Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)

Vol-2, Issue-2 , 2016

ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

Comparison of PID Control of system with Passive control

1
Salsala Abubaker, 2Dr.S.Nagan, and 3Dr.T.Nasar
1
Ph.D Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Noorul Islam University, Thucklay, India
2
Associate Professor - Department of Civil Engineering, Thyagarajar college of engineering,Madurai, India.
3
Assistant Professor Department of Applied Mechanics and Hydraulics, National Institute
of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal,India.

Abstract : New civil engineering structures are
long and slender and they have less damping.
Therefore they are subjected to large vibrations
when earthquake or wind acts. These excitations
may cause structural collapse of the structure.
Therefore to control these vibrations
supplementary control devices are used. Tuned
liquid column damper (TLCD) is one of a
passive control device to reduce the excitations.
TLCD will transfer the energy from the structure
to TLCD by the motion of water in a U-shape
tube like devices fitted with an orifice opening.
Due to this motion the excitations will reduced.
The aim of this paper is to study the effectiveness
of fuzzy logic control algorithm in TLCD system.
The results are compared with structure only,
passive, PID controlled system. From this paper,
the vibrations can be effectively suppressed with
the PID controller.
Yalla et al [4, 5], Hrovet et al [6] etc were worked
with semi active TLCD. Abe et al [3], Zeigler [8],
Soong [9], Adeli [10] etc were also worked with
various aspects of TLCD.
The behaviour of the structure due to
excitation can be accounted by PID control.The
limits are calculated by trial and error method.
Control methods provide a method of
approximate reasoning like human decision making
process. The effectiveness of the PID controlled
system which is subjected to unit step force is
studied.
2. The System
The testing system is shown in Fig 1.

Keywords: Tuned liquid column damper, control

device, state, passive, PID controller.

1. Introduction
Now the civil engineering structures are light, long
and low damping structures. Hence the excitation
will affect the stability of the structures. Hence the
Fig. 1: the system
researchers focus on the structural control which
reduces the excitations by dissipating the energy. The The equation of motion of the system can be written
structural control can be done in three ways: as as [1]:
passive, active and semi active. There is no need of
external force in passive system, but in an active
system a large amount of external force was needed
for its working. A small external power source like
battery is used in Semi active devices. (1)
Where,
Tuned liquid column dampers (TLCD) are structural mass
one of the varieties of a tuned liquid damper (TLD). damping coefficient of the structure
This will reduce the vibrations by transferring the structural stiffness
energy from the main structure to TLCD by the structural displacement
motion of water in a U-shape tube. Firstly the TLCD structural velocity
was proposed by Sakai et.al [7]. Haroun et al [2], acceleration of the structure
 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-2 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

mass of the water column in the damper=(Al)

stiffness of the water column in the
damper=(2Ag)
displacement of the water in the damper
velocity of the water in the damper
acceleration of the water in the damper
_ density of water
A- area of cross section of the tube
l- total length of the water column
- length ratio (= b/l)
b- horizontal length of the column
g- gravitational constant
F(t)- external force acting in the structure
u(t)- control force
In state space form Eq (1) represented as,
Fig. 2: The test system

(2) In this paper unit step loading is used for excitation.

Then the state space form, The TLCD is placed on the top floor of the structure.
(3) The TLCD is designed as the liquid mass of TLCD is
1% of first generalized mass of structure, the length
Where X=
ratio of TLCD is 0.9 and max=15. The system is
A= analysed with passive and PID control and the
results are compared.
B=
The building response can be represented as
Y=CX+Du (4) 4. Results
Where,
The simulation is done by Matlab Simulink.
C=[I], D=[0]
First the system is analysed structure only, the with
passive control. Then the system is also analysed
3. Properties of Test system
with PID control with limits of proportional (P) =
1285.535, integral (I) = 0.66 and derivative (D)=0.
The system is shown in Fig 6,[6].The lumped
This limits got from trial and error method. Matlab
mass on each floor of the structure is 1313386
Simulink test models and the simulation results are
kN and the stiffness matrix K in kN/m is
shown below.

The damping ratio of structure is assumed to be 3% Fig. 3: Structure only

in each mode. From the eigen value, we got the
natural frequency as 0.23, 0.35, 0.42, 0.49 and 0.56
Hz.

Fig. 4: The system with passive control

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 498

 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-2 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

From the Figs 6-8, the output of the each systems

are given. We got the absolute maximum
displacement of the structure is more reduced in PID
controlled system with respect to passive and
structure only systems. The percentage reduction in
PID control is nearly 58% and that in passive is 56%.
Fig. 5: PID controlled system Comparatively PID controlled system is more
p
efficient than passive system and structure only
system.
-6
x 10
6
6. Conclusion
Displacement of structure in meters

4
From this study, we can see that PID
2 controlled system is comparatively more efficient
0
than passively controlled and structure only systems.
Passive control system shows more control than
-2
structure only system. TLCD is also very efficient in
-4
reducing vibrations due to the external forces.
-6
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time in seconds References
Max:0.0000055m
[1] Housner GW, Bergman LA, Caughey TK,
Fig. 6: output of structure only Chassiakos AG, Claus RO, Masri SF et al. Structural
control: past, present, and future.J Eng Mech
3
x 10
-6
1997;123(9):897971.
[2] Haroun MA, Pires JA. Active orifice control in
Displacement of structure in meters

2 hybrid liquid column dampers. In: Proceedings of the

First World Conference on Structural Control, vol. I,
1
Los Angeles, FA1. USA: IASC,1994:6978.
0 [3] Abe M, Kimura S, Fujino Y. Control laws for semi-
active tuned liquid column damper with variable
-1
orifice opening. Paper presented at 2nd International
-2 Workshop on Structural Control, Hong Kong,
December 1996.
-3
0 20 40 60 80 100 [4] S.K. Yalla, A. Kareem, J.C. Kantor, Semi-active
Time in seconds tuned liquid column dampers for vibration control of
Max:0.0000024m structures,Eng. Structures, 23, pp:1469-1479, 2001
[5] S.K. Yalla , A. Kareem, Optimum absorber
Fig. 7: output of passive system. parameters for tuned liquid column dampers, J.
Structural Eng., 126, PP:906-915, 2000.
[6] Hrovat D, Barak P, Rabins M, Semi-active versus
passive or active tuned mass dampers for structural
x 10
-6
controlJ EngMech,ASCE;109(3),pp:691705, 1983.
2
[7] Sakai F, Takaeda S, Tamaki T. Tuned liquid column
0
damper- new type device for suppression of building
Displacement in meters

-2 vibrations,In: Proceedings of international

-4 conference on high rise buildings,pp: 926-31, 1989.
-6
[8] Ziegler F, The tuned liquid column damper as the
-8
cost - effective alternative of the mechanical damper
in civil engineering structures,Int J Acoustics
-10
Vib,pp:12(1):25-39, 2007.
-12
0 20 40 60 80 100 [9] Soong TTActive structural control - theory and
Time in seconds
practice London and New York: Longman and
Max:0.0000023m Wiley, 1991.
[10] HojjatAdeli, Smart structures and building
Fig. 8: output of PID controlled system. automation in the 21st century, The 25th

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 499

 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-2 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

International symposium in automation and Robotics

in construction, June 26-29,2008.
[11] Felix Weber, GlaucoFeltrin, and Olaf
Huth,Guidelines for Structural Control, SAMCO
Final Report 2006.
[12] T.K. Datta,A state-of-the-art review on active
control of structures,iset Journal of Earthquake
Technology, Paper No. 430, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 1-17,
March 2003.
[13] Nikos G. Pnevmatikos ,New strategy for controlling
structures collapse against earthquakes, Natural
Science, Vol.4, Special Issue, 667-676 ,2012.
[14] S. Pourzeynali, P. Jooeib,Semi-active Control of
Building Structures using Variable Stiffness Device
and Fuzzy Logic, IJE TRANSACTIONS A: Basics
Vol. 26, No. 10, 1169-1182,October 2013.
[15] Monica PTRACU1, Ioan DUMITRACHE2, Petre
PTRU3, A comparative study for advanced
seismic vibration control algorithms. U.P.B. Sci.
Bull., Series C, Vol. 74, Iss. 4, 2012

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 500