Results beetwen seismostruct and othe software

[warcorsario]

Currently, I am evaluating an 8-level building using a pushover type nonlinear analysis, comparing the results between the seismostruct 2018 and etabs 2016 software, finding disturbing results, for example in seismostruct I get a period of 0.53 seconds for the first vibration mode, while in etabs for that first mode the period is 0.72. Why this discrepancy in the results?

[seismosoft]

We are not sure what could be the reason for such large differences. Possible reasons could be discrepancies in the material properties, section dimensions are geometry. The value of the modulus of elasticity of concrete is usually the most common 'suspect'.
Seismosoft Support

[sanya greek]

Currently, I am evaluating an 8-level building using a pushover type nonlinear analysis, comparing the results between the seismostruct 2018 and etabs 2016 software, finding disturbing results, for example in seismostruct I get a period of 0.53 seconds for the first vibration mode, while in etabs for that first mode the period is 0.72. Why this discrepancy in the results?

It can depend from masses you used. For example, Seismostruct don't use forces like masses. And if you putted forces in the place of walls (masonry) it will not account in eigenvalue analysis. So you mast go to Settings--> Gravity and Mass-->Define mass from-->From both Frame/Mass elementsand loads