Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228720291
CITATIONS READS
0 250
5 authors, including:
Anders Carlson
University of Southern California
10 PUBLICATIONS 41 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Anders Carlson on 19 February 2016.
1 2
summed and the rms velocity obtained by the analysis of the
resulting simulated floor velocity time history.
This modal analysis method has two noticeable advantages
3
over other methods. First, it is more flexible. The time history
response is easily translated into rms, peak, or peak-to-peak and
frequency domain depending on the form of the criterion (i.e.,
manufacturers criteria). Second, it could potentially be more 27-0
accurate. Rather than estimating the footfall input force,
measured footfall impulse responses are used. Also, the modal Figure 3: Design Parameters of Concrete Floor for
analysis takes into account more than just the first mode of the Consideration in Floor Vibration
structure.
For both floors, measurements were conducted with
COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED footfall excitation at a rate of 100 steps per minute by a 175 lb.
FLOOR VIBRATIONS walker. The floor vibration was measured with the transducer
placed at the center of the bay. The person was walking at a
A comparison of the prediction methods described in the distance of about 2 feet from the transducer. In addition to the
previous section was achieved by predicting and measuring the footfall-induced vibration measurements, the floors natural
floor vibrations of a composite floor and a concrete floor. In frequency and stiffness were measured using a dynamic shaker
both cases, the tested floor was a newly constructed floor in a with reaction mass.
teaching laboratory building. The resulting measured and predicted floor velocities (in
The composite floor was constructed of 3.5 in. normal rms) are shown in Table 2. The natural frequency and stiffness
weight concrete (145 pounds per cubic foot) fill on top of a 2 of the composite floor were measured to be 12.5 Hz and 220
6
in. thick metal deck. The bay size (bounded by four columns) Kips/in. and those of the concrete floor were measured as 12.5
was 21 ft.-4 in. by 32 ft.-10 in.. The beams and girders were Hz and 400 Kips/in. These measured natural frequencies and
1
W27X84 and W30X116, respectively. The floor framing for stiffness values were used as inputs in both of the prediction
the composite floor are illustrated in Figure 2. methods in order to yield a consistent comparison of the
1
methods.)
0