Volume 2, Number 1, June 2004

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE 36th JOINT MEETING OF THE PANEL ON WIND AND
SEISMIC EFFECTS 17-22 MAY 2004
This Volume 2 Number 1 issue of Panel Update begins the second year of the Panel’s eNewsletterthat is aimed as sharing news about Panel activities. We value your readership and welcome yourcomments about content and format. The June issues of each eNewsletter deviates from its normal
two page format by sharing greater highlights from the recently conducted annual Panel Joint Meeting.

Technical Meetings, 17-19 May• 29 technical presentations• Eight Sessions- Transportation Systems;- Next-Generation Building andInfrastructure Systems;- Wind Engineering;- Storm Surge and Tsunamis;- Geotechnical Engineering and
Ground Motion;- Dams;- Advanced Information andCommunication Technology for
Disaster Prevention and Public
Figure 1. Group Photograph of Panel Members at 36th
Health Evaluation;
Joint Panel Meeting.
- Progressive Collapse of Buildings.
• Technical presentations highlighted important work by the US and Japan Panel organizations.
• Panel Task Committees (T/C) activities grow in strength and are making good progress
toward meeting the expectations set out in the Panel’s Strategic Plan adopted at its 33rd Joint
Panel Meeting. Three T/C Workshops will be conducted during the next 12-months. T/Cs arean effective vehicle to exchange in-depth advanced seismic and wind technologies being
used by both countries. They increasingly seek partnering activities with other Panel T/Cs
and other UJNR Panels. The T/C on Storm Surge and Tsunamis was reinstituted bring thenumber of T/Cs to seven.
• The Panel will explore the creation of a new Task Committee on the Fire Performance of
Building and Transportation Structures in partnership with the U.S.-Japan Panel on Fire
Research and Safety. Both Panels will to develop a proposed charter for the new Task
Committee for consideration for approval at the Panel’s 37th Joint Meeting, May 2005.
Technical Site Visits, 20-22 May
During the 36th Joint Panel Meeting the delegation visited three locations:
1.
CHICAGO
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM).
Introduction. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM) founded in 1936 provides architectural, urban
design, engineering, and interior architecture services. Its work ranges from architectural design andengineering of buildings to master planning and design of communities. SOM was involved in thedesign and construction of many well known buildings including the 100-story John Hancock Tower in1Chicago; 109-story Sears Tower, Chicago; the Lever House, New York City, the U.S. Air Force
Academy; the Bank of America World Headquarters, San Francisco; and many others. SOM has
completed projects in more than 50 countries.
Shane McCormick, SOM Associate and Lead Structural Designer of the Trump Tower, Christopher
Rockey Associate, and Bradley Young hosted the delegation to technical overviews on SOM’s
involvement in designing the Burj Dubai Highrise Building, Trump Tower, the NSF Tall Building Wind
Study, and the Gehry Band Shell followed by a visit to the construction site.
Burj Dubai Building. SOM is the architecturaldesign consultants for the Burj Dubai
skyscraper. The Burj Dubai building will be theworld’s tallest building at 610 m high. Its cost is
estimated at between $1 billion and $2 billion.
The design was selected as the winning entryof an invited design competition for the tower
held by Emaar Properties PJSC of Dubai early
2003. Construction started in January 2004 andwill be completed at the end of 2009.
The building will be the centerpiece of a large
scale mixed-use development being developedby Emaar Properties PJSC of Dubai, which will
combine residential, commercial, hotel,
entertainment, shopping and leisure outlets
with open green spaces, water features,
pedestrian boulevards, a shopping mall and a
tourist-oriented old town.

Figure 2. Overview of SOM’s buildings designed for
Chicago.

The design of Burj Dubai is derived from icons, six pedal rose, andthe geometries of the desert flower, which is indigenous to theregion, and the patterning systems embodied in Islamicarchitecture. It combines historical and cultural influences with
cutting edge technology to achieve a high-performance building
which will set the new standard for development in the Middle Eastand become the model for the future of the city. Burj Dubai (Burj is
the Arabic word for tower or mountain) will be a ‘city within a city’,combining residential, commercial, hotel, entertainment, shopping
and leisure outlets with open green spaces, water features,
pedestrian boulevards, an old town and one of the world’s largest
shopping malls.
Wind tunnel tests were performed by RWDI Consulting Engineers,
Ontario, Canada. The structure will be designed to withstand windspeeds of 36 m/s. Discussion addressed the computer and windtunnel testing performed to design against vortex-induced vibration.
Its tapered profile and notched levels will facilitate in “shredding”
winds. The building’s material selection is based on availability ofindigenous materials -- poured concrete containing blast furnace
slag and microsilicates. The piles are supported on mat
Figure 3. Burj Dubai Building
foundations with reinforced concrete core wall system and steel(Image courtesy of Skidmore,braced frame. The structural design is stiff for torsion. A direct load
Owings, & Merrill)
path from the top of the building to its base provides for torsional
stability. There is a continuous hexagonal core. Its aspect ratio is8.2. The tower is composed of three elements arranged around a central core. As the tower rises
from the flat desert base, setbacks occur at each element in an upward spiraling pattern, decreasing2the mass of the tower as it reaches toward the sky. At the top, the central core emerges and issculpted to form a finishing spire. A Y-shaped floor plan maximizes views of the Persian Gulf.
Trump Tower. Donald Trump along with the owner of the Chicago
newspaper, Sun Times entered into a 50-50 partnership to build the$700 million mixed use structure. The Trump Towers will include
condos, hotel rooms, office space, a restaurant, retail space, a healthclub and spa, and a riverfront park. The building will be the 4th-tallest
in Chicago – Sears Tower at 442 m tall, the Aon Center at 346 m;
John Hancock Building at 344 m tall.
Scheduled for completion in 2007 the Trump Tower will occupy thesite of the current Sun Times building. Under its current schedule,
Trump Tower Chicago marks the tallest building project in the UnitedStates since the Sears Tower was completed in 1974. The 92-floor
343 m highrise asymmetrically shaped structure will have a stainlesssteel façade with setbacks at three levels. The setbacks were selected
to give the tower a visual continuity with its surroundings by matching
the heights of surrounding buildings. Residential units on the 89th
floor will break a 37-year world record held by the 344 m tall John
Hancock Center for the world's highest homes off ground level.
The building is shaped to reflect its orientation along the riverfront,
and its width is sensitive to its surroundings. The south side of thetower parallels the bank of the Chicago River, and this position
enables the structure to connect with Chicago's north-south grid.

Figure 4. Trump Tower looking
west down the Chicago River(Image courtesy of Skidmore,
Owings, & Merrill)

The tower relates to its neighbors through a series of setbacks, the first of which occurs on the eastside of the tower, at a height that is essentially the same as the cornice line of the Wrigley Building to
the east. The next setback is on the west side of the tower and relates to both the height of theresidential tower to the north and Marina City, to the west. The third and final setback is on the eastside of the tower and relates to the height of the IBM Building immediately adjacent.
Materials include a stainless steel and clear anodized aluminum that reflects and refracts light fromthe sun. The tubes are set out from the glass surface to provide density and thickness and a metallic
quality to the flush glass wall. This mullion system is vertical and horizontal and provides a delicate
latticework to the facade. Wind tunnel testing was performed by RWDI Consulting Engineers, Canada.
NSF Tall Building Wind Study. Working with the University of Western Ontario and the Universityof Notre Dame under a National Science Foundation grant, SOM has instrumented three of four highrise buildings (three in Chicago and one planned for Seoul, Korea) to validate in full scale theobserved performance of tall buildings against wind tunnel and models used in their design. Buildings
were instrumented with accelerometers, rooftop anemometers and high precision GPS systems.
The objectives of the work are to evaluate the performance of structural systems for tall buildings infull-scale wind environments to develop dynamic characteristics of high-rise buildings over a range of
amplitudes. To facilitate unhindered access to real-time measurements an internet framework isunder development to allow the project team, designers, consultants, and researchers, analysis
capabilities from remote location. The subsequent analyses will provide insight into a variety of
response characteristics for tall buildings and permit the systematic validation of existing design
practice through the comparison of analytical and wind tunnel response estimates with full-scaleobservations.
Preliminary results suggest full-scale measurements collected appear to be consistent with thepredictions from wind tunnel tests. Fundamental frequencies were accurately predicted by finite
element modeling and damping values were slightly lower than levels assumed during design. The
buildings will continue to be monitored for more analysis of damping over a range of amplitudes.

3Grant Park Amphitheatre Band Shell. SOM is involved in project management of Chicago’s $450
million 10 ha Grant Park Amphitheater designed by the architect, Frank Gehry. The Grant Park band
shell contains a stage similar in size to The Symphony Center (Orchestra Hall) and accommodates
an orchestra of 120 musicians and a chorus of 150 singers. The band shell is about 18 m high withsteel ribbons that extend 11 m to 12 m high like the petals of a flower. The details of the band shellare:• Stage opening is 27 m wide by 15 m tall. The proscenium doors contain 90 panes of glass.
• The Trellis is supported by 24 1.8 m diameter; 4.6 m tall concrete pylons set 18 m apart.
• The Trellis is made up of 120 pieces of 300 mm to 460 mm diameter pipes. Pieces range
from 15 m to 32 m with the average of 24 m.
Under the trellis, there will be 4,000 self-rising seats and space for another 6,000 people on the lawn.
The 190 m x 99 m trellis, 18 m at its highest point, will accommodate hanging of loudspeakers for acomputer-controlled sound system. A 290 m long serpentine pedestrian bridge designed by Frank
Gehry will be covered with a stainless steel skin. This approach alongside the lawn will double as asound berm, containing the music and suppressing automobile traffic ambient noise.
The steel pipe trellis is a bilaterally
symmetrical, two-way intersecting arch
form–a shell structure. The trellis consistsof 24 flat arches, two each the same,
made of 300 mm to 450 mm diameter
pipes. The arches spring from parallellines of twelve 1.8 m diameter concretepylons, 4.6 m tall and 18 m apart. One
flatter and one steeper arch spring fromeach pylon and land on different pylons
along the opposite line. Nearly 700
aluminum panels make up the back of theGehry ribbons. The panels were designed using the software, CATIA, a CAD/CAM system produced
Figure 5. Pedestrian Bridge from public garages, far right andby Dassault Systems France. The panels, ranging
from 1.2 m to 2.4 m in width and 2 m to 7 m inphoto, leading to the band shell shown as a trellis at upper left
length, are made from high-strength aluminum
platescut to oftheprofiledefinedby Gehry’smodel.
(Image courtesy
PublicBuilding
Commissionof Chicago)
Each plate has a unique position within its frame, determined by the algorithm, which analyzes thesolid model surface of Gehry’s design. The result is a series of shapes determined by the computerthat are cut and assembled into frames on the shop floor, using computer numerically controlled
equipment. The panels are held in place by 2,064 arms. 5,200 interlocking stainless steel sheets
cover the Gehry ribbons.
The sculpted design of the band shell and pedestrian bridge is developed with CAD application and
CATIA, a CAD/CAM software system produced by Dassault Systems France, to provide rapid
prototyping capabilities which remove a number of intermediate steps in the process allowing new
physical models to be validated. The system is then used to control the manufacturing process.
Gehry and his team have radically altered the process and the way in which decisions are made to
reduce risk and uncertainty and improve the predictability in design decision.
SOM imposed a two-way diagonal grid system on the architect’s random arch configuration.
Intersecting arches meet on the same surface but at different angles. For economy andconstructability, SOM worked with Gehry to reduce the number of radii per arch to four. Radii change
at the welded nodes. For economy in fabrication, SOM designed the arches to curve in one direction
only. The four chord Pipe Truss is 0.5 m in diameter with 50 mm wall thickness. Box girders are in thecenter. Shoring towers supported the trellis at 48 node points. A braced top beam supported devices
that suspended the trellis near the node point.

4

The structure will open in July 2004. The Band Shell cost $45 million and the serpentine bridge costs$15 million. The overall structure with parking is $450 million; the City of Chicago will pay 50 percent
and the remainder is from private donations.
2.
URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
University of Illinois, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department http://www.uiuc.edu andhttp://cee.ce.uiuc.edu
Dr. Nicholas Jones, Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEED) and Dr. Amr
Elnashai, Director, Mid-America Earthquake Center and PI of the NEES Project, Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering hosted the delegation. Reviews included the MAE, NEES and thework to upgrade the existing Multi-Axial Full-Scale Sub-Structuring Testing and Simulation Facility(MUST-SIM) site. CEED’s research budget is $17 million/year that supports 50 faculty.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) Earthquake Engineering Centers were established in 1997
under a program that expanded the National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo to
expand knowledge and technology for earthquake hazard mitigation. This decision was based on theoriginal National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) that was funded in 1986 to
conduct team-based earthquake engineering and multidisciplinary research and carry out information
dissemination activities had been funded by NSF for 10-years (two five-year periods).
NSF funded three earthquake engineering research centers for up to $2 million each for a five-year
period. The Centers can be funded for a subsequent and final five-year period. The centersemphasize cross-disciplinary team research, provide educational and training opportunities forundergraduate and graduate students, and establish outreach channels to industry, government
agencies, and potential user groups. The centers formed a network to facilitate cooperation andsharing human and financial resources and facilities. The three Centers that were funded are: theMultidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER), the Pacific Earthquake
Engineering Research Center (PEER), and the Mid-America Earthquake Center (MAE).
Mid-America Earthquake Center (MAE) http://mae.ce.uiuc.edu and http://mae.cee.uiuc.edu.
Professor Amr Elnashai, Director of MAE reviewed the objectives of MAE and outlined its major focus
in Consequence-Based Engineering (CBE). The University of Illinois is the lead MAE organization
collaborating with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Georgia Institute of Technology,
Washington University, University of Puerto Rico, and Texas A&M University in studying the response
and behavior of the built environment that is translated to communities and national networks byresearchers at these institutions in social science, economics and urban planning. Researchers at the
University of Memphis and Saint Louis University provide the technical foundation for research inseismology and geophysics, which is complemented with talents in geotechnical engineering at
Georgia Institute of Technology and the University of Illinois. MAE supports 37 research projects, 43
professors, and 60 students.
MAE’s mission is:“to develop through research, and disseminate through education and outreach, new engineering
approaches necessary to minimize consequences of future earthquakes across hazard-prone
regions, including but not limited to, the eastern and central United States. Correlated interdisciplinary
research synthesizing damage across regions, estimating seismic vulnerability across regional andnational networks, and improving current engineering approaches, forms the core research needed todevelop such consequence-based approaches, and to support stakeholder interests in risk
assessment and seismic engineering.”

MAE's core research focuses on addressing Consequence-Based Engineering (CBE) that includes
three thrust areas. A program coordinator for each thrust area is responsible for planning andexecuting research and implementing projects. The thrust areas are:

5

•

•

•

Damage Synthesis. An interdisciplinary thrust area focused on developing advanced tools tomodel damage and minimize consequences that have been previously assessed and to
estimate economic impact. This work focuses on development of advanced visualization
modules for easy-to-understand hypothetical consequences of scenario earthquake events.
Using these models user-defined hazard mitigation scenarios can be examined easily andquickly.
Consequence Minimization. This thrust studies ways that damage synthesis tools can best be
used to reduce the consequences of future earthquakes. Central to this effort is research on
probabilistic decision support that will provide the user with rational methods for judging
which system interventions are the most appropriate.
Hazard Definition. This work is directed towards development of synthetic earthquake
hazards as needed for input to the damage synthesis module. Research findings from thisthrust develops further fundamental earth science as it relates to better physicalunderstandings of source, path and site effects, and ground failures.

MAE Visualization Tools are available at http://alg.ncsa.uiuc.edu/do/projects/visualization/mae
National Earthquake Engineering
Simulation (NEES). NSF manages
the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for
Earthquake Engineering Simulation(NEES) a national resource with a shiftof earthquake engineering researchemphasis from current reliance on
physical testing to integrated
experimentation, computation, theory,
databases, and model-based
simulation. Eighteen awards have been
made, to date, in areas of: shake table
research equipment; geotechnicalcentrifuge research equipment;
tsunami wave basin; large-scale
Figure 6. Dr. Amr Elnashai, Director, Mid-America Earthquake
laboratory experimentation systems;
Center discussed MAE’s activities and focus in Consequencefield experimentation and monitoring
Based Engineering.
installations; system integration;
consortium development. NEES will
include 15 earthquake engineering experimental research equipment installations networked throughthe high performance Internet. Initially through 2004, NEES includes equipment sites funded throughNSF program solicitations. NSF envisions that other globally significant earthquake engineering
equipment sites will participate in NEES and bring unique experimental capabilities to NEES. NEES
will become operational by September 30, 2004 and is expected to run through September 30, 2014.
The program will provide for using advanced experimental and simulation capabilities to test andvalidate more complex and comprehensive analytical and computer numerical models. It will stressuse of distributed experimental research equipment, including teleobservation and teleoperation, andto enable computation and distributed simulation for earthquake engineering experimentation.
Researchers will be provided with remote access to a repository of databases, user-developed
simulation software, and models for use in model-based simulation and visualization through accessto a computational grid. Researchers will form an integrated network that facilitates interdisciplinary
global collaboration among scientists and engineers. The program will enable participation from a
broader earthquake engineering community, including educators, students, practitioners, and public
sector organizations and individuals, who will have access to the equipment, data, models andsoftware from NEES. The NEES Authorized Funding is $81.8 million.

6

Fast Hybrid Testing Laboratory
University of Colorado, Boulder$1,983,553
Permanently Instrumented Field Sites
Brigham Young University$1,944,423
Tsunami Wave Basin
Oregon State University$4,775,832

Multi-Axial Subassemblage Testing
SystemUniversity of Minnesota, Twin Cities$6,472,049
System Integration
University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign$10,000,000

Three (two relocatable)
Shake Tables
University of Nevada, Reno
$4,398,450

Dual (relocatable) Shake Tables
and High Performance Actuators
State University of New York,
University at Buffalo$6,160,785$4,379,865
Geotechnical Centrifuge
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute$2,380,579
Lifeline Testing Facility
Cornell University$2,072,716

Geotechnical Centrifuge
University of California, Davis$4,614,294

Multi-directional Testing Facility
Lehigh University$2,593,317

Consortium Development
Consortium of Universities for
Research in Earthquake Engineering$1,999,907
Reconfigurable Reaction Wall
University of California, Berkeley$4,268,323

Modular Simulation Laboratory
University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign$2,958,011

Field Testing Equipment
University of Texas, Austin$2,937,036

Large Uniaxial Shake Table
University of California, San Diego$5,890,000

Field Testing Equipment
University of California, Los Angeles$2,652,761

Figure 7. Locations of NEES Universities and Award Amounts. Figure provided by the National Science
Foundation.

The University received four NEES awards:• $2.96 million award for a Multi-Axial Full-Scale Sub-Structuring Testing and Simulation
Facility (MUST-SIM),• $10 million award to develop a "NEES grid: a distributed virtual laboratory for advanced
earthquake experimentation and simulation",• $0.3 million to design a national online network for sharing earthquake engineering data.
• $0.09 million to convene an Earthquake Engineering Research Community Workshop
Multi-Axial Full-Scale Sub-Structures Testing and Simulation (MUST-SIM). The $2.96 million
award is to create a facility where a full-scale subassembly can be subjected to complex loading andimposed deformation states at multiple connection points on the subassembly, including theconnection between the structure and its foundation. This NEES Multi-Axial Full-Scale Sub-Structures
Testing and Simulation (MUST-SIM) facility consists of:• 6-DOF load and position control at three connection points,• system modularity to allow for easy expansion and low-cost maintenance/operation,• multiple dense arrays of non-contact measurement devices,• T-section strong wall creating two testing compartments each providing support in threeloading planes and• advanced visualization and data mining capabilities for integrated teleoperation andteleobservation.
The MUST-SIM facility achieves the first two features through the development of modular six-DOF"Loading and Boundary Condition Boxes" (LBCB) that allow for precise application of complex load
and boundary conditions. The LBCBs, which are 4 m x 2 m x 2 m and house six actuators each, will
be able to impose motions on the test structures that are determined from the results of concurrently
running numerical models of the test specimen and the surrounding structure/foundation/soil system7

