Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1
Pushover Analysis for an Elevated Water Tanks
N. Vinay, Dr. Gopi Siddappa and Dr.G.S. Suresh
Abstract--- Elevated water tanks are one of the most
important lifeline structures in earthquake prone regions. In
major cities and also in rural areas elevated water tanks
forms an integral part of water supply scheme. These
structures has large mass concentrated at the top of slender
supporting structure, hence these structures are especially
vulnerable to horizontal forces due to earthquake. Elevated
water tanks that are inadequately analyzed and designed have
suffered extensive damage during past earthquakes. Hence it
is important to check the severity of these forces for particular
region. The tanks are used to store water placed either on the
ground or at an elevation. The need for a water tank is as old
as civilization of man, providing storage of water for drinking,
Irrigation, agriculture, fire suppression, agricultural farming
both for plants and livestock, chemical manufacturing, food
preparation as well as many other applications. All water
tanks are designed as crack free structures to eliminate any
leakage. The Analysis and Design of reinforced concrete
structures to sustain static and dynamic loading is an
important task facing structural engineers. The existing codes
are based on elastic analysis which has no measure of the
deformation capability of members or of structure. Thus the
Non-Linear static pushover analysis is becoming a popular
tool for seismic performance, evaluation of existing and new
structures. The expectation is that the pushover analysis will
provide adequate information on seismic demands imposed by
the design ground motion on the structural system and its
components. The purpose of this project is to summarize the
basic concepts on which the pushover analysis can be based,
assess the accuracy of pushover predictions, identify
conditions under which the pushover will provide adequate
information and perhaps more importantly to identify cases in
which the pushover predictions will be inadequate or even
misleading. The aim of this project is to provide relevant
information and implementation of Non- linear Static
[pushover] analysis for elevated water tanks.
Keywords--- Water Tank, Pushover Analysis, Earthquake,
Leakage
I. INTRODUCTION
E LEVATED water tanks are commonly used in public
water distribution system. Being an important part of
lifeline system, and due to post earthquake functional needs,
seismic safety of water tanks is of considerable importance.
Elevated water tanks also called as elevated service reservoirs
N. Vinay, PG Student, vinaymtech21@gmail.com
Dr. Gopi Siddappa, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering PESCE,
Mandya, Karnataka, India. E-mail: gopisiddappa@gmail.com
Dr.G.S. Suresh, Professor & HOD Department of Civil Engineering, NIE,
Mysore, Karnataka, India. E-mail: gss_nie@yahoo.com
ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring
275
(ESRs) typically comprises of a container and a supporting
tower (also called as staging). Staging in the form of
reinforced concrete shaft and in the form of reinforced
concrete column-brace frame are commonly deployed. The
column-brace frame type of staging is essentially a 3D
reinforced concrete frame which supports the container and
resists the lateral loads induced due to earthquake or wind.
Aim of the present study is to bring out the differences in
seismic behavior of column beam (Building) frame and
column-brace (staging) frame in the post-elastic region and to
quantify their ductility. In addition, nonlinear dynamic
analysis is also performed to bring out the differences in the
nonlinear dynamic behavior of two types of frames. Pushover
analysis is an approximate analysis method in which the
structure is subjected to monotonically increasing lateral
forces with an invariant height-wise distribution until a target
displacement is reached. Pushover analysis consists of a series
of sequential elastic analysis, superimposed to approximate a
force-displacement curve of the overall structure. A two or
three dimensional model which includes bilinear or trilinear
load-deformation diagrams of all lateral force resisting
elements is first created and gravity loads are applied initially.
Pushover Analysis option will allow engineers to perform
pushover analysis as per FEMA -356 and ATC-40. Pushover
analysis is a static, nonlinear procedure using simplified
nonlinear technique to estimate seismic structural
deformations. It is an incremental static analysis used to
determine the force-displacement relationship, or the capacity
curve, for a structure or structural element. The analysis
involves applying horizontal loads, in a prescribed pattern, to
the structure incrementally, i.e. pushing the structure and
plotting the total applied shear force and associated lateral
displacement at each increment, until the structure or collapse
condition.
Priestley et al (1988) describes a stress-strain model for
confined as well as unconfined concrete subjected to uniaxial
compressive loading. The unified stress-strain model for
confined concrete is developed for members with circular and
rectangular sections, under static or dynamic loading. The
document given by Applied Technology Council (ATC-40,
1997) provides analytical procedures for evaluating the
seismic performance of existing buildings. Simplified
nonlinear analysis methods are provided. Use of nonlinear
procedures in general has been discussed and capacity
spectrum method is introduced. By using static pushover
analysis method lateral force resisting capacity of structure is
obtained. Habibullah et al.(1998) describe the steps involved
in performing pushover analysis of simple three dimensional
frame model using SAP2000 software. The recent advent of
performance based design has brought pushover analysis to
forefront; hence, there is a need to have away to perform
Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 276
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1

pushover analysis using standard software. The paper briefly
describes each step of the procedure of pushover analysis in
SAP2000 which is a general purpose finite element structural
analysis program. The paper uses default values of user
defined hinge properties from the software.
Inel and Ozmen (2006) discuss the effects of plastic hinge
properties on nonlinear response of reinforced concrete
buildings. The paper discusses the results of pushover analysis
with default and user defined hinge properties. Four storey
building is considered and a study is carried out with the help
of SAP2000. The paper gives details of reinforcement as well
as other structural features of the buildings under
consideration. The study gives emphasis on the comparison of
pushover curves with different plastic hinge lengths and other
parameters such as spacing of transverse reinforcement are
also included in the study. The paper by Kadid and Boumrkik
(1987) is aimed at evaluating the performance of the framed
structures under future expected earthquakes. Need was felt to
evaluate the performance of structures after Boumerdes (2003)
earthquake which devastated a large part of Algeria. It is
stated that pushover analysis is a viable method to assess the
damage vulnerability of buildings. The paper explains
pushover analysis of three framed buildings with 5, 8 and 12
stories representing low, medium and high rise buildings
respectively. The study is carried out using general finite
element software SAP2000.
IV. METHOD OF ANALYSIS
For seismic performance evaluation, a structural analysis
of the mathematical model of the structure is required to
determine force and displacement demands in various
components of the structure. Several analysis methods, both
elastic and inelastic, are available to predict the seismic
performance of the structures. There are two methods of
analysis, elastic and inelastic methods. In the present study
inelastic analysis is adopted. Inelastic analysis procedures
basically include inelastic time history analysis and inelastic
static analysis which is also known as pushover analysis.
V. PUSH OVER ANALYSIS USING SAP 2000
Consider a single bay single story frame with the same
cross section throughout as shown in Figure 1(a) the frame is
subjected to self weight only. The intention is to demonstrate
the step by step procedure of pushover analysis in SAP2000.

II. PURPOSE OF DOING PUSH OVER ANALYSIS

The pushover is expected to provide information on many
response characteristics that cannot be obtained from an
elastic static or dynamic analysis. The following are the
examples of such response characteristics: Figure 1(a):
1. The realistic force demands on potentially brittle
elements, such as axial force demands on columns, force
demands on brace connections, moment demands on
beam to column connections, shear force demands in
reinforced concrete beams, etc.
2. Estimates of the deformations demands for elements that
have to form inelastically in order to dissipate the energy
imparted to the structure.
3. Estimates of the inter storey drifts that account for
strength or stiffness discontinuities and that may be used
to control the damages and to evaluate P-Delta effects.
4. Identification of the strength discontinuous in plan
elevation that will lead to changes in the dynamic
characteristics in elastic range.
Figure 1(b)
III. SCOPE OF PRESENT STUDY
Figure 1(a) and Figure 1(b) shows the example frame
In the present study, modeling of the Elevated circular selected for demonstration and details of reinforcement of the
water tank (Base fixed) under loads has been analyzed using cross-section provided. The step by step procedure of
SAP2000 software and the frame is analyzed using SAP2000 pushover analysis is as follows:
software up to the failure and the load deformation curves and
results are obtained. In this study default hinges are used in Step 1: Geometry
beams and columns and thus pushover graph is obtained from Step 2: Section and Material properties
excel spread sheet
Step 3: Nonlinear hinge properties
Step 4: Load patterns and load cases

ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring

Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 277
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1

Step 5: Analysis.
Step 6: Results
Figure 2 shows the capacity curve for the example frame
considered (Inel and Ozmen). The base shear is linear upto 40
kN force corresponding to roof displacement 0.01m

80
Base Shear(kN)

40

20

0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14

Roof Displacement (m)

Figure 2: Capacity Curve for the Example Frame (Base Shear
versus Roof Displacement)

VI. BENCKMARK PROBLEM FOR VALIDATION AND

DISCUSSIONS
Inel and Ozmen (2006) have studied the effects of plastic
hinge properties in nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete
buildings. SAP 2000 Nonlinear Version 8 has been used for
Figure 3: Details of Structure (Inel and Ozmen, 2006)
pushover analysis by Inel and Ozmen (2006). Pushover
analysis is carried out for default as well as user defined hinge PUSHOVER
properties. A 4-story building of plan dimensions 16m x 12m 500
Base Shear (kN)

is used for study as shown in Figure 3(a). This consists of 400

typical beam-column RC frame building with no shear walls. 300
Typical floor to floor height is 2.8m. The building is 11.2 m in 200
elevation. Material properties are assumed to be 16 MPa for 100
the concrete compressive strength and 220MPa for yield 0
strength of both longitudinal and transverse reinforcements.
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Types of column sections are given in Figure 3(b) All
Displacement (m)
beams are of 200mm x 500mm and amounts of top and bottom
reinforcement is shown in Figure 3(c) and column dimensions Figure 4: Capacity Curve for Benchmark Problem
are given in the Figure 3(d). Transverse reinforcement spacing
of 100mm has been considered. The dead and participating The present study is as follows: a water tank of 90000
live loads (30% of live load) on the frame are 1976 kN and litres capacity with height of staging 16m upto the bottom of
360 kN. Since there is no torsional effect in the selected the tank. The tank is supported with 8 columns symmetrically
structure, two-dimensional modeling is employed. The first placed on a circle of 10.6m mean diameter. The staging of the
mode period is 0.755 s. Modal properties of first three modes tank is divided into 4 panels each of 4m height. The columns
are given in Table 1. Figure 4 shows the capacity curve for are connected to foundation by means of ring beam, the top of
benchmark problem given by Inel and Ozmen. which is provided at 1m below the ground level so that actual
height of first panel is 5m.
Table 1: Dynamic Characteristics of the Benchmark Problem
Mode No. 1 2 3 Table 2: Basic Material Properties
Modulus of Modulus of Characteristic Yield Ultimate
Period (s) 0.755 0.250 0.147 Elasticity Elasticity strength of stress for strain in
of steel, Es of concrete, concrete, steel, bending,
(MPa) Ec(MPa) fck(MPa) fy(MPa) cu
Mass participation 0.819 0.117 0.036
factor 210000 22360.68 20 415 0.0035

ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring

Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 278
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1

Table 3: Typical Dimensions of Brace and Reinforcement

Adopted

B D Top Botto Top Botto Diam Spacin

(m (mm Cover m steel m eter of g of
m) ) (mm) Cover diamet steel stirrup stirrups
(mm) er stirrup (mm) (mm)
(mm) s
(mm)
300 700 30 20 4-25 4-25 12 230

The plan and sectional elevation of the elevated water tank

considered for the present study is shown in Figure. 5(a)
and 5(b). The skeleton 3D View of bracings, columns and
bottom ring beam is shown in Figure 6(a) and the details
of the bottom ring beam is given in Figure 6(b). Figures 6(c)
and 6(d) shows the details of circular column detailing of
bracings respectively Figure 6(a): 3D View of Bracings, Columns

Figure 6(b): Details of Bottom Ring Beam and Bottom Ring

Figure 5(a): Plan of Water Tank Beam

Figure 6(c): Details of Circular Column

Figure 5(b): Sectional Elevation of the Structure

Figure 6(d): Details of Bracings

ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring

Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 279
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1

VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

In the present study, non-linear response of elevated water
tank modeled as per details mentioned above. The objective of
this study is to see the variation of load-displacement graph
and check the maximum base shear and displacement of the
frame. Figure 7 shows the capacity curve obtained from the
present study using SAP2000. Table 4 gives the list of
displacement and base force for various steps of analysis from
which capacity curved is obtained.

PUSHOVE
R CURVE
1000
Base Shear (kN)

800
600
400
200
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Displacement (m) Figure 8: Elevated Circular Liquid Storage Tank with
Columns Rigid at Top and Fixed at Footings
Figure7: Capacity Curve for Elevated Water Tank
Table 4: Tabular Data for Capacity Curve An elevated circular liquid storage tank with columns rigid
at top and fixed at footings is shown in Figure 8. Figures 9 to
Displacement Base Force 14 describes the deformed shapes of the frames at various
Step
(m) (kN) steps of analysis and also the formation of hinges on the
0 0.002524 0 columns and braces. The colour code at the bottom of the
1 0.007303 139.272 figures helps in identifying the intensity of the hinge
2 0.018056 323.378 formation. At step 0 and 1 (Figures 9 and 10 ), ie, in the early
3 0.107928 770.592 steps of analysis, there is no deformation and hence hinges
4 0.132474 859.575 are not observed and also colour code do not appear at the
5 0.134049 862.953
bottom of the figure.
6 0.143164 874.885
7 0.220411 919.399
8 0.243897 927.328
9 0.251265 928.517
10 0.266958 929.817
11 0.274844 930.016
12 0.28382 929.871
13 0.299267 928.741
14 0.328868 919.053
15 0.328877 874.98
16 0.331027 886.955
17 0.331317 887.821
18 0.332386 889.553
19 0.332906 890.067
20 0.333608 890.223
21 0.335111 890.242
22 0.352583 884.071

Figure 9: Deformed Shape of the Frame at Step-0

ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring

Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 280
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1

Figure 10: Deformed Shape of the Frame at Step-1 Figure 13: Deformed Shape of the Frame at Step-15

Figure 11: Deformed Shape of the Frame at Step-5 Figure 14: Deformed Shape of the Frame at Step

Comparison between the SAP 2000 model and the bench

mark problem (Inel and Ozmen)

1000

800
Base Shear(kN)

600

400 Present study

200 Inel and ozmen

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Displacement (m)

Figure 12: Deformed Shape of the Frame at Step-10

Figure 15: Combined Capacity Curve

ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring

Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 281
Paper ID SAM131, Vol. 1

Base shear v/s roof displacement are plotted in Figure 15.

From the present study it is seen from Figure 15, the
maximum displacement has been obtained as 340mm and the
average top drift is therefore equal to about 2.5% of the total
height of the building. And for the bench mark problem the
maximum displacement has been obtained as 210mm and the
average top drift is therefore equal to about 2% of the total
height of the building.

VIII. CONCLUSIONS
In the present study, the non-linear response of RCC frame
of an elevated circular liquid storage tank using SAP 2000
under the loading has been carried out with the intention to
study the relative importance of several factors in the non-
linear analysis of RC frames. The frame behaved linearly
elastic up to a base shear value of around 310 kN. At the value
of base-shear 910 kN, it depicted non-linearity in its behavior.
Increase in deflection has been observed to be more with load
increments at base-shear of 910 kN showing the elasto-plastic
behavior. The joints of the structure have displayed rapid
degradation and the inter storey deflections have increased
rapidly in non-linear zone. The frame has shown variety of
failures like beam-column joint failure, flexural failures and
shear failures. Prominent failures are joint failures.

REFERENCES
[1] ATC (1997)., NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings. FEMA 273 Report, prepared by the Applied Technology
Council for the Building Seismic Safety Council, published by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
[2] Habibullah, Ashraf., Stephen and Pyle.(1998). Practical Three-
Dimensional Nonlinear Static Pushover Analysis. Structure Magazine,
U.S.A, 1-2.
[3] Kadid and Boumrkik. (1987). Pushover Analysis of Reinforced
Concrete Frame Structures, Asian Journal of Civil Engineering
(building and housing).
[4] Mehmet Inel and Hayri Baytan Ozmen.(2006). Effects of plastic hinge
properties in nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete buildings.
Department of Civil Engineering, Pamukkale University, 2007 Denizli,
Turkey.
[5] Priestley, M. J. N., and Park R. (1987). Strength and Ductility of
Concrete Bridge Columns under Seismic Loading. ACI Structural
Journal, Technical paper, Title n 84-S8, 79(1), 61-76.

ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7 | 2012 Bonfring