Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Model-based framework for multi-axial real-time hybrid simulation testing

Abstract

Real-time hybrid simulation is an efficient and cost-effective dynamic testing technique for performance evaluation of structural systems subjected to earthquake loading with rate-dependent behavior. A loading assembly with multiple actuators is required to impose realistic boundary conditions on physical specimens. However, such a testing system is expected to exhibit significant dynamic coupling of the actuators and suffer from time lags that are associated with the dynamics of the servo-hydraulic system, as well as control-structure interaction (CSI). One approach to reducing experimental errors considers a multi-input, multi-output (MIMO) controller design, yielding accurate reference tracking and noise rejection. In this paper, a framework for multi-axial real-time hybrid simulation (maRTHS) testing is presented. The methodology employs a real-time feedback-feedforward controller for multiple actuators commanded in Cartesian coordinates. Kinematic transformations between actuator space and Cartesian space are derived for all six-degrees-offreedom of the moving platform. Then, a frequency domain identification technique is used to develop an accurate MIMO transfer function of the system. Further, a Cartesian-domain model-based feedforward-feedback controller is implemented for time lag compensation and to increase the robustness of the reference tracking for given model uncertainty. The framework is implemented using the 1/5th-scale Load and Boundary Condition Box (LBCB) located at the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign. To demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed methodology, a single-story frame subjected to earthquake loading is tested. One of the columns in the frame is represented physically in the laboratory as a cantilevered steel column. For realtime execution, the numerical substructure, kinematic transformations, and controllers are implemented on a digital signal processor. Results show excellent performance of the maRTHS framework when six-degrees-of-freedom are controlled at the interface between substructures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Asai T, Chang CM, Phillips BM and Spencer Jr BF (2013), “Real-time Hybrid Simulation of a Smart Outrigger Damping System for High-rise Buildings.” Engineering Structures, 57: 177–188.

  2. Blakeborough A, Williams MS, Darby AP and Williams DM (2001), “The Development of Real–time Substructure Testing,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 359(1786): 1869–1891.

  3. Bonnet PA, Lim CN, Williams MS, Blakeborough A, Neild SA, Stoten DP and Taylor CA (2007), “Real-time Hybrid Experiments with Newmark Integration, MCSmd Outer-loop Control and Multi-tasking Strategies,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 36(1): 119–141.

  4. Botelho RM and Christenson RE (2015), “Robust Stability and Performance Analysis for Multi-actuator Real-Time Hybrid Substructuring,” Dynamics of Coupled Structures, Volume 4, Springer, Cham, 1–7.

  5. Butterworth JA, Pao LY and Abramovitch DY (2008). “The Effect of Nonminimum-phase Zero Locations on the Performance of Feedforward Model-inverse Control Techniques in Discrete-time Systems,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 2696–2702.

  6. Carrion JE and Spencer Jr BF (2007), Model-based Strategies for Real-time Hybrid Testing. Newmark Structural Engineering Laboratory Report Series, Urbana, IL.

  7. Carrion JE, Spencer Jr BF and Phillips BM (2009), “Real-time Hybrid Simulation for Structural Control Performance Assessment,” Earthquake Engineering & Engineering Vibration, 8(4): 481–492.

  8. Castaneda N, Gao X and Dyke SJ (2015), “Computational Tool for Real-time Hybrid Simulation of Seismically Excited Steel Frame Structures.” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 29(3): 4014049.

  9. Chae Y, Ricles JM and Sause R (2013), “Modeling of a Large-scale Magneto-rheological Damper for Seismic Hazard Mitigation. Part II: Semi-active Mode,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 42(5): 669–685.

  10. Chae Y, Ricles JM and Sause R (2014). “Large-scale Real-time Hybrid Simulation of a Three-story Steel Frame Building with Magneto-rheological Dampers.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 139(7): 1215–1226.

  11. Chang CM, Frankie TM, Spencer Jr BF and Kuchma DA (2015), “Multiple Degrees of Freedom Positioning Correction for Hybrid Simulation.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 19(2): 277–296.

  12. Darby AP, Williams MS and Blakeborough A (2002), “Stability and Delay Compensation for Real-Time Substructure Testing,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 128(12): 1276–1284.

  13. Devasia S (2002), “Should Model-based Inverse Inputs be Used as Feedforward under Plant Uncertainty?” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 47(11): 1865–1871.

  14. Dong B, Sause R and Ricles JM (2015), “Accurate Real-time Hybrid Earthquake Simulations on Largescale MDOF Steel Structure with Nonlinear Viscous Dampers,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 44(12): 2035–2055.

  15. Elnashai AS, Spencer Jr BF, Kuchma DA, Yang G, Carrion JE, Gan Q and Kim SJ (2006), “The Multi-axial Fullscale Sub-structured Testing and Simulation (MUSTSIM) Facility at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,” Advances in Earthquake Engineering for Urban Risk Reduction, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 245–260.

  16. Frankie TM Abdelnaby AE, Silva P, Sanders D, Elnashai AS, Spencer Jr BF, Kuchma D and Chang CM (2013), “Hybrid Simulation of Curved Four-span Bridge: Comparison of Numerical and Hybrid Experimental/Analytical Results and Methods of Numerical Model Calibration.” Structures Congress 2013, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 721–732.

  17. Franklin GF, Powell JD and Emami-Naeini A (2015), Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems, Pearson.

  18. French CW, Schultz AE, Hajjar JF, Shield CK, Ernie D W, Dexter RJ, Du DH-C, Olson SA, Daugherty DJ and Wan CP (2004), “Multi-axial Subassemblage Testing (MAST) System: Description and Capabilities.” 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B. C., Canada.

  19. Friedman AJ, Dyke SJ, Phillips BM, Ahn R, Dong B, Chae Y, Castaneda N, Jiang Z, Zhang J, Cha Y, Ozdagli, AI, Spencer BF, Ricles JM, Christenson R, Agrawal A and Sause R (2015), “Large-scale Real-time Hybrid Simulation for Evaluation of Advanced Damping System Performance,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 141(6): 04014150

  20. Gao X, Castaneda N and Dyke SJ (2014), “Experimental Validation of a Generalized Procedure for MDOF Realtime Hybrid Simulation.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 140(4): 4013006.

  21. Hakuno M, Shidawara M and Hara T (1969), “Dynamic Destructive Test of a Cantilever Beam, Controlled by an Analog-computer,” Proceedings of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 1969(171): 1–9.

  22. Hashemi MJ, Tsang HH, Al-Ogaidi Y, Wilson JL, and Al-Mahaidi R (2017), “Collapse Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Building Columns through Multi-axis Hybrid Simulation,” ACI Structural Journal, 114(2): 437–449.

  23. Hessabi RM and Mercan O (2012), “Phase and Amplitude Error Indices for Error Quantification in Pseudodynamic Testing.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 41(10): 1347–1364.

  24. Horiuchi T, Inoue M, Konno T and Namita Y (1999), “Real-time Hybrid Experimental System with Actuator Delay Compensation and Its Application to a Piping System with Energy Absorber,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 28(10): 1121–1141.

  25. Jung RY, Shing PB, Stauffer E and Thoen B (2007), “Performance of a Real-time Pseudodynamic Test System Considering Nonlinear Structural Response,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 36(12): 1785–1809.

  26. Karavasilis TL, Ricles JM, Marullo T and Chen C (2009), HybridFEM, A Program for Nonlinear Dynamic Time History Analysis and Real-time Hybrid Simulation of Structures, ATLSS Engineering Research Center Report.

  27. Kim SB, Spencer Jr BF and Yun CB (2005), “Frequency Domain Identification of Multi-input, Multi-output Systems Considering Physical Relationships Between Measured Variables,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 131(5): 461–472.

  28. Kim SJ, Holub CJ and Elnashai AS (2011), “Experimental Investigation of the Behavior of RC Bridge Piers Subjected to Horizontal and Vertical Earthquake Motion,” Engineering Structures, 33(7): 2221–2235.

  29. Lamarche CP, Tremblay R, Léger P, Leclerc M and Bursi, OS (2010), “Comparison Between Real-time Dynamic Substructuring and Shake Table Testing Techniques for Nonlinear Seismic Applications,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 39(12): 1299–1320.

  30. Lee C and Salapaka SM (2009), “Robust Broadband Nanopositioning: Fundamental Trade-offs, Analysis, and Design in a Two-degree-of-freedom Control Framework,” Nanotechnology, IOP Publishing, 20(3): 35501.

  31. Lunenburg JJM, van de Wal MMJ, Bosgra OH and Oomen TAE (2009), “Inversion-Based Feedforward Design for Beyond Rigid Body Systems: A Literature Survey,” DCT Report 2009.105, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.

  32. Mahin Sa and Shing PB (1985), “Pseudodynamic Method for Seismic Testing,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 111(7): 1482–1503.

  33. Mahmoud HN, Elnashai AS, Spencer Jr BF, Kwon OS and Bennier DJ (2013), “Hybrid Simulation for Earthquake Response of Semirigid Partial-strength Steel Frames,” Journal of Structural Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, 139(7): 1134–1148.

  34. Mercan O, Ricles JM, Sause R and Marullo T (2009), “Kinematic Transformations for Planar Multi-directional Pseudodynamic Testing,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 38(9): 1093–1119.

  35. Merlet JP (2006), Parallel robots. Solid Mechanics and its Applications, Springer Science & Business Media.

  36. Murray JA and Sasani M (2016), “Near-collapse Response of Existing RC Building under Severe Pulse-type Ground Motion Using Hybrid Simulation,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 45(7): 1109–1127.

  37. Na O, Kim S and Kim S (2014), “Multi-directional Structural Dynamic Test using Optimized Real-time Hybrid Control System,” Experimental Techniques, 1–12.

  38. Nakashima M (2001), “Development, Potential, and Limitations of Real-time Online (Pseudo-dynamic) Testing,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 359(1786): 1851–1867.

  39. Nakashima M, Kato H and Takaoka E (1992). “Development of Real-time Pseudo Dynamic Testing,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 21(1), 79–92.

  40. Nakata N, Spencer Jr BF and Elnashai AS (2007), Multidimensional Mixed-mode Hybrid Simulation Control and Applications. Newmark Structural Engineering Laboratory Report Series.

  41. Nakata, N, Spencer Jr BF and Elnashai AS (2010), “Sensitivity-based External Calibration of Multiaxial Loading System,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 136(2): 189–198.

  42. Paccot F, Andreff N and Martinet P (2009), “A Review on the Dynamic Control of Parallel Kinematic Machines: Theory and Experiments,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, 28(3): 395–416.

  43. Phillips BM, Chae Y, Jiang Z, Spencer Jr BF, Ricles JM, Christenson R, Dyke SJ and Agrawal AK (2010), “Realtime Hybrid Simulation Benchmark Study with a Large-Scale MR Damper,” 5th World Conference on Structural Control and Monitoring, 12–14.

  44. Phillips BM and Spencer Jr BF (2013a), “Model-based Multiactuator Control for Real-time Hybrid Simulation,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 139(2): 219–228.

  45. Phillips BM and Spencer Jr BF (2013b), “Model-based Feedforward-feedback Actuator Control for Real-time Hybrid Simulation,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 139(7): 1205–1214.

  46. Reinhorn AM, Sivaselvan MV and Liang Z (2005), “Large Scale Real Time Dynamic Hybrid Testing Technique–shake Tables Substructure Testing.” The First International Conference on Advances in Experimental Structural Engineering, Y. Itoh and T. Aoki, eds., Nagoya, Japan.

  47. Reinhorn AM, Sivaselvan M, Weinreber S and Shao X (2004), “Real-time Dynamic Hybrid Testing of Structural Systems,” 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.

  48. Saouma V, Haussmann G, Kang D and Ghannoum W (2014), “Real-time Hybrid Simulation of a Nonductile Reinforced Concrete Frame,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 140(2): 1–12.

  49. Shao X and Reinhorn AM (2012), “Development of a Controller Platform for Force-based Real-time Hybrid Simulation,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Taylor & Francis Group, 16(2): 274–295.

  50. Shao X, Reinhorn AM and Sivaselvan MV (2011), “Real-time Hybrid Simulation Using Shake Tables and Dynamic Actuators,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 137(7): 748–760.

  51. Simeonov VK, Sivaselvan MV and Reinhorn AM. (2000), “Nonlinear Analysis of Structural Frame Systems by the State-space Approach.” Computer-aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, Blackwell Publishers, Inc., 15(2): 76–89.

  52. Stein G and Athans M (1987), “The LQG/LTR Procedure for Multivariable Feedback Control Design,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 32(2): 105–114.

  53. Takanashi K, Udagawa K, Seki M, Okada T and Tanaka H (1975), “Nonlinear Earthquake Response Analysis of Structures by a Computer-actuator On-line System.” Bulletin of Earthquake Resistant Structure Research Center, No. 8.

  54. Tomizuka M (1987), “Zero Phase Error Tracking Algorithm for Digital Control,” Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 109(1): 65–68.

  55. Wallace MI, Sieber J, Neild SA, Wagg DJ and Krauskopf B (2005a), “Stability Analysis of Real-time Dynamic Substructuring Using Delay Differential Equation Models,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 34(15): 1817–1832.

  56. Wallace MI, Wagg DJ and Neild SA (2005b), “An Adaptive Polynomial Based Forward Prediction Algorithm for Multi-actuator Real-time Dynamic Substructuring,” Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 461(2064): 3807–3826.

  57. Zou Q and Devasia S (1999), “Preview-based Stableinversion for Output Tracking of Linear Systems,” Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 121(4): 625.

Download references

Acknowledgment

The first author gratefully acknowledges the financial support for his Doctorate Studies from CONICYTChile through Becas Chile Scholarship No. 72140204, and Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria (Chile) through Faculty Development Scholarship No. 208-13.

Author information

Correspondence to Billie F. Spencer Jr..

Additional information

Supported by: CONICYT-Chile through Becas Chile Scholarship under Grant No. 72140204, and Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria (Chile) throu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fermandois, G.A., Spencer, B.F. Model-based framework for multi-axial real-time hybrid simulation testing. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 16, 671–691 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-017-0407-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • real-time hybrid simulation
  • multiple actuators
  • dynamic coupling
  • kinematic transformations
  • model-based compensation