IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Analyzing complex wake-terrain
Seismic analysis of Multi storey Building on interactions and its implications on wind-
farm performance.
Sloping Ground and Flat Ground by using ETABS Mandar Tabib, Adil Rasheed and Franz
Fuchs

- Flying over uneven moving terrain based

To cite this article: K Veera Babu et al 2023 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1130 012004 on optic-flow cues without any need for
reference frames or accelerometers
Fabien Expert and Franck Ruffier

- Analysis of terrain navigability in

underwater terrain aided navigation
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Miao Zhao, Zhenyang Xu and MA
Weiqiang

This content was downloaded from IP address 202.52.243.98 on 22/03/2023 at 03:41

ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

Seismic analysis of Multi storey Building on Sloping Ground

and Flat Ground by using ETABS

K Veera Babu 1, S Siva Rama Krishna 2, Venu Malagavelli 3

1. M. Tech, Student, Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of
Aeronautical Engineering, Dundigal, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500043, India.
2. Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Aeronautical Engineering,
Dundigal, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500043, India.

3.Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Aeronautical Engineering, Dundigal,

Hyderabad, Telangana, 500043, India.

Abstract. Due to urbanization and industrialization, which paved the door for the development
of tall, multi-story structures on mountainous terrain, land is scarce in emerging nations like
India. Buildings built on hilly terrain differ from those built on flat terrain due of their uneven
and asymmetrical vertical and horizontal structures. These buildings are also significantly more
vulnerable to earthquake pressures when located in mountainous terrain. The primary goal of the
current endeavor is to investigate how structures behave on level and sloping terrain. Hillyplaces
require different construction configurations than level areas. Hill structures vary from those on
lowlands in that they are torsionally linked, highly irregular, and asymmetrical in both the
horizontal and vertical planes. As a result, they are vulnerable to severe damage when an
earthquake strikes. The behavior of a multi-story structure with two distinct slope angles was
attempted to be studied in this paper, and a comparison with flat ground was made. by taking
Earthquake Zone II into account. Buildings on level ground and buildings on slanted ground are
compared. The models are created with the aid of the structural analysis program ETABS.
Response spectrum analysis is used for analysis. The analysis's findings, including storey shear,
storey drifts, moments, and displacement, are tabulated and examined.

Keywords: Irregularity, sloping ground, sloping angles, ETABS software, Response spectrum
analysis

1. Introduction

The most catastrophic and unpredictably occurring natural occurrence is an earthquake. When a building
is subjected to seismic pressures, human lives are not immediately lost; instead, the building is damaged,
which causes it to collapse, endangering the lives of its residents and damaging nearby property.
Particularly in a growing nation like India, the recent earthquakes' widespread devastation of low- and
high-rise structures calls for more inquiry [1]. A structure that is subject to seismic or earthquake forces
is always at risk of being damaged, but the risk is increased significantly if the structure is sloped, such
as a building on a hill that is inclined toward the ground. This is due to the formation of plastic hinges
on the uphill side of short columns due to higher lateral stresses [2]. Structures on slopes differ from
those on plains because they are irregular both vertically and

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

horizontally. Seismic zones II and V cover a sizable portion of the hilly terrain in northern and north-
eastern India [3,4].

Doda (2013), Nepal earthquake (2015), and Sikkim (2011) have recently caused extensive damage. Due
to the fast urbanization, increased economic growth, and consequent increase in population density in
this area, multi-storey RC framed structures are required [5]. There is a requirement that buildings be
built on sloped ground in this area due to the dearth of flat land. The building on flat ground is shown in
the figure 1 below. In the present-day study, a two-tale framed constructing with dispositions of 0°, 10°,
and 20° to the floor this is difficulty to sinusoidal floor movement is modelled the usage of an
experimental setup, proven the usage of finite detail coding, and the effects acquired are proven through
wearing out linear time records evaluation in structural evaluation and layout software.

Figure 1: Building on sloping ground

1.1. Irregular building

Because of choppy mass, strength, and stiffness distributions alongside of peak of the constructing, the
constructing systems must be assigned to irregular building as shown in figure 1. The evaluation and
layout are extra hard whilst such homes are constructed in excessive seismic zones [6].

The building's lateral force resisting system is the component that resists seismic forces (L.F.R.S). The
building's L.F.R.S. might be of a variety of sorts. Shear walls, frame-shear wall dual systems, and special
moment resistant frames are the most prevalent types of these systems in a building seen in figure 2 of
most cases, the weak structural planes in a building system are where damage first appears in a structure.
These flaws cause the structure to continue to deteriorate, which causes it to collapse [7,8]. These flaws
are frequently caused by structural abnormalities in a building system's stiffness, strength,and mass. Plan
and vertical irregularities are two primary categories for the structural irregularity. If there's a choppy
distribution of mass, strength, and stiffness alongside the constructing height, the shape is probably
categorized as vertically irregular. According to IS 1893:2002,[9] a Storey in a constructing is taken into
consideration to have mass irregularity if its mass is extra than 200% of the tale subsequent to it [10,
11]. A storey is taken into consideration to be "weak" if its pressure is much less than 60% that of the
storey without delay above it. A storey is referred to as a "soft storey" if its stiffness is less than 70% or
higher than that of the storey next to it [12, 13].

2
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

Figure 2: Re-entrant corner irregularity

It is the Centroid's stiffness in a floor-diaphragm layout. Only translational displacement will occur in
the floor diaphragm when the center of stiffness is subjected to lateral stress. Since behavior is connected
both in plan and along height, other levels are free to translate and rotate. Centre of stiffness is a
consequence of structural characteristics and is unaffected by loading [14]. The point on the floor
through which lateral force must flow for a one-story structure in order for the floor to experience only
rigid body translation and not rigid body rotation is referred to as the center of stiffness, according to
IS1893-2002, [9].

1.2 Regular building

Regular structures don't have any noticeable plan or vertical configuration discontinuities. Certain
physical discontinuities in irregular structures, whether in plan, elevation, or both, have an impact on
how well they perform when subjected to lateral loads. The top of the building (or the top of the setback)
must be followed by all lateral load-resisting vertical elements (columns) running uninterruptedly to the
foundations. From the base to the top, the lateral stiffness and mass of floors must either remain constant
or gradually decrease (without abrupt variations). When masonry infillsare taken into account, the
actual storey resistance shouldn't differ noticeably between adjacent storeys.

2. Literature studies

Likhitharadhya Y R, Praveen J V, Sanjith J, Ranjith A, et al (2016),[2] Although flat ground is typically

where the structures are built, because level land is so scarce, development has begun on slopes. On
land that slopes, there are two different construction configurations: step back and step back setback.
This study's research took into account a G+ 10 story RCC structure with a ground slope ranging from
100 to 300. It has been compared to the structure standing on level ground. Using the structure analysis
programmed ETAB 2015, the building was modelled and examined to determine the impact of the
bottom floor columns' varied heights at various earthquake-related locations. Response spectrum
studies were used to do the seismic study in accordance with IS:1893 (part 1): 2002. The results included
top storey displacement, storey acceleration, base shear, and mode period. Short columns may be more
adversely affected by earthquakes.

Ravikumar et al. (2012),[7] examined two different types of irregularities in building models: vertical
irregularity with setback and sloping ground and plan irregularity with geometric and diaphragm

3
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

discontinuity. To determine the seismic demands, pushover analysis was done using various lateral
load instances in all three directions. Every structure taken into consideration is three stories tall and
has a unique layout with uneven elevation patterns.

Patel et al. (2014),[10] With the use of the analysis tool ETabs, a 3D analytical model of an eight-
story structure was examined in order to determine the effects of a concrete shear wall at various
earthquake-prone areas as well as the change in column height caused by sloping land. In the current
study, lateral load analysis was done in line with seismic code to analyze the impacts of seismic load
and pushover analysis was performed to estimate the seismic vulnerability.

3. Scope of the study

The goal of the project is to create earthquake-resistant buildings utilizing IS 1893:2002,[9] to compare
multi-story regular and irregular structures' seismic responses to flat terrain and multi-story structures
on hills. To compare the results of Story Drift, Shear force, bending moment, and Building Torsion of
regular and irregular buildings with 10-degree and 20-degree slope ground structures with flat ground
models developed with ETABS software in order to investigate, in accordance with IS 1893:2002, the
seismic behavior of multi-story structures in Zone II.

4. Methodology used

4.1 Response spectrum analysis

The idealized single-degree freedom system's most response for the duration of earthquake ground
movements, with a positive duration and damping. This evaluation became finished according with IS
1893-2002. (part1). Enter the soil type and seismic zone factor right here according to IS 1893-2002.
(part1). The ETABS programmed applies the same old response spectra for the form of soil below
attention to the building for the study [14, 15].

This approach permits the attention of a constructing's many response modes (withinside the frequency
domain). For all structures apart from the ones which can be very primary or tremendously complicated,
that is required with the aid of using many constructing codes. Computer evaluation can be used to
discover those modes for a structure. The response of a structure may be characterized as a group of
several precise forms (modes) that during a vibrating string correspond to the "harmonic." In order to
estimate the overall response of the structure, a response is examined for every mode from thelayout
spectrum primarily based totally at the modal frequency and the modal mass. In order to do this, we
ought to decide the energy of all outside influences, i.e. See the effects at the constructing after doing
X, Y, and Z [16, 17]. The following are examples of combination techniques:

x Absolute means that peak values are added.

x Square root of the squares' sum (SRSS).
x complete quadratic combination (CQC), a technique that, for closely spaced modes,
outperforms SRSS.

Since phase information is lost during the generation of the response spectrum, the outcome of a
response spectrum analysis utilizing the response spectrum from a ground motion is often different from
the result of a linear dynamic analysis using that ground motion alone [18].

4
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

The reaction spectrum technique is no longer applicable in situations when structures are either too
irregular, too tall, or significant to a community in disaster response, and more complicated analysis is
frequently needed, such as non-linear static analysis or dynamic analysis [19,20].

4.2 Procedure used

In this paper the response of G+12 building is carried out by using response spectrum method as per
ETABS software. The detailed process of the study is discussed below

4.3 Problem statement

The following are the fundamental data used in analysis.

x Height of typical Storey = 3m

x Height of ground Storey = 3m
x Length of the building = 15 m
x Width of the building = 13 m
x Height of the building = 39 m
x Number of stores = 13
x Wall thickness = 230 mm
x Slab Thickness = 150 mm
x Grade of concrete = M30
x Grade of the steel = Fe500
x Support = Fixed
x Column size = 460mmX230mm
x Beam size = 350mmX230mm
x Location of Building = India
x Live load = 3 KN/m2
x Dead load = 2 KN/m2
x Density of concrete = 25 KN/m3
x Seismic Zones = Zone II
x Site type = II
x Importance factor = 1.5
x Response reduction factor = 5
x Damping Ratio = 5%
x Structure class = C
x Basic wind speed = 44m/s
x Risk coefficient (K1) = 1.08
x Terrain size coefficient (K2) = 1.14
x Topography factor (K3) = 1.36
x Wind design code = IS 875: 2015 (Part 3),[21]
x RCC design code = IS 456:2000,[22]
x Steel design code = IS 800: 2007,[23]
x Earthquake design code = IS 1893: 2016 (Part 1),[24]

5
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

4.4 Modelling buildings

In this paper the three building models namely 00 slope, 100 slope and 200 slope structure are considered
in Zone II seismic considerations. In this stage the three buildings are modelled according to the
considered problem statement. Initially the grid data (Plan data) and storey data are defined as per
considered problem statement. Then the material properties related to the concrete and steel of M30
grade and Fe500 are defied in the ETABS software. The frame section properties like beams, columns
and slabs are assigned for the grid structure model the complete 3D model of the building isshown
below figure 3 for the 00-slope building.

Figure 3: Building with 0 degrees slope

Now the angle of slope 10o, 20o is defied for the remaining two models. The loads which are related to
the gravity loads and lateral loads are applied as per the specifications. Now the response spectrum
analysis is conducted for the three models which are made in Zone II seismic consideration. Now do
the analysis of the structure then finally results of storey drift, shear, bending, torsion, time period,
frequency etc are compared within these models in order to obtain better results. The models of 100
slope, 200 slope and shown in the below figure 4 and figure 5.

Figure 4: Building with 10 degrees slope

6
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

Figure 5: Building with 20 degrees slope

5. Analysis results and discussions

5.1 Storey drift

The lateral displacement of a floor with respect to the floor below is known as "storey drift," and "storey
drift ratio" is the product of "storey drift" and "storey height. The results of the storey drift due to
response function in X direction is shown in the below figure 6

Comparison of Storey Drift

20 Degree
Storey Number

4 slope
6 10 Degree
8 slope
10 0 Degree
12 Slope
14
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006
Drift in m

Figure 6: Comparison of Storey drift values

From the above figure 6 it was observed that the drift values are observed less intensity for 200 slope
building than remaining 100 slopes or 00 slopes in zone II seismic consideration. Because of the less
amount of the loading distribution (due to less frame sections) at the top two storeys the values of drift
are obtained less in case of 20o slope.

7
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

5.2 Storey acceleration

The displacement of a single story with respect to the foundation or ground level of the structure is
referred to as story displacement. As we travel up the structure, we can anticipate increasing total
displacement values. The comparison of the storey accelerations is shown in the below figure 7 related
to the 0o slope, 10o slope and 20o slope using response spectrum analysis.

Comparison of storey acceleration

G
20 Degree slope
Storey Number

4
6 10 Degree slope
8
10 0 Degree Slope
12
14
-80 120 320 520 720
Acceleration values

Figure 7: Comparison of Storey acceleration values

From the above observations it was concluded that by increase in the sloping of the ground there will
be chance of oscillations and these oscillations can for the storey acceleration can be observed in figure
7. In this paper the storey acceleration values are more for the 20o slope than remaining cases like 0o
slope and 10o slopes.

5.3 storey shear

Building in which the horizontal part at the floor level is not rotated. The shear building gets its name
from the fact that the deflected structure shares many characteristics with a cantilever beam that is only
deflected by shear forces. The comparison of storey shear values for the three different cases namely
0o slope, 10o slope and 20o slope are shown in the below figure 8 considered as per response spectrum
method analysis.

Comparison of shear Values

G
2
4
Storey Number

6
20 Degree slope
10 10 Degree slope
12 0 Degree Slope
14
0 100 200 300 400 500
Shear in kN

Figure 8: Comparison of Storey shear values

8
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

From the above observations it was concluded that by increase in the sloping of the ground there will
be chance of increase in the seismic load. In this study the storey acceleration values are more for the
20o slope than remaining cases like 0o slope and 10o slopes.

5.4 Storey Bending

The comparison of storey bending values for the three different cases namely 0o slope, 10o slope and
20o slope are shown in the below figure 9 considered as per response spectrum method analysis.

Comparison of Bending Values

G
2
4
Storey Number

6
20 Degree slope
8
10 Degree slope
10
12 0 Degree Slope

14
-1000 4000 9000 14000
Bending in kN-m

Figure 9: Comparison of Storey bending values

From the above observations it was concluded that by increase in the sloping of the ground there will
be chance of increase in the seismic load. In this study the storey bending values are more for the 20o
slope than remaining cases like 0o slope and 10o slopes.

5.5 Storey Torsion

The comparison of storey torsion values for the three different cases namely 0o slope, 10o slope and
20o slope are shown in the below figure 10 considered as per response spectrum method analysis. From
the above observations it was concluded that by increase in the sloping of the ground there willbe
chance of increase in the seismic load. In this study the storey torsion values are more for the 20o slope
than remaining cases like 0o slope and 10o slopes.

9
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

Comparison of Torsion Values

G
2
4
Storey number

8
20 Degree slope
10
10 Degree slope
12
0 Degree Slope
14
-400 100 600 1100 1600 2100 2600 3100
Torsion in kN-m

Figure 10: Comparison of Storey torsion values

5.6 Base shear

Base shear is a measurement of the greatest predicted lateral force from seismic activity on the base of
the structure. It is determined using the lateral force formulae for the seismic zone, soil type, and building
code. The base shear in the building structure is commonly obtained due to the presents of thevertical
loading condition. The comparison of the base shear in zone II seismic condition are shown in the below
figure 11 for the three cases of slopes namely 00 slope, 100 slope and 200 slope.

Comparison of Base shear Values

482
480
478
Base shear in kN

476
474
472
470
468
0 Degree Slope 10 Degree slope 20 Degree slope
Angle of slope

Figure 11: Comparison of base shear values

From the above figure 11 it was observed that for the building model made with 100 slopes will have
high base shear values that 00 slope and 200 slope. Because the effect of high gravity loads in case of
100 slope building the base shear is more.

10
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

6. Conclusions

From the above study the following conclusions were made

1. The values of deflection are observed as high for 20-degree slope building and for the remaining
models the storey drift values are almost equal intensities in case of RSA X load case.
2. The shear, bending, torsion values are less values obtained in case of 0-degree slop,10-degree slop
and high values are obtained for 20-degree slope.
3. The time period is decreasing by providing the ground slope and it also decreasing by providing the
building irregularities.
4. The time period is increasing by providing the ground slope and it also increasing by providing the
building irregularities.
5. By providing the slope to the ground the base shear is increasing when we compared with flat ground
building.
6. Setback buildings are more stable and won't sustain as much damage from lateral load action when
built on level ground as opposed to other structures on sloping land.
7. While setback buildings may be preferred if the cost of levelling the sloping land is within
reasonable limitations, step back structures on sloping ground attract more action forces than do
setback buildings.
8. The figures also show that constructions on sloped land are more vulnerable to earthquake damage
than ones on flat ground.
9. Storey displacements are mostly shear walls than core shear walls beneath earthquake zones. - II.
10. On Flat ground, setback building attracts less action forces as comparing with other configurations
on sloping ground which make it more stable and it would not tolerate more damages due to the
lateral load action

7. References

[1]. B.G. Birajdar1, S.S. Nalawade2, “SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF BUILDINGS RESTING ON

SLOPING GROUND”, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C.,
Canada August 1-6, 2004, Paper No. 1472.
[2]. Likhitharadhya Y R1, Praveen J V2, Sanjith J3, Ranjith A4, “Seismic Analysis of Multi-Storey
Building Resting on Flat Ground and Sloping Ground”, International Journal of Innovative Research
in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 5, Issue 6, June 2016
[3]. Shivanand.B1, H.S. Vidyadhara2, “DESIGN OF 3D RC FRAME ON SLOPING GROUND”,
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, Volume: 03 Issue: 08 |
Aug-2014.
[4]. Mr. Tamboli Nikhil Vinod, Dr. Ajay Swarup,” STUDY OF SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF MULTI-
STORIED R.C.C. BUILDINGS RESTING ON SLOPING GROUND AND BRACING SYSTEM”,
IJARIIE, Vol-3 Issue-4 2017.
[5]. D. J. Misal, M. A. Bagade, “Study of Seismic Behavior of Multi-Storied R.C.C. Buildings Resting
on Sloping Ground and Considering Bracing System”, International Journal of Engineering
Research Volume No.5 Issue: Special 3, pp: 690-697.

11
ITSCMSI-2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1130 (2023) 012004 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1130/1/012004

[6]. Sarkar P, Prasad AM, Menon D. Vertical geometric irregularity in stepped building frames.
Engineering Structures. 2010 Aug 1;32(8):2175-82.
[7]. Ravikumar, C. M., Babu Narayan, K. S., “Effect of Irregular Configurations on Seismic
Vulnerability of RC Buildings” Architecture Research, 2(3):2026DOI: 10.5923/j.arch.02
03.01.2012.
[8]. S. A.A. A. Rahman & G. Deshmukh (2013), “Seismic Response of Vertically Irregular RC Frame
with Stiffness Irregularity at Fourth Floor”, International Journal of Emerging Technology and
Advanced Engineering, vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 377–385, 2013
[9]. IS 1893 (Part-I) 2002: Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part-I General
Provisions and Buildings, Fifth Revision, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[10]. Patel, M. U. F. et al., “A Performance study and seismic evaluation of RC frame buildings on
sloping ground” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-
1684, p-ISSN: 2320-334X-, PP 51-58, 2014.
[11]. Singh, Y. and Phani, G., “Seismic Behavior of Buildings Located on Slopes” - An Analytical
Study and Some Observations from Sikkim Earthquake of September 18, 2011. 15th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering Journal 2012.
[12]. Babu, N. J. and Balaji, K.Y.G.D, “Pushover analysis of unsymmetrical framed structures on
sloping ground” International Journal of Civil, Structural, Environmental and Infrastructure
Engineering Research and Development (IJCSEIERD) ISSN 2249-6866 Vol. 2 Issue 4 Dec - 2012
45-54.
[13]. Dya, Adrian Fredrick C., and Andres Winston C. Oretaa. "Seismic vulnerability assessment of soft
story irregular buildings using pushover analysis." Procedia Engineering 125 (2015): 925-932.
[14]. Nala wade S.S. “Seismic Analysis of Buildings on Sloping Ground,” M.E. Dissertation, University
of Pune, Pune Dec-2003.
[15]. Bozorgnia Y, Bertero V, "Earthquake Engineering: From Engineering Seismology to Performance
Based Engineering", CRC Press, 2004.
[16]. Birajdar B.G., Nalawade. S.S., 13WCEE 2004 Seismic analysis of buildings resting on sloping
ground. Conference on Our World in Concrete & Structures: 29 – 30 August 2002, Singapore.
[17]. Athanassiadou C.J, 2008, Seismic performance of R/C plane frames irregular in elevation,
Engineering Structures 30 (2008):1250–1261.
[18]. Gourabi, A. and Yamani, M. (2011) Active Faulting and Quaternary Landforms Deformation
Related to the Nain Fault on sloping ground. American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 7, 441-
447.
[19]. Vijaya Narayanan A.R., RupenGoswami and Murty C.V.R., 15WCEE 2012 Performance of RC
Buildings along Hill Slopes of Himalayas during 2011 Sikkim Earthquake.
[20]. ChaitraliArvindDeshpande, P. MMohite, “Effect of Sloping Ground on Step- Back and Setback
Configurations of R.C.C. Frame Building”, International Journal of Engineering Research &
Technology (IJERT), Vol. 3 Issue 10, October2014.
[21]. IS 875.3: Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures
- Part 3: Wind Loads (IS 875: Part 3), New Delhi: BIS.
[22]. IS: 456, Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete code of practice, Bureau of Indian,
Standards, New Delhi, 2000.
[23]. IS 800-2007: General Construction in Steel — Code of Practice; 3rd S Revision, New Delhi: BIS
Indian standards.
[24]. IS 1893-Part 1, Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. Bureau of
Indian Standards, (2016).
.

12