Modal Analysis

Single Degree-of-Freedom (SDOF)

Undamped
Viscously Damped
Hysterically (Structurally) Damped

Undamped Systems (Theory)

F(t)

Spatial Model (Free vibration)

mx kx 0
x(t ) Xeit
m X kX 0
2

(k m ) X 0
2

0 (k / m)1/ 2

m
k

Undamped Systems (Forced vibration)

1
0.9

mx kx f (t )
f (t ) Fe

it

(k m ) X F
2

0.7
0.6
H()

x(t ) Xe

it

0.8

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

X
1
H ( ) ( )
2
F k m

10

(Rad/s)

12

14

16

18

20

FRF=Frequency
Response Function

Viscous Damping (Free Vibration)

mx cx kx 0
x(t ) Xe

st

ms cs k 0
2

s1, 2 0 i 0 1 2

02 k / m, c /( 2 km )
x(t ) Xe t e i d t

0 , d 0 1

2
5

Viscous Damping (Forced Vibration)

mx cx kx f (t )

0.1
0.09

i t

( m ic k ) Xe Fe
X
1
H ( )
F ( k 2 m ) i c
1
H ( )
(k 2 m) 2 (c) 2

0.08
0.07
0.06
H()

i t

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0

10

(Rad/s)

12

14

16

18

20

18

20

180

160

140

c
H ( ) Arc tan g

2
k m

(D e g re e )

120

100

80

60

40

20

10

(Rad/s)

12

14

16

Structural Damping
# Viscous damping is not a good representative of real
structures.
# Damping in real structures is frequency-dependent.
# A damper whose rate varies with frequency.
f

Viscous damper

Dry friction

Structural damping

Structural Damping
ce d /
mx ce x kx f (t )

Equivalent Viscous damping

( m 2 ice k ) X F
( m 2 id k ) X F
1
H ( )
(k m 2 ) id
1/ k
H ( )
(1 ( / 0 ) 2 ) i

=Structural damping
loss factor

Alternative Forms of FRF

i t

Xe
X
H ( ) it
Fe
F
i t

Ve
V
Y ( ) it
Fe
F

Receptance

Mobility

i t

Ae
A
A( ) it
Fe
F

Inertance or accelerance

Relation between receptance and

mobility
x(t ) Xeit
i t
i t

v(t ) x(t ) iXe Ve

V iX
Y ( )
iH ( )
F
F
Y ( ) H ( )

Y H 90

Relation between receptance and

Inertance
x(t ) Xe

i t

a (t ) x(t ) 2 Xeit Aeit

A 2 X
2
A( )
H ( )
F
F
A( ) 2 H ( )

A H 180

Definition of FRFs
Response
Parameter: R

Standard FRF: R/F

Inverse FRF:
F/R

Displacement

Receptance

Dynamic
Stiffness

Admitance
Dynamic Flexibility
Dynamic Compliance
Velocity

Mobility

Mechanical
Impedance

Acceleration

Inertance

Apparent Mass

Accelerance

Graphical Display of FRFs

Modulus of FRF vs. frequency and phase vs.
frequency (Bode type of plot)
Real part of FRF vs. frequency and imaginary part
vs. frequency
Real part of inverse FRF vs. frequency (or
frequency^2) and imaginary part of inverse FRF
vs. frequency (or frequency^2)
Real part of FRF vs. imaginary part of FRF
(Nyquist type of plot)

Modulus vs. Frequency

Receptance FRF

Inertance FRF

Mobility FRF

Modal Analysis and Testing

Modulus vs. Frequency

0
=1
M

00
=1
M

K=100000
0
10
K=

00
00
0
10
K=

K=1000000

Receptance FRF

0
00
0
10
K=

M=10

M=100

0
00

10
K=

M
=1
0

M
=1
00

Mobility FRF
00
00

Inertance FRF
Modal Analysis and Testing

Modulus vs. Frequency

A low Frequency straight-line (correspond to
stiffness)
A high frequency straight-line (correspond to
mass)
The resonant region with its abrupt magnitude and
phase variation

Frequency Response of Mass and

stiffness Elements
FRF
H ( )
log H ( )
Y ( )
log Y ( )
A( )
log A( )

Mass
1/ 2m
log m 2 log

Stiffness
1/ k
log k

i / m
log m log

i / k
log log k

1/ m
log m

2 / k
2 log log k

Real and Imaginary vs. Frequency

Receptancd FRF

Mobility FRF

Inertance FRF
Modal Analysis and Testing

Real vs. Imaginary

(Viscous Damping)

Real vs. Imaginary

(Viscous Damping)

i
2 c i ( k 2 m )
Y ( ) iH ( )

2
k m ic (k m 2 ) 2 (c) 2

2c
Re(Y )
(k m 2 ) 2 (c) 2
( k 2 m)
Im( Y )
(k m 2 ) 2 (c) 2
Let
U Re(Y )
V Im( Y )
(U 1 / 2c) 2 V 2 (1 / 2c) 2

Real vs. Imaginary

(Structural Damping)

Real vs. Imaginary

(Structural Damping)

1
(k 2 m) id
H ( )

2
k m id (k m 2 ) 2 (d ) 2
( k 2 m)
Re(Y )
(k m 2 ) 2 (d ) 2
d
Im( Y )
(k m 2 ) 2 (d ) 2
Let
U Re(Y )
V Im( Y )
U 2 (V 1 / 2d ) 2 (1 / 2d ) 2

Conclusions
Close inspection of real structures suggests that
viscous damping is not a good representative for
MDOF systems.
All structures show a degree of structural
damping.
Structural damping acts like an imaginary
stiffness in frequency domain.
Modulus vs. Frequency and Nyquist type plots for
FRFs are more common.