Vibration Concepts: P Chandramouli

Vibration Concepts
P Chandramouli
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
January 21/22, 2020
Mouli (IIT Madras) Royal Enfield Noise & Vibration January 21/22, 2020 1 / 51
1 Review: Forced vibration response
2 Modal Truncation
Mode Acceleration Methods
Modal Truncation Augmentation
Review: Forced vibration response
Overview for Harmonic Excitation
We want to solve Mẍ + Cẋ + Kx = FejΩt

This equation can be from simple lumped parameter modeling
Could be based on finite element model
Usually matrix C is not explicitly assembled
The steps involved are as follows
Solve eigenvalue problem KX = ω 2 MX
Generates natural frequencies ωi and corresponding mode shape
Xi
Form modal matrix Ψ = [X1 X2 · · · Xn ]
Modal Superposition
We will assume proportional damping so C is not explicitly

needed
This will enable the modal matrix Ψ to diagonalize damping
matrix too
Transform to modal coordinates using x(t) = Ψy(t)
ΨT MΨÿ + ΨT CΨẏ + ΨT KΨy = ΨT FejΩt
Several SDOF equations result due to orthogonality of mode
shapes with M and K
ÿi + 2ξi ωi ẏi + ωi2 yi = gi ejΩt ; i = 1, 2, · · · , N
Modal Superposition 2
Steady-state solution yi (t) = Yi ej(Ωt+φi )

Yi is the amplitude and φi the phase of response with respect to
excitation
From this go back to the physical co-ordinates x(t)
N
Yi ejφi Xi ejΩt
P
x(t) =
i=1
The magnitude of complex scalar Yi ejφi is contribution of ith
mode to the response x(t)
Modal Participation Factor is |Yi |2 / i |Yi |2
P
|Yi | reduces approximately as ω12 for Ω ωi
i
Tends to zero as Ω ωi
Example: Two DOF system
Consider the 2 DOF system with

m = 10 kg, k = 1 × 105 N/m and
c = 40 Ns/m
Natural Frequencies:
√ ω1 = 100 rad/s
and ω2 = 100 3 rad/s
Modal damping ξ1 = 0.02 and
ξ2 = 0.035
Mode shape vectors are φ1 = √120 [1 1]T
and φ2 = √120 [−1 1]T
Modal Response: Real Part
Modal Response: Imaginary Part
Modal Participation Factors
Physical Response: Amplitude
Physical Response: Phase
Modal Truncation Mode Acceleration Methods
Need for Mode Truncation
We generally cannot solve MDOF problems using all the modes

Suppose we have a FE model with 60,000 DOF
Computationally expensive to extract all modes
Errors in modes/frequencies for higher modes
Not essential to do so for large DOF systems
Usually excitation frequency is bounded
Ωmin ≤ Ω ≤ Ωmax
1
For modes with ωi Ωmax contribution ≈ ωi2
Tends to zero for increasing i
Mode Truncation
The contribution to response decreases for higher frequency

modes
Error introduced by modal truncation is usually small
Errors in response
Errors in spatial representation of excitations
General guideline is to include only modes with natural
frequencies less than 2Ωmax or 2.5Ωmax
Let us now look at an example
Example
Natural Frequencies and Mode shapes
Natural frequencies in rad/s are

7.2, 13.6, 18.1, 37.2, 65.7, 
−0.0141969
66.1, 74.7and 81.9 
−0.0000586 0.6882350


 −0.1546987
 
−0.0004824
 
−0.1006778
−0.1655522
  −0.0002579
   0.0448676 
 
−0.2227714 0.0041270 0
φ1 = −0.2192865 ; φ4 = −0.0000007 ; φ7 = −0.0044866

 −0.1617804 
 −0.0412759 
 0.0006569 

−0.1526868
  −0.0225693
  −0.0002931
 
−0.0144225 0.3517796 0.0000087
Excitation range: 2-25 rad/s
Modal Participation Factors

