## 3 Results and Discussion
### Seismic Performance Analysis for Other Structural Variables  
In addition to the variables explained above, four other variables were taken into consideration within the scope of this study. Structural analyses were performed by creating separate structural models for each variable. Detailed explanations for each model are given below. Model I: Another variable considered in this study is the number of stories. A six-storey structural model was preferred to compare the changes in the number of stories. In the RC building selected as a six-storey example, only the number of stories was selected as a variable and all other structural characteristics were selected as the same. The 2D and 3D models obtained for the six-storey sample RC building are shown in Figure 10.  
The 2D models of these structural models are shown in Figure 11.  
Figure 10: Applied loads for a six-storey sample RC building with 2D and 3D models. Figure 9: Comparison of target displacements for different soil classes and PGAs. Model II: One of the most common damages observed after an earthquake is structural damage caused by a soft/weak storey. This situation, which may occur due to different reasons, is due to the difference in strength/rigidity between storeys. In this study, the ground storey height was selected to be greater than the other storeys in order to reveal the effect of this situation. While all storey heights in the reference building were selected to be equal and 3 m, in the model created for comparisons, the ground storey height was selected to be 4 m, and the heights of all other storeys were selected to be equal and 3 m. Only the ground storey height was taken into account as a variable. The 2D models obtained are shown in Figure 12.  
Model III: Another variable was the change in RC frame openings. While each opening in both directions was 5 m in the reference building model, this value was selected as 6 m for comparisons. In this model, only the frame opening and local soil classes were selected as variables. The comparison of the storey plans of this model is made in Figure 13.  
Figure 11: The 2D models of different numbers of stories. Figure 12: Structural models for the change of ground storey height. In the structural model for different frame openings, other structural features were kept constant. Frame opening and local soil classes were selected as variables. The 2D structural models for frame opening changes are illustrated in Figure 14.  
Model IV: Since reinforced-concrete buildings with different storey heights were observed in the earthquake region, storey height was selected as the variable in this model. A variable considered in the study was the height value of each storey in the building. In the analyses where all other structural characteristics were the same, each storey height was selected as 3 m for the reference building, while in the model where the comparisons would be made, each storey height was considered as 2.80 m. Therefore, while the total height of the reference building was 27 m, the total building height for the structural model created for comparison was 19.80 m. The 2D visuals obtained for both models are illustrated in Figure 15.  
Figure 11.0 The 2D structural models obtained for different frame openings. Figure 11.1 Storey formwork plans used for different frame openings. The comparison of the target displacement values attained for the created structural models for different soil classes is shown in Figure 11.2 In all these structural models, the damping ratio was 5%, the structural importance class was II and the earthquake zone was the II-degree earthquake zone. All other structural parameters are considered the same as the reference building model. The obtained results show that there are significant decreases in target displacements with good local soil conditions. For Model I, where the number of stories in the structure is reduced, target displacements have decreased compared to the seven-storey model, which is the reference building.