4. Conclusions
Response evaluation of structures equipped with FVDs can be complex due to their nonlinear power-law constitutive behavior. In the framework of SLT, the nonlinear FVDs can be replaced by equivalent linear FVDs, so that linear methods of analysis (e.g., the response spectrum method), or linear random vibration theory are still applicable.
Based on the outcome of this study, it is recommended that the equivalent damping coefficients of nonlinear FVDs be calculated through a developed equal-energy non-Gaussian stochastic linearization technique. The proposed method offers improved accuracy and significant advantages over the force-based Gaussian stochastic linearization technique, widely adopted in the literature. It has been demonstrated that it is better able to capture the nonlinear response of the system in terms of displacement, velocity, and dissipated energy of FVDs, especially for more severe nonlinearities of the FVDs. Furthermore, the proposed expression does not entail any additional computational effort in comparison with the conventional formula, which is important for design purposes.
Two major assumptions are made in this note and should be acknowledged here. The first one is the stationarity of both the input and output processes. The results reported in this note refer strictly to a stationary response analysis. In reality, earthquake ground motions are non-stationary in nature: strictly speaking, the variances of the response process entering the SLT expressions would be functions of the time. However, it is meant that ground motion records are sufficiently long so that there exists a central part of the response, usually the strong motion phase that is of higher importance for design purposes, in which the stationary assumption could be at least acceptable. The second assumption is that the analysis has been restricted to SDOF systems. However, in multi-degree-of-freedom systems with multiple dampers, one-to-one relationships between equivalent damping coefficients and relative velocity variances are involved. Consequently, the developed expressions for SDOF systems are still applicable by substituting σu̇ with σΔu̇ j , where Δu̇ j is the relative velocity at the ends of the j th device.