Post on 01-Oct-2015
description
transcript
RELUIS Linea di ricerca NRELUIS Linea di ricerca N.4.4JulyJuly 2007 Meeting2007 Meeting
RomaRoma3 Luglio 20073 Luglio 2007
EUCENTRE Univeris delgistudi di Pavia
12 unit12 unit di ricercadi ricercaTask Argomento UR 1 Principi, aspetti generali, azione Pavia
2 Strutture in calcestruzzo, a telaio Bologna 3 Strutture in calcestruzzo, a pareti e
miste Ferrara
4 Strutture prefabbricate Brescia
5 Struttura in muratura Genova 6 Strutture in acciaio Napoli 7 Strutture miste acciaio calcestruzzo Benevento 8 Strutture in legno Trento 9 Ponti esistenti e di nuova costruzione Milano Poli 10 Strutture sismicamente isolate Basilicata 11 Fondazioni superficiali e profonde Milano Poli 12 Strutture di sostegno Perugia
Review of programme LINEA IVReview of programme LINEA IV11 ANNOANNO 22 ANNOANNO 33 ANNOANNO
DefinitionDefinition of of generalgeneral aspectsaspectsDefinitionDefinition of of specificspecific aspectsaspectsSelectionSelection of case of case studiesstudiesDesign Design usingusingtraditionaltraditionalmethodsmethodsDesign using Design using displacementdisplacement--based methodsbased methodsNonNon--linear timelinear time--history analyseshistory analysesIdentification and Identification and discussion of discussion of issuesissuesSpecificSpecificimprovementsimprovements totothe the displacementdisplacementbasedbased methodmethodReRe--designdesign and and verificationverificationDevelopmentDevelopment of of specificspecificguidelinesguidelinesDevelopment of a Development of a model code and model code and general general commentarycommentary
me Fu F Fn rKi he Ki Ke y d
(a) SDOF Simulation (b) Effective Stiffness Ke
1 2 3 4 5 6Displacement Ductility
0
20
40
60
D
a
m
p
i
n
g
(
%
)
0 1 2 3 4 5Period (seconds)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
)
5%
10%
15%
20%
30%
d
Te
Elasto-Plastic
Steel Frame
Concrete Frame
Unbonded Prestressing
(c) Equivalent damping vs. ductility (d) Design Displacement Spectra
DDBD fundamentalsDDBD fundamentals
Sviluppo del progetto Sviluppo del progetto
Strutture a telaio in c.a. a differente Strutture a telaio in c.a. a differente numero di piani e campate (in numero di piani e campate (in particolare, da 1 a 6 piani e da 1 a 3 particolare, da 1 a 6 piani e da 1 a 3 campate);campate);
I materiali sono quelli comunemente I materiali sono quelli comunemente utilizzati nella pratica corrente utilizzati nella pratica corrente (calcestruzzo Rck 300 ed acciaio (calcestruzzo Rck 300 ed acciaio FeFe b b 44 k;44 k;
1.1. STRUTTURE CONSIDERATESTRUTTURE CONSIDERATE(progettate secondo la procedura DDBD)(progettate secondo la procedura DDBD)
Analisi dinamiche non lineariAnalisi dinamiche non lineariTelaio 36 Telaio 36 -- Sintesi dei risultatiSintesi dei risultati
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 40
1
2
3
4
5
6
Drift di piano [%]
n piano Inviluppo drift massimi
Sismi tipo 2 - ag = 0.35
Sismi tipo 1.1 - ag = 0.35
Sismi tipo 1.2 - ag = 0.35
Sismi con Te>4s - ag = 0.35
Sismi tipo 2 - ag = 0.50
0 50 100 150 200 250 3000
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Spostamento orizzontale [mm]
altezza della struttura [cm] Inviluppo spostamenti massimi assoluti
Sismi tipo 2 - ag = 0.35
Sismi tipo 1.1 - ag = 0.35
Sismi tipo 1.2 - ag = 0.35
Sismi con Te>4s - ag = 0.35
Sismi tipo 2 - ag = 0.50
Nelle due figure seguenti sono sovrapposti i valori medi degli inviluppi degli spostamenti e degli interstory drift ottenuti per 4 diversi gruppi di sismi.
ResearchResearch UnitUnit 3: RC 3: RC WallsWalls & & MixedMixed
20 storey case study wall 20 storey case study wall structure examined.structure examined.
ForceForce--Based Design and Based Design and Displacement Based Design Displacement Based Design undertaken.undertaken.
NonNon--linear timelinear time--history history analyses undertaken to analyses undertaken to consider performance.consider performance.
Capacity design implications Capacity design implications considered.considered. Snellezza del muro h/l = 10,7
RU 3: Risultati RU 3: Risultati -- FBDFBD
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
A
l
t
e
z
z
a
[
m
]
Momento [kNm]
An. Dinamica (3 acc. Naturali)An. Dinamica (7 acc. Naturali)An. Dinamica (3 acc. Artificiali)An. Dinamica (7 acc. Artificiali)Approccio agli spostamentiAmplificazione dinamica
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
A
l
t
e
z
z
a
[
m
]
Taglio [kN]
An. Dinamica (3 acc. Naturali)An. Dinamica (7 acc. Naturali)An. Dinamica (3 acc. Artificiali)An. Dinamica (7 acc. Artificiali)Approccio agli spostamentiAmplificazione dinamica
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V
a
l
o
r
i
d
i
d
u
t
t
i
l
i
t
[
-
]
Accelerogrammi artificialiDuttilit richiesta Duttilit richiesta media Duttilit disponibile
Confronto tra la duttilit richiesta dalla serie di 7 accelerogrammi artificiali, la duttilit richiesta media e la duttilit
disponibile calcolata con approccio alle forze per CDA
FBD drifts not reported!!!
RU 3: Risultati RU 3: Risultati -- DBDDBD
02468
1012141618
1 2 3 4 5 6 7V
a
l
o
r
i
d
i
d
u
t
t
i
l
i
t
[
-
]
Accelerogrammi artificialiDuttilit richiesta Duttilit richiesta media Duttilit disponibile
Confronto tra la duttilit richiesta dalla serie di 7 accelerogrammi artificiali, la duttilitrichiesta media e la duttilit disponibile calcolata con approccio agli spostamenti
RU 3: CONFRONTI CON DIVERSI PROGRAMMI DI RU 3: CONFRONTI CON DIVERSI PROGRAMMI DI CALCOLOCALCOLO
Again design driftappears to bearound 1.5%
Definition of typical Italian precast concrete building layoutsDefinition of typical Italian precast concrete building layoutsThree different case studies:Three different case studies:
One storey PC building One storey PC building with with double teedouble tee roof roof elementselements
One storey PC building One storey PC building with with omegaomega roof roof elementselements
One storey PC building One storey PC building with precast concrete with precast concrete columns and long span columns and long span wood beamswood beams
7
5
0
0,00 m
8,40 m1.1.
2.2.
3.3.
ResearchResearch UnitUnit 4: 4: PrePre--castcast structuresstructures
M=Me
h=he
d
Ke, Ke,
d
h=he
M=Me
Kfoundation
Kfoundation
M=Me
h=he
d
Ke, Ke,
d
h
M
Kfoundation
Me
he
1.1.
3.3.
2.2.
4.4.
RESEARCH PHASE DEFINITION
Columns fixed at the base and pinned at the top, the foundation flexibility is not taken into account.
As in phase 1 but considering the effect of foundation flexibility
Take into account the different types of base connection (pocket foundation, grouted sleeves); foundation flexibility taken into account
Considering the effect of changing the inflection point along the column due to the presence of column to beam connections.
Unit di ricerca N.4STRUTTURE PREFABBRICATE
Prof. Paolo RIVAIng. Andrea BELLERI
COLUMN TO FOUNDATION CONNECTIONS
40Section B-B
4
0
9
9
2 9
8
9
St. 16/10 L=3306
10 22 L=7218 L=3719
22 L=19526 L=171
7
8
St. 16/10 L=250
St. 8/10 L=1662
5
8 L=1304
PF8
8
2
4
6
GroutEMACO S55
B
5
B
7
2
8
PF Force-Drift
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
-8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Drift (%)
L
a
t
e
r
a
l
f
o
r
c
e
(
k
N
)
Theoretical yield
P-
Planned to use experimental results to calibrate the parameters of the hysteresis rule that will be used in the Finite Element analyses to validate the DDBD procedure .
Unit di ricerca N.4STRUTTURE PREFABBRICATE
Prof. Paolo RIVAIng. Andrea BELLERI
FUTURE EFFORTSFUTURE EFFORTS1. Define a parametric procedure to determine the true column
point of inflection (due to the presence of top connections).
2. Model the behaviour of different types of column to foundation connection.
3. Take into account foundation flexibility.
4. Define the DDBD procedure to take into account different column to base connection types and validate it by means of time history analyses.
5. Analyse the other case studies.
6. Continue the experimental survey.
Unit di ricerca N.4STRUTTURE PREFABBRICATE
Prof. Paolo RIVAIng. Andrea BELLERI
ResearchResearch UnitUnit 5: 5: MasonryMasonry structuresstructures
Displacement and energy dissipation considered.Displacement and energy dissipation considered. Case study structures under examination.Case study structures under examination.
RU5: Case RU5: Case StudyStudy structurestructure 1 1 New New ConstructionConstruction
2060
1
2
0
0
PLAN (ground storey)
4
3
0
3
3
0
3
3
0
3
3
0
Principal elevation
RU5: Case RU5: Case StudyStudy structurestructure 2 2 ExistingExisting ConstructionConstruction
Structure is a section of an existing solid block Structure is a section of an existing solid block masonry building.masonry building.
Building has undergone changes with time and Building has undergone changes with time and possesses several weak elements and irregular possesses several weak elements and irregular characteristics.characteristics.
(h sotto trave=312)
a
(h =345)(h sotto trave=324)
3
3
0
1
8
2
1
1
0
1
8
1
CAMERA
203
129
a=14
+0.33
213108
1
7
9
1
1
2
(h =345)(h sotto trave=324)
CAMERA
1
7
7
1
1
0
(h =350)CAMERA
102
208
210
1 08
CAMERA (h putrella=0000)(h voltino=00000)
127
203
2
6
0
2
2
5
97CAMERA
(h sotto trave=314)(h =340)
209
2
9
8
1
2
0
CAMERA
(h sotto trave=315(h =340)
a
ANDRONE(h chiave=348)(h imposta=291)
3
2
0
2
0
0
(h trave=300)
CAMERA (h =325)
0.00
p= 30
a= 17.5
2
2
3
1
1
7
CAMERA (h chiave=346)(h imposta=244)
1
1
0
2
6
0
128
236
+0.26
PLAN (ground storey)
180180 360 200230
1150
1
1
6
0
3
0
5
4
7
0
3
8
5
2
3
0
2
3
0
2
3
0
Elevation of structural wallTransverse section
ResearchResearch UnitUnit 6: Steel 6: Steel structuresstructures
Various displacement considerations and relations have Various displacement considerations and relations have been developed for different frame configurations.been developed for different frame configurations.
A trial DBD method has been developed for bucklingA trial DBD method has been developed for buckling--restrained brace (BRB), moment resisting frame (MRF) restrained brace (BRB), moment resisting frame (MRF) type structures and now concentrically braced frame (CBF) type structures and now concentrically braced frame (CBF) structures. structures.
Recent work has concentrated on design of CBF systems.Recent work has concentrated on design of CBF systems. 5 & 105 & 10--storey case study structures have been designed storey case study structures have been designed
and methodology performance assessed.and methodology performance assessed.
RU6: CBF RU6: CBF considerationsconsiderations
Compression brace buckling
Tension brace yieldingUltimate state (max compression brace ductility)
Possible target pointVb
ueff
Individual brace response:
comp
tens
Typical Pushover
2.4 8.3F = +c
r a b = +
( )1 2.4 8.32 2
c F
y
= = +
EF
rKL y =
RU6: Displacement contributionsRU6: Displacement contributions
Storey drift components: column Storey drift components: column axial deformations, brace axial axial deformations, brace axial deformations and beam middeformations and beam mid--span span deflection.deflection.
r l r li,d i,d br,i,d b,i,d c,i,d c,i,d
i,d i ii i
22 2
v v vtg tg
L sen h
+= + + +
r lb,i,d c,i,d c,i,d 2
br,i,d i i,d yi
22
vsen
h ++ + =
Relation between strain quantities Relation between strain quantities and brace ductility.and brace ductility.
RU6: Case study RU6: Case study applicationsapplications
3500
3500
3500
3500
4000
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5ud (m)
V
b
(
k
N
)
Design
Pushover with brittle braces
Actual pushover
10 storey structure10 storey structureResults for accurate Results for accurate
iterative methoditerative method
0123456789
10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5u i (m)
F
l
o
o
r
TargetRHA Average2s_R12s_R22s_R32s_R42s_R52s_R62s_R7
Tension
0123456789
1011
-15 -13 -11 -9 -7 -5 -3 -1 1 3 5 7 9 f
F
l
o
o
r
Target
Capacity
RHA
Compression
RU6: Case study RU6: Case study applicationsapplications
3500
3500
3500
3500
4000
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
10 storey structure10 storey structureResults for simplified Results for simplified
methodmethod
0100200300400500600700800900
1000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25ueff (m)
V
b
(
K
N
)
Design
Analysis
0123456789
10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5u i (m)
F
l
o
o
r
TargetRHA Average2s_R12s_R22s_R32s_R42s_R52s_R62s_R7
Tension
0123456789
1011
-15 -13 -11 -9 -7 -5 -3 -1 1 3 5 7 9 f
F
l
o
o
r
Target
Capacity
RHA
Compression
Pushover with real sections and residual strength for compression
diagonals at the design displacements
Research Unit 7: Composite Research Unit 7: Composite StructuresStructures
Case study structures described.Case study structures described. Force basedForce based--design carried out. Intended to verify design design carried out. Intended to verify design
using displacementusing displacement--based assessment.based assessment. 3D structure modelled in SAP2000.3D structure modelled in SAP2000. Parameters expected to influence behaviour of structures Parameters expected to influence behaviour of structures
identified.identified.
RU7: Case study structuresRU7: Case study structures
9-storeys of 3.5m (ground storey 4m)
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
0,00
+ 4,00
+ 7,50
+ 11,00
+ 14,50
+ 18,00
+ 21,50
+ 25,00
+ 28,50
+ 32,00
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
4
,
0
0
3
,
4
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
31,00
7,006,005,006,007,00
3
2
,
0
0
Moment resisting frame in longitudinal direction
HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320
HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320
HE B 320
HE B 320
HE B 320
HE B 280 HE B 280
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
3
0
0
HE B 280HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320
HE B 280HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320HE B 280
HE B 280HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320HE B 320
HE B 280HE B 280
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450
IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450 IPE 450I
P
E
3
0
0
I
P
E
4
5
0
I
P
E
4
5
0
Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6
X1
X2
X3
X4
X5
7,00 6,00 5,00 6,00 7,00
31,00
6
,
0
0
6
,
0
0
6
,
0
0
6
,
0
0
2
4
,
0
0
Y
X
Pianta piano tipo
PLAN
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
H
E
B
2
8
0
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3
x 12,5 168,3 x 12,5
168,3 x 12,5168,
3 x 12
,5
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
IPE 300 IPE 300
IPE 300 IPE 300
IPE 300 IPE 300
IPE 300 IPE 300
IPE 300 IPE 300
IPE 300 IPE 300
IPE 300 IPE 300
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
2
,
9
0
3
,
4
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
0
5
3
,
0
5
3
,
0
5
3
,
0
5
3
,
0
5
3
,
0
5
3
,
0
5
IPE 300
IPE 300
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 450
IPE 300
IPE 300
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
H
E
B
3
2
0
+ 32,00
+ 28,50
+ 25,00
+ 21,50
+ 18,00
+ 14,50
+ 11,00
+ 7,50
+ 4,00
0,00
4
,
0
0
3
,
5
0
3
,
5
5
3
,
0
5
6,00 6,00 6,00 6,00
3
2
,
0
0
24,00
Braced frames in transverse direction
RU7: General design progressRU7: General design progress Case study structures dimensioned using a forceCase study structures dimensioned using a force--based based
design approach.design approach.
HE B 280
280
2
8
0
10,5
1
8
2
4
4
1
8
R25
12,5168
,3
Profilo circolare cavo formato a caldo
IPE 300
1
0
,
7
7,1
3
0
0
150
2
7
8
,
6
1
0
,
7
R15
2
0
,
5
2
7
9
2
0
,
5
300
3
2
0
HE B 320
IPE 450
1
4
,
6
4
2
0
,
8
1
4
,
6
4
5
0
190
600
150
61,5 88,5
5
5
Lamiera grecata tipoA 55/P 600 HI-BOND
t = 1.5 mm Fe 430 hP =55 mm
Rete elettrosaldata 10/25
600
5
5
1
5
0
Solaio compostocalcestruzzo-lamiera grecata
Research Unit 8: Timber StructuresResearch Unit 8: Timber Structures
Case study structures selected & described. Case study structures selected & described. Characteristics of timber joint studied Characteristics of timber joint studied important important
deformation parameters obtained. Design deformation parameters obtained. Design displacement considerations made.displacement considerations made.
DisplacementDisplacement--based design methodology based design methodology developing.developing.
MonteMonte--Carlo simulations to probabilistically Carlo simulations to probabilistically evaluate performance of case study structures evaluate performance of case study structures currently underway.currently underway.
RU8: Portal frame case studyRU8: Portal frame case study
Radial joint behaviour studied intended that joints yield.
RU8: Displacement considerationsRU8: Displacement considerations Yield displacement composed of deformations from joint Yield displacement composed of deformations from joint
+ frame. This is added to acceptable plastic deformation + frame. This is added to acceptable plastic deformation to give design displacement.to give design displacement.
Yield characteristics of single bolt control system yield Yield characteristics of single bolt control system yield dispdisp.. Strength of joint can be controlled (without significantly Strength of joint can be controlled (without significantly
changing yield displacement) by changing number of bolts.changing yield displacement) by changing number of bolts.
RU8: Factors influencing target displacementsRU8: Factors influencing target displacements
RU8: Factors influencing target displacementsRU8: Factors influencing target displacements
Research Unit 9: New & existing Research Unit 9: New & existing bridgesbridges
DDBD of regular concrete bridges. Comparison with force DDBD of regular concrete bridges. Comparison with force based design. Verification with time history analyses.based design. Verification with time history analyses.
DDBD of irregular concrete bridges. Comparison with force DDBD of irregular concrete bridges. Comparison with force based design. Verification with time history analyses.based design. Verification with time history analyses.
DDBD of long span concrete bridges with limited ductile DDBD of long span concrete bridges with limited ductile piers and with/without inpiers and with/without in--plane movement joints. plane movement joints. Comparison with force based design. Verification with time Comparison with force based design. Verification with time history analyses.history analyses.
Activities of RU9 in the second yearActivities of RU9 in the second year
Parametric study: regular bridges
H=7.5 m, 10 m, 12.5 m, 15 m
Activities of RU9 in the second yearActivities of RU9 in the second yearCalcestruzzo
Materialsfc 40 [MPa] Resistenza a compressione Ec 30000 [MPa] Modulo elastico Wc 25 [kN/m3] Peso specifico Acciaio fy 455 [MPa] Sforzo di snervamento Es 200000 [MPa] Modulo elastico dbl 43 [mm] Diametro barre longitudinali
Abutmens: elastic behaviour, stiffness K=75000 kN/m, damping 8%, displacement limit 100 mm
Deck: Iyy=44 m4 Pier diameter: from 2 m to 2.7 m
Pier design displacement limit:4% of drift
Some results: regular bridge
SDOF parametersH [m] 7.5 10 12.5 15sys [%] 10.5 8.5 7.5 6.4Dd [m] 0.24 0.32 0.399 0.479Meff [ton] 2909 2948 2994 3039Teff [s] 1.4 1.73 2.08 2.38Keff [kN/m] 59005 38754 27313 21109VB [kN] 14180 12394 10908 10101SS [%] 31.4 45.2 62.7 79.3
H = 7.5 mA1 P1 P2 P3 A2
H[m] - 15.00 7.50 15.00 -D[m] - 2.50 2.50 2.50 -Mass[ton] 357 928 986 928 357D - 1.27 6.99 1.27 - [%] 8.00 7.66 18.05 7.66 8.00V [kN] 2223 2432 4864 2432 2223M [kN*m] - 36477 36477 36477 -Keff [kN/m] 75000 11825 16224 11825 75000
H = 10.0 mA1 P1 P2 P3 A2
H[m] - 20.00 10.00 20.00 -D[m] - 2.50 2.50 2.50 -Mass[ton] 357 949 997 949 357D - 0.96 5.39 0.96 - [%] 8.00 5.00 17.15 5.00 8.00V [kN] 2800 1660 3471 1660 2800M [kN*m] - 33207 34709 33207 -Keff [kN/m] 75000 6094 8681 6094 75000
H =12.5 mA1 P1 P2 P3 A2
H[m] - 25.00 12.50 25.00 -D[m] - 2.50 2.50 2.50 -Mass[ton] 357 970 1007 970 357D - 0.77 4.38 0.77 - [%] 8.00 5.00 16.31 5.00 8.00V [kN] 3420 885 2299 885 3420M [kN*m] - 22134 28737 22134 -Keff [kN/m] 75000 2603 4596 2603 75000
H = 15.0 mA1 P1 P2 P3 A2
H[m] - 30.00 15.00 30.00 -D[m] - 2.50 2.50 2.50 -Mass[ton] 357 991 1018 991 357D - 0.64 3.69 0.64 - [%] 8.00 5.00 15.51 5.00 8.00V [kN] 4006 409 1273 409 4006M [kN*m] - 12282 19091 12282 -Keff [kN/m] 75000 1006 2120 1006 75000
Displacement Pattern Limit Limit Yield
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Position [m]
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
[
m
]
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Position [m]
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
[
m
]
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Position [m]
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
[
m
]
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Position [m]
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
[
m
]
Elastic Modal Superposition witha and w/o R Effective and Modified Modal Superposition
H = 7.5 m
H = 10.0 m
H =12.5 m
H = 15.0 m
Design THA Average EMS with R EMS no R EffMS MMS
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
0 40 90 140 190 240 2800
1
2
3
4x 105
Position [m]
M
o
m
e
n
t
[
k
N
*
m
]
Better moment prediction when using effective-stiffness modal superposition (EffMS)
Some results: irregular bridge
Long span concrete bridges with limited ductile piers and with/without in-plane movement joints
Bridge dimension and shape from real condition limited ductility, significant irregularities in span and pier heights.
Some different assumption in comparison previous analyses: moment capacities are different at different pier bases. The distribution of shear force is estimated by:
P,iP,i
P,i
VH
P,iP,i
P,i
VH (Ductile column)
(Elastic column) P,i P ,iP ,i
P ,i
VH
P,i=moment capacity of ith pier as a percentage of the moment capacity of critical pier.
discretized pier elements with lumped masses have to be considered
Secant stiffness from:
23N 1 N 1i i i
c sec top B ii 1 i 1
F h hHE I V F H3 2 3
= =
= +
3D fiber element model for non linear time-history analyses
Software: OPENSEESversion 1.7.3 (Fenves et al 2006)
A Revised Effective Modal Superposition is applied: effective modal superposition with 5% damped acceleration spectrum is used to estimate the abutment shear and deck transverse moment. effective modal superposition with design displacement spectrum scaled down by appropriate system damping is used to calculate the flexural moment demand at the potential plastic hinge locations (when higher modes are equally important as first inelastic mode)
Deck properties
Pier properties
Substitute structure parameters
Some results: bridge with in-plan movement joint
X-axis Y-axis Z-axis19.24 10-set 297.44 647.4
Cross sectional area (m2)
Second moment of area (m4) about local
sys (%) sys (m) Msys (Mt) M (%)8.93 0.726 10230 39.08
Tsys(s) Ksys (s) VB (kN) SS (%)4 25250 18330 12.70%
Abut 1 Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4 Abut 2M
(MNm) --- 570 470 440 390 ---
D (rad/m) --- 0.81x10-3 1.12x10-3 0.63x10-3 0.55x10-3 --- (%) --- 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 ---
Y-axis Z-axis thickness4 7 1.2 20.64
X-axis Y-axis Z-axis10-set 101.36 35.76
Dimension (m) along local Sectional area (m2)
Second moment of area (m4)
Abut 1 Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4 Abut 2V (kN) 4850 29500 22500 16600 19400 3100
MN (MNm) --- 1355 960 700 880 --- (%) --- 4 2.5 2.5 2.5 ---
Revised effective modal superposition results
FBD results
Research Unit 10: Structures with Research Unit 10: Structures with passive control (isolation) devicespassive control (isolation) devices
Tentative displacementTentative displacement--based design methodology based design methodology for both isolated bridges and isolated buildings for both isolated bridges and isolated buildings proposed. proposed.
Building case study structure selected (4Building case study structure selected (4--storey RC storey RC frame), bridge case study structure still being frame), bridge case study structure still being decided on. decided on.
Different isolation systems listed & equivalent Different isolation systems listed & equivalent viscous damping considered.viscous damping considered.
Some issues identified for further study.Some issues identified for further study. Important phases of research listed.Important phases of research listed. Collaboration with other groups not requested. Collaboration with other groups not requested.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600Shear (KN)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
2nd floor
DDBD ULD TLD JPN SAP 2
4th floor
3rd floor
1st floor
Isolator
Case StudyCase Study
Previous Activities of RU10Previous Activities of RU10Implementation and verification of a DDBD procedure for BIImplementation and verification of a DDBD procedure for BI--
BuildingsBuildingsDiscrepancies between DDBD predictions and NTHA resultsDiscrepancies between DDBD predictions and NTHA results
SAP2000
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1 5 0 2 00 2 5 0 3 00
Target Displacement/Limit Displacement (%)
(
m
m
)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
7000 5 00 1 000 1 5 00 2 000
40% 60% 100%80%
(
m
m
)Elasto-Plastic system (EP) with r=1.5%
1.1. Rubber Devices (RD)Rubber Devices (RD)
2.2. Added Damping Added Damping RDsRDs (ADRD)(ADRD)
3.3. ElastoElasto--Plastic systems (EP)Plastic systems (EP)
4.4. LeadLead--Rubber Bearings (LRB)Rubber Bearings (LRB)
5.5. SteelSteel--PTFE Sliding Bearings (SB) + RDPTFE Sliding Bearings (SB) + RD
6.6. SB + SMA devices with/out viscous dampers (VD)SB + SMA devices with/out viscous dampers (VD)
7.7. Friction Pendulum Systems (FPS) with/out VDFriction Pendulum Systems (FPS) with/out VD
8.8. SB + Steel Hysteretic Device (SHD)SB + Steel Hysteretic Device (SHD)
SAPi
SAPAV
DDBD
Dt/DlimDDBDULDTLDJPN
SAP
STOREY SHEAR STOREY SHEAR FORCES FORCES
Isolation Isolation SystemsSystems
base displ.floor
Activities of RU10 in the second yearActivities of RU10 in the second year
Experimental Shaking table and PseudoExperimental Shaking table and Pseudo--Dynamic Tests on different reducedDynamic Tests on different reduced--
scale Models of multiscale Models of multi--storeysstoreys BIBI--BuildingsBuildings
MOTIVATION: observation of appreciable discrepancies in terms of both max. base displacement and max. storey shear forces between DDBD predictions and NTHA results for some Isolation Systems
Evaluation of enhanced equivalent static force
Distributions
Evaluation of enhanced
damping ratios &/or damping
reduction factors
Experimental Experimental
Numerical Numerical
Same iterative procedure as in Same iterative procedure as in BlandonBlandon and Priestley [2005]and Priestley [2005]
FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS OF THE DDBD FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS OF THE DDBD PROCEDURE FOR BIPROCEDURE FOR BI--BUILDINGSBUILDINGS
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
NTHAsNTHAs of 3of 3--, 5, 5--, 8, 8--storey building Modelsstorey building Modelsequipped with different equipped with different ISsISs (SAP2000)(SAP2000)
BI-buildings with inelastic superstructure
Activities of RU10 in the second yearActivities of RU10 in the second year
ElastoElasto--Plastic systems (EP)Plastic systems (EP)
SB + SMA devices without viscous dampersSB + SMA devices without viscous dampers
Results of the studyResults of the study
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Ashour
Tolis Faccioli
SSN
prEC8
FR-ESP
CHINA
JPN
N-H
Wu Hanson
EC8
Iter. Proc.
optim.i
f
i
f
/
i
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
AshourTolis FaccioliSSNprEC8FR-ESPCHINAJPNN-HWu HansonEC8optim.r=0r=1.5r=3r=5r=10
f
i (%)0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
i
f
/
i
=10
=20
=30
=40
=50
=60
=70
i
f
/
i
i
f
%%
%
%%
Activities of RU10 in the second yearActivities of RU10 in the second year
ElastoElasto--Plastic systems (EP)Plastic systems (EP) SB + SMA devices without VDSB + SMA devices without VD
Results of the studyResults of the study
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Dy=10mm, r=1%Dd/Dlim=40%
Dy=20mm, r=0%Dd/Dlim=60%
Dy=10mm, r=1%Dd/Dlim=60%
Dy=15mm, r=3%Dd/Dlim=60%
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Reviewed DDBD
DDBD
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Dy=5mm, r=5%b=0.5, FR=10%Dd/Dlim=40%
Dy=5mm, r=3%b=0.3, FR=5%Dd/Dlim=60%
Dy=10mm, r=5%b=0.5, FR=2.5%
Dd/Dlim 80%
Dy=5mm, r=1%b=0.5, FR=2.5%Dd/Dlim=100%
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Reviewed DDBD
DDBD
DA
Vm
ax(S
AP)
/
Dt
exact predictions
ERROR
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
S0
S1
S2
S3
Linear (e)
Bilinear (g)
Parabolic (f)
Pi=f( T2/T1, T1/Tf; Tis/Tf )
=
ii
iibi am
amVF
e
e
d
d
c
c
b
b
b
g
g
g
f
f
f
ed
c
a
a
a
0 1 5 3 0 4 5
e
e
d
d
c
c
b
b
b
g
g
g
f
f
fe
d
c
a
a
a
0 1 5 3 0 4 5
e
e
d
d
c
c
b
b
b
g
g
g
f
f
fed
c
a
a
a
0 1 5 3 0 4 5
LDRB PGA=0.54g;Tiso/Tbf=3.56
a: experimentalb: uniform (ITA)c: triangular (ITA/USA)
g: bilinear
S3
S2
S1
kNFSB+SHD
PGA=0.31g;Tiso/Tbf=4.26FSB+SMA
PGA=0.54g;Tiso/Tbf=3.86
d: trapezoidal (JPN)e: linearf: parabolic
S3
S2
S1
S3
S2
S1
90.0
353.0
97.5
Tavola Vibrante
Celle di carico
150.0
90.0
150.0
345.0
Forze statiche equivalenti Forze statiche equivalenti Confronti sperimentaliConfronti sperimentali
Attivit svolta nel corso del secondo anno di ricerca
1. Simulazione numerica delle prove sperimentali eseguite su tavola vibrante presso il PWRI, mediante il codice di calcolo 4GL (Paolucci, 1997)
2. Calibrazione ed utilizzo del modello costitutivo SFCM, allo scopo di creare abachi che descrivano il decadimento della rigidezza e lincremento di smorzamento del sistema terreno - fondazione
Research Unit 11: Deep & shallow foundationsResearch Unit 11: Deep & shallow foundations
Simulazione delle prove sperimentali su tavola vibrante (PWRI)Fondazione modello posta su tavola vibrante, sollecitata con diversi segnali sismici
-0.5-0.25
00.25
0.5
M
/
V
B
5.5 7.5 9.5 11.5 13.5 15.5Time (s)
-0.5-0.25
00.25
0.5
M
/
V
B
Case 2-2
no degr.
degr.
5.5 6 6.5-0.2-0.1
00.10.2
M
/
V
B
observed
simulated
Case 2-2
Simulazione delle prove sperimentali su tavola vibrante (PWRI)
Creazione di abachi mediante il modello SFCM
Obiettivo:Simulazione di prove cicliche, per mettere in evidenza linfluenza di vari parametri progettuali sullandamento delle curve di decadimento della rigidezza e di variazione dello smorzamento
Calibrazione dei parametri del modello:prove sperimentali eseguite ad Ispra (TRISEE, 1998)
Creazione di abachi mediante il modello SFCMAnalisi ed interpolazione dei risultati rigidezza rotazionale
1E-005 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1rotazione (rad)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
K
/
K
0
(
-
)
Vmax/V
La disposizione dei punti dipende unicamente dal fattore di sicurezza
0,000000
0,200000
0,400000
0,600000
0,800000
1,000000
1,200000
0,000100 0,001000 0,010000 0,100000 1,000000
rotazione (rad)
K
/
K
0
maKK += 1
10
0,000000
0,200000
0,400000
0,600000
0,800000
1,000000
1,200000
0,000010 0,000100 0,001000 0,010000 0,100000 1,000000
spostamento u/B (-)
K
T
/
K
T
0
Creazione di abachi mediante il modello SFCMAnalisi ed interpolazione dei risultati rigidezza traslazionale
La disposizione dei punti dipende dal fattore di sicurezza e dal valore di h/B
nbKTKT += 1
10
1E-006 1E-005 0.0001 0.001 0.01spostamento normalizzato u/B (m)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
K
T
/
K
T
0
(
-
)
Creazione di abachi mediante il modello SFCMAnalisi ed interpolazione dei risultati smorzamento
1E-005 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1rotazione (rad)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
s
m
o
r
z
a
m
e
n
t
o
(
-
)
La disposizione dei punti dipende unicamente dal fattore di sicurezza
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
0,000100 0,001000 0,010000 0,100000 1,000000
rotazione (rad)
s
m
o
r
z
a
m
e
n
t
o
(
-
)
dc +=
Creazione di abachi mediante il modello SFCMVerifica: confronto con i dati sperimentali:
PWRI
Rigidezza rotazionale - sabbia densa (VMAX/V=29.7 - a=5192.13, m=1.02)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
0,00001 0,0001 0,001 0,01 0,1 1
rotazione (rad)
K
/
K
0
(
-
)
abacosperimentali
Rigidezza rotazionale - sabbia mediamente addensata (VMAX/V=16.3 - a=653.02, m=0.788)
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1
0,00001 0,0001 0,001 0,01 0,1 1
rotazione (rad)
K
/
K
0
(
-
)
abacosperimentali
Sintesi risultati ottenutiSintesi risultati ottenuti
ValidazioneValidazione su dati da tavola vibrante di un modello semplice per lo su dati da tavola vibrante di un modello semplice per lo studio dellstudio dellinterazione dinamica suolointerazione dinamica suolo--struttura in campo nonstruttura in campo non--linearelineare.
Calibrazione del modello costitutivo SFCM sulla base di prove sperimentali cicliche su modelli di grande scala, e creazione di abachi che descrivano il decadimento della rigidezza e lincremento di smorzamento del sistema terreno - fondazione
Research Unit 12: Retaining StructuresResearch Unit 12: Retaining Structures
Summary of progress for Summary of progress for LineaLinea IVIV
Available literature appears to be well Available literature appears to be well researched.researched.
Some useful DDBD recommendations are Some useful DDBD recommendations are emerging emerging likely that draft model code can likely that draft model code can be formed.be formed.
Book on Book on DisplacementDisplacement BasedBased SeismicSeismicDesign of Design of StructuresStructures
New book New book releasedreleased 2007 2007 withwith a a lotlot of material of material relevantrelevant toto Linea IV.Linea IV.
ChapterChapter 14 14 includesincludes the the basicsbasics of a of a draftdraft code code forforDBD.DBD.
SampleSample PagesPages
Info to be proposed:
Design motions
Performance Criteria
SampleSample PagesPagesInfo to be proposed:
Strain limits
Drift limits
Material Strengths
SampleSample PagesPages
Info to be proposed:
Design displacement profile for different structural types.
Guidelines for the formation of equivalent SDOF systems
SampleSample PagesPages
Info to be proposed:
Equivalent viscous damping expressions
Effective period & stiffness approach
Design base shear and equivalent lateral forces.
... e Capacity Design?
LikelyLikely scope of scope of draftdraft model code model code
RC framesRC frames RC walls & frameRC walls & frame--wallswalls PC structures PC structures capanonecapanone UnreinforcedUnreinforced masonry masonry
structuresstructures Steel structures Steel structures MRFsMRFs, ,
CBFsCBFs, BRB frames, BRB frames Composite structures Composite structures --
MRFsMRFs
Timber structures Timber structures capanonecapanone con con nodinodi anulareanulare
Bridges Bridges RC: Regular & RC: Regular & IrregularIrregular
Isolated structures Isolated structures Retaining structures Retaining structures
paratiaparatia a a cuneocuneo Foundation Structures Foundation Structures
piled and pad footingspiled and pad footings
GrazieGrazie
RELUIS Linea di ricerca N.4July 2007 Meeting12 unit di ricercaReview of programme LINEA IVSviluppo del progetto STRUTTURE CONSIDERATE(progettate secondo la procedura DDBD)Research Unit 3: RC Walls & MixedRU 3: Risultati - FBDRU 3: Risultati - DBDRU 3: CONFRONTI CON DIVERSI PROGRAMMI DI CALCOLOResearch Unit 4: Pre-cast structuresResearch Unit 5: Masonry structuresRU5: Case Study structure 1 New ConstructionRU5: Case Study structure 2 Existing ConstructionResearch Unit 6: Steel structuresRU6: CBF considerationsRU6: Displacement contributionsRU6: Case study applicationsRU6: Case study applicationsResearch Unit 7: Composite StructuresRU7: Case study structuresRU7: General design progressResearch Unit 8: Timber StructuresRU8: Portal frame case studyRU8: Displacement considerationsRU8: Factors influencing target displacementsRU8: Factors influencing target displacementsResearch Unit 9: New & existing bridgesResearch Unit 10: Structures with passive control (isolation) devicesSummary of progress for Linea IVBook on Displacement Based Seismic Design of StructuresSample PagesSample PagesSample PagesSample PagesLikely scope of draft model code Grazie