See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/365313038

A Numerical-Based Model to Determine the Resonance of the Steel Cores of

Transformers

Conference Paper · October 2022

DOI: 10.23919/ARWtr54586.2022.9959938

CITATIONS READS

0 31

3 authors, including:

Ali Al-Abadi Marcus Wagner

HITACHI ENERGY Ostbayerische Technische Hochschule Regensburg
40 PUBLICATIONS 100 CITATIONS 130 PUBLICATIONS 678 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ali Al-Abadi on 12 December 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2022 7th International Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers (ARWtr) – Baiona - Spain, (23)24-26 October 2022

A Numerical-Based Model to Determine the

Resonance of the Steel Cores of Transformers
Ali Al-Abadi, Member, IEEE, Stefan Buchner and Marcus Wagner

Φ
Abstract— The laminated steel core of transformers is one core steps was presented in [4]. In [5] a FEM model to predict
of the main sources of the generated sound, as it is excited by transformer core noise was developed by using COMSOL.
different electromagnetic effects during its normal operation. If The prediction tool can be used to demonstrate the influence
the core is excited in its eigenfrequencies, the sound generated by
of various material properties and geometrical parameters on
a transformer will increase significantly. Therefore, knowledge
of the core’s eigenmodes and -frequencies in an early design the sound power levels of transformer core noise. FEM
stage can decrease expenses by avoiding costly modifications that simulation results were compared with experimental
might be required to avoid the sound levels exceeding the measurements. However, the FEM simulations are only valid
specified values after the final factory acceptance test. The for a limited range of the investigated core dimensions, as it
current study focuses on developing a core resonance model to requires correction factors to validate it with the
determine the eigenmodes and -frequencies of a transformer
measurements. In addition, the FEM simulation is expensive
core. The core’s geometry was simplified to a connected-beam
structure and a numerical-based approach was applied. The and requires lengthy computation time. In general, almost all
accuracy of the developed model was validated against finite the available literature focuses on analysing the transformer
element method (FEM), using ANSYS on a reference three-leg core through FEM simulations or experimental
core model. measurements.
The current study presents a core resonance model
Index Terms— core resonance, modal analysis, finite element constructed with low computing time and an acceptable
methods, no-load sound level, transformer.
accuracy. The geometry of the core was simplified to a
connected-beam structure, and a numerical-based approach
I. INTRODUCTION
was applied. The model was set up to calculate the
T
C ore resonance, if it occurs, is one of the main reasons
for the increase in the sound level generated by
transformers during no-load operation. As the core represents
eigenmodes and -frequencies of the core. The accuracy of the
developed model was validated against the FEM, using
ANSYS on a reference core model. The current version of the
a large proportion of the total transformer mass, an excitation developed model only covers the three-leg core-type
in its eigenfrequencies leads to a significant increase in the transformer design. Other core designs like, four and five-leg
dynamic behaviour of the core laminations and, hence, an are under development.
increase in the generated sound. Therefore, it is crucial to
avoid excitation of the core’s eigenfrequencies. II. MAIN COMPONENTS OF A TRANSFORMER CORE
The sound emitted by a transformer’s core is regulated by
As shown in Figure 1, the model used in this study to
legislation and has to comply with customer specifications for
examine the transformer core consists of three limbs
the sound level, and this should be verified in the factory
connected by yokes at the top and at the bottom.
acceptance test. Knowledge regarding the eigenfrequencies
and the correlated eigenmodes of the transformer’s core in an
early design stage can decrease expenses through avoiding
costly modifications of the design at a later stage if the
specified sound level is exceeded.
The finite element method (FEM) simulation tools are
effective and can initially be used to construct a core
resonance model for daily use. Investigation of the vibration
characteristics for monitoring of power transformer were
performed using a developed FEM model of the complete
winding assembly and core [1, 2]. Analysis of natural
frequency of a FEM numerical model of transformer core with
winding to map structural dynamics and vibrations of its
selected parts with respect of the mechanical resonance was
presented in [3]. A FEM simulation-based model that was
developed based on performing bunch of FEM simulations to
generate design curves to determine the local resonance of the
Fig. 1. Structure of the here examined transformer core.

A. Al-Abadi is with Hitachi Energy, 59929 Brilon, Germany. (ali.al-

abadi@hitachienergy.com)
S. Buchner and M. Wagner are with Ostbayerische Technische
Hochschule (OTH) Regensburg, Laboratory of Finite-Element-Analysis,
93053 Regensburg, Germany.
978-84-09-43125-0 /22 © 2022 Red iNtransf
36
2022 7th International Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers (ARWtr) – Baiona - Spain, (23)24-26 October 2022

B. Stiffness Matrix of the Finite Beam Element

To reduce eddy current losses, the yokes and limbs were
composed of laminations that were electrically isolated from
each other, as shown in cross section A-A. The laminations
were fixed in position through a frictional connection. For this
purpose, a clamping structure was applied at the top and the
bottom yokes to press the laminations together. The clamping
structures were connected by tie bars. Two feet were bolted
on to the clamping structure on the bottom yoke, and the
transformer core was connected to the remaining structure of
the transformer via the feet.
III. CORE RESONANCE MODEL
The core resonance model (CRM) was based on the FEM.
The governing equation for an FEM-based modal analysis is
described by the generalized eigenvalue problem as
g ⋅ g ⋅ 0,
Reduced integrated Timoshenko elements were used to
discretize the beam structure of the simplified transformer
core in the developed model. Since the beam structure of the
transformer core contains vertical and horizontal beam
sections, a suitable finite element must have a rotational DoF
ψe,i at each node, a DoF perpendicular to the element’s length
we,i, and a DoF along the element’s length ue,i. Figure 3 shows
the required DoF of a two-nodded element. According to [6],
the element’s stiffness matrix Ke can be split into two parts,
namely,
• The bar element that defines the stiffness of axial
forces, containing the DoF ue,i and
• The beam element that defines the stiffness of
transverse forces and in-plane moments, containing
the DoF we,i and ψe,i.
(1)

where the squared circular eigenfrequency ω is the

eigenvalue of the problem. For each eigenfrequency ω, the
eigenvector Φ contains the displacements of the global nodes
for each of their degrees of freedom (DoFs). Therefore, the
eigenvector Φ characterizes the eigenmodes of the evaluated
Fig. 3. Required DoF of a two-nodded in-plane beam element.

structure. The global stiffness matrix g is a result of a Once the stiffness matrices of both parts have been
multiple local stiffness matrices of each finite element determined, the combined stiffness matrix of the element is
transformed into the global coordinate system. The global derived by merging the stiffness matrices of the bar and the
mass matrix g results from the local mass matrices of each beam element. Thereby, kbe,ij and kba,ij represent the
finite element transformed into the global coordinate system. components of the two merged stiffness matrices.
The discretization of the transformer core as well as the
, 0 0 , 0 0
derivation of global and local stiffness and mass matrices are ⎡ ⎤
shown in the following sections. ⎢ 0 , , 0 , , ⎥
⎢ 0 , , 0 , , ⎥
A. Discretization of the Transformer Core Geometry ⎢ , 0 0 , 0 0 ⎥
(2)
⎢ ⎥
To minimize the computing time of the model, the
⎢ 0 , , 0 , , ⎥
0 0
geometry of the transformer core was simplified to a
⎣ , , , , ⎦
connected-beam structure. Based on this simplification, the
transformer core was discretized by finite beam elements. According to [6], the stiffness matrix of a bar element can
Figure 2 shows the discretized beam structure of the be obtained by assuming that the bar behaves like a spring.
transformer core. The geometry of the core in the model was Figure 4 displays the equivalent system with its DoF e, , and
defined by eight key points (kps). The kps are connected to the spring forces e, .
each other by nine beam sections. To discretize the simplified
core, nodes were placed along each beam section and beam
elements were defined between corresponding nodes.

Fig. 4. Equivalent system of a linear bar element

The stiffness of a bar with the element length ! , the cross-

sectional area "#$%&& and the Young’s modulus '
+⋅,cross
bar (3)
0e

is obtained by using Hooke’s law σ = ε ·E. The spring forces

e, bar ⋅1 e, e, 2 (4)
Fig. 2. Discretization of the connected-beam structure as a simplified model
for the transformer core.
e, bar ⋅1 e, e, 2 (5)

978-84-XX-XXXXX-X /22 © 2022 Red iNtransf

37
2022 7th International Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers (ARWtr) – Baiona - Spain, (23)24-26 October 2022

can be obtained from the displacements e, and e, . Using To eliminate this error, the falsely occurring shear strain is
the matrix notation for (4) and (5) purposely ignored with the use of the Gaussian quadrature
with only one Gauss point in the centre of the beam element.
, ,
3 4 5 6⋅ 8 9 (6) The stiffness matrix of a Timoshenko element of length le, is
, :;;;;;;<;;;;;;=
, obtained by the Gauss quadrature with one central Gauss point
>?,@AB [6] is,
leads to the stiffness matrix of the linear bar element of the L L L L
length le ⎡ 0? 0? ⎤
⎢ L L 0? + NOO L L 0? + NOO ⎥
+ ,CBDEE 1 1 ⎢ M ⎥
0? 0?
, $ F H (7) ⎢ ⎥
1 1
0? ,JK L L L L
(8)
⎢ 0? 0? ⎥
A reduced integrated linear Timoshenko element is used ⎢ L L 0? + NOO L L 0? + NOO ⎥
⎣ M
for the beam element because this analysis is reliable for thick 0? 0? ⎦
beams. This is due to the independence of the rotational DoF
ψe,i. from the transverse DoF we,i. However, the Timoshenko with
beam contains simplifications that can impair the results of λ s "cross R, (9)
the derived model, for example,
• The cross sections are assumed to remain flat, and where E is the Young’s modulus G is the shear modulus, s is
• The shear stress over the cross section is simplified to the shear stress factor and STT is the second moment of inertia
a constant distribution applied on a shear area, which of the beam’s cross-section.
is shown in Fig. 5.
C. Mass Matrix of the Finite-Beam-Element
In this study, the mass matrix of one finite element Me is
subdivided into a mass matrix of a bar element and a mass
matrix of a beam element. The combination of both matrices
is analogous to (2). In the following equations the mass
matrices are calculated according to [6].
The mass matrix of a linear bar element with the length !
and the density U is,
Fig. 5. Simplification of the shear stress distribution of a Timoshenko beam.

The shear area "s is derived from the cross-sectional area V ,CBDEE 0? 2 1
F H
"cross , using shear stress factors s "s ⁄"cross . A selection $ (10)
W 1 2
of shear factors can be found in [6]. Furthermore, the reduced
The mass matrix of the beam element results from the
integration eliminates the shear locking effect that occurs in
summation
the thin beam when linear elements are used.
The effect originates from the linear shape functions that beam beam,t M beam,r (11)
are unable to replicate the deformation that occurs in reality.
Figure 6a) shows the deformation that occurs in reality and of a matrix representing the translational inertia
6b) the deformation of the linear, analytically integrated
156 22 ! 54 13 !
Timoshenko element for a pure bending. As the shape ⎡ ⎤
functions are linear, the beam element performed deformation V ,CBDEE 0?
⎢ 22 ! 4! 13 ! 3 ! ⎥
⎢ 54 13 ! 156 22 ! ⎥
[,\ (12)
]
causes a shear strain γ, which does not occur in reality [7].
⎣ 13 ! 3! 22 ! 4 ! ⎦

and a matrix representing the rotational inertia

36 3! 36 3 !
⎡ ⎤
V NOO
⎢ 3 ! 4 ! 3! ! ⎥
36 3 ! 36 3! ⎥
[,$ (13)
] 0? ⎢
⎣ 3! ! 3! 4! ⎦
D. Generation of the Global Stiffness and Mass Matrix
The stiffness and mass matrix of the element type (Sec. III-
C) is applied to each element, defined by the discretization
(Sec. III-B).
To derive the global stiffness and mass matrix, each of the
locally defined matrices should be transformed into the global
coordinate system. Thereafter, the transformed matrices are
Fig. 6. Comparison of the deformation that occurs in reality a) and the
deformation of the linear, analytically integrated Timoshenko element b) for
assembled to the corresponding global matrix. This process is
a pure bending deformation. the same for the generation of the global stiffness matrix Kg
and the global mass matrix Mg. For this reason, only the

978-84-XX-XXXXX-X /22 © 2022 Red iNtransf

38
2022 7th International Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers (ARWtr) – Baiona - Spain, (23)24-26 October 2022

generation of the global stiffness matrix is presented in the

following. TABLE I
MAPPING OF THE MATRIX ELEMENTS OF THE ELEMENT’S
Figure 7 shows a finite element with its local DoF (ue,i, we,i
STIFFNESS MATRIX Ke IN THE GLOBAL STIFFNESS MATRIX Kg.
and ψe,i), and the global coordinate system (ug, wg and ψg).

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Fig. 7. Finite element with its local DoF (index e), which is rotated by the
angle Θ for the global coordinate system (index g). To derive the eigenmodes and -frequencies of a
transformer core with the CRM, the second moment of area
The length and position of each element in the global must be calculated. Figure 8 shows the simplified cross
coordinate system is defined by the discretization. To section of the yokes and limbs of the transformer core. The
combine all finite elements, their stiffness and mass matrices cross section consists of several laminated steps with different
should be transformed from their local coordinate system 0 heights hi and widths ti. As the laminations are clamped, it can
b b
and 0 into the global coordinate system and . be assumed that the relative displacements between the
According to [6], the stiffness matrix is achieved by, laminations are negligible. Therefore, the laminations are
g
considered as one solid part. The y-y axis is perpendicular to
e cT ⋅ l
e ⋅ c, (14) the plane in which the evaluated in-plane eigenmodes of the
transformer core are situated. The cross section is symmetrical
and the mass matrix,
to the x-x axis.
g
e cT ⋅ l
e ⋅ c, (15)

using the transformation matrix,

cos Φ sin Φ 0 0 0 0
⎡ ⎤
sin Φ cos Φ 0 0 0 0
⎢ ⎥
⎢ 0 0 1 0 0 0⎥
c (16)
⎢ 0 0 0 cos Φ sin Φ 0⎥
⎢ 0 0 0 sin Φ cos Φ 0⎥
⎣ 0 0 0 0 0 1⎦
where Θ is the rotation angle between the local and the global
coordinate systems (Fig. 7).
Once the finite element stiffness matrices are converted
into global coordinates, they can be combined with the global
stiffness matrix by adding them together while considering Fig. 8. Simplified cross section of the yokes and limbs of the transformer core
the particular DoFs. Each component of the stiffness matrix to one solid part.
of a finite element refers to a DoF of a global node. The global
nodes are defined by the discretization and are numerated. To calculate the second moment of inertia with regard to
Each element is defined between two global nodes i and j, the y-y axis, one half of the symmetrical cross section is
which have the node numbers ni and nj. If the two global node subdivided into six rectangles to represent the number of steps
numbers n1 and n2 of the finite element are known, the row in the investigated core geometry. The second moment of
nrow,g and column ncol,g can be determined, to which the inertia of each rectangular step with the height hi and width ti
components of its stiffness matrix Ke have to be added in the is
global stiffness matrix Kg. Table I shows the stiffness matrix
\i ji
of the implemented finite element. The first row and the first Syy, . (17)
column of Table I show the calculation rules that define row
nrow,g and column ncol,g in the global stiffness matrix Kg, to The second moment of inertia of the entire cross section is
which each component of the element’s stiffness matrix Ke
Syy
sum
2 ⋅ ∑Wn Syy, , (18)
has to be added to.
which results from the sum of its components Syy, .

