Modeling limit force capacities of high force to volume lead extrusion dampers

Vishnupriya, V.; Rodgers, Geoffrey W.; Chase, J. Geoffrey

doi:10.1007/s11709-021-0724-x

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The peak forces achieved from the FE analysis are in good agreement with the force predicted using empirical model for the HF2V devices in previous research. Analytical models of the HF2V devices using first principles predicts the upper and limit loads of the HF2V devices (Vishnupriya et al 2021). The computed FEM forces lie between the analytically predicted HF2V upper-and lower-bound limit force ranges.…”

Section: Fem Force Prediction: Quantitative Validationmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…The HF2V device dissipates energy when the central bulged shaft of the device moves under external excitation through the solid-lead working material. As the bulged shaft is displaced through the device, the lead deforms and plastically extrudes through the narrower annular orifice between the bulge and the cylinder wall, producing forces from friction and extrusion (Vishnupriya et al 2018(Vishnupriya et al , 2021Rodgers et al 2006aRodgers et al , 2007. The displaced lead flows around the bulge and remains in contact with the shaft behind the bulge, where the lead recrystallizes and regains its original properties (Paul 1940;Robinson et al 1976) at ambient temperatures.…”

Section: Hf2v Device Mechanicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 illustrates the dimensions of the HF2V devices as given in Table 3. They are segregated into small, typical, and large devices based on their force capacities and dimensions (Vishnupriya et al 2018(Vishnupriya et al , 2021.…”

Section: Device Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the resulting finite-element model is a generic model that can predict well within the range for all types of HF2V lead extrusion dampers. Therefore, it can be used as a design tool along with the design-based model (Vishnupriya et al 2018(Vishnupriya et al , 2021 to obtain the precise force capacity range of the desired device, limiting the need for extensive prototype validation and possible device redesign. However, due to the safety-critical nature of the implementation of these devices, final experimental testing to prove the design is likely to remain a necessary step before installation in the field.…”

Section: Overall Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Nonlinear Finite-Element Modeling of HF2V Lead Extrusion Damping Devices: Generic Design Tool

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supplemental energy-dissipation devices are increasingly used to protect structures, limiting loads transferred to structures and absorbing significant response energy without sacrificial structural damage. The displacement of the bulged shaft plastically deforms lead in the high force to volume (HF2V) device, dissipating significant energy. HF2V devices are currently designed using limited precision models, so there is variability in force prediction. Further, although the outcome force is predicted, the knowledge of the exact internal mechanisms resulting in these device forces is lacking, limiting insight and predictive accuracy in device design. This study develops a generic finiteelement (FEM) model using commercially available software to better understand force generation and aid in precision device design, thus speeding up the overall design and implementation process for uptake and use. The model is applied to 17 experimental HF2V devices of various sizes. The highly nonlinear analysis is run using the software with automatic increments to balance higher accuracy and computational time. The total force output is sum of the friction forces between lead and steel and the contact pressure forces acting between moving shaft and displaced lead. FEM forces and plots of the 17 devices are compared with experimental device forces and test plots. The errors from force comparison for all 17 devices range from −8% (overprediction) to þ39% (underprediction) with a mean absolute error of 7.6% and a signed average error of 4.7%, indicating most errors were small. In particular, the standard error (SE) in manufacturing is SE ¼ AE14%. Overall, 13 of 17 devices (76%) are within AE1 SE of 14%; 3 of 17 devices (18%) are within AE2 SE (AE28%), and the last has −39% error, which is within AE3 SE ¼ AE42%. These results show low errors and a distribution of errors compared with experimental results that are within experimental device construction variability. The overall modeling methodology is objective and repeatable, and thus generalizable. The results validate the overall approach with relatively very low error, providing a general modeling methodology for accurate design of HF2V devices.

show abstract

Section: Fem Force Prediction: Quantitative Validationmentioning

confidence: 66%