Seismic drift and ductility demands and their dependence on ground motions

Engineering Structures

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 637-653

  Krawinkler, H ^a   Medina, R ^a   Alavi, B ^b  

^a Stanford University   (United States)

^b EXPONENT INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Inelastic dynamic analysis; Performance based design; Seismic demands

Indexed keywords

DUCTILITY; PROBABILITY; SEISMIC PROSPECTING; STRUCTURAL FRAMES;

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING;

SEISMOLOGY;

DUCTILITY; DYNAMIC RESPONSE; EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; GROUND MOTION; SEISMIC RESPONSE;

EID: 0037375563     PISSN: 01410296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00174-8     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. FEMA 273. NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1997.
2. SEAOC. Vision 2000, performance based seismic engineering for buildings. Sacramento, CA: Structural Engineers Association of California, 1995.
3. FEMA 350 Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 2000
4. Gupta A, Krawinkler H. Dynamic P-delta effects for flexible inelastic steel structures. ASCE J Struct Eng 2000;126(1):145-54.
5. Gupta A, Krawinkler H. Relating SMRFs seismic drift demands to element deformation demands. AISC Eng J 2002;39(2);100-8.
6. FEMA 302. 1997 Edition: NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1997.
7. Somerville P. Development of an improved ground motion representation for near fault ground motions. SMIP98 Seminar on Utilization of Strong-Motion Data, Oakland, CA, September. 1998.
8. UBC. Structural engineering design provisions. In: Uniform Building Code. International Conference of Building Officials, vol. 2. 1997.
9. Alavi B, Krawinkler H. Effects of near-fault ground motions onframe structures. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Report No. 138. Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, February 2001.
10. Gupta A, Krawinkler H. Behavior of ductile SMRFs at various seismic hazard levels. ASCE J Struct Eng 2000;126(1):98-107.
11. Cornell CA.Calculating building seismic performance reliability; a basis for multi-level design norms. Proceedings of the Eleventh World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico. June 1996.
12. Luco N, Cornell CA. Effects of random connection fractures on the demands and reliability for a 3-story pre-Northridge SMRF structure. Proceedings of the Sixth US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, Washington. June 1998
13. Luco N. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis, SMRF connection fractures, and near-source effects. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, June 2002.