STRUCTURAL VIBRATIONS DUE TO

HUMAN ACTIVITY
Whats Old? Whats New? Whats Hot?
Presented by
Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.
Emeritus Professor
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
thmurray@vt.edu
61st Structural Engineering Conference
University of Kansas
March 3, 2016
1
Whats Old?

2
 Whats Old?

The Speaker: KU Ph.D. 1970

3
Whats New?

11
Steel Design Guide

Vibrations of Steel-Framed
Structural Systems
Due to Human Activity

Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.

Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
David E. Allen, Ph.D.
National Research Council Canada
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Eric E. Ungar, Sc.D., P.E.
Acentech Incorporated
Cambridge, MA
D. Brad Davis, Ph.D., S.E.
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

4
 SJI Technical Digest 5 - 2nd Ed. 2014
Written by
Prof. Tom Murray
Emeritus Professor
Virginia Tech
Prof. Brad Davis
Assistant Professor
University of Kentucky

Follows AISC DG11

Walking Excitation
Modified ISO Scale
Resonant Build-Up
Rhythmic Excitation
Finite Element Analysis
Retrofitting of Lively Floors

5
5
 AISC Design Guide 11 - 2nd Ed. 2016
New Co-Author
Prof. Brad Davis
Assistant Professor, University of Kentucky 11
Steel Design Guide

Introduction Vibrations of Steel-Framed

Evaluation Criteria for Human Comfort Structural Systems
Due to Human Activity
Natural Frequency of Steel Framed Floor Systems
Design for Walking Excitation Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.
Virginia Tech

Design for Rhythmic Excitation

Blacksburg, VA

David E. Allen, Ph.D.

National Research Council Canada
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Design for Sensitive Equipment and Sensitive Occupancies

Eric E. Ungar, Sc.D., P.E.
Acentech Incorporated
Cambridge, MA
D. Brad Davis, Ph.D., S.E.

Finite Element Analysis Methods

University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY

Evaluation of Vibration Problem Systems and Remedial

Measures AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

6
6
AISC DG11 2nd Ed.

7
 Selected Topics from DG11 2nd Ed.

Low and High Frequency Floors (LFF and HFF)

Low Frequency Floor Assessment

Finite Element Analysis Overview

Assessment of Problem Floors

8
 Definition Low Frequency Floor
Low Frequency Floor (LFF)
A low frequency floor is one that can undergo resonant
build-up due to walking.
A resonant build-up can occur if at least one natural
mode has a frequency less than ~9 Hz.
1.5
Resonant Peak Accel. = 1.36%g
Meas. Acceleration (%g)
1
Build-up 0.5

-0.5

-1
RMS Accel. = 0.531%g
-1.5
0 2 4 6
Time (sec.)

9
 Definition High Frequency Floor
High Frequency Floor (HFF)
A high frequency floor is one that cannot undergo
resonant build-up because the dominant frequency is
greater than ~ 9 Hz.
The response resembles a series of individual impulse
responses to individual footsteps.

Impulse
Responses

10
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Walking Dynamic Loading
When humans walk, run, bounce, sway, or jump,
inertial forces cause dynamic loads.
2
Ground Reaction / Weight

1.5 Knee bends,

Heel Strike weight shifts
forward
1
Push off

0.5

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Time (sec.)

11
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Walking Dynamic Loading
Series of footstep forces cannot be represented by
simple equations.
0.4
Left Footstep Summation
0.35
Ground Reaction (kip)

0.3 Fourier
0.25
Series
0.2
Need Simple
Mathematical
0.15

0.1

0.05 Representations
Right Footstep
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Time (sec.)

12
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Walking Dynamic Loading
Specialized Fourier Series for Human
Induced Forces
Weight of Harmonic Phase
Walker (lbf) Number Lag

4
F ( t ) = 0 + Q h sin(2 h fStep t h )
h=1

DC Offset Harmonic Dynamic Load Step or Pacing

not needed. Amplitude Factor (DLF) Frequency

Need Q, DLFs, range of step frequencies, and

phase lags.

13
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Walking Step Frequencies
fStep between 1.6 Hz and 2.2 Hz (96 bpm and
132 bpm)
Average is about 1.9-2.0 Hz (114-120 bpm)

14
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Resonant Responses
Practical examples
- Pushing a child on a swing.
- Jumping on a diving board.
Same applies to floors: if hfStep matches a
natural frequency resonance, which
causes the most severe response.
Matches a Natural Causes
Frequency Resonance
(Most Severe
4 Response)
F( t ) = Q h sin(2 h fStep t h )
h=1

15
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Resonant Response
Example:
- Natural Frequency = 5.00 Hz.
- Walking at 1.67 Hz (within normal walking range)
- Responses at 1.67 Hz, 3.33 Hz, 5.00 Hz, 6.67 Hz
1.5 0.35
Peak Accel. = 1.36%g Response to
Meas. Acceleration (%g)

0.3 3rd Harmonic

Meas. Acceleration (%g)

1
(5.00 Hz)
0.25
0.5 Response to
0.2 2nd Harmonic
0 (@ 3.33 Hz)
Response to
0.15 4th Harmonic
-0.5 Response to (6.67 Hz)
0.1
1st Harmonic
-1 (@ 1.67 Hz)
0.05
RMS Accel. = 0.531%g
-1.5 0
0 2 4 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (sec.) Frequency (Hz)

16
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Why do some walkers cause more floor
motion then other walkers?

Because their pace is a sub-harmonic of the floor

dominant frequency.
That is a harmonic of their walking speed,
Generally, 2 or 3 times their walking speed
matches the floor dominant frequency.

17
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Specialize by defining P for walking.
Possible to write an equation that works
regardless of which harmonic is applicable.
4
F ( t ) = 0 + Q h sin(2 h fStep t h )
h=1

=0.83e 0.35 fn

18
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Adjustments
Incomplete resonant build-up.
Walker and annoyed person are not at the
same location at the same time.
Use a reduction factor, R = 0.5 for floors
with two-way mode shapes
Use R = 0.7 for footbridges with a one-way
mode.

19
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Predicted Walking Acceleration
P
aSteadyState =
2 M DLF Call this Po

R P R Q 0.83e 0.35f R Q 0.83e 0.35f

n n
Po e 0.35f
n

ap = = = g= g
2 M 2 0.5W / g W W
Po =
(0.5)(157 lb)(0.83) 65 lb for floors
Po =
(0.7)(157 lb)(0.83) 91.2 lb (use 92 lbf) for footbridges

Po e 0.35f
n
Predicted Peak Acceleration
ap = g
W Due to Walking in DG11

20
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Predicted Tolerance
a p P o exp(0.35 f n) a o
=
g W g
where
ap/g = predicted acceleration ratio
ao/g = acceleration limit for the appropriate occupancy
(Example: 0.005 or 0.5%g for quiet spaces.)
Po = amplitude of the driving force, 65 lb or 92 lb
W = effective weight supported by the beam or joist panel,
girder panel, or combined panel, as applicable, lb
fn = fundamental natural frequency of a beam or joist panel,
a girder panel, or a combined panel, as applicable, Hz
= damping ratio

21
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Accuracy of the AISC DG11

Data from a study being conducted at the

University of Kentucky by Dr. Brad Davis.

22
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Example. Determine the effect of Floor Length on
the response of Bays A and B due to walking.

23
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
W is a function of Floor Width and Length
ap P o exp(0.35 f n) a o
Bj = Cj (Ds / Dj)1/4Lj < 2/3 x Floor Width
g W g
Bg = Cg(Dj /Dg)1/4 Lg < 2/3 Floor Length
Bays A
Floor Width:
4x30 = 120
Floor Length
32.5+16+32.5 = 81
Length Bay B
Floor Width:
4x30 = 120
Floor Length
Length

32.5+16 = 48.5

24
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Bay A Response
Bays A & B
Bj is same for both Bays.
Bg is different for each Bay
because Floor Length is
different.
Bg = 59.9 < 2/3 Floor Length

Bays A:
Floor Length = 81
Girder 2/3x81 = 54 < 59.9
Panel ap/g = 0.46%g < 0.5%g
OK

25
 Low Frequency Floor Assessment
Bay B Response
Bays A & B
Bg = 59.9 < 2/3 Floor Length

Bays A:
Floor Length = 81
ap/g = 0.46%g < 0.5%g
OK
Bay B:
Floor Length = 48.5
2/3x48.5 =32.3 < 59.9
ap/g =0.61%g > 0.5%g
Girder NG
Panel

26
Finite Element Analysis

27
 Finite Element Analysis
Overview of Evaluation Procedure
Develop 3D model.
- Specialized for extremely low amplitude motion.
Predict natural modes.
Predict response to human activity.
Compare to tolerance limit.

28
 Finite Element Analysis
Extent of Model
Horizontal Expanse
Avoid over-predicting area in motion.
Beware uniform framing over many bays.

15 Bays in Motion
Unrealistic
Unconservative.

29
 Finite Element Analysis
Extent of Model
Horizontal
Motion should be limited to the bay being evaluated
plus a few around it.
Option: Start with model of large area. Delete bays if
necessary.
Bay Being
Evaluated

Another Option: Model the bay being evaluated plus

one bay each side.

30
 Finite Element Analysis
Natural Mode Prediction
Typical Eigenvalue Analysis
Number of Modes
All modes with single curvature within a bay.
Include modes up to about double the fundamental natural
frequency.
Many modes are often predicted.
Use Frequency Response Function (FRF) to determine
dominate mode.

31
 Finite Element Analysis
Frequency Response Function
1 lbf sinusoidal load

Dominant Frequency

Accelerance FRF Mag. (%g/lbf)

Natural Frequencies

1 lbf 0.1
Width
Related to
Sinusoidal Force, Frequency = f 0.05 damping

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Steady state
Frequency (Hz)

response
amplitude, %g
Sinusoidal Response, Frequency = f

32
 Finite Element Analysis
Frequency Response Function
FRF Computed using Steady State Analysis in SAP2000
- Requires hysteretic
damping.

- Stiffness proportional
coefficient = 2b

- Mass proportional
coefficient = 0

33
 Finite Element Analysis
Walking Acceleration Prediction FRF Method
FRF Magnitude
FRFMax = Highest magnitude under 9 Hz.
FRFMax in %g/lb
Harmonic Force Amplitude: Product of
Reference bodyweight, Q = 168 lb
Dynamic coefficients, ai.
ai = 0.4, 0.07, 0.06, 0.05
a2 through a4 approximated by
=0.09e 0.075f n

34
 Finite Element Analysis
Walking Acceleration Prediction FRF Method
Partial Build-Up Factor
Envelope Function
TBU = resonant build-up duration
= 1 e 2 f nTBU
H = harmonic causing resonance
= 1 e 2 HN
N = number of footsteps
For N = 6 (typical length of walking path in offices)
= 50 + 0.25 if < 0.01
12.5 + 0.625 if 0.01 < 0.03
=
= 1.0 if 0.03

35
 Finite Element Analysis
Walking Acceleration Prediction FRF Method
In equation form,
a p FRFMax Q
=

Bay is OK if
Tolerance Limit
from DG11
a p ao e.g., 0.5%g for
offices.

36
Problem Floor Evaluation

37
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Simplified Testing Procedure
Requiring minimal equipment, time, and cost.
Handheld Analyzer
Seismic Accelerometer
Heel-Drop impact to obtain floor natural frequency.
Walking at sub-harmonic frequency to obtain
maximum response.
Filtering of response data: 1 Hz to 15-20 Hz
Comparison of Equivalent Sinusoidal Peak
Acceleration (ESPA) to appropriate tolerance limit.

38
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Sample Equipment Set

Datastick VSA-1214, 1215

Metronome

Seismic Accelerometer and Cables

39
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Heel-Drop Tests
Raise onto balls of feet and drop forcefully.
Heel-drop forcing function contains up to 40 Hz and
is ideal for determining floor frequency.

Time History Frequency Spectrum

40
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Measured Walking Acceleration
Problem floors are usually low frequency floors
an occupant causes resonance.
Want to cause resonance during tests.
Step frequency, fStep
- In normal range: 1.6 Hz to 2.2 Hz.
- Such that integer multiple of fStep = fn
- Example: fn = 6 Hz. Select fStep = 2 Hz
because third harmonic will match fn, resonance.
Metronome is used to monitor walking speed.
Multiple individual walkers
Multiple tests per walker.

41
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Processing
Individual peaks not representative.
Tolerance limits are sinusoidal accelerations.
So compute Equivalent Sinusoidal Peak
Acceleration (ESPA)
- Compute rolling two second Root Mean Square (RMS)
acceleration.
- For example: at t =1.8 sec., compute RMS from 0.8 sec.
to 2.8 sec.
- Maximum rolling RMS x 2 = ESPA.

42
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Case Study

214
574

38
324

2211 324

43
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Measured Natural Frequencies
Heel-drop Tests at Stations 1-7.
Stations 1 and 5 of primary interest.

8.69 Hz
6.88 Hz

44
 Problem Floor Evaluation
Measured Walking Accelerations.

Walking at 2.17 Hz

(4)(2.17)= 8.69 Hz

ESPA = 1.79%g

Retrofit Required

Station 1

45
 Whats Hot (Cool)?
New Approaches to Evaluate Floors
Supporting Sensitive Equipment
Analysis Techniques for Evaluating
Slender Monumental Stairs

46
Sensitive Equipment

47
 Sensitive Equipment
Tolerance Limits

Manufacturers requirements are generally in terms

of velocity, but sometimes acceleration.

Generic requirements are available.

Requirements are usually very strict.

Short span, very stiff floor systems are required.

48
 Sensitive Equipment
Sensitive Equipment Tolerance Limits
Peak velocity or acceleration specific limit.
Narrowband spectral velocity or acceleration specific
limit.
One-third octave spectral velocity or acceleration
generic limit. 3
10

Velocity (mips, rms)

2
10

1
10

0
10
4 5 6.3 8 10 12.5 16 20
Time (sec) Frequency (Hz)

Acceleration Waveform Narrowband Spectral One-third Octave Spectral

Acceleration Velocity

49
 Sensitive Equipment
Example Waveform Acceleration Limit

GE Open MRI
Pre-installation
Manual

50
 Sensitive Equipment
Example Waveform Acceleration Limit

51
 Sensitive Equipment
Example HFF Waveform Acceleration Limit
Limit = 0.01 m/s2

aPeakToPeak = 0.0998%g (predicted)

= 0.00979 m/s2

High Frequency Floor Response

52
 Sensitive Equipment
Walking Speeds in AISC DG11 2nd Ed.
Walking fstep Walking
Speed (Hz) (bpm)
Very Slow 1.25 75
Slow 1.6 96
Moderate 1.85 110
Fast 2.1 125
Very Slow: One or two persons in a lab or exam room.
Slow: Three to five persons in a lab or exam room.
Moderate: More than five persons in a lab or exam
room.
Fast: Large lab or exam room or near a corridor.
53
 Sensitive Equipment
Peak Velocity and Acceleration Predictions
19 109 f step
1.43 1.43
a p 310 f step
vp = =
W f n1.3 g W f n0.3
1.3x109 f n 22 f n
if f n f 4 max
e if f n f 4 max e
Wf n ap W
v p = max 1.43
= max 1.43
9
19x10 f step g 310 f step
W f n1.3 W f n0.3
Top equations for very slow walking.
Bottom equations for other walking speeds with
- First expressions for low frequency floors
- Second expressions for high frequency floors

54
 Sensitive Equipment
Generic Limits
Specific limits are often not
available during the design
phase. Therefore Generic
Limits can be used.
Generally expressed as one-
third octave spectral velocity
magnitudes.
Most common are Velocity
Critical, VC, curves.
From Ungar et al. (2004)

55
Monumental Stairs

56
 Slender Monumental Stairs
Architectural Features
In high-end buildings.
Aggressive requirements.
Long spans.
Slender stringers.
Low mass.

57
 Slender Monumental Stairs
Susceptible to Vibrations
Natural frequencies usually below 9-10 Hz.
Stair descent step frequency up to 4 Hz.
- 2nd harmonic can match fn up to 8 Hz.
- 3rd harmonic can match fn up to 12 Hz.
Harmonic force amplitudes are high.
Resonance High Accelerations

58
 Slender Monumental Stairs
Group Amplifications
Groups can cause much higher accelerations
than an individual.
Same velocity, fixed stride length Same fstep.
Three times higher accelerations.
Prediction Methods
Finite Element Analysis
Manual Calculations

59
 Slender Monumental Stairs
Manual Calculations
Stairs are often linear elements.
Idealize as a beam on a slope

60
 Slender Monumental Stairs
Acceptance Criteria
1/2
Frequency: gE s I t
= Ls = Stringer Length
2 4
fn
wLs
Predicted Acceleration:
a p RQ cos (1 exp(100)) a o
2

g W g
Descending Acceleration Tolerance Limits
Step Frequency Acceleration
Remarks
Hz Limit (%g)
<2.5 1.7 Normal Descents
Rapid Descents -
2.5-4.0 3.0
Not Perceptible
Rapid Descents
2.5-4.0 4.7
Perceptible

61
Strength is essential but otherwise
unimportant.
Hardy Cross

Thank You!!

62