Smart Structures and Systems

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Real-time hybrid testing using model-based delay compensation

  • Carrion, Juan E. (Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP) ;
  • Spencer, B.F. Jr. (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
  • Received : 2007.06.20
  • Accepted : 2008.03.30
  • Published : 2008.11.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Real-time hybrid testing is an attractive method to evaluate the response of structures under earthquake loads. The method is a variation of the pseudodynamic testing technique in which the experiment is executed in real time, thus allowing investigation of structural systems with time-dependent components. Real-time hybrid testing is challenging because it requires performance of all calculations, application of displacements, and acquisition of measured forces, within a very small increment of time. Furthermore, unless appropriate compensation for time delays and actuator time lag is implemented, stability problems are likely to occur during the experiment. This paper presents an approach for real-time hybrid testing in which time delay/lag compensation is implemented using model-based response prediction. The efficacy of the proposed strategy is verified by conducting substructure real-time hybrid testing of a steel frame under earthquake loads. For the initial set of experiments, a specimen with linear-elastic behavior is used. Experimental results agree well with the analytical solution and show that the proposed approach and testing system are capable of achieving a time-scale expansion factor of one (i.e., real time). Additionally, the proposed method allows accurate testing of structures with larger frequencies than when using conventional time delay compensation methods, thus extending the capabilities of the real-time hybrid testing technique. The method is then used to test a structure with a rate-dependent energy dissipation device, a magnetorheological damper. Results show good agreement with the predicted responses, demonstrating the effectiveness of the method to test rate-dependent components.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahmadizadeh, M., Mosqueda, G. and Reinhorn, A.M. (2006), "Compensation of actuator delay and dynamics for real-time hybrid structural simulation", Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Structural Control and Monitoring, University of California - San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
  2. Ahmadizadeh, M. (2007), "Real-time seismic hybrid simulation procedures for reliable structural performance testing", PhD Dissertation, Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo.
  3. Ahmadizadeh, M., Mosqueda, G., and Reinhorn, A.M. (2008), "Compensation of actuator delay and dynamics for real-time hybrid structural simulation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 37(1), 21-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.743
  4. Blakeborough, A., Williams, M. S., Darby, A. P., and Williams, D. M. (2001), "The development of real-time substructure testing", Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society: Theme Issue on Dynamic Testing of Structures, A 359, 1869-1891.
  5. Broyden, C.G. (1965), "A class of methods for solving nonlinear simultaneous equations", Mathematics of Comp., 19, 577-593. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-1965-0198670-6
  6. Carrion, J.E. and Spencer B.F. (2006), "A model-based delay compensation approach for real-time hybrid testing", Proceedings of the US-Taiwan Workshop on Smart Structural Technology for Seismic Hazard Mitigation, Taipei, Taiwan.
  7. Carrion, J.E. and Spencer, B.F. (2007), "Model-based strategies for real-time hybrid testing", Newmark Structural Engineering Laboratory Report Series, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, No 006 (http://hdl.handle.net/2142/3629).
  8. Combescure, D. and Pegon, P. (1997), "$\alpha$-Operator splitting time integration technique for pseudodynamic testing error propagation analysis", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 16, 427-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(97)00017-1
  9. Darby, A.P., Blakeborough, A. and Williams, M.S. (1999), "Real-time substructure tests using hydraulic actuator", J. Eng. Mech., ASCE, 125(10), 1133-1139. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1999)125:10(1133)
  10. Darby, A.P., Blakeborough, A., and Williams, M.S. (2001), ''Improved control algorithm for real-time substructure testing", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 30(3), 431-448. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.18
  11. Darby, A.P., Williams, M.S., and Blakeborough, A. (2002), "Stability delay compensation for real-time substructure testing", J. Eng. Mech., 128(12), 1276-1284. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2002)128:12(1276)
  12. Dyke, S.J., Spencer, B.F., Quast, P. and Sain, M.K. (1995), "Role of control-structure interaction in protective system design", J. Eng. Mech., ASCE, 121(2), 322-338. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1995)121:2(322)
  13. Ellis, G. (2000), Control System Design Guide, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
  14. Emmons, A. and Christenson, R. (2006), "Proposed full-scale experimental verification of semiactive control applied to a nonlinear structure", Proceedings of the 17th Analysis and Computation Conference (ASCE), Paper No. 4.
  15. Franklin, G.F., Powell, J.D. and Emani-Naeini, A. (2002), Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
  16. Hakuno, M., Shidawara, M. and Hara, T. (1969), "Dynamic destructive test of a cantilever beam controlled by an analog-computer", Trans. Jpn Soc. Civ. Engrs, 171, 1-9, (In Japanese).
  17. Hilber, H.M., Hughes, T.J.R. and Taylor, R.L. (1977), "Improved numerical dissipation for time integration algorithms in structural dynamics", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 5(3), 283-292. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290050306
  18. Horiuchi, T., Nakagawa, M., Sugano, M. and Konno, T. (1996), "Development of a real-time hybrid experimental system with actuator delay compensation", Proceedings of 11th World Conf. Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Paper No. 660.
  19. Horiuchi, T., Inoue, M., Konno, T. and Namita Y. (1999), "Real-time hybrid experimental system with actuator delay compensation and its application to a piping system with energy absorber", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28(10), 1121-1141. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199910)28:10<1121::AID-EQE858>3.0.CO;2-O
  20. Horiuchi, T. and Konno, T. (2001), "A new method for compensating actuator delay in real-time hybrid experiments", Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society: Theme Issue on Dynamic Testing of Structures, A 359, 1786-1893.
  21. Jung, H-J., Choi, K-M., Park, K-S. and Cho, S-W. (2007), "Seismic protection of base isolated structures using smart passive control system", Smart Struct. Sys., (3)3, 385-403. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2007.3.3.385
  22. Magonette, G. (2001), "Development and application of large-scale continuous pseudo-dynamic testing techniques", Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society: Theme Issue on Dynamic Testing of Structures, A 359, 1771-1799.
  23. Mahin, S.A. and Shing, P.B. (1985), "Pseudodynamic method for seismic testing", J. Struct. Eng., 111(7), 1482-1503. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:7(1482)
  24. Mahin, S.A., Shing, P.B., Thewalt, C.R. and Hanson, R.D. (1989), "Pseudodynamic test method. Current status and future directions", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 115(8), 2113-2128. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1989)115:8(2113)
  25. Maiti, D.K., Shyju, P.P. and Vijayaraju, K. (2006), "Vibration control of mechanical systems using semi-active MR-damper", Smart Struct. Sys., 2(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2006.2.1.061
  26. Mosqueda, G., Stojadinovic, B. and Mahin, S. (2004), "Geographically distributed continuous hybrid simulation", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, Paper No. 0959.
  27. Mosqueda, G. and Ahmadizadeh, M. (2007), "Combined implicit or explicit integration steps for hybrid simulation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 36(15), 2325-2343. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.731
  28. Nakashima, M., Kaminosono, T., Ishida, I. and Ando, K. (1990), "Integration techniques for substructure pseudo dynamic test", Proceedings of Fourth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, Palm Springs, California.
  29. Nakashima, M., Kato, H. and Takaoka, E. (1992), "Development of real-time pseudo dynamic testing", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 21(1), 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290210106
  30. Nakashima, M. and Masaoka, N. (1999), "Real time on-line test for MDOF systems", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28(4), 393-420. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199904)28:4<393::AID-EQE823>3.0.CO;2-C
  31. Reinhorn, A.M., Sivaselvan, M., Weinreber, S., and Shao, X. (2004), "Real-time dynamic hybrid testing of structural systems", Proceedings, Third European Conference on Structural Control, Vienna, Austria.
  32. Shao, X., Reinhorn, A.M. and Sivaselvan, M. (2006), "Real time dynamic hybrid testing using force based substructuring", Proceedings, 8th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA.
  33. Shing, P.B., Nakashima, M. and Bursi, O.S. (1996), "Application of pseudodynamic test method to structural research", Earthquake Spectra, EERI, 12(1), 29-54. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585867
  34. Shing, P.B., Spacone, E. and Stauffer, E. (2002), "Conceptual design of fast hybrid test system at the University of Colorado", Proceedings, Seventh U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Boston.
  35. Shing, P.B., Wei, Z., Jung, R.Y. and Stauffer, E. (2004), "Nees fast hybrid test system at the University of Colorado", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, Paper No. 3497.
  36. Spencer, Jr., B.F., Dyke, S.J., Sain, M.K., and Carlson, J.D. (1997), "Phenomenological model for magnetorheological dampers", J. Eng. Mech., ASCE, 123(3), 230-238. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1997)123:3(230)
  37. Spencer, Jr., B.F. and Nagarajaiah, S. (2003), "State of the art of structural control", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 129(7), 845-856. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:7(845)
  38. Spencer Jr., B.F. et al. (2004). "The MOST experiment: earthquake engineering on the grid", Technical Report NEESgrid-2004-41.
  39. Spencer, B.F. and Carrion, J.E. (2007), "Real-time hybrid testing of semi-actively controlled structure with MR damper", 2nd International Conference on Advances in Experimental Structural Engineering, Shanghai, China.
  40. Stanway, R., Sproston, J.L. and Stevens, N.G. (1987), "Non-linear modeling of an electrorheological vibration damper", J. Electrostatics, 20, 167-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3886(87)90056-8
  41. 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 Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, Tokio, Japan.
  42. Takanashi, K. and Nakashima, M. (1987), "Japanese activities on on-line testing", J. Eng. Mech., ASCE, 113(7), 1014-1032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1987)113:7(1014)
  43. Wu, B., Wang, Q-Y., Shi, P-F., Ou, J-P. and Guan, X-C. (2006), "Real-time substructure test of JZ20-2NW offshore platform with semi-active MR dampers", Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, Paper No. 185.
  44. Yang, G., Spencer Jr., B.F., Carlson, J.D. and Sain, M.K. (2002), "Large-scale MR fluid dampers: modeling and dynamic performance considerations", Eng. Struct., 24, 309-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00097-9
  45. Zhao, J., French, C., Shield, C., and Posbergh, T. (2003), "Considerations for the development of real-time dynamic testing using servo-hydraulic actuation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32(11), 1773-1794. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.301

Cited by

  1. Understanding and modelling the physical behaviour of magnetorheological dampers for seismic structural control vol.20, pp.6, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/20/6/065013
  2. An effective online delay estimation method based on a simplified physical system model for real-time hybrid simulation vol.14, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2014.14.6.1247
  3. Real-time hybrid simulation of a multi-story wood shear wall with first-story experimental substructure incorporating a rate-dependent seismic energy dissipation device vol.14, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2014.14.6.1031
  4. Stability of central difference method for dynamic real-time substructure testing vol.38, pp.14, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.927
  5. Real-time hybrid simulation for structural control performance assessment vol.8, pp.4, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-009-9122-4
  6. Model updating with constrained unscented Kalman filter for hybrid testing vol.14, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2014.14.6.1105
  7. Improvement of Real-Time Hybrid Simulation Using Parallel Finite-Element Program pp.1559-808X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1469442
  8. A dragonfly inspired flapping wing actuated by electro active polymers vol.6, pp.7, 2008, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2010.6.7.867
  9. Numerical modeling of high-strength steel composite K-eccentrically braced frames and spatial substructure hybrid simulation tests vol.17, pp.11, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00720-2
  10. Stability and Accuracy Analysis of Real-Time Hybrid Simulation (RTHS) with Incomplete Boundary Conditions and Actuator Delay vol.20, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219455420501229
  11. Real‐time hybrid simulation of a space substructure based on high‐strength steel composite Y‐eccentrically braced frames vol.28, pp.8, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.2771
  12. Robust and high fidelity real-time hybrid substructuring vol.157, pp.None, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.107720