Experimental Techniques

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-018-0287-5

Development of a Low-Cost Single-Axis Shake Table Based on Arduino

E. Damcı 1 & Ç. Şekerci 2

Received: 17 May 2017 / Accepted: 4 September 2018

# The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc 2018

Abstract
Experimental setup for studying the behavior of structures are large and require high investment costs. However, comparing
theoretical results to the dynamic behavior of structures using scaled structure models is a preferred research method in civil
engineering. Therefore, a low-cost shake table named SARSAR with Arduino microcontroller boards has been developed for
earthquake simulations. The horizontal components of the acceleration records obtained from past earthquakes are scaled and
transferred to the shake table by developing software programs using an Arduino DUE board. For verification, the response of the
table is measured by a data acquisition unit based on an Arduino MEGA board. The seismic ground motion along the horizontal
axis is transferred to the shake table via a linear actuator system built with a ball screw assembly, linear bearings and a stepper
motor.

Keywords Earthquake shaking table . Arduino . Earthquake simulation . Structural dynamics . Earthquake engineering

Introduction accordance with the subject, a comparison of similar small-

Investigating the effects of ground motion on structures is one
of the most interesting subjects of earthquake and structural
engineering research. Examining the behavior of structures
under earthquake loads with large-scale shake tables [1–5]
requires high investment cost. The behavior can be studied
using appropriate scaling techniques on small-scale structure
models, which is an acceptable approach in civil engineering
research. Comparing the results obtained from experiments
performed on small-scale shake tables with theoretical results
is a preferred research method [6–10]. The behavioral effects
of dynamic forces on unscaled small models can also be ex-
amined with respect to their structural characteristics. In
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article
(https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-018-0287-5) contains supplementary
material, which is available to authorized users.
* E. Damcı
edamci@istanbul.edu.tr; erdemdamci@gmail.com
Ç. Şekerci
csekerci@dogus.edu.tr
1
Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Istanbul
University - Cerrahpasa, Avcılar, 34320 Istanbul, Turkey
2
Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Dogus
University, Acibadem, Kadiköy, 34722 Istanbul, Turkey
scale shake tables is given in Table 1.
Apart from the production of the electromechanical setup,
the accurate response of such devices to the control signals is
critical. Achieving accurate processing of transmitted motion
data by microcontrollers and a precise response of the me-
chanical system are both major software and hardware prob-
lems. Several studies on the control and calibration of small or
large-scale shake tables have considered these issues [14–18].
In addition, studies have focused on the development of small-
scale shake tables [11, 19, 20].
In recent years, many research studies have used Arduino
microcontrollers due to their convenience and versatility [21].
These studies include low-cost data collection systems, auto-
mated control and robotics, devices and systems developed
for different purposes, and open-source graphical interfaces
developed for these kind of devices and systems [22–32].
T h i s p a pe r p r e s en t s a l o w - c o s t , A r du i n o - b a s e d ,
displacement-controlled single-axis shake table called
SARSAR that was developed to investigate the dynamic be-
havior of scaled structure models (Fig. 1). The developed
control algorithm and the response of the shake table are in-
vestigated in detail. The dimensions of the developed shake
table’s top plate are 500 × 500 mm2. The actuator assembly,
which consists of a ball screw and stepper motor, can achieve
a table speed of up to 350 mm/s and has a maximum frequen-
cy response of 17 Hz. Rotation of the stepper motor is
achieved by a microstepping driver controlled by an
 Exp Tech

Table 1 Small shaking tables and their technical specifications

Specification Shao and Enyart [9] Kınay [11] Quanser shake Table II [12] Testbox shake Table [13] SARSAR
(present study)

Top plate dimensions (cm) 91.5 × 91.5 40x40x1 46 × 46 50 × 50 × 1 50 × 50

Maximum stroke (mm) ±76.2 ±70 ±76 200 ±75
Maximum velocity (mm/s) – 250 665 @ 7.5 kg 500 350
Maximum acceleration (g) 4 2 2.5 @ 7.5 kg 1@100 kg 1.5 @17 Hz
Payload (kg) 228 80 7.5 – 200 @ 0.4 g
Degrees of freedom One One One One One
Simulation ability Earthquake Earthquake Earthquake Earthquake Earthquake
Actuator unit Hydraulic actuators Servo motor Servo motor with ball screw Servo motor Stepper motor
with ball screw with ball screw

Arduino DUE microcontroller. The displacement and acceler-
ation responses of the shake table for the desired motion are
also recorded with Arduino compatible sensor modules.
Accelerations are measured by MPU6050 modules, using
the I2C serial communication protocol, and displacements
are measured with linear potentiometers. The analog voltage
output of the linear potentiometer is monitored and recorded
by a data acquisition unit built by an Arduino MEGA micro-
controller. In the developed program for Arduino MEGA mi-
crocontroller, start and stop times and dates are logged by the
acquisition unit with the help of a DS1302 real time clock
module using an open source library [33] which is utilized
in accordance with the aim of the project.
Materials and Methods
Mechanical Components and Hardware
of the Developed Shake Table
In the mechanical system of the developed single-axis shake
table SARSAR, precision linear ball bearings and a slides set
Fig. 1 General view of the developed shake table SARSAR
are used in the design to minimize the friction. The diameter of
the slides on which the ball bearings move is 16 mm. The
slides are fixed with suitable supports. In the prototype phase,
the top and bottom plates are manufactured by CNC work-
manship with an 18-mm-thick MDF plate and a 10-mm-thick
aluminum plate. The linear actuator assembly used to drive
the single-axis displacement-controlled shake table is created
from a 2-phase hybrid stepper motor with a rated torque value
of 8.5 N∙m and a sensitivity of 200 steps/revolution (1.8°)
(Leadshine, 86HS85) as well as a precision ball screw set with
a diameter of 16 mm and a pitch size of 10 mm. The stepper
motor is controlled by a high-performance microstepping
driver (Leadshine, MA860H), which uses pure sinusoidal cur-
rent control technology with an input frequency of up to
300 kHz. The control signals are transferred by an Arduino
DUE R3 microcontroller to the microstepping driver, which is
adjusted to 400 steps/revolution. An Arduino DUE R3 board
that has a 32-bit Arm-Cortex processor at a clock speed of
84 MHz with 512 KB of flash memory is provided for the
motion control of the table for desired displacement-time data
with the help of a program loaded onto the microcontroller.
The presented SARSAR shake table can perform simple har-
monic and damped harmonic motion for various amplitudes
and frequencies and seismic ground motion simulations with
the developed Arduino programs. The shake table is calibrated
through various amplitude and frequency responses for simple
harmonic motion. With the given configuration, the maximum
speed achieved is approximately 350 mm/s, and the maximum
frequency responses are approximately 12 and 17 Hz at am-
plitudes of ±2 mm and ± 1 mm, respectively.
The maximum stroke of the shake table with a 500 × 500
mm2 top plate is ±75 mm, and the resolution of the displace-
ment is 1/40 mm based on the actuator and microstepping
driver assembly. With the developed programs, acceleration-
time history data of past earthquakes can be scaled and simu-
lated by the shake table. The testing of a scaled building model
is shown in Fig. 2, and the wiring of the main components of
the developed system is shown in Fig. 3.
Exp Tech
Fig. 2 Instant photographs of a
structure model tested on the
SARSAR shake table for an
earthquake simulation
Sensors and Data Acquisition Unit
The developed control unit of the shake table for driving the
table and acquiring data consists of two Arduino
microcontrollers built in an enclosure box, as shown in
Figs. 4 and 5. While driving the shake table with an Arduino
DUE microcontroller, the response of the shake table for the
desired motion is measured using an Arduino MEGA micro-
controller. The purpose of using a different Arduino board for
data acquisition is to minimize cumulative latencies in earth-
quake or harmonic frequency responses. The 8-bit microcon-
troller of the MEGA board has a speed of 16 MHz with
256 KB of flash memory. A low-cost Arduino-compatible
accelerometer and linear potentiometer outputs are synchro-
nously viewed by a computer and written to a log file.
Table accelerations are measured by an Arduino NANO and
an MPU6050 module, which has 16-bit resolution for tri-axial
acceleration output. Each sensor module is calibrated by the
Earth’s gravity. The displacements of the shake table for the
desired motion are measured with a 10 kΩ linear potentiom-
eter with 150 mm stroke, which is assembled between the top
and bottom plates of the shake table. The output voltage of the
linear potentiometer (0–5 V) is recorded via the analog pins of
the Arduino MEGA board by its internal 10-bit analog-to-
digital converter (ADC). Stability for accurate ADC is provid-
ed by an external 5 V precise voltage regulator with an error of
±2 mV, and the external analog reference voltage in (AREF
in) option is activated in the Arduino code. This precise volt-
age regulator is also used to provide the excitation voltage for
instrumentation. A shield is developed to access the digital
and analog pins of the MEGA board from the front panel of
the data acquisition unit, and separate passive low-pass filters
with the cut-off frequency set to 106 Hz (a 2.2 kΩ resistor in
series with a 680 nF capacitor) are placed into six analog input
channels. With this configuration, the maximum sampling rate
of the data acquisition unit is approximately 833 Hz for single-
channel measurements and 200 Hz for six-channel measure-
ments, which is sufficient to observe the dynamic behavior of
the shake table. Arduino code for the given setup of the data
acquisition part of the control unit of shake table is given in
Online Resource 1.
Costs
One of the main goals of the project is to develop a low-cost
earthquake shaking table for research and education facilities.
The VAT-exclusive costs for the electro-mechanical compo-
nents found in the Turkish market and on the global web
market are listed in Appendix Table 4, and costs may vary
by country. The total cost is approximately $770, which can
be easily funded for beginners and graduate researchers.
Simulation of Harmonic Motion and Calibration
Procedure
Open-loop control for the calibration process is achieved by
the simulation of a cosine wave for various frequencies and
amplitudes. The response of the table to the desired motion is
observed by comparing the desired and achieved frequencies.
Several simulation cases with different amplitudes and fre-
quencies are examined to determine the response and frequen-
cy limits of the shake table.
In the current configuration, one revolution of the stepper
motor requires 400 steps. The linear actuator assembly makes
a 10 mm displacement for each revolution of the stepper
motor according to its pitch size. The unit displacement of
the shake table, denoted by Δs, can be written as shown in
(equation (1)) and has a value of 0.025 mm for the given
configuration.
Δs ¼ ball screw pitch=steps per revolution ð1Þ

Fig. 3 Wiring diagram of basic
components of SARSAR shake
table
For each unit displacement, a single pulse must be gen-
erated with an Arduino DUE microcontroller to drive the
shake table via the microstepping driver. In the simulation
process of a harmonic motion, the number of pulses that
must be generated for a quarter period can be calculated as
follows:
Exp Tech
n ¼ A=Δsðn∈NÞ ð2Þ
In (equation (2)), A represents the amplitude, which is the
target displacement, and n is the number of steps for a quarter
period of a harmonic motion. The total number of steps to be
generated will be equal to 4n for the simulation of a single
Exp Tech

Ready Limit Sw1 Limit Sw2 SARSAR SA-01 EARTHQUAKE SHAKING TABLE

A0 A1 A2
Reset

Table
Shake Table
Position
A3 A4 A5

Power Data Logger Shake Table

On/Off
Reset Reset

SARSAR Programming Programming

Earthquake Shaking Table
Model: SA-01 v.00 On Off On Off
Shake table control and 6 channel general purpose
12V DC data logger unit.
For general purpose analog voltage measurement,
channels A0-A5 max input voltage is +5V. ADC
resolution: 10 bits. Sampling rate: 200Hz.

Input: 12V DC - 1000mA

Fig. 4 Views from the developed control and data acquisition unit. Front view (up) and back view (down)

cycle of any harmonic motion with a displacement-controlled 8
 9

>
> −1 i >
>
actuator. With a stepper motor, harmonic motion could be >
> cos 1− >
>
>
> n 1 >
>
achieved only by calculating varying delays between each >
< ; 0 < i≤ 2n; t ðiÞ≤ >
=
sequent step, including the binary values of B1^ and B0^, as t ði Þ ¼
2π f d

 2f d
ð3Þ
shown in Fig. 6. Each time difference between sequent steps >
> −1 i >
>
> cos −3 þ >
to drive the stepper motor is calculated via (equations (3)–(5))
>
>
>
> n 1 > >
>
>
: ; 2n < i ≤ 4n; t ðiÞ > ;
to generate the control signal data. 2π f d 2f d

Fig. 5 Interior of the control and

DAQ unit 5V precise voltage regulator

RTC module

Arduino DUE Arduino MEGA

with shield

Fig. 6 Representation of the
control signal loaded to the
Arduino DUE microcontroller
Δt i ¼ t ði þ 1Þ−t ðiÞ ð4Þ
delayi ¼ Δt i −3μs−ddsðdelayi ∈NÞ ð5Þ
In (equation (3)), t(i) is the time corresponding to a pulse
step required to drive the stepper motor, which is given by i.
The desired frequency for the harmonic motion is denoted by
fd. (equation (4)) provides the time difference of each sequent
step, which is represented by Δti. In each step for a unit rota-
tion of the stepper motor or for a unit displacement of the
shake table, according to the datasheet of the high-
performance microstepping driver, a single pulse with logic
level B1^ must be generated in at least 1.5 μs. In this study, the
logic high duration for each pulse is taken as a constant value
of 3 μs. Thus, the varying delay values for each sequent step
are calculated for a single cycle of a harmonic motion accord-
ing to (equation (5)). According to the datasheet of the
Leadshine MA860H microstepping driver, direction signal
must be ahead of pulse signal by at least 5 μs to ensure correct
direction. Because of this, in the presented control algorithm
calculated time differences for each sequent step also include
this specific constant delay, which is denoted by dds and taken
as 7 μs.
With the given equations, several Arduino codes are auto-
matically prepared by software written in C++, and the re-
sponse of the shake table is examined in detail. Arduino codes
for the simulation of simple harmonic motion for ±60 mm at
0.20 Hz and ± 40 mm at 1.75 Hz are given in
Online Resources 2 and 3, respectively. The time difference
between the desired and achieved harmonic motions is deter-
mined by calculating the dominant frequencies of both the
desired and achieved motions according to their power spectra
with using Matlab software [34]. Evaluating these calculated
differences in frequencies for a unit displacement of the shake
table, the latency values, denoted by ltcf, are obtained accord-
ing to (equation (6)).


1 1 Δs
ltc f ¼ −  ð6Þ
fa fd 4A
In (equation (6)), A is the amplitude where fd and fa repre-
sent the desired and achieved frequencies of the harmonic
motion, respectively. The calculated latency values are given
in Table 2. After obtaining these latency times, corrected har-
monic motion data are regenerated with (equation (7)) to cal-
ibrate the shake table.
Exp Tech
 
delayif ¼ Δt i −3μs−dds−ltc f delayif ∈N ð7Þ
The differences between the calibrated and uncalibrated
results of the shake table for two different harmonic motions
are shown in Figs. 7, 8, 9 and 10. The frequency differences in
the power spectrum and time lag from the cross-correlation
calculations in the uncalibrated results are compensated for in
the correction process. As a result of the calibration process,
the maximum error in achieved frequency is 0.07% for har-
monic motion of ±60 mm at 0.20 Hz (Fig. 8) and 0.22% for
±40 mm harmonic motion at 1.75 Hz (Fig. 10).
Earthquake Simulation
The horizontal components of acceleration records obtained
from the PEER Strong Ground Motion Database [35] were
used to generate motion control signals. The acceleration
values for the desired component of any earthquake were con-
verted to displacement-time data via numerical integration.
Considering the displacement limits of the shake table, the
production of simulation data to drive the shake table is scaled
according to the criteria given in Scaling Technique section
and converted by the earthquake data processing software
given in Processing of Earthquake Data section to automati-
cally generate Arduino codes for various earthquakes. The
structure of the Arduino program and the evaluation of the
obtained results are discussed in Programming Arduino for
Earthquake Simulation and Results and Performance
Evaluation of the Shake Table sections, respectively.
Scaling Technique
In a real earthquake ground displacements occur greater than
the stroke of the presented shake table and because of that a
scaling process need to be carried out for simulation. The main
aim in this study is to keep the accelerations equal to the actual
earthquake accelerations during a simulation, which does not
mean that the model to be tested will be scaled in the same
way. If the purpose of scaling is to obtain the scaled displace-
ments of the actual structure, the scaled model should be pro-
duced considering the masses to be affected by earthquake
accelerations according to the stiffness’s of the structural ele-
ments. With the help of dimensional analyses, a summary of
scale factors obtained from different similitude considerations
Exp Tech

Table 2 Calculated latency times

for the frequency-amplitude rela- ltcf [μs] Amplitude [mm]
tion in microseconds for bare
table 2 5 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 70

Frequency [Hz] 0.25 6.00 5.83 8.69 6.90 7.5 9.77 7.29 7.26 8.99 9.00
0.5 5.35 6.30 7.49 7.83 7.14 8.33 7.27 7.16 7.28 7.27
0.75 1.78 6.42 6.90 8.61 7.23 7.50 7.82 7.14 7.25 7.10
1.0 2.08 6.07 8.33 8.05 7.44 7.14 7.12 7.47 7.44 7.18
1.25 3.27 8.57 7.20 7.34 7.23 7.44 7.47 7.47 7.44
1.5 4.16 8.21 8.27 7.18 7.29 7.59 7.23 7.20
1.75 5.05 7.85 7.02 7.46 7.26 7.57 7.29
2.0 7.14 8.21 6.84 7.14 7.58 7.44 7.14
2.5 5.65 7.85 7.08 7.14 7.14
3.0 5.95 6.90 7.73 7.42
3.5 7.73 6.78 7.26 7.34
4.0 7.14 6.66 7.14
5.0 8.03 7.26
6.0 7.73 6.54
7.0 6.84
8.0 7.29
9.0 6.64
10.0 7.44
11.0 6.98
12.0 7.91

for earthquake loadings, suggested by Harris and Sabnis [10], quantities of force and length, respectively and S represent
is given in Table 3. In these dimensional analyses, T represents the scale factors where the subscripts E, l denote the elastic
the unit of time, F and L represent the units of physical modulus and length, respectively for elastic structures.

Time-Displacement Graph, 60mm @ 0.2Hz

100
Displacement [mm]

Achieved
50 Desired

-50

-100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time [s]

Power Spectrum Graph

2000
fa = 0.1971 Hz
1500 fd = 0.2 Hz
Amplitude

1000

Achieved
500
Desired

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Frequency [Hz]

108 Cross-Correlation Graph

1

0.5
Correlation

-0.5

-1
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Lag 104

Fig. 7 Determination of the latency value for calibration. Uncorrected results for ±60 mm harmonic motion at 0.2 Hz
 Exp Tech

Time-Displacement Graph, 60mm @ 0.2Hz

100
Displacement [mm]

Achieved
50 Desired

-50

-100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time [s]

Power Spectrum Graph

2000
fa = 0.20014 Hz
1500 fd = 0.2 Hz
Amplitude

1000

Achieved
500
Desired

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Frequency [Hz]

108 Cross-Correlation Graph

1

0.5
Correlation

-0.5

-1
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Lag 104

Fig. 8 Corrected results for the specified latency for ±60 mm harmonic motion at 0.2 Hz

In the scaling process, the maximum displacement range of
the table and the maximum speed that the shake table can
achieve are considered, and the peak values of the acceleration
records are kept at the same value to maintain the dynamic
characteristics of a seismic ground motion. Taking λL as the
displacement scale, λT as the time scale and λA as the acceler-
ation scale, according to the acceleration row of the Table 3,
(equation (8)) must be obtained after the scaling process to
keep the peak accelerations at the same value in a strong
ground motion simulation [10].

Time-Displacement Graph, 40mm @ 1.75Hz

50
Displacement [mm]

Achieved
Desired

-50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time [s]

Power Spectrum Graph

1000

fa = 1.6179 Hz
Amplitude

fd = 1.75 Hz
500

Achieved
Desired

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Frequency [Hz]

106 Cross-Correlation Graph

2

1
Correlation

-1

-2
-8000 -6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Lag

Fig. 9 Determination of the latency values for calibration. Uncorrected results for ±40 mm harmonic motion at 1.75 Hz
Exp Tech

Time-Displacement Graph, 40mm @ 1.75Hz

50
Displacement [mm]

Achieved
Desired

-50
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s]

Power Spectrum Graph

1000

fa = 1.7538 Hz
Amplitude

fd = 1.75 Hz
500

Achieved
Desired

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Frequency [Hz]

106 Cross-Correlation Graph

5
Correlation

-5
-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000
Lag

Fig. 10 Corrected results for the specified latency for ±40 mm harmonic motion at 1.75 Hz

λL
λA ¼ ¼1 ð8Þ According to (equation (10)), the time scale must be the
λ2T square root of the selected scale value to keep the peak accel-
λL ¼ λ2T ð9Þ eration values constant for an acceleration-based scaling pro-
pffiffiffiffiffi cess. With the presented scaling technique, earthquakes’
λT ¼ λ L ð10Þ acceleration-time history data were scaled according to the

Table 3 Scale factors suggested by Harris and Sabnis [10] for earthquake response of structures

Scale factors

Dimension True replica Artificial mass Gravity forces neglected

model simulation prototype material

Loading Force, Q F SESl2 SESl2 Sl2

Pressure, q FL−2 SE SE 1
Acceleration, a LT−2 1 1 Sl−1
Gravitational acceleration, g LT−2 1 1 Neglected
Velocity, v LT−1 Sl1/2 Sl1/2 1
Time, t T Sl1/2 Sl1/2 Sl
Geometry Linear dimension, l L Sl Sl Sl
Displacement, δ L Sl Sl Sl
Frequency, ω T−1 Sl-1/2 Sl-1/2 Sl−1
Material properties Modulus, E FL−2 SE SE 1
Stress, σ FL−2 SE SE 1
Strain, ε - 1 1 1
Poisson’s ratio, ν - 1 1 1
Mass density, ρ FL−4 T2 SE/S1 a 1
Energy, EN FL SESl2 SESl3 Sl3
a
(gρl/E)m = (gρl/E)p

maximum stroke of the shake table by considering the maxi-
mum velocity and payloads that can be driven.
Processing of Earthquake Data
Data were processed for the simulation of an earthquake by
software developed in the C++ language. The selected earth-
quake acceleration-time histories for simulation were convert-
ed to displacement-time history data by the numerical integra-
tion technique and scaled for the given value according to the
maximum stroke or to the scale of the structure model to be
tested. Scaled earthquake data points and processed data
points are shown in Fig. 11. The control signals for the motion
of the shake table were processed on the scaled displacement-
time history by using the unit displacement value (Δs) of the
actuator, which was calculated using (equation (1)).
The length of the Δs element, which also represents the
resolution of the motion, is equal to the ratio of the pitch size
of the ball screw and the number of steps intended for one
revolution of the stepper motor with driver adjustment. In the
presented configuration, the Δs value of the shake table is equal
to 0.025 mm when the ball screw pitch size is 10 mm, and the
steps per revolution was set to 400 pulses. Scaled displacement-
time data were linearly interpolated for the given resolution to
obtain sufficient levels of accuracy in velocity and direction. At
the end of the process, the delays between each motor step were
obtained, which enabled the velocities of the motion to be cal-
culated based on the time differences for each fixed Δs table
unit displacement and then stored in a vector. After these values
were calculated, the Arduino code for driving the table was
generated automatically by the developed software. A flow-
chart of the developed software is shown in Fig. 12.
Programming Arduino for Earthquake Simulation
The number of logic signals written in an Arduino code varies
from approximately 10,000 to 50,000 steps for an earthquake
Fig. 11 Earthquake data Displacement
processing for the unit
displacement (Δs) of the shaking
table
Si
S i+1= S i + s
S i+2= S i+1 + s
S i+3= S i+2 + s
Exp Tech
simulation. It has been experienced that the maximum size of
a vector array that can be opened in an Arduino DUE micro-
controller is approximately 11,000 rows, which is not suffi-
ciently large to store earthquake data for long durations. To
solve this problem, the total step vectors consisting of delay
and direction data were partitioned into frames that include
1000 and 125 variables, respectively, to store delays and di-
rection signals between sequent pulses in an array. Two dy-
namic vector arrays were used for the simulation process to
read these partitioned data in the Arduino code. During the
simulation process, these dynamic arrays were updated within
the loop of the Arduino DUE code. The structure of the
Arduino code, including subroutines for an earthquake simu-
lation, is shown in Fig. 13. Each variable of the delay array
was declared as 4 bytes of integers to maintain long durations
for slow motions. Direction data were generated from the
slopes of the displacement-time history. The signal takes a
binary value of B0^ or B1^ based on its sign. Direction signals
generated to control the stepper motor were stored in another
array, where one-bit direction data correspond to 4 bytes of
single delay data. Thus, a single byte of direction data corre-
sponding to eight steps of motion maintains a low computa-
tional time and reduces the cumulative latency during the sim-
ulation process. Each delay array with 1000 rows has a corre-
sponding direction array with 125 rows containing a single
byte of variable for each row.
In the control algorithm of the shake table, the Arduino
DUE board is used to pulse the microstepping driver to min-
imize the microcontroller’s latency time in each loop step.
Calculations such as a scaling process and numerical integra-
tion to obtain the velocity and displacement history from the
earthquake acceleration data with an Arduino microcontroller
are not preferred due to the latencies caused by the micropro-
cessor. These data were prepared as discussed in Processing of
Earthquake Data section.
For each displacement step Δs, the duration between the
pulses was calculated numerically from previously prepared
Processed data point
Scaled earthquake data point
Time
ti t i
+1
t
+2
i t i
+ + +
t i
+1
+2
ti
=
ti
+1
t i
=
=
+2
t i
+3
t i
Exp Tech
Fig. 12 Flowchart of the
earthquake data processing
software for SARSAR
scaled earthquake displacement-time data, as discussed in
Processing of Earthquake Data section. Each unit displace-
ment step includes a pulse signal Bhigh^ with a duration of
3 μs and a Blow^ with a variable duration calculated for each
step, as shown in Fig. 6.
Selecting the appropriate latency value in the Arduino
code is the most important issue in performing an accurate
simulation with the shake table. It is difficult to determine a
specific latency time for an earthquake because of the var-
ious frequencies found in a seismic ground motion and the
nonlinear frequency response characteristic of the Arduino
DUE and microstepping driver combination, as discussed
in Simulation of Harmonic Motion and Calibration
Procedure section. Instead, several experimental observa-
tions on earthquake simulations have shown that accept-
able results can be obtained by subtracting a fixed latency
of 7 μs from each step’s duration to compensate for the
cumulative latency, which can also be obtained by the cal-
ibration procedure presented in Simulation of Harmonic
Motion and Calibration Procedure section. Thus, the total
period for each unit displacement of the shake table can be
written as shown in (equation (11)), where ltce represents
the constant latency value given for the selected earth-
quake simulation.
 
Δt i ¼ delayei þ 3μs þ dds þ ltce delayei ∈N ð11Þ
During the simulation, two limit switches were assembled
under the top plate to protect the shake table from exceeding
the limits of stroke. These switches are connected to the spec-
ified interrupt pins of the Arduino DUE board. The shake table
stops automatically when one of the switches is opened during
the simulation process. Generated Arduino codes for the sim-
ulation of Düzce and Northridge Earthquakes in 1/15 scale are
given in Online Resources 4 and 5, respectively.
Results and Performance Evaluation of the Shake
Table
Two strong ground motions, the 1999 Düzce and 1994
Northridge earthquakes, were selected to evaluate the perfor-
mance of the shake table. The relative RMS error values for
displacement and time were calculated according to (equa-
tions (12) and (13)) [18] by using the achieved and desired
earthquake displacement-time history data.
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ð1=N ÞΣ Nn¼1 ðxa ½n−xd ½nÞ2
εrel ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  100 ð12Þ
ð1=N ÞΣ Nn¼1 ðxd ½nÞ2

Fig. 13 Flowchart of the Arduino
program for earthquake
simulation
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ð1=N ÞΣ Nn¼1 ðt a ½n−t d ½nÞ2
εrel ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  100 ð13Þ
ð1=N ÞΣ Nn¼1 ðt d ½nÞ2
In (equation (12)), xa and xd denote the achieved and de-
sired displacement values, respectively, and in (equation (13)),
ta and td denote the achieved and desired time values, respec-
tively, for the simulation process. N is the number of data
points used to calculate the error.
Figure 14 shows the acceleration-time graph of the Düzce
earthquake that occurred on November 12, 1999 with a mag-
nitude of 7.14. The total duration of the earthquake was
Exp Tech
25.885 s, and the 1/15 scaled simulation duration (1/(15)0.5)
is equal to 6.663 s. Figure 15 provides a comparison of the
scaled and recorded displacement-time history with a linear
displacement transducer placed between the top and bottom
plates of the shake table. The relative RMS error in the dis-
placements for the bare table calculated according to (equation
(12)) is 3.62%, and the relative RMS error calculated in time
according to (equation (13)) is 0.35%. Furthermore, a cross-
correlation was calculated for the displacement-time histories
to obtain the time difference between the desired and achieved
motion. With the selected latency time of 7 μs, the total time
difference between the desired and achieved ground motion
Exp Tech

0,3
Düzce earthquake 12 November, 1999
Düzce Meteoroloji station (40.84364N-31.14888E) record
0,2 North-South component

0,1
Acceleration [g]

-0,1

-0,2

-0,3

Acceleration
-0,4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Time [sec]
Fig. 14 Acceleration-time history of the Düzce earthquake [35]

was approximately 30 ms for 10,034 steps intended for the
motion. Considering this time lag as an error, it corresponds to
an error of 0.045% for 6.663 s of simulation time and 2.99 μs
of average error for the unit displacement of the shake table.
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ð1=N ÞΣ Nn¼1 ð€xa ½n−€xd ½nÞ2
εrel ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  100 ð14Þ
ð1=N ÞΣ Nn¼1 ð€xd ½nÞ2
An acceleration record was also taken by using a low-cost
MPU6050 accelerometer module mounted onto the top plate
of the shake table. The shake table was fixed on the ground to
eliminate dynamic losses during the acceleration record. The
obtained results can be interpreted as satisfactory considering
the capabilities of the sensor module. The scaled and recorded
acceleration-time histories are compared in Fig. 16. The ac-
celeration record was filtered by a 4th-order Butterworth low-
pass filter at 20 Hz, and according to (equation (14)), the
relative RMS error for acceleration is 41.1% due to the sensi-
tivity and noise level of the sensor. More satisfactory results
can be taken with more precise, expensive accelerometers.
The east-west component of the 1994 Northridge earth-
quake’s acceleration-time history recorded at the Newhall Fire
Station is shown in Fig. 17. The strong ground motion that
occurred on November 12, 1994 had a magnitude of 6.69.
The total duration of the earthquake was 40 s, and the 1/15
scaled simulation duration (1/(15)0.5) was equal to 10.327 s.
The scaled and recorded displacement-time histories are com-
pared in Fig. 18. The relative RMS error in displacements for
the bare table calculated according to (equation (12)) was
4.57%, and the relative RMS error calculated in time according
to (equation (13)) was 1.08%. The total time difference between
the desired and achieved ground motion obtained by cross-
correlation was approximately 3 ms for 7203 steps intended
for the motion. The same latency time of 7 μs was specified
for each step, and the average error in latency corresponds to

40
Düzce earthquake 12 November, 1999
Düzce Meteoroloji station record (40.84364N-31.14888E)
30 Scaled North-South component
Displacement scale: 1/15, time scale: 1/(15) 0.5

20
Displacement [mm]

10

-10

-20 Scaled
Recorded (Payload= 0)
-30 Recorded (Payload= 120 kg)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time [sec]
Fig. 15 Comparison of the scaled displacement-time history (desired) with the recorded table displacement under a 120 kg payload for the Düzce
earthquake
 Exp Tech

0,4
Düzce earthquake 12 November, 1999
Düzce Meteoroloji station record (40.84364N-31.14888E)
0,3 Scaled North-South component
Displacement scale: 1/15, time scale: 1/(15) 0.5
0,2
Acceleration [g]

0,1

-0,1

-0,2

-0,3 Scaled
Recorded (Payload= 0)
-0,4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time [sec]
Fig. 16 Comparison of the scaled acceleration-time history (desired) with the recorded acceleration-time history (achieved) taken by the MPU6050
sensor for the Düzce earthquake

416 ns for the unit displacement of the shake table. The error for
total simulation time was calculated as 0.03%.
Satisfactory results were obtained considering the capabil-
ities of the MPU6050 accelerometer sensor module. The
scaled and recorded acceleration-time histories are compared
in Fig. 19. The acceleration record was filtered by a 4th-order
Butterworth low-pass filter at 20 Hz, and the relative RMS
error for acceleration was calculated as 28.9% due to the sen-
sitivity and noise level of the sensor.
Similarly, as presented in the earthquake simulations, the
shake table SARSAR can be programmed for several strong
ground motions with appropriate scaling values. Simulation
videos’ including these earthquakes is given in Appendix 2.
Discussion
The measurements made with loaded and unloaded shake ta-
bles yielded satisfactory results. The errors in the displace-
ment measurements caused by the given configuration of the
shake table’s mechanical setup and 10-bit ADC resolution can
0,6
0,4
Acceleration [g]
be reduced by increasing the resolution of the ADC. The most
important aspect of the project is to reach higher payloads
compared to similar shaking tables for earthquake simulation.
For this purpose, a stepper motor with a rated torque of
8.5 N∙m, was selected. According to the stepper motor’s
datasheet, the rated torque of the stepper motor decreases with
increasing speed of the stepper motor. Thus, the theoretical
axial load bearing capacity of the shake table also decreases
with increasing speed of the stepper motor for the given ball
screw diameter and pitch size. The axial load bearing capacity
of the shaking table’s actuator must be increased to achieve
higher payloads. Two alternative designs can be considered:
(i) increasing the torque of the stepper motor and (ii) changing
the pitch size of the ball screw. Theoretical calculations for the
desired harmonic motions for bare table and constant payloads
including inertial loads are carried out for the investigation of
this issue. The equivalent payloads generated from the rota-
tional inertia of the rotating parts such as stepper motor’s rotor,
1610 size ball screw and GS14 coupling, are taken into con-
sideration according to (equation (15)) with the self-mass of
the shake table’s moving top plate.
Northridge earthquake 17 January, 1994
Newhall Fire station record
East-West component

0,2

-0,2

-0,4
Acceleration Data
-0,6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Time [sec]
Fig. 17 Acceleration-time history of the Northridge earthquake [35]
Exp Tech

25
Northridge earthquake 17 January, 1994
20 Newhall Fire station record
Scaled East-West component
15 Displacement scale: 1/15, time scale: 1/(15) 0.5
Displacement [mm]
10

-5

-10 Scaled
Recorded (Payload= 0)
-15
Recorded (Payload= 40 kg)
-20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [sec]
Fig. 18 Comparison of the scaled displacement-time history (desired) with the recorded table displacement under a 40 kg payload for the Northridge
earthquake

2 mp is the payload of the shake table in kilograms. Using these

2π
me ¼ ð J m þ J s þ J c Þ 
pitch
In (equation (15)), me represents the total equivalent
payload and Jm, Js, Jc represent the rotational inertia of the
stepper motor, and where, Jm, Js, Jc are taken as 270 kgmm2
for Leadshine 86HS85, 30.11 kgmm2 for 1610 ball screw
and 6.2 kgmm2 for GS14 coupling for the given actuator as-
sembly, respectively. Considering these equivalent loads,
intended torque-speed relations for the desired harmonic mo-
tions under constant payloads are calculated according to
(equations (16) and (17)).
A  sinϕ
Speed ¼ 2πf  ½rpm ð16Þ
pitch  60
 
Torque ¼ 2πf 2  A  cosϕ  ms þ me þ mp  60½N⋅m
In (equation (16)), ϕ is the phase ranging from 0 to π/2 in
radians and in (equation (17)) ms is the self-mass of the mov-
ing parts of top plate where equal to approximately 13 kg and
½kg ð15Þ equations, different speed-torque curves are computed which
are entangled to the torque (capacity) curve of the stepper
motor for the desired harmonic motions. Computed speed-
torque curves for different amplitudes and the capacity curve
of the stepper motor that is taken from the datasheet of the
specified model 86HS85 is shown in Fig. 20. Using these
curves, shake table’s actual capacity for the desired harmonic
motions, are examined for closer frequencies at constant am-
plitudes until the stepper motor loses steps for the bare table
and constant payload. 10 kg steel plates are used as lumped
masses for payload setting and are bonded to each other with
double-sided tapes. The entangled envelope curves obtained
from experimental results for the bare table and loaded with
mp = 100 kg payload are shown in Fig. 20 with dashed lines.
These entangled envelope curves shows the achieved torque-
ð17Þ speed relation, which indicates that the shake table cannot
achieve the frequency-amplitude demands above this curve.
It is interesting to note that; in experimental work it is experi-
enced that above 20 Hz for amplitudes less than 1 mm, the
loaded shake table can achieve higher torque than the

0,6
Northridge earthquake 17 January, 1994
Newhall Fire station record
0,4 Scaled East-West component
Displacement scale: 1/15, time scale: 1/(15) 0.5
Acceleration [g]

0,2

-0,2

-0,4 Scaled
Recorded (Payload= 0)
-0,6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [sec]
Fig. 19 Comparison of the scaled acceleration-time history (desired) with the recorded acceleration-time history (achieved) taken by the MPU6050
sensor for the Northridge earthquake

Fig. 20 Achieved speed-torque curves of different frequency-amplitude relation for the bare and loaded table compared to the torque curves of the
86HS85 stepper motor
theoretical capacity examined with bare table, without exceed-
ing the 8.5 N∙m limit value. Using these entangled curves,
calculated and examined frequency-amplitude response of
the shake table for bare and loaded table is shown in Fig. 21.
In addition to these, for the investigation on pitch size;
decreasing the pitch size of the ball screw increases the num-
ber of steps intended for the motion, and thus, the stepper
motor’s rpm will increase to achieve the desired speed for
the simulation. The rated torque will decrease with increasing
required speed for the stepper motor, as increasing the number
of steps will also increase the cumulative latency, which must
be accurately considered. To represent this issue, frequency-
amplitude curves for the bare table are computed for 1605 and
1620 size ball screws (pitch = 5 and 20 mm respectively) ac-
cording to (equations (15)–(17)) and shown in Fig. 22.
Decreasing the pitch has a significant effect on torque-speed
demand where the capacity of the stepper motor is exceeded
for the desired harmonic motions.
Fig. 21 Comparisons of
frequency-amplitude response of
the shake table for bare and load-
ed table (mp = 100 kg)
Exp Tech
Another issue for the accurate simulation of earthquakes
is the rated speed of the shake table. The table speed should
exceed 600 mm/s for realistic or unscaled earthquake sim-
ulations. With the configuration considered in this paper,
the rated speed of the table is approximately 350 mm/s.
The pitch size of the ball screw can be increased to achieve
higher table speeds. The pitch size of the ball screw is
negatively correlated with the axial load bearing capacity
of the linear actuator system due to the intended speed. In
spite of the fact that the theoretical axial load bearing ca-
pacity of the actuator will decrease, intended speed for the
stepper motor will also decrease, and thus higher torque
will be provided with the benefit of reduced effect of rota-
tional inertias of the actuator system. To demonstrate this
fact, frequency-amplitude demand curves computed for the
1620 size ball screw (pitch = 20 mm) are shown in Fig. 22.
As seen in the figure, increasing the pitch size has clear
advantages in the frequency-amplitude response.
Exp Tech

Fig. 22 Computed frequency-

amplitude curves for 1605 and
1620 ball screws compared to the
actual capacity curve of the bare
table

Therefore, it can be said that to achieve higher speeds for understand in what rotational regime the motor performance
the given configuration of the actuator assembly, while in- should be enhanced, if the earthquake simulation exceeds the
creasing the pitch size of the ball screw, the torque demand table capacity.
will also decrease which will result in achieving higher axial
loads that will directly affect the payload capacity. Scaled ground velocity
As a result, the second alternative on reducing pitch size Speed ¼ ½rpm ð18Þ
pitch  60
has certain disadvantages, and thus, to achieve higher pay-
loads in a simulation process, both of the alternative designs Torque ¼ Scaled ground acceleration
can be taken into consideration with increased pitch size and  
increased motor torque combination for an improved shake ms þ me þ mp  pitch
 ½N⋅m ð19Þ
table performance. 2π
In addition to these, for the investigation of torque-speed
demands of an earthquake simulation for bare and loaded table Instead of increasing the pitch size for faster movement of
for the given actuator assembly of the shake table is shown shake table, the maximum speed can also be increased by
in Figs. 23 and 24. The absolute torque-speed demands of changing the steps/revolution value of the microstepping driv-
1999 Düzce earthquake are plotted by using (equations (18) er, which can be set to a default number of 200 steps. With this
and (19)) for the bare and loaded table. By these equations, setting, the unit displacement of the shake table will be equal
when earthquake simulations for different payload and scales to 1/20 mm. However, increasing the speed according to the
are compared with the shake table’s capacity, it will be easy to decrease in steps will adversely affect the resolution of the

Fig. 23 Comparison of speed-

torque demand and capacity
curves for 1610 ball screw
(pitch = 10 mm) for bare table

Fig. 24 Comparison of speed-
torque demand and capacity
curves for 1610 ball screw
(pitch = 10 mm) under 120 kg
payload
motion, which will also affect the accuracy of the motion.
Several configurations should be investigated for future works
to establish an optimum design for the actuator assembly.
With the given configuration of the shake table presented in
this paper, the latency times of the control unit consisting of an
Arduino DUE microcontroller and high-performance
microstepping driver combination were measured and precise-
ly determined with a low-cost Arduino MEGA microcontroller.
The desired accuracy in the response of the shaking table was
obtained after this calibration process. With the presented open-
loop calibration method, errors calculated in time can be com-
pensated for by entering the correct latency value for a harmon-
ic motion simulation. However, in earthquake simulations, it is
difficult to establish a fixed latency value because of the exis-
tence of several frequencies found in a ground motion. One of
the most important factors affecting the time errors in an earth-
quake simulation is the irregular relationship between the laten-
cy and frequency-amplitude response. The calculated latency
times given in Table 2 vary from 2 to 9 μs. Although large
displacements with lower frequencies have higher latency
values, small displacements, such as ±2 mm and ± 5 mm, have
lower latency values for lower frequencies. The underlying
facts of the irregularity in latency can be stated as follows:
i. Displacement losses in the unit displacement of the actua-
tor due to the resolution of motion during the preparation
of the desired motion data;
ii. Real-to-integer conversions when calculating the delays
(the Arduino delay function uses integer values) between
the steps of the stepper motor;
iii. Numerical integration losses during the process to obtain
displacement-time history data from acceleration-time
history data; and
Exp Tech
iv. The lag in the response of the microcontrollers of the
Arduino DUE and the microstepping driver.
The response of the shake table was examined in detail via
measurements performed with the onboard instrumentation,
and good coherence between the desired and recorded data
was achieved. However, latency values can be considered in
two ways in future work for a more precise simulation process:
i. Latency times exhibit several differences for different earth-
quakes based on their dominant frequencies. As an accept-
able approach, for each earthquake simulation, a fast Fourier
transform (FFT) can be performed, and a constant latency
time can be selected from the chart shown in Simulation of
Harmonic Motion and Calibration Procedure section accord-
ing to the dominant frequency of the displacement-time
history.
ii. Alternatively, the displacement-time history of an earth-
quake can be divided into windows for fixed or variable
time sections, and variable latency values can be assigned
during the processing and programming stages given in
Processing of Earthquake Data and Programming Arduino
for Earthquake Simulation section for an earthquake simu-
lation based on each window’s dominant frequency.
The developed earthquake simulator is a low-cost shake
table that can be used in both education settings and academic
studies. The methodology presented in this paper enables the
construction of larger shake tables with different ball screw
assemblies and increased the stepper motor torque. In addi-
tion, the presented system is open for development with the
use of different development boards, such as Raspberry Pi,
Orange Pi and Banana Pi.
Exp Tech

Conclusion for scaled structure models in both educational and research

Arduino microcontroller boards are increasingly used in re-
search projects because of their versatility and low cost. In this
paper, a compact, accurate and low-cost shake table named
SARSAR was developed for the simulation of harmonic and
seismic ground motion for research projects in the fields of
structural dynamics and earthquake engineering. With the re-
sults presented in this study, the developed shake table
SARSAR, which is also open for improvement, can be used
settings to better understand the behavior of structures.
SARSAR can also be easily modified and upgraded for dif-
ferent ad hoc projects and future research.
Acknowledgments The authors thank to Koray Gürkan from the Electric
and Electronics Department, Cenk Alhan and Savaş Erdem from the Civil
Engineering Department and Yener Taşkın from the Mechanical
Engineering Department of Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa for their
Contribution and help.

Appendix 1

Table 4 Prices of the main components of shake table SARSAR

Component Part number Brand Source Unit Unit cost Price

Table top and bottom plates + CNC – – Turkey 1 $72,0 $72,0

Linear rail shaft, 515 mm WV16 NIMET Turkey 2 $5,0 $10,0
Linear bearing SCE16UU SAMICK Turkey 4 $11,0 $44,0
Linear rail support SK-16 SAMICK Turkey 6 $6,0 $36,0
Ball screw, 600 mm 1610 GTEN Turkey 1 $21,0 $21,0
Ball screw nut 1610FSUD GTEN Turkey 1 $48,0 $48,0
Ball screw nut housing BSG 16 H BMS Turkey 1 $12,0 $12,0
Ball screw support BK12 SUNGIL Turkey 1 $47,0 $47,0
Ball screw support BF12 SUNGIL Turkey 1 $22,0 $22,0
Coupling GS14 KULKARNI Turkey 1 $6,5 $6,5
Stepper motor 86HS85 LEADSHINE Turkey 1 $110,0 $110,0
Microstepping driver MA860H LEADSHINE Turkey 1 $105,0 $107,0
Linear potentiometer, 150 mm LPS 150 OPKON Turkey 1 $51,0 $51,0
Limit switch KW12–2 – Turkey 2 $0,4 $0,8
Accelerometer module MPU6050 – Glob. Web 1 $2,0 $2,0
Arduino DUE board DUE R3 – Turkey 1 $31,0 $31,0
Arduino MEGA board 2560 R3 – Turkey 1 $9,0 $9,0
Arduino NANO board – – Turkey 1 $5,0 $5,0
Power supply, 60 V AC - 750 W – MERVESAN Turkey 1 $41,0 $41,0
Enclosure box for control & logger DT-340 ALTINKAYA Turkey 1 $19,0 $19,0
Enclosure box for accelerometer HH-012 ALTINKAYA Turkey 1 $0,7 $0,7
Metal works (machining and milling) – – Turkey 1 $25,0 $25,0
Consumables, approximately – – Turkey - Glob. Web 1 $50,0 $50,0
(Cables, buttons, electronic components, etc.)
Total $770,0

Appendix 2

Videos for earthquake and harmonic motion simulations can be found at www.sarsar.net.

References
1. Benedetti D, Carydis P, Pezzoli P (1998) Shaking table tests on 24
simple masonry buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 27:67–90.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199801)27:1<67::AID-
EQE719>3.0.CO;2-K
2. Kim SE, Lee DH, Ngo-Huu C (2007) Shaking table tests of a two-
story unbraced steel frame. J Constr Steel Res 63:412–421. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.04.009
3. Ozcelik O, Luco JE, Conte JP (2008) Identification of the mechan-
ical subsystem of the NEES-UCSD shake table by a least-squares
approach. J Eng Mech 134:23–34. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9399(2008)134:1(23)
4. Ozcelik O, Luco JE, Conte JP et al (2008) Experimental character-
ization, modeling and identification of the NEES-UCSD shake ta-
ble mechanical system. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37:243–264. https://
doi.org/10.1002/eqe.754
5. Kawamata Y, Nakayama M, Towhata I, Yasuda S (2016) Dynamic
behaviors of underground structures in E-defense shaking experi-
ments. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 82:24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
soildyn.2015.11.008
6. Zhang R, Lauenstein PV, Phillips BM (2016) Real-time hybrid sim-
ulation of a shear building with a uni-axial shake table. Eng Struct
119:217–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.04.022
7. Yang TY, Li K, Lin JY et al (2015) Development of high-
performance shake tables using the hierarchical control strategy
and nonlinear control techniques. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44:
1717–1728. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2551
8. Saranik M, Lenoir D, Jézéquel L (2012) Shaking table test and
numerical damage behaviour analysis of a steel portal frame with
bolted connections. Comput Struct 112–113:327–341. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2012.07.009
9. Shao X, Enyart G (2014) Development of a versatile hybrid testing
system for seismic experimentation. Exp Tech 38:44–60. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1567.2012.00837.x
10. Harris HG, Sabnis GM (1999) Structural modeling and experimen-
tal techniques, 2nd edn. CRC Press
11. Kınay G (2006) Construction and control of a desktop earthquake
simulator. MSc Thesis, İzmir Institute of Technology, Turkey
12. Quanser Shake Table II Product Information Sheet. https://www.
quanser.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Shake-Tables-and-
Smart-Structures-Datasheet-v1.6.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 2018
13. Testbox-shaketable | Teknik Destek Grubu. http://www.
teknikdestek.com.tr/en/urun/16/testbox-shaketable?category_id=
6. Accessed 23 Feb 2017
14. Nakata N (2010) Acceleration trajectory tracking control for earth-
quake simulators. Eng Struct 32:2229–2236. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.engstruct.2010.03.025
15. Trombetti TL, Conte JP (2002) Shaking table dynamics: results
from a test-analysis comparison study. J Earthq Eng 6:513–551.
https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363246902000917
16. Kuehn J, Epp D, Patten WN (1999) High-fidelity control of a seis-
mic shake table. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28:1235–1254. https://doi.
org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199911)28:11<1235::AID-
EQE864>3.0.CO;2-H
Exp Tech
17. Guan G-F, Wang H-T, Xiong W (2015) Multi-input multi-output
random vibration control of a multi-axis electro-hydraulic shaking
table. J Vib Control 21:3292–3304. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1077546314521444
18. Luco JE, Ozcelik O, Conte JP (2010) Acceleration tracking perfor-
mance of the UCSD-NEES shake table. J Struct Eng 136:481–490.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000137
19. Torun A, Çunkaş M (2009) Implementation and Design of a
Shaking Table Oscillating in two-Axis. AKU J Sci Eng:85–96
20. Sinha P, Rai DC (2009) Development and performance of single-
axis shake table for earthquake simulation. Curr Sci 96:1611–1620
21. Arduino. https://www.arduino.cc/. Accessed 5 Feb 2016
22. Candelas FA, Garcia GJ, Puente S, et al (2015) Experiences on
using Arduino for laboratory experiments of automatic control
and robotics. In: IFAC-PapersOnLine. pp 105–110. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.11.221
23. Ali AS, Zanzinger Z, Debose D, Stephens B (2016) Open source
building science sensors (OSBSS): a low-cost Arduino-based platform
for long-term indoor environmental data collection. Build Environ 100:
114–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.02.010
24. Chac R, Oller S (2014) Designing experiments using digital fabri-
cation in structural dynamics. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract 143:1–
9. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000315
25. Fatehnia M, Paran S, Kish S, Tawfiq K (2016) Automating double
ring infiltrometer with an Arduino microcontroller. Geoderma 262:
133–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.08.022
26. Ferdoush S, Li X (2014) Wireless sensor network system design
using raspberry pi and Arduino for environmental monitoring ap-
plications. In: Procedia Comput. Sci. pp 103–110. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.procs.2014.07.059
27. (2014) NEES Instructional Shake Table (ITS100). https://
datacenterhub.org/resources/8036/download/ITS100_User_
Manual_V1.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 2018
28. Hamiche H, Guermah S, Saddaoui R et al (2015) Analysis and
implementation of a novel robust transmission scheme for private
digital communications using Arduino Uno board. Nonlinear Dyn
81:1921–1932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-015-2116-z
29. Anzalone GC, Glover AG, Pearce JM (2013) Open-source color-
imeter. Sensors (Switzerland) https://doi.org/10.3390/s130405338
30. Fisher DK, Gould PJ (2012) Open-source hardware is a low-cost
alternative for scientific instrumentation and research. Mod
Instrum. https://doi.org/10.4236/mi.2012.12002
31. Wittbrodt BT, Glover AG, Laureto J et al (2013) Life-cycle eco-
nomic analysis of distributed manufacturing with open-source 3-D
printers. Mechatronics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.
2013.06.002
32. Koenka IJ, Sáiz J, Hauser PC (2014) Instrumentino: an open-source
modular Python framework for controlling Arduino based experi-
mental instruments. Comput Phys Commun. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cpc.2014.06.007
33. DS1302 Library. http://www.rinkydinkelectronics.com/library.
php?id=5. Accessed 5 Feb 2016
34. Matlab release (2017b) Computer programme. The MathWorks,
Inc., Natick
35. PEER Ground Motion Database - PEER Center. http://ngawest2.
berkeley.edu/. Accessed 5 Feb 2016