1387

2
1
-1
-2
ashoosht@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir

.
. (Tuned Mass Damper) TMD
.
.
. IDARC
. 70
4 8 TMD
.

: IDARC

-1
) (TMD Tuned Mass Damper .
. .
1909 ] .[1 1928
] .[2 1956
] . [3
] .[4 1967
] .[5 1981
] .[6 .
.
] .[7
].[10

-2

91775 -1111

h.afzali@gmail.com
 1387

1 . CS MS KS
d . ud , us ug

.
( M s + md )u&&s + C s u& s + K s u s = ( M s + md )u&&g md u&&d )(1
) md u&&d + c d u& d + k d u d = md (u&&s + u&&g )(2

kd
md
Ks cd

Ms

Cs

-1

md u&&d ) (2 ) (1 ) (3 ) (4 :
M s u&&s + C s u& s + K s u s = M s u&&g + FTMD )(3
FTMD = cd u& d + k d u d )(4
FTMD .
) (2) (3) (4 .

. IDARC
] .[9
.
IDARC .
4 8 .
3/8 3/2 .
5 .
. ].[10

-2
TMD ] .[3
.
] .[8
.

. .
.

TMD .
(Root Mean Square) RMS . )
(5 .
 1387

i=n

y 2
i
= YRMS i =1 )(5
n
Yi ti n
. .
RMS .
TMD .

-3
4 .
.
. RMS
TMD . ) (2 ) (3 RMS
. ) (4 ) (5 RMS

) TMD in 4th floor ( m = 0.03 ) TMD in3rd floor ( m = 0.03

30
Decrease of RMS of Roof
)Displacement ( %

25
20
15
10
5
0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
PGA

-2 4) RMS(

) TMD in 4th floor ( m=0.03 ) TMD in 3rd floor ( m=0.03

30
Decrease of RMS of Roof
)Displacement ( %

25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
PGA

-3 4) RMS(
 1387

) TMD in 4th floor ( m = 0.03 ) TMD in 3 rd floor ( m = 0.03

30

Decrease of RMS of
) Base Shear ( %
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
PGA

-4 4) RMS(

) TMD in 4th floor ( m = 0.03 ) TMD in 3 rd floor ( m = 0.03

30
Decrease of RMS of
) Base Shear ( %

25
20
15
10
5
0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
PGA

-5 4) RMS(

) (6 ) (9 8 RMS .

TMD in 8th floor TMD in 7th floor TMD in 6th floor

80
Decrease of RMS of Roof
) Displacement ( %

60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
0.05 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45
PGA

-6 8) RMS(
 1387

TMD in 8th floor TMD in 7th floor TMD in 6th floor

80

Decrease of RMS of Roof

) Displacement ( %
60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
0.05 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45
PGA

-7 8) RMS(
TMD in 8th floor TMD in 7th floor TMD in 6th floor

25
Decrease of RMS of Base

20
) Shear ( %

15

10

0
0.05 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55
PGA

-8 8) RMS(

TMD in 8th floor TMD in 7th floor TMD in 6th floor

25
Decrease of RMS of Base

20
) Shear ( %

15

10

0
0.05 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55
PGA

-9 8) RMS(

RMS
.
. TMD
. 0/25 g TMD
. 8 . 8
.
TMD 0/35 g
.
. 0/35 g 8
 1387

. 8 RMS
20 15 . 8
.
.

-4
-
. .
.

.
.
.
) & f S (u , u :
M s u&&s + C s u& s + f s (u , u& ) = M s u&&g + FTMD )(6
Ee . .
.
E h (t ) = f S (u , u& ).du E e )(7
IDARC
. ) (10 ) (11 4
.

without TM D TM D in 4th floor TM D in 3rd floor

2.50E+04
)Total Hysteretic Energy (KN-mm

2.00E+04

1.50E+04

1.00E+04

5.00E+03

0.00E+00
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
PGA

-10 4

) (12 ) (13 8 .
.
. 13
. TMD
. 0/45 g
.
 1387

without TM D TM D in 4th floor TM D in 3rd floor

1.00E+05

)Total Hysteretic Energy (KN-mm

8.00E+04

6.00E+04

4.00E+04

2.00E+04

0.00E+00
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
PGA

-11 4

without TM D TM D in 8th floor TM D in 7th floor TM D in 6th floor

7.00E+04
)Total Hysteretic Energy (KN-mm

5.60E+04

4.20E+04

2.80E+04

1.40E+04

0.00E+00
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
PGA

-12 8

without TM D TM D in 8th floor TM D in 7th floor TM D in 6th floor

4.00E+05
)Total Hysteretic Energy (KN-mm

3.20E+05

2.40E+05

1.60E+05

8.00E+04

0.00E+00
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
PGA

-13 8

.
TMD .
 1387

TMD ) (Active Mass

) (Active Tendon .
.

.
.

-5
- .
.
.
-2 4 0/25 g 8
0/35 g . .
.
.
-3 .
.
.
-4 .
.
TMD .

-8
1.Frahm, H. ,( 1909)Device for damping vibrations of bodies, US patent #989958, Oct. 30.
2.Ormondroyd, J. and Den Hartog, J. P. ,( 1928)The theory of dynamic vibration absorber, Trans. ASME,
APM. 50-7,9-22.
3.Den Hartog, J. P. , (1956) Mechanical Vibration, McGraw-Hill, New York.
4. Bishop, R. E. D. ; Welbourn, D. B.,(1952) The Problem of the Dynamic Vibration Absorber: , Engineering,
Lond. ,174,769.
5. Falcon, K. C., Stone, B. J., Simcock, W. D. and Andrew, C. , (1967)Optimization of vibration absorbers: a
graphical method for use on idealized systems with restricted damping, J. Mech. Engng. Sci,9,374-381
6.Randall, S. E., Halsted, D. M. and Taylor, D. L. , (1981) Optimum vibration absorbers for linear damped
systems , J. Mech. Des. ASME,103,908-913
7. Rana, R. and Soong, T. T. , (1998)Parametric study and simplified design of tuned mass dampers,
Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, No.3, pp. 193-204.
8. Tsai, H. C. , Lin G. C. , (1993) Optimum tuned mass dampers for minimizing steady-state response of
support excited and damped systems, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol 22, 957-973
9. Valles, R. E. , Reinhorn, A. M. , Kunnath, S. K. , Li, C. and Madan A. , () IDARC 2D Version 4.0:
computer program for the inelastic damage analysis of buildings , Technical Report NCEER--,
University of New York at Buffalo.

.10 "(1385) "

.