View Single Post
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 1:26 PM
seismic's Avatar
seismic seismic is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 115
According to modern regulations, the seismic design of buildings is based on the requirements of adequate design and plasticity. The inevitable inelastic behavior under strong seismic excitation is directed at selected elements and failure mechanisms.
In particular, the lack of adequate design of the nodes and the clearly limited plasticity of the elements lead to fragile forms of failure.
In short, they necessarily manage the failure which they can not control because they can not control the large deformation resulting from the large displacement of the ground with characteristics of high acceleration, large oscillation width and seismic duration.
They basically send forces to the nodes, which divide them into the cross sections of the trunks of the elements of which they are composed.
The strength of a structure depends on the numerous unbalanced coefficients and in part random factors of the earthquake, and on the strength of the sections. (The direction of the earthquake is unknown, the exact content of the seismic excitation frequencies is unknown, its duration is unknown.) Even the maximum possible accelerations given by seismologists, and determine the seismic design factor, have a probability of exceeding more than 10%.
What do I do with the design proposal.
I just deflect the seismic intensities in the ground.
With the method of designing, pre-tensioning and anchoring the sides of the walls from their upper ends to the foundation ground, using unrelated tendons, which have at the ends ground anchoring mechanisms as well as anchoring and pre-tensioning mechanisms, I hope to bend the inclinations. and to transport them through the tendons and the vertical large and strong cross-sections of the walls into the ground, preventing and preventing their turning and bending of the trunk, which cause the deformation of the bearing organism which is directly connected with the failures of the construction in earthquake.
The compaction of the soil mechanism at the same time ensures a stronger bearing capacity of the foundation soil. With the appropriate sizing design of the walls and their placement in appropriate places, we also prevent the torsional buckling that occurs in asymmetric and high metal structures.
The good thing about the design method I suggest is that it does not negate the existing seismic design method but has the ability to amplify it so effectively that together they can defeat any earthquake.
The fact that I send the magnitudes of the earthquake into the ground has been proven experimentally.
If you watch this video after 2.40 minutes you will see that the beams that support the seismic base are partially raised.
The beams in the experiment represent the ground and after they are partially raised it means that the stresses are deflected - they return to the ground and do not go to the cross sections of the beams to break them.
In the second video which follows the existing design method and does not have the anchoring mechanism collapses.
Pay attention to the cross sections at the nodes that break at a much lower acceleration.
Why are you still planning like this?
The patent works statically like a prestressed valley bridge. Why? ... the patent works better on reinforced concrete walls than it does on columns? Answer. Works best on elongated walls for three reasons a) On the pillar we can place only one anchoring mechanism, while on the walls we place more anchoring mechanisms, one on each of its many sides. More anchor mechanisms, more earthquake response force. b) The pillar is a huge lever. To find the overturning force of the column, multiply the force by the distance. Example. If the pillar receives at its upper end a lateral force of 10 tons and the distance of the force from the base is 3 meters then the tipping force is 3x10 = 30 tons. The wall If we have a wall with dimensions 3 meters high and 2 meters wide and apply a lateral force of 10 tons at its highest point, the tipping force will be ... height X force / width That is 3X10 / 2 = 15 tons. Conclusion. the mechanism receives less tipping force on the walls than it receives with the columns. c) The cross-sections of the reinforced concrete of the vertical bearing elements are more stressed in compression when it has the patent. By increasing the cross section of the vertical elements of the bearing body, ... the ability of the reinforced concrete to receive compressive forces increases. Elongated walls usually have a larger cross section than columns, so they are more resistant to compressive forces. For the above three reasons, the elongated walls have a higher performance with the patent than the columns. Another reason is that the walls do not bend as easily as the columns so they have little deformation and even increased resistance to shear.
Reply With Quote