Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Modal Testing
Application Note 243 - 3
i j /m
() =
r=1
( n - 2)2 + (2n ) 2
2
Preface
Table of Contents
Preface
Introduction
11
12
System Assumptions
13
14
Introduction
14
15
16
18
Shaker Testing
19
Impact Testing
22
Transduction
25
Measurement Interpretation
29
30
Measurement Averaging
30
31
32
Complete Survey
34
38
Introduction
38
Modal Parameters
39
40
41
43
Multiple Mode-Methods
45
47
48
Introduction
48
Structural Modification
49
50
52
53
Bibliography
54
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1
Phases of a
modal test
Test Structure
ir jr
n
ij() =
2
r = 1 mr ( - 2 + j2r)
r
Modal Parameters
Frequency
Damping
{} Mode Shape
Figure 1.2
SDOF discrete
parameter model
Damper c
Spring k
Response
Displacement (x)
Figure 1.3
Equation of
motion
modal definitions
Figure 1.4
Complex roots
of SDOF
equation
Excitation
Force (f)
Mass m
.
..
mx + cx + kx = f(t)
c or = c
n2 = k , 2n =
m
2km
m
s1,2 = - + jd
Damping Rate
Damped Natural Frequency
Figure 1.5
SDOF
impulse
response/
free decay
e - t
Figure 1.6
Frequency
response
polar
coordinates
Magnitude
H() =
1/m
(n - ) + (2n ) 2
2
2 2
Phase
() = tan-1
2n
n2 -2
Figure 1.7
Frequency
response
rectangular
coordinates
Real
H() =
(n -2)2 + (2n ) 2
Imaginary
2n - 2
2
H() =
-2n
(n -2)2 + (2n ) 2
2
Figure 1.8
Nyquist plot
of frequency
response
()
H()
Figure 1.9
Different forms
of frequency
response
Displacement
1
k
1
2m
Table 1.1
Different forms
of frequency response
Response
Variable
Compliance
X
F
Displacement
Force
Mobility
V
F
Velocity
Force
Accelerance
A
F
Acceleration
Force
Frequency
Velocity
Definition
1
m
Frequency
Acceleration
1
m
2
k
Frequency
Figure 1.10
MDOF discrete
parameter model
k2
c1
m2
m1
k3
c2
k4
c3
c4
m
3
Figure 1.11
Equations of
motion
modal definitions
..
.
[m]{x} + [c]{x} + [k]{x} = {f(t)}
{}r , r = 1, n modes
Figure 1.12
MDOF impulse
response/
free decay
Amplitude
k1
0.0
Sec
6.0
Figure 1.13
MDOF frequency
response
dB Magnitude
i j /m
() =
r=1
( n - 2)2 + (2n ) 2
2
0.0
1
Figure 1.14
SDOF modal
contributions
Frequency
Mode 1
Mode 3
dB Magnitude
Mode 2
0.0
1
10
Frequency
Figure 1.15
Viscous damping
energy dissipation
.
cx
E = ceq X2
Force vs Displacement
Figure 1.16
System
block diagram
Input
Excitation
G(s)
Output
Response
System
Figure 1.17
Definition of
transfer function
Transfer Function =
G(s) =
Output
Input
Y(s)
X(s)
11
12
Figure 1.18
S-plane
representation
i
d
n
s-plane
System Assumptions
Figure 1.19
3-D Laplace
representation
j
Real Part
j
Imaginary Part
j
Magnitude
Phase
13
Chapter 2
14
Figure 2.1
System block
diagram
Excitation
X()
H()
Y()
Figure 2.2
Structure
under test
Structure
Force Transducer
Shaker
Response
Figure 2.3
General test
configuration
Controller
Analyzer
Structure
Transducers
Exciter
15
16
Figure 2.4a
Example of
free support
situation
Free
Boundary
Figure 2.4b
Example of
constrained
support
situation
Constrained
Boundary
system is used, the rigid body frequencies will be much lower than the
frequencies of the flexible modes and
thus have negligible effect. The rule
of thumb for free supports is that the
highest rigid body mode frequency
must be less than one tenth that of
the first flexible mode. If this criterion is met, rigid body modes will have
negligible effect on flexible modes.
Figure 2.5 shows a typical frequency
response measurement of this type
with nonzero rigid body modes.
response of the base at the attachment points over the frequency range
of interest. Then, verify that this
response is significantly lower than
the corresponding response of the
structure, in which case it will have
a negligible effect. However, the
frequency response may not be measurable, but can still influence the
test results.
There is not a best practical or
appropriate method for supporting
a structure for frequency response
testing. Each situation has its own
characteristics. From a practical
standpoint, it would not be feasible
to support a large factory machine
weighing several tons in a free test
state. On the other hand, there may
be no convenient way to ground a
very small, lightweight device for the
constrained test state. A situation
could occur, with a satellite for example, where the results of both tests
are desired. The free test is required
to analyze the satellites operating
environment in space. However, the
constrained test is also needed to
assess the launch environment
attached to the boost vehicle.
Another reason for choosing the
appropriate boundary conditions is
for finite element model correlation
or substructure coupling analyses. At
any rate, it is certainly important during this phase of the test to ascertain
all the conditions in which the results
may be used.
Figure 2.5
Frequency
response
of freely
suspended
system
FREQ RESP
50.0
10.0
/Div
-30.0
FxdXY 0
Hz
1.5625k
17
Table 2.1
Excitation
functions
Minimze leakage
Signal to noise
RMS to peak ratio
Test measurement time
Controlled frequency content
Controlled amplitude content
Removes distortion
Characterize nonlinearity
Sine
steady
state
No
Very
high
High
Very
long
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
A full function dynamic signal analyzer will have a signal source with a
sufficient number of functions for
exciting the structure. With lower
quality analyzers, it may be necessary
to obtain a signal source as a separate part of the signal processing
equipment. These sources often
provide fixed sine and true random
functions as signals; however, these
may not be acceptable in applications
where high levels of accuracy are
desired. The types of functions
available have a significant influence
on measurement quality.
True
random
Periodic*
in analyzer window
Pseudo
Random
random
No
Fair
Yes
Fair
Fair
Good
Fair
Very
good
Yes*
Yes*
No
No
Yes*
No
Yes
No
18
Fast
sine
Transient
in analyzer window
Impact
Burst
sine
Burst
random
Yes
Fair
Yes
High
Yes
Low
Yes
High
Yes
Fair
Fair
Fair
High
Fair
Yes*
No
Yes
No
Yes*
Yes*
No
Yes
Low
Very
good
No
No
No
No
High
Very
good
Yes*
Yes*
No
Yes
Fair
Very
good
Yes*
No
Yes
No
Shaker Testing
The most useful shakers for modal
testing are the electromagnetic
shown in Fig. 2.6 (often called
electrodynamic) and the electro
hydraulic (or, hydraulic) types. With
the electromagnetic shaker, (the more
common of the two), force is generated by an alternating current that
drives a magnetic coil. The maximum
frequency limit varies from approximately 5 kHz to 20 kHz depending
on the size; the smaller shakers
having the higher operating range.
The maximum force rating is also a
function of the size of the shaker and
varies from approximately 2 lbf to
1000 lbf; the smaller the shaker, the
lower the force rating.
With hydraulic shakers, force
is generated through the use of
hydraulics, which can provide much
higher force levels some up to
several thousand pounds. The maximum frequency range is much lower
though about 1 kHz and below. An
advantage of the hydraulic shaker is
its ability to apply a large static preload to the structure. This is useful
for massive structures such as grinding machines that operate under
relatively high preloads which may
alter their structural characteristics.
19
Figure 2.6
Electrodynamic
shaker with
power amplifier
and signal source
Power Amplifier
Figure 2.7
Mass loading
from shaker
setup
Ax
Structure
Fs
Loading
Mass
Fm
Load
Cell
F1
Fs = Fm - MmAx
20
Figure 2.8
Stinger
attachment
to structure
Figure 2.9
Test support
mechanisms
Figure 2.10
Shaker/structure
impedance
mismatch
FREQ RESP
40.0
30 Avg
50%Ovlp
Hann
dB
FRF
-40.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
POWER SPEC1
-20.0
dB
30 Avg
Hz
50%Ovlp
2.1k
Hann
Force Spectrum
rms
V2
-100
Fxd Y 1.1k
Hz
2.1k
21
Impact Testing
Another common excitation mechanism in modal testing is an impact
device. Although it is a relatively
simple technique to implement, its
difficult to obtain consistent results.
