| 1. |
How long has this
program been operational? Month:
April Year: 1997 |
| |
|
| |
Tillamook County taxpayers voted approval for Hospital work in
summer of 1996. Ground breaking was April 1997.
|
| |
|
| 2. |
What are the major
purposes of this program? What problem(s) or
issue(s) was
it designed to address? |
| |
|
| |
Seismic protection of County’s only hospital. Design criteria
was to a UBC ’94
Zone IV standard, exceeding that required by Oregon State Building
Codes
Division’s designation of Zone III for Tillamook. (Damping of the structure
with "supplemental" fluid viscous dampers has permitted an elastic design under
0.25g PGA demand which actually exceeds a UBC ’94 Zone IV standard
(i.e. 0.21g base
shear reduced, for UBC design purposes, from a 0.4g PGA). |
| |
|
| 3. |
Describe the specific
activities and operations of the program. |
| |
|
| |
Various construction crews will install "dynamic" braces,
which integrate fluid viscous dampers. Existing shear walls will be strengthened. |
| |
|
| 4. |
Does this program take a
new and creative approach or method? If yes, please describe. |
| |
|
| |
In consultation with its Structural Engineer, HBE Corporation (St.
Louis), TCGH, as the first "fixed-base" hospital in the world to install fluid
viscous dampers, has indeed taken a creative approach in preserving its building’s
structure under a
0.25 PGA input. |
| |
|
| 5. |
What were the program’s
start-up costs and source(s) of
funding? |
| |
|
| |
$11 Million Budget* Source: Taxpayers and Adventist Health System |
| |
|
| |
*Of the $11 Million Renovation and Addition total, installation of
supplemental damping will cost $250,000 (or $5.63 sq./ft.) |
| |
|
| 6. |
What are the program’s annual operational costs and source(s)
of funding? |
| |
|
| |
N/A Budget Source: Taxpayers and Adventist Health System |
| |
|
| 7. |
How many employees
(full-time equivalent) work(ed) with this
program? |
| |
|
| |
Various construction crews. Tillamook County General Hospital, a
49-bed acute
care hospital, serves a community of 20,000 county residents and employs
over
20 workers. |
| |
|
| 8. |
To the best of your
knowledge, did this program originate in your state? Yes |
| |
|
| |
Are you aware of similar programs in other states? Yes |
| |
|
| |
San Bernardino County’s Arrowhead Regional Medical Center
(Colton, CA)
(although of a "base-isolated" design) has applied Taylor
Devices’ fluid viscous dampers for supplemental damping. |
| |
|
| 9. |
Has the program been
fully implemented? No |
| |
|
| |
If No, what actions remain to be taken? |
| |
|
| |
Construction will progress through Fall, 1998. |
| |
|
| 10. |
Is there evidence
that the program has been effective in achieving its stated purpose(s)? Briefly summarize evaluations (pro and con) of how well
the
program has addressed the defined problem(s) or issue(s). |
| |
|
| |
Though seismic input has yet to exercise any installed Taylor fluid
viscous
damper, substantial testing (including that at UC Berkeley for the Golden Gate
Bridge retrofit) has proven efficacy |
| |
|
| 11. |
How has the program
changed since its inception? What limitations or obstacles might
other states expect to encounter if they attempt to adopt this
program? |
| |
|
| |
Since the supplemental damping approach supplanted a shear wall
addition
program, no substantial change in seismic design has occurred. A damped
design
brought substantial cost and construction disturbance benefits over
that of shear wall
addition. |
| |
|
| |
Allowing similar benefits to flow to other states depends upon
property owners, design professionals and State Building Officials being alerted to the
benefits of supplemental damping. |
| |
|
| 12. |
Additional comments: |
| |
|
| |
Significant to this nomination is the proof of practical and
economic
implementation of "supplemental damping." "Fluid viscous
dampers" allow
designers and owners to substitute deliberate channeling of
earthquake-induced energy to discrete and capable structural elements in lieu of
the historically
relied upon "crutch" of random inelastic behavior. This new
structural
engineering tool empowers engineers and owners to candidly surmount the
deficiencies of the present Building Code. In this way building owners may
prepare to
minimize future operational disruption AND economic loss.
|
