Abstract
                                                                        Recent revision of Indian standard code on earthquake resistant design suggested certain recommendations for inclusion of effects of vertical ground acceleration for design of buildings. Clause 6.3.2.1 of IS 1893 (Part 1) suggests that for non-orthogonal frames, load combinations should include 30% of earthquake load in other directions along with the direction considered and Clause 6.3.2.1.1 suggests that for orthogonal frames, full load has to be applied. Besides, clause 6.3.3 mentions that all the buildings present in seismic zone IV and V have to consider vertical ground motion effects. This results in 73 load combinations for calculating the design forces in structural members. However, the necessity to consider the effects of vertical ground motions for regular buildings, although present in seismic zones IV and V, is not  verified. To verify the above clauses for regular buildings, a case study is performed on a 5 storied regular framed RC building. Using, linear static analysis, design forces in structural members for the contradicting clauses on load combinations are compared. From the study, it is concluded that 3-dimensional ground motion effects are not necessary for every building even if the building is located in seismic zone IV or V.