Sensitivity Analysis of Friction Tuned Mass Damper and its Performance Compared to Tuned Mass Damper at Different Seismic Hazard Levels

Document Type : Articles

Authors

1 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

2 Department of Civil Engineering, Daneshpajoohan Higher Education Institute, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

One of the most up-to-date seismic control devices are friction tuned mass damper (FTMD). This type of damper is a combination of a tuned mass damper (TMD) and a nonlinear frictional damper. In this paper, the governing equations for a single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) structure equipped with a FTMD and effective parameters on these systems performance are expressed first. Then, SDOF structures with linear behavior equipped with a FTMD are modeled and validated in OpenSEES software. Finally, the sensitivity analysis of these models to their effective parameters is performed. The structures mass is assumed to be 10 tons, their period is 0.5 second and their damping ratio is assumed to be 2%. Nonlinear time history analyses are done for these structures using 40 strong ground motions from the SAC project. These ground motions consist of 20 records (La01-La20) at design basis earthquake (DBE) level and 20 records (La21-La40) at maximum considered earthquake (MCE) level for the Los Angeles area. Effective parameters on the performance of FTMD assumed in this study are the friction coefficient of the damper, the mass ratio of the damper to the structure and the frequency ratio of the damper to the structure. Average of the structures' maximum displacement is determined for two ground motion records sets and effects of the mentioned parameters on the structural performance are discussed. Results show that the responses are more sensitive to frequency ratio rather than friction coefficient and mass ratio. The best value for the friction coefficient varies between 0.1 and 0.3 at DBE level, and varies between 0.2 and 0.4 for MCE level.
Based on the results obtained for SDOF structures, application of FTMD on multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) is discussed in the next step. This is done for short period structures because this type of damper is more effective on these structures. Three MDOF structures with linear behavior and period of 0.3, 0.5 and 1 second are selected and the seismic performance of these structures equipped with FTMD is investigated and compared with the same structures equipped with tuned mass damper (TMD). The mass of stories is uniformly distributed among structure and the mass of each story is 10 ton. In addition, the damping ratio for the main structure in all models is assumed to be 2% and the stiffness of the stories is decreased linearly with the triangular pattern. Same ground motion records are used for the nonlinear time history analysis of MDOF structures and the results for the mean maximum relative displacement of the stories under DBE and MCE levels are compared for structures with FTMD and TMD. Results show that the structures equipped with FTMD have better performance than the structures equipped with TMD, but with increasing structures period, performance of two systems approach each other. In addition, 3 and 5 story structures equipped with FTMD have better performance at DBE level while a 10-story structure equipped with this damper has better performance at DBE level.

Keywords

References

  1. Den Hartog, J.P. (1956) Mechanical Vibrations. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  2. Kwok, K. and Samali, B. (1995) Performance of tuned mass dampers under wind loads. Engineering Structures, 17(9),655-667.
  3. Rana, R. and Soong, T., (1998) Parametric study and simplified design of tuned mass dampers. Engineering Structures, 20(3), 193-204.
  4. Cao, H., Reinhorn, A., Soong, T. (1998) Design of an active mass damper for a tall TV tower in Nanjing, China. Engineering Structures, 20(3), 134-143.
  5. Bakre, S. and Jangid, R. (2007) Optimum parameters of tuned mass damper for damped main system. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 14(3), 448-470.
  6. Zahrai, S., Dehghan-Niri, E., Mohtat, A. (2007) Design methodology for MTMD performance optimization using a new criterion for robustness. In: COMPDYN European Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. City: Rethymno, Greece.
  7. Leung, A. and Zhang, H. (2009) Particle swarm optimization of tuned mass dampers. Engineering Structures, 31(3), 715-728.
  8. Mander, J.B., Chey, M., Carr, A., Chase, J.G. (2010) Semi-active tuned mass damper building systems: Application. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 39(1), 69-89.
  9. Mander, J.B., Chey, M., Carr, A., Chase, J.G. (2010) Semi-Active Tuned Mass Damper Building Systems: Design.
  10. Arfiadi, Y. and Hadi, M. (2011) Optimum placement and properties of tuned mass dampers using hybrid genetic algorithms. Iran University of Science & Technology, 1(1), 167-187.
  11. Greco, R. and Marano, G.C. (2013) Optimum design of Tuned Mass Dampers by displacement and energy perspectives. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 49, 243-253.
  12. Carmona, J.E.C., Avila, S.M., Doz, G. (2017) Proposal of a tuned mass damper with friction damping to control excessive floor vibrations. Engineering Structures, 148, 81-100.
  13. Ricciardelli F., and Vickery BJ. (1999) Tuned vibration absorbers with dry friction damping. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28(7), 707–723.
  14. Almazan, J.L., De la Llera, J.C., Inaudi, J.A., Lopez-Garcıa, D., Izquierdo, LE. (2007) A bidirectional and homogeneous tuned mass damper: A new device for passive control of vibrations. Engineering Structures, 29(7), 1548–1560.
  15. Pall, A.S., Marsh, C., Fazio, P. (1980) Friction joints for seismic control of large panel structures. PCI Journal, 26(6), 38-61.
  16. Mualla, I.H., (2000) Parameters influencing the behavior of a new friction damper device. SPIE's 7th Annual International Symposium on Smart Structures and Materials, International Society for Optics and Photonics.
  17. Mirzabagheri, S., Sanati, M., Aghakouchak, A.A., Khadem, S.E. (2015) Experimental and numerical investigation of rotational friction dampers with multi units in steel frames subjected to lateral excitation. Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 15(2), 479-491.
  18. Gewei, Z. and Basu, B. (2010) A study on friction-tuned mass damper: harmonic solution and statistical linearization. Journal of Vibration and Control, 17(5), 721–731.
  19. Lin, G.L., Lin, C.C., Lu, L.Y., Ho, Y.B. (2012) Experimental verification of seismic vibration control using a semi‐active friction tuned mass damper. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 41(4), 813-830.
  20. Pisal, A.Y. and Jangid, R.S. (2014) Seismic response of multi-story structure with multiple tuned mass friction dampers. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering (IJASE), 6, 46.
  21. Pisal, A.Y. and Jangid, R.S. (2016) Dynamic response of structure with tuned mass friction damper. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering, 8(4), 1-15.
  22. Kim, S.Y., and Lee, C.H. (2019) Peak response of frictional tuned mass dampers optimally designed to white noise base acceleration. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 117, 319-332.
  23. Wen, Y.K. (1976) Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems. J. Eng. Mech. Div. ASCE, 102(2), 249–263.
  24. Bhaskararao, A.V., Jangid, R.S. (2006a) Seismic analysis of structures connected with friction dampers. Eng Struct., 28, 690–703.
  25. http://people.duke.edu/~hpgavin/cee541/quakeGMs.html.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 21 May 2018
  • Revise Date: 10 February 2021
  • Accept Date: 26 December 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics