Non-Linear Static Analysis of Multi-Storied Building
Non-Linear Static Analysis of Multi-Storied Building
Non-Linear Static Analysis of Multi-Storied Building
d) Distribution of Design Force- The design
base shear, V
B
computed above shall be
distributed along the height of the building as
per the following expression
IV. PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
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. This
example uses default properties.
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.
Define the pushover load cases. In ETABS
more than one pushover load case can be run
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) Volume 4 Issue 10 - Oct 2013
ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 4631
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.
V. METHODOLOGY
The 6 storied building is shown in Fig 1. The seismic
analysis of building is done by Static Analysis and
then goes through the Pushover Analysis with given
above procedures for Zone III. The obtained results
are shown in Tables.
VI. RESULTS AND GRAPHS
TABLE 1. Data for Pushover Curve
STEP DISPLACEMENT
BASE
FORCE
A-
B
B-
IO
IO-
LS
LS-
CP
CP-
C
C-
D
D-
E
>E TOTAL
0 0.0 0.0
198
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 198
1 0.0743 97.12
198
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 198
2 0.1485 194.42
194
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 198
3 0.1919 251.37
155
18 11 14 0 0 0 0 198
4 0.2705 341.71
150
13 17 16 0 2 0 0 198
5 0.2985 363.96
150
10 9 11 0 0 0 18 198
6 0.2687 359.26
150
8 8 13 0 1 0 18 198
7 0.2847 377.26
150
8 8 9 0 0 0 23 198
8 0.1572 220.20
198
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 198
Fig 2. Graph shows the curve of Base shear Vs Displacements
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B
a
s
e
S
h
e
a
r
i
n
K
N
Displacement in M
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) Volume 4 Issue 10 - Oct 2013
ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 4632
Fig 3. Modeling of the structure
Fig 4. Formation of Plastic Hinges at step 4
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) Volume 4 Issue 10 - Oct 2013
ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 4633
VII. CONCLUSIONS
The frame behaved linearly elastic up to a
base shear value of around 180 KN at the
value of base shear 360 KN it depicted non
linearity in its behavior. Increase in
deflection has been observed to be drop
down with load increments at base shear of
360 KN.
The frame has shown variety of failures like
beam-column joint failure, flexural failure
and shear failure. Flexural failures have
been seen in beams.
The Pushover Analysis was including 8
steps it has been observed that one sub
sequent push to building, hinges started
forming in beams first. Initially hinges were
in A-B stage and subsequently proceeding to
B-IO stage. Out of 198 hinges 194 in A-B
stage, 4 in B-IO stage. Overall performance
of building is said to be B-IO stage.
REFERENCES
[1] ATC 40-Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete
Buildings, Applied Technology Council, November 1996.
[2] Chopra AK. Dynamics of Structures: theory and
applications to earthquake engineering. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ; 1995.
[3] FEMA-273-NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, October 1997.
[4] ETABS Users Manual, Integrated Building Design
Software, Computer and Structures Inc. Berkeley, USA.
[5] IS 1893(Part1):2002, Criteria for earthquake resistant
design of structures, Part 1 General provisions and
buildings, Bureau of Indian Standard, 2002.