seismic

Antiseismic Systems - Earthquake Protection Systems (seismic stop)

56 posts in this topic

The main object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of our invention along with its application method in the construction field for structural projects is to minimise the problems associated with the safety of structural projects such as buildings in the case of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornados and very powerful winds in general. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the roof of a large, geometrical part of the building structure which independent of the load-bearing structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich.

This pre-stressing force is applied by the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects, said mechanism mainly consisting of a steel cable penetrating free in the centre the vertical support elements of the structure, as well as the drilling length, beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the banks (walls) of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. This embedding is attained due to the drilling hole being somewhat smaller than the exterior diameter of the completely opened anchor mechanism. Said steel cable's top end is also tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism exerting a continuous uplifting force. This pulling mechanism comprises a piston, said piston reciprocating within a piston sleeve, connected to a pressure chamber beneath it. This pulling force, exerted on the top-end of the steel cable, by the hydraulic mechanism due to the hydraulic pressure originating from the rise of the chamber towards the piston, and the reaction in this pulling force originating from the embedded anchor at its other end generate the desirable compression in the construction project which in turn is tied to the ground and thus rendered resistant to the horizontal forces of an earthquake.

Utility analysis of the anti-seismic system titled: “Hydraulic Tie Rod for Construction Projects”.

What does this invention achieve which is not achieved with the current technology?

Current technology simply secures the structure to the ground. My invention unites it with the ground making these two as one (like a sandwich). For me, this uniting of the structure with the ground beneficially changes the direction and type of forces which act upon the structure dynamically during an earthquake.

Influences which cause failure in buildings:

a) Shearing stress

B) Moment of the nodes

How these are created:

A) SHEARING STRESS

a) Shearing stress is created mainly on the vertical supporting components during earthquake acceleration due to the inertia of the mass.

Question: Is the shearing stress the same in all of the supporting components?

Answer: No. The shearing is greater in force in the ground floor components

Question: Why?

Answer: For two main reasons

- They have to handle (in movement) a greater mass which necessitates greater inertia, thereby creating greater shearing on the cross section plan.

- The ground floor components are more rigid.

All of the other supporting components (except for those of the ground floor) have a certain amount of elasticity in the nodes and supporting components which is beneficial in that they absorb the force of the earthquake due to transfer of this force into heat.

However, this beneficial absorption of energy is cancelled to a greater degree by the components of the ground floor for one main reason. Underneath the components (columns) on the ground floor the base is inflexible (because it is usually under the ground). It therefore transfers wholly the acceleration of the earthquake (and in this way shearing stress is also increased).

At the components (columns) of the upper floors the same does not occur because the components of the ground floor have already absorbed part of the force and less energy is transferred upwards to the more elastic components.

Because of this and due to the increased mass load which has to be handled we see greatly increased shearing stresses on the ground floor components. This explains why the majority of failures happen on the ground floor.

This issue can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the components of the ground floor. But if we do this then another problem occurs; we lose the elasticity in the components (and in this way we also lose the damping of the acceleration).

B) MOMENT OF THE NODES

Moment of the nodes also acts to create stress on the horizontal and vertical supporting components by shearing stress and occurs for the following reason.

During the acceleration of an earthquake we know that there is inertia of the load bearing elements but in addition inertia of the bearing mass has to be handled. These burden the vertical components with horizontal shearing stress.

In a high rise building, the vertical components are united from the first up to the top floor. The structural integrity of all the components of the load bearing elements (columns, girders, slabs) is improved when these are joined at the node points.

During the inertia of the bearing elements, these node points react with moment which taxes the vertical and horizontal supporting elements with shearing stresses. If the design is not correct, this results in failure of the vertical elements which are brittle but not the horizontal.

The reason for this is that the vertical elements (columns) have a smaller cross section by comparison to the girders. The girders mass along the length forms a structural unit with the slab so that it is considered a unified body stronger than the vertical element.

If we consider that each column bears at least two girders, we understand the difference in endurance (with regards to the shearing) between the column and the horizontal bearing element.

During oscillation of a tall building, there is the tendency for it to lift up off the ground on one side due to moment, creating a gap underneath the back foundations. That is, the front columns try to lift up the back ones due to the structural unity that they have. This unity is provided by the girders.

This gap cancels the resistance which is present between the ground and building base as the base which was securing the building is now in mid-air.

Of course, this event never really happens in reality because the static load of the structure during the lifting of one side immobilizes the column with the base to the ground creating moment of the nodes.

These moments create slanted shearing of the cross section of the vertical element which cannot withstand the load and we have cancelling of the structural unity of the building.

This explanation can be clearly seen during the first minute of the experiment which I have carried out:

View this video.

It is the Greek dialect, but

Shows three different load-bearing structure.

a) The first bearing frame construction is lightweight.

B) The second bearing frame construction is heavy.

c) The third, bearing frame is bolted to the ground

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See how nodes react when we have an earthquake.

In the first minutes of the experiment, we see a wooden structure (building skeleton) which, during inertia oscillates and lifts up on one side and then on the other alternately. This occurs because it is light and the nodes withstand the moment which is created from the static weight of the unsupported side of the structure.

As soon as we place the static load of the two bricks, it still oscillates but the base does not lift up on either side. In this situation the nodes can no longer withstand the additional load of the bricks.

Considering the analysis I have done above, we see why a structure fails when the limits of the design are surpassed.

There is no absolute anti-seismic design.

Current Greek anti-seismic systems have a certain amount of endurance but from this point onwards, the truth is that they are fragile. In my opinion the endurance here has particular limits due to my reasoning above. This phenomenon can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the ground floor components. If we do this though, another problem emerges; as stated before; we lose elasticity of the components (and the depreciation of the acceleration).

MY PROPOSED SOLUTION

The solution can be seen in the continuation of the experiment shown in the link above as well as in the explanation below.

There are three issues which need to be addressed in order to apply pre-stressing between the ground and the structure (the clamping of the ground with the structure)

a) bending

B) durability of the materials

c) durability of the ground

For the pre-stressing or clamping of the structure with the ground to operate beneficially during an earthquake, a large cross section plan of the supporting components is necessary as well as very durable materials if it is to provide additional benefits.

Pre fabricated houses offer these two necessary components as they are constructed completely from fortified concrete.

The problem of loose ground © is resolved by using Radiere together with the specialised hydraulic traction mechanism. This improves the durability of the ground and provides additional support to the foundations.

Imagine PREFABRICATED houses which are made of fortified concrete and secured (screwed) at their four corners with this seismic base … even if they are turned upside down, nothing can happen to them.

Question:

When we do not screw down the base, what will happen?

Answer:

If we have tall buildings completed constructed from fortified concrete, these will withstand the shearing stress but their nodes will have increased load due to the gap (discussed above) which is created under the base during second moment of the area as well as the greater static load which they bear. The combination of moment and static load creates slanting cracks in the walls.

Because of this prefabricated houses are suitable to be built only a few stories high. If we make the prefabricated house from fortified concrete ONE with the ground though:

http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

…. It cannot lift up on one side during second moment of the area and in this way we avoid moment of the nodes.

THE FINANCIAL ASPECT

I believe that with this method, prefabricated houses can be placed in towns. Until now these houses have only been suitable for rural areas. The main reason for this is that the law does not allow them to be built more than two stories high.

If they become invulnerable during an earthquake and they can withstand the force with many stories then their construction will be permitted in towns.

At this moment, they are not permitted in towns because if, in a town ten story buildings are allowed and prefabricated ones can only be constructed up to two stories, financially it is not feasible to lose the possibility of another eight stories.

If I enable them to withstand earthquakes, then conventional methods of construction will be dispensed due to the fact that prefabricated structures are 30-50% cheaper because they are industrially produced. This way the manufacturers will profit from this change.

Apart from being for anti-seismic use, my invention can be used as a pre-stressing anchor for the improvement of the ground:

For example: http://postimage.org/image/29l3p1xpg/

That is, it can improve the density of loose ground as well as not allowing the structure to move upwards (during oscillation) or downwards (during subsidence of the ground).

I have already mentioned the placement methods in existing and buildings under construction as well as other types of structures such as dams and bridges etc.

The patent is also appropriate also for the protection of lightweight buildings during tornadoes which are seen mostly in the United States .

From my prospective, a mountain of research on various building is necessary which, without the financial support of the state or some other private organisation, I cannot bring to a satisfactory conclusion. I do not know where to start and where to finish.

Kind regards,

Yiannis Limperis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anti-seismic system placed in a shaft of a load-bearing structure

The main object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of our invention along with its application method in the construction field for structural projects is to minimise the problems associated with the safety of structural projects such as buildings in the case of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornados and very powerful winds in general. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the roof of a large, geometrical part of the building structure which independent of the load-bearing structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich.

This pre-stressing force is applied by the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects, said mechanism mainly consisting of a steel cable penetrating free in the centre the vertical support elements of the structure, as well as the drilling length, beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the banks (walls) of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. This embedding is attained due to the drilling hole being somewhat smaller than the exterior diameter of the completely opened anchor mechanism. Said steel cable's top end is also tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism exerting a continuous uplifting force. This pulling mechanism comprises a piston, said piston reciprocating within a piston sleeve, connected to a pressure chamber beneath it. This pulling force, exerted on the top-end of the steel cable, by the hydraulic mechanism due to the hydraulic pressure originating from the rise of the chamber towards the piston, and the reaction in this pulling force originating from the embedded anchor at its other end generate the desirable compression in the construction project which in turn is tied to the ground and thus rendered resistant to the horizontal forces of an earthquake.

Utility analysis of the anti-seismic system titled: “Hydraulic Tie Rod for Construction Projects”.

What does this invention achieve which is not achieved with the current technology?

Current technology simply secures the structure to the ground. My invention unites it with the ground making these two as one (like a sandwich). For me, this uniting of the structure with the ground beneficially changes the direction and type of forces which act upon the structure dynamically during an earthquake.

Influences which cause failure in buildings:

a) Shearing stress

B) Moment of the nodes

How these are created:

A) SHEARING STRESS

a) Shearing stress is created mainly on the vertical supporting components during earthquake acceleration due to the inertia of the mass.

Question: Is the shearing stress the same in all of the supporting components?

Answer: No. The shearing is greater in force in the ground floor components

Question: Why?

Answer: For two main reasons

- They have to handle (in movement) a greater mass which necessitates greater inertia, thereby creating greater shearing on the cross section plan.

- The ground floor components are more rigid.

All of the other supporting components (except for those of the ground floor) have a certain amount of elasticity in the nodes and supporting components which is beneficial in that they absorb the force of the earthquake due to transfer of this force into heat.

However, this beneficial absorption of energy is cancelled to a greater degree by the components of the ground floor for one main reason. Underneath the components (columns) on the ground floor the base is inflexible (because it is usually under the ground). It therefore transfers wholly the acceleration of the earthquake (and in this way shearing stress is also increased).

At the components (columns) of the upper floors the same does not occur because the components of the ground floor have already absorbed part of the force and less energy is transferred upwards to the more elastic components.

Because of this and due to the increased mass load which has to be handled we see greatly increased shearing stresses on the ground floor components. This explains why the majority of failures happen on the ground floor.

This issue can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the components of the ground floor. But if we do this then another problem occurs; we lose the elasticity in the components (and in this way we also lose the damping of the acceleration).

B) MOMENT OF THE NODES

Moment of the nodes also acts to create stress on the horizontal and vertical supporting components by shearing stress and occurs for the following reason.

During the acceleration of an earthquake we know that there is inertia of the load bearing elements but in addition inertia of the bearing mass has to be handled. These burden the vertical components with horizontal shearing stress.

In a high rise building, the vertical components are united from the first up to the top floor. The structural integrity of all the components of the load bearing elements (columns, girders, slabs) is improved when these are joined at the node points.

During the inertia of the bearing elements, these node points react with moment which taxes the vertical and horizontal supporting elements with shearing stresses. If the design is not correct, this results in failure of the vertical elements which are brittle but not the horizontal.

The reason for this is that the vertical elements (columns) have a smaller cross section by comparison to the girders. The girders mass along the length forms a structural unit with the slab so that it is considered a unified body stronger than the vertical element.

If we consider that each column bears at least two girders, we understand the difference in endurance (with regards to the shearing) between the column and the horizontal bearing element.

During oscillation of a tall building, there is the tendency for it to lift up off the ground on one side due to moment, creating a gap underneath the back foundations. That is, the front columns try to lift up the back ones due to the structural unity that they have. This unity is provided by the girders.

This gap cancels the resistance which is present between the ground and building base as the base which was securing the building is now in mid-air.

Of course, this event never really happens in reality because the static load of the structure during the lifting of one side immobilizes the column with the base to the ground creating moment of the nodes.

These moments create slanted shearing of the cross section of the vertical element which cannot withstand the load and we have cancelling of the structural unity of the building.

This explanation can be clearly seen during the first minute of the experiment which I have carried out:

View this video. It is the Greek dialect, but Shows three different load-bearing structure. a) The first bearing frame construction is lightweight. B) The second bearing frame construction is heavy. c) The third, bearing frame is bolted to the ground See how nodes react when we have an earthquake.

In the first minutes of the experiment, we see a wooden structure (building skeleton) which, during inertia oscillates and lifts up on one side and then on the other alternately. This occurs because it is light and the nodes withstand the moment which is created from the static weight of the unsupported side of the structure.

As soon as we place the static load of the two bricks, it still oscillates but the base does not lift up on either side. In this situation the nodes can no longer withstand the additional load of the bricks.

Considering the analysis I have done above, we see why a structure fails when the limits of the design are surpassed.

There is no absolute anti-seismic design.

Current Greek anti-seismic systems have a certain amount of endurance but from this point onwards, the truth is that they are fragile. In my opinion the endurance here has particular limits due to my reasoning above. This phenomenon can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the ground floor components. If we do this though, another problem emerges; as stated before; we lose elasticity of the components (and the depreciation of the acceleration).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MY PROPOSED SOLUTION

The solution can be seen in the continuation of the experiment shown in the link above as well as in the explanation below.

There are three issues which need to be addressed in order to apply pre-stressing between the ground and the structure (the clamping of the ground with the structure)

a) bending

B) durability of the materials

c) durability of the ground

For the pre-stressing or clamping of the structure with the ground to operate beneficially during an earthquake, a large cross section plan of the supporting components is necessary as well as very durable materials if it is to provide additional benefits.

Pre fabricated houses offer these two necessary components as they are constructed completely from fortified concrete.

The problem of loose ground © is resolved by using Radiere together with the specialised hydraulic traction mechanism. This improves the durability of the ground and provides additional support to the foundations.

See what happens to conventional houses:

Imagine PREFABRICATED houses which are made of fortified concrete and secured (screwed) at their four corners with this seismic base … even if they are turned upside down, nothing can happen to them.

Question:

When we do not screw down the base, what will happen?

Answer:

If we have tall buildings completed constructed from fortified concrete, these will withstand the shearing stress but their nodes will have increased load due to the gap (discussed above) which is created under the base during second moment of the area as well as the greater static load which they bear. The combination of moment and static load creates slanting cracks in the walls.

Because of this prefabricated houses are suitable to be built only a few stories high. If we make the prefabricated house from fortified concrete ONE with the ground though:

http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

…. It cannot lift up on one side during second moment of the area and in this way we avoid moment of the nodes.

THE FINANCIAL ASPECT

I believe that with this method, prefabricated houses can be placed in towns. Until now these houses have only been suitable for rural areas. The main reason for this is that the law does not allow them to be built more than two stories high.

If they become invulnerable during an earthquake and they can withstand the force with many stories then their construction will be permitted in towns.

At this moment, they are not permitted in towns because if, in a town ten story buildings are allowed and prefabricated ones can only be constructed up to two stories, financially it is not feasible to lose the possibility of another eight stories.

If I enable them to withstand earthquakes, then conventional methods of construction will be dispensed due to the fact that prefabricated structures are 30-50% cheaper because they are industrially produced. This way the manufacturers will profit from this change.

Apart from being for anti-seismic use, my invention can be used as a pre-stressing anchor for the improvement of the ground:

For example: http://postimage.org/image/29l3p1xpg/

That is, it can improve the density of loose ground as well as not allowing the structure to move upwards (during oscillation) or downwards (during subsidence of the ground).

I have already mentioned the placement methods in existing and buildings under construction as well as other types of structures such as dams and bridges etc.

The patent is also appropriate also for the protection of lightweight buildings during tornadoes which are seen mostly in the United States .

From my prospective, a mountain of research on various building is necessary which, without the financial support of the state or some other private organisation, I cannot bring to a satisfactory conclusion. I do not know where to start and where to finish.

Kind regards,

Yiannis Limperis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a contract with the Technical University to do applied research on the seismic system.

The first information shows that go too well.

The problem is that the University was placed in a three-story and five-storey building, with small columns dimensions 0,30 x 0,40 cm, and showed that increases the strength of construction 30.9% more of the existing method

In the elevator shaft will be better.

Here is the draft report of the simulation https://rapidshare.com/#!download|182p10|580587526|Draft_Report_Ευρεσιτεχνίας.rar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Yiannis.

Here we meet again: me, you and your legendary hydraulic tie rod :).

I miss the old days with your legendary experimental methods and their lively description. Keep on going!

Edited by rigid_joint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yiannis we are your groupies!

Today your love, tomorrow the world!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Yiannis.

Here we meet again: me, you and your legendary hydraulic tie rod :).

I miss the old days with your legendary experimental methods and their lively description. Keep on going!

Like Johnnie Walker!

You can find me here... You know it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can find me here...

As you probably know, after having over 4000 posts in the Greek engineering forums, I don't care about them anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Designing frames, or asymmetrical structures, the solution is....

1) to separate the flexible columns, from the rigid columns

2) amortization method of seismic energy in the vertical and horizontal axis of the frame

3) nodes to move freely round the rigid column.

post-76-14570089619724_thumb.jpg

By the design method I suggest, you have the opportunity to design a flexible structure.

Rigid vertical elements:

The main reason I designed the seismic joint is to separate the flexible columns from rigid columns.

With this method, we have a framed construction which is flexible, and in it, a rigid column, which is independent on load bearing because it has a seismic joint.

The main role of the rigid components is to control the deformation of the bearing.

Plasticity:

A flexible node (seismic joint) deletes the usefulness of plasticity.

post-76-14570089619596_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yiannis, you will always be my man!

By the way, so many years have passed and the torsional component is still wanted (dead or alive :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yiannis, you will always be my man!

By the way, so many years have passed and the torsional component is still wanted (dead or alive :))

Me to my friend... we are twins... you are rigid_joint and I am... seismic_ joint until the earth will turn, I will do them crazy. :)

My suggestion for framed structures (method Seismic Stop):

post-76-14570089620051_thumb.jpg

Edited by seismic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PCT Opinion

http://postimage.org/image/32vfj43z8/

http://postimage.org/image/2g4sfacsk/

http://postimage.org/image/332ou0y04/

http://postimage.org/image/33322bpyc/

http://www.adslgr.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=123103&d=1366131394&thumb=1

From what the examiner says that I have something patentably new and useful. Improved anchoring means comprising expansion anchors in combination with hydraulic tensioning means to keep the building tightly tethered to the ground. This would also be good for hurricane country, like the US Gulf Coast.

In Greece I have the patent.

I had filed for international patent in pct passed Research Report (A).

Filing in America at the patent office.

I have not gotten a patent in America yet .... expected more.

I went to a university in Greece.

This one http://users.civil.ntua.gr/papadrakakis/ and here http://www.itsak.gr/en. I have the first preliminary results of applied research simulationIs in Greek language. They are very good results.

The Institute of Engineering Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Research and Technical Institute has a different opinion. They told me that.... there is not a program in the whole world that simulates vertical prestressing.

They told me that I need to do (experiments) seismic testing on some construction models, because it is not possible to simulate. I have no money for experiments. I want to find a foreign university to work on experiments, without me to pay money.

The patent is under investigation by me and the Greek university and we have discovered much about the patent.

As you can see in the photo, what tractor is useful for other jobs also

http://postimg.org/image/29l3p1xpg/

Serves to earthquake, for tornadoes in lightweight construction, and for retaining loose slopes.

Even improves the strength of loose foundation.

I want to publish in scientific journals.

But I do not know how to do the drafting.

I'm not a civil engineer.

I am foreman, and a building contractor.

Teachers want me to pay and do all the experiments and simulations, and then they'll make publications in scientific journals.

I do not have any more money to do all the experiments... so the publication in scientific journals is delayed.

I need a sponsor to pay the experiments.

In Greece there is not one?

Generally I need partners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who wants to work with me to continue applied research on my invention;

These are the first results of applied research from the National Technical University of Greece.

I have no money to continue applied research.

I am looking to find scientific partners.

I did the translation myself.

I hope you UNDERSTAND what I say.

Basics of simulation

Page 5 of 34

This project involves the numerical simulation and investigate the behavior of the system.

Brief description of the invention

The principal object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of the present invention as well as of the method for constructing building structures utilizing the hydraulic tie rod of the present invention is to minimise the aforesaid problems associated with the safety of construction structures in the event of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and very high lateral winds. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the building structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich. Said pre-stressing is applied by means of the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects. Said mechanism comprises a steel cable crossing freely in the centre the structure's vertical support elements and also the length of a drilling beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the walls of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. Said steel cable's top end is tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism, exerting a continuous uplifting force. The pulling force applied to the steel cable by means of the hydraulic mechanism and the reaction to such pulling from the fixed anchor at the other end of it generate the desired compression in the construction project.

Page 6 of 34

Investigates the behavior of buildings with and without the proposed system in order to draw useful conclusions about the effectiveness

The challenge is the preliminary investigation into the conceptual,

software was chosen Seismostruct v5.2.2 company Seismosoft.

Page 7 of 34

General description of the tested models

Examined two buildings a three-storey and a five-storey

materials of models

1) confined concrete ( conf )

2) non-confined concrete ( une )

3) steel ( rein )

1) confined concrete ( conf ) features

features symbol rate units

compressive strength fc 30 MPa

tensile strength ft 0 MPa

deformation at σ max εc 0,002

parameter toggles kc 1,2

specific weight Yconc 24 kN/m3

Page 8 of 34

Figure 2 detail reinforcement concrete element.

Distinguished positions confining concrete

Figure 3 diagram Chart - strain (sample) for confined concrete used in the models.

Page 9 of 34

2) non-confined concrete ( une )

features symbol rate units

compressive strength fc 30 MPa

tensile strength ft 0 MPa

deformation at σ max εc 0,002

parameter toggles kc 1

specific weight Yconc 24 kN/m3

Figure 4 diagram Chart - strain (sample) for confined concrete used in the models.

Page 10 of 34

3) steel ( rein )

steel has the following characteristics

features symbol rate units

elasticity parameter Es 200 GPa

yield stress fy 500 MPa

hardening parameter μ 0,005

strain at break εult 0,1

specific weight Y steel 78 kN/m3

Figure 5. diagram Chart - strain (sample) steel used in the models.

sections

The cross sections of the models is

1) cross-section column

2) cross-section beam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Page 11 of 34

cross-section column

the cross section of the column model consists of confined concrete ( conf )

non-confined concrete ( unc )

has the following characteristics

characteristic rate

sectional shape rectangular

Width 30 cm

height 40 cm

reinforcement at corners 4/16

reinforcement upper and lower cheek Φ/12

lateral sidewall reinforcement 2/12

total reinforcement 4/16+6/12

Figure 6. section column

Distinguish three different materials

Page 12 of 34

cross-section beam

The cross beam consists of confined concrete ( conf )

non-confined concrete ( unc )

has the following characteristics

characteristic rate

sectional shape T-shaped plate-girder

effective width 100 cm

slab thickness 15 cm

beam height 60 cm

beam width 25 cm

reinforcement beam down 3/14

reinforcement beam over 2/14

Buccal armature beam Φ10/cheek

armor plate over 6/10

armor plate under 4/10

total reinforcement 5/14+12/10

Figure 7. cross beam. distinguish three different materials.

Page 13 of 34

finite elements

the finite element models used in the building is a three-dimensional non - linear ribbed finite element based on the strength

(3D Inelastic force-based element ) with 4 integration points along with visa fibers.

The number of fibers in each section is 200

this item is used for the simulation of columns and beams.

Figure 8. finite element space, to simulate columns and beams

4.4 analysis - methodology

performed nonlinear analyzes for each building with the finite element method, taking into consideration effects of nonlinearity of material and geometry.

analyzes are non-linear, static ( pushover ), while charging a triangular distribution

height which corresponds approximately to the first peculiarity of the examined structure

The total number of trainees loads has rate 1kN that the base shear during charging it to a rate 1kN and therefore importune coefficient λ is equal to the base shear (1*λ) for the various phases of the analysis.

value - the objective of the movement is set at 0.18 m

The load is transmitted in 50 steps for both models.

Page 14 of 34

As a control node set node of higher level of construction ( z=max ) to whom x=0 and y=0, as shown in more detail in Figures

The proposed system causes the exercise of a compressive force in each column where applicable.

The simulation of this phenomenon

been addressed by imposing a compressive strength in columns

considered that the system applies.

5. three-storey reinforced concrete building

5.1 general characteristics of the building.

the test building displays regularity

in plan and height.

general characteristics of the building.

floor height...................................................3m

span length x ...............................................5m

span length z ...............................................5m

diaphragm ....... yes on each floor

supports .......... anchors on all nodes with z=0 (ground)

Figure 9. plan three-storey building

Page 15 of 34

Figure 10. front face of the three-storey building

Figure 11. side view of the three-storey building

Page 16 of 34

Figure 12. perspective view of a three storey building (a)

characterized the control node of the structure

Figure 13. perspective view of a three storey building (B)

characterized the control node of the structure.

Page 17 of 34

5.2 analytical results

5.2.1 without the application of prestressing.

The following figure shows the diagram

base shear - displacement for node monitoring.

Figure 14. power curve (kN) - displacement (m) without the application of prestressing

the maximum value of the chart is 900.62 kN, illustrated for the displacement of the control node 0.1296 m

5.2.2 compressive load 600 kN to nodes of higher level.

Applied compressive load 600 kN to nodes of higher level due to the prestressing force.

Initial (A) charged with the compressive force the central column.

then (B) the load applied to the four corner columns.

to the end © loaded all the 9 columns of the building

The positive trend in each column is ..

600 kN / (0.30 m * 0.40)=5000 kN/m2=5MPa

the ultimate limit state of column

because grief

(Taking into account the safety factor

having a value of 1.5 for concrete),

the tensile strength for concrete C 30 is 30 MPa/1.5=20MPa.

Page 18 of 34

therefore the positive trend in the columns corresponding to the 5/20 = 25% strain at break,

the ultimate limit state.

A. Compressive load of 600 kN to the central hub of higher level.

The diagram below shows the chart base shear-movement

for the control node.

Figure 15. power curve (kN) - displacement (m) applying compressive load 600 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level

the maximum value of the diagram without the application of prestressing was

600.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 600

to the central hub of the upper level is

929.82 kN for displacement 0.1116 m

improving the carrying capacity is

978.77 - 929.82 = 48.95 kN

the percentage improvement in base shear is

48.95 / 900.62 = 5.4%

result

There is a slight improvement in the carrying capacity of the building,

due to the application of the compressive load on the central column of the building.

Page 19 of 34

B.Compressive load 600 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level.

The following figure shows the base shear diagram

- Movement on the control node.

Figure 16. power curve - Shift by applying compressive load 600 kN at 4 corner nodes of the upper level

the maximum value of the diagram without the application of prestressing was

900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 600 kN at 4

corner nodes of the upper level is.

978.77 kN for displacement 0.1044 m

improvement in carrying capacity is.

978.77 - 900.62 = 78.15 kN

the percentage improvement in base shear is.

218.39 / 900.62 = 8.7%

result

there is a slight improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in the four corner columns of the building.

Page 20 of 34

Γ. Compressive load 600 kN on all nodes of higher level.

The following figure shows the diagram base shear - displacement for node control

Figure 17. power curve ( kN ) - displacement ( m )

applying compressive load 600 kN on all nodes of higher level

the maximum value of the chart without applying prestressing was

900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 600 kN to all nodes of the upper level is

1,119.01 kN for displacement 0.1008 m

improvement in bearing capacity is 1119.01 - 900.62 = 218.39 kN

The percentage improvement in the maximum base shear is 218.39 / 900.62 = 24.2%

result

observed a significant improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in all the 9 columns of the building

Page 21 of 34

5.2.3 compressive load 1,200 kN to nodes of higher level

applied compressive load 1,200 kN to nodes of higher level, ratio of prestressing force.

initially ( A ) charged with the compressive strength the four corner columns

slowly charged and nine columns of the building

applied compressive load 1,200 kN to nodes of higher level due to the prestressing force.

The positive trend in each column is

1200 kN / ( 0.30 m *0.40 m ) = 10,000 kN/m2 =10 MPa

the ultimate limit state of the column due to grief (taking into account the safety factor has a value of 1.5 for concrete)

the tensile strength for concrete C 30 is 30 MPa / 1.5 = 20 MPa

therefore

The positive trend in columns

corresponds to 10/20 = 50% strain at break

A. compressive load 1,200 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level

The following figure shows the base shear diagram - movement on the control node.

Figure 18. power curve (kN) - Displacement (m) applied compressive load 1,200 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level.

Page 22 of 34

the maximum value of the chart without applying prestressing was

900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying compressive load 1200 kN at 4 corner points of the maximum level is

995.46 kN for displacement 0.1188 m

improvement in bearing capacity is

995.46 - 900.62 = 10.5%

result

there is a slight improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in the four corner columns of the building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B. compressive load 1,200 all nodes of higher level.

The following figure shows the base shear - displacement diagram for the control node.

Figure 19. power curve ( kN ) - Displacement (m) applied compressive load 1,200 kN all nodes of higher level.

the maximum value of the diagram without the application of prestressing was

900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 1200 kN on all nodes of higher level is 1, 179.33 kN for displacement 0.0864 m

improvement in bearing capacity is

1179.33 - 900.62 = 278.71 kN

The percentage improvement in base shear is

278.71 / 900.62 = 30.9%

result

observed a significant improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in all nine columns of the building

Page 23 of 34

Conclusions.

when the system is applied to all columns, then leads to significantly increased values ​​of the bearing capacity of the building.

considered that the results of the preliminary investigation are encouraging.

required

Further detailed investigation of the system in two phases.

First-level analytical simulation, which will consider more detailed models of structures with more charges.

second-level shake table experiment where you need to consider a range of construction, to scale.

To evaluate the system's behavior in real loading conditions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

experiment

after the experiment

next step is

a) Repair the transmission of seismic base

B) Experiment in two more phases with higher acceleration (speed)

c) If the model is not damaged, Ι will take off the bolts and I will do the experiment again without them. (comparing similar models with my system and without my system). to make some useful conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EXPERIMENT

this video shows the medium accelerations .

Even greater acceleration

Even greater speed than the other two times .

Look towards the end of the video that gets the beam base !

In this video got the beam broke the bearing of a bar that makes the transmission

reciprocating motion, and I had after 3.5 minutes that nodded to stop.

The model did not suffer the slightest , the base dissipated .

no cracking ... not suffered the slightest .

After the experiment

Edited by seismic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THIRD EXPERIMENT WITHOUT THE SYSTEM SEISMOSTOP

After the third experiment (Control structure model and base)

If the system I have is strong or not, by anchoring structures will be discussed later with another different experiment .

Consider if the foundation of the project with the ground and the roof is better seismic design of the existing earthquake regulations .

Imagine that fat in this experiment

there is only the construction and soil.

The construction in our model starts from the raft and above, and the ground of the iron based seismic and down.

I think that in the depths of a drilling anchors if the anchor is impossible for construction to pick up all this ground.

Since I consider the seismic base as ground very powerful clamping , in our experiment, think that soil is the seismic base, bearings , the W of the iron beam, the beams O.S which rests the foundation, and whatever else may be.

The model ground ( seismic base) join the tendons .

During the oscillation of the model tendons reacted to rising roof and raised the iron seismic base. The iron seismic base in turn raised his bearings which rests , bearings found resistance at the anode were in F the iron beam , and this is well anchored to the beam from the O.S lifted upwards.

All this is a result of chain torque model.

Removing the screws from the bottom of the base changed the whole scene .

The model not having the screws to hold it began to wobble dangerously . The bearings were no longer in the upward tendency of the beam Π, because the model of oscillated only on the basis of seismic iron . Instead of upward trends bearings took percussive strokes of the oscillation of raft on the seismic base. Bearings are dyed and not withstand the impact. For this and broke .

The model does not fight happened almost anything, because it was very powerful nodes ( horizontal and vertical ) and because it was not possible to test the accelerations tested the previous experiment with the bolts , because we would have complete reversal .

The conclusion I make myself is that if the model was more multi storey would have even more sway than that of two floors .... The first conclusion is that this earthquake is very much necessary for the fine buildings to stop the oscillation from the air, and the earthquake .

If this model O.S experiment was made ​​of bricks ( bricks ) without columns, imagine for yourself what would happen if there were no screws and rods . Conclusion necessary that the earthquake in the continuous construction.

This is my opinion .... I would be happy to know and yours .

Basically what makes this invention is that it makes far more powerful rigid large vertical elements , giving them greater resistance to both cutting as well as the lateral loads .

There are many designs for installation , which depend on the architectural design needs .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ultimate seismic system construction

We plan ductile structures, but we also need the torsional stiffness to stop the torsion of asymmetric floors.

Design methods yield (or else plastic zones) which are default locations of failure to be the first ultimate-yield in a powerful earthquake.

My invention provides...

a) vertical elements .... 1) stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation.

B) Better methods yield-or else plastic zones

Video design.

My invention provides...

a) vertical elements .... 1) stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation.

How...?

Brief description of the invention

The principal object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of the present invention as well as of the method for constructing building structures utilizing the hydraulic tie rod of the present invention is to minimise the aforesaid problems associated with the safety of construction structures in the event of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and very high lateral winds. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the building structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich. Said pre-stressing is applied by means of the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects. Said mechanism comprises a steel cable crossing freely in the centre the structure's vertical

support elements and also the length of a drilling beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the walls of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. Said steel cable's top end is tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism, exerting a continuous uplifting force. The pulling force applied to the steel cable by means of the hydraulic mechanism and the reaction to such pulling from the fixed anchor at the other end of it generate the desired prestressing in the construction project.

This prestressing ensures to the vertical elements of 1) greater stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation.

B) Better methods yield-or else plastic zones

In the video we see two static systems....one inside the other.

The first prestressed rigid structure has 1) greater stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation,...to receive large shocks from ductile static carrier and stop the deformation of ductile static carrier.

At the height of the plates created seismic joint for two reasons

1)The seismic joint gradually grows on the upper floors to avoid transferring loads to the lower floors, derived from the primary impact plate - elevator shaft

See the plan http://s5.postimg.org/rllh3dhzb/002.jpg

2)For to separate the vertical rigid elements of the ductile elements for better cooperation between these two structural systems

The seismic joint gives freedom to all the free movement of ductile construction which itself is a mechanism amortization of seismic energy.

Amortization of seismic energy ensures the invention of the video .. to

1) The hydraulic system on the roof.

2) The seismic joint

3) The horizontal seismic isolation

These two structural systems can work together as we see in the video

or we can only use the rigid structural system itself to build rigid structures, as indicated by the links

http://postimg.org/image/poaeawzrj/

1) Model response frame structure with absorption of energy at the base , on the roof , and bulkheads of slabs .

Is this the model construction

2 ) Plan model asymmetric multi-storey building with energy absorption in the base ,

the roof , and bulkheads of slabs .

Is this model http://postimage.org/image/tg1lzxv05/

3 ) Model response with energy absorption in the loft

Is this the model construction

and this in plan http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

4 ) Model response to absorption of energy in existing structures .

One of the many design models wall O.S transfected or transfected steel structures

http://postimage.org/image/k51vo9k15/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read something else...

not write it in the books.

As shown in Figure 1 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/

When the column is at stationary state, the static actions are balanced with the opposing forces of soil

As shown in Figure 3 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/

The oscillation of the building changes the vertical axis of the column

See the slope change P that is observed at the regional sides.

As shown in Figure 2 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/

The combination of static actions, Σ with the changes of vertical axis of the column, create the torsional moment P of the node.

How the invention stops the existence torsional moment P of the node.

As shown in Figure 4 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/

Clamped column can not be moved up and down because it is clamped with the ground, with the mechanism of the invention.

As shown in Figure 5 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/

The Clamped column with the ground, stops the oscillation of the vertical axis of the column, because the hydraulic mechanism of the invention applies an opposite stress in the rise of the roof Δ ( derived from the clamped anchor in soil ) and another inverted stress in the base Ε

As shown in Figure 6 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/

The Clamped column with the ground, transfer lateral load of inertia at the vertical axis of the column, as shear force.

This does not happen with the seismic design of today.

Τhe seismic design of today drives the shear forces at the small sections of the columns and beams.

What design is the best?

1) To plan the seismic design of today drives the shear forces at the small sections of the columns and beams.

or 2) To plan the seismic design of today drives the shear forces at the small sections of the columns and beams, plus...The Clamped column with the ground, transfer lateral load of inertia at the vertical axis of the column, as shear force?

Also ... prestressed construction ...

a) reduces the eigenfrequency construction / soil

B) Increases active behaviour of columns

c) Increases resistance to shear

e) improves the oblique tension

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All seismic systems that exist today have the idea of the horizontal seismic isolation.

The seismic system I propose is very different from other seismic systems.

a) It is the first sentence Awards I suggesting the clamped structure to the ground.

B) It is the first time worldwide that I suggest applying a reaction at the highest point of the roof, to stop the deformation of construction.

c) It is the first time worldwide that I suggest a system able to deflection earthquake loadings, to stronger cross-section able to receive the shear stress.

If you know a static model which will be able to stand on this seismic base.....

please tell me to do the experiment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE ULTIMATE CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM FOR EARTHQUAKE

The earthquakes in recent years around the world have put in first priority the major social and economic issue of the seismic behavior and overall seismic protection of structures against earthquakes .

Various methods have been developed to optimize the response of structures to seismic action

An important part of developments for seismic strengthening of buildings, does not agree with modern architectural needs , which require as much as possible free plans ( unbalanced construction) and reduction of structural elements of the building .

Also , the architectural needs differentiate the surface coverage of the building on each floor

. The problems arising from the application of these architectures claims is to create

* ultimate limit state at soft storey,

1. ) a change in the symmetry of the columns ,

1. ) stronger strain construction , because it creates a concentration effect of action on columns

* asymmetric structures is observed the torsional effect on floors .

Today

a) We plan ductile structures, but we also need the torsional stiffness to stop the torsion of asymmetric floors.

B) Design methods yield (or else plastic zones) which are default locations of failure to be the first ultimate-yield in a powerful earthquake.

This seismic design planning today is very useful but insufficient current architectural needs.

In my quest to design the ultimate seismic system, I built a mechanism and design a method with high earthquake resistance because it improves the indicators of

1. ) the ductile

1. ) Of the plastic zones

* The torsional stiffness of asymmetric structures ;

1. ) Improves resistance of the column relative to the shear force

* Increases active behaviour of columns

1. ) Improves awry tension

* Reduces vibration and deformability of the construction

* reduces resonant vibration

* It helps avoid the concentration effect of action at soft storey,

* In the pretension there is no problem of insufficient impertinence of concrete and steel .

* Ensures stronger foundation.

* ensures damping decrement of seismic loads , which leads to reduced resonant response

* The invention automatically improves the traction of steel which is observed in prestressed steel

The invention automatically improves clamped structure with the ground

even when the structure has recurrent vibration.

( Many circles loads)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE ULTIMATE CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM FOR EARTHQUAKE

The earthquakes in recent years around the world have put in first priority the major social and economic issue of the seismic behavior and overall seismic protection of structures against earthquakes .

Various methods have been developed to optimize the response of structures to seismic action

An important part of developments for seismic strengthening of buildings, does not agree with modern architectural needs , which require as much as possible free plans ( unbalanced construction) and reduction of structural elements of the building .

Also , the architectural needs differentiate the surface coverage of the building on each floor

. The problems arising from the application of these architectures claims is to create

1) ultimate limit state at soft storey,

2 ) a change in the symmetry of the columns ,

3 ) stronger strain construction , because it creates a concentration effect of action on columns

4) asymmetric structures is observed the torsional effect on floors .

Today

a) We plan ductile structures, but we also need the torsional stiffness to stop the torsion of asymmetric floors.

B) Design methods yield (or else plastic zones) which are default locations of failure to be the first ultimate-yield in a powerful earthquake.

This seismic design planning today is very useful but insufficient current architectural needs.

In my quest to design the ultimate seismic system, I built a mechanism and design a method with high earthquake resistance because it improves the indicators of

1 ) the ductile

How we can improve the ductility of columns of ductile structural system

Reply . Separating the ductile structural system of the rigid structural system,

by placing them between seismic joint, partition isometric seismic loads on the vertical elements of the two structural systems.

What will happen if we do not distinguish these two structural systems ;

When the earthquake started , the ductile columns bend because they have great elasticity .

Large rigid columns, do not bend because they have stiffness.

The result is ... all of the earthquake loads to be received from the rigid elements.

2 ) Of the plastic zones.

Question. How to improve the indicators of plastic zones;

Reply . Separating the ductile structural system of the rigid structural system,

by placing them between seismic joint.

The seismic joint works like the plastic zone for the yield load of the earthquake.

(Without Fail)

3) The torsional stiffness of asymmetric structures ;

Question. How to improve the indicators of torsional stiffness of asymmetric structures;

Reply. By placing more than one rigid structural systems (with the interposition of a seismic joint between at selected points) inside the asymmetric ductile static system

Even the pretension creates anyway stiffness.

4 ) Improves resistance of the column relative to the shear force

5) Increases active behaviour of columns

6 ) Improves awry tension

Question.

4) How do I improve the strength of the column relative to the shear force and shear force base;

5) How do I increase the active behaviour of columns;

6) How to Improve the oblique tension?

Reply . We know from the bibliography that pretension itself is very positive, because it improves the trajectories of oblique tension

On the other hand we have another good ... reduced cracking because we apply compression stress which increases the active behaviour of columns;, as well as increases the stiffness of the structure , which reduces the deflection causing failure.

7) Glider displacement node of higher level, and the deflection of the rigid structure

Question.

How glider displacement node of higher level, and the deflection of the rigid structure?

Reply. Introducing a new vertical resistance to the roof (stops the roof to get up) coming from the ground, through the mechanism of the invention.

Even the pretension creates anyway stiffness, and the deflection of the rigid structure.

8) lower the natural frequency of the soil and construction;

Question. How do we lower the natural frequency of the soil and construction;

Reply. Because the compression stress in the cross section of the columns, lowers the natural frequency

And because Introducing a new vertical resistance to the roof, it stop the natural frequency, because seismic damping applied to the width of the wave of the earthquake.

9) It helps avoid the concentration effect of action at soft storey,

10) In the pretension there is no problem of relevance ( consistency ) of concrete and steel .

Question.

9) How it helps to avoid concentration load intensity in soft floor;

10) How eliminates the problem of relevance of concrete and steel;

Reply. In a prestressed well, there are is not baffles and this gives the opportunity to work as a body to control the curve of the ductile system and keeps control over the vertical axis before break.

In prestressing there is no problem with the relevance as present in the inert reinforcing concrete because the clamped structure clamped at both ends of the mechanism of the invention, out of the concrete.

The deflection on the vertical axis of the ductile system

due to the difference spectrum of multiple plates, which tend to give the vertical axis in the form of S

If we take a candle and break it with your hands in the center will observe that

the candle breaks, but the wick stays in the candle.

But if you break the candle at its ends, will not do the same.

The interface of the two materials is less at the edges,

whereby smaller and the reaction

than is the reaction of the other party.

The result is the wick of the candle at the ends to lose its relevance and be pulled out of the candle

The same phenomenon is observed in the columns of the ground floor.

We always see when the columns fail, the steel pulled out of the concrete, shaped curve, but never cut.

The pretension applied the mechanism of the invention does not exhibit said the problem of relevance, simply because there is no link between concrete and tendon, because it passes freely through the concrete.

The tendon anchors applied to both ends of the mechanism out of the concrete.

11) Ensures stronger foundation.

Question. How did the invention provides a stronger foundation;

Reply. The clamping mechanism of the invention stops the building to go up and down. as does the screw with hanger bolts.

12) The invention automatically improves the traction of steel which is observed in prestressed steel

Reply.

The hydraulic system automatically improves - pulling steel - observer in pretension.

The hydraulic system automatically improves anchorage of the anchor to the ground and maintains the structure anchored to the ground,

even in many circles loads

13) ensures damping decrement of seismic loads , which leads to reduced resonant response

Reply.

The forces that cause energy called damping forces and always oppose the motion of the system running oscillation.

The design method that I follow dampening

1) horizontally at the base

2) at the level of (bulkheads) plates and the shaft. (Seismic joint)

3) on the roof, mounted the hydraulic system.

And all this without eliminating the ductility of the bearing, which in itself and is a damping seismic energy.

These two structural systems can work together, or we can only use the rigid component alone to build rigid structures

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Gurudev
      Hello,
      Can any one tell me what are the codes for design of steel structure in Egypt.
      Also how to account for seismic load i.e., seismic zonal map, soil condition, PGA, method of analysis etc.?
      When I searched it on google, I found few research paper but no official code or link for the code?
      Any help will be appreciated.
      Thanks in advance.
    • By Ausekle
      Hello!
      I find a couple of the instructions in Annex E to EN 1998-5 ("Simplified analysis for Retaining Structures") a bit confusing. Does anyone have any reflections or advice in order to help me understand EC's point of view regarding the two following issues?
      1) Why does the sign convention for term (1-kv) not match between the expression for calculating the force Ed (expression E.1) and the expressions for calculating the seismic inertia angle, teta (expressions E.6, E.13 and E.16). One might interpret it as follows: if (1-kv) is used for calculating the seismic inertia angle, then (1+kv) should be used in the final step of calculationg the force acting on wall and vice versa. This does not seem logical (same direction of vertical acceleration should be used throughout each analyzed case of pseudostatic analysis, i presume?) and it is in contradiction to what all other litterature that i have consulted (USACE, Steven L. Cramer among others) suggest. Is it just a typo? Perharps not a big thing, but i fear that this might confuse some engineers who are new in the field of seismic design (like myself) if they were to follow the code.
      2)EC have introduced a "simplified" expression E.3 for calculation K_AE when the conventional Mononobe-Okabe formula does not provide a solution (when limiting values for horizontal seismic cofficient (kh) and/or angle of friction are reached which results in imaginary values for the square root term in the equation). Somehow, I find it difficult to accept as an appropriate approach to the problem. In fact, if, for instance, kh is gradually increased, the K_AE value as calculated accordnig to the conventional Mononobe-Okabe formula will increase as well until the formula reaches it´s limit of validity region. If one then uses expression E.3 acc to Eurocode instead, the K_AE-values will then start to decrease for increased kh. So far i have only seen this approach in EC, no other litterature. Could it be that the justification of such approach is the assumption that when the conventional equation for k_AE has reachtd it´s limit of validity, the calculated maximum value is overly conservativ already? Spontaneously, I would rather use the maximum value of K_AE (just before the imaginary values start to apear) than expression E.3. Or use an alternative method for calculating the force when Mononobe-Okabe metod no longer is valid.
      Any reflections on one of the items above or both will be much appreciated! (I realize that this text turned out a bit congested, however, i hope i have managed to express myself clearly enough for those of you who have been in Contact with the mentioned section of EC. Otherwise, please, feel free to ask for clarifications!)
      Best Regards,
      Ausekle
    • By CrazyCheese
      Hi all, I came across this recently and thought I'd start my membership here by sharing:
      http://en.midasuser.com/news/news_view.asp?idx=184258&pg=1&sk=&so=&sort=&bid=74&nCat=
      I've attended one of their sessions before and it was ok. They start with general discussions about concepts and code preferences before moving on to software demonstration (That, I believe, is the real purpose of the series). Still, it's a good way to spend an hour.
    • By oswaldo
      Hello my name is Oswaldo, I'm doing a bachelor in civil engineering and my question is:
      What is the code with which I can make an anti seismic design of formwork and what type is the recommended formwork for this design.
    • By iihh
      Hello all,
      I'll start a design of a concrete building according Eurocodes. All foundations will be pad / isolated.
      I have some questions about foundation design.
      1. Have all foundation to be at one level in seismic region?
      2. How much could be the eccentricity relative to the foundation size?
      Thank you in advance