Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experimental and numerical dynamic response of a SDOF vibro-impact system with double gaps and bumpers under harmonic excitation

  • Published:
International Journal of Dynamics and Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

During strong earthquakes, structural pounding may occur between structures and the surrounding moat wall because of the limited separation distance and the deformations of the isolator. An arrangement that favours the solution of this problem is the interposition of bumpers. Thus, the influence of geometrical and mechanical characteristics of isolation and mitigation devices on nonlinear non-smooth response of vibro-impact systems is experimentally and numerically investigated in this paper on the basis of a laboratory campaign of experimental tests and a numerical model. Shaking table tests are carried out under a harmonic excitation in order to investigate two different configurations: the absence and the presence of bumpers. For different values of the table acceleration peak are applied, four different amplitude values of the total gap between mass and bumpers are considered, and also four different types of bumpers are employed. The experimental response of the system is analysed in terms of table acceleration, gap clearance, bumpers’ stiffness, and pseudo-resonance frequency; a suitable normalization is adopted in order to better interpret experimental results; in particular, mass acceleration is normalized with respect to table acceleration and excursion is normalized with respect to gap. The signals of the system’s response are appropriately elaborated to verify the possibility of modifying the system’s response and direct it towards the (conflicting) objectives desired to simultaneously reduce displacements and accelerations. A suitable model has been developed to numerically simulate the behaviour of the system by using a general-purpose computer code, achieving a good agreement with the experimental results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kelly JM (1997) Earthquake-resistant design with rubber. Springer, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Ismail M, Rodellar J, Pozo F (2015) Passive and hybrid mitigation of potential near-fault inner pounding of a self-braking seismic isolator. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 69:233–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jangid R, Kelly J (2001) Base isolation for near-fault motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 30:691–707. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Murat D, Srikanth B (2007) Equivalent linear analysis of seismic-isolated bridges subjected to near-fault ground motions with forward rupture directivity effect. Eng Struct 29:21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Basili M, De Angelis M (2007) Optimal passive control of adjacent structures interconnected with nonlinear hysteretic devices. J Sound Vib 301:106–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2006.09.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Basili M, De Angelis M (2007) A reduced order model for optimal design of 2-MDOF adjacent structures connected by hysteretic dampers. J Sound Vib 306:297–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2007.05.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Reggio A, De Angelis M (2015) Optimal energy-based seismic design of non-conventional Tuned Mass Damper (TMD) implemented via inter-story isolation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44:1623–1642. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Reggio A, De Angelis M (2013) Optimal design of an equipment isolation system with nonlinear hysteretic behavior. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:1907–1930. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lu LY, Lee TY, Juang SY, Yeh SW (2013) Polynomial friction pendulum isolators (PFPIs) for building floor isolation: an experimental and theoretical study. Eng Struct 56:970–982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.06.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Reggio A, De Angelis M (2014) Combined primary–secondary system approach to the design of an equipment isolation system with High-Damping Rubber Bearings. J Sound Vib 333:2386–2403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2013.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Renzi E, De Angelis M (2005) Optimal semi-active control and non-linear dynamic response of variable stiffness structures. J Vib Control 11:1253–1289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546305054597

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Basili M, De Angelis M (2014) Investigation on the optimal properties of semi active control devices with continuous control for equipment isolation. Scalable Comput 15:331–343. https://doi.org/10.12694/scpe.v15i4.1054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tsai H (1997) Dynamic analysis of base-isolated shear beams bumping against stops. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26:515–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199705)26:5%3c515:AID-EQE654%3e3.0.CO;2-C

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Malhotra P (1997) Dynamics of seismic impacts in base-isolated buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26:797–813. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199708)26:8%3c797:AID-EQE677%3e3.0.CO;2-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Komodromos P, Polycarpou PC, Papaloizou L, Phocas MC (2007) Response of seismically isolated buildings considering poundings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:1605–1622. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Komodromos P (2008) Simulation of the earthquake-induced pounding of seismically isolated buildings. Comput Struct 86:618–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2007.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Polycarpou PC, Komodromos P (2011) Numerical investigation of potential mitigation measures for poundings of seismically isolated buildings. Earthq Struct 2:1–24. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2011.2.1.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Masroor A, Mosqueda G (2013) Impact model for simulation of base isolated buildings impacting flexible moat walls. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:357–376. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mavronicola EA, Polycarpou PC, Komodromos P (2016) Effect of planar impact modeling on the pounding response of base-isolated buildings. Front Built Environ 2:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2016.00011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu C, Yang W, Yan Z, Lu Z, Luo N (2017) Base pounding model and response analysis of base-isolated structures under earthquake excitation. Appl Sci 7:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/app7121238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Masroor A, Mosqueda G (2012) Experimental simulation of base-isolated buildings pounding against moat wall and effects on superstructure response. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41:2093–2109. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Andreaus U, De Angelis M (2016) Nonlinear dynamic response of a base-excited SDOF oscillator with double-side unilateral constraints. Nonlinear Dyn 84:1447–1467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-015-2581-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Andreaus U, Baragatti P, De Angelis M, Perno S (2017) A preliminary experimental study about two-sided impacting SDOF oscillator under harmonic excitation. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 12:061010-1–061010-10. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Andreaus U, Baragatti P, De Angelis M, Perno S (2017) Shaking table tests and numerical investigation of two-sided damping constraint for end-stop impact protection. Nonlinear Dyn 90:2387–2421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-017-3810-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Naeim F, Kelly J (1999) Design of seismic isolated structures: from theory to practice. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Hunt KH, Crossley FRE (1975) Coefficient of restitution interpreted as damping in vibro-impact. J Appl Mech 42:440–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Núñez K, Rivas L, Scattolini M, Rosales C, Perera R, Matos M (2007) Mechanical properties of TPVs of EPDM/polypropylene/paraffin oil. Rev Téc Ing Univ Zulia 30:445–453

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Sapienza University of Rome, under the Scientific Research Program: Year 2016, Protocol RM116154C359801B, Title “Two-sided damping constraint optimal control for improving performances of vibration isolation and end-stop impact protection”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184, Rome, Italy

    Ugo Andreaus & Maurizio De Angelis

Authors
  1. Ugo Andreaus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maurizio De Angelis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ugo Andreaus.

Appendix: Meaning of the symbols

Appendix: Meaning of the symbols

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andreaus, U., De Angelis, M. Experimental and numerical dynamic response of a SDOF vibro-impact system with double gaps and bumpers under harmonic excitation. Int. J. Dynam. Control 7, 1278–1292 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-019-00532-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-019-00532-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation