# Influence of Directionality on the Seismic Response of Typical RC Buildings
## 4 Results and Discussion
### Interstory Drift  
The results obtained in the archetypes using the accelerograms contained in Table 1 are presented below. This part shows the interstory drift measurements, which are very important in the verification of the design as they can be correlated with the damage achieved in a specific story. Figure 11a shows that Archetype 1 presents a clear trend, with the angles of incidence of 135\({}^{\circ}\) and 315\({}^{\circ}\) producing the least response in the \(y\) axis (dotted lines). For the \(x\) axis (solid lines), the trend is not so clear, because, apart from the two angles of incidence mentioned for the \(y\) axis, it is noted that the incidence angles of 112.5\({}^{\circ}\) and 292.5\({}^{\circ}\) also present low values of interstory drift. The response obtained in the \(y\) axis is similar to that obtained by the SRSS combination (see Figure 8b). Note that, in these figures, each color corresponds to a specific story, obtaining in this case greater drift on the highest stories of the archetype. Figure 12a,b show the results obtained in Archetype 2. Given the irregular shape of the displacements and interstory drifts, it seems that the minimums are given for angles of incidence of 135\({}^{\circ}\) and 315\({}^{\circ}\), with a clear similarity between the SRSS combination and the results obtained by the \(y\) axis. Also note that the largest interstory drift measurements are reached for angles of incidence of 45\({}^{\circ}\) and 225\({}^{\circ}\). For the analysis in the \(x\) axis, it is noted that the angles of incidence for which the smallest drift is obtained are the 45\({}^{\circ}\) and 225\({}^{\circ}\) angles. On the contrary, the largest interstory drifts in the \(y\) axis are reached for angles of incidence of 157.5\({}^{\circ}\) and 337.5\({}^{\circ}\). Regarding Archetype 3, Figure 13 shows a relatively homogeneous distribution for the results obtained along the \(y\) axis. However, on the \(x\) axis, a clear influence of the angle of incidence is observed. First, it can be seen that, on the \(x\) axis, the maximum interstory drift measurements are reached for both angles of incidence of 0\({}^{\circ}\) and 90\({}^{\circ}\), while on the \(y\) axis, the maximum interstory drift measurements are reached for angles of incidence of 157.5\({}^{\circ}\) and 337.5\({}^{\circ}\), with a notable reduction in interstory drift for angles of incidence of 67.5\({}^{\circ}\) and 247.5\({}^{\circ}\). The distribution obtained by means of the SRSS combination is similar to that obtained in the results with respect to the \(y\) axis. This dissimilar behavior can beattributed to the fact that the structure on the \(x\) axis is symmetric, while on the \(y\) axis, it is highly asymmetric. Figure 11: Mean interstory drift measurements normalized for Archetype 1 per story, (**a**) without and (**b**) with SRSS combination. Figure 12: Mean interstory drift normalized for Archetype 2 per story, (**a**) without and (**b**) with SRSS combination. Finally, the results obtained with Archetype 4 are presented. It is observed that this archetype presents the most homogeneous response, which coincides with the more regular structure obtained with structural frames in both directions, without the presence of eccentricities. Note especially in Figure 14b that the interstory drift values are uniform regardless of the angle of incidence, with a slight predominance of the 0\({}^{\circ}\) angle. Additionally, it can be mentioned that the drift distribution in this archetype maintains the tendency to increase with the height observed in the rest of the archetypes. Figure 14: Mean interstory drift normalized for Archetype 4 per story, (**a**) without and (**b**) with SRSS combination. Figure 13: Mean interstory drift normalized for Archetype 3 per story, (**a**) without and (**b**) with SRSS combination. Table 5 summarizes the results obtained from all the analyses regarding interstory drift.