An optimization study for viscous dampers between adjacent buildings

Integrated Design of Hybrid Interstory-Interbuilding Multi-Actuation Schemes for Vibration Control of Adjacent Buildings under Seismic Excitations

“…In this case, the best performance is achieved by the linked configuration CC6, which produces a 50.6% of reduction with respect to the uncontrolled response. In contrast, the values of building B (2) indicate a better behavior of the unlinked control configurations. For this building, the best performance corresponds to the unlinked control configuration CC3, which produces a 45.5% of reduction with respect to the uncontrolled response.…”

“…The control configuration I (CC1), presented in Figure 2a, is an unlinked configuration that includes two interstory actuators (d 1 and d 2 ) located at the buildings' lowest level. The control configuration II (CC2), presented in Figure 2b, is a linked configuration that includes an interstory actuator (d 1 ) located at the lowest level of the building B (2) , and an interbuilding actuator (d 2 ), located at the fourth-story level. Control configurations with three and four actuation devices are presented in Figures 3 and 4, respectively.…”

“…Thus, for the configuration CC6 displayed in Figure 4b, the number of actuation devices is n d = 4 and the measured-output vector has the form y(t) = [y 1 (t), y 2 (t), y 3 (t), y 4 (t)] T , where y 1 (t) is the interstory velocity at the first-story level in building B (1) , y 2 (t) and y 3 (t) denote the interstory velocity at the first and second story levels in building B (2) , respectively, and y 4 (t) is the interbuilding velocity at the four-story level. In this case, by considering the matrix T VI u given in Equation (26), we obtain the measured-output matrix …”

“…To provide an intuitive and effective summary of this complex set of numerical results, the control configurations have been grouped by the number of actuation devices. Thus, the peak-values of the absolute interstory drifts and interbuilding approaches corresponding to the control configurations with two actuation devices (CC1 and CC2) are presented in Figure 11, where the interstory drift peak-values corresponding to the four-story building B (1) are presented in the left-hand-side graphic, the interbuilding approach peak-values are shown in the central graphic, and the interstory drift peak-values corresponding to the five-story building B (2) are displayed in the right-hand-side graphic. In the graphics of this section, the following colors and line styles have been used: blue lines present the values of the unlinked control configurations, red lines represent the linked control configurations, and black lines correspond to the uncontrolled configuration; additionally, active controllers are represented by solid lines, and passive controllers by non-solid lines.…”

“…Over the last years, a significant research effort has been made in this field. Recent works on the seismic response of adjacent structures include nonlinear dynamical models for pounding events [2][3][4][5], stochastic assessment of pounding risk [6], structural analysis of large buildings connected by sky-bridge links [7], seismic response of adjacent nonstructural components [8], and reduced-order models for the study of the analytical characteristics of linked structures [9][10][11][12]. Also, a wide variety of control strategies has been recently proposed, including passive linking systems with viscous and viscoelastic elements [13][14][15][16][17][18], nonlinear linking dampers [19,20], semiactive magnetorheological linking dampers [21][22][23], shared Tuned-Mass-Dampers [24][25][26], and active linking devices [27,28].…”