C H A P T E R 4

Tuned Mass
Damper
Systems

4.1

INTRODUCTION
A tuned mass damper (TMD) is a device consisting of a mass, a spring, and a
damper that is attached to a structure in order to reduce the dynamic
response of the structure. The frequency of the damper is tuned to a particular
structural frequency so that when that frequency is excited, the damper will
resonate out of phase with the structural motion. Energy is dissipated by the
damper inertia force acting on the structure. The TMD concept was first
applied by Frahm in 1909 (Frahm, 1909) to reduce the rolling motion of ships as
well as ship hull vibrations. A theory for the TMD was presented later in the
paper by Ormondroyd and Den Hartog (1928), followed by a detailed
discussion of optimal tuning and damping parameters in Den Hartogs book on
mechanical vibrations (1940). The initial theory was applicable for an undamped
SDOF system subjected to a sinusoidal force excitation. Extension of the theory
to damped SDOF systems has been investigated by numerous researchers.
Significant contributions were made by Randall et al. (1981), Warburton (1981,
1982), Warburton and Ayorinde (1980), and Tsai and Lin (1993).
This chapter starts with an introductory example of a TMD design and a
brief description of some of the implementations of tuned mass dampers in
building structures. A rigorous theory of tuned mass dampers for SDOF systems
subjected to harmonic force excitation and harmonic ground motion is discussed
next. Vari- ous cases, including an undamped TMD attached to an undamped
SDOF system, a damped TMD attached to an undamped SDOF system, and
a damped TMD attached to a damped SDOF system, are considered. Time
history responses for a
217

218 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

range of SDOF systems connected to optimally tuned TMD and subjected to harmonic and seismic excitations are presented. The theory is then extended to MDOF
systems, where the TMD is used to dampen out the vibrations of a specific mode.
An assessment of the optimal placement locations of TMDs in building structures is
included. Numerous examples are provided to illustrate the level of control that can
be achieved with such passive devices for both harmonic and seismic excitations.
4.2

AN INTRODUCTORY EXAMPLE
In this section, the concept of the tuned mass damper is illustrated using the twomass system shown in Figure 4.1. Here, the subscript d refers to the tuned mass
damper; the structure is idealized as a single degree of freedom system.
Introducing the following notation
2

= k
-m

(4.1)

c = 2m

(4.2)

kd
2
d = ------md

(4.3)

cd = 2 d d m d

(4.4)

and defining m as the mass ratio,

md
m = ------m

(4.5)

the governing equations of motion are given by

p

= - ---- m
u
Primary mass 1 + mu + 2u + u
m

kd

md
m
cd

c
u

(4.6)

FIGURE 4.1:
system.

SDOF-TMD

u + ud

Section 4.2

Tuned mass ud + 2 d d u d +
d u d

=
u

An Introductory Example 219

(4.7)

The purpose of adding the mass damper is to limit the motion of the structure
when it is subjected to a particular excitation. The design of the mass damper
involves specifying the mass md ,
kd, and damping coefficient cd . The
stiffness
optimal choice of these quantities is discussed in Section 4.4. In this example, the
near-optimal approximation for the frequency of the damper,
d =

(4.8)

is used to illustrate the design procedure. The stiffnesses for this frequency
combi- nation are related by

(4.9)

k d = mk

Equation (4.8) corresponds to tuning the damper to the fundamental period of the
structure.
Considering a periodic excitation,
p = p sint

(4.10)

u sin t + 1

the response is given by

u = u d sint + 1 +
2
ud =

(4.11)
(4.12)

where u and denote the displacement amplitude and phase shift, respectively.
The critical loading scenario is the resonant condition, = . The solution for this
case has the following form:

u =

--p
--
-k
m

------------------1
-------------------2
1 +1 ---- -- +
--- ----- 2

--1
----= u
2d

(4.13)

2d
(4.14)

2
1
tan1 = ------ +
-------m 2d
tan2 =

--2

(4.15)
(4.16)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 220 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

220 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Note that the response of the tuned mass is 90 out of phase with the response of
the primary mass. This difference in phase produces the energy dissipation
contributed by the damper inertia force.
The response for no damper is given by
u =
p
-- ------
k 2

(4.17)

= ---
1
2

(4.18)

To compare these two cases, we express Eq. (4.13) in terms of an equivalent

damping ratio:
(4.19)
p
-
u =
--1
----k
2e

2
1
1 + ---- -- + ---- ---- 2

where
=

m
-----

(4.20)

2 d

Equation (4.20) shows the relative contribution of the damper parameters to the
total damping. Increasing the mass ratio magnifies the damping. However, since
the added mass also increases, there is a practical limit on m. Decreasing the
damping coefficient for the damper also increases the damping. Noting Eq.
(4.14), the rela- tive displacement also increases in this case, and just as for the
mass, there is a prac- tical limit on the relative motion of the damper. Selecting
the final design requires a compromise between these two constraints.

Example 4.1: Preliminary design of a TMD for a SDOF system

Suppose =

0 and we want to add a tuned mass damper such that the equivalent

damping ratio is 10%. Using Eq. (4.20), and setting e = 0.1, the following relation
between m and d is obtained:
m

2
1
----- 1 + ---- -- + --- ----- 2 =
2

2d

0.1

The relative displacement constraint is given by Eq. (4.14):

(1)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 221 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

--1
---- u
2d

(2)

Section 4.2

An Introductory Example 221

Combining Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) and setting = 0 leads to

= 0.1
m

(3)

u d
-----
-- 2
1+
---
2
u

Usually, u d is taken to be an order of magnitude greater than u . In this case,

Eq. (3) can be approximated as
(4)
m
u d
---- - - -
-- 0.1
2 u

The generalized form of Eq. (4) follows from Eq. (4.20):

10
u

------------2ue d u

m
Finally, taking u
=

(5)

yields an estimate for m:

2 0 . 1
m = - --- -- --- -- --- - = 0.02
10

(6)

This magnitude is typical for m. The other parameters are

u
--- - d = 2 - = 0.05
d
u

(7)

kd = mk = 0.02
k

(8)

and from Eq. (4.9)

It is important to note that with the addition of only 2% of the primary

mass, we obtain an effective damping ratio of 10%. The negative aspect is the
large rela- tive motion of the damper mass; in this case, 10 times the
displacement of the pri- mary mass. How to accommodate this motion in an
actual structure is an important design consideration.

A description of some applications of tuned mass dampers to building structures is presented in the following section to provide additional background on
this type of device prior to entering into a detailed discussion of the underlying
theory.

222 Chapter 4

4.3

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

EXAMPLES OF EXISTING TUNED MASS DAMPER SYSTEMS

Although the majority of applications have been for mechanical systems, tuned
mass dampers have been used to improve the response of building structures
under wind excitation. A short description of the various types of dampers and
several building structures that contain tuned mass dampers follows.

4.3.1 Translational Tuned Mass Dampers

Figure 4.2 illustrates the typical configuration of a unidirectional translational
tuned mass damper. The mass rests on bearings that function as rollers and allow
the mass to translate laterally relative to the floor. Springs and dampers are
inserted between the mass and the adjacent vertical support members, which
transmit the lateral out-of-phase force to the floor level and then into the
structural frame. Bidirectional translational dampers are configured with
springs/dampers in two orthogonal directions and provide the capability for
controlling structural motion in two orthogonal planes. Some examples of early
versions of this type of damper are described next.
John Hancock Tower (Engineering News Record, Oct. 1975)
Two dampers were added to the 60-story John Hancock Tower in Boston to reduce
the response to wind gust loading. The dampers are placed at opposite ends of the
fifty-eighth story, 67 m apart, and move to counteract sway as well as twisting due to
the shape of the building. Each damper weighs 2700 kN and consists of a lead-filled
steel box about 5.2 m square and 1 m deep that rides on a 9-m-long steel plate. The
lead-filled weight, laterally restrained by stiff springs anchored to the interior columns of the building and controlled by servo-hydraulic cylinders, slides back and
forth on a hydrostatic bearing consisting of a thin layer of oil forced through holes
in the steel plate. Whenever the horizontal acceleration exceeds 0.003g for two consecutive cycles, the system is automatically activated. This system was designed and
manufactured by LeMessurier Associates/SCI in association with MTS System
Corp., at a cost of around 3 million dollars, and is expected to reduce the sway of
the building by 40 to 50%.
Support
md

Floor beam

Direction of motion

FIGURE 4.2: Schematic diagram of a translational tuned mass damper.

