Ovunc, B. A.

Lumped versus Distributed Parameter Systems

The Engineering Handbook.
Ed. Richard C. Dorf
Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC, 2000

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

16
Lumped versus Distributed Parameter
Systems
16.1 Procedure of Analysis
16.2 Continuous Mass Matrix Method

Member under Axial Displacement Member under Bending along Its Major Moment of Inertia Axes
Dynamic Member Stiffness Matrix for Plane and Space Frames

16.3
16.4
16.5
16.6
16.7
16.8

Consistent Mass Matrix Method

Lumped Mass Matrix Method
Free Vibration of Frames
Forced Vibration
Practical Applications
Structures without Additional Effects
Single Beams Frames

16.9 Structures with Additional effects

Single Beams Frames

Bulent A. Ovunc
University of Southwestern Louisiana

The lumped, consistent, and distributed (or continuous) mass methods are the main methods for
dynamics and vibration analyses of structures. In the continuous mass method the equations of
motion are satisfied at every point of the structure. In the consistent and lumped mass methods they
are satisfied only at the joints of the structures. In consistent mass the displacements within
members are assumed as static displacements. The lumped mass method considers the members as
massless springs. The lumped and consistent mass methods are simple and fast; they are fairly
approximate, but their accuracy decreases for structures subjected to the effects of the shear and
rotatory inertia, member axial force, elastic medium, and so on. The continuous mass method
provides accurate results under the assumptions made.

16.1 Procedure of Analysis

For frames, the general formulation is based on the vector of displacement fao (y; t)g at a time t
and at a point y on the center line of its constitutive members. The same formulation is valid for
the above mentioned three methods, only the vector of center line displacement fao (y; t)g depends
on the assumptions made for each method.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

For materially and geometrically linear frames, the vector fao (y; t)g is made of four independent
components,
fao (y; t)gT = [u(y; t)

v(y; t)

w(y; t)

#( ; t)]

(16:1)

where u(y; t) , v(y; t) , and w(y; t) are the displacements along the member axes x, y, z; #( ; t) is
the twist rotation about y axis, and = (x2 + y 2 )1=2 . It is assumed that the material properties are
independent of time, and that the external disturbances applied to a structure are proportional to a
same-time variable function. Thus, the displacement function fao (y; t)g , can be written in
separable variable form. The integration of the differential equations and elimination of the
integration constants gives
fao (y; t)g = [N (y)]fd(t)g = [N (y)]fdgf (t)

(16:2)

where fd(t)g = fdgf (t) , [N (y)] , and fdg are time-independent matrix-of-shape functions and
vector-of-member displacements, and f (t) is a time-variable function of external disturbances. See
Fig. 16.1.
Figure 16.1 Coordinate axes systems.

The strains f"g at a point within the cross section of a member can be obtained from the center

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

line displacements fao (y; t)g [Przemieniecki, 1968] as

f"g = [@]fao (y; t)g = [B(y)]fdgf (t)

(16:3)

where [B(y)] = [@][N (y)] , and [@] is the matrix of differential operators.
The stresses fg are determined from the stress-strain relationship as
fg = [E]f"g = [E][B(y)]fdgf (t)

(16:4)

The expressions of the strain energy, Ui , and kinetic energy, K , as well as the work done by
damping forces, WD , and by externally applied loads, We , are written as
Ui =

1
2

WD =
K =

1
2

[B(y)] [E][B(y)] dV
v

cfa_ o g fao g dV = cf_(t)f(t)fdgT

Z
m

mfa_ o gT fa_ o g dV = 12 (f_(t))2 fdgT

f"g fg dV =

1
(f (t))2 fdgT
2

We = fe (t)

fPo gT fao g dy = fe (t)

[N (y)] [N (y)] dV
v

fdg

[N (y)]T [N (y)] dV
v

fPo gT [N (y)] dy

fdg

(16:5)

fdg

fdg

where fe (t) and fPo g are the time-dependent and -independent parts of the vector of externally
applied joint forces.
For a member, stiffness [k] , mass [m] , and damping [c] matrices are determined by substituting
the strain energy Ui , damping energy WD , kinetic energy K , and external energyWe into the
Lagrangian dynamic equation [Ovunc, 1974],
@WD
d
@Ui

+
@dj
@dj
dt

@K
@ d_j

@We
@dj

(16:6)

which provides the equation of forced vibration for a member as

[k]fdgf(t) 2o [m]fdgf_(t) + [m]fdgf(t) = fPo gfe (t)

(16:7)

where the damping matrix [c] is assumed to be proportional to mass matrix [m] and o is the
damping coefficient.
For the free vibration, fP g = 0 , the equation of motion is divided into two
partstime-independent and time-dependent:
([k] ! 2 [m])fdg = 0

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

(16:8)

df (t)
d2 f (t)
+ ! 2 f(t) = 0
+ 2!
2
dt
dt

(16:9)

The time-dependent part, f (t) , Eq. (16.9), is the same for all four independent cases, and
= o ! [Paz, 1993].
Although the lumped mass method was developed long before the continuous mass method, the
continuous mass method is herein explained first. The consistent and lumped mass methods are
presented as particular cases of continuous mass method.

16.2 Continuous Mass Matrix Method

For the materially and geometrically linear frames, an arbitrary vibration of its member is obtained
by combining the four independent components: axial displacement, torsional rotation, and
bending in two orthogonal planes.

Member under Axial Displacement

For members with constant section, the time-independent part of the differential equation of free
vibration has been given [Ovunc, 1985]. (See Fig. 16.2.)
d2 Y (y)
+ 2 Y (y) = 0
2
dy

(16:10)

where 2 = (! 2 m Cf p)=EA ; and where m = (A + q)=g; p , and Cf are the mass, the
peripheral area, and the friction coefficient of the elastic medium per unit length of the member,
respectively.
Figure 16.2 Axial force member.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

The time-independent part, f (t) , is the same for all four independent cases.
The time-independent part of axial displacement function Y (y) is obtained by integrating Eq.
(16.10), through the elimination of the integration constants fCg , by the boundary conditions; thus
one has
Y (y) = fax (y)gT [L]1 fdax g = fNax (y)gT fdax g

(16:11)

The nature of the shape function fNax (y)g depends on the sign of parameter 2 .
fNax (y)gT = (1= sin ` )f(sin ` cos y cos ` sin y)

sin yg for 2 > 0

fNax (y)gT = (1= sinh ` )f(sinh ` cosh y cosh ` sinh y)

sinh yg for 2 > 0

Member under Bending along Its Major Moment of Inertia

Axes
For members with constant section, the time-independent part of the differential equation of free
vibration (see Fig. 16.3) has been given by Ovunc [1985] as
2
d4 Z
2d Z
+ 2k
4 Z = 0
4
2
dy
dy

(16:12)

where 2k 2 = P=EI , 4 = (! 2 m Cs p0 )=EI ; and where I; Cs , and where p0 are the moment
inertia of the cross section, the subgrade coefficient of the elastic medium, and the projected area
of the cross section.
Figure 16.3 Bending member.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

The shape function fNbd (y)g due to deflection,

Z(y) = fbd (y)gT [L]1 fdbd g = fNbd (y)gT fdbd g

(16:13)

is obtained in a similar manner as in the case of axial displacement, Eq. (16.11). The nature of the
shape function fNbd (y)g and its component fbd (y)gT depend on the parameters 21 and 22 ,
which are expressed in terms of k 2 and 4 :
1 = [( 4 + k4 )1=2 + k 2 ]1=2 ;

2 = [( 4 + k 4 )1=2 k2 ]1=2

Thus, for 4 > 0 and P > 0 (compression is positive),

fbd (y)gT = (sin 1 y

cos 1 y

sinh 2 y

cosh 2 y)

(16:14)

The above expression remains the same when the axial force P is tension, except 1 and 2 must
be interchanged. For the combination of 4 < 0 and P < 0 or P > 0 , the expression of fbd (y)g
can be determined in a similar manner.
The member stiffness matrices for the twist rotation and the bending in the Oxy plane are
obtained by following similar steps as in the previous cases. The stiffness matrix for the space
frame is determined by combining the stiffness matrices of all four independent cases.

