Energy-based Adaptive Modal Pushover Analysis Using an Innovative

Combination Method

B. Farhadi
Islamic Azad University, Chaloos branch, Mazandaran, Iran

M.A. Shayanfar
Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

K. Shakeri
University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran

ABSTRACT:
In recent years, lots of efforts are devoted to develop the new pushover procedures to assess the seismic demands
of the structures. But most of these procedures do not have enough accuracy in comparison to the nonlinear time
history analysis because of using the non-adaptive load patterns and quadratic modal combination methods. In
this paper a new energy based adaptive modal pushover analysis is proposed which is using an innovative
weighted direct algebraic addition method to combine the effects of the higher modes. In the proposed
procedure, the capacity spectrum is established based on the energy concept and also adaptive load pattern is
implemented to consider the effects of the changes in the structural vibration characteristics. This method is
applied to two steel moment resistant frames under 7 near field earthquake records to investigate the accuracy of
the predicted responses. Results show the success of this method.

Keywords: seismic demand, pushover, adaptive, energy, weighted modal combination.

1. INTRODUCTION

During the last decade, the nonlinear static procedure (NSP) is developed widely in the engineering
practice to estimate the seismic demands of the structures. The conventional pushover analyses
implement uniform, triangular or first mode inertia forces as the lateral load pattern which is kept
invariant during the inelastic phase (FEMA-356 2000; ATC-40 1996). In these procedures the
structure is pushed with a monotonous increasing predefined load pattern until the target displacement
achieved or the structure collapsed. These methods estimate seismic demands of the low-rise
structures more accurate than their linear counterpart. Not including higher modes effects, especially
in the high-rise buildings is one of the main drawbacks of the conventional procedures. Using the
invariant load pattern is the other obstacle of the conventional methods. Recently some advanced
pushover analyses proposed to overcome these drawbacks. (Chopra and Goel 2002; Jan et al. 2004;
Kunnath 2004; Antoniou and Pinho 2004; Kalkan and Kunnath 2006; Shakeri et al. 2010). These
procedures could be categorized into two main approaches: 1. Single-run procedures. 2. Multi-run
procedures.

In the single-run modal pushover analyses, the structure is pushed with the combined modal forces
(Jan et al. 2004; Kunnath 2004). The applied load vectors reflect the contributions of the instantaneous
higher modes and their interaction in the inelastic phase. In the adaptive forms of these methods, at
each step, the load pattern is defined by combining the instantaneous modal loads (Antoniou and
Pinho 2004; Shakeri et al. 2010). The progresses changes in the modal properties of the structure
during the analysis are considered in these adaptive procedures.

The multi-run modal pushover procedures are developed based on the elastic modal decomposition
concepts (Moghadam 2002; Chopra and Goel 2002;). In the modal pushover analysis (MPA) proposed
by Chopra and Goel (2002), multiple pushover analyses are carried out separately with lateral load
pattern corresponding to the considered elastic mode shapes. Then the total seismic response is
calculated by combining the responses due to each modal load. Since in the higher modes the increase
of the roof displacement is not proportional to the other storey displacement, and may even be
reversals, Hernandez-Montes et al. (2004) have proposed an MPA methodology based on the energy
concepts. Furthermore, in order to account the ongoing changes in the modal attribute, adaptive form
of the multi-run pushover procedures are also developed (Gupta and Kunnath 2000; Kalkan and
Kunnath 2006).

In order to improve the performance of the multi-run pushover procedures, in this paper a Weighted
Adaptive Modal Combination (WAMC) procedure is proposed. The WAMC procedure implements
the force-based adaptive load pattern and the energy concept to calculate the target displacement. Also
a novel modal combination rule, based on the effective mass ratio is used to combine the resulted
responses of the considered modes.

2. WEIGHTED ADAPTIVE MODAL COMBINATION METHODOLOGY

The proposed Weighted Adaptive Modal Combination (WAMC) procedure is developed based on
three main features. 1- Implementing energy concept in order to translate the capacity curve
coordinates of the multi degree of freedom (MDOF) system into a single degree of freedom (SDOF)
system and finding the target displacement. 2- Using adaptive lateral load patterns in each mode. 3-
Obtain the final results by using an innovative modal combination rule. The main aspects of the
WAMC procedure are described in the following sections.

2.1. Target displacement

In the pushover procedures, the seismic demands are obtained when the structure achieve the target
displacement. Therefore, like the load pattern, the target displacement is one of the important key
elements in the pushover analyses. In the enhanced pushover methodologies which use multi-mode
analysis (e.g. MPA) the target displacement in each mode is achieved by transforming the MDOF
responses into a bilinear SDOF response (Chopra and Goel 2002).

In the higher modes, the increase of the roof displacement is not proportional to the other stories and
may even be reversal. In this regard an energy-based method is proposed by Hernandez-Montes et al.
(2004) to convert the displacement coordinate from the MDOF system to an equivalent SDOF system.
In the WAMC procedure, the capacity curve is also developed based on the energy concept. For more
detail, refer to Shakeri et al. (2010)

2.2. Adaptive lateral load pattern

Using Adaptive lateral load patterns is the other principal feature of the WAMC method. First of all an
incremental base-shear quantity, λ is selected. At each step, the λ, incremental base-shear is multiplied
by the mass matrix, m, and the corresponding instantaneous mode shape vector, using Eqn. 2.1. to
achieve the incremental applied force in the i-th storey at k-th step, dF i (k-1). The incremental applied
forces at each step are added to the previous existing forces using Eqn. 2.2.

dFi ( k −1) = λ.m.φ ( k −1) (2.1)

Fi ( k ) = dFi ( k −1) + Fi ( k −1) (2.2)

2.3. Modal combination rule based on the modal effective mass

The square-root-of-sum-of-the-squares (SRSS) and the complete quadratic combination (CQC) rules
commonly are used by the different researchers to combine the responses resulted from the different
modes. Also Shakeri and his co-workers (2007 and 2010) have developed an efficient optimal weight
(OW) combination rule for using in MPA procedure. In OW the genetic algorithm is used to minimize
the error and optimize the weight factors. Here an innovative weighted modal combination rule based
on the modal effective mass is proposed to combine the responses resulted from the different
individual pushovers with adaptive load pattern corresponding to the considered modes.

For a number of the first considered modes, the effective masses are computed, M eff,i . For each mode
the absolute response is multiplied by the ratio of the corresponding effective mass to the effective
mass of the first mode and then combined with together using the direct algebraic addition (Eqn. 2.3).

 M eff ,1   M eff , 2   M eff ,3 

r= . r1 +  . r2 +  . r3 + ... (2.3)
 M eff ,1   M eff ,1   M eff ,1 

Where r 1 , r 2 and r 3 are the responses resulted from the considered modes. Also r is the final result.
Assuming the first mode as the main mode in the structural vibration is the principal concept of this
method. It means that the first mode effective mass could be accepted as the total mass of the
structure.

3. VALIDATION OF THE WAMC

In order to verify the accuracy of the WAMC methodology a computer code called OpenSees
(Mazzoni et al.2007) has been implemented. OpenSees is an object-oriented framework for finite
element analysis. Validation studies are verified for two steel moment frame buildings in which higher
modes have more effects on the results. Results obtained with the WAMC method are compared with
the conventional first-mode lateral load pattern (M1), MPA procedure and the adaptive modal
combination (AMC) methodology (Kalkan and kunnath 2006) using the force-based lateral load
pattern instead of the displacement-based which is called Force-based Adaptive Modal Combination
(FAMC) in this paper. The results of the different pushover analyses are then compared to the
benchmark response resulted from the detailed nonlinear time history analysis (NTHA).

3.1. Structural models

In this paper, SAC-9 and SAC-20 buildings, perimeter steel moment resistant frame (SMRF) buildings
designed by consulting structural engineers for the Phase II of the SAC project, (FEMA-355C, 2000)
are selected as the sample buildings. Only one of the five-bay perimeter SMRFs representing half of
these buildings in the N-S direction are modelled (two dimensional). The effects of the gravity loads
are neglected in the analysis. Hysteretic material and displacement based element, which is a
distributed-plasticity displacement beam-column element is used to model the structures.

3.2. Earthquake records

In order to assess the accuracy of the WAMC in comparison to the other pushover procedures under
different ground motions, seven near fault ground motions were considered in this research. All
records are downloaded from the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) site,
(http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat). The earthquake records are summarized in the table 1.
Table 3.1. The earthquake records

Used name Record/Component HP (Hz) LP (Hz) PGA (g) PGV (cm/s) PGD(cm)
Chichi CHICHI/CHY080-V 0.03 50 0.724 49 27.82
Erzican ERZIKAN/ERZ-NS 0.1 Null 0.515 83.9 27.35
Kobe KOBE/KJM000 0.05 Null 0.821 81.3 17.68
Landers LANDERS/LCN275 0.08 60 0.721 97.6 70.31
Lomaperieta LOMAP/LGP000 0.1 Null 0.563 94.8 41.18
Northridge NORTHR/RRS228 Null Null 0.838 166.1 28.78
Tabas TABAS/TAB-LN 0.05 Null 0.836 97.8 36.92

3.3. Comparative assessment

The structural models are simulated in the OpenSees and then subjected to the different ground
motions listed in Table 3.1. The NTHA procedure is performed for each earthquake records and the
maximum responses of the structures are considered as the benchmark responses. Final responses of
the different pushover procedures are compared with the benchmark responses.

The accuracy of FAMC, MPA, M1 and the proposed WAMC procedures are evaluated in this study.
In all of these methods except the conventional pushover procedure based on the first mode, M1 the
first three modes are considered. The target displacement has been estimated through the maximum
inelastic displacement resulted from the nonlinear dynamic analysis of the equivalent SDOF systems.

3.4. Inter-storey drift prediction

To express the success of different pushover procedures, an error index is defined by Eqn. 3.1.
as presented by Lopez-Menjivar and Pinho (2004).

2
1 n
 ∆ i − NTHA − ∆ i − NSP 
Error∆ (%) = 100 ×
n
∑ 
i =1  ∆ i − NTHA
 (3.1)


Where, Δ i-NTHA is the peak inter-storey drift at a given level i, resulting from the NTHA procedure,
Δ i-NSP is the corresponding inter-storey drift resulted from the considered NSP procedure, and n is the
number of stories. Decreasing in the error index means that the responses of the nonlinear static
procedure are close to the NTHA responses.

The inter-storey drift profiles resulting from the different pushover procedures and the NTHA
procedure are compared for the SAC-9 and SAC-20 buildings subjected to different ground motions
respectively in Fig. 3.1 and Fig.3.2. For each considered pushover procedure, the average inter-storey
drifts error resulted from seven different ground motions are also presented in these figures.

The results obtained from this research validate the accuracy of the WAMC procedure and also
express that this methodology result in better prediction of the inter-story drift profiles in comparison
to the M1, MPA and FAMC in both SAC-9 and SAC-20 under the most of the ground motions. The
FAMC and MPA procedures usually overestimate the inter-story drift, especially the FAMC
methodology. While, the WAMC procedures underestimates the inter-story drift profile in most cases
but it is more accurate than the other considered methodologies.
Figure 3.1. SAC-9 building peak inter-story drift profiles resulted from the NTHA and different NSP methods
under the different ground motion and their corresponding average drift errors.
Figure 3.2. SAC-20 building peak inter-story drift profiles resulted from NTHA and different NSP methods
under the different ground motion and their corresponding average drift errors.
4. CONCLUSION

As a new nonlinear static procedure, a weighted adaptive modal combination (WAMC) method which
is based on the energy-concept is proposed. WAMC include the effects of the higher modes and
progressive changes in the vibration characteristics during the inelastic response. Also this method
considers the period elongation and the frequency content of a design or particular response spectra.
Moreover a new modal combination rule is used to combine the modal responses. For each mode the
absolute response is multiplied by the ratio of the corresponding effective mass to the effective mass
of the first mode and then combined with together using the direct algebraic addition.

The WAMC procedure is evaluated through the two nine and twenty story buildings under seven
ground motions. Furthermore this method compare with other pushover procedures. This study shows
that the modal pushover analysis (MPA) usually overestimate the inter-storey drift of the buildings and
it is a reliable method but the accuracy of the WAMC procedure is much better than the MPA in drift
prediction.

REFERENCES

ATC-40 (1996). Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Applied Technology Council, Redwood
City, California).
Antoniou S. and Pinho R. (2004). Advantages and limitations of adaptive and non-adaptive force-based pushover
procedures. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 8:4, 497-522.
Chopra, A. K. and Goel, R. K. (2002). A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for
buildings, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamic 31, 561-582.
FEMA-356 (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared by
American Society of Civil Engineers for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
FEMA-355C (2000). State of Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel Moment Frames Subject to
Earthquake Ground Shaking, prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Washington, DC.
Gupta, B. and Kunnath, S. K. (2000). Adaptive spectra-based pushover procedure for seismic evaluation of
structures, Earthquake Spectra 16:2, 367-391.
Hernandez-Montes, E., Kwon O-S. and Aschheim M.A. (2004). An energy-based formulation for first-and
multiple-mode nonlinear static (Pushover) analyses. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 8, 69-88.
Jan, T.S., Liu, M.W. and Kao, Y.C. (2004).An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the
seismic demands of high-rise buildings. Engineering Structures 26, 117-128.
Kalkan, E. and Kunnath, S.K. (2006). Adaptive modal combination procedure for nonlinear static analysis of
building structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 132:11, 1721-1731.
Kunnath, S.K. (2004). Identification of modal combination for nonlinear static analysis of building structures.
Computer-aided Civil Engineering 19, 246-259.
Lopez-Menjivar, M.A. and Pinho, R. (2004). A review of existing pushover methods for 2-D reinforced concrete
buildings. Rose School, Pavia, Italy.
Mazzoni, S., Mckenna, F., Scott, M.H. and Fenves, G.L. (2007). Open System for Earthquake Engineering
Simulation(Opensees) Command Language Manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, Univ. of
California.,Berkeley. ( http://opensees.berkeley.edu )
Moghadam, A.S. (2002). A pushover procedure for tall buildings. Twelfth European conference on earthquake
engineering.
Shakeri, K., Shayanfar, M.A. and Kabeyasawa, T. (2010). A storey shear-based adaptive pushover procedure for
estimating seismic demands of buildings. Engineering Structures 32:1, 174-183
Shakeri K, Shayanfar MA, Moghadam AS. (2007). An efficient method for optimum combination of modes
required for pushover analysis. Ninth Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Shakeri, K. and Mohebbi, M. (2010). Optimal combination for modal pushover analysis by using genetic
algorithm. World Academi of Science, Engineering and Technology. 61, 411-417.