U.N.A.M.

Instituto de Ingeniera

A New Approach for the

Performance Based Seismic
Design of Structures
A Gustavo Ayala

September 2003

Performance Based Seismic Design

Conjunction of the design, construction
and maintenance procedures necessary to
reach,
through
engineering
means,
predictable performances for multiple
design objectives.
Its purpose is to minimize the economic
losses after a seismic event during the
useful life of the structures.

Performance Based Seismic Design

Is it really new? NO
Is it really good? YES

NOVEL or NOBLE?

Background

PBSD is not a new concept, however, with the

current procedures of seismic design it is not
possible to guarantee that the objectives of
the design philosophy are satisfied.
The application of the PBSD implies the use of
methods and tools which emphasize a precise
characterization of the structures and lead to
predictions using a level of technology higher
than that currently used.
The Computational Mechanics group of the
Institute of Engineering at UNAM has
developed
various
procedures
for
the
evaluation and design of structures using the
philosophy of PBSD.

Needs
Procedures for the PBSD of structures
validated
with
realistic
performance
indexes which guarantee for a given design
level a better control of the performance
objectives.

Till now the design philosophy and the

theoretical basis which regulate the PBSD
of structure have been established.
However, more work on the development

Objective
To develop a simplified method for the PBSD
which implicitly involves in its formulation the
non linear behaviour and be directly applicable
to different criteria for the objectives of PBSD.
Develop a methodology to determine design
spectra based on the concepts of PBSD and the
control of damage.
Validate the simplified method of PBSD in plane
frames, asymmetric buildings and bridges.

Performance Based Seismic Design

Seismic performance level.
Expression the maximum acceptable damage in a
structure subjected to earthquake action.

Seismic design level.

Seismic demand representing the hazard of a site

where the structure would be located.

Seismic design objectives.

Union of a performance level and a level of seismic

design.

Performance Based Seismic Design

ATC-33
FEMA 273, ATC 40
SEAOC- Vision 2000
Euro Code 8
Japanese code

EC8: Conventional Criterion

Explicitly satisfy the level of performance Life
safety under a design level rare
Limit the economic losses through a check of
the damage limits for a frequent demand
Prevent the collapse under any imaginable
demand through a Capacity Design

Performance Level
Seismic Design Level

Collapse
Fully
Life safety
prevention
operational Operational

Frequent (43 years)

50% in 30 years
Ocassional (72 years)
50% in 50 years
Rare (475 years)
10% in 50 years
Very Rare (970 years)
10% en 100 years

p N
er o
fo n
co rm a cc
Ba
n an ep
st c t
sic
Es
ru e a
O
se
ct in ble
b
je
nt
io n
ct
ia
n ew
iv
l

Cr
/R
e
iti
i
sk
ca
lS
O
bj
af
ec
et
y
tiv
O
e
bj
ec
tiv
e

Performance Level
SEAOC- Vision 2000

Life
Fully
Safety
Operational
operational
D
es

Collapse
prevention

Performance Level
SEAOC- Vision 2000
General damage

Fully functional

Vertical Elems.
Horizontal Elems.

Performance level where

essentially no damage occurs

Non structural
Elems.
Sanitary, electrical
and mechanical
systems

Life
operational Safety
D
es

Contents

Collapse
prevention

Performance Level
SEAOC- Vision 2000

Fully Operational
Performance level where
essentially no damage occurs

D max.
Distortions 0.002-0.005
Floor Accel. 0.10g
Strength Rel. <1
Non structural
behaviour

Life
Operational safety

Collapse
prevention

Performance Level
SEAOC- Vision 2000

Collapse
prevention
Extreme state of damage in

which the capacity of the

structure to sustain vertical
loads is significantly diminished.
Life
Fully
safety
Operational
Operational

General damage
Vertical Elems.
Horizontal Elems.
Non structural
Elems.
Sanitary, electrical
and mechanical
systems
Contents

Performance Level
SEAOC- Vision 2000

Collapse
prevention
Extreme state of damage in

which the capacity of the

structure to sustain vertical
loads is significantly diminished.
Life
Fully
Safety
Operational
Operational

D max
Distortions 0.02-0.04
Rotactions 0.02-0.05
Floor Accel 1.5g
Strength Rel. f()
Ductility and
dissipation of energy
(Damage indexes)

Design Level
Location of epicentres and
identification of seismic sources
Frequency of events at each
source
Distribution of the magnitude of
the events and their number
Attenuation of seismic waves
Effects of local soil conditions
Determination of the seismic
hazard

Fully
Operational
Frequent (43 years)
50% in 30 years
Ocassional (72 years)
50% in 50 years
Rare (475 years)
10% in 50 years
Very Rare (970 years)
10% in 100 years

O
bj
et
iv
o

Design Level

Completament
Funcional

1000

Periodo de Retorno (aos)

Frequent (43 years)

50% in 30 years
Ocassional (72 years)
50% in 50 years

100
Pe(50%)
Pe(20%)
Pe(10%)
Pe(5%)

Rare (475 years)

10% in 50 years

Pe(2%)
10
0

10

20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Periodo de exposicin (vida til aos)

90

Very Rare (970 years)

100
10% in 100 years

O
bj
et
iv
o

Design Level

Tasa de excedencia (1/yr)

0.1

Completament
Funcional

T=0.15 s
T=0.3 s

Frequent (43 years)

T=0.5 s

50% in 30 years

T=1.0 s
T=2.0 s
T=3.0 s
0.01

A m ax

Ocassional (72 years)

50% in 50 years
Rare (475 years)
10% in 50 years

0.001
0

100

200
Aceleracin (gal)

300

Very Rare (970 years)

400
10% in years

O
bj
et
iv
o

Design Level

Fully
Operational
Frequent (43 years)

1200

50% in 30 years

Aceleracin gal.

1000

Ocassional (72 years)

50% in 50 years

800
600
43 aos
400

72 aos

Rare (475 years)

10% in 50 years

475 aos
200

970 aos

0
0

0.5

1.5

T sec

2.5

Very Rare (970 years)

10% in 100 years

O
bj
et
iv
o
S

Design Level

Fully
Opertional
Frequent (43 years)

1200

50% in 30 years

Aceleracin gal.

1000

Ocassional (72 years)

50% in 50 years

800
600
43 aos
400

72 aos

Rare (475 years)

10% in 50 years

475 aos
200

970 aos

0
0

0.5

1.5

T sec

2.5

Very Rare (970

years)
10% in 100 years

O
bj
et
iv
o

Procedures of PBSD
Design process that relates a performance
level with a seismic design level.
a) Displacements Moehle 1992; Priestley 1998,

2000; Kowalsky 1994, 1997;

Paulay 2000; Fajfar 1999, Calvi

b) Energy

Mander 1996

c) Distortions

Heidebrecht
2000

a),b) o c) +
d) Damage

Ayala, Sandoval, Vidaud,

Basilio, Torres and Avelar

Work Assumptions

Based on concepts of structural

dynamics extended to systems with
non linear behaviour it is possible to
transform the capacity curve in the
behaviour curve of an equivalent SDFS.

The behaviour curve of an equivalent

SDFS can be idealized as bilinear.

Procedure for the

Performance Based Seismic
Design.

Determine the elastic stiffness of the structure and

transform it to the space Sa vs Sd
T=0.5s

T=1.0s

T=1.5s

T=2.0s

0.5

Sa (g)

0.4

0.3

T=3.0s

0.2

T=4.0s

0.1

0
0

10

20

30
Sd (cm )

40

50

For an assumed damage distribution calculate the slope of

the second branch of the behaviour curve
T=0.5s

T=1.0s

T=1.5s

T=2.0s

0.5

Sa (g)

0.4

0.3

T=3.0s

0.2

T=4.0s
0.1

0
0

10

20

30
Sd (cm )

40

50

Define the demand spectrum for the target

performance index
k2

k1

2
m

T
2
2
m

T
1

T12
2
T2

Based on the stiffnesses for the elastic and

ultimate state, calculate the strength spectrum
corresponding to the chosen performance index.
Relationship of the demand with the required
state of functionality.

Define the strength spectrum for the target

performance index
T=0.5s T=1.0s
1

T=1.5s

T=2.0s

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.6

R/m (g)

R/m (g)

=1

=1

0.4

=4

0.4

=2

=2
0.2

T=3.0s

=3

0.2

=3

T=4.0s

=4
0

0
0

3
T seg

20

40

60
Sd (cm )

Uniqueness of the solution

80

100

120

Superpose the elastic and inelastic branches in

the space of the demand spectrum
0.15

R/m (g)

0.1

0.05

0
0

10
Sd (cm )

15

Superpose the elastic and inelastic branches in

the space of the demand spectrum
0.15

R/m (g)

0.1

0.05

0
0

10
Sd (cm )

15

Superpose the elastic and inelastic branches in

the space of the demand spectrum
0.15

R/m (g)

0.1

0.05

0
0

10
Sd (cm )

15

Ductility Performance Index

Sa

T2

1
T1

T2

Sd

Locus of the performance points which

satisfy the target ductility
Uniqueness of the solution

Translate the second branch to the point the demand spectrum

satisfies the target performance index
0.15

0.1
R/m (g)

0.05

0
0

10
Sd (cm )

15

Behaviour curve for a design satisfying several

performance levels
0.15
T2

Sa (g)

0.1

0.05

T1

0
0

Sd (cm )

10

15

Carry out a static analysis with a distribution of lateral

forces equivalent to those acting on the structure under
seismic conditions

Strength and corresponding displacement

spectra
300

Sdy=(R/my)/

60

250

50

200

40

150

30

100

20

50

10

0
0

3
T (s)

Sd (cm )

R/m gal

R/my

6
Sdy

300

60

250

50

200

40

150

30

100

20

50

10

0
0

3
T (s)

Sdu Sd y

Sd (cm )

R/m gal

Acceleration and corresponding displacement

spectra

R/my

Sdy

Sdu

PBSD Procedure - Fundamental Mode

Sa

Sa

T1

T1

T2
Sd

Sd

Sa
R/m2

R/m1

Sd y

k
2
k1

Sd u

R

m

2
m

T1

T
1
T2

Sd

Sa

160

R/m1
R

m

2
m

T2

1 1

/ m (gals)

140

[T1, (R/m)1]

, , ,

120

R/m 1

100

80

60

40

T (seg)

20

Sd

0
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

PBSD Procedure - Modal Spectral

Analysis
Sa

Sa

T1

T1

T2
Sd

10.0

Sd

Sa (m/s )

k
2
k1

8.0

SCT-EW (erep2)
SCT-EW (ereo)

Sao / Sa2

6.0

Sa2 = (R/m )2 - (R/m)1

2
m

T2
2
m

T1

T
1
T2

4.0

(T2, Sao )

2.0

(T2, Sa2 )

160
10.0

Sa (m/s )

T (s)

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

R/m1

Sao / Sa1
Sa1 = ( R/m )1

8.0

0.0
0.0

5.0

R
m

1 1

[T1, (R/m)1]

, , ,

120

SCT-EW (erep1)

80

SCT-EW (ereo)

4.0

R

m

/ m (gals)

140

100

(T1, Sao)

6.0

60

(T1, Sa1)
40

2.0

T (s)

T (seg)

20

0.0
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

Fundamental Mode PBSD Procedure

Behaviour curve

Capacity curve

Sa

Vu

R/m 2

Vy

R/m1

desplazamiento

Sd y

Sd u

Sd

dy

du

Many Modes PBSD Procedure

260.0

Curva de comportamiento
/ m (gals)

Curva de mgdl
Curva de 1gdl

240.0
220.0
200.0

VN

180.0
160.0

T2

V1

140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0

T1

40.0
20.0

desplazamiento (cm)

0.0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

azotea

45

Vy N

Behaviour
Curve

VuN

Capacity Curves
for 1 mode and
for many modes

Determinaton of PBSD Spectra

Existing Approaches for the Design Level

Vision 2000:

To use as seismic design level demands corresponding to intensities

with a given probability of exceedence. It does not give information on

the rate of exceedence of the performance level.
This work:

To use seismic design objectives consisting in pairs of performance level

versus seismic design level corresponding to an exceedence rate of the

performance level.

Performance Based Design Spectra

Design Objective:

For an chosed design

objective, spectra with a
uniform rate of
exceedence of the
proposed performance
level
155
137. 78
120. 56

R/m

103. 33
86. 11
68. 89
51. 67
34. 44
17. 22

0.31 0.63

0.94 1 .25 1.56 1.88 2.19

2.5 2.81 3 .13

T (seg.)

3.44

3.7 5 4. 06 4.38 4.69

PBSD Spectra
Rate of exceedence of a performance
level

Expected number of times per unit time in which the performance of the structure exceeds certain
performance level when subjected to earthquakes of different magnitudes and seismic sources
defining the seismic hazard of the site.

Mui

i 1

Mo

d i M

Pr ,i r rlim M , Li dM
dM

Seismicity.
Probability of exceedence of a performance level.

PBSD Spectra
Considerations:

Region under study, the lake zone of Mexico City

The only source that contributes to the seismic hazards of Mexico City is the Guerrero gap.
The probability that the structural system develops a ductility > 4 is equal to the probability that
the system has a strength less than that required to reach such ductility.

d M
R
Pr R e R M dM
dM
Mo
Mu

Observation: It is necessary to check the uniqueness of the relationship strength-ductility.

PBSD Spectra
Evaluation of the seismic hazard

Identifify the earthquake generating zones that affect an specific site.

Evaluate the rate of seismic activity of the sourcers generators of earthquakes (rate of
exceedence of magnitudes).

Probability of exceedence of a performance level

Response of a SDFS to a set of seismic events.

Basic Design Objective

Performance level: Near to collapse, performance index = 4.
Design level: Very rare, rate of exceedence of the performance level of 1/1000.

155
137.78
120.56

R/m

103.33
86.11
68.89
51.67
34.44
17.22

0.31 0.63 0. 94 1.25 1.56 1.88 2.19

2.5 2.81 3.13 3.44 3.75 4. 06 4.38 4.69

T (seg.)

Seismicity parameters for the subduction zone of Guerrero

T00 = 80 years
M0 = 7.0
Mu = 8.4

(Elapsed time in years since the last occurrence of an earthquake with magnitude M > M0)

(Threshold magnitude)

(Maximum magnitude)

D = 7.5
F = 0.0
M = 0.27
To = 39.7 years

(D, F, Parameter defining the variation od expected magnitude with time)

(Standard deviation of magnitudes)

(Median of the time between events of magnitude M > M0)

Expected magnitude value:

E M 80 7.5

Exceedence rate of magnitudes (M)

TASA DE EXCEDENCIA DE MAGNITUDES

Ta sa d e excede ncia (1 /ao) log

0.1

0.01

1 10

1 10

4
7

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

7.7 7.8
Magnitud

7.9

8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

Exceedence rate of an earhquake of magnitude M or higher (M), for the seismic source of Guerrero

Relationship of magnitude recurrence

Characteristic earthquake model
In the model of a characteristic earthquake the rate of exceedence of the magnitude changes as a function of tme
and it is given by:

M E M T 00
M 0 1

M 0

MU M M 0

M Mu

E M T 00 max M 0, D F * Ln T 00
0

1
T0

Probability of exceedence of a performance level

Pr R e R M
Earthquake
simulations

Simulated
earthquakes

Green
Functions

Earthquake
M = 6.9

7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6,7.7,

7.8, 7.9, 8.0, 8.1, 8.2

Registered 25 April
1989 at the SCT station
in Mexico City

1000 simulations
for each
magnitude

Probability of exceedence of a performance level

0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

R/m

R / mu

2.00

T2

1.80

1.60

R / my

1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40

T1

0.20
0.00
0.0

Sd y

Sdu

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

Sd
1.40
1.20
1.00

4
5%
23 %

0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00

Strengths PDF

f (R / m )

Distribucin de probabilidad

R/ m

4
5%
23 %
8.1

Probability density functions of strengths obtained for periods of 0.05 to 5 s and a M = 8.1 demand

Probability of exceedence of a performance level

f (Re)
0.03

R_

P Re R 1 P Re R

0.02

P Re R

40

80

Re

120

160

200

Re

P (Re > R)
1

M 8.1
T 2 seg .

1 - F (R)

P Re R 1 F R

0.01

0.5

40

80

120
R

160

200

Uniform Hazard Spectra

8.4

7.0

d M
dM

Pr R e R M dM

Uniform Hazard Spectrum

Seismic design objective: performance level ( = 4) and design level very rare (rate of exceedence
1/1000).
ESPECTRO D E PELIGRO UNIFORME

165
148.5

4
5%
23 %

132
115.5

R/m

99
82.5
66
49.5
33
16.5
0.05

0.43

0.81

1.19

1.57

1.95

2.33
2.72
T (seg.)

Tasa de excedencia = 0.001 / ao, Tr = 1000 aos

3.1

3.48

3.86

4.24

4.62

Uniform Hazards Spectra

ESPECTROS DE PELIGRO UNIFORME

165

4
5%
23 %

148.5
132
115.5

R/m

99
82.5
66
49.5
33
16.5
0.05

0.43

0.81

1.19

Tasa de
Tasa de
Tasa de
Tasa de

excedencia
excedencia
excedencia
excedencia

1.57

1.95

2.33
2.72
T (seg.)
= 0.001 / ao, Tr = 1 000 aos
= 0.002 / ao, Tr = 5 00 aos
= 0.005 / ao, Tr = 2 00 aos
= 0.01 / a o, T r = 10 0 aos

3.1

3.48

3.86

4.24

4.62

E xceedencerate (1/year)

Exceedence curves for different vibration

periods.

4
5%
23 %

R/m ductility 4 (cm/sec2)

Illustrative Examples

Medium Height Plane Frame

Plan

Elevation

Life safety

Rare (475 years)

10% in 50 years

SCT-EW

Acel. (gals)

200
100
0
-100
-200

20

40

60

t (Seg.)

80

100

120

140

Ilustrative Example
SCT-EW, =4, =0.24

60

300

250

50

250

200

40

200

150

30

100

20

50

10

0
0

3
T (s)

R/m gal

300

Sd (cm )

R/m gal

Force-Desplacements Spectra
(Constant Ductility)

Curva de
Comportamiento

150
100

50

0
0

10

20

30
Sd cm

40

50

60

Strength demand in structural elements

C arg a gravitacional

Gravitational Loading

FyVy
i

FuVu
FyVy
i -
i

Lateral elastic

Lateral - elastic

Table of Resisting Moments (t-m)

Beams
Columns

Left

Level

Central

Right
j

M+

M-

M+

M-

M+

M-

M+

M-

M+

M-

M+

M-

M+

M-

200

200

100

150

100

150

90

140

90

140

100

150

100

150

200

200

30

85

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

85

120

120

30

85

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

85

120

120

125

180

25

70

25

75

25

75

25

70

125

180

100

100

15

70

20

60

15

70

15

70

20

60

15

70

150

150

50

105

10

50

90

140

90

140

10

50

50

105

100

100

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

80

30

80

50

50

20

50

20

50

20

50

20

50

20

50

20

50

Illustrative Example
Proposed Damage
Distribution

Obtained Damage
Distibution
Evaluation Method

Obtained Damage
Distibution
Step by Step Analysis

17 storey RC Frame
17
16

60x60

15
14

8.0 m

13

75x75

12
11
10

8.0 m

@3.20 m

90x90

8
7
6

8.0 m

5
4

110x110

3
2

8.0 m

8.0 m

8.0 m

1
4.0 m

Design Forces (stage 2)

Level

Force

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

2.62
4.29
6.52
9.01
11.59
14.06
15.79
17.34
19.43
21.78
23.81
25.88
27.59
28.36
28.49
28.77
28.24

Design Forces
roof = 5.44 ton/m
floors = 6.33 ton/m

Gravitational
Loading

Base shear
V = 408.64
ton

Stage
1

Base shear
V = 313.57
ton

Stage
2

Asymmetric Building
Principal beams (0.8 X 0.4 m2)
Secondary beams (0.6 X 0.25 m2)
Columns (0.8 X 0.8 m2)

12.8

A
7.0
8.4

B
CM
7.0
C
7.0
D

8.0

8.00

8.0
2

8.00
4

Intersorey Drifts

Frame

Design A, Dynamic Analysis

with 30% in X and 100% in Y of
SCT-EW

Design A, Dynamic Analysis with

100% in X and 30% in Y of SCTEW
Evaluation II

Interstorey Drifts

Design B, Dynamic Analysis with

100% in X of SCT-NS and 100% in Y
of SCT-EW

Design B, Dynamic Analysis with

100% in X of SCT-EW and 100% in
Y of SCT-NS

Analized Bridge

Strength Spectra
R/m

12.00

ID = 0
ID = 0.1
ID= 0.2
ID = 0.3
ID = 0.4

10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00

T (seg)
1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

R/ m

Strength Spectra
ID = 0

12.00

ID = 0.4

10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00

1.87

0.00
0.4153
0.00
1.00

T (seg)

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

R/ m

Behaviour Curve
3.00
2.12

2.00

1.87

1.00
0.0084

0.0114

0.00
0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

D (m)

Conclusions

With this method it is possible to know if a given

performance index can be reached for a structure
and a seismic demand.

With this method it is possible to control

displacements and interstorey drifts and thus satisfy
the design objectives.

In general the method does not directly guarantee

local performances e.g. it is not possible to control in
a direct manner the magnitude of plastic rotations in
elements, only their distribution within the structure.

Conclusions
The

results obtained with this method suggest

the need to consider in the definition of design
spectra the pos-yielding strength ratio of the
capacity curve of the structure.

As

the nominal strengths obtained with this

method need to be modified to standardize
the design of a structure, it is necessary to
check that the modified design satisfies the
performance
levels
under
these
new
conditions.

Conclusions

The proposed method has the advantage to be able to

control the damage in the structure. This characteristic
makes it possible that a single design may satisfy different
performance levels.

The modal spectral version of the method can be applied to

more general cases in which the contribution of higher
modes is important.

The recursive application of this method allows to control

the economic implications of seismic design when varying
the intensity and distribution of damage, balancing the
initial costs with those of repairing the damage and colateral
losses due to the lack of functionality after a design
earthquake occurs.

Conclusions

It is shown that it is possible to reach sismic design objectives

considering as design level the corresponding to a rate of
exceedence of a proposed performance level.

Different damage configurations correspond to different slopes

of the secon (inelastic) branchof the behaviour curve and, as a
consequence, different design spectra.

From a practical point of view it is not possible to exactly satisfy

with a single design more than two design levels.

Recommendations

Validate this method for other performance indexes, for

which it is necessary to develop the design spectra for
these performance indexes.

Investigate further the definition and validation of the

performance levels.

Investigate seismic design levels with different

probabilities of exceedence of other design levels.

Considered the assumed relationship of the

parameter in the Park y Ang damage index with the
stiffness degradation of the structure evaluate the
range of values of this parameter in real structures.

Recommendations
Investigate the relationship strength ductility as
it is possible that a given ductility is reached with
more than one strength.

Develop and validate a methodology which allows

to satisfy with a single design different performance
levels.

Calculate

design spectra for other ductilities and

for other performance indexes.
Obtain design spectra for different values and
from them reduction factors, funtion of , to difine
design spectra based on a reference nominal
spectrum.

Practical Considerations
Consider for the calculation of nominal
design strengths for the elements realistic
behaviour models for the concrete and steel.
Whenever it is impossible to reach a
performance index associated to the global
behaviour of the structure, it is necessary to
modify the structure accordingly and repeat
the procedure.