ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al.

ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF CONCRETE DIAGRID BUILDING AND ITS COMPARISON

WITH CONVENTIONAL FRAME BUILDING
1ROHIT KUMAR SINGH, 2Dr. VIVEK GARG, 3Dr. ABHAY SHARMA

1Postgraduate student, Structural Engineering, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, India

2Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, India

3Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, India

Email id: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Construction of multistorey building is rapidly increasing throughout the world. Advances in construction technology,
materials, structural systems, analysis and design software facilitated the growth of these buildings. Diagrid buildings are
emerging as structurally efficient as well as architecturally significant assemblies for tall buildings. Recently the diagrid
structural system has been widely used for tall buildings due to the structural efficiency and aesthetic potential provided by
the unique geometric configuration of the system. Generally, for tall building diagrid structure steel is used. In present work,
concrete diagrid structure is analysed and compared with conventional concrete building. Structural design of high rise
buildings is governed by lateral loads due to wind or earthquake. Lateral load resistance of the structure is provided by
interior structural system or exterior structural system. Due to inclined columns lateral loads are resisted by axial action of
the diagonal in diagrid structure compared to bending of vertical columns in conventional building.

A regular five storey RCC building with plan size 15 m 15 m located in seismic zone V is considered for analysis. STAAD.Pro
software is used for modelling and analysis of structural members. All structural members are designed as per IS 456:2000
and load combinations of seismic forces are considered as per IS 1893(Part 1): 2002. Comparison of analysis results in terms
of storey drift, node to node displacement, bending moment, shear forces, area of reinforcement, and also the economical
aspect is presented. In diagrid structure, the major portion of lateral load is taken by external diagonal members which in
turn release the lateral load in inner columns. This causes economical design of diagrid structure compared to conventional
structure. Drift in diagrid building is approx. half to that obtained in conventional building. In this study, steel reinforcement
used in diagrid structure is found to be 33% less compared to conventional building.

Keywords: Diagrid building, conventional building, storey drift, economy, seismic forces.

1. INTRODUCTION

Tall buildings emerged in the late nineteenth century in conventional orthogonal structures for tall buildings
the U.S.A. They constituted a socalled American such as framed tubes, diagrid structures carry lateral
Building Type, meaning that most important tall wind loads much more efficiently by their diagonal
buildings were built in the U.S.A. Today, they are a members axial action. Todays architects have been
worldwide architectural phenomenon. Many tall losing interest in aesthetic expressions provided by
buildings are built worldwide, especially in Asian conventional braced tubes composed of orthogonal
countries, such as China, Korea, Japan, and Malaysia. members and large diagonal members because they
Based on data available and published in the 1980s, always seek something new and different. A Diagrid
about 49% of the worlds tall buildings were located in structure provides great structural efficiency without
North America. The distribution of tall buildings has vertical columns have also opened new aesthetic
changed radically with Asia now having the largest share potential for tall building architecture. Diagrid has a
with 32%, and North Americas having 24%.This data good appearance and it is easily recognized. The
demonstrates the rapid growth of tall building configuration and efficiency of a diagrid system reduces
construction in Asian countries during this period while the number of structural element required on the faade
North American construction has slowed. In fact, eight of of the buildings, therefore less obstruction to the outside
the top ten tall buildings are now in Asia and only two of view. The structural efficiency of diagrid system also
them namely the Sears Tower and the Empire State helps in avoiding interior and corner columns, and
Building, are in North America. Generally, the function of therefore allowing significant flexibility with the floor
tall buildings has been as commercial office buildings. plan. Diagrid system around perimeter saves
Other usages, such as residential, mixeduse, and hotel approximately 20 percent of the structural steel weight
tower developments have since rapidly increased. Tall when compared to a conventional momentframe
building development involves various complex factors structure. The diagonal members in diagrid structural
such as economics, aesthetics look, technology, systems carry gravity loads as well as lateral forces due
municipal regulations, and politics. Among these, to their triangulated configuration. Diagrid can save upto
economics has been the primary governing factor. For a 20% to 30% the amount of structural steel in a highrise
very tall building, its structural design is generally building.
governed by its lateral stiffness. Comparing with

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1330

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)
The term diagrid is a combination of the words (c) Study of results in terms of moments, forces, drift,
diagonal and grid and refers to a structural system deflection, and also the economy.
that is singlethickness in nature and gains its structural
integrity through the use of triangulation. Diagrid Many recently work is done in diagrid structure. Some of
systems can be planar, crystalline or take on multiple the important work are mentioned here such as 1)
curvatures, they often use crystalline forms or curvature StiffnessBased Design Of Steel Diagrid Structure, 2)
to increase their stiffness. Perimeter diagrids normally Optimal angles of diagrid for 60 storey structures, 3)
carry the lateral and gravity loads of the building and are Strategies to Reduce Lateral Forces on Highrise
used to support the floor edges. Buildings that Use Diagrid Structural System,4) Analysis
There are engineeringbased reasons that would suggest and design of 36 storey building, 5)Seismic
the use of a diagrid. Some of them are: performance evaluation of Diagrid system building. The
brief description of these work are summarized below.
1. Increased the stability due to triangulation
2. Combination of the gravity and lateral loadbearing K.Moon presented Design and Construction of Steel
systems, potentially providing more efficiency. Diagrid Structures by stiffness method.
3. Provision of alternate load paths (redundancy) in Study and design of 60 and 80 storey building is carried
the event of a structural failure (which lacks in case out with uniform and varying angle.
of conventional framed building). Based on the above design studies, it is suggested to use
4. Reduced weight of the superstructure can translate a varying angle diagrid structure for a very tall building
into a reduced load on the foundations. if its aspect ratio bigger than about 7 and a uniform angle
The distribution of load in diagrid structure are shown diagrid is adopted for a tall building with its aspect ratio
below: smaller than about 7.

KyoungSun Moon, Jerome J. Connor and John
E.Fernandez studied the behaviour diagrid structural
system for tall buildings and their characteristics and
methodology for preliminary design. They concluded at
the end for optimal angles for 60storey diagrid
structures, which briefly described below. In this study
two different diagrid structural schemes are examined.
Scheme 1 includes the use of four vertical corner
columns; and scheme 2 has no vertical corner columns.
The same set of seven different diagrid angles is
considered for both schemes, results in 14 different
building structures. From calculation results , it is
indicated that 70 diagrid angle gives best result for
shear rigidity and bending rigidity.

Strategies to Reduce Lateral Forces on Highrise
Buildings that Use Diagrid Structural System: This paper
focus on the reduction in lateral forces in tall diagrid
structures. Binh K. Nguyen and Hasim Altan study the
behaviour of lateral forces and come to conclusion how
to reduce it. The strategies to increase tallbuildings
1.1 OBJECTIVE OF THIS STUDY lateral performance can be divided into 3 categories: (1)
Aerodynamic Modifications; (2) Structural
Safety and minimum damage level of a structure could Reinforcements; and (3) Using Auxiliary Damping
be the prime requirement of high rise buildings .To meet Devices/Systems.
these requirements, the structure should have adequate
lateral strength & sufficient ductility. In this thesis, I Seismic performance evaluation of Diagrid system
have taken two G+4 storey buildings, one for diagrid and building : J. Kim, Y. Jun and Y.Ho Lee presented a paper
other for conventional frame, in which every storey is of on seismic performance evaluation of diagrid building.
3m height is taken in both building and analysis values Design and analysis of a 36 storey building is carried for
are compared in terms of Moment, Shear force, Axial different angle. The analysis model structures are 36
force, Displacement, Drift and also the economical aspect story diagrid structures with various slopes (50.2,61.0,
is compared for the seismic zone V. 67.4, 71.6, 74.5, and 79.5). Analysis result shows that
The main objective of this paper is to investigate the as the slope of braces increased the shear lag effect
behaviour of buildings, i.e., diagrid and conventional increased and the lateral strength decreased. The diagrid
frame under the seismic zone V. For comparison of two structures with the brace angle between 60 to 70
buildings under the same seismic zone, the parameter in seemed to be most efficient in resisting lateral as well as
both the buildings is taken same. The work is to be gravity loads. The diagrid structure with circular plan
carried out by conducting shape showed higher strength than the diagrid structure
(a) Modelling of both the building frames. with square plan as a result of decrease in shear lag
(b) Analysis of building frames considering seismic phenomenon. Analysis and design of 36 storey building:
parameters. This paper presented by Khushbu Jani, Paresh V. Patel

