Scholarlink

<p>The resilience of high-rise buildings in seismically active areas is influenced by both the type of retrofitting system and its incorporation into the building design. In the present study, a 14-storey reinforced concrete building retrofitted with shear walls and fluid viscous dampers (FVDs) is compared seismically using extended three-dimensional analysis of building systems (ETABS) modelling in accordance with IS 1893:2016 (Part 1). Important characteristics like displacement, drift, shear and stiffness were assessed under various configurations using response spectrum analysis. The findings indicate that while FVDs do not increase stiffness, they efficiently dissipate energy and improve overall responsiveness when positioned at corners. Shear walls, on the other hand, offer the greatest improvement in stiffness and deformation control. The novelty of the present study lies in its direct comparative framework under identical conditions, highlighting the significance of placement strategy and clarifying the different contributions of stiffness-based and damping-based systems. These results offer generalizable guidance for high-rise building seismic retrofit optimization.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Seismic analysis of multi-storey structures: comparing the influence of fluid viscous dampers and shear wall

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月27日

查看全文
  • Arunima R Nair,
  • Rohini C Kale

摘要

The resilience of high-rise buildings in seismically active areas is influenced by both the type of retrofitting system and its incorporation into the building design. In the present study, a 14-storey reinforced concrete building retrofitted with shear walls and fluid viscous dampers (FVDs) is compared seismically using extended three-dimensional analysis of building systems (ETABS) modelling in accordance with IS 1893:2016 (Part 1). Important characteristics like displacement, drift, shear and stiffness were assessed under various configurations using response spectrum analysis. The findings indicate that while FVDs do not increase stiffness, they efficiently dissipate energy and improve overall responsiveness when positioned at corners. Shear walls, on the other hand, offer the greatest improvement in stiffness and deformation control. The novelty of the present study lies in its direct comparative framework under identical conditions, highlighting the significance of placement strategy and clarifying the different contributions of stiffness-based and damping-based systems. These results offer generalizable guidance for high-rise building seismic retrofit optimization.