Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Goa, India
th
Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Tall Multi-flue Chimneys under Aerodynamic and Seismic Force
Negar Sadegh Pour
Petrofac International Limited Sharjah, U.A.E
Indrajit Chowdhury
Petrofac International Limited Sharjah, U.A.E Keywords: Soil stiffness, aerodynamic response, chimney, modal analysis, earthquake ABSTRACT: Dynamic response of tall chimneys under wind and earthquake force has been a topic of significant interest to engineers for quite some time in the industry. It is only in recent times it has been acknowledged that the underlying soil affects the dynamic response of the chimneys especially under earthquake force. As far as aerodynamic response is concerned there is yet any consistent study available as to how soil-foundation system affects the across and along-wind response of the chimney which is often the guiding design criteria for a tall chimney. The present paper proposes a semi analytic mathematical model based on which both seismic and aerodynamic response of such tall chimneys are studied for various soil stiffness and are compared with the fixed base conventional method as per UBC 97(for seismic load) and CICIND (for wind loading).Some of the salient feature of the paper is, unlike adding the soil stiffness to the diagonal element of the stiffness matrix (which happens to be the usual practice) it uses a modified mathematical model (considering multi-degree of freedom) for soil coupling as was developed originally by Veletsos and Meek for single degree of freedom. The paper extends this theory to cater to the material and radiation damping of the soil within the modal analysis framework for dynamic soil structure interaction (DSSI) response for the chimney. The method being semi analytic does not require elaborate modelling effort thus could make it computationally attractive for engineers undertaking design of such chimneys in the industry.
1 Introduction
The study of the effects of soil-structure interaction on aerodynamic response of tall RCC chimneys have not received much attention till date , though some attempts have been made for the seismic analysis of tall chimneys with the influence of soil flexibility. While it is an established fact that soil foundation interaction reduces the response under earthquake how it affects the aerodynamics response is still not very clear. The present paper attempts to study the same based on a semi analytic mathematical model considering interaction between the underlying soil foundation and the structure. The soil structure interaction is based on linear behaviour in both structure and soil. The super structure ( the chimney) is assumed as an elastic beam with constant properties along the height. The shear deformation and the effects of the axial forces are neglected. The foundation was assumed as a rigid circular foundation resting on a elastic half space without any embedment with perfect bonding between soil and the foundation.
The time period of vibration of a structure increases with decreasing soil stiffness. Based on this phenomena Veletsos and Meek (1974) has proposed an expression for time period for a single degree of freedom system as
T = T 1+
K h2 k (1 + x ) Kx K
(2)
Where
2696
1 1 1 h2 = + + ke k K x K
In which,
(2)
ke
For a system having n degree of freedom above equation can be extended to a matrix form as below
(3) (4)
Where [F]n n and [K ]n n are flexibility matrix of soil structure system and stiffness matrix with suffix as mentioned earlier, respectively. And [h]nn is radius vector of the lumped masses to the center of foundation springs. The damping matrix for a multi-degree freedom system is similarly given by
(5)
Here
e = Damping ratio of the equivalent soil structure system = Damping ratio of the equivalent fixed base system usually taken as 0.02 to 0.05 for RCC chimneys.
x = Damping ratio of the soil for horizontal mode x = 0.288/ B x where B x = = Damping ratio of the soil for rocking mode x
32(1 ) s rx 0.375(1 )J x g = 0.15 /[(1 + Bx ) Bx ] where B x = 5 s r x
3
(7 8 )mg
The values Kx, K, x and and their notations are as per Richart et al (1970)
EI(
E = Elastic modulus of the chimney
4y z
4
) + A(
2y t 2
)=0
(8)
I = Moment of Inertia of the chimney cross section = Mass density of the chimney material A = Cross section area y = Displacement of the beam a function of geometry and time, expressed as:
y(z, t) = Y(z)q(t )
(9)
Based on separation of variable technique eqn (8) can be separated into two linear differential equation and one of them is
EI(
d 4 Y A 2 )+ Y=0 EI dz 4
(10)
For a uniform cantilever beam, considering appropriate boundary condition, the shape function solution(Chopra 1995) can be written as:
2697
Ym = sin
Here
(11)
m =
(12)
k ij =
EI(z)
dz 2
dz 2
dz
(13)
H m ij = A i (z) j (z)dz 0
(14)
The double derivative of the shape function mentioned in eqn (11) is given by
2 i z z iz i z (15) sin i sinh i + i cos H + cosh H 2 H H H 2 j jz jz jz j z Y j = 2 sin cos sinh + j + cosh (16) H H H H H z dz Now considering = when d = and as z 0, 0 and as z H, 1 we can now express the H H
Yi =
double derivatives as
F ( )i = F ( ) j =
H2 2 j H2
H 2 j H2
f i ( )
f j( )
(17)
(18)
k ij =
and mass of the system is given by
EI i j
2
H
i
f ( ) f ( )
0
i
(19)
m ij = AH
f ( )
0
f ( ) j d where i=j=1,2,3,m
(20)
Thus for the first three modes the fixed base stiffness matrix is given by
1 4 2 1 f ( )1 d Symmetric 0 1 1 EI 2 2 4 ( )2 d = 3 2 1 f ( )2 f ( )1 d 2 f2 H 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 2 3 1 f ( )3 f ( )1 d 3 2 f ( )3 f ( )2 d 3 f ( )3 d 0 0 0
[K ]ij
(21)
2698
[M]ij
1 2 f ( )1 d 0 1 = AH f ( )2 f ( )1 d 0 1 f ( )3 f ( )1 d 0
Symmetric
f
1 0 0
( )2 d
3 2
f ( ) f ( ) d
1 2 f ( )3 d 0
(22)
(23)
(24)
(25)
1 [I]33 + 1 h 2 Kx K
[ ]
33
(26)
[h ]33 = H i f( i )d f( i ) 2 d
0
0
[h]33
Considering T = 2 M K = 2
(27)
[M ][F ]1
we finally have
[Te ]3 3
(28)
Substituting [K] and [F] from eqn(23) and expanding eqn(5) damping ratio matrix can be written as
2699
[ e ]33
(29)
Eqn (28) and (29) gives the time period and the damping ratio for the first three modes for a multi-flue chimney considering DSSI.
wg ( z) =
Where as per CICIND
3(G 1) z H2 H
w
0
( z )zdz
(30)
G = Gust factor, and is expressed as G = 1 + 2gi B + ES/ wm ( z ) = Static wind load per unit height
Referring to CICIND it will be observed that in the factor G the terms E,g, and S are all a function of frequency vis-a vis the time period of the chimney. It is thus apparent that as the time period varies due to soil effect so will the gust factor and the aerodynamic response. To assess this effect quantitatively, three different chimneys were analyzed with and without soil effect under wind load. Figs (1), (2) and (3) shows percentage variation in base moment considering, soil- structure interaction (MSSI) and fixed base (Mfx) case. Here t is average thickness of shell along the height of the chimney, and Df is diameter of foundation. The result shows that decrease in shear wave velocity (i.e. softer is the soil), base moment of chimney increases under along wind force and higher is the wind more is the increment. For very stiff soil, M SSI M fx .
Figure 1. Comparison of base moment for longitudinal wind (wind velocity 36m/s)
2700
Figure 2. Comparison of base moment for longitudinal wind (wind velocity 20m/s)
2.5 .10
6
2 .10
Moment(kN.m)
M SSI( z ) M FB( z )
1.5 .10
1 .10
5 .10
50
100
150 z
200
250
300
z(m)
Figure 3. Comparison of moment for longitudinal wind Df=60m Vw=36m/s Height=300m The base moment due to across wind response of tall chimneys as per ACI-307-5 is expressed as
(31)
Of all these factors the terms Vcr (The critical wind velocity at which the vortex shedding takes place), ), a,s Sp etc are all functions of the natural frequency of the chimney. It is again evident from eqn(31) that as the frequency of the chimney gets modified due to the soil foundation effect the vortex shedding response also alters from its fixed base response.Fig 4 and Fig 5 shows across wind response attenuates with DSSI.
Figure 4. Comparison of base moment for across wind (wind velocity 36m/s)
2701
5 .10
4 .10
M SSI( z ) M FB( z)
3 .10
2 .10
1 .10
50
100
150 z
200
250
300
Figure 6. Comparison of seismic base moment for firm soil spectrum (Z=0.40) (ACI-307)
6 Conclusion
The effect of foundation flexibility on the reinforcement concrete chimneys to wind excitation can be significant and should be addressed in design stage. The presence of soft soils for tall chimney may increase base moment of longitudenal wind up to 10 percent and decrease across wind up to 50 percent that may affect design forces. These changes will be less in the stiffer soils and in the zones with less base wind speed. None of the present codes present any method for estimation of influence of soil structure interaction. It might be advisable to take soil
2702
structure inter action effects into account for calculation of wind load in different codes. Soil structure interaction also has an important effect on seismic forces of tall chimneys. Although for tall chimneys rested on firm soil, earthquake loads decreased as a result of increasing in period values, seismic forces may amplify by using different response spectra in calculation. This means that the soil structure interaction effects are reliant on the characteristic of the seismic excitation in addition to chimneys properties.
7 References
ACI307 1998. Design and Construction of Reinforcement Concrete Chimneys, ACI committee 307 Report ASCE7 2002. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Virginia Chopra A.K. 1995. Dynamics of Structures, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff, New Jersey. Chowdary I., Dasgupta S.P., 2002. Earthquake Response of Soil-Structure System, Indian Geotechnical Journal, 32(2),ppCICIND 2001. Model Code for Concrete Chimneys, Part A. The Shell, Second Edition, Revision 1 Hutry, W.C. and Rubenstein, M. F. 1967, Dynamics of Structures, Prentice-Hall of India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi IBC 2003. International Building Code, Structural Design, Chapter 16. Luco J. E,1986.Soil-Structure Interaction Effects on the Seismic Response of Tall Chimneys, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,Vol.5, pp403-409 Lysmer, J and Richart, F.E. Jr.1966, Dynamic Response of Footing to Vertical Loading. J. Soil Mech. and Found. Div. Proc. ASCE, Vol. 92, No. SMI, January, pp. 65-91 Navaro C. 1992. Influence of Soil Flexibility on the Seismic Behaviour of Chimneys, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,Vol.11,No.3., pp170-177 UBC 1997, Uniform building Code, Structural Design Requirement, Chapter 16 Veletsos, A.S. and Meek J. W. 1974, Dynamic Behaviour of Building-Foundation System, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 3,No. 2, pp 121-138
2703