# On the Modeling and Analysis of Brittle Failure in Existing R/C Structures Due to Seismic Loads
## 3 Example Application of the Proposed Numerical Simulation Procedures
### Evaluation of the Analyses Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Story**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Column**} & \multirow{3}{*}{\(v\)} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Plan Direction _X_**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Plan Direction _Y_**} \\  & & & \(V_{flex,X}\) & \(V_{v,X}\) & \(V_{a,X}\) & \(V_{lap,X}\) & \(V_{ij,X}\) & \(V_{flex,Y}\) & \(V_{v,Y}\) & \(V_{a,Y}\) & \(V_{lap,Y}\) & \(V_{ij,X}\) \\  & & & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** & **(kN)** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{1} & C1,1 & 0.06 & 24.50 & 39.36 & 24.50 & 18.17 & 32.64 & 24.50 & 39.36 & 24.50 & 18.17 & 32.64 \\  & C2,1 & 0.06 & 65.75 & 39.46 & 65.75 & 40.51 & 65.74 & 208.03 & 128.81 & 208.03 & 113.55 & 105.58 \\  & C3,1 & 0.10 & 28.80 & 50.58 & 28.80 & 22.60 & 36.77 & 28.80 & 50.58 & 28.80 & 22.60 & 36.77 \\  & C4,1 & 0.14 & 32.44 & 59.60 & 32.44 & 26.36 & 40.27 & 32.44 & 59.60 & 32.44 & 26.36 & 40.27 \\  & C5,1 & 0.29 & 42.69 & 87.76 & 42.69 & 37.06 & 51.07 & 42.69 & 87.76 & 42.69 & 37.06 & 51.07 \\  & C6,1 & 0.23 & 38.60 & 79.50 & 38.60 & 32.79 & 46.65 & 38.60 & 79.50 & 38.60 & 32.79 & 46.65 \\  & C7,1 & 0.08 & 26.33 & 38.99 & 26.33 & 20.06 & 34.46 & 26.33 & 38.99 & 26.33 & 20.06 & 34.46 \\  & C8,1 & 0.16 & 34.14 & 64.27 & 34.14 & 28.12 & 41.91 & 34.14 & 64.27 & 34.14 & 28.12 & 41.91 \\  & C9,1 & 0.18 & 35.14 & 67.43 & 35.14 & 29.18 & 43.04 & 35.14 & 67.43 & 35.14 & 29.18 & 43.04 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{2} & C1,2 & 0.03 & 22.38 & 40.06 & 22.38 & 16.23 & 31.36 & 22.38 & 40.06 & 22.38 & 16.23 & 31.36 \\  & C2,2 & 0.04 & 59.49 & 39.95 & 59.49 & 34.52 & 63.58 & 189.69 & 130.38 & 189.69 & 95.49 & 102.52 \\  & C3,2 & 0.06 & 25.51 & 39.48 & 25.51 & 19.45 & 34.47 & 25.51 & 39.48 & 25.51 & 19.45 & 34.47 \\  & C4,2 & 0.09 & 28.18 & 38.90 & 28.18 & 22.21 & 37.11 & 28.18 & 38.90 & 28.18 & 22.21 & 37.11 \\  & C5,2 & 0.18 & 37.40 & 70.81 & 37.40 & 31.70 & 45.75 & 37.40 & 70.81 & 37.40 & 31.70 & 45.75 \\  & C6,2 & 0.14 & 33.50 & 60.33 & 33.50 & 27.68 & 42.09 & 33.50 & 60.33 & 33.50 & 27.68 & 42.09 \\  & C7,2 & 0.05 & 23.71 & 39.67 & 23.71 & 17.63 & 32.79 & 23.71 & 39.67 & 23.71 & 17.63 & 32.79 \\  & C8,2 & 0.10 & 29.70 & 51.38 & 29.70 & 23.76 & 38.47 & 29.70 & 51.38 & 29.70 & 23.76 & 38.47 \\  & C9,2 & 0.11 & 30.28 & 52.74 & 30.28 & 24.38 & 39.10 & 30.28 & 52.74 & 30.28 & 24.38 & 39.10 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{3} & C1,3 & 0.01 & 19.79 & 40.35 & 19.79 & 13.40 & 28.06 & 19.79 & 40.35 & 19.79 & 13.40 & 28.06 \\  & C2,3 & 0.02 & 52.10 & 40.25 & 52.10 & 26.53 & 57.29 & 167.86 & 131.36 & 167.86 & 71.95 & 92.84 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C3,3 & 0.03 & 21.36 & 39.97 & 21.36 & 15.03 & 29.76 & 21.36 & 39.97 & 21.36 & 15.03 & 29.76 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C4,3 & 0.04 & 22.76 & 39.78 & 22.76 & 16.46 & 31.15 & 22.76 & 39.78 & 22.76 & 16.46 & 31.15 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C5,3 & 0.11 & 30.04 & 53.06 & 30.04 & 23.94 & 38.21 & 30.04 & 53.06 & 30.04 & 23.94 & 38.21 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C6,3 & 0.08 & 26.50 & 39.02 & 26.50 & 20.31 & 34.90 & 26.50 & 39.02 & 26.50 & 20.31 & 34.90 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C7,3 & 0.02 & 20.41 & 40.16 & 20.41 & 14.04 & 28.76 & 20.41 & 40.16 & 20.41 & 14.04 & 28.76 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C8,3 & 0.06 & 24.32 & 39.40 & 24.32 & 18.07 & 32.78 & 24.32 & 39.40 & 24.32 & 18.07 & 32.78 \\ \cline{1-1}  & C9,3 & 0.05 & 24.17 & 39.59 & 24.17 & 17.89 & 32.52 & 24.17 & 39.59 & 24.17 & 17.89 & 32.52 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Normalized average axial load and shear strengths of the SPEAR building columns calculated according to the RSA system [30; 31; 32]. Table 3 summarizes the peak displacement values obtained from the sequence of analyses for the center of mass of the three floors to the different intensity ground motions. Relative lateral drift ratios were obtained by dividing the relative floor displacement values by the clear floor height.