• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.87 no.4
• /
• pp.363-373
• /
• 2023

Since the first family of structure-dependent methods can simultaneously integrate unconditional stability and explicit formulation in addition to second order accuracy, it is very computationally efficient for solving inertial problems except for adopting auto time-stepping techniques due to no nonlinear iterations. However, an unusual stability property is first found herein since its unconditional stability interval is drastically different for zero and nonzero damping. In fact, instability might occur for solving a damped stiffness hardening system while an accurate result can be obtained for the corresponding undamped stiffness hardening system. A technique of using a stability factor is applied to overcome this difficulty. It can be applied to magnify an unconditional stability interval. After introducing this stability factor, the formulation of this family of structure-dependent methods is changed accordingly and thus its numerical properties must be re-evaluated. In summary, a large stability factor can result in a large unconditional stability interval but also lead to a large relative period error. As a consequence, a stability factor must be appropriately chosen to have a desired unconditional stability interval in addition to an acceptable period distortion.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.65 no.1
• /
• pp.91-98
• /
• 2018

Three structure-dependent integration methods with no numerical dissipation have been successfully developed for time integration. Although these three integration methods generally have the same numerical properties, such as unconditional stability, second-order accuracy, explicit formulation, no overshoot and no numerical damping, there still exist some different numerical properties. It is found that TLM can only have unconditional stability for linear elastic and stiffness softening systems for zero viscous damping while for nonzero viscous damping it only has unconditional stability for linear elastic systems. Whereas, both CEM and CRM can have unconditional stability for linear elastic and stiffness softening systems for both zero and nonzero viscous damping. However, the most significantly different property among the three integration methods is a weak instability. In fact, both CRM and TLM have a weak instability, which will lead to an adverse overshoot or even a numerical instability in the high frequency responses to nonzero initial conditions. Whereas, CEM possesses no such an adverse weak instability. As a result, the performance of CEM is much better than for CRM and TLM. Notice that a weak instability property of CRM and TLM might severely limit its practical applications.

• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.297-313
• /
• 2016

A virtual parameter is introduced into the formulation of the previously published integration method to improve its stability properties. It seems that the numerical properties of this integration method are almost unaffected by this parameter except for the stability property. As a result, it can have second order accuracy, explicit formulation and controllable numerical dissipation in addition to the enhanced stability property. In fact, it can have unconditional stability for the system with the instantaneous degree of nonlinearity less than or equal to the specified value of the virtual parameter for the modes of interest for each time step.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.65 no.1
• /
• pp.121-128
• /
• 2018

Three structure-dependent integration methods with no numerical dissipation have been successfully developed for time integration. Although these three integration methods generally have the same numerical properties, such as unconditional stability, second-order accuracy, explicit formulation, no overshoot and no numerical damping, there still exist some different numerical properties. It is found that TLM can only have unconditional stability for linear elastic and stiffness softening systems for zero viscous damping while for nonzero viscous damping it only has unconditional stability for linear elastic systems. Whereas, both CEM and CRM can have unconditional stability for linear elastic and stiffness softening systems for both zero and nonzero viscous damping. However, the most significantly different property among the three integration methods is a weak instability. In fact, both CRM and TLM have a weak instability, which will lead to an adverse overshoot or even a numerical instability in the high frequency responses to nonzero initial conditions. Whereas, CEM possesses no such an adverse weak instability. As a result, the performance of CEM is much better than for CRM and TLM. Notice that a weak instability property of CRM and TLM might severely limit its practical applications.

• Transactions on Control, Automation and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.32-37
• /
• 2002

Applications of scaled telemanipulation into micro or nano world that shows many different features from directly human interfaced tools have been increased continuously. Here, we have to consider many aspects of scaling such as force, position, and impedance. For instance, what will be the possible range of force and position scaling with a specific level of performance and stability\ulcorner This knowledge of feasible staling region can be critical to human operator safety. In this paper, we show the upper bound of the product of force and position scaling and simulation results of 1DOF scaled system by using the Llewellyn's unconditional stability in continuous and discrete domain showing the effect of sampling rate.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.411-428
• /
• 2004

In this study, a newly developed unconditionally stable explicit method is employed to solve momentum equations of motion in performing pseudodynamic tests. Due to the explicitness of each time step this pseudodynamic algorithm can be explicitly implemented, and thus its implementation is simple when compared to an implicit pseudodynamic algorithm. In addition, the unconditional stability might be the most promising property of this algorithm in performing pseudodynamic tests. Furthermore, it can have the improved properties if using momentum equations of motion instead of force equations of motion for the step-by-step integration. These characteristics are thoroughly verified analytically and/or numerically. In addition, actual pseudodynamic tests are performed to confirm the superiority of this pseudodynamic algorithm.

• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.159-178
• /
• 2014

Although the family methods with unconditional stability and numerical dissipation have been developed for structural dynamics they all are implicit methods and thus an iterative procedure is generally involved for each time step. In this work, a new family method is proposed. It involves no nonlinear iterations in addition to unconditional stability and favorable numerical dissipation, which can be continuously controlled. In particular, it can have a zero damping ratio. The most important improvement of this family method is that it involves no nonlinear iterations for each time step and thus it can save many computationally efforts when compared to the currently available dissipative implicit integration methods.

• Journal of the Korean Mathematical Society
• /
• v.60 no.2
• /
• pp.273-302
• /
• 2023

In this paper, a fully discrete numerical scheme for the viscoelastic Oldroyd flow is considered with an introduced auxiliary variable. Our scheme is based on the finite element approximation for the spatial discretization and the backward Euler scheme for the time discretization. The integral term is discretized by the right trapezoidal rule. Firstly, we present the corresponding equivalent form of the considered model, and show the relationship between the origin problem and its equivalent system in finite element discretization. Secondly, unconditional stability and optimal error estimates of fully discrete numerical solutions in various norms are established. Finally, some numerical results are provided to confirm the established theoretical analysis and show the performances of the considered numerical scheme.

• The Pure and Applied Mathematics
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.289-298
• /
• 2010

In this paper, we propose a second-order prediction/correction (SPC) domain decomposition method for solving one dimensional linear hyperbolic partial differential equation $u_{tt}+a(x,t)u_t+b(x,t)u=c(x,t)u_{xx}+{\int}(x,t)$. The method can be applied to variable coefficients problems and singular problems. Unconditional stability and error analysis of the method have been carried out. Numerical results support stability and efficiency of the method.

• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.279-288
• /
• 2017

Having the ability to keep on yielding stable solutions in problems involving high potential of instability, composite time integration methods have become very popular among scientists. These methods try to split a time step into multiple sub-steps so that each sub-step can be solved using different time integration methods with different behaviors. This paper proposes a new composite time integration in which a time step is divided into two sub-steps; the first sub-step is solved using the well-known Newmark method and the second sub-step is solved using Simpson's Rule of integration. An unconditional stability region is determined for the constant parameters to be chosen from. Also accuracy analysis is perform on the proposed method and proved that minor period elongation as well as a reasonable amount of numerical dissipation is produced in the responses obtained by the proposed method. Finally, in order to provide a practical assessment of the method, several benchmark problems are solved using the proposed method.