kopftest

GERB Vibration Control SystemsBerlin, Germany

Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control Systems

for Machinery, Equipment and BuildingsK.-H. Reinsch

P. Nawrotzki

Athens, November 11, 2010

Properties of Helical Steel Springs

• Linear Load-Deflection Curve

• Static = Dynamic Characteristics

• High Load Capacities

• High Elasticity = High Isolation Efficiency

• Spring Constants in all Spatial Directions

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Horizontal Displacement [mm]

Ho

rizo

nta

l F

orc

e [

kN

]

measured

linear (theor.)

Helical Steel Spring Elements

kopftest

Properties of VISCODAMPERS ®

• High Damping Forces

• Determination of Damping Resistance

in all Spatial Directions

• High Velocity-Proportionality

GERB Damping Mechanism Spring- / Damper Elements 2010

kopftest

1. Introduction �

2. Vibration Isolation of Machinery

3. Floating Slab Track Systems

4. Vibration Isolation of Buildings

5. Seismic Protection of Buildings & Equipment

6. Seismic Protection of Machinery

7. Damper Systems (Passive Control)

Priciple of Vibration Isolation

kopftest

Metal Forming – Presses and Hammers Transfer Press with Spring Support (Mexico)

kopftest

Fields of Application – Power Plant

Pipework

Damper

Transformer

Diesel Generator Feed Pump

Turbine

Condenser

Floating Floor

Coal Mill

Fan

Priciple of Operation – Turbines

kopftest

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4

Ratio of Frequencies f/f0

Ra

tio

of

Fo

rce

s F

/F0

I [%]

D = 0

D = 0.1

D = 0.2

D = 0.3

F0

F

Mass

High Vibration Isolation Efficiency KW Bellary 500 MW - India

kopftest

Typical Turbine System 1000 MW Typical Turbine System 1000 MW

kopftest

Typical Turbine System 1000 MW Turbine Foundation 1000 MW, China

kopftest

Elastic Support of Fan Foundations Integrated Boiler Feed Pump Foundation

kopftest

Example: Heifei Turbine Building, 300 MW

1. Introduction �

2. Vibration Isolation of Machinery

3. Floating Slab Track Systems

4. Vibration Isolation of Buildings

5. Seismic Protection of Buildings & Equipment

6. Seismic Protection of Machinery

7. Damper Systems (Passive Control)

kopftest

Variations of

Floating Slab Systems

Floating Track Slabs with Steel Springs Floating Slab Track on Top of Station

kopftest

Vibration Control for Trackbeds

The GSI-System

kopftest

Metro Line in Japan

1. Introduction �

2. Vibration Isolation of Machinery

3. Floating Slab Track Systems

4. Vibration Isolation of Buildings

5. Seismic Protection of Buildings & Equipment

6. Seismic Protection of Machinery

7. Damper Systems (Passive Control)

kopftest

2400 seat Concert Hall, Manchester/UK 2400 seat Concert Hall, Manchester/UK

kopftest

2400 seat Concert Hall,

Manchester/UK

Vibration Controlled Buildings

kopftest

1. Introduction

2. Vibration Isolation of Machinery

3. Floating Slab Track Systems

4. Vibration Isolation of Buildings

5. Seismic Protection of Buildings & Equipment

6. Seismic Protection of Machinery

7. Damper Systems (Passive Control)

BCS – Shaking Table Tests / IZIIS Skopje

kopftest

Skopje: Izmit Excitation (Turkey 1999)Mendoza Campus of the

Technical National University of Argentina

Rigid Base ... with BCS

kopftest

Base-Control System in Mendoza

Arrangement ofSpring and Damper

Devices

Mendoza – M5.7 Event on August 5, 2006

X-dir

Y-dir

Z-dir

Measured Excitation

below Buildings

kopftest

Measured Performance of BCS

Acceleration at the Building Top

X-Dir. Y-Dir.

a) b)

Measured Performance of BCS

kopftest

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Cape Mendocino

Coalinga

Loma Prieta – Corralitos

Imperial Valley, Array Nº 6

Kobe

Chi-Chi –Taiwan

Northridge New Hall

Cape Mendocino, Petrolia

Northridge – Sylmar

Tabas – Iran

Imperial Valley, El Centro

Horizontal Displacement [mm]

Base Isolation System

Base Control System

Structural Responses of Layout Analysis

- Mendoza -

Structural Responses of Layout Analysis

- Mendoza -Brief Characteristics of BIS and BCSBrief Characteristics of BIS and BCS

Spring Systems

Low

Medium

Low

Very low

High

Medium

Medium

Nearly no effect

Easily possible

Medium

Integrated

Spring Systems

Low

Medium

Low

Very low

High

Medium

Medium

Nearly no effect

Easily possible

Medium

Integrated

Rubber Systems

Extremely low

Very high

Very low

Very low

No

Very large

Large

Sometimes problematic

Difficult

High

No

Rubber Systems

Extremely low

Very high

Very low

Very low

No

Very large

Large

Sometimes problematic

Difficult

High

No

Horizontal Stiffness

Vertical Stiffness

Horiz. Acceleration

Stress / Strain Level

Vertical Efficiency

Displacement

Vert. Soil Reaction

Higher Modes

Exchange of Devices

Bearing Capacity

Vibration Isolation / SB Noise

Horizontal Stiffness

Vertical Stiffness

Horiz. Acceleration

Stress / Strain Level

Vertical Efficiency

Displacement

Vert. Soil Reaction

Higher Modes

Exchange of Devices

Bearing Capacity

Vibration Isolation / SB Noise

kopftest

Spent Fuel Storage Tank in high Seismic Zone

Total Supported Weight:

5800 Metric Tons

Design Base Excitation:

0,45-0,55 g (PGA)

Spent Fuel Storage Tank in high Seismic Zone

kopftest

Boiler Structure, Turkey

PGA = 0,40 g

Boiler Structure, Turkey

PGA = 0,40 g

Installation Process below Boiler, TurkeyInstallation Process below Boiler, Turkey

kopftest

Air Core Reactors in Substation, California

Design Ground Motion (IEEE): 1.0 g PGA

System Frequencies with Springs and

VISCODAMPERS®

Rocking: F1 = 0,58 Hz, D1 > 25%

Vertical: F3 = 1,98 Hz, D3 > 30%

Elastic: F7 = 3,7 Hz

Air Core Reactors in Substation, California

kopftest

Seismic Qualification: IEEE Std 693-1997- High Seismic Performance Level -

kopftest

1. Introduction

2. Vibration Isolation of Machinery

3. Floating Slab Track Systems

4. Vibration Isolation of Buildings

5. Seismic Protection of Buildings & Equipment

6. Seismic Protection of Machinery

7. Damper Systems (Passive Control)

Printing Machine

in Sofia

kopftest

Problems with the Seismic Performance

of Conventional Layout

1. Shaft Acceleration more than 1.0 g

2. Horizontal Relative Displacement more than 100 mm

3. High Stress Levels in the Foundation System

Cross Section of Machine Building

with Spring Supported Top TG Deck

Step 1

kopftest

Spring Supported Turbine Foundation

in High Seismic Zone of Italy

Spring Elements and Dampers are

not shown in the FE Model

First Mode of Foundation System

at 0,8 Hz and

12% of Critical Damping

0,00

0,25

0,50

0,75

1,00

1,25

1,50

0,1 1 10 100

Frequency [Hz]

Ac

ce

lera

tio

n [

g]

Effects of Frequency Reduction on

Seismic Performance

kopftest

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1,0

1,1

1,2

1,3

1,4

0 5 10 15 20 25

Damping in %

Co

rre

cti

on

Fa

cto

r ξξ ξξ

Eurocode 8

Uniform Building Code 97

Taiwan Building Code

Architectural Institute Japan

IEEE Std 693-1997

Effects of Damping Increase on

Seismic Performance

Spring Supported TG Deck / Connection

of Substructure and Machine Building

Step 2

kopftest

Nuclear TG Deck 1000 MW – Seismic Design

LONGITUDINAL DIRECTION

0.01

0.1

1

10

0.1 1 10 100

FREQUENCY [Hz]

SP

EC

. A

CC

EL

ER

AT

ION

[g

]

SPRINGS TYPE TNA

(f = 0.99 Hz, D = 10.0 %)

WITHOUT SPRINGS (f = 2.88 Hz, D = 5.0 %)

SPRINGS TYPE GP

(f = 1.55 Hz, D = 5.0 %)

SSE (D = 5.0 %)

Typical Control of Seismic PerformanceTypical Control of Seismic Performance

kopftest

1. Introduction

2. Vibration Isolation of Machinery

3. Floating Slab Track Systems

4. Vibration Isolation of Buildings

5. Seismic Protection of Buildings & Equipment

6. Seismic Protection of Machinery

7. Damper Systems (Passive Control)

28

.11.2

01

0

Viscodampers® in NPP Paks, Hungaria

kopftest

PDD - QRDC Building, Taipeh

QRDC Building

Taipeh

„Prestressed

Damper“

Prestessed Damping Device (PDD)

kopftest

Rigid Connection vs. Prestressed Dampders QRDC Building, Taipeh

kopftest

QRDC Building, Taipeh

QRDC Building,

PDD with Covering

kopftest

PDD Test on Shaking Table in Skopje PDD Test on Shaking Table in Skopje

kopftest

• Increasing Global Damping Properties

• Tailor-Made Solutions

• Different Mechanisms Possible

• Against Wind, Earthquakes, Man-Induced

Excitation

• Maintenance-Free

Tuned-Mass Damper Systems

0

2

4

6

8

10

0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0

Ratio of Frequencies

Moti

on o

f M

ain

Syste

m

HS

0,1

0,1

0,192

TMD w ith Same

Frequency as

Main System

TMD w ith optimum

Frequency

TMD w ith optimum

Frequency and

Damping

Main System Only

Principle of Tuned-Mass Systems

kopftest

Suspension Bridge in Breslau, Poland Foot Bridge – Without TMD 1st Mode

kopftest

Foot Bridge – Without TMD 2nd Mode Application of TMD - Foot Bridge in Poland

kopftest

Millenium Bridge,

London/UK

The Millennium Bridge, London

kopftest

50 Vertical TMDs

Mass: 1000 – 2000 kg

Tuned Frequency: 1,2 – 2,2 Hz

The Millennium Bridge, London

8 Horizontal TMDs

Mass: 2500 kg

Tuned Frequency: 0,46 Hz

The Millennium Bridge

kopftest

Seismic Protection with Tuned-Mass Systems

TMD 6TMD 7TMD 8

TMD 5

TMD 4

TMD 3

TMD 2

TMD 1

Tuned-Mass System – Mexico

kopftest

DOHA Sport City Tower

Tuned-Mass

Damper in DOHA

Sport City Tower

- 140 tons -

kopftest

TMD at Hangzhou Bay Tower, China 40 t - TMCS in the Test Stand

kopftest

GERB Vibration Control SystemsBerlin, Germany

Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control Systems

for Machinery, Equipment and BuildingsK.-H. Reinsch

P. Nawrotzki

Athens, November 11, 2010

Thank you !