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1331

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)
shows the analysis and design of a 36 storey steel diagrid
structure. Analysis result shows that , lateral load is
mainly resisted by exterior frame (Diagonal Columns)
and gravity load is resisted by both the exterior frame
(Diagonal Columns) and interior frame. From the results,
it can be observed that interior frame is mainly resisting
gravity loading.

2. METHODOLOGY
In this study comparison of diagrid and conventional
building under seismic forces is done. Here G+ 4 storey is
taken and same live load is applied in both the buildings
for its behaviour and comparison.
The framed buildings are subjected to vibrations
because of earthquake and therefore seismic analysis is
essential for these building frames. The fixed base
system is analyzed by employing in both building frames Figure 3: Plan of conventional/ diagrid building
in seismic zone V by means of Staad.Pro software. The
response of both the building frames is studied for useful
interpretation of results.

2.1 STEPS FOR COMPARISON

A comparison of results in terms of moments,

displacements, shear force, axial force, drift and
economy has been made. Following steps are adopted in
this study:

Step1 Selection of building geometry and Seismic zone:

The behaviour of both the models is studied for Zone V
of Seismic zones of India as per IS code 1893 (Part 1):
2002 for which zone factor (Z) is 0.36. Five storey
building is taken. Each storey is of 3m height. Depth of
foundation is taken as 1.5 m.
Step2 Formation of load combination: Six primary load
case and thirteen load combination is considered for Figure 4: Structure model of diagrid building
analysis and design.
Step3 Modelling of building frames using STADD.Pro
software
Step4 Analysis of both the building frames is done
under seismic zone v and each load combination.
Step5 Comparative study of results in terms of
maximum moments in columns and beams, storey
displacement, shear force, axial force, drift and economy.

2.2 STRUCTURAL MODELS
Structural models are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 5: Elevation of diagrid building

A regular floor plan of 15m x 15m is considered in both

buildings. Storey height is 3m. The angle of inclined
column(45o) is kept constant throughout the height. The
design dead load and live load are 4.5 kN/m2 and 4
kN/m2 respectively. Exterior wall load is taken negligible
in both the buildings. Both the building frames are
Figure 2: Structural model of conventional building
analyzed for seismic zone V. Seismic parameters are
taken as per Indian code IS 1893(Part 1) : 2002.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1332

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)
Analysis results of both buildings taken as 200 x 400 mm for both buildings. The shear
force and bending moment in beam for different floors
The analysis results in terms of Displacement, Inter are compared between conventional and diagrid
storey Drift, Bending moment in beams and columns and building.
economy are presented in this section. Size of beam is

Figure 6: Plan of building showing the selected beam numbering


Table 1 Comparison of max. Shear forces(Fy) and bending moments(Mz) in ground floor beams between
conventional building and diagrid building.

Beam Conventional Building Diagrid Building Ratio

No. Fy(kN)(1) Mz(kNm) (2) Fy(kN)(3) Mz(kNm)(4) (3/1) (4/2)
1 24.2 32.3 25.5 36.0 1.05 1.11

2 24.1 32.0 20.0 27.0 0.83 0.84

3 24.1 32.0 16.0 21.0 0.66 0.66

4 24.2 32.3 25.5 36.0 1.05 1.11

5 27.0 36.1 12.1 14.0 0.45 0.39

6 28.0 38.0 12.1 14.0 0.43 0.37

7 27.0 36.0 10.0 11.0 0.37 0.31

8 26.2 35.0 9.5 10.0 0.36 0.29

9 26.1 35.0 9.5 10.0 0.36 0.29

10 24.1 32.0 20.0 27.0 0.83 0.84

11 26.2 35.0 9.5 10.0 0.37 0.29

12 27.3 37.0 12.0 14.0 0.44 0.38

13 28.0 38.0 12.0 14.0 0.43 0.37

14 27.3 37.0 12.1 14.0 0.44 0.38

15 27.3 37.0 12.0 14.0 0.44 0.38

16 24.0 32.0 16.0 21.0 0.67 0.66

17 26.0 35.0 10.0 10.0 0.38 0.29

18 27.3 37.0 12.0 14.0 0.44 0.38

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1333

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)

Figure 7: Shear force (Fy) in Ground floor beam between conventional and diagrid building.

Figure 8: Bending moment (Mz) in Ground floor beam between conventional and diagrid building.

From shear force and bending moment diagram, the interior vertical column as well as exterior diagonal
corner beams (1, 4) in case of diagrid is having slightly column).
higher value as compared to conventional building. But
for interior beams, the value in diagrid is approx. half or
below than this as compared to conventional building.
The ratio of shear force and bending moment for first,
second, third, fourth floor is approx. same as that of
ground floor. The value of shear force for top floor is
approx. 0.8 times of conventional building in diagrid.

Interior Column Analysis: The analysis of the interior

column is carried out at each floor in terms of axial force,
bending moment in y and z direction. The plan of the
selected location for analysis is shown in fig.9. The
behaviour of the rest of interior column is shown by
symmetry. The selected location of the column to be
analyzed.

The size of column in conventional frame building is Figure 9: Selected location of the column for result
taken as 450 x 450 mm for bottom two storey and 400 x Discussion
400 mm for top three storey. In case of diagrid 300 x 300
mm size column is taken throughout the structure (i.e.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1334

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)
Table. 2 Comparison of Axial force(Fx), bending moment (My & Mz) in interior column analysis for location A.
Interior Column
Conventional Building Diagrid Building Ratio

Location A Fx(kN) My(kN Mz(kN Fx(kN) My(kN Mz(kN
(4/1) (5/2) (6/3)
(1) m) (2) m) (3) (4) m) (5) m) (6)
Ground
Floor 931 132 132 977 29 29 1.05 0.22 0.22
First Floor 720 110 110 768 27 27 1.07 0.25 0.25
Second
Floor 513 99 99 555 27 27 1.08 0.27 0.27
Third Floor 312 83 83 342 24 24 1.10 0.29 0.29
Fourth
Floor 113 49 49 126 14 14 1.12 0.29 0.29

Figure 10: Comparison of axial force (Fx) in column at location A

Figure 11: Comparison of bending moment (My) in column at location A, (same graph for Mz )

From graph it is cleared that bending moment in interior From analysis result, it is obtained that area of
column is relaxed in diagrid structure, although axial reinforcement in interior column is approx. half to that
force is nearly same. Similar behaviour is seen in required in conventional building. The weight of steel
location at B, C & D. This is due to internal column in required in diagrid structure is 33% less than that of
diagrid structure carry only gravity load and seismic conventional building. Volume of concrete used in both
force is resist by external diagonal column while in structure is approx. same( 201 m3 in conventional and
conventional both internal and external column resist 204 m3 in diagrid building).
gravity and seismic load.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1335

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)

Figure 14: Maximum Drift of floor w.r.t adjacent floor
Figure 12: Comparison of steel quantity between
conventional and diagrid building CONCLUSIONS
In this study, it is observed that due to diagonal columns
Lateral Displacement and Max. Drift : in periphery of the structures, the diagrid structure is
more effective in lateral load resistance. Due to this
Lateral displacement means the total displacement of the property of diagrid structure, interior column is used of
floor w.r.t ground. It is caused due to lateral forces(wind smaller size for gravity load resistance and only small
or seismic) acting on building. quantity of lateral load is considered for it. While in case
of conventional frame building, both gravity and lateral
Lateral Displacement (in mm) load is resisted by exterior as well as interior column.
Conventional
Floor building Diagrid building The following points are concluded from above study
0.7 0.3 about diagrid structure:
Ground Floor
6.8 3.9 Structural performance: Diagrid building shows less
First Floor lateral displacement and drift in comparison to
15.2 8.3 conventional building.
Second Floor
Material saving property: Although volume of
24.0 12.7 concrete used in both building is approx. same, but
Third Floor
diagrid shows more economical in terms of steel
30.8 16.5
Fourth Floor used. Diagrid building saves about 33% steel
34.7 18.8 without affecting the structural efficiency.
Fifth Floor Better resistance to lateral loads: Due to diagonal
columns on its periphery, diagrid shows better
resistance to lateral loads and due to this, inner
columns get relaxed and carry only gravity loads.
While in conventional building both inner and outer
column are designed for both gravity and lateral
loads.
Aesthetic look: In comparison to conventional
building, diagrid buildings are more aesthetic in look
and it becomes important for high rise buildings.

So from results and comparison with conventional
building, one can adopt diagrid structure for better
lateral load resistance and this becomes important for
seismic zone IV or V.
Figure 13: Lateral Displacement at each floor w.r.t
Ground REFERENCES
Drift means the relative displacement of floor w.r.t lower 1. Clark W, Kingston J. 1930. The Skyscraper: A Study
one. in the Economic Height of Modern Office Buildings.
American Institute of Steel Construction: New York.
2. Khan, F.R., & Sbarounis, J. (1964). Interaction of
shear walls and frames in concrete structures under
lateral loads. Structural Journal of the American
Society of Civil Engineers, 90(ST3), 285335.
3. Khan, F.R. (1969). Recent structural systems in steel
for highrise buildings. In Proceedings of the British
Constructional Steelwork Association Conference on
Steel in Architecture. London: British Constructional
Steelwork Association.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1336

ROHIT KUMAR SINGH et al. ISSN: 2348-4098
DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 6 AUGUST 2014 (VER II)
4. A. G. Davenport, The Response of Six Building 20. Roelofs, R. (2008). Trussed Faade Constructions: A
Shapes to Turbulent Wind, Seria A, Mathematical Study of the Opportunities of a Structural System.
and Physical Sciences. Vol. 269, No. 1199, A Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.
Discussion on Architectural Aerodynamics, 1971, pp. 21. Moon K.S., MaterialSaving Design Strategies for
385394. Tall Building Structures", CTBUH 8th World
5. Khan, F.R. (1973). Evolution of structural systems Congress, Dubai, March 2008.
for highrise buildings in steel and concrete. In J. 22. P. Irwin, J. Kilpatrick, J. Robinson and A. Frisque,
Kozak (Ed.), Tall Buildings in the Middle and East Wind and Tall Buildings: Negatives and Positives,
Europe: Proceedings of the 10th Regional The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings,
Conference on Tall BuildingsPlanning, Design and Vol. 17, (2008), pp. 915928
Construction. Bratislava: Czechoslovak Scientific and 23. Moon, K. (2008), Optimal Grid Geometry of Diagrid
Technical Association. Structures for Tall Buildings. Architectural Science
6. Popov, E.P. (1982). Seismic framing systems for tall Review, 51.3, pp. 239251.
buildings. Engineering Journal/American Institute of
Steel Construction, 19(Third Quarter), 141149. 24. Design and Construction of Steel Diagrid Structures,
7. Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat. 1995. K. Moon , NSCC2009 , School of Architecture, Yale
Structural Systems for Tall Buildings. McGrawHill: University, New Haven, USA.
New York. 25. Kim J., Jun Y. and Lee Y.H., Seismic Performance
8. AISC. 1998. Manual of Steel Construction: Load and Evaluation of Diagrid System Buildings", 2nd
Resistance Factor Design. American Institute of Steel Specialty Conference on Disaster Mitigation,
Construction: Chicago, IL. Manitoba, June 2010.
9. Kareem, T. Kijewski and Y. Tamura, Mitigation of 26. Jani Khushbu, Analysis and Design of Diagrid
Motions of Tall Buildings with Specific Examples of Structural System for High Rise Steel Buildings, M.
Recent Applications, Wind and Structures, Vol. 2, Tech. Dissertation, Nirma University, Ahmadabad,
No. 3, 1999, pp. 201251. 2012.
10. Ali, M.M. (2001). Art of the Skyscraper: The Genius 27. A New System of construction: the Diagrid
of Fazlur Khan. New York: Rizzoli. Method Explained. Architect and Building News.
11. Kimura, Y., MacRae, G. A., and Roeder, C., Column 13 May 1.v.146, p121122.
Stiffness Effects on Braced Frame Seismic 28. Strategies to Reduce Lateral Forces on Highrise
Behaviour," Proceedings of the 7th U.S. National Buildings that Use Diagrid Structural System, Binh
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, K. Nguyen and Hasim Altan , School of Architecture
Boston, Paper No. 49, 2002. The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United
12. Moon K.S., Dynamic Interrelationship between Kingdom.
Technology and Architecture in Tall Buildings", 29. IS 456: 2000 Plain Reinforced concrete Code of
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Architecture, Practice, Bureau of Indian Standard, New Delhi.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2005. 30. IS 1893(PartI): 2002. Criteria for Earthquake
13. Taranath BS, Wind and earthquake resistant Resistant Design of Structures. Bureau of Indian
buildings, Marcel Dekker, New York, 2005. Standard, New Delhi.
14. Ali, M.M. (2005). The skyscraper: epitome of human 31. Diagrid structuresSystems, Connections, Details by
aspirations. In Proceedings of the 7th World Terri Meyer Boake.
Congress of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban
Habitat: Renewing the Urban Landscape [CDROM]. BIOGRAPHY
Chicago, IL: Council on Tall Buildings and Urban
Habitat.
15. Jantz, Dirk H. 30 St. Mary Axe/Swiss Re Rohit Kumar Singh, Post
Headquarter, London. 14.04.2005. Graduate Student, Civil
16. H. E. Ilgin and M. H. Gunel, The Role of Aerodynamic Engineering Department,
Modifications in the Form of Tall Buildings against MANIT, Bhopal, M.P, India
Wind Excitation, METU JFA 2007/2 (24:2), pp. 17
25.
17. M. M. Ali and K. S. Moon, Structural Developments Dr. Vivek Garg, Assistant
in Tall Buildings: Current Trends and Future Professor, Civil Engineering
Prospects, Architectural Science Review, Vol. 50.3, Department, MANIT, Bhopal,
2007, pp. 205223. M.P, India
18. R. J. Smith and M. R. Willford, The Damped
Outrigger Concept for Tall Building, The Structural
Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 16, 2007, Dr. Abhay Sharma, Associate
pp. 501517. Professor, Civil Engineering
19. Moon, K., Connor, J. J. & Fernandez, J. E. (2007). Department, MANIT, Bhopal,
Diagrid Structural Systems for Tall Buildings: M.P, India
Characteristics and Methodology for Preliminary
Design, The Structural Design of Tall and Special

Buildings, Vol. 16.2, pp. 205230.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY- www.ijset.in 1337