This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of linear and nonlinear structural analysis methods, evaluating their Its effect in optimizing and sustaining structural designs. By leveraging advanced scientific data and analytical techniques, this study aims to discern the optimal conditions and scenarios for employing each method. The research includes detailed calculations, comparative data, and case studies, emphasizing the sustainability implications and long-term benefits of each approach.

The growing urgency for sustainable construction practices has necessitated a reevaluation of traditional design approaches in favor of more environmentally responsible methodologies. This paper presents a comparative analysis between optimal and adequate structural design within the context of sustainable construction. Focusing on two case studies—a cutting-edge, sustainably designed commercial building (the Bullitt Center) and a conventional mid-rise residential building in Chicago—the research explores how different design philosophies impact material efficiency, environmental footprint, economic performance, and occupant satisfaction.Through detailed life cycle assessments (LCA) and life cycle energy analyses (LCEA), the study quantifies the advantages of optimal design, which integrates advanced materials, renewable energy systems, and water conservation technologies. The findings demonstrate that while optimal design requires a higher initial investment, it significantly reduces long-term operational costs and environmental impact, achieving a net-zero energy status and greatly improving occupant well-being. In contrast, the conventional building, which adheres to standard design practices, exhibits higher embodied energy, greater environmental degradation, and lower occupant satisfaction.The paper concludes that optimal structural design is not only more sustainable but also economically viable over the building's life span. It emphasizes the importance of integrating sustainability from the earliest stages of design to achieve meaningful environmental and economic benefits. The study calls for the adoption of policy incentives and advanced modeling tools to facilitate the widespread implementation of optimal design principles in the construction industry.

Tall structures and towers have captivated humans for thousands of years, and so they are a fact of modern life in cities for a variety of reasons. However, the most challenging design problem is meeting operational performance requirements and maintaining occupant comfort. Not only are the site energy costs high, the attendant environmental consequences of using non-renewable energy sources are great. This fact prompted searchers and designers to advance and fully embrace green and environmentally friendly design. One of the key goals of the green building movement and technique is to reduce the material, constructional, and operational costs of buildings. This goal can be accomplished by drawing on the synergies

between building geometry, material usage, and the local climate demands. Architect Ken Yeang, in his famous book The Green Skyscraper, suggests that in different climate zones, they should be arranged in different locations to reduce the yearly energy consumption of the building. But Yeang’s claim of the structural system parameters have clear implications for structural performance since buildings with asymmetric distribution of stiffness are known to be susceptible to damaging torsional modes of vibration when subjected to wind or earthquake loading. Thus, this study performs thermal and structural analysis to address the implications of different footprints and core placements on energy and structural performance. The results demonstrate that to accomplish Yeang's claim, a supplementary lateral load resistance system is needed, which demands additional structural material. As a result, buildings with an asymmetric distribution of stiffness are the most expensive, which has a negative impact on the building's

environmental and economic aspects.