CTA, MST – seismic calculation Roland Platzer, ZM1 DESY Hamburg Munich, January 28 th, 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Evaluation of shell thicknesses Prof. Ch. Baniotopoulos I. Lavassas, G. Nikolaidis, P.Zervas Institute of Steel Structures Aristotle Univ. of Thessaloniki,
Advertisements

An-Najah National University
Chp12- Footings.
ETABS Three Dimensional Static and Dynamic Analysis and Design of Buildings.
MEEG 5113 Modal Analysis Set 3.
1 Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3© 2012 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved. Structural Analysis of a Nuclear Fuel Handling Machine.
Beams and Frames.
Finite Element Model Generation Model size Element class – Element type, Number of dimensions, Size – Plane stress & Plane strain – Higher order elements.
ANALYSES OF STABILITY OF CAISSON BREAKWATERS ON RUBBLE FOUNDATION EXPOSED TO IMPULSIVE WAVE LOADS Burcharth, Andersen & Lykke Andersen ICCE 2008, Hamburg,
Seismic design for the wind turbine tower (WP1.5 background document presentation) Institute of Steel Structures Aristotle Univ. of Thessaloniki.
SOFTWARE USED CAESER II ISOMETRIC DRAWING PREFACE Piping Stress analysis is a term applied to calculations, which address the static and dynamic loading.
SEISMIC ANALYSIS Stability of a slope can be affected by seismicity in two ways: earthquake and blasting. These seismic motions are capable of inducing.
Mechanical Vibrations
#1 212 Ketter Hall, North Campus, Buffalo, NY Fax: Tel: x 2400 Control of Structural Vibrations Lecture.
ENGR 225 Section
Team K-TRON Team Members: Ryan Vroom Geoff Cunningham Trevor McClenathan Brendan Tighe.
Dynamics Free vibration: Eigen frequencies
FE Modeling Strategy Decide on details from design Find smallest dimension of interest Pick element types – 1D Beams – 2D Plate or.
A Comparison of Numerical Methods and Analytical Methods in Determination of Tunnel Walls Displacement Behdeen Oraee-Mirzamani Imperial College London,
Studying Earthquakes. Seismology: the study of earthquakes and seismic waves.
Analyses of tunnel stability under dynamic loads Behdeen Oraee; Navid Hosseini; Kazem Oraee 1.
Introduction to virtual engineering László Horváth Budapest Tech John von Neumann Faculty of Informatics Institute of Intelligent Engineering.
RESPONSE SPECTRUM METHOD
Streamlined Process for Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Nuclear Facilities Utilizing GTSTRUDL and MTR/SASSI Wei Li, Michael Perez, Mansour Tabatabaie,
Fundamental Concepts and Principles
© 2011 Autodesk Freely licensed for use by educational institutions. Reuse and changes require a note indicating that content has been modified from the.
ID-2125 Marianela Najul KARLYS PULIDO PARICIA CAMACHO FRAMED STRUCTURE.
CABLE-STAYED BRIDGE SEISMIC ANALYSIS USING ARTIFICIAL ACCELEROGRAMS
Static Pushover Analysis
85M102006D. Seismic Analysis for a Turbine Building with Spring Supported Turbine / Generator Deck Feifei Lu, PE Shaw Power Group, Charlotte, NC June.
Bentley RM Bridge Seismic Design and Analysis
Using GSA & Compos for dynamic and footfall analysis 1 Footfall induced vibration analysis using Compos Thomas Li (Software Technology Group)
Prepared By: Mohammed wafiq omer Mahmoud hammad Abd Algani Sami Malath omair An-Najah National University Faculty of Engineering Civil Engineering Department.
Chapter 4 Forces and Newton’s Laws of Motion Why things move the way the do.
CH 14 Sections (3-4-10) Sound Wave. Sound is a wave (sound wave) Sound waves are longitudinal waves: longitudinal wave the particle displacement is parallel.
Chapter 4 Axial Load. Saint -Venant's Principle Saint-Venant's Principle claims that localized effects caused by any load acting on a body will dissipate.
Building Fun You will have 30 minutes to build the strongest structures you can with only the materials you are provided with. Explain to the class the.
PAT328, Section 3, March 2001MAR120, Lecture 4, March 2001S14-1MAR120, Section 14, December 2001 SECTION 14 STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS.
ATLAS thermosiphon project Piping design and seismic analysis framework Délio Ramos EN/MME,
Seismic Analysis of Some Geotechnical Problems – Pseudo-dynamic Approach Seismic Analysis of Some Geotechnical Problems – Pseudo-dynamic Approach Dr. Priyanka.
Strength of Material-1 Introduction. Dr. Attaullah Shah.
Response of MDOF structures to ground motion 1. If damping is well-behaving, or can be approximated using equivalent viscous damping, we can decouple.
MODELING OF SEISMIC SLOPE BEHAVIOR WITH SHAKING TABLE TEST Meei-Ling Lin and Kuo-Lung Wang Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University.
LATHE VIBRATIONS ANALYSIS ON SURFACE ROUHHNESS OF MACHINED DETAILS LATHE VIBRATIONS ANALYSIS ON SURFACE ROUHHNESS OF MACHINED DETAILS * Gennady Aryassov,
MODULE 08 MULTIDEGREE OF FREEDOM SYSTEMS. 2 Structure vibrating in a given mode can be considered as the Single Degree of Freedom (SDOF) system. Structure.
1 MIDTERM EXAM REVIEW. 2 m 081.SLDASM REVIEW Excitation force 50N normal to face k=10000N/m m=6.66kg Modal damping 5%
DEWEK 2004 Lecture by Aero Dynamik Consult GmbH, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Kleinhansl ADCoS – A Nonlinear Aeroelastic Code for the Complete Dynamic Simulation.
Overview of Lecture Series Dermot O’Dwyer. Material to be Covered Identify factors that Influence bridge response Identifying the types of problems that.
BASICS OF DYNAMICS AND ASEISMIC DESIGN
Page 1 Introduction to Lagrange Chapter 13 - RIGIDSMSC.Dytran Seminar Notes CHAPTER 13 - RIGIDS.
Mode Superposition Module 7. Training Manual January 30, 2001 Inventory # Module 7 Mode Superposition A. Define mode superposition. B. Learn.
Warm cryostat mechanical calculations A.Catinaccio PH-DT Engineering Office, CERN Page 1 CERN, May 27th 2015.
EC3 VERIFICATION SCIAENG® EC3 VERIFICATION SCIAENG® SPECIAL THANKS TO ALL INVOLVED D. ALVAREZ FEITO J.C. BATISTA LOPES C. BAULT O. BELTRAMELLO A.CATINACCIO.
ISEC-02 Second International Structural Engineering and Costruction Conference September 22-26,2003, Rome “EVALUATION AND RESULTS’ COMPARISON IN DYNAMIC.
Results Verification Has the model been correctly implemented?
Chapter I Vectors and Scalars AAIT Engineering Mechanics Statics Department of Tewodros N. Civil Engineering.
Basics of Earthquakes Frequency
ILC MDI Platform Concept
Mechanical Vibrations
Th 11 International Conference on Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures Protection of Masonry Housing in High Seismic Zones with Low-Cost Rubber.
AQQABA SECONDRY SCHOOL Structural Design.
Dead zone analysis of ECAL barrel modules under static and dynamic loads for ILD Thomas PIERRE-EMILE, Marc ANDUZE– LLR.
Implementation of 2D stress-strain Finite Element Modeling on MATLAB
DEFINITIONS Dynamics of Machinery
1 Course Code: SECV1030 Course Name: Engineering Mechanics Module 1 : Static.
STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS SEYE NIGUSSIE. Introduction WHAT IS STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS ?  Dynamics concerned with the study of force and motion which are time dependent.
Earthquake Magnitude Ahmed Elgamal
Analysis And Design Of AS-Shorooq Residential Building
Evaluation of shell thicknesses Prof. Ch. Baniotopoulos I. Lavassas, G. Nikolaidis, P.Zervas Institute of Steel Structures Aristotle Univ. of Thessaloniki,
CALTRANS SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA Version 1.7 November 2012
Presentation transcript:

CTA, MST – seismic calculation Roland Platzer, ZM1 DESY Hamburg Munich, January 28 th, 2013

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 2/21 CTA, MST – seismic calculation Topics > Calculation program > Calculation model > Calculations before > Assumptions for earthquake > RSTAB calcualtion > Program output > Calculation results

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 3/21 Calculation program RSTAB 7 Ing. Software Dlubal, Structural Analysis and Design Software ( > German-Czech company, since 1987 > Software from civil engineering, support structure planning > 3D-Models, statics and dynamics > Only Beam elements (FEA-module also available -> RFEM) > Method of analysis  Linear Static Analysis  Second-Order Analysis (Non-linear)  Large Deformation Analysis (Non-linear, Newton-Raphson) > Definition of load cases/groups/combinations with superimposing > Results as deformations, inner forces and reaction forces as well as stresses (from module Steel) > RSTAB Module Dynam:  Basis: natural frequencies, eigenmode  Addition I: forced vibration analysis, external excitation (tabular loads, harmonic functions, accelerogram)  Addition II: generation of equivalent seismic loads (DIN 4149, EC 8, IBC)

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 4/21 Calculation model Model restrictions > All members are described by beam elements > Significant cubic bodies and plates are described by girder, grids or rigid connections > Elements support all forces and moments in the three dimensions > All connections (nodes of the system) were modelled as rigid  exceptions are tie rods = beam type rope partly degrees of freedom for bearings > Large Deformation Analysis (Newton-Raphson) > Non perfect system  slag of tie rods of about L/500  misalignment of tubes (angle L/350 [~45 mm in total], bow L/350) > Only midpoints of mirrors, simplified clamps > No foundation implemented

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 5/21 Calculation model Model properties > Geometry based on MST prototype 1 status  1294 nodes, 1617 members > Used material is steel S 355:  Yield strength 355 MPa  E = MPa  Thermal expansion /K  Density 7850 kg/m³ > Structural weight considered > considered additional weights  mirrors: 35 kg/m² (43.6 kg per mirror, including AMC and support triangle)  camera: 2.5 t (distributed on 4 nodes)  counter weight: 2 times t => in total t

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 6/21 Calculation before Use cases, orientations and load combinations no.Wind Orientatio n Load Combination 1 50 km/hr # G 21.0G + 1.0W +1.0 T +30/ (G+Ga 100 ) + 1.5W T +30/ G + 1.5I T G I + 1.5Wi T G +1.5I Wi T # 2 1.0G 81.0G + 1.0W +1.0 T +30/ (G+Ga 100 ) + 1.5W T +30/ G + 1.5I T G I + 1.5Wi T G +1.5I Wi T # 3 1.0G 141.0G + 1.0W T +30/ (G+Ga 100 ) + 1.5W T +30/ G + 1.5I T G I + 1.5Wi T G +1.5I Wi T km/hr # 11.35(G+Ga 70 ) + 1.5W T +30/-50 20# 21.35(G+Ga 70 ) + 1.5W T +30/-50 21# 31.35(G+Ga 70 ) + 1.5W T +30/ km/hr # 11.35(G+Ga 10 ) + 1.5W T +30/-50 23# 21.35(G+Ga 10 ) + 1.5W T +30/-50 24# 31.35(G+Ga 10 ) + 1.5W T +30/ km/hr # G I + 1.5Wi T G + 1.5I Wi T # G I + 1.5Wi T G + 1.5I Wi T # G I + 1.5Wi T G + 1.5I Wi T km/hr # 41.35G + 1.5W T +50/-50 32# 51.35G + 1.5W T +50/-50 33# 61.35G + 1.5W T +50/-50

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 7/21 Assumption for earthquake Load combinations no.WindOrientationLoad Combination km/hr # 41.35G + 1.5W T +50/-50 35# 51.35G + 1.5W T +50/-50 36# 61.35G + 1.5W T +50/ No wind, Earthquake # 11.0 G E 38# 21.0 G E 39# 41.0 G E General Question: How react the MST main structure under seismic loading? Not included in that investigations are the behavior of equipment like mirrors, AMCs or electronic devices.

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 8/21 As a scenario was chosen an earthquake in California ( , 4:31) with a magnitude of 6.7 and a maximum horizontal acceleration of m/s² (= 0.47 g). The details are listed below. PlaceNorthridge Country California Latitude ° Longitude ° Depth18 km Name of monitoring stationLos Angeles - UCLA Grounds Land of monitoring stationCalifornia Latitude of monitoring station ° Longitude of monitoring station ° Distance of monitoring station to epicenter19 km Undergroundmarine deposit Amount of measures3000 Measure steps0.02 s Measure time s Maximum acceleration in X-direction m/s^2 Maximum acceleration in Y- direction4.646 m/s^2 Maximum acceleration in Z- direction2.606 m/s^2 Space wave-magnitude Mb6.700 Local magnitude Ml6.600 Surface wave magnitude Ms6.700 Assumption for earthquake Chosen earthquake

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 9/21 Assumption for earthquake Listed accelerations due to RSTAB-library

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 10/21 RSTAB calculation Assumptions in the input data > Time history analysis > Additional masses > Forces in members not considered yet > Damping Di = 0,01 (rough and low (?) estimation of “Lehrsches Dämpfungsmaß”) > No foundation and soil influence (soil bedding value) considered yet > Response spectrum method also possible > DIN 4149, EC 8, IBC > Classes/Categories, Ground ? > Ratio horizontal and vertical accelerations ? (e. g. 50 %) > Damping ?

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 11/21 Program Output Data reached from RSTAB calculation > Time history analysis chosen > Results as function of time and max/min > Natural frequencies > Eigenmodes > Inner forces > Reaction forces > Displacements, velocities and accelerations > Equivalent mass factors for validation > Disadvantage: huge data (1.2 GB) with timeline (could be reduced to min/max values) > Response spectrum method also possible > Only maximum values > Superposition as square root of sum of squares (SRSS rule) or complete quadratic combination (CQC rule)

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 12/21 Program Output Equivalent mass factors

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 13/21 Program Output Natural frequencies

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 14/21 Program Output Eigenmodes

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 15/21 Program Output Inner forces

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 16/21 Program Output Reaction forces

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 17/21 Program Output Displacements (velocities and accelerations also possible)

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 18/21 Calculation results Results regarding strength of MST prototype 1

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 19/21 Calculation results Results regarding strength of MST prototype 1

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 20/21 Calculation results Results regarding strength of MST prototype 1

Roland Platzer | seismic calculation | CTA, MST | January 28 th 2013 | Page 21/21 Seismic calculation Thank you for listening