1 / 25

NEESR-SG: Controlled Rocking of Steel-Framed Buildings with Replaceable Energy Dissipating Fuses

NEESR-SG: Controlled Rocking of Steel-Framed Buildings with Replaceable Energy Dissipating Fuses. Greg Deierlein, Paul Cordova, Eric Borchers, Xiang Ma, Alex Pena, Sarah Billington, & Helmut Krawinkler, Stanford University Jerome Hajjar, Kerry Hall, Matt Eatherton, University of Illinois

lita
Download Presentation

NEESR-SG: Controlled Rocking of Steel-Framed Buildings with Replaceable Energy Dissipating Fuses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NEESR-SG: Controlled Rocking of Steel-Framed Buildings with Replaceable Energy Dissipating Fuses Greg Deierlein, Paul Cordova, Eric Borchers, Xiang Ma, Alex Pena, Sarah Billington, & Helmut Krawinkler, Stanford University Jerome Hajjar, Kerry Hall, Matt Eatherton, University of Illinois Mitsumasa Midorikawa, Hokkaido University David Mar, Tipping & Mar Associates and Greg Luth, GPLA

  2. Discussion issues • Prototype Building Information • Preliminary E-Defense Test Setup • Testbed Details • Dual versus Single Rocking Frame • List of Other Issues • Schedule and Logistics • Industry Collaboration Opportunities

  3. Prototype Structure

  4. Summary of Parametric Study Resultsfor Prototype Building α Peak Response Values Hall, K. et al. 2006, Report No. ST-06-01, Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering, UIUC * Peak values are the mean values of peak response values from a set of scaled ground motions

  5. Preliminary Design of System Test at E-Defense (2009) • Large (2/3 scale) frame assembly • Validation of dynamic response and simulation • Proof-of-Concept • construction details • re-centering behavior • fuse replacement • Collaboration & Payload Projects

  6. Similitude Model and Assumptions • Proc. 1 Mass density ratio = 1 • Time distorted • Proc. 2 Time and strain rate ratio = 1 • Mass ratio relatively large • Proc. 3 Acceleration ratio = 1, mass ratio reasonably small, time not too distorted • Preferred option

  7. Inferred Demand Parameters for Specimen Comparison of Floor Mass Unit: metric ton. 1 ton = 9.8 kN = 2.2 kips • Testbed floor mass: 60 ~ 100 ton Inferred Force Demands for 4-story Specimen

  8. Unit: mm. 1000 mm = 3.28 ft Basis Parameters of Specimen Approximate Member Sizes • Dimension scale lr = 0.68 • Member size determined by scaling from prototype • Shown in red circle are displacement range for each joints

  9. Testbed Details • New load cell configuration • Horizontal cross-bracing between testbed frames • Attachment to frame specimen • Roller detail • Pin detail with exterior columns

  10. Change of Load Cell Configuration Old New

  11. Old versus New Load Cell Configuration Center Load Cells (new) Side Load Cells (old)

  12. Horizontal Cross-bracing members Interfere with frame specimen

  13. Horizontal Cross-bracing members Solution under consideration Cross beams to connect the two testbed frames Cables to tie together the white and blue beams

  14. Frame Load Introduction Plan 1– Roller Detail

  15. Plan 2 - Pin with Exterior Columns Detail

  16. Dual versus Single Frame

  17. Single Frame with Central Load Cell

  18. Single Frame – Fuse Details

  19. Single Frame – Fuse Details

  20. ABAQUS Modeling of Fuse Similar Deformation Mode

  21. Load-Deformation Curves of a Case Test ABAQUS Analysis 10~20% higher loads

  22. Non-symmetric fuse loading under Single Frame Setup

  23. List of Other issues • Design anchoring specimens to the table • Use steel or concrete for base beam? • Resistance capacity of shake table • Available instrumentation • number of channels • type and number of instruments • Ground motion record • what record to use • how it would be scaled • Construction of specimen • how to assemble frame specimen • Construction sequence (Testbed first and then specimen? or sequential installation of testbed 1, specimen, testbed 2)

  24. Schedule and Logistics • Schedule • Spring 2008, UIUC test • Summer 2008, finalization of E-Defense specimen design • Autumn 2008, finalization of instrumentation plan • Winter 2008, E-Defense specimen construction & instrumentation • Spring 2009, E-Defense test • Logistics • Confirmation of student team members and establish contact. (Tokyo Tech: Hirotaka Ando? Kyoto Univ:? E-Defense: ?) • When to send students to E-Defense

  25. Industry Collaboration Industry partners from Japan to participate in design, detailing, and construction (Nippon Steel Corp? Other consultants or fabricators?) In-kind funding for materials (shapes, plate, connectors), fabrication (specimens and load frame components [trough, loading beams, etc.]) Fuse fabrication (same fabricator as specimen?) Supplier of PT cables and anchorages, and contractor for installation (E-Defense staff?) Capabilities for E-Defense staff in steel erection (e.g., bolting of fuses, resolution of fit-up issues) Other issues?

More Related