Assessment of FEMA356 nonlinear static procedure and modal pushover analysis for seismic evaluation of buildings

2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamid Reza Khoshnoud ◽  
Kadir Marsono
Keyword(s):  
Pushover Analysis ◽  
Seismic Evaluation ◽  
Modal Pushover Analysis ◽  
Nonlinear Static Procedure ◽  
Nonlinear Static ◽  
Modal Pushover

scholarly journals Evaluation of Modal and FEMA Pushover Procedures Using Strong-Motion Records of Buildings

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 653-684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh K. Goel
Keyword(s):  
Pushover Analysis ◽  
Strong Motion ◽  
Northridge Earthquake ◽  
Reasonable Estimate ◽  
Modal Pushover Analysis ◽  
Higher Mode Effects ◽  
Mode Effects ◽  
Nonlinear Static Procedure ◽  
Nonlinear Static ◽  
Fema 356

The objective of this investigation is to evaluate the FEMA-356 Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP) and a recently developed Modal Pushover Analysis (MPA) procedure using recorded motions of four buildings that were damaged during the 1994 Northridge earthquake. For this purpose, displacements and drifts from the FEMA-356 NSP and the MPA procedures are compared with the values “derived” from the recorded motions. It is found that the FEMA-356 NSP typically underestimates the drifts in upper stories and overestimates them in lower stories when compared to the recorded motions. Among the four FEMA-356 distributions considered, the “Uniform” distribution led to the most excessive underestimation or overestimation indicating that the need to carefully reevaluate the usefulness of this distribution in the FEMA-356 NSP. Furthermore, FEMA-356 distributions failed to provide accurate estimates of story drifts for a building that satisfied the FEMA-356 criterion for detecting the presence of higher mode effects indicating the need to carefully re-examine this criterion. The MPA procedure, in general, provides estimates of the response that are much closer to the values from the recorded motion compared to those from the FEMA-356 NSP. In particular, the MPA procedure, unlike the FEMA-356 NSP, is able to capture the effects of higher modes. For a building that exhibits dominant effects of “soft” first story, however, neither the MPA procedure nor the FEMA-356 NSP led to reasonable estimate of the response.

Applicability of Modal Pushover Analysis on Bridges

2011 ◽  
Vol 255-260 ◽  
pp. 806-810
Author(s):  
Biao Wei ◽  
Qing Yuan Zeng ◽  
Wei An Liu
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Analysis ◽  
Pushover Analysis ◽  
Time History ◽  
Seismic Demand ◽  
Seismic Demands ◽  
Modal Pushover Analysis ◽  
History Analysis ◽  
Bridge Structures ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Modal Pushover

Taking one irregular continuous bridge as an example, modal pushover analysis (MPA) has been conducted to judge whether it would be applicable for seismic analysis of irregular bridge structures. The bridge’s seismic demand in the transverse direction has been determined through two different methods, inelastic time history analysis (ITHA) and MPA respectively. The comparison between those two results indicates that MPA would be suitable only for bridges under elastic or slightly damaged state. Finally, some modifications are used to improve the MPA’s scope of application, and the results illustrate that the adapted MPA will be able to estimate bridges’ seismic demands to some extent.

Extension of the Modal Pushover Analysis to Assess Structures Exposed to Blast Load

2018 ◽  
Vol 144 (3) ◽  
pp. 04018006
Author(s):  
Amir Saedi-Daryan ◽  
Sahman Soleimani ◽  
Masoud Hasanzadeh
Keyword(s):  
Pushover Analysis ◽  
Blast Load ◽  
Modal Pushover Analysis ◽  
Modal Pushover
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document