基于Maxwell型阻尼器的多重调谐质量阻尼器性能评价

研究了基于Maxwell型阻尼器的多重调谐质量阻尼器(MTD—MTMD)在控制结构地震反应方面的最优动力特性。利用建立的设置MTD-MTMD时结构的传递函数,定义了设置MTD—MTMD时结构的动力放大系数(DMF)。将MTD-MTMD的优化准则定义为结构最大动力放大系数的最小值的最小化(Min．Min．Max．DMF)。利用定义的优化准则,评价了Maxwell型阻尼器的松弛时间系数(RTC)对MTD—MTMD最优参数和有效性的影响。利用最大的MTD—MTMD动力放大系数(DMF),评价了RTC对MTD-MTMD冲程的影响。     

结构主动与被动调谐质量阻尼器的减震性能

使用Kanai-Tajimi地震动模型,建立了主动调谐质量阻尼器(ATMD)结构系统的传递函数。将ATMD最优参数的评价准则定义为：设置ATMD结构均方根位移(解析式)的最小值的最小化。将ATMD有效性的评价准则定义为：设置ATMD结构均方根位移的最小值的最小化与未设置ATMD结构的均方根位移之比。根据逃择的评价准则,评价了地震卓越频率系数(EDFR)对ATMD抗震控制性能的影响。同时也评价了EDFR对被动调谐质量阻尼器(PTMD)抗震控制性能的影响。     

结构最优主动调谐质量阻尼器风致振动控制的研究

基于我国现行的风荷载规范,建立了在风荷载作用下结构-主动调谐质量阻尼器(ATMD)系统的动力方程。定义ATMD最优参数准则为:结构-ATMD系统的位移或加速度响应方差的最小化。ATMD有效性的评价准则为:设置ATMD结构的最小化位移或加速度响应方差与未设置ATMD结构的位移或加速度响应方差之比(分别称为位移和加速度减振系数)。根据上述准则,在频域内数值研究了结构自振频率、标准化加速度反馈增益系数、质量比对ATMD系统的最优参数(包括最优频率比和阻尼比)、有效性和冲程的影响。此外,为了比较的目的,论文同时考虑了结构TMD风致振动控制的情况。     

结构双层多重调谐质量阻尼器(DMTMD)控制策略的鲁棒性评价

基于定义的二类优化目标函数,评价双层多重调谐质量阻尼器(DMTMD)控制策略对漂移频率系数(DFR)摄动的鲁棒性。数值研究表明,使用第二类优化准则设计的DMTMD、双重调谐质量阻尼器(DTMD)和多重调谐质量阻尼器(MTMD)比使用第一类优化准则设计的DMTMD、DTMD和MTMD具有更高的对DFR摄动的鲁棒性。而且,使用第二类优化准则设计的总数为4的DMTMD、DTMD和总数为11的MTMD具有近似相同的对DFR摄动的鲁棒性。     

多层结构MTMD振动控制系统参数优化研究

采用振动控制算法中的线性二次型最优控制,研究了在地震作用下的结构控制作用系统参数优化设计,即假定控制器数量、位置,对控制作用参数进行优化.将选取的主结构简化为多自由度模型,将MTMD(多重调谐质量阻尼器)对结构的反力与地震荷载共同作为结构的荷载输入分析;基于对主结构多模态耦合作用的考虑以及MTMD加载位置的初步假定,以二次型性能指标对系统状态方程加以控制.得到控制效果与利用最优参数法的结构控制效果做进一步比较验证.最后利用ANSYS优化设计模块,对已得到的控制器参数进行二次优化.     

桥染结构MTMD被动控制的理论研究和实桥分析

采用频域分析法考虑TMD在多自由度结构中的位置，推导了具有MTMD的多自由度结构受控振型广义坐标的频率响应方程，据此进行了MTMD的参数优化和设计。算例表明，只要MTMD设计正确，它就可以有产地减小结构在地震作用下的动力响应。     

