5924626f1949c1962d4-796a 20250125080057877 beie:beie director@blueeyesintelligence.org WEB-FORM International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE) IJRTE 22773878 10.35940/ijrte.2277-3878 https://www.ijrte.org/ 01 30 2025 13 5 Department of Civil Engineering, Mumbai University, Pune (Maharashtra), India. Chaitali Bangar https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6220-3854 Prof. Roshni John Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Saraswati College of Engineering, Navi Mumbai (Maharashtra), India. The redistribution of design bending moments in continuous reinforced concrete beams is widely acknowledged as a valuable resource for designers of reinforced concrete structures. Moment redistribution is beneficial for practical design, as it provides flexibility in reinforcement arrangement. According to IS 13920:2016, the minimum reinforcement at the bottom face of the beam at support locations must be 50 Parsant of the top reinforcement at the same point. At the same time, it should be no less than 25 Parsant of the support reinforcement at midspan to meet ductility requirements. In detailing the junctions between columns and beams, the author has noted that congestion of reinforcement at the column faces of the beams poses practical challenges when placing both longitudinal and transverse rebars for the columns. This congestion can lead to inadequate concrete compaction, increasing the risk of honeycombing. By redistributing the top moment in the beam at the support location to the bottom face at midspan, it becomes possible to reduce both the top and bottom reinforcement at the supports, thus optimizing the reinforcement allocation in beams. This study examines a three-dimensional G Plus 20-storey building, which includes both laterally stiffened and unstiffened designs with symmetrical plans. The entire structure is situated in zone III on medium soil conditions, incorporating partial moment releases. The percentages of moment redistributed in the beams were determined at 10 Parsant, 20 Parsant, and 30 Parsant for the laterally unstiffened structure, and 10% for the laterally stiffened structure. Following this, a response spectrum analysis was performed using STAAD Pro. By IS 13920:2016, comparisons were made between the beams' top and bottom-face longitudinal reinforcement across various moment redistribution values. 01 30 2025 01 30 2025 8 13 CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 10.35940/BEIESP.CrossMarkPolicy www.ijrte.org true International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE) Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering and Sciences Publication (BEIESP) Based on my understanding, this article has no conflicts of interest. This article has not been sponsored or funded by any organization or agency. The independence of this research is a crucial factor in affirming its impartiality, as it has been conducted without any external sway. The data provided in this article is exempt from the requirement for ethical approval or participant consent. The adequate resources of this article are publicly accessible. The authorship of this article is contributed equally to all participating individuals. 10.35940/ijrte.E8178.13050125 https://www.ijrte.org/portfolio-item/E817813050125/