Section 4.3

Examples of Existing Tuned Mass Damper Systems 223

Citicorp Center (Engineering News Record, Aug. 1975, McNamara 1977,

Petersen 1980)
The Citicorp (Manhattan) TMD was also designed and manufactured by LeMessurier Associates/SCI in association with MTS System Corp. This building is 279 m
high and has a fundamental period of around 6.5 s with an inherent damping ratio
of 1% along each axis. The Citicorp TMD, located on the sixty-third floor in the
crown of the structure, has a mass of 366 Mg, about 2% of the effective modal mass
of the first mode, and was 250 times larger than any existing tuned mass damper at
the time of installation. Designed to be biaxially resonant on the building structure
with a variable operating period
6.25 s 20%, adjustable linear damping from 8
of
to 14%, and a peak relative displacement of 1.4 m, the damper is expected to
reduce the building sway amplitude by about 50%. This reduction corresponds to
increasing the basic structural damping by 4%. The concrete mass block is about
2.6 m high with a plan cross section of 9.1 m by 9.1 m and is supported on a series of
twelve 60-cm-diameter hydraulic pressure-balanced bearings. During operation,
the bearings are supplied oil from a separate hydraulic pump, which is capable
of rais- ing the mass block about 2 cm to its operating position in about 3
minutes. The damper system is activated automatically whenever the
horizontal acceleration exceeds 0.003g for two consecutive cycles and will
automatically shut itself down when the building acceleration does not exceed
0.00075g in either axis over a 30-minute interval. LeMessurier estimates
Citicorps TMD, which cost about 1.5 million dollars, saved 3.5 to 4 million
dollars. This sum represents the cost of some 2800 tons of structural steel that
would have been required to satisfy the deflection constraints.
Canadian National Tower (Engineering News Record, 1976)
The 102-m steel antenna mast on top of the Canadian National Tower in Toronto
(553 m high including the antenna) required two lead dampers to prevent the
antenna from deflecting excessively when subjected to wind excitation. The
damper system consists of two doughnut-shaped steel rings, 35 cm wide, 30 cm
deep, and
2.4 m and 3 m in diameter, located at elevations 488 m and 503 m. Each ring holds
about 9 metric tons of lead and is supported by three steel beams attached to the
sides of the antenna mast. Four bearing universal joints that pivot in all directions
connect the rings to the beams. In addition, four separate hydraulically activated
fluid dampers mounted on the side of the mast and attached to the center of each
universal joint dissipate energy. As the lead-weighted rings move back and forth,
the hydraulic damper system dissipates the input energy and reduces the towers
response. The damper system was designed by Nicolet, Carrier, Dressel, and Associates, Ltd., in collaboration with Vibron Acoustics, Ltd. The dampers are tuned to
the second and fourth modes of vibration in order to minimize antenna bending
loads; the first and third modes have the same characteristics as the prestressed concrete structure supporting the antenna and did not require additional damping.
Chiba Port Tower (Kitamura et al., 1988)

224 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Chiba Port Tower (completed in 1986) was the first tower in Japan to be equipped
with a TMD. Chiba Port Tower is a steel structure 125 m high weighing 1950
metric tons and having a rhombus-shaped plan with a side length of 15 m. The
first and second mode periods are 2.25 s and 0.51 s, respectively for the x
direction and 2.7 s and 0.57 s for the y direction. Damping for the fundamental
mode is estimated at 0.5%. Damping ratios proportional to frequencies were
assumed for the higher modes in the analysis. The purpose of the TMD is to
increase damping of the first mode for both the x and y directions. Figure 4.3
shows the damper system. Manu- factured by Mitsubishi Steel Manufacturing
Co., Ltd., the damper has mass ratios with respect to the modal mass of the first
mode of about 1/120 in the x direction and 1/80 in the y direction; periods in the
x and y directions of 2.24 s and 2.72 s, respectively; and a damper damping ratio
of 15%. The maximum relative displacement of the damper with respect to the tower is about 1 m in each direction.
Reductions of around 30 to 40% in the displacement of the top floor and 30% in
the peak bending moments are expected.
The early versions of TMDs employ complex mechanisms for the bearing and
damping elements, have relatively large masses, occupy considerable space, and are
quite expensive. Recent versions, such as the scheme shown in Figure 4.4, have
been designed to minimize these limitations. This scheme employs a multiassemblage of elastomeric rubber bearings, which function as shear springs, and bitumen
rubber compound (BRC) elements, which provide viscoelastic damping capability.
The device is compact in size, requires unsophisticated controls, is multidirectional,
and is easily assembled and modified. Figure 4.5 shows a full-scale damper being
subjected to dynamic excitation by a shaking table. An actual installation is contained in Figure 4.6.

FIGURE 4.3: Tuned mass damper for Chiba-Port Tower. (Courtesy of J. Connor.)

Section 4.3

Examples of Existing Tuned Mass Damper Systems 225

Weight mass

BRC

Multi-stage
rubber bearings

Air brake

Limit switch

Vibration direction of building

FIGURE 4.4: Tuned mass damper with spring and damper assemblage.

FIGURE 4.5: Deformed positiontuned mass damper. (Courtesy of J. Connor.)

FIGURE 4.6: Tuned mass damperHuis Ten Bosch Tower, Nagasaki. (Courtesy
of J. Connor.)

226 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Auxiliary mass
Actuator
Support

Floor beam

Direction of motion

FIGURE 4.7: An active tuned mass damper configuration.

The effectiveness of a tuned mass damper can be increased by attaching an auxiliary mass and an actuator to the tuned mass and driving the auxiliary mass with the
actuator such that its response is out of phase with the response of the tuned mass.
Figure 4.7 illustrates this scheme. The effect of driving the auxiliary mass is to produce
an additional force that complements the force generated by the tuned mass and
therefore increases the equivalent damping of the TMD (we can obtain the same
behavior by attaching the actuator directly to the tuned mass, thereby eliminating the
need for an auxiliary mass). Since the actuator requires an external energy source,
this system is referred to as an active tuned mass damper. The scope of this chapter is
restricted to passive TMDs. Active TMDs are discussed in Chapter 6.
4.3.2 Pendulum Tuned Mass Damper
The problems associated with the bearings can be eliminated by supporting the
mass with cables which allow the system to behave as a pendulum. Figure 4.8(a)
shows a simple pendulum attached to a floor. Movement of the floor excites the
pendulum. The relative motion of the pendulum produces a horizontal force that
opposes the floor motion. This action can be represented by an equivalent SDOF
system that is attached to the floor, as indicated in Figure 4.8(b).
The equation of motion for the horizontal direction is
W d
+
T sin -------- u + u d
(4.21)
= 0
g
where T is the tension in the cable. When is small, the following
approximations apply:
ud =

L
sinL

T W d
Introducing these approximations transforms Eq. (4.21) to

(4.22)

Section 4.3

Examples of Existing Tuned Mass Damper Systems 227

u

L
keq

8
md
ud

md

t=0

u + ud

(a) Actual system

(b) Equivalent system

FIGURE 4.8: A simple pendulum tuned mass damper.

W
md ud + -----L

= m u
d

(4.23)

and it follows that the equivalent shear spring stiffness is

(4.24)

W
k eq = ------d
-L

The natural frequency of the pendulum is related to k eq by

k
-------eq = d =
g
md

(4.25)

-L

Noting Eq. (4.25), the natural period of the pendulum is

T d = 2 L

(4.26)

--g

The simple pendulum tuned mass damper concept has a serious limitation.
Since the period depends on L, the required length for large Td may be greater than

the typical story height. For instance, the length for Td = 5 s is 6.2 meters whereas
the
story height is between 4 and 5 meters. This problem can be eliminated by resorting to
the scheme illustrated in Figure 4.9. The interior rigid link magnifies the
support motion for the pendulum and results in the following equilibrium
equation:

228 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

md
u + u1

u + u1 + u d

FIGURE 4.9: Compound

pendulum.

W
d
+ ------ -- = 0
d
m d u + u1 + u d u
L

(4.27)

The rigid link moves in phase with the damper and has the same displacement
amplitude. Then, taking u1 = ud in Eq. (4.27) results in

m
Wd
mdu d + -------d =

2L
-----u
u
2

(4.28)

The equivalent stiffness is Wd/2L, and it follows that the effective length is equal to
2L. Each additional link increases the effective length by L. An example of a pendulum-type damper is described next.
Crystal Tower (Nagase and Hisatoku, 1990)
The tower, located in Osaka, Japan, is 157 m high and 28 m by 67 m in plan,
weighs 44000 metric tons, and has a fundamental period of approximately 4 s in
the north- south direction and 3 s in the east-west direction. A tuned pendulum
mass damper was included in the early phase of the design to decrease the windinduced motion of the building by about 50%. Six of the nine air cooling and
heating ice thermal storage tanks (each weighing 90 tons) are hung from the top
roof girders and used as a pendulum mass. Four tanks have a pendulum length
of 4 m and slide in the north-south direction; the other two tanks have a
pendulum length of about 3 m and slide in the east-west direction. Oil dampers
connected to the pendulums dissi- pate the pendulum energy. Figure 4.10 shows
the layout of the ice storage tanks that were used as damper masses. Views of the
actual building and one of the tanks are presented in Figure 4.11 on page 230.
The cost of this tuned mass damper system was around $350,000, less than 0.2%
of the construction cost.

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 229

2 for structural control

in G direction
4 for structural control
10.5 m in B direction

27.6 m

9.0 m

Displacement of regenerative tanks

used in structural control (roof plan)

x
x
4 m67.2 m

Support frame
Suspension material
Ice storage
tank

Ice storage tank

(90 ton)
Guide roller
Coil spring

Coil spring
Oil
damper

Stopper

Oil damper
Coil spring

Elevation of regenerative tank

TMD fill-scale experiment system

FIGURE 4.10: Pendulum damper layoutCrystal Tower. Takemaka Corporation.

A modified version of the pendulum damper is shown in Figure 4.12 on page
231. The restoring force provided by the cables is generated by introducing curvature in the support surface and allowing the mass to roll on this surface. The vertical
motion of the weight requires an energy input. Assuming is small, the equations
for the case where the surface is circular are the same as for the conventional pendulum with the cable length L, replaced with the surface radius R.
4.4

TUNED MASS DAMPER THEORY FOR SDOF SYSTEMS

In what follows, various cases ranging from fully undamped to fully damped
condi- tions are analyzed and design procedures are presented.

4.4.1 Undamped Structure: Undamped TMD

Figure 4.13 shows a SDOF system having mass m and stiffness k, subjected to
both external forcing and ground motion. A tuned mass damper with mass md
and stiff- ness kd is attached to the primary mass. The various displacement
measures are u g, the absolute ground motion; u, the relative motion between the
primary mass and the ground; and ud , the relative displacement between the
damper and the primary mass. With this notation, the governing equations take
the form

ConCh04v2.fm Page 230 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

230 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

FIGURE 4.11: Ice storage tankCrystal Tower. (Courtesy of Takemaka

Corporation.)

m d u d + u+ kd u d = mdag

(4.29)

ma g +
mu + ku k du d =
p

(4.30)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 231 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

where ag is the absolute ground acceleration and p is the force loading applied to
the primary mass.

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 231

8
R

md

Floor
(a)

md
keq

(b)

FIGURE 4.12: Rocker pendulum.

p

kd

md
m

u + ug

ug

ud + u + ug

FIGURE 4.13: SDOF system coupled with a TMD.

The excitation is considered to be periodic of frequency ,
ag =

a g sin
t

(4.31)

232 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

p = p sin t

(4.32)

Expressing the response as

u =
ud =

u sin
t u

(4.33)
(4.34)

sin t
and substituting for these variables, the equilibrium equations are transformed to
md 2 + kd u d m d 2 u =
m d a
k d u d + m 2 + ku =
The solutions for u and u
by

(4.35)
g

ma g +
p

are given

(4.36)

1
p
d
u =
---- -

ma 1 + m 2
g
-------- d
----------------------- ---- ---- -----

k D1
k
D1

= --p--- -m---------
m
a g
m
------ --- - -- -----
k d D1
k d D 1

(4.37)

(4.38)

where
2

D1 = 1 1 d m

(4.39)

and the terms are dimensionless frequency ratios,

= =
d =

--- ---------------
k m
- =

- ------------------- ---
d

kd
md

(4.40)

(4.41)

Selecting the mass ratio and damper frequency ratio such that
2

1 +m = 0
d

reduces the solution to

(4.42)

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 233

u =
-p
k

(4.43)

p
2
= -- --- +
m
a g
------ --- kd
kd

(4.44)

This choice isolates the primary mass from ground motion and reduces the
response due to external force to the pseudostatic value, p k. A typical range
for m is 0.01 to 0.1. Then the optimal damper frequency is very close to the
forcing frequency. The exact relationship follows from Eq. (4.42).

opt

------
----------

(4.45)

1+
m
We determine the corresponding damper stiffness with

kd

=
d

opt

m
opt
d

----2m
----m
= -----1- + m

(4.46)

Finally, substituting for kd , Eq. (4.44) takes the following form:

a
= 1-----+----- --m
---- p--- g--
+
m k
2

(4.47)

We specify the amount of relative displacement for the damper and

determine m with Eq. (4.47). Given m and , the stiffness is found using Eq.
(4.46). It should be noted that this stiffness applies for a particular forcing
frequency. Once the mass damper properties are defined, Eqs. (4.37) and (4.38)
can be used to determine the response for a different forcing frequency. The
primary mass will move under ground motion excitation in this case.
4.4.2

Undamped Structure: Damped TMD

The next level of complexity has damping included in the mass damper, as shown in
Figure 4.14. The equations of motion for this case are

m d u d + c d u d + k d u d + md u
=

md
ag

mu + ku cdud kdud = ma g +
p

(4.48)

(4.49)

234 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

The inclusion of the damping terms in Eqs. (4.48) and (4.49) produces a phase
shift between the periodic excitation and the response. It is convenient to work
initially with the solution expressed in terms of complex quantities. We express
the excitation as
ag =

p = ge

(4.50)

it

(4.51)

p
e
where a

it

and p are real quantities. The response is taken as

u = ue
ud =
ud
e

it

(4.52)

i
t

(4.53)

where the response amplitudes, u and ud , are considered to be complex quantities.

The real and imaginary parts of ag correspond to cosine and sinusoidal input.
Then the corresponding solution is given by either the real (for cosine) or
imaginary (for sine) parts of u and ud. Substituting Eqs. (4.52) and (4.53) in the
set of governing
equations and cancelling eit from both sides results in
m d 2 + ic d + kd ud m d 2 u
=
ic d + kd ud + m 2 + ku
=

md
a g
ma
+ p

(4.54)

(4.55)
g

The solution of the governing equations is

p
2
2
u = --- ----f
+
i2 f

---kD 2

a g
2
---
m ------- 1 + mf
i2f1 + m
d

(4.56)
2

kD2

kd
k

md

m
cd
ug

u + ug

ud + u + ug

FIGURE 4.14: Undamped SDOF system coupled with a damped TMD system.

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 235

2
ud = -p---------a g
- --- -m
----kD2 kD2

(4.57)

where
2

2 2

2
D2 = 1 f
m f
d
f = -----

+ i2f
1 1 + m
d

(4.58)
(4.59)

and was defined earlier as the ratio of to [see Eq. (4.40)].

Converting the complex solutions to polar form leads to the following
expressions:
(4.60)

i
u = p H e 1 -a---g-m
----H
i 2
e
k

1
i

ud = p--H e
k

a
m

2
i 3

---- -----H e

(4.61)

where the H factors define the amplification of the pseudo-static responses, and the
s are the phase angles between the response and the excitation. The various H
and terms are as follows:
2

2 2

f + 2f d
H 1 = --------------------------------------------- -----------D2
2

2 2

1 + mf + 2f1 +
H 2 = m 2
d----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------D2
H3 =
2
--- ------D2
H4 =
1
---- -----D2

(4.62)

(4.63)

(4.64)

(4.65)

D2 =

Also,

1
f

2 2 2

m f

1 = 1 3

+ 2 d f 1 1 +
m

(4.66)

(4.67)

236 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

2 = 2 3

(4.68)
2

2f 1 1 + m
tan 3 = d-------------------------------------------------------------- 2
2
2
2
1 f m f
2
tan1 =
2 d f
---------------tan2 = f 2 2

(4.69)

(4.70)

(4.71)

2f1 + m
----------------------------------d
2
2
1 + mf
For most applications, the mass ratio is less than about 0.05. Then the amplification
factors for external loading H 1 and ground motion H 2 are essentially equal. A
similar conclusion applies for the phase shift. In what follows, the solution corresponding to ground motion is examined and the optimal values of the damper properties for this loading condition are established. An in-depth treatment of the
external forcing case is contained in Den Hartogs text (Den Hartog, 1940).
Figure 4.15 shows the variation of H2 with forcing frequency for specific values of damper mass m and frequency ratio f , and various values of the damper
damping ratio, d .
d = 0, there are two peaks with infinite amplitude
When
located on each side of = 1 . As d is increased, the peaks approach each other
and then merge into a single peak located at 1. The behavior of the
amplitudes suggests that there is an optimal value of d for a given damper
configuration ( md
and kd or, equivalently, m and f ). Another key observation is that all the curves
pass through two common points, P and Q. Since these curves correspond to different values of d , the location of P and Q must depend only on m and f .
Proceeding with this line of reasoning, the expression for H2 can be written as
2

H=
2

2
2 2
a a a +
a1 + d a 2
2
1
2
d
-------------------- =
-----------------------------2
2
-2
2
2 2
a
4 a3 a4 + d
a3 + da 4

(4.72)

where the a terms are functions of m, , and f . Then for H2 to be independent of

d , the following condition must be satisfied:
a
----a1
(4.73)
= --3
a2
a4
The corresponding values for H2 are

H2

PQ

a2
---a
4

(4.74)

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 237

30
m=
f=1

0.01
d

=1

=0

25

H2

20

15

10

0
0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95
p
1

1
D
p =w

1.05

1.1

1.15

FIGURE 4.15: Plot of H2 versus .

