Seismic P-8 effects in

medium height moment

resisting steel frames
J. A. Tjondro, P. J. Moss and A. J. Carr
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
(Received August 1990; revised January 1991)

An analytical investigation of the P-A effects in medium height steel

moment resisting frames to selected earthquake motions is reported.
The frames with various design drifts and fundamental natural
periods were designed according to the load provisions for New
Zealand seismic risk zone A of the Draft Code of Practice for General
Structural Design and Design Loading for Buildings, DZ4203. The
effect of strength degradation was investigated. Dynamic magnification factors for the member forces and displacement are also
presented. Limits for the maximum plastic hinge rotation, inelastic
drift, curvature ductility, displacement ductility and prediction of
maximum plastic hinge rotation based on the inter-storey drift are
suggested.

Keywords: steel frames, earthquake motions

Many previous investigations of P-A effects have

indicated that the combination of large gravity loads and
lateral displacement, especially in medium to high rise
buildings, could cause this second-order effect to
become significant. In these investigations the level of
significance of the P-A effect has been expressed in
terms such as stability indices, drift indices and the ratio
of base shear to total mass. When the P-A effect
becomes significant, consideration must be given to the
large increases in displacement, curvature ductility
demand, plastic hinge rotation and drift in order to maintain the stability and serviceability of the structures.
There are many different approaches to solving for PA effects. In static analyses the increase of secondary
moment can be taken into account as the product of
relative inter-storey displacement and the vertical force,
or an incremental analysis with updated coordinates can
be carried out. In dynamic time-history analyses the
effect of changing coordinates must be taken into
account in every step of the time-history analysis.
For first-order static load analyses using a drift limit
and stability index at a certain level of loading as in a
previous study I, the effect of p-A can be dealt with in
a simple, practical way. The complexity of P-A effects
in dynamic time-history analyses arise because of the
characteristics and the intensities of different earthquakes and structural properties of the materials.
In this study, 13 two-bay steel moment resisting
frames were designed for various 'design drifts' (see the
later section on seismic design and analysis of frames)
and fundamental periods, based on the DZ4203

equivalent static approach with a basic seismic acceleration coefficient for seismic zone A 2. The behaviour of
the frames has been investigated by inelastic timehistory analyses using five different earthquake records.
Relationships between the results of the equivalent
static analysis and dynamic time-history analysis were
drawn to convert the inelastic time-history analysis to
the static analysis based on DZ4203 since dynamic timehistory analyses are expensive to carry out. Design drift
limits are recommended and the influence of drift limitations on plastic hinge rotation, curvature ductility and on
designing the frame lateral stiffness are also described.

Previous studies relation to P-A effects

Paulay 3 discussed the probable effect of P-A moments
on inelastic dynamic frame response for reinforced concrete structures. It was suggested that if the strength
demand due to the P-A effect exceeds 15 % of the ideal
lateral load carrying capacity of a sub-frame, the
strength demand should be increased. The P-A effect
should be considered by evaluating the stability index
from the expression
Or = Wtr. 8 / ( ~ M i - Wtr. 8)

By expressing the storey drift, 8, in terms of the average

slope of the frame (i.e. A,/H), the average of the storey
heights above and below the floor under consideration,
and a suitable displacement magnification factor 3, which
relates the storey drift to the average slope of the frame,

0141-0296/92/020075 - 16
1992 B u t t e r w o r t h - H e i n e m a n n Ltd

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2 75

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

the expression for Qr becomes
O r = )k

[(h.

~Vtr. / ~ u ) / ( H ~ M i

- )~. h c . Wtr.

Au) ]

where
Qr
X

h,

Wtr
A
H
Mi

stability index with reference to floor r

displacement magmficatlon factor which should be
taken as 2.0, 2.4 and 3.0 in seismic zones A, B and
C, respectively
average storey height
total gravity load considered at floor r
maximum displacement at roof level
total height of frame
ideal moment capacity of the beams at floor r
(Paulay 3)

Andrews 4 discussed lateral flexibility and displacement

ductility controls to ensure that the frame P-z~ effect never
became significant and could be ignored It was recommended that deflection control provided an efficient,
acceptable and certain means of limiting the P-z~ effect
to a tolerable level. The current values of drift limit at
0.01 for zone A was maintained and new limits of 0.008
and 0.006 for zones B and C were introduced.
Carr and Moss I, using a dynamic time-history
analysis program for inelastic frame structures,
investigated the response of several concrete frames
with different stiffness properties and strength. It was
found that with a drift limit of 0.01, p_A effects can be
ignored For inter-storey drifts greater than 0.01, the
effect of gravity load leads to a rapidly increasing
augmentation of the inter-storey drift and could exceed
the ability of some structures to provide the necessary
ductility In the case of concrete structures, the provision of extra reinforcement increases the strength of the
frames but scarcely changes the stiffness For steel
framed structures, this is not possible as the strength and
stiffness of the steel sections are fixed in relation to each
other
Montgomery 5 found that the P-za effect has a significant influence when the ratio of the total weight to base
shear is greater than or equal to 10, or the maximum
storey drift is more than twice the storey drift at yield

Seismic design and analysis of frames

The frames were designed according to DZ4203 with
the new basic seismic acceleration spectrum, which
seems slightly stronger than E1 Centro 1940. Calculation
of the base shear is based on

V=C~
C=C..R.Z

for Steel Structures . The 6-, 12- and 18-storey flames

were designed with various design drift limits. The
'design drift limit' was defined as the ductility factor/~,
times the elastic drift from the equivalent static load, as
a prediction of the inelastic drift under seismic
loading 2.
The following load combinations were used for design
1.4 D

1 . 2 D + 1.6Lr
1.2 D + I.2 Ls + E
0.9D+E
The weight of the floor slab was 2.7 kPa with 0.5 kPa
for finishing and combined with self weight of the
member gave total uniform dead load of 23.4 kN m-i.
Live load for general use, L,, = 2.5 kPa, serviceability
live load, Ls, = 0.8 kPa. Typical frames are shown in

Figure 1.
Steel frames, by their very nature, are usually more
flexible and therefore have longer fundamental periods
than concrete frames This gives an advantage in reducing the response of the steel frames under certain types
of earthquakes, though in some cases they could
experience the peak response of an earthquake with a
greater long period excitation The critical combination
of design load for medium to high rise buildings is
usually the combination of gravity load with horizontal
earthquake load or with the wind load. Frames were
expected to survive with repairable damage at the design
earthquake load. Instability in steel frames may be
caused by the failure to achieve moment capacity,
excessive joint rotation, storey column hinging
mechanisms and local or lateral buckling which results
in strength degradation
To achieve low design drifts, some of the above
loading combinations become noncritical; this design
excluded consideration of the load.combinations with
wind load. To maintain the column stability, the ratio of
axial force to compression yield force, P/P,., was considered less than 0.4 as suggested by De Buen 7 or P/P,
less than 0.5 as suggested b~, the New Zealand Study
Group for Steel Structures . The stiffness of both
beams and columns should be increased proportionally
to achieve a lower drift limit without allowing plastic
hinges to shift to the exterior columns. Some plastic
hinges in the interior columns may be allowed but will
lead to a significant increase in plastic hinge rotations and
will distribute significant additional moment to the
exterior columns, which may then lead to column hinging. Flange and web slenderness ratios of beams and columns were chosen within the limits suggested by the
New Zealand Study Group for Steel Structures. The fundamental period and design base shear for the frames
analysed having different design drifts are given in

Table 1.
where
C, basis seismic coefficient varying with #
Z zone factor, for seismic risk zone A = 0.85
R risk factor = 1.0
# structural ductility factor = 3.0
A ductility factor of 3.0 for steel moment resisting
frames was suggested by the New Zealand Study Group

76

Eng. Struct 1992, Vol 14, No 2

Members, joint connections and loading

Joint connections were modelled as rigid joints. Structural components or members were modelled by a
prismatic member having an inelastic spring hinge at
each end. The ends of the members incorporate rigid end
blocks which were taken as half of the column or beam
depth to approximately match the real structures.

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

Eighteen-storey

I,,

==
t~

:I

Twelve-storey

L/

J.

Frame
analysed

==

Six-storey
E

g
p~

,/;

r/n

7.00 m

7.00 m

Figure 1 (left) Six-, twelve- and eighteen-storey steel moment-resisting frames (right) Typical plan view (In all cases the storey height
is 3.5 m)

Uniform dead and seismic live load was applied to the

beams as fixed end moments and shear forces at the end
nodes ignoring their rigid end-block lengths.

Moment-curvature relationship
A bi-linear elastic moment curvature relationship was
chosen for the columns. An elasto-plastic model was
assumed to be adequate for steel beams in moment
resisting frames.
Previous studies by Otani 9, Moss et al. ~o and others
using different hysteresis rules showed that the response
of the structures is generally insensitive to the shapes of
hysteresis loop.

Moment-axial load interaction

An approximation was used in the moment-axial interaction diagram as shown in Figure 2. The effect of axial
tension or compression 8 on the bending moment
capacity of the member are defined by
(i) P/Py < 0.15
(ii) P/Py > 0.15

M/Mp = 1.0
P/Py + M/(1.18M~) = 1.0

P
:xial

compression

Table 1 Design drifts, periods and design base shearsforframes

analysed
Frame
no.

Design drift
index

Period
(s)

Design base shear

(KN)

1
2
3
4

0.0131
0.0139
0.0168
0.0188

1.143
1.270
1.474
1.581

348
310
272
255

12-storey
frame

5
6
7
8
9

0.0105
0.0112
0.0132
0.O150
0.0167

1.774
1.866
2.230
2.409
2.658

460
426
376
356
333

18-storey
frame

10
11
12
13

0.0123
0.0135
0.0152
0.0163

2.792
2.959
3,237
3.618

487
466
433
387

6-storey
frame

-Mp

+M

Bending

moment

Pyt
Axial tension

Figure 2

Moment-axial load interaction diagram

Eng. Struct. 1 9 9 2 , Vol. 14, No 2

77

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

Damping
In order to ensure that all modes are subcritically
damped when using a proportionally damped model, a
value of 5% of critical damping for steel frames was
assumed as follows
for 6-storey, 1st and 6th modes
for 12-storey, 1st and 10th modes
for 18-storey, 1st and 15th modes

Pacoima Dam S14W, 1971

Parkfield N65E, 1966
The E1 Centro 1940 and artificial NZ4203/A were used
as the design level earthquakes for New Zealand seismic
zone A. Bucharest, Parkfield and Pacoima Dam were
used to gain a complete understanding of the response of
the frames under severe earthquakes.

Inelastic time history analyses

Strength degradation
The commentary of NZS4203, C3.2, permits some loss
of strength of a primary member of up to 30% after 8
reversals, or 4 cycles, provided the overall building ductilities are met l~(see Figure 3). This code requirement
is likely to be conservative for steel beams if compared
to the studies and experiments as shown by Popov and
Pickney 12, Vann et al. ~3 and other researchers with
specimens which had a slenderness ratio approximately
the same as that used in this analytical study.
Lukey and Adams 14, studied the effect of local buckling on the moment capacity. In some of their specimens,
with flange slenderness higher than those used in this
project, they found that the first local buckling occured
at the instance when the plastic hinge rotations ranged
between 0.042 - 0 . 1 2 0 rad for various specimens. Local
buckling or lateral buckling and large hinge rotations
will accelerate strength degradation. The effect of
strength degradation was considered in these analyses,
though the value taken for the loss of strength (see
Figure 3) was chosen to be conservative in view of the
lack of available experimental data.

Earthquake acceleration records

Five different earthquake acceleration records were
chosen to study the effects of P-A and the general
behaviour of the frames designed to DZ4203 loading
criteria under different intensities and characteristics of
earthquake motions. The designed frames with various
design drifts and fundamental periods were analysed
under the following earthquakes
Bucharest N-S, 1977 (corrected)
E1 Centro N-2,,1940 (corrected)
artificial NZ4203 for seismic zone A

"o 1.0

ro 0.7

Residual strength

I
4

Cycle number
Figure 3

78

Degrading strength model

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

Investigation of P-A effects from the results of the

inelastic time-history analyses has been done by comparing the standard analyses and the analyses with the
inclusion of P-A effects for the maximum value of: the
curvature ductility, plastic hinge development, storey
deflections, axial load and column moment magnification factors, base shear and column shear forces. The
effect of considering strength degradation was also
included. The influence of P-A effects on storey
displacements, plastic hinge rotations and inter-storey
drifts are described in reference 15.
For the 12-storey steel moment resisting frames, the
axial force due to gravity load in the lower part of the
frame is almost twice of that in the lower part of 6-storey
moment resisting frames. The fundamental natural
period of the frame was such that it gave significant
response from the earthquakes. Because the gravity load
is greater, the effect of secondary moment will be of
more importance for this 12-storey frame compared to
the 6-storey frame with the same design drift.
The 18-storey steel moment resisting frames had a
range of natural periods between 2.8 s and 3.6 s. The
axial compression force was mainly due to the gravity
load with the contribution of earthquake load on the
axial force being small compared to the gravity load.
Seismic coefficients in these 18-storey frames were quite
low owing to the long fundamental natural periods of
these structures. It is probable that wind loading would
be more critical than earthquake loading.

Inelastic time-history analysis results

Curvature ductility
6-storey frames: Beams in the middle storeys generally
exhibit higher curvature ductility, (see Figure 4). The
frames under the E1 Centro 1940 record showed that no
yielding occured at the column bases. The influence of
P-A only appeared at frame 4 with a design drift of
0.0188 h, and in the other frames with a design drift of
0.0131 h - 0 . 0 1 6 8 h the inclusion of p-A effects is
negligible.
During the artificial earthquake NZ4203/A, maximum curvature ductility higher than under the El Centro 1940 record occured for a design drift of
0.0168 h - 0 . 0 1 8 8 h and was close to the curvature ductility under the E1 Centro 1940 record at the low drift
limit of 0.0131 h - 0 . 0 1 3 9 h. Yielding occured in the
column bases at a design drift of 0.0188 h when P-A was
taken into consideration.
Analyses using the Parkfield and Bucharest earthquakes did not show a significant effect on the inclusion
of p-A, except for the Parkfield earthquake acting on the

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

MRF6-Drift

index=0.0131

MRF6-Drift

index=0.0139

8
7

Pacoima__

5 -I

Pacima

1
0

Storey level
8

7 ~-

//

"--.._. ~ _

i n d e x = 0. 016~

MRF6-Drift

index=0,0188

~'~. Pacoima

~"'-

Storey level

Figure 4

~ ~..

6E //

MRF6-Drift

3
Storey level

3
Storey level

Six-storey frames. Comparison of maximum curvature ductility between standard analyses (

frame with a desisn drift of 0.139 h where p-A showed a

significant effect in the 3 lower storeys. Parkfield gwes
a higher curvature ductility than Bucharest in the top
part of the structure.
Under the Pacoima Dam record at a design drift of
0.0131 h, no significant p-A effect was found. Frames
with design drifts of 0.0139 h-0.0188 h showed very
large increase in curvature ductility because of the
second-order effect.

12-storey frames: Curvature ductility demand in these

frames was higher in the lower to the middle height of
the structure as illustrated in Figure 5. A design drift
index of 0.0105 showed no significant influence of the
p-A effect under all of the earthquakes used in this
study.
Curvature ductility during the E1 Centro 1940 record
and the artificial NZ4203/A record in the frame with
design drift index of 0.0167 was almost uniform through
the floor levels with a value of 2.50. No significant
effect from these two earthquakes was visible. The
Bucharest earthquake gave a significant increase in curvature ductility at the column base and beams at the first
floor level (see Figure 5). During the Pacoima Dam
earthquake, hinges occured in the interior columns with

) and P-A analyses ( - - - )

column curvature ductility at the second floor of 15.9

and a beam curvature ductility of 18.8 at the first floor.
Comparing the standard analysis, which included the
p-A effect with the El Centro 1940, artificial
NZ4203/A, Bucharest and Parkfield earthquakes, at a
design drift index lower than 0.0152, the P-z~ did not
give a significant effect. The inclusion of p-A effect during the Pacoima Dam earthquake showed significant
increases in the curvature ductilities in the lower levels
with design drift index of 0.0132-0.0152. A curvature
ductility greater than 6.0 with a standard analysis
indicated a significant effect on the increase of curvature
ductility for the analysis with inclusion of Me P-~ effect.

18-storeyframes: In general, curvature ductility in these

frames as shown in Figure 6, was almost uniform at all
floor levels under the E1 Centro 1940 and artificial
NZ4203/A earthquakes.
The curvature ductility demand during the El Centro
1940 record was low for a high design drift index and
increased from 1.9 to 2.8 when the drift index reduced.
It is difficult to define the pattern of the influence of the
p-A effect, as at a design drift index of 0.0152, the P-z~
effect increased the beam curvature ductilities in the
upper part of the structures and in the lower part reduced
Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2 79

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

MRF12- Drift index=0.0105

6.0~
5.5
5.0~-~

.....
~.
I ~ f'j.~\
/ "---~\,/f'f~

,/

,.5

MRF12- Drift index=0.0132

6.01
5.5
Parkfield

~Parkfield

5.0

"t,

Y 4.0

=~

3.0

2.0

3.0

2.0

1.5

:~

f,
///

1.5

1.0

1.0

0.5

0.5

6.0

5.5

5.0"

5
6
7
S t o r e y level

10

11

12

MRF 12 - D r i f t i n d e x = 0.0152

5
6
7
S t o r e y level

10

11

MRF 12 - D r i f t i n d e x = 0.0167
6.0
5.5

Parkfiel~--~,.

~= 4 5 "~
"
3.5"

5.0~_ / I

,-,,

.I/ I ~ \
f"",/~

Bucharest
\

"'N~

4.5

"X~,

2.5

~/LxV~--XBucharest

3.5 I~ ' / ~ /

Par k f i e l d ' k \

\,~x

~ 2.5

1.5

,Lo

1.0
0.

Figure 5

5
6
7
S t o r e y level

10

11

5
6
7
S t o r e y level

T w e l v e - s t o r e y frames. C o m p a r i s o n o f m a x i m u m c u r v a t u r e ductility b e t w e e n s t a n d a r d analyses (

the beam curvature ductilities. However, the effect, is

negligible.
The curvature ductility demand under the artificial
NZ4203/A record decreased when the frame became
stiffer. The influence of the P-A effect was only significant at frame 13.
The Bucharest record gave a different behaviour. The
value of maximum beam curvature ductility was always
around 4.5, but the location of the maximum value was
in different beams. Similar behaviour was found in the
Parkfield record. The value was only slightly raised
from 4.5 to 5.0 and the maximum curvature ductility
shifted to the beams in the lower storey as the design
drift became lower.
The Pacoima Dam record gave curvature ductilities of
9.1 at design drift of 0.0162 h and 6.5 for a design drift
of 0.0123 h. Significant effects with the inclusion of P-A
appeared in the range of design drift indices of 0.0123
to 0.0162.

Plastic hinge development and selected storey

deflections
6-storey frame: Lateral deflected shapes of frame 1
having a drift index of 0.0131 at selected times are
shown in Figure 7.

80

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

10

11

12

) and P-A analyses ( - - - )

El Centre 1940 earthquake: During this earthquake no

column hinging occured. From the analyses (both with
and without p-A effects), the maximum number of
simultaneous plastic hinges developed at 2.88 s with
37 % of the total possible hinges that could occur in the
beams.
For the deflected shapes shown in Figure 7, it can be
seen that the first yield occured at 1.96 s. The maximum
positive top floor displacement occured at 2.97 s. At
2.89 s, the axial compression load in one exterior
column was at its maximum. At 5.87 s, the maximum
negative top floor displacement occured with maximum
axial compression force in the other exterior column. No
higher mode effect was detected during this earthquake.

Pacoima Dam earthquake: Plastic hinges were fully

developed in the three column bases and the maximum
plastic hinges that developed in the beams were 75 % of
the total number of possible hinges that could occur. All
the beams yielded during the Pacoima Dam earthquake.
The first yield occured at 2.72 s in the two beams at the
first storey. It was noticed that maximum plastic hinge
formations occured during 2.91 s - 4 . 2 0 s. The maximum 15ositive top floor displacement was reached at
3.11 s whereas the maximum negative top floor
displacement occured at 3.75 s.

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

MRF 18- Drift index=0.0123

6.0
S.5
5.0

field
u

4.0
3.5
3 3.0

"O

t. 2.5
u
2.0

1.5
1.0
0.5
I

8
10 12
Storey level

14

16

18

6.0
5.5 [
5.0 [
4.5'[
4.0
"O
o 3.5
3.0
?
2.5
u
2.0
X
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
0

MRF 18- Drift index=0.0135

Parkfield ~
~

MRF18- Drift index=0.0152

I

30.~ ~ . 3
2.5

2.0

1.5
1.0

~ 1.5
I .0

0.5
0

0.5
0

Bucharest

o 3.s

Figure 6

(---)

8
10 12
Storey level

arest

8
10 12
Storey level

6"015"05"5
= 4.5~_

-~.

,~.~.~

14

16

18

MRF 18- Drift index=0.0162

6.0!
5.5
5.0
~- 4.5
,. ^ :

harest

3.o~
~

o 3.5

14

16

18

2.5

2.0

8
I0
12
Storey level

Eighteen-storey frames. Comparison of maximum curvature ductility between standard analyses (

12-storey frame:
El Centro 1940 earthquake: For frame 5, the maximum
formation of plastic hinges, occured at only about 20%
of the total possible beam hinge locations under the E1
Centro 1940 earthquake. The lateral drift was more
important in designing this frame and resulted in greater
stiffness of the structure. The first yield occured at
2.15 s in the beam at the 9th floor. The maximum
positive top floor displacement (see Figure 8a) occurred
at 8.93 s with maximum compression force in one
exterior column and maximum plastic hinge rotation in
the beam at level 5. The maximum top floor displacement occured at 6.23 s with maximum axial compression force in the other exterior column. No plastic
hinges occured in the column bases under the El Centro
1940 record for this frame.

Pacoima Dam earthquake: The Pacoima Dam earthquake developed 70% of the possible beam hinges at
3.72 s. The first yield occured at 2.75 s in the beam at
the first floor. Significant response occured from 2.94 s
to 3.83 s. The maximum positive top floor displacement
occured at 3.24 s, the same time with maximum compression at column 25 and maximum beam plastic hinge

14

16

18

) and p-A analyses

rotation. Maximum axial compression force at an

exterior column occured at 3.69 s and maximum
negative top floor displacement at 5.50 s. During this
earthquake the top floor displacement at first yield was
less than the 8th floor displacement, (see the deflection
pattern in Figure 8b). This could cause a problem in
defining structural displacement ductility in terms of the
ratio of the maximum to the first yield top floor displacement.

18-storey frame:
Parkfield earthquake: The maximum formation of
plastic hinges in the beams was 45% of the possible
mechanisms. For the deflected shapes shown in Figure
9, the first yield occured at 3.63 s and the maximum
positive top floor displacement occured at 4.85 s
together with maximum axial compression force in one
exterior cohimn. The maximum negative top floor
displacement occured at 3.72 s together with maximum
axial compression force in the other exterior column.

Pacoima Dam earthquake: As with the Parkfield earthquake, the maximum formation of plastic hinges/was
45 % of the possible plastic hinges. The formation of the

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

81

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

J
196

. .'-4-"
198

200

-'-4-.-4
=.

.~

2.,43

---11---41
"----4-----,4
--4-.-41

3
2.44

2.72

2.83

2.91

---4 "--.-.4
---4--4
--41--11

2.51

2.84

2.86

2.87

2.91

2.92

3.03

3.48

2.94

3.00

~--e E~e

....

2.88

3.08

3.36

3.41

3.42

3.49

4.50

3.53

3.57

3.65

3.66

3.63

4.12

4.20

4.95

7.78

7.80

ItJ

B---i

4.52

4.54

5.32

5.33

J
5.78

,4..-,
H H

I
5.79

5.82

5.83

5.88

5.89

8.00

8.18

8.19

8.21

8.37

8.39

2.72

3.00

2.89
4.55
1.96
5.87

t
-200

I
-100

100

200

-400
b

-300

-200

-100

100

200

300

400

Displacement (mm)

Displacement (mm)

Figure 7 Six-storey f r a m e Selected storey deflections of frame 1 under: (a) El Centro 1940 earthquake; and (b) Pacoima Dam earthquake
records

plastic hinges in the beams at levels 15 to 16 and levels

3 to 6 at 8.02 s was related to the higher mode effect.
The maximum negative top floor displacement occured
at 2.43 s when the frame was still in the elastic range
(see Figure 9).

Axial load and column moment amplification factor

6-storey frames:
Axial load: A small variation of maximum axial load
occured in the exterior columns during the different

82

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

earthquakes as illustrated in Figure 10. The value of

maximum axial load for the outer column bases during
seismic loading for frame 1 was between 14001600 kN and from the combination of 1.2D + 1.2Ls +
E in the equivalent static analysis gave maximum axial
force of 1190 kN. The approximation for amplification
factor was between 1.3 and 1.4. No significant influence
of the P-A effect on the column axial forces was
observed in this frame (design drift = 0.0131 h). The
axial force at the interior column was almost constant,
because of the symmetrical location of that column.

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

2.15

"

L2S~3'"

2:~0 . . . .

5.41"

2.25

":6 18 L 6,19

I i

L
I ~

.~'' ~j !

I' 18~88
' 3

"'8.80

8~9S"

8.86

"

-250Displa0cement2(SmL)500

"

'~3."6 L

"2.87 . . . .

3 tl~

1 2.98

i.
' 3.72

'
HH

HH

6 37

L
I
I

-500
-250
0 250 500
Displacement(mm)

3--'-'--E
~ H
~ N
~ H

6.86

7.00

7.65

7.7

7.81

7.86

7.90

7.91

8.98

b
Figure 8

T w e l v e - s t o r e y frame. Selected storey deflections of frame 5 under: (a) El

quakerecords

Column moment: The columns in the lower storeys

reached their full moment capacities but this was not the
case in the upper storeys. In the lower storeys, the maximum moment was used to design the columns and in the
upper levels the same column section was provided
either to control the drift or for practical reasons.

9.17

Centro1940earthquake;

and (b) Pacoima Dam earth-

The difference between the two analyses was negligible for frame 1, except under the Pacoima Dam
record. The amplification of column moment in the
lower storeys between the time-history analysis and the
equivalent static analysis with a load combination of
1.2D + 1.2Ls + E was about 2.0 and 2.5 times for El

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

83

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

3.63
- - - -

q,58

3.72
~

'

4.52

~ H

H H

I'
3.63

"3~;7'

3.~0

3.~6 . . . . 4 1 ; 0 ' "

4T~2"

4.66

4.74

4.81

4.90

4:

4;;0

47~6

"4.s2

.85

---q ---I
----9 - - I
- - I ---q
H 11--4
HII-~
H II--~

4.58

4.82

5.89

5.95

6.16

6.44

-250

250

500

750

Displacement
!

:1

L.

---q ---d

2.76

-~4---4
~ 9 ---II

.-.-4 --4
II-,.,I I~1

H
I~-I I--I

1t-41-4
I~1 t-I

. :

. c

--

2.66

"

2.4 II1

. .

3.08

3.17

--411----tl

II---I i-~1

Hill
H H
H H

11---i-4

3.31

3.90

3.93

3.98

4.12

6.40

7.79

8.02

8.21

9.69

9.89

10.02

1.63

11.66

-250

~
0

250

Displacement
Eighteen-storey

frame.

Selected

storey

deflections

of frame

-8.21

Figure 9

4.56

5.25

.48

3.18

,.-,

2.97

I..-qJ-a
H I1'-I

(ram)

1 0 uncler: (a) P a r k f i e l d

earthquake

a n d (b) P a c o i m a

750

500
(mm)
Dam

earthquake

records

Centro 1940 and Pacoima Dam records respectively (see

Figure 11).
12-storey frames
Axial load: The amplification factor to the combination
of 1.2D + 1.2/_,, + E was 1.2 for the El Centro 1940
and 1.4 for the Pacoima Dam earthquakes (see Figure
12). The inclusion of the P-A effect was insignificant in
the axial compression force because the gravity load was

84 Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

quite large and dominated the axial force in the

of these 12-storey frames.

column

Column moment: Plots of the envelopes of the exterior

column moment showed that the influence of the P-z~ for
design drift 0.0105 h was negligible (see Figure 13).
The column moment under the Pacoima Dam record was
twice the column moment under the El Centro 1940
record. The design column moment at the base from the
load combination of 1.2D + 1.2L~ + E was 360 kN.

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

10
4
;

"1

El Centro
I I

._.

-]

"PajTi~a

I !

!6
U.

L_IL__I L _ ] r . _ l ~EI Centro

1.2 D+I.6LR'-~__I ~
~._
_Pacoima
1.2D+1.2Ls+E'~----~ 1

-500

-I 000
Axial load (kN)

-1500

-2000

-3

.~=

~]

EICentro

I-II~L~III~'~.P9

Figure 10 Six-storey frame. Axial load envelopes for an exterior

column of frame I

-1000

,I

-2000

-3000

]I

rkfield
r

-4000

Axial load (kN)

Figure 12 Twelve-storey frame. Axial load envelopes for an
exterior column of frame 5

Amplification factors of 2.0 for E1 Centro 1940 and 3.0

for Pacoima Dam earthquakes must be provided for this
exterior column. The column moments in the middle to
the top part of the structure were low compared with the
moment capacities.

was calculated from the equivalent static analysis, compared with 290 kN and 400 kN from E1 Centro 1940 and
Pacoima Dam earthquakes. The amplification factor was
about 2.00 and 3.00 for El Centro 1940 and Pacoima
Dam records, respectively.
It can be seen from Figure 16 that the effect of p-A in
the calculation of column shear forces was negligible for
this frame.

18-storey frames
Axial load: The combination of 1.2D + 1.2Ls + E at a
design drift of 0.0123 h gave an axial compression force
of 4330 kN at one exterior column. The maximum axial
compression force during the five earthquakes used in
this study did not show much variation (see Figure 14).
The amplification factor for the axial force was only
about 1.1 - 1.2 since the gravity load dominated the column axial load in these 18-storey frames

12-storey frames: The design base shear from the

equivalent static load with ductility factor of 3.0 was
460 kN. The El Centro 1940 and Pacoima Dam records
gave a base shear of approximately 2.0 and 3.0 times the
design base shear
Figures 17 and 18, show that the shear forces in the
interior columns for different earthquakes were close
The artificial NZ4203/A gave shear forces between
those under El Centro 1940 and Pacoima Dam earthquakes. The column shear in the interior columns was
higher than the exterior columns, since the lumped mass
in the interior column was greater than that in the
exterior columns, although the stiffness of the columns
was the same.

Column moment: The flexibility of the frames was controlled by design drift, thus the limiting yield moment
capacity was difficult to develop (see Figure 15).
Distribution of column storey shear forces:
6-storey frames: The design base shear force of 348 kN
was calculated from the equivalent static analysis, while
the total maximum base shear during time-history
analysis was 700 kN under the El Centro 1940 earthquake and 1100 kN under the Pacoima Dam earthquake.
In the exterior column base the shear force of 135 kN

Paco,
, .Ju
P-A

I .

oo

='T]

Pacoima I

LL

L.=u.

2
El C e n t r o

-800

:;?z G./Pac , a I

--El Centro
P-A 4

lj.

. . . .

Parkfield

Pacoima~l i

was 487 kN. The total maximum base shear under

!
!

18-storey frames: The design base shear in frame 10

'''~

il

-600

-400

-200

200

400

600

800

Moment (kNrn)
Figure 1 1 Six-storey frame. Bending moment e n v e l o p e s for an exterior column of frame 1

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol 14, No 2

85

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al

12

10
Centro~
p-A

LJ.

Pacoima
p-A

[~

P-b.

Parkfield
p-A
Parkfield ~
p-A

~j

I ParkfieldF_~..I

l
I

I--I000

Pacoima

il ,II ,
-800

-400

-600

-200

200

400

600

[
I

800

1000

1200

Moment [kNm]

Figure 13 Twelve-storey frame. Bending moment envelopes for an exterior column of frame 5

Parkfield or Pacoima Dam earthquakes gave an

amplification factor of 3.0 and 2.5, respectively (see

Figure 19).
Strength degradation."
6-storey frames: A significant increase in inter-storey
drift occurred for the frame with a design drift of 0.0188
when subjected to the El Centro 1940 and NZ4203/A
earthquakes. The maximum plastic hinge rotation
increased under both earthquakes when strength
degradation was modelled.
For frame 3 with a drift index of 0.0168 there were
significant effects under the Pacoima Dam and Parkfield
earthquakes, though this effect diminished for the
smaller design drifts. During the E1 Centro 1940 earthquake, frame 1 showed a reduced response with the top
floor displacement falling from 135 mm to 118 mm and
the maximum beam curvature ductility reducing from
3.5 to 2.7. The plastic hinge rotations also reduced.

16

14

Pacoima i!

I
L~

. . . .

~0.3Py

l,JEt Centro

i0
O
O

12-storey frames: Frame 9 showed significant effects

1 2D+l.6L
6

'--'--1

I
4
2

~-1

1.2D.el.2Ls+E......"

I
1

El C e n t r o p-A
Pacoima P-~,NZ4203A

I
Parkfield

-2000
-4000
Axial load [kN}

tttl!

-6000

Figure 14 Eighteen storey frame. Axial load envelopes for an

exterior column of frame 10

86

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

when the degrading strength model was used with the

artificial NZ4203/A record, the maximum beam curvature ductility increasing from 2.6 to 6.9 and plastic
hinge rotations from 0.018 rad to 0.045 rad due to the
long duration of strong shaking in this earthquake
record. As a result, the beams reached yield many times
since the strength degradation was based on the number
of cycles of loading. The more cycles that take place, the
greater strength the degradation would be. Strength
degradation with the E1 Centro 1940 earthquake slightly
reduced the response of the frames. For the other three
records, Pacoima Dam, Parkfield and Bucharest,
strength degradation was very significant when the drift
limit was 0.0167 h. Strength degradation was insignifi-

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

18

~--~~P~_o~ma

Mp~.

F.__F~Pacima

ElCentro~

Lh

r"

II
r

Pacoima~
P-A
"L_!7

Centro

.m.

I
I

Pacoima

_JI ~

fi_L_i

NZ4203A
Parkfield ~
\

i I
-2000

i
-1500

I I

i
-1000

NZ4203A

II
I

Bucharest

Bucharest
I

500

-500

1000

1500

2000

Moment (kNm)
Figure 15

Eighteen-storey frame. Bending moment envelopes for an exterior column of frame 10

cant for all of the earthquakes for frame 5. The response

of the frame was reduced under artificial NZ4203/A.

12

r.JF=~,0
F-'

18-storeyframes

~'L'-]

The frames with a design drift index of 0.0123 did not

show significant strength degradation for the design

NZ.203A.#~L~
L

,..~. Pacoima

~1~" i

P-&

8,

I_'I' p

P-~

El

NZ4203t
-400

-200
0
200
q00
Column shear (kN)
Figure 16 Six-storey frame. Shear force envelopes for the
interior column of frame 1

-600

-400

200
-200
Column shear (kN)

400

600

Twelve-storey frame. Shear force envelopes for the

interior column of frame 5

Figure 1 7

Eng. Struct.

1992,

Vol. 14, No 2

87

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

12

increase in the plastic hinge rotation occurred due to

strength degradation during the artificial NZ4203/A
earthquake, varying from a maximum of 0.015 rad at
the 13th floor to 0.023 rad at the 6th floor. Increases
from 0.034 rad to 0.052 rad were observed under the
Pacoima Dam earthquake.

EI Centro
J~
P-D

NZ4203A*r-Pt
'

06

,T

L7

~J~r-JN Z4203 A
p-A

._~._
I-'"

X"I

acoma

El Centro

-400

-200

200

11

400

Column shear (kN)

Figure 18 Twelve-storey frame. Shear force envelopes for an
exterior column of frame 5

Fundamental natural period:

6-storey frame: The effective fundamental period is a
function of the mass and the effective stiffness. In this
study the period was measured from the time-history of
the top floor displacement. The effective period was
measured both from the half cycle before until the half
cycle after maximum top floor displacement (T2) and
from twice the half cycle before maximum top floor
displacement (T0. Comparison was made with the
initial fundamental period (To) determined for the
original elastic model. The results for frames 1 and 2 are
shown in Tables 2 and 3.
The measured fundamental period from the top floor
displacement in a multi-degree-of-freedom (d.o.f.)
system is not very accurate since the influence of higher
modes may distort the result. The effective period
measured from the top floor displacement time-history
under the Bucharest record showed a difference of
0.3 s - 0 . 4 s when compared to the initial fundamental
period.

18

12-storey frame: For frame 5, the effective time period

measured from the top floor displacement time-history
as described above is shown in Table 4.

18-storey frame: In the 18-storey frames, periods

measured from the top floor displacement were difficult
to determine and not very accurate because the plot of
the top floor displacement time-history did not show
clearly the length of the cycle. The results from measuring the top floor displacement in these frames gave a
lower fundamental period as given in Tables 5 and 6.

"

t.

.,ceotro

Table 2
Frame 1

1
2
3
4
5

'

),;0

To = 1.153 s

Bucharest
El Centro 1940
Art. NZ4203/A
Pacoima Dam
Parkfield

T1
(s)

T2
(s)

1.54
1,36
1.26
1,26
1.18

1.41
1.25
1.14
1.30
1.10

T1
(s)

T2
(s)

1.78
1.16
1.12
1,36
1.20

1.70
1.15
1.20
1.32
1.27

T0
Column shear (kN)

Figure 19 Eighteen-storey frame. Shear force envelopes for an

exterior column of frame 10

level earthquakes such as the El Centro 1940 and

artificial NZ4203/A earthquakes. In general, curvature
ductilities increased in the lower part of the frames due
to strength degradation whereas the top part was not
affected. At a design drift of 0.0162 h, a significant

88

Effective time period for frame 1

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

Table 3

Effective time period for frame 2

Frame 2

To = 1.273 s

1
2
3
4
5

Bucharest
El Centro 1940
Art. NZ4302/A
Pacoima Dam
Parkfield

M o m e n t resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et a/.

Table 4

Frame 5

1
2
3
4
5

To

1.777 s

Bucharest
El Centro 1940
Art. NZ4302/A
Pacoima Dam
Parkfield

Tab/e 5

Frame 12

1
2
3
4
5

Effective time period for frame 5

T1
(a)

T2
(s)

1.64
1.80
1.72
1.42
1.94

1.79
1.88
1.80
1.39
1.59

Effective time period for frame 12

To = 2.797 s

Bucharest
El Centro 1940
Art. NZ4302/A
Pacoima Dam
Parkfield

T1

T2

(s)

(s)

2.00
2.00
2.80
2.00
2.40

1.90
2.50
3.50
1.62
2.80

1
2
3
4
5

To = 1.273 s

Bucharest
El Centro 1940
Art. NZ4302/A
pacoima Dam
Parkfield

Column moment: It is difficult to utilize the full column

moment capacity in medium height steel moment
resisting frames where the strong column - weak beam
concept is used in the design of the structures. As
column sizes are often governed by stiffness requirements to limit inter-storey drifts, the member strengths
are often greater than required.
Column shear: In general, the maximum total base shear
in time-history analyses during the E1 Centro 1940 earthquake and the Pacoima Dam earthquake were 2.0 and
3.0 times the design base shear. The allowable shear
force was higher than that demanded by the earthquakes,
but this should always be checked in the design.
Strength degradation: The model used was quite conser-

Tab/e 6 Effective time period for frame 13

Frame 13

El Centro earthquake gave an amplification of 1.2 and

the Pacoima Dam earthquake the value of 1.3 times the
result from the combination of 1.2D + 1.2L, + E. The
amplification factors of 1.2 and 1.4, 1.1 and 1.2 were
found for El Centro 1940 and Pacoima Dam respectively
for 12- and 18-storey frames.

TT

T2

(s)

(s)

2.00
3.20
2.80
2.00
2.40

2.00
3.20
3.60
1.70
2.90

Conclusions
Curvature ductility
Curvature ductility generally increased when the drift
increased to the higher limits. Beam curvature ductility
of 5.0 gave satisfactory behaviour in the structures controlling the P-A effect when the design drift index limit
was 0.017. A curvature ductility greater than 6.0
showed that the P-A effect exerted significant influence.
The column bases with curvature ductility greater than
3.0 showed the significant effects of including P-A. At
the lower part of the structures the P-A effect must be
considered in increasing the curvature ductility,
especially when the strength degradation was taken into
account. Limiting curvature ductility in the lower
storeys seems necessary.

Force amplification factor

Axial forces
The axial force amplification factor was shown to be
significant for the 6- and 12-storey frames because earthquake loading gave a significant contribution to the axial
load in the column when compared with the gravity
load. In the 18-storey frame gravity load dominated the
axial compression force in the column. The increase of
axial force due to the earthquake was small compared
with the existing gravity load. For the 6-storey frame the

vative and only a small influence on the strength

degradation was shown when the maximum plastic hinge
rotation was limited to 0.030 rad. Under the E1 Centro
1940 earthquake for a frame with design drift lower than
0.017 h, the influence of strength degradation was
insignificant. Consideration must be given to the earthquakes with long duration shaking which may produce
a large number of cycles of plastic deformation.

Wind loading: In general, for the 6- and 12-storey

frames, the design base shear due to the seismic loading
was greater than total lateral load due to the wind
loading. For the 18-storey frame, the wind loading could
be higher than the design base shear depending on the
wind zone area. In that case the drift would be controlled
by the wind loading.
Design considerations: Dynamic P-A effects are not the
same as those found from static analyses since the
flexibility of the structure also affects the natural period.
Simple rules for designers are needed as an augmented
static analysis would not provide the desired solution.
For practical design, providing the lateral stiffness or
allowable drift for the buildings is limited, the
magnification by P-A should be less than 10% and may
be ignored. Thus keeping the inter-storey drift,
curvature ductility and plastic hinge rotation below fixed
limits, could be used to simplify P-A problems.

Acknowledgments
The study presented in this project was carried out in the
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, under the overall guidance of the head of department Professor R. Park. Financial assistance provided
by Heavy Engineering Research Association, New
Zealand is also gratefully acknowledged. The first
named author thanks Parahyangan Catholic University,
Bandung, Indonesia for the financial support which
enabled him to study in New Zealand.

Eng. Struct.

1992,

Vol. 14, No 2

89

Moment resisting steel frames: J. A. Tjondro et al.

References
1 Carr, A. J. and Moss, P. J. 'The effects of large displacements on the
earthquake response of tall concrete frame structures', Bull. New
Zealand Nat. Soc. for Earthquake Eng., 1980, 13, (4). 317-328
2 New Zealand Standard 'General structural design and design loadings
for buildings', Draft for Comment, DZ4203, (proposed revision of
reference 11) 1986
3 Paulay, T. 'A consideration of P-delta effects in ductile reinforced
concrete frames', Bull. New Zealand Nat. Soc. for Earthquake Eng.,
1978, 11, (3), 151-160
4 Andrews, A. L. 'Slenderness effects in earthquake resisting frames',
Bull. New Zealand Nat. Soc. for Earthquake Eng., 1977, 10, (3),
154-158
5 Montgomery, C. J. 'Influence of P-delta effects on seismic design',
Canadian J. Civ. Eng., 1981, 8, 3 1 - 4 3
6 patton, R. N. 'Analysis and design methods' Section B, New Zealand
Steel Study Group, Bull New Zealand Nat. Soc. for Earthquake Eng.
1985, 18, (4), 329-336
7 De l~uen, O. 'Ch 4, steel structures', in Design of earthquake resistant structures, (ed. E. Rosenblueth) Pentech Press, Plymouth, UK
1980

90

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 2

8 Butterworth, J. W. and Spring, K. C. F. 'Column design', section D,

New Zealand Steel Study Group, Bull. New Zealand Nat. S<,c. for
Earthquake Engineering., 1985, 18, (4), 344-350
9 Otani, S. 'Hysteresis models of reinforced concrete for earthquake
response analysis', J. Faculty of Eng. Univ. Tokyo (B), 1981,
XXXVI, (2), 125-159
10 Moss, P. J., Carr, A. J. and Buchanan, A. H. 'Seismic response of
low rise buildings', Res. Rep. 86-15, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, June 1986
11 New Zealand Standard 'Code of practice for general structural design
and design loadings for buildings', NZS4203, 1984
12 Popov, E. P. and Pinkney, R. B. 'Cyclic yield reversal in steel
building corrections', Proc. ASCE, 1969, 95, ST3, 125-135
]-3 Vann, ~Ar. P., T-t~omps0n, L. E., Whalley, L. E. and Ozier, L. D.,
"Cyclic behaviour of rolled steel members' Proc 5 WCEE. 1973, 1,
t 18.7- 1193
14 Lukey, A. F. and Adams, P. F. "Rotation capacity of beams under
moment gradient', J. ASCE, 1969, 95, ST6, 1173- 1188
15 Tjondro, J. A., Moss, P. J. and Carr, A. J. 'P-delta effects in medium
height moment-resisting steel frames under seismic loading', Bull.
New Zealand Nat. Soc. [or Earthquake Eng., 1990, 23, (4), 305-321