0 Up votes0 Down votes

24 views6 pagesIDARC

Oct 13, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

IDARC

© All Rights Reserved

24 views

IDARC

© All Rights Reserved

- A Tale for the Time Being
- Fault Lines
- Soul Harvest: The World Takes Sides
- The Sea Glass Sisters: Prelude to The Prayer Box
- Krakatoa: The Day the World Exploded: August 27, 1883
- Krakatoa
- The Trembling Hills
- Pacific: Silicon Chips and Surfboards, Coral Reefs and Atom Bombs, Brutal Dictators, Fading Empires, and the Coming Collision of the World's Superpowers
- Pacific: Silicon Chips and Surfboards, Coral Reefs and Atom Bombs, Brutal Dictators, Fading Empires, and the Coming Collision of the World's Superpowers
- The Gifted: A New Edition of Terri Blackstock's Classic Tale
- 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed
- Aftershock
- Rogue Wave
- Judgment of Paris: California vs. France and the Historic 1976 Paris Tasting That Revolutionized Wine
- Earthquake-Resistant Structures: Design, Build, and Retrofit
- Industrial Power Engineering Handbook
- In My Sister's House: A Novel
- The Hatching: A Novel
- Ghosts of the Tsunami: Death and Life in Japan's Disaster Zone
- Cataclysm

You are on page 1of 6

e-ISSN : 2249-8303, p-ISSN : 2319-2208 VSRD International Journals : www.vsrdjournals.com

/ 41

REVIEW ARTICLE

PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

A TOOL FOR NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURE

1Sonam

1,2 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, I.E.S. I.P.S. Academy, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, INDIA.

*Corresponding Author: sonamyadav.241087@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

For structural design and assessment of reinforced concrete members, the non-linear analysis has become an important tool. The

method can be used to study the behavior of reinforced concrete structure. The previous earthquake in which many concrete structure

have been severely damaged or collapsed, have indicated the need for evaluating the seismic adequacy of buildings. A Pushover

analysis is non linear static analysis, a tool for seismic evaluation of existing structures. The pushover analysis shows the pushover

curve between the displacement and base shear.

1. INTRODUCTION

The previous earthquakes (Bihar earthquake, Great

Sumatra earthquake, Garhwal Earthquake, Jabalpur

Earthquake, Chamoli (Himalaya, India) Earthquake, Bhuj

Earthquake, diglipur earthquake) in which many concrete

structures have been severely damaged or collapsed, have

indicated the need for evaluating the seismic adequacy of

buildings. In particular, the rehabilitation of older

concrete structures in high seismicity areas is matter of

growing concern, since structures venerable to damage

must be identified and an acceptable level of safety must

be determined. To make such assessment, simplified

linear-elastic methods are not adequate. Thus, the

structural engineering community has developed a new

generation of design and seismic procedures that

incorporate performance based structures and are moving

away from Simplified linear elastic methods and towards

a more non-linear technique. Recent interests in the

development of performance based codes for the design

or rehabilitation of buildings in seismic active areas show

that an inelastic procedure commonly referred to as the

pushover analysis is a viable method to assess damage

vulnerability of buildings. Basically, a pushover analysis

is a series of incremental static analysis carried out to

develop a capacity curve for the building.

2. ANALYSIS PROCEDURES

Four procedures are presented for seismic analysis of

buildings: two linear procedures, and two nonlinear

procedures. The two linear procedures are termed the

Linear Static Procedure (LSP) and the Linear Dynamic

Procedure (LDP). The two nonlinear procedures are

termed the Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP) and

Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP).

Types of analysis: Different types of analysis are as

follows:

Linear Static Analysis.

Linear Dynamic Modal Response Spectrum

Analysis.

Linear Dynamic Explicit Response History Analysis.

Procedure (LSP), design seismic forces, their distribution

over the height of the building, and the corresponding

internal forces and system displacements are determined

using a linearly elastic, static analysis. In the LSP, the

building is modeled with linearly-elastic stiffness and

equivalent viscous damping that approximate values

expected for loading to near the yield point. Design

earthquake demands for the LSP are represented by static

lateral forces whose sum is equal to the pseudo lateral

load.

Linear Dynamic Procedure (LDP): Under the Linear

Dynamic Procedure (LDP), design seismic forces, their

distribution over the height of the building, and the

corresponding internal forces and system displacements

are determined using a linearly elastic, dynamic analysis.

The basis, modeling approaches, and acceptance criteria

of the LDP are similar to those for the LSP. The main

exception is that the response calculations are carried out

using either modal spectral analysis or Time-History

Analysis. Modal spectral analysis is carried out using

linearly-elastic response spectra that are not modified to

account for anticipated nonlinear response. The LDP

includes two analysis methods,

The Response Spectrum and

Time-History Analysis Methods.

The Response Spectrum Method uses peak modal

responses calculated from dynamic analysis of a

mathematical model. Only those modes contributing

significantly to the response need to be considered.

Modal responses are combined using rational methods to

estimate total building response quantities. The TimeHistory Method (also termed Response-History Analysis)

involves a time-step-by-time-step evaluation of building

response, using discredited recorded or synthetic

earthquake records as base motion input.

Static Procedure (NSP), a model directly incorporating

inelastic material response is displaced to a target

displacement, and resulting internal deformations and

forces are determined. The nonlinear load-deformation

characteristics of individual components and elements of

the building are modeled directly. The mathematical

model of the building is subjected to monotonically

increasing lateral forces or displacements until either a

target displacement is exceeded or the building collapses.

The target displacement is intended to represent the

maximum displacement likely to be experienced during

the design earthquake.

Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP): Direct nonlinear dynamic analysis, which takes into account the

non-linear characteristics of masonry structural elements,

is the only way to obtain accurate information regarding

the actual behavior of a masonry structure subjected to

seismic loads. However, to avoid the sophisticated direct

non-linear dynamic analysis, the non-linear behavior and

energy dissipation capacity of the structure is taken into

account by performing simple linear elastic analysis, but

considering a reduced response spectrum, called a design

spectrum , obtained by introducing the behavior factor,

i.e. force reduction factor q. The vulnerability of existing

structures to probable earthquake hazard is a matter of

concern nationally/internationally. Seismic vulnerability

and hazard assessment are useful for retrofitting

decisions, damage estimation, loss estimation, evaluation

of loss of functionality, evaluation of facility loss,

estimation of fatalities, estimation of down time and

disaster response planning with suitable retrofitting

schemes. Identifying potential hazards ahead of time and

advance planning can save lives and significantly reduce

injuries and property damage. However, advanced

methodologies, which can be used by the local

consultants and local regulating bodies which are based

on study of Indian stock of masonry buildings, are not

available. The current Indian seismic codes lack in

defining step by step procedural details for assessing

seismic vulnerability of the of the buildings under

consideration using nonlinear procedures. Collapse

prevention under the expected maximum seismic load is

one of the objectives of a performance-based design. The

proposed research focuses on the performance based

probabilistic seismic vulnerability assessment of existing

masonry buildings. The development of probabilistic

structural damage estimation procedures are justified

looking at the uncertain nature of future ground motions.

It is important to evaluate such buildings and improve the

seismic resistance of the buildings that are found to be

vulnerable. Analyses of these types of buildings require

very sophisticated material and structural modeling,

computational tools and rational estimates of probable

future ground motions. For this purpose, fragility curves

are useful tools, since they allow estimation of the

probability of structural damage due to earthquakes as a

function of ground motion indices or intensity measures

(IM), e.g., peak ground acceleration (PGA), elastic

spectral acceleration (Sa), elastic spectral displacement

(Sd) etc. The analyses determine the probabilities of

certain performance objective under the effect of

probable seismic hazard.

3. PUSHOVER METHODOLOGY

A pushover analysis is performed by subjecting a

structure to a monotonically increasing pattern of lateral

loads, representing the inertial forces which would be

experienced by the structure when subjected to ground

shaking. Under incrementally increasing loads various

structural elements may yield sequentially. Consequently,

at each event, the structure experiences a loss in stiffness.

Using a pushover analysis, a characteristic non linear

force displacement relationship can be determined. Main

steps involved in pushover methodology.

Definition of plastic hinges: In SAP2000, nonlinear

behavior is assumed to occur within a structure at

concentrated plastic hinges. The default types include

an uncoupled moment hinges, an uncoupled axial

hinges, an uncoupled shear hinges and a coupled

axial force and biaxial bending moment hinges.

Definition of the control node: control node is the

node used to monitor displacements of the Structure.

Its displacement versus the baseshear forms the

capacity (pushover) curve of the Structure.

Developing the pushover curve which includes the

evaluation of the force distributions. To have a

displacement similar or close to the actual

displacement due to earthquake, it is important to

consider a force displacement equivalent to the

expected distribution of the inertial forces. Different

forces distributions can be used to represent the

earthquake load intensity

Estimation of the displacement demand: This is a

crucial step when using pushover analysis. The

control is pushed to reach the demand displacement

which

represents

the

maximum

expected

displacement resulting from the earthquake intensity

under consideration.

Evaluation of the performance level: Performance

evaluation is the main objective of a performance

based design. A component or action is considered

satisfactory if it meets a prescribed performance.

The main output of a pushover analysis is in terms of

response demand versus capacity. If the demand curve

intersects the capacity envelope near the elastic range,

Fig.1a, then the structure has a good resistance. If the

demand curve intersects the capacity curve with little

reserve of strength and deformation capacity, Fig.1b, then

it can be concluded that the structure will behave poorly

during the imposed seismic excitation and need to be

retrofitted to avoid future major damage or collapse.

4. CAPACITY

The overall capacity of a structure depends on the

strength and deformation capacities of the individual

components of the structure. A Pushover analysis

procedure uses a series of sequential elastic analysis,

superimposed to approximate a force displacement

capacity diagram of the overall structure. The

account for reduced resistance of yielding components. A

lateral force distribution is again applied until a

predetermined limit is reached. Pushover capacity curves

approximate how structure behaves after exceeding the

elastic limits.

5. DEMAND (DISPLACEMENT)

Ground motions during an earthquake produce complex

6. PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

After assigning all properties of the models, the

displacement controlled pushover analysis of the models

are carried out. The models are pushed in monotonically

increasing order until target displacement is reached or

structure loses equilibrium; whichever occurs first. For

this purpose, target displacement at roof level and number

of steps in which this displacement must be defined. In

this study, target displacement is taken 4% of building

height. Pushover curve is a base shear force versus roof

displacement curve. The peak of this curve represents

maximum lateral load carrying capacity of the structure.

The initial stiffness of the structure is obtained from the

tangent at pushover curve at zero load level. The collapse

Collapse

Prevention

Level

vary with time. Tracking this motion at every time step to

determine structural design requirements is judged

impractical. For nonlinear method it is easier and more

direct to use a set of lateral displacement as a design

condition for a given structure and ground motion, the

displacement is an estimate of the maximum expected

response of the building during ground motion. Typical

seismic demand Vs. Capacity is shown in Fig 1 & 2.

is assumed when structure losses its 75% strength and

corresponding roof displacement is called maximum

roof displacement.

It is a plot drawn between base shear and roof

displacement. Performance point and location of hinges

in various stages can be obtained from pushover curve as

shown in Fig.5. The range AB is elastic range, B to IO is

the range of immediate occupancy IO to LS is the range

of life safety and LS to CP is the range of collapse

prevention.

The Different Building performance levels are shown in

Table 1.

Building Performance Levels

Immediate

Life Safety

Occupancy

Level

Level

Operational

Level

Overall

Damage

Severe

Moderate

light

Very light

General

Little residual

stiffness and

strength, but

load

bearing

Columns and

walls

Function. Large

permanent

drifts.

Some exits

blocked. In fills

and unbraced

Parapets failed

or at incipient

failure.

Some residual

Strength and stiffness left

in all stories. Gravityload-bearing elements

function. No

Out-of-plane failure of

walls or tipping of

parapets. Some permanent

drift.

Damage to partitions.

Building may be beyond

economical repair.