2

Substituting for the a terms in Eq. (4.73), we obtain a quadratic equation for :
4

1 + mf 2 + 1----+ 0 .5 m
----- --- - ---- ---1+m

+f
0

(4.75)

The two positive roots 1 and 2 are the frequency ratios corresponding to points
P and Q. Similarly, Eq. (4.74) expands to

2 PQ

= --------------1----+----m
-----------------2
1 1 1 + m

(4.76)

Figure 4.15 shows different values for H2 at points

and Q. For optimal
P
behavior, we want to minimize the maximum amplitude. As a first step, we require
the values of H2 for 1 and 2 to be equal. This produces a distribution that is
symmetrical about 2 = 1 1 + m, as illustrated in Figure 4.16. Then, by increasing the damping ratio, d , we can lower the peak amplitudes until the peaks coincide with points
and Q. This state represents the optimal performance of the
P
TMD system. A further increase in d causes the peaks to merge and the
amplitude to increase beyond the optimal value.

238 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

30

25

20

>

H2

15

d
d

Q
dlopt

10

0.85

p
1l opt
0.95

0.9

1
p

p
2lo
1.05

D
=w

1.1

1.15

pt

FIGURE 4.16: Plot of H2 versus for fopt .

Requiring the amplitudes to be equal at P and Q is equivalent to the following condition on the roots:
2

1 1 + m=
1

(4.77)

1 1 + m
2

Then, substituting for 1 and 2 using Eq. (4.75), we obtain a relation between the
optimal tuning frequency and the mass ratio:
(4.78)
fopt =

d opt

----
---- ----0 .5
--- - ---m
---1+m
1

= f
opt

The corresponding roots and optimal amplification factors are

(4.79)

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 239

12

opt

H2

opt

1 0.5m
------------------------1+m

(4.80)

(4.81)

=
1 +
-- ---- ----m
-----0.5m

The expression for the optimal damping at the optimal tuning frequency is

opt

m3 0.5m
-----------------------------------------------81 + m1 0.5m

(4.82)

Figures 4.17 through 4.20 show the variation of the optimal parameters with the
mass ratio, m.
The response of the damper is defined by Eq. (4.61). Specializing this equation for the optimal conditions leads to the plot of amplification versus mass ratio
contained in Figure 4.21. A comparison of the damper motion with respect to the
motion of the primary mass for optimal conditions is shown in Figure 4.22.

0.98

fopt

0.96

0.94

0.92

0.9

0.88 0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

FIGURE 4.17: Optimum tuning frequency ratio, fopt .

0.09

0.1

ConCh04v2.fm Page 240 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

240 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

1.1
fopt
1.05

0.95

1, 2lopt

p2 lopt

1 lopt

0.9

0.85

0.8 0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.18: Input frequency ratios at which the response is independent of

damping.
0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14

dlopt

0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

FIGURE 4.19: Optimal damping ratio for TMD.

0.09

0.1

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 241

25

15

H2 l

opt

20

10

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.20: Maximum dynamic amplification factor for SDOF system (optimal
tuning and damping).
300

250

H4 l

opt

200

150

100

50

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

FIGURE 4.21: Maximum dynamic amplification factor for TMD.

0.1

242 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

20
fopt, popt,

18

dlopt

16

H
= 4
H2

10
u

12

u d

14

8
6
4
2
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.22: Ratio of maximum TMD amplitude to maximum system amplitude.

Lastly, response curves for a typical mass ratio, m
=

1.1 , and optimal

tuning

are plotted in Figure 4.23 and Figure 4.24. The response for no damper is also plotted in Figure 4.23. We observe that the effect of the damper is to limit the motion in
a frequency range centered on the natural frequency of the primary mass and
extending about 0.15. Outside of this range, the motion is not significantly influenced by the damper. d= 0.0
= 0.03
= 0.061 (op
= 0.1
d
timal)
damper
d

m = 0.01
fopt = 0.98
76

30
No
25

20

H2

15

10

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95 p
1
1lopt
p D
=w

pt
p 1.05
2 lo

1.1

1.15

1.2

FIGURE 4.23: Response curves for amplitude of system with optimally tuned TMD.

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 243

150

=
d=
d=
d=
d=
d

m=0
fopt =

0.0
0.03
0.06
0.1 1 (optimal)
0.2

.01
0.9876

H4

100

50

0.85

0.9

0.95

D
=w

1.05

1.1

1.15

FIGURE 4.24: Response curves for amplitude of optimally tuned TMD.

The maximum amplification for a damped SDOF system without a TMD,
undergoing harmonic excitation, is given by Eq. (1.32):
- -1
H = ------------2
2 1

(4.83)

Since is small, a reasonable approximation is

(4.84)

1
H -- ---2

Expressing the optimal H2 in a similar form provides a measure of the equivalent

damping ratio e for the primary mass:
e =

-----------------2H 2
1

(4.85)

opt

Figure 4.25 shows the variation of e with the mass ratio. A mass ratio of 0.02 is
equivalent to about 5% damping in the primary system.

244 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

0.12
fopt, popt,

lopt

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.25: Equivalent damping ratio for optimally tuned TMD.

The design of a TMD involves the following steps:
Establish the allowable values of displacement of the primary mass and
the TMD for the design loading. This data provides the design
values for
H2
.
and H4
opt

opt

Determine the mass ratios required to satisfy these motion constraints

from Figure 4.20 and Figure 4.21. Select the largest value of m.
Determine fopt form Figure 4.17.
Compute d :
d = fopt

(4.86)

Compute kd :
kd =

2
opt

(4.87)

d
d

Determine d

Compute cd :

mk
2
m = f

from Figure 4.19.

opt

cd = 2 d

opt

dmd

= mf opt
2 d

opt

(4.88)

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 245

Example 4.2: Design of a TMD for an undamped SDOF system

Consider the following motion constraints:
H

2 opt

(1)

H4
---- ---------- 6
H-2
opt

(2)

Constraint Eq. (1) requires m 0.05. For constraint Eq. (2), we need to take
m 0.02 . Therefore, m 0.05 controls the design. The relevant parameters are

m = 0.05

f opt = 0.94

md = 0.05m

d = 0.94

kd = m f opt
k

opt

= 0.135

Then
2

= 0.044k

4.4.3 Damped Structure: Damped TMD

All real systems contain some damping. Although an absorber is likely to be
added only to a lightly damped system, assessing the effect of damping in the
real system on the optimal tuning of the absorber is an important design
consideration.
The main system in Figure 4.26 consists of the mass m, spring stiffness k, and
viscous damping c . The TMD system has mass md , stiffness kd , and viscous damping cd . Considering the system to be subjected to both external forcing and ground
excitation, the equations of motion are

=
md u d + c d ud + k dud +
mda g
mdu

mu + cu + ku c d u d kd u d mag +
=
p

(4.89)

(4.90)

p
kd

md
m
c

cd
ug

u+
ug

FIGURE 4.26:

ud + u + ug

Damped SDOF system coupled with a damped TMD system.

246 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Proceeding in the same way as for the undamped case, the solution due to
periodic excitation (both p and ug) is expressed in polar form:
i 5 a g m
i
p
= ---H
----------H 6 e 6
5 e
u
k
k
i 7 a g m
i

= p---H
----------H 8 e 8
7 e
ud
k
k

(4.91)
(4.92)

The various H and terms are defined as follows:

2

2 2

(4.93)

f + 2 f d
H5 = --------------------------------------------- -------------D3
2

2 2

(4.94)

1 + mf + 2f1 +
H6 = m 2
----------------------------------------------------------------d
-------------------------------D3
H7 =

----- --2-D-3
8 =
1+ 2
---- -- ---- --- ---- 2
H

----------

D3 =

(4.95)

(4.96)

D3

f 2 2 m + 1 2 f 2 2 4 d f 2 2

(4.97)

+ 4f 2 2 + d f1 2 1 + m
5 = 1 7

(4.98)

6 = 2 7

(4.99)

8 = 3 7

(4.100)

tan 7 =

f 2 2 + f 1 2 1 + m
d
2-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- f 2 2 m + 1 2 f 2 2 4 d f
2

tan3 = 2

(4.101)

(4.102)

The 1 and 2 terms are defined by Eqs. (4.70) and (4.71).

In what follows, the case of an external force applied to the primary mass is
considered. Since D3 involves , we cannot establish analytical expressions for the
optimal tuning frequency and optimal damping ratio in terms of the mass ratio. In

this case, these parameters also depend on . Numerical simulations can be applied

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems

247

to evaluate H5 and H7 for a range of , given the values for m, , f , and d . Starting with specific values for
and , plots of H5 versus can be generated for a
m
range of f and d . Each H5 plot has a peak value of H5 . The particular
combi- nation of f and d that corresponds to the lowest peak value of H5 is
taken as the
optimal state. Repeating this process for different values of m and produces the
behavioral data needed to design the damper system.
Figure 4.27 shows the variation of the maximum value of H5 for the optimal
state. The corresponding response of the damper is plotted in Figure 4.28. Adding
damping to the primary mass has an appreciable effect for small m. Noting
Eqs. (4.91) and (4.92), the ratio of damper displacement to primary mass displacement is given by
-

- --

---u

H7

--------------------------- - 2-------------------------= --------2

2 2
=
f +d
H5
2
2 f
-

(4.103)

Since is small, this ratio is essentially independent of . Figure 4.29 confirms this
statement. The optimal values of the frequency and damping ratios generated
through simulation are plotted in Figures 4.30 and 4.31. Lastly, using Eq. (4.85),
H5
can be converted to an equivalent damping ratio for the primary system.
opt

e =

-----------------2H 5

(4.104)

opt

Figure 4.32 shows the variation of e with m and .

Tsai and Lin (1993) suggest equations for the optimal tuning parameters f
and d determined by curve fitting schemes. The equations are listed next for
completeness.

1 0 .5 m
2
f = ----- ---- ----- --- - ---- ---- + 1 2
1
1+m

(4.105)

2.375 1.034 m 0.426mm

3.730 16.903 m + 20.496m2 m
3m

d =

------------------------------------------------- + 0.151
0.170
81 + m1 0.5m
2

+ 0.163+ 4.980 m

(4.106)

248 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

40
=
=
=
=

35
30

0.0
0.01
0.02
0.05

0.1

H5l

opt

25
20
15
10
5
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.27: Maximum dynamic amplification factor for damped SDOF system.
300
=0.0
=0.01
=
=0.02
=0.05
0.1

250

H7l

opt

200

150

100

50

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

FIGURE 4.28: Maximum dynamic amplification factor for TMD.

0.1

Section 4.4

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for SDOF Systems 249

20
= 0.0
= 0.01
= 0.02

18
16

= 0.05
= 0.1

12
10

u d

H7
=
uH5

14

8
6
4
2
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.29: Ratio of maximum TMD amplitude to maximum system amplitude.

1
=
=
=
=
=

0.98
0.96
0.94

0.0
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.1

fopt

0.92
0.9
0.88
0.86
0.84
0.82
0.8

0.01

0.02

FIGURE 4.30:

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

Optimum tuning frequency ratio for TMD, fopt .

0.1

ConCh04v2.fm Page 250 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

250 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14

d opt

0.12
0.1
0.08
= 0.0
= 0.01
= 0.02
= 0.05
= 0.1

0.06
0.04
0.02
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

FIGURE 4.31: Optimal damping ratio for TMD.

0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14

0.12
0.1
0.08
= 0.0
= 0.01
= 0.02
= 0.05
= 0.1

0.06
0.04
0.02
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
m

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

FIGURE 4.32: Equivalent damping ratio for optimally tuned TMD.

0.1

ConCh04v2.fm Page 251 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

Section 4.5
251

Case Studies: SDOF Systems

Example 4.3: Design of a TMD for a damped SDOF system

Example 4.2 is reworked here, allowing for 2% damping in the primary system. The
same design motion constraints are considered:
H

5 opt

(1)

H7
---- ---------- 6
H--5
opt

(2)

Using Figure 4.27, the required mass ratio for = 1.2 is m 0.03. The other optimal values are fopt = 0.965 and
= 0.105 . Then
opt
d
md = 0.03m

d = 0.955

kd =

mf opt

0.027k

In this case, there is a significant reduction in the damper mass required for this
set of motion constraints. The choice between including damping in the primary
system versus incorporating a tuned mass damper depends on the relative costs
and reli- ability of the two alternatives, and the nature of the structural
problem. A TMD system is generally more appropriate for upgrading an
existing structure where access to the structural elements is difficult.

4.5

CASE STUDIES: SDOF SYSTEMS

Figures 4.33 to 4.44 show the time history responses for two SDOF systems with
periods of 0.49 s and 5.35 s, respectively under harmonic (at resonance conditions),
El Centro, and Taft ground excitations. All examples have a system damping ratio
of 2% and an optimally tuned TMD with a mass ratio of 1%. The excitation magnitudes have been scaled so that the peak amplitude of the response of the system
without the TMD is unity. The plots show the response of the system without
the TMD (the dotted line) as well as the response of the system with the TMD (the
solid line). Figures showing the time history of the relative displacement of
the TMD with respect to the system are also presented. Significant reduction in the
response of the primary system under harmonic excitation is observed. However,
optimally tuned mass dampers are relatively ineffective under seismic excitation,
and in some cases produce a negative effect (i.e., they amplify the response
slightly). This poor performance is attributed to the ineffectiveness of tuned mass
dampers for impulsive loadings as well as their inability to reach a resonant condition and therefore dissipate energy under random excitation. These results are in
close agreement with the data presented by Kaynia et al. (1981).

252 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

T = 0.49 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

1
0.8
0.6

u (m)

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
0

10
20
With TMDWithout
TMD 30
Time (s)

40

50

60

FIGURE 4.33: Response of SDOF to harmonic excitation.

6
T = 0.49 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

ud (m)

-2

-4

-6

10

20

30

40

50

60

Time (s)

FIGURE 4.34:

Relative displacement of TMD under harmonic excitation.

Section 4.5
253

Case Studies: SDOF Systems

T = 0.49 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

1
0.8
0.6
0.4

u (m)

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
Without TMD
10
With TMD 20

30

40

50

60

Time (s)

FIGURE 4.35: Response of SDOF to El Centro excitation.

6
T = 0.49 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01
4

ud (m)

-2

-4

-6

FIGURE 4.36:

10

20

30
Time (s)

40

50

60

Relative displacement of TMD under El Centro excitation.

254 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

T = 0.49 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

1
0.8
0.6
0.4

u (m)

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
Without TMD
10
With TMD 20

30

40

50

60

Time (s)

FIGURE 4.37: Response of SDOF to Taft excitation.

6
T = 0.49 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01
4

ud (m)

-2

-4

-6

10

FIGURE 4.38:

20

30
Time (s)

40

50

Relative displacement of TMD under Taft excitation.

60

Section 4.5
255

T = 5.35 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

Case Studies: SDOF Systems

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
u (m)

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
Without TMD
With TMD

-1
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Time (s)

FIGURE 4.39: Response of SDOF to harmonic excitation.

6
T = 5.35 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

ud (m)

-2

-4

-6

FIGURE 4.40:

10

20

30
Time (s)

40

50

60

Relative displacement of TMD under harmonic excitation.

256 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

T = 5.35 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
u (m)

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
Without TMD
10
With TMD 20

30

40

50

60

Time (s)

FIGURE 4.41: Response of SDOF to El Centro excitation.

6
T = 5.35 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

ud (m)

-2

-4

-6

FIGURE 4.42:

10

20

30
Time (s)

40

50

60

Relative displacement of TMD under El Centro excitation.

Section 4.5
257

T = 5.35 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

Case Studies: SDOF Systems

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
u (m)

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
Without TMD
With TMD

-1
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Time (s)

FIGURE 4.43: Response of SDOF to Taft excitation.

6
T = 5.35 s
= 0.02
m = 0.01

ud (m)

-2

-4

-6

10

FIGURE 4.44:

20

30
Time (s)

40

50

Relative displacement of TMD under Taft excitation.

60

258 Chapter 4

4.6

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

TUNED MASS DAMPER THEORY FOR MDOF SYSTEMS

The theory of a SDOF system presented earlier is extended here to deal with a
MDOF system having a number of tuned mass dampers located throughout the
structure. Numerical simulations, which illustrate the application of this theory to
the set of example building structures used as the basis for comparison of the
differ- ent schemes throughout the text, are presented in the next section.
p1

p2

k1

k2

kd

m1

m2

c1

md

c2

cd

u1 + ug

ug

u2 + ug

u2 + ug + ud

FIGURE 4.45: 2DOF system with TMD.

A 2DOF system having a damper attached to mass 2 is considered first to
intro- duce the key ideas. The governing equations for the system shown in Figure
4.45 are

m1u1 + c 1u 1 + k1 u1 k2 u 2 u1 c 2 u 2 u1
p1 m 1 u g
=

m2 u2 + c 2 u2 u1 + k 2 u 2 u1 kdu d
= p2
c du d
m2ug

md ud + kdud + cd ud = md u 2 + ug

(4.107)

(4.108)

(4.109)

The key step is to combine Eqs. (4.107) and (4.108) and express the
resulting equation in a form similar to the SDOF case defined by Eq. (4.90). This
operation reduces the problem to an equivalent SDOF system, for which the
theory of Section 4.4 is applicable. The approach followed here is based on
transforming the original matrix equation to scalar modal equations.
Introducing matrix notation, Eqs. (4.107) and (4.108) are written as
0

p1 m 1 a g

MU + CU + KU =

where the various matrices are

p2
m2 a g

kdud +
c d ud

(4.110)

Section 4.6

U =

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for MDOF Systems 259

u1

(4.111)

u2
M=

m1

(4.112)
m2

K =

k2

C =

(4.113)

k1 + k2 k 2
k2

(4.114)

c1 + c2 c2
c2

c2

We substitute for U in terms of the modal vectors and coordinates

U = 1 q1 + 2 q 2

(4.115)

