Modal Analysis

Dr.
Peter Avitabile
Presentation Topics
Intent
Modal Overview
Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

University of Massachusetts Lowell
SDOF Theory
MDOF Theory
Measurement Definitions
IMAC 19
Young Engineer Program
Excitation Considerations
MPE Concepts
TUTORIAL:
Linear Algebra
Basics of Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile
peter_avitabile@uml.edu
Friday, February 07, 2003
Intent of Young Engineer Program

The intent of the Young Engineer Program is to expose the new
or young engineer to some of the basic concepts and ideas
concerning analytical and experimental modal analysis.
It is NOT intended to be a detailed treatment of this material.
Rather it is intended to prepare one for some of the in-depth
papers presented at IMAC so that the novice has some
appreciation of the detailed material presented in these papers.
This presentation is intended to identify the basic methodology
and techniques currently employed in this field and to expose
one to the typical modal jargon used in the field.
Intent of Young Engineer Program
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Experimental Modal Analysis

A Simple Non-Mathematical Presentation
Dr. Peter Avitabile
Mechanical Engineering - UMASS Lowell
Could you explain
and how is it
used for solving
dynamic problems?
modal analysis
Illustration by Mike Avitabile
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Analytical Modal Analysis

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

x
&
Eigensolution
[[K n ] [M n ]]{x n } = {0}
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Could you explain modal analysis for me ?

Simple time-frequency response relationship
RESPONSE
increasing rate of oscillation
FORCE
time
frequency
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Could you explain modal analysis for me ?

Sine Dwell to Obtain Mode Shape Characteristics
MODE3
MODE 1
MODE 2
MODE 4
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Just what are the measurements called FRFs ?
A simple inputoutput problem

8
5
2
Magnitude
Real
3
0
-3
8
-7
1.0000
Phase
-1.0000
Imaginary
5
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Just what are the measurements called FRFs ?

Response at point 3
due to an input at point 3
h32
2
1
3
1
Drive
Point
FRF
h33
h31
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Why is only one row/column of FRFs needed ?

The third row of the FRF matrix - mode 1
The peak amplitude of the imaginary part of the

FRF is a simple method to determine the mode shape
of the system
Dr. Peter Avitabile


The second row of the FRF matrix is similar
The peak amplitude of the imaginary part of the

FRF is a simple method to determine the mode shape
of the system
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Any row or
column can be
used to extract
mode shapes
- as long as it is
not the node of
a mode !
?
Dr. Peter Avitabile

More measurements better defines the shape

MODE # 1
MODE # 2
MODE # 3
DOF # 1
DOF #2
DOF # 3
10
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats the difference between shaker and impact ?

1
h 13
1
2
1
3
2
h 23
3
h 33
h 31
h 32
h 33
Theoretically - - Experimental Modal Analysis
11
NOTHING ! ! !
Dr. Peter Avitabile
What measurements do I actually make ?

ANALOG SIGNALS
OUTPUT
INPUT
ANTIALIASING FILTERS
Actual time signals

Analog anti-alias filter
AUTORANGE ANALYZER
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS
OUTPUT
INPUT
APPLY WINDOWS
INPUT
OUTPUT
COMPUTE FFT
LINEAR SPECTRA
LINEAR
OUTPUT
SPECTRUM
LINEAR
INPUT
SPECTRUM
Digitized time signals

Windowed time signals
Compute FFT of signal
AVERAGING OF SAMPLES
COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA
INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM
COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE
FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION
Average auto/cross spectra

Compute FRF and Coherence
COHERENCE FUNCTION
12
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats most important in impact testing ?

Hammers and Tips
40
COHERENCE
dB Mag
FRF
INPUT POWER SPECTRUM
-60
0Hz
800Hz
COHERENCE
40
FRF
dB Mag
-60
0Hz
200Hz
13
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats most important in impact testing ?

Leakage and Windows
ACTUAL TIME SIGNAL
SAMPLED SIGNAL
WINDOW WEIGHTING
WINDOWED TIME SIGNAL
14
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats most important in shaker testing ?

AUTORANGING
AVERAGING WITH WINDOW
AUTORANGING
AVERAGING
AUTORANGING
Random
with
Hanning
Burst
Random
AVERAGING
Different
excitation
techniques are
available for
obtaining good
measurements
Sine
Chirp
1
15
Dr. Peter Avitabile

How do I get mode shapes from the FRFs ?

MODE 2
2
1
MODE 1
5
2
4
1
3
6
16
Dr. Peter Avitabile

The FRF is made up

from each individual
mode contribution
which is determined
from the
a ij1
a ij2
a ij3
frequency,
damping,
residue
17
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF
SDOF
The task for the modal test engineer is to

determine the parameters that make up the pieces
of the frequency response function
18
Dr. Peter Avitabile

HOW MANY POINTS ???
RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
Mathematical
routines help to
determine the
basic parameters
that make up
the FRF
RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
HOW MANY MODES ???
19
Dr. Peter Avitabile

What is operating data ?

Why and How Do Structures Vibrate?
INPUT TIME FORCE
f(t)
y(t)
FFT
IFT
INPUT SPECTRUM
f(j )
OUTPUT SPECTRUM
h(j )
20
y(j )
Dr. Peter Avitabile


If I make measurements on a structure at an
operating frequency, sometimes I get some
deformation shapes that look pretty funky .
Maybe they are just noise?
Is that possible ???
21
Dr. Peter Avitabile


But if I make a measurement at an operating
frequency and its close to a mode, I can easily
see what appears to be one of the modes
MODE 1 CONTRIBUTION
MODE 2 CONTRIBUTION
22
Dr. Peter Avitabile


And if I make a measurement at an operating
frequency and its close to another mode, I can
easily see what appears to be one of the modes
23
Dr. Peter Avitabile


I think I just answered my own question !!!
I think Im starting to understand this now !!!

24
Dr. Peter Avitabile


The modes of the structure act like filters
which amplify and attenuate input excitations
on a frequency basis
OUTPUT SPECTRUM
y(j )
f(j )
INPUT SPECTRUM
25
Dr. Peter Avitabile

So what good is modal analysis ?
EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL
TESTING
FINITE
ELEMENT
MODELING
MODAL
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION
PERFORM
EIGEN
SOLUTION
MASS
DEVELOP
MODAL
MODEL
Repeat
until
desired
characteristics
are
obtained
RIB
STIFFNER
SPRING
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES
REQUIRED
Yes
No
DONE
DASHPOT
USE SDM
TO EVALUATE
STRUCTURAL
CHANGES
STRUCTURAL
DYNAMIC
MODIFICATIONS
26
The dynamic
model can be
used for studies
to determine the
effect of
structural
changes of the
mass, damping
and stiffness
Dr. Peter Avitabile

So what good is modal analysis ?

Simulation, Prediction, Correlation, to name a few
FREQUENCY
RESPONSE
MEASUREMENTS
FINITE
ELEMENT
MODEL
CORRECTIONS
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION
EIGENVALUE
SOLVER
MODAL
PARAMETERS
MODEL
VALIDATION
MODAL
PARAMETERS
SYNTHESIS
OF A
DYNAMIC MODAL MODEL
MASS, DAMPING,
STIFFNESS CHANGES
FORCED
RESPONSE
SIMULATION
STRUCTURAL
DYNAMICS
MODIFICATION
MODIFIED
MODAL
DATA
REAL WORLD
FORCES
STRUCTURAL
RESPONSE
27
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Single Degree of Freedom Overview

f(t)
x(t)
m
k
100
T = 2 / n
=0.1%
=1%
X1
=2%
X2
=5%
10
=10%
=20%
-90
=20%
/ n
=10%
t1
=5%
=2%
1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k
=1%
=0.1%
-180
/ n
SDOF Overview
t2
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF Definitions
Assumptions
lumped mass
x(t)
stiffness proportional
to displacement
damping proportional to
velocity
linear time invariant
m
k
2nd order differential

equations
SDOF Overview
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF Equations
Equation of Motion
d2x
dx
m 2 + c + kx = f ( t )
dt
dt
or
m && + cx + kx = f ( t )
x
&
Characteristic Equation
ms 2 + cs + k = 0
Roots or poles of the characteristic equation

s1, 2
SDOF Overview
c
=
2m
c + k
m
2m
3
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF Definitions
Poles expressed as
s1, 2 = n
(n )2 n 2 = jd
POLE
Damping Factor
= n
Natural Frequency
n = k
% Critical Damping
= c
m
n
cc
Critical Damping
c c = 2mn
Damped Natural
Frequency
d = n 1 2
SDOF Overview
CONJUGATE
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF - Harmonic Excitation

100
=0.1%
=1%
=2%
=5%
10
=10%
-90
=20%
=20%
=10%
=5%
=2%
=1%
=0.1%
-180
/n
/ n
x
1
=
st (1 2 )2 +(2 )2
SDOF Overview
2
=tan 1
2
1
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF - Damping Approximations

MAG
T = 2 / n
X1
X2
0.707
MAG
t1
n
1
=
Q=
2 2 1
SDOF Overview
t2
x1
= ln 2
x2
Dr. Peter Avitabile

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)
x (s) = b 1 (s)f (s) = h (s)f (s)
and
System Transfer Function

1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k
SDOF Overview
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF - Transfer Function
Polynomial Form
1
h (s) =
ms 2 + cs + k
Pole-Zero Form
1/ m
h (s) =
*
(s p1 )(s p1 )
Partial Fraction Form
*
a1
a1
+
h (s) =
*
(s p1 ) (s p1 )
Exponential Form
1 t
h(t) =
e sin d t
md
SDOF Overview
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF - Transfer Function & Residues
Residue
a1 =
h (s)(s p1 )
sp1
1
=
2 jmd
related to
mode shapes
Source: Vibrant Technology
SDOF Overview
Dr. Peter Avitabile

