STRUCTURAL VIBRATIONS DUE TO

HUMAN ACTIVITY
Whats Old? Whats New? Whats Hot?
Presented by
Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.
Emeritus Professor
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
thmurray@vt.edu

61st Structural Engineering Conference

University of Kansas
March 3, 2016
1

Whats Old?

Whats Old?
The Speaker: KU Ph.D. 1970

Whats New?
11

Steel Design Guide

Vibrations of Steel-Framed
Structural Systems
Due to Human Activity
Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA

David E. Allen, Ph.D.

National Research Council Canada
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Eric E. Ungar, Sc.D., P.E.

Acentech Incorporated
Cambridge, MA

D. Brad Davis, Ph.D., S.E.

University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

SJI Technical Digest 5 - 2nd Ed. 2014

Written by
Prof. Tom Murray
Emeritus Professor
Virginia Tech
Prof. Brad Davis
Assistant Professor
University of Kentucky

Follows AISC DG11

Walking Excitation
Modified ISO Scale
Resonant Build-Up
Rhythmic Excitation
Finite Element Analysis
Retrofitting of Lively Floors
5

AISC Design Guide 11 - 2nd Ed. 2016

New Co-Author
Prof. Brad Davis
Assistant Professor, University of Kentucky

11

Steel Design Guide

Vibrations of Steel-Framed
Introduction
Structural Systems
Evaluation Criteria for Human Comfort
Due to Human Activity
Natural Frequency of Steel Framed Floor Systems
Design for Walking Excitation
Design for Rhythmic Excitation
Design for Sensitive Equipment and Sensitive Occupancies
Finite Element Analysis Methods
Evaluation of Vibration Problem Systems and Remedial
Measures
Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.

Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA

David E. Allen, Ph.D.

National Research Council Canada

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Eric E. Ungar, Sc.D., P.E.

Acentech Incorporated
Cambridge, MA

D. Brad Davis, Ph.D., S.E.

University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

AISC DG11

nd
2

Ed.

Selected Topics from DG11 2nd Ed.

Low and High Frequency Floors (LFF and HFF)
Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Finite Element Analysis Overview
Assessment of Problem Floors

Definition Low Frequency Floor

Low Frequency Floor (LFF)
A low frequency floor is one that can undergo resonant
build-up due to walking.
A resonant build-up can occur if at least one natural
mode has a frequency less than ~9 Hz.
Meas. Acceleration (%g)

Resonant
Build-up

1.5

Peak Accel. = 1.36%g

1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
RMS Accel. = 0.531%g

-1.5
0

2
4
Time (sec.)

Definition High Frequency Floor

High Frequency Floor (HFF)

A high frequency floor is one that cannot undergo

resonant build-up because the dominant frequency is
greater than ~ 9 Hz.
The response resembles a series of individual impulse
responses to individual footsteps.

Impulse
Responses

10

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Walking Dynamic Loading
When humans walk, run, bounce, sway, or jump,
inertial forces cause dynamic loads.
Ground Reaction / Weight

1.5

Heel Strike

Knee bends,
weight shifts
forward

Push off

0.5

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Time (sec.)

11

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Walking Dynamic Loading
Series of footstep forces cannot be represented by
simple equations.
0.4

Summation

Left Footstep

Ground Reaction (kip)

0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0

Right Footstep
0.5

1.5

Need Simple
Mathematical
Representations

Fourier
Series

Time (sec.)

12

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Walking Dynamic Loading
Specialized Fourier Series for Human
Induced Forces
Weight of
Walker (lbf)

Harmonic
Number

Phase
Lag

F ( t ) = 0 + Q h sin(2 h fStep t h )
h=1

DC Offset
not needed.

Harmonic
Amplitude

Dynamic Load
Factor (DLF)

Step or Pacing
Frequency

Need Q, DLFs, range of step frequencies, and

phase lags.

13

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Walking Step Frequencies
fStep between 1.6 Hz and 2.2 Hz (96 bpm and
132 bpm)
Average is about 1.9-2.0 Hz (114-120 bpm)

14

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Resonant Responses
Practical examples
- Pushing a child on a swing.
- Jumping on a diving board.

Same applies to floors: if hfStep matches a

natural frequency resonance, which
causes the most severe response.
Matches a Natural
Frequency
4

F( t ) = Q h sin(2 h fStep t h )

Causes
Resonance
(Most Severe
Response)

h=1

15

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Resonant Response
Example:
- Natural Frequency = 5.00 Hz.
- Walking at 1.67 Hz (within normal walking range)
- Responses at 1.67 Hz, 3.33 Hz, 5.00 Hz, 6.67 Hz
0.35
Peak Accel. = 1.36%g

Meas. Acceleration (%g)

Meas. Acceleration (%g)

1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1

Response to
3rd Harmonic
(5.00 Hz)

0.3
0.25

Response to
2nd Harmonic
(@ 3.33 Hz)

0.2

Response to
4th Harmonic
(6.67 Hz)

0.15
0.1
0.05

Response to
1st Harmonic
(@ 1.67 Hz)

RMS Accel. = 0.531%g

-1.5
0

2
4
Time (sec.)

0
1

Frequency (Hz)

16

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Why do some walkers cause more floor
motion then other walkers?
Because their pace is a sub-harmonic of the floor
dominant frequency.
That is a harmonic of their walking speed,
Generally, 2 or 3 times their walking speed
matches the floor dominant frequency.

17

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Specialize by defining P for walking.
Possible to write an equation that works
regardless of which harmonic is applicable.
4

F ( t ) = 0 + Q h sin(2 h fStep t h )
h=1

=0.83e 0.35 fn

18

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Adjustments
Incomplete resonant build-up.
Walker and annoyed person are not at the
same location at the same time.
Use a reduction factor, R = 0.5 for floors
with two-way mode shapes
Use R = 0.7 for footbridges with a one-way
mode.

19

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Predicted Walking Acceleration
aSteadyState

P
=
2 M

DLF

Call this Po

Po e 0.35f
R Q 0.83e 0.35f
R P R Q 0.83e 0.35f
g
g=
ap =
=
=
W
W
2 M
2 0.5W / g
n

Po
Po

=
(0.5)(157
lb)(0.83) 65 lb for floors
=
(0.7)(157
lb)(0.83) 91.2 lb (use 92 lbf) for footbridges
Po e 0.35f
ap =
g
W
n

Predicted Peak Acceleration

Due to Walking in DG11

20

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Predicted Tolerance
a p P o exp(0.35 f n) a o
=

g
W
g
where
ap/g
= predicted acceleration ratio
ao/g
= acceleration limit for the appropriate occupancy
(Example: 0.005 or 0.5%g for quiet spaces.)
Po
= amplitude of the driving force, 65 lb or 92 lb
W
= effective weight supported by the beam or joist panel,
girder panel, or combined panel, as applicable, lb
fn
= fundamental natural frequency of a beam or joist panel,
a girder panel, or a combined panel, as applicable, Hz

= damping ratio
21

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Accuracy of the AISC DG11

Data from a study being conducted at the

University of Kentucky by Dr. Brad Davis.
22

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Example. Determine the effect of Floor Length on
the response of Bays A and B due to walking.

23

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Length

Length

ap
g

W is a function of Floor Width and Length

Bj = Cj (Ds / Dj)1/4Lj < 2/3 x Floor Width
Bg = Cg(Dj /Dg)1/4 Lg < 2/3 Floor Length

P o exp(0.35 f n) a o

W
g

Bays A
Floor Width:
4x30 = 120
Floor Length
32.5+16+32.5 = 81
Bay B
Floor Width:
4x30 = 120
Floor Length
32.5+16 = 48.5

24

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Bay A Response
Bays A & B
Bj is same for both Bays.
Bg is different for each Bay
because Floor Length is
different.
Bg = 59.9 < 2/3 Floor Length

Girder
Panel

Bays A:
Floor Length = 81
2/3x81 = 54 < 59.9
ap/g = 0.46%g < 0.5%g
OK

25

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Bay B Response
Bays A & B
Bg = 59.9 < 2/3 Floor Length

Girder
Panel

Bays A:
Floor Length = 81
ap/g = 0.46%g < 0.5%g
OK
Bay B:
Floor Length = 48.5
2/3x48.5 =32.3 < 59.9
ap/g =0.61%g > 0.5%g
NG

26

Finite Element Analysis

27

Finite Element Analysis

Overview of Evaluation Procedure
Develop 3D model.
- Specialized for extremely low amplitude motion.
Predict natural modes.
Predict response to human activity.
Compare to tolerance limit.

28

Finite Element Analysis

Extent of Model
Horizontal Expanse
Avoid over-predicting area in motion.
Beware uniform framing over many bays.

15 Bays in Motion
Unrealistic
Unconservative.

29

Finite Element Analysis

Extent of Model
Horizontal
Motion should be limited to the bay being evaluated
plus a few around it.
Option: Start with model of large area. Delete bays if
necessary.
Bay Being
Evaluated

Another Option: Model the bay being evaluated plus

one bay each side.
30

Finite Element Analysis

Natural Mode Prediction
Typical Eigenvalue Analysis
Number of Modes
All modes with single curvature within a bay.
Include modes up to about double the fundamental natural
frequency.

Many modes are often predicted.

Use Frequency Response Function (FRF) to determine
dominate mode.

31

Finite Element Analysis

Frequency Response Function

1 lbf
Sinusoidal Force, Frequency = f

Steady state
response
amplitude, %g

Accelerance FRF Mag. (%g/lbf)

1 lbf sinusoidal load

Dominant Frequency
Natural Frequencies

0.1

0.05

0
0

Width
Related to
damping

4
6
Frequency (Hz)

10

Sinusoidal Response, Frequency = f

32

Finite Element Analysis

Frequency Response Function
FRF Computed using Steady State Analysis in SAP2000
- Requires hysteretic
damping.
- Stiffness proportional
coefficient = 2b
- Mass proportional
coefficient = 0

33

Finite Element Analysis

Walking Acceleration Prediction FRF Method
FRF Magnitude
FRFMax = Highest magnitude under 9 Hz.
FRFMax in %g/lb
Harmonic Force Amplitude: Product of
Reference bodyweight, Q = 168 lb
Dynamic coefficients, ai.
ai = 0.4, 0.07, 0.06, 0.05
a2 through a4 approximated by
=0.09e 0.075f n
34

Finite Element Analysis

Walking Acceleration Prediction FRF Method
Partial Build-Up Factor
Envelope Function

= 1 e 2 f nTBU
= 1 e

2 HN

TBU = resonant build-up duration

H = harmonic causing resonance
N = number of footsteps

For N = 6 (typical length of walking path in offices)

= 50 + 0.25 if < 0.01

=
12.5 + 0.625 if 0.01 < 0.03

=
1.0 if 0.03

35

Finite Element Analysis

Walking Acceleration Prediction FRF Method
In equation form,

=
a p FRFMax Q
Bay is OK if

a p ao

Tolerance Limit
from DG11
e.g., 0.5%g for
offices.

36

Problem Floor Evaluation

37

Problem Floor Evaluation

Simplified Testing Procedure

Requiring minimal equipment, time, and cost.

Handheld Analyzer
Seismic Accelerometer
Heel-Drop impact to obtain floor natural frequency.
Walking at sub-harmonic frequency to obtain
maximum response.
Filtering of response data: 1 Hz to 15-20 Hz
Comparison of Equivalent Sinusoidal Peak
Acceleration (ESPA) to appropriate tolerance limit.
38

Problem Floor Evaluation

Sample Equipment Set

Datastick VSA-1214, 1215

Metronome

Seismic Accelerometer and Cables

39

Problem Floor Evaluation

Heel-Drop Tests
Raise onto balls of feet and drop forcefully.
Heel-drop forcing function contains up to 40 Hz and
is ideal for determining floor frequency.

Time History

Frequency Spectrum
40

Problem Floor Evaluation

Measured Walking Acceleration

Problem floors are usually low frequency floors

an occupant causes resonance.
Want to cause resonance during tests.
Step frequency, fStep
- In normal range: 1.6 Hz to 2.2 Hz.
- Such that integer multiple of fStep = fn
- Example: fn = 6 Hz. Select fStep = 2 Hz
because third harmonic will match fn, resonance.

Metronome is used to monitor walking speed.

Multiple individual walkers
Multiple tests per walker.

41

Problem Floor Evaluation

Processing
Individual peaks not representative.
Tolerance limits are sinusoidal accelerations.
So compute Equivalent Sinusoidal Peak
Acceleration (ESPA)
- Compute rolling two second Root Mean Square (RMS)

acceleration.
- For example: at t =1.8 sec., compute RMS from 0.8 sec.
to 2.8 sec.
- Maximum rolling RMS x 2 = ESPA.

42

Problem Floor Evaluation

38
324

574

214

Case Study

2211

324

43

Problem Floor Evaluation

Measured Natural Frequencies
Heel-drop Tests at Stations 1-7.
Stations 1 and 5 of primary interest.

8.69 Hz
6.88 Hz

44

Problem Floor Evaluation

Measured Walking Accelerations.
Walking at 2.17 Hz
(4)(2.17)= 8.69 Hz
ESPA = 1.79%g
Retrofit Required
Station 1

45

Whats Hot (Cool)?

New Approaches to Evaluate Floors
Supporting Sensitive Equipment
Analysis Techniques for Evaluating
Slender Monumental Stairs

46

Sensitive Equipment

47

Sensitive Equipment
Tolerance Limits
Manufacturers requirements are generally in terms
of velocity, but sometimes acceleration.
Generic requirements are available.
Requirements are usually very strict.
Short span, very stiff floor systems are required.

48

Sensitive Equipment
Sensitive Equipment Tolerance Limits
Peak velocity or acceleration specific limit.
Narrowband spectral velocity or acceleration specific
limit.
One-third octave spectral velocity or acceleration
generic limit.
3

Velocity (mips, rms)

10

10

10

10
Time (sec)

Acceleration Waveform

Narrowband Spectral
Acceleration

6.3 8 10 12.5
Frequency (Hz)

16

20

One-third Octave Spectral

Velocity
49

Sensitive Equipment
Example Waveform Acceleration Limit
GE Open MRI
Pre-installation
Manual

50

Sensitive Equipment
Example Waveform Acceleration Limit

51

Sensitive Equipment
Example HFF Waveform Acceleration Limit
Limit = 0.01 m/s2
aPeakToPeak = 0.0998%g (predicted)
= 0.00979 m/s2

High Frequency Floor Response

52

Sensitive Equipment
Walking Speeds in AISC DG11 2nd Ed.
Walking
Speed
Very Slow
Slow
Moderate
Fast

fstep
(Hz)
1.25
1.6
1.85
2.1

Walking
(bpm)
75
96
110
125

Very Slow: One or two persons in a lab or exam room.

Slow: Three to five persons in a lab or exam room.
Moderate: More than five persons in a lab or exam
room.
Fast: Large lab or exam room or near a corridor.
53

Sensitive Equipment
Peak Velocity and Acceleration Predictions
1.43
19 109 f step
vp =
W
f n1.3

v p = max

1.3x109 f n
if f n f 4 max
e
Wf n
9

19x10
W

1.43
f step
f n1.3

1.43
a p 310 f step
=
g
W f n0.3

ap
g

= max

22 f n
if f n f 4 max
e
W
1.43
310 f step
W f n0.3

Top equations for very slow walking.

Bottom equations for other walking speeds with
- First expressions for low frequency floors
- Second expressions for high frequency floors
54

Sensitive Equipment
Generic Limits
Specific limits are often not
available during the design
phase. Therefore Generic
Limits can be used.
Generally expressed as onethird octave spectral velocity
magnitudes.
Most common are Velocity
Critical, VC, curves.
From Ungar et al. (2004)
55

Monumental Stairs

56

Slender Monumental Stairs

Architectural Features
In high-end buildings.
Aggressive requirements.
Long spans.
Slender stringers.
Low mass.

57

Slender Monumental Stairs

Susceptible to Vibrations
Natural frequencies usually below 9-10 Hz.
Stair descent step frequency up to 4 Hz.
- 2nd harmonic can match fn up to 8 Hz.
- 3rd harmonic can match fn up to 12 Hz.

Harmonic force amplitudes are high.

Resonance High Accelerations

58

Slender Monumental Stairs

Group Amplifications
Groups can cause much higher accelerations
than an individual.
Same velocity, fixed stride length Same fstep.
Three times higher accelerations.

Prediction Methods
Finite Element Analysis
Manual Calculations

59

Slender Monumental Stairs

Manual Calculations
Stairs are often linear elements.
Idealize as a beam on a slope

60

Slender Monumental Stairs

Acceptance Criteria
Frequency:

fn

1/2
gE s I t
=
4
2
wLs

Ls = Stringer Length

Predicted Acceleration:
2
a p RQ cos (1 exp(100)) a o
W
g
g
Descending Acceleration Tolerance Limits
Step Frequency
Acceleration
Remarks
Hz
Limit (%g)
<2.5
1.7
Normal Descents
Rapid Descents 2.5-4.0
3.0
Not Perceptible
Rapid Descents
2.5-4.0
4.7
Perceptible
61

Strength is essential but otherwise

unimportant.
Hardy Cross

Thank You!!

62