Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pushover Analysis An Inelastic Static Analysis Methods: Courtesy of Barış Binici
Pushover Analysis An Inelastic Static Analysis Methods: Courtesy of Barış Binici
an
Inelastic Static Analysis Methods
- Steps:
Collect information from an existing structure
Assess whether info is dependable and penalize accordingly
Conduct structural analysis
- Linear static analysis
- Nonlinear static analysis (Pushover analysis)
- Incremental pushover analysis
- Time history analysis
Identify for each member the damage level
Decision based on number of elements at certain damage levels
Time History?
- Actual earthquake response is hard to predict anyways.
- Closest estimate can be found using inelastic time-history analysis.
- Difficulties with inelastic time history analysis:
- Suitable set of ground motion (Description of demand)
- hysteretic behavior models (Description of capacity)
- Computation time (Time)
- Post processing (Time and understanding)
Alternative approach is pushover analysis.
0.6
0.4
Acceleration (g)
0.2
0 Sec.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
Pushover Analysis
Definition: Inelastic static analysis of a
structure using a specified (constant or
variable) force pattern from zero load to a
prescribed ultimate displacement.
Use of it dates back to 1960s to1970s to
investigate stability of steel frames.
Many computer programs were developed
since then with many features and limitations.
Available Computer Programs
Design Oriented:
SAP 2000, GTSTRUDL, RAM etc.
Research Oriented:
Opensees, IDARC, SeismoStrut etc.
What is different?
User interface capabilities
Analysis options
Member behavior options
Section Damage Levels
500
AK
400
GV G
Moment
(kN.m)
p = p / Lp 300
t = y + p 200
100
0
(y) (t)
0.0000 0.0200 0.0400 0.0600 0.0800 0.1000 0.1200
Erilik
(rad/m)
How do we estimate strains from
a structural analysis?
Moment Moment
My
Curvature Strain
y u
Moment
pu =(u y) Lp OR
My Utilize this idealized
p =( y) Lp moment-rotation
Where Lp = 0.5h response in inelastic
structural analysis
Plastic
pu Rotations
Definition of Potential Plastic Hinges
End regions of columns and beams (center for gravity loads)
are the potential plastic hinges
Plastic hinges are hinges capable of resisting My (not
significantly more, hardening allowed) undergoing plastic
rotations
Rigid End
zones
Elastic
h Beam- Plastic
Column Hinges
Element
Lp
Elastic Parts
For regions other than plastic hinging occurs, cracking is expected therefore
use of cracked stiffness is customary (0.4-0.8) EIo
0.4-0.8EIo
Moment
EIo
Erilik
Curvature
Pushover Analysis
Steps of Pushover Analysis:
A Simple Incremental Procedure
1. Build a computational model of the structure
Steps of Pushover Analysis
Vi = Vi-1 + V
Results from Step i-1 + Results from an
Fi = Fi-1 + F incremental analysis with a hinge placed at i-1th
yield location = ith hinge formation
di = di-1 + d
Steps of Pushover Analysis
Step n:
Sufficient number of plastic hinges have formed and
system has reached a plastic mechanism. Note that this
could be a partial collapse mechanism as well. Beyond
this point system rotates as a rigid body.
ANALYSIS DONE
- Plot Base Shear- Roof Displacement
- Check member rotations and identify performance levels
Example Application: 3 Story- 2 Bay
RC Frame (Courtesy of Ahmet Yakut)
MODEL
12 J8 15
J4 J12
3 6 9
3m
11 J7 14
J3 J11
2 5 8 3m
10 J6 13
J2 J10
4 3m
1 7
J1 J5 J9
6m 6m
Assumptions
Assume
Constant Axial Load on Columns for Analysis Steps
Rigid-plastic with no hardening or softening moment-rotation behavior for
columns and beams
plastic hinging occurs when moment capacity is within 5% tolerance
Load combinations 1.0 DL + 0.3 LL and 1.0 DL + 0.3 LL+1.0EQ to compute
axial load levels
DL=15kN/m LL=2kN/m
EQ=40kN
DL=15kN/m LL=2kN/m
EQ=20kN
DATA
Columns Beams
10-f10
3-f10
60cm 50cm
3-f10
60cm 25cm
y
u l t
Eleman
Member N My
kN kNm rad/m rad/m
1 -83,786 124 0,0055 0,111
2 -51,347 115,5 0,0056 0,115
3 -19,872 107,5 0,0056 0,119 My
4 -253,392 166 0,0059 0,085
5 -158,905 143 0,0060 0,099
6 -64,797 119 0,0060 0,113
Moment
7 -124,104 133,5 0,0056 0,105
8 -77,747 122 0,0057 0,112
9 -31,201 110 0,0054 0,118
10 5,606 49 0,0073 0,103
11 1,421 50 0,0069 0,102
12 -17,233 53 0,0069 0,099 fy Erilik f ult
13 5,606 49 0,0073 0,103
14 1,421 50 0,0069 0,102
15 -17,233 53 0,0069 0,099
160
SYSTEM IS UNSTABLE
140
120
80
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Roof Displacement (mm)
140
100
SAP2000
80 hardening/loss of strength
P-M interaction
60
40
20
Systematic stiffness approach
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30