The convenience of this technique
is attractive because it requires very
little hardware and provides shorter
measurement times. The method of
applying the impulse, shown in Figure
2.11, includes a hammer, an electric
gun or a suspended mass. The hammer, the most common of these, is
used in the following discussion.
However, this information also
applies to the other types of
impact devices.
Since the force is an impulse, the
amplitude level of the energy applied
to the structure is a function of the
mass and the velocity of the hammer.
This is due to the concept of linear
momentum, which is defined as mass
times velocity. The linear impulse is
equal to the incremental change in
the linear momentum. It is difficult
though to control the velocity of the
hammer, so the force level is usually
controlled by varying the mass.
Impact hammers are available in
weights varying from a few ounces to
several pounds. Also, mass can be
added to or removed from most hammers, making them useful for testing
objects of varying sizes and weights.
The frequency content of the energy
applied to the structure is a function
of the stiffness of the contacting surfaces and, to a lesser extent, the mass
of the hammer. The stiffness of the
contacting surfaces affects the shape
of the force pulse, which in turn
determines the frequency content.
Figure 2.11
Impact devices
for testing
Figure 2.12
Frequency
content of
various pulses
350
m
Hard
50.0
m
/Div
Medium
Real
Soft
v
Pulse
-50.0
m
Fxd Y -46.9
15.9m
Sec
1Avg
POWER SPEC1
0%Ovlp
Fr/Ex
-50.0
10.0
/Div
Hard
Medium
dB
Soft
rms
v2
-130
Fxd X
22
0%Ovlp
FILT TIIME1
Hz
2.5k
Figure 2.13
Useful frequency
range of pulse
spectrum
Figure 2.14
Force pulse
with force
window applied
1Avg
POWER SPEC1
0%Ovlp
Fr/Ex
-50.0
10.0
/Div
-72 dB
-88 dB
dB
rms
v2
-130
Fxd Y
2.5k
Hz
0%Ovlp
FILT TIIME1
120
m
20.0
m
/Div
Real
v
-40.0
m
Fxd X
250
100m
Sec
Force Pulse
Ampl
1.0
Time
Force Window
23
Figure 2.15
Decaying
response with
exponential
window applied
FILT TIIME2
No Data
250
m
62.5
m
/Div
Response
Real
v
-250
m
Fxd Y
0.0
512m
Sec
Exponential Window
Time
WIND TIIME2
0% Ovlp
250
m
62.5
m
/Div
Windowed Response
Real
v
-250
m
Fxd Y
24
0.0
Sec
512m
Transduction
Now that an excitation system has
been set up to force the structure into
motion, the transducers for sensing
force and motion need to be selected.
Although there are various types of
transducers, the piezoelectric type
is the most widely used for modal
testing. It has wide frequency and
dynamic ranges, good linearity and is
relatively durable. The piezoelectric
transducer is an electromechanical
sensor that generates an electrical
output when subjected to vibration.
This is accomplished with a crystal
element that creates an electrical
charge when mechanically strained.
Figure 2.16
Frequency
response of
transducer
dB Mag
Frequency
Figure 2.17
Stud mounted
load cell
25
Figure 2.18
Frequency
response of
transducer
20k-25k
Stud
15k-20k
Cement, Wax
5k-7k
Magnet
26
Figure 2.19
Mass loading
from
accelerometer
3Avg
FREQ RESP
50.0
0%Ovlp
FR/Ex
Frequency
10.0
/Div
Amplitude
dB
-30.0
Fxd Y
Hz
2.5k
27
Figure 2.20
Example of
the input
half ranging
INST TIME2
COHERENCE
1.1
80.0
m
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
50 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
Hann
Mag
20.0
m
/Div
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
Real
2.1k
v
dB
-80.0
m
Fxd XY
-40.0
0.0
Sec
8.0m
Hz
Fxd XY 1.1k
2.1k
Figure 2.21
Example of
the input
under ranging
INST TIME2
COHERENCE
1.1
130
m
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
50 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
Hann
Mag
32.5
m
/Div
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
Real
2.1k
v
dB
-130
m
Fxd XY
-40.0
0.0
Sec
8.0m
Hz
Fxd XY 1.1k
2.1k
Figure 2.22
Example of
the input
over ranging
INST TIME2
Ov2
80.0
m
COHERENCE
1.1
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
Ov2
50 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
Hann
2.1k
Ov2
Mag
20.0
m
/Div
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
Real
v
dB
-80.0
m
Fxd X
28
-40.0
0.0
Sec
8.0m
Fxd XY 1.1k
Hz
2.1k
Measurement Interpretation
Having discussed the mechanics of
setting up a modal test, it is appropriate at this point to make some trial
measurements and examine their
trends before proceeding with data
collection. Taking the time to investigate preliminaries of the test, such
as exciter or response locations,
various types of excitation functions
and different signal processing
parameters will lead to higher quality
measurements. This section includes
preliminary checks such as adequate
signal levels, minimum leakage
measurements and linearity and
reciprocity checks. The concept and
trends of the driving point measurement and the combinations of measurements that constitute a complete
modal survey are discussed.
Figure 2.23
Random
test signals
FILT TIME 1
10.0
m
Real
50%Ovlp
Random Noise
-10.0
m
Fxd Y 0.0
HIST 1
10.0
k
Real
Sec
90 Avg 50%Ovlp
799m
Histogram
0.0
V
Fxd XY -10.0m
Figure 2.24
Transient
test signals
FILT TIME 1
400
m
Real
10.0m
0%Ovlp
Typical Force
After the structure has been supported and instrumented for the test,
the time domain signals should be
examined before making measurements. The input range settings on
the analyzer should be set at no more
than two times the maximum signal
level as shown in Figure 2.20. Often
called half-ranging, this takes advantage of the dynamic range of the
analog-to-digital converter without
underranging or overranging the
signals.
The effect resulting from underranging a signal, where the response
input level is severely low relative to
the analyzer setting, is illustrated in
Figure 2.21. Notice the apparent
noise between the peaks in the frequency response and the resulting
poor coherence function. In
Figure 2.22, the response is severely
overloading the analyzer input section and is being clipped. This results
in poor frequency response and,
consequently, poor coherence since
the actual response is not being
measured correctly.
-400
m
Fxd Y 0.0
FILT TIME 2
700
m
Real
Sec
0%Ovlp
512m
Exponential Decaying
v
-700
m
Fxd Y 0.0
Response
Sec
512m
29
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1
Measurement
averaging
frequency
response
COHERENCE
1.1
5 Avg
50% Ovlp
FREQ RESP
Hann
5 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
100
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
5 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
2.1k
Imag
Hann
dB
-40.0
Hz
Fxd Y 1.1k
2.1k
-100
Fxd Y
-128
128
Real
5 Averages
COHERENCE
1.1
30 Avg
50% Ovlp
FREQ RESP
Hann
30 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
100
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
30 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
2.1k
Imag
Hann
dB
-40.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
Hz
2.1k
-100
Fxd XY
30 Averages
30
-128
Real
128
Figure 3.2
Frequency
response with
true random
signal and
no windows
FILT TIME2
50%Ovlp
50.0
m
12.5
m
/Div
Real
v
-50.0
m
Fxd Y
0.0
799m
Sec
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
Unif
50 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
Unif
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
2.1k
dB
-40.0
Hz
Fxd Y 1.1k
Figure 3.3
Frequency
response with
burst random
signal
COHERENCE
1.1
2.1k
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
50 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
Hann
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
2.1k
dB
-40.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
Hz
2.1k
31
Figure 3.4
Frequency
response with
true random
signal and
Hann window
FILT TIME2
0%Ovlp
50.0
m
12.5
m
/Div
Real
v
32
-50.0
m
Fxd Y
0.0
799m
Sec
15 Avg
0% Ovlp
Unif
15 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Unif
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
FREQ RESP
40.0
2.1k
dB
-40.0
Fxd Y 1.1k
Hz
2.1k
Figure 3.5
Effects of
increasing
frequency
resolution
COHERENCE
1.1
50 Avg
0% Ovlp
FREQ RESP
Hann
50 Avg
0% Ovlp
Hann
200
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
50.0
50 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
4k
Imag
Hann
dB
-30.0
Hz
Fxd Y 0
-200
Fxd Y
4k
-257
257
Real
Baseband Measurement
COHERENCE
1.1
50 Avg
5% Ovlp
FREQ RESP
Hann
50 Avg
5% Ovlp
Hann
100
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 745
FREQ RESP
40.0
50 Avg
Hz
5% Ovlp
2.345k
Imag
Hann
dB
-40.0
Hz
Fxd Y 745
2.345k
-100
Fxd XY
-128
128
Real
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
FREQ RESP
Hann
50 Avg
50% Ovlp
Hann
100
Mag
0.0
Fxd Y 1.2k
FREQ RESP
40.0
50 Avg
Hz
50% Ovlp
1.6k
Imag
Hann
dB
-40.0
Fxd Y 1.2k
Hz
1.6k
-100
Fxd Y
-128
Real
128
33
Complete Survey
As frequency response functions are
being acquired and stored for subsequent modal parameter estimation,
an adequate set of measurements
must be collected in order to arrive
at a complete set of modal parameters. This section describes the
number and type of measurements
that constitute complete modal survey. Definitions and concepts, such
as driving point measurement and
a row or column of the frequency
response matrix are discussed.
Optimal shaker and accelerometer
locations are also included.
A complete, although redundant, set
of frequency response measurements
would form a square matrix of size N,
where the row corresponds to
response points and the columns
correspond to excitation points, as
illustrated in Figure 3.6. It can be
shown, however, that any particular
row or column contains sufficient
information to compute the complete
set of frequencies, damping, and
mode shapes. In other words, if
the excitation is at point 3, and the
response is measured at all the
points, including point 3, then column
of the frequency response matrix will
be measured. This situation would be
the result of a shaker test. On the
other hand, if an accelerometer is
attached to point 7, and a hammer is
used to excite the structure at all
points, including point 7, then row 7
on the matrix will be measured. This
would be the result of an impact test.
The measurement where the
response point and direction are the
same as the excitation point and
direction is called a driving point
measurement. The beam in Figure
3.7 illustrates a measurement of this
type. Driving point measurements
34
Figure 3.6
Frequency
response
matrix
H11
H12
H21
H22
HN1
H1N
HNN
Figure 3.7
Driving point
measurement
setup
and stiffness as well. It is not necessary to make a driving point measurement to obtain only frequencies,
damping factors and unscaled mode
shapes. However, a set of scaled
mode shapes and consequently,
modal mass and stiffness cannot be
extracted from a set of measurements
that does not contain a driving point.
Figure 3.8
Driving point
frequency
response
FREQ RESP
56.0
3 Avg
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
3 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
Real
-56.0
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
100
1.25k
Imag
-100
Hz
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
40.0
1.25k
3 Avg
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
3 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
dB
-40.0
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
180
1.25k
Phase
-180
Fxd Y 0
Hz
1.25k
Figure 3.9
Typical
free beam
mode shapes
35
Figure 3.10
Cross-point
frequency
response
FREQ RESP
56.0
3 Avg
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
3 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
Real
-56.0
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
100
Imag
-100
Hz
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
40.0
1.25k
3 Avg
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
3 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
dB
-40.0
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
180
1.25k
Phase
-180
Fxd Y 0
Hz
1.25k
Figure 3.11
Typical
cantilever
beam mode
shapes
36
1.25k
Figure 3.12
Frequency
response with
excitation at
node of
vibration
FREQ RESP
100
3 Avg
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
3 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
Imag
-100
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
40.0
1.25k
dB
-40.0
Hz
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
56.0
1.25k
3 Avg
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
3 Avg
Hz
0% Ovlp
Fr/Ex
Imag
-56.0
Fxd Y 0
FREQ RESP
40.0
1.25k
dB
-40.0
Hz
Fxd Y 0
Figure 3.13
Symmetric
frequency
response
matrix
H11
H12
H21
H22
1.25k
H1N
Hij
Hji
HN1
HNN
Hij = Hji
37
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1
Typical flow
of modal test
Measure
complete
set of
frequency
responses
Identify Modal
l Frequency
l Damping
l Mode Shape
Scale Mode
Shape
l Modal Mass
l Modal
Stiffness
38
Modal Parameters
One of the most fundamental
assumptions of modal testing is that
a mode of vibration can be excited
at any point on the structure, except
at nodes of vibration where it has no
motion. This is why a single row or
column of the frequency response
matrix provides sufficient information to estimate modal parameters.