SDOF - Frequency Response Function
h ( j) = h (s)
SDOF Overview
s = j
*
a1
a1
=
+
*
( j p1 ) ( j p1 )
10
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Coincident-Quadrature Plot
Bode Plot
0.707 MAG
Nyquist Plot
SDOF Overview
11
Dr. Peter Avitabile


DYNAMIC COMPLIANCE
DISPLACEMENT / FORCE
MOBILITY
VELOCITY / FORCE
INERTANCE
ACCELERATION / FORCE
DYNAMIC STIFFNESS
FORCE / DISPLACEMENT
MECHANICAL IMPEDANCE
FORCE / VELOCITY
DYNAMIC MASS
SDOF Overview
FORCE / ACCELERATION
12
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Multiple Degree of Freedom Overview

[B(s )]1 = [H(s )] = Adj[B(s )] = [A(s )]
det[B(s )] det[B(s )]
f1
p1
k1
f2
p2
c1
f3
p3
m2
m1
m3
k2
c2
k3
c3
R1
D1
MODE 1
MODE 2
MODE 3
R2
D2
\
{&&} +
p
MDOF Overview
\
{p} +
&
{p} = [U ]T {F}
R3
D3
F1
F2F3
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF Definitions
Assumptions
f2
lumped mass
m2
stiffness proportional
to displacement
k2
damping proportional to
velocity
linear time invariant
MDOF Overview
f1
c2
x1
m1
k1
2nd order differential

equations
x2
c1
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF Equations
Equation of Motion - Force Balance
m1&&1+(c1 + c 2 )x1c 2 x 2 +(k1 + k 2 )x1k 2 x 2 =f1 (t )
x
&
&
m 2 && 2 c 2 x1+c 2 x 2 k 2 x1 +k 2 x 2 =f 2 (t )
x
&
&
Matrix Formulation
x
&&1
m1
&&
m 2 x 2
Matrices and
Linear Algebra
are important !!!
&
(c1 + c 2 ) c 2 x1
+

c2
c 2 x 2
&
(k1 + k 2 ) k 2 x1 f1 ( t )
+
x = f ( t )
k 2 2 2
k2
MDOF Overview
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF Equations
Equation of Motion
[M ]{&&}+[C]{x}+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
x
&
Eigensolution
[[K ][M ]]{x}=0

Frequencies (eigenvalues) and
Mode Shapes (eigenvectors)
\
MDOF Overview
2
1
=

\

2
2
and [U ] = [{u1}
\
{u 2 } L]
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Space Transformation

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

Projection operation
p1

L]p 2
M

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

&
p
Modal equations (uncoupled)
m1
m2
p
&&1 c1
&& +
p
2
\ M

MDOF Overview
c2
&
p1 k1
p +
&
2
\ M

5
k2
T
p1 {u1} {F}
p ={u }T {F}
2 2
\ M M

Dr. Peter Avitabile


Diagonal Matrices Modal Mass
Modal Damping
\
{&&} +
p
Modal Stiffness
\
{p} +
&
{p} = [U ]T {F}
Highly coupled system

transformed into
k1
k2
m3
c2
MODE 2
f3
p3
m2
c1
MODE 1
f2
p2
m1
simple system
MDOF Overview
f1
p1
k3
c3
MODE 3
Dr. Peter Avitabile


..
.
[M]{x} + [C]{x} + [K]{x} = {F(t)}
=
f1
p1
m1
{x} = [U]{p} = [{u } {u } {u }

1
MODAL
]{p}
k1
SPACE
c1
MODE 1
f2
p2
m2
k2
..
.
T
[ M ]{p} + [ C ]{p} + [ K ]{p} = [U] {F(t)}
{u }p + {u }p + {u }p
1 1
2 2
3 3
c2
MODE 2
f3
p3
m3
k3
c3
MODE 3
MDOF Overview
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF - Laplace Domain

Laplace Domain Equation of Motion
[[M]s
{
+ [C]s + [K ]] x (s )} = 0 [B(s )]{x (s )} = 0
System Characteristic (Homogeneous) Equation
[[M]s +[C]s+[K ]] = 0
p k = k jdk
Damping
MDOF Overview
Frequency
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF - Transfer Function

System Equation
{x (s )}
[B(s )]{x (s )} = {F(s )} [H(s )] = [B(s )] =
{F(s )}
1
System Transfer Function
[B(s )]
[A(s )]
Adj[B(s )]
= [H(s )] =
=
det[B(s )] det[B(s )]
[A(s )]
Residue Matrix
det[B(s )]
Characteristic Equation
MDOF Overview
Mode Shapes
Poles
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF - Residue Matrix and Mode Shapes

Transfer Function evaluated at one pole
qk
T
[H(s )]s=s = {u k }
{u k }
sp k
can be expanded for all modes
k
[H(s )] =
k =1
MDOF Overview
q k {u k }{u k }
q k {u }{u }
+
(sp*k )
(sp k )
T
10
*
k
* T
k
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF - Residue Matrix and Mode Shapes

Residues are related to mode shapes as
[A(s )]k
a11k
a
21k
a 31k
M
a12 k
a 22 k
a 32 k
M
MDOF Overview
a13k
a 23k
a 33k
M
= q k {u k }{u k }
L
u1k u1k
u u
L
=q k 2 k 1k
L
u 3k u1k
M
O
11
u1k u 2 k
u 2k u 2k
u 3k u 2 k
M
u1k u 3k
u 2 k u 3k
u 3k u 3k
M
L
L
L
O
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF - Drive Point FRF
h ij ( j ) =
a ij1
( j p 1 )
+
( j p 2 )
MDOF Overview
( j p* )
2
( j p 3 )
a* 3
ij
( j p* )
3
( j p 1 )
q1 u i 1 u j 1
( j p* )
1
q 2u i 2u j 2
( j p 2 )
+
a* 2
ij
a ij 3
q1 u i 1 u j 1
( j p* )
1
a ij 2
h ij ( j ) =
a* 1
ij
q 2u i 2u j 2
( j p* )
2
q 3u i 3u j 3
( j p 3 )
12
q 3u i 3u j 3
( j p* )
3
Dr. Peter Avitabile

MDOF - FRF using Residues or Mode Shapes

h ij ( j ) =
R1
+
( j p1 ) ( j p* )
1
+
D1
a* 1
ij
a ij1
a* 2
ij
a ij 2
+
+ L
( j p 2 ) ( j p* )
2
R2
D2
R3
D3
F1
F2F3
a ij1
h ij ( j ) =
q1u i1u j1
* * *
1 i 1 j1
*
1
qu u
+
( j p1 ) ( j p )
+
q 2u i 2u j 2
* * *
2 i2 j2
*
2
qu u
( j p 2 ) ( j p )
MDOF Overview
a ij2
a ij3
2
3
+ L
13
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Time / Frequency / Modal Representation

PHYSICAL
TIME
FREQUENCY
ANALYTICAL
MODAL
f1
p1
m1
k1
MODE 1
c1
MODE 1
+
p2
f2
m2
k2
MODE 2
c2
MODE 2
p3
f3
m3
k3
MODE 3
MODE 3
MDOF Overview
c3
14
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Overview Analytical and Experimental Modal Analysis

TRANSFER
FUNCTION
[B(s)] = [M]s2 + [C]s + [K]
LAPLACE
DOMAIN
[B(s)] -1 = [H(s)]
qk u j {u k}
[U]
[ A(s) ]
det [B(s)]
[U]
FINITE
ELEMENT
MODEL
T
[K - M]{X} = 0
MODAL
PARAMETER
ESTIMATION
ANALYTICAL
MODEL
REDUCTION
N
H(j )
LARGE DOF
MISMATCH
X j(t)
H(j ) =
MDOF Overview
Xj (j )
Fi (j )
FFT
Fi (t)
15
MODAL
TEST
EXPERIMENTAL
MODAL MODEL
EXPANSION
Dr. Peter Avitabile

INPUT
SYSTEM
u(t)
n(t)
x(t)
OUTPUT
v(t)
H
m(t)
ACTUAL
NOISE
MEASURED
y(t)
-10
-20
-30
-40
1.0000
-50
-60
-1.0000
dB
-70
- 80
- 90
-100
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
10
12
14
15.9375
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Actual time signals
ANALOG SIGNALS
OUTPUT
INPUT
ANTIALIASING FILTERS
Analog anti-alias filter
AUTORANGE ANALYZER
ADC DIGITIZES SIGNALS
Digitized time signals
OUTPUT
INPUT
APPLY WINDOWS
INPUT
Windowed time signals
OUTPUT
COMPUTE FFT
LINEAR SPECTRA
Compute FFT of signal
LINEAR
OUTPUT
SPECTRUM
LINEAR
INPUT
SPECTRUM
AVERAGING OF SAMPLES
COMPUTATION OF AVERAGED
INPUT/OUTPUT/CROSS POWER SPECTRA
INPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
Average auto/cross spectra
OUTPUT
POWER
SPECTRUM
CROSS
POWER
SPECTRUM
COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE
Compute FRF and Coherence
COHERENCE FUNCTION
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Leakage
F
R
E
Q
ACTUAL
DATA
CAPTURED
DATA
T
I
M
E
RECONTRUCTED
DATA
ACTUAL
DATA
Periodic Signal
U
E
N
C
Y
Non-Periodic Signal
CAPTURED
DATA
RECONTRUCTED
DATA
Leakage due to
signal distortion
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Windows
0
Time weighting functions

are applied to minimize
the effects of leakage
-10
-20
-30
-40
Rectangular
-50
-60
Hanning
dB
-70
Flat Top
- 80
- 90
-100
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
10
12
14
15.9375
and many others
Windows DO NOT eliminate leakage !!!

