CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 46Vibration Control and Rheological FluidsSeismic Performance and AnalysisGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Experimental Shake Table Testing of an Adaptive Passive Negative Stiffness Device within a Highway Bridge Model

Attary, Navid, Symans, Michael, Nagarajaiah, Satish, Reinhorn, Andrei M., Constantinou, Michael C., Sarlis, Apostolos A., Pasala, Dharma T. R., Taylor, Douglas P.·2015·Earthquake Spectra
DOI 10.1193/101913eqs273m
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The implementation of a mechanical negative stiffness device (NSD) within a reduced‐scale highway bridge model and its performance under seismic loading conditions is evaluated via shaking table tests. Four different isolation system configurations are considered: isolated bridge (IB), IB with viscous dampers, IB with NSDs, and IB with viscous dampers and NSDs. In addition, two bridge pier configurations were considered: one with flexible piers (mimicking a middle span of a multi‐span bridge) and one with braced piers (mimicking a single span bridge supported on abutments). The main feature of the NSD is a large pre‐compressed spring, which can push the structure away from its initial undeformed position and thus induce negative stiffness behavior. The experimental results clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of the NSDs in limiting the seismic response of the bridge and provide validation of numerical simulation results wherein numerical models of the bridge model components were calibrated via system identification testing.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1193/101913eqs273m

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Attary et al. evaluated the performance of Negative Stiffness Devices for seismic response control of scaled highway bridge structures experimentally on a shake table using four different bridge configurations: isolated bridge; NSDs+IB; VD+IB; and NSDs+VD+IB.

    “Attary et al. [84, 85] evaluated the performance of Negative Stiffness Devices (NSD) for seismic response control of scaled highway bridge structures experimentally on a shake table using four different bridge configurations: 1) isolated bridge (IB); 2) NSDs+IB; 3) VD+IB; and 4) NSDs+VD+IB.”

    From Invited Review: Recent developments in vibration control of building and bridge structures (2017) · cites this paper as [84]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. AttaryN.SymansM. D.NagarajaiahS.ReinhornA. M.ConstantinouM. C.TaylorD.PasalaD. T. R.andSarlisA. A.2012a.Performance evaluation of a seismically isolated bridge structure with adaptive passive negative stiffness Proc. of Fifteenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (15WCEE) Lisbon Portugal.
  2. NagarajaiahS.2010.Adaptive stiffness systems: recent developments in structural control using semiactive/smart variable stiffness and adaptive passive stiffness Proc. 5thWorld Conference on Structural Control and Monitoring Paper No. 5WCSCM–007.
  3. NagarajaiahS.ReinhornA. M.ConstantinouM. C.TaylorD.PasalaD. T. R.andSarlisA. A.2010.Adaptive negative stiffness: a new structural modification approach for seismic protection Proc. 5th World Conference on Structural Control and Monitoring Paper No. 5WCSCM–103.
  4. PasalaD. T. R.SarlisA. A. S.NagarajaiahS.ReinhornA. M.ConstantinouM. C.andTaylorD.2011.Adaptive negative stiffness: A new structural modification approach for seismic protection Proceedings of 2011 ASCE Structures Congress Las Vegas NV.
  5. PasalaD. T. R.SarlisA. A. S.NagarajaiahS.ReinhornA. M.ConstantinouM. C.andTaylorD.2012b.Negative stiffness device for seismic protection of multistory structures Proceedings of 2012 ASCE Structures Congress Chicago IL.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Attary, N., Symans, M., Nagarajaiah, S., Reinhorn, A. M., Constantinou, M. C., Sarlis, A. A., Pasala, D. T. R., & Taylor, D. P.
Affiliations
  • Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (US)
  • Rice University (US)
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
  • Taylor Devices, Inc. North Tonawanda NY
ORCID
Venue
Earthquake Spectra
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-11
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
2163-2194
ISSN
  • 1944-8201 (ISSN-L)
  • 8755-2930
DOI
10.1193/101913eqs273m
OpenAlex
W2140246943
Cited by
46
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Earthquake Spectra (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (CMMI‐0830391)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Vibration Control and Rheological Fluids
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Seismic Performance and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Keywords
negative stiffness device, highway bridges, seismic response, shaking table test, viscous dampers, bridge piers, system identification, numerical model calibration, multi-span bridges

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