Comparative Analysis of a Square Tall Building for Dominating Effect of Earthquake or Wind

International Journal of Civil Engineering

© 2025 by SSRG - IJCE Journal

Volume 12 Issue 7

Year of Publication : 2025

Authors : Digvijay S Hada, S K Nagar, A K Dwivedi

10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V12I7P112

How to Cite?

Digvijay S Hada, S K Nagar, A K Dwivedi, "Comparative Analysis of a Square Tall Building for Dominating Effect of Earthquake or Wind," SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 12,  no. 7, pp. 130-144, 2025. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V12I7P112

Abstract:

In recent years, structural engineering has experienced a crucial transformation, marked by substantial progress in the design of tall buildings. These tall buildings must be designed to withstand wind-induced lateral loads and seismic forces. However, analysing tall buildings for these forces individually can be time-consuming. By identifying the dominant forces (wind or seismic) at specific building heights, designers can prioritize during the design process, ultimately reducing time and resources. This research analyses buildings from 26 to 104 meters under hard and loose soil types in Seismic Zones IV and V, along with wind speeds of 55, 50, and 47 m/s. To assess how building height, soil type, seismic intensity, and wind loads collectively influence structural behaviour. The results show that in Earthquake Zone V with loose soil, wind forces dominate in buildings with heights of more than 64 m, 84 m, and 92 m for wind speeds of 55, 50 and 47 m/s, respectively. In comparison, in Zone IV, wind forces dominate in buildings with heights of more than 48 m and 56 m for wind speeds of 50 m/s and 47 m/s, respectively. For hard soil in Zone V, wind forces dominate in buildings with heights of more than 35 m and 44 m for wind speeds of 50 m/s and 47 m/s, respectively. Wind forces dominate at lower building heights in harder soils and lower seismic zones, making wind force consideration mandatory for shorter buildings in areas with higher wind speeds. Soil conditions have a greater influence than seismic zone on buildings shorter than 64 m in seismic Zones IV and V.

Keywords:

In recent years, structural engineering has experienced a crucial transformation, marked by substantial progress in the design of tall buildings. These tall buildings must be designed to withstand wind-induced lateral loads and seismic forces. However, analysing tall buildings for these forces individually can be time-consuming. By identifying the dominant forces (wind or seismic) at specific building heights, designers can prioritize during the design process, ultimately reducing time and resources. This research analyses buildings from 26 to 104 meters under hard and loose soil types in Seismic Zones IV and V, along with wind speeds of 55, 50, and 47 m/s. To assess how building height, soil type, seismic intensity, and wind loads collectively influence structural behaviour. The results show that in Earthquake Zone V with loose soil, wind forces dominate in buildings with heights of more than 64 m, 84 m, and 92 m for wind speeds of 55, 50 and 47 m/s, respectively. In comparison, in Zone IV, wind forces dominate in buildings with heights of more than 48 m and 56 m for wind speeds of 50 m/s and 47 m/s, respectively. For hard soil in Zone V, wind forces dominate in buildings with heights of more than 35 m and 44 m for wind speeds of 50 m/s and 47 m/s, respectively. Wind forces dominate at lower building heights in harder soils and lower seismic zones, making wind force consideration mandatory for shorter buildings in areas with higher wind speeds. Soil conditions have a greater influence than seismic zone on buildings shorter than 64 m in seismic Zones IV and V.

References:

