Stability analysis of SDOF real‐time hybrid testing systems with explicit integration algorithms and actuator delay

Real-time hybrid testing is a method that combines experimental substructure(s) representing component(s) of a structure with a numerical model of the remaining part of the structure. These substructures are combined with the integration algorithm for the test and the servo-hydraulic actuator to form the real-time hybrid testing system. The inherent dynamics of the servo-hydraulic actuator used in real-time hybrid testing will give rise to a time delay, which may result in a degradation of accuracy of the test, and possibly render the system to become unstable. To acquire a better understanding of the stability of a real-time hybrid test with actuator delay, a stability analysis procedure for single-degree-of-freedom structures is presented that includes both the actuator delay and an explicit integration algorithm. The actuator delay is modeled by a discrete transfer function and combined with a discrete transfer function representing the integration algorithm to form a closed-loop transfer function for the real-time hybrid testing system. The stability of the system is investigated by examining the poles of the closed-loop transfer function. The effect of actuator delay on the stability of a real-time hybrid test is shown to be dependent on the structural parameters as well as the form of the integration algorithm. The stability analysis results can have a significant difference compared with the solution from the delay differential equation, thereby illustrating the need to include the integration algorithm in the stability analysis of a real-time hybrid testing system. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  A. Blakeborough,et al.  Improved control algorithm for real‐time substructure testing , 2001 .

[2]  Nathan M. Newmark,et al.  A Method of Computation for Structural Dynamics , 1959 .

[3]  Gene F. Franklin,et al.  Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems , 1986 .

[4]  Gregory M. Hulbert,et al.  Frequency‐domain analysis of time‐integration methods for semidiscrete finite element equations—part II: Hyperbolic and parabolic–hyperbolic problems , 2001 .

[5]  Thomas J. R. Hughes,et al.  Improved numerical dissipation for time integration algorithms in structural dynamics , 1977 .

[6]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Real-time hybrid testing using model-based delay compensation , 2008 .

[7]  Martin S. Williams,et al.  REAL-TIME SUBSTRUCTURE TESTS USING HYDRAULIC ACTUATOR , 1999 .

[8]  Masayoshi Nakashima,et al.  Development of real‐time pseudo dynamic testing , 1992 .

[9]  David J. Wagg,et al.  Stability analysis of real‐time dynamic substructuring using delay differential equation models , 2005 .

[10]  Jinping Ou,et al.  Stability and accuracy analysis of the central difference method for real‐time substructure testing , 2005 .

[11]  O. Mercan,et al.  Real‐time hybrid testing using the unconditionally stable explicit CR integration algorithm , 2009 .

[12]  Gregory M. Hulbert,et al.  Frequency‐domain analysis of time‐integration methods for semidiscrete finite element equations—part I: Parabolic problems , 2001 .

[13]  Martin S. Williams,et al.  Real‐time hybrid experiments with Newmark integration, MCSmd outer‐loop control and multi‐tasking strategies , 2007 .

[14]  Guoshan Xu,et al.  Operator‐splitting method for real‐time substructure testing , 2006 .

[15]  Y. Namita,et al.  Real‐time hybrid experimental system with actuator delay compensation and its application to a piping system with energy absorber , 1999 .