WR1

Apparently, you have a "load transfer problem".
The first and foremost thing that is expected is that reactions should equal applied loads. This should always be checked by design engineers unfortunately  this doesn't happen so often. If your applied loads don't match reactions, there is no point in discussion "Design Results" because your are designing for a model that doesn't represent "actual conditions".
For your situation, have you tried only modelling the balcony beams in a new ETABS model and check the reactions as suggested above? 
Or did you try isolating the load combinations and checking reaction for each load case against manual calculation as suggested above to pin down the load case that is causing problem?
Other items that you can do is apply your loads on cantilever as line loads.
I also want to comment that this thread is a perfect example of why SEFP should ban people from sharing their models. Everyone, expects someone else to check and figure out the problem and the discussion about potential problem is lost. Other items that are observed are that original poster (generally speaking) may only entertain the replies that require less to zero effort and totally avoid or not answer things that require him to crunch some manual numbers or to do math. Something that Admins/Moderators can consider. I believe this will improve the quality of discussion on this forum.
 

Have you tried the above quoted items? Is this resolved?

No, scaling is for dynamic base shear. Scaling will not increase mass participation. If 90% is not achieved you have to include more mass, that means increase the number of modes.

First of all my apologies, if my question seems stupid because of my unfamiliarity with the topic.
When defining response spectrum load case in ETABS, we have three directions; u1, u2 and u3.
Lets assume the excitation angle = 0 and building principle direction is u1
So I will apply response spectrum function (per IBC 2006) in u1 direction by a scale factor.
My question is why we don't apply u2 and u3 in the SAME LOAD CASE.
My understanding is, according to WILSON in his book on STATIC & DYNAMIC ANALYSIS, CHAPTER 15. The response is calculated for each direction separately. Then this response is combined by different methods (CQC, SRSS etc) which is called MODEL COMBINATION.
In CQC method response in 2 directions is assumed to be a portion of 1 direction means S2=a.S1
Where a = 0 to 1.0, recommended value is 0.50 to 0.85
I know in EQ building has only one principle direction. Although EQ can hit from any direction but there is always one major direction. or you can say major acceleration in 1 direction. Lets say u1.
As in CQC method the response in other direction will be some portion of response in major direction. I also know that If we have equal spectra CQC is reduced to SRSS method which is independent from the excitation angle theta.
My confusion is we will do MODAL COMBINATION (cqc or srss) only when we want to combine u1, u2 and u3 at the same time. But if we are applying only u1 in one response spectrum load case, then we DONT have to do modal combination. It is the same thing as in CQC S2=a. S1. Now in this case a=0. so S2=0. All we have is only response in u1 direction.
Then in my building models what i do? include u1 and u2 both in one load case or in separate load cases?

Spring stiffness is provided in geotechnical report. If you don't have that, you can see other relations; such as in Bowel's book. Here, in middle east, we take modulus of subgrade reaction = SBC x 100 for isolated foundations and SBC x 120 for rafts. SBC is in units of kN/m².
 
SBC=Soil Bearing Capacity

I can discern this is due to the moment as your base is fixed and probably the governing combination include lateral loads.
Few checks that you need to perform:
1. Are columns sway special in ETABS? If yes then why?
2. Can you tie these columns with tie beams at PARKING or BASE level to reduce critical length of column?
3. If PARKING to BASE height is 1m then from scale of the attached image, PARKING to 1ST FLOOR is just 2.5m. Is it right?
Base on the grid spacing of 2.5m, I do not see any problem having 300x300 columns with 2 to 3% reo giving 1800 to 2800 square mm. Or you are not concerned about sizing and just curious why the increase in reo? 
If so, check the bending moment on governing load combination and you will get a fair idea what's happening here.

Depending on the plan, you can try strap beams, connecting beams etc.

I am currently using steel designers handbook 8th edition based on AS4100.

Wondering if there is any quick drag and drop kind of parametric tools for drawing of common structural temporary works which are also quick to use for structural engineers? Have tried Revu, Cad, Sketchup, Edraw etc. Not talking about full fledged drafting CAD softwares. For example brackets, props, bolts etc which you can drag/drop and change dimensions? Any suggestions? Libraries?

Depending on the plan, you can try strap beams, connecting beams etc.

moment

Not Fixed. Apply pin. (Depends on your connection details though).
Apply for all supports not just first and last.

I think I misunderstood your question initially. I thought of it as a simple cantilever beam. However, from the trailing discussion I can discern the said beam was part of a building or frame. And yes, that's where the torsion stiffness play a role.

I was referring to ACI 350-06 Appendix I (Working stress method) which limits fs to 20ksi or 0.33fy if fy=60ksi.
 
 

Checking torsional irregularity from dynamic analysis is complex. Do as follows;
1. Make all static load combinations with static E.
2. Check Ax
3. Apply the required amplification in response spectrum cases.
Don't check Ax on dynamic (unreasonable results, wrong results). Also, don't include all static seismic directions in single load case (e.g. in newer versions of ETABS like 13 onwards). Make each static load case separately like in older ETABS 9. Combined case will give you wrong Ax.
Also, if amplification is too high, check manually that joint, which might be unrestrained or at the corner. You might need to change it's framing etc.

not true in all cases. uncontrolled internal temperature has the same effects like outside sun heat on the structure.
There are usually documents stating weather station data. You should use mean yearly average highs and lows not daily.
It also depends on approval authority. For example in Dubai, limit is 45m.
Expansion joints are nice from structural point of view only. As a structural engineer, Id try my best to avoid them. Construction isnt that easy for expansion joints. What about water leakage?
Except ground floor columns and walls that will have huge forces due to restrain (supports).
This is my opinion. I don't think T+E should be added.

What do you mean it does not take the negative values? As far as I can recall there are four load cases with positive and negative directions. Please elaborate your question.

Please refere to CSI wikki and search for p-delta
they recommend you 1.2D+0.5L
reasons is that it covers all the load combinations in ACI chapter 9...(conservatively) for lateral analaysis..
for P (big P) delta..you need to include all gravity loads that are with lateral load combinations..
as lateral loads will sway your frame...and will create some displacement lets say in column...then the column will experience magnified moments because of the P (axial dead loads on colum) so this P multiplied by delta ...create moment M = P.e
start with 2 or 3 ietration then aftera analsyis...goto last analysis run log and check if p delta converged or not...if not then increase the number of iterations...
please have a look at this manual in this thread...it will clear some of your doubts


http://www.sepakistan.com/topic/28-etabs-model-checking-tips-tricks/
for drifts...see this topic on my website or search in this forum: http://www.ranawaseem.com/

It should be relative deflection. For example a beam in X supporting on girders in Y direction. You need to take the net deflection of supports and mid-span (for s.s. case) to compute deflections.

Dear followers,
I am sharing with you my practice examples I did for Earthquake Engineering! HTH! If you find any mistake update me please!
 
Eigen Modes Example
Inelastic Response Spectrum Example
EQ Examples_ws.zip

I'd like to add here that ACI report on punching; in examples, use bi axial moments but they are shifted from column center to centroid of critical punching perimeter (in this way, they are reduced in magnitude).
However in PCA Notes (in main chapter of punching) they mention not to take biaxial moment at the same time.
Another issue; in PCA Notes (in one of the edge columns punching example), they just take Axial force to check the extent of parameter upto where punching reinforcement can be terminated. They don't use Axial+Moment, they use only axial force for this.

See the code e.g. UBC-97 to calculate amplification factor Ax. Max Ax = 3.0. This Ax you will multiply by 5% (0.05) and input in response spectrum cases/static earthquake cases.
To calculate Ax, you need maximum and average story displacements at CM. You can export this data from ETABS Tables to EXCEL for static earthquake cases (Don't use spectrum cases for this).
Once in EXCEL, you will see column named 'Ratio'. This will be Max/Avg displacement. Sort this out to find values more than 1.2. These are the locations you need to amplify torsion.
After checking which stories you need to amplify torsion in, use the amplified torsion value for e in response spectra cases.

This is absolutely wrong practice.
1. PIERS
Assign as per option a (See image posted by sir Makhzumi in previous reply)
Why didn't you apply pier to spandrels. Most people do not apply piers labels to spandrels. Give up on that.
Lets talk about this image. The top floor. Piers go horizontal with same number. 2 shells of P3, 2 shells of P2 and 2 shells of S1 should all have been defined as one pier.
Then P2 and P3 slender piers below them should be assigned different pier names separately.
Infact, as flexural deformations are dominant in these slender piers, divide them (mesh) into 4 pieces and assigned different pier to top 2 shells and different to bottom 2 shells (depends on the moment diagram though).
 
2. SPANDRELS
Assign as per option a (See image posted by sir Makhzumi in previous reply)
The spandrel I see in image is a deep beam. Isn't it? L/D < 4? If so, where is the meshing?
If its not a deep beam then apply different spandrel labels to each shell atleast in the middle for postive moment design.

See the code e.g. UBC-97 to calculate amplification factor Ax. Max Ax = 3.0. This Ax you will multiply by 5% (0.05) and input in response spectrum cases/static earthquake cases.
To calculate Ax, you need maximum and average story displacements at CM. You can export this data from ETABS Tables to EXCEL for static earthquake cases (Don't use spectrum cases for this).
Once in EXCEL, you will see column named 'Ratio'. This will be Max/Avg displacement. Sort this out to find values more than 1.2. These are the locations you need to amplify torsion.
After checking which stories you need to amplify torsion in, use the amplified torsion value for e in response spectra cases.

You are spot on Rana. Its horse and cattle show