10
1
Modal Response Amplitude
0.1
Mode 1
10−3 Mode 2
Mode 3
Mode 4
Mode 5
10−4
10−5
0 5 10 15 20 25
Excitation Frequency, rad/s
Physical Response: Full vs. Truncated

x1: All modes
1
x1: First 4 modes
x2: All modes
Response Amplitude x2: First 4 modes
0.1
10−3
0 5 10 15 20 25
Physical Response: Full vs. Truncated

x3: All modes
1
x3: First 4 modes
x6: All modes
Response Amplitude x6: First 4 modes
0.1
10−3
0 5 10 15 20 25
Mode Acceleration method
The modes left out create error in low frequency prediction

Effect is quasi-static since their natural frequencies are quite
high in relation to low frequency excitation
We now describe the method of Hansteen and Bell (1979) for
correction
On the accuracy of mode superposition analysis in structural
dynamics, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 7,
405-411
MAM Procedure
x(t) = Ψr yr (t)+ Ψd yd (t)

The red colored part is the contribution from left out modes Ψd
The relation between the physical and modal force vectors
F(t) = MΨg(t) = MΨr gr (t) + MΨd gd (t)
Let first term be Fr (t) and second Fd (t)
Proposal was to add a static correction due to the second part
of the load
x(t) = Ψr yr (t) + K−1 Fd (t)
Fd (t) = {I − MΨr ΨTr }F(t)
Example
Natural Frequencies and Mode shapes
Natural frequencies in rad/s are

7.2, 13.6, 18.1, 37.2, 65.7, 
−0.0141969
66.1, 74.7and 81.9 
−0.0000586 0.6882350


 −0.1546987
 
−0.0004824
 
−0.1006778
−0.1655522
  −0.0002579
   0.0448676 
 
−0.2227714 0.0041270 0
φ1 = −0.2192865 ; φ4 = −0.0000007 ; φ7 = −0.0044866

 −0.1617804 
 −0.0412759 
 0.0006569 

−0.1526868
  −0.0225693
  −0.0002931
 
−0.0144225 0.3517796 0.0000087
Excitation range: 2-25 rad/s
Mass 1 response
0.1
x1: All modes
x1: First 4 modes
x1: HB MAM
Response Amplitude
10−3
0 5 10 15 20 25
Mass 1 response: Zoomed View

0.02
x1: All modes
x1: First 4 modes
x1: HB MAM
0.01
Response Amplitude
2×10−3
16 18 20 22 24
Mass 3 response
1
x3: All modes
x3: First 4 modes
x3: HB MAM
Response Amplitude
0.1
0.01
0 5 10 15 20 25

0.2
x3: Full model
x3: 4 Mode Truncation
x3: HB MAM
0.1
Response Amplitude
0.02
16 18 20 22 24
Cornwell-Craig-Johnson Version of MAM
We begin with the full modal response vector

y(t) = Ω−1 g(t) − 2ξω ẏ − ÿ

 2
ω1 ... 0 2ξ1 ω1 . . . 0
  
 .. .. .. ; 2ξω =  .. . . .. 
Ω= . . .   . . . 
0 . . . ωN2 0 . . . 2ξN ωN
We now convert to the physical co-ordinates
x(t) = ΨΩ−1 g(t) − 2ξω ẏ − ÿ

For the second term we truncate to only the used modes

x(t) = ΨΩ−1 g(t) − Ψm Ω−1

m 2ξω ẏm + ÿm
Cornwell-Craig-Johnson Version of MAM
Using the fact that g(t) = ΨT F(t)

x(t) = ΨΩ−1 ΨT F(t) − Ψm Ω−1

m 2ξω ẏm + ÿm
This can be written as

x(t) = K−1 F(t) − Ψm Ω−1

m 2ξω ẏm + ÿm
The first term represents the static response due to the
excitation load vector
The second part is the dynamic effect of the retained modes
CCJ MAM 3
A pure displacement based form

x(t) = K−1 F(t) − Ψm Ω−1

m gm (t) − Ωym (t)
x(t) = Ψm ym (t) + K−1 F(t) − Ψm Ω−1

m gm (t)
In this form the Hansteen and Bell is equivalent to the Cornwell,
Craig and Johnson form (1983)
On the applications of mode-acceleration methods to structural
engineering problems, Earthquake Engineering & Structural
Dynamics, 11, 679-688
Mass 1 response
0.1
x1: All modes
x1: First 4 modes
x1: CCJ MAM
Response Amplitude
10−3
5 10 15 20 25

