Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011 1072

Leuven, Belgium, 4-6 July 2011

G. De Roeck, G. Degrande, G. Lombaert, G. Müller (eds.)
ISBN 978-90-760-1931-4

Assessment of floor vibration using the OS-RMS90 method

F. Galanti1, Ch. Heinemeyer2, M. Feldmann2, S. Lentzen1

1
TNO Built Environment and Geosciences, Van Mourik Broekmanbweg 6, 2628XE Delft, The Netherlands
2
Institute of Steel Construction, RWTH Aachen University, Mies-van-der-Rohe-Str. 1, 52074 Aachen, Germany
email: flavio.galanti@tno.nl, hei@stb.rwth-aachen.de, feldmann@stb.rwth-aachen.de, sven.lentzen@tno.nl

ABSTRACT: To achieve flexibility with regard to space-arrangement and occupancy, multi-storey buildings require large span
floor structures with a minimum of internal columns and walls. Modern materials and methods of construction are becoming
more and more suitable to fulfill these requirements. It is common for the design of slender floor structures to be determined not
only by the ultimate limit states but by serviceability criteria such as deflections and vibrations. This paper describes a procedure
for the determination and assessment of floor response due to walking. Comfort criteria for vibrations are defined in relation to
the use of the floor. The procedure is based on the calculation of the one-step root mean square (OS-RMS) value of the response
of a floor which is brought into vibration due to a person walking on that floor. It is obtained from the combination of measured
or simulated floor mobility functions and a standard walking load function. In order to take into account the possible statistical
variation in the loading, the 90 percentile of OS-RMS values obtained for different persons’ weights and walking speeds is
determined. It is possible to carry out the design check in a simplified manner using design charts from which the OS-RMS90
value can be read off directly assuming the floor under investigation can be schematized as a single degree of freedom. In this
case it is sufficient to determine the basic dynamic characteristics of the floor in terms of damping, first natural frequency and
modal mass. The simplified method enables the designer to assess quickly whether a floor design will be susceptible to walking
loads.

KEY WORDS: Human induced vibration, floors, walking, light weight structures.

1 INTRODUCTION performance of floors with respect to human induced

Sustainability requires multi-storey buildings which are
designed taking flexibility in space arrangement and in usage
into account. As a consequence large span floor structures
with a minimum number of intermediate columns or walls are
of interest. Modern materials and construction processes, e.g.
composite floor systems or pre-stressed flat concrete slabs
with high strength materials, are capable of fulfilling these
requirements.
These slender floor structures have in common, that their
design is usually not controlled by ultimate limit states but by
serviceability criteria, i.e. deflections or vibrations.
Whereas for ultimate limit state verifications and for the
determination of deflections design codes provide sufficient
rules, the calculation and assessment of floor vibrations in the
design stage has still a number of uncertainties. These
uncertainties are related to:
− a suitable design model including the effects of
frequencies, damping, displacement amplitudes, velocity
and acceleration to predict the dynamic response of the
floor structure with sufficient reliability in the design
stage,
− the characterization of boundary conditions for the model,
− the shape and magnitude of the excitation,
− the assessment of the floor response in relation to the use
of the floor and the degree of vibration tolerance of the
users.
A recent project funded by the Research Fund for Coal and
Steel (RFCS), has resulted in a method for verifying the
vibrations [1]. The method, referred to as the one step root
mean square method (OS-RMS), has been published in a a
Dutch guideline [2] and a European guideline [3]. The Dutch
guideline describes the complete method, whereas the
European guideline is limited to the so-called hand calculation
method. The method is one of several methods developed in
the past to deal with floor vibrations.
This paper describes the procedure for the determination
and assessment of floor responses to walking of pedestrians
which on one hand takes account of the complexity of the
mechanical vibrations problem, and on the other hand is also
suitable for design purposes.
2 DESCRIPTION OF THE WALKING LOAD
Walking differs from running as one foot keeps continuously
contact to the ground while the other foot moves. It can be
described by the time history of walking induced contact
forces.
Due to the periodicity of the contact forces it is possible to
consider the walking load as a periodic function with a period,
T, equal to the inverse of the step frequency, fs:
1
T= (1)
fs
A standard walking load is defined as a series of consecutive
steps whereby each step load (or footfall) is described by a
polynomial [1]. The normalized step load is given by:
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011 1073

8
S (t ) ∑ K i t i 0 ≤ t < ts
S N (t ) = =  i =1 (2) 1.5

G  0 t < 0; t ≥ t s

Normalized force [-]

1.0
where G is the person's mass and ts is the total time during
which one foot is in contact with the ground. The coefficients
K1 to K8 depend on the step frequency, fs, and are given in
Table 1. The duration of a single step, ts, not to be confused 0.5
Step frequency
with period, T, is given by the following formula: 1.5 Hz
2.2 Hz
t s = 2.6606 − 1.757 ⋅ f s + 0.3844 ⋅ f s2 (3) 0.0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
The step load describes the different phases of the contact
between foot and ground as shown in Figure 1. Figure 2 gives Time [s]
examples of the time history of the contact forces during one
footfall for two different step frequencies. Figure 1. Example of the time history of the normalized
contact force for two different step frequencies.

One individual walking cannot be the basis for the design of

a b c d floors for vibration comfort but a representative loading has to
be found which covers a relevant majority of loading
scenarios. Hence the loading is described in a statistical
manner.
In order to obtain information on the statistical distributions
of step frequencies fs;i, measurements of step frequencies were
carried out in the entrance of an office building in Delft. The
distribution of step frequencies were found not to be
correlated with the distribution of body weights G, hence two
probability distribution functions are sufficient to describe the
statistical variation of the loading. In the calculations of the
response, a total of 700 combinations of step frequency and
Right leg: body weights need to be considered (35 step frequencies and
Ground contact Streched, Rocking Swing 20 body weights). Each combination leads to a response with
full body weight
a probability of occurrence described by a joint probability
Figure 3. Movement phases of legs and feet during walking. distribution function as shown in Figure 2.

Table 1: Coefficients K1 to K8 for given step frequency, fs.

fs ≤ 1.75 1.75 < fs < 2 fs ≥ 2

K1 -8 × fs + 38 24 × fs – 18 75 × fs - 120.4
K2 376 × fs – 844 -404 × fs + 521 -1720 × fs + 3153
K3 -2804 × fs + 4224 × fs – 6274 17055 × fs -
6025 31936
K4 6308 × fs – -29144 × fs + -94265 × fs +
16573 45468 175710
K5 1732 × fs + 109976 × fs – 298940 × fs -
13619 175808 553736
Figure 2. Frequency distribution of body mass and step
K6 -24648 × fs + -217424 × fs + -529390 × fs + frequency for a population of 700.
16045 353403 977335
K7 31836 × fs – 212776 × fs – 481665×fs -
33614 350259 888037 3 DETERMINATION OF THE FLOOR RESPONSE
K8 -12948×fs + -81572×fs + -174265×fs +
15532 135624 321008 The dynamic response of a floor structure due to walking is
determined by the loading characteristics, as described in
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011 1074

paragraph 2, and by the structural dynamic properties of the the 90% upper limit of the OS-RMS value and can be
floor. obtained by carrying out the following two steps:
The floor's characteristics are described in terms of a 1.) Determination of the responses of the floor for all
mobility frequency response function, FRF, or transfer possible load combinations: step frequency from 1.64
function. Using this function in combination with the standard Hz to 3 Hz in steps of 0.04 Hz and body mass from
walking load, the response of a floor is obtained. The transfer 30 kg to 125 kg in steps of 5 kg – in total 700
function method can be applied where the floor response is combinations should be considered. An example of
obtained either by measurement or by finite element the response of one floor as a function of step
calculations. frequency and body weight is presented in Figure 4.
In obtaining the transfer function, the excitation point and 2.) Determination of the cumulative frequency
response points do not necessarily have to coincide. Further, it distribution of OS-RMS values. From the relative
is assumed that the excitation point is kept fixed, that is, the frequency (probability) of each step frequency and
walking path is not taken into consideration. The response body weight combination, the cumulative frequency
point should be selected where nuisance is to be expected and of the OS-RMS value is obtained. The 90 % upper
the excitation point should correspond to a point in the limit is defined as the OS-RMS90 design value.
walking path.
As a rule, either the locations leading to the largest mobility
or the locations representing the most practical situation
should be selected. For most floors the excitation and
response points can be selected in the middle of the floor.
3.1 Floor response for a single combination of step
frequency and person’s weight
The one step root mean square value (OS-RMS) represents the
response of a floor that is brought into vibration due to a
person walking on that floor. It is obtained from the measured
or simulated floor mobility and the standard walking load
function for a person with given weight and walking pace.
The OS-RMS value is defined as the root mean square value
over a given interval of the frequency weighted velocity
response at a point on the floor. The interval is selected
starting from the highest peak in the response and either the
previous or the next peak in the response, see Figure 3. From
this definition, it follows that the interval corresponds to Figure 4. Vibration response for defined ranges of step
period, T, between one step and the next. frequency and body mass.
The weighted response is obtained by applying the
following weighting function: 3.3 Hand calculation method
It is also possible to follow a simplified approach, which
1 1
HW ( f ) = (4) avoids having to calculate the mobility function of a floor and
v0 1 + ( f 0 / f ) 2 carrying out a statistical analysis. This approach, referred to as
the hand calculation method, can be applied when a floor is
where f0=5.6 Hz and v0 is the reference velocity which is adequately described by a one degree of system consisting of
taken as 1.0 mm/s. Because of division by a reference a mass connected to a spring and damper. The OS-RMS90
velocity, the weighted response and the OS-RMS value are design value is obtained directly as a function of the dynamic
dimensionless. parameters which describe such a system, i.e., the mass, m,
2 the stiffness, k, and the damping ratio, ζ. In guidelines [2] and
v in mm/s

Original Signal
0 [2] this function has been determined in advance and is
-2
represented in graphs from which the OS-RMS90 can be read
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 off (see Figure 6 below). An implementation as a function in
2 MS Excel is currently also available.
v in mm/s

0
RMS = 0.56 mm/s
The function can be obtained by applying the steps
described in the previous paragraph for the mobility function
-2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 of system with one degree of freedom:
time in s
Ω
Figure 3. Selection of interval in weighted velocity response H v (Ω ) = (5)
for calculation of the OS-RMS value. (
m Ω −ω2
) + (2ζωΩ)
2 2 2

3.2 Design value of the floor response

In applying the hand calculation method, the dynamic
The design value of the floor response takes into account the properties of the floor structure need to be determined. In
possible statistical variation in the loading. It is determined as
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011 1075

general, it is sufficient to determine the following parameters Table 2. Recommended vibration levels according to building
for the first mode of vibration: function.
− natural frequency f,
OS-RMS90 Function
− modal mass Mmod,

Schools, training centers

− damping value ζ.

Industrial Workshops
The first and second parameters above can be readily

Residential buildings

Residential building
Hospitals, surgeries
estimated using formulas in classical texts on structural

Office buildings

Senior citizens’

Sports facilities
dynamics. The guidelines provide also a set of formulas for

Meeting rooms
Critical areas
different types of structures (generally beams and plates) and

Lower limit

Upper limit
given boundary conditions. The damping ζ instead is
considered as a combination of damping effects arising from:

Hotels
Class
− the type of material used in the structure,
− furniture and equipment, A 0.0 0.1
− permanent installations and finishing (such as lighting and B 0.1 0.2
ceilings). C 0.2 0.8
For each of these three damping effects a value of damping is D 0.8 3.2
provided in the guidelines. The damping of the floor is then E 3.2 12.8
obtained as the summation of these individual damping F 12.8 51.2
values.
When the mode frequency and the frequency of steps are Recommended
identical, resonance can lead to very large response Critical
amplitudes. Resonance can also occur for higher harmonics of Not recommended
the step frequency, i.e. where a multiple of the step frequency
coincides with the natural frequency. In the transfer function
method these possible resonance effects are implicitly taken
into account. For the hand calculation method, however,
higher modes need to be taken explicitly into consideration. 5 DESIGN PROCEDURE
Where higher floor modes may be relevant for design,
modal mass and frequency should be determined for each The implementation of the hand calculation method consists
mode i of interest and the OS-RMS90,i value should be read off in the three steps described in Figure 5. For the purpose of
for each mode i. The resulting OS-RMS90 value is determined obtaining the response of a floor, design diagrams, like the
by a sum of squares rule: one in Figure 6, have been developed. These diagrams have
been elaborated for a range of natural frequencies between 0
OS − RMS90 = ∑ OS − RMS
i
90 ,i (6) and 20 Hz and modal masses between 100 and 100000 kg.
Nine different graphs for each of the damping ratios ranging
from 1% to 9% are available in the guidelines.
From the diagrams, the floor response can be read off in
terms of the OS-RMS90 value. Contour levels indicate the
4 ASSESSMENT OF THE FLOOR RESPONSE corresponding floor response class.

The purpose of the assessment is to ensure a design, whereby

vibrations due to walking are so small that adequate comfort
for the users is attained. For the assessment, the floor response
is categorized into one of six response classes, A to F, as
given in Table 2. Each response class is defined in terms of a
lower and upper limit of the OS-RMS90 vibration level.
Since the perception of vibrations is dependent on the
activities carried out by users, different building functions are
assigned different recommended floor response classes.
The floor response classes have been determined on the
basis of different codes, design guides and measurement
performed in the past [1]. Figure 5. Design steps in the hand calculation method.
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011 1076

building and gymnastic halls. RFCS Report EUR 21972 EN, ISBN 92-
Classification based
Klassifizierung bei on
eineraDämpfung
damping ratio of 3%
von 3% 79-01705-5, 2006, http://europa.eu.int
20 10
19
11
9
7
5 4
3.2 2.6
2.8
2 1.8
1.61.4
1.2 1
0 .7
0. 6
0. 5
0.4 0.1
[2] Waarts, P. Trillingen van vloeren door lopen: Richtlijn voor het
8 2.2 0. 8 0.2
18
6 3
2.4 0.3 voorspellen, meten en beoordelen. SBR, September 2005.
17
16
15
12
13
10
9 5 4
3.2 2.6
2.8
1.6 1.4 0.7 0.6 0.4
0.1
A [3] Heinemeyer Ch., Feldmann M., Caetano E., Cunha A., Galanti F.,
14
17 11
8
7 2 1.8
2.2
2 .4
1.2
1
0.8
0.5
0.2 Goldack A., Hechler O., Hicks S., Keil A., Lukic M., Obiala R.,
3 0.3
13 25
21 6 Schlaich M., Smith A., Waarts P., 2007, RFCS-Project: Human induced
12
12
Vibration of Steel Structures – HIVOSS: Design Guideline and
B
0.1
13
10 3.2 2.6 1.6 0 .7 0.6
4 1.4 0.4
1137
29
17 11
9
7
5
2.8
2 1.8 1.2 1 0.5 0.2
Background Report.
10 8
45
49 41
33
3
2.2
2.4 0.8 0.3 http://www.stb.rwth-aachen.de/projekte/2007/HIVOSS/download.php
9 21 6
25 0.1

8
12
C
7,1 Hz 13
10 1.6 0.70.6 0 .4 0.2 0.1
3.2 2.6 1.4 0.5 0.3
7 5 4 1
37 9 1.2 0.2
2.8
Hz
ine inHz

116 2 0.8
29 11 7 1.8
17
156136

D
8
6 2.2
56 33 2.4
76
der Deck

45 0.4
96 41 3 0.3
49
of floor

5 21 6 0.2
25 0.70.6 0.5
1 0 .8 0.4 0.3
216196 1.61.4 1.2
Eigenfrequenz

0.3

E
276 0.5
236 12
4 256 176 0.6
2.6
Eigen frequency

0.4

F 13
10
4
3.2
2 .8

2.2
2
1.8
0.8 0.6
0.7

0.50. 4 0.3
5 0 .3
0.2
2.4
3 1
0.7
9 0.5 0.4
0.3
3 1 .41.2
37 7 1.6 0.6 0.4
196 0. 8 0.7 0. 5
216
1 0.6
27 6 116 11 8 2 .6 21.8
2.8 22.4
.2 1.2
1.4
0.8
1
316 6 3.2 1.6
356 29 17 1.8
2 1.2
1.4
456 4 3
2.6 2.2 1.6
79 6
696
856 5 36 476 336 5
836
876
776
756 616
676
576 416 296
816
736
716 59 6496
636 396 2.82.4
2 656 436
556
516 376 136 1.8
3.2 2
156 1.6
3 2.2 1.4
33 12 2.6 1.8 1.2
7 2.4 2 1.6
256236 21 4
2.8 1.4 1
56 10 1 .2 0. 8
98 6 2.2 1.8 1
13 3.2 0.80.7 0.6
0.5
45 1.6
1.4 0.4
41 1.2 0.6
76 5
3 2.6 0.5
25 2 1
49 0.7
96 2.4
0.8
0.4 0.3

1
100 200 500 1000 2 000 5000 10000 20000 50000 100000

17220 kg
Modale Masse der Decke in kg
Modal mass of floor in kg
Figure 6. Example of diagram from which the OS-RMS90
value can be read off.

6 CONCLUSION

This paper presents a method to determine and evaluate

design values for floor vibration. The method is the first to
take into account the variation in step frequency and body
mass of walking people leading to a design value of the floor
response which is defined as the 90% upper limit value of the
dynamic response.
The method is applicable in simplified form as a hand
calculation method, suitable for design assessment purposes.
Current research is focussing on optimization and extension
of the assessment procedure and on the interaction between
different design aspects such as that which exists between
transmission of vibrations and transmission sound. Dealing
both with vibration and sound may lead to conflicting design
requirements that are not easy to resolve. The research
towards optimizing and extening the assessment procedure
includes:
− increasing the calculation efficiency of the transfer
function method,
− simplyfying the design diagrams,
− assessment of (lightweight) stairscases.

REFERENCES
[1] European Commission – Technical Steel Research: Generalisation of
criteria for floor vibrations for industrial, office, residential and public