Asian journal of Civil Engineering

Comparative Study of the Performance Analysis of Fixed Base and Base

Isolated Diagrid Structures (G+30 Floors) using ETABS

Abdul Majeed1, Farah Naz2, Zaheer Ahmed3, Muhammad Saqlain4, Meer Muhammad5, Muhammad Arslan Zulfiqar⁶ and
Naveed Anjum7

1
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Pakistan, majeedshk15@gmail.com.
2
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil
Engineering, Pakistan, farah.naz@kfueit.edu.pk.
3
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Pakistan, dr.zaheer@kfueit.edu.pk.
4
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Pakistan, saqlainaslam888@gmail.com.
5
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Pakistan, i.meer1417@gmail.com.
6
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Pakistan, marslanzulfiqar9@gmail.com.
7
Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information Technology 64200 RYK, Punjab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Pakistan, naveed.anjum@kfueit.edu.pk

*Corresponding author
Engr. Farah Naz

Department of Civil Engineering, Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, Rahim Yar Khan
64200, Pakistan, farah.naz@kfueit.edu.pk

Dr. Zaheer Ahmed

Department of Civil Engineering, Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, Rahim Yar Khan
64200, Pakistan, dr.zaheer@kfueit.edu.pk

Abstract
Current practices building high-rises in earthquake-prone areas are generally inadequate to protect
them against earthquakes. The challenge is through this study, to present a novel method: Diagrid-
Base Isolation System. Diagrid-Base Isolation Systems address the possibility of merging diagrid
systems, which are grid patterns diagonally designed to provide shear rigidity, while base isolation
ensures safety by dissipating the seismic energy using bearings. Such a combination would allow for
excellent earthquake protection and design flexibility in enabling accommodation of various
architectural requirements, with less costliness compared to traditional methods. The first will be
comparing the efficiency of base isolation in a conventional building through a fixed-base model and
either diagrid or outrigger structure models with base isolation. They will further enhance by
optimizing its components in terms of the diagonal supports and the base isolators. That will help
them tailor Diagrid-Base Isolation System for buildings having different heights and areas under
different intensities of the earthquake. The researchers will run detailed, advanced computer
simulations on how Diagrid-Base Isolation System behaves in earthquake conditions and explore
various control systems. They will host studies on the dynamics of movement of the building, the
distribution of tension, and other internal forces which act on the components of the building. Such
detailed analyses will be conducted on entire building structures and dynamical responses under
seismic conditions using ETABS software. In this study, important parameters which will be evaluated
for obtaining the effectiveness of Diagrid-Base Isolation System are diagrid configurations, rubber-
based base isolator, and displacement of the building during the earthquake, drift, distribution of
stresses in the structure, and base share. It is envisaged that this research will make some important
contributions to the further development of structural engineering. The results can provide valuable
insight into how best to select, improve, and implement Diagrid-Base Isolation System with an eye on
finally erecting buildings that would be taller, safer, and more adaptive in earthquake-prone areas.

Keywords: Diagrid Structure, High-Rise Structures, Base Isolation, Seismic Performance, ETABS,
Earthquake Resistant.

1. Introduction
This study explores the optimization and enhancement of Diagrid-Base Isolation Systems to improve
building performance in earthquake-prone areas. Traditional construction methods face significant
risks due to limited seismic resilience, whereas offers robust earthquake protection, design
flexibility, and cost-effectiveness [1]. The study compares fixed base models with base-isolated
diagrid and outrigger structures to evaluate their effectiveness. components, including diagonal
supports and base isolators, are meticulously examined and fine-tuned for varying building heights
and seismic intensities. Using advanced computer simulations and ETABS software, the research
analyzes behavior under seismic forces, focusing on movement dynamics, stress distribution, and
internal forces [2, 3]. The findings aim to advance structural engineering by providing insights for
selecting and enhancing, thereby improving seismic-resistant structural design practices [5, 6]. The
diagrid structural system, characterized by its diagonal grid, eliminates the need for columns and
provides exceptional lateral stiffness and architectural appeal [7]. This system is effective in
distributing and resisting lateral loads, reducing torsional effects, and enhancing seismic
performance. Base isolation systems, depicted with natural rubber bearings decouple a building's
superstructure from its foundation, allowing independent movement relative to ground motion [8, 9].
This significantly reduces the transmission of seismic forces, enhancing the earthquake resilience of
buildings and ensuring occupant safety. Overall, combining diagrid structures with base isolation
systems creates a robust and aesthetically pleasing structural solution capable of withstanding
natural disasters and supporting long-term development [10, 11].

1.1. Diagrid Structural System

The diagonalized grid structure known as the diagrid structural system eliminates the need for columns by using diagonal grids
instead of one or both. Diagrids are a type of perimeter structural arrangement that are distinguished by a tangled diagonal grid
of diagonal pieces that withstand both gravity and lateral loads [12]. Advanced structural systems including the diagrid system,
tube system, core system, and mixed concrete system were made possible by the new era of towering buildings, which also led
to faster construction times. For both reinforced concrete and steel, the diagrid structural system has been widely used because
of the highly composite geometric shapes of tall buildings. The perimeter structural components of diagrid constructions
primarily supply the lateral stiffness. Since the lateral forces are distributed uniformly throughout the structural elements,
innovative structural systems such as Diagrid have been discussed in this area as potential remedies for earthquake and wind
loading constraints.

Figure 1. Depicts a Diagrid Structure. The Tornado Tower is notable for both its architectural design and its exceptional
structural engineering qualities. Its structural system plays a crucial role in maintaining stability and durability during extreme
weather conditions, such as strong winds and tornadoes. Diagrid structures, characterized by a diagonal grid of structural
members, exhibit unique responses to earthquake forces. The diagonal members in a diagrid system efficiently distribute and
resist lateral loads, such as those generated during an earthquake [13]. One key advantage of diagrid structures is their ability
to reduce torsional effects, which are often a concern in traditional frame structures. The diagonal bracing inherent in diagrids
offers increased stiffness and lateral stability, making them less prone to swaying and torsional motion during seismic events.
This enhanced lateral resistance helps protect the building's structural integrity and ensure the safety of occupants. Overall,
diagrid structures are consider a reliable choice for seismic regions, leveraging their innovative design to minimize
vulnerability to earthquake-induced forces. Selecting the appropriate lateral load-resisting system is crucial for high-rise
structures due to its significant impact on structural integrity, stability, and cost-effectiveness. To evaluate the benefits and
drawbacks of diagrid systems in withstanding lateral loads, a comparative analysis must be conducted.

1.2. Base isolation System:

Base isolation systems are sophisticated seismic mitigation technologies designed to protect buildings from the damaging
effects of earthquakes. These systems function by decoupling a building's superstructure from its foundation, allowing
independent movement relative to ground motion. This innovative approach significantly reduces the transmission of seismic
forces to the structure, enhancing its earthquake resilience and ensuring the safety of its occupants. Figure 2. Depicts Natural
Rubber Bearings (NRBs), made from layers of natural rubber and steel plates, are known for their flexibility and ability to
deform under seismic loads, dissipating energy and reducing the forces transmitted to the building. Base isolation is widely
recognized as a leading seismic mitigation technique, specifically aimed at enhancing of earthquake. Resilience of
buildings by isolating the superstructure from the foundation. This decoupling mechanism allows the superstructure to move
independently from the foundation, thereby significantly reducing the impact of ground motion during an earthquake. The
primary objective of base isolation is to minimize the transfer of seismic forces and vibrations to the building, thereby
protecting its structural integrity and ensuring the safety of its occupants [17, 18 and 19].

2. Research Gap

Diagrid-Base Isolation Systems () are not a one-size-fits-all solution. Buildings of different heights
react differently to lateral forces such as seismic loads and wind. Current research has not
thoroughly examined performance in high-rise buildings. While diagrids and base isolation systems
have been studied separately, there is a gap in understanding how they function together, especially
in relation to building height and practical challenges. To fully understand the potential, challenges,
and practicality of Diagrid-Base Isolation Systems in earthquake-prone areas, we need tailored
techniques and comprehensive comparisons with traditional systems. This study will evaluate and
compare the efficiency of various lateral force-resisting systems across buildings of different heights.

3. Aim and Objectives:

The following research is performed to revolutionize earthquake-resistant, high-rise design by

investigating Diagrid-Base Isolation Systems. This work combines the strength of diagrid structures
with the seismic-dampening effects of base isolation for the synergies of integration, how exactly
diagrid structures and base isolation systems work in coordination, pinning down areas in which they
improve performance for one another and possible integration hurdles. Following are the objectives
of the study:

3.1. Seismic event optimization:

We will evaluate, through detailed analysis, the seismic response under various earthquake
conditions, such as frequency, duration, and intensity.

3.2. Bridging the Gap between Research and Reality:

Addressing practical challenges in the implementation in real-world construction, including

construction methods and their cost considerations, and how these systems can adapt to
architectural designs.

3.3. Spreading Seismic Knowledge:

Research findings will be disseminated through academic publications, conferences, and industry
forums. This will be a significant contribution to the total knowledge base within the bounds of
structural engineering and earthquake-resistant practices for building design.

Such comparisons between the performance of traditional fixed-base and base isolated structures
will help lead to a new generation of high-rise buildings that are architecturally striking, yet able to
resist even the strongest earthquakes.

4. Methods and Materials

4.1. Modelling Procedure of Fixed-Base and Base-Isolated Buildings in ETABS:

This section will explain the modelling process for fixed base and base isolated buildings considering
a sample high-rise structure with G+30 floors and analysis will be performed for seismic loads as per
UBC-97 for isolated building and IS 1893 (Part 1):2002 for fixed base structure. The subject of the
question is a reinforced concrete building (RCC) constructed with seismic stability in mind. This SMRF
(Special Moment Resisting Frame) consists of concrete columns, beams, and slabs and provides
stability. Earthquake concerns were considered as a fundamental component of the design since it is
located in a high-risk zone (Zone 4 with a maximum considered earthquake acceleration of 0.24g)
and the presence of medium soil, which can influence earthquake impact. This building will make
use of M30 grade concrete which is the most popular choice in terms of compressive strength. The
area of reinforcement is the high-strength Fe500 steel bars. The standard floor level of 3 meters is
used. The dimensions are

Plinth height: 0.9 meters above ground level

Foundation depth: 0.6 meters below ground level

Parapet height: 1 meter

Slab thickness: 180 millimeters

External wall thickness: 230 millimeters

Internal wall thickness: 195 millimeters

Column size: 250 millimeters wide by 750 millimeters deep

Beam size: 250 millimeters wide by 450 millimeters deep

Diagonal element (likely bracing) size: 400 millimeters by 400 millimeters

The other part of the design involves calculation of dead and live loads. Floors are planned and
calculated to resist the applied load of 3 kN/m^2 which is commonly used in multi-story residential
buildings. The roof will be designed with a lower live load capacity of 1.5 kN/m².On the whole, this
text is about a concrete construction incorporating design parameters needed for a safe earthquake
infrastructure. It contains the details of the structural materials, dimensions, and expected loads as
well. But it needs to be said that this is only one part of the overall structural design process.

4.2. Model design

4.2.1. Building Geometry:

In ETABS, create a 3D model of the building for G+30. Model columns, beams, slabs, and walls with
their respective dimensions and materials.

4.2.2. Openings in walls—doors, windows, etc.—as required:

For the base-isolated model, include diagrid elements of the specified size and connect them to the
building frame appropriately.

4.2.3. Material Properties:

Assign actual concrete and steel properties for the given grades of M30 and Fe500,
respectively .material props: Material properties for masonry walls to be assigned with the specified
density. Sections: It is assumed that dimensions for beam column, slab wall and diagrid sections are
given. Supports: For the fixed-base model all column supports at base are fixed, which means they
have no translation or rotation.

4.2.4. Base isolated model:

Column supports to be pinned at the base, allowing them to rotate but not translate. The base
isolation system is modeled using link elements with stiffness and damping properties that represent
the behavior of the bearings. Define Loads Apply dead load due to self-weight of structural elements:
beams, columns, slabs, walls, and diagrids, as per the defined material densities. Apply live loads on
floors and roof as mentioned.

4.2.5. Seismic loads for each model according to the selected code:

The base-isolated model will use UBC-97 with the building's location to be Seismic Zone 4, and the
importance factor. The fixed-base model will use IS 1893, with the same considerations.

4.2.6. Analyzing and Designing:

Linear static analysis will be performed on both models with the defined loads and supports.

For the base isolated model: Design the base isolators—rubber bearings—based on analysis results
and various design codes or guidelines. Obtain the analysis results from each model with respect to
parameters like base shear, story drifts, and inter-story displacements. Documentation:

All modeling processes should be documented, mentioning the assumptions taken, material
properties, and load definitions. Present the clearly obtained analysis results of both fixed-base and
base-isolated models. In this paper, the detailed procedure for modeling of fixed-base and base-

isolated buildings is described through ETABS for seismic analysis. This process can be further
modified with additional considerations like the P-Delta effects or nonlinear analysis for specific
design requirements are shown in Figure 03, 04, 05, 06, 07 and 08.

4.3. Detailing:

4.3.1. Project Setting-up:

Look into the project units and coordinate system; set up global parameters like gravity and seismic
loads. Generate the 3D model based on architectural drawings of the building, considering the floor
slabs, columns, beams, walls, and diagrids in the case of base-isolated ones.

4.3.2. Material Properties:

The correct material properties should be assigned for each element—concrete and steel—in terms of
their respective modulus of elasticity, yield strength, and Poisson's ratio.

4.3.3. Support Conditions:

The support conditions are as follows: Fixed supports at the base of the fixed-base model; pinned
supports with base isolators that are explicitly modeled as link elements at the base-isolated model.

4.3.4. Applied Loads and Combinations:

Apply applicable loads: dead, live, wind, seismic, according to design codes and project requirements;
define load combinations according to design requirements.

4.3.5. Analysis Selection:

Analysis type, linear static or nonlinear, Analysis Configuration, Analysis settings, analysis
parameters, convergence criteria, and control options, load case and combination specifications.

4.3.6. Dynamic analysis parameters—if any—model analysis:

The structural response under defined loads and combinations shall be obtained using the ETABS
analysis. Analysis results shall be checked for model stability and acceptable structural behavior.

4.3.7. Result Interpretation:

Displacements, member forces, and other outputs shall be analyzed and interpreted for assessing the
structure performance. Result Visualization by plots, diagrams, and animations.

4.3.8. Comparative Analysis:

Compare and discuss the final results of the diagrid-base isolation model with that of the fixed-base
diagrid model.

5. Results

Results from ETABS software for Diagrid Structure with Fixed Isolation:
5.1.1. Story Displacement:

The maximum displacement from the static case in seismic zone-2B+ in both x-axis and y- axis which
are in increasing order from bottom to top. The highest displacement occurs at Story 30, with 9.282
in in X direction which means it can be more susceptible under dynamic load (Earthquake or wind
load). The displacement results depicted in the Figure 09 corroborate the structural performance
under seismic loading for both the X and Y directions. In the EQ X, the graph clearly illustrates an
upward trend, with displacements increasing as we move from the base to the top of the structure.
Story 30 exhibits the highest displacement at 9.282 in, while Story1 has the lowest at 1.776 in.

Similarly, Figure 10 corroborate the Y-direction displacement graph would show a similar pattern, highlighting the structure's
resilience against lateral forces. These graphical representations provide a visual confirmation of the structural stability and
seismic performance, reinforcing the robustness of the Diagrid Structures with Fixed Isolation in seismic zone-2B.

5.1.2. Story Drift:

Story drift, a pivotal parameter in structural engineering, precisely measures the lateral displacement or movement occurring
between consecutive floors within a building when subjected to seismic forces or dynamic loads. The results are thoughtfully
presented in Figure 17 illustrating story drift outcomes in the Figure 11 EQ-X direction. Notably, Story 1 exhibits the highest
recorded story drift, reaching a modest 0.012339. This observation underscores that, as elevation increases, the story drift
attains its maximum value, highlighting the vertical distribution of lateral movement.

Similarly, Figure 12 meticulously convey the story drift findings, this time in the EQ-Y direction.
Remarkably, Story 1 once again stands out, registering a peak story drift of 0.007621. These
precise results reaffirm the structural integrity and performance of the building, demonstrating that,
in both directions, the uppermost story experiences the greatest lateral displacement under the
influence of seismic forces

5.1.3. Story Shear:

The results in Figure 13 meticulously convey the EQ X-direction show the distribution of story shear
forces throughout the structure. The Story shear decreases progressively from the top to the bottom
of the building, with the highest value observed at Story 1 (the top) and the lowest at the base. The
negative story shear values indicate a resisting force in the opposite direction of the seismic load. All
story shear results in the EQ X-direction are detailed in the table below. The shear at the base is zero,
which is a positive outcome in seismic analysis. A base shear of 0 in both the X and Y directions
indicates that the building is well-designed and capable of withstanding lateral forces without
significant displacement or instability during a seismic event.

In the EQ-Y direction, the story shear results display in Figure 14 meticulously convey a pattern similar to those in the EQ-X
direction, reflecting the distribution of lateral forces throughout the structure. As with EQ-X, the story shear values in EQ-Y are
negative, indicating resisting forces counteracting the seismic load. These findings confirm that the structure is well-designed to
withstand lateral forces in both directions, with the highest story shear observed at the topmost story (Story 1) and progressively
decreasing towards the base. The presence of zero-story shear at the base in both EQ-X and EQ-Y directions further validates
the structural stability and equilibrium of the building during seismic events, ensuring it can endure lateral forces without
significant displacement or instability.

5.2. Results from ETABS software for Diagrid Structure with Base Isolation:

5.2.1. Story Displacement:

The maximum displacement from the static case in seismic zone-2B+ in both x-axis and y- axis which are in increasing order
from bottom to top. Figure 15 illustrates that the highest displacement occurs at Story 30, with 6.156 in in X direction which
means it can be more susceptible under dynamic load (Earthquake or wind load). The displacement results depicted in the
graph below corroborate the structural performance under seismic loading for both the X and Y directions. In the EQ X, the
graph clearly illustrates an upward trend, with displacements increasing as we move from the base to the top of the structure.
Story 30 exhibits the highest displacement at 6.156 in, while Story1 has the lowest at 0.451 in.

Similarly in Figure 16, the Y-direction displacement graph would show a similar pattern, highlighting the structure's resilience
against lateral forces. These graphical representations provide a visual confirmation of the structural stability and seismic
performance, reinforcing the robustness of the Diagrid Structures with Fixed Isolation in seismic zone-2B.

5.2.2. Story drift:

Story drift, a pivotal parameter in structural engineering, precisely measures the lateral displacement or movement occurring
between consecutive floors within a building when subjected to seismic forces or dynamic loads. The results are thoughtfully
presented in Figure 17, illustrating story drift outcomes in the EQ-X direction. Notably, Story 1 exhibits the highest recorded
story drift, reaching a modest 0.003137. This observation underscores that, as elevation increases, the story drift attains its
maximum value, highlighting the vertical distribution of lateral movement.

Similarly, Figure 18 meticulously convey the story drift findings, this time in the EQ-Y direction. Remarkably, Story 1 once
again stands out, registering a peak story drift of 0.005233. These precise results reaffirm the structural integrity and
performance of the building, demonstrating that, in both directions, the uppermost story experiences the greatest lateral
displacement under the influence of seismic forces.

5.2.3. Story Shear

The results in Figure 19.the EQ X-direction illustrate the distribution of story shear forces throughout the structure. The story
shear progressively decreases from the top to the bottom of the building, with the highest value observed at Story 1 (the top)
and the lowest at the base.

The negative story shear values indicate a resisting force opposite to the direction of the seismic load. All story shear results in
the EQ X and Y. The zero shear at the base is a positive outcome in seismic analysis. A base shear of 0 in both the X and Y
directions suggests that the building is well-designed and capable of withstanding lateral forces without significant
displacement or instability during a seismic event.

In the EQ-Y direction, the story shear results exhibit a pattern similar to those in the EQ-X direction, Figure 20 showing the
distribution of lateral forces throughout the structure. As in EQ-X, the story shear values in EQ-Y are negative, indicating
resisting forces counteracting the seismic load. These findings confirm that the structure is well-designed to withstand lateral
forces in both directions, with the highest story shear occurring at the topmost story (Story 1) and progressively decreasing
towards the base. The presence of zero-story shear at the base in both EQ-X and EQ-Y directions further validates the structural
stability and equilibrium of the building during seismic events, ensuring it can endure lateral forces without significant
displacement or instability.

5.4. Comparative Analysis of Diagrid Structure with fixed and Rubber Base Isolation:

The maximum story displacement EQ X is highest for diagrid structure with fixed isolation as compared to diagrid structure
with rubber base isolation as shown in Figures 21. The observed maximum story displacement in EQ X directions, with the
highest values for the diagrid structure with fixed isolation, underscores the distinct seismic response characteristics of these
structural systems. The diagrid structure with fixed isolation higher displacement reflects its relatively flexible nature during
seismic events, resulting in larger lateral movements and potential occupant discomfort. In contrast, the diagrid structure with
rubber base isolation has minimal displacement signifies its superior stiffness and reduced lateral movement, making it an
attractive choice for minimizing structural risk and ensuring occupant well-being during seismic events. G+30 diagrid structure
with rubber base isolation exhibits minimal displacement, demonstrating its exceptional stiffness and reduced lateral movement.
This makes it an ideal choice for minimizing structural risk and ensuring the safety and well-being of occupants during seismic
events. The selection of these structural systems should be guided by specific seismic conditions, architectural considerations,
and engineering objectives to optimize both safety and performance.

While comparing the maximum story drift in EQ X directions, the diagrid structure with fixed isolation shows the highest
values, as illustrated in Figures 22. This observed maximum story drift highlights the distinct seismic response characteristics of
these structural systems. The higher story drift in the diagrid structure with fixed isolation indicates its relatively flexible nature
during seismic events, leading to larger lateral movements and potential occupant discomfort. In contrast, the diagrid structure
with rubber base isolation demonstrates minimal story drift, signifying its superior stiffness and reduced lateral drift. This
makes it an ideal choice for minimizing structural risk and ensuring occupant well-being during seismic events. This enhances
its attractiveness for minimizing structural risk and ensuring the safety and well-being of occupants during seismic events. The
selection of these structural systems should be informed by specific seismic conditions, architectural considerations, and
engineering objectives to optimize both safety and Performance.

6. Conclusion:

(I). Improved Seismic Performance: Diagrid structures with base isolation systems gave useful insight
that they enhance a building's seismic performance significantly.

(II). Exceptional Stability: Base isolated diagrid structures show very good structural integrity and
stability. The small values of story drift and displacement prove effectiveness in fighting lateral
seismic forces that ensures the safety of occupants. Offers greater lateral stability than fixed-base
diagrid structures and conventional systems. The system is efficient in distributing seismic loads and
considerably reduces torsional effects, thus justifying its use in tall buildings. With increased building
height.

(III). Advanced Modeling and Analysis: By using state-of-the-art software such as ETABS, the project
allows a better understanding of how buildings dynamically respond to seismic loading.

(IV). Combined Advantages: The research underlines the benefits of using diagrid structures for
architectural flexibility and efficiency in material usage. Added with the seismic isolation achieved by
base isolators, it is particularly true of Natural Rubber Bearings, hence becomes very attractive.

(V). Cost Effectiveness: Although the initial investment cost to implement might be a little more on
the higher side, the long-term benefits balance these concerns. Minimized damage, enhanced safety,
and prolonged building life make cost-effective in the long term.

(VI). General Impact: The research not only establishes the effectiveness of base isolated diagrid
structures in earthquake resilience but also outlines practical guidelines and design strategies for real
construction projects. This knowledge will be useful for architects and engineers, therefore raising the
adoption of base isolated diagrid structures in high-rise buildings located in earthquake-prone
regions.
(VII). Brief Conclusion: The fact is this: is an optimum and most effective structural system for high-
rise buildings in earthquake zones that provides good stability and much-improved lateral resistance;
it is also more cost-effective in the long run.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the Civil Engineering department, khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information
Technology Rahim Yar Khan, Pakistan for providing the necessary computing facilities. The Authors are thankful to the
reviewers for their comments and suggestions, which have helped in improving the manuscript.

Funding

No fundind was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Authors Information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Khawaja Fareed University of Engineering & Information
Technology, Rahim Yar Khan 64200 Pakistan.

Abdul Majeed, Farah Naz, Zaheer Ahmed, Muhammad Saqlain Aslam, Meer Muhammad and Muhammad Arslan Zulfiqar.

Contributions

Conceptualization: [U.A.]; Methodology: [U.A.]; Writing original draft-preparation: [U.A.]; Writing review and editing:
[U.A.]; Supervision: [F.N.]; Writing review: [F.N.]; Writing review: [N.A.]

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and Permissions

Springer nature or its licenser (e.g., society and other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement
with the author(s) and other rights holder(s); author self-achieving of the accepted manuscripts version of this article is solely
governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

References:

[1]. Chopra, A. K. (2017). Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall.

[2]. Moon, K. S. (2007). Diagrid Structures for Complex-Shaped Tall Buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering,

[3]. Naeim, F., & Kelly, J. M. (1999). Design of Seismic Isolated Structures: From Theory to Practice. John Wiley &
Sons.
 [4]. Muto, M., & Gunning, J. G. (2004). Seismic and Wind Design of Buildings. ASCE Press.

[5]. Skinner, R. I., Robinson, W. H., & McVerry, G. H. (1993). An Introduction to Seismic Isolation. John Wiley &
Sons.

[6]. Smith, B. S., & Coull, A. (1991). Tall Building Structures: Analysis and Design. John Wiley & Sons.

[7]. Moon, K. S. (2008). Diagrid Structures for Complex-Shaped Tall Buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering,
134(1), 25-34.

[8]. Mazzolani, F. M., & Mandara, A. (2012). Seismic Performance of Innovative Diagrid Structures. Journal of Earthquake
Engineering, 16(5), 679-695.

[9]. Naeim, F., & Kelly, J. M. (2009). Design of Seismic Isolated Structures: From Theory to Practice. John Wiley &
Sons.

[10]. Miranda, E., & Taghavi, S. (2005). Approximate Floor Acceleration Demands in Multistory Buildings. Journal of
Structural Engineering, 131(4), 536-544.

[11]. Lu, X., & Guan, H. (2011). Seismic Design of Tall Buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering, 137(10),
1131-1142.
[12]. Ali, M.M. and K.S. Moon, Structural developments in tall buildings: current trends and future prospects. Architectural
science review, 2007. 50(3): p. 205-223.
[13]. Maqhareh, M., The evolutionary process of diagrid structure towards architectural, structural and sustainability concepts:
reviewing case studies. 2014.

[14]. Vhanmane, M. and M. Bhanuse, Study of Behaviour of High Rise Buildings with Diagrid Systems. Trends in Civil
Engineering and Challenges for Sustainability: Select Proceedings of CTCS 2019, 2020: p. 249-262.

[15]. Kazemi, P., A. Ghisi, and S. Mariani, Classification of the Structural Behavior of Tall Buildings with a Diagrid
Structure: A Machine Learning-Based Approach. Algorithms, 2022. 15(10): p. 349.

[16]. Kelly, J. M. (1993). Earthquake-Resistant Design with Rubber. Springer-Verlag.

[17]. Skinner, R. I., Robinson, W. H., & McVerry, G. H. (2000). An Introduction to Seismic Isolation. John Wiley & Sons.

[18]. Naaseh, S., & Naeim, F. (2010). Design and Analysis of Base-Isolated Structures. Earthquake Engineering Handbook,
CRC Press.

[19]. Tiwary, A.K., Different types of system in high-rise buildings: a preliminary comparative seismic analysis in a 40-story
RC building. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 2022. 7(6): p. 347.

[20]. Preetha, V., et al., Comparative Study on Response Spectrum Analysis of Building with Composite Columns and RCC
Columns. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 2020. 9: p. 1842-9.

[21]. Committee, A. Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary. 2008. American
Concrete Institute.

[22]. Lu, X., Lin, J., & Lu, X. (2015). Performance-based seismic design and simulation of a super- tall mega-braced frame-
core tube building. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 44(11), 1775-1792.
[23]. Kildashti, K., & Laman, J. A. (2018). Performance of Diagrid Structural Systems for High- Rise Buildings under Seismic
Loading. International Journal of Steel Structures, 18(2), 571- 582.

[24]. Gupta, A., & Krawinkler, H. (2000). Estimation of seismic drift demands for frame structure. Earthquake Engineering &
Structural Dynamics, 29(9), 1287-1305.

[25]. Loo, W. Y., Guan, H., & Lee, D. J. (2012). An overview of seismic design of high-rise reinforced concrete buildings in
Australia. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, 13(3), 219-236.