Você está na página 1de 20

Effects of MR Damper Placement on Structure Vibration Parameters

By: Karla Villarreal


Advisors: Claudia Wilson Makola M. Abdullah, Ph.D.

Overview
Introduction Control Systems MR Damper Background Objective Methodology Results Conclusion Future Work

Introduction

Parking garage (FEMA 2004) (1)

Damage on 12 street (Paso Robles Earthquake 2003) (2)

th

Collapsed apartment buildings (Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute 1999) (3)

Control Systems
Systems that absorb vibration or movement
Passive
No power required Directly damps vibration

Active
Requires power Applies a force directly into the system to damp vibration

Semi-Active
Requires minimal power Applies a force that changes the system Change helps dampen the vibration

Magneto-Rheological Damper
Semi-Active Magneto Rheology Controllable fluid Para-magnetic particles
20-ton large-scale MR Fluid Damper (Yang 2001) (4)

Background
1940s Serviceability
Suspension systems
Shock absorbers Seat suspensions Prosthetics

Other Uses
Exercise machines Washing machines
LORD Corporation (2004) (5)

Semi-Active vibration control


Bridges Buildings

Research Objective
To find the effect of MR damper placement on the equivalent damping ratio and on the natural frequency of a building.

Methodology
MATLAB:
Uncontrolled Controlled

Simulink:
MR damper Free vibration response

Graphical Analysis:
Free Vibration Building Response vs. Time Modal Building Response vs. Time

Data Analysis:

Damping ratio () Natural frequency shift Determine the sensitive current range Comparing MR damper placement results

Equations
Equation of Motion of building with earthquake

! + cx ! + kx = f m! !g m! x x
Damper Equations
(Spencer et al. 1997) (6)

A, , , ko , n, xo , k1 = constants

! + k1(x xo ) f = c0 y 1 != ! + ko (x y)] [z + co x y co + c1 !y !zz ! = x z


n1 n
Mechanical Model of the MR Damper (6)

!y !) z + A(x !y !) (x

MR Damper

Controlled and Uncontrolled Systems

3 DOF Building (8) Mass: 3.456*105 kg Stiffness: 1.2*108 kN/m 1st natural frequency: 1.319 Hz 1st simulation uncontrolled

Subjected to FVR Constant input of zero force Given initial conditions 5 cm displacement on each floor 2nd simulation controlled by MR Damper

Equiv. Damping and Freq. Shift


Frequency Shift

Equivalent Damping Equation (7)

ui 1 ln = 2 * j ui+ j

Freq. Response
Placement: Current (A) 1st Floor Resonant Freq. (Hz) 1.31977 1.32681 1.33374 1.33404 1.33576 1.33620 1.33590 1.35586 Freq. Shift (Hz) 0 .00702 .01396 .01426 .01597 .01642 .01611 .01608 2nd Floor Resonant Freq. (Hz) 1.31977 1.32443 1.325117 1.324994 1.320271 1.319383 1.319156 1.319104 Freq. Shift (Hz) 0 .00467 .00535 .00523 .01599 .00038 .00061 .00066 3rd Floor Resonant Freq. (Hz) 1.31977 1.32320 1.30979 1.30981 1.30933 1.30911 1.30904 1.30899 Freq. Shift (Hz) 0 .00657 .00997 .00996 .01044 .01066 .01073 .01078

No Damper 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Equivalent Damping Ratios


Placement: Current (A) No Damper 0 1 2 3 4 5 1st Floor Damping Ratio (%) 2.19365 2.80357 5.99476 6.28860 7.14884 7.42823 7.47207 Add. Damping (%) 0 .60992 3.80111 4.09495 4.95519 5.23458 5.27843 2nd Floor Damping Ratio (%) 2.19365 3.91337 3.60766 4.86715 3.38542 2.19772 2.20284 2.20450 Add. Damping (%) 0 1.71972 1.41401 2.67350 1.19177 0.00408 0.00919 0.01086 3rd Floor Damping Ratio (%) 2.19365 1.59208 1.27050 2.30744 1.13409 1.08789 1.06836 1.05826 Add. Damping (%) 0 -.60157 -.092315 .011379 -1.05956 -1.10576 -1.12529 -1.13539

7.47976

5.28612

Damper Placement Results

Sensitive Current Range


Sensitive Current Range
6.00000
Additional Damping (%)

Sensitive Current Range


0.01800 0.01600 Frequency Shift (Hz) 0.01400 0.01200 0.01000 0.00800 0.00600 0.00400 0.00200

5.00000 4.00000 3.00000 2.00000 1.00000 0.00000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


Current (Amps)

0.00000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Current (Amps)

Conclusion
1. Effect of MR Damper placement on natural

freq. shift:
Occurs at every floor Larger shifts occur when MR Damper was placed on the 1st floor

2. Effect of MR Damper placement on : Values decreased as the MR Damper was moved up in the building
Controlled best on 1st Floor

3. Sensitive current range from 0-3 Amps

Future Work
Comparing the Sensitive Current Range to the Sensitive Voltage Range Run simulations for 10 DOF New project on Effects of MR Damper placement on bridge vibration response

Acknowledgements
MCEER REUJAT program Makola M. Abdullah, Ph.D. Claudia Wilson, M.S.C.E. Tokyo University
Dr. Yozo Fujino

References
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Northridge picture: FEMA for Kids http://www.app1.fema.gov/cgishl/kids/picture.cfm?picture=002730.gif&id=10 2004. Paso Robles picture: Central Coast Tourist http://www.centralcoasttourist.com/San_Luis_Obispo_CO/earthquake2003/Paso_Robl es_Earthquake.htm 2004. Izmit earthquake picture: Kandilli Observatory and Eartquake Research Institute, Boazii University http://www.eas.slu.edu/Earthquake_Center/TURKEY/ 1999. MR Fluid Damper: G.Yang."Large-Scale Magnetorheological Fluid Damper for Vibration Mitigation: Modeling, Testing and Control," Ph.D dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 2001. LORD Corporation, cable stayed bridge: http://www.lord.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=543 2004. Spencer Jr.,B.F., Dyke, S.J., Sain, M.K. & Carlson, J.D. (1997). Phenomenological model of a magnetorheological damper. J. of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 123(3):230-238. Chopra, A.K. (2001). Free Vibration Tests. Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ:54-57. Park, K.S., Koh, H.M. & Ok, S.Y. (2002). Active Control of Earthquake Excited Structures Using Fuzzy Supervisory Technique. Advances in Engineering Software 33. 761-768. Reference the Stiffness stuff Ribakov, Y. and Reinhorn, A. M. (2003). "Design of Amplified Structural Damping Using Optimal Considerations". ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 129 (10), 1422-1427.

Você também pode gostar