MODAL

MATHS
π
FORMULAS FOR STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
ISSUE 3

−
δ

Ian Ward
 Natural frequency
The single degree of freedom, or SDOF, system is a useful concept in structural
dynamics. It consists of a mass M connected to ground via a spring with stiffness K
and a damper with damping coefficient C. If the mass is given an initial
displacement (x) and then released, the displacement oscillates about zero and
gradually decreases with time.

M x

Time

K C The frequency of oscillation is

1 K
called the natural frequency and, fn =
for low levels of damping, is given by 2π M
1
The period of oscillation is T=
fn

The rate of decay of the response is governed by damping. For structural

applications this is expressed as a 'damping ratio' or as a 'logarithmic decrement'.

Damping Ratio
If the damping were to be gradually increased until the displacement dropped to
zero without any oscillation then the SDOF would be said to be 'critically damped'
with a damping coefficient of Ccrit (indicated by the blue curve in the graph below).

< critical damping

xp
critically damped
xp+1 > critical damping
Displacement

Time

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 1
 Any further increase in the damping would give rise to a slower decay to zero
(the red curve in the graph). In practice, structural damping is only a fraction of
the critical value and the decay of vibration is more closely represented by the
green curve in the graph. The amount of damping can be defined in terms of a
critical damping ratio:
C
damping ratio ξ=
Ccrit
The relationship between the damping ratio and the damping coefficient is

C = 2ξ Mω = 2 ξ MK
with the circular frequency ω given by ω = 2π f
Logarithmic Decrement
An alternative way of describing the structural damping is to consider the height
of successive peaks in the vibration decay (denoted as xp and xp+1 in the graph on
the previous page). The natural logarithm of this ratio is the logarithmic
decrement δ (or 'log dec'):
 xp  xp δ
logarithmic decrement δ = ln   i.e. =e
 x p+ 1  x p+1

Or, if the decay over a number of cycles N is considered then

1  xp  xp Nδ
logarithmic decrement δ= ln   i.e. =e
N  xp+N  x p+N

The relationship between the

logarithmic decrement and the damping ratio is... δ = 2π ξ

As a rough guide, a logarithmic decrement of 0.1 means that the peak amplitude
falls by approximately 10% in each successive cycle.

Another way of visualizing the vibration decay associated with a particular

damping value is to consider the number of cycles required to cause the peak
amplitude to decay to a certain level.

 1 
ln  
decay to 50% ... N50 =
 0.5  = ln ( 2) = ln ( 2)
δ δ 2π ξ

 1 
ln  
decay to 5% ... N5 =
 0.05  = ln ( 20) = 1
=
π
(approx)
δ 2πξ 2ξ δ
(these relationships are shown in the graph overleaf)

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 2
 50
decay to 50%
Number of cycles, N, decay to 5%
required for amplitude to 40
decay to a given percentage
of the original level.
30

20

10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
damping ratio ξ (%)

Dynamic Magnification Factor

If a sinusoidal load is applied to the SDOF the response eventually reaches a
'steady-state' condition. The graph below shows the response of a SDOF with 5%
damping ratio when the sinusoidal load is applied at three different frequencies
(but with the same load amplitude).
Displacement

Time

load applied at 1/2 fn

load applied at fn
load applied at 2 fn

The peak value of the steady-state deflection, as a proportion of the static

deflection, is called the 'Dynamic Magnification Factor', given by:
1
DMF =
2
1 −  f   +  2ξ f 
2 2

  fn    fn 
    

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 3
 DMF versus frequency ratio for different levels of damping

100
damping ratio = 0.5% 2
damping ratio = 2%
damping ratio = 5%
damping ratio = 10%
damping ratio = 20%

DMF

10

Note that, for high levels of damping,

the maximum response (resonance)
occurs when the forcing frequency is
slightly lower than the natural
frequency. For low damping levels,
when the forcing frequency increases
above the natural frequency the
response decreases back down to the
static value when f = 2 fn

0.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

frequency ratio f/fn

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 4
 The maximum DMF occurs when the forcing frequency is

2
fmax = fn 1 − 2ξ

The value of the maximum DMF is

1 π
DMFmax = =
2ξ δ
From this it follows that the displacement at resonance is

1 F π F
xres = =
2ξ K δ K
and the acceleration at resonance is
1 F π F
ares = =
2ξ M δ M

The DMF curve also supplies a means for determining the damping ratio:

1
∆f where >f is the width of the DMF curve at
ξ= 2
2fmax
times the resonant amplitude at frequency fmax.

