A Pushover Seismic Evaluation Method For Tall and Asymmetric Buildings

國立台灣科技大學
營建工程系
碩士學位論文
學號： M9905801
A Pushover Seismic Evaluation Method

for Tall and Asymmetric Buildings
研究生 :Yusak Oktavianus
(蔡優光 )
指導教授 :歐昱辰
共同指導教授 :蕭輔沛
中華民國一百零一年六月二十九日
JUNE 29, 2012
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Give thanks to Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior for His blessing so that this
thesis can be completed well and on time. This thesis is intended to fulfill one of the
requirements set by master degree program, Construction Engineering Department,
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
This thesis cannot be accomplished without support and encourage from any parties.
With abundant of honor, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to:
1. Prof. Yu-Chen Ou as my home lecturer and as my supervisor who always give
important advices to finish this thesis and encourage me to pour out my best
capability.
2. Dr. Fu-Pei Hsiao as my supervisor who always guide me step by step with his
knowledge and his patience. His open minded and his willingness to discuss make
me can give my best performance.
3. Prof. Jenn-Shin Hwang and Prof. Yin-Nan Huang as my committee members
during my oral defense for the positive suggestions related to my research.
4. My lovely family and my girlfriend, Serna Jarny, for their love, spirit, hope, and
support that make my life more colorful in pursuing study in NTUST Taiwan.
5. My classmate, my lab mate, and my roommate for the discussion, experience,
team work, and time we spend together
6. NTUST for the full scholarship that allow me to pursue my master degree without
any funding difficulty.
7. Other parties that cannot be written one by one as the limitation of the space for
their help and support while I was studying in NTUST.
I realized that nothing perfect, therefore any positive comment and advice are
very welcomed. Finally, I hope this thesis can be useful for future study and practice.
Taipei, June 29, 2012
Yusak Oktavianus
i
A Pushover Seismic Evaluation Method
for Tall and Asymmetric Buildings
Graduate Student : Yusak Oktavianus
Thesis Advisor : Yu-Chen Ou
Thesis Co-Advisor : Fu-Pei Hsiao
ABSTRACT
Pushover (PO) is a well known and practical analysis for evaluating new or existing
buildings. The conventional pushover predicts the seismic demands well in the 1st
mode dominant building, and will produce larger error as the higher mode effect
contribution increases. This research tries to overcome the weakness based on the
observed behavior of the structures in nonlinear dynamic analysis. Two-, 8-, and 20-
storey RC frame buildings with 0%, 5%, 10%, 15% of eccentricity for each building
subject to nonlinear response history analysis (NRHA) are used. An inelastic response
spectrum which is used in the extended N2 method is also used in this research.
Because of the one way computation, no iteration is needed. Four modifications are
made to take account the higher mode effects both in elevation and in plan which are
based on the observed behavior. The assumption that higher mode effect will keep in
elastic behavior used in the extended N2 method is eliminated. The modifications are
verified in a 14-storey building with 10% eccentricity with medium and high inelastic
degree of the structure. Displacement and drift at center of mass, and coefficient of
torsion are used as the seismic demands parameter. The results show that the
proposed method can give better accuracy towards the actual behavior of the structure
and keep the simplicity of the PO method.
Keyword: Pushover, Higher mode effect, torsional effect, nonlinear dynamic,

extended N2 method
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................. i
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ v
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... vi
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
1.1. Background and Research Motivation ........................................................... 1
1.2. Objectives and scopes .................................................................................... 2
1.3. Outline ............................................................................................................ 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................... 5
2.1. Previous research............................................................................................ 5
2.1.1. Modal Pushover Analysis (MPA) ........................................................... 5
2.1.2. Modified Modal Pushover Analysis (MMPA) ....................................... 6
2.1.3. Practical Modal Pushover Analysis (PMPA) .......................................... 6
2.1.4. Method of Modal Combination (MMC) ................................................. 6
2.1.5. Adaptive Pushover (APO) ...................................................................... 7
2.1.6. Dynamic pushover with SRM load pattern ............................................. 7
2.2. ATC-40........................................................................................................... 7
2.3. FEMA 356 .................................................................................................... 17
2.4. Basic N2 method .......................................................................................... 23
2.5. Comparison between ATC-40, FEMA 356, and Basic N2 method ............. 29
2.6. Extended N2 method .................................................................................... 36
2.7. Compatible ground motion matching a spectrum ........................................ 37
3. BUILDING EXAMPLE AND GROUND MOTION ......................................... 39
3.1. Buildings Example ....................................................................................... 39
3.2. Ground motion ............................................................................................. 43
4. NRHA RESULT AND ANALYTICAL STUDY................................................. 45
4.1. Maximum displacement result ..................................................................... 45
4.2. Coefficient of torsion result.......................................................................... 52
4.3. Maximum inter-storey drift result ................................................................ 57
4.4. Analytical study............................................................................................ 64
iii
4.5. Step-by-step procedure of proposed method ................................................ 74
5. VERIFICATION AND DISCUSSION................................................................ 79
6. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ................................................................ 91
6.1. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 91
6.2. Suggestion .................................................................................................... 92
REFERENCE .............................................................................................................. 93
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................. 95
A.1. MATLAB Code for extended N2 method for this research ......................... 95
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Damping modification factor ߢ (Ou, 2012)............................................12
Table 2.2. Structural behavior type (Ou, 2012) .........................................................12
Table 2.3. Near source factors (Ou, 2012) ................................................................13
Table 2.4. Seismic source type (Ou, 2012) ...............................................................14
Table 2.5. Minimum allowable value for ܴܵ‫ ܣ‬and ܴܸܵ ........................................15
Table 2.6. Drift limits (Ou, 2012)..............................................................................17
Table 2.7. Values for modification factor C0 (FEMA-356, 2000) .............................19
Table 2.8. Values for effective mass factor Cm (FEMA-356, 2000)..........................20
Table 2.9. Values for modification factor ‫ܥ‬ଶ (FEMA-356, 2000) ...........................21
Table 2.10. Comparison result of each method ...........................................................34
Table 2.11. Difference action in Basic N2, FEMA 356 AND ATC-40 .......................35
Table 3.1. Details of members for each building ......................................................41
Table 3.2. Natural period of mode n of the building .................................................41
Table 3.3. Effective mass factor in x-direction about mode n ...................................42
Table 3.4. List of earthquake ground motion ............................................................44
Table 5.1. Calculation sheet for defining target top displacement for 14-storey
building with 10% eccentricity. ................................................................80
Table 5.2. The displacement error resulted from basic N2, extended N2, and
proposed method at center of mass ..........................................................82
Table 5.3. The coefficient of torsion error resulted from basic N2, extended N2,
and proposed method................................................................................84
Table 5.4. The inter-storey drift error resulted from basic N2, extended N2, and
proposed method at center of mass ..........................................................85
Table 5.5. The displacement error resulted from basic N2, extended N2, and
proposed method at flexible edge .............................................................88
proposed method at flexible edge .............................................................90
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Elastic acceleration spectra: (a) Sa-T format; (b) AD format ...................8
Figure 2.2. Pushover analysis of a building (Ou, 2012) ..............................................9
Figure 2.3. Pushover curve (capacity curve) (Ou, 2012) ............................................9
Figure 2.4. Capacity curve: (a) 𝑉 − 𝛿 format; (b) Sa-Sd format (Ou, 2012) ..........10
Figure 2.5. Derivation of damping (Ou, 2012).......................................................... 11
Figure 2.6. Damping modification factor (ATC-40, 1996) .......................................12
Figure 2.7. Reduction of 5% damped spectrum by 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉 .........................15
Figure 2.8. Procedure to determine performance point (Ou, 2012) ..........................16
Figure 2.9. The acceptance criteria for performance objectives (FEMA-356,
2000) .......................................................................................................17
Figure 2.10 Idealized Force-Displacement Curves (FEMA-356, 2000) ....................18
Figure 2.11. 𝐶1 values (FEMA-356, 2000) ................................................................20
Figure 2.12. 𝐶2 from Table 2.9 (FEMA-356, 2000) ..................................................21
Figure 2.13. 𝐶2 from nonlinear response history analysis (FEMA-356, 2000) ..........22
Figure 2.14. EPP and SD hysteretic models ................................................................22
Figure 2.15. 𝐶3 values (FEMA-356, 2000)................................................................23
Figure 2.16. Building data and Elastic acceleration spectra (Fajfar, 2000).................24
Figure 2.17. Elastic and inelastic response spectra for constant ductility (Fajfar,
1999) .......................................................................................................25
Figure 2.18. Idealized bilinear capacity curve with zero post-yielding stiffness
and transformation from base shear-displacement format to Sa-Sd
format (Fajfar, 1999) ...............................................................................27
Figure 2.19. Determination of displacement demand, 𝑆𝑑 : (a) 𝑇 ∗ < 𝑇𝐶 ; (b)
𝑇 ∗ ≥ 𝑇𝐶 (Fajfar, 2000) ...........................................................................27
Figure 2.20. Simple version of ductility factor (Fajfar, 1999) ....................................29
Figure 2.21. The plan view of the building model ......................................................30
Figure 2.22. Performance point of ATC-40 .................................................................31
Figure 2.23. Defining the target displacement by FEMA 356 ....................................32
Figure 2.24. Target displacement by basic N2 method ...............................................34
Figure 2.25. The displacement shape of each method ................................................35
vi
Figure 2.26. Example of correction factor for higher mode effect in elevation, CE
(Kreslin & Fajfar, 2011) ..........................................................................36
Figure 2.27. Example of correction factor for higher mode effect in plan, CT
(Kreslin & Fajfar, 2011) ..........................................................................37
Figure 2.28. Response spectra: (a) Original response spectra from the ground
motions; (b) Compatible response spectra from the compatible
ground motions .......................................................................................37
Figure 3.1. Plan view and elevation view: (a) 2-storey (b) 8-storey; (c) 14-storey;
(d) 20-storey ............................................................................................40
motions; (b) Compatible response spectra from the compatible
ground motions .......................................................................................43
Figure 4.1. Displacement result for 2-storey building: (a) 0% eccentricity 0.1g
(𝜇 = 0.46 ) ; (b) 0% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.86 ) ; (c) 5%
eccentricity 0.1g 𝜇 = 0.48 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.904 );
(e) 10% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.5 ); (f) 10% eccentricity 0.4g
(𝜇 = 1.99 ) ; (g) 15% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.52 ) ; (h) 15%
eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 2.08 ) .................................................................46
(𝜇 = 2.78 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.64 ); (c) 5% eccentricity
0.6g 𝜇 = 2.86 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.76 ) ; (e) 10%
eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.98 ); (f) 10% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.96 );
(g) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 3.13 ); (h) 15% eccentricity 1g
(𝜇 = 5.21 ) .............................................................................................47
eccentricity 0.1g 𝜇 = 0.85 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ); (e)
10% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.84 ) ; (f) 10% eccentricity 0.4g
eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.31 ) .................................................................48
(𝜇 = 5.1 ); (b) 5% eccentricity 0.6g 𝜇 = 5.1 ; (c) 10% eccentricity
vii
0.6g (𝜇 = 5.04 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 4.96 ) ....................49
eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.48 ) .................................................................50
(𝜇 = 2.27 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.79); (c) 5% eccentricity
0.6g 𝜇 = 2.27 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.78 ) ; (e) 10%
(𝜇 = 3.71 ) .............................................................................................51
(μ = 5.3 ); (b) 5% eccentricity 1.4g μ = 5.29 ; (c) 10% eccentricity
1.4g (μ = 5.25 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 1.4g (μ = 5.19 ) .....................51
Figure 4.8. Coefficient of torsion result for 2-storey building: (a) 5% eccentricity
0.1g 𝜇 = 0.48 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.904 ); (c) 10%
eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.5 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.99 );
(𝜇 = 2.08 ) .............................................................................................53
0.6g 𝜇 = 2.86 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.76 ) ; (c) 10%
eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.98 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.96 );
(e) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 3.13 ); (f) 15% eccentricity 1g
(𝜇 = 5.21 ) .............................................................................................53
0.1g 𝜇 = 0.85 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ) ; (c) 10%
eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.84 ) ; (d) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 =
3.36 ); (e) 15% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.83 ); (f) 15% eccentricity
0.4g (𝜇 = 3.31 ) ....................................................................................54
viii
0.6g 𝜇 = 5.1 ; (b) 10% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 5.04 ); (c) 15%
eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 4.96 ) .................................................................55
Figure 4.12. Coefficient of torsion result for 20-storey building: (a) 5%
eccentricity 0.1g 𝜇 = 0.38 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.51 );
(c) 10% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.38 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 0.4g
(𝜇 = 1.5 ) ; (e) 15% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.37 ) ; (f) 15%
eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.48 ) .................................................................56
eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.27); (b) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.78 );
(c) 10% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.25 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 1g
(𝜇 = 3.75 ) ; (e) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.22 ) ; (f) 15%
eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.71 ) ....................................................................57
eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.29) ; (b) 10% eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.25 );
(c) 15% eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.19 )....................................................57
Figure 4.15. Drift result for 2-storey building: (a) 0% eccentricity 0.1g
eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 2.08 ) .................................................................58
(𝜇 = 2.78 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.64 ); (c) 5% eccentricity
0.6g (𝜇 = 2.86) ; (d) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.76 ) ; (e) 10%
(𝜇 = 5.21 ) ..............................................................................................59
(𝜇 = 0.85 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ); (c) 5% eccentricity
0.1g 𝜇 = 0.85 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ) ; (e) 10%
eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.84 ); (f) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.36 );
(g) 15% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.83 ); (h) 15% eccentricity 0.4g
ix
(𝜇 = 3.31 ) ..............................................................................................60
Figure 4.18. Drift result for 8-storey building: (a) 0% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 5.1 );
(b) 5% eccentricity 0.6g ( 𝜇 = 5.1 ) ; (c) 10% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 5.04 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 4.96 ) ...............................61
eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.38) ; (d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.51 );
eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.48 ) .................................................................62
(𝜇 = 2.27 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.79); (c) 5% eccentricity
0.6g (𝜇 = 2.27) ; (d) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.78 ) ; (e) 10%
(𝜇 = 3.71 ) ..............................................................................................63
(𝜇 = 5.3 ) ; (b) 5% eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.29 ); (c) 10%
eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.25 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.19 ) ..64
Figure 4.22. Linear assumed displacement vs proposed displacement shape in
20-storey building 5% eccentricity: (a) load pattern; (b) assumed
displacement shape .................................................................................66
Figure 4.23. Reduction factor to the target top displacement considering the
torsion resulted by NRHA ......................................................................68
Figure 4.24. The multiplier or weight factor of CT value resulted from NRHA: (a)
CTt PO multiplier; (b) CTtRSA multiplier................................................69
Figure 4.25. The proposed multiplier of PO and RSA to calculate the final
coefficient of torsion ...............................................................................70
Figure 4.26. The “whip effect” on chi-chi earthquake: 20-storey 1.4g μ ≈ 5............71
Figure 4.27. The max storey displacement versus the max drift displacement in
0% eccentricity building: (a) 2-storey 0.4g; (b) 8-storey 0.4g; (c)
20-storey 0.4g .........................................................................................71
x
Figure 4.28. The value of max drift displacement divided by the max storey
displacement in the top floor: (a) NRHA result; (b) proposed γr ...........73
Figure 4.29. The value of decomposed max drift displacement divided by the max
storey displacement: (a) 2-storey by ground motion; (b) 2-storey by
proposed coefficient,γj ;(c) 8-storey by ground motion; (d) 8-storey
by proposed coefficient, γj ;(e) 20-storey by ground motion; (f)
20-storey by proposed coefficient,γj .......................................................74
Figure 4.30. Elastic acceleration spectra: (a) Sa-T format; (b) AD format .................75
Figure 4.31. Flowchart of the proposed method .........................................................78
Figure 5.1. (a) Normalized lateral force pattern 𝐹𝑗 ; (b) assumed displacement
shape ∅𝑗 .................................................................................................80
Figure 5.2. Graphical way to obtain the target top displacement of SDOF of
14-storey building, 10% eccentricity, 0.6g resulted by 1st
modification of proposed method. ..........................................................80
Figure 5.3. Displacement result at center of mass for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity:
(a) pga=0.6g; (b) pga=1g ........................................................................82
Figure 5.4. Coefficient of torsion result for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity: (a)
pga=0.6g; (b) pga=1g ..............................................................................83
Figure 5.5. Inter-storey drift result at center of mass for 14-storey
10%-eccentricity: (a) pga=0.6g; (b) pga=1g ...........................................85
Figure 5.6. Displacement result at flexible edge for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity:
(a) pga=0.6g; (b) pga=1g ........................................................................87
Figure 5.7. Inter-storey drift result at flexible edge for 14-storey
10%-eccentricity: (a) pga=0.6g; (b) pga=1g ...........................................89
Figure A.1. Extended N2 result from the MATLAB code .......................................105
xi
(This page is intentionally left blank)
xii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1.Background and Research Motivation
Nowadays, seismic design criteria tend to shift from the force-based procedure to
performance-based procedure both for design and evaluation purpose. Pushover
analysis becomes very well known method in determining seismic demand because of
its simplicity and accuracy for short and symmetric or 1st mode dominant building.
Pushover analysis estimates seismic demands directly from the earthquake design
spectrum and capacity curve, excluding the complications to select and to scale the
ground motions. In the other side, Nonlinear Response History Analysis (NRHA)
typically demands high computational resources.
For tall and asymmetric building, traditional pushover analysis cannot come up
with higher mode effect both in elevation and in plan (torsional effect), respectively.
Moreover, traditional pushover (ATC-40 and FEMA 356) requires an iteration process
to get the performance point or target displacement.
A lot of researches have been done to make the traditional pushover can give
better result and retain its simplicity. (Chopra & Goel, 2002, 2004; Chopra, Goel, &
Chintanapakdee, 2004; Fajfar, 1999, 2000; Kreslin & Fajfar, 2011; Kunnath, 2004;
Marus̆ić & Fajfar, 2005; R. Rofooei, K. Attari, Rasekh, & Shodja, 2006; Reyes &
Chopra, 2011; Rofooei, Attari, Rasekh, & Shodja, 2007). The previous methods are
time consuming and there is an assumption that higher mode effect will remain in
elastic behavior.
In the other side, N2 method has a simple way (no need iteration) to get the
target displacement which uses the inelastic response spectra and the capacity curve to
get the target displacement (Fajfar, 1999, 2000). The extended N2 method has the
same way as the basic N2 to calculate the target displacement. The extension is the
usage of response spectrum analysis (RSA) as the correction to the seismic demands
which assume that the higher mode effect will keep in the elastic behavior (Kreslin &
Fajfar, 2011; Marus̆ić & Fajfar, 2005). Though N2 method has its simplicity and has
been extended, but it usually still conservative in determining the coefficient of
torsion in large earthquake and in some cases result unconservatism in determining
1
the drift.
By explanation explained above, a proposed method is introduced to come up
with the higher mode effect problems using the pushover analysis. The proposed
method also uses the inelastic response spectra like the N2 method does to keep the
simplicity, i.e. no need iteration in obtaining the target displacement.Additional 4
modifications are made to improve the PO such the seismic demands will approach
the real behavior. The modifications are made to consider the higher mode effect and
based on the behavior of the real building. NRHA is assumed to be similar with the
real behavior of the building. Three different buildings which are 2-storey, 8-storey
and 20-storey reinforced concrete frame building with 0%, 5%, 10%, and 15%
eccentricity and with several pga value are taken as the source of database for finding
the behavior. By these modifications, there is no need to assume that the higher mode
effect will keep in elastic behavior.
A 14-storey reinforced concrete frame building with NRHA, basic N2, extended
N2, and the proposed method is established to check the competence of the proposed
method. Several seismic demands are taken into account, which are displacement and
drift at center of mass and at the flexible edge
1.2.Objectives and scopes
The objective of this research is to find the simplest and the most accurate
method to approach the real behavior. This objective is accomplished by several small
modifications:
1. New lateral load pattern which takes account the contribution of higher mode
effect in elevation
2. Adjusted target displacement which considers the higher mode effect in plan
(torsional effect) based on the real behavior
3. Adjusted coefficient of torsion based on the real behavior
4. Adjusted inter-storey displacement to calculate inter-storey drift based on the
real behavior
Three different buildings which are 2-storey, 8-storey and 20-storey reinforced
concrete frame building with 0%, 5%, 10%, and 15% eccentricity and with several
pga value of ground motions are taken as the source of database for finding the real
2
behavior.
1.3. Outline
This thesis is divided into 6 chapters as follows:

 Chapter 1 gives general introduction about this research, including background
and research motivation, objectives and scopes, and outline.
 Chapter 2 describes briefly literatures which are related to this research.
 Chapter 3 shows buildings example and ground motions which are used in
analytical study and verification study.
 Chapter 4 describes the result of NRHA, basic N2, and extended N2, including
the modifications that should be applied based on the analytical study and step by
step procedure.
 Chapter 5 contains verification of proposed method in a 14-storey building and
the comparison with the NRHA result, basic N2, and extended N2 method.
 Chapter 6 describes conclusions and suggestions of this study.
3
4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Previous research
There are a lot of researches done to modify the pushover such approach the
NRHA result. Some of them are described as follows:
2.1.1. Modal Pushover Analysis (MPA)
Modal Pushover Analysis (MPA) combines the pushover analysis with uncouple
modal response history analysis. Several dominant modes are used separately as the
lateral load for the pushover analysis with target displacement defined from the
uncouple response history analysis result to an inelastic SDOF system (Chopra &
Goel, 2002, 2004). This method gives good result compare with NRHA, but it is a
time consuming method because need to run the uncouple modal response history
analysis in order to get the target displacement for each mode. The short description
of this method is described as follows:
The governing differential equations of the response of MDOF system subjected
to horizontal ground motion 𝑢𝑔 (𝑡) are presented in Eqs.(2.1) to (2.3).
𝑚𝑢 + 𝑐𝑢 + 𝑘𝑢 = −𝑚𝑖𝑢𝑔 𝑡 (2.1)
𝑁 𝑁
𝑚𝑖 = 𝑠𝑛 = 𝛤𝑛 𝑚𝜙𝑛 (2.2)
𝑛 =1 𝑛=1
𝐿𝑛
𝛤𝑛 = ; 𝐿𝑛 = 𝜙𝑛𝑇 𝑚𝑖 ; 𝑀𝑛 = 𝜙𝑛𝑇 𝑚𝜙𝑛 (2.3)
𝑀𝑛
where𝑢 is lateral floor displacement relative to the ground; 𝑚, 𝑐, 𝑘 are the mass,
damping, and stiffness matrices, respectively; 𝑖 is influence vector of each element
which equal to 1; ϕ𝑛 is the structural natural vibration of nth mode.
For „exact‟ NRHA, because history of the displacement controls the next
displacement, thus the relation between the lateral force 𝑓𝑠 at the N floor levels and
the lateral displacements 𝑢 are not single-valued. Therefore, Eq.(2.1) becomes:
𝑚𝑢 + 𝑐𝑢 + 𝑓𝑠 𝑢, 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑢 = −𝑚𝑖𝑢𝑔 𝑡 (2.4)
By neglecting the coupling of the N equations, Eqs.(2.5) to (2.7) will become the
governing equation of uncoupled modal response history analysis (UMRHA).
5
𝑚𝑢 + 𝑐𝑢 + 𝑓𝑠 𝑢, 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑢 = −𝑠𝑛 𝑢𝑔 𝑡 (2.5)
𝐹𝑠𝑛
𝐷𝑛 + 2𝜁𝑛 𝜔𝑛 𝐷𝑛 + = −𝑢𝑔 𝑡 (2.6)
𝐿𝑛
𝐹𝑠𝑛 = 𝐹𝑠𝑛 𝐷𝑛 , 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝐷𝑛 = 𝜙𝑛𝑇 𝑓𝑠 𝐷𝑛 , 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝐷𝑛 (2.7)
2.1.2. Modified Modal Pushover Analysis (MMPA)
Modified Modal Pushover Analysis (MMPA) takes account the higher mode effect
by assuming that the behaviour of higher mode will remain in elastic state. By this
assumption, clasical modal analysis for linear system is used to take account the
higher mode effect. Therefore no need to perform the pushover analysis for higher
mode. NRHA is used to get the target displacement of the inelastic first mode which
in turn will be used in the pushover analysis. This method is simpler than MPA, but
will result larger error in larger degree of inelastic action(Chopra et al., 2004)
2.1.3. Practical Modal Pushover Analysis (PMPA)
Practical Modal Pushover Analysis (PMPA) is similar with the MMPA with
additional simplification to determine the target displacement of inelastic first mode.
The target displacement of inelastic first mode is obtained by multiplying the median
target displacement of linear system with inelastic deformation ratio (Reyes & Chopra,
2011). This method has good prediction of the seismic demand and will be similar as
RSA result in linear system, and no need to run the NRHA, but still need to select the
ground motions and run many of linear dynamic analysis to get the median elastic
target displacement.
2.1.4. Method of Modal Combination (MMC)
Method of Modal Combination (MMC) tries to combine several modes by adding

or reducing the contribution of different mode in determining the lateral forces. This
method will have so many alternative lateral force patterns and will consume much
time (Kunnath, 2004).
6
2.1.5. Adaptive Pushover (APO)
Adaptive Pushover (APO) tries to change the load pattern in every step by
following the displacement pattern from the previous step. The load pattern will be
changed as many as the step required in pushover analysis. This cause the method
also becomes time consuming (Rofooei et al., 2007).
2.1.6. Dynamic pushover with SRM load pattern
Combination of effective modal load pattern and NRHA in SDOF system to get
the target displacement (Dynamic pushover with SRM load pattern) tries to take
account the higher mode effect in the loading pattern by including the higher mode
with effective modal mass as the multiplication factor, and use the NRHA to get the
target displacement (R. Rofooei et al., 2006)
2.2. ATC-40
ATC-40 (ATC-40, 1996) uses peak roof displacement of the building to determine
the performance of the building subjected to earthquake ground motion. Combination
between capacity curve and demand response spectrum with some iteration process
are used to get the performance point or target displacement. ATC-40, called Capacity
Spectrum method, requires AD format for both of capacity curve and demand spectra.
The steps of ATC-40 are described as follows:
1. Convert a demand response spectrum found in the building codes from the
standard Sa (Spectra Acceleration) - T (Period) format to AD format as shown
in Figure 2.1and Eq. (2.8)
𝑇2
𝑆𝑑 = 𝑆 (2.8)
4𝜋 2 𝑎
7
1.2 1.2
Spectral acceleration (g)

0.8 0.8
0.4 0.4
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 20 40 60 80
Period (s) Spectral displacement (cm)
(a) (b)
Figure 2.1. Elastic acceleration spectra: (a) Sa-T format; (b) AD format
2. Perform pushover analysis and generate the relationship between roof

displacement  and base shear V (pushover capacity curve). This is
illustrated in Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3. The lateral story forces applied to the
structure is in proportion to the product of the mass and first mode shape
which is described in Eq. (2.9). Alternatively, Eq.(2.10) can be used to
determine the lateral story force pattern. Gravity loads should be included in
this analysis. Subsequently, convert the base shear-displacement format to the
Sa-Sd format.
𝑤𝑥 ϕ𝑥
𝐹𝑥 = 𝑛 (2.9)
𝑗 =1 𝑤𝑗 ϕ𝑗
𝑤𝑥 𝑕𝑥𝑘
𝐹𝑥 = 𝑛 𝑘𝑉 (2.10)
𝑗 =1 𝑤𝑗 𝑕𝑗
where 𝐹𝑥 is the lateral force at level x; 𝑤𝑥 or 𝑤𝑗 is the weight at level x or j;

and ϕ𝑥 orϕ𝑗 is the displacement at level x or j corresponding to first mode
shape of the structure;𝑕𝑥 or 𝑕𝑗 is the height from the base to level x or j; For
structures having a period of 0.5 seconds or less, k = 1; For structures having a
period of 2.5 seconds or more, k = 2; For structures having a period between
0.5 and 2.5 seconds, k can be determined by linear interpolation between 1 and
2 or may be taken equal to 2.
8
F4 Level 4
F3 Level 3
F2 Level 2
F1 Level 1
Figure 2.2. Pushover analysis of a building (Ou, 2012)
200
160
Base shear (tf)
120
80
40
0
0 10 20 30 40
Roof displacement (cm)
Figure 2.3. Pushover curve (capacity curve) (Ou, 2012)
(a) Convert points  (roof displacement) into Sd
Eq.(2.11) is used to convert the roof displacement  into the Sd
coordinate.
𝛿
𝑆𝑑 = (2.11)
Γ1 ∙ 𝜙𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑓 ,1
where  1 is modal participation factor for the first mode and is defined by
Eq. (2.12)
𝑁
𝑗 =1 𝜙𝑗 1 ∙ 𝑚𝑗
Γ1 = 𝑁 2 (2.12)
𝑗 =1 𝜙𝑗 1 ∙ 𝑚𝑗
(b) Convert points V (base shear) into Sa
Eqs.(2.13) and (2.14) is used to convert the base shear V into the Sa
coordinate.
9
𝑉𝑏
𝑆𝑎 = (2.13)
𝛼1
𝑁 2
𝑗 =1 𝜙𝑗 1 ∙ 𝑚𝑗
𝛼1 = 𝑁 2
(2.14)
𝑗 =1 𝜙𝑗 1 ∙ 𝑚𝑗
200 0.5
160 0.4
Base shear (tf)
120 0.3
Sa (g)
80 0.2
40 0.1
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25
Roof displacement (cm) Sd (cm)
(a) (b)
Figure 2.4. Capacity curve: (a) 𝑉 − 𝛿 format; (b) Sa-Sd format (Ou, 2012)
3. Estimation of damping and reduction of 5 percent damped response spectrum

The damping that occurs when an earthquake ground motion shakes the
structure to the inelastic range can be defined as a combination of hysteretic
damping and viscous damping that is natural in the structure.
Hysteretic damping is defined as the area inside the loops that are formed
when the base shear is plotted in opposition to the structure displacement as
shown in Figure 2.5.
The equivalent viscous damping, 𝛽𝑒𝑞 , correlated with a maximum
displacement of𝑑𝑝 can be estimated from the Eqs. (2.15) to (2.18)
𝛽𝑒𝑞 = 𝛽0 + 0.05 (2.15)
1 𝐸𝐷
𝛽0 = (2.16)
4𝜋 𝐸𝑆0
𝐸𝐷 = 4(𝑎𝑦 𝑑𝑝 − 𝑎𝑝 𝑑𝑦 ) (2.17)
𝐸𝑆0 = 𝑎𝑝 𝑑𝑝 /2 (2.18)
where  0 is hysteretic damping represented as equivalent viscous damping;
and 0.05 is 5% viscous damping which is natural in the structure (assumed to
be constant); 𝐸𝐷 is energy dissipated by damping; and 𝐸𝑆0 is maximum strain
10
energy as shown in Figure2.5.
Figure 2.5. Derivation of damping (Ou, 2012)
Figure 2.5 shows an idealized hysteresis loop which is reasonable for a

ductile detailed building subjected to relatively short duration ground motion
(not enough cycles to extensively degrade elements) and with equivalent
viscous damping less than approximately 30%. For non ductile buildings,
calculation of the equivalent viscous damping using Eq. (2.15)and the
idealized hysteresis loop in Figure 2.5will overestimate the realistic value of
damping. In order to consider imperfect hysteresis loops (loops reduced in
area), a damping modification factor,𝜅, is used in Eq. (2.19)
𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝜅𝛽0 + 0.05 (2.19)
The 𝜅-factor is listed in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2. Moreover, it is shown in
Figure 2.6.The 𝜅-factor depends on the structural behavior of the building, i.e.
the quality of the seismic resisting system and the duration of ground shaking.
For easiness, ATC-40 defines three categories of structural behavior.

Structural behavior Type A represents stable, reasonably full hysteresis loops
11
most similar to Figure 2.5, and is assigned a 𝜅 of 1.0 (except at higher
damping values). Type B represents a moderate reduction of area and is
assigned a basic 𝜅 of 2/3 (𝜅 is also reduced at higher values of 𝛽𝑒𝑞 to be
consistent with the Type A relationships). Type C represents poor hysteretic
behavior with a substantial reduction of loop area (severely pinched) and is
assigned a 𝜅 of 1/3.
Table 2.1. Damping modification factor 𝜅 (Ou, 2012)

Structural behavior type 0 
 1 6 .2 5 1.0
Type A 0 .5 1  a y d p  d ya p 
 1 6 .2 5 1.13-
a pd p
 25 0.67
Type B 0 .4 4 6  a y d p  d ya p 
 25 0.845-
a pd p
Type C Any value 0.33
Figure 2.6. Damping modification factor (ATC-40, 1996)
Table 2.2. Structural behavior type (Ou, 2012)

Shaking Essentially new Average existing Poor existing
duration(a) building(b) building(c) building(d)
Short Type A Type B Type C
Long Type B Type C Type C
12
(a) Shaking duration
 Sites with a near-source factor, N  1.2 (see Table 2.3 and Table 2.4),
may be assumed to have short-duration ground shaking. (sites near a
seismic source (fault), a relatively short duration of very strong shaking
would be expected )
 Sites located in seismic zone 3 should be assumed to have long duration
ground shaking. (sites far from fault rupture, a much longer duration of
ground shaking would be expected at the level of response described by
the site spectrum. Although, ground shaking is not as strong the previous
case, longer duration of shaking increases the potential for degradation
of the structural system)
 Sites located in seismic zone 4 (with a near-source factor of N <1.2)
should be assumed to have long-period ground shaking.
 Long duration ground shaking should be assumed for soft soil sites.
(b) Essentially new building: buildings whose primary elements make up an
essentially new lateral system and little strength or stiffness is contributed
by noncomplying elements.
(c) Average existing building: buildings whose primary elements are
combinations of existing and new elements, or better than average
existing systems.
(d) Poor existing building: buildings whose primary elements make up
noncomplying lateral force systems with poor or unreliable hysteretic
behavior.
Table 2.3. Near source factors (Ou, 2012)

Seismic Closest distance to known seismic sources
source  2km 5km 10km  15km
type N A NV N A NV N A NV N A NV
A 1.5 2.0 1.2 1.6 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.0
B 1.3 1.6 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
C 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
13
Table 2.4. Seismic source type (Ou, 2012)
Seismic source definition
Seismic Maximum
Slip rate, SR
source Seismic source description moment
(mm/year)
type magnitude
Faults that are capable of producing
A large magnitude events and Which M  7.0 SR  5
have a high rate of seismic activity
Not Not
B All faults other than types A and C
applicable applicable
Faults that are not capable of
producing large magnitude
C M  6.5 SR<2
earthquakes and that have a relatively
low rate of seismic activity
Taking the damping into account, the response spectrum is reduced by

reduction factors 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉 which are described in Eqs. (2.20) and (2.21)
(Note: input 𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓 =10 for 10% damping)
1 3.21 − 0.68ln⁡
(𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓 )
𝑆𝑅𝐴 = = (2.20)
𝐵𝑠 2.12
1 2.31 − 0.41ln⁡
(𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓 ) (2.21)
𝑆𝑅𝑉 = =
𝐵𝐿 1.65
Both 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉 must be greater than or equal to allowable values in
Table 2.5. The elastic response spectrum (5% damped) is thus reduced to a
response spectrum with damping values greater than 5% critically damped
(See Figure 2.7).
14
1.6
S DS
1.2
Elastic response spectrum, 5% damped
S DS SR A
0.8
S D1
T
0.4
S D 1 S RV
T
Elastic response spectrum, 15% damped
0
0 1 2 3 4
Period (s)
Figure 2.7. Reduction of 5% damped spectrum by 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉
Table 2.5. Minimum allowable value for 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉

Structural behavior type SRA S RV
Type A 0.33 0.50
Type B 0.44 0.56
Type C 0.56 0.67
4. Performance point determination

The procedure for obtaining the performance point is described as follows:
(a) Draw the capacity curve and 5% damped ADRS response spectrum in the
same figure.
(b) Define a trial performance point 𝑆𝑎𝑝𝑖 , 𝑆𝑑𝑝𝑖 . This is done using the equal
displacement approximation.
(c) A bilinear approximation of the capacity curve is made such that the area
under the capacity curve and the bilinear representation is the same.
(d) The spectral reduction factors 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉 are computed and the
demand spectrum is reduced. The reduced demand spectrum is plotted
together with the capacity spectrum.
i. If the reduced demand spectrum intersects the capacity spectrum at𝑆𝑎𝑝𝑖 ,
𝑆𝑑𝑝𝑖 or if the intersection point 𝑆𝑑𝑝 is within 5% of S d p i , then this point
15
represents the performance point.
ii. If the intersection point does not lie within acceptable tolerance (≤5%
of 𝑆𝑑𝑝𝑖 ) then select another point and repeat steps (c) to (d). The
intersection point obtained in Step (d) can be used as the starting point
for the next iteration.
Figure 2.8. Procedure to determine performance point (Ou, 2012)
5. Check for response limits