No permanent drift.

Structure

substantially

retains original

Strength and

stiffness.

Minor cracking of

facades, partitions,

and ceilings as well

as structural

elements.

Elevators can be

restarted. Fire

protection operable.

No permanent

drift; structure

substantially

Retains original strength and

stiffness. Minor cracking of

facades, partitions, and ceilings as

well as structural elements. All

Systems important to normal

operation are functional.

Building is near

collapse

Non

structural

Components

Extensive

damage.

Falling hazards

mitigated but many

architectural,

mechanical, and

electrical systems

curve that hinge must begin to drop load. The way load is

dropped from a hinge that has reached point C is that the

pushover force (base shear) is reduced until the force in

that hinge is consistent with the force at point D. as the

Force is dropped, all elements unload, and the

displacement is reduced. Once the yielded hinge reaches

the Point D force level, the pushover force is again

increased and the displacement begins to increase again.

If all the hinges are within the CP limit then the structure

is said to be safe. However, depending upon the

importance of structure the hinges after IO range may

also need to be retrofitted.

7. METHODS OF ANALYSIS

For seismic performance evaluation, a structural analysis

of the mathematical model of the structure is required to

determine force and displacement demands in various

components of the structure. Several analysis methods,

both elastic and inelastic, are available to predict the

seismic performance of the structures.

Elastic Methods of Analysis: The force demand on each

component of the structure is obtained and compared with

available capacities by performing an elastic analysis.

Elastic analysis methods include code static lateral force

procedure, code dynamic procedure and elastic procedure

using demand-capacity ratios. These methods are also

known as force-based procedures which assume that

structures respond elastically to earthquakes. In code

static lateral force procedure, a static analysis is

performed by subjecting the structure to lateral forces

obtained by scaling down the smoothened soil-dependent

elastic response spectrum by a structural system

dependent force reduction factor, "R". In this approach, it

is assumed that the actual strength of structure is higher

than the design strength and the structure is able to

dissipate energy through yielding. In code dynamic

procedure, force demands on various components are

Equipment and

contents are

generally

secure, but may not

operate due to

mechanical

and

other utilities are

available, possibly

from

analysis may be either a response spectrum analysis or an

elastic time history analysis. Sufficient number of modes

must be considered to have a mass participation of at least

90% for response spectrum analysis. Any effects of

higher modes are automatically included in time history

analysis. In demand/capacity ratio (DCR) procedure, the

force actions are compared to corresponding capacities as

demand/capacity ratios. Demands for DCR calculations

must include gravity effects. While code static lateral

force and code dynamic procedures reduce the full

earthquake demand by an R-factor, the DCR approach

takes the full earthquake demand without reduction and

adds it to the gravity demands. DCRs approaching 1.0 (or

higher) may indicate potential deficiencies. Although

force-based procedures are well known by engineering

profession and easy to apply, they have certain

drawbacks. Structural components are evaluated for

serviceability in the elastic range of strength and

deformation. Post-elastic behavior of structures could not

be identified by an elastic analysis. However, post-elastic

behavior should be considered as almost all structures are

expected to deform in inelastic range during a strong

earthquake. The seismic force reduction factor "R" is

utilized to account for inelastic behavior indirectly by

reducing elastic forces to inelastic. Force reduction factor,

"R", is assigned considering only the type of lateral

system in most codes, but it has been shown that this

factor is a function of the period and ductility ratio of the

structure as well. Elastic methods can predict elastic

capacity of structure and indicate where the first yielding

will occur, however they dont predict failure

mechanisms and account for the redistribution of forces

that will take place as the yielding progresses. Real

deficiencies present in the structure could be missed.

Moreover, force-based methods primarily provide life

safety but they cant provide damage limitation and easy

repair. The drawbacks of force-based procedures and the

dependence of damage on deformation have led the

researches to develop displacement-based procedures for

seismic performance evaluation. Displacement-based

procedures are mainly based on inelastic deformations

rather than elastic forces and use nonlinear analysis

procedures considering seismic demands and available

capacities explicitly.