As a result, the frequency and damping of any mode in a structure are
constants that can be estimated
from any one of the measurements
as shown in Figure 4.2. In other
words, the frequency and damping
of any mode are global properties of
the structure.
In practical applications, it is important to include sufficient points in the
test to completely describe all the
modes of interest. If the excitation
point has not been chosen carefully
or if enough response points are
not measured, then a particular mode
may not be adequately represented.
At times it may become necessary to
include more than one excitation
location in order to adequately
describe all of the modes of interest.
Frequency responses can be measured independently with single-point
excitation or simultanously with
multiple-point excitations.
The mode shapes as a whole are also
global properties of the structure, but
have relative values depending on the
point of excitation and scaling and
sorting factors. On the other hand,
each individual modal coefficient that
makes up the mode shape is a local
property in the sense that it is estimated from the particular measurement associated with that point as
shown in Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.2
Concepts of
modal parameters
Mode = 1
Vibrating Beam
Mode = 2
Mode = 3
Measurement
Points
Dampin
Freque
ncy
Figure 4.3
Modal
parameters
Frequency
Damping
Global
{}
Mode Shape
Local
39
Figure 4.4
Increasing
accuracy in
curve fit
methods
Single-Mode
Methods
l Easy, fast
l Limited
Multi-Mode
Methods
l More
Accurate
l Slower
Multi-Measurement
l Global Accuracy
l Large Amount of
Data Processing
40
Single-Mode Methods
As stated earlier, the general
procedure for estimating modal
parameters is to estimate frequencies
and damping factors, then estimate
modal coefficients. For most singlemode parameter estimation techniques, however, this is not always
the case. In fact, it is not absolutely
necessary to estimate damping in
order to obtain modal coefficients.
This is typical in a troubleshooting
environment where frequencies and
mode shapes are of primary concern.
The basic assumption for single-mode
approximations is that in the vicinity
of a resonance, the response is due
primarily to that single mode. The
resonant frequency can be estimated
from the frequency response data
(illustrated in Figure 4.5) by observing the frequency at which any of the
following trends occur:
Figure 4.5
Frequency
response
Magnitude
Phase
n Frequency
Real
Imaginary
n Frequency
41
Figure 4.6
Damping factor
from half power
640
m
80.0
m
/Div
Damping
Mag
0.0
Hz
Figure 4.7
Quadrature
peak pick
640
m
160
m
/Div
Imag
Modal Coefficient
-640
m
Figure 4.8
Circle fit
method
Imaginary
Real
Modal Coefficient
42
100
Figure 4.9
Comparison of
quadrature and
circle fit methods
Imaginary
Real
Peak
Pick
Figure 4.10
Analytical
expression of
frequency
response
Circle Fit
Circle Fit
Peak
Pick
n
i j
H() =
2
2
(
) + j(2 n)
n
r=1
43
Figure 4.11
Single mode
summation of
frequency
response
Mass Line
dB Magnitude
Stiffness Line
0.0
2
Frequency
Frequency
dB Magnitude
0.0
44
Figure 4.12
Residual terms
of frequency
response
H() =
i j
-w2m
Lower Modes
H() =
i j
k
Higher Modes
Multiple-Mode Methods
The single-mode methods discussed
earlier perform reasonably well for
structures with lightly damped and
well separated modes. These methods are also satisfactory in situations
where accuracy is of secondary concern. However, for structures with
closely spaced modes, particularly
when heavily damped, (as shown in
Figure 4.13) the effects of adjacent
modes can cause significant approximations. In general, it will be necessary to implement a multiple-mode
method to more accurately identify
the modal parameters of these types
of structures.
Figure 4.13
Damping and
modal coupling
64.0
80
/Div
Mag
0.0
Hz
433.7
2.4437k
2.0
/Div
Mag
0.0
Hz
443.7
2.4437k
Figure 4.14
Frequency
response
representation
n
H() =
k=1
H() =
rk*
rk
+
j - pk*
j - pk
a0sm + a, s m - 1 + . . .
b0sn + b, sn - 1 + . . .
n
h(t) = rk e -k t + rk*e-*k t
k=1
Partial Fraction
Polynomial
Complex Exponential
45
46
Figure 4.15
Proportional
damping
representation
Figure 4.16
Imaginary
Real
2k
= k
Figure 4.17
Imaginary
r1k2 +r2k 2
2k
ak
= k
Figure 4.18
Two closely
spaced real
modes
Imaginary
Real
47
Chapter 5
48
Figure 5.1
Alternative
types of
structural
models
FFT
Response Model (measurements)
Curve Fit
Structural Modification
When troubleshooting a vibration
problem or investigating simple
design changes, an analysis method
known as structural modification,
illustrated in Figure 5.2, can be very
useful. Basically, the method determines the effects of mass, stiffness
and damping changes on the dynamic
characteristics of the structure. It is
a straightforward technique and gives
reasonable solutions for simple
design studies. Some of the benefits
of using structural modification are
reduced time and cost for implementing design changes and elimination
of the trial-and-error approach to
solving existing vibration problems.
The technique can be extended to
an iterative process, often called
sensitivity analysis, in order to
categorize the sensitivity of specific
amounts of mass, stiffness or
damping changes.
In general, structural modification
involves two interrelated design
investigations. In the first, a physical
mass, stiffness or damping change
can be specified with the analysis
determining the modified set of
modal parameters. The second
involves specifying a frequency and
having the analysis determine the
amount of mass, stiffness or damping
needed to shift a resonance to this
new frequency. For the users
convenience, specific applications of
these basic methods, such as tuned
absorber, design are usually included.
Figure 5.2
Structural
modification
simulation
Engine Mount
Stiffness, Damping
SM
Troublesome Mode
SYNTHESIS
Pole Residue
40.0
7.5
/Div
dB
-20
FxdXY 1.375k
Hz
2.975k
49
Table 5.1
Tabular
comparisons
of frequency
FE (Hz)
15.7
21.3
19.4
26.4
25.5
30.0
28.3
31.2
30.5
Figure 5.3
Graphical
comparison
of frequencies
Fe
Test
50
Test (Hz)
17.5
Figure 5.4
Numerical
comparison of
mode shapes
[ I ]
Mode 2
51
Figure 5.5
Substructure
coupling
analysis
Airplane
Component Analysis
Fuselage
Wing
Engine
Wing
Fuselage
Engine
52
Figure 5.6
Forced
response
simulation
Force Inputs
Engine RPM
Road Surface
System Model
, ,
System Response
Ride Motion
53
Bibliography
Robert D.Cook
Concepts and Applications of
Finite Element Analysis
John Wiley & Sons
1981
Roy R. Craig, Jr.
Structural Dynamics:
An Introduction to Computer
Methods
John Wiley & Sons
1981
Clare D. McGillem, George R. Cooper
Continuous and Discrete Signal
and System Analysis
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.
1974
Francis S. Tse, Ivan E. Morse,
Rolland T. Hinkle
Mechanical Vibrations:
Theory and Applications
Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
1978
D. Brown, G.Carbon, K. Ramsey
Survey of Excitation Techniques
Applicable to Automotive Structures
Society of Automotive Engineers,
#770029
1977
R. J. Allemang, D. L. Brown
A Correlation Coefficient for Modal
Vector Analysis
Proceedings of the 1st International
Modal Analysis Conference
1982
54
R. J. Allemang, D. L. Brown,
R. W. Rost
Multiple Input Estimation of
Frequency Response Functions
Proceedings of the 2nd International
Modal Analysis Conference
1984
D. L. Brown, R. J. Allemang,
Ray Zimmerman, M. Mergeay
Parameter Estimation Techniques
for Modal Analysis
Society of Automotive Engineers,
#790221
1979
Norm Olsen
Excitation Functions for Structural
Frequency Response Measurements
Proceedings of the 2nd International
Modal Analysis Conference
1984
John R. Crowley, G. Thomas Rocklin,
Albert L. Klosterman, Havard Vold
Direct Structural Modification
Using Frequency Response Functions
Proceedings of the 2nd International
Modal Analysis Conference
1984