Application of an SMA‐based hybrid control device to 20‐story nonlinear benchmark building

SUMMARY This paper investigates the seismic response control of a 20-story nonlinear benchmark building with a new recentering variable friction device (RVFD). The RVFD combines energy dissipation capabilities of a variable friction damper (VFD) with the recentering ability of shape memory alloy (SMA) wires. The VFD that is the first subcomponent of the hybrid device consists of a friction generation unit and piezoelectric actuators. The clamping force of the VFD can be adjusted according to the current level of ground motion by adjusting the voltage level of piezoelectric actuators. SMA wires that exhibit a unique hysteretic behavior and full shape recovery after experiencing large strains is the second subcomponent of the hybrid device. Numerical simulations of a seismically excited 20-story benchmark building are conducted to evaluate the performance of the hybrid device. A continuous hysteretic model is used to capture frictional behavior of the VFD and a neuro-fuzzy model is employed to describe highly nonlinear behavior of the SMA components of the hybrid device. A fuzzy logic controller is developed to adjust the voltage level of VFDs for favorable performance in an RVFD hybrid application. Results show that the RVFD modulated with a fuzzy logic control strategy can effectively reduce interstory drifts and permanent deformations without increasing acceleration response of the benchmark building for most cases. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Genda Chen,et al.  Shake table tests of a quarter‐scale three‐storey building model with piezoelectric friction dampers , 2004 .

[2]  Reginald DesRoches,et al.  Seismic Assessment of Concentrically Braced Steel Frames with Shape Memory Alloy Braces , 2007 .

[3]  Reginald DesRoches,et al.  Unseating prevention for multiple frame bridges using superelastic devices , 2005 .

[4]  Lucia Faravelli,et al.  A passive control device with SMA components: from the prototype to the model , 2009 .

[5]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Benchmark Control Problems for Seismically Excited Nonlinear Buildings , 2004 .

[6]  Donatello Cardone,et al.  Implementation and testing of passive control devices based on shape memory alloys , 2000 .

[7]  Andrei M. Reinhorn,et al.  Teflon Bearings in Base Isolation II: Modeling , 1990 .

[8]  Osamu Yoshida,et al.  Seismic Control of a Nonlinear Benchmark Building using Smart Dampers , 2004 .

[9]  Ricardo Herrera,et al.  Steel beam–column connection using copper-based shape memory alloy dampers , 2008 .

[10]  Francesco Marazzi,et al.  Technology of Semiactive Devices and Applications in Vibration Mitigation , 2006 .

[11]  Reginald DesRoches,et al.  Experimental response modification of a four‐span bridge retrofit with shape memory alloys , 2009 .

[12]  Songye Zhu,et al.  Seismic behaviour of self‐centring braced frame buildings with reusable hysteretic damping brace , 2007 .

[13]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Seismic assessment of bridge structures isolated by a shape memory alloy/rubber-based isolation system , 2010 .

[14]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Evaluation of the performance of a sliding-type base isolation system with a NiTi shape memory alloy device considering temperature effects , 2010 .

[15]  T. T. Soong,et al.  Passive Energy Dissipation Systems for Structural Design and Retrofit , 1998 .

[16]  Reginald DesRoches,et al.  CYCLIC PROPERTIES OF SUPERELASTIC SHAPE MEMORY ALLOY WIRES AND BARS , 2004 .

[17]  Osman E. Ozbulut,et al.  Superelastic semi‐active damping of a base‐isolated structure , 2008 .

[18]  M. Saiid Saiidi,et al.  Cyclic Response of Concrete Bridge Columns Using Superelastic Nitinol and Bendable Concrete , 2009 .

[19]  María Ofelia Moroni,et al.  A fuzzy model of superelastic shape memory alloys for vibration control in civil engineering applications , 2007 .

[20]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Neuro-fuzzy Modeling of Temperature- and Strain-rate-dependent Behavior of NiTi Shape Memory Alloys for Seismic Applications , 2010 .

[21]  R. S. Jangid,et al.  Seismic analysis of structures connected with friction dampers , 2006 .

[22]  B. Andrawes,et al.  Superelastic SMA–FRP composite reinforcement for concrete structures , 2010 .

[23]  Reginald DesRoches,et al.  Seismic Performance Assessment of Steel Frames with Shape Memory Alloy Connections. Part I — Analysis and Seismic Demands , 2010 .

[24]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Enhanced damping of lightweight structures by semi-active joints , 2008 .

[25]  Chin-Hsiung Loh,et al.  GA-based optimum design of a shape memory alloy device for seismic response mitigation , 2010 .

[26]  Roberto T. Leon,et al.  Design and analysis of braced frames with shape memory alloy and energy-absorbing hybrid devices , 2010 .

[27]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Optimal design of superelastic‐friction base isolators for seismic protection of highway bridges against near‐field earthquakes , 2011 .

[28]  José A. Inaudi,et al.  Modulated homogeneous friction : A semi-active damping strategy , 1997 .

[29]  V. Torra,et al.  Built in dampers for family homes via SMA: An ANSYS computation scheme based on mesoscopic and microscopic experimental analyses , 2007 .

[30]  S. Hurlebaus,et al.  Smart structure dynamics , 2006 .

[31]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Application of semi-active control strategies for seismic protection of buildings with MR dampers , 2010 .

[32]  Lyan-Ywan Lu,et al.  Predictive control of seismic structures with semi‐active friction dampers , 2004 .

[33]  Kazuto Seto,et al.  Active Control of Structures , 2008 .