Inelastic methods of Analysis: Structures suffer

significant inelastic deformation under a strong

earthquake and dynamic characteristics of the structure

change with time so investigating the performance of a

structure requires inelastic analytical procedures

accounting for these features. Inelastic analytical

structures by identifying failure modes and the potential

for progressive collapse. Inelastic analysis procedures

basically include inelastic time history analysis and

inelastic static analysis which is also known as pushover

analysis.

The inelastic time history analysis is the most accurate

method to predict the force and deformation demands at

various components of the structure. However, the use of

inelastic time history analysis is limited because dynamic

response is very sensitive to modeling and ground motion

characteristics. It requires proper modeling of cyclic loaddeformation characteristics considering deterioration

properties of all important components. Also, it requires

availability of a set of representative ground motion

records that accounts for uncertainties and differences in

severity, frequency and duration characteristics.

Moreover, computation time, time required for input

preparation and interpreting voluminous output make the

use of inelastic time history analysis impractical for

seismic performance evaluation. Inelastic static analysis,

or pushover analysis, has been the preferred method for

seismic performance evaluation due to its simplicity. It is

a static analysis that directly incorporates nonlinear

material characteristics. Inelastic static analysis

procedures include Capacity Spectrum Method,

Displacement Coefficient Method and the Secant

Method.

8. NECESSITY OF NON-LINEAR STATIC

PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

The existing building can become seismically deficient

since seismic design code requirements are constantly

upgraded and advancement in engineering knowledge.

Further, Indian buildings built over past two decades are

seismically deficient because of lack of awareness

regarding seismic behavior of structures. The widespread

damage especially to RC buildings during earthquakes

exposed the construction practices being adopted around

the world, and generated a great demand for seismic

evaluation and retrofitting of existing building stocks.

9. PURPOSE OF NON-LINEAR STATIC

PUSH-OVER ANALYSIS

The purpose of pushover analysis is to evaluate the

expected performance of structural systems by estimating

performance of a structural system by estimating its

strength and deformation demands in design earthquakes

by means of static inelastic analysis, and comparing these

demands to available capacities at the performance levels

of interest. The evaluation is based on an assessment of

important performance parameters, including global drift,

inter story drift, inelastic element deformations (either

absolute or normalized with respect to a yield value),

deformations between elements, and element connection

forces (for elements and connections that cannot sustain

inelastic deformations), The inelastic static pushover

analysis can be viewed as a method for predicting seismic

force and deformation demands, which accounts in an

approximate manner for the redistribution of internal

range of structural behavior.

10.DIFFERENT HINGE PROPERTIES IN

PUSHOVER ANALYSIS ON SAP 2000

There are three types of hinge properties in SAP2000.

They are default hinge properties, user-defined hinge

properties and generated hinge properties. Only default

hinge properties and user-defined hinge properties can be

assigned to frame elements. When these hinge properties

are assigned to a frame element, the program

automatically creates a different generated hinge property

for each and every hinge.

Default hinge properties cannot be modified. They also

cannot be viewed because the default properties are

section dependent. The default properties cannot be fully

defined by the program until the section that they apply to

is identified. Thus to see the effect of the default

properties, the default property should be assigned to a

frame element, and then the resulting generated hinge

property should be viewed. The built-in default hinge

properties are typically based on FEMA-273 and/or ATC40 criteria.

User-defined hinge properties can be either is based on

default properties or they can be fully user-defined. When

user-defined properties are based on default properties,

the hinge properties cannot be viewed because, again, the

default properties are section dependent. When userdefined properties are not based on default properties,

then the properties can be viewed and modified.

The generated hinge properties are used in the analysis.

They can be viewed, but they cannot be modified.

Generated hinge properties have an automatic naming

convention of LabelH#, where Label is the frame element

label, H stands for hinge, and # represents the hinge

number. The program starts with hinge number 1 and

increments the hinge number by one for each consecutive

hinge applied to the frame element. For example if a

frame element label is F23, the generated hinge property

name for the second hinge applied to the frame element is

F23H2. The main reason for the differentiation between

defined properties (in this context, defined means both

default and user-defined) and generated properties is that

typically the hinge properties are section dependent. Thus

different frame section type in the model. This could

potentially mean that a very large number of hinge

properties would need to be defined by the user.

11.CONCLUSION

Pushover analysis is a solution for complicated problems

of estimating the capacity and deformation problems for

certain type of structure. The results obtained in the terms

of demand, capacity and plastic hinges gave an insight

into the real behavior of structure.

12.REFERENCE

[1] Sudhir K. Jain,(1988) On better engineering preparedness:

lessons from the 1988 bihar earthquake. Earthquake

Spectra, EERI, Vol.8, No.3, 1992.

[2] Sudhir K. Jain et al, (1997) Some Observations on

Engineering Aspects of the Jabalpur Earthquake of 22 May

1997 EERI Special Earthquake Report, EERI Newsletter,

Vol.32, No.2, August 1997.

[3] Sudhir K. Jain et al, (1998) Indian Earthquakes : An

Overview The Indian Concrete Journal, Vol. 72, No. 11,

November 1998.

[4] Sudhir K. Jain et al, (1999) Chamoli (Himalaya, India)

Earthquake of 29 March 1999 EERI Special

Earthquake Report, EERI Newsletter Vol.33, No.7, July

1999.

[5] Sudhir K. Jain et al, (2001) A field report on structural

and geotechnical damages sustained during the 26 January

2001 M7.9 Bhuj Earthquake EERI RECONNAISSANCE.

[6] Prabuddha dasgupta et al, (2001) the structural

deficiencies of engineered building:exposed during 2001

bhuj earthquake

[7] Durgesh C. Rai et al, (2002) north andaman (diglipur)

earthquake of 14 september 2002 RECONNAISSANCE

REPORT.

[8] Nicola Augenti et al, (2002) Performance of School

Buildings during the 2002 Molise, Italy, Earthquake

Earthquake Spectra, Volume 20, No. S1, pages S257

S270, July 2004; 2004, Earthquake Engineering

Research Institute.

[9] C.V.R. Murty et al, (2004) Performance of Structures in

the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (India) during the

December 2004 Great Sumatra Earthquake and Indian

Ocean Tsunami Earthquake Spectra, Volume 22, No. S3,

pages S321S354, June 2006; 2006, Earthquake

Engineering Research Institute.

[10] Durgesh C Rai et al, (2005) preliminary report on the

2005north kashmir earthquake of october 8, 2005 Indian

Institute of Technology Kanpur, India.

[11] Naeem et al, (2005) a summary report on muzaffarabad

earthquake, Pakistan Earthquake Engineering Center at

the Department of Civil Engineering, N-W.F.P. University

of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar, Pakistan.

[12] Hemant B. Kaushik et al, (2006) Performance of

structures during the Sikkim earthquake of 14 February

2006 current science, vol. 91, no. 4, 25 august 2006.

