Development of a Laboratory Test Program to Examine Human-Structure Interaction

Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

Vibration serviceability is a widely recognized design criterion for assembly-type structures likely subjected to rhythmic human-induced excitation. Current design guidance is based on the natural frequency of the structure. However, a phenomenon known as human-structure interaction suggests that there is a dynamic interaction between the structure and the occupants, altering the natural frequency of the system. It is unknown if this shift in natural frequency is significant enough to warrant consideration in the design process. Therefore, there is a need to identify the circumstances under which human-structure interaction should be considered because of its potential impact on serviceability assessment. Because the influence of the structural properties on human-structure interaction cannot be separated from the influence of the crowd characteristics, this study explores the interface of both factors through experimental testing. To do so, a laboratory test structure is designed, constructed, and operated based on particular design criteria selected with knowledge from previous human-structure interaction studies. This study provides a review of the design and construction of the test structure, methods used to validate a finite element computer model to the as-built structure, and the experimental testing procedure for testing with occupants.

Keywords

Human-structure interaction Experimental modal analysis Crowd dynamics 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Comer A, Blakeborough A, Williams MS (2010) Grandstand simulator for dynamic human-structure interaction experiments. Exp Mech 50(6):825–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murray TM, Allen DE, Ungar EE (1997) Floor vibrations due to human activity, Steel design guide series, no. 11. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sachse R, Pavic A, Reynolds P (2003) Human-structure dynamic interaction in civil engineering dynamics: a literature review. Shock Vib Digest 35:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lenzen KH (1966) Vibration of steel joist-concrete slab floors. AISC Eng J (6th Ser) 3:133Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ellis BR, Ji T (1997) Human-structure interaction in vertical vibrations. Proc Inst Civil Eng Struct B 122(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Littler JD (1998) Full-scale testing of large cantilever grandstands to determine their dynamic response. In: Thompson PD, Tolloczko JJA, Clarke JN (eds) Stadia, arenas and grandstands. E and FN Spon, London, pp 123–134Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ellis BR, Ji T (1994) Floor vibration induced by dance-type loads: verification. Struct Eng 72(3):45–50Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brownjohn JMW (1999) Energy dissipation in one-way slabs with human participation. In: Proceedings of Asia-Pacific vibration conference, vol 1. Nanyang Technological University, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Falati S (1999) The contribution of non-structural components to the overall dynamic behavior of concrete floor slabs. Thesis, University of Oxford, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yao S, Wright J, Pavic A, Reynolds P (2004) Experimental study of human-induced dynamic forces due to bouncing on a perceptibly moving structure. Can J Civil Eng 31(6):1109–1118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yao S, Wright JR, Pavic A, Reynolds P (2006) Experimental study of human-induced dynamic forces due to jumping on a perceptibly moving structure. J Sound Vib 296:150–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sim JH (2006) Human-structure interaction in cantilever grandstands. Thesis, University of Oxford, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ji T, Ellis BR (1995) Human actions on structures. Soc Earthquake Eng Civil Eng Dyn (SECED) Newsl (ICE) Autumn, 4–5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dougill JW, Wright JR, Parkhouse JG, Harrison RE (2006) Human structure interaction during rhythmic bobbing. Struct Eng 84(22):32–39Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Institution of Structural Engineers (2008) Dynamic performance requirements for permanent grandstands subject to crowd action, IStructE/DTLR/DCMS working group on dynamic performance and design of stadia structures and seating decks. Institution of Structural Engineers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    SAP2000 (2011) Overview, Computers and Structures, Inc. http://www.csiberkeley.com/sap2000. Accessed 16 Sep 2011
  17. 17.
    American Society of Civil Engineers (2010) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE/SEI 7–10, RestonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    American Institute of Steel Construction (2007) Steel construction manual, 13th edn. American Institute of Steel Construction, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dougill JW (2005) Recommendations for design of grandstands subject to dynamic crowd excitation. In: Proceedings of the 6th European conference on structural dynamics (EURODYN 2005). European Association for Structural Dynamics (EASD), Munich, pp 491–496Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Firman RJ III (2010) Investigating the effects of various crowd characteristics on the dynamic properties of an occupied structure. Thesis, Bucknell University, LewisburgGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    IOtech eZ-Series (2011) Analysis software for IOtech devices – National instruments. http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/208342. Accessed 13 Sep 2011
  22. 22.
    Vibrant Technology, Inc. (2011) Modal analysis, ODS, acoustic, and finite element analysis software (ME’scope). http://www.vibetech.com/go.cfm/enus/content/index. Accessed 13 Sep 2011

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2012 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringBucknell UniversityLewisburgUSA

Personalised recommendations