_—< PART I Single-Degree-of-Freedom SystemsEquations of Motion, Problem Statement, and Solution Methods PREVIEW In this opening chapter, the structural dynamics problem is formulated for simple strac- tures that can be idealized as a system with a lumped mass and a massless. supporting Structure. Linearly elastic structures as well as i tic structures subjected to applied dynamic force or earthquake-induced Then four methods for solving the differential equation governin the structure are reviewed briefly. The chapter ends with an « mic response of single-degree-of-freedom systems is 1.1 SIMPLE STRUCTURES imple structures. such as the pergola Lo and the elevated water tank of Fig, 1.1.2. We are imerested in under- standing the vibration of these structures when subjected to a lateral (or horizontal) force at the top or horizontal ground motion due to an carthquake, We call these structures simpie because they can be idealized as a concentrated or Jumped mass a supported by a massless structure with stiffness & in the lateral direction. Such an idealization is appropriate for this pergola with a heavy concrete roof supported by light-sicel-pipe columns, which can be assumed as massless, The concrete raat is very SUiff and the Mexibility of the structure in literal for horizontal) motion is provided ly by the columns, The idealized system is shown in Fig. 1.1.38 with a ‘Supporting the tributary length of the concrete rool, ‘This4 Equasons of Motion, Problem Staiement, and Solution Math Chap. he mass of the roof shown, and its lateral stiffness & is equal to the sum of the stifffresses of individual pipe columns. A similar idealization, shown in Fig. 1.1.3b, is appropriate for the tank when it is full of water. With sloshing of water not possible in a full tank, it is a lumped mass m supported by a relatively light tower that can be assumed as massless. The cantilever tower supporting the water tank provides lateral stiffness k to the structure. For the moment we will assume that the lateral motion of these structures is small in the sense that the supporting structures deform within their linear elastic limit, ‘We shall see later in this chapter that the differential equation governing the lateral displacement u(r) of these idealized structures without any external excitation—applied force or ground motion—is mii +ku= 0 (LL.D) us ii denotes the velocity of the mass and 4 its acceleration. The solution of this equation, presented in Chapter 2, will ‘show that if the mass of the idealized systems of Fij Jis displaced through some initial displacement (0), then released and permitted to vibrate freely, the sfructure will oscillate ‘of vibrate back and forth about its initial equilibrium position, Ax shown in Fig, 1.1.3e, the same maximum displacement occurs oscillation after oscillation; these oscillations con- tinue forever and these idealized systems would never come to rest. This is unrealistic,Figure 1.1.2 This reinforced-concrete tank on a 40-ft-tall siigle concrete cohen, located meas the Vabdivia Airport, was undamaged by the Chilean earthquakes ‘of May 1960, When the tank is fall of Mo ‘water, the structure can be analyzed as a ssingle-degree-of freedom system. (From K. V. Steinbrugge Collection. courtesy of the Eanhquake Enginoering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.) Suggests that if the roof of the pergola or the top of the water tank were Pulled laterally by a rope and the rope were suddenly cut, the structure would oscillate with ever-decreasing amplitude and eventually come to rest. Such experiments were performed on laboratory models of one-story frames. and measured records of their free vibration Rigid slab - — Ss Tributary ve ft > 0) length fon ~@—« s a | - Massless columns, Masses tower (a b) eo ; q Figure 1.1.3 (3) Idealized pergola, (h) idealized water tank: 4) initial displacement, iaNAAAHNVAUUUTUVHTTTTTUUUE 2 Bie = Wil J ’ 52 Bingle-Degroe-of-Freedom System ‘The process by which vibration steadily diminishes in amplitude is called In damping the kinetic energy and strain every of the vibrating system are dissipated by ‘Yariows mechanisms that we shall memion Laer. For the moment, we simply recognize ‘that an energy-dlissipating mechanism should be included in the structural idealization in order to incorporate the feature of decaying motion observed during free vibwation tests of a structure. ‘The most commonly used damping element is the viscous damper, in part because it is the simplest to deal with mathematically. In Chapters 2 and 3 we introduce other energy-dissipating mechanisms. 1.2 SINGLE-DEGREE-OF-FREEDOM SYSTEM The system considered is shown schematically in Fig, 1.2.1, It consists of a mass m con- centrated at the roof level, a massless frame that provides stiffness 1 the system, and a viscous damper (also known as a dashpot) that dissipates vibyratio ‘The beam and columns are assumed to be inextensible axis This system may be considered as an idealization of 4 one-story structure. Each Structural member (beam, column, wall, ete.) of the actual structure contributes 10 the inertial (mass), elastic (stif flexibility), and energy dissipation (damping) properties of the structure. In the idealized system, however, cach of these properties is concentrated in three separate, pure components ponent, stiffness compement, and damping component ‘The number of independent displ tions of all the n ‘of freedom (DOFs) for the stiffness peopertic al energy of the system. red to define the displaced posi- alled the number grees typically necessary to det « DOFs necessary fo ied ts y tse formulated with e the lateral stiff- ‘one ses relative one-story {ra tion. The st three DOFs—lateral displacement and tw ness of the frame (see Section 1.3). In 0 detern ast, the structure s concentrated at one gree-af freedom (SDP d with Mass i L211 Singhe-lnpree-cf-freedaen system: (ab applied farce it); (ts) eartbaqualke- ed ground enn,Equations of Mation, Problem Statement, and Solution Methods = Chap. 1 “Two types of dynamic excitation will be comsidered: (i pexternal force p(1) in the lat- ‘eral direction (Fig. 1.2.La), and (2) earthaake-induced ground motion p(t) (Fig. 1.2 1b), Tn both cases w denotes the relative displacement between the mass and the base of the ssiracture 1.3 FORCE-DISPLACEMENT RELATION Consider the system shown in Fig. 1.3.Ja with no dynamic excitation subjected to an externally applied static force fs along the DOF was shown. The internal force resist~ ing the displacement w is equal and opposite to the external force fs (Fig. 1.3.1b). I is desired to determine the relationship between the force fs and the relative displace- meat u associated with deformations inthe structure, This force-displacement relation would be linear at small deformations but would become nonlinear at larger deforma- Wioas (Fig. 1.3.le%, both nonlinear and linear relations are considered (Fig. 1.3.16 and d). To determine the relationship between fc and w is a standard problem in static stnac- tural analysis, and we assume that the reader is familiar with such analyses. Thus the presentation here is brief and limited to those aspects that are essential.Sec. 13 Force—Displacement Relation 1.3.1 Linearly Elastic Systems For a linear system the relationship between the Lateral force fs and resulting deformation w is linear, that is, fomku a3 ) ‘where & isthe lateral stiffness of the system: its units are fosce/length, Implicit in Eq, (1.3.1) is the assumption that the linear /,—w relationship determined for small deformations of ‘the structure is also valid for larger deformations, This lingar relationship implies that fi isa single-valued function of w (i.e., the loading and unloading curves are identical), Such aa system is said t be elastic: hence we use the term linearly elastic system to emphasiae both properties. Consider the frame of Fig. 1.3.20 with bay width £, height A, elastic modulus E, and second moment of the cross-section: of moment of inertia)’ about the axis of bending = fs and J. for the beam and columns, respectively; the columns are clamped (or fixed) at the base. The lateral stiffness of the frame can readily be determined for the two ‘extreme cases: If the beam is rigid [i.c., flexural rigidity EJ, = 00 (Fig. 1.3.2b)), sy ~ IE), El. 5 le ‘On the other hi aay Observe that for the two extr lateral stiffness of the frame is independent of £., the The lateral stiffness « can be calculated by star trix of the frame is forn beam lengt alistic stiffness of the beam ral analysis. The stiff vlaied with respect to three DOFs: the Ei, Fl,=0 tb) te Figure 14.2 ‘a this book the preferred term for Fix sevond momen of wre instead of the coenmonly used meme ey inertia, the lator will be reserved foe defining inertial efccis aes inied with sedationsl mation of rid bauies,Equations of Motion, Problem Statement, and Solution Methods = Chap 4 amd the rotations of the two beam-columa joints (Fig. 1.3.2a). By static condensation gp slimination of Uhe rotational DOFs, the lateral foree-displacement relation of Eq. (1.3.4) ig determined. Applying this procedure to a frame with £ = 2h and Ely = El, its latera) stiffness is obtained (see Example 1.1): 96 El, ta (134) The lateral stiffness of the frame can be computed similarly for any values of fy, and 4, using the stiffness coeflicients for a uniform flexural element presented in Appendix |, If shear deformations in clements are neglected, the result can be written in the form ers 35) where = 1/41, is the beam-ro-column stiffixess ratio (to be elaborated in Section 18.1.1), For p = 0,00, and }. Eg, (1.3.5) reduces to the results of Eqs. (1.3.3), (1.3. respectively, The lateral stiffness is plotted as a function of p in Fig. | a factor of 4 as p increases from zero to infinity. m4 EAGEL SIP) 1092 6407 tot Pig “a0! 1 e Figure 13.3 ‘Variation of lateral stiffness, £, with Iheam-to-columm stiffness ratio, p. Example 11 Calculate the lateral stiffness for the frame shown in Fig. Ella, assuming the elements to be axially rigid. .os eee metic’ locations and formation of plastic hinges to obtain the Sec. 1.3 Force-Displacoment Relation Ww ‘Solution This structure can be analycod by any'oF the standard methods, inchiding moment slistributins, Hore we use the d fof stiffness influcace eefficients ti solve the probiem, ‘The systern has the three DOFs shown in Fig. E1.1a. Tosobtain the first columa of the 353 stiffness maurix, we imparse unit si 1. with wey = yO. The fares 4) roquired 10 miaindain this deflected shewn in Fig, AIR, These are deterred using the stiffness coefficients for a ural clement presented in Appendix 1, The elements 4, in the second cobun are determined by impasing a) = | ‘with wy) = ary mm 0; see Fig. El te stiffisess matrix can be dete “Thais the 8 = 3 saith ‘writtca, Fos a frase w a [ss “ eye] (?] ; From the second and thi sms of Laveral by Thus This procedure to elimin 1.3.2 Inelastic Systems the force—detorw Determined by ¢ nent unde mms is shown fger amplitudes of deform nd the un differ from the initial loading branch; such a system is suid to be ithe force fs correspond ory of the deformat This implies that valued and depen asing (positive velocity) force can be expressed as fy = fot, a) (1.3.6) ‘The force-deformation relation for the idealized one-story frame (Fig, 1.3.14) deforming ‘into the inelastic range can be determined in one of two w ys. One approach is methods of nonlinear static structural analysis, For example, in analyzing a steel structure with an assumed stress—sirain Law, the analysis keeps track of the initiation and spreading ial boasting. use= @ Equations of Motion, Probiem Statement, and Solution Methods = Chap y Figure 134 Foece-deformation relation for a structural sizel component. (From HL. Krawinkiler, V. ¥, Bertera, and EF. Popov, “Inelastic Behavior of Stee! Beam-io- ‘Column Subassemblages.” Report No. FERC 71-7, University of California, Berkeley, Calif, 1971.) ‘curve (oa) shown in Fig. k3.1c. The unloading (a—c) and reloading (e-a) curves can be ‘computed similarly of can be defined from the initial loading curve using existing hypothe- ses. Another approach is to define the inelastic force—deformation relation as an idealized version of the experimental data, such as in Fig. 1.3.4. ‘We are interested in studying the dynamic response of inelastic systems because ‘many structures are designed with the expectation that they will undergo some cracking. yielding, and damage during intense ground shaking caused by earthquakes.amt friction between the structure itself and nonstructural clement: sch as jo _ It seems impossible wo identify or describe mathematically each of these rey ting mechanisms in un actual building. As a result, the damping in actual structures is usually represented ina highly ideal- ited manner, For many purposes the actual damping ina SDF structure can be idealized satisfactorily by a linear viscous damper or dashpot. ‘The damping coefficient is selected ‘so that the vibrational energy it dissipates is equivalent to the energy dissipated in all the damping mechanisms, combined, present in the actual structure. This idealization is there- fore called equivalent viscous damping, a concept developed further in Chapter Figure 1.4.la shows linear viscous damper subjected toa force fp along the DOF a, ‘The internal force in the damper is equal and opposite to the external force fy (Fig. 1.4.1), force fp is related vo the velocity d across the linear : fo = cit (4) where the constant c is the viscous damping ce it has units of force x time/length, Unlike the stiffness of a structure, the damping coefficient cannot be calculated from the dimensions of the structure and the sizes of the structural clements. This should not be surprising because, as we noted earlier, it is not feasible to identify all the mechanisms that dissipate vibrational energy of actual structures. Thus vibration experiments on actual structures provide the data for evaluating the damping coctiicient. These may be free vibration experiments that bead to data such as those shown 2. 1.1.4; the measured rate ‘at which motion decays in free vibration will provide a basis for evaluating the damping coefficient, as we shall see in Chapter 2. The damping property may also be determined * from forced vibration experimemts, a topic that we study in Chapter 3 ‘The equivalent viscous damper is intended to model the energy dissipation at defor- ‘mation amplitudes within the linear clastic limit structure, Over this range of deformations, the damping coefficient « deter ) esperiments may wary with the deformation amplitude. This nonlinea property is usually not consid- i j indirectly by selecting a value for Jeformation amplitude, usually ity of the darn the damping coefficient that is appropriate for the expec taken as the deformation associated with the linearly elastic limit of the structure, ; External force fn errr nn —— te fo Resisting fowweEquations of Motion, Problem Statement, and Solution Methods — Chap Additional energy is diss tions, Under cyclic Fores force—deformati: duc to inelastic behavior of the structure at ta deformations, this behavior implies formation sop (Fig. Late). The daumy defor deform a hyste g energy dissipated during ‘one deformation cycle betwee n limits ta, is given by the area within the hysteresis loop abeda (Fig. I.3.lc). ‘This energy dissipation is usually mot modeled by a viscous damper, especially if the excitation is earthquake gr 7. Instead, the w accurate appre ‘count for the energy dissipation thro recognize the inelastic relationship between re tion, such as shown in Figs. 1.3.1eand 1.3.4, in solving the ¢ 0 (Chapter 5). Such force-deformation relationsh from experiments on structures or structural components 1 slow F ate-dependent effects. of deform: note in Chi stic behavior is te ps are obtained excludi The usua by the sume viscous dumper ions within the linearly elastic ran; g any energy diss sing fi isto model this damping in the incl that was defined cartier for si 1.5 EQUATION OF MOTION: EXTERNAL FORCE Figure 1.5.14 shows th idealized one-story frame introduced earlier subjected to-an exter: nally applied dynamic force p(s) in the direction of the DOF a. This notation indicates that the force p varies with time /. The resulting displacement of the mass also varies with time; it is denoted by w(t). In Sections 1.5.1 and 1.5.2 we derive the differential equation governing the displacement wis) by two methods using (1) Newton's second law of motion, and (2) dynamic equilibrium. An altemative poim of view for the derivation is presented in Section 1.5.3 1.5.1 Using Newton's Second Law of Motion The forces acting on the mass at some instant of time are show include the external force p(t), the elastic (or inelastic) resisting force fs (Fig. 1.3.1). and the damping resisting force fy (F The external force is wken to be positive in the direction of the x-axis, and the displacement u(/), velocity irr), and acceleration itt) are also: positive in the direction of the x-axis. The elastic and damping forces are shown Fy ™ "1 -- pn pu th an gee gene a oe (ay th) te Figure 1.84 in Fig. 1.5.1b. These