Evaluation of Modal and FEMA Pushover Procedures Using Strong-Motion Records of Buildings

The objective of this investigation is to evaluate the FEMA-356 Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP) and a recently developed Modal Pushover Analysis (MPA) procedure using recorded motions of four buildings that were damaged during the 1994 Northridge earthquake. For this purpose, displacements and drifts from the FEMA-356 NSP and the MPA procedures are compared with the values “derived” from the recorded motions. It is found that the FEMA-356 NSP typically underestimates the drifts in upper stories and overestimates them in lower stories when compared to the recorded motions. Among the four FEMA-356 distributions considered, the “Uniform” distribution led to the most excessive underestimation or overestimation indicating that the need to carefully reevaluate the usefulness of this distribution in the FEMA-356 NSP. Furthermore, FEMA-356 distributions failed to provide accurate estimates of story drifts for a building that satisfied the FEMA-356 criterion for detecting the presence of higher mode effects indicating the need to carefully re-examine this criterion. The MPA procedure, in general, provides estimates of the response that are much closer to the values from the recorded motion compared to those from the FEMA-356 NSP. In particular, the MPA procedure, unlike the FEMA-356 NSP, is able to capture the effects of higher modes. For a building that exhibits dominant effects of “soft” first story, however, neither the MPA procedure nor the FEMA-356 NSP led to reasonable estimate of the response.

[1]  David Bonowitz,et al.  Seismic Response of an Instrumented 13-Story Steel Frame Building Damaged in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake , 1997 .

[2]  Peter Fajfar,et al.  THE N2 METHOD FOR THE SEISMIC DAMAGE ANALYSIS OF RC BUILDINGS , 1996 .

[3]  Gary C. Hart,et al.  Reliability of Nonlinear Static Methods for the Seismic Prediction of Steel Frame Buildings , 2000 .

[4]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Evaluation of a Modified MPA Procedure Assuming Higher Modes as Elastic to Estimate Seismic Demands , 2004 .

[5]  Helmut Krawinkler,et al.  PROS AND CONS OF A PUSHOVER ANALYSIS OF SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION , 1998 .

[6]  Farzad Naeim Performance of 20 extensively‐instrumented buildings during the 1994 Northridge earthquake , 1998 .

[7]  W. J. Hall,et al.  Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes , 1999 .

[8]  A. Chopra,et al.  Inelastic Deformation Ratios for Design and Evaluation of Structures: Single-Degree-of- Freedom Bilinear Systems , 2004 .

[9]  Jack P. Moehle,et al.  Performance Assessment for a Reinforced Concrete Frame Building , 2000, Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes.

[10]  J. Paris Performance assessment. , 1998, Journal of public health medicine.

[11]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering , 1995 .

[12]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings , 2002 .

[13]  Rakesh K. Goel EVALUATION OF NONLINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES USING STRONG-MOTION RECORDS OF BUILDINGS , 2003 .

[14]  Bruce F. Maison,et al.  How Safe Are Pre-Northridge WSMFs? A Case Study of the SAC Los Angeles Nine-Story Building , 1999 .

[15]  Farzad NAEIM LEARNING FROM STRUCTURAL AND NONSTRUCTURAL SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF 20 EXTENSIVELY INSTRUMENTED BUILDINGS , 1999 .

[16]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Evaluation of Modal and FEMA Pushover Analyses: SAC Buildings , 2004 .

[17]  James O Jirsa,et al.  Nonlinear Analyses of an Instrumented Structure Damaged in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake , 1998 .

[18]  Sashi K. Kunnath,et al.  Seismic Performance and Retrofit Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Structures , 1997 .

[19]  C. Aring,et al.  A CRITICAL REVIEW , 1939, Journal of neurology and psychiatry.

[20]  Andrei M. Reinhorn,et al.  Inelastic analysis techniques in seismic evaluations , 2019, Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes.

[21]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Advanced inelastic static (pushover) analysis for earthquake applications , 2001 .

[22]  Sashi K. Kunnath,et al.  Adaptive Spectra-Based Pushover Procedure for Seismic Evaluation of Structures , 2000 .