Stability and accuracy analysis of the central difference method for real‐time substructure testing

The central difference method (CDM) that is explicit for pseudo-dynamic testing is also believed to be explicit for real-time substructure testing (RST). However, to obtain the correct velocity dependent restoring force of the physical substructure being tested, the target velocity is required to be calculated as well as the displacement. The standard CDM provides only explicit target displacement but not explicit target velocity. This paper investigates the required modification of the standard central difference method when applied to RST and analyzes the stability and accuracy of the modified CDM for RST. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Shuenn-Yih Chang,et al.  Explicit Pseudodynamic Algorithm with Unconditional Stability , 2002 .

[2]  M. Nakashima,et al.  Japanese Activities on On‐Line Testing , 1987 .

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

[4]  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.

[5]  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.

[6]  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.

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

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

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

[10]  E. Cowen,et al.  Turbulent Prandtl Number in Neutrally Buoyant Turbulent Round Jet , 2002 .

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

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

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

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