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

In Trouble !!!!!
Dr. Peter Avitabile

peter_avitabile@uml.edu

## 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.

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Could you explain

and how is it
used for solving
dynamic problems?

modal analysis

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Modal Analysis and Structural Dynamics

DISK DRIVE
INDUCED VIBRATIONS
RESPONSE
OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

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

(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

FORCE

time

frequency

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## 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

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Response of a Simple Plate

Sine Dwell to Obtain Mode Shape Characteristics

MODE3

MODE 1

MODE 2

MODE 4

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Analytical Modal Analysis

Equation of motion

Eigensolution

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Finite Element Models

Models used for design
development
No prototypes are
necessary

## Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

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
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

Modal characteristics
are defined from actual
measurements
Damping can be
evaluated

## Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

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

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

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

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

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

## Average auto/cross spectra

Compute FRF and Coherence

COHERENC E FUNCTION

15

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MODE 2

2
1

MODE 1
5

2
4
1
3
6

16

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

a ij1

a ij2
a ij3

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

17

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Flow Diagram for Response

Why and How Do Structures Vibrate?

f(t)

y(t)

FFT

IFT

INPUT SPECTRUM

OUTPUT SPECTRUM

f(j )

h(j )

y(j )

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

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 )

f(j )
INPUT SPECTRUM

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)

21

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

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

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
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

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

25

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

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

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

CONNECTION

## REDUCED SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

MODAL SPACE MODEL

## FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

Modal/Physical Models

Impedance Models

## FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

TIE MATRIX

CONNECTION
FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

29

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Hybrid/Impedance Modeling
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

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]

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

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.

f(t)

y(t)

FFT

IFT

INPUT SPECTRUM

OUTPUT SPECTRUM

f(j )

h(j )

y(j )

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

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

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

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

36

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Could you explain

and how is it
used for solving
dynamic problems?

modal analysis

37

## 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

## Models used for design

development
No prototypes are
necessary

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

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

Polynomial

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Finite Element Modeling

Strain Displacement Relationship
The strain displacement relationship is given by

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

[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

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)

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

[0] [M1 ]
[B1 ] =

[M1 ] [C1 ]

[M ] [0]
[A1 ] = 1

[0] [ K1 ]

## [[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
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

c1

MODE 1
p

m
k

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

## Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics

46

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics

47

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics

48

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Source: Bathe - Numerical Methods in Finite Element Analysis

Analytical Topics

49

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

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

equations

## 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

s1, 2

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

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

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

## System Characteristic Equation

b(s) x (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

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Polynomial Form

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

Pole-Zero Form

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

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

Exponential Form

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

## 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

Residue
a1 =
h (s)(s p1 )

sp1

1
=
2 jmd

related to
mode shapes

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

Bode Plot

Nyquist Plot

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

T = 2 / n

-90

X1

=20%

X2

=10%

= ln

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

x1
2
x2

-180
/ n
t1

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

f1

c2
x1

m1
k1

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

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}

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

## 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 )]

[
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

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

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

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

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

## 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

## 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

## 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

DISPLAY

DIGITAL
FILTER

FFT

DISCRETE
DATA

## 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

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

## Average auto/cross spectra

Compute FRF and Coherence

COHERENC E FUNCTION

## 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

## 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

## 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
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.

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

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

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

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

13

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization Error
All of the available
dynamic range of the
analog to digital
converter is not used
effectively

10 volt
range
on

## 0.5 volt signal

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

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

## The alternating part of

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

15

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Quantization Error
too low for the signal
to be measured and
causes clipping of the
signal
1 volt
range
on

A
D
C
M
A
X

R
A
N
G
E

## 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

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

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

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

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

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
against aliasing.

ACTUAL

f max

BW

CF
800

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

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

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

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

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
Leakage is probably the most common and most serious digital
signal processing error. Unlike aliasing, the effects of leakage
can not be eliminated.

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

## 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

10

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Windows

11

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

## 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

OUTPUT

INPUT

APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT

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

OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM

CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM

## FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Measurement Definitions

## Compute FRF and Coherence

COHERENC E FUNCTION

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

x(t)
INPUT

Sx(f)

h(t)

y(t)

TIME

SYSTEM

OUTPUT

H(f)

Sy(f)

FREQUENCY

x(t)

y(t)

Sx(f)

Sy(f)

H(f)

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

Rxx(t)
INPUT

Gxx(f)

Ryx(t)

Ryy(t)

TIME

SYSTEM

OUTPUT

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

u(t)

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

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

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.
- easy setup
- fast measurement time
- minimum of equipment
- low cost
- poor rms to peak levels
- poor for nonlinear structures
- force/response windows needed
- pretrigger delay needed
- double impacts may occur

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

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

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

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

INPUT EXCITATION

## 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
best peak to RMS level
best signal to noise ratio
good for nonlinear characterization
widely accepted and understood
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

AUTORANGING

## 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.
gives a good linear approximation for a system with slight nonlinearities
relatively fast
overlap processing can be used
relatively good general purpose excitation
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%)
has all the advantages of random excitation
the function is self-windowing
no leakage
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

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
has all the same advantages as swept sine
self windowing function
good for nonlinear characterization
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

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.
excellent peak to RMS level
excellent signal to noise ratio
good for nonlinear characterization
leakage free measurements obtained
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

COH

FRF
BURST RANDOM

## RANDOM & HANNING

Excitation Considerations

33

BURST RANDOM

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

AUTORANGING

Random
with
Hanning

Burst
Random

AUTORANGING

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

MDOF POLYNOMIAL

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

NO COMPENSATION
Y

y=mx
X

COMPENSATION
Y

y=mx+b

Y

## 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

## 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

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Classification of Modes
Well separated - lightly damped

## 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

Polynomial Form

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

Pole-Zero Form

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

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

Exponential Form

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

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Time Domain

Frequency Domain

## 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 )

a ij2
a ij3

2
3

+ L
9

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

from each individual
mode contribution
which is determined
from the

a ij1

a ij2
a ij3

frequency,

damping,
residue

10

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MDOF

SDOF

## The task for the modal test engineer is to

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

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

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
- Good for systems where the poles are not global
- Frequency and damping is different for the system
- Local modes/node points are not characterized well

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
- Good for systems where the poles are global
- Better estimate of the frequency and damping
- Local modes are better characterized
- Frequency and damping must be global in FRFs

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
- Good for systems where the poles are global
- Better estimate of the frequency and damping
- Repeated roots can be identified
- Frequency and damping must be global in FRFs

15

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

Complex ???

16

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

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

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

20

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

MODE # 1

MODE # 2
MODE # 3

DOF # 1

DOF #2

DOF # 3

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

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)

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

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

## Approximate since peak is determined from the

frequency resolution

## Good quick check before attempting major modal

parameter estimation

25

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

## for single mode

response extraction

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

## Real part is shifted

Nyquist circle is

displaced and
rotated

Remove effects of

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

in the Nyquist

## Noise and leakage have

a pronounced effect on
circle

egg-shaped

## used as much today due

to the availability of
many MDOF methods

h ( j)=
=

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

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

29

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## SDOF Rational Fraction Polynomial

Simply the ratio of two

polynomials

## SDOF type characteristics,

its real benefits are for
multiple modes

## to greatly simplify the

numerical processing

30

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Multiple Degree of Freedom

Modal Parameter Estimation

IFT

Complex Exponential

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

numerically fast and stable
handles many modes

IFT

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

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.

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

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

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

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 band

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

## band effects of other modes through the use of

more poles in the estimation process

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

## heavily damped systems - there is sufficient data

represented in the frequency domain

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

technique

## 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

Det[A ]

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

## 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

det[B(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

## 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

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

## 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)

## 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

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

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

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

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

## Applications for solution of eigenproblems are

plentiful. Common methods are
Jacobi

Givens

Subspace Iteration

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

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

## [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

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

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&} +

\
{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)

(UNKNOWN)

FORCE
(MEASURED)

## Matrix inversion can only be performed if the

matrix [Gxx] has linearly independent inputs

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

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

] [

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

25

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Linear Algebra Applications

Many other applications exist
Correlation

Model Updating

Operating Data
Nonlinearities

Rotating Equipment

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

Repeat
until
desired
characteristics
are
obtained

STRUCTURAL
CHANGES
REQUIRED
Yes

SPRING

No
DONE

DASHPOT

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

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

decreased

## 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

## approaches were developed but experimental data typically

only contained translational DOF - no rotational DOF

## beam bending were developed to approximate beam

characteristics for structural changes

## 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

## Spline fitting approaches were developed

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

## 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

the model

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

## However, rotational DOF are difficult to obtain for

measured functions

## 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)

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}

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 ]

## [[[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

## 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

## 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

[ 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

singular value decomposition of the changes to the system

O
r
T

i =1
O

r
T

i =1
O

O
r
T
T

i =1
O

O
r
T
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

[0] [M1 ]
[B1 ] =

[M1 ] [C1 ]

[M ] [0]
[A1 ] = 1

[0] [ K1 ]

## [[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 ]

## And expressing them in state space

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

[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

## 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

## 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

## 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

## {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
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

## 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

## 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

## 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

## 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

## 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

## provides an indicator as to how the

individual dofs contribute to the overall
modal vector correlation

## 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

## Performed at n space or a space

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

## 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

## 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

## 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

1

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

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 ]

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
?

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

Expansion to
Full Space
may smear
and distort
mode shapes

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

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

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

(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

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

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

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

-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

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

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

27

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

28

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

29

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

30

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

31

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

32

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

33

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

34

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

35

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Skyline containment

Matrix smearing

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

## mass/stiffness of individual elements

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

37

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

38

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

39

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

40

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

41

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

42

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

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

## 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

43

## Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

## Model Updating requires extreme care in order to

obtain reliable results
A firm understanding of the modeling techniques
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

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