Right after performance point 𝑆𝑎𝑝 , 𝑆𝑑𝑝 is obtained, the base shear ( V p ) and
roof displacement (  p ) at the performance point are calculated by Eqs. (2.13)

and (2.11), respectively. Then, check the global building response and local
element response. The global building responses consist of checking whether
the lateral force resistance has degraded by more than 20% of the peak
resistance and the lateral drift limits should satisfy the limits given in the Table
2.6. The local element response, identify the critical components and check as
detailed in Chapter 11 of ATC-40
16
Table 2.6. Drift limits (Ou, 2012)
Performance level
Inter-story drift Immediate Damage Structural
Life safety
limit occupancy control stability
Maximum total Vi
0.01 0.01-0.02 0.02 0.33
drift Pi
Maximum
0.005 0.005-0.015 No limit No limit
inelastic drift
where V i is the total calculated lateral shear force in story i and Pi is the total
gravity load (i.e. dead plus likely live load) at story i.
2.3. FEMA 356
FEMA 356 (FEMA-356, 2000) is firstly established for retrofitting of existing

structures, but the procedures are equally applicable for new design. The owner
decides the expected performance of the building, and then the engineer designs a
new or retrofit structure to achieve the performance objective. The performance
objectives are divided into 4 categories which are operational performance, immediate
occupancy (IO), life safety (LS), and collapse prevention (CP). Each performance is
divided into 2 parts which are primary and secondary member. The limitation of each
category is drawn in Figure 2.9.
Figure 2.9.The acceptance criteria for performance objectives (FEMA-356, 2000)

The most common lateral load patterns are inverted triangular, uniform, or first
mode load pattern. The capacity curve resulted from the pushover analysis is
transformed into an idealized force-displacement curve explained as follows (see
Figure 2.10):
1. The first linear line of the idealized force-displacement curve begins from the
origin.
17
2. The second linear line ends at the calculated target displacement.
3. The meeting point of the two linear line defines effective lateral stiffness
( K e ),effective yield strength ( Vy ), and effective positive post-yield
stiffness(  K e ).The intersection point is determined by satisfying following

constraints:
 The effective stiffness, K e , is defined such the first line passes through the
calculated curve at a point where the base shear is 60% of the effective yield
strength or 60% of intersection point.
 The areas below the idealized bilinear curve should be approximately equal
with the areas below the actual capacity curve with the same ending point.
 The effective yield strength should not be taken as greater than the maximum
base shear force at any point along the actual curve.
(a) Positive post-yield slop (b) Negative post-yield slop

Figure 2.10. Idealized Force-Displacement Curves (FEMA-356, 2000)
FEMA 356 or coefficient method modifies the linear elastic response of the
equivalent SDOF system by giving a series of coefficients C0 toC3 to generate an
estimation of maximum global displacement (elastic and inelastic), which is termed as
target displacement. The top target displacement can be calculated by Eq. (2.22)
𝑇𝑒2
𝛿𝑡 = 𝐶0 𝐶1 𝐶2 𝐶3 𝑆𝑎 𝑔 (2.22)
4𝜋 2
where:
𝐶0 is modification factor to transform the spectral displacement of an equivalent
SDOF system to the roof displacement of the building MDOF system. It can be
18
calculated from
 The first modal participation factor
 The modal participation factor at the level of the control node calculated using
a shape vector corresponding to the deflected shape of the building at the
target displacement.
 The appropriate value from Table 2.7.
Table 2.7. Values for modification factor C0 (FEMA-356, 2000)
𝐶1 is modification factor to adjust the displacements calculated for the linear elastic
response to the expected maximum displacements of an inelastic SDOF oscillator
with EPP hysteretic properties
1 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑒 ≥ 𝑇𝑐
𝑅−1 𝑇𝑠
𝐶1 = 1+ (2.23)
𝑇𝑒
𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑒 < 𝑇𝑐
𝑅
𝑆𝑎
𝑅= 𝐶 (2.24)
𝑉𝑦 /𝑊 𝑚
where 𝑇𝑐 is characteristic period of the response spectrum, defined as the
transition period from the constant-acceleration segment to the constant-velocity
segment of the spectrum; 𝑅 is ratio of elastic strength demand to reduced elastic
strength demand;𝑉𝑦 is yield strength calculated using the idealized bilinear
capacity curve; 𝑊 is effective seismic weight, consist of total dead load and
some portions of other gravity loads as calculated in Section 3.3.1.3.1 of FEMA
356; 𝐶𝑚 is effective mass factor to account for higher mode mass participation
effects as obtained from Table 2.8.
19
Table 2.8.Values for effective mass factor Cm (FEMA-356, 2000)
The 𝐶1 should not greater than the values given in Section 3.3.1.3.1 (Linear
Static Procedure, LSP section) nor less than 1. Values of 𝐶1 in Section3.3.1.3.1
are
1 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑒 ≥ 𝑇𝑐
𝐶1 = (2.25)
1.5 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑒 < 0.1𝑠
with linear interpolation used to calculate 𝐶1 for the intermediate values of Te .
Figure 2.11(a) shows an example of values of 𝐶1 according to Eq. (2.23)for
various 𝑅 and periods 𝑇𝑒 for 𝑇𝑐 equal to 0.4 seconds. Limitation on values 𝐶1
according to Eq. (2.25)is also shown in Figure 2.11(a). Figure 2.11(b) shows
values of 𝐶1 from nonlinear response history analysis, representing true values
of 𝐶1 . It can be seen that Eq. (2.23) basically captures the behavior of 𝐶1 versus
𝑅 and 𝑇𝑒 .
Eq. (2.25)
(a)𝐶1 from Eq. (2.23) (b)𝐶1 from nonlinear response history analysis
Figure 2.11. 𝐶1 values (FEMA-356, 2000)
20
𝐶2 is modification factor to take into account the effect of pinched hysteretic shape,
stiffness degradation, and strength deterioration on the maximum displacement
response. Values of 𝐶2 depends on framing systems and structural performance
levels (i.e., immediate occupancy, life safety, and collapse prevention) and listed
in Table 2.9.Figure 2.12shows an example of values of 𝐶2 . Figure 2.13shows the
values of 𝐶2 from nonlinear response history analysis for ratios of maximum
displacements of SD (stiffness degrading) systems to corresponding EPP (elastic
perfectly plastic) systems. Hysteretic behaviors of these two systems are shown in
Figure 2.14.
Table 2.9. Values for modification factor 𝐶2 (FEMA-356, 2000)
Note: T is fundamental period of the building determined using Eigen value analysis
or empirical equations (Section 3.3.1.2 of FEMA 356).
Figure 2.12. 𝐶2 from Table 2.9 (FEMA-356, 2000)
21
Figure 2.13. 𝐶2 from nonlinear response history analysis (FEMA-356, 2000)
Figure 2.14. EPP and SD hysteretic models
𝐶3 is modification factor to take into account the dynamic P-Δ effects.𝐶3 is equal to
1 for buildings with positive post-yield stiffness. For buildings with negative
post-yield stiffness, values of 𝐶3 arecalculated using Eq. (2.26)
3/2
𝛼 𝑅−1
𝐶3 = 1 + (2.26)
𝑇𝑒
where 𝛼 is post-yield stiffness.Figure2.15 shows the examples of 𝐶3 values.
22
(a) An Example of 𝐶3 by Eq. (2.27) (b) Values of 𝐶3 from nonlinear
response history analysis
Figure 2.15. 𝐶3 values (FEMA-356, 2000)
𝑆𝑎 is response spectrum acceleration at the effective fundamental period of the

building.
𝑔 is gravitational acceleration.
𝑇𝑒 is effective fundamental period of the building which is defined in Eq. (2.27)
𝐾𝑖
𝑇𝑒 = 𝑇𝑖 (2.27)
𝐾𝑒
where𝑇𝑖 is elastic fundamental period (in seconds) calculated by elastic dynamic

analysis; 𝐾𝑖 is elastic lateral stiffness of the building; and 𝐾𝑒 is effective lateral
stiffness of the building as defined previously.
2.4. Basic N2 method
N2 method is a variant of capacity spectrum method established in Europe by

Peter Fajfar. The name N2 consists of N and 2 which is defined as nonlinear analysis
and two mathematical models, respectively. The conventional capacity spectrum
design uses elastic spectra with equivalent damping and period. The N2 method uses
an inelastic spectrum which is obtained by applying a reduction factor to typical
smooth elastic design spectra.
The N2 method is proposed to eliminate 2 drawbacks of conventional capacity
23
spectrum (FEMA 356 and ATC-40) which are the need of iteration process and the
usage of equivalent damping and period. By N2 method, the iteration process will be
eliminated and no need to use the equivalent damping and period. These proceed is
done because there is no physical principle that justifies the existence of a stable
relationship between the hysteretic energy dissipation and equivalent viscous damping,
and the period associated with the intersection of the capacity curve with the highly
damped spectrum may have no relation with the dynamic response of the inelastic
system (Fajfar, 1999).
The inelastic spectra are based on statistical analyses, in which near-fault and
impulsive type of ground motion has not been included. Care should be taken in long
period range (actual displacements are typically constant) and in very long period
range (where the spectral displacements decrease to the level of the peak ground
displacement).
The steps of N2 method is described as follows:
1. Building data and Elastic acceleration spectra
a. Structure data: mass, height, and properties of the section
b. Elastic acceleration spectra Sae
Figure 2.16. Building data and Elastic acceleration spectra (Fajfar, 2000)
2. Convert the seismic demand into AD format and get inelastic spectra
a. Elastic spectra
𝑇2
𝑆𝑑𝑒 = 2 𝑆𝑎𝑒 (2.28)
4𝜋
Where Sae and Sde are the value of elastic acceleration and elastic
displacement spectrum, respectively corresponding to the period T and
fixed viscous damping ratio (usually 5%).
b. Inelastic spectrum for constant ductility
Inelastic spectrum is defined by Eqs. (2.29) and (2.30)
24
𝑆𝑎𝑒
𝑆𝑎 = (2.29)
𝑅𝜇
𝜇 𝜇 𝑇2 𝑇2
𝑆𝑑 = 𝑆𝑑𝑒 = 𝑆 = 𝜇 𝑆 (2.30)
𝑅𝜇 𝑅𝜇 4𝜋 2 𝑎𝑒 4𝜋 2 𝑎
where𝑆𝑎 is inelastic acceleration; Rμis the reduction factor due to ductility;
𝑆𝑑 is inelastic displacement; μis the ductility factor (ratio between the
maximum displacement and the yield displacement)
𝑇
𝑅𝜇 = 𝜇 − 1 +1 𝑇 < 𝑇𝑐 (2.31)
𝑇𝑐
𝑅𝜇 = 𝜇 𝑇 ≥ 𝑇𝑐 (2.32)
Figure 2.17. Elastic and inelastic response spectra for constant ductility (Fajfar,
1999)
At the longer periods, the displacement spectrum is typically constant so the

acceleration spectrum will decreases with the square of period T. Long period
is depending on the earthquake and site characteristics (can be start at 2
seconds). In very long period range, spectral displacements decrease to the
value of the peak ground displacement
3. Pushover analysis
a. Assume displacement shape ∅
b. Determine lateral load distribution by Eq. (2.33)
𝑃 = 𝑀 ∅ ; 𝑃𝑖 = 𝑚𝑖 ∅𝑖 (2.33)
where 𝑃𝑖 is the lateral load in level i; 𝑚𝑖 is mass at level i; ∅𝑖 is assumed
displacement shape at level i.
c. Run the pushover analysis and determine the base shear (V) – top
25
displacement (Dt) relationship
4. Equivalent SDOF and capacity diagram

a. Determine mass m* by Eq. (2.34)
𝑚∗ = 𝑚𝑖 ∅𝑖 (2.34)
The ∅value should be constant and does not change during the structural
response to ground motion. ∅is normalized (the value of top is 1) and any
reasonable shape can be used for ∅. As special case, the elastic first mode
shape can be assumed
b. Transform MDOF quantities (Q) to SDOF (Q*)
𝐷∗ = 𝐷𝑡 /Γ (2.35)
𝐹 ∗ = 𝑉/Γ (2.36)
∅𝑇 𝑀 1 𝑚𝑖 ∅ 𝑖 𝑚∗
Γ= = = (2.37)
∅𝑇 𝑀∅ 𝑚𝑖 ∅2𝑖 𝑚𝑖 ∅2𝑖
𝛤 is equivalent to 𝛤1 in capacity spectrum method (ATC-40) , and to C0 in
the displacement coefficient method (FEMA 356).The initial stiffness both
of equivalent SDOF system and MDOF is the same.N2 method requires the
post-yield stiffness is equal to zero, because the reduction factor 𝑅𝜇 is
defined as the ratio of the required elastic strength to the yield strength.The
strain hardening is incorporated in the demand spectra. The moderate strain
hardening does not have a significant influence on displacement demand.
Thus, the N2 method approximately apply for systems with zero or small
strain-hardening
c. Determine an approximate elasto-plastic force-displacement relationship
d. Determine strength 𝐹𝑦∗ ,𝐷𝑦∗ ,and period 𝑇 ∗ by Eqs. (2.35), (2.36), and (2.38),
respectively,
𝑚∗ 𝐷𝑦∗
𝑇 ∗ = 2𝜋 (2.38)
𝐹𝑦∗
e. Determine capacity diagram (Acceleration versus displacement)

𝐹∗
𝑆𝑎 = (2.39)
𝑚∗
Step 4b.until 4e. are drawn in Figure 2.18.
26
Figure 2.18. Idealized bilinear capacity curve with zero post-yielding stiffness and
transformation from base shear-displacement format to Sa-Sd format (Fajfar,
1999)
5. Seismic demand for the equivalent SDOF model
a. Determine the reduction factor 𝑅𝜇 (Vidic et al. 1994) based on the elastic
period of the idealized capacity curve.
𝑆𝑎𝑒
𝑅𝜇 = (2.40)
𝑆𝑎𝑦
𝑇𝐶
𝜇 = 𝑅𝜇 − 1 +1 𝑇 ∗ < 𝑇𝐶 (2.41)
𝑇∗
𝜇 = 𝑅𝜇 𝑇 ∗ ≥ 𝑇𝐶 (2.42)
b. Determine the displacement demand 𝑆𝑑 = 𝐷∗ (refer to Figure 2.19)
𝑆𝑑𝑒 𝑇𝐶
𝑆𝑑 = 𝑅𝜇 − 1 ∗
+ 1 𝑇 ∗ < 𝑇𝐶 (2.43)
𝑅𝜇 𝑇
𝑆𝑑 = 𝑆𝑑𝑒 𝑇 ∗ ≥ 𝑇𝐶 (2.44)
Note: all steps in the procedure can be performed numerically without using the graph
(a)𝑇 ∗ < 𝑇𝐶 (b) 𝑇 ∗ ≥ 𝑇𝐶

Figure 2.19. Determination of displacement demand, 𝑆𝑑 : (a)𝑇 ∗ < 𝑇𝐶 ; (b) 𝑇 ∗ ≥ 𝑇𝐶
(Fajfar, 2000)
27
6. Global seismic demand for the MDOF model
Transform SDOF displacement demand to the top displacement of the MDOF
model by Eq. (2.45)
𝐷𝑡 = Γ 𝑆𝑑 (2.45)
7. Local seismic demand for the MDOF model
a. Perform pushover analysis of MDOF model up to the top displacement 𝐷𝑡
(or to an amplified value of 𝐷𝑡 ). Pushover result from result in step 3
should be used only until target top displacement 𝐷𝑡 in step 6.
b. Determine local quantities (eg. Story drifts, rotation θ) corresponding to 𝐷𝑡 .
8. Performance evaluation (Damage analysis)
Compare local and global seismic demands in step 7 with the capacities for the
relevant performance level.
The basic N2 method is limited to the planar or symmetric structure. When the
higher mode effects are significant, the basic N2 will not accurate again. The inelastic
spectra are based on the equal displacement rule (medium- and long-period range)
which yields too small inelastic displacements in the case of near-fault ground
motions, hysteretic loops with significant pinching or significant stiffness/or strength
deterioration, and for systems with low strength (yield strength to required elastic
strength ratio less than 0.2). Equal displacement rule also will not have satisfied result
for soft soil conditions
In the case of short period structures, inelastic displacements are larger than the
elastic ones, so Rμ is smaller than μ. Transition period or characteristic period Tc will
decrease and increase with a decreasing and increasing ductility factor, respectively.
Equations (2.46) to (2.48) and Figure 2.20 are simple version formula by Vidic et al
(1994). Conservative result (higher seismic demand) are obtained for short-period
structures in the case of low ductility demand (μ<4). Non conservative results happen
for higher ductility demand.
28
Figure 2.20. Simple version of ductility factor (Fajfar, 1999)
𝑇
𝑅𝜇 = 𝜇 − 1 +1 𝑇 < 𝑇𝑐 (2.46)
𝑇0
𝑅𝜇 = 𝜇 𝑇 ≥ 𝑇𝑐 (2.47)
𝑇0 = 0.65 𝜇 0.3 𝑇𝐶 ≤ 𝑇𝐶 (2.48)
In the short period structures, the inelastic displacement is more sensitive due to
the changing of structural parameters than in the medium- and long-period ranges.
Consequently, estimation of inelastic displacement are less accurate in the
short-period range, but it is still can be achieved since the absolute values of
displacements in the short-period region are small and typically they do not control
the design.
2.5. Comparison between ATC-40, FEMA 356, and Basic N2 method

Eight storey RC frame building is chosen as a building model to compare the
available nonlinear static procedure. The methods compared are ATC-40, FEMA 356,
and basic N2 method. The displacement is used as the parameter to be compared. The
plan view of the building is drawn in Figure 2.21. The storey height of the building is
5 m for first and second floor, and 3.1 m for third floor and above. The slab thickness
is 20 cm. Total weight and height of the building is 3639 ton and 28.6 m, respectively.
The concrete strength and steel yield strength is 25 MPa and 500 MPa, respectively.
The size of the column and beam is 60x60 cm2and 40x60 cm2, respectively. The
longitudinal reinforcement steel for the column is 8Ø25, and 4Ø20 for each top and
bottom of the beam. The shear strength is design over the flexural strength such the
failure is not happen in shear failure. Fixed-base condition is used and P-Δ effect is
29
ignored. The elastic flexural and shear stiffness properties of cracked elements are
assumed to be one-half of the uncracked one. Material nonlinearity is modeled by
plastic hinges at both ends of every planar element which are beams and columns.
Bi-linear moment-rotation relationship without strain hardening is used in defining the
plastic hinges. Unlimited ductility is assumed.
Figure 2.21. The plan view of the building model

