macl.caeds.eng.uml.

edu

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell

Presentation Topics TUTORIAL NOTES:

Intent Structural Dynamics and
Things Shake and Break !
Experimental Modal Analysis
Modal Overview
Analytical Modeling
SDOF Theory
MODE3
MODE 1
MDOF Theory
DSP - DQAL Windows
Measurement Definitions
Excitation Considerations
MPE Concepts MODE 2
MODE 4

Linear Algebra
Structural Modification
Correlation/Updating Copyright 2000 All Rights Reserved
In Trouble !!!!!
Dr. Peter Avitabile [email protected] Tuesday, July 06, 2004 1
Intent of Structural Dynamics & Modal Overview

The intent of this

Structural Dynamics and Modal Analysis Overview
is to expose undergraduate engineering students
to some of the basic concepts and ideas concerning
analytical and experimental modal analysis for solving
structural dynamic problems.

It is NOT intended to be a detailed treatment of this material.

Rather it is intended to prepare the students for some basic

material to enhance their ability to solve some structural dynamics
problems that may be encountered during this summer session.

Intent of Modal Analysis Overview 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques

Could you explain and how is it

modal analysis used for solving
dynamic problems?

Illustration by Mike Avitabile Illustration by Mike Avitabile Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Analysis and Structural Dynamics

DISK DRIVE
INDUCED VIBRATIONS

RESPONSE
INPUT TIME FORCE OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE
FFT INPUT FORCE
IFT
BOARD
CABINET RESPONSE

FAN INDUCED
INPUT VIBRATIONS
FORCE
INPUT POWER SPECTRUM 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 2 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

response due to a vertical bump high speed video

superimposed on a random excitation showing drop load
(AVI file) (AVI file)

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Response of a Simple Plate

Simple time-frequency response relationship

RESPONSE
increasing rate of oscillation

FORCE

time

frequency

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Response of a Simple Plate

Measure many points on the

plate simultaneously to view
the actual response

Different deformation
patterns can be seen as the
excitation sweeps from low
frequency to high frequency

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 6 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

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Analytical Modal Analysis

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

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

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Finite Element Models

Advantages Disadvantages

Models used for design Modeling assumptions

development Joint design difficult to model
No prototypes are Component interactions are
necessary difficult to predict
Damping generally ignored

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Finite Element Models

Analytical models are developed

to describe the system mass and
stiffness characteristics of a
component or system
The model is decomposed to
express the part in terms of its
modal characteristics - its
frequency, damping and shapes

The dynamic characteristics help

to better understand how the
structure will behave and how to
adjust or improve the component
or system design

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Experimental Modal Analysis

MEASURED RESPONSE
[Y]

[F]
APPLIED FORCE

fref1

fref2

[H]
FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS

Advantages Disadvantages

Modal characteristics Requires hardware

are defined from actual Actual boundary conditions
measurements may be difficult to simulate
Damping can be Different hardware
evaluated prototypes may vary
Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Experimental Modal Analysis

Measured frequency response

MODE # 1

MODE # 2

functions from a modal test can

MODE # 3

also be used to describe the DOF # 1

structures dynamic properties - DOF #2

its frequency, damping and shapes DOF # 3

40
COHERENCE

dB Mag

FRF

INPUT POWER SPECTRUM

-60

0Hz 800Hz
AUTORANGING AVERAGING

1 2 3

1 2 3 4

1
h 13
1 2 3

2
1

3
2

h 23
3

h 33
h 31

h 32 h 33

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Experimental Data Reduction

Measured frequency response

functions from a modal test or
V V V V V

operating data can be used to

V V V V
V

develop a model of the dynamic

characteristics of the system

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 What Are Measurements Called FRFs ?

A simple input-
output problem
8

1 2 3
0
-3
8
-7

Magnitude Real
6

MODE # 1

MODE # 2

MODE # 3

DOF # 1

DOF #2

1.0000
DOF # 3

-1.0000

Phase Imaginary
Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Digital Signal Processing Flow Diagram

Actual time signals

ANALOG SIGNALS

INPUT OUTPUT

ANTIALIASING FILTERS

AUTORANGE ANALYZER
Analog anti-alias filter
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS

INPUT OUTPUT

Digitized time signals

APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT
OUTPUT
Windowed time signals
COMPUTE FFT

Compute FFT of signal

LINEAR SPECTRA

LINEAR LINEAR
INPUT OUTPUT
SPECTRUM SPECTRUM

AVERAGING OF SAMPLES

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA

INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM
OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
Average auto/cross spectra
COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION COHERENC E FUNCTION

Compute FRF and Coherence

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Experimental Mode Shapes From FRFs

MODE 2

1 4

3 6

MODE 1
5

4
1

3
6

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Experimental Mode Shapes From FRFs

The task for the modal

test engineer is to
a ij1

1
a ij2
2

determine the parameters

a ij3 3

1
2 3
that make up the pieces
of the frequency response
HOW MANY POINTS ???

function

RESIDUAL
Mathematical routines
EFFECTS RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
help to determine the
basic parameters that
make up the FRF
HOW MANY MODES ???

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 17 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Flow Diagram for Response
Why and How Do Structures Vibrate?

INPUT TIME FORCE

OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE
f(t) y(t)

FFT IFT

INPUT SPECTRUM FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION OUTPUT SPECTRUM

f(j ) h(j ) y(j )

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 18 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 What is Operating Data ?
If an excitation is applied close to a mode, then
that mode is excited - if not, then the response
is the linear combination of all the modes excited

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 What is Operating Data ?
The modes of the structure act like filters
which amplify and attenuate input excitations
on a frequency basis
OUTPUT SPECTRUM

y(j )

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

f(j )

INPUT SPECTRUM

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 20 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 What is Operating Data ?
The raw time response of the structure may seem
complicated but it is really nothing more than the
linear combination of the effects of all the modes
that are excited by the specific input

response due to a vertical bump

superimposed on a random excitation
(AVI file)

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 What Good is Modal Analysis ?

EXPERIMENTAL FINITE
MODAL ELEMENT
TESTING MODELING

MODAL PERFORM
The dynamic
model can be
PARAMETER EIGEN
ESTIMATION SOLUTION

DEVELOP MASS RIB used for studies

to determine the
MODAL STIFFNER
MODEL

Repeat
SPRING effect of
structural
until STRUCTURAL
desired
characteristics CHANGES No
are
REQUIRED DASHPOT
changes of the
obtained

Yes DONE

USE SDM
TO EVALUATE
mass, damping
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES STRUCTURAL and stiffness
DYNAMIC
MODIFICATIONS

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 22 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 What Good is Modal Analysis ?
Simulation, Prediction, Correlation, to name a few
FREQUENCY FINITE
RESPONSE CORRECTIONS ELEMENT
MEASUREMENTS MODEL

PARAMETER EIGENVALUE
ESTIMATION SOLVER

MODAL MODEL MODAL

PARAMETERS VALIDATION PARAMETERS

SYNTHESIS
OF A
DYNAMIC MODAL MODEL

STRUCTURAL FORCED
MASS, DAMPING, REAL WORLD
DYNAMICS RESPONSE
STIFFNESS CHANGES FORCES
MODIFICATION SIMULATION

MODIFIED
STRUCTURAL
MODAL
RESPONSE
DATA

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 23 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Correlation and Updating Models

RVAC

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

FRAC

Analytical and FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL DOF CORRELATION

experimental models
DOF CORRELATION

are correlated and

CoMAC CORTHOG
VECTOR CORRELATION Experimental Analytical
2
[M] , [K] ) [U n ] , [ ]

adjusted to
+
g DOF CORRELATION
[Tu ] = [Un ] [Ua ]

provide COMBINING ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA

FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

MAC AND

better
ORTHOGONALITY
VECTOR CORRELATION FINITE ELEMENT

component
1
0.9
1.2

1
EXPERIMENTAL MODAL MODEL
0.8
0.7 0.8 MODE
SWITCHING
[En ] = [T u ] [E a ]
0.6
0.6
0.5

and system
0.4

MAC
0.4
0.3 0.2
0.2
0
0.1
0
1
GUYAN
OR 0.8 FEM 5
VECTOR CORRELATION

models
MAC 0.6 FEM 4

0.4 FEM 3
0.2
FEM 2
0

POC
1.2 FEM 1
EXP1 EXP 2
1.2 EXP 3 EXP 4
EXP 5
1
1
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
0

SEREP EXPERIMENTAL
IRS

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 24 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Correlation and Updating Models

FINITE ELEMENT

CoMAC CORTHOG
COORDINATE
MAC MODE MODAL OR COORDINATE
ORTHOGONALITY
MODAL SWITCHING ASSURANCE CRITERIA
ASSURANCE CRITERIA
CRITERIA
MATRIX

OR
FEM 5
0.8

0.6 FEM 4
VECTOR CORRELATION
0.4 FEM 3

0.2
FEM 2
Experimental Analytical
0
FEM 1
PSEUDO EXP1
EXP 2
EXP 3
EXP 4
EXP 5

ORTHOGONALITY
CRITERIA
MATRIX
DOF CORRELATION
POC

EXPERIMENTAL
FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

Vector tools RVAC

RESPONSE
VECTOR
FRAC ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
ASSURANCE

Degree of freedom tools

CRITERIA

FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

DOF CORRELATION

Frequency tools
VECTOR CORRELATION

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Correlation and Updating Models

ANALYTICAL MODEL
MODEL
IMPROVEMENT
REGIONS

AMI

MODEL
IMPROVEMENT
SSO/MSSO
REGIONS

Models can be adjusted to better reflect actual measured

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

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 System Models

System models are developed

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

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 System Assembly

Components may be
described by a variety
of different methods

depending on the
problem and results
necessary

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 28 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 System Models

Modal Models Reduced Models

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL
FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

MODAL SPACE MODEL

REDUCED SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

MODAL TIE MATRIX 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

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

TIE MATRIX
CONNECTION

MODAL SPACE MODEL FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 29 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Hybrid/Impedance Modeling

In addition to more conventional

system modeling approaches,
measured frequency response
MACHINE
CHUCK

CONNECTION IMPEDANCE

functions can also be used to

MEASURED AT MACHINE

assemble systems and provide more

realistic boundary conditions

CONNECTION IMPEDANCE REFERENCE IMPEDANCE

SYNTHESIZED FROM SYNTHESIZED FROM
HYBRID MODELING FEM OF WORKPIECE FEM OF WORKPIECE

calc3_xyz UNIV:1974:+Z
10 10

0 0

120
-10 -10

-20 HYBRID -20

-30 -30
dB 100
-40 -40

-50
(s2)/(kg)
FEM -50

-60 -60

dB
-70 -70
5 100 200 255.75

Hz

Dof 15286 REFERENCE

Dof 15286 CALCULATED
(m/s2)/N

0 1000 2000 2550

Hz

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 30 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Dynamic Force Estimation

Using both measured operating data and frequency response

function, estimates of the dynamic forces driving the system can
be estimated
OPERATIONAL
DISPLACEMENTS
[Y]
Estimated force vs reference @dof7 part4
10-1

Reference
-2
10
Estimated

-3
10

-4
10
Lbf^2

-5
10

-6
10
Estimated force vs reference @dof17 part4
10 -1

10
-7
Reference
-2
10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Hz Estimated

-3
10

-4
10
Lbf^2

-5
10

-6
10

-7
10

[H]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Hz

[F]
FREQUENCY RESPONSE
FUNCTIONS

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 31 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 System Response

System response can be computed

for both linear and non-linear
systems by various methods.

INPUT TIME FORCE OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

f(t) y(t)

FFT IFT

INPUT SPECTRUM FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION OUTPUT SPECTRUM

f(j ) h(j ) y(j )

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 32 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Different Mathematical Models

There are basically three different types of

models that are commonly used for solving
structural dynamic problems:

Physical or Spatial Models

Modal Space Models
Response Based Models

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 33 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Physical or Spatial Models

These models are developed from basic physical

characteristics describing the system mass,
damping and stiffness typically from a finite
element model description:

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

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

i j

i j
E, I

Fi L Fj

156 22L 54 13L

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

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 34 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Space Models

These models are developed from the modal

characteristics describing the frequency, damping
and mode shape:

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

ls d e ls
od e Mo
d M se d
se B a
a l Ba d al
si c M o
Phy
\ \ \
p1 f1 p2 f2 p3 f3 M {&p&} + C {p& } + K {p} = [U ]T {F}
m1 m2 m3
k1 c1 k2 c2 k3 c3
\ \ \

MODE 1 MODE 2 MODE 3

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 35 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Response Based Models

These models are developed from characteristics

of the system response typically from frequency
response measurements:

en ts
pon
Co m
s ted
r Te
elso d els
M od d Mo
ased B ase
a l B n se
s i c po
Phy Res

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 36 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Could you explain and how is it

modal analysis used for solving
dynamic problems?

Illustration by Mike Avitabile Illustration by Mike Avitabile Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Overview of Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques 37 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Analytical Topics
for
Structural Dynamic Modeling

Analytical Topics 1 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 2 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 3 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 DISCRETIZED
SOLUTION SOLUTION

Analytical Topics 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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
12 6L 12 6L
6L 4L2 6L 2L2
[k ] = EI3
L 12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L


i j

i
j
156 22L 54 13L
E, I 22L 4L2 13L 3L2
[m] = AL
F i L Fj 420 54 13L 156 22L
13L 3L2 22L 4L2

Analytical Topics 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Topics for Structural Dynamic Modeling

The basis of the finite v

element method is
summarized below 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 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Finite Element Model Considerations

DEGREES OF FREEDOM
maximum 6 dof can be described at a point in space

finite element use a maximum of 6 dof

most elements use less than 6 dof to describe the element

TRUSS TORSIONAL ROD

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

3D BEAM

PLATE

CONTINUUM ELEMENTS

Analytical Topics 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Finite Element Model Considerations

Advantages Disadvantages

Models used for design Modeling assumptions

development Joint design difficult to model
No prototypes are Component interactions are
necessary difficult to predict
Damping generally ignored

Analytical Topics 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Model Considerations

A TYPICAL FINITE ELEMENT USER MAY ASK

what kind of elements should be used?

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

Analytical Topics 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Model Considerations

ALL THESE QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED, IF

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

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

IF A ROUGH BACK OF THE ENVELOP ANALYSIS

CAN NOT BE FORMULATED, THEN
MOST LIKELY THE ANALYST DOES NOT KNOW
ENOUGH ABOUT THE PROBLEM AT HAND TO
FORMULATE A FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Analytical Topics 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Modeling

Using standard finite element modeling techniques, the following steps

are usually followed in the generation of an analytical model

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

Analytical Topics 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Modeling
Element Definition
Shape Functions

Each element is approximated by

Linear

{} = [N ]{x}
where
{} - vector of displacements in element
[N] - shape function for selected element Quadratic
{x} - nodal variable

Element shape functions can range from linear

interpolation functions to higher order polynomial Polynomial

functions.

Analytical Topics 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Modeling
Strain Displacement Relationship

The strain displacement relationship is given by

{} = [B]{x}
where

{} - vector of strain within element

[B] - strain displacement matrix

(proportional to derivatives of [N])

{x} - nodal variable

Analytical Topics 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Modeling
Mass and Stiffness Formulation

The mass and stiffness relationship is given by

[M ] = V [N][N]T V
[K ] = V [B]T [C][B]V
where
[M] - element mass matrix
[K] - element stiffness matrix
[N] - shape function for element
{} - density
[B] - strain displacement matrix
[C] - 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 u3
1 2

1 2 3

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 ip f jp
i 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 u i f ip
k =
p k p u j f jp

Now for element #1

k1 k1 u1 f11
k =
1 k1 u 2 f 21

And for element #2 k 2 u 2 f 22

k2
k =
2 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 u1 f1
k k + k
k 2 u 2 = f 2
1 1 2
k2 k 2 u 3 f 3

Analytical Topics 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 u1 f1
k k + k
k 2 u 2 = f 2
1 1 2
k2 k 2 u 3 f 3

k1 + k 2 k 2 u 2 0
k =
2 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 k2 k5
1 1 2 5
k2 k 2 + k3 k3
k3 k3 + k 4 k4

k5 k4 k 4 + k 5
Notice that the banded nature of the matrix is not preserved when
elements are arbitrarily added to the assembly

Analytical Topics 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Finite Element Modeling

Equation of Motion (n x n)
[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}

Eigensolution

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

Frequencies (eigenvalues) and Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)

\ 12
=

2
22 and [U] = [{u1} {u 2 } L]
\ \

Analytical Topics 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Modeling

Modal transformation (n x m)
p1

{x} = [U ]{p} = [{u1} {u 2 } 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
mii i = j
{u i } T
[M ]{u j } = {u i }
T
[K ]{u j } =
k ii i = j
0i j 0i j

Analytical Topics 28 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 ] = M1 TRUE !!!

\

\
Modal Damping [U1 ]T [C1 ][U1 ] = C1 ???????

\

\
Modal Stiffness [U1 ]T [K1 ][U1 ] = K1 TRUE !!!

\
Analytical Topics 29 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] [M1 ] &x& [M1 ] [0] x& 0
=
[M ]
1 [C1 ] x& [0] [ K1 ] x F

The equation of motion can be recast as

[B1 ]{Y& } [A1 ]{Y} = {Q}
[0] [M1 ] [M ] [0]
[B1 ] = [A1 ] = 1
[M1 ] [C1 ] [0] [ K1 ]

The eigensolution and modal transformation is then

[[A1 ] [B1 ]]{Y} = {0} {Y} = [1 ]{p1}

Analytical Topics 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

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

Analytical Topics 34 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Finite Element Model Reduction & Expansion

Guyan Reduction Dynamic Condensation

[I] [ I] [I] [ I]
[Ts ]= = [Tf ]= =
[t ]
s [ K dd ] 1
[ K ]
da [t ]
f [ B dd ] 1
[ B ]
da

IRS Reduction
[I] [0] [0]
[Ti ] = [ ][ ][ ]1
[K a ]
1 +
[K dd ] [ K da ] [0] [K dd1 ] M
n s

T M a

SEREP Reduction
(
[ ] [ ]T [ ] 1[ ]T
U a U a U a Ua )

[Tu ] = [U n ][U a ]g =
( 1
)
T
[U d ] [U a ] [U a ] [U a ]

T

Analytical Topics 35 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Finite Element Model Reduction & Expansion

The type of reduction utilized can have a significant impact

on the accuracy of the resulting reduced model.

Much work has been done in this area to minimize the

distortion of the reduced model.

The same reduction matrices are also used for expansion of

reduced model information (ie, test data)

Strong differing opinions prevail on this subject !!!

Analytical Topics 36 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods

Many times the model may be needed to perform

dynamic response studies
Some traditional methods are:
Mode Superposition
Frequency Domain Solution
Direct Integration of Equations of Motion

Analytical Topics 37 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods - Mode Superposition

Using the modal space formulation, a simple integration on

the SDOF system can be performed
p1 {u1} {F}
T
m1 &p&1 c1 p& 1 k1
m2 &p& + c2 p& + k2 p ={u }T {F}
2 2 2 2
\ M \ M \ M M

p 1
f 1

m
{x} = {u1 }p1
1

k 1 c1

MODE 1 {x} = [U]{p} = {u1 }p1 + {u2 }p2 + {u3 }p3

p 2 f 2

k 2 c2 {x} = {u2 }p2 = + +

MODE 2

p 3 f 3

m 3

k 3 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

m rij,k rij*,k
h ij ( j)= +
j k j k
*
k =1

Analytical Topics 39 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods - Frequency Domain

Frequency domain input-output schematic

OUTPUT SPECTRUM

y(j ) m rij,k rij*,k

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

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

f(j ) No
y i ( j)= h ij ( j)f j ( j)
INPUT SPECTRUM
j=1

Analytical Topics 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 Explicit

Houbolt Implicit
Wilson Implicit
Newmark Implicit =0, =0 (constant acceleration)
Newmark Implicit =1/2, =1/4 (average acceleration)
Newmark Implicit =1/2, =1/6 (linear acceleration)

Analytical Topics 45 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods - Central Difference

Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics 46 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods - Central & Houbolt

Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics 47 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods - Wilson

Source: UMASS Lowell Structural Dynamic Modeling Techniques Seminar Notes

Analytical Topics 48 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Numerical Methods - Comparison

Source: Bathe - Numerical Methods in Finite Element Analysis

Analytical Topics 49 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Single Degree of Freedom Overview
x(t) f(t) I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

m
R
e
a
l

k c Fr equency

100 =0.1% T = 2 / n
=1%
X1
=2%
X2
=5%
10
=10%

=20% 0
I
m
a
g
1 i
n
a
r
y

-90 =20%

/n =10%

=5% t1 t2
=2%

1
Real
=1%

=0.1%

-180
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k
/ n

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Definitions

Assumptions

lumped mass
stiffness proportional
x(t) f(t)
to displacement
m
damping proportional to
velocity
k c
linear time invariant
2nd order differential
equations

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 2 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Equations

Equation of Motion
d2x dx
m 2 + c + kx = f ( t ) or m &x& + cx& + kx = f ( t )
dt dt

Characteristic Equation

ms 2 + cs + k = 0

Roots or poles of the characteristic equation

2
c c + k
s1, 2 =
2m 2m m

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Definitions

Poles expressed as j

s1, 2 = n (n )2 n 2 = jd
POLE
d
Damping Factor = n

Natural Frequency n = k
m

n
% Critical Damping = c
cc
Critical Damping c c = 2mn
Damped Natural CONJUGATE
d = n 1 2
Frequency

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Poles in the S-plane

As the damping is
varied from no FRF

damping to critical TIME

damping and
FRF FRF

beyond, the poles

TIME

TIME

move as shown FRF = 0.3

= 0.1
j
=0

The impulse and TIME

= 0.7

frequency response
are shown as the
= 1.0
TIME

damping is varied > 1.0

TIME

STABLE UNSTABLE

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Laplace Domain

Equation of Motion in Laplace Domain

(ms 2 +cs+k)x (s) = f (s) with b(s ) = (ms 2 +cs+k)

System Characteristic Equation

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

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Transfer Function

System Transfer Function

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

Complex valued
function defines the
surface shown

Source: Vibrant Technology

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Transfer Function

Polynomial Form 1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k
1/ m
Pole-Zero Form h (s) =
(s p1 )(s p1* )

a1 a1*
Partial Fraction Form h (s) = +
(s p1 ) (s p1* )

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

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Damped Exponential Response

Amplitude

Damping Decay

Period

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

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Transfer Function & Residues

Residue

a1 =
h (s)(s p1 ) sp1

1
=
2 jmd

related to
Source: Vibrant Technology
mode shapes

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Frequency Response Function

The Frequency Response Function is the System

Transfer Function evaluated at s = j
a1 a 1*
h ( j) = h (s) s = j
= +
( j p1 ) ( j p1* )

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Frequency Response Function
Bode Plot Coincident-Quadrature Plot

Nyquist Plot

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Frequency Response Function

DYNAMIC COMPLIANCE DISPLACEMENT / FORCE

MOBILITY VELOCITY / FORCE

INERTANCE ACCELERATION / FORCE

DYNAMIC STIFFNESS FORCE / DISPLACEMENT

MECHANICAL IMPEDANCE FORCE / VELOCITY

DYNAMIC MASS FORCE / ACCELERATION

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Effects of Damping & Damping Estimates

Damping Effects Damping Estimates

100 =0.1% MAG
=1%

=2%

=5%
1 n
Q= =
10 0.707
=10% MAG
=20% 2 2 1
1

/n 1 n 2
Half Power Points
0

T = 2 / n

X1
-90 =20%

x1
X2
=10%

=5%
=2% = ln 2
=1%

=0.1%
x2
-180
/ n

t1 t2

Log Decrement

Basic Modal Analysis Theory 14 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 )]

p1 f1 p2 f2 p3 f3
m1 m2 m3

k1 c1 k2 c2 k3 c3 R1

D1

MODE 1 MODE 2 MODE 3

R2
D2
R3

\ \ \ D3

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

F1 F2F3

\ \ \

MDOF Overview 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF Definitions

Assumptions
f2 x2
lumped mass m2

stiffness proportional
k2 c2
to displacement
damping proportional to f1 x1
m1
velocity
linear time invariant
k1 c1
2nd order differential
equations

MDOF Overview 2 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 Matrices and
Linear Algebra
m 2 &x& 2
are important !!!
(c1 + c 2 ) c 2 x& 1
+ x&
c 2 c 2 2

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

MDOF Overview 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF Equations

Equation of Motion
[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
Eigensolution
[[K ][M ]]{x}=0
Frequencies (eigenvalues) and
Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)
\ 1
2

=

2

22 and [U ] = [{u1} {u 2 } L]
\ \

MDOF Overview 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Space Transformation

Modal transformation
p1

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

Projection operation
[U ]T [M ][U]{&p&} + [U]T [C][U]{p& } + [U ]T [K ][U ]{p} = [U ]T{F}
Modal equations (uncoupled)
p1 {u1} {F}
T
m1 &p&1 c1 p& 1 k1
m2 &p& + c2 p& + k2 p ={u }T {F}
2 2 2 2
\ M \ M \ M M

MDOF Overview 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Space Transformation

Diagonal Matrices -
Modal Mass Modal Damping Modal Stiffness
\ \ \
M {&p&} + C {p& } + K {p} = [U ]T {F}

\ \ \

Highly coupled system

p1 f1 p2 f2 p3 f3

transformed into
m1 m2 m3

k1 c1 k2 c2 k3 c3

simple system MODE 1 MODE 2 MODE 3

MDOF Overview 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Space Transformation
PHYSICAL MODEL
.. .
[M]{x} + [C]{x} + [K]{x} = {F(t)}

=
p1 f1
m1

{x} = [U]{p} = [{u 1 } {u 2 } {u 3 } ]{p} k1 c1

MODE 1
+ p2 f2

MODAL SPACE m2

k2 c2

.. . T +
MODE 2

[ M ]{p} + [ C ]{p} + [ K ]{p} = [U] {F(t)} p3 f3

m3

{x} = [U]{p} = {u 1 }p1 + {u 2 }p2 + {u 3 }p3 k3 c3

MODE 3

MDOF Overview 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF - Laplace Domain

Laplace Domain Equation of Motion

[[M]s 2
+ [C]s + [K ]]{x (s )} = 0 [B(s )]{x (s )} = 0

System Characteristic (Homogeneous) Equation

[[M]s +[C]s+[K ]] = 0
2
p k = k jdk

Damping Frequency

MDOF Overview 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF - Transfer Function

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

{F(s )}
System Transfer Function
Adj[B(s )] [A(s )]
[B(s )]
1
= [H(s )] = =
det[B(s )] det[B(s )]

[A(s )] Residue Matrix Mode Shapes

det[B(s )] Characteristic Equation Poles

MDOF Overview 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF - Residue Matrix and Mode Shapes

Transfer Function evaluated at one pole

qk
[H(s )]s=s = {u k } {u k }T
k
sp k
can be expanded for all modes
q k {u k }{u k } q k {u }{u } * T
m T *
[H(s )] = + k k

k =1 (sp k ) (sp*k )

MDOF Overview 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF - Residue Matrix and Mode Shapes

Residues are related to mode shapes as

[A(s )]k = q k {u k }{u k }

T

a11k a12 k a13k L u1k u1k u1k u 2 k u1k u 3k L

a a 22 k a 23k L u u u 2k u 2k u 2 k u 3k L
21k =q k 2 k 1k
a 31k a 32 k a 33k L u 3k u1k u 3k u 2 k u 3k u 3k L
M O M O
M M M M

MDOF Overview 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF - Drive Point FRF

a ij1 a *ij1
h ij ( j ) = +
( j p1 ) ( j p*1 )
a ij 2 a *ij 2
+ +
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )
a ij 3 a *ij 3
+ +
( j p 3 ) ( j p*3 )

*
q1 u i 1u j 1 q1 u i 1u j 1
h ij ( j ) = +
( j p1 ) ( j p*1 )
*
q 2u i 2u j 2 q 2u i 2u j 2
+ +
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )
*
q 3u i 3u j 3 q 3u i 3u j 3
+ +
( j p 3 ) ( j p*3 )

MDOF Overview 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 MDOF - FRF using Residues or Mode Shapes
a ij1 a*ij1
h ij ( j ) = +
( j p1 ) ( j p*1 )
R1
a ij 2 a*ij 2
D1 + + + L
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )
R2
D2
R3
D3

F1 F2F3

a ij1
1
a ij2 2
* * *
q1u i1u j1 qu u
1 i 1 j1
a ij3 3

h ij ( j ) = +
( j p1 ) ( j p ) *
1
1 2 3
* * *
q 2u i 2 u j 2 qu u
2 i2 j2
+ + + L
( j p 2 ) ( j p ) *
2

MDOF Overview 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Time / Frequency / Modal Representation
PHYSICAL TIME FREQUENCY
ANALYTICAL

MODAL
p1 f1
m1

k1 c1

MODE 1
MODE 1 + + +
p2 f2
m2

k2 c2

MODE 2 MODE 2
+ + p3
+ f3
m3

k3 c3

MODE 3
MODE 3

MDOF Overview 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Overview Analytical and Experimental Modal Analysis
LAPLACE
2
[B(s)] = [M]s + [C]s + [K] DOMAIN
TRANSFER
FUNCTION
[B(s)] -1 = [H(s)]

qk u j {u k} [U] [ A(s) ]
det [B(s)]
FINITE ANALYTICAL
[U] ELEMENT MODEL
MODEL REDUCTION
[MA] = [T] T[M N] [T]
MODAL [K - M]{X} = 0
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION H(j )

LARGE DOF
CORRELATION &
MISMATCH MODEL UPDATING

[EN ]' = [TU ] [EA]

X j(t)
Xj (j ) FFT
H(j ) =
Fi (j ) MODAL
Fi (t)
TEST
EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL MODEL
EXPANSION

MDOF Overview 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Digitization,
Quantization,
Aliasing,
Leakage

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage

Objectives of this lecture:

Overview basic digital signal processing concepts

Discuss digitization and sampling
Discuss quantization
Discuss aliasing and anti-aliasing filters
Discuss leakage

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 2 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

TIME DOMAIN

physics of the system TRANSFORMATION TRANSFORMATION

* Frequency domain represents

SUBSET PARAMETER ESTIMATION

FREQUENCY LAPLACE

the system in terms of it's

DOMAIN DOMAIN

periodicities

* Laplace domain represents

the system in terms of its
poles and residues FREQUENCY

AMPLITUDE

TIME

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 3 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 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
The Anatomy of the FFT Analyzer

ANALOG
SIGNAL
The FFT Analyzer can be broken
down into several pieces which
involve the digitization, filtering,
ANALOG
FILTER
transformation and processing of a
signal.
Several items are important here:
ADC
Digitization and Sampling
DISPLAY

Quantization of Signal
DIGITAL
Aliasing Effects
FFT
FILTER Leakage Distortion
Windows Weighting Functions
DISCRETE
The Fourier Transform
DATA Measurement Formulation

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 The Anatomy of the FFT Analyzer

Actual time signals

ANALOG SIGNALS

INPUT OUTPUT

ANTIALIASING FILTERS

Analog anti-alias filter

AUTORANGE ANALYZER
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS

INPUT OUTPUT
Digitized time signals
APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT
OUTPUT
Windowed time signals
COMPUTE FFT

Compute FFT of signal

LINEAR SPECTRA

LINEAR LINEAR
INPUT OUTPUT
SPECTRUM SPECTRUM

AVERAGING OF SAMPLES

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA

INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM
OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM Average auto/cross spectra
COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

Compute FRF and Coherence

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION COHERENC E FUNCTION

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analog Filter

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

dB
Rolloff

Fc
Frequency

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 7 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

T T
1 1 2
x AVG = x dt x RMS = x ( t )dt
To To

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Complex Notation

Real / Imaginary Representation

a + jb a - real part j = 1
b - imaginary part

Magnitude / Phase Representation

(a + jb) = a 2 + b 2 = a tan (b / a )

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 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Digitization of Time Signals

With analog sampling devices, only the performance of the

analog instrumentation was of concern. With the use of digital
signal processing (DSP) techniques, additional consideration must
be given to the analog to digital conversion (ADC) process.

The analog signal must be digitized and several additional items

become important in order to minimize distortion of the original
signal. These are quantization, sampling, aliasing and leakage.

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Digitization of Time Signals

Sampling rate of the ADC is specified as a maximum that is

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

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Quantization

Sampling refers to the rate at which the signal is collected.

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

ADC BIT STEPS

4bit = 0000 = 23 + 2 2 + 21 + 2 0 = 16levels

12bit = 000000000000= 211 + 210 + L + 21 + 20 = 4096levels = 72dBdynamicrange

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Quantization

Quantization errors refer to the accuracy of the amplitude

measured. The 6 bit ADC represents the signal shown much
better than a 4 bit ADC

A A
D D
C C

M M
A A
X X

R R
A A
N N
G G
E E

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Quantization Error

Underloading of the ADC causes amplitude errors in the signal

All of the available

dynamic range of the
analog to digital
converter is not used
effectively
10 volt
range 0.5 volt signal
on
ADC
This causes amplitude
and phase distortion of
the measured signal in
both the time and
frequency domains

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Quantization Error

A large DC bias can cause amplitude errors in the alternating

part of the signal. AC coupling uses a high pass filter to
remove the DC component from the signal
All of the available
dynamic range of the
analog to digital
converter is dominated
by the DC signal
10 volt
range The alternating part of
on the signal suffers from
ADC quantization error

This causes amplitude

and phase distortion of
the measured signal

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Quantization Error

Overloading of the ADC causes severe errors also

The ADC range is set

too low for the signal
to be measured and
causes clipping of the
signal
A

1 volt
D
C

range M

1.5 volt signal

A

on
X

ADC
A
N
G
E

This causes amplitude

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

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 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
Digital Sample Fs = 1 / t

t spacing

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 17 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Sampling Theory

In order to extract valid frequency information, digitization of

the analog signal must occur at a certain rate.

Shannon's Sampling Theorem states fs > 2 fmax

That is, the sampling rate must be at least twice the desired
frequency to be measured.

For a time record of T seconds, the lowest frequency

component measurable is f = 1 / T

With these two properties above, the sampling parameters can

be summarized as fmax = 1 / 2 t
t = 1 / 2 fmax

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 18 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Sampling Parameters

Due to the Rayleigh Criteria and Shannons Sampling Theorum,

the following sampling parameters must be observed.

T=N t

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Sampling Parameters

Due to the Rayleigh Criteria and Shannons Sampling Theorum,

the following sampling parameters must be observed.

PICK THEN AND

t fmax = 1 / (2 t) T = N t

fmax t = 1 / (2 fmax ) f = 1/(N t)

f T = 1 / f t = T / N

T f =1 / T fmax = N f / 2

If we choose f = 5 Hz and N = 1024

Then T = 1 / f = 1 / 5 Hz = 0.2 sec
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

T 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

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

TIME DOMAIN FREQUENCY DOMAIN

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Aliasing
WRAP-AROUND
ACTUAL SIGNAL

OBSERVED ACTUAL
ALIASED SIGNAL

f max

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

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 22 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Anti-Aliasing Filters

WRAP-AROUND

Most good FFT analyzers have

anti-aliasing filters which
protect against aliasing. OBSERVED ACTUAL

These are low pass filters that

typically have a roll off rate and f max

are not ideal.

Usually only 80% of the anti-
aliasing filter range is used to BW

provide additional protection

against aliasing. CF

800 1024

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 23 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Fourier Transform

Forward Fourier Transform

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

and Inverse Fourier Transform
+
x ( t )= Sx (f )e j2 ft df

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 24 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Discrete Fourier Transform

Even though the actual time signal is continuous, the signal is

discretized and the transformation at discrete points is
+
Sx (mf )= x ( t )e j2 mf t dt

This integral is evaluated as

+
Sx (mf )t x(nt )e j2mf nt
n =

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

the case), then the transformation becomes
N 1
Sx (mf )t x( nt )e j2 mf nt
n =0

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Fourier Transform - Periodic Signal

Actual Time ACTUAL

Signal
DATA

Captured Time CAPTURED

Signal
DATA

Reconstructed RECONTRUCTED
DATA
Time Signal

Frequency
Spectrum

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Fourier Transform - Nonperiodic Signal

Actual Time ACTUAL

Signal DATA

Captured Time CAPTURED

Signal DATA

Reconstructed RECONTRUCTED
Time Signal DATA

Frequency
Spectrum

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Leakage

F
ACTUAL
DATA

CAPTURED
Periodic Signal R
E
DATA

T
T

RECONTRUCTED
Q
I
DATA

Non-Periodic Signal U
M
E
ACTUAL

E
DATA

CAPTURED N
C
DATA

Y
T

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Leakage due to
signal distortion

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 28 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Leakage

When the measured signal is not periodic in the sample

interval, incorrect estimates of the amplitude and frequency
occur. This error is referred to as leakage.

Basically, the actual energy distribution is smeared across the

frequency spectrum and energy leaks from a particular f into
adjacent f s.

Leakage is probably the most common and most serious digital

signal processing error. Unlike aliasing, the effects of leakage
can not be eliminated.

Digitization, Quantization, Aliasing, Leakage 29 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Windows

-10

AMPLITUDE
-20

0
-30

-10
-40

-20
-50

-30
-60

dB

ROLLOFF -70
-40

-50
- 80

-60
- 90

dB

-70
-100
-16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375

- 80

- 90

WIDTH -100
-16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375

Windows 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Windows

Objectives of this lecture:

Overview window concept

Discuss different windows
Discuss effects of windows

Windows 2 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 3 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

F
ACTUAL
DATA

CAPTURED
Periodic Signal R
E
DATA

T
T

RECONTRUCTED
Q
I
DATA

Non-Periodic Signal U
M
E
ACTUAL

E
DATA

CAPTURED N
C
DATA

Y
T

RECONTRUCTED
DATA

Windows 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 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 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Windows - Rectangular/Hanning/Flattop

Time weighting functions

AMPLITUDE are applied to minimize
the effects of leakage
ROLLOFF

Rectangular
WIDTH Hanning
General window Flat Top
frequency characteristics
and many others

Windows DO NOT eliminate leakage !!!

Windows 6 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 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Windows 7 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%.

-10

-20

Amplitude
-30

-40

-50

-60

dB

-70

- 80

- 90

-100
-16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Windows 8 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 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Windows 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Windows - Hanning Window Process

Windows 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Windows - Flattop Window Process

Windows 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Windows - Periodic Signal

Rectangular Hanning Flat Top

0 0 0

-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 -100 -100

-16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375 -14 -12 -8 -6 -4 -2 2 4 6 8 12 14
-16 -10 0 10 15.9375

Windows 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Window Effects

THEORETICAL WINDOW SHAPE ACTUAL SIGNAL

0 7

-1 DELTA F 0 DELTA F 1 DELTA F

0 6 0 7 0 8

X X X

0 7 0 7 0 7

CONVOLUTION OF THE
THEORETICAL WINDOW
0 7
AND THE ACTUAL SIGNAL
RESULTING FREQUENCY SPECTRUM IN THE FREQUENCY DOMAIN

Windows 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 OUTPUT

u(t) v(t)
H ACTUAL

n(t) m(t)
NOISE

x(t) y(t) MEASURED

-10

-20

-30

1.0000 -40

-50

-60

-1.0000

dB

-70

- 80

- 90

-100
-16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 15.9375

Measurement Definitions 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurement Definitions

Objectives of this lecture:

Define the basic measurements needed for

experimental modal analysis
Define linear spectra and power spectra
Include the effects of noise

Measurement Definitions 2 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurement Definitions

Actual time signals

ANALOG SIGNALS

INPUT OUTPUT

ANTIALIASING FILTERS

AUTORANGE ANALYZER
Analog anti-alias filter
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS

INPUT OUTPUT

Digitized time signals

APPLY WINDOWS

INPUT
OUTPUT
Windowed time signals
COMPUTE FFT

Compute FFT of signal

LINEAR SPECTRA

LINEAR LINEAR
INPUT OUTPUT
SPECTRUM SPECTRUM

AVERAGING OF SAMPLES

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA

INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM
OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
Average auto/cross spectra
COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION COHERENC E FUNCTION

Compute FRF and Coherence

Measurement Definitions 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurements - Linear Spectra

x(t) h(t) y(t) TIME

INPUT SYSTEM OUTPUT FFT & IFT

Sx(f) H(f) Sy(f) FREQUENCY

x(t) - time domain input to the system

y(t) - time domain output to the system

Sx(f) - linear Fourier spectrum of x(t)

Sy(f) - linear Fourier spectrum of y(t)

H(f) - system transfer function

h(t) - system impulse response

Measurement Definitions 4 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
df S y (f )= y( t )e j2 ft dt

+ +

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

Note: Sx and Sy are complex valued functions

Measurement Definitions 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurements - Power Spectra

Rxx(t) Ryx(t) Ryy(t) TIME

INPUT SYSTEM OUTPUT FFT & IFT

Gxx(f) 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 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurements - Linear Spectra
lim 1
R xx ()=E[ x ( t ), x ( t + )]=
T TT x ( t )x ( t + )dt

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

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

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

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

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

Measurement Definitions 7 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
S y S*x =HSx S*x H= =
Sx Sx G xx
*
Other
H2 formulation formulations
- susceptible to noise on the output
- overestimates the actual H of the system for H exist

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

COHERENCE
(S y S*x )(Sx S*y ) G yx / G xx H1
2
xy = = =
(Sx S*x )(S y S*y ) G yy / G xy H2
Measurement Definitions 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Measurements - Noise

H=G uv /G uu
INPUT SYSTEM OUTPUT

u(t) v(t)
ACTUAL
H
1
H1 =H
1+G nn n(t) m(t)
G uu NOISE

G mm
H 2 =H1+
x(t) y(t) MEASURED
G vv

Measurement Definitions 9 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 OUTPUT

u(t) v(t)
H ACTUAL
H1 = Sv Su* / Su Su* = Guv / Guu
n(t) m(t)
NOISE

x(t) y(t) MEASURED

Measurement Definitions 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
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 OUTPUT

Sm Sm* + Sv Sv* = H2 Su Sv* u(t)

H
v(t)
ACTUAL

Gmm + Gvv = H2 Guv n(t) m(t)

NOISE

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

x(t) y(t) MEASURED
H2 = H ( 1 + Gmm / Gvv )

Measurement Definitions 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 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 OUTPUT

u(t) v(t)
Sv Su* = H1 ( SuSu* + SnSn* ) H ACTUAL

Gvu = H1 ( Guu + Gnn ) n(t) m(t)

NOISE

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

x(t) y(t) MEASURED
H1 = H / ( 1 + Gnn / Guu )

Measurement Definitions 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
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 OUTPUT

u(t) v(t)
H2 = Gvv / Guv H ACTUAL

n(t) m(t)
NOISE

x(t) y(t) MEASURED

Measurement Definitions 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
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 OUTPUT

u(t) v(t)
the following can be written H ACTUAL

2 = Gvv / ( Gvv + Gmm ) n(t) m(t)

NOISE

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

Measurement Definitions 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
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

OUTPUT HV H1

H2

INPUT

Measurement Definitions 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurements - Auto Power Spectrum

x(t) y(t)

INPUT FORCE OUTPUT RESPONSE

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 xx (f) G yy (f)

AVERAGED CROSS

POWER SPECTRUM

G yx (f)
Measurement Definitions 18 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurements - Frequency Response Function

AVERAGED INPUT AVERAGED CROSS AVERAGED OUTPUT

POWER SPECTRUM POWER SPECTRUM POWER SPECTRUM

G xx (f) G yx (f) G yy (f)

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

H(f)

Measurement Definitions 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Measurements - FRF & Coherence

Coherence
1

Real

0Hz AVG: 5 200Hz

COHERENCE
Freq Resp
40

dB Mag

-60

0Hz AVG: 5 200Hz

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Measurement Definitions 20 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Excitation Considerations
1 2 3

1
h 13
1 2 3

2
1

3
2

h 23
3

h 33
h 31

h 32 h 33

Excitation Considerations 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Impact Excitation

Excitation Considerations 2 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 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Impact Excitation
An impulsive excitation which is very short in the time window
usually lasting less than 5% of the sample interval.

ADVANTAGES
- easy setup
- fast measurement time
- minimum of equipment
- low cost
DISADVANTAGES
- poor rms to peak levels
- poor for nonlinear structures
- force/response windows needed
- pretrigger delay needed
- double impacts may occur
- high potential for signal overload and underload of ADC

Excitation Considerations 4 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 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Impact Excitation - Hammer Tip Selection

METAL TIP HARD PLASTIC TIP

Real Real

-976.5625us 123.9624ms -976.5625us 123.9624ms

TIME PULSE TIME PULSE

dB Mag dB Mag

0Hz
FREQUENCY SPECTRUM 6.4kHz 0Hz
FREQUENCY SPECTRUM 6.4kHz

SOFT PLASTIC TIP RUBBER TIP

Real Real

-976.5625us 123.9624ms -976.5625us 123.9624ms

TIME PULSE TIME PULSE

dB Mag dB Mag

0Hz
FREQUENCY SPECTRUM 6.4kHz 0Hz
FREQUENCY SPECTRUM 6.4kHz

Excitation Considerations 6 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 7 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 998.53516ms
TIME PULSE
0Hz
FREQUENCY SPECTRUM 800Hz

dB Mag

0Hz
FREQUENCY SPECTRUM 800Hz

Excitation Considerations 8 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 200Hz

Excitation Considerations 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Impact Excitation - Windows May Be Necessary

ACTUAL TIME SIGNAL

SAMPLED SIGNAL

WINDOW WEIGHTING

WINDOWED TIME SIGNAL

Excitation Considerations 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Impact Excitation - Exponential Window

If the signal does not

naturally decay within the
sample interval, then an T=N t

exponentially decaying
window may be necessary.

However, many times

changing the signal
processing parameters such
as bandwidth and number of
spectral lines may produce a T=N t

signal which requires less

window weighting

Excitation Considerations 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. Ref#1 Ref#2 Ref#3

Excitation Considerations 13 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 UNDER TEST

structure using a long FORCE TRANSDUCER

rod called a stinger

STINGER

or quill SHAKER

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

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

Excitation Considerations 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Signal Types
Excitation techniques can be broken down into two categories:
Deterministic Signals

Non-Deterministic (Random) Signals

Deterministic Signals
conform to a particular mathematical relationship

can be described exactly at any instant in time

response of the system can also be exactly defined if the

system character is known

swept sine, sine chirp, digital stepped sine are examples

Non-Deterministic (Random) Signals

do not conform to a particular mathematical relationship

can not be described exactly at any instant in time

described by some statistical character of the signal

generally have varying amplitude, phase and frequency

content at any point in time

pure random, periodic random, burst random are examples

Excitation Considerations 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Swept Sine Excitation

INPUT EXCITATION

OUTPUT TIME RESPONSE

Slowly changing sine signal sweeping from one frequency to another

frequency

Excitation Considerations 17 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Swept Sine Excitation

A slowly changing sine output sweeping from one frequency to

another frequency

ADVANTAGES
best peak to RMS level

best signal to noise ratio

good for nonlinear characterization

widely accepted and understood

DISADVANTAGES
slowest of all test methods

leakage is a problem

does not take advantage of speed of FFT process

Excitation Considerations 18 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Random Excitation with Hanning Window

AUTORANGING AVERAGING WITH WINDOW

1 2 3 4

An ergodic, stationary signal with Gaussian probability distribution.

Typically, has frequency content at all frequencies.

Excitation Considerations 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Random Excitation with Hanning Window

An ergodic, stationary signal with Gaussian probability distribution.

Typically, has frequency content at all frequencies.

ADVANTAGES
gives a good linear approximation for a system with slight non-

linearities
relatively fast

overlap processing can be used

relatively good general purpose excitation

DISADVANTAGES
even with windows applied to the measurement leakage

is a very serious problem

FRFs are generally distorted due to leakage with

(significant distortion at the peaks)

excessive averaging necessary to reduce variance on data

Excitation Considerations 20 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Random Excitation with Hanning Window
Time signal Frequency Signal

0s 1.999s 0Hz 400Hz

0s 1.999s 0Hz AVG: 10 400Hz

Excitation Considerations 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Random Excitation with Overlap Processing

OVERLAP PROCESSING 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
1 3 5 7 9 the block that has been heavily
weighted to zero
overlap processing allows for
almost twice as many averages
4 10
2 6 8
with the same data when fifty
percent overlap is used

Excitation Considerations 22 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Burst Random Excitation

AUTORANGING AVERAGING

1 2 3 4

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

Excitation Considerations 23 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Burst Random Excitation

A random excitation that exists over only a portion of the data

block (typically 50% to 70%)

ADVANTAGES
has all the advantages of random excitation

the function is self-windowing

no leakage

DISADVANTAGES
if response does not die out within on sample interval, then

leakage is a problem

Excitation Considerations 24 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Burst Random Excitation
Time signal Frequency Signal

End of burst

0s Shaker off 1.999s 0Hz 400Hz

Response decays exponentially

0s 1.999s 0Hz AVG: 10 400Hz

Excitation Considerations 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Sine Chirp Excitation

AUTORANGING AVERAGING

1 2 3 4

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

Excitation Considerations 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Sine Chirp Excitation

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

ADVANTAGES
has all the same advantages as swept sine

self windowing function

good for nonlinear characterization

DISADVANTAGES
nonlinearities will not be averaged out

Excitation Considerations 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Sine Chirp Excitation
Time signal Frequency Signal

0s 1.999s 0Hz 400Hz

0s 1.999s 0Hz AVG: 10 400Hz

Excitation Considerations 28 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Digital Stepped Sine Excitation

AUTORANGING AVERAGE AUTORANGING AVERAGE

IFT IFT

1 2 3 1 2 3

Sine waves are generated at discrete frequencies which correspond to

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

Excitation Considerations 29 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Digital Stepped Sine Excitation
Sine waves are generated at discrete frequencies which correspond
to the digital values of the FFT analyzer for the frequency
resolution available. The system is excited with a single sine wave
and the steady state response is measured. Once one spectral line is
obtained, the next digital frequency is acquired until all frequencies
have been measured.

ADVANTAGES
excellent peak to RMS level

excellent signal to noise ratio

good for nonlinear characterization

leakage free measurements obtained

DISADVANTAGES
slowest of all test methods

Excitation Considerations 30 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comparison - Random/Hann, Burst Random, Chirp

RANDOM

BURST RANDOM

SINE CHIRP

Excitation Considerations 31 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Random with Hanning Window vs Burst Random

Frequency Response Function Coherence

RANDOM

RANDOM

BURST RANDOM

BURST RANDOM

When comparing the measurement with random and burst random,

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

Excitation Considerations 32 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Random with Hanning Window vs Burst Random

RANDOM
COH

FRF
BURST RANDOM

RANDOM & HANNING BURST RANDOM

Excitation Considerations 33 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Excitation Considerations - Shaker Excitation
AUTORANGING AVERAGING WITH WINDOW

Random Leakage is a serious concern

with
Hanning
Accurate FRFs are necessary
1 2 3 4

AUTORANGING AVERAGING

Burst
Random Special excitation
techniques can be
1 2 3 4

AUTORANGING AVERAGING used which will result

Sine in leakage free
Chirp measurements without
1 2 3 4
the use of a window

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#2 Ref#3
Ref#1

Excitation Considerations 35 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 ] Measurements are

developed in a
H11 H12 L H1, Ni similar fashion to
H the single input
H 22 L H 2, Ni
[H]= 21 single output case
M M M but using a matrix
H H No , 2 L H No , Ni formulation
No ,1

where
[H ]=[G XF ][G FF ]1 No - number of outputs
Ni - number of inputs

Excitation Considerations 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
[A k ] [A*k ]
lower j
[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 )
* * *

SYSTEM EXCITATION/RESPONSE
PEAK PICK SDOF POLYNOMIAL
MULTIPLE REFERENCE FRF MATRIX DEVELOPMENT

INPUT FORCE

RESIDUAL COMPENSATION

LOCAL CURVEFITTING
INPUT FORCE IFT
GLOBAL CURVEFITTING
INPUT FORCE
POLYREFERENCE CUVREFITTING
COMPLEX EXPONENTIAL MDOF POLYNOMIAL

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Parameter Estimation Concepts

NO COMPENSATION
Y

y=mx
X

COMPENSATION
Y

y=mx+b Y
X

WHICH DATA ???

Y

X
X

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 2 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Parameter Extraction Considerations
HOW MANY POINTS ???

ORDER OF THE MODEL

AMOUNT OF DATA TO
RESIDUAL
BE USED
EFFECTS RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
COMPENSATION FOR
RESIDUALS

HOW MANY MODES ???

The test engineer identifies these items

NOT THE SOFTWARE !!!
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Parameter Extraction Considerations
HOW MANY POINTS ???

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

terms k( ) *
k

j
[Ak ]
( s s ) + (s s )
[A ]*
k
RESIDUAL
* EFFECTS
k=i k k RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
upper
[Ak ]
( s s ) + (s s )
[A ]
*
k
*
terms k k

HOW MANY MODES ???

[H(s )] = lower residuals + [Ak ]

+
[A*k ] j
+ upper residuals
k =i (ss k ) (ss k )
*

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Classification of Modes
Well separated - lightly damped Closely spaced - lightly damped

Well separated - heavily damped Closely spaced - heavily damped

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 5 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* 1 t
h (s)= + h ( t )= e sin d t
(s p1 ) (s p1* ) 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 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Different Forms of the Same Equation

Polynomial Form 1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k
1/ m
Pole-Zero Form h (s) =
(s p1 )(s p1* )

a1 a1*
Partial Fraction Form h (s) = +
(s p1 ) (s p1* )

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

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Why Have Different Methods

Frequency Domain
Time or frequency - which to use ???

Time Domain
It really depends on which domain
has the most data

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 MDOF - Summation of Many SDOF Systems
a ij1 a*ij1
h ij ( j ) = +
( j p1 ) ( j p*1 )
R1
a ij 2 a*ij 2
D1 + + + L
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )
R2
D2
R3
D3

F1 F2F3

a ij1
1
a ij2 2
* * *
q1u i1u j1 qu u
1 i 1 j1
a ij3 3

h ij ( j ) = +
( j p1 ) ( j p ) *
1
1 2 3
* * *
q 2u i 2 u j 2 qu u
2 i2 j2
+ + + L
( j p 2 ) ( j p ) *
2

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

The FRF is made up

from each individual
mode contribution
which is determined
a ij1
from the

frequency,
1
a ij2
2
a ij3 3

damping,

1
2 3
residue

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

MDOF

SDOF

The task for the modal test engineer is to

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

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Parameter Extraction Considerations

The FRF matrix contains

redundant information MULTIPLE REFERENCE FRF MATRIX DEVELOPMENT

regarding the system

frequency, damping and
mode shapes

Multiple referenced data

can be used to obtain LOCAL CURVEFITTING

better estimates of GLOBAL CURVEFITTING

modal parameters
POLYREFERENCE CUVREFITTING

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Parameter Extraction Considerations

Local Curvefitting

- Each measurement is curvefit to estimate

the frequency, damping and residue for
each FRF
- The frequency and damping is allowed to vary for each measurement
and may not be the same for every measurement

ADVANTAGES
- Good for systems where the poles are not global

DISADVANTAGES
- Frequency and damping is different for the system
- Local modes/node points are not characterized well

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Parameter Extraction Considerations

Global Curvefitting

- A set of measurements are curvefit to

estimate the frequency and damping
- The residue is estimated in a second pass

ADVANTAGES
- Good for systems where the poles are global
- Better estimate of the frequency and damping
- Local modes are better characterized

DISADVANTAGES
- Frequency and damping must be global in FRFs

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Parameter Extraction Considerations

Polyreference Curvefitting

- A set of measurements are curvefit to

estimate the frequency and damping
- The residue is estimated in a second pass
and is based on redundant FRF matrix information

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

DISADVANTAGES
- Frequency and damping must be global in FRFs

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Selection of Bands

Select bands for possible SDOF or MDOF

extraction for frequency domain technique.
Residuals ??? Complex ???

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Mode Determination Tools

Summation MIF

A variety of tools assist in the determination

and selection of modes in the structure
1 Point Each From Panels 1,2, and 3 (37,49,241)
4
10

3
10

2
10

1
10
CMIF

0
10

-1
10

-2
10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Frequency (Hz)

CMIF Stability Diagram

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 17 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Extraction Methods

Peak Picking Circle Fitting 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

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
S6
S5
S4
S3
S2
S1

MAC

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Single Degree of Freedom
Modal Parameter Estimation
Peak Picking Circle Fitting SDOF Polynomial

I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

Real

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 20 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Peak Pick - First Step in Reviewing Test Data
MODE # 1

Simple Peak Picking MODE # 2

MODE # 3

DOF # 1

DOF #2

DOF # 3

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Peak Pick - First Step in Reviewing Test Data

Simple Peak Picking

MODE 2

1 4

3 6

MODE 1
5

4
1

3
6

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 22 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Simple Peak Pick - SDOF System

Substitute the pole into the SDOF FRF equation

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

a1 =h ( j) n

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 23 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Simple Peak Pick - Consider Additional Modes

Substitute the first pole into the FRF equation

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

MODE 1 CONTRIBUTION

MODE 2 CONTRIBUTION

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 24 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Simple Peak Pick - Considerations and Use

Peak pick is a quick and simple check

Modes must be well spaced

(ie: no significant modal overlap)
Approximate since peak is determined from the
frequency resolution
Good quick check before attempting major modal
parameter estimation
Quickly identify erroneous measurement points
(ie: phase reversal, incorrect direction, etc)

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF - Complex Exponential Response

Time domain
response can be
used to extract
parameters

Amplitude
Damping Decay

This time domain

technique is
generally used on
multiple mode time
response data Period

Generally not used

for single mode 1
h(t) = e t sin d t
response extraction md

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Approximation - Effects of Other Modes

Simple symmetric
characteristics of
SDOF system
distorted by
adjacent modes
Real part is shifted
Nyquist circle is
displaced and
rotated
Remove effects of
adjacent modes or
add compensation to
basic equations

Source: Ewins - Modal Testing, 2nd Edition

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Circle Fit - Kennedy-Pancu

Simple equation of a
circle is fit to the data
in the Nyquist
Noise and leakage have
a pronounced effect on
circle
Use of windows tends
to make the circle look
egg-shaped
Circle fit method not
used as much today due Source: Heylen, Modal Analysis - Theory and Testing

to the availability of U + jV
h ( j)= + R + jI
many MDOF methods r + j( r )
= U2 +V2
r ; tan() = U V

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 28 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Polynomial Form

Simple equation of a
1
polynomial for one mode is h (s)=
ms 2 + cs + k
used to fit the function
Additional terms are
typically added to account
for effects of adjacent or
out-of-band modes
Fast, simple, easy to use
Inappropriate for use with compensation terms can be added to
very closely spaced modes account for out of band effects

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 29 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
SDOF Rational Fraction Polynomial

Simply the ratio of two

polynomials
While useful for estimating
SDOF type characteristics,
its real benefits are for
multiple modes
Orthogonal polynomials used
to greatly simplify the
numerical processing
More discussion on this in
the advanced curvefitting Source: Richardson, Rational fraction Polynomial

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 30 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Multiple Degree of Freedom
Modal Parameter Estimation

IFT

Complex Exponential
MDOF Polynomial Methods

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 31 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Complex Exponential
One of the first mdof estimators was the complex exponential which uses
the Prony Algorithm to solve the set of equations. The Toeplitz equations
are used to form the characteristic polynomial followed by the mode
shape extraction using Vandemonde Equation formulation.
m
1
h ( t )= e kt sin dk t
k =1 m k dk
ADVANTAGE
numerically fast and stable

handles many modes

IFT

DISADVANTAGE
time domain leakage is a concern

must overspecify modes to handle residuals

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 32 Dr. Peter Avitabile

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

a ij2 a *ij2
h ij ( j) = +
( j p 2 ) ( j p*2 )
a ij3 a *ij3
+ +
( j p 3 ) ( j p*3 )

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

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

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 33 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Other Time Domain Techniques
Other time domain techniques exist which extend the Complex
Exponential technique described above.

Techniques such as Ibrahim Time Domain and Polyreference LSCE

utilize some variant of the equation below to formulate the problem

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

O

global parameters are extracted for poles and shapes

uses MIMO time data for the estimation process

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 34 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Other Frequency Domain Techniques
Other frequency domain techniques exist which extend the
polynomial technique described above.

Techniques such as Least Squares Frequency Domain, Orthogonal

Polynomial, Frequency Domain Parameter Identification utilize some
variant of the rational fraction, partial fraction or reduced equation
of motion to formulate the problem

u ik L kj
m
LR ij
[h ij ( j)] = + * + UR ij + 2
k =1 ( j p k )
global poles, MPF and shapes extracted
LSFD nonlinear problem solved iteratively
RFP - ill-conditioning possible for higher order polys
use of orthogonal poly to minimize numerical problems

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 35 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Parameter Extraction Considerations

MODAL PARAMETER ESTIMATION MODELS

Time representation

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

Frequency representation

[( j) 2N
+ a1 ( j) 2 N 1 + L + a 2 N ]h ij ( j) =
[( j) 2M
+ b1 ( j) 2 M 1 + L + b 2 M ]

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 36 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations

Numerical Considerations
Generally the time domain is numerically more
stable than the frequency domain approaches
Time domain techniques are generally better for
handling noisy data acquired
The frequency domain is more advantageous for
averaging noise in the data acquisition phase

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 37 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations

Bandwidth Considerations
The time domain is best suited for wide
bandwidths with many modes included in the
estimation process
The frequency domain is best suited for narrow
frequency bands with limited number of modes in
the band

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 38 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations

Out-of-Bandwidth Considerations
The frequency domain is best suited for
compensation effects through the use of
residuals in the mathematical formulation
The time domain can only account for out of
band effects of other modes through the use of
more poles in the estimation process

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 39 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations

Damping Considerations
The time domain is generally well suited for
lightly damped systems - there is an abundance
of data available in the time domain
The frequency domain is generally well suited for
heavily damped systems - there is sufficient data
represented in the frequency domain

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 40 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Modal Parameter Estimation Considerations

Best Combination
The MPE process can be broken down into two
stages
- poles extraction
- residue estimation
First, estimate polyreference poles (or global
poles) using either a time or frequency domain
technique
Second, estimate residues using a frequency
domain technique where residuals are easier to
include in the estimation process

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts 41 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Linear Algebra Concepts

{v1}
T
s1
T
{v 2 }
s2
[A] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3} L]
s3 {v 3 }T

O M

x . . . x
0 x . . .

[U ]= . 0 x . .
. . 0 x .
[A]nm{X}m ={B}n
0 . . 0 x
[A]nm =[V]nn [S]nm [U]Tmm
[A ]1=[Adjo int[A]] {X}m =[A ]gnm{B}n =[[V ]nn [S]nm [U ]Tmm ] {B}n
g

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

Linear Algebra Concepts 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra

The analytical treatment of structural dynamic

systems naturally results in algebraic equations
that are best suited to be represented through
the use of matrices

Some common matrix representations and linear

algebra concepts are presented in this section

Linear Algebra Concepts 2 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra

Common analytical and experimental equations

needing linear algebra techniques
[G ] = [H][G ]
yf ff [H ] = [G yf ][G ff ] 1

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )} [[K ][M ]]{x}=0

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

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

Linear Algebra Concepts 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Matrix Notation

A matrix [A] can be described using row,column as

a 11 a 12 a 13 a 14
a a 22 a 23 a 24
21
[A ] = a 31 a 32 a 33 a 34
a a 42 a 43 a 44
41
a 51 a 52 a 53 a 54
( row , column )
[A]T -Transpose - interchange rows & columns
[A]H - Hermitian - conjugate transpose

Linear Algebra Concepts 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Matrix Notation

A matrix [A] can have some special forms

Square Diagonal Triangular
a 11 a 12 a 13 a 14 a 15 a 11 a11 a 12 a 13 a 14 a 15
a 0 a 25
a 22 a 23 a 24 a 25
a 22

a 22 a 23 a 24

21
[A ] = a 31 a 32 a 33 a 34 a 35 [A ] = a 33 [A ] = 0 0 a 33 a 34 a 35
0
a a 42 a 43 a 44 a 45
a 44
0 0 a 44 a 45
41
a 51 a 52 a 53 a 54 a 55 a 55 0 0 0 0 a 55

Symmetric Toeplitz Vandermonde

a 11 a 12 a 13 a 14 a 15
a 5 a6 a7 a8 a9
a a 25 a 1 a1 a 12
12
a 22 a 23 a 24
a5 a6 a7 a8
4
[A ] = a13 a 23 a 33 a 34 a 35 [A ] = a 3 a4 a5 a6 a7 [A ] =
1 a2 a 22
a a 45 a 1 a 32
a6
a 24 a 34 a 44 a3
14 2
a3 a4 a5

a 15 a 25 a 35 a 45 a 55 1 a4 a 24
a 1 a2 a3 a4 a 5

Linear Algebra Concepts 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Matrix Manipulation

A matrix [C] can be computed from [A] & [B] as

b11 b12
a 11 a 12 a 13 a 14 a 15 b 21 b 22 c11 c12

a a 22 a 23 a 24
a 25 b 31 b 32 = c 21 c 22
21
a 31 a 32 a 33 a 34 a 35 b 41

b 42
31
c c 32
b 51 b 52

c 21 = a 21b11 + a 22 b 21 + a 23 b 31 + a 24 b 41 + a 25 b 51

c ij = a ik b kj
k

Linear Algebra Concepts 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Simple Set of Equations

A common form of a set of equations is

[A ] {x} = [b]
Underdetermined # rows < # columns
more unknowns than equations
(optimization solution)

Determined # rows = # columns

equal number of rows and columns

Overdetermined # rows > # columns

more equations than unknowns
(least squares or generalized inverse solution)

Linear Algebra Concepts 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Simple Set of Equations

This set of equations has a unique solution

2x y = 1 2 1 0 x 1
x + 2 y 1z = 2 1 2 1 y = 2

y+z =3 0 1 1 z 3

whereas this set of equations does not

2x y = 1 2 1 0 x 1
x + 2 y 1z = 2 1 2 1 y = 2

4x 2 y = 2
4 2 0 z 2

Linear Algebra Concepts 8 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 0 0 0 0 x x x x x
x x 0 0 0 0 x x x x

[L] = x x x 0 0 [U] = 0 0 x x x
x x x x 0 0 0 0 x x

x x x x x 0 0 0 0 x

Linear Algebra Concepts 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Static Decomposition

Once the matrix [A] is written in this form then

the solution for {x} can easily be obtained as

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

Linear Algebra Concepts 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Eigenvalue Problems

Many problems require that two

matrices [A] & [B] need to be reduced
[A]{&x&} + [B]{x} = {Q( t )} [[B] [A ]] {x} = 0
Applications for solution of eigenproblems are
plentiful. Common methods are
Jacobi Givens Householder
Subspace Iteration Lanczos

Linear Algebra Concepts 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Singular Valued Decomposition

Any matrix can be decomposed using SVD

[A ] = [U ][S][V ]T

[U] - matrix containing left hand eigenvectors

[S] - diagonal matrix of singular values
[V] - matrix containing right hand eigenvectors

Linear Algebra Concepts 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Singular Valued Decomposition

SVD allows this equation to be written as

{v1}
T
s1
T
{v 2 }
s2
[A] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3} L]
s3 {v 3 }T

O M

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 + L

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 and s1 = 1
3

Then the matrix [A1] can be formed to be
1 1 2 3

[A1 ] = {u1} s1 {u1}T = 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 and s2 = 1
1

Then the matrix [A2] can be formed to be
1 1 1 1

[A 2 ] = {u 2 } s 2 {u 2 }T = 1 [1] {1 1 1} = 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

The size and rank are the same as previous case
Clearly the rows and columns
are linearly related
Linear Algebra Concepts 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Singular Valued Decomposition

Now consider a general matrix [A3] to be

2 3 2
[A 3 ] = 3 5 5 = [A1 ] + [A 2 ]
2 5 10
The characteristics of this matrix are not
obvious at first glance.

Singular valued decomposition can be used to

determine the characteristics of this matrix

Linear Algebra Concepts 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Singular Valued Decomposition

The SVD of matrix [A3] is

1 1 0 1 {1 2 3}
[A] = 2 {1 1 1}
1 0
1

3 1

0
0 {0 0 0}

or
1 1 0
[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
12 6L 12 6L
6L 4L2 6L 2L2
[k ] = EI3
L 12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L


i j

i
j
156 22L 54 13L
E, I 22L 4L2 13L 3L2
[m] = AL
F i L Fj 420 54 13L 156 22L
13L 3L2 22L 4L2

x C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 x

C C 22 C 23 C 24 C 25 C 26 y
y 21
C C32 C33 C34 C35 C36 z
{} = [C]{} z = 31
xy C 41 C 42 C 43 C 44 C 45 C 46 xy

xz C51 C52 C53 C54 C55 C56 xz

yz C 61 C 62 C 63 C 64 C 65 C 66 yz

Linear Algebra Concepts 18 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra Applications

Finite element model development uses individual

elements that are assembled into system matrices

Linear Algebra Concepts 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra Applications

Structural system equations - coupled

[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
Eigensolution - eigenvalues & eigenvectors
[[K ][M ]]{x}=0
Modal space representation
of equations - uncoupled
\ \ \
M {&p&} + C {p& } + K {p} = [U ]T {F}

\ \ \

Linear Algebra Concepts 20 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra Applications

Multiple Input Multiple Output Data Reduction

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

RESPONSE FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS FORCE

(MEASURED) (UNKNOWN) (MEASURED)

Matrix inversion can only be performed if the

matrix [Gxx] has linearly independent inputs

Linear Algebra Concepts 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra Applications

Principal Component Analysis using SVD

{v1}
T
s1
T
{v 2 }
s2
[G xx ] = [{u1} {u 2 } {0} L]
0 {0}T

O M
[Gxx]

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

{v1}
T
s1
T
{v 2 }
s2
[H] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3} L]
s3 {v 3 }T

O M
[H]

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Frequency (Hz)

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

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

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][` ]
T
I
T
I
2

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

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

Linear Algebra Concepts 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Linear Algebra Applications

Many other applications exist

Correlation Model Updating

Advanced Data Manipulation
Operating Data Rotating Equipment
Nonlinearities Modal Parameter Estimation

and the list goes on and on

Linear Algebra Concepts 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 TWENTY YEARS OF
STRUCTURAL DYNAMIC
EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL
TESTING
FINITE
ELEMENT
MODELING MODIFICATION
MODAL PERFORM
PARAMETER EIGEN
ESTIMATION SOLUTION

FULL SPACE PHYSICAL MODEL

DEVELOP MASS RIB
MODAL STIFFNER
MODEL
MODAL SPACE MODEL

Repeat
until
desired
STRUCTURAL MODAL TIE MATRIX SPRING
characteristics CHANGES
are No
obtained REQUIRED
DONE
Yes
MODAL SPACE MODEL
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 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 2 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 3 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification

Structural Dynamic Modification - Complex Modes:

The proportional mode approximation works well with mass

and stiffness changes for a proportional mode system
However, modifications involving damping tends to disrupt
any proportionality that may exist requiring the formulation
to address non-proportional modes
State space formulation allowed for the use of non-
proportional damping models
Eigenvalue modification approach or Local Eigenvalue
Modification Procedure used with the complex mode
approach

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 4 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification

Local Eigenvalue Modification Procedure:

Due to the significant computational advantage and lack of

significant computational resources, the Local Eigenvalue
Modification Procedure (LEMP) was the method used in
early approaches
As computational power increased, the need for the LEMP
decreased
Many implementations reverted to the Eigenvalue
Modification Technique as computational resources became
more readily available

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification

Realistic Structural Changes:

Early implementations only allowed for simple changes in

mass, damping and stiffness
3D beam elements and rib stiffeners using finite element
approaches were developed but experimental data typically
only contained translational DOF - no rotational DOF
Approaches for beam using Guyan reduction and 3 point
beam bending were developed to approximate beam
characteristics for structural changes
System models were also developed using the unconstrained
modal approach for individual components

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification

Estimation of Rotational DOF:

The lack of rotational DOF spurred the development of

different approaches to estimate these necessary DOF
Spline fitting approaches were developed
FEM shape expansion approaches were developed
Experimental approaches were attempted to attempt to
estimate rotational DOF

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification

Modal Truncation Effects:

The most serious of all effects is related to the lack of all

of the modes to completely describe the entire space of
the model
Modal truncation is by far one of the most serious concerns
in defining the modal data base
Attempts to approximate residual approximations for the
truncated modes help to improve the structural modification
process

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification

Impedance Modeling as an Alternative:

At approximately the same time, structural modifications

using response functions were developed
This impedance modeling approach provided a good
alternative to the modal approach
FRF functions contain the effects of all modes in the
measured functions - modal truncation is not a issue
However, rotational DOF are difficult to obtain for
measured functions
System modeling using the impedance modeling approach
were also developed

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 9 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 Truncation

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 10 Dr. Peter Avitabile
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 d e ls
od e Mo
d M se d
se B a
a l Ba d al
si c M o
Phy
\ \ \
p1 f1 p2 f2 p3 f3 M {&p&} + C {p& } + K {p} = [U ]T {F}
m1 m2 m3
k1 c1 k2 c2 k3 c3
\ \ \

MODE 1 MODE 2 MODE 3

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MDOF Equations

Equation of Motion (n x n)
[M ]{&x&}+[C]{x& }+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
Eigensolution
[[K ][M ]]{x}=0
Frequencies (eigenvalues) and Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)
1
2
\
2 = 22

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

\ \

Modal transformation (n x m)
p1

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

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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)
p1 {u1} {F}
T
m1 &p&1 c1 p& 1 k1
m2 &p& + c2 p& + k2 p ={u }T {F}
2 2 2 2
\ M \ M \ M M

Modal Mass Modal Damping Modal Stiffness

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

[U1 ]T [C1 ][U1 ] = C1
[U1 ]T [K1 ][U1 ] = K1

\ \ \

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Modal Space Transformation

Diagonal Matrices (m x m) -
Modal Mass Modal Damping Modal Stiffness

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

\ \ \

Highly coupled system

p1 f1 p2 f2 p3 f3

transformed into
m1 m2 m3

simple system k1 c1 k2 c2 k3 c3

MODE 1 MODE 2 MODE 3

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Structural Changes to the System

Mass and Stiffness Changes (n x n)

[M 2 ] = [M1 ] + [M12 ] [K 2 ] = [K1 ] + [K12 ]

Another eigensolution is needed to uncouple the system

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

Some advantages can be obtained if the existing

modal space solution is used to estimate the changes
to the system

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Eigenvalue Modification Technique

The modal projection is used to recast the equations as

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

where [M12 ] = [U1 ]T [M12 ][U1 ] [K12 ] = [U1 ]T [K12 ][U1 ]

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

uncouple the set of equations
O O
+ [U ]T [K ][U ] + [U ]T [M ][U ] {p } = {0}
K M 1 1
1 1 12 1 1 1 12
O O

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Eigenvalue Modification Technique

The mode shapes are updated using

{p1} = [U12 ]{p 2 } resulting in [U 2 ] = [U1 ][U12 ]

which implies that the final modes are developed as

linear combinations of the original modes of the
unmodified system

For the ith mode of the system, the following

describes the modified mode

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

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 17 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Eigenvalue Modification Technique

The process is best shown in the schematic below

ORIGINAL MODIFIED
STATE MOD IFIC ATION STATE

'N'
PHYSICAL PHYSICAL
SPACE [M ],[K ] [ M ] , [ K 12 ] [M ],[K ] DOF
1 1 12 2 2

MODAL { x } = [ U 1 ] { p 1} { x } = [ U 2 ] { p 2} M<<N
TRANSFORMATION

2 2 'M'
MODAL [ ],[U ] { p } = [U ]{ p } [ ],[U ] MODAL
1 1 1 12 2 2 2
SPACE DOF

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 18 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Local Eigenvalue Modification Technique

Additional computation advantages are obtained through

singular value decomposition of the changes to the system
O r

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

i =1
O
O r

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

i =1
O
which can be projected to modal space as
O r

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

i =1
O
O r

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

i =1
O
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 19 Dr. Peter Avitabile
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 O
+ {v } {v }T {p } = {0}
K M
1 1k 1k 1k 1 1
O O
O O
+ {v } {v }T {p } = {0}
K M 1m 1m 1m 1
1 1
O O
The solution then reduces to a second order equation for
each of the m modes of the system

{ } { }
2 2
u (i ) T {t } u (i ) T {t }
m k m m
1 1
= =
k i =1 22 i2 2 m i =1 22 i2

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 20 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
System Modeling Formulation

A system model can be developed using the same approach

for individual modal components
[U ] = [ ]
UA
O [U ]
B

MA


{ }
&p& A

O
+ [U ]T
[ M ][ U ]
O

M B


{ }
&p&B

O
O

KA



pA
{ }

O
+ + [U ]T
[ K ][U ] = {0}
O




KB

pB

{ }

O

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Complex Mode Solution

The Structural Dynamic Modification process can also be

applied to systems with nonproportional modes.
[0] [M1 ] &x& [M1 ] [0] x& 0
=
[M ]
1 [C1 ] x& [0] [ K1 ] x F

The equation of motion can be recast as

[B1 ]{Y& } [A1 ]{Y} = {Q}
[0] [M1 ] [M ] [0]
[B1 ] = [A1 ] = 1
[M1 ] [C1 ] [0] [ K1 ]

The eigensolution and modal transformation is then

[[A1 ] [B1 ]]{Y} = {0} {Y} = [1 ]{p1}

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 22 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Complex Mode Solution

Considering changes to the system as

[M 2 ] = [M1 ] + [M12 ]
[M 2 ]{&x&} + [C2 ]{x& } + [K 2 ]{x} = {F( t )} [C2 ] = [C1 ] + [C12 ]
[K 2 ] = [K1 ] + [K12 ]
And expressing them in state space
[A 2 ] = [A1 ] + [A12 ]
[B2 ]{Y& } [A 2 ]{Y} = {Q( t )}
[B2 ] = [B1 ] + [B12 ]
[0] [M12 ] [M12 ] [0]
[B12 ] = [A ] =
[M12 ] [C12 ] 12 [0]
[ K12 ]

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 23 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Complex Mode Solution

The eigensolution can be obtained

O O
I + [B ]{p& } + [A ]{p} = {Q ( t )}
1 12 1 12
O O

[A12 ] = [1 ]T [A12 ][1 ] [B12 ] = [1 ]T [B12 ][1 ]

The Local Eigenvalue Modification Procedure can also be

applied to the complex mode solution

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 24 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Response Based Models

These models are developed from characteristics

of the system response typically from frequency
response measurements:

en ts
pon
Co m
s ted
r Te
elso d els
M od d Mo
ased B ase
a l B n se
s i c po
Phy Res

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Impedance Modeling

Frequency Response Functions can also be used to investigate

structural modifications. The FRF can be written as
m q k u ik u jk q k u ik*u jk*
Hij ( j) = +
k =1 ( j p k ) ( 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 c b a

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

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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
FRFs describing FRFs
describing connection describing
output response points input force
points points

j
i
COMPONENT A

CONNECTION POINTS

COMPONENT B

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 28 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 29 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 30 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 31 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Truncation

Simple support modification - Modal truncation is not a

problem since the available unmodified modes are adequate
to span the space of the problem

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

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 32 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Truncation

Cantilever modification - Modal truncation is a problem since

the available unmodified modes are not adequate to span the
space of the problem

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

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 33 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Truncation

All final modified system modes are NOT affected the same

Each mode is made from a different recipe

{u 2 }(i ) = {u1}(1) U12(1i) + {u1}( 2) U12( 2i) + {u1}(3) U12(3i ) +L
Just because one ingredient is missing doesnt
mean that you cant make any other recipes

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 34 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Rotational DOF

Adding additional Translation DOF (residual terms) does not

improve the modification - Extra Rotational DOF are needed

CANTILEVER BEAM

Ref. 5 Modes 10-5 Modes 10 Modes

# Freq. (1-5 TDOF) (1-10 TDOF) (1-10 TDOF)
(1-5 RDOF) (1-5 RDOF) (1-10 TDOF)
(Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz)

1 21.6 24.8 24.8 22.2

2 139.6 162.8 162.6 144.9
3 398.6 476.0 473.7 411.4

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 35 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Rotational DOF

Rotational DOF are needed for Impedance Methods also

CANTILEVER BEAM

TDOF

RDOF

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 36 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 37 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 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 38 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
TOP TEN SDM BLUNDERS

10 Geometry not accurate (rib modifications)

9 Calibration not performed
8 Weight vs mass density
7 Inconsistent units used (inch - feet)
6 Add stiffness between 2 dof that have no shape value
5 Add mass - modes shift up in frequency
4 Add stiffness - modes shift down in frequency
3 Forget to include rigid body modes for free-free models
2 Forget that only the connection DOF matter for SDM

and the #1 SDM blunder

TRUNCATION
Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 39 Dr. Peter Avitabile
IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Summary

A brief review of the

EXPERIMENTAL FINITE
MODAL ELEMENT
TESTING MODELING

Structural Dynamic
Modification process
MODAL PERFORM
PARAMETER EIGEN
ESTIMATION SOLUTION

was given to summarize RIB

the past twenty years. DEVELOP
MODAL
MASS
STIFFNER
MODEL

Repeat
SPRING
until

The paper has a

STRUCTURAL
desired
characteristics CHANGES No
are
REQUIRED DASHPOT
significant amount of
obtained

Yes DONE

material that cannot be

covered in this short
USE SDM
TO EVALUATE
STRUCTURAL

presentation. CHANGES STRUCTURAL

DYNAMIC
MODIFICATIONS

Twenty Years of Structural Dynamic Modification 40 Dr. Peter Avitabile

IMAC20 Los Angeles, California February 2002 Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 Test-Analysis
Correlation-Updating
Considerations

Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis and Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 1 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 The Overall Correlation and Updating Process
FINITE ELEMENT MODEL MAC AND ORTHOGONALITY
1
0.9
1.2
0.8
0.7 1
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.4 0.6

0.3 0.4
0.2
0.2
0.1
0 0

MODEL
MAC GUYAN
IMPROVEMENT
REGIONS
1.2 1.2

1 1

0.8 0.8

2 0.6 0.6
[M] , [K] ) [U n ] , [ ] 0.4 0.4

+ 0.2 0.2

g 0 0

RVAC [Tu ] = [Un ] [U a ]

IRS SEREP

FRAC
COMBINING ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA

FINITE ELEMENT
DOF CORRELATION
EXPERIMENTAL

VECTOR CORRELATION
FINITE ELEMENT
EXPERIMENTAL MODAL MODEL

[En ] = [T u ] [E a ]
VECTOR CORRELATION MODE
SWITCHING

MAC
DOF CORRELATION
1

OR 0.8 FEM 5

0.6 FEM 4 VECTOR CORRELATION

CoMAC CORTHOG 0.4 FEM 3
0.2
FEM 2
0
Experimental Analytical
POC
FEM 1
EXP1 EXP 2
EXP 3 EXP 4
EXP 5

DOF CORRELATION

FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

EXPERIMENTAL

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 2 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Test-Analysis Correlation-Updating Considerations

Objectives of this lecture:

Briefly describe the different correlation tools

available
Conceptually, overview the correlation process
Briefly overview the model updating process

A significant amount of effort is required to

completely describe all the techniques and tools
available

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 3 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 CORTHOG
COORDINATE COORDINATE
MAC MODE
MODAL OR ORTHOGONALITY
MODAL SWITCHING ASSURANCE CRITERIA
ASSURANCE CRITERIA
CRITERIA
MATRIX

OR
FEM 5
0.8

0.6 FEM 4
VECTOR CORRELATION
0.4
Experimental Analytical
FEM 3

0.2
FEM 2

0
FEM 1
PSEUDO EXP1
EXP 2
EXP 3
EXP 4
EXP 5

ORTHOGONALITY
CRITERIA DOF CORRELATION
MATRIX

POC
RVAC FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL
RESPONSE
EXPERIMENTAL
VECTOR
FRAC ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

DOF CORRELATION

VECTOR CORRELATION

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 4 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 5 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Overview of Correlation Techniques

Two basic levels of correlation are considered:

Modal vector correlation provides a

global indicator of the level of
correlation achieved

Degree of freedom (dof) correlation

provides an indicator as to how the
individual dofs contribute to the overall
modal vector correlation

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 6 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Overview of Correlation Techniques

Vector Correlation Techniques:

Modal Assurance Criteria (MAC):

Simple dot product
independent of mass weighting

Orthogonality Checks (POC):

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 7 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Overview of Correlation Techniques

DOF Correlation Techniques:

Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria (CoMAC):

Simple dot product
correlation on dof basis for correlated
mode pairs
independent of mass weighting

Enhanced Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria:

Extension of CoMAC

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 8 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Overview of Correlation Techniques

DOF Correlation Techniques:

Frequency Response Assurance Criteria (FRAC):

simple dot product
correlation of FEM and Test FRFs

Coordinate Orthogonality Check (CORTHOG)

Identified correlation on a dof basis
mass matrix used for weighting
similar to CoMAC in concept except
correlated mode pairs not required

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 9 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:

MAC =
({V } {V }) i
T
j
2

({V } {V })({V } {V })
ij
i
T
i j
T
j

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: FINITE ELEMENT

MAC

=
[{u } {e }]i
T
j
2
MODAL
ASSURANCE
MACij
[{u } {u }][{e } {e }]
CRITERIA
T T MATRIX
i i j j

MODE
SWITCHING VECTOR CORRELATION

low values - not similar 1

high values - very similar

FEM 5
0.8

0.6 FEM 4

0.4 FEM 3

0.2
FEM 2

0
FEM 1
EXP1
EXP 2
EXP 3
EXP 4
EXP 5

EXPERIMENTAL

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 11 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Orthogonality Check

For modal vectors scaled to unit modal mass, the

vectors must satisfy the orthogonality condition:

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 12 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Pseudo Orthogonality Check - POC

The Pseudo Orthogonality Check relating the

correlation between the analytical and
experimental modal vectors with the analytical
mass matrix is
?
POC = [E ] [M ][U ] = [I]
T

1
1.2 1.2 1.2
0.9
0.8 1 1 1
0.7
0.8 0.8 0.8
0.6
0.6 0.6 0.6
0.5
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
0.3
0.2 0.2 0.2
0.2
0.1 0 0 0
0

GUYAN IRS SEREP

MAC

Typically, most people feel the smaller the POC

off-diagonal terms the better correlation that
exists. However, these terms may be small
and vectors may still be relatively uncorrelated
Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 13 Dr. Peter Avitabile
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Pseudo Orthogonality Check - POC

The Pseudo Orthogonality Check is an assessment

as to how close the experimental vectors are
aligned with the analytical vectors
? ?
[E ] [M ] [ U ] = [I]
T
[E ] [K ] [ U ] = [ 2 ]
T

These equations can be evaluated at:

FEM Space - requires expansion

Reduced Space - requires reduction
Intermediate space - requires both
Substantial numerical advantages using SEREP!

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 14 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Pseudo Orthogonality Check - POC

Expansion to
Full Space
may smear
Reduction to and distort
Test Space mode shapes
may result
in distorted
mass and
stiffness
matrices

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 15 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Cross Orthogonality Check

The Cross Orthogonality Check is also used for

correlation purposes

? ?
[E ] [M ] [E ] = [I]
T
[E ] [K ] [E ] = [ 2 ]
T

These equations can be evaluated at:

FEM Space - requires expansion

Reduced Space - requires reduction

Similar to POC (off-diagonal terms are squared)

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 16 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Coordinate Modal Assurance Criteria - CoMAC

The CoMAC gives an indication of the contribution

of each dof to the MAC for a given mode pair
2
m
(c)
u k e k
(c)

CoMAC(k ) = c=1
m m

(u ) (e )
c=1
(c) 2
k
c=1
(c) 2
k

Low values of CoMAC

indicate little correlation
CoMAC
COORDINATE
MODAL

whereas high values of

ASSURANCE
Experimental Analytical
CRITERIA

CoMAC indicate very DOF CORRELATION

high correlation
FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 17 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 DOF CORRELATION

and experimental
vectors FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 18 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( ) }
2
a x *
i j i j
FRAC( j) =
({H( ) } {H( ) } ) ({H( ) } {H( ) } )
a
i j
a *
i j
x
i j
x *
i j

Low values of FRAC

indicate little
FRAC
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE

correlation whereas
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA

high values of FRAC FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

indicate very high DOF CORRELATION

correlation

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 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 RVAC

indicate little RESPONSE
VECTOR
ASSURANCE

correlation whereas
CRITERIA

high values of RVAC

indicate very high FINITE ELEMENT EXPERIMENTAL

correlation

VECTOR CORRELATION

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 21 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Coordinate Orthogonality Check - CORTHOG

The Coordinate Orthogonality Check helps to

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

POC Orthogonality

POC ijk = e ki m kp u pj ORTHOG ijk = u ki m kp u pj

p p

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 22 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Coordinate Orthogonality Check - CORTHOG

The Coordinate Orthogonality Check is simply the

comparison of what should have been obtained
analytically for each dof in an orthogonality check
to what was actually obtained for each dof in a
pseudo-orthogonality check from test

SD = CORTHOG ijk = e ki m kp u pj u ki m kp u pj
p

Variety of different -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

formulations with dof 1 emu

umu Experimental

different scaling dof 2 emu

umu
Analytical

approaches dof 3
umu
emu

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 23 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
MAC Contribution

The MAC Contribution is a relatively simple and

straightforward technique to determine the degree
of contribution of each dof to the MAC value
achieved

pick a mode pair of interest

select a target MAC value
delete dof until target MAC value achieved

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 24 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Force Unbalance

The Force Balance is a simple calculation to

determine the inequality that exists in the
equation of motion
?
[[K ] [M ]]{x}={0}

uses the FEM mass and stiffness matrices

uses experimental frequencies and mode shapes
compute the inequality that exists

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 25 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Model Updating Topics

Model Updating techniques can be broken down

into two categories:

Direct Techniques

Indirect Techniques (Sensitivity based)

Modal Based Techniques

Response Based Techniques
Some basic theory of analytical model
improvement and localization of model change are
described

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 26 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Model Improvement Terminology

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 27 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 28 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 29 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 30 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Model Improvement - AMI

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 31 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Model Improvement - SSO

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 32 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Analytical Model Improvement - MSSO

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 33 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Model Updating - Sensitivity Approaches

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 34 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comments on Direct Techniques

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

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

Skyline approaches attempt to retain the original topology

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 35 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comments on Direct Techniques

Matrix smearing Skyline containment

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 36 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Model Updating - Sensitivity Approaches

Differences that are typically minimized:

Frequency differences
Mode shape differences
Frequency response differences

Parameters that may be updated:

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 37 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comments on Indirect Techniques

Indirect Techniques - Sensitivity approach

Modal Based Techniques

Frequency differences
Shape differences
Response differences

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 38 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comments on Indirect Techniques

Indirect Techniques -Sensitivity -Modal Approach

Frequency differences
Likely to be the most accurate parameter
measured
No spatial information needed
Relatively simple calculations
No reduction/expansion problems

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 39 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comments on Indirect Techniques

Indirect Techniques -Sensitivity -Modal Approach

Shape differences
Less accurate on a dof basis
Spatial information included
Mode pairing necessary
Calculations more complicated
Reduction/expansion is a problem

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 40 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
Comments on Indirect Techniques

Indirect Techniques - Sensitivity approach

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 41 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
General Comments

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 42 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
General Comments

Use of all the correlation tools necessary to

interpret the data available
Both modal and response based techniques should be
used together for the updating
One technique alone may not be sufficient to
adequately update the model

Once updated, the model should be perturbed both

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 43 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
General Comments

Model Updating requires extreme care in order to

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

Test/Analysis Correlation/Updating Considerations 44 Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
 macl.caeds.eng.uml.edu

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory
University of Massachusetts Lowell

Presentation Topics TUTORIAL NOTES:

Intent Structural Dynamics and
Things Shake and Break !
Experimental Modal Analysis
Modal Overview
Analytical Modeling
SDOF Theory
MODE3
MODE 1
MDOF Theory
DSP - DQAL Windows
Measurement Definitions
Excitation Considerations
MPE Concepts MODE 2
MODE 4

Linear Algebra
Structural Modification
Correlation/Updating Copyright 2000 All Rights Reserved
In Trouble !!!!!
Dr. Peter Avitabile [email protected] Tuesday, July 06, 2004 1