Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T01:42:54.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Family of Explicit Dissipative Algorithms for Pseudodynamic Testing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2011

S.- Y. Chang
S.- Y. Chang*
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, National Taipei University of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan 10608, R.O.C.
*
*Professor
Get access

Abstract

The α-function method is a family of second-order explicit methods with controlled numerical dissipation. Thus, it is very promising for the pseudodynamic testing of a system where high frequency responses are of no interest. This is because that favorable numerical dissipation can suppress the spurious growth of high frequency responses, which might arise from numerical and/or experimental errors during a test. Furthermore, the implementation of an explicit method for the pseudodynamic testing is much simpler than for an implicit method. The superiority of using this method in performing a pseudodynamic test was verified both analytically and experimentally. In fact, results of error propagation analysis reveal that the spurious growth of high frequency responses can be suppressed and less error propagation is identified when compared to the Newmark explicit method. Actual tests were conducted pseudodynamically to confirm all the analytical results. It is also illustrated that although the high frequency response is insignificant to the total response it may be significantly amplified and propagated and finally destroys the pseudodynamic test results.

Keywords

Numerical dissipationPseudodynamic testError propagation.
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Mechanics , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 145 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, R.O.C. 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Shing, P. B. and Mahin, S. A., “Experimental Error Propagation in Pseudodynamic Testing. UCB/EERC-83/12,” Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley (1983).Google Scholar
2.Shing, P. B. and Mahin, S. A., “Pseudodynamic Method for Seismic Performance Testing: Theory and Implementation, UCB/EERC-84/01,” Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley (1984).Google Scholar
3.Chang, S. Y., “Nonlinear Error Propagation Analysis for Explicit Pseudodynamic Algorithm,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 129(8), pp. 841–850 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Chang, S. Y., “Unconditional Stability for Explicit Pseudodynamic Testing,” Structural Engineering and Mechanics, An International Journal, 18(4), pp. 411–428 (2004).Google Scholar
5.Shing, P. B. and Mahin, S. A., “Cumulative Experimental Errors in Pseudodynamic Tests,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 15, pp. 409–424 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Shing, P. B. and Mahin, S. A., “Experimental Error Effects in Pseudodynamic Testing,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 116, pp. 805–821 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Chang, S. Y., “Improved Numerical Dissipation for Explicit Methods in Pseudodynamic Tests,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 26, pp. 917–929 (1997).Google Scholar
8.Shing, P. B. and Mahin, S. A., “Elimination of Spurious Higher-Mode Response in Pseudodynamic Tests,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 15, pp. 425–445 (1987a).Google Scholar
9.Takanashi, K., Udagawa, K., Seki, M., Okada, T. and Tanaka, H., “Nonlinear Earthquake Response Analysis of Structures by a Computer-Actuator on-Line System,” Bulletin of Earthquake Resistant Structure Research Center, 8, Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan (1975).Google Scholar
10.Newmark, N. M., “A Method of Computation for Structural Dynamics,” Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, pp. 67–94 (1959).Google Scholar
11.Chang, S. Y., “Application of the Momentum Equations of Motion to Pseudodynamic Testing,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series A, 359 (1786), pp. 1801–1827 (2001).Google Scholar
12.Chang, S. Y., “An Improved On-Line Dynamic Testing Method,” Engineering Structures, 24(5), pp. 587–596 (2002).Google Scholar
13.Chang, S. Y., “Explicit Pseudodynamic Algorithm with Unconditional Stability,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 128(9), pp. 935–947 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Chang, S. Y., “Error Propagation of HHT-α Method for Pseudodynamic Tests,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 9(2), pp. 223–246 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Chang, S. Y., “Error Propagation in Implicit Pseudodynamic Testing of Nonlinear Systems,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 131(12), pp. 1257–1269 (2005).Google Scholar
16.Clough, R. W. and Penzien, J., Dynamics of Structures. McGraw-Hill, New York (1967).Google Scholar
17.Chang, S. Y. and Mahin, S. A., “Two New Implicit Algorithms of Pseudodynamic Test Methods,” Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, 16(5), pp. 651–664 (1993).Google Scholar
18.Chang, S. Y., Tsai, K.C and Chen, K.C, “Improved Time Integration for Pseudodynamic Tests,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27. pp. 711–730 (1998).Google Scholar