Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM65550
Volume:
10 |
6 |
Jun 2026
Pages:
1-3
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Civil Engineering
G H Raisoni College of Engineering and Management Wagholi, Pune
Department of Civil Engineering
G H Raisoni College of Engineering and Management Wagholi, Pune
This paper presents an analytical evaluation of a post-tensioned/reinforced concrete flat-slab building system under seismic loading. The study is based on a basement + Ground + four typical floors + attic structural prototype having an overall plan dimension of 23.40 m x 16.60 m, flat slab thickness of 200 mm, 600 mm x 600 mm columns and drop-panel regions at slab-column joints. ETABS-based response spectrum analysis and IS code-based checks are used to compare TMT and GFRP reinforced flat-slab alternatives. The adopted post-tensioning calculation uses a 12.7 mm low-relaxation strand with an effective force of 108.1 kN after losses, producing an equivalent upward balancing load of 3.75 kN/m2, approximately 62.5% of the service dead load. Results show that GFRP reinforcement increases X-direction top displacement from 20.992 mm to 30.734 mm and X-direction drift from 0.001660 to 0.002325, while reducing X-direction seismic force attraction from 1110.8523 kN to 794.9928 kN. Punching shear demand-capacity ratios remain within safe limits for both systems. The study concludes that TMT provides superior deformation control, whereas GFRP offers durability benefits that require careful drift and connection safety verification.
KEYWORDS
The study shows that PT/flat-slab systems are efficient for architectural planning and gravity load resistance, but their seismic performance must be evaluated through both global and local response parameters. The absence of beams increases the importance of lateral stiffness and slab-column connection safety. TMT reinforcement provides superior displacement and drift control because of its higher modulus of elasticity. GFRP reinforcement offers corrosion resistance and lower seismic force attraction, but produces higher deformation and therefore requires strict drift, ductility and punching shear verification. For the analysed building, both TMT and GFRP systems satisfy the IS drift limit and punching shear demand-capacity requirements. The TMT model is more suitable where lateral stiffness and deformation control govern. GFRP may be adopted where durability and corrosion resistance are important, provided adequate stiffness-enhancing measures such as drop panels, RC walls, perimeter beams or core walls are included. Future work should include nonlinear time history analysis, shake table testing, soil-structure interaction and cost-durability optimization of PT/GFRP flat-slab systems.
[1] R. P. Apostolska, G. S. Necevska-Cvetanovska, J. P. Cvetanovska, and N. Mircic, "Seismic performance of flat-slab building structural systems," in Proc. 14th World Conf. Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 2008. [2] Bureau of Indian Standards, Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part 1: General Provisions and Buildings, IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, New Delhi, India, 2016. [3] Bureau of Indian Standards, Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice, IS 456:2000, New Delhi, India, 2000. [4] Bureau of Indian Standards, Code of Practice for Prestressed Concrete, IS 1343:2012, New Delhi, India, 2012. [5] Bureau of Indian Standards, High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and Wires for Concrete Reinforcement - Specification, IS 1786:2008, New Delhi, India, 2008. [6] S. Aidarov, A. Nadazdi, E. Pugach, N. Tosic, and A. De La Fuente, "Cost-oriented analysis of fibre reinforced concrete column-supported flat slabs construction," Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 51, p. 104205, Jul. 2022. [7] D. A. Fanella, M. Mahamid, and M. Mota, "Flat plate-voided concrete slab systems: design, serviceability, fire resistance, and construction," Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, vol. 22, no. 3, p. 04017004, Aug. 2017. [8] D. Abu-Salma, R. L. Vollum, and L. Macorini, "Modelling punching shear failure at edge slab-column connections by means of nonlinear joint elements," Structures, vol. 34, pp. 630-652, Dec. 2021. [9] D. Z. Yankelevsky, Y. S. Karinski, A. Brodsky, and V. R. Feldgun, "Dynamic punching shear of impacting RC flat slabs with drop panels," Engineering Failure Analysis, vol. 129, p. 105682, Nov. 2021. [10] S.-H. Choi, I. Heo, J.-H. Kim, H. Jeong, S.-H. Lee, and K. S. Kim, "Effect of slab gravity load on slab-column connection with different compressive strengths," Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 45, p. 103647, Jan. 2022.
Publication Date
6/27/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
19
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...