Comparison Between GTStrudl Integrated and Partial Model Analysis Case study: ATF Power Plant CTG&STG Building foundation A Presentation Submitted to:

Comparison Between GTStrudl Comparison Between GTStrudl Integrated and Partial Model Integrated and Partial Model

AnalysisAnalysis

Case study: ATF Power Plant CTG&STG Building foundationCase study: ATF Power Plant CTG&STG Building foundation

A Presentation Submitted to:A Presentation Submitted to:GT STRUDL Users Group24th Annual GT STRUDL Users Group24th Annual

Meeting & Training Seminar Meeting & Training Seminar Year 2012Year 2012

11

PGESCo.

PGESCo stands for (Power Generation PGESCo stands for (Power Generation Engineering Services Company).Engineering Services Company).

Established in 1994Established in 1994 Located in Cairo, EgyptLocated in Cairo, Egypt Focused on EPCM Projects (Engineering, Focused on EPCM Projects (Engineering,

Procurement, Construction and Procurement, Construction and Management)Management)

Produced more than 20,000MW Produced more than 20,000MW

22

Table of contentsTable of contents

IntroductionIntroduction PurposePurpose STG & CTG Building Integrated ModelSTG & CTG Building Integrated Model Integrated versus partial model analysisIntegrated versus partial model analysis Pile reactions summary tablePile reactions summary table Pile caps Bending Moment summary tablePile caps Bending Moment summary table Advantages and disadvantages of full modeling Advantages and disadvantages of full modeling

methodmethod Conclusion Conclusion

33

IntroductionIntroduction

A comparison will be performed between A comparison will be performed between separate models of the steel frame and separate models of the steel frame and the foundation ( Partial Model) and a the foundation ( Partial Model) and a model that combines the steel structure model that combines the steel structure and the foundation (Integrated Model). and the foundation (Integrated Model).

The comparison reflects the redistribution The comparison reflects the redistribution of loads on piles and the measure for that of loads on piles and the measure for that will be the difference in pile reactions in will be the difference in pile reactions in both cases. both cases.

44

PurposePurpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate The purpose of this study is to investigate whether using the integrated model will whether using the integrated model will yield any savings in the number of piles & yield any savings in the number of piles & foundations sizes compared to the foundations sizes compared to the conventional approach of partial models. conventional approach of partial models.

55

Steam Turbine Generator & Combustion Turbine Steam Turbine Generator & Combustion Turbine Generator Building Integrated ModelGenerator Building Integrated Model

XXXX

XXXX

141.5 FT

XXXX

XXXX

450.8 FT

XXXX

XXXX

109.1 FT

X

Y

Z 66

Pile Caps, piers & Grade Beam LayoutPile Caps, piers & Grade Beam Layout

X

Y

Z 77

Pile Springs LayoutPile Springs Layout

88

Integrated versus Partial Model Integrated versus Partial Model ResultsResults

The Next Slides will show 3 types of foundation The Next Slides will show 3 types of foundation and compare the results between the integrated and compare the results between the integrated versus the partial model. versus the partial model.

4 Piles foundation .4 Piles foundation . 6 piles foundation .6 piles foundation . 15 piles foundation .15 piles foundation .

99

4 Piles Foundation Layout4 Piles Foundation Layout

X

Y

Z KFZ 4893.

KFY 4.7151E+05

SPRING KFX 4893.

RESTRAIN FX FY FZ MY

XXXX

XXXX

3.600 M

XXXX

XXXX

3.600 M

1010

Pile No. Force (KN) Pile No. Force (KN)P_1 0.094 P_1 23.957P_2 0.096 P_2 25.834P_3 0.092 P_3 25.829P_4 0.094 P_4 23.959

Lateral

X-Dir

Lateral

X-Dir

Partial Model Integrated Model Foundation

with4 Piles

Max Pile Reaction 120 kN

Integrated versus Partial Model Integrated versus Partial Model Results Results

Lateral Dir : ( X – Dir )Lateral Dir : ( X – Dir )

1111

Pile No. Force (KN) Pile No. Force (KN)P_1 -116.583 P_1 -60.175P_2 -116.583 P_2 -52.699P_3 -116.583 P_3 -60.174P_4 -116.583 P_4 -52.699

Z-Dir

Lateral

Z-Dir

Lateral



with4 Piles

Lateral Dir : ( Z – Dir )Lateral Dir : ( Z – Dir )

Results Summary ( 4 piles found. Lateral Dir)Results Summary ( 4 piles found. Lateral Dir) The Reactions in piles decreases by 55 %.The Reactions in piles decreases by 55 %. The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 55 The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 55

% .% .

1212

Pile No. Force (KN) Pile No. Force (KN)P_1 547.359 P_1 667.100P_2 1121.464 P_2 931.936P_3 1119.009 P_3 874.959P_4 547.519 P_4 727.179


Virtical Virtical

Y-DirY-Dir


with4 Piles

Vertical Dir : ( Y – Dir )Vertical Dir : ( Y – Dir )

Results Summary ( 4 piles found. Vertical Dir)Results Summary ( 4 piles found. Vertical Dir) The Reactions in pile No.1 and No.4 increases by The Reactions in pile No.1 and No.4 increases by

20 to 25%20 to 25%.. The Reactions in piles No.2 and No. 3 decreases The Reactions in piles No.2 and No. 3 decreases

by 18 to 22%.by 18 to 22%. The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 18% .The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 18% .

1313


X

Y

Z KFZ 4893.

KFY 4.7151E+05

SPRING KFX 4893.


XXXX

XXXX

5.700 M

XXXX

XXXX

3.600 M

1414

Foundationwith

6 pillesPile No. Force (KN) Max Pile Reaction 120 kN Pile No. Force (KN)

P_1 0.298 P_1 1.544P_2 0.348 P_2 1.603P_3 0.366 P_3 1.593P_4 0.415 P_4 1.651P_5 0.411 P_5 1.654P_6 0.304 P_6 1.541

Integrated Model

Lateral

X-Dir

Partial Model

Lateral

X-Dir



1515

Foundationwith


P_1 10.374 P_1 8.904P_2 10.351 P_2 8.879P_3 10.360 P_3 8.889P_4 10.335 P_4 8.863P_5 10.344 P_5 8.873P_6 10.366 P_6 8.893

Integrated Model Partial Model

Lateral

Z-Dir

Lateral

Z-Dir


Results Summary ( 6 piles found. Lateral Dir)Results Summary ( 6 piles found. Lateral Dir) The Reactions in piles decreases by 15 %.The Reactions in piles decreases by 15 %. The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 15 % .The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 15 % .

1616

Foundationwith


P_1 946.648 P_1 971.021P_2 1144.256 P_2 1143.409P_3 1144.870 P_3 1145.646P_4 1181.050 P_4 1149.496P_5 1181.641 P_5 1151.654P_6 946.406 P_6 968.862

Integrated Model

Virtical

Partial Model

Y-Dir

Virtical

Y-Dir


Results Summary ( 6 piles found. Vertical Dir)Results Summary ( 6 piles found. Vertical Dir) The Reactions in pile No.1 and No.6 increases by The Reactions in pile No.1 and No.6 increases by

2.6 %2.6 %.. The Reactions in piles No.4 and No. 5 decreases The Reactions in piles No.4 and No. 5 decreases

by 2.7 %.by 2.7 %. The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 2.7 % .The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 2.7 % .

1717


X

Y

Z KFZ 4893.

KFY 4.7151E+05

SPRING KFX 4893.


1818

Foundationwith


P_1 37.660 P_1 29.048P_2 42.779 P_2 31.025P_3 42.774 P_3 31.020P_4 42.763 P_4 30.979P_5 42.753 P_5 30.966P_6 26.892 P_6 27.531P_7 26.897 P_7 27.538P_8 26.900 P_8 27.544P_9 26.899 P_9 27.547

P_10 27.455 P_10 27.642P_11 32.598 P_11 27.781P_12 32.602 P_12 27.764P_13 32.570 P_13 27.742P_14 32.558 P_14 27.735P_15 27.720 P_15 32.563

Partial Model Integrated Model

Lateral

X-Dir

Lateral

X-Dir



1919


Foundationwith



P_10 41.260 P_10 35.839P_11 8.345 P_11 14.920P_12 10.344 P_12 19.521P_13 23.121 P_13 26.608P_14 33.948 P_14 32.110P_15 48.587 P_15 39.545

Lateral

Z-Dir

Lateral

Z-Dir


2020

Results Summary ( 15 piles found. Lateral Dir)Results Summary ( 15 piles found. Lateral Dir) The Reactions in Some piles increases by The Reactions in Some piles increases by

2.4 to 79 %.2.4 to 79 %. The Reactions in some piles decreases by 19 The Reactions in some piles decreases by 19

to 28 %.to 28 %. The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 19 The maximum pile Reaction decreases by 19

% .% .

2121

Foundationwith



P_10 872.248 P_10 863.013P_11 1115.003 P_11 1051.533P_12 976.673 P_12 992.372P_13 813.286 P_13 871.691P_14 851.474 P_14 885.255P_15 1085.892 P_15 1006.274

Vertical

Y-Dir

Vertical

Y-Dir



2222

Results Summary ( 6 piles found. Vertical Dir)Results Summary ( 6 piles found. Vertical Dir) The Reactions in Some piles increases by The Reactions in Some piles increases by

5.2 %5.2 %.. The Reactions in Some piles decreases by The Reactions in Some piles decreases by

6.0 %.6.0 %. The maximum pile Reaction decreases by The maximum pile Reaction decreases by

6.0 % .6.0 % .

2323

Piles Reactions Summary in Metric TonesPiles Reactions Summary in Metric Tones

Footing Footing typestypes

Max single pile reactionMax single pile reaction

M-TonsM-Tons

Total piles reactionTotal piles reaction

M-TonsM-Tons

Partial Partial ModelModel

IntegrateIntegrated Model d Model

Diff. %Diff. % Partial Partial ModelModel

IntegrateIntegrated Model d Model

Diff. %Diff. %

5 Piles 5 Piles footingfooting

112.5112.5 105.6105.6 6.13%6.13% 527.1527.1 524.3524.3 0.53%0.53%


120120 104.2104.2 12.95%12.95% 632.9632.9 580.5580.5 8.27%8.27%


108.1108.1 95.4095.40 11.75%11.75% 749.2749.2 681.1681.1 9.08%9.08%


118.5118.5 98.398.3 17.05%17.05% 876.1876.1 808808 7.78%7.78%


116.7116.7 106.3106.3 8.91%8.91% 1525.751525.75 1403.21403.2 8.03%8.03%

2424

ConclusionConclusion The changes in lateral force on piles in both The changes in lateral force on piles in both

directions X & Z is significant directions X & Z is significant .. It shows that all piles act together to carry the It shows that all piles act together to carry the

lateral forces so it decreases the maximum pile lateral forces so it decreases the maximum pile reaction in the lateral direction. reaction in the lateral direction.

This will save piles in case the govern This will save piles in case the govern design force is due to seismic or wind.design force is due to seismic or wind.

For the Vertical Forces in piles there are For the Vertical Forces in piles there are changes in the values decreases the changes in the values decreases the maximum pile reaction. And this could maximum pile reaction. And this could save pilessave piles

2525

Section cut for 9 PilesSection cut for 9 PilesIntegrated ModelIntegrated Model

Section cut for 9 PilesSection cut for 9 PilesPartial ModelPartial Model

Section cut in Pile caps Section cut in Pile caps for bending moment for bending moment

resultsresults

2626

Pile caps Bending Moment summary table in Metric TonesPile caps Bending Moment summary table in Metric Tones

Footing Footing typestypes

Bending Moment in short Bending Moment in short direction in M-tonsdirection in M-tons

Bending Moment in long direction Bending Moment in long direction in M-tonsin M-tons

Partial Partial ModelModel

Integrated Integrated Model Model

Diff. %Diff. % Partial Partial ModelModel

Integrated Integrated Model Model

Diff. %Diff. %


383.9383.9 305.1305.1 20%20% 201.5201.5 212.3212.3 -5.4%-5.4%


392.5392.5 367.8367.8 6.0%6.0% 164.3164.3 159.1159.1 -3.2%-3.2%


358.7358.7 336.5336.5 6.0%6.0% 312.4312.4 271.3271.3 13.3%13.3%


534.5534.5 487.4487.4 8.8%8.8% 345.4345.4 364.4364.4 -5.5%-5.5%


219.8219.8 257.8257.8 -17%-17% 519.0519.0 534.3534.3 -3%-3%

A Section was taken at the face of the pier for each pile cap and the A Section was taken at the face of the pier for each pile cap and the results are summarized in the following table:results are summarized in the following table:

2727

Effects of modeling on the steel Effects of modeling on the steel structure structure

Comparison of the bracing and columns Comparison of the bracing and columns forces between the integrated model and forces between the integrated model and the separate steel model.the separate steel model.

2828

The Steel Building ModelThe Steel Building Model

X

Y

Z

2929

The Steel Building with foundation The Steel Building with foundation Integrated ModelIntegrated Model 3030

Line 1

BracingNo. 1

BracingNo. 2

BracingNo. 3

BracingNo. 4

BracingNo. 5

Bracings ResultsBracings Results

3131

Bracing No. 1 ( Unit KN )

Max Tension Max Compresion Max Tension Max Compresion81.7165 -191.1369 15.21% 0.60% 94.14426 -192.2865

Bracing No. 2

Max Tension Max Compresion Max Tension Max Compresion66.30501 -207.1914 11.60% -0.20% 73.99805 -206.7762

Bracing No. 3


Bracing No. 4

Max Tension Max Compresion Max Tension Max Compresion68.69469 -232.0849 -4.87% -46.25% 65.34732 -124.7447

Bracing No. 5

Max Tension Max Compresion Max Tension Max Compresion78.62447 -238.5137 -14.87% -45.04% 66.9314 -131.0848

Steel Model Integrated ModelTension Comp.


Steel model Integrated ModelTension Comp.



3232

Line 2

BracingNo. 1

BracingNo. 2

BracingNo. 3

BracingNo. 4

BracingNo. 5

3333

Bracing No. 1 ( Unit KN )


Bracing No. 2


Bracing No. 3


Bracing No. 4


Bracing No. 5







3434

CO

L.1

CO

L.1

1

CO

L.1

0

CO

L.9

CO

L.8

CO

L.7

CO

L.6

CO

L.5

CO

L.4

CO

L.3

CO

L.2

CO

L.1

2

CO

L.1

3

CO

L.1

5

CO

L.1

4

The Results of ColumnsThe Results of Columns

3535

COL.1

Tension Comp.3.832112 4.508721 0 19.05141 12.85703-3.5934 -4.74952 0 -14.9212 -19.4417

-8.02% 0.75%

Tension Comp.3.791669 4.518632 0 19.09339 13.46985-3.59415 -4.75129 0 -14.9044 -18.5129

COL.2

Tension Comp.23.43421 0.787123 0.782825 7.031206 140.3907-23.7564 -0.35052 -0.74932 -5.15617 -417.018

41.96% -1.43%

Tension Comp.23.17312 0.777944 0.761527 7.354359 137.8842-23.4001 -0.3093 -0.74065 -4.78707 -413.314

COL.3

Tension Comp.23.9021 0.505731 0.632513 4.233146 102.8223-18.6314 -0.29207 -0.61486 -4.12753 -403.093

37.44% -1.83%

Tension Comp.24.7747 0.530477 0.631636 4.536676 96.82106-17.8981 -0.28605 -0.61519 -4.14272 -397.297

Steel Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

106.4414 -453.033

Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

97.90798 -456.437

Steel Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

11.35946 -673.114

Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

16.12626 -663.519

Steel Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

24.92461 -639.594

Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

34.25691 -627.857

3636

COL.4

Tension Comp.27.02548 0.207732 1.197958 3.038345 120.6689-21.7894 -0.37189 -0.9235 -3.34819 -415.305

69.13% -3.18%

Tension Comp.28.42893 0.234635 1.107368 3.194533 107.2481-20.3272 -0.33995 -0.99005 -3.01827 -403.492

COL.5

Tension Comp.21.52819 0.344049 0.527809 3.107098 99.30077-18.9302 -0.27164 -0.53327 -3.09335 -322.335

