1. Performance University of California, Los Angeles Field Testing & Monitoring of Structural Performance NSF NEES Awardee Meeting September 28, 2001

2. Project Team UCLA Project Participants John W. WallacePI Structures Joel P. ConteCo-PIStructures Deborah EstrinCo-PIInformation Systems Patrick J. FoxCo-PISoils Jonathan P. StewartCo-PISoils Daniel WhangProject Researcher/Manager Eunjong YuPh.D. Student Structural Engineering Technology Laboratories (SETEL) UCLA UC Irvine UCSD Caltech USC

3. Project Overview Vibration Source Command Center Data acquisition and control UCLA Satellite Instrumented Building (structure, foundation, soil) e.g., wood, masonry, steel, RC Bridge, dam, other Web broadcast Tele-observation

4. Equipment Overview Vibration Equipment – –Eccentric mass shakers (3) 0 to 4.2 Hz Peak Force of 20 kips (1) 0 to 25 Hz Peak Force of 100 kips (2) Independent or synchronized (higher modes, torsion) – –Linear inertial shaker (1) Arbitrary force histories with peak force of 5 kips Sensors (~150) – –Accelerometers (structure and soil vibrations) Bandwidth: DC to 200 Hz Full scale range: +/-0.25g to +/-4g – –Potentiometers, LVDTs, Fiber Optics, Strain gauges DC LVDTs with +/- 3 inches (Elotek Systems, Inc.)

5. Equipment Overview Cone Penetration Rig – –Subsurface characterization & installation of geo sensors Wireless Data Transmission and Data Acquisition Antelope software UNIX-based Relational database for efficient storage – –Digitizers and routers/antennas (Kinemetrics, Q330) Low power demand – –Satellite uplink 1.28 Mbits/s data transmission

6. Project Timeline Year 1 & beginning of Year 2 – –Cone Penetration Rig, Eccentric Shakers – –Integration: mass shakers with linear shaker control, data acquisition with Antelope software – –Mobile trailer design – –Pilot studies for wireless data acquisition/control – –Linear inertial shaker (start of Year 2) Years 2 & 3 – –Expanded pilot studies (laboratory and campus) – –Develop (geo) and purchase of sensors – –Bulk purchases & System integration – –Web based documentation and training Year 4 – –Complete purchases and system integration – –Field pilot studies & Satellite transmission system

7. Status Cone Penetration Rig Cone Penetration Rig Hogentogler (Columbia, MD) –Approved and Delivered, August 7, 2001 Eccentric Mass Shakers Eccentric Mass Shakers ANCO (Boulder, CO) –Approved and ordered –Anticipated delivery date ~ Nov. 1 Sensors & Wireless Data Acquisition System Sensors & Wireless Data Acquisition System Kinemetrics (Pasadena, CA) –NSF approval received, Sept 22, 2001 Linear Mass Shaker Linear Mass Shaker –Detail specifications under development

8. LAN Network Gigabit backbone is available within School of Engineering. Connection to NEES workstation is anticipated in the Fall 2001. Gigabit backbone is available within School of Engineering. Connection to NEES workstation is anticipated in the Fall 2001. Field operation: use and integration of satellite uplink/downlink with NEESgrid. Potential to use ISP at field site for web connectivity? Field operation: use and integration of satellite uplink/downlink with NEESgrid. Potential to use ISP at field site for web connectivity?

9. Critical Questions - SI Many of the relevant questions have already been asked by U. of Minnesota. Specific questions pertinent to UCLA are: Support of Antelope (proprietary data acquisition software, Kinemetrics)? Support of Antelope (proprietary data acquisition software, Kinemetrics)? Field web/backbone connectivity (satellite, ISP) Field web/backbone connectivity (satellite, ISP)

10. Critical Questions - CD Who determines priorities on equipment/facility usage? Who determines priorities on equipment/facility usage? Who is responsible for the shipping/insurance costs associated with the field-testing equipment? Who is responsible for the shipping/insurance costs associated with the field-testing equipment? –e.g., fabrication of shipping crates will be required; does the Consortium purchase these, and then we reimburse through user fees? To what extent will the NEES equipment sites have the ability to insert special clauses on equipment usage into contracts? To what extent will the NEES equipment sites have the ability to insert special clauses on equipment usage into contracts? –e.g., recall of field-testing equipment for priority usage, such as EQ aftershock monitoring)

11. Critical Questions - CD How is potential teaching use to be prioritized versus research use? How is potential teaching use to be prioritized versus research use? How soon will data storage/retrieval protocols be established and how will these be reconciled with the various data acquisition systems and other protocols being used? How soon will data storage/retrieval protocols be established and how will these be reconciled with the various data acquisition systems and other protocols being used? –e.g., Labview vs. Kinemetrics Antelope software for data acquisition. –e.g., PEER database protocol