You are on page 1of 110

# 3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 1

Structural
Dynamics
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 2
Spring-Mass system subjected
k
F(t)
m
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 3
Free-body diagram of the mass.
F(t)
m
T =kx
=
m
x m ma

=
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 4
t F x k x m
x m x k t F

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 5
0 x k x m
0 t F
: s Homogeneou

Solution of D.E. is sum
of homogeneous and
particular solutions:
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 6
0 x x
: Then
m
k
: Let
2
2

e
2
is the natural circular frequency
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 7
2
t is the period (measured in seconds)
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 8
x
m

t
Displacement due to simple harmonic motion.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 9
One Dimensional
Bar Element

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 10
( ) t f

e
x 1
( ) t f

e
x 2
x 2
d

x 1
d

1
2
x

L
Step 1 - Select Element Type
E - modulus of elasticity
A - cross-sectional area
- mass density
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 11
Step 2 - Select a
Displacement Function
L
x

N
L
x

1 N
d

N d

N u

a a u

2
1
x 2 2 x 1 1
2 1
=
=
+ =
+ =
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 12
Step 3 - Define
Strain/Displacement and
Stress/Strain Relationships
{ } | |{ }
| |
{ }
{ } | |{ } | || |{ } d

B D D
d

L L
B
d

B
x

x
x
x
x
= c = o
)
`

=
(

=
=
c
c
= c
2
1
1 1
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 13
Step 4 - Derive Element
Stiffness and Mass Matrices
and Equations
x 2 x 1
f

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 14
a m f

=
Newtons Second Law
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 15
2
2
2
2 2 2
2
1
2
1 1 1
t
d

m f

t
d

m f

x
x
e
x
x
x
e
x
c
c
+ =
c
c
+ =
NODAL EQUILIBRIUM
EQUATIONS
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 16
2
AL
m
2
AL
m
2
1
m
1
and m
2
are obtained by
lumping the total mass of the
bar equally at the two nodes
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 17
( ) t f

e
x 1
( ) t f

e
x 2
x 2
d

x 1
d

1
2
x

L
m
1
m
2
Lumped Mass Model
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 18

c
c
c
c
(

2
x 2
2
x 1
2
1
x 2
x 1
e
x 2
e
x 1
t
d

t
d

m 0
0 m
f

## Equilibrium in Matrix Form

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 19
( ) { } | |{ } | |{ } d

t f

e

+ =
Equilibrium in Matrix Form
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 20
| |
| |
{ }
{ }
{ }
ons Accelerati Nodal
nts Displaceme Nodal
Matrix Mass Lumped Element
Matrix Stiffness Element
2
2
1 0
0 1
2
1 1
1 1
t
d

AL
m
L
AE
k
c
c
=
(

=
(

=

Defining Terms
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 21
{ } { }
{ } | | { }
{ } | | { }dV u

N f
dV X N f
u

X
V
T
b
V
T
b
e
}}}
}}}
=
=
=

Consistent Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 22
{ } | |{ }
{ } | |{ }
{ } | |{ } d

N u

N u

N u

=
=
=
Consistent Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 23
{ } | | | |{ }
{ } | |{ }
| | | | | |dV N N m

f
dV d

N N f
V
T
b
V
T
b
}}}
}}}
=
=
=

Consistent Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 24
| | | | | |
| |
| | x

d
L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

A m

dV
L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

dV N N m

L
V
V
T
}
}}}
}}}
(

=
(

=
=
0
1
1
1
1
Consistent Mass Matrix
Bar Element
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 25
| |
| |
(

=
(
(
(

|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|

|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|

|
.
|

\
|

|
.
|

\
|

=
}
2 1
1 2
6
1
1 1 1
0
L A
m

d
L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

L
x

A m

L
Consistent Mass Matrix
Bar Element
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 26
d M d K t F

STEP 5 - Assemble the Global
Equations and Apply B.C.s
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 27
d M d K t F

Now must solve coupled set
of ODEs instead of set of
linear algebraic equations!
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 28
| | | | | |dV N N m
V
T
}}}
=
Consistent Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 29
v

