## 4 Evaluating the Seismic Response of Structures
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Story**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Field**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Inter-Story Drift Ratio**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Near/Far**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Displacement\({}_{\text{Ave}}\) (m)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Near/Far**} \\  & & & (Max)\({}_{\text{Ave}}\) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**3**} & Near & 0.03 & 3 & 0.23 & 3.29 \\  & Far & 0.01 & & 0.07 & 3.29 \\  & Near & 0.04 & & 0.47 & 3.36 \\  & Far & 0.01 & & 0.14 & 3.36 \\  & Near & 0.03 & & 0.58 & \\  & Far & 0.01 & 3 & 0.17 & 3.41 \\  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Axial Force\({}_{\text{Ave}}\) (kN)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Moment\({}_{\text{Ave}}\) (kN-m)**} \\  & Near & 500.8 & & 552.7 & \\  & Far & 232.1 & 2.16 & 209.5 & 2.64 \\  & Near & 1173.5 & & 1078.2 & \\  & Far & 672.6 & & 458.3 & 2.35 \\  & Near & 2250.9 & & 1376.1 & 1.9 \\  & Far & 1448 & & 723.1 & \\  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Acceleration\({}_{\text{Ave}}\) (m/s\({}^{2}\))**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Velocity\({}_{\text{Ave}}\) (m/s)**} \\  & Near & 17.76 & & 1.42 & \\  & Far & 8.48 & & 0.67 & 2.12 \\  & Near & 18.57 & & 2.06 & \\  & Far & 10.67 & 1.74 & 1.07 & 1.93 \\  & Near & 20.48 & & 2.39 & \\  & Far & 10.15 & 2.02 & 1.16 & 2.06 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Comparison of the average of seismic response parameters of studied frames under to the simultaneous effects of the horizontal and vertical constituents of far- and near-field earthquakes with fling-step records. The maximum axial force developed in the C12 column on the first floor of the three-story building was 582.10 kN when subjected to the influences of both the horizontal and vertical constituents of the near-fault record with fling-step and 289.50 kN when subjected to the influences of the far-field earthquake (Table 1). The Big Bear (#EQF\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)1) and Chi-Chi-29 (#EQN\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)3) records respectively imposed these forces on the columns. The peak axial force created in the column subjected to the influence of both components of the near-field earthquake was therefore 2.01 times higher than that of the far-field earthquake. According to the Big Bear (#EQF\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)1) and Chi-Chi-52 (#EQN\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)2) records, the peak axial force developed by the near-fault record in the C13 column of the first floor of the eight-story building was 3109.9 kN and that by the far-field earthquake was 1598.50 kN. The maximum force developed by the near-field earthquake in the column was therefore 1.95 times higher than that developed by the far-field earthquake. Table 3 compares the average maximum axial force in the column subjected to the influence of far-field and near-field ground motions. According to the Big Bear (#EQF\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)1) and Chi-Chi-52 (#EQN\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)2) records, the maximum moment developed in the C11 column of the first floor of the three-story building subjected to the simultaneous effects of the horizontal and vertical constituents of the near-fault records with a fling-step earthquake was 613.60 kN\(\cdot\)m, and that of the far-field earthquake was 265.60 kN\(\cdot\)m. The maximum moment developed by the near-field earthquake was therefore 2.31 times higher than that of the far-field earthquake. According to the Kern County (#EQF\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)2) and Chi-Chi-52 (#EQN\({}_{\rm(V+H)}\)2) records, the maximum moment developed in the C13 column subjected to the effects of the horizontal and vertical constituents of the near-field earthquake was 1578.00 kN\(\cdot\)m and that of the far-field earthquake was 522.50 kN\(\cdot\)m. The moment created in the column by the near-field earthquake was therefore 3.02 times higher than that created by the far-field earthquake.