Dynamic Analysis of Buildings Using The Finite Element Method Sacatoma
Dynamic Analysis of Buildings Using The Finite Element Method Sacatoma
Abstract. This paper deals with finite element vibration analysis of buildings. Each component of
building is discretized by its appropriated finite element, that is, bar and beam element for the frame
sub-structure, plate finite element for the slabs. By applying compatibility and equilibrium conditions,
all sub-structural interactions are incorporated into the system in order to produce a more refined
structural analysis of buildings. Other issues for building vibration such as shear deformation, rotatory
inertia, and plate-beam eccentricity are investigated as well. Numerical examples are presented and
compared with results from commercial numerical packages widespread.
Keywords: FEM, Buildings, Dynamic
1. INTRODUCTION
The Finite Element Method (FEM) is a numerical technique based on continuum discretization so
that the body is divided into finite number of small parts named elements and by expressing the
unknown variable fields in terms of assumed approximating functions within each element. These
functions are expressed in terms of discrete points named nodes. Clough & Wilson [1] give interesting
historical details about first steps to establish of FEM solutions. For example, in 1960 the designation
of finite element method was coined by Ray Willian Clough when a static analysis of stress plane
problem [2] was modeled using that new born technique. Since then FEM solutions have been
received many other contribution and applied to a variety engineering problems. This is the case for
vibration analysis of frame and plate [3]-[6]. Additional details on vibration FEM solutions including
more complex structures such as shells can be found elsewhere, for example [3]-[9].
A specific topic in building structural analysis has been studied by many researchers is associated
with eccentric relative position beam-plate at each floor. One of many strategies has established to
deal with eccentricity problem is the rigid offset approach. Harik et al. [14] presented an analytical
solution, Mukhopadhya [15] proposed a finite difference solution, Harik et al. [14], Arajo [16],
Sapountzakis et al. [17], Deb et al. [18]-[19], gave finite element solutions, Tanaka et al. built
boundary element solutions.
In this paper the influence of effects such as shear deformation, rotatory inertia, and platebeam eccentricity into building vibration responses are analyzed by house-made program called EDF
and commercial packaged Ansys.
Plates
Space Frame
Building
Figure 2. (a) Beam-plate configuration: (a) non-eccentric case; (b) eccentric case.
When a beam and a plate have no eccentricity implies nodal points of beam element coincide with
some nodes of plate element, see Figure 2(a). In this case, no additional step is required and both beam
and plate elemental contributions can be directly and independently assembled in global matrices of
the structure. On other hand when beam-plate eccentricity exists (very usual situation in buildings, see
Figure 2(b) it is necessary to reposition the degrees of freedom of the beam (usually located on its
centroidal axis) onto a plane of the plate (usually median plane, see Figure 3) or vice-versa. Due to
change of nodal location of beam, the energy conservation of system requires mass and stiffness
matrices of the beam are transformed too.
1
0
0
[ ] =
0
0
u1
U 1
u
U
2
2
u 3
U 3
= [ ] where
u 4
U 4
u 5
U 5
u 6
U 6
0 0 0 0 e
1 0 0 e 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1
(1)
The final transformed matrices of the beam with respect to plate median plane system are:
[K ] = [ ] [K ][ ]
[M ] = [ ] [M ][ ]
P
(2)
(3)
In addition, the assembly of the transformed matrices given in Eq(2) and Eq(3) can be done as
shown in appendix - Figure 14(b). For the building problem, an assembling strategy is to create three
subsets of typical nodes. The first is associated with (stretching/bending) plate nodes that do not
receive any contribution from space frame nodes, called Plate nodes. The second subset is called
Mixed nodes and it receives both plate and space frame contributions. The third subset called
Frame nodes is formed by off-plate nodes. The subset dimensions are respectively given by
5 N L , 6 L M and 6 L F . Let there be a plate element with node orientation (i, j, k) and interacting with
two (i,j) and (j,l) oriented frame elements, see Figure 4. Then, the assembly of building matrices from
all elemental contribution can be done as shown in appendix - Figure 14(c).
Detail A
Figure 4. (a) Real structure; b) Discretized structure; c) Beam-Plate elements interacting at node j.
3. NUMERICAL RESULTS
All mathematical details of the finite element solution described in this paper were encoded in the
program called EDF.FOR, see Lucena [11]. In order to check EDF.FOR performance, vibration
analysis of two structures (space frame and four-storey building) is presented. The results of this
house-made program are compared to commercial package ANSYS outputs.
3.1 Space Frame
This example was originally proposed by Petyt [12], see Figura 5. The mechanical and dimensions
of the members are: Young modulus, E = 219,9 x10 9 N / m 2 ; density, = 7900kg / m 3 and length,
L = 1m . Both Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko models are taken into account and the results from
both programs are shown in Table 1.
Section AA
Section BB
Mode
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
EDF
Model
Euler1
11.808796
11.808796
15.4457303
34.1154902
34.1154902
43.433024
123.299665
125.736015
145.00127
154.139833
154.139833
157.719628
169.296732
169.296732
169.626978
190.617268
225.625976
225.625976
239.219681
246.457127
43.330254
123.18396
125.6063
144.88404
153.98871
153.98871
157.54384
169.14853
69.148533
169.32003
190.16343
225.32584
225.32584
238.87411
246.0154
43.329
122.05
124.36
143.99
153.63
153.63
156.15
168.87
168.87
169.31
190.15
223.8
223.8
238.54
245.72
43.29169296
122.9237718
43.18938625
122.8097391
125.3376278
144.3209478
25.20986295
144.2060394
153.4583667
153.4583667
153.3105848
153.3105848
156.8369922
164.9313557
168.3485203
168.3485203
185.4286436
223.4873333
223.4873333
236.8261719
243.4084611
156.6655141
164.6636774
168.2042581
168.2042581
185.0307075
223.2009211
223.2009211
236.4969022
243.0062042
For sake of a better visualization, the results of Table 1 are plotted, see Figure 6.
No rotatory inertia
Rotatory inertia
Ansys
Model
Timoshenko
11.774
11.808
15.391
33.992
34.108
43.263
121.99
124.3
143.88
153.45
153.63
156.02
164.81
168.69
168.87
185.12
221.94
223.76
237.25
244.01
3.083254020001557
6.133236349035065
10.699237061042660
17.936212724087930
24.823920795071000
30.606705038030040
40.816869158106850
47.758536892544060
51.998620754883710
3.0829
6.1322
10.651
17.847
24.497
30.556
40.234
46.995
50.961
3.059042393325857
6.090743238372382
10.629603122588180
17.743458077855130
24.609889249841980
30.441299394962270
40.348166803980430
46.961864549614620
51.399784463171740
3.0586
6.0897
10.582
17.655
24.338
30.389
39.775
46.235
50.532
Table 3 Frequencies (Hz) for eccentric case: (plate h=0.10m) (beams h=0.50m)
Euler-Bernoullis beam
Timoshenkos beam
Mode N
EDF
ANSYS
EDF
ANSYS
1
1.061105210654078
1.0600
1.052878883863958
1.0518
2
1.069293282336665
1.0684
1.060060841738016
1.0593
5
3.124465230676489
3.1205
3.098809652840658
3.0951
10
6.143373253738758
6.1371
6.100320485187121
6.0943
15
12.818649259830260
12.742
12.705003588424920
12.630
20
20.492074748603760
20.333
20.289840881110260
20.189
25
27.490250113643460
27.043
27.221579028101290
26.782
30
31.587787232354530
31.561
31.405497422876140
31.376
35
43.533910399307850
42.826
43.291480405625190
42.625
40
50.194220128101630
48.459
50.045250822373090
48.315
45
53.158655994945020
51.930
52.177054714839100
51.022
Table 4 - Non-eccentric case: (plate h=0.10m) (beam h=0.80m)
Euler-Bernoullis beam
Timoshenkos beam
Mode N
EDF
ANSYS
EDF
ANSYS
1
0.9777737465142289
0.97767
0.9698353132263625
0.96973
2
0.9796925061525277
0.97959
0.9722366292403232
0.97213
5
2.845731851293956
2.8454
2.824630045531332
2.8243
10
5.497798210133395
5.4970
5.459845809899770
5.4591
15
14.831850434225120
14.708
14.716596862275180
14.596
20
24.099711540057980
23.971
23.685053731839450
23.524
25
30.405686660826370
29.792
30.182141949107190
29.584
30
35.744411088574980
34.730
35.716495690795860
34.703
35
45.569945054429910
44.477
44.918095831465320
43.615
40
53.179774314214070
52.360
52.789080492217070
51.107
45
59.693230687868560
58.063
58.688231895087200
58.148
Table 5 - Frequencies (Hz) for eccentric case: (plate h=0.10m) (beam h=0.80m)
Euler-Bernoullis beam
Timoshenkos beam
Mode N
EDF
ANSYS
EDF
ANSYS
1
0.9813890571155897
0.98293
0.9732779425289443
0.98125
2
0.9863427704428834
0.98709
0.9786756420889796
0.98592
5
2.861052757951518
2.8606
2.839452174069153
2.8580
10
5.500626179040095
5.4950
5.462595784379647
5.4940
15
16.706018819362260
16.555
16.558035888165120
16.411
20
28.044182252379500
27.728
27.343770282073450
27.046
25
31.864847655130900
31.222
31.620607422652910
30.992
30
36.210165576136050
35.291
35.955307263621120
34.968
35
47.867119090662290
44.218
47.636652351543720
44.003
40
55.012062684831130
52.910
54.902568106283380
51.712
45
58.919546022347830
55.373
58.042801175215840
54.735
Mode
1
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Variation
(%)
-5.4
-6.8
-7.7
-10.4
38.6
34.4
22.5
16.8
11.6
11.4
14.8
Mode
1
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Variation
(%)
-7.5
-7.8
-8.4
-10.5
30.3
36.9
15.9
14.6
10.0
9.6
10.8
Figure 10. Settings of the 20th mode (a) h=80; (b) h=50
The second part of the building vibration analysis is concerned on plate slender ratio influence in
building responses. Hence some assumption is done: beam-plate problem is always eccentric, all
beams have the same cross-section (20 x80)cm , and all columns cross-section is square with dimension
20cm.
The influence of plate thickness variation in the building vibration behavior is initially done and
shear deformation effects are not included (classical plate model). Analyses for three thicknesses of
the plate 10, 20 and 30 cm are independently done. By selecting DKT element, EDF and Ansys
results are shown in Table 5, Table 6 and Table 7. For sake a better visualization the outputs are
plotted together in Figure 11.
Table 6. Frequencies (Hz) eccentric case: (plate h=0.20m) (beam h=0.80m) - column (0.20x0.20)m
Euler-Bernoulli
Timoshenko
Mode N
EDF
ANSYS
EDF
ANSYS
1
0.8293750409755191
0.83044
0.8227936436689241
0.82388
2
0.8340287604609957
0.83445
0.8276543806135503
0.82810
5
2.417162832657765
2.4167
2.399140468688497
2.3988
10
4.634355366607846
4.6318
4.602253750231750
4.5998
15
18.129607984803820
18.046
17.833315482366810
17.714
20
28.109150010122560
28.145
27.991753951863470
28.027
25
42.387049407920120
41.670
41.322183753097150
36.889
30
45.099012533007870
44.012
43.801345471503300
42.697
35
58.162430748004090
57.335
57.756874147415520
55.909
40
64.49996888117163
64.405
63.066791827934590
62.789
45
65.345883383739720
65.287
63.707594933563410
63.631
Table 7. Frequencies (Hz) eccentric case: (plate h=0.30m) (beam h=0.80m) - column (0.20x0.20)m
Euler-Bernoulli
Timoshenko
Mode N
EDF
ANSYS
EDF
ANSYS
1
0.7314230031823287
0.73224
0.7259813796638660
0.72678
2
0.7357778526412748
0.73612
0.7303252140427594
0.73065
5
2.131274143423030
2.1311
2.115764573823893
2.1156
10
4.079733654343166
4.0784
4.051566408859258
4.0503
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
16.630121151899140
29.002845646654430
44.219052338206040
55.184507852580140
63.994146800298080
65.285823976308460
65.604209407136820
16.612
29.057
43.821
54.130
63.636
65.233
65.584
16.579815076595760
28.904550876622010
43.227278646436850
54.682751123006350
62.540515496259820
63.617427580988740
63.909799670753620
Mode
1
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
16.562
28.960
42.832
53.618
62.281
63.571
63.882
Variation (%)
HL=20 HL=30
-15.5
-25.5
-15.4
-25.4
-15.5
-25.5
-15.7
-25.8
8.5
-0.5
0.2
3.4
33.0
38.8
24.5
52.4
21.5
33.7
17.2
18.7
10.9
11.3
Mode
1
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Variation (%)
HL=20 HL=30
-15.5
-25.4
-15.4
-25.4
-15.5
-25.5
-15.7
-25.8
7.7
-0.2
2.4
5.6
30.6
35.7
21.9
51.3
20.6
31.5
15.2
16.3
9.9
13.2
Figure 12. Plate rigidity influence and shear deformation effects on eccentric case
The results show there are no significative changes until 45th mode vibration responses when shear
deformation was taken into account.
At last third part of the building vibration analysis in this paper is concerned about influence of
variation of column cross-section dimensions. The assumptions for this analysis are: all plates has
thickness 10cm and a cross-section (20 x80)cm is set for all beams. Two cross-section dimensions are
set to the all columns, ( 20 x 20)cm and (40 x 40)cm .. The EDF and Ansys results for (40 x 40)cm crosssection columns in Table 9 are shown only. In Figure 13 both column cross-sections analyses are
plotted.
Tabela 9. Frequencies (Hz) eccentric case: (plate h=0.10m) (beam h=0.80m) - column (0.40x0.40)m
Euler-Bernoullis beam
Timoshenkos beam
Mode
Number
EDF
ANSYS
EDF
ANSYS
1
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2.984353648437686
3.054102673539377
9.212390099187937
17.312097285493380
20.308793665539740
32.328691239677820
35.467487874409320
45.352876833737640
50.625448328801750
59.774830750619830
62.338234193366160
2.9881
3.0591
9.2083
17.097
20.198
31.618
34.664
43.417
48.568
53.851
60.002
2.897020117432950
2.942812889441475
8.899009872081662
17.159695509391720
19.716451606859310
31.930651694976390
34.106090408379160
44.819779928222640
49.406304454311320
59.611505646993460
61.645643383805460
2.9021
2.9500
8.9050
16.950
19.628
31.330
33.445
42.518
47.507
53.757
59.406
Mode
1
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Variation
(%)
204.1
209.6
222.0
214.7
21.6
15.3
11.3
25.2
5.8
8.7
5.8
[1]
Clough, R. W.; Wilson E. L. Early Finite Element Research at Berkeley, Present at the Fifth
U.S. National Conference on Computational Mechanics, 1990.
[2]
Clough, R. W., The Finite Element Method in Plane Stress Analysis, Proc. 2nd ASCE Conf.
On Eletronic Computation, Pittsburg, Pa. Sept. 1960.
[3]
Anderson, R.G., Irons, B.M., Zienkiewicz, O.C. Vibration and stability of plates using finite
elements. Int. Journal of Solids and Structures, 4 1031-1005, 1968.
[4]
[5]
[6]
Mackerle, J. Finite element vibration analysis of beams, plates and shells. Shock and
Vibration, 6 97109, 1969.
[7]
Samanta, A. & Mukhopadhyay, M. Finite element static and dynamic analyses of folded
plates. Eng. Struct., 21 277-871 1999.
[8]
Lim, G.H. Vibration of plates and shells using finite elements (1996-1997). Finite Elem. Anal.
Design, 31 223-30, 1999.
[9]
[11] Viana, H. R. G. Anlise esttica e vibratria de placas utilizando-se o mtodo dos elementos
finitos. Universidade Federal da Paraba, Dissertao de mestrado, 2008.
[12] Petyt, M. Introduction to finite element vibration analysis. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
[13] Batoz, J.L. & Lardeur, P.A. A discrete shear triangular nine dof element for the analysis of tick
to very thin plates. Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng. V.28. p. 533-560, 1989.
[14] Harik, I. E. & Guo, M. Finite Element Analysis of Eccentrically Stiffened Plates in Free
Vibration. Computer and Structures. 6, Vol. 49, pp. 1007-1015, 1993.
[15] Mukhopadhya, M. Stiffened Plates in Bending. Computer and Structures. 4, Vol. 50, pp. 541548, 1994.
[16] Arajo, J. M. Avaliao dos mtodos simplificados para clculo de lajes macias apoiadas em
vigas flexveis. Teoria e Prtica na Engenharia Civil. Vol. 12, PP. 1-11, 2008.
[18] Deb, A. & Botton, M. Finite element models for Stiffened plates under transverse loading.
Computer and Structures. 3, Vol. 28, pp. 362-372. 1988.
[19] Deb, A. & Deb, M. K. Analysis of Orthotropically Modeled Stiffened Plates. International
Journal of Solids Structures. 5, Vol. 25, pp. 647-667, 1991.
[20] Tanaka, M. & Bercin, A. N. Static bending analysis of stiffened plates using the boundary
element method. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements. Pp. 147-154, 1998.
APPENDIX
[ [ ] [0 ] ]
[k ] = [ [k ] [ 0 ] ]
[k ] = [k ] [0] + [k ]
[0]
0
[k ]
*
ij 5 x 6
= k ijL
*
ik 5 x 6
**
ij
L
ik 5x5
L
jj 5 x 5
(5)
5x1 5 x 6
P
jj 6x6
5 x1
6 x6
1x 5
(4)
5x1
5x6
(6)
[k ]
k Ljk 5 x 5
=
[0]1x 5
[ ]
[0]5 x 5 + [k P ]
[0] 6 x 6 jk 6x6
(7)
[k ]
kL
= kk 5 x 5
[0]1x 5
[ ]
[0]5 x1 + [k P ]
[0] 5 x 6 kk 6x6
(8)
78 678
[0]5 x1 + [6
k Pjj ]6x6 + [k jj ]6x6
[0] 6 x 6
(9)
**
jk 6 x 6
**
kk 6 x 6
[k ]
***
jj 6 x 6
[ ]
k Ljj 5 x 5
=
[0]1x 5
Pilar
barra