Error Analysis for Pseudodynamic Test Method. II: Application
Publication: Journal of Engineering Mechanics
Volume 116, Issue 7
Abstract
Error propagation characteristics for the pseudodynamic test method based on implicit time‐integration schemes are evaluated and compared to those for an explicit time‐integration scheme. For random errors and a linear structure with one degree of freedom, the error amplification factor for the implicit scheme is generally lower than that for the explicit scheme. The difference is small when the time step is small compared to the period of oscillation of the structure, and increases for larger time steps. The advantages of the implicit scheme become more apparent for an N‐degree‐of‐freedom structure consisting of N equal masses connected by shear springs of equal stiffness, and errors that occur independently from one story to the next. In this case, the error amplification factor at first increases as the number of degrees of freedom is increased, but then decreases and appears to approach an asymptotic value of unity when the number of degrees of freedom becomes very large. As an example of an inelastic system, the effect of random measurement errors on the response of an elastic‐perfectly plastic oscillator is evaluated. This example serves to verify the range over which linearity of the error structure is applicable.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Brigham, O. E. (1974). The fast Fourier transform. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
2.
Hulbert, G. M., and Hughes, T. J. R. (1987). “An error analysis of truncated starting condition in step‐by‐step time integration: Consequences for structural dynamics.” Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 15(7), 901–910.
3.
Peek, R., and Yi, W. H. (1990). “Error analysis for pseudodynamic test method. I: Analysis.” J. Engrg. Mech., ASCE, 116(7), 1618–1637.
4.
Shing, P. S. B., and Mahin, S. A. (1983). “Experimental error propagation in pseudodynamic testing.” Report No. UCB/EERC‐83/12, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif., Jun.
5.
Shing, P. S. B., and Mahin, S. A. (1987a). “Cumulative experimental errors in pseudodynamic tests.” Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 15(4), 409–424.
6.
Shing, P. S. B., and Mahin, S. A. (1987b). “Elimination of spurious higher‐mode response in pseudodynamic tests.” Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 15(4), 425–445.
7.
Thewalt, C. A., and Mahin, S. A. (1987). “Hybrid solution techniques for generalized pseudodynamic testing.” Report No. UCB/EERC‐87/09, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif., Jul.
8.
Yi, W. H. (1988). “Experimental error analysis for pseudodynamic test method.” Project Report, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., Aug.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 ASCE.
History
Published online: Jul 1, 1990
Published in print: Jul 1990
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.