Advertisement

Continuous PsD Testing With Substructuring

  • P. Pegon
Part of the CISM International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 502)

Abstract

This work presents the development and implementation of a domain decomposition approach for solving dynamics problems involving continuous testing with analytical substructuring in the non-linear range. This approach implements an inter-field parallel time integration procedure suitable to work with an explicit experimental synchronous process using small time steps, such as the one running continuous PsD testing, and an implicit, possibly iterative, analytical process using large time steps. The characteristics and the robustness of the proposed schemes are illustrated by means of a parametric numerical study. The results of the first validation under test conditions are also presented. For completness, the presentation includes a short presentation of the continuous PsD testing and its implementation at the ELSA laboratory and some general comments regarding substructuring.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. A. Bonelli, O. S. Bursi, L. He, G. Magonette, and P. Pegon. Convergence analysis of a parallel interfield method for heterogeneous simulations with dynamic substructuring. Accepted for publication in Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 2008.Google Scholar
  2. A. Bossi. Isolamento sismico: prove di dispositivi dissipativi con il metodo pseudo-dinamico continuo con sottostrutturazione. Tesi di laurea, Universita degli studi di, Perugia, Italy, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. O. S. Bursi. Computational Techniques for Simulation of Monolithic and Heterogeneous Structural Dynamic Systems. In O. S. Bursi and D. J. Wagg, editors, Modern Testing Techniques for Structural Systems, Dynamics and Control. CISM, 2008.Google Scholar
  4. Ph. Buchet. Controller users manual. EUR-Report No. 22329 EN, 2006a.Google Scholar
  5. Ph. Buchet. Acquisition and control software architecture. EUR-Report no. 22723 EN, 2006b.Google Scholar
  6. Ph. Buchet and P. Pegon. Psd testing with substructuring: Implementation and use. JRC-Special Publication No. I.94.25, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. F. Casciati, G. Magonette, and F. Marazzi. Technology of Semiactive Devices and Applications in Vibration Mitigation. Chichester, UK, 2006.Google Scholar
  8. D. Combescure and P. Pegon. α-operator splitting time integration technique for pseudodynamic testing: error propagation analysis. Soil Dynamics & Earthquake Engineering, 16:427–443, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D. Combescure, P. Pegon, and G. Magonette. Numerical investigation of the impact of experimental errors on various pseudo-dynamic integration algorithms. pp 2479–2484, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1995. Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering.Google Scholar
  10. S. N. Dermitzakis and S. A. Mahin. Development of substructuring techniques for on-line computer controlled seismic performance testing. Technical report, Earth. Eng. Research Center, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA, USA, 1985. Report No. UCB/EERC-85/04.Google Scholar
  11. J. Donea, G. Magonette, P. Negro, P. Pegon, A. V. Pinto, and G. Verzeletti. Pseudodynamic capabilities of the ELSA laboratory for earthquake testing of large structures. Earthquake Spectra, 12:163–180, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. U. Dorka. Erdbebensicherung durch Structural Control. Stahlbau, 73:661–667, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Gravouil and A. Combescure. Multi-time-step explicit-implicit method for non-linear structural dynamics. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng, 50:199–225, 2001.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. L. He. Development of Partitioned Time Integration Schemes for Parallel Simulation of Heterogeneous Systems. PhD thesis, University of Trento, Italy, 2008.Google Scholar
  15. R.-Y. Jung, P. B. Shing, E. Stauffer, and B. Thoen. Performance of a real-time pseudodynamic test system considering nonlinear structural response. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, pages 36:1785–1809, 2007.Google Scholar
  16. O.-S. Kwon, N. Nakata, A. Elnashai, and B. Spencer. A framework for multi-site distributed simulation and application to complex structural systems. J. of Earthquake Engineering, page 9:741–753, 2005. Technical Note.Google Scholar
  17. G. Magonette. Development and application of large-scale continuous pseudo-dynamic testing technique. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 359:1771–1799, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. G. Magonette, P. Pegon, F. J. Molina, and Ph. Buchet. Development of fast continuous pseudodynamic substructuring tests. Kyoto, Japan, 1998. Proc. of the Second World Conf. on Struct. Control, 28 June–1 July 1998.Google Scholar
  19. A. Millard. CASTEM 2000, Guide dutilisation. Saclay, France, 1993. Rapport CEA 93/007.Google Scholar
  20. F. J. Molina, G. Magonette and P. Pegon. Assessment of systematic experimental errors in pseudo-dynamic tests. proc. 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2002. Paper Reference 525, 9–13 September.Google Scholar
  21. F. J. Molina and M. Géradin. Earthquake Engineering experimental Research at JRC-ELSA. NATO workshop. Extreme Man-Made and Natural Hazards in Dynamics of Structures (NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security). 2007. Springer, 311–351.Google Scholar
  22. F. J. Molina, G. Verzeletti, G. Magonette, Ph. Buchet, and M. Géradin. Bidirectional pseudodynamic test of a full-size three-storey building. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, pages 28:1541–1566, 1999.Google Scholar
  23. G. Mosqueda. Continuous Hybrid Simulation with Geographically Distributed Substructures. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 2003.Google Scholar
  24. The MOST Experiment, July 30 2003. Neesgrid technical report. Technical report, 2003. http://it.nees.org/documentation/pdf/MOST_document_v1.0.pdf.Google Scholar
  25. M. Nakashima and H. Kato. Experimental Error Growth Behavior and Error Growth Control in On-line Computer Test Control Method. Japan, 1987. BRI-Report.Google Scholar
  26. M. Nakashima and N. Masaoka. Real-time on-line test for mdof systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamic, 28:393–420, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. M. Nakashima, T. Akazawa, and O. Sakaguchi. Integration method capable of controlling experimental error growth in substructure pseudo dynamic test. AIJ J. of Struct. Constr. Engng., 454:61–71, 1993.Google Scholar
  28. P. Pan, M. Tada, and M. Nakashima. Online hybrid test by internet linkage of distributed test-analysis domains. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, page 35:15811583, 2006.Google Scholar
  29. P. Pegon. Psd testing with substructuring: the case of asynchronous motion. JRC-Special Publication No.I.96.42, 1996.Google Scholar
  30. P. Pegon and G. Magonette. Continuous psd testing with non-linear substructuring: presentation of a stable parallel inter-field procedure. JRC-Special publication No. SPI.02.167, 2002.Google Scholar
  31. P. Pegon and G. Magonette. Continuous psd testing with non-linear substructuring: using the operator splitting technique to avoid iterative procedures. JRC-Special publication No. SPI.05.30, 2005.Google Scholar
  32. P. Pegon and G. Magonette. Continuous psd testing with non-linear substructuring: recent developments for the vab project. JRC Special Publication No.99.142, 1999.Google Scholar
  33. P. Pegon and A. V. Pinto. Pseudo-dynamic testing with substructuring at the elsa laboratory. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, pages 29:905–925, 2000.Google Scholar
  34. A. V. Pinto, P. Pegon, G. Magonette, and G. Tsionis. Pseudo-dynamic testing of bridges using non-linear substructuring. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, pages 33:1125–1149, 2004.Google Scholar
  35. R. W. Clough and J. Penzien. Dynamics of structures. McGraw-Hill, New-York, 1993. 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  36. Y. Takahashi and G.L. Fenves. Software framework for distributed experimental computational simulation of structural systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, pages 35:267–291, 2006.Google Scholar
  37. Y.-S. Yang, S.-H. Hsieh, K.-C. Tsai, S.-J. Wang, K.-J. Wang, W.-C. Cheng, and C. W. Hsu. Isee: Internet-based simulation for earthquake engineering—part I: Database approach. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2007. In press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CISM, Udine 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Pegon
    • 1
  1. 1.European Laboratory for Structural Assessment, Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen, Joint Research CentreEuropean CommissionIspraItaly

Personalised recommendations