Anti-Seismic System Placed in a Shaft of a Load-Bearing Structure

Τheory

What does this invention achieve which is not achieved with the current technology?Current technology simply secures the structure to the ground.

My invention unites it with the ground making these two as one (like a sandwich). For me, this uniting of the structure with the ground beneficially changes the direction and type of forces which act upon the structure dynamically during an earthquake.
Influences which cause failure in buildings:

a) Shearing stressb) Moment of the nodesHow these are created:A) SHEARING STRESSa) Shearing stress is created mainly on the vertical supporting components during earthquake acceleration due to the inertia of the mass.Question: Is the shearing stress the same in all of the supporting components?

Answer: No. The shearing is greater in force in the ground floor components

Question: Why?

Answer: For two main reasons- They have to handle (in movement) a greater mass which necessitates greater inertia, thereby creating greater shearing on the cross section plan.- The ground floor components are more rigid.All of the other supporting components (except for those of the ground floor) have a certain amount of elasticity in the nodes and supporting components which is beneficial in that they absorb the force of the earthquake due to transfer ofthis force into heat.

However, this beneficial absorption of energy is cancelled to a greater degree by the components of the ground floor for one main reason.

Underneath the components (columns) on the ground floor the base is inflexible (because it is usually under the ground). It therefore transfers wholly the acceleration of the earthquake (and in this way shearing stress is also increased).

At the components (columns) of the upper floors the same does not occur because the components of the ground floor have already absorbed part of the force and less energy is transferred upwards to the more elastic components.Because of this and due to the increased mass load which has to be handled we see greatly increased shearing stresses on the ground floor components.

This explains why the majority of failures happen on the ground floor.This issue can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the components of the ground floor. But if we do this then another problem occurs; we lose the elasticity in the components (and in this way we also lose the damping of the acceleration).B) MOMENT OF THE NODESMoment of the nodes also acts to create stress on the horizontal and vertical supporting components by shearing stress and occurs for the following reason.

During the acceleration of an earthquake we know that there is inertia of the load bearing elements but in addition inertia of the bearing mass has to be handled. These burden the vertical components with horizontal shearing stress.In a high rise building, the vertical components are united from the first up to the top floor.

The structural integrity of all the components of the load bearing elements (columns, girders, slabs) is improved when these are joined at the node points.During the inertia of the bearing elements, these node points react with moment which taxes the vertical and horizontal supporting elements with shearing stresses.

If the design is not correct, this results in failure of the vertical elements which are brittle but not the horizontal.The reason for this is that the vertical elements (columns) have a smaller cross section by comparison to the girders. The girders mass along the length forms a structural unit with the slab so that it is considered a unified body stronger than the vertical element.

If we consider that each column bears at least two girders, we understand the difference in endurance (with regards to the shearing) between the column and the horizontal bearing element.During oscillation of a tall building, there is the tendency for it to lift up off the ground on one side due to moment, creating a gap underneath the back foundations. That is, the front columns try to lift up the back ones due to the structural unity that they have.

This unity is provided by the girders.This gap cancels the resistance which is present between the ground and building base as the base which was securing the building is now in mid-air.Of course, this event never really happens in reality because the static load of the structure during the lifting of one side immobilizes the column with the base to the ground creating moment of the nodes.

These moments create slanted shearing of the cross section of the vertical element which cannot withstand the load and we have cancelling of the structural unity of the building.This explanation can be clearly seen during the first minute of the experiment which I have carried out

:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJIsx1sKkLk&feature=player_embedded

View this video.

It is the Greek dialect, but Shows three different load-bearing structure. a) The first bearing frame construction is lightweight. b) The second bearing frame construction is heavy. c) The third, bearing frame is bolted to the ground See how nodes react when we have an earthquake.

In the first minutes of the experiment, we see a wooden structure (building skeleton) which, during inertia oscillates and lifts up on one side and then on the other alternately.

This occurs because it is light and the nodes withstand the moment which is created from the static weight of the unsupported side of the structure.As soon as we place the static load of the two bricks, it still oscillates but the base does not lift up on either side.

In this situation the nodes can no longer withstand the additional load of the bricks.Considering the analysis I have done above, we see why a structure fails when the limits of the design are surpassed.

There is no absolute anti-seismic design.Current Greek anti-seismic systems have a certain amount of endurance but from this point onwards, the truth is that they are fragile.

In my opinion the endurance here has particular limits due to my reasoning above. This phenomenon can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the ground floor components. If we do this though, another problem emerges; as stated before; we lose elasticity of the components (and the depreciation of the acceleration)

.MY PROPOSED SOLUTION

The solution can be seen in the continuation of the experiment shown in the link above as well as in the explanation below.

There are three issues which need to be addressed in order to apply pre-stressing between the ground and the structure (the clamping of the ground with the structure)a) bendingb) durability of the materialsc) durability of the groundFor the pre-stressing or clamping of the structure with the ground to operate beneficially during an earthquake, a large cross section plan of the supporting components is necessary as well as very durable materials if it is to provide additional benefits.Pre fabricated houses offer these two necessary components as they are constructed completely from fortified concrete.

The problem of loose ground (c) is resolved by using Radiere together with the specialised hydraulic traction mechanism. This improves the durability of the ground and provides additional support to the foundations.See what happens to conventional houses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgc19Qsj8Jo&feature=player_embedded

Imagine PREFABRICATED houses which are made of fortified concrete and secured (screwed) at their four corners with this seismic base … even if they are turned upside down, nothing can happen to them.

Question:When we do not screw down the base, what will happen?

Answer:

If we have tall buildings completed constructed from fortified concrete, these will withstand the shearing stress but their nodes will have increased load due to the gap (discussed above) which is created under the base during second moment of the area as well as the greater static load which they bear.

The combination of moment and static load creates slanting cracks in the walls.Because of this prefabricated houses are suitable to be built only a few stories high. If we make the prefabricated house from fortified concrete ONE with the ground though:
http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

…. It cannot lift up on one side during second moment of the area and in this way we avoid moment of the nodes.

THE FINANCIAL ASPECT

I believe that with this method, prefabricated houses can be placed in towns. Until now these houses have only been suitable for rural areas. The main reason for this is that the law does not allow them to be built more than two stories high.If they become invulnerable during an earthquake and they can withstand the force with many stories then their construction will be permitted in towns.

At this moment, they are not permitted in towns because if, in a town ten story buildings are allowed and prefabricated ones can only be constructed up to two stories, financially it is not feasible to lose the possibility of another eight stories.If I enable them to withstand earthquakes, then conventional methods of construction will be dispensed due to the fact that prefabricated structures are 30-50% cheaper because they are industrially produced.

This way the manufacturers will profit from this change.Apart from being for anti-seismic use, my invention can be used as a pre-stressing anchor for the improvement of the ground:For example http://postimage.org/image/29l3p1xpg/

That is, it can improve the density of loose ground as well as not allowing the structure to move upwards (during oscillation) or downwards (during subsidence of the ground).

I have already mentioned the placement methods in existing and buildings under construction as well as other types of structures such as dams and bridges etc.The patent is also appropriate also for the protection of lightweight buildings during tornadoes which are seen mostly in the United States .

I appreciate your efforts, but nothing can be shown to work, (absolutely), until it's tried in real life. Since you claim to have a patent, you should be looking for investors, not engineers.

I'm getting a strange sense of deja vu. Were you or your brother here a few months ago with an underground shock absorber system that claimed to do the same thing?

I can't find the thread...................but it was another inventor from Greece with a patent.

They don't come up that often.

If word count means anything, this is a winner.

The simulation is done at Technical University of Greece
( By Professor Manolis PapadrakakisInstitute of Structural Analysis & Seismic ResearchNational Technical University of Athenshttp://users.civil.ntua.gr/papadrakakis/en/cv.html )
showed that the system improves the earthquake resistance of structures 31.9% more than the current earthquake safety regulations.Draft report In Greek dialect.Simulation results in attachment.

https://rapidshare.com/#!download|182p12|580587526|Draft_Report_Ευρεσιτεχνίας.rar

not extend

See here on Post 34

http://www.emichanikos.gr/showthread.php?880-A%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%B9%CF%83%CE%B5%CE%B9%CF%83%CE%BC%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C-%CF%83%CF%8D%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%B1-%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%B8%CE%B5%CF%84%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%AD%CE%BD%CE%BF-%CF%83%CE%B5-%CF%86%CF%81%CE%B5%CE%AC%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BF-%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%85-%CF%86%CE%AD%CF%81%CE%BF%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%B1/page2
I believe that if placed correctly in different agencies, will increase the strength of theconstruction industry by 100% with what this means in terms of safety, economy,engineering, and the cost to repair occurring after the earthquake.

More information on the website of the patent
http://www.antiseismic-systems.com/index.php?lang=en

ummm...what happens when the earth around the anchors is fractured by the quake?

Ground fluidization (subsidence) as well as the cracks, caused by an earthquake, are a major problem, which, however, in part has been resolved by the invention.

Stopping the videο http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPaNZcHBKRI&feature=player_embedded at the point showing under the ground surface, a pipe can be observed starting from the anchor and reaching up to the bottom part of the base.

This is called resistance pipe, and is useful for the following reasons:

• it constitutes the passage of the steel cable applying the pre-stressing,
• should the ground recede under the base, then this resistance pipe undertakes the weight of the base and transfers it to the banks (side-walls) of the drilling (this is a very important reason),
• should the banks of the drilling recede (due to oscillations), the steel cable does not sag because the hydraulic pressure (under the piston in the upper part of the system) causes the tightening of the steel cable which in turn generates resistance on the bottom anchor piston the movement of which activates the anchor pins to move towards the solid ground around them restoring the desirable embedding in the banks (side-walls) of the drilling.

I just don't know about this, especially without actual independent laboratory load testing and analysis backing up the claims.....

Well, if I was one of the big wig investors on the TV show "Shark Tank" I'd have to fold and walk away from any deal without some verification that this works. Computer sims are one thing, but not the "end all".

You're right, it's the very same guy or his brother or cousin......

TRUST BUT VERIFY........having a Patent means squat, because in the end it has to actually work and lives are a stake if it fails.

a) The hydraulic pressure does not let the wire come loose.
b) if the slope of the drilling subsided, the mechanism automatically opens.
c) does not allow construction to go neither up nor down

You have very fair.
We tried more experiments

I read your site with interest but I don't understand your sandwich simile. How is this better in a non-obvious way than any other known anchoring mechanism?

The difference between them is as follows.I create prestressing between ground and roof. (Since the mechanism of hydraulic tractorimplements vertical prestressing in columns or walls, we know that this pre-stressing in the superposition have beneficial results.)It is the first time in the world to do this.Current technology simply secures the structure to the ground. My invention unites it with the ground making these two as one (like a sandwich).
What are the benefits of prestressing on the cutting floor of the column.

The prestressing (general sorrow) has positive results, because the trajectoriesimproves the lateral strength.

On the other hand you have and the other good ... reduced cracking compression, which increases the cross-section and increases the stiffness of the structure.

The factors that determine the seismic behavior of structures are numerous, and partlyprobabilistic nature. (Unknown address earthquake unknown the exact content of the seismic excitation frequency, duration unknown.) Even the maximum possibleacceleration given by the seismologists, are unlikely to be exceeded, more than 10%planned

The correlation of the quantities (if we can see that) "inertial tensions - damping forces -elastic forces - dynamic design characteristics - soil interaction design - Positive Ground Movement" is a non-linear way and unexplored in the dynamics of structures with non-obvious content .

I don't see anything resembling a sandwich.

Your claim is for a precompressed wall element. Am I right that the usual practice is to stretch the rebar, not to compress it?

You also have an underground anchor in a wellbore, connected to that precompressed wall element, for the purpose of maintaining the anchor in compression. You mention something about a screw configuration for the anchor. Is this an independent claim?

Anti-seismic system placed in a shaft of a load-bearing structure

The main object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of our invention along with its application method in the construction field for structural projects is to minimise the problems associated with the safety of structural projects such as buildings in the case of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornados and very powerful winds in general. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the roof of a large, geometrical part of the building structure which independent of the load-bearing structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich.

This pre-stressing force is applied by the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects, said mechanism mainly consisting of a steel cable penetrating free in the centre the vertical support elements of the structure, as well as the drilling length, beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism http://postimage.org/image/2dmcy79yc/

that is embedded into the banks (walls) of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. This embedding is attained due to the drilling hole being somewhat smaller than the exterior diameter of the completely opened anchor mechanism.

Said steel cable's top end is also tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism exerting a continuous uplifting force. http://postimage.org/image/2mlql3ag4/

This pulling mechanism comprises a piston, said piston reciprocating within a piston sleeve, connected to a pressure chamber beneath it. This pulling force, exerted on the top-end of the steel cable, by the hydraulic mechanism http://postimage.org/image/qwytuv44/

due to the hydraulic pressure originating from the rise of the chamber towards the piston, and the reaction in this pulling force originating from the embedded anchor at its other end generate the desirable compression in the construction project which in turn is tied to the ground and thus rendered resistant to the horizontal forces of an earthquake. http://postimage.org/image/14tj1webo/

THE BENEFICIAL EFECTS OF PRESTRESSING (TRACTION) BETWEEN THE BULDING STRUCTURE AND THE GROUND

a) If we have a solid concrete column anchored to the ground with the traction mechanism and fortified with steel

or

b) If we have a solid concrete column prestressed with the ground (like a sandwich)

and we apply a horizontal traction, these columns will have more resistance to the sideways traction compared to a single column which simply stands on the ground.

This, I believe, is understandable to all.

Now, if we have two solid concrete columns that are not anchored to the ground but connected to each other at the top by a beam and we then apply a sideways force, in my opinion the following will occur:

1) Firstly, the columns themselves will produce a small resistance to the sideways force

2) When this resistance in the columns bends they do not subside as before because another force acts.

3) This additional force which resists the sideways traction is in the nodes.

This strength in the nodes arises from the union of the two columns with the beam which creates structural integrity and entity.

This node strength resists the sideways force like a torque.

If we consider all the resistance forces acting against the sideways traction we see that:

Concrete columns which are anchored or prestressed with the ground will create greater resistance than those which are simply resting upon the ground.

The corners will not need to act in resistance if the anchored or prestressed columns manage on their own to bring about enough resistance to the side force which we are applying.

Here we see that the prestressed or anchored columns act in addition to the existing resistance of the structure with regards to the horizontal inertia tension when faced with the opposing acceleration of an earthquake.

If the cross-section plan of the solid concrete walls http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/ is appropriately constructed and the anchoring or prestressing is also appropriate then the corners will not need to undergo any torque resistance to side forces.

In this way we eliminate torque of the corners.

The union of the walls with the ground is carried out by the traction mechanism.

There are six methods of placement

HYDRAULIC TIE ROD FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO BUILDING STABILITY

FIRST PLACEMENT METHOD

The patented video shows the mode of operation and method of collaboration of the antiseismic system, with bearings, which offers effective seismic isolation of the vertical and horizontal axes of a structure so that buildings repairs are avoided to the greatest extent following an earthquake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPaNZcHBKRI&feature=player_embedded

The above is achieved by placing right at the centre of the load-bearing structure, (Or both ends of the building) architecturally exploitable in an effort to lower the cost, pre-stressed with the ground but independent from the load-bearing structure, rigid shaft, or dimensionally large cross-shaped column, or even a big room. The essential condition for the above rigid geometrical forms is for them to have axial vertical continuity, along the whole height of the building, and to be constructed entirely from reinforced pre-stressed with the ground concrete.

This pre-stressing applied by the hydraulic tie rod on the shaft and on the ground, is mainly imposed in order for these two parts to become one body, such that at the horizontal acceleration of the earthquake, the ground, the base, and the loft of the shaft are found in the same acceleration phase (in the same time-space as one body in the three dimensions).

The larger the geometric dimensions of the base (cross-section area), relative to the height, the larger is the resistance in the foot block, as well as in the emerging shearing.

An increase in the pre-stressing placed on the shaft, means a corresponding increase in its resistance to shearing, an increase in the compaction of the drilling banks, and consequently a better embedding of the anchor mechanism.

In order to achieve the independence of the rigid shaft from the load-bearing structure, we leave a gap between them. This gap is useful for the following reasons:

• earthquake dynamics is not transferred from the shaft to the load-bearing structure,
• the load-bearing structure remains independent in the seismic insulation offered to it by the double "one-piece" base-plate away from the oscillating shaft,
• the load-bearing structure exhausts the mechanical resistance properties of the existing reinforcement, (so that it does not transfer large impact forces to the shaft), and just before it breaks, there occurs damping and retaining of the load-bearing structure on hydraulic systems placed in the lift gap, (rubber, or dampers),
• to prevent the load-bearing structure from leaning on the lift shaft and transferring the additional compressive forces of its weight, thereby making the application of further pre-stressing forces on the shaft possible, thus rendering it more rigid.
• to help the columns in transferring the earthquake forces, not only vertically, but also laterally in same time-space, by means of the pre-stressed rigid shaft and the dampers.

All this elasticity of the vertical axis of the load-bearing structure may be put under control in such a fashion as to achieve the smooth transfer of its vertical axis torques to the shaft.

When it is intended for the upper floors to oscillate more than the lower ones, the gap on the upper floors is made larger, setting a lower pressure on their hydraulics, in relation to the lower floors. Operating in such a manner, and in order to keep the bending action of the vertical axis under control to avoid the destructive transfer of torque towards the lower floors, the transfer of torque is computed statically during the plate impact from each and every floor onto the shaft and following that the proper gap between each floor plate and the rigid structure is computed and the proper hydraulic pressure is applied on the dampers.

In order to further strengthen the rigidity of the rigid structure (shaft), to decrease the oscillation amplitude, to prevent the overthrow, and to increase the shaft resistance to the shearing stress that is generated by the lateral impact of the plates due to their inertia, it is necessary to render the rigid structure "one-body" with the ground.

This can be achieved by means of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects mechanism, applying pre-stressing between the loft (top floor) and the ground, making these two parts "one-body".

CONCLUSION

It is wrong to let the columns transfer all alone the horizontal forces of an earthquake from the bottom to the top in the load-bearing structure, as is currently the case in the majority of the building construction methods.

The horizontal forces of an earthquake are not transferred effortlessly from the columns to the structure framework, this being due to the existence of other forces acting contrary to the direction of the earthquake horizontal forces, said forces originating from the inertia of the plates and resulting in the plates not responding readily to the direction of the earthquake horizontal forces. This opposition of forces on the horizontal axis of the building structure, creates shearing stresses, as well as non-uniform bending in the shape of an S (for the reasons reported above) deforming the vertical axis of the structure, with the known results.

It is at this point that the invention provides for the columns to transfer the earthquake forces uniformly and smoothly, not only vertically towards the top, but also horizontally to the floor plates, by means of the hydraulic tie rod, the pre-stressed shaft, and the hydraulic dampers placed in the gap.

Deductively in this way, the framework vertical axis maintains its initial form, not deforming into an S shape, due to the uniform movement of the mass of the multiple plates in the same time-space imposed on them by the pre-stressed shaft, relieving and helping this way the columns to transfer the destructive earthquake forces to the plates. That is to say, the invention creates controlled flexibility on the load-bearing structure vertical axis, helps the columns transfer laterally the earthquake forces to the plates, at the same time achieving the seismic insulation of the load-bearing structure horizontal axis (with double "one-piece" base-plates carrying elastic inserts between them). Moreover it also stops the tendency of the building to rise unilaterally, said tendency originating from the increase of the oscillation co-ordination, which oscillation co-ordination depends on the height of the building, the time duration of the earthquake as well as the wavelength of the earthquake and the amplitude of its oscillation.

Ground fluidization (subsidence) as well as the cracks, caused by an earthquake, are a major problem, which, however, in part has been resolved by the invention.

Stopping the video at the point showing under the ground surface, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPaNZcHBKRI&feature=player_embedded

or http://postimage.org/image/2dmcy79yc/

a pipe can be observed starting from the anchor and reaching up to the bottom part of the base.

This is called resistance pipe, and is useful for the following reasons:

• it constitutes the passage of the steel cable applying the pre-stressing,
• should the ground recede under the base, then this resistance pipe undertakes the weight of the base and transfers it to the banks (side-walls) of the drilling (this is a very important reason),
• should the banks of the drilling recede (due to oscillations), the steel cable does not sag because the hydraulic pressure (under the piston in the upper part of the system) causes the tightening of the steel cable which in turn generates resistance on the bottom anchor piston the movement of which activates the anchor pins to move towards the solid ground around them restoring the desirable embedding in the banks (side-walls) of the drilling.

SECOND PLACEMENT METHOD

There is another method of placement of the hydraulic traction mechanism in building structures.

This method does not include horizontal seismic isolation, http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

Or bearings

Or gaps

We simply convert sections of the internal brick-built walls of the building to walls consisting of reinforced concrete which have the same continuation on all of the floors. We insert these at carefully placed low pre-stress points between the bore hole and the hydraulic mechanism on the roof.

What we achieve with this method:

a) If the skeletal framework of a building tilts by a few degrees due to oscillation created by an earthquake, do the corners of the framework nodes have the possibility to remain at 90 degree angles?

Of course not,

Why not?

Simply stated, because the skeletal framework has a static load. During oscillation the nodes are required to take the force, but they cannot withstand this so the corners change shape, and, from right angles, some become greater and some lesser than 90 degrees. This results in slanting or bowed cracks in the corner nodes.

If the corners do withstand the static load so that they remain as right angles, logic tells us that the front and back columns will alternatively raise each other off the ground during oscillation. This, though, is impossible because the bearing element is full of nodes and static loads.

b) If the oscillation creates the above problems on the nodes, wouldn't it be best if we can prevent this? And if so, how can we achieve this?

c) Another option might be to bind the building all around with steel cables at 45 degrees and anchor them (something which is impossible in practice).

Alternatively, we could take a portion of the structure, for example the internal walls and replace them with reinforced concrete and anchor these with the ground at appropriate points. In this way oscillation is prevented by bringing about resistance with roof, the connecting columns and the foundations of the structure.

Why do I recommend that we convert the internal brick walls to reinforced concrete and to anchor these with the ground?

For the following reasons:

a) So that the external walls are fully available for placement of doors, windows and glass panelling.

b) Because the internal walls due to their architectural nature have a cruciform shape and this dimensional form creates greater resistance to an earthquake from whichever direction it comes.

c) Because the formwork can be placed and removed easily.

d) Because dimensionally they are capable of withstanding the tendency to bend.

e) Because they have a superior dimensional plan and are capable of creating greater resistance in the chambers and columns.

In the diagrams below we illustrate the conversion of brick walls to reinforced concrete as well as the anchor points necessary to prevent oscillation of the building which strains the nodes of the structure creating slanting cracks: http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

Placement in underwater roads:

http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVsUYe0

Placement in continuous brick- based structures:

http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVsUGM0

Placement in subordinate and wooden houses for protection from both earthquake and hurricane damage:

http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVsUEgS

Placement in a dam:

http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVsUQKA

This system can also be placed in bridge pylons under the bearings.

THIRD PLACEMENT METHOD

By applying prestressing with the hydraulic traction mechanism between the drill hole and the top of the structure via the vertical supports. This prestressing not only improves endurance against shearing, but there is an additional advantage.

During inertia tension of the bearing element, oscillation is brought about. At the prestressed vertical support, two opposing forces are created. One in the pressure chamber and the other in the vertical column and it's foundation as a reaction to the oscillation. Within the body of the vertical support these two opposing forces created act in resistance against the earthquake.

This resistance is in addition to the resistance already present in the nodes of the structure and acts against the catastrophic power of the earthquake.

We can exert prestress on the vertical elements in two ways:

a) normal prestress or

b) controlled lesser prestress.

If the preferred elements are able to withstand the stressing we apply the normal pre-stress. If they cannot, then we apply the controlled lesser prestress.

Greater prestress is applied initially, the moment we have sunk the traction mechanism in the drill hole, prior to construction of the support structure.

And afterwards, when we have anchored the steel cable with a wedge at ground level at the foundations, we fill the drill hole with concrete prior to constructing a pile. Then we continue the construction and when it is completed we undertake a simple pre-stressing of the upper chamber and foundations.

That is, the same steel cable will receive two pre-stresses. One initially between the ground surface and the anchor, and a second one between the foundations and upper chamber, with differing tensions.

With this method we have other benefits such as:

Compression of the ground (prior to the construction of the pile), protection of the mechanism from rust and avoidance of water extraction which may be present in coastal areas.

We can control the anchorage of the structure, with as much prestress or anchoring as is needed, since the prestress underneath the foundations will have a greater intensity than the subsequent prestressing of the foundations of the structure.

FOURTH PLACEMENT METHOD: BETWEEN THE RADIERE (FOUNDATIONS WHICH COVER THE COMPLETE AREA OF THE CONSTRUCTION) AND THE GROUND.

As can be seen in the photograph http://postimage.org/image/15or8eeuc/ , at the upper part there are two bricks which support a bolt.

Above and below the bolt there are two thick metal plates.

The lower plate is soldered to a resistance pipe.

The upper plate has a hole for the bolt to pass through.

The upper plate bears a nut on the top side and another nut on the underside.

The more this bolt is pulled upwards, the greater the anchor diameter anchor becomes below. This in turn presses increasingly against the walls of the borehole thereby providing anchorage.

If we drill a borehole with a diameter of 20cm and depth of 1.4m and we sink the anchor in it,http://postimage.org/image/2fyw5jh38/ the sinking will halt at the lower plate as it is larger than the hole.

If the bricks in the photograph are in fact hydraulic jacks.http://postimage.org/image/15or8eeuc/ By elevating these we can create a great amount prestress in the system and very strong anchorage against the sides of the borehole.

When the jacks are elevated they exert pressure both upwards and downwards.http://postimage.org/image/15or8eeuc/

The lower plate cannot move downwards because there is resistance from the ground.

The bolt on the upper side of the top plate prevents it from rising due to the upward pressure which the hydraulic jacks create.

We then screw the nut which is situated between the two plates downwards until it reaches the lower plate and in this way we complete the prestressing.

Then we remove the jacks.

Now consider the bolt which protrudes from the ground. We stated that it is secured to the top plate at its upper surface by a nut.

The upper part of the bolt which bears the plate is anchored inside the fortified concrete of the foundations (the radiere). Also, the foundations are connected to the concrete walls via the joining mechanism.http://postimage.org/image/xci31flw/

In this way we will have the beneficial results that I have stated above. That is, we will prevent torque of the corners.

FIFTH PLACEMENT METHOD FOR EXISTING PILOTIS

Here, on each column of the pilotis which is situated around the perimeter of the foundations, we place metal beams which are connected to each other and prestressed at their four corners with the ground using the patented mechanism. After doing this, we place another four metal beams parallel and tangent to the sides of the column. These are anchored into the grooves of the other metal beams. Afterwards we make grooves in the parallel metal beams so that they can be tightened with nuts and bolt. We pass the bolt inside a pipe so that it is independent from the concrete. Around the perimeter of the column we place clamps or insert screws which protrude from the column. We construct a concrete mantle around the perimeter of the column. When this is set, the upper end of the bolt is tightened using the nuts, so creating prestressed concrete.

The same process is repeated on each column of the pilotis.

SIXTH PLACEMENT METHOD FOR EXISTING PREFABRICATED HOUSES

Here, in order to apply prestressing to the structure there are two problems:

1) How will we drill a bore hole?

2) How will we pass the metal cable through the reinforced concrete walls?

SOLUTION

1) Instead of drilling a bore hole under the base, we drill it 40 cm beyond the external fortified concrete walls of the existing prefabricated house.

2) We apply surface prestress between the ground surface and the drill hole so that we anchor the traction mechanism well with the ground.

Prior to applying prestress on the traction mechanism though we have carried out the following:

Underneath the tightening nut we place a hollow steel beam of which one end extends outwards and penetrates into the fortified concrete walls of the structure (which we have previously dug out).

The other end extends back from the bore hole so that we have lever resistance.

The outer end of the hollow beam has a U-shaped groove which is used to anchor one end of the metal cable.

The other end of the cable is anchored to the top of the concrete wall once we have ensured its passage through it by opening a deep gully which is plastered over after the prestressing operation.

In this way we anchor the building externally.

By the same method we can prestress with the ground other prefabricated structures such as dams, pylons, bridges etc.

The traction mechanism is appropriate for all works where piles and cement injection are required. In fact it is far superior to these because it has the added benefit of greater resistance as well as improvement in the relaxation of the ground due to prestressing and ground compression.

It can even be used for containment of loose ground on mountain slopes during the excavation and construction of roads.

Other beneficial properties offered by prestressing of a structure with the ground include:

1) Prestressing (in general, compression) has a very positive result as it improves the trajectories of oblique tension.

2) Compression means that there is reduced cracking. This increases the active cross section and increases rigidity of the structure.

We have two types of construction traction mechanisms and two patent licences pending internationally:

1) The simple traction mechanism for construction. This has exactly the same utility with the hydraulic one on solid ground.

2) The hydraulic traction mechanism for construction. This is suited to loose ground because is protects the structure more from subsidence.

How it achieves this

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOUNDATIONS

I propose using large area foundations (radiere) and not individual bases

ECONOMICAL/TECHNICAL STUDY

There are three methods of construction:

a) Frame structure, where the weight of the furniture, the slabs, the walls and the beams is transferred to the columns and then from the columns it is transferred to the foundations.

In a skeletal structure, the walls even though they are counted as static load play an important role in the strength of the structure.

Here, building alterations which are carried out by an individual owner within an apartment building are wrong, not only for his own apartment, but for the whole apartment building.

We must agree that with regards to frame structure, he who carries out alterations must be aware of this.

b) Continuous construction, where the loads are assumed by the walls and transmitted to the ground.

Here alterations are prohibited without an expert.

c) Composite construction, which either utilises different materials (metal beams plus concrete) or continuous construction together with a frame.

I consider that the construction suitable for the traction mechanism is continuous construction internally and frame structure externally.

How I propose to deal with the problem of building alterations:

If, for example, we are constructing an apartment building where every floor contains four apartments, I would carry out the following so that individual owners can carry out the alterations they wish.

Firstly, I would place columns around the perimeter of the building.

After, internally I would construct the internal design in a cross pattern so that the cross creates the partition walls of the four apartments.

I would convert the cross to walls of reinforced concrete and I would anchor their ends with the hydraulic traction mechanism.

At the centre of the cross the elevator shaft would be built and the hallway around this would provide entrance to the apartments (these also made out of reinforced concrete).

If this is done, from whichever direction the earthquake comes there is resistance in the roof and the foundations. Not only this, but because of the large profile area of the cross section of the concrete walls, we eliminate the problem of shearing and bending.

Another possibility which we could carry out so that there is the option to carry out building alterations is the following:

If the apartment building has adjacent walls (which have no windows) we convert the adjacent walls to fortified concrete ones with anchoring. In addition, we convert another central internal wall of the apartment building to fortified concrete so that a double T cross section is formed.

Another possible form which we can give so that we can carry out alterations is to place two elevator shafts together with the corridor shafts at two opposing ends of the structure and insert the traction mechanism in their corners.

These square shafts may serve either as elevators, storerooms or other communal spaces.

If you search, there are always solutions.

I am a builder by trade and when I give an estimate for concrete construction work, the first thing I examine is the degree of difficulty of the formwork.

If you were to ask me to take on the whole construction including the excavation, I would make certain comparisons as to what is in my best interests. Radiere (continuous foundations which cover the whole area of the construction) or foundations with connecting beams ?

Initially I would calculate how many cubic metres of concrete are required for the radiere and how many for the foundations with connecting beams.

From my experience, I believe that the radiere uses 20% more fortified concrete compared to foundations with their connecting beams. The latter though requires much more work than the former in the following areas:

a) formwork

b) excavation

Comparing the figures, we see that the two options if not exactly the same, the radiere is slightly cheaper than the foundations and connecting beams.

It is a fact that more cubic metres of concrete with less formwork create more profit for the contractor. The estimate then per cubic metre of fortified concrete for the radiere will be markedly lower.

Comparing these figures, we see that the radiere is somewhat cheaper even if it does have 20% more fortified concrete.

As for the walls, it is cheaper to build one solid fortified concrete wall than it is to constructing in its place two columns with beam and double masonry.

If the whole house is constructed from fortified concrete there will still be sideways deflections (cracks) because the static loads increase on the bearing element, the inertia of which during an earthquake, will cause the building to lift up on one side and transfer its weight to moment of the nodes.

The cost is approximately 4,000 euro for an anchored radiere of 100 metres square. This includes the mechanisms (the cost of the anchor is 200 euro), construction works and boreholes.

http://postimage.org/image/w37m65ms/

http://postimage.org/image/2mkga1kmc/

http://postimage.org/image/14s73bc04/

http://postimage.org/image/15qym72jo/

http://postimage.org/image/2r7apjukk/

With rock we have a difficult but shallow borehole. On soft ground we have an easy but deeper one. I estimate that these will have the same cost.

The opinion of the great teacher of America.
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Khalid Mosalam <mosalam@ce.berkeley.edu>
To: Giannhs Lymperis <lymperis_ios@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sun, April 17, 2011 11:24:15 PM
Subject: Re: New antiseismic systems

Dear John,
This seems like a very promising system. I believe we can try to get a grant for testing it on our shaking tables in UC-Berkeley. I will be glad to work with you on such tests to prove the concept. We have several small tables that we can use with small fund but we will have to make a small model for this system. We also have a big table that we can use but it would be costly in this case and requires a larger structural system to build and test. I will read more about your system in your website.

Regards,Khalid

Khalid M. Mosalam, PhD, PE
Professor and Vice Chair
733 Davis Hall
Structural Engineering, Mechanics and Materials
Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720-1710
Tel 510-643-4805
Fax 510-643-8928
e-mail: mosalam@ce.berkeley.edu
http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~mosalam

Let me share something with you. Having a patent doesn't lead to riches. I salute your effort, but once again, you've got a patent.

Turning your idea into money is the hard part.

If you have a patented product, then our opinion means squat.

It either works, or it doesn't.

What you need, is someone to believe in your product, that also has money.

You've come to the wrong place brother.

I know my friend.

Here in Greece they want me to be buried alive.

What I want is to spread the idea.

By myself I can not do anything else.

If a rich man in America wants to build the product, I dont want money.

Rich people in America are an endangered, (but not protected), species. Your passion is admirable. If the idea has merit................consider it spread.

The truth is.
At the University of Greece tried to simulate a five-storey building.
The columns dimensions are 0.30 X 0.40 x3.00.
The pillars were nine.
The prestressing between the ground and the roof was 50% of the strength of the column.In all columns applied prestressing.
The result was 30.9% more resistant to earthquake loadings.
If this method is applied to larger columns, such as lift shafts of reinforced concrete or reinforced concrete walls, then the strength of the building will be 100% more than it is today.

That's the problem
The method changing everything.

You haven't been paying attention.

The method of changing everything, sometimes comes through good ideas, but mostly it is done with war.

Unfortunately, the changes are not usually for the better.

Sorry to be a bummer.

The best idea in the world, is just an idea, nothing more.................................until it is sold.

@kramarat

You haven't been paying attention.

The method of changing everything, sometimes comes through good ideas, but mostly it is done with war.

Unfortunately, the changes are not usually for the better.

Sorry to be a bummer.

The best idea in the world, is just an idea, nothing more.................................until it is sold.

seismic... or until it is prove.... that is good?

I've become a bit of a pessimist as of late. Despite the inconvenience of reality, I've got a president that believes that every human endeavor can be achieved with sunshine. He's wrong......................................and all of the money in the world can't make him right. Not today anyway. I look forward to the day that he is.

Although your comparison with a sandwich remains obscure, it appears that you have a good idea for countering lateral shear by tethering the building to a secure anchor underground and keeping that tether under tension by hydraulic means. At least that's what I think is your invention. I haven't done a search to see whether this is new or not, nor do I know its class/subclass in the US Patent Office's Manual of Classification so such a search could be done.

For purposes of a US patent, please be aware of the rule that you must file before a year goes by from the public disclosure of your invention.

It makes basic sense to me that to counter the destructive lift effect of lateral shear in an earthquake (the reason fingernail clippings go all over), you need a force acting in the opposite direction to the destructive shear lift, i.e. a compressive force. Your solution seems simple and feasible and your retrofit to existing buildings much less obtrusive than the conventional methods.

On further reflection and in view of your extensive later comments, it appears you also have an improved linkage of the building with the ground comprising hydraulic tensioning means which might also serve to dissipate the energy of the earthquake at the joints of the tethering mechanism.

Sorry about the scoffers and skeptics and their discouraging comments. Wall Street can always count on a chorus of ignorant defenders of the status quo. Local building code people and other defenders of the status quo might be compared to Zeus in the Aeschylus play, Prometheus Bound. Like Prometheus, your reward for helping mankind by new technology is punishment.

I guess I'm the messenger of bad news again.

If he publicly discloses his invention, he doesn't have a year to do anything. He has already given it away.

The US has recenty changed patent law to "first to file", not first to invent.

If you want to be the smartest guy in class..................it pays to do your homework.

{Edit} okay, you're kind of right. But any patent attorney will tell you, that public disclosure without at least a provisional is the kiss of death...................unless of course, it's not a great idea................then it's all just a waste of time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_invent

In post #17 the OP mentions not wanting money... Just maybe he is only looking for the recognition and implementation of this new design, and really has the goal of helping humanity?

I really haven't read his idea over very deeply, but the reason I chimed in here is because I was looking for a place to bring up the topic of earthquake prediction. Although I don't want to hijack someones discussion... Might be better to start a new thread?