Dynamic Member Stiffness Matrix for Plane and Space Frames

The dynamic member stiffness matrix [kdy ] for either a plane frame or a space frame is obtained by
substituting either the shape functions for axial displacement and bending in Oyz plane [Eqs.
(16.11) and (16.13)] or the shape functions of all the four independent cases, in the Lagrangian
dynamic equation [Eq. (16.6)], integrating [Eq. (16.7)] one has
[kdyn ] = [k] ! 2 [m]

(16:15)

The continuous mass method has also been extended to frames with tapered members [Ovunc,
1990].

16.3 Consistent Mass Matrix Method

In the consistent mass matrix method, the deformations within a member are static deformations.
The shape function for each independent component fN (y)g is a static displacement due to its
corresponding independent cases. Thus, the shape functions for axial displacement, fNax (y)g , and
for bending in the Oyz plane, fNbn (y)g , are given as
fNax (y)gT = ((1 )

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

(16:16)

fNbn (y)gT = ((1 3 2 + 2 3 )

( 2 2 + 3 )`

(3 2 2 3 )

( 2 + 3 )` )
(16:17)

where = y=`: The shape functions for twist rotation and bending in the Oxy plane are obtained
in similar manner.
The member stiffness [k] and mass [m] matrices are evaluated by substituting the shape
functions in the Lagrangian dynamic equation [Eq. (16.6)]. Herein, the stiffness matrix [k] is a
static stiffness matrix and the mass matrix [m] is a full matrix [Przemieniecki, 1968; Paz, 1993].
Moreover, the member stiffness matrix [k] and the mass matrix [m] for the consistent mass
matrix method can be obtained as the first three terms of the power series expansion of the
dynamic member stiffness matrix [kdyn ] for the continuous mass matrix [Paz, 1993].

16.4 Lumped Mass Matrix Method

The lumped mass method is obtained from the continuous mass matrix method by considering the
limit when the mass of the members tend to zero. Thus, the shape functions [Eq. (16.17)] and the
member stiffness matrix [k] are the same as in the consistent mass method. But the mass matrix
[m] is diagonal [Paz, 1993].

16.5 Free Vibration of Frames

The stiffness coefficients for the frames are evaluated from those of its members as
Ki;j =

kr;s ;

Mi;j =

mr;s ;

Pi =

pr

where r and s are the member freedom numbers corresponding to the i and j of the structure
freedoms.
The equation of free vibration is obtained from those of members [Eq. (16.8)]
([K] ! 2 [M ])fDg = f0g

(16:18)

where fDg is the vector of the structure displacements.

The natural circular frequencies, !i , and the corresponding modal shapes, fDi g , are calculated
from the equation of free vibration [Eq. (16.18)], also called the frequency equation.

16.6 Forced Vibration

The second-order differential (n simultaneous equations with n unknowns)

_
[M ]fD(t)g
+ 2o [M ]fD(t)g
+ [K]fD(t)g = fP (t)g = fPo gfe (t)

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

(16:19)

is converted to n separate, second-order, single-variable differential equations through the two

orthogonality conditions, which proves that each modal shape vector fDi g is independent of the
others. The ith participation factor Ai is defined as the component of given forced vibration on the
ith modal shape vector fDi g . Thus, any arbitrary motion can be determined by considering the
summation of its components Ai on each modal shape vector fDi g [Clough and Penzien, 1993;
Paz, 1993; Ovunc, 1974].
If the time variable factor fe (t) of the external disturbance [Eq. (16.2)] is periodic (pulsating),
the forced vibration can be directly determined without the calculation of participation factors
Ai [Paz, 1993].

