Comparison of response spectrum and equivalent static analysis for identifying the safest location of floating columns using ETABS in zone IV.

Many of the high-rise buildings and tall structures are currently designed with floating columns for aesthetic intentions and to deliver additional space for mobility in parking spaces and effective utilization of working areas in a building. However, when compared to typical buildings, some of the structures are more likely to be damaged or collapse during earthquakes in high seismic zones. The soft-story, vertical or plan irregularity, Floating Column (FC), and large loads are all common features of modern multi-story buildings, whereas modern technology in the construction industry returns out to be an increasingly common practice in India's cities. Most RC structures were found to be constructed with these flaws were particularly unfavorable seismically active zones based on the findings of previous earthquake research. These outcomes occurred because of a variety of considerations, including a non-uniform distribution of mass, stiffness, and strength are all factors to consider. In this investigation, it has been compared for the analysis of multi-story buildings with and without Floating Columns (FC) at various levels in regular plans, to build a safe placement for floating columns in seismic designs. Using the software ETABS 2017, Equivalent Static Analysis (ESA) and Response Spectrum Analysis (RSA) have been performed on the Mathematical 3D model of G+10 building of a regular plan, and these models were compared, and it will assist in determining the structures numerous analytical properties as well as providing a very systematic and cost-effective design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]