Advertisement

Structural health monitoring of single degree of freedom flexible structure having active mass damper under seismic load

  • Abdul Qadir Bhatti
Technical Paper
  • 204 Downloads

Abstract

In this research, the application of active mass damper (AMD) has been experimentally tested using electromagnetic uniaxial shake table. The characteristic of an active damper has been presented. A state-feedback controller has been introduced for single flood active mass damper (AMD) using numerical modeling. The model was built and experiment was performed in laboratory having AMD to discuss the effect of model parameters and the development of parameters by inputting the data obtained from most severe earthquake on Oct 8 2005 in Pakistan. The system model, control design and observer were tested on shake table having 46 cm × 46 cm dimensions in real time vibrations. The shake table used has capability of running with powerful actuator having scaled accelerograms of real time earthquakes. The setup to operate the controller on real experimental work was discussed. It was observed that about 40% reduction in vibration can be achieved using active mass damper.

Keywords

Seismic simulation Active mass damper Shake table test 

References

  1. 1.
    Bhatti AQ, Zamir S, Rafi Z, Khatoon Z, Ali Q (2011) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of Islamabad. J Asian Earth Sci 42(3):468–478.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2011.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    EERI Special Earthquake Report (2006) Learning from earthquakes the kashmir earthquake of october 8, 2005: impacts in PakistanGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhatti AQ (2016) Application of dynamic analysis and modelling of structural concrete insulated panels (SCIP) for energy efficient buildings in seismic prone areas. Elsevier J Energy Build 128:164–177.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhatti AQ (2016) Scaled accelerographs for design of structures in Quetta, Baluchistan Pakistan. Int J Adv Struct Eng (IJASE) 8(4):401–410.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-016-0141 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhatti AQ (2017) Dynamic response characteristics of steel portal frames having semi rigid joints under sinusoidal wave excitation. Int J Adv Struct Eng (IJASE) 9(4):309–313.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-017-0167-8 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Battaini M, Yang G, Spencer BF Jr (2000) Bench-scale experiment for structural control. J Eng Mech ASCE 126(2):140–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Battaini M, Dyke SJ (1998) Fault tolerant structural control systems for civil engineering applications. J Struct Control 5:1–26.  https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.4300050101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kareem A, Kijewski T (1999) Mitigation of motions of tall buildings with specific examples of recent applications. Wind Struct 2:201–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Suhardjo J, Spencer BF Jr, Kareem A (1992) Frequency domain optimal control of wind excited buildings. ASCE J Eng Mech 118:2463–2481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Suhardjo J, Kareem A (1997) Structural control of off-shore platforms. In: Proceedings of the 7th international off-shore and polar engineering conference IOSPE-7, HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Housner G et al (1997) Structural control: past, present and future. ASCE J Eng Mech 123:897–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bhatti AQ (2013) Performance of viscoelastic dampers (VED) under various temperatures and application of magnetorheological dampers (MRD) for seismic control of structures. Mech Time Depend Mater (MTDM) 17(3):275–284.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11043-012-9180-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Linderman LE, Spencer BF Jr (2016) Decentralized active control of multistory civil structure with wireless smart sensor nodes. J Eng Mech.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001126 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bhatti AQ (2005) Effective force testing: a method of seismic simulation for structural testing using electromagnetic structure. Master Thesis Paper Department of Built Environment, Tokyo Institute of Technology Japan, vol 9, pp 181–185Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang C, Ou J (2015) Modeling and dynamical performance of the electromagnetic mass driver system for structural vibration control. Eng Struct 82:93–103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.10.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Durrani AJ, Elnashai AS, Hash-ash YMA, Masud A (2005) The Kashmir Earthquake of October 8, 2005. A Quick Look Report. Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Varum H, Teixeira-Dias F, Marques P, Pinto A, Bhatti AQ (2014) Performance evaluation of retrofitting strategies for non-seismically designed RC buildings using steel braces. Bull Earthq Eng 11(4):1129–1156.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9421-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khan IU, Shan DS, Bhatti AQ (2014) Temperature effect analysis of viscoelastic damper and Magnetorheological damper for vibration control of stayed-cable. Bridge Maint Saf Manag Life Ext.  https://doi.org/10.1201/b17063-332 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Soong TT (1990) Active structural control: theory and practice. Longman Scientific and Technical Essex, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Whalen TM, Bhatia KM, Archer GC (2002) Semi-active vibration control for the 3rd generation benchmark problem including modal spillover suppression. In: Proceedings of the 15th ASCE engineering mechanics conference. Columbia University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Doyle TC et al (1989) State space solutions to standard H2 and H∞ control problems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 34(8):831–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Duke SJ et al (1996) Acceleration feedback control of MDOF systems. ASCE J Eng Mech 122:907–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gaviria CA, Montejo LA (2016) Output-only identification of the modal and physical properties of structures using free vibration response. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 15(3):575–589.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-016-0345-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pujol G, Acho L (2013) Active control for a perturbed flexible structure: an experimental study. Asian J Control 15:1566–1570.  https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.582 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Agranovich G, Ribakov Y (2013) Scaling ground motions using optimal feedback control for testing structures by shake table. Struct Control Health Monit 20:1176–1190.  https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.1526 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringIslamic University of MadinahMadinahKingdom of Saudi Arabia
  2. 2.National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST)IslamabadPakistan

Personalised recommendations