1.

INTRODUCTION
Due to urbanization, we need to serve more population in the same area, tall buildings
are the suitable technique for providing residence, office and commercial purposes in
the same location.

1.1. General

Tall building defined as per criteria for structural safety of tall buildings ced 38 It is a
building of height greater than 45 m, but less than 250 m, normally intended for use as
residential, office and other commercial buildings.

Tall buildings are highly sophisticated engineering projects, due to the complexity of
designing a tall structure engineers requires advanced design techniques. The process
of designing tall buildings has changed over the past years. However, In order to
design better tall buildings information must be collected on the performance of
existing structures. For the design of tall structure an engineer need to know the
performance of the building designed through code, so that he can improve the
performance by using some other literature work.
Currently, project is about the performance assessment of the tall building designed as
per the draft code recommended by CED 38 Committee. The design of tall buildings
mainly involves a conceptual design, analysis, preliminary design and optimization, to
safely carry gravity and lateral loads. The design criteria are strength, serviceability
and stability. The strength is satisfied by limit stresses, while serviceability is satisfied
by drift limits. Stability is satisfied by factor of safety against buckling and p -
effects. The aim of the structural engineer is to arrive at suitable structural schemes, to
satisfy these criteria. The wind load study is required because, for a tall structures
wind is also the one of the main governing design load criteria. Tall buildings are
called as Vertical Cities
1.2. About CED 38

CED 38 is a technical committee for Special Structures Sectional Commithe ttee.

Working under chairman ship of Devdas Menon (IIT Madras Professor). Present code
CED 38 (10639): CRITERIA FOR STRUCTURAL SAFETY OF TALL
BUILDINGS is deals with design provisions of tall structures.

1
1.3. Need of Tall Structures Study
As per the recent studies the population increased rapidly in last few decades
however, in-spite of limited land resources the commercial and residential
requirements are satisfied by using Tall structures. Therefore, wind and seismic
performance assessment of tall building is required to improve the understanding of
the behaviour of the structure.
1.4. Criteria of Tall Structure
There are no absolute criteria that are accepted internationally to differentiate the tall
buildings. However, there are various height criterias for tall buildings as follows
i) As per Council on Tall Building and Urban Habitat, 2017
Tall Buildings: 45 m to 300 m
Super Tall Buildings: 300 m to 600 m
Mega Tall Buildings: >600 m
ii) As per High-Rise security & Fire Life safety, 3rd edition, 2009
Height at which the evacuation is difficult during an accident it is called as
High-Rise / Tall Building. Generally they started from 7 to 10 stories.
iii) As per NFPA, 2016
Tall Buildings: > 75 feets
iv) As per IS 875: Part 3, 2015
Low Rise Buildings: < 20 m
High Rise Buildings: 50 m
v) As per Draft code on Criteria For Structural Safety of Tall Building, 2016
Tall Buildings: 45 m to 250 m
Super Tall Buildings: > 250 m
vi) As per Hazus - MH MR5
Low - rise Building: < 3 storey
High rise Building: > 8 storey

2. LITRATURE REVIEW
Literature work was carried out mainly on three areas. They are
1. Classification of Structural System for the tall structures
2. p - and Higher mode Effect on the Tall Structures
3. Seismic performance of buildings with various structural systems.

2
2.1 Classification of Structural System for the tall structures

For designing any tall building we should know the various systems that are using in
the field and know about the advantages and drawbacks of the each system.

Falconer (1981) author in this thesis discusses about the classified of the various
structural systems based on Loading-Oriented Schemes, Material-Oriented Schemes
and Framing-Oriented Schemes. Proposed a classified system mainly based on frame
and working utility. Discussed various advantages and disadvantages of various
structural classification systems.

Gunel and Ilgin (2006) discussed about the classification of structural systems for
tall buildings specifies various structural systems that can be used for the lateral
resistance of tall buildings based on the basic reaction mechanism/structural
behaviour for resisting the lateral loads. Nowadays, reinforced concrete and
composite structures are in serious competition with the steel structures, and by the
advancements in concrete technology, such as manufacturing ultra-high-strength
concrete, all the structural systems classified above can be applied in reinforced
concrete. In the near future, it is thought that, the preference of composite and
concrete tall building structures will increase. Furthermore, tall buildings with new
structural classification which can be called as mixed systems and bundled
systems will be introduced. Mixed systems use the combination of two or more of
the above different systems. On the other hand, bundled systems utilize the bundled
form of structural systems as in the case of Burj Dubai where the structure utilizes
bundled shear wall system, which is also named as buttressed core system.

Fig 1. Different structural form for different heights of structure (Ref. Unknown
source)

3
2.2 p - and higher mode effect on the tall structures

p - effect is the important parameter in tall building because it creates additional

moment needed to be resisted by the structure which is higher in tall buildings. Higher
modes changes the behaviour of the structure during lateral loads

Sullivan, Priestley and Calvi (2013) discussed about estimating the higher-mode
response of ductile structures through the examination of the fully dynamic behaviour
of a reinforced concrete frame-wall structures. Author put-forward the concept of
transitory inelastic modes which is similar method of Eigen-value analysis of the
structure. The plastic hinge locations are assigned by yield tangent stiffness. By super
position approach of transitory inelastic mode shows better prediction of base shear
values. By using transitory inelastic modal characteristics instead of elastic modal
characteristics for the capacity design of structures it is benefit.

Konapure and Dhanshetti (2015) discussed about the effect of p - on multi-story

building. Generally, p - effect is negligible up to 7 storey buildings where only
gravity loads are governing load combinations. As it is iterative method, three
iterations are required for convergence of the results. As number of stories increases
means (height of building increases) the p - effect becomes more and more
predominant from respective parameters like displacement, storey drifts, column &
beam moments column & beam shear forces. Author analysed the building with P-
(structure deformation) and P- (with structure & member deformation) does not
differ for displacement, storey drifts, and column & beam moments, beam shear
except column shear. In case of column shear P- (structure deformation) gives
maximum column shear than P- (with structure & member deformation). Column
shear reduces when member deformations are also considered.

Dhawale and Narule (2016) discussed about the analysis result of the p - effect on
high-rise building as number of storey increases p - effect becomes more important.
p - effect was only observed in some of the beams and columns (exterior columns
and their adjacent beams) in some load cases. If these load cases are prevailing load
cases for design of member, then only we can say that it is considerable. This
condition is observed in 25 and 30 storey buildings and mostly in 30 storey building.
So we can say that, at least it is necessary to check the results of analysis with and

4
without considering p - effect for the buildings with 25 stories. Building is analysed
by iteration method author done it for 10 times but its observed that the results are
converging after 2 iterations. So there is no change in the results by increasing the
number of iterations. Author advise to perform P- analysis for a structure more than
25 storey, up to 25 stories the designed by using linear analysis. The result are valid
for regular R.C.C residential building

Manasa and Manjularani (2017) discussed the effect of wind load on the tall
building on tall building by p - effect. The drift ratio is found out for wind loading,
considering with and without p - effect for different number of stories such as 10,
20, 30, 40 and 50 in design software. Drift ratio is very small in lower stories and
reaches maximum at the story level increases. The effect of p - increases as the
height of the building increases and it high for slender members.

2.3 Seismic performance of buildings with various structural systems.

In this we study the performance of the existing structures during earthquakes and
performance of the structures of the various configurations.

Nilupa and Nicholas (2010) seismic performance of super tall buildings is a general
concepts and there are various methods. In this author done performance analysis by
using model analysis, DDBD, capacity spectrum method, N2 method. It is shown that
these methods may not be directly applicable to super tall buildings due to the higher
mode effects. The phenomenon of higher-mode period increasing has been illustrated
through the non-linear dynamic analysis of a 300m tall building.

Burak and Hakki (2013) effect of shear wall to floor area ratio on the seismic
performance of the building As the shear wall ratio increases, the observed drift
decreases; however, when this ratio exceeds 1.5%, the reduction in the values
maximum interstory drift values becomes less pronounced compared with the
reduction in drift levels for a change of the shear wall ratio beyond 0.5%. For a 5-
story buildings indicated that at least 1.0% of the shear wall ratio should be provided
during design to control the drift of a shear wall-frame structure. By increasing the
shear wall percentages total number of member yielding was reduced. By shear wall
ratio 1.5% yielding members are reduced even in strong ground motion. The drift
values are decreases by increasing the shear wall ratio, but when the fundamental

5
period of building and earthquake period is closer the drift amplification was taken
place in the direction of motion. Base shear carried by shear wall increases rapidly
from 0.5% to 1.0 %, the increase is moderate in 1.0 % to 2.0%. Ground floor shear
walls carry about 80% of the base shear. The base shear force carried by the walls is
observed to be more than 90% for shear wall ratios of 1.5 and 2.0%.

Deger, Yang, Wallace and Jack (2014) Seismic performance of 2 RC core wall
buildings with and without moment resisting frames and analysed at various hazard
levels to assess seismic performance. Building 1 was a reinforced concrete core wall
only building, whereas Building 2 was a similar core wall building with perimeter
moment resisting frame. Designed by using US code and PEER guidelines. The
performance wise the building with dual system designed as per PEER performed
well. The cost analysis was done only core wall system was economical than dual
system even after the earthquake and retrofitting charges.

Sanjay and Umesh (2016) discussed about effect of aspect ratio in the multi-storey
building. The analysis was performed for 2 bay, 8 bay, 12 bay & 16 bay for 4 th, 16th,
24th & 32nd storey Buildings. The Base shear increases gradually with increase in
number of bay and up to 16th storey but for all the cases of 2 bay, 8 bay, 12 bay & 16
bay the base shear is randomly decreases with increase of bays in 24th and 32nd story.
The Base Shear is obtained lower for 2 bay buildings and higher for 16 bay buildings.
Lowest value is obtained in case of 2 bay-32nd storey building, whereas highest in
case of 16 bay-16th storey. The Storey overturning moment increases gradually with
increase in number of bay and storeys for all the cases of 2 bay,8 bay,12 bay & 16 bay
buildings for each 4th, 16th, 24th & 32nd storey buildings. The Storey overturning
moment is obtained lower for 2 bay buildings and higher for 16 bay buildings. Lowest
value is obtained in case of 2 bay-4th storey building, whereas highest in case of 16
bay-32nd storey. The Storey Drift increases gradually with increase in number of bays
and storeys, for 4th, 16th, 24th & 32nd storey buildings for all the cases of 2 bay, 8
bay,12 bay & 16 bay buildings except the case of 2 bay-32nd storey, in which there is
obtained some little decrease. The Storey Drift is obtained lower for 2 bay buildings
and higher for 16 bay buildings.

6
2.4. Salient Features of the Literature Review
The various classification of the structural systems available for the tall
building.
Structural systems main advantages and drawbacks.
The suitable structural system for a various heights of the building.
For better performance of the building by considering P - effect, new design
concept by using transitory inelastic modal.
P effect is significant after 7 storeys.
P effect on the interior and exterior columns with different height of the
building.
Wind load on building by P effect was analysed.
For analysing a tall building normal method are accurate because of the higher
mode effect.
Performance of building with different shear wall to floor area ratio, it is
effective from 1.0% to 1.5%.
Performance analysis of building designed as per U.S code and PEER of core
wall and core wall with MRF system. Performance is better in PEER design
on core wall with MRF but the cost analysis core wall is economical.
Importance of aspect ratio & number of bays is calculated, base shear and
storey drift increases as bays increases up to 16th storey but base shear it is
reduced after 16th storey.

3. CLASSIFICATION OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

The various structural systems available for design of tall buildings. Some of the
structural configuration developed by mixing two or more system (Dual System).
They are:
1. Moment Frame System
2. Structural Wall System
3. Frame Tube System
4. Tube-in-Tube System
5. Bundled Tube System
6. Structural Wall + Moment Frame System
7. Structural Wall + Tube Frame System

7
8. Structural Wall + Flat Slab System with perimeter Moment Frame
9. Outrigger System

3.1. Moment Frame System

It is a structural system comprising of beam-column frames and resisting the vertical
and lateral loads. In buildings up to 30 stories, frame action usually takes care of
lateral resistance except for very slender buildings. For buildings with over 30 stories,
the rigidity of the frame system remains mostly insufficient for lateral sway resulting
from wind and earthquake actions

3.2. Structural Wall System

It is a structural system comprising of inter-connected structural walls, wherein the
vertical and lateral loads are resisted by the wall through axial load, in-plane bending
moment and shear force. The wall element form the primary lateral load resisting
structural system for the building, and resist the loads imposed on them through axial,
shear and flexural actions, and through coupling actions offered by the connecting
link element. Shear walls may be described as vertical cantilevered beams, which
resist lateral wind and seismic loads acting on a building and transmitted to them by
the floor diaphragms. Shear walls are generally parts of the elevator and service cores,
and frames to create a stiffer and stronger structure. This system structurally behaves
like a concrete building with shear walls resisting all the lateral loads. The
construction of the structure through structural wall is about up to 90 story. If we use
structural wall above 90 m, its economical go to dual systems discussed later.
3.3. Frame Tube System
Framed tube systems, are proper for steel, reinforced concrete and composite
construction, and represent a logical evolution of the conventional frame structure.
Since frame and shear-walled frame systems become inefficient in very tall buildings,
framed tube becomes an alternative of these systems. The primary characteristic of a
tube is the employment of closely spaced perimeter columns interconnected by deep
spandrels, so that the whole building works as a huge vertical cantilever to resist
overturning moments. It is an efficient system to provide lateral resistance with or
without interior columns. The efficiency of this system is due to great number of rigid
joints acting along the periphery, creating a large tube. Exterior tube carries all the
lateral loading. The gravity loading is shared between the tube and the interior

8
columns or walls, if they exist. The framed tube building leave free space in the
interior floor area besides free from the bracing and heavy columns, the lateral loads
are resisted by the frame provides in the perimeter. The method of achieving the
tubular behaviour by using columns on close centres connected by a deep spandrel is
the most common system because of the rectangular windows arrangement. There are
two popular versions used currently for this system for construction: one system
utilizes composite columns and concrete spandrels while the other utilizes structural
steel spandrels instead of concrete ones. As the columns are closely spaced for
creating a tube action, for the ground floor there be a problem for using lobby space it
can be overcome by using transfer girders or inclined columns. Height-to-width ratio,
plan dimensions, spacing, and size of columns and spandrels of the buildings, directly
affect the efficiency of the system. Even though the tube form was developed
originally for rectangular or square buildings, and probably its most efficient use in
those shapes, circular, triangular, and trapezoidal forms could be employed as well.
When lateral sway is critical and starts controlling the design, the framed tube can
be used, if we need to improve by tube in the core to create tube-in-tube system,
which can be constructed over 100 stories height. The 110-storey-high World Trade
Centre Twin Towers (1972) with its tube-in-tube steel structure and the DeWitt-
Chestnut Apartment Building (1965) with its reinforced concrete structure are good
examples of the frame tube system.
3.4. Tube-in-Tube System
It is a structural system, which is an extension of the Tube Structure, where there is an
internal tube, often a core element, supplementing the external perimeter described as
the Tube Structure above, to enhance the overall lateral global stiffness. Just as the
Tube Structure, typically, even this system is reserved for very tall buildings.

3.5. Bundled Tube System

It is a structural system, which is an extension of the Tube Structure and/or the Tube-
in-Tube Structure, where the architectural plan of the tower allows to facilitate
multiple tubes connected together, to enhance the lateral stiffness of the structure. Just
as the Tube Structure and the Tube-in-Tube Structure, typically, even this system is
reserved for very tall buildings.
Bundled tube systems are proper for steel, reinforced concrete, and composite
construction. A single framed tube does not have an adequate structural efficiency, if

9
the building dimensions increase in both height and width. Namely, the wider the
structure is in plan, the less effective is the tube. In such cases, the bundled tube, also
known as modular tube, with larger spaced columns is preferred. This concept, being
created by the need for vertical modulation in a logical fashion, can be defined as a
cluster of tubes interconnected with common interior panels to generate a perforated
multi cell tube. Since this system is originated from the arrangement of individual
tubes, a variety of floor configurations could be achieved by simply terminating a tube
at any desired height without sacrificing structural stiffness. This feature makes the
setbacks with different shapes and sizes possible. It has advantages in structuring
unsymmetrical shapes. Since the bundled-tube design is derived from the layout of
individual tubes, the cells can be in different shapes such as triangular, hexagonal, or
semi-circular units. The disadvantage, however, is that the floors are divided into tight
cells by a series of columns that run across the building width. Since spaced columns
are large, and thinner spandrels, this system allows wider window spaces and free
passage into lobby for the ground floor user while compared to the single-tube
structure. Moreover, this system also makes the architectural planning of the building
more flexible since any tube module can be dropped out whenever required by the
planning of the interior spaces. Two versions are possible using either framed or
diagonally braced tubes. The 57-storey-high One Magnificent Mile Building (1983) in
Chicago is a good example of a concrete bundled-tube design. The best example of a
steel bundled tube concept is the 108-storey-high Sears Tower (1974) in Chicago. In
this building, the advantage of the bundled form was taken into consideration and
some of the tubes are made disconnected, and the plan of the building was reduced at
stages along the height. Bundled-tube concept has a broad application because of its
modular quality. The tubes or cells can be organized in a variety of ways to create
different massing; it can be utilized for a 30-storey-high building as well as for ultra-
tall structures with over 100 stories.
3.6. Structural Wall + Moment Frame System
It is a structural system comprising of (beam-column) frames and structural walls
resisting the vertical and lateral loads. The relative share of the lateral load resisted
between these systems is dependent on their relative lateral stiffnesss. This system is
used for the structures up to 50 stories.

10
3.7. Structural Wall + Tube Frame System
It is a structural system comprising closely spaced columns and deep beams in the
perimeter frame for an efficient tube action. The internal vertical elements comprising
of core or columns is primarily utilized resist gravity loads only. Effective utilization
of the perimeter of the building maximizes the overall stiffness for a given building
plan shape; this system is effective for very tall buildings.

3.8. Structural Wall + Flab Slab System with Perimeter Moment

Frame
It is a structural system comprising of structural walls, a beam-less floor system, and
columns resisting the vertical and lateral loads. The relative share of the lateral load
resisted between these systems is dependent on their relative lateral stiffnesss.

3.9. Outrigger System

It is a structural system comprising of a core element and perimeter columns, resisting
the vertical and lateral loads. The outrigger system is similar to structural wall and
moment frame system but there is a difference is the structural wall is provided inside
as a core and the outside peripheral part is the moment frame system. Essentially, the
perimeter columns are for resisting gravity loads only. The core element is connected
to select perimeter column element by deep beam elements, known as outriggers.

4. COMPARISION OF CED 38 WITH VARIOUS INDIAN

DESIGN CODES
There are various design codes for the general guidelines for the design of the
structure, however the few clause are different for the tall buildings. IS 456 is an code
of practise for the plain and reinforced concrete for general building construction,
however the tall structure requires some changes are here. IS 1893: (Part 1) 2016 is
the earthquake resistant design the requirement for the tall structures are different. IS
13920: 2016 is the ductile detailing of members as the structure is more flexible and
slender than normal buildings clauses are altered. IS 875: (Part 3) 2015 is code for
wind load on the structure but there is very small changes in the return period for few
type of structures. IS 1892: 1979 is code for sub-soil study, the tall building has
higher loads so requires more soil investigation than normal buildings. IS 1904: 1986

11
is code of practise for foundation design, where the loads are high in tall building so
there is change in permissible limits and foundation design .
Table 1. CED 38 vs IS 456
CED 38 IS 456
Minimum Grade of Concrete is M30 Minimum Grade of Concrete is M20

Table 2. CED 38 vs IS 1893: (part1) 2016

CED 38
Damping Ratio Concrete is 2%, 1.5% for
Composite and 1% for steel Buildings
Minimum Base shear coefficient as per building
height
IS 1893: (part1) 2016
5% damping irrespective of the material type.
Uniform base shear coefficients

Table 3. CED 38 vs IS 1892: 1979

CED 38 IS 1892: 1979
For bore holes For bore holes
i. 30 m spacing b/w them i. 5 pits for 0.4 H = 4000 m2
ii. Minimum 2 boreholes per Tower ii. 50 m for Cone penetration test

Table 4. CED 38 vs IS 875: (Part 3) 2015

CED 38 IS 875 (Part 3): 2015
For Wind tunnel Studies return period is 10 Generally we use 50 years return period
years
Table 5. CED 38 vs IS 13920: 2016
CED 38 IS 13920: 2016
Minimum dimension of the Column Minimum dimension of the Column
i) 15 X diameter of largest longitudinal i) 20 X diameter of largest longitudinal
bar bar
ii) 300 mm ii) 300 mm
Structural wall thickness not less than 160 mm In structural wall
and H /20 (Larger) i) 150mm
w
ii) 300 mm for building with coupled
shear walls
Base Shear coefficients as per Height Uniform base shear coefficients
Special requirement for Zone IV and V Calculation of R/f based Type of wall with few
Minimum thickness 200 mm equations
R/F : 0.4% in each direction Minimum R/f in any type of wall: 0.25%

12
Table 6. CED 38 vs IS 1904: 1986
CED 38 IS 1904: 1986
FOS for overturning and sliding is 1.5 Overturning : 1.5 & 2
Sliding : 1.5 & 1.75
Depth of foundation: NO values are specified but said minimum of 50
1. 1/15 of H for Raft cm is required
2. 1/12 of H for Pile and Pile raft
Permissible settlement: Permissible settlement:
Raft: 50 mm(Soil & Rock) Raft: 100 mm & 75 mm(Soil)
Isolated : 25 mm & 12 mm (Soil & Rock) Isolated: 75 mm & 60 mm (Soil)

In the draft code of design of tall buildings, there are various clauses that are newly
available are:
1. For a particular location there is no height restriction as per structural system, but
as per the draft code there are clear specification of the height of the building for
every system and in every zone.
2. There are permissible limits for the vertical floor accerlations. So we need to
maintain certain additional mass if the floor accerlation its crossing the limits.
3. Using of the special moment resisting frame system in the Zone III, IV, V than
using moment resisting frame.
4. Procedure and limits are specified for the design of Frame Tube and Tube
Tube System.

5. Objectives
Following are the objectives of the study
To compare the draft code of design tall buildings with various Indian design
codes.
To compare the draft code of design tall buildings with various national codes viz.
American, European and New Zealand codes.
To write commentary for the draft code CED 38 (10639) Criteria for Structural
safety of Tall building.
To study the efficacy of the various structural systems for designing a 30 storey
(100 m) tall building.
To analytically evaluate the performance of the building designed as per draft
code by using non-linear analysis.

13
6. Scope of Work
Currently, the study will be on the behaviour of the RC buildings (designed as per
draft code).
The study was carried out on the building with structural systems are moment
frame system, structural wall system and dual system (structural wall + moment
frame).
The building for analysis are with following limitations
Simple regular plan building
Set backs are not considered
Maximum height of the structure is 100 m

7. REFERENCES
Burak, B., and Hakki, G. C., (2013), Effect of shear wall area to floor area ratio on
the seismic behavior of reinforced concrete buildings, Journal of Structural
Engineering, 139(11), 1928-1937.
Deger, Z. T., Yang, T. Y., Wallace, J. W., and Jack, M., (2014), Seismic
performance of reinforced concrete core wall buildings with and without moment
resisting frame, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 24(7), 477-
490.
Dhawale, P. J., and Narule, G. N., (2016), Analysis of P-Delta effect on high rise
buildings, International Journal of Engineering Research and general sciences,
4(4), 90-103.
Gunel, M. H., and Ilgin, H. E., (2007), A proposal for the classification of structural
systems of tall buildings, Journal of Building and Environment, Elsevier,
Science Direct 42: 2667-2675.
IS 1892:1979, Subsurface Investigation for Foundation Code of Practice (first
revision), BIS, New Delhi, India.
IS 1904:1986, Design and Construction of Foundations in Soils Code of Practice
(third revision), BIS, New Delhi, India.
IS 456:2000, Plan and Reinforced Concrete Code of Practice (fourth revision), BIS,
New Delhi, India.
IS 875(Part 3):2015, Design Loads (Other than Earthquake) for buildings and
Structure- Code of Practice (third revision), BIS, New Delhi, India.

14
IS 1893(Part 1):2016, Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, part 1
general provision and building (sixth revision), BIS, New Delhi, India.
IS 13920:2016, Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures
subjected to Seismic Forces Code of Practice (first revision), BIS, New Delhi,
India.
Konapure, C. G., and Dhanshetti, P.V., (2015), Effect of P-Delta action on multi-
storey buildings, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology,
4(1), 668-672.
Manasa, C. K., Manjularani, P., (2017), Effect of wind load on tall RC buildings by
P-Delta analysis, Int. conf. on current trends in Eng. Science and Technology.
Nilupa, H., Priyan, M., Tuan, N., and Nicholas, H., (2010), Seismic performance of
super tall buildings, International Conference on sustainable built environment,
160-168.
Sanjay, K. S., and Umesh, P., (2016), Effect of aspect ratio & plan configuration on
seismic performance of multi-storeyed regular R.C.C. building: An evaluation by
static analysis, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced
Engineering, 6(1), 192-197.
Sullivan, T. J., Priestley, M. J. N., and Calvi, G. M., (2008), Estimating the higher-
mode response of ductile structures." Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 12(3),
456-472.

15