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Windows
Special windows are
used for impact testing
Force window
Exponential Window
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Linear Spectra

h(t)
Sx(f)
TIME
OUTPUT
FFT & IFT
H(f)
INPUT
y(t)
SYSTEM
x(t)
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
Dr. Peter Avitabile


+
x ( t )= Sx (f )e j2 ft df
Sx (f )= x ( t )e j2 ft dt
y( t )= S y (f )e
j2 ft
S y (f )= y( t )e j2 ft dt
df
h ( t )= H(f )e
j2 ft
H(f )= h ( t )e j2 ft dt
df
Note: Sx and Sy are complex valued functions
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Power Spectra

Rxx(t)
INPUT
Gxx(f)
Ryx(t)
Ryy(t)
TIME
SYSTEM
OUTPUT
FFT & IFT
Gxy(f)
Gyy(f)
FREQUENCY
Rxx(t) - autocorrelation of the input signal x(t)

Ryy(t) - autocorrelation of the output signal y(t)
Ryx(t) - cross correlation of y(t) and x(t)
Gxx(f) - autopower spectrum of x(t)
G xx ( f ) = S x ( f ) S* ( f )
x
G yy(f) - autopower spectrum of y(t)
G yy ( f ) = S y ( f ) S* ( f )
y
G yx(f) - cross power spectrum of y(t) and x(t)
G yx ( f ) = S y ( f ) S* ( f )
x
Dr. Peter Avitabile


lim 1
R xx ()=E[ x ( t ), x ( t + )]=
x (t )x (t + )dt
T TT
+
G xx (f )= R xx ()e j2 ft d=Sx (f )S* (f )

x
lim 1
R yy ()=E[ y( t ), y( t + )]=
y(t )y(t + )dt
T TT
+
G yy (f )= R yy ()e j2 ft d=S y (f )S* (f )

y
R yx ()=E[ y( t ), x ( t + )]=
lim 1
y(t )x (t + )dt
T TT
G yx (f )= R yx ()e j2 ft d=S y (f )S* (f )

x
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Derived Relationships

S y =HSx
H1 formulation
- susceptible to noise on the input
- underestimates the actual H of the system
S y S* G yx
x
H=
=
*
Sx Sx G xx
S y S* =HSx S*
x
x
H2 formulation
- susceptible to noise on the output
- overestimates the actual H of the system
Other
formulations
for H exist
S y S* G yy
y
=
H=
*
Sx S y G xy
S y S* =HSx S*
y
y
COHERENCE
2
xy
(S y S* )(Sx S* )
x
y
(Sx S* )(S y S* )
x
y
10
G yx / G xx
G yy / G xy
H1
H2
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Noise
H=G uv /G uu
1
H1 =H
1+G nn
G uu
G mm
H 2 =H1+
G vv
INPUT
SYSTEM
u(t)
n(t)
OUTPUT
v(t)
H
m(t)
x(t)
ACTUAL
y(t)
11
NOISE
MEASURED
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Auto Power Spectrum
x(t)
OUTPUT RESPONSE
INPUT FORCE
G xx (f)
yy
AVERAGED INPUT
AVERAGED OUTPUT
POWER SPECTRUM
POWER SPECTRUM
12
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Cross Power Spectrum
AVERAGED INPUT
AVERAGED OUTPUT
POWER SPECTRUM
POWER SPECTRUM
G yy (f)
G xx (f)
AVERAGED CROSS
POWER SPECTRUM
G yx (f)
13
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - Frequency Response Function
AVERAGED INPUT
AVERAGED CROSS
AVERAGED OUTPUT
POWER SPECTRUM
POWER SPECTRUM
POWER SPECTRUM
G yx (f)
G yy (f)
G xx (f)
H(f)
14
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Measurements - FRF & Coherence

Coherence
1
Real
0
0Hz
AVG: 5
200Hz
COHERENCE
Freq Resp
40
dB Mag
-60
0Hz
AVG: 5
200Hz
15
Dr. Peter Avitabile

1
h 13
1
2
1
h 23
3
h 33
h 31
h 33
h 32
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Excitation Considerations - Impact

The force spectrum can be customized to some extent
through the use of hammer tips with various hardnesses.
CH1 Time
CH1 Time
1.8
Real
Real
-3
-200
-976.5625us
123.9624ms
-976.5625us
CH1 Pwr Spec

-20
123.9624ms
CH1 Pwr Spec

-10
dB Mag
dB Mag
-70
-110
0Hz
6.4kHz
0Hz
CH1 Time
3.5
6.4kHz
CH1 Time
8
Real
Real
-1.5
-2
-976.5625us
123.9624ms
-976.5625us
CH1 Pwr Spec

-20
123.9624ms
CH1 Pwr Spec

-10
dB Mag
dB Mag
-120
-110
0Hz
6.4kHz
0Hz
6.4kHz
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Excitation Considerations - Impact/Exponential

The excitation must be sufficient to excite all the modes
of interest over the desired frequency range.
40
COHERENCE
dB Mag
FRF
-60
0Hz
800Hz
40
COHERENCE
FRF
dB Mag
-60
0Hz
200Hz
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Excitation Considerations - Impact/Exponential

The response due to impact excitation may need an
exponential window if leakage is a concern.
ACTUAL TIME SIGNAL
SAMPLED SIGNAL
WINDOW WEIGHTING
WINDOWED TIME SIGNAL
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Excitation Considerations - Shaker Excitation

AUTORANGING
Random
with
Hanning
Burst
Random
AVERAGING WITH WINDOW
AUTORANGING
Accurate FRFs are necessary
AVERAGING
AUTORANGING
Leakage is a serious concern
Special excitation
techniques can be
used which will result
in leakage free
measurements without
the use of a window
AVERAGING
Sine
Chirp
1
as well as other techniques

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Excitation Considerations - MIMO

Multiple referenced FRFs are
obtained from MIMO test
Energy is distributed
better throughout the
structure making
better measurements
possible
Ref#1
Ref#2
Ref#3
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Large or
complicated
structures
require
special
attention
Dr. Peter Avitabile

[G XF ]=[H][G FF ]
H11
H
[H]= 21
M
H
No,1
H12
H 22
M
H No , 2
[H ]=[G XF ][G FF ]1
L H No, Ni
L
L
H1, Ni
H 2, Ni
M
Measurements are
developed in a
similar fashion to
the single input
single output case
but using a matrix
formulation
where
No - number of outputs
Ni - number of inputs
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Measurements on the same structure can show
tremendously different modal densities depending
on the location of the measurement
Source: Michigan Technological University Dynamic Systems Laboratory
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Parameter Estimation Concepts

[A k ] + [A* ] + j [A k ] + [A* ] + upper [A k ] + [A* ]
k
[H(s )]=
i (ss ) (ssk* ) terms (ss ) (ssk* )
*
(ss k ) (ss k ) k =
terms
k
k
k
k
lower
SYSTEM EXCITATION/RESPONSE
SDOF POLYNOMIAL
PEAK PICK
MULTIPLE REFERENCE FRF MATRIX DEVELOPMENT
INPUT FORCE
RESIDUAL COMPENSATION
INPUT FORCE
INPUT FORCE
LOCAL CURVEFITTING
IFT
GLOBAL CURVEFITTING
POLYREFERENCE CUVREFITTING
COMPLEX EXPONENTIAL
MDOF POLYNOMIAL
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Parameter Estimation Concepts

NO COMPENSATION
y=mx
COMPENSATION
y=mx+b
X
WHICH DATA ???

Y
X
X
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Parameter Extraction Considerations

HOW MANY POINTS ???
RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
ORDER OF THE MODEL

AMOUNT OF DATA TO
BE USED
COMPENSATION FOR
RESIDUALS
HOW MANY MODES ???
The test engineer identifies these items

NOT THE SOFTWARE !!!
Dr. Peter Avitabile


HOW MANY POINTS ???
lower
[Ak ]
[A ]
terms
*
k
*
k
[H( s) ] = ( s s ) + s s
( )
j
[Ak ]
[A ]
*
k
*
k
( s s ) + (s s )
k=i
RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
upper
[Ak ]
[A ]
terms
RESIDUAL
EFFECTS
*
k
*
k
( s s ) + (s s )
HOW MANY MODES ???
[A k ] + [A* ] + upper
k
[H(s )] = lower residuals +
(ss k ) (ss* )
k =i
k
j
Dr. Peter Avitabile

The basic equations can be cast in either the

time or frequency domain
*
a1
a1
h (s)=
+
*
(s p1 ) (s p1 )
1 t
h ( t )=
e sin d t
md
Dr. Peter Avitabile


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
+ a 1 ( j) 2 N 1 + L + a 2 N ]h ij ( j) =
[( j)
2M
+ b1 ( j) 2 M 1 + L + b 2 M ]
Dr. Peter Avitabile


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

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

Mode Determination Tools

Summation
MIF
A variety of tools assist in the determination

and selection of modes in the structure
1 Point Each From Panels 1,2, and 3 (37,49,241)
4
10
10
10
10
CMIF
10
-1
10
-2
10
0
50
100
150
CMIF
200
250
Frequency (Hz)
300
350
400
450
500
Stability Diagram
9
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Modal Extraction Methods

Peak Picking
Circle Fitting
SDOF Polynomial
A multitude of techniques exist
IFT
Complex Exponential
MDOF Polynomial Methods

10
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Model Validation
Synthesis
Validation tools exist

to assure that an
accurate model has
been extracted from
measured data
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
MAC
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
11
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Linear Algebra Concepts

[A] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3}
x . . . x
0 x . . .
[U]= . 0 x . .
. . 0 x .
0 . . 0 x
s3
T
{v1}
T
{v 2 }
{v 3 }T
O M
[A]nm{X}m ={B}n
[A]nm =[V]nn [S]nm [U]T
mm
{X}m =[A ]g {B}n =[[V ]nn [S]nm [U ]T ] {B}n

mm
nm
g
T
{X}m =[[U ]mm [S]nm [V]nn ]{B}n
[A ]1=[Adjo int[A ]]
Det[A ]
s1
s2
L]
Dr. Peter Avitabile

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

Linear Algebra
Common analytical and experimental equations
needing linear algebra techniques
[G ] = [H][G ]
yf
[H ] = [G yf ][G ff ]
ff
[[K ][M ]]{x}=0
[M ]{&&}+[C]{x}+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
x
&
[B(s )]1 = [H(s )] = Adj[B(s )]

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

or
[H(s )] = [U] S [L]T
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Matrix Notation
A matrix [A] can be described using row,column as
a 11
a
21
[A ] = a 31
a
41
a 51
a 12
a 22
a 32
a 42
a 52
a 13
a 23
a 33
a 43
a 53
a 14
a 24
a 34
a 44
a 54
( row , column )
[A]T -Transpose - interchange rows & columns

[A]H - Hermitian - conjugate transpose
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Matrix Notation
A matrix [A] can have some special forms
Diagonal
Square
a 11
a
21
[A ] = a 31
a
41
a 51
a 12
a 22
a 32
a 13
a 23
a 33
a 14
a 24
a 34
a 42
a 52
a 43
a 53
a 44
a 54
a 15
a 25
a 35
a 45
a 55
a 22
a 33
a 44
a 55
Toeplitz
Symmetric
a 11
a
12
[A ] = a13
a
14
a 15
a 11
[A ] =
Triangular
a 12
a 22
a 23
a 13
a 23
a 33
a 14
a 24
a 34
a 24
a 25
a 34
a 35
a 44
a 45
a 15
a 25
a 35
a 45
a 55
a 5
a
4
[A ] = a 3
a
2
a1
a 11
0
[A ] = 0
0
a 12
a 22
0
a 13
a 23
a 33
a 14
a 24
a 34
0
0
0
0
a 44
0
Vandermonde
a6
a5
a4
a3
a2
a7
a6
a5
a4
a3
a8
a7
a6
a5
a4
a9
a8
a7
a6
a5
1
[A ] =
1
a1
a2
a3
a4
2
a1
a2
2
2
a3
a2
4
Dr. Peter Avitabile

a 15
a 25
a 35
a 45
a 55
Matrix Manipulation
A matrix [C] can be computed from [A] & [B] as
a 11
a
21
a 31
a 12
a 22
a 32
a 13
a 23
a 33
a 14
a 24
a 34
b11
a 15 b 21
b
a 25
31
a 35 b 41
b 51
b12
b 22 c11
b 32 = c 21
c
b 42
31
b 52
c12
c 22
c 32
c 21 = a 21b11 + a 22 b 21 + a 23 b 31 + a 24 b 41 + a 25 b 51
c ij = a ik b kj
k
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Simple Set of Equations

A common form of a set of equations is
[A ] {x} = [b]
Underdetermined
# rows < # columns
more unknowns than equations
(optimization solution)
Determined
# rows = # columns
equal number of rows and columns
Overdetermined
# rows > # columns
more equations than unknowns
(least squares or generalized inverse solution)
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Simple Set of Equations

This set of equations has a unique solution
2x y = 1
x + 2 y 1z = 2
y+z =3
2 1 0 x 1
1 2 1 y = 2

0 1 1 z 3

whereas this set of equations does not

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

4x 2 y = 2
4 2 0 z 2
Dr. Peter Avitabile

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
[U] = 0
0
x 0 0 0 0
x x 0 0 0
[L] = x x x 0 0
x x x x 0
x x x x x
x x
x x
0 x
0 0
0 0
x
x
x
x
0
x
x
x
x
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Static Decomposition
Once the matrix [A] is written in this form then
the solution for {x} can easily be obtained as
[A ] = [L][U ]
[U ] {X} = [L]1 [B]
Applications for static decomposition and inverse
of a matrix are plentiful. Common methods are
Gaussian elimination
Crout reduction
Gauss-Doolittle reduction
Cholesky reduction
10
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Eigenvalue Problems
Many problems require that two
matrices [A] & [B] need to be reduced
[[B] [A ]] {x} = 0
[A ]{&&} + [B]{x} = {Q( t )}

x
Applications for solution of eigenproblems are

plentiful. Common methods are
Jacobi
Givens
Subspace Iteration
Householder
Lanczos
11
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Singular Valued Decomposition

Any matrix can be decomposed using SVD
[A ] = [U ][S][V ]T
[U] - matrix containing left hand eigenvectors
[S] - diagonal matrix of singular values
[V] - matrix containing right hand eigenvectors
12
Dr. Peter Avitabile


SVD allows this equation to be written as
[A] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3}
s1
s2
L]
{v1}
T
{v 2 }
{v 3 }T
O M
T
s3
which implies that the matrix [A] can be written in

terms of linearly independent pieces which form
the matrix [A]
[A ] = {u1}s1{v1}T + {u 2 }s 2 {v 2 }T + {u 3}s3 {v3}T +

13
Dr. Peter Avitabile


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 2 3
1

T
[A1 ] = {u1} s1 {u1} = 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
14
Dr. Peter Avitabile


