Welcome to Francis Academic Press

Academic Journal of Architecture and Geotechnical Engineering, 2019, 1(1); doi: 10.25236/AJAGE.010102.

Comparative Study on Existing Seismic Performance Evaluation Methods of Buildings Based on Life Cycle


Liang LI

Corresponding Author:
Liang LI

Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics, Zhengzhou, Henan 450015, China


This paper aims at the main structural forms of multi-storey buildings (frame structure, masonry structure and bottom frame structure) in our country in the whole life cycle, and compares the analysis results of bottom shear method, mode decomposition response spectrum method, time history analysis method and Pushover method by using the general finite element software SAP2000. Then it is converted into the displacement response of the corresponding multi-degree-of-freedom structure, and the total displacement response of the structure is obtained through the mode combination method. By comparing it with the target displacement of the shear wall, it is judged whether the design result meets the performance target requirements. The results show that the four seismic performance evaluation methods have little difference in the analysis results of multi-storey buildings. Among them, Pushover method is a fast, simple and practical evaluation method. Weak links can be found when evaluating the seismic performance of structures under rare earthquakes, which can provide more references for seismic performance evaluation and reinforcement.


The whole life cycle, Multi-storey buildings, Earthquake resistance, Performance evaluation, Compare

Cite This Paper

Liang LI. Comparative Study on Existing Seismic Performance Evaluation Methods of Buildings Based on Life Cycle. Academic Journal of Architecture and Geotechnical Engineering (2019) Vol. 1, Issue 1: 20-29. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJAGE.010102.


[1] Hu Ying, Pei Lijian, Han Chunxiu. (2019). Research on seismic performance evaluation method of building masonry structure based on BIM [J]. Chinese Journal of Earthquake Engineering, no. 1, pp. 221-226.
[2] Wang Jinwen, Zhang Meisong, Ma Zhenyan, et al. (2018). Research on key technologies for seismic performance design of a high-altitude corridor [J]. Building Structure, no. 1, pp. 36-41.
[3] Zhang Hong, Chen Xu, ZHANGHong, et al. (2017). Numerical simulation analysis of multilayer frame structure [J]. Jiangsu Architecture, no. 4, pp. 50-54.
[4] Mu Qian [1], Liu Wenfeng [1, 2], et al. ( 2018). Study on seismic performance and evaluation methods of RC frame structure [J]. Journal of Qingdao Technological University, no. 3, pp. 9-14.
[5] Wang Chenggang. (2017). Simple analysis of multi-story frame building structure design [J]. Building Material Development Direction, no. 15, no. 23, pp. 177-178.
[6] Zhang Hai. ( 2017). Research on Dynamic Management of Engineering Cost Full Life Cycle [J]. Green Environmental Protection Building Materials, no. 6, pp. 00216-00216.
[7] Yang Xiao. (2017). Stakeholder Analysis of Infrastructure PPP Projects from the Perspective of the Whole Life Cycle [J]. China Collective Economy, no. 1, pp. 55-57.
[8] He Xingjun. (2017). Comparative analysis of the whole process and life cycle engineering cost management [J]. SME Management and Science and Technology (Mid-Term), no. 8, pp. 12-13.
[9] Su Dong, Ma Zhongneng, Li Chengxiang, et al. (2018). Full life cycle cost model and sensitivity analysis of switchgear in distribution network [J]. Power System Protection and Control, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 150-155.
[10] Jin Chen. (2017). Seismic identification analysis of a reinforced concrete frame building [J]. Building Structure, no. S2, pp. 506-510.