Australian Journal of Structural Engineering

ISSN: 1328-7982 (Print) 2204-2261 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsen20

Recording Inter-Storey Drifts of Structures in Time-

History Approach for Seismic Design of Building
Frames

A S Hokmabadi, B Fatahi & B Samali

To cite this article: A S Hokmabadi, B Fatahi & B Samali (2012) Recording Inter-Storey Drifts of
Structures in Time-History Approach for Seismic Design of Building Frames, Australian Journal of
Structural Engineering, 13:2, 175-179

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.7158/13287982.2012.11465107

Published online: 16 Nov 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 13

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsen20

Download by: [The UC San Diego Library] Date: 10 April 2017, At: 10:53
 175

Recording inter-storey drifts of structures in time-history

approach for seismic design of building frames*

AS Hokmabadi, B Fatahi† and B Samali

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney, Broadway, NSW

ABSTRACT: The growing trend in the application of direct displacement-based or performance-

based design, lays more emphasis on the precise prediction of design parameters such as the
inter-storey drift controlling the performance level of the structure. Practising engineers employ
different methods to record the inter-storey drifts in time-history approach mainly based on the
maximum lateral deformation of the structure. In this study, a 15-storey concrete moment resisting
building is designed using time-history analysis. Then reliability and accuracy of each method in
predicting the maximum inter-storey drifts under the influence of three earthquake records, namely
1995 Kobe, 1994 Northridge and 1940 El Centro earthquakes, are investigated. Results clearly
indicate that to choose the most critical drift to evaluate the performance level of structures, the
absolute maximum drift over time should be calculated. Other methods based on the maximum
storey deflection may result in unconservative design.

KEYWORDS: Inter-storey drift; structure; time-history; earthquake; deflection.

REFERENCE: Hokmabadi, A. S., Fatahi, B. & Samali, B. 2012, “Recording inter-

storey drifts of structures in time-history approach for seismic design of building
frames”, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 175-180,
http://dx.doi.org/10.7158/S11-118.2012.13.2.

1 INTRODUCTION In addition, most of the force-based design codes

employ an additional check in terms of limiting inter-
Performance-based seismic design is a modern storey drifts to ensure that particular deformation-
approach to earthquake-resistant design. Seismic based criteria are met. For example, ASCE (2010)
performance (performance level) is described by defines allowable storey drift for structures
considering the maximum allowable damage state considering type and risk category of the structure.
(damage performance) for an identified seismic Australian code (Standards Australia, 2007) indicates
hazard (hazard level). Performance levels describe 1.5% as the maximum allowable storey drift. It
the state of structures after being subjected to a is believed that, the inter-storey drift is the most
certain hazard level, and based on FEMA (1997) are acceptable parameter to control the displacement,
classified as: fully operational, operational, life safe, resulting damage, and in turn performance of the
near collapse or collapse. Overall lateral deflection, structure. Thus, the importance of precise prediction
ductility demand, and inter-storey drifts are the of drifts in structural designs is obvious.
most commonly used damage parameters. Five
Practising structural engineers may calculate the
quantitative maximum inter-storey drifts are used to
inter-storey drifts using some indicative numbers
categorise the mentioned five qualitative levels as:
such as the maximum absolute deflection during
<0.2%, <0.5%, <1.5%, <2.5% and >2.5%, respectively
earthquake while adopting time-history approach.
(FEMA, 1997).
Alternatively, they may go through a tedious job
* Paper S11-118 submitted 25/07/11; accepted for publication
and calculate the maximum inter-storey drifts
after review and revision 2/03/12. considering all time-steps during the earthquake.
† Corresponding author Dr Behzad Fatahi can be contacted at Although the last approach is the most accurate
[email protected]. one, the ability of the first two approximating

© Institution of Engineers Australia, 2012 Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol 13 No 2

S11-118 Hokmabadi.indd 175 10/08/12 11:29 AM

 176 “Recording inter-storey drifts of structures in time-history ...” – Hokmabadi, Fatahi & Samali

