Final Thesis

PERFORMANCE BASED ANALYSIS OF NEW AND EXISTING
R.C.C. BUILDINGS
SUBMITTED BY
SHAH MRUGESH DILIPKUMAR

090070720009
GUIDE BY
PROF. SUMANT B. PATEL
M.E Structure
Associate Professor, Structural Engg. Dept.,

B.V.M Engineering College
A Thesis Submitted to
Gujarat Technological University
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of Master of Engineering
in Structural Engineering
JUNE,2011
Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya Engineering College

Vallabh Vidhyanagar 388 120
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that research work embodied in this thesis entitled Performance
based analysis of new and existing R.C.C buildings, was carried out by Mr. Shah
Mrugesh Dilipkumar having Enrollment No. 090070720009 at Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidhyalaya (Engineering College) (007), Vallabh Vidyanagar, for partial
fulfillment of M.E. Structure degree to be awarded by Gujarat Technological
University. This research work has been carried out under my supervision and is to
my satisfaction.
Date: 13/06/2011
Place: B.V.M Engg. College
_______________
___________________
Supervisor
Principal
Prof. Sumant B. Patel
Dr. F.S.Umrigar
Associate Professor, Structure dept.,

B.V.M Engineering College,
B.V.M Engineering College,
Vallabh Vidhyanagar,
Vallabh Vidhyanagar,
II
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
based analysis of new and existing R.C.C buildings was carried out by Mr. Shah
fulfillment of M.E. degree to be awarded by Gujarat Technological University. He has
complied to the comments given by the Mid Semester Thesis Reviewer to my
satisfaction.
Date: 13/06/2011
_______________
___________________
Mrugesh D. Shah
Supervisor
(090070720009)
Prof. Sumant B. patel
PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE

based analysis of new and existing R.C.C buildings was carried out by Mr. Shah
fulfillment of M.E. degree to be awarded by Gujarat Technological University, has
been accepted and published for publication by the National Conference On Recent
Trends In Engineering And Technology, at Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya
during 13-14 May 2011.
Date: 13/06/2011
Place: B.V.M Engg. College\
__________________
__________________
Mrugesh D. Shah
Supervisor
(090070720009)

__________________
Principal
Dr. F.S.Umrigar
III
THESIS APPROVAL
This is to certify that work embodied in this work entitled Performance based
analysis of new and existing R.C.C buildings was carried out by Mr. Shah
Mahavidhyalaya (Engineering College) (007), Vallabh Vidyanagar, is approved for
award of the degree of M.E. Structure by Gujarat Technological University.
Date: / /2011
Examiner(s) :
____________________
_____________________
___________________
IV
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
I hereby certify that I am the sole author of this thesis and that neither any part
of this thesis nor the whole of the thesis has been submitted for a degree to any other
University or Institution.
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, my thesis does not infringe upon
anyones copyright nor violate any proprietary rights and that any ideas, techniques,
quotations, or any other material from the work of other people included in my thesis,
published or otherwise, are fully acknowledged in accordance with the standard
referencing practices.
I declare that this is a true copy of my thesis, including any final revisions, as
approved by my thesis review committee.
Date: 13/06/2011
_______________
Mrugesh D. Shah
Enrolment No. 090007072009
Verified by:
_______________
Supervisor
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I express my deep sense of gratitude and sincere thanks to my guide Prof. S. B. Patel,
Professor, Department of Structural Engineering, Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya
(Engineering College), Vallabh Vidhyanagar. I express my hearty thanks to him who,
right from the conceptualization of the problem to the finishing stage of the Major
Project part molding my work. From the very beginning of the thesis, his valuable
discussions and continuous reviews and suggestions helped me a lot during this study.
My sincere thanks to Dr. F. S. Umrigar, Principal, Birla Vishvakarma

Mahavidhyalaya(Engineering College). Dr. A. K. Verma, Head, Department of
Structural Engineering, Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya(Engineering College),
Vallabh Vidhyanagar. and also to other
faculty members of Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidhyalaya(Engineering College) for their blessing to commit my work in time.
I am also all staff members of Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya(Engineering

College) for their gentle support to me in every respect.
I am really thankful to my friends, who have been great supporters in my Major

Project work. And most importantly, I express my deep sense of gratitude to my
family, for their endless love and moral support that constantly encouraged me.
Many others helped me directly and indirectly, I also convey my thanks to them.
Mrugesh D. Shah
(Enroll No: 090070720009)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
CERTIFICATE PAGE
II
COMPLITION CERTIFICATE
III
PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE
III
THESIS APPROVAL
IV
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY PAGE
ACKNOLEDGMENTS
VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VII
LIST OF FIGURES
XII
LIST OF TABLES
XVIII
ABSTRACT
XX
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
1.2 Background
1.3 Objective of work
1.4 Scope of the work
1.5 Report outline
Chapter 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 General
2.2 Nonlinearity
2.3 Demand and Capacity
2.4 Analysis methods
2.5 Methods of obtaining performance point
13
2.6 Building performance
15
Chapter 3 - STATIC NONLINEAR PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
19
3.1 General
19
3.2 Static nonlinear pushover analysis
19
3.2.1 Introduction
19
VII
3.2.2 Need for push over analysis
20
3.2.3 Limitation of pushover analysis
20
3.2.4 Consideration
21
3.3 The Pushover Analysis Procedure
23
3.4 Capacity spectrum method
24
3.4.1 Capacity curve
24
3.4.2 Capacity spectrum
25
3.4.3 Demand curve
26
3.4.4 Demand spectrum
28
3.4.5 Performance point
29
3.4.6 Performance check
30
3.4.6.1 At expected maximum displacement
30
3.4.6.2 Geotechnical effect
31
3.4.6.3 Other consideration
32
Chapter 4 - SOFTWARE IMPLEMENTATION FOR PUSHOVER
33
ANALYSIS IN ETABS 9.7

4.1 Introduction
33
4.2 Basic steps
35
4.2.1 Create the model
35
4.2.2 Run static analysis
46
4.2.3 Design the structure
47
4.2.4 Pushover analysis
48
4.2.4.1 Define hinge properties
48
4.2.4.2 Define static push over cases
54
4.2.4.3 Run static nonlinear analysis
60
4.2.4.4 Display static pushover curve
60
4.2.4.5 Display deformed shape
63
4.2.4.6 Evaluating of building at performance point
63
4.3 Example
63
4.3.1 Analysis and Design of 3d frame
63
4.3.2 Comparison of total DL and LL
64
65
VIII
4.3.3 Results and Discussion
Chapter 5 - EFFECT OF PLASTIC HINGE PROPERTIES ON PUSHOVER
69
ANALYSIS
5.1 Introduction
69
5.2 Moment-Curvature relationship
69
5.3 Determination of Moment, Curvature and Rotation
72
5.4 Plastic hinge zones
74
5.4.1 Types of Plastic Hinges
74
5.4.2 Plastic Hinge Length
75
5.5 Analysis and Design of 3D frame
77
5.6 Result and Discussion
79
Chapter 6 - ANALYSIS OF NEW R.C.C. BUILDING WITH DIFFERENT
83
CONFIGURATION
6.1 Introduction
83
6.2 List of Models of bare frame, infill as membrane, and infill as strut
83
6.3 Modeling of G+4 building
84
6.3.1 G+4 model 44 bays without infill
85
6.3.2 G+4 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall with GF as soft story
86
6.3.3 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut with GF as soft story
87
6.3.4 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut without soft story
88
89
6.3.6 G+4 model 33 bays with infill membrane wall
89
89
6.3.8 G+4 model 33 bays with infill as equivalent strut
89
89
89
6.3.11 G+4 model 22 bays with infill as equivalent strut with GF as soft
89
story
89
89
6.3.13 G+4 model 44 bays without infill (2m bays)
90
IX
6.3.14 G+4 model 44 bays without infill (Square Column)
90
6.3.15 G+4 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall (Square Column)
90
6.3.16 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut (Square Column)
91
6.4 Modeling of G+10 building
91
92
92
92
93
93
93
93
story
93
93

94
94
story
94
94
94
95
6.4.15 G+10 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall ( Square Column)
95
6.4.16 G+10 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut (Square Column)
96
6.5 Static Linear, Dynamic and Response Spectrum Analysis and Design.
96
6.6 Frame Nonlinear Hinge Property
99
6.7 Static Nonlinear Cases
99
6.8 Results and discussion
99
6.8.1 G+4 Building model
102
6.8.1.1 G+4 model 44 bays without infill
104
6.8.1.2 G+4 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall GF as soft story
105
6.8.1.3 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut GF as soft story
107
6.8.1.4 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut
109
6.8.1.5 Result for G+4 for PUSH-X and PUSH-Y
111
112
X
113
115
6.8.2.3 G+10 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut

Chapter - 7 ANALYSIS OF NEW R.C.C. BUILDING WITH UNIFORM
117
LOCATION AND QUANTITY OF INFILL PANELS

7.1 Introduction
117
7.2 List of Building for parametric study of strut
117
7.3 Modeling of buildings
117
7.4 Results and discussion
119
7.4.1 Yielding
119
7.4.2 Capacity curves and Performance levels
129
Chapter 8 - ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BUILDING
131
8.1 Introduction
131
8.2 Evaluating Structural details of an existing building
131
8.3 Modeling of an Existing Building
134
8.4 Assigning Frame Nonlinear Hinge Property
136
8.5. Nonlinear Static Load Cases & Analysis of Existing building
136
8.6 Results and Discussion
136
8.6.1 Existing Building without infill walls
136
8.6.2 Existing Building with infills as equivalent strut.
139
Chapter 9 - CONCLUSION AND SCOPE O F FUTURE WORK
143
References
146
XI
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig.
Description
Pg.
No
No
2.1
Geometric Nonlinearity , P- Effect
2.2
Capacity curve and Capacity spectrum
2.3
Demand curve and Demand spectrum
2.4
Performance point
2.5
Obtaining performance point by adding strength to system
14
2.6
Obtaining performance point by enhancing ductility to system
14
2.7
Obtaining performance point by adding damping or isolation to
15
system
2.8
Performance and Structural deformation demand for ductile structure
17
2.9
Performance and Structural deformation demand for non ductile
18
structure
3.1
Capacity curve
24
3.2
Capacity spectrum
26
3.3
Demand curve (Traditional spectrum)
27
3.4
Construction of a 5% damped elastic response spectrum
27
3.5
Reduced response spectrum
28
3.6
Capacity spectrum in Traditional and ADRS formats
28
3.7
Performance point
29
3.8
Capacity spectrum superimposed over response spectra in traditional
29
and ADRS formats

3.9
Shallow foundation model
31
4.1
New Model Initialization form
36
4.2
Building Plan Grid System and Story Data Definition form
36
4.3
Concrete Frame Design Preferences form
37
4.4
Define Materials form
37
4.5
Material Property Data Form
38
XII
4.6
Define Frame Properties form
38
4.7
Rectangular Section form
39
4.8
SD Section Data form
39
4.9
CSISD form
40
4.10
CSISD form with Shape Properties-Solid form
40
4.11
CSISD form with Edge Reinforcing form
41
4.12
Define Wall/Slab/Deck Section form
41
4.13
Slab Section form
42
4.14
Create Lines in Region or at click form
42
4.15
Create Column in Region or at click form
42
4.16
Draw Rectangle Areas form
43
4.17
Define Static load cases Names form
44
4.18
IS 1893:2002 Seismic loading form
44
4.19
Shell/Area loads assigning form
45
4.20
Uniform Surface loads form
45
4.21
Analysis Option form
46
4.22
Moment 3-3 Diagram form
47
4.23
Start Design/Check of Structure form
48
4.24
Define Frame Hinge Properties form
49
4.25
Force V/s Deformation curve
50
4.25a
Assign Frame Hinges (Pushover) form for BEAM
52
4.26
Assign Frame Hinges (Pushover) form for COLUMN
52
4.27
Define Frame Hinges (Pushover) form
53
4.28
Frame Hinges Property Data form
53
4.29
3-D View of generated hinges
54
4.30
Define Static Nonlinear Cases form
55
4.31
Static Nonlinear Case Data PUSH1
55
4.32
56
4.33
Run Static Non Linear analysis
60
4.34
Display static pushover curve
61
4.35
Capacity Spectrum
61
4.36
Deformed shape form
63
4.37
Deformed shape form
63
XIII
4.38
Plan and Elevation of building
64
4.39
Reinforcement (mm2) detailing in Element
66
4.40
Pushover Curve as per this work and literature (PUSH-2)
66
4.41
Capacity Spectrum curve as per this work and literature (PUSH-2)
68
5.1
Deformation of a flexural member
70
5.2
Moment Curvature relationships for reinforced concrete beam
71
section
5.3
Doubly reinforced beam section with flexure
72
5.4
Stress and strain distribution for same compressive force in concrete
73
when steel reaches yield stress

5.5
Beam hinge pattern
75
5.6
Locations of Potential plastic hinges where special detailing is
76
required
5.7
Beams with relocated plastic hinges
76
5.8
3D Frame of building
77
5.9
Reinforcement (mm2) detailing in Element
77
5.10
Moment curvature relationship
78
5.11
Moment rotation relationship
78
5.12
Moment hinges in ETABS
79
5.13
Hinge formation at yielding point
80
5.14
Hinge formation at near to collapse point
81
5.15
Tabular format of pushover curve considering default hinge
82
properties
5.16
Tabular format of pushover curve considering user defined hinge
85
properties
6.1
Plan for 44 bays G+4 Storey
85
6.2
Elevation of G+4 bare frame model of 44 bays
86
6.3
G+4 model with infill as membrane wall of 44 bays
87
6.4
G+4 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays
88
6.5
G+4 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays without soft story
88
6.6
G+10 model with infill as membrane wall of 44 bays
91
6.7
G+10 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays
92
6.8
G+10 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays without soft story
93
XIV
6.9
Response Spectrum Curve of IS 1893 2002 (part I)
95
6.10
Nonlinear hinges in beams, columns and diagonal strut
96
6.10a
97
6.10b
98
6.10c
98
6.11
Pushover Curve for G+4 bare frame 44 bays (PUSH-2)
99
6.12
Capacity Spectrum Curve for G+4 bare frame 44 bays (PUSH-2)
100
6.13
Hinge formation at performance point for G+4 bare frame (PUSH-2)
101
6.14
Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve for G+4 with wall
102
(PUSH-2)
6.15
Hinge Formation G+4 with wall at performance point (PUSH-2)
103
6.16
Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve of G+4 with
104
equivalent strut (PUSH-2)

6.17
Hinge formation G+4 with strut at performance point (PUSH-2)
105
6.18
Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve of G+4 with
106
equivalent strut (PUSH-2)

6.19
Hinge formation G+4 with strut at performance point
107
6.20
Pushover Curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve of G+10 without infill
109
(PUSH-2)
6.21
Hinge formation G+10 without infill at performance point
111
6.22
Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum curve of G+10 with wall
112
(PUSH-2)
6.23
Hinge formation G+10 with infill as membrane at performance point
113
(PUSH-2)
6.24
Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum curve of G+10 with strut
113
(PUSH-2)
6.25
Hinge formation G+10 with strut at performance point
114
7.1
Bare Frame (0% strut)
118
7.2
Infill Strut in first and last bay
118
7.3
Infill Strut in first and third
118
7.4
Infill Strut in second and third
118
7.5
Infill Strut in Second and fourth
119
7.6
Infill Strut (100% strut)
119
XV
7.7
Bare Frame(0%)
119
7.8
Infill Strut(50%)
119
7.9
Infill Strut (100%)
119
7.10
Deflected shape at performance point and ultimate point in X
121
direction for G+4 storied bldg. with 0% Infill (outer frame)

7.11
121
direction for G+4 storied bldg. with 0% Infill(Inner frame)

7.12
122
7.13
122

7.14
123
7.15
123

7.16
124
7.17
124

7.18
125
7.19
125

7.20
126
7.21
126

7.22
Deflected shape at performance point in X direction for G+10 storied
127
bldg. with 0% Infill (Inner frame)

7.23
Deflected shape at ultimate point in X direction for G+10 storied
127

7.24

XVI
128
7.25
128
bldg. with 50% Infill(Inner frame)

7.26
129

7.27
129

7.28
Capacity curves of G+4 storied building in X Direction
130
7.29
Capacity curves of G+10 storied building in X Direction
130
8.1
Column location
132
8.2
Beam location
133
8.3a
Plan of existing building
135
8.3b
3D model of existing building
135
8.4
Model having equivalent Strut
135
8.5a
Pushover curve for X-dirn.
137
8.5b
Pushover curve for Y-dirn.
137
8.6a
Capacity Spectrum Curve X-dirn.
137
8.6b
Capacity Spectrum Curve Y-dirn.
137
8.7
Hinge formation Existing building without strut X-dirn. at
139
performance point
8.8
Hinge formation Existing building without strut Y-dirn. At
139
performance point
8.9a
Pushover curve for X-dirn.
140
8.9b
Pushover curve for Y-dirn.
140
8.10a
Capacity Spectrum Curve X-dirn.
140
8.10b
Capacity Spectrum Curve Y-dirn.
140
8.11
Hinge formation Existing building with strut X-dirn. at performance
142
point
8.11
Hinge formation Existing building with strut Y-dirn. at performance

point
XVII
142
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Description
Pg
No.
No
2.1
Target Building Performance Levels and Ranges
16
3.1
Lateral drifts limits
30
4.1
Tabular format of pushover curve as per this work (PUSH-2)
67
4.2
Tabular format of pushover curve as per literature (PUSH-2)
67
6.1
Model for G+4 and G+10
83
6.2
Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab
85
6.3
Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab (Square
90
Column)
6.4
Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab for G+10
91
6.5
Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab (Square
94
Column) for G+10

6.6
Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 bare frame 44 bays
100
(PUSH-2)
6.7
Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 with membrane wall
103
6.8
Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 with Strut
104
6.9
106
6.10
Result for G+4 for PUSH-X and PUSH-Y
107
6.11
Tabular format of pushover curve for G+10 bare frame 44 bays
110
(PUSH-2)
6.12
Tabular format of pushover curve for G+10 with membrane wall
112
6.13
114
6.14
Result for G+10 for PUSH-X and PUSH-Y
115
7.1
Buildings for G+4 and G+10
117
8.1
Column Schedule
131
8.2
Beam Schedule
132
8.3
Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building without
137
strut in X-dirn.
XVIII
8.4
Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building without
138
strut in Y-dirn.
8.5
Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building with strut
141
in X-dirn.
8.6
Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building with strut

in Y-dirn.
XIX
141
ABSTRACT
Performance Based Seismic Engineering is the modern approach to
earthquake resistant design. It is an attempt to predict the buildings with predictable
seismic performance.
The main objective of study is to perform performance based analysis i.e. to

obtain performance levels of buildings for the future earthquake. Also understand its
collapse mechanism in case of extensive damage also to study the influence of brick
masonry infill walls and the structural behaviour including yield patterns of RC
framed buildings.
Two kinds of new R.C.C. buildings were taken for analysis: G+4 and G+10 to
cover the broader spectrum of low rise & high rise building construction. Different
modeling issues were incorporated through various models for G+4 and G+10 R.C.C.
building. The analysis was performed on new as well as existing R.C.C. buildings and
the performance of buildings in future earthquake was obtained. The software used
for performing Nonlinear Static Analysis (Pushover Analysis) is ETABS 9.7.
The results of push analysis are compared using default hinge properties as per
ATC 40 and user defined hinge properties as per stress strain relationship. In practice,
ATC 40 based default hinge properties are used due to convenience and simplicity.
But the observation clearly show that the user defined hinge model is better than the
default hinge model in reflecting nonlinear behavior compatible with the element
properties.
G+4 and G+10 story building model without infill has an overall performance
in Life Safety to Collapse Prevention.
G+4 and G+10 story building model with infill as membrane wall has an
overall performance in Immediate Occupancy level.
G+4 and G+10 story building model with infill as equivalent strut has an
overall performance in Collapse Prevention level.
XX
However, for building models with equivalent strut shown axial hinges
formation in strut because of brittle property assigned to strut members.
In case of building models without infills at GF, soft storey effect has been
seen remarkably.
It has been observed that for an existing building overall performance is

largely depends on the modeling of an existing building.
XXI
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The Buildings, which appeared to be strong enough, may crumble like houses
of cards during earthquake and deficiencies may be exposed. Experience gain from
the earthquake of Bhuj, 2001 demonstrates that the most of buildings collapsed were
found deficient to meet the requirements of the present day codes. In last decade, four
devastating earthquakes of world have been occurred in India, and low to mild
intensities earthquakes shake our land frequently. Due to wrong construction practices
and ignorance for earthquake resistant design of buildings in our country, most of the
existing buildings are vulnerable to future earthquakes.
In the simplest case, seismic design can be viewed as a two-step process. The
first, and usually most important one, is the conception of an effective structural
system that needs to be configured with due regard to all-important seismic
performance objectives, ranging from serviceability considerations to life safety and
collapse prevention. This step comprises the art of seismic engineering, since no rigid
rules can, or should, be imposed on the engineer's creativity to devise a system that
not only fulfills seismic performance objectives, but also pays tribute to functional
and economic constraints imposed by the owner, the architect, and other professionals
involved in the design and construction of a building. By default, this process of
creation is based on judgment, experience, and understanding of seismic behaviour,
rather than rigorous mathematical formulations. Rules of thumb for strength and
stiffness targets, based on the fundamental knowledge of ground motion and elastic
and inelastic dynamic response characteristics, should suffice to configure and
roughly size an effective structural system.
The second step of the design process should involve a demand/ capacity
evaluation at all important performance levels, which requires identification of
important capacity parameters and prescription of acceptable values of these
parameters, as well as the prediction of the demands imposed by ground motions.
Suitable capacity parameters and their acceptable values, as well as suitable methods
for demand prediction will depend on the performance level to be evaluated.
In light of these facts, it is imperative to seismically evaluate the existing
building with the present day knowledge to avoid the major destruction in the future
earthquakes. The Buildings found to be seismically deficient should be retrofitted/

strengthened.
Evaluation of building is required at two stages (1) Before the retrofitting, to
identify the weakness of the building to be strengthened, and (2) After the retrofitting,
to estimate the adequacy and effectiveness of retrofit.
1.2 BACKGROUND
Once the earthquake hits, its too late to protect your homes and belongings.
But there are ways to limit future earthquake damage. The causalities from the
earthquakes suffered during the last decade has made it necessary to control and
access buildings that have been constructed without any regard to appropriate seismic
design characteristics. Thus, in recent years there has been an extensive examination
of performance of structures during an earthquake using performance based
techniques. The most used method to evaluate performance of structures is Nonlinear
Static Analysis widely known as Pushover Analysis.
Performance based seismic engineering is the modern approach to earthquake
resistant design. The promise of performance-based analysis is to produce structures
with predictable seismic performance. Performance based engineering is not new.
Automobiles, Airplanes, and turbines have been designed and manufactured using this
approach for many decades. But the applications of the same to the buildings were
limited. Generally in such applications one of more full-scale prototypes of the
structure are built and subjected to extensive testing. The design and manufacturing
process is then revised to incorporate the lessons learned from the experimental
evaluations. What makes performance-based analysis of buildings different is that,
each building designed by this process is virtually unique and the experience obtained
is not directly transferable to buildings of other type, size, and performance
objectives. In order to utilize performance-based analysis effectively and intelligently,
one needs to be aware of the uncertainties involved in both structural performance and
seismic hazard estimations.
Every structural system is designed to have a seismic capacity that exceeds the
anticipated seismic demand. A key requirement of any meaningful performance based
analysis is the ability to assess seismic demands and capacities with a reasonable
degree of certainty.
1.3
OBJECTIVE OF WORK
As mentioned above, each building needs to be accessed for its seismic
capacity and characteristic performance of building is required to understood. Hence,

performance based analysis is essential for the buildings to understand its behavior
and response during earthquake.
The objectives of the present study are as follows:1. The main objective of study is to perform performance based analysis i.e. to
obtain performance levels of buildings for the future earthquake. Also

understand its collapse mechanism in case of extensive damage.
2.
To study the influence of brick masonry (BM) infill walls and the structural
behaviour including yield patterns of RC framed buildings.
3.
In addition to above, the building is to be assessed for additional strength

requirement. The strength to the building can be imparted by appropriate
amount of retrofitting and restrengthening.
Because of the involvement of large set of parameters, manual calculations is
very complex and unmanageable, and hence, use of established software is

essential. The software like ETABS 9.7 Nonlinear, which is capable of performing
performance based analysis is employed.
1.4
SCOPE OF THE WORK

The scope of work include broadly two parts of performance based analysis,
firstly analysis of a new building which has to met specific performance level in
future earthquake and secondly, analysis and assessment of an existing building
performance level in future earthquake.
In view to fulfill the above outlined objective of work, following work was defined.
Selection of an appropriate structural layout for new as well as an existing
R.C.C. building.
Carryout Static Nonlinear Analysis (Pushover Analysis) for R.C.C. building.
Generate pushover curve (Base Shear-Roof Displacement) for R.C.C.
building.
Obtain Demand curve by converting Response Spectrum into ADRS
(Acceleration Displacement Response Spectrum) format.
Superposition of Capacity curve and Demand Curve to obtain performance

point for a specific level of earthquake.
Evaluation of building performance with reference to performance point.
Comparison of hinge properties as per IS code and ATC 40.
Understanding the collapse mechanism of different structural members of an
R.C.C. building.
Suggesting an appropriate measure for restrengthening or retrofitting of an
R.C.C. Building.
1.5
REPORT OUTLLINE
The contents of major project are divided in to various chapters as follows;
Chapter 1 summarized the introductory part. It also includes the objectives of
study and scope of work.

The literature review is presented in Chapter 2. This provides the specific
points from technical papers, books, journals and reports by Applied Technical
Council (ATC-40) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA-273). This
chapter provides the understanding and importance of performance based design of
structures.
Chapter 3 is the fundamentals of Nonlinear Static Analysis, which includes
the, procedure for performing Pushover analysis and Evaluating, Performance point.
Chapter 4 contains the detail study of software and its implementations for
Nonlinear Static Analysis. One 3D frame example is considered.
Effects of hinge properties on nonlinear analysis are covered in Chapter 5.
Theoretical procedure for finding moment rotation relationship is covered in this
chapter. One 3D frame example is considered for understanding the role of plastic
hinge properties in pushover analysis
Chapter 6 contains the pushover analysis of new R.C.C. building with
different models addressing modeling issues. Results are obtained in form of capacity,
demand, performance point, performance level, Hinge formation pattern at
performance point.
Chapter 7 contains the pushover analysis of new R.C.C. building with uniform
infills. Chapter 8 includes analysis of an existing R.C.C. building.
Finally, chapter 9 is the Conclusion and Further Scope of work. References are
included in the end of the thesis.
4
CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 GENRAL
Literature survey is essential to review the work done in the area of
performance based engineering. To take up the specific need to perform the analysis,
the literature like technical papers, journals and books need to be referred. The prime
important in the review was to understand the analysis and different concepts of
performance based analysis.
2.2 NONLINEARITY
As it is required to know the ultimate capacity of building, the analysis is
essential to be carried out up to the plastic zone. The nonlinearities in RCC members
can be geometric as well as material. Both of these become more important at higher
deformations.
A.J. Carr and P.J. Moss (1991)[P1] describes Geometric nonlinearity as a
change in the elastic load-deformation characteristics of the structure caused by the
change in the structural shape due to large deformation. It appears when the
deflections of the structure are large enough to cause significant changes in the
geometry of the structure, requiring the equilibrium equations to be formulated for the
deformed configuration. These geometric nonlinearities can become significant in
frames, which are displaced laterally due to seismic movements or by wind loads. The
interaction between the gravity loads induced axial forces in the columns and the
lateral displacements give rise to moments and forces in addition to those determined
in a common first order analysis. This additional effect is commonly referred as Pdelta effects, where P refers to the gravity loading and delta the lateral
displacements.
Fig.2.1 Geometric Nonlinearity

2.3 DEMAND AND CAPACITY
ATC 40[B1] document emphasizes the use of available simplified nonlinear
static procedures like the capacity spectrum method, the displacement coefficient
method and secant method and focused on the capacity spectrum method (CSM)
which uses the intersection of capacity (pushover) curve and a reduced response
spectrum to estimate maximum displacement. This method requires determination of
three primary elements: This method requires determination of three primary
elements: capacity, demand and performance, Each of these element is briefly
discussed below.
Capacity:
The overall capacity of a structure depends on the strength and deformation
capacities of the individual components of the structure. In order to determine
capacities beyond the elastic limits, some form of nonlinear analysis, such as the
pushover procedure, is required. This procedure uses a series of sequential elastic
analysis, superimposed to approximate a force displacement capacity diagram of the
overall structure. The mathematical model of the structure is modified to account for
reduced resistance of yielding components.
Fig.2.2 Capacity curve and Capacity spectrum

A lateral force distribution is again applied until additional components yield.
This process is continued until the structure become unstable or until a predetermined
limit is reached.
Demand:
Ground
motion during an earthquake
produce complex horizontal
displacement patterns in the structures. It is impractical to trace this lateral

displacement at each time-step to determine the structural design parameters. The
traditional design methods use equivalent lateral forces to represent the design
condition. For nonlinear methods it is easier and more direct to use a set of lateral
displacements as the design condition. For a given structure and ground motion, the
displacement demand is an estimate of the maximum expected response of the
building during the ground motion.
Fig.2.3 Demand curve and Demand spectrum
Performance:
Once, a capacity curve and demand displacement, are defined, a performance
check can be done. A performance check verifies that structural and nonstructural
components are not damaged beyond the acceptable limits of the performance
objective for the forces and displacements implied by the displacement demand.
Fig.2.4 Performance point
2.4 ANALYSIS METHODS

M J N Priestley[P2] has given two methods which are N2 method and direct
displacement-based design. In N2 method, an estimate of seismic displacement
demand is found by response spectrum analysis of a single degree of freedom bilinear
mode, representing the first elastic mode of the structure. This displacement demand
is compared with the results of pushover analysis of a multi degree of freedom
representation of the structure. The displacement-based design is the forced based
approach with the addition of a displacement check to ensure that the acceptable
performance is achieved in the design earthquake.
V.K.R. Kodur, M.A. Erki, and J.H.P. Quenneville (1995)[P3] gives simple
analytical procedure, which can be used by practicing engineers, for the seismic
design of masonry-infilled frames is presented. The analysis procedure, based on the
experimental and analytical studies reported in the literature, accounts for the effect of
infill in all three stages, namely, in computing seismic loading, in predicting response
of the infilled frame, and in determining the strength of the infilled frame. The
behavior of an infilled frame is dependent on the properties of frame and infill; hence,
the response of such frames should be based on overall frame to infill composite
action rather than on isolated bare frame behavior. The proposed analytical procedure
can be implemented in the normal course of design and uses readily available
computational tools.
As per Krawinkler and Senevirantnas (1998) [P4] opinion the push over
analysis could be implemented for all structures, but it should be completed with other
evaluation procedure if higher mode effects were judged to be important. No unique
criterion could be establish for the condition, since the importance of higher mode
effects depends on the number of stories as well as on the peak(s) and plateau(s) of
the design spectrum. Examples for additional evaluation procedures were, in order of
preference, inelastic dynamic analysis with a representative suit of ground motions
and elastic dynamic analysis using the unreduced design spectrum and suitable modal
combination procedure. The latter procedure would provide estimates of elastic
demand ratio that needed to be compared to acceptable values.
Ashraf Habibullah (1998)[P5] has presented the steps used in performing a
pushover analysis of a simple three-dimensional building. SAP2000, a state-of-the-art,
general purpose, three-dimensional structural analysis program, is used as a tool for
performing the pushover. The following steps are included in the pushover analysis.
Step 1 through 4 discuss creating the computer model, step 5 runs the analysis, and
steps 6 through 10 review the pushover analysis results.
1. Creating the basic computer model (without the pushover data) in the usual
manner.
2. Define properties and acceptance criteria for the pushover hinges. The program
includes several built-in default hinge properties that are based on average values
from ATC-40 for concrete members and average values from FEMA-273 for steel
members. These built in properties can be useful for preliminary analyses, but user
defined properties are recommended for final analyses.
3. Locate the pushover hinges on the model by selecting one or more frame members
and assigning them one or more hinge properties and hinge locations.
4. Define the pushover load cases. In SAP2000 more than one pushover load case can
be run in the same analysis. Also a pushover load case can start from the final
conditions of another pushover load case that was previously run in the same analysis.
Typically the first pushover load case is used to apply gravity load and then
subsequent lateral pushover load cases are specified to start from the final conditions
of the gravity pushover. Pushover load cases can be force controlled, that is, pushed to
a certain defined force level, or they can be displacement controlled, that is, pushed to
a specified displacement. Typically a gravity load pushover is force controlled and
lateral pushovers are displacement controlled. SAP2000 allows the distribution of
lateral force used in the pushover to be based on a uniform acceleration in a specified
direction, a specified mode shape, or a user-defined static load case.
5. Run the basic static analysis and, if desired, dynamic analysis. Then run the static
nonlinear pushover analysis.
6. Display the pushover curve and the table which gives the coordinates of each step
of the pushover curve and summarizes the number of hinges in each state(for
example, between IO and LS, or between D and E).
7. Review the pushover displaced shape and sequence of hinge formation on a stepby-step basis. Hinges appear when they yield and are color coded based on their state.
Paulo B. Loureno, Rita C. Alvarenga, Roberto M. Silva (2005)[P6] states
that masonry infills is an issue that has attracted the attention of several researchers in
the past, both from the experimental and analytical points of view. Nevertheless, the
results are often questionable due to the large variability of masonry properties, the
limited number of tests carried out and the large number of influencing factors. paper
addresses this limitation by using numerical analysis as a simulation of an
experimental laboratory, and by performing a sensitivity analysis about the influence
of the different influence factors. The modelling approach has been validated using
the experimental results of two masonry walls subjected to horizontal loading. The
parametric study subsequently carried out allowed to propose a strut-and-tie model
that provides a novel simplified expression for the failure of infill walls belonging to
frames subjected to horizontal loading. The contribution of masonry panels for
stiffness and strength of masonry infilled frames is significant. Nevertheless, their
favourable effect is usually not taken into account because masonry partitions walls
are assumed non-structural and reliable design tools are lacking. From the parametric
10
study, a simplified model able to represent the collapse of masonry infills was
proposed. The model is based on a decomposition of the usual diagonal strut in
multiple struts and one tie. The proposed expressions for diagonal cracking and corner
crushing are then compared with the parametric study and experimental results
available in the literature, showing good agreement. The proposed tool is therefore a
simple and useful approach for the design of masonry infilled panels.
Shuraim , A. Charif (2007)[P7] use the nonlinear static analytical procedure
(Pushover) as introduced by ATC-40 was applied for the evaluation of existing design
of a reinforced concrete frame, in order to examine the applicability of the pushover
for evaluating design of new buildings, order to examine the applicability of the
pushover for evaluating design of new buildings. Potential structural deficiencies in
the frame were assessed by the code seismic-resistant design and pushover
approaches, for the sake of comparison. In the first approach, the potential
deficiencies were determined by redesigning under one selected seismic combination
in order to show which members would require additional reinforcement. In the
second approach, a pushover analysis was conducted to assess the seismic
performance of the frame and detect the locations of the plastic hinges.
Conclusion In the first method the design was evaluated by redesigning under one
selected seismic combination in order to show which members would require
additional reinforcement. It was shown that most columns required significant
additional reinforcement, indicating their vulnerability if subjected to seismic forces.
On the other hand, the nonlinear pushover procedure shows that the frame is capable
of withstanding the presumed seismic force with some significant yielding at all
beams and one column. Vulnerability locations from the two procedures are
significantly different.
A. Kadid and A. Boumrkik (2008)[P8] have evaluated the performance of
framed buildings under future expected earthquake by conducting non linear static
pushover analysis. To achieve this objective, three framed buildings with 5,8 and 12
stories respectively were analyzed. The results obtain from the study show that
properly designed frames will perform well under seismic loads. Following were
some of the conclusions drawn from the analysis:
11
- The pushover analysis is a relatively simple way to explore the non linear behaviour
of buildings
- The behaviour of properly detailed reinforced concrete frame building is adequate as
indicated by the intersection of the demand and capacity curves and the distribution of
hinges in the beams and the columns. Most of the hinges developed in the beams and
few in the columns but with limited damage
- The causes of failure of reinforced concrete during the Boumerdes earthquake may
be attributed to the quality of the materials of the used and also to the fact that most of
buildings constructed in Algeria are of strong beam and weak column type and not to
the intrinsic behaviour of framed structures.
- The results obtained in terms of demand, capacity and plastic hinges gave an insight
into the real behaviour of structures.
V.G. Pereira1, R.C. Barros, M.T. Csar (2009)[P9] use three commercial
software packages (SAP 2000, Seismo Struck and MIDAS/CIVIL) universally used in
the design of civil engineering structures, are applied on a parametric study of
pushover analyses of a RC frame of an office building under a few evaluative phases.
In order to represent the influence of the masonry infill panels the equivalent tie
method is used. The pushover analyses were performed using three softwares, two
based on concentrated plastic hinges (SAP 2000 and MIDAS/CIVIL) and another
based on distributed hinges (Seismo Struck). Confronting the capacity curves
obtained by all of them, it was found that the final level of all the pushover curves
become close together as the parametric study progresses. There is greater stiffness in
the structure so that the top displacements are smaller. It was also observed that the
curves obtained by uniform and modal distribution are close enough comparing to the
triangular one.
2.5 METHODS OF OBTAINING PERFORMANCE POINT

No building can be pushed to eternity without failure. Performance point is
where the Seismic Capacity and the Seismic Demand curves meet. If the performance
point exists and damage state at that point is acceptable, the building satisfies the
push-over criterion. If not, the building is required to alter to satisfy the pushover
criteria.
12
According to ATC 40, the location of performance point must satisfy two
relationships:
1. The point must lie on the capacity spectrum curve in order to represent the structure
at a given displacement, and
2. The point must lie on a spectral demand curve, reduced from the elastic, 5 percent
damped design spectrum that represents the nonlinear demand at the same structural
displacement.
ATC 40 considers the determination of performance point, a trial and error
method that searches for satisfaction of the above two specified criteria.
There are three methods of obtaining performance point given in ATC-40.
They are: Procedure A, Procedure B, Procedure C
Procedure A is more transparent and most direct application of the
methodology. It is truly iterative, but is formula based and easily can be programmed
into a spreadsheet. It is more an analytical method than a graphical method. It is the
best method for beginners as it is most direct and easiest to understand.
Procedure B is also an analytical method but is simpler than Procedure A.
simplification is introduced in the bilinear modeling of the capacity curve that enables
a relatively direct solution for the performance point with little iteration. It assumes
that not only the initial slope of bilinear representation of capacity curve remains
constant, but also the post yield slope remains constant.
Procedure C is graphical method and is most convenient for hand analysis. It
is not particularly convenient for spreadsheet programming. It is the least transparent
application of the methodology.
Farzed Naeim (2001)[W1] gives some solution if the performance point
doesnt exist. There are three solutions.
Add Strength or Stiffness or both to the building: As shown in fig.2.5 one of the
reasons for not getting performance point is that the demand is more and capacity is
less. Adding strength or stiffness to the building raises the capacity of the building
and subsequently the capacity curve of the building which intersects the demand
curve.
13
Fig. 2.5 Obtaining performance point by adding strength to system

Enhance System Ductility: Enhancing ductility in the building will increase the
capacity of building to resist more loads in nonlinear range. As shown in Fig. 2.6 the
capacity spectrum of this building will be elongated as it will be able to deform more
under the constant load.
Fig. 2.6 Obtaining performance point by enhancing ductility to system

Reduce Seismic Demand by adding Damping or Isolation: Adding damping will
reduce the demand as there will be more energy dissipation. This will bring down the
demand curve as shown in Fig. 2.7.
14
Fig. 2.7 Obtaining performance point by adding damping or isolation to system

2.6 BUILDING PERFORMANCE
ATC 40 also gives guidelines regarding Performance Objectives. Performance
Objective specifies the desired seismic performance of the building. It includes
consideration of damage states for several levels of ground motion. Performance level
describes a limiting damage condition which may be considered satisfactory for a
given building and a given ground motion. Target performance level is specified
independently. Structural performance levels are given names and number
designations while nonstructural performance levels are given names and letter
designations.
Performance of building can be evaluated by combination of evaluation of
Structural performance and Nonstructural performance. Farzed Naeim[W1] has
describes this performance levels in brief.
Structural performance levels are defined as:
1. Immediate Occupancy (SP-1): limited structural damage with the basic vertical and
lateral force resisting system retaining most of their pre-earthquake characteristics and
capacities.
2. Damage Control (SP-2): a placeholder for a state of damage somewhere between
Immediate Occupancy and Life Safety.
3. Life Safety (SP-3): significant damage with some margin against total or partial
collapse. Injuries may occur with the risk of life-threatening injury being low. Repair
may not be economically feasible.
15
4. Limited Safety (SP-4): a placeholder for a state of damage somewhere between

Life Safety and Structural Stability.
5. Structural Stability (SP-5): substantial structural damage in which the structural
system is on the verge of experiencing partial or total collapse. Significant risk of
injury exists. Repair may not be technically or economically feasible.
6. Not considered (SP-6): placeholder for situations where only non-structural seismic
evaluation or retrofit is performed.
Non-Structural performance levels are defined as:
1. Operational (NP-A): non-structural elements are generally in place and functional.
Back-up systems for failure of external utilities, communications and transportation
have been provided.
2. Immediate Occupancy (NP-B): non-structural elements are generally in place but
may not be functional. No back-up systems for failure of external utilities are
provided.
3. Life Safety (NP-C): considerable damage to non-structural components and
systems but no collapse of heavy items. Secondary hazards such as breaks in highpressure, toxic or fire suppression piping should not be present.
4. Reduced Hazards (NP-D): extensive damage to non-structural components but
should not include collapse of large and heavy items that can cause significant injury
to groups of people.
5. Not considered (NP-E): non-structural elements, other than those that have an
effect on structural response, are not evaluated.
Table 2.1 shows the Target Building Performance Levels and Ranges
16
Performance Objectives given by FEMA 302[B3], three acceptable

performance levels are established: 1) Immediate Occupancy, 2) Life Safety, and 3)
Collapse prevention as described in above context. The three performance levels are
combined with the two design ground motions to define a performance objective for
each of the four seismic use groups. Performance Objective Life Safety is the basic
objective for Seismic Use Group I (Standard Occupancy) buildings in FEMA 302,
and is the required minimum performance for all buildings governed by this
document. The remaining three objectives define enhanced performance required for
special occupancy, and hazardous or essential facilities. The expected seismic
response of these performance objectives is indicated graphically in Fig. 2.8 for
ductile structures, and Fig. 2.9 for non ductile structures.
Fig.2.8 Performance and Structural deformation demand for ductile structure
17
Fig.2.9 Performance and Structural deformation demand for non ductile

structure
18
CHAPTER 3 - STATIC NONLINEAR PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

3.1 GENRAL
During earthquake many of buildings collapsed due to lack of understanding
the behavior of structures in inelastic zones. Elastic analysis gives only elastic
capacity of the structure and it also indicates where the first yield occurs. But this
elastic analysis cannot give any information about redistribution of force and
moments and failure mechanism.
For checking behavior of structure in inelastic zones nonlinear analysis is
necessary. The development of rational methodology that is applicable to the seismic
design of new structures using available ground motion information and engineering
knowledge, and yet is becomes available has been supported for sometimes now. This
is the focus of several major research and development efforts throughout the world.
In majority of cases nonlinear analysis is used.
3.2 STATIC NONLINEAR PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
3.2.1 Introduction
There are various elastic and inelastic methods, available for analysis of
existing concrete buildings. Elastic analysis methods include code static lateral force
procedures, code dynamic lateral force procedures and elastic procedures using
demand capacity ratio. The most basic inelastic analysis method is the complete
nonlinear time history analysis. Other simplified nonlinear analysis methods includes
the Capacity Spectrum Method (CSM) that uses the intersection of the capacity
(pushover) curve and a reduced response spectrum to estimate maximum
displacement; the displacement coefficient method that uses pushover analysis and a
modified version of the equal displacement approximation to estimate maximum
displacement; and the secant method that uses a substitute structure and secant
stiffness.
Nonlinear Static Analysis (Pushover Analysis) provides a particularly rigorous
treatment of the reduction of seismic demand for increasing displacement. It is an
attempt to explicitly address the nonlinear behavior of the structure.
The Capacity Spectrum Method, a nonlinear static procedure that provides a
graphical representation of the global force-displacement capacity curve of the
structure and compares it to the response spectra representation of the earthquake
19
demands, is a very useful tool in the evaluation and retrofit design of existing concrete
building. The graphical representation provides a clear picture of how a building
responds to earthquake ground motion, and it provides an immediate and clear picture
of how various retrofit strategies, such as adding stiffness or strength, will impact the
buildings response to earthquake.
3.2.2 Need for push over analysis
Conventionally, seismic assessment and design has relied on linear or
equivalent linear (with reduced stiffness) analysis of structural systems. In this
approach, simple models are used for various components of the structure, which is
subjected to seismic force evaluated from elastic or design spectra, and reduced by
force reduction factors. The resultant displacements are amplified to account for the
reduced applied forces. This procedure, though simple and easy to apply in the design
office environment, suffers from the following shortcomings:
1. The force reduction factors recommended in codes of practice are approximate and
do not necessarily represent the specific structure under consideration.
2. The mechanism that will most likely be responsible for collapse is unlikely to be
that represented by the elastic action and deformation distribution.
3. When critical zones of a structure enter into the inelastic range, the force and
deformation distribution change significantly. This change is not represented by a
global reduction of force.
4. The global and particularly the local distribution of deformations in the inelastic
range may represent no resemblance to those in the elastic range. The same applies to
the values of deformations, not just the distribution.
As a consequence of the above, the reduced force amplified deformation
linear elastic approach fails to fit within the principle of failure mode control. This in
turn has to lead to an increase in the use of inelastic analysis as a more realistic means
of assessing the deformation state in structures subjected to strong ground motion.
3.2.3 Limitation of pushover analysis

Following are the limitation of pushover analysis
1. Pushover analysis procedure implies that there is separation between the structural
capacity and earthquake demand. There are numerous research findings, which
establish that structural capacity and earthquake demand are interrelated.
20
2. Pushover analysis is a static analysis and neglects inherent dynamic nature. During
an earthquake, the behavior of a nonlinearly yielding structure can be described by
balancing the dynamic equilibrium at every time step. By focusing only on the strain
energy of the structure during monotonic static push, the procedure can leave a
misleading impression that energy associated with the dynamic components of forces
(i.e. kinetic energy and viscous damping energy) are insignificant. The energy of a
structure under earthquake force is given by,
Ei = Ek + Es + Ev + Ed
Where,
Ei = earthquake input energy
Ek = Kinetic energy
Es = Static energy
Ev = Viscous damping energy
Ed = Controlled damping energy
3. Pushover analysis over simplifies the structure modeling. The procedure assumes
that it is possible to substructure a nonlinear three dimensional structure and
characterize its behavior by two parameters, base shear force and roof displacement.
4. Pushover fails to produce good correlation for earthquakes with predominantly
impulsive ground motions.
5. Pushover analysis procedure considers only the lateral earthquake loading and
ignores vertical component of earthquake loading.
6. Pushover analysis procedure implicitly assumes that the damage is a function of the
lateral deformation of the structure, neglecting duration effect, number of stress
reversals and cumulative energy dissipation demand. It is generally accepted that
damage of a structure is a function of deformation and energy.
7. Pushover analysis procedure does not take into account the progressive change in
the model properties that take place in a structure as it experience cyclic non-linear
yielding during an earthquake.
3.2.4 Consideration
As described previously, it is a technique by which a computer model is
subjected to lateral load of certain shape. The intensity of lateral load is increased and
the sequence of failure is recorded.
21
For meaningful pushover analysis the most important considerations are

summarized as commandments. There are ten of such commandments which are
briefly described below:
1. Do not underestimate the importance of the loading or displacement shape
function:
The loading or displacement shape function is selected to represent the predominant
dynamic mode shape of the building. Quit often, the inverted triangular shape is used.
It is important to keep load shape function constant during the push.
2. Know your performance objective before you push the building.
Since the objective of pushover analysis is to access the status of building and
its components in damaged state, it is important to understand the specific
performance objectives desired for the building.
Performance objective like collapse prevention, life safety or immediate
occupancy can be translated in terms of: given set of design spectra and specific limit
states acceptable for various structural components when subjected to the seismic
demand embodied in these design spectra.
3. If it is not designed, it cannot be pushed.
E, A and I are not sufficient. As pushover analysis is a strong function of force
displacement characteristics of individual members, the connections, initial stiffness,
yield moment and post yield behavior is also to be taken care of.
4. Do not ignore Gravity loads.
Inclusion and exclusion of gravity load can have a effect on the shape of
pushover curve and member yielding and failure sequence. Due to the unsymmetric
distribution of positive and negative reinforcement in R/C beams, gravity load delays
the onset of yielding and cracking in the beams, resulting in a stiffer structure at lower
magnitude of base shear.
5. Do not push beyond the failure unless and otherwise you can model the failure.
To understand the complete collapse mechanism of system, modeling of
elements failing initially are most important, though it is complex.
6. Pay attention to the rebar development and lap lengths.
For R/C members of existing building, it is very important to note the
development lengths, when calculating the member capacities. If inadequate
development lengths are present, the contributing steel area should be reduced to
account for this inadequacy.
22
7. Do not ignore the shear failure mechanisms.

If shear capacity of structural members is not sufficient to permit the
formation of flexural plastic hinge, shear failure will precede the formation of plastic
hinge at the end of members.
8. P- effect may be more important than you think.
For large lateral displacement and large axial force in columns, P- effect
becomes increasingly significant.
9. Do not confuse the push over with real earthquake loading.
The push-over load is monotonically increased while earthquake loading
continually change in amplitude and direction during the duration of earthquake
ground motion.
Moreover, pushover loads and structural response are in phase while earthquake
excitation and building response are not necessarily in phase.
10. Three-Dimensional buildings may require more than a planar push.
For a building with strong asymmetry in plan, a planar (Two Dimensional)
push over analysis may not suffice. For such cases a 3D model of the building must
be constructed and subjected to pushover analysis.
3.3 THE PUSHOVER ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
The ATC 40 provides detailed guidelines about how to perform a nonlinear
static pushover analysis. The most important parts of this method are the construction
of the Capacity Spectrum and the design Response Spectra and finding of the point of
intersection of the capacity and the response spectra. The intersection defines the
performance level of the structure for the design earthquake. The following procedure
is based on the ATC 40 procedure.
1. Form the analytical model of the nonlinear structure.
2. Set the performance criteria, like drift at specific floor levels, limiting plastic hinge
rotation at specific plastic hinge points, etc.
3. Apply the gravity load and analyze for the internal forces.
4. Assign the equivalent static seismic lateral load to the structure incrementally.
There is guideline how to distribute loads between different floor levels. This is either
based on the current code specified load or equivalent static load computed based on
modal analysis.
23
5. Select a control point (usually at the top floor) to watch displacement.

6. Apply the lateral load gradually using incremental iteration procedure.
7. Draw the Base Shear vs. Controlled Displacement curve. This is called
pushover curve.
8. Convert the pushover curve to the Acceleration-Displacement Response-Spectra
(ADRS) format. This is called capacity spectrum.
9. Obtain the equivalent damping based on the expected performance level.
10. Get the design Response Spectra for different levels of damping and adjust the
spectra for the nonlinearity based on the damping in the Capacity Spectrum.
11. The capacity spectrum and the design response spectra can be plotted together
when they are expressed in the ADRS format.
12. The intersection of the capacity spectrum and the response spectra defines the
performance level. If the performance level satisfies the design, the design is okay,
otherwise adjustment to the structures is required.
3.4 CAPACITY DPECTRUM METHOD
3.4.1 Capacity curve
The overall capacity of a structure depends on the strength and deformation
capacities of the individual components of the structure. In order to determine
capacities beyond the elastic limits, some form of nonlinear analysis is required. This
procedure uses sequential elastic analysis, superimposed to approximate forcedisplacement diagram of the overall structure. The mathematical model of the
structure is modified to account for reduced resistance of yielding components. A
lateral force distribution is again applied until additional components yield. The
process is continued until the structure becomes unstable or until a predetermined
limit is reached. A typical capacity curve is shown in fig.3.1
Fig.3.1 Capacity curve

24
3.4.2 Capacity spectrum

To convert the capacity curve, which is in terms of base shear and roof
displacement into the capacity spectrum which is a representation of the capacity
curve in ADRS-acceleration displacement response spectra (Sa Vs Sd) format, the
required equation to make the transformation are as follows ( Refer ATC-40, Volume1, p-8.9):
Eq.3.1
Eq.3.2
Eq.3.3
Eq.3.4
Where,
PF1 = modal participation factor for the first natural mode.
1= modal mass coefficient for the first natural mode.
Wi/g = mass assigned to level i.
i1= amplitude of node 1 at level i.
N = Level N, the level which is the uppermost in the main portion of the structure.
V = Base shear.
W = Building dead weight plus likely live load.
25
roof = roof displacement (V and the associated delta roof make up points on the
capacity curve).
Sa = spectral acceleration.
Sd = spectral displacement (Sa and the associated Sd make up point on the capacity
spectrum).
First calculate the modal participation factor PF1 and modal mass coefficient
using equations Eq.1.1 and Eq1.2. Then each point on the capacity curve (V, Delta
roof), calculate the associated point (Sa, Sd) on the capacity spectrum using Eq.3.1 and
Eq.3.4.
A typical capacity spectrum is as shown in fig.3.2.
Fig.3.2 Capacity spectrum

3.4.3 Demand curve
Ground motion during an earthquake produces complex horizontal
displacement patterns which may vary with time. Tracking this motion at every time
step to determine structural design requirements is judge impractical. For a given
structure and a ground motion, the displacement demands are estimate of the
maximum expected response of the building during the ground motion. Demand curve
is a representation of the earthquake ground motion. It is given by spectral
acceleration (Sa) Vs. Time period (T) as shown in fig.3.3.
26
Fig.3.3 Demand curve (Traditional spectrum)

Value of seismic coefficient CA should be taken to equal to 0.312 times the
spectral response acceleration (units of g) at a period of 0.3 seconds i.e. effective peak
acceleration (EPA). A factor of about 2, 5 times CA represents the average value of a
5 % damped short period system in the acceleration domain. The seismic coefficient
Cv should be taken equal to 0.456 times spectral response acceleration (units of g) at a
period of 1 seconds and it represents 5 % damped response of a 1-second system and
when divided by period defines response in the velocity domain. Fig.3.4. illustrates
the construction of an elastic response spectrum (Demand curve) (Refer ATC-40,
Volume-1, p-4-12).
Fig.3.4 Construction of a 5% damped elastic response spectrum (Demand Curve)

As per provisions and commentary on Indian seismic code IS 1893(part-1),
equivalent seismic coefficient CA is given by,
Eq.3.5
CA = Z*g*Sa/g (at EPA)
27
Now,
Eq.3.6
CV = 2.5CA*TS
3.4.4 Demand spectrum
To convert Demand curve (traditional spectrum-Sa Vs T format) into demand

spectrum (acceleration displacement response spectrum-Sa Vs Sd format), following
Eq.3.7 should be used (Refer ATC-40, Volume-1, p-8-10).
Sa =
Eq.3.7
A typical demand spectrum is as shown in fig.3.5.
Fig.3.5 Reduced response spectrum
Fig.3.6 Capacity spectrum in Traditional and ADRS formats
28
3.4.5 Performance point

Performance point can be obtained by superimposing capacity spectrum and
demand spectrum and the intersection point of these two curves is performance point.
Fig.3.7 shows superimposing demand spectrum and capacity spectrum.
Fig.3.7 Performance point
Fig.3.8 Capacity spectrum superimposed over response spectra in traditional

and ADRS formats
Check performance level of the structure and plastic hinge formation at
performance point. A performance check verifies that structural and non-structural
components are not damaged beyond the acceptable limits of the performance
objective for the force and displacement implied by the displacement demand.
29
3.4.6 Performance check

3.4.6.1 At expected maximum displacement
Once the performance point i.e. spectral acceleration and spectral displacement is
find out, the base shear and roof displacement at the performance point can be found
out from this values. Then, the following step should be followed in the performance
check:
1. For the global response, verify
a. Lateral force resistance has not degraded by more then 20% of peak
resistance.
b. The lateral drifts satisfy the limits given in Table 3.1.
Inter story
Table 3.1 Lateral drifts limits

Immediate
Damage
Life
Drift limit
Occupancy
control
safety
stability
0.01
0.01-0.02
0.02
0.33 Vi/Pi
0.005
0.005-0.015
No limit
No limit
Maximum total
drift
Maximum
inelastic drift
Structural
2. Identify and classify the different elements in the building. Any of the
following building type may be present: Beam-column frames, slab-column
frames, solid walls, coupled walls, performed walls, punched walls, floor
diaphragms and foundation.
3. Identify all primary and secondary components.
4. For each element type, identify critical component and action to be checked.
5. The strength and deformation demands at the structures performance point
should be equal to or less then the capacities considering all co-existing forces
acting with the demand spectrum.
6. The performances of secondary elements (such as gravity load carrying
member not part of lateral load resisting system)are reviewed for acceptability
for the specific performance level.
7. Non-structural elements are checked for specific performance level.
30
3.4.6.2 Geotechnical effect

The deformation movement of the foundations of a building can significantly
affect the seismic response and performance of structures. The response parameter of
foundation element are depends on structural as well as geotechnical components.
Spread footing elements, for example, might consist of a rigid structural plate
component model of concrete footing bearing on soil represented by geotechnical
components as shown in fig.3.9.
There is a large degree of uncertainty associated with both strength and
stiffness of the geotechnical components. Thus, ATC-40 recommends enveloping
analysis to determine the sensitivity of seismic performance of foundation behavior.
Fig.3.9 Shallow foundation model

Geotechnical properties are very ductile and failure is very rarely encountered.
Thus, deformation limit of geotechnical components are not explicitly define.
However, deformation of geotechnical components may affect the deformation and
acceptability components in the superstructure.
31
3.4.6.3 Other consideration

1. For 3D model with torsional effects consideration, the lateral load should be
applied plotted on the capacity curve should be for the center of mass of the roof.
2. For structures with long fundamental periods (more than 1 second), higher mode
effects may be more critical. Pushover analysis should be more critical. Pushover
analysis should be done for other mode shapes say 2 nd, 3rd, etc. using corresponding
force distribution.
32
CHAPTER
SOFTWARE
IMPLEMENTATION
FOR
PUSHOVER ANALYSIS IN ETABS 9.7

4.1 INTRODUCTION
The nonlinear analysis of a structure is an iterative procedure. It depends on
the final displacement, as the effective damping depends on the hysteretic energy loss
due to inelastic deformations, which in turn depends on the final displacement. This
makes the analysis procedure iterative. A simple iterative method, such as NewtonRaphson Method can be used in conjunction with a method for solution of linear
equations of equilibrium, to perform step by- step analysis. Difficulty in the solution
is faced near the ultimate load, as the stiffness matrix at this point becomes negative
definite due to instability of the structure becoming a mechanism.
Some nonlinear computer program like DRAIN-2DX is available which is
able to perform pushover analysis directly with no iteration required. The other
software available to perform nonlinear static (pushover) analysis are ETABS, SAP,
ADINA, SC-Push3D Extended Three Dimensional Buildings Systems (ETABS) and
Structural Analysis Program finite element program that works with complex
geometry and monitors deformation at all hinges to determine ultimate deformation. It
has built-in defaults for ACI 318 material properties and ATC-40 and FEMA 273
hinge properties. Also it has capability for inputting any material or hinge property.
ETABS 9.7 deals with the buildings only.
The analysis in ETABS 9.7 involves the following four steps.
1. Modeling
2. Static analysis
3. Designing
4. Pushover analysis
1. Modeling
Modeling of any structure in software is very crucial for performing any type
of analysis using software. A small mistake in modeling can change the final analysis
results drastically.
Modeling of the structure in the software includes, creating grid system,
adding the structural elements as per the drawing, defining the structural properties
33
and assigning those structural properties to the respective structural elements. The
various steps involved in modeling are as follows.
1.
Units are set for the convenience
2.
Define the properties of various material used in the models.
3.
Define the section properties of various structural element of the model.
4.
Draw the model in the graphical environment.
5.
Define different loads and their combination.
6.
Assign section properties to the model and boundary condition.
7.
Assign the various loads on the structure.
2. Static analysis
Once the model is built, static analysis is performed after defining the various
loads and their combination.
3. Design
In RC frame section, properties of nonlinear hinges are mainly based on the
outcome of the design section. So, prior to pushover analysis it is necessary to do
design. Using appropriate code
recommendation, model is first designed for the
response to the static analysis.

If designer is using Section Designer sections to construct RC frame then no
need to go for design.
4. Pushover analysis
Many nonlinear static analyses are possible. But it is usual to consider only
three primary cases that are Push 1 gravitational push, Push 2 push starting from
the end of gravitational push and it is in X Direction, and last Push 3 also starting
from the end of gravitational push and it is in Y Direction.
The following general sequences of steps are involved in performing a static
nonlinear analysis
1. Create a model just like any other analysis.
2. Define frame hinge properties and assign them to the frame element.
3. Define any load cases and static and dynamic analysis cases that may be
needed for steel or concrete design of the frame element, particularly if default
hinge are used.
34
4. Run the analysis cases needed for design.

5. If any concrete hinge properties are based on default values to be computed by
the program, one must perform concrete design so that reinforcing steel is
determined.
6. If any steel hinge properties are based on default values to be computed by the
program for Auto-select frame section properties, one must perform steel
design and accept the section chosen by program.
7. Define the load cases that are needed for in the pushover analysis, including :
Gravity loads and other load that may be acting on the structure before
the seismic loads are applied.
Lateral loads that may be used to push the structure.
8. Define the nonlinear static analysis Cases to be used for pushover analysis,
including:
A sequence of one or more cases that start from zero and apply gravity
and other fixed loads using load control. These cases can include
staged construction and geometric nonlinearity,
One or more pushover cases that start from this sequence and apply
lateral pushover loads. These loads should be applied under
displacement control.
The monitored displacement is usually at the roof level of the structure
and will be used to plot push over curve.
9. Run the push over analysis cases.
10. Review the push over result: Plot the pushover curve, The deflected shape
showing the hinge state, force and moment plots.
11. Revise the model as necessary and repeat.
4.2 BASIC STEPS
4.2.1 Create the model
1. Create the basic grid system
This step shows how to create the basic grid system. The structural objects are
set relative to the grid system.
Begin creating the grid system by clicking the File menu > New model
button, the form shown in fig.4.1 will be displayed.
35
Fig.4.1 New Model Initialization form

Select the Default.edb button on the form shown in fig.4.1, form shown in
fig.4.2 will be displayed and in this form define Grid dimension, Story dimension
and Units.
Fig.4.2 Building Plan Grid System and Story Data Definition form
2. RC frame code selection
Select the Option menu > Preferences > Concrete frame design command
the form shown in fig.4.3 will displayed. Select the appropriate Design code.
36
Fig.4.3 Concrete Frame Design Preferences form

3. Define the material properties
Begin defining various material properties used in the model by clicking the
Define menu > Material properties command, the form shown in fig.4.4 Will be
displayed.
Fig.4.4 Define Materials form

Select Add new Material or Modify/Show Material button on the form
shown in fig.4.4, form shown in fig.4.5 will be displayed, Define material
property data.
37
Fig.4.5 Material Property Data Form

4. Define section properties
Begin defining various section properties used in the model by clicking the
Define menu > Frame Section command, the form shown in fig.4.6 will be
displayed.
Fig.4.6 Define Frame Properties form

Select the Add Rectangular button on the form shown in fig.4.6, form shown
in fig.4.7 will be displayed and in the form add Section Name, Dimensions, and
Material.
38
Fig.4.7 Rectangular Section form

Select the Add SD Section button on the form shown in fig.4.6, form shown
in fig.4.8 will be displayed and in the form add Section Name, Material.
Fig 4.8 SD Section Data form

Select the Section Designer button on the form shown in fig.4.8, form shown
in fig.4.9 will be displayed and in the form select Draw menu > Draw Solid shape >
Rectangle button click at the center so rectangle section shown in fig.4.10 will be
displayed.
By right clicking on the Rectangle section, Dialog box shown in fig.4.10 will
be displayed. Change Height, Width, Reinforcing details.
39
Fig.4.9 CSISD form
Fig.4.10 CSISD form with Shape Properties-Solid form

Reinforcing Bar Size, Bar Spacing, and Bar cover. By right clicking on the
Rectangle section Reinforcing bar, Dialog box shown in fig.4.11 will be displayed.
Change
40
Fig.4.11 CSISD form with Edge Reinforcing form

By clicking the Define menu > Wall/Slab/Deck Sections command, the form
shown in fig.4.12 will be displayed.
Fig.4.12 Define Wall/Slab/Deck Section form

Select the Modify/show section or Add new Slab button on the form shown in
fig.4.12, form shown in fig.4.13 will be displayed and in the form add Shel type,
Geometry.
41
Fig.4.13 Slab Section form

5. Draw Beam, Column, Slab
Begin Draw various elements are used in the model by clicking the Draw
menu > Draw Line Objects > Create Lines in Region or at click command, the
form shown in fig.4.14 Will be displayed.
Fig.4.14 Create Lines in Region or at click form

Assign the Beam to the Different Grid elements.
By clicking the Draw menu > Draw Line Objects > Create Column in
Region or at click command, the form shown in fig.4.15 Will be displayed.
Fig.4.15 Create Column in Region or at click form

Assign the Column to the Different Grid elements.
42
By clicking the Draw menu > Draw Area Objects > Draw Rectangle Areas
command, the form shown in fig.4.16 Will be displayed.
Fig.4.16 Draw Rectangle Areas form

Assign the Slab to the Different Grid floor.
6. Define the Static load cases
The model is to be created and the properties are to be assigned. The software
calculates and apply Dead Load automatically while Live load is to be applied to each
floor as per IS 875-Part I. The other load cases required to be define are Lateral loads
in two different horizontal (X and Y) directions. These lateral loads are required while
carrying out Nonlinear Static Analysis. The shape functions of lateral loads are very
important for Nonlinear Static Analysis. Quit often, the inverted triangular shape is
used. It is achieved by applying maximum load at the top of the structure which
subsequently reduces to zero at the bottom. The magnitude of the applied lateral force
is not important but the direction of application of loads is important.
Add a static load case, click the Define menu > Static Load Cases command
button, to access the Define Static Load Case Names the form Shown in fig.4.17
Complete the following action using that form:
1. Type the name of the load case in the Load edit box. The program does not allow
use of duplicate names.
2. Select a load type from the Type drop-down names.
3. Type a self-weight multiplier in the Self-weight Multiplier edit box.
4. If the load type specified in Quake or wind, Select an option from the Auto Lateral
Load drop-down list.
5. Click the Add New Load button.
43
Fig.4.17 Define Static load cases Names form

In case of Earth Quake Load, Changes the Direction and Eccentricity, Seismic
Coefficients select Modified Load form shown in fig.4.18 will be displayed.
Fig.4.18 IS 1893:2002 Seismic loading form

Modify Coefficients Direction and Eccentricity, Seismic Coefficient, Time
Period, Factors and story Range.
7. Assign Structural Loads
The load cases define are required in order to be able to assign loads to
points/joints, lines/frames, and areas/shells. The user must first select the object
44
before a load can assigned to the object. After the object has been selected, Click the
Assign menu > Shell/Area load > Uniform command as shown in fig.4.19, form
Fig.4.19 Shell/Area loads assigning form
Fig.4.20 Uniform Surface loads form

Select the Load Case Name, Magnitude of load and Direction.
45
8. Define Analysis option

The analysis options available are Dynamic analysis and P-Delta analysis.
Dynamic analysis includes static analysis also. The parameters which are required to
define are Number of modes and type of analysis (Eigenvalue analysis and RitzVector Analysis). While performing Dynamic analysis, the analysis window provides
some important information like Number of modes found, frequency of each mode,
time period of each mode and modal participation factor. Once the analysis is
performed successfully, the results like deformations, shear forces, bending moments
of each element can be displayed or listed for each load cases and load combinations
cases defined.
To Define analysis option select Analysis menu > Set Analysis Option
command form shown in fig.4.21 will be displayed.
Fig.4.21 Analysis Option form

4.2.2 Run static analysis
To run analysis select the Analysis menu > Run Analysis command.
Once the analysis is performed successfully, the results like deformations,
shear forces, bending moments of each element can be displayed or listed for each
load cases and load combinations cases defined in the Display menu.
46
For an example, Let us take Moment 3-3 as shown in Fig.4.22 for elevation of
building.
Fig.4.22 Moment 3-3 Diagram form

4.2.3 Design the structure
The ETABS 9.7 design includes the following
Steel Frame Design
Concrete Frame Design
Composite Beam Design
Steel Joist Design
Shear Wall Design
To perform the design, first run the analysis, then click on the Option menu >
Preface to select the Design code and then click the Design menu and select the
appropriate design from the drop down menu. The type of design available depends
on the type of member used in the model. That is, the user cannot complete shear wall
design if no shear walls have been included in the model.
For an example, Let us take design of concrete frame. Firstly select frame
members then select Design menu > Concrete Frame Design > Start design/Check
of structure command as shown in fig.4.23
47
Fig.4.23 Start Design/Check of Structure form

4.2.4 Pushover analysis
4.2.4.1 Define hinge properties
Frame nonlinear properties are used to define nonlinear force-displacement
and/or moment rotation behavior that can be assigned to discrete locations along the
length of frame elements. These nonlinear hinges are only used during static nonlinear
analysis. For all other types of analysis, these hinges are rigid and have no effect on
the linear behavior of element.
Type of hinges:
Uncoupled hinge types are the Axial P, Shear V2, Shear V3, Torsion T,
Moment M2 and Moment M3. The suffix 2 and 3 indicates the local axes direction i.e.
shear V2 is the shear along local axis 2. These hinges can exist in the same frame
hinge property, but there is no interaction between them.
The interacting P-M2-M3 frame hinge type is a coupled hinge. It can exist
with uncoupled shear hinges but cannot exist with uncoupled axial or moment hinges.
48
Types of hinge properties:

There are three types of hinge properties in the software: Default hinge
property, User defined hinge property and generated hinge property. Only default
hinge property and user defined hinge property can be assigned to the frame elements.
When a default or user defined hinge property is assigned to any frame element, it
will automatically creates a new generated hinge property for each hinge.
Default hinge properties cannot be modified. They also can not be viewed
because the default properties are section dependent. The default properties can not be
fully defined by the program until the section that they apply to is identified. Thus, to
see the effect of the default properties, the default property should be assigned to a
frame element, and then the resulting generated hinge property should be viewed.
Fig.4.24 shows the default hinge properties available with the software. Default hinge
properties are as per ATC-40 and FEMA 273.
Fig.4.24 Define Frame Hinge Properties form

User-defined hinge properties can be either based on default properties or they
can be fully user-defined. When user-defined properties are based on default
properties, the hinge properties can not be viewed because the default properties are
section dependent. When user defined properties are not based on default properties,
then the properties can be viewed and modified. Only the generated hinge properties
are actually used in the analysis. They can be viewed, but they can not be modified.
Generated hinge properties have an automatic naming convention of Label H#, where
Label is the frame element label, H stands for hinge, and # represents the hinge
49
number. For each element, the program starts with hinge number 1 and increments the
hinge number by one for each consecutive hinge assigned to the frame element. For
example, the generated hinge property name F23H2 refers to the second hinge
assigned to frame element F23.
Plastic Deformation curve:
For each degree of freedom, one can define a force-displacement (momentrotation) curve that gives the yield value and the plastic deformation following yield.
This is done in terms of a curve with values at five point A-B-C-D-E, as shown in
fig.4.25. One may specify a symmetric curve, or one that differs in the positive and
negative direction.
Fig.4.25 Force V/s Deformation curve

The shape of this curve as shown in fig.4.25 is intended for pushover analysis.
One can use any shape wanted. The following points should be noted:
Point A is always the origin.
Point B represents yielding. No deformation occurs in the hinge up to point B,
regardless of the deformation value specified for point B. The displacement at
point B will be subtracted from the deformation at point C, D, and E. Only plastic
deformation beyond point B will be exhibited by the hinge.
Point C represents the ultimate capacity for pushover analysis. However, one may
specify slope from C to D for other purposes.
Point D represents a residual strength for pushover analysis. However, one may
specify a positive slope from C to D or D to E for other purposes.
Point E represents total failure. Beyond point E the hinge will drop load down to
point F (not shown) directly below point E on the horizontal axis. If one does not
50
wish the hinge to fall this way, be sure to specify large value for the deformation
at point E.
One may specify additional deformation measures at points IO (immediate
occupancy), LS (life safety), and CP (collapse prevention). These are informational
measures that are reported in the analysis results and used for performance-based
design. They do not have any effect on the behavior of the structure.
Prior to reaching point B, all-deformation is linear and occurs in the hinge in
the frame element itself, not the hinge. Plastic deformation beyond point B occurs in
the element. When the hinge unloads elastically, it does so without any plastic
deformation, i.e., parallel to slope A-B. Program it self calculate the yield value from
the frame section properties.
When you display the deflected shape in the graphical user interface for a non
linear static case, the hinge are plotted as colored dots indicating their most extreme
state:
B to IO
IO to LS
LS to CP
CP to C
C to D
D to E
E
The colors used for the different states are indicated on the plot. Hinges that
have not experienced any plastic deformation (A to B) are not shown.
Assign hinge properties:
To assign hinge properties, after selection the frame elements, click the Assign
menu > Frame/Line > Frame Nonlinear hinges. In Fig.4.25a and fig.4.26 default
hinge properties are selected for Beam and Column respectively.
51
Fig.4.25a Assign Frame Hinges (Pushover) form for BEAM
Fig.4.26 Assign Frame Hinges (Pushover) form for COLUMN

To view the assign default hinge property select Define menu > Frame
nonlinear hinge property command form shown in fig 4.26 will be displayed.
52
Fig.4.27 Define Frame Hinges (Pushover) form

In fig.4.27, Click on Show generated property then right click on the any
Define Hinge property which you want to show, form shown in fig.4.28 will be
displayed.
Fig.4.28 Frame Hinges Property Data form
53
Fig.4.29 3-D View of generated hinges

In fig4.29 shows the hinge property generated on various beam and column.
4.2.4.2 Define static push over cases:
Pushover analysis is a powerful feature available with the software. In addition
to performing pushover analysis for performance-based seismic design, this feature
can be used to perform general static nonlinear analysis and the analysis of staged
(incremental) construction. For performing such analysis, Static Nonlinear cases are
to be defined.
To add a static pushover cases, click the Define menu > Static
Nonlinear/Pushover cases command, the Define static Nonlinear Cases form as
54
Fig.4.30 Define Static Nonlinear Cases form

Select the Add new case button on the form shown in fig.4.30, form shown in
fig.4.31 will be displayed.
As shown in Fig.4.31 and Fig.4.32 for defining the Static Nonlinear Cases
(Pushover Cases) requires the understanding of following points:
Fig.4.31 Static Nonlinear Case Data PUSH1
55
Fig.4.32 Static Nonlinear Case Data PUSH2

Options:
Options area is used control the pushover analysis. The analysis can be Forced
Controlled or Displacement Control.
Push to Load Level Defined by pattern option button is used to perform a
forced control analysis. The analysis applies the full load value defined by the sum of
all loads specified in the Load Pattern box. This option is used for applying gravity
load to the structure.
The Push To Displ. Magnitude option button is used to perform a
displacement- controlled analysis. The load combination specified in the Load Pattern
is applied but its magnitude is increased or decreased as necessary to keep the control
displacement increasing in magnitude.
This option is useful for applying lateral load to the structure or for any case
where the magnitude of the applied load is not known in advance. The control
displacements are Monitored Displacement and Conjugate Displacement.
The Monitored Displacement is a single displacement component at a single
point that is monitored during a static nonlinear analysis. The monitored degree of
freedom and the monitored point location are all given default values by ETABS; the
values can be easily replaced. The default value for the monitored point is a point
56
located at the top of the structure. The default monitored degree of freedom is UX;
other available directions are UY, UZ,RX, RY, and RZ.
For the most meaningful pushover curve, it is important to choose a monitored
displacement that is sensitive to the applied load pattern. For example, one should not
typically monitor degree of freedom UX when the load is applied in direction UY.
The conjugate displacement is a weighted sum of all displacement degrees of
freedom in the structure: each displacement component is multiplied by the load
applied at that degree of freedom, and the results are summed. The conjugate
displacement is usually the most sensitive measure of displacement in the structure
under a given specified load.
When performing a displacement-controlled static nonlinear analysis, it is
usually recommended that you use the conjugate displacement unless a displacement
in the structure that monotonically increases during the analysis is identified.
Generally, two static nonlinear cases are defined, one for gravity load and
other for lateral load. Firstly the analysis is carried out by applying gravity load and
then the second analysis, using lateral load in load pattern, starts at the end of the
previous case. To start the current case from the end of previous case, Start from
Previous Case option is used.
The static nonlinear analysis can be controlled by specifying the Minimum
Saved Steps, Maximum Null Steps, Maximum Total Steps, Maximum Iteration Steps,
Iteration Tolerance and Event Tolerance.
Member Unloading Method:
Member unloading method is used to handle the hinges that drop load. When
hinge unloads, the load that hinge was carrying has to be removed and to be
distributed it to the rest of the structure. The software provides three different methods
to solve this problem of hinge unloading. Hinge unloading occurs whenever the
stress-strain (force-deformation or moment-rotation) curve shows a drop in capacity.
1. Unload Entire Structure:

When the hinge reaches negative slope portion of stress-strain, the applied
load is continued to increase. If this results in increased strain (decreased stress) the
analysis proceeds. If the strain tries to reverse, the load on the whole structure
reverses, until the hinge is fully unloaded to the next segment on the stress-strain
57
curve. Other parts of the structure may now pick up the load that was removed from
the unloading hinge. This method is the most efficient of the three methods available,
and is usually the first method to try. It generally works well if hinge unloading does
not require large reductions in the load applied to the structure. It will fail if two
hinges compete to unload, i.e., where one hinge requires the applied load to increase
while the other requires the load to decrease. In this case, the analysis will stop with
the message "UNABLE TO FIND A SOLUTION", in which case other two methods
should be used.
2. Apply Local Redistribution:
This method is similar to the first method, except that instead of unloading the
entire structure, only the element containing the hinge is unloaded. When a hinge is
on a negative-sloped portion of the stress-strain curve and the applied load causes the
strain to reverse, the program applies a temporary, localized, self-equilibrating,
internal load that unloads the element. This causes the hinge to unload. Once the
hinge is unloaded, the temporary load is reversed, transferring the removed load to
neighboring elements. This method will fail if two hinges in the same element
compete to unload, i.e., where one hinge requires the temporary load to increase while
the other requires the load to decrease. In this case, the analysis will stop with the
message "UNABLE TO FIND A SOLUTION".
3. Restart Using Secant Stiffness:
This method is quite different from the first two. Whenever any hinge reaches
a negative-sloped portion of the stress-strain curve, all hinges that have become
nonlinear are reformed using secant stiffness properties, and the analysis is restarted.
This method is similar to the approach suggested by the FEMA 273 guidelines, and
makes sense when performing pushover analysis where the static nonlinear analysis
represents cyclic loading of increasing amplitude rather than a monotonic static push.
Geometric Nonlinearity Effect:
Three options are available for considering geometric nonlinearity in the problem.
1. None:
All equilibrium equations are considered in the undeformed configuration of
the structure.
58
2. P-delta:
The equilibrium equations take into partial account the deformed
configuration of the structure. Tensile forces tend to resist the rotation of elements and
stiffen the structure, and compressive forces tend to enhance the rotation of elements
and destabilize the structure. This may require a moderate amount of iteration.
3. P-delta and Large Displacements:
All equilibrium equations are written in the deformed configuration of the
structure. This may require a large amount of iteration. The large displacement option
is used for cable structures undergoing significant deformation; and for buckling
analysis, particularly for snap-through buckling and post-buckling behavior.
For most other structures, the P-delta option is adequate, particularly when
material nonlinearity dominates.
Load Pattern:
The distribution of load applied on the structure for a given static nonlinear
case is defined as a scaled combination of one or more of the following:
Any static load case.
Uniform acceleration acting in any of the three global directions. The force at each
joint is proportional to the mass tributary to that joint and acts in the specified
direction.
A modal load for any eigen or Ritz mode. The force at each joint is proportional to
the product of the modal displacement, the modal circular frequency squared (w2),
and the mass tributary to that joint, and it acts in the direction of the modal
displacement.
The load combination for each static nonlinear case is incremental, i.e., it acts
in addition to the load already on the structure if starting from a previous static
nonlinear case.
Active Structure:
Active Structure option is required to set for Stage Construction. If the whole
structure is to be analyzed without stage construction, active structure is to be set to
only one stage ALL and the check labeled Loads Apply to Added Elements Only
should not be checked.
59
4.2.4.3 Run static nonlinear analysis:

To run the static nonlinear analysis, As shown in Fig.4.33. Click the Analysis
menu > Run Static Non Linear analysis command.
Fig.4.33 Run Static Non Linear analysis

After running static non linear analysis command, you can see analysis result
and deform shapes for different pushover cases in the Display menu.
4.2.4.4 Display static pushover curve:

To see the static pushover curve, click the Display menu> Show static
pushover curve command, the form as shown in fig.4.34 will be displayed.
60
Fig.4.34 Display static pushover curve

Select Capacity Spectrum, the form as shown in Fig.4.35 will be displayed.
Fig.4.35 Capacity Spectrum

Damping Period and Demand Spectra Parameters:
When the Capacity Spectrum option is chosen as the Plot Type on the
Pushover Curve form, the Demand Spectrum and Damping Parameters areas of the
form become active. The shape of demand spectra with 5% damping is controlled by
the values input in the seismic coefficient Ca, and seismic coefficient Cv edit box.
61
Checking show the family of demand spectra box in demand spectrum area overlays a
family of demand spectra on the capacity curve in ADRS format. The family of
curves can include up to four demand-spectra curves, each with a different effective
damping ratio, beff. By default, the software plots curves with beff = 0.05, 0.1, 0.15
and 0.2. The damping ratios for any of the four curves can be changed by editing the
value in one of the four Damping Ratios, beff edit boxes. The values input into the
beff edit boxes must be between 0 and 1, inclusively. A value of 0, or a blank edit
box, means to omit that demand spectrum curve.
Checking Show Single Demand Spectra (Variable Damping) displays the
demand spectra as single curve. The method of constructing single demand spectra is
similar to the Procedure B in ATC 40 except that the software does not make the
simplifying assumption that post yield stiffness remains constant. Check the Show
Constant Period Lines At check box to display lines of constant period.
These lines appear as radial lines on the capacity spectrum plot. By default the
program plots lines for T = 0.5, 1, 1.5 and 2 seconds. The periods for any of the four
curves can be changed by editing the value in one of the four associated edit boxes. A
value of 0, or a blank edit box, means to omit that period line.
In the Damping Parameters area, the value of Inherent/Additional Damping is
to be provided.
The value input into this box must be between 0 and 1, inclusively. The
default value is 0.05. The b0 term is automatically included by the ETABS analysis
method, and the 5% inherent viscous damping term can be specified in the
Inherent/Additional Damping edit box as 0.05.
If there is additional viscous damping provided in the structure, perhaps by
viscous dampers that are not specifically included in the model, and then this damping
should also be included in the Inherent/Additional Damping edit box. Thus if the
damping inherent in the structure is assumed to be 5% of critical damping, and
dampers which provide an additional 7% of critical damping are assumed to be added
to the structure (although they are not actually in the model), then the value input in
the Inherent/Additional Damping edit box should be 0.12, since 0.05 + 0.07 = 0.12.
Structural Behavior type/Kappa Factor is also available. The Structural Behavior
types A, B and C defaults to the value defined for those structural behaviour types in
ATC 40. The User Defined Kappa Factor option allows the user to input other kappa
(k) values.
62
4.2.4.5 Display deformed shape:

To see the deformed shape, click the Display menu> show deformed shape
command, the form as shown in fig.4.36 will be displayed.
Fig.4.36 Deformed shape form
Fig.4.37 Deformed shape form
To View deform shape at any step of static nonlinear case, will be displayed.
For an example as shown in fig.4.37 select load and step so form shown in fig will be
displayed.
4.2.4.6 Evaluating of building at performance point
The step by step nonlinear hinge formation for a static nonlinear analysis can
be displayed graphically in the software. Once the hinge yields, it is shown as a
colored dot with the color indicating the maximum amount of plastic deformation that
has occurred. Different color notation is given at each stage of the hinge formation.
4.3 EXAPMPLE
To verify the answers of ETABS 9.7 and for proper understanding of software
implementation, One solved problem from LEARNING OF ETABS SOFTWAR
[W2]
by Prakash Siyani, Saumil Tank, Paresh V. Patel were taken.
4.3.1 Analysis and Design of 3d frame

A three dimensional reinforced concrete (RC) frame structure was considered
for nonlinear analysis as shown in fig. 4.38. All beams were of 300450 mm size and
columns are 300450 mm size with 120 mm slab thickness. 3.2 kN/m2 live load and
1 kN/m2 floor finishing load were considered.
63
Fig. 4.38 Plan and Elevation of building

Earthquake parameters considered are medium soil, Zone V and response
reduction factor 5. Story height is taken 3.2m. Material properties are assumed as
M25 concrete and Fe 415 longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. Rigid diaphragm
was considered.
4.3.2Comparison of total DL and LL
Dead Load
Weight of slab = 512200.1224 = 345 kN
Weight of beam = 50.30.45(125+204) 24 = 2268 kN
Weight of column = 50.30.45(3.2-.45) 24 = 891 kN
Total weight = 6615 kN
Live Load
Live load = 412203+112201.5 = 3240 kN
Floor Finish Load
FF = 512201 = 1200 kN
In ETABS, dead load and other loads are shown fr om table as shown in
figure
64
4.3.3 Results and Discussion

Design is carried out using ETABS software as per IS 456-2000.
Reinforcement in beam and column are shown in fig. 4.39.
65
Fig. 4.39 Reinforcement (mm2) detailing in Element

Before carrying out nonlinear analysis, nonlinear static load cases are to be
defined. Two load cases are defined one having gravity load pattern (PUSH1) and
second having lateral load pattern in X dir. (PUSH2). For push over analysis first
apply the gravity loading and then use lateral displacement in sequence for derive
capacity curve and demand curve.
Pushover curve as per this work and literature are shown in fig.4.40.
Both the Push over curve are same.
Fig. 4.40 Pushover Curve as per this work and literature (PUSH-2)
66
Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 shows the tabular format of pushover curve as per
this work and literature respectively. Both the table shows the displacement, base
force and yield formation, Values of both are matches with each other.
Table 4.1 Tabular format of pushover curve as per this work (PUSH-2)
Table 4.2 Tabular format of pushover curve as per literature (PUSH-2)
Fig.4.41 shows the Capacity Spectrum curve as per this work and literature
respectively. Fig shows the values of performance point in terms of (V,D), (Sa,Sd),
and (Teff,Beff), This values are nearly same.
67
Fig. 4.41 Capacity Spectrum curve as per this work and literature (PUSH-2)
68
CHAPTER 5 - EFFECT OF PLASTIC HINGE PROPERTIES ON

PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The Nonlinear Static Analysis (Pushover) is an iterative procedure, in which
loading is applied iteratively until the required displacement is achieved. The structure
is capable of undergoing large deflections near-maximum load carrying capacity. This
may save lives by giving warning of failure and preventing total collapse.
In implementation of pushover analysis, modeling is one of the important steps for
providing nonlinear behavior of structural element. Modeling of structures for such
analysis includes defining locations in structural components based on possibility of
damage. Such locations, known as hinge, are classified depending on combinations of
forces acting on it. Determination of nonlinear properties is quantified by strength and
deformation capacities of each structural component in model. The ultimate
deformation capacity of component depends on the ultimate curvature and plastic
hinge length. In practice, FEMA 356 and ATC 40 documents specified default hinge
properties are used due to convenience and simplicity, but one should be aware about
the role of user defined hinge properties on results of pushover analysis. ETABS has
already implemented these default nonlinear hinge properties.
This chapter aims to study the possible differences in result of pushover
analysis due to default and user defined nonlinear hinge properties, using ETABS
program.
5.2 MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP
The behavior of reinforce concrete section and influence of various parameter
can be represented by relation between moment, curvature and axial force. fig.5.1
shows a straight element of Reinforced Concrete member with equal end moments
and axial forces. The radius of Curvature R is measured from the neutral axis. The
radius of Curvature R, neutral axis depth kd, concrete strain in the extreme
compression fiber c, and tension steel strain s, will vary along the member because
between the cracks the concrete will be carrying some tension. Considering only a
small element of length dx of the member and using the notations of fig.5.1, the
rotation between the ends of the element is given by,
69
.Eq.5.1
.Eq.5.2
Deformation of a flexural member
Strain Distribution
Fig.5.1 Deformation of a flexural member

Now 1R is the curvature at the element (the rotation per unit length of
member) and is given the symbol
.. Eq.5.3
The curvature will actually vary along the length of the member because of the
fluctuation of the neutral axis depth and the strains between the cracks. If the element
length is small and over a crack, the curvature is given by Eq.5.3 with C and S as the
strains in concrete and steel at the cracked section.
If the strains at the critical section of a reinforced concrete beam are measured
over a short gauge length as the bending moment is increased to failure, the curvature
may be calculated from Eq.5.3 permitting the Moment Curvature relationship for
the section to be obtained. Two such curves obtained from measurements on singly
reinforced beams failing in tension and compressions are shown in fig. 5.2. Both
curves are linear in the initial stages, and the relationship between moment M and
curvature is given by the classical elastic equation,
70
(a) Section Failing in Tension
(b) Section Failing in Compression
Fig.5.2 Moment Curvature relationships for reinforced concrete beam section
.Eq.5.4
Where EI is the flexural rigidity of the section. With increase in moment,
cracking of the concrete reduces the flexural rigidity of the sections, the reduction in
rigidity being greater for the lightly reinforced section than for the more heavily
reinforced section. The behavior of section after cracking is dependent mainly on the
steel content. Lightly reinforced sections shows, fig.5.2 (a) results in practically linear
M curve up to point of steel yielding. When steel yields, a large increase in
curvature occurs at nearly constant bending moment, the moment rising slowly to a
maximum due to an increase in the internal lever arm, then decreasing. In heavily
reinforced sections shows in fig.5.2 (b), on the other hand, the M becomes
nonlinear when the concrete enters in inelastic part of stress strain relationship, and
failure can be quite brittle unless the concrete is confined by closed stirrups at close
centers. If the concrete is not confined, the concrete crushes at a relatively small
curvature before the steel yields, causing an immediate decrease in the moment
carrying capacity. To ensure ductile behavior in practice, steel contents less than the
balanced design value are always used for beams [D2].
71
5.3 DETRMINATION OF MOMENT, CURVATURE AND ROTATION

Under lateral load, the structures dissipate energy under severely imposed
deformations through critical regions of the members, often termed as plastic
hinges. Location of plastic hinges in the structures is important, because plastic
hinges cause excessive deformation. In plastic hinges regions, rotations of the
member is very high which leads to failure. Fig 5.3 (a) represent the general case of
doubly reinforced rectangular section at first yield of the tension steel and at ultimate
concrete strain. The curvature at first yield of tension steel 9y may be found from Eq.
4.5 in term of the strain in steel at yield for the steel contents considered. When the
tension steel first reaches the yield strength, the stress in extreme fiber of the concrete
may be appreciably less than the concrete stress [D2].
Fig. 5.3 Doubly reinforced beam section with flexure.

(a) At first yield. (b) At ultimate.
The stress-strain curve for concrete is approximately linear up to 0.7 fC; hence
if the concrete stress does not exceed this value when the steel reaches yield strength,
the depth to neutral axis may be calculated using elastic theory formula. Once neutral
axis depth factor k has been determined, the magnitude of force and the centroid of
the compressive force in steel and the concrete can be found. The equation defining
the moment and curvature at first yield are.
... Eq.5.5
.Eq.5.6
72
.Eq.5.7
Where
n = Es/Ec
pt = AS / bd
pt = AS/bd
AS = area of tension steel
AS = area of compression steel
b = width of section
d = effective depth of tension steel
d = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of compression steel
EC = modulus of elasticity of concrete
ES = modulus of elasticity of steel
fY = yield strength of steel
jd = distance from centroid of compressive force in the steel and concrete to the
centroid of tension
If the stress in extreme compression fiber of the concrete is greater than
approximately 0.7 fC, the neutral axis depth at first yield of tension steel should be
calculated using the actual curved stress-strain curve from the concrete.
However, an estimate may be obtained from the straight line formula even if
the computed stress is as high as fC. Fig. 5.4 indicates that the value for k calculated
from the straight line formula will be smaller than the actual value for k if concrete
stress distribution is curve, which will lead to an underestimating of Y and
overestimation of MY [D2].
Fig. 5.4 Stress and strain distribution for same compressive force
in concrete when steel reaches yield stress
73
The ultimate curvature and moment of doubly reinforced section are given by
following equation.
.. Eq.5.8
... Eq.5.9
...Eq.5.10
5.4 PLASTIC HINGE ZONES
In R.C. member, the plastic hinge is defined as that section of the beam, where
plastification of concrete in compression and yielding of steel in tension zone has
occurred causing rotation of the section under constant ultimate moment. Location of
plastic hinge in beams must be clearly identified since special detailing requirements
are needed in inelastic regions of beams of frames subjected to earthquake forces. In
capacity design concept, potential plastic hinges regions within structure are clearly
defined. These are designed to have dependable flexural strengths as close as
practicable to the required strength.
Subsequently, these regions are carefully detailed to ensure that estimated ductility
demands in these regions can be reliably achieved. This is obtained primarily by
closely-spaced and well anchored transverse reinforcement.
5.4.1 Types of Plastic Hinges
Two types of plastic hinge develop in structure element based on the locations
as:
I. Positive plastic hinges.
II. Negative plastic hinges.
I. Positive plastic hinges.
Positive plastic hinges are generally formed in the long span beams, which is
dominating by gravity load, where the tension reinforcement is at the bottom and
compression at top fiber as shown in Fig.5.5. If the plastic hinges are formed at
column faces, the hinge plastic rotations is . Positive plastic hinges formed at the
distance L1 from right end of beam. Therefore rotation of the positive plastic hinges
74
= (l/L1) as shown in Fig.5.5
Fig. 5.5 Beam hinge pattern

II. Negative Plastic Hinge
Negative plastic hinges are generally formed in short span of beam, which is
dominated by seismic actions or lateral force, where the tension at top and
compression at bottom occurs. This hinges are formed adjacent to the face of the
column or at the maximum negative moment regions. As shown in Fig. 5.5 the plastic
hinges formed at the adjacent side of the column, rotation of the beams at the plastic
hinges is .
5.4.2 Plastic Hinge Length
M.J.N Priestly and T. Paulay described the equation for hinge length as,
...Eq.5.11
L = 0.054L + 0.022 fY dbl
Where, Lp is the potential plastic hinge length, L is the distance from the
critical section to the point of contra flexure, fY is the yield strength of the beam
longitudinal bars of diameter dbl.
The special detailing of the transverse reinforcement should be required in 2h
length of plastic hinge. Where, h is the depth of the section. When critical section of
the plastic hinge is at the face of the supporting column, this length is measured from
the critical section towards the span as shown in fig.5.6.
Where the critical section of the plastic hinge is not at the face of a column
and is located at a distance not less than the beam depth h away from a column, the
length should be assumed to begin between the column face and the critical sections,
at least 0.5h from the critical section, and to extend at least 1.5h past critical
section towards mid span. At positive plastic hinges where the shear force is zero at
the critical sections, such as at C shown in Fig. 5.6, the length should extended by h in
both directions from the critical sections.
75
Fig. 5.6 Locations of Potential plastic hinges where special detailing is required
Redistribution of moments and shear forces relies entirely on rotation within
plastic hinges in the beams. The apparent redistribution of moments and shear forces
between individual columns also relies on plastic hinge rotations in the beam only. It
is recommended that in any span of a continuous beam in a ductile frame, the
maximum moments may be decreased, if so desired, by up to 30% of the absolute
maximum moments derived for that span from elastic analysis, for any combination
of seismic and gravity loading. This limit is placed to ensure that plastic hinges do not
occur prematurely under a moderate earthquake, and that the beam rotational ductility
demand is not increased excessively.
Fig. 5.7 Beams with relocated plastic hinges
76
5.5 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF 3D FRAME

A three dimensional reinforced concrete (RC) frame structure was considered for
nonlinear analysis as shown in fig. 5.8. All beams were of 300450 mm size and
columns are 450450 mm size with 150 mm slab thickness. 2 kN/m2 live load was
considered.
Fig. 5.8 3D Frame of building

Earthquake parameters considered are medium soil, Zone V and response
reduction factor 5. Story height is taken 3m. Material properties are assumed as M25
concrete and Fe 415 longitudinal and transverse reinforcement.
Design was carried out using ETABS software as per IS 456-2000.
Reinforcement in beam and column are shown in fig. 5.9.
Fig. 5.9 Reinforcement (mm2) detailing in Element
77
Based on the size of member and percentage of reinforcement in beam,

moment rotation relationships are derived at yield condition using Eq. 5.6 and Eq. 5.7
and at ultimate condition using Eq. 5.9 and Eq. 5.10. An EXCEL sheet is developed to
Moment (kN-m)
100
80
77
62
60
40
34
20
0
Moment (kN-m)
calculate moment curvature relationship as shown in fig. 5.10.
0
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
77
62
34
13
0
0
Curvature
13
0.01
0.02
Rotation
0.03
0.04
Fig. 5.10 Moment curvature relationship Fig. 5.11 Moment rotation relationship
The pushover analysis consists of the application of gravity loads and a
representative lateral load pattern. The frames are subjected to gravity analyses and
simultaneously lateral loading. Gravity loads are in place during lateral loading. In all
cases, lateral forces are applied monotonically in a step-by-step in nonlinear static
analysis. The applied lateral forces are proportional to the product of mass and the
first mode shape amplitude at each story level under consideration. Moment rotation
relationship is most important to understand the behavior of structural element. This
relation is derived using EXCEL sheet as a user defined hinge properties. Moment
versus curvature relationship is shown in fig. 5.10. ETABS has a facility to consider
the user defined hinge properties. User defined moment versus rotation relationship as
given in ETABS is shown in fig. 5.11.
78
(a) Default moment hinge properties
(b) User defined moment hinge properties
Fig. 5.12 Moment hinges in ETABS
Default hinge properties are based upon a simplified set of assumptions that
may not be appropriate for all structures. One may want to use default properties as a
starting point, and explicitly override properties as needed during the development of
model. This study defines three points corresponding to 10% for immediately
occupancy, 50% for life safety, and 90% for collapse prevention for plastic hinge
deformation capacity. Moment versus rotation relationship based on default hinge
properties is shown in Fig.5.12 (b)
5.6 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The hinge patterns are plotted at yielding point (top displacement is 0.0241 m)
as shown in fig. 5.13 and at a near to collapse point (top displacement is 0.072 m) as
shown in fig. 5.14.
79
Default hinge properties
User defined hinge properties

(a) Outer Frame

(a) Outer Frame
Fig. 5.13 Hinge formation at yielding point
80

(a) Inner Frame

(b) Inner Frame
Fig. 5.14 Hinge formation at near to collapse point
Before carrying out nonlinear analysis, nonlinear static load cases are to be
defined. Two load cases are defined one having gravity load pattern (PUSH1) and
second having lateral load pattern in X dir. (PUSH2). For push over analysis first
apply the gravity loading and then use lateral displacement in sequence for derive
capacity curve and demand curve. Development of hinges during pushover analysis
considering user defined and default hinge properties are shown in fig. 5.15 and fig.
5.16.
81
Fig. 5.15 Tabular format of pushover curve considering default hinge properties
Fig. 5.16 Tabular format of pushover curve considering user defined hinge
properties
From above study following findings are observed:
- The base shear capacity of models with the default hinges and with the user defined
hinges properties are similar. The variation in the base shear capacity is less than 1%.
Thus, the base shear capacity does not depend on whether the default or user-defined
hinge properties are used.
- Comparison of hinging patterns indicates that both models with default hinges and
the user-defined hinges estimate plastic hinge formation at the yielding point quite
well. However, there are significant differences in the hinging patterns at near to
collapse point.
- Capacity curve and demand curve is nearly matched in both models. So, hinge
properties considered based on stress-strain relationship and default hinge properties
based on ATC 40 and FEMA 356 are nearly same.
82
CHPTER 6 - ANALYSIS OF NEW R.C.C. BUILDING WITH

DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter deals with the analysis of new R.C.C. building. As mentioned in
previous chapter ETABS 9.7 software performs Nonlinear Static Analysis (Pushover
Analysis). ETABS 9.7 deals with building systems. As the performance based
analysis of buildings were to be carried out, we had stick to the ETABS 9.7. Two kind
of R.C.C. buildings were taken for analysis: G+4 and G+10. Different types of model
to simulate real field problem were developed. The different types of models also
reveals influence of modeling issues to overall analysis of the building. In all the
models, the support condition was assumed to be fixed and soil condition was
assumed as medium soil.
6.2 LIST OF MODELS OF BARE FRAME, INFILL AS MEMBRANE AND
INFILL AS STRUT
Table 6.1 Model for G+4 and G+10
No
Name
Storey
Bays in
Size of
Column
both
bay
Geometry
direction (meter)
1
Bare Frame
G+4
44
Rectangle
Infill as Membrane (GF soft story)
G+4
44
Rectangle
Infill as Strut (GF soft story)
G+4
44
Rectangle
Infill as Strut (without soft story)
G+4
44
Rectangle
Bare Frame
G+4
33
Rectangle
G+4
33
Rectangle
G+4
33
Rectangle
G+4
33
Rectangle
Bare Frame
G+4
22
Rectangle
10
G+4
22
Rectangle
11
G+4
22
Rectangle
12
G+4
22
Rectangle
83
13
Bare Frame
G+4
44
Rectangle
14
Bare Frame
G+4
44
Square
15
G+4
44
Square
16
G+4
44
Square
17
Bare Frame
G+10
44
Rectangle
18
G+10
44
Rectangle
19
G+10
44
Rectangle
20
G+10
44
Rectangle
21
Bare Frame
G+10
33
Rectangle
22
G+10
33
Rectangle
23
G+10
33
Rectangle
24
G+10
33
Rectangle
25
Bare Frame
G+10
22
Rectangle
26
G+10
22
Rectangle
27
G+10
22
Rectangle
28
G+10
22
Rectangle
29
Bare Frame
G+10
44
Rectangle
30
Bare Frame
G+10
44
Square
31
G+10
44
Square
32
G+10
44
Square
6.3 MODELING OF G+4 BUILDING

Fig. 6.1 shows the plan of G+4 building having 4 bay in X-direction and 4 bay
in Y-direction. It was a symmetric structure with respect to both the horizontal
directions. Bays are of 4m in length in both directions. All the slabs were considered
as shell element of 150mm thickness.
84
Fig 6.1 Plan for 44 bays G+4 Storey

The model was the bare frame having beams, columns and slabs. The
geometric property assigned to all the beams and columns and loading on slabs are
listed in Table 6.2. All structural members were of M25 grade concrete and Fe415
steel. The slabs were considered as rigid floor diaphragm.
Table 6.2 Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab

Floor
Column
Beam size
Live
Size
(mmmm)
Load
KN/ m2
(mmmm)
GF
230x600
230500
1st floor
230x600
230x500
2nd floor
230x500
230x450
1.5
3rd floor
230x500
230x450
1.5
4th floor
230x450
230x450
1.5
As per the general practice followed in field, the column and beam sizes were
reduced going from GF to 4th floor, also the live loads were reduced as per IS: 875
85
fig 6.2 shows the elevation of the building model. The storey height was 3m and the
support condition at base was assumed to be fixed. The lateral load was applied in Xdirection.
Fig 6.2 Elevation of G+4 bare frame model of 44 bays

The reduction of size of the columns and beams are clearly observed from the
fig. 6.2
The model incorporates infill wall as a membrane element. The property of
membrane element is such that it has only inplane stiffness and outplane stiffness is
voids. The infill walls were provided below all the beams except the first floor beams.
The thickness of wall was 115mm. The material properties of masonry infill wall are
listed below:
Modulus of Elasticity: 1200000 kN/m2
Density: 20 kN/m3
Poissons ratio: 0.17
86
Fig. 6.3 G+4 model with infill as membrane wall of 44 bays

The geometrical properties of beams and columns and loading were same as
considered in bare frame. The reduction of size of the columns and beams are clearly
observed from the fig. 6.3.
In the case of an infill wall located in a lateral load-resisting frame the
stiffness and strength contribution of the infill has to be considered. Non-integral infill
frame subjected to lateral load behaves like diagonally braced frame. An infill wall
can be replaced by an equivalent compression only strut in the analysis model.
In this model, the equivalent compression strut was modeled in place of membrane
wall having material property same as membrane wall. fig. 6.4 shows the elevation of
the model with strut. The ends of diagonal struts were released for moments in all the
directions, to make it as a pinned joint. The thickness of the strut was same as the
thickness of membrane wall. The equivalent width should be taken as one third of the
diagonal length of strut. The width of strut was calculated as 600 mm.
87
Fig. 6.4 G+4 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays

The dot at the end of strut as shown in fig. 6.4 represents the end releases. In
ETABS 9.7 released hinges are provided at both ends. As shown in fig. 6.4, the
orientation of the diagonal strut was such that it takes only axial compressive load
under lateral loading.
Fig. 6.5 shows the elevation of G+4 with strut at ground floor also. All the
properties and loading conditions were same as G+4 with strut having soft storey.
This model were created and analyzed to see the effect of soft storey and failure
mechanism in case of soft storey.
Fig. 6.5 G+4 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays without soft story
88

Modeling process and geometrical properties are similar to G+4 model of 44
bays without infill, Instead of 44 bays 33 bays were provided.
Modeling process and geometrical properties are similar to G+4 model 44
bays with infill membrane wall with GF as soft story, Instead of 44 bays 33 bays
were provided.
bays with infill as equivalent strut with GF as soft story, Instead of 44 bays 33 bays
were provided.
Modeling process and geometrical properties are similar to G+4 model 44 bays with
infill as equivalent strut without soft story, Instead of 44 bays 33 bays were
provided.
bays without infill, Instead of 44 bays 22 bays were provided.
were provided.
were provided.
bays with infill as equivalent strut without soft story, Instead of 44 bays 22 bays
were provided.
bays without infill, Instead of 4m bays 2m bays were provided.
89

Modeling process and geometrical properties except column sizes are similar
to G+4 model of 44 bays without infill. Column sizes are shown in Table 6.3
Table 6.3 Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab (Square Column)
Floor
Column Size
Beam size
Live Load
(mmmm)
(mmmm)
on slab
KN/ m2
GF
600x600
230500
1st floor
600x600
230x500
2nd floor
500x500
230x450
1.5
3rd floor
500x500
230x450
1.5
4th floor
450x450
230x450
1.5
6.3.15 G+4 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall (Square Column)
to G+4 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall with soft story. Column sizes are
as per Table 6.3
(Square Column)
to G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut without soft story. Column sizes
are as per Table 6.3
6.4 MODELING OF G+10 BUILDING

Fig. 6.6 shows the elevation of G+10 model without infill. The storey height
was kept constant as 3m.
90
Fig 6.6 Elevation of G+10 bare frame model of 44 bays

The geometrical properties are listed in Table 6.4. The concrete grade was
M25 and steel grade was considered as Fe415. All the slabs were 150mm thick. Rigid
floor diaphragm action was considered during analysis.
Table 6.4 Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab

Live load on
Column size
Beam size
(mm)
(mm)
GF
230x900
230x650
1st floor
230x900
230x650
2nd floor
230x900
230x650
3rd floor
230x750
230x650
4th floor
230x750
230x650
5th floor
230x750
230x650
6th floor
230x550
230x650
7th floor
230x450
230x450
8th floor
230x450
230x450
1.5
9th floor
230x450
230x450
1.5
10th floor
230x450
230x450
1.5
Floor
91
slab
(kN/m2)
Fig. 6.7 shows the elevation of G+10 model 44 bays with infill as membrane
wall. The thickness of the masonry infill wall was 115mm. The material property of
masonry was kept same as G+4 with infill as membrane wall model. The walls were
provided at all the internal as well as external panels of the building at all the floors.
The geometrical property of beams and columns and loading on slabs were kept same
as in the bare frame. The size reduction of columns at different storey is seen from the
Fig.6.7
Fig. 6.7 G+10 model with infill as membrane wall of 44 bays

Every wall of the previous model was replaced by an equivalent diagonal
strut. The thickness of strut was kept same as the thickness of wall and the width was
taken as one third of the diagonal length of strut. The ends of diagonal struts were
released for moments in all the directions, to make it as a pinned joint. The thickness
of the strut was same as the thickness of membrane wall. The equivalent width should
be taken as one third of the diagonal length of strut. The width of strut was calculated
as 600 mm.
Fig. 6.8 shows the elevation of G+10 with strut at ground floor also. All the
properties and loading conditions were same as G+10 with strut having soft storey.
92
Fig. 6.8 G+10 with infill as equivalent strut of 44 bays without soft story
Modeling process and geometrical properties are similar to G+10 model of
44 bays without infill, Instead of 44 bays 33 bays were provided.
were provided.
were provided.
bays with infill as equivalent strut, Instead of 44 bays 33 bays were provided.
Modeling process and geometrical properties are similar to G+10 model of
44 bays without infill, Instead of 44 bays 22 bays were provided.
were provided.
93
were provided.
bays with infill as equivalent strut, Instead of 44 bays 22 bays were provided.
bays without infill, Instead of 4m bays 2m bays were provided.
to G+10 model of 44 bays without infill. Column sizes are shown in Table 6.5
Table 6.5 Geometric Properties of frame and live loads on slab (Square Column)
Floor
Column size (mm)
Beam size (mm)
Live load on slab

(kN/m2)
GF
900x900
230x650
1st floor
900x900
230x650
2nd floor
900x900
230x650
3rd floor
750x750
230x650
4th floor
750x750
230x650
5th floor
750x750
230x650
6th floor
550x550
230x650
7th floor
450x450
230x450
8th floor
450x450
230x450
1.5
9th floor
450x450
230x450
1.5
10th floor
450x450
230x450
1.5
6.4.15 G+10 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall ( Square Column)
to G+10 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall with GF as soft story. Column
sizes are as per Table 6.5
94
(Square Column)
to G+10 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut. Column sizes are as per Table
6.5
6.5 STATIC LINEAR, DYNAMIC AND RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS
Once the model was created, the static, dynamic and response spectrum
analysis was performed. Performing dynamic analysis gives no. of modes, time period
for each mode and mode participation factor. Response Spectrum Curve as shown in
fig. 6.9 1 for 5% damping and medium soil as per IS 1893-2002 (part I) was default
assigned to the software.
Fig. 6.9 Response Spectrum Curve of IS 1893 2002 (part I)

As it is a new R.C.C. building model, the design was carried out as per IS 4562000. All the sections were found safe for the applied forces.
95
6.6 FRAME NONLINEAR HINGE PROPERTY

Nonlinear hinge properties are most essential part of Pushover analysis,
because they ensure Nonlinear Static Analysis of buildings. Nonlinear hinges were
added to beams, columns and diagonal struts. From the analysis it was concluded that
the probable location of hinge formations in beams are at the ends. Also the governing
forces in beams are Shear force and Bending Moments and thus, default Moment
(M3) hinges and Shear (V2) hinges were added at relative distance 0.05 and 0.95, i.e.
at both the ends. The columns were provided with default Axial Moment Interaction
(PMM) hinges at base as column undergoes the interaction of axial force and biaxial
moments. Hinges are shown in fig. 6.10. The diagonal strut takes only axial
compression load. Also the material property for diagonal strut is masonry, thus
default axial hinge property cannot be assigned to strut. The failure load for the strut
was estimated and nonlinear axial property was explicitly defined. The failure load
calculation of diagonal strut is described in Appendix I.
Fig. 6.10 Nonlinear hinges in beams, columns and diagonal strut

6.7 STATIC NONLINEAR CASES
Static Nonlinear Cases were to be defined for performing Nonlinear Static
Analysis. For analysis of all the models, two nonlinear cases were defined namely
PUSH1, PUSH2 and PUSH3. First nonlinear case was PUSH1 for gravity loads. It is
load controlled as the magnitude applied gravity load case was known. The
96
displacement of 1st node of top storey was monitored for analysis. Member unloading
method used was Unload Entire Structure. Geometric Nonlinearity was also
considered in analysis. fig. 6.10 shows the Static Nonlinear Case defining for all
cases.
PUSH2 considers lateral load in X-direction and it was displacement controlled as
applied lateral load was not known. The analysis starts at the end of PUSH1 analysis.
Member unloading Method and Geometric Nonlinearity were taken same as in
PUSH1 case.
PUSH3 considers lateral load in Y-direction and it was displacement controlled as
applied lateral load was not known. The analysis starts at the end of PUSH1 analysis.
Member unloading Method and Geometric Nonlinearity were taken same as in
PUSH1 case.
Fig.6.10a Static Nonlinear Case Data PUSH1
97
Fig.6.10b Static Nonlinear CasePUSH2
Fig.6.10c Static Nonlinear Case PUSH3
98
6.8 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Various building models were developed and pushover analysis was
performed. The results obtained after Nonlinear Static analysis are, Pushover curve
(Base Shear Vs Roof Displacement), Capacity Spectrum Curve (ADRS Format),
Performance Point, Tabular format of Pushover curve, Tabular format of Capacity
Spectrum curve, Storey Drift, Bending moment diagram, Shear force diagram and
deformation shape for each step. Variety of results were obtained & critically
discussed. However, the bending moment diagram shear force diagram and
deformation diagram for each step of analysis is not mentioned.
Pushover curve obtained for G+4 building model 44 without infill walls i.e.
bare frame is as shown in Fig. 6.11 The ultimate base shear the building can take
before failure is around 8705 kN and the corresponding roof displacement is 261mm.
Fig. 6.11 Pushover Curve for G+4 bare frame 44 bays (PUSH-2)
The capacity spectrum curve of the same model is shown in Fig. 6.12. Red
curve in the Fig. 6.12 shows the response spectrum curve for various damping values.
The Response Spectrum curves are governed by the values of Coefficient of
Acceleration (Ca) and Coefficient of Velocity (C V). For getting the response spectrum
curve as per IS:1893-2002 (part I), the value of Ca and CV were calculated and
assigned to the software. The values of Ca and CV for all type of soils are given in
Appendix-III. For medium soil and Zone V, Ca is 0.36 and CV is 0.495.
99
Fig. 6.12 Capacity Spectrum Curve for G+4 bare frame 44 bays (PUSH-2)
In Fig. 6.12, the green curve is the capacity spectrum curve, red curves are
response spectrum curve for various damping ratios and yellow curve is Single
Demand Spectra. The intersection point of Single Demand Spectra with the Capacity
Spectrum Curve is the performance point. The base shear at performance point is
4050 kN and corresponding displacement is 82 mm. Table 6.6 shows the step wise
base shear, corresponding roof displacement and number of hinges formed in different
nonlinear ranges.
Table 6.6 Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 bare frame 44 bays
(PUSH-2)
100
The pushover analysis was including fourteen steps. It has been observed that, on
subsequent push to building, hinges started forming in beams first. Initially hinges
were in B-IO stage and subsequently proceeding to IO-LS and LS-CP stage. On
further pushing of buildings the hinges formed initially, moved to higher stage of
hinge property. At performance point, where the capacity and demand meets, out of
1050 assigned hinges 782were in AB stage, 66, 51, and 151 hinges are in B-IO, IOLS and LS-CP stages respectively. From Fig. 6.13 it is evident that building has good
capacity to resist future earthquake as demand seen less. As at performance point,
hinges were in LS-CP range, overall performance of building is said to be Life Safety
to Collapse Prevention. Also it has been observed that, at ultimate capacity of
building hinges formed were in columns which were located inside the buildings. At
ultimate load, columns capacity exhausted and analysis stopped. Hinges formation are
shown in Fig. 6.13
Fig. 6.13 Hinge formation at performance point for G+4 bare frame (PUSH-2)
101
In this model, the infill walls were modeled as membrane element with inplane stiffness and no out of plane stiffness. From Fig. 6.14, the ultimate base shear
before failure is around 11277.10 kN which is higher compared to bare frame
structure, and corresponding displacement is 50mm which is less as compared to bare
frame structure as it is having high stiffness because of the presence of infill walls.
The drop in the pushover curve indicates the failure of some of the member, which
suddenly reduces the applied load to the structure.
Fig. 6.14 Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve for G+4 with wall
(PUSH-2)
Tabular format of pushover curve is shown in Table 6.7. As mentioned above,
the drop in the pushover curve comes at step 4 where three hinges are reaching to its
failure stage. Because the G+4 building model do not have infill walls at ground floor
and rest of all upper storey infill walls, it has anticipated a large displacement and
formation of hinges (yielding of members) at ground floor to first floor level. The
same has been observed from the result. This is typical soft storey phenomenon of the
building. At performance point, the base shear was 9209.57 kN and corresponding
roof displacement 33 mm.
102
Table 6.7 Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 with membrane wall
The pushover analysis was including five steps. It has been observed that, on
subsequent push to building, hinges started forming in beams first. Initially hinges
were in B-IO stage and subsequently proceeding to IO-LS and LS-CP stage. On
further pushing of buildings the hinges formed initially, moved to higher stage of
hinge property. At performance point, where the capacity and demand meets, out of
1050 assigned hinges 965 were in AB stage, 60 and 25 hinges are in B-IO and IO-LS
stages respectively. From Fig. 6.14 it is evident that building has good capacity to
resist future earthquake as demand seen less. As at performance point, hinges were in
IO-LS range, overall performance of building is said to be Immediate Occupancy to
Life Safety. Hinges formation at performance point are shown in Fig. 6.15
Fig. 6.15 Hinge Formation G+4 with wall at performance point (PUSH-2)
103
6.8.1.3 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut GF soft story
In the model, the infills were provided as equivalent compression only strut.
The pushover curve and capacity spectrum curve is shown in fig. 6.16. The
performance point obtained in this case is almost 1.5 times higher than that obtained
in bare frame model and lesser by half than model having infills as membrane wall,
which is sufficient to understand that G+4 building model with membrane wall is
stiffer compared to G+4 building model with equivalent strut.
Fig. 6.16 Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve of G+4 with equivalent
strut (PUSH-2)
The pushover analysis includes eight steps. Interesting point was that, the
subsequent formation of hinges has not taken place. The reason was the brittle
property of masonry strut. There was no hinge formation in columns, while the beams
closer to the strut which were failing, started showing hinge formation at later stages
because of the redistribution of the forces. At the performance point, three axial
hinges were in C-D range, which indicates that there was a failure of strut under the
expected earthquake demand.
Table 6.8 Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 with Strut
104
Hinges formation at performance point are shown in Fig. 6.17.
Fig. 6.17 Hinge formation G+4 with strut at performance point (PUSH-2)
6.8.1.4 G+4 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut without soft story
In the model, the infills were provided as equivalent compression only strut.
The pushover curve and capacity spectrum curve is shown in fig. 6.18. The
performance point obtained in this case is almost 1.5 times higher than that obtained
in bare frame model and lesser by 1.25 times than model having infills as membrane
wall, which is sufficient to understand that G+4 building model with strut is stiffer
compared to G+4 building model with bare frame.
105
Fig. 6.18 Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve of G+4 with equivalent
strut (PUSH-2)
The pushover analysis includes eight steps. It has been observed and as
tabulated in Table 6.9, initially the axial hinges have formed into the strut and were in
A-B range, up to second step of analysis. In step three, out of 1450 hinges assigned,
1039 hinges were in A-B range, 54 in B-IO, 58 in IO-LS, 128 in LS-CP while 171
hinges were in CP-C range. Interesting point was that, the subsequent formation of
hinges has not taken place. The reason was the brittle property of masonry strut. There
was no hinge formation in columns, while the beams closer to the strut which were
failing, started showing hinge formation at later stages because of the redistribution of
the forces.
Table 6.9 Tabular format of pushover curve for G+4 with Strut
Hinges formation at performance point are shown in Fig. 6.19.
106
Fig.6.19 Hinge formation G+4 with strut at performance point

Table 6.10 Result for G+4 for PUSH-X and PUSH-Y
PerformN
O
Name
Bays
ance
point X
(KN)
Bare Frame
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
Infill as Strut
(GF soft story)
Infill as Strut
(without soft story)
Displace-
Perfor
ment X
mance
(Meter)
level
Performance
point Y
(KN)
Displacement Y
(Meter)
44
4050.97
0.081
LS-CP
2924.57
0.132
44
9209.57
0.033
IO-LS
5612.33
0.071
44
7028.71
0.080
CP
5266.00
0.123
44
6262.6
0.059
CP
5906.68
0.094
107
Bare Frame
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
Infill as Strut
(GF soft story)

Infill as Strut

9
Bare Frame
10
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
11
Infill as Strut
(GF soft story)
12
Infill as Strut
13
Bare Frame
(2m bay)
14
Bare Frame
15
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
16
Infill as Strut
33
2370.58
0.081
LS-CP
1695.91
0.149
33
5535.1
0.033
IO-LS
3551.06
0.071
33
4046.00
0.077
CP
3162.90
0.118
33
3844.40
0.063
CP
3600.22
0.096
22
1115.33
0.077
LS-CP
834.49
0.119
22
2618.55
0.032
IO-LS
1925.32
0.069
22
1893.90
0.071
CP
1596.67
0.111
22
1827.20
0.061
CP
1754.31
0.093
44
1704.24
0.025
LS-CP
795.23
0.022
44
4712.34
0.083
LS-CP
4712.34
0.083
44
9642.19
0.031
IO-LS
9642.19
0.031
44
7396.40
0.070
CP
7396.40
0.070
Table shows results of Performance Point and Corresponding displacement for

different types of frame. Result shows that Bare frame having lesser values of
Performance Point then Infill as strut and Infill as strut having lesser values of
Performance Point then infill as membrane wall.
Table also shows that overall performance of bare frame is in Life safety to
Collapse prevention, Infill as membrane wall having performance in Immediate
Occupancy to Life safety and Infill as strut having performance in Collapse
prevention.
Soft story phenomena also observed in analysis.
108
The result no 1 to 12 shows that as the number of bays decreases Performance

point decreases 2times then the previous model of same condition but corresponding
displacement remains constant or nearly same to the previous model of same
condition.
By comparing result no 9 and 13 having plan dimension of 8m8m but having
different bays, Shows that performance point increases with the increase in bays but
corresponding displacement reduces this is due to increase in stiffness.
By comparing result of square column shows same values of Performance
Point and Corresponding displacement for particular frame type in both directions
because of stiffness is same in both directions. While rectangle column shows higher,
Performance Point and lesser corresponding displacement in X direction and lesser,
Performance Point and higher corresponding displacement in Y direction due to
column is stiffer in X-direction then Y-direction.

Fig. 6.20 shows the pushover curve and capacity spectrum curve of G+10
building model without infill.
Fig. 6.20 Pushover Curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve of G+10 without infill
PUSH-2
The maximum roof displacement of the building is 519mm and corresponding
failure load is 9617.20 kN. The base shear at performance point was around 4163 kN
109
and corresponding displacement 146 mm. Comparing it with G+4 building model
without infill, there was not much difference in base shear but the displacement at
performance point of this model was doubled. The reason is, as the height of building
is more; the overall stiffness of building under lateral loading reduces, which increase
the lateral displacement of the building under applied lateral load. The performance
point was in linear range and hence the building was found safe against predicted
earthquake. Table 6.11 shows the number of hinges at different steps.
Table 6.11 Tabular format of pushover curve for G+10 bare frame 44 bays
(PUSH-2)
The pushover analysis includes 13 steps. It has been observed that on

subsequent push to building, hinges started forming in beams first. There was
subsequent development of hinges proceeding from IO-LS and LS-CP stage because
of the ductile behavior of structure under lateral loading. From Table 8.6 the base
shear at failure was around 9617.20 kN and corresponding roof displacement 519mm.
At ultimate failure stage, out of 2035 assigned hinges, 1571 hinges were in A-B
range, 64, 53, and 333 hinges were in B-IO, IO-LS, and LS-CP range, respectively,
and 14 hinges were in D-E range. In columns the hinges started forming in later stages
and it remains in LS-CP range till failure while 30 hinges which failed at final step,
were the hinges of beams of 2nd floor to 4th floor. The reason for column not being
failed was the strong column weak beam concept used while modeling. The graphical
representation of hinge formation at performance point is shown in fig. 6.21. It shows
that when demand equals the capacity, 218 hinges were in LS-CP range and none of
110
the hinges of the building was in failure stage. Thus, the overall building is safe and
its overall performance said to be in Life Safety to Collapse Prevention.
Fig. 6.21 Hinge formation G+10 without infill at performance point

6.8.2.2 G+10 model 44 bays with infill membrane wall
In the model, the infill wall was modeled as membrane wall. The lateral
stiffness of the building was increases by providing infills as membrane wall. The
base shear at performance point was higher than that of bare frame and strut. Fig. 6.22
shows the pushover curve and capacity spectrum curve for G+10 with wall.
111
Fig. 6.22 Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum curve of G+10 with wall
(PUSH-2)
The base shear at performance point was 12335.91 kN and corresponding
displacement 86 mm. The behavior of the building under lateral loading was similar
to that of G+4 building model with infills as membrane wall. Table 6.12 shows the
tabular format of pushover curve. There were seven steps of analysis. The base shear
was much higher compared to previous model. Under lateral push, initially the hinges
were started forming in columns in B-IO range. Subsequently these hinges have gone
into higher ranges.
Fig.6.23 shows the hinges formation at performance point. It shows that when
demand equals the capacity. The overall building is safe and its overall performance
said to be in Immediate occupancy to Life Safety level.
112
Fig. 6.23 Hinge formation G+10 with infill as membrane at performance point
(PUSH-2)
6.8.2.3 G+10 model 44 bays with infill as equivalent strut without soft story
The model was created by providing equivalent strut from ground floor to top
floor. The pushover curve and capacity spectrum curve is shown in fig. 6.24
Fig. 6.24 Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum curve of G+10 with strut
(PUSH-2)
113
Table 6.13 shows the tabular format of pushover curve. There were five steps
of analysis.
The graphical representation of hinge formation is shown in Fig. 6.25
Fig. 6.25 Hinge formation G+10 with strut at performance point
114

Table 6.14 Result for G+10 for PUSH-X and PUSH-Y
PerforN
O
Name
Bare Frame
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
Infill as Strut (GF

soft story)
Infill as Strut
Bare Frame
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
Infill as Strut (GF

soft story)
Infill as Strut
Bare Frame
10
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
11
Infill as Strut (GF

soft story)
12
Infill as Strut
13
Bare Frame
(2m bay)
14
Bare Frame
Bays
mance
point X
Displace- Perfor
ment X mance
level
Performance
point
Displacement at
(Meter)
(kN)
(Meter)
44
4163.29
0.146
LS-CP
3230.50
0.261
44
12335.91
0.086
IO-LS
8683.06
0.113
44
6963.66
0.138
CP
5583.71
0.190
44
6734.12
0.129
CP
5569.25
0.163
33
2419.50
0.144
LS-CP
1901.13
0.253
33
6501.66
0.106
IO-LS
5232.66
0.131
33
4068.28
0.135
CP
3705.12
0.219
33
3840.35
0.129
CP
3191.84
0.156
22
1156.34
0.145
LS-CP
923.22
0.240
22
2852.65
0.114
IO-LS
2657.72
0.145
22
1904.81
0.142
CP
1977.06
0.221
22
1850.42
0.136
CP
1545.55
0.157
44
3208.87
0.094
LS-CP
2231.30
0.170
44
5510.87
0.138
LS-CP
5510.87
0.138
115
(kN)
15
Infill as Membrane
(GF soft story)
16
Infill as Strut
44
12546.46
0.058
IO-LS
12546.46
0.058
44
8450.71
0.130
CP
8450.71
0.130
Similar results shows for G+10 which was discussed for G+4.
Comparing results of G+10 with G+4, there is not much difference in base
shear but the displacement at performance point of this model was doubled. The
reason is, as the height of building is more; the overall stiffness of building under
lateral loading reduces, which increase the lateral displacement of the building under
applied lateral load.
116
CHAPTER 7 - ANALYSIS OF NEW R.C.C. BUILDING WITH

VARIOUS LOCATION AND QUANTITY OF INFILL PANELS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
To carry out the parametric study related to the influence of infill strut density
in plan as well as in elevation, a symmetric G+4 and G+10 storied building with an
identical floor framing plan as shown in fig.6.1 was considered for analysis. The
comparative study between the bare frame buildings and the buildings with infilled
frames with different infill wall densities has been carried out with respect to dynamic
characteristics, capacity curves, performance points, yield patterns, with the help of
pushover analysis.
To carry out the parametric study related to the influence of infill strut , In one
direction infill strut density is 100% (In this case Y dirn) and infill strut density in
other direction is varies from 0%(bare frame), 50%(partial strut), and 100% (fully
strut).
7.2 LIST OF BUILDING FOR PARAMETRIC STUDY OF STRUT
Table 7.1 Buildings for G+4 and G+10
Bays in both
Number
Name
Storey
G+4
44
Infill Strut (50% strut) in first and last bay
G+4
44
Infill Strut (50% strut) in first and third bay
G+4
44
Infill Strut (50% strut) in second and third bay
G+4
44
Infill Strut (50% strut) in Second and fourh
G+4
44
Infill Strut (100% strut)
G+4
44
G+10
44
Infill Strut (50% strut) in second and third bay
G+10
44
direction
7.3 MODELING OF BUILDINGS

Modeling process for G+4 and G+10 are as per chapter 6. The geometric
property assigned to all the beams and columns and loading on slabs for G+4 and
117
G+10 are as per Table 6.1 and Table 6.4 respectively. All structural members were of
M25 grade concrete and Fe415 steel. The slabs were considered as rigid floor
diaphragm.
7.3 ELEVATION OF BUILDING IN x DIRECTION
Fig.7.1 Bare Frame (0% strut)
Fig.7.2 Infill Strut in first and last bay
Fig.7.3 Infill Strut in first and third
Fig.7.4 Infill Strut in second and third
118
Fig.7.5 Infill Strut in Second and fourth
Fig.7.7 Bare Frame (0%)
Fig.7.6 Infill Strut (100% strut)
Fig.7.8 Infill Strut (50%)
Fig.7.9 Infill Strut (100%)
7.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

7.4.1 Yield pattern
A study of the yield pattern in the different building configurations considered
in this, investigation has been made to understand the inelastic behaviour of the
119
buildings under monotonically applied incremental static loads in different directions.

Following changes in the yield pattern are observed with the change in infill wall
density.
The yield patterns in the G+4 storied bare frame building are presented in
fig.7.10 and fig 7.11. In the 4 storied buildings without infills, hinges first occur in
the third storey beams. Further pushing of the structure results hinges forming in the
ground storey beams. Then, hinges are formed in the ground storey columns. With the
addition of 50% infills strut of the X direction of this building, the hinges first
developed in the masonry infills. Masonry struts start yielding from ground storey
upwards. After yielding of the masonry infills, hinges were formed in the beams of
the ground and the first storey. Hinges were also observed in the columns surrounding
the infilled bays. The sequence of hinge formation in the frame with 50% infills is
presented in fig.7.12 to fig 7.19. From an appraisal of the yield patterns for the bare
frame and the frame with 50% infills, it will be evident that the inclusion of mere 50%
infills in the frame significantly changes the yield pattern. Fig.7.12 to fig 7.19 show
that yield pattern significantly changes with the location of infill strut.
Similar yield patterns were observed in the case of 100% infilled frames. It can also
be observed that with the increase in infill density, greater extent of hinging was seen
in the columns of the building. For instance, hinges in the columns of the second and
third storey in the case of the 100% infilled frames can be seen in fig.7.20 to fig 7.21.
In the infilled frames, in general, yielding in beams took place after the yielding of
most of the masonry struts, followed by formation of hinges in the columns
surrounding the infilled bays.
In case of the G+10 storied building without infills, the beams of the third, fifth , and
seventh storeys started yielding first. Further pushing of the structure resulted in
hinges forming in the beams of the storeys immediately below and above the storeys
of initial yielding (3rd, 5th and 7th). Columns hinging in the ground storey followed
beam hinging. The sequence of hinge formation in the 10 storied bare frame is
presented in fig.7.22 and fig 7.23. The addition of 50% infills significantly changed
the yield pattern of the G+10 storied structures as can be seen in fig.7.24 and fig 7.25.
As seen with the other infilled frames, the masonry struts started yielding from the
lower storey upwards. The first yielding in the beams took place in the beams of the
120
middle storeys i.e third, fifth , and seventh storeys. Yielding in beams of the upper
and lower storeys took place after this. The columns of the fifth and sixth storeys
yielded after the hinge formation in the upper and lower storey beams. In case of the
G+10 storied building with 100% infills, the beams of ground storey started yielding
after most of the masonry strut had yielded. Subsequently, the beams in the middle
storey yielded. Columns of the middle stores (3rd, 5th and 7th) yielded in next stage. It
was observed for this case that most of the beams and columns in the top three storeys
had not yielded. fig.7.26 and fig 7.27 present the yield patterns for the G+10 storied
building with 100 % infills
Fig.7.10 Deflected shape at performance point and ultimate point for X direction
in G+4 storied bldg. with 0% Infill (outer frame)
in G+4 storied bldg. with 0% Infill(Inner frame)
121
122
123
124
125
126
Fig.7.22 Deflected shape at performance point in X direction for G+10 storied

Fig.7.23 Deflected shape at ultimate point in X direction for G+10 storied bldg.
with 0% Infill (Inner frame)
127

with 50% Infill(Inner frame)
128

with 100% Infill (Inner frame)
7.4.2 Capacity curves and performance levels
A comparative study has been made of different configurations of the multistoried building with respect to their performance levels for Design Basis Earthquake
129
(DBE) and Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE). The fig.7.28 and fig.7.29
present the capacity curves for various infill wall densities for the two building
configurations considered in this study. In general, it has been observed that presence
of infills improves the strength of the frames but reduces ductility.
The relatively low infill wall density of 50%, did not improve the shear
capacity, but reduced roof displacements by a significant amount. Further increase in
the infill density improved the base shear capacity but reduced displacement capacity
of the frames.
The performance point for DBE and MCE are displayed using the symbols by
and
respectively in the capacity curves of fig.7.28 and fig.7.29.
Fig.7.28 Capacity curves of G+4 storied building in X Direction
Fig.7.29 Capacity curves of G+10 storied building in X Direction
130
CHAPTER 8 - ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BUILDING

8.1 INTRODUCTION
The chapter deals with the performance based analysis of an existing building.
The building taken as a case study was Dev shikhar, Ganesh chokadi, Anand. It is
G+5 residential building without lift core and having water tank at top. The typical
storey height is 3m.The year of construction of Dev shikhar apartment is 2010. The
selection of existing building was with an intention of finding capacity of building to
check its safety against earthquake. Each floor is having two flats almost equal in its
construction.
8.2 EVALUTION STRUCTURAL DETAILS OF AN EXISTING BUILDING

Typical slab details, terrace slab details, column and foundation details were
the four structural drawings available for Dev Shikhar apartment.
The concrete grade were M25 and reinforcement was Fe415. All the beams
were 115mm thick and 400 mm depth unless other wise specified. All the slabs were
115mm thick. Due to symmetry of building in plan the details of beams were same on
the either side of the axis of symmetry. The sizes of beams of typical slab and column
are tabulated.
Table 8.1 Column Schedule
Note :- Dimensions are in mm
Column C2,C3,
C16,C17,
C7,C10,
C11,C12,
No.
C18,C27
C22,C23
C24,C26
680350
760220
220760
Up
C4,C5
to 450450
third
16-20
16-20
10-20
10-20
floor
8@100cc
8@100cc
8@100cc
8@100cc
After
450450
680350
760220
220760
Third
12-20
12-20
10-12
10-12
floor
8@100cc
8@100cc
8@100cc
8@100cc
131
Fig.8.1 Column location

Table 8.2 Beam Schedule
Note :- Dimensions are in mm
Beam Bars
B1
B2
230115
Cross section
Beam Bars
B7
230420
5-20
8-12
8@100cc
8@100cc
115350
B8
230420
4-12
8-12
8@100cc
8@100cc
132
Cross section
B3
B4
B5
B6
230420
B9
230115
9-12
5-12
8@100cc
8@100cc
115320
B10
350260
8-12
9-12
8@100cc
8@100cc
230260
B11
230580
5-12
10-20
8@100cc
8@100cc
115420
B12
230350
8-12
7-20
8@100cc
8@100cc
133
Fig.8.2 Beam location

8.3 MODELING OF EXISTING BUILDING
After evaluating the structural details, modeling of an existing building was
done in ETABS.
Two different models were created in the software: a bare frame and frame
having infill as equivalent strut. The material properties and geometrical properties of
structural elements were defined in to the software. The orientation of columns was
provided and the beam offsets were also given as per the drawings. The Plan and 3D
view of building are shown in fig.8.3. The grid lines were formed at each location of
columns. Typical storey height was taken as 3.0m and base storey height was taken as
4.26 which includes 1.26m of foundation depth. The beams were created as per the
location in drawing and corresponding properties of beams and columns were
assigned. All the slabs were 115mm thick and the slabs were taken as Rigid Floor
Diaphram.
134
Fig. 8.3a Plan of existing building
Fig. 8.3b 3D model of existing building
One water tank was modeled at the top of the building. Columns at the
location of water tank were extended to the top of tank. The bottom slab of tank was
100mm thick and water load was calculated considering tank full and applied as area
load on the base slab.
Property was kept same for both the models.
Fig. 8.4 Model having equivalent Strut

In second model, equivalent compression strut was provided to consider the
effect of infill walls. The properties of equivalent strut are given in Appendix I. The
location of infill walls were selected from the drawing. The strut was provided only
135
where there are the beam column junctions as shown in Fig. 8.4. The load of the wall
was calculated and applied to the beams below it.
8.4 ASSIGN FRAME NONLINEAR HINGE PROPERTY
For pushover analysis, nonlinear hinges were to be provided to the frame
structural elements. All the beams were provided with default moment (M3) hinge
and user defined shear hinge at both the ends. All the columns were provided with
default PMM hinge. The size of beams, columns and the reinforcement provided were
provided into the software. Depending upon this data the program will calculate the
yield moments and corresponding displacement which is used for nonlinear static
analysis
8.5. NONLINEAR STATIC LOAD CASES & ANALYSIS OF EXISTING
BUILDING
Before carrying out nonlinear analysis, nonlinear static load cases were to be
defined. Three load cases were defined one having gravity load pattern (PUSH1),
second having lateral load pattern in X dirn (PUSH2) and third having lateral load
pattern in Y dirn (PUSH3). Unloading method used was Unload Entire Structure
and geometric nonlinearity was also considered. PUSH1 case was load controlled,
PUSH2 and PUSH3 case was displacement controlled and was considered started at
the end of PUSH1 case.
Static linear and dynamic analysis was performed before performing pushover
analysis. Once the pushover analysis is performed, the software creates a LOG file
which contains all the details of the iterations and steps involved into the pushover
analysis.
8.6 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

8.6.1 Existing Building without infill walls
The building was analyzed for lateral loading in both the horizontal directions.
Fig. 8.5 shows the pushover curve in X and Y-direction. Stiffness were same in both
direction so the base shear at failure were nearly same. The capacity spectrum curve
are shown in fig.8.6.
136
Fig. 8.5a Pushover curve for X-dirn.
Fig. 8.5b Pushover curve in Y-dirn.
The base shear at performance point for loading in X-dirn was 1127.37 kN and
corresponding displacement was 69mm. In case of lateral loading in Y-dirn., the base
shear at performance point was 1167.01kN and corresponding displacement was 62
mm.
Fig. 8.6a Capacity Spectrum Curve X
Fig. 8.6b Capacity Spectrum Curve Y
Table 8.3 shows the hinge development of structure under lateral loading in
X-dirn.
Table8.3 Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building without strut
in X-dirn.
137
There were 3 steps of analysis in X-dirn. and 3 steps of analysis in Y-dirn.

Table 8.3 and 8.4 shows the hinge formation of Existing building without strut in X
and Y direction respectively. In both the cases, initially the hinges started forming in
beams and subsequently hinges were formed into columns. From Table 8.3, for
loading in X-dirn, at performance point, out of 1656 assigned hinges, 1402 hinges
were in linear range, 173 were in B-IO range, 78 were in IO-LS range and 2 hinges
were in LS-CP range. Thus the overall building was considered to be in Life Safety
level in case of predicted earthquake in X-dirn. The graphical representation of hinge
formation at performance point of existing building without strut in X-dirn. and Ydirn. is shown in fig.8.7 and fig.8.8 respectively.
Table8.4 Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building without strut
in Y-dirn.
In case of loading in Y-dirn., from Table 8.4, in step 2 the base shear was
1903.53 kN and two hinges were C-D stage. These hinges were the shear hinges in
beams. Shear failure in the beams was not considered as the total failure of the
building and hence the analysis proceeded. Thus the overall building was considered
to be in Life Safety level in case of predicted earthquake in Y-dirn.
138
Fig. 8.7 Hinge formation Existing building without strut X-dirn. at performance point
Fig. 8.8 Hinge formation Existing building without strut Y-dirn. at performance point
8.6.2 Existing Building with infills as equivalent strut.

Fig.8.9 and Fig.8.10 shows the Pushover curve and Capacity Spectrum Curve
respectively
139
Fig.8.9a Pushover curve for X-dirn. Fig.8.9b Pushover curve in Y-dirn.

The base shear at performance point for loading in X-dirn, was 2281.38 kN
and corrsoponding displacement 48mm. In case of lateral loading in Y-dirn., the base
shear at performance point was 2070.64kN and corresponding displacement 51 mm
Fig.8.10aCapacity Spectrum Curve XdirnFig.8.10bCapacity Spectrum Curve

Ydirn
There were 5 steps of analysis in X-dirn. and 5 steps of analysis in Y-dirn.

Table 8.5 and 8.6 shows the hinge formation of Existing building without strut in X
and Y direction respectively. In both the cases, initially the hinges started forming in
beams and subsequently hinges were formed into columns. From Table 8.5, for
loading in X-dirn, at performance point, out of 1846 assigned hinges, 1589 hinges
were in linear range, 150 were in B-IO range, 44 were in IO-LS range and 2 hinges
were in LS-CP range and 60 in CP-C range. Thus the overall building was considered
140
to be in Collapse prevention level in case of predicted earthquake in X-dirn. The

graphical representation of hinge formation at performance point of existing building
with strut in X-dirn. and Y-dirn. is shown in fig. 8.11 and fig.8.12 respectively.
Table8.5 Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building with strut in Xdirn.
From Table 8.6, for loading in Y-dirn, at performance point, out of 1846
assigned hinges, 1501 hinges were in linear range, 168 were in B-IO range, 75 were in
IO-LS range and 41 hinges were in LS-CP range and 60 in CP-C range. Thus the
overall building was considered to be in Collapse prevention level in case of predicted
earthquake in Y-dirn.
Table8.6 Tabular format of pushover curve for Existing Building with strut in Ydirn.
141
Fig.8.11 Hinge formation Existing building with strut X-dirn. at performance point
Fig.8.12 Hinge formation Existing building with strut X-dirn. at performance point
As discussed in chapter 6, similar results and behavior of structure obtained for real
life structure.
142
CHAPTER 9 - CONCLUSION AND SCOPE O F FUTURE WORK

Nonlinear Static Analysis was performed on various new R.C.C building
models. Various results were obtained after performing the analysis. After detailed
study of the results and behavior of buildings during analysis, the following
conclusions were made.
New RCC Buildings
Different building model developed based on different modeling aspects

showed distinct modeling effect on overall results of the building.
As new building has been designed for an earthquake forces prior to nonlinear
analysis its performance was found satisfactory, overall.
G+4 and G+10 story building model without infill has an overall performance
in Life Safety to Collapse Prevention.
G+4 and G+10 story building model with infill as membrane wall has an
overall performance in Immediate Occupancy level.
G+4 and G+10 story building model with infill as equivalent strut has an
overall performance in Collapse Prevention level.
From the results for G+4 and G+ 10 story building, Bare frame without infill
having lesser lateral load capacity (Performance point value) as compared to
bare frame with equivalent strut and bare frame with equivalent strut has lesser
lateral load capacity compared to bar frame with membrane wall.
As the no of bays increases lateral load carrying capacity increases but with
the increase in bays corresponding displacement does not increases.
As the no of storey increases lateral load carrying capacity does not increase
but corresponding displacement increases.
It has been observed that, building models without infill show flexure
(moment- M3) hinge formation, while building models with infill wall as
membrane element shown axial moment interaction (PMM) hinge formation.
i.e. for bare frame beams were yielded first while for infill as membrane
element columns were yielded first.
However, for building models with equivalent strut shown axial hinges
formation in strut because of brittle property assigned to strut members.
143
In case of building models without infills at GF, soft storey effect has been
seen remarkably.
Bulding with infilled frame has high initial stiffness, attracts most of the
lateral forces, but fails prematurely because of the brittle behaviour. In such
cases RC frames must have sufficient backup strength to avoid the collapse of
the structure.
The nature and characteristics of pushover curve and capacity spectrum curve
obtained for all building models were comparable to the literature.
Existing Building
Pushover curve for an existing building in X-dirn. and Y-dirn. were more or
less same in nature but different in magnitude.
An existing building made without considering infill strut shows its

performance in LS-CP range, i.e. building is called safe against predicted
earthquake.
Even though an existing building is safe for predicted earthquake, some of the
members which yielded extensively need an immediate attention - either
retrofit or restrengthen.
An existing building made with considering infill strut shows its performance
in CP range, i.e. building is called safe against predicted earthquake.
Results and behaviour of existing building observed were nearly same as new
building.
Future Scope of Work

Looking to the work done in present thesis following work can be taken as future
scope of work related to this topic
Effect of location and thickness variation of infill panels on overall behavior

of the building.
Infill as equivalent strut is universally adopted for masonry wall but infill as
masonry membrane wall gives better performance so one may use shearwall
(reinforced concrete wall) for performance based analysis.
Estimation of retrofitting and restrengthening for an existing building.
144
Parametric study of performance based analysis for new as well as an existing

building for different levels of an earthquake.
Developing
and
validating
pushover
curve
after
retrofitting
and
restrengthening an existing building.
Nonlinear dynamic analysis of buildings with variation in infills along height,

and eccentrically placed infills can be performed.
Safe collapse mechanism Ductility aspect for new as well as an existing

building
However, area of performance based analysis of R.C.C. building is still open to

include various allied parameters to study.
145
Appendix-I
MODELING OF INFILL WALLS
For lateral load resisting frame, the stiffness of infill wall and strength
contribution has to be considered. Non-integral infill frame subjected to lateral load
behaves like a diagonally braced frame. Hence, appropriately, infill wall can be
replaced by an equivalent compression only strut in the analysis model.
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY OF MASONRY

The modulus of elasticity of masonry is calculated from the tables given below
where, fm = Compressive strength of brickwork
146
[B3]
1psi = 0.006894757 Mpa

So, modulus of elasticity of masonry varies from 874.61 Mpa to 2637.00 Mpa.
Brick masonry walls are commonly constructed in India using cement mortar
of 1:6 and bricks (first or second class) of size 210 x 110 x 60 mm. So, compressive
strength (fm) of brick masonry constructed in India will be 4.13 Mpa for first class
bricks and 2.06 Mpa for second class bricks . For calculation of the strut parameter
here fm has been taken as 2.8 Mpa to be on conservative side.
So, all the strut should be modelled with modulus of elasticity,
Em = 550fme = 1200 Mpa
EQUIVALENT WIDTH OF STRUT

The key to the equivalent diagonal strut approach lies in determination of
effective width of the equivalent diagonal strut. For solid walls width of equivalent
diagonal strut (w or a) can be taken as [B3].
a 0.175 1hcol
0.4
rinf
FAILURE PROPERTIES OF STRUT

The equivalent struts has to be modeled with axial hinges, which has brittle
load-deformation relation only for compression. Fig. 1 shows a typical loaddeformation relation for the axial hinge in strut. R (FC) and y (DC) represent the yield
load and the yield deformation, respectively, of the strut.
147
Fig. 1 A typical stress-strain relation for axial hinges in equivalent struts.

Lower of the failure loads corresponding to the following failure modes is
taken as the strength(R) of the masonry infill.
I. Local crushing of the masonry at one of the compression corners of the infill
wall.
II. Shear cracking along the bed-joints of the bricks.
I. Crushing failure
The diagonal load causing local crushing (Rc) is given by the following
equation [D1].
Rc = C tinf sec fm
The length of contact at the column (C) at the compression diagonal corner is
calculated using the following formula
Here is the relative stiffness of the infill to the frame. It can be expressed as
[B3]
1/ 4
Emetinf sin 2
1
4 E fe I col hinf
Here,
hcol
=Column height between centerlines of beams
hinf
= Height of infill panel
Efe
= Expected modulus of elasticity of frame material
Eme
= Expected modulus of elasticity of infill material
148
Icol
= Moment of inertia of column (Lowest of the two Columns)
Linf
= Length of infill panel
= Diagonal length of infill panel
tinf
= Thickness of infill panel and equivalent strut
= Angle whose tangent is the infill height-to-length aspect ratio

= (1/ cot (h /l))
= Coefficient used to determine equivalent width of the infill strut
II. Shear failure

Shear failure load RS can be estimated by a relation which is obtained from
simple and non dimensional curve. Following relationship of RS proposed.[D1]
Where, fm = The bond shear strength between the masonry and mortar. It is varies
from 0.24 Mpa for low strength mortar to 0.69 Mpa for high strength mortar . Again
to be in conservative side fm is taken as 0.24 for the calculation.
Lower of RC and RS is the axial strength (R or FC) of the equivalent strut. Yield
deformation (Y or DC) is to be calculated using the following formula.
The ratio of cracking force to maximum strength (FC/FM) is taken as 0.55.
149
APPENDIX II
A.1 CALCULATION OF SHEAR CAPACITY OF R.C. MEMBER
Calculation of shear hinge properties for beams and columns, the yield shear
force for the hinge is calculated considering shear capacities of both concrete and
steel. Detailed calculations using excel sheet is given below,
Properties
fCK = 25
Mpa
fY = 415
Mpa
Modulus of Elasticity of concrete
EC = 25000
Mpa
Modulus of Elasticity of steel
ES = 2E+05
Mpa
Beam or Column size
Cover
B= 300
mm
D= 450
mm
d= 40
mm
d= 410
mm
Length of member
L= 4000
mm
Area of tension Reinforcement
At= 390
mm2
Pt= 0.3107
Shear Reinforcement
Dia. of bar
= 8
Spacing
= 250
No. of Legs
= 2
Area of Shear Reinforcement
ASv= 101.12
mm
mm2
Gross Area of concrete
Ag= 135000 mm2
Axial Load
Pu= 0
CALCULATION
As per Clause cl:40.4(a) of IS: 456-2000
VsY = 59.875 kN
Shear capacity of concrete,
Where,
150
kN
But not exceeding 1.5

As per IS 456 Table 19
Where,
= 9.1532
c= 0.4040
Shear capacity of concrete
VC = 49.70 kN
Total Shear Capacity V = VSY + VC
V = 109.57 kN
But after Yielding, the shear is resisted by the stirrups only.

Shear Modulus G = E/(2(1+))
G= 10416.67
Shear stiffness K = (G*Ag)/L = = 390625

Yield Displacement (Y) = F/K = 0.277761
Since the shear failure is a brittle type of failure, increase the ultimate deformation by
only 50%.
OUT PUT
VU = 109.579 kN
0.2 VU = 21.91 kN
U = 0.000281 m
m = 0.00421 m
151
shear
strength
21.91579
21.91579
115.0579
109.579
0
-109.579
-115.058
-21.9158
-21.9158
shear
deformation
0.006312
0.000421
0.000421
0.000281
0
-0.00028
-0.00042
-0.00042
-0.00631
Force versus Displacement curve
152
A.2 CALCULATION OF MOMENT CURVATURE () AND & ROTATION

() RELATIONSHIP FOR R.C. MEMBER
Excel sheet developed for calculations of Moment Rotation relationship for
structural member for defining Moment hinge properties. Moment Curvature
Rotation relationship depends up on sectional properties, material properties,
compression and tension reinforcement and length of member.
Properties
fCK = 25
Mpa
fY = 415
Mpa
Modulus of Elasticity of concrete
EC = 25000
Mpa
Modulus of Elasticity of steel
ES = 2E+05
Mpa
Modulus of rupture
= 3.5
Beam or Column size
Cover
Length of member
B= 300
mm
D= 450
mm
d= 40
mm
d= 410
mm
L= 4000
mm
Area of tension Reinforcement (As)
AS= 390
mm2
Area of compression steel (As)
AS= 392
mm2
Tension steel
Pt= 0.3107
Pt= 0.3107
Compression steel
Calculate the Moment, Curvature and Rotation

1. At just prior to cracking of concrete
2. At first yield of tension steel
3. When the concrete reaches an extreme fiber compression strain of 0.0032
Construct approximate tri-linear moment-curvature for section
Solution
1, Before cracking
The modulus of ratio n = ES/EC = 8
A = 140460 mm2
153
Centroid of transformed section is given by taking moments of the areas about the top
edge of the section
Y = 225 mm
Hence the moment of inertia is given by
I = (bD3/12)+ (bD( -(D/2))2 + ((n-1)AST( -d)2)+ ((n-1)ASC( -d)2)
I = 2464993500 mm4
Cracking will occur when the modulus of rupture = 3.5 reached in bottom fiber.
=34.2962233 kN-m
= 5.56532E-07 rad/mm
= 0.000556532 rad/m
2, After cracking, at first yield

Assuming the concrete is behaving elastically
K = 0.190628704
Kd = 78.15776877 mm
Now,
S = 0.002075
154
from the strain diagram

C = 0.000488
fC = 12.217
Therefore the triangular stress block is an approximation.
From the strain diagram we find
S = 0.0004
C = 88.207
= 143239.2438 N = 143.239 kN
= 34401.00014 N = 34.401 kN
Therefore, total compressive force is 177.64 kN acting @
= 28.75 mm
jd = d-
= 381.246 mm
MOR at yield = 61.70473kN-m

at yield = 0.00625 rad/m
3, After cracking, at ultimate load
Assume that the compression steel is also yielding;
155
from top edge,
Now, fS = S ES
But CC + CS = T
CC = fCba
where = 0.85
CS = ASCfY
T = ASTfY
Solving this 5 eq we get Quadratic Equation :
Xa2 + Ya + Z = 0
X= 13.53
Y = 385
Z = -27200
Now, Solving this Quadatic equation

a = 35.41
c = 41.658
fs = 31.855
= 77.92 kN-m
= 7.20136E-05 rad/mm
= 0.072013 rad/m
ab = y+p
156
ab = ylp+ (u-p) lp
Where lp = (0.054L)+(0.022fydbl)
lp = 289.04 mm
Rotation at yielding point
y = ylp = 0.00180
Plastic Rotation
p = (u-p) lp = 0.0190
Ultimate Rotation
Moment (kN-m)
100
80
77
62
60
40
34
20
0
Moment (kN-m)
ab = y+p = 0.0208
0
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
77
62
34
13
0
Curvature
Moment curvature relationship
13
0
0.01
0.02
Rotation
0.03
0.04
Moment rotation relationship
157
Appendix-III
CALCULATION OF CA AND CV
An Elastic Response Spectrum, for each earthquake hazard level of interest at a site is
based on the site seismic coefficients CA and CV. The seismic coefficient C A
represents the effective peak acceleration (EPA) of the ground. A factor of about 2.5
times CA represents the average value of peak response of a 5 % damped short period
system in the acceleration domain. The seismic coefficient C V represents 5 % damped
response of a 1-second system and when divided by period defines acceleration
response in the velocity domain.
Fig. 2 Construction of a 5 % damped Elastic Response Spectrum
The Response Spectrum for 5 % damping given in IS:1893:2002 (part I) is

shown in Fig 3
158
Fig. 4 Response Spectrum Curve of IS 1893 2002 (part I)

Coefficient of acceleration (C A) = Z
Coefficient of velocity (C V) = 2.5*CA*TS
For Zone III (Rock, or Hard Soil)
CA = 0.16
T = 0.4
CV = 2.5*0.16*0.4=0.16
The value of CA and CV is calculated for all the zones for considering soil conditions.
These values of CA and CV are tabulated in Table-1.
Table-1 Coefficient of Acceleration and Coefficient of Velocity
Seismic coefficient, CA
Zone II
Zone III
Zone IV
Zone V
(0.10)
(0.16)
(0.24)
(0.36)
Type I
0.1
0.16
0.24
0.36
Type II
0.1
0.16
0.24
0.36
Type III
0.1
0.16
0.24
0.36
Soil
Seismic coefficient, CV
Type I
0.1
0.16
0.24
0.36
Type II
0.1375
0.22
0.33
0.495
Type III
0.1675
0.268
0.402
0.603
159
P. PAPER
1. A.J carr and P.J. Moss, P-Delta effects in the seismic Response of Ductile
Reinforced Concrete Frames, Pacific conference on Earthquake engineering,
New Zealand, November 1991.
2. M J N Priestley, Performance Based Seismic Design,12th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, February 2000.
3. V.K.R.Kodur, M.A.Erki and J.H.P.Quenneville, Seismic design and analysis
of masonry-infilled frames, National research center Canada, June 1995.
4. Helmut Krawinkler and G. D. P. K. Seneviratna, Pros and cons analysis of
seismic evaluation Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, Nos 4-6, pp. 452-464,
1998.
5. Ashraf Habibullah, Practical Three Dimensional Nonlinear Static Pushover
Analysis, Published in Structure Magazine, Winter 1998.
6. Paulo B.Loureno, Rita C.Alvarenga, Roberto M.Silva, Validation of simplified model

for the design of masonry infilled frames, University of Minho, 2005.
7. A. Shuraim , A. Charif, Performance of pushover procedure in evaluating the

seismic adequacy of reinforced concrete frames, King Saud University, 2007
8. A. Kadid and A. Boumrkik, Pushover analysis of reinforced concrete frame
structures, Asisn journal of civil engineering (Building and housing) Vol. 9,
pp. 75-83, 2008.
9. V.G. Pereira1, R.C. Barros, M.T. Cesar, A parametric study of r/c frame
based on pushover analysis, 3rd International Conference on Integrity , July
2009
160
10. Farzad Naeim, Hussain Bhatia, Roy M. Lobo. Performance Based Seismic
Engineering Seismic Design Handbook, 2001.
11. Robin davis, Praseetha krishnan, Devdas menon, Meher prasad, Effeect of
infill stiffness on seismic performance of multi story r/c frame building in
India, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering , August 2004.
W. WEB SITE
1. Farzad Naeim, Hussain Bhatia, Roy M. Lobo, The seismic design
handbook,2001
www.scribd.com/doc/22696678/The-Seismic-Design-HandBook
2. Prakash Siyani, Saumil Tank, and Paresh V. Patel, Learning of ETABS
software, may 2009
www.scribd.com/doc/38226024/ETABS-Examples-Manual
B. BOOKS
1. ATC-40, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Applied
Technology Council, November 1996.
2. FEMA-273, NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings,
Fedral emergency management agency, October 1997.
3. FEMA-302 Prestandard and Commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of
buildings, Fedral emergency management agency , November 2000
4. P. C. Varghese, Advanced Reinforced Concrete Design, Text Book, New
Delhi.
5. SAP 2000 manual, Three Dimensional Static and Dynamic Analysis and
Design of Structures, Computer and Structure Inc. Berkeley, June 1998
161
6. ETABS Users Manual, Integrated Building Design Software, Computer

and Structure Inc. Berkeley, February 2008
7. IS1893(part1)-2002, Criteria for earthquake resistance design of structure,
Bureau of Indian standard, 2002
D. DISSERTATIONS
1. DARJI RAMKRISHNA V, M.Tech Thesis, Performance based analysis of
R.C.C buildings, NIRMA University, May 2005.
2. Amrish M. Bhavsar, M.E Thesis, M- Curvature of Pushover analysis,
Sardar patel University, 2008
3. Prakash K. Siyani, M.Tech Thesis, Performance based design of shear wall
building, NIRMA University, May 2009.
4. Fulvio Parisi, PhD Thesis, Non-Linear Seismic Analysis of Masonry
Buildings, University of Naples Fedrico II, 2010.
5. Sudhanshu Sood, M.E Thesis, Performance seismic design of Buildings,
Thapar University, July 2010.
162

Final Thesis

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Final Thesis

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

PERFORMANCE BASED ANALYSIS OF NEW AND EXISTING

SHAH MRUGESH DILIPKUMAR

Associate Professor, Structural Engg. Dept.,

Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya Engineering College

Prof. Sumant B. Patel

Associate Professor, Structure dept.,

B.V.M Engineering College,

Prof. Sumant B. patel

PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE

Prof. Sumant B. patel

My sincere thanks to Dr. F. S. Umrigar, Principal, Birla Vishvakarma

faculty members of Birla Vishvakarma

Mahavidhyalaya(Engineering College) for their blessing to commit my work in time.

I am also all staff members of Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidhyalaya(Engineering

I am really thankful to my friends, who have been great supporters in my Major

PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY PAGE

1.3 Objective of work

1.4 Scope of the work

1.5 Report outline

Chapter 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW

2.3 Demand and Capacity

2.4 Analysis methods

2.5 Methods of obtaining performance point

2.6 Building performance

Chapter 3 - STATIC NONLINEAR PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

3.2 Static nonlinear pushover analysis

3.2.2 Need for push over analysis

3.2.3 Limitation of pushover analysis

3.3 The Pushover Analysis Procedure

3.4 Capacity spectrum method

3.4.1 Capacity curve

3.4.2 Capacity spectrum

3.4.3 Demand curve

3.4.4 Demand spectrum

3.4.5 Performance point

3.4.6 Performance check

3.4.6.1 At expected maximum displacement

3.4.6.2 Geotechnical effect

3.4.6.3 Other consideration

Chapter 4 - SOFTWARE IMPLEMENTATION FOR PUSHOVER

ANALYSIS IN ETABS 9.7

4.2 Basic steps

4.2.1 Create the model

4.2.2 Run static analysis

4.2.3 Design the structure

4.2.4 Pushover analysis

4.2.4.1 Define hinge properties

4.2.4.2 Define static push over cases

4.2.4.3 Run static nonlinear analysis

4.2.4.4 Display static pushover curve

4.2.4.5 Display deformed shape

4.2.4.6 Evaluating of building at performance point

4.3.1 Analysis and Design of 3d frame

4.3.2 Comparison of total DL and LL

4.3.3 Results and Discussion

Chapter 5 - EFFECT OF PLASTIC HINGE PROPERTIES ON PUSHOVER

5.2 Moment-Curvature relationship

5.3 Determination of Moment, Curvature and Rotation

5.4 Plastic hinge zones

5.4.1 Types of Plastic Hinges

5.4.2 Plastic Hinge Length

5.5 Analysis and Design of 3D frame

5.6 Result and Discussion