Acta Polytechnica https://doi.org/10.14311/AP.2024.64.0142 Acta Polytechnica 64(2):142–181, 2024 © 2024 The Author(s). Licensed under a CC-BY 4.0 licence Published by the Czech Technical University in Prague A PRACTICAL WAY TO APPLY A TECHNIQUE THAT ACCELERATES TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURES UNDER DIGITISED EXCITATIONS Aram Soroushian International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Structural Engineering Research Center, No. 21, West Arghavan St., North Dibajee St., S. Lavasani St., 19537 Tehran, Iran correspondence: a.soroushian@iiees.ac.ir Abstract. Time history analysis using direct time integration is a versatile and widely accepted tool for analysing the dynamic behaviour of structures. In 2008, a technique was proposed to accelerate the time history analysis of structural systems subjected to digitised excitations. Recently, this technique has been named as the SEB THAAT* (Step-Enlargement-Based Time-History-Analysis-Acceleration- Technique), and the determination of appropriate values for its parameter is introduced as the main challenge. To overcome this challenge, a procedure is proposed in this paper. The basis of the procedure is the comments on accuracy control in structural dynamics and numerical analysis of ordinary differential equations, legalised in the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004. As the main achievement, by using the proposed procedure, we can apply the SEB THAAT and carry out the time history analysis clearly and with less parameter setting compared to the ordinary time history analysis. The proposed procedure is always applicable and, except when the behaviour is very complex, oscillatory and non-linear, the reductions in analysis run-time are considerable while the changes in accuracy are negligible. The performance can be sensitive to the problem, the integration method, the target response, and the severity of the non-linear behaviour. Compared to the previous tests on the SEB THAAT, the efficiency of applying the SEB THAAT using the proposed procedure is better, the sensitivity of the performance to the problem is lower, and a measure of accuracy is available. Compared to other techniques for accelerating structural dynamic analyses, the use of the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure has several positive points, including the simplicity of implementation. Keywords: Structural dynamics, time integration, analysis run-time, response accuracy, digitised excitation, the SEB THAAT, clear application, NZS 1170.5:2004. 1. Introduction In many structural analyses, the behaviour is dynamic and non-linear. The semi-discretised models can be expressed as [1–6]: Mü(t) + fint(t) = f(t), 0 ≤ t ≤ tend, Initial conditions: ∣∣∣∣∣∣ u (t = 0) = u0, u̇ (t = 0) = u̇0, fint (t = 0) = fint0 , non-linearity constraints: Q, (1) where t is the time, tend stands for the analysis interval, M is the mass matrix, fint indicates the vector of internal force, f(t) indicates the vector of excitation (external force), u(t) denotes the vector of displacement, u̇(t) denotes the vector of velocity, ü(t) denotes the vector of acceleration, u0 implies the initial displacement, u̇0 implies the initial velocity, fint0 implies the initial internal force (fint0 , is not needed in linear problems, it may be essential in the presence of material non-linearity), Q represents the constraints that distinguish non- linear behaviour from linear behaviour, e.g. rigid barriers cannot be passed (see e.g. [7]). For the analysis of Equation (1), direct time inte- gration (see Figure 1) is a versatile tool that generally leads to approximate solutions after lengthy computa- tions [1, 2]. Accuracy and run-time are very impor- tant in advanced computations, where many and/or lengthy analyses are to be carried out, e.g. IDA (In- cremental Dynamic Analysis) and analytical fragility curve computations [8–10]. Accordingly, considerable effort is being made to increase the accuracy and/or to reduce the analysis run-time. Some of the main approaches are: (1.) reducing the structural models by replacing them with models with fewer degrees of freedom [11–13], (2.) reducing the number of excitation records, in applications such as seismic analysis [14–16], (3.) reducing the number of oscillatory modes [17–19], 142 https://doi.org/10.14311/AP.2024.64.0142 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://www.cvut.cz/en vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Figure 1. Brief description of analysis of Equation (1) using direct time integration. (4.) time parallel methods [20–22], (5.) using higher order/more accurate analysis meth- ods/strategies, e.g. see [2, 23–27]. Meanwhile, in the last decades, direct down sampling, truncation methods, and their combinations, are used for faster analyses of structures under digitised exci- tations [28–32]. Returning to Equation (1) and the time integra- tion computation, when f(t) is available in a digitised format, the generally accepted comment for the inte- gration step is as follows [1, 33–36]: ∆t = min ( T χ , ∆tcr, ∆tCFL, f ∆t ) , (2) where ∆t is the integration step, T is the smallest oscillatory period with worthwhile contribution to the response [36], ∆tcr is the upper bound on the integration step because of the linear theory of numerical stability [2, 23, 33], ∆tCFL is the upper bound on the integration step in wave propagation problems and associated with spatial discretisation [37], f ∆t is the step at which the excitation is digitised [1, 33, 35, 38] (and disappears when the excitation is continuous), χ is defined as follows [1, 34, 35]: χ =  10 when the behaviour is linear, 100 when the behaviour is non-linear and there is no impact, 1000 when the behaviour is non-linear and there are impacts. (3) In many analyses, f ∆t is the governing term in Equa- tion (2), leading to ∆t = f ∆t. Focusing on this special case, which will be even more popular in fu- ture (in view of the improvements in recording instru- mentation), there are several major methods, that can accelerate the analyses by modifying the f(t); see [30–32, 39–42]. In view of the main features of one of these methods, i.e. the SEB THAAT (Step- Enlargement-Based Time History Analysis Accelera- tion Technique) [38, 39, 43–46], as listed below: • Significant reduction in the analysis run-time; see Table 1, • sufficiently accurate response history when the pa- rameters are set properly; see e.g. [45, 46], • simple formulation [1, 38, 39], • good versatility; see Table 1, • contribution of all the data of the original excitation in the new excitation [1, 38, 39], • having a mathematical basis [39], • having a formulation that depends on the excitation and not directly on the structural system [39], • considerable number of the previous successful tests; see the review presented in Table 1, • reducing the analysis run-time without increasing the use of in-core memory [1, 38, 39], the SEB THAAT has a good potential to accelerate analyses of systems subjected to digitised excitations. In a review on the other methods [30–32, 40–42], three do not use the original excitation’s total data in defin- ing the new excitation [30–32], three take into account features of earthquakes and may be inappropriate for general structural dynamic problems [30, 31, 40], one produces new excitations digitised in unequal steps [40], the formulation and implementation of one is complicated [41], and for the method proposed in [42], the implementation is more complicated than the SEB THAAT [38, 39] and the method is tested on a small number of examples; see also Section 6. The SEB THAAT is therefore a good candidate for 143 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Structural system Reduction in the run-time [%]∗ Details Residential buildings 50–90 About 200 buildings with linear/non-linear behavior, regularity/irregularity in plan/height, under different earthquakes A thirty-story building 50 A thirty-story steel three-dimensional frame subjected to two different excitations Buildings subjected to multi-component earthquakes 75 An eight-story steel three-dimensional frame subjected to the three-component Abbar earthquake Water tanks 67 Some experimental- and some real-sized water tanks subjected to different earthquakes Bridges 30–80 About 20 real bridges with linear/non-linear behaviors, some with pre-stressed elements, subjected to different excitations including the multi-support Power station, Cooling tower, Space structure, Silo 50–90 A couple of each structure, considering linear/non-linear behavior, different near-/far-field excitations and different integration schemes Earth dams <80 Several earth dams each subjected to several earthquake records Milad telecommunication tower 50–70 Considering linear/non-linear behavior, near-/far-field excitations, and different integration schemes Structural systems damped non-classically 30–90 Considering linear and non-linear behavior, and different integration schemes Typical Iranian multi-span reinforced concrete bridges >50 Developing IDA curves and fragility functions, considering deficient cap beam-column joint ∗ In the price of negligible inaccuracy. Table 1. The main tests on the SEB THAAT’s performance (see [1, 47, 48]). further study to speed up the analysis of structural systems subjected to digitised excitations. The objective of this paper is to review the SEB THAAT and propose a procedure for its clear application; such a procedure does not exist at present; see [38]. In continuation, after reviewing the SEB THAAT, its major challenge (i.e. proper selection of the SEB THAAT’s parameter and clear application of the SEB THHAT [38]) is discussed. Then, to overcome the challenge, a procedure is pro- posed and its performance is evaluated via several examples, including a realistic example. A number of mainly practical issues are discussed later, and fi- nally, the paper concludes with an overview of the achievements and an outlook for the future. 2. A review of the SEB THAAT 2.1. The focal idea, basics, and main formulation Convergence is the most basic requirement of approx- imate computations [49, 50]. The analysis of Equa- tion (1) by direct time integration is an approximate computation [1, 2, 23]. Therefore, convergence must be established for time integration calculations. Con- vergence of the responses produced by time integration implies that, for sufficiently small integration steps, by using smaller steps, the difference between the computed and exact responses should asymptotically vanish; see Figure 2 and [2, 23, 51]. In Figure 2, E is the error in arbitrary norm (the above-mentioned difference) [52] and q is the rate of convergence, gen- erally equal to the integration method’s order of accu- racy [23, 39]. The analysis run-time is another impor- tant feature of direct time integration [1, 2, 23, 53]. When the right-hand-side of the first relation in Equation (1) is in digitised format, replacement of the excitation with an excitation digitised in larger steps can reduce the analysis run-time. The replacement is, however, an approximate computation, and the computed responses should continue converging to the exact responses. This idea, in addition to using all the data of the excitation in producing the new excitation, is formulated as the SEB THAAT, based on two mathematical facts, a broadly accepted convention and a realistic assumption [39]. The two facts are: (1.) Consider Equation (1), its analysis by an integra- tion method of order q, and an approximation of f(t), i.e. fnew(t), converging to f(t) with order q′. If q′ ≥ q, the analysis of Equation (1) by the integra- tion method, after replacing f(t) with fnew(t), leads to responses that converge to the responses of the original Equation (1), with order q [39, 54]. 144 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Figure 2. Typical trend of convergence in direct time integration analysis. (2.) For a continuous function of a continuously chang- ing variable x, i.e. H(x), if ∆x is a sufficiently small change of x, (O implies the big Oh operator) [55]: H(x + ∆x) + H(x − ∆x) = 2H(x) + O(∆x2). (4) The convention is the second order of accuracy of majority of integration methods [2, 23]; and the re- alistic assumption is that, despite being available in digitised format, the f(t) in Equation (1) is a smooth function [55] of t. If these are valid, the SEB THAAT replaces f(t) (digitised in step f ∆t) with a new exci- tation fnew(t), digitised in step (f ∆t)new: (f ∆t)new = nf ∆t, n > 1 (5) The new excitation, which preserves the response con- vergence and uses all the data of the original excitation, is defined as follows for integer values of n [1, 38, 39] (for real values of n, see [56]): fnew(t = ti) = f̄(ti) when ti = 0 af̄(ti) + (1 − a) n′∑ k=1 bk[ f̄ (ti + k f ∆t) +f̄ (ti − k f ∆t) ] when ti = t1, t2, , . . . , t′ end − nf ∆t f̄(ti) when ti = t′ end fnew(t ̸= ti) = 0 (6) where ti = i(n f ∆t), i = 0, 1, 2, . . . , t′ end n f ∆t , (7) f̄(ti) = { f(ti) when 0 ≤ ti ≤ tend, O when tend < ti ≤ t′ end, (8) a = 1 2 , bk = 1 2n′ , (9) n′ =  n − 1 when ti = t1 = n f ∆t or ti = t′ end − n f ∆t, j ( j ∈ Z+, n 2 − 1 < j ≤ n 2 ) when n f ∆t < ti < t′ end − n f ∆t, (10) and considering that tend f ∆t is not necessarily a positive integer, t′ end =  tend when tend n f ∆t ∈ Z+, l(n f ∆t) when tend n f ∆t /∈ Z+, tend < l(n f ∆t) < tend + n f ∆t. (11) Implementation of Equations (5)–(11) is reviewed in Figure 3. Application of the SEB THHAT to analysis of Equation (1), using a specific value of n, implies: (1.) computation of fnew(t), (2.) replacing f(t) with fnew(t) in Equation (1), (3.) time integration of Equation (1), with the inte- gration step, obtained from Equation (5). In view of Equations (2) and (5)–(11) and Fig- ure 3, for a clear and effective application of the SEB THAAT, the value of n must be set carefully. Assigning an excessively large value to n can lead to very inaccurate responses, while assigning too small a value to n will prevent the SEB THAAT from reducing the analysis run-time, in accordance with the potential of the problem, the analysis, and the SEB THAAT. In view of Equation (5) and because of the small run-time needed to implement Equations (6)–(11) (compared to that of direct time integration), the SEB THAAT can reduce the analysis run-time. How- ever, the response of the analysis after applying the SEB THAAT should differ negligibly from the re- sponse computed ordinarily. With attention to Equa- tion (2), a comment to limit the inaccuracy is to satisfy (see [1, 38]): f ∆t < min ( T χ , ∆tcr, ∆tCFL ) . (12) 2.2. The literature Since its launch in 2008, research on the SEB THAAT has progressed in two main directions. In one di- rection, the performance of the SEB THAAT is un- der test (see Table 1), considering different struc- tural systems, different non-linear behaviours, differ- ent damping mechanisms, different integration meth- ods, different digitised excitations, etc., and start- ing with single degree of freedom systems [39], re- cently focusing on large systems such as the Mi- 145 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Figure 3. The process of replacing f(t) with fnew(t) using Equations (5)–(11). lad telecommunication tower [57], earth dams and bridges [47, 48, 58, 59], and the Lower San Fernando Dam [60]. Each test looks for answers to the following three questions: (1.) Is Equation (12) valid? (2.) When Equation (12) is valid, is there any real value for n that, after using the SEB THAAT, leads to sufficiently accurate target responses? Specifi- cally, is the following equation valid: Equation (12) holds ⇒ ∃ n > 1: Rnew ∼= R? (13) (R and Rnew are the target responses obtained from the ordinary analysis and the analysis using the SEB THAAT, respectively.) (3.) When Equation (12) is valid, is Equation (13) valid for all values of n satisfying: n ≤ nmax = 1 f ∆t min ( T χ , ∆tcr, ∆tCFL ) ? (14) (Equation (14) is derived by replacing the f ∆t in Equation (12) with nmax f ∆t.) For the problems reviewed in Table 1, the answers to the three questions are positive, and the reduction in the run-times is considerable [1, 43, 45–48, 57–67]. Even more, for some tests, Equation (13) holds for values of n larger than the nmax in Equation (14), e.g. see [66]. Furthermore, for two tests [57, 61], the accu- racies increase after applying the SEB THAAT, i.e. simultaneous reduction in the analysis run-time and the error of the target response. Besides, the results of the few tests carried out on systems with wave propa- gation behaviour are satisfactory [1, 47, 58, 60]. Also, in one test, the decrease in the run-time is greater, when the behaviour is non-linear [57]. The successful performance of the SEB THAAT, when the excitation record is related to near- or far-field earthquakes, is briefly demonstrated [60], as well. Impressive applica- tion of the SEB THAAT to the analysis of multistory steel structure buildings when the structural plan is regular or irregular in plan or height is another great achievement [44, 61, 66, 68]. It is also displayed that the application of the SEB THAAT in analyses es- sential for fragility study, though is together with verification computations, can considerably reduce the total run-time [47, 48]. Finally, some tests on the application of the SEB THAAT to analyses other than the solution of Equation (1) have been successfully carried out; see [38, 69–71]. The other main direction of the research seeks an- swers to various conceptual questions. First, it is shown that the excitation can be multi-component [72]. The effect of non-linearity on the performance and specifically the accuracy of the responses after appli- cation of the SEB THAAT are studied next. As the result, when the non-linearities are modelled properly 146 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Figure 4. Reduction in analysis run-time as a function of the scale n, for linear direct time integration computations accelerated by the SEB THAAT. and adequate values are assigned to the parameters of the non-linear solution, the SEB THAAT’s per- formance can be conceptually similar in linear and non-linear analyses [46]. Meanwhile, the T in Equa- tion (2) should be related to the target response [73]. Then, the practical preference for considering an up- per bound for the enlargement scale, n, is mentioned (see [1, 74]). The SEB THAAT is later compared with direct down sampling; and as a main observation, though the down sampling can lead to a good accuracy and analysis run-time reduction in some tests, the per- formance of the SEB THAAT is never weaker [64]. In the same study [64], it is demonstrated, that for the SEB THAAT to be successful, Equation (1) should not necessarily be the result of finite element method [4, 75]; finite volume method [76] is also acceptable. It is then studied whether the inaccuracy because of the SEB THAAT can cause numerical instability [77]. As the outcome, when Equation (2) holds, the responses obtained from linear analyses are stable, regardless of whether the SEB THAAT is applied. Meanwhile, even when the integration method’s order of accuracy is different from two, the SEB THAAT can be success- ful [78]. The effects of the SEB THAAT on the run- times of linear and non-linear time integration analyses are compared as well [79]; in addition, it is also shown that, in contrast to non-linear analyses, in linear anal- yses, the reductions can be determined, in terms of the enlargement scale (see [1]). The next study [80] was on values of a and bk different from those intro- duced in Equation (9) and subjected to the following convergence-based restriction (inherited from [39]): n′∑ k=1 bk = 0.5. (15) As the result, though Equation (9) is not always the best selection, it is the best selection when consid- ering different cases of the parameters in Equation (1) and different integration methods. The other question was how to extend Equations (6)–(11) to an arbitrary real value of n larger than one; an appropriate way is presented in [56]. Some initial studies are also per- formed on the frequency content of the inaccuracies due to the SEB THAAT (see [1]). Recently, the per- formance of the SEB THAAT has been studied when the structural system is non-classically damped [43]. As the result, for majority of time integration meth- ods, the performance is independent of the type of viscous damping. In a very recent study, it has been demonstrated that for steel structural buildings with 5–20 floors, the SEB THAAT can be reliably used, considering n = 2 [44]. Finally, the performance of the SEB THAAT compared to some other analysis acceleration techniques is discussed in [42]. 2.3. A major challenge As discussed in [38, 44, 60], a major challenge for the SEB THAAT is the clear and practical application of the SEB THAAT. For a better explanation, with reference to Figure 4 and Equation (12), the reduction in the analysis run-time and the accuracy of the target response can be very sensitive to the problem under investigation. As a direct consequence, for a clear practical application of the SEB THAAT, assigning appropriate values to the SEB THAAT’s parameter, i.e. n, is an important challenge. In addition, time history analysis of structural sys- tems, while irreplaceable in many cases [81], is gener- ally time consuming [1, 23, 39, 82], especially when the analysis is a part of a probabilistic or optimisation 147 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica computation, the structural system is very large, or the structural behaviour is highly non-linear or very oscillatory; see [82–85]. In application of the SEB THAAT, the reductions in the analysis run-time can be significant (see Table 1), even compared to other analysis acceleration methods (see [1] and Section 6). Consequently, it is reasonable to use the SEB THAAT to reduce the large computational efforts in many real time history analyses. Developing a practical way for clear and simple application of the SEB THAAT is therefore a necessity, for which, the SEB THAAT’s enlargement scale, n, should be set carefully. Moreover, taking into account Equations (5)–(11) and (13), n is the only parameter to be set for applica- tion of the SEB THAAT (in addition to the parameters of the ordinary time history analysis). Accordingly, the main challenge for a clear practical application of the SEB THAAT is determining the appropriate value of n. Some ambiguities are stated next. First, currently the only relation for determining the n is the following inequality: 1 < n ≤ nmax = 1 f ∆t min ( T χ , ∆tcr, ∆tCFL ) . (16) Secondly, given its definition, T in Equation (16) cannot be easily determined or estimated, especially prior to the analysis. Next, that the definition of T , given immediately after Equation (2), and in par- ticular the notion of “worthwhile” therein, is not clear. Then, the T χ in Equation (16) is not a pre- cise criterion for accuracy [1, 86–90]. Finally, the T χ in Equations (2) or (16) is the only term in these equations that relates the integration step to the structural system and behaviour. Consequently, a di- rect determination of n is complicated and can be costly, contradicting the purpose of the SEB THAAT, i.e. reducing the analysis run-time. An alterna- tive can be to approximate the appropriate value of n by some upper estimation of n and attempt to correct the estimation in several steps. Mean- while, for special groups of analyses, simple reliable values can be assigned to n; for a recent achievement, see [44]. 3. Simple application of the SEB THAAT 3.1. Theoretical bases The current approach to applying the SEB THAAT is to simply assign a value to n, based on the experience. In this section, the current approach is replaced with an algorithm that, starting from an upper estimation of n, after a number of repetitive time integration computations, assigns a value to n, appropriate for the accuracy of the target response. The new approach is consistent with the comments, in: (1.) structural dynamics [33], (2.) numerical solution of ordinary initial value prob- lems [91], (3.) the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92]. Accordingly, it is reasonable to terminate the itera- tions of the new approach using the criterion in the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92], that is, after repeating a time integration computation with half steps, the absolute relative difference of the two peak target responses should not exceed 5 %. It is reasonable to start from n = 20; see Figure 4 and [43]. Therefore, what remains unclear is mainly the details of each successive analysis, with respect to the previ- ous analyses. Specially, it should be determined how to change the n and the ∆t. For non-linear analyses, additional details, e.g. the non-linear tolerance, need special attention, as well. Using a subscript on the right to introduce the sequence of time integration computation and paying attention to the discussion above and Equation (5) leads to: ∆t1 = n1 f ∆t, n1 = 20. (17) With careful attention to Equation (17), the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92], and the comments in structural dynamics and numerical analysis of initial value problems [33, 91], not only the n but also the f ∆t can change from one time integration computation to the next time integration computation. Even in ordinary analyses, when repeat- ing a time integration computation with half an inte- gration step, the f ∆t is halved by linear interpolation of the excitation data [33, 35, 92, 93]. Consequently, Equation (17) would rather be replaced with: ∆t1 = n1 f ∆t1, n1 = 20, f ∆t1 = f ∆t. (18) It is also worth noting that the successive compu- tations starting from Equation (17) cannot consider integration steps smaller than f ∆t (see the inequality in Equation (5)), whereas there is no limitation when starting from Equation (18). In view of the details of the SEB THAAT, the fnew(t) corresponding to j = 1 can be obtained by first replacing the digitised f(t), with a record, g(t), digitised in steps equal to f ∆t1, using linear interpo- lation; and then using Equations (6)–(11) and n = n1, to replace g(t) with fnew(t). This approach can be used for all the successive computations, i.e. arbi- trary value of j (for the first computation, the linear interpolation is trivial). Accordingly, by extending Equation (18) to: ∆tj = nj f ∆tj , (19) determination of how nj and f ∆tj should change with j is to be clarified. Comparing with the successive time integration computations in ordinary time history analysis, where 148 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . nj 20 10.5 5.75 3.375 2.1875 1.59375 1.296875 1.0742175 · · · > 1 ∆tj ∆tj−1 - 0.2625 0.2738 0.2935 0.3241 0.3643 0.4069 0.4428 · · · < 0.5 ∆tj f ∆t 20 5.25 1.4375 0.421875 0.13671875 . . . . . . . . . · · · > 0 Table 2. A numerical review of Equation (22). ∆tj = f ∆tj (see [33, 35, 92]), f ∆tj can be consid- ered representing the inaccuracy because of the in- tegration method’s approximation [1, 2, 23]. Sim- ilarly, with regard to Equation (5), nj represents the inaccuracy due to the SEB THAAAT. There- fore, with attention to the theoretical bases of the SEB THAAT [38, 39], it is reasonable to preserve the consistency between the changes of the two sources of inaccuracy. Given this, the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92], and the fact that, at n = 1 and f ∆t → 0, the inaccuracies due to the SEB THAAT and the approximations of the integra- tion method disappear, it is reasonable to preserve the consistency by: nj − 1 nj−1 − 1 = f ∆tj f ∆tj−1 = 1 2 , j = 2, 3, 4, . . . (20) Specifically, the reason for the “ 1 2” in Equation (20) is the tradition of halving the integration steps to check the accuracy of the target response in engineer- ing and science; see [33, 35, 91, 93]. Together with Equations (18) and (19), Equation (20) leads to the following integration steps: ∆tj = nj f ∆tj , j = 1, 2, 3, . . . j = 1 : n1 = 20, f ∆t1 = f ∆t j = 2, 3, 4, . . . : nj = nj−1 + 1 2 , f ∆tj = ∆tj − 1 2 (21) and the fact that (see also Table 2): 0.25 < ∆tj ∆tj−1 = nj nj−1 f ∆tj f ∆tj−1 = nj−1 + 1 2 nj−1 f ∆tj−1 2 f ∆tj−1 = 1 4 nj−1 + 1 nj−1 < 0.5, j = 2, 3, 4, . . . (22) From Equation (22) and Table 2, the following points can be concluded: (1.) The ending criterion of the time history anal- ysis in the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92] cannot be used, when setting the integration step according to Equation (21). The reason is that, different from what is implied in Equation (21) (see the third row in Table 2), in the procedure in the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92], the integration step halves with each new time integration. Using Pj to introduce the peak target response in the jth computation, Figure 5. A procedure for simple and clear applica- tion of the SEB THAAT. the correct ending criterion is (see Appendix A, for a proof attempt): |Pj−1 − Pj | Pj ≤ 1 60 [( 4nj−1 nj−1 + 1 )2 − 1 ] , j = 2, 3, 4, . . . (23) Note that, using nj−1 = 1 in Equation (23) simpli- fies Equation (23) to the ending criterion in the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92]. (2.) A procedure that uses Equation (21) for comput- ing ∆tj can be continued endlessly, until the ending criterion is satisfied, i.e. there is no lower bound on ∆tj . The reason is implied in the relation leading to ∆tj ; see Equation (21) and Table 2. (3.) As it should, the integration step ∆tj converges to zero (see the last row of Table 2). A procedure to simply and clearly apply the SEB THAAT is presented next. 3.2. The procedure By using the following procedure, assigning values to n, the main parameter of the SEB THAAT, can be automated, eliminating concerns about determination of n (see Figure 5): (a) Select the target response, the integration method (preferably unconditionally stable; see [1, 2, 23, 94]), 149 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica j 1 2 3 4 5 6 δ̄j 1.E−2 1.E−6 1.E−9 1.E−11 1.E−13 1.E−14 Table 3. Values of non-linear tolerance in application of the proposed procedure. and for non-linear problems, set the non-linear so- lution details. (b) j = 0. (c) j = j + 1. (d) Compute nj , using: n1 = 20, (24a) nj = nj−1 + 1 2 , j = 2, 3, 4, . . . (24b) (e) Use linear interpolation to change the f(t) at the right hand side of Equation (1) to g(t), digitised in steps equal to f ∆tj , defined as follows (when j = 1, g(t) = f(t)): f ∆tj = f ∆t 2j−1 . (25) (f) Use Equations (6)–(11) to change g(t) to fnew(t), digitised in steps equal to ∆tj : ∆tj = nj f ∆tj . (26) (g) Time integrate Equation (1), considering fnew(t) as f(t), and ∆tj as the integration step; for non- linear problems, use the non-linear tolerances, δ̄j , stated in Table 3 (see the comments in [95] and the difference between the integration steps in the last row of Table 2), and do not stop the computa- tion when the iteration of non-linear solution fails (see [96]). (h) Compute the peak target response, as Pj . (?) If only one-time integration computation is car- ried out, return to Step (c). (?) If the last two peak target responses computed in Step (h) do not satisfy Equation (23), return to Step (c). (i) Accept the last time integration computation and response as final. (j) Stop. Obviously, for application of the above procedure, no parameter regarding the SEB THAAT needs to be set in advance, a measure of inaccuracy is computed (see Appendix A), and there is no limitation for the appli- cation. These are remarkable achievements in terms of simplicity, availability of a measure of inaccuracy, and versatility. Nevertheless, it is also essential to study the accuracy and computational effort of applying the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure and compare the results with those summarised in Table 1. 3.3. Complementary points The procedure proposed in the previous section, be- sides eliminating the need to select a value for n, has removed the T , χ, ∆tcr, and ∆tCFL from the analysis. This is an additional significant achievement, simpli- fying the analysis even more. The removal of these four parameters can be explained by considering the role of these four parameters in time history analysis. In short, these parameters are only necessary to main- tain the accuracy (including numerical stability) of the target response [1, 2, 23, 33, 34]. Meanwhile, the accuracy is checked in the last decision-making step of the proposed procedure (just before the Step (i)). Therefore, it is reasonable to consider the accuracy control according to Equation (2) redundant and dis- card it. A main difference between the previous applica- tions of the SEB THAAAT and applying the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure is that while in the previous applications there was only one time integration computation, several time integration computations are essential when using the proposed procedure. In addition, a measure of the accuracy is available in terms of the peak target response when using the proposed procedure. Accordingly, when comparing the proposed procedure with the ordinary analysis, it is reasonable to carry out the ordinary analysis sequentially, each time with half steps, and end the analysis iterations with the 5 % criterion of NZS 1170.5:2004, as well. (This is in agreement with the existing comments; see [33, 91, 93].) Considering this and Figure 5, we can expect the proposed proce- dure to be neither complicated nor computationally expensive. Finally, it is worth noting that adding the “prefer- ably unconditionally stable” to the Step (a) of the proposed procedure implies that using an uncondi- tionally stable method for the analysis is preferable, but not obligatory [2, 23, 94]. (Only, unconditionally unstable methods should not be used.) Several expla- nations can be presented for this statement in Step (a) of the procedure. Firstly, the procedure involves re- peating time integration computations, and hence even when the response is inaccurate in one-time inte- gration computation, it may be sufficiently accurate in the subsequent computations. The run-time needed for the inaccurate computation is negligible compared to the total analysis run-time as well; see the last row of Table 2 and [1]. The second explanation is that the time history analysis and time integration are mostly for non-linear analyses [1, 2, 23], for which satisfying the requirements of linear stability may be insufficient; see [1, 86–90, 97]. And as the final explanation, using 150 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . j 1 2 3 4 5 6 ≥7 δ̄j 1.E−2 1.E−4 1.E−6 1.E−8 1.E−10 1.E−12 1.E−14 Table 4. Values of non-linear tolerance for ordinary sequential time integration computations [95]. Equations (24)–(26), similarly for all problems, re- gardless of the integration method, makes the analysis to be simpler, more attractive, and perhaps even more efficient for large problems. 