SEISMIC ANALYSIS ASSIGNMENT

Sevak Hakobyan

Instructor: Lisa Y. Wang

CE 5502-Structural Dynamics

1) 1940 El Centro Earthquake, North-South Direction, ground acceleration time

history plotted in MATLAB (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: 1940 El Centro Ground Acceleration Time History

2) Hand calculations of natural frequencies and time periods for first 2 modes.

1
2
3
3) Modal Analysis (SAP2000)

Figure 2: SAP2000 Model

4
- Material Properties

- Section Properties

5
- Mass Source

6
- Load Case Data – Modal

- Modal Analysis – Mode 1 & 2

7
Structure is symmetric therefore Mode 1 (XZ-axis) and Mode 2 (YZ-axis) are same.

Comparison of Time Periods:

Hand Calc. SAP2000

0.40 0.40

- Modal Analysis – Mode 3 & 4

Structure is symmetric therefore Mode 3 (XZ-axis) and Mode 4 (YZ-axis) are same.

Comparison of Time Periods:

Hand Calc. SAP2000

0.16 0.16

8
4) Linear Time-History Analysis w/ 2%.

- Time History Function

- Load Case Data – Linear Modal History

9
- Acceleration Response History of the Structure to El Centro Earthquake with
2% Damping.

MAX Acceleration: 355.3 in/sec^2 @ t=5.5 s

10
- Displacement Response History of the Structure to El Centro Earthquake with
2% Damping.

MAX Displacement: 1.314 in @ t=5.71 s

11
5) Linear Time-History Analysis w/ 5%.

- Acceleration Response History of the Structure to El Centro Earthquake with

5% Damping.

MAX Acceleration: 259.9 in/sec^2 @ t=2.4 s

12
- Displacement Response History of the Structure to El Centro Earthquake with
5% Damping.

MAX Displacement: 0.917 in @ t=4.86 s

13
 Comparison between 2% and 5% Linear Analysis Results

Acceleration Linear Analysis 2% vs 5% Results

400

300

200
Acceleration (in/sec2)

100

0 2% Damping
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 5% Damping
-100

-200

-300

-400
Time

Based on the graph above, the structure with 5% damping has less acceleration in N-S
direction.

Displacement Linear Analysis 2% vs 5% Results

1.5

0.5
Displacement (in)

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2% Damping
-0.5 5% Damping

-1

-1.5

-2
Time

Based on the graph above, the structure with 5% damping has less displacement in N-S
direction

14
 6) Non-Linear Time-History Analysis w/ 2%.

Acceleration Response History of the Structure to El Centro Earthquake with 2%

Damping.

MAX Acceleration: 153.4 in/sec^2 @ t=2.4 s

15
MAX Displacement: 0.591 in @ t=2.3 s

16
7) Non-Linear Time-History Analysis w/ 2% (P-Delta).

MAX Acceleration: 69.15 in/sec^2 @ t=2.4 s

17
MAX Displacement: 0.479 in @ t=2.2 s

18
Comparison between Linear Analysis W/ 2% Damping & Non-Linear Analysis W/ 2%
Damping Results

19
 (Units in KSI)

Based on the model analysis of stress in columns, the structure yielded under applied
earthquake force. The maximum yield stress of steel given is Fy=46 KSI but the columns
at the bottom are experiencing 48.72 KSI. This is the reason that acceleration &
displacement nonlinear analysis values are much smaller than acceleration &
displacement linear analysis values.

20
Comparison between Nonlinear Analysis W/ 2% Damping & Nonlinear Analysis W/ 2%
Damping (P-Delta) Results

21