P. 1
final presentation

final presentation

|Views: 172|Likes:
Published by api-19884175

More info:

Published by: api-19884175 on Dec 01, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/18/2014

pdf

text

original

OPTIMIZATION OF BALANCE OF PLANT BUILDINGS THROUGH A DATABSE OF BUILDING COMPONENTS

By Bagga Raja I. (M.Tech Sem IV)

Guide : Shri. Jignesh V. Chokshi (Manager, Civil-Structural Dept, L&T-S&L Ltd.)
CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Flow of presentation
• • • • • • • • • • • Introduction to power plants Motivation and Objective of study Literature Survey Analysis and Design of Balance of Plant Buildings Preparation of database and Result interpretation Introduction of brick infills in Balance of Plant Buildings Introduction of pushover analysis in Balance of Plant Buildings Practical application of pushover analysis in Balance of Plant Buildings Summary and conclusion Future scope of work References

Introduction to power plants

Power Plant Buildings
Covered Under Present Study

Power Block Structures

Balance of Plant Buildings

Storage Shed Fire Water Pumphouse

Electrostatic Precipitator Control Room

Compressor House

BOP BUILDINGS

Fuel Oil Pumping And Heating Unit

Diesel Generator Building Service Building Deminerlized Tank and PumpHouse

Fuel Oil Transfer Pumphouse

Motivation of Study
● Balance of buildings are present in each and every power plant. ● The layout of power plant is generalized. ● If another plant of same capacity is to be constructed, the change is in bay width, width of building, roof level, depth of foundation and design seismic horizontal coefficient. ● Here an attempt has been made to prepare a database to obtain optimum design.

Objective of Study
● To prepare a database for Balance of Plant buildings ● To model brick infills in Balance of Plant buildings as per: Proposed Draft and Commentary on IS: 1893(Part I)  FEMA-273 ● To introduce pushover analysis in Balance of Plant buildings and its application to a practical problem

Literature Survey
• Black and Veatch [1] describe the basic concept of working of power plants and the working of different components of process plant and planning of power plants. The book explains the various mechanical processes which takes part in the power plants and also highlights the general requirements for structure layout. • Sudhir K Jain et al. [6] propose draft provisions and commentary on Indian Seismic Code IS 1893 (Part 1) as a part of ongoing project on building codes sponsored by Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority, Gandhinagar at Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. They suggest the equivalent single diagonal strut approach for structural modeling of brick infills. They present an empirical relationship for evaluating the equivalent width of diagonal strut for solid walls and perforated walls.

Continued
• ATC-40 [10] provides a wealth of information regarding concepts, theories and procedures of nonlinear static analysis. The document also presents the step by step procedure to determine the capacity and demand. • Apart from the literature review mentioned above, as this project is being done at a power plant engineering esteemed company like L&T-S&L, a thorough study of buildings for recently executed project was conducted.

No. of buildings considering combinations of parameters = 150 & No. of factors to be recorded = 67
Bay width m 5 6 8 Width of building m 6 8 10 Foundation Level m 3 4 5 Height m 5 6 8 Ah % 10 15 20

Example:- 5083610 5 08 3 6 10
Bay Width Width of building Foundation Level Height A h%

Analysis and Design of Balance of Plant Buildings

1

2

Preparation of Visual Basic Tool

1 The Frame Data Generation

2 The *.$2k File Generation

I M P O R T

BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM

SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAM

Preparation of database and Result interpretation

Representative Volume = (4× L× B× (Bf/Tf)2× (Bf+Tf)2)

m3

Scattered Data
Plinth Beam Vol. x 1e-02 (mm) Tributary Area 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 10% Ah 8000 16000 24000 32000 Representative Volume (m3) 15% Ah 20% Ah

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Corner Footing
14000 13000
-1

2500 2300 2100 1900 1700 1500 1300 1100 900
0 10% A h 8000 16000 Re pre se nta tive V olum e) (m 15% A h
3

11000 Footing Area x 1e-04 Tributary Area 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 24000 20% A h 32000

Footing Area x 1e-07 Tributary Vol.

(mm

12000

)

0 10% A h
8000 7000 Footing Volume x 1e-05 Tributary Volume 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 0

8000

16000 24000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3) (m e 15% A h 20% A h

3200

6000 (mm) Footing Volume x 1e-01 Tributary Area 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 0 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

24000

32000

8000

16000 Re pre se nta tive V olum e )(m
3

24000

3200

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Intermediate Footing
5400 4800 4200 Footing Area x 1e-04 Tributary Area 3600 3000 2400 1800 1200 600 0 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m -1

6000 5500 ) Footing Area x 1e-08 (mm Tributary Volume 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 0 8000 16000 Re pre se n ta tive V olum e ) (m
3

24000

32000

24000

3200

10% A h 3500 (mm) 3000 2500 Footing Volume x 1e-01 Tributary Area 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 8000

15% A h

20% A h

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

3000 2500 Footing Volume x 1e-05 Tributary Volume 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3) (m e 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h 24000 32000 2000 1500 1000 500 0 8000 16000 Re p re se nta tive V o lu m e) (m
3

24000

32000

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Gable Footing
3000 2750 2500 Footing Area x 1e-04 Tributary Area 2250 2000 1750 1500 1250 1000 0 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3 -1

3000 ) 24000 32000 Footing Area x 1e-08 (mm Tributary Volume 2600 2200 1800 1400 1000 0 8000 16000 R e p re se nta tive V o lum e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

24000

32000

1600 (mm)
14000

1400
12500 Footing Volume x 1e-06 Tributary Volume

1200 Footing Volume x 1e-01 Tributary Area 1000 800 600 400 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se nta tive V olu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h

11000 9500 8000 6500

32000

5000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Corner Column
6000 5500 5000
Column Area x 1e-09 Tributary Area 5750 5500 5250 5000 4750 4500 4250 4000 3750

Column Area x 1e-05 Tributary Area

4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V olu m 3) (m e 15% A h 20% A h 24000 32000

3500 0 10% Ah 8000 16000 24000 20% Ah 32000 Representative Volume (cubic meter) 15% Ah

5250 5000 (mm) 4750 4500 4250 4000 3750 3500 3250 3000 2750 2500 2250 0 10% A h 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

6000 5750 5500 5250 5000 4750 4500 4250 4000 3750 3500 3250 3000 0 8000 16000
3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

Column Volume x 1e-01 Tributary Area

Column Volume x 1e-05 Tributary Volume

24000 20% A h

32000

24000

32000

15% A h

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Intermediate Column
2500 2250 (mm Column Area x 1e-09 Tributary Vol.
0 8000 16000
3 Re p re se nta tive V o lu m e) (m -1 )

2250 2000 1750 1500 1250 1000 750 500 0 10% A h 11000 10300 9600 Column Volume x 1e-06 Tributary Volume 8900 8200 7500 6800 6100 5400 4700 4000 8000 16000 3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h 24000 20% A h

2000 Column Area x 1e-05 Tributary Area 1750 1500 1250 1000 750 500
24000 32000

3200

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

9500 (mm) Column Volume x 1e-02 Tributary Area 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3) (m e 15% A h 32000 20% A h

0

8000

16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m

24000

3200

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Gable Column
1800
-1 )

2250 2000 1750 1500 1250 1000 750 500 0 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
11000 10300 9600 Column Volume x 1e-06 Tributary Volume 8900 8200 7500 6800 6100 5400 4700
3

1650 1500 Column Area x 1e-05 Tributary Area 1350 1200 1050 900 750 600 24000 32000

Column Area x 1e-09 Tributary Vol.

