An Investigation on the Accuracy of Nonlinear Static Procedures for Seismic Evaluation of Buckling-restrained Braced Frames

Presented herein is an assessment of current nonlinear static procedures (NSPs) for seismic evaluation of bucklingrestrained braced frames (BRBFs) which have become a favorable lateral-force resisting system for earthquake resistant buildings. The bias and accuracy of modal, improved modal pushover analysis (MPA, IMPA) and mass proportional pushover (MPP) procedures are comparatively investigated when they are applied to BRBF buildings subjected to two sets of strong ground motions. The assessment is based on a comparison of seismic displacement demands such as target roof displacements, peak floor/roof displacements and inter-story drifts. The NSP estimates are compared to 'exact' results from nonlinear response history analysis (NLRHA). The response statistics presented show that the MPP procedure tends to significantly overestimate seismic demands of lower stories of tall buildings considered in this study while MPA and IMPA procedures provide reasonably accurate results in estimating maximum inter-story drift over all stories of studied BRBF systems.

Authors:

• An Hong Nguyen
• Chatpan Chintanapakdee
• Toshiro Hayashikawa

Keywords:

• Buckling-restrained braced frames
• nonlinearresponse history analysis
• nonlinear static procedure
• seismicdemands.

References:

[1] ATC Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings: Volumes 1
and 2, ATC-40, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City,
California, 1996.
[2] ASCE Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of
building, FEMA-356, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE),
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2000.
[3] C. Chintanapakdee and A.K. Chopra, "Evaluation of modal pushover
analysis using generic frames," Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 417-442, 2003.
[4] A.K. Chopra and R.K. Goel, "A modal pushover analysis procedure for
estimating seismic demands for buildings," Earthquake Engineering
and Structural Dynamics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 561-582, 2002.
[5] A. Gupta and H. Krawinkler, "Seismic demands for performance
evaluation of steel moment resisting frame structures (SAC Task
5.4.3)," Report No. 132, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering
Center, Stanford University, California, 1999.
[6] H. Bobadilla and A.K. Chopra, "Modal pushover analysis for seismic
evaluation of reinforced concrete special moment resisting frame
buildings," Report no. EERC 2007-01, Earthquake Engineering
Research Center. University of California, Berkeley, California, 2007.
[7] H. Krawinkler and G.D.P.K. Seneviratna, "Pros and cons of a pushover
analysis of seismic performance evaluation," Engineering Structures,
vol. 20, no. 4-6, pp. 452-464, 1998.
[8] S.K. Kunnath and E. Kalkan, "Evaluation of seismic deformation
demands using nonlinear procedures in multistory steel and concrete
moment frames," ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, vol. 41, no.
1, pp. 159-82, 2004.
[9] A.K. Chopra and C. Chintanapakdee, "Evaluation of modal and FEMA
pushover analyses: vertically "regular" and irregular generic frames,"
Earthquake Spectra, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 255-271, 2004.
[10] A.K. Chopra, R.K. Goel, and C. Chintanapakdee, "Evaluation of a
modified MPA procedure assuming higher modes as elastic to estimate
seismic demands," Earthquake Spectra, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 757-778,
2004.
[11] M. Jianmeng, Z. Changhai, and X. Lili, "An improved modal pushover
analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands of structures,"
Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, vol. 7, no. 1, pp.
25-31, 2008.
[12] S.P. Kim and Y.C. Kurama, "An alternative pushover analysis
procedure to estimate seismic displacement demands," Engineering
Structures, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 3793-3807, 2008.
[13] S. Akkar and A. Metin, "Assessment of improved nonlinear static
procedures in FEMA-440," Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE,
vol. 133, no. 9, pp. 1237-1246, 2007.
[14] G.R. Kumar, S.R.S. Kumar, and V. Kalyanaraman, "Behaviour of
frames with non-buckling bracings under earthquake loading," Journal
of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 254-262, 2007.
[15] C.M. Uang and M. Nakashima, "Steel buckling-restrained braced
frames. Earthquake engineering: Recent advances and applications,"
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2003.
[16] R. Sabelli, S.A. Mahin, and C. Chang, "Seismic demands on steel
braced frame buildings with buckling restrained braces," Engineering
Structures, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 655-666, 2003.
[17] B. Asgarian and H.R. Shokrgozar, "BRBF response modification
factor," Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 65, no. 2, pp.
290-298, 2009.
[18] C. Chintanapakdee, A.H. Nguyen, and T. Hayashikawa, "Assessment of
modal pushover analysis procedure for seismic evaluation of bucklingrestrained
braced frames," The IES Journal Part A: Civil & Structural
Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 174-186, 2009.
[19] V. Prakash, G.H. Powell, and S. Campbell, "DRAIN-2DX: Base
program description and user guide," Report no. UCB/SEMM-93/17,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley,
California, 1993.
[20] P. Somerville, N. Smith, S. Punyamurthula, and J. Sun, "Development
of ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC steel
project," Report no. SAC/BD-97/04, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento,
California, 1997.
[21] N. Shome and C.A. Cornell, "Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of
nonlinear structures," Report No. RMS-35, Stanford University,
California, 1997.