978-84-XX-XXXXX-X /22 © 2022 Red iNtransf

39
2022 7th International Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers (ARWtr) – Baiona - Spain, (23)24-26 October 2022
The reference core model was investigated with FEM and
the developed CRM and the resulting eigenmodes and -
frequencies were compared. To evaluate the correlation
between the eigenmodes of the two models, the modal
assurance criterion (MAC) was applied [8], namely,
w
T ⋅q
1qref ,i CRM,v 2
"o ,p T ⋅q T (19)
xqref,i ref,i y⋅xqCRM,v ⋅qCRM,v y
This MAC criterion compares mode i of the FEM model
(reference) to mode j of the developed CRM. For this purpose,
the corresponding eigenvectors of both models, ref, and
CRM,p, were used. There was good correlation for MAC > 0.8
and almost no correlation for MAC < 0.3 [8].
A. Reference Model
The reference model was set up with the finite element
software ANSYS Workbench 2021 R2. Figure 9 shows the
three-dimensional discretized model of the transformer core.
The developed CRM does not contain the clamping structure
of the transformer core, as shown in Fig. 1, and it was also
omitted in the reference model. The implementation and
validation of the clamping structure is beyond the scope of the
current study and intended to be included in a future study.
Fig. 9. Three-dimensional discretized reference model of the transformer
core, set up in ANSYS Workbench 2021 R2.
The boundary conditions were applied on the contact
surface of the core and feet with a fixed support (Fig. 1). The
support surfaces are marked red in Fig. 9. The core of the
transformer is discretized by quadratic, tetrahedron, and
hexahedron elements. Therefore, there are no simplification
regarding the core’s dimensions. The model includes the step-
lap corners, which are not included in the CRM. The
generated mesh contains 1,163,843 nodes with three DoFs
each. The currently developed CRM is two dimensional, and,
therefore, only the in-core-plane eigenmodes and the
corresponding eigenfrequencies of the reference model were
978-84-XX-XXXXX-X /22 © 2022 Red iNtransf
40
considered. To calculate the MAC, the eigenvectors of the
modes being compared must be of the same length. The
eigenvectors contain the displacement for each DoF at each
node. The reference model is discretized with three-
dimensional elements and, therefore, have three translational
DoFs per node. The developed CRM simplifies the geometry
of the transformer core to a beam structure. For this reason,
the nodes of the CRM were distributed along the centre line
of the core, as displayed in Fig. 9. Each of the nodes has two
translational and one rotational DoF. Therefore, the
displacements of the reference model were evaluated at the
node positions of the CRM. The MAC criterion can then be
calculated, using the in-plane translational DoF of the
comparison models.
B. Comparison of the Core Resonance Model and the
Reference Model
For the Comparison of the two models, steel with density
ρ 7850 kg⁄m , Young’s modulus ' 2 ⋅ 10~ N⁄mm
and shear modulus R 76.92 ⋅ 10 N⁄mm was used. The
beam structure of the CRM is congruent to the centre line of
the transformer core, as displayed in Fig. 9. The CRM has two
fixed supports at the key points 5 and 7 (Fig. 2). The modes
of the CRM and the reference model were compared.
Therefore, the modes of the two models that correspond to
each other were assigned with the use of the MAC. Then the
corresponding modes were evaluated for each mode
combination for the first ten modes of the reference model.
The mode of the CRM that led to the highest MAC value was
assigned to each mode of the reference model. Table II lists
the corresponding mode numbers, the MAC values, and the
resulting relative deviations of the eigenfrequencies of the
modes assigned to each other.
TABLE II
COMPARISON OF THE REFERENCE MODEL AND THE CORE
RESONANCE MODEL.
Furthermore, the first four corresponding eigenmodes and
the correlated eigenfrequencies are displayed in Table III. The
mode numbers in Table III indicate analogous to the first two
columns of Table II, which mode of the CRM was assigned to
the reference model. The MAC values of the compared modes
are higher than 0.81. Therefore, the eigenmodes that were
assigned to each other were well correlated.
The mode numbers in Table II show that the first ten modes
of the CRM were assigned to the first ten modes of the
reference model. Therefore, it can be concluded that, in the
evaluated range, the CRM did find all modes of the reference
model and did not return any additional modes.
2022 7th International Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers (ARWtr) – Baiona - Spain, (23)24-26 October 2022
TABLE III
COMPARISON OF THE IN-PLANE EIGENMODES AND -
FREQUENCIES OF THE TRANSFORMER CORE, DETERMINED BY
THE REFERENCE MODEL AND THE CORE RESONANCE MODEL.
The relative deviation between the assigned modes of the
two models was less than 12.5%, which indicates a sufficient
accuracy of the CRM. The deviations are partly due to the
assumption made by the CRM that the beam sections have a
constant cross section. This assumption is not perfectly valid
at the connections of the limbs and yokes. At these
connections, the cross section is normally larger, and thus,
stiffer than the limbs and yokes cross sections. This
assumption leads to an error especially for eigenmodes, where
high a rotation occurs and creates angles which deviate from
the rectangular connection of the yokes and limbs at the
intersection locations. This angle deviation in the connection
points explains the deviations in the modes 3 and 4 of the
reference model and the corresponding modes of the CRM.
The accuracy of the developed CRM could be improved by
considering the larger area at the connection points of the
yokes and the limbs.
V. CONCLUSION
In this study, a FEM-based core resonance model (CRM)
that requires low computing time was developed to determine
the eigenmodes and -frequencies of a transformer core at an
early design stage. The comparison of the CRM and a
reference model has shown that a simplification of the
978-84-XX-XXXXX-X /22 © 2022 Red iNtransf
41
View publication stats
transformer core to a connected-beam structure is suitable for
this purpose. The validation with a detailed, three-
dimensional discretized FEM model shows good agreement.
The current version of the developed CRM only covers the
three-leg core design. Other core designs like, four and five-
leg and the air-gapped core are under development.
Furthermore, relevant attaching parts like tie bars, clamping
structure and feet (Fig. 1) as well as clamping forces were not
taken into account. Therefore, these must be incorporated to
improve the accuracy of the CRM. The CRM should still be
validated through an experimental modal analysis.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] Wang Y. Transformer vibration and its application to condition
monitoring. Ph.D. Thesis, 2015.
[2] Wang, Y., Pan, J., Jin, M., Finite element modelling of the vibration of
a power transformer. Proc. Acoustics 2001, 24 November, Gold Coast,
Australia, paper No. 34, 2001
[3] L. Koudela, et. al, Analysis of natural frequencies in the transformer
core, CPEE – AMTEE 2015: Joint conference Computational Problems
of Electrical Engineering and Advanced Methods of the Theory of
Electrical Engineering: Třebíč, Czech Republic, 6th – 8th September
2015.
[4] Ahmed Gamil, Franz Schatzl, and Ali Al-Abadi. Simulation-Based
Investigation for Local Resonance Frequencies in Power Transformer
Core. DAGA-44. Jahrestagung für Akustik, Munich, Germany,2018.
[5] R. Haettel, M. Kavasoglu, A. Daneryd and C. Ploetner, Prediction of
Transformer Core Noise, Excerpt from the Proceedings of the 2014
COMSOL Conference in Cambridge, 2014
[6] M. Merkel and A. Öchsner. Eindimensionale Finite Elemente. Ein
Einstieg in die Methode. 2., Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin
Heidelberg, 2014.
[7] M. Wagner. Lineare und nichtlineare FEM. Eine Einführung mit
Anwendungen in der Umformsimulation mit LS-DYNA®. 3rd ed.
Springer eBook Collection. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien
Wiesbaden and Imprint Springer Vieweg, 2022.
[8] H. Dresig and A. Fidlin. Schwingungen mechanischer Antriebssysteme.
Modellbildung, Berechnung, Analyse, Synthese. 4., korrigierte
Auflage. Springer eBook Collection. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer
Vieweg, 2020.
VII. BIOGRAPHY
Ali Al-Abadi graduated from University of Baghdad, Iraq in 1997 for B.Sc.
and in 2000 for M.Sc. He received the Dr.-Ing. degree from Friedrich-
Alexander-University, Erlangen, Germany. From 2010 to 2015 he worked as
research assistant and research associate at the same University. He was
responsible for industrial projects. Ali joined SGB-SMIT Group located in
Regensburg, Germany in 2015 as a Senior Expert and Team Leader of the
global R&D Projects. In 2022 he joined Hitachi Energy located in Brilon,
Germany as a Principal Engineer. His main experiences are sound and
vibrations, thermal modelling, losses, and magnetic-field calculations of
transformers. Ali is an active member of IEEE, DAGA and ASME, and a
participant member in the CIGRE working group WG-A2.54. He has been
publishing, presenting, and reviewing many scientific and technical papers in
the international conferences and peer review journals. Ali is an active
contributor in power transformers and wind energy sectors.
Stefan Buchner graduated from the OTH Regensburg, Germany in 2020 for
B. Eng. and in 2022 for M.Sc. Since March 2021 he works as a technical
associate in the department for finite element analysis at the OTH
Regensburg.
Marcus Wagner received a diploma in mechanical engineering from the
University of Stuttgart in 1995 and the Dr.-Ing. in 2000. After a post-doc at
Stanford University where he worked on model-reduction techniques for
multi-frequency acoustic fluid-structure interaction problems, he joined the
BMW group in Munich 2002. He worked there as a computational engineer
in the field of sheet metal forming simulation. In 2011 Marcus received a call
to the OTH Regensburg, where he serves as the head of the laboratories for
Finite-Element-Analysis as well as Structural Dynamics and Analysis. Major
fields of interest are numerical methods for short-time dynamics, exterior
acoustics, structural dynamics, numerical simulation of sheet metal forming
and combination of numerical methods with methods from machine learning.