Applied Element Method as a Practical Tool for Progressive ...
Transcript of Applied Element Method as a Practical Tool for Progressive ...
Applied Element Method as a Practical Tool for Progressive
Collapse Analysis of Structuresp y
April 22nd, 2008
AgendaApplied Element Method as a Practical Tool forApplied Element Method as a Practical Tool for
Progressive Collapse Analysis of StructuresApril 22nd, 2008
8am PDT (Los Angeles) / 11am EDT (New York) / 4pm BST (London)
Welcome & Introduction (Overview of NAFEMS Activities)Welcome & Introduction (Overview of NAFEMS Activities)Matthew Ladzinski, NAFEMS North AmericaMatthew Ladzinski, NAFEMS North America
Applied Element Method as a Practical Tool for Applied Element Method as a Practical Tool for Progressive Collapse Analysis of StructuresProgressive Collapse Analysis of Structures
Dr. Hatem TagelDr. Hatem Tagel--Din, Applied Science International, LLCDin, Applied Science International, LLC
Q&A Session Q&A Session P lP lPanelPanel
ClosingClosing
www.nafems.orgwww.nafems.orgLadzinski Tagel-Din
THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONTHE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONTHE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONTHE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONFOR THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS FOR THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
COMMUNITYCOMMUNITY
An Overview of NAFEMS NA Activities
Matthew LadzinskiMatthew LadzinskiNAFEMSNAFEMSNorth American RepresentativeNorth American Representative
www.nafems.orgwww.nafems.org
Planned Activities in North America
WebinarsNew topic each month!p
Verification & Validation (V&V): Quantifying Prediction Uncertainty and Demonstrating Simulation Credibility (May 15)Managing FEA in the Design Process (June)
Recent webinars:Recent webinars:AUTOSIM: The Future of Simulation in the Automotive IndustryA Common Sense Approach to Stress Analysis and Finite Element ModelingThe Interfacing of FEA ith Press re Vessel Design Codes (CCOPPSThe Interfacing of FEA with Pressure Vessel Design Codes (CCOPPS Project)Multiphysics Simulation using Directly Coupled-Field Element TechnologyMethods and Technology for the Analysis of Composite MaterialsMethods and Technology for the Analysis of Composite MaterialsSimulation Process ManagementSimulation-supported Decision Making (Stochastics)Simulation Driven Design (SDD) Findings
www.nafems.orgwww.nafems.org
To register for upcoming webinars, or to view a past webinar, please visit: www.nafems.org/events/webinars
Planned Activities in North America
EventsPractical Stress Analysis & Finite ElementPractical Stress Analysis & Finite Element Methods with Bob Johnson
An opportunity to ensure that your organization gets maximum benefit from using FEAgThree-day Training CourseApril 30th – May 2nd, 2008 in Troy, MIOnly a two seats left! ywww.nafems.org/events
www.nafems.orgwww.nafems.org
Planned Activities in North America
NAFEMS NA 2008 Regional SummitNAFEMS 2020 Vision of Engineering Analysis and Simulation
NAFEMS 2020 will bring together the leading visionaries, developers, and practitioners of CAE-related technologies and business processesGoal: Provide attendees with the best “food for thoughtGoal: Provide attendees with the best “food for thought and action” to deploy CAE over the next several yearsLocation: Embassy Suites Hotel & Convention Center,
Hampton VirginiaHampton, VirginiaDate: October 29-31, 2008
Call for Papers Now Open!Call for Papers Now Open!
For more information visit:
www.nafems.orgwww.nafems.org
For more information, visit: www.nafems.org/nafems2020
Other NAFEMS Activities
NAFEMS Simulation Data Management Working Group (SDMWG) – name tbdg p ( )
www.nafems.org/tech/sdmwg
NAFEMS NA eNews UpdateMonthly newsletter containing information on upcoming NAFEMS NA activitiesCan be downloaded at: www.nafems.org/regional/north_america/enews
www.nafems.orgwww.nafems.org
Applied Element Method as a Practical Tool for Progressive Collapse Analysis offor Progressive Collapse Analysis of
Structures
Hatem Tagel-DinApplied Science International, LLC
Contents
• Definition of Progressive Collapse • Problem Statement• Why AEM?• AEM Theory• Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEM
A l i Ad t f AEM d t FEM• Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEM• Practical Examples for Progressive Collapse Simulations
Definition of Progressive Collapse
“A collapse that is triggered by localized damage that can’t be contained and leads to a chain of failures resulting in a partial or total structural collapse, where the final damage is disproportionate to the local damage of the triggering event”
Definition of Progressive Collapse GSA Code: Guidance
GSA: Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernization Projects.
Objective to reduce the potential for progressive collapse through:
1) Redundancy for ensuring alternative load paths2) Structural Continuity and Ductility3) Capability of resisting load reversals4) Capability of resisting shear failure
Definition of Progressive Collapse GSA Code: Analysis
Remove a vertical supporting element from the location being considered (first fl l ) d d t t ti d i l i f th t t
y
floor only) and conduct a static or dynamic analysis for the structure.
Interior considerationExterior consideration
Definition of Progressive Collapse GSA Code: Analysis
1) Maximum Allowable Collapse Area:
y
Problem Statement
• Given:– Structural full geometryStructural full geometry– Full reinforcement detailing– Material properties
Th (B b lli i fi– Threat type (Bomb, car collision, fire, element removal.)
• Questions:– Will the structural collapse or not?– Is it partial or total collapse?– Which part will fail and how?Which part will fail and how?– What is the footprint of the collapsed
structures?What are the effects of falling debris on– What are the effects of falling debris on adjacent structures?
Why AEM?Why AEM?
Why AEM?Methods for Structural AnalysisMethods for Structural Analysis
• Finite Element Method (FEM)• Boundary Element Method (BEM)• Finite Difference Method• Discrete Element Method (DEM)• Discrete Element Method (DEM)• Discontinuous Deformation Analysis (DDA)• Truss Method and Lattice Method• Strut and Tie Method• Spring Network Method
Fi it S ti M th d• Finite Section Method• Rigid Body and Spring Method (RBSM)• Mesh-Free Methods
Why AEM?FEM/DEM Comparison
M M
Collapse History
FEM/DEM Comparison
lifie
d FE
M
nced
FEM
Linear Cracking, Yield, Crushing
Buckling, Post-Buckling
Debris falling as Rigid Bodies CollisionElement
Separation
Sim
pl
Adv
an
Continuum Discrete
Can not be
FEMAutomated
Problems with Static analysis and
Accurate
ycontinuum materials Reliable
Not reliableDEM
Why AEM?Analysis of Oklahoma City Building Using Advanced FEMAnalysis of Oklahoma City Building Using Advanced FEM
Why AEM?Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAdvantages of AEM compared to FEM
• Analysis AdvantagesA l i i i l th i lifi d FEM d t th– Analysis is as simple as the simplified FEM and as accurate as the advanced FEM.
– Output includes stresses, strain and internal force diagrams– Automatic yield and cut of reinforcement barsAutomatic yield and cut of reinforcement bars
– Automatic element separation and contact detection – Automatic plastic hinge formation
A t ti l t lli i– Automatic element collision• Modeling Advantages
– Physical elements
M h i hi– Much easier meshing– Easier modeling of reinforcement bars– Realistic and Easier modeling for Steel Structures
Why AEM?
Complexity, Accuracy, Time and Qualifications of User
ons
utio
ns
Progressive Collapse Analysis
le S
olut
io
inea
r Sol
u
Sim
pl
ghly
Non
li
Engineering Judgment, Uncertainty and Construction Cost
Hig
Advanced FEMFEM
GapSimplified FEM
Not verifiedPerformance Based Design
AEM
Not verifiedPerformance Based Design
AEM
Why AEM?Analysis of Oklahoma City Building Using AEMAnalysis of Oklahoma City Building Using AEM
Why AEM?Analysis of Oklahoma City Building Using AEMAnalysis of Oklahoma City Building Using AEM
AEM Theoretical Background Element Discretization
Material Springs
The continuum is discretized into elements connected together with nonlinear springs that represent the material behaviorp g p
The springs represent axial deformations as well as shear deformations
AEM Theoretical Background Connectivity (Matrix Springs)y ( p g )
Volume Volume represented by represented by springssprings
Element 1Element 1 Element 2Element 2YZ
x
Element 1Element 1El t 1El t 1 El t 1El t 1 Element 1Element 1Element 1Element 1 Element 1Element 1
Normal SpringsNormal Springs Shear Springs Shear Springs xx--zz Shear Springs Shear Springs yy--zz
AEM Theoretical Background Connectivity (Reinforcement Springs)y ( p g )
Element 1Element 1 Element 2Element 2YZ Reinforcing bar
xbar
Element 1Element 1Element 1Element 1 Element 1Element 1
Normal SpringsNormal Springs Shear Springs Shear Springs xx--zz Shear Springs Shear Springs yy--zzp gp g p gp g p gp g yy
AEM Theoretical Background Connectivity (Steel Sections)y ( )
2 ways for modeling a steel section
Implicit Steel section Explicit Steel sectionp p
Vacuum cellsSteel Elements
Vacuum cells
AEM Theoretical Background Connectivity (Matrix Springs)y ( p g )
Steel Springs
AEM Theoretical Background Connectivity (Matrix Springs)
Steel Springs
y ( p g )
concrete
Concrete Springsp g
AEM Theoretical Background Masonry Walls Modeling
MortarMortar
y g
BrickBrick
ConcreteConcrete
MortarMortar
AEM Theoretical Background Masonry Walls Modeling
Brick Springs
y g
p g
Concrete Springs
Mortar Springs
AEM Theoretical Background Degrees of Freedomg
Normal Normal
Shear x-z Shear x-zShear x-y
Shear x-y Normal
TranslationTranslation RotationRotation
AEM Theoretical Background Assembly of Overall Stiffness Matrix
12 12 x x 12 12 stiffness matrixstiffness matrix
y
Elements directly affect each otherElements directly affect each other
O ll Stiff M t iO ll Stiff M t iOverall Stiffness MatrixOverall Stiffness Matrix
AEM Theoretical Background Equation of Motion
[ ]{ } [ ]{ } [ ]{ } { }iiiiii FyKyCyM Δ=Δ+Δ+Δ &&& Incremental Equation of Motion
q
Step-by-step integration (Newmark-beta) method requestedrequested
Acceleration
yoo(ti+Δt){ } { } { }
{ } { } { } { } 221 tytytyy
tytyy
iiii
iii
ΔΔβ+Δ+Δ=Δ
ΔΔγ+Δ=Δ
&&&&&
&&&&&
Δt
{ } { } { } { }2
tytytyy iiii ΔΔβ+Δ+Δ=Δ
Timeti ti +θ Δt
AEM Theoretical BackgroundMaterial Models (Material Models (Concrete under axial stresses)
TensionTension CompressionCompressionFully path-dependent model for concrete(Okamura and Maekawa 1991)(Okamura and Maekawa, 1991)
AEM Theoretical BackgroundMaterial Models (Material Models (Concrete under Shear Stresses)
Before CrackingBefore Cracking After CrackingAfter Cracking
Friction and interlockingFriction and interlocking
AEM Theoretical BackgroundMaterial Models (Material Models (Steel under axial stresses)
TensionTension CompressionCompressionFully path-dependent model for reinforcementy(Ristic et al, 1986)
z
AEM Theoretical BackgroundMaterial Models (Material Models (Cracking Criteria)
τxzσx
τyz
yτzy
τxyy
τyx
σy
xτzx σz
y
z
τxy
τxz σxτyz
τzx σzτyx
yτzy
τxyσy
Plane of majorPlane of majorx
Plane of major Plane of major principal stressprincipal stress
AEM Theoretical BackgroundCut of RebarCut of Rebar
VonVon--Misses Criteria applied for Ultimate StrengthMisses Criteria applied for Ultimate StrengthBar resists only Normal and shear forcesBar resists only Normal and shear forcesNo Flexural rigidity at the timeNo Flexural rigidity at the time--beingbeing
NNVV
F il lFailure envelope
1222
⎟⎟⎞
⎜⎜⎛
+⎟⎟⎞
⎜⎜⎛
+⎟⎟⎞
⎜⎜⎛ MVN 1=⎟⎟
⎠⎜⎜⎝
+⎟⎟⎠
⎜⎜⎝
+⎟⎟⎠
⎜⎜⎝ PPP MVN
AEM Theoretical BackgroundTypes of ContactTypes of Contact
Corner-Face TypeEdge-Edge Type Corner-Ground Type
AEM Theoretical BackgroundCollision SpringsCollision Springs
F lliF lliFallingFallingElementElement
Normal and shear springs are createdNormal and shear springs are created
Shear spring in XShear spring in XShear spring in yShear spring in y Normal SpringNormal Spring
AEM Theoretical BackgroundFEM/AEM ComparisonFEM/AEM Comparison
FEMFEM AEMAEM
Full nodal compatibility
D f ti i id l tD f ti i id l t D f ti t id l tD f ti t id l tDeformations inside elementsDeformations inside elements Deformations outside elementsDeformations outside elements
Deformations in surface springsDeformations in surface springs
AEM Theoretical BackgroundFEM/AEM ComparisonFEM/AEM Comparison
FEM AEM
8 nodes x 3 DOF 24 DOF/ Element 6 DOF/ Element
AEM Theoretical BackgroundFEM/AEM ComparisonFEM/AEM Comparison
16 17 18 19 201211109 1211109
11 12 13 14 15
1211109
8765
1211109
8765
6 7 8 9 104321 4321
FEM AEM1 2 3 4 5
Elements compatible at nodes (moves together there)
Elements are connected through their faces(moves together there)
For example Node 13 connects Elements 6,7,10,11
Deformations are inside the l t
their facesFor example elements 6,7,10,11
are not compatible in deformationsDeformations are localized at the
elements faces of the elements
AEM Theoretical BackgroundFEM/AEM ComparisonFEM/AEM Comparison
Connectivity includedNo Connectivity
FEM AEM
AEM Theoretical BackgroundFEM/AEM Comparison (Transition Elements)FEM/AEM Comparison (Transition Elements)
FEM AEM
There should be transition elements between large elements and small elements
There is no need for the transition elements between large elements and small elements
Modeling Advantages of AEM Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMcompared to FEMcompared to FEMcompared to FEM
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEasy Element ConnectivityEasy Element Connectivity
Easy Mesh Generation
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEasy Element Connectivity
FEM AEM
Easy Element Connectivity
Auto meshing of elements connectivity
Difficult meshingand For CompatibilityCompatibility Merge Nodes of Slab and Column
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEasy Element Connectivity
Sl bSl b
Easy Element Connectivity
Concrete SlabConcrete Slab
Girder
Wind
Girder
Wind
olum
n
Window Frame
olum
n
Window Frame
BrickWall
C BrickWall
C
Glass WindowGlass Window
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEasy Element Connectivity
FEM AEM
Easy Element Connectivity
Difficult meshingBetween wide
d thi l tConnection of
and thin elements Elements Through Interfaces
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEasy Modeling of Steel StructuresEasy Modeling of Steel Structures
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMNo Need for Gap ElementsNo Need for Gap Elements
AEMAEM Solid ElementsSolid ElementsShell ElementsShell Elements
In Simplified FEM link elements should be located and definedlocated and defined in the beginning.
In AEM, link between a column and a footing is automaticallyautomatically defined at Springs
Modeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMModeling Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEasy Modeling of Reinforcement DetailsEasy Modeling of Reinforcement Details
Analysis Advantages of AEM Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMcompared to FEMcompared to FEMcompared to FEM
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Iterations using Simplified FEM
C d t t ti d i l i
Remove a vertical support
Analysis Iterations using Simplified FEM
Conduct a static or dynamic analysis
DCR exceeded in any
member?yesyes
NoNo
DCR exceeded based upon shear
force ?
yesyes
Failed members should be removed from the
The member is considered a
failed member
NoNo
Flexural DCR ratio exceeded in a member end ?
model, and all dead and live loads associated with failed members should be redistributed to
Place a hinge at the member’s end
At inserted hinge apply
yesyes
NoNo
Flexural DCR values for both ends of a
member, as well as span itself, are
exceeded ?
the other members in adjacent bays
At inserted hinge, apply equal-but-opposite moments whose magnitude should equal the expected flexural strength
The member is considered a
failed member
yesyes
End
NoNo
Calculate collapsed area
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMNo Need for Analysis Iterations using AEM
Remove a vertical support
No Need for Analysis Iterations using AEM
Conduct a dynamic analysis
EndCalculate collapsed area
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMManual Formation of Plastic Hinges using Simplified FEM
1-In commercial FEM, usually explicit plastic hinges, in predefined locations, should be defined by the user in order to perform the nonlinear analysis.
Manual Formation of Plastic Hinges using Simplified FEM
y p y
2-Both Moment-curvature and Moment-rotation relations in such a case should be estimated by the user before analysis3 The user should be a qualified engineer3-The user should be a qualified engineer
Predefined Plastic HingesMoment-Curvature
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAutomatic Formation of Plastic Hinges
1- The Nonlinear analysis is automatically considered in ELS. Location, number and all properties of plastic hinges in ELS are automatically determined by the ELS.
Automatic Formation of Plastic Hinges
Plastic hinge at maximum +ve moment
Plastic hinge at maximum -vemoment
Plastic hinge at maximum -vemoment
2- In FEM commercial software, fiber plastic hinges are used to overcome the disadvantage in (predefined moment-curvature), However definition of the Fiber hinge properties is difficult and needs large time to represent concrete and steel cellscells.
3-Preprocessing time in SAP is longer than ELS. Post processing time is equal in SAP and ELS.
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAutomatic Formation of Plastic HingesAutomatic Formation of Plastic Hinges
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAutomatic Formation of Plastic HingesAutomatic Formation of Plastic Hinges
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMComparison between Progressive Collapse Analysis using AEM and FEM
(1) In FEM analysis, no bar rupture available Not accurate
Comparison between Progressive Collapse Analysis using AEM and FEM
(2) In FEM analysis, no element separation and collision available Not accurate
(3) Since no progressive collapse can be simulated with FEM Iterative analysis is(3) Since no progressive collapse can be simulated with FEM, Iterative analysis is carried out in order to remove collapsed elements and to redistribute their loads to adjacent elements Time consuming and not accurate
(4) In AEM, Plastic hinge formation, failure and collapse of members is automated Advantage of AEM
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMLocalization of Failed Areas
Cracking and Plastic Hinges Formation
Mechanisms Formation and Elements Failure
Progressive collapse of Elements
Collision and Progressive collapse of Parts of Structures
Automatic prediction in one analysisAutomatic prediction in one analysis
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMEffects of Reinforcement Bars
00 0.5 1 1.5
O C l d
Effects of Reinforcement Bars
-10
-5
on (c
m)
Bottom RFT= 82% of LEFEM design
76%
One Column removed
-20
-15
Floo
r Def
lect
io
71%
63%
50%
No collapse
-30
-25
Time (Seconds)
50%
44% & Non-continuousBottom RFT
Collapsing
Time (Seconds)
Strengthened GirdersStrengthened Girders(above collapsed columns)(above collapsed columns)
Amount of additional RFT Amount of additional RFT (calculated as a percentage of RFT (calculated as a percentage of RFT based upon elastic analysis afterbased upon elastic analysis afterbased upon elastic analysis after based upon elastic analysis after element removal)element removal)
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMInternal Force Diagrams Through Integration of StressesInternal Force Diagrams Through Integration of Stresses
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMInternal Force Diagrams Through Integration of StressesInternal Force Diagrams Through Integration of Stresses
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMDamage assessments due to column removalDamage assessments due to column removal
Highly cracked zones
Highly cracked zones
P Q R
7 7
6 6
P.6
Case (1)
PP QQ RR
7 77 7
6 66 6
P.6P.6
Case (1)
8 8
8.3 8.3
9 9
Case (1)
Case (2)
Case (3)
8 88 8
8.3 8.38.3 8.3
9 99 9
Case (1)
Case (2)
Case (3)
P Q R
9 9
P.6PP QQ RR
9 99 9
P.6P.6
Collapse of Column Q-6
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMDamage assessments due to two column removalDamage assessments due to two column removal
P Q R
7 7
6 6
P.6
Case (1)
PP QQ RR
7 77 7
6 66 6
P.6P.6
Case (1)
8 8
8.3 8.3
9 9
Case (1)
Case (2)
Case (3)
8 88 8
8.3 8.38.3 8.3
9 99 9
Case (1)
Case (2)
Case (3)
P Q R
9 9
P.6PP QQ RR
9 99 9
P.6P.6
Collapse of Columns Q-6 and R-6
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMDamage assessments due to column removal
Damage assessments due to column removal
11270
3847 2074
11270
38472074
11270
3847 2074
11270
38472074
11270
3847 2074
11270
38472074
11270
3847 2074
11270
38472074
1082211063
5160
3
3728
4481
10822
5160
3
448111063
3728
1082211063
5160
3
3728
4481
10822
5160
3
448111063
3728
1082211063
5160
3
3728
4481
10822
5160
3
448111063
3728
1082211063
5160
3
3728
4481
10822
5160
3
448111063
3728
1226912269 1226912269 1226912269 1226912269
Bending Moment Just After Bending Moment Just After Column CollapseColumn Collapse
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMVisual Damage AssessmentsVisual Damage Assessments
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMVisual Damage/Non-Structural ComponentsVisual Damage/Non-Structural Components
Analysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMAnalysis Advantages of AEM compared to FEMVisual Damage/Automatic Contact DetectionVisual Damage/Automatic Contact Detection
Earthquake Directionq
Verification ExamplesVerification Examples
Verification Examples Verification Examples Charlotte Coliseum, North Carolina
Demolition ScenarioDemolition Scenario
Verification Examples Verification Examples Charlotte Coliseum, North Carolina
