Premium
Real‐time hybrid experimental system with actuator delay compensation and its application to a piping system with energy absorber
Author(s) -
Horiuchi T.,
Inoue M.,
Konno T.,
Namita Y.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
earthquake engineering and structural dynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.218
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1096-9845
pISSN - 0098-8847
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1096-9845(199910)28:10<1121::aid-eqe858>3.0.co;2-o
Subject(s) - earthquake shaking table , actuator , piping , compensation (psychology) , hybrid system , control theory (sociology) , energy (signal processing) , engineering , response time , structural engineering , computer science , mechanical engineering , physics , psychology , electrical engineering , control (management) , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence , psychoanalysis , computer graphics (images) , machine learning
A real‐time hybrid experimental method , in which output from an actuator‐excited vibration experiment and response calculation are combined on‐line and conducted simultaneously in real time, is being developed as a new seismic experimental method for structural systems. In real‐time hybrid experiments, however, there is an inevitable actuator‐response delay, which has an effect equivalent to negative damping. To solve this problem, a real‐time hybrid experimental system (including an actuator‐delay compensation method) was developed. And seismic experiments were conducted in order to demonstrate the advantages of this system. Experimental results obtained using the developed hybrid experimental system were compared with exact results obtained using shaking‐table experiments, and it was found that the two experimental methods gave almost identical results. It can therefore be concluded that the structural response can be obtained precisely by using the developed hybrid experimental system. Comparison of these experiments showed the advantages of the hybrid experiments; that is, they are simple and economical. This is because the hybrid experiment requires only a small structure as the excitation model, while a shaking‐table experiment must consider the whole structural system. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.