Advertisement

International Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 16, Issue 8, pp 871–885 | Cite as

Semi-Active Control of Structures Equipped With MR Dampers Based on Uniform Deformation Theory

  • Reza Karami Mohammadi
  • Samin Najarzade
Research paper

Abstract

Optimization based on uniform deformation theory (UDT) was proposed as a new technique in the field of optimum design of structures. In this paper, the concept of UDT has been utilized for semi-active control of buildings equipped with magneto-rheological (MR) dampers. Based on UDT, a method for determining the optimum control voltage using a polynomial controller has been presented. The coefficients of the polynomial controller have been determined by minimizing the standard deviation of the maximum inter-story drifts of a structure and by utilizing the Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm. The proposed controller based on UDT has been applied to control three- and six-story nonlinear shear buildings subjected to various earthquakes. The performance of this controller was evaluated regarding the uniform distribution of the maximum inter-story drifts and the reduction of the structural responses. Using this method, the maximum inter-story drifts of the structures were remarkably uniform in comparison to the uncontrolled structures. In addition, the maximum structural responses, especially the maximum inter-story drifts of the structures, significantly decreased.

Keywords

Semi-active control Magneto-rheological damper Uniform deformation theory Polynomial controller Particle swarm optimization 

References

  1. 1.
    Yi F, Dyke S, Caicedo J, Carlson JD (2001) Experimental verification of multi input seismic control strategies for smart dampers. ASCE J Eng Mech 127(11):1152–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Casciati F, Magonette G, Marazzi F (2006) Technology of semi-active devices and applications in vibration mitigation. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Soukissian TH, Tsalis C (2015) The effect of the generalized extreme value distribution parameter estimation methods in extreme wind speed prediction. Nat Hazards 78(3):1777–1809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sarkar A, Kumar N, Mitra D (2014) Extreme wind climate modeling of some locations in India for the specification of the design wind speed of structures. KSCE J Civ Eng 18(5):1496–1504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spencer BF Jr, Dyke SJ, Sain MK, Carlson JD (1997) Phenomenological model for magnetorheological dampers. ASCE J Eng Mech 123(3):230–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dyke SJ, Spencer BF, Sain MK, Carlson JD (1996) Modeling and control of magnetorheological dampers for seismic response reduction. Smart Mater Struct 5:565–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yang G (2001) Large-scale magnetorheological fluid damper for vibration mitigation: modeling, testing and control. Ph.D dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IndianaGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Halabian AM, Zafarani MM, Soheilipour MS et al (2016) Optimal semi-active control of seismically excited MR-equipped nonlinear buildings using FLC and multi-objective NSGAII algorithms considering ground excitation. J Civil Struct Health Monit 6(3):561–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liem DT, Ahn KK (2016) Adaptive semi-parallel position/force-sensorless control of electro-hydraulic actuator system using MR fluid damper. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 17(11):1451–1463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leitmann G (1994) Semi active control for vibration attenuation. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 5:841–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McClamroch NH, Gavin HP (1995) Closed loop structural control using electrorheological dampers. American Control Conference, American Automatic Control Council, Washington (DC), p 4173–4177Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jansen LM, Dyke SJ (2000) Semi-active control strategies for MR dampers: a comparative study. ASCE J Eng Mech 126(8):795–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Inaudi JA (1997) Modulated homogeneous friction: a semi-active damping strategy. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 26(3):361–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Soong TT (1990) Active structural control: theory and practice. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cha YJ, Agrawal AK (2011) Decentralized output feedback polynomial control of seismically excited structures using genetic algorithm. Struct Control Health Monit 20(3):241–258Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cha YJ, Zhang J, Agrawal AK, Dong B, Friedman A, Dyke SJ, Ricles J (2013) Comparative studies of semi-active control strategies for MR dampers: pure simulation and real-time hybrid tests. ASCE J Struct Eng 139:1237–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Karami Mohammadi R (2001) Effect of shear strength distribution on the reduction of seismic damage of structures. Ph. D. Dissertation, Civil Engineering Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karami Mohammadi R, El-Naggar MH, Moghadam H (2004) Optimum strength distribution for seismic resistant shear-buildings. Int J Solids Struct 41(22–23):6597–6612CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (1995) Particle swarm optimization, vol 4. IEEE Int. Conf. on Neural. Networks, Perth, p 1942–1949Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chopra AK (2001) Dynamic of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall Inc., LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moghaddam H (1996) Earthquake engineering, 1st edn. Tehran (in Persian) Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moghaddam H, Esmailzadeh Hakimi B (1999) On the optimum seismic loading of multistory structures. 3rd International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, Tehran, p 669–676Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee SS, Goel SC (2001) Performance based seismic design of structures using target drift and yield mechanism. US–Japan Seminar on Advanced stability and Seismicity Concept for Performance Based Design of Steel and Composite Structures, KyotoGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moghadam H, Hajirasouliha I (2004) A new approach for optimum design of structures under dynamic excitation. Asian J Civil Eng Build Hous 5(2):69–84Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moghadam H, Hajirasouliha I, Doostan A (2005) Optimum seismic design of concentrically braced steel frames: concepts and design procedures. J Constr Steel Res 61(2):151–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moghadam H, Hajirasouliha I (2005) Fundamentals of optimum performance based design for dynamic excitation. ScientiaIranic 12(4):368–378Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moghaddam H, Hajirasouliha I (2008) Optimum strength distribution for seismic design of tall buildings. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 17(2):331–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moghadam H, Karami Mohammadi R (2006) More efficient seismic loading for multi degrees of freedom structures. ASCE J Struct Eng 132(10):1673–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moghadam H (2009) On the optimum performance-based design of structures. Proceedings of a US–Iran Seismic Workshop, IrvineGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hajirasouliha I, Moghadam H (2009) New lateral force distribution for seismic design of structures. ASCE J Struct Eng 135(8):906–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hajirasouliha I, Moghaddam H, Pilakoutas K (2011) Topology optimization for the seismic design of truss-like structures. J Comput Struct 89(7–8):702–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hajirasouliha I, Pilakoutas K (2012) General seismic load distribution for optimum performance-based design of shear buildings. J Earthq Eng 16(4):443–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hajirasoliha I, Asadi P, Pilakoutas P (2011) An efficient performance-based seismic design method for reinforced concrete frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41(4):663–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    KaramiMohammadi R, Sharghi AH (2014) On the optimum performance-based design of eccentrically braced frames. Steel Compos Struct 16(4):357–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang DH, Liao WH (2011) Magnetorheological fluid dampers: a review of parametric modeling. Smart Mater Struct 20(2):023001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jung HJ, Spencer BF Jr, Lee IW (2003) Control of seismically excited cable-stayed bridge employing magnetotheological fluid dampers. ASCE J Struct Eng 129(7):873–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Civil Engineering DepartmentK. N. Toosi University of TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.Earthquake Engineering, Civil Engineering DepartmentK. N. Toosi University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations