Modelling of seismic impact on a double-contour geodesic dome taking into account the flexibility of nodal connections

Introduction. Currently, an urgent problem is the development of self-supporting lightweight structures that provide reliable and universal protection in any extreme natural phenomena. Objects of this class include double-contour geodesic dome systems, the design of which fully meets modern trends in geoclimatic or climate-resistant architecture. The supporting frame of a double-contour geodesic dome is formed by a system of repeating rod fragments connected using special collapsible nodal connections. There is no information in the literature on finite element modelling of the dynamic response of a double-contour geodesic dome to a seismic impact, taking into account the accuracy of the nodal joints of the supporting frame rods.

Materials and methods. Macros written in the APDL language embedded in the ANSYS Mechanical software package  were used for numerical analysis of the transient process. Accounting for the linear and angular ductility of the nodal joints of the dome frame rods is implemented using combined finite elements COMBIN14. The process of building a finite element ensemble consisting of beams and combined elements is automated.

Results. As a result of the modal analysis, it was found that the type of geometry of the core frame of the geodesic dome in combination with the parameters of the ductility of the rotary balls significantly affects its own pairs.Computational experiments have been performed for two variants of geodesic dome frames under seismic impact with an intensity of eight points.

Conclusions. The proposed concept of modelling nodal joints of the dome core frame using combined finite elements allows us to indirectly take into account the effect of damping under dynamic influence. The developed technique of constructing a finite element model of the geodesic dome frame, taking into account hingerod connections, can be used in designing the design of a real art object of this type.

1. Travush V.I., Antoshkin V.D., Erofeeva I.V., Gudozhnikov S.S. Study of the design and technological capabilities of prefabricated spherical shells. Regional Architecture and Engineering. 2014; 2:89-101. EDN SFOZYN. (rus.).

2. Esipova A.A. Application of geodesic domes in construction: advantages and disadvantages. Science and Modernity. 2015; 38:8-11. EDN UAWBBF. (rus.).

3. Zhivotov D.A., Pastukh O.A., Tilinin Yu.I. Architectural and spatial planning solutions of spherical shape buildings. Contemporary Problems of Architecture and Construction. 2021; 91-96. DOI: 10.1201/97810-03176428-20

4. González-Avilés А.B., Pérez-Carramiñana C., Galiano-Garrigós A., Pérez-Millán M.I. Energy Benefits of Tourist Accommodation Using Geodesic Domes. Buildings. 2024; 14(2):505. DOI: 10.3390/buildings-14020505

5. Rapp M., Cabrera D., Lu S. A polytrihedral dome for acoustic retroreflection, and its application to creative-arts practice-led research. Applied Acoustics. 2022; 195:108860. DOI: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2022.108860

6. Bysiec D., Maleska T. Numerical Analysis of Steel Geodesic Dome under Seismic Excitations. Materials. 2021; 14(16):4493. DOI: 10.3390/ma14164493

7. Da Silva L.S., Oliveira S., Costa R., Gentili F. Design and Analysis of Steel Structures Considering the 3D Behaviour of the Joints. Advanced Steel Construction. 2020; 16(2):137-145. DOI: 10.18057/IJASC.2020.16.2.5

8. Pavlov G.N. Basic concepts of automation of architectural design of geodesic domes and shells. News of Higher Educational Institutions. Construction. 2005; 10(562):104-108. EDN PFAKVD. (rus.).

9. Kolpakov A., Dolgov O., Korolskiy V., Popov S., Anchutin V., Zykov V. Analysis of Structural Layouts of Geodesic Dome Structures with Bar Filler Considering Air Transportation. Buildings. 2022; 12(2):242. DOI: 10.3390/buildings12020242

10. Lakhov A.Ya. The Approximate Method of Maximal Tensile Stress Determination in Rods of Double-Contour Geodetic Domes of the System “R” Exposed to Dead Load. Vestnik MGSU [Proceedings of Moscow State University of Civil Engineering]. 2014; 1:58-65. EDN RTUKHL. (rus.).

11. Rossot D., Machado R.D., Barbieri N., de Lima K.F. Experimental and Numerical Study of a Geodesic Dome Under Static and Dynamic Loads and the Influence of Nodal Connections. Experimental Techniques. 2022; 46(5):823-834. DOI: 10.1007/s40799-021-00509-6

12. Grunbaum B., Shephard G.C. Duality of Polyhedra. Shaping Space. 2013; 211-216. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-92714-5_15

13. Tarnai T. Geodesic Domes: Natural and Man-Made. International Journal of Space Structures. 2011; 26(3):215-227. DOI: 10.1260/0266-3511.26.3.215

14. Dudareva N., Zagayko S. SolidWorks 2011 with Examples. St. Petersburg, BHV-Petersburg, 2011; 496. EDN SDQLTR. (rus.).

15. Gaydzhurov P., Tsaritova N. Deformation modeling of rod structures under kinematic controlled action. International Journal for Computational Civil and Structural Engineering. 2024; 20(3):14-23. DOI: 10.22337/2587-9618-2024-20-3-14-23

16. Tsaritova N.G., Kurbanov A.Ib., Kurbanovа A.Аl. Energy-efficient buildings based on transformable fra-mes. Building and Reconstruction. 2022; 6(104):91-103. DOI: 10.33979/2073-7416-2022-104-6-91-103. EDN WRCQIB. (rus.).

17. Tsaritova N.G., Tumasov A.A., Kurbanova A.A., Shtankevich A.V. Shaping of buildings based on rod arches with variable geometry. Construction: Science and Education. 2023; 13(2):6-19. DOI: 10.22227/2305-5502.2023.2.1. EDN ORSBSV. (rus.).

18. Patent RU No. 2586351 C1, IPC E04B 1/58. Hinged joint of a spatial rod structure of regular structure / Tsaritova N.G., Buzalo N.A.; applicant Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education “South-Russian State Polytechnic University (NPI) named after M.I. Platov”; application No. 2015100939/03 dated 12.01.2015. Publ. 10.06.2016.