Observations on the Reliability of Alternative Multiple-Mode Pushover Analysis Methods
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 132, Issue 3
Abstract
Although multiple-mode pushover analysis methods have been proposed for general use in the seismic analysis of moment-resisting frames, difficulties have been encountered in their implementation with specific structures. Two alternative multiple mode methods were developed to overcome these difficulties. Estimates of four response quantities determined with the alternative methods are compared herein for a set of five buildings subjected to suites of scaled ground motions. The uneven accuracy of the estimates, relative to the range of values determined by nonlinear dynamic analysis, suggests that results obtained by both alternative methods should be regarded with caution, until such time that the scope of applicability of the methods has been clearly established.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers extend their sincere appreciation to Professor Anil K. Chopra and Professor Rakesh K. Goel for their insightful contributions to modal pushover analysis. Much of the present work was stimulated by the discussions and developments that took place under the auspices of the recent ATC-55 project. This project, which focused on the use of inelastic analysis procedures for design and rehabilitation, was conducted by the Applied Technology Council with funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. However, the writers are solely responsible for the results and conclusions presented herein, which do not necessarily represent the views of these organizations.
References
Applied Technology Council (ATC). (1996). “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings.” Rep. No. ATC-40, Volumes 1 and 2, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, Calif.
Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC). (1997). NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, FEMA-273, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Building Seismic Safety Council. (2005). Improvement of inelastic seismic analysis procedures, FEMA-440, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Chopra, A. K., and Goel, R. K. (2001). A modal pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic demands for buildings: Theory and preliminary evaluation, PEER-2001/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
Goel, R. K., and Chopra, A. K. (2004). “Evaluation of modal and FEMA pushover analyses: SAC buildings.” Earthquake Spectra, 20(1), 225–254.
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, 757–778.
Hernández-Montes, E., Kwon, O.-S., and Aschheim, M. (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. (2004). “An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of high-rise buildings.” Eng. Struct.; 26(1), 117–128.
Reinhorn, A. (1997). “Inelastic analysis techniques in seismic evaluations.” Seismic design methodologies for the next generation of codes, Proc. of the International Workshop, P. Fajfar and H. Krawinkler, eds., Bled, Slovenia.
Sasaki K. K., Freeman, S. A., and Paret, T. F. (1998). “Multi-mode pushover procedure (MMP)—A method to identify the effects of higher modes in pushover analysis.” Proc., 6th U.S. National Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Seattle.
Tjhin, T., Aschheim, M., and Hernández-Montes, E. (2005). “Estimates of peak roof displacement using ‘equivalent’ single degree of freedom systems.” J. Struct. Eng., 131(3), 517–522.
Vamvatsikos, D., and Cornell, C. A. (2002). “Incremental dynamic analysis.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 491–514.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 132 • Issue 3 • March 2006
Pages: 471 - 477
Copyright
© 2006 ASCE.
History
Received: Oct 5, 2004
Accepted: Jun 27, 2005
Published online: Mar 1, 2006
Published in print: Mar 2006
Notes
Note. Associate Editor: Gregory A. MacRae
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.