Abstract
This study deals with optimal control of the coupling active tuned mass damper (ATMD) system for two neighboring structures under earthquake excitations. It also investigates the seismic performances of the proposed system including the issues on actuator failure problems. The conventional control approach is to use two ATMDs independently where each ATMD is individually installed at each structure without any connection between two structures. Since this uncoupling configuration does not allow transferring its control force to the other structure, it cannot adapt to emergency situation in which one of the two actuators becomes inoperable due to the power cuts or outages. On the other hand, the proposed control approach is to use a coupling ATMD system where two ATMDs with one mass being shared are installed to interconnect two structures. Hence, the proposed coupling ATMD system can transmit the control force of the remaining actuator to another structure through the interconnection configuration so that it can adapt to the one-side actuator failure. In a numerical example, the conventional independent and newly proposed coupling systems have been optimally designed to have similar control performance in normal operational conditions, and their performances have been compared to each other under the malfunction conditions of one-side actuator. Their comparative results verified the outstanding adaptive performance of the proposed coupling ATMD system over the independent ATMD system. The independent ATMD system showed considerably degraded control performance compared to its own normal control performance, whereas the proposed system exhibits much improved control performance over the independent ATMD system by fully utilizing the other normally operating actuators through the coupling configuration.
Highlights
Introduction e seismic response control problem of two neighboring buildings has been successfully addressed by introducing a method of interconnecting two adjacent buildings with control devices such as linear passive [1,2,3], nonlinear passive [4,5,6], active [7,8,9], semiactive [10,11,12], and hybrid [13, 14] systems. is is due to the fact that there exists optimal control capacity in reducing the responses of the neighboring parallel structures interconnected with the control device [1, 4]
In [13], we dealt with the hybrid control system consisting of passive damper and tendon-type active device where the active devices are installed inside the buildings and the passive dampers are used as the link members
Given Qz CTy Cy, the optimal control gain Gu is mainly dependent upon the selection of two parameters r1T and r2T in Ru. us, these two parameters become the design variables of the two control systems such as independent ATMD system (IAS) and coupling ATMD system (CAS). e control force u in equation (5) is substituted into equation (3), and the seismic response can be simulated by z_ As − BuGuz + Bwx€g
Summary
The two systems are referred to as IAS (independent ATMD system) and CAS (coupling ATMD system), respectively. E element of the second column of bu is −1 for the DOF of the ATMD mass, +1 for the floor of the right building where the ATMD is installed, and other elements are 0 for the DOFs of the floors with no actuator; since the two buildings are interconnected with the coupling ATMD, the mass, damping coefficient, and stiffness matrices are defined as follows: MCAS. Given Qz CTy Cy, the optimal control gain Gu is mainly dependent upon the selection of two parameters r1T and r2T in Ru. us, these two parameters become the design variables of the two control systems such as IAS and CAS. e control force u in equation (5) is substituted into equation (3), and the seismic response can be simulated by z_ As − BuGuz + Bwx€g
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
