4.7 Article

A comparison between different optimization criteria for tuned mass dampers design

期刊

JOURNAL OF SOUND AND VIBRATION
卷 329, 期 23, 页码 4880-4890

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2010.05.015

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tuned mass sampers (TMDs) are widely used strategies for vibration control in many engineering applications, so that many TMD optimization criteria have been proposed till now. However, they normally consider only TMD stiffness and damping as design variables and assume that the tuned mass is a pre-selected value. In this work a more complete approach is proposed and then also TMD mass ratio is optimized. A standard single degree of freedom system is investigated to evaluate TMD protection efficiency in case of excitation at the support. More precisely, this model is used to develop two different optimizations criteria which minimize the main system displacement or the inertial acceleration. Different environmental conditions described by various characterizations of the input, here modelled by a stationary filtered stochastic process, are considered. Results show that all solutions obtained considering also the mass of the TMD as design variable are more efficient if compared with those obtained without it. However, in many cases these solutions are inappropriate because the optimal TMD mass is greater than real admissible values in practical technical applications for civil and mechanical engineering. Anyway, one can deduce that there are some interesting indications for applications in some actual contexts. In fact, the results show that there are some ranges of environmental parameters ranges where results attained by the displacement criterion are compatible with real applications requiring some percent of main system mass. Finally, the present research gives promising indications for complete TMD optimization application in emerging technical contexts, as micro-mechanical devices and nano resonant beams. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据