, y

y 2 y 2
d

, f

1 1
m

|
2 2
m

|
y 1 y 1
d

, f

L
1 2
Beam Element
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 30
Shape Functions
2 2 3
3
4
2 3
3
3
3 2 2 3
3
2
3 2 3
3
1
L x

L x

L
1
N
L x

3 x

2
L
1
N
L x

L x

2 L x

L
1
N
L L x

3 x

2
L
1
N
=
+ =
+ =
+ =
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 31
-0.500
0.000
0.500
1.000
0
N
1

N
3

N
2

N
4

L
Shape Functions
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 32
| | | | | |
| |
(
(
(
(

=
=
}}}
2 2
2 2
4 22 3 13
22 156 13 54
3 13 4 22
13 54 22 156
420
L L L L
L L
L L L L
L L
m
m
dV N N m
V
T
Consistent Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 33
210
L
0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0
210
L
0
0 0 0 1
2
m
m
2
2
Lumped Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 34
2nd and 4th terms account for rotary inertia.
o = 0 if this is ignored.
o = 17.5 if mass moment of inertia of bar
spinning about one end is selected
3
2
L
2
m
I
2
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
Lumped Mass Matrix
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 35
| |
| |
3
2
1
u
u
u
2 1 1
1 2 1
1 1 2
12
m
Q
Q 0
0 Q
m
(
(
(

=
(

=
For each degree of freedom
Consistent Mass Matrix - CST
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 36
2 0 1 0 1 0
0 2 0 1 0 1
1 0 2 0 1 0
0 1 0 2 0 1
1 0 1 0 2 0
0 1 0 1 0 2
12
At
m
Consistent Mass Matrix - CST
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 37
| |
| |
3
2
1
u
u
u
1 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 1
3
m
Q
Q 0
0 Q
m
(
(
(

=
(

=
Lumped Mass Matrix - CST
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 38
| |
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

=
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
3
At
m
Lumped Mass Matrix - CST
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 39
| |
| |
At m
m
Q
Q
Q
m
=
(
(
(
(

=
(
(

=
4 2 1 2
2 4 2 1
1 2 4 2
2 1 2 4
36
0
0
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 40
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

=
4 0 2 0 1 0 2 0
0 4 0 2 0 1 0 2
2 0 4 0 2 0 1 0
0 2 0 4 0 2 0 1
1 0 2 0 4 0 2 0
0 1 0 2 0 4 0 2
2 0 1 0 2 0 4 0
0 2 0 1 0 2 0 4
36
m
m
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 41
Hybrid Methods
Attempts have been made to combine
consistent and lumped mass approaches
to achieve some of the benefits of each!
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 42
HRZ Lumping
1. Hinton, Rock, and Zienkiewicz
2. Compute the diagonal terms of consistent
mass matrix.
3. Compute total mass of element, m
4. Compute s by adding diagonal coefficients
associated with translational D-O-F that are
in same direction.
5. Scale all diagonal coefficients by multiplying
by m/s
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 43
HRZ - Bar Element
| |
| |
(

=
=

=
=
(

=
3 0
0 3
6
L A
m

2
3
s
m
6
L A
4 s
L A m
2 1
1 2
6
L A
m

## 3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 44

HRZ - Beam Element
| |
312
420
420
312
4 22 3 13
22 156 13 54
3 13 4 22
13 54 22 156
420
2 2
2 2
=

=
=
(
(
(
(

=
s
m
L A
s
L A m
L L L L
L L
L L L L
L L
m
m
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 45
HRZ - Beam Element
| |
(
(
(
(
(
(

=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

=
2
2
2
2
L
39
L
39
78
m
L 4
312
420
0 0 0
0 156
312
420
0 0
0 0 L 4
312
420
0
0 0 0 156
312
420
420
m
m

## 3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 46

36
1
36
8
76
3
76
16
3 x 3
Gauss Rule
2 x 2
Gauss Rule
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 47
36
1
36
4
36
1
36
4
36
16
36
16
3 x 3
Gauss Rule
2 x 2
Gauss Rule
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 48
m n Consistent (%) HRz Lumping (%) Ad Hoc Lumping (%)
1 1 0.11 0.32 0.32
2 1 0.4 0.45 0.45
2 2 0.35 2.75 4.12
3 1 5.18 0.05 5.75
3 2 4.68 2.96 10.15
3 3 13.78 5.18 19.42
4 2 16.88 1.53 31.7
Mode Type of Mass Matrix
% error in natural frequencies of a thick
simply-supported plate.
Half of the plate modeled with 8-noded
24 d-o-f elements
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 49
Optimal Lumping
Only translational d-o-f
Based on consistent mass matrix
Chose integration points to coincide
with nodal locations
[m] will be diagonal

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 50
Let p be the highest order complete
polynomial in shape function N
let m be the highest order derivative
in strain energy (m = 1 elasticity, m
= 2 bending)
Chose quadrature rule with degree of
precision 2(p-m)
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 51
Three noded bar element
p = 2
m = 1
2(p-m) = 2
Newton -Cotes has points at the nodes.
(Simpson Rule)
( ) ( ) ( )
(

+
|
.
|

\
|
+
+ = b f
6
1
2
a b
f
6
4
a f
6
1
a b dx ) x ( f
b
a
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 52
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 m j i
1 N 1 N
6
1
0 N 0 N
6
4
1 N 1 N
6
1
1 1
2
L
A m
2
L
J
d J N N dx N N A m
ij
j i j i j i ij
1
1
j i j i ij
= =
(

+ + =
=
= =
} }

| |
(
(
(

=
4 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1
6
AL
m
1
2
3
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 53
Serendipity
12
1

3
1
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 54
Lagrangian
36
1
9
1
9
4
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 55
Mass Matrices
Product [m]{a} must yield the correct total force on
an element (F = ma) when {a} represents a rigid-
body translational acceleration.
Consistent mass matrices, [m] and [M] are positive
definite.
Lumped mass matrix is positive semi-definite when
zero terms appear on main diagonal.
Lumped mass matrix is indefinite when negative
terms appear on main diagonal.

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 56
Mass Matrices
Special treatment may be needed to
handle the last two cases.

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 57
Best Type ?
1. Consistent matrices usually
more accurate for flexural
problems.
2. Consistent matrices give upper
bounds on natural frequencies.

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 58
Best Type ?
1. Lumped matrices usually give natural
frequencies less than exact values.
2. Simpler to form.
3. Occupy less storage.
4. Require less computational effort.
5. Usually more important in time-history than
in vibration problems.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 59
Damping
1. Structural damping is not viscous.
2. Due to mechanisms such as hysteresis and
slip in connections.
3. Mechanisms not well understood.
4. Awkward to incorporate into structural
dynamic equations.
5. Makes equations computationally difficult.
6. Effects usually approximated by viscous
damping.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 60
Types of Damping Models
Phenomenological Damping Methods
(models actual dissipative mechanisms)
Elastic-Plastic Hysteresis Loss
Structural Joint Friction
Material Micro-cracking
Spectral Damping Methods
Introduce Viscous Damping
Relies on Fraction of Critical Damping
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 61
Critical Damping
Damping Critical
Damping Critical of Fraction
1 =

## Critical Damping marks the transition between

oscillatory and non- oscillatory response of a
structure
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 62
Critical Damping Ratio
Concrete s Prestresse or Reinforced
structures steel riveted or Bolted
Piping Steel
% 15 % 2
% 15 % 2
% 5 % 5 . 0
s s
s s
s s
Actual value may depend on stress level.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 63
Rayleigh or Proportional
Damping
M K C
Damping matrix is a linear combination of
stiffness and mass matrices:
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 64
Rayleigh or Proportional
Damping
[C] is orthogonal damping matrix.
Modes may be uncoupled by eigenvectors
associated with undamped problem.
|
.
|

\
|
e
|
e o =
2
1
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 65
If critical damping ratio is known
at two frequencies then:
2
1
2
2
1 2 2 1
2 1
2
1
2
2
1 1 2 2
2
2
2
1
e e
e e
e e = |
e e
e e
= o
|
.
|

\
|
e
|
e o =
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 66
Natural Frequencies and Mode Shapes
Undamped, Unforced Response
) Hz (
D
t sin D D
t cos D D
t sin D D
2
t
e
=
e
e e =
e e =
e =
2
f
frequency circular
f - o - d nodal of amplitudes

## 3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 67

Results in generalized eigenproblem
2
0 D M K
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 68
0 D
0 M K
Trivial Solution:
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 69
| | | |
{ } 0
0
=
=
D
M K
Nontrivial Solution:
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 70
rs Eigenvecto Associated
es) (eigenvalu Polynomial
stic Characteri of Roots

i
i
D
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 71
Modes Normal D
s Frequencie Natural
i
i
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 72
Natural Frequencies
[K] and [M] n x n then there are n eigenvalues
and n eigenvectors
[K] and [M] positive definite then eigenvalues are
all positive
M
ii
= 0 infinite eigenvalue
M
ii
< 0 negative eigenvalue - imaginary frequency
Use condensation to remove i
th
equation if M
ii
= 0
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 73
Rayleigh Quotient
{ } | |{ }
{ } | |{ }
| |
| |
{ }
eigenvalue i to ion approximat
r eigenvecto i to ion approximat
definite positive
symmetric
th
th

=
D
M
K
D M D
D K D
T
T
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 74
Rayleigh Quotient
eigenvalue est arg l
eigenvalue smallest
v M v
v K v
max
min
max
T
T
min

s s
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 75
Modal Methods
When [K], [C], [M] are known and time
independent the problem is linear.
conditions initial as given 0 D , 0 D
R D K D C D M
ext

= + +
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 76
Modal Methods
Assume orthogonal damping, such as
Rayleigh Damping. Modes can be uncoupled:
j i
0 D C D
0 D K D
0 D M D
j
T
i
j
T
i
j
T
i
=
=
=
=
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 77
i i i
T
i
2
i i
T
i
i
T
i
2 D C D
D K D
1 D M D
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 78
Eigenvectors are linearly independent
| |
{ } | |{ }
{ } amplitudes modal
shapes) (mode
rs eigenvecto of matrix
Z
Z D | =
= |
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 79
Substitute into:
given 0 D , 0 D
R D K D C D M
ext

= + +
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 80
given 0 D ) 0 ( Z
0 D ) 0 ( Z
R Z K Z C Z M
ext
= |
= |
= | + | + |

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 81
Mode Displacement Method
p Z Z Z I
2
= e + +

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 82
Mode Displacement Method
Pre-multiply by [|]
T

given 0 D ) 0 ( Z
0 D ) 0 ( Z
R Z K
Z C Z M
ext
T T
T T
= |
= |
| = | | +
| | + | |

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 83
Mode Displacement Method
2
T
T
T
K
C
I M
e = | |
= | |
= | |
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 84
Mode Displacement Method
p Z Z Z I
2
= e + +

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 85
Modes Uncouple:
n , 1 i p Z Z 2 Z
Z Z Z Z I
i
2
i i i i i
2
= = e + e +
= e + +

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 86
0 D M ) 0 ( Z
0 D M ) 0 ( Z
0 D M ) 0 ( Z I
0 D M ) 0 ( Z M
0 D ) 0 ( Z
0 D ) 0 ( Z
T
T
T
T T
| =
| =
| =
| = | |
= |
= |

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 87
=
m
1 i
i i
eq
Z D
n m
Reduce size of problem:
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 88
Error Estimate:
{ }
% 1 ) t ( e
R
D K D C D M R
) t ( e
ext
ext
s

=
: analysis accurate an For

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 89
In many structural dynamics
problems, more modes
participate in the quasi-static
response than in the dynamic
response. For a small m value,
the mode displacement method
may have difficulty in predicting
the quasi-static response.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 90
Mode Acceleration method
Method
p Z Z Z I
2

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 91
given 0 D ) 0 ( Z
0 D ) 0 ( Z
R D K Z C Z M
ext
= |
= |
= + | + |

Modal transformation only on
inertial and damping terms
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 92
| |{ } { } | || |{ } | || |{ }
{ } | | { } | | | || |{ } | || |{ } ( ) Z C Z M K R K D
Z C Z M R D K
ext
ext

| | =
| | =
1 1
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 93
T
T
M
I M

## 3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 94

Z C Z K R K D
T
1 ext 1

| | =

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 95
T
1
1
2
T T
1
2
1
2
T
2
T
K
I K
I K
K

| = e |
| = | = e |
= e | |
e = | |
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 96
{ } | | { } | | | | { } | | | || |{ }
{ } | | { } | || | { } | | | || |{ } Z C K Z R K D
Z C K Z K R K D
ext
T
ext

| + e | =
| + | =

1
1
2 1
1 1 1
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 97
{ } | | { } | | | | { } | | | || |{ }
{ } | | { } | || | { } | | | | | | | || |{ }
{ } | | { } | || | { } | || | | |{ } Z Z R K D
Z C K Z R K D
Z C K Z K R K D
ext
T T
ext
T
ext

e | + e | =
| | | + e | =
| + | =

1
2
1
2 1
1
1
2 1
1 1 1
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 98
=

|
|
.
|

\
|
e

+
e
| =
+ e | =
m
1 i
i
i
i
i
2
i
i
ext 1
1
2 ext 1
Z
2
Z
1
R K D
Z Z R K D

First term on RHS represents quasi-static
response, the second term represents
corrections for inertia and viscous effects.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 99
n , 1 i p Z Z 2 Z
i
2
i i i i i
= = e + e +

Solve for Z terms as before:
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 100
Mass Condensation
Reduces number of d-o-f.
Reduces expense of computing
eigenvalues.
Detrimental to accuracy.
Not used with optimal lumping.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 101
Guyan Reduction

|
|
.
|

\
|
(
(

(
(

0
0
D
D
M M
M M
K K
K K
s
m
ss
T
ms
ms mm
ss
T
ms
ms mm
m - master degree of freedom
s - slave degree of freedom
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 102
Guyan Reduction
m - master degree of freedom
s - slave degree of freedom

Basic Assumption:
For lowest frequency modes the inertial
forces on slave d-o-f are less important
than elastic forces transmitted by master
d-o-f. Thus we ignore all mass except M
mm

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 103
Guyan Reduction
{ } | | | | { }
m
T
ms
1
ss s
s
m mm
ss
T
ms
ms mm
D K K D
0
0
D
D
0 0
0 M
K K
K K

=

)

|
|
.
|

\
|
(
(

(
(

## 3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 104

Guyan Reduction
| |{ }
| |
(
(

=
=

T
ms
1
ss
m
s
m
K K
I
T
D T
D
D
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 105
Guyan Reduction
T M T M
T K T K
0 D M K
T
r
T
r
m r r
=
=
=
Both [K
r
] and [M
r
] are generally full.
[M
r
] contains both mass and stiffness terms
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 106
Guyan Reduction
ext
r m r m r m r
ext
T
ext
r
T
r
R D K D C D M
R T R
T C T C
= + +
=
=

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 107
Compute Slaves
i
m
T
ms i
T
ms
1
ss i ss
i
s
D M K M K D =

3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 108
Choosing Master D-O-F
Choose d-o-f where inertia is most important
These are characterized by large mass to
stiffness ratios.
Each d-o-f that has a time varying applied
Master d-o-f should not be clustered.
Process can be automated
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 109
Process for Choosing Master D-O-F
Scan diagonal coefficients of [K] and [M].
Choose d-o-f for which K
ii
/M
ii
is largest.
This becomes first slave.
Condense [K] and [M] by one order.
Repeat process using condensed matrices till
a user specified number of d-o-f remain.
These are Master d-o-f chosen in near
optimal way.
3/22/2014 Dynamic Analysis 110
Number of Master D-O-F
Choose cut-off frequency e
c

Take this to be about three times the highest
frequency of interest.
Terminate selection of master d-o-f when K
ii
/M
ii

< e
c
2
Can combine manual and automatic selection (i.e.
Choose each d-o-f that has a time varying applied
load and then automatically select others.)
Number of Master d-o-f may be 10% - 20% of
total d-o-f.