Nature of seismic control force in acceleration feedback

SUMMARY Active control methods have been applied to numerous civil structures in recent years. A significant amount of the research on active control methods has been based on full-state feedback using the linear quadratic regulator (LQR) control algorithm; because measurement of the full state (i.e., the displacements and velocities of all DOFs) is difficult, such algorithms are impractical in full-scale implementations. Output feedback strategies based on measured acceleration at a limited number of points has been proposed and validated. However, a thorough understanding of the dissipative nature of the associated control forces and the way in which these forces protect the structure have been elusive. This paper considers the hysteric behavior of the control forces produced by the widely employed linear quadratic Gaussian (LQG)-based acceleration feedback control strategies and explores parallels with the pseudo-negative stiffness (PNS) semi-active damping systems. Numerical simulation studies carried out on one-story and three-story buildings with active bracing show that the LQG-based algorithms are quite versatile and can produce controllers with a variety of behaviors, including the PNS, depending upon the control objectives chosen. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  R. Stengel.  Stochastic Optimal Control: Theory and Application , 1986 .

[2]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Role of Control-Structure Interaction in Protective System Design , 1995 .

[3]  Gian Paolo Cimellaro,et al.  Retrofit of a hospital through strength reduction and enhanced damping , 2006 .

[4]  Y. Wen.  Method for Random Vibration of Hysteretic Systems , 1976 .

[5]  James T. P. Yao,et al.  CONCEPT OF STRUCTURAL CONTROL , 1972 .

[6]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Implementation of an active mass driver using acceleration feedback control , 1996 .

[7]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Modeling and Control of Magnetorheological Dampers for Seismic Response Reduction , 1996 .

[8]  Takuji Kobori,et al.  FUTURE DIRECTION ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF SEISMIC-RESPONSE-CONTROLLED STRUCTURES , 1996 .

[9]  Hirokazu Iemura,et al.  Simple algorithm for semi‐active seismic response control of cable‐stayed bridges , 2005 .

[10]  Hirokazu Iemura,et al.  Passive and semi‐active seismic response control of a cable‐stayed bridge , 2002 .

[11]  T. T. Soong,et al.  Acceleration Feedback Control of MDOF Structures , 1996 .

[12]  Bijan Samali,et al.  Benchmark Problem for Response Control of Wind-Excited Tall Buildings , 2004 .

[13]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Frequency domain optimal control strategies for aseismic protection , 1994 .

[14]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODEL FOR MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL DAMPERS , 1997 .

[15]  Hirokazu Iemura,et al.  Advances in the development of pseudo‐negative‐stiffness dampers for seismic response control , 2009 .

[16]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering , 1995 .

[17]  T. T. Soong,et al.  STRUCTURAL CONTROL: PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE , 1997 .

[18]  Hirokazu Iemura,et al.  Negative stiffness friction damping for seismically isolated structures , 2006 .

[19]  Min Liu,et al.  Negative stiffness characteristics of active and semi‐active control systems for stay cables , 2008 .

[20]  Felix Weber,et al.  Clipped viscous damping with negative stiffness for semi-active cable damping , 2011 .

[21]  Takuji Kobori,et al.  Technology Development and Forecast of Dynamical Intelligent Building (D.I.B , 1990 .