16.7 Practical Applications

For any structure the natural circular frequency ! can be expressed in terms of a parameter C as
[Paz, 1993]
!=C

EIj
mj ` j4

(16:20)

where E is the Young's modulus, and Ij , mj , and `j are the moment of inertia, mass, and span
length of a selected member j.
Substituting the natural circular frequency ! (its expression in terms of C) into the frequency
equation [Eq. (16.18)] gives
jC 2 [M ] + [K]j = 0

(16:21)

where the general terms Mrs and Krs of the mass and the stiffness matrix are constant and
expressed as
Mrs = Mrs =mj `j

and

Krs = Krs `j =EIj

(16:22)

It can be easily seen that the determinant of the frequency equation [Eq. (16.21)] is independent of
the member characteristics (E; m; `; I ) but depends on the parameter C. If, in a frame, the same
characteristics of the members are multiplied by the same factor, the magnitude of the parameter C
remains unchanged. However, a natural circular frequency wi corresponding to Ci changes [Eq.
(16.20)]. If the characteristics of some members change and those of the others remain constant,
the parameter Ci is affected.
The advantages of one method over the others and the limits on their accuracy depend on the
number and type of the members in the structures and whether the structure is subjected to
additional effects.
The type of member depends on the ratio of the thickness t (of its cross section) to its span
length ` : = t=` .
If the ratio = O(1=100) is in the order of 1/100, the effect of bending is negligible. The

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

member is a very thin member, called cable.

If the ratio = O(1=10) , axial force, torsion, and bending are affecting the member. The
member is a thin member.
If the ratio = O(1) , the member is considered a deep beam.
The inclusion of the variation of the width or the thickness of the member, the effect of member
axial force, shear, rotatory inertia, vibration of the member within an elastic medium, and so on
constitutes the additional effects.
The dynamic responses of beams and frames are evaluated with or without the additional effects
by lumped and consistent mass methods. The results are compared with those evaluated by
continuous mass.

16.8 Structures without Additional Effects

Single Beams
The data related to a cantilever beam composed of a single element or with two, three, or five
subelements are given in Fig. 16.4. The dynamic responses of each beam have been determined by
the lumped mass and the consistent mass matrix methods. The first two natural circular
frequencies, !1 and !2 , and the vertical displacement dv11 , rotation dr11 , and shearing force V11 at
the free end 1 as well as the bending moment M21 at the fixed end 2 due to the first mode !1 are
furnished in Table 16.1 for the lumped mass method, for the consistent mass method, and for the
continuous mass method.
Figure 16.4 Cantilever beam formed by (a) a single member, (b) two, (c) three, (d) five subelements and
subjected to a force P (t) = Po (t)fe (t) .

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

Table 16.1 Comparison of Analyses

!1

Member

!2

Single
Two
Three
Five

66.2265
85.3437
90.4627
93.3437

0.00
439.6537
510.7243
560.500

Single
Two
Three
Five

95.4062
94.9687
94.9687
94.9687

925.5823
595.0385
592.2191
590.7352

Single

95.0762

595.8353

dv11 101

dr11 102

Analysis by Lumped Mass Method

:0
.51534
:38314
.39661
:34954
.37075
:33090
.35681
Analysis by Consistent Mass Method
:32200
.35050
:32070
.34934
:32023
.34882
:32014
.34831
Analysis by Continuous Mass Method
:32080
.34962

V11 (k)

M21 (k=ft)

9.490
1.515
1.061
.625

71.714
30.179
29.104
28.548

2.000
1.317
.954
.611

26.180
28.052
28.177
28.190

1.312

28.025

In the lumped mass method, increasing the number of subelements improves the accuracies of
the natural circular frequencies !1 , !2 , and !i and those of the vertical displacements, dv11 , and
rotations, dr11 , when their magnitudes are compared to their magnitudes obtained by the
continuous mass method. For the consistent mass method, the beam has better approximations
when it is subdivided into two subelements.

Frames
Three-story frames have been selected as examples to compare responses obtained by lumped,
consistent, and continuous mass methods [Ovunc, 1980]. The data for the three-story frames are
given in Fig. 16.5.
Figure 16.5 Three-story steel frame.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

The dynamic responses of the three-story frame for three different ratios of = Ib =Ibo are
selected, where Ib and Ibo are new and actual moments of inertia of the beams. The moments of
inertia Ibo are for thin members with a depth-to-span ratio in the order of 1/10. Only the sizes of
the beams have been varied.
The frame's first two natural circular frequencies (!1 ; !2 ) , horizontal displacements (dh71 ; dh72 )
at joint 7, and bending moments (M11 ; M12 ) at joint 1 are given in Table 16.2.
Table 16.2 Dynamic Responses of a Three-Story Frame
Method
Lumped
mass

= Ib =Ibo

!1

!2

dh71 (ft)

.01
1.00
100.00

2.9275
7.5657
8.2351

10.9188
22.3703
23.7597

.94994
.11420
.09400

Consisten
t
mass

.01
1.00
100.00

2.9099
7.5652
8.2429

10.5168
22.3942
23.7951

.95120
.11440
.09382

Continuo
us
mass

.01
1.00
100.00

2.1738
7.3964
8.2402

10.0834
21.8749
23.7688

1.19336
.11410
.09370

dh72 (ft)

.02215
.00105
.00091
.02279
.00106
.00092
.00236
.00106
.00091

M11 (k=ft)

M12 (k=ft)

163.871
81.711
78.053

15.2073
1.2817
1.2048

162.792
81.672
78.032

15.5520
1.2886
1.2148

228.538
81.849
78.110

39.703
1.317
2.216

The responses obtained by lumped mass and consistent mass methods are close to each other for
any magnitude of (or ). However, they are roughly approximate compared to those obtained by
the continuous mass method for low order of the ratio = O(:01) (or )that is, when the beams
are very thin. The responses obtained by lumped mass, consistent mass, and continuous mass are
very close for the actual or higher order of the ratio O(1) (or )that is, for thin and deep
beams.

16.9 Structures with Additional Effects

Single Beams
The cantilever beam subdivided into three subelements is subjected to a static axial force fax , at its
free end 1 (Fig. 16.6). The effect of member axial force fax appears in the equations of free
vibration as an additional matrix[NLM ] and [NC S ] for the lumped and consistent mass methods
[Eq. (16.18)]:
([K] + [NLM ] ! 2 [MLM ])fDg = f0g

(16:23)

([K] + [NC S ] ! 2 [MC S ])fDg = f0g

(16:24)

In the continuous mass method, the member axial force fax appears in the argument of the
trigonometric or hyperbolic functions [Eq. (16.14)].

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

Figure 16.6 Beam subjected to axial force.

The dynamic responses of the cantilever beam (Fig. 16.6) have been computed by the lumped
and consistent mass method by only changing the magnitude of the member axial force fax from
zero to its critical value (fax )crit [Eqs. (16.23, 16.24)]. The same computations have been
performed by using the continuous mass method [Eq. (16.14)].
The ratios for ,
mi;mj = !1;mi =!01;mj

(16:25)

of the first natural frequency by method mi , (with the effect of member axial force) versus that of
method mj (without the effect of member axial force) are plotted in Fig. 16.7. The index mi or mj
designates LM , CS , and CT the lumped mass, consistent mass, and continuous mass methods.
Figure 16.7 Effect of member axial force.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

The comparison of the variations of the ratios LM;LM with LM;C T [Eq. (16.24)] exhibits rough
approximation. The approximation involved in the variations of ratios C S;CS and C S;CT is very
close to the actual one.
The comparison of the variations of the ratios LM;C T and C S;CT with C T;CT exhibits some
degree of approximation.

Frames
All the columns of the three-story steel frame are assumed to be subjected to a static axial force,
fax , of the same magnitude.
The dynamic responses of the three-story frame were evaluated by lumped, consistent, and
continuous mass methods. Two different cases were considered. In the first case, only the
magnitudes of the weights acting on the beams have been increased by a factor m. In the second
case, the magnitudes of the member axial force, fax , and the weights acting on each beam have
been increased by px and m, in such a way that both factors have the same magnitude, px = m .
For a same-method mj , the ratio
i;mj = (!i =!oi ) mj

(16:26)

of the ith natural frequency !i , (including the effect of member axial force and/or additional mass,
only on the beams) versus the ith natural frequency !oi (excluding all the additional effect) is
plotted in Fig. 16.8. The ratio i;C T for first, second and third natural frequencies computed by
continuous mass methodis also shown in Fig. 16.8.
Figure 16.8 Additional effects on members.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

The sways at the floor level Dmj , including and excluding the effect of the axial force fax , are
computed by the lumped, consistent, and continuous mass matrix methods. The variations of the
sway at the floor levels Dmj are plotted in Fig. 16.9.
Figure 16.9 Sways at floor levels.

When the effects of member axial forces are excluded, the sways at the floor levels obtained by
lumped, consistent, and continuous mass methods are almost the same. The effect of member axial
force has shown small variations in the floor sways evaluated by lumped and consistent mass
methods. But the variation in the sways at the floor levels computed by continuous mass method is
large.
Although the first buckling mode for lumped and consistent mass methods occurs by increasing
sways from lower to upper floors, for the continuous mass method the first buckling mode occurs
between the base and the first floor. The relative displacement of second and third floors with
respect to the displacement of the first floor tends to zero.

Defining Terms
Damping: Results from the internal friction within the material or from system vibration within
another material.
Damping energy: Work done by the internal friction within the material as a result of the
motion.
Kinetic energy: Work done by a mass particle as a result of its motion.
Stiffness coefficient Ki ;j : Force or moment in the direction of the first index (i) required to
maintain the equilibrium of the body due to a unit displacement or rotation in the direction of
the second index (j), while all the other specified displacements and rotations are equal to
zero.
Strain energy: Work done by a particle due to its stress and strain.
External energy: Work done by an external force due to a displacement in its
direction.
1998 by CRC PRESS LLC

References
Clough, R. W. and Penzien, J. 1993. Dynamic of Structures. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ovunc, B. A. 1974. Dynamics of frameworks by continuous mass method. Compt. Struct. 4:1061
1089.
Ovunc, B. A. 1980. Effect of axial force on framework dynamics. Compt. Struct. 11:389395.
Ovunc, B. A. 1985. SoilStructure interaction and effect of axial force on the dynamics of offshore
structures. Compt. Struct. 21:629-637.
Ovunc, B. A. 1990. Free and Forced Vibration of Frameworks with Tapered Members, Struceng &
18, p. 341346.
Paz, M. 1993. Structural Dynamics, Theory and Computations. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
Przemieniecki, J. S. 1968. Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Further Information
Paz, M. 1986. Microcomputer Aided Engineering: Structural Dynamics, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York.
Ovunc, B. A. 1972. The dynamic analysis of space frameworks by frequency dependent stiffness ma
International Association for Bridges and Structural Engineering, vol. 32/2, Zurich, Switzerlan
154.
Ovunc, B. A. 1986. Offshore platforms subjected to wave forces. In Recent Applications in Computa
169.
Ovunc, B. A. 1985. STDYNL, a code for structural systems. In Structural Analysis Systems (ed. Nik
238.
Ovunc, B. A. 1992. Dynamics of Offshore Structures Supported on Piles in Cohesionless Soil. ASME
July 4, ASME PD, vol. 47-5, p. 1118.
Ovunc, B. A. 1990. Vibration of Timoshenko Frames Including Member Axial Force and Soil-Struct
6, p. 359364.

1998 by CRC PRESS LLC