Comparative study on seismic analysis of conventional slab and flat slab for irregular shaped buildi

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 08 | Aug 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Comparative study on seismic analysis of conventional slab and flat slab for irregular shaped buildings: A review

1P.G. Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Islampur, Maharashtra, India.

2 Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Islampur, Maharashtra, India.

***

Abstract - For a building to perform well during an earthquake, its configuration is crucial. The overall geometry, structural system, and load component of a building are the key factors influencing its seismic configuration. In flat slab structures and traditional slab structures, the parameters behave differently. The design of structures is the subject of research not only in India but also in other developed nations. The building is still damaged as a result of the earthquake for many causes. Seismic load is a major component in the collapse of many high-rise buildings. Structural irregularity also adds on the seismic actions and causes devastation. To study the structural irregularity, a torsion check is covered in IS 1893:2016 part 1. In this paper, a brief review of comparison between different types of slabs and effect of structural irregularity on them is discussed. Also, the effect of various parameters like storey displacement, storey shear, storey drift, etc. on the structures is studied.

Key Words: Conventional slab, Flat slab, Structural irregularity, Etabs software, Storey displacement, Storey drift,Storeyshear.

1. INTRODUCTION

India's infrastructure facilities have grown as a result of urbanization.Thelandareahasshrunk.Thisresultedinthe construction of medium to high-rise buildings. Population growth puts strain on limited land space. It leads to the residential development of the city. The cost of land has risen significantly. There was also a need to reserve importantagriculturalproductionareas.Allofthesefactors contributetotheupwardtrendofresidentialconstruction. Tallcommercialbuildingsfacilitatetheproximityofbusiness activities.Theyarealsobeingdevelopedincitycentresasa corporate prestige symbol. High-rise buildings are now attracting both business and tourists. The slab rests on ordinarybeamsandcolumnsinaconventionalbuilding.The load travels from slab to columns, columns to beams, and thenbeamstofoundationinaconventionalbuilding.Aflat slabisaconcreteslabthatissupportedbycolumnsatthe sametimewithouttheuseofbeams.Aflatslabissimpleto buildandrequireslittlescaffolding.Flatslabsarecommonly utilisedinindustrialandcommercialstructures.Theseismic zone plays an important role in the construction of earthquake-resistant building structures. Storey Shear,

Storeydisplacement,Storeydrift,andLateralforcesacting onastructurehavealwaysbeencriticalindeterminingthe building'sseismicstability.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The review of available literature published by various researchers in context of seismic analysis of multistorey building with different types of slabs is presented in the followingsection.

Farheen S. S., Rohini B. [1] studied the RCC building's structural value.A(G +5) buildingstructureis taken into accounttoexaminetheaim,withandwithoutX-bracingfor Rectangle,L,andTshapeplanconfigurations.Theanalysisis doneinETABS.Storeydisplacement,overturningmoment, base shear, and storey drift are the factors that are compared. According to comparable static analysis, the storeydisplacementisfoundtobewithinacceptablebounds andislowestinrectangle-shapedbuildingswithbracingand without bracing. While T shape models with bracings recordedthelowestvaluesforbothpushoversituations,L andTshapebuildingswerefoundtohavethehighestbase shearvalues.StoreydriftwashighestinLshapebuildingand leastinrectangularinequivalentstaticanalysis.

Bidreddy, R.S., Sanni, S.H. [2] considered a G+12 storey building for study and it is assumed that this building is presentonbothflatgroundandonslopinggroundhaving inclination20°.Themodelsalsohavetwoalternateshear wallconfigurationsandinfillwalls.Additionally,themodels haveasoftstoreystructure.Asaresult,atotaloftenmodels areproducedforanalysis.Similarstaticanalysisisdonein this case for the study. All of the models' drift values fall withinacceptablebounds.Therefore,allmodelswitha20° sloping angle are secure and within the legal bounds. The authorcameattheadditionalconclusionthataddingbrick andshearwallstothemodelswouldreducedisplacement. Also,theobservedparameterslikedisplacement,drift,base shear, and time period are found to be maximum in bare framemodel.

Mahesh Kumar, C.L., Shwetha, K.G. [3] examined the stabilityofflatslabs,post-tensionedslabs,andwaffleslabs inthisstudybytakingintoaccounttheshearcharacteristics, deflection parameters, and their behavior under seismic

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 08 | Aug 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

staticanddynamicstresses.Usingthefiniteelementanalysis programsETABSandSAFE,effectsonlateraldisplacement, storey shear, storey stiffness, punching shear, short-term, and long-term deflection have been investigated. In comparisontoribbedslab,flatslabandpost-tensionedslab requirealargerdropsize.Whencomparingflatandribbed slabs,thedisplacementisgreaterforthepost-tensionedslab andlessforthelatter.Storeyshearishighincaseofflatslab andstoreystiffnessisalsohighincaseofflatslabcompared towaffleandposttensionedslab.

Akshata Barkade, Prof. U.L. Deshpande [4] studiedand designedaG+10commercialbuildingforseismiczonesIV and V with several slab arrangements, such as a conventionalslab,aflatslabwithdroppanels,andagrid/ waffleslab.Severalcharacteristics,suchasstoreydrift,base shear, and storey displacement, which affect the performance of the structure, play an important part in determiningthestructure'sresponsetoseismicstresses.In ETABS 2016, the analysis and design were done in compliance with IS 456:2000 and IS 1893:2016 using concreteoftheM30gradeandsteeloftheFE500grade.The conventionalslabhasa94.16%lessstoryshearthantheflat slabinseismiczonesIVandV.Whenastructureisdesigned withaconventionalslab,thevalueofbaseshearis22.89% higherthanwhenabuildingisdesignedwithaflatslab.

Sridevi, Sudarshan, et al. [5] usedtheETABSsoftwareto examinestructuresthataresubjectedtobothseismicload and blast load. This study takes into account regular, Lshaped, and C-shaped buildings with a range of RC and compositestructural heights.Fortheseismic analysis,the responsespectrumapproachistakenintoaccount.Inorder to determine how the structures will react to seismic and blast loads, a comparison analysis was conducted. The current analytical comparison study demonstrates that lateralstorydisplacementinbuildingswithblastloadingis greater than that in buildings with seismic loads. Regular buildingsperformbetteroverallthanL-shapedandC-shaped buildingsinRCandcompositestructureswhensubjectedto seismicload.

Nitish, Mayur, et al. [6] usedCSIETABS2016inthispaper tocreateandanalyzethree-dimensionalanalyticalmodelsof G+20storeybuildings.BuildingsinIndia'searthquakezone IIIaretakenintoaccountduringtheanalysis.AG+20story building with a flat slab (with drops) and traditional slab system is the subject of the analysis and design. Different parameters,suchasstorydrift,displacement,stiffness,and time period, are compared. According to the study, story driftis10%higherinconventionalslabsthaninflatslabs, andstorydisplacementsarefoundtoincreaselinearlywith building height and are 10% higher in conventional slabs thaninflatslabs.Also,thetimeperiodinconventionalslab buildingmodelstructureis1.05timesmorethantheflatslab buildingmode.

Shital, Kuldeep, et al. [7] studiedtheseismicbehaviourof different types of slab structures i.e., Flat slab structure, conventional slab structure, flat slab structure with drop underdifferentearthquakezonesisdone.ItisaG+5storey buildinganalysedinETABSsoftwareconsideringfourzones II,III,IV,V. Fromtheaboveanalysis,theauthorconcluded thatstorydisplacementismaximuminflatsystemandleast inconventionalslabsysteminalltheseismiczonesforboth regular and irregular structure. Also, story shear is maximuminflatslabsystemandleastinflatslabwithdrop systeminalltheseismiczoneforbothregularandirregular structure.

Sagar, Milind, et al. [8] analyzed a G+12 multistoried buildinghavingflatslabwithcolumnheadandconventional slabusingE-TABS software inthis paper. The parameters like storey displacement, storey drift, storey shear, base shearandtimeperiodarecompared.Thezonesconsidered were II, III, IV, V and the effect of height of building on performanceofthesetypesofbuildingsunderseismicforces wasstudied. Itshowsthatthejointdisplacementsandbase reactionsofbothbuildingsincreaseswithrespecttoZoneII to Zone V. For maximum joint displacement traditional design performed better than flat slab building. When compared for base moment flat slab building performed betterthantraditionalslabbuilding.

