Similar articles

Abstract: The endurance time (ET) method is a time history based dynamic analysis in which structures are subjected to gradually intensifying excitations and their performances are judged based on their responses at various excitation levels. Using this method, the computational effort required for estimating probable seismic demand parameters can be reduced by an order of magnitude. Calculation of the maximum displacement or target displacement is a basic requirement for estimating performance based on structural design. The purpose of this paper is to compare the results of the nonlinear ET method with the nonlinear static pushover (NSP) method of FEMA 356 by evaluating performances and target displacements of steel frames. This study will lead to a deeper insight into the capabilities and limitations of the ET method. The results are further compared with those of the standard nonlinear response history analysis. We conclude that results from the ET analysis are in proper agreement with those from standard procedures.

[1]AISC, 1989. Manual of Steel Construction: Allowable Stress Design (9th Ed.). American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, USA.

[2]Akkar, S., Metin, A., 2007. Assessment of improved nonlinear static procedures in FEMA-440. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 133(9):1237-1246.

[3]ATC-40, 1996. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, USA.

[4]BHRC 2800-05, 2005. Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings (3rd Ed.). Building and Housing Research Center, Tehran, Iran.

[5]Chandler, A.M., Lam, N.T.K., 2001. Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: a multidisciplinary review. Engineering Structures, 23(12):1525-1543.

[6]Chopra, A.K., Goel, R.K., Chintanapakdee, C., 2004. Evaluation of a modified MPA procedure assuming higher modes as elastic to estimate seismic demands. Earthquake Spectra, 20(3):757-778.

[7]Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., Sadeghazar, M., 2004. Endurance time method for seismic analysis and design of structures. Scientia Irania, 11(4):361-370.

[8]Estekanchi, H.E., Riahi, H.T., Vafai, A., 2006. Endurance Time Method: A Dynamic Pushover Procedure for Seismic Evaluation of Structures. First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, 433:1-9.

[9]Estekanchi, H.E., Valamanesh, V., Vafai, A., 2007. Application of endurance time method in linear seismic analysis. Engineering Structures, 29(10):2551-2562.

[10]Estekanchi, H.E., Arjomandi, K., Vafai, A., 2008. Estimating structural damage of steel moment frames by endurance time method. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 64(2):145-155.

[11]Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., Riahi, H.T., 2009. Endurance time method: exercise test as applied to structures. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 10(5):559-577.

[12]Eurocode 8, 2001. Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance-Part 1: General Rules Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium.

[13]Fajfar, P., 2000. A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra, 16(3):573-592.

[14]FEMA 273, 1997. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, USA.

[15]FEMA 356, 2000. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, USA.

[16]FEMA 440, 2005. Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, USA.

[17]Freeman, S.A., Nicoletti, J.P., Tyrell, J.V., 1975. Evaluations of Existing Buildings for Seismic Risk–A Case Study of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington. Proceedings of the 1st US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, p.113-122.

[18]Goel, R.K., Chopra, A.K., 2004. Evaluation of modal and FEMA pushover analysis: SAC buildings. Earthquake Spectra, 20(1):225-254.

[19]INBC, 2005. Iranian National Building Code. Office of Collection and Extension of National Building Code, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran.

[20]Kalkan, E., Kunnath, S.K., 2007. Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for seismic evaluation of buildings. Engineering Structures, 29(3):305-316.

[21]Krawinkler, H., Seneviratna, G.D.P.K., 1998. Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering Structures, 20(4-6):452-464.

[22]Kunnath, S.K., Kalkan, E., 2004. Evaluation of seismic deformation demands using nonlinear procedures in multistory steel and concrete moment frames. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, 41(1):159-181.

[23]Madarshahian, S.R., Estekanchi, H.E., 2007. Investigation of Nonlinear Endurance Time and Static Pushover Methods in Estimating Steel Moment Frames Performance. Fifth International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, p.1-7 (in Persian).

[24]Riahi, H.T., Estekanchi, H.E., 2010. Seismic assessment of steel frames with endurance time method. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 66(6):780-792.

[25]Riahi, H.T., Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., 2009a. Application of endurance time method in nonlinear seismic analysis of SDOF systems. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(10):1817-1832.

[26]Riahi, H.T., Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., 2009b. Estimates of average inelastic deformation demands for regular steel frames by the endurance time method. Scientia Iranica, 16(5):388-402.

[27]Saiidi, M., Sozen, M.A., 1981. Simple nonlinear seismic analysis of R/C structures. Journal of the Structural Division, 107(5):937-953.

[28]Shattarat, N.K., Symans, M.D., McLean, D.I., Cofer, W.F., 2008. Evaluation of nonlinear static analysis methods and software tools for seismic analysis of highway bridges. Engineering Structures, 30(5):1335-1345.

[29]Valamanesh, V., Estekanchi, H.E., 2010. A study of endurance time method in the analysis of elastic moment frames under three-directional seismic loading. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 11(5):543-562.

[30]Valamanesh, V., Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., 2010. Characteristics of second generation endurance time accelerograms. Scientia Iranica, 17(1):53-61.