This is referred to as the half-power bandwidth method for determining the

damping, and is shown graphically in the figure below.

DMFmax
∆f
ξ=
2fmax
>f DMFmax

2
DMF

fmax

Frequency

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 5
 Build-up of Resonant Response

The response after a number of cycles, N, as a proportion of the final resonant

response is given by:

x
(
= 1−e
− 2π ξN )
x res
This expression is illustrated in the figure below for a number of different damping
ratios.

1
0.96

x/xres
0.75

0.5

0.25
damping ratio = 5%
damping ratio = 2%
damping ratio = 1%
damping ratio = 0.5%
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Number of cycles to achieve resonance, N

An approximate relationship for the number of cycles required to reach the

maximum resonant response (strictly speaking, 96% of it) is:

1 π
Npeak = =
2ξ δ

The figure shows that roughly the same number of cycles again are required for
the response to build up from 96% to 100% of the maximum resonant response.

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 6
 Formulas for natural frequency

Undamped natural frequency of 1 K

system with stiffness K and mass M fn =
2π M

2
Damped natural frequency fd = fn 1−ξ

(This shows that the damped natural frequency of a structure with 5%

damping will only be 0.1% lower than the undamped natural frequency. This
means that, for typical engineering structures, it can be assumed that fd = fn).

Natural frequency of a SDOF system in 1 g

terms of the self-weight deflection > fn =
2π ∆
caused by 1g (Blevins (1979)).
15.76
i.e. fn = (with > in mm)
∆

Modified version of the equation above.

18
Approximate value for the natural frequency of fn = (with > in mm)
a structure with distributed mass and stiffness ∆
(Steel Designer's manual (2003)).

String/cable of length L with tension 1 T

fn =
T and mass per unit length m. 2L m

1 g
Pendulum of length L. fn =
2π L

Undamped natural frequency of system with

1 K
torsional stiffness K (moment/rotation) and fn =
mass moment of inertia J. 2 π J

Approximate formula for road 100

fn =
bridge of length L metres L
(Bachmann & Ammann (1995)).

Approximate formula for 46

fn =
building of height H metres H
(Ellis (1980)).

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 7
 Modal properties of uniform beams with various support conditions (Blevins (1979))

2 E=Young's modulus, L=length,

Natural frequency λi EI I=area moment of inertia,
of mode i fi =
2 m m=mass per unit length.
2π L
(see below for values of λ)

Generalized mass Participation

Mode λ (fraction of total mass) factor
Fixed - Free beam
i=1 1.875 0.250 1.566
i=2 4.694 0.250 0.867
i=3 7.855 0.250 0.509

Fixed - Fixed beam

i=1 4.730 0.396 1.320
i=2 7.853 0.439 0.000
i=3 10.996 0.437 0.550

Fixed - Pinned beam

i=1 3.927 0.439 1.298
i=2 7.069 0.437 0.125

> i=3 10.210 0.437 0.506

Pinned - Pinned beam

i=1 π 0.500 1.273
i=2 2π 0.500 0.000

> > i=3 3π 0.500 0.424

Free - Free beam

i=1 4.730 0.250 0.000
i=2 7.853 0.250 0.000
i=3 10.996 0.250 0.000

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 8
 Fundamental frequencies of plates with various support conditions
(Bachmann & Ammann (1995))
E=Young's modulus, t=thickness,
2
Natural λ Et ρ=density, a=length, b=width,
f=
frequency
a
2
(
12 ρ 1 − ν )
2 µ=a/b, ν=Poisson's ratio
(see below for values of λ)

(
λ = 1.57 1 + μ
2
) λ = 1.57 (1 + 2.5 μ 2 + 5.14 μ4)

λ = 1.57 (5.14 + 2.92 μ2 + 2.44 μ 4) λ = 1.57 (1 + 2.33 μ2 + 2.44 μ4)

λ = 1.57 (2.44 + 2.72 μ2 + 2.44 μ 4) λ = 1.57 (5.14 + 3.13 μ2 + 5.14 μ 4)

λ = 3.25 λ = 6.53

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 9
 Maximum Response of an Undamped SDOF Elastic System
Subject to Various Load Pulses (Biggs (1964))

2.2

2
DLFmax

1.8
force

M
1.6

K period T

1.4

1.2

0.8
td td td
force

force

force

0.6

time time time

0.4 td td
force

force

0.2

time time

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
td/T

In the derivation of these charts no damping has been included because it has no
significant effect. The maximum DLF usually corresponds to the first peak of
response, and the amount of damping normally encountered in structures is not
sufficient to significantly decrease this value.

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 10
 Tuned Mass Dampers

The TMD design chart below gives the Tuned

additional overall damping ratio (ξa) Mass
provided by a TMD with active mass Md Damper
when attached to a structure with modal
mass Ms and inherent damping ξs. The chart
is based on a TMD with ξd = 15% and a
structure with ξs in the range 0.5% - 2.5%.
It also assumes that the TMD is located at Structure
the position of maximum response of the
mode being damped.

The overall damping becomes ξs + ξa.

modal
mass
ratio
ξa(%)
Md/Ms
(%)

frequency ratio fd/fs (%)

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 11
 Tuned Mass Dampers
Md
If the TMD can be tuned then the TMD chart ξa =
shows that the additional damping is roughly Ms

Maximum deflection of 1 π
xreld = =
TMD relative to structure 2ξd δd

fs Md
Optimum TMD frequency fd = with μ=
(Mead (1998)) 1+μ Ms

3 μ
Optimum TMD damping ratio ξd =
(Bachmann & Ammann (1987)) (
8 1+μ )3
Wind-induced vortex shedding

fn D fn=natural frequency,
Critical wind speed for vortex
vcrit = D=across-wind dimension,
shedding (Blevins 2001) St St=Strouhal number.

For a circular cylinder St is approximately 0.2 and therefore vcrit = 5 fn D

The susceptibility of vortex-induced vibrations depends on the structural damping

and the ratio of the structural mass to the fluid mass. This is expressed by the
Scruton number (Sc), also known as the 'mass-damping parameter' (Scruton 1981).

L
⌠
 m ( x) ϕ ( x ) 2 dx
2 me δ s ⌡0 (equivalent mass
Sc = with me = per unit length)
2 L
ρair D ⌠
 ϕ ( x) 2 dx
⌡0

Wind-induced galloping den Hartog (1956)

2 Sc fn D dCy/dα is the rate of change

Critical wind speed
vcrit =
for galloping dCy of the lateral force coefficient
with angle of attack
dα

A section dCy
is susceptible >0
dCy  dCL 
dα
note that
=−  + CD
to galloping if dα  dα 
with CL=lift coefficient, CD=drag coefficient

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 12
 Seismic Response Spectrum Analysis
Relationship between SDOF response and structural response for each mode.
Single Degree of Freedom response spectrum
Sa 1.4
acceleration (g)
Sa ξ = 2%
1.2
ξ = 7%
1
Sa
SDOF acceleration 0.8

0.6
ZPA
0.4
fn
0.2

0
base acceleration 0.1 1 10 f (Hz) 100
ZPA π
Approximate relationship Sa = = ZPA
2ξ δ
Structure with distributed mass and stiffness
L
⌠ 2
Generalized mass MG =  ϕ ( x) ml ( x) dx
(modal mass) ⌡0

L
i ⌠
 ϕ ( x) ml ( x ) dx
⌡0
Participation Γ=
natural L
factor (see page 8 ⌠
frequency fn for typical values)  ϕ ( x ) 2 ml ( x) dx
⌡0
L
mode shape
ϕ(x) Maximum ( )
ai = Γ ϕ xi Sa
acceleration
mass per at point i 2
 L 
unit length ⌠ ϕ ( x ) ml ( x) dx 
ml(x)  ⌡0 
Effective mass ME =
 
L
⌠
 ϕ ( x ) 2 ml ( x) dx
⌡0
2
Base shear force SFbase = ME Sa = Γ MG Sa

The maximum response from each of the modes can be combined using the 'Square
Root Sum of Squares' or 'Complete Quadratic Combination' method (see next page).

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 13
 Combination of Modal Responses
This section compares two standard techniques for combining the response from
different modes, namely the SRSS (Square Root Sum of Squares) and CQC (Complete
Quadratic Combination) methods. As the name suggests, the SRSS method calculates
the combined response by performing an SRSS on the modal contributions. For the
CQC method the modal responses, a, are combined by making use of modal
cross-correlation coefficients (Wilson, Kiureghian & Bayo):

∑ ∑i ∑j (ai ρi , j aj)
2
a_SRSS = ( ai ) a_CQC =
i
where i, j represent the modes and 1.5
 fi   fi 
8 ξi ξj  ξi + ξj   
ρi , j =
 fj   fj 
2
  f i  2 f i   f i  
2
 fi 
2
 2 2
1 −  f j   + 4 ξi ξj f j 1 +  f j   + 4 ( ξi) + ( ξj)   f j 
       
where f=frequency and ξ=damping ratio. The difference between the two methods
is illustrated with some examples based on 4 modes, each with a=1:

3  2   1 0.01 0 0
     
5 2 0.01 1 0.01 0
f=   Hz ξ=   % ρ=   Well-spaced modes
7  2   0 0.01 1 0.02 
      a_SRSS = 2
9  2   0 0 0.02 1  a_CQC = 2.03

 3  2   1 0.01 0.01 0
      Two of the modes
5 2 0.01 1 1 0
f=   Hz ξ =   % ρ=   now closely spaced
 5.01  2   0.01 1 1 0 a_SRSS = 2
     
 9  2   0 0 0 1 a_CQC = 2.46

3   10   1 0.13 0.05 0.03 

      Well-spaced modes
5 10 0.13 1 0.26 0.1
f =   Hz ξ=  % ρ=  with increased ξ
7   10   0.05 0.26 1 0.38  a_SRSS = 2
      a_CQC = 2.42
9   
10  0.03 0.1 0.38 1 

Two close modes

 5  2  1 1
f=  Hz ξ =   % ρ=  a_SRSS = 1.414
 5.01  2  1 1
a_CQC = 2

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 14
 Tripartite Graph Paper

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 15
 References

• Bachmann H., Ammann W., 'Vibrations in Structures Induced by Man and

Machines'. IABSE. 1987.
• Barltrop N.D.P., Adams A.J., ‘Dynamics of Fixed Marine Structures’. 3rd
Edition. MTD. 1991.
• Biggs J.M., ‘Introduction to Structural Dynamics’. McGraw-Hill. 1964.
• Blevins R.D. ‘Formulas for Natural Frequency and Mode Shape’. Van Nostrand
Reinhold. 1979.
• Blevins R.D., ‘Flow-Induced Vibration’. Second Edition. Krieger. 2001.
• Chopra A.K., ‘Dynamics of Structures – A Primer’. Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute. 1981.
• Chopra A.K., ‘Dynamics of Structures – Theory and Applications to Earthquake
Engineering’. Prentice Hall. 1995.
• Clough R.W., Penzien J., ‘Dynamics of Structures’. Computers and Structures
Inc. Second edition. 2003.
• Coates R.C., Coutie M.G., Kong F.K., ‘Structural Analysis’. Chapman & Hall.
1997.
• Craig R.R., ‘Structural Dynamics – An Introduction to Computer Methods’. John
Wiley. 1981.
• Den Hartog J.P., ‘Mechanical Vibrations’. McGraw-Hill. 1956.
• DynamAssist structural dynamics toolbox. www.DynamAssist.com.
• Gupta A.K. ‘Response Spectrum Method in Seismic Analysis and Design of
Structures’. Blackwell Scientific Publications. 1990.
• Irvine H.M., ‘Structural Dynamics for the Practising Engineer’. Allen and
Unwin. 1986.
• Karnovsky I.A., Lebed O.I., ‘Formulas for Structural Dynamics: Tables, Graphs
and Solutions’. McGraw-Hill. 2001.
• Maguire J.R., Wyatt T.R., 'Dynamics An Introduction for Civil and Structural
Engineers'. ICE Design and Practice Guide. Thomas Telford. 1999.
• Mead D.J., 'Passive Vibration Control'. John Wiley and Sons. 1998.
• Neumark N.M., Rosenbleuth E.,’Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering’.
Prentice-Hall. 1971.
• Norris C.H. et al ‘Structural Design for Dynamic Loads’. McGraw-Hill. 1959.
• Scruton C., 'An Introduction to Wind Effects on Structures'. Engineering Design
Guide 40. Oxford University Press. 1981.
• Simiu E., Scanlan R.H., ‘Wind Effects on Structures – An Introduction to Wind
Engineering’. John Wiley and Sons. 1986
• Wilson E.L., Kiureghian A., Bayo E.P. 'A Replacement for the SRSS Method in
Seismic Analysis'. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. Vol. 9,
187-194 (1981).
• Young W.C. 'Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain'. McGraw-Hill. Sixth
Edition. 1989.

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 16
 Terminology fd damped natural frequency

δ logarithmic decrement fi natural frequency of mode i

Hf frequency interval
fn undamped natural frequency

ξ damping ratio
g acceleration due to gravity
ω circular frequency (2πf)
h plate thickness
ν Poisson's ratio
H height
Γ participation factor
J mass moment of inertia
ϕ mode shape
K stiffness
µ aspect ratio, mass ratio
L length
ρ density
ml mass per unit length
H self-weight deflection
M mass
a acceleration, amplitude
ME effective mass
C damping coefficient
MG generalized mass
Ccrit critical damping coefficient
N number of cycles
CD drag coefficient
SDOF single degree of freedom
CL lift coefficient
Sc Scruton number

Cy lateral force coefficient

St Strouhal number

CQC complete quadratic combination SRSS square root sum of squares

D across-wind dimension t time, thickness

DMF dynamic magnification factor T period, tension

E Young's modulus x displacement

f frequency ZPA zero period acceleration

Ian Ward
MODAL
Issue 3
March 2016 MATHS 17
 INDEX
Acceleration at resonance 5 Natural frequency from deflection 7

Beam frequency 8 Number of cycles to resonance 6

Beam generalized mass 8 Participation factor 13

Beam participation factor 8 Pendulum natural frequency 7

Bridge frequency 7 Period 1

Building frequency 7 Rectangular plate natural frequency 9

Build-up of resonant response 6 References 16

Cable natural frequency 7 Resonance 4

Circular frequency 2 Response after a number of cycles 6

Circular plate natural frequency 9 Response of SDOF to various loads 10

Complete quadratic combination 14 Scruton number 12

Critical damping ratio 2 Seismic base shear 13

Critical wind speed 12 Seismic response spectrum 13

Damped natural frequency 7 Single degree of freedom (SDOF) 1

Damping coefficient 1,2 Spectral acceleration 13

Damping ratio 1,2 Square plate natural frequency 9

Displacement at resonance 5 Square root sum of squares 14

Dynamic load factor (DLF) 10 String natural frequency 7

Dynamic magnification factor (DMF) 3-5 Strouhal number 12

DMF – frequency at maximum value 5 TMD design chart 11

DMF – maximum value 5 TMD optimum damping ratio 12

Effective mass 13 TMD optimum frequency 12

Galloping 12 TMD relative displacement 12

Generalized mass 13 Torsional frequency 7

Half-power bandwidth 5 Tripartite graph paper 15

Logarithmic decrement 1,2 Tuned mass damper (TMD) 11,12

Mass-damping parameter 12 Vibration decay 2,3

Modal mass 13 Vortex shedding 12

Natural frequency 1,7-9 Zero period acceleration 13