Scribd
Upload
132 views

Seismic Analysis Methods

Seismic analysis is the calculation of how a structure responds to earthquakes. It is part of structural design in earthquake-prone regions. Early methods involved applying lateral forces based on a structure's weight, but it is now understood that a structure's dynamic properties affect earthquake loads. Modern analysis methods include equivalent static analysis, response spectrum analysis, and linear or nonlinear dynamic analysis using computer models. The most complex designs may incorporate base isolation or distributed seismic protection elements requiring specialized analysis.

Uploaded by

Hafizullah Amin
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
132 views

Seismic Analysis Methods

Seismic analysis is the calculation of how a structure responds to earthquakes. It is part of structural design in earthquake-prone regions. Early methods involved applying lateral forces based on a structure's weight, but it is now understood that a structure's dynamic properties affect earthquake loads. Modern analysis methods include equivalent static analysis, response spectrum analysis, and linear or nonlinear dynamic analysis using computer models. The most complex designs may incorporate base isolation or distributed seismic protection elements requiring specialized analysis.

Uploaded by

Hafizullah Amin
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Seismic analysis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to navigationJump to search
Main article: Earthquake engineering

This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its
sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please help
to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (April 2011) (Learn how
and when to remove this template message)

First and second modes of building seismic response

Seismic analysis is a subset of structural analysis and is the calculation of the response of a
building (or nonbuilding) structure to earthquakes. It is part of the process of structural
design, earthquake engineering or structural assessment and retrofit (see structural engineering) in
regions where earthquakes are prevalent.
As seen in the figure, a building has the potential to 'wave' back and forth during an earthquake (or
even a severe wind storm). This is called the 'fundamental mode', and is the lowest frequency of
building response. Most buildings, however, have higher modes of response, which are uniquely
activated during earthquakes. The figure just shows the second mode, but there are higher 'shimmy'
(abnormal vibration) modes. Nevertheless, the first and second modes tend to cause the most
damage in most cases.
The earliest provisions for seismic resistance were the requirement to design for a lateral force equal
to a proportion of the building weight (applied at each floor level). This approach was adopted in the
appendix of the 1927 Uniform Building Code (UBC), which was used on the west coast of the United
States. It later became clear that the dynamic properties of the structure affected the loads
generated during an earthquake. In the Los Angeles County Building Code of 1943 a provision to
vary the load based on the number of floor levels was adopted (based on research carried out
at Caltech in collaboration with Stanford University and the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, which
started in 1937). The concept of "response spectra" was developed in the 1930s, but it wasn't until
1952 that a joint committee of the San Francisco Section of the ASCE and the Structural Engineers
Association of Northern California (SEAONC) proposed using the building period (the inverse of the
frequency) to determine lateral forces.[1]
The University of California, Berkeley was an early base for computer-based seismic analysis of
structures, led by Professor Ray Clough (who coined the term finite element[2]). Students included Ed
Wilson, who went on to write the program SAP in 1970,[3] an early "finite element analysis" program.
Earthquake engineering has developed a lot since the early days, and some of the more complex
designs now use special earthquake protective elements either just in the foundation (base isolation)
or distributed throughout the structure. Analyzing these types of structures requires specialized
explicit finite element computer code, which divides time into very small slices and models the
actual physics, much like common video games often have "physics engines". Very large and
complex buildings can be modeled in this way (such as the Osaka International Convention Center).
Structural analysis methods can be divided into the following five categories.

Contents

 1Equivalent static analysis


 2Response spectrum analysis
 3Linear dynamic analysis
 4Nonlinear static analysis
 5Nonlinear dynamic analysis
 6See also
 7References

Equivalent static analysis[edit]


This approach defines a series of forces acting on a building to represent the effect of earthquake
ground motion, typically defined by a seismic design response spectrum. It assumes that the
building responds in its fundamental mode. For this to be true, the building must be low-rise and
must not twist significantly when the ground moves. The response is read from a design response
spectrum, given the natural frequency of the building (either calculated or defined by the building
code). The applicability of this method is extended in many building codes by applying factors to
account for higher buildings with some higher modes, and for low levels of twisting. To account for
effects due to "yielding" of the structure, many codes apply modification factors that reduce the
design forces (e.g. force reduction factors).

Response spectrum analysis[edit]


See also: Response spectrum
This approach permits the multiple modes of response of a building to be taken into account (in
the frequency domain). This is required in many building codes for all except very simple or very
complex structures. The response of a structure can be defined as a combination of many special
shapes (modes) that in a vibrating string correspond to the "harmonics". Computer analysis can be
used to determine these modes for a structure. For each mode, a response is read from the design
spectrum, based on the modal frequency and the modal mass, and they are then combined to
provide an estimate of the total response of the structure. In this we have to calculate the magnitude
of forces in all directions i.e. X, Y & Z and then see the effects on the building.. Combination
methods include the following:

 absolute – peak values are added together


 square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS)
 complete quadratic combination (CQC) – a method that is an improvement on SRSS for closely
spaced modes
The result of a response spectrum analysis using the response spectrum from a ground motion is
typically different from that which would be calculated directly from a linear dynamic analysis using
that ground motion directly, since phase information is lost in the process of generating the response
spectrum.
In cases where structures are either too irregular, too tall or of significance to a community in
disaster response, the response spectrum approach is no longer appropriate, and more complex
analysis is often required, such as non-linear static analysis or dynamic analysis.

Linear dynamic analysis[edit]


Static procedures are appropriate when higher mode effects are not significant. This is generally true
for short, regular buildings. Therefore, for tall buildings, buildings with torsional irregularities, or non-
orthogonal systems, a dynamic procedure is required. In the linear dynamic procedure, the building
is modelled as a multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) system with a linear elastic stiffness matrix and an
equivalent viscous damping matrix.
The seismic input is modelled using either modal spectral analysis or time history analysis but in
both cases, the corresponding internal forces and displacements are determined using linear elastic
analysis. The advantage of these linear dynamic procedures with respect to linear static procedures
is that higher modes can be considered. However, they are based on linear elastic response and
hence the applicability decreases with increasing nonlinear behaviour, which is approximated by
global force reduction factors.
In linear dynamic analysis, the response of the structure to ground motion is calculated in the time
domain, and all phase information is therefore maintained. Only linear properties are assumed. The
analytical method can use modal decomposition as a means of reducing the degrees of freedom in
the analysis.

Nonlinear static analysis[edit]


In general, linear procedures are applicable when the structure is expected to remain nearly elastic
for the level of ground motion or when the design results in nearly uniform distribution of nonlinear
response throughout the structure. As the performance objective of the structure implies greater
inelastic demands, the uncertainty with linear procedures increases to a point that requires a high
level of conservatism in demand assumptions and acceptability criteria to avoid unintended
performance. Therefore, procedures incorporating inelastic analysis can reduce the uncertainty and
conservatism.
This approach is also known as "pushover" analysis. A pattern of forces is applied to a structural
model that includes non-linear properties (such as steel yield), and the total force is plotted against a
reference displacement to define a capacity curve. This can then be combined with a demand curve
(typically in the form of an acceleration-displacement response spectrum (ADRS)). This essentially
reduces the problem to a single degree of freedom (SDOF) system.
Nonlinear static procedures use equivalent SDOF structural models and represent seismic ground
motion with response spectra. Story drifts and component actions are related subsequently to the
global demand parameter by the pushover or capacity curves that are the basis of the non-linear
static procedures.

Nonlinear dynamic analysis[edit]


Nonlinear dynamic analysis utilizes the combination of ground motion records with a detailed
structural model, therefore is capable of producing results with relatively low uncertainty. In nonlinear
dynamic analyses, the detailed structural model subjected to a ground-motion record produces
estimates of component deformations for each degree of freedom in the model and the modal
responses are combined using schemes such as the square-root-sum-of-squares.
In non-linear dynamic analysis, the non-linear properties of the structure are considered as part of
a time domain analysis. This approach is the most rigorous, and is required by some building
codes for buildings of unusual configuration or of special importance. However, the calculated
response can be very sensitive to the characteristics of the individual ground motion used as seismic
input; therefore, several analyses are required using different ground motion records to achieve a
reliable estimation of the probabilistic distribution of structural response. Since the properties of the
seismic response depend on the intensity, or severity, of the seismic shaking, a comprehensive
assessment calls for numerous nonlinear dynamic analyses at various levels of intensity to represent
different possible earthquake scenarios. This has led to the emergence of methods like
the incremental dynamic analysis.[4]

See also[edit]
 Applied element method
 Earthquake simulation
 Extreme Loading for Structures – seismic analysis software
 Modal analysis using FEM
 OpenSees – analysis software
 Structural dynamics
 Vibration control

References[edit]
1. ^ ASCE. (2000). Pre-standard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings
(FEMA-356) (Report No. FEMA 356). Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers
prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
2. ^ ATC. (1985). Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California (ATC-13) (Report).
Redwood, CA: Applied Technology Council.
3. ^ Bozorgnia, Y, Bertero, V, "Earthquake Engineering: From Engineering Seismology to
Performance-Based Engineering", CRC Press, 2004.
4. ^ "Early Finite Element Research at Berkeley", Wilson, E. and Clough R., presented at the
Fifth U.S. National Conference on Computational Mechanics, Aug. 4–6, 1999
5. ^ "Historic Developments in the Evolution of Earthquake Engineering", illustrated essays by
Robert Reitherman, CUREE, 1997, p12.
6. ^ Vamvatsikos D., Cornell C.A. (2002). Incremental Dynamic Analysis. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 31(3): 491–514.

You might also like