INTRODUCTION

Amongst the natural hazards, earthquakes have the potential for causing the greatest damages. Since earthquake forces are random in nature & unpredictable, the engineering tools needs to be sharpened for analyzing structures under the action of these forces. Performance based design is gaining a new dimension in the seismic design philosophy wherein the near field ground motion (usually acceleration) is to be considered. Earthquake loads are to be carefully modeled so as to assess the real behavior of structure with a clear understanding that damage is expected but it should be regulated. In this context pushover analysis which is an iterative procedure shall be looked upon as an alternative for the orthodox analysis procedures. The promise of performance-based seismic engineering (PBSE) is to produce structures with predictable seismic performance. Performance-based engineering is not new. Automobiles, airplanes, and turbines have been designed and manufactured using this approach for many decades. Generally in such applications one or more full-scale prototypes of the structure are built and subjected to extensive testing. The design and manufacturing process is then revised to incorporate the lessons learned from the experimental evaluations. Once the cycle of design, prototype manufacturing, testing and redesign is successfully completed, the product is manufactured in a massive scale. In the automotive industry, for example, millions of automobiles which are virtually identical in their mechanical characteristics are produced following each performance-based design exercise. What makes performance-based seismic engineering (PBSE) different and more complicated is that in general this massive payoff of performance-based design is not available. That is, except for large-scale developments of identical buildings, each building designed by this process is virtually unique and the experience obtained is not directly transferable to buildings of other types, sizes and performance objectives. Therefore, up to now PBSE has not been an economically feasible alternative to conventional prescriptive code design practices. Due to the recent advances in seismic hazard assessment, PBSE methodologies, experimental facilities, and computer applications, PBSE has become increasing more attractive to developers and engineers of buildings in seismic regions. It is safe to say that

within just a few years PBSE will become the standard method for design and delivery of earthquake resistant structures. In order to utilize PBSE effectively and intelligently, one need to be aware of the uncertainties involved in both structural performance and seismic hazard estimations. The recent advent of performance based design has brought the nonlinear static pushover analysis procedure to the forefront. Pushover analysis is a static, nonlinear procedure in which the magnitude of the structural loading is incrementally increased in accordance with a certain predefined pattern. With the increase in the magnitude of the loading, weak links and failure modes of the structure are identified. The loading is monotonic with the effects of the cyclic behavior and load reversals being estimated by using a modified monotonic forcedeformation criteria and with damping approximations. Static pushover analysis is an attempt by the structural engineering profession to evaluate the real strength of the structure and it promises to be a useful and effective tool for performance based design. The seismic performance of the structure can be determined by comparing demand of the expected earthquake with the capacity of the structure. So, we can evaluate the performance level of the structure i.e. is it in immediate occupancy stage or life safety stage or collapse stage etc. So, as per the requirement of the client one can decide the performance level of the new structure and design it as per required criteria and also for the existing structures, retrofitting can be done. Response quantities estimated from the analysis of the building model need to be compared to acceptable or allowable limits that are termed acceptance criteria. These limits can be specified both at global level in terms of inter storey drift limits and at the local level in terms of component demand limits. The limits are function of performance levels, hence to achieve a higher performance level for a given hazard level, the acceptable criteria will be higher i.e. like the structure should be in immediate occupancy stage after expected earthquake.

NEED OF PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN

From the effects of significant earthquakes (since the early 1980s) it is concluded that the seismic risks in urban areas are increasing and are far from socioeconomically acceptable levels. There is an urgent need to reverse this situation and it is believed that one of the most effective ways of doing this is through: (1) the development of more reliable seismic standards and code provisions than those currently available and (2) their stringent implementation for the complete engineering of new engineering facilities. A performance-based design is aimed at controlling the structural damage based on precise estimations of proper response parameters. This is possible if more accurate analyses are carried out, including all potential important factors involved in the structural behavior. With an emphasis on providing stakeholders the information needed to make rational business or safety-related decisions, practice has moved toward predictive methods for assessing potential seismic performance and has led to the development of performance based engineering methods for seismic design.

ADVANTAGES OF PERFORMANCE BASED SEISMIC DESIGN

In contrast to prescriptive design approaches, performance-based design provides a systematic methodology for assessing the performance capability of a building. It can be used to verify the equivalent performance of alternatives, deliver standard performance at a reduced cost, or confirm higher performance needed for critical facilities. It also establishes a vocabulary that facilitates meaningful discussion between stakeholders and design professionals on the development and selection of design

options. It provides a framework for determining what level of safety and what level of property protection, at what cost, are acceptable to stakeholders based upon the specific needs of a project. Performance-based seismic design can be used to: al buildings with a higher level of confidence that the performance intended by present building codes will be achieved. intended by present building codes, but with lower construction costs. losses) than intended by present building codes. assess the potential seismic performance of existing structures and estimate potential losses in the seismic event. assess the potential performance of current prescriptive code requirements for new buildings, and serve as the basis for improvements to code-based seismic design criteria so that future buildings can perform more consistently and reliably.

Performance-based seismic design offers society the potential to be both more efficient and effective in the investment of financial resources to avoid future earthquake losses. Further, the technology used to implement performance-based seismic design is transferable, and can be adapted for use in performance-based design for other extreme hazards including fire, wind, flood, snow, blast, and terrorist attack. The advantages of PBSD over the methodologies used in the current seismic design code are summarized as the following six key issues: 1. Multi-level seismic hazards are considered with an emphasis on the transparency of performance objectives. 2. Building performance is guaranteed through limited inelastic deformation in addition to strength and ductility. 3. Seismic design is oriented by performance objectives interpreted by engineering parameters as performance criteria.

4. An analytical method through which the structural behavior, particularly the nonlinear behavior is rationally obtained. 5. The building will meet the prescribed performance objectives reliably with accepted confidence. 6. The design will ensure the minimum life-cycle cost.

ATC-40 PROVISIONS for retrofitting of structures

ATC stands for Applied Technology Council which is formed in the United States of America. The main objective of this council is seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings. Although the procedures recommended in this document are for concrete buildings, they are applicable to almost all types of buildings. This document provides guidelines to evaluate and retrofit concrete structures using performance based objectives. Following steps are recommended by ATC-40 for evaluation and retrofitting: 1. Determine the primary goal of the project. 2. Select engineering professionals with demonstrated experience in the analysis, design and retrofit of the buildings in seismically hazardous region. 3. Decide performance objectives for specific level of seismic hazard. 4. Choose Regular site visits and review of drawings. 5. Check whether applied nonlinear procedure is appropriate or not for selected structure. 6. Check quality control measures. 7. Perform nonlinear static analysis if appropriate.

8. Determine inelastic curve known as pushover curve and convert to capacity spectrum. 9. Obtain response spectrum and convert to ADRS format. 10. 11. 12. Obtain performance point. Prepare construction documents and Monitor construction quality.

Performance objectives
A performance objective has two essential parts a damage state and level of seismic hazard. Seismic performance is described by designating the maximum allowable damage state (performance level) for an identified seismic hazard (earthquake ground motion). A performance objective may include consideration of damage states for several levels of ground motion and would then be termed a dual or multiple level performance objectives. The target performance objective is split into structural performance level (SP-n, Where n is the designated number) and non-structural performance level (NP-n, Where n is the designated letter). These may be specified independently. However, the combination of the two determines the overall building performance level.

Structural performance levels

Structural performance levels are defined as follows: 1. Immediate Occupancy (SP-1): It is a state of Limited structural damage, with the basic vertical and lateral force resisting system. Retaining most of their preearthquake characteristics and capacities.

2. Damage control (SP-2): This is a placeholder for a state of damage somewhere between immediate occupancy and life safety. 3. Life Safety (SP-3): This is a significant damage state with some margin against total or partial collapse. Injuries may occur with the risk of life-threatening injury being low. Repair may not be economically feasible. 4. Limited Stability (SP-4): This state is a placeholder for a state of damage somewhere between life safety and structural stability. 5. Structural Stability (SP-5): This is a Substantial structural damage in which the structural system is on the verge of experiencing partial or total collapse. Significant risk of injury exists. Repair may not be technically or economically feasible. 6. Not considered (SP-6): This is a placeholder for situations where only non-structural seismic evaluation or retrofit is performed.

Non-structural Performance levels

Non-structural Performance levels are defined as follows: 1. Operational (NP-A): Non-structural elements are generally in place and functional. Backup systems for failure of external utilities. Communications and transportation have been provided. 2. Immediate Occupancy (NP-B):

Non-structural elements are generally in place but may not be functional. No backup system for failure of external utilities is provided. 3. Life safety (NP-C): Considerable damage to non-structural components and systems but no collapse of heavy items. Secondary hazards such as breaks in high pressure, toxic or fire suppression piping should not be present. 4. Reduced Hazards (NP-D): Extensive damage to non-structural components but should not include collapse of large and heavy items that can cause significant injury to groups of people. 5. Not Considered (NP-E): Non-structural elements, other than those that have an effect on structural response are not evaluated.

Table

shows

Combination

of

structural

and

non-structural

performance levels for Building performance levels. Building Performance Levels Structural performance levels Non-Structural performance levels
Damage Control Considered Immediate Occupancy Structural

Stability

Limited

Safety

Safety

SP-1

SP-2

SP-3

SP-4

SP-5

SP-6

Life

NP-A Operational NP-B Immediate Occupancy NP-C Life safety NP-D Reduced Hazards NP-E Not considered

1-A
Operational

2-A

NR

NR

NR

NR

1-B
Immediate Occupancy

2-B

3-B 3-C
Life safety

NR

NR

NR

1-C NR

2-C 2-D

4-C 4-D

5-C 5-D 5-E

Structural Stability

6-C 6-D
Not Applicable

3-D

NR

NR

3-E

4-E

Legend

Combination of structural and non-structural performance levels for Building performance levels

Not

INELASTIC DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF THE STRUCTURE

In high seismicity areas most of the structures are designed to deform beyond their elastic limits during the design earthquake. To fully understand how a structure will perform, inelastic dynamic response of the structure is to be considered. The two methods to perform inelastic dynamic response of the structure are nonlinear time history analysis and pushover analysis.Fig.4.1 describes type of methods to evaluate inelastic dynamic response of the structure.

Methods to evaluate inelastic dynamic response of the structure Performance-based methods require reasonable estimates of inelastic deformation or damage in structures. Elastic Analysis is not capable of providing this information and Nonlinear dynamic response time history

analysis is capable of providing the required information, but very time consuming. Nonlinear static pushover analysis provides reasonable estimates of inelastic behavior. So, nonlinear static pushover analysis is used to simplify nonlinear time history analysis process.

STATIC NONLINEAR PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

Introduction
Establish an equivalent single-degree-of-freedom system

representative of the dynamic response of the structure in its first mode which is dominant mode of seismic response for regular structure. It is achieved by analyzing the structure under a set of slowly increasing representative lateral loads. The resulting base shear Vs. roof displacement plot is used to compute its response to any given set of ground motions. Fig shows General Force Vs. Displacement curve.

General Force Vs. Displacement curve Pushover analysis is a static nonlinear procedure for evaluation of seismic performance of structures in which the magnitude of structural load

is incremented in accordance with some pre-defined pattern. With the increase in magnitude of loading, weak links and failure modes of the structure are found. The loading is monotonic with the effect of cyclic behavior and load reversals being estimated by using a modified monotonic force-deformation criteria and with damping approximations.

Need for pushover analysis

Elastic analysis gives good indication of the elastic capacity of structures and indicates where the first yielding will occur. However, it cannot predict mechanisms and redistribution of forces during progressive failure and also the potential of progressive collapse. This is possible to a considerable accuracy with the use of pushover analysis. The use of inelastic procedure for design and evaluation attempts to help engineers to have better understanding of how the structure will behave when subjected to earthquake forces. Following are the basic need for pushover analysis: To estimate the peak deformations for a given structure and a given spectra. Engineer would be able to see if a given structure would be fullyoperational or near-collapse, or in some other damage-state in between, after the "expected earthquake". To indicate which components of the structure is expected to perform worst and should be retrofitted.

Limitations of pushover analysis

Following are the limitations of pushover analysis 1. Pushover analysis procedure implies that there is separation between the structural capacity and earthquake demand. There are

numerous research findings, which establish that structural capacity and earthquake demand are interrelated. 2. Pushover analysis procedure implicitly assumes that the damage is a function of the lateral deformation of the structure, neglecting duration effects, number of stress reversals and cumulative energy dissipation demand. It is generally accepted that damage of a structure is a function of deformation and energy. 3. Pushover analysis is a static analysis and neglects inherent dynamic nature. During an earthquake, the behaviour of a nonlinearly yielding structure can be described by balancing the dynamic equilibrium at every time step. By focusing only on the strain energy of the structure during a monotonic static push, the procedure can leave a misleading impression that energy associated with the dynamic components of forces (i.e., kinetic energy and viscous damping energy) are insignificant. The energy of a structure under earthquake force is given by, Ei = Ek + Es +Ev + Ed Where, Ei earthquake input energy Ek Kinetic energy Es Static energy Ev Viscous damping energy Ed Controlled damping energy 4. Pushover analysis procedure considers only the lateral earthquake loading and ignores vertical component of earthquake loading.

5. Pushover analysis over simplifies the structural modelling. The procedure assumes that it is possible to substructure a nonlinear three dimensional structure and characterize its behaviour by two parameters, base shear force and roof displacement. 6. Pushover analysis procedure does not take into account the progressive changes in the model properties that take place in a structure as it experiences cyclic non-linear yielding during an earthquake. 7. Pushover fails to produce good correlation for earthquakes with predominantly impulsive ground motions.

ESTIMATION OF DEMAND CURVE

Estimates of force and deformation demands in critical regions of structures have been based on dynamic analysis-first, of simple systems, and second, on inelastic analysis of more complex structural configurations. The latter approach has allowed estimation of force and deformation demands in local regions of specific structural models. Dynamic inelastic analysis of models of representative structures have been used to generate information on the variation of demand with major structural as well as ground-motion parameters. Such an effort involves consideration of the practical range of values of the principal structural parameters as well as the expected range of variation of the ground motion parameters. Structural parameters includes the structure fundamental period, principal member yield levels, and force displacement characteristics. Input motion of reasonable duration and varying intensity and frequency characteristics

normally have to be considered. Useful information on demands has also been obtained from tests on specimens subjected to simulated earthquake motions using shaking tables and, the pseudo-dynamic method of testing. Ground motions during an earthquake produces complex horizontal displacement patterns which may vary with time. Tracking this motion at every time step to determine structural design requirements is judged impractical. For a given structure and a ground motion, the displacement demands are an estimate of the maximum expected response of the building during the ground motion. Demand curve is a representation of the earthquake ground motion. A typical demand curve is shown in Fig. We can convert the demand curve, which is in terms of spectral acceleration and time period into the demand spectrum which is a representation of the capacity curve in ADRS-acceleration displacement response spectra (Sa Vs Sd) format.

Demand curve

ESTIMATION OF CAPACITY CURVE

To survive earthquakes, codes require that structures possess adequate ductility to allow them to dissipate most of the energy from the ground motions through inelastic deformations. However, deformations in

the seismic force resisting system must be controlled to protect elements of the structure that are not part of the lateral force resisting system. The fact is that many elements of the structure that are not detailed for ductility will participate in the lateral force resisting mechanism and can become severely damaged as a result. This is required in order to provide a ductile system to resist earthquake forces. The overall capacity of a structure depends on the strength and deformation capacities of the individual components of the structure. In order to determine capacities beyond the elastic limits, some form of nonlinear analysis is required. This procedure uses sequential elastic analyses, superimposed to approximate force-displacement diagram of the overall structure. The mathematical model of the structure is modified to account for reduced resistance of yielding components. A lateral force distribution is again applied until additional components yield. The process is continued until the structure becomes unstable or until a predetermined limit is reached. A typical capacity curve is shown in Fig. We can convert the capacity curve, which is in terms of base shear and roof displacement into the capacity spectrum which is a representation of the capacity curve in ADRS-acceleration displacement response spectra (Sa Vs Sd) format.

Capacity curve

PERFORMANCE POINT
Performance point can be obtained by superimposing capacity spectrum and demand spectrum and the intersection point of these two curves is a performance point as shown in Fig.

Superimposing demand spectrum and capacity spectrum Check performance level of the structure and plastic hinge formations at performance point. A performance check verifies that structural and nonstructural components are not damaged beyond the acceptable limits of the performance objective for the forces and displacements implied by the displacement demand.

PUSHOVER CURVE
For each degree of freedom, one can define a force-displacement (moment-rotation) curve that gives the yield value and the plastic deformation following yield. This is done in terms of a curve with values at five points, A-B-C-D-E, as shown in Fig is called as a pushover curve.

The pushover curve One can specify additional deformation measures at points IO (immediate occupancy), LS (life safety), and CP (collapse prevention). These are informational measures that are reported in the analysis results and used for performance-based design. They do not have any effect on the behavior of the structure.

LOADING CRITEIA FOR PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

The loading which is to be applied for the pushover analysis is the product of the storey masses and first mode shape of the building as the first mode is the most dominant mode in the building usually. The example of the loading is shown in the fig. below.

This load was applied to the structure for pushover analysis. This load is similar to the inverted triangular loading suggested for pushover analysis by various codes such as ATC-40, etc.

ASSUMPTIONS INCLUDED FOR THE LOADING CRITERIA

1. The material is homogeneous, isotropic and linearly elastic. 2. All columns supports are considered as fixed at the foundation. 3. Tensile strength of concrete is ignored in sections subjected to bending. 4. The super structure is analyzed independently from foundation and soil medium, on the assumptions that foundations are fixed. 5. The floor acts as diaphragms, which are rigid in the horizontal plane.

6. Pushover hinges are assigned to all the member ends. 7. The maximum target displacement of the structure is kept at 2.5% of the height of the building.

Type of hinges:
Yielding and post-yielding behaviour can be modelled using discrete user-defined hinges. Currently hinges can only be introduced into frame elements; they can be assigned to a frame element at any location along that element. Uncoupled moment, torsion, axial force and shear hinges are available. There is also a coupled P-M2-M3 hinge which yields based on the interaction of axial force and bending moments at the hinge location. More than one type of hinge can exist at the same location, for example, you might assign both a M3 (moment) and a V2 (shear) hinge to the same end of a frame element. Default hinge properties are provided based on FEMA-356 criteria. [19]

Default Hinge Properties:

A hinge property may use all default properties, or one may partially defined and use only some default properties. Default hinge properties are based upon a simplified set of assumptions that may not be appropriate for all structures. You may want to use default properties as a starting point, and explicitly override properties as needed during the development of your model. Default properties require that the program have detailed knowledge of the Frame Section property used by the element that contains the hinge. This means:

 The material must have a design type of concrete or steel For concrete Sections: The shape must be rectangular or circular The reinforcing steel must be explicitly defined, or else have already been designed by the program before nonlinear analysis is performed. For steel Sections, the shape must be well defined: General and Nonprismatic Sections cannot be used Auto select Sections can only be used if they have already been designed so that a specific section has been chosen before nonlinear analysis is performed. For situations where design is required, you can still define and assign hinges to Frame elements, but you should not run any nonlinear analyses until after the design has been run. Default properties are available for hinges in the following degrees of freedom: Axial (P) Major shear (V2) Major moment (M3) Coupled P-M2-M3 (PMM)

Methodology to perform Static Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

General
Two key elements of a performance based design procedure are demand and capacity. Demand is representation of the earthquake ground motion. Capacity is a representation of the structures ability to resist the seismic demand. The performance is dependent on the manner in which

capacity is able to handle the demand. In other words, the structure must have the capacity to satisfy demands of the earthquake such that the performance of the structure is compatible with the objectives of the design. Nonlinear pushover analysis can be done by capacity spectrum method and displacement coefficient method.

Capacity spectrum method

Capacity curve
The overall capacity of a structure depends on the strength and deformation capacities of the individual components of the structure. In order to determine capacities beyond the elastic limits, some form of nonlinear analysis is required. This procedure uses sequential elastic analyses, superimposed to approximate force-displacement diagram of the overall structure. The mathematical model of the structure is modified to account for reduced resistance of yielding components. A lateral force distribution is again applied until additional components yield. The process is continued until the structure becomes unstable or until a predetermined limit is reached. A typical capacity curve is as shown in Fig.

Capacity curve

Capacity spectrum
To convert the capacity curve, which is in terms of base shear and roof displacement into the capacity spectrum which is a representation of the capacity curve in ADRS-acceleration displacement response spectra (Sa Vs Sd) format, the required equations to make the transformation are as follows (Refer ATC-40, Volume-1, p-8.9):

_________A

_________B Sa=V/(W*1) _________C

_________D

Where, PF1 = modal participation factor for the first natural mode.

1 = modal mass coefficient for the first natural mode.

Wi/g = mass assigned to level i. i1 = amplitude of mode 1 at level i. N = level N, the level which is the uppermost in the main portion of the

structure. V = base shear. W = building dead weight plus likely live loads. roof = roof displacement ( V and the associated roof make up points on the capacity curve ). Sa = spectral acceleration. Sd = spectral displacement ( Sa and the associated Sd make up points on the capacity spectrum ).

First calculate the modal participation factor PF1 and modal mass coefficient

using A and B. Then each point on the capacity curve (V,

roof), calculate the associated point (Sa, Sd) on the capacity spectrum using C and D. A typical capacity spectrum is as shown in Fig.

Capacity spectrum

Demand curve
Ground motions during an earthquake produces complex horizontal displacement patterns which may vary with time. Tracking this motion at every time step to determine structural design requirements is judged impractical. For a given structure and a ground motion, the displacement demands are an estimate of the maximum expected response of the building during the ground motion. Demand curve is a representation of the earthquake ground motion. It is given by spectral acceleration (Sa) Vs. Time period (T) as shown in Fig.

Demand curve (Traditional spectrum) Value of Seismic coefficient CA should be taken to be equal to 0.4 times the spectral response acceleration (units of g) at a period of 0.3 seconds i.e. effective peak acceleration (EPA). A factor of about 2.5 times CA represents the average value of a 5 % damped short period system in the acceleration domain. The seismic coefficient CV represents 5 % damped response of a 1-second system and when divided by period defines response in the velocity domain. Fig illustrates the construction of an elastic response spectrum (Demand curve) (Refer ATC-40, Volume-1, P-4.12).

Construction of a 5 % damped elastic response spectrum (Demand curve) As per proposed draft provisions and commentary on Indian seismic code IS: 1893 (part-I), equivalent seismic coefficient CA as per IS: 1893 (part-I) is given by, CA = Z*g*Sa/g(at EPA) Now, Cv = 2.5CA*TS _________2 _________1

Demand spectrum
To convert Demand curve (traditional spectrum-Sa Vs T format) into demand spectrum (acceleration displacement response spectrum-Sa Vs Sd format), following eqn 3 to be used (Refer ATC-40, Volume-1, p-8.10). Sd = SaT2/4 2

_________ 3

A typical demand spectrum is as shown in Fig.

Demand spectrum (ADRS spectrum)

Demand spectra in Traditional and ADRS formats

Performance point
Performance point can be obtained by superimposing capacity spectrum and demand spectrum and the intersection point of these two curves is a performance point. Fig. shows superimposing of demand spectrum and capacity spectrum.

Superimposing demand spectrum and capacity spectrum

Capacity spectrum superimposed over response spectra in traditional and ADRS formats

Check performance level of the structure and plastic hinge formations at performance point. A performance check verifies that structural and nonstructural components are not damaged beyond the acceptable limits of the performance objective for the forces and displacements implied by the displacement demand.

Performance check
At expected maximum displacement
Once the performance point i.e. spectral acceleration and spectral displacement is found out, the base shear and roof displacement at the performance point can be found out from these values. Then, the following steps should be followed in the performance check: 1. For the global building response, verify a. Lateral force resistance has not degraded by more than 20 % of peak resistance. b. The lateral drifts satisfy the limits given in the Table. Performance limit Inter storey drift limit Maximum total drift Maximum inelastic drift Deformation limits 0.005 0.005-0.015 No Limit No Limit Immediate Occupancy Damage control Life Safety Structural stability

0.01

0.010.02

0.02

0.33 Vi/Pi

2. Identify and classify the different elements in the building. Any of the following building type may be present: Beam-column frames, slab-column frames, solid walls, coupled walls, perforated walls, punched walls, floor diaphragms and foundations. 3. Identify all primary and secondary components. 4. For each element type, identify critical components and actions to be checked. 5. The strength and deformation demands at the structures performance point should be equal to or less than the capacities considering all coexisting forces acting with the demand spectrum. 6. The performances of secondary elements (such as gravity load carrying members not part of the lateral load resisting system) are reviewed for acceptability for the specified performance level. 7. Non-structural elements are checked for the specified performance level.