土木工程结构的双层多重调谐质量阻尼器控制策略

为能得到用尽可能少的调谐质量阻尼器(TMD)组成有效性和鲁棒性高的多重调谐质量阻尼器控制系统，本文提出了一种适用于土木工程结构的新控制策略——双层多重调谐质量阻尼器(DMT—MD)。使用定义的优化目标函数，评价了双层多重调谐质量阻尼器(DMTMD)的控制性能。数值结果表明，双层多重调谐质量阻尼器(DMTMD)比多重凋谐质量阻尼器(MTMD)具有更好的有效性和对频率调谐的鲁棒性。DMTMD比双重调谐质量阻尼器(DTMD)具有更好的有效性，而DMTMD和DT—MD对频率调谐的鲁棒性近似相同。因此，双层多重调谐质量阻尼器是一种先进的结构控制策略。     

基于满意度的液体质量双调谐减振器参数优化及应用

为探讨多重液体质量双调谐阻尼器(MTLMD)参数优化算法,引入满意度理论,以满意度水平为目标函数,建立了主结构与MTLMD系统动力放大系数的三参量改进型加权满意度方程.对南京大胜关长江大桥吊杆结构MTLMD系统最优阻尼比及频率比等参数进行优化分析,得出了满意度水平、信心指数及最优参数之间的相互关系.研究结果表明:以满意...     

土-结构动力相互作用对结构控制的影响

本文研究了土-结构动力相互作用对采取不同控制措施的结构控制效果的影响。文中首先建立了主动调谐质量阻尼器(ATMD)、半主动磁流变阻尼器(MR)和被动多重调谐质量阻尼器(MTMD)等三种结构控制措施在时域中的控制算法和控制律，然后基于子结构法，采用间接边界元方法，通过傅里叶变换，推导了分别安装三种结构控制措施的受控结构在频域中的运动方程，数值仿真分析了某36层高层建筑的地震反应及其控制效果。结果表明，当采用ATMD或MTMD控制时，考虑土-结构动力相互作用后结构地震反应有所减小；当采用MR控制时，考虑土-结构动力相互作用后结构地震反应有很大程度的减小。由此看来，在设计软土地基上高层结构的结构控制措施时，不考虑土-结构动力相互作用对结构控制效果的影响是偏于安全的。     

可控制杆件在双层柱面网壳结构中的最优布置

在分析网壳结构特点的基础上，提出了网壳结构中半主动控制器位置优化的两种准最优准则，研究了变刚度变阻尼可控制杆件在双层柱面网壳结构中最优布置规律。通过仿真分析，验证了准最优准则的有效性和最优位置规律的正确性。     

Active multiple tuned mass dampers for structures under the ground acceleration

Active multiple tuned mass dampers (AMTMD) consisting of many active tuned mass dampers (ATMDs) with a uniform distribution of natural frequencies have been, for the first time, proposed for attenuating undesirable vibrations of a structure under the ground acceleration.The multiple tuned mass dampers (MTMD) in the AMTMD is manufactured by keeping the stiffness and damping constant and varying the mass. The control forces in the AMTMD are generated through keeping the identical displacement and velocity feedback gain and varying the acceleration feedback gain. The structure is represented by its mode‐generalized system in the specific vibration mode being controlled using the mode reduced‐order method. The optimum parameters of the AMTMD are investigated to delineate the influence of the important parameters on the effectiveness and robustness of the AMTMD by conducting a numerical searching technique. The parameters include the frequency spacing, average damping ratio, tuning frequency ratio, total number and normalized acceleration feedback gain coefficient. The criterion, which can be stated as the minimization of the minimum values of the maximum dynamic magnification factors (i.e. Min.Min.Max.DMF), is chosen for the optimum searching. Additionally, for the sake of comparison, the results of the optimum MTMD (the passive counterpart of AMTMD) and ATMD are also taken into account in the present paper. It is demonstrated that the proposed AMTMD can be expected to significantly reduce the oscillations of structures under the ground acceleration. It is also shown that the AMTMD can remarkably improve the performance of the MTMD and has higher effectiveness than ATMD. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Optimum multiple tuned mass dampers for structures under the ground acceleration based on DDMF and ADMF

Multiple tuned mass dampers (MTMD) consisting of many tuned mass dampers (TMDs) with a uniform distribution of natural frequencies are taken into consideration for attenuating undesirable vibration of a structure under the ground acceleration. A study is conducted to search for the preferable MTMD which performs better and is easily manufactured from the five available models (i.e. MTMD‐1 – MTMD‐5), which comprise various combinations of the stiffness, mass, damping coefficient and damping ratio in the MTMD. The major objective of the present study then is to evaluate and compare the control performance of these five models. The structure is represented by its mode‐generalized system in the specific vibration mode being controlled by adopting the mode reduced‐order approach. The optimum parameters of the MTMD‐1 – MTMD‐5 are investigated to reveal the influence of the important parameters on their effectiveness and robustness using a numerical searching technique. The parameters include the frequency spacing, average damping ratio, tuning frequency ratio, mass ratio and total number. The criteria selected for the optimum searching are the minimization of the maximum value of the displacement dynamic magnification factor (DDMF) and that of the acceleration dynamic magnification factor (ADMF) of the structure with the MTMD‐1 – MTMD‐5 (i.e. Min.Max.DDMF and Min.Max.ADMF). It is demonstrated that the optimum MTMD‐1 and MTMD‐4 yield approximately the same control performance, and offer higher effectiveness and robustness than the optimum MTMD‐2, MTMD‐3, and MTMD‐5 in reducing the displacement and acceleration responses of structures. It is further demonstrated that for both the best effectiveness and robustness and the simplest manufacturing, it is preferable to select the optimum MTMD‐1. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Performance of multiple tuned mass dampers for attenuating undesirable oscillations of structures under the ground acceleration

Multiple tuned mass dampers (MTMDs) consisting of many tuned mass dampers (TMDs) with a uniform distribution of natural frequencies are considered for attenuating undesirable vibration of a structure. The MTMD is manufactured by keeping the stiffness and damping constant and varying the mass. The structure is represented by its mode‐generalized system in the specific vibration mode being controlled using the mode reduced‐order method. The optimum parameters of the MTMD are investigated to delineate the influence of the important parameters on the effectiveness and robustness of the MTMD by conducting a numerical searching technique in two directions. The parameters include: the frequency spacing, average damping ratio, mass ratio and total number. The criterion selected for the optimization is the minimization of the maximum value of the dynamic magnification factor (DMF) of the structure with MTMD (i.e. Min.Max.DMF). In this paper, for the sake of comparison, the MTMD(II), which is made by keeping the mass constant and varying the stiffness and damping coefficient, and a single TMD are also taken into account. It is demonstrated that the optimum frequency spacing of the MTMD is the same as that of the MTMD(II) and the optimum average damping ratio of the MTMD is a little larger than that of the MTMD(II). It is also found that the optimum MTMD is more effective than the optimum MTMD(II) and the optimum single TMD with equal mass. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Optimum multiple tuned mass dampers for structures under the ground acceleration based on the uniform distribution of system parameters

The five MTMD models, with natural frequencies being uniformly distributed around their mean frequency, have been recently presented by the first author. They are shown to have the near‐zero optimum average damping ratio (more precisely, for a given mass ratio there is an upper limit on the total number, beyond which the near‐zero optimum average damping ratio occurs). In this paper, the eight new MTMD models (i.e. the UM‐MTMD1～UM‐MTMD3, US‐MTMD1～US‐MTMD3, UD‐MTMD1 and UD‐MTMD2), with the system parameters (mass, stiffness and damping coefficient) being, respectively, uniformly distributed around their average values, have been, for the first time here, proposed to seek for the MTMD models without the near‐zero optimum average damping ratio. The structure is represented by the mode‐generalized system corresponding to the specific vibration mode that needs to be controlled. Through minimization of the minimum values of the maximum dynamic magnification factors (DMF) of the structure with the eight MTMD models (i.e. through the implementation of Min.Min.Max.DMF), the optimum parameters and values of Min.Min.Max.DMF for these eight MTMD models are investigated to evaluate and compare their control performance. The optimum parameters include the optimum mass spacing, stiffness spacing, damping coefficient spacing, frequency spacing, average damping ratio and tuning frequency ratio. The six MTMD models without the near‐zero optimum average damping ratio (i.e. the UM‐MTMD1～UM‐MTMD3, US‐MTMD1, US‐MTMD2 and UD‐MTMD2) are found through extensive numerical analyses. Likewise, the optimum UM‐MTMD3 offers the higher effectiveness and robustness and requires the smaller damping with respect to the rest of the MTMD models in reducing the responses of structures subjected to earthquakes. Additionally, it is interesting to note, by comparing the optimum UM‐MTMD3 with the optimum MTMD‐1 recently investigated by the first author, that the effectiveness and robustness for the optimum UM‐MTMD3 is almost identical to that for the optimum MTMD‐1 (without inclusion of the optimum MTMD‐1 with the near‐zero optimum average damping ratio). Recognizing these performance benefits, it is preferable to employ the optimum UM‐MTMD3 or the optimum MTMD‐1 without the near‐zero optimum average damping ratio, when installing the MTMD for the suppression of undesirable oscillations of structures under earthquakes. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Multiple active–passive tuned mass dampers for structures under the ground acceleration

