Modal Analysis and

Correlation
Structural Dynamics Agenda Topics

How to characterize structural How does my structure naturally

How to validate simulation models?
behavior? want to move?

Fundamentals Modal Analysis Modal Correlation

Natural Frequencies, Resonances, Damping Curve fitting, data quality checks (MAC), mode Modal Assurance Criteria, Modal Contribution,
shapes Updating

structure-
structure-borne air-
air-borne

structure-
structure-borne

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 2 Siemens PLM Software
Why are structural dynamics important?
Product Development Process
Troubleshoot

Validate
Cost of Change

Engineer

Concept Detail Prototype Production Field

Drawing Failure
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 4 Siemens PLM Software
Aircraft Flutter

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 6 Siemens PLM Software
Tacoma Bridge Collapse

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 7 Siemens PLM Software
Natural frequency of a traffic signal

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 8 Siemens PLM Software
What is a natural frequency?
Natural Frequency

Natural frequency is the frequency at which a system naturally vibrates once it has
been forced into motion
f(t)

x(t)

k c

ground

Single Degree of Freedom System

k
n   natural frequency (rad/sec)
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019 m
Page 10 Siemens PLM Software
Natural Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 11 Siemens PLM Software
Resonant Frequency

Resonance is the buildup of large amplitude that occurs when a structure is excited
at its natural frequency

Amplitude
ω f = 0.4 ω f = 1.01 ω f =1.6
3 Single Degree of Freedom Systems with ω n = 1.01 Frequency
same mass, stiffness and damping

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 12 Siemens PLM Software
Structural Damping

Damping is any effect that tends to reduce the oscillations in a system

c
   d  n 1   2

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

2 km
Page 13 Siemens PLM Software
How do we determine the resonant
behavior of a structure?
Frequency Response Functions

Frequency Response Functions (FRFs) measure the system’s output in

response to known an input signal
o u tp u t
FRF 
input
RESPONSE

FORCE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 15 Siemens PLM Software
Time  Frequency

!
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 16 Siemens PLM Software
Frequency Response Functions

Frequency Response Functions (FRFs) measure the system’s output in

response to known an input signal
o u tp u t
FRF 
input
RESPONSE

FORCE
-50.00
N2/Hz
dB

-100.00
0.00 Hz 1024.00

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 17 Siemens PLM Software
What can an FRF tell you?

Resonant Frequency 1.7

1.4
1.2

Amplitude
1.0

g/N
Damping 0.7
0.5
0.3
0.0
618
Mode Shape Phase
°

➢ Requires Multiple FRFs

-393
10 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 651
Hz
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 18 Siemens PLM Software
What can an FRF tell you?

1.6
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9

Imag
0.8

g/N
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
-0.1
1
Real
g/N

-700e-3
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019 10 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 651
Hz
Page 19 Siemens PLM Software
Quality Factor

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 20 Siemens PLM Software
Damping calculation – Active Picture

2776.18 2722.33
2800.0
2400.0 2228.38
2355.74

Amplitude 2000.0 Curve Q (/)

(in/s2)/lbf

14.15 | 17.29 | 15.85 | 19.89 | 16.30

1400.0 1381.96

1000.0

400.0
0.0
618
Phase
°

75.94 84.21 60.54 71.35 49.80

-393 135.00 305.00 387.00 476.00 559.00

10 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 651
Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 21 Siemens PLM Software
Other Damping Terms

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 22 Siemens PLM Software
Mode Shape:

Excitation in which a system is affected under a specific frequency.

Has a particular shape in which it moves – each node moves

sinusoidally with fixed phase relation to each other node

1st mode

2nd mode

3rd mode
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 23 Siemens PLM Software
Mode Shape:

Excitation in which a system is affected under a specific frequency.

Has a particular shape in which it moves – each node moves

sinusoidally with fixed phase relation to each other node

3rd mode

Node: place where displacement

is zero for a given mode shape

Anti-node: position of maximum displacement

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 24 Siemens PLM Software
More interesting mode shapes…. Brake disc mode 1

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 25 Siemens PLM Software
More interesting mode shapes…. Brake disc mode 2

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 26 Siemens PLM Software
More interesting mode shapes…. Brake disc mode 3

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 27 Siemens PLM Software
Some Math…

1.6
1.0

Imag
g/N
0.5
-0.1
1

g/N
-700e-3
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019 10 100 200 300 400 500 651
Page 28 Siemens PLM Software
Hz
FRFs determine mode shapes

1st Bending Mode

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 29 Siemens PLM Software
FRFs determine mode shapes

1st Torsional Mode

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 30 Siemens PLM Software
Experimental Modal Analysis

The process of identifying the dynamic behavior of a system (structure) in terms of

it’s modal parameters

Modal parameters
• Frequency ▪ Troubleshooting
• Damping ▪ Simulation and prediction
▪ Optimization
• Mode Shape ▪ Diagnostics and health monitoring
f(t)

x(t)
m

k c

ground

Single Degree of Freedom System

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 31 Siemens PLM Software
Experimental Modal Analysis Process
24
20
Curve Fit to Estimate Modal Parameters
16
(m/s2)/N
Amplitude

14

10
8

0
0 25 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Hz
Measure the Frequency Response Functions

Response

Frequency
Damping
Mode Shapes

Input Input
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 32 Siemens PLM Software
Linearity of the FRF

1.00 0.10

)
g/N

Log
(
Log
N2

FRF DRV:1:+X/FOR:1:+X
FRF DRV:1:+X/FOR:1:+X (1)
FRF DRV:1:+X/FOR:1:+X (2)
F AutoPow er FOR:1:+X
F AutoPow er FOR:1:+X
Hz
F AutoPow er FOR:1:+X
10.0e-6 0.00 Linear 100.00
180.00 0.00 Linear 100.00
Hz

Phase
°
1.00e-6 -180.00
0.00 Hz 100.00 0.00 Hz 100.00

3 different excitation levels

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 33 Siemens PLM Software
Measurement Techniques
Measurement Equipment

Excitation
• Laboratory
(shakers, hammer, force cell, …)
• Operational excitations
(road simulation, flight simulation, wind
excitation, …)
• Unusual excitations
(loudspeaker, gun shot, explosion, …)

Response
• (Accelerometers, Laser,…)

Measurement system
• Data acquisition system: SCADAS
(minimum 2 channels)
• Processing on PC (Test.Lab)

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 35 Siemens PLM Software
Excitation Techniques

Impact Testing Shaker Testing

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 36 Siemens PLM Software
Impact Testing
Time Frequency
Minimal equipment
Easy and fast

Input
Good for wide range of structures
Limited frequency range

Response
FRF

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 37 Siemens PLM Software
Impact Testing: Various Tips

Which tip
should I
use?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 38 Siemens PLM Software
Impact Testing: Various Tips
5.50 1.00 -4.00

Amplitude

/Hz
Log
g/N

dB
/

N2
Metal Tip

0.02 0.00 -60.00

0.00 Hz 5000.00

5.50 1.00 -4.00

Amplitude

/Hz
Log
g/N

dB
/

2
N
Nylon Tip

0.02 0.00 -60.00

0.00 Hz 5000.00

5.50 1.00 -4.00

Amplitude

/Hz
Log
g/N

dB
/

N2
Rubber Tip

0.02 0.00 -60.00

0.00 Hz 5000.00

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 39 Siemens PLM Software
The Right Tools for the Job

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 41 Siemens PLM Software
 Roving Hammer
vs.
Roving Accelerometer?

Any Difference?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 42 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Test
Nine Point Modal x Three Directions
• Force In the ‘Z’ Direction. (One Direction)
• Triaxial Accelerometer

Possible Inputs and Outputs

A1x A1y A1z A2x A2y A2z … A9x A9y A9z

F1x
F1y
F1z
F2x
F2y
F2z

…
F9x
F9y
F9z
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 43 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Test
Nine Point Modal x Three Directions
• Force In the ‘Z’ Direction. (One Direction)
• Triaxial Accelerometer

Possible Inputs and Outputs

A1x A1y A1z A2x A2y A2z … A9x A9y A9z

F1x
F1y
F1z
F2x
F2y One complete Row or one
F2z complete column required
to calculate mode shape
…
F9x
F9y
F9z
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 44 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Test
Nine Point Modal x Three Directions
• Force In the ‘Z’ Direction. (One Direction)
• Triaxial Accelerometer

Possible Inputs and Outputs

A1x A1y A1z A2x A2y A2z … A9x A9y A9z

F1x
F1y
F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z … A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z

F2x
F2y
F2z

…
F9x
F9y
F9z
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 45 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Test
Nine Point Modal x Three Directions
• Force In the ‘Z’ Direction. (One Direction)
• Triaxial Accelerometer

Possible Inputs and Outputs

A1x A1y A1z A2x A2y A2z … A9x A9y A9z

F1x
F1y
F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z … A1x/F1z A1x/F1z A1x/F1z

F2x
F2y
F2z
Complete row  possible to
calculate mode shape ☺
…
F9x
F9y
F9z
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 46 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Test
Nine Point Modal x Three Directions
• Force In the ‘Z’ Direction. (One Direction)
• Triaxial Accelerometer

Possible Inputs and Outputs

A1x A1y A1z A2x A2y A2z … A9x A9y A9z

F1x
F1y
F1z A1x/F1z A1y/F1z A1z/F1z

F2x
F2y
F2z A1x/F2z A1y/F2z A1z/F2z

…
F9x
F9y
F9z A1x/F9z A1y/F9z A1z/F9z

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 47 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Test
Nine Point Modal x Three Directions
• Force In the ‘Z’ Direction. (One Direction)
• Triaxial Accelerometer

Possible Inputs and Outputs

A1x A1y A1z A2x A2y A2z … A9x A9y A9z

F1x
F1y

Incomplete!
F1z A1x/F1z A1y/F1z A1z/F1z

F2x
F2y
F2z A1x/F2z A1y/F2z A1z/F2z

…
F9x
F9y
F9z A1x/F9z A1y/F9z A1z/F9z

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 48 Siemens PLM Software
Shaker Testing

Time Frequency
Time Consuming to setup
Control frequency range
Control Force Amplitude

Input
Better for larger structures
Typically fixed excitation point, multiple
response points - measured in batches

Response
FRF

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 49 Siemens PLM Software
Coherence

Coherence is a value from 0 to 1 that shows how much of

the output is really due to the input

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 56 Siemens PLM Software
Coherence

1.00

Coherence differs from 1 in case of:

• Non-Linearity
• Unmeasured sources
• Node
Real
/

• Frequency range of excitation

• Other noise

F Coherence DRV:1:+X
F Coherence DRV:2:+X
F Coherence ENG:1:+Y
F Coherence FUSL:5:+X

0.00
0.00 Hz 100.00

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 57 Siemens PLM Software
Pretrigger

Pretrigger is the amount of “buffer time” measured before the impulse

▪ Lose initial part of the input signal

▪ Use a pretrigger to avoid distorted FRF

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 58 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
Modal Impact Test
Acquisition parameters
Joseph did help us a lot …

-1

-2
Joseph Fourier
-3 (º1768 - †1830)
-4 Théorie analytique de la chaleur (1822)

2.5
• Fourier’s law of heat conduction
2

u   2u  2u 
1.5

k  2  2 
0.5

t  x y 
-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-2.5

Any signal can be described as • Analyzed in terms of infinite mathematical

a combination of sine waves of series
different frequencies
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 61 Siemens PLM Software
Fourier Transform
Transforms from Time Domain to Frequency Domain
• Fourier: “Any signal can be described as a unique combination of sine
waves of different frequencies and amplitudes”
• Complicated signals become easier to understand

Amplitude

Amplitude

Amplitude

Frequency
Time
(Hz)
(seconds)

No information is lost when converting!

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 62 Siemens PLM Software
 “What is leakage?”

When the spectral content of your signal does not correspond to an available spectral line.

f  1 Hz
5 V Sine Wave - 3 Hz 5 V Sine Wave - 2.5 Hz

5V 5V

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hz Hz
63 Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 63 Siemens PLM Software
Periodic Signals

T T = N t

FFT stiches time over infinity Are these signals the same?
YES!

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 64 Siemens PLM Software
Non-Periodic Signals

T T = N t

Are these signals

the same? NO!

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 65 Siemens PLM Software
Time  Frequency

!
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 66 Siemens PLM Software
DSP Error: Leakage

Smearing of
spectral content across
ALL FREQUENCIES

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 67 Siemens PLM Software
Cause of leakage: Non Periodic Signals

T T = N t

Sharp impulse  leakage

Must be removed

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 69 Siemens PLM Software
Windows: Minimize Leakage

Original signal

Window function

1
x

=
Windowed signal

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 70 Siemens PLM Software
Windows: Minimize Leakage

No longer have “impulse” in signal

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 71 Siemens PLM Software
How to minimize leakage? Windows.

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 72 Siemens PLM Software
Window Types – Specific Characteristics

Rectangular, uniform Hanning Flat top

Time domain

AKA No Window
Freq. domain

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 73 Siemens PLM Software
Amplitude Errors

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 75 Siemens PLM Software
Energy Errors

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 76 Siemens PLM Software
Window Types – Specific Characteristics

Windows distort the amplitude and total energy

content of the data.
They also smear the frequency content.
This smearing cannot be corrected.
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 77 Siemens PLM Software
Windows

Windows limit spectral resolution

Hanning: 1.5 f Flattop: 3.4 f

Up to 15% amplitude Up to 0.02% amplitude

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 78 Siemens PLM Software
Exponential Window for Response

• Exponential Window Increases Apparent Damping Values When Applied.

• Avoid Applying The Exponential Window Unless Absolutely Necessary.

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 79 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Points
Measuring of Frequency Response Functions

Excitation Degrees of Freedom (DOF) Natural Modes of vibration

1 2 1 2 3
3

Mode 1
Response DOF

1
Mode 2

3
Mode 3
Driving point FRFs

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 81 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point FRF

Selection and verification of excitation locations

• Are all modes present in driving point FRF ?
• At nodal point: mode is not excited
• Spatially separated Good
excitation
point

Bad
excitation
point

Measure Driving Points for a number of positions and compare FRFs

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 83 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

Survey Location Point:1

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 84 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

FRF Point:2

Survey Location Point:2

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 85 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

FRF Point:2

FRF Point:3

Survey Location Point:3

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 86 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

FRF Point:2

FRF Point:3

FRF Point:4

Survey Location Point:4

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 87 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

FRF Point:2

FRF Point:3

FRF Point:4

FRF Point:5

Survey Location Point:5

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 88 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

FRF Point:2
Which is the
appropriate
FRF Point:3

excitation point?
FRF Point:4

FRF Point:5

Survey Location Point:6

FRF Point:6

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 89 Siemens PLM Software
Driving Point Survey

FRF Point:1

FRF Point:2

FRF Point:3

FRF Point:4

FRF Point:5

Survey Location Point:6

FRF Point:6

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 90 Siemens PLM Software
Tips for modal testing
Boundary Conditions – What are your Goals?

Real boundary conditions “Free-free” suspension

• Flexibility of fixtures • Soft spring, elastic cord

• Added damping, stiffness, mass • Pneumatic suspension
• Environmental Conditions • Correlation with FEM
•Can Obtain Rigid Body Modes

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 92 Siemens PLM Software
Boundary Conditions – simulating free-free

Pneumatic suspension

Elastic cords

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 93 Siemens PLM Software
Boundary Conditions

Some Practical Examples – Operational Conditions

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 94 Siemens PLM Software
Rigid Body Modes – Rigid Body Properties

Free-Free Boundary Condition

• Approximation of a true “Free System” (FEM)
• Rigid Body Modes Are No Longer Zero – Negligible Effect on
Flexible Mode

Rigid body mode frequency < 10 % of first flexible mode

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 95 Siemens PLM Software
SDOF Peak Picking
Calculation of mode shape

1st Bending Mode

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 98 Siemens PLM Software
Calculation of mode shape

1st Torsional Mode

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 99 Siemens PLM Software
Experimental Modal Analysis

How do we know we have enough

measurement points for our test?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 100 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
SDOF Peak Picking on
Plate (6 points)
MDOF Curve Fitting
Structure with High Modal Separation

SDOF peak picking is

only suitable for data
with well-separated
modes
Amplitude

No influence from
surrounding
modes

Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 103 Siemens PLM Software
Structure with Low Modal Separation

MDOF curve fitter is

required to separate
closely-spaced
modes
Amplitude

Large influence
from surrounding
modes

Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 104 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation

Goal of modal parameter estimation 0.10

H ()  
n
vi   liT 

v  l
*
i i
H

i 1 j   i j  *
i

• What is the model order?

(m/s2)/N
• How many modes to curve-fit?

Log
Solutions
• Stabilization diagram
• Mode indicator functions

10.0e-12 24.09 42.72

0.00 Hz 80.00

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 105 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation – Assume 1 Mode

f1 = 50 Hz

d1 = 20 %

Amplitude

25 50 75 Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 106 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation – Assume 2 Modes

f1 = 25 Hz f2 = 75 Hz

d1 = 10 % d2 = 10 %

Amplitude

25 50 75 Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 107 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation – Assume 3 Modes

f1 = 25 Hz f2 = 50 Hz f3 = 75 Hz

d1 = 5 % d2 = 5 % d3 = 5 %

Amplitude

25 50 75 Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 108 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation – Stabilization Diagram

▪ Compare modal parameters at current order with previous order

▪ Increase the model order until modes stabilize

Stability
o : new pole

Amplitude

Model Order
f : frequency
d : damping
s : all

0
Frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 109 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
MDOF Curve Fitting
on Flat Plate
Mode Indicator Function

Mode Indicator Function (MIF) helps identify the modes for a system where multiple
reference FRFs were measured
▪ commonly used to detect the presence of repeated roots

Double “dip”
indicates two
modes at same
frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 111 Siemens PLM Software
Why are rigid body modes seen at
high frequencies?
Modal Assurance Criterion

Modal Assurance Criterion (MAC) describes how similar the shapes are for a given mode
pair using a scale of 0 to 1 (e.g. 0% to 100%)

.5

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 113 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Example

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019 MAC = 100% correlation

Page 114 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Example

MAC = 0.015 (1.5% correlation)

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 115 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Example

6 Points

764 Hz and 385 Hz - MAC = 0.96 (96% correlation)

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 116 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Example

15 Points

764 Hz and 385 Hz - MAC = 0.03 (3% correlation)

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 117 Siemens PLM Software
MAC for flat plate with 6 DOFs

.5

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019 Spatial Aliasing – not enough response points

Page 118 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
SDOF Peak Picking on
Plate (15points)
MAC for flat plate with 15 DOFs

.5

No High Off Diagonal Correlations

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 120 Siemens PLM Software
Polymax MDOF Curve Fitting
LSCE versus LMS PolyMAX

LSCE LMS PolyMAX

-For smaller models +Large number of responses

-High computational load +Fast, efficient computation

-High damping is a problem +High damping no problem

-High modal density +High modal density

-Not for broadband analysis +Broadband analysis

-Unclear stabilization diagram +Crystal-clear stabilization diagram

Not all MDOF curve fitters are created equal !

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 122 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation - LSCE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 123 Siemens PLM Software
Modal Parameter Estimation – LMS Test.Lab PolyMax

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 124 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
PolyMAX Modal
Analysis
PolyMAX Validation Studies
Validation Study of PolyMAX Algorithm

FE model of a full trimmed car body

• Synthesized a set of FRFs to use for curve fitting
• FRFs generated for 780 DOF / 2 references
• 0.125 Hz frequency resolution
• 300 modes in 0-100 Hz band, including local modes

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 127 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – Identifying Modes

Number of modes found

• PolyMAX: 189/300 modes
• LSCE(Time MDOF): 101/300 modes

• 0 – 60 Hz band
• PolyMAX: 90/105 modes
• LSCE: 70/105 modes

Possibly more modes found if more FRFs used (local modes)

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 128 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – Comparing Mode Shapes

MAC matrix ▪ MAC matrix

LSCE (X) – FE (Y) ▪ PolyMAX (X) – FE (Y)

PolyMAX yields good correlation to higher frequency

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 129 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – “Noisy” FRFs

1.00 1.00

)
(m/s2)/N

Log
(
Amplitude
/

Hz
10.0e-6 4.00 Linear 20.00
180.00 4.00 Linear 20.00
Hz

Phase
°
F Coherence w ing:vvd:+Z/Multiple
F Coherence back:vde:+Y/Multiple

0.05 -180.00
Hz Hz

Multiple Coherence FRFs

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 130 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – “Noisy” FRFs

LSCE
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 131 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – “Noisy” FRFs

LMS PolyMAX
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 132 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – FRF Synthesis with PolyMax

0.10 10.0e-3

)
g/N

Log

g/N

Log
(

(
Hz Hz
100e-6 4.00 Linear 20.00 1.00e-6 4.00 Linear 20.00
180.00 4.00 Linear 20.00 180.00 4.00 Linear 20.00
Hz Hz
Phase

Phase
°

°
-180.00 -180.00
Hz Hz

Left wing Back of the plane

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 133 Siemens PLM Software
PolyMax Validation – Lightly Damped Structures

Stabilization FRF synthesis

1.00

)
(m/s2)/N

Log
(
Hz
10.0e-6 10.00 Linear 64.00
180.00 10.00 Linear 64.00
Hz

Phase
°
-180.00
10.00 Hz 64.00

PolyMAX alleviates the need to use a different curve fitter

algorithm for heavy and lightly damped structures

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 134 Siemens PLM Software
Advanced Techniques
#1 – Automatic Mode Expansion

Test Mesh

STL File

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 136 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
Modal Expansion
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 138 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 139 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 140 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 141 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1
MOVE 2

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 142 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1
MOVE 2

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 143 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1
MOVE 2
MOVE 3

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 144 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1
MOVE 2
MOVE 3

Are the frequencies of

the structure the same
between Move 1, Move 2
and Move 3?
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 145 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Could one versus all

accelerometers make a
difference?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 146 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Which one of these mode

shapes is more likely to be
affected by accelerometer
mass loading?
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 147 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 148 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Does placing at top

versus bottom have
different frequency shift
effect?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 149 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1
A/F
MOVE 2
A/F
MOVE 3
A/F

Hz Hz

Which Frequency is right?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 150 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission
1.18 1.00

MOVE 1
Amplitude

Amplitude
g/N

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Sum FRF SUM
Page 151 0.01 404.43 Siemens PLM Software
915.01 0.00
404.43 Hz 915.01
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 152 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission
0.89 1.00

ALL
EVEN THIS ONE IS
MOVES
Amplitude

Amplitude
EFFECTED
g/N

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Sum FRF SUM
Page 153 0.01 404.43 Siemens PLM Software
915.01 0.00
404.43 Hz 915.01
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission – All Data Sets

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 154 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission – Single Data Set

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 155 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

MOVE 1
A/F
Partial Shape 1

MOVE 2
A/F

Partial Shape 2
MOVE 3
A/F

Partial Shape 3
Hz Hz

Complete Shape
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 156 Siemens PLM Software
Multi-Run Modal: Transmission

ANALYZE ALL ANALYZE EACH MOVE SEPARATELY

MOVES AT ONCE AND COMBINE
(MULTI-RUN)

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 157 Siemens PLM Software
DEMONSTRATION:
Multi Run Modal
Correlation
 “Old” Product Design Cycle

Product Design Process

TIME

Functional Activities

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 161 Siemens PLM Software
 “Modern” Product Design Process

Product Design Process

▪ Simulate product
performance before
prototypes are
available
TIME

▪ Use single
prototype & testing
for validation

Functional Activities

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 162 Siemens PLM Software
 Pretest & Correlation: Process Improvement

Product 1 Product 2

TIME TIME
Correlation Correlation

Pretest Pretest
Analysis Analysis

FE Modeling

Process Improvement
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 163 Siemens PLM Software
 Pretest & Correlation: Motivation

COST !
▪ Minimize Failures
▪ FEA accuracy degrades as mode order increases
▪ Simulation results are used for design decisions in Acoustics, NVH,
Durability, Loads, etc…

▪ Reduce Warranty Issues

▪ Improve customer satisfaction

▪ Shorten Product Design Cycle

• Single prototype for validation

▪ Achieve “Design Right First Time”

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 164 Siemens PLM Software
 Modal Assurance Criterion

▪ Modal Assurance Criterion (MAC) describes how similar the shapes are for a given
mode pair using a scale of 0 to 1

.5

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 165 Siemens PLM Software
 MAC Example

MAC = 100%
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 166 Siemens PLM Software
 MAC Example

MAC = 1.5%
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 167 Siemens PLM Software
 MAC Example

6 Points

764 Hz and 385 Hz - MAC = 96%

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 168 Siemens PLM Software
 MAC Example

15 Points

764 Hz and 385 Hz - MAC = 3%

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 169 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Exhaust System

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 170 Siemens PLM Software
Exhaust Mode at 15 Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 171 Siemens PLM Software
Exhaust Mode at 15 Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 172 Siemens PLM Software
Exhaust Modes at 15 and 130 Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 173 Siemens PLM Software
Exhaust Modes at 15 and 130 Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 174 Siemens PLM Software
 6 Exhaust Modes up to 137 Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 175 Siemens PLM Software
 FEA Model Pretest, Correlation, Updating Tools

Simcenter Testlab Simcenter3D

• View and Animate Modes from Simulation (Nastran, Abaqus, • View and Animate Modes from Simulation (Nastran,
Ansys, etc) and Test Abaqus, Ansys, etc) and Test (Universal file and Testlab)
• View and overlay FRFs (Nastran) from Simulation and Test • View and overlay FRFs (Nastran) from Simulation and Test
• Modal Data Acquisition (Shakers, Impact) (Universal File)
• Mode Shape Correlation (MAC) • Pretest Analysis
• Mode Shape Correlation (MAC)
• MAC Contribution
• Updating via Solution 200 in Nastran

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 176 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Pretest Analysis

Step 1: Use FE model to pick some initial accelerometer locations

Supported FEA Software:

•NASTRAN
•ANSYS Initial Accel locations
•Abaqus
•IDEAS
•Universal File Format

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 177 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Pretest Analysis

Step 2: Use MAC to assure that accelerometer locations are

sufficient to uniquely identify all modes from FEM Normal Modes
Analysis

MAC: Modal Assurance Criterion

A measure of how well mode shapes are
correlated.

In this case, the MAC diagram shows large

off-diagonal terms, indicating that several
modes are non-uniquely identified.

Thus, more accelerometers are required to

guarantee a good test.

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 178 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Pretest Analysis

Step 3: Use Pretest to automatically locate additional accelerometers

to meet requested MAC criterion.

• 5 accelerometers have been

Additional Accel’s
added to the exhaust model as
shown to reach the target off-
diagonal MAC of <0.15

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 179 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Pretest Analysis

Step 3: Use Pretest to automatically locate additional accelerometers

to meet requested MAC criterion.

• New MAC diagram shows all

modes uniquely identified. This is
indicated by reduction of off-
diagonal terms.

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 180 Siemens PLM Software
Simcenter3D Pretest and Correlation

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 181 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Pretest Analysis

Step 5: Create wireframe geometry for Modal Test and export to

Simcenter Testlab software.

• A Testlab project file is created

containing the exhaust geometry,
as well as the FE mode shapes &
frequencies.

• Reduced FE modes provide the

test engineer with the ability to
visually check the shapes.

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 182 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Modal Test
Perform the modal test on the physical structure.

• The test engineer mounts

accelerometers, and collects modal
data by exciting the structure with
shakers or an impact hammer in
the locations as indicated by
Pretest.

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 183 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Correlation
Step 1: Use the Correlation Manager to import the Test and FE
Models, and define correlation parameters.

Parameters:
▪ MAC threshold value for matching
of FE/Test mode pairs

▪ Coordinate system translations and

rotations

▪ Frequency range for both FE and

Test

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 184 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Correlation
Step 2: Use Correlation Tools to evaluate how well FE and Test
models correlate.

Global MAC plot shows:

• Good mode shape:
correlation of modes 1-8

• Mode swapping between

modes 11 and 13 for FE and
Test models

• MAC <0.75 for modes 9-13

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 185 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Correlation
Step 2: Use Correlation Tools to evaluate how well FE and Test
models correlate.

Relative Frequency Difference

plot shows:

• Small frequency
differences

• < 6% for modes 1-9

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 186 Siemens PLM Software
Are results close enough?
Although initial inspection might lead us to assume this is good
correlation, further analysis yields a different conclusion…
• Correlation of fundamental modes does not guarantee correlation
throughout operating frequency band

• Higher order modes are relevant to acoustic, vibration, and durability

performance – they are well within the operating frequency range

• Ignoring higher order mode correlation could lead to bad engineering

decisions, for example:
- Poor Exhaust Hangar locations leading to Noise and Vibration Issues
- Vibration fatigue due to Engine or Road excitation at resonant
frequencies

CONCLUSION: All modes in operating frequency band should be correlated!

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 187 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Contribution
Step 2: Use Correlation Tools to evaluate how well FE and Test
models correlate.

MAC Contribution Display:

• Shows DOFs making
most negative contribution
to MAC

In this case:
• 9 DOFs can be removed
to improve MAC from 85%
to 95% for Mode Pair 1, 1

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 188 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Contribution

TEST FE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 189 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Contribution

TEST FE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 190 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Contribution

TEST FE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 191 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Contribution

MAC WILL
NOT CHANGE
MUCH

TEST FE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 192 Siemens PLM Software
MAC Contribution

MAC WILL
CHANGE A
LOT

TEST FE

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 193 Siemens PLM Software
 Application Case: Sensitivity & Updating
Step 4: Sensitivity Analysis and FE Model Updating

Sensitivity Analysis:
•Consideration of physical
exhaust system leads
engineer to consider effect of
weld on this junction (ignored
in the FE model)
FE Model Updating:
• Manual updating
• Element thickness increased
locally in weld location
• Amount of thickness
increase guided by MAC and
Frequency correlation

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 194 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Sensitivity & Updating

Sensitivity: Ranks the contribution of various parameters of the FE

model to its modal behavior.

Updating: Changing the FE model to improve it’s correlation to Test

results.

Sensitivity & Updating Options:

• Manual inspection & manual
updating using correlation indicators

•Sensitivity Analysis & Nastran

SOL200 FE Model updating

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 195 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Results

MAC Correlation
• Improved from 0.69 to 0.8

• Mode swapping eliminated

Frequency Correlation
• Improved from max 15%
error to 6%

• Improved from max 23 Hz

error to only 8 Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 196 Siemens PLM Software
Application Case: Summary
Pretest Analysis was used to ensure reliable Modal Test results:
• Automated wireframe creation
• Optimized accelerometer/exciter locations
• FE mode visualization

Correlation Analysis leveraged Modal Test results to obtain a reliable

Finite Element Model
• Full frequency and mode shape correlation
• Insight was provided into physical parameters of model causing
correlation issues
• FE Model was Updated to improve reliability
• Critical Design decisions (exhaust hangar location, fatigue life estimation,
etc.) were made based on complete and correct information

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 197 Siemens PLM Software
 Pretest & Correlation: Conclusion

Modal Tests must validate product designs

• Reliability of test results depend upon accelerometer and shaker/impact placement

FE/Test Correlation is Key to “Design Right First Time”

• Fundamental mode correlation is not enough
• Higher order modes are most difficult to correlate

Simcenter3D Pretest & Correlation Increases Reliability of FE Models and Test Results
• FE Models accurate over entire operating frequency range
• Test results capturing all modes uniquely
• Design decisions based on the complete and correct information

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 198 Siemens PLM Software
QUIZ
What can an FRF tell you?

16.0

Resonant Frequency 14.0

13.0
12.0
11.0
10.0

(m/s2)/N
Amplitude
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
Damping 4.0
3.0
2.0
Hz
0.0 10.00 Linear 950.00
180 10.00 Linear 950.00
Hz

Phase
°

Mode Shape
-180
➢ Requires Multiple FRFs
10 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 950
Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 200 Siemens PLM Software
What is this?
10.4

ss sv s s s s s s s f s d 32
ss sv s s s o s s d v f s d 31
ss sd s s s s s s s f s d 30
ss sv s s s s s s s v s d 29
ss sv s s s s s d s v s d 28
ss sf s s s s s df f s o 27
ss os s s s s s ss o s 26
ss s s s s s s s s s 25
ss fs s s s s s s f s 24
ss s s s s s s ss s 23
ss s s s s s s dv s 22
ss s s s s s s df s 21
ss s s s s s s ss s 20
Amplitude

ss s s s s s s sv s 19
g/lbf

ss s s s s s s f o s 18
ss s s s s s s d s 17
ss s s s s s s s d 16
df s v v s s s d f 15
sd s ov s s s v d 14
dd s o v s s s d f 13
df s v s s s f f 12
f s s s s s s f 11
df s o v s o o o 10
f s o o d o o 9
o o f o o 8
f s o 7
o o 6
o 5

63.3e-3
85.1 Linear 837
Hz

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 201 Siemens PLM Software
What is MAC abbreviation for?

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 202 Siemens PLM Software
What is MAC abbreviation for?

Modal Assurance Criterion

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 203 Siemens PLM Software
What is MAC abbreviation for?

Modal Assurance Criterion

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019

Page 204 Siemens PLM Software
 IS THIS A
“GOOD”
MAC?

205 copyright LMS International - 2005

Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2019
Page 205 Siemens PLM Software