Khaja Ateequddin, waseemsohail [9] dealt with the analysis of irregular flat slab multistorey building under lateralloadslikeseismic,windloads.Andtoevaluateseismic conditions of a building like lateral displacement, storey drift,baseshear,timeperiod.Inthispaper,7modelsofa10storey building have been prepared by using ETABS software. Structural irregularities considered are building witharegularplan,re-entrantcorners,re-entrantcorners with L-shape, vertical irregularity on one side, vertical irregularityonbothsides,rectangleshapewithdiaphragm discontinuity,inverse-Tasdiaphragmirregularity.Following a comparison of all 7 models, it is found that when the building'swidthisgreaterinonedirectionthanitisinthe other, the lateral displacement is reduced by 58 percent. Additionally,comparedtoYdirection,thestoreydrift inX directionisreduced.Themodelwithverticalirregularityon bothsidesoccursatmode3fortheshortesttimeduration. Andforthemodel withthere-entrantcornerL-shape,the longesttimeperiodoccursinmode1.

Atif, M., et al. [10] completelyassessedtwoslabsystemsin ordertoevaluatetheseismicresponsetoeachslabsystem. TheOMRFframewithshearwallsand4,6,8storeyswere adoptedinthisstudy.ETABSsoftwarewasusedforanalysis and design, and the equivalent static technique, response spectrum, and time history were used for analysis. Storey drift,baseshear,timeperiod,storeyshear,andaxialforcein columns are the criteria for evaluation. It shows that grid slabbuildinghasabetterseismicresponsethanribbedslab building. Also, In OMRF building shear wall takes the

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 08 | Aug 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

immensepercentageofthebaseshearandthestoreyshear. Approximatelyabove95%fromtheloadwouldbewithstood by shear walls. The author also concluded that the appropriateselectionoftheslabsystemplaysanimportant roleinthestructurestabilityagainstthebothoflateraland gravityforces

Sreelaya P. P., Anuragi P. [11] comparedthebehaviorof multistory buildings with flat slabs, ribbed slabs, and conventionalgridslabsongroundandslopingground.Inthe study a 3D analytical model with the slope chosen in between 0 to 20 degree is taken. Using the ETABS 2016 program,theresponsespectrumanalysisiscarriedoutfor all models in accordance with IS 1893-2002. From the response spectrum analysis, the author studied the propertiesofthebuildingsuchasdisplacement,storeydrift andstoreyshearforallthemodels.Thestoreydisplacement forflatslabmodelis50%morewhencomparedwithribbed slab.ItalsostatesthatthestoreyshearGridslabmodel is 18.62%morewhencomparedwiththeFlatslabmodeland 28.21%morewhencomparedwithribbedslab.Plainground hasmorestoreydriftthan slopingground;thisis because thestructurehasmorefixity.Theauthorhasconcludedthat conventional slabs are more suitable for construction in seismic zones when compared to flat slab or ribbed slab system.

Dr Ramakrishna Hegde, Chethana, Nanditha Vinod Kumar [12] studied and compared the procedure and performancesoftheConventionalRCframeslab,FlatSlab and Grid slab. Under earthquake zone II, these are researchedandinvestigated.E-Tabs2015ISCode456-2000 is used for the modes. Buildings with G+14 floors are considered,designed,andanalysedforlateral(earthquake andwind)andgravity(DLandLL)loadcases.Accordingto the Indian Standard Code for earthquake resistant structures,theequivalentstaticmethodisappliedtodesign andanalyzethestructures.Ithasbeenfoundthatgridslab structures performed better seismically than flat slab structures.Accordingtotheauthor,gridandflatslabshavea 10% lower Storey drift than conventional slabs. The base shearofaconventionalslabis37%higherthanagridslab and 44% higher than a flat slab. Additionally, the conventionalslab'sstoreydisplacementis3%higherthan thatoftheflatslatandgridslabs.

Vishesh P. Thakkar, Anuj K. Chandiwala [13] analyzeda G+5, G+8 and G+11 multistoried building having flat slab withdrop,flatslabwithoutdropandconventionalslabusing ETABS software. The factors taken into account included time, base shear, storey displacement, storey drift, and storeyshear.Themainobjectiveofthispaperistocompare the seismic behaviour of multi storey buildings having conventional RC frame, flat slab with drop and flat slab without drop in seismic zone III with type II soil. The effectiveness of these sorts of buildings against seismic stresses was studied in relation to building height. It was

foundthatthestoreydisplacementvalueofflatslabwithout drop building is about 44.11 % higher compared to conventional RC Frame building and 26.19 % higher compared to flat slab with drop building. Also, the storey drift of flat slab without drop building is about 42.56 % higher compared to conventional RC Frame building and 25.12 % higher compared to flat slab with drop building. Comparing flat slab buildings with drops to standard RC frame buildings, the base shear of flat slab buildings with drops is around 10.37 % greater and 1.24 % higher, respectively. Considering all the parameters, author concluded that conventional building has superior performanceinearthquakeagainstflatslabwithdropand flatslabwithoutdrop.

V. Mani Deep, P. Polu Raju [14] usedSAP2000todononlinearstaticanalysis(pushoveranalysis)tocomprehendthe behaviorofaG+9multistoryresidentialbuildinginIndia's seismiczonesII,III,IV,andVthathasidenticalgeometrical attributes. Investigations into the force-displacement relationships,inelasticstructuralbehavior,sequentialhinge formations, and other aspects of multistory building behaviorhavebeenconducted.Accordingtotheanalysis's findings,baseshear,displacement,andtimeperiodgradually increasedastheseismicactivity'sintensitywentfromzone IItozoneV.Additionally,abuildingwithseveralzoneshas hadahingeformationobtainedandseen.Plastichingeswere initiallyformedattheendsofbeamsandatthebaseoflower storeycolumns.Fromthere,theformationofhingesspread to the middle and upper storeys. The author further determined that the extent of the building's damage is minimal and that, given the significance of the structure, columnsatthelowerstoryneedtoberepaired.

Rasna, Safvana, et al. [15] usedasoftware-assisteddirect approachforthemanualdesignofaflatslab.Lackofabeam makesflatslabsmoresusceptibletopunchingshear.ETABS softwarehasbeenusedtoanalyzeflatandconventionalslab structures.Theflatslab'smaximumdisplacementvalue is loweratthemiddleofthestrip.Additionally,theflatslab's value of shell stresses is lower than that of a traditional construction. Software analysis was used to compare the punching shear value of a flat slab to manual design. To preventpunchingshearfailurethestrongconcreteshouldbe used, design the reinforcement correctly that is reinforce each possible failure plane, deepen the slab, making the column larger, introducing drop panels or flared column heads.

Renuka, Vinayak [16] analysed the structures having conventionalslabandflatslabundertheearthquakeloading using ETABS version 13.1.2. Comparative analysis of conventionalslab,flatslabwithoutdrop,flatslabwithdrop, flatslabwithcolumnheadandflatslabwithbothdropand column head is done. 5 (G+4) storey, 10(G+9) storey, 15(G+14) storey buildings were modelled. The same buildingswerestudiedfordifferentseismiczonewhichare

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page175

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 08 | Aug 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

zoneII,zoneIII,zoneIV,andzoneVandtakingsoiltypeII. Parameters like lateral displacement, storey drifts, storey shear,designbaseshear,andaxial forcesarestudied.The author concluded that, flat slab without drop experiences moredisplacementthantheflatslabwithcolumnhead,with drop, both with drop and column head. As well as, for 5 storey,10storeyand15storeybuildingthedisplacementis increasedastheheightofthestoreyincreases.Italsostates that both flat slab with drop and with column head experiences almost equal storey shear. And conventional slabexperienceslessdriftcomparedtoeveryother.

Anghan, Mitan, et al. [17] executedthecompletemodelling of13storeybuildings,analysis,anddesignbythemeanof SAP2000software.Theperformanceoftwobuildingswas studiedintermsoflateraldisplacement,timeperiod,base shear,storydrift,inlinearanalysisbymeansofcode-IS1893 (part-1):2002.Thispapershowsthatbuildinginsoftsoilis morecriticalthanbuildingsituatedinmediumandhardsoil. Also, the column moments are more in conventional R.C. buildingcomparedtoflatslabbuilding.Andaxialforceon columnduetoallloadcombinationisapproximatelysamein both building but shear force and bending moment is comparatively more in conventional slab building. Due to monolithic construction, conventional building has more time period than flat slab buildings. Future scopeof work suggestedisthatthesamestudycanbecarriedoutbyusing steelstructure.

Vinod Kumar Reddy, Vaishali [18] usedETABSsoftwareto conductacomparativeseismicanalysisofconventional,flat slabwithdropandwithoutdropframedstructureswithand without masonry infill wall. The parameters studied are fundamental natural period, design base shear, displacementsandstorydrift.Itshowsthatthedisplacement of the flat slab with drop structures are having more deflectionthanconventionalandflatslabwithdropframed structures. Story drift is reduced by using masonry infill; however,storydriftisgreaterinstructureswithoutmasonry infill than in structures with masonry infill. 4 prepared models of structure without masonry infills, with considering equivalent diagonal strut, with considering shearwallandwithconsideringbracingsystemarehaving displacementsasModel122percentmorethanmodel2,38 percentmorethanmodel3,and25percentmorethanmodel 4. The paper also concludes that conventional framed structuresarehaving7%morebaseshearthanflatslabwith dropframedstructuresand16%morethanflatslabwithout dropframedstructures.

S.Mahesh , B. Panduranga Rao [19] performed analysis and design of a residential G+11 multi story building for earthquakeandwindloadusingETABSandSTAADPROV8i. Theresearchtakesintoaccountavarietyofseismiczones, and for each zone, the behavior is evaluated using three differentsoiltypes Hard,Medium,andSoft.Itisconcluded that when the regular and irregular configurations are

compared, the base shear value is greater in the regular configuration.Becauseofthestructure,thedimensionsare moresymmetrical.Andthevalueofstoreydriftisgreaterin theregularconfiguration.Becauseofthemoresymmetrical dimensions of the structure. When comparing different zones,zone5hasahigherbaseshearvalueforbothregular andirregularconfigurations.

Fardis M.N. [20] dealtwiththeUScodesandEurocode6,8, etc. This paper briefly shows modelling and analysis of buildings. Modelling process of beams and columns are learnt.Therearespecialmodellingaspectsforwallswhich arealsocalledaswidecolumnanalogy.Modellingoffloor diaphragmsconsistsof2ways,rigidandsemi-rigid(flexible) diaphragm.Mostlyfloordiaphragmsaremodelledasrigid onesbyintroducingamasternodeateachfloorclosetothe centreofmassoffloorandnotcoincidingwithanyoneofthe floornodes.Onlytwotranslationsinthediaphragm'splane andarotationarounditsnormalcomprisethisnode'sthree degrees of freedom. All remaining nodes on that floor are calledasslaves.Floordiaphragmsaremodelledasflexible onlyifflooritselforsomeofitsbeamsarepost-tensioned anditisnecessaryforareliablecalculationofthein-plane actioneffectsduetopost-tensioning.Ageneralruleofthumb states that a footing can be considered rigid if it doesn't extendmorethantwiceasfarinplanfromtheverticalpiece it supports. Also, a good measure of the regularity in plan (irrespectiveofthequalitativecriteriaforregularity)isthe lackofsignificantrotationaboutthevertical(andofglobal reactiontorquewithrespecttothataxis)inthe(few)lower mostmodeswhichhelpsintorsioncheck.

3. CONCLUSIONS

Fromtheabovestudyitisclearthatresearchershad studied different types of problems related to seismic analysisanddesignfordifferenttypesofslabs.Inaddition, effortsweremadetomakethestructuremoreeconomicalby various changes in types of slabs, types of soils, masonry infills,slopesofgroundsandmanymore.Thesoftwaresused toanalyzeanddesignwerealsodifferentviz.E-TABS,Staad Pro,SAFE,SAP2000.Theseismiczoneplaysanimportant role in the construction of earthquake-resistant building structures. Base shear, displacement, and time period graduallyincreasedastheseismicactivity'sintensitywent fromzoneIItozoneV(V.ManiDeepetal.2017).Lackofa beammakesflatslabsmoresusceptibletopunchingshear. To prevent punching shear failure the strong concrete should be used, design the reinforcement correctly that is reinforce each possible failure plane, deepen the slab, makingthecolumnlarger,introducingdroppanelsorflared columnheads(RasnaP.etal.2017).Nowadays,demandof multi-storeyed buildings is increased. The storey displacement is increased as the height of the storey increases(RenukaG.etal.2016).Italsostatesthatbothflat slab with drop and with column head experiences almost equal storey shear. Soil types are also critical in case of

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page176

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 08 | Aug 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

seismic analysis. Building in soft soil is more critical than buildingsituatedinmediumandhardsoil(AnghanJaimiset al.2016).Masonryinfillwallinabuildingreducesthestory driftofstructure(MVinodKumarReddyetal.2014).

Whentheregularandirregularconfigurationsare compared,thebaseshearandstoreydriftvalueisgreaterin the regular configuration as the dimensions are more symmetrical(S.Maheshetal.2014).Slopeofgroundalways varyfromplacetoplace.Plaingroundhasmorestoreydrift thanslopingground;thisisbecausethestructurehasmore fixity(SreelayaP.P.etal.2019).Structuralirregularitieslike plan irregularity are an important factor in failure of building.StoreydriftishighestinLshapebuildingandleast in rectangular building in equivalent static analysis and storeydisplacementislowestinrectangle-shapedbuildings withbracingandwithoutbracing(FarheenS.S.etal.2021). Also,regularbuildingsperformbetteroverallthanL-shaped and C-shaped buildings in RC and composite structures whensubjectedtoseismicload(Sridevietal.2021).When thebuilding'swidthisgreaterinonedirectionthanitisin theother,thelateraldisplacementisreducedby58percent; additionally,comparedtoY direction,thestoreydriftin X directionisreducedinthegivencases(KhajaAteequddinet al.2019). Moreover, adding brick and shear walls to the models would reduce displacement (Bidreddy, R.S. et al. 2022). Story displacement is maximum in flat system and leastinconventionalslabsysteminalltheseismiczonesfor both regular and irregular structure (Shital Borkar et al. 2021).

Structurewithirregularities consideringdifferent typesofslabsisasubjectofconcernasitishighlyunstable and is in need of additional research. Different shapes of buildingshavedifferenteffectsinseismicanalysisandthat impact can be minimalised. Hence, plan irregularities and theircombinationswithdifferentslabscanbeafuturescope ofwork.

REFERENCES

[1] Farheen,ShaikShaista,andB.Rohini.“SeismicResponse of Multi-Storey Building with Different Plan Configuration Using X-Bracing.” Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering,Springer,Singapore,2021,pp.963–78.

[2] Bidreddy,RatnakalaS.,andShankarH.Sanni.“Seismic Analysis of Multi-Storey Building on Sloping Ground withGround,MiddleandTopSoftStorey.”LectureNotes inCivilEngineering,2021,pp.149–65.

[3] MaheshKumar,C.L.,andK.G.Shwetha.“AComparative StudyofFlatSlab,WaffleSlabandPost-TensionedSlab Under the Action of Dynamic Loads.” Resilient Infrastructure,2021,pp.303–15.

[4] Barkade, Akshata, and U. L. Deshpande. “Comparative Study and Behavior of Seismic Performance of

Conventional Slab, Flat Slab and Grid Slab for Seismic Zone IV and V.” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), vol. 08, no. 09, 2021,pp.1169–75.

[5] Sridevi, and G. “Comparative Study on Behavior of Structures Subjected to Seismic and Blast Loads. Springer, Singapore, 2021.” Advances in Geotechnics andStructuralEngineering,Springer,vol.143,2021,pp. 301–11.

[6] Mohite,NitishA.“ComparativeSeismicAnalysisStudyof G+ 20 Story Building with Flat Slab and Conventional SlabUsingETABS.”InternationalJournalforResearchin AppliedScienceandEngineeringTechnology,vol.9,no. 11,2021,pp.32–38.

[7] Borkar,Shital,etal.“AnalysisofFlatSlabStructuresin Comparison with Conventional Slab Structures.” IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol.822,no.1,2021,p.012049.

[8] Kitey,SagarN.,etal.“ComparativeStudyofFlatSlaband Conventional Slab in Various Seismic Zones Using ETabs.”JournalofEmergingTechnologiesandInnovative Research(JETIR),vol.7,no.9,2020,pp.88–99.

[9] Ateequddin, Khaja, and Waseemsohail. “Effect of Irregularity Shape on Flat Slab Multistorey Building Under Lateral Loading Using Etabs.” A Journal of CompositionTheory,vol.12,no.7,2019,pp.482–91.

[10] Zakaria,Atif,etal.“EffectsoftheAccidentalEccentricity on Regular and Irregular Buildings.” International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering,vol.8,no.11,2019,pp.2157–63.

[11] P P, Sreelaya, and Anuragi P. “Seismic Analysis of MultistoreyBuildingwithDifferentSlabTypeonPlain andSlopingGroundUsingETABS.”InternationalJournal ofAppliedEngineeringResearch,vol.14,no.12,2019, pp.143–47.

[12] Hegde, Ramakrishna, et al. “Comparative Study on SeismicAnalysisofConventionalSlab,FlatSlabandGrid SlabSystemforAR.CFramedStructures.”International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET),vol.5,no.19,2018,pp.394–401.

[13] VisheshP.Thakkar,etal.“ComparativeStudyofSeismic Behavior of Flat Slab and Conventional RC Framed Structure.” International Journal of Engineering ResearchandTechnology,vol.6,no.04,2017,pp.923–29.

[14] V.ManiDeep,andP.PoluRaju.“PushoverAnalysisofRC Building:ComparativeStudyonSeismicZonesofIndia.” International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology(IJCIET),vol.8,no.4,2017,pp.567–78.

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

Volume: 09 Issue: 08 | Aug 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

[15] Rasna P, et al. “Comparative Study of Analysis of Flat Slab and Conventional Slab Using ETAB Software.” InternationalJournalofScientificResearchinScience, EngineeringandTechnology,vol.3,no.2,2017,pp.674–77

[16] Madiwalar,RenukaGurusiddappa,andVinayakVijapur. “ComparativeStudyofDifferentType ofFlatSlab and ConventionalSlabforanRCStructureUnderEarthquake Loading.”BonfringInternationalJournalofManMachine Interface,vol.4,no.SpecialIssue,2016,pp.50–55

[17] AnghanJaimis,etal.“ComparativeStudyofFlatSlaband ConventionalSlabUsingSoftwareAid.”GlobalResearch and Development Journal for Engineering, 2016, pp. 230–37.

[18] M Vinod Kumar Reddy, and Vaishali G Ghorpade. “Comparitive Study of Seismic Analysis Between ConventionalandFlatSlabwithDropandwithoutDrop Framed Structures with Different Masonary Infills.” International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology(IJERT),vol.3,no.10,2014,pp.694–98.

[19] Mahesh, S., and B. Panduranga Rao. “Comparison of Analysis and Design of Regular and Irregular ConfigurationofMultiStoryBuildinginVariousSeismic Zones and Various Types of Soils Using ETABS and STAAD.” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering,vol.11,no.6,2014,pp.45–52.

[20] Fardis, Michael. “Analysis and Modelling for Seismic Design or Assessment of Concrete Buildings.” Seismic Design, Assessment and Retrofitting of Concrete Buildings, vol. 8, Springer Publishing, 2009, pp. 299–439.

[21] Bureau of Indian Standards: IS-1893, part 1 (2016), “CriteriaforEarthquakeResistantDesignofStructures: Part 1 General provisions and Buildings”, New Delhi, India.

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal |