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

net/publication/292986256

A Modal Superposition Method for the Analysis of Nonlinear Systems

Chapter · January 2016

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-29910-5_28

CITATION READS

1 1,182

3 authors, including:

Ender Cigeroglu H. Nevzat Özgüven

Middle East Technical University Middle East Technical University
90 PUBLICATIONS   410 CITATIONS    159 PUBLICATIONS   2,402 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Nonlinear Identification of Bolted Joints - Part of Horizon 2020 MSCA-ITN-2016 - EXPERTISE (models, EXperiments and high PERformance computing for Turbine
mechanical Integrity and Structural dynamics in Europe) View project

Theoretical and Experimental Analysis of Non-Linear Structures" In colloboration with Imperial College (Sponsored by British Council) June 1990-April1993. View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ender Cigeroglu on 05 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 A Modal Superposition Method for the Analysis of Nonlinear Systems

Erhan Ferhatoğlu1,2, Ender Ciğeroğlu1, H. Nevzat Özgüven1

1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Middle East Technical University, 06800, Ankara, TURKEY
2
Turkish Aerospace Industries, Inc., 06980, Ankara, TURKEY 
E-mail: erhan.ferhatoglu@metu.edu.tr, ender@metu.edu.tr, ozguven@metu.edu.tr

ABSTRACT

In the determination of response of nonlinear structures, computational burden is always a major problem even if frequency
domain methods are used. One of the methods used to decrease the computational effort is the modal superposition method
for nonlinear systems where the modes of the linear system are used in the calculation. However, depending on the type of
the nonlinearity, in order to obtain an accurate response, the number of modes retained in the response calculations needs to
be increased, which increases the number of nonlinear equations to be solved. In this study, a method is proposed to decrease
the number of modes used for systems having nonlinearities where the equivalent stiffness varies between two limiting
values. For such systems, one can define different linear systems for each value of the limiting equivalent stiffness. In this
study, it is proposed to use a combination of these linear mode shapes in the modal superposition method. It is shown that
proper combination of mode shapes of different linear systems provides satisfactory results by keeping the number of modes
used at a minimum. The method is demonstrated on case studies where describing function method is used in the analysis of
the nonlinear system.

KEYWORDS

Modal Superposition Method, Hybrid Mode Shapes, Nonlinear Vibration, Describing Function Method, Newton’s Method

1 INTRODUCTION

Most of the engineering structures show nonlinear behavior. Determination of dynamic response of large nonlinear structures
can be troublesome in terms of computational time even though frequency domain methods are used. In modal superposition
method, decreasing the number of modes used in the solution procedure reduces number of nonlinear equations; hence, the
computational effort as well. On the other hand, in order to obtain an accurate response, the number of modes used should be
increased. Finding the optimum number of modes required in solution of nonlinear systems has always been a challenge.

In literature, various frequency domain solution methods have been proposed in order to have accurate response with reduced
computational effort. Menq et al. [1] proposed receptance method, which decreases the total number of nonlinear equations
to be solved. Chen and Menq [2] also worked on prediction of the resonant response of frictionally constraint blade systems
by using receptance method. Authors used different mode shapes for different cases to decrease the computational time. For
the nonlinear vibration analysis of structures with frictional contact interfaces, Petrov [3] considered the effect of number of
modes retained in the receptance method. It is observed from their results that the error outside of the resonance regions is
higher than the error around it. Moreover, accuracy of the resonance frequencies and the frequency response function
increases as the number of modes used increases. Kuran and Özgüven [4] proposed a modal superposition method for
nonlinear systems and they showed that using even one mode at the resonance region for local nonlinearities gives
satisfactory results. However, this condition may hold if the natural frequencies of the linear structure are sufficiently away
from each other and if the nonlinear element does not excite the higher modes of the linear system. In such cases, the number
of modes used need to be increased in order to capture the dynamic behavior of the system. Cigeroglu et. al [5, 6] proposed a
modal superposition method for the nonlinear forced response analysis of bladed disk systems where authors employed
multiple modes of the system in order to obtain sufficient accuracy.

In this paper, the concept of hybrid modes for certain nonlinearity types is introduced. For some nonlinearities, such as
piecewise linear stiffness, dry friction, etc., equivalent stiffness of the nonlinearity has limiting values depending on the
vibration amplitude. In such cases equivalent stiffness of the nonlinearity varies from one limit to the other, where linear
systems are obtained at these limiting cases neglecting the equivalent damping of the nonlinearity. Instead of using the mode
shapes of the linear system without the nonlinearities, proper combination of the mode shapes of the linear systems
corresponding to these limiting cases can provide a better basis for the nonlinear solution. Therefore, less number of modes
can be used in the nonlinear response calculations. A similar approach is used by Cigeroglu and Özgüven [7], where authors
decompose the simplified microslip element into a linear stiffness and a nonlinear element, and include the linear part into
the original stiffness matrix which simplifies the solution process. In this paper hybrid modes composed of these limiting
linear systems is proposed for the solution of the nonlinear system. It is observed from the case studies performed that hybrid
mode shapes composed of proper combination of linear modes of these limiting cases provide satisfactory results by keeping
the number of modes used in the solution at a minimum.

2 THEORY

Hybrid mode shapes proposed in this study can be used in both solution methods, i.e. modal superposition method or
receptance method. In this study modal superposition method (MSM) is used in the solution of the case studies considered.
Consider a nonlinear system defined by the following matrix equation

M  
x  C  x  iH  x  K  x  f N  f , (1)

where M , C , H and K represent the mass, viscous damping, structural damping, and stiffness matrices of the linear
system, respectively. f N represents the internal nonlinear force vector, i is the unit imaginary number. Here, x is the vector
of displacements and dot denotes differentiation with respect to time. f represents the external harmonic forcing vector. The
nonlinear internal forcing vector, f N can be written as follows by using describing function method (DFM) with single
harmonic [8]

f N  Δ  x   Δ re  iΔ im   x , (2)

where Δ is displacement (velocity, etc.) dependent complex nonlinearity matrix, Δ re and Δim are real and imaginary parts.
Therefore, the nonlinear equation of motion can be written as follows

x  C  x  i  H  Δ im   x   K  Δ re   x  f ,
M   (3)

It can be seen from Eq. (3) that real part of the nonlinearity matrix changes the overall stiffness matrix of the system whereas
the imaginary parts modifies the overall structural damping matrix. Therefore, at the limiting cases the equivalent linear
systems with modified stiffness and structural damping matrices can be defined where the new stiffness matrix of the system
can be written as

K l  K  Δ re ,l , (4)

where K l is the new stiffness matrix and Δ re , l is the real part of the nonlinearity matrix of the l th limiting case. For the sake
of simplicity the number of limiting cases considered in the rest of the study is taken as 2. A new eigenvalue problem can be
defined as

 K l  l M   xl  0, l  1, 2 (5)

Solution of the eigenvalue problem gives eigenvalues l , which are the squares of the natural frequencies, and mass
normalized mode shape matrix Φ l .
Elements of the nonlinearity matrix, Δ can be written as follows [8]

n
Δ kk   kk   kj and Δ kj   kj , (6)
j 1
jk

where  kj is the harmonic input describing function of a nonlinear element in the system and can be described as equivalent
complex stiffness for the internal nonlinear force, f Nkj acting between the k th and the j th coordinates. Single harmonic
describing function,  kj can be obtained as [9, 10]

i 2
 kj   f Nkj   ei d ,  t , (7)
 Xk  X j 0

where X k is the complex amplitude of the k th degree of freedom. Describing function value,  , is decomposed into real and
imaginary parts as

   re  i im , (8)

During the solution process, describing function for each nonlinearity is recalculated at every iteration step. Comparing the
real part of the describing function, i.e. equivalent stiffness, with respect to the limiting value of the real part of the describing
function, k * , a ratio is defined

 re
 , (9)
k

where 0    1 and k * is selected as the maximum of the limiting equivalent stiffnesses. Assuming the maximum of the
limiting equivalent stiffness is for limiting case 2, i.e. maximum value of  becomes 1, hybrid mode shape matrix can be
obtained as a linear combination of the mode shapes of both limiting cases as

Φ  [1 2  n ]   Φ 2  1    Φ1 , (10)

Response of the system can be written in terms of hybrid mode shapes as

Nm
x  t   arr eit , (11)
r 1

where r is the r th mode shape, ar is the complex coefficient of the r th mode shape and N m is the number of modes
considered in the expansion. Substituting Eq. (11) into Eq. (3) the following result is obtained

 2 ΦT MΦ  a  i ΦT CΦ  a  ΦT  K  iH  Φ  a  ΦT Δ  a  Φ  a  ΦT  f , (12)

where a is the vector of complex amplitudes of modal coefficients. In this nonlinear equation set, the unknowns are the
modal coefficients given in vector a , which are complex.

Numerical solution of the set of nonlinear algebraic equation given by Eq. (12) can be obtained by using Newton’s method
with Arc-length continuation. Detailed information about Newton’s method with Arc-length continuation can be found in
[11,12].

Computational time is directly related to the number of modes used in Eq. (12). Although small number of modes is
sufficient for some systems in which natural frequencies of the structure are well separated, it should be increased in order to
get accurate response for highly nonlinear systems which increases the computational load. However, using hybrid mode
shapes as explained above decreases the number of modes required in the analysis and hence, the computational time. In the
following section, proposed approach is demonstrated on cases studies.

3 CASE STUDIES

In this section, proposed method is presented on several case studies having different nonlinearities. In order to apply
proposed approach, nonlinearities in the system should have equivalent stiffness which does not change at least at one
limiting value of the vibration amplitude. For instance, as vibration amplitude (displacement, velocity etc.) increases
equivalent stiffness converges to a specific value. Piecewise linear stiffness, gap and dry friction nonlinearities (Fig. 1) show
this kind of behavior and they are used in the following case studies.

fN   fN fN
 
N  
k2  
k1   k kd
‐   x x  x 
    

‐ N  

Piecewise Linear Stiffness Gap Nonlinearity Dry Friction Nonlinearity

Nonlinearity
 
Fig. 1 Internal nonlinear force of nonlinearities with respect to displacement

Validation of the proposed method is demonstrated on a system in which natural frequencies are close to each other. Utilizing
a system like this, it is provided that contribution of other modes to the response at the resonance region is comparable and
the effect of other modes cannot be neglected. Therefore, the effect of using hybrid mode shapes can be clearly demonstrated
on such a system. The underlying linear system used in the case study is a 6-degree-of-freedom (DOF) system given in Fig.
2.

k1 k2 k3 k4 k5 k6
m m m m m m

h1   h2   h3 h4 h5 h6  
x1 x2 x3 x4 x5   x6

F (t )
Fig. 2 Six-DOF linear system

The values of the parameters of this 6-DOF linear system are given as follows

m  3kg , k1  7500 N / m , k2  k5  2500 N / m , k3  k4  k6  5000N / m , F  10 N ,   0.01

3.1 Case Study 1: Piecewise Linear Stiffness Element

This nonlinear element is connected between the 6th mass and ground. The parameters of the nonlinear element are
k1  2000 N / m , k2  10000 N / m ,   0.015m . Fig. 3 shows response of the 6th DOF for linear (i.e., there is no nonlinear
element) and nonlinear systems. Hardening effects and jump phonemena are seen at the resonance regions as expected. In the
response calculation of the nonlinear system all the modes of the linear system are used; hence, no reduction is done.
Studying the piecewise nonlinear element, it can be conluded that, two limiting equivalent stiffness values can be defined.
The first one is k1 , which is the case if the vibration amplitude is small than the break away amplitude (limiting case 1) and
the second one is k 2 , which is the case if the vibration amplitude is very large (limiting case 2). Therefore, adding these
equivalent stiffness values to the original system it is possible to define two additional linear systems. After solving the
eigenvalue problems, hybrid mode shapes are obtained by using Eqs. (8), (9) and (10).

In Figs. 4 and 5, response of the 6th mass is given by using one mode of the linear system without nonlinearities, one mode of
linear system corresponding to limiting case 1, one mode of the linear system corresponding to limiting case 2, and one mode
of the hybrid mode shapes. It is observed from the results that one mode of hybrid mode shapes gives very accurate results
throughout the frequency range considered. It should be noted that the difference observed at the off-resonance region is due
to the fact that vibration amplitudes at off-resonance region are very small compared to those at resonance.

1
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
0
10
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10

-4
10

-5
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 3 Displacement amplitude of the 6th mass with respect to frequency

 1
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
0 1 Mode of Linear System
10
1 Mode of Limiting Case 1
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

1 Mode of Limiting Case 2

1 Mode of Hybrid Mode Shapes
-1
10

-2
10

-3
10

-4
10

-5
10
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Frequency [rad/s]
 
Fig. 4 Effect of linear modes used on the displacement amplitude of the 6th mass around the first resonance

0
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
1 Mode of Linear System
1 Mode of Limiting Case 1
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

-1
10 1 Mode of Limiting Case 2
1 Mode of Hybrid Mode Shapes

-2
10

-3
10

-4
10
24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Frequency [rad/s]
 
Fig. 5 Effect of linear modes used on the displacement amplitude of the 6th mass around the second resonance
3.2 Case Study 2: Gap Element

In this case, the nonlinear element, i.e. gap element, is connected between the 6th mass and ground, as in the Case Study 1.
The values of the parameters of the nonlinearity are k  4000 N / m ,   0.02m . Fig. 6 shows the displacement amplitude of
the 6th mass as a function of frequency for the linear and nonlinear systems. For gap nonlinearity, there exists one limiting
equivalent stiffness, which is referred to as limiting case 2. For limiting case 1, limiting equivalent stiffness is taken as zero
which corresponds to the case with no nonlinear element.

Displacement amplitude of the 6th mass with respect to frequency is given in Figs. 7 and 8. It is observed from the results
obtained that hybrid mode shape outperforms the other cases. Accuracy of the method can be increased further if 2 modes are
used instead of a single mode.

1
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
0
10
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10

-4
10

-5
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 6 Displacement amplitude of the 6th mass with respect to frequency

 1
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
1 Mode of Limiting Case 1
1 Mode of Limiting Case 2
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

0
10 1 Mode of Hybrid Mode Shapes

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 7 Effect of linear modes used on the displacement amplitude of the 6th mass around the first resonance

Frequency Response of Nonlinear System

0
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
1 Mode of Limiting Case 1
1 Mode of Limiting Case 2
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

1 Mode of Hybrid Mode Shapes

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 8 Effect of linear modes used on the displacement amplitude of the 6th mass around the second resonance
3.3 Case Study 3: Dry Friction Element

In this case study, the nonlinear element, i.e. dry friction, is connected between the 1st mass and the 6th mass. Parameters of
the dry firction nonlinearity are kd  1000 N / m ,  N  15 N . Comparison of the linear and nonlinear responses for the 6th
mass are given in Fig. 9 where the effect of dry friction nonlinearity is very clear at the first and second resonances. Studying
dry friction nonlinearity, two limiting cases can be defined. For very large displacement amplitudes, since majority of a cycle
is covered by slip state, limiting equivalent stiffness is zero which is referred to as limiting case 1. On the other hand, if the
displacement amplitude is very small, dry friction element stays always in stick state which results in a limiting equivalent
stiffness of k d and this case is considered as limiting case 2. It should be also noted that limiting case 1 corresponds to the
linear system without the dry friction element.

In Figs. 10 and 11, response of the 6th mass is calculated by using one mode of linear system corresponding to limiting case
1, one mode of the linear system corresponding to limiting case 2 and one mode of the hybrid mode shapes. It is seen from
the results obtained that using hybrid mode shapes gives more accurate results.

