Earthq Engng Struct Dyn - 1973 - Wirsching - Minimal Structural Response Under Random Excitation Using The Vibration

10969845, 1973, 4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eqe.4290020402 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [19/03/2023].
See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL. 2, 303-312 (1974)
MINIMAL STRUCTURAL RESPONSE UNDER RANDOM

EXCITATION USING THE VIBRATION ABSORBER
PAUL H. WIRSCHING
Associate Professor of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A.
AND
GARY W. CAMPBELL
Associate Reliability Engineer, Westinghouse Plant Apparatus Division, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
SUMMARY
The equations of motion are derived for the first mode response of a linear multistorey structure having a linear
vibration absorber attached to the roof. Furthermore, the variance of the first mode response to a gaussian white
noise lateral base acceleration (as a model of earthquake excitation) is determined. Smallest possible values of the
variance of the response along with corresponding absorber parameters are established using an optimization
program. It is demonstrated that the absorber is quite effective in reducing first mode response for 5- and 10-storey
structures even with relatively small values of the absorber mass. Moreover, minimal responses for the randomly
excited single-degree-of-freedomsystem have been determined, and a design example is presented. The absorber
system has potential application not only in earthquake engineering but also in aerospace and terrestrial vehicle
design.
INTRODUCTION
If during an earthquake, the displacement of the building relative to the ground can be reduced, then the
internal loads in the structural members also will be diminished. This ability to reduce the displacement will
result in increased structural integrity in an earthquake environment. One method for controlling the struc-
tural motion is by means of a vibration absorber system. The absorber consists of a mass attached to the roof
by a spring and a dashpot. Figure 1 shows a model of the basic system.
I
'N-1 m !-z
N-1
I
;$2bG;
I
-
Y(t)
Figure 1. Model of structural system
The literature contains references to the vibration absorber dating back to 1909 when Frahm suggested the
absorber to reduce the dynamic response of ships.6 Modern vibration analysis texts (e.g. References 1 and 13)
discuss the use of the vibration absorber to limit the absolute motion of a single degree of freedom system
subjected to a harmonic force. In the case of zero damping (for both the initial system and the absorber), the
absolute motion of the mass can become zero when the inertia force of the absorber is 180" out of phase
Received 10 August 1973
0 1974 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
303
10969845, 1973, 4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eqe.4290020402 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [19/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
304 PAUL H. WIRSCHING AND GARY W. CAMPBELL
with the applied force. The net force on the mass can be zero if the absorber natural frequency is chosen to be
equal to the forcing frequency.
When the applied force is a random (or stochastic) process, and when significant damping exists in the
structure, the absorber still can be effective but in a slightly different way. By adding damping to the absorber,
it now plays the role of an energy dissipation device. Motion of the mass is reduced due to the dissipation
of system energy through the absorber damper as well as the inertial effects. Morrow and co-workers'l
showed that, under a white noise input the absolute displacement of the mass could be reduced by a properly
chosen absorber. Curtis and Boykin5 also consider the possible reduction of absolute motion using an
absorber. Mixson and SteinerlO discuss how an absorber can be used to reduce transmitted vibrations to
railroad passengers. Srinivasan12considered the possibility of improving the absorber by adding, in parallel
to the primary mass, a damped as well as an undamped absorber mass. The absorber as used to limit
structural response to earthquake excitation has been studied by Gupta and Chandrasekaren' who proposed
the use of several absorbers and showed that this system could reduce the structural response to the Taft
(1952) earthquake. Winching and Yao159l6performed analog computer simulations of structures having an
absorber and subjected to non-stationary earthquake-like excitation. They demonstrated that the absorber
can reduce internal loads in certain multistorey structures, but these results were not optimized with respect
to absoiber damping and stiffness.
Crandall and MarkS present an analysis of the single-degree-of-freedomabsorber system subjected to a
white noise base acceleration and show some results concerning the relative displacement response. The
study reported in the present paper essentially generalizes their problem to include the first mode response
of a multidegree-of-freedom system. Moreover, values of the absorber parameters selected so as to minimize
relative motions have been determined for both single and multidegree of freedom systems.
A model of the system considered is presented in Figure 1. Both the structure and the absorber are assumed
to be linear. The excitation, a lateral base acceleration, is given as a stationary gaussian white noise process.
Only the first mode response of the multistorey system is considered in this analysis. It has been demon-
strated that the total structural seismic response is dominated by the first mode for typical 5- and 10-storey
subjected to earthquake-like excitation.
General references describing the development of this problem are Hurty and Rubinstein: Lin: Bendat
and Piersol,2 and Crandall and Marks3The equations of motion have been developed elsewhere for a more
general system,16but are included here for reference purposes.
THE EQUATIONS OF MOTION

