Methods of Analysis

  • Gian Paolo Cimellaro
  • Sebastiano Marasco
Part of the Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering book series (GGEE, volume 45)


The chapter analyzes the structural seismic analysis methods. The four common analysis method are illustrated (Linear static, linear dynamic, nonlinear static, and nonlinear dynamic analyses). Additionally, the direct displacement-based seismic design procedure is discussed in detail.


  1. 1998-1 E (2004) Design of structures for earthquake resistance Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  2. 318 AC (2014) Building code requirements for structural concreteGoogle Scholar
  3. 356 FEMAF (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  4. Chopra AK, Goel RK (2002) A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(3):561–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cimellaro GP, Marasco S (2014) Opensignal: a software framework for earthquake record processing and selectionGoogle Scholar
  6. Fajfar P (2002) Structural analysis in earthquake engineering breakthrough of simplified non-linear methods. In: 12th European conference on earthquake engineering, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Fajfar P, Fischinger M (1988) N2-A method for non-linear seismic analysis of regular buildings. In: Proceedings of the ninth world conference in earthquake engineering, vol 5, pp 111–116Google Scholar
  8. Fajfar P, Marušić D, Peruš I (2005) Torsional effects in the pushover-based seismic analysis of buildings. J Earthq Eng 9(06):831–854Google Scholar
  9. Filiatrault A, Christopoulos C (2006) Principles of passive supplemental damping and seismic isolation. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  10. Kalkan E, Kunnath SK (2006) Adaptive modal combination procedure for nonlinear static analysis of building structures. J Struct Eng 132(11):1721–1731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kiureghian AD, Nakamura Y (1993) CQC modal combination rule for high-frequency modes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 22(11):943–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mahaney JA, Paret TF, Kehoe BE, Freeman SA, Consortium UCUSE, et al (1993) The capacity spectrum method for evaluating structural response during the loma prieta earthquake. US Central United States Earthquake Consortium (CUSEC), pp 501–510Google Scholar
  13. Megson T (2005) Structural and stress analysis, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, pp xi–xiiGoogle Scholar
  14. Mezzina M, Raffaele D, Uva G, Carano GC (2011) Progettazione sismo-resistente di edifici in cemento armato. CittStudi EdizioniGoogle Scholar
  15. NTC-08 (2008) Nuove Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica ItalianaGoogle Scholar
  16. Paraskeva TS, Kappos AJ (2010) Further development of a multimodal pushover analysis procedure for seismic assessment of bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39(2):211–222Google Scholar
  17. Priestley M, Kowalsky M (2000) Direct displacement-based seismic design of concrete buildings. Bull N Z Natl Soc Earthq Eng 33(4):421–444Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gian Paolo Cimellaro
    • 1
  • Sebastiano Marasco
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Structural, Geotechnical and Building Engineering (DISEG)Politecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations