Dynamic Response to Different Models of Adjacent Coupled Buildings

  • Augusto PippiEmail author
  • Pedro Bernardes Júnior
  • Suzana Avila
  • Marcus de Morais
  • Graciela Doz
Original Paper



In this work, the control technique effectiveness of structural coupling between adjacent buildings when using more realistic structural models is verified. It is possible, therefore, to use different damper configurations and different directions of earthquake action.


Generally, the models used to represent adjacent buildings are simplified by reducing the number of degrees of freedom, such as the shear frame model. The model simplifications often affect the response obtained, that is, the quality of the model itself that does not represent well the realistic response of the structure. In this sense, the modal response of a steel spatial frame was obtained experimentally, to perform a comparison with a numerical model to ascertain the results. Using this numerical model and an idealized adjacent model, also calibrated by the experimental results, a seismic numerical analysis was performed with the structures connected by passive control devices. Quantity, position and mechanical properties of the devices were obtained through a particle swarm optimization method, performed in simplified shear frame models from the experimental structure.


The results indicated the importance of choosing the structural model to obtain the structure response in terms of natural frequency, maximum displacements and story drift. Reductions of up to 60% in maximum displacements were found.


Discrepancies even in simple three-dimensional models compared to the shear frame model were verified. This study shows that even with earthquakes acting on the structure in different directions, a certain degree of reliability is possible by modifying the arrangement of the dampers.


Vibration control Passive control Structural coupling Seismic analysis 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the Brazilian agency CNPq (Council of National Scientific and Technological Development) and FAP-DF (Foundation of Research Support of Federal District) for financial support of this study.


