STUDY ON STRUCTURES INCORPORATED

WITH MR DAMPING MATERIAL

(BASED ON PSO ALGORITHM)
BASED ON RESEARCH PAPERS BY –
1. Ying-Qing, Xie Wen-Han, Jing Xingjian , Frontiers in Materials Study on Structures Incorporated With MR Damping Material Based
on PSO Algorithm, VOLUME 6 ,YEAR 2019 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmats.2019.00037
DOI=10.3389/fmats.2019.00037 ISSN=2296-8016
2. G. Yang a, B.F. Spencer Jr. a , J.D. Carlson b , M.K. Sain, Department of Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences, Large-scale MR
fluid dampers: modelling and dynamic performance considerations, University of Notre Dame, 156 Fitzpatrick Hall, Notre Dame, IN
46556, USA b Lord Corporation, 110 Lord Drive, Cary, NC 27511, USA c Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Notre
Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA

| FINAL YEAR PROJECT-VNIT(2023-24) | ANUPAM SONAR | ASHUTOSH RABARY |

ABOUT THE MR DMAPERS BEING USED:
• MR dampers are used for reducing the vibration or dynamic response of structures.
• The shear-valve type of MR damper is used in this study.
• The relationship between the force and displacement of the MR damper is given by Equation (3):
fdi = fc sgn[u˙(t)] + c0u˙(t)
• The frictional force (fc) is calculated as fc = 3LdApτy, where Ld is the effective length, Ap is the
cross-sectional area of the piston, and τy is the yielding shear stress.
• - The coefficient c0 represents the damping of the MR damper.
ABOUT THE MR DMAPERS BEING USED:
• - The dynamic equation for the controlled structure equipped with MR dampers is described in
the study.
• - The magnitude of the external magnetic field can be controlled by control currents (Ic), which
affects the yielding shear stress (τy).
• - The relationship between τy and Ic is given by Equation (2):
τy = A1e−Ic + A2 ln(Ic + e) + A3Ic
• - A1, A2, and A3 are coefficients of the MR damping material.
• - The shear stress (τ) in the MR damping material is related to the shear strain rate (˙γ) by
Equation (1): τ = τy sgn( ˙γ ) + η ˙γ
• - The MR damping material can change from a free-flowing liquid to a viscoelastic solid when
subjected to a magnetic field.
• - The yield stress of the MR damping material can be controlled by changing the intensity of the
magnetic field.
ABOUT THE MR DMAPERS BEING USED:
• - The control currents applied to MR dampers can be adjusted to effectively reduce the
displacement and acceleration responses of structures.
• - Various control algorithms have been developed for controlling the control currents of MR
dampers, including linear optimal controllers, acceleration feedback control methods, intelligent
neuro-fuzzy control strategies, and fuzzy control algorithms with neural network models.
• - The particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is used in this study to control the
displacement and acceleration responses of structures equipped with MR dampers.
• - The PSO algorithm effectively reduces the displacement responses and to some extent, the
acceleration responses of the structure.
• - The PSO algorithm is more effective in reducing seismic responses compared to passive control
structures.
• - The PSO algorithm allows for the selection of appropriate control currents for MR dampers
based on a fitness function.
• - The PSO algorithm optimizes the control currents to achieve multi-objective control of the MR
intelligent structure.
ABOUT THE MR DMAPERS BEING USED:
IMPORTANT POINTS
1. The control current applied to MR dampers affects the yielding shear stress of the MR damping
material, which in turn affects the displacement and acceleration responses of the structure.
2. The magnitude of structural displacement responses is crucial for the safety of building
structures, while the acceleration responses are related to the destruction of internal
appendages, furniture, and the safety of people within the structure.
3. The PSO algorithm optimizes control currents for MR dampers to reduce both displacement
and acceleration responses simultaneously, ensuring structural stability and minimizing
damage.
4. Displacement control is more important than acceleration control in seismic control of
structures, as the weight of displacement is greater than that of acceleration in the fitness
function.
5. Balancing displacement and acceleration responses is essential for achieving both structural
safety and comfort, as excessive displacement can compromise stability, while excessive
acceleration can lead to discomfort and potential damage.
Dynamic Equation of the Controlled Structure
• MR dampers are installed between the chevron brace on each floor of the steel frame structure.
• The dynamic equation for the n-floor steel frame structure equipped with MR dampers can be
described as
Mx¨ + Cx˙ + Kx = −MIs¨e − Bfd
• M, C, and K are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the steel frame structure,
respectively.
• x is an n-dimensional vector to represent the displacement response of each floor of the steel
frame structure relative to the ground.
• I is an n-dimensional column vector with 1 for each element.
• s¨e is the seismic acceleration.
• B is an n-dimensional vector to show the number of MR dampers installed on each floor of the
steel frame structure.
• fd is an n-dimensional vector of control forces generated by MR dampers at each floor.
WHAT IS PSO ALGORITHM?
• The PSO algorithm (Particle Swarm Optimization) is a computational optimization technique
inspired by the social behaviour of bird flocking and fish schooling.
• The original version of the PSO algorithm was proposed by James Kennedy and Russell Eberhart in
1995.
• The PSO algorithm involves a group of particles that move through a problem space, searching for
the optimal solution.
• Each particle adjusts its position and velocity based on its own experience and the best solution
found by the group.
vij(t + 1) = vij(t) + c1 ∗ rand1( ) ∗ (pij(t) − zij(t)) + c2 ∗ rand2( ) ∗ (pij(t) − zij(t))
zij(t + 1) = zij(t) + vij(t + 1)
where the subscript j means the j-th dimension of the particle; the subscript i means the i-th
particle in the particle swarm; t is the t-th generation; c1 represents the cognitive learning
coefficient which is used to adjust the step of particle that flies toward the best location of itself; c2
represents the social learning coefficient which is used to adjust the step of a particle that flies
toward the global best position; rand1( ) and rand2( ) are two independent random functions within
the range of [0,1]
PSO ALGORITHM WITH CONSTRICTION FACTOR
• The PSO algorithm with constriction factor was proposed by Clerc in 1999 and enhanced by
Eberhart and Shi in 2000.
• The velocity evolution equation of the PSO algorithm with constriction factor is given by
vij(t + 1) = k * (vij(t) + c1 ∗ rand1( ) ∗ (pij(t) − zij(t)) + c2 ∗ rand2( ) ∗ (pij(t) − zij(t))
where vij(t) is the current velocity of the i-th particle in the j-th dimension, pij(t) is the optimal
position experienced by the i-th particle, zij(t) is the current position of the i-th particle, c1 and c2 are
cognitive and social learning coefficients, and rand1() and rand2() are random functions within the
range of [0,1].
• The constriction factor k in the algorithm is calculated as
k = 2 / (|2 - ϕ - √(ϕ2 - 4ϕ)|), where ϕ = c1 + c2 and ϕ > 4.
• The constriction factor controls and constrains the flight speed of particles in the PSO algorithm.
• The PSO algorithm with constriction factor achieves a balance between global detection and
particle exploitation, ensuring convergence of the particle swarm algorithm.
PSO ALGORITHM EXAMPLES
PSO ALGORITHM DESIGN OF MR INTELLIGENT
STRUCTURE
• The PSO algorithm is used to design the control of MR intelligent structures.
• The PSO algorithm is a multi-objective optimal control method.
• The algorithm aims to control both the displacement and acceleration responses of the structure.
• The PSO algorithm selects control currents for MR dampers to achieve multi-objective control.
• The fitness function is defined to minimize the displacement and acceleration responses.
• The PSO algorithm with constriction factor is chosen for its effectiveness in controlling particle
movement.
• The termination condition of the PSO algorithm is based on meeting seismic requirements for
displacement and acceleration responses.
• The PSO algorithm ensures the safety of the structure and allows for rapid selection of control
currents for MR dampers.
DEFINITION OF FITNESS FUNCTION
• - In the PSO control of an MR intelligent structure, a multi-objective optimal control algorithm is
adopted.
• - The fitness function, also known as the objective function, is used to set the targets for
structural displacement and acceleration.
• - The fitness function is defined as F(t) = αf1(t) + βf2(t), where F(t) is the fitness function, α and β
are weighting coefficients, and f1(t) and f2(t) are the objective functions for displacement and
acceleration, respectively.
• - The objective function f1(t) represents the maximum displacement response of each floor, while
f2(t) represents the maximum acceleration response of each floor.
f1(t) = |xn|/Max(xn)
f2(t) = ((|x¨1|/Max(x¨1)) +(|x¨2|/Max(x¨2)) + · · · + (|x¨n|/Max(x¨n ))/n
DEFINITION OF FITNESS FUNCTION

• The weighting coefficients α and β determine the weight relationship between displacement and
acceleration in the fitness function.
• The seismic requirements and building codes determine the maximum allowable displacement
(Max(xn)) for each floor, which is used in the fitness function.
• The fitness function is designed to prioritize displacement control over acceleration control, as
displacement is considered more important for structural safety.
• The selection of the fitness function is reasonable and effective in reducing structural
displacement responses and to some extent, acceleration responses.
TERMINATION CONDITION SETTING OF PSO
ALGORITHM
• The termination condition of the PSO algorithm in the study is based on whether the structural
displacement response and acceleration response meet the seismic requirements and building
codes.
• When the displacement response and acceleration response are less than the preset maximum
value, the search for the optimal solution can be terminated.
• The termination condition ensures the safety of building structures and allows for the rapid
selection of the control current (or voltage) of the MR damper.
• The PSO algorithm terminates when the structural displacement response and acceleration
response meet the seismic requirements, indicating that the optimal solution has been found.
• The setting of the termination conditions in the PSO algorithm ensures the effectiveness of the
control and the achievement of the desired objectives.
DIFFERENT CONTROL METHODS USING
WHICH MR DAMPER IS USED
• ON state: Refers to the control method where the control current applied to the MR damper is set
at the maximum current level (2A).
• OFF state: Refers to the control method where the control current applied to the MR damper is
set at the minimum current level (0A).
• PSO state: Refers to the control method using the Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm to
control the MR intelligent structure. It involves optimizing the displacement and acceleration
responses simultaneously using the PSO algorithm.
• Uncontrolled state: Refers to the state where no control method is applied to the MR damper,
and the structure is left uncontrolled.
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
• Numerical analysis was conducted on a five-floor steel frame structure with one MR damper
installed on each floor.
• The parameters of the structure, such as mass, stiffness, and height, were determined.
• The PSO algorithm was chosen as the control method for the MR intelligent structure.
• The PSO algorithm with a constriction factor was used to control and constrain the movement of
particles.
• The termination condition of the PSO algorithm was set based on the displacement and
acceleration responses meeting seismic requirements.
• El Centro seismic waves and Taft seismic waves were selected as the earthquake excitations.
• The maximum displacement and acceleration responses of each floor were compared between
the PSO control structure, ON-control structure, OFF-control structure, and uncontrolled
structure.
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS

• The PSO algorithm effectively reduced the displacement responses of the structure and to some
extent, reduced the acceleration responses as well.
• The PSO algorithm was more effective in reducing seismic responses compared to passive control
structures.
• The selection of the fitness function in the PSO algorithm was reasonable and effective.
• The PSO algorithm showed effectiveness in reducing displacement and acceleration responses
under different seismic excitations.
RESULTS
• Table 1 compares the maximum displacement responses of each floor under the El-Centro seismic
excitation.
• The PSO algorithm achieved a maximum displacement of 7.8 mm for the first floor, 6.3 mm for
the second floor, and 8.1 mm for the third floor.
• The ON-control method had displacements of 4.9 mm, 5.2 mm, and 7.1 mm for the respective
floors.
• The OFF-control method had displacements of 14.6 mm, 8.5 mm, and 11.2 mm for the respective
floors.
• The uncontrolled structure had displacements of 16.8 mm, 12.6 mm, and 16.7 mm for the
respective floors.
• The PSO algorithm reduced the displacements by 25.80%, 21.15%, and 14.08% compared to the
uncontrolled structure for the respective floors.
RESULTS

• Table 2 compares the maximum acceleration responses of each floor under the El-Centro seismic
excitation.
• The PSO algorithm achieved a maximum acceleration of 1.66 m/s2 for the first floor, 1.93 m/s2 for
the second floor.
• The ON-control method had accelerations of 5.21 m/s2 and 7.25 m/s2 for the respective floors.
• The OFF-control method had accelerations of 2.83 m/s2 and 6.00 m/s2 for the respective floors.
• The uncontrolled structure had accelerations of 2.36 m/s2 and 15.25 m/s2 for the respective
floors.
• The PSO algorithm reduced the accelerations by 68.13% and 73.76% compared to the ON-control
method for the respective floors.
CONCLUSION
• These results indicate that the PSO algorithm effectively reduced both the displacement and
acceleration responses of the structure under the El-Centro seismic excitation. The reduction
rates achieved by the PSO algorithm are significant compared to other control methods,
demonstrating its effectiveness in mitigating seismic responses.