Earthquake and Large Structures Testing at the Bristol Laboratory for Advanced Dynamics Engineering

  • Matt S. Dietz
  • Luiza Dihoru
  • Olafur Oddbjornsson
  • Mateusz Bocian
  • Mohammad M. Kashani
  • James A. P. Norman
  • Adam J. Crewe
  • John H. G. Macdonald
  • Colin A. Taylor
Conference paper
Part of the Geotechnical, Geological, and Earthquake Engineering book series (GGEE, volume 22)

Abstract

Integrated within the Bristol Laboratory for Advanced Dynamics Engineering (BLADE) at the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Bristol, the Earthquake and Large Structures (EQUALS) Laboratory is the UK’s largest dynamic test laboratory that specialises in earthquake engineering. The facilities contained include a six degree of freedom shaking table surrounded by a strong floor and adjacent strong walls. The capacity and capability of these facilities are described. The role and significance of the EQUALS infrastructure is demonstrated by discussion of a number of recent and ongoing projects. Subject areas ­encompassed include inclined cable dynamics, human-structure interaction, multiple support excitation, pile-soil interaction, non-linear self-aligning structures and corroded reinforced concrete.

Keywords

Reinforced Concrete Plastic Hinge Seismic Performance Cable Tension Reinforced Concrete Column 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] under grant agreement n° 227887. The authors acknowledge also the support of the following institutions: the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (under grants GR/R51261/01, GR/R99539/01, GR/R99539/01, GR/T28270/01, EP/D080088/1, EP/D073944/1), Rannis (The Icelandic Centre for Research), Landsvirkjun (the Icelandic National Power Company), the RELUIS consortium, and URS/Scott Wilson.

References

  1. Brownjohn JMW, Fok P, Roche M et al (2004) Long span steel pedestrian bridge at Singapore Changi Airport – part 2: crowd loading tests and vibration mitigation measures. Struct Eng 82(16):28–34Google Scholar
  2. Bocian M, Macdonald JHG, Burn JF (2011) Modelling of self-excited vertical forces on structures due to walking pedestrians. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on structural dynamics (Eurodyn 2011), Leuven, Belgium, 1110–1117Google Scholar
  3. Dallard P, Fitzpatrick AJ, Flint A et al (2001) The London Millennium footbridge. Struct Eng 79(22):17–33Google Scholar
  4. Dietz M, Muir Wood D (2007) Shaking table evaluation of dynamic soil properties. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece, paper 1196Google Scholar
  5. Dietz M, Oddbjornsson O, Taylor CA et al (2010) Shaking table testing of a post-tensioned tendon frame retrofitted with metallic shear panel dissipator. In: 9th US/10th Canadian conference on earthquake engineering, Toronto, paper 1185Google Scholar
  6. Dihoru L, Bhattacharya S, Taylor CA et al (2009) Experimental modelling of kinematic bending moments of piles in layered soils. In: IS-Tokyo 2009 – international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
  7. Dihoru L, Taylor CA, Bhattacharya S et al (2010a) Stiffness design for granular materials – a theoretical and experimental approach. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on ­physical modelling in geotechnics, Zurich, paper 013Google Scholar
  8. Dihoru L, Taylor CA, Bhattacharya S et al (2010b) Physical modelling of kinematic pile-soil ­interaction under seismic conditions. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on physical modelling in geotechnics, Zurich, paper 012Google Scholar
  9. Dihoru L, Taylor CA, Bhattacharya S et al (2010c) Shaking table testing of free field response in layered granular deposits. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference of earthquake engineering, Ohrid, paper 166Google Scholar
  10. Dobry R, O’Rourke MJ (1983) Discussion on seismic response of end-bearing piles. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 109:778–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Du YT, Clark LA, Chan A (2005) Effect of corrosion on ductility of reinforcing bars. Mag Concr Res 57(7):407–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Erdik M (1998) Seismic vulnerability of megacities. In: Booth E (ed) Seismic design practice into the next century: research and application. Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  13. Hao H (1998) A parametric study of the required seating length for bridge decks during earthquake. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 27(1):91–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hof AL, van Bockel RM, Schoppen T et al (2007) Control of lateral balance in walking – experimental findings in normal subjects and above-knee amputees. Gait Posture 25(2):250–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ingólfsson ET, Georgakis CT, Ricciardelli F et al (2011) Experimental identification of pedestrian-induced lateral forces on footbridges. J Sound Vib 330(6):1265–1284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kashani MM, Crewe AJ, Canisius TDG (2010) Ductility of corrosion damaged RC bridges in seismic assessment. In: Proceedings of the 5th international ASRANet conference, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  17. Loh CH, Penzien J, Tsai YB (1982) Engineering analyses of SMART 1 array accelerograms. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 10(4):575–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lupoi A, Franchin P, Pinto PE et al (2005) Seismic design of bridges accounting for spatial ­variability of ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34(4–5):327–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Macdonald JHG (2008) Pedestrian-induced vibrations of the Clifton Suspension Bridge UK. In: Proc Inst Civ Eng – Bridge Eng 161(BE2):69–77Google Scholar
  20. Macdonald JHG (2009) Lateral excitation of bridges by balancing pedestrians. Proc R Soc Lond A 465(2104):1055–1073MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Macdonald JHG, Dietz MS, Neild SA et al (2010a) Generalised modal stability of inclined cables subject to support excitations. J Sound Vib 329(21):4515–4533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Macdonald JHG, Dietz MS, Neild SA (2010b) Dynamic excitation of cables by deck and/or tower motion. Proc Inst Civ Eng – Bridge Eng 163(2):101–112Google Scholar
  23. Mylonakis G (2001) Simplified model for seismic pile bending at soil layer interfaces. Soil Found 41:47–58Google Scholar
  24. Norman JAP, Crewe AJ (2008) Development and control of a novel test rig for performing multiple support testing of structures. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, paper no. 02-02-0051Google Scholar
  25. Norman JAP, Virden DW, Crewe AJ et al (2006) Modelling of bridges subject to multiple support excitation. Struct Eng 84(5):26–28Google Scholar
  26. Oddbjornsson O (2009) Dynamics of nonlinear elastic moment resisting frames. PhD thesis, Univeristy of Bristol, BristolGoogle Scholar
  27. Oddbjornsson O, Alexander, NA, Taylor CA et al (2007) Computational analysis of precast concrete frames with post-tensioned tendons. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on civil, structural and environmental engineering computing. Civil-Comp Press, paper 167Google Scholar
  28. Oddbjornsson O, Alexander, NA, Taylor CA et al (2008) Shaking table testing of nonlinear elastic moment resisting frames. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, paper 11–0110Google Scholar
  29. Ojaghi M, Lamata-Martinez I, Dietz M et al (2010a) UKNEES – distributed hybrid testing between Bristol, Cambridge and Oxford Universities. In: 9th US/10th Canadian conference on earthquake engineering, Toronto, paper 1024Google Scholar
  30. Ojaghi M, Lamata-Martinez I, Dietz M et al (2010b) Real-time hybrid testing in geographically distributed laboratories. In: 14th European conference on earthquake engineering, Ohrid, paper 872Google Scholar
  31. Priestley MJN, Park R (1987) Strength and ductility of bridge columns under seismic loading. Struct J Am Concr Inst 84(1):61–76Google Scholar
  32. Racic V, Pavić A, Brownjohn JMW (2009) Experimental identification and analytical modelling of human walking forces: literature review. J Sound Vib 326(1–2):1–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1970) Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analysis. Report no. EERC 70–10. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  34. Stanton J, Nakaki S (2002) Precast Seismic Structural Systems PRESSS Vol. 3–09: Design guidelines for precast concrete seismic structural systems, University of Washington, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  35. Venuti F, Bruno L (2009) Crowd-structure interaction in lively footbridges under synchronous lateral excitation: a literature review. Phys Life Rev 6:176–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Winter DA (2005) Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  37. Zapico JL, Gonzalez MP, Friswell MI et al (2003) Finite element updating of a small scale bridge. J Sound Vib 268(5):993–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Živanović S, Pavić A, Ingólfsson ET (2010) Modelling spatially unrestricted pedestrian traffic on footbridges. J Struct Eng ASCE 136(10):1296–1308CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matt S. Dietz
    • 1
  • Luiza Dihoru
    • 1
  • Olafur Oddbjornsson
    • 1
  • Mateusz Bocian
    • 1
  • Mohammad M. Kashani
    • 1
  • James A. P. Norman
    • 1
  • Adam J. Crewe
    • 1
  • John H. G. Macdonald
    • 1
  • Colin A. Taylor
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of BristolBristolUK

Personalised recommendations