Article

Journal of Vibration and Control

118

A method for bidirectional ! The Author(s) 2017

Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
active control of structures DOI: 10.1177/1077546317705556
journals.sagepub.com/home/jvc

Satyam Paul and Wen Yu

Abstract
Proportional-derivative (PD) and proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers are popular control algorithms in
industrial applications, especially in structural vibration control. In this paper, the designs of two dampers, namely the
horizontal actuator and torsional actuator, are combined for the lateral and torsional vibrations of the structure. The
standard PD and PID controllers are utilized for active vibration control. The sufficient conditions for asymptotic stability
of these controllers are validated by utilizing the Lyapunov stability theorem. An active vibration control system with two
floors equipped with a horizontal actuator and a torsional actuator is installed to carry out the experimental analysis. The
experimental results show that bidirectional active control has been achieved.

Keywords
PID control, bidirectional control, active vibration control, stability, building structure

control devices can be categorized as passive, active,

1. Introduction
The control of structures subjected to hazardous earth-
quake waves is an area of vast interest for researchers.
Yao (1972) proposed the idea of structural control that
has played a major role in the eld of structural engin-
eering. Bidirectional seismic waves induce translation
torsion coupled vibrations in buildings, which are more
severe in high buildings. Recent investigations show
that one of the prime factors of building collapse is
due to the bidirectional seismic ground motions (Lin
and Tsai, 2008). The asymmetric characteristic of the
building will induce simultaneous lateral and torsional
vibrations known as torsion coupling when subjected to
bidirectional seismic inputs (Lin et al., 2010). Goel
(1997) demonstrated that exible-side elements in
asymmetric-plan buildings having large eccentricities
in both directions may be more severely damaged due
to seismic forces.
There are two types of control for structural vibra-
tions: (1) using smart materials in the construction of
buildings (Housner et al., 1997); (2) applications of con-
trol devices like actuators (Balendra et al., 2001; Yan
and Zhou, 2006), dampers (Hitchcock et al., 1997), and
isolators (Chang, 1999; Hochrainer et al., 2000) to the
structures. The control devices play a signicant role in
preventing damage to the structure. The structural
hybrid, and semi-active (Spencer and Nagarajaiah,
2003). Soong and Spencer (2002) laid down the basic
concepts of passive and active structural control.
Castaldo and Ripani (2016) proposed a friction pendu-
lum isolator to analyze the eect of soil characteristics
in terms of frequency content related to sti, medium,
and soft soils based on the seismic performance of elas-
tic buildings. Castaldo and Tubaldi (2015) and
Castaldo et al. (2017) demonstrated the isolator
system to analyze elastic structural systems. Works
related to reliability of engineering structures using fric-
tion pendulum system have been mentioned in the
papers by Castaldo et al. (2015, 2016). The active
mass damper, which is widely implemented, utilizes
the mass without spring and dashpot (Chang and
Soong, 1980). Because translationtorsion coupled
vibrations exist with respect to bidirectional seismic
waves, in this paper a torsional actuator is utilized.
Departamento de Control Automatico, CINVESTAV-IPN (National
Polytechnic Institute), Mexico City, Mexico
Received: 17 October 2016; accepted: 25 March 2017
Corresponding author:
Wen Yu, Av. IPN 2508, Zacatenco, Mexico City, Mexico.
Email: yuw@ctrl.cinvestav.mx
2 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)
It is a disk-motor device which is incorporated in the
structure to minimize the torsional response of the
building.
A good control law gives good performance of anti-
vibration. Researchers have made several attempts to
incorporate high level controllers for active vibration
control of structures. The pole-placement H1 control
with target damping ratio was proposed by Park et al.
(2008). In the study by Du and Zhang (2008), a genetic
algorithm was applied to determine the feedback con-
trol. Many optimal control algorithms are applied for
the active vibration control of structures, e.g. ltered
linear quadratic control (Seto, 1996), linear quadratic
regulator (Alavinasab et al., 2006), and linear quadratic
Gaussian control (Ho and Ma, 2007). De Iuliis and
Castaldo (2012) proposed a novel semi-active control
strategy on the basis of an energetic strategy to minim-
ize the seismic demand related to a one-way asymmetric
system. All of the above controllers are model-based
which are complex and require the exact model of the
structure.
For real application, an eective controller should
be simple, robust, and fault tolerant. Proportional-
derivative (PD) and proportional-integral-derivative
(PID) control has been widely applied in industrial pro-
cesses. It may be the best control strategy because it
demonstrates its eectivity without knowledge of the
model and also due its simplicity, as well as being incor-
porated with distinct physical meanings. Yanik et al.
(2013) utilized magnetorheological (MR) dampers in
combination with the MR-MD scheme to control a
three-dimensional structure subjected to bidirectional
seismic excitations. The controller used the mechanism
of PD control. It calculates the essential forces required
to control the structural vibrations. In the study by
Guclu and Yazici (2008), PD and PID controllers
were used in numerical simulations to control a struc-
ture under a unidirectional earthquake. Nigdeli and
Boduroglu (2013) used active tendons to control tor-
sionally irregular and multistory structures under the
grip of near-fault ground motion excitation. In their
work, PID type controllers were used to generate the
control signals. Nigdeli (2014) presented various feed-
back control strategies in relation to active control in
earthquake utilizing PID-type controllers. A numerical
algorithm was taken into consideration for nding out
the parameters of PID control.
The problems of existing bidirectional PD/PID con-
trol strategies are that: (1) they do not consider the
lateraltorsional control mechanism, i.e. only a hori-
zontal actuator was used to mitigate the lateraltor-
sional vibration but a combination of horizontal
actuator and torsional actuator was not implemented;
(2) they do not analyze the stability of a closed-loop
system.
In this paper, standard PD and PID control are uti-
lized for active vibration control of the structure in
order to solve the above two problems. Initially the
analysis is based on the lateraltorsional vibration,
linear and nonlinear structure stiness, and the hyster-
esis of the structure model under the bidirectional wave.
Then the sucient conditions for asymptotic stability
of the PD/PID control are validated by utilizing the
Lyapunov stability theorem. These conditions are
quite convenient for the designer to choose the control-
ler gains straightaway. An active vibration control
system with two oors equipped with a horizontal actu-
ator and a torsional actuator is set up in order to carry
out the experimental analysis. The experimental results
using the PD and PID controller validate their eect-
iveness and stability.
2. Structural bidirectional modeling
and active control
The normal method of structure design considers the
seismic response arising from ground motion that acts
separately in two orthogonal directions. Generally, an
earthquake exhibits arbitrary directions which are rep-
resented as bidirectional ground movement, and it
could reduce the participation of the traverse frames
to the structure torsional and lateral stiness (see
Figure 1).
The simplest structure is a one-story building. For
one direction it can be modeled by (Alavinasab et al.,
2006)
mx cx_ sx fe 1
where m is the mass, c is the damping coecient, s is the
stiness, fe is an external force applied to the structure,
m
k,c
x axis
y axis
Figure 1. Bidirectional ground forces exerted on the building
structures.
Paul and Yu 3

where x x1    xn , y1    yn , 1    n T 2 <3n
Y
2 3
Sx 0 Sx
6 Sy 7
S4 0 Sy 5,
cm (lx , ly ) Sx Sy S
cf X
2 3
s1 s2 s2    0 0
m2 6 7
6 .. .. .. .. .. 7,  x, y, 
S 6 . . . . . 7
4 5
fy 0 0 . . . sn sn
m1 fx
si si sxi l2yi syi l2xi , i 1    n represents floor,
s is the stiffness
2 3
Figure 2. A two-floor building. sx1 ly1 sx2 ly2 sx2 ly2    0 0
6 7
6 .. .. .. .. .. 7
and x, x,_ and x are the displacement, velocity, and Sx 6 . . . . . 7 2 <3n
4 5
acceleration, respectively.
0 0 . . . sxn lyn sxn lyn
If the external force is in bidirectional, there are not 2 3
only vibrations in X and Y axes, but also torsion cou- sy1 lx1 sy2 lx2 sy2 lx2    0 0
pling. The torsional oscillation comes from the asym- 6 7
6 .. .. .. .. .. 7
metric characteristic of the building, i.e. the physical Sy 6 . . . . . 7 2 <3n
4 5
center (cf) is dierent from the mass center (cm); see
0 0 . . . syn lxn syn lxn
the two-oor building in Figure 2.
The motion of an n-oor structure can be expressed
as (Chopra, 2011; Saiful Islam et al., 2012; Nigdeli and The matrix S represents the overall stiness matrix
Boduroglu, 2013; Paul et al., 2015) whereas the matrix S represents the stiness matrix in
x, y, and  directions, respectively, by substituting .
Mx Cx_ fs fe 2 Also lxi and lyi represent the lengths of the structure in
n nn nn
where x 2 < , M2< , C2< , fs X- and Y-directions, respectively, i 1, 2. The overall
fs,1    fs,n 2 <n is the structure stiness force vector, stiness matrix S can be calculated by substituting Sx,
and fe 2 <n is the external force vector applied to the Sy, and S using S and also by substituting Sx and Sy .
structure.   The damping matrix C is proportional to mass
Also, M diag Mx , My , Jt 2 <3n3n , diag is a matrix M and stiness matrix S
diagonal matrix, Mx My diagm1    mn , m  i is the
mass of the ith oor, Jt diag m1 r21    mn r2n is the C aM bS
polar moment of inertia.
2 3 using the Rayleigh method, represented by the equa-
Mx 0   tion. Therefore the damping matrix C has the same
 T 6 7 ax
fe fx , fy 4 0 My 5 form as of the stiness matrix S, i.e.
ay
0 0 2 3
Cx 0 Cx
where ax are ay are the accelerations of the external 6 Cy 7
C4 0 Cy 5
force in X and Y directions. The displacements of the
Cx Cy C
structure,
 Twith respect to the bidirectional force
fe fx , fy , have three components x x, y, T ,
where  is the torsional angle.
The structure stiness force fs can be modeled as a
linear model or a nonlinear model. In the simple linear
2.1. Nonlinear stiffness
case When the structure is under the grip of very strong
force which deforms the structure beyond its limit of
fs Sx 3 linear elastic behavior, the structure stiness force fs
cannot be modeled as a linear model. The behavior of
4 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

the structure can be demonstrated using a BoucWen

model. The advantages incorporated in the BoucWen Y uy
model is that it can demonstrate inelastic behavior of
the structure where the strength/stiness degradation ux
can be easily incorporated. The relationship between i , fi
the forces and displacements is (Lee and Hong, 2010)

f,i i si xi 1  i si i 4
X
fy rt
u
where  x, y, i 1    n, and i are positive
numbers. fx

The rst part of equation (4) is the elastic stiness;

the second part is the inelastic stiness. The nonlinear
function i is given by
Figure 3. Bidirectional active control of structures.
1 h    1
i Ax_ i  i x_ i ai  li ai vi
i 5
   1 i the dampers, and  is the location matrix of the dam-
i x_ i ai  li vi ai signx_ i ai
pers, which is dened as

where A, i , i , i , n, and  are positive numbers. 1 if i j fl
i,j 7
i 1
i Ei controls the stiness degradation; 0 otherwise
vi 1
i Ei controls strength degradation. The nor-
malized dissipated hysteretic energy is where 8i, j 2 f1, . . . , , ng, fl  f1, . . . , , ng, fl are the
oors on which the dampers
 areinstalled. For a two-
Z t
x_ i ai 1 1,1 1,2
Ei 1  i dt i i i i oor building,  . If the damper is
0 i i 2,1 2,2
 
0 0
The property of passivity states that the system stor- placed on the second oor, fl f2g,  : If
0 1
age energy is always less than the energy supplied. the damper is placed on both rst and second
Ikhouanea et al. (2007) demonstrated that the Bouc 
1 0
Wen model is considered to be passive with respect to oor,fl f1, 2g,  .
0 1
its energy storage. The nonlinear dierential equation (5)
is continuous and also it is dependent on time. The prop- The closed-loop system represented by equation (6)
erty of local Lipschitz is also maintained. It can be vali- is the control equation that is utilized for control and
dated that equation (5) has a unique solution on a time stability analysis. In the forthcoming section, this equa-
interval 0, t0 . In the stability analysis involved in the tion is subdivided in to three components, namely X
latter part, this property will be utilized. component, Y component, and  component, and
then analysis is carried out.
If we illustrate the closed-loop system mentioned by
2.2. Horizontal actuator and torsional actuator equation (6) along all three directions, i.e. X, Y, and 
In order to minimize the vibrations caused by the bidir- directions, then
ectional external forces (fx and fy), a horizontal actu-
ator and a torsional actuator are installed on the Mx x Cx x_ fsx  fx ux  dux
structure, as shown in Figure 3. The horizontal actu-
ator is placed near the mass center of the building. The My y Cy y_ fsx  fy uy  duy 8
torsional actuator is placed on the physical center
 of the
T Jt  C _ fs u  du
building. The control forces are u ux , uy , u :
Considering the building model given by equation (2)
and the control, the closed-loop system is The damper force for the ith oor is dened as

