Effectiveness of a 2D TLD and Its Numerical Modeling

M. J. Tait, A.M.ASCE1; N. Isyumov, F.ASCE2; and A. A. El Damatty3

Abstract: The tuned liquid damper 共TLD兲 is increasingly being used as an economical and effective dynamic vibration absorber to
mitigate the dynamic response of structures. The ability to design a TLD to operate in two directions simultaneously is particularly
attractive. In this paper the results of bidirectional 共2D兲 structure-TLD tests are reported on. These include the free-surface motion, the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

resulting base shear forces, and the work done by bidirectional tuned liquid dampers 共2D TLD兲 attached to simple structures and response
displacements and accelerations of 2D structure-TLD systems. The importance of this experimental study is that it examines 2D structure-
TLD behavior over a range of excitation amplitude values covering the practical range of serviceability accelerations for buildings
subjected to wind loads. Experimental results are subsequently used to verify the applicability of a unidirectional structure-TLD numerical
model to 2D structure-TLD analysis. Findings indicate that the structure-TLD model is capable of describing the structure-TLD response
within the range of system response amplitudes experimentally tested.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-9445共2007兲133:2共251兲
CE Database subject headings: Structural control; Damping; Passive control; Vibration; Numerical models.

Introduction the motions of a structure with different fundamental frequencies

The dynamic response characteristics of a unidirectional tuned
liquid damper 共1D TLD兲 and its application as a dynamic vibra-
tion absorber 共DVA兲 for controlling the resonant response of
structures have been studied extensively. Numerical models have
been developed to simulate both the fluid sloshing motion and the
resulting forces that develop as a result of the fluid motion for a
1D TLD 共Kareem and Sun 1987; Welt and Modi 1992; Sun et al.
1989, 1995; Kaneko and Ishikawa 1999兲. However, utilizing TLD
devices to suppress bidirectional resonant structural motions, such
as two fundamental sway modes of a structure simultaneously,
has received less attention. Circular tanks have been used to miti-
gate resonant motions in axis-symmetric structures 共Tamura et al.
1995兲. A bidirectional tuned liquid column damper with period
adjustment 共LCD-PA兲 has been experimentally investigated and
installed in a structure 共Shimizu and Teramura 1994兲. However,
little information exists on simple passive rectangular bidirec-
tional tuned liquid dampers 共2D TLD兲 with damping screens and
their performance as vibration absorbers. Soong and Dargush
共1997兲 indicated that rectangular tanks may be used to mitigate
1
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, McMaster Univ.,
1280 Main St. W, Hamilton ON, Canada L8S 4L7 共corresponding
author兲. E-mail: taitm@mcmaster.ca
2
Professor Emeritus and Research Director, The Alan G. Davenport
Wind Engineering Group, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Univ. of Western Ontario, London ON, Canada N6A 5B8.
3
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Univ. of Western Ontario, London ON, Canada N6A 5B8.
Note. Associate Editor: Satish Nagarajaiah. Discussion open until July
1, 2007. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. To
extend the closing date by one month, a written request must be filed with
the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted
for review and possible publication on December 1, 2004; approved on
June 19, 2006. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineer-
ing, Vol. 133, No. 2, February 1, 2007. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/2007/
2-251–263/$25.00.
in two major directions. However, they stated that caution must
be taken as theory was developed for TLDs subjected to unidirec-
tional excitation. To the best of the writers’ knowledge, the over-
all performance of TLDs as bidirectional dynamic vibration
absorbers has not been investigated to date. Furthermore, current
numerical models used to simulate the response of TLDs under
1D excitation have not been validated for simulating the response
of TLDs subjected to 2D excitation.
This paper describes results from experimental tests conducted
using a two degree of freedom test apparatus designed to model
the behavior of a 2D structure-TLD system excited by random
forces. Forced vibration tests using band-limited white noise
excitation were conducted to examine the dynamic response be-
havior of a 2D structure-TLD system. Two different 2D structure-
TLD systems were modeled in order to study the response of both
a square and a rectangular 2D TLD. Measured response param-
eters were analyzed to determine if the response of a 2D
structure-TLD system can be determined using superpositioning
over a range of excitation amplitude values covering the practical
range of serviceability accelerations for buildings subjected to
wind loads. Wave breaking was not observed during testing and
its affect on 2D TLD response behavior is not considered in this
study. The performance of a 2D TLD undergoing bidirectional
excitation over a range of amplitudes is presented in terms of
efficiency. Finally, simulations from a nonlinear numerical model
of a 1D structure-TLD system are compared to measured results
from the 2D structure-TLD system.
Dynamic Vibration Absorber/Tuned Liquid
Damper Theory
The following parameters are commonly used to describe a dy-
namic vibration absorber and determine its efficiency.

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 251

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

 Mass Ratio equating the variance of the originally undamped structure to that
of the structure-TLD system. For a lightly damped system excited
␾ mTLD
2
␮= 共1兲 by a broad band random force the effective damping can be esti-
M*

冋冕 册
mated by
⬁ −1
where M *⫽generalized mass of the primary structure correspond- ␲
␨eff = f s 兩H共f兲兩2df − ␨s 共6兲
ing to the vibration mode being suppressed; and ␾⫽normalized 4 0
modal deflection value of the structure at the TLD location. The
absorber mass, mTLD, for a TLD with damping screens can be where 兩H共f兲兩⫽frequency response function of the structure with
approximated using potential flow theory 共i.e., mTLD ⬇ m1兲, where an attached vibration absorber; and ␨s⫽the damping ratio of the
m1 is calculated using linear potential flow theory as 共Graham and primary structure.
Rodriguez 1952兲 Optimal tuning ratio, ⍀opt, and inherent damping ratio, ␨opt,

冋 册
values expressed in terms of the mass ratio ␮, have been deter-
␲h
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

8 tanh mined for a linear vibration absorber attached to an undamped

L structure 共Warburton 1982兲. Due to the nonlinear nature of a
m1 = mw 共2兲
␲ 3h TLD, ⍀ and ␨TLD vary with structural response amplitude, there-
L fore, ⍀opt and ␨TLD-opt can only be achieved at a single specified
target level of structural-TLD system response. As a result, at any
where mw⫽total mass of the contained water; h⫽quiescent water other structure-TLD response amplitude the performance of a
depth; and L⫽tank length in the direction of the fundamental TLD is expected to decrease. For this experimental study ⍀ and
sloshing mode of interest. ␨TLD were estimated to have near-optimal values of 0.98 and
6.5%, respectively, at a system peak average hourly response ac-
Tuning Ratio celeration of 20 g⫻10−3. This corresponds to the maximum rec-
f TLD ommended acceleration of an office building based on a 10 year
⍀= 共3兲 return period.
fs
Warburton 共1982兲 has calculated the optimal effective damp-
where f TLD⫽natural frequency of the TLD; and f s⫽natural fre- ing of a linear DVA, ␨eff-opt, attached to an undamped structure

冑
quency of the generalized structure having generalized mass, excited by a random white noise force to be
stiffness, and damping values of M *, K*, and C*, respectively. 1 ␮ + ␮2
The fundamental sloshing frequency of a TLD with damping ␨eff-opt = 共7兲
4 3␮
screens designed to mitigate wind-induced motions to acceptable 1+
levels has been found to be weakly nonlinear for L / h values 4
ranging from 5 to 8 共Tait 2004兲. As a result an estimate of The efficiency, ⌿, of a TLD as a dynamic absorber is denoted
f TLD can be made using linear wave theory 共Warnitchai and Pin- here as the ratio of the experimentally determined effective damp-
kaew 1998; Ju et al. 2004; Tait et al. 2004a兲 if it is assumed that ing ␨eff to that of an optimized linear TMD vibration absorber,
f TLD ⬇ f w, where f w is given by 共Lamb 1932兲 ␨eff-opt, with a mass ratio value based on the total mass of the

fw =
1
2␲
冑 ␲g
L
tanh
L
冉 冊
␲h
共4兲
water
⌿=
␨eff
␨eff-opt
⫻ 100 共8兲

where g⫽gravitational acceleration.

Experimental Setup

Damping Ratio A photograph of the apparatus used to model the 2D structural-

The equivalent viscous damping ratio of a TLD can be expressed
as
cTLD
␨TLD = 共5兲
4␲mTLD f TLD
The equivalent viscous damping of a TLD equipped with
damping screens is nonlinear and has been found for the screen
type and arrangement employed in this study to be related to the
square of fluid velocity 共Tait et al. 2004a兲.
In addition, the efficiency of a TLD is weakly dependent on
the structural damping ratio, ␨s, and its influence on TLD effi-
ciency is usually negligible for small values of ␨s, which is often
the case for civil structures that incorporate TLD devices.
Effectiveness and Efficiency of Vibration Absorber
The performance of a dynamic vibration absorber is often mea-
sured by the amount of effective damping, ␨eff, it provides to the
original structure 共not equipped with the absorber兲 in order to
TLD systems is shown in Fig. 1. A plan view of the setup, shown
in Fig. 2, indicates that both the fundamental x and y sway modes
of the structure and the fundamental x and y sloshing modes of
the TLD are aligned in the principal x- and y-directions. Also
shown in Fig. 2 are two hydraulic actuators, aligned with the x
and y axes, which are used to excite the system. The actuators are
connected to a mass M * through two driver springs with constants
KDx and KDy, respectively. Additional springs are aligned along
the x and y axes with spring constants KSx and KSy, respectively,
to adjust the natural sway frequencies of primary structure. The
contribution of the pendulum stiffness, K P, to the overall stiffness
of the structure has been accounted for. The stiffness values of a
tested system K*x and K*y in the x- and y-directions are determined
using Eqs. 共9兲 and 共10兲, respectively
K*x = 兺 KSx + 兺 KDx + KP 共9兲
K*y = 兺 KSy + 兺 KDy + KP 共10兲

achieve the same dynamic response as the structure-TLD system. The structure’s natural sway frequencies f sx and f sy in the two
Vickery and Davenport 共1970兲 calculated the value of ␨eff by principal directions are given by

252 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

 by vertical hangers and rigidly connected to the frame by load
cells. This setup allows the shear forces that develop as a result of
the sloshing water to be measured in both the x- and y-directions,
FTLDx and FTLDy, by subtracting the recorded ballast mass forces
from measured TLD forces, which included the tank mass. The
ratio of mw to M * was set to a value of 2.5% for all 2D tests
reported on in this study. The TLD damping screens provided the
damping, ␨TLD, required for the TLD to perform efficiently at its
design response level 共Tait et al. 2004b兲. The screen configura-
tions and their locations with respect to tank dimensions a and b
are shown in Fig. 3共b兲. Dimensions for one of the slats of the
damping screen, including thickness, t, depth, d, and spacing, s,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

are shown in Fig. 3共c兲.

The instrumentation used in this study is shown in Figs. 2 and
Fig. 1. Structure-TLD system test apparatus 3共a兲. A total of 11 wave probes, shown in Fig. 2, were used to
provide an instantaneous description of the free surface profile.

冑
The normalized probe locations are referenced from the center of
1 K*x the tank and are listed in Table 1. The motion of the structure was
f sx = 共11兲
2␲ M* recorded using four laser transducers, as shown in Fig. 2, allow-
ing both the sway and torsional motions to be measured. The

f sy =
1
2␲
冑 K*Y
M*
共12兲
accelerations of the structure were measured using two acceler-
ometers, one oriented along each principal direction of motion.
The actuator motion in each direction was recorded using a laser
Fig. 3共a兲 shows a 2D TLD located in the upper portion of a transducer.
rigid frame and a ballast mass in the lower portion of the rigid The properties of the 2D TLDs tested in this study are given in
frame. The TLD and ballast mass were suspended from the frame Table 2. Columns 2 and 3 describe the length of the tank in the x-

Fig. 2. Plan view of experimental setup

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 253

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. 共a兲 TLD rigid test frame and load cells; 共b兲 TLD tank dimensions and damping screen configuration; and 共c兲 TLD damping screens

and y-directions, respectively. The total height of the tank, H, and

the height of the quiescent water depth, h, are provided in Col-
umns 4 and 5. The fundamental sloshing frequencies in the x- and
Table 1. TLD Wave Probe Locations
y-directions are provided in the last two columns. The first tank
Wave has a square geometry and is intended for a structure with
probe X/a Y /b matched frequencies in the two fundamental sway modes. The
WP-1 0.00 0.45 second tank has a rectangular aspect ratio of 1:1.1 and was de-
WP-2 0.00 0.25 signed for a structure having different fundamental sway mode
WP-3 0.00 0.00 frequencies. The properties of the tested structural-TLD systems
WP-4 0.00 −0.35 are provided in Table 3. The mass M * and stiffness K*x and K*y
WP-5 0.00 −0.45 values are provided in Columns 2–4, respectively. Free-vibration
WP-6 0.45 0.00 tests were performed on both systems without water in the TLD
WP-7 −0.45 0.00
tank in order to estimate the structural damping ratio values, ␨sx
and ␨sy, which are given in Table 3. The values of the mass ratio,
WP-8 0.45 −0.45
␮, and tuning ratio, ⍀, for both principal directions are given in
WP-9 −0.45 −0.45
the last three columns.
WP-10 0.45 0.45
The excitation applied in all tests was Gaussian white-noise
WP-11 −0.45 0.45
band-limited between 0.2 and 1.2 Hz. Five different load intensi-

254 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

 Table 2. TLD Properties
System a b
TLD 共m兲 共m兲
ST1 0.966 0.966
ST2 0.874 0.966
ties were applied to each system with the RMS values of the
applied actuator force, denoted as ␴F, summarized in Table 4. A
total of four different tests were conducted for each load intensity
level. For all load intensities tested the structure-TLD system
being investigated was first subjected to a 1D excitation in each
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
principal direction. Subsequently, the structure-TLD system was
excited by applying the same excitation force in both directions
simultaneously. This excitation case was fully correlated and de-
noted as “C” in this paper. Finally, the 2D structure-TLD system
test was performed using uncorrelated excitations, and is denoted
as “U.” In uncorrelated test cases the random forces applied in the
principal axes were orthogonal and uncorrelated. All data were
sampled at 15 Hz and an analog low-pass filter, with a cutoff limit
of 5.0 Hz, was used to suppress noise from the recorded signals
and prevent aliasing. The sampling rate used in this study allows
the response signal to be examined in both time and frequency
domains.
For identification purposes, each test is described using three
symbols. The first symbol, either ST1 or ST2, is used to identify
the tested system. The second symbol 共LC1–LC5兲 describes the
load intensity 共excitation amplitude兲 values shown in Table 4. The
third symbol is either X, Y, C, or U and represents a 1D
x-direction, 1D y-direction, 2D correlated or 2D uncorrelated
loading type, respectively. For example, ST1-LC3-U represents a
2D uncorrelated test conducted on System ST1 for Load Intensity
LC3.
Experimental Results
Normalized measured time histories of various measured param-
eters, including excitation forces, structural displacements, struc-
tural accelerations, TLD free-surface motions and TLD base shear
forces, were recorded for both 1D and 2D excitations in both
principal directions. Frequency response functions of the
structural-TLD systems for both 1D and 2D excitation tests are
compared to determine if any significant changes in the response
behavior of the structure-TLD systems tested occurred. The TLD
base shear forces are examined using a statistical approach to
determine if the fundamental sloshing modes of the TLD are or-
thogonal or uncoupled under uncorrelated excitation. An energy
approach is employed to further investigate if the fundamental
sway modes and fundamental sloshing modes of a structure-TLD
system can be treated as effectively uncoupled. The effective
damping provided by a 2D TLD is calculated and its efficiency
level examined. Numerical simulations using a 1D nonlinear
numerical model are carried out and results combined using su-
perpositioning. Numerical solutions are then compared to experi-
Table 3. Structure-TLD Properties
M* Kx* K*y
System 共kg兲 共N/m兲 共N/m兲
ST1 4,480 55,100 55,100
ST2 4,040 60,040 49,660
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 255
J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.
H h f TLD-x f TLD-y
共m兲 共m兲 共Hz兲 共Hz兲
0.300 0.119 0.545 0.545
0.300 0.119 0.600 0.545
mental results to assess the validity of combining two orthogonal
1D numerical structure-TLD simulations to predict the response
of a 2D structure-TLD system.
Frequency Response
Structure-TLD system frequency response functions, 兩H共f兲兩, cal-
culated using the measured applied excitation and system re-
sponse motions for Test Series ST1 for all load types 共X, Y, C,
and U兲 are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. Fig. 4共a兲 provides a compari-
son of the frequency response functions of the system in the
x-direction, 兩Hx共f兲兩, for both 1D and 2D excitation tests. The fre-
quency response functions from the 1D and 2D correlated and 2D
uncorrelated tests are found to be in excellent agreement, indicat-
ing the system’s x-direction dynamic response characteristics re-
main effectively unchanged under bidirectional excitation. The
same behavior is found for the y-direction dynamic response
characteristics of the system by comparing 兩Hy共f兲兩 in Fig. 4共b兲.
The same dynamic response behavior was observed for System
ST2. This dynamic response behavior is expected to occur in a
system having orthogonal 共uncoupled兲 modes.
As a consequence of the inherently nonlinear behavior of a
TLD, the effectively uncoupled behavior found for Load Intensity
LC3 is examined over the range of excitation amplitudes consid-
ered in this study. Figs. 5共a and b兲 show the frequency response
functions of System ST1 in the x-direction for the minimum and
maximum load intensities tested. The average peak hourly accel-
eration values recorded for ST1-LC1 and ST1-LC5 test cases
were approximately 5 and 32 g⫻10−3, respectively. These re-
sponse accelerations adequately cover the serviceability limit cri-
teria range. The frequency response functions corresponding to
the x-direction for ST1 are shown in Fig. 5共a兲 for Load Intensity
LC1 and Fig. 5共b兲 for Load Intensity LC5, respectively.
Figs. 4 and 5 show negligible difference in the frequency re-
sponse behavior of the 2D structure-TLD system when subjected
to either 1D or 2D excitation. This type of system response be-
havior indicates both perpendicular structural sway modes and
perpendicular fundamental TLD sloshing modes are effectively
uncoupled. It should be recognized that coupling does occur be-
tween the structure and the TLD in both principal directions.
However, the structure-TLD system response in the x- and
y-directions is found to be effectively uncoupled. As the response
of the system has been found to remain uncoupled, the total re-
sponse of the system under 2D excitation can be considered to be
the superposition of the response in each principal direction.
TLD Shear Forces
The frequency response functions for the 2D structure-TLD sys-
tem examined above, having two fundamental structural sway
␨sx ␨sy ␮x ␮y
共%兲 共%兲 共%兲 共%兲 ⍀x ⍀y
0.1 0.1 1.9 1.9 0.98 0.98
0.1 0.1 1.7 1.9 0.98 0.98
 Table 4. Applied Load Cases TLD Shear Forces Resulting from Unidirectional Excitation
Load ST1 ␴F ST2 ␴F Figs. 6共a and b兲 show that for the unidirectional test cases negli-
case 共N兲 共N兲 gible shear forces develop in the direction orthogonal to the di-
rection of excitation. These results for a square TLD are similar to
LC1 13 12
those recorded by Reed et al. 共1998兲 for a rectangular tank with a
LC2 26 24 large frequency separation value of 1.75 between the fundamental
LC3 52 48 sloshing modes. For the largest 1D load intensity tested 共LC5兲 on
LC4 77 70 System ST1, the maximum shear force that occurred in the direc-
LC5 100 91 tion orthogonal to the direction of excitation was found to be less
than 6% of the maximum force measured in the direction of
excitation.
modes and two fundamental TLD sloshing modes, were found to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

