4.7 Article

A parametric identification scheme for non-deteriorating and deteriorating non-linear hysteretic behaviour

Journal

STRUCTURAL CONTROL & HEALTH MONITORING
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages 108-131

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/stc.142

Keywords

parametric identification; deterioration; hysteretic behaviour; Masing model; distributed element model; non-linear behaviour

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The identification of deteriorating and non-deteriorating non-linear rate-independent hysteretic phenomena is considered using a recently developed model form. The model type, developed by authors Ashrafi and Smyth is a generalized Masing model and is based on the observed memory behaviour of distributed element models. The model's direct analytical link between the force-displacement response functions and the distribution of the distributed element yield displacements together with the ductility permits a parametric identification to be performed using non-linear optimization techniques for arbitrary response time histories. The Weibull and Rayleigh distributions are considered in this study. The identified parameters accurately determine the physical model and are robust when the simulation model assumed distribution was the same as that used for identification, and also in the over-parametrized case when the model was more complex than necessary. In the Linder-parametrized case, where the assumed model lacked the complexity of the underlying phenomenon, relatively accurate response agreement was obtained without accurate parameter convergence. Such a result was not robust in the validation phase with other arbitrary excitations. Overall however, assuming sufficient complexity in the identified model, the approach provides a means of identifying deterioration with a fixed-parameter model suitable for simulation with arbitrary excitations. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available