Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 68 views

    18 224

    Uploaded by

    Huaman Chavez Jesus Angel
    This document discusses adapting ACI 351.3R for explicit representation of piles and pile-cap interaction in structural models. It presents a methodology for developing notional pile elements to represent pile groups and their interaction with the pile cap. It demonstrates the approach on an original process facility foundation and retrofit configuration. Response comparisons show good agreement between measured and analyzed vibration levels, validating the foundation modeling approach. The conclusions state that the notional pile methodology was verified for this application and discusses pros and cons of the notional pile representation technique.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    18 224

    Uploaded by

    Huaman Chavez Jesus Angel
    68 views48 pages
    This document discusses adapting ACI 351.3R for explicit representation of piles and pile-cap interaction in structural models. It presents a methodology for developing notional pile elements to represent pile groups and their interaction with the pile cap. It demonstrates the approach on an original process facility foundation and retrofit configuration. Response comparisons show good agreement between measured and analyzed vibration levels, validating the foundation modeling approach. The conclusions state that the notional pile methodology was verified for this application and discusses pros and cons of the notional pile representation technique.

    Original Description:

    concrete

    Original Title

    18-224

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses adapting ACI 351.3R for explicit representation of piles and pile-cap interaction in structural models. It presents a methodology for developing notional pile elements to represent pile groups and their interaction with the pile cap. It demonstrates the approach on an original process facility foundation and retrofit configuration. Response comparisons show good agreement between measured and analyzed vibration levels, validating the foundation modeling approach. The conclusions state that the notional pile methodology was verified for this application and discusses pros and cons of the notional pile representation technique.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    68 views48 pages

    18 224

    Uploaded by

    Huaman Chavez Jesus Angel
    This document discusses adapting ACI 351.3R for explicit representation of piles and pile-cap interaction in structural models. It presents a methodology for developing notional pile elements to represent pile groups and their interaction with the pile cap. It demonstrates the approach on an original process facility foundation and retrofit configuration. Response comparisons show good agreement between measured and analyzed vibration levels, validating the foundation modeling approach. The conclusions state that the notional pile methodology was verified for this application and discusses pros and cons of the notional pile representation technique.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 48

    Adapting ACI 351.

    3R for
    Explicit Representation of
    Piles and Pile-Cap
    Interaction
    with Model Validation and Application to Retrofit Analysis
    ▪ Tim Hogue, PhD, PE, SE, M.ACI
    Senior Civil/Structural Engineer
    Hargrove Engineers + Constructors
    Mobile, AL
    ▪ David Kerins, PE, F.ACI
    Senior Engineering Advisor
    ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Ltd.
    Spring, TX
    ▪ Matthew Brightman, PE, SE
    Americas/IOL Regional Civil/Structural Engineering DTL
    ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Ltd.
    Spring, TX
    Original Retrofit
    PROCESS
    MOTOR
    PROCESS
    MOTOR

    GEARBOX
    GEARBOX
    Original Configuration
    Retrofit Configuration
    Foundation Model Basis

    From Arya, O’Neill and Pincus, 1979


    Foundation Model Basis
    (Original Configuration)
    1. Drive block
    only

    2. Process block
    only

    3. Entire
    foundation
    Rigid Cap Assumption

    From ACI 351.3R-18, Fig. 5.5.2.2a


    Single, Isolated Pile Properties

    From ACI 351.3R-18, Fig. 5.5.1a


    Single, Isolated Pile Properties

    From ACI 351.3R-18, Fig. 5.5.1a


    Group Action Factors
    Group Action Factors
    Group Action Factors
    Integrated Group Properties

    PILES

    CAP-SOIL FRICTION

    RATIO
    Integrated Group Properties

    PILES

    CAP-SOIL FRICTION

    RATIO
    Integrated Group Properties

    PILES

    CAP-SOIL FRICTION

    RATIO
    Notional Piles – Concept
    ▪ Distribute Stiffness Spatially
    ▪ Pile – Cap Interaction
    Notional Piles – Execution
    ▪ 7 Terms
    ▪ “Beam” Parameters: A, L, Ix, Iz
    ▪ Off-Diagonals
    ▪ Use One Spring
    Notional Pile Properties
    Notional Pile Properties
    Notional Pile Properties
    Notional Pile “Beam”
    Notional Pile “Beam”
    Notional Pile “Beam” – STAAD Input
    Notional Pile Properties

    0
    Additional Notes
    ▪ Activated Mass
    ▪ Rocking
    ▪ Damping
    ▪ Torsion
    Model - Original Configuration
    PROCESS
    GEARBOX
    MOTOR
    Forces - Original Configuration

    MOTOR

    fs = 1.5
    Measured vs. Analysis Response
    PIP
    STC01015:
    0.12”/sec
    Comparison Comments
    ▪ Veracity of Foundation Modeling
    ▪ Measured vs. Computed
    ➢Damping Too Large
    ➢Force Too Small
    ➢Synthesis Too Large
    ➢Structure Too Stiff
    ➢S:N
    Comparison Comments (cont’d)
    ▪ Measurement Synthesis
    ▪ Dynamic Forces
    ▪ Soil Properties
    ▪ Overall Foundation Modeling
    Foundation Modeling Guidance for Retrofit
    ▪ Baseline Model → 1x Gs
    ▪ Limit Damping
    ▪ Set Dynamic Loads at Nominal
    ▪ No Stiffness Tinkering
    Foundation Model Basis
    (Retrofit Configuration)
    1. Drive block only

    2. Process block only

    3. Entire foundation
    Analysis Model
    (Retrofit Configuration)

    CAP-SOIL SPRING
    AND MASS
    Response Limits
    1. Displacements (Owner)
    1.3/1.4 mils Pk-to-Pk
    2. Natural Frequencies (Owner)
    Avoid 0.8-1.2x Operating Speeds
    3. Surface Distortion (GB Vendor)
    1/7500 Ea Fdn Block
    1/15000 GB Footprint
    4. Bearing (Base) Velocity (GB Vendor)
    0.28 in/sec rms – DIN ISO 10816
    5. Velocity (PIP STC01015)
    0.12 in/sec
    Responses
    1. Displacements
    0.39 mils vs. 1.40 mils
    2. Natural Frequencies
    Within 0.8-1.2x Oper Speeds (“NG”)
    3. Surface Distortion
    0.03 mil vs. 3.00 mil limit

    4. Bearing (Base) Velocity


    0.019 in/sec rms vs. 0.28 in/sec rms
    5. Velocity (PIP STC01015)
    0.12 in/sec
    Epilogue
    Conclusions
    ▪ Foundation Modeling Verified*
    ▪ Notional Piles – Pros & Cons

    You might also like