The displacement shape of the building is assumed. The assumption used in this
building is a linear inverted triangle:
∅𝑇 = [0.175; 0.350; 0.458; 0.566; 0.675; 0.783; 0.892; 1]
The corresponding lateral load pattern can be defined by the Eq. (2.33):
𝑃T = [0.184; 0.367; 0.458; 0.566; 0.675; 0.783; 0.892; 1]
For comparison purpose, all of the methods use the same lateral load pattern and
capacity curve.
ATC-40
The capacity curve resulted is converted to Sa-Sd format and drawn in the same
plot with the 5% demand spectra. A trial performance point 𝑆𝑎𝑝 1 , 𝑆𝑑𝑝 1 which is
0.092g, 29.07 cm is defined by equal displacement rule. A bilinear curve then is
drawn such the area under the capacity curve and the bilinear representation is the
same. From the Figure 2.22, 𝑎𝑦 = 0.092𝑔; 𝑑𝑦 = 8.66 𝑐𝑚; 𝑎𝑝 = 0.092𝑔; 𝑑𝑝 =
29.07𝑐𝑚. The building is assumed to be type B. Then the hysteretic damping is
calculated based on Eqs. (2.16) to (2.18).
30
2 𝑎𝑦 𝑑𝑝 − 𝑎𝑝 𝑑𝑦
𝛽0 = = 44.89%
𝜋 𝑎𝑝 𝑑𝑝
0.9
Demand spectra
0.8
First iteration
0.7
performance point
Reduced demand spectra
0.6
Initial performance point
Sa (g)
0.5
0.4
0.3
Capacity curve Idealized capacity curve
0.2
Say1
0.1
Sap1 Sdy1 Sdp1 Sdp2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
Sd (cm)
Figure 2.22. Performance point of ATC-40
Using Table 2.1., the damping modification factor effective viscous damping is
calculated.
0.446(𝑎𝑦 𝑑𝑝 − 𝑑𝑦 𝑎𝑝 )
𝜅 = 0.845 − = 0.53
𝑎 𝑝 𝑑𝑝
Then, the effective damping is obtained using, Eq. (2.19):
𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝜅𝛽0 + 0.05 = 28.8%
The damping will reduce the response spectrum. The reduction factor is defined by
Eqs. (2.20) and (2.21) and governed by Table 2.5
1 3.21 − 0.68 ln 𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓
𝑆𝑅𝐴 = = = 0.44 ≥ 0.44 (𝑂𝐾)
𝐵𝑠 2.12
1 2.31 − 0.41 ln 𝛽𝑒𝑓𝑓
𝑆𝑅𝑉 = = = 0.565 ≥ 0.56 (𝑂𝐾)
𝐵𝐿 1.65
Plot the reduce demand spectrum into the graph and the intersection between this
reduced demand spectrum with the capacity curve will result new performance point.
The iteration is done by repeat the calculation until the new performance point has
less than 5% error compare with the previous performance point.
31
The last performance point is:
𝑆𝑎𝑝 = 0.092𝑔
𝑆𝑑𝑝 = 31 𝑐𝑚
𝑆𝑎𝑦 = 0.097𝑔
𝑆𝑑𝑦 = 9.23 𝑐𝑚
The target displacement of SDOF is equal to 𝑆𝑑𝑝 = 31 𝑐𝑚
The target displacement of MDOF is equal to Γ1 × 𝜙𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑓 ,1 × 𝑆𝑑𝑝 = 1.3898 × 1 ×
31 = 43.08 𝑐𝑚
FEMA 356
4000
Ki Final iteration of Bilinear curve
3500 bilinear curve
3000
Base shear (kN)
2500
2000 Capacity curve

1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Top displacement (cm)
Figure 2.23. Defining the target displacement by FEMA 356

After plotting the capacity curve, an initial target displacement is defined, for
example 5% of the total height. Then, the bilinear approximation with a rule
explained in FEMA 356 section is done.
From the Figure 2.23:
0.6𝑉𝑦 = 1622 𝑘𝑁
0.6𝛿𝑦 = 7.2 𝑐𝑚
𝑉𝑦 = 2703 𝑘𝑁
𝛿𝑦 = 12 𝑐𝑚
𝐾𝑖 = 225.19 𝑘𝑁/𝑐𝑚
𝐾𝑒 = 225.47 𝑘𝑁/𝑐𝑚
𝐾𝑖
𝑇𝑒 = 𝑇𝑖 = 1.96 𝑠𝑒𝑐
𝐾𝑒
32
𝑆𝐷1
𝑆𝑎 = = 0.3 𝑔 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑒 > 𝑇𝑠 )
𝑇𝑒
𝛼𝐾𝑒 = −0.017 𝑘𝑁/𝑐𝑚
𝛼≈0
From the FEMA 356 section, the value of the coefficient is:
𝐶0 = 1.3 Table 2.7.
𝐶1 = 1 Eqs.(2.23) to (2.25)
𝐶2 = 1 Table 2.9
𝐶3 = 1 Eq. (2.26)
The target displacement is calculated based on Eq. (2.22)

𝑇𝑒 2
𝛿𝑡 = 𝐶0 𝐶1 𝐶2 𝐶3 𝑆𝑎 𝑔
4𝜋 2
1.972
= 1.3 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 0.3 × × 981 = 37.23 𝑐𝑚
4𝜋 2
Then, set 𝛿𝑡 = 37.23 𝑐𝑚 as the target displacement for the next iteration until
the error produced between the new target displacement and the previous one is
less than 5%.
The final target displacement is 𝛿𝑡 = 38.08 𝑐𝑚
Basic N2 method
Figure 2.24draw the process to obtain the target displacement. Modal
participation factor is calculated using Eq. (2.37):
𝑚∗
Γ= = 1.3898
𝑚𝑖 ∅2𝑖
Define the bilinear curve. This can be done by follow the FEMA 356 rule with post
yielding stiffness is equal to zero. Then, transform to the SDOF and obtain:
𝐷𝑦 = 11.97 𝑐𝑚
𝐹𝑦 = 𝐹𝑢 = 2696 𝑘𝑁
𝐷𝑦∗ = 8.62 𝑐𝑚
𝐹𝑦∗ = 𝐹𝑢∗ = 1940 𝑘𝑁
∗
𝑚∗ 𝐷𝑦∗
𝑇 = 2𝜋 = 1.966 > 𝑇𝐶 → 𝜇 = 𝑅𝜇 ; 𝑆𝑑 = 𝑆𝑑𝑒
𝐹𝑦∗
33
𝑆𝑎𝑒 = 0.3𝑔
𝑆𝑑 = 𝑆𝑑𝑒 = 29.32 𝑐𝑚
Say = 0.09g
𝑆𝑎𝑒
𝜇 = 𝑅𝜇 = = 3.4
𝑆𝑎𝑦
And the target displacement of MDOF is:
𝐷𝑡 = 𝛤𝑆𝑑 = 40.75 cm
1.2
0.8
Elastic demand spectra
Inelastic demand
Sa (g)
0.6 spectra Idealized response

spectra
0.4 T*=1.966 s
Sae=0.31
0.2 Rμ=3.4
Say =0.09
Sde=29.32
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Sd (cm)
1.2
Figure 2.24. Target displacement by basic N2 method
The comparison result and the difference action of each method is listed in Table
1
2.10and Table 2.11., respectively.
0.8
0.6 Table 2.10. Comparison result of each method
0.4 Triangular displacement form Basic N2 FEMA-356 ATC-40

C0 or 𝛤 1.3898 1.3 1.3898
0.2
Ke (kN/cm) 225.15 225.47 225.19
0
0 2 α 4 6 8 10 0 -0.00007 -0.027
Period (s)
Dt (cm) 40.75 38.08 43.08
1.2
Figure 2.25. shows the displacement shape of each method. The basic N2 result
values in between the ATC-40 and1FEMA 356.
0.8
0.6 Series1
Series2
0.4
0.2
0
0 134 2 3 4 5 6
1.2
Figure 2.25. The displacement shape of each method
Table 2.11. Difference action in Basic N2, FEMA 356 AND ATC-40
Basic N2 method FEMA 356 ATC-40
Any desired lateral force

distribution can be
Several different lateral load patterns are
Pushover analysis obtained by assuming
suggested
appropriate displacement
shape
Transformation 𝛤 (same with FEMA 273 𝛤1 (restricted only in

from the MDOF to if same displacement C
0
SDOF system first mode shape)
shape is used)
No idealization of the
Has a rule for
pushover curve is
any reasonable primary model the
made (just bilinear
slope can be used bilinear
curve with the same
Bilinear idealization idealization
area)
The difference in secondary slope has no practical consequences
𝛤 represents C0
μ /R represents C Determined from
μ 1
no C and C (assume Elastic equivalent elastic
Determination of 2 3 displacement spectra by using
the displacement equal to one or can be times by 4 equivalent damping
demand (target considered by multiply the coefficient and period to consider
displacement) displacement demand or (C ,C ,C ,C )
0 1 2 3
the inelastic behaviour
dividing the reduction
of the structure
factor by appropriate
modification factor)
Another comparison between several nonlinear static pushover shows the same
trend with the above example (Causevic & Mitrovic, 2011)
35
2.6. Extended N2 method
Extended N2 method combines the result of basic N2 method and RSA. RSA is
linear dynamic analysis or response spectrum analysis. The result of RSA should be
adjusted such the top displacement of the building will have same value with that of
basic N2 method. The larger value between basic N2 method and RSA will be used as
the final result. The purpose of including the RSA is to take account the higher mode
effect of the building which is assumed to be keep in elastic behavior. Correction
factor for higher mode effect both in elevation (CE) and in plan (CT) are taken into
account and drawn in Figure 2.26 and Figure 2.27, respectively.
Figure 2.26. Example of correction factor for higher mode effect in elevation, CE
(Kreslin & Fajfar, 2011)
36
Figure 2.27. Example of correction factor for higher mode effect in plan, CT
(Kreslin & Fajfar, 2011)
2.7. Compatible ground motion matching a spectrum
The response spectra from each ground motions are homogenized in amplitude to
be similar with a target response spectrum. The purpose is to make the response in
linear dynamic is the same for all spectra, such only the effect of nonlinearity of the
structure will make different. Figure 2.28 shows the original response spectra resulted
from original earthquake ground motion and the modified response spectra resulted
from compatible earthquake ground motion.
1.6 1.2
Earthquake
ground motions
Ground acceleration (g)
1
1.2 Eurocode 8 0.4g
0.8
0.8 0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Period (s) Period (s)
(a) (b)
Figure 2.28.Response spectra: (a) Original response spectra from the ground motions;
(b) Compatible response spectra from the compatible ground motions
The scaling and matching process is done by RspMatch2005 proposed by

Hancock (Hancock et al., 2006). Several artificial compatible ground motions with the
37
same amplitude are used and applied to the building to find the inelastic response of
the building.
38
3. BUILDING EXAMPLE AND GROUND
MOTION
3.1. Buildings Example
The building example for the analytical study is consisting of 3 kinds of buildings
which are 2-storey, 8-storey and 20-storey building. While, the building example for
verification purpose is a 14-storey reinforced concrete frame building. The building
plan view and the elevation view are shown in Figure 3.1 and the details of members
for each building are shown in Table 3.1.
For 2-storey building, the storey height is 3.5 m both for 1st and 2ndstorey. The
slab thickness is 15 cm. Total weight of the building is 305 ton. For 8-storey building,
the storey height is 5 m for first and second floor, and 3.1 m for above second floor.
The slab thickness is 20 cm. Total weight of the building is 3639 ton. For 14-storey
building, the storey height is 5 m for first and second floor, and 3.5 m for above
second floor. The slab thickness is 20 cm. Total weight of the building is 8990 ton.
For 20-storey building, the storey height is 3.5m for all storey. The slab thickness is
20 cm. Total weight of the building is 13710 ton. These buildings‟ natural period is in
velocity constant which is in between the 0.6s (transitional period from acceleration
constant to velocity constant) and 3s (displacement is assumed to be constant when
the period larger than 3 s).
(a)
39
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 3.1.Plan view and elevation view: (a) 2-storey (b) 8-storey; (c) 14-storey;
(d) 20-storey
40
Table 3.1. Details of members for each building
Column details Beam details
No. of
storey
Level Size 𝑓𝑐′ Size 𝑓𝑐′ Bottom
2 Steel Top steel
(cm ) (MPa) (cm2) (MPa) steel
2 1-2 25 x 25 25 8Ø16 20 x 30 25 3Ø16 3Ø16
8 1-8 60 x 60 25 8Ø25 40 x 60 25 4Ø20 4Ø20
1-10 120 x 120 30 32Ø25
14 60 x 80 30 8Ø25 8Ø25
11-14 100 x 100 30 20Ø28
1-10 150 x 150 35 32Ø32
20 11-18 120 x 120 30 32Ø25 60 x 80 30 8Ø25 8Ø25
19-20 100 x 100 30 20Ø28
For 2-,8-, and 20-storey building, there are four eccentricities which are 0%, 5%,
10%, and 15%, while for 14-storey building, there is only one eccentricity which is
10%. All steel has yield stress equal to 500 MPa and ultimate stress equal to 625 MPa.
Fixed-base condition is used and P-Δ effect is ignored. The elastic flexural and shear
stiffness properties of cracked elements are assumed to be one-half of the uncracked
one. Table 3.2 and Table 3.3 describe the dynamic properties of buildings. Material
nonlinearity is modeled by plastic hinges at both ends of every planar element which
are beams and columns. Bi-linear moment-rotation relationship without strain
hardening is used in defining the plastic hinges. Unlimited ductility is assumed.
PERFORM-3D V4.0.4 (CSI, 2008) program is used in this research to do all
types of analysis which are pushover analysis, response spectrum analysis, and
nonlinear response history analysis. MATLAB (The MathWorks, 2009) is used to
make the calculation faster.
Table 3.2. Natural period of mode n of the building

Tn (seconds)
14-
2-storey 8-storey 20-storey
Mode storey
0% 5% 10% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 10% 0% 5% 10% 15%
ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc
1 0.92 0.94 1.00 1.09 2.14 2.18 2.29 2.45 1.98 2.51 2.53 2.61 2.74
2 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.14 1.91 2.51 2.51 2.51 2.51
3 0.30 0.72 0.71 0.69 0.60 1.58 1.57 1.56 1.22 0.83 1.60 1.62 1.65
4 0.30 0.31 0.33 0.35 0.60 0.62 0.65 0.69 0.59 0.83 0.84 0.87 0.92
5 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.32 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.57 0.45 0.83 0.83 0.83
6 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.32 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.38 0.45 0.56 0.57 0.57
41
7 0.22 0.32 0.34 0.37 0.30 0.29 0.45 0.47 0.50
8 0.22 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.29 0.29 0.45 0.45 0.45
9 0.16 0.24 0.24 0.26 0.20 0.20 0.31 0.31 0.33
10 0.16 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.29 0.31 0.31
11 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.17 0.15 0.29 0.29 0.29
12 0.11 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.23
13 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.20 0.21 0.21
14 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.20
15 0.07 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.15 0.16 0.17
16 0.08 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.15
17 0.08 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.14
18 0.06 0.07 0.11 0.12 0.13
19 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.11
20 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.11
21 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.10
22 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.09
23 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08
24 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.08
Table 3.3. Effective mass factor in x-direction about mode n

Effective mass factor in x-direction (%)
14-
2-storey 8-storey store 20-storey
Mode y
0% 5% 10% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 10% 0% 5% 10% 15%
ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc ecc
1 0 42.48 37.01 32.98 90.23 43.3 39.4 35.53 39.04 73.92 36.45 35.01 32.93
2 91.89 45.95 45.95 45.95 0 45.11 45.11 45.11 40.96 0 36.96 36.96 36.96
3 5.72 3.46 8.93 12.96 5.11 1.81 5.72 9.58 1.91 11.05 0.51 1.95 4.05
4 2.76 3.73 3.23 2.88 0 2.45 2.23 2.01 4.47 0 5.41 5.11 4.72
5 4.05 4.05 4.05 2.44 2.56 2.56 2.56 4.8 0 5.52 5.52 5.52
6 0.33 0.82 1.18 0 0.1 0.32 0.53 0.34 4.65 0.11 0.4 0.77
7 1.86 1.17 1.06 0.96 1.5 1.48 2.27 2.13 1.97
8 0 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.65 0 2.33 2.33 2.33
9 0 0.05 0.5 0.68 0.13 1.79 0.08 0.57 1.26
10 0.32 0.89 0.46 0.3 0.89 0 1.25 0.82 0.2
11 0 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.98 0.25 1.31 1.31 1.31
12 0.04 0.04 0.12 0.11 0.08 1.23 0.05 0.82 0.73
13 0.01 0.16 0.15 0.22 0.58 0.03 0.85 0.1 0.21
14 0 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.64 0 0.89 0.89 0.89
15 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.4 0.84 0.65 0.61 0.56
16 0.08 0 0.67 0.67 0.67
42
17 0.46 0.56 0.02 0.08 0.16
18 0.28 0 0.43 0.4 0.36
19 0.33 0.52 0.45 0.45 0.45
20 0.06 0 0.02 0.07 0.12
21 0.11 0.11 0.41 0.37 0.34
22 0.13 0.26 0.42 0.42 0.42
23 0.04 0 0.02 0.06 0.22
24 0.04 0 0.27 0.24 0.1
3.2. Ground motion
Various types of short duration of ground motions with wide range variation of
pga (0.15g-0.84g) are chosen. Table 3.4 displays the earthquakes that are chosen in
this research. The records are selected from the PEER ground motion database
(PEER). A target response spectrum chosen for benchmark is Eurocode 8 (EC8)
response spectrum. Each ground motion is changed to be compatible to the target
response spectrum. Refer Figure 3.2 for the original response spectra from the ground
motions and the compatible response spectra from the artificial compatible ground
motions. Several pga, i.e. 0.1g, 0.4g, 0.6g, 1g, 1.4g of target response spectra are
chosen to represent small and large earthquake. The average value from all of max
value of ground motions response with its ± standard deviation σ is used as the
reference for verifying the accuracy of extended N2 and proposed method.
1.6 1.2
Earthquake
ground motions
Ground acceleration (g)
1
1.2 Eurocode 8 0.4g
0.8
0.8 0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Period (s) Period (s)
(a) (b)
motions; (b) Compatible response spectra from the compatible ground motions
43
Table 3.4. List of earthquake ground motion
Site
Orientation PGA PGV PGD
No. Earthquake Station Condition
(degree) (g) (m/s) (m)
(USGS)
1 1979 Imperial Valley 6 El Centro Array #6 C 140 0.376 0.631 0.269
Los Gatos -Lexington
2 1989 Loma Prieta A 0 0.442 0.844 0.147
Dam
3 1992 Landers Yermo C 0 0.151 0.290 0.228
4 1994 Northridge Sylmar C 0 0.843 1.289 0.326
5 1995 Kobe Takatori D 0 0.611 1.271 0.358
6 1999 Chi-Chi TCU074 C 0 0.597 0.733 0.204
7 1990 Upland Pomona C 0 0.1860 0.104 0.011
44
4. NRHA RESULT AND ANALYTICAL
STUDY
4.1. Maximum displacement result
Each building is given several pga of earthquake to study the real behavior of that
building in different degree of inelasticity whose values are from less than 1 to 5. The
displacement described in this research is the displacement at the center of mass.
The displacement results of 2-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are
described in Figure 4.1. The displacement results of 2-storey buildings with pga equal
to 0.6g and 1g are described in Figure 4.2.The displacement results of 8-storey
buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are described in Figure 4.3.The
displacement results of 8-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.6g are described in
Figure 4.4.The displacement results of 20-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and
0.4g are described in Figure 4.5.The displacement results of 20-storey buildings with
pga equal to 0.6g and 1g are described in Figure 4.6.The displacement results of
20-storey buildings with pga equal to 1.4g are described in Figure 4.7.
800 800
average average
700 Ave+stdev 700
Ave+stdev
600 Ave-stdev 600
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
500 extended N2 extended N2

500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20
Displacement (cm) Displacement (cm)
(a) (b)
800 800
average
average
700 700 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
600 600 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
500 extended N2 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20
(c) (d)
45
800 800
average average
700 Ave+stdev 700
Ave+stdev
600 Ave-stdev 600 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
extended N2
500 500 extended N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20
(e) (f)
800 800
average average
700 700
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
extended N2 500 extended N2

500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0
0
0 5 10 15 20
0 1 2 3 4 5
(g) (h)
(𝜇 = 0.46 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.86 ); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.1g
𝜇 = 0.48 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.904 ); (e) 10% eccentricity 0.1g
(𝜇 = 0.5 ); (f) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.99 ); (g) 15% eccentricity 0.1g
(𝜇 = 0.52 ); (h) 15% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 2.08 )
800 800
average average
700 700
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
600 600 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
500 extended N2 500 extended N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100
100
0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0 10 20 30 40 50
(a) (b)
800 800
average average
700 Ave+stdev 700 Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
extended N2 extended N2
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 10 20 30 40 50
46
(c) (d)
800 800
average average
700 700
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 10 20 30 40 50
(e) (f)
800 800
average average
700 Ave+stdev 700
Ave+stdev
600 Ave-stdev 600
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

Ave-stdev
extended N2
500 500
extended N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 10 20 30 40 50
(g) (h)
(𝜇 = 2.78 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.64 ); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.6g
𝜇 = 2.86 ; (d) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.76 ); (e) 10% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 2.98 ); (f) 10% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.96 ); (g) 15% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 3.13 ); (h) 15% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 5.21 )
3500 3500
average average
3000 3000
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 10 20 30 40 50
(a) (b)
3500 3500
average
average
3000 Ave+stdev
3000 Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500 2500
extended N2
extended N2
2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 10 20 30 40 50
47
(c) (d)
3500 3500
average average
3000 3000
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

extended N2
2000 2000 extended N2
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 10 20 30 40 50
(e) (f)
3500 3500
average average
3000 3000
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 10 20 30 40 50
(g) (h)
3500 3500
average average
3000 3000 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
2500 Ave-stdev 2500

2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(a) (b)
48
3500 3500
average average
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(c) (d)
(𝜇 = 5.1 ); (b) 5% eccentricity 0.6g 𝜇 = 5.1 ; (c) 10% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 5.04 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 4.96 )
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
(a) (b)
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
(c) (d)
8000
average 8000
average
7000
Ave+stdev 7000
Ave+stdev
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
6000
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
5000 extended N2
5000 extended N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
(e) (f)
49
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
(g) (h)
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 30 60 90 120 150
(a) (b)
8000 8000
average average
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 30 60 90 120 150
(c) (d)
8000 8000
average average
7000 Ave+stdev 7000
Ave+stdev
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
6000
Storey height (cm)
extended N2 Ave-stdev
5000 5000 extended N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000
2000
1000
1000
0
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 30 60 90 120 150
50
(e) (f)
8000 8000
average average
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 30 60 90 120 150
(g) (h)
(𝜇 = 2.27 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.79); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.6g
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
6000 6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
(a) (b)
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
(c) (d)
(μ = 5.3 ); (b) 5% eccentricity 1.4g μ = 5.29 ; (c) 10% eccentricity 1.4g
(μ = 5.25 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 1.4g (μ = 5.19 )
51
4.2. Coefficient of torsion result
Coefficient of torsion represents the effect of higher mode effect in plan which is
equal to the displacement at the flexible edge divided by the displacement at the
center of mass. The displacement at the stiff edge is assumed to be the same as at the
center of mass. In the symmetrical building which has 0% eccentricity will have the
coefficient of torsion value equal to 1.
The coefficient of torsion results of 2-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and
0.4g are described in Figure 4.8. The coefficient of torsion results of 2-storey
buildings with pga equal to 0.6g and 1g are described in Figure 4.9. The coefficient of
torsion results of 8-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are described in
Figure 4.10. The coefficient of torsion results of 8-storey buildings with pga equal to
0.6g are described in Figure 4.11. The coefficient of torsion results of 20-storey
buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are described in Figure 4.12. The coefficient
of torsion results of 20-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.6g and 1g are described in
Figure 4.13. The coefficient of torsion results of 20-storey buildings with pga equal to
1.4g are described in Figure 4.14.
800 800
average
700 700 Ave+stdev
600 600 Ave-stdev

Storey height (cm)
extended N2
Storey height (cm)
500 500
basic N2
400 400
average
300 300
Ave+stdev
200 Ave-stdev 200
100 extended N2 100

basic N2
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35
Coefficient of Torsion Coefficient of Torsion
(a) (b)
800 800
average
700 Ave+stdev 700
600 Ave-stdev 600

Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
500 500
basic N2
400 400
300 300 average

Ave+stdev
200 200 Ave-stdev
100 100 extended N2
basic N2
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
(c) (d)
52
800 800
average average
700 Ave+stdev 700
Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
extended N2
500 500 extended N2
basic N2
basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4
(e) (f)
0.1g 𝜇 = 0.48 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.904 ); (c) 10% eccentricity
0.1g (𝜇 = 0.5 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.99 ); (e) 15% eccentricity 0.1g
(𝜇 = 0.52 ); (f) 15% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 2.08 )
800 800
700 700
600 600
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
500 500
400 400
300 average 300 average

Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
200 200
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
basic N2 basic N2
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35
(a) (b)
800 800
700 700
600 600
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
500 500
400 400

Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
200 200
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
basic N2 basic N2
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35
(c) (d)
800 800
700 700
600 600
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
500 500
400 400
200 Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
200
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
basic N2 basic N2
0 0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35
(e) (f)
53
0.6g 𝜇 = 2.86 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.76 ); (c) 10% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 2.98 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.96 ); (e) 15% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 3.13 ); (f) 15% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 5.21 )
3500 3500
average
3000 Ave+stdev 3000
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

2500 2500
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
2000 basic N2 2000
average
1500 1500
Ave+stdev
1000 1000 Ave-stdev
500 500 extended N2

basic N2
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2
(a) (b)
3500 3500
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500
Storey height (cm)
2500
2000 basic N2 2000 basic N2
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3
(c) (d)
3500 3500
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500 2500
Storey height (cm)
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35
(e) (f)
0.1g 𝜇 = 0.85 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ); (c) 10% eccentricity 0.1g
(𝜇 = 0.84 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.36 ); (e) 15% eccentricity 0.1g
(𝜇 = 0.83 ); (f) 15% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.31 )
54
3500 3500
average average
3000 Ave+stdev
3000 Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

2500 2500
basic N2 extended N2
2000 2000 basic N2
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3
(a) (b)
3500
average
3000 Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500 Ave-stdev
extended N2
2000
basic N2
1500
1000
500
0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35
Coefficient of Torsion
(c)
0.6g 𝜇 = 5.1 ; (b) 10% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 5.04 ); (c) 15% eccentricity 0.6g
(𝜇 = 4.96 )
8000 8000
a vera ge
average
7000 Ave+stdev 7000
Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
6000 6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
Storey height (cm)
5000 ba sic N2 5000 extended N2

basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000
2000
1000
1000
0
0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3
1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12 1.14
(a) (b)
8000 8000
a vera ge a vera ge
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
6000 6000
extended N2
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
Storey height (cm)
5000 ba sic N2 5000 ba sic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4
(c) (d)
55
8000 8000
a vera ge
a vera ge
7000 Ave+stdev
7000 Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
6000 extended N2 Ave-stdev
6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

ba sic N2 extended N2
5000 5000
ba sic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4
(e) (f)
eccentricity 0.1g 𝜇 = 0.38 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.51 ); (c) 10%
eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.38 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.5 ); (e) 15%
eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.37 ); (f) 15% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.48 )
8000
8000 average
average
7000 Ave+stdev
7000 Ave+stdev
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
extended N2 5000
5000 basic N2
basic N2 4000
4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25
(a) (b)
8000 8000
average average
Ave-stdev 6000 Ave-stdev
6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 basic N2 5000
basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25
(c) (d)
8000 8000
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
6000 6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 basic N2 5000
basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25
(e) (f)
56
eccentricity 0.6g 𝜇 = 2.27 ; (b) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.78 ); (c) 10%
eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.25 ); (d) 10% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.75 ); (e) 15%
eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.22 ); (f) 15% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.71 )
8000 8000
average average
7000 7000 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
5000 5000
basic N2 basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25
(a) (b)
8000
average
7000 Ave+stdev
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
5000
basic N2
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25
Coefficient of Torsion
(c)
eccentricity 1.4g 𝜇 = 5.29 ; (b) 10% eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.25 ); (c) 15%
eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.19 )
4.3. Maximum inter-storey drift result
The drift described in this research is the maximum inter storey drift at the center of
mass. The Drift results of 2-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are
described in Figure 4.15. The Drift results of 2-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.6g
and 1g are described in Figure 4.16. The Drift results of 8-storey buildings with pga
equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are described in Figure 4.17. The Drift results of 8-storey
buildings with pga equal to 0.6g are described in Figure 4.18. The Drift results of
20-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.1g and 0.4g are described in Figure 4.19. The
Drift results of 20-storey buildings with pga equal to 0.6g and 1g are described in
Figure 4.20. The Drift results of 20-storey buildings with pga equal to 1.4g are
described in Figure 4.21.
57
800
800 average
average
700 Ave+stdev
700 Ave+stdev
600 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

600 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
500 extended N2 500
basic N2
basic N2 400
400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
800 800
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
600 600
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

500 500 basic N2
basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
800 800
average average
700 700
Ave+stdev Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

500
basic N2 basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(e) (f)
800 800
average average
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
500 500
basic N2 basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Drift (%) Displacement (cm)
(g) (h)
Figure 4.15. Drift result for 2-storey building: (a) 0% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 =
0.46 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.86 ); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.1g 𝜇 = 0.48 ;
(d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.904 ); (e) 10% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.5 ); (f)
10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 1.99 ); (g) 15% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.52 ); (h)
15% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 2.08 )
58
800 800
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
600 600
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
800 800
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
600 600
Storey height (cm)

extended N2
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
500 basic N2 500
basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
800 800
average average
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
500 500
basic N2 basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(e) (f)
800 800
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
600 600
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
500 500 basic N2
basic N2
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(g) (h)
2.78 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.64 ); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.6g 𝜇 = 2.86 ;
(d) 5% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.76 ); (e) 10% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 2.98 ); (f)
10% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 4.96 ); (g) 15% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 3.13 ); (h) 15%
eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 5.21 )
59
3500 3500
average
average
3000 3000 Ave+stdev
Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm) Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

2500 Ave-stdev 2500
extended N2
extended N2
2000 2000 basic N2
basic N2
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
3500 3500
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

2500 2500
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
3500
average 3500
average
3000 Ave+stdev
3000 Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500
Storey height (cm)
2500 Ave-stdev
extended N2
2000 extended N2
basic N2 2000
basic N2
1500
1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(e) (f)
3500 3500
average average
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500 2500
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(g) (h)
0.85 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.1g 𝜇 = 0.85 ;
(d) 5% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.4 ); (e) 10% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.84 ); (f)
10% eccentricity 0.4g (𝜇 = 3.36 ); (g) 15% eccentricity 0.1g (𝜇 = 0.83 ); (h)
60
3500 3500
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

Storey height (cm)
2500 2500
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
3500 3500
average average
Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
2500 2500
2000 basic N2 2000
basic N2
1500 1500
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
Figure 4.18. Drift result for 8-storey building: (a) 0% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 5.1 );
(b) 5% eccentricity 0.6g 𝜇 = 5.1 ; (c) 10% eccentricity 0.6g (𝜇 = 5.04 ); (d)
8000 8000
7000 7000
6000 6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

Ave+stdev 4000 Ave+stdev
4000
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
3000 3000
extended N2
extended N2
2000 basic N2 2000
basic N2
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
8000 8000
7000 7000
6000 6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 5000
average average
Ave-stdev 3000 Ave-stdev
3000
2000 2000
basic N2 basic N2
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
61
8000 8000
average
7000 7000 Ave+stdev
Storey height (cm)
6000 6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)

extended N2
5000 average 5000
basic N2
Ave+stdev
4000 4000
Ave-stdev
3000 3000
extended N2
2000 basic N2 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(e) (f)
8000
8000
7000
7000
6000
Storey height (cm)
6000
Storey height (cm)

5000 average
5000
Ave+stdev average
4000 4000 Ave+stdev
Ave-stdev
3000 Ave-stdev
extended N2 3000
extended N2
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(g) (h)
8000 8000
7000 7000
6000 6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 5000
average
4000 Ave+stdev 4000
average
Ave-stdev
3000 3000 Ave+stdev
extended N2
Ave-stdev
2000 basic N2 2000
extended N2
1000 1000 basic N2
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
8000 8000
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
6000 6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
62
8000 8000
average average
Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
6000
Storey height (cm)
extended N2 6000
Storey height (cm)

extended N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(e) (f)
8000 8000
average average
Ave-stdev
6000 6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)

extended N2
extended N2
5000 basic N2 5000
basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(g) (h)
(𝜇 = 2.27 ); (b) 0% eccentricity 1g (𝜇 = 3.79); (c) 5% eccentricity 0.6g
8000 8000
average average
7000 Ave+stdev 7000
Ave+stdev
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
6000 Ave-stdev
Storey height (cm)
extended N2
5000 extended N2
basic N2 5000
basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) (b)
8000 8000
average average
6000 Ave-stdev Ave-stdev
6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 5000 basic N2
basic N2
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(c) (d)
63
(𝜇 = 5.3 ); (b) 5% eccentricity 1.4g 𝜇 = 5.29 ; (c) 10% eccentricity 1.4g
(𝜇 = 5.25 ); (d) 15% eccentricity 1.4g (𝜇 = 5.19 )
4.4. Analytical study
In the conventional pushover analysis, there are two important steps to do, i.e.
how to determine the lateral load pattern and how to use response spectrum and
pushover curve to determine the target displacement. Extended N2 method uses the
inelastic design spectra to obtain the target displacement. Therefore, this method does
not need any iteration process. Moreover, Extended N2 method combines the basic
N2 with linear dynamic analysis called response spectrum analysis (RSA) to take
account the higher mode effect. This method is done by taking the larger value of the
seismic demand, i.e displacement, drift, and coefficient of torsion for each degree of
freedom which is obtained in basic N2 and RSA. The RSA need to be normalized
until the roof target displacement of RSA is the same as the basic N2. The main idea
of the extended N2 method is by assuming that the behavior of higher mode effects
will be in elastic behavior. Basic N2 will capture nonlinearity for the first mode since
the load pattern is based on linear assumed displacement shape. RSA will capture the
elastic higher mode effect. In the other side, the proposed method will consider that
inelastic behavior of the higher mode effect could occur especially when the
earthquake becomes so intense. The proposed method also uses the inelastic response
spectra like the N2 method does to keep the simplicity in obtaining the target
displacement with 4 modifications based on the real behavior (NRHA result).
The idea of the proposed method is include the higher mode effect in elevation by
using the lateral load pattern described in 1st modification. This first modification
modifies the basic N2 method by including the higher mode contribution. The result
will get nearer to the NRHA result rather than the basic N2. The next modification is
including the higher mode effect in torsion by using reduction factor to the target
displacement described in 2nd modification. By these two modifications, the target
displacement could be defined more accurate than the conventional pushover with
triangular assumed displacement shape.
64
The next two modifications (3rd and 4th modification) try to capture the higher mode
effect and dynamic response. Since the PO result is nonlinear static analysis, therefore
the target displacement should be enlarged to adjust the static result become dynamic
result. The 3rd and 4th modification describes how to deal with the coefficient of
torsion and the drift, respectively.
1stand 2ndmodification:
From Figure 4.1 to Figure 4.7, it is obtained that the target displacement resulted
by extended N2 method still too conservative. This is shown by the result which
greater than the value of average plus one times standard deviation from NRHA. The
reason of this phenomenon is because this research only uses linear assumed
displacement shape or inverted triangular for basic N2 that will ignore the
contribution of higher mode in elevation. Moreover, in the same ductility, the error of
the displacement increases as the eccentricity increases. It is caused by the same target
top displacement result produced by pushover analysis. In the other hand, The NRHA
generates smaller target top displacement in larger eccentricity as the effect of higher
mode effect in plan. This caused larger difference between the result of pushover
analysis and NRHA in larger eccentricity. Above explanation requires an
improvement to take the higher mode effects both in elevation and in plan into
account.
Higher mode effect in elevation is solved by using combination of modal load
pattern based on Eq. (4.1). Effective mass factor is used to represent the contribution
of each mode. Figure 4.22shows the difference between the linear assumed
displacement shape and displacement shape resulted from proposed load pattern.
𝐹𝑗 = (𝑚𝑗 ∙ 𝛷𝑖𝑗 ∙ Г𝑖 ∙ 𝑆𝑎 𝑖 ∙ 𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 )2 (4.1)

𝑖=1
𝑘
𝑗 =1 𝑚𝑗 ∙ 𝜑𝑖𝑗
Г𝑖 = 𝑘 (4.2)
𝑗 =1 𝑚𝑗 ∙ 𝜑𝑖𝑗2
𝑘
𝑗 =1 𝑚𝑗 ∙ 𝜑𝑖𝑗2
𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 = 2 (4.3)
𝑘
𝑗 =1 𝑚𝑗 ∙ 𝜑𝑖𝑗
65
𝑚𝑗 ∙ ∅𝑗
𝐹𝑗 = (4.4)
𝑚𝑘
where 𝐹𝑗 is horizontal loading at floor j; 𝑚𝑗 is total mass in floor j; 𝛷𝑖𝑗 is
normalized mode shape in mode i and floor j;Г𝑖 is the modal participation factor for
mode shape i; 𝑆𝑎 𝑖 is the spectral acceleration of the response spectra in the period of
mode shape i; 𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 is the effective mass factor for mode shape i which equal to
effective modal mass of mode i divided by total mass; 𝜑𝑖𝑗 is mode shape in mode i
and floor j; n is number of mode; k is number of floor;∅𝑗 is assumed displacement
shape in floor j. As shown in Eq.(4.1), 𝑚𝑗 ∙ 𝛷𝑖𝑗 ∙ Г𝑖 ∙ 𝑆𝑎 𝑖 represents the equivalent
static force at floor j. This force from each mode is combined using 𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 factor and
SRSS rule.
8000 8000
proposed load pattern proposed load pattern
7000 7000
basic N2 method basic N2 method
6000 6000
Storey height (cm)
Storey height (cm)
5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Normalized load pattern Normalized assumed displaecment shape
(a) (b)
Figure 4.22. Linear assumed displacement vs proposed displacement shape in
20-storey building 5% eccentricity: (a) load pattern; (b) assumed displacement shape
Compared to the basic N2, the proposed load pattern will give better results,
since we consider the contribution of higher mode. Applying the proposed load
pattern to the building will result smaller target top displacement such the level of
conservatism will decrease. This equation is different with the other methods
mentioned in literature review. Effective mass factor is included in the equation as
weight factor to represent the contribution of each mode. By using this new
approximation in determining the lateral force pattern, the participation weight of
different modes can be considered. The number of modes which should be taken into
account is when the total of effective mass factor of those modes is larger than 90%.
Higher mode effect in plan (torsional effect) has not been include in the above
66
modification, thus second modification should be added to take the torsional effect
into account. In the FEMA-356 and ATC-40, some iteration steps that require much
time are needed to obtain the target displacement. N2 method has no iteration while
using the inelastic response spectra to define the target displacement. Moreover, the
target displacement resulted by N2 is similar with FEMA-356 and ATC-40as
explained in the literature review and in another paper (Causevic & Mitrovic, 2011).
Therefore, this research adopts the N2 method (Fajfar, 2000) in using the inelastic
response spectra to get the target displacement.
In torsional dominant building, basic PO will result similar value of target
displacement as in symmetric building. In the other hand, The NRHA produces
smaller target displacement in larger eccentricity as described previously from Figure
4.1 to Figure 4.7. Therefore, a modification is made based on the NRHA result in
2-,8-,and 20- storey building with 0%, 5%, 10%, 15% of eccentricity. Several pga are
chosen to make the level of inelasticity, 𝜇, vary from less than 1 to 5. The reduction
factor of maximum top displacement resulted by NRHA for all of the investigated
building is shown in Figure 4.23. From the real behavior (NRHA), actually the
intensity does not affect so much in the reducing factor. The main factor is the
eccentricity itself. When the eccentricity higher, the reduction factor also larger.
Torsional mode effective mass factor is used to represent the eccentricity and torsional
effect that contribute to the building. The second modification to come up the
torsional effect is described in Eq.(4.5).
n
dtt = dtti ∙ 1 − 0.8789 𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 (4.5)

i=1
where dtt is final target displacement at top floor; dttiPO is initial target
displacement at top floor resulted from the PO analysis in 1st modification;
n
1 − 0.8789 i=1 𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 is regression line to determine the reduction factor for
target displacement represented by torsional effective mass factor in
x-direction;𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 is the effective mass factor of torsional mode in x-dir at mode-i.
n
The value of i=1 𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 becomes larger in larger eccentricity. 𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 is used to
represent the degree of torsional effect.
67
Figure 4.23. Reduction factor to the target top displacement considering the torsion
resulted by NRHA
By two modifications explained above, the modified load pattern and target
displacement, the final target displacement will have better accuracy compare with the
NRHA.
3rd modification:
Higher mode effect in plan, torsional effect, is represented by coefficient of
torsion (CT) which equal to the comparison value between the displacement at the
flexible edge and displacement at center of mass (CM) in the same level of storey.
The extended N2 assume that the higher mode effect will keep in elastic, thus use the
RSA to capture the higher mode effect. By this assumption, the result from extended
N2 method will be more conservative in larger earthquake (higher degree of
inelasticity) since the large earthquake produce smaller seismic demand. This is
because in large earthquake, the real CT value will be decreased due to the inelasticity
of the structure, while the CT value from the RSA will keep in large value. This cause
the RSA tend to give conservative result especially in large earthquake.
In the other hand, the pushover result (basic N2) usually tends to underestimate
the CT value especially in small earthquake. A study to the real behavior of the top
floor of the building through NRHA is done to understand the contribution of
pushover and RSA using the inelasticity of the structure as the parameter. The result
of the study is drawn in Figure 4.24. Based on the real behavior that the contribution
of RSA should be decreased and contribution of PO should be increased while the
68
degree of inelasticity, 𝜇, increases, the proposed method want to combine the result
from the PO result and RSA, such the conservatism caused by the assumption that
higher mode will keep in elastic behavior will be reduced. The weight factor that
based on the degree of inelasticity, 𝜇, is used to define the participation of the PO
and the RSA. Eq. (4.6) is used to get the weight factor both for PO and RSA, and the
final CT value of the system. The multiplier or the weight factor both for PO and RSA
is drawn in Figure 4.25.
𝜇 2 𝜇 2
CTj final = ∙ CTj PO + 1 − ∙ CTj RSA (4.6)
𝜇 + 0.9 𝜇 + 0.9
where CTjfinal is the final coefficient of torsion in floor j; CTj PO is the coefficient of
torsion in floor j resulted from PO; CTj RSA is coefficient of torsion in floor j resulted
from RSA. Note that the PO in this formula should be defined as the basic N2 with
two modifications described previously.
(a) (b)
Figure 4.24. The multiplier or weight factor of CT value resulted from NRHA: (a)
CTt PO multiplier; (b) CTt RSA multiplier
69
Figure 4.25. The proposed multiplier of PO and RSA to calculate the final coefficient
of torsion
By this third modification, the assumption used in extended N2 that the structure
will have elastic behavior of higher mode is eliminated and take into account the
inelastic higher mode effect by giving the weight factor both for PO and RSA.
4thmodification:
Maximum inter-storey drift resulted from NRHA is not directly derived from the
maximum storey displacement. This is because the max inter-storey drift in NRHA
possibly happens not in every maximum storey displacement. These higher mode and
dynamic effect, called “whip effect”, is explained in Figure 4.26. It is shown that in
lower level of the structure, maximum inter-storey drift happen in the similar value as
the maximum displacement in corresponding level occur. In upper level of the
building, the maximum inter-storey drift happens in much smaller value compare with
the maximum displacement of corresponding level. When the max drift resulted from
NRHA (Figure 4.26) is decomposed to the displacement in each storey level, called
max drift displacement, the result shows that max drift displacement gives larger
value in upper storey level, while the lower storey is keep the same. This phenomenon
is explained in Figure 4.27.
70
Figure 4.26. The “whip effect” on chi-chi earthquake: 20-storey 1.4g μ ≈ 5
(a) (b)
(c)
Figure 4.27. The max storey displacement versus the max drift displacement in 0%
eccentricity building: (a) 2-storey 0.4g; (b) 8-storey 0.4g; (c) 20-storey 0.4g
71
From this phenomenon, the target displacement from the PO result actually
needs to be modified for calculating the inter-storey drift purpose. Figure 4.28 and
Figure 4.29shows the multiplication factor of target displacement in top floor and the
shape of the multiplication factor in each floor, respectively, resulted both from the
ground motion and the proposed coefficient. The proposed coefficient which
considers the height of the building, the ductility (degree of inelasticity), and the
fundamental period of the building is described in Eqs. (4.7) to (4.10). Eq. (4.10)
describes the contribution of the stiffness of the building which is represented by the
natural period of the building. When the natural period is larger, the stiffness is
smaller, and the effect of higher mode effect is larger, hence the multiplication of the
top floor becomes larger. Figure 4.28 also explains that when the ductility increases
until the value is equal to 3, the multiplier of the top floor also increases. This is
because the structure has its both elastic behavior and inelastic behavior. Then, when
the ductility becomes so large, which is assumed to be larger than 3, the effect of the
inelastic behavior will control the behavior such the multiplication value becomes
smaller. The parabolic approach is made to catch that behavior resulted by NRHA and
concluded in Eq. (4.9). The value 1.03 shows that the peak multiplication value is
increase by 3% from the linear state of the structure. The value of 3 describe that the
peak value is happen in ductility equal to 3. Eq. (4.8) is made based on the Figure
4.29where in the lower level of the structure (assumed equal to 25% of the total
height), the multiplication factor will equal to 1, and will increase linearly to the top
of the building to the value obtained in (4.9).
dmaxdrift −j = dtj ∙ γj (4.7)

hj − 0.25ht
γj = ∙ γr − 1 +1 ; γj ≥ 1 and γ1 = 1 (4.8)
0.75ht
μ−3 2
γr = 1.03 ∙ γT − ; μ≥1 (4.9)
133.33 ∙ γT
𝑇𝑛 𝑇𝑛
γT = 0.01 ∙ 1+ +1 (4.10)
𝑇𝑐 𝑇𝑐
where dmaxdrift −j is the dummy displacement in floor- j which is used to calculate
the max inter-storey drift; dmax −j is the target displacement in floor- j resulted from
72
the 1st and 2nd modification presented previously; γj is the multiplication factor
which include the effect of storey height, ductility, and period of the structure; hj is
the height of the floor;ht is the total height;γr is multiplication factor at roof of the
building; γT is the stiffness effect of the structure represented by fundamental
period 𝑇𝑛 of the structure; μ is the ductility; 𝑇𝑐 is the change point from the
acceleration constant to the velocity constant in demand spectra.
(a) (b)
Figure 4.28. The value of max drift displacement divided by the max storey
displacement in the top floor: (a) NRHA result; (b) proposed γr
(a) (b)
73
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
Figure 4.29. The value of decomposed max drift displacement divided by the max
storey displacement: (a) 2-storey by ground motion; (b) 2-storey by proposed
coefficient,γj ;(c) 8-storey by ground motion; (d) 8-storey by proposed
coefficient, γj ;(e) 20-storey by ground motion; (f) 20-storey by proposed coefficient,γj
4.5. Step-by-step procedure of proposed method
In this section, step-by-step of proposed method will be described. The whole

procedure is similar with the basic N2 method and additional four modifications.
Figure 4.31shows the flowchart of the proposed method.
1. a. Calculate mass of each floor 𝑚𝑗 and be placed at x% of eccentricity from the
center of the building.
This step is to make the building example become has an eccentricity. x value can
74
be 5, 10, or any value desired. In asymmetric building, this step can be ignored
since the building already has its eccentricity.
b. Choose the elastic acceleration spectra and change to AD format.

This research takes EC8 with pga equal to 0.4g and 0.1g as the elastic acceleration
spectra with 5% damping (see Figure 4.30). The conversion from Sa-T format to
Sa-Sd format can be accomplished using Eq. (4.11).
T2
Sde = S (4.11)
4 π2 ae
where Sde and Sae are elastic spectral displacement and elastic spectral
acceleration, respectively.
1.2 1.2
0.8 0.8
0.4 0.4
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 20 40 60 80
Period (s) Spectral displacement (cm)
(a) (b)
Figure 4.30. Elastic acceleration spectra: (a) Sa-T format; (b) AD format
2. Run the Pushover analysis

Before running the pushover analysis, spatial distribution of lateral force should
be determined. As outlined in theory and assumptions chapter, lateral force
distribution can be obtained by several steps. The first step is get several dominant
mode shape of the building and normalized it. The second step is calculating the
modal participation factor and effective mass factor described in Eqs. (4.2) and
(4.3), respectively. The third step is obtaining the spectral acceleration in
corresponding period of each mode shape and the mass participation factor for
each mode. The last step is by following Eq. (4.1), the lateral force distribution is
75
defined and the applied lateral force to the building is normalized value so that 𝐹𝑗
at the top of the building equal to one.
3. Transform the MDOF capacity curve to SDOF capacity curve

The real MDOF capacity curve system is modified to bilinear system. The
FEMA approach where the intersection point between the real MDOF capacity
curve and the bilinear curve is 60% of the yield point of the bilinear curve is used
with α equal to zero. Eqs.(4.12) to (4.16) are used to transform the MDOF
bilinear curve to SDOF bilinear curve and transform from the base shear-top
displacement format to Sa-Sd format.
𝑄 = Г𝑄 ∗ (4.12)
𝑘
𝑗 =1 𝑚𝑗 ∙ ∅𝑗
Г= 𝑘 (4.13)
𝑗 =1 𝑚𝑗 ∙ ∅𝑗2
𝑚∗ 𝐷𝑦∗
𝑇 ∗ = 2𝜋 (4.14)
𝐹𝑦∗
𝐹 ∗𝑦
𝑆𝑎𝑦 = (4.15)
𝑚∗
𝑆𝑎𝑒
𝑅𝜇 = (4.16)
𝑆𝑎𝑦
where 𝑄 could be replaced with 𝐹𝑢 , 𝐹𝑦 , 𝐷𝑡 , or 𝐷𝑦 which are defined as
ultimate base shear, yield base shear, target displacement, or yield displacement,
respectively; star rank is used to distinguish the SDOF from MDOF system; Г is
defined as modal participation factor for assumed displacement shape; ∅𝑗 is
defined as assumed displacement shape at floor j (note that the used assumed
displacement shape has been explained at theory and assumptions section); 𝑚∗ is
defined as equivalent mass of SDOF system which equal to 𝑚𝑖 ∙ ∅𝑖 .
4. Get inelastic acceleration spectra

From step 1b and by using Eqs.(4.17) to (4.20), inelastic acceleration spectra can
be obtained. This step of defining the inelastic acceleration spectra is the same
with N2 method.
76
Sae
Sa = (4.17)
Rμ
μ
Sd = S (4.18)
R μ de
T
Rμ = μ − 1 +1 T < TC (4.19)
Tc
Rμ = μ T ≥ TC (4.20)
where μ is displacement ductility factor obtained by dividing the target
displacement with yield displacement; R μ is reduction factor due to ductility; TC
is the characteristic period of the ground motion defined as transition period
between constant acceleration and constant velocity in the response, i.e. 0.6
second.
5. Seismic demands
a. Target displacement at center of mass
Target displacement for SDOF system can be obtained by using Eqs. (4.21)
and (4.22). These two equations are resulted from combination of Eqs. (4.17)
to (4.20). Eq. (4.12) should be used to convert the target displacement from
SDOF system to MDOF system. After obtaining the target displacement of
MDOF, it should be noted to modify the target displacement to take the
torsional effect into account described in second modification section by Eq.
(4.5).
Sde TC
d∗tti = 1 + R μ − 1 ∗ T ∗ < TC (4.21)
Rμ T
∗
dtti = Sde T ∗ ≥ TC (4.22)
b. Coefficient of torsion
Torsional effect is discussed in term of coefficient of torsion (CT) which is
defined as the comparison between the displacement value in the flexible edge
and the displacement value in the center of mass. The stiff edge will have
smaller displacement value compare with that of in the center of mass,
therefore in this research for conservatism purpose, the displacement value in
stiff edge is assumed to be the same as that of in the center of mass. Then, the
term CT in this research is only for comparison between the displacement
value in the flexible edge and the displacement value in the center of mass.
77
Extended N2 method uses the maximum value of CT between RSA and
the basic N2 result as it assumes that the higher mode effect will keep in
elastic behavior. In the other hand, the proposed method try to include the
inelastic behavior of the higher mode by using weight factor to get the
combination between PO and RSA described by Eq. (4.6)
c. Inter-storey drift at center of mass
In this proposed method, as explained in theory and assumption that the
maximum inter-storey drift resulted from NRHA is not directly derived from
the maximum storey displacement, thus the max drift displacement gives
larger value in upper floor of the building than the original max storey
displacement. The multiplier of the max storey displacement for calculating
storey drift is described in Eqs. (4.7) to (4.10)
Eqs. (4.1) to Eqs. (4.12)
to (4.13) Eq. (4.15)
(4.4)
Run Capacity MDOF to F-D to Sa-
Fj &  j
Pushover curve SDOF Sd
Eqs. (4.17)
to (4.20)
mj,, Sae Eqs. (4.21)
Start Sa & Sd d*tti
& Sde to (4.22)
Linear Eqs. (4.12)

Run RSA CTRSA dtti
response to (4.13)
Eq. (4.5) Eqs. (4.7) to

(4.10)
Eq. (4.6) CTfinal CTPO dtt dmaxdrift-j
End End End
Figure 4.31. Flowchart of the proposed method
78
5. VERIFICATION AND DISCUSSION
The proposed method is verified by a 14-storey building with 10% eccentricity.
The ground motions attached are0.6g and 1g to represent the medium and intense
ground motion. This ground motion is chosen to show the effect of nonlinearity
towards the seismic demands. The specification of the building and ground motion
has been described in Chapter 3.
Both extended N2 and proposed method are examined with the NRHA. When the
result is between the average value plus one standard deviation and average value
minus one standard deviation, it is categorized as zero error. This represents that the
degree of conservatism is still reasonable. When the result is larger than the average
value plus one standard deviation or smaller than average value minus one standard
deviation, the error is calculated. The calculation of error is described in Eqs. (5.1)
and (5.2).
mean + σ − Y
%error = ∙ 100% for Y > mean + σ (5.1)
(mean + σ)
(mean − σ) − Y
%error = ∙ 100% for Y < mean − σ (5.2)
(mean − σ)
where Y is the seismic demand (displacement, drift, or coefficient of torsion) resulted
both from extended N2 method or proposed method; mean is the average seismic
demand from all of the maximum value of the ground motions‟ response; σ is the
standard deviation. Based on the Eqs. (5.1) and (5.2), the negative error represents the
conservative result, while the positive error represents the unconservative result.
The lateral force patterns and assumed displacement shape for 14-storey building
both in extended N2 and proposed method are described in Figure 5.1. The difference
of the lateral load pattern becomes clearer when the contribution of higher mode in
elevation is larger. Or in the other word, the difference between extended N2 method
and the proposed method will be clearer in high rise building. The target displacement
can be determined either by calculation sheet in Table 5.1or by graphical way in
Figure 5.2. In Table 5.1, It can be concluded that target top displacement resulted by
extended N2 method is larger than the proposed method. This occurrence happens
especially when the higher mode effect becomes dominant.
79
(a) (b)
Figure 5.1. (a) Normalized lateral force pattern 𝐹𝑗 ; (b) assumed displacement shape
∅𝑗
Figure 5.2.Graphical way to obtain the target top displacement of SDOF of

14-storey building, 10% eccentricity, 0.6g resulted by 1st modification of
proposed method.
Table 5.1. Calculation sheet for defining target top displacement for 14-storey
building with 10% eccentricity.
Basic N2 and Extended
Note Proposed method
N2 method
∗ 2
m (kg ∙ sec /cm) 5026 5716
Bilinear
approximation ɼ 1.46 1.32
of MDOF and Dy (cm) 25.97 25.97
SDOF
Fy = Fu (kN) 15432 15432
80
D∗y (cm) 17.83 19.61
Fy∗ = Fu∗ (kN) 10597 11655
∗
T (s) 1.81 1.93
Say (g) 0.219 0.212
yield pga (g) - 0.273
n
𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐹𝑖 - 0.033
i=1
Sde (cm) 67.5 71.95
Sae (g) 0.829 0.777
Calculate target Rμ 3.784 3.669
displacement in
1g of pga d∗tti (cm) 67.5 71.95
dtti (cm) 98.3 95.32
dtt (cm) 98.3 92.52
Sde (cm) 40.48 43.17
Sae (g) 0.497 0.466
Calculate target Rμ 2.27 2.2
displacement in
0.6g of pga d∗tti (cm) 40.48 43.17
dtti (cm) 58.98 57.19
dtt (cm) 58.98 55.54
The displacement result at the center of mass, coefficient of torsion result, and
inter-storey drift result at the center of mass are graphed in Figure 5.3, Figure 5.4, and
Figure 5.5, respectively. In those figure, the basic N2 method, extended N2 method,
proposed method, and the ground motions are compared. The ground motions results
are summarized become three value which are average from all of the maximum
value of each ground motions, and plus minus one times standard deviation. From
Table 5.2, the maximum absolute error of displacement induced by both basic N2 and
extended N2 is 5.06% and 6.07% for pga equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively. The error
is induced from the linear assumption of the displacement shape and the ignorance of
the reduction effect in target displacement in CM caused by torsion (described
previously in 1st and 2nd modification). The basic N2 and extended N2 have the same
value, because pushover result dominates the target displacement instead of RSA
result. In the other hand, the maximum absolute error of displacement induced by
proposed method is 0.47% and 0.39% for pga equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively. The
small error (less than 5% for displacement) resulted from proposed method shows that
by 1st and 2nd modifications, the proposed method can capture the effect of the
81
higher mode effect both in elevation and in plan toward the target displacement.
5500
Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
3500 Extended N2
3000 Proposed method
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 15 30 45 60
Displacement (cm)
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.3.Displacement result at center of mass for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity: (a)
pga=0.6g; (b) pga=1g
Table 5.2. The displacement error resulted from basic N2, extended N2, and proposed
method at center of mass
Error percentage (%)

0.6g (=2.2) 1g (=3.7)
Height Floor
(cm) level basic N2 Extended Proposed basic N2 Extended Proposed
N2
method method method N2 method method
method
5200 14 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -4.81 -4.81 0.00
4850 13 -1.12 -1.12 0.00 -5.08 -5.08 0.00
82
4500 12 -1.48 -1.48 0.00 -5.54 -5.54 0.00
4150 11 -1.98 -1.98 0.00 -6.00 -6.00 0.00
3800 10 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 -6.07 -6.07 -0.25
3450 9 -3.67 -3.67 0.00 -5.85 -5.85 -0.39
3100 8 -4.58 -4.58 0.00 -5.36 -5.36 -0.28
2750 7 -5.02 -5.02 -0.16 -4.52 -4.52 0.00
2400 6 -5.06 -5.06 -0.47 -3.39 -3.39 0.00
2050 5 -4.55 -4.55 -0.21 -2.20 -2.20 0.00
1700 4 -3.94 -3.94 0.00 -1.06 -1.06 0.00
1350 3 -3.28 -3.28 0.00 -0.20 -0.20 0.00
1000 2 -2.60 -2.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
500 1 -1.56 -1.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5500 Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
Extended N2
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
1.04 1.08 1.12 1.16 1.2 1.24
Coefficient of torsion, CT
(a)
5500 Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
Extended N2
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
1.04 1.08 1.12 1.16 1.2
Coefficient of torsion, CT
(b)
Figure 5.4.Coefficient of torsion result for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity: (a) pga=0.6g;
(b) pga=1g
83
Table 5.3. The coefficient of torsion error resulted from basic N2, extended N2, and
proposed method
0.6g (=2.2) 1g (=3.7)
Height Floor
method N2 method method method N2 method method
5200 14 3.65 0.00 0.00 1.94 -4.96 0.00

4850 13 4.01 0.00 0.00 1.62 -4.94 0.00
4500 12 4.32 0.00 0.11 1.44 -4.92 0.00
4150 11 3.98 0.00 0.00 1.37 -4.99 0.00
3800 10 3.87 0.00 0.00 1.48 -5.59 0.00
3450 9 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.61 -6.09 0.00
3100 8 3.99 0.00 0.00 1.82 -6.13 0.00
2750 7 3.87 0.00 0.00 2.06 -6.14 0.00
2400 6 3.66 0.00 0.00 2.40 -6.20 0.00
2050 5 3.24 0.00 0.00 2.69 -6.13 0.00
1700 4 3.18 0.00 0.00 2.77 -5.69 0.00
1350 3 3.18 0.00 0.00 2.76 -5.20 0.00
1000 2 3.19 0.00 0.00 2.88 -5.07 0.00
500 1 3.24 0.00 0.00 3.15 -4.75 0.00
5500 Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
3500 Extended N2
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
Drift (%)
(a)
84
5500 Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
3500 Extended N2
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 1 2 3
Drift (%)
(b)
Figure 5.5.Inter-storey drift result at center of mass for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity: (a)
proposed method at center of mass
0.6g (=2.2) 1g (=3.7)
Height Floor
5200-4850 14-13 33.97 -7.46 0.00 30.37 -25.34 -0.41

4850-4500 13-12 29.88 -10.79 0.00 24.13 -29.65 0.00
4500-4150 12-11 18.83 -13.31 0.00 8.99 -33.08 -2.18
4150-3800 11-10 0.39 -5.96 0.00 0.00 -8.34 0.00
3800-3450 10-9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.55 0.00
3450-3100 9-8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -5.39 -3.43
3100-2750 8-7 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 -6.62 -7.15
2750-2400 7-6 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.72 -7.35 -9.64
2400-2050 6-5 0.00 0.00 -0.66 -6.09 -6.25 -9.58
2050-1700 5-4 -2.25 -2.25 -4.07 -5.20 -5.20 -7.12
1700-1350 4-3 -5.13 -5.13 -5.37 -2.91 -2.91 -3.28
1350-1000 3-2 -5.04 -5.04 -1.31 -1.74 -1.74 0.00
1000-500 2-1 -3.52 -3.52 0.00 -0.60 -0.60 0.00
500-0 1-0 -1.56 -1.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
From Figure 5.4, the coefficient of torsion resulted by NRHA is smaller when the
inelastic degree is larger. This indicates that the extended N2 method will result larger
85
degree of conservatism in larger ductility. The value of coefficient of torsion in
extended N2 method is relatively the same in all intensity because the RSA result
which has the same result in arbitrary pga usually takes control. In the other hand, by
giving weight factor described in 3rd modification, the proposed method reduces the
level of conservatism. From Table 5.3, basic N2 usually underestimate the result,
while the extended N2 overestimate it. Both extended N2 and proposed method give
very good result in pga equal to 0.6g, which are 0% and 0.1% error for extended N2
and proposed method, respectively. When the pga equal to 1g, the maximum error of
CT generated by basic N2 and extended N2 method is 3.15% and 6.2%, respectively.
In the other hand the proposed method still gives good result which is zero error. This
coefficient of torsion actually is not the final result of seismic demand. The coefficient
of torsion should be multiplied by the displacement and drift at center of mass to
define the displacement and drift at flexible edge. The comparison of displacement
and drift at flexible edge are described in Figure 5.6 and Figure 5.7, respectively.
Moreover, the comparisons of those errors are described in Table 5.5 and Table 5.6.
From Figure 5.5, it is drawn that all of the method gives small error in the middle
of the building. The proposed method becomes better than basic N2 and extended N2
method in the upper level of the building. From Table 5.4, the maximum absolute
error of inter-storey drift produced by basic N2 method is 33.97% and 30.37% for pga
equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively. The maximum absolute error of inter-storey drift
induced by extended N2 is 13.31% and 33.08% for pga equal to 0.6 and 1g,
respectively. The maximum absolute error of inter-storey drift produced by proposed
method is 5.37% and 9.64% for pga equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively. The error
produced by extended N2 method becomes larger in larger inelastic degree of a
structure. This is caused by the assumption that the higher mode effect keep in elastic
state. In the other hand, because the proposed method is made based on the real
behavior of the building, the error generated is below 10% which is very small.
86
5500
Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
3500 Extended N2
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 15 30 45 60 75
Displacement (cm)
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.6.Displacement result at flexible edge for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity: (a)
From Figure 5.6 and Table 5.5, it is shown that the error from basic N2 is reduced
compare with the error produced in center of mass, while the extended N2 method
produce larger error in flexible edge compare with the error produced in center of
mass. It is because the coefficient of torsion (CT) value resulted by basic N2 is
unconservative and the displacement at the CM is overestimated, hence make the
result in flexible edge eventually become better. In the other side, both CT value and
displacement at CM resulted by the extended N2 are overestimated, hence make the
result in flexible edge become much more overestimated. The proposed method gives
better result both in center of mass and in flexible edge because the CT value and
displacement at center of mass resulted by proposed method have no error and small
87
error, respectively. From Table 5.5, the maximum absolute error of displacement at
flexible edge produced by basic N2 method is 0% and 2.13% for pga equal to 0.6 and
1g, respectively. The maximum absolute error of displacement at flexible edge
respectively. The maximum absolute error of displacement at flexible edge produced
by proposed method is 0% and 0.83% for pga equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively.
Table 5.5. The displacement error resulted from basic N2, extended N2, and proposed
method at flexible edge
0.6g (=2.2) 1g (=3.7)
Height Floor
N2 N2
method method method method
method method
5200 14 0.00 -4.13 0.00 -0.32 -11.40 0.00
4850 13 0.00 -4.38 0.00 -0.56 -11.68 0.00
4500 12 0.00 -4.66 0.00 -1.03 -12.18 0.00
4150 11 0.00 -5.08 0.00 -1.58 -12.76 0.00
3800 10 0.00 -5.81 0.00 -2.02 -13.30 -0.33
3450 9 0.00 -6.71 0.00 -2.13 -13.51 -0.83
3100 8 0.00 -7.34 0.00 -1.63 -13.05 -0.72
2750 7 0.00 -7.79 0.00 -0.81 -12.25 -0.26
2400 6 0.00 -8.10 0.00 0.00 -11.19 0.00
2050 5 0.00 -8.12 0.00 0.00 -10.05 0.00
1700 4 0.00 -7.56 0.00 0.00 -8.96 0.00
1350 3 0.00 -6.76 0.00 0.00 -8.21 0.00
1000 2 0.00 -5.91 0.00 0.00 -7.53 0.00
500 1 0.00 -4.56 0.00 0.00 -6.21 0.00
88
5500 Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
3500 Extended N2
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4
Drift (%)
(a)
5500 Average
5000 Ave+Stdev
4500 Ave-Stdev
4000 Basic N2
3500 Extended N2
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 1 2 3 4
Drift (%)
(b)
Figure 5.7.Inter-storey drift result at flexible edge for 14-storey 10%-eccentricity: (a)
From Figure 5.7, it is drawn that all of the method gives small error in the middle
of the building. The proposed method becomes better than basic N2 and extended N2
method in the upper level of the building. From Table 5.6, the maximum absolute
error of inter-storey drift produced by basic N2 method is 38.51% and 39.57% for pga
equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively. The maximum absolute error of inter-storey drift
respectively. The maximum absolute error of inter-storey drift produced by proposed
method is 5.71% and 10.73% for pga equal to 0.6 and 1g, respectively. The basic N2
produces large error both in pga equal to 0.6g and 1g. This phenomenon is explained
in the 4th modification. The error produced by extended N2 method becomes larger in
89
larger inelastic degree of a structure. This is caused by the assumption that the higher
mode effect keep in elastic state. In the other hand, because the proposed method is
made based on the real behavior of the building, the maximum error generated is only
10% which is very small.
proposed method at flexible edge
0.6g (=2.2) 1g (=3.7)
Floor
Height (cm)
level basic N2 Extended Proposed basic N2 Extended Proposed
5200-4850 14-13 38.51 -9.09 0.00 39.57 -20.96 0.00

4850-4500 13-12 34.96 -12.39 1.33 32.73 -27.16 0.00
4500-4150 12-11 24.52 -14.88 0.00 18.82 -33.96 0.00
4150-3800 11-10 5.07 -7.04 0.00 0.00 -11.62 0.00
3800-3450 10-9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9.61 0.00
3450-3100 9-8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -11.21 -2.22
3100-2750 8-7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -13.34 -6.63
2750-2400 7-6 0.00 -1.07 0.00 -0.78 -15.04 -9.92
2400-2050 6-5 0.00 -3.64 -1.70 -2.87 -14.82 -10.73
2050-1700 5-4 0.00 -7.53 -4.99 -2.28 -14.13 -8.58
1700-1350 4-3 -0.68 -9.98 -5.71 -0.04 -11.77 -4.73
1350-1000 3-2 -0.68 -10.01 -1.74 0.00 -10.68 0.00
1000-500 2-1 0.00 -8.26 0.00 0.00 -9.68 0.00
500-0 1-0 0.00 -4.56 0.00 0.00 -6.21 0.00
90
6. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
6.1. Conclusion
Several main conclusions of this research are gathered as follows:

1. Compare with the conventional pushover, the proposed method does not need the
iteration process. This is because the proposed method adopts the N2 method that
use the inelastic spectra thus does not require the iteration process.
2. In the first modification, the effective mass factor (EMF) included in determining
the lateral load pattern effectively contributes to give a better result of target
displacement, particularly in high rise symmetric buildings.
3. In the second modification, the reduction factor toward the displacement which
includes the torsional effective mass factor (TEMF) successfully gives a better
result of the target displacement, particularly in the torsional dominated building.
4. By combining the 1st and 2nd modification, an asymmetric high rise building can
be well predicted in target displacement.
5. In the third modification, the ductility or degree of inelasticity, 𝜇, is used as the
weight factor towards the coefficient of torsion of the Pushover (PO) result and
Response Spectra Analysis (RSA) result. Pushover (PO) result represents the
nonlinear behavior, while Response Spectra Analysis (RSA) result represents the
linear behavior. This third modification gives better result of the Coefficient of
Torsion (CT) in reducing the level of conservatism caused by the elastic behavior
assumption of the higher modes.
6. In the fourth modification, the multiplication factor towards the target
displacement to get the maximum inter-storey drift can predict the actual
inter-storey drift. This factor allows nonlinear behavior of higher modes.
7. The proposed method eliminates the assumption that the higher mode effects keep
in the elastic behavior and hence reduces the level of either conservatism or
unconservatism resulted by the elastic higher mode assumption.
91
6.2. Suggestion
Based on this research, several suggestions to the future studies are proposed as
follows:
1. Since this research only focuses on medium and long period structures, the future
studies can observe the validity of this proposed method in short and very long
period structures.
2. Include the effect of the strength and stiffness degradation by using the
appropriate hysteretic models such as the Takeda model.
92
REFERENCE
ATC-40. (1996). Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings. Washington,
DC: Applied Technology Council.
Causevic, M., & Mitrovic, S. (2011). Comparison between non-linear dynamic and
static seismic analysis of structures according to European and US provisions.
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 9(2), 467-489. doi:
10.1007/s10518-010-9199-1
Chopra, A. K., & Goel, R. K. (2002). A modal pushover analysis procedure for
estimating seismic demands for buildings. Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics, 31(3), 561-582. doi: 10.1002/eqe.144
Chopra, A. K., & Goel, R. K. (2004). A modal pushover analysis procedure to
estimate seismic demands for unsymmetric-plan buildings. Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 33(8), 903-927. doi: 10.1002/eqe.380
Chopra, A. K., Goel, R. K., & Chintanapakdee, C. (2004). Evaluation of a Modified
MPA Procedure Assuming Higher Modes as Elastic to Estimate Seismic
Demands. Earthquake Spectra, 20(3), 757-778.
CSI. (2008). PERFORM-3D Nonlinear Analysis and Performance Assessment 3D
Structures (Version 4.0.4). Berkeley, California: Computers and Structures,
Inc.
Fajfar, P. (1999). Capacity spectrum method based on inelastic demand spectra.
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 28(9), 979-993. doi:
10.1002/(sici)1096-9845(199909)28:9<979::aid-eqe850>3.0.co;2-1
Fajfar, P. (2000). A Nonlinear Analysis Method for Performance-Based Seismic
Design. Earthquake Spectra, 16(3), 573-592.
FEMA-356. (2000). Pre standard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings-FEMA 356. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
Hancock, J., Jennie Watson-Lamprey, Abrahamson, N. A., Bommer, J. J., Markatis, A.,
Mccoy, E., & Mendis, R. (2006). An Improved Method of Matching Response
Spectra of Recorded Earthquake Ground Motion using Wavelets. Journal of
Earthquake Engineering, 10(1), 1-23.
Kreslin, M., & Fajfar, P. (2011). The extended N2 method considering higher mode
93
effects in both plan and elevation. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 10(2),
695-715. doi: 10.1007/s10518-011-9319-6
Kunnath, S. K. (2004). Identification of modal combinations for nonlinear static
analysis of building structures. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure
Engineering, 19(4), 246-259. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8667.2004.00352.x
Marus̆ ić, D., & Fajfar, P. (2005). On the inelastic seismic response of asymmetric
buildings under bi-axial excitation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural
Dynamics, 34(8), 943-963. doi: 10.1002/eqe.463
Ou, Y.-C. (2012). Seismic Resistant Design. Lecture note. Construction Engineering.
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
R. Rofooei, F., K. Attari, N., Rasekh, A., & Shodja, A. H. (2006). Comparison of
Static and Dynamic Pushover Analysis in Assessment of the Target
Displacement. [Research Paper]. International Journal of Civil Engineering,
4(3), 212-225.
Reyes, J. C., & Chopra, A. K. (2011). Three-dimensional modal pushover analysis of
buildings subjected to two components of ground motion, including its
evaluation for tall buildings. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics,
40(7), 789-806. doi: 10.1002/eqe.1060
Rofooei, F. R., Attari, A., Rasekh, A., & Shodja, A. H. (2007). Adaptive Pushover
Analysis. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (Building and Housing), 8(2007),
343-358.
The MathWorks, I. (2009). MATLAB The Language of Technical Computing
(Version 7.8.0.347 (R2009a)): The MathWorks, Inc.
94
APPENDIX
A.1. MATLAB Code for extended N2 method for this research
%% input by user
n=101;
aaa=linspace(0,1,n)';
for zzz=1:n
pga=aaa(zzz);
coef1=2.5;
coef2=0.4;
coef3=0.6;
Sds=coef1*pga; %
Sd1=pga/coef2*coef3;
T0=0.1;
Ts=Sd1/Sds;
TL=3;
Tc=0.6;
%% Pick-up the data from txt file
load 'building data.txt';
load 'PO output.txt';
load 'RSA result.txt';
load 'PO displacement history.txt';
stheight=building_data(:,1);
height=cumsum(stheight);
ads=building_data(:,2);
mass=building_data(:,3);
drift=PO_output(:,1);
bshear=PO_output(:,2);
cmRSA=RSA_result(:,1);
f1RSA=RSA_result(:,2);
f4RSA=RSA_result(:,3);
%% Lateral force distribution & modal participation factor