The equations of motion of the structure of Figure 1 can be written in matrix form as
[ml @I+ [CI (2)+ [kl {XI = m1
where
{F(,.[ .
0
0
C(Z-i,)+K(Z-z,)
]
Also, zi is the absolute displacement of the ith mass, and x, is the displacement of the ith mass relative to
the ground
xi = zi- Y(t>
or
{XI = (4-(1)Y (3)
where (1) is a vector of 1's and y ( t ) is the displacement of the ground as a function of time. Furthermore, it is
assumed that [c] = a[m]+/3&] so that the equations uncouple in a modal analysis.
The equation of motion of the absorber mass is
MZ+C(Z-i,)+K(Z-z,) =0 (4)
LINEAR VIBRATION ABSORBER
Equations (1) and (4)define the motion of the system. Let

v = z-z,
Upon substitution of equations (3) and (5) into equation (1)
[ml { X I + [CI (21+ [kl {XI = - Iml {l}J + {F(t)}
where now
The fundamental natural frequency and mode, denoted as w1 and {+} respectively, are determined from an
eigenvalue analysis of the free undamped equations of motion. The eigenvector {+} is normalized so that
{+IT
[ml {+I = m (8)
Assuming response in the first mode only, {x} can be represented by a single co-ordinate. Thus,
{XI = {+Iq (9)
Substituting equations (3), (5), (7) and (9) into equations (4) and (6) and premultiplying equation (6) by
{+}T, the equations of motion become
q + 25,017j +w; q +p+N(252wzzj + w; v ) = -ay

ij+252w27j+w;q++Nq = - y
where
w; = KIM, the natural frequency of M
5, = damping factor in the first mode
C2 = C/2Mw2,damping factor
= Nth value of {+}

p = M/m,the mass ratio
In the special case of a single degree of freedom system, a = +," = 1, and q is the displacement of m relative
to the ground.
RESPONSE TO RANDOM EXCITATION

The base acceleration j i is assumed to be a white noise process having zero mean. The spectral density of j i
is denoted as So and is defined for - co < w -=co,where w is the frequency in rad/sec. For the system without
the absorber, the response q(t) will be a zero mean process with variance,
This is a modified form of the single-degree-of-freedom formula.3I9

For the system with the absorbers, the response q( t)will be a zero mean stationary process. The computation
of the variance of the process is summarized as follows. The variance is
rm
u! = J S,,(w)dw
--m
where S,,(w) is the spectral density of q(t). This can be found as the first row, first column element of the
cross spectral density matrix of the response,
and [H(o)] is the frequency response matrix. The prime indicates complex conjugate, and T, the transpose.
[s{p)(o)] is the cross Spectral density matrix of the force.
First the frequency response matrix is determined. Let the forces on the system (the right-hand side of
equations (10)) be harmonic, y = exp (iwt). Then the steady-state response also will be harmonic. Thus,
where the bar indicates a complex number. Then the equations of motion are of the form,
[Z(W)l {El = {FOI
where
The frequency response matrix is defined as

[H(o)l= [Z(w)l-l (18)
For this problem,
[ +
- w2 2 5, w2(iw) wg + +
[H(o)I = -
1
A(w> 4lv w2
2 5, 0,p(iw) pwi
+
- w2 2 5, w,(iw) w; +
where A(w) is the determinant of the matrix on the right-hand side of equation (19).
1 (19)
The base acceleration is now assumed to be a white noise process, denoted as W ( t ) ,and having spectral
density So, so that,
The cross correlation matrix can be written as
where S ( 7 ) is the delta function.

The cross spectral density matrix is the Fourier transformation of the cross correlation matrix. Thus,
Equations (19) and (22) are then substituted into equation (13). The first row, first column element, denoted
as S,,(w), is evaluated by performing the required matrix operations. In turn the variance of the response
is obtained by the integration of equation (12). Evaluation of the integral may be performed using a general
formulation, as shown on page 72 of Reference 3:
LINEAR VIBRATION ABSORBER 307
MINIMUM RESPONSES
A dimensionless response ratio, uz/uo,is formed. This ratio is an index of the performance of the absorber
system. If the response ratio is less than one, the absorber has decreased the level of the first mode structural
response, and vice versa. An optimization digital computer program was used to minimize the response ratio
c2
as a function of (the absorber damping ratio) and w2/wl (the ratio of the absorber frequency to the structure
frequency) for various values of p and el.
First the single degree of freedom system was considered (a = c $ ~=~ 1). Minimal response ratios are
presented in Figure 2 as a function of p and el.
The values of 5, and o2which correspond to the minimal
response ratio are given in Figure 3. Values of 5, are essentially independent of 5,.
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.1 ~ 1 0 . 0 0 1
The use of these results will be demonstrated by carrying out the design of an absorber for a single degree
of freedom structure having a mass of 100 kg, a natural frequency of 2 Hz and a damping factor of 0.05. It
is specified that the mass ratio cannot be greater than 0.10, and that the system is subjected to a white noise
base acceleration. Design requires that values of M , C and K be specified.
From Figure 2 it is seen that uz/aohas a minimum value of 0.69 when p = 0.10. Therefore the absorber
mass is chosen as M = (0.10) 100 = 10 kg. From Figure 3 the values of 5, = 0.15 and w2/w1 = 0.845 will
result in the 31 per cent reduction in response standard deviation. The spring constant for the structure is
obtained from the basic natural frequency equation,
k = 4rr2fim
= 4(9.87)(2)2(100) = 15,800 N/m

Then,
) 0.845
w2/w1 = , / ( K / M ) / J ( k / m=
can be solved for K,
K = k/~(0*845)~
= = 1130N/m
15,800(0~10)(0.714)
Figure 3. Absorber parameters for minimal response of single-degree-of-freedom system
0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40
Figure 4. Minimal response for 5-storey structure

PAUL H. WIRSCHING AND GARY W. CAMPBELL
,
PI
P
,
0.15
I
0.05 0.10
I
0.0
0.01
t
0.0
0.1
I
308
.
The value of C is obtained from the definition of the damping factor.

C = 25,JKM
= 2(0.15),/[(1130)(10)] = 31.9 N-sec/m.
Minimal response ratios for a 5-storey (a = 2.10; I$N = 0.60) and a 10-storey (a = 2-90; (bn = 0.44)
structure are given in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. These minimal values were determined for two values
of (,, namely 0.02 and 0.05, which are commonly used for design purposes. Also shown are the corresponding
values of w2/wl and 5, which produce these minimal responses. Again 5, is essentially independent of 5,.
__
---------_____
-
0.5
ti- 0.02-
5,. 0.05---
0.0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Figure 5. Minimal response for 10-storey structure
Since the most meaningful index of structural performance is reliability (or probability of failure), a simple
example will be presented to illustrate potential value of the absorber system. Consider a lightly damped
SDF system having a natural frequency offi = 2 Hz subjected to a stationary white noise base acceleration
of duration T = 30 sec. Suppose that the standard deviation of the response process is uz = 1. First passage
failure will be assumed, and the failure level is given as a = 4. Using a Poisson approximation to the first
passage probability of failure pr,
pi = 2flTexp --
( I;:
Using the values above, it is found that pi = 0.0380 for the system without the absorber. The decrease in the
response process realized with the addition of the absorber results in a lower pi.Figure 6 provides dramatic
illustration of the possible improvement in the safety of a stochastically loaded system having an absorber.
Even though the curve shown is for a specific case and the Poisson model is not the most accurate description
for first passage failures,17 the fact remains that relatively small reductions in u can result in substantial
improvements in structural performance. Moreover, if fatigue were the mode of failure, the Palmgren-Miner
model suggests that the mean cycles to failure can increase by roughly a factor of 5 by a reduction of uZ from
1.0 to 0.8 (inverse slope of the log S-N curve = 5).
Pf
10-1 -
la3-
165-
16’ -
L
169-
=x/=o
I I I I I 1 1 1 1 ~
Figure 6. Risk as a function of response ratio
CONCLUSIONS
The absorber system has been shown to be effective in reducing structural deformations for both single- and
multidegree-of-freedom linear systems having a stationary white noise base excitation. Absorber parameter
values which minimize the response of a single-degree-of-freedomsystem, as well as the first mode response
of a 5- and 10-storey shear structure have been determined for various values of light damping for the
basic structure.
Results of the study indicated that a considerable reduction in fundamental mode response can be realized
from relatively small absorber weights. For absorber weights of only 10 per cent of the single floor weight
(p = O-lO), the standard deviation of the first mode response can be reduced by 23 per cent and 18 per cent
respectively for a 5- and 10-storey structure having = 0.05. And for a single-degree-of-freedomsystem, the
response can be cut by 31 per cent for p = 0.10 and 6, = 0.05.
Two possible uses of the results of this study are:
1. The incorporation of the absorber into civil structures to reduce the probability of failure under
earthquake excitation.
2. The use of the absorber in spacecraft systems to reduce both the stresses in structural members and the
possibility of interference of certain spacecraft components with the shroud during the boost phase.
In both situations, stationary white noise base acceleration is often a resonable model to use. Moreover, in
both cases is may be possible to use an existing part of the system as the absorber mass.
However, additional study of the absorber system is required before it may be implemented into such
structural designs as suggested above. In particular some of the problems which should be considered are :
1. The effect of the absorber on higher modes of a structure. While the first mode response is seen to be
substantially reduced, the higher mode response may in fact increase. For earthquake-type excitation, it has
been demonstrated that for shear structures up to 12 floors, the first mode response contributes more than
80 per cent to the total motion.l*Thus higher mode response may not be a problem in this situation, especially
for shorter structures.
2. The behaviour of the absorber when the structure experiences elasto-plastic deformations. As the
frequency of the system decreases, the absorber will lose part of its effectiveness. How much loss occurs should
be compared to how much the design can tolerate.
3. The damping mechanism. Most damping mechanisms are not linear velocity dependent over a wide
range of velocities. The effect of non-linear absorber damping should be studied. Moreover, the problems
associated with dissipation of large amounts of energy should be considered.
While major technical problems remain, the absorber system promises to reduce substantially the risk, or
probability of failure, of a structural system subjected to stationary stochastic excitation.
APPENDIX
Notation
modal force coefficient (N-sec2)
damping coefficient
damping coefficient, absorber
modal damping
natural frequency (Hz)
force matrix
frequency response matrix
a positive integer index
stiffness matrix
stiffness, absorber
mass of ith floor
mass matrix
mass, absorber
number of floors
probability of failure
spectral density
time
displacement of absorber relative to top floor (ft)
displacement of ith floor relative to ground
system response
lateral ground motion of earthquake
absolute displacement of ith floor
absolute displacement of absorber mass
system damping factor
absorber damping factor
modal displacement (dimensionless)
mass ratio, M/&
standard deviation of system response without absorber
standard deviation of system response with absorber
modal displacement of Nth floor in first mode
the ith modal displacement
modal matrix
frequency (rad/sec)
system natural frequency (rad/sec)
absorber natural frequency (rad/sec)
REFERENCES
1. R. A. Anderson, Fundamentals of Vibrations, MacMillan, New York, 1969.
2. J. S. Bendat and A. G. Piersol, Measurement and Analysis of Random Data, Wiley, New York, 1966.
3. S. H. Crandall and W. D. Mark, Random Vibrations in Mechanical Systems, Academic Press, New York, 1963.
4. G. W. Campbell, ‘The use of an absorber as a vibration reduction device for improved reliability of seismic structures’,
Master’s Thesis, Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department, The University of Arizona, 1972.
5. J. A. Curtis and T. R. Boykin, ‘Response of two-degree-of-freedom systems to white noise base excitation’, J. ACOUS~,
SOC.Am. 33, 655-663 (1961).
6. J. P. Den Hartog, Mechanical Vibrations, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1956.
I. Y. P. Gupta and A. R. Chandrasekaran, ‘Absorber system for earthquake excitations’, Proc. 4th Wld Conf Earthquake
Engng, Santiago, Chile (1969).
8. W. C . Hurty and M. F. Rubinstein, Dynamics of Structures, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964.
9. Y. K. Lin, Probabilistic Theory of Structural Dynamics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.
10. J. S. Mixson and R. Steiner, ‘Optimization of a simple dynamic model of a railroad car under random and sinusoidal
inputs’, Stochastic Processes in Dynamical Problems, ASME, (1969).
11. C. T. Morrow, B. A. Troesch and H. R. Spence, ‘Random response of two coupled resonators without loading’, J. Acoust.
SOC.Am. 3 3 , 4 6 5 5 (1961).
12. A. V. Srinivasan, ‘Analysis of parallel damped dynamic vibration absorbers’, J. Engng for Industry, Trans. ASME, 91,
282-287 (1969).
13. W. T. Thompson, Vibration Theory and Applications, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1965.
14. P. H. Wirsching and J. T. P. Yao, ‘Modal response of structures’, J . Struct. Div., ASCE, 96, 879 (1970).
15. P. H. Wirsching and J. T. P. Yao, ‘Monte Carlo study of seismic structural safety’, J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 97, 1497-1519
(1971).
16. P. H. Wirsching and J. T. P. Yao, ‘Safety design concepts for seismic structures’, to be published in the Journal of
Comp. Struct., 3, 809-826 (1973).
17. J. N. Yang and M. Shinozuka, ‘On the first excursion probability in stationary narrow band random vibration”, J. Appl.
Mech. 1017-1022 (1971).

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn - 1973 - Wirsching - Minimal Structural Response Under Random Excitation Using The Vibration

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn - 1973 - Wirsching - Minimal Structural Response Under Random Excitation Using The Vibration

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10969845, 1973, 4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eqe.4290020402 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [19/03/2023].

MINIMAL STRUCTURAL RESPONSE UNDER RANDOM

Figure 1. Model of structural system

THE EQUATIONS OF MOTION

Equations (1) and (4)define the motion of the system. Let

q + 25,017j +w; q +p+N(252wzzj + w; v ) = -ay

= Nth value of {+}

RESPONSE TO RANDOM EXCITATION

This is a modified form of the single-degree-of-freedom formula.3I9

cross spectral density matrix of the response,

The frequency response matrix is defined as

The cross correlation matrix can be written as

where S ( 7 ) is the delta function.

= 4(9.87)(2)2(100) = 15,800 N/m

0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Figure 4. Minimal response for 5-storey structure

The value of C is obtained from the definition of the damping factor.

0.0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Figure 6. Risk as a function of response ratio

You might also like