An Experimental
Methodology
for Assessing
the Stability
of Ancient
Columns
ONE-MA3
Final Project
12-13-16
Florence Lo
Daly Wettermark
Background
Methodology
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Multi-Drum Ancient Columns
Save the Tourists
Preserve the History
Goal
To establish an inexpensive, quick, and effective method for assessing the stability of problematic ancient columns under seismic agitation.
Background
Methodology
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
What has been studied?
Theory of Flawed Drums
Ioannis Stefanou, Ioannis Psycharis, Ioannis-Orestis Georgopoulos, 2011 “Dynamic response of reinforced masonry columns in classical monuments”. Construction and Building Materials 25 4325–4337
Physical Testing of Ideal Drums
Vasileios A. Drosos & Ioannis Anastasopoulos, 2015
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering
“Experimental investigation of the seismic response of classical temple columns”
Background
Methodology
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Physical Testing
Analytical Modeling
Creating Specimens
Compare
DotProduct LLC
Infrared 3D scanner
Leica Terrestrial
Laser Scanner
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
3D Imaging
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Point Cloud Raw Data
Left: full .stl
Right: .stl separated into drums
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Rendering Data - Tempio di Giove, Pompeii
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Start with something even simpler...
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
3D Printing
Z-Corp Spectrum
Gypsum Powder 3D Printer
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Tilt Table
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Why use limit analysis for static tests?
n drums
n free bodies
n equations of motion
1-2 free bodies
1-2 equations of motion
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Center of mass behind pivot point Center of mass in front of pivot point
Location of center of mass dependent on angle of tapering
Equivalent horizontal ground acceleration = tan
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Shake Table
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Pompeii
Pompeii
0.15
Boston
0.08
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Undamaged
Motion
Magnification
Amplified between 4.5-5.5 Hz
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Dynamic Modes Observed
Rocking Rotating 3rd Mode?
Dominant mode at seismic frequencies
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Conclusions
Successfully used 3D column scan to create model for 3D printing
Ideal 3D printed models behave close to what is expected analytically under static conditions
Dynamic behavior is significantly affected by flaws in drums, even if mass is not removed. Stability is not exactly the same as static tests predict.
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
Future Work
Simulate earthquake-like acceleration patterns, rather than constant acceleration
Perform dynamic tests on flaws in different orientations
Model effect of flawed drum’s location and orientation mathematically
Analyze effect of amplitude along with frequency in dynamic tests
Record failure modes in tilt table test
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
Background
Methodology
A huge thank you:
Background
Methodology
Results
Applications
Results and Analysis
Conclusions and Future Work
References
[1] Vasileios A. Drosos & Ioannis Anastasopoulos (2015), Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, “Experimental investigation of the seismic response of classical temple columns”
[2] Irani, A. Ochsendorf, J. “Structural Assessment and Historical Review of the Dome at Soltaniyeh”
[3] Mühlhaus, H., Sulem, J., and Unterreiner, P. (1997). "Discrete and Continuous Models for Dry Masonry Columns." J. Eng. Mech., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399, 399-403.
[4] Komodromos P, Papaloizou L, Polycarpou P. (2008) “Simulation of the response of ancient columns under harmonic and earthquake excitations”. Eng Struct 30:2154–64
[5] Michaltsos, I. Raftoyiannis. (2014) “Rocking and Sliding of Ancient Temple Columns Under Earthquake Excitations“. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics Vol. 14, No. 2
[6] DeJong, M. (2009) “Seismic Assessment Strategies for Masonry Structures.” Diss. MIT.
[7] Stefanou, I et al. (2011) “Dynamic response of reinforced masonry columns in classical monuments” Construction and Building Materials 25 4325–4337
[8] Papantonopoulos, C et al. (2002) “Numerical prediction of the earthquake response of classical columns using the distinct element method” Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn.; 31:1699–1717