The Pushover Analysis from basics - Rahul Leslie

1. 1. 1 The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by . Rahul Leslie Assistant Director,
Buildings Design, DRIQ, Kerala PWD, Trivandrum, India
2. 2. 2 Introduction • Performance Based Design --- an emerging field – To provide engineers with a
capability to design buildings that have predictable and reliable performance in earthquakes – It
employs concept of ‘performance objectives’, which is the specification of an acceptable level of
damage on experiencing a earthquake of a given severity. (FEMA 349) • Seismic design for the
future – Presently a linear elastic analysis alone is sufficient for both its elastic and ductile design
– In course of time, for large critical structures, a specially dedicated non- linear procedure will
have to be done, which finally influences the seismic design as a whole. The Pushover Analysis –
from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
3. 3. 3 Introduction • Linear approach (IS:1893-2002) is based on the Response Reduction factor R.
– For example, R = 5, means that 1/5th of the seismic force is taken by the Limit State capacity of
the structure. – Further deflection is taken by the ductile capacity of the structure. – Reinforced
Concrete (RC) members are detailed (as per IS:13920) to confirm its ductile capacity. – We never
analyse for the ductile part, but only follow the reinforcement detailing guidelines for the same.
The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
4. 4. 4 Introduction • The drawback is that the response beyond the limit state is neither a simple
extrapolation, … • … nor a perfectly ductile behaviour with pre-determinable deformation
capacity, due to various reasons: – Change in stiffness of members due to cracking and yielding, –
P-delta effects, – Change in the final seismic force estimated (due to Change in • time period ‘T’
and • effective damping ratio ‘ζ’ (also represented by ‘β’) – etc. The Pushover Analysis – from
basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
5. 5. 5 Introduction • Although elastic analysis gives a good indication of elastic capacity of
structures and shows where yielding will first occur, – It cannot predict the redistribution of forces
during the progressive yielding that follows and predict its failure mechanisms. • A non-linear
static analysis can predict these more accurately. – It can help identify members likely to reach
critical states during an earthquake for which attention should be given during design and
detailing. The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
6. 6. 6 Introduction The Pushover Analysis (PA): • PA is a non-linear analysis procedure to estimate
the strength capacity of a structure beyond its Limit State up to its ultimate strength. • It can help
demonstrate how progressive failure in buildings most probably occurs, and identify the mode of
final failure. • The method also predicts potential weak areas in the structure, by keeping track of
the sequence of damages of each and every member in the structure. The Pushover Analysis –
from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
7. 7. 7 PA can be useful under two situations:  When an existing structure has deficiencies in
seismic resisting capacity,  due to either omission of seismic design when built, or  the
structure becoming seismically inadequate due to a later upgradation of the seismic codes, is to be
retrofitted to meet the (present) seismic demands, PA can show where the retrofitting is required
and how much.  For a building in its design phase, PA results help scrutinise and fine tune the
seismic design based on SA. Introduction The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by
Rahul Leslie
8. 8. 8 • For a new building, PA is meant to be a second stage analysis (The first stage being a
conventional Seismic analysis - SA). • This is because the details of reinforcement provided are
required to calculate exact hinge properties (to be covered later) • But one has to design the
structure based on SA in order to obtain the reinforcement details. • This means that PA is meant
to be a second stage analysis (The first stage being a conventional SA). • Thus the emerging
methodology to an accurate seismic design is: 1. First a conventional linear seismic analysis based
on which a primary structural design is done; 2. Insertion of hinges determined based on the
design/detail and then 3. A pushover analysis is done, followed by 4. Modification of the design
and detailing, wherever necessary, based on the latter analysis. 5. The above steps may have to be
iterated, if required. Introduction The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
9. 9. 9 Features of a Typical Pushover Approach • The model, which is a Multi-degree of freedom
(MDoF) model, is used for the analysis There are certain features common to all PA approaches:
1. An analysis model of the building, is generated using a common analysis-design software
 package (having facility for PA), like – STAAD.Pro, – SAP2000, ETABS, – MIDAS/Gen, etc.
The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
10. 10. 10 Non-linear Building model & Non-linear Hinges Pushover analysis uses a non-linear
computer model for the analysis: – This is done by incorporated in the form of non-linear hinges
inserted into an otherwise linear elastic model which one generates using a common analysis-
design software package (STAAD.Pro, SAP2000, ETABS, MIDAS/Gen, etc.) – Hinges are points
on a structure where one expects cracking and yielding to occur in relatively higher intensity so
that they show higher flexural/shear displacement, under a cyclic loading The Pushover Analysis –
from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
11. 11. 11 - These are locations where one expects to see cross diagonal cracks in an actual building
structure after a seismic mayhem – they would be at either ends of beams and columns, the ‘cross’
being at a small distance from the joint – this is where one inserts hinges in the corresponding
computer model. Non-linear Building model & Non-linear Hinges The Pushover Analysis – from
basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
12. 12. 12 • Basically a hinge represents localised force-displacement relation of a member through its
elastic and inelastic phases under seismic loads. • A flexural hinge represents the moment-rotation
relation of a beam. • Hinges are of various types – namely, – (1) flexural hinges, – (2) shear hinges
– (3) axial hinges. Non-linear Building model & Non-linear Hinges The Pushover Analysis – from
basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
13. 13. 13 • The flexural and shear hinges are inserted into the ends of beams and columns. • Since the
presence of masonry infills have significant influence on the seismic behaviour of the structure,
modelling them using equivalent diagonal struts (of ‘truss’ elements) is common in PA • The axial
hinges are inserted at either ends of the diagonal struts Non-linear Building model & Non-linear
Hinges The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
14. 14. 14 Typical Moment Hinge property: • AB represents the linear range from unloaded state (A)
to its effective yield (B), • Followed by an inelastic but linear response of reduced (ductile)
stiffness from B to C. • CD shows a sudden reduction in load resistance, followed by a reduced
resistance from D to E, and • finally a total loss of resistance from E to F. Flexural Hinge Non-
linear Building model & Non-linear Hinges The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by
Rahul Leslie
15. 15. 15 • These hinges have non-linear states defined within its ductile range as – ‘Immediate
Occupancy’ (IO), – ‘Life Safety’ (LS) and – ‘Collapse Prevention’ (CP) • This is usually done by
dividing B-C into four parts and denoting IO, LS and CP, which are states of each individual
hinges Flexural Hinge Non-linear Building model & Non-linear Hinges The Pushover Analysis –
from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
16. 16. 16 There are certain features common to all PA approaches: 2. The model is pushed
monotonically with an invariable distribution of lateral load with some predefined distribution
pattern such as: – Proportional to 1st mode (or SRSS combination of modes) – Inverted triangle /
Uniform distribution – Power distribution (for example, parabolic) ∑ = n i k jj k ii bi hW hW VQ
Features of a Typical Pushover Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by
Rahul Leslie
17. 17. 17 There are certain features common to all PA approaches: 2. (Continuation …) • Unlike
conventional SA, in Pushover analysis, analysis for Gravity loads is done first, continued by an
analysis for Lateral loads. • Since PA is done to simulate the behaviour under actual loads, the
Gravity loads applied are not factored, but in accordance with Cl.7.3.3 and Table 8 of IS:1893-
2002 : [DL + 0.25 LL≤3kN/sq.m + 0.5 LL>3kN/sq.m] Features of a Typical Pushover Approach
The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
18. 18. 18 3. A pushover curve is obtained, which is a Base shear (Vb) vs. Roof top displacement
(Δrt) curve – Base shear is sum of all horizontal support reactions in that direction – Roof top
displacement is the displacement at the centre of mass of the general roof Features of a Typical
Pushover Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
19. 19. 19 4. A single-degree of freedom (SDoF) model, corresponding to the MDoF model, and the
rules to convert the parameters of the MDoF model (Vb & Δrt) to those of the SDoF model (Sa &
Sd) are defined Features of a Typical Pushover Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics
Presented by Rahul Leslie
20. 20. 20 4. (Continuation…) A single-degree of freedom (SDoF) model, corresponding to the
MDoF model, and the rules to convert the parameters of the MDoF model (Vb & Δrt) to those of
 the SDoF model (Sa & Sd) are defined – In ATC-40 and FEMA440, the conversion is (where ),
and – In EC 8 (where Sa and Sd are denoted by F* and d* respectively) and α WV Sa b / = M Mk
1= =α rtkkP rt Sd @,11 == ⋅ ∆ = φ 1= = k b P V Sa 1= ∆ = kP rt Sd Features of a Typical
Pushover Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
21. 21. 21 5. The Sa-Sd curve has to be converted to an equivalent bi-linear curve (equal energy) by a
suitable method – Different codes follow different methods ATC-40 and FEMA440 – ATC-40
and FEMA440 follows the method of keeping the 1st line as initial tangent stiffness and adjusts
the 2nd line (to the point under consideration) such that to get the ‘equal area’. Features of a
Typical Pushover Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
22. 22. 22 5. The Sa-Sd curve has to be converted to an equivalent bi-linear curve (equal energy) by a
suitable method – Different codes follow different methods EC 8 – EC8 (EuroCode 8) follows the
method of keeping the 2nd line (to the point under consideration) as ‘perfectly plastic’, ie.,
horizontal and adjusts the 1st line such that to get the ‘equal area’. Features of a Typical Pushover
Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
23. 23. 23 5. The Sa-Sd curve has to be converted to an equivalent bi-linear curve (equal energy) by a
suitable method – Different codes follow different methods ATC-40 and FEMA440 EC8 Features
of a Typical Pushover Approach The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
24. 24. 24 PA procedures can generally be classified to two: 1. DCM (Displacement Coeff. Method):
These procedures estimates a Target displacement prior to the analysis, to which the model has to
be pushed, and on analysis, checked for the intended (good) performance at that displacement.
The method is nevertheless, iterative. Ref:- - FEMA356, - FEMA440 (Ch.5), - EC 8 2. CSM
(Capacity Spectrum Method): The analysis is done, and each pt. on the pushover curve (known as
Capacity curve) is consecutively checked to see whether the Sa-Sd at that pt. meets (or intersects)
the Response Spectrum curve (known as Demand curve), reduced by a factor. (continued…)
Different Pushover Approaches The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
25. 25. 25 PA procedures can generally be classified to two: 2. CSM : … For each point on the
Capacity curve, the Demand curve to be checked with, for intersection, is a Response Spectrum
curve reduced by a reduction factor calculated corresponding to that point under consideration on
the Capacity curve. When the curves intersects (or meet), that meeting point is known as the
Performance Pt. Ref:- - ATC-40, - FEMA440 (Ch.6) - EC8 (Optional method) Different Pushover
Approaches The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
26. 26. 26 The steps for the CSM method are: 1. First, the Response Spectrum (RS) curve has to be
modified: from its ordinates of Sa vs. Time period ‘T’, to its ‘Acceleration Displacement
Response Spectrum’ (ADRS) form, which is an Sa vs. Sd curve. • This to facilitate the super-
imposing the pushover curve over the RS (which is in its ADRS form) RS ADRS Steps for CSM
method of Pushover Analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
27. 27. 27 The steps for the CSM method are: 1. First, the Response Spectrum (RS) curve has to be
modified: from its ordinates of Sa vs. Time period, to its ‘Acceleration Displacement Response
Spectrum’ (ADRS) form, which is an Sa vs. Sd curve. • This is done by using the relation RS
ADRS Sa T Sd 2 2 4π = Steps for CSM method of Pushover Analysis The Pushover Analysis –
from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
28. 28. 28 2. Super-impose the converted Pushover curve on the ADRS curve: Steps for CSM method
of Pushover Analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
29. 29. 29 3. With the Capacity curve (Pushover curve) superimposed on the Demand curve (ADRS),
each point on the former is consecutively checked to : i. Get the yield point ordinates (Say & Sdy)
ii. Calculate the ductility μ and the 2nd tangent stiffness coeff. α ATC-40, FEMA440 EC8 Steps
for CSM method of Pushover Analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul
Leslie
30. 30. 30 iii. Determine the reduced ADRS for the above parameters corresponding to that pt. on the
Capacity curve as:  ATC-40/FEMA440 : Calculate damping β from ductility μ and 2nd tangent
stiffness coefficient α. Reduce ADRS corresponding to β  EC 8 : Reduce ADRS corresponding
to ductility μ ATC-40, FEMA440 EC8 Steps for CSM method of Pushover Analysis The
Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
31. 31. 31 • For example, in ATC-40, for the reduction of the Demand (ADRS) curve, the ‘effective’
damping ratio β is determined from the formula : Steps for CSM method of Pushover Analysis y p
d d =µ ( )( ) ( )ααµπµ αµ κβ −+ −− += 1 112 05.0eff init nd K K2 =α y y init d a K = yp yp nd dd
aa K − − =2 The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
32. 32. 32 • …where the Damping Modification Factor κ is determined from the building type Table :
Structural behaviour types Table : Values for Damping Modification Factor κ Shaking Duration
Essentially New Building Average Existing Building Poor Existing Building Short Type A Type
B Type C Long Type B Type C Type C Structure behaviou r type βeq(%) κ Type A ≤16.25 1.0
>16.25 Type B ≤25 0.67 >25 Type C Any value 0.33 ( ) 02/51.013.1 βπ− ( ) 02/446.0845.0 βπ−
Steps for CSM method of Pushover Analysis ( )( ) ( )ααµπµ αµ κβ −+ −− += 1 112 05.0eff The
Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
33. 33. 33 ( ) 12.2 681.021.3 (%)effeLog SRa β− = ( ) 65.1 41.031.2 (%)effeLog SRv β− = • From the
effective damping ratio β, the factors for reducing the ADRS curve are determined from the
formula : Steps for CSM method of Pushover Analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics
Presented by Rahul Leslie
34. 34. 34 4. Include the reduced ADRS Demand curve in the super-imposed graph: Steps for CSM
method of Pushover Analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
35. 35. 35 Step by step through each method 1. The conventional SA procedure is explained to
highlight the difference in approaches between SA & PA 2. Trace the progress of a PA from
beginning to end, • both demonstrates plots of Vb vs Δroof top and RS curve in its – separate and
uncombined form and – also their transformed and super-positioned ADRS plot. The Pushover
Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
36. 36. 36 • In SA, the maximum DBE force acting on the structure is Z/2.(Sa/g), (assuming I = 1)
with Sa/g corresponding to the estimated time period. • Its envelop is the RS curve marked q • The
RS curve for the Limit State design is plotted in terms of Z/2R. (Sa/g), and is marked as curve p.
Step by step through each method -- SA Method The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented
by Rahul Leslie
37. 37. 37 • Fig. shows the Vb vs Δroof top displacement. – The point P represents the Vb and Δroof
top for the design lateral load (ie., of 1/R times full load) – The point Q represents the same for the
full load, had the building been fully elastic – Point Q' for a perfectly-elastic perfectly-ductile
structure. – The slope of the line OP represents the stiffness of the structure in a global sense.
Since the analysis is linear, the stiffness remains same throughout the analysis, with Q being an
extension of OP. Step by step through each method -- SA Method The Pushover Analysis – from
basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
38. 38. 38 Step by step through each method -- SA Method • The same is represented in Fig.(left)
where, for the time period Tp of the structure, – the full load is represented by Q (Saq), and – the
design load by P (Sap). The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
39. 39. 39 Step by step through each method -- SA Method • The ADRS representation of SA is as in
Fig.(left). – the full load is represented by Q (Saq), – the design load by P (Sap). The Pushover
Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
40. 40. 40 Step by step through each method -- PA Method Now we shall see how differently the PA
approaches the same scenario :- • The segment OA in Fig.(left) is equivalent to OP in Fig.(right),
with the slope representing the global stiffness in its elastic range. The Pushover Analysis – from
basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
41. 41. 41 Step by step through each method -- PA Method The RS curve : Segment OA has time
period Ta, curve ‘a’ representing the RS curve and Saa is the lateral load demand, in its elastic
range. The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
42. 42. 42 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • ADRS representation: The Pushover
Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
43. 43. 43 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • As the analysis progresses, the lateral
load is monotonically increased beyond its elastic limit of A, and the first hinges are formed. This
decreases the overall stiffness of the structure. This is represented by the segment AB. • The
decrease in slope of OB from that of OA shows the change in secant stiffness. The Pushover
Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
44. 44. 44 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • The first hinges are formed, decreasing
the overall stiffness of the structure, which in turn increases T and β, represented by point B in the
plots. The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
45. 45. 45 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • The change in the x-axis value of point B
from that of point A shows the shift of time period from Ta to Tb. • The increase in β of the
structure calls for a corresponding decrease in the RS curve, reduced by a factor calculated from β,
 which has thus come down from curve a to b. The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by
Rahul Leslie
46. 46. 46 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • ADRS representation: Note the angular
shift from Ta to Tb . • The increase in β of the structure calls for a corresponding decrease in the
RS curve, reduced by a factor calculated from β, which has thus come down from curve a to b.
The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
47. 47. 47 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • As the lateral load is further increased
monotonically, more hinges are formed and the existing hinges have further yielded in its non-
linear phase represented by point C • This has further reduced the stiffness (the slope of OC), The
Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
48. 48. 48 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • (Here are the two graphs overlapped – a
possibility The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
49. 49. 49 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • This has further reduced the stiffness,
and increased T (from Tb to Tc). The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
50. 50. 50 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • More hinges are formed and the existing
hinges have further yielded in its non-linear phase, represented by point C • Note the angular shift
from Tb to Tc. The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
51. 51. 51 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • Here the point C is where the capacity
curve OABC extending upwards meets the demand curve in, which was simultaneously
descending down to curve c. • Thus C is the point where the total lateral force expected Sac is
same as the lateral force applied ~Vbc • This point is known as the performance point. The
Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
52. 52. 52 Step by step through each method -- PA Method • It is also defined as the point where the
‘locus of the performance point’, the line connecting Saa, Sab and Sac, intersects the capacity
curve The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
53. 53. 53 PA Method – Reviewing results • Once the performance point is found, the overall
performance of the structure can be checked to see whether it matches the required performance
level, based on inter-storey drift limits specified in ATC- 40, which are – 0.01h for IO, – 0.02h for
LS, and – 0.33(Vb/W)∙h for CP, (h = height of the building). • The performance level is based on
the importance and function of the building. For example, hospitals and emergency services
buildings are expected to meet a performance level of IO. The Pushover Analysis – from basics
Presented by Rahul Leslie
54. 54. 54 • The next step is to review the hinge formations at performance point. One can see the
individual stage of each hinge, at its location. • Tables are obtained showing the number of hinges
in each state, at each stage, based on which one decides which all beams and columns to be
redesigned. • The decision depends whether the most severely yielded hinges are formed in beams
or in columns, whether they are concentrated in a particular storey denoting soft story, and so on.
PA Method – Reviewing results OA AB BC The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by
Rahul Leslie
55. 55. 55 Adaptation for the Indian Code Adapting of Pushover Analysis (PA) for IS:1893-2002 •
The PA has not been introduced in the Indian Standard code yet. However the procedure described
in ATC-40 can be adapted for the seismic parameters of IS:1893-2002. • The RS curve in ATC-40
is described by parameters – Ca and – Cv, where the curve just as in IS:1893, is having a flat
portion of intensity 2.5 Ca and a downward sloping portion described by Cv/T. Resp. Spec (ATC-
40) The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
56. 56. 56 • The seismic force in IS:1893- 2000 is represented by (ZI/2R).(Sa/g), where Sa/g is
obtained from the RS curve, which in our code is represented by – 2.5 in the flat portion & – the
downward sloping portion by • 1/T for hard soil, • 1.36/T for medium soil and • 1.67/T for soft
soil. Resp. Spec (IS:1893-2002)       = g Sa R ZI Ah 2 Adaptation for the Indian
Code The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
57. 57. 57 • On comparison it can be inferred that – Ca = Z/2 and – Cv = Z/2 for hard, 1.36∙Z/2 for
medium and 1.67∙Z/2 for soft soil • Here ‘I’ is not considered, since in PA, the criteria of
importance of the structure is taken care of by the performance levels (IO, LS & CP) • R is also
not considered since PA is always done for the full lateral load. Resp. Spec (ATC-40) Resp. Spec
(IS:1893-2002)       =      = g SaZ g Sa R ZI Ah 22 Adaptation
for the Indian Code The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
58. 58. 58 • The ‘Limit State’ inter-storey drift limit specified in IS:1893-2002, being 0.004, when
accounted for – R = 5 for ductile design and – I = 1.5 for important structures (IO performance
level) = 1.0 for ordinary structures (LS performance level) gives 0.004∙R/I = 0.02 and 0.0133 for
IO and LS respectively • The drift limit can be compared with those specified in ATC-40 (0.01
and 0.02 for IO and LS respectively). The limit for IO in IS:1893-2002 is more relaxed than that in
ATC-40. • This 0.004∙R/I can be taken as the IS:1893-2002 limits for pushover drift, where I takes
the values corresponding to Important and Ordinary structures for limits of IO and LS
respectively. Adaptation for the Indian Code The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by
Rahul Leslie
59. 59. 59 • Presented in this section are the results of a pushover analysis done on a 10 storey RCC
building of a shopping complex using the structural package of SAP2000. Example of a building
analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
60. 60. 60 • In the model, beams and columns were modelled using frame elements, into which the
hinges were inserted. • Diaphragm action was assigned to the floor slabs to ensure integral lateral
action of beams in each floor. • Although analysis was done in both transverse and longitudinal
directions, only the results of the former are discussed here. • The lateral load was applied in
pattern of that of the 1st mode shape in the transverse direction of the building, with an intensity
for DBE as per IS:1893-2002, corresponding to zone-III in hard soil. Example of a building
analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
61. 61. 61 • The ADRS plot shows the Sa and Sd at performance point as 0.085g and 0.242m. • The
corresponding Vb and Δroof top are 1857.046 kN and 0.287m. The value of effective T is 3.368s.
• The effective β at that level of the demand curve which met the performance point is 26%.
Example of a building analysis The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
62. 62. 62 Example of a building analysis • Table shows the hinge state details at each step of the
analysis. Step Δroof top (m) Vb (kN) Hinge States Total Hinges A to B B to IO IO to LS LS to CP
CP to C C to D D to E > E 0 0 0 1752 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752 1 0.058318 1084.354 1748 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
1752 2 0.074442 1348.412 1670 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752 3 0.089645 1451.4 1594 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752
4 0.26199 1827.137 1448 168 136 0 0 0 0 0 1752 5 0.41105 2008.48 1384 144 136 88 0 0 0 0
1752 6 0.411066 1972.693 1384 146 136 86 0 0 0 0 1752 7 0.411082 1576.04 1376 148 136 39 0
0 53 0 1752 8 0.411098 1568.132 1376 148 136 37 0 0 55 0 1752 9 0.411114 1544.037 1375 149
136 31 0 0 61 0 1752 10 0.40107 1470.133 1375 149 136 31 0 0 61 0 1752 The Pushover Analysis
– from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
63. 63. 63 • For the performance point, taken as step 5 (which actually lies between steps 4 and 5), –
95% of hinges are within LS and IO performance levels – 88% within IO performance level.
Example of a building analysis Step Δroof top (m) Vb (kN) Hinge States Total Hinges A to B B to
IO IO to LS LS to CP CP to C C to D D to E > E 0 0 0 1752 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752 1 0.058318
