Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Damping and Energy Dissipation
Damping and Energy Dissipation
Systems
By
Indrajit Chowdhury
Chief Discipline Supervisor
Civil & Structural Engineering
Petrofac International Limited
Sharjah, U.A.E.
and
Shambhu P. Dasgupta
Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Kharagpur 721302, India.
e-mail: dasgupta@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in
Summary
For systems with large degrees of freedom, it is difficult to guess meaningful
values of Rayleigh damping coefficients and at the start of an analysis. A number of
general-purpose commercially available have the provision of providing the value of
and for calculation of Rayleigh damping matrix for dynamic analysis of systems with
multi-degree of freedom. Since an engineer may not be in a position to pre-assess the
same at the beginning, has no option but to assume an unrealistic constant damping ratio
for all modes. Based on the present technique it is very simple to develop a spreadsheet
and arrive at a rational value of and which develops a damping ratio sequence
increasing progressively with each of the subsequent modes and one can furnish input
data for the dynamic analysis.
The present paper outlines a procedure, which ensures a rational estimate of and
even for a system with large degrees of freedom. The results obtained have been
checked against different class of real life structure and foundation systems and the
results are presented graphically.
Key-Words: Dynamics, damping, eigen values, finite element method, natural
frequency, soil-foundation system.
(1)
in whch [C] = damping matrix of the physical system; [M] = mass matrix of the physical
system; [K] = stiffness matrix of the system; and are pre-defined constants.
The major advantage gained in converting the damping matrix into an equivalent
Rayleigh damping lies in the fact that using orthogonal transformation a structure having
n degrees of freedom can be reduced to n-number of uncoupled equations. However, for
systems with large degrees of freedom, it is difficult to guess meaningful values of and
at the start of the analysis.
As such in most of the practical engineering analysis the analyst makes
simplifying assumptions in selecting damping ratios (constant for all significant modes)
based on his experience or standard literature that would hopefully be valid for the
overall system. It is a fact that modal mass participation decreases with increase in modes
e. g. say, for first mode mass participation be 45%, second mode 20%, third mode 10%
etc till nearly 100% mass participation is achieved. Based on above, one can infer that
[ = (k/m)], as mass participation decreases with higher modes, the frequency increases
and it is indeed an observed phenomenon. Considering cc (critical damping) = 2(km),
we can conclude that with reduction in modal mass for successive modes, cc will decrease
with increase in mode. Overall damping of a system being a constant (since k and m are
constant for a system), the damping ratio, D, is given by D = c/cc. As cc decreases with
increase in modes, D will increase with increasing modes. Thus the main digression from
reality in such case is that while damping goes on increasing with each mode with a
guessed unique value of damping ratio at the advent of the analysis the damping ratio
remains constant for all modes. For a particular system where higher mode contribution is
significant the results obtained based on the presumptive damping ratio will surely not be
realistic.
The present paper outlines a procedure, which ensures a rational estimate of and
even for a system with large degrees of freedom. The results obtained have been
checked against different class of real life structure and foundation systems and the
results are presented graphically.
{}
{}
&& + [C] X
& + [K ]{X} = {P }
[M] X
t
(2)
{}
{}
(3)
(4)
0
+ 2 2
{ }T [C]{ } =
.
.
.
.
0
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+ n 2
0
(5)
2n n = + n2
(6)
When the system has two degrees of freedom eqn. (6) reduces to
21 1 = + 12
22 2 = + 22
(7)
However, while solving a system having a large degrees of freedom, say 400 or
1000 equations, the analyst is in some difficulty to arrive at the values of Rayleigh
coefficients, which shall be valid for all the n degrees of equation (which could be any
values like 400, 800, 1000 etc) or shall be valid for all significant modes. Surely there is
no straightforward solution to arrive at these values. An iterative solution is possible and
this can be obtained possibly from the best-fit values of and in a particular system. A
method is described in the following through which one can arrive at the unique values of
Rayleigh coefficients and they will be valid also for systems having large degrees of
freedom.
Computation of coefficients and for large systems
As it is shown in eqn. (5), the orthogonal transformation of the damping matrix reduces
the matrix [C] to the form
2 ii = + i2
(8)
+
2 i
2
(9)
From eqn. (9) it can be observed that the damping ratio is proportional to the natural
Fig.1. The figure demonstrates some interesting result. For the first portion (frequency
range 0.5-8.5 rad /sec) the curve shows marked non-linearity and beyond that the
variation is linear.
0.3
Damping Ratio(C/Cc)
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
frequency
12
18
24
30
36
42
Natural Frequency
48
One need not measure n, where n could be 100, 500,1000 depending on the degree of
freedom. What is relevant here is a first few modes for which there is a significant mass
participation. Beyond this, results are of no practical consequence. For instance, for a
steel structure of 500 degree-of-freedom if it is found that 100% mass participation
occurs in the first 15 modes (say), instead of starting with 5% constant damping for all
modes, one can start with a minimum 2% damping in the first mode and define at 15th
mode, = 5% and this is the zone of relevance.
From the curve shown in Fig.1, it can be concluded that for some y = a/x + bx,
when x is small, the first term is a/x dominates at the initial stage and as x increases the
value a/x diminishes and approaches zero and the term bx starts dominating the equation.
In other words for if it is very flexible and have a very low fundamental frequency will
show non linear damping properties in the beginning with respect to frequency and would
converge to a linear proportionality with frequency as the eigen values increases with
each subsequent mode. Flexible antennas, very long piles, or tall chimney (height > 275
m) would possibly show this type of behaviour at the outset.
However, most of the civil engineering structures are usually designed to have a
reasonable rigidity and would have a much higher value of the fundamental frequency,
the term containing / 2 will usually dominate. Moreover, considering the fact that the
non-linear range is very small for normal structures it will not be unrealistic to assume
that the damping ratio for each mode is linearly proportional to the frequency of the
system.
Thus, a set of values 1, 2 , 3 .......... ... n and 1, 2 , 3 ............. n have been
assumed as the corresponding damping ratio for ith mode considering a linear relationship
and the damping ratio thus obtained is given by
i =
m 1
( i 1 ) + 1
m 1
(10)
in whichi = damping ratio for the ith mode( for all i m ); 1 = damping ratio for the first
mode; m = damping ratio for the mth significant mode considered in the analysis; i =
natural frequency for the ith mode;1 = natural frequency for the first mode; m = natural
frequency for the mth significant mode considered for the analysis.
For structures having large degrees of freedom, it is only the first few modes,
which contribute to the significant dynamic behaviour. Now, how many modes will have
a significant contribution can be ascertained from
For most of the engineering structures, the number of significant modes by which
almost 95% of the mass has participated is usually around 3 at the minimum and about 25
at the maximum.
Based on an eigen value solution and modal mass participation result one can identify
the significant modes (= m) and follow the following procedure step by step as shown
hereafter. Select number of modes = 2.5 m and perform an eigen value analysis;
Select 1, the damping ratio for the first mode of the system;
Select m, the damping ratio for the mth significant mode;
For intermediate modes i, where 1< i < m, obtain i from eqn. (10) based on linear
interpolation;
For modes greater than m extrapolate the values based the expression
i =
m 1
( m +i m ) + 1 ,
m 1
(11)
2 11 2 m m
2
12 m
(12)
(13)
Plot the four sets of data based on eqn. (9) and check which data fits best with the
linear interpolation curve for the first m significant modes.
Select the corresponding value of and as the desired value, which will give the
incremental damping ratio based on Rayleigh damping.
In some cases it might so happen that values will show variation in higher modes
beyond m significant modes but this is irrelevant, so long as the values are closely
matching for the first m modes, since the contribution of higher modes greater than m are
deemed insignificant for the system, the above theory has been bench marked against
three real life cases consisting of different types of structures and foundations.
Case1: A 220m RCC chimney having 100 degrees of freedom has first six values of
natural frequencies as 3.0,4.0,7.0,8.0,12.0 and 20.0 rad /sec, respectively.
It is assumed that the significant dynamic response of the system will die down within
first six modes with damping ratios varying between 2% to 10% within the first six
modes.
Select suitable values of and .
Solution
Given below are the eigen values for the first 15 modes. Now, taking the first
modal damping ratio as 2% and sixth modal damping ratio as 10%, data for the full range
of eigen values interpolated / extrapolated are shown in Table I.
For the first six modes the range values are
2 = 20 rad/sec and 2 = 0.10 and 1 = 3 rad/sec and 1 = 0.02.
Based on the above values
=
2 0.1 20 2 0.03 3
=
400 9
Natural
frequency
(rad/sec)
Damping Ratio
based
on
Linear
Interpolation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
4
7
8
12
20
25
32
38
47
62
75
110
135
140
0.02
0.024705882
0.038823529
0.043529412
0.062352941
0.1
0.123529412
0.156470588
0.184705882
0.227058824
0.297647059
0.358823529
0.523529412
0.641176471
0.664705882
1 = 3 rad/sec
and 1 = 0.02
0.05549
Thus based on the above two sets of data the average values and are: = 0.04309
and = 0.009708. Based on the above values, the damping ratios are found to vary as
shown in Table II.
Frequency
Linear
Damping
Damping
upto
6th
Mode approximation
Damping
upto
full
range approximation
Damping
with average
data
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
4
7
8
12
20
25
32
38
47
62
75
110
135
140
0.02
0.024705882
0.038823529
0.043529412
0.062352941
0.1
0.123529412
0.156470588
0.184705882
0.227058824
0.297647059
0.358823529
0.523529412
0.641176471
0.664705882
0.02
0.023682864
0.036923639
0.041611253
0.060818414
0.1
0.124654731
0.159251918
0.188946022
0.233523426
0.307868988
0.372327366
0.545919554
0.669934641
0.694738765
0.02348961
0.025924489
0.037192791
0.041444351
0.059276352
0.096327637
0.119785269
0.152771618
0.181116821
0.223700165
0.294762608
0.356396269
0.522424179
0.641052911
0.66478066
0.021745
0.024804
0.037058
0.041528
0.060047
0.098164
0.12222
0.156012
0.185031
0.228612
0.301316
0.364362
0.534172
0.655494
0.67976
On plotting the data, the variations are as given in Fig. 2. It can be observed that
damping with 15-mode approximation matches the best with the datum value based on
linear interpolation. Hence, the design Rayleigh coefficients are: = 0.0095 and =
0.05549.
Comparison of Damping Modes
0.8
Damping ratio
0.7
0.6
Linear Damping
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
3
12
20
25
32
38
47
62
Frequency
Number of significant modes = 6; Damping ratio = 0.10 for first mode; Damping
ratio = 0.15 for the sixth mode.
The design value of = 0.05549 and = 0.0105 based on 15 mode interpolation.
It can be concluded from Fig. 3 that the frequencies are more or less same for the first six
modes showing the rigid body modes of the system and the damping ratio remains more
or less constant at the range of 0.1. Data for the full range of eigen values interpolated /
extrapolated are shown in Table III.
Comparison of Damping Modes
5
4.5
Damping ratio
Linear Damping
3.5
Damping upto 6 th Mode
aproximation
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
18.9 20 20.2 20.2 21.9 28.5 124 128 157 294 313 348 366 412 452
Frequency
Fig. 3_ Variation of damping ratio for a boiler feed pump based on finite element
analysis
Table III._Values natural frequency versus damping ratio
Sl No
Natural
Damping Ratio
frequency based on Linear
Interpolation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
18.93
19.97
20.19
20.24
21.91
28.45
124.41
128.38
157.43
293.7
312.86
348.45
366.48
411.57
452.34
0.1
0.105462185
0.106617647
0.106880252
0.115651261
0.15
0.653991597
0.674842437
0.827415966
1.543119748
1.64375
1.830672269
1.925367647
2.162184874
2.37631302
Number of significant modes = 6; Damping ratio = 0.02 for first mode; Damping ratio =
0.05 for the sixth mode
Design value of and = -0.354 and 0.0162 respectively based on interpolation for first
six modes. It is observed in Fig. 4 that for modes beyond the 10th, damping shows slight
lower value than the datum (i.e. the linear damping curve) but in reality it is irrelevant
since 95% of the mass has already participated by the 6th mode. The variation curves are
as shown Fig. 4. Based on the above values, the damping ratios are found to vary as
shown in Table IV.
Comparison of Damping Modes
0.12
Linear Damping
Damping ratio
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
8
99
1
10
.6
11 1
.0
5
11 3
.1
6
11 4
.4
24
9.
9.
26
9.
92
8.
77
8.
69
8.
23
8.
84
60
7.
6.
07
6.
6.
4
22
Frequency
Natural
frequency
Damping
ratio
based on linear
Interpolation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
6.074
6.22
6.601
7.846
8.233
8.693
8.778
8.927
9.263
9.8
9.991
10.61
11.053
11.164
11.424
0.02
0.021672394
0.026036655
0.040297824
0.044730813
0.05
0.050973654
0.052680412
0.05652921
0.062680412
0.06486827
0.071958763
0.077033219
0.078304696
0.081282932