0.02
x1: All modes
x1: First 4 modes
x1: CCJ MAM
0.01
Response Amplitude
2×10−3
16 18 20 22 24
Mass 3 response
1
x3: All modes
x3: First 4 modes
x3: CCJ MAM
Response Amplitude
0.1
0.01
5 10 15 20 25

0.2
x3: All modes
x3: First 4 modes
x3: CCJ MAM
0.1
Response Amplitude
0.02
16 18 20 22 24
Modal Truncation Modal Truncation Augmentation
Mode Truncation Augmentation
Retained eigenvectors do not represent the spatial loading

pattern adequately
Usually chosen based on the frequency content associated with
loads
Several methods exist for taking care of this
Mode Acceleration that we have discussed so far
For base excitation Missing Mass method is used
Residual Stiffness method for random excitation
Here we are proposing an augmentation of the truncated modal
set
Vectors to be derived from the spatial pattern of loads
MTA Explained
We will assume that the force vector can be written as shown

below
F(t) = F0 f (t) ; F0 represents spatial variation of load
Time dependence assumed to be the same for simplicity
Now the transformed equations in modal domain become
ÿi + 2ξi ωi ẏi + ωi2 yi = gi f (t); i = 1, 2, . . . , m
m N with N being the total physical DOF
g = [gr gd ]T = ΨT F0
gd not used in solution construction
MTA 3
The load represented by gr is given by
F0r = MΨr gr
Residual force not represented by modal forces is
F0d = F0 − MΨr gr = I − MΨr ΨTr F0

We had this earlier in the Hansteen & Bell formulation

We now obtain the static response to this load
Solve KZs = F0d
Form augmented stiffness & mass matrices
Ka = ZTs KZs ; Ma = ZTs MZs
Solve the eigenvalue problem Ka Q = ωR2 Ma Q
MTA 4
In our 8 DOF example case Zs is a vector of size N × 1

If we have p loading patterns then Zs is a matrix of size N × p
Ka and Ma are of size p × p
We have p eigenvectors Qk each of size p × 1 for each
eigenvalue ωRk
The p augmented vectors are now simply
ΓR = Zs Q
The augmented modal matrix becomes
h i
Ψa = Ψr ΓR
MTA 5
A modal transformation is now done with augmented modal

matrix Ψa
The set of equations will be as follows
ÿi + 2ξi ωi ẏi + ωi2 yi = gi f (t); i = 1, 2, . . . , m
2 y = g f (t)
ÿj + 2ξRj ωRj ẏj + ωRj j j
j = m + 1, m + 2, . . . , m + p
Decoupling as ΓR orthogonal to Ψr Orthog
ωRj is higher than the retained frequencies ωi

Response now simply obtained as x(t) = Ψa y(t)
Mass 1 response
0.1
x1: Full model
x1: MTA
Response Amplitude
10−3
0 5 10 15 20 25

0.02
x1: Full model
x1: MTA
0.01
Response Amplitude
2×10−3
16 18 20 22 24
MAM vs MTA: Zoomed View

x1: Full model
x1: MTA
x1: Mode Acceleration
Response Amplitude
2×10−3
22 22.5 23 23.5 24 24.5 25
Remarks
We have seen two different mode acceleration methods
These are equivalent to each other and work well in improving
accuracy
The MTA adds a set of eigenvectors using residual load
information
Equivalent to including higher modes
If the damping and inertia term for the augmented set is zero
then MTA becomes MAM
If no modes are included and only MT vectors are generated
Unit loads at selected locations
Leads to Guyan Reduction
Orthogonality Proof
To show ΨTr KZs Q = 0

Using KZs = F0d we have

ΨTr F0d Q = ΨTr I − MΨr ΨTr F0 Q
This becomes ΨTr F0 Q − ΨTr ΨTr MΨr F0 Q

The boxed part is I
This implies that ΨTr KZs Q = 0
Hence Ψr is orthogonal to Zs Q
Go Back
Large System
Courtesy: http://www.aviationabove.com/the-dreamliner-passenger-experience/ Back
Large System
Taken From: D. de Klerk et al., 2008, “General Framework for Dynamic Substructuring: History, Review, and Classification of
Techniques,” AIAA Journal, vol. 46, pp. 1169-1181. Back
Mass Matrix
 
M1 0 0 0 0
 0 M2 0 0 0 
 
 
 0
M= 0 M3 0 0 

 0 0 0 M4 0 


0 0 0 0 M5
Back
Stiffness Matrix
 
K1 + K3 −K1 0 −K3 0
 −K1 K1 + K2 −K2 0 0
 

 
K=
 0 −K 2 K 2 + K 5 + K 6 0 −K 5 

 −K3 0 0 K3 + K4 −K4 


0 0 −K5 −K4 K4 + K 5
Back
Natural Frequencies and Mode Shapes
Natural frequencies in Hz
1.50, 4.51, 5.02, 7.82 and 9.67
First 3 mode shapes
     



−0.3972





−0.5094





−0.1034


−0.3287 −0.4551 −0.4650

 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 

X1 = −0.2310 ; X2 = −0.0355 X3 = −0.3642



 −0.4415






−0.0366





 0.5158 



−0.3814
   0.5145 
  −0.2327
 
Return
Constraint Modes for S2
Return
Compare Mode Shapes
First 3 mode shapes

     



−0.3972





−0.5094





−0.1034


−0.3287 −0.4551 −0.4650

 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 

X1 = −0.2310 ; X2 = −0.0355 X3 = −0.3642
−0.4415 −0.0366
     

















 0.5158 



−0.3814
   0.5145 
  −0.2327
 
Return
After transformation
First 3 mode shapes

     



−0.3972





−0.5094





−0.1034


−0.3287 −0.4551 −0.4650

 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 

X1 = −0.2310 ; X2 = −0.0355 X3 = −0.3642
−0.4415 −0.0366
     

















 0.5158 



−0.3814
   0.5145 
  −0.2327
 
Return

Vibration Concepts: P Chandramouli

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Vibration Concepts: P Chandramouli

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vibration Concepts

January 21/22, 2020

Overview for Harmonic Excitation

We want to solve Mẍ + Cẋ + Kx = FejΩt

We will assume proportional damping so C is not explicitly

Steady-state solution yi (t) = Yi ej(Ωt+φi )

Example: Two DOF system

Consider the 2 DOF system with

Modal Response: Real Part

Modal Response: Imaginary Part

Modal Participation Factors

Physical Response: Amplitude

Physical Response: Phase

Need for Mode Truncation

We generally cannot solve MDOF problems using all the modes

The contribution to response decreases for higher frequency

Natural Frequencies and Mode shapes

Natural frequencies in rad/s are

Excitation range: 2-25 rad/s

Modal Participation Factors

Physical Response: Full vs. Truncated

Physical Response: Full vs. Truncated

Mode Acceleration method

The modes left out create error in low frequency prediction

x(t) = Ψr yr (t)+ Ψd yd (t)

Natural Frequencies and Mode shapes

Natural frequencies in rad/s are

Excitation range: 2-25 rad/s

Mass 1 response: Zoomed View

Mass 3 response: Zoomed View

Cornwell-Craig-Johnson Version of MAM

We begin with the full modal response vector

For the second term we truncate to only the used modes

Cornwell-Craig-Johnson Version of MAM

Using the fact that g(t) = ΨT F(t)

This can be written as

A pure displacement based form

x(t) = Ψm ym (t) + K−1 F(t) − Ψm Ω−1

Mass 1 response: Zoomed View

Mass 3 response: Zoomed View

Mode Truncation Augmentation

Retained eigenvectors do not represent the spatial loading

We will assume that the force vector can be written as shown

We had this earlier in the Hansteen & Bell formulation

Solve the eigenvalue problem Ka Q = ωR2 Ma Q

In our 8 DOF example case Zs is a vector of size N × 1

A modal transformation is now done with augmented modal

ωRj is higher than the retained frequencies ωi

Mass 1 response: Zoomed View

MAM vs MTA: Zoomed View

To show ΨTr KZs Q = 0

This becomes ΨTr F0 Q − ΨTr ΨTr MΨr F0 Q

Courtesy: http://www.aviationabove.com/the-dreamliner-passenger-experience/ Back

Natural Frequencies and Mode Shapes

Constraint Modes for S2

Compare Mode Shapes

First 3 mode shapes

First 3 mode shapes

You might also like