Dynamic equations are presented that have been deduced for a real-time dynamic substructuring shaking table test of an equipment-structure system, based on the branch mode substructure method. The equipment is adopted as the experimental substructure, which is loaded by the shaking table, while the structure is adopted as the numerical substructure. Real-time data communication occurs between the two substructures during the test. A real-time seismic energy calculation method was proposed for the calculation of energy responses, both in the experimental substructure and the numerical substructure. Taking a representative four-story steel frame/equipment model, real-time dynamic substructuring shaking table tests and overall model tests were executed. The proposed real-time dynamic substructuring shaking table testing method was verified by comparing the test results with shaking table test results for the overall model. The energy responses of each component in the equipment-structure system, using different connection types, also were studied. Changes in the connection types can lead to changes in the energy responses of the equipment-structure system, especially with respect to the equipment. The choice of the connection for the equipment-structure coupled system should take into account the operational performance objective of the equipment.
AhnTSKimYJKimSD (2013) Large-scale testing of coupled shear wall structures with damping devices. Advances in Structural Engineering16(11): 1943–1956.
2.
AlhanCGavinHP (2005) Reliability of base isolation for the protection of critical equipment from earthquake hazards. Engineering Structures27(9): 1435–1449.
3.
BojórquezETerán-GilmoreARuizSE, et al. (2011) Evaluation of structural reliability of steel frames: interstory drift versus plastic hysteretic energy. Earthquake Spectra27(3): 661–682.
4.
ChenBWengSZhiL, et al. (2016) Response control of a large transmission tower-line system under seismic excitations using friction dampers. Advances in Structural Engineering20(8): 1155–1173.
5.
ChenGSoongT (1994) Energy-based dynamic analysis of secondary systems. Journal of Engineering Mechanics120(3): 514–534.
6.
ChenMCPantoliEWangX, et al. (2015) Full-scale structural and nonstructural building system performance during earthquakes: part I—specimen description, test protocol and structural response. Earthquake Spectra32(2): 737–770.
7.
FanYCLohCHYangJN, et al. (2009) Experimental performance evaluation of an equipment isolation using MR dampers. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics38(3): 285–305.
8.
FiliatraultASullivanT (2014) Performance-based seismic design of nonstructural building components: the next frontier of earthquake engineering. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration13(1): 17–46.
9.
FurukawaSSatoEShiY, et al. (2013) Full-scale shaking table test of a base-isolated medical facility subjected to vertical motions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics42(13): 1931–1949.
10.
GünaySMosalamKTakhirovS (2015) Real-time hybrid simulation in a shaking table configuration for parametric studies of high-voltage equipment and IEEE693 development. Nuclear Engineering and Design295: 901–909.
11.
HanMQinL (2004) Seismic analysis on multiply supported secondary systems with detached connecting area. World Earthquake Engineering20(4): 52–58.
12.
Heredia-ZavoniEPérez-PérezABarranco-CiciliaF (2010) A method for the transfer function matrix of combined primary–secondary systems using classical modal decomposition. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics35(2): 251–266.
13.
JiangXYanSC (1994) Two step method of the branched modal and its use for liquid-structure-pile-soil interaction system. Journal of Vibration Engineering7(4): 346–350.
14.
KalkanEKunnathSK (2008) Relevance of absolute and relative energy content in seismic evaluation of structures. Advances in Structural Engineering11(1): 17–34.
15.
LeeSKParkECMinKW, et al. (2007) Real-time hybrid shaking table method for the performance evaluation of a tuned liquid damper controlling seismic response of building structures. Journal of Sound and Vibration302(3): 596–612.
16.
LiHNGuoW (2006) State-of-the-art review on development of floor response spectrum. World Earthquake Engineering22(2): 7–13.
17.
LiJChenHSunZS (2003) Shaking table tests on spatial structure-eq21 model systems. Engineering Mechanics20(1): 157–161.
18.
LinYZChristensonR (2011) Real-time hybrid test validation of a MR damper controlled building with shake table tests. Advances in Structural Engineering14(1): 79–92.
19.
LuLYLinGL (2008) Predictive control of smart isolation system for precision equipment subjected to near-fault earthquakes. Engineering Structures30(11): 3045–3064.
20.
MercanORiclesJM (2009) Experimental studies on real-time testing of structures with elastomeric dampers. Journal of Structural Engineering135(9): 1124–1133.
21.
MosalamKMGünaySTakhirovS (2016) Response evaluation of interconnected electrical substation equipment using real-time hybrid simulation on multiple shaking tables. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamic45(14): 2389–2404.
22.
MosquedaGRetamalesRFiliatraultA, et al. (2009) Testing facility for experimental evaluation of non-structural components under full-scale floor motions. Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings18(4): 387–404.
23.
NakashimaMKatoHTakaokaE (1992) Development of real-time pseudo dynamic testing. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics21(1): 79–92.
24.
National Standard of the People’s Republic of China (2010) Codes for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB50011-2010). Beijing, China: China Building Industry Press.
25.
ReggioADe AngelisM (2013) Optimal design of an equipment isolation system with nonlinear hysteretic behaviour. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics42(13): 1907–1930.
26.
ReggioADe AngelisM (2014) Combined primary-secondary system approach to the design of an equipment isolation system with high-damping rubber bearings. Journal of Sound and Vibration333(9): 2386–2403.
27.
TagawaYTuJYStotenDP (2010) Inverse dynamics compensation via “simulation of feedback control systems.”Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering225(1): 137–153.
28.
TanPLiXLiuL, et al. (2014) Control mechanism and performance analysis of a mega-sub structure control system. China Civil Engineering Journal47(11): 55–63.
29.
TangZYChenSCZhangJX, et al. (2016) Study on the stability prediction of real-time dynamic substructuring system based on shaking table. Engineering Mechanics33(12): 217–224.
30.
TuTNDaoTNAaletiS, et al. (2018) Seismic assessment of a three-story wood building with an integrated CLT-lightframe system using RTHS. Engineering Structures167: 659–704.
31.
WangFJiangXL (2010) Analysis of soil-structure interaction system based on transformer substations including main plant and electrical equipment interaction. Advances in Structural Engineering18(11): 1959–1980.
32.
WangFLiHNYiTH (2015) Energy spectra of constant ductility factors for orthogonal bidirectional earthquake excitations. Advances in Structural Engineering18(11): 1887–1900.
33.
WangQWangJTJinF, et al. (2011) Real-time dynamic hybrid testing for soil-structure interaction analysis. Rock and Soil Mechanics31(12): 1690–1702.
34.
WongKKFCheeYL (2004) Energy dissipation of tuned mass dampers during earthquake excitations. Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings13(2): 105–121.
35.
YanXLiZHanQ, et al. (2014) Shaking tables test on a long-span rigid-framed bridge considering soil-structure interaction. Engineering Mechanics31(2): 58–65.
36.
ZhuSShiXLeungRCK, et al. (2014) Impact of construction-induced vibration on vibration-sensitive medical equipment: a case study. Advances in Structural Engineering17(6): 907–920.
