1 / 16

Main Project Sponsors and Contributors

Main Project Sponsors and Contributors. Steve Mahin, UC Berkeley Jos é I. Restrepo, UC San Diego Ian Buckle, UN Reno Matthew J. Schoettler, UC San Diego Francesco Carrea, UC San Diego David Duck, UC San Diego Gabriele Guerrini, UC San Diego Elide Pantoli, UC San Diego

betsy
Télécharger la présentation

Main Project Sponsors and Contributors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Main Project Sponsors and Contributors

  2. Steve Mahin, UC Berkeley José I. Restrepo, UC San Diego Ian Buckle, UN Reno Matthew J. Schoettler, UC San Diego Francesco Carrea, UC San Diego David Duck, UC San Diego Gabriele Guerrini, UC San Diego Elide Pantoli, UC San Diego Mike Keever, Caltrans Mark Mahan, Caltrans Cliff Roblee, Caltrans Tom Shantz, Caltrans Phil Yin, FHWA Steve Mahin, Chair José I. Restrepo Vesna Terzic, UC Berkeley Matthew J. Schoettler Research Team Blind Prediction Committee NEES@UCSD & UCSD Personnel • Dan Radulescu • Andy Gunthardt • Robert Beckley • Darren McKay • Steve Morris • Lony Rodriguez • Alex Sherman • Jeff Rivor • Brad Durant • Matteo Orio

  3. Overall Objectives of the Test Program • Observe and document the nonlinear dynamic response up to collapse of a full-scale bridge column designed as per Caltrans SDC • Observe scale effects with shake table testing of columns being carried out at UC Berkeley • Landmark test offering practitioners and researchers the chance to blindly predict the response of the test structure, to investigate epistemic uncertainty in nonlinear modeling and to enhance future modeling techniques

  4. Test Specimen Features and Instrumentation September 28 August 4 56 days • 4ft diameter by 24 ft tall column • 260 ton inertial mass • 272 sensors sampled at 240 Hz • 3 GPS-50 Hz differential stations

  5. Blind Prediction Earthquake Sequence Kobe 1995 Loma Prieta 1989 LP Design EQ

  6. EQ5 Takatori (80%)

  7. Blind Prediction Data Concrete Measured unit weight: 150 pcf Hoops Longitudinal Reinforcement

  8. Questionnaire • Two Categories: Researchers and Engineering Professionals • 41 entries from 14 countries

  9. Responses Max. Displacement (mm)

  10. Responses Max. Total Acceleration (g)

  11. Responses Max. Bending Moment (kN-m)

  12. Responses Max. Axial Compression (kN) Static

  13. Eng. Professionals: ……………………………………………… ……………………………………………… Blind Prediction Winners • Researchers: Zhe Qu, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan ……………………………………………… Bill Tremayne, Holmes Culley, San Francisco Lawrence Burkett, Rutherford & Chekene, San Francisco

  14. António Arêde & team, University of Porto, Portugal Otton Lara & team, Escuela Superior Técnica del Litoral, Ecuador Farzin Zareian & team, UC Irvine Certificates of Distinction Researchers Engineering Professionals • Eric Kelley, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. • Andreas Schellenberg, Rutherford & Chekene

  15. EQ8: Takatori 100%

More Related