advance dynamic testing techniques in structural engineering
TRANSCRIPT
1
Prof. Samir P Parmar (CE-14103277)
Research Scholar, Dept. of Civil Engineering, IIT Kanpur
Mail: [email protected]
ADVANCED DYNAMIC TESTING TECHNIQUES
IN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
2 Contents of presentation
Introduction of dynamic testing methods
Effective force testing
Pseudo dynamic testing
Real time hybrid dynamic testing
3 INTRODUCTION
Quasi-static loading test method (QST)
Shaking table testing method (STT)
Effective force method (EFT)
Pseudo-dynamic testing method (PDT)
Real time pseudo-dynamic testing method (RTPDT)
Real time dynamic hybrid testing method (RTDHT)
4 Quasi-static loading test method (QST)
A test specimen is subjected to slowly changing prescribed forces or deformations by means of hydraulic actuators
Inertial forces within the structures are not considered in this method.
Purpose is to observe the material behavior of structural elements, components, or junctions when they are subjected to cycles of loading and unloading.
Dynamic nature of earthquakes are not captured
5 Shaking table testing method (STT)
Test structures may be subjected to actual earthquake acceleration records to investigate dynamic effects
Inertial effects and structure assembly issues are well represented
The size of the structures are limited or scaled by the size and capacity of the shake table
6 Effective Force Method Pseudo-dynamic testing Real Time Dynamic Hybrid Testing (new development)
m5x5a
:
m4x4a
:
m3x3a
:
m2x2a
:
m1x1a
:
F i
F2
F1
F i
Other testing methods (STT)
7 Effective force testing method (EFT)
Effective Force Technique
Hybrid Testing & Computing Real-Time Pseudo-
Dynamic Hybrid Testing System
Real-Time “Dynamic” Hybrid Testing System
m5x5a
:
m4x4a
:
m3x3a
:
m2x2a
:
m1x1a
:
Applies the inertial ground motion generated forces through synchronized actuators - NEW
8 Effective force testing method (EFT)
applying dynamic forces to a test specimen that is anchored rigidly to an immobile ground; perform real-time earthquake simulation
these forces are proportional to the prescribed ground acceleration and the local structural masses.
based on a force control algorithm
m5x5a
:
m4x4a
:
m3x3a
:
m2x2a
:
m1x1a
:
9 Effective force testing method (EFT)
Effective Force Technique
Hybrid Testing & Computing Pseudo-Dynamic Hybrid
Testing System Real-Time “Dynamic”
Hybrid Testing System
F2
F1
Applies forces in substructure through actuators only – real time operation is a benefit but not a must
10 Pseudo-dynamic testing method (PSD)
applying slowly varying forces to a structural model
motions and deformations observed in the test specimens are used to infer the inertial forces that the model would have been exposed to during the actual earthquake
Substructure techniques
11 Real time pseudo-dynamic testing method (RTPDT)
Same as the PSD test except that it is conducted in the real time
Introduce problem in control, such as delay caused by numerical simulation and actuator
12
Effective Force Technique
Hybrid Testing & Computing Real-Time Pseudo-Dynamic
Hybrid Testing System Real-Time “Dynamic”
Hybrid Testing System
Applies forces in substructure through shake table and actuators – real time operation is a must
13Real-Time Seismic Hybrid Testing
S I M ULA T EDS T RUCT URE
FULL OR N EA RFULL S CA LE T ES T EDS UBS T RUCT URES HA KI N G T ABLES
(100 t on)
REA CT I ONW A LL
I N T ERFA CE FORCESA CT I VE FEEDBA CK FROMS I M ULA T ED S T RUCT UREA PPLI ED BY A CT UA T ORS
A GA I N S T REA CT I ON W ALL
Fig.1. Real-Tim e Hybrid Seism ic Testing System (Substructure Dynamic Testing)
Real time Hybrid seismic testing System (Substructure Dynamic Testing)
14 Real time dynamic hybrid testing method (RTDHT)
based on shaking table test combined with substructure techniques.
part of the structure (the physical model) is constructed and tested on the shaking table
The rest part of the structure (the numerical model) is numerically modeled in the compute
the earthquake effect on the superstructure was calculated as a interface force and applied to the substructure by the actuators (force control based)
15 Block Diagrams of Various Testing Methods
Excitation Specimen Response
16 Open Loop Test
> Quasi-Static Loading: Cyclic Loading
> Shaking Table: Ground Motion
Specimen Response
Quasit-static; Shaking Table Test
17 Open Loop Control (in concept)
Effective Force Test
Specimen ResponseExcitation
Mass Multiplier & Actuator Application
Effective Force
18 Closed Loop Test
Excitation Specimen Response
Solution of ModelsEquation of Motion
applied displacement
force measured
Pseudo-dynamic Test Method
19 Closed Loop TestRESPONSE ANALYSIS (Superstructure)
EXCITATIONSpecimen
(SUBSTRUCTURE)SUBSTRUCTURE
RESPONSE
SUPERSTRUCTURERESPONSE
STRUCTURERESPONSE
measuredforce (q)
dislacment command
CONTROL IMPLEMENTATION
Pseudo-dynamic Test with Substructure
20 Closed Loop Test
Real-time Hybrid Dynamic Test
Simulator/Controller>RESPONSE ANALYSIS (Superstructure)>DELAY COMPENSATION
EXCITATIONShake Table
Specimen(SUBSTRUCTURE)
SUBSTRUCTURERESPONSE
SUPERSTRUCTURERESPONSE
STRUCTURERESPONSE
measureddisplacement
force command
externalforce (p)
21Summary of dynamic test methods
Advantages Disadvantages
PDT
Size of the specimen can be large or very large
Inertial forces are not true forces and distorted by discrete parameter model, actuators and computers
Rate effects are neglected because of quasi-static loading
RTPDT
Size of the specimen can be large or very large
Inertial forces are not true forces and distorted by discrete parameter model, actuators and computers
Actuator time delay is introduced
STT True inertia forces in assembly Size of the specimen is limited
RTDHT True inertia forces on the specimen Specimen can be large or very large
Part of the inertia forces are simulated with errors (same as PDT)
Actuator time delay is introduced
22 Effective Force Testing
a Mx Cx Kx 0
Equation of motion
Subscript refers to motion relative to a fixed reference frame (absolute displacement)
xa g x x I xa g x x I
x tg eff Mx Cx Kx M P
23 Open Loop Control (in concept)
Effective Force Test
Specimen ResponseExcitation
Mass Multiplier & Actuator Application
Effective Force
24 Effective Force Test – Hardware Components
Servo-Hydraulic Actuators
Servo-Hydraulic Control System
Elastic Spring
Measurement Instrumentation (DAQ)
Computer Simulator Controller
25Effective Force Test – Hardware
Configuration
xPc SoftwareSCRAMNetDSP Read/
Write
DSPSignal
Generation
CONTROLLER
SCRAMNet
Test SoftwareControl
Servo-Controller
Servo-Hydraulic Control
STS
DAQ HardwareSignal
Conditioners
`
Structure
DAQ
`
xPC SoftwareSCRAMNetAnalog I/O
Analog I/OSCRAMNet to
Analog I/O Bridge
26 Effective Force Test -Dynamic force controlSeries elasticity and displacement feedback
Actuator with Displacement Control Structure
Command Signal
Compensator
Load Cell
Series Spring, KLC
Target Force
Measured Force
1 / KLC
27Effective Force Test -Dynamic force control
Series elasticity and displacement feedback
KLCGActuator
2
1ms cs k
Actuator inClosed-loop
Displacement Control
Series Spring
Structure
Compensation
1/KLCActuator
1G
C
StructureDisplacement
ActuatorDisplacement
DesiredForce
AchievedForce+
++
-
ActuatorDisplacement
Feedback
2
2
Achieved ForceCG
Desired Force 1 CGLC
ms cs kms cs k K
Ideal: C = 1/G
28 Effective Force Test -Dynamic force control
The advantages of using the series spring
the actuator can be well tuned and operated in displacement control
it provides for one more parameter than can be altered in the control design (the oil stiffness cannot be)
the term KLC(1-CG) in the transfer function indicates that the smaller the value of KLC the less sensitive is the transfer function to deviations of C from 1/G
29 Effective Force Test – Effect of Time Delay
The dynamic characteristics of hydraulic actuators inevitably include a response delay , which is equivalent to negative damping
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Frequency (Hz)
Mag
nitu
de
Experimental
Numerical
30 Effective Force Test – Predictive Control
KLCT = e-s
2
1ms cs k
Actuator Series Spring
Structure
1/KLC+
++
-
20 0 0 0
1
LCm s c s k K
+
+
T0-
+Model of Structure-
Spring SystemDelayModel
PredictiveDisplcement
CorrectiveDisplcement
Smith Predictor
31 Effective Force Test – Predictive Control
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Frequency (Hz)
Mag
nitu
de
Without compensationWith compensation
32 Effective Force Test – Software
•Simulink®•Real-time Workshop®5•XPC Target
33 Pseudo dynamic testing
Define a model of the structure system Define the desired excitation – usually base acceleration Calculate the expected response of structure – displacement Use an actuator to apply the desired displacement in the
structure Measure the resistance force in the structure (or estimate it from
measurements) Repeat the above steps – start from second
i i i i Md Cd R f
34 Pseudo-dynamic testingInput excitation fi (desired)
Impose di+1 on the structure
Measure ri+1
Set i - 1 = I
-1
i+1 i+1 i+1 i iΔt Δta = m+ c f -r -cv - ca2 2
i+1 i i i+1Δtv =v + a +a2
2
i+2 i+1 i+1 i+1Δtd =d +Δtv + a2
35
Excitation Specimen Response
Solution of ModelsEquation of Motion
applied displacement
force measured
Pseudo-dynamic Test Method
Pseudo dynamic testing
36 Pseudo-dynamic testing – Hardware components
Servo-Hydraulic Actuators
Servo-Hydraulic Control Systems
Measurement Instrumentation
On-line computer
37Pseudo-dynamic testing – Hardware
Configuration (Local)
Matlab SoftwareIntegration Algorithm
Simulation Interface
SCRAMNet
SIMULATOR
xPc SoftwareSCRAMNetDSP Read/
Write
DSPSignal
Generation
CONTROLLER
xPC SoftwareSCRAMNetAnalog I/O
Analog I/OSCRAMNet to
Analog I/O Bridge
DAQ
SCRAMNet
Test SoftwareControl
Servo-Controller
Servo-Hydraulic Control
Flex Test
SV
DAQ HardwareSignal
Conditioners
`` `
38 Pseudo dynamic testing
Discretized equation of motion of the structure at time intervals for ,
i i i i Md Cd R f it i t 1i toN
Equation solved in computer step by step, with Ri as the reaction
force measured from the specimen under test. Result is the displacement command of next step that will be applied to the specimen at each node of mass by actuators.
39 Pseudo dynamic test—integration algorithm
Both explicit and implicit time-stepping integration algorithm can be applied for solving equation of motion in Pseudo-dynamic tests.
Explicit methods compute the response of the structure at the end of current step based on the state of the structure at the beginning of the step.
Central difference method (Takanashi et al. 1975), Newmark- Beta method (1959), Modified Newmark’s method (1986), The γ-function pseudodynamic algorithm (Chang et al. 1997) Unconditionally stable explicit method(Chang, 2002)
(continued on next)
40Pseudo dynamic test—integration algorithm(continued) Implicit methods require knowledge of the structural response at the target
displacement in order to compute the response.
the displacement is dependent on other response parameters at the end of the step
iteration is required in the algorithm to satisfy both the imposed kinematic conditions and the equilibrium conditions at the end of the time step
Newmark – Alpha method (Hilber et al. 1977) Hybrid implicit algorithm (Thewalt and Mahin, 1987) Newton iteration (Shing, 1991)
,
41 Pseudo dynamic test—integration algorithm(continued) Implicit iteration algorithm provide improved stability
characteristics and permit the used of larger integration time steps
Iteration on experimental model is not practical since structure materials are path dependent
Explicit methods are easier to implement
Explicit integration methods are preferred for PSD simulation when stability limits are satisfied for the structural model under investigation
42 Pseudo dynamic test—integration algorithm(continued)Example: Modified Newmark’s Method
11121 )1()(
iiiiii tfRRddMdM
iiiitt dddd 2
2
1
)(2 11
iiiit dddd
111
1 )1(22
)2(2
iiiiii t
RRfMddd
Substitute into and solve for
43 Pseudo-dynamic testing – sub structuring principle
May fabricate only part of the structure whose hysteretic behavior is complex and apply the test to this part
Remaining part treated in the computer
44 Pseudo-dynamic testing – sub structuring principle
subscripts a and e denote the degrees of freedom within the analytical and experimental substructures.
a
e
a
e
a
e
aaT
ea
eaee
a
e
aaT
ea
eaee
ff
RR
dd
CCCC
dd
MMMM
aeaaeaaeaeeeeeeeeee dKdCdMfdKdCdM
dKdCdMfdKdCdM Teze
Teae
Teaaaaaaaaaaa
ee e e ea aD d f D d
Taa a a ea eD d f D d
Tested part. Calculate displacement command for next step. Interface force: Analytical part. Calculate interface state used in interface
force.
ea aD d
45 Pseudo-dynamic testing – Hardware Configuration (Internet)
NTCP ServerTCP/IP
NTCP PluginSCRAMNetSimulation Interface
SIMULATION INTERFACE
xPc SoftwareSCRAMNetDSP Read/
Write
DSPSignal
Generation
CONTROLLER
xPC SoftwareSCRAMNetAnalog I/O
Analog I/OSCRAMNet to
Analog I/O Bridge
DAQ
LAN/WAN
SCRAMNet
Test SoftwareControl
Servo-Controller
Servo-Hydraulic Control
Flex Test
SV
DAQ HardwareSignal
Conditioners
Matlab SoftwareTCP/IP
Integration Algorithm
SIMULATION COORDINATOR
Analysis Site
Remote Substructure Site
`
`` `
46 Pseudo-dynamic testing –Software
Response analysis – Mat lab Simulink
Controller implementation – Matlab Stateflow
47 Dynamic hybrid testing - I
Combined use of earthquake simulators, actuators and computational engines for simulation
Details later in the presentation
Physical Substructure
Computational Substructure
Ground/Shake Table
Shake Table
Structural Actuator
Computational Substructure
Physical Substructure
Response Feedback `
48Dynamic hybrid testing - II
Shake Table
Laminar Soil Box
Foundation
Well understood
Focus of interest
`
Structural Actuator
49Real-time dynamic hybrid testing - II
Acceleration input:Table introduces
inertia forces
Shake Table
Laminar Soil Box
Foundation
`
Structural Actuator
Response Feedback
Distributed mass
Has to operate in Force Control
50
Physical Substructure
Computational Substructure
Ground/Shake Table
Shake Table
Structural Actuator
Computational Substructure
Physical Substructure
Response Feedback `
Substructure Testing – Unified Approach
31 1 3 3 2
2First story contributionto shake table acceleration Third story contribution
to shake table acceleration
1 2
Shake table acceleration,
Actuator Force, 1
t
a
ku s u s x x
m
F s m
1 3 3 3 2
First story contribution Third story contributionto actuator force to actuator force
1u s k x x
51 Unified approach to substructure testing
If , then the control requires a shake table and an actuator to implement the substructure testing.
If , then the controller require just an actuator to implement the substructure testing as pseudo-dynamic testing:
Note: In pseudo-dynamic testing, inertia effects are computed. In dynamic hybrid testing ( ), the actuator should
operate in force control.
1 30 and 0s s
1 30 and 0s s
1 30 or 0s s
52 Hybrid Controller Implementation (UB-NEES)
Design done jointly between MTS and UB
Physical Substructur
e
Computational Substructure
Ground/Shake Table
Shake Table
Structural Actuator
Computational Substructure
MTS ActuatorController (STS)
MTS Hydraulic PowerController (HPC)
MTS Shake TableController (469D)
SC
RA
MN
ET
I
SCRAMNET II
Compensation ControllerxPC Target
Real-time Simulator
General PurposeData Acquisition
System
Network Simulator
Data Acquisition
Optional Optional
HYBRID CONTROLLERUB-NEES NODE
CONTROL OFLOADING SYSTEM
Physical Substructur
e
Hybrid Testing
• Flexible architecture using parallel processing
53 Implementation of RTDHT
Structure
Actuator
ShakeTable
54 Substructure response
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.014
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Hybrid test
Shake table
Second (simulated)floor
Structure
Actuator
ShakeTable
First (physical)floor
55 Shake Table at University of California, USA
Schematic representation of NEES/UCSD Shake Table.
Reference:
56 Multishaker facility at SUNY-Buffalo
57 Fast hybrid test (FHT) system of University of Colorado-Boulder
58 IIT Kanpur, Pseudo Static Laboratory
59 Fatigue Testing Facility of IIT Kanpur, India
60 Fatigue Testing Facility of IIT Kanpur, India
Actuator (Mass Shaker)
61 Mass Shaker and other instruments
Special Thanks to Dr. Samit Ray Chowdhury,IIT Kanpur
62