Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley
Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley
Figure 8. Two stories (left) and hybrid test on shake table (right).A sample result from a sine-sweep test is .shown in the frequency domain inFigure 9. The result is compared with a computational simulation of the two storymodel. The result shows a small discrepancy in the damping representation. This isthe subject of current work.The results from real-time hybrid tests are presented for two cases:• Two stories structure — tested and analyzed using h shake table motion.• Hybrid system: one story with an actuator on physically tested on shake table0.100.090.080.070.060.050.040.030.020.010.000.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.00.0140.0120.0100.0080.0060.0040.0020.0000.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0Figure 9. Results of simulation experiments.The results in Figure 9 (on left) show the transfer function of the systemmeasured during the experiment and the reference computation at first floor. Figure9 (on right) shows the computed reponse of the virtual second story from measureddata versus the analytical simulation. The hybrid test is capable to achieve bothamplitude and frequency content with minor differences — attributed to theresolution of the data acquisition system The rest of discrepancies are believed tostem from unmodelled damping in the system and from some latency.9. CONCLUDING REMARKSThe Real Time Dynamic Hybrid Testing System is implementing combined physicaltesting and computational simulations to enable dynamic testing of sub-structures267
including the rate and inertial effects while considering the whole system. The paperpresents a new force control scheme with a predictive compensation procedure whichenabled the real-time implementation. The new system was tested through benchtests and medium scale pilot testing successfully. The procedures are implemented inthe full / large scale University at Buffalo NEES node which includes 2 six-degree-offreedomshake tables and three high-speed dynamic actuators and a structural testingsystem controller (STS) capable to implement the control algorithms presented above.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis work was made possible by the National Science Foundation (NSF) grant CMS0086611 and CMS0086612. The authors acknowledge the financial support.REFERENCESChu, S. C., T. T. Soong, and A. M. Reinhorn. (2002). “Real-Time Active ControlVerification via Structural Simulator”, Journal of Engineering Structures, 24 (3)343–353.Horiuchi, T., et al. (1999). Real-time hybrid experimental system with actuator delaycompensation and its application to a piping system with energy absorber,Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28(11), 1121–1141.Kausel, E. (1998), New seismic testing method I: Fundamental concepts, Journal ofEngineering Mechanics-ASCE, 124(5): 565–570.Mahin, S. A., P. B. Shing, C. R. Thewalt. (1985). Pseudo dynamic method for seismictesting, J. Struc. Engrg., ASCE, 115(8), 2113–2128.Nagarajaiah, S., A. M. Reinhorn, and M. C. Constantinou. (1992). Experimental-Study of Sliding Isolated Structures with Uplift Restraint, Journal of StructuralEngineering-ASCE, 1992 118(6): 1666–1682.Nakashima, M., H. Kato, and E. Takaoka.(1992). Development of real-time pseudodynamic testing, Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,21(1), 79–92.Reinhorn, A. M., M. V. Sivaselvan, Z. Liang, and X. Shao. (2004). Real-timeDynamic Hybrid Testing of Structural Systems, 13 th World Conference onEarthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., August 1–6, Paper No. 1644.Shing, P. B., and S. A. Mahin. (1985). Computational aspects of a seismicperformance test method using on-line computer control, EarthquakeEngineering and Structural Dynamics, 13, 507–526.Sivaselvan, M., and A. M. Reinhorn. (2004). Nonlinear Structural Analysis towardsCollapse Simulation: A Dynamical Systems Approach, Technical ReportMCEER-04-0005, MCEER, University at Buffalo.268
- Page 232 and 233: in predicting damage as well as rep
- Page 234 and 235: 4.2.2 Modeling the Data Using Stand
- Page 236 and 237: that the defining demand using a no
- Page 238 and 239: • The influence on the dynamic re
- Page 240 and 241: deviations σ and correlation coeff
- Page 242 and 243: The first three modes of vibration
- Page 244 and 245: Details about the ten records selec
- Page 246 and 247: to allow a quantitative assessment
- Page 248 and 249: Cornell A. C., F. Jalayer, R. Hambu
- Page 250 and 251: limited possibilities of overcoming
- Page 252 and 253: uildings, up to five stories high (
- Page 254 and 255: Efficiency η, %100806040203D-RWBW-
- Page 256 and 257: Table 1. Performance criteria for c
- Page 258 and 259: Because the analytical model strong
- Page 260 and 261: REFERENCESAguilar, G., R. Meli, R.
- Page 262 and 263: tests of its type ever conducted. T
- Page 264 and 265: end work-point to work-point). And
- Page 266 and 267: Fig. 5 shows the actual application
- Page 268 and 269: 3Roof Disp. (mm)250200150100500-50-
- Page 270 and 271: Base Shear (kN)Base Shear (kN)40002
- Page 272 and 273: 8. CONCLUSIONSBased on the test and
- Page 274 and 275: REAL-TIME DYNAMIC HYBRID TESTING OF
- Page 276 and 277: :::::2004) can be formulated using
- Page 278 and 279: The structure to be simulated is di
- Page 280 and 281: measurements, to the modeling of th
- Page 284 and 285: ROLES OF LARGE-SCALE TEST FOR ASSES
- Page 286 and 287: mid-height in the third story, at w
- Page 288 and 289: cycles were repeated for each ampli
- Page 290 and 291: the tests with ALC panels were excl
- Page 292 and 293: the relationship between the moment
- Page 294 and 295: attachment details adopted for inst
- Page 296 and 297: FULL-SCALE LABORATORY TESTING: STRA
- Page 298 and 299: economic losses resulting from the
- Page 300 and 301: 4. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOME OF STRUCT
- Page 302 and 303: 15001000500Shear [kN]0-8.0 -6.0 -4.
- Page 304 and 305: 5.1 3D Tests on a Torsionally Unbal
- Page 306 and 307: Non-linear substructuring was recen
- Page 308 and 309: PERFORMANCE BASED ASSESSMENT — FR
- Page 310 and 311: 4 x 50 m = 200 mC1 C2 C3h u = 7 mh
- Page 312 and 313: some procedures are (contrary to th
- Page 314 and 315: 5 th floor disp. [cm]0.60.0-0.6CC =
- Page 316 and 317: While the global drift of the build
- Page 318 and 319: the use of such connections in eart
- Page 320 and 321: I d = 0.25elastic limitmaximum resi
- Page 322 and 323: As regards the influence of differe
- Page 324 and 325: ON GROUND MOTION DURATION AND ENGIN
- Page 326 and 327: time between the first and last acc
- Page 328 and 329: FyFyFyFFFkk0.03kδδδcover a large
- Page 330 and 331: T5b, T13a, T13b, T20a and T20b can
including the rate and inertial effects while considering the whole system. The paperpresents a new force control scheme with a predictive compensation procedure whichenabled the real-time implementation. The new system was tested through benchtests and medium scale pilot testing successfully. The procedures are implemented inthe full / large scale <strong>University</strong> at Buffalo NEES node which includes 2 six-degree-<strong>of</strong>freedomshake tables and three high-speed dynamic actuators and a structural testingsystem controller (STS) capable to implement the control algorithms presented above.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis work was made possible by the National Science Foundation (NSF) grant CMS0086611 and CMS0086612. The authors acknowledge the financial support.REFERENCESChu, S. C., T. T. Soong, and A. M. Reinhorn. (2002). “Real-Time Active ControlVerification via Structural Simulator”, Journal <strong>of</strong> Engineering Structures, 24 (3)343–353.Horiuchi, T., et al. (1999). Real-time hybrid experimental system with actuator delaycompensation and its application to a piping system with energy absorber,Journal <strong>of</strong> Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28(11), 1121–1141.Kausel, E. (1998), New seismic testing method I: Fundamental concepts, Journal <strong>of</strong>Engineering Mechanics-ASCE, 124(5): 565–570.Mahin, S. A., P. B. Shing, C. R. Thewalt. (1985). Pseudo dynamic method for seismictesting, J. Struc. Engrg., ASCE, 115(8), 2113–2128.Nagarajaiah, S., A. M. Reinhorn, and M. C. Constantinou. (1992). Experimental-Study <strong>of</strong> Sliding Isolated Structures with Uplift Restraint, Journal <strong>of</strong> StructuralEngineering-ASCE, 1992 118(6): 1666–1682.Nakashima, M., H. Kato, and E. Takaoka.(1992). Development <strong>of</strong> real-time pseudodynamic testing, Journal <strong>of</strong> Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,21(1), 79–92.Reinhorn, A. M., M. V. Sivaselvan, Z. Liang, and X. Shao. (2004). Real-timeDynamic Hybrid Testing <strong>of</strong> Structural Systems, 13 th World Conference onEarthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., August 1–6, Paper No. 1644.Shing, P. B., and S. A. Mahin. (1985). Computational aspects <strong>of</strong> a seismicperformance test method using on-line computer control, EarthquakeEngineering and Structural Dynamics, 13, 507–526.Sivaselvan, M., and A. M. Reinhorn. (2004). Nonlinear Structural Analysis towardsCollapse Simulation: A Dynamical Systems Approach, Technical <strong>Report</strong>MCEER-04-0005, MCEER, <strong>University</strong> at Buffalo.268
Change language