An Erratum has been published for this article in Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003; 32(15):2451. Multiple active–passive tuned mass dampers (MAPTMD) consisting of many active–passive tuned mass dampers (APTMDs) with a uniform distribution of natural frequencies have been, for the first time here, proposed for attenuating undesirable oscillations of structures under the ground acceleration. The MAPTMD is manufactured by keeping the stiffness and damping coefficient constant and varying the mass. The control forces in the MAPTMD are generated through keeping the identical displacement and velocity feedback gain and varying the acceleration feedback gain. The structure is represented by the mode‐generalized system corresponding to the specific vibration mode that needs to be controlled. Through minimization of the minimum values of the maximum dynamic magnification factors (DMF) of the structure with the MAPTMD (i.e. through implementation of Min.Min.Max.DMF), the optimum parameters of the MAPTMD are investigated to delineate the influence of the important parameters such as mass ratio, total number, normalized acceleration feedback gain coefficient and system parameter ratio on the effectiveness (i.e. Min.Min.Max.DMF) and robustness of the MAPTMD. The optimum parameters of the MAPTMD include the optimum frequency spacing, average damping ratio and tuning frequency ratio. Additionally, for the sake of comparison, the results for a single APTMD are also taken into account in the present paper. It is demonstrated that the proposed MAPTMD can be employed to significantly reduce the oscillations of structures under the ground acceleration. Also, it is shown that the MAPTMD can render high robustness and has better effectiveness than a single APTMD. In particularly, if and when requiring a large active control force, MAPTMD is more promising for practical implementations on seismically excited structures with respect to a single APTMD. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Optimum Multiple Tuned Mass Dampers for base-excited undamped system

Optimum parameters of Multiple Tuned Mass Dampers (MTMD) for an undamped system to harmonic base excitation are investigated using a numerical searching technique. The criteria selected for the optimality is the minimization of steady-state displacement response of the main system. The explicit formulae for the optimum parameters of MTMD (i.e. damping ratio, bandwidth and tuning frequency) are then derived using curve-fitting scheme that can readily be used for engineering applications. The error in the proposed explicit expressions is investigated and found to be quite negligible. The optimum parameters of the MTMD system are obtained for different mass ratios and number of dampers. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Seismic response of controlled structures with active multiple tuned mass dampers

Active multiple tuned mass dampers （referred to as AMTMD）, which consist of several active tuned mass dampers （ATMDs） with identical stiffness and damping coefficients but varying mass and control force, have recently been proposed to suppress undesirable oscillations of structures under ground acceleration. It has been shown that the AMTMD can remarkably improve the performance of multiple tuned mass dampers （MTMDs） and is also more effective in reducing structure oscillation than single ATMDs. Notwithstanding this, good performance of AMTMD （including a single ATMD illustrated from frequency-domain analysis） may not necessarily translate into a good seismic reduction behavior in the time-domain. To investigate these phenomena, a three-story steel structure model controlled by AMTMD with three ATMDs was implemented in SIMULINK and subjected to several historical earthquakes. Likewise, the structure under consideration was assumed to have uncertainty of stiffness, such as 4-15% of its initial stiffness, in the numerical simulations. The optimum design parameters of the AMTMD were obtained in the frequency-domain by implementing the minimization of the minimum values of the maximum dynamic magnification factors （DMF） of general structures with AMTMD. For comparison purposes, response analysis of the same structure with a single ATMD was also performed. The numerical analysis and comparison show that the AMTMD generally renders better effectiveness when compared with a single ATMD for structures subjected to historical earthquakes. In particular, the AMTMD can improve the effectiveness of a single ATMD for a structure with an uncertainty of stiffness of 4-15% of its initial stiffness.