employing pseudo-dynamic testing methods. Dense arrays of state-of-the-art, non-contact
instrumentation, will allow near real-time model updating for the model-based simulation.
MUST-SIM’s Loading and Boundary Condition Boxes (LBCB) each use six actuators or 18 actuators
for the three independent boxes. These six DOF boxes may be attached at the bottom (on the strong
floor), on the side (on the reaction wall) or at the top (through an A-frame reacting onto the strong
floor) of test specimens. Go to http://cee.ce.uiuc.edu/research/nees/lbcb.asp for a description of the
LBCB and performance of the loading equipment.
A new reaction wall was constructed in CEED's Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory as part of the
NEES earthquake engineering testing facility. It is 25 m long and 9 m high. The facility will be
deployed in testing complete soil-foundation-structure systems.
The MUST-SIM will allow researchers to combine
computer simulation with laboratory testing to better
understand what happens to structures and building
materials during an earthquake.
The laboratory’s testing floor is 15 m x 40 m based on areinforced concrete box girder that is about 5 m deep.
The girder was proportioned to accommodate tests to
failure of full-scale bridge girders. The box girder'smass is over 106 kg making it an effective reaction
structure for dynamic experiments. The box girder is ina bay equipped with an overhead crane of 200 kN
capacity and has a clear height under the crane of over
9 m. The slab in the test area is perforated by 75 mm
Figure 8. NEES MUST-SIM Reaction
diameter holes at 914 mm spacing to facilitate theWall (Image courtesy of University of Illinois)
installation of modular loading equipment for a variety
of tests with vertical and horizontal loads. The bottom
slab and walls of the tunnels have attachments for installation of equipment for three-dimensionalloading. A permanently installed piping system under the pressure of 21 MPa delivers hydraulic-ram
fluid to all points on the test floor from a pair of pumps with a combined capacity of 5.7 L/sec.
To verify testing protocols, experiments are tested at 1/5th scale using a 1/5 reaction wall. These tests
are integrated with other models and software for experimentation, analysis, and visualization andcan be networked to the other 15 NEES users who have the authority to control the experiment. The
same networking is available for full-scale testing. NEES and MAE and the Earthquake Engineering
Centers are essentially one unit seeking answers to problems through shared capacities.
NEESgrid. The NEESgrid is a 39-month, $10,000,000 program to develop and operate a distributed
virtual laboratory for advanced earthquake experimentation and simulation. The effort is led by the
University of Illinois working in partnership with the Argon National Laboratory, Math and Computer
Science Division; University of Michigan, Collaboratory for Research on Electronic Work; Universityof Southern California, Information Science Institute and the Civil Engineering Department; andCarnegie-Mellon University, National Laboratory for Applied Network Research. This multiorganizational team will make operational the Internet-based, national-scale high performance
network system for NEES, called "NEESgrid". NEESgrid will connect, through a high performance
Internet network, distributed major earthquake engineering research equipment that includes shake
tables, geotechnical centrifuges, a tsunami wave basin, large-scale laboratory experimentation
systems, and field experimentation and monitoring installations funded through separate NEES
equipment awards made by the NSF NEES program. Teleobservation, teleoperation, and network
monitoring will be performed among the NEES organizations. The NEESgrid will link computational
resources and data storage facilities that will archive experimental and analytical earthquake
engineering and related data. NEESgrid also will provide distributed physical and numericalsimulation capabilities and resources for visualization of experimental and computed data. NEESgrid

8support nodes will maintain online knowledge bases that contain tutorials and operate help desks forusing NEESgrid.
A $300,000 award is for implementing the NEES on-line network that will provide earthquake
engineers remote access to testing and experimental facilities. The network will provide researchers
across the U.S. access to advanced research equipment, databases, and computer modeling andsimulation tools.
Its $90,000 Workshop award is to organize a national workshop that will define the information
technology requirements of the earthquake engineering research community for NEES. This
workshop will seek input from the earthquake engineering research community in six areas:• access to shared use earthquake engineering research equipment,• supporting telecollaboration and teleoperation of the shared use equipment,• shared use of distributed heterogeneous data sets,• definition of new data types and metadata schemes,• use and sharing of simulation models, and• use of advanced visualization technologies and tools.
The results of this workshop will be disseminated on the World Wide Web and in printed form.
National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) Visualization and Virtual
Environments Group. Alan Craig of the Visualization and Virtual Reality, NCSA was one of two
hosts providing demonstrations about NCSA’s Computer Aided Visualization Environment (CAVE)
and the High Resolution Tiled Display Wall (HRTDW).
The CAVE is a virtual reality facility designed to explore and interact with spatially engaging
environments. The CAVE allows stereoscopic viewing that enables the users to interact with theirdata such as "climb inside" a hurricane and visualize its complex and chaotic elements from any
angle or visual perspective. A biological researcher can examine a tightly coiled strand of DNA andvirtually "unravel" this strand and manipulate it in an environment that preserves the critical depth
information of the data. Such technology allows innovation and facilitates cutting-edge research. The
CAVE is a room about 3 m x 3 m with three walls and a floor. Projectors, situated behind the walls,
projected computer-generated imagery onto the walls and floor. Two perspective-corrected images
were drawn for each frame, one for the right eye and one for the left. Special glasses are worn toensure that each eye sees only the image drawn for it. This created a stereoscopic effect where thedepth information encoded in the virtual scene was restored and conveyed to the eyes of those using
it. The CAVE has an advanced tracking system that enables it to constantly track the position andorientation of the special tracked glasses and the CAVE Wand. The tracked glasses have a wireattached to them that is attached to the Tracker Control Unit. The person wearing the tracked glasses
controls the viewpoint of the CAVE. They can look around the corner of an object, step behind it, lookunderneath it, or anything else that they could do in real life. None of the other glasses have thiscapability. The CAVE Wand is also attached to the Tracker Control Unit by a wire and allows theoperator to walk around (with the joystick in the middle) or interact with the virtual world through thepush buttons.
The HRTDW uses eight by five grid of off-the-shelf Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) projectors poweredby an equal number of side-by-side computers that creates a mosaic of imagery. The overall display
is 2.6 m by 5.4 m that provides 31.5 million pixels. Each projector is aligned to minimize any visible
gap between the edges of the projected image. The Tiled Display wall allows in-depth visualization to
explore classes of problems that would be very difficult to analyze such as visualize the interior of asevere storm and examining the flow of particles through it. Analyzing prototype equipment andstructural assembly techniques allows close up views to develop and test potential product design
before building physical models and specifying assembly techniques that ultimately will reduce costs
and speeds the time-to-market.
The delegation discussed advanced technologies permitting 3D visualization of hazard andvulnerability before and after intervention. The approach combines the system inventory, the various

