Seismic structural demands and inelastic deformation ratios: a theoretical approach

  • Chikh, Benazouz (National Earthquake Engineering Research Center, CGS) ;
  • Mebarki, Ahmed (University Paris-Est, Laboratoire Modelisation et Simulation Multi Echelle (MSME)) ;
  • Laouami, Nacer (National Earthquake Engineering Research Center, CGS) ;
  • Leblouba, Moussa (Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Sharjah) ;
  • Mehani, Youcef (National Earthquake Engineering Research Center, CGS) ;
  • Hadid, Mohamed (National School of Built and Ground Works Engineering (ENSTP)) ;
  • Kibboua, Abderrahmane (National Earthquake Engineering Research Center, CGS) ;
  • Benouar, Djilali (University of Sciences& Technology Houari Boumediene (USTHB), Faculty of Civil Engineering)
  • Received : 2016.05.04
  • Accepted : 2017.03.22
  • Published : 2017.04.25


To estimate the structural seismic demand, some methods are based on an equivalent linear system such as the Capacity Spectrum Method, the N2 method and the Equivalent Linearization method. Another category, widely investigated, is based on displacement correction such as the Displacement Coefficient Method and the Coefficient Method. Its basic concept consists in converting the elastic linear displacement of an equivalent Single Degree of Freedom system (SDOF) into a corresponding inelastic displacement. It relies on adequate modifying or reduction coefficient such as the inelastic deformation ratio which is usually developed for systems with known ductility factors ($C_{\mu}$) and ($C_R$) for known yield-strength reduction factor. The present paper proposes a rational approach which estimates this inelastic deformation ratio for SDOF bilinear systems by rigorous nonlinear analysis. It proposes a new inelastic deformation ratio which unifies and combines both $C_{\mu}$ and $C_R$ effects. It is defined by the ratio between the inelastic and elastic maximum lateral displacement demands. Three options are investigated in order to express the inelastic response spectra in terms of: ductility demand, yield strength reduction factor, and inelastic deformation ratio which depends on the period, the post-to-preyield stiffness ratio, the yield strength and the peak ground acceleration. This new inelastic deformation ratio ($C_{\eta}$) is describes the response spectra and is related to the capacity curve (pushover curve): normalized yield strength coefficient (${\eta}$), post-to-preyield stiffness ratio (${\alpha}$), natural period (T), peak ductility factor (${\mu}$), and the yield strength reduction factor ($R_y$). For illustrative purposes, instantaneous ductility demand and yield strength reduction factor for a SDOF system subject to various recorded motions (El-Centro 1940 (N/S), Boumerdes: Algeria 2003). The method accuracy is investigated and compared to classical formulations, for various hysteretic models and values of the normalized yield strength coefficient (${\eta}$), post-to-preyield stiffness ratio (${\alpha}$), and natural period (T). Though the ductility demand and yield strength reduction factor differ greatly for some given T and ${\eta}$ ranges, they remain take close when ${\eta}>1$, whereas they are equal to 1 for periods $T{\geq}1s$.


deformation ratio;yield strength;reduction factors;ductility;inelastic spectra;Pushover;normalized yield strength coefficient;seismic design


Supported by : National Earthquake Engineering Research Center (CGS, Algeria)


  1. Akkar, S. and Metin, A. (2007), "Assessment of improved nonlinear static procedures in FEMA-440", J. Struct. Eng., 133(9), 1237-1246.
  2. ATC-40 (1996), Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings, Applied Technology Council, report ATC-40. Redwood City.
  3. Baber, T.T. and Noori, M.N. (1985), "Random vibration of degrading, pinching systems", J. Eng. Mech., 111(8), 1010-1026.
  4. Bardakis, V.G. and Dritsos, S.E. (2007), "Evaluating assumptions for seismic assessment of existing buildings", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 27(3), 223-233.
  5. Benavent, C.A. and Escolano, M.D. (2012), "Shaking table tests of structures with hysteretic dampers: experimental results versus prediction using non-linear static methods", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 10(6), 1857-1883.
  6. Benazouz, C., Moussa, L. and Ali, Z. (2012), "Ductility and inelastic deformation demands of structures", Struct. Eng. Mech., 42(5), 631-644.
  7. Borzi, B. and Elnashai, A.S. (2000), "Refined force reduction factors for seismic design", Eng. Struct., 22(10), 1244-1260.
  8. Bouc, R. (1967), "Forced vibration of mechanical systems with hysteresis", Proceedings of the fourth conference on non-linear oscillation, Prague, Czechoslovakia.
  9. Chikh, B., Leblouba, M., Mehani, Y., Kibboua, A., Hadid, M. and Zerzour, A. (2014), "Ductility spectrum method for design and verification of structures: single-degree-of-freedom bilinear systems", Proceeding of 15th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey, 24-29 August.
  10. Chikh, B., Mehani, Y. and Leblouba, M. (2016), "Simplified procedure for seismic demands assessment of structures", Struct. Eng. Mech., 59(3), 455-473.
  11. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (1999), "Capacity-demand-diagram methods based on inelastic design spectrum", Earthq. Spectra., 15(4), 637-656.
  12. Chopra, A.K. and Chiatanapakdee, C. (2003), "Inelastic deformation ratios for design and evaluation of structures", Rep. No.EERC-2003-09, EERC, Univ. of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
  13. Chopra, A.K. and Chintanapakdee, C.(2004), "Inelastic deformation ratios for design and evaluation of structures: single-degree-of-freedom bilinear systems", J. Struct. Eng., 130(9), 1309-1319.
  14. Elghadamsi, F.E. and Moraz, B. (1987), "Inelastic earthquake spectra", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 15(1), 91-104.
  15. Fajfar, P. and Gaspersic, P. (1996), "The N2 method for the seismic damage analysis of RC buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 25(1), 31-46.<31::AID-EQE534>3.0.CO;2-V
  16. Fajfar, P. (1999), "Capacity spectrum method based on inelastic demand spectra", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28(9), 979-993.<979::AID-EQE850>3.0.CO;2-1
  17. Fajfar, P. (2000), "A nonlinear analysis method for performancebased seismic design", Earthq. Spectra, 16(3), 573-592.
  18. Farrow, K.T. and Kurama, Y.C. (2004), "SDOF displacement ductility demands based on smooth ground motion response spectra", Eng. Struct., 26(12), 1713-1733.
  19. FEMA (1997), NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Rep. No. FEMA-273 (Guidelines) and Rep. No. FEMA-274 (Commentary), Washington, D.C.
  20. FEMA(2000), Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Rep. No.FEMA-356, Washington, D.C.
  21. FEMA (2005), Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures, FEMA-440, Redwood City.
  22. Freeman, S.A., Nicoletti, J.P. and Tyrell, J.V. (1975), "Evaluation of existing buildings for seismic risk-a case study of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington", Proceedings of 1st U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley.
  23. Goel, R.K. (2008), "Evaluation of current nonlinear static procedures for reinforced concrete buildings", The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
  24. Guohuan, L., Jijian, L., Chao, L. and Mi, Z. (2016), "Structural response analysis in time and frequency domain considering both ductility and strain rate effects under uniform and multiplesupport earthquake excitations", Earthq. Struct., 10(5), 989-1012.
  25. Iwan, W.D. (1980), "Estimating inelastic response spectra from elastic spectra", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 24(12), 1623-1643.
  26. Kazaz, L. (2016), "Seismic deformation demands on rectangular structural walls in frame-wall systems", Earthq. Struct., 10(2), 329-350.
  27. Kowalsky, M.J. (1994), "Displacement-based design-a methodology for seismic design applied to RC bridge columns", Master's Thesis, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California.
  28. Kunnath, S.K., Reinhorn, A.M. and Lobo, R.F. (1992), IDARC Version 3.0: A program for the inelastic damage analysis of reinforced concrete structures, Technical Report NCEER (Vol. 92), US National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research.
  29. Lai, S.S.P. and Biggs, J.M. (1980), "Inelastic response spectra for aseismic building design", J. Struct. Div., 106(6), 1295-1310.
  30. Laouami, N., Slimani, A., Bouhadad, Y., Chatelain, J.L. and Nour, A. (2006), "Evidence for fault-related directionality and localized site effects from strong motion recordings of the 2003 Boumerdes (Algeria) earthquake: Consequences on damage distribution and the Algerian seismic code", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 26(11), 991-1003.
  31. Lin, Y.Y., Chang, K.C. and Wang, Y.L. (2004), "Comparison of displacement coefficient method and capacity spectrum method with experimental results of RC columns", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 33(1), 35-48.
  32. Lobo, R.F. (1994), "Inelastic dynamic analysis of reinforced concrete structures in three dimensions", Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo.
  33. Mahin, S.A. and Lin, J. (1983), Construction of inelastic response spectra for single-degree-of-freedom systems, Computer program and applications, Report No. UCB/EERC-83/17, University of California, Berkeley.
  34. Massumi, A. and Monavari, B. (2013), "Energy based procedure to obtain target displacement of reinforced concrete structures", Earthq. Struct., 48(5), 681-695.
  35. Matamoros, A., Browning, J. and Luft, M. (2003), "Evaluation of simple methods for estimating drift of reinforced concrete buildings subjected to earthquakes", Earthq. Spectra, 19(4), 89-861.
  36. MATLAB: The language of technical computing, Version 8.0. (2008), TheMathworks Inc., Natick, Mass.
  37. Miranda, E. (1991), "Seismic evaluation and upgrading of existing structures", Ph.D. Univ. of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
  38. Miranda, E. (1993), "Evaluation of site-dependent inelastic seismic design spectra", J. Struct. Eng., 119(5), 1319-1338.
  39. Miranda, E. (2000), "Inelastic displacement ratios for structures on firm sites", J. Struct. Eng., 126(10), 1150-1159.
  40. Miranda, E. (2001), "Estimation of inelastic deformation demands of SDOF systems", J. Struct. Eng., 127(9), 1005-1012.
  41. Miranda, E. and Ruiz-Garcia, J. (2002), "Evaluation of approximate methods to estimate maximum inelastic displacement demands", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 539-560.
  42. Miranda, E. and Akkar, S.D. (2003), "Evaluation of iterative schemes in equivalent linear methods", Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
  43. Nassar, A.A. and Krawinkler, H. (1991), "Seismic demands for SDOF and MDOF systems", (No. 95) John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University.
  44. Newmark, N.M. and Hall, W.J. (1982), "Earthquake spectra and design", Earth Syst. Dyn., 1.
  45. Ordaz, M. and Perez-Rocha, L.E. (1998), "Estimation of strength reduction factors for elastoplastic systems: a new approach", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 27(9), 889-901.<889::AID-EQE755>3.0.CO;2-W
  46. Pankaj, P. and Lin, E. (2005), "Material modelling in the seismic response analysis for the design of RC framed structures", Eng. Struct., 27(7), 1014-1023.
  47. Reinhorn, A.M, (1997), "Inelastic analysis techniques in seismic evaluations", Eds. P. Fajfar and H. Krawinkler, Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes, Balkema, Rotterdam.
  48. Riddell, R. and Newmark, N.M. (1979), "Statistical analysis of the response of nonlinear systems subjected to earthquake", Civil engineering studies, Structural research series, 468.
  49. Riddell, R., Hidalgo, P. and Cruz, E. (1989), "Response modification factors for earthquake resistant design of short period buildings", Earthq. Spectra, 5(3), 571-590.
  50. Riddell, R., Garcia, J.E. and Garces, E. (2002), "Inelastic deformation response of SDOF systems subjected to earthquakes", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 515-538.
  51. Sang, W.H., Sung, J.H., Ki, H.M. and Myoungsu, S. (2014), "Improved capacity spectrum method with inelastic displacement ratio considering higher mode effects", Earthq. Struct., 7(4), 587-607.
  52. Seneviratna, G.D.P.K. and Krawinkler, H. (1997), "Evaluation of inelastic MDOF effects for seismic design", John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center.
  53. Shih-Sheng, P.L. and John, M.B. (1980), "Inelastic response spectra for a seismic building design", J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(6), 1295-1310.
  54. Tiwari, A.K. and Gupta, V.K. (2000), "Scaling of ductility and damage-based strength reduction factors for horizontal motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 29(7), 969-987.<969::AID-EQE948>3.0.CO;2-N
  55. Veletsos, A.S. and Newmark, N.M. (1960), "Effect of inelastic behavior on the response of simple systems to earthquake motions", Proceedings of the 2nd world conference on earthquake engineering, 895-912.
  56. Vidic, T., Fajfar, P. and Fischinger, M. (1994), "Consistent inelastic design spectra: strength and displacement", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 23(5), 507-521.
  57. Wen, Y.K. (1976), "Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems", J. Eng. Mech., 102(2), 249-263.
  58. Whittaker, A., Constantinou, M. and Tsopelas, P. (1998), "Displacement estimates for performance-based seismic design", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 124(8), 905-912.
  59. Yazdani, A. and Salimi, M.R. (2015), "Earthquake response spectra estimation of bilinear hysteretic systems using randomvibration theory method", Earthq. Struct., 8(5), 1055-1067.
  60. Zerbin, M. and Aprile, A. (2015), "Sustainable retrofit design of RC frames evaluated for different seismic demand", Earthq. Struct., 9(6), 1337-1353.