THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL BUILDINGS

Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)

Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI:10.1002/tal.181

CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES WITH PASSIVE

AND ACTIVE TUNED MASS DAMPERS

S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI*

Civil Engineering Faculty, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Valiasr-Mirdamad Crossing, Tehran-19697, Iran

SUMMARY
Tuned mass dampers (TMDs) and active tuned mass dampers (ATMDs) are control devices added in tall buildings
to suppress the response of buildings in irregular external excitations such as earthquakes and wind. The
performance of both passive and active damper systems can be assessed by parametric studies. This paper presents
a brief description of the theory of passive and active tuned mass dampers. In this work, the effect of TMDs has
been studied by changing the frequency ratio of the damper to the first mode of the structure. It was observed that
the extra damping provided by TMDs, called effective damping, can primarily be obtained from design charts
developed for this purpose. A 25-storey building is designed and analysed using these charts as an example. The
behaviour of a structure with an active tuned mass damper is investigated. The related parameters and equations of
the active mass damper for the building are solved and its behaviour arising from external loads is studied. The
conventional studies, which are based on white-noise excitations, usually overestimate the performance of TMDs
and ATMDs. Hence, in order to study the behaviour of a building with a TMD and an ATMD in real excitations,
El-Centro and Tabas earthquakes are selected. The results show a significant increase in the effect of TMD
performance in controlling the structural displacements by using additional control devices. Copyright  2002
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1. INTRODUCTION
The availability of modern methods of structural analysis and the use of new construction materials
result in lighter and more flexible building structures. This impetus, in turn, could lead to the
discomfort of tenants and uncertainties in structures in certain types of high-rise buildings, as reported
in technical reports. A review of results in the literature indicates that such undesirable effects on
tenants highly depend on the acceleration response of the building, while the safety of structures
depend on the displacement response of the building. To limit the structural response within an
acceptable range, passive and active control devices are used in most tall buildings.
Attempts to apply tuned mass dampers (TMDs) to civil engineering structures against external
excitations began in 1970. A series of research projects was conducted during the 1970s on a response-
controlled structure. Yao (1978) laid down a more rigorous controlling and theory based on concepts
of structural control. This research probed more deeply, through parametric study, tuned mass dampers
and active tuned mass dampers (ATMDs) and the effectiveness of them in moderating the dynamic
characteristics of structures. Later, different types of passive and active response control systems were
proposed for civil engineering structures. Theoretical analyses were conducted. The results of analyses
conducted on a significant number of those clearly show the effectiveness of the systems.

* Correspondence to: M. Yahyai, Civil Engineering Faculty, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Valiasr-Mirdamad Crossing,
Tehran-19697, Iran.

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received June 2000
Accepted June 2000
2 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

Figure 1. Tuned mass damper. f, external excitation; m, mass; k, stiffness; c, damping; X, displacement; subscript
1, main system; subscript 2, tuned mass damper

2. TUNED MASS DAMPERS

Tuned mass dampers (vibration absorbers) are viscous spring–mass units which are added to vibratory
systems to reduce their dynamic motion. The mechanical model of translational vibration of a tuned
mass damper–building system is shown in Figure 1, such that it oscillates at the same frequency as that
of the structure but with a phase shift. The mass is usually attached to the building through a spring–
dashpot system and energy is dissipated by the relative motion which develops between the TMD mass
and structure (James et al., 1980; Kwok and Samali, 1995; Soong, 1990; Xu, 1996).
In a one-degree-of-freedom system fitted with a tuned mass damper, as shown in Figure 1, the
equations of the system subjected to an external excitation f can be written in the form

m1x1 ‡ c1 x_ 1 ‡ k1 x1 ˆ c2 y_ ‡ k2 y ‡ f …1†

m2y ‡ c2 y_ ‡ k2 y ˆ m2x1 …2†

in which m1, k1, c1 are the mass, stiffness and damping of main system, respectively, and m2, k2, c2 are
those of TMD. In the above equations, y = y(t) = x2(t) x1(t) is the relative displacement between
TMD and building.
The effectiveness of a TMD can be evaluated in terms of effective damping. By replacing the two-
degree-of-freedom system (with tuned mass damper) with an equivalent one-degree-of-freedom
system, shown in Figure 2, an effective damping ce of an equivalent system can be defined as the
damping required to sustain the same magnitude of response under the same excitation. The

Figure 2. Equivalent one-degree-of-freedom system fitted with a tuned mass damper. f, external excitation; X1,
displacement of main system; m1, mass of main system; ce, effective damping

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
 CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES 3

Figure 3. Design chart for effective damping, xe, for damping coefficient xs = 0
02. !TMD, !s, frequency of tuned
mass damper and of the structure, respectively

performance of a tuned mass damper system in buildings and other structures can be assessed by
parametric studies (Kwok and Samali, 1995; Xu and Kwok, 1994).