The modal vectors satisfy the following orthogonality relations [see Eq. (2.211)]:
T

(4.116)

j Ki = ij j j
Mi

Defining modal mass, stiffness, and damping terms,

m j =

j
Mj
T

(4.117)
2

= j
m j

= j
K j

c j = jTC j

(4.118)

(4.119)

expressing the elements of j as

j =

j1
j2

and assuming damping is proportional to stiffness

(4.120)

= K

(4.121)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 260 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

260 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

we obtain a set of uncoupled equations for q1 and q2 :

m j q j + c j q j +
kj q j =

j1 p 1 m1 a g
j = 1, 2

+ j2 p 2 m2 a g + kd u d + c du d

(4.122)

With this assumption, the modal damping ratio is given by

c
j = -----j
-----2-j m
j

= j
--------2

(4.123)

Equation (4.122) represents two equations. Each equation defines a particular

SDOF system having mass, stiffness, and damping equal to m k, , and . Since
a TMD is effective for a narrow frequency range, we have to decide on which
modal
resonant response is to be controlled with the TMD. Once this decision is made,
the analysis can proceed using the selected modal equation and the initial
equation for the TMD [i.e., Eq. (4.109)].
Suppose the first modal response is to be controlled.
j = 1 in
Taking
Eq. (4.122) leads to

m 1 q1 + c 1 q 1 + k1 q 1 = 11p1 + 12p2

(4.124)

m1 11 + m2 12 a g + 12 kd u d + cd ud
In general, u2 is obtained by superposing the modal contributions
u2 = 12q1 + 22 q2

(4.125)

However, when the external forcing frequency is close to , the first mode
1
response will dominate, and it is reasonable to assume
u2 12 q1

(4.126)

Solving for q1

q1 =

---1
----u
12

(4.127)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 261 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

and then substituting in Eq. (4.124), we obtain

Section 4.6

1e

u 2 + c

1e

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for MDOF Systems 261

u2 + k1e u 2 = kd u d + cd ud

1e

(4.128)

1e m1e ag

where m 1e , c 1e , k 1e , p 1e , and 1e represent the equivalent SDOF

parameters for the combination of mode 1 and node 2, the node at which the
TMD is attached. Their definition equations are
m

1e

k1e =

(4.129)

--- m
1
------ 1
2
12

(4.130)

---- k 1

----2
12

1e

=
k1e

(4.131)
(4.132)

p
1 1 + 1 p
p = -----1------- ----------- ---2
2
1e
- --
--12- 12
1e = --------- m 1 11 +
m2 22
m 1

(4.133)

Equations (4.109) and (4.128) are similar in form to the SDOF equations
treated in the previous section. Both set of equations are compared next.
TMD equation

md ud + cd ud + kd ud = m d u a g
versus

(4.134)

md ud + cd ud + kd ud = m d u 2 ag
Primary mass equation

mu + cu + ku = cd u + kd ud + p mag
d
versus

m 1e u2 + c 1e u 2 +
k1e u 2
Taking

= c d u d + kd u d + p
u2 u

(4.135)

1e

1e m

1e a g

c 1e
c

1e

1e

1e

k 1e
k

(4.136)

262 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

transforms the primary mass equation for the MDOF case to

mu + cu + ku = cd u + k ud + p ma g
d
d

(4.137)

which differs from the corresponding SDOF equation by the factor . Therefore,
the solution for ground excitation generated earlier has to be modified to account
for the presence of .
The generalized solution is written in the same form as the SDOF case. We
need only to modify the terms associated with ag (i.e., H6, H8 and Their
expanded form is as follows:

2 2

H6 =

+ mf + 2f+ m
-------------------------------------------------------------------d
--------------------------------

(4.138)

D3
H8 =

(4.139)

2
2

1 + 1 + 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------D3

tan a2
tan a3

2f+
m
d
= ------------------------------------2
2
f +
-- m
2
= ------------ --- ---- ------------1 + 1 2

(4.140)

(4.141)

6 = a2 7

(4.142)

8 = a3 7

(4.143)

where D3 is defined by Eq. (4.97), and is given by Eq. (4.101).

7
From this point on, we proceed as described in Section 4.4. The mass ratio is
defined in terms of the equivalent SDOF mass.
md
m = --------m 1e

(4.144)

Given m and 1 , we find the tuning frequency and damper damping ratio using
Figures 4.30 and 4.31. The damper parameters are determined with
m d = m m

1e

d = f

opt

cd = 2
d

(4.145)
o
p
t

dm d

(4.146)

Section 4.6

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for MDOF Systems 263

Expanding the expression for the damper mass,

m m
md = =

1e

mM

1
1
----------------------------2
12

(4.148)

shows that we should select the TMD location to coincide with the maximum
amplitude of the mode shape that is being controlled. In this case, the first mode
is the target mode, and 12 is the maximum amplitude for 1.
This derivation can be readily generalized to allow for tuning on the i th
modal frequency. We write Eq. (4.127) as
qi ---1----u
i2 2

(4.149)

where i is either 1 or 2. The equivalent parameters are

m

ie

k ie

ie

(4.150)

(4.151)

= m
ie

Given m

1
--- ----m i
2
i2

and i , we specify m and find the optimal tuning with

d = f opt i

(4.152)

Example 4.4: Design of a TMD for a damped MDOF system

To illustrate the foregoing procedure, a 2DOF system having m1 m = 1 is con2
=
= 1 s and a uniform
sidered. Designing the system for a fundamental period of
T1
deformation fundamental mode profile yields the following stiffnesses (refer to
Example 1.6):
k1 = 122
k2 =

= 118.44

8 =

78.96
Requiring a fundamental mode damping ratio of 2%, and taking damping proportional to stiffness (C = K), the corresponding is
2
= 0.0064
= --------1 =
1 0 .
--- -0 2
--- -

264 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

The mass, stiffness, and damping matrices for these design conditions are
M = 10
01
K = 197.39 78.96
78.96 78.96
C =

1.26 0.51
0.51 0.51

Performing an eigenvalue analysis yields the following frequencies and

mode shapes:
1 = 6.28 rad/s

2 = 15.39 rad/s

1 = 0.5
1.0

2 =

1.0
0.5

The corresponding modal mass, stiffness, and damping terms are

m 1 =

1 M 1 = 1.25

k1 = 1 K 1 = 49.35

= 2T M2 = 1.25

k2 = 2
K 2

= 296.09

1 C1 = 0.32
c

= 2 C 2 = 1.90

2 =

= 0.02

1 = ------ 1
------2-1 m

c
------ -

= 0.049

------2-2 m
2

The optimal parameters for a TMD located at node 2, having a mass ratio of
0.01 and tuned to a specific mode, are as follows:
Mode 1: optimum location is node 2
fopt = 0.982

md = 0.0125

opt

= 0.062

kd = 0.4754

cd = 0.0096

Mode 2: optimum location is node 1

f opt =

md = 0.972

0.0125
opt

k d = 0.068

2.7974

cd = 0.0254

Section 4.6

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for MDOF Systems

265

This result is for the damper located at node 2. When located at node 1, the mass
and stiffness are reduced 75%.
The general case of a MDOF system with a tuned mass damper connected
to the nth degree of freedom is treated in a similar manner. Using the notation
defined previously, the jth modal equation can be expressed as

m j q j + c j qj + kj q j = p j + jn k d ud +
c d ud
where p

j = 1, 2, . . .

(4.153)

denotes the modal force due to ground motion and external forcing, and

jn is the element of j corresponding to the nth displacement variable. To control

the ith modal response, we set j =
i
approximation

in Eq. (4.153) and introduce the

qi ---1----u
in

(4.154)

This leads to the following equation for un :

m ie u n + c ie u n + kie
un =
where

ie

k ie

p ie + k d ud +
c d ud

i
--- M
----- =
2
in

---

----2
in

i M

= 2i
m

(4.155)

(4.156)

(4.157)

ie

ie

= kie

p = --ie
1
----p i
in
The remaining steps are the same as described previously. We specify m

(4.158)
(4.159)

and i ,

determine the optimal tuning and damping values with Figures 4.30 and 4.31, and
then compute md and d .
=
md

m m

=
ie

T
m
----- M
--i
2
i

(4.160)

in

d = f
opt i

(4.161)

The optimal mass damper for mode i is obtained by selecting n such that in is the
maximum element in i .

266 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Example 4.5: Design of TMDs for a simply supported beam

y, u

P*

x*

EI constant

x
L

FIGURE E4.5a
Consider the simply supported beam shown in Figure E4.5a. The modal
shapes and frequencies for the case where the cross sectional properties are constant and the transverse shear deformation is negligible are

n x= sin n--- x
-L
E I n
= ----- -- ---- -4
n
m L

(1)

(2)

n = 12
We obtain a set of N equations in terms of N modal coordinates by
expressing the transverse displacement, u(x, t), as
(3)

u =

q i t j x

j=1

and substituting for u in the principle of virtual displacements specialized for negligible transverse shear deformation [see Eq. (2.157)],
L

M dx

(4)

b u
dx

Substituting for ,

dx2

(5)

Section 4.6

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for MDOF Systems 267

and taking
u = q j j

(6)

leads to the following equations:

M jxxdx =
bj dx

(7)

j = 12 . . . N
Lastly, we substitute for M and b in terms of and q and evaluate the integrals. The expressions for M and b are
(8)

M = EI = EI

qllxx
l=1
N

b = mu + bxt = m

lql + bxt

(9)

l=1

Noting the orthogonality properties of the modal shape functions,

L

(10)

L
j k dx =
---0
jk
2
j
-- L

-- jxxkxxdx 4 ---jk 2
=
0
L

(11)

the modal equations uncouple and reduce to

m j q j + k j q j =
p
where

L m
= ---------2

-j
L--- 4
----

(12)
j

(13)

kj = EI

L 2

jx
= b sin ----
--0

dx L

(14)
(15)

268 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

When the external loading consists of a concentrated force applied at the location x = x* (see Figure E4.5a), the corresponding modal load for the jth mode is
p

(16)

*
* sin
Pj
x
----------L

In this example, the force is considered to be due to a mass attached to the beam
as indicated in Figure E4.5b. The equations for the tuned mass and the force are
*

m d u + ud + kd u d + cd ud =
0
*
m d

u
+ ud = P*

(17)
(18)

u* + ud

md
kd

cd
u*

x*

FIGURE E4.5b
Suppose we want to control the ith modal response with a tuned mass damper
attached at x = x*. Taking j equal to i in Eqs. (12) and (13), the ith modal equation
has the form

m i q i + k i q i

sin

k du d + c du d

x
---- - *
----L

(19)

Assuming the response is dominated by the ith mode, u * x * tis approximated by

i x
u * x *tq sin -- ---- --*
i
L-

(20)

and Eq. (19) is transformed to an equation relating u* and ud .

ie u *

ki

+ u* =

kd ud + c dud

(21)

Section 4.6

Tuned Mass Damper Theory for MDOF Systems 269

where
m

=
ie

--- m
----------------------- i --- 2
sin -- x
--- --*
L

(22)

The remaining steps utilize the results generated for the SDOF undamped structure
damped TMD system considered in Section 4.3. We use mie and kie as the mass
and stiffness parameters for the primary system.
To illustrate the procedure, consider the damper to be located at midspan,
and the first mode is to be controlled. Taking i = 1 and x* = L 2, the
corresponding parameters are
i x
= 1
sin -- ---- --*
L-

(23)
L
m

---------2

E
I
L

-- --- --- - --- 4

kie = k1 = --2 L

ie

= m
=

(24)

(25)

We specify the equivalent damping ratio, e , and determine the required mass ratio
from Figure 4.32. For example, taking e = 0.06 requires m = 0.03. The other
parameters corresponding to
= 0.03 follow from Figures 4.29, 4.30, and 4.31.
m
d = 0.965
f opt = ----1

d opt

= 0.105

d
---- - = 5
*
u

(26)

(27)
(28)

Using these parameters, the corresponding expression for the damper properties are
md =

0.03m
1

d =
kd =

0.9651

2
cd = d
m

2 d d m d

(29)

(31)

(30)

(32)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 270 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

270 Chapter 4

Once m

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

and 1

are specified, the damper properties can be evaluated. For

example, consider the beam to be a steel beam having the following properties:
L = 20 m
m = 1000 kg m
I = 8 104 m4

(33)

E = 2 1011 N m2
The beam parameters
are

m 1
10000 kg
=
1 = 9.87 rad
s

(34)

Applying Eqs. (29) through (32) results in

md = 300 kg
d =
9.52 r s
kd =
27215 N m
cd =
599.8 N s m

(35)

The total mass of the girder is 20,000 kg. Adding 300 kg, which is just 1.5% of the
total mass, produces an effective damping ratio of 0.06 for the first mode response.
The mode shape for the second mode has a null point at x = L/2, and therefore
locating a tuned mass at this point would have no effect on the second modal
response. The optimal locations are x*
=

L 4 and x*
=

3L 4. Taking x* = L 4

and i = 2, we obtain
i x
sin -- ---- --* - = 1
LL

(36)

2e

k2e

= m
=

---------2

= k2 =
8EIL

(37)

- L

1 6 E
I
= -- --- ----- - -4 --
--

(38)

ConCh04v2.fm Page 271 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

L
The procedure from here on is the same as before. We specify e and determine
the required mass ratio and then the frequency and damping parameters. It is of
interest to compare the damper properties corresponding to the same equivalent
damping
ratio. Taking e = 0.06, the damper properties for the example steel beam are

Section 4.7

Case Studies: MDOF Systems 271

md = 300 kg
kd =

(40)
(41)

435440 N

cd = m

(42)

2400 N s m
The required damper stiffness is an order of magnitude greater than the corresponding value for the first mode response.
CASE STUDIES: MDOF SYSTEMS
This section presents shear deformation profiles for the standard set of building
examples defined in Table 2-4. A single TMD is placed at the top floor and tuned
to either the first or second mode. The structures are subjected to harmonic
ground acceleration with a frequency equal to the fundamental frequency of the
buildings, as well as scaled versions of El Centro and Taft ground accelerations.
As expected, significant reduction in the response is observed for the harmonic
excitations (see Figures 4.46 through 4.49). The damper is generally less
effective for seismic excita- tion versus harmonic excitation (see Figures 4.50
through 4.61). Results for the low period structures show more influence of the
damper, which is to be expected since the response is primarily due to the first
mode. This data indicates that a TMD is not the optimal solution for controlling
the motion due to seismic excitation.
1
Building 1
Quadratic based Initial
H = 25 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.15
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Harmonic TMD Mode 1

0.9
0.8

x
H

0.7
Normalized height

4.7

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%

0.1
0

0.001

0.002

m = 2%
m = 5%
"{ *
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

0.009

FIGURE 4.46: Maximum shear deformation for Building 1.

0.01

272 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

1
Building 2
Quadratic based Initial
H = 50 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.25
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Harmonic
TMD Mode 1

0.9
0.8

Normalized height

x
H

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%
m = 2%
m = 5%

0.1
0

"{ *
0

0.001

0.002

0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

0.008

0.009

0.01

FIGURE 4.47: Maximum shear deformation for Building 2.

1

Normalized height
H

0.9

Building 3 Quadratic based Initial

0.8
0.7

H = 100 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.40
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Harmonic TMD Mode 1

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%

0.1
0

0.001

"{*
0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

m = 2%
m = 5%
0.008

0.009

FIGURE 4.48: Maximum shear deformation for Building 3.

0.01

Section 4.7

Case Studies: MDOF Systems 273

1
Building 4
Quadratic based Initial
H = 200 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.63
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Harmonic TMD Mode 1

0.9

Normalized height
H

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%
m = 2%
m = 5%

0.1
0

0.001

0.002

"{ *
0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

0.008

0.009

0.01

FIGURE 4.49: Maximum shear deformation for Building 4.

Building 1 Quadratic based Initial

Normalized height
H

0.9
0.8
0.7

H = 25 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.15
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
El Centro TMD Mode 1

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%

0.1
0

0.001

"{ *
0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

m = 2%
m = 5%
0.008

0.009

FIGURE 4.50: Maximum shear deformation for Building 1.

0.01

274 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

1
Building 1
Quadratic based Initial
H = 25 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.15
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Taft
TMD Mode 1

0.9

Normalized height
H

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%
m = 2%
m = 5%

0.1
0

0.001

0.002

"{ *
0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

0.008

0.009

0.01

FIGURE 4.51: Maximum shear deformation for Building 1.

1
Building 2
Quadratic based Initial
H = 50 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.25
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
El Centro TMD Mode 1

Normalized height
H

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

m = 0%
m = 1%
m = 2%
m = 5%

0.1
0

0.001

0.002

"{ *
0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007
Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

0.008

0.009

FIGURE 4.52: Maximum shear deformation for Building 2.

0.01

Section 4.7

Case Studies: MDOF Systems 275

Building 2
Quadratic based Initial
H = 50 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.25
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Taft
TMD Mode 1

1
0.9

x Hheight
Normalized

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

"{ * 0.006
0.005

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

0.01

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.53: Maximum shear deformation for Building 2.

x Hheight
Normalized

1
0.9 Building 3
Quadratic based Initial
H = 100 m
0.8 pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.40
0.7 Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
El Centro
0.6 TMD Mode 1
0.5
0.4
0.3
m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

"{*
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.54: Maximum shear deformation for Building 3.

0.01

276 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

1
Building 3
Quadratic based Initial
H = 100 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.40
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Taft
TMD Mode 1

0.9

x Hheight
Normalized

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

"{*
0.004 0.005

0.006

0.007

=
=
=
=

0.008

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

0.01

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

x Hheight
Normalized

FIGURE 4.55: Maximum shear deformation for Building 3.

Building 3
1 Quadratic based Initial
H = 100 m
0.9 pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.40
Sv = 1.2 m/s
0.8 1 = 2%
El Centro
0.7 TMD Mode 2
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

"{*
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.56: Maximum shear deformation for Building 3.

0.01

Section 4.7

Case Studies: MDOF Systems 277

1
Building 3
Quadratic based Initial
H = 100 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.40
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Taft
TMD Mode 2

0.9

x Hheight
Normalized

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

"{*
0.004 0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

0.01

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.57: Maximum shear deformation for Building 3.

1
0.9
Building 4
Quadratic based Initial
H = 200 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.63
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
El Centro
TMD Mode 1

x Hheight
Normalized

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

"{*
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.58: Maximum shear deformation for Building 4.

0.01

278 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Building 4
Quadratic based Initial
H = 200 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.63
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Taft
TMD Mode 1

0.9

x Hheight
Normalized

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

"{*
0.004 0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

0.01

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.59: Maximum shear deformation for Building 4.

1
0.9

Building 4
Quadratic based Initial
H = 200 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.63
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
El Centro
TMD Mode 2

xH
Normalized
height

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

"{*
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.60: Maximum shear deformation for Building 4.

0.01

Problems 279
1
Building 4
Quadratic based Initial
H = 200 m
pm = 20,000 kg/m
s = 0.63
Sv = 1.2 m/s
1 = 2%
Taft
TMD Mode 2

0.9

x Hheight
Normalized

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

m
m
m
m

0.2
0.1
0

"{*
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

=
=
=
=

0%
1%
2%
5%

0.009

0.01

Maximum shear deformation "{ (m/m)

FIGURE 4.61: Maximum shear deformation for Building 4.

PROBLEMS
Problem 4.1
Verify Eqs. (4.13) through (4.17). Hint: Express p, u, and ud in complex form
p = p e it
u = ueit
ud = u e it
d

and solve Eqs. (4.6) and (4.7) for u and u d. Then take
u =
ud =

u e i1
u d e i1 + 2

= d =

ConCh04v2.fm Page 280 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

280 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

Problem 4.2
Refer to Eqs. (4.14) and (4.20). Express e as a function of m, , and u u
d.
Take = 0.05, and plot e versus
m
of the displacement ratio, u u d .

for a representative range of the magnitude

Problem 4.3
Figure 4.7 illustrates an active tuned mass damper configuration. The damper
can be modeled with the 2DOF system shown in Figure P4.3. The various terms are
as follows: us is the total displacement of the support attached to the floor beam;
Fa is the self-equilibrating force provided by the actuator; mdkdcd are parameters for the damper mass; ka and ma are parameters for the auxillary mass.

kd

ka

R
Fa
cd
md

ma
us + ud

us

us + ud + ua

FIGURE P4.3
(a) Derive the governing equation for md and ma . Also determine an
expression for the resultant force, R, that the system applies to the
floor beam.
(b) Consider ma to be several orders of magnitude smaller than md (e.g.,
ma = 0.01md ). Also take the actuator force to be a linear function of
the relative velocity of the damper mass.

Fa = c a u d
Specialize the equations for this case. How would you interpret the contribution
of the actuator force to the governing equation for the damper mass?
Problem 4.4
Design a pendulum damper system having a natural period of 6 seconds and
requiring less than 4 meters of vertical space.

ConCh04v2.fm Page 281 Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:33 PM

Problems 281

Problem 4.5

L1

m1

m2

FIGURE P4.5
The pendulum shown in Figure P4.5 is connected to a second mass, which is
free to move horizontally. The connection between mass 1 and mass 2 carries only
shear. Derive an equation for the period of the compound pendulum and the length
of an equivalent simple pendulum. Assume the links are rigid.
Problem 4.6
Refer to Figure 4.12. Establish the equations of motion for the mass, md ,
con- sidering to be small. Verify that the equivalent stiffness is equal to Wd R.
Problem 4.7
Refer to Figure 4.15 and Eq. (4.76). Derive the corresponding expression
H
for P1 starting with Eq. (4.62) and using the same reasoning strategy.
Q
Considering
the mass ratio, m, to be less than 0.03, estimate the difference in
the optimal
values for the various parameters.
Problem 4.8
ranging from 0 to 0.2,
Generate plots of H1 versus for
m
d
f = 0.9876. Compare the results with the plots shown in Figure 4.23.

= 0.01, and

Problem 4.9
Consider a system composed of an undamped primary mass and a tuned
mass damper. The solution for periodic force excitation is given by [see Eqs.
(4.52) to (4.71)]

282 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

u = ue it

(1)

ud = u d e it

(2)

u =

---H e i 1

(3)

k
p
---H
ud = e i3
k

(4)

3
2

2 2

f + 2f
d
-------------------- ------------H1 =
-----------------------D2
H3 =

2
--- ------D2

D2 =

1
f

(5)

(6)
2

2 2 2

m f

+ 2 d f 1 1 + m

(7)

The formulation for the optimal damper properties carried out in Section 4.3
was based on minimizing the peak value of H1 (actually H2 but H1 behaves in a
sim- ilar way) (i.e., on controlling the displacement of the primary mass).
Suppose the
design objective is to control the acceleration of the primary mass. Noting Eqs. (1)
and (3), the acceleration is given by

u = a = ae it
p

a = ---- --- 2 H e i +
--k

(8)
(9)

Substituting for k transforms Eq. (9) to

p

a = - ---- H e i1 +
m

(10)

where
2
H = H 1

(11)

Investigate the behavior of H1 with fm, and d . If it behaves similar to H 2 , as

shown in Figure 4.15, describe how you would establish the optimal values for
the various parameters, and also how you would design a tuned mass system
1
when H is
specified.

Problems 283

Problem 4.10
Design a TMD for a damped SDOF system having = 0.02. The design
motion constraints are
(a)
H

5 opt

10

H7
---- ----------- 5
H-5
opt
(b)
H5

opt

H7
--------- ------ 5
H-5
opt
(c) Repeat part (b), considering to be equal to 0.05.
Problem 4.11
This problem concerns the design of a tuned-mass damper for a damped
single degree of freedom system. The performance criteria are
eq =

0.1

u d u = 5

(a) Determine the damper properties for a system having m = 10,000 kg

and k = 395 kN/m for the following values of :
= 0.02
=

0.05

(b) Will the damper be effective for an excitation with frequency

2.5rad/s? Discuss the basis for you conclusion.
Problem 4.12
Refer to Example 3.7. Suppose a tuned mass damper is installed at the top
level (at mass 5).

284 Chapter 4

Tuned Mass Damper Systems

(a) Determine the damper properties such that the equivalent damping
ratio for the fundamental mode is 0.16. Use the values of m, k, c
from Example 3.7. Assume stiffness proportional damping for c.
(b) Consider the tuned mass damper to be a pendulum attached to m5
(Figure P4.12). Determine md and L for the damper properties established in part (a).
u5

m5
L
k5, c 5
md

FIGURE
P4.12
(c) Repeat part (a) for the case where the mass damper is tuned for the
sec- ond mode rather than for the first mode, and the desired
equivalent modal damping ratio is 0.3. Use the same values of m, k, c
and assume stiffness proportional damping.
Problem 4.13
Consider a cantilever shear beam with the following properties:

= 50 m
= 20000 kg/m

DT

0 .6 x
--- - --- -- kN
8 10 1
H
5

(a) Model the beam as a 10DOF discrete shear beam having 5 m

segments. Determine the first three mode shapes and frequencies.
Normalize the mode shapes such that the peak amplitude is unity for
each mode.
(b) Design tuned mass dampers to provide an effective modal damping ratio
of 0.10 for the first and third modes. Take 1 =
damping is proportional to stiffness.
Note: You need to first establish the optimal location of the tuned mass
dampers for the different modes.
Problem 4.14
Consider a simply supported steel beam having the following properties:

1.2 and assume

modal

Problems 285

L = 30 m
m = 1500 kg m
I = 1 10

m4

(a) Design tuned mass damper systems that provide an equivalent

damping of 0.05 for each of the first three modes.
(b) Repeat part (a) with the constraint that an individual damper mass cannot exceed 300 kg. Hint: Utilize symmetry of a particular mode shape
to locate a pair of dampers whose function is to control that mode.
Problem 4.15

15 m

15 m

Constant EI

u1

FIGURE 4.15
Consider the simply supported beam shown in Figure P4.15. The beam has
a uniform weight of 15 kN/m and a concentrated weight at midspan of 100 kN.
The flexural rigidity is constant and equal to 200,000 kN-m2.
(a) Assume the first mode can be approximated by:
=
u

sin - --- x
u1 L

Determine the governing equation for u1 using the principle of virtual

displacements.
(b) Design a tuned mass damper to provide an equivalent damping ratio of
0.05 for the first mode. Assume no damping for the beam itself.
(c) Will the damper designed in part (b) be effective for the second mode?
Explain your answer.
Problem 4.16
Refer to Problem 3.25, part (b). Suggest a tuned mass damper for generating
the required energy dissipation.