Reinforcement Design and Seismic Response Analysis: A Comparison of STAAD Pro and ETABS

Abstract

This study looked at the design and seismic performance of a G+6 multistory residential building using STAAD Pro and ETABS software. The design and analysis followed the Indian Standard Codes and Practices for a building measuring 40×60 ft, divided into 20 segments. The analysis included dead, live, wind, and seismic loads, and the structure was tested under each condition. Key modeling assumptions for this study included using standard concrete and steel material properties, such as M25 grade concrete and Fe415 grade steel, fixed boundary conditions at the base, and load combinations according to Indian Standard provisions IS 456:2000 and IS 1893:2016. The results showed that ETABS usually indicated a larger reinforcement area for the columns than STAAD Pro, but the required reinforcement area was smaller for ETABS. For beams, ETABS provided more cost-effective options due to its flexibility in bar size and quantity. The study also noted that STAAD Pro could not automatically design slab reinforcements according to Indian standards. Seismic response analyses were carried out, including base shear, story drift, and displacement. These findings reveal the differences in precision between the software and the need for accuracy and efficiency. A detailed review of the design and seismic performance of multi-story buildings uncovered several strategies and factors that are important for improving resilience in earthquake-prone areas.