Tracking Error-Based Servohydraulic Actuator Adaptive Compensation for Real-Time Hybrid Simulation

Real-time hybrid simulation combines experimental testing and numerical simulation by dividing a structural system into experimental and analytical substructures. Servohydraulic actuators are typically used in a real-time hybrid simulation to apply command displacements to the experimental substructure(s). Servohydraulic actuators may develop a time delay due to inherent actuator dynamics that results in a desynchronization between the measured restoring force(s) and the integration algorithm in a real-time hybrid simulation. Inaccuracy or even instability will occur in a hybrid simulation if actuator delay is not compensated properly. This paper presents an adaptive compensation method for actuator delay. An adaptive control law is developed using an error tracking indicator to adapt a compensation parameter used in the proposed compensation method. Laboratory tests involving large-scale real-time hybrid simulations of a single degree of freedom moment resisting frame with an elastomeric damper are conducted to experimentally demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed adaptive compensation method. The actuator tracking capability is shown to be greatly improved and exceptional experimental results are still achieved when a good estimate of actuator delay is not available.

[1]  T. T. Soong,et al.  Supplemental energy dissipation: state-of-the-art and state-of-the- practice , 2002 .

[2]  Oya Mercan.  Analytical and experimental studies on large scale, real-time pseudodynamic testing , 2007 .

[3]  P. Benson Shing,et al.  Performance evaluation of a real‐time pseudodynamic test system , 2006 .

[4]  Antony Darby,et al.  The development of real–time substructure testing , 2001, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

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

[6]  Katsuhiko Ogata,et al.  Discrete-time control systems (2nd ed.) , 1995 .

[7]  Σταυροσ Δερμιτζακησ,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF SUBSTRUCTURING TECHNIQUES FOR ON-LINE COMPUTER CONTROLLED SEISMIC PERFORMANCE TESTING , 1985 .

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

[9]  M.I. Wallace,et al.  An adaptive polynomial based forward prediction algorithm for multi-actuator real-time dynamic substructuring , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[10]  Stephen A. Mahin,et al.  Real-Time Error Monitoring for Hybrid Simulation. Part I: Methodology and Experimental Verification , 2007 .

[11]  Andrei M. Reinhorn,et al.  Compensation of actuator delay and dynamics for real‐time hybrid structural simulation , 2008 .

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

[13]  Cheng Chen.  Development and numerical simulation of hybrid effective force testing method , 2007 .

[14]  J. Ricles,et al.  Development of Direct Integration Algorithms for Structural Dynamics Using Discrete Control Theory , 2008 .

[15]  Toshihiko Horiuchi,et al.  A new method for compensating actuator delay in real–time hybrid experiments , 2001, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

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

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

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

[19]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Stability and accuracy analysis of outer loop dynamics in real‐time pseudodynamic testing of SDOF systems , 2007 .

[20]  Jian Zhao,et al.  Considerations for the development of real-time dynamic testing using servo-hydraulic actuation , 2003 .

[21]  P. Benson Shing,et al.  Performance of a real‐time pseudodynamic test system considering nonlinear structural response , 2007 .

[22]  Y. Wen.  Equivalent Linearization for Hysteretic Systems Under Random Excitation , 1980 .

[23]  Stephen A. Mahin,et al.  Real-Time Error Monitoring for Hybrid Simulation. Part II: Structural Response Modification due to Errors , 2007 .

[24]  Xiaoyun Shao,et al.  Real time dynamic hybrid testing using force-based substructuring , 2006 .

[25]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Stability Analysis of Direct Integration Algorithms Applied to MDOF Nonlinear Structural Dynamics , 2008 .

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

[27]  Richard Christenson,et al.  Large-Scale Experimental Verification of Semiactive Control through Real-Time Hybrid Simulation , 2008 .

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

[29]  Katsuhiko Ogata,et al.  Discrete-time control systems , 1987 .

[30]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Simplified design procedure for frame buildings with viscoelastic or elastomeric structural dampers , 2005 .

[31]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Stability analysis of SDOF real‐time hybrid testing systems with explicit integration algorithms and actuator delay , 2008 .