Evaluation of Conventional and Adaptive Pushover Analysis Ii: Comparative Results

Papanikolaou, Vassilis K.; Elnashai, Amr S.; Pareja, Juan F.

doi:10.1080/13632460609350590

Cited by 41 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In an extensive investigation, Papanikolaou et al [23] concluded that in general the adaptive pushover was not providing considerable advantages over the conventional pushover analysis. Although adaptive analysis can demonstrate better performance comparing to conventional analysis for irregular structures, this advantage is not valid for all cases.…”

Section: Pushover Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Seismic response factors of reinforced concrete pedestal in elevated water tanks

Ghateh

Kianoush

Pogorzelski³

2015

Engineering Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Pushover Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Seismic response factors of reinforced concrete pedestal in elevated water tanks

Ghateh

Kianoush

Pogorzelski³

2015

Engineering Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Conventional and adaptive pushover techniques are compared to IDA by Elnashai (2002), and in Papanikolaou andElnashai (2005, 2006) a test case of eight different reinforced concrete buildings of various plan, height, ductility, and directional effects are investigated to determine the ease of use and accuracy for each of these methods. Although it is shown that adaptive pushover methods yield more accurate results and have some advantages over conventional pushover curves, it is deemed that both techniques are adequate for structural systems free from significant irregularities in plan and elevation.…”

Section: Capacity Spectrum Methods As Methodology For Structural Assesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation-Based Fragility Relationships for Unreinforced Masonry Buildings

2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unreinforced masonry (URM) structures represent a significant portion of the residential building stock of the Central and Eastern United States (CEUSA), accounting for 15% of homes in the 8-state region impacted by the New-Madrid Seismic Zone and an even greater portion of the building stock in most other regions of the world. In addition to significant population, the brittle nature of URM buildings further supports a thorough consideration of seismic response given the susceptibility to severe failure modes. Currently, there is a pressing need for analytically based fragility curves for URM buildings. In order to improve the estimation of damage state probabilities through the development of simulation-based masonry fragilities, an extensive literature survey is conducted on pushover analysis of URM structures. Using this data, capacity diagrams are generated, from which damage exceedance limit states are defined.Demand is simulated using synthetically derived accelerograms representative of the CEUSA.Structural response is evaluated using an advanced capacity spectrum method developed at the Mid-America Earthquake Center. Capacity, demand, and response are thus derived analytically and response data is used to generate an improved and uniform set of fragility curves for use in loss-assessment software via a framework amenable to rapid expansion of pushover database and variation of ground motion records. A set of best practices is hereby developed for selection and use of experimental and analytical data, input ground motions, analysis of structural capacity, limit state definitions, seismic design categories, and probabilistic analysis methods. Curves are expressed in multiple forms for wide range of use in loss-assessment applications. Results are discussed and compared with other relationships developed in the literature, along with those generated using HAZUS opinion-based capacity data. The parameters of the improved fragility relationships developed and presented in this thesis are provided and suggested for reliable use in seismic loss assessment software.iii To my wife, Erin iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

show abstract

“…Since a large number of parameters affect the outcome of such procedures, further research is required, in order to accurately evaluate each one of them, which will allow more accurate criteria to be proposed and allow other cases of buildings, such as those having irregular structural systems, to be evaluated. For the latter cases, the use of advanced pushover procedures such as those presented by Chopra and Goel [2002], Antoniou and Pihno [2004], and Kalkan and Kunnath [2006], could be proposed, since these methods have proven to lead to more accurate results [Papanikolaou and Elnashai, 2005;Papanikolaou et al, 2006]. However, even in its current form, the procedure has a strong practical applicability since it allows to easy assessment of the results that arise from a seismic evaluation procedure for an existing building.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

A Simplified Procedure to Select a Suitable Retrofit Strategy for Existing RC Buildings Using Pushover Analysis

Baros

Dritsos

2008

Journal of Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past ten years, the development of analytical procedures to accurately evaluate the seismic performance of existing buildings has gathered the attention of researchers. This has resulted in the publication of several standards, which, however, inadequately cover the issue of retrofit strategy selection. In the present article, a procedure that allows a comparison of available strategies in order to select the optimum solution for an existing deficient building is proposed. The procedure is based on calculating the pushover curve for the unstrengthened structure. A capacity spectrum is then estimated assuming different retrofit scenarios, which is then used for the evaluation of the strategies. The latter is based on criteria that assess the main structural system characteristics and how each solution benefits them. The final step of the procedure introduces simplified rules that allow the approximate design of each retrofit solution, which allows the evaluation of their applicability. The proposed procedure was applied to two idealized buildings with different structural systems. Results obtained indicate that less effective or inapplicable rehabilitation strategies were properly detected. Thus, the results were considered acceptable in terms of identifying the possible optimum strategy, which, however, should be verified with a detailed design of the retrofit system.

show abstract

Evaluation of Conventional and Adaptive Pushover Analysis Ii: Comparative Results

Cited by 41 publications

References 5 publications

Seismic response factors of reinforced concrete pedestal in elevated water tanks

Seismic response factors of reinforced concrete pedestal in elevated water tanks

Simulation-Based Fragility Relationships for Unreinforced Masonry Buildings

A Simplified Procedure to Select a Suitable Retrofit Strategy for Existing RC Buildings Using Pushover Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About