9levels of vulnerability of the system under consideration and the hazard definition using advanced IT
and GIS-based visualization in an interactive module that displays losses for given return periods,
specific loss estimates for a scenario event or a real earthquake occurrence for a system relevant to a
stakeholder. The project combines engineering seismologists, structural and geotechnical earthquake
engineers, and computer scientists.
3.
ST. LOUIS
Clark Cable-Stay Bridge, Alton, Il and New I-70 Cable-Stay Bridge. The delegation visited the
Clark Bridge in Alton, Illinois to view its design and environmental setting. Thomas Havenar from
Hanson Professional Services and Dr. Nicholas Marianos from Modjeski and Masters discussed thedesign and construction of the Clark Bridge, Alton, Illinois and the new I-70 Cable-stay Bridge
respectively.
Clark Bridge.
The Clark Bridge links Illinois and Missouri. This $100 million bridge (costs includes demolition andrenovations) accommodates four lanes of vehicle traffic and two bicycle lanes. It was named after the
explorer William Clark who with Meriwether Lewis spent two-years during their 6,400 km expedition
up the Mississippi River and to the Pacific Ocean during 1804-1806. The bridge replaced the former 6
m wide Clark Bridge constructed in the 1920s.
Construction of the new Clark Bridge started in 1989 and was completed in 1994. Its main span is
414 m. The bridge is constructed of a central pylon 18 m above the river and 30 m above its
foundation. Piling tips are H-beams that served as a “stinger” to allow the piles to be driven 43 m
below bedrock. The center span is supported by an innovative cable stay anchorage system. Its
pylons are designed for cable stays with saddle pipe anchorage at the top. It is a single pylon and twoplanes of stays arrangement. The floor beams are 31 m spans, tapered 1.5 m to 1.8 m deep. The
deck thickness is 260 mm tapered to 0.6 m thick at
the pylon.
Cable stays vary from 19 to 46 strands that are epoxy
coated within a polyethylene pipe with tedlar tape orinserted in a painted metal pipe.
DOT requested installation of cross ties in 1996 or
1997 to dampen rain-induced vibrations.
The bridge required 6 million kg of structural steel,
34,000 m3 of concrete, and 260 km of cable (44cables). The bridge design was based mostly on
AASHTO standards. Wind loads were derived fromthe University of Western Ontario wind tunnel tests.
The bridge design was honored with ten design
awards and was the subject of a NOVA Special(documentary science television series).

Figure 9. Clark Bridge, Alton, Illinois

Proposed I-70 cable Stay Bridge.
The proposed $280 million I-70 Mississippi River cable-stay bridge is part of a $1.6 billion
Illinois/Missouri transportation project that includes improving three major interstates that travel
through and around St. Louis. The bridge will feature three planes of cables and two single-pylon
towers 137 m above the deck each inclined nine degrees from the river. The bridge when completed
will become the world’s widest cable-stayed structure at 68 m. Originally the bridge will be designed
for eight lanes of traffic -- 22 m per side. Shoulders will allow an additional lane to be used for
expansion at a later time. The 610 m main span will be the longest clear span across the river and thelongest cable-stayed span in the Western Hemisphere and the fifth longest in the world. Construction
was scheduled to start in 2004 but has been delayed due to the Congressional passage of the 2003

10

Transportation Reauthorization Bill; original completion is estimated at 2010. The bridge is designed
for a 150-year life.
One of the main geotechnical issues isthe existence of thick deposits of “lowdensity” sand below the water table.
Limestone bedrock is 37 m below thesurface on the Illinois side andbetween 9 m and 18 m below thesurface on the Missouri side. The loose
sand and the bridge’s high seismic
design requirements, results in thepotential for liquefaction during anearthquake. To accommodate these
conditions the foundations will feature
Figure 10. Proposed new I-70 Cable Stay Bridge St. Louis.
4 - 1.2 m to 3.7 m diameter, 37 m long
(Image courtesy Hanson Professional Services)
drilled piers founded in rock to support
the bridge superstructure. Also,
possible areas of small voids in the rock under the Illinois tower will be filled before the Tower isconstructed.
The scour analyses led to special considerations about the bridge substructure. Excavation for the
Illinois side pylon will be made using “a large, dredge well caisson.” This method will incorporate a 34
m to 43 m concrete base containing open dredge wells with a perimeter steel cutting edge, which issunk into the overburden. On the Missouri side, where bedrock is much shallower, a large concretepedestal and footing foundation on rock will support the pylon.
Hydraulics analysis estimate the effect of the bridge on flood levels for the 100-year flood and for the
500-year flood indicated significant impacts on flood levels.
The Bridge’s main span will consist of 1,600 km of 15 mm diameter stay-cable strand. The larger
stands are 335 m long with 2,000 Kip tension over 100 stands per bundle. The design wind speed is
35 m/s with buffeting. The fundamental period is 0.23 HZ lateral and vertical is 0.25 Hz.
The bridge deck will be designed with a center joint so both halves of the bridge can operate
independently. The center joint needs to accommodate various bridge deck rotations. The bridge will
include dampers to reduce cable vibrations. Design provisions will include an option to install counter
cable connectors at a later date should they be needed.
Melvin Price Lock and Dam.
http://www.mvs.usace.army.mil/dinfo/pa/NEWNAVIGATIONPAGE/melvinpricelocksanddam.htm
Dr. Gregory Hempen, Geophysicist/Geological Engineer, USACE St. Louis District hosted thedelegation about the design and operation of and a visit to the Melvin Price Lock and Dam (MPLD).
The Corps has been involved in the construction of the National Road, navigation improvements on
the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, dam construction, domestic inland waterway development, to namea few. In 1880 Congress mandated the USACE to create and maintain navigation channels and today
they maintain over 19,000 km of US waterways. The USACE operates 36 district offices in the US;
these districts follow watershed boundaries. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) dates backto 1802 when Congress authorized the President to organize and establish a Corps of Engineers thatwas based in West Point, NY.
This new dam was build downstream of the older dam but upstream of the confluence of theMississippi and Missouri Rivers. The Mississippi River has the third largest drainage basin in theworld. The Missouri River is the longest river in the US and drains approximately one-sixth of theNorth American continent. The combined Missouri-Mississippi river system is the fourth longest riverin the world.

11

The dam replaced Dam #26 constructed in the 1930s and became operational in 1938. It is locatedjust upstream of the old and new Clark Bridge and about 3 km north of the new MPLD. Over time thedam’s locking capacity became inadequate to accommodate the increased river traffic and thestructure began to deteriorate with structural deficiencies. Scour holes developed in places below thedam and the scouring of the river bed led to the disintegration of the concrete and loss of foundationmaterial which resulted in deflection and settlement of the lock walls and dam piers.
Construction on a new twin lock anddam began in 1979 and construction
was partially completed and the dam
and main lock began operation in 1991.
Its main lock measures 365 m long by
34 m wide and the auxiliary lockmeasures 180 m long and 34 m wide.
The dam dimensions are 488 m longwith nine tainter gates (balanced by acounterweight as it is raised andlowered to keep the water level at thedesired depth). The gates are each 34
m wide by 13 m high; they are notdesigned to control flooding. The pool
length is 65 km.
Figure 11. Aerial view of the Melvin Price Lock and Dam. (Image
courtesy of USACE)

12