You are on page 1of 370

macl.caeds.eng.uml.

edu

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell

Presentation Topics
Intent
Things Shake and Break !
Modal Overview

TUTORIAL NOTES:
Structural Dynamics and
Experimental Modal Analysis

Analytical Modeling
SDOF Theory
MODE 1

MDOF Theory

MODE3

DSP - DQAL Windows


Measurement Definitions
Excitation Considerations
MPE Concepts

MODE 2

MODE 4

Linear Algebra
Structural Modification
Correlation/Updating

Copyright 2000 All Rights Reserved

In Trouble !!!!!
Dr. Peter Avitabile

peter_avitabile@uml.edu

Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Intent of Structural Dynamics & Modal Overview

The intent of this


Structural Dynamics and Modal Analysis Overview
is to expose undergraduate engineering students
to some of the basic concepts and ideas concerning
analytical and experimental modal analysis for solving
structural dynamic problems.
It is NOT intended to be a detailed treatment of this material.
Rather it is intended to prepare the students for some basic
material to enhance their ability to solve some structural dynamics
problems that may be encountered during this summer session.

Intent of Modal Analysis Overview

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Could you explain

and how is it
used for solving
dynamic problems?

modal analysis

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Analysis and Structural Dynamics


DISK DRIVE
INDUCED VIBRATIONS
RESPONSE
OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

INPUT TIME FORCE

FFT

IFT

INPUT FORCE
BOARD
RESPONSE

CABINET

INPUT POWER SPECTRUM

INPUT
FORCE

FAN INDUCED
VIBRATIONS
OUTPUT POWER SPECTRUM

Modal Analysis is the study of the dynamic character of a


system which is defined independently from the loads applied
to the system and the response of the system.
Structural dynamics is the study of how structures respond
when subjected to applied loads. Many times, in one form or
another, the modal characteristics of the structure is used to
determine the response of the system.
Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

How Do Structures Respond Dynamically ?


The raw time response of a structure may seem
complicated but it is really nothing more than the
linear combination of the effects of all the modes
that are excited by the specific input

high speed video


showing drop load
(AVI file)

response due to a vertical bump


superimposed on a random excitation
(AVI file)
Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Response of a Simple Plate


Simple time-frequency response relationship
RESPONSE

increasing rate of oscillation

FORCE

time

frequency

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Response of a Simple Plate

Measure many points on the


plate simultaneously to view
the actual response
Different deformation
patterns can be seen as the
excitation sweeps from low
frequency to high frequency

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Response of a Simple Plate


Sine Dwell to Obtain Mode Shape Characteristics

MODE3

MODE 1

MODE 2

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

MODE 4

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Modal Analysis


Equation of motion

[M n ]{&x& n } + [C n ]{x& n } + [K n ]{x n } = {Fn ( t )}

Eigensolution

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

[[K n ] [M n ]]{x n } = {0}

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Models

Advantages
Models used for design
development
No prototypes are
necessary

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Disadvantages
Modeling assumptions
Joint design difficult to model
Component interactions are
difficult to predict
Damping generally ignored

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Models


Analytical models are developed
to describe the system mass and
stiffness characteristics of a
component or system
The model is decomposed to
express the part in terms of its
modal characteristics - its
frequency, damping and shapes
The dynamic characteristics help
to better understand how the
structure will behave and how to
adjust or improve the component
or system design
Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Experimental Modal Analysis


[Y]

MEASURED RESPONSE

[F]
APPLIED FORCE

fref1

fref2

[H]
FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS

Advantages
Modal characteristics
are defined from actual
measurements
Damping can be
evaluated

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Disadvantages
Requires hardware
Actual boundary conditions
may be difficult to simulate
Different hardware
prototypes may vary

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Experimental Modal Analysis


Measured frequency response
functions from a modal test can
also be used to describe the
structures dynamic properties its frequency, damping and shapes
40

MODE # 1
MODE # 2
MODE # 3

DOF # 1

DOF #2

DOF # 3

COHERENCE

dB Mag
FRF
INPUT POWER SPECTRUM

-60
0Hz

800Hz

AUTORANGING

AVERAGING

h 13
1

2
1

3
2

h 23
3

h 33

h 31

h 33

h 32

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Experimental Data Reduction


Measured frequency response
functions from a modal test or
operating data can be used to
develop a model of the dynamic
characteristics of the system

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

What Are Measurements Called FRFs ?


A simple inputoutput problem
8
5
2
8

3
0
-3
8
-7

Magnitude

Real

MODE # 1
MODE # 2
MODE # 3

DOF # 1

DOF #2

DOF # 3

1.0000

Phase

-1.0000

Imaginary

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Digital Signal Processing Flow Diagram


ANALOG SIGNALS
OUTPUT

INPUT

ANTIALIASING FILTERS

Actual time signals


Analog anti-alias filter

AUTORANGE ANALYZER
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS

OUTPUT

INPUT

APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT

OUTPUT

COMPUTE FFT
LINEAR SPECTRA
LINEAR
OUTPUT
SPECTRUM

LINEAR
INPUT
SPECTRUM

Digitized time signals


Windowed time signals
Compute FFT of signal

AVERAGING OF SAMPLES

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA

INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM

COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Average auto/cross spectra


Compute FRF and Coherence

COHERENC E FUNCTION

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Experimental Mode Shapes From FRFs


MODE 2

2
1

MODE 1
5

2
4
1
3
6

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Experimental Mode Shapes From FRFs

a ij1

a ij2
a ij3

HOW MANY POINTS ???

RESIDUAL
EFFECTS

RESIDUAL
EFFECTS

The task for the modal


test engineer is to
determine the parameters
that make up the pieces
of the frequency response
function
Mathematical routines
help to determine the
basic parameters that
make up the FRF

HOW MANY MODES ???

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Flow Diagram for Response


Why and How Do Structures Vibrate?

INPUT TIME FORCE

OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

f(t)

y(t)

FFT

IFT

INPUT SPECTRUM

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

OUTPUT SPECTRUM

f(j )

h(j )

y(j )

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

18

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

What is Operating Data ?


If an excitation is applied close to a mode, then
that mode is excited - if not, then the response
is the linear combination of all the modes excited

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

What is Operating Data ?


The modes of the structure act like filters
which amplify and attenuate input excitations
on a frequency basis
OUTPUT SPECTRUM

y(j )

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

f(j )
INPUT SPECTRUM

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

What is Operating Data ?


The raw time response of the structure may seem
complicated but it is really nothing more than the
linear combination of the effects of all the modes
that are excited by the specific input

response due to a vertical bump


superimposed on a random excitation
(AVI file)

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

21

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

What Good is Modal Analysis ?

EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL
TESTING

FINITE
ELEMENT
MODELING

MODAL
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION

PERFORM
EIGEN
SOLUTION

Repeat
until
desired
characteristics
are
obtained

RIB
STIFFNER

MASS

DEVELOP
MODAL
MODEL

SPRING
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES
REQUIRED
Yes

USE SDM
TO EVALUATE
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES

No
DONE

DASHPOT

STRUCTURAL
DYNAMIC

The dynamic
model can be
used for studies
to determine the
effect of
structural
changes of the
mass, damping
and stiffness

MODIFICATIONS

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

What Good is Modal Analysis ?


Simulation, Prediction, Correlation, to name a few
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
MEASUREMENTS

FINITE
ELEMENT
MODEL

CORRECTIONS

PARAMETER
ESTIMATION

EIGENVALUE
SOLVER

MODAL
PARAMETERS

MODEL
VALIDATION

MODAL
PARAMETERS

SYNTHESIS
OF A
DYNAMIC MODAL MODEL

MASS, DAMPING,
STIFFNESS CHANGES

STRUCTURAL
DYNAMICS
MODIFICATION

FORCED
RESPONSE
SIMULATION

MODIFIED
MODAL
DATA

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

REAL WORLD
FORCES

STRUCTURAL
RESPONSE

23

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Correlation and Updating Models


RVAC

Analytical and
experimental models
are correlated and
adjusted to
provide
better
component
and system
models

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

FINITE ELEMENT

CoMAC
VECTOR CORRELATION

) [U n ] , [ ]
+
g
[Tu ] = [Un ] [Ua ]

[M] , [K]

VECTOR CORRELATION

FINITE ELEMENT

MODE
SWITCHING

0.6
0.4

0.3

MAC

0.2

0.2

EXPERIMENTAL

EXPERIMENTAL MODAL MODEL


[En ] = [T u ] [E a ]

0.5
0.4

FINITE ELEMENT

COMBINING ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA

0.8

0.6

CORTHOG
Experimental Analytical

DOF CORRELATION

1.2

0.7

DOF CORRELATION

0.9
0.8

EXPERIMENTAL
DOF CORRELATION

MAC AND
ORTHOGONALITY

FRAC

0.1

GUYAN

MAC

FEM 5
FEM 4

0.6

POC

VECTOR CORRELATION

FEM 3

0.2

1
0.8

0.4

1.2

1.2

OR

FEM 2

0
EXP1 EXP 2

FEM 1
EXP 3 EXP 4

EXP 5

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

IRS

EXPERIMENTAL

SEREP

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Correlation and Updating Models


FINITE ELEMENT

CoMAC
MAC

MODE
SWITCHING

MODAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
MATRIX

OR

COORDINATE
MODAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

CORTHOG
COORDINATE
ORTHOGONALITY
CRITERIA

OR

1
FEM 5

0.8

FEM 4

0.6
0.4

VECTOR CORRELATION

FEM 3

0.2

Experimental

FEM 2

Analytical

PSEUDO
ORTHOGONALITY
CRITERIA
MATRIX

EXP1

FEM 1
EXP 2

EXP 3

EXP 4

EXP 5

DOF CORRELATION

POC
EXPERIMENTAL

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL

Vector tools

RVAC
RESPONSE
VECTOR
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

FRAC

FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

Degree of freedom tools

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL
DOF CORRELATION

Frequency tools
VECTOR CORRELATION

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Correlation and Updating Models


ANALYTICAL MODEL

MODEL
IMPROVEMENT
REGIONS

AMI

MODEL
IMPROVEMENT
REGIONS

SSO/MSSO

Models can be adjusted to better reflect actual measured


system characteristics
Joint stiffness can be more accurately identified
Simplistic modeling assumptions can be modified to reflect
the actual system

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

System Models
System models are developed
from component models which
can be obtained from physical
models, reduced models, modal
models or measurement models
All of these methods may be
used to develop a system model

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

27

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

System Assembly
Components may be
described by a variety
of different methods

depending on the
problem and results
necessary
Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

28

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

System Models
Modal Models

Reduced Models

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

MODAL SPACE MODEL

REDUCED SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL


CONNECTION

MODAL TIE MATRIX

REDUCED SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL


MODAL SPACE MODEL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL


FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

Modal/Physical Models

Impedance Models

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL


TIE MATRIX

CONNECTION
FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

MODAL SPACE MODEL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

29

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Hybrid/Impedance Modeling
In addition to more conventional
system modeling approaches,
measured frequency response
functions can also be used to
assemble systems and provide more
realistic boundary conditions

MACHINE

CHUCK
CONNECTION IMPEDANCE
MEASURED AT MACHINE

CONNECTION IMPEDANCE
SYNTHESIZED FROM
FEM OF WORKPIECE

HYBRID MODELING
calc3_xyz

REFERENCE IMPEDANCE
SYNTHESIZED FROM
FEM OF WORKPIECE

UNIV:1974:+Z

10

10

120
-10

-10

HYBRID

-20

dB

-30

-20

-30

-40

100

-40

FEM

-50

(s2)/(kg)
-60

-50

-60

dB
-70

-70
5

100

200

255.75

Hz

Dof 15286 REFERENCE


Dof 15286 CALCULATED
(m/s2)/N

0
0

1000

2000

2550

Hz

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

30

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Dynamic Force Estimation


Using both measured operating data and frequency response
function, estimates of the dynamic forces driving the system can
be estimated
OPERATIONAL
DISPLACEMENTS

[Y]

Estimated force vs reference @dof7 part4


10-1

Reference

-2

10

Estimated

-3

10

-4

10

Lbf^2
-5

10

-6

10

Estimated force vs reference @dof17 part4


10 -1

Reference

-7

10

10

10

10

-2

50

100

150
Hz

200

250

Estimated

300

-3

-4

Lbf^2

10

10

10

[H]

-5

-6

-7

50

100

150
Hz

200

250

300

[F]
FREQUENCY RESPONSE
FUNCTIONS

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

31

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

System Response
System response can be computed
for both linear and non-linear
systems by various methods.

INPUT TIME FORCE

OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

f(t)

y(t)

FFT

IFT

INPUT SPECTRUM

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

OUTPUT SPECTRUM

f(j )

h(j )

y(j )

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

32

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Different Mathematical Models


There are basically three different types of
models that are commonly used for solving
structural dynamic problems:
Physical or Spatial Models
Modal Space Models
Response Based Models

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

33

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Physical or Spatial Models


These models are developed from basic physical
characteristics describing the system mass,
damping and stiffness typically from a finite
element model description:
[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
12 6L 12 6L
6L 4L2 6L 2L2

[k] = EI3
L 12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L

i
i
Fi

E, I
L

j
Fj

156 22L 54 13L


22L 4L2 13L 3L2

[m] = AL
420 54 13L 156 22L
13L 3L2 22L 4L2

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

34

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Space Models


These models are developed from the modal
characteristics describing the frequency, damping
and mode shape:
[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}

ls
s
e
l
d
e
od
Mo
M
d
d
se
e
a
s
B
Ba
al
l
d
a
o
c
M
si
y
h
P
\
f1

p1

k1

m2
c1

MODE 1

f2

p2

m1
k2

m3
c2

MODE 2

f3

p3

k3

c3

\
{&p&} +

\
{p& } +

{p} = [U ]T {F}

MODE 3

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

35

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Response Based Models


These models are developed from characteristics
of the system response typically from frequency
response measurements:
ts
n
e
on
p
m
Co

ed
t
s
Te
r
ls
so
e
l
d
e
od
Mo
M
d
ed
ase
s
B
a
B
l
se
n
a
c
o
i
p
s
Res
Phy

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

36

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Could you explain

and how is it
used for solving
dynamic problems?

modal analysis

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

37

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Topics
for
Structural Dynamic Modeling

Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Structures Vibrate
All structures vibrate to some degree
Objectionable vibrations range from annoying
items such as car vibration considerations to
catastrophic failures such as the famous
Tacoma Narrows Bridge
But there are also many good vibrations some designs incorporate vibrations to achieve the
desired level of performance
Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Types of Models
Models are developed to assist in the design and
understanding of system dynamics
Analytical models (such as finite element models)
are utilized in the design process
Experimental models are also used for many
systems where modeling is not practical or models
are too difficult to develop

Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


Finite element models are commonly used
What are we trying to do when generating a model

CONTINUOUS
SOLUTION

Analytical Topics

DISCRETIZED
SOLUTION

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


Modeling Issues

continuous solutions work well with structures that are well behaved
and have no geometry that is difficult to handle
most structures don't fit this simple requirement
(except for frisbees and cymbals)
real structures have significant geometry variations that are
difficult to address for the applicable theory
a discretized model is needed in order to approximate the actual
geometry
the degree of discretization is dependent on the waveform of the
deformation in the structure
finite element modeling meets this need

Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


Finite element modeling involves the descretization of the structure
into elements or domains that are defined by nodes which describe
the elements.
A field quantity such as displacement is approximated using polynomial
interpolation over each of the domains.
The best values of the field quantity at nodes results from a
minimization of the total energy.
Since there are many nodes defining many elements, a set of
simultaneous equations results.
Typically, this set of equations is very large and a computer is used to
generate results.

Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


Nodes represent geometric locations in the structure.
Elements boundary are defined by the nodes.
The type of displacement field that exists over the domain will
determine the type of element used to characterize the
domain.
Element characteristics are determined from
Theory of Elasticity
and
Strength of Materials.

Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Topics for Structural Dynamic Modeling


Structural element formulations use the same general
assumptions about their respective behavior as their respective
structural theories (such as truss, beam, plate, or shell)
Continuum element formulations (such as 2D and 3D solid
elements) comes from theory of elasticity

6L 12 6L
12
6L 4L2 6L 2L2

[k ] = EI3
L 12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L

Analytical Topics

E, I

Fj

54
13L
156 22L
22L 4L2 13L 3L2

[m] = AL
13L 156
22L
420 54
13L 3L2 22L
4L2

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Topics for Structural Dynamic Modeling


The basis of the finite
element method is
summarized below

v
u

t
s

subdivide the structure into small finite elements


each element is defined by a finite number of node points
assemble all elements to form the entire structure
within each element, a simple solution to governing equations
is formulated (the solution for each element becomes a
function of unknown nodal values
general solution for all elements results in algebraic set of
simultaneous equations

Analytical Topics

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


DEGREES OF FREEDOM
maximum 6 dof can be described at a point in space
finite element use a maximum of 6 dof
most elements use less than 6 dof to describe the element
TRUSS

TORSIONAL ROD

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS
3D BEAM
PLATE

CONTINUUM ELEMENTS

Analytical Topics

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations

Advantages

Models used for design


development
No prototypes are
necessary

Disadvantages

Analytical Topics

11

Modeling assumptions
Joint design difficult to model
Component interactions are
difficult to predict
Damping generally ignored

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


A TYPICAL FINITE ELEMENT USER MAY ASK

what kind of elements should be used?


how many elements should I have?
where can the mesh be coarse; where must it be fine?
what simplifying assumptions can I make?
should all of the physical structural detail be included?
can I use the same static model for dynamic analysis?
how can I determine if my answers are accurate?
how do I know if the software is used properly?

Analytical Topics

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Considerations


ALL THESE QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED, IF

the general structural behavior is well understood


the elements available are understood
the software operation is understood
(input procedures, algorithms,etc.)

BASICALLY - we need to know what we are doing !!!


IF A ROUGH BACK OF THE ENVELOP ANALYSIS
CAN NOT BE FORMULATED, THEN
MOST LIKELY THE ANALYST DOES NOT KNOW
ENOUGH ABOUT THE PROBLEM AT HAND TO
FORMULATE A FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Analytical Topics

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Using standard finite element modeling techniques, the following steps
are usually followed in the generation of an analytical model

node generation
element generation
coordinate transformations
assembly process
application of boundary conditions
model condensation
solution of equations
recovery process
expansion of reduced model results

Analytical Topics

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Element Definition

Shape Functions

Each element is approximated by

Linear

{} = [N ]{x}
where
{}
[N]
{x}

- vector of displacements in element


- shape function for selected element
- nodal variable

Element shape functions can range from linear


interpolation functions to higher order polynomial
functions.

Analytical Topics

15

Quadratic

Polynomial

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Strain Displacement Relationship
The strain displacement relationship is given by

{} = [B]{x}
where
{}

- vector of strain within element

[B]

- strain displacement matrix


(proportional to derivatives of [N])

{x}

- nodal variable

Analytical Topics

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Mass and Stiffness Formulation
The mass and stiffness relationship is given by

[M ] = V [N][N]T V
where
[M]
[K]
[N]
{}
[B]
[C]

[K ] = V [B]T [C][B]V
- element mass matrix
- element stiffness matrix
- shape function for element
- density
- strain displacement matrix
- stress-strain (elasticity) matrix

Analytical Topics

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Coordinate Transformation
Generally, elements are formed in a local coordinate system which is
convenient for generation of the element.
Elemental matrices are transformed from the local elemental
coordinate system to the global coordinate system using

{x1} = [T12 ]{x 2 }


LOCAL SYSTEM

GLOBAL SYSTEM

Analytical Topics

18

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Assembly Process
Elemental matrices are then assembled into the global master matrices
using

{x k } = [c k ]{x g }

where
{xk} - element degrees of freedom
[ck] - connectivity matrix
{xg} - global degrees of freedom

The global mass and stiffness matrices are assembled and boundary
conditions applied for the structure

Analytical Topics

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Static Solutions
typically involve decomposition of a large matrix
matrix is usually sparsely populated
majority of terms concentrated about the diagonal
Eigenvalue Solutions
use either direct or iterative methods
direct techniques used for small matrices
iterative techniques used for a few modes from large matrices
Propagation Solutions
most common solution uses derivative methods
stability of the numerical process is of concern
at a given time step, the equations are reduced to an equivalent
static form for solution
typically many times steps are required

Analytical Topics

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Simple Example


Consider the 2 spring system shown below
u1

u2
1

u3
2

f
1

each spring element is denoted by a box with a number


each element is defined by 2 nodes denoted by the circle with a
number assigned to it
the springs have a node at each end and have a common node point
the displacement of each node is denoted by u with a subscript to
identify which node it corresponds to
there is an applied force at node 3

Analytical Topics

21

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Simple Example


The first step is to formulate the spring element in a general sense
ui

uj
p

f jp

f ip
j

the element label is p


the element is bounded by node i and j
assume positive displacement conditions at both nodes
define the force at node i and node j for the p element

Application of simple equilibrium gives

f ip = k p (u i u j ) = + k p u i k p u j
f jp = k p (u j u i ) = k p u i + k p u j
Analytical Topics

22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Simple Example


This can be written in matrix form to give

kp
k
p

k p u i f ip
=

k p u j f jp

Now for element #1

k1 k1 u1 f11
=
k

1 k1 u 2 f 21

And for element #2

k2
k
2

k 2 u 2 f 22
=

k 2 u 3 f 32

The equilibrium requires that the sum of the internal forces equals
the applied force acting on each node

Analytical Topics

23

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Simple Example


The three equations can be written as

k1u1 k1u 2 = f1
k1u1 + k1u 2 + k 2 u 2 k 2 u 3 = f 2
k 2u 2 + k 2u 3 = f3
or in matrix form

k1
k1
k k + k
2
1 1
k2

Analytical Topics

u1 f1

k 2 u 2 = f 2

k 2 u 3 f 3

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Simple Example


Now applying a boundary condition of zero displacement at node 1 has
the effect of zeroing the first column of the K matrix which gives three
equations with 2 unknowns. Solving for the second and third equation
gives

k1
k1
k k + k
2
1 1
k2

u1 f1

k 2 u 2 = f 2

k 2 u 3 f 3

k1 + k 2
k

k 2 u 2 0
=

k 2 u 3 f 3

Analytical Topics

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Simple Example


Assembly of the stiffness matrix with more elements

k1
k1
k k + k + k
2
5
1 1
k2

k5

k2
k 2 + k3
k3

k3
k3 + k 4
k4

k5

k4

k 4 + k 5

Notice that the banded nature of the matrix is not preserved when
elements are arbitrarily added to the assembly

Analytical Topics

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Equation of Motion (n x n)

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}


Eigensolution

[[K ][M ]]{x}=0


Frequencies (eigenvalues) and Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)

Analytical Topics

12

22

and

27

[U] = [{u1} {u 2 }

L]

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling


Modal transformation (n x m)

{x} = [U ]{p} = [{u1} {u 2 }

p1

L]p 2
M

Projection operation

[U]T [M ][U]{&p&} + [U]T [C][U]{p& } + [U]T [K ][U]{p} = [U]T{F}


Vector orthogonality

{u i }

mii i = j
[M ]{u j } =
0i j

Analytical Topics

{u i }

28

k ii i = j
[K ]{u j } =
0i j

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Modal Space


Since the mode shapes are linearly independent and
orthogonal w.r.t the mass and stiffness matrices
Modal Mass

\
[U1 ]T [M1 ][U1 ] =

Modal Damping

\
[U1 ]T [C1 ][U1 ] =

Modal Stiffness

\
[U1 ]T [K1 ][U1 ] =

Analytical Topics

29

M1

TRUE !!!

C1

???????

K1

TRUE !!!

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Proportional Damping


The damping matrix is only uncoupled for a special case
where the damping is assumed to be proportional to the mass
and/or stiffness matrices

\
[U1 ]T [[M ] + [K ]][U1 ] =

M + K

Many times proportional damping is assumed since we do not


know what the actual damping is
This assumption began back when computational power was
limited and matrix size was of critical concern
But even today we still struggle with the damping matrix !!!

Analytical Topics

30

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Non-Proportional Damping


However, if we knew the damping matrix then a solution can
be obtained after rearranging the equations.
[0]
[M ]
1

[M1 ] &x& [M1 ] [0] x& 0

=
[C1 ] x& [0] [ K1 ] x F

The equation of motion can be recast as

[B1 ]{Y& } [A1 ]{Y} = {Q}

[0] [M1 ]
[B1 ] =

[M1 ] [C1 ]

[M ] [0]
[A1 ] = 1

[0] [ K1 ]

The eigensolution and modal transformation is then

[[A1 ] [B1 ]]{Y} = {0}


Analytical Topics

{Y} = [1 ]{p1}
31

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Modeling - Non-Proportional Damping


COMPLEX MODES
The solution to the state space formulation will result in a
set of modes that are generally complex in form.
The mode shapes will have both real and imaginary parts.
The mode shapes will become much more difficult to
describe especially as the damping becomes significantly
different than the proportional damped form.
MAKE SURE YOU REALLY WANT COMPLEX MODES !!!
DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE DAMPING MATRIX ???

Analytical Topics

32

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Reduction & Expansion


Is there any reason to want to have a less complicated
representation of the detailed finite element model ?

or to obtain an expansion of reduced information ?

Analytical Topics

33

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Reduction & Expansion


Many times it is necessary to formulate a reduced model of
a structure especially for correlation and updating models
Mapping Transformation Matrix

x a
{x n }= =[T ]{x a }
x d
Reduced System Matrices

[K a ] = [T ]T [K n ][T ]

[M a ] = [T ]T [M n ][T ]

Analytical Topics

34

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Reduction & Expansion


Guyan Reduction

Dynamic Condensation

[ I]

[I]
[Ts ]= =
1

[
K
]
[
K
]

[
]
t
da
s
dd

[ I]

[I]
[Tf ]= =
1

[
B
]
[
B
]

[
]
t
f
dd
da

IRS Reduction

[I]

[0]
[Ti ] =
+
1

[K dd ] [ K da ] [0]
SEREP Reduction

[Tu ] = [U n ][U a ]g
Analytical Topics

[0]

1
[
][
][
]
[K a ]
M
T
M
a
n s

[K dd1 ]

(
(

)
)

[ ] [ ]T [ ] 1[ ]T
Ua
U a U a U a

1
T
T

[U d ] [U a ] [U a ] [U a ]

35

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Finite Element Model Reduction & Expansion


The type of reduction utilized can have a significant impact
on the accuracy of the resulting reduced model.
Much work has been done in this area to minimize the
distortion of the reduced model.
The same reduction matrices are also used for expansion of
reduced model information (ie, test data)
Strong differing opinions prevail on this subject !!!

Analytical Topics

36

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods
Many times the model may be needed to perform
dynamic response studies
Some traditional methods are:
Mode Superposition
Frequency Domain Solution
Direct Integration of Equations of Motion

Analytical Topics

37

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Mode Superposition


Using the modal space formulation, a simple integration on
the SDOF system can be performed
m1

m
k

m2

c2

p& 1 k1
p& +
2
\ M

{x} = {u1 }p1

c1

{x} = [U]{p} = {u1 }p1 + {u2 }p2 + {u3 }p3

MODE 1
p

m
k

{x} = {u2 }p2

c2

k2

T
p1 {u1} {F}
p ={u }T {F}

2 2

\ M M

&p&1 c1
&p& +
2
\ M

MODE 2
p

m
k

c3

{x} = {u3 }p3

MODE 3

Analytical Topics

38

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Frequency Domain


Using the frequency domain input-output relationships,
Output Response = System Characteristic X Input Forces

the response due to many forces can be computed


No

yi ( j)= h ij ( j)f j ( j)
j=1

The frequency response function is needed for this response

rij,k
rij*,k
h ij ( j)=
+

*
j k j k
k =1
m

Analytical Topics

39

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Frequency Domain


Frequency domain input-output schematic
OUTPUT SPECTRUM

rij,k
rij*,k

+
h ij ( j)=
*
j p k j p k
k =1

y(j )

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

No

f(j )

y i ( j)= h ij ( j)f j ( j)

INPUT SPECTRUM

Analytical Topics

j=1

40

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Frequency Domain


Response - 5Z

Response - 3Z

No

y i ( j)= h ij ( j)f j ( j)
j=1

Response - 2Z

Applied Excitation Force - 1Z

Analytical Topics

41

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Direct Integration


The equation of motion is integrated using numerical step-by-step
procedure for a number of t steps. The term 'direct' means that the
equations of motion are formulated in a physical space at Ndof without
any transformation to another space (ie,modal space).
The equation of motion is to be satisfied not at any time t but rather an
equivalent 'static' equilibrium is sought at discrete time intervals t
apart. Note that from this statement, the static solution techniques will
be employed for the system at many different t time steps. In essence,
'effective' loads are computed from the manipulation of the velocity and
acceleration terms of the equation of motion to reduce the problem to a
simple-to-solve static equivalent problem.

Analytical Topics

42

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Direct Integration


Basically, numerical integration is a process of marching along in time
where response parameters (acceleration, velocity and displacement) at
time t are evaluated from their known historic values. Typically, three
values are needed for three unknowns. Two of these values are derived
from assumptions regarding the manner in which response parameters
vary during a time step. The third equation is the equation of motion
written at a selected point.
An important aspect of numerical integration is the selection of the time
step used in the integration process. If the time step is selected to be
too large then the computed response will suffer from the effects of
'numerical damping' that will distort the results even the scheme is
unconditionally stable.

Analytical Topics

43

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Schemes


Explicit Schemes
scheme is explicit when the equation of motion is written at time t
(which is the current time)
computationally efficient when compared to implicit schemes
these techniques are only conditionally stable
typically there is no factorization of [K] or [M] needed for most cases
Implicit Schemes
scheme is implicit when the equation of motion is written at next time
step (which is t + t)
requires more computation when compared to explicit schemes
these techniques are usually unconditionally stable
usually factorization of [K] or [M] is needed for most cases

Analytical Topics

44

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Schemes


Some common integration techniques
Central diff
Houbolt
Wilson
Newmark
Newmark
Newmark

Analytical Topics

Explicit
Implicit
Implicit
Implicit
Implicit
Implicit

=0, =0
=1/2, =1/4
=1/2, =1/6

45

(constant acceleration)
(average acceleration)
(linear acceleration)

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Central Difference

Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics

46

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Central & Houbolt

Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics

47

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Wilson

Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics

48

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Numerical Methods - Comparison

Source: Bathe - Numerical Methods in Finite Element Analysis

Analytical Topics

49

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Single Degree of Freedom Overview


f(t)

x(t)

I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

R
e
a
l

k
100

Fr equency

T = 2 / n

=0.1%
=1%

X1

=2%

X2

=5%

10

=10%
=20%

I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

-90

=20%

/n

=10%

t1

=5%
=2%

1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k

=1%
=0.1%

-180
/ n

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

t2

Real

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Definitions
Assumptions
lumped mass

f(t)

x(t)

stiffness proportional

to displacement

damping proportional to

velocity

linear time invariant

2nd order differential

equations

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Equations
Equation of Motion
d2x
dx
m 2 + c + kx = f ( t )
dt
dt

or

m &x& + cx& + kx = f ( t )

Characteristic Equation
ms 2 + cs + k = 0

Roots or poles of the characteristic equation


s1, 2

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

c
=

2m

c + k

m
2m
3

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Definitions
Poles expressed as
s1, 2 = n

(n )2 n 2 = jd
POLE

Damping Factor

= n

Natural Frequency

n = k

% Critical Damping

= c

m
n

cc

Critical Damping

c c = 2mn

Damped Natural
Frequency

d = n 1 2

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

CONJUGATE

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Poles in the S-plane


As the damping is
varied from no
damping to critical
damping and
beyond, the poles
move as shown

FRF

TIME
FRF

FRF

TIME
TIME

= 0.1

The impulse and


frequency response
are shown as the
damping is varied

=0

= 0.3

FRF

TIME

= 0.7

= 1.0

TIME

> 1.0

TIME

STABLE

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

UNSTABLE

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Laplace Domain


Equation of Motion in Laplace Domain
(ms 2 +cs+k)x (s) = f (s)

with

b(s ) = (ms 2 +cs+k)

System Characteristic Equation


b(s) x (s) = f (s)

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

x (s) = b 1 (s)f (s) = h (s)f (s)

and

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Transfer Function


System Transfer Function
1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k

Complex valued
function defines the
surface shown

Source: Vibrant Technology

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Transfer Function

Polynomial Form

1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k

Pole-Zero Form

1/ m
h (s) =
(s p1 )(s p1* )

Partial Fraction Form

a1
a1*
h (s) =
+
(s p1 ) (s p1* )

Exponential Form

1 t
h(t) =
e sin d t
md

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Amplitude

SDOF - Damped Exponential Response

Damping Decay

Period

h(t)
Basic Modal Analysis Theory

1
md

e t
9

sin d t
Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Transfer Function & Residues

Residue
a1 =
h (s)(s p1 )

sp1

1
=
2 jmd

related to
mode shapes

Source: Vibrant Technology

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Frequency Response Function


The Frequency Response Function is the System
Transfer Function evaluated at s = j
h ( j) = h (s)

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

s = j

a1
a 1*
=
+
( j p1 ) ( j p1* )

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Frequency Response Function


Coincident-Quadrature Plot

Bode Plot

Nyquist Plot

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Frequency Response Function


DYNAMIC COMPLIANCE

DISPLACEMENT / FORCE

MOBILITY

VELOCITY / FORCE

INERTANCE

ACCELERATION / FORCE

DYNAMIC STIFFNESS

FORCE / DISPLACEMENT

MECHANICAL IMPEDANCE

FORCE / VELOCITY

DYNAMIC MASS

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

FORCE / ACCELERATION

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Effects of Damping & Damping Estimates


Damping Effects
100

Damping Estimates
MAG

=0.1%
=1%
=2%
=5%

10

Q=

0.707
MAG

=10%
=20%

1
n
=
2 2 1

/n

Half Power Points

T = 2 / n

-90

X1

=20%

X2

=10%

= ln

=5%
=2%
=1%
=0.1%

x1
2
x2

-180
/ n
t1

Basic Modal Analysis Theory

14

t2

Log Decrement

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Multiple Degree of Freedom Overview


[B(s )]1 = [H(s )] = Adj[B(s )] = [A(s )]
det[B(s )] det[B(s )]

f1

p1

k1

f2

p2

c1

f3

p3

m2

m1

m3

k2

c2

k3

c3

R1
D1

MODE 1

MODE 2

MODE 3

R2
D2

\
{&p&} +

MDOF Overview

\
{p& } +

{p} = [U ]T {F}

R3
D3

F1

F2F3

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF Definitions
Assumptions

f2

lumped mass

m2

stiffness proportional

k2

to displacement

damping proportional to

velocity

linear time invariant

f1

c2
x1

m1
k1

2nd order differential

x2

c1

equations

MDOF Overview

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF Equations
Equation of Motion - Force Balance
m1&x&1+(c1 + c 2 )x& 1c 2 x& 2 +(k1 + k 2 )x1k 2 x 2 =f1 (t )
m 2 &x& 2 c 2 x& 1+c 2 x& 2 k 2 x1 +k 2 x 2 =f 2 (t )

Matrix Formulation
m1

&x&1

m 2 &x& 2
(c1 + c 2 ) c 2 x& 1
+
x&

c
c

2
2 2

Matrices and
Linear Algebra
are important !!!

(k1 + k 2 ) k 2 x1 f1 ( t )
+
=

k
k
x
f
(
t
)

2
2
2 2

MDOF Overview

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF Equations
Equation of Motion

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}

Eigensolution

[[K ][M ]]{x}=0


Frequencies (eigenvalues) and
Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)
\

MDOF Overview

1
=

\

22

and [U ] = [{u1}
\
4

{u 2 } L]

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Space Transformation


Modal transformation

{x} = [U ]{p} = [{u1} {u 2 }


Projection operation

p1

L]p 2
M

[U ]T [M ][U]{&p&} + [U]T [C][U]{p& } + [U ]T [K ][U ]{p} = [U ]T{F}


Modal equations (uncoupled)
m1

m2

&p&1 c1
&p& +
2
\ M

MDOF Overview

c2

p& 1 k1
p& +
2
\ M
5

k2

T
p1 {u1} {F}
p ={u }T {F}

2 2

\ M M

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Space Transformation


Diagonal Matrices Modal Mass

Modal Damping

{&p&} +

Modal Stiffness

{p& } +

{p} = [U ]T {F}

Highly coupled system


transformed into

k1

k2

m3
c2

MODE 2

f3

p3

m2
c1

MODE 1

f2

p2

m1

simple system
MDOF Overview

f1

p1

k3

c3
MODE 3

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Space Transformation


PHYSICAL MODEL
..
.
[M]{x} + [C]{x} + [K]{x} = {F(t)}
=

f1

p1
m1

{x} = [U]{p} = [{u 1 } {u 2 } {u 3 }

MODAL

]{p}

k1

SPACE

c1
MODE 1
f2

p2
m2
k2

..
.
T
[ M ]{p} + [ C ]{p} + [ K ]{p} = [U] {F(t)}
{x} = [U]{p} = {u 1 }p1 + {u 2 }p2 + {u 3 }p3

c2
MODE 2
f3

p3
m3
k3

c3
MODE 3

MDOF Overview

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - Laplace Domain


Laplace Domain Equation of Motion

[[M]s

+ [C]s + [K ]]{x (s )} = 0 [B(s )]{x (s )} = 0

System Characteristic (Homogeneous) Equation

[[M]s +[C]s+[K ]] = 0

p k = k jdk

Damping

MDOF Overview

Frequency

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - Transfer Function


System Equation

x (s )}
{
[B(s )]{x (s )} = {F(s )} [H(s )] = [B(s )] =
{F(s )}
1

System Transfer Function

[B(s )]

[
Adj[B(s )]
A(s )]
= [H(s )] =
=
det[B(s )] det[B(s )]

[A(s )]

Residue Matrix

det[B(s )]

Characteristic Equation

MDOF Overview

Mode Shapes
Poles

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - Residue Matrix and Mode Shapes


Transfer Function evaluated at one pole

[H(s )]s=s

qk
T
{u k }
= {u k }
sp k

can be expanded for all modes


m

[H(s )] =
k =1

MDOF Overview

q k {u k }{u k }
q k {u }{u }
+
(sp*k )
(sp k )
T

10

*
k

* T
k

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - Residue Matrix and Mode Shapes


Residues are related to mode shapes as

[A(s )]k
a11k
a
21k
a 31k
M

a12 k
a 22 k
a 32 k
M

MDOF Overview

a13k
a 23k
a 33k
M

= q k {u k }{u k }

L
u1k u1k
u u
L
=q k 2 k 1k
L
u 3k u1k
M
O

11

u1k u 2 k
u 2k u 2k
u 3k u 2 k
M

u1k u 3k
u 2 k u 3k
u 3k u 3k
M

L
L

L
O

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - Drive Point FRF

h ij ( j ) =

a ij1
( j p1 )
+

( j p 2 )

MDOF Overview

( j p*2 )

( j p 3 )

a *ij 3
( j p*3 )

( j p1 )

q1 u i 1u j 1

( j p*1 )

q 2u i 2u j 2
( j p 2 )
+

a *ij 2

a ij 3

q1 u i 1u j 1

( j p*1 )

a ij 2

h ij ( j ) =

a *ij1

q 2u i 2u j 2

( j p*2 )

q 3u i 3u j 3
( j p 3 )

12

q 3u i 3u j 3

( j p*3 )

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - FRF using Residues or Mode Shapes


h ij ( j ) =
R1

+
( j p1 ) ( j p*1 )
+

D1

a*ij1

a ij1

a*ij 2

a ij 2

+
+ L
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )

R2
D2
R3
D3

F1

F2F3
a ij1

h ij ( j ) =

q1u i1u j1

* * *
1 i 1 j1
*
1

qu u

+
( j p1 ) ( j p )
+

q 2u i 2 u j 2

* * *
2 i2 j2
*
2

qu u

( j p 2 ) ( j p )

MDOF Overview

a ij2
a ij3

2
3

+ L
13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Time / Frequency / Modal Representation


PHYSICAL

TIME

FREQUENCY

ANALYTICAL

MODAL
f1

p1
m1
k1

MODE 1

c1
MODE 1

+
p2

f2

m2
k2

MODE 2

c2
MODE 2

p3

f3

m3
k3
MODE 3

MODE 3

MDOF Overview

c3

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Overview Analytical and Experimental Modal Analysis


LAPLACE
DOMAIN

[B(s)] = [M]s + [C]s + [K]

TRANSFER
FUNCTION

[B(s)] -1 = [H(s)]

qk u j {u k}

[U]

[ A(s) ]
det [B(s)]

[U]

FINITE
ELEMENT
MODEL
[MA] = [T] T[M N] [T]

[K - M]{X} = 0

MODAL
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION

H(j )

LARGE DOF
MISMATCH

H(j ) =

Xj (j )
Fi (j )

CORRELATION &
MODEL UPDATING
[EN ]' = [TU ] [EA]

X j(t)

MDOF Overview

ANALYTICAL
MODEL
REDUCTION

FFT
Fi (t)

15

MODAL
TEST

EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL MODEL
EXPANSION

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Digitization,
Quantization,
Aliasing,
Leakage
T

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage


Objectives of this lecture:
Overview basic digital signal processing concepts
Discuss digitization and sampling
Discuss quantization
Discuss aliasing and anti-aliasing filters
Discuss leakage

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Time - Frequency - Laplace


Each domain casts the same information from a different view
point. Many times things that are confusing or unclear in one
domain become easier to interpret in another domain.
* Time domain represents the
physics of the system

TIME DOMAIN

TRANSFORMATION

* Frequency domain represents


the system in terms of it's
periodicities

SUBSET

FREQUENCY
DOMAIN

* Laplace domain represents


the system in terms of its
poles and residues

TRANSFORMATION

PARAMETER ESTIMATION

LAPLACE
DOMAIN

FREQUENCY

AMPLITUDE

TIME

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Transformation from Time to Frequency


Many times a transformation is performed to provide a better
or clearer understanding of a phenomena. The time
representation of a sine wave may be difficult to interpret. By
using a Fourier series representation, the original time signal
can be easily transformed and much better understood.
Transformations are also
performed to respresent the same
data with significantly less
information. Notice that the
original time signal was defined by
many discrete time points (ie,
1024, 2048, 4096 ) whereas the
equivalent Fourier representation
only requires 4 amplitudes and 4
frequencies.
Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

The Anatomy of the FFT Analyzer


The FFT Analyzer can be broken
down into several pieces which
involve the digitization, filtering,
transformation and processing of a
signal.

ANALOG
SIGNAL

ANALOG
FILTER

ADC

DISPLAY

DIGITAL
FILTER

FFT

DISCRETE
DATA

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Several items are important here:


Digitization and Sampling
Quantization of Signal
Aliasing Effects
Leakage Distortion
Windows Weighting Functions
The Fourier Transform
Measurement Formulation

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

The Anatomy of the FFT Analyzer


Actual time signals

ANALOG SIGNALS
OUTPUT

INPUT

ANTIALIASING FILTERS

Analog anti-alias filter

AUTORANGE ANALYZER
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS

OUTPUT

INPUT

APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT

OUTPUT

COMPUTE FFT
LINEAR SPECTRA
LINEAR
OUTPUT
SPECTRUM

LINEAR
INPUT
SPECTRUM

Digitized time signals


Windowed time signals
Compute FFT of signal

AVERAGING OF SAMPLES

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA

INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM

COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Average auto/cross spectra


Compute FRF and Coherence

COHERENC E FUNCTION

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analog Filter
The analog filter removes the portion of the data that can cause
aliasing.

dB

Rolloff

Fc
Frequency

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sinusoidal Terminology
The peak displacement, peak-to-peak displacement, average
value and rms value are shown below for a sinusoid.

PEAK
AVERAGE

RMS
PEAK TO PEAK

RMS = 0.707x PEAK


AVERAGE = 0.637 x PEAK
PEAK TO PEAK = 2 x PEAK

x AVG =

1 2
x RMS = x ( t )dt
To

1
x dt

To

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Complex Notation
Real / Imaginary Representation

a + jb

a - real part
b - imaginary part

j = 1

Magnitude / Phase Representation

= a tan (b / a )

(a + jb) = a 2 + b 2
Complex Conjugate

(a + jb)* = a jb

Complex Multiplication

(a + jb)(a jb) = a 2 + b 2
(a + jb)(c jd ) = (ac bd ) + j(bc + ad )
Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Digitization of Time Signals


With analog sampling devices, only the performance of the
analog instrumentation was of concern. With the use of digital
signal processing (DSP) techniques, additional consideration must
be given to the analog to digital conversion (ADC) process.
The analog signal must be digitized and several additional items
become important in order to minimize distortion of the original
signal. These are quantization, sampling, aliasing and leakage.

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Digitization of Time Signals


Sampling rate of the ADC is specified as a maximum that is
possible. Basically, the digitizer is taking a series of
snapshots at a very fast rate as time progresses
Digital
Analog Signal
Representation
ADC

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization
Sampling refers to the rate at which the signal is collected.
Quantization refers to the amplitude description of the signal.
A 4 bit ADC has 24 or 16 possible values
A 6 bit ADC has 26 or 64 possible values
A 12 bit ADC has 212 or 4096 possible values

ADC BIT STEPS


4bit = 0000 = 23 + 2 2 + 21 + 2 0 = 16levels
12bit = 000000000000= 211 + 210 + L + 21 + 20 = 4096levels = 72dBdynamicrange

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization
Quantization errors refer to the accuracy of the amplitude
measured. The 6 bit ADC represents the signal shown much
better than a 4 bit ADC

A
D
C

A
D
C

M
A
X

M
A
X

R
A
N
G
E

R
A
N
G
E

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization Error
Underloading of the ADC causes amplitude errors in the signal
All of the available
dynamic range of the
analog to digital
converter is not used
effectively

10 volt
range
on
ADC

0.5 volt signal


This causes amplitude
and phase distortion of
the measured signal in
both the time and
frequency domains

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization Error
A large DC bias can cause amplitude errors in the alternating
part of the signal. AC coupling uses a high pass filter to
remove the DC component from the signal
All of the available
dynamic range of the
analog to digital
converter is dominated
by the DC signal

10 volt
range
on
ADC

The alternating part of


the signal suffers from
quantization error
This causes amplitude
and phase distortion of
the measured signal

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization Error
Overloading of the ADC causes severe errors also
The ADC range is set
too low for the signal
to be measured and
causes clipping of the
signal
1 volt
range
on
ADC

A
D
C
M
A
X

1.5 volt signal

R
A
N
G
E

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

This causes amplitude


and phase distortion of
the measured signal in
both the time and
frequency domains
16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sampling
Each sample is spaced delta t seconds apart. Sufficient
sampling is needed in order to assure that the entire event is
captured. The maximum observable frequency is inversely
proportional to the delta time step used

Fs = 1 / t

Digital Sample

t spacing

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sampling Theory
In order to extract valid frequency information, digitization of
the analog signal must occur at a certain rate.
Shannon's Sampling Theorem states

fs > 2 fmax

That is, the sampling rate must be at least twice the desired
frequency to be measured.
For a time record of T seconds, the lowest frequency
component measurable is
f = 1 / T
With these two properties above, the sampling parameters can
be summarized as
fmax = 1 / 2 t
t = 1 / 2 fmax

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

18

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sampling Parameters
Due to the Rayleigh Criteria and Shannons Sampling Theorum,
the following sampling parameters must be observed.
T=N t

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sampling Parameters
Due to the Rayleigh Criteria and Shannons Sampling Theorum,
the following sampling parameters must be observed.
PICK

THEN

AND

fmax = 1 / (2 t)

T = N t

fmax

t = 1 / (2 fmax )

f = 1/(N t)

T = 1 / f

t = T / N

f =1 / T

fmax = N f / 2

If we choose f = 5 Hz and N = 1024


T = 1 / f = 1 / 5 Hz = 0.2 sec
Then
fs = N f = (1024) (5 Hz) = 5120 Hz
fmax = fs = (5120 Hz) / 2 = 2560 Hz
Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Time vs. Frequency


An inverse relationship between time and frequency exists
T

BW
Given delta t = .0019531 and N = 1024 time points,
then T = 2 sec and BW= 256 Hz and delta f = 0.5 Hz

TIME DOMAIN

FREQUENCY DOMAIN

BW
Given delta t = .000976563 and N = 1024 time points,
then T = 1sec sec and BW = 512 Hz and delta f = 1 Hz

TIME DOMAIN

FREQUENCY DOMAIN

BW
Given delta t = .0019531 and N = 512 time points,
then T = 1 sec and BW = 256 Hz and delta f = 1 Hz

TIME DOMAIN

FREQUENCY DOMAIN

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

21

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Aliasing
WRAP-AROUND

ACTUAL SIGNAL

OBSERVED

ACTUAL

ALIASED SIGNAL

f max

Aliasing results when the sampling does not occur fast enough.
Sampling must occur faster than twice the highest frequency
to be measured in the data - sampling of 10 to 20 times the
signal is sufficient for most time representations of varying
signals
However, in order to accurately represent a signal in the
frequency domain, sampling need only occur at greater than
twice the frequency of interest

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Anti-Aliasing Filters
Most good FFT analyzers have
anti-aliasing filters which
protect against aliasing.

WRAP-AROUND

OBSERVED

These are low pass filters that


typically have a roll off rate and
are not ideal.
Usually only 80% of the antialiasing filter range is used to
provide additional protection
against aliasing.

ACTUAL

f max

BW

CF
800

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

23

1024

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Fourier Transform

Forward Fourier Transform


+

Sx (f )= x ( t )e j2 ft dt

and Inverse Fourier Transform


+

x ( t )= Sx (f )e j2 ft df

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Discrete Fourier Transform


Even though the actual time signal is continuous, the signal is
discretized and the transformation at discrete points is
+

Sx (mf )= x ( t )e j2 mf t dt

This integral is evaluated as


Sx (mf )t

x(nt )e j2mf nt

n =

However, if only a finite sample is available (which is generally


the case), then the transformation becomes
N 1

Sx (mf )t x( nt )e j2 mf nt
n =0

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Fourier Transform - Periodic Signal


Actual Time
Signal

ACTUAL
DATA

Captured Time
Signal

CAPTURED
DATA

Reconstructed
Time Signal

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Frequency
Spectrum
Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Fourier Transform - Nonperiodic Signal


Actual Time
Signal

ACTUAL
DATA

Captured Time
Signal

CAPTURED
DATA

Reconstructed
Time Signal

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Frequency
Spectrum
Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

27

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Leakage
F
R
E
Q

ACTUAL
DATA

CAPTURED
DATA

T
I
M
E

Periodic Signal

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Non-Periodic Signal

U
E
N
C
Y

ACTUAL
DATA

CAPTURED
DATA

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Leakage due to
signal distortion

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

28

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Leakage
When the measured signal is not periodic in the sample
interval, incorrect estimates of the amplitude and frequency
occur. This error is referred to as leakage.
Basically, the actual energy distribution is smeared across the
frequency spectrum and energy leaks from a particular f into
adjacent f s.
Leakage is probably the most common and most serious digital
signal processing error. Unlike aliasing, the effects of leakage
can not be eliminated.

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

29

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows
0

-10

AMPLITUDE

-20

0
-30

-10
-40

-20
-50

-30
-60

dB

ROLLOFF

-40

-70

-50
- 80

-60
- 90

dB
-100
-16

-70
-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

10

12

14

-100
-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

15.9375

- 80

- 90

WIDTH

Windows

-6

-4

-2

10

12

14

15.9375

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows
Objectives of this lecture:
Overview window concept
Discuss different windows
Discuss effects of windows

Windows

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows
A window is a weighting function that is applied to the measured
signal. The function of the window is to make the measured
signal appear to look more periodic in the sample interval
thereby reducing the effects of leakage
Some common windows are
* Rectangular
* Hanning
* Flat Top
* Force / Exponential

Windows

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows
In order to better satisfy the periodicity requirement of the
FFT process, time weighting functions, called windows, are used.
Essentially, these weighting functions attempt to heavily weight
the beginning and end of the sample record to zero - the middle
of the sample is heavily weighted towards unity
ACTUAL
DATA

CAPTURED
DATA

T
I
M
E

Periodic Signal

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Non-Periodic Signal
ACTUAL
DATA

CAPTURED
DATA

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Windows

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

F
R
E
Q
U
E
N
C
Y

Windows - Rectangular/Hanning/Flattop
Rectangular - Unity gain applied to entire sample interval; this
window can have up to 36% amplitude error if the signal is not
periodic in the sample interval; good for signals that inherently
satisfy the periodicity requirement of the FFT process
Hanning - Cosine bell shaped weighting which heavily weights the
beginning and end of the sample interval to zero; this window
can have up to 16% amplitude error; the main frequency will
show some adjacent side band frequencies but then quickly
attenuates; good for general purpose signal applications
Flat Top - Multi-sine weighting function; this window has
excellent amplitude characteristics (0.1% error) but very poor
frequency resolution; very good for calibration purposes with
discrete sine

Windows

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Rectangular/Hanning/Flattop
Time weighting functions
are applied to minimize
the effects of leakage

AMPLITUDE

ROLLOFF

Rectangular
Hanning

WIDTH

General window
frequency characteristics

Flat Top
and many others

Windows DO NOT eliminate leakage !!!


Windows

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Rectangular
The rectangular window function is shown below. The main lobe is narrow, but the side lobes are very large
and roll off quite slowly. The main lobe is quite rounded and can introduce large measurement errors. The
rectangular window can have amplitude errors as large as 36%.

-10

-20

Amplitude
-30

-40

-50

-60

dB
-70

- 80

- 90

-100
-16

-14

-12

Windows

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

10

12

14

15.9375

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0.5

1.5

2.5

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Hanning
The hanning window function is shown below. The first few side lobes are rather large, but a 60 dB/octave
roll-off rate is helpful. This window is most useful for searching operations where good frequency
resolution is needed, but amplitude accuracy is not important; the hanning window will have amplitude errors
of as much as 16%.
0

-10

-20

Amplitude
-30

-40

-50

-60

dB
-70

- 80

- 90

-100
-16

-14

-12

Windows

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

10

12

14

15.9375

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0.5

1.5

2.5

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Flat Top


The flat top window function is shown below. The main lobe is very flat and spreads over several frequency
bins. While this window suffers from frequency resolution, the amplitude can be measured very accurately
to 0.1%.

-10

-20

Amplitude
-30

-40

-50

-60

dB
-70

- 80

- 90

-100
-16

-14

-12

-10

Windows

-8

-6

-4

-2

10

12

14

-3

15.9375

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0.5

1.5

2.5

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Hanning Window Process

Windows

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Flattop Window Process

Windows

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Periodic Signal


Rectangular

Hanning

Flat Top

-10

-10

-10

-20

-20

-20

-30

-30

-30

-40

-40

-40

-50

-50

-50

-60

-60

-60

dB

dB

dB

-70

-70

-70

- 80

- 80

- 80

- 90

- 90

- 90

-100
-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

Windows

-2

10

12

14

15.9375

-100
-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

12

10

12

14

15.9375

-100
-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

10

12

14

15.9375

Window Effects
THEORETICAL WINDOW SHAPE

ACTUAL SIGNAL
0

-1 DELTA F

0 DELTA F

1 DELTA F

RESULTING FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

Windows

X
7

CONVOLUTION OF THE
THEORETICAL WINDOW
AND THE ACTUAL SIGNAL
IN THE FREQUENCY DOMAIN
13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Force/Exponential for Impact Testing


Special windows are used for impact testing

Force
window

Windows

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows - Force/Exponential for Impact Testing


Special windows are used for impact testing

Exponential
window

Windows

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurement Definitions
INPUT

SYSTEM

u(t)

n(t)

x(t)

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

ACTUAL

NOISE

MEASURED

y(t)

-10

-20

-30

-40

1.0000

-50

-60
-1.0000

dB
-70

- 80

- 90

-100
-16

Measurement Definitions

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

10

12

14

15.9375

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurement Definitions
Objectives of this lecture:
Define the basic measurements needed for

experimental modal analysis

Define linear spectra and power spectra


Include the effects of noise

Measurement Definitions

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurement Definitions
Actual time signals

ANALOG SIGNALS
OUTPUT

INPUT

ANTIALIASING FILTERS

Analog anti-alias filter

AUTORANGE ANALYZER
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS

Digitized time signals

OUTPUT

INPUT

APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT

Windowed time signals

OUTPUT

COMPUTE FFT
LINEAR SPECTRA

Compute FFT of signal

LINEAR
OUTPUT
SPECTRUM

LINEAR
INPUT
SPECTRUM

AVERAGING OF SAMPLES

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA

INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

Average auto/cross spectra

OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM

COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Measurement Definitions

Compute FRF and Coherence

COHERENC E FUNCTION

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Linear Spectra


x(t)
INPUT

Sx(f)

h(t)

y(t)

TIME

SYSTEM

OUTPUT

FFT & IFT

H(f)

Sy(f)

FREQUENCY

x(t)

- time domain input to the system

y(t)

- time domain output to the system

Sx(f)

- linear Fourier spectrum of x(t)

Sy(f)

- linear Fourier spectrum of y(t)

H(f)

- system transfer function

h(t)

- system impulse response

Measurement Definitions

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Linear Spectra


+

x ( t )= Sx (f )e j2 ft df

Sx (f )= x ( t )e j2 ft dt

y( t )= S y (f )e

j2 ft

S y (f )= y( t )e j2 ft dt

df

h ( t )= H (f )e

j2 ft

H (f )= h ( t )e j2 ft dt

df

Note: Sx and Sy are complex valued functions

Measurement Definitions

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Power Spectra


Rxx(t)
INPUT

Gxx(f)

Ryx(t)

Ryy(t)

TIME

SYSTEM

OUTPUT

FFT & IFT

Gxy(f)

Gyy(f)

FREQUENCY

Rxx(t) - autocorrelation of the input signal x(t)


Ryy(t) - autocorrelation of the output signal y(t)
Ryx(t) - cross correlation of y(t) and x(t)
Gxx(f) - autopower spectrum of x(t)

G xx ( f ) = S x ( f ) S*x ( f )

Gyy(f) - autopower spectrum of y(t)

G yy ( f ) = S y ( f ) S*y ( f )

Gyx(f) - cross power spectrum of y(t) and x(t)

G yx ( f ) = S y ( f ) S*x ( f )

Measurement Definitions

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Linear Spectra


lim 1
R xx ()=E[ x ( t ), x ( t + )]=
x ( t )x ( t + )dt

T TT
+

G xx (f )= R xx ()e j2 ft d=Sx (f )S*x (f )

lim 1
R yy ()=E[ y( t ), y( t + )]=
y( t )y( t + )dt

T TT
+

G yy (f )= R yy ()e j2 ft d=S y (f )S*y (f )

lim 1
R yx ()=E[ y( t ), x ( t + )]=
y( t )x ( t + )dt

T TT
+

G yx (f )= R yx ()e j2 ft d=S y (f )S*x (f )

Measurement Definitions

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Derived Relationships


S y =HSx

H1 formulation
- susceptible to noise on the input
- underestimates the actual H of the system

S y S*x G yx
H=
=
*
Sx Sx G xx

S y S*x =HSx S*x

H2 formulation
- susceptible to noise on the output
- overestimates the actual H of the system

Other
formulations
for H exist

S y S*y G yy
H=
=
*
Sx S y G xy

S y S*y =HSx S*y


COHERENCE

2
xy

Measurement Definitions

(S y S*x )(Sx S*y )


(Sx S*x )(S y S*y )
8

G yx / G xx
G yy / G xy

H1
H2

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Noise

H=G uv /G uu

1
H1 =H

1+G nn
G uu
G mm
H 2 =H1+

vv

Measurement Definitions

INPUT

SYSTEM

u(t)

n(t)

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

x(t)

ACTUAL

y(t)

NOISE

MEASURED

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Noise
H1 FORMULATION - OUTPUT NOISE ONLY
Using the basic input-output model and adding noise Sm on
the output, gives
Sm + Sv = H Su
Post-multiplying by the conjugate of the input spectrum Su* ,
gives
( Sm + Sv ) Su* = H1 Su Su*
Sm Su* + Sv Su* = H1 Su Su*
If the output noise is incoherent with input signal
(uncorrelated), then SmSu* = 0 as more averages are taken.
Then the following can be written

INPUT

SYSTEM

u(t)

H1 = Sv Su* / Su Su* = Guv / Guu


n(t)

x(t)

Measurement Definitions

10

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

ACTUAL

y(t)

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

NOISE

MEASURED

Measurements - Noise
H2 FORMULATION - OUTPUT NOISE ONLY
Using the basic input-output model and adding noise Sm on the
output, gives
Sm + Sv = H Su
Post-multiplying by the conjugate of the output spectrum
( Sm* + Sv* ) , gives
( Sm + Sv ) ( Sm* + Sv* ) = H2 Su ( Sm* + Sv* )
Sm Sm* + Sv Sv* + Sv Sm* + Sm Sv* = H2 Su Sm* + H2 Su Sv*
If the output noise is incoherent with input and output signal
(uncorrelated), then as more averages are taken, the following can
be written
INPUT

SYSTEM

Sm Sm* + Sv Sv* = H2 Su Sv*

u(t)

Gmm + Gvv = H2 Guv

n(t)

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

ACTUAL

NOISE

H2 = ( Gmm + Gvv ) / Guv = H + Gmm / Guv


x(t)

H2 = H ( 1 + Gmm / Gvv )
Measurement Definitions

11

y(t)

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MEASURED

Measurements - Noise
H1 FORMULATION - INPUT NOISE ONLY
Using the basic input-output model and adding noise Sn on the input,
gives
Sv = H ( Su + Sn )
Post-multiplying by the conjugate of the input spectrum ( Su* + Sn* ) ,
gives
Sv ( Su* + Sn* ) = H1 ( Su + Sn ) ( Su* + Sn* )
Sv Su* + Sv Sn* = H1 ( SuSu* + SnSn* + SnSu* + SuSn* )
If the input noise is incoherent with input and output signal
(uncorrelated), then as more averages are taken, the following can be
written
INPUT

SYSTEM

u(t)

Sv Su* = H1 ( SuSu* + SnSn* )


Gvu = H1 ( Guu + Gnn )

n(t)

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

ACTUAL

NOISE

H1 = Guv / ( Guu + Gnn ) = ( Guv / Guu ) / ( 1 + Gnn / Guu )


x(t)

H1 = H / ( 1 + Gnn / Guu )
Measurement Definitions

12

y(t)

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MEASURED

Measurements - Noise
H2 FORMULATION - INPUT NOISE ONLY
Using the basic input-output model and adding noise Sn on
the input, gives
Sv = H ( Su + Sn )
Post-multiplying by the conjugate of the output spectrum
Sv* , gives
Sv Sv* = H2 ( Su + Sn ) Sv*
Sv Sv* = H2 ( Su Sv* + Sn Sv* )
If the input noise is incoherent with input and output signal
(uncorrelated), then as more averages are taken, the
following can be written
INPUT

SYSTEM

u(t)

H2 = Gvv / Guv
n(t)

x(t)

Measurement Definitions

13

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

ACTUAL

y(t)

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

NOISE

MEASURED

Measurements - Noise
COHERENCE - OUTPUT NOISE
Using the basic input-output coherence model and adding
noise Sm on the output, gives
2 = ( Gyx 2 ) / Gxx Gyy
2 = ( H Guu )2 / [( Su Su* ) ( Sv + Sm ) ( Sv* + Sm* )
2 = ( H Guu )2 / [( Guu ) ( SvSv* + SmSm* + SmSv* + SvSm* )

As more averages are taken, the following can be written


2 = ( H 2 Guu 2 ) / [( Guu ) ( Gvv + Gmm )]
Recalling that
H2 =

Gvv / Guu

(since Sv = H Su)

INPUT

SYSTEM

u(t)

the following can be written


2 = Gvv / ( Gvv + Gmm )

n(t)

OUTPUT

v(t)

H
m(t)

ACTUAL

NOISE

2 = 1 / ( 1 + Gmm/Gvv )
x(t)

Measurement Definitions

14

y(t)

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MEASURED

Frequency Response Function - Hv


When considering both noise on the input and
output simultaneously, another frequency reponse
function can be computed from the total least
squares solution

{S y } {Sm }= [H V ]{{Sx } {Sn }}


This formulation is a better approximation of the
true frequency response of the system in the
presence of noise on both input and output
simultaneously.
Measurement Definitions

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

H1, H2, HV - Comparison


H 1 reduces noise on the output only
H 2 reduces noise on the input only
H v reduces noise on the input and output sim ultaneously

HV

OUTPUT

H1

H2
INPUT
Measurement Definitions

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Auto Power Spectrum

x(t)

y(t)
OUTPUT RESPONSE

INPUT FORCE

G xx (f)

G yy (f)

AVERAGED INPUT

AVERAGED OUTPUT

POWER SPECTRUM

POWER SPECTRUM

Measurement Definitions

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Cross Power Spectrum

AVERAGED INPUT

AVERAGED OUTPUT

POWER SPECTRUM

POWER SPECTRUM

G yy (f)

G xx (f)

AVERAGED CROSS
POWER SPECTRUM

G yx (f)
Measurement Definitions

18

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - Frequency Response Function

AVERAGED INPUT

AVERAGED CROSS

AVERAGED OUTPUT

POWER SPECTRUM

POWER SPECTRUM

POWER SPECTRUM

G yx (f)

G yy (f)

G xx (f)

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

H(f)
Measurement Definitions

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Measurements - FRF & Coherence


Coherence
1

Real

0
0Hz

AVG:

200Hz

COHERENCE
Freq Resp
40

dB Mag

-60
0Hz

AVG:

200Hz

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Measurement Definitions

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Excitation Considerations
1

h 13
1

2
1

h 23
3

h 33

h 31

h 33

h 32

Excitation Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation

Excitation Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation
Objectives of this lecture:
Overview impact excitation techniques
Review hammer/tip characteristics
Review special DSP considerations

Excitation Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation
An impulsive excitation which is very short in the time window
usually lasting less than 5% of the sample interval.
ADVANTAGES
- easy setup
- fast measurement time
- minimum of equipment
- low cost
DISADVANTAGES
- poor rms to peak levels
- poor for nonlinear structures
- force/response windows needed
- pretrigger delay needed
- double impacts may occur
- high potential for signal overload and underload of ADC

Excitation Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Hammer Tip Selection


The force spectrum can be customized to some extent
through the use of hammer tips with various hardnesses.
A hard tip has a very short pulse and will excite a wide
frequency range. A soft tip has a long pulse and will excite
a narrow frequency range.
However, the hammer tip alone does not totally determine
the frequency range excited. The local flexibility of the
structure must also be considered.

Excitation Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Hammer Tip Selection


METAL TIP

HARD PLASTIC TIP

Real

Real

-976.5625us

TIME PULSE

123.9624ms

-976.5625us

dB Mag

TIME PULSE

123.9624ms

dB Mag

FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

0Hz

6.4kHz

0Hz

FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

6.4kHz

RUBBER TIP

SOFT PLASTIC TIP


Real

Real

-976.5625us

TIME PULSE

-976.5625us

123.9624ms

TIME PULSE

123.9624ms

dB Mag

dB Mag

0Hz

Excitation Considerations

FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

6.4kHz

0Hz

FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

6.4kHz

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Pretrigger Delay


Pretrigger delay is often used to minimize the distortion of
the triggering effect from the impact pulse
t=0
NO PRETRIGGER
USED

t=0

PRETRIGGER
SPECIFIED

Excitation Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Double Impact


Double impacts can occur due to a sloppy hammer swing or
many times due to the responsive nature of many structures.
They should be avoided wherever possible.
DOUBLE IMPACT
Real

DOUBLE IMPACT
-976.5625us

998.53516ms

TIME PULSE
Real

dB Mag

-976.5625us

0Hz

FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

TIME PULSE

998.53516ms

800Hz

dB Mag

FREQUENCY SPECTRUM

0Hz

Excitation Considerations

800Hz

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Right Hammer for the Test


40

COHERENCE

dB Mag
FRF
INPUT POWER SPECTRUM

-60
0Hz

800Hz

40

COHERENCE
FRF

dB Mag
INPUT POWER SPECTRUM

-60
0Hz

Excitation Considerations

200Hz

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Windows May Be Necessary

ACTUAL TIME SIGNAL

SAMPLED SIGNAL

WINDOW WEIGHTING

WINDOWED TIME SIGNAL

Excitation Considerations

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impact Excitation - Exponential Window


If the signal does not
naturally decay within the
sample interval, then an
exponentially decaying
window may be necessary.

T=N t

However, many times


changing the signal
processing parameters such
as bandwidth and number of
spectral lines may produce a
signal which requires less
window weighting

Excitation Considerations

T=N t

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Multiple Reference Impact Test


Mount a few accelerometers at key points on the structure
where the majority of the modes can be observed.
Impact ALL points in ALL directions.
Multiple reference data is then obtained.
Ref#1

Ref#2

Ref#3

Excitation Considerations

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Multiple Reference Impact Test


Mount ALL the
accelerometers at ALL
points in ALL of the
required directions.
Impact a few key points
where most of the
desired modes can be
observed.
Multiple reference data
is then obtained.

Excitation Considerations

Ref#1

13

Ref#2

Ref#3

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Shaker Excitation

Excitation Considerations

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Shaker Excitation
RESPONSE TRANSDUCER

Excitation device is
attached to the
structure using a long
rod called a stinger
or quill

STRUCTURE UNDER TEST


FORCE TRANSDUCER
STINGER
SHAKER

Excitation device is attached to the structure using a long rod called a


stinger or quill
Its purpose is to provide input along the shaker excitation axis with
essentially no excitation of the other directions
It is also intended to be flexible enough to not provide any stiffness
to the other directions
The force gage is always mounted on the structure side of the quill
NOT ON THE SHAKER SIDE
Excitation Considerations

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Signal Types
Excitation techniques can be broken down into two categories:
Deterministic Signals
Non-Deterministic (Random) Signals
Deterministic Signals
conform to a particular mathematical relationship
can be described exactly at any instant in time
response of the system can also be exactly defined if the
system character is known
swept sine, sine chirp, digital stepped sine are examples
Non-Deterministic (Random) Signals
do not conform to a particular mathematical relationship
can not be described exactly at any instant in time
described by some statistical character of the signal
generally have varying amplitude, phase and frequency
content at any point in time
pure random, periodic random, burst random are examples
Excitation Considerations

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Swept Sine Excitation


INPUT EXCITATION

OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

Slowly changing sine signal sweeping from one frequency to another


frequency

Excitation Considerations

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Swept Sine Excitation


A slowly changing sine output sweeping from one frequency to
another frequency
ADVANTAGES
best peak to RMS level
best signal to noise ratio
good for nonlinear characterization
widely accepted and understood
DISADVANTAGES
slowest of all test methods
leakage is a problem
does not take advantage of speed of FFT process

Excitation Considerations

18

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Random Excitation with Hanning Window


AUTORANGING

AVERAGING WITH WINDOW

An ergodic, stationary signal with Gaussian probability distribution.


Typically, has frequency content at all frequencies.

Excitation Considerations

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Random Excitation with Hanning Window


An ergodic, stationary signal with Gaussian probability distribution.
Typically, has frequency content at all frequencies.
ADVANTAGES
gives a good linear approximation for a system with slight nonlinearities
relatively fast
overlap processing can be used
relatively good general purpose excitation
DISADVANTAGES
even with windows applied to the measurement leakage
is a very serious problem
FRFs are generally distorted due to leakage with
(significant distortion at the peaks)
excessive averaging necessary to reduce variance on data

Excitation Considerations

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Random Excitation with Hanning Window


Time signal

Frequency Signal

0s

1.999s

0Hz

0s

1.999s

0Hz

Excitation Considerations

21

400Hz

AVG: 10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

400Hz

Random Excitation with Overlap Processing


OVERLAP PROCESSING

Excitation Considerations

10

22

used to reduce test time with


pure random excitations
Hanning window tends to weight
the first and last quarter of
the time block to zero and this
data is not effectively used in
the normal averaging process
effectively uses the portion of
the block that has been heavily
weighted to zero
overlap processing allows for
almost twice as many averages
with the same data when fifty
percent overlap is used

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Burst Random Excitation


AUTORANGING

AVERAGING

A random excitation that exists over only a portion of the data block
(typically 50% to 70%).

Excitation Considerations

23

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Burst Random Excitation


A random excitation that exists over only a portion of the data
block (typically 50% to 70%)
ADVANTAGES
has all the advantages of random excitation
the function is self-windowing
no leakage
DISADVANTAGES
if response does not die out within on sample interval, then
leakage is a problem

Excitation Considerations

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Burst Random Excitation


Time signal

Frequency Signal
End of burst

0s

Shaker off

0Hz

1.999s

400Hz

Response decays exponentially


0s

0Hz

1.999s

Excitation Considerations

25

AVG: 10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

400Hz

Sine Chirp Excitation


AUTORANGING

AVERAGING

A very fast swept sine signal that starts and stops within one sample
interval of the FFT analyzer

Excitation Considerations

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sine Chirp Excitation


A very fast swept sine signal that starts and stops within one
sample interval of the FFT analyzer
ADVANTAGES
has all the same advantages as swept sine
self windowing function
good for nonlinear characterization
DISADVANTAGES
nonlinearities will not be averaged out

Excitation Considerations

27

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Sine Chirp Excitation


Time signal

Frequency Signal

0s

1.999s

0Hz

0s

1.999s

0Hz

Excitation Considerations

28

400Hz

AVG: 10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

400Hz

Digital Stepped Sine Excitation


AUTORANGING

AVERAGE

AUTORANGING

IFT

IFT

AVERAGE

Sine waves are generated at discrete frequencies which correspond to


the digital values of the FFT analyzer for the frequency resolution
available. The system is excited with a single sine wave and steady
state response measured. Once one spectral line is obtained, the next
digital frequency is acquired until all frequencies have been measured.

Excitation Considerations

29

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Digital Stepped Sine Excitation


Sine waves are generated at discrete frequencies which correspond
to the digital values of the FFT analyzer for the frequency
resolution available. The system is excited with a single sine wave
and the steady state response is measured. Once one spectral line is
obtained, the next digital frequency is acquired until all frequencies
have been measured.
ADVANTAGES
excellent peak to RMS level
excellent signal to noise ratio
good for nonlinear characterization
leakage free measurements obtained
DISADVANTAGES
slowest of all test methods

Excitation Considerations

30

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comparison - Random/Hann, Burst Random, Chirp

RANDOM

BURST RANDOM

SINE CHIRP

Excitation Considerations

31

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Random with Hanning Window vs Burst Random


Frequency Response Function

Coherence

RANDOM

RANDOM

BURST RANDOM

BURST RANDOM

When comparing the measurement with random and burst random,


notice that the random excitation peaks are lower and appear to be
more heavily damped when compared to the burst random. - also notice
the coherence improvement at the resonant peaks.

Excitation Considerations

32

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Random with Hanning Window vs Burst Random

RANDOM

COH

FRF
BURST RANDOM

RANDOM & HANNING

Excitation Considerations

33

BURST RANDOM

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Excitation Considerations - Shaker Excitation


AUTORANGING

Random
with
Hanning

Burst
Random

AVERAGING WITH WINDOW

AUTORANGING

Accurate FRFs are necessary

AVERAGING

AUTORANGING

Leakage is a serious concern

Special excitation
techniques can be
used which will result
in leakage free
measurements without
the use of a window

AVERAGING

Sine
Chirp
1

as well as other techniques


Excitation Considerations

34

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Excitation Considerations - MIMO


Multiple referenced FRFs are
obtained from MIMO test

Energy is distributed
better throughout the
structure making
better measurements
possible
Ref#1

Excitation Considerations

35

Ref#2

Ref#3

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Excitation Considerations - MIMO

Large or
complicated
structures
require
special
attention

Excitation Considerations

36

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Excitation Considerations - MIMO

[G XF ]=[H][G FF ]
H11
H
[H]= 21
M
H
No ,1

H12
H 22
M
H No , 2

[H ]=[G XF ][G FF ]1

Excitation Considerations

H1, Ni
L H 2, Ni

M
L H No , Ni
L

Measurements are
developed in a
similar fashion to
the single input
single output case
but using a matrix
formulation

where
No - number of outputs
Ni - number of inputs

37

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Excitation Considerations - MIMO


Measurements on the same structure can show
tremendously different modal densities depending
on the location of the measurement

Excitation Considerations

38

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts


j
[
[
A k ] [A*k ]
A k ] [A*k ] upper [A k ] [A *k ]
[H(s )]=
+
+
+
+
+
*
*
*
terms (ss k ) (ss k )
k =i (ss k ) (ss k ) terms (ss k ) (ss k )
lower

SYSTEM EXCITATION/RESPONSE

SDOF POLYNOMIAL

PEAK PICK
MULTIPLE REFERENCE FRF MATRIX DEVELOPMENT

INPUT FORCE

RESIDUAL COMPENSATION

INPUT FORCE
INPUT FORCE

LOCAL CURVEFITTING

IFT

GLOBAL CURVEFITTING
POLYREFERENCE CUVREFITTING

COMPLEX EXPONENTIAL

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

MDOF POLYNOMIAL

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Estimation Concepts


NO COMPENSATION
Y

y=mx
X

COMPENSATION
Y

y=mx+b

WHICH DATA ???


Y

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


HOW MANY POINTS ???

RESIDUAL
EFFECTS

RESIDUAL
EFFECTS

ORDER OF THE MODEL


AMOUNT OF DATA TO
BE USED
COMPENSATION FOR
RESIDUALS

HOW MANY MODES ???

The test engineer identifies these items


NOT THE SOFTWARE !!!
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


HOW MANY POINTS ???

lower

[Ak ]

[A ]

terms

*
k

*
k

[H( s) ] = ( s s ) + s s
( )
j

[Ak ]

[A ]

*
k

*
k

( s s ) + (s s )
k=i

RESIDUAL
EFFECTS

upper

[Ak ]

[A ]

terms

*
k

RESIDUAL
EFFECTS

*
k

( s s ) + (s s )
HOW MANY MODES ???

[
[
Ak ]
A*k ]
[H(s )] = lower residuals +
+
+ upper residuals
*
(ss k )
k =i (ss k )
j

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Classification of Modes
Well separated - lightly damped

Closely spaced - lightly damped

Well separated - heavily damped

Closely spaced - heavily damped

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Time and Frequency Domain Representations


The basic equations can be cast in either the
time or frequency domain

a1
a1*
h (s)=
+
(s p1 ) (s p1* )

1 t
h ( t )=
e sin d t
md

There is essentially no difference in these


equations from a theoretical standpoint
provided there is an infinite amount of
amplitude and frequency resolution
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Different Forms of the Same Equation

Polynomial Form

1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k

Pole-Zero Form

1/ m
h (s) =
(s p1 )(s p1* )

Partial Fraction Form

a1
a1*
h (s) =
+
(s p1 ) (s p1* )

Exponential Form

1 t
h(t) =
e sin d t
md

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Why Have Different Methods

Time Domain

Frequency Domain

Time or frequency - which to use ???

It really depends on which domain


has the most data
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF - Summation of Many SDOF Systems


h ij ( j ) =
R1

+
( j p1 ) ( j p*1 )
+

D1

a*ij1

a ij1

a*ij 2

a ij 2

+
+ L
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )

R2
D2
R3
D3

F1

F2F3
a ij1

h ij ( j ) =

q1u i1u j1

* * *
1 i 1 j1
*
1

qu u

+
( j p1 ) ( j p )
+

q 2u i 2 u j 2

* * *
2 i2 j2
*
2

qu u

( j p 2 ) ( j p )

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

a ij2
a ij3

2
3

+ L
9

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts


The FRF is made up
from each individual
mode contribution
which is determined
from the

a ij1

a ij2
a ij3

frequency,

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

damping,
residue

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

MDOF

SDOF

The task for the modal test engineer is to


determine the parameters that make up the pieces
of the frequency response function

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


The FRF matrix contains
redundant information
regarding the system
frequency, damping and
mode shapes
Multiple referenced data
can be used to obtain
better estimates of
modal parameters

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

12

MULTIPLE REFERENCE FRF MATRIX DEVELOPMENT

LOCAL CURVEFITTING
GLOBAL CURVEFITTING
POLYREFERENCE CUVREFITTING

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


Local Curvefitting
- Each measurement is curvefit to estimate
the frequency, damping and residue for
each FRF
- The frequency and damping is allowed to vary for each measurement
and may not be the same for every measurement
ADVANTAGES
- Good for systems where the poles are not global
DISADVANTAGES
- Frequency and damping is different for the system
- Local modes/node points are not characterized well

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


Global Curvefitting
- A set of measurements are curvefit to
estimate the frequency and damping
- The residue is estimated in a second pass
ADVANTAGES
- Good for systems where the poles are global
- Better estimate of the frequency and damping
- Local modes are better characterized
DISADVANTAGES
- Frequency and damping must be global in FRFs

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


Polyreference Curvefitting
- A set of measurements are curvefit to
estimate the frequency and damping
- The residue is estimated in a second pass
and is based on redundant FRF matrix information
ADVANTAGES
- Good for systems where the poles are global
- Better estimate of the frequency and damping
- Repeated roots can be identified
DISADVANTAGES
- Frequency and damping must be global in FRFs

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Selection of Bands
Select bands for possible SDOF or MDOF
extraction for frequency domain technique.
Residuals ???

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Complex ???

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Mode Determination Tools


Summation

MIF

A variety of tools assist in the determination


and selection of modes in the structure
1 Point Each From Panels 1,2, and 3 (37,49,241)
4

10

10

10

10
CMIF

10

-1

10

-2

10
0

50

100

150

CMIF

200

250
Frequency (Hz)

300

350

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

400

450

500

Stability Diagram
17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Extraction Methods


Circle Fitting

Peak Picking

SDOF Polynomial

I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

Real

A multitude of techniques exist

IFT

Complex Exponential

MDOF Polynomial Methods


Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

18

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Model Validation
Synthesis

Validation tools exist


to assure that an
accurate model has
been extracted from
measured data
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

MAC

S1

S2

S3

S4

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

S5

S6

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Single Degree of Freedom


Modal Parameter Estimation
Circle Fitting

Peak Picking

SDOF Polynomial

I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

Real

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Peak Pick - First Step in Reviewing Test Data


MODE # 1

Simple Peak Picking

MODE # 2
MODE # 3

DOF # 1

DOF #2

DOF # 3

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

21

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Peak Pick - First Step in Reviewing Test Data


Simple Peak Picking
MODE 2

2
1

MODE 1
5

2
4
1
3
6

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Simple Peak Pick - SDOF System


Substitute the pole into the SDOF FRF equation
h ( j)

a1
a1*
=
+
( jn + jd ) ( jn + + jd )
a1 =h ( j)

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

23

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Simple Peak Pick - Consider Additional Modes


Substitute the first pole into the FRF equation
h ( j)

a1
a1*
a2
a *2
=
+
+
+
( j1 + 1 jd ) ( j1 + 1 + jd ) ( jn + 2 jd 2 ) ( jn + 2 + jd 2 )

MODE 1 CONTRIBUTION

MODE 2 CONTRIBUTION

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Simple Peak Pick - Considerations and Use


Peak pick is a quick and simple check
Modes must be well spaced

(ie: no significant modal overlap)

Approximate since peak is determined from the

frequency resolution

Good quick check before attempting major modal

parameter estimation

Quickly identify erroneous measurement points

(ie: phase reversal, incorrect direction, etc)

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF - Complex Exponential Response

response can be
used to extract
parameters

Amplitude

Time domain

Damping Decay

This time domain

technique is
generally used on
multiple mode time
response data

Period

Generally not used

for single mode


response extraction

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

h(t)

26

1
md

e t

sin d t

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Approximation - Effects of Other Modes


Simple symmetric

characteristics of
SDOF system
distorted by
adjacent modes

Real part is shifted


Nyquist circle is

displaced and
rotated

Remove effects of

adjacent modes or
add compensation to
basic equations
Source: Ewins - Modal Testing, 2nd Edition
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

27

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Circle Fit - Kennedy-Pancu


Simple equation of a

circle is fit to the data


in the Nyquist

Noise and leakage have

a pronounced effect on
circle

Use of windows tends

to make the circle look


egg-shaped

Circle fit method not

used as much today due


to the availability of
many MDOF methods

Source: Heylen, Modal Analysis - Theory and Testing

h ( j)=
=

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

28

U + jV
+ R + jI
r + j( r )

U2 +V2

; tan() = U V

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Polynomial Form


Simple equation of a

polynomial for one mode is


used to fit the function

h (s)=

1
ms 2 + cs + k

Additional terms are

typically added to account


for effects of adjacent or
out-of-band modes

Fast, simple, easy to use


Inappropriate for use with

compensation terms can be added to


account for out of band effects

very closely spaced modes

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

29

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

SDOF Rational Fraction Polynomial


Simply the ratio of two

polynomials

While useful for estimating

SDOF type characteristics,


its real benefits are for
multiple modes

Orthogonal polynomials used

to greatly simplify the


numerical processing

More discussion on this in

the advanced curvefitting

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

Source: Richardson, Rational fraction Polynomial

30

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Multiple Degree of Freedom


Modal Parameter Estimation

IFT

Complex Exponential

MDOF Polynomial Methods

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

31

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Complex Exponential
One of the first mdof estimators was the complex exponential which uses
the Prony Algorithm to solve the set of equations. The Toeplitz equations
are used to form the characteristic polynomial followed by the mode
shape extraction using Vandemonde Equation formulation.
m

1
h ( t )=
e kt sin dk t
k =1 m k dk

ADVANTAGE
numerically fast and stable
handles many modes

IFT

DISADVANTAGE
time domain leakage is a concern
must overspecify modes to handle residuals

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

32

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF Polynomial
This method uses a Rational Fraction polynomial form of the FRF in order
to extract modal parameters. Both the numerator and denominator
polynomials are used in a least squares fit to extract the polynomial
coefficients.

h ij ( j) =

a ij2

a *ij2

( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )
+

a ij3

a *ij3

( j p 3 ) ( j p*3 )

A key advantage of the frequency domain representation of the FRF is


that the effects of out-of-band modes can be easily accounted for by
adding extra terms to the numerator polynomial.

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

33

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Other Time Domain Techniques


Other time domain techniques exist which extend the Complex
Exponential technique described above.
Techniques such as Ibrahim Time Domain and Polyreference LSCE
utilize some variant of the equation below to formulate the problem

O
[L]
[h ( t )] = [V] e t

global parameters are extracted for poles and shapes


uses MIMO time data for the estimation process

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

34

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Other Frequency Domain Techniques


Other frequency domain techniques exist which extend the
polynomial technique described above.
Techniques such as Least Squares Frequency Domain, Orthogonal
Polynomial, Frequency Domain Parameter Identification utilize some
variant of the rational fraction, partial fraction or reduced equation
of motion to formulate the problem

LR ij

u ik L kj
[h ij ( j)] =
+ * + UR ij + 2

k =1 ( j p k )

global poles, MPF and shapes extracted


LSFD nonlinear problem solved iteratively
RFP - ill-conditioning possible for higher order polys
use of orthogonal poly to minimize numerical problems

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

35

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Parameter Extraction Considerations


MODAL PARAMETER ESTIMATION MODELS
Time representation

h ij ( n ) ( t ) + a1h ij ( n 1) ( t ) + L + a 2 n h ij ( n 2 N ) ( t ) = 0
Frequency representation

[( j)

2N

+ a1 ( j) 2 N 1 + L + a 2 N ]h ij ( j) =

[( j)

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

2M

+ b1 ( j) 2 M 1 + L + b 2 M ]

36

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations


Numerical Considerations
Generally the time domain is numerically more

stable than the frequency domain approaches

Time domain techniques are generally better for

handling noisy data acquired

The frequency domain is more advantageous for

averaging noise in the data acquisition phase

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

37

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations


Bandwidth Considerations
The time domain is best suited for wide

bandwidths with many modes included in the


estimation process

The frequency domain is best suited for narrow

frequency bands with limited number of modes in


the band

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

38

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations


Out-of-Bandwidth Considerations
The frequency domain is best suited for

compensation effects through the use of


residuals in the mathematical formulation

The time domain can only account for out of

band effects of other modes through the use of


more poles in the estimation process

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

39

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations


Damping Considerations
The time domain is generally well suited for

lightly damped systems - there is an abundance


of data available in the time domain

The frequency domain is generally well suited for

heavily damped systems - there is sufficient data


represented in the frequency domain

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

40

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations


Best Combination
The MPE process can be broken down into two

stages
- poles extraction
- residue estimation

First, estimate polyreference poles (or global

poles) using either a time or frequency domain


technique

Second, estimate residues using a frequency

domain technique where residuals are easier to


include in the estimation process
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

41

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Concepts


[A] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3}
x . . . x
0 x . . .

[U ]= . 0 x . .
. . 0 x .

0 . . 0 x

s3

T
{v1}
T

{v 2 }
{v 3 }T

O M

[A]nm{X}m ={B}n
[A]nm =[V]nn [S]nm [U]Tmm

{X}m =[A ]gnm{B}n =[[V ]nn [S]nm [U ]Tmm ] {B}n


{X}m =[[U ]mm [S]gnm [V]Tnn ]{B}n

[A ]1=[Adjo int[A]]
Det[A ]

Linear Algebra Concepts

s1

s2
L]

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra
The analytical treatment of structural dynamic
systems naturally results in algebraic equations
that are best suited to be represented through
the use of matrices
Some common matrix representations and linear
algebra concepts are presented in this section

Linear Algebra Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra
Common analytical and experimental equations
needing linear algebra techniques

[G ] = [H][G ]
yf

[H ] = [G yf ][G ff ]

ff

[[K ][M ]]{x}=0

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}

[B(s )]1 = [H(s )] = Adj[B(s )]


det[B(s )]

[B(s )]{x (s )} = {F(s )}


or

Linear Algebra Concepts

O
[H(s )] = [U] S [L]T
O

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Matrix Notation
A matrix [A] can be described using row,column as
a 11
a
21
[A ] = a 31
a
41
a 51

a 12
a 22

a 13
a 23

a 14
a 24

a 32
a 42
a 52

a 33
a 43
a 53

a 34
a 44
a 54

( row , column )

[A]T -Transpose - interchange rows & columns


[A]H - Hermitian - conjugate transpose

Linear Algebra Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Matrix Notation
A matrix [A] can have some special forms
Diagonal

Square
a 11
a
21
[A ] = a 31
a
41
a 51

a 12
a 22

a 13
a 23

a 14
a 24

a 32
a 42
a 52

a 33
a 43
a 53

a 34
a 44
a 54

a 15
a 25

a 35
a 45

a 55

a 11

a 22

[A ] =

a 33
a 44

a 55

Toeplitz

Symmetric
a 11
a
12
[A ] = a13
a
14
a 15

Triangular

a 12
a 22

a 13
a 23

a 14
a 24

a 23
a 24
a 25

a 33
a 34
a 35

a 34
a 44
a 45

a 15
a 25

a 35
a 45

a 55

Linear Algebra Concepts

a 5
a
4
[A ] = a 3
a
2
a 1

a11
0

[A ] = 0
0

a 12
a 22

a 13
a 23

a 14
a 24

0
0
0

a 33
0
0

a 34
a 44
0

Vandermonde
a6
a5

a7
a6

a8
a7

a4
a3
a2

a5
a4
a3

a6
a5
a4

a9
a8

a7
a6

a 5

1
[A ] =
1

a1
a2
a3
a4

a 12

a 22
a 32

a 24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

a 15
a 25

a 35
a 45

a 55

Matrix Manipulation
A matrix [C] can be computed from [A] & [B] as
a 11
a
21
a 31

a 12
a 22
a 32

a 13
a 23
a 33

a 14
a 24
a 34

b11
a 15 b 21

a 25 b 31

a 35 b 41

b 51

b12
b 22 c11

b 32 = c 21

c
b 42
31
b 52

c12
c 22

c 32

c 21 = a 21b11 + a 22 b 21 + a 23 b 31 + a 24 b 41 + a 25 b 51
c ij = a ik b kj
k

Linear Algebra Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Simple Set of Equations


A common form of a set of equations is

[A ] {x} = [b]
Underdetermined
# rows < # columns
more unknowns than equations
(optimization solution)
Determined
# rows = # columns
equal number of rows and columns
Overdetermined
# rows > # columns
more equations than unknowns
(least squares or generalized inverse solution)

Linear Algebra Concepts

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Simple Set of Equations


This set of equations has a unique solution
2x y = 1
x + 2 y 1z = 2
y+z =3

2 1 0 x 1
1 2 1 y = 2


0 1 1 z 3

whereas this set of equations does not


2x y = 1
x + 2 y 1z = 2
4x 2 y = 2

Linear Algebra Concepts

2 1 0 x 1
1 2 1 y = 2



4 2 0 z 2

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Static Decomposition
A matrix [A] can be decomposed and written as

[A ] = [L][U ]
Where [L] and [U] are the lower and upper
diagonal matrices that make up the matrix [A]
x
x

[L] = x
x

0
x
x
x
x

Linear Algebra Concepts

0 0
0 0
x 0
x x
x x

0
0

0
0

x
0

[U] = 0
0

0
9

x
x
0
0
0

x
x
x
0
0

x
x
x
x
0

x
x

x
x

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Static Decomposition
Once the matrix [A] is written in this form then
the solution for {x} can easily be obtained as

[A ] = [L][U ]
[U ] {X} = [L]1 [B]
Applications for static decomposition and inverse
of a matrix are plentiful. Common methods are
Gaussian elimination

Crout reduction

Gauss-Doolittle reduction

Cholesky reduction

Linear Algebra Concepts

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Eigenvalue Problems
Many problems require that two
matrices [A] & [B] need to be reduced

[[B] [A ]] {x} = 0

[A]{&x&} + [B]{x} = {Q( t )}

Applications for solution of eigenproblems are


plentiful. Common methods are
Jacobi

Givens

Subspace Iteration

Linear Algebra Concepts

Householder
Lanczos

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Singular Valued Decomposition


Any matrix can be decomposed using SVD

[A ] = [U ][S][V ]T
[U] - matrix containing left hand eigenvectors
[S] - diagonal matrix of singular values
[V] - matrix containing right hand eigenvectors

Linear Algebra Concepts

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Singular Valued Decomposition


SVD allows this equation to be written as

[A] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3}

s1

s2
L]

{v1}
T

{v 2 }
{v 3 }T

O M
T

s3

which implies that the matrix [A] can be written in


terms of linearly independent pieces which form
the matrix [A]

[A ] = {u1}s1{v1}T + {u 2 }s 2 {v 2 }T + {u 3 }s 3 {v3 }T +
Linear Algebra Concepts

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Singular Valued Decomposition


Assume a vector and singular value to be
1

u1= 2
3

and

s1 = 1

Then the matrix [A1] can be formed to be

[A1 ] = {u1} s1 {u1}T

1
1 2 3

= 2 [1] {1 2 3} = 2 4 6

3

3 6 9

The size of matrix [A1] is (3x3) but its rank is 1


There is only one linearly independent
piece of information in the matrix
Linear Algebra Concepts

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Singular Valued Decomposition


Consider another vector and singular value to be
1

u 2= 1
1

and

s2 = 1

Then the matrix [A2] can be formed to be

[A 2 ] = {u 2 } s 2 {u 2 }T

1
1 1 1

= 1 [1] {1 1 1} = 1 1 1

1
1 1 1

The size and rank are the same as previous case


Clearly the rows and columns
are linearly related
Linear Algebra Concepts

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Singular Valued Decomposition


Now consider a general matrix [A3] to be
2 3 2
[A 3 ] = 3 5 5 = [A1 ] + [A 2 ]
2 5 10

The characteristics of this matrix are not


obvious at first glance.
Singular valued decomposition can be used to
determine the characteristics of this matrix

Linear Algebra Concepts

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Singular Valued Decomposition


The SVD of matrix [A3] is
1
[A] = 2
3

or

1

1
1

0 1
{1 2 3}

{1 1 1}
0
1

0
0 {0 0 0}

1
0
1
[A] = 21{1 2 3}T + 1 1{1 1 1}T + 00{0 0 0}T
3
1
0


These are the independent quantities that


make up the matrix which has a rank of 2
Linear Algebra Concepts

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


The basic solid mechanics formulations as well as
the individual elements used to generate a finite
element model are described by matrices

6L 12 6L
12
6L 4L2 6L 2L2

[k ] = EI3
L 12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L

E, I

Linear Algebra Concepts

Fj

x C11
C
y 21
C
{} = [C]{} z = 31
xy C 41
xz C51

yz C 61

54
13L
156 22L
22L 4L2 13L 3L2

[m] = AL
420 54
22L
13L 156
13L 3L2 22L
4L2

C12
C 22

C13
C 23

C14
C 24

C15
C 25

C32

C33

C34

C35

C 42
C52

C 43
C53

C 44
C54

C 45
C55

C 62

C 63

C 64

C 65

18

C16 x
C 26 y

C36 z

C 46 xy

C56 xz

C 66 yz

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Finite element model development uses individual
elements that are assembled into system matrices

Linear Algebra Concepts

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Structural system equations - coupled

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}


Eigensolution - eigenvalues & eigenvectors

[[K ][M ]]{x}=0


Modal space representation
of equations - uncoupled
\

\
{&p&} +

Linear Algebra Concepts

\
{p& } +

20

{p} = [U ]T {F}

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Multiple Input Multiple Output Data Reduction

[G ] = [H][G ]
yx

[H ] = [G yx ][G xx ]1

xx

[Gyx]

[H]

[Gxx]

RESPONSE
(MEASURED)

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS


(UNKNOWN)

FORCE
(MEASURED)

Matrix inversion can only be performed if the


matrix [Gxx] has linearly independent inputs

Linear Algebra Concepts

21

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Principal Component Analysis using SVD

[G xx ] = [{u1} {u 2 } {0}
[Gxx]

s1

s2
L]

{v1}
T

{v 2 }
0
{0}T

O M
T

SVD of the input excitation matrix identifies the


rank of the matrix - that is an indication of how
many linearly independent inputs exist
Linear Algebra Concepts

22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


SVD of Multiple Reference FRF Data

[H] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3}
[H]

{v1}
T

{v 2 }
{v 3 }T

O M
T

s1

s2
L]

s3

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS

50

100

150

200
250
Frequency (Hz)

300

350

400

450

500

SVD of the [H] matrix gives an indication


of how many modes exist in the data
Linear Algebra Concepts

23

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Least Squares or Generalized Inverse for
Modal Parameter Estimation Techniques

[
[
Ak ]
A*k ]
[H(s )] =
+
*
(
s
s

(
)
s

s
k =i
k
k)
j

Least squares error minimization of


measured data to an analytical function
Linear Algebra Concepts

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Extended analysis and evaluation of systems

[K ][U] = [M I ][U][`2 ]

[U ][K ][U] = [U] [M ][U][` ]


[K ] = [K ] + [V] [` + K ][V]
T

] [

[K S ][U ][U ] [M I ] [K S ][U ][U ] [M I ]


T

[K I ] = [K S ] + [V ]T [`2 + K S ][V ] [[K S ][U ][V ]] [[K S ][U ][V ]]T


generally require matrix manipulation of some type

Linear Algebra Concepts

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Linear Algebra Applications


Many other applications exist
Correlation

Model Updating

Advanced Data Manipulation


Operating Data
Nonlinearities

Rotating Equipment

Modal Parameter Estimation

and the list goes on and on

Linear Algebra Concepts

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL
TESTING

FINITE
ELEMENT
MODELING

MODAL
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION

PERFORM
EIGEN
SOLUTION

TWENTY YEARS OF
STRUCTURAL DYNAMIC
MODIFICATION
FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

RIB
STIFFNER

MASS

DEVELOP
MODAL
MODEL

MODAL SPACE MODEL


Repeat
until
desired
characteristics
are
obtained

STRUCTURAL
CHANGES
REQUIRED
Yes

MODAL TIE MATRIX

SPRING

No
DONE

DASHPOT

MODAL SPACE MODEL

USE SDM
TO EVALUATE
STRUCTURAL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

CHANGES

Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis and Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell
(Excerpt of slides used for presentation at IMAC20 in Los Angeles, California February 2002)
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Objectives of this lecture -->> 20 years in 20 minutes:
Describe the basic types of mathematical models used in

modification studies

Real Normal Modes -or- Complex Modes


Modal Space Models -or- Impedance Models
Simplistic Modifications -or- Realistic Modifications
Structural Dynamic Modification -or- System Modeling
Truncation Effects ! ! !
Rotational Degrees of Freedom ! ! !

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Structural Dynamic Modification:
Introduced in the late 70s
Desktop computers were lacking in computational power
Local Eigenvalue Modification Technique allowed for

efficient computation of structural changes but only one


change at a time was possible

Simple changes in mass, damping and stiffness could be

quickly evaluated

Proportional mode assumption used in early approaches


Structural changes or resonant specification allowed
Tuned absorber studies allowed
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Structural Dynamic Modification - Complex Modes:
The proportional mode approximation works well with mass

and stiffness changes for a proportional mode system

However, modifications involving damping tends to disrupt

any proportionality that may exist requiring the formulation


to address non-proportional modes

State space formulation allowed for the use of non-

proportional damping models

Eigenvalue modification approach or Local Eigenvalue

Modification Procedure used with the complex mode


approach

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Local Eigenvalue Modification Procedure:
Due to the significant computational advantage and lack of

significant computational resources, the Local Eigenvalue


Modification Procedure (LEMP) was the method used in
early approaches

As computational power increased, the need for the LEMP

decreased

Many implementations reverted to the Eigenvalue

Modification Technique as computational resources became


more readily available

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Realistic Structural Changes:
Early implementations only allowed for simple changes in

mass, damping and stiffness

3D beam elements and rib stiffeners using finite element

approaches were developed but experimental data typically


only contained translational DOF - no rotational DOF

Approaches for beam using Guyan reduction and 3 point

beam bending were developed to approximate beam


characteristics for structural changes

System models were also developed using the unconstrained

modal approach for individual components

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Estimation of Rotational DOF:
The lack of rotational DOF spurred the development of

different approaches to estimate these necessary DOF

Spline fitting approaches were developed


FEM shape expansion approaches were developed
Experimental approaches were attempted to attempt to

estimate rotational DOF

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Modal Truncation Effects:
The most serious of all effects is related to the lack of all

of the modes to completely describe the entire space of


the model

Modal truncation is by far one of the most serious concerns

in defining the modal data base

Attempts to approximate residual approximations for the

truncated modes help to improve the structural modification


process

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


Impedance Modeling as an Alternative:
At approximately the same time, structural modifications

using response functions were developed

This impedance modeling approach provided a good

alternative to the modal approach

FRF functions contain the effects of all modes in the

measured functions - modal truncation is not a issue

However, rotational DOF are difficult to obtain for

measured functions

System modeling using the impedance modeling approach

were also developed

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


The first 10 years of IMAC were seen to be the birth
and development of Structural Dynamic Modification.
The Eigenvalue Modification and LEMP. This was followed
by the development of more realistic structural elements.
Issues pertaining to RDOF and truncation were addressed.
The next 10 years leaned towards the utilization of the
SDM Technique and development of System Modeling
tools. There was also a trend towards using frequency
based modification and system modeling techniques.
Even today, the two most important issues still pose
problems for the modal and frequency based techniques.

Rotational DOF
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

Truncation
10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Space Models


These models are developed from the modal
characteristics describing the frequency, damping
and mode shape:
[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}

ls
s
e
l
d
e
od
Mo
M
d
d
se
e
a
s
B
Ba
al
l
d
a
o
c
M
si
y
h
P
\
f1

p1

k1

m2
c1

MODE 1

f2

p2

m1
k2

m3
c2

MODE 2

f3

p3

k3

c3

\
{&p&} +

\
{p& } +

{p} = [U ]T {F}

MODE 3

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF Equations
Equation of Motion (n x n)

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}


Eigensolution

[[K ][M ]]{x}=0


Frequencies (eigenvalues) and Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)
\

2
1
=

\

22

and

Modal transformation (n x m)

{x} = [U ]{p} = [{u1} {u 2}


Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

12

[U] = [{u1} {u 2}

L]

p1

L]p 2
M

Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Space Transformation


Projection operation

[U ]T [M ][U ]{&p&} + [U ]T [C][U ]{p& } + [U ]T [K ][U ]{p} = [U ]T{F}


Modal equations (uncoupled)
m1

m2

&p&1 c1
&p& +
c2
2
\ M

Modal Mass
\
[U1 ]T [M1 ][U1 ] =

p& 1 k1
p& +
k2
2
\ M

T
p1 {u1} {F}
p ={u }T {F}

2 2

M
\ M

Modal Damping
M1

\
[U1 ]T [C1 ][U1 ] =

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

13

Modal Stiffness
C1

\
[U1 ]T [K1 ][U1 ] =

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

K1

Modal Space Transformation


Diagonal Matrices (m x m) Modal Mass

Modal Damping

{&p&} +

Modal Stiffness

{p& } +

{p} = [U ]T{F}

Highly coupled system

transformed into
simple system

f1

p1

k1

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

14

k2

m3
c2

MODE 2

f3

p3

m2
c1

MODE 1

f2

p2

m1

k3

c3
MODE 3

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Structural Changes to the System


Mass and Stiffness Changes (n x n)

[K 2 ] = [K1 ] + [K12 ]

[M 2 ] = [M1 ] + [M12 ]

Another eigensolution is needed to uncouple the system

[[[K1 ] + [K12 ]] [[M1 ] + [M12 ]]]{x} = {0}


Some advantages can be obtained if the existing
modal space solution is used to estimate the changes
to the system

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Eigenvalue Modification Technique


The modal projection is used to recast the equations as
O

+ [K ]{p } = [0]
+ [M ]{&p& } +
M
K
1
12
1
1
12 1


O
O

where

[M12 ] = [U1 ]T [M12 ][U1 ]

[K12 ] = [U1 ]T [K12 ][U1 ]

An eigensolution of an (m x m) system is required to


uncouple the set of equations
O

+ [U ]T [K ][U ]
+ [U ]T [M ][U ] {p } = {0}
K
M
1
1
12
1
1
1
12
1 1



O
O

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Eigenvalue Modification Technique


The mode shapes are updated using

{p1} = [U12 ]{p 2 }

resulting in

[U 2 ] = [U1 ][U12 ]

which implies that the final modes are developed as


linear combinations of the original modes of the
unmodified system
For the ith mode of the system, the following
describes the modified mode

{u 2 }(i ) = {u1}(1) U12(1i) + {u1}( 2) U12( 2i ) + {u1}(3) U12(3i ) +L

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

17

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Eigenvalue Modification Technique


The process is best shown in the schematic below
ORIGINAL
STATE

PHYSICAL
SPACE

[M ],[K ]
1
1

MODAL
TRANSFORMATION

{ x } = [ U 1 ] { p 1}

MODAL
SPACE

2
[ ],[U ]
1
1

MOD IFIC ATION

[ M

12

] , [ K 12 ]

{ p } = [U
]{ p }
1
12
2

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

18

MODIFIED
STATE

[M ],[K ]
2
2

'N'
PHYSICAL
DOF

{ x } = [ U 2 ] { p 2}

M<<N

2
[ ],[U ]
2
2

'M'
MODAL
DOF

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Local Eigenvalue Modification Technique


Additional computation advantages are obtained through
singular value decomposition of the changes to the system

O
r
T

[M12 ] = [Tm ] m [Tm ] = {t mi } mi {t mi }T


i =1
O

r
T

[K12 ] = [Tk ] k [Tk ] = {t ki } ki {t ki }T


i =1
O

which can be projected to modal space as

O
r
T
T

[M12 ] = [ U1] [Tm ] m [Tm ] [ U] = {v mi } mi {vmi }T


i =1
O

O
r
T
T

[K12 ] = [ U1] [Tk ] k [Tk ] [ U1] = {v ki } ki {v ki }T


i =1
O

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Local Eigenvalue Modification Technique


If only one change of mass or stiffness is considered then
these equations can be reduced to
O

+ {v } {v }T
{p } = {0}
K
M
1
1k 1k 1k
1


O
O
O
O


+ {v } {v }T {p } = {0}
K
M
1
1
1m 1m 1m 1




O
O

The solution then reduces to a second order equation for


each of the m modes of the system

{ }

u (i ) T {t }
m
k
1

=
k i =1 22 i2

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

1
2 m

20

{ }

u (i ) T {t }
m
m

=
22 i2
i =1

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

System Modeling Formulation


A system model can be developed using the same approach
for individual modal components
UA

MA

&p& A

T
[
]
[
][
]
+

U
M
U

&p&B
M

KA


O
+
O

KB

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

{ }

[U ] = [

[U ]
B

{ }

21

pA

T
[
]
[
][
]
+

U
K
U

pB

= {0}

{ }
{ }

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Complex Mode Solution


The Structural Dynamic Modification process can also be
applied to systems with nonproportional modes.
[0]
[M ]
1

[M1 ] &x& [M1 ] [0] x& 0

=
[C1 ] x& [0] [ K1 ] x F

The equation of motion can be recast as

[B1 ]{Y& } [A1 ]{Y} = {Q}

[0] [M1 ]
[B1 ] =

[M1 ] [C1 ]

[M ] [0]
[A1 ] = 1

[0] [ K1 ]

The eigensolution and modal transformation is then

[[A1 ] [B1 ]]{Y} = {0}


Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

{Y} = [1 ]{p1}
22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Complex Mode Solution


Considering changes to the system as

[M 2 ] = [M1 ] + [M12 ]
[C2 ] = [C1 ] + [C12 ]
[K 2 ] = [K1 ] + [K12 ]

[M 2 ]{&x&} + [C2 ]{x& } + [K 2 ]{x} = {F( t )}

And expressing them in state space

[A 2 ] = [A1 ] + [A12 ]
[B2 ] = [B1 ] + [B12 ]

[B2 ]{Y& } [A 2 ]{Y} = {Q( t )}


[0]
[B12 ] =
[M12 ]

[M12 ]
[0]
[M12 ]
[
]

=
A
12
[0]
[C12 ]
[ K12 ]

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

23

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Complex Mode Solution


The eigensolution can be obtained
O

+ [B ]{p& }
+ [A ]{p} = {Q ( t )}
I

1
12
1
12

O
O

[A12 ] = [1 ]T [A12 ][1 ]

[B12 ] = [1 ]T [B12 ][1 ]

The Local Eigenvalue Modification Procedure can also be


applied to the complex mode solution

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Response Based Models


These models are developed from characteristics
of the system response typically from frequency
response measurements:
ts
n
e
on
p
m
Co

ed
t
s
Te
r
ls
so
e
l
d
e
od
Mo
M
d
ed
ase
s
B
a
B
l
se
n
a
c
o
i
p
s
Res
Phy

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impedance Modeling
Frequency Response Functions can also be used to investigate
structural modifications. The FRF can be written as
m

Hij ( j) =

q k u ik u jk

k =1 ( j p k )

q k u ik*u jk*
( j p k * )

Using force balance and compatibility equations, the effects


of a modification can be written in terms of the unmodified
system as
x a = H ab Fb + H aa Fa
Fa =

1
H aa

x
~
1
H cb = c = H cb H ca H aa
H ab
Fb

H ab Fb

x c = H ca Fa + H cb Fb

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Impedance Modeling Extended to System Modeling


A system model can be developed using the impedance
modeling approach
h Cij = h Aij H A iS ([H A ]SS + [H B ]SS )1{H A }Sj

FRFs
describing
connection
points

FRFs
describing
output response
points

FRFs
describing
input force
points

COMPONENT A

CONNECTION POINTS

COMPONENT B

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

27

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
Generally, the lower order modes are sufficient to describe
a structural dynamic problem
However, the SDM process
may require modes that are
not included in the frequency
range of response interest

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

28

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
A single structural change can have the effect of recoupling
all the uncoupled modal DOF. Truncation effects are quite
different for the modified and unmodified models

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

29

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
A free-free beam is subject to 2 changes in stiffness to
develop a simple support beam and a cantilever beam.
While one modification has accurate predictions with only 5
modes, the other modification does not

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

30

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
Simple support and cantilever modification
Modal transformation from modal space 1 to modal space 2

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

31

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
Simple support modification - Modal truncation is not a
problem since the available unmodified modes are adequate
to span the space of the problem

{u 2 }(i ) = {u1}(1) U12(1i) + {u1}( 2) U12( 2i ) + {u1}(3) U12(3i ) +L

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

32

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
Cantilever modification - Modal truncation is a problem since
the available unmodified modes are not adequate to span the
space of the problem

{u 2 }(i ) = {u1}(1) U12(1i) + {u1}( 2) U12( 2i ) + {u1}(3) U12(3i ) +L

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

33

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Truncation
All final modified system modes are NOT affected the same

Each mode is made from a different recipe

{u 2 }(i ) = {u1}(1) U12(1i) + {u1}( 2) U12( 2i) + {u1}(3) U12(3i ) +L


Just because one ingredient is missing doesnt
mean that you cant make any other recipes
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

34

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Rotational DOF
Adding additional Translation DOF (residual terms) does not
improve the modification - Extra Rotational DOF are needed
CANTILEVER BEAM

1
2
3

Ref.
Freq.
(Hz)

5 Modes
(1-5 TDOF)
(1-5 RDOF)
(Hz)

10-5 Modes
(1-10 TDOF)
(1-5 RDOF)
(Hz)

10 Modes
(1-10 TDOF)
(1-10 TDOF)
(Hz)

21.6
139.6
398.6

24.8
162.8
476.0

24.8
162.6
473.7

22.2
144.9
411.4

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

35

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Rotational DOF
Rotational DOF are needed for Impedance Methods also
CANTILEVER BEAM

TDOF

RDOF

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

36

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Rigid Body Modes


Many experimental modal test databases do not contain the
rigid body modes of the free-free system.
In any modifications that tie an unconstrained component to
ground or to another substructure, the rigid body modes
must be available as part of the modal data base.
If they are not available, then some other approximation
of them must be included or the modification process will
be missing a key ingredient.

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

37

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Complex vs Proportional Modes


A proportional based approximation is generally acceptable
if the original modal database is proportional and the
modifications to be studied do not significantly disrupt the
proportionality of the system.
However, if the starting modal database is complex or the
changes to be investigated will disrupt the proportionality
of the system, then a complex mode formulation is
recommended.

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

38

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

TOP TEN SDM BLUNDERS


10 Geometry not accurate (rib modifications)
9

Calibration not performed

Weight vs mass density

Inconsistent units used (inch - feet)

Add stiffness between 2 dof that have no shape value

Add mass - modes shift up in frequency

Add stiffness - modes shift down in frequency

Forget to include rigid body modes for free-free models

Forget that only the connection DOF matter for SDM

and the #1 SDM blunder


TRUNCATION
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

39

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Summary
A brief review of the
Structural Dynamic
Modification process
was given to summarize
the past twenty years.
The paper has a
significant amount of
material that cannot be
covered in this short
presentation.

EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL
TESTING

FINITE
ELEMENT
MODELING

MODAL
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION

PERFORM
EIGEN
SOLUTION

MASS

DEVELOP
MODAL
MODEL

Repeat
until
desired
characteristics
are
obtained

RIB
STIFFNER

SPRING
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES
REQUIRED
Yes

USE SDM
TO EVALUATE
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES

No
DONE

DASHPOT

STRUCTURAL
DYNAMIC
MODIFICATIONS

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification


IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002

40

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Test-Analysis
Correlation-Updating
Considerations
Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis and Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

The Overall Correlation and Updating Process


MAC AND ORTHOGONALITY

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL


1
0.9

1.2

0.8
0.7

0.6

0.8

0.5
0.4

0.6

0.3

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.1

MODEL
IMPROVEMENT
REGIONS

MAC

GUYAN

1.2

[U n ] , [ ]
+
g
[Tu ] = [Un ] [U a ]

[M] , [K]

RVAC

1.2

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

IRS

FRAC

SEREP

COMBINING ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL
DOF CORRELATION
FINITE ELEMENT

VECTOR CORRELATION

MAC

DOF CORRELATION
CoMAC

EXPERIMENTAL MODAL MODEL


[En ] = [T u ] [E a ]

MODE
SWITCHING

VECTOR CORRELATION

CORTHOG
Experimental Analytical

OR

1
FEM 5

0.8

FEM 4

0.6
0.4
0.2

POC

VECTOR CORRELATION

FEM 3
FEM 2

0
EXP1 EXP 2

FEM 1
EXP 3 EXP 4

EXP 5

DOF CORRELATION

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL
EXPERIMENTAL

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Test-Analysis Correlation-Updating Considerations


Objectives of this lecture:
Briefly describe the different correlation tools

available

Conceptually, overview the correlation process


Briefly overview the model updating process

A significant amount of effort is required to

completely describe all the techniques and tools


available
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Correlation Techniques
Correlation between analytical and experimental
data is an important part of the structural
dynamic characterization and updating of systems
FINITE ELEMENT

CoMAC

MAC

COORDINATE
MODAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

MODE
SWITCHING

MODAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
MATRIX

CORTHOG
COORDINATE
ORTHOGONALITY
CRITERIA

OR

OR

FEM 5

0.8

FEM 4

0.6
0.4

VECTOR CORRELATION
Experimental

FEM 3

0.2

Analytical

FEM 2

PSEUDO
ORTHOGONALITY
CRITERIA
MATRIX

EXP1

FEM 1
EXP 2

EXP 3

EXP 4

EXP 5

DOF CORRELATION

POC
RVAC

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL

RESPONSE
VECTOR
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

EXPERIMENTAL

FRAC
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL
DOF CORRELATION

VECTOR CORRELATION

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Overview of Correlation Techniques


Vector correlation provides global indicator:
Modal Assurance Criteria
Orthogonality Checks

DOF correlation provides spatial indicator:


Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria
Coordinate Orthogonality Check
Frequency Response Assurance Criteria

Other tools:
MAC Contribution
Force Unbalance
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Overview of Correlation Techniques


Two basic levels of correlation are considered:
Modal vector correlation provides a

global indicator of the level of


correlation achieved

Degree of freedom (dof) correlation

provides an indicator as to how the


individual dofs contribute to the overall
modal vector correlation

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Overview of Correlation Techniques


Vector Correlation Techniques:
Modal Assurance Criteria (MAC):
Simple dot product
independent of mass weighting

Orthogonality Checks (POC):

Performed at n space or a space


mass reduced for a space calc
shape expanded for n space calc
reduction/expansion has an effect

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Overview of Correlation Techniques


DOF Correlation Techniques:
Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria (CoMAC):
Simple dot product
correlation on dof basis for correlated

mode pairs
independent of mass weighting

Enhanced Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria:


Extension of CoMAC

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Overview of Correlation Techniques


DOF Correlation Techniques:
Frequency Response Assurance Criteria (FRAC):
simple dot product
correlation of FEM and Test FRFs

Coordinate Orthogonality Check (CORTHOG)


Identified correlation on a dof basis
mass matrix used for weighting
similar to CoMAC in concept except

correlated mode pairs not required

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Assurance Criteria - MAC


Originally formulated for the test engineer to
determine the degree of correlation between
vectors from different tests, MAC between two
vectors is defined as:

(
{V } {V })
MAC =
({V } {V })({V } {V })
2

ij

values range between 0 and 1


approaching zero indicates no similarity
approaching one indicates high similarity
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

10

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modal Assurance Criteria - MAC


MAC was extended to allow an assessment
between analytical and experimental modal
vectors:
MACij

MAC

[
{u } {e }]
=
[{u } {u }][{e } {e }]
2

MODAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
MATRIX

FINITE ELEMENT

MODE
SWITCHING

VECTOR CORRELATION

low values - not similar


1

high values - very similar

FEM 5

0.8

FEM 4

0.6
0.4

FEM 3

0.2

FEM 2

0
EXP1

FEM 1
EXP 2

EXP 3

EXP 4

EXP 5

EXPERIMENTAL

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

11

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Orthogonality Check
For modal vectors scaled to unit modal mass, the
vectors must satisfy the orthogonality condition:
[ U ]T [M ] [ U ] = [I]
[ U ]T [K ] [ U] = [ 2 ]

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

12

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Pseudo Orthogonality Check - POC


The Pseudo Orthogonality Check relating the
correlation between the analytical and
experimental modal vectors with the analytical
mass matrix is
?

POC = [E ] [M ][U ] = [I]


T

1
0.9
0.8
0.7

1.2

1.2

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.2

1.2

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

MAC

GUYAN

IRS

SEREP

Typically, most people feel the smaller the POC


off-diagonal terms the better correlation that
exists. However, these terms may be small
and vectors may still be relatively uncorrelated
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

13

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Pseudo Orthogonality Check - POC


The Pseudo Orthogonality Check is an assessment
as to how close the experimental vectors are
aligned with the analytical vectors
?

[E ] [M ] [ U ] = [I]
T

[E ] [K ] [ U ] = [ 2 ]
T

These equations can be evaluated at:


FEM Space - requires expansion
Reduced Space - requires reduction
Intermediate space - requires both

Substantial numerical advantages using SEREP!


Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

14

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Pseudo Orthogonality Check - POC

Expansion to
Full Space
may smear
and distort
mode shapes

Reduction to
Test Space
may result
in distorted
mass and
stiffness
matrices

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

15

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Cross Orthogonality Check


The Cross Orthogonality Check is also used for
correlation purposes
?

[E ] [M ] [E ] = [I]
T

[E ] [K ] [E ] = [ 2 ]
T

These equations can be evaluated at:


FEM Space - requires expansion
Reduced Space - requires reduction

Similar to POC (off-diagonal terms are squared)

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

16

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria - CoMAC


The CoMAC gives an indication of the contribution
of each dof to the MAC for a given mode pair

(c)
(c)
u k e k
c=1

CoMAC(k ) =

(u ) (e )
c=1

Low values of CoMAC


indicate little correlation
whereas high values of
CoMAC indicate very
high correlation

(c) 2
k

c=1

CoMAC
COORDINATE
MODAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

17

Experimental

Analytical

DOF CORRELATION

FINITE ELEMENT

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

(c) 2
k

EXPERIMENTAL

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Modulus Difference
The Modulus Difference was developed to
supplement the results from CoMAC
ModulusDifference( k ) = u (kc ) e (kc )

Assists in identifying
discrepancies
between analytical
and experimental
vectors

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

DOF CORRELATION

FINITE ELEMENT

18

EXPERIMENTAL

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Enhanced CoMAC - ECoMAC


The CoMAC gives an indication of the contribution
of each dof to the MAC for a given mode pair
m (c) (c)
u k e k

ECoMAC(k ) = c=1
2m

Low values of ECoMAC indicate high correlation


whereas high values of CoMAC indicate very low
correlation
Very sensitive to phasing of vectors - which
makes it more sensitive
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

19

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Frequency Response Assurance Criteria - FRAC


The FRAC is used to identify similarity between a
measured and analytical FRF - formed like MAC

{H( ) } {H( ) }
FRAC( j) =
({H( ) } {H( ) } ) ({H( ) } {H( ) } )
a
i j

a
i j

2
x *
i j

a *
i j

x
i j

Low values of FRAC


indicate little
correlation whereas
high values of FRAC
indicate very high
correlation
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

x *
i j

FRAC
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL
DOF CORRELATION

20

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Response Vector Assurance Criteria - RVAC


The RVAC is used to identify the degree of
similarity that exists at a particular frequency
RVAC() = MAC({E test ()}, {U fem ()})

Low values of RVAC


indicate little
correlation whereas
high values of RVAC
indicate very high
correlation

RVAC
RESPONSE
VECTOR
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

FINITE ELEMENT

EXPERIMENTAL

VECTOR CORRELATION

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

21

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Coordinate Orthogonality Check - CORTHOG


The Coordinate Orthogonality Check helps to
identify the contribution of individual dofs to
each of the off-diagonal terms of the POC
matrix
Identifies which dof are most discrepant between
the analytical and experimental vectors on a mass
weighted basis
POC

Orthogonality
ORTHOG ijk = u ki m kp u pj

POC ijk = e ki m kp u pj

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

22

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Coordinate Orthogonality Check - CORTHOG


The Coordinate Orthogonality Check is simply the
comparison of what should have been obtained
analytically for each dof in an orthogonality check
to what was actually obtained for each dof in a
pseudo-orthogonality check from test
SD = CORTHOG ijk = e ki m kp u pj u ki m kp u pj
p

Variety of different
formulations with
different scaling
approaches

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

-4

-3

-2

dof 3

23

emu
umu

dof 1
dof 2

-1

emu

Experimental
Analytical

umu
umu

emu

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MAC Contribution
The MAC Contribution is a relatively simple and
straightforward technique to determine the degree
of contribution of each dof to the MAC value
achieved
pick a mode pair of interest
select a target MAC value
delete dof until target MAC value achieved

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

24

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Force Unbalance
The Force Balance is a simple calculation to
determine the inequality that exists in the
equation of motion
?

[[K ] [M ]]{x}={0}

uses the FEM mass and stiffness matrices


uses experimental frequencies and mode shapes
compute the inequality that exists

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

25

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Model Updating Topics


Model Updating techniques can be broken down
into two categories:
Direct Techniques
Indirect Techniques (Sensitivity based)

Modal Based Techniques


Response Based Techniques
Some basic theory of analytical model
improvement and localization of model change are
described
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

26

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Model Improvement Terminology

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

27

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

28

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

29

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

30

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

31

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Model Improvement - SSO

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

32

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Analytical Model Improvement - MSSO

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

33

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Model Updating - Sensitivity Approaches

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

34

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comments on Direct Techniques


Direct Techniques
Usually a one step process that does not require iteration
to obtain a solution
Usually based on equation of motion and orthogonality
conditions

Exact results obtained (in the sense that the target modes
are reproduced
Generally updated matrices are difficult to interpret and
smearing of results occurs

Skyline approaches attempt to retain the original topology


of the system assembly
Reduction and expansion have a dramatic effect on results

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

35

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comments on Direct Techniques


Skyline containment

Matrix smearing

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

36

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Model Updating - Sensitivity Approaches


Differences that are typically minimized:

Frequency differences
Mode shape differences
Frequency response differences

Parameters that may be updated:

mass/stiffness of individual elements


mass/stiffness of groups of elements
parameters associated with individual elements
parameters associated with groups of elements

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

37

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comments on Indirect Techniques


Indirect Techniques - Sensitivity approach
Modal Based Techniques
Frequency differences
Shape differences
Response differences

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

38

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comments on Indirect Techniques


Indirect Techniques -Sensitivity -Modal Approach
Frequency differences
Likely to be the most accurate parameter

measured
No spatial information needed
Relatively simple calculations
No reduction/expansion problems

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

39

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comments on Indirect Techniques


Indirect Techniques -Sensitivity -Modal Approach
Shape differences

Less accurate on a dof basis


Spatial information included
Mode pairing necessary
Calculations more complicated
Reduction/expansion is a problem

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

40

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Comments on Indirect Techniques


Indirect Techniques - Sensitivity approach
Response Based Techniques
Contains complete information in frequency range
No need to estimate modal parameters
FRFs are more accurate than modal parameters
Response may be item of interest
Damping may be difficult to determine
Selection of certain spectral lines may cause
numerical difficulties
Using only a few FRFs may distort the results
Difficult to identify parameters for change
Measured FRFs must be acquired with high accuracy

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

41

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

General Comments

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

42

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

General Comments
Use of all the correlation tools necessary to
interpret the data available
Both modal and response based techniques should be
used together for the updating
One technique alone may not be sufficient to
adequately update the model

Once updated, the model should be perturbed both


analytically and experimentally and the correlation
process repeated to assure that meaningful
parameters have been obtained from the updating
process

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

43

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

General Comments

Model Updating requires extreme care in order to


obtain reliable results
A firm understanding of the modeling techniques
employed are necessary in order to adequately adjust
the finite element model
A thorough understanding of the experimental data
used for the updating process is critical
A clear definition of what is meant by an improved
model is necessary
The analyst has a tremendous responsibility in
identifying which areas of the model are to be
updated and which sets of modes are the best modes
to use in the updating process

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations

44

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

macl.caeds.eng.uml.edu

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell

Presentation Topics
Intent
Things Shake and Break !
Modal Overview

TUTORIAL NOTES:
Structural Dynamics and
Experimental Modal Analysis

Analytical Modeling
SDOF Theory
MODE 1

MDOF Theory

MODE3

DSP - DQAL Windows


Measurement Definitions
Excitation Considerations
MPE Concepts

MODE 2

MODE 4

Linear Algebra
Structural Modification
Correlation/Updating

Copyright 2000 All Rights Reserved

In Trouble !!!!!
Dr. Peter Avitabile

peter_avitabile@uml.edu

Tuesday, July 06, 2004