remain constant under all loading combinations considered in this
study. To validate the assumption of effectively uncoupled funda-
mental sloshing modes the TLD shear forces, f TLDx and f TLDy are
examined for different excitation cases.
Time history segments of the normalized shear forces,
measured between the structure and the TLD, are shown in
Figs. 6共a–d兲 for ST1-LC5 for all four loading cases. Figs. 6共a–d兲
allow comparisons to be made between the shear forces that de-
velop in the x- and y-directions corresponding to the fundamental
sloshing modes FTLDx and FTLDy under the four different excita-
tion cases considered.
TLD Shear Forces Resulting from Bidirectional Excitation
The normalized time histories of FTLDx in Fig. 6共a兲, FTLDy in
Fig. 6共b兲, and those found in Fig. 6共c兲, corresponding to Test Case
ST1-LC5-C, are in excellent agreement. This shows negligible
change occurred in the TLD shear forces when the system was
excited bidirectionally. The normalized time history segment of
FTLDx shown in Fig. 6共d兲 for Test Case ST1-LC5-U is found to be
in excellent agreement with that of Test Cases ST1-LC5-C and
ST1-LC5-X.
Two random variables are linearly independent if the correla-
tion coefficient, ␳xy is equal to zero. Furthermore, two uncorre-

Fig. 4. ST1-LC3 frequency response functions: 共a兲 x-direction; 共b兲 y-direction

Fig. 5. ST1 frequency response functions in x-direction for 共a兲 LC1; 共b兲 LC5

256 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

 calculated correlation coefficients for the applied forces, struc-
tural response displacements, and measure TLD shear forces are
shown in Table 5. For all three parameters considered it can be
seen that the correlation coefficient is near zero, indicating that
the structural response in the two sway modes are orthogonal and
that negligible coupling occurred between the fundamental TLD
sloshing modes. These calculated values indicate that the funda-
mental sloshing modes of a square or rectangular TLD corre-
sponding to the principal tank directions excited unidirectionally
or bidirectionally prior to wave breaking remain effectively
uncoupled.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Work Done by Sloshing Forces

If the fundamental sway modes of the structure and the TLD
shear forces in both principal directions remain orthogonal, then
the work done by the shear forces in one principal direction will
be zero when multiplied by the structural displacements in the
orthogonal principal direction for an applied 2D uncorrelated-type
excitation. The cumulative work done by the TLD shear forces
and structural displacements was calculated from the measured
time histories using Eqs. 共13兲–共16兲
n

Wxx = 兺
i=1
FTLDx共ti兲⌬x共ti兲 共13兲
n

Wyy = 兺
i=1
FTLDy共ti兲⌬y共ti兲 共14兲
n

Wxy = 兺
i=1
FTLDx共ti兲⌬y共ti兲 共15兲
n

Wyx = 兺
i=1
FTLDy共ti兲⌬x共ti兲 共16兲

where n⫽total number of data points in the time history; and ⌬x

Fig. 6. Normalized TLD shear forces 共a兲 ST1-LC5-X; 共b兲
ST1-LC5-Y; 共c兲 ST1-LC5-C; and 共d兲 ST1-LC5-U
lated random variables with zero mean are orthogonal 共Preumont
1994兲. For the uncorrelated test cases the applied excitation was
uncorrelated and the shear forces in the y-direction, FTLDy,
measured, for example, during Test ST1-LC5-U and shown in
Fig. 6共d兲, are not the same as those shown for Tests ST1-LC5-Y
and ST1-LC5-C. The shear forces corresponding to the x- and
y-directions can be considered as two random variables having
zero mean and, therefore, the correlation coefficient can be used
to determine if these measured shear forces are orthogonal. The
and ⌬y⫽structural displacements in the x- and y-directions, re-
spectively. The calculated values of the work done by the sloshing
forces were normalized by the RMS kinetic energy of the struc-
ture given as
1
T = M *␴˙ 2 共17兲
2
where ␴˙ ⫽measured RMS response velocity of the structure. This
leads to normalized work done quantities, W⬘xx, W⬘yy, W⬘xy, and W⬘yx,
corresponding to Wxx, Wyy, Wxy, and Wyx, respectively.
The normalized work done values are plotted versus the di-
mensionless parameter t / Ts, where t⫽time and Ts⫽period of the
structure. Figs. 7共a and b兲 show the normalized work done values
for LC3 for both Structural-TLD Systems ST1 and ST2. For both
structure-TLD systems the work done by the terms W⬘xy and W⬘yx is
found to be less than 6% of the work done by the terms W⬘xx and

Table 5. System ST1 Correlation Coefficients

Applied excitation TLD shear forces Structural displacements
Load case C U C U C U
LC1 1.00 −0.01 1.00 −0.04 1.00 −0.02
LC2 1.00 −0.01 1.00 −0.05 1.00 −0.02
LC3 1.00 −0.01 1.00 −0.05 1.00 −0.02
LC4 1.00 −0.01 1.00 −0.06 1.00 −0.02
LC5 1.00 −0.01 1.00 −0.06 1.00 −0.02

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 257

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 7. Normalized work done for 共a兲 ST1-LC3-U; 共b兲 ST2-LC3-U

W⬘yy. Figs. 8共a and b兲 show the normalized work done by the shear
forces for the ST1-LC2-U and ST1-LC5-U test cases. The work
done by the terms W⬘xy and W⬘yx was also found to be less than 6%
of the work done by the terms W⬘xx and W⬘yy. The negative work
done by terms W⬘xy and W⬘yx indicates that there is a negligible
transfer of energy into the “orthogonal” direction of the sloshing
motion.
The findings from this study indicate that the orthogonal fun-
damental sway modes and the orthogonal fundamental sloshing
modes remain effectively uncoupled. This uncoupled response be-
havior was observed for both ST1 and ST2 structural-TLDs under
all load intensities tested. No wave breaking was observed to
occur for the load intensities considered in this study. From the
above findings, along with previous shake table studies 共Tait et al.
2005兲, a 2D TLD can be designed assuming the fundamental
sloshing modes in the principal directions are effectively un-
coupled. This has been found for both square and rectangular
tanks where the free surface of the TLD does not experience wave
breaking.
2D-TLD Efficiency
TLD efficiency in the x- and y-directions, calculated using Eq.
共8兲, are shown in Figs. 9共a and b兲 as a function of the average
hourly peak acceleration, âhourly. The average hourly peak accel-
eration value is used in wind serviceability criteria as a measure
of the acceptable wind-induced motion limits 共Isyumov 1995兲.
The maximum efficiency is found to occur near the 20 g⫻10−3
response level, which corresponds to the target value selected in
the design of the tested structure-TLD systems. Since ␨TLD is
proportional to the square of the fluid velocity at the screens, the
TLD will have insufficient inherent damping at small system re-
sponse amplitudes resulting in decreased efficiency. When the
structural response equals the target design response level, an
optimal value of ␨TLD will be achieved resulting in maximum
TLD efficiency. For larger structural response amplitudes ␨TLD
will exceed the optimal value and the efficiency of the over-
damped TLD decreases. However, the onset of wave breaking
will be significantly suppressed.

Fig. 8. Normalized work done for 共a兲 ST1-LC2-U; 共b兲 ST1-LC5-U

258 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 9. Efficiency 2D TLD ST1-LC3: 共a兲 x-direction; 共b兲 y-direction

Fig. 10. Normalized free surface response motions under 1D excitation: 共a兲 x-direction WP-7; 共b兲 y-direction WP-5

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 259

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 11. Normalized free surface response motions at WP-9: 共a兲 correlated loading; 共b兲 uncorrelated loading
Additionally, Figs. 9共a and b兲 show that the 2D correlated and
uncorrelated tests lead to similar efficiency values as a result of
the uncoupled response behavior in the two principal directions.
The TLD exceeds an efficiency level of 80% over a peak struc-
tural acceleration response range of 10–30 g⫻10−3, which is in
the 10-year range for offices and apartments 共Isyumov 1995兲, in
the x- and y-directions for both ST1 and ST2 structure-TLD sys-
tems. The TLD design can be changed to target a different range
of accelerations by changing the solidity ratio of the screens
and/or the number of damping screens installed inside the tank.
Numerical Simulation
Results from the experimental study are compared to simulations
of a TLD using a nonlinear numerical model based on shallow
water wave theory 共Lepelletier and Raichlen 1988兲 with damping
screens 共Kaneko and Ishikawa 1999兲. The model simulates the
sloshing behavior of a TLD subjected to unidirectional excitation.
The interaction between the TLD and the structure is captured
by applying the resulting TLD shear forces, calculated by the
nonlinear fluid model, on the structure at each time step in
addition to the applied excitation force. The resulting structural
acceleration is then used as the input excitation for the TLD in the
260 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007
J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.
next time step. This is accomplished using a fourth-order Runge–
Kutta method. The equation of motion for the structure is ex-
pressed as
M *ẍs共t兲 + C*ẋs共t兲 + K*xs共t兲 = Fe共t兲 + FTLD共t兲 共18兲
where M *, C*, and K*⫽mass, damping, and stiffness of the pri-
mary structure; and xs⫽structural displacement. Fe共t兲⫽applied
excitation; and FTLD共t兲⫽TLD shear force generated by the fluid
motion. The value of FTLD共t兲 is determined by calculating the
momentum change associated with the sloshing fluid over each
time step, as suggested by Keneko and Ishikawa 共1999兲. The
input excitation, Fe共t兲, used in the numerical model matched the
experimentally applied excitation forces allowing direct compari-
sons to be made between the numerical simulations and experi-
mental results. The structure-TLD system properties used in the
model were taken from values given in Tables 2 and 3.
The numerical structure-TLD system model was analyzed in
each direction using 1D excitation, independently. The numerical
model is used to simulate the free-surface response at WP-6 and
WP-7 in the x-direction and WP-1 and WP-5 in the y-direction,
whose locations are shown in Fig. 2. Additionally, the TLD forces
resulting from the sloshing fluid motion and the structural dis-
placement and acceleration are calculated. Results obtained by
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 12. Normalized TLD shear forces: 共a兲 x-direction 共correlated loading兲; 共b兲 y-direction 共correlated loading兲; and 共c兲 y-direction 共uncorrelated
loading兲

summing 1D numerical response time histories are used to predict
various 2D response parameter time histories for different excita-
tion configurations applied in the tests.
Model and Experimental Response Comparisons
TLD Free-Surface Motions
The 1D numerical model is first validated using the measured
results from the 1D experimental tests. Fig. 10 compares the mea-
sured and simulated free-surface profiles at WP-7 and WP-5 lo-
cated near the end walls of the tank for the ST1-LC3-X
and ST1-LC3-Y test cases. The simulations are found to be in
good agreement with the experimental results, however, the nu-
merical model overestimates the maximum free-surface response
amplitude.
To confirm that the TLD sloshing modes are effectively un-
coupled, the free-surface response is summed at each time step
to simulate the free-surface motion under 2D excitation. The
free-surface response is calculated at WP-9 for both the correlated
and uncorrelated bidirectional excitation cases by summing the
1D numerical time history results for WP-7 and WP-5 shown in
Fig. 10. Fig. 11 shows the estimated free-surface time histories
for both the correlated 关Fig. 11共a兲兴 and uncorrelated 关Fig. 11共b兲兴
excitation forces for ST1-LC3. The results are in good agreement
with experimental measured values, which confirms a 1D nonlin-
ear model can be used to predict free-surface response motions of
a 2D excited bidirectionally.
TLD Shear Forces
The measured shear forces that develop from the sloshing fluid
are compared with values calculated using the 1D numerical
model. Fig. 12共a兲 shows the predicted normalized shear force
time history is in good agreement with the measured one in the
x-direction for ST1-LC3-C. Figs. 12共b and c兲 compare the mea-
sured and predicted shear force time histories in the y-direction
for both the ST-LC3-C and ST1-LC3-U cases. For all excitation
amplitudes studied, good agreement is found between the pre-
dicted and measured base shear forces.

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 261

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 13. Normalized structural accelerations: 共a兲 x-direction 共correlated loading兲; 共b兲 y-direction 共correlated loading兲; and 共c兲 y-direction 共uncor-
related loading兲

System Response Accelerations

Figs. 13共a–c兲 compare the simulated time histories of the struc-
tural accelerations, as, to measured values for the x-direction
under correlated loading and the y-direction for both correlated
and uncorrelated load cases for Load Intensity LC3. Good agree-
ment between the simulated and measured time histories is found.
Structural accelerations calculated using the nonlinear numerical
model at all other excitation amplitudes are in good agreement
with the corresponding experimental results.
The resultant horizontal shear force, FTLD-R, applied to the
structure by the TLD and resultant accelerations, aR, experienced
by the building occupants 共Isyumov 1995兲 are found by adding
the square root of the sums of the squares of the x and y values in
time. The resultant simulated values are shown along with the
experimental values for the normalized TLD shear forces and
structural accelerations in Figs. 14 and 15, respectively. The same
level of agreement for other excitation amplitudes was also found.
This verifies that the 1D nonlinear model can be used to predict Fig. 14. Normalized resultant TLD shear forces

262 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007

J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by WALTER SERIALS PROCESS on 06/12/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 15. Normalized resultant structural accelerations
the response of a 2D structure-TLD system. Additionally, it can
be used to accurately predict the free-surface motions and TLD
shear forces.
Conclusions
The performance of a 2D structure-TLD system has been inves-
tigated in this paper. Experiments have been conducted to in-
vestigate the response characteristics of 2D structure-TLD sys-
tems under random white noise excitation. An experimental ap-
paratus capable of modeling the fundamental sway modes of a
structure is presented. A 2D TLD is attached to the structure and
subsequently the system is subjected to both 1D excitation and
2D correlated and uncorrelated excitation.
The response of a 2D structure-TLD system excited bidirec-
tionally was found to correspond to the linear superposition of the
responses of two 1D structure-TLD systems. Findings from this
study indicate that by choosing the appropriate aspect ratio for the
TLD it can be used to reduce structural responses in two modes of
vibration simultaneously with no penalty on its performance. The
efficiency of a 2D TLD was compared to that of an optimal linear
TMD. Findings indicate that a 2D TLD can operate at near to
90% efficiency at a target building acceleration of 20 g⫻10−3. In
addition, the efficiency of a 2D structure-TLD was found to re-
main greater than 80% over a peak response acceleration range of
10–30 g⫻10−3.
A 1D nonlinear numerical model was used to predict the
response of a 2D structure-TLD system by assuming that the
system can be represented by two uncoupled 1D structure-TLD
systems. The model is used to predict the free-surface response,
the TLD shear forces, and the structural accelerations for both 2D
correlated and uncorrelated loading cases. The 1D model is found
to be capable of predicting 2D structure-TLD system response by
linear superpositioning. This greatly simplifies the design of a 2D
structure-TLD system as it allows it to be designed as two effec-
tively uncoupled 1D structure-TLD systems.
References
Graham, E. W., and Rodriguez, A. M. 共1952兲. “The characteristics of fuel
motion which affect airplane dynamics.” J. Appl. Mech., 19共3兲,
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2007 / 263
J. Struct. Eng. 2007.133:251-263.
381–388.
Isyumov, N. 共1995兲. “Motion perception, tolerance, and mitigation.”
Proc., 5th World Congress of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban
Habitat, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ju, Y. K., Yoon, S. W., and Kim, S. D. 共2004兲. “Experimental evaluation
of a tuned liquid damper system.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., Struct. Build.,
157共4兲, 251–262.
Kaneko, S., and Ishikawa, M. 共1999兲. “Modeling of tuned liquid damper
with submerged nets.” J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 121共3兲, 334–343.
Kareem, A., and Sun, W. J. 共1987兲. “Stochastic response of structures
with fluid containing appendages.” J. Sound Vib., 119共3兲, 389–408.
Lamb, H. 共1932兲. Hydrodynamics, Cambridge University Press, London,
U.K.
Lepelletier, T. G., and Raichlen, F. 共1988兲. “Nonlinear oscillations in
rectangular tanks.” J. Eng. Mech., 114共1兲, 1–23.
Preumont, A. 共1994兲. Random vibration and spectral analysis, Kluwer
Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Read, D., Yu, J., Yeh, H., and Gardarsson, S. 共1998兲. “Investigation of
tuned liquid dampers under large amplitude excitation.” J. Eng.
Mech., 124共4兲, 405–413.
Shimizu, K., and Teramura, A. 共1994兲. “Development of vibration control
system using U-shaped water tank.” Proc., 1st Int. Workshop and
Seminar on Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Timisoara,
Romania, 25–34.
Soong, T. T., and Dargush, G. F. 共1997兲. Passive energy dissipation sys-
tems in structural engineering, Wiley, New York.
Sun, L. M., Fujino, Y., Pacheco, B. M., and Isobe, M. 共1989兲. “Nonlinear
waves and dynamic pressures in rectangular tuned liquid dampers:
Simulation and experimental verification.” Struct. Eng./Earthquake
Eng., 6共2兲, 251s–262s.
Sun, L. M., Fujino, Y., Chaiseri, P., and Pacheco, B. M. 共1995兲. “The
properties of tuned liquid dampers using a TMD analogy.” Earth-
quake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 24共9兲, 967–976.
Tait, M. J. 共2004兲. “The performance of 1D and 2D tuned liquid damp-
ers.” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Tait, M. J., E1 Damatty, A. A., and Isyumov, N. 共2004a兲. “Testing of
tuned liquid damper with screens and development of equivalent
TMD model.” Wind Struct., 7共4兲, 215–234.
Tait, M. J., Isyumov, N., and E1 Damatty, A. A. 共2004b兲. “The efficiency
and robustness of a unidirectional tuned liquid damper and modelling
with an equivalent TMD.” Wind Struct., 7共4兲, 235–250.
Tait, M. J., El Damatty, A. A., and Isyumov, N. 共2005兲. “An investigation
of tuned liquid dampers equipped with damping screens subjected to
2D excitation.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34共7兲, 719–735.
Tamura, Y., Fujii, K., Ohtsuki, T., Wakahara, T., and Kohsaka, R. 共1995兲.
“Effectiveness of tuned liquid dampers under wind excitation.” Eng.
Struct., 17共9兲, 609–621.
Vickery, B. J., and Davenport, A. G. 共1970兲. “An investigation of the
behavior in wind of the proposed CentrePoint Tower, in Sydney, Aus-
tralia.” Research Rep. BLWT-1-70, Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel
Laboratory, Univ. of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Warburton, G. B. 共1982兲. “Optimum absorber parameters for various
combinations of response and excitation parameters.” Earthquake
Eng. Struct. Dyn., 10共3兲, 381–401.
Warnitchai, P., and Pinkaew, T. 共1998兲. “Modeling of liquid sloshing in
rectangular tanks with flow-dampening devices.” Eng. Struct., 20共7兲,
593–600.
Welt, F., and Modi, V. J. 共1992兲. “Vibration damping through liquid slosh-
ing. Part 1: A nonlinear analysis.” Trans. ASME, J. Vib. Acoust.,
114共1兲, 10–16.