Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Response surface methodology based multi-objective optimization of tuned mass damper for jacket supported offshore wind turbine

  • Rahman, Mohammad S. (Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University) ;
  • Islam, Mohammad S. (Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University) ;
  • Do, Jeongyun (Industry-University Cooperation Foundation, Kunsan National University) ;
  • Kim, Dookie (Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University)
  • Received : 2017.01.17
  • Accepted : 2017.03.21
  • Published : 2017.08.10
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper presents a review on getting a Weighted Multi-Objective Optimization (WMO) of Tuned Mass Damper (TMD) parameters based on Response Surface Methodology (RSM) coupled central composite design and Weighted Desirability Function (WDF) to attenuate the earthquake vibration of a jacket supported Offshore Wind Turbine (OWT). To optimize the parameters (stiffness and damping coefficient) of damper, the frequency ratio and damping ratio were considered as a design variable and the top displacement and frequency response were considered as objective functions. The optimization has been carried out under only El Centro earthquake results and after obtained the optimal parameters, more two earthquakes (California and Northridge) has been performed to investigate the performance of optimal damper. The obtained results also compared with the different conventional TMD's designed by Den Hartog's, Sadek et al.'s and Warburton's method. From the results, it was found that the optimal TMD based on RSM shows better response than the conventional damper. It is concluded that the proposed response model offers an efficient approach regarding the TMD optimization.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP), National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)

References

  1. Brock, J.E. (1946), "A note on the damped vibration absorber", Trans. ASME, J. Appl. Mech., 13(4), A-284.
  2. Den Hartog, J.P. (1985), Mechanical Vibrations, Courier Corporation.
  3. Derringer, G. and Suich, R. (1980), "Simultaneous optimization of several response variables", J. Qual. Technol., 12(4), 214-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224065.1980.11980968
  4. Derringer, G.C. (1994), "A balancing act-optimizing a products properties", Quality Prog., 27(6), 51-58.
  5. Frahm, H. (1911), Device for Damping Vibrations of Bodies, U.S. Patent 989,958.
  6. Jeong, I.J. and Kim, K.J. (2009), "An interactive desirability function method to multiresponse optimization", Euro. J. Operat. Res., 195(2), 412-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.02.018
  7. Khan, A., Do, J. and Kim, D. (2016), "Cost effective optimal mix proportioning of high strength self-compacting concrete using response surface methodology", Comput. Concrete, 17(5), 629-638. https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2016.17.5.629
  8. Khan, A., Do, J. and Kim, D. (2016), "Experimental optimization of high-strength self-compacting concrete based on D-optimal design", J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 143(4), 04016108.
  9. Khuri, A.I. (1996), Multiresponse Surface Methodology, Handbook of Statistics, 13, 377-406.
  10. Lee, C.L., Chen, Y.T., Chung, L.L. and Wang, Y.P. (2006), "Optimal design theories and applications of tuned mass dampers", Eng. Struct., 28(1), 43-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.06.023
  11. Myers, R.H., Montgomery, D.C. and Anderson-Cook, C.M. (2016), Response Surface Methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments, John Wiley & Sons.
  12. Ormondroyd, J. (1928), "Theory of the dynamic vibration absorber", Tran. ASME, 50, 9-22.
  13. Pourzeynali, S., Salimi, S., Yousefisefat, M. and Kalesar, H.E. (2016), "Robust multi-objective optimization of STMD device to mitigate buildings vibrations", Earthq. Struct., 11(2), 347-369. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.2.347
  14. Saaty, T.L. (1990), Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World, RWS Publications.
  15. Sadek, F., Mohraz, B., Taylor, A.W. and Chung, R.M. (1997), "A method of estimating the parameters of tuned mass dampers for seismic applications", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 26(6), 617-636. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199706)26:6<617::AID-EQE664>3.0.CO;2-Z
  16. Sadhukhan, B., Mondal, N.K. and Chattoraj, S. (2016), "Optimisation using central composite design (CCD) and the desirability function for sorption of methylene blue from aqueous solution onto Lemna major", Karbala Int. J. Modern Sci., 2(3), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kijoms.2016.03.005
  17. Salvi, J. and Rizzi, E. (2016), "Closed-form optimum tuning formulas for passive tuned mass dampers under benchmark excitations", Smart Struct. Syst., 17(2), 231-256. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2016.17.2.231
  18. Soto-Perez, L., Lopez, V. and Hwang, S.S. (2015), "Response surface methodology to optimize the cement paste mix design: time-dependent contribution of fly ash and nano-iron oxide as admixtures", Mater. Des., 86, 22-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.049
  19. Vaidya, O.S. and Kumar, S. (2006), "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications", Euro. J. Operat. Res., 169(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028
  20. Warburton, G.B. (1981), "Optimum absorber parameters for minimizing vibration response", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 9(3), 251-262. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290090306
  21. Zhou, X., Lin, Y. and Gu, M. (2015), "Optimization of multiple tuned mass dampers for large-span roof structures subjected to wind loads", Wind Struct., 20(3), 363-388. https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2015.20.3.363

Cited by

  1. 가중 다목적성을 고려한 구조물 응답 제어용 TMD의 RSM 기반 실용적 최적 설계 vol.21, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.11112/jksmi.2017.21.6.113