Bouc–Wen model of hysteresis

In structural engineering, the Bouc–Wen model of hysteresis is one of the most used hysteretic models[1][2] typically employed to
describe non-linear hysteretic systems. It was introduced by Robert Bouc[3][4] and extended by Yi-Kwei Wen,[5] who demonstrated its
versatility by producing a variety of hysteretic patterns.
This model is able to capture, in analytical form, a range of hysteretic cycle shapes
matching the behaviour of a wide class of hysteretical systems. Due to its versatility and mathematical tractability, the Bouc–Wen model has
gained popularity. It has been extended and applied to a wide variety of engineering problems, including multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF)
systems, buildings, frames, bidirectional and torsional response of hysteretic systems, two- and three-dimensional continua, soil
liquefaction and base isolation systems. The Bouc–Wen model, its variants and extensions have been used in structural control—in
particular, in the modeling of behaviour of magneto-rheological dampers, base-isolation devices for buildings and other kinds of damping
devices. It has also been used in the modelling and analysis of structures built of reinforced concrete, steel, masonry, and timber.

Contents
Model formulation
Definitions
Absorbed hysteretic energy
Modifications to the original Bouc–Wen model
Bouc–Wen–Baber–Noori model
Two-degree-of-freedom generalization
Wang and Wen modification
Asymmetrical hysteresis
Calculation of the response, based on the excitation time-histories
Analytical calculation of the hysteretic response
Parameter constraints and identification
Criticism
References
Further reading

Model formulation
Consider the equation of motion of a single-degree-of-freedom (sdof) system:

 
 
 
  (Eq.1)

here, represents the mass, is the displacement, the linear viscous damping coefficient, the restoring force and the
excitation force while the overdot denotes the derivative with respect to time.

According to the Bouc–Wen model, the restoring force is expressed as:

 
 
 
  (Eq.2)

where is the ratio of post-yield to pre-yield (elastic) stiffness, is the yield force, the yield displacement, and
a non-observable hysteretic parameter (usually called the hysteretic displacement) that obeys the following nonlinear differential equation
with zero initial condition ( ), and that has dimensions of length:

 
 
 
  (Eq.3)

or simply as:

 
 
 
  (Eq.4)

where denotes the signum function, and , , and are dimensionless quantities controlling the behaviour of the model (
retrieves the elastoplastic hysteresis). Take into account that in the original paper of Wen (1976),[5] is called , and is called .
Nowadays the notation varies from paper to paper and very often the places of and are exchanged. Here the notation used by Song J.
and Der Kiureghian A. (2006)[6] is implemented. The restoring force can be decomposed into an elastic and a hysteretic part as
follows:

 
 
 
  (Eq.5)
and

 
 
 
  (Eq.6)

therefore, the restoring force can be visualized as two springs connected in parallel.

For small values of the positive exponential parameter the transition from elastic to the post-elastic branch is smooth, while for large
values that transition is abrupt. Parameters , and control the size and shape of the hysteretic loop. It has been found[7] that the
parameters of the Bouc–Wen model are functionally redundant. Removing this redundancy is best achieved by setting .

Wen[5] assumed integer values for ; however, all real positive values of are admissible. The parameter is positive by assumption, while
the admissible values for , that is , can be derived from a thermodynamical analysis (Baber and Wen (1981)[8]).

Definitions
Some terms are defined below:

Softening: Slope of hysteresis loop decreases with displacement

Hardening: Slope of hysteresis loop increases with displacement
Pinched hysteresis loops: Thinner loops in the middle than at the ends. Pinching is a sudden loss of stiffness, primarily caused by
damage and interaction of structural components under a large deformation. It is caused by closing (or unclosed) cracks and yielding of
compression reinforcement before closing the cracks in reinforced concrete members, slipping at bolted joints (in steel construction) and
loosening and slipping of the joints caused by previous cyclic loadings in timber structures with dowel-type fasteners (e.g. nails and
bolts).
Stiffness degradation: Progressive loss of stiffness in each loading cycle
Strength degradation: Degradation of strength when cyclically loaded to the same displacement level. The term "strength degradation"
is somewhat misleading, since strength degradation can only be modeled if displacement is the input function.

Absorbed hysteretic energy

Absorbed hysteretic energy represents the energy dissipated by the hysteretic system, and is quantified as the area of the hysteretic force
under total displacement; therefore, the absorbed hysteretic energy (per unit of mass) can be quantified as

 
 
 
  (Eq.7)

that is,

 
 
 
  (Eq.8)

here is the squared pseudo-natural frequency of the non-linear system; the units of this energy are .

Energy dissipation is a good measure of cumulative damage under stress reversals; it mirrors the loading history, and parallels the process
of damage evolution. In the Bouc–Wen–Baber–Noori model, this energy is used to quantify system degradation.

Modifications to the original Bouc–Wen model

Bouc–Wen–Baber–Noori model

An important modification to the original Bouc–Wen model was suggested by Baber and Wen (1981)[8] and Baber and Noori (1985,
1986).[9][10]

This modification included strength, stiffness and pinching degradation effects, by means of suitable degradation functions:

 
   
 

where the parameters , and are associated (respectively) with the strength, stiffness and pinching degradation effects. The
, and are defined as linearly-increasing functions of absorbed hysteretic energy :

 
 
 
  (Eq.10a)

 
 
 
  (Eq.10b)

      (Eq.10c)
 
The pinching function is specified as:

 
 
 
  (Eq.11)

where:

 
 
 
  (Eq.12a)

 
 
 
  (Eq.12b)

and is the ultimate value of , given by

 
 
 
  (Eq.13)

Observe that the new parameters included in the model are: , , , , , , , , , and . When , or
no strength degradation, stiffness degradation or pinching effect is included in the model.

Foliente (1993)[11] and Heine (2001)[12] slightly altered the pinching function in order to model slack systems. An example of a slack system
is a wood structure where displacement occurs with stiffness seemingly null, as the bolt of the structure is pressed into the wood.

Two-degree-of-freedom generalization

Consider a two-degree-of-freedom system subject to two-dimensional excitations. Its equation of motion is given by:

where and stand for the mass and damping matrices, and are the displacements, and are the excitations and and are
the restoring forces acting in two orthogonal (perpendicular) directions, which are given by

where is the initial stiffness matrix, is the ratio of post-yield to pre-yield (elastic) stiffness and and represent the hysteretic
displacements.

Using this two-degree-of-freedom generalization, Park et al. (1986)[13] represented the hysteretic behaviour of the system by:

 
 
 
  (Eq.14a)

 
 
 
  (Eq.14b)

This model is suited, for instance, to reproduce the geometrically-linear, uncoupled behaviour of a biaxially-loaded, reinforced concrete
column. Software like ETABS and SAP2000 use this formulation to model base isolators.

Wang and Wen (2000)[14] attempted to extend the model of Park et al. (1986)[13] to include cases with varying 'knee' sharpness (i.e., ).
However, in so doing, the proposed model was no longer rotationally invariant (isotropic). Harvey and Gavin (2014)[15] proposed an
alternative generalization of the Park-Wen model[13] that retained the isotropy and still allowed for , viz.

 
   
 

 
   
 

Take into account that using the change of variables: , , , , the equations Eq. 14 reduce to
the uniaxial hysteretic relationship Eq. 3 with , that is,

 
 
 
  ()

since this equation is valid for any value of , the hysteretic restoring displacement is isotropic.

Wang and Wen modification

Wang and Wen (1998)[16] suggested the following expression to account for the asymmetric peak restoring force:

 
   
 

where is an additional parameter, to be determined.

Asymmetrical hysteresis

Asymmetric hysteretical curves appear due to the asymmetry of the mechanical properties of the tested element, of the imposed cycle
motion, or of both. Song and Der Kiureghian (2006)[6] proposed the following function for modelling those asymmetric curves:

 
 
 

where:

 
 
 

and

 
   
 

where , are six parameters that have to be determined in the identification process. However, according to Ikhouane et al.
(2008),[17] the coefficients , and should be set to zero. Aloisio et al. (2020)[18] extended the formulation presented by Song and Der
[6]
Kiureghian (2006) to reproduce pinching and degradation phenomena. Two additional parameters and lead to the pinched load
paths, while eight coefficients determine the strength and stiffness degradation.

Calculation of the response, based on the excitation time-histories

In displacement-controlled experiments, the time history of the displacement and its derivative are known; therefore, the
calculation of the hysteretic variable and restoring force is performed directly using equations Eq. 2 and Eq. 3.

In force-controlled experiments, Eq. 1, Eq. 2 and Eq. 4 can be transformed in state space form, using the change of variables ,
, and as:

 
   
 

and solved using, for example, the Livermore predictor-corrector method, the Rosenbrock methods or the 4th/5th-order Runge–Kutta
method. The latter method is more efficient in terms of computational time; the others are slower, but provide a more accurate answer.

The state-space form of the Bouc–Wen–Baber–Noori model is given by:

 
 
 

This is a stiff ordinary differential equation that can be solved, for example, using the function ode15 of MATLAB.

According to Heine (2001),[12] computing time to solve the model and numeric noise is greatly reduced if both force and displacement are
the same order of magnitude; for instance, the units kN and mm are good choices.

Analytical calculation of the hysteretic response

The hysteresis produced by the Bouc–Wen model is rate-independent. Eq. 4 can be written as:

 
 
 
  (Eq.20)

where within the function serves only as an indicator of the direction of movement. The indefinite integral of Eq.19 can be
expressed analytically in terms of the Gauss hypergeometric function . Accounting for initial conditions, the following relation
holds:[19]

 
 
 
  (Eq.21)
where, is assumed constant for the (not necessarily small) transition under examination, and , are the
initial values of the displacement and the hysteretic parameter, respectively. Eq.20 is solved analytically for for specific values of the
exponential parameter , i.e. for and .[19] For arbitrary values of , Eq.20 can be solved efficiently using e.g. bisection – type
methods, such as the Brent's method. [19]

Parameter constraints and identification

The parameters of the Bouc–Wen model have the following bounds , , , , , , , .

As noted above, Ma et al.(2004)[7] proved that the parameters of the Bouc–Wen model are functionally redundant; that is, there exist
multiple parameter vectors that produce an identical response from a given excitation. Removing this redundancy is best achieved by setting
.

Constantinou and Adnane (1987)[20] suggested imposing the constraint in order to reduce the model to a formulation with well-
defined properties.

Adopting those constraints, the unknown parameters become: , , , and .

Determination of the model parameters using experimental input and output data can be accomplished by system identification techniques.
The procedures suggested in the literature include:

Optimization based on the least-squares method, (using Gauss–Newton methods, evolutionary algorithms, genetic algorithms, etc.); in
this case, the error difference between the time histories or between the short-time-Fourier transforms of the signals is minimized.
Extended Kalman filter, unscented Kalman filter, particle filters
Differential evolution
Genetic algorithms
Particle Swarm Optimization
Adaptive laws
Hybrid methods[21]

Once an identification method has been applied to tune the Bouc–Wen model parameters, the resulting model is considered a good
approximation of true hysteresis when the error between the experimental data and the output of the model is small enough (from a
practical point of view).

Criticism
The hysteretic Bouc–Wen model has received some criticism regarding its ability to accurately describe the phenomenon of hysteresis in
materials. Ikhouane and Rodellar (2005)[22] give some insight regarding the behavior of the Bouc–Wen model and provide evidence that
the response of the Bouc–Wen model under periodic input is asymptotically periodic.

Charalampakis and Koumousis (2009)[23] propose a modification on the Bouc–Wen model to eliminate displacement drift, force relaxation
and nonclosure of hysteretic loops when the material is subjected to short unloading reloading paths resulting to local violation of Drucker's
or Ilyushin's postulate of plasticity.

References
1. Vaiana, Nicolò; Sessa, Salvatore; Marmo, Francesco; Rosati, 6. Song J. and Der Kiureghian A. (2006) Generalized Bouc–Wen
Luciano (August 2018). "A class of uniaxial phenomenological model for highly asymmetric hysteresis. Journal of Engineering
models for simulating hysteretic phenomena in rate-independent Mechanics. ASCE. Vol 132, No. 6 pp. 610–618
mechanical systems and materials" (http://link.springer.com/10.1 7. Ma F., Zhang H., Bockstedte A., Foliente G.C. and Paevere P.
007/s11071-018-4282-2). Nonlinear Dynamics. 93 (3): 1647– (2004). Parameter analysis of the differential model of hysteresis.
1669. doi:10.1007/s11071-018-4282-2 (https://doi.org/10.1007% Journal of applied mechanics ASME, 71, pp. 342–349
2Fs11071-018-4282-2). ISSN 0924-090X (https://www.worldcat.o
8. Baber T.T. and Wen Y.K. (1981). Random vibrations of hysteretic
rg/issn/0924-090X).
degrading systems. Journal of Engineering Mechanics. ASCE.
2. Vaiana, Nicolò; Sessa, Salvatore; Rosati, Luciano (January 107(EM6), pp. 1069–1089
2021). "A generalized class of uniaxial rate-independent models
9. Baber T.T. and Noori M.N. (1985). Random vibration of
for simulating asymmetric mechanical hysteresis phenomena" (ht
degrading pinching systems. Journal of Engineering Mechanics.
tps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0888327020303708).
ASCE. 111 (8) p. 1010–1026 .
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing. 146: 106984.
doi:10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106984 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.y 10. Baber T.T. and Noori M.N. (1986). Modeling general hysteresis
mssp.2020.106984). behaviour and random vibration applications. Journal of
Vibration, Acoustics, Stress, and Reliability in Design. 108 (4) pp.
3. Bouc, R. (1967). "Forced vibration of mechanical systems with 411–420
hysteresis". Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Nonlinear
Oscillation. Prague, Czechoslovakia. p. 315. 11. G. C. Foliente (1993). Stochastic dynamic response of wood
structural systems. PhD dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic
4. Bouc, R. (1971). "Modèle mathématique d'hystérésis: application Institute and State University. Blacksburg, Virginia
aux systèmes à un degré de liberté". Acustica (in French). 24:
16–25. 12. C. P. Heine (2001). Simulated response of degrading hysteretic
joints with slack behavior. PhD dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic
5. Wen, Y. K. (1976). "Method for random vibration of hysteretic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, Virginia URL:
systems". Journal of Engineering Mechanics. American Society
http://hdl.handle.net/10919/28576/
of Civil Engineers. 102 (2): 249–263.
13. Park Y.J., Ang A.H.S. and Wen Y.K. (1986). Random vibration of 19. Charalampakis, A.E.; Koumousis, V.K. (2008). "On the response
hysteretic systems under bi-directional ground motions. and dissipated energy of Bouc–Wen hysteretic model". Journal
Earthquake Engineering Structural Dynamics, 14, 543–557 of Sound and Vibration. 309 (3–5): 887–895.
14. Wang C.H. and Wen Y.K. (2000). Evaluation of pre-Northridge Bibcode:2008JSV...309..887C (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/ab
low-rise steel buildings I: Modeling. Journal of Structural s/2008JSV...309..887C). doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2007.07.080 (https://do
Engineering 126:1160–1168. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733- i.org/10.1016%2Fj.jsv.2007.07.080).
9445(2000)126:10(1160) 20. Constantinou M.C. and Adnane M.A. (1987). Dynamics of soil-
15. Harvey P.S. Jr. and Gavin H.P. (2014). Truly isotropic biaxial base-isolated structure systems: evaluation of two models for
hysteresis with arbitrary knee sharpness. Earthquake yielding systems. Report to NSAF: Department of Civil
Engineering and Structural Dynamics 43, 2051–2057. Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA
doi:10.1002/eqe.2436 (https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2436) 21. Charalampakis, A.E.; Koumousis, V.K. (2008). "Identification of
16. Wang C.H. and Wen Y.K. (1998) Reliability and redundancy of Bouc–Wen hysteretic systems by a hybrid evolutionary
pre-Northridge low-rise steel building under seismic action. Rep algorithm". Journal of Sound and Vibration. 314 (3–5): 571–585.
No. UILU-ENG-99-2002, Univ. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Bibcode:2008JSV...314..571C (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/ab
Champaign, Ill. s/2008JSV...314..571C). doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2008.01.018 (https://do
i.org/10.1016%2Fj.jsv.2008.01.018).
17. Ihkouane F. and Pozo F. and Acho L. Discussion of Generalized
Bouc–Wen model for highly asymmetric hysteresis by Junho 22. Ikhouane, F.; Rodellar, J. (2005). "On the hysteretic Bouc–Wen
Song and Armen Der Kiureghian. Journal of Engineering model". Nonlinear Dynamics. 42: 63–78. doi:10.1007/s11071-
Mechanics. ASCE. May 2008. pp. 438–439 005-0069-3 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11071-005-0069-3).
18. Aloisio A. and Alaggio R. and K{\"o}hler J. and Fragiacomo M. 23. Charalampakis, A.E.; Koumousis, V.K. (2009). "A Bouc–Wen
Extension of Generalized Bouc-Wen Hysteresis Modeling of model compatible with plasticity postulates". Journal of Sound
Wood Joints and Structural Systems. Journal of Engineering and Vibration. 322 (4–5): 954–968.
Mechanics. ASCE. January 2020. pp. Bibcode:2009JSV...322..954C (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/ab
s/2009JSV...322..954C). doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2008.11.017 (https://do
i.org/10.1016%2Fj.jsv.2008.11.017).

Further reading
Ikhouane, Fayçal; Rodellar, José (2007). Systems with Hysteresis Analysis, Identification and Control Using the Bouc-Wen Model.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9780470513194.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bouc–Wen_model_of_hysteresis&oldid=1000078463"

This page was last edited on 13 January 2021, at 13:20 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;

additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy
Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.