Prediction of inelastic response of base-isolated building frame by pushover analysis

Abstract

With the advancements in the analysis tools to estimate the inelastic performance of the buildings, the Pushover Analysis (POA) has been adopted as a reliable procedure for the assessment of the nonlinear performance of the buildings. The pushover analysis has a few advantages over the nonlinear dynamic analysis; (i) it is less time-consuming; (ii) it is easy to implement as it does not require to define specific earthquake time-history data. The one of the governing parameters in the seismic response prediction by the POA is the choice of the load pattern. The present study is performed to evaluate the predictions of a new lateral load pattern (LLP) which is developed to perform the pushover analysis of base-isolated buildings. A LLP is developed by modifying the original uniform load pattern; as an example, a 5-storey building frame, which resembles low rise buildings and a 10-storey building, which resembles midrise buildings are selected for the analysis. The buildings are provided with the base isolation layer at the bottom of the buildings with the lead rubber bearings’ isolators (LRB). The POA is conducted by selecting three target displacements depicting three behavioral states of the building. The three states are such chosen to depict the structural behavior from elastic to plastic range. For the comparison purpose, the conventional LLP which corresponds to the fundamental mode shape is also used. The predictions of the newly proposed LLP are then compared with the accurate results obtained by conducting the Nonlinear Time History Analysis (NTHA). A suite of real far-field earthquake records is used for performing the NTHA. The study concludes that the new LLP provides better results as compared to the conventional LLP when compared to the benchmark estimates obtained by the NTHA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

References

  1. Cardone, D., Flora, A., & Gesualdi, G. (2013). Inelastic response of RC frame buildings with seismic isolation. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 42(6), 871–889.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chopra, A. K., & Goel, R. K. (2002). A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,31(3), 561–582.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Datta, T. K. (2010). Seismic analysis of structures. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Doudoumis, N. I., Kotanidis, C., Doudoumis, I. N. (2006). A comparative study on static push-over and time-history analysis methods in base isolated buildings. Paper presented at the First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, September, paper.

  5. Elnashai, A. S. (2001). Advanced inelastic static (pushover) analysis for earthquake applications. Structural Engineering and Mechanics,12(1), 51–70.

    Google Scholar 

  6. FEMA-356. (2000). Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington, DC: SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

  7. Faal, H. N., & Poursha, M. (2017). Applicability of the N2, extended N2 and modal pushover analysis methods for the seismic evaluation of base-isolated building frames with lead rubber bearings (LRBs). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,98, 84–100.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fajfar, P., & Gaspersic, P. (1996). The N2 method for the seismic damage analysis of RC buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,25(1), 31–46.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ghobarah, A. (2001). Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of development. Engineering Structures,23(8), 878–884.

    Google Scholar 

  10. IS-1893. (2016). (Part 1) Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Manak Bhawan, New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jan, T. S., Liu, M. W., & Kao, Y. C. (2004). An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of high-rise buildings. Engineering Structures,26(1), 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jangid, R., & Datta, T. (1995). Seismic behaviour of base-isolated buildings: a state-of-the-art review. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Structures and buildings,110(2), 186–203.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kalkan, E., Kunnath, S. K. (2004). Method of modal combinations for pushover analysis of buildings. Paper presented at the Proc., 13th World Conference on Eq. Engineering.

  14. Kalkan, E., & Kunnath, S. K. (2007). Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for seismic evaluation of buildings. Engineering Structures,29(3), 305–316.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kelly, J. M. (1986). Aseismic base isolation: review and bibliography. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,5(4), 202–216.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kikuchi, M., Black, C. J., & Aiken, I. D. (2008). On the response of yielding seismically isolated structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 37(5), 659–679.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kilar, V., & Koren, D. (2009). Seismic behaviour of asymmetric base isolated structures with various distributions of isolators. Engineering Structures, 31(4), 910–921.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kilar, V., & Koren, D. (2010). Simplified inelastic seismic analysis of base-isolated structures using the N2 method. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,39(9), 967–989.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kilar, V., Petrovcic, S., Koren, D., & Šilih, S. (2011). Seismic analysis of an asymmetric fixed base and base-isolated high-rack steel structure. Engineering Structures,33(12), 3471–3482.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Koren, D., & Kilar, V. (2011). The applicability of the N2 method to the estimation of torsional effects in asymmetric base-isolated buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,40(8), 867–886.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Krawinkler, H. (1996). A few basic concepts for performance based seismic design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico. Paper.

  22. Krawinkler, H., & Seneviratna, G. (1998). Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering Structures,20(4), 452–464.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kreslin, M., & Fajfar, P. (2011). The extended N2 method taking into account higher mode effects in elevation. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,40(14), 1571–1589.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lee, D.-G., Hong, J.-M., & Kim, J. (2001). Vertical distribution of equivalent static loads for base isolated building structures. Engineering Structures,23(10), 1293–1306.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Li, S., Zuo, Z., Zhai, C., & Xie, L. (2017). Comparison of static pushover and dynamic analyses using RC building shaking table experiment. Engineering Structures,136, 430–440.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Liu, Y., & Kuang, J. (2017). Spectrum-based pushover analysis for estimating seismic demand of tall buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,15(10), 4193–4214.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nakamura, Y., Derakhshan, H., Griffith, M. C., Magenes, G., & Sheikh, A. H. (2017). Applicability of nonlinear static procedures for low-rise unreinforced masonry buildings with flexible diaphragms. Engineering Structures,137, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ordonez, D., Foti, D., & Bozzo, L. (2003). Comparative study of the inelastic response of base isolated buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 32(1), 151–164.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Providakis, C. (2008). Pushover analysis of base-isolated steel–concrete composite structures under near-fault excitations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,28(4), 293–304.

    Google Scholar 

  30. SEAONC. (1986). Tentative seismic isolation design requirements: structural engineers association of northern California. California: Seismology Committee Base Isolation Subcommittee.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Soleimani, S., Aziminejad, A., & Moghadam, A. (2017). Extending the concept of energy-based pushover analysis to assess seismic demands of asymmetric-plan buildings. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,93, 29–41.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tso, W., & Moghadam, A. (1998). Pushover procedure for seismic analysis of buildings. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials,1(3), 337–344.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Uva, G., Porco, F., Fiore, A., Ruggieri, S. (2018). Effects in conventional nonlinear static analysis: Evaluation of control node position. Paper presented at the Structures.

  34. Warn, G. P., & Ryan, K. L. (2012). A review of seismic isolation for buildings: historical development and research needs. Buildings,2(3), 300–325.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wen, Y.-K. (1976). Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division,102(2), 249–263.

    Google Scholar 

  36. York, K., & Ryan, K. L. (2008). Distribution of lateral forces in base-isolated buildings considering isolation system nonlinearity. Journal of Earthquake Engineering,12(7), 1185–1204.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohit Bhandari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhandari, M. Prediction of inelastic response of base-isolated building frame by pushover analysis. Asian J Civ Eng (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-020-00267-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Lateral load pattern
  • Elastic–plastic state
  • Lead rubber bearing
  • Elastic state
  • Far-field earthquakes
  • Pushover analysis