Concrete building systems require decisions at both the member and the building level, because locally efficient cross sections do not necessarily lead to a favorable whole-building response. This study presents a two-level comparative framework comprising (i) a member-level parametric assessment of nine reinforced-concrete and composite cross-section families across six concrete grades (54 scenarios) and (ii) a building-level ETABS assessment of seven structural configurations (Models A–G) derived from a residential reinforced-concrete frame benchmark. At the member level, the alternatives were evaluated based on axial resistance, along with simplified screening-level CO2 and cost proxies. At the member level, axial resistance increased with concrete grade, although the marginal benefit diminished at higher grades for steel-dominant layouts. Balanced composite sections showed the most favorable normalized strength-to-material-proxy trends, whereas steel-heavy alternatives provided high absolute resistance but lower overall efficiency. The comparison between the member-level hybrid-section screening and the building-level composite configuration further showed that promising local section behavior does not automatically translate into superior whole-building performance. At the building level, the compared configurations were assessed through vertical base reactions, modal properties, and top-level lateral displacement response. Replacing solid beams and columns with hollow members of identical outer dimensions reduced the self-weight-related base reaction from 9591 to 8832 kN (7.9%) but slightly increased the top-level displacement response, indicating a mass–stiffness trade-off. Larger improvements were obtained when the global lateral-force-resisting mechanism was modified directly: the braced configuration produced the shortest fundamental period (T1=0.433 s) and the lowest displacement response, while the core-wall configuration also reduced both period and displacement substantially. By contrast, the height-extended configuration produced the most flexible response among Models A–F. An additional exploratory variant with semi-rigid beam-to-column connections (Model G) confirmed that connection-level flexibility produces a measurable but moderate increase in period and displacement relative to the reference frame, without altering the global load-resisting mechanism. Overall, the results confirm that member-level and building-level assessments should be treated as complementary decision levels in early-stage structural design.
Baghdadi et al. (Sat,) studied this question.