Evaluation of a Modified MPA Procedure Assuming Higher Modes as Elastic to Estimate Seismic Demands

The modal pushover analysis (MPA) procedure, which includes the contributions of all significant modes of vibration, estimates seismic demands much more accurately than current pushover procedures used in structural engineering practice. Outlined in this paper is a modified MPA (MMPA) procedure wherein the response contributions of higher vibration modes are computed by assuming the building to be linearly elastic, thus reducing the computational effort. After outlining such a modified procedure, its accuracy is evaluated for a variety of frame buildings and ground motion ensembles. Although it is not necessarily more accurate than the MPA procedure, the MMPA procedure is an attractive alternative for practical application because it leads to a larger estimate of seismic demands, improving the accuracy of the MPA results in some cases (relative to nonlinear response history analysis) and increasing their conservatism in others. However, such conservatism is unacceptably large for lightly damped systems, with damping significantly less than 5%. Thus the MMPA procedure is not recommended for such systems.

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

[2]  Lawrence L. Kupper,et al.  Probability, statistics, and decision for civil engineers , 1970 .

[3]  R. Medina,et al.  Seismic Demands for Nondeteriorating Frame Structures and Their Dependence on Ground Motions , 2003 .

[4]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Period formulas for moment-resisting frame buildings , 1997 .

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

[6]  Anil K. CHOPRA,et al.  EVALUATION OF MODAL PUSHOVER ANALYSIS USING VERTICALLY IRREGULAR FRAMES , 2002 .

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

[8]  José I. Restrepo,et al.  Earthquake‐induced floor horizontal accelerations in buildings , 2002 .

[9]  T. Igusa,et al.  Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering by Anil K. Chopra , 1996 .

[10]  A. Veletsos,et al.  Effect of Inelastic Behavior on the Response of Simple Systems to Earthquake Motions , 1975 .

[11]  Marc O. Eberhard,et al.  Behavior‐Based Method to Determine Design Shear in Earthquake‐Resistant Walls , 1993 .

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

[13]  N. Abrahamson,et al.  Modification of Empirical Strong Ground Motion Attenuation Relations to Include the Amplitude and Duration Effects of Rupture Directivity , 1997 .

[14]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Evaluation of Modal and FEMA Pushover Analyses: Vertically “Regular” and Irregular Generic Frames , 2004 .

[15]  Helmut Krawinkler,et al.  Seismic drift and ductility demands and their dependence on ground motions , 2003 .

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

[17]  Johnny Sun,et al.  Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project , 1997 .

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