In contemporary urban environments, building structures are increasingly exposed to a diverse array of extreme threats. Standard engineering design practices often focus on gravity loads and expected environmental forces, frequently neglecting "abnormal" load cases. Among these, the sudden loss of a primary vertical load-carrying member such as a column represents one of the most perilous scenarios. This failure, often precipitated by construction inaccuracies, industrial explosions, accidental vehicular impacts, or other unforeseen catastrophic events, acts as a trigger for a catastrophic phenomenon known as progressive collapse. In such a scenario, the failure of a single element initiates a chain reaction, where the redistribution of forces causes adjacent members to fail, eventually leading to partial or total structural collapse. However, the inherent susceptibility of steel frames to spontaneous, large-scale deformation under redistributed loads creates a critical vulnerability. The primary objective of this research was to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the efficacy of concentric bracing systems specifically diagonal, V-shaped, and inverted V-shaped braces as a defensive strategy to enhance the ductility and overall safety of steel buildings against the threat of progressive collapse. The methodological framework of the study utilized SAP2000, a high-precision finite element analysis software. The researchers performed non-linear static and dynamic analyses, which are essential for capturing the complex structural response after a member has been removed. By accounting for geometric non-linearities, the models were able to accurately simulate how connections behave during the intense stress of a structural failure. The scope of the study was broad, analyzing structures of varying heights 3, 8, and 12 stories under both normal conditions and simulated column-removal events. For the 3-story structures, the data highlighted a significant disparity between unbraced and braced configurations. Without any bracing, the structure proved highly unstable. The inclusion of cross-bracing (diagonal) resulted in a 63% reduction in roof displacement compared to the unbraced baseline in non-collapse scenarios. When progressive collapse was explicitly introduced, the V-shaped bracing emerged as the superior performer, mitigating displacement by 64%. Acceleration profiles provided further insight: while the inverted V-bracing caused a 46% increase in roof acceleration during non-collapse conditions, the cross-bracing system saw the highest acceleration 28% higher than unbraced models during the collapse event itself. The 8-story and 12-story models revealed that the effectiveness of bracing is not purely tied to height but depends heavily on the configuration. For 8-story buildings, the cross-bracing system consistently outperformed others, reducing roof displacement by 38% in stable conditions and by a remarkable 50% during a collapse event. The acceleration metrics showed that under non-collapse conditions, chevron-style (V and inverted V) braces experienced 16% higher acceleration, whereas, in collapse, the inverted V-brace showed a 20% increase. The 12-story models maintained these trends; the cross-brace remained the most efficient at controlling displacements, yielding a 23% reduction, while the V-shaped and inverted V-shaped configurations induced higher accelerations during collapse events, peaking at 28% above the baseline. The fundamental conclusion drawn from this extensive analysis is that unbraced structures, regardless of their total height, are dangerously susceptible to disproportionate collapse unless they are heavily over-designed. Such over-design is often economically unfeasible and inefficient. The study confirms that the strategic integration of concentric bracing significantly bolsters a structure’s capacity to absorb energy and redistribute forces after a column failure. Ultimately, the research identifies the cross-bracing system as the most effective solution for minimizing displacement and improving overall structural resilience. These findings provide a vital empirical basis for engineers and architects, advocating for the adoption of specific bracing geometries to safeguard infrastructure against the modern, unpredictable risks of the 21st century.