1 / 19

Structural Vibration Control Using Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper

The Eighteenth KKCNN Symposium on Civil Engineering. Structural Vibration Control Using Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper. Han-Rok Ji , Graduate Student , KAIST, Korea Yeong-Jong Moon, Ph. D. Candidate , KAIST, Korea Chun-Ho Kim, Professor , Joongbu University, Korea

tynice
Download Presentation

Structural Vibration Control Using Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Eighteenth KKCNN Symposium on Civil Engineering Structural Vibration Control Using Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper Han-Rok Ji, Graduate Student, KAIST, Korea Yeong-Jong Moon, Ph. D. Candidate, KAIST, Korea Chun-Ho Kim, Professor, Joongbu University, Korea In-Won Lee, Professor, KAIST, Korea

  2. CONTENTS • Introduction • Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper • Numerical Analysis • Conclusions

  3. Introduction • Tuned Mass Damper • widely used mechanical damping device • Simple and efficient vibration control system • No external power, energy dissipation, inherent reliability • Restricted performance resulted from the fixed parameters • Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper • Alternative device of conventional TMD • Improved control performance with stability of TMD • High robustness and adaptability

  4. Objective • Analytical study on semiactive TMD using MR damper for mitigating the vibration of structures • Application of various semiactive control algorithms to MR damper • Robustness analysis for the semiactive TMD system

  5. x2 c(t) m2 k2 x1 m1 m1 k1 c1 Semiactive Tuned Mass Damper • Controllable damping device is installed in the place of passive dashpot. • Produce the additional control effect to the primary structure. SDOF system with semiactive TMD • Equation of Motion (1)

  6. Dynamic model of MR damper • modified Bouc-Wen model (Spencer et al., 1997) Bouc-Wen c0 k1 c1 k0 c1 c0 k0 k1 (2) Modified Bouc-Wen Model

  7. Semiactive Control Algorithms • on-off velocity based groundhook control • on-off displacement based groundhook control • clipped optimal algorithm • maximum energy dissipation algorithm

  8. On-off velocity based groundhook control (Koo et al. 2003) • Based on velocity of primary system (v1 ) and TMD (v2 ) (3) • On-off displacement based groundhook control (Koo et al. 2003) • Based on velocity of primary system (v1 ) and TMD (v2 ) displacement of primary system (x1 ) (4)

  9. Clipped optimal algorithm (Dyke et al, 1996) • linear optimal controller and clipped algorithm (5) Fc : desired damper force by optimal controller Fd : measured damper force • Maximum energy dissipation algorithm (Jansen and Dyke, 2000) • Controlvoltage is determined so that the structure dissipates the maximum energy (6) Fd : measured damper force

  10. Numerical Analysis • Three-story shear building MR damper mTMD = 150 kg , kTMD = 36,401 N/m • Input earthquake excitations • amplitude scaled El Centro, Hachinohe earthquakes

  11. Parameters of MR damper (Spencer et al., 1997) Bouc-Wen c0 k1 k0 c1 c1 c0 k0 k1 Modified Bouc-Wen model • maximum damper force : 1,500 N • minimum voltage : 0 V • maximum voltage : 2.25 V

  12. Response of building model J1 : normalized peak floor displacement J2 : normalized peak interstory drift J3 : normalized peak acceleration

  13. Evaluation criteria under two earthquakes • El Centro earthquake • Hachinohe earthquake Normalized value Normalized value • The efficiency of semiactive TMD is slightly better than that of TMD. • Passive on mode has the worst performance.

  14. Robustness Analysis • Real structures can have structural uncertainties in many reasons. • Control performance of TMD is restricted considerably due to off-tuning effect. • Stiffness perturbation is considered to verify the robustness of the semiactive TMD • Response with stiffness matrix perturbation • Perturbed stiffness matrix (7) : amount of perturbation (-15%, -10%, -5%, +5%, +10% and +15%)

  15. Time history with +15% stiffness perturbation under Hachinohe earthquake Interstory drift (cm) Acceleration (m/sec2) Time (sec) • The maximum and RMS values with semiactive TMD are reduced compared with that of conventional TMD.

  16. Evaluation criteria under El Centro earthquake Normalized peak drift (J2) Normalized peak acceleration (J3) • Overall performance of semiactive TMD is better than that of TMD. • Efficient algorithm : on-off DBG control for interstory drift clipped optimal control for acceleration

  17. Evaluation criteria under Hachinohe earthquake Normalized peak drift (J2) Normalized peak acceleration (J3) • Semiactive TMD is superior to conventional TMD. • On-off DBG and clipped optimal algorithm have sufficient robustness.

  18. Conclusions • Analytical study on semiactive TMD with MR damper is performed. • Various semiactive control algorithms are adopted and the performance of each algorithm is evaluated. • Semiactive TMD system shows slightly better performance than conventional TMD system.

  19. Sufficient robustness is obtained under the structural perturbation with semiactive TMD. • The on-off displacement based groundhook theory and clipped optimal algorithm is appropriate algorithm for semiactive TMD system.

More Related