4. Illustrative examples 4.1. Preliminary notes Ground motions are generally available in a digitised format [33]. For this reason, and because of the role of the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92] in the presented discussions, the structural systems in this section are considered to be subject to ground acceleration. Accordingly, in Equation (1): f(t) = −MΓüg(t), (27) where üg(t) implies the ground acceleration, Γ is a vector with the size of the degrees of freedom, needed for matrix multiplication and considering spatial changes of üg [33]. In addition, similarly to the majority of the past stud- ies on the SEB THAAT (see Table 1), the examples here have a structural dynamic nature, where the members of Γ are all equal to one. Furthermore, as explained in Subsection 3.3, for comparing the or- dinary analysis with the analysis according to the proposed procedure, the former is consisted of sequen- tial time integration computations. The procedure is similar to the proposed procedure, with roots in con- ventional analyses (see [33, 35, 92]; only slight changes (including replacement of Table 3 with Table 4 and using nj = 1) are implemented in the proposed proce- dure. For a better explanation, for ordinary analyses, first, a time integration computation is carried out with f ∆t as the integration step and the non-linear tolerance recommended in [95]; see Table 4. The com- putation is then repeated, with updated parameters, including half integration steps, new non-linear tol- erances (see Table 4), and new excitations obtained using linear interpolation. If the absolute relative difference of the two peak target responses is not more than 5 %, the last response is final. Otherwise, the computation is repeated, until convergence of the peak target response is reached. Meanwhile, as demon- strated in [96], similar to the analyses using the pro- posed procedure for application of the SEB THAAT, the time integrations do not stop when the non-linear solutions fail. A question that may arise here is why in the first time integration computation of the ordinary time history analysis, the selection of the integration step is not according to Equation (2) or its slightly modified version in the New Zealand Seismic Code [35, 92]. A main reason is that, given the objective of the paper and the ending criterion of the proposed procedure, it is sufficient to show that the proposed procedure is clear in application and can notably reduce the analysis run-time (compared to the ordinary analyses), for many cases. Considering these, for the sake of simplicity and consistency with the analyses according to the proposed procedure, it is reasonable to consider one of the terms in the right hand side of Equation (2), and use f ∆t as the integration step of the first time integration computation of the ordinary time history analysis. For majority of cases, this approach (using an integration step in the first analysis larger than the result of Equation (2)) will reduce the analysis run- time of ordinary time history analysis. The reduction in analysis run-time due to the use of the proposed procedure will then be a lower-bound of the true reduction in the analysis run-time. When needed, Equation (2) can be considered for determination of the integration step in the first time integration computation of the ordinary time history analysis. Accuracy of the responses after applying the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure is determined by comparing the responses with the responses obtained from the ordinary analysis. The run-times essential for the analyses are compared in view of the total numbers of integration steps. Ac- cordingly, in this section, fractional time stepping, with the maximum number of non-linear iterations equal to five (as conventional) [98, 99], is used for the non-linear solution. Other choices for measuring the analysis run-time and non-linear solution are used in the study of a realistic example in Section 5. All values are given in the International System of Units (SI). 4.2. Example one: A simple non-linear problem Figure 6 shows a preliminary model of a tall build- ing’s structural system, subjected to a ground ac- celeration. g stands for the acceleration of gravity, equal to 9.81 m s−2, and Table 5 reviews the model’s main properties. Specifically, the stiffness is linear- elastic/perfect-plastic considering unloading (uyi is the yield displacement of the ith spring), and hence the behaviour may be non-linear. In Step (a) of the proposed procedure, the base shear is set as the target response, and the C-H method [100] (ρ∞ = 0.7) is set for time integra- tion. Steps (b)–(d) lead to n1 = 20. As the result of Steps (e) and (f), Figure 7a shows the excitation in the first time integration computation (“new” as 151 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (a). Structure’s model. (b). Ground acceleration. Figure 6. The structural system in the first example. i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10−9 × mi 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 10−9 × ki 2 2 2 2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 10−9 × ci 1.2 0.8 0.6 0.25 0.25 0.15 0.05 0.02 - - - - - - - - - - uyi 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Table 5. Main properties of the structural system in the first example. a subscript implies that the argument is related to the SEB THAAT’s application using the proposed procedure). In Step (g), the non-linear tolerance is set to 10−2 that, when used together with the inte- gration step set in Step (f), results in the time history reported in Figure 8a for the target response, the peak of which is stated at the top of the figure. In view of the number of analyses carried out, the computation proceeds from Step (h) to Step (c). Steps (c) and (d) lead to n2 = 10.5, using which, Steps (e) and (f) result in Figure 7b as the excitation record. In Steps (g) and (h), using the tolerance in Table 3 corresponding to j = 2 and the integration step equal to the step of the excitation in Figure 7b, leads to a time integra- tion computation with the results shown in Figure 8b. According to the number of time integration computa- tions performed, it is then checked whether the peak target responses reported in Figures 8a and 8b satisfy Equation (23). The answer is positive, and Step (i) introduces Figure 8b as the final response; and the procedure stops in Step (j). In the ordinary analysis, a time integration com- putation is first performed with steps equal to f ∆t (=0.01 s) and a non-linear tolerance equal to 10−2 (see Table 4). The resulting time history of the target response and the peak value are shown in Figure 9a. The second computation is carried out with half steps and a non-linear tolerance equal to 10−4 (see Table 4). The consequence is shown in Figure 9b. Given the peak values noted at the top of Figures 9a and 9b, the difference in the peak target responses is much less than 5 % and hence the response displayed in Figure 9b is final. The run-times of the two analy- sis approaches are compared in Table 6 (where the red oval shapes refer to the run-time details of the final computations and the red numbers are used to compare the run-times), and the good accuracy is evi- dent when comparing Figures 8b and 9b. The result is an 87.26 % reduction in the analysis run-time, at the cost of a visually unrecognisable change in the accuracy of the target response. Therefore, by using the proposed procedure, the SEB THAAT may be 152 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). j = 1. (b). j = 2. Figure 7. Excitation records obtained from Steps (e) and (f) of the proposed procedure for the first example. (a). j = 1. (b). j = 2. Figure 8. History of the target response and the peak value as the result of Steps (g) and (h) of the proposed procedure for the first example. (a). j = 1. (b). j = 2. Figure 9. History of the target response and the peak value obtained from ordinary time history analysis of the first example. easily applicable (without worrying about the value of n) and significantly speed up non-linear time history analyses. Finally, it should be noted that the be- haviour of the structural system is indeed non-linear, albeit slightly, as shown in Figure 10. 4.3. Example two: An interesting linear problem The model in Figure 11a is subjected to the ground acceleration in Figure 11b. The target response, S, is the sum of the kinetic energy EK and the potential en- ergy EP (equal to the input energy of the earthquake minus the energy damped in the structure), i.e., S = EK + EP . (28) Given Equations (1) and (28), by denoting the dis- placements of the three masses by u1, u2, and u3, and the corresponding velocities by u̇1, u̇2, and u̇3, the target response S can be expressed as [93]: S =5(u̇2 1 + u̇2 3) + 10u̇2 2 + 10u1 2 + 5(u3 − u1)2 + 20u3 2. (29) Starting the study with the proposed procedure, in Step (a), S is the target response and the integration 153 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Analysis iteration Ordinary sequential analyses Proposed procedure Integration step [s] Number of integration steps Total number of integration steps Integration step [s] Number of integration steps Total number of integration steps 1 0.01 8 006 8 006 0.2 606 606 2 0.005 16 190 24 196 0.0525 2477 3 083 Table 6. Study of the analysis run-times of the first example. Figure 10. Exact history of the target response in the first example and its linear counterpart. (a). Structure’s model. (b). Ground acceleration. Figure 11. The structural system in the second example. 154 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). j = 1. (b). j = 2. Figure 12. Records obtained from Steps (e) and (f) of the proposed procedure for the second example. (a). j = 1. (b). j = 2. Figure 13. History of the target response and the peak value obtained from Steps (d) and (e) of the proposed procedure applied to the second example. (a). ∆t = f ∆t. (b). ∆t = 0.5f ∆t. Figure 14. History of the target response together with the peak value obtained from ordinary time history analysis of the second example. method is set to the HHT method [101] (α = −0.05, γ = 0.55, β = 0.275625). As the results of Steps (b)– (d), j = 1 and n1 = 20. The result of Steps (e) and (f) is the digitised record displayed in Figure 12a. Steps (g) and (h) lead to the target response history and the peak value shown in Figure 13a. Since only one time-integration computation is carried out, the computation proceeds to Step (c), which, together with Step (d), lead to j = 2 and n2 = 10.5. Using these results, Steps (e) and (f) lead to Figure 12b, from which Steps (g) and (h) lead to Figure 13b. The peak target responses in Figures 13a and 13b are compared with respect to Equation (23), and as the result, the response reported in Figure 13b is final. The first time integration computation of the or- dinary time history analysis is carried out with steps equal to that of the excitation record, i.e. f ∆t = 0.005 s. The obtained target response is shown in Figure 14a. The time integration is then repeated with half a step, resulting in Figure 14b. The peaks of the two responses are within 0.02 % rel- ative difference. Accordingly, Figure 14b represents the final target response. The accuracy is determined by comparing Figures 14b and 13b, and the analy- sis run-times are compared by the number of steps, which is clear due to the linear behaviour. As a result, by using the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure, assigning a value to n is auto- 155 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (a). Model of the structure. (b). Ground acceleration. Figure 15. The structural system in the third example [96]. Property Floor (i) 1 2 3 4 5 6 10−9 × mi [Kg] 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 0.6 0.6 10−11 × ki [N/m] 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.2 Damping [N s m−1] Classical [33], considering 2 % damping for the 1st and 3rd natural modes Table 7. Main properties of the structural system in the third example [96]. (a). Target response. (b). Displacement of the sixth floor. Figure 16. Exact responses of the system introduced in Figure 15 and Table 7. mated, the response is computed accurately, and the run-time is reduced, with the decrease of the number of integration steps from 12 000 ( 20 0.005 + 20 0.005×0.5 ) to 962 ( 20 0.005×20 + 20 0.005×0.5×10.5 ), i.e. 91.98 %. 4.4. Examples three and four: Tests on analyses non-linear due to elastic impact 4.4.1. A brief overview Pounding and collision are of major causes of de- struction during earthquakes [102–105]. Besides, time history analysis is a powerful tool for seismic analysis (see [1, 33, 35]) and, in the first and second examples, the damping was nonzero and non-classical. Consid- ering these, two structural models, involved in elastic impact, one damped classically, and one undamped, are studied, in the next two subsections. 4.4.2. A classically damped system involved in elastic impact Consider the structural system introduced in Figure 15 and Table 7. The average acceleration method [106] is selected for the time integration, and the velocity of the third floor is set as the target response. Given Figure 16, the elastic impacts actually occur and cause the behaviour to be non-linear. For both the ordinary and proposed analyses, details of the non-linear solu- tion are set similar to those in the first example. After the sequential time integration computations, the re- sults shown in Table 8 and Figure 17 are achieved. 156 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Features Analysis Ordinary According to the proposed procedure Number of time integration computations 2 2 Total number of integration steps 4 788 888 Decrease in the analysis run-time [%] 81.45 Table 8. Summary of the analysis run-time study for the system introduced in Figure 15 and Table 7. Figure 17. Final responses obtained for the system introduced in Figure 15 and Table 7 using average acceleration time integration method. Figure 18. The ground acceleration in repetition of the study of the system introduced in Figure 15a and Table 7. Accordingly, the reduction in the analysis run-time is 81.45 %, and despite the slight difference between the two graphs in Figure 17, the accuracy is acceptable, considering that: (1.) The main seismic features of the response [33] are not changed, (2.) both the ordinary and the proposed analyses do not consider the accuracy in the entire history, (3.) neither of the two graphs in Figure 17 are exact, (4.) results of non-linear dynamic analyses are rarely exact [1, 89, 97, 107]. The study is repeated, considering the excitation in Figure 18 (instead of that in Figure 15b). Also, instead of one target response, three target responses, includ- ing the third floor’s displacement, velocity, and accel- eration, are taken into account, separately. Results of the study are summarised in Table 9 and Figure 19, dis- playing the very good performance of the SEB THAAT when applied according to the proposed procedure. In more detail, while the difference between Figures 19a and 19b is negligible, the computation leading to Fig- ure 19b is about 10.8 times faster, i.e. the analysis run- time is 90.71 % shorter. Table 9 and Figure 19 also dis- play that the performance of the proposed procedure is not necessarily sensitive to the target response. In con- trary, comparing Table 8 with Table 9 and Figure 17 with Figure 19 implies that the performance of the SEB THAAT’s application using the proposed proce- dure can be sensitive to excitation. Finally, Figure 20 confirms non-linearity of the dynamic behaviour. 4.4.3. An undamped system involved with elastic impact and material non-linearity The structural system in this section is the bridge structure introduced in Figure 21 (see [96, 108]), where the vertical movements are neglected, the decks are rigid, the piers are massless, the damping is zero, the 157 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Target response Number of time integration computations Total number of integration steps Decrease in the analysis run-time [%]Ordinary analysis Analysis according to the proposed procedure Ordinary analysis Analysis according to the proposed procedure 3rd floor’s displacement 2 2 113 056 10 500 90.71 3rd floor’s velocity 2 2 113 056 10 500 90.71 3rd floor’s acceleration 2 2 113 056 10 500 90.71 Table 9. Summary of the analysis run-time study for the system introduced in Figures 15a and 18 and Table 7. (a). Analysed ordinarily. (b). Analysed according to the proposed procedure. Figure 19. Final responses for the system introduced in Figures 15a and 18 and Table 7 using the average acceleration time integration method. (a). The first target response. (b). The third target response. (c). Displacement of the sixth floor. Figure 20. Evidences for the non-linear behaviour of the system introduced in Figures 15a and 18 and Table 7. 158 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). Model of the structure. (b). Ground acceleration. Figure 21. The structural system in the fourth example. impacts are elastic, and the following three alterna- tives are considered for the s in Figure 21a: s = 0.4657588964, 0.7452142342, 1.117821351, (30) and the rest of the parameters are set as follows: di = 0.2 m, ki = 0.2 × 105 N m−1, mi = 3 × 106 kg, uyi = 0.3 m, i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 7. (31) Equation (30) introduces three cases, where the struc- tural system has 25 %, 100 %, and 200 % additional excitation, compared to when the system is in the vicinity of linear/non-linear behaviour, for which, s = 0.3726071171 (note that the non-linearity is of piece-wise linear type [1, 107, 108]). These percent- ages can also be referred to as the severity of the non-linear behaviour, SN; see [96]. Accordingly, by studying the performance of the proposed procedure for different values of s, we can arrive at an idea about the effect of severity of the non-linear behaviour on the performance. The displacement of Point A in Figure 21 (the central pier’s mid-point), uA, and the potential energy of the system, EP , i.e.: EP = 1 2 7∑ i=1 uifi, (32) are considered as target responses, in two separate studies (the new variable fi stands for the shear force of the ith pier from left). In addition to the fact that, because of Equation (30), the behaviour is non-linear, given the sizes of di and uyi in Equation (31), the elastic impact is always involved in the non-linear behaviour. By removing the material non-linearity, the target responses change as shown in Figure 22, in orange. Evidently, the contribution of material non- linearity is negligible when SN = 25 % and is signifi- cant when SN = 100 % and SN = 200 %. Meanwhile, by comparing the blue graphs in Figures 22a, 22b, and 22c, we can get an idea of the extent to which the non-linearity can affect the behaviour. In addition to changes in the physical parameters, i.e. the target response and the severity of non-linear 159 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (a). SN = 25 %. (b). SN = 100 %. (c). SN = 200 %. Figure 22. Exact target responses of the system defined in Figure 21 and Equation (31). Case Target response Integration method SN [%] Case Target response Integration method SN [%] C111 uA Average Acceleration 25 C211 EP Average Acceleration 25 C112 uA Average Acceleration 100 C212 EP Average Acceleration 100 C113 uA Average Acceleration 200 C213 EP Average Acceleration 200 C121 uA Central difference 25 C221 EP Central difference 25 C122 uA Central difference 100 C222 EP Central difference 100 C123 uA Central difference 200 C223 EP Central difference 200 C131 uA C-H (ρ∞ = 0.85) 25 C231 EP C-H (ρ∞ = 0.85) 25 C132 uA C-H (ρ∞ = 0.85) 100 C232 EP C-H (ρ∞ = 0.85) 100 C133 uA C-H (ρ∞ = 0.85) 200 C233 EP C-H (ρ∞ = 0.85) 200 Table 10. The eighteen cases under consideration in the study of the system introduced in Figure 21 and Equation (31). behaviour SN, changes in the integration method (as a computational parameter) are also taken into ac- count. The analyses are carried out thrice, using the average acceleration [106], the central difference [109], and the C-H [100] (ρ∞ = 0.85) time integration meth- ods. Consequently, eighteen cases are included in the study; see Table 10, where, in the first and fifth columns, the three digits in right of each C introduce the target response, the integration method, and the severity of non-linear behaviour, respectively. The final results are reported in Figures 23–25, where the first number in the top boxes implies the percentage of reduction in the analysis run-time and the two num- bers in the parentheses are the numbers of repetitions in the ordinary and proposed analyses, respectively. The main observations are as follows: (1.) The final target responses obtained from the pro- posed analysis approach and ordinary analysis do not always match over the entire analysis interval. (2.) In rare cases, the application of the SEB THAAT using the proposed approach seems to slightly increase the analysis run-time; see Figures 25a and 25e. 160 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). C111. (b). C211. (c). C121. (d). C221. (e). C131. (f). C231. Figure 23. Final responses obtained for the systems introduced in Figure 21 and Equation (31) and the corresponding reductions in the analysis run-times, when SN = 25 %. (3.) Both the accuracy of the target response and the reduction in the analysis run-time because of ap- plying the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure may be sensitive to the target response, the integration method, and the severity of non- linear behaviour. In particular, the reductions in the run-time are generally greater when examin- ing the displacement of Point A. Meanwhile, the sensitivities are greater when the SN is greater. The first observation can be explained by the seis- mic requirements that influence the analysis proce- dures (see also [33, 35, 92]). Based on these needs, the ending criterion of both the ordinary and pro- posed analyses is the convergence of the peak target response. Therefore, it is not reasonable to expect the two responses to necessarily match or even come close to each other over the entire time frame of the analy- ses. Accordingly, the accuracy shown in Figures 23–25 is acceptable. Further explanation is presented in Section 6. Regarding the second observation, firstly, the num- ber of cases displaying a longer analysis run-time when using the proposed procedure is low and the observed amount of the increase is small. Then, the observation is in agreement with the literature [1, 46, 79], accord- ing to which, the details of the non-linear solution should be set carefully. For instance, for this specific problem, by changing the maximum number of non- linear iterations from five to three, the reduction of the analysis run-time in Figure 25a changes from −9.07 % to approximately +14.25 %. Thirdly, as stated in Section 4.1, the first time integration computation of ordinary analyses is generally carried out with a step obtained from Equation (2) or a slightly different 161 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (a). C112. (b). C212. (c). C122. (d). C222. (e). C132. (f). C232. Figure 24. Final responses obtained for the systems introduced in Figure 21 and Equation (31) and the corresponding reductions in the analysis run-times, when SN = 100 %. version of Equation (2) (e.g. see [35, 92]). For the previous examples in this paper, the result of Equa- tion (2) is not very different from f ∆t. In this example, however, the result of Equation (2) is about 30 times smaller than f ∆t. Using the correct step for the first time integration computation of the ordinary analysis changes Figure 25 to Figure 26, where the reduction in the analysis run-time is considerable and about that of the previous examples, and the accuracies of the blue graphs are about those of the black graphs, as well as the blue graphs in Figure 25. Finally, and in comple- tion of the previous explanation, the behaviour of the system corresponding to Figure 25 is very complicated; Figure 27 clearly displays that, when SN = 200 %, the response is not only highly oscillatory [110, 111], but also mathematically stiff [112, 113]. And to explain the third observation, the time his- tory analysis, ordinarily or according to the proposed procedure, is sensitive to the target response (because of the ending criterion of the analysis), is sensitive to the integration method (because of the direct effect of the integration method on the response), and is sensi- tive to the SN (because changes in the SN change the excitation). Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that the difference of the final responses obtained from the two analyses also depend on these three parameters and the performance of using the SEB THAAT accord- ing to the proposed procedure to be sensitive to these parameters. It is also worth noting that because of the fact that convergence is preserved in different stages of the discussion, and the ending criterion in the pro- posed procedure is in close relation to the convergence (see Appendix A), the sensitivity to the integration method is much lower than the sensitivities to the 162 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). C113. (b). C213. (c). C123. (d). C223. (e). C133. (f). C233. Figure 25. Final responses obtained for the systems introduced in Figure 21 and Equation (31) and the corresponding reductions in the analysis run-times, when SN = 200 %. SN and target response. In more detail, sensitivity to the integration method is negligible, unless when the SN is very high and proper convergence is delayed to smaller steps; see Figures 23–25 and [1, 89, 97]. The better performance when the target response is the displacement of Point A can be explained by the fact that both the SEB THAAT and the proposed proce- dure are based on the convergence of the responses; see also [1, 39]. Non-linear behaviour potentially con- flicts with convergence of the responses produced by the time integration [97]. Besides, because of the na- ture of the problem, specifically the similarity of the column characteristics and the structure’s geometry, the most crucial source of non-linearity is the collision of the first and last decks with the adjacent supports. Given this, the location of Point A in the structural system, and that the potential energy is affected by the response at different locations in the system, the effect of the non-linearity on the displacement of Point A is less than the effect on the total potential energy. Consequently, the performance is reasonably better for the displacement of Point A. The lower sensitivity at lower SN values can be explained in a similar way. 5. A realistic example Most of real structural systems are of a few thou- sand degrees of freedom. Therefore, to display that the proposed procedure can be successful in practice, a three-dimensional steel structure subjected to a two- component earthquake is studied in this section; see Figures 28 and 29 and Table 11. When modelling the structural system, no specific assumption, e.g. shear building assumption, is taken into account. One node is added at the mid-point of each beam and column, 163 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (a). Figure 25a. (b). Figure 25b. (c). Figure 25c. (d). Figure 25d. (e). Figure 25e. (f). Figure 25f. Figure 26. Changes due to the use of the correct value of the integration step in the first time integration of the ordinary analyses. with exception of the beams already halved by brac- ings, as well as the beams at the highest level. Each of the four beams at the highest level is divided to six beam-elements. The lengths of beam-elements are hence equal to two meters throughout the model. This results in a model with 4 968 degrees of free- dom. The pattern of the bracings is continued to the ground. The lumped masses are placed at the beam- column connections, equal to 5 000, 10 000, 20 000, and 43 200 kg at the corners of each level of the structure (not at the top level), at the periphery of each level (not at the corners and top level), at the connections not at the periphery, and at the connections at the top of the structure (see Figure 28a), respectively. Damp- ing is assumed to be of Rayleigh type [33], and equal to five percent in the first and third natural modes of the linear structure. Four target responses are taken into account simultaneously; given Figure 28a, accel- eration and displacement of Point A in the x and z directions, respectively, displacement of Point B in the x direction, and the total base shear. The latter is obtained from: VBS = √ ( ∑ Base Columns Rx)2 + ( ∑ Base Columns Ry)2 , (33) where, VBS represents the total horizontal force trans- mitted to the foundation (disregarding the damping forces), and Rx and Ry stand for the shear force at the lowest floor’s typical column in the x and y direction, respectively. Figure 28b, together with the difference between Figures 30a and 30b, confirms that the struc- tural behaviour is non-linear. Simple two-node beam- column elements and two-node truss elements are used for the finite element modelling of the beams (and columns) and bracings, respectively [4, 75, 94]. The 164 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). Exact potential energy. (b). Exact displacement of Point A. Figure 27. Complexity of the structural behaviour in the fourth example when SN = 200 %. average acceleration method [106] is used for the time integration. The Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno (BFGS) method [114, 115] is used for the non-linear solution. Finally, the OPEN System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OPENSEES) is chosen as the structural analysis software [116]. The results of analysing the system ordinarily and when applying the SEB THAAT using the proposed procedure are reported in Table 12 and Figure 31. Accordingly, the performance of the proposed proce- dure may be acceptable for realistic structural systems. The increase in computational efficiency is consider- able, as well. Finally, the presented example differs from the previous examples in the size of the structure, the consideration of a two-component earthquake as the excitation, the non-linear solution method, and the consideration of multiple target responses simul- taneously. 6. Discussion 6.1. The achievements and their significance In line with the objective of the paper, the main achievement is that the SEB THAAT can now be applied, without assigning a value to the enlargement scale n. This is important from a practical point of view, particularly because of the significant variation in the reduction in the analysis run-time, reported in Table 1. Meanwhile, we can compare the previous applica- tions of the SEB THAAT, summarised in Table 1, with the 25 observations reported in Sections 4 and 5 (see Table 13). As a result, when using the proposed pro- cedure, the overall reductions in run-time are higher and the sensitivity to the problem is lower. In ad- dition, compared to the previous tests, which were some on linear and some on non-linear analyses, the tests reported in this paper (with the exception of the second example) are on non-linear analyses, some with complicated behaviour. In conclusion, the use of the proposed procedure for application of the SEB THAAT, can be considered adequate. For a detailed comparison, the first example, which showed an 87 % reduction in the analysis run-time at the cost of a visually unrecognisable change in accuracy (see Ta- ble 13), is re-examined using the SEB THAAT with- out the new procedure. For this example, the ap- plication of the SEB THAAT considering different values of the enlargement scale n, the integration method and the target response according to Sec- tion 4.2, and a conventional value for the non-linear tolerance, i.e. 1.E−4 (see [117]), leads to Figure 32. It can be clearly seen that without using the pro- posed procedure, the 87 % reduction in the analy- sis run-time, observed in Section 4.2, is achieved at the cost of 33 % change in the accuracy of the tar- get response when using n = 36. In comparison, the use of the SEB THAAT according to the pro- posed procedure, achieved only a 1.21 % change in accuracy, as can be seen from Figures 8b and 9b, and its performance is, therefore, superior to the previous applications of the SEB THAAT. Accord- ingly, using the proposed procedure for application of the SEB THAAT in the first example has consid- erably increased the computational efficiency of the 165 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (a). Model appearance. (b). Material. Figure 28. Structural system in the realistic example. 166 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . (a). x direction component. (b). y direction component. Figure 29. Earthquake record in the realistic example. Structural member Profile Area [cm2] Moment of inertia [cm4] Beams IPE 270 45.90 5790 Columns Box 360×360×16 214 41 450 Bracings 2U160 48.00 - Table 11. Structural members and their properties in the realistic example. (a). The linear counterpart. (b). The actual system. Figure 30. Target responses of the realistic example. 167 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Analysis Number of time integration computations Total analysis run-time Reduction in the run-time [%] Ordinary 2 12h 56′ 11′′ 93Using the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure 2 56′ 23′′ Table 12. Summary of the analysis run-time study for the system in the realistic example. Figure 31. Accuracy of the proposed approach in the realistic example. 168 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Structural system Reduction in the analysis run-time [%] Accuracy of the target response Details An eighteen story building 87 Visually matching in the entire analysis interval See Section 4.2 A linear three-DOF system 92 Visually matching in the entire analysis interval See Section 4.3 A six story building subjected to pounding at the sixth floor studied in four cases 81–91 Visually matching almost in the entire analysis interval See Subsection 4.4.2 A multi-span bridge in 18 different cases of non-linear behavior, integration method, and target response 77–97∗ The peak target responses, and the frequency content are very close See Subsection 4.4.3 A realistic six floor building 93 Visually matching almost in the entire analysis interval See Section 5 ∗ For the sake of brevity, only six results are presented in Figure 26; however, the presented reduction is based on 18 results. Table 13. Brief review of the reduction in analysis run-times in Sections 4 and 5. Figure 32. Changes in analysis run-time and accuracy of the peak target response in terms of n when applying the SEB THAAT to the analysis of the first example without using the proposed procedure. SEB THAAT. Consequently, the proposed procedure, besides eliminating the ambiguity of assigning correct values to the enlargement scale n, may enhance the computational efficiency of using the SEB THAAT. This implies improvement in simplicity and efficiency of the SEB THAAT. In addition, unlike previous applications of the SEB THAAT, the parameters T and χ do not play a role in the application of the SEB THAAT using the new procedure. In other words, whereas in the previous applications, the T and χ were considered approximately and ambiguously but directly, by us- ing the proposed procedure, the roles of T and χ are implied in the repetitions of time integration computa- tion indirectly but clearly and with less approximation. This removes the problems of assigning values to T and χ, and makes the application of the SEB THAAT to be more simpler and clearer. Due to the capabilities of time integration in the analysis of systems with static instability (zero stiffness) [1, 2, 23], it is reasonable to expect the SEB THAAT to perform well in these analyses. This has not yet been investigated [38], and the second example in this paper is indeed the first report in this field. Finally, none of the previous applications of the SEB THAAT consider multiple target responses simultaneously; the realistic example presented in this paper is a pioneer in this area. 6.2. The weak points Parameter-less simple and clear application of the SEB THAAT with acceptable reduction in the analysis run- time, and accuracy of the target response, is the main advantage of the proposed procedure compared to the previous applications of the SEB THAAT. However, there are also disadvantages. A disadvantage of the proposed procedure is that the final target response may be digitised in steps which, if smaller than the step of the excitation f ∆t, may not be a fraction of f ∆t, and, if larger than f ∆t, may not be a multiplier of f ∆t. This is triv- ial in theory, but inconvenient in practice, and can be a hindrance in post-processing. For example, it 169 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica may prevent a simple increase of the accuracy of the responses by Richardson extrapolation [25, 26, 118]. A second disadvantage is that using the proposed procedure does not guarantee a decrease in analysis run-time. In other words, although, in view of the examples presented, the analysis run-time decreases when the SEB THAAT is applied according to the proposed procedure, and the probability of the run- times increase decreases when the details of the non- linear solution are well set, the probability has not been theoretically prevented. This disadvantage is likely to be more pronounced if the problem and/or the analysis is unusually complex. Finally, inherited from the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5: 2004 [35, 92], when applying the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure, the analysis ends with convergence of the peak target response. This criterion may be inappropriate for im- portant analyses, especially when the target response is to be computed accurately in the entire analysis interval. 6.3. More on the complicatedness of the bridge example As implied in [96], for the structural system intro- duced in Figure 21 and Equations (30) and (31), both the structural behaviour and the time integration computation are complicated. The main reasons are: (1.) The non-linearity of the system originates in two different sources, i.e. elastic collision and material non-linearity; see Figure 22 and the following fourth point. (2.) Because of Equation (30), the behaviour is compli- cated, especially when SN = 200 %; see Figures 22c and 27. (3.) Also because of the shape of the excitation in Figure 21b, the mathematical stiffness [112, 113] of the problem is considerable. (4.) As the main reason for complexity of the be- haviour, in view of Figure 21a and Equation (31), the collisions and material loading/unloading at different locations of the structural system and at different time instants are completely dependent. In other words, independent of the excitation and the SN, the non-linearity starts with the collision of the first or seventh mass to the neighbouring support. Then, when the columns are in the plastic range, the collision of the mass above the column with one of the two neighbouring masses (or sup- port) will usually result in unloading and change in the behaviour of the column from plastic to elastic. This means that many collisions and unloading oc- cur simultaneously, which adds complexity to both the behaviour and the computation. Finally, the complexity because of this reason increases by the second and third reasons mentioned above, i.e. high SN and mathematical stiffness. (5.) The last example in [96] differs from the bridge example presented in Subsection 4.4.3, in the earth- quake excitation and the values of SN. The two excitations in the example in [96] are not particu- larly more complex than the excitation in Subsec- tion 4.4.3. In addition, while the structural behavior in the example presented in [96] is very complicated, the maximum values of SN in the examples in [96] and this paper are 100 % and 200 %, respectively. Therefore, the bridge example presented in this pa- per is more complicated than that presented in [96]. The complexity of the behaviour and the computa- tion leads to a weaker performance of the proposed procedure in this special example as compared to the other examples studied in this paper; see Ta- ble 13. Nevertheless, this is consistent with the na- ture of time integration analyses, which may require very small integration steps to achieve sufficient ac- curacy in non-linear complicated analyses; see [1, 86– 90, 96, 97, 107, 108, 119, 120]. In other words, the weaker performance in highly complicated non-linear problems, though would rather be eliminated, is to be expected, taking into account the performance of well- known time integration methods in analysis of complex structural dynamic behaviour [2, 23, 86–90, 121–126]. 6.4. Comparison with other analysis acceleration methods The aim of this paper is only to simplify the applica- tion of the SEB THAAT by eliminating the parame- ters from the application process. The objective has been achieved and, in the cases studied (as examples), efficiency has been improved; see Table 13. In addi- tion, the SEB THAAT has already been compared with some other techniques; see [1, 42]. Taking this into account, the comparison presented in [1] is briefly extended in Table 14 to a rough comparison between the following eight techniques: (1.) The SEB THAAT according to the new proce- dure, proposed in this paper, (2.) direct down sampling [28], (3.) parareal time integration [20–22, 127], (4.) time integration of integrated problems [41], (5.) combination of truncation and direct down sam- pling [30], (6.) impact based replacement of the earthquake record [40], (7.) the SEB THAAT by assigning values to the en- largement scale n [38, 39], (8.) adaptive fast non-linear analysis; see [128–130]. The comparison shows the superior performance of the SEB THAAT using the proposed procedure from various points of view. It is also worth noting that the overall reduction in the analysis run-time because of the eighth technique [128–130] is slightly higher than that of the first technique; see Table 13 and [128]. 170 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Feature Technique (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Simplicity of application a b e d d d c d Effect on the in-core memory a a c b a a a b Number of the past successful tests b a c d c d b c Theoretical basis a c a d c c b b Versatility a a a b a b a c Capability to be simply plugged in analysis software a a d e b c a c Using all the excitation data a c a a b a a a Computational effort needed for application b a f g d e b c Additional computational facilities needed b a e d c c b c Number of parameters additional to ordinary analysis a b d a c b b b Applicability beyond structural dynamics a a a b b c a c ∗ The “a”, “b”, “c”, “d”, “e”, “f”, and “g”, respectively, imply that the technique is the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh best technique from the point of view of the feature stated in the first column. Table 14. A rough comparison between eight techniques for accelerating time history analysis of Equation (1)∗. However, even from the point of view of computational efficiency, the first technique is superior due to its negligible impact on the in-core memory, and the larger number of the examples presented in this paper compared to those presented in [128, 129]. 6.5. Main challenges and a perspective of the future By using the proposed procedure, the SEB THAAT can be simply and clearly applied to structural dy- namic analyses. Considering this, Tables 1 and 13, and the significance of computations’ run-times [131], it is reasonable to use the proposed procedure for ap- plication of the SEB THAAT in real analyses. More efforts are nevertheless essential (some ongoing), in the following directions: (1.) With regard to the SEB THAAT and its applica- tion: (a) Enhancement of the application to complex structural dynamic analyses, e.g. highly oscilla- tory non-linear analyses. (b) Application to wave propagation problems. The behaviour of many important oscillatory sys- tems is a combination of structural dynamics and wave propagation. As indicated in Table 1 and Sections 4 and 5, the SEB THAAT has mostly been tested in application to structural dynamic problems. In wave propagation problems, the number of degrees of freedom is generally larger, the run-times are more, and the need to speed up the analysis is greater. (c) Application to the analysis of systems subjected to various excitations. Many important structural systems can be subjected to several digitised ex- citations simultaneously, e.g. off-shore platforms that are exposed to earthquake, wind, and sea wave. These problems tend to be large, non- linear, and complicated and time consuming to analyse. The application of the SEB THAAT to such problems can be complicated, especially when the difference between the digitisation steps is considerable. It is therefore essential to improve the SEB THAAT and the proposed procedure to accelerate such analyses. (d) Increasing the public attention and interest in the SEB THAAT, by: i. Preparing a user-friendly internet webpage to convert f(t) to fnew(t). ii. Preparing a user-friendly internet webpage to apply the proposed procedure. iii. Testing the application of the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure in the analysis of large realistic systems with com- plex behaviour (with a real need to reduce the analysis run-time). (2.) Regarding the proposed procedure: (a) Introducing a theoretical guarantee, if neces- sary together with modifications of the proposed procedure, regarding the reduction of the anal- ysis run-time, without significant change in the accuracy, when applying the SEB THAAT to arbitrary time history analysis. (b) Making changes to the procedure so that either the time step at which the final target response is reported is an integer multiple of the excita- tion digitisation step, or the excitation step is an integer multiple of the target response output step. (c) Modification of the ending criterion of the pro- posed procedure, for cases where checking the peak of the target response is not sufficient, e.g. very important structural systems. The future of the SEB THAAT’s application using the proposed procedure is promising in view of pre- sented discussions, Tables 1, 13, and 14, Equation (12), and the following two facts: (1.) Due to improvements in recording instrumenta- tion [48, 132, 133], the smallest available value of f ∆t is in continuous decrease. 171 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica (2.) Due to the continuous improvements in structural optimisation [134–136], the ever-increasing variety of material properties [137, 138], and the growing importance of financial aspects, the general trend of structural system changes is towards lighter and less stiff structures. This leads to oscillations of the target response in larger periods. Many of the above seven challenges will be overcome in the near future. In addition, the SEB THAAT and the proposed procedure will be integrated in commercial structural analysis software, which will allow many numerical tests to be carried out leading to further improvements. Various theoretical improvements can be expected, as well. Finally, given the mathematical basis of the SEB THAAT [1, 38, 39], the application of the SEB THAAT using the proposed procedure can be tested on problems other than Equation (1). 7. Conclusion The SEB THAAT was proposed in 2008 as a tech- nique to replace the digitised excitations with exci- tations digitised in larger steps, so that time history analyses can be accelerated at the cost of acceptable changes in accuracy. After many successful tests on the SEB THAAT, this paper proposes a procedure that eliminates the need to assign values to the main parameter of the SEB THAAT. Assigning values to some parameters of the analysis is eliminated, as well. The proposed procedure has roots in the New Zealand Seismic Code, NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92], the computa- tional traditions in structural dynamics [33], and nu- merical solution of ordinary differential equations [91]. The main achievements are as follows: (1.) The SEB THAAT can now be applied with no concern about the parameters n, T , and χ; this is even simpler than an ordinary (without application of the SEB THAAT) analysis according to NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92]. (2.) Using the proposed procedure, the SEB THAAT can be applied, regardless of the problem, the exci- tation, the integration method, and the non-linear solution details, i.e. no limitation exists for the application of the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure. (3.) In view of the presented twenty-five cases, the performance of the SEB THAAT, when applied according to the proposed procedure, is satisfactory. However, it is weaker in the analysis of complicated, highly oscillatory, and highly non-linear structural dynamic systems. The weakness is consistent with the characteristics of time integration analysis of highly oscillatory highly non-linear systems. (4.) The previous point is valid for the accuracy of the target response, as well as the analysis run-time. (5.) Both the reduction in the analysis run-time and the accuracy of the target response are potentially sensitive to the problem, the severity of non-linear behaviour, the target response, the excitation, and the integration method. Given the convergence, the sensitivity to the integration method is less than the other sensitivities, unless the behaviour is very complicated. (6.) Compared to the SEB THAAT’s previous appli- cations, the performance of the SEB THAAT when applied according to the proposed procedure seems less sensitive to the problem. (7.) The application of the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure seems leading to more computational efficiency compared to the previous applications of the SEB THAAT. (8.) Inherited from the features of time integration, the SEB THAAT can reduce the analysis run-time in analysis of statically unstable systems, with neg- ligible effect on the accuracy of the target response. (9.) The SEB THAAT can perform well when several target responses are under consideration simultane- ously. (10.) Compared to several other analysis acceleration methods, the application of the SEB THAAT using the proposed procedure is superior, in terms of simplicity of application, negligible effect on the in-core memory, significant reduction in analysis run-time, etc. Based on the above results, the author can recom- mend using the SEB THAAT according to the pro- posed procedure for analysis of arbitrary structural dynamic systems subjected to excitations available in digitised format. Given the significant reduction in the analysis run-time reported in Table 13, and the fact that still only twenty-five cases have been tested for the proposed procedure, it is recommended that in real applications additional checks for accu- racy be performed after the final response is obtained. Repeating the analysis with other integration meth- ods, or using the SEB THAAT without the proposed procedure can be two alternatives. These checks will negatively affect the reduction in the analysis run- time, but are essential until sufficient testing of the proposed procedure. Some remaining challenges are as follows: (1.) Improving the proposed procedure for cases with complicated, highly oscillatory, highly non-linear behaviour. (2.) Detailed study of the ending criterion of the pro- posed procedure for applications where controlling the peak response is not sufficient for the response accuracy. (3.) Testing and improving the SEB THAAT and the proposed procedure for an analysis of wave propagation problems. (4.) Testing and improving the SEB THAAT and the proposed procedure for an analysis of structural 172 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . systems subjected to several excitations, digitised in steps, sized differently. Finally, using the proposed procedure, the SEB THAAT is applicable to analysis of problems with governing equations different from Equation (1). The performance, i.e., the reduction in analysis run- time and the accuracy of the target response, should, however, be investigated. This can accelerate analysis of systems in different fields, and besides may increase the interest in the SEB THAAT. List of symbols a An auxiliary variable in determination of the new excitation by the SEB THAAT bk An auxiliary variable in determination of the new excitation by the SEB THAAT ci Viscous damping of the ith damper in Figures 6a and 11a C-H Chung-Hulbert (time integration method) Cijk An indicator for the cases examined in Subsec- tion 4.4.3, introduced in Table 10 di Distances between the decks and the supports, intro- duced in Figure 21a E Computational error EK Kinetic energy EP Potential energy Erj Error of the peak target response obtained from the jth time integration computation of the proposed procedure fi Shear force of the ith column from left in Figure 21a fint Vector of internal forces of an MDOF structural system f Vector of external forces of an MDOF structural system fnew New excitation obtained from the SEB THAAT fint0 Vector of internal forces of an MDOF structural system at t = 0 finti Vector of internal forces of an MDOF structural system at t = ti f̄ An auxiliary variable for determining the new excita- tion by the SEB THAAT g Acceleration of gravity g(t) A record digitised in step f ∆tj , obtained from the main excitation record, f , using linear interpolation, in the proposed procedure HHT Hilber-Hughes-Taylor (time integration method) IDA Incremental Dynamic Analysis ki Stiffness of the ith spring in Figures 6a and 11a Lp Interval of the integration steps, at which the results of the analysis converge properly mi ith mass in Figures 6a and 11a M Mass matrix MDOF Multi-Degree-of-Freedom n Step enlargement scale and the only parameter of the SEB THAAT, eliminated when using the proposed procedure n′ An auxiliary variable for determining the new excita- tion by the SEB THAAT n1 Value assigned to n in the proposed procedure, in the first time integration computation nj Value assigned to n in the proposed procedure, in the jth time integration computation nmax Largest value of n satisfying the accuracy-based comments on time integration step Pj The peak target response in the jth time integration computation of the proposed procedure Pexact The exact peak target response Q Constraints in the governing equation that distinguish non-linear behaviour from linear behaviour q Rate of convergence, generally equal to the order of accuracy of the time integration method q′ Rate of convergence of the approximation in the excitation Rx x direction component of the shear force in the typi- cal column of the lowest floor of the realistic example, without considering the damping forces Ry y direction component of the shear force in the typi- cal column of the lowest floor of the realistic example, without considering the damping forces R The target response obtained from the ordinary time history analysis Rnew The target response obtained using the SEB THAAT s A scaling factor for the excitation in Subsection 4.4.3 S Target response in the second example, equal to the sum of the kinetic and potential energies SEB THAAT The name of the technique, its ap- plication is simplified in this paper (abbreviated from Step-Enlargement-Based Time-History-Analysis- Acceleration-Technique) SI The International System of Units (abbreviated from the French Le Système International d’Unités) SN A measure for severity of the non-linear structural dynamic behaviour, and abbreviation of Severity of non-linear structural dynamic behaviour t Time tend Duration of the dynamic behaviour and the time history analysis t′ end Duration of the new excitation obtained from the SEB THAAT ti ith time station of the time integration computation T Smallest oscillatory period with a worthwhile contri- bution to the target response (f ∆t)new Digitisation step of the SEB THAAT’s result ∆t Step of time integration computation ∆tj Integration step in the jth time integration compu- tation in application of the SEB THAAT according to the proposed procedure χ A downscaling factor in Equation (2), introduced in Equation (3) ∆tcr Upper bound of the integration step due to the linear theory of numerical stability ∆tCFL Upper bound of the integration step in wave prop- agation problems associated with spatial discretisation f ∆t Digitisation step of the excitation f ∆tj The digitisation step of the excitation in the jth time integration computation in the analysis according 173 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica to the proposed procedure u Displacement vector of an MDOF structural system u̇ Velocity vector of an MDOF structural system ü Accelerations vector of an MDOF structural system u0 Displacement vector of an MDOF structural system at t = 0 u̇0 Velocity vector of an MDOF structural dynamic system at t = 0 ü0 Acceleration vector of an MDOF structural dynamic system at t = 0 ui Displacement vector of an MDOF structural dynamic system at t = ti u̇i Velocity vector of an MDOF structural dynamic system at t = ti üi Acceleration vector of an MDOF structural dynamic system at t = ti uA Displacement of central pier’s mid-point in Subsec- tion 4.4.3 üg Ground acceleration (üg)x x direction component of ground acceleration (üg)y y direction component of ground acceleration uyi Yield displacement of the ith spring in Figure 6a u1 Displacement of the first mass in the second and fourth examples u2 Displacement of the second mass in the second and fourth examples u3 Displacement of the third mass in the second and fourth example u4 Displacement of the fourth mass in the fourth example u5 Displacement of the fifth mass in the fourth example u6 Displacement of the sixth mass in the fourth example u7 Displacement of the seventh mass in the fourth exam- ple u̇1 Velocity of the first mass in the second example u̇2 Velocity of the second mass in the second example u̇3 Velocity of the third mass in the second example VBS Total horizontal force transferred to the foundation in the realistic example disregarding the damping forces Z+ The set of positive integers α One of the three parameters of the HHT time integra- tion method β One of the three parameters of the HHT time integra- tion method δ̄j The non-linear tolerance in the jth time integration computation ε Uniaxial strain σ Uniaxial stress σy Uniaxial yield stress γ One of the three parameters of the HHT time integra- tion method Γ A vector which, if the f in Equation (1) originates in üg, is essential in computation of f ρ∞ Spectral radius of a time integration method at very large values of ∆t T tan θ1 Young’s modulus tan θ2 Slope of the second line in the uniaxial stress- strain plot, for materials with bilinear behaviour and kinematic hardening Acknowledgements The author is sincerely grateful to the reviewers of the paper for their detailed comments, which improved the quality of the paper from various points of view. The second thanks of the author goes to the editors of the journal, whose patience also allowed a sufficient period of time between the initial submission of this paper and its final acceptance, such that even some of the weaknesses not directly addressed by the reviewers could be found and corrected. The author also feels the need to express his sincere gratitude to Mr. Saeed Amiri, for modelling and carrying out the structural analyses of the realistic example on OPEN SEES. Finally, the author acknowl- edges the financial support of the International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES) in relation to Projects 7420, 7510, 7528, and 7537. References [1] A. Soroushian. Integration step size and its adequate selection in analysis of structural systems against earthquakes. In M. Papadrakakis, V. Plevris, N. D. Lagaros (eds.), Computational Methods in Earthquake Engineering: Volume 3, pp. 285–328. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017. ISBN 978-3-319-47798-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47798-5_10 [2] T. Belytschko, T. J. R. Hughes. Computational Methods for Transient Analysis. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1983. [3] J. Henrych. Finite Models and Methods of Dynamics in Structures. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1990. [4] K.-J. Bathe. Finite Element Procedures. Klaus-Jurgen Bathe, USA, 2014. [5] J. Argyris, J. P. Mlejnek. Dynamics of Structures. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1991. [6] T. Belytschko, W. K. Liu, B. Moran. Non-linear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA, 2000. [7] P. Wriggers. Computational Contact Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, UK, 2002. [8] D. Vamvatsikos, C. A. Cornell. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 31(3):491–514, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141 [9] A. Miano, F. Jalayer, H. Ebrahimian, A. Prota. Nonlinear dynamic analysis procedure with limited number of analyses and scaling. In Proceedings of the 7th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2019), pp. 970–985. 2019. https://doi.org/10.7712/120119.6972.19723 [10] S. Diamantopoulos, M. Fragiadakis. Modeling, fragility and risk assessment of ancient freestanding columns and colonnades. Engineering Structures 275:115273, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115273 [11] N. Teunisse, L. Demasi, P. Tiso, R. Cavallaro. Reduced basis methods for structurally nonlinear Joined Wings. Aerospace Science and Technology 68:486–495, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.05.041 174 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47798-5_10 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141 https://doi.org/10.7712/120119.6972.19723 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115273 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.05.041 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . [12] Y. Lee, B. Seo, E. T. Lee. Application of model reduction techniques to jacket structures. International Journal of Steel Structures 15(1):1–6, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-014-1101-6 [13] D.-H. Ko, S.-H. Boo. Efficient structural dynamic analysis using condensed finite element matrices and its application to a stiffened plate. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 10(12):1958, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10121958 [14] J. Kiani, C. Camp, S. Pezeshk, N. Khoshnevis. Application of pool-based active learning in reducing the number of required response history analyses. Computers & Structures 241:106355, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2020.106355 [15] M. Mousavi, M. Ghafory-Ashtiany, A. Azarbakht. A new indicator of elastic spectral shape for the reliable selection of ground motion records. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 40(12):1403–1416, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1096 [16] V. Manfredi, A. Masi, A. G. Özcebe, et al. Selection and spectral matching of recorded ground motions for seismic fragility analyses. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 20(10):4961–4987, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01393-0 [17] D. N. Herting. A general purpose, multi-stage, component modal synthesis method. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 1(2):153–164, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-874X(85)90025-3 [18] D. Rixen. A Lanczos procedure for efficient mode superposition in dynamic analysis. In 43rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2002-1393 [19] V. Sonneville, M. Scapolan, M. Shan, O. A. Bauchau. Modal reduction procedures for flexible multibody dynamics. Multibody System Dynamics 51(4):377–418, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11044-020-09770-w [20] J. Cortial. Time-parallel Methods for Accelerating the Solution of Structural Dynamics Problems. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, USA, 2011. [21] J. F. Hajjar, J. F. Abel. Parallel processing for transient nonlinear structural dynamics of three-dimensional framed structures using domain decomposition. Computers & Structures 30(6):1237–1254, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(88)90189-7 [22] B. G. Simpson, M. Zhu, A. Seki, M. Scott. Challenges in GPU-accelerated nonlinear dynamic analysis for structural systems. Journal of Structural Engineering 149(3):04022253, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSENDH.STENG-11311 [23] W. L. Wood. Practical Time Stepping Schemes. Oxford, New York, USA, 1990. [24] W. Kim, J. N. Reddy. A new family of higher-order time integration algorithms for the analysis of structural dynamics. Journal of Applied Mechanics 84(7):071008, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036821 [25] Z. Zlatev, I. Dimov, I. Faragó, A. Havasi. Richardson Extrapolation: Practical Aspects and Applications (Vol. 2). Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin, Germany, 2018. [26] M. N. Bismarck-Nasr, A. D. Marmo Oliveira. On enhancement of accuracy in direct integration dynamic response problems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 20(7):699–703, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290200708 [27] M. Rezaiee-Pajand, S. A. Esfehani, H. Ehsanmanesh. An explicit and highly accurate Runge-Kutta family. Civil Engineering Infrastructures Journal 56(1):51–78, 2023. https://doi.org/10.22059/ceij.2022.330788.1792 [28] A. V. Oppenheim, R. W. Schafer. Discrete-time Signal Processing. 3rd Ed. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2009. [29] S. Srivastav, J. M. Nau. Structural response to truncated earthquake accelerograms. Journal of Structural Engineering 114(5):1189–1192, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 9445(1988)114:5(1189) [30] J. C. Reyes, W. A. Avila, A. Sierra. Fast nonlinear response history analysis: An application to irregular building structures. In D. Köber, M. De Stefano, Z. Zembaty (eds.), Seismic Behaviour and Design of Irregular and Complex Civil Structures III, pp. 47–55. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020. ISBN 978-3-030-33532-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33532-8_5 [31] Y. H. Shuang Li, Y. Wei. Truncation method of ground motion records based on the equivalence of structural maximum displacement responses. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 26(10):5268–5289, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2020.1868364 [32] Y. He, S. Li, Y. Wei, L. Xie. A novel strong ground motion duration to reduce computation time of structural time history analysis. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 164:107641, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107641 [33] R. W. Clough, J. Penzien. Dynamics of Structures. McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1993. [34] J. F. McNamara. Solution schemes for problems of nonlinear structural dynamics. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 96(2):96–102, 1974. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3454158 [35] NZS 1170.5 Supp 1. Structural design actions – Part 5: Earthquake actions. Standards New-Zealand, New Zealand, 2004. [36] C. C. Chen, A. R. Robinson. Improved time-history analysis for structural dynamics. I: Treatment of rapid variation of excitation and material nonlinearity. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 119(12):2496–2513, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 9399(1993)119:12(2496) [37] C. A. de Moura, C. S. Kubrusly. The Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy (CFL) Condition. Birkhäuser Basel, Boston, USA, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-8176-8394-8 [38] A. Soroushian. A technique for time integration with steps larger than the excitation steps: review of the past addressing the existing challenges and a perspective of the future. In Proceedings of 8th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational 175 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-014-1101-6 https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10121958 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2020.106355 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1096 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01393-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-874X(85)90025-3 https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2002-1393 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11044-020-09770-w https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(88)90189-7 https://doi.org/10.1061/JSENDH.STENG-11311 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036821 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290200708 https://doi.org/10.22059/ceij.2022.330788.1792 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:5(1189) https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:5(1189) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33532-8_5 https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2020.1868364 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107641 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3454158 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1993)119:12(2496) https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1993)119:12(2496) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-8176-8394-8 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2021), pp. 1476–1491. 2021. https://doi.org/10.7712/120121.8574.19609 [39] A. Soroushian. A technique for time integration analysis with steps larger than the excitation steps. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering 24(12):2087–2111, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.1097 [40] M. Hosseini, I. Mirzaei. Simplification of earthquake accelerograms for rapid time history analysis based on the impulsive load concept. In Proceedings of the 4th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2013), pp. 2304–2312. 2013. https://doi.org/10.7712/120113.4667.C1670 [41] S.-Y. Chang. Integrated equations of motion for direct integration methods. Structural Engineering and Mechanics 13(5):569–589, 2002. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2002.13.5.569 [42] N. Majidi, H. T. Riahi, S. M. Zandi, I. Hajirasouliha. Development of practical downsampling methods for nonlinear time history analysis of complex structures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 175:108247, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108247 [43] A. Soroushian. Performance of a time integration acceleration technique applied to seismic analysis of non-classically damped structural dynamics. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering 46(2):1281–1300, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-021-00666-z [44] A. Soroushian, A. S. Moghadam, A. Sabzei, et al. An engineering comment for simply accelerating seismic response history analysis of mid-rise steel-structure buildings. Journal of Architectural and Engineering Research 4:3–23, 2023. https://doi.org/10.54338/27382656-2023.4-001 [45] A. Soroushian. Direct time integration with steps larger than the steps by which the excitations are digitized [Title translated from Persian]. Technical report no. 7510, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Iran, 2011. [46] A. Soroushian. On the performance of a recent technique for more efficient time integration in severe seismic conditions. In Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Advances in Structural Engineering and Mechanics (ASEM’11), pp. 2090–2108. 2011. [47] M. A. Daziano. Seismic vulnerability assessment of earth dams [Title translated from Spanish]. Ph.D. thesis, National University of Tucuman, Argentina, 2017. [48] A. Taghinia, A. Vasseghi, M. Khanmohammadi, A. Soroushian. Development of seismic fragility functions for typical Iranian multi-span RC bridges with deficient cap beam – column joints. International Journal of Civil Engineering 20(3):305–321, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-021-00661-5 [49] P. Henrici. Discrete Variable Methods in Ordinary Differential Equations. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1962. [50] J. C. Strikwerda. Finite Difference Schemes and Partial Differential Equations. Wadsworth & Books/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 1989. [51] A. Soroushian. Proper convergence a concept new in science and important in engineering. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference from Scientific Computing to Computational Engineering (4th IC-SCCE), pp. 607–613. 2010. [52] A. Ralston, P. Rabinowitz. First Course in Numerical Analysis. McGraw-Hill, USA, 1978. [53] X. Zhou, K. K. Tamma. A new unified theory underlying time dependent linear first-order systems: a prelude to algorithms by design. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 60(10):1699– 1740, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1019 [54] S. N. Penry, W. L. Wood. Comparison of some single-step methods for the numerical solution of the structural dynamic equation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 21(11):1941–1955, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620211102 [55] M. D. Greenberg. Foundations of Applied Mathematics. Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, New York, USA, 2013. [56] A. Soroushian, Y. Zarabimanesh, K. Soleymani, S. M. Khalkhali. A new technique for fractional enlargement of integration steps in transient analysis against digitized excitations. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Structural Engineering Dynamics (ICE-Dyn 2017), p. 119. 2017. [57] Y. Zarabimanesh. On the possibility to reduce the computational cost of time history analysis of the Milad telecommunication tower [Title translated from Persian]. Master’s thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), 2017. [58] A. Soroushian, A. Vasseghi, M. Hosseini. On practical performance of a technique for more efficient dynamic analysis in view of real seismic analysis of bridge structures. In M. Papadrakakis, M. Fragiadakis, V. Plevris (eds.), Computational Methods in Earthquake Engineering: Volume 2, pp. 613–634. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6573-3_28 [59] S. E. Hosseini. Numerical investigation on pattern of stress/pore water pressure variation inside imper-vious core of embankment dams during earthquakes [Title translated from Persian]. Master’s thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), 2017. [60] A. Lashgari, A. Soroushian, H. Zafarani. Assessment of a technique for faster time integration in application to seismic wave propagation analysis. Wave Motion p. 103320, 2024. [In print]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wavemoti.2024.103320 [61] A. A. Hadad. Reducing computational costs in time integration analyses of buildings with irregularities in height because of mass [Title translated from Persian]. Master’s thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), 2015. 176 https://doi.org/10.7712/120121.8574.19609 https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.1097 https://doi.org/10.7712/120113.4667.C1670 https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2002.13.5.569 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108247 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-021-00666-z https://doi.org/10.54338/27382656-2023.4-001 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-021-00661-5 https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1019 https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620211102 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6573-3_28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wavemoti.2024.103320 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . [62] A. Soroushian, A. J. Mehrnoosh, Y. Zarabimanesh, et al. On the performance of a computational cost reduction technique when applied to cooling towers transient analysis. In Proceedings of the 7th European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering (ECCOMAS VII), pp. 1421–1431. 2016. https://doi.org/10.7712/100016.1896.11470 [63] F. Nateghi, M. Yakhchalian. On less computational costs for analysis of silos seismic behavior by time integration. In Proceedings of 3rd ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2011), p. 364. 2011. [64] A. Soroushian, P. Farshadmanesh, S. Azad. On the essentiality of techniques to enlarge integration steps in transient analysis against digitized excitations. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering 17(1):43–60, 2015. [65] M. Bastami. A technique for more efficient time integration applied to seismic analysis of power sub-station equipment. In Proceedings of 11th World Congress on Computational Mechanics (WCCM2014), pp. 1319–1329. 2014. [66] A. Sabzei. On the performance of a recent technique for seismic analyses computational cost reduction when applied to buildings structural systems [Title translated from Persian]. Master’s thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), 2013. [67] A. Soroushian. On practical performance of a technique recently proposed for time integration analysis with less computational cost. In Proceedings of The 17th International Conference on Sound and Vibration (ICSV 17), p. 325. 2010. [68] A. Baiani, A. Soroushian, S. Amiri. On the performance of a time integration computational cost reduction technique in implementation in the analysis of buildings with irregularity in plan. In Proceedings of 11th International Congress on Civil Engineering (11th ICCE), pp. 1–8. 2018. [69] A. Soroushian, E. M. Farahani. Efficient static analysis of assemblies of beam-columns subjected to continuous loadings available as digitized records. Frontiers in Built Environment 4:215–229, 2019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00083 [70] A. Soroushian, S. Amiri. Reduction in space for dynamic finite element analysis of assemblies of beam-columns when the mass is available in digitized format. Journal of Applied and Computational Mechanics 8(1):71–83, 2022. https://doi.org/10.22055/jacm.2019.31603.1898 [71] A. Soroushian, S. Amiri. Simultaneous reduction in time and space for dynamic finite element models of beam–column assemblies. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering 45(2):1265–1279, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00377-x [72] O. Bahar, S. Ramezani. Faster time integration analysis for building structures subjected to 3-component earthquakes. In Proceedings of 3rd ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2011), p. 695. 2011. [73] A. Soroushian. On the accuracy of accelerations in general implementation of a recently proposed seismic analysis computational cost reduction technique. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference from “Scientific Computing to Computational Engineering” (5th IC-SCCE), pp. 376–383. 2012. [74] S. Azad. A study on accelerating time history analysis of bridges [Title translated from Persian]. Master’s thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), 2015. [75] O. C. Zienkiewicz, R. L. Taylor. The Finite Element Method for Solid and Structural Mechanics. Sixth ed. Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2005. [76] R. J. Leveque. Finite Volume Methods for Hyperbolic Problems. Vol. 31. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2002. [77] A. Soroushian, A. Garakaninezhad, A. Yahyapour, A. A. Hadad. Performance of a computational cost reduction technique in lengthy time interval analyses. In Proceedings of 11th World Congress on Computational Mechanics (WCCM2014), pp. 2054–2063. 2014. [78] S. Azad, A. A. Hadad, S. Amiri, A. Soroushian. Case studies on the performance of a transient analysis computational cost reduction technique when applied to analyses with integration methods of order one two and four. In Proceedings of 6th International Conference from “Scientific Computing to Computational Engineering” (6th IC-SCCE), pp. 85–94. 2014. [79] A. Garakaninezhad, A. Yahyapour, A. Asgarihadad, A. Soroushian. A comparison between linear and nonlinear time history analysis after implementing a recent computational cost reduction technique. In Proceedings of 11th World Congress on Computational Mechanics (WCCM2014), pp. 1–2. 2014. [80] A. Zakizadeh. Investigation on the role of the parameter representing the influence of the eliminated excitation stations in the performance of a transient analysis computational cost reduction technique [Title translated from Persian]. Master’s thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Iran, 2017. [81] P. Fajfar. Analysis in seismic provisions for buildings: past, present and future. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 16(7):2567–2608, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0290-8 [82] M. Fragiadakis, M. Papadrakakis. Modeling, analysis and reliability of seismically excited structures: Computational issues. International Journal of Computational Methods 05(04):483–511, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219876208001674 [83] H. Kazemi, M. Ghafory-Ashtiany, A. Azarbakht. Development of fragility curves by incorporating new spectral shape indicators and a weighted damage index: case study of steel braced frames in the city of Mashhad, Iran. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration 16(2):383–395, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-017-0388-7 [84] N. D. Lagaros, V. Plevris, N. A. Kallioras. The mosaic of metaheuristic algorithms in structural optimization. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering 29(7):5457–5492, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-022-09773-0 177 https://doi.org/10.7712/100016.1896.11470 https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00083 https://doi.org/10.22055/jacm.2019.31603.1898 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00377-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0290-8 https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219876208001674 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-017-0388-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-022-09773-0 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica [85] K. Deng, P. Pan, A. Lam, Y. Xue. A simplified model for analysis of high-rise buildings equipped with hysteresis damped outriggers. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 23(15):1158–1170, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1113 [86] Y. M. Xie, G. P. Steven. Instability, chaos, and growth and decay of energy of time-stepping schemes for non-linear dynamic equations. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering 10(5):393–401, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.1640100505 [87] T. Belytschko, D. F. Schoeberle. On the unconditional stability of an implicit algorithm for nonlinear structural dynamics. Journal of Applied Mechanics 42(4):865–869, 1975. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3423721 [88] A. Cardona, M. Geradin. Time integration of the equations of motion in mechanism analysis. Computers & Structures 33(3):801–820, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(89)90255-1 [89] S. Rashidi, M. A. Saadeghvaziri. Seismic modeling of multi-span simply-supported bridges using ADINA. Computers & Structures 64(5-6):1025–1039, 1997. Proceedings of the 11th ADINA Conference. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(97)00016-3 [90] K. H. Low. Convergence of the numerical methods for problems of structural dynamics. Journal of Sound and Vibration 150(2):342–349, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-460X(91)90628-W [91] E. Hairer, G. Wanner, S. P. Nørsett. Solving Ordinary Differential Equations I: Non-Stiff Problems. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78862-1 [92] NZS 1170. (2004) Structural design actions, Part 5: Earthquake actions – New Zealand, 2004. New Zealand. [93] A. F. D’Souza, V. K. Garg. Advanced Dynamics Modeling and Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1984. [94] T. J. R. Hughes. The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1987. [95] A. Soroushian. Test of an idea for setting the nonlinearity tolerance in nonlinear response history analyses according to procedures originated in the seismic code of New Zealand NZS 1170.5:2004. In Proceedings of 9th ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering (COMPDYN 2023), pp. 4375–4390. 2023. [96] A. Soroushian, P. Wriggers. Elimination of the stops because of failure of nonlinear solutions in nonlinear seismic time history analysis. Journal of Vibration Engineering & Technologies 11(6):2831–2849, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42417-023-00968-8 [97] A. Soroushian, P. Wriggers, J. Farjoodi. On practical integration of semi-discretized nonlinear equations of motion. Part 1: reasons for probable instability and improper convergence. Journal of Sound and Vibration 284(3):705–731, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2004.07.008 [98] J. M. Nau. Computation of inelastic response spectra. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 109(1):279–288, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 9399(1983)109:1(279) [99] S. A. Mahin, J. Lin. Construction of inelastic response spectra for single degree-of-freedom systems. Technical report no. UCB/EERC-83/17, Earthquake Engineering Research Center (EERC), University of California, CA, USA, 1983. [100] J. Chung, G. M. Hulbert. A time integration algorithm for structural dynamics with improved numerical dissipation: The generalized-α method. Journal of Applied Mechanics 60(2):371–375, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2900803 [101] H. M. Hilber, T. J. R. Hughes, R. L. Taylor. Improved numerical dissipation for time integration algorithms in structural dynamics. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 5(3):283–292, 1977. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290050306 [102] N. I. Basöz, A. S. Kiremidjian, S. A. King, K. H. Law. Statistical analysis of bridge damage data from the 1994 Northridge, CA, Earthquake. Earthquake Spectra 15(1):25–54, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586027 [103] V. Jeng, W. L. Tzeng. Assessment of seismic pounding hazard for Taipei City. Engineering Structures 22(5):459–471, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00123-0 [104] V. I. Babitsky, V. L. Krupenin. Vibration of Strongly Nonlinear Discontinuous Systems. Springer, Germany, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-44488-6 [105] M. Miari, R. Jankowski. Analysis of pounding between adjacent buildings founded on different soil types. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 154:107156, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107156 [106] N. M. Newmark. A method of computation for structural dynamics. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division 85(3):67–94, 1959. https://doi.org/10.1061/JMCEA3.0000098 [107] A. Soroushian, P. Wriggers, J. Farjoodi. Practical integration of semidiscretized nonlinear equations of motion: Proper convergence for systems with piecewise linear behavior. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 139(2):114–145, 2013. https: //doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000434 [108] A. Soroushian. New Methods to maintain responses’ convergence and control responses’ errors in the analysis of nonlinear dynamic models of structural systems [Title translated from Persian]. Ph.D. thesis, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran, 2003. [109] R. W. Clough. Numerical integration of equations of motion. Lectures on finite element methods in continuum mechanics, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, 525–533, 1973. [110] D. Cohen, T. Jahnke, K. Lorenz, C. Lubich. Numerical integrators for highly oscillatory Hamiltonian systems: A review. In A. Mielke (ed.), Analysis, Modeling and Simulation of Multiscale Problems, pp. 553–576. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-35657-6_20 [111] X. Wu, B. Wang, L. Mei. Oscillation-preserving algorithms for efficiently solving highly oscillatory second- order ODEs. Numerical Algorithms 86(2):693–727, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-020-00908-7 178 https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1113 https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.1640100505 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3423721 https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(89)90255-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(97)00016-3 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-460X(91)90628-W https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78862-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42417-023-00968-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2004.07.008 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1983)109:1(279) https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1983)109:1(279) https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2900803 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290050306 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586027 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00123-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-44488-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107156 https://doi.org/10.1061/JMCEA3.0000098 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000434 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000434 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-35657-6_20 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-020-00908-7 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . [112] E. Hairer, G. Wanner. Solving Ordinary Differential Equations II: Stiff and Differential-Algebraic Problems. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05221-7 [113] C. Lubich, D. Weiss. Numerical integrators for motion under a strong constraining force. Multiscale Modeling & Simulation 12(4):1592–1606, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1137/14096092X [114] K. J. Bathe, A. P. Cimento. Some practical procedures for the solution of nonlinear finite element equations. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 22(1):59–85, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(80)90051-1 [115] G. Dahlquist, A. Bjorck. Numerical Methods. Dover, USA, 2003. [116] S. Mazzoni, F. McKenna, M. H. Scott, G. L. Fenves. OpenSees Manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research, USA, 2005. [117] SAP2000. User’s Guide: A Structural Analysis Program for Static of Linear Systems (Educational Version). Computers & Structures Inc., USA, 1999. [118] P. Krysl. Confidence intervals for Richardson extrapolation in solid mechanics. Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification 7(3):031005, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4055728 [119] P. Wriggers. Nonlinear Finite Element Methods. Springer, Berlin, 2008. [120] A. Neuenhofer, F. C. Filippou. Evaluation of nonlinear frame finite-element models. Journal of Structural Engineering 123(7):958–966, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 9445(1997)123:7(958) [121] K.-J. Bathe. Conserving energy and momentum in nonlinear dynamics: A simple implicit time integration scheme. Computers & Structures 85(7):437–445, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2006.09.004 [122] M. Rezaiee-Pajand, M. Hashemian, A. Bohluly. A novel time integration formulation for nonlinear dynamic analysis. Aerospace Science and Technology 69:625–635, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.07.032 [123] W. Kim, J. H. Lee. An improved explicit time integration method for linear and nonlinear structural dynamics. Computers & Structures 206:42–53, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2018.06.005 [124] R. K. Kapania, S. Park. Nonlinear transient response and its sensitivity using finite elements in time. Computational Mechanics 17(5):306–317, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00368553 [125] Y. M. Xie. An assessment of time integration schemes for non-linear dynamic equations. Journal of Sound and Vibration 192(1):321–331, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1006/jsvi.1996.0190 [126] E. L. Wilson, I. Farhoomand, K. J. Bathe. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of complex structures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 1(3):241–252, 1972. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290010305 [127] A. R. M. Rao, K. Loganathan, N. V. Raman. Nonlinear transient dynamic analysis on parallel processors. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 10(6):443–454, 1995. https: //doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.1995.tb00304.x [128] B. Li, W.-C. Chuang, S. M. Spence. An adaptive fast nonlinear analysis (AFNA) algorithm for rapid time history analysis. In Proceedings of 8th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2021), pp. 1426–1436. 2021. https://doi.org/10.7712/120121.8570.19399 [129] B. Li, W.-C. Chuang, S. M. J. Spence. Reliability of inelastic wind excited structures by dynamic shakedown and adaptive fast nonlinear analysis (AFNA). Engineering Structures 296:116869, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116869 [130] CSI Analysis Reference Manual For SAP2000, ETABS, SAFE and CSiBridge. Computers & Structures, USA, 2017. [131] A. Quarteroni, R. Sacco, F. Saleri. Numerical Mathematics (Vol. 37). Springer, USA, 2000. [132] J. Havskov, G. Alguacil. Instrumentation in Earthquake Seismology (Modern Approaches in Geophysics). Springer, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2969-1 [133] A. K. Chopra. Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Application to Earthquake Engineering. Prentice-Hall, USA, 2012. [134] N. D. Lagaros, A. T. Garavelas, M. Papadrakakis. Innovative seismic design optimization with reliability constraints. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 198(1):28–41, 2008. Computational Methods in Optimization Considering Uncertainties. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2007.12.025 [135] Z.-L. Zhao, S. Zhou, K. Cai, Y. Min Xie. A direct approach to controlling the topology in structural optimization. Computers & Structures 227:106141, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.106141 [136] I. Chamatidis, M. Stoumpos, G. Kazakis, et al. Overview on machine learning assisted topology optimization methodologies. In T. Rabczuk, K.-J. Bathe (eds.), Machine Learning in Modeling and Simulation: Methods and Applications, pp. 373–394. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36644-4_10 [137] Q. M. Hu, R. Yang. Mechanical properties of structural materials from first-principles. Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science 10(1):19–25, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2006.02.002 [138] J. A. P. S. Elorz, D. F. González, L. F. Verdeja. Structural Materials: Properties and Selection. Springer, Switzerland, 2019. [139] A. Soroushian, P. Wriggers, J. Farjoodi. A statement for the convergence of approximate responses and its application in structural dynamics. In Proceedings of 2nd International Conference from Scientific Computing to Computational Engineering (2nd IC-SCCE), pp. 131–137. 2006. 179 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05221-7 https://doi.org/10.1137/14096092X https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(80)90051-1 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4055728 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1997)123:7(958) https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1997)123:7(958) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2006.09.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.07.032 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2018.06.005 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00368553 https://doi.org/10.1006/jsvi.1996.0190 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290010305 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.1995.tb00304.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.1995.tb00304.x https://doi.org/10.7712/120121.8570.19399 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116869 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2969-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2007.12.025 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.106141 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36644-4_10 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2006.02.002 Aram Soroushian Acta Polytechnica Appendix A. A proof of Equation (23) is given in this appendix. In time history analyses equipped with accuracy control (e.g. as addressed in the New Zealand Seismic Code [35, 92]), it is common to repeat the first time integration computation with another time integration computation using half steps. Then, the absolute relative difference between the two peaks (i.e. |P1−P2| P2 ) is compared with 0.05. If the relative difference is larger than 0.05, the last time integration computation and the comparison of the two peaks are repeated until the difference becomes equal or smaller than 0.05, i.e. the 0.05 criterion is satisfied. From the other side, a proper convergence of the response implies that the log-log plot of the error versus the integration step is a line with positive slope (the positive slope is generally referred to as the convergence rate and is almost equal to the order of accuracy) [51]; see Figure 2. Therefore, when the response obtained from a time integration computation converges properly, by repeating the computation with half integration steps, the error of the computation decreases 2q-fold (q is the integration method’s order of accuracy). In addition, close to the exact response, responses converge properly [51] and the approach to the exact response is from one side [139]. Accordingly, from simple mathematics [55], and under the assumption of sufficiently small integration steps (equivalent to the assumption of sufficient closeness to the exact response), comparing the absolute relative difference, i.e. |P1−P2| P2 , with 0.05, implies comparing the relative error of P1 [52], i.e.: Er1 = ∣∣∣∣P1 − Pexact Pexact ∣∣∣∣ , (34) with 0.05(2q − 1)−12q (where, Pexact is the exact peak response), which is the same as comparing the relative error of P2 (the peak response of the analysis carried out with the smaller steps ∆t2), i.e.: Er2 = ∣∣∣∣P2 − Pexact Pexact ∣∣∣∣ , (35) with 0.05(2q − 1)−1. In other words: Er2 ≤ 1 2q − 10.05. (36) Equation (36) can be considered as the basis of the accuracy-control addressed in [35, 92]. Consequently, to arrive at Equation (23), we can estimate Er2, taking into account the step changes in Table 2, and substitute the estimation in Equation (36). When the step in the second time integration computation is not half the step in the first computation (i.e. ∆t2 ̸= 0.5∆t1), from the definition of proper convergence or Figure 2 (considering Points 1 and 2 on the properly converging section of Figure 2; Point 1 on the right of Point 2): log (Er1) − log (Er2) log (∆t1) − log (∆t2) = q for sufficiently small integration steps, (37) which is equivalent to: Er2 ∆t2 q = Er1 ∆t1 q . (38) From simple mathematics [55] and the fact that ∆t2 ̸= ∆t1, Equation (38) leads to: Er2 ∆t2 q = Er1 ∆t1 q = Er1 − Er2 ∆t1 q − ∆t2 q . (39) From Equation (39), and that close to the exact response, properly converging responses are either all more or all less than the exact response [139]: Er2 ∆t2 q = ∣∣∣∣P1 − P2 Pexact ∣∣∣∣ ∆t1 q − ∆t2 q . (40) Substituting the indices 1 and 2 in Equation (40), with j − 1 and j, respectively, and using Equation (22), results in: Erj = ∣∣∣∣Pj−1 − Pj Pexact ∣∣∣∣( ∆tj−1 ∆tj )q − 1 = ∣∣∣∣Pj−1 − Pj Pexact ∣∣∣∣( 4nj−1 nj−1 + 1 )q − 1 . (41) 180 vol. 64 no. 2/2024 A Practical Way to Apply a Technique That Accelerates . . . Repeating the replacement of indices for Equation (36) leads to: Erj ≤ 1 2q − 10.05. (42) Substituting Equation (41) in Equation (42) leads to:∣∣∣∣Pj−1 − Pj Pexact ∣∣∣∣( 4nj−1 nj−1 + 1 )q − 1 ≤ 0.05 2q − 1 . (43) Since nj−1 is larger than one and q is not smaller than one, Equation (43) can be re-written as:∣∣∣∣Pj−1 − Pj Pexact ∣∣∣∣ ≤ 0.05 2q − 1 [( 4nj−1 nj−1 + 1 )q − 1 ] . (44) In practice, Pexact is unavailable, and its closest substitute when convergence occurs properly is Pj (implied in Figure 2). Meanwhile, the order of accuracy is recommended not to be less than two and is generally equal to two [2, 23, 91]. Accordingly, Equation (44) can change form to:∣∣∣∣Pj−1 − Pj Pj ∣∣∣∣ ≤ 0.05 3 [( 4nj−1 nj−1 + 1 )2 − 1 ] , (45) which is identical to Equation (23) (the same result can be obtained, by concentrating on the control of Er1 instead of Er2). This makes the proof complete. Additionally, after each two sequential time integration computations, the following relation: Erj = 3 ∣∣∣∣Pj−1 − Pj Pj ∣∣∣∣ [( 4nj−1 nj−1 + 1 )2 − 1 ]−1 , (46) presents a measure for the accuracy of the final target response, not only for the ordinary time history analyses according to NZS 1170.5:2004 [35, 92], but also when the SEB THAAT is applied to the time history analyses according to the proposed procedure; for the former nj = nj−1 = 1 (given Figure 2, the “3” in the right hand side seems to have a safety factor role). 181 Acta Polytechnica 64(2):142–181, 2024 1 Introduction 2 A review of the SEB THAAT 2.1 The focal idea, basics, and main formulation 2.2 The literature 2.3 A major challenge 3 Simple application of the SEB THAAT 3.1 Theoretical bases 3.2 The procedure 3.3 Complementary points 4 Illustrative examples 4.1 Preliminary notes 4.2 Example one: A simple non-linear problem 4.3 Example two: An interesting linear problem 4.4 Examples three and four: Tests on analyses non-linear due to elastic impact 4.4.1 A brief overview 4.4.2 A classically damped system involved in elastic impact 4.4.3 An undamped system involved with elastic impact and material non-linearity 5 A realistic example 6 Discussion 6.1 The achievements and their significance 6.2 The weak points 6.3 More on the complicatedness of the bridge example 6.4 Comparison with other analysis acceleration methods 6.5 Main challenges and a perspective of the future 7 Conclusion List of symbols Acknowledgements References A