## 9 Seismic Isolation and Energy Dissipation Devices for Composite Structures  
### Seismic Isolation and Energy Dissipation Devices for Composite Structures: State-of-the-Art  
Two common strategies employed to improve the performance of steel-concrete composite buildings and minimize their damage during seismic events are seismic isolation and supplementary dampers. Seismic isolation entails the introduction of a flexible layer between the composite building and its foundation to isolate the structure from ground motion. On the other hand, supplementary dampers work by dissipating energy during seismic events, thereby reducing acceleration and displacement demands on composite structural elements. The combination of these techniques offers numerous benefits for steel-concrete composite buildings, including enhanced strength, ductility, and flexibility. Extensive studies, simulations, and practical applications have demonstrated the effectiveness of seismic isolation and supplementary dampers. By optimizing the integration of these systems, engineers can create resilient and secure composite structures capable of withstanding seismic loads and improving overall performance in earthquake-prone areas. [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2022) [143] examined the effectiveness of high-rise composite buildings with base isolation in reducing seismic response during earthquakes. Two base-isolated steel-concrete buildings with twelve- and fifteen-story levels were analyzed, using lead rubber-bearing isolators for base isolation. Composite base-isolated buildings were compared to fixed-base composite and reinforced concrete counterparts. Seismic responses were evaluated using the response spectrum method for the highest seismic zone according to the Indian Code. The results showed that base isolation with lead rubber-bearing isolators reduces overall seismic responses of composite buildings by 50-60%. The 15-story building demonstrated higher effectiveness. Base-isolated composite buildings had approximately 50% less story drift and displacements compared to reinforced concrete buildings. Similarly, a comparative analysis of the seismic responses of three different building types, namely reinforced concrete buildings, fixed-base composite buildings, and base-isolated composite buildings using lead rubber-bearing base isolators, was investigated by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2022) [144]. They indicated that the integrated application of base isolation and composite building in base-isolated composite buildings results in superior overall performance compared to reinforced concrete and fixed-base composite buildings, particularly in three-, six-, and nine-story buildings. Furthermore, the study revealed that fixed-base composite buildings outperform reinforced concrete buildings across all three levels of stories, highlighting the suitability of base-isolated composite buildings for high-rise, mid-rise, and low-rise buildings. [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2023) [145] investigated alternative dissipative systems in composite steel-concrete frame structures. An experiment evaluated the mechanical properties of three plate flanges with different parameters and power factors under various cyclic loadings. The examined systems demonstrated high resistance and the ability to dissipate seismic vibration energy. Similarly, [PERSON] et al. (2019) [118] evaluated the effectiveness of a standard multi-story building with a steel-concrete composite frame designed with and without structural fuses using nonlinear transient dynamic analysis. Numerical models were created using a distributed plasticity approach. These models were adjusted based on experimental data from the literature. The study quantified global response parameters including energy dissipation, base shear, and inter-story drifts. [PERSON] et al. (2021) [146] developed a protective system for composite buildings using buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) and viscous dampers (VDs) to address the combined threat of earthquakes and winds.