Analytical Method for Designing the Tuned Mass Damper Based on the Complex Stiffness Theory

  • Farid Kordi
  • Javad AlamatianEmail author
Research paper


In this paper, a new approach is presented for designing the tuned mass damper (TMD). Formulation of the dynamic magnification factor for the absorbed structure leads to a nonlinear equation, which is solved here analytically for determining the TMD’s specifications. Suitable root, selected based on the structural dynamic theories, is complex, which shows that the TMD mechanism probably has little damping. This formulation leads to new closed-form relationships for designing the TMD’s mass, stiffness and damping. For numerical verification of the proposed method, vibrations of two shear buildings, excited by some near-field and far-field ground acceleration records, are controlled using the TMD mechanism. Results show that the efficiency of the proposed technique for controlling the structural vibrations is higher than other existing approaches.


Passive control Tuned mass damper Complex stiffness Analytical method 


  1. Chopra AK (1995) Dynamics of structures, theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Connor JJ (2003) Introduction to structural motion control. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  3. Domizio M, Ambrosini D, Curadelli O (2015) Performance of TMDs on nonlinear structures subjected to near-fault earthquakes. Smart Struct Syst 16(4):725–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Giuliano F (2013) Note on the paper, Optimum parameters of tuned liquid column–gas damper for mitigation of seismic-induced vibrations of offshore jacket platforms, by Seyed Amin Mousavi, Khosrow Bargi, and Seyed Mehdi Zahrai. Struct Control Health Monit 20(5):852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Iwata Y (1982) On the construction of the dynamic vibration absorber. Jpn Soc Mech Eng 820:150–152Google Scholar
  6. Jiang Z (2018) The impact of a passive tuned mass damper on offshore single-blade installation. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 176:65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kim HS (2014) Seismic response reduction of a building using top-story isolation system with MR damper. Contemp Eng Sci 7(21):979–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Krenk S (2005) Frequency analysis of the tuned mass damper. J Appl Mech 72:936–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lackner MA, Rotea MA (2011) Passive structural control of offshore wind turbines. Wind Energy 14(3):373–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lin CC, Wang JF, Lien CH, Chiang HW, Lin CS (2010) Optimum design and experimental study of multiple tuned mass dampers with limited stroke. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39(14):1631–1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liu MY, Chiang WL, Hwang JH, Chu CR (2008) Wind-induced vibration of high-rise building with tuned mass damper including soil–structure interaction. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 96(6–7):1092–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Miguel LFF, Lopez RH, Miguel LFF, Torii AJ (2016) A novel approach to the optimum design of MTMDs under seismic excitations. Struct Control Health Monit 23(11):1290–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller DW, Crawley EF, Wards BA (1985) Inertial actuator design for maximum passive and active energy dissipation in flexible space structures. In: Structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, pp 536–544Google Scholar
  14. Mohebbi M, Shakeri K, Ghanbarpour Y, Majzub H (2013) Designing optimal multiple tuned mass dampers using genetic algorithms (GAs) for mitigating the seismic response of structures. J Vib Control 19(4):605–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nishihara O, Asami T (2002) Closed-form solutions to the exact optimizations of dynamic vibration absorbers. J Vib Acoust 124:576–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ormondroyd J, Den Hartog JP (1928) The theory of dynamic vibration absorber. Trans Am Soc Mech Eng 50:9–22Google Scholar
  17. Pourzeynali S, Salimi S, Yousefisefat M, Eimani Kalesar H (2016) Robust multi-objective optimization of STMD device to mitigate buildings vibrations. Earthq Struct 11(2):347–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Quaranta G, Mollaioli F, Monti G (2016) Effectiveness of design procedures for linear TMD installed on inelastic structures under pulse-like ground motion. Eartq Struct 10(1):239–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Salvi J, Rizzi E (2016) Closed-form optimum tuning formulas for passive tuned mass dampers under benchmark excitations. Smart Struct Syst 17(2):231–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Si Y, Karimi HR, Gao H (2014) Modelling and optimization of a passive structural control design for a spar-type floating wind turbine. Eng Struct 69:168–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Warburton GB (1982) Optimal absorber parameters for various combinations of response and excitation parameters. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 10:381–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Xiang P, Nishitani A (2014) Optimum design of tuned mass damper floor system integrated into bending-shear type building based on H, H2, and stability maximization criteria. Struct Control Health Monit 22(6):919–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Yamaguchi H (1988) Damping of transient vibration by a dynamic absorber. Trans Jpn Soc Mech Eng 54:561–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhou X, Lin Y, Gu M (2015) Optimization of multiple tuned mass dampers for large-span roof structures subjected to wind loads. Wind Struct 20(3):363–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zilletti M, Elliott SJ, Rustighi E (2012) Optimisation of dynamic vibration absorbers to minimise kinetic energy and maximise internal power dissipation. J Sound Vib 331:4093–4100CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Civil Engineering Department, Mashhad BranchIslamic Azad UniversityMashhadIran

Personalised recommendations