model-2 (M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e) has a stepped setback; Model-3 (M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) has a setback with floating columns at the 2nd floor; and Model-4 (M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e) has a setback with floating columns at the 6th floor. The analytical findings are presented in terms of storey displacement, storey drift, target displacement, performance point, and plastic hinge formation. The study showed that M\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e exhibited higher storey displacement and drift, while M\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e had the highest target displacement and performance point in the pushover curve. These findings highlight the influence of setback configuration and floating column position on the seismic response of RC buildings.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Seismic Performance of G+7 RCC Buildings with Setbacks and Floating Columns Using Non-Linear Pushover Analysis","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-06-06 04:51:48","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6774786/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"0d0f726b-4c5d-49c1-a30e-bc4d1778206e","owner":[],"postedDate":"June 6th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-23T21:44:15+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-06-06 04:51:48","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6774786","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6774786","identity":"rs-6774786","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}