Performance Validations of Semiactive Controllers on Large-Scale Moment-Resisting Frame Equipped with 200-kN MR Damper Using Real-Time Hybrid Simulations

Self Cite

Summary Numerous structures have been designed and built without taking earthquake ground motions or outdated seismic design codes into account. In order to improve the seismic performance of existing structures, many retrofit approaches based on performance‐based design have been developed. However, some of these approaches are inapplicable due to structural limitations or because they were developed with the assumption of single‐degree‐of‐freedom, which does not take higher modes into account. To overcome the limitations of these traditional methods, a multi‐performance‐based control design (MPBCD) methodology has been proposed by integrating a decentralized semi‐active control algorithm, magnetorheological dampers, and an advanced multi‐objective optimization method to provide various sets of retrofit control designs to satisfy multiple target performances under multiple seismic intensities without changing structural cross‐section sizes or material properties. This MPBCD method provides engineers with numerous sets of control designs (i.e., control device layouts with control design parameters) to help them select proper control designs to retrofit existing building structures and improve seismic performance. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Section: Control Devicementioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic retrofit of MRF buildings using decentralized semi‐active control for multi‐target performances

Cha

Agrawal

2016

Self Cite

“…Saouma et al, conducted an RTHS study on a nonductile reinforced concrete frame and compared the results with shake table testing . Cha et al, evaluated the performances of four semiactive control algorithms for the control of a large‐scale realistic moment‐resisting frame using a large‐scale 200‐kN MR damper . Mercan and Ricles studied structures with full‐scale elastomeric dampers using RTHS .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive stability indicator: a novel approach to configuring a real‐time hybrid simulation

Maghareh

Dyke

RabieniaHaratbar

et al. 2016

Summary Real‐time hybrid simulation (RTHS) is an effective and versatile tool for the examination of complex structural systems with rate dependent behaviors. To meet the objectives of such a test, appropriate consideration must be given to the partitioning of the system into physical and computational portions (i.e., the configuration of the RTHS). Predictive stability and performance indicators (PSI and PPI) were initially established for use with only single degree‐of‐freedom systems. These indicators allow researchers to plan a RTHS, to quantitatively examine the impact of partitioning choices on stability and performance, and to assess the sensitivity of an RTHS configuration to de‐synchronization at the interface. In this study, PSI is extended to any linear multi‐degree‐of‐freedom (MDOF) system. The PSI is obtained analytically and it is independent of the transfer system and controller dynamics, providing a relatively easy and extremely useful method to examine many partitioning choices. A novel matrix method is adopted to convert a delay differential equation to a generalized eigenvalue problem using a set of vectorization mappings, and then to analytically solve the delay differential equations in a computationally efficient way. Through two illustrative examples, the PSI is demonstrated and validated. Validation of the MDOF PSI also includes comparisons to a MDOF dynamic model that includes realistic models of the hydraulic actuators and the control‐structure interaction effects. Results demonstrate that the proposed PSI can be used as an effective design tool for conducting successful RTHS. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

“…This improvement in approach was needed because of compliance and other dynamic characteristics of the test setup, which will be present in most large-scale RTHS. In [22,23], the experimental substructure is a three-story structure with an MR damper in the first story, and the analytical substructure is a 3-DOF linear numerical model; the ground motion for the RTHS was the 1940 El Centro earthquake record scaled by 0.5. Two phases of RTHS were conducted: in the first phase, the DBF is the experimental substructure, and in the second phase, the DBF together with the MRF is the experimental substructure.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In [22,23], the experimental substructure is a three-story structure with an MR damper in the first story, and the analytical substructure is a 3-DOF linear numerical model; the ground motion for the RTHS was the 1940 El Centro earthquake record scaled by 0.5. In [22,23], the experimental substructure is a three-story structure with an MR damper in the first story, and the analytical substructure is a 3-DOF linear numerical model; the ground motion for the RTHS was the 1940 El Centro earthquake record scaled by 0.5.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cha et al [22], Friedman et al [23] and Chae et al[24] used RTHS to conduct a performance evaluation of structural control strategies for magnetorheological (MR) dampers. In [22,23], the experimental substructure is a three-story structure with an MR damper in the first story, and the analytical substructure is a 3-DOF linear numerical model; the ground motion for the RTHS was the 1940 El Centro earthquake record scaled by 0.5. In [24], the experimental substructure is a three-story structure with MR dampers in the first and second stories, while the analytical substructure is a numerical model of a moment-resisting frame (MRF) with 148 DOFs; the intensity of ground motions for the RTHS were 60% and 80% of the design basis earthquake (DBE) level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accurate real‐time hybrid earthquake simulations on large‐scale MDOF steel structure with nonlinear viscous dampers

Dong

Sause

Ricles

2015

Summary This paper presents real‐time hybrid earthquake simulation (RTHS) on a large‐scale steel structure with nonlinear viscous dampers. The test structure includes a three‐story, single‐bay moment‐resisting frame (MRF), a three‐story, single‐bay frame with a nonlinear viscous damper and associated bracing in each story (called damped braced frame (DBF)), and gravity load system with associated seismic mass and gravity loads. To achieve the accurate RTHS results presented in this paper, several factors were considered comprehensively: (1) different arrangements of substructures for the RTHS; (2) dynamic characteristics of the test setup; (3) accurate integration of the equations of motion; (4) continuous movement of the servo‐controlled hydraulic actuators; (5) appropriate feedback signals to control the RTHS; and (6) adaptive compensation for potential control errors. Unlike most previous RTHS studies, where the actuator stroke was used as the feedback to control the RTHS, the present study uses the measured displacements of the experimental substructure as the feedback for the RTHS, to enable accurate displacements to be imposed on the experimental substructure. This improvement in approach was needed because of compliance and other dynamic characteristics of the test setup, which will be present in most large‐scale RTHS. RTHS with ground motions at the design basis earthquake and maximum considered earthquake levels were successfully performed, resulting in significant nonlinear response of the test structure, which makes accurate RTHS more challenging. Two phases of RTHS were conducted: in the first phase, the DBF is the experimental substructure, and in the second phase, the DBF together with the MRF is the experimental substructure. The results from the two phases of RTHS are presented and compared with numerical simulation results. An evaluation of the results shows that the RTHS approach used in this study provides a realistic and accurate simulation of the seismic response of a large‐scale structure with rate‐dependent energy dissipating devices. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.