[1] IS 875 (Part 3): 2015, “Design Loads (Other than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures - Code of Practice Part 3 Wind Loads,” Bureau of Indian Standards, 2015.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[2] IS 1893-1: (2002), “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures,” Part 1 General Provisions and Buildings, Bureau of Indian Standards, pp. 1-45, 2002.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[3] IS 456: (2000), “Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice,” Bureau of Indian standards, pp. 1-114, 2000.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[4] Alfonso Vulcano, “Comparative Study of the Earthquake and Wind Dynamic Responses of Base-Isolated Buildings,” Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, vol. 74-76, pp. 751-764, 1998.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[5] T. Balendra, C.H Yu, and F.L. Lee, “An Economical Structural System for Wind and Earthquake Loads,” Engineering Structures, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 491-501, 2001.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[6] Khaled Mohamed Heiza, and Magdy A. Tayel, “Comparative Study of The Effects of Wind and Earthquake Loads on High-Rise Buildings,” Challenge Journal of Concrete Research Letters, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 386-405, 2012.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[7] S.Mahesh, and B.Panduranga Rao, “Comparison of Analysis and Design of Regular and Irregular Configuration of Multi Story building in Various Seismic Zones and Various Types of Soils using ETABS and STAAD,” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, vol. 11. no. 6, pp. 45-52, 2014.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[8] Anirudh Gottala et al., “Comparative Study of Static and Dynamic Seismic Analysis of a Multistoried Building,” International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 173-183, 2015.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[9] Mahmud Sazzad, and Samdani Azad, “Effect of Building Shape on the Response to Wind and Earthquake,” International Journal of Advanced Structures and Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 232-236, 2015.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[10] Gauri G. Kakpure, and Ashok R. Mundhada, “Comparative Study of Static and Dynamic Seismic Analysis of Multistoried RCC Building by ETAB: A Review,” International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 16-20, 2016.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[11] Chenyang Yuan et al., “Fragility Analysis of Large-Scale Wind Turbines Under the Combination of Seismic and Aerodynamic Loads,” Renewable Energy, vol. 113, pp. 1122-1134, 2017.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[12] Rabi Akhtar, Shree Prakash, and Mirza Aamir Baig, “Study of Comparison between Static and Dynamic Analysis Subjected to Wind and Earthquake Load,” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 3009-3014, 2017.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[13] Zheng Lu, Kun Li, and Ying Zhou, “Comparative Studies on Structures with a Tuned Mass Damper and a Particle Damper,” Journal of Aerospace Engineering, vol. 31, no. 6, 2018.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[14] Raffaele De Risi, Subhamoy Bhattacharya, and Katsuichiro Goda, “Seismic Performance Assessment of Monopile-Supported Offshore Wind Turbines Using Unscaled Natural Earthquake Records,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 109, pp. 154-172, 2018.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[15] Piguang Wang et al., “Wind, Wave and Earthquake Responses of Offshore Wind Turbine on Monopile Foundation in Clay,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 113, pp. 47-57, 2018.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[16] Ghanbari Hamid et al., “Performance Assessment of Different Tabular Systems for Tall Buildings Against Dynamic Wind and Earthquake Effects,” 8th Internal Conference on Seismology & Earthquake Engineering, Tehran, Iran, pp. 1-2, 2019. [Google Scholar]
[17] Yang Yang et al., “Analysis of Seismic Behaviour of an Offshore Wind Turbine with a Flexible Foundation,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 178, pp. 215-228, 2019.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[18] Xiao-Wei Zheng et al., “Damage Risk Assessment of a High-Rise Building Against Multihazard of Earthquake and Strong Wind with Recorded Data,” Engineering Structures, vol. 200, 2019.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[19] Wei Jing, Huan Feng, and Xuansheng Cheng, “Dynamic Responses of Liquid Storage Tanks Caused by Wind and Earthquake in Special Environment,” Applied sciences, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 1-16, 2019.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[20] Ruifu Zhang, Zhipeng Zhao, and Kaoshan Dai, “Seismic Response Mitigation of a Wind Turbine Tower Using a Tuned Parallel Inerter Mass System,” Engineering Structures, vol. 180, pp. 29-39, 2019.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[21] Zhi Zhao et al., “Studies on Application of Scissor-Jack Braced Viscous Damper System in Wind Turbines Under Seismic and Wind Loads,” Engineering Structures, vol. 196, 2019.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[22] Swagato Biswas Ankon, “A Comparative Study of Behavior of Multi-Storied Regular and Irregular Buildings under Static and Dynamic Loading,” Open Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 337-352, 2020.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[23] Pourya Kazemi Esfeh, and Amir M. Kaynia, “Earthquake Response of Monopiles and Caissons for Offshore Wind Turbines Founded in Liquefiable Soil,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 136, pp. 1-22, 2020.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[24] Zijun Wang, Pedro Martinez-Vazquez, and Boming Zhao, “Pushover Analysis of Structures Subjected to Combined Actions of Earthquake and Wind,” Engineering structures, vol. 221, pp. 1-25, 2020.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[25] Hussin Ahmad Hasrat, “Comparative Study of Various High Rise Building Lateral Load Resisting Systems for Seismic Load & Wind Load: A Review,” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 291-297, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[26] Maha Al-Soudani, Hesham Aamer Najim Abbas, and Hesham A. Numan, “Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Structures Under Wind and Earthquake Using Different Design Methods,” Journal of Engineering Research, vol. 11, no. 1B, pp.1-13, 2023.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[27] Huaxiao Wu et al., “Comparison of Dynamic Responses of Parallel-Placed Adjacent High-Rise Buildings under Wind and Earthquake Excitations,” Shock and Vibration, vol. 2021, pp. 1-14, 2021.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[28] Shinyoung Kwag et al., “Significance of Multi-Hazard risk in Design of Buildings Under Earthquake and Wind Loads,” Engineering Structures, vol. 243, pp. 1-14, 2021.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[29] Hao Zhu, Deyu Li, and Jun Xu, “Dynamic Analysis and Optimization of a Wind Turbine Tower Subject to Wind and Earthquake Loads,” The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, vol. 31, no. 15, 2022.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[30] Praful P. Gujjewar, S.S. Rathore, and Aasif M. Baig, “Static and Dynamic Analysis of Transmission Tower to Wind and Seismic Loads,” vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 3925-3933, 2022.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[31] Wisam S. Abdulateef, and Farzad Hejazi, “Fuzzy Logic Based Adaptive Vibration Control System for Structures Subjected to Seismic and Wind Loads,” Structures, vol. 55, pp. 1507-1531, 2023.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[32] Hong Lin et al., “Hong LinA CFD-FEA Coupled Model for Simulating Dynamic Response of Offshore Jacket Platform Under Earthquake Considering Wind, Wave, Current and Aftershock Loads,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 300, 2024.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[33] Piguang Wang et al., “Effects of Wind-Wave-Current-Earthquake Interaction on the Wave Height and Hydrodynamic Pressure Based on CFD Method,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 305, 2024.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[34] Lilin Wang, and Takeshi Ishihara, “Failure-Mechanism for Wind Turbines Supported by Pile Groups at the Kugino Wind Farm in the Kumamoto Earthquake,” Structures, vol. 69, pp. 1-20, 2024.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[35] Takeshi Ishihara, Yoshihisa Iida, and Lilin Wang, “Numerical Study of Combined Seismic and Aerodynamic Loads on Wind Turbine Support Structures by Coupled and Uncoupled Approaches,” Structures, vol. 60, pp. 1-17, 2024.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]