Seismic Performance Evaluation of Essential Facilities Building in Dhaka City by Pushover Analysis

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Uddin, Md. Noyim
dc.contributor.author Amin, Md. Tanvir Ehsan
dc.date.accessioned 2021-10-11T06:07:34Z
dc.date.available 2021-10-11T06:07:34Z
dc.date.issued 2012-11-15
dc.identifier.citation 1. Allahabadi R., [1987] “Drain 2DX – Seismic Response and Damage Assessment for 2D Structures,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of California at Berkeley, California. 2. Antoniou, S. [2003] “Pushover Analysis for Seismic Design and Assessment of RC Structures,” PhD Thesis, Engineering Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Section, Imperial College, London, UK. 3. Antoniou, S., Pinho, R. [2004] “Advantages and limitations of adaptive and non-adaptive force-based pushover procedures,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering; Vol 8, No. 4. 4. Applied Technology Council [1996] “California Seismic Safety Commission, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings,” Report No. SSC96-01 (ATC 40), California, USA. 5. Bangladesh National Building Code [BNBC 1993] “Housing and Building Research Institute, Bangladesh Standard and Testing Institution,” Dhaka, Bangladesh. 6. Bracci, J.M., Kunnath, S.K. and Reinhorn, A.M. [1997] “Seismic Performance and Retrofit Evaluation of RC Structures,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 123, 3-10. 7. Bracci, J.M., Reinhorn A.M. and Mander J,B [1995] “Seismic resistance of reinforced concrete frame structures designed for gravity loads : Performance of structural system,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 5, 597-609, 711-723. 8. Chopra, A.K. [1995] “Dynamics of Structures; Theory an applications to Earthquake Engineering,” Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 9. Chopra A.K. and Goel R.K., [1999] “Capacity Demand Diagram Methods for Estimating Seismic Deformation of Inelastic Structures: SDOF Systems, PEER Report 1999/02,” Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of California, Berkeley. 10. City of Los Angeles (COLA), [1995] “Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings and Concrete Frame Buildings with Masonry Infills,” January 31, 1995. 11. Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), [1998] “SAP2000 Three Dimensional Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis and Design of Structures,” V7.40N, Berkeley, California. References 50 12. Elnashai, A.S. [2000] “Advanced Inelastic Static (Pushover) Analysis for Seismic Design and Assessment,” G.Penelis International Symposium on Concrete and Masonry Structures, Thessaloniki. 13. Elnashai, A.S. [2002] “Do we really need inelastic dynamic analysis?,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 6, Special Issue 1, pp. 123-130. 14. Faella, G. [1996] “Evaluation of RC structures seismic response by means of nonlinear static pushover analyses,” 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, Paper no. 1146, 8 pp. 15. Fajfar, P. and Fischinger, M. [1988] “N2 - Method for Nonlinear Seismic Analysis of Regular Structures,” Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan, 1988), Vol. 5, pp. 111-116. 16. Federal Emergency Management Agency [2002] “Pre-standard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Building (FEMA 365),” Washington, D.C, USA. 17. Gulkan, P. and Sozen, M.A. [1974] “Inelastic response of reinforced concrete structures to earthquake motions,” ACI Journal, Vol. 71, pp. 604–610. 18. Gupta B. [1999], “Enhanced Pushover Procedure and Inelastic Demand Estimation for Performance-Based Seismic Evaluation of Buildings,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL. 19. Kim, S. and D‟Amore, E. [1999] “Push-over analysis procedures in earthquake engineering,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 15, No. 3, August, pp. 417-434. 20. Krawinkler H. [1995] “New trends in seismic design methodology,” Proceedings 10th ECEE, The Netherlands, Rotterdam, pp. 821–830. 21. Krawinkler H. and Seneviratna G.D.P.K., [1998] “Pros and Cons of a Pushover Analysis of Seismic Performance Evaluation,” Engineering Structures, Vol.20, 452-464. 22. Kunnath, S.K., Reinhorn, A.M. and Lobo, R.F. [1992] “IDARC Version 3.0 – a program for inelastic damage analysis of reinforced concrete structures,” National Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research., State University of New York at Buffalo, Technical Report no; NCEER-92-0022. 23. Lawson R.S., Reinhorn A.M. and Lobo R.F., [1994] “Nonlinear Static Pushover Analysis - Why, When and How?,” Proceedings of the 5th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Chicago, Vol. 1, 283-292. 24. Lefort, T. [2000] “Advanced Pushover Analysis of RC Multi-story Buildings,” MSc dissertation, Engineering Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Section, Imperial College, London, UK.. 25. Md Abdur Rashid [2007] “Evaluation of Seismic Design Deficiencies of Mid-Rise Apartment Building and Remedies,” Individual Study, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh. 26. Mwafy A.M. and Elnashai A.S., [2001] “Static Pushover versus Dynamic Analysis of R/C Buildings,” Engineering Structures, Vol. 23, 407-424. References 51 27. Nassar A.A. and Krawinkler H. [1991] “Seismic Demands for SDOF and MDOF Systems,” John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University; Report No.95. 28. Papanikolaou, V. [2000] “Development and Verification of Adaptive Pushover Analysis Procedures,” MSc dissertation, Engineering Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Section, Impeial College, London, UK.. 29. R. Shahrin & T.R. Hossain [2011] “Seismic performance evaluation of residential buildings in Dhaka city by using pushover analysis,” 4th Annual Paper Meet and 1st Civil Engineering Congress, Dhaka, Bangladesh. 30. Saiidi, M and Sozen, M.A. [1981] “Simple nonlinear analysis of RC structures,” ASCE, ST Division, Vol. 107, No. ST5, pp. 937-951. 31. Sasaki, K.K., Freeman, S.A. and Paret, T.F [1998] “Multimodal Pushover Procedure (MMP) - A Method to Identify the Effects of Higher Modes in a Pushover Analysis,” Proceedings of the Sixth US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering (Oakland, California, 1998), Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 12 pages. 32. SERMİN OĞUZ, [2005] “Evaluation of Pushover Analysis Procedure for Frame Structure,” Middle East Technical University. 33. Tso W.K., Moghadam A.S. [1998] “Pushover procedure for seismic analysis of buildings,” Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, Vol. 1, No.3, pp.337-344. 34. V.K. Papanikolaou, A.S. Elnashai and J.F. Pareja [2005] “Limits of Applicability of Conventional and Adaptive Pushover Analysis for Seismic Response Assessment,” University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1152
dc.description Supervised by Mohammed Shafiqual Alam, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering(CEE), Islamic University Of Technology (IUT), Board Bazar, Gazipur-1704, Bangladesh. en_US
dc.description.abstract Bangladesh is situated in moderate earthquake prone region. Major metropolitan cities of our country are under serious threat because of faulty design and construction of structures. Buildings designed without seismic consideration could be vulnerable to damage even under low levels of ground shaking from distant earthquakes. So the structural engineers now-a-days are more concerned about the different earthquake analysis procedures. According to Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC 1993), the buildings are designed according to equivalent static force method, response spectrum method and time history analysis. But the actual performance of a structure can be hardly found by these methods. Nonlinear inelastic pushover analysis provides a better understanding about the actual behaviour of the structures during earthquake and hence, the application of pushover analysis to evaluate the seismic performance of Secretariat Clinic Building located at Secretarial of Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka is the focus of this thesis. The analysis has been performed in two orthogonal direction of the building based on ATC-40 procedure and it was found that building base shear capacity in shorter direction is about 30% higher than the capacity in longer direction. The inter-storey drift in two orthogonal directions is below 1% (0.38% and 0.74%) at performance point, which corresponds to Immediate Occupancy performance level as per ATC-40 guideline of global acceptability of buildings. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Islamic University of Technology(IUT), Board Bazar, Gazipur, Bangladesh en_US
dc.subject Seismic performance evaluation, Pushover analysis, Inter-storey drift, ATC-40. en_US
dc.title Seismic Performance Evaluation of Essential Facilities Building in Dhaka City by Pushover Analysis en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search IUT Repository


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Statistics