Performance Based Seismic Evaluation of G+12 RCC Structures in Seismic Zone IV with and without Corner Shear Walls Considering Soil Types I, II, and III

Notice

This is an unedited manuscript accepted for publication and provided as an Article in Press for early access at the author’s request. The article will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and galley proof review before final publication. Please be aware that errors may be identified during production that could affect the content. All legal disclaimers of the journal apply.

Year : 2026 | Volume : 16 | 02 | Page :
    By

    Komal Kailas Salve,

  • Prof. Dinesh M. Pandit,

  1. M. Tech Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Chh.Shahu College of Engineering. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar,, Maharashtra, india
  2. Assistant Professor, Department Of Civil Engineering,Chh. Shahu College of Engineering. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, Maharashtra, India

Abstract

Seismic behavior of multi-storey buildings is significantly influenced by structural stiffness and supporting soil conditions. This study investigates the seismic response of a G+12 reinforced concrete building by comparing two structural configurations, namely buildings with shear walls and buildings without shear walls, under three soil conditions: Type I, Type II, and Type III soils. The analysis is carried out using the response spectrum method in accordance with IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016, and evaluates important response parameters such as storey displacement, storey drift, base shear, and overturning moment. The results indicate that the inclusion of shear walls considerably improves the seismic performance of the structure. In the Y-direction, lateral displacement is reduced by approximately 15–20%, while storey drift decreases by nearly 25–30%, with all drift values remaining within permissible limits. The influence of soil type is also significant, as displacement and drift increase progressively from hard soil to soft soil due to seismic wave amplification. Soft soil conditions produce the highest structural response, whereas hard soil conditions result in comparatively lower values. The study further reveals that the inclusion of shear walls increases the base shear by about 35–42% and the overturning moment by approximately 9–10%. This increase is attributed to the enhanced stiffness and reduced natural time period of the structure, which leads to greater seismic force attraction. Despite the increase in seismic forces, the overall structural performance improves because of better control over lateral deformation and inter-storey drift. The study concludes that shear walls play a crucial role in enhancing the seismic resistance of multi-storey reinforced concrete buildings, particularly in regions with weak soil conditions, and the most efficient structural performance is achieved when shear walls are combined with hard soil conditions. Seismic behavior of multi-storey buildings is significantly influenced by structural stiffness and supporting soil conditions. This study investigates the seismic response of a G+12 reinforced concrete building by comparing two structural configurations, namely buildings with shear walls and buildings without shear walls, under three soil conditions: Type I, Type II, and Type III soils. The analysis is carried out using the response spectrum method in accordance with IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016, and evaluates important response parameters such as storey displacement, storey drift, base shear, and overturning moment. The results indicate that the inclusion of shear walls considerably improves the seismic performance of the structure. In the Y-direction, lateral displacement is reduced by approximately 15–20%, while storey drift decreases by nearly 25–30%, with all drift values remaining within permissible limits. The influence of soil type is also significant, as displacement and drift increase progressively from hard soil to soft soil due to seismic wave amplification. Soft soil conditions produce the highest structural response, whereas hard soil conditions result in comparatively lower values. The study further reveals that the inclusion of shear walls increases the base shear by about 35–42% and the overturning moment by approximately 9–10%. This increase is attributed to the enhanced stiffness and reduced natural time period of the structure, which leads to greater seismic force attraction. Despite the increase in seismic forces, the overall structural performance improves because of better control over lateral deformation and inter-storey drift. The study concludes that shear walls play a crucial role in enhancing the seismic resistance of multi-storey reinforced concrete buildings, particularly in regions with weak soil conditions, and the most efficient structural performance is achieved when shear walls are combined with hard soil conditions.

Keywords: Shear Wall, Seismic Analysis, Storey Drift, Displacement, Soil Type, E-Tab

How to cite this article:
Komal Kailas Salve, Prof. Dinesh M. Pandit. Performance Based Seismic Evaluation of G+12 RCC Structures in Seismic Zone IV with and without Corner Shear Walls Considering Soil Types I, II, and III. Recent Trends in Civil Engineering & Technology. 2026; 16(02):-.
How to cite this URL:
Komal Kailas Salve, Prof. Dinesh M. Pandit. Performance Based Seismic Evaluation of G+12 RCC Structures in Seismic Zone IV with and without Corner Shear Walls Considering Soil Types I, II, and III. Recent Trends in Civil Engineering & Technology. 2026; 16(02):-. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/rtcet/article=2026/view=245384


References

  1. M. Abualreesh, “Reliability-based optimization of shear walls in RC shear wall-frame buildings subjected to earthquake loading,” Case Studies in Construction Materials, vol. 16, Jun. 2022, Art. no. e00978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e00978.
  2. A. Ozku, “Effect of shear wall on seismic performance of RC frame buildings,” Engineering Failure Analysis, vol. 100, pp. 60–75, Jun. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.02.032.
  3. K. Khand, “Reliability-based approach to shear wall positioning in seismic design,” International Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 25–38, 2025.
  4. Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), ETABS – Integrated Building Analysis and Design Software, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  5. K. Chopra, Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, 4th ed., Pearson Education, 2017.
  6. K. Duggal, Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2013.
  7. Agarwal and M. Shrikhande, Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, PHI Learning, New Delhi, India, 2006.
  8. Suwondo, “Comparative seismic analysis of RC buildings using response spectrum and static methods,” Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 12456–12463, 2025.
  9. Seçkin, “Influence of shear wall layout on seismic performance of RC buildings,” Journal of Innovative Engineering and Natural Science, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 45–52, 2025.
  10. S. Wagh et al., “Earthquake analysis of structure using ETABS,” International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1123–1129, 2026.
  11. A. Sourov et al., “ETABS-based structural analysis of a high-rise building on soft soil,” Open Access Library Journal, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 1–10, 2025.
  12. F. Haque et al., “Seismic performance evaluation of multi-storey RC structures,” Results in Engineering, vol. 22, pp. 101234, 2025.
  13. P. Sahane and K. R. Kale, “Seismic performance of regular and irregular high-rise buildings,” International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology (IJRASET), vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 567–573, 2026.
  14. Nandarge and K. R. Kale, “Comparative seismic analysis of G+40 RCC building using ETABS,” International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology (IJRASET), vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 890–897, 2026.
  15. Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 – Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, New Delhi, India, 2016.
  16. Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 456: 2000 – Plain and Reinforced Concrete – Code of Practice, New Delhi, India, 2000.
Ahead of Print Subscription Original Research
Volume 16
02
Received 08/05/2026
Accepted 19/05/2026
Published 25/05/2026
Publication Time 17 Days
4

Login


My IP

PlumX Metrics