Date post: | 17-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | bethanie-smith |
View: | 238 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 11
Smart Passive System based on MR DamperSmart Passive System based on MR Damperfor Benchmark Structural Control Problemfor Benchmark Structural Control Problemfor a Seismically Excited Highway Bridgefor a Seismically Excited Highway Bridge
4th World Conference on Structural Control and Monitoring
Kang-Min Choi, KAIST, KoreaHyung-Jo Jung, Sejong University, KoreaSang-Won Cho, The University of Western Ontario, CanadaIn-Won Lee, KAIST, Korea
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 22
CONTENTS CONTENTS
I.I. IntroductionIntroduction
II.II. Benchmark Highway Bridge StructureBenchmark Highway Bridge Structure
III.III. Smart Passive Control SystemSmart Passive Control System
IV.IV. Numerical Simulation ResultsNumerical Simulation Results
V.V. ConclusionsConclusions
Contents
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 33
- Viscous fluid out of magnetic field
- Solid-like in a magnetic field
- Proportional strength to magnitude of magnetism
Magnetorheological (MR) fluid
IntroductionIntroduction Semiactive MR Dampers
Introduction
Without Magnetic FieldsWithout Magnetic Fields With Magnetic FieldsWith Magnetic Fields
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 44
- Damping coefficient depending on electric current
- Requirements : External power for current supply
Sensors for feedback control
MR fluid damper
Introduction
Limitation for large-scale structuresLimitation for large-scale structures
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 55
Introduction
Cho, S.W., Jung, H.J., Lee, I.W. (2005) “Smart passive syste
m based on magnetorheological damper.”
Smart Materials and Structures, 14, 707-714.
- Change characteristics of MR damper
with electromagnetic induction (EMI) system
- Control without external power and control algorithm
- Verified by small-scaled shaking table experiment(Jung et al. 2005)
Smart Passive Control System
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 66
Introduction
Investigate the effectiveness of the Smart Passive
Control System for Benchmark Structural Control
Problem for a Seismically Excited Highway Bridge
Objective of this study:
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 77
91/5 highway bridge in southern California, USA
- Details of the bridge are presented in the definition paper (Agrawal et al. 2005)
Benchmark Highway Bridge StructureBenchmark Highway Bridge Structure
Structural Model
Benchmark Highway Bridge Structure
Isolated using four non-linear LRB on each abutment and one bearing on each bent column at the center
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 88
Benchmark Highway Bridge Structure
LRBMR damperEMI system
Smart Passive SystemSmart Passive System
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 99
Smart Passive Control System
Faster MR damper movement Higher EMF
EMI system is a source of power supply and has adaptability.
MR Damper
damper deformation
magnetic field
inducedcurrent
EMI system
Schematic of the Smart Passive System
Smart Passive Control SystemSmart Passive Control System
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1010
Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction
EMI System for MR Damper
Smart Passive Control System
dt
dABN
dtN BdΦ
: Electromotive force (EMF)
N : Number of turns of coil
: Magnetic flux
B : Magnetic field
A : Area of cross section
BΦ
(1)
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1111
Smart Passive Control System
Magnetic Field
Solenoid
Movementof Solenoid
Change of Area
x
w
dt
dxwBN
dt
dABN
wBNK emf
(2)
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1212
Numerical Simulation ResultsNumerical Simulation Results
MR damper
Numerical Simulation Results
Maximum force level: 1000 kN
Maximum voltage : 10 Volts
- Parameters of the MR damper are described in the sample control design of the benchmark definition paper (Agrawal et al. 2005)
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1313
Input earthquakes
: North Palm Springs (1986)
: TCU084 component of Chi-Chi earthquake, Taiwan (1999)
: El Centro component of Imperial Valley earthquake (1940)
: Rinaldi component of Northridge earthquake (1994)
: Bolu component of Duzce, Turkey (1999)
: Nishi-Akashi component of Kobe (1995)
Numerical Simulation Results
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1414
Evaluation criteria
Numerical Simulation Results
J1: Pk. base shear
J2: Pk. over. mom.
J3: Pk. mid. disp.
J4: Pk. mid. acc.
J5: Pk. bear. Def.
J6: Pk. ductility
Peak response quantities Normed response quantities
J9: Norm. base shear
J10: Norm. over. mom.
J11: Norm. mid. disp.
J12: Norm. mid. acc.
J13: Norm. bear. Def.
J14: Norm. ductility
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1515
Numerical Simulation Results
Controller itself
J15: Pk. control force
J16: Pk. Stroke
J17: Pk. instantaneous power
J18: Pk. total power
J19: Number of control devices
J20: Number of sensors
J21: Dim. of the discrete state vector
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1616
Optimal passive control
Numerical Simulation Results
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Optimal passive-on (5 V)
VVopt 5
Voltage (V)
Average of sum of evaluation criteria
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1717
Design of EMI system
Numerical Simulation Results
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
12.5 25 37.5 50 67.5 75 87.5 100
)sec/( mVK emf
Design of EMI system (50V·sec/m)
mVK emf sec/50
Average of sum of evaluation criteria
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1818
Numerical Simulation Results
- Number of turns of coil- Number of turns of coil - Magnitude of magnetic field
- Width of magnets
- Magnitude of magnetic field
- Width of magnets
TB 5.0
cmw 5
2000N
mVK emf sec/ 50
cmw 5
)( wBNK emf
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 1919
Numerical results
Numerical Simulation Results
0.00
0.60
1.20
1.80
2.40
J1 J2 J3 J4 J5 J6 J9 J10 J11 J12 J13 J14 J15 J16
Passive-off
Passive-on
Optimal passive
Lyapunov
Smart passive
- The effectiveness of the smart passive is clearly demonstrated.
Average of each evaluation criteria for all earthquakes
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 2020
Numerical Simulation Results
Voltage induced at one EMI system under El Centro earthquake
- The enough voltage can be generated by EMI system designed
according to structural response.
- The enough voltage can be generated by EMI system designed
according to structural response.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
2
4
6
8
10
Time (sec)
Vol
tage
(V
)
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 2121
Numerical Simulation Results
- The smart passive system has significant advantage that it requires
no power supply during controlling structures with similar function
to other control systems
- Thus, the smart passive system was able to reduce efficiently by itself
without any power supply and control algorithm according to
structural responses.
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 2222
- Smart passive control system is based on
electromagnetic induction (EMI) using MR damper.
- The EMI system takes a role of power supply and has adaptability.
- Smart passive control system is based on
electromagnetic induction (EMI) using MR damper.
- The EMI system takes a role of power supply and has adaptability.
ConclusionsConclusions
Conclusions
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 2323
Conclusions
Performance verification of benchmark problem
- Smart passive system is significantly better
than passive -off and -on cases.
- Smart passive system is comparable with passive optimal and semiactive Lyapunov control case.
: It is highly energy efficient.
- Smart passive system is significantly better
than passive -off and -on cases.
- Smart passive system is comparable with passive optimal and semiactive Lyapunov control case.
: It is highly energy efficient.
Smart passive system is the superior control device. Smart passive system is the superior control device.
Structural Dynamics & Vibration Control LabStructural Dynamics & Vibration Control Lab 2424
Thank YouThank You
for Your Attentionfor Your Attention