Mx Cx_ fs  fe u  du 6 fi mdi di i 9

where u 2 <3n is the control signal which is fed to the where mdi is the mass of the damper, di is the acceler-
dampers, du is the damping and friction force vector of ation of the damper, and i is the acceleration of the
Paul and Yu 5
q
structure along the damper, i a2i,x a2i,y : fi should where  is the angular acceleration of the building and
be separated into X and Y directions as t is the angular acceleration of the torsional actuator.
Obviously, to decrease the torsional response, the dir-
ui,x fi cos mdi di cos ai,x ections of t and  should be dierent.
ui,y fi sin mdi di sin ai,y Consider the friction of the torsional actuator
ai,x ai,y
i frt c_t Fc tanh_t 13
cos sin
x i,x ai,x di cos where c is the torsional viscous friction coecient, Fc is
x i,y ai,y di sin the coulomb friction torque, and tanh is the hyperbolic
tangent depending on  and motor speed. The nal
where is the angle of the damper along the X-axis, x i,x torsion control is
and x i,y are the relative acceleration of the damper
along X and Y directions. So u Jt t 
 frt 14

ai,x ai,y
fi mdi di mdi di
cos sin
We dene the control force of T the damper along X
and Y directions as ud ux , uy
 T
udi mdi x i,x , x i,y
Consider the friction of the damper,
 
fri,x cx_ i,x mdi g tanh x_ i,x
 
fri,y cx_ i,y mdi g tanh x_ i,y
where c, , and  are the damping coecients of the
column friction (Roldan et al., 2014). The nal control
of the damper is given by
ux mdi x i,x  fri,x
uy mdi x i,y  fri,y
Using equations (8) and (10)
Mx x Cx x_ fsx  fx mdi x i,x  fri,x  dux
My y Cy y_ fsx  fy mdi x i,y  fri,y  duy
 T
The third element of the control u ux , uy , u is
the torsion force u. The torsion actuator is a rotating
disk equipped with a DC motor and is placed at the
physical center (see Figure 3). The control object is to
decrease the torsional response of the structures due to
the bidirectional movements, the mass center and the
physical center being dierent.
The inertia moment of the torsional actuator is
Jt mt r2t
where mt is the mass of the disc and rt is the radius of
the disc. The torque  generated by the disc is
u Jt t 
Using equations (8) and (14),
Jt  C _ fs Jt t 
 frt  du
The main role of the horizontal actuator is to reduce
the response of acceleration of building in X and Y
directions, whereas the main role of the TA is to min-
imize the torsional eect on the building. For the
closed-loop system represented by equation (6)
2   3
cx_ i,x mdi g tanh x_ i,x dux
6   7
du 6 7
4 cx_ i,y mdi g tanh x_ i,y duy 5 15
c_t Fc tanh_t du
The movements of the horizontal actuator and tor-
sional actuator are sliding in nature. The sliding mech-
10
anism of the actuators absorbs the energy from the
friction. The kinetic energy is converted into heat
energy in this phenomenon. So the coecients in the
friction models are assumed to be coulomb.
3. Bidirectional PD/PID control
3.1. Closed-loop system with PD control
As PD control is very simple and robust to uncertain-
ties, it is the most popular controller for mechanical
systems. It is the simplest controller for structural
vibration control systems. A PD controller is the best
choice. PD control has the following form when the
horizontal actuator control is coupled with the tor-
sional actuator control
11
u Kp e  Kd e_ 16
where e x  xd , x x, y, T , xd is desired reference
vector, for the vibration control, xd 0: Kp and Kd are
12 positive-denite constant matrices that correspond to
6 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

the proportional and derivative gains. The PD control In order to analyze the PID controller, equation (20)
of equation (16) for structures becomes is expressed by

u Kp x  Kd x_ 17 u Kp x  Kd x_  
Zt
The design of the controller is based on the suitable  Ki xd, 00
0
gain selection Kp and Kd in equation (16) such that the
closed-loop system is stable and good performances are
achieved. For the bidirectional structure control,
 the The closed-loop system of equation (6) with the PID
gains of one-oor PD are KP diag Kpx , Kpy , control (equation (19)) becomes
Kp 2 <6x6 , Kd diag Kdx , Kdy , Kd . The closed-loop
system of equation (6) with the PD control shown in Mx Cx_ Sx fe du Kpx x  Kdx x_  
equation (17) is 21
n_ Ki x

Mx Cx_ Sx fe du Kp x  Kd x

_ 18
In matrix form, the closed-loop system is
2 3
Here the terms Sx fe du can be regarded as 
uncertainties. In the following section, we assume it d6 7
4x5
satises the Lipschitz condition. dt
x_
It is well known that the regulation error becomes 2 3
smaller while increasing the derivative gain. The cost of Kix x
large derivative gain results in slow transient perform- 6 x_ 7
4 5
ance. Only when derivative gain tends to innity, the
regulation error converges to zero (Lewis et al., 2004).
However it would seem better to use a smaller deriva-
tive gain if the system contains high-frequency noise
signals.
3.2. Closed-loop system with PID control
In order to decrease the steady-state errors caused by
these uncertainties, the derivative gain Kd has to be
increased. The transient performances worsen; for
example, the response becomes slow. Adding an inte-
grator could solve the problem of big derivative gain.
PID controllers use a feedback strategy and have three
actions. P action is introduced for increasing the speed
of response, D action is introduced for damping pur-
poses, and I action is introduced for obtaining a desired
steady-state response (De Cock et al., 1997). The PID
control is given by
Z t
u Kp x  xd  Ki x  xd d  Kd x_  x_ d
0
where Kp, Ki, and Kd are positive denite and Ki is the
integration gain. For the structure control, xd x_ d 0,
equation (19) becomes
Z t
u Kp x  Ki xd  Kd x_
0
M1 Cx_ Sx fe du Kpx x Kdx x_ 
22
Unlike the H2 control (Saragih, 2010) and optimal
control (Alavinasab et al., 2006), PD control does not
need the model of the structure. The model discussed in
the above section will be used for stability analysis in
this paper. The theory analysis of bidirectional PD con-
trol has yet to appear in publications (Guclu and
Yazici, 2008).
4. Stability of the bidirectional PD/PID
control
4.1. PD control
As the combined forces generated by the horizontal
actuator and torsional actuator are fed to the structure,
these forces may stabilize or destabilize the structure. If
the control algorithm generates an unstable signal, the
horizontal actuator and torsional actuator will generate
forces that can make the structure unstable. This matter
19 becomes more complicated for nonlinear devices, as a
bounded input signal may also make nonlinear devices
generate an unstable output.
In general cases, the structures associated with open-
loop systems are asymptotically stable. This is true for
the case when there is no external force, fe 0: The
criteria are valid in the case of inelastic stiness because
20
of its bounded-input, bounded-output (BIBO) stability
and passivity properties. In the event of seismic
Paul and Yu 7

excitation, the ideal active control force required for
cancelling out the vibration completely is u fe . But
practically it is not possible because fe is not always
measurable and is much bigger than any control
device force. Therefore, the main intention of the
active control is to maintain the vibration as minimum
as possible by mitigating the relative movement
between the structural oors. Normally the structural
parameters are partly known and the structure model
might have embedded nonlinearity such as the hyster-
esis phenomenon.
It is quite favorable to represent the closed-loop
system of equation (18) with PD control as
 
Mx Cx_ f  Kp x Kd x_
where f fs fe du :
The following theorem gives the stability analysis of
the PD control given by equation (17). To simplify the
proof, we assume that nn Inn , which means that
each oor has a horizontal actuator and a torsional
actuator.
Therefore, we have three sets to represent X, Y, and
 directions
 
