Prefabricated concrete frame structures exhibit inherently low damping ratios and are susceptible to joint stiffness degradation under seismic loading, both of which limit the effectiveness of conventional passive and model-dependent semi-active control strategies. This study presents an adaptive damping system based on a solenoid-valve-controlled hydraulic damper, governed by a piecewise gain-scheduled PID closed-loop control strategy specifically designed for the low-damping and frequency-drift characteristics of prefabricated frames. The novelty lies in tailoring a model-free, output-feedback PID controller with drift-triggered three-stage gain scheduling to the joint-degradation behavior of precast frames, so that no online structural model or state estimation is required and a fail-safe passive fallback is retained on power or sensor loss. An eight-story numerical model incorporating semi-rigid beam-column joints with Modified Ibarra-Medina-Krawinkler hysteretic behavior is established in OpenSees, and the proposed system is evaluated against passive optimal damping and classical clipped-optimal semi-active control under 14 ground motion records at three intensity levels. Under the design-basis earthquake, the PID system achieves mean peak displacement, acceleration, and base shear reductions of 26.8%, 22.1%, and 20.8%, respectively, with a damper energy dissipation ratio of 46%. Robustness analyses demonstrate that under ±20% joint stiffness perturbation, the performance fluctuation of the PID system is approximately 40% to 43% of that of the clipped-optimal scheme. The results confirm that the proposed strategy matches the suppression performance of clipped-optimal control while roughly halving its performance sensitivity to joint-stiffness uncertainty, and does so without any structural model, state observer, or optimization at run time—demonstrating a practical, robust, and low-complexity route to semi-active seismic protection of prefabricated frames.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: