PEER Undergraduate Seismic Competition 2006 PEER SLC Summer Retreat Dongdong Chang.
-
date post
20-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of PEER Undergraduate Seismic Competition 2006 PEER SLC Summer Retreat Dongdong Chang.
• Provide Civil/Structural Engineering Undergraduates with a Hands on Experience with Seismic Design– Other Competitions: Steel Bridge and
Concrete Canoe
• Build Awareness of the Versatile Activities of PEER amongst Undergrads– Future Graduate Students
• Increase Value and Role of SLC
Thrust for Competition
• Design a Cost Effective 15-Level Commercial Office Structure to Resist Severe Earthquake Loading– Kobe, Northridge, El Centro
• Design Must Meet the Following Needs:– Economic (Maximize Exterior Openings)– Architectural (Not a box like structure)– Zoning Constraints (Setbacks)– A Given Load Distribution– Deformation Limitations
Competition Objectives
• First Competition Held on May 12th, 2004 at PEER NSF Site Visit (Richmond Field Station)– 5 Teams from PEER Competed– Approximately 1.5 Years of Planning/Development of
this Event on Behalf of PEER SLC Members
• MCEER Competition, Based on PEER Rules, Held on January 29th, 2005
• Second Competition Held on April 30th, 2005 at PEER Annual Meeting (Walnut Creek)– 6 Teams Competed (1 from MAE and 1 from MCEER)– Add performance prediction in judging rules
Competition History
• UC Irvine Girl’s Team – 1st place
• UC Irvine Boy’s Team – 2nd place
• UC San Diego – 3rd place
• UC Davis – 4th place
• Oregon State Univ. – 5th place
2004 Competitors
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1.25 lb9
1.25 lb10
2 lb11
2 lb12
2 lb13
2 lb14
2 lb15Floor Level
2004 Competition
Structural Loading
0.01 0.1 1 10Period (s)
0
10
20
30
SpectralAcceleration
(m /s2)
ElCentroNorthridgeKobe
Acceleration Response Spectra for PEER UndergraduateSeism ic Com petition Earthquake Motions (5% Dam ping)
Base Motions
Roof Acceleration
Base Acceleration
rationRoofAccele
BaseDispRoofDispeCoefPerformanc
max
max
dtdtrationBaseAcceleBaseDisp
dtdtrationRoofAcceleRoofDisp
Measured
Structure Roof Acceleration
Shaker Base Acceleration
Computed
Small PerformanceCoef is good!
Base Isolation – UC Irvine
A Busy Test Setup
2004 Competition – Testing Day
NSF Site Review Committee Members Watching UCSD Model
• UC Davis Team #2 – 1st place
• Florida A&M University (MCEER) – 2nd place
• UC Berkeley – 3rd place
• UC Davis Team #2 – 4th place
• Oregon State Univ. – 5th place
• Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (MAE) – 6th place
2005 Competitors
2005 Competition -- Changes
• Add a 12 – 14 lbs Roof Weight to Structure
• Add Structural Seismic Performance Prediction in the Scoring Criteria:– PerformanceCoef. – 75%– Performance Prediction – 25%
12 to 20 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb
1.25 lb8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1.25 lb9
1.25 lb10
2 lb11
2 lb12
2 lb13
2 lb14
2 lb15Floor Level
Add Roof Weight/Sculpture in 2005 Competition.
2005 Competition
Structural Loading
0 1 2 3x, Acceleration (g)
0
1
2
3
4
5
f(x
)
Team 1( = 0.8g, = 0.1g)
Team 2( = 1.0g, = 0.5g)
Performance Prediction
• Scoring Criteria: Validity of Using PerformanceCoef. As the
Major Criteria for Seismic Performance
• Base Isolation: Almost All Teams Used Base Isolation
System and Some of The Displacement Drift Is Not Reasonable Nor Realistic
Problems from 2005 Competition
Plan of 2006 Seismic Competition
• April 20th – 21st, Mascone Center, SF.
• Rules Changes Based on Feedback and Limitations From 2005 Competition.
• New Seismic Chairs Committee.
• Teams National Wide: PEER, MAE, MCEER.
• A New Performance-Based Scoring Method
• Base Isolation Displacement is Limited
• Model Dimensions Limitation: – Height < ~1.5m
– Total Plan Area < 1.0 ~ 3.0 m2
• Allowed:– Seismic Lateral Force Resistance Systems
• Add Two Special Awards: – Spirit of The Competition
– Structural Innovation
2006 Competition Rules Changes
Performance-Based Scoring Method
Three Primary Components:• Annual Income • Annual Initial Building Cost• Annual Seismic Cost
The Structure Performance is Measured by Annual Revenue
Annual Revenue = Annual Income –
Annual Initial Building Cost – Annual Seismic Cost
Structure Performance Measurement
• Annual Seismic Cost– Three Accelerometers at the Roof, the First Floor,
and the Shake Table Base• EDP1: Peak Relative Drift Between Roof and First Floor
(Lost Caused by Structural Damage)
• EDP2: Peak Absolute Roof Acc.
(Lost Caused by Equipment Damage)
– Annual Economical Damage = Sum of Economical Lost of the Two EDP for the Ground Motion Divided by Return Period of the Ground Motion
– Annual Seismic Cost = Sum of The Annual Economical Damage for the Three Ground Motions
• Oral presentation
• Poster
• Final scoring (the annual revenue)
• Architecture
• Workmanship
• Special awards
2006 Competition Scoring