AEM ModelAEM Model
Verification Examples Verification Examples Charlotte Coliseum, North Carolina
11 22 33 4411 22 33 44
Verification Examples Verification Examples Charlotte Coliseum, North Carolina
Verification Examples Verification Examples Sheraton Hotel, Raleigh North Carolina
LayoutLayout
Verification Examples Verification Examples Sheraton Hotel, Raleigh North Carolina
AEM ModelAEM Model
Verification Examples Verification Examples Sheraton Hotel, Raleigh North Carolina
11 22 3311 22 33
Verification Examples Verification Examples Sheraton Hotel, Raleigh North Carolina
Verification Examples Verification Examples Stubbs Tower, Savannah, Georgia
ELS ModelELS Model
The removedThe removed
Verification Examples Verification Examples Stubbs Tower, Savannah, Georgia
Level (1) at 0.10 sec
The removed The removed components are components are shown in redshown in red
Level (1) at 1.1 sec
Level (1) at 1.43 secLevel (2) at 0.125 sec Level (1) at 2.60 sec
Level (3) at 0.15 sec Level (1) at 1.767 secLevel (1) at 2.27sec
Level (6) at0.175 sec Level (1) at 1.93 sec Level (1) at 2.28 sec
Level (1) at 0.767 sec Level (1) at 2.10 sec
Verification Examples Verification Examples Stubbs Tower, Savannah, Georgia
(1) (3)
(2) (4)( ) ( )
Verification Examples Verification Examples Stubbs Tower, Savannah, Georgia
Verification Examples Verification Examples Briquetting Structure, Australia
Verification Examples Verification Examples Briquetting Structure, Australia
Verification Examples Verification Examples Briquetting Structure, Australia
(1) (2) (3)
(4) (5) (6)
Verification Examples Verification Examples Briquetting Structure, Australia
200
100
150
Forc
e (t
ons)
50
F
00 5 10 15 20 25 30
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresHot rolled steel beam under flexureHot rolled steel beam under flexure
25
30
35
15
20
25
Load
(Ton
)
FEMFEM 5
10
FEM ELS2
AEMAEM
00 1 2 3 4 5 6
Displacement (cm)
Stress contours
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresConcrete-Filled Tube Girder under Four-Point Loading
mm
Box (120*120*3 84)
120mm
120m Box (120 120 3.84)
50mm 250mm 250mm 50mm500mm
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresConcrete-Filled Tube Girder under Four-Point Loading
3000
3500
2500
3000
m)
1500
2000
Mom
ent (
kN.c
m
500
1000
M
EXPeriment
00 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Deflection (cm)
ELS
Deflection (cm)
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresSteel Composite Beam under Four-Point Loading
610mm
64mm
1118mm
64mm
610mm
64mm
1118mm
64mm
W16* 6
64mm
W16* 6
64mm
Shear stud 20 mm Shear stud 20 mm 150mm 150mm
W16* 6
64mm
W16* 6
64mm
Shear stud 20 mm Shear stud 20 mm 150mm 150mm
B1 B2B1 B2
L/3 L/3 L/3
L= 2.44m
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresSteel Composite Beam under Four-Point Loading (B1)
30000
35000
20000
25000ad
(kg)
5000
10000
15000Loa
0
5000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Deflection (cm)
EXP ELS
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresSteel Composite Beam under Four-Point Loading (B2)
35000
40000
20000
25000
30000
(kg)
10000
15000
20000
Load
0
5000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Deflection (cm)
EXP ELS
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresHybrid Steel Girder with Longitudinal and Transverse Stiffeners
50 mm
7000 mm
Longitudinal Stiffeners900 mm
200 mm
4.50 mm
15 mm
Transverse Stiffeners
o g tud a St e e s
Verification Example of Steel StructuresVerification Example of Steel StructuresHybrid Steel Girder with Longitudinal and Transverse Stiffeners
1000
1200
Deflection Pattern obtained by ELS (elevation).
600
800
plie
d lo
ad (K
N)
Deflection Pattern obtained by ELS (plan)
200
400Ap
ELSExpe
00 20 40 60 80 1
Deflection (mm)
L t l t i l b kli b d i th i tLateral torsional buckling observed in the experiment
THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONTHE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONFOR THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COMMUNITYFOR THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COMMUNITY
Q&A SessionQ&A Session
Using the Q&A tool, please submit any questions you may have for our panel.questions you may have for our panel.
THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONTHE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONFOR THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COMMUNITYFOR THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COMMUNITY
Thank you!Thank you!