Benchmark control problem for real-time hybrid simulation

Abstract This paper presents the problem definition and guidelines for a benchmark control problem in real-time hybrid simulation for a seismically excited building, to appear in a Special Issue of Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing. Benchmark problems have been especially useful in enabling a community of researchers to leap forward on a given topic, distill the lessons learned, and identify the capabilities and limitations of various approaches. The focus here is on the design of an effective transfer system displacement tracking controller which is a commonly used approach for ensuring that interface conditions between numerical and experimental substructures are satisfied. In this study, a laboratory model of a three-story steel frame is considered as the reference structure. Realistic numerical models are developed and provided to represent the numerical and experimental substructures and the transfer system, which is comprised of hydraulic actuation, sensing instrumentation, and control implementation hardware. Experimental components are identified and provided as Simulink models, which are executed in real-time using Simulink Desktop Real-Time capability to enable realistic virtual real-time hybrid simulation. The task of each participant of the Special Issue is to design, evaluate, and report on their proposed controller approaches using the numerical models and computational codes provided. Such approaches will be assessed for robustness and performance using the provided tools. This benchmark problem is expected to further the understanding of the relative merits, as well as provide a clear basis for evaluating the performance of various control approaches and algorithms for RTHS. To illustrate some of the design challenges, a sample control strategy employing a proportional-integral (PI) controller is included, in addition to the built-in control loop of the transfer system.

[1]  Masayoshi Nakashima,et al.  Development, potential, and limitations of real–time online (pseudo–dynamic) testing , 2001, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[2]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Benchmark problems in structural control : Part II : Active tendon system , 1998 .

[3]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Evaluation of a real-time hybrid simulation system for performance evaluation of structures with rate dependent devices subjected to seismic loading , 2012 .

[4]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Stability analysis for real‐time pseudodynamic and hybrid pseudodynamic testing with multiple sources of delay , 2008 .

[5]  Stephen A. Mahin,et al.  Computational aspects of a seismic performance test method using on‐line computer control , 1985 .

[6]  Rui M. Botelho,et al.  Robust Stability and Performance Analysis for Multi-actuator Real-Time Hybrid Substructuring , 2015 .

[7]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Phase I IASC-ASCE Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Problem Using Simulated Data , 2004 .

[8]  敏彦 堀内,et al.  加振機の応答遅れを補償した実時間ハイブリッド実験システムの開発 : 第1報,補償方法と1自由度系の実験への適用 , 1995 .

[9]  Motohiko Hakuno,et al.  DYNAMIC DESTRUCTIVE TEST OF A CANTILEVER BEAM, CONTROLLED BY AN ANALOG-COMPUTER , 1969 .

[10]  Ping Tan,et al.  Benchmark structural control problem for a seismically excited highway bridge—Part I: Phase I Problem definition , 2009 .

[11]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Hybrid Simulation for Earthquake Response of Semirigid Partial-Strength Steel Frames , 2013 .

[12]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Experimental Studies on Real-Time Testing of Structures with Elastomeric Dampers , 2009 .

[13]  Xiuyu Gao,et al.  Experimental Validation of a Generalized Procedure for MDOF Real-Time Hybrid Simulation , 2014 .

[14]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Experimental Phase II of the Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Problem , 2003 .

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

[16]  Juan E. Carrion,et al.  Real-time hybrid simulation for structural control performance assessment , 2009 .

[17]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  PHASE I BENCHMARK CONTROL PROBLEM FOR SEISMIC RESPONSE OF CABLE-STAYED BRIDGES , 2003 .

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

[19]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Smart base‐isolated benchmark building. Part I: problem definition , 2006 .

[20]  Xiuyu Gao,et al.  Development of a robust framework for real-time hybrid simulation: From dynamical system, motion control to experimental error verification , 2012 .

[21]  Narutoshi Nakata,et al.  Compensation techniques for experimental errors in real-time hybrid simulation using shake tables , 2014 .

[22]  Selim Günay,et al.  Seismic performance evaluation of high voltage disconnect switches using real‐time hybrid simulation: I. System development and validation , 2014 .

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

[24]  Masayoshi Nakashima,et al.  Real-time on-line test for MDOF systems , 1999 .

[25]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Servo-hydraulic actuator in controllable canonical form: Identification and experimental validation , 2018 .

[26]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Smart base‐isolated benchmark building part IV: Phase II sample controllers for nonlinear isolation systems , 2006 .

[27]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Enabling role of hybrid simulation across NEES in advancing earthquake engineering , 2015 .

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

[29]  Xiuyu Gao,et al.  Computational Tool for Real-Time Hybrid Simulation of Seismically Excited Steel Frame Structures , 2015 .

[30]  Martin S. Williams,et al.  Laboratory testing of structures under dynamic loads: an introductory review , 2001, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

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

[32]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Feedforward actuator controller development using the backward-difference method for real-time hybrid simulation , 2014 .

[33]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  TECHNICAL NOTE A FRAMEWORK FOR MULTI-SITE DISTRIBUTED SIMULATION AND APPLICATION TO COMPLEX STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS , 2005 .

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

[35]  Arun Prakash,et al.  Establishing a stability switch criterion for effective implementation of real-time hybrid simulation , 2014 .

[36]  Oreste S. Bursi,et al.  Hybrid simulation of a multi‐span RC viaduct with plain bars and sliding bearings , 2015 .

[37]  Arun Prakash,et al.  Predictive stability indicator: a novel approach to configuring a real‐time hybrid simulation , 2017 .

[38]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Adaptive time series compensator for delay compensation of servo‐hydraulic actuator systems for real‐time hybrid simulation , 2013 .

[39]  Benjamin C. Kuo,et al.  AUTOMATIC CONTROL SYSTEMS , 1962, Universum:Technical sciences.

[40]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Parametric model of servo-hydraulic actuator coupled with a nonlinear system: Experimental validation , 2018 .

[41]  Tsu-Chin Tsao,et al.  A linearized electrohydraulic servovalve model for valve dynamics sensitivity analysis and control system design , 2000 .

[42]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Phase II Benchmark Control Problem for Seismic Response of Cable-Stayed Bridges , 2003 .

[43]  Xiuyu Gao,et al.  Real time hybrid simulation: from dynamic system, motion control to experimental error , 2013 .

[44]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Model-based framework for multi-axial real-time hybrid simulation testing , 2017, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration.

[45]  Amin Maghareh,et al.  Experimental implementation of predictive indicators for configuring a real-time hybrid simulation , 2015 .

[46]  Hisashi Tanaka,et al.  NON-LINEAR EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURES BY A COMPUTER-ACTUATOR ON-LINE SYSTEM Part III : Reponse Analyses of 1-Bay 2-Story Steel Frames , 1980 .

[47]  Carol K. Shield,et al.  EFFECTIVE FORCE TESTING: A METHOD OF SEISMIC SIMULATION FOR STRUCTURAL TESTING , 1999 .

[48]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Geographically Distributed Real-Time Hybrid Simulation of MR Dampers for Seismic Hazard Mitigation , 2012 .

[49]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Performance Validations of Semiactive Controllers on Large-Scale Moment-Resisting Frame Equipped with 200-kN MR Damper Using Real-Time Hybrid Simulations , 2014 .

[50]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Benchmark problems in structural control: part I—Active Mass Driver system , 1998 .

[51]  邦明 宇田川,et al.  電算機-試験機オンラインシステムによる構造物の非線形地震応答解析 : その1 : システムの内容 , 1975 .

[52]  Ali Irmak Ozdagli,et al.  Distributed real-time hybrid simulation: Modeling, development and experimental validation , 2015 .

[53]  晃一 高梨,et al.  電算機-試験機オンラインシステムによる構造物の非線形地震応答解析 : その 2・はり崩壊型一層一スパン鋼製フレーム , 1978 .

[54]  P. Benson Shing,et al.  Application of Pseudodynamic Test Method to Structural Research , 1996 .

[55]  Viswanath Kammula,et al.  Model updating method for substructure pseudo‐dynamic hybrid simulation , 2013 .

[56]  Stephen A. Mahin,et al.  Pseudodynamic Method for Seismic Testing , 1985 .

[57]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Phase II of the ASCE Benchmark Study on SHM , 2002 .

[58]  Bin Wu,et al.  Robust integrated actuator control: experimental verification and real‐time hybrid‐simulation implementation , 2015 .

[59]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  AN EXPERIMENTAL BENCHMARK PROBLEM IN STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING , 2001 .