ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative seismic performance of steel EBF shear links frame designed to IS 18168:2023 using force-based and direct displacement method.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent introduction of IS 18168:2023 marks a significant advancement in the seismic design of steel structures in India by providing dedicated provisions for eccentrically braced frames (EBFs). While the code promotes link-controlled energy dissipation, its performance under different design philosophies, particularly in the nonlinear range, remains largely unexplored. This study presents a comprehensive seismic performance evaluation of steel EBF buildings designed as per IS 18168:2023 using conventional Force-Based Design (FBD) and Direct Displacement-Based Design (DDBD) approaches. The nonlinear static pushover analysis, nonlinear time-history analysis, and incremental dynamic analysis are performed for four building heights of 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-storey. In addition, various important response parameters, including inter-storey drift, link rotation, plastic hinge distribution, variability, and collapse-related behaviour, have been systematically examined. Based on the results, it has been confirmed that EBF systems designed according to IS 18,168 exhibit a stable and desirable seismic behaviour, with inelastic deformation pretty much localized in the shear links. With respect to FBD, however, DDBD provides stronger control over nonlinear response due to approximately 20–40% lower median drift demands, 30–50% reduction at critical link rotation in MCE level, and strongly reduced record-to-record variability. Further, the drift escalation in DDBD frames is delayed while collapse robustness is notably improved, particularly for the midand high-rise buildings. Overall, the study brings out that though IS 18,168 provides a robust codal framework in the design of EBF systems, integrating DDBD within this codal context further leads to a more realistic, predictable, and performanceoriented seismic response, especially under strong ground motions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.