2.1 Parametric analyses

Several analyses have been made in this research to investigate the performance of tuned mass damper
by changing mass ratio, position of TMD in different floors and increasing the number of TMDs in a
building. It is seen that by increasing the mass ratio, the damping of the building increases linearly, and
hence the displacement of the structure reduces particularly when the frequency of excitation is near to
the fundamental frequency of the structure, whereas the velocity and acceleration of the controlled
structure remains almost the same. It is also seen that by changing the position of the TMD in the
floors, the damping of the structure changes by a small amount while the response of the structure

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
4 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

increases. It is seen that a suitable position for adjusting the TMD system is near the top of the
building.
It is observed that, by adjusting a second TMD tuned with a 2nd mode of vibration which is the
dominant frequency in terms of human perception, the most suitable place for getting maximum
performance from the second TMD is below the mid-height of the building.
As a result of this study, it is seen that, for a building fitted with a tuned mass damper, the total
effective damping xt of the building can be taken as the linear sum of the structural damping xs and the
effective damping xe provided by the TMD (Kwok and Samali, 1995; Xu and Kwok, 1994). Hence we
can write

t ˆ s ‡ e …3†

For this purpose, design charts have been developed by analysing about 14 000 buildings. To
estimate the effective damping of a structure with TMD and the related tuning frequency ratio, thse
charts can be used. A sample of these charts is shown in Figure 3 for which 2800 buildings were
analysed. These charts are for effective damping of TMD for mass ratio of 2%. By using such charts,
one can evaluate the tuning frequency ratio and the damping evaluated in this frequency ratio so that
the optimum damping for a structure can be obtained.

2.2 Numerical example for tuned mass dampers

In order to identify the effect of a TMD system and check the charts mentioned above, we consider a
25-storey building for investigation. The related parameters are the mass of each floor, equal to 12
404
t s2 m 1, and the damping ratio of the first mode of vibration, assigned as 2%. The parameters of TMD
are the mass; equal to 4
644 t s2 m 1, which is about 2% of the mass of fundamental mode of the
building, and the damping ratio of the damper, set as 15%. The model is subjected to the Tabas
earthquake, and a sinusoidal base excitation is taken as white-noise excitation. The frequency of
sinusoidal excitation is set to 1
10 times the fundamental frequency of the building. The behaviour of
the structure under this load, near the fundamental frequency of the building is investigated.
From the chart, the tuning frequency of the TMD is about 98% of the fundamental frequency of the
structure, which corresponds to a an effective damping ratio of about xe = 7
4%. Hence the total
damping ratio of the first mode of the structure with the TMD system is xt = xs ‡ xe =
0
02 ‡ 0
074 = 0
094. The analysis of the 25-storey building shows the damping ratio is about
xt = 0
09372  0
094. Therefore, it can be concluded that these charts are a good reference to calculate
the properties of a TMD system at the primary design stage of buildings.
In this section of the paper, the behaviour of a building with a TMD system in base excitations is
considered. The maximum acceleration of excitations is set to 0
10 g. Because most conventional
parametric studies are based on white-noise excitations and these excitations usually overestimate the
performance of TMDs, El-Centro and Tabas earthquakes are selected for analyses to see the behaviour
of a building with a TMD in real base excitations.
The uncontrolled and controlled displacement of the 25th floor of the structure are shown in Figures
4 and 5. Figure 4 shows the displacement under El-Centro earthquake. As it is seen, the TMD
decreases the response of the structure to 87% of that in an uncontrolled building. By evaluating storey
drift and storey shear values, shown in Figures 6 and 8, it was seen that storey drift and storey shear
decrease to 96% and 99%, respectively, of those in the uncontrolled structure.
Also, by considering Figure 5, it is seen that the TMD system reduces the response of the structure
by 8% as compared with the values for the uncontrolled structure. The storey drift and storey shear
values shown in Figures 7 and 9 reduce by 4% and 3%, respectively. It is concluded that TMDs have

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
 CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES 5

Figure 4. Linear displacement, at time t, of the top of the structure under El-Centro excitation. TMD, tuned mass
damper

Figure 5. Linear displacement, at time t, of the top of the structure under Tabas excitation. TMD, tuned mass
damper

