Evaluation of ASCE-41, ATC-40 and N2 static pushover methods based on optimally designed buildings

Abstract

Alternative static pushover methods for the seismic design of new structures are assessed with the aid of advanced computational tools. The current state-of-practice static pushover methods as suggested in the provisions of European and American regulations are implemented in this comparative study. In particular the static pushover methods are: the displacement coefficient method of ASCE-41, the ATC-40 capacity spectrum method and the N2 method of Eurocode 8. Such analysis methods are typically recommended for the performance assessment of existing structures, and therefore most of the existing comparative studies are focused on the performance of one or more structures. Therefore, contrary to previous research studies, we use static pushover methods to perform design and we then compare the capacity of the outcome designs with reference to the results of nonlinear response history analysis. This alternative approach pinpoints the pros and cons of each method since the discrepancies between static and dynamic analysis are propagated to the properties of the final structure. All methods are implemented in an optimum performance-based design framework to obtain the lower-bound designs for two regular and two irregular reinforced concrete building configurations. The outcome designs are compared with respect to the maximum interstorey drift and maximum roof drift demand obtained with the Incremental Dynamic Analysis method. To allow the comparison, also the life-cycle cost of each design is calculated; i.e. a parameter that is used to measure the damage cost due to future earthquakes that will occur during the design life of the structure. The problem of finding the lower bound designs is handled with an Evolutionary type optimization algorithm. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.