Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Efficient solution of the multiple seismic pounding problem using hierarchical substructure techniques

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Computational Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Structural pounding is one of the major reasons for severe structural damage or even collapse. Thus, detailed simulations, including dynamic contact formulations, are often required in order to obtain reliable response information of structures. This leads inevitably to computationally expensive analysis. Therefore, in this paper, an effective hierarchical substructure method, adapted to structural pounding problems, is introduced. Based on that, a hybrid substructure method is presented. Both strategies are presented on an academic multiple pounding example, applying both a sinusoidal and a real earthquake excitation. It is shown that both strategies enable accurate low-order representations of the complex full dynamic contact problem. Thereafter, the new approaches are compared with the classical modal truncation strategy and an improved controlled modal truncation strategy. It is shown that an extensive improvement of the approximation of the full response can be achieved applying the new hierarchical substructure and the new hybrid substructure approach.

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
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kasai K, Maison BF (1997) Building pounding damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Eng Struct 19:195–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pantelides CP, Ma X (1998) Linear and nonlinear pounding of structural systems. Comput Struct 66:79–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barbato M, Tubaldi E (2013) A probabilistic perfomance-based approach for mitigating the seismic pounding risk between adjacent buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:1203–1219

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Chase GC, Boyer F, Rodgers GW, Labrosse G, MacRae A (2014) Probabilistic risk analysis of structural impact in seismic events for linear and nonlinear systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 43:1565–1580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tubaldi E, Freddi F, Barbato M (2016) Probabilistic seismic demand model for pounding risk assessment. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45:1743–1758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jankowski R, Mahmoud S (2016) Linking of adjacent three-story buildings for mitigation of structural pounding during earthquakes. Bull Earthq Eng 14:3075–3097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Elwardany H, Seleemah A, Jankowski R (2017) Seismic pounding behavior of multi-story buildings in series considering the effect of infill panels. Eng Struct 144:139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jankowski R, Mahmoud S (2015) Modelling of structural pounding. Earthquake-induced structural pounding. GeoPlanet: earth and planetary sciences. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  9. Anagnostopoulos AS (2004) Equivalent viscous damping for modeling inelastic impacts in earthquake pounding problems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33:897–902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Jankowski R (2005) Non-linear viscoelastic modelling of earthquake-induced structural pounding. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34:595–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jankowski R (2006) Analytical expression between the impact damping ratio and the coefficient of restitution in the non-linear viscoelastic model of structural pounding. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:1135–1142

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chau KT, Wei XX (2001) Ponding of structures modelled as non-linear impacts of two oscillators. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 30:633–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Muthukumar S, DesRoches R (2006) A Hertz contact model with nonlinear damping for pounding simulation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35:811–828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ye K, Li L, Zhu H (2009) A note on the Hertz contact model with nonlinear damping for pounding simulation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:1135–1142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bhaskararao AV, Jangid RS (2006) Dynamic response of adjacent structures connected with friction dampers. Eng Struct 28:690–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Patel CC, Jangid RS (2011) Dynamic response of adjacent structures connected by friction damper. Earthq Struct 2:149–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Efraimiadou S, Hatzigeorgiou GD, Beskos DE (2013) Structural pounding between adjacent buildings subjected to strong ground motions. Part I: the effect of different structures arrangement. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:1509–1528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Licari M, Sorace S, Terenzi G (2015) Nonlinear modeling and mitigation of seismic pounding between R/C frame buildings. J Earthq Eng 19:431–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ghandil M, Aldaikh H (2017) Damage-based seismic planar pounding analysis of adjacent symmetric buildings considering inelastic structure-soil-structure interaction. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46:1141–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rega G, Troga H (2005) Dimension reduction of dynamical systems: methods, models, applications. Nonlinear Dyn 41:1–15

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Kerschen G, Golinval JC, Vakakis AF, Bergman AL (2005) The method of proper orthogonal decomposition for dynamical characterization and order reduction of mechanical systems: an overview. Nonlinear Dyn 41:147–169

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Bamer F, Bucher C (2012) Application of the proper orthogonal decomposition for linear and nonlinear structures under transient excitation. Acta Mech 223(12):2549–2563

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Bamer F, Kazhemi AA, Bucher C (2017) A new model order reduction strategy adapted to nonlinear problems in earthquake engineering. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(4):537–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bamer F, Markert B (2017) An efficient response identification strategy for nonlinear structures subject to nonstationary generated seismic excitations. Mech Based Des Struct Mach 45:313–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hurty WC (1965) Dynamic analysis of structural systems using component modes. AIAA J 3:678–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Craig RR, Bampton MC (1968) Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses. AIAA J 6:1313–1319

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. MacNeal RH (1971) A hybrid method of component mode synthesis. Comput Struct 1:581–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rubin S (1975) Improved component-mode representation for structural dynamic analysis. AIAA J 13:995–1006

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Rixen DJ (2004) A dual Craig–Bampton method for dynamic substructuring. J Comput Appl Math 168:383–391

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Sridhar A, Kouznetsova VG, Geers MGD (2016) Homogenization of locally resonant acoustic metamaterials towards an emergent enriched continuum. Comput Mech 57:423–435

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Batou A, Soize C (2009) Identification of stochastic loads applied to a non-linear dynamical system using an uncertain computational model and experimental responses. Comput Mech 43:559–571

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Ezvan O, Batou A, Soize C (2015) Multilevel reduced-order computational model in structural dynamics for the low- and medium-frequency ranges. Comput Struct 160:111–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ezvan O, Batou A, Soize C, Gagliardini L (2017) Multilevel model reduction for uncertainty quantification in computational structural dynamics. Comput Mech 59:219–246

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Ohayon R, Sozie C (2014) Clarification about component mode synthesis methods for substructures with physical flexible interfaces. Int J Aeronaut Space Sci 15:113–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Li G (2008) A multilevel component mode synthesis approach for the calculation of the phonon density of states of nanocomposite structures. Comput Mech 42:593–606

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Lim SP, Liu AQ, Liew KM (1994) Dynamics of flexible multibody systems using loaded-interface substructure synthesis approach. Comput Mech 15:270–283

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Zucca S (2017) On the dual Craig–Bampton method for the forced response of structures with contact interfaces. Nonlinear Dyn 87:2445–2455

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Starc B, Cepon G, Boltezar M (2017) A mixed-contact formulation for a dynamics simulation of flexible systems: an integration with model-reduction techniques. J Sound Vib 393:145–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wriggers P (2006) Comput Contact Mech, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. Chopra AK (2007) Dynamics of structures, theory and applications to earthquake engineering, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kobe Takarazuka earthquake measurement 1995-01-16(UTC: 20:46:52), ath.KOBE.TAZ000.AT2. (2016) Strong Motion Virtual Data Center (VDC). www.strongmotioncenter.org

  42. Saint-Venant AJCB (1855) Memoire sur la Torsion des Prismes. Mem Divers Savants 14:233–560

    Google Scholar 

  43. Love AEH (1927) A treatise on the mathematical theory of elasticity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of General Mechanics (IAM), RWTH Aachen University, Templergraben 64, 52056, Aachen, Germany

    Franz Bamer, Jianye Shi & Bernd Markert

Authors
  1. Franz Bamer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jianye Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernd Markert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Franz Bamer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bamer, F., Shi, J. & Markert, B. Efficient solution of the multiple seismic pounding problem using hierarchical substructure techniques. Comput Mech 62, 761–782 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-017-1525-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-017-1525-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation