DIANA新工程砌體材料模型（英文版）

DIANA

Online

Training

SeriesNew

Engineering

Masonry

Material

Model

in

DIANATopics

?

New

Engineering

Masonry

Model

?

Simplified

soil

models

?

New

proposed

workflow

NLTH

earthquake

approach1Situation?

The

Northern

Netherlands

has

been

subjected

to

natural

gas

extraction

since

the

1950’s.?

Such

activity

induced

a

certain

level

of

seismicity

in

the

area,

with

a

first

earthquake

recorded

in

1991,

with

a

low

rate

of

events

per

years.?

From

2003

the

number

of

events

and

magnitude

started

to

increase,

and

in

2012

the

largest

event,

with

a

magnitude

ML

=

3.6,

was

recorded.?

The

induced

earthquake

of

2012

was

in

high

part

responsible

of

most

of

the

actual

damage

in

the

Groningen

region.?

The

magnitude

of

this

event

was

not

extremely

high

but,

however,

its

effect

on

structures

and

infrastructures

in

the

surrounding

area

was

amplified

due

to

the

shallow

depth

of

the

earthquake

and

the

soft

layers

constituting

the

foundational

soil.

2Housing

and

buildings

in

Netherlands?

Inside

100

mm

calcium

silicate

brick?

Outside

100

mm

clay

brick?

Connection

more

or

less

wall

ties

(4/m2?).Depending

on

environmentmore

or

less

corroded.?

NOT

DESIGNED

FOREARTHQUAKES

!3Model

-

Overview4Tensile

behaviourCrushingCoulomb-based

shear

retentionModel

validation

tests:Developed

at

DIANA

FEA

together

with

professor

J.G.

Rots

of

Delft

University

of

Technology

(TUDELFT)5Model

–

background

need

Mainly

used

model

TSCM

does

not

take

into

account

the

orthotropy

of

the

masonry

material

and

does

not

allow

for

linear

unloading

(only

secant).

The

failure

load

is

well

described

but

hysteretic

loops

are

small

without

energy.

The

new

model

is

a

total-strain

based

continuum

model

that:

?

covers

tensile,

shear

and

compression

failure

modes,

?

in

the

x,y

horizontal-vertical

bed

joint

–

head

joint

system,

?

with

adequate

secant,

elastic

and

mixed

hysteresis

loops

for

the

different

failure

modes,

?

including

orthotropy,

by

using

different

properties

for

the

elasticity,

strength

and

softening

for

the

two

directions.TUEtestsonTUDtestsonEy/ExLiteratureexistingmasonryreplicatedmasonryClaybrick2.02.1(solidbricks)1.3(perforatedbricks)CalciumsilicatebrickModel

–

Elastic

input6TUEtestsonTUDtestsonfty/ftxLiterature:existingmasonryreplicatedmasonryClaybrick1/31/3.3(solidandperforatedbricks)1/2.8(perforatedbricks)Calciumsilicatebrick1/21/4.51/3.6Model

–

Tensile7Tensile

behaviour????????

=2??????

???

??TUEtestsonTUDtestsonfcy/fcxLiteratureexistingmasonryreplicatedmasonryClaybrick2.02.0(solidbricks)1.8(perforatedbricks)CalciumsilicatebrickModel

-

Compression8Crushing??

=????????????

????Model

–

Shear,

sliding9

Coulomb-based

shear

retention????????

=

??????

0,??

?

??????tan(??)????????=2??????

?

?

??+??????

tan??

??TUEtestsonTUDtestsonfty/ftxLiterature:existingmasonryreplicatedmasonryClaybrick1/31/3.3(solidandperforatedbricks)1/2.8(perforatedbricks)Calciumsilicatebrick1/21/4.51/3.6TUEtestsonTUDtestsonEy/ExLiteratureexistingmasonryreplicatedmasonryClaybrick2.02.1(solidbricks)1.3(perforatedbricks)CalciumsilicatebrickTUEtestsonTUDtestsonfcy/fcxLiteratureexistingmasonryreplicatedmasonryClaybrick2.02.0(solidbricks)1.8(perforatedbricks)CalciumsilicatebrickModel

–

suggested

correlation1011TUD

Validation

tests

'MATERI'1

NAME

"Masonry"

MCNAME

CONCR

MATMDL

MASONR

ENGMAS

DENSIT

1.65200E+03

YOUNG

1.49100E+09

SHRMOD

5.00000E+08

TENSTR

1.20000E+051.49100E+094.00000E+04GF1

4.00000E+01COMSTR

6.20000E+061.00000E+016.20000E+064.00000E+044.00000E+00GC

4.00000E+04EPSCFA

4.00000E+00PHI

0.53COHESI

2.30000E+05ASPECT:

GFS

2.00000E+01:

CRKCOH:

CBSPEC

ROTS:

RAYLEI

1.11000E+009.00000E-04YOUNG

:1500

Mpa

(E)SHRMOD

:500

Mpa

(G)TENSTR

:0.12/0.04

Mpa

(ft)GF1

:0.04/0.01

Nmm

(Gf)COMSTR

:6.2/6.2

Mpa

(fd)GC:40Nmm(Gc)EPSFAC

:4PHI

:0.53COHESI

:0.23-

factorTAN(30)Mpa

(C)GFS:0.02Nmm

(Gfs)Some

1-2%

small

strain

dampingcan

be

added.12Typical

component

tests

?

Variations:

–

L/H

ratio

–

Clamped

or

cantilever

–

Overburden

stressEx=Ey1.491GPaG500GPaFtx0.120MPaFty0.04MPaGftx40N/mGfty10N/mFcx=Fcy6.2MPaGfc40kN/mΦ0.53radC0.21MPaGfsNOREDUCTIONρ31652kg/m13LOWSTA

Test

LowstaEx=Ey4.182GPaG1.400GPaftx0.238MPafty0.238MPaGftx15N/mGfty15N/mfcx=fcy6.2MPaGfc40kN/mΦ0.4radC0.21MPaGfsNOREDUCTIONρ31852kg/m14LOWSTA

Test

sliding

wallFx(kN)120100806040200dx(mm)-8-6-4-202-20-40468-60-80-100LOWSTA_Q_GFS-120LOWSTA_L_GFSValidation

Quadratic

linear15Quadratic

vs.

Linearelements

(<

100

mm)Quadratic

vs.

Linearelements

(<

200

mm)-140140-1010-140

-40

-60

-80-100-120-200140120100

80

60

40

20-10-8-6-4-20246810Fx

(kN)dx

(mm)LOWSTA_Q_2_GFSLOWSTA_L_2_GFS16

Examples

of

Dutch

buildings?

Non-linear

time-history

analysis

of

an

existing

masonry

building

with

double-leaf

wallsEarthquakesignalABCUxmax[mm]38.835.432.8Uymax[mm]45.342.936.2wcr,max[mm]4.03.94.4Fbase,x[MN]37.335.930.0Fbase,y[MN]30.931.431.1Fbase,z*[MN]80.453.568.0*

Relative

to

self-weight.Examples

of

Dutch

buildings17?

Assessment

of

the

effectiveness

of

seismic

strengthening

measures

for

an

existing

school

buildingStrengthening

measuresUnstrengthenedStrengthenedMax.

displacementsMax.

crack

width18Cases

observations

?

In

tensile

and

compression

region

for

building

is

not

much

hysteretic

energy

absorption.

?

Shear/sliding

is

much

more

important.19interaction

can

beexplicitly

taken

into

account

inthe

analysis.?

Direct

consideration

of

the

local

site

conditions.

Relevance

of

soil-structure

interaction

effects?

Soil-structure

interaction

effects

not

usually

taken

into

account

in

the

structural

design.?

Some

methods

allow

to

consider

the

effects

of

soil

and

foundation

system

through

the

introduction

of

lumpedsprings

at

the

base

of

the

structure,

based

on

existing

formulations

available

in

the

literature;?

Other

methods

take

advantage

of

the

directmodelling

of

portions

of

soil

through

finite

element

approaches.

?

A

‘direct

approach’

is

followed:

?

An

effective

soil

volume

is

directly

modelled

under

the

structure

discretized

through

solid

elements.

?

The

building

and

the

foundation

system

is

also

explicitly

modelled.

?

The

effects

of

the

nonlinearities

due

to

the

soil

behaviour

and

to

the

building’s

materials

and

geometry,

as

well

as

their20

Input

set

of

Force

time-histories?

The

dynamic

excitation

is

introduced

at

the

base

of

the

soil

column

as

a

set

of

Forcetime-histories

proportional

to

the

velocity

time-histories

associated

to

the

ground

motion.?

For

each

component,

the

Forcetime-history

is

calculated

by

multiplying

the

velocitytime-history

by

the

dampingcoefficient

associated

to

the

same

direction.?

The

use

of

Force

time-histories

and

linear

dampers

at

the

base

of

the

soil

column

has

the

advantage

of

allowing

the

energy

to

be

radiated

back

in

the

underlying

space.

Horizontal

Force

time-histories

(2

in-plane

directions):

Vertical

Force

time-histories

(along

the

height):

:

horizontal

velocity

time-histories

(X,

Y

directions)

:

vertical

velocity

time-histories

(Z

direction)Horizontal

dampers(2

in-plane

directions):

:

mass

density

:

in-plane

area

:

shear

and

compression

wave

velocitiesVertical

damper(along

the

height):

With:

Damping

coefficient

for

base

dampers?

Viscous

uniaxial

dampers

defined

on

the

basis

of

the

damping

coefficient.?

The

dampers

are

characterized

by

a

damping

coefficient

equal

to

the

product

of

the

mass

density

and

the

shear

wave

velocity

of

the

underlying

layer

with

the

area

of

the

base

of

the

soil

column.?

The

properties

of

the

bedrock

are

used

for

the

half-space.-

Hardin-Drnevich:-

Ramberg-Osgood:-

Shear

strain-Stiffness

ratio

diagram:-

Soil

behaviour:

Non-linear

G/G0

curves

according

to

soil

layer

profile:

Soil

model

non-linear

parameters?

Simple

soil

models

available

in

DIANA:Soil

model

non-linear

parametersGoStrain

where

G=0.7Go?

Max.

and

Min.

shear

strains

in

thein-plane

directions:Shear

strain

profiles

along

the

foundation

soilPropertyAbase

[m2]h

[m]ρ

[kg/m3]3D

soil

block100

x

1003018003D

soil

column1x1301800Equivalent

3D

soil

column

1x1

30

18000000Combined

soil

model

*

30

*E[N/m2]1.92E+081.92E+081.92E+12*G

[N/m2]ν

[-]Vs

[m/s]Vp

[m/s]ch

[Ns/m]cv

[Ns/m]7.20E+070.332003233.60E+095.87E+097.20E+070.332003233.60E+055.87E+057.20E+110.332003233.60E+095.87E+09*0.332003233.60E+095.87E+09*:

top

and

bottom

part

different

(resp.

100

and

1

m)-

Equivalent

Density,

Stiffness,

Soil

properties-

Equivalent

damping

coefficientsEquivalent

soil

modelsAcceleration

(g)Acceleration

(g)0.20.01.21.00.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0Period

(s)Spectralacceleration(g)0.20.00.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0Period

(s)

1.8

1.6

1.4Spectr

1.2alaccele

1.0ration(g)-

Equivalent

Density,

Stiffness,

Soil

properties-

Equivalent

damping

coefficientsEquivalent

soil

modelsOther

elements

for

hysteresis?

Interfaces–

Include

plasticity,

hysteretic

behavior.?

Springs–

Include

yield

plateau

and

linearunloading/reloading.Interfaces

PILE.GappingautomaticDissipative

Materials

for

Dynamics

?

Concrete

–

Total

Strain

crack

model

?

Maekawa

Cracked

Concrete

curves

?

Japan

Society

of

Civil

Engineers

(JCSE)

2012

curves

–

Maekawa-Fukuura

model29Maekawa-

Fukuura

model

in

DIANA?

Non-orthogonal

Crack

model–

Threshold

angle

θ:

With

the

non-orthogonal

crack

option

the

user

can

define

a

threshold

angle

θ

for

the

minimum

anglebetween

two

different

cracks

in

the

same

integration

point.–

Maximum

6

cracks

in

1

point:

By

default

the

threshold

angle

θ

=

90°,

which

gives

the

non-orthogonal

crack

option

the

samebehavior

as

the

Fixed

crack

option.

However,

when

the

thresholdangle

θ

i