Mx x Cx x_  Cx _ fx Kpx x Kdx x _
 
My y Cy y_ Cy _ fy Kpy y Kdy y_
 
Jt  C _  Cx x_ Cy y_ f Kp  Kd 
_
26
We will analyze these one by one. Here we consider
 1. If all the individual structural equations in equa-
tion (26) with the PD controller are stable, the entire
structural is stable using a PD controller. For that pur-
pose we select a Lyapunov candidate as
23
1 1
Vx x_ T Mx x_ xT Kpx x 27
2 2
The rst term of equation (27) signies the kinetic
energy and the second term denotes elastic potential
energy. As Mx and Kpx are positive denite matrices,
so Vx  0. The derivative of equation (27) is

Theorem 1. Considering the structural system of equa- V_ x x_ T Mx x x_ T Kpx x

tion (6) controlled by the PD controller of equation  
x_ T Cx x_ Cx _  fx  Kpx x  Kdx x_ x_ T Kpx x
(17), the closed-loop system given by equation (18) is
stable, provided that the control gains are positive. The x_ T Cx Kdx x_ x_ T Cx _  x_ T fx
regulation errors converge to the following residual sets 28
2 
_ kx_ k2 _ 2 using the matrix inequality
_ hj
Dx x, Qx h  
fx 

f fx
Qx
 XT Y YT X  XT X YT 1 Y 29
2
_ y_ 2
Dy y_ , hj h_   fy 2  fy
Qy f
Qy
2 24 It is valid for any X, Y 2 <nm , and any
2
_ x,
D h, _ y_ j h_ kx_ k2Q y_ Q 0 5  T 2 <nn , so we can write the scalar variable
x_ T fx as
Q 

  f 2f  fx 2
f  fy 1 1
x_ T fx x_ T fx fTx x_  x_ T fx x_ fT 1
fx f 30
2 2
where  fx  fTx 1
f fx ,  fy  fTy 1  f  fT 1
f fy , f f ,
Cx f Cx 4 fx 4 0, Cy f Cy 4 fy 4 0, and C where fx is any positive denite matrix. Now x_ and _
1 1
f Cx f Cy 4 f 4 0: are related to each other and suppose

Proof. The closed-loop system of equation (23) can _  f x_ 31

also be represented as
where f is a positive denite matrix. As the X compo-
2 3 2 3 2 3
Mx x Cx x_  Cx _ fx nent of ground acceleration will give a torsion in the
6 M y 7 6 7 6 7 structure in a counterclockwise sense, we have assumed
4 y 5 4 Cy y_ Cy _
5 4 fy 5

the relation to be negative. Using equation (31) in equa-
Jt  C _  Cx x_ Cy y_ f tion (28)
82 3 2 39
< Kpx x
> Kdx x_ >=
6 K y 7 6 K y_ 7 V_ x x_ T Cx Kdx x_  Tf xC
_ x x_  x_ T fx
 4 py 5 4 dy 5 25
>
: >
;
Kp  Kd _ V_ x x_ T Cx f Cx Kdx x_  x_ T fx
8 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

2
We select fx as So kx_ k2Qx _ Qx is bounded via an invariant set argu-
ment. Also using equation (34) it can be shown
that kx_ k
Cx f Cx 4 fx 4 0 32 _ are also bounded. Let kx_ k2 _ 2 denotes the
and khk Qx Qx
largest tracking error during the Tk interval.
Then using
2
So equation (39) and bounded kx_ k2Qx _ Qx imply that
h 2 i
V_ x  x_ T Cxx f Cx Kdx  fx x_ fTx 1
fx fx 33 lim kx_ k2Qx _ Qx   fx 2f  fx 0
k!1
If we choose the gain Kdx > 0, and also since f is 2
positive denite matrix, Cxx 4 0, Cx 4 0 we have So kx_ k2Qx _ Qx will converge to  fx 2f  fx :
Therefore, the derivative of regulation error x and 
converges to the residual set
V_ x  x_ T Qx x_  fx  lm Qx kx_ k2 fTx 1
fx fx 34
n o
D_ x x, _ kx_ k2 _ 2   fx 2  fx
_ j 40
Qx Qx f
where Qx Cx f Cx Kdx  fx 4 0: V_ x is there-
fore an ISS-Lyapunov function. Using Theorem 1
from Sontag and Wang (1995), the boundedness of Also for kx_ k2Qx 4  fx , the total time is nite and
fTx 1  fx implies that the regulation error kx_ k is
fx fx  hence Vx 12 x_ T Mx x_ 12 xT Kpx x is bounded, hence 2 the
bounded regulation error x_ is bounded. Also for _ Qx 4
2f  fx , the total time is nite and hence assuming
kx_ k2Qx 4  fx_ , 8t 2 0, T 35 V 12 _T Jt _ 12 T Kp  it can be shown to be bounded
and so regulation error _ is also bounded, _  f x_ and
then we can conclude that V_ x 5 0 when kx_ k2Qx 4  fx_ . Jt Mx r2 : Again using the Lyapunov candidate
From equation (31) we have Vy 12 y_T My y_ 12 yT Kpy y, and using the similar sort of
    stability analysis we can infer that the derivative of
x_  1 _ jx_ j  1 _, jx_ jjx_ j  1  _ _ j, regulation error y and  converges to the residual set
f , f f  jx
2 n o
kx_ k2 2 _ _ y_ 2 _ 2   fy 2  fy
f D_ y y,
_ j Qy Qy f 41
36
where
Implementing equation (36) in equation (35), we
have _ f y_ 42
2
_ 4 2  fx , 8t 2 0,  37 is positive due to clockwise sense and
Qx f

Qy Cy f Cy Kdy  fy 4 0

The above condition also satises V_ x 5 0 when 2
_ 2 4 2  fx : Adding equations (35) and (37), we For y_ Qy 4  fy , the total time is nite and hence
Qx f
have Vy 12 y_T My y_ 12 yT Kpy y is bounded; hence
2 the regula-
tion error y_ is bounded. Also for _ Qy 4 2f  fy , the
2
kx_ k2Qx _ Qx 4  fx 2f  fx , 8t 2 0, T  38 total time is nite and hence assuming V
1 _T _ 1 T
2  J0  2  Kp  it can be shown to be bounded and
so regulation error _ is also bounded, _ f y_ and
Now we 2 show that the total time during which Jt My r2 : Using the Lyapunov candidate V
kx_ k2Qx _ Qx 4  fx 2f  fx is nite. Let Tk denotes 1 _T _ 1 T
2  J0  2  Kp , and using the similar sort of stability
2
the time interval during which kx_ k2Qx _ Qx 4  fx analysis, we can infer that the derivative of regulation
2 error x, y and  converges to the residual set
2f  fx : kx_ k2Qx _ Qx 4  fx 2f  fx will stay inside the
2
circle in case kx_ k2Qx _ Qx 4  fx 2f  fx stay outside n 2 2
the circle of radius  fx 2f  fx for nite times and then D_  ,
_ x, _ _ Q kx_ k2Q y_ Q
_ yj
P o
re-enter the circle. Also, 1 k1 Tk 5 1, since the total   f 2  fx 2  fy
2 f f 43
time kx_ k2Qx _ Qx 4  fx 2f  fx is nite and

lim Tk 0 39 where, x_  1 _ _ 1 ,

_ Q C 1
k!1 f , y f 2 f Cx
f Cy Kd  f 4 0: For _ Q 4  f , the total
1
Paul and Yu 9

time is nite and hence assuming V Most of the uncertainties are rst-order continuous
1 _T _ 1 T
2  J0  2  Kp  it can be shown to be bounded and functions. Since fs , fe and du are rst-order continuous
so regulation error _ is also bounded. For functions and satisfy Lipschitz condition, P2 can be
kx_ k2Q 4 2
f
 fx , the total time is nite and hence established. R
Vx 12 x_ T Mx x_ 12 xT Kpx x is bounded,


2 hence the regula- We calculate the lower bound of f dx as
tion error x_ is bounded. For
y_
Q 4 2  fy , the total
f
Z t Z t Z t Z t
time is nite and hence Vy 12 y_ T My y_ 12 yT Kpy y is
fdx fs dx fe dx du dx 48
bounded, hence the regulation error y_ is bounded. 0 0 0 0
Rt
Here 
4.2. PID control R t we dene the lower bound of 0 fs dx as fs ,
and 0 du dx as du : 
Now we analyze the stability of the bidirectional PID Compared with fs and du , fe is much bigger in the
control represented by equation
  (20). The equilibrium case
Rt of earthquake. We dene the lower bound of
of equation (22) is x , x, x_  x , 0, 0 : Since at equi-
librium point x 0 and x_ 0, the equilibrium is
f0, 0, 0: In order to move the equilibrium to origin,
we dene
0 f e dx as fe : Finally, the lower bound kfx is
kfx fs  fe  du 49
The following theorem gives the stability analysis of
x x  f0 44 PID controller.

The nal closed-loop equation becomes Theorem 2. Considering the structural system of equa-
  tion (6) controlled by the PID controller of equation
Mx x Cx f Cx x_ fx Kpx x  Kdx x_  x f0 (20), the closed-loop system of equations (45) and(46)
x Kix x is asymptotically  stable at Tthe equilibriums
 x 
_ T 0, y  f0, y, y_ 0, and   f0, ,
f0, x, x
45 _ T 0, provided that the PID gains satisfy

r 
In a similar manner 1 1   kcx f kcx
lm Kdx  lm Mx lm Kpx 1
  4 3 lM Mx
My y Cy f Cy y_ fy
 lm Cx  lm f Cx
Kpy y  Kdy y_  y f0 r
1 1   lm Kpx
y Kiy y lM Kix  lm Mx lm Kpx
  46 6 3 lM M x
J0  C 1 1 _
f Cx f Cy  f 3
lm Kpx  kf kcx f kcx 
2
Kp   Kd _   f0
r" #
 Ki    1 1     kcy f kcy
lm Kdy  lm My lm Kpy 1  
4 3 lM M y
In order to analyze the stability of equations (45)
and (46), we need the following properties.  lm Cy  lm f Cy
P1. The positive denite matrix M Mx My satis- r
1 1     lm Kpy
es the following condition lM Kiy  lm My lm Kpy  
6 3 lM My
0 5 lm M  kMk  lM M  m 3
lm Kpy  kf kcy f kcy 
0 5 ljt Jt  kJt k  lJt Jt  jt 2
r" #
where lm M and lM M are the minimum and max- 1 1   1 kc 1 1
f kcx f kcy
ljt Kd  lj Jt ljt Kp
imum eigenvalues of the matrix M, respectively and 4 3 t lJt Jt
m 4 0 is the upper bound, ljt Jt and lJt Jt are the
minimum and maximum eigenvalues of the matrix Jt,  ljt C  lj0 1 1
f Cx  lj0 f Cy
r
respectively and jt 4 0 is the upper bound. 1 1   lj Kp
P2. The term f is Lipschitz over x~ and y~ lJt Ki  lj Jt ljt Kp t
6 3 t lJt Jt
3
fx~  fy~  kf x~  y~ 47 ljt Kp  kf kc 1 1
f kcx f kcy 
2
10 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

Proof. Here the Lyapunov function is dened as Now we have

q
1
1 1  1 3 lm Mx lm Kpx 3
Vx x_ T Mx x_ xT Kpx x Tx K1 T
ix  x x  x  57
2 2 4 2 lM Mx lm K1
Zt 50 ix lm Kpx
 T  T
x Mx x_ x Kdx x fdx  kfx
2 4 0
The derivative of equation (50) is
where V0 0: In order to show that Vx  0, it is
separated into three parts, such that Vx Vx1 
V_ x x_ T Mx x x_ T Kpx x Tx K1 _ T  x xT  x
ix  x x
Vx2 Vx3 2
 
x_ T Mx x_ xT Mx x  x_ T Kdx x x_ T f
1  2 2
Vx1 xT Kpx x xT Kdx x 58
6 4
Zt 51
fdx  kfx  0, Kpx 4 0, Kdx 4 0 Using equation (29) we can write
0

1     
Vx2 xT Kpx x Tx K1 T
ix  x x  x  xT Cxx x_  kcx xT x x_ T x_
6 4 2 2
 f T  f   59
11 lm K1
ix 2 52 _
x Cx x  kc xT x x_ T x_
 lm Kpx kxk2 x 
2 2 x
23 4
 kxk x
where kCx k  kcx and kCx k  kcx : So x Kix ,
T K1 T T T
ix  becomes x , and x  becomes x Kix . Using
equation (59) we have
3
When  
lm K1
ix lm Kpx
h i
s    f
r !2 V_ x x_ T Cx f Cx Kdx  Mx  kcx  kcx x_
1 lm Kpx 3 h 2 2i 2
Vx2 kxk    0 53
 T    f
2 3 4lm Kpx x x Kpx  Kix  kcx  kc x
2 2 2 x
 T
 x fx  f0 x_ T f 0
and 2
60
1 1 
V3x xT Kpx x x_ T Mx_ xT Mx_ 54
6 2 2
Now using the Lipschitz condition of equation (47)
Because
 T 
x f0  fx   kf kxk2
2 2
XT AX  kXkkAXk  kXkkAkkXk  lM AkXk2 55  T  61
 x fx  f0  xT kf x
2 2
when
From equation (29)
q
1
1 3 lm Mx lm Kpx x_ T f 0  fT 01T f 0 62

2 lM Mx
0 1 Using equation (61)
1 2 2
1B l m K px k x k l m M x k x _ k h i
C
Vx3  @3 A 56    f
2 V_ x x_ T Cx f Cx Kdx  Mx  kcx  kcx x_
lM Mx kxkkx_ k h 2 2 2
T    f  i
r !2 x Kpx  Kix  kcxx  kc  kf x
1 lm Kpx p 2 2 2 x 2
kxk lm Mx kx_ k  0 x_ T f 0
2 3
63
Paul and Yu 11

becomes From the Lyapunov function

h
V_ x  x_ T lm Cx lm f Cx lm Kdx 1 1 
V _T J0 _ T Kp  K1 T
i     
i 2 2 4
   f Zt 70
 lM Mx  kcx  kcx x_  T _  T
2 2 2  J0   Kdy  fd  kf
h 64 2 4 0
T  
x lm Kpx  lM Kix  kcxx
2 2 Similarly we can prove V  0: Thus we can prove
 f  i V_   0, kk decreases if
 kc  kf x
2 x 2 r"
1 1   kc 1 1
f kcx f kcy
So V_ x  0, kxk minimizes if two conditions are met: ljt Kd  ljt Jt ljt Kp 1
4 3 lJt Jt
(1) lm Cx lm f Cx lm Kdx  2 lM Mx kcx #

f kcx ; (2) lm Kpx  2 lM Kix k cx 2 f kcx kf :
Now using equation (57) and lm Kix lM 1Kix , we have
1  ljt C  ljt 1 1
f Cx  ljt f Cy

r
r  1 1   lj Kp
1 1   kc f kcx lJt Ki  ljt Jt ljt Kp t
lm Kdx  lm Mx lm Kpx 1 x 6 3 lJt Jt
4 3 lM Mx
3
 lm Cx  lm f Cx lj0 Kp  kf kc 1 1
f kcx f kcy  71
2
65
The above theorems suggest that the closed-loop
system is asymptotically stable. But we cannot decide
again 2 lM Kix 23 lm Kpx : Hence on the global stability of the closed-loop system. This is
due to the fact that the hysteresis property is associated
r
1 1   lm Kpx with the stiness of the structure. The hysteresis output
lM Kix  lm Mx lm Kpx 66 depends on the deformation factor at all times. This
6 3 lM M x
deformation behaves according to the application or
Also removal of forces. So the deformation is not the same
before and after the application of forces and hence the
3 equilibrium position is also not static. Therefore the
lm Kpx  kf kcx f kcx  67
2 equilibrium positions before and after the earthquake
are not the same. The stable point becomes shifted after
By the Lyapunov function an earthquake event.
Let us consider a ball of radius & in three-dimensional
1 1  space. This three-dimensional space is represented by X
Vy y_T My y_ yT Kpy y Ty K1 T
iy  y y  y component, Y component, and component. The ball
2 2 4
Zt 68 center is at origin of the state space system where:
 
yT My y_ yT Kdy y fdy  kfy V_ x  0, V_ y  0, V_   0: The origin of the closed-loop
2 4 0
systems represented by equations (54), (55), and (56) is
stable equilibrium. Now we will prove for the asymp-
Similarly we can prove Vy  0 and thus, using sta- totic stability of the origin. For that we use La Salles
bility analysis criteria, we can prove V_ y  0 if theorem by dening the terms x , y , and  as follows
n  T o
r" #
  1 1     kcy f kcy x zx t xT , x_ T , xT 2 <3n : V_ x 0 ,
lm Kdy  lm My lm Kpy 1  
4 3 lM M y x 2 <n , x 0 2 <n , x_ 0 2 <n
h iT 
 lm Cy  lm f Cy T T T 3n _
r _
y zy t y , y , y 2 < : Vy 0 ,
1 1     lm Kpy 72
lM Kiy  lm My lm Kpy   y 2 <n , y 0 2 <n , y_ 0 2 <n
6 3 lM My n o
 T
3  z t T , _T , T 2 <3n : V_  0 ,
lm Kpy  kf kcy f kcy 
2
 2 <n ,  0 2 <n , _ 0 2 <n
69
12
Figure 4. Two-story structure with actuator arrangement.
Figure 5. Pictorial view of sensor and actuators.
Using equation (69) and substituting x 0 and
x_ 0, we have V_ x 0. Similar analysis with y 0
and y_ 0 and also  0 and _ 0 will yield V_ y 0
and V_  0. Similarly, these conditions hold good for
x_ 0, y_ 0, and _ 0 for all t  0. Therefore,
zx t, zy t, and z t belongs to x, y, and  ,
respectively. Also, imparting these conditions to equa-
Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)
and constructed. This structure was mounted on a
shake table to carry out the experimental analysis
along with the actuators (see Figure 4). The bidirec-
tional shake table is made of two Quanser one
degree-of-freedom shake table (I-40), which moves in
X and Y directions. The lengths of each oor in X and
Y directions are 54 cm and 32 cm, respectively. The
tions (54), (55), and (56) we have: _x 0, _y 0, and total height of the structure from the shake table is
_ 0. Also, x 0, y 0, and  0 for all t  0: So
zx t is the only initial condition in x, zy t is the only
initial condition in y, and z t is the only initial con-
dition in  . Therefore, the origin is asymptotically
stable according to La Salles theorem.
5. Experimental comparison results
In order to analyze and validate the bidirectional
PD/PID controllers, a two-oor structure was designed
120 cm; there are 60 cm between the rst oor and
the second oor.
The horizontal actuator and torsional actuator are
placed on the second oor of the structure. AMD is a
linear servo actuator (STB1108, Copley Controls
Corp). The total length of the actuator is 34 cm. The
torsional actuator is a heavy disk mounted on a DC
motor. The disc is made of aluminum with diameter
30 cm. The total moving mass of the horizontal actu-
ator and torsional actuator is designed to be 5% of the
Paul and Yu 13

total mass of the structure. The physical center is 16 cm The software environment is Simulink Quarc soft-
from X-direction and 27 cm from Y-direction. The ware. The control action and seismic forces are gener-
mass center is 15 cm from X-direction and 11 cm from ated in this software. The control actions between the
Y-direction. The torsional actuator is on the physical computer and the dampers are synchronized using RT-
center; the horizontal actuator is placed on the mass DAC/USB data acquisition board. The amplier is the
center. Figure 5 shows the sensors, horizontal actuator, Quanser VoltPAQ-X2. The sampling frequency of all
and torsional actuator. control actions is 1 kHz. The two-axis accelerometers
(XL403A) are mounted on each oor.
The relative acceleration ar of each oor should is

Table 1. Average vibration displacement by AMD TA. ar as  ag

PD control PID control No control
where as is the two-dimensional acceleration of the
X direction 0.2468 0.1654 0.7514 accelerometer and ag the acceleration of the shake
Y direction 0.0512 0.0366 0.1320 table. A numerical integrator is used to compute the
 direction 0.0623 0.0342 0.1174 velocity and displacement from the accelerometer
signal (Thenozhi and Yu, 2013, 2014).
Since there is no angular sensor, we use the angular
accelerations which are calculated by
Table 2. Average vibration displacement with PD control.      
C01 C02 _ C02 _ K01 K02
with AMD with TA No control 1   1  2  1
m1 r21 m1 r21 m1 r21
X direction 0.4715 0.5145 0.7514      
K02 Cx1 ly1 Cx2 ly2 Cx2 ly2
Y direction 0.0910 0.1012 0.1320  2 _
x 1  x_ 2
m1 r21 m1 r21 m1 r21
 direction 0.1042 0.0778 0.1174    
Kx1 ly1 Kx2 ly2 Kx2 ly2
x1  x2
m1 r21 m1 r21
   
Cy1 lx1 Cy2 lx2 Cy2 lx2
Table 3. Average vibration displacement with PID control.  y_ 1 y_2
m1 r21 m1 r21
   
with AMD with TA No control Ky1 lx1 Ky2 lx2 Ky2 lx2
 2
y1 y2
X direction 0.2588 0.3844 0.7514
m1 r1 m1 r21
       
Y direction 0.0520 0.0729 0.1320 2  C02 _1  C02 _2 K02 1  K02 2
 direction 0.042 0.0343 0.1174 m2 r22 m2 r22 m2 r22 m2 r22
Displacement X(cm) Displacement X(cm) Displacement X(cm)

2 No Control
AMD

2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
2 No Control
TA

2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
2 No Control
AMD+TA

2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 6. PD control of the second floor in the X direction.

14 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

Displacement Y(cm)
1 No Control
AMD
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
Displacement Y(cm)

1 No Control
TA
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
Displacement Y(cm)

1
No Control
AMD+TA
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 7. PD control of the second floor in the Y direction.

Ang. Disp Theta(rad) Ang. Disp Theta(rad) Ang. Disp Theta(rad)

1 No Control
AMD
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
1 No Control
TA
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
1 No Control
AMD+TA
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 8. PD control of the second floor in the y direction.

0.8
PD Control U=Uq+TAUu

0.6

0.4
Control Signal(V)

0.2

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 9. The PD control signal.

Paul and Yu 15

1.5
PID Control U=Uq+TAUu

1
Control Signal(V)

0.5

0.5

1.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 10. The PID control signal.

Displacement X(cm) Displacement X(cm) Displacement X(cm)

2 No Control
AMD
0

2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s) No Control
2
TA

2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
2 No Control
AMD+TA
0

2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 11. PID control of the second floor in the X direction.

        The theorems of this paper provide sucient condi-

Cx2 ly2 Cx2 ly2 Kx2 ly2 Kx2 ly2
x_ 1 x_ 2  x1 x2 tions for the minimal values of the proportional
m2 r22 m2 r22 m2 r22 m2 r22 and derivative gains as well as maximum values of the
       
Cy2 lx2 Cy2 lx2 Ky2 lx2 Ky2 lx2 integral gains. The PD/PID gains are chosen to
2
y_ 1  2
y_2  2
y1  y2
m2 r2 m 2 r2 m 2 r2 m2 r22 ensure performance as well as within the stable range
by the stability analysis. The following PD gains are
where 1 and 2 are the angular accelerations of the rst used
and the second oor.  
The structural parameters of the two-oor building lm Mx 10, lm kcx 20, lm kcx 8, lm My
are identied o-line and are used in the calculation of 10, lm kcy 22
the angular accelerations. The angular velocity and 73
angular displacement are calculated by the same lm kcy 6, ljt J0 5, lm kc 21, lm kcx
numerical integrators. 8, lm kcy 6, kf 700
16 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

Displacement Y(cm) Displacement Y(cm) Displacement Y(cm)

1 No Control
AMD
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
1 No Control
TA

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
1 No Control
AMD+TA
0

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 12. PID control of the second floor in the Y direction.

Ang. Disp Theta(rad) Ang. Disp Theta(rad) Ang. Disp Theta(rad)

1 No Control
AMD

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
1 No Control
TA

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)
1 No Control
AMD+TA

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time(s)

Figure 13. PID control of the second floor in the y direction.

From Theorem 2, we use the following PID gains The performance validation of these controllers is
implemented by the vibration control with respect to
lm Kpx  1092, lm Kdx  55, lM Kix  2324, the seismic execution on the prototype. The Northridge
lm Kpy  1092 earthquake signal is used to vibrate the shake table. In
  order to feed the signals to the shake table, the displace-
lm Kdy  55, lM Kiy  2324, lj0 Kp  1102,
ment of the Northridge earthquake is scaled from
lj0 Kd  85, lJ0 Ki  3563 16.92 cm to 1.50 cm, whereas the time is scaled from
Kpx 1800, Kpy 2000, Kp 2200, Kdx 160 39.98 s to 11.91 s. From the reference point on either
Kdy 220, Kd 300, Kix 2000, Kiy 2300, side, the maximum movement of the shake table is 2
cm. The control object is to minimize the relative dis-
Ki 3500
placement of each oor in both directions.
74 The comparisons of the bidirectional PD and PID
vibration controllers are carried out in three cases: (1)
Here the proportional and derivative gains are the without any active control (no control); (2) only
same as the PD gains in equation (73). with the torsional actuator (AMD); (3) with both the
Paul and Yu
horizontal actuator and the torsional actuator
(AMD TA). The vibration reductions are in three dir-
ections: X direction, Y direction, and  direction.
The average vibration displacement are calculated
by the mean squared error as
1X N
MSE xk2
N k1
where xk is the displacement of the oor and N is the
total data number. The comparison results of the aver-
age vibration displacement are shown in Tables 1 to 3.
Figures 6 to 8 show the actions of the PD controllers
to suppress the vibrations along the X direction, Y dir-
ection, and  direction, respectively. Figures 9 and 10
represent the control signals of PD control and PID
control, respectively. Tables 1 to 3 present the quanti-
tative analysis of vibration control with both the actu-
ators using PD/PID control along X direction,
Y direction, and  direction, respectively.
From Figures 6 to 8 as well as Tables 1 and 2, it can
be seen that the horizontal actuator performs well in
vibration control along the X direction and Y direction.
It has little damping ability along the  direction. For
the torsional actuator, it has perfect vibration damping
along the  direction, but fails to attenuate vibration
along the X direction and Y direction. When horizontal
actuator and torsional actuator act simultaneously, it is
observed that the results of vibration attenuation is
much better along the X direction, Y direction, and 
direction. The main reason is the active vibration con-
trol is achieved by the place of the actuator and the
torque direction of the actuator.
Figures 11 to 13 display the actions of the PID con-
trol to reduce the vibration along X direction, Y direc-
tion, and  direction, respectively. Tables 1 and show
that the PID controller performs much better than PD
controller in reducing vibrations along the X direction,
Y direction, and  direction. The behaviors of horizon-
tal actuator and torsional actuator with PID controller
have the similar forms as with PD controllers.
6. Conclusions
In this paper, a two-oor structure associated with one
horizontal actuator and one torsional actuator for
active vibration control is proposed. The theoretical
contribution is the stability analysis for the bidirec-
tional PD/PID control. The sucient conditions of sta-
bility are extracted in order to tune the PD/PID gains.
The minimum values of the proportional and derivative
gains and the maximum values of the integral gains are
specied using the Lyapunov stability analysis.
The experimental results show that both PD and
PID controllers work well with horizontal actuator
17
and torsional actuator. The PID controller is better
than the PD controller in minimizing the vibrations in
all three directions. The PID controller in combination
with both horizontal actuator and torsional actuator
are considered to be the most ecient in mitigation of
vibration along X direction, Y direction, and 
direction.
The PD control of the torsional actuator reduces the
torsional vibration attenuation, but it fails to attenuate
the vibrations along the X direction and Y direction.
However, the PID control of the torsional actuator can
reduce the vibration along the X direction and Y direc-
tion. The vibration attenuations along X direction and
Y direction are eectively achieved by the horizontal
actuator, but it fails to attenuate vibration along the 
direction with the PD controller. From the qualitative
analysis, the PID controller of the horizontal actuator
is slightly better for the mitigation of vibration along
the  direction. Further work on the torsional actuator
design is needed to minimize the vibrations along all
three directions.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no nancial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Alavinasab A, Moharrami H and Khajepour A (2006) Active
control of structures using energy-based LQR method.
Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering
21(8): 60518.
Balendra T, Wang CM and Yan N (2001) Control of wind-
excited towers by active tuned liquid column damper.
Engineering Structures 23(9): 10541067.
Castaldo P and Ripani M (2016) Optimal design of friction
pendulum system properties for isolated structures con-
sidering different soil conditions. Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering 90: 7487.
Castaldo P and Tubaldi E (2015) Influence of FPS-bearing
properties on the seismic performance of base-isolated
structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics 44(15): 28172836.
Castaldo P, Amendola G and Palazzo B (2017) Seismic fra-
gility and reliability of systems isolated by friction pendu-
lum device: seismic reliability-based design (SRBD).
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 46(3):
425446.
Castaldo P, Palazzo B and Della Vecchia P (2015) Seismic
reliability of base-isolated structures with friction pendu-
lum bearings. Engineering Structures 95: 8093.
18
Castaldo P, Palazzo B and Della Vecchia P (2016) Life cycle-
cost and seismic reliability analysis of 3D systems
equipped with FPS for different isolation degrees.
Engineering Structures 125: 349363.
Chang CC (1999) Mass dampers and their optimal designs for
building vibration control. Engineering Structures 21(5):
454463.
Chang JCH and Soong TT (1980) Structural control using
active tuned mass damper. Journal of Engineering
Mechanics Division 106(6): 10911098.
Chopra AK (2011) Dynamics of Structures: Theory and
Applications to Earthquake Engineering. 4th edn.
Prentice-Hall International Series.
De Cock K, De Moor B, Minten W, et al. (1997) A tutorial on
PID control. Report ESAT-SISTA/TR. Leuven, Belgium:
Department of Electrical Engineering, Katholieke
Universiteit Leuven.
De Iuliis M and Castaldo P (2012) An energy-based approach
to the seismic control of one-way asymmetrical structural
systems using semi-active devices. Ingegneria Sismica I
2012 (4): 3142.
Du H and Zhang N (2008) H1 control for buildings with time
delay in control via linear matrix inequalities and genetic
algorithms. Engineering Structures 30(1): 8192.
Goel RK (1997) Seismic response of asymmetric systems:
energy-based approach. Journal of Structural Engineering
123(11): 14441453.
Guclu R and Yazici H (2008) Vibration control of a structure
with ATMD against earthquake using fuzzy logic control-
lers. Journal of Sound and Vibration 318(12): 3649.
Hitchcock PA, Kwok KCS, Watkins RD, et al. (1997)
Characteristics of liquid column vibration absorbers
(LCVA). I. Engineering Structures 19(2): 126134.
Ho CC and Ma CK (2007) Active vibration control of struc-
tural systems by a combination of the linear quadratic
Gaussian and input estimation approaches. Journal of
Sound and Vibration 301(35): 429449.
Hochrainer MJ, Adam C and Ziegler F (2000) Application of
tuned liquid column dampers for passive structural con-
trol. In: 7th international congress on sound and vibration
(ICSV 7), Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, 47 July
2000, pp.31073114.
Housner GW, Bergman LA, Caughey TK, et al. (1997)
Structural control: present and future. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics 123(9): 897971.
Ikhouanea F, Manosaa V and Rodellara J (2007) Dynamic
properties of the hysteretic BoucWen model. Systems and
Control Letters 56(3): 197205.
Lee CS and Hong HP (2010) Statistics of inelastic responses
of hysteretic systems under bidirectional seismic excita-
tions. Engineering Structures 32(8): 20862074.
Lewis FL, Dawson DM and Abdallah CT (2004) Robot
Manipulator Control: Theory and Practice. 2nd edn.
Marcel Dekker Inc.
Lin CC, Chang C and Wang JF (2010) Active control of irregu-
lar buildings considering soilstructure interaction effects.
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 30(3): 98109.
Lin JL and Tsai KC (2008) Seismic analysis of two-way asym-
metric building systems under bi-directional seismic
Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)
ground motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural
Dynamics 37(2): 305328.
Nigdeli SM (2014) Effect of feedback on PID controlled
active structures under earthquake excitations.
Earthquakes and Structures 6(2): 217235.
Nigdeli SM and Boduroglu MH (2013) Active tendon control
of torsionally irregular structures under near-fault ground
motion excitation. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure
Engineering 28(9): 718736.
Park W, Park KS and Koh HM (2008) Active control of large
structures using a bilinear pole-shifting transform with H1
control method. Engineering Structures 30(11): 33363344.
Paul S, Yu W and Li X (2015) Recent advances in bidirec-
tional modeling and structural control. Shock and
Vibration Epub ahead of print 28 December 2015.
DOI: 10.1155/2016/6275307.
Roldan C, Campa FJ, Altuzarra O, et al. (2014) Automatic
identification of the inertia and friction of an electromech-
anical actuator. Mechanisms and Machine Science 17:
409416.
Saiful Islam ABM, Hussain RR, Jameel M, et al. (2012) Non-
linear time domain analysis of base isolated multi-storey
building under site specific bi-directional seismic loading.
Automation in Construction 22: 554566.
Saragih R (2010) Designing active vibration control with min-
imum order for flexible structures. In: IEEE international
conference on control and automation, Xiamen, China,
911 June 2010, pp.450453.
Seto K (1996) A structural control method of the vibration of
flexible buildings in response to large earthquake and
strong winds. In: Proceedings of the 35th IEEE conference
on decision and control, Vol. 1, 13 December 1996, pp.658
663. IEEE.
Sontag ED and Wang Y (1995) On characterizations of the
input-to-state stability property. Systems and Control
Letters 24(5): 351359.
Soong TT and Spencer BF Jr (2002) Supplemental energy
dissipation: state of the art and state of the practice.
Engineering Structures 24(3): 243259.
Spencer BF and Nagarajaiah S (2003) State of the art of
structural control. Journal of Structural Engineering
129(7): 845856.
Thenozhi S and Yu W (2013) Advances in modeling and
vibration control of building structures. Annual Reviews
in Control 37(2): 346364.
Thenozhi S and Yu W (2014) Stability analysis of active
vibration control of building structures using PD/PID
control. Engineering Structures 81(7): 208218.
Yan G and Zhou LL (2006) Integrated fuzzy logic and genetic
algorithms for multiobjective control of structures using
MR dampers. Journal of Sound and Vibration 296(12):
368382.
Yanik A, Pinelli JP and Gutierrez H (2013) Control of a
three-dimensional structure with magneto-rheological
dampers. In: 11th international conference on vibration
problems, Lisbon, Portugal, 912 September 2013.
Yao JTP (1972) Concept of structural control. Journal of the
Structural Division 98(7): 15671574.