approaches in capturing the maximum inter-storey and horizontal elements due to cracking (ACI, 2008)
drifts accurately is discussed in the present study. and by allocating 5% damping ratio to the structure.
In addition, geometric non-linearity (p-Δ effects) is
incorporated in the numerical analysis. Then, after
2 NUMERICAL ANALYSIS seismic analyses, structural sections are designed
AND DISCUSSION according to Australian standard for concrete
structures (Standards Australia, 2009) by considering
According to FEMA (1997), inter-storey drift is the performance level of the structure to be in life safe
determined as the difference between the deflections level indicating the maximum inter-storey drifts of
of two adjacent floors which can be expressed as a the model being less than 1.5%.
percentage of the storey height. However, which
storey deflection should be considered in calculation Both analysis and design procedures are conducted
of inter-storey drift is questionable in time-history adopting SAP2000 V.14 finite element software (CSI,
procedure. This issue is not critical for equivalent 2010) employing frame elements to model beams
lateral force procedure as only the maximum and columns of the structure. The frame element
storey deflection is calculated during this analysis uses general beam-column formulations which
(Wilkinson & Hiley, 2006). Similarly, in modal include the effects of biaxial bending, torsion, axial
response spectrum analysis, combinations of different deformation, and biaxial shear deformations as
structural modes are used to calculate the structure described by Bathe & Wilson (1976). The specified
response in term of storey deflection (Chopra, 2007). compressive strength of the concrete is assumed
However, in time-history procedure, the following to be f’c = 32 MPa, the specific yield strength of the
approaches have been proposed to be employed by steel rebar fy = 400 MPa, and the concrete density γc =
practising engineers to calculate inter storey drifts: 25 kN/m3 is used to design the structure. The inter-
related function between compressive strength and
• Calculations of the storey drift according to the modulus of elasticity of concrete is used to calculate
maximum absolute storey deflection irrespective the modulus of elasticity of concrete according to
of occurrence time (first approach). clause 6.1.2 of Australian standard for concrete
• Calculations of the storey drift according to storey structures (Standards Australia, 2009).
deflection when the maximum deflection at top
level occurs (second approach). The natural frequency of the designed structure is
0.56 Hz and the maximum imposed base shear under
• Calculations of the total maximum storey drift at 1995 Kobe, 1994 Northridge and 1940 El Centro
each level considering all time-steps during the earthquakes are 596.3 kN (0.079W), 659.4 kN (0.088W)
earthquake (third approach). and 221.4 kN (0.029W), respectively, where W is the
Obviously, the third approach is the most accurate total weight of the structure.
one capturing the critical inter-storey drifts during Figure 1 displays storey deflections and inter-storey
an earthquake, and first two approaches are drifts of the mentioned 15-storey structure under
approximating approaches in which their accuracies Kobe earthquake using three different recording
are affected by the degree of modal interaction and approaches. Deflections reported for the third
higher mode effects. Since the first two approaches approach are captured when the maximum drift
are popular among practising engineers due to occurs (eg. at 12.38 second for Kobe). According
simplicity and convenience, the accuracy of these two to figure 1, the maximum inter-storey drift of the
methods in capturing the critical design inter-storey structure does not occur at the time when the
drift should be evaluated carefully. maximum storey deflection occurs. Also, both first
In this study, a 15-storey concrete moment resisting and second approaches result in lower critical inter-
building frame with the total height of 45 m and storey drifts (12% less for both approaches) to be used
width of 12 m consisting of three spans is considered. in the design, which is unconservative.
The frame’s geometry is selected to represent the Figures 2 and 3 demonstrate storey deflections and
conventional type of mid-rise buildings in a relatively inter-storey drifts for Northridge and El Centro
high risk earthquake prone zone. The above earthquakes, respectively. As illustrated in figure
mentioned frame is loaded vertically (dead and live 2(b), either of the first two approaches predicts
loads) according to the relevant Australian code the maximum inter-storey drift less than the third
(Standards Australia, 2007) and analysed employing approach (5% and 7% less), which is believed to
dynamic time-history approach based on equivalent capture a more realistic behaviour. Moreover, they
elastic response of the structural system under the cannot capture the location of the maximum drift
influence of 1995 Kobe, 1994 Northridge and 1940 correctly. For example, the maximum inter-storey
El Centro earthquakes. The frame is considered as drift of the structure during Kobe earthquake occurs
moderately ductile frame and the equivalent linear at level eight (third approach), however, both of the
approach is used to capture the non-linear cyclic other approaches record the critical drift at level
behaviour of the structure during the time-history three. Figure 3(b) also clearly indicates the inaccuracy
analysis by reducing the stiffness of both vertical in adopting the first two approaches in recording the

Australian Journal of Structural Engineering Vol 13 No 2

S11-118 Hokmabadi.indd 176 10/08/12 11:29 AM

 “Recording inter-storey drifts of structures in time-history ...” – Hokmabadi, Fatahi & Samali 177

(a) (b)

Figure 1: (a) Storey deflections (mm) and (b) inter-storey drifts (%) under Kobe earthquake.

(a) (b)

Figure 2: (a) Storey deflections (mm) and (b) inter-storey drifts (%) under Northridge earthquake.

(a) (b)

Figure 3: (a) Storey deflections (mm) and (b) inter-storey drifts (%) under El Centro earthquake.

critical inter-storey drift (9% and 20% less) and its 3 CONCLUSION
location for El Centro earthquake.
In the present study, accuracy of different approaches
Various uncertainties are involved in the seismic
which have been proposed to be employed by
design, which are mainly due to earthquake loads,
practising engineers to calculate structural inter-
modelling limitations and structural parameters,
such as effective stiffness and damping characteristics storey drifts under earthquake while adopting time-
of the structure. Clearly, inaccuracies in predicting history approach have been evaluated. Calculation
the inter-storey drifts of the structure under the of the storey drift based on the maximum absolute
earthquake loading can contribute to the overall storey deflection (first approach) or storey deflection
uncertainties in the predictions. For example, as the at the time of the maximum deflection at top level of
results of this study indicate, adopting simplified the structure (second approach) results in inaccurate
methods to record the inter-storey drifts can under and unsafe prediction of the critical inter-storey
predict the drifts by 20%, which may exacerbate drift which is the key parameter in controlling
the condition when combined with other sources the displacement and in turn performance of the
of uncertainties (eg. loading, analysis methods, and structure. For this particular case, a 15-storey
material properties). moment resisting concrete frame, the first and second

Australian Journal of Structural Engineering Vol 13 No 2

S11-118 Hokmabadi.indd 177 10/08/12 11:29 AM

 178 “Recording inter-storey drifts of structures in time-history ...” – Hokmabadi, Fatahi & Samali

approaches recorded maximum inter-storey drifts up Bathe, K. J. & Wilson, E. L. 1976, Numerical methods
to 20% less than the third approach, which is believed in finite element analysis, Prentice-Hall, Englewood
to be the most accurate method. This difference in Cliffs, N. J.
predicting the design inter-storey drift may change
the performance levels of the structures from life safe Chopra, A. K. 2007, Dynamics of Structures, Prentice
to near collapse for some cases. It should be noted that Hall.
more rigorous simulation methods such as the fully-
non-linear analysis of structures directly capturing
Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), SAP2000 v14
material cyclic non-linearities, yielding and plastic
Analysis Reference Manual, Berkley, California.
deformations result in more accurate predictions.
Results of this study indicates that the third Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
approach, predicting the total maximum inter-storey 1997, BSSC 1997 NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic
drifts considering all time steps, should be adopted Rehabilitation of Buildings, Part 1: Provisions and Part
in the seismic design of structures particularly in the 2: Commentary, FEMA 273/274.
performance base design, which is very sensitive to
the predicted displacement level.
Standards Australia, 2007, AS1170.4 2007 Structural
design actions – Earthquake actions in Australia.
REFERENCES
Standards Australia, 2009, AS3600 2009 Concrete
American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2008, ACI318-08 Structures.
2008 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
and Commentary.
Wilkinson, S. M. & Hiley, R. A. 2006, “A non-linear
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2010, response history model for the seismic analysis
ASCE7-10 2010 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings of high-rise framed buildings”, Computers and
and Other Structures. Structures, Vol. 84, pp. 318-329.

Australian Journal of Structural Engineering Vol 13 No 2

S11-118 Hokmabadi.indd 178 10/08/12 11:29 AM

 “Recording inter-storey drifts of structures in time-history ...” – Hokmabadi, Fatahi & Samali 179

ASLAN HOKMABADI

Aslan S. Hokmabadi completed his BEng in Civil Engineering and MEng in

Geotechnical Engineering. His research has mainly focused on studying the
lateral behaviour of piles, site effect and soil-structure interaction resulting in
several peer-reviewed technical papers. In addition, he has more than three
years of industry experience, and has been involved in design and construction
of several large embankment dams.

BEHZAD FATAHI

Behzad Fatahi has worked as a consulting and site geotechnical and railway
engineer. He has completed doctorate studies in soft soil geomechanics from
the University of Wollongong. Behzad was named “Australasia Young Railway
Engineer of Year 2007” by Engineers Australia and the Railway Technical Society
of Australasia. He is currently a full-time senior Lecturer of Geotechnical and
Railway Engineering at the University of Technology Sydney, and has worked
at Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd for several years.

BIJAN SAMALI

Prof Bijan Samali is the holder of a Personal Chair in Structural Engineering

at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS). He has been with UTS for
23 years. His main areas of research include structural dynamics and its
applications to wind and earthquake, and more recently use of smart materials,
dynamic assessment and health monitoring of bridges and buildings. He is
the author of over 250 scholarly publications, and speaker at many national
and international conferences.

Australian Journal of Structural Engineering Vol 13 No 2

S11-118 Hokmabadi.indd 179 10/08/12 11:29 AM