Passive-Hybrid System of Base-Isolated Bridge with Tuned Mass Absorbers

  • Said Elias
  • Vasant Matsagar
Conference paper
Part of the Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering book series (GGEE, volume 47)


Nowadays, improved versions of earthquake response modification devices are being introduced to maximise efficacy in dynamic vibration abatement in structures. Here, hybrid system has been proposed to be used for earthquake response modification of bridges by combined use of two passive devices: base isolation systems and tuned mass absorbers. The efficacy of the passive-hybrid system is verified by implementing it in a reinforced concrete (RC) bridge subjected to earthquake ground motions. The RC bridge has three continuous spans and supported on two piers in the middle and abutments at the ends. In the developed numerical model, the flexibility of the founding soil has been accounted for. The numerical model is analysed to determine the dynamic response of the bridge equipped with the passive-hybrid system and a comparison is made with the dynamic response determined without installing such systems. Primarily, it is concluded that the passive-hybrid system exhibits significantly improved performance in dynamic response abatement of the bridge. Nonetheless, the founding soil flexibility at the bottom end of the piers influences the efficacy of the tuned mass absorbers provided at the mid-span of the bridge deck because it affects the modal response quantities.


Bridge Passive-hybrid system Foundation flexibility 


  1. Aly AM (2014a) Proposed robust tuned mass damper for response mitigation in buildings exposed to multi-directional wind. Struct Design Tall Spec Build 23(3):664–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aly AM (2014b) Vibration control of high-rise buildings for wind: a robust passive and active tuned mass damper. Smart Struct Syst 13(3):473–500MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aly AM, Zasso A, Resta F (2011) Dynamics and control of high-rise buildings under multi-directional wind loads. Smart Mater Res 2011:549621. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Daniel Y, Lavan O, Levy R (2012) Multiple tuned mass dampers for multimodal control of pedestrian bridges. J Struct Eng 138(9):1173–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Debnath N, Deb SK, Dutta A (2015) Multi-modal vibration control of truss bridges with tuned mass dampers and general loading. J Vib Control 22(20):4121–4140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dicleli M (2007) Supplemental elastic stiffness to reduce isolator displacements for seismic-isolated bridges in near-fault zones. Eng Struct 29(5):763–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dicleli M, Buddaram S (2007) Equivalent linear analysis of seismic-isolated bridges subjected to near-fault ground motions with forward rupture directivity effect. Eng Struct 29(1):21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elias S, Matsagar VA (2014a) Wind response control of a 76-storey benchmark building installed with distributed multiple tuned mass dampers. J Wind Eng 11(2):37–49Google Scholar
  9. Elias S, Matsagar VA (2014b) Distributed multiple tuned mass dampers for wind vibration response control of high-rise building. J Eng
  10. Elias S, Matsagar VA (2015) Optimum tuned mass damper for wind and earthquake response control of high-rise building. In: Advances in structural enginerring, Dynamics 2, pp 1475–1487. ISBN: 978-8-13-222192-0 (Print), 978-8-13-222193-7 (Online). doi: 10.1007/978-81-322-2193-7_113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elias S, Matsagar VA (2017a) Effectiveness of tuned mass dampers in seismic response control of isolated bridges including soil-structure interaction. Lat Am J Solids Struct.
  12. Elias S, Matsagar VA (2017b) Research developments in vibration control of structures using passive tuned mass dampers. Annu Rev Control 44:129–156. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elias S, Matsagar VA (2018) Wind response control of tall buildings with a tuned mass damper. J Build Eng 15:51–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elias S, Matsagar VA, Datta TK (2015) Effectiveness of distributed multiple tuned mass dampers in along wind response control of chimney. In: 14th International Conference on Wind Engineering (ICWE14), Porto Alegre, Brazil, June 21–26Google Scholar
  15. Elias S, Matsagar VA, Datta TK (2016) Effectiveness of distributed tuned mass dampers for multi-mode control of chimney under earthquakes. Eng Struct 124:1–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elias S, Matsagar VA, Datta TK (2017a) Distributed tuned mass dampers for multi-mode control of benchmark building under seismic excitations. J Earthq Eng.
  17. Elias S, Matsagar VA, Datta TK (2017b) Distributed multiple tuned mass dampers for seismic response control of chimney with flexible foundation.In: 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (16WCEE), Santiago, Chile, January 9–13Google Scholar
  18. Elias S, Matsagar V, Datta TK (2017c) Distributed multiple tuned mass dampers for wind response control of chimney with flexible foundation. Procedia Eng 199:1641–1646. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gill D, Elias S, Steinbrecher A, Schröder C, Matsagar VA (2017) Robustness of multi-mode control using tuned mass dampers for seismically excited structures. Bull Earthq Eng 15:1–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jangid RS (2004) Seismic response of isolated bridges. J Bridg Eng 9(2):156–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li C (2000) Performance of multiple tuned mass dampers for attenuating undesirable oscillations of structures under the ground acceleration. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 29(9):1405–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li C (2002) Optimum multiple tuned mass dampers for structures under the ground acceleration based on DDMF and ADMF. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(4):897–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lu Z, Masri SF, Lu XL (2011) Parametric studies of the performance of particle dampers under harmonic excitation. Struct Control Health Monit 18(1):79–98zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Lu Z, Lu XL, Lu W, Masri SF (2012) Experimental studies of the effects of buffered particle dampers attached to a multi-degree-of-freedom system under dynamic loads. J Sound Vib 331(9):2007–2022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luu M, Zabel V, Könke C (2012) An optimisation method of multi-resonant response of high-speed train bridges using TMDs. Finite Elem Anal Des 53:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matin A, Elias S, Matsagar VA (2014) Seismic control of continuous span concrete bridges with multiple tuned mass dampers. In: Proceeding of 2nd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (2ECEES), Istanbul, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  27. Matin A, Elias S, Matsagar VA (2017) Seismic response control of reinforced concrete bridges with soil-structure interaction. Bridge Struct Eng 47(1):46–53Google Scholar
  28. Matsagar VA, Jangid RS (2004) Influence of isolator characteristics on the response of base-isolated structures. Eng Struct 26(12):1735–1749. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Matsagar VA, Jangid RS (2006) Seismic response of simply supported base-isolate bridge with different isolators. Int J Appl Sci Eng 4(1):55–71Google Scholar
  30. Miguel LFF, Lopez RH, Torii AJ, Miguel LFF, Beck AT (2016) Robust design optimisation of TMDs in vehicle-bridge coupled vibration problems. Eng Struct 126:703–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pisal AY, Jangid RS (2016) Vibration control of bridge subjected to multi-axle vehicle using multiple tuned mass friction dampers. Int J Adv Struct Eng 8(2):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Spyrakos CC (1990) Assessment of SSI on the longitudinal seismic response of short span bridges. Const Build Mater 4(4):170–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tongaonkar NP, Jangid RS (2003) Seismic response of isolated bridges with soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23:287–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Said Elias
    • 1
  • Vasant Matsagar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology (IIT) DelhiNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations