Presentation on theme: "1 Simulation of Nonstructural Components by Siavash Soroushian PhD Student University of Nevada, Reno E-Defense Workshop August 17-19, 2011, Japan."— Presentation transcript:
1 Simulation of Nonstructural Components by Siavash Soroushian PhD Student University of Nevada, Reno E-Defense Workshop August 17-19, 2011, Japan
Host InstitutionFunded by Research Team 2 Manos Maragakis, PI of NEES-GC Keri L. Ryan, PI of NEES TIPS Siavash Soroushian, PhD student University of Nevada, Reno: University of Connecticut: Arash E. Zaghi, Assistant Professor USG Building Systems: Lee Tedesco Dennis Alvarez NSFA Russ Fleming
Host InstitutionFunded by Why are Nonstructural Elements Important? 3 Nonstructural damage accounts for 79% of the total earthquake damage Nonstructural systems are subjected to the dynamic environment of the building Seismic damage to nonstructural systems can be triggered at response intensities smaller than those required to produce structural damage
Host InstitutionFunded by Types of Nonstructural Systems Classification according to sensitive response parameter: Interstory drift-sensitive elements: masonry walls, partitions, doors, windows Acceleration-sensitive elements: suspended ceilings, boilers, ducts, tanks, light fixtures Drift and acceleration-sensitive elements: fire sprinklers system, pipes 4
Host InstitutionFunded by 5 Objectives of System Experiments at E-Defense Site NEES - UNR Test-bed Study configurations of Ceiling-Piping-Partition (CPP) systems in full-scale 5-story steel moment frame building –Comparative performance of CPP systems for isolated and fixed-base structural configurations. –Response of the nonstructural components, as part of a system, under large drifts/accelerations. –Interactions within and between the nonstructural components. –Interactions between the components and the structure. 5
Location of CPP Nonstructural Systems NEES - UNR Test-bed 6 Ceilings, Partition Walls, and Sprinkler Piping (CPP) installed on 4 th and 5 th floors o Highest accelerations expected (2.0g) o Large drifts (near 1%) o Best available open space
Objectives of Nonstructural Testing NEES - UNR Test-bed 7 Ceiling system Effect of bracing on large areas of ceiling. Performance of perimeter seismic clips. Effect of additional mass such as lighting systems. Dynamic amplification of ceiling relative to floor.
Host InstitutionFunded by 8 Ceiling System Design Assumptions USG Suspended Ceiling material were used for this experiment. The ceiling grid system were designed based on International Building Code (IBC) category D,E,F. Area of the ceiling is 970 ft 2. The 5 th ceiling system has lateral bracing, there is no bracing at the 4 th floor. Some heavy tiles were placed to represent the additional weight of lighting systems. 7/8 wall closure (angles) were used along with ACM7 Seismic Clip. The plenum height is 3 ft.
` ` Ceiling System Perimeter Attachment 9 Unattached Perimeter: - ¾ end grid/ wall clearance - Screw at the middle of clip slot - Partition attach screw through either wings of clip ` ` Attached Perimeter: - End grid tied to the partitions - Screw at either top holes of the clip - Partition attach screw through either wings of clip
Ceiling System Hangers and Braces 10 Ceiling Hanger Wires: - To transfer the ceiling weight to the deck above. - Hilti X-CW hanger wires at 4 on center were used. - Hangers installed within 8 of perimeter partitions. Ceiling Bracing: - To transfer the seismic force of ceiling to the deck above - Composed of : 1. Compression post 1.a Pipe section 1.b Steel Stud 2. Horizontal restraint within 2" of intersection and splayed 90° apart at 45° angles 2.a Wire 2.b Steel stud
Host InstitutionFunded by 11 Objectives of Nonstructural Testing (Cont.) NEES - UNR Test-bed Piping system Behavior of arm over versus straight drops Study the No Gap and 2 in. oversized ceiling hole Comparative performance of flexhose and conventional drop pipes.
Piping System Configuration (Overall) NEES - UNR Test-bed 12 Same configuration on 4 th and 5 th floor Pipe dimensions: Riser: 3 pipe Grooved fitting Main Run: 2.5 pipe Grooved fitting Branch Line: 1 pipe Threaded fitting Branch Line 1: - 3 Drops - 22 Long - 1 Arm over Branch Line 2: - 3 Drops - 22 Long - Straight Drop Branch Line 3: - 2 Drops - 12 Long - One flexhose Drop
Piping System Configuration (Brace & Hangers) NEES - UNR Test-bed 13 1.Pipe Hangers: To transfer the pipe weight to the above deck. 2.Pipe Solid Braces: To transfer the seismic force of piping system to the above deck: -Lateral Brace -Longitudinal Brace 3.Pipe Wire Restrainers: To limit the translational movement of sprinkler heads
Piping System Configuration (Sprinkler Head) NEES - UNR Test-bed 14 No Gap Configuration: No gap exist between the ceiling panels and sprinkler heads 2 in. Gap Configuration: 2 in. oversized ring exist between the ceiling panels and sprinkler heads
Host InstitutionFunded by 15 Objectives of Nonstructural Testing (Cont.) NEES - UNR Test-bed Partition system Effect of slip versus fixed track connection Behavior of unbraced self-standing partial height partitions Comparative performance of Institutional and commercial corner- and T-connection details. Influence of openings (doors and windows) on response of partitions.
Host InstitutionFunded by 16 Partition System Design Assumptions All the partitions on the fifth floor are Slip Track connection and on the fourth floor Full Connection. All the partitions except one on the fourth floor have commercial detail. All the partitions except one on the fifth floor have institutional detail. Thicker steel stud and track section were used Stronger corner and T detail were used