(mm

0 10% A h

8000

16000 3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h

24000 20% A h

3200

9000 8000 7000 Column Volume x 1e-02 Tributry Area 6000 5000 4000 3000 0 8000 16000 Re p r e s e n tative V o lu m 3) (m e 24000 32000

(mm)

4000 0 8000 16000 Re pre se nta tive V o lum 3) (m e 24000 32000

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Transverse Plinth Beam
700
-1

7000 ) (mm Plint Beam Area x1e-10 Tributary Volume 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000
0 10% A h 8000 16000 3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e )(m 15% A h 24000 20% A h 340 320 300 Plinth Beam Vol. x 1e-05 Tributary Volume 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 Re pre se nta tive V olum e3) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 3 Re pre se nta tive V olu m e ) (m 15% A h 24000 20% A h 32000

650 600 Plinth Beam Area x 1e-05 Tributary Area 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200

0 10% A h

8000

16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h
3

24000 20% A h

3200

28500 (mm) Plinth Beam Volume x 1e-10 Tributary Area 27000 25500 24000 22500 21000 19500 18000 16500

3200

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Longitudinal Plinth Beam
5500

6000
-1

5750 5500 5250 5000 4750 4500 4250 4000 3750 3500 3250 3000 0 10% A h
3400 3300 3200 3100

Plinth Beam Area x 1e-06 Tributary Area

5000 4750 4500 4250 4000 3750 0 10% A h 3350 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000

Plinth Beam Area x 1e-10 Tributary Volume

(mm

5250

)

8000

16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

24000 20% A h

3200

15% A h

(mm) Plinth Beam Volume x 1e-02 Tributary Area

3250 3150 3050 2950 2850 2750 2650 2550 2450 2350 0 8000 16000
3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e ) (m

Plinth Beam Volume x 1e-05 Tributary Volume

3000 2900 2800 2700 2600 2500 2400 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Re pre se nta tive V olum e3)(m 15% A h 30000 20% A h

24000

32000

3500

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

10% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Transverse Lintel Beam
8000 (mm 7500 7000 LintelBeamArx1e-6 Tributary Area 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000
-1

7500 ) 7000 6500 Lintel Beam Area x 1e-10 Tributary Volume 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 0 8000 16000
3 R e p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

24000

32000

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

31500 (mm) 30500 Lintel Beam Volume x 1e-06 Tributary Volume 0 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

3300 3100 2900 2700 2500 2300 2100 1900 0 10% A h 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta itve V o lu m e) (m 15% A h
3

29500 Lintel Beam Volume x 1e-03 Tributary Area 28500 27500 26500 25500 24500 23500 24000 32000

24000

3200 20% A h

10% A h

15% A h

20% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Longitudinal Lintel Beam
7000
-1

6500 ) (mm Lintel Beam Area x 1e-10 Tributary Volume 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e ) (m 15% A h 20% A h

6500 6000 Lintel Beam Area x 1e-06 Tributary Area 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000

3200

4250 (mm) 4000 Lintel Beam Volume x 1e-6 Tributary Volume 0 10% A h 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

3500

3750 3500 3250 3000 2750 2500 24000 20% A h 32000

3250

Linterl Volume x 1e-02 Tributary Area

3000

2750

2500 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 Re p re se nta tive V o lu m 3) (m e 15% A h 20% A h

3200

15% A h

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Gable Roof Beam
700 650 600 Roof Beam Area x 1e-05 Tributary Area 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 0 10% A h 3000 (mm) 2750 8000 16000 Re pre se nta tive V olum e3)(m 15% A h 24000 20% Ah 32000 Roof Beam Area x 1e-10 Tributary Volume (mm
-1

8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 0 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

)

24000

3200

3250 3050 2850 Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-06 Tributary Volume
0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000

2500 Roof Beam Volume x 1e-02 Tributary Area 2250 2000 1750 1500 1250

2650 2450 2250 2050 1850 1650 1450 1250 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se nta tive V olum e ) (m 15% A h 20% A h

3200

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Longitudinal Roof Beam
8000

9000
-1

8500 8000 7500

7500 Roof Beam Area x1e-06 Tributary Area

(mm Roof Beam Area x 1e-10 Tributary Vol.

)
7000 6500 6000 5500 0 10% A h 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e ) (m 15% A h

7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h
3

24000 20% A h

32000

24000 20% A h

32000

4700 (mm) 4600 4500 Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-02 Tributary Area 4400 4300 4200 4100 4000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000
Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-06 Tributary Volume

6000 5750 5500 5250 5000 4750 4500 4250 4000 3750 3500 3250 3000 0 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e ) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

24000

32000

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Transverse Roof Beam
8500 8250 Roof Beam Ar.x1e-10 (mm -1 ) Tributary Volume 8000 7750 Roof Beam Area x 1e-06 Tributary Area 7500 7250 7000 6750 6500 6250 6000 5750 5500 0 10% A h 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h

9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 24000 20% A h 32000 0 8000 16000 Re p re se nta tive V o lu m e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

24000

3200

7000 6750 (mm) Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-06 Tributary Volume 6500 6250 6000 5750 5500 5250 5000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 R e p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3) (m e 15% A h 24000 20% A h 32000

8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 0 8000 16000 Re p re se n ta tive V olu m e) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

Roof Beam Vol. x 1e-02 Tributary Area

24000

3200

Estimation of Concrete Quantity for Secondary Roof Beam
10500 ) 9500 Roof Beam Area x 1e-06 Tributary Area 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 0 10% A h
10000 (mm) 9500
Roof Beam Volume x 1e-06 Tributary Volume

12000 11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 0 10% A h
10000 9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 R e p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000
-1

8000

16000
3 Re pre se nta tive V olum e) (m

24000 20% A h

32000

Roof Beam Area x 1e-10 Tributary Volume

(mm

10000

8000

16000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h
3

24000 20% A h

3200

15% A h

9000 8500

Roof Beam Volume x 1e-02 Tributary Area

8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re pre se nta tive V o lum e ) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000

Estimation of Reinforcement Quantity for Columns
11000
3

) 10500 10000 9500 9000 8500 8000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 Re pre se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m 15% A h
3

Steel Quanity in Corner Column x 1e-02 (kg/m

24000 20% A h

32000

3

1600 1560 1520 1480 1440 1400 1360 1320 1280 1240 1200 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e (m 3) 15% A h 20% A h 32000
3

Steel Quantity in Intermediate Column x 1e-01 (kg/m

1600 1550 1500 1450 1400 1350 1300 1250 1200 1150 1100 1050 1000 0 8000 16000 Re pre se nta tive V olum e ) (m 10% A h 15% A h 20% A h
3

)

Steel Quantity in Gable Column x 1e-01 (kg/m

)

24000

32000

Estimation of Reinforcement Quantity
17000 Transverse Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m3)
3 Longitudinal Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m )

15600 14800 14000 13200 12400 11600 10800 0 10% Ah 8000 16000 24000 Representative Volume (m 3) 15% Ah 20% Ah 32000

16000 15000 14000 13000 12000 11000 10000 9000 0 10% Ah 8000 16000
Representative Volume (m
3)

Steel Quanity in

24000 20% Ah

32000

15% Ah

Plinth Beam
3

Steel Quantity in
) Steel Quantity in Longitudinal Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

19000 18500 18000 17500 17000 16500 16000 15500 15000 14500 14000 13500 13000 0 10% A h 8000 160 00 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3e (m ) 15% A h 24000 20% A h 3 200 0

3)

16000 15500 15000 14500 14000 13500 13000 12500 12000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m 3) (m e 15% A h 20% A h 32000

Steel Quanitity in Transverse Lintel Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

Lintel Beam

Estimation of Reinforcement Quantity for Roof Beam
3

)

16500 Steel Quanitity in Trans. Gable Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m 16000 15500 15000 14500 14000 13500 13000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 24000 3 Re p re se nta tive V o lum e ) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000 Steel Quantity in Longitudinal Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m

3

17000

14000 13000 12000 11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 0 10% A h 8000 16000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e ) (m 15% A h 24000 20% A h

)

32000

12800 )
3

7000 6750

12200 Steel Quantity in Trans. Interm. Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m
Steel Quantity in Secondary Roof 3 Beam x 1e-02 (kg/m )

6500 6250 6000 5750 5500 5250 5000 0 8000 10% A h 16000 24000 3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lum e) (m 15% A h 20% A h 32000

11600 11000 10400 9800 9200 8600 0 10% A h 8000 16000
3 Re p re se n ta tive V o lu m e) (m

24000 20% A h

32000

15% A h

Introduction of Brick Infills in B.O.P. buildings

Bare frames

Infilled Frames

EQUIVALENT DIAGONAL STRUT APPROACH

Proposed Draft and Commentary on IS: 1893 (Part I)

Federal Emergency Management Agency-273

Equivalent Diagonal Strut Approach

Compression

Gap

Cracks

Equivalent Diagonal Strut Approach
Earthquake force

Earthquake force Pin joints

Proposed Draft Provisions And Commentary On Indian Seismic Code IS: 1893 (Part I)
Without opening With opening

wdo = ρ w wds

d wds = 3

Federal Emergency Management Agency-273
Without opening

a = 0.175(λl hcol ) −0.4 rinf

 Eme tinf sin 2θ  λ=   4 E fe I col hinf   

1/ 4

Modeling of Brick Infill Through SAP 2000

Comparison of Bare Frame and Infilled Frame
Model No. Model Designati on Model Parameter L (m) B (m) Bf (m) Tf (m) Ah %

1 2 3 4 5

6083610 5083615 6083515 5085520 6084620

6 5 6 5 6

08 08 08 08 08

3 3 3 5 4

6 6 5 5 6

10 15 15 20 20

1200 1000 Axial Force (kN) 800 600 400 200 0 1 2 3 M o d e l Nu m b e r 4 5

1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1 2 3 M od e l Nu m be r 4 5

B are F ram es IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills

FE M A 273 S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

Axial Force (kN)

B are Fram es IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills

FE M A 273 S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

Corner Column
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Axial Force (kN)

Intermediate Column

3 4 5 M o d e l N um be r B are F ram es F E M A 273 S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

1

2

Gable Column

800 700 Base Moment (kN-m) 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1 B are Fram es IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills 2 3 M od e l Num b e r 4 5

600 500 Base Moment (kN-m) 400 300 200 100 0 3 4 5 M od e l Num be r B are Fram es F E M A 273 S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills 1 2

F E M A 273 S olid Infills IS : 1893 P ropos ed Draft P erforated Infills

Corner Column
300 Base Moment (kN-m) 250 200 150 100 50 0 1 2 3 4 5 Model Number FEMA 273 Solid Infills IS: 1893 Proposed Draft Perforated Infills

Intermediate Column

Bare Frames IS: 1893 Proposed Draft Solid Infills

Gable Column

Introduction of Pushover Analysis in B.O.P. buildings
• The Non-Linear Static Procedure of Pushover analysis is defined in the Federal Emergency Management Agency-273 document as a non– linear static approximation of the response, that a structure will undergo when subjected to dynamic earthquake loading.
UN F Vb
Push-over Curve Load vs Deflection

UN Vb

ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
Intensity Measure
Joe’s

F O R C E

B A

C D E

DEFORMATION DEFORMATION F O C B R D C E A E DEFORMATION

F O R C E

B A

C D E

Joe’s

Very rare events (2%/50yrs) Rare events (10%/50yrs) Occasional events (20%/50yrs) Frequent events (50%/50yrs)

Beer! Food!

Beer! Food!

Immediate Occupancy Life Safety

Collapse Prevention

Damage Measure

CAPACITY SPECTRUM METHOD
• The capacity spectrum method provides a graphical representation of the expected seismic performance of the existing or retrofitted structure by the intersection of the structure’s capacity spectrum with a response spectrum (demand spectrum). • The intersection is the performance point, and the displacement coordinate of the performance point is the estimated displacement demand of the structure.

CAPACITY SPECTRUM CONVERSION
• Capacity: Capacity is a representation of the structure’s ability to resist the seismic demand.
Spectral Acceleration - Sa

Base Shear - V

Vi, Δroof

Sai , Sdi

Roof Displacement - Δr

Spectral Displacement - Sd

Capacity Curve

Capacity Spectrum

RESPONSE SPECTRUM CONVERSION
• Demand (displacement):Demand is a representation of the of the earthquake ground motion.
Co Lin nstan tP es e

ri o

d

arel ecc Al art ce pS

Time Period

rel ecc Al art ce pS

Spectral Displacement

DESIGN SPECTRUM

REDUCED RESPONSE SPECTRUM

CAPACITY SPECTRUM METHOD
• Performance: Once a capacity curve and demand displacement are defined, a performance check can be done.

Application to B.O.P. building
• • Model no. – 5083615 and 5083610 Live Load – 1.5 kN/m2

STEPS TO PERFORM PUSHOVER ANALYSIS

Performing Pushover Analysis Through SAP 2000

Load Cases

1

2

3

Interpretation
Roof displ. Base force (m) (kN) .033 1756.7 A-B B-IO IO-LS LS-CP CP-C C-D D-E >E TOTAL

90

60

0

0

0

0

0

0

150

Summary and Conclusion
• • This database and graphs will result in saving of time in future and also help to complete the proposals for various projects within the stipulated time. For a large company like L&T-S&L, delivering design output in a stringent time schedule is one of the challenges. This will help in quick estimation of framing element sizes and accelerate the design process. This database will be kept in company’s repository and will be enriched by adding data of buildings designed now onwards. The modeling of brick infills as per IS: 1893 (Part I) Proposed Draft is relatively simpler as it requires a definition of fewer parameters compared to FEMA-273. It is thus suggested that in order to model brick infills in practical problems, IS: 1893 (Part I) Proposed Draft method should be adopted.

• •

Continued
• From the results, of the pushover analysis it is learnt that the power plant buildings be designed for immediate occupancy, so that during the post earthquake scenario, there is least possible damage to these buildings. • It is foreseen that current Indian Codes may incorporate pushover analysis in the in future, so the pushover analysis is introduced in current study. • In order to survive competition in the global market, L&TS&L desires that their engineers should be prepared if pushover analysis is introduced in the next revision of Indian codes.

Future scope of Work
• • • • • The number of buildings can be increased in the database by varying different parameters like width, roof height, foundation level, soil bearing capacity and building length. The brick infills can be modeled in more number of buildings, to provide a consistent basis for comparison. The nonlinear push over analysis can be performed on more number of infilled frames as well as bare frames, to study the behavior of B.O.P. buildings. The present visual basic tool may be modified for multistoried buildings and could thus be used to prepare a database for multistoried buildings. The nonlinear push over analysis can be performed on multistoried buildings with infilled frames.

References
• • • • • Black and Veatch, “Power Plant Engineering”, First Indian Edition, CBS publishers, 1998. G.D. Rai, “An Introductions to Power Plant Technology”, Third Edition, Khanna Publishers, 1996. Diptesh Das and C.V.R. Murty, “Brick masonry infills in seismic design of RC framed buildings: Part 1- Cost Implications” The Indian Concrete Journal, July 2005 pp.39-44. Mohammad Ailaari and Ali M. Memari, ”Experimental Evaluation of a Sacrificial Seismic Fuse Device for Masonry Inifll Walls” Journal of Architectural Engineering © ASCE / June 2007 pp.111-125. Hemant B. Kaushik, Durgesh C. Rai and Sudhir K. Jain, “Code Approaches to Seismic Design of Masonry-Infilled Reinforces Concrete Frames: A State-of-the-Art Review”, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 22, No. 4, November 2006, pp.961-983.

Continued
• Sudhir K. Jain and C.V.R. Murty, “Proposed Draft Provisions and Commentary on Indian Seismic Code IS 1893 (Part 1)”, pp. 84-86. • Federal Emergency Management Agency-273, “NEHRP Commentary on the Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, October 1997 • Federal Emergency Management Agency-356, “Prestandard and Commentary For the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, November 2000. • Ashraf Habibullah and Stephen Pyle, “Practical Three Dimensional Non linear Static Pushover Analysis”, Structure Magazine, Winter, 1998. • Applied Technical Council-40, “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buidlings”, Volume 1, November 1996. • Applied Technical Council-33, “NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buidlings”, November 1997.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->