Optimal seismic retrofit of fractional viscoelastic dampers for minimum life-cycle cost of retrofitted steel frames

Beheshti, Maryam; Asadi, Payam

doi:10.1007/s00158-019-02454-w

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results showed that the peak structural responses, including displacement and acceleration, increase with ambient temperature (Beheshti and Asadi, 2020;Chang et al, 1992;Samali and Kwok, 1995). In general, there are three approaches to analyze the ambient temperature effect of VE materials and dampers: by using the thermal-mechanical model (Guo et al, 2016), empirical equation (Chang et al, 1992), and time-temperature correspondence (Beheshti andAsadi, 2020, Lewandowski andPrzychodzki, 2018;Moreira et al, 2010;Wei et al, 2017;Xu et al, 2020). The first is time-consuming when it is applied to a large-scale structure, the second greatly depends on the experimental data, and the third is a widely acceptable method in the polymer viscoelasticity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…However, the ambient temperature effect is considerable for viscoelastically damped structures. These results showed that the peak structural responses, including displacement and acceleration, increase with ambient temperature (Beheshti and Asadi, 2020;Chang et al, 1992;Samali and Kwok, 1995). In general, there are three approaches to analyze the ambient temperature effect of VE materials and dampers: by using the thermal-mechanical model (Guo et al, 2016), empirical equation (Chang et al, 1992), and time-temperature correspondence (Beheshti andAsadi, 2020, Lewandowski andPrzychodzki, 2018;Moreira et al, 2010;Wei et al, 2017;Xu et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Seismic performance of viscoelastically damped structures at different ambient temperatures

Dai

Gai

et al. 2020

Journal of Vibration and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experimental results show that mechanical behaviors of viscoelastic dampers are greatly affected by ambient temperature. Neglecting the ambient temperature effect will lead to an inaccurate seismic evaluation on viscoelastically damped structures. This study investigates the ambient temperature effect on the seismic performance of viscoelastically damped structures. An efficient algorithm is proposed to solve the seismic response of viscoelastically damped structures at different ambient temperatures based on the time–temperature correspondence. Numerical simulations of a ten-story viscoelastically damped steel frame under historical earthquakes are presented to illustrate the ambient temperature effect on the seismic performance. The results show that the natural frequency decreases with the increase in ambient temperature, whereas the damping ratio change with ambient temperature greatly depends on the viscoelastic damper properties. The seismic displacement reduction, in general, decreases with the increase in ambient temperature. The seismic acceleration reduction with ambient temperature is affected by the viscoelastic damper properties, structural parameters, and earthquakes together.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic performance of viscoelastically damped structures at different ambient temperatures

Dai

Gai

et al. 2020

Journal of Vibration and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Micheli et al (2019) LCC is used to discuss the cost-effectiveness of viscous and friction dampers designed to ensure performance-based code-compliant accelerations in steel frame tall buildings under wind loading. In Beheshti and Asadi (2020) LCC is used as the minimization objective for the optimal seismic retrofit of steel frames with viscoelastic dampers, while accounting for their temperature dependence. In Jiang et al (2020) a new seismic LCC assessment methodology relying on cost-based fragility analysis is proposed to measure the effectiveness of steel panel walls installed in steel frame buildings.…”

Section: Conventional Versus Lcc Performance Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic effectiveness and robustness of tuned mass dampers versus nonlinear energy sinks in a lifecycle cost perspective

Matta

2020

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tuned mass dampers (TMDs) and nonlinear energy sinks (NESs) are two viable options for passively absorbing structural vibrations. In seismic applications, a trade-off exists in their performance, because TMDs’ effectiveness varies with the structural stiffness while NESs’ effectiveness varies with the earthquake intensity. To investigate this trade-off systematically, a lifecycle cost- (LCC-) oriented robust analysis and design method is here proposed, in which the effectiveness of a solution is measured by the reduction it entails in the expected cost of future seismic losses. In it, structural stiffness variability is modelled using a worst-case approach with lower and upper bounds, while seismic intensity variability is inherently captured by the incremental dynamic analyses underlying every LCC evaluation. The resulting worst-case lifetime cost provides a rational metric for discussing pros and cons of TMDs and NESs, and becomes the objective function for their robust optimization. The method is applied to the design of TMDs and NESs on a variety of single- and multi-story linear building models, located in a moderate-to-high seismic hazard region. Mass ratios from 1 to 10% and structural stiffness reductions up to 4 times are considered. Results show that TMDs are consistently more effective than NESs even in the presence of large stiffness reductions, provided that structural stiffness uncertainty is considered in design. They also show that a conventional robust H∞ design provides for TMDs a solution which is very close to that obtained by minimizing the proposed LCC metric.

show abstract

“…[ 1 ] Therefore, in recent studies, the life‐cycle cost has been the seismic optimization goal of designing the control system for retrofitting (or seismic design) the structures. [ 2–9 ] Mitropoulou and Lagaros [ 3 ] investigated the performance and cost of seismic isolators using life‐cycle cost analysis. They showed that although the seismic isolator system is expensive, the life‐cycle cost is less than its fixed counterpart.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The findings showed that the total life‐cycle cost of the optimized controlled structure is less than the life‐cycle cost of controlled structures and goes from about 10% to 28% decrease. Beheshti and Asadi [ 8 ] optimized the seismic design of the viscoelastic dampers for the minimum life‐cycle cost of steel frames. They demonstrated that utilizing more dampers can significantly reduce the expected life‐cycle damage costs of the supposed structures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life‐cycle cost optimization of semiactive magnetorheological dampers for the seismic control of steel frames

Salajegheh

Asadi

2020

Structural Design Tall Build

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to achieve minimum life-cycle cost, by applying a seismic design optimization of the steel frames with semiactive magnetorheological (MR) dampers. The total life-cycle cost, which includes the initial constructional and expected damage costs, is an adequate goal to satisfy both employer and users. For optimal performance of the dampers, two fuzzy control systems are suggested, each having two different inputs. Results of numerical analysis for an 11-story steel structure show that using MR dampers decreases the interstory drift ratios to a permissible limit. It also reduces life-cycle cost when the design is optimum and when the dampers are evenly distributed by 23% and 14%, respectively. In the case where the objective function was to minimize the total life-cycle cost, the expected injury and fatality, as the most crucial financial parameters, had the highest decrease rate. There was also a 17% drop in comparison to the state that the dampers are evenly distributed. The fuzzy control with drift and velocity as inputs had better performance in minimizing the total life-cycle cost than the other fuzzy control, which used acceleration instead of velocity.

show abstract

Optimal seismic retrofit of fractional viscoelastic dampers for minimum life-cycle cost of retrofitted steel frames

Cited by 13 publications

References 22 publications

Seismic performance of viscoelastically damped structures at different ambient temperatures

Seismic performance of viscoelastically damped structures at different ambient temperatures

Seismic effectiveness and robustness of tuned mass dampers versus nonlinear energy sinks in a lifecycle cost perspective

Life‐cycle cost optimization of semiactive magnetorheological dampers for the seismic control of steel frames

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About