CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Vibration Control and Rheological FluidsGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresSeismic Performance and Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tuned mass damper effects on the response of multi-storied structures observed in geotechnical centrifuge tests

Open access
Jabary, R.N., Madabhushi, S.P.G.·2015·Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering
DOI 10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.06.013
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Tuned mass dampers (TMDs) are widely used to reduce vibrations in structures. However, very little research is available on the experimental investigation of TMDs and their performance in soil-structure systems. In this paper, a series of geotechnical centrifuge tests was conducted to investigate the effects of TMDs on the response of a multiple-storey sway frame structure undergoing dynamic soil-structure interaction (SSI). Structural responses were recorded for a wide range of input motion characteristics, damper configurations and soil profiles. The practicality associated with the use of TMDs in the damping of resonant structures in light of unexpected earthquake characteristics different from design earthquakes was experimentally demonstrated. Tuning a TMD to soil-structure system properties rather than fixed-base structural properties was found to double the improvement in damping and reduce the original peak response by nearly half. The potential effectiveness of a de-tuned mass damper in light of significant SSI was also demonstrated.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.06.013

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Chakraborty, 2011, Reliability based optimum design of Tuned Mass Damper in seismic vibration control of structures with bounded uncertain parameters, Probab. Eng. Mech., 26, 215, 10.1016/j.probengmech.2010.07.007 · DOI
  2. Liu, 2008, Wind-induced vibration of high-rise building with tuned mass damper including soil-structure interaction, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 96, 1092, 10.1016/j.jweia.2007.06.034 · DOI
  3. Bekdaş, 2011, Estimating optimum parameters of tuned mass dampers using harmony search, Eng. Struct., 33, 2716, 10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.05.024 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Lin, 2010, Vibration control of seismic structures using semi-active friction multiple tuned mass dampers, Eng. Struct., 32, 3404, 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.07.014 · DOI
  5. Dutta, 2004, Response of low-rise buildings under seismic ground excitation incorporating soil-structure interaction, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 24, 893, 10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.07.001 · DOI
  6. Jabary RN, Madabhushi SPG. An experimental investigation of soil-structure interaction in a sway frame structure with tuned mass dampers. In: Cunha A, Cactano E, Ribeiro P, Müller G (Eds.) Proceedings of the 9th international conference on structural dynamics, EURODYN 2014, Porto, Portugal, 30 June-2 July; 2014. p. 741–7.
  7. Xu, 1992, Wind-induced response of soil-structure-damper systems, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 43, 2057, 10.1016/0167-6105(92)90632-K · DOI
  8. Takewaki, 2000, Soil-structure random response reduction via TMD-VD simultaneous use, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 190, 677, 10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00434-X · DOI
  9. Ghosh, 2004, Effect of soil interaction on the performance of tuned mass dampers for seismic applications, J Sound Vib., 274, 1079, 10.1016/j.jsv.2003.09.060 · DOI
  10. Weber, 2010, Assessment of long-term behavior of tuned mass dampers by system identification, Eng. Struct., 32, 3670, 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.08.011 · DOI
  11. Lin, 1999, Seismic response reduction of irregular buildings using passive tuned mass dampers, Eng. Struct., 22, 513, 10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00054-6 · DOI
  12. Madabhushi SPG, Schofield AN, Lesley S. A new stored angular momentum (SAM) based earthquake actuator. In: Kimura T, Kusakabe O, Takemura J, editors. Proceedings of the international conference, Centrifuge ׳98, IS-Tokyo ׳98, Tokyo, Japan. Rotterdam: Balkema; 23–25 September 1998. p. 111–6.
  13. Brennan AJ, Madabhushi SPG, Houghton N.E. Comparing laminar and esb containers for dynamic centrifuge modelling. In: Ng CWW, Zhang LM, Wang YH (Eds.). Proceedings of the sixth international conference on physical modelling in geotechnics, ICPMG ׳06, 4–6 August 2006, Hong Kong. Rotterdam: Balkema; 2006. p. 171–6. · DOI
  14. Schofield, 1980, Cambridge geotechnical centrifuge operations, Géotechnique, 30, 227, 10.1680/geot.1980.30.3.227 · DOI
  15. Warburton, 1982, Optimum absorber parameters for various combinations of response and excitation parameters, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 10, 381, 10.1002/eqe.4290100304 · DOI
  16. White, 2003, PSD measurement using the single particle optical sizing (SPOS) method, Géotechnique, 53, 317, 10.1680/geot.2003.53.3.317 · DOI
  17. Ghosh B, Madabhushi SPG. An efficient tool for measuring shear wave velocity in the centrifuge. In: Proceedings of the international conference on physical modelling in geotechnics, 2002-7- to –, St John׳s, NL, Canada; 2002. p. 119–24. · DOI
  18. Haigh, 2002, Applications of wavelet analysis to the investigation of the dynamic behaviour of geotechnical structures, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 22, 995, 10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00124-0 · DOI
  19. Brennan, 2005, Evaluation of shear modulus and damping in dynamic centrifuge tests, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 131, 1488, 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:12(1488) · DOI
  20. Jabary RN, Madabhushi SPG. An experimental investigation of tuned mass dampers on the seismic response of a multi-storey structure. In: Vemury C, Elia G, Rouainia M, Wilkinson S (Eds.). Proceedings of the young engineers conference, SECED 2013. Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom; 3-4 July 2013. p. 76–81

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Jabary, R. N., & Madabhushi, S. P. G.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Jabary, R.N.
ORCID
Madabhushi, S.P.G.
Venue
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
77
Pages
373-380
ISSN
0267-7261 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.06.013
OpenAlex
W1595989389
Cited by
44
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8
FWCI
6.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Vibration Control and Rheological Fluids
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Seismic Performance and Analysis
Keywords
tuned mass damper, soil-structure interaction, seismic response reduction, geotechnical centrifuge tests, resonant structures, soil profile, damper configuration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review