1084.354 1748 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752 2 0.074442 1348.412 1670 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752 3 0.089645
1451.4 1594 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 1752 4 0.26199 1827.137 1448 168 136 0 0 0 0 0 1752 5 0.41105
2008.48 1384 144 136 88 0 0 0 0 1752 6 0.411066 1972.693 1384 146 136 86 0 0 0 0 1752 7
0.411082 1576.04 1376 148 136 39 0 0 53 0 1752 8 0.411098 1568.132 1376 148 136 37 0 0 55 0
1752 9 0.411114 1544.037 1375 149 136 31 0 0 61 0 1752 10 0.40107 1470.133 1375 149 136 31
0 0 61 0 1752 The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
64. 64. 64 • Following figures shows the hinge states during various stages in course of the analysis.
Example of a building analysis Fig: Hinge states in the structure model at (a) step 0 & (b) step 3
The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
65. 65. 65 • Following figures shows the hinge states during various stages in course of the analysis.
Example of a building analysis Fig: Hinge states in the structure model at (c) step 5 & (d) step 8
The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
66. 66. 66 • Following figures shows the hinge states during various stages in course of the analysis.
Example of a building analysis Fig: Hinge states in the structure model at (e) step 10 The
Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
67. 67. 67 • Hinge properties – Determining hinge properties (beams, columns, diagonal struts) –
Determining hinge properties for flat-slab and shear walls • Seismic analysis  design/detailing 
hinge property calculation  insertion of hinges  Pushover Analysis – Doing the above manually
at a practically acceptable speed – Non-availability of a semi-automatic method in standard
Analysis Packages (STAAD, ETABS, etc.) : Facility to quickly define details of provided
reinforcement bars for beams & columns and have the package to automatically insert
 appropriately calculated hinges not available. Issues The Pushover Analysis – from basics
Presented by Rahul Leslie
68. 68. 68 • Inclusion of building torsion (no standardized guidelines available) • Inclusion of higher
modes in PA – PA with vectors that represent the effects of multiple modes (FEMA 356) –
Explicit consideration of Multiple Modes • Modal Pushover Analysis (Chopra and Goel, (2001). •
Incremental Response Spectrum Analysis (Aydinoglu, 2003) • Consecutive Modal Pushover
(Poursha et al., 2009) – Progressive changes in the load vector pattern applied to the structure. •
Displacement Adaptive Pushover (Antoniou and Pinho, 2004) • IS:1893-2002 is yet to include the
method Limitations The Pushover Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
69. 69. 69 References: • IS 1893 (Part 1)–2002, “Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant
Design of Structures, Part 1: General Provision and Buildings”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi. • FEMA 356 (2000) “Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings”, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, USA. • ATC-40 (1996)
“Seismic Analysis and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings”, vol. I, Applied Technology Council,
Redwood City, CA, USA. • FEMA-440 (2005) “Improvement of Nonlinear static seismic analysis
procedures”, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A. • prEN 1998-1
(2003) “Eurocode 8 Part 1: Design of structures for earthquake resistance”, European Committee
for Standardization, Brussels. • Jisha S. V. (2008), Mini Project Report “Pushover Analysis”,
Department of Civil Engineering, T. K. M. College of Engineering, Kollam, Kerala. The Pushover
Analysis – from basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
70. 70. 70 A write up on this topic can be found at … http://rahulleslie.blogspot.in/p/blog-page.html
… but covers only the ATC-40 method of pushover analysis. Note The Pushover Analysis – from
basics Presented by Rahul Leslie
71. 71. 71 An effort has been made to present the topic as simple as possible… …presume, at least to
some extend, the aim has been fulfilled. Conclusion Thank you [email protected]
Recommended

 How to Use LinkedIn Learning
Online Course - LinkedIn Learning


 Teaching Complex Topics
Online Course - LinkedIn Learning


 Office 2016 for Educators
Online Course - LinkedIn Learning

App4 time history analysis

 rafa far

Seismic Analysis
Krishnagnr

Non linear static pushover analysis

jeyanthi4

3.4 pushover analysis

NASRIN AFROZ

Part-I: Seismic Analysis/Design of Multi-storied RC Buildings using

STAAD.Pro...
Rahul Leslie


Part-II: Seismic Analysis/Design of Multi-storied RC Buildings using

STAAD.Pr...
Rahul Leslie

A Picture Album of the Finite Element Method

Rahul Leslie