PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 3, 2026Structures2 citationsOpen Access

Vertical irregularity in RC MRF and wall structures: Evaluation and proposal of irregularity levels and impacts on behaviour factor

View Full Paper
DSDavi SantosJMJosé MeloHMHelder Maranhão

Key Points

  • Irregular elevation significantly impacts seismic response in DCM structures, indicating design vulnerabilities.
  • The study found a proposed 20% reduction in behaviour factors for irregular structures compared to regular ones.
  • Analysis was performed using ETABS22® and adaptive pushover analysis in SeismoStruct v2025, focusing on Eurocode 8 guidelines.
  • Proposed classification for Eurocode 8 includes levels of regularity to simplify design and enhance safety.

Abstract

Eurocode 8 is currently undergoing revision on several aspects, such as ductility classes, damage limitation thresholds, local ductility requirements and their corresponding detailing provisions, and criteria for structural irregularities. This work assessed the impact of irregularity in elevation on seismic response by analysing regular in plan DCM (Ductility Class Medium) frame and wall structures. The increase in ground floor height implemented the irregularity to produce shifts in the inter-storey lateral stiffness. The design of those models was performed following the current generation Eurocode 8 (EC8) guidelines, using ETABS22® and the nonlinear analysis was assessed by an adaptive pushover analysis in SeismoStruct v2025. Additionally, this study examines the changes in behaviour factor calculus methodology in the first and second generations of EC8 in those models. The main purpose of this work is to propose an intermediate behaviour factor, considering the hypothesis that different levels of seismic response of irregular structures exist. The outcomes of this research revealed that, for DCM structures, irregular elevation impacts the seismic response substantially. Moreover, it is proposed for the second generation of Eurocode 8 a classification of regular, irregular and strongly irregular structures, with a corresponding reduction of 20 % of ( q ) for irregular structures and 30 % for strongly irregular structures.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Santos et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a76162c6e9836116a2f403https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2026.111281
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A review of research on seismic behaviour of irregular building structures since 20022007 · 253 citations
  2. 2Plastic Hinge Length of RC Shear Walls: A Mechanical Approach Considering Plane Bending and Tension Shift2025 · 1 citations
  3. 3Research on the Influence of the Target Spectrum and Amplitude Scaling Method on the Dynamic Time History Analysis Results of a High-Rise Building Structure2025 · 1 citations
  4. 4Seismic Response of Vertically Irregular Frames: Response History and Modal Pushover Analyses2004 · 168 citations
  5. 5Experimental Study and Finite Element Modelling of Squat Shear Walls under Combined Cyclic Loads and High Axial Loads2023 · 7 citations