TSINGHUA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

ISSN 1007-0214 20/21 pp124-130

Volume 11, Number 1, February 2006

Push-Over Analysis of the Seismic Behavior of a Concrete-Filled

Rectangular Tubular Frame Structure*

†
NIE Jianguo (聂建国) **, QIN Kai (秦 凯), XIAO Yan (肖 岩)

Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China;

† Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA

Abstract: To investigate the seismic behavior of concrete-filled rectangular steel tube (CFRT) structures, a
push-over analysis of a 10-story moment resisting frame (MRF) composed of CFRT columns and steel
beams was conducted. The results show that push-over analysis is sensitive to the lateral load patterns, so
the use of at least two load patterns that are expected to bound the inertia force distributions is recom-
mended. The M -φ curves and N -M interaction surfaces of the CFRT columns calculated either by Han’s
formulae or by the USC-RC program (reinforced concrete program put forward by University of Southern
Califonia) are suitable for future push-over analyses of CFRT structures. The P-∆ effect affects the MRF
seismic behavior seriously, and so should be taken into account in MRF seismic analysis. In addition, three
kinds of RC structures were analyzed to allow a comparison of the earthquake resistance behavior of CFRT
structures and RC structures. The results show that the ductility and seismic performance of CFRT struc-
tures are superior to those of RC structures. Consequently, CFRT structures are recommended in seismic
regions.

Key words: concrete-filled rectangular steel tube; push-over analysis; capacity curve; reinforced concrete

static inelastic analysis, and by comparing these de-

Introduction mands to available capacities at the performance levels.
Push-over analysis is basically a nonlinear static
Over the past twenty years the static push-over proce-
analysis that is performed by imposing an assumed dis-
dure has been presented and developed by several au-
tribution of lateral loads over the height of a structure
thors, including Saiidi and Sozen[1], Fajfar and Gasper-
and increasing the lateral loads monotonically from
sic[2], Bracci et al.[3], amongst others. This method is
zero to the ultimate level corresponding to the incipient
also described and recommended as a tool for design
collapse of the structure. The gravity load remains con-
and assessment purposes for the seismic rehabilitation
stant during the analysis. Push-over analysis is very
of existing buildings[4]. The purpose of push-over
useful in estimating the following characteristics of a
analysis is to evaluate the expected performance of a
structure: 1) the capacity of the structure as represented
structural system by estimating its strength and defor-
by the base shear versus top displacement graph; 2) the
mation demands in design earthquakes by means of a
maximum rotation and ductility of critical members; 3)
the distribution of plastic hinges at the ultimate load;
Received: 2004-06-30; revised: 2004-11-07
and 4) the distribution of damage in the structure, as
﹡Supported by the Overseas Youth Cooperative Foundation of the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 50128807) expressed in the form of local damage indices at the ul-
﹡﹡To whom correspondence should be addressed. timate load. Although push-over analyses of reinforced
E-mail: niejg@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn; Tel: 86-10-62772457
 NIE Jianguo (聂建国) et al：Push-Over Analysis of the Seismic Behavior of …
concrete (RC) structures and steel structures have been
carried out by many researchers and designers, at
present push-over analyses for the concrete-filled steel
tube (CFT) structures are rarely reported in the
literature.
CFT columns have become increasingly popular in
structural applications. This is partly due to their ex-
cellent earthquake resistant properties such as high
strength, high ductility, and large energy absorption
capacity[5]. At present, theoretical analysis of these
structures focuses mostly on the static behavior of the
CFT members, such that the seismic responses of the
CFT structures have been rarely studied. Some re-
search on the seismic behavior of CFT structures is,
however, documented in the literature. The elasto-
plastic time-history analysis of CFT structures has
been discussed by Li et al.[6] Their results show that
no irreparable damage occurs in structures under in-
tense earthquake loading, which demonstrates that
CFT structures excel in seismic performance. The
seismic behaviors of four kinds of 5-story frame
structures that are composed of CFT and of RC col-
umns have been studied by Huang et al.[7] The
SAP2000 program was used in the time-history
analyses for calculating the seismic responses of the
structures. The dynamic behavior and earthquake re-
sponse of the CFT and RC structures were analyzed.
The authors conclude that the earthquake resistance
behavior of CFT structures is excellent compared to
that of RC structures. Experimental investigation of a
2-span, 3-story model of a CFT frame has been car-
ried out under vertical stable loads and lateral cyclic
loads by Li et al.[8] Based on the CFT frame model
experiment, a nonlinear finite element analysis was
Fig. 1 Plan, elevation, and typical cross-sections of structural members of the CFRT structure (mm)
125
completed[9]. The calculated results coincided with
the test results, providing a practical method for the
seismic design of CFT frames. Although the seismic
behavior of CFT frame structures has been investi-
gated by many researchers in recent years, the differ-
ent elasto-plastic analysis methods are confined by
their rationality, applicability, and efficiency. These
methods need to be modified regarding aspects of
their mechanical models, hysteretic characteristics,
and calculation efficiency, and more experimental re-
search still needs to be carried out to check the accu-
racy of these analysis methods.
Although concrete-filled steel rectangular tubular
columns are inferior to concrete-filled steel circular
tubular columns in terms of bearing capacity, they are
superior in many other aspects, such as beam-column
connection constructability, stability, and fire resis-
tance. Therefore, they are increasingly used for high-
rise buildings in many countries all around the world.
However, application of concrete-filled rectangular
steel tube (CFRT) structures is still restricted because
of the lack of engineering information on the overall
seismic behavior of CFRT structures. For the purpose
of investigating the seismic responses under severe
earthquake conditions, a push-over analysis of a 10-
story CFRT structure has been carried out and is re-
ported in this paper.
1 Push-Over Analysis
A 10-story moment resisting frame structure that is com-
posed of concrete-filled rectangular steel tube columns
and steel beams was studied. The plan, elevation, and
typical cross-sections of structural members of the CFRT
 126 Tsinghua Science and Technology, February 2006, 11(1): 124-130

structure are shown in Fig. 1. The SAP2000 program Similarly, the PMM hinge is used by SAP2000 to
is used for the push-over analysis of the CFRT struc- simulate the plastic hinge caused by axial load and
ture. The floors of the building are 100 mm deep, and biaxial bending moments. User-defined PMM hinges
are modeled as shell elements in SAP2000. The di- are therefore applied to the CFRT columns in this
mensions and material properties of the structural model. The M-φ curves and N-M interaction surfaces
members are shown in Table 1. In SAP2000 the of the CFRT columns are calculated using both Han’s
CFRT columns and steel beams are modeled as frame formulae[10] and the USC-RC program(RC program
elements. put forward by University of Southern California), for
the purpose of comparison. The typical N−M interac-
Table 1 Dimensions and material properties of the
strutural members of the CFRT structure tion surface and M-φ curve of the CFRT columns are
Steel beams CFRT columns
shown in Fig. 3.
Story No.
(mm) (mm)
1,2 700×300×13×24 700×20
3 700×300×13×24 700×18
4-6 692×300×13×20 700×18
7-10 692×300×13×20 700×16
Material property Q345 Q345，C40

1.1 Hinge properties

In frame structures plastic hinges usually form at the

ends of beams and columns under earthquake action.
For beam elements, plastic hinges are mostly caused
by uniaxial bending moments, whereas for column
elements, plastic hinges are mostly caused by axial
loads and biaxial bending moments. Therefore, in
push-over analysis different types of plastic hinges
should be applied for the beam elements and the col-
umn elements separately.
In SAP2000, the M3 hinge is used to simulate the
plastic hinge caused by uniaxial moment, so user-
defined M3 hinges are applied to the steel beams in
this model. To calculate moment-rotation curves of
the steel beams, the following assumptions are
adopted: 1) a classical bilinear isotropic hardening
model is applied to represent the stress-strain behav-
ior of the steel beam; and 2) plane sections remain
plane. The typical M-φ curve for the steel beams is
shown in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 M -φ curve of steel beams in the 1st-3rd stories
Fig. 3 N -M interaction surface and M -φ curve of
CFRT columns in the 1st and 2nd stories
1.2 Lateral load patterns
The lateral load patterns are intended to represent the
distribution of inertia forces in a design earthquake[11].
It is clear that the distribution of inertia forces will
vary with the severity of the earthquake (i.e., the extent
of inelastic deformations) and with time during an
earthquake. Since no single load pattern can capture
the variations in the local demands expected in a de-
sign earthquake, two lateral load patterns that are ex-
pected to bound the inertia force distributions are used
in this push-over analysis. One is an inverted triangular
lateral load pattern calculated by the base shear method;
the other is the design lateral load pattern calculated
using SAP2000 including higher mode effects. The
 NIE Jianguo (聂建国) et al：Push-Over Analysis of the Seismic Behavior of … 127

horizontal loads are applied in the X-direction and Y-
direction in turn for the purpose of investigating the seismic
behavior of the whole structure.
As Dong et al. mentioned in Ref. [12], the P-∆ effect
seriously affects the stability of an unbraced frame. There-
fore, push-over analyses with and without accounting for
the P-∆ effect are carried out in order to investigate the
P-∆ effect on the seismic behavior of the CFRT structure.
1.3 Results
compared to other parameters.
Figure 4 also shows that the ultimate base shears de-
crease remarkably in the push-over analyses as a result of
the P-∆ effect. Similarly, the post-yield stiffness de-
creases for the same reason. Therefore, we can draw a con-
clusion that the P-∆ effect affects the seismic behavior
of the moment resisting frame seriously and consequently,
the effect should be taken into account in any future MRF
seismic analyses.

The results of the push-over analysis can be used to es-

timate the potential ductility of the structure, to evalu-
ate its lateral load resistant capacity, and to identify the
failure mechanism. It is thus important to analyze the
push-over results to obtain the seismic behavior of the
CFRT structure.
1.3.1 Load-deformation relationship
The capacity of the structure as represented by the
base shear versus top displacement graph is very use-
ful in estimating the seismic behavior of a structure in
a push-over analysis. The capacity curves obtained in
the push-over analyses are shown in Fig. 4, from
which we find that for the cases AccelX(Y)-Han-P−,
AccelX(Y)-USC-RC-P−, EQX(Y)-Han-P−, EQX(Y)-
USC-RC-P−, and EQX(Y)-Han-P+ the termination is
caused by exceeding the target top displacement
(1.6 m), while for the cases AccelX(Y)-Han-P+, Ac-
celX(Y)-USC-RC-P+, and EQX(Y)-USC, RC-P+ the
termination is caused by the formation of a plastic
mechanism for the whole structure. The initial stiff-
ness values and yield base shears of the cases using Fig. 4 Capacity curves of different push-over cases of the
CFRT structure
AccelX(Y) lateral load patterns are higher than the
Notes: EQX(Y) represents cases using the inverted trian-
cases using EQX(Y) lateral load patterns. Therefore, gular lateral load pattern calculated by the base shear
the conclusion can be drawn that the push-over analy- method, AccelX(Y) represents cases using the design lat-
sis results are sensitive to lateral load patterns. More- eral load pattern calculated using SAP2000 including
over, the trends of the capacity curves in the X- higher mode effects; Han represents cases using the
direction and in the Y-direction are similar, as shown M -φ and N -M curves calculated by Han’s formulae,
in Fig. 4. Consequently, the seismic behavior of the USC-RC represents cases using the M -φ and N -M
curves calculated using the USC-RC program; P− repre-
whole structure can be evaluated by one of the direc-
sents cases without considering the P-∆ effect, P+
tions for this case. represents cases including the P-∆ effect.
As shown in Fig. 4, the capacity curves are almost
the same in the elastic region despite the different 1.3.2 Final interstory drifts
M -φ curves and N -M interaction surfaces of the The interstory drifts at the moment of termination in
CFRT columns. The post-yield stiffness values for the push-over analyses are shown in Fig. 5. These data
cases using M -φ and N -M curves calculated by are useful in predicting the weak stories of the CFRT
Han’s formulae are higher than those calculated by structure. From Fig. 5, we observe that the interstory
USC-RC program, but the differences are small drifts of the 1st-3rd stories are remarkably higher than
 128 Tsinghua Science and Technology, February 2006, 11(1): 124-130

those of the other stories. Therefore, the weak section of
the CFRT structure should be the first 3 stories for this ex-
ample, and it is necessary to strengthen them in
engineering application.
1.3.3 Plastic hinge distributions
It can be found that the plastic hinge distributions are
similar in all the push-over analysis cases despite
variations in the lateral load patterns, the P -∆ ef-
fect, the M -φ and N -M curves of the CFRT col-
umns and the lateral load directions. Figure 6 illus-
trates the progressive occurrence and extent of the
plastic behavior of the CFRT frame at various

Fig. 5 Final interstory drifts of different push-over cases of the CFRT structure

Fig. 6 Progressive occurrence of plastic hinges in EQX-USC-RC-P− push-over analysis

 NIE Jianguo (聂建国) et al：Push-Over Analysis of the Seismic Behavior of … 129

performance levels for the EQX-USC-RC-P− push- AccelX(Y) lateral load patterns calculated using
over analysis case. Plastic yielding first occurs at base- SAP2000 were used; P-∆ effects were not taken
support sections of the first-story column members as into account.
seen in Fig. 6a. With increasing the lateral load, plastic
Table 2 Dimensions of the vertical columns in
hinges occur at all of the base-support sections of the different structures (mm)
first-story columns and some of the bottom sections Story No. 1,2 3-6 7-10
of the second-story and third-story columns. More-
CFRT columns 700×20 700×18 700×16
over, both end-sections of some beams in the 2nd-6th
CFT columns 790×22.6 790×20.3 790×18.1
stories also reach plastic yielding at this stage as shown
Strength-equivalent
in Fig. 6b. Subsequently, the number of plastic hinges 855 842 828
RC columns
at the sections of the CFRT columns and steel beams
Stiffness-equivalent
inreases continually as shown in Fig. 6c. The extent of 822 813 805
RC columns
plastic behavior of the hinges develops with increas-
Side-length-equivalent
ing horizontal load. Finally, the push-over analysis 700 700 700
RC columns
terminates due to either exceeding the target top dis-
placement or the formation of a plastic mechanism for
From the X-direction capacity curves of the CFRT
the whole structure. At this stage, shown in Fig. 6d, the
and RC structures, shown in Fig. 7a, we may find that
extent of the plastic hinges at base-support sections of
the termination of the push-over analysis for the
the first-story columns develops sufficiently, while the
other plastic hinges of the CFRT columns and steel CFRT structure is caused by exceeding the target top
beams in the 2nd-3rd stories also develop to a certain displacement of 1.6 m, while the termination of the
extent. Therefore, we can draw the conclusion that the push-over analyses for RC structures is caused by the
weak section of the CFRT structure should be the 1st- formation of a plastic mechanism over the whole
3rd stories for this example, and it is necessary to structure. As the RC structures cannot reach the target
strengthen them in engineering application, in agree- top displacement, we can draw the conclusion that the
ment with the conclusion drawn in Section 1.3.2. CFRT structure is superior to the RC structures in

2 Comparison
For the purpose of comparing the seismic
performance of CFRT structures with RC structures,
four kinds of 10-story frames, composed of CFRT
and RC columns, have been studied. SAP2000 was
used for push-over analyses of these structures. For
convenience of comparison, the structures are almost
identical except for the vertical columns, which are
formed from different materials and dimensions, as
shown in Table 2. The dimensions of the strength-
equivalent RC columns are calculated based on the
EA equivalence with the CFRT columns where E is
the modulus of elasticity, A is the area of the section.
Similarly, the stiffness-equivalent RC columns are
calculated on the basis of EI equivalence, and the
side-length-equivalent RC columns are calculated on
the basis of B equivalence with the CFRT columns,
where I is the moment of inertia of the section, and
B is the side-length of the columns. For the push-
over analyses of these different structures, the Fig. 7 Capacity curves of different structures
 130 Tsinghua Science and Technology, February 2006, 11(1): 124-130
terms of ductility and deformation capacity. Moreover,
the yield and ultimate base shears of the CFRT struc-
ture are higher than those of the RC structures, so the
conclusion that the CFRT structure has better earth-
quake resistance capacity than the RC structures can
be drawn. Similar conclusions can be obtained from
inspection of Fig. 7b, so the seismic behavior of the
CFRT structure is superior to the RC structures.
The push-over results of CFRT structure and CFT
structure are also compared in Fig. 7. The dimensions
of the CFT columns are calculated based on As and
Ac equivalence with the CFRT columns, where As is
the section area of steel tube, and Ac is the section
area of filled concrete. Although the CFRT columns
are inferior to the CFT columns in terms of axial
bearing capacity, they are superior in flexural capacity.
In this model, the axial compression ratio is less than
0.2, so the influence of the moment resistant capacity of
the columns is more important than the axial bearing ca-
pacity. As a result, the seismic behavior of the CFRT
structure is superior to the CFT structure in this model.
3 Conclusions
In this paper the seismic behaviors of five kinds of 10-
story frame structures, composed of CFRT columns,
CFT columns, and RC columns, have been studied.
The seismic responses of the CFRT, CFT, and RC
structures in push-over analyses have been compared
and some concluding remarks can be obtained as
follows:
1) The push-over analysis results show that the duc-
tility and seismic behavior of the CFRT structure are
superior to those of the RC structures. Consequently,
CFRT structures are recommended in seismic regions.
2) Since the push-over analysis results are sensitive
to the lateral load patterns, the use of at least two load
patterns that are expected to bound the inertia force
distributions is recommended in push-over analysis.
3) The push-over analysis results are slightly
influenced by the M-φ curves and N-M interaction
surfaces of the CFRT columns. Therefore, curves
calculated either by Han’s formulae or by the USC-RC
program are suitable for future push-over analyses of
CFRT structures.
4) Since the P-∆ effect seriously affects the seismic
behavior of MRF, this effect should be taken into account
in MRF seismic analyses in future research.
References
[1] Saiidi M, Sozen M A. Simple nonlinear seismic analysis of
RC structures. Journal of the Structural Division, 1981, 107(5):
937-952.
[2] Fajfar P, Gaspersic P. The N2 method for the seismic damage
analysis of RC buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Struc-
tural Dynamics, 1996, 25(1): 31-46.
[3] Bracci J M, Kunnath S K, Reinhorn A M. Seismic perform-
ance and retrofit evaluation of reinforced concrete structures.
Journal of Structural Engineering, 1997, 123(1): 3-10.
[4] FEMA. NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of
buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report
No. FEMA-273. Washington D.C., 1997.
[5] Shams Mohammad, Saadeghvaziri M A. State of the art of
concrete-filled steel tubular column. ACI Structural Journal,
1997, 94(5): 558-571.
[6] Li Xiangzhen, Cheng Guoliang, Yu Dejie, Zhou Fulin. Elasto-
plastic time-history analysis of concrete filled steel tubular
structure. World Earthquake Engineering, 2002, 18(1): 73-76.
(in Chinese)
[7] Huang Xiangyun, Zhou Fulin, Xu Zhonggen. Comparative
study on the earthquake behavior of concrete filled steel tubu-
lar structures. World Earthquake Engineering, 2001, 17(2):
86-89. (in Chinese)
[8] Li Zhongxian, Xu Chengxiang, Wang Dong, Wang Chengbo.
Experimental research on the seismic behavior of concrete
filled steel tubular frame structure. Building Structure, 2004,
34(1): 3-6. (in Chinese)
[9] Ding Yang, Xu Chengxiang, Dai Xuexin, Li Xianzhong.
Nonlinear finite element analysis of concrete filled steel tubu-
lar frame structure. Building Structure, 2004, 34(1): 7-10. (in
Chinese)
[10] Han Linhai. Concrete-filled Steel Tubular Structure. Beijing:
Science Press, 2000: 169-200. (in Chinese)
[11] Krawinkler H, Seneviratna G D P K. Pros and cons of a push-
over analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering
Structures, 1998, 20(4-6): 452-464.
[12] Kim Hee Dong, Lee Myung Jae. The P -∆ effects of non-
symmetric frames. In: Proceedings of Sixth Pacific Structural
Steel Conference. Beijing, China, 2001: 394-399.