I think that's a good idea................and well worthy of a new thread.

I tend to spout off on here, but I'm constantly learning things.............which is cool.

Of particular interest at the moment is the increased frequency of earthquakes as they relate to fracking.

It's fascinating.............................as well as providing some substance to the notion that we, 'know not what we do', until it's too late, of course.

Start a thread.................................the worst that can happen is that everyone thinks you're stupid. I hit that milestone a couple of years ago.

LMAO!!! I'll try and get right on that.

PS: The fracking thing is a whole thread of it's own. Which btw has already been discussed on here a bit I believe. In fact here is the link to that thread.

snatr

In post #17 the OP mentions not wanting money... Just maybe he is only looking for the recognition and implementation of this new design, and really has the goal of helping humanity?

seismic

This is ... I do not want money ... I want to help people in the earthquake.

@wilmot

Although your comparison with a sandwich remains obscure, it appears that you have a good idea for countering lateral shear by tethering the building to a secure anchor underground and keeping that tether under tension by hydraulic means. At least that's what I think is your invention. I haven't done a search to see whether this is new or not, nor do I know its class/subclass in the US Patent Office's Manual of Classification so such a search could be done.

seismic

I made two deposits in the patent office of America.
research report All with ( A )

PCT Opinion

http://postimage.org/image/32vfj43z8/

http://postimage.org/image/2g4sfacsk/

http://postimage.org/image/332ou0y04/

http://postimage.org/image/33322bpyc/

wilmot

It makes basic sense to me that to counter the destructive lift effect of lateral shear in an earthquake (the reason fingernail clippings go all over), you need a force acting in the opposite direction to the destructive shear lift, i.e. a compressive force. Your solution seems simple and feasible and your retrofit to existing buildings much less obtrusive than the conventional methods.

seismic

It's just like you say above it

. In an earthquake there is a resistance to the roof, and .. on the other side of the base.

wilmot

On further reflection and in view of your extensive later comments, it appears you also have an improved linkage of the building with the ground comprising hydraulic tensioning means which might also serve to dissipate the energy of the earthquake at the joints of the tethering mechanism.

seismic

It's just like you say above it

Thanks for sharing that. From what the examiner says you have something patentably new and useful. Improved anchoring means comprising expansion anchors in combination with hydraulic tensioning means to keep the building tightly tethered to the ground. This would also be good for hurricane country, like the US Gulf Coast. How would your anchors hold in mud?

Read here .... and here that this can be donehttp://www.antiseismic-systems.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2&Itemid=5&lang=en&limitstart=7
http://www.antiseismic-systems.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8:hydraulic-tension-tie-sort&catid=1&lang=en&limitstart=2&Itemid=

Here is the full patent.
http://www.antiseismic-systems.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2&Itemid=5&lang=en

Despite my pessimism, I appreciate your efforts. I sincerely believe that your invention has the potential to save lives.

Please let us know when it catches on....................or any point in between.

We'll be here.

a) Take a scaffold (such as scaffolding of the building)

.b) Apply prestressing between ground and top (all four limbs through the holes).

The result will be.

More resistance to lateral loads.

So it can be mounted on steel structures such as skyscrapers made ​​of steel.

The downward loads are always in the building ......
The moments at the nodes are not there when ... if these downward loads are balancedby the opposite forces of the ground

The main loads are bad for the building during the earthquake excitation is two.
a) Horizontal loads. (Inertia)
b) Vertical loads (weight of the building)

Stopping the building has oscillation (with the mechanism of the patent) then balances the downward load of the building, with the opposing forces of ground support.
So the building has small deformations

So not slanted crack

This would also be useful for mobile homes and wood structures in tornado and hurricane country. Shear stress can come from wind as well as from ground movement. The hydraulically-tensioned tie rod can be connected to a net that would prevent debris like cars etc. from blowing away.

As you say ....it is.

It may also be placed in,

a) loose soil slopes of roads, with metal net.

b) In all the general construction (existing or under construction) such as bridges, dams etc.

discovered a screw for large structures.

My Friends.The plan indicates a link to the wall of reinforced concrete.
http://postimage.org/image/pb6enkih7/
When we ground acceleration (A) from the earthquake, due to its inertia, wall to create a torque (Δ) and an opposing lateral force (B)
The result is when the wall accept these charges, tend to be reversed.
I ask
How much power needs to put in (E) so that the wall not reversed, and not even get up from the ground;

Wall dimensions 3,00 m x 1,5 m x 0,30 m
Pecial weight concrete 2450kg/m3
Ground acceleration 20m/min
Benchmark (E)
Acceleration (A) as shown on the plan.

designing frames, or asymmetrical structures, the solution is....
1) to separate the flexible columns, from the rigid columns 2) amortization method of seismic energy in the vertical and horizontal axis of the frame. 3) nodes to move freely round the rigid column

Looking good!!!

Have you found a way to do a scale model mockup?

That seems like the next logical step after the drawings. Maybe approach a university?

I went to a university in Greece.

this one http://users.civil.ntua.gr/papadrakakis/

and here http://www.itsak.gr/en

I have the first preliminary results of applied research simulationIs in Greek language. It's very good results.

The Institute of Engineering Seismology and Earthquake EngineeringResearch and Technical Institute has a different opinion.told me that .... there is not a program in whole world that simulates vertical prestressing.

They told me that I need to do ( experiments ) seismic testing on some construction models, because it is not possible to simulate. I have no money for experiments.I want to find a foreign university to work on experiments.to prove the usefulness of patent

Ι am looking for partners.

View this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJIsx1sKkLk

It is the Greek dialect, but

Shows three different load-bearing structure.

a) The first bearing frame construction is lightweight.

b) The second bearing frame construction is heavy.

c) The third, bearing frame is bolted to the ground

See how nodes react when we have an earthquake.

designing frames, or asymmetrical structures, the solution is....
1) to separate the flexible columns, from the rigid columns
2) amortization method of seismic energy in the vertical and horizontal axis of the frame.
3) nodes to move freely round the rigid column
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/i...m6_iuOU6fsUXY2
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...QN70j5YbWn9fqQ
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...DCVJEcQdIhzJsg
By design method that I suggest,
you have the opportunity to design a flexible structure.
Rigid vertical elements
The main reason I designed the seismic joint (rubber mounted air gap between the baffle plates and the shaft) are
to separate the flexible columns of rigid columns.
With this method, we have a frame construction which is flexible,
and in it, a rigid colomn, which is independent of load bearing because it has a seismic joint
The rigid components to take the main role assigned to them, and is to controlling the deformation of the bearing.
plasticity
a flexible node (the seismic joint) deletes the usefulness of plasticity

My suggestion for frame structure (Method seismic stop)

I can understand your frustration in finding partners; I'm dealing with the same issue with a different product, and also have no money.

A few suggestions:

Try finding internet sites that are specific to civil engineering. Architectural blogs and forums might also be helpful.

Another would be to see if you can find a college graduate student that may be interested in doing some real life scenario computer simulations, which combine your design with data from earthquakes that have already occurred.

Also, look around at current earthquake protective designs that are already in use, and backtrack the history of those designs. Find out about the people that came up with those designs, and how they went about getting their design into the real world.

Find the names of current earthquake specific design firms, and contact them directly.

your advice is very good and useful.thank you very much.I wish you good luck also, for your own product.

Sure thing. Good luck to you too. Hopefully we will both be able to post a success story one day.

Who wants to work with me to continue applied research on my invention;
These are the first results of applied research from the National Technical University of Greece.
I have no money to continue applied research.
I am looking to find scientific partners.
I did the translation myself.
I hope you UNDERSTAND what I say.



Basics of simulation
Page 5 of 34
This project involves the numerical simulation and investigate the behavior of the system.
Brief description of the invention
The principal object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of the present invention as well as of the method for constructing building structures utilizing the hydraulic tie rod of the present invention is to minimise the aforesaid problems associated with the safety of construction structures in the event of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and very high lateral winds. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the building structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich. Said pre-stressing is applied by means of the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects. Said mechanism comprises a steel cable crossing freely in the centre the structure's vertical support elements and also the length of a drilling beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the walls of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. Said steel cable's top end is tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism, exerting a continuous uplifting force. The pulling force applied to the steel cable by means of the hydraulic mechanism and the reaction to such pulling from the fixed anchor at the other end of it generate the desired compression in the construction project.

Page 6 of 34
Investigates the behavior of buildings with and without the proposed system in order to draw useful conclusions about the effectiveness
The challenge is the preliminary investigation into the conceptual,
software was chosen Seismostruct v5.2.2 company Seismosoft.
Page 7 of 34
General description of the tested models
Examined two buildings a three-storey and a five-storey
materials of models
1) confined concrete ( conf )
2) non-confined concrete ( une )
3) steel ( rein )

1) confined concrete ( conf ) features

features symbol rate units

compressive strength fc 30 MPa
tensile strength ft 0 MPa
deformation at σ max εc 0,002
parameter toggles kc 1,2
specific weight Yconc 24 kN/m3

Page 8 of 34
http://postimg.org/image/rqu2o0737/
Figure 2 detail reinforcement concrete element.
Distinguished positions confining concrete
http://postimg.org/image/ibs9p3mrx/
Figure 3 diagram Chart - strain (sample) for confined concrete used in the models.

Page 9 of 34
2) non-confined concrete ( une )

features symbol rate units

compressive strength fc 30 MPa
tensile strength ft 0 MPa
deformation at σ max εc 0,002
parameter toggles kc 1
specific weight Yconc 24 kN/m3
http://postimg.org/image/7e8qrdyxt/
Figure 4 diagram Chart - strain (sample) for confined concrete used in the models.

Page 10 of 34
3) steel ( rein )
steel has the following characteristics

features symbol rate units

elasticity parameter Es 200 GPa
yield stress fy 500 MPa
hardening parameter μ 0,005
strain at break εult 0,1
specific weight Y steel 78 kN/m3
http://postimg.org/image/brzb3wrtv/
Figure 5. diagram Chart - strain (sample) steel used in the models.

sections
The cross sections of the models is
1) cross-section column
2) cross-section beam

Page 11 of 34
cross-section column
the cross section of the column model consists of confined concrete ( conf )
non-confined concrete ( unc )
has the following characteristics

characteristic rate

sectional shape rectangular
Width 30 cm
height 40 cm
reinforcement at corners 4/16
reinforcement upper and lower cheek Φ/12
lateral sidewall reinforcement 2/12
total reinforcement 4/16+6/12

Figure 6. section column http://postimg.org/image/3yjmc0263/
Distinguish three different materials

Page 12 of 34
cross-section beam

The cross beam consists of confined concrete ( conf )
non-confined concrete ( unc )
has the following characteristics

characteristic rate

sectional shape T-shaped plate-girder
effective width 100 cm
slab thickness 15 cm
beam height 60 cm
beam width 25 cm
reinforcement beam down 3/14
reinforcement beam over 2/14
Buccal armature beam Φ10/cheek
armor plate over 6/10
armor plate under 4/10
total reinforcement 5/14+12/10

Figure 7. cross beam. distinguish three different materials.
http://postimg.org/image/liebad51d/
Page 13 of 34
finite elements
the finite element models used in the building is a three-dimensional non - linear ribbed finite element based on the strength
(3D Inelastic force-based element ) with 4 integration points along with visa fibers.
The number of fibers in each section is 200
this item is used for the simulation of columns and beams.

Figure 8. finite element space, to simulate columns and beams
http://postimg.org/image/48p23wyrb/
4.4 analysis - methodology

performed nonlinear analyzes for each building with the finite element method, taking into consideration effects of nonlinearity of material and geometry.
analyzes are non-linear, static ( pushover ), while charging a triangular distribution
height which corresponds approximately to the first peculiarity of the examined structure

The total number of trainees loads has rate 1kN that the base shear during charging it to a rate 1kN and therefore importune coefficient λ is equal to the base shear (1*λ) for the various phases of the analysis.
value - the objective of the movement is set at 0.18 m
The load is transmitted in 50 steps for both models.

Page 14 of 34

As a control node set node of higher level of construction ( z=max ) to whom x=0 and y=0, as shown in more detail in Figures

The proposed system causes the exercise of a compressive force in each column where applicable.
The simulation of this phenomenon
been addressed by imposing a compressive strength in columns
considered that the system applies.

5. three-storey reinforced concrete building
5.1 general characteristics of the building.

the test building displays regularity
in plan and height.

general characteristics of the building.

floor height............................................ .......3m
span length x ...............................................5m
span length z ...............................................5m
diaphragm ....... yes on each floor
supports .......... anchors on all nodes with z=0 (ground)

Figure 9. plan three-storey building
http://postimg.org/image/a050s6yg7/

Page 15 of 34

Figure 10. front face of the three-storey building
http://postimg.org/image/viypllunn/
Figure 11. side view of the three-storey building
http://postimg.org/image/6mws5h4vb/

Page 16 of 34

Figure 12. perspective view of a three storey building (a)
characterized the control node of the structure
http://postimg.org/image/kqx8rm1gn/

Figure 13. perspective view of a three storey building (b)
characterized the control node of the structure.
http://postimg.org/image/jzxkdmhvb/

Page 17 of 34

5.2 analytical results
5.2.1 without the application of prestressing.

The following figure shows the diagram
base shear - displacement for node monitoring.

Figure 14. power curve (kN) - displacement (m) without the application of prestressing
http://postimg.org/image/jzxkdmhvb/

the maximum value of the chart is 900.62 kN, illustrated for the displacement of the control node 0.1296 m

5.2.2 compressive load 600 kN to nodes of higher level.
Applied compressive load 600 kN to nodes of higher level due to the prestressing force.
Initial (A) charged with the compressive force the central column.
then (B) the load applied to the four corner columns.
to the end (C) loaded all the 9 columns of the building

The positive trend in each column is ..
600 kN / (0.30 m * 0.40)=5000 kN/m2=5MPa

the ultimate limit state of column
because grief
(Taking into account the safety factor
having a value of 1.5 for concrete),
the tensile strength for concrete C 30 is 30 MPa/1.5=20MPa.

Page 18 of 34

therefore the positive trend in the columns corresponding to the 5/20 = 25% strain at break,
the ultimate limit state.

A. Compressive load of 600 kN to the central hub of higher level.

The diagram below shows the chart base shear-movement
for the control node.

Figure 15. power curve (kN) - displacement (m) applying compressive load 600 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level
http://postimg.org/image/50gpcep27/

the maximum value of the diagram without the application of prestressing was
600.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 600
to the central hub of the upper level is
929.82 kN for displacement 0.1116 m

improving the carrying capacity is
978.77 - 929.82 = 48.95 kN

the percentage improvement in base shear is
48.95 / 900.62 = 5.4%

result
There is a slight improvement in the carrying capacity of the building,
due to the application of the compressive load on the central column of the building.

Page 19 of 34

B.Compressive load 600 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level.

The following figure shows the base shear diagram
- Movement on the control node.

Figure 16. power curve - Shift by applying compressive load 600 kN at 4 corner nodes of the upper level
http://postimg.org/image/pakwo6603/

the maximum value of the diagram without the application of prestressing was
900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 600 kN at 4
corner nodes of the upper level is.
978.77 kN for displacement 0.1044 m

improvement in carrying capacity is.
978.77 - 900.62 = 78.15 kN

the percentage improvement in base shear is.
218.39 / 900.62 = 8.7%

result
there is a slight improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in the four corner columns of the building.


Page 20 of 34

Γ. Compressive load 600 kN on all nodes of higher level.

The following figure shows the diagram base shear - displacement for node control

Figure 17. power curve ( kN ) - displacement ( m )
applying compressive load 600 kN on all nodes of higher level
http://postimg.org/image/i7pfrq2sd/

the maximum value of the chart without applying prestressing was
900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 600 kN to all nodes of the upper level is
1,119.01 kN for displacement 0.1008 m

improvement in bearing capacity is 1119.01 - 900.62 = 218.39 kN

The percentage improvement in the maximum base shear is 218.39 / 900.62 = 24.2%

result
observed a significant improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in all the 9 columns of the building

Page 21 of 34

5.2.3 compressive load 1,200 kN to nodes of higher level

applied compressive load 1,200 kN to nodes of higher level, ratio of prestressing force.

initially ( A ) charged with the compressive strength the four corner columns
slowly charged and nine columns of the building

applied compressive load 1,200 kN to nodes of higher level due to the prestressing force.
The positive trend in each column is
1200 kN / ( 0.30 m *0.40 m ) = 10,000 kN/m2 =10 MPa

the ultimate limit state of the column due to grief (taking into account the safety factor has a value of 1.5 for concrete)
the tensile strength for concrete C 30 is 30 MPa / 1.5 = 20 MPa
therefore
The positive trend in columns
corresponds to 10/20 = 50% strain at break

A. compressive load 1,200 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level

The following figure shows the base shear diagram - movement on the control node.

Figure 18. power curve (kN) - Displacement (m) applied compressive load 1,200 kN at 4 corner nodes of higher level.
http://postimg.org/image/4ix16x4o3/

Page 22 of 34

the maximum value of the chart without applying prestressing was
900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying compressive load 1200 kN at 4 corner points of the maximum level is
995.46 kN for displacement 0.1188 m

improvement in bearing capacity is
995.46 - 900.62 = 10.5%

result
there is a slight improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in the four corner columns of the building.

B. compressive load 1,200 all nodes of higher level.

The following figure shows the base shear - displacement diagram for the control node.

Figure 19. power curve ( kN ) - Displacement (m) applied compressive load 1,200 kN all nodes of higher level.
http://postimg.org/image/7fonkxzvn/

the maximum value of the diagram without the application of prestressing was
900.62 kN for displacement 0.1296 m

the maximum value of the chart by applying a compression load 1200 kN on all nodes of higher level is 1, 179.33 kN for displacement 0.0864 m

improvement in bearing capacity is
1179.33 - 900.62 = 278.71 kN

The percentage improvement in base shear is
278.71 / 900.62 = 30.9%

result
observed a significant improvement in the bearing capacity of the building, through the application of compressive forces in all nine columns of the building

Page 23 of 34

Conclusions.
when the system is applied to all columns, then leads to significantly increased values ​​of the bearing capacity of the building.

considered that the results of the preliminary investigation are encouraging.
required
Further detailed investigation of the system in two phases.

First-level analytical simulation, which will consider more detailed models of structures with more charges.

second-level shake table experiment where you need to consider a range of construction, to scale.
To evaluate the system's behavior in real loading conditions

my experiment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nS8kOudxxyY
after the experiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50lvScbp8VA

next step is
a) Repair the transmission of seismic base
b) Experiment in two more phases with higher acceleration (speed)
c) If the model is not damaged, Ι will take off the bolts and I will do the experiment again without them. (comparing similar models with my system and without my system). to make some useful conclusions.

EXPERIMENTthis video shows the medium accelerations .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ubLKyyO2q0Even greater accelerationhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOyoEWpvsjMEven greater speed than the other two times .Look towards the end of the video that gets the beam base !https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6og4VWFcGAIn this video got the beam broke the bearing of a bar that makes the transmissionreciprocating motion, and I had after 3.5 minutes that nodded to stop.The model did not suffer the slightest , the base dissipated .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUH5OBd64vcno cracking ... not suffered the slightest .After the experimenthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBJi...ature=youtu.behttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNfB...ature=youtu.behttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnsC...ature=youtu.behttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XH-...ature=youtu.be
THIRD EXPERIMENT WITHOUT THE SYSTEM SEISMOSTOPhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux8TzWYvuQ0

After the third experiment (Control structure model and base)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTBr0CtjRoM

If the system I have is strong or not, by anchoring structures will be discussed later with another different experiment .
Consider if the foundation of the project with the ground and the roof is better seismic design of the existing earthquake regulations .
Imagine that fat in this experiment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6og4VWFcGA there is only the construction and soil.
The construction in our model starts from the raft and above, and the ground of the iron based seismic and down.
I think that in the depths of a drilling anchors if the anchor is impossible for construction to pick up all this ground.
Since I consider the seismic base as ground very powerful clamping , in our experiment, think that soil is the seismic base, bearings , the W of the iron beam, the beams O.S which rests the foundation, and whatever else may be.
The model ground ( seismic base) join the tendons .
During the oscillation of the model tendons reacted to rising roof and raised the iron seismic base. The iron seismic base in turn raised his bearings which rests , bearings found resistance at the anode were in F the iron beam , and this is well anchored to the beam from the O.S lifted upwards.
All this is a result of chain torque model.

Removing the screws from the bottom of the base changed the whole scene .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux8TzWYvuQ0

The model not having the screws to hold it began to wobble dangerously . The bearings were no longer in the upward tendency of the beam Π, because the model of oscillated only on the basis of seismic iron . Instead of upward trends bearings took percussive strokes of the oscillation of raft on the seismic base. Bearings are dyed and not withstand the impact. For this and broke .
The model does not fight happened almost anything, because it was very powerful nodes ( horizontal and vertical ) and because it was not possible to test the accelerations tested the previous experiment with the bolts , because we would have complete reversal .
The conclusion I make myself is that if the model was more multi storey would have even more sway than that of two floors .... The first conclusion is that this earthquake is very much necessary for the fine buildings to stop the oscillation from the air, and the earthquake .
If this model O.S experiment was made ​​of bricks ( bricks ) without columns, imagine for yourself what would happen if there were no screws and rods . Conclusion necessary that the earthquake in the continuous construction.
This is my opinion .... I would be happy to know and yours .
Basically what makes this invention is that it makes far more powerful rigid large vertical elements , giving them greater resistance to both cutting as well as the lateral loads .
There are many designs for installation , which depend on the architectural design needs .

Read something else...
not write it in the books.

As shown in Figure 1 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/
When the column is at stationary state, the static actions are balanced with the opposing forces of soil
As shown in Figure 3 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/
The oscillation of the building changes the vertical axis of the column
See the slope change P that is observed at the regional sides.
As shown in Figure 2 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/
The combination of static actions, Σ with the changes of vertical axis of the column, create the torsional moment P of the node.
How the invention stops the existence torsional moment P of the node.
As shown in Figure 4 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/
Clamped column can not be moved up and down because it is clamped with the ground, with the mechanism of the invention.
As shown in Figure 5 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/
The Clamped column with the ground, stops the oscillation of the vertical axis of the column, because the hydraulic mechanism of the invention applies an opposite stress in the rise of the roof Δ ( derived from the clamped anchor in soil ) and another inverted stress in the base Ε
As shown in Figure 6 http://postimg.org/image/rbudm6oqr/
The Clamped column with the ground, transfer lateral load of inertia at the vertical axis of the column, as shear force.
This does not happen with the seismic design of today.
Τhe seismic design of today drives the shear forces at the small sections of the columns and beams.
What design is the best?
1) To plan the seismic design of today drives the shear forces at the small sections of the columns and beams.
or 2) To plan the seismic design of today drives the shear forces at the small sections of the columns and beams, plus...The Clamped column with the ground, transfer lateral load of inertia at the vertical axis of the column, as shear force?
Also ... prestressed construction ...
a) reduces the eigenfrequency construction / soil
b) Increases active behaviour of columns
c) Increases resistance to shear
e) improves the oblique tension

The ultimate seismic system construction
We plan ductile structures, but we also need the torsional stiffness to stop the torsion of asymmetric floors.
Design methods yield (or else plastic zones) which are default locations of failure to be the first ultimate-yield in a powerful earthquake.
My invention provides...
a) vertical elements .... 1) stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation.

b) Better methods yield-or else plastic zones
Video design. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPaNZcHBKRI
My invention provides...
a) vertical elements .... 1) stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation.
How...?
Brief description of the invention
The principal object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of the present invention as well as of the method for constructing building structures utilizing the hydraulic tie rod of the present invention is to minimise the aforesaid problems associated with the safety of construction structures in the event of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and very high lateral winds. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the building structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich. Said pre-stressing is applied by means of the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects. Said mechanism comprises a steel cable crossing freely in the centre the structure's vertical
support elements and also the length of a drilling beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the walls of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. Said steel cable's top end is tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism, exerting a continuous uplifting force. The pulling force applied to the steel cable by means of the hydraulic mechanism and the reaction to such pulling from the fixed anchor at the other end of it generate the desired prestressing in the construction project.
This prestressing ensures to the vertical elements of 1) greater stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation.
b) Better methods yield-or else plastic zones
In the video we see two static systems....one inside the other.
The first prestressed rigid structure has 1) greater stiffness 2) resistance to shear force 3) greater resistance to horizontal load 4) less deformation 5) strong foundation,...to receive large shocks from ductile static carrier and stop the deformation of ductile static carrier.
At the height of the plates created seismic joint for two reasons
1)The seismic joint gradually grows on the upper floors to avoid transferring loads to the lower floors, derived from the primary impact plate - elevator shaft
See the plan http://s5.postimg.org/rllh3dhzb/002.jpg
2)For to separate the vertical rigid elements of the ductile elements for better cooperation between these two structural systems

The seismic joint gives freedom to all the free movement of ductile construction which itself is a mechanism amortization of seismic energy.
Amortization of seismic energy ensures the invention of the video .. to
1) The hydraulic system on the roof.
2) The seismic joint
3) The horizontal seismic isolation
These two structural systems can work together as we see in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPaNZcHBKRI
or we can only use the rigid structural system itself to build rigid structures, as indicated by the links
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6og4VWFcGA
http://postimg.org/image/poaeawzrj/

1) Model response frame structure with absorption of energy at the base , on the roof , and bulkheads of slabs .

Is this the model construction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPaNZcHBKRI

2 ) Plan model asymmetric multi-storey building with energy absorption in the base ,
the roof , and bulkheads of slabs .

Is this model http://postimage.org/image/tg1lzxv05/

3 ) Model response with energy absorption in the loft

Is this the model construction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJIsx1sKkLk
and this in plan http://postimage.org/image/r1aadhj8/

4 ) Model response to absorption of energy in existing structures .
One of the many design models wall O.S transfected or transfected steel structures
http://postimage.org/image/k51vo9k15/

All seismic systems that exist today have the idea of the horizontal seismic isolation.
The seismic system I propose is very different from other seismic systems.
a) It is the first sentence Awards I suggesting the clamped structure to the ground.
b) It is the first time worldwide that I suggest applying a reaction at the highest point of the roof, to stop the deformation of construction.
c) It is the first time worldwide that I suggest a system able to deflection earthquake loadings, to stronger cross-section able to receive the shear stress.
If you know a static model which will be able to stand on this seismic base.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6og4VWFcGA
please tell me to do the experiment

New experiments.
no Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoM5pEy7n9Q