13.57% -3.35%

Tension Comp.22.97966 0.302077 0.524653 3.02405 87.56697-17.5146 -0.22756 -0.54737 -2.78359 -312.694

COL.6

Tension Comp.19.76512 0.187701 0.413881 2.331397 79.66361-13.7226 -0.33523 -0.4195 -2.85645 -295.67

-13.05% -1.62%

Tension Comp.20.98004 0.214977 0.41849 3.221397 83.00864-12.7533 -0.37899 -0.42215 -2.95818 -293.696

MX MY MZ

30.62848 -522.286Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ

MX MY MZ

35.22692 -530.886Steel Model

AxialFY FZ

MX MY MZ


AxialFY FZ

MX MY MZ

63.37163 -604.015Steel Model

AxialFY FZ

MX MY MZ


AxialFY FZ

MX MY MZ

17.09194 -746.005Steel Model

AxialFY FZ

3737

COL.13

Tension Comp.28.07608 5.544801 0.067291 48.43609 109.0755-18.6391 -4.52536 -0.05653 -20.2135 -401.833

54.93% 6.94%

Tension Comp.28.91741 5.56685 0.072086 50.23985 131.5461-18.3267 -4.37842 -0.05657 -24.1606 -397.056

COL.14

Tension Comp.26.72402 5.478857 0.054941 25.77568 169.4964-28.0869 -3.39432 -0.0466 -22.5381 -466.164

-41.85% 4.74%

Tension Comp.26.85497 5.608631 0.095299 26.6055 172.7055-28.611 -3.57874 -0.1112 -22.6916 -466.07

COL.15

Tension Comp.5.169636 2.733764 0 10.84878 17.82712-4.33241 -3.21283 0 -11.3767 -19.4215

-19.11% 11.21%

Tension Comp.4.834511 2.708189 0 10.82504 22.23224-4.34471 -3.21192 0 -11.3875 -19.3476

Without foundation

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

20.709 -723.881

Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

32.08542 -774.088

Without foundation

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

-16.4583 -737.003

Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

-9.57051 -771.932

Without foundation

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

79.79099 -376.576

Intgrated Model

AxialFY FZ MX MY MZ

64.54599 -418.799

3838

Advantages of full modeling Advantages of full modeling methodmethod

Serves to get the optimum number of piles Serves to get the optimum number of piles and pile caps size. and pile caps size.

Approximate simulation of the exactApproximate simulation of the exact

distribution of the loads.distribution of the loads. Effect of any modification in structural Effect of any modification in structural

steel model will be automatically steel model will be automatically incorporated in the foundation analysis incorporated in the foundation analysis and vice versa.and vice versa.

3939

Disadvantages of full modeling Disadvantages of full modeling methodmethod

Regarding The effect on the steel Regarding The effect on the steel structure, the results shows a great effect structure, the results shows a great effect on the bracing and column which could on the bracing and column which could help in the reduction of the steel structure help in the reduction of the steel structure weight .weight .

The results of the steel need more time The results of the steel need more time and effort to confirm these reduction .and effort to confirm these reduction .

4040

ConclusionConclusion Using the integrated model can reduce the total number Using the integrated model can reduce the total number

of piles for each pile cap. This is achieved specially when of piles for each pile cap. This is achieved specially when the max pile reaction from the partial model analysis the max pile reaction from the partial model analysis exceeds the max allowable pile load by 8%. exceeds the max allowable pile load by 8%.

Comparing the bending moment resulting from the Comparing the bending moment resulting from the integrated and partial models proved that The overall integrated and partial models proved that The overall change in the values of moments will have no significant change in the values of moments will have no significant effect on the design of pile caps sections. effect on the design of pile caps sections.

The Integrated model can reduce the Steel structure The Integrated model can reduce the Steel structure weight by using smaller section due to the reduction of weight by using smaller section due to the reduction of forces in the members, we should do more effort to proof forces in the members, we should do more effort to proof this conclusion for the steel .this conclusion for the steel .

4141

Documents

Comparison Between GTStrudl Integrated and Partial Model Analysis Case study: ATF Power Plant CTG&STG Building foundation A Presentation Submitted to: