Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis ii

Comparative results

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper, the methodology for evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis presented in a companion paper is applied to a set of eight different reinforced concrete buildings, covering various levels of irregularity in plan and elevation, structural ductility and directional effects. An extensive series of pushover analysis results, monitored on various levels is presented and compared to inelastic dynamic analysis under various strong motion records, using a new quantitative measure. It is concluded that advanced (adaptive) pushover analysis often gives results superior to those from conventional pushover. However, the consistency of the improvement is unreliable. It is also emphasised that global response parameter comparisons often give an incomplete and sometimes even misleading impression of the performance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)127-151
Number of pages25
JournalJournal of Earthquake Engineering
Volume10
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2006

Fingerprint

Concrete buildings
Dynamic analysis
Ductility
Reinforced concrete
ductility
strong motion
dynamic analysis
reinforced concrete
methodology
evaluation
analysis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Building and Construction
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology

Cite this

Papanikolaou, Vassilis K. ; Elnashai, Amr S. ; Pareja, Juan F. / Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis ii : Comparative results. In: Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2006 ; Vol. 10, No. 1. pp. 127-151.
@article{8b9534464b0c430da93dc5c069625db6,
title = "Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis ii: Comparative results",
abstract = "In this paper, the methodology for evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis presented in a companion paper is applied to a set of eight different reinforced concrete buildings, covering various levels of irregularity in plan and elevation, structural ductility and directional effects. An extensive series of pushover analysis results, monitored on various levels is presented and compared to inelastic dynamic analysis under various strong motion records, using a new quantitative measure. It is concluded that advanced (adaptive) pushover analysis often gives results superior to those from conventional pushover. However, the consistency of the improvement is unreliable. It is also emphasised that global response parameter comparisons often give an incomplete and sometimes even misleading impression of the performance.",
author = "Papanikolaou, {Vassilis K.} and Elnashai, {Amr S.} and Pareja, {Juan F.}",
year = "2006",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/13632460609350590",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "127--151",
journal = "Journal of Earthquake Engineering",
issn = "1363-2469",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis ii : Comparative results. / Papanikolaou, Vassilis K.; Elnashai, Amr S.; Pareja, Juan F.

In: Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 1, 01.01.2006, p. 127-151.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis ii

T2 - Comparative results

AU - Papanikolaou, Vassilis K.

AU - Elnashai, Amr S.

AU - Pareja, Juan F.

PY - 2006/1/1

Y1 - 2006/1/1

N2 - In this paper, the methodology for evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis presented in a companion paper is applied to a set of eight different reinforced concrete buildings, covering various levels of irregularity in plan and elevation, structural ductility and directional effects. An extensive series of pushover analysis results, monitored on various levels is presented and compared to inelastic dynamic analysis under various strong motion records, using a new quantitative measure. It is concluded that advanced (adaptive) pushover analysis often gives results superior to those from conventional pushover. However, the consistency of the improvement is unreliable. It is also emphasised that global response parameter comparisons often give an incomplete and sometimes even misleading impression of the performance.

AB - In this paper, the methodology for evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis presented in a companion paper is applied to a set of eight different reinforced concrete buildings, covering various levels of irregularity in plan and elevation, structural ductility and directional effects. An extensive series of pushover analysis results, monitored on various levels is presented and compared to inelastic dynamic analysis under various strong motion records, using a new quantitative measure. It is concluded that advanced (adaptive) pushover analysis often gives results superior to those from conventional pushover. However, the consistency of the improvement is unreliable. It is also emphasised that global response parameter comparisons often give an incomplete and sometimes even misleading impression of the performance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32644437308&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32644437308&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13632460609350590

DO - 10.1080/13632460609350590

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 127

EP - 151

JO - Journal of Earthquake Engineering

JF - Journal of Earthquake Engineering

SN - 1363-2469

IS - 1

ER -