1
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
0
10
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10

-4
10

-5
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 9 Displacement amplitude of the 6th mass with respect to frequency

 1
Frequency Response of Nonlinear System
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
1 Mode of Limiting Case 1
1 Mode of Limiting Case 2
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

0
10 1 Mode of Hybrid Mode Shapes

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 10 Effect of linear modes used on the displacement amplitude of the 6th mass around the first resonance

Frequency Response of Nonlinear System

0
10
Pure Linear Response
Nonlinear Response
1 Mode of Limiting Case 1
1 Mode of Limiting Case 2
Displacement Amplitude of DOF 6[m]

1 Mode of Hybrid Mode Shapes

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Frequency [rad/s]

Fig. 11 Effect of linear modes used on the displacement amplitude of the 6th mass around the second resonance
 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

In this study, a new approach based on hybrid mode shapes defined in this study is proposed to obtain dynamic response of
nonlinear structures. For systems with nonlinear elements where the equivalent stiffness has limiting values, hybrid mode
shapes composed of mode shapes of the linear systems corresponding to each limiting equivalent stiffness value can be
defined. Hybrid mode shapes are obtained by a linear combination of mode shapes of the limiting linear cases by monitoring
the equivalent stiffness of nonlinear elements in the iterative solution process. Using these hybrid mode shapes in the forced
response prediction of nonlinear structures leads to accurate solution of system by keeping the number of mode shapes at a
minimum. This results in a significant reduction in computational time, which is very important for large nonlinear systems.

In the case studies presented in this study, piecewise linear stiffness, gap element and dry friction element are the
nonlinearities used which show the aforementioned limiting behaviors. A 6-DOF lumped parameter model with a single
nonlinear element attached is considered in all case studies. It is observed that hybrid mode shapes proposed in this study
give very satisfactory results compared to the mode shapes of the linear system obtained by disregarding the nonlinear
elements.

5 REFERENCES

[1] Menq C.H., Griffin J.H., Bielak J., “The influence of microslip on vibratory response, Part II: a ‘'comparison with
experimental results”, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 107(2), pp. 295-307, 1986

[2] Chen J.J., Menq C.H., “Prediction of the resonant response of frictionally constrained blade systems using
constrained mode shapes”, Proceedings of the International Gas Turbine & Aero Engine Congrees & Exhibition, Stockholm,
Sweden, 1998

[3] Petrov E.P., “A high-accuracy model reduction for analysis of nonlinear vibrations in structures with contact
interfaces”, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 133(10), 102503/1-102503/10., 2011

[4] Kuran B., Özgüven H.N., “A modal superposition method for nonlinear structures”, Journal of Sound and Vibration,
189(3), pp. 315-339, 1996

[5] Cigeroglu E., An N., Menq C.H., “A microslip friction model with normal load variation induced by normal
motion”, Nonlinear Dynamics, 50(3), pp.609-626, 2007

[6] Cigeroglu E., An N., Menq C.H., “Forced response prediction of constrained and unconstrained structures coupled
through frictional contacts”, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 131(2), 2009

[7] Cigeroglu E., Özgüven H.N., “Non-linear vibration analysis of bladed disks with dry friction dampers”, Journal of
Sound and Vibration, 295, pp.1028-1043, 2006

[8] Tanrıkulu O., Kuran B., Özgüven H.N., Imregun M., “Forced harmonic response analysis of non-linear structures
using describing functions”, AIAA Journal, 31(7), pp. 1313-1320, 1993

[9] Gelb A., Vander Velde W.E., “Multiple-input describing functions and nonlinear system design”, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1968

[10] Atherton, D.P., “Nonlinear control engineering: Describing Function Analysis and Design.”, Van Nostrand
Reinhold, London, 627 pages, 1975.

[11] Cigeroglu E., Samandari H.,”Nonlinear free vibration of double walled carbon nanotubes by using describing
function method with multiple trial functions”, Physica E ,46, pp. 160-173, 2012

[12] Groll G.V., Ewins D.J., “The harmonic balance method with arc-length continuation in rotor/stator contact
problems”, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 241(2), pp. 223-233, 2001 

View publication stats