  1. 1.
    Moon KS (2005) Dynamic interrelationship between technology and architecture in tall buildings. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ali MM, Moon KS (2007) Structural developments in tall buildings: current trends and future prospects. Archit Sci Rev 50:205–223. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Housner GW, Bergman LA, Caughey TK et al (1997) Structural control: past, present, and future. J Eng Mech 123:897–971. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Soong TT, Dargush GF (1997) Passive energy dissipation systems in structural engineering. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Song TT, Spencer BF Jr (2000) Active, semi-active and hybrid control of structures. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 33:387–402Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spencer BF Jr, Nagarajaiah S (2003) State of the art of structural control. J Struct Eng 129:845–856. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim HS, Kang JW (2014) Seismic response control of adjacent buildings using shared tuned mass damper. J Korean Assoc Spat Struct 4:75–84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klein RE, Cusano C, Stukel J (1972) Investigation of a method to stabilize wind induced oscillations in large structures. In: ASME winter annual meeting, Paper No 72Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Westermo BD (1989) The dynamics of interstructural connection to prevent pounding. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 8:687–699. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luco JE, Barros CP (1998) Optimal damping between two adjacent elastic structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 27:649–659.;2-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xu YL, He Q, Ko JM (1999) Dynamic response of damper-connected adjacent buildings under earthquake excitation. Eng Struct 21:135–148. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abdullah M, Hanif JH, Richardson A, Sobanjo J (2001) Use of a shared tuned mass damper (STMD) to reduce vibration and pounding in adjacent structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 30:1185–1201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Christenson RE, Spencer BF Jr, Johnson EA, Seto K (2006) Coupled building control considering the effects of building/connector configuration. J Struct Eng 132:853–863. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pérez LA, Avila S, Doz G (2014) Seismic response control of adjacent buildings connected by viscous and hybrid dampers. Dyn Civ Struct 4:433–440. Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Patel CC (2017) Seismic analysis of parallel structures coupled by lead extrusion dampers. Int J Adv Struct Eng 9:177–190. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ellis BR (1980) An assessment of the accuracy of predicting the fundamental natural frequencies of buildings and the implications concerning the dynamic analysis of structures. Proc Inst Civ Eng 69:763–776. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crawford R, Ward HS (1964) Determination of the natural periods of buildings. Bull Seismol Soc Am 54:1743–1756Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ward HS (1969) Dynamic characteristics of a multistorey concrete building. Proc Inst Civ Eng 43:553–572. Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schultz A (1992) Approximating lateral stiffness of stories in elastic frames. J Struct Eng 118:243–263. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim JY, Kim DY, Kim SD (2008) Evaluations of the dynamic properties for a residential tall building in Korea. In: Proc CTBUH 8th World CongGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kwok KCS, Tse KT, Campbell S (2001) Field measurements of dynamic properties of high-rise buildings. Adv Struct Eng 14:1107–1128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Snaebjornsson JT, Thorhallsson ER (2016) Dynamic characteristics of multi-story reinforced concrete buildings. In: Proc 22nd Czech Conc Day 235–240.
  23. 23.
    Acunzo G, Fiorini N, Mori F, Spina D (2018) Modal mass estimation from ambient vibrations measurement: a method for civil buildings. Mech Syst Signal Process 98:580–593. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin HP, Chang SC, Chu C (2016) Modal characteristics of planar multi-story frame structures. J Mech 32:501–514. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ezeokpube GC, Osadebe NN (2010) Effects of joint stiffening on the dynamic response of frames. Niger J Technol 29:5–12Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mbanusi EC, Obodoh DA (2016) Free vibration response of double-bay multi-storey building frames with stiffened joints. Int J Eng Comput Sci 5:16620–16638Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hurty WC, Rubinstein MF (1967) Dynamics of structures. Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Johnson D (2000) Advanced structural mechanics. D. Johnson and Thomas Telford Limited, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Clough RW, Penzien J (2003) Dynamics of structures. Computers & Structures, Inc., BerkeleyzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Klein RE, Healy MD (1987) Semi-active control of wind induced oscillations in structures. In: Proc. 2nd Int Conf Struct Control. pp 354–369.
  31. 31.
    Christenson RE, Spencer BF Jr, Johnson EA (2007) Semiactive connected control method for adjacent multidegree-of-freedom buildings. J Eng Mech 133:290–298. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Raheem SE (2014) Mitigation measures for earthquake induced pounding effects on seismic performance of adjacent buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 12:1705–1724. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Palacios-Quiñonero F, Rubió-Massegú J, Rossell JM, Karimi HR (2017) Integrated design of hybrid interstory-interbuilding multi-actuation schemes for vibration control of adjacent buildings under seismic excitations. Appl Sci 7:323–345. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pérez L, Avila S, Doz G (2017) Experimental study of the seismic response of coupled buildings models. Procedia Eng 199:1767–1772. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pérez Penã LA (2017) Resposta Dinâmica de Edificações Adjacentes Acopladas: Considerações sobre a Interação Solo–Estrutura. PhD Thesis, Universidade de Brasília, BrasilGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Roh H, Cimellaro GP, Garcia DL (2011) Seismic response of adjacent steel structures connected by passive device. J Adv Struct Eng 14:499–517. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huang X, Zhu HP (2013) Optimal arrangement of viscoelastic dampers for seismic control of adjacent shear-type structures. Zhejiang Univ Sci A 14:47–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bigdeli K, Hare W, Nutini J, Tesfamariam S (2016) Optimizing damper connectors for adjacent buildings. Optim Eng 17:47–75. MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jankowski R, Mahmoud S (2016) Linking of adjacent three-storey buildings for mitigation of structural pounding during earthquakes. Bull Earthq Eng 14:3075–3097. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Guenidi Z, Ounis A, Shrimali MK, Datta TK (2017) Control of adjacent buildings using shared tuned mass damper. Procedia Eng 199:1568–1573. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Song J, Tse KT, Hu G, Liang S, Zou L (2018) Dynamic properties of wind-excited linked tall buildings considering both intrabuilding and interbuilding structural couplings. J Struct Eng 144:1. Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pippi AS (2018) Resposta dinâmica para diferentes modelos de edificações adjacentes acopladas. Master’s Thesis, Universidade de Brasília, BrasilGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Barthi SD, Dumne SM, Shrimali MK (2010) Seismic response analysis of adjacent buildings connected with MR dampers. Eng Struct 32:2122–2133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Abdeddaim M, Ounis A, Djedoui N, Shrimali MK (2016) Pounding hazard mitigation between adjacent planar buildings using coupling strategy. J Civ Struct Health Monit 6:603–617. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Abdeddaim M, Ounis A, Shrimali MK, Datta TK (2017) Retrofitting of a weaker building by coupling it to an adjacent stronger building using MR dampers. Struct Eng Mech 2:197–208. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Asano M, Yamano Y, Yoshie K, Koike Y, Nakagawa K, Murata T (2003) Development of active-damping bridges and its application to triple high-rise buildings. JSME Int J 46:854–860. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bigdeli K (2012) Optimal placement and design of passive damper connectors for adjacent structures. Master’s Thesis, University of British Columbia, OkanaganGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Uz ME, Hadi MNS (2018) Earthquake resistant design of buildings. Taylor & Francis Group, EUA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on neural networks, pp 1942–1948.
  50. 50.
    Shabbir F (2015) Particle swarm optimization with sequential niche technique for dynamic finite element model updating. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 30:359–375. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hamdy M, Nguyen AT, Hensen JLM (2016) A performance comparison of multi objective optimization algorithms for solving nearly-zero-energy-building design problems. Energy Build 121:57–71. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Cui Y, Geng Z, Zhu Q, Han Y (2017) Multi-objective optimization methods and application in energy saving. Energy 125:681–704. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bernardes Jr PL (2018) Amortecedor tipo pêndulo invertido para controle de vibrações em edifícios altos. Master’s Thesis, Universidade de Brasília, BrasilGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bernardes Junior PL, Colheirinhas GB, Morais MVG, Avila SM (2017) Optimization of inverted pendulum damper parameters for vibration control in tall buildings. In: Proc XXXVIII Ibero-latin American congress on computational methods in engineering.
  55. 55.
    Pippi AS, Bernardes Jr PL, Avila SM, Morais MVG, Doz G (2018) Limitations of a dynamic shear-frame model based in a small-scale experimental steel structure. In: MATEC Web Con, vol 211, pp 14005Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Gupta V, Pajgade PS (2015) Torsional behavior of multistorey buildings with different structural irregularities—a review. Int J Res Eng Sci Technol 1:168–173Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Thaskeen R, Shajee S (2016) Torsional irregularity of multi-storey structures. Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 5:18861–18871. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Krishtel eMaging Solutions Private Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.PECC, Postgraduate Program in Structures and Civil ConstructionUniversity of Brasilia (UnB)BrasíliaBrazil
  2. 2.PPG, Postgraduate Program in Engineering Material IntegrityUniversity of Brasilia (UnB), Campus of Gama (FGA)BrasíliaBrazil

Personalised recommendations