Advertisement

Modified Mode-Adaptive Bi-directional Pushover Analysis Considering Higher Mode for Asymmetric Buildings

  • K. FujiiEmail author
Chapter
  • 26 Downloads
Part of the Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering book series (GGEE, volume 48)

Abstract

In this paper, the Mode-Adaptive Bi-directional Pushover Analysis (MABPA) previously presented by the author is modified by considering the higher (third) mode response. The modifications proposed in this paper are (a) the peak response of the third mode is estimated from the independent single-degree-of freedom (SDOF) model representing the third mode, and (b) the peak response of each frame is predicted by combining the results from the original MABPA and the third mode response using the square root of the sum of square (SRSS) rule. The modified MABPA is applied to two six-story asymmetric building models with bidirectional setback. The predicted results are compared with time-history analysis results and other simplified procedures; modal pushover analysis (MPA), improved modal pushover analysis (IMPA), a variant of MPA considering bidirectional excitation by (Manoukas G, Athanatopoulou A, Avramidis I, Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 38:88–96, 2012) and (Manoukas G, Avramidis I, Bull Earthq Eng 12(6):2607–2632, 2014), and the original MABPA. The results show that the predicted peak response at “flexible-edge” frame by each simplified procedure agree well with the time-history analysis results. On the contrary, the predicted peak response at the “stiff-edge” frame according to each simplified procedure is different: some of the predicted results, including the results via original MABPA, underestimate the time-history analysis results, while the results via modified MABPA are conservative compare to the time-history analysis results.

Keywords

Modified Mode-Adaptive Bi-Directional Pushover Analysis (Modified MABPA) Asymmetric buildings Bi-directional excitaion Pushover analysis 

References

  1. BCJ (2016) The building standard law of Japan on CD-ROM. The Building Center of Japan, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  2. Belejo A, Bento R (2016) Improved modal pushover analysis in seismic assessment of asymmetric plan building under the influence of one and two horizontal components of ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 87:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.04.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosco M, Ghersi A, Marino EM (2012) Corrective eccentricities for assessment by nonlinear static method of 3D structures subjected to bidirectional ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41(13):1751–1773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chopra AK, Goel RK (2004) A modal pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic demands for unsymmetric-plan buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33(8):903–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fujii K (2014) Prediction of the largest peak nonlinear seismic response of asymmetric buildings under bi-directional excitation using pushover analysis. Bull Earthq Eng 12(2):909–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fujii K (2016) Assessment of pushover-based method to a building with bidirectional setback. Earthq Struct 11(3):421–443.  https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.3.421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Krestin M, Fajfar P (2012) The extended N2 method considering higher mode effects in both plan and elevation. Bull Earthq Eng 10(2):695–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Manoukas G, Avramidis I (2014) Evaluation of a multimode pushover procedure for asymmetric in plan building under biaxial seismic excitation. Bull Earthq Eng 12(6):2607–2632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Manoukas G, Athanatopoulou A, Avramidis I (2012) Multimode pushover analysis for asymmetric buildings under biaxial seismic excitation based on a new concept of the equivalent single degree of freedom system. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 38:88–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.01.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Otani S (2004) Japanese seismic design of high-rise reinforced concrete buildings – an example of performance-based design code and state of practices. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Paper No. 5010, Vancouver, Canada, 1–6, August, 2004Google Scholar
  11. Reyes JC, Chopra AK (2011a) Three-dimensional modal pushover analysis of buildings subjected to two components of ground motion, including evaluation for tall buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40(7):789–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Reyes JC, Chopra AK (2011b) Evaluation of three-dimensional modal pushover analysis for unsymmetric-plan buildings subjected to two components of ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40(13):1475–1494CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ArchitectureChiba Institute of TechnologyNarashino-shi, ChibaJapan

Personalised recommendations