- Sesimic Performance of r c Buildings on Sloping Grounds With Diffrent Types of Bracings Systems (2)Uploaded bypradz71
- Bridge Problems for the SE Exam-Lateral LoadsUploaded byfaumijk
- Earthquake Engineering [2012]Uploaded bySchreiber_Dieses
- EarthquakeUploaded bysgi
- Seismic Analysis FJUploaded byBina Aji Nugraha
- Pushover Procedure for Seismic Analysis of BuildingsUploaded byOdair Tonatiu Martínez Reyes
- pbdUploaded byrksjcit
- 2011_aademovicUploaded byДрагана Скоко
- Steel Structures - CSIR-Structural Engineering Research CentreUploaded bySamir Prajapati
- IJRI-CCE-02-006Uploaded byijripublishers
- Development of a Model Code for Direct Displacement Based Seismic Design-calvi-2009Uploaded bypouyamh
- njnjnUploaded bymohmmed
- 14_05-02-0067Uploaded byVikas Biradar
- Seismic Analysis of Rcc Framed BuildingUploaded byAsif Billal
- Seismic Design Lec 2Uploaded bySajal Kulshrestha
- seismic-drift-control-and-building-periods.pdfUploaded byclam2014
- 2512 the Aseismic Design and Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of a 350m High Braced Steel FrameUploaded bydskumar49
- Seismicassessmentofbuildingsaccordingtoeurocode8part3w Oexampleofetabs 140112124335 Phpapp02Uploaded byEddie Chan
- CRITERIA FOR SEISMIC RISK REDUCTION OF EARTHQUAKEUploaded byRuben Iggen
- Seismic Engineering GuidelinesUploaded byvlad_gaitan888
- Fema p440a Part1Uploaded byPourang Ezzatfar
- Fema p440aUploaded byajalil2000
- Proposed Changes to the Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Provisions of the Bangladesh National Building CodeUploaded bymalumius
- 12 Seismic Evaluation Pushover AnalysisUploaded bynm2020
- 2012 Pushover Analysis for Cold Formed Storage Rack Structures.pdfUploaded byAhmed Taha
- Thesis FulltextUploaded bycrvishnuram
- السلوك الزلزالي للمباني الغير منتظمة رأسياUploaded bySeifeldin Ali Marzouk
- PDS_RM_Bridge_Combined_LTR_EN_LR.pdfUploaded byMohd Faizal
- 1-s2.0-S0045794910002129-main.pdfUploaded bylangchen
- 14_05-01-0490.pdfUploaded bysree

- nistgcr10-917-9.pdfUploaded byvicvic ortega
- Seismic Performance.pdfUploaded byBesian Sinani
- Ghali, Amin_ Neville, Adam - Structural Analysis _ a Unified Classical and Matrix Approach, Seventh Edition (2017, Taylor and Francis)Uploaded bysunny
- NIST.GCR.17-917-46v3Uploaded byxxxsimon
- socavacionUploaded byxxxsimon

- Theory of MachinesUploaded byNagarajan Pitchandi
- Ch10-Slope Stability Examples 2Uploaded byrafi
- ASSG 4.pdfUploaded byClinton Okere
- BIBIOGRAFIEUploaded byddanutzz
- 2L 75x75x6Uploaded byManuelGarcia
- arXiv-1302.2578Uploaded byvlax035
- Unit 7 PresentationUploaded bySherazAhmed
- tesisUPV3883 (1)Uploaded bychaudharymeel
- Cuti Terancang Fizik Tingkatan 4Uploaded byanamegat
- 371hw06s (Rapid mix tank design-sample 1)Uploaded byYang Ching Hian
- PHY11 Finals Reviewer.docxUploaded byAyla
- Chapter ONEUploaded byahmedyashar
- Nr 220301 Mechanics of FluidsUploaded bySrinivasa Rao G
- 03 Effect of Temperature on Viscosity as Determined by Ball-Drop MethodUploaded byangelaleron
- 0068_C12Uploaded byvrajan1988
- Nanoscale Heat TransferUploaded byThongkool Ctp
- 1980_Roos_Chem Phys_A Complete Active Space SCF Method (CASSCF) Using a Density Matrix Formulated Super-CI ApproachUploaded byvitoribeiro90
- 2. KINEMATICSUploaded byAfrozsyed350
- Split-Deflection Method of Classical Rectangular Plate AnalysisUploaded byJASH MATHEW
- Oil and Parafin EmulsionUploaded byWaltoy Diniz
- 05. HeatUploaded byscottsum
- Lab Report 3.docxUploaded byMinhaj Ullah
- ESRUploaded byAnonymous ETPqS5NG9
- Fatigue (Material)Uploaded bystevenspillkumar
- sm ch (1)Uploaded bysandwichnachos
- SKEMA JAWAPAN(GELOMBANG)Uploaded byChewLee Tan
- NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE STRUCTURAL RESPONSE OF A HEAVING AIRFOIL SUBJECTED TO OSCILLATORY FLOW AND PARAMETRIC EXCITATIONUploaded byRodolfo Curci Puraca
- Aether Vibrations - Behold The New Old ParadigmUploaded bywizzerbang22
- Presentation ProblemsUploaded byARFarry
- Chapter 2 Motion Along a Straight LineUploaded byAfnan Azizi

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.