DOCSLIB.ORG

FEMA P-2091, a Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FEMA P-2091, a Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction A Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction FEMA P-2091 / December 2020 FEMA P-2091 / December 2020 A Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction Prepared by APPLIED TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL 201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 240 Redwood City, California 94065 www.ATCouncil.org Prepared for FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY Michael Mahoney, Project Officer Robert D. Hanson, Subject Matter Expert Washington, D.C. APPLIED TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL Jon A. Heintz, Program Executive, Program Manager Ayse Hortacsu, Project Manager PROJECT TECHNICAL COMMITTEE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS Bret Lizundia (Project Technical Director) Timothy D. Ancheta C.B. Crouse Laurel Jiang Steve Harris Ricardo Henoch Boris Jeremic Gyimah Kasali Jonathan P. Stewart Lisa M. Star Michael Valley Christos Tokas Jiejing Zhou PROJECT REVIEW PANEL Peter Lee Sissy Nikolaou* Robert Pekelnicky Payman Khalili Tehrani *ATC Board Representative Notice Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the Applied Technology Council (ATC), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), or the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Additionally, neither ATC, DHS, FEMA, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product, or process included in this publication. Users of information from this publication assume all liability arising from such use. The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies. Cover image – Photo of project site showing soil conditions and foundation and superstructure under construction. Preface Modern building codes include criteria for how ground motions enter a structure’s foundation and affect the building response. This soil-structure interaction (SSI) can make a substantial difference in how buildings behave during earthquake shaking and how they should be designed, yet there is relatively little implementation of SSI effects by practicing structural engineers. Provisions are available in ASCE/SEI 7-16 and in ASCE/SEI 41-17 that can be used to address SSI. In addition, a research report prepared by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) published in 2012 is also a valuable resource. In 2019, the Applied Technology Council (ATC), with funding from FEMA under Task Order Contract HSFE60-17-D-1005, commenced the ATC-144 project. The objective of this project was to develop this document, A Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction, to present information regarding SSI as implemented in code provisions but in an easy-to- understand, concise format targeted toward practicing engineers to help them determine when SSI effects are of importance and show them examples of how to implement them in design. ATC is indebted to the leadership of Bret Lizundia, Project Technical Director, and to the members of the ATC-144 Project Team for their efforts in developing this Guide. The Project Technical Committee, consisting of C.B. Crouse, Steve Harris, Boris Jeremic, Bret Lizundia (Chair), Jonathan Stewart, and Michael Valley, performed the technical development efforts and served as primary authors. Tim Ancheta, Laurel Jiang, Gyimah Kasali, and Lisa Star assisted in the development of the design examples, and Ricardo Henoch and Jiejing Zhou provided detailed review of the design examples as members of the Project Working Group. Chris Tokas developed many of the figures in the document. The Project Review Panel, consisting of Peter Lee, Sissy Nikolaou, Robert Pekelnicky, and Payman Khalili Tehrani provided technical review, advice, and consultation at key stages of the work. The names and affiliations of all who contributed to this report are provided in the list of Project Participants. FEMA P-2091 Preface iii ATC also gratefully acknowledges Michael Mahoney (FEMA Project Officer), and Robert D. Hanson (FEMA Subject Matter Expert) for their input and guidance in the preparation of this document. Carrie J. Perna (ATC) provided report production services. Ayse Hortacsu Jon A. Heintz ATC Director of Projects ATC Executive Director iv Preface FEMA P-2091 Table of Contents Preface ........................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ............................................................................................... ix List of Tables ................................................................................................xv 1. Introduction ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview .................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Types of Soil-Structure Interaction Modeling .......................... 1-1 1.3 Purpose of the Guide ................................................................ 1-2 1.4 Scope of the Guide ................................................................... 1-2 1.5 Target Audience for the Guide ................................................. 1-2 1.6 Key SSI Terminology ............................................................... 1-3 1.7 Tips for Understanding and Implementing SSI ........................ 1-4 1.8 Organization of the Guide ........................................................ 1-5 2. Situations Where SSI is Important ................................................. 2-1 2.1 Overview .................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Large Building Footprint Reduces Design Forces ................... 2-1 2.3 Substantial Foundation Embedment Reduces Design Forces ....................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 High Structure-to-Soil Stiffness Ratios Will Lengthen Period and Change Design Forces ....................................................... 2-2 2.5 Foundation Rocking Impacts Superstructure Behavior ............ 2-4 3. Rule of Thumb Test for Inertial SSI Significance ......................... 3-1 3.1 Overview .................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Key Equation ............................................................................ 3-1 3.3 Determining Average Effective Shear Wave Velocity ............. 3-2 3.4 Determining Fundamental Period of the Structure ................... 3-3 3.5 Example .................................................................................... 3-4 3.5.1 Building Description ................................................... 3-4 3.5.2 Average Effective Shear Wave Velocity ..................... 3-6 3.5.3 Fundamental Period of the Structure ........................... 3-7 3.5.4 Structure-to-Soil Stiffness Ratio ................................. 3-7 3.6 Comparisons Using Site Class ................................................. 3-7 4. Base Slab Averaging ........................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Overview .................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Key Equations .......................................................................... 4-2 4.3 Determining Effective Foundation Size ................................... 4-3 4.4 Determining whether Base Slab Averaging Applies ................ 4-3 4.5 Limitations and Issues .............................................................. 4-4 4.6 Example .................................................................................... 4-5 FEMA P-2091 Table of Contents v 5. Embedment Effects .......................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Overview................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Key Equation ............................................................................ 5-1 5.3 Determining Depth of Embedment ........................................... 5-2 5.4 Limitations and Issues .............................................................. 5-6 5.5 Example .................................................................................... 5-7 6. Foundation and Soil Flexibility ....................................................... 6-1 6.1 Overview................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Soil Properties for Flexibility Calculations .............................. 6-2 6.3 Vertical and Rotational Springs ................................................ 6-3 6.3.1 Method 1 – Rigid Foundation and Flexible Soil .......... 6-3 6.3.2 Method 2 – Flexible Foundation and Nonlinear Flexible Soil ................................................................. 6-8 6.3.3 Method 3 – Flexible Foundation and Linear Flexible Soil ............................................................................... 6-8 6.4 Horizontal Springs .................................................................... 6-9 6.4.1 Method 1 .................................................................... 6-10 6.4.2 Resistance due to Passive Pressure ............................ 6-12 6.4.3 Resistance due to Friction or Cohesion ..................... 6-13 6.5 Bounding Analyses ................................................................. 6-14 6.6 Vertical and Rotational Spring
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2021 Oregon Seismic Hazard Database: Purpose and Methods
    State of Oregon Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Brad Avy, State Geologist DIGITAL DATA SERIES 2021 OREGON SEISMIC HAZARD DATABASE: PURPOSE AND METHODS By Ian P. Madin1, Jon J. Francyzk1, John M. Bauer2, and Carlie J.M. Azzopardi1 2021 1Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 800 NE Oregon Street, Suite 965, Portland, OR 97232 2Principal, Bauer GIS Solutions, Portland, OR 97229 2021 Oregon Seismic Hazard Database: Purpose and Methods DISCLAIMER This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. This publication cannot substitute for site-specific investigations by qualified practitioners. Site-specific data may give results that differ from the results shown in the publication. WHAT’S IN THIS PUBLICATION? The Oregon Seismic Hazard Database, release 1 (OSHD-1.0), is the first comprehensive collection of seismic hazard data for Oregon. This publication consists of a geodatabase containing coseismic geohazard maps and quantitative ground shaking and ground deformation maps; a report describing the methods used to prepare the geodatabase, and map plates showing 1) the highest level of shaking (peak ground velocity) expected to occur with a 2% chance in the next 50 years, equivalent to the most severe shaking likely to occur once in 2,475 years; 2) median shaking levels expected from a suite of 30 magnitude 9 Cascadia subduction zone earthquake simulations; and 3) the probability of experiencing shaking of Modified Mercalli Intensity VII, which is the nominal threshold for structural damage to buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • Bray 2011 Pseudostatic Slope Stability Procedure Paper
    Paper No. Theme Lecture 1 PSEUDOSTATIC SLOPE STABILITY PROCEDURE Jonathan D. BRAY 1 and Thaleia TRAVASAROU2 ABSTRACT Pseudostatic slope stability procedures can be employed in a straightforward manner, and thus, their use in engineering practice is appealing. The magnitude of the seismic coefficient that is applied to the potential sliding mass to represent the destabilizing effect of the earthquake shaking is a critical component of the procedure. It is often selected based on precedence, regulatory design guidance, and engineering judgment. However, the selection of the design value of the seismic coefficient employed in pseudostatic slope stability analysis should be based on the seismic hazard and the amount of seismic displacement that constitutes satisfactory performance for the project. The seismic coefficient should have a rational basis that depends on the seismic hazard and the allowable amount of calculated seismically induced permanent displacement. The recommended pseudostatic slope stability procedure requires that the engineer develops the project-specific allowable level of seismic displacement. The site- dependent seismic demand is characterized by the 5% damped elastic design spectral acceleration at the degraded period of the potential sliding mass as well as other key parameters. The level of uncertainty in the estimates of the seismic demand and displacement can be handled through the use of different percentile estimates of these values. Thus, the engineer can properly incorporate the amount of seismic displacement judged to be allowable and the seismic hazard at the site in the selection of the seismic coefficient. Keywords: Dam; Earthquake; Permanent Displacements; Reliability; Seismic Slope Stability INTRODUCTION Pseudostatic slope stability procedures are often used in engineering practice to evaluate the seismic performance of earth structures and natural slopes.
    [Show full text]
  • Living on Shaky Ground: How to Survive Earthquakes and Tsunamis
    HOW TO SURVIVE EARTHQUAKES AND TSUNAMIS IN OREGON DAMAGE IN doWNTOWN KLAMATH FALLS FRom A MAGNITUde 6.0 EARTHQUAke IN 1993 TSUNAMI DAMAGE IN SEASIde FRom THE 1964GR EAT ALASKAN EARTHQUAke 1 Oregon Emergency Management Copyright 2009, Humboldt Earthquake Education Center at Humboldt State University. Adapted and reproduced with permission by Oregon Emergency You Can Prepare for the Management with help from the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Reproduction by permission only. Next Quake or Tsunami Disclaimer This document is intended to promote earthquake and tsunami readiness. It is based on the best SOME PEOplE THINK it is not worth preparing for an earthquake or a tsunami currently available scientific, engineering, and sociological because whether you survive or not is up to chance. NOT SO! Most Oregon research. Following its suggestions, however, does not guarantee the safety of an individual or of a structure. buildings will survive even a large earthquake, and so will you, especially if you follow the simple guidelines in this handbook and start preparing today. Prepared by the Humboldt Earthquake Education Center and the Redwood Coast Tsunami Work Group (RCTWG), If you know how to recognize the warning signs of a tsunami and understand in cooperation with the California Earthquake Authority what to do, you will survive that too—but you need to know what to do ahead (CEA), California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), of time! California Geological Survey (CGS), Department of This handbook will help you prepare for earthquakes and tsunamis in Oregon. Interior United States Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration It explains how you can prepare for, survive, and recover from them.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond the Angle of Repose: a Review and Synthesis of Landslide Processes in Response to Rapid Uplift, Eel River, Northern Eel River, Northern California
    Portland State University PDXScholar Geology Faculty Publications and Presentations Geology 2-23-2015 Beyond the Angle of Repose: A Review and Synthesis of Landslide Processes in Response to Rapid Uplift, Eel River, Northern Eel River, Northern California Joshua J. Roering University of Oregon Benjamin H. Mackey University of Canterbury Alexander L. Handwerger University of Oregon Adam M. Booth Portland State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/geology_fac David A. Schmidt Univ Persityart of of the W Geologyashington Commons , Geomorphology Commons, and the Geophysics and Seismology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y See next page for additional authors Citation Details Roering, Joshua J., Mackey, Benjamin H., Handwerger, Alexander L., Booth, Adam M., Schmidt, David A., Bennett, Georgina L., Cerovski-Darriau, Corina, Beyond the angle of repose: A review and synthesis of landslide pro-cesses in response to rapid uplift, Eel River, Northern California, Geomorphology (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.02.013 This Post-Print is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Geology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Joshua J. Roering, Benjamin H. Mackey, Alexander L. Handwerger, Adam M. Booth, David A. Schmidt, Georgina L. Bennett, and Corina Cerovski-Darriau This post-print is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/geology_fac/75 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Beyond the angle of repose: A review and synthesis of landslide processes in response to rapid uplift, Eel River, Northern California Joshua J.