[a b]=size(mass);
lfd=zeros(a,b);
for i=1:a
lfd(i,b)=ads(i,b).*mass(i,b)./mass(a,b);
end
Ln=mass.*ads;
Mstar=mass.*ads.^2;
MPF=sum(Ln)/sum(Mstar);
%% Target displacement
displ=drift*height(a);
bshear=bshear*9.8145/1000; % convert kg to KN
95
maxdispl=max(displ);
[c d]=size(bshear);
area_po=zeros(c,d);
area_po(1,1)=0;
for i=2:c
area_po(i,d)=area_po(i-1,d)+.5*(displ(i,d)-displ(i-1,d))*(bshear(i,d)-bshear(i-1,d))+(d
ispl(i,d)-displ(i-1,d))*min(bshear(i,d),bshear(i-1,d));
end
max_area_po=max(area_po);
x_seed=rand(1,1)*maxdispl;
x1=x_seed;
diffx_60=1;
while diffx_60>10^-10
y1=(max_area_po)/(maxdispl-.5*x1);
x_60=0.6*x1; y_60=0.6*y1;
cc=y_60-bshear;
[e f]=size(cc);
dd=zeros(e-1,1);
for i=1:e-1
dd=cc(i,f)*cc(i+1,f);
end
[dd_sort ind]=sort(dd,'ascend');
ind1=ind(1,1);
ind2=ind(1,1)+1;
x_60_new=interpolate(bshear(ind1),displ(ind1),bshear(ind2),displ(ind2),y_60);
diffx_60=abs(x_60-x_60_new);
x1=1/0.6*x_60_new;
end
Dtstar=maxdispl/MPF;
Dystar=x1/MPF;
Fystar=y1/MPF;
Fustar=Fystar;
Tstar=2*pi*(sum(Ln)*Dystar*981.45/100/(Fystar*1000))^.5;
Say=Fystar*1000/sum(Ln)/9.8145/981.45;
if Tstar > 0 && Tstar < T0

Sae=(Sds-pga)/T0*Tstar+pga;
elseif Tstar >= T0 && Tstar <= Ts
Sae=Sds;
elseif Tstar > Ts && Tstar <= TL
Sae=Sd1/Tstar;
else
Sae=Sd1*TL/Tstar^2;
end
Sde=Tstar^2/4/pi^2*Sae*981.45;
Rm=Sae/Say;
96
if Tstar < Tc
Sd = Sde/Rm*(1+(Rm-1)*Tc/Tstar);
else
Sd=Sde;
end
[g h]=size(aaa);
Dt(zzz,1)=MPF*Sd;
end
X1 = displ;
Y1 = bshear;
X2 = Dt;
Y2 = aaa;
%obtain yield disp and pga elastic

yield_displ=x1; %or displ(2,1) --> need check
ii=1;
while yield_displ>X2(ii,1)
ii=ii+1;
end
pga_elastic = interpolate(X2(ii-1,1),Y2(ii-1,1),X2(ii,1),Y2(ii,1),yield_displ);
X1mod=max(X2);
ii=1;
while X1mod>X1(ii,1) && X1(ii,1)<max(X1)
ii=ii+1;
end
Y1mod = interpolate(X1(ii-1,1),Y1(ii-1,1),X1(ii,1),Y1(ii,1),X1mod);
X1_new=[X1;X1mod]; Y1_new=[Y1; Y1mod];
[X1_new l]=sort(X1_new,'ascend');
Y1_new=Y1_new(l,:);
indX1=find(X1_new==X1mod);
X1_new=X1_new(1:indX1,1);
Y1_new=Y1_new(1:indX1,1);
%[AX,H1,H2] = plotyy(X1_new,Y1_new,X2,Y2);
set(gca,'FontName','Timesnewroman','fontSize',14)
hl1 = line(X1_new,Y1_new,'Color','r','LineStyle','--');
AX(1) = gca;
set(AX(1),'XColor','r','YColor','r')
AX(2) = axes('Position',get(AX(1),'Position'),...
'XAxisLocation','top',...
'YAxisLocation','right',...
'Color','none',...
97
'XColor','k','YColor','k');
hl2 = line(X2,Y2,'Color','k','Parent',AX(2));
set(get(AX(1),'Ylabel'),'String','Base Shear
(kN)','FontName','Timesnewroman','fontSize',14)
set(get(AX(2),'Ylabel'),'String','pga (g)','FontName','Timesnewroman','fontSize',14)
set(get(AX(1),'Xlabel'),'String','Target top displacement
(cm)','FontName','Timesnewroman','fontSize',14)
set(get(AX(2),'Xlabel'),'String','Target top displacement
(cm)','FontName','Timesnewroman','fontSize',14)
grid on
%% Torsional Effect & Drift & Displacement

CTf1=flipud(f1RSA)./flipud(cmRSA);
[a b]=size(CTf1);
for i=1:a
if CTf1(i,1)<1
CTf1(i,1)=1;
end
end
CTf1(1,1)=CTf1(2,1);
CTf4=flipud(f4RSA)./flipud(cmRSA);
[a b]=size(CTf4);
for i=1:a
if CTf4(i,1)<1
CTf4(i,1)=1;
end
end
CTf4(1,1)=CTf4(2,1);
pga_i=input('pga= ');
Sds=coef1*pga_i;
Sd1=pga_i/coef2*coef3;
Ts=Sd1/Sds;
Dt_i=convert( pga_i, Sds, Sd1, T0, Ts, TL, Tc );

[a b]=size(PO_displacement_history);
displmatrix=[PO_displacement_history(:,b),PO_displacement_history(:,2:b-1)];
[c d]=size(displmatrix);
iii=1;
while Dt_i > displmatrix(iii,d)
iii=iii+1;
end
xx1=displmatrix(iii-1,d);
xx2=displmatrix(iii,d);
98
storeydispl=zeros(d,1);
for i=1:d
storeydispl(i,1)=interpolate(xx1,displmatrix(iii-1,i),xx2,displmatrix(iii,i),Dt_i);
end
figure;
plot(storeydispl,height)
title('Center of mass')
xlabel('Displacement (cm)')
ylabel('Height (cm)')
hold on
normRSA=flipud(cmRSA*max(storeydispl)/max(cmRSA));
p=plot(normRSA,height);
set(p,'Color','red','LineWidth',2,'LineStyle','--')
legend('basic N2','extended N2','Location','best')
grid on
[a b]=size(height);
c=1+(a-2)*2+1;
height2=zeros(c,1);
height2(1,1)=height(1,1);
height2(c,1)=height(a,1);
j=2;
for i=2:c-1
height2(i,1)=height(floor(j),1);
j=j+0.5;
end
drift1=zeros(a-1,1);
for i=1:a-1
drift1(i,1)=(storeydispl(i+1,1)-storeydispl(i,1))/(height(i+1,1)-height(i,1));
end
j=1;
for i=1:c
driftN2(i,1)=drift1(floor(j),1);
j=j+0.5;
end
drift3=zeros(a-1,1);
for i=1:a-1
drift3(i,1)=(normRSA(i+1,1)-normRSA(i,1))/(height(i+1,1)-height(i,1));
end
j=1;
for i=1:c
driftnormRSA(i,1)=drift3(floor(j),1);
j=j+0.5;
end
figure;
99
plot(driftN2,height2)
title('Center of mass')
xlabel('Drift (%)')
hold on
p=plot(driftnormRSA,height2);
legend('basic N2','extendedN2','Location','best')
grid on
CEdrift=driftnormRSA./driftN2;
[a b]=size(CEdrift);
for i=1:a
if CEdrift(i,1)<1
CEdrift(i,1)=1;
end
end
CEdispl=normRSA./storeydispl;
[a b]=size(CEdispl);
for i=1:a
if CEdispl(i,1)<1
CEdispl(i,1)=1;
end
end
CEdispl(1,1)=1;
hold off
figure;
plot([CEdrift],[height2])
hold on
title('Coefficient of higher mode')
xlabel('CE')
p=plot([CEdispl],[height]);
legend('CE drift','CE displacement','Location','best')
grid on
extN2displ_sted=storeydispl.*CTf1.*CEdispl;
extN2displ_cm=storeydispl.*CEdispl;
extN2displ_fled=storeydispl.*CTf4.*CEdispl;
figure;
plot([extN2displ_sted],[height])
hold on
title('Stiff edge')
100
p=plot(storeydispl,height);
legend('Extended N2 method','basic N2 method','Location','best')
grid on
figure;
plot([extN2displ_cm],[height])
hold on
title('Center of Mass')
grid on
figure;
plot([extN2displ_fled],[height])
hold on
title('Flexible edge')
grid on
[a b]=size(CTf1);
CTf1_2=zeros((a-2)*2+2,1);
CTf1_2(1,1)=CTf1(1,1);
CTf1_2((a-2)*2+2,1)=CTf1(a,1);
j=2;
for i=2:(a-2)*2+1
CTf1_2(i,1)=CTf1(floor(j),1)
j=j+0.5;
end
[a b]=size(CTf4);
CTf4_2=zeros((a-2)*2+2,1);
CTf4_2(1,1)=CTf4(1,1);
CTf4_2((a-2)*2+2,1)=CTf4(a,1);
j=2;
for i=2:(a-2)*2+1
CTf4_2(i,1)=CTf4(floor(j),1)
j=j+0.5;
101
end
extN2drift_sted=driftN2.*CTf1_2.*CEdrift;
extN2drift_cm=driftN2.*CEdrift;
extN2drift_fled=driftN2.*CTf4_2.*CEdrift;
figure;
plot([extN2drift_sted],[height2])
hold on
title('Stiff edge')
xlabel('Drift (%)')
p=plot(driftN2,height2);
grid on
figure;
plot([extN2drift_cm],[height2])
hold on
title('Center of Mass')
xlabel('Drift (%)')
grid on
figure;
plot([extN2drift_fled],[height2])
hold on
title('Flexible edge')
xlabel('Drift (%)')
grid on
The MATLAB code above is supported by interpolate.m which has content as

follows:
function [ y ] = interpolate( x1, y1, x2, y2, x )
y = y1+(y2-y1)/(x2-x1)*(x-x1);
end
102
The input example of the above MATLAB program in 8-storey 15% eccentricity with
pga equal to 0.4g is described as follows:
building data.txt
0 0 0
500 0.234911551 488.0269003
500 0.548076012 474.6284899
310 0.678669741 461.2304871
310 0.781939308 461.2300795
310 0.865439429 461.2304871
310 0.929550794 461.2300795
310 0.973937645 461.2296719
310 1 439.3698798
PO output.txt
0 0
2.74E-03 174354
2.87E-03 181911.5
2.99E-03 189126.6
3.12E-03 195925.4
…
4.98E-02 276013.5
4.99E-02 276042.6
5.00E-02 276053.7
5.01E-02 276079.6
RSA result.txt
27.718 25.323 29.849
26.96 24.627 29.036
25.701 23.474 27.683
23.925 21.85 25.773
21.651 19.77 23.326
18.848 17.207 20.309
15.277 13.942 16.467
6.5953 6.0126 7.1148
0 0 0
PO displacement history.txt
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
2.74E-03 1.8459 4.3037 5.328 6.1382 6.793 7.2959 7.6438 7.8477
0
2.87E-03 1.937 4.5033 5.5723 6.418 7.1014 7.6263 7.9895 8.2025
0
2.99E-03 2.0368 4.709 5.8211 6.7007 7.4115 7.9576 8.3355 8.5573
0
3.12E-03 2.1414 4.9219 6.0754 6.9872 7.724 8.2901 8.6819 8.9121
0
103
….
4.98E-02 69.949 135.37 137.52 139.03 140.22 141.15 141.83 142.29
0
4.99E-02 70.131 135.72 137.87 139.38 140.57 141.5 142.18 142.64
0
5.00E-02 70.313 136.08 138.22 139.73 140.92 141.86 142.54 142.99
0
5.01E-02 70.494 136.43 138.58 140.09 141.28 142.21 142.89 143.35
0
The figures resulted from the above MATLAB program in 8-storey 15% eccentricity
with pga equal to 0.4g are drawn as follows:
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
104
(e) (f)
(g) (h)
(i) (j)
Figure A.1. Extended N2 result from the MATLAB code
105

106
Profile
Name Yusak Oktavianus (蔡優光)

Gender Male
Place/Date of birth Jember / October 16, 1988
Nationality Indonesia
Email scooter_my_vehicle@yahoo.com
yusak.oktavianus@yahoo.com
Academic profile
2006-2010 Bachelor Degree
Civil Engineering Department
Petra Christian University
Surabaya, Indonesia
2010-2012 Master Degree
Construction Engineering Department
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology
(Taiwan Tech)
Taipei, Taiwan

A Pushover Seismic Evaluation Method For Tall and Asymmetric Buildings

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Pushover Seismic Evaluation Method For Tall and Asymmetric Buildings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

國立台灣科技大學

A Pushover Seismic Evaluation Method

Taipei, June 29, 2012

Keyword: Pushover, Higher mode effect, torsional effect, nonlinear dynamic,

by proposed coefficient, γj ;(e) 20-storey by ground motion; (f)

20-storey by proposed coefficient,γj .......................................................74

Figure A.1. Extended N2 result from the MATLAB code .......................................105

1.2.Objectives and scopes

This thesis is divided into 6 chapters as follows:

2.1.1. Modal Pushover Analysis (MPA)

2.1.2. Modified Modal Pushover Analysis (MMPA)

2.1.3. Practical Modal Pushover Analysis (PMPA)

2.1.4. Method of Modal Combination (MMC)

Method of Modal Combination (MMC) tries to combine several modes by adding

2.1.6. Dynamic pushover with SRM load pattern

Spectral acceleration (g)

Spectral acceleration (g)

2. Perform pushover analysis and generate the relationship between roof

where 𝐹𝑥 is the lateral force at level x; 𝑤𝑥 or 𝑤𝑗 is the weight at level x or j;

Figure 2.2. Pushover analysis of a building (Ou, 2012)

Figure 2.3. Pushover curve (capacity curve) (Ou, 2012)

(a) Convert points  (roof displacement) into Sd

Eq.(2.11) is used to convert the roof displacement  into the Sd

(b) Convert points V (base shear) into Sa

3. Estimation of damping and reduction of 5 percent damped response spectrum

Figure 2.5. Derivation of damping (Ou, 2012)

Figure 2.5 shows an idealized hysteresis loop which is reasonable for a

For easiness, ATC-40 defines three categories of structural behavior.

Table 2.1. Damping modification factor 𝜅 (Ou, 2012)

Type C Any value 0.33

Figure 2.6. Damping modification factor (ATC-40, 1996)

Table 2.2. Structural behavior type (Ou, 2012)

Table 2.3. Near source factors (Ou, 2012)

Taking the damping into account, the response spectrum is reduced by

Figure 2.7. Reduction of 5% damped spectrum by 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉

Table 2.5. Minimum allowable value for 𝑆𝑅𝐴 and 𝑆𝑅𝑉

4. Performance point determination

Figure 2.8. Procedure to determine performance point (Ou, 2012)

5. Check for response limits

roof displacement (  p ) at the performance point are calculated by Eqs. (2.13)

2.3. FEMA 356

FEMA 356 (FEMA-356, 2000) is firstly established for retrofitting of existing

Figure 2.9.The acceptance criteria for performance objectives (FEMA-356, 2000)

stiffness(  K e ).The intersection point is determined by satisfying following

(a) Positive post-yield slop (b) Negative post-yield slop

Table 2.7. Values for modification factor C0 (FEMA-356, 2000)

Figure 2.12. 𝐶2 from Table 2.9 (FEMA-356, 2000)

Figure 2.14. EPP and SD hysteretic models

𝑆𝑎 is response spectrum acceleration at the effective fundamental period of the

where𝑇𝑖 is elastic fundamental period (in seconds) calculated by elastic dynamic

2.4. Basic N2 method

N2 method is a variant of capacity spectrum method established in Europe by

At the longer periods, the displacement spectrum is typically constant so the

4. Equivalent SDOF and capacity diagram

e. Determine capacity diagram (Acceleration versus displacement)

(a)𝑇 ∗ < 𝑇𝐶 (b) 𝑇 ∗ ≥ 𝑇𝐶

2.5. Comparison between ATC-40, FEMA 356, and Basic N2 method

Figure 2.21. The plan view of the building model

Figure 2.22. Performance point of ATC-40

2000 Capacity curve

Figure 2.23. Defining the target displacement by FEMA 356

The target displacement is calculated based on Eq. (2.22)

0.6 spectra Idealized response