Nees sfsi demonstration project
Download
1 / 33

NEES SFSI Demonstration Project - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 111 Views
  • Uploaded on

NEES SFSI Demonstration Project. Project Meeting – August 1, 2005 Austin, TX Matthew Dryden Prof. Gregory Fenves University of California, Berkeley. NEES SFSI Simulations – UCB Objectives. Develop component and system models for bridge-foundation system.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' NEES SFSI Demonstration Project' - fahim


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Nees sfsi demonstration project
NEES SFSI Demonstration Project

Project Meeting – August 1, 2005

Austin, TX

Matthew Dryden

Prof. Gregory Fenves

University of California, Berkeley


Nees sfsi simulations ucb objectives
NEES SFSI Simulations – UCBObjectives

  • Develop component and system models for bridge-foundation system.

  • Calibrate models using experimental data:

    • Column tests: cyclic model for columns

    • Field tests: response of single bent including pile-soil interaction

    • Centrifuge tests: response of piles, bents, and system at small scale

    • Shake table tests: response of structural system at large scale

  • Synthesize prototype system model from calibrated models and conduct parameter study on different configurations and site conditions.

  • Simulation tasks are coordinated between Univ. Washington, UC Davis, and UC Berkeley with coordination of project investigators.


Analysis of shaking table tests

Bent 3

Bent 2

Bent 1

Analysis of Shaking Table Tests

  • Calibration of OpenSees structural model based on data from UNR shaking table tests













Collaborative efforts with ucd
Collaborative Efforts with UCD

  • Collaboration between UCB and UCD on development of SFSI models using OpenSees


Selection of prototype systems

2-span or 4-span bridges.

Column heights based on dimensions of centrifuge tests.

Include a range of soil types to investigate the influence of site effects on the system response.

Selection of Prototype Systems


Selection of prototype systems1

Study the effect of variation in ground level on the response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).

Determine the sensitivity of the response to various abutment models.

Selection of Prototype Systems


Prototype model
Prototype Model response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).

  • Simulate the response of a long viaduct.

  • Excitation applied as displacement time histories determined from SHAKE analyses.


Site response analysis
Site Response Analysis response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).


Global response effect of soil structure interaction
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Effect of Soil Structure Interaction


Global response effect of soil structure interaction1
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Effect of Soil Structure Interaction


Global response effect of soil structure interaction2
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Effect of Soil Structure Interaction


Global response effect of bar slip model
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Effect of Bar Slip Model


Global response effect of bar slip model1
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Effect of Bar Slip Model


Global response effect of bar slip model2
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Effect of Bar Slip Model


Local response
Local Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).


Local response1
Local Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).


Local response2
Local Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).


Global response comparison with fixed base case
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Comparison with Fixed Base Case


Global response comparison with fixed base case1
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Comparison with Fixed Base Case


Global response comparison with fixed base case2
Global Response response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).Comparison with Fixed Base Case


Continuing work hierarchy of models
Continuing Work - Hierarchy of Models response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).

  • Develop models at varying levels of sophistication to determine how much complexity is necessary to capture the response adequately.

  • OpenSees 3-D model of structure with p-y curves and displacement time histories determined from SHAKE analyses.

  • Collaborate with UCD to develop 3-D model of structure with 3-D solid elements for the soil.


Questions or Comments? response of bridges (differing motions at abutment level vs. at base of columns).


ad