    [Show full text]
  • Position, Displacement, Velocity Big Picture
    Position, Displacement, Velocity Big Picture I Want to know how/why things move I Need a way to describe motion mathematically: \Kinematics" I Tools of kinematics: calculus (rates) and vectors (directions) I Chapters 2, 4 are all about kinematics I First 1D, then 2D/3D I Main ideas: position, velocity, acceleration Language is crucial Physics uses ordinary words but assigns specific technical meanings! WORD ORDINARY USE PHYSICS USE position where something is where something is velocity speed speed and direction speed speed magnitude of velocity vec- tor displacement being moved difference in position \as the crow flies” from one instant to another Language, continued WORD ORDINARY USE PHYSICS USE total distance displacement or path length traveled path length trav- eled average velocity | displacement divided by time interval average speed total distance di- total distance divided by vided by time inter- time interval val How about some examples? Finer points I \instantaneous" velocity v(t) changes from instant to instant I graphically, it's a point on a v(t) curve or the slope of an x(t) curve I average velocity ~vavg is not a function of time I it's defined for an interval between instants (t1 ! t2, ti ! tf , t0 ! t, etc.) I graphically, it's the \rise over run" between two points on an x(t) curve I in 1D, vx can be called v I it's a component that is positive or negative I vectors don't have signs but their components do What you need to be able to do I Given starting/ending position, time, speed for one or more trip legs, calculate average
    [Show full text]
  • Earthquake/Landslide Death Scene Investigation Supplement
    Death Scene Investigation Supplement EARTHQUAKE/LANDSLIDE 1 DECEDENT PERSONAL DETAILS Last Name: First Name: Sex: Law Enforcement Case Number (if available): Male Female ME/C Case Number (if available): Law Enforcement Agency (if applicable): Date of Birth: Date of Death: Estimated Found Known MM DD YYYY MM DD YYYY Location of Injury (physical address, including ZIP code): 2 LOCATION OF THE DECEDENT Was the decedent found INDOORS? Yes No Complete 2A: OUTDOORS In what part of residence or building was the decedent found? Did the incident destroy the location? Yes No Unknown Did the incident collapse the walls or ceiling of the location? Yes No Unknown 2A OUTDOORS Was the decedent found OUTDOORS? Yes No Go to Section 3: Information about Circumstances of Death Any evidence the person was previously in a... Structure? Yes No Unknown Vehicle? Yes No Unknown 3 INFORMATION ABOUT CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH Does the cause of death appear to be due to any of the following? Select all potential causes of death. Complete all corresponding sections, THEN go to Section 7. Injury – Struck by (e.g., falling object)/Blunt force/Burns Complete Section 4: Injury Questions Motor Vehicle Crash Complete Section 5: Motor Vehicle Crash Questions Other (e.g., exacerbation of chronic diseases) Complete Section 6: Other Non-Injury Causes Questions 1 4 INJURY QUESTIONS How did the injury occur? Check all that apply: Hit by or struck against (Describe) Crushed (Describe) Asphyxia (Describe) Cut/laceration/impaled (Describe) Electric current or burn (Describe) Burn and/or
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution Pattern of Landslides Triggered by the 2014
    International Journal of Geo-Information Article Distribution Pattern of Landslides Triggered by the 2014 Ludian Earthquake of China: Implications for Regional Threshold Topography and the Seismogenic Fault Identification Suhua Zhou 1,2, Guangqi Chen 1 and Ligang Fang 2,* 1 Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan; [email protected] (S.Z.); [email protected] (G.C.) 2 Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China * Correspondance: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-731-8253-9756 Academic Editor: Wolfgang Kainz Received: 16 February 2016; Accepted: 11 March 2016; Published: 30 March 2016 Abstract: The 3 August 2014 Ludian earthquake with a moment magnitude scale (Mw) of 6.1 induced widespread landslides in the Ludian County and its vicinity. This paper presents a preliminary analysis of the distribution patterns and characteristics of these co-seismic landslides. In total, 1826 landslides with a total area of 19.12 km2 triggered by the 3 August 2014 Ludian earthquake were visually interpreted using high-resolution aerial photos and