Evaluation of the Cost Effectiveness of Three Different Structural Systems for Tall Buildings

Abstract

New tall building developments of ever-increasing heights have been taking place around the world. The structural system of a high-rise building is designed to withstand vertical gravity loads as well as lateral forces induced by wind or seismic activity. The structural system consists only of the members designed to carry the loads, and all other members are referred to as non-structural. The structural system for a high-rise structure is determined by the selection and arrangement of the primary structural elements to withstand the different combinations of gravity and lateral loads as effectively as possible. A high-rise building needs to be stabilized for horizontal loads, and to achieve this; several different structural systems can be chosen. All the different systems have evolved from the traditional rigidly jointed structural frame. The fundamental design for all these structural systems has been to place as much of the load-carrying material as possible around the building’s external fringe to maximize its flexural rigidity. This study has concentrated on three of these structural systems: the rigid frame system, the dual system, and the shear wall system. These systems were chosen because of their common use in the region. This study aims to evaluate the three structural systems and figure out which system is the most cost-effective to utilize based on the number of floors (10, 20, and 30) as well as the minimum element cross-section and reinforcement ratio. This will be provided by static checking (dynamical is required) of the results obtained from ETABS. Following the completion of the work using ETABS 2016 and comparing the systems in terms of strength and economy, the findings were as follows: the most economical system for 10 floors is the rigid frame system, the shear wall system for 20 floors, and the shear wall system for 30 floors.