DIANA新工程砌体材料模型英文

NewEngineeringMasonryMaterial

Model

inDIANADIANA

Online

Training

SeriesTopics•

New

Engineering

MasonryModel•

Simplified

soilmodels•

New

proposedworkflowNLTH

earthquakeapproach1Situation•

The

Northern

Netherlands

has

been

subjected

to

natural

gasextractionsincethe

1950’s.•

Such

activity

induced

a

certain

level

of

seismicity

in

the

area,

with

afirst

earthquake

recorded

in

1991,

with

a

low

rate

of

events

peryears.•

From

2003

the

number

of

events

and

magnitude

started

toincrease,

and

in

2012

the

largest

event,

with

a

magnitude

M

=

3.6,Lwas

recorded.•

The

induced

earthquake

of

2012

was

in

high

part

responsible

ofmost

ofthe

actual

damage

in

theGroningen

region.The

magnitude

of

this

event

was

not

extremely

high

but,

however,its

effect

on

structures

and

infrastructures

in

the

surrounding

areawas

amplified

due

to

the

shallow

depth

of

the

earthquake

and

thesoftlayers

constituting

the

foundational

soil.2Housing

and

buildings

in

Netherlands•

Inside

100mm

calcium

silicate

brick•

Outside

100

mmclay

brick•

Connection

more

or

less

wallties(4/m2?).Depending

on

environmentmore

orlesscorroded.•

NOT

DESIGNEDFOREARTHQUAKES

!3Model

-OverviewCrushingTensile

behaviourModel

validationtests:Coulomb-basedshearretentionDevelopedatDIANA

FEA

togetherwithprofessorJ.G.

RotsofDelftUniversityofTechnology(TUDELFT)4Model

–

background

needMainly

used

model

TSCM

doesnottake

intoaccountthe

orthotropy

ofthemasonry

material

anddoes

not

allow

forlinear

unloading

(onlysecant).The

failure

load

iswell

described

but

hysteretic

loops

aresmallwithoutenergy.The

new

model

isatotal-strainbasedcontinuum

modelthat:•

coverstensile,

shear

andcompression

failure

modes,•

inthex,y

horizontal-vertical

bed

joint

–

headjoint

system,•

with

adequate

secant,elastic

andmixed

hysteresis

loops

forthedifferent

failuremodes,•

including

orthotropy,

byusing

different

properties

for

theelasticity,strengthand

softening

forthe

two

directions.5Model

–

Elastic

inputTUEtestsonexisting

masonry2.1(solid

bricks)1.4TUDtestsonreplicated

masonry1.3(perforated

bricks)1.6Ey/ExLiteratureClaybrick2.01.5Calcium

silicate

brick6Model

–

Tensile2퐺푓푡휀

=푢푙푡Tensile

behaviourℎ푓푡TUEtestsonTUDtestsonfty/

ftxLiterature:existing

masonry1/3.3

(solid

andperforated

bricks)1/4.5replicated

masonry1/2.8

(perforatedbricks)Claybrick1/31/27Calcium

silicate

brick1/3.6Model

-Compression퐸휀푝푒푎푘푛

=푓푐CrushingTUEtestsonexisting

masonry2.0(solid

bricks)1.5TUDtestsonfcy/fcxLiteraturereplicated

masonry1.8(perforated

bricks)1.0Claybrick2.01.5Calcium

silicate

brick8Model

–

Shear,

slidingCoulomb-basedshearretention휏푚푎푥

=

푚푎푥

0,

푐

−

휎푦푦tan(휑)2퐺푓푠

휎푦푦

tan

휙훾

=푢푙푡+ℎ

∙

푐퐺9Model

–

suggested

correlationTUEtestsonexisting

masonry2.1(solid

bricks)1.4TUDtestsonreplicated

masonry1.3(perforated

bricks)1.6Ey/ExLiteratureClaybrick2.01.5Calcium

silicate

brickTUEtestsonexisting

masonry2.0(solid

bricks)1.5TUDtestsonreplicated

masonry1.8(perforated

bricks)1.0fcy/fcxLiteratureClaybrick2.01.5Calcium

silicate

brickTUEtestsonexisting

masonry1/3.3

(solid

andperforated

bricks)1/4.5TUDtestsonreplicated

masonry1/2.8

(perforatedbricks)fty/

ftxLiterature:Claybrick1/31/2Calcium

silicate

brick1/3.610TUD

Validation

tests'MATERI'1NAMEYOUNG

:1500SHRMOD:500TENSTR

:0.12/0.04

Mpa(ft)GF1

:0.04/0.01Nmm(Gf)COMSTR

:6.2/6.2

Mpa(fd)Mpa(E)Mpa(G)"Masonry"MCNAMECONCRMATMDLMASONRENGMASDENSITYOUNGSHRMODTENSTRGF1COMSTRGCEPSCFAPHI1.65200E+031.49100E+095.00000E+081.20000E+054.00000E+016.20000E+064.00000E+044.00000E+000.531.49100E+094.00000E+041.00000E+016.20000E+064.00000E+044.00000E+00GC:40Nmm(Gc)-factorTAN(30)Mpa(C)Nmm(Gfs)EPSFAC

:4PHI:0.53COHESI

:0.23COHESIASPECTGFSCRKCOHCBSPEC

ROTSRAYLEI

1.11000E+002.30000E+05GFS:0.02::::2.00000E+01Some1-2%small

straindampingcanbeadded.9.00000E-0411Typical

component

tests•

Variations:–

L/Hratio–

Clamped

orcantilever–

Overburden

stress12LOWSTATest

LowstaEx=EyG1.491

GPa500GPa0.120

MPa0.04

MPa40

N/mFtxFtyGftxGftyFcx=FcyGfcΦ10N/m6.2MPa40kN/m0.

53

rad0.21

MPaCGfsNOREDUCTIONρ1652

kg/m313LOWSTATest

sliding

wallEx=Ey

4.182GPaG1.400GPa0.238MPa0.238MPa15N/mftxftyGftxGfty15N/mfcx=fc6.2MPayGfcΦ40kN/m0.

4radC0.21MPaGfsρNO

REDUCTION1852kg/m314Validation

Quadratic

linearQuadratic

vs.Linearelements

(<100

mm)140Quadratic

vs.Linearelements

(<200

mm)140Fx

(kN)Fx

(kN)1201008012010080606040402020dx

(mm)10dx

(mm)1000-10-8-6-4-202468-10-8-6-4-202468-20-40-60-80-100-120-140-20-40-60-80-100-120-140LOWSTA_Q_GFSLOWSTA_L_GFSLOWSTA_Q_2_GFSLOWSTA_L_2_GFS15Examplesof

Dutch

buildings•

Non-lineartime-historyanalysisof

anexistingmasonry

building

with

double-leafwallsUxmax

Uymax

wcr,max

Fbase,x

Fbase,y

Fbase,z[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

[MN]

[MN]

[MN]*EarthquakesignalABC38.835.432.845.342.936.24.03.94.437.335.930.030.931.431.180.453.568.0*Relativetoself-weight.16Examplesof

Dutch

buildings•

Assessment

ofthe

effectiveness

ofseismicMax.

displacementsstrengthening

measuresfor

anexistingschoolbuildingUnstrengthenedStrengthenedStrengthening

measures17Max.

crackwidthCases

observations•

Intensileand

compression

region

forbuildingisnotmuch

hysteretic

energyabsorption.•

Shear/slidingis

muchmore

important.18Relevanceof

soil-structure

interaction

effects•

Soil-structure

interaction

effectsnot

usually

taken

into

account

inthe

structural

design.•

Some

methods

allow

to

consider

the

effects

of

soil

and

foundation

system

through

theintroduction

of

lumped

springs

at

the

base

of

the

structure,

based

on

existing

formulationsavailable

inthe

literature;•

Other

methods

take

advantage

of

the

direct

modelling

of

portions

of

soil

through

finite

elementapproaches.•

A‘direct

approach’

is

followed:−

An

effective

soil

volume

is

directly

modelled

under

the

structurediscretized

through

solidelements.−

Thebuilding

and

the

foundation

system

is

alsoexplicitlymodelled.−

The

effects

of

the

nonlinearities

due

to

the

soil

behaviour

and

to

thebuilding’s

materials

and

geometry,

as

well

as

theirinteraction

canbethe

analysis.explicitly

taken

into

account

in−

Direct

considerationofthe

local

site

conditions.19InputsetofForcetime-histories•

The

dynamic

excitation

isintroduced

at

thebase

of

thesoil

column

as

asetof

Forcetime-historiesproportional

tothe

velocitytime-histories

associated

totheground

motion.•

Foreach

component,

theForcetime-history

iscalculated

by

multiplying

thevelocitytime-history

by

thedamping

coefficientassociated

tothesame

direction.•

The

useof

Forcetime-histories

and

linear

dampers

atthebase

ofthe

soil

column

has

theadvantage

ofallowing

theenergy

tobe

radiated

back

inthe

underlying

space.Horizontal

Forcetime-histories(2in-planedirections):Vertical

Forcetime-histories(along

theheight)::horizontal

velocity

time-histories

(X,

Y

directions):vertical

velocity

time-histories

(Zdirection)20Damping

coefficient

forbase

dampers•

Viscous

uniaxial

dampers

defined

on

thebasis

ofthe

damping

coefficient.•

The

dampers

are

characterized

by

adamping

coefficient

equal

totheproduct

ofthe

mass

density

and

theshear

wave

velocityof

theunderlying

layer

withthe

area

ofthe

base

ofthe

soil

column.•

The

properties

of

thebedrock

are

used

for

the

half-space.Horizontal

dampers(2in-planedirections):Vertical

damper(along

theheight)::mass

density:in-plane

area:shear

and

compression

wave

velocitiesWith:Soilmodelnon-linear

parameters•

Simplesoilmodelsavailablein

DIANA:-

Shear

strain-Stiffness

ratio-

Ramberg-Osgood:-

Hardin-Drnevich:diagram:-

Soil

behaviour:

Non-linear

G/G0curvesaccording

tosoil

layerprofile:Soilmodelnon-linear

parametersGoStrain

where

G=0.7GoShearstrain

profilesalong

thefoundation

soil•

Max.andMin.

shear

strains

in

thein-planedirections:Equivalent

soilmodels-

EquivalentDensity,Stiffness,

Soilproperties-

EquivalentdampingcoefficientsEquivalent3DsoilcolumnProperty3Dsoilblock3DsoilcolumnCombined

soilmodelAbase

[m2]h[m]100

x100301x11x1*303030ρ[kg/m3]E[N/m2]G[N/m2]ν[-]18001800180000001.92E+127.20E+110.33*1.92E+087.20E+070.331.92E+087.20E+070.33**0.33Vs

[m/s]Vp

[m/s]ch

[Ns/m]cv

[Ns/m]2002002002003233233233233.60E+095.87E+093.60E+055.87E+053.60E+095.87E+093.60E+095.87E+09*:top

andbottom

part

different

(resp.

100

and

1m)Equivalent

soilmodels-

EquivalentDensity,Stiffness,

Soilproperties-

Equivalentdampingcoefficients1.21.00.20.01.21.00.20.0peclcceatig)ectcelio0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.00.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0Period

(s)Period

(s)Other

elementsfor

hysteresis•

Interfaces–

Includeplasticity,

hysteretic

behavior.•

Springs–

Includeyieldplateauandlinearunloading/reloading.Interfaces

PILE.GappingautomaticDissipative

Materials

for

Dynamics•

Concrete–

TotalStrain

crack

model•

Maekawa

Cracked

Concrete

curves•

Japan

Societyof

Civil

Engineers

(JCSE)

2012

curvesura29Maekawa-

Fukuura

modelin

DIANA•

Non-orthogonal

Crack

model–

Threshold

angle

θ:With

the

non-orthogonal

crack

option

theuser

can

define

athreshold

angleθ

for

the

minimum

anglebetween

two

different

cracks

inthesame

integration

point.–

Maximum

6

cracks

in1

point:

Bydefault

the

threshold

angleθ=90°,

which

givesthenon-orthogonal

crack

option

the

samebehavior

as

the

Fixed

crack

option.

However,

when

the

thresholdangleθ

isdefined

at

a