The skeleton of a building consists of the columns (vertical parts) and the girders and slabs (horizontal parts). The girders and slabs are joined at the nodes.
Under normal conditions, all loading is vertical. When an earthquake occurs, additional horizontal loading is placed on the skeleton.
The resultant effect of horizontal plus vertical loading puts strain on the nodes. It alters their angle from 90 degrees, creating at times acute and at other times obtuse angles.
The vertical static loads equilibrate with the reaction of the ground.
The horizontal earthquake load exerts a lifting effect on the bases of the columns. In addition, due to the elasticity of the main body of the columns, the earthquake acts by shifting the heights of each plate by a different amplitude and a different phase. That is, the upper plates shift more than the lower ones. The modal shifts of the skeleton are many, so many that the differing, shifting directions of the earthquake deform and destroy the skeleton.
The ideal situation would be if we could construct a building skeleton where, during an earthquake all the plates would shift by the same amplitude as the ground without differing phases. In this way the shape will be preserved and we would not have any deformation of the frame, hence no damage.
The research I have carried out has resulted in the creation of an anti- seismic design for buildings which achieves exactly this result.
I have succeeded in doing this by constructing large elongated ridged columns shaped -, +, Γ or T to which a pulling force is applied from the roof and from the ground, applying bilateral pressure to the entire column. This force acts to prevent bilateral shifting of the columns and curvature at their bases so preventing the deformation which occurs throughout the whole structure during an earthquake.
In an earthquake, the columns lose their eccentricity and their bases are lifted, creating twisting in all of the nodes of the structure. There is a limit to the eccentricity, that is, there is a limit to the surface area of the base which is lifted by the rollover moment.
To minimise the twisting of the bases, we place strong foot girders in the columns.
In the large longitudinal columns (walls), due to the large moments which occur during an earthquake, it is practically impossible to prevent rotation with the classical way of construction of the foot girders.
The following result occurs with this lifting of the base in combination with the elasticity. When one column of the frame lifts one end of the beam upwards, at the same time the other column at its other end moves violently downwards.
This stresses the beam and has the tendency to twist it in different directions at the two ends, deforming its body in an S shape.The same deformation occurs with the columns also, due to the twisting of the nodes and the differential phase shift of vertical plates.
In order to prevent the lifting of the base, we clamp the base of the structure to the ground using the patented mechanism.
However, if we want to prevent the lifting of the whole columnar structure which stems from the lifting of its base as well as from the elasticity of its main body, then the best point for enforcing an opposing, balancing force is the roof. This opposing tendency on the roof must come from an external source and not applied from within the structure. This external source is the ground underneath the base. From here the external force is applied.
Underneath the base of the structure, we drill a hole into the ground and clamp it with the patented anchor. With the aid of a cable which passes freely through a pipe in the column, we transfer this force which we obtained from the ground up to the roof.
At this point in the roof, we insert a stop with a screw to prevent the raising of the roof of the longitudinal columns which happens during an earthquake and deforms all the plates.
In this way, we control the oscillation of whole structure. That is, the deformity which the structural failure causes. With this method, we do not see changes in the form of the structure, because it maintains the same shape it had prior to and during the earthquake.
The reaction of the mechanism to the raising of the roof of the longitudinal column and the opposing reaction of the at the bottom part of the base, divert the lateral load of the earthquake into the strong vertical section.
With this diversion of the lateral load of the earthquake to the vertical columns, the twisting of the nodes is abolished because the lateral loadings of the earthquake are 100% borne along the length of the columns, so it is impossible for them to twist in their main sections.
In the experiments I have carried out in actual scale earthquake acceleration of 1.77g and amplitude over 0.11 in a two story building model to scale 1:7.14, the difference in the model with and without the patented mechanism can clearly be seen.
See the link below for the experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheLymperis2/videos

new experiments
1) With the seismic system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoM5pEy7n9Q
2)Without the seismic system first experiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsSJJhOfwq0
3) Without the seismic system second experiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-X4tF9C7SE
4)damage Control https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZkCKY0EypM

http://metalkat.gr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=828:2014-07-13-17-48-38&catid=39:2010-02-10-15-45-09&Itemid=102

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhkUlxC6IK4

My name is John Lymperis. The video shows the mechanism of the seismic system and a seismic design method.
Also presents experiments with and without seismic patent, one beside the other to compare the seismic protection offered by the invention.
The utility of the invention has been shown experimentally.
Patent Idea
If on a table put two columns one column we screwed on the table, and the other simply put on the table.
If you shift the table, the unbonded column will be overthrown.
The bolted column outlast the lateral loading.
What I do in every column of a building to withstand more lateral earthquake loading. That is, simply screwed to the ground.
This pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil becomes world's first time.
The horizontal earthquake load generates oscillation, and the result is that the upper plates shift more than the lower ones, the columns lose their eccentricity exerts a lifting effect on the bases, and creating twisting in all of the nodes of the structure.
The ideal situation would be if we could construct a building skeleton where, during an earthquake all the plates would shift by the same amplitude as the ground without differing phases.
The research I have carried out has this resulted. The method of the invention stops all these problems of deformation in the building construction applying with the mechanism pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil.
1)Comparing with existing anti seismic systems, the invention increases the strength of the structure to an earthquake over 100% and reduces the cost of protection more than 50%
2) I believe that with this method, prefabricated houses can be placed in towns constructing several floors.
Manufacturers and all of us will profit from this change because they are industrially produced 30-50% cheaper.
3) Apply placement in all building projects are under construction , but and in many existing structures, ensuring seismic protection.
Protects and lightweight construction of tornadoes .
Use also as anchor for the support of ground slope on highways .
Εnsures a strong foundation in soft ground.
And all this in a patent
There is no absolute seismic design.
The invention provides the absolute seismic design.
This monopoly makes it very marketable.
The scientific team consists of
Professor Panagiotis Karidis seismic technology and Founder of seismic base at Technical University.
B) Nikos Markatos chemical engineer and former rector of the Technical University.
All of us have over 40 years experience, and this is the guarantee of the investment that we ask you to do.

There are many design methods.
First method.
my friends we can tried this method includes horizontal seismic insulation and one or more embedded rigid central fiery.
An elastic skeleton of a building with horizontal seismic insulation and therein one or more independent rigid bodies. Listen to the voice in the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO6MxxH0lMU
Second method. design with elongated rigid columns
The horizontal earthquake load exerts a lifting effect on the bases of the columns. In addition, due to the elasticity of the main body of the columns, the earthquake acts by shifting the heights of each plate by a different amplitude and a different phase. That is, the upper plates shift more than the lower ones. The modal shifts of the skeleton are many, so many that the differing, shifting directions of the earthquake deform and destroy the skeleton.
The ideal situation would be if we could construct a building skeleton where, during an earthquake all the plates would shift by the same amplitude as the ground without differing phases. In this way the shape will be preserved and we would not have any deformation of the frame, hence no damage.
The research I have carried out has resulted in the creation of an anti- seismic design for buildings which achieves exactly this result.
I have succeeded in doing this by constructing large elongated ridged columns shaped -, +, Γ or T to which a pulling force is applied from the roof and from the ground, applying bilateral pressure to the entire column. This force acts to prevent bilateral shifting of the columns and curvature at their bases so preventing the deformation which occurs throughout the whole structure during an earthquake.
In an earthquake, the columns lose their eccentricity and their bases are lifted, creating twisting in all of the nodes of the structure. There is a limit to the eccentricity, that is, there is a limit to the surface area of the base which is lifted by the rollover moment.
To minimise the twisting of the bases, we place strong foot girders in the columns.
In the large longitudinal columns (walls), due to the large moments which occur during an earthquake, it is practically impossible to prevent rotation with the classical way of construction of the foot girders.
The following result occurs with this lifting of the base in combination with the elasticity. When one column of the frame lifts one end of the beam upwards, at the same time the other column at its other end moves violently downwards.
This stresses the beam and has the tendency to twist it in different directions at the two ends, deforming its body in an S shape.The same deformation occurs with the columns also, due to the twisting of the nodes and the differential phase shift of vertical plates.
In order to prevent the lifting of the base, we clamp the base of the structure to the ground using the patented mechanism.
However, if we want to prevent the lifting of the whole columnar structure which stems from the lifting of its base as well as from the elasticity of its main body, then the best point for enforcing an opposing, balancing force is the roof. This opposing tendency on the roof must come from an external source and not applied from within the structure. This external source is the ground underneath the base. From here the external force is applied.
Underneath the base of the structure, we drill a hole into the ground and clamp it with the patented anchor. With the aid of a cable which passes freely through a pipe in the column, we transfer this force which we obtained from the ground up to the roof.
At this point in the roof, we insert a stop with a screw to prevent the raising of the roof of the longitudinal columns which happens during an earthquake and deforms all the plates.
In this way, we control the oscillation of whole structure. That is, the deformity which the structural failure causes. With this method, we do not see changes in the form of the structure, because it maintains the same shape it had prior to and during the earthquake.
The reaction of the mechanism to the raising of the roof of the longitudinal column and the opposing reaction of the at the bottom part of the base, divert the lateral load of the earthquake into the strong vertical section.
With this diversion of the lateral load of the earthquake to the vertical columns, the twisting of the nodes is abolished because the lateral loadings of the earthquake are 100% borne along the length of the columns, so it is impossible for them to twist in their main sections.
third method.
(The prestressed columns do not have ductility, and can not absorb energy)
What I do to solve this problem
Simply, Ι do not apply pretension between the roof and drilling.
what am I doing.
First apply pretension between the level of the foundation base (ground) and the anchor mechanism which is in the depths of the hole of drilling.
The pretension is twice than it is the axial loads I want to receive the tendon in an earthquake.
The initial prestressing applied to achieve very strong adhesion
(Clamping) of the anchor into the walls of the borehole.
Then fill the hole drilling with Concrete.
After uniting the tendon that extends from the borehole, with a nut, to lengthen until the roof.
We take care of the tendon to pass through a plastic tube free, so to avoid guilds (adhesion) with this concrete.
On the roof, inserted between the tendon and the roof a spring which simply tighten with a screw.
Do not apply any other second pretension.
The spring on the roof leaves the column to oscillate inside the elastic range while applying seismic damping because it prevents the rise of the roof of the long column.
But stop the column to pass on inelastic failure region.

Accepted! for publishing by our journal Open Journal of Civil Engineering (OJCE)
ojce@scirp.org
To lymperis_ios@yahoo.com Today at 10:40 AM
Dear Author(s),
We are writing with our great pleasure to let you know that your manuscript is accepted for publishing by our journal Open Journal of Civil Engineering (OJCE) and our heartfelt appreciation for your intellectual contribution.
Reviewers have said... It studies the ultimate anti seismic system in the paper. The focus is clear, the innovation is strong and the academic level is high. This study has great social significance.
Paper ID: 1880388
Paper Title: The ultimate anti seismic system
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.
Best regards,
Editorial Assistant of OJCE
Scientific Research Publishing
Email: ojce@scirp.org
Open Journal of Civil Engineering_Engineering_Journals_SCIRP

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=59888

The Ultimate Anti-Seismic System
Open Journal of Civil Engineering Vol.5 No.3, Pub. Date: September 24, 2015