Review of Diagrid and Conventional Frame Systems for Modern Building Design

Year : 2025 | Volume : 12 | Issue : 03 | Page : 47 53
    By

    Yugandhara R. Sonawane,

  • Rahul S. Patil,

  • Geeta R. Surashe,

Abstract

The demand for high-rise buildings in modern cities has accelerated the development of structural systems that balance safety, efficiency, and architectural innovation. Conventional moment-resisting frames, though widely adopted, often become inefficient in tall structures due to higher material consumption and greater lateral displacements under seismic and wind loading. Diagrid systems, defined by their diagonally inclined members forming triangulated grids, provide an alternative approach with enhanced lateral stiffness, reduced drift, and material efficiency. This review consolidates thirty studies published between 2016 and 2024 that compare diagrid and conventional structural systems, with most analyses conducted through ETABS. Findings indicate that diagrid systems consistently reduce roof displacement by 20–35%, inter-storey drift by 15–25%, and base shear by up to 18% compared to conventional frames. Additionally, material use is reduced by 10–20%, improving both sustainability and cost-effectiveness. However, challenges remain in the constructability of complex joints, optimization of diagrid angles, and connection detailing. The review emphasizes the potential of diagrid systems for sustainable high-rise construction while identifying gaps that require further exploration through experimental studies, performance-based seismic design, and advanced optimization algorithms. This paper contributes to the growing body of literature on diagrids by providing a comprehensive synthesis of research, thereby serving as a reference for engineers and architects seeking efficient structural solutions for tall buildings in seismic and wind-prone regions.

Keywords: Diagrid structure, conventional frame, High-rise buildings, seismic performance, ETABS, structural efficiency

[This article belongs to Journal of Structural Engineering and Management ]

How to cite this article:
Yugandhara R. Sonawane, Rahul S. Patil, Geeta R. Surashe. Review of Diagrid and Conventional Frame Systems for Modern Building Design. Journal of Structural Engineering and Management. 2025; 12(03):47-53.
How to cite this URL:
Yugandhara R. Sonawane, Rahul S. Patil, Geeta R. Surashe. Review of Diagrid and Conventional Frame Systems for Modern Building Design. Journal of Structural Engineering and Management. 2025; 12(03):47-53. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/josem/article=2025/view=225979


References

1. M. Tirkey and R. Kumar, “Comparative Analysis of Diagrid and Conventional Building Frames using ETABS,” Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 2345–2352, 2020.
2. I. W. Sukrawa, I. G. A. Gunawan, and N. A. Wardana, “Performance of Diagrid Structures under Lateral Loads,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 419, 2019.
3. J. A. Shah, S. Mevada, and R. Patel, “Diagrid Structural System for High Rise Buildings,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Dev., vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 41–48, 2016.
4. P. K. Kumar and R. Sabarinathan, “Study of High Rise Steel Diagrid Buildings,” Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1234–1241, 2018.
5. M. Kanthi and K. Pavitra, “Comparative Study of Diagrid Structures and Conventional Structures,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 1011–1015, 2020.
6. M. Varsani and V. Patel, “Comparative Study of Hexagrid, Diagrid and Conventional Structures,” Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 245–250, 2017.
7. F. Ersania and I. Arindya, “Seismic Performance of Diagrid Structures,” J. Civil Eng. Forum, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 153–164, 2019.
8. P. Choudhary, R. Kumar, and P. Sharma, “Comparative Seismic Analysis of High-Rise Diagrid and Conventional Frame Structures,” Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 2033–2038, 2022.
9. B. Gunashree and N. Nagarjuna, “Seismic Analysis of High Rise Diagrid Structure,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1142–1147, 2022.
10. S. Rajmane and A. Awate, “Seismic Performance of RCC Diagrid and Conventional Buildings,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 342–348, 2024.
11. D. Shukla, A. Sharma, and R. Patel, “Comparative Analysis of Diagrid and Conventional Building under Wind and Earthquake,” Int. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 512–519, 2023.
12. M. Trishna, K. Rajesh, and V. Gopi, “Study on Seismic Performance of Diagrid Structures,” Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 98–104, 2022.
13. V. Navasare and S. Choudhary, “Comparative Study on Diagrid Structural System and Conventional Frame,” Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 555–562, 2020.
14. A. Senthilkumar and R. Umamaheswari, “Study on Diagrid and Conventional Structures,” Int. J. Civil Eng. Technol., vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 550–557, 2017.
15. S. Mizwa and M. Ilyas, “Comparison of Diagrid and Conventional Building using ETABS,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 1230–1236, 2020.
16. S. Divya and R. Saraswathy, “A Study on Diagrid Structural System,” Int. J. Eng. Sci. Res. Technol., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 399–405, 2016.
17. P. Patel and P. Chandarana, “Review on Diagrid Structural System,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 48–53, 2019.
18. R. Gayatri and R. Dagad, “Comparative Analysis of Diagrid and Conventional Frame,” Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res., vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 1623–1627, 2017.
19. S. Tagade, K. Rathi, and A. Patil, “Comparative Study of Diagrid Structure with Conventional Structure,” Int. J. Innov. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 225–231, 2021.
20. A. Behera, S. Patel, and D. Patil, “Comparative Analysis of Diagrid, Outrigger and Shear Wall Structures,” Int. J. Adv. Res. Sci. Eng., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 401–406, 2018.
21. J. Jose, “Comparative Analysis of Diagrid and Conventional Structures with Different Plan Geometry,” Int. J. Res. Eng. Appl. Sci., vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 56–61, 2017.
22. V. Vinutha and G. Vinay, “Comparative Study of RCC Diagrid and Conventional Buildings,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 321–326, 2019.
23. S. Rafey and M. Azeem, “Comparison of Diagrid and Braced Frame Structures,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 92–97, 2018.
24. P. Sahitya, P. Murthy, C. Murty, and S. Krishna, “Optimization of Diagrid Structures for High-Rise Buildings,” Int. J. Eng. Technol., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 133–137, 2018.
25. M. Jewuła and M. Kozłowski, “Structural Analysis of Diagrid Systems,” MATEC Web Conf., vol. 219, pp. 02014, 2018.
26. R. Komala and A. Pitaloka, “Study on Diagrid Structural System for Tall Buildings,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 364, 2019.
27. M. Vijay, R. Shinde, and A. Kulkarni, “Analysis of Diagrid Structures with Different Diagrid Angles,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 74–80, 2018.
28. P. Premdas and S. Sirajuddin, “Study on Optimum Angle for Diagrid Structures,” Int. J. Innov. Eng. Technol., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 31–36, 2019.

Regular Issue Subscription Review Article
Volume 12
Issue 03
Received 26/08/2025
Accepted 03/09/2025
Published 08/09/2025
Publication Time 13 Days
212

Login


My IP

PlumX Metrics