Adaptive Modal Combination Procedure for Nonlinear Static Analysis of Building Structures
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 132, Issue 11
Abstract
A new pushover analysis procedure derived through adaptive modal combinations (AMC) is proposed for evaluating the seismic performance of building structures. The methodology offers a direct multimode technique to estimate seismic demands and attempts to integrate concepts built into the capacity spectrum method recommended in ATC-40 (1996), the adaptive method originally proposed by Gupta and Kunnath (2000) and the modal pushover analysis advocated by Chopra and Goel (2002). The AMC procedure accounts for higher mode effects by combining the response of individual modal pushover analyses and incorporates the effects of varying dynamic characteristics during the inelastic response via its adaptive feature. The applied lateral forces used in the progressive pushover analysis are based on instantaneous inertia force distributions across the height of the building for each mode. A novel feature of the procedure is that the target displacement is estimated and updated dynamically during the analysis by incorporating energy-based modal capacity curves in conjunction with constant-ductility capacity spectra. Hence it eliminates the need to approximate the target displacement prior to commencing the pushover analysis. The methodology is applied to two existing steel moment-frame buildings and it is demonstrated that the AMC procedure can reasonably estimate critical demand parameters such as roof displacement and interstory drift for both far-fault and near-fault records, and consequently provides a reliable tool for performance assessment of building structures.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers wish to thank the anonymous reviewers of this paper whose comments have contributed to improving the overall methodology. Funding for this study provided by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NSFCMS-0296210, as part of the U.S.–Japan Cooperative Program on Urban Earthquake Disaster Mitigation, is gratefully acknowledged. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
References
Akkar, S., Yazgan, U., and Gulkan, P. (2004). “Deformation limits for simple non-degrading systems subjected to near-fault ground motions.” Proc., 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Miracd, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, Paper No. 2276.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2000). “Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings.” FEMA-356, Washington, D.C.
Antonio, S., and Pinho, R. (2004). “Development and verification of a displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure.” J. Earthquake Eng., 8(5), 643–661.
Antonio, S., Rovithakis, A., and Pinho, R. (2002). “Development and verification of a fully adaptive pushover procedure.” Proc., 12th European Conf. on Eq. Engineering, London, Paper No. 822.
Applied Technology Council (ATC). (1996). “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings.” Rep. No. ATC-40, Volumes 1 and 2, Redwood City, Calif.
Applied Technology Council (ATC). (2005). “Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures.” Rep. No. FEMA-440, Redwood City, Calif.
Aydinoglu, M. N. (2003). “An incremental response spectrum analysis procedure based on inelastic spectral displacements for multi-mode seismic performance evaluation.” Bulletin of the Earthquake Engineering, 1(1), 3–36.
Chopra, A. K., and Goel, R. K. (2002). “A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 561–582.
Chopra, A. K., Goel, R. K., and Chintanapakdee, C. (2004). “Evaluation of a modified MPA procedure assuming higher modes as elastic to estimate seismic demands.” Earthquake Spectra, 20(3), 757–778.
Elnashai, A. S. (2000). “Advanced static inelastic (pushover) analysis for seismic design and assessment.” The George Penelis Symp. on Concrete and Masonry Structures, Aristotle Univ. of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece, 23–34.
European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (2001). “Eurocode 8—Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1, European Standard prEN 1998-1, Draft No. 4, Brussels, Belgium.
Goel, R. K., and Chopra, A. K. (2004). “Evaluation of modal and FEMA pushover analyses: SAC buildings.” Earthquake Spectra, 20(1), 225–254.
Gupta, B., and Kunnath, S. K. (2000). “Adaptive spectra-based pushover procedure for seismic evaluation of structures.” Earthquake Spectra, 16(2), 367–391.
Hernandez-Montes, E., Kwon, O. S., and Aschheim, M. A. (2004). “An energy based formulation for first and multiple-mode nonlinear static (Pushover) analyses.” J. Earthquake Eng., 8(1), 69–88.
Jan, T. S., Liu, M. W., and Kao, Y. C. (2003). “An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of high-rise buildings.” Eng. Struct., 26(1), 117–128.
Kalkan, E., and Kunnath, S. K. (2004a). “Lateral load distribution in nonlinear static procedures for seismic design.” Proc., ASCE Structures Congress, ASCE, Reston, Va., 1–10.
Kalkan, E., and Kunnath, S. K. (2004b). “Method of modal combinations for pushover analysis of buildings.” Proc., 13th World Conference on Eq. Engineering, Miracd, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, Paper No. 2713.
Kunnath, S. K. (2004). “Identification of modal combinations for nonlinear static analysis of building structures.” Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng., 19(4), 246–259.
Kunnath, S. K., and Kalkan, E. (2004). “Evaluation of seismic deformation demands using nonlinear procedures in multistory steel and concrete moment frames.” ISET J. Earthquake Technol., 41(1), 159–182.
Kunnath, S. K., Nghiem, Q., and El-Tawil, S. (2004). “Modeling and response prediction in performance-based seismic evaluation: Case studies of instrumented steel moment-frame buildings.” Earthquake Spectra, 20(3), 883–915.
The MathWorks Inc. (2001). MATLAB—Version 6.1, Natick, Mass.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. (2001). Design example and commentary for the calculation of response and limit strength, Japan (in Japanese).
Miranda, E., and Akkar, S. D. (2002). “Evaluation of approximate method to estimate target displacements in PBEE.” The 4th U.S.–Japan Workshop on Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology for Reinforced Concrete Building Structures, PEER Rep. No. 2002/21, 75-86, Berkeley, Calif.
OpenSees. (2005). “Open system for earthquake engineering simulation.” http://opensees.berkeley.edu (May 25, 2005).
Tjhin, T., Aschheim, M., and Hernandez-Montes, E. (2004). “Estimates of peak roof displacement using ‘equivalent’ single degree of freedom systems.” J. Struct. Eng., 131(3), 517–522.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 132 • Issue 11 • November 2006
Pages: 1721 - 1731
Copyright
© 2006 ASCE.
History
Received: May 31, 2005
Accepted: Feb 24, 2006
Published online: Nov 1, 2006
Published in print: Nov 2006
Notes
Note. Associate Editor: Marvin W. Halling
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.