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

T
[A 2 ] = {u 2 } s 2 {u 2 } = 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
15
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Now consider a general matrix [A3] to be
2 3 2
[A 3 ] = 3 5 5 = [A1 ] + [A 2 ]
2 5 10
The characteristics of this matrix are not

obvious at first glance.
Singular valued decomposition can be used to
determine the characteristics of this matrix
16
Dr. Peter Avitabile


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

3

or
1

1
1

{1 2 3}
0 1

0
1 {1 1 1}

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

0
1
3

These are the independent quantities that

make up the matrix which has a rank of 2
17
Dr. Peter Avitabile

Linear Algebra Applications

The basic solid mechanics formulations as well as
the individual elements used to generate a finite
element model are described by matrices
6L 12 6L
12
6L 4L2 6L 2L2
[k ] = EI
L3 12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L
E, I
Fj
x C11
C
y 21
C
{} = [C]{} z = 31
xy C 41
xz C51

yz C 61
54
13L
156 22L
22L 4L2 13L 3L2
[m] = AL
13L 156
420 54
22L
13L 3L2 22L
4L2
C12
C13
C14
C15
C 22
C32
C 42
C 23
C33
C 43
C 24
C34
C 44
C 25
C35
C 45
C52
C 62
C53
C 63
C54
C 64
C55
C 65
18
C16 x
C 26 y

C36 z

C 46 xy
C56 xz

C 66 yz
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Finite element model development uses individual
elements that are assembled into system matrices
19
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Structural system equations - coupled
[M ]{&&}+[C]{x}+[K ]{x}={F( t )}
x
&
Eigensolution - eigenvalues & eigenvectors
[[K ][M ]]{x}=0

Modal space representation
of equations - uncoupled
\
\
{&&} +
p
\
{p} +
&
20
{p} = [U ]T {F}
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Multiple Input Multiple Output Data Reduction
[G ] = [H][G ]
yx
[H ] = [G yx ][G xx ]1
xx
[Gyx]
[H]
[Gxx]
RESPONSE
(MEASURED)
FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS

(UNKNOWN)
FORCE
(MEASURED)
Matrix inversion can only be performed if the

matrix [Gxx] has linearly independent inputs
21
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Principal Component Analysis using SVD
[G xx ] = [{u1} {u 2 } {0}
[Gxx]
s1
s2
L]
{v1}
T
{v 2 }
0
{0}T
O M
T
SVD of the input excitation matrix identifies the

rank of the matrix - that is an indication of how
many linearly independent inputs exist
22
Dr. Peter Avitabile


SVD of Multiple Reference FRF Data
[H] = [{u1} {u 2 } {u 3}
[H]
{v1}
T
{v 2 }
{v 3 }T
O M
T
s1
s2
L]
s3
FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTIONS
50
100
150
200
250
Frequency (Hz)
300
350
400
450
500
SVD of the [H] matrix gives an indication

of how many modes exist in the data
23
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Least Squares or Generalized Inverse for
Modal Parameter Estimation Techniques
[A k ] + [A* ]
k
[H(s )] =
(ss k ) (ss* )
k =i
k
j
Least squares error minimization of

measured data to an analytical function
24
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Extended analysis and evaluation of systems
[K ][U ] = [M I ][U ][`2 ]
[U ][K ][U] = [U] [M ][U][` ]

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

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

generally require matrix manipulation of some type
25
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Many other applications exist
Correlation
Model Updating
Advanced Data Manipulation

Operating Data
Rotating Equipment
Nonlinearities
Modal Parameter Estmation
and the list goes on and on
26
Dr. Peter Avitabile


Modal Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modal Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dr.

Modal Analysis & Controls Laboratory

Basics of Modal Analysis

Friday, February 07, 2003

Intent of Young Engineer Program

Intent of Young Engineer Program

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Experimental Modal Analysis

Could you explain

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Experimental Modal Analysis

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Illustration by Mike Avitabile

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Analytical Modal Analysis

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

Experimental Modal Analysis

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

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Could you explain modal analysis for me ?

increasing rate of oscillation

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Could you explain modal analysis for me ?

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Just what are the measurements called FRFs ?

A simple inputoutput problem

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Just what are the measurements called FRFs ?

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Why is only one row/column of FRFs needed ?

The peak amplitude of the imaginary part of the

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Why is only one row/column of FRFs needed ?

The peak amplitude of the imaginary part of the

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Why is only one row/column of FRFs needed ?

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

More measurements better defines the shape

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats the difference between shaker and impact ?

Theoretically - - Experimental Modal Analysis

What measurements do I actually make ?

Actual time signals

Digitized time signals

COMPUTATION OF FRF AND COHERENCE

FREQUENCY RESPONSE FUNCTION

Experimental Modal Analysis

Average auto/cross spectra

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats most important in impact testing ?

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats most important in impact testing ?

WINDOWED TIME SIGNAL

Experimental Modal Analysis

Dr. Peter Avitabile

Whats most important in shaker testing ?

AVERAGING WITH WINDOW