DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Error propagation effects for explicit pseudodynamic algorithms

  • Chang, Shuenn-Yih (National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering, National Taiwan University)
  • Published : 2000.08.25

Abstract

This paper discusses the error propagation characteristics of the Newmark explicit method, modified Newmark explicit method and ${\alpha}$-function dissipative explicit method in pseudodynamic tests. The Newmark explicit method is non-dissipative while the ${\alpha}$-function dissipative explicit method and the modified Newmark explicit method are dissipative and can eliminate the spurious participation of high frequency responses. In addition, error propagation analysis shows that the modified Newmark explicit method and the ${\alpha}$-function dissipative explicit method possess much better error propagation properties when compared to the Newmark explicit method. The major disadvantages of the modified Newmark explicit method are the positive lower stability limit and undesired numerical dissipation. Thus, the ${\alpha}$-function dissipative explicit method might be the most appropriate explicit pseudodynamic algorithm.

Keywords

References

  1. Chang, S.Y. (1992), "Two new implicit algorithms of pseudodynamic test methods", Thesis for Master of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.
  2. Chang, S.Y. and Mahin, S.A. (1993), "Two new implicit algorithms of pseudodynamic test methods", Journal of Chinese institute of Engineers, 16(5), 651-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.1993.9677539
  3. Chang, S.Y. (1997), "Improved numerical dissipation for explicit methods in pseudodynamic tests", Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 26, 917-929. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199709)26:9<917::AID-EQE685>3.0.CO;2-9
  4. Chang, S.Y., Tsai, K.C. and Chen, K.C. (1998), "Improved time integration for pseudodynamic tests", Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27, 711-730. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199807)27:7<711::AID-EQE753>3.0.CO;2-6
  5. Chang, S.Y. (2000), "The ${\gamma}$-function pseudodynamic algorithm", Journal of Earthquake Engineering (in press).
  6. Newmark, N.M. (1959), "A method of computation for structural dynamics", journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, 67-94.
  7. Shing, P.B. and Mahin, S.A. (1987), "Elimination of spurious higher-mode response in pseudodynamics tests", Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 15, 425-445. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290150403
  8. Shing, P.B. and Mahin, S.A. (1987), "Cumulative experimental errors in pseudodynamic tests", Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 15, 409-424. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290150402
  9. Shing, P.B. and Mahin, S.A. (1990), "Experimental error effects in pseudodynamic testing", journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 116, 805-821. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1990)116:4(805)
  10. Takanashi, K., Udagawa, K., Seki, M., Okada, T. and Tanaka, H. (1975), "Nonlinear earthquake response analysis of structures by a computer-actuator on-line system", Bulletin of Earthquake Resistant Structure Research Center, 8, Institute of lndustrial Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Cited by

  1. Selection of time step for pseudodynamic testing vol.10, pp.3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-011-0079-8
  2. Applications of a Family of Unconditionally Stable, Dissipative, Explicit Methods to Pseudodynamic Tests vol.41, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-016-0151-4
  3. Analytical investigations of seismic responses for reinforced concrete bridge columns subjected to strong near-fault ground motion vol.6, pp.3, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-007-0757-8
  4. Analytical exploration of γ-function explicit method can pseudodynamic testing of nonlinear systems vol.4, pp.1, 2005, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-005-0030-y
  5. Extensions of nonlinear error propagation analysis for explicit pseudodynamic testing vol.8, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-009-8145-1
  6. Application of the momentum equations of motion to pseudo-dynamic testing vol.359, pp.1786, 2001, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2001.0874