Landsat-8 images. The sizes of the landslides were, in general, much smaller than those triggered by the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. The main types of landslides were rock falls and shallow, disrupted landslides from steep slopes. These landslides were unevenly distributed within the study area and concentrated within an elliptical area with a 25-km NW–SE striking long axis and a 15-km NW–SE striking short axis. Three indexes including landslides number (LN), landslide area ratio (LAR), and landslide density (LD) were employed to analyze the relation between the landslide distribution and several factors, including lithology, elevation, slope, aspect, distance to epicenter and distance to the active fault.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk Analysis of Soil Liquefaction in Earthquake Disasters
    E3S Web of Conferences 118, 03037 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/201911803037 ICAEER 2019 Risk analysis of soil liquefaction in earthquake disasters Yubin Zhang1,* 1National Earthquake Response Support Service, Beijing 100049, P. R. China Abstract. China is an earthquake-prone country. With the development of urbanization in China, the effect of population aggregation becomes more and more obvious, and the Casualty Risk of earthquake disasters also increases. Combining with the characteristics of earthquake liquefaction, this paper analyses the disaster situation of soil liquefaction caused by earthquake in Indonesia. The internal influencing factors of soil liquefaction and the external dynamic factors caused by earthquake are summarized, and then the evaluation factors of seismic liquefaction are summarized. The earthquake liquefaction risk is indexed to facilitate trend analysis. The index of earthquake liquefaction risk is more conducive to the disaster trend analysis of soil liquefaction risk areas, which is of great significance for earthquake disaster rescue. 1 Risk analysis of earthquake an earthquake of M7.5 occurred in the Palu region of liquefaction Indonesia. The liquefaction caused by the earthquake is evident in its severity and spatial range. According to the Earthquake disasters often cause serious damage to us report of Indonesia's National Disaster Response Agency because they are unpredictable. Search the US Geological (BNPB), more than 3,000 people were missing in Petobo Survey (USGS) website for the number of earthquakes and Balaroa, two of Palu's worst-hit areas. These with magnitude 6 and above in the last 50 years, about situations were compared with remote sensing images 7,000times.Earthquake liquefaction has existed since before and after the disaster.
    [Show full text]
  • SEISMIC ANALYSIS of SLIDING STRUCTURES BROCHARD D.- GANTENBEIN F. CEA Centre D'etudes Nucléaires De Saclay, 91
    n 9 COMMISSARIAT A L'ENERGIE ATOMIQUE CENTRE D1ETUDES NUCLEAIRES DE 5ACLAY CEA-CONF —9990 Service de Documentation F9II9I GIF SUR YVETTE CEDEX Rl SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF SLIDING STRUCTURES BROCHARD D.- GANTENBEIN F. CEA Centre d'Etudes Nucléaires de Saclay, 91 - Gif-sur-Yvette (FR). Dept. d'Etudes Mécaniques et Thermiques Communication présentée à : SMIRT 10.' International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology Anaheim, CA (US) 14-18 Aug 1989 SEISHIC ANALYSIS OF SLIDING STRUCTURES D. Brochard, F. Gantenbein C.E.A.-C.E.N. Saclay - DEHT/SMTS/EHSI 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex 1. INTRODUCTION To lirait the seism effects, structures may be base isolated. A sliding system located between the structure and the support allows differential motion between them. The aim of this paper is the presentation of the method to calculate the res- ponse of the structure when the structure is represented by its elgenmodes, and the sliding phenomenon by the Coulomb friction model. Finally, an application to a simple structure shows the influence on the response of the main parameters (friction coefficient, stiffness,...). 2. COULOMB FRICTION HODEL Let us consider a stiff mass, layed on an horizontal support and submitted to an external force Fe (parallel to the support). When Fg is smaller than a limit force ? p there is no differential motion between the support and the mass and the friction force balances the external force. The limit force is written: Fj1 = \x Fn where \i is the friction coefficient and Fn the modulus of the normal force applied by the mass to the support (in this case, Fn is equal to the weight of the mass).
    [Show full text]
  • PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION WASHINGTON PARK RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS Portland, Oregon
    APPENDIX H PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION WASHINGTON PARK RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS Portland, Oregon REPORT July 2011 CORNFORTH Black & Veatch CONSULTANTS APPENDIX H Report to: Portland Water Bureau 1120 SW 5th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204-1926 and Black and Veatch 5885 Meadows Road, Suite 700 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION WASHINGTON PARK RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS PORTLAND, OREGON July 2011 Submitted by: Cornforth Consultants, Inc. 10250 SW Greenburg Road, Suite 111 Portland, OR 97223 APPENDIX H 2114 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. iv 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 General .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Site and Project Background ......................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope of Work .............................................................................................................. 1 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 3 2.1 General .......................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Companion Studies ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Oscillations
    CHAPTER FOURTEEN OSCILLATIONS 14.1 INTRODUCTION In our daily life we come across various kinds of motions. You have already learnt about some of them, e.g., rectilinear 14.1 Introduction motion and motion of a projectile. Both these motions are 14.2 Periodic and oscillatory non-repetitive. We have also learnt about uniform circular motions motion and orbital motion of planets in the solar system. In 14.3 Simple harmonic motion these cases, the motion is repeated after a certain interval of 14.4 Simple harmonic motion time, that is, it is periodic. In your childhood, you must have and uniform circular enjoyed rocking in a cradle or swinging on a swing. Both motion these motions are repetitive in nature but different from the 14.5 Velocity and acceleration periodic motion of a planet. Here, the object moves to and fro in simple harmonic motion about a mean position. The pendulum of a wall clock executes 14.6 Force law for simple a similar motion. Examples of such periodic to and fro harmonic motion motion abound: a boat tossing up and down in a river, the 14.7 Energy in simple harmonic piston in a steam engine going back and forth, etc. Such a motion motion is termed as oscillatory motion. In this chapter we 14.8 Some systems executing study this motion. simple harmonic motion The study of oscillatory motion is basic to physics; its 14.9 Damped simple harmonic motion concepts are required for the understanding of many physical 14.10 Forced oscillations and phenomena. In musical instruments, like the sitar, the guitar resonance or the violin, we come across vibrating strings that produce pleasing sounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of Response Spectrum Analysis in Historical Buildings
    Transactions on the Built Environment vol 15, © 1995 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509 Application of response spectrum analysis in historical buildings M.E. Stavroulaki, B. Leftheris Institute of Applied Mechanics, Department of Engineering Greece Abstract The basic concepts and assumptions used in the response spectrum analysis method is reviewed in this paper with respect to its application in historical buildings. More specifically, the methodology of modeling and the applica- tion of the response spectrum analysis is described and discussed through our work with the Lighthouse at the Venetian Harbor of Chania. 1 Introduction The main cause of damage in building structures during an earthquake is usually their response to ground induced motions. In order to evaluate the behaviour of the structure for this type of loading condition, the princip- les of structural dynamics must be applied to determine the stresses and deflections generated in the structure. The dynamic characteristics of the building is established by its natu- ral frequencies, modes and damping: the analysis is based on linear-elastic behaviour of materials and the ground input motion is a smoothed de- sign spectrum in order to calculate the maximum values of the structural response. In this work we describe the application of response spectrum analysis to the Lighthouse at the Venetian Harbour of Chania. We use the example, however, to discuss the requirements of response spectrum analy- sis for historical buildings in general. The Lighthouse is a masonry structure built by the Egyptians in 1838. Transactions on the Built Environment vol 15, © 1995 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509 94 Dynamics, Repairs & Restoration 2 Finite Element modeling of masonry structures The finite element method of analysis requires the selection of an appro- priate model that would sufficiently represent the real structure.
    [Show full text]