Figure 6. Storey drift (horizontal axis) under El-Centro excitation. TMD, tuned mass damper. Vertical axis: storey

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
6 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

Figure 7. Storey drift (horizontal axis) under Tabas excitation. TMD, tuned mass damper

Figure 8. Storey shear (horizontal axis) under El-Centro excitation. TMD, tuned mass damper

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
 CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES 7

Figure 9. Storey shear (horizontal axis) under Tabas excitation. TMD, tuned mass damper

less effect in reducing the response of a building in real excitation, specially in those TMD, whose
frequency is different from the fundamental frequency of buildings. Hence, we have to use other
devices to control the buildings under such loadings.

3. ACTIVE TUNED MASS DAMPERS

In the previous section it was seen that tuned mass dampers are not effective devices to reduce
vibrations whose frequency of excitation is different from the fundamental frequency of buildings. So,
in order to increase the effectiveness of tuned mass dampers we have to use additional devices. In this
section, active tuned mass damper equations are solved and added to the TMD system.

Figure 10. Tuned mass damper system with active control force, u. For definitions of variables, see Figure 1

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
8 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

Generally, an active tuned mass damper is a feedback control system which is designed to sense
structural motions and to generate a corrective control force acting on the structure.
Consider a TMD system designed to control the first mode of a tall building. The configuration is
given in Figure 10 in which f represents the external excitation and u is the control force added to the
system. The equations of motion of the system can be written in the form (Abdel-Rohman and
Leipholz, 1979; James et al., 1980; Soong, 1990):

m1x1 ‡ c1 x_ 1 ‡ k1 x1 ˆ c2 y_ ‡ k2 y ‡ f u …4†
m2y ‡ c2 y_ ‡ k2 y ˆ u m2x1 …5†

In the above equations, u is taken as a compressive force.

For more complex multi-degree-of-freedoms, the equations of motion can be expressed in a state-
space vector form (James et al., 1980; Soong, 1990; Ung and Yao, 1978; Yang et al., 1992):

z_ …t† ˆ Az…t† ‡ Bu…t† ‡ Hf …t† …6†

where

" #
x…t†
z…t† ˆ …7†
x_ …t†

is a 2n-dimensional state vector and

" #
0 I
Aˆ …8†
K M 1
CM 1

" #
0
Bˆ …9†
DM 1

and

" #
I
Hˆ …10†
EM 1

The matrix A is namely a system matrix of dimension 2n  2n. The matrices B and H have
dimensions 2n  m and 2n  r, respectively, specifying the locations of controllers and external
excitations in the state-space equation.
Since only the first mode of a structure is of concern and only one damper will be installed on
building, the equations of motion can be expressed in the form

z_ ˆ Az ‡ Bu ‡ f …11†

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
 CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES 9

8 9 8 9
>
> z1 >
> >
> x1 >
>
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> > > >
< z2 >
= <y>
> =
zˆ ˆ …12†
>
> z3 >
> >
> x_ 1 >
>
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> > > >
>
: ; : > > ;
z4 y_
2 3
0 0 1 0
6 7
6 0 0 0 1 7
6 7
6 7
A ˆ 6 k1 k2 c1 c2 7 …13†
6 m1 7
6 m1 m1 m1 7
4    5
m2 ‡ m1 ‡ mc21
k1 k2 k2 c1 c2
m1 m1 m2
8 9
> 0 >
>
> >
>
>
> >
>
>
< 0 >
=
Bˆ …14†
>
> 1 >
>
>
> m1 >
>
>
> >
>
: ;
1
m1 ‡ m12

and
8 9
>
> 0 >
>
>
> >
>
< 0 >
> =
f ˆ f …15†
>
> >
>
>
>
m1 >
>
>
: f >
;
m1

The effectiveness of an active control system is usually measured in terms of structural safety,
human comfort and minimum cost. Structural safety can be ensured by imposing a constraint on the
maximum allowable deflection and/or acceleration at a critical location on the structure. In addition, a
human comfort requirement dictates that the acceleration should not violate some acceptable criterion.
The cost of active control imposes a third constraint that can usually be expressed as a function of the
magnitude of the control forces applied to the structure. While it is desirable to maximize the safety of
the structure and to minimize the cost, both requirements cannot be achieved simultaneously. In order
to reach a compromise of the two conflicting desirable requirements, an objective function, referred as
a performance index J, can be formulated with the appropriate weighting functions. Many
performance indices have been covered in the literature for different requirements in vibration
control and various types of designs. A commonly used performance index for civil engineering
purpose is given as (Hrovat et al., 1983; James et al., 1980, Soong, 1990, Ung and Yao, 1978; Yang
et al., 1992):
Z tf
1
Jˆ ‰zT …t†Qz…t† ‡ uT …t†Ru…t†Šdt …16†
2 0

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
10 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

In which Q is 2n  2n positive semidefinite matrix and R is an m  m positive definite matrix. The

matrices Q and R are referred to as weighting matrices, whose magnitudes are assigned according to
the relative importance attached to the state variables and to the control forces in the minimization
procedure. The assignment of large values to the elements of Q indicates that reduction in response is
given priority over the control forces required. The vice versa is true when the elements of R are large
in comparison with those of Q. Hence, by varying the relative magnitudes of Q and R one can adjust
the controllers to achieve a proper trade-off between control effectiveness and control energy
consumption. Frequently, one can assign the weighting matrix Q and check the stability condition by
solving the eigenvalues of the controlled structure. This will involve trial-and-error procedures. When
the number of controllers is not small, this approach is feasible. For instance, this method will be
suitable if every floor of the building is installed with-controller or if one mode of vibration is chosen
for creating the equation. However, if the number of controllers is small compared with the number of
degrees of freedom of the building, systematic procedures have to be adopted to assign the Q matrix in
order to guarantee the stability of the controlled structure.
Let tf → ? in Equation (16). It follows from modern control theory that the optimal linear feedback
control law for u(t) is given by

u…t† ˆ Gz…t† …17†

in which

Gˆ R 1 BT P …18†

where G is called as the control gain. The matrix P is a symmetric matrix known as a Ricatti matrix,
which satisfies the Ricatti equation:

PA PBR 1 BT P ‡ AT P ‡ Q ˆ 0 …19†

3.1 Numerical example for active tuned mass dampers

As seen in previous section, a TMD system loses its ability to control structures in excitations whose
frequency of vibration is different from that of the building. In order to identify the effect of an active
system added to TMD, we consider the same 25-storey building as before. The related parameters of
building and TMD system are the same and additional parameters for calculating related equations are
given below.
The matrix Q is considered in two forms Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0], and Q = diag[1, 0
001, 1, 0
001], and R,
which is a scalar in this condition, is set as R = 10 4 and R = 10 5. So by solving the Ricatti equation
we obtain control gain G as follows:
. for R = 10 5
and Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0], G = [557
7727 0 85
9450 7
9041];
. for R = 10 5
and Q = diag[1, .001, 1, .001], G = [555
6584 3
3738 8
7836 13
8258];
. for R = 10 4
and Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0], G = [162
9293 0 15
3785 3
5356];
. for R = 10 4
and Q = diag[1, .001, 1, .0], G = [160
6889 0
3753 10
1102 4
6186].
In order to realize the behaviour of the system, the time delay for the active control system is
considered and set as 0
06 s. By assuming R = 10 5, Figures 11 and 12 depict the displacement of the
top floor of the building under two earthquakes. ATMD(1) indicates Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0], and
ATMD(2) indicates Q = diag[1, 0
001, 1, 0
001]. The results show that by controlling the structure,

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
 CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES 11

Figure 11. Displacement, at time t, of top storey with an active tuned mass damper (ATMD) under El-Centro
excitation. TMD, tuned mass damper

even with time delay, the response of structure decreases under excitations with frequencies different
from the fundamental frequency of the structure. As it is seen, the response of the structure under El-
Centro earthquake reduces to 35% [in ATMD(1)] and 47% [in ATMD(2)] of those in the uncontrolled
structure. Under Tabas earthquake the values are about 37% and 45%. The values of storey drift are
evaluated and shown in Figures 13 and 14. From these figures it can be concluded that the active
control system is a powerful device to improve a TMD’s properties by reducing storey drift values. As
it is seen, under El-Centro earthquake the storey drift is about 61% and 62% for ATMD(1) and
ATMD(2), respectively. The same values under Tabas earthquake are 38% and 45%. The values of
ATMD with R = 10 4 are also evaluated and shown in Table 1 for the purpose of comparison. By
considering the values in Table 1, it is seen that by increasing the value of R, the required force and
relative displacement of damper and building decreases, but response of the controlled structure
increases. So one should have to make a balance between response reduction, control force and
relative displacement in order to evaluate the best control parameters for ATMD system and building.
It is also seen that the relative values computed by the matrix Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0] are more accurate
than those calculated by the matrix Q = diag[1, 0
001, 1, 0
001]. It is concluded that by changing the
values of matrix Q even by a small amount, significant changes occur in the results. It is also seen that,
in order to gain to the best values for matrix Q, proper procedures must be extracted.

4. CONCLUSIONS
In this research, the effect of TMDs has been considered in changing the dynamic properties of

Figure 12. Displacement, at time t, of top storey with an active tuned mass damper (ATMD) under Tabas
excitation. TMD, tuned mass damper

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
12 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

Figure 13. Storey drift values (horizontal axis) in El-Centro excitation. ATMD, active tuned mass damper

Figure 14. Storey drift values (horizontal axis) in Tabas excitation. ATMD, active tuned mass damper

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
 CONTROL OF RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES 13

Table 1. Values of maximum displacement, relative displacement and required control force for an active tuned
mass damper (ATMD)

Excitation
ATMD parameters El-Centro Tabas
R = 1  10 , Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0]
5

Maximum displacement (m) 0
354 0
3684

Relative displacement between ATMD and structure 0
9939 2
6419
Required force for ATMD (ton) 19
732 23
743
R = 1  10 5, Q = diag[1, 0
001, 1, 0
001]
Maximum displacement (m) 0
4714 0
4477
Relative displacement between ATMD and structure 0
7508 2
0086
Required force for ATMD (ton) 15
887 19
33
R = 1  10 4, Q = diag[1, 0, 1, 0]
Maximum displacement (m) 0
5409 0
5476
Relative displacement between ATMD and structure 0
6863 1
7372
Required force for ATMD (ton) 7
841 13
776
R = 1  10 4, Q = diag[1, 0
001, 1, 0
001]
Maximum displacement (m) 0
5638 0
5526
Relative displacement between ATMD and structure 0
6201 1
5452
Required force for ATMD (ton) 7
401 12
316
Note: for definition of R and Q, see Section 3.

buildings. It was seen that by increasing the mass ratio of TMD to building, the damping of the
building increases linearly. The displacement of the structure reduces particularly when the frequency
of excitation is near to the fundamental frequency of the structure. By changing the position of TMD to
different floors, the appropriate position for adjusting the TMD is found to be near the top of the
building’s. It is observed that by adjusting a second TMD tuned to the 2nd mode of vibration, which is
the dominant frequency with regard to human comfort, the best results are obtained when a second
TMD is installed in the intermediate floors of buildings. As a result of these analyses it was observed
that effective damping by a TMD can be obtained from design charts developed. An analysis was made
to verify these charts and hence it is suggested that these charts can be used in primarily calculation of
dynamic properties of TMDs. By analysing structures under real earthquakes it can be observed that
although tuned mass dampers are effective for excitations whose frequency is near to the fundamental
frequency of buildings, they have less effect in controlling buildings whose frequency of vibration is
different than that of the TMD. So, other devices are offered to control the buildings under such loads.
Active tuned mass dampers are helpful devices to satisfy the safety condition in structures. In these
systems, when moderate reduction in response is encountered, the system can operate in passive mode.
The added active system increases the TMD’s performance in controlling the structure displacements,
when high reduction of response is achieved.

REFERENCES

Abdel-Rohman M, Leipholz HHE. 1979. General approach to active structural control. Journal of Engineering
Mechanics Division, ASCE 105(6): 1007–1023.
Hrovat D, Barak P, Rabins M. 1983. Semi-active versus passive or active tuned mass dampers for structural
control. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 109(3): 691–705.
James Chang CH, Soong TT. 1980. Structural control using active tuned mass dampers. Journal of Engineering
Mechanics Division, ASCE 106(6): 1091–1098.

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)
14 S. K. RASOULI AND M. YAHYAI

Kwok KCS, Samali B. 1995. Performance of tuned mass dampers under wind loads. Engineering Structures 17(9):
655–667.
Soong TT. 1990. Active Structural Control: Theory and Practice. John Wiley: New York.
Ung SS, Yao JP. 1978. Action control of building structures. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division
104(2): 335–350.
Xu YL, Kwok KCS. 1994. Semianalytical method for parametric study of tuned mass dampers. Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE 120(3): 747–763.
Xu YL. 1996. Parametric study of active mass damper for wind-excited tall buildings. Engineering Structures,
18(1): 64–76.
Yang JN, Li Z, Liu SC. 1992. Stable controllers for instantaneous optimal control. Journal of Engineering
Mechanics, ASCE 118(8): 1612–1630.

Copyright  2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 11, 1–14 (2002)