10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 1

Structural
Dynamics
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 2
Spring-Mass system
subjected to a time
dependent load.
k
F(t)
m
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 3
Free-body diagram of the
mass.
F(t)
m
T = kx
=
m
x m ma
 
·
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 4
t F x k x m
x m x k t F
 
 
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 5
0 x k x m
0 t F
: s Homogeneou
 
Solution of D.E. is sum
of homogeneous and
particular solutions:
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 6
0 x x
: Then
m
k
: Let
2
2
 
ω
2
is the natural circular frequency
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 7
2
is the period (measured in seconds)
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 8
x
m
τ
Displacement due to simple harmonic motion.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 9
One
One
Dimensional
Dimensional
Bar Element
Bar Element
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 10
t f
ˆ
e
x 1
t f
ˆ
e
x 2
x 2
d
ˆ
x 1
d
ˆ
1
2
x
ˆ
L
Step 1 - Select Element Type
E - modulus of elasticity
A - cross-sectional area
ρ - mass density
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 11
Step 2 - Select a
Displacement Function
L
x
ˆ
N
L
x
ˆ
1 N
d
ˆ
N d
ˆ
N u
ˆ
x
ˆ
a a u
ˆ
2
1
x 2 2 x 1 1
2 1
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 12
Step 3 - Define
Strain/Displacement and
Stress/Strain Relationships
{ ¦ [ ]{ ¦
[ ]
{ ¦
{ ¦ [ ]{ ¦ [ ] [ ] { ¦ d
ˆ
B D D
d
ˆ
d
ˆ
d
ˆ
L L
B
d
ˆ
B
x
ˆ
u
ˆ
x
x
x
x
· ε · σ
¹
'
¹
¹
'
¹
·
]
]
]

− ·
·


· ε
2
1
1 1
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 13
Step 4 - Derive Element
Stiffness and Mass
Matrices and Equations
x 2 x 1
f
ˆ
f
ˆ
With time dependent loading
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 14
a m f


·
Newton’s Second Law
Newton’s Second Law
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 15
2
2
2
2 2 2
2
1
2
1 1 1
t
d
ˆ
m f
ˆ
f
ˆ
t
d
ˆ
m f
ˆ
f
ˆ
x
x
e
x
x
x
e
x


+ ·


+ ·
NODAL EQUILIBRIUM
EQUATIONS
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 17
t f
ˆ
e
x 1
t f
ˆ
e
x 2
x 2
d
ˆ
x 1
d
ˆ
1
2
x
ˆ
L
m
1
m
2
Lumped Mass Model
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 18
2
x 2
2
x 1
2
1
x 2
x 1
e
x 2
e
x 1
t
d
ˆ
t
d
ˆ
m 0
0 m
f
ˆ
f
ˆ
f
ˆ
f
ˆ
Equilibrium in Matrix
Form
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 19
( ) { ¦ [ ] { ¦ [ ] { ¦ d
ˆ
m
ˆ
d
ˆ
k
ˆ
t f
ˆ
e
 
+ ·
Equilibrium in Matrix
Form
10/14/08 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
ˆ
d
ˆ
d
ˆ
AL
m
L
AE
k


·
]
]
]

ρ
·
]
]
]



·
 
Defining Terms
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 21
{ ¦ { ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦ dV u
ˆ
N f
dV X N f
u
ˆ
X
V
T
b
V
T
b
e
∫∫∫
∫∫∫
ρ − ·
·
ρ − ·
 
 
Consistent Mass Matrix
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 22
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦ d
ˆ
N u
ˆ
d
ˆ
N u
ˆ
d
ˆ
N u
ˆ
 
 


·
·
·
Consistent Mass Matrix
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 23
{ ¦ [ ] [ ]{ ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦
[ ] [ ] [ ] dV N N m
ˆ
d
ˆ
m
ˆ
f
dV d
ˆ
N N f
V
T
b
V
T
b
∫∫∫
∫∫∫
ρ ·
− ·
ρ − ·
 
 
Consistent Mass Matrix
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 24
[ ] [ ] [ ]
[ ]
[ ] x
ˆ
d
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
A m
ˆ
dV
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
m
ˆ
dV N N m
ˆ
L
V
V
T

∫∫∫
∫∫∫
]
]
]


¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹

ρ ·
]
]
]


¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹

ρ ·
ρ ·
0
1
1
1
1
Consistent Mass Matrix
Bar Element
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 25
[ ]
[ ]
]
]
]

ρ
·
]
]
]
]
]

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

ρ ·

2 1
1 2
6
1
1 1 1
0
L A
m
ˆ
x
ˆ
d
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
L
x
ˆ
A m
ˆ
L
Consistent Mass Matrix
Bar Element
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 26
d M d K t F
 
STEP 5 - Assemble the Global
Equations and Apply B.C.’s
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 27
d M d K t F
 
Now must solve coupled set
Now must solve coupled set
of ODE’s instead of set of
of ODE’s instead of set of
linear algebraic equations!
linear algebraic equations!
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 28
[ ] [ ] [ ] dV N N m
V
T
∫∫∫
ρ ·
Consistent Mass Matrix
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 29
v
ˆ
, y
ˆ
x
ˆ
y 2 y 2
d
ˆ
, f
ˆ
1 1
m
ˆ
,
ˆ
φ
2 2
m
ˆ
,
ˆ
φ
y 1 y 1
d
ˆ
, f
ˆ
L
1 2
Beam Element
10/14/08 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
ˆ
L x
ˆ
L
1
N
L x
ˆ
3 x
ˆ
2
L
1
N
L x
ˆ
L x
ˆ
2 L x
ˆ
L
1
N
L L x
ˆ
3 x
ˆ
2
L
1
N
− ·
+ − ·
+ − ·
+ − ·
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 31
-0.500
0.000
0.500
1.000
0
N
1
N
3
N
2
N
4
L
Shape Functions
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 32
[ ] [ ] [ ]
[ ]
]
]
]
]
]
]

− − −



·
ρ ·
∫∫∫
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
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 34
2nd and 4th terms account for rotary inertia.
α = 0 if this is ignored.
α = 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
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 38
[ ]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

ρ
·
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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 39
[ ]
[ ]
At m
m
Q
Q
Q
m
ρ ·
]
]
]
]
]
]

·
]
]
]
]

·
4 2 1 2
2 4 2 1
1 2 4 2
2 1 2 4
36
0
0
Consistent Mass Matrix -
Quad
10/14/08 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
Consistent Mass Matrix -
Quad
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 41
Hybrid Methods
Attempts have been made to combine
consistent and lumped mass approaches
to achieve some of the benefits of each!
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 42
HRZ Lumping

Hinton, Rock, and Zienkiewicz

Compute the diagonal terms of
consistent mass matrix.

Compute total mass of element, m

Compute
s
s

by

adding diagonal
coefficients associated with
translational D-O-F that are in same
direction.

Scale all diagonal coefficients by
multiplying by m/s
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 43
HRZ - Bar Element
]
]
]

ρ
·
·
ρ
× ·
ρ ·
]
]
]

ρ
·
3 0
0 3
6
L A
m
ˆ
2
3
s
m
6
L A
4 s
L A m
2 1
1 2
6
L A
m
ˆ
10/14/08 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
·
ρ
× ·
ρ ·
]
]
]
]
]
]

− − −



·
s
m
L A
s
L A m
L L L L
L L
L L L L
L L
m
m
10/14/08 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
ˆ
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 46
HRZ – Quadratic Serendipity
36
1
36
8
76
3
76
16
3 x 3
Gauss Rule
2 x 2
Gauss Rule
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 47
HRZ – Quadratic Lagrangian
36
1
36
4
36
1
36
4
36
16
36
16
3 x 3
Gauss Rule
2 x 2
Gauss Rule
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 49
Optimal Lumping

Only translational d-o-f

Based on consistent mass matrix

Use appropriate quadrature rule

Chose integration points to
coincide with nodal locations

[m] will be diagonal
10/14/08 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)
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 51
Three noded bar element
p = 2
m = 1
2(p-m) = 2
Three point quadrature rule.
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
10/14/08 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
· ≠
]
]
]

+ + − − − − ρ ·
·
ξ · ρ ·

]
]
]
]
]

ρ
·
4 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1
6
AL
m
1
2
3
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 53
Serendipity
12
1

3
1
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 54
Lagrangian
36
1
9
1
9
4
10/14/08 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.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 56
Mass Matrices

Special treatment may be needed
to handle the last two cases.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 57
Best Type ?
1. Consistent matrices usually
more accurate for flexural
problems.
2. Consistent matrices give
upper bounds on natural
frequencies.
10/14/08 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.
10/14/08 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.
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 61
Critical Damping
Damping Critical
Damping Critical of Fraction
1 ξ
Critical Damping marks the transition between
oscillatory and non- oscillatory response of a
structure
10/14/08 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
≤ ξ ≤
≤ ξ ≤
≤ ξ ≤
Actual value may depend on stress level.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 63
Rayleigh or Proportional
Damping
M K C
Damping matrix is a linear combination of
stiffness and mass matrices:
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 64
Rayleigh or Proportional
Damping
[C] is orthogonal damping matrix.
Modes may be uncoupled by eigenvectors
associated with undamped problem.
2
1
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 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
π
ω
·
ω
ω ω − ·
ω ω ·
ω ·
2
f
frequency circular
f - o - d nodal of amplitudes
 

10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 67
Results in generalized eigenproblem
2
0 D M K
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 68
0 D
0 M K
Trivial Solution:
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 69
[ ] [ ]
{ ¦ 0
0

· λ −
D
M K
Nontrivial Solution:
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 70
rs Eigenvecto Associated
es) (eigenvalu Polynomial
stic Characteri of Roots
i
i
D
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 71
Modes Normal D
s Frequencie Natural
i
i
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 73
Rayleigh Quotient
{ ¦ [ ]{ ¦
{ ¦ [ ]{ ¦
[ ]
[ ]
{ ¦
eigenvalue i to ion approximat
r eigenvecto i to ion approximat
definite positive
symmetric
th
th
λ
· λ
D
M
K
D M D
D K D
T
T
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 74
Rayleigh Quotient
eigenvalue est arg l
eigenvalue smallest
v M v
v K v
max
min
max
T
T
min
λ
λ
λ ≤ ≤ λ
10/14/08 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

  
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 78
Eigenvectors are linearly
independent
[ ]
{ ¦ [ ]{ ¦
{ ¦ amplitudes modal
shapes) (mode
rs eigenvecto of matrix
Z
Z D φ ·
· φ
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 79
Substitute into:
given 0 D , 0 D
R D K D C D M
ext

  
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 80
given 0 D ) 0 ( Z
0 D ) 0 ( Z
R Z K Z C Z M
ext
 
  
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 81
Mode Displacement
Method
p Z Z Z I
2
  
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 82
Mode Displacement
Method
Pre-multiply by [φ]
T
given 0 D ) 0 ( Z
0 D ) 0 ( Z
R Z K
Z C Z M
ext
T T
T T
· φ
· φ
φ · φ φ +
φ φ + φ φ
 
  
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 83
Mode Displacement
Method
2
T
T
T
K
C
I M
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 84
Mode Displacement
Method
p Z Z Z I
2
  
10/14/08 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
  
  
10/14/08 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
 
 
 
 
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 87
·
m
1 i
i i
eq
Z D
n m
Reduce size of problem:
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 88
Error Estimate:
% 1 ) t ( e
R
D K D C D M R
) t ( e
ext
ext

− − −
·
: analysis accurate an For
  
10/14/08 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.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 90
Mode Acceleration method
Method
p Z Z Z I
2
  
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 92
[ ] { ¦ { ¦ [ ] [ ]{ ¦ [ ] [ ]{ ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦ [ ] [ ] [ ]{ ¦ [ ] [ ]{ ¦ ( ) Z C Z M K R K D
Z C Z M R D K
ext
ext
  
  
φ − φ − ·
φ − φ − ·
− − 1 1
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 93
T
T
M
I M

10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 94
Z C Z K R K D
T
1 ext 1
  
φ − φ − ·

− −
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 95
T
1
1
2
T T
1
2
1
2
T
2
T
K
I K
I K
K



− −


10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 96
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦ [ ] [ ] { ¦ [ ] [ ] [ ]{ ¦
{ ¦ [ ] { ¦ [ ] [ ] { ¦ [ ] [ ] [ ]{ ¦ Z C K Z R K D
Z C K Z K R K D
ext
T
ext
  
  
φ + ω φ − ·
φ + φ − ·





− −
1
1
2 1
1 1 1
10/14/08 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
  
  
  
ξ ω φ + ω φ − ·
φ φ φ + ω φ − ·
φ + φ − ·
− −







− −
1
2
1
2 1
1
1
2 1
1 1 1
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 98
·


,
`

.
|
ω
ξ
+
ω
φ − ·
ξ + ω φ − ·
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.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 99
n , 1 i p Z Z 2 Z
i
2
i i i i i
  
Solve for Z terms as before:
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 100
Mass Condensation

Reduces number of d-o-f.

Reduces expense of computing
eigenvalues.

Detrimental to accuracy.

Not used with optimal lumping.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 101
Guyan Reduction
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
·
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹

,
`

.
|
]
]
]
]

λ −
]
]
]
]

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
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 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

− ·
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
·
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹

,
`

.
|
]
]
]
]

λ −
]
]
]
]

10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 104
Guyan Reduction
]
]
]
]


·
·
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
'
¹
− T
ms
1
ss
m
s
m
K K
I
T
D T
D
D
10/14/08 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
10/14/08 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
  
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 107
Compute Slaves
i
m
T
ms i
T
ms
1
ss i ss
i
s
D M K M K D λ − λ − − ·

10/14/08 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 load should be chosen.

Master d-o-f should not be clustered.

Process can be automated
10/14/08 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.
10/14/08 Dynamic Analysis 110
Number of Master D-O-F
 Choose cut-off frequency ω
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
< ω
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.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful