UNIVERSITA’ DI CHIETI-PESCARA Instructors: Enrico Spacone, Guido Camata, Cristina Cantagallo

NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURES

Fall Term 2012

4. Nonlinear Methods of Analysis

(according to Eurocode 8)

Part of the class notes© for this course were developed jointly by
Prof. E. Spacone at the University “G D’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, Italy
1
and Prof. J. P. Conte at the University of California, San Diego, USA
 Analysis Procedures in EC8

• Linear Static
• Linear Dynamic (Modal Analysis)
– 3D Modal Analysis considered general
reference method in EC8
• Nonlinear Pushover
• Nonlinear Time-History

2
 Nonlinear Methods: General

• As a minimum, use a bilinear Force-Deformation law at

element level
• In RC elements, the minimum requirement is bilinear
with initial stiffness = cracked elastic or trilinear
• Zero post-yield stiffness can be assumed, unless
strength degradation is expected
• Mean values of material properties should be used
• Axial forces due to gravity loads should be taken into
account when determining force-deformation relations
for structural elements
• The seismic action should be applied in both positive
and negative direction
3
 Analysis Procedures in EC8

• Linear Static
• Linear Dynamic (Modal Analysis)
– 3D Modal Analysis considered general
reference method in EC8
• Nonlinear Pushover
• Nonlinear Time-History

4
 Pushover Analysis in short

Vb
d
FN

Base Shear
F1
d
Vb Top Displacement

5
 Nonlinear Pushover

• It may be applied to verify the structural

performance of newly designed and of existing
buildings for the following purposes:
a) To verify the overstrength ratio values au/a1
b) To estimate the expected plastic mechanisms and
the distribution of damage
c) To assess the structural performance of existing or
retrofitted buildings
d) As an alternative to the design based on LE
analysis which uses the behavior factor q. In this
case the target displacement should be used as the
basis for design
6
 Nonlinear Pushover
Vb

DLS

ULS

CLS
d
dy du dc

Damage LS Ultimate LS Collapse LS 7

 Steps of Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
8
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
9
 Nonlinear model of structure

• Frame elements for skeleton

• 2D, 3D FEs for special elements (slabs,
shear walls, stiarcases, etc.)
• Special elements for infills, joints, etc.

• Choice of model type (2D or 3D?)

10
Regularity in Plan
Fy
y

z
y Fx
x

x
11
Irregularity in Plan
Fy
y

z
y
x
Fx

x
12
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
13
Application of gravity loads

14
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
15
 Pushover Analysis

Consider at least two lateral load distributions

F1i=mi d1 F2i=miF1i d2

1 Vb1 2 Vb2

“Uniform” load distribution 1 “Modal” load distribution 2

16
F1i=mi -F1i F2i=miF1i -F2i d1a d1b d2a d2b

1a 1b 2a 2b Vb

Vb 1a
1b
2a
Base Shear

2b
CAPACITY CURVES

d 17
Top Displacement
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
18
 Reduction to equivalent SDOF

d d*
m*  ΦT MR

Vb
F*  F*
Vb 
d
Vb d*  F*


d d*
N

Φt MR F i
m*
 t  i 1

Φ MΦ  Fi 2 N

m F
N


2
  i i
i 1  mi  i 1 19
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
20
 Bilinearization of Capacity Curve

F* F*
Fy*

E m*

d *y d m* d* d m* d*
d m* Target displacement (must be estimated at this point)

 * Em*  m*d *y
d y  2  dm  * 
*
T *  2
 F  Fy*
 y 
21
 Capacity Spectrum

F* F*
m* g
Fy*

d* d *y d m* d*

22
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
23
 Classical Elastic Design Spectrum

TD
TC
SA /g

TB

SA (T*) /g

T* T (sec)

24
 ADRS Design Spectrum

TB
SA /g

SA (T*) /g

SD (T*) SD (m)

25
Need to transform elastic demand into
inelastic demand (approx. approach)
Long period Short Period
Equal dmax Equal Energy
F F
A

Y B
Fy Fy

d d
dy d ep  d e O
d y d e d ep
26
Target Displacement: long period

SA /g
T*>TC

T* medium and long

d *y d t*  d et* SD (m)

27
 Target Displacement: short period

Case 1 Fy* m*  Se T * 

T*<T d t*  d et*
C
SA /g

Case 2 Fy* m*  Se T * 
T* short
d et*  TC 
d 
*
t  1   qu  1 
qu  T* 

Se  T * 
qu 
Fy* m*

d *y d et* d t* SD (m)

28
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
29
Conversion to MDOF

d t*
dt

dt  dt*

Vb F*

30
 Steps for Nonlinear Pushover

• Nonlinear model of structure

• Application of gravity loads
• Pushover analysis (Capacity Curve)
• Reduction to equivalent SDOF
• Bilinearization of Capacity Curve
• Determination of Target Displacement
• Conversion to displacement of MDOF
• Checks for Limite State of interest
31
 Combinatin of effects
Vby

Fy
y Alternative 1
dy
d ty SRSS
E Edy

EEd  EEdx
2
 EEdy
2

Vbx
Alternative 2
Fx
EEd  EEdy  0,3EEdx
E Edx
x
dx 32
d tx
Accidental torsional effects

Ey Ey
 Ex
2eay C L
M  Ex y
2eax eai = 5% Li

CM = Mass Center

L
x

33
 Analysis Procedures in EC8

• Linear Static
• Linear Dynamic (Modal Analysis)
– 3D Modal Analysis considered general
reference method in EC8
• Nonlinear Pushover
• Nonlinear Time-History

34
 Nonlinear Time-History: General

• When using a spatial model, apply three

simultaneously acting accelerograms
(different)
• Artificial accelerograms
• Recorded accelerograms
• Simulated accelerograms

35
 Accelerograms

• Must use:
– Minimum of 3 accelerograms
– The mean of SA(T=0) (calculated from the t.h.)
≥ ag for site in question
– Given T1 = fundamental period in direction of
load application, between 0,2 T1 and 2T1, no
value of the mean 5% damping elastic
spectrum should be < 90% of the
corresponding value of 5% damping elastic
response spectrum

36
 Artificial Accelerograms

• Must match elastic response spectra

(x=5%)
• Duration shall be consistent with
magnitude
• When site-specific info is missing, the
minimum duration of stationary part is 10 s

37
 Recorded and simulated Accelerograms

• Can be used provided that the samples

used are adequately qualified with regard
to the seismogenetic features of the
sources and to the soil conditions
appropriate to the site. Values must be
scaled to the values of ag for the site
• Specific rules for soil amplification
analyses and for dynamic slope stability
verifications

38
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses

• ≥ 7 time-history analyses
– Take average Ed

• Otherwise
– Take most unfavorable value of Ed

39
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses

• If a spatial model of the structure is used,

simultaneously acting accelerograms shall
be taken as acting in both horizontal
directions

40
 Check

• The following relation shall be satisfied for all

structural elements including connections and
the relevant non-structural elements

Ed ≤Rd

• If Ed from nonlinear analysis method, Ed is a

force for brittle mechanisms, Ed is a
deformation/displacement (e.g. plastic hinge or
chord rotations) for ductile mechanisms

41
 Check

• Max forces in elements

• Max deformations in elemnts
• Max floor displacements
• Max interstory drifts
• Column ductility
• Beam ductility

42
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses

SPECTRUM-COMPATIBLE ACCELEROGRAMS
Deviation s of the mean spectrum

• Average measure of difference between mean spectrum and design spectrum

43
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses

SPECTRUM-COMPATIBLE ACCELEROGRAMS
Maximum deviation smax for the single event

44
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses
Non scaled recorded accelerograms
2
1.5
1

File 000333xa EQ:157 Alkion, Grecia

Acceleration [g]

0.5
0
-0.5

-1.5
-1

-2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Orientation of Transducer:N30E 24/02/1981
Time [sec]

File 000333ya EQ:157 Alkion, Grecia

Acceleration [g]

-1 Orientation of Transducer:N120 24/02/1981

-2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Time [sec]

1.5

File 000439xa EQ:213 Spitak, Armenia

Acceleration [g]

0.5

-0.5

-1.5
-1 Orientation of Transducer:N-S 07/12/1988
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time [sec]

2
1.5
1
File 000475ya EQ:230 Manjil, Iran
Acceleration [g]

0.5
0
-0.5

-1.5
-1 Orientation of Transducer:N33W 20/06/1990
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Time [sec]

0.5

File 000600ya EQ:286 Umbria-Marche, italia

Acceleration [g]

-0.5

-1
Orientation of Transducer: WE 26/09/1997
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Time [sec]

File 001257ya EQ:472 Izmit, Turchia

Acceleration [g]

-1

-2 Orientation of Transducer: EW 17/08/1999

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Time [sec]

1.5

File 001312ya EQ: 474

1

0.5

0
Ano-Liosia, Grecia
Orientation of Transducer: N126 07/09/199945
-0.5

-1

-1.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Time [sec]
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses
Scaled accelerograms: Zone 3, Soil C

x=5% Spettro delle Pseudoaccelerazioni

1.00
000333xa EQ:157
0.90 000333ya EQ:157
000439xa EQ:213
0.80
000475ya EQ:230
0.70 000600ya EQ:286
001257ya EQ:472
0.60 001312ya EQ: 474
PSA (g)

MEDIA
0.50 OPCM

0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
T (sec)

Scaled by less than 1.6 46

 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses
ACCELEROGRAMS SCALED TO SAME PGA
0.4
0.3

0.2
0.1
0
File 000203xa EQ:93 Montenegro
-0.1

-0.2
-0.3

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36
Orientation of Transducer:N-S 15/04/1979
Time [sec]

0.5

0
File 000335ya EQ:158 Alkion, Grecia
Orientation of Transducer:N120
-0.5

-1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
24/02/1981
Time [sec]

0.5

0
File 000439ya EQ:213 Spitak, Armenia
-0.5

-1
Orientation of Transducer:E-W 07/12/1988
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Time [sec]

0.5

0
File 000479xa EQ:230 Manjil, Iran
-0.5

-1
Orientation of Transducer:N40E 20/06/1990
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52
Time [sec]

0.5

0
File 000600ya EQ:286 Umbria-Marche, Italia
-0.5

-1
Orientation of Transducer:WE 26/09/1997
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52
Time [sec]

1
File 001726ya EQ:561 Adana, Turchia
27/06/1998
0

-1

-2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Orientation of Transducer:EW
Time [sec]

0.8
0.6
Golfo di Aqaba, Israele
0.4
0.2 File 005794xa EQ:1771
0
-0.2
-0.4
22/11/1995 47
-0.6
Orientation of Transducer:NS
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Time [sec]
 Nonlinear Time-History Analyses
Accelerograms scaled to same PGA: Zone 3, Soil C

x=5% Spettro delle Pseudoaccelerazioni

000203xa
4.00 000335ya
000439ya
3.50 000479xa
000600ya
3.00 001726ya
005794xa
2.50
PSA / PGA

OPCM
MEDIA
2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
T(sec)

48
 Conclusions

• Nonlinear PO analyses are faster but approximations are larger

• Applicability of PO is questionable, mainly for plan and
elevation irregular buildings
• Questionable combination rules for effect combinations after PO
in two orthogonal directions
• Structural models are basically identical, both for PO and TH
• Number of accelerograms need to be checked
• Modeling capabilities are not exhaustive

49
 Appendix A: Derivation of N2 PO Method

PUSHOVER PROCEDURE N2 - 1

d d*
m*  ΦT MR
Fb
F* 
Fb  F*
Fb d F*
d* 


d d*

It is important to understand the derivation of the method, mainly the transformation from
MDOF to SDOF. The derivation shows approximations and limitations of the method

50
 Nonlinear Pushover

PUSHOVER PROCEDURE N2 - 2
The N2 procedure was developed by Prof. Fajfar, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia (Fajfar,
2002). The two basic assumptions are:

1) The pseudo-static lateral force has the following shape:

P=MFp(t)
where p(t) = force intensity
F is a possible deformed shape (not necessarily a mode shape)

2) The structural response, in terms of floor displacements, is expressed as:

U≈Fz(t)
where z(t) is the response generalized coordinate.

These are very rough approximations. Force vector and response shape are proportional. This
51
is the method initial step. The method was developed for shear buildings
 Nonlinear Pushover

PUSHOVER PROCEDURE N2 - 3

Nonlinear static analysis

F(U)=P
Nonlinear dynamic analysis (undamped)

MU  F(U)  MRug
An “equivalence” is sought between the two systems, but only to establish a transformation
between MDOF system and SDOF system.

52
 Nonlinear Pushover

PUSHOVER PROCEDURE N2 - 4

MU  P  MRug

Premultiply by FT, and substitute U=Fz(t) and P=MFp(t), then

ΦT MΦz  ΦT MΦp  ΦT MRug

or
z Vb
m* d *  F *  m* ug or m*   m* ug
 
where

ΦT MΦ
m  Φ MR
* T
d  T
*

Φ MR
z
z

F *  ΦT MΦp 
1

 ΦT MR  p  b
V


53
 Nonlinear Pushover

PUSHOVER PROCEDURE N2 - 5

z Fb
m* d *  F *  m* ug or m*   m* ug
 

d d*
m*  ΦT MR
Fb
F* 
Fb  F*
Fb d F*
d* 


d d*

The frame response if approximated by the response of a single, nonlinear sdof with mass
m* and displaceent d*, subjcted to the design ground motion u g
54
Appendix B: Strength checks

Rottura Duttile
Ductile failure
F

dy du
ductility d
Beam ductile failure: check
deformation demand vs
deformatiton capacity
55
 Brittle failure

Fu

Column brittle failure: check

force demand vs force capacity

Brittle column shear failure prior to flexural failure

56