ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply?
|
|
- Nigel Wells
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? By George Weilbacher Compression Analytical Group Manager Exterran Guy Gendron VP Engineering Services BETA Machinery Analysis A Wood Group Company Presented at: Gas Machinery Conference 2015 Austin, TX 1. Introduction Seismic risk is a real hazard in many parts of the world including North America, South America, and Asia. In North America, California, Alaska, some areas in the eastern states, and Canada are prone to significant earthquakes. Compressor Packagers and OEMs are often asked to assess the impact of seismic events on their compressor packages destined for these areas. There are two challenges facing packagers when conducting a seismic analysis: 1. determine which areas of the package would be affected by a seismic event (piping, bottles, skid, etc.); and 2. specify the appropriate engineering/vibration analysis required for the application. A seismic study is typically conducted to the requirements of ASCE Standard 7-10 to determine what loads to apply to a package and to evaluate stresses and displacements. This paper will review the methods proposed in this Standard and evaluate how the code requirements are applicable to compressor packages. The conclusion will evaluate the accuracy of the ASCE Standard and list additional work required for the seismic verification of a compressor package. ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 1
2 2. A Typical Reciprocating Compressor Package A typical compressor package is shown in Figure 1. Although many different designs can be built, the design shown in Figure 1 gives a good idea of the type of skid-mounted, separable compressor package studied in this paper. Depending on the application, such a package will include suction and discharge bottles (green in Fig. 1), scrubbers (orange), lots of piping, and of course a driver (purple) and a compressor (magenta). A compressor can execute several stages of compression. Between each stage, the gas will usually flow to a cooler (not shown in Figure 1) before it flows back to a scrubber for the next stage of compression. In most cases, the compressor and the driver are mounted on a pedestal whereas the rest of the components are connected directly to skid beams. The skid and the pedestals are isolated in Figure 2. Depending on their construction and the resulting load paths between driver mounting and base skid, pedestals can have varying inherent flexibilities. If that flexibility becomes an issue, packagers will sometimes pour concrete in the pedestals as well as in the skid underneath the pedestals. This has a triple effect of adding mass, stiffness, and damping. Added mass and stiffness tend to shift natural frequencies and lower amplitudes of response, while damping tends to lower amplitudes of response with negligible, if any, effect on the natural frequency of concern. Other components of interest for this project, aside from the pedestal and the skid beams, are isolated in Figure 3. These include suction (light green) and discharge (dark green) bottles as well as scrubbers (orange). It is interesting to note that the scrubbers are skirt-mounted. Scrubber vessels are welded to the skirts, which are in turn either welded or bolted to the skid, sometimes directly to the skid beams, other times through base plates. The use of base plates may occur for either bolted or welded attachments of the scrubber to the skid structure. The selection for mounting compressor packages is often considered within the framework of cost. Primary influencers include compressor horsepower, residual imbalances and dynamic forces, expected life of the field, and soil conditions. The foundation itself for separable compressor packages can vary from compacted earthen gravel pads, concrete mats, concrete blocks, or hybrid pile system with a concrete pile cap consisting of either a concrete mat or block. Today, in the lower 48, there is also a developing trend of mounting separable compressor packages to piles themselves, although this practice has been employed in the far, remote reaches of Canada for some longer period of time. The difference between a concrete block and a concrete mat is distinguished by size and intent of the concrete pour. Blocks are generally sized so they provide a reactive mass of four to five times the weight of a reciprocating machine as suggested by ACI 351.3R [4]. Mats or pads tend to be significantly thinner and are sized without considering reactive mass effects. Yet, they provide a foundation more substantial/positive than the earthen pad. Examples of block, pile with pile cap, and pile mounted separable compressor packages are illustrated in Figures 4 through 6. In each case, anchor bolts are provided between the skid beams and the foundation at locations around the periphery of the skid. In some cases, anchor bolts are also installed underneath the pedestals where vibration forces are typically higher. However, those are better to be avoided, as they are quite difficult to install and add to fabrication and installation costs. Figure 1 Typical Compressor Package ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 2
3 Figure 2 Skid Beams and Pedestal Figure 3 Main Components of Interest Figure 4 Package Installed on a Concrete Pad ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 3
4 Figure 5 Package Installed on a Pile Cap Figure 6 Package Installed Directly on Piles 3. Why This Paper? When purchasing separable compressor packages, end users often request a seismic analysis. While the reasons for a seismic analysis are assumed to vary depending on federal, state, and local mandates, other possible considerations include black-start capabilities following an earthquake event, and the ultimate desire to ensure the compressor package does not present a hazard to life in such an event. The latter being especially true in higher population density zones when compressor packages are located near facilities such as homes, subdivisions, schools, etc. or when used in compressing hazardous gases such as H2S where a release of gas can have a significant impact on the range of an evacuation zone. The ultimate goal in all of these cases is the protection of life. As a specialized consulting company in the field of vibration for compressor skids, BETA is often approached to verify that a package can sustain the loads of an earthquake. In most cases, specification requirements are not clear. This leads to some uncertainty as to what must be checked, what are the methods available to assess the integrity and suitability of a package subject to earthquake loadings, and how the verification/analysis is to be performed. Still, one can deduce the primary concern: the threat to life associated with a gas release or the inability of the compressor to provide safe and reliable black-start capability if called upon. ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 4
5 Having established the primary concern for gas releases 1, the most logical point to start a seismic analysis is the pressure vessel and piping codes from which most compressor packages, at least those produced in North America for use in seismic zones defined in the introduction to this paper, are constructed. The codes of primary consideration are the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) and its B31.3 Process Piping standard. The code to which most pressure vessels used in compressor packaging are designed and constructed is the ASME Section 8, Division 1 BPVC. Per Section UG-22 (f) of this code, seismic loadings shall be considered in the design of pressure vessels where required. Section UG-23 of this code provides guidance on acceptable stress levels due to seismic loading, however, these are assumed to be static values as the effects of fatigue type loadings are not considered in Section 8 Division 1. Non-mandatory Appendix G provides suggested practices regarding piping reactions and the design of supports and attachments. Section G-5 specifically addresses the skirt reactions of large vertically supported vessels subjected to seismic loadings. What the code is lacking is any specific or recommended method for conducting seismic analyses on pressure vessels. Unlike the pressure vessel code, the ASME Process Piping code, B31.3, provides more explicit information in the conduct of seismic analyses of piping systems in Section In this section, it is stated The effect of earthquake loading shall be taken into account in the design of piping. The analysis considerations and loads may be as described in ASCE 7. Authoritative local seismological data may also be used to define or refine the design of earthquake loads. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Standard 7 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures is one of the main authorities on the design of buildings and nonbuilding structures subjected to environmental loads such as wind, rain, snow, and earthquakes. Chapters 11-23, more than 130 pages, of their latest standard, ASCE 7-10, cover the seismic design of buildings and nonbuilding structures. Additional commentary is provided in Appendix C Chapters C.11 through C.19 and C.22. The goal of this paper is to examine ASCE 7-10 and see how its rules and guidelines can be applied to the design of safe compressor assemblies in earthquake prone zones, identify short comings in its recommendations, and make suggestions to be addressed in the future by the compression industry. 1 This is not to negate the need for consideration of other secondary effects such as deformation in the skid and pedestal which could possibly result in misalignment rendering the compressor package inoperable. ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 5
6 4. Basic Tenets and Discussion of Considerations for Conducting a Seismic Analysis per ASCE 7 One of the basic tenets that govern seismic design according to ASCE is that the life and safety of the public must be preserved in the case of the maximum credible earthquake. However, it is expected that under that maximum credible earthquake, inelastic deformation and damage will occur in the structures. Another important tenet is that the structures are designed in such a way that they will not present any structural damage under a less severe but more frequent earthquake. Other kinds of damage might be occurring, but no structural damage. Thirdly, the reserve strength, the ductility and the redundancy in the lateral force resistance system is taken into account through a response modification factor called R. This factor results in design loads smaller than the loads that would be used to design a structure expected to remain elastic during the design earthquake. R values that vary from 2 to 8 are proposed in ASCE Finally, in most cases, 5% damping is assumed to predict the response of the structure to the design earthquake. These considerations are taken into account to scale either the ground motion or the lateral force that is then used to design the structure. The dilemma presented is that the ASCE code is primarily written to address loading of buildings, tanks, other structures, and piping not necessarily highly mechanically/structurally complex, multi-stage, skid-mounted separable reciprocating compressor packages. In the absence of more specific guidance, however, the ASCE code is the most applicable to the specific topic of compressor packages. 5. ASCE 7-10 vs. ASCE 7-05 Changes in seismic calculations have been introduced in ASCE First, uniform-hazard ground motion has now been replaced by risk-targeted ground motion. ASCE 7-10 now assumes a collapse risk target of 1% in 50 years rather than a 2% in 50-year hazard level as it was the case in previous editions of this standard. Although the specified ground motions have not changed significantly with the introduction of ASCE 7-10, there are a few areas where the new ground motions are different. New Madrid, MO is one example, Charleston, SC is another one. A complete map of the ratio of ASCE 7-10 spectral response at short periods (S S ) values to ASCE 7-05 S S values is provided in [1]. Increases that vary between 10-40% are mainly seen in California, Oregon, and Washington. Increases of more than 40% are for a small area at the border between New Mexico and Colorado. Decreases that vary between 10-20% are noticed on most of the American Midwest and East Coast. Changes in the spectral response at 1 s (S 1 ) values are less severe. Some wording has also been added in ASCE 7-10 to define what a nonbuilding structure is. The wording fits well with the kind of structures considered in this paper. The question that remains is whether nonbuilding structures are considered as similar to buildings or not similar to buildings. To that effect, J.G. Soules in his webinar available on the ASCE website makes an interesting comment. For Soules, to be classified as not being similar to buildings, a nonbuilding structure must present two characteristics: 1) present a lateral force-resisting system that is not similar to a building; 2) present dynamic characteristics (vibration modes) that are not similar to buildings. We will discuss these considerations further when looking at the different components that comprise a skid assembly. ASCE 7-10 also introduced a Risk Category and a Seismic Importance Factor. These are present to recognize the fact that large earthquakes will result in damage to structures. They also take into account the fact that the consequence of damage or failure is not the same for all structures. Serious damages to certain critical facilities will disproportionally impact a community. As a result, the seismic protection requirements are tailored to the relative importance of a structure. Such structures include those that are necessary for response and recovery efforts, present the potential for catastrophic loss in the event of an earthquake, or house a very large number of occupants less able to care for themselves. 6. Methods for Evaluating Seismic Loading According to ASCE In order to define the applied loading necessary to assess structural integrity of compressor packages per the nonbuilding structures and non-structural components requirements of the ASCE 7 code, it is first necessary to select the seismic design category, component importance factor, and risk category. ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 6
7 In determining the seismic design category, mapped acceleration parameters are selected by considering the ground motion maps provided in Chapter 22 of the ASCE code. An example of these maps is provided in Figure 7. As the maps provide values for Site Class B, the ground motion parameters provided are scaled by the site coefficient values provided in Tables and of the code. Site classes are based on soil properties and determined per Chapter 20. In the absence of soil properties, a Site Class D is chosen. With the above information, the actual seismic design category is determined from the methods of Section 11.6 of the code. Selection of risk categories and importance factors is less cumbersome coming from the information presented in ASCE 7 Table which is presented as Table 1 below and ASCE 7 Table which is presented as Table 2. Figure 7: S S Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE R ) Ground Motion Parameter for the Conterminous US for 0.2s Spectral Response Acceleration (5% of Critical Damping), Site Class B. ASCE ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 7
8 Table 1: ASCE Table Risk Category of Buildings and Other Structures for Flood, Wind, Snow, Earthquake, and Ice Loads. Table 2: ASCE 7 Table Importance Factors by Risk Category of Buildings and Other Structures for Snow, Ice, and Earthquake Loads. ASCE Chapter 15, Section of ASCE 7-10 states structural analysis procedures for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings shall be selected in accordance with Section It further proposes four possible analysis procedures to assess the effects of an earthquake for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings. These methods are the Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure per Section 12.8, the Modal Response Spectrum Analysis per Section 12.9, the Seismic Response History Procedure per Section 16.1, and the nonlinear response history procedure in accordance with Section Each procedure presents its own degree of complexity. A fifth alternative allows for prescribed analysis procedures based on specific reference documents, provided the requirements of Section are met. The objective of this section is to briefly present the Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure, the Modal Response Spectrum Analysis and the Seismic Response History Procedure. The interested reader should refer to the ASCE 7-10 standard for details. The first procedure of interest, and the simplest, is called the Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure (ELFP), described in detail in Section 12.8 of ASCE This method is universally used to verify the seismic design of piping systems, vessels, etc. The ELFP method specifies the base shear that should be applied as a static load to a structure to simulate the effects of an earthquake. Once calculated, this base shear is then distributed to each story level of the structure to produce the displacement of the different floors, as well as the forces and moments that should be used to design the beams and columns. The base shear value depends on the weight of the structure and a seismic response coefficient. The seismic response coefficient in turn depends on the location of the installation and how prone this location is to earthquakes, the type of lateral and vertical seismic force-resisting system, as well as the importance of the structure. ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 8
9 The second procedure is called the Modal Response Spectrum Analysis (MRSA). It is described in detail in Section 12.9 of the Standard. In this procedure, a sufficient number of natural vibration modes of the structure must first be calculated. The response of the structure in each mode is then predicted using a design response spectrum. The spectrum proposed in ASCE 7-10 is shown in Figure 8. This spectrum approximates the response of a 5% damped single degree of freedom system. Its amplitude, specified by S D1 and S DS, depends on the period or frequency of the mode, the location of the structure and the foundation through what is called the Site Class. Essentially and as can be seen in Figure 8, the spectrum first increases for short period modes (high frequency modes), then becomes flat for longer periods, and finally decreases. Also, as a response spectrum, it elicits response from all modes present in the system in which significant spatial coherence is present between the forces and the modes. This leads to question the intent of ASCE 7 which addresses well posed civil type structures versus complex mechanical/structural systems such as skid-mounted, separable compressor packages. Figure 8 Design Response Spectrum The spectrum is used to define an equivalent static force similar to the one calculated with the ELFP procedure, but this time this force is specific to a particular mode of vibration. The response of the structure to which this static load is applied is then calculated. The total response of the structure is finally obtained by combining the responses from each individual mode. Finally, the third method is called Seismic Response History Procedure (SRHP). This method is detailed in Chapter 16 of the standard. It is by far the most complex of the three procedures described here. As its name indicates and contrary to the other two methods presented above, SRHP requires the application of several ground motion accelerations at the base of the structure. The ground motions must be similar to the ground motion recorded during previous earthquakes in the same region. When 3D modeling is used, pairs of ground motions must be applied in two perpendicular directions. Provisions are made to make sure that the response predicted by the SRHP is not significantly lower than the one predicted by the ELFP. The popular code CAESAR which is used for piping systems includes both the ELFP and the MRSA methods. Most structural analysis programs used in the civil industry such as SAP2000 include all three methods. More general FEA programs do not include any of the methods, but procedures that implement those methods can be programmed so that these methods are automated. Finally, the standard includes a table that specifies which methods are permitted. This table is reproduced as Table 3 of this paper. Two parameters must be considered to select the method that should be used: the Seismic Design Category and the Structural Characteristics of the building. The Seismic Design Category depends on the magnitude of the spectral acceleration response (the seismicity of the area where the structure is installed) and the risk category defined in Table 1 of this paper. On the other hand, the characteristics of the building take into account the height of the building and its shape. What is confusing about this table is that all three methods described above are permitted for most structures. It is only for the buildings classified as Seismic Design Category D, E or F (the most critical buildings located in the most active regions from a seismic point of view) and as Other Structures for which the ELFP method is not permitted. This ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 9
10 leaves a lot of interpretation to the analyst who must then decide whether the structure that they are studying fits in one of the Structural Characteristics categories or not. Depending on that decision, either the simpler and universally ELFP method can be used or not. It is the authors opinion that the ELFP method can be applied to most components of a compressor assembly as will be explained later in this paper. Seismic Design Category Table 3 ASCE 7-10, Table , Permitted Analytical Procedures. Structural Characteristics ELFP MRSA SRHP B,C All structures P P P D,E,F P: Permitted; NP: Not permitted, T S = S D1 /S DS 7. Components That Must Be Studied Risk Category I or II buildings not exceeding two stories above the base P P P Structures of light frame construction P P P Structures with no structural irregularities and not exceeding 160 ft in structural height P P P Structures exceeding 160 ft in structural height with no structural irregularities and with T<3.5T S P P P Structures not exceeding 160 ft in structural height and having only horizontal irregularities of Type 2,3,4 or 5 in Table [ASCE 7-10] or vertical irregularities of Type 4, 5a or 5b in Table [ASCE 7-10] P P P All other structures NP P P In this section, we will consider different types of components and propose a strategy to make sure that equipment is properly designed to withstand an earthquake in accordance with the ASCE 7-10 standard. 7.1 Driver and Compressor on Pedestals Packages include a driver (motor or engine) and a compressor, typically mounted on a pedestal. Such an arrangement is shown in Figure 3. The structure of a typical pedestal is better seen in Figure 2. From a structural point of view, a pedestal can be seen as a fairly flexible structure with respect to lateral excitations. Due to the heavy mass of the driver and the compressor, lower natural frequencies can be obtained from the assembly of the compressor and the driver. The driver and the compressor are stiff structures that can be considered as separate masses with a definite inertia mounted on the flexible structure that constitutes the pedestal. The pedestal is in turn mounted on the stiff structure that constitutes the skid attached to its foundation. ASCE 7-10 already includes some considerations for the case of Vertical Combinations, that is the case where a flexible upper portion is attached to a rigid lower portion. These considerations are presented in article Under certain conditions, a two-stage equivalent lateral force procedure is permitted. That is, the upper portion, the compressor, the driver, the distance pieces, the cylinders, the bottles and the pedestal in our case, can be designed as a separate structure fixed at the base of the pedestal. The rigid lower portion, the skid in our case, can be designed as a separate structure. The reactions from the upper portion shall be as determined during the analysis of that portion. Such twostage strategy could be used for the pedestal verification. ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 10
11 Additionally, it is recommended to verify that the anchor bolts of the driver and the compressor can sustain the loads that will be generated during the design earthquake. The stresses in pedestal plates and members should also be verified with the appropriate load combinations of dead, live, and earthquake loads. It must also be noted that the driver and the compressor are not centered on the skid. This can be observed in Figure 3 where we can see that these components are not centered along the long side of the skid. However, the stiffness of the skid and the stiffness provided by the anchor bolts are fairly uniformly distributed over the entire skid. As a result, some torsional loads will be generated under an earthquake that hits along the long side of the skid. This torsional effect will likely be seen in the distribution of the reaction loads at the anchor bolts. 7.2 Vertical Vessels Most compressor packages will include vertical vessels called scrubbers. Those are shown in orange in Figure 3. A scrubber is typically welded to a skirt that is then welded or bolted to the skid beams. Just like it was the case for the driver and the compressor mounted on a pedestal, a scrubber, its skirt and the skid to which it is attached can be treated as Vertical Combinations. As previously mentioned, such combinations are covered in article of the ASCE 7-10 standard. Under certain conditions, the scrubber can then be analyzed separately and the forces generated can be added to the skid beams to which the scrubber is attached. In some cases, the beams at the base of a scrubber are filled with concrete so as to increase the mass, the stiffness, and the damping of the scrubber base. In this case, treating the skid and scrubber as a vertical combination, as permitted by ASCE 7-10, is even more justified as the base is even stiffer than skid beams only. Some complexity might come from the fact that pipes are connected to scrubbers. Because any significant stiffness will generate larger undesirable nozzle loads during an earthquake, the stiffness of these pipes is typically low compared to the stiffness of the base. In these cases, it is reasonable to assume that during an earthquake, most of the load would be resisted by the base and not transferred to other components by the pipe. This situation needs to be investigated further in order to establish guidelines on the maximum stiffness of the pipes that are connected to a scrubber. Further complicating the analysis of such vessels is the need to consider flexibility of piping attachments per Section Per the ASCE 7 Table Minimum Design Displacements for Piping Attachments, shown below as Table 4, the minimum design displacements for mechanically anchored tanks and vessels are quite severe. These displacements would be a concern for inlet piping to suction scrubbers, the suction spool nozzles, and the cylinder nozzles. It could also be a concern at piping connections at the cooler. Table 4: ASCE 7 Table Minimum Design Displacements for Piping Attachments. In a recent article, Wieschollek et al. [3] have run time history analyses on several types of vessels, including vertical vessels. Although the dimensions of the vessels that they have looked at are much larger than the typical vessels that we find on reciprocating compressor packages, it is interesting to look at their results. The results indicate that the seismic ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 11
12 design forces prescribed in the European standard used (equivalent of the ASCE 7-10 standard), result in a design that remains in the elastic range when applied to the vessel. They also indicate a certain amount of strength past the initial elastic behavior before collapse of the vessel occurs. In two of the three cases studied, failure corresponds to the buckling of the skirt. In terms of calculations for vertical vessels, it is recommended that the stress in the vessel and the skirt be checked and verified to be below guideline. The weld at the intersection between the vessel and the skirt as well as the connection between the skirt and the skid beams must also be checked for sufficient strength. The deflection of the scrubber should also be calculated to make sure it is below the guideline of height/100. Of course, there should be enough clearance around the vessel to allow such a motion without hitting other pipes or vessels. 7.3 Pipes and Pipe Supports Pipes and pipe supports should also be checked as they will be excited during an earthquake. ASME B31E covers the seismic design of above-ground piping systems. Table 1 of that standard indicates which analysis methods are permitted. The analysis method must be selected based on the peak spectral acceleration (smaller or larger than 0.3g), the pipe diameter (smaller or larger than 4 in diameter) as well as the criticality of the piping system (must the pipe remain leak-tight or operable during and after the design earthquake?). Three analysis methods are possible. In the case of a 4 in diameter or less noncritical pipe, no additional analysis is required to take into account the loads that will be generated by the design earthquake. In the case of a 4 in or more noncritical pipe located in a zone where the spectral acceleration is larger than 0.3g or for a 4 in or smaller critical pipe located in a zone where the spectral acceleration is less than 0.3g, design by rule is allowed. Finally, for the case of a critical pipe smaller than 4 in in diameter located in a zone where the spectral acceleration is larger than 0.3g as well as for all critical piping of 4 in diameter or more, design by analysis must be performed. In the case of design by analysis, it must be shown that the total stress caused by the pressure in the pipe, the sustained and the seismic loads are smaller than a design allowable depending on the material. In the case of elevated pipes, the clearance from other components to allow the motion of the pipe that will occur during an earthquake must also be checked. 7.4 Horizontal Vessels ASCE 7-10 also includes considerations for saddle supported horizontal vessels. The level of displacements and loads to be sustained by such design are specified. The loads that must be considered depend on whether the weight of the vessel is smaller than 25% of the combined weight of the vessel and the skid or larger. In the case where the weight of the vessel is smaller than 25% of the combined weight, the designer is referred to the section that covers the design of non-structural components. In the second case, when the weight of the vessel is larger than 25% of the combined weight, the requirements depend on the stiffness of the vessel. Stiff vessels can be considered as rigid masses. For more flexible vessels, a combined analysis is recommended. Wieschollek et al. [3] have also analyzed different saddle-supported horizontal tanks. Unfortunately, as it was the case for vertical vessels, the vessels considered are much bigger than what we typically find on compressor skids. Keeping this in mind, it is still interesting to note that when analyzed in detail, the tanks displayed a significant amount of ductility. It is also clear that the design loads prescribed by the European standard result in designs that remain in the elastic range when the typical earthquakes used in this study are applied. Their study has also shown the positive impact of adding reinforcing rings. Reinforcing rings are in fact recommended for large pressure vessels or vessels located in high seismicity areas. 8. Conclusion This paper has described the ASCE requirements for the seismic design of structures and how these requirements can be applied to the design of different components typically found on compressor skids. Although ASCE 7-10 is mainly concerned with seismic requirements as they apply to buildings, it is seen that many components are similar in shape ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 12
13 and also present a similar dynamic response. For that reason, the ASCE requirements form a good basis to establish the technical requirements for seismic calculations in the case of compressor packages. However, as presented, there are gaps between the application intent of ASCE 7 and the actual application to complex systems such as the modern skid-mounted, separable compressor package. In absence of specific guidance on the application of ASCE 7 or other earthquake criteria to systems such as a compressor packages, it is necessary for purchasers of such equipment to think through their earthquake concerns and ensure these are conveyed to the packager during the contract negotiation period. Likewise, it is important for the packager to specifically define the earthquake requirements and analysis expectations to the third-party specialized engineering firm to ensure end-user concerns are addressed. All parties end-user, packager, and specialized engineering firm need to be cognizant of cost implications as these could place a significant adder to the contracted delivery price of any given unit. Also, the seismic verification of a package will require more work and more discussion between structural, piping, and pressure vessels engineers in order to clearly establish a working procedure that will insure the integrity of the compressor packages. Finally, on top of this coordination effort, additional efforts are required in order to decide on a consistent approach for seismic analysis of reciprocating compressor packages. ASCE assumptions such as tolerated damage during the design earthquake, a 5% damping ratio, response modification factors (R) larger than 1, and even the selection of the method between the Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure, the Modal Response Spectrum Analysis, or the Seismic Response History Procedure should be looked at as part of these additional efforts. 9. References 1. Ghosh, S.K., Significant changes from ASCE 7-05 to ASCE 7-10, part 1: Seismic design provisions, available at: Winter14%20Seismic%20Design%20Precast%20Provisions%20in%20ASCE%207.pdf. 2. Soules, J.G. (Greg), Introduction to the Seismic Design of Nonbuilding Structures to ASCE 7-10, available at ASCE Knowledge & Learning. 3. Wieschollek, M., Diamanti, K., Pinkawa, M., Hoffmeister, B. and Feldmann, M., Guidelines for Seismic Design and Analysis of Pressure Vessels, Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, July 14-18, ACI 351.3R, Foundations for Dynamic Equipment (Reapproved 2011). ASCE Seismic Requirements for Typical Compressor Packages: Do They Apply? Page 13
0306 SEISMIC LOADS GENERAL
0306 SEISMIC LOADS 0306.1 GENERAL Every structure, and portion thereof, including nonstructural components such as architectural, mechanical, and electrical components, shall be designed and constructed
More informationPVP2006-ICPVT
Proceedings of PVP2006-ICPVT-11 2006 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference July 23-27, 2006, Vancouver, BC, Canada PVP2006-ICPVT-11-93732 SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF A PRESSURE VESSEL Mike Porter
More informationOptimized Skid Design for Compressor Packages
Optimized Skid Design for Compressor Packages Chris Harper, P.Eng. Principal Engineer charper@betamachinery.com By Beta Machinery Analysis Presented at: Gas Machinery Conference 2013 October 7-10, 2013
More informationTrends in the Seismic Design Provisions of U.S. Building Codes
Trends in the Seismic Design Provisions of U.S. Building Codes Seismic design provisions in building codes of the United States have undergone profound and farreaching changes in recent years. This paper
More informationChapter 13 SEISMICALLY ISOLATED STRUCTURE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
Chapter 13 SEISMICALLY ISOLATE STRUCTURE ESIGN REQUIREMENTS 13.1 GENERAL 13.1.1 Scope. Every seismically isolated structure and every portion thereof shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
More information3. Analysis Procedures
3. Analysis Procedures 3.1 Scope This chapter sets forth requirements for analysis of buildings using the Systematic Rehabilitation Method. Section 3.2 specifies general analysis requirements for the mathematical
More information7. Seismic Design. 1) Read.
7. Seismic Design Lesson Objectives: 1) Describe code based seismic design in accordance with ASCE 7-16 and IBC 2012. 2) Compute mapped and design spectral accelerations. 3) Categorize and identify the
More informationSTRUCTURAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (SEISMIC PROVISIONS) FOR EXISTING BUILDING CONVERTED TO JOINT LIVING AND WORK QUARTERS
INFORMATION BULLETIN / PUBLIC - BUILDING CODE REFERENCE NO.: LABC Chapter 85 Effective: 01-01-2011 DOCUMENT NO.: P/BC 2011-110 Revised: Previously Issued As: P/BC 2002-110 STRUCTURAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
More informationResponse of TBI case study buildings
Response of TBI case study buildings ANALYSIS OF STEEL BUILDING Pierson Jones & Farzin Zareian May 7 th, 2010 Introduction Three 40-story Building BRBF Systems building Structural and Earthquake Engineering
More informationEFFECTS OF STRONG-MOTION DURATION ON THE RESPONSE OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME BUILDINGS ABSTRACT
Proceedings of the 9th U.S. National and 1th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering Compte Rendu de la 9ième Conférence Nationale Américaine et 1ième Conférence Canadienne de Génie Parasismique
More informationTHE NEW ZEALAND LOADINGS CODE AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE DESIGN OF SEISMIC RESISTANT PRESTRESSED CONCRETE STRUCTURES
162 This paper was presented at the N.Z.P.C.I. 12th Conference, 1976. Annual THE NEW ZEALAND LOADINGS CODE AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE DESIGN OF SEISMIC RESISTANT PRESTRESSED CONCRETE STRUCTURES G.W. Butcher*
More informationDivision IV EARTHQUAKE DESIGN
1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE CHAP. 16, DIV. IV 1626 1627 Division IV EARTHQUAKE DESIGN SECTION 1626 GENERAL 1626.1 Purpose. The purpose of the earthquake provisions herein is primarily to safeguard against
More informationEngr. Thaung Htut Aung M. Eng. Asian Institute of Technology Deputy Project Director, AIT Consulting
Engr. Thaung Htut Aung M. Eng. Asian Institute of Technology Deputy Project Director, AIT Consulting Selection of Structural systems Load paths Materials Approximate sizing of members Primary mechanisms
More informationThis point intends to acquaint the reader with some of the basic concepts of the earthquake engineer:
Chapter II. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH II.1. Introduction: The purpose of this chapter is to review first the basic concepts for earthquake engineering. It is not intended to review the basic concepts
More informationConsideration of torsional irregularity in Modal Response Spectrum Analysis
Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures X 209 Consideration of torsional irregularity in Modal Response Spectrum Analysis O. A. Mohamed & O. A. Abbass Department of Civil Engineering, Abu Dhabi University,
More informationCase Study: Challenges of a Single-layer Reticulated Dome
Case Study: Challenges of a Single-layer Reticulated Dome Naveed Anwar, Pramin Norachan, Thaung Htut Aung AIT Consulting, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand Contact: nanwar@ait.asia Abstract
More informationRemarks regarding FEMA 368 seismic analysis guidelines
Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures V 765 Remarks regarding FEMA 368 seismic analysis guidelines O. A. Mohamed Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Hartford, U.S.A.
More informationAN EXAMINATION OF DAMAGES OF REINFORCED CONCRETE CONSOLED BUILDINGS IN TURKEY DUE TO 17 AUGUST 1999 KOCAELI EARTHQUAKE
13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 2644 AN EXAMINATION OF DAMAGES OF REINFORCED CONCRETE CONSOLED BUILDINGS IN TURKEY DUE TO 17 AUGUST 1999
More informationCOMPARATIVE SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF RC FRAME BUILDINGS DESIGNED FOR ASCE 7 AND IS 1893
ISET GOLDEN JUBILEE SYMPOSIUM Indian Society of Earthquake Technology Department of Earthquake Engineering Building IIT Roorkee, Roorkee October 20-21, 2012 Paper No. D019 COMPARATIVE SEISMIC PERFORMANCE
More informationSECTION NON-STRUCTURAL SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS
SECTION 014100 - PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS A. Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including General and Supplementary Conditions and Division 01 Specification Sections, apply
More informationSIGNIFICANCE OF SHEAR WALL IN FLAT SLAB MULTI STORIED BUILDING - A REVIEW. Vavanoor, India
SIGNIFICANCE OF SHEAR WALL IN FLAT SLAB MULTI STORIED BUILDING - A REVIEW Athira M. V 1, Sruthi K Chandran 2 1PG Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Sreepathy Institute of Management And Technology,
More information3.5 Tier 1 Analysis Overview Seismic Shear Forces
Chapter 3.0 - Screening Phase (Tier ) 3.5 Tier Analysis 3.5. Overview Analyses performed as part of Tier of the Evaluation Process are limited to Quick Checks. Quick Checks shall be used to calculate the
More informationSEISMIC DAMAGE CONTROL WITH PASSIVE ENERGY DEVICES: A CASE STUDY
SEISMIC DAMAGE CONTROL WITH PASSIVE ENERGY DEVICES: A CASE STUDY by Robert J. McNamara, SE McNamara/Salvia, Inc. Consulting Structural Engineers One International Place Boston, MA 02110 This paper presents
More informationTorsional and Seismic Behavior of Shear Wall Dominant Flat Plate Buildings
Torsional and Seismic Behavior of Shear Wall Dominant Flat Plate Buildings Ramya S R 1, Dr. P M Ravindra 2 1M. Tech Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Bangalore Institute of Technology, Bengaluru-
More informationComparative Study on Dynamic Analysis of Irregular Building with Shear Walls
Comparative Study on Dynamic Analysis of Irregular Building with Shear Walls Le Yee Mon Civil Engineering Department, Mandalay Technological University, Mandalay, Myanmar Abstract: South East Asia including
More informationStructural Engineering, Mechanics, and Materials. Preliminary Exam - Structural Design
Fall Semester 2018 Preliminary Exam - Structural Design A small building is located in downtown Berkeley. The structural system, either structural steel or reinforced concrete, comprises gravity framing
More informationDISPLACEMENT-BASED SEISMIC ASSESSMENT AND REHABILITATION OF EXISTING NON-DUCTILE REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES
Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved 12 th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering Paper Reference 523 (quote when citing this paper) DISPLACEMENT-BASED SEISMIC ASSESSMENT AND REHABILITATION
More informationEARTHQUAKE LOADS ON MULTISTOREY BUILDINGS AS PER IS: AND IS: : A COMPARATIVE STUDY
EARTHQUAKE LOADS ON MULTISTOREY BUILDINGS AS PER IS: 1893-1984 AND IS: 1893-2002: A COMPARATIVE STUDY S.K. Ahirwar 1, S.K. Jain 2 and M. M. Pande 3 ABSTRACT : 1 Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engg., M.I.T.S.,
More informationComparison between Seismic Behavior of Suspended Zipper Braced Frames and Various EBF Systems
Comparison between Seismic Behavior of Suspended Zipper Braced Frames and Various EBF Systems A. Niknam 1, A. Sharfaei 2 1- Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Faculty, University of Science & Technology,
More informationEarthquake Analysis of Multi Storied Residential Building - A Case Study
RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS Earthquake Analysis of Multi Storied Residential Building - A Case Study E. Pavan Kumar 1, A. Naresh 2, M. Nagajyothi 3, M. Rajasekhar 4 1, 2 (Student, Department of Civil
More informationDynamic Analysis of Large Steel Tanks
Transactions of the 17 th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 17) Prague, Czech Republic, August 17 22, 2003 Paper # K14-1 Dynamic Analysis of Large Steel Tanks
More informationEVALUATION OF NONLINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDINGS
EVALUATION OF NONLINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDINGS By H.S. Lew 1 and Sashi K. Kunnath Presented at the rd Joint Meeting of the UJNR Panel on Wind and Seismic Effects ABSTRACT This
More informationTHE PLAZA AT PPL CENTER ALLENTOWN, PA
: MOMENT FRAME COMPARISON Introduction Design Intent IBC 2000 and ASCE 7-98 recognizes steel frames designed with a response modification factor, R, less than or equal to three as structural steel systems
More informationPushover Analysis Of RCC Building With Soft Storey At Different Levels.
Pushover Analysis Of RCC Building With Soft Storey At Different Levels. Achyut S. Naphade 1, Prof. G. R. Patil 2 1 (M.E. (Structure) Student, Department of Civil Engineering Rajarshi Shahu College of Engineering,
More informationComparative Study of Pushover Analysis on RCC Structures
Comparative Study of Pushover Analysis on RCC Structures Ashwini.K.C PG Student, Department of Civil Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysore, Karnataka, India Dr. Y. M. Manjunath Professor,
More information2.15 Tokamak Seismic Analysis
2.15 Tokamak Seismic Analysis 2.15.1 Introduction 1 2.15.2 Input Conditions 3 2.15.2.1 Design Response Spectra 3 2.15.2.2 Damping Coefficients 4 2.15.3 Model Overview 4 2.15.4 Main Results Under SL-2 Seismic
More informationVibration Certification Case Studies Vertical Pump Machinery Controlled with Variable Frequency Drives
R RUSH USH E EQUIPMENT QUIPMENT A ANALYSIS, NALYSIS, IINC. NC. 2401 EAST #181 43430 EASTSEVENTEENTH FLORIDA AVE.,ST., #F331 Rush@RushEngineering.com Rush@RushEngineering.com SANTAHEMET, ANA, CALIFORNIA
More informationPrinciples of STRUCTURAL DESIGN. Wood, Steel, and Concrete SECOND EDITION RAM S. GUPTA. CRC Press. Taylor& Francis Group
SECOND EDITION Principles of STRUCTURAL DESIGN Wood, Steel, and Concrete RAM S. GUPTA CRC Press Taylor& Francis Group Boca Raton London New York CRC Press is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Croup, an
More informationConcept of Earthquake Resistant Design
Concept of Earthquake Resistant Design Sudhir K Jain Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar November 2012 1 Bhuj Earthquake of 2001 Magnitude 7.7, ~13,805 persons dead Peak ground acceleration ~0.60g
More informationCHAPTER 8 THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS WITH LARGE MOMENT END-PLATE CONNECTIONS 8.1 INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 8 THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS WITH LARGE MOMENT END-PLATE CONNECTIONS 8.1 INTRODUCTION According to the AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (1997), steel
More informationSTUDY ON ROLE OF ASYMMETRY IN PUSHOVER ANALYSIS WITH SEISMIC INTERPRETATION
Journal of Civil, Structural, Environmental, Water resources and Infrastructure Engineering Research (JCSEWIER) ISSN 2278-3539 Vol.2, Issue 2 Sep 2012 47-58 TJPRC Pvt. Ltd., STUDY ON ROLE OF ASYMMETRY
More informationBASIC METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR BRIDGES
BASIC METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR BRIDGES Bhumika B. Mehta M. E. CIVIL CASAD. B-2, Kalindi Flats, Opp. Kadwa Patidar Boarding, C. G. Road, Ahmedabad 380 006 Ph. No. (079) 6561093 bhumi_29@rediffmail.com bhumika_mehta@indiatimes.com
More informationInternational Journal of Engineering Trends and Applications (IJETA) Volume 5 Issue 5, Sep-Oct 2018
RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS Comparative Study of Seismic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Building with Flat Slab and Conventional Slab Floor System Nyome Tin [1], Khin Thanda Htun [2] Department of Civil
More informationSEISMIC VULNERABILITY OF EXISTING RC BUILDINGS IN INDIA
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 1207 SEISMIC VULNERABILITY OF EXISTING RC BUILDINGS IN INDIA Prathibha S 1 and A Meher Prasad 2 SUMMARY
More informationSEAU 5 th Annual Education Conference 1. Read the Standard! ASCE Analysis Provisions. (not just the tables and equations)
ASCE 41-13 Robert Pekelnicky, PE, SE Principal, Degenkolb Engineers Chair, ASCE 41 Committee* *The view expressed represent those of the author, not the standard s committee as a whole. ASCE 41-13 Analysis
More informationPV Newsletter Monthly Publication from CoDesign Engineering Academy
Volume 2012, Issue 6 June 15, 2012 PV Newsletter Monthly Publication from CoDesign Engineering Academy Tall Vertical Pressure Vessels Introduction Tall pressure vessels are generally defined as those where
More informationSpecial Civil Engineer Examination Seismic Principles Test Plan
SDR Workbook 2015 IBC Version Special Civil Engineer Examination Definition of Seismic Principles Seismic Principles is defined as the fundamental principles, tasks and knowledge s underlying those activities
More informationSeismic Considerations of Circuit Breakers
Seismic Considerations of Circuit Breakers Willie Freeman, IEEE 693 Working Group ABB Inc, Mt. Pleasant PA, USA IEEE Tutorial - 2008 Abstract: The tutorial covers the seismic qualification of high voltage
More informationNonlinear Dynamic Analysis a Step Advance
Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis a Step Advance in Assessing the Vulnerability of Buildings Editor s note: The strength of an earthquake catastrophe model in producing to Earthquake reliable loss estimates lies
More informationOver the last decade, drilled and postgrouted micropile foundations have
Seismic Design of Micropile Foundation Systems Leo Panian, S.E., and Mike Korolyk, S.E. Over the last decade, drilled and postgrouted micropile foundations have come to be increasingly relied on for resisting
More informationAnalysis of a Multi-Tower Frame Structure connected at different levels using ETABS
Analysis of a Multi-Tower Frame Structure connected at different levels using ETABS RISHABH SISODIA 1, N. Tej Kiran 2, K. Sai Sekhar Reddy 3 1Student, Dept. of Structural and Geotechnical Engineering,
More informationEVOLUTION OF UBC AND IBC STATIC LATERAL FORCE PROCEDURE
EVOLUTION OF UBC AND IBC STATIC LATERAL FORCE PROCEDURE Introduction: A model building code is a document containing standardized building requirements applicable throughout the United States. Model building
More informationNONLINEAR PERFORMANCE OF A TEN-STORY REINFORCED CONCRETE SPECIAL MOMENT RESISTING FRAME (SMRF)
NONLINEAR PERFORMANCE OF A TEN-STORY REINFORCED CONCRETE SPECIAL MOMENT RESISTING FRAME (SMRF) Houssam Mohammad Agha, Li Yingmin, Oday Asal Salih and A ssim Al-Jbori Doctoral Candidate, College of Civil
More informationDesign Requirements of Buildings and Good Construction Practices in Seismic Zone
Design Requirements of Buildings and Good Construction Practices in Seismic Zone CII Safety Symposium & Exposition 2015: 11th September 2015: Kolkata Stages of Structural Design Concept Finalisation of
More informationDisplacement-Based Seismic Analysis of A Mixed Structural System
Displacement-Based Seismic Analysis of A Mixed Structural System Jane Li SUMMARY As energy costs soar, public demand for massive transportation systems has increased. Massive transportation systems often
More informationInelastic Deformation Demands of Non-Ductile Reinforced Concrete Frames Strengthened with Buckling-Restrained Braces
Proceedings of the Tenth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering Building an Earthquake-Resilient Pacific 6-8 November 2015, Sydney, Australia Inelastic Deformation Demands of Non-Ductile Reinforced
More informationAlexis Pacella Structural Option Dr. Schneider Lexington II, Washington D.C. Technical Report #3 November 21,
1 Executive Summary: Lateral System Analysis and Confirmation Design is an depth look at the lateral system of Lexington II and the loads of which it must carry. The structural system of Lexington II is
More informationTHE USE OF DUCTILITY IN NUCLEAR FACILITIES
SECED 2015 Conference: Earthquake Risk and Engineering towards a Resilient World 9-10 July 2015, Cambridge UK THE USE OF DUCTILITY IN NUCLEAR FACILITIES Paul DOYLE 1 Abstract The author works for a nuclear
More informationEARTHQUAKE LATERAL FORCE ANALYSIS. Dr. Jagadish. G. Kori Professor & Head Civil Engineering Department Govt. Engineering College, Haveri
EARTHQUAKE LATERAL FORCE ANALYSIS By Dr. Jagadish. G. Kori Professor & Head Civil Engineering Department Govt. Engineering College, Haveri-581110 Earthquake Lateral Force Analysis The design lateral force
More informationWire-rope Bracing System with Central Cylinder,
Wire-rope Bracing System with Central Cylinder, element Finite Element based application Based Application N. Fanaie & S. Aghajani Khajeh Nasiroddin Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran SUMMARY:
More informationNational Information Service for Earthquake Engineering University of California, Berkeley
nisee National Information Service for Earthquake Engineering University of California, Berkeley Strength Reduction Factors in Performance-Based Design By Eduardo Miranda National Center for Disaster Prevention
More informationSEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF 4-LEGGED SELF-SUPPORTING TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 24 Paper No. 215 SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF 4-LEGGED SELF-SUPPORTING TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS G. GHODRATI AMIRI 1, M.A. BARKHORDARI
More information4.2 Tier 2 Analysis General Analysis Procedures for LSP & LDP
4.2 Tier 2 Analysis 4.2.1 General Four analysis procedures are provided in this section: Linear Static Procedure (LSP), Linear Dynamic Procedure (LDP), Special Procedure, and Procedure for Nonstructural
More informationCE 549 Building Design Project Spring Semester 2013
CE 549 Building Design Project Spring Semester 2013 Instructor: Farzad Naeim, Ph.D., S.E., Esq. E-Mail: naeim@usc.edu Syllabus Overview: We will design a mid-rise office building using a team-approach
More informationCOMPARISON OF A REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING STRENGTHRND WITH VARIOUS METHODS
COMPARISON OF A REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING STRENGTHRND WITH VARIOUS METHODS Farnaz ALINOORI 1 and Kadir GÜLER 2 ABSTRACT The earthquake performance of a school building having three stories which has
More informationRELIABILITY OF NONLINEAR STATIC METHODS FOR THE SEISMIC PERFORMANCE PREDICTION OF STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS
RELIABILITY OF NONLINEAR STATIC METHODS FOR THE SEISMIC PERFORMANCE PREDICTION OF STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS Matthew J. SKOKAN 1 And Gary C. HART 2 SUMMARY Nonlinear static pushover methods of analysis are
More informationSeismic assessment of an existing hospital
International Students Conference of Civil Engineering, ISCCE 2012, 10-11 May 2012, Epoka University, Tirana, Albania Seismic assessment of an existing hospital Egla Luca Department of Civil Engineering,
More informationEVALUATION OF SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF IRREGULAR STEEL STRUCTURES IN PLAN WITH BRB AND EBF BRACES UNDER NEAR-FAULT EARTHQUAKE
IJBPAS, January, 2015, 5(1), Special Issue: 572-581 ISSN: 2277 4998 EVALUATION OF SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF IRREGULAR STEEL STRUCTURES IN PLAN WITH BRB AND EBF BRACES UNDER NEAR-FAULT EARTHQUAKE HOSSEIN NASERI
More informationctbuh.org/papers CTBUH Recommendations for the Seismic Design of High-Rise Buildings
ctbuh.org/papers Title: Author: Subject: CTBUH Recommendations for the Seismic Design of High-Rise Buildings Michael Willford, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat Structural Engineering Publication
More informationCEE Earthquake Resistant Design General Information
University of California at Berkeley Civil and Environmental Engineering Instructor: Stephen A. Mahin Spring Semester 2003 CEE 227 -- Earthquake Resistant Design General Information Course Objectives This
More informationDesign Provisions for Earthquake Resistance of Structures. The Standards Institution of Israel
Israeli Standard SI 413 June 1995 Amendment No. 5 December 2013 Design Provisions for Earthquake Resistance of Structures The Standards Institution of Israel 42 Haim Levanon, Tel Aviv 69977, tel. 03-6465154,
More informationPushover Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures with Coupled Shear Wall and Moment Frame. *Yungon Kim 1)
Pushover Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures with Coupled Shear Wall and Moment Frame *Yungon Kim 1) 1) R&D Division, Hyundai Engineering and Construction, Yong-in 446-716, Korea 1) yungon.kim@hdec.co.kr
More informationsixteen seismic design Earthquake Design Earthquake Design Earthquake Design dynamic vs. static loading hazard types hazard types: ground shaking
APPLIED ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURES: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND SYSTEMS DR. ANNE NICHOLS FALL 2017 lecture sixteen dynamic vs. static loading amplification of static affect time duration acceleration & velocity
More informationTechnical Report #3. Matthew R Peyton
Technical Report #3 This Document is Technical Report #3 for 5th year senior thesis in the Architectural Engineering Departments at The Pennsylvania State University. In this report the existing reinforced
More informationDynamic Response of Ground Supported Rectangular Water Tanks to Earthquake Excitation
Research Article http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/mejs.v9i1.5 Dynamic Response of Ground Supported Rectangular Water Tanks to Earthquake Excitation Birhane Aregawi* and Abdulaziz Kassahun School of Civil Engineering,
More informationIndex terms Diagrid, Nonlinear Static Analysis, SAP 2000.
Pushover Analysis of Diagrid Structure Ravi K Revankar, R.G.Talasadar P.G student, Dept of Civil Engineering, BLDEA S V.P Dr P.G Halakatti College of Engineering & Technology Bijapur-586101 Associate Professor,
More informationSeismic Evaluation of the Historic East-Memorial Building Retrofitted with Friction Dampers, Ottawa, Canada
Seismic Evaluation of the Historic East-Memorial Building Retrofitted with Friction Dampers, Ottawa, Canada S. Jabbour & D.J. Carson Parsons Brinckerhoff Halsall Inc. SUMMARY: A seismic evaluation under
More informationVALLIAMMAI ENGINEERING COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING SUBJECT CODE: CE6701 SUBJECT NAME: STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING YEAR : IV SEM : VII QUESTION BANK (As per Anna University
More informationMOUNTAIN STATE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD HEADQUARTERS
MOUNTAIN STATE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD HEADQUARTERS PARKERSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA DOMINIC MANNO STRUCTURAL OPTION FACULTY CONSULTANT: DR. ANDRES LEPAGE Technical Report 3 11-21-08 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF
More informationComparison of Chilean and US Seismic Design Provisions for Timber Structures
Comparison of Chilean and US Seismic Design Provisions for Timber Structures J. Daniel Dolan Professor and Director of Codes and Standards, Wood Materials and Engineering Laboratory, Washington Peter Dechent
More informationNONBUILDING STRUCTURE DESIGN
12 NONBUILDING STRUCTURE DESIGN Harold O. Sprague Jr., P.E. Chapter 14 of the 2000 NEHRP Recommended Provisions and Commentary (hereafter, the Provisions and Commentary) is devoted to nonbuilding structures.
More informationSurvey and Testing of Pre-1988 Braced Frame Structures From The West Coast of the United States
Survey and Testing of Pre-1988 Braced Frame Structures From The West Coast of the United States Dan Sloat 1, Charles W. Roeder 2, Dawn E. Lehman 3, and Jeffrey W. Berman 4 1 Graduate Student, Dept. of
More informationCE 549 Building Design Project Spring Semester 2010
CE 549 Building Design Project Spring Semester 2010 Instructor: Farzad Naeim, Ph.D., S.E., Esq. E-Mail: naeim@usc.edu Syllabus Overview: We will design a mid-rise office building using a team-approach
More informationAssessment of the Vulnerability of Buildings to Progressive Collapse due to Blast Loads
CSCE 2011 General Conference - Congrès générale 2011 de la SCGC Ottawa, Ontario June 14-17, 2011 / 14 au 17 juin 2011 Assessment of the Vulnerability of Buildings to Progressive Collapse due to Blast Loads
More informationNonlinear seismic response of structural systems having vertical irregularities due to discontinuities in columns
Nonlinear seismic response of structural systems having vertical irregularities due to discontinuities in columns N. Kara Selçuk University, Department of Civil Engineering, Konya, Turkey Z. Celep Istanbul
More informationMethodology for design of earthquake resistant steel liquid storage tanks
Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures V 699 Methodology for design of earthquake resistant steel liquid storage tanks M. A. Haroun & M. A. Al-Kashif University of California, Irvine, and American
More informationSeismic behavior of concrete structures equipped with ADAS devices
Acta Technica 62 No. 4B/2017, 1 8 c 2017 Institute of Thermomechanics CAS, v.v.i. Seismic behavior of concrete structures equipped with ADAS devices Hassan Ghahremani Feshalenji 1 Abstract. The added damping
More informationSTORAGE RACKS PLAN REVIEW LIST (2011 LABC)
STORAGE RACKS PLAN REVIEW LIST (2011 LABC) Plan Check Submittal Date: Plan Check / PCIS Application #: Job Address: Applicant (name & phone #): Reviewed by (print first / last name): Telephone #: E-mail:
More informationCOMPARATIVE STUDY OF SEISMIC FORCES BASED ON STATIC AND DYNAMIC ANALYSIS AS PER IS:
Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2015 Ramanujam I V R and Dr H Sudarsana Rao, 2015 Research Paper ISSN 2319 6009 www.ijscer.com Vol. 4, No. 1, February 2015 2015 IJSCER. All Rights Reserved COMPARATIVE
More informationSeismic Steel Design 12/9/2012
Chapter 8 Design of Seismic-Resistant Steel Building Structures: A Brief Overview SEISMIC STEEL DESIGN IN CANADA and the USA Instructor: Dr. Carlos E. Ventura, P.Eng. Department of Civil Engineering The
More informationINVESTIGATION ON NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BUILDING AND INTRODUCING SEISMIC RETROFITTING OUTLINES WITH CASE STUDY
13 th World onference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.., anada August 1-6, 4 Paper No. 356 INVESTIGATION ON NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BUILDING AND INTRODUING SEISMI RETROFITTING OUTLINES WITH
More informationNonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Base Isolated Reinforced Concrete Building
Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Base Isolated Reinforced Concrete Building Anju Agarwal 1, Nirendra Dev 2, Ibadur Rahman 3 Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Delhi Technological University,
More informationXyston Inn. NY. Proposal. Xiaodong Jiang. Structure Option. Advisor: Dr. Linda Hanagan
Proposal Xiaodong Jiang Structure Option Advisor: Dr. Linda Hanagan December 12, 2014 Executive Summary Xyston Inn is a 17-story hotel building that will be located in Brooklyn, New York. The design of
More informationXyston Inn. NY. Proposal. Xiaodong Jiang. Structure Option. Advisor: Dr. Linda Hanagan
Proposal Xiaodong Jiang Structure Option Advisor: Dr. Linda Hanagan December 12, 2014 Executive Summary Xyston Inn is a 17-story hotel building that will be located in Brooklyn, New York. The design of
More informationSEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF SUPER TALL BUILDINGS
160 SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF SUPER TALL BUILDINGS Nilupa Herath, Priyan Mendis, Tuan Ngo, Nicholas Haritos The Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Melbourne Vic 3010, Australia
More informationPEER Tall Building Seismic Design Guidelines
PEER Tall Building Seismic Design Guidelines Preliminary Design Recommendations & Performance Studies John Hooper Principal & Director of Earthquake Engineering Magnusson Klemencic Associates SEAW November
More informationAvailable at ISSN
Page No.149 Available at www.ijcasonline.com ISSN 2349 0594 International Journal of Modern Chemistry and Applied Science International Journal of Modern Chemistry and Applied Science 2015, 2(3), 148-152
More informationDepartment of Civil Engineering, SKP Engg. College, Tiruvanamalai, TN, India
DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF MULTI- STOREYED BUILDING UNDER STATIC AND DYNAMIC LOADING CONDITIONS USING ETABS Balaji.U. A 1, Mr. Selvarasan M.E. B 2 1 PG Student, 2 Asst.Professor Department of Civil Engineering,
More informationSeismic Response of RC Building Structures using Capacity Spectrum Method with included Soil Flexibility
Seismic Response of RC Building Structures using Capacity Spectrum Method with included Soil Flexibility G. N. Cvetanovska, R. Apostolska and J. Cvetanovska University "Ss. Cyril and Methodius", Institute
More informationOffshore Requirements for Turbine Exhaust System Analysis and Design
Offshore Requirements for Turbine Exhaust System Analysis and Design Analysis Process and Results for Development of an Optimal Exhaust System from an Internal pressure, Wind, Seismic and Aero-Acoustic
More information