Upload
douglascoombs
View
241
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
1/114
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
Date: __04/14/06 ________
I, ___Suresh Babu Chennagowni _______________________________,
hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:
Master of Science
in:
Mechanical EngineeringIt is entitled :
Study of the effect of Mass Distribution, Pathof Energy and Dynamic Coupling on Combined Coherence (A Non-linerarity Detection Method)
This work and its defense approved by:
Chair: _Dr. Randall J. Allemang ______ _Dr. Allyn W. Phillips ________
_Dr. Ronald L. Huston _________ ______________________________
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
2/114
Study of the Effect of Mass Distribution, Path of Energy and Dynamic
Coupling on Combined Coherence (A Non-linearity Detection Method)
A thesis submitted to the
Division of Research and Advanced Studies
of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in the department of Mechanical Engineering
of the College of Engineering
2006
by
Suresh Babu Chennagowni
Bachelor of Engineering, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India, 2002
Committee Chair: Dr. Randall J. Allemang
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
3/114
ABSTRACT
Almost all practical systems are non-linear to some extent with the non-linearity being
caused by one or a combination of factors. If the system is non-linear, errors are
introduced in the data analysis and are observed during the modal tests of a structure. For
example, high forcing levels may cause the frequency response function estimates to
show non-coherent behavior over certain frequency bands. A new coherence function
(Combined Coherence) provides a method to separate the effects of structural non-
linearities and the digital signal processing errors.Thomas Roscher [1] applied the combined coherence formulation to theoretical data
generated from a lumped parameter (M, K, C) with static coupling. The results showed
improvement in the combined coherence function over the ordinary coherence, but when
Doug Coombs [2] applied combined coherence to a real world structure, it did not show
improvement. In this thesis, as an extension of previous work, study is done on
theoretical data generated from a lumped mass model with dynamic coupling. The effects
of mass distribution, spatial density, forcing level, location of forcing function, path of
energy and the dynamic coupling on the combined coherence are studied. The testing
cases include SIMO and MIMO cases for a MDOF simulink model with a cubic
hardening type of nonlinearity applied at different locations. Combined Coherence is
calculated for a non-linear model and effects on the combined coherence are studied for
the following cases.
Effect of varying the force input
Effect of dynamic coupling
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
4/114
Effect of location of input and path of energy
Effect of mass distribution
Effect of spatial density of masses
Effect of scaling of motions
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
5/114
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
6/114
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude towards all who were involved in the
completion of this thesis. First of all, I would like to thank Dr. Randall Allemang for
providing me with this opportunity to work under his guidance. I would also like to thank
Dr. Allyn Phillips who helped me out through the research. Dr. Randy and Dr. Allyn
have always been a source of support and encouragement. Their inputs and advice have
contributed substantially to the completion of my work.
I would like to thank Dr. Ronald Huston for serving as member on my thesis
committee.
I express my thanks to my colleagues at Structural Dynamics Research
Laboratory for their helpful discussions in various matters during the course of this work.
I would also like to thank all those who helped me with the style and grammar of the
writing.
Finally, I would like to thank my parents and family for constantly supporting my
academic pursuits.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
7/114
I
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Theoretical Background 3
2.1 Linear Model..3
2.2 SDOF Mechanical System.....4
2.3 Frequency Response Function...5
2.4 Theory of Ordinary and Multiple Coherence....7
2.5 Excitation Techniques8
2.6 Overview of Non-Linearity9
2.7 Non-Linearity Detection Techniques...12
3. Non-Linear Detection Method (Combined Coherence Function) ...15
3.1 Theory of Combined Coherence..15
3.2 Development of Combined Coherence17
3.3 Application of Combined Coherence to Rocher Analytical Model.18
3.4 Application of Combined Coherence to Real world system22
3.5 Theoretical Model used to study the Combined Coherence....24
4. Application of Combined coherence to Analytical Model 29
4.1 Effect of Varying the Force Input....29
4.2 SIMO situations with Dynamic Coupling33
4.3 MIMO situations with Dynamic Coupling..42
4.4 Effect of Dynamic Coupling on Combined Coherence...51
4.5 Effect of Location of Input and Path of Energy on Combined Coherence..59
4.6 Effect of Mass Distribution on Combined Coherence.66
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
8/114
II
4.7 Effect of Spatial Density of Masses on Combined Coherence74
4.8 Effect of Scaling of Motions of DOF on Combined Coherence..82
5. Conclusions ...89
6. Future Work .....92
7. References .....93
8. Appendix ..95
8.1 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 1 and 2....95
8.2 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 1 and 3.96
8.3 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 1 and 4....97
8.4 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 2 and 3....98
8.5 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 2 and 4.99
8.6 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 3 and 4...100
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
9/114
III
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: SDOF4
Figure 2-2: Single Input System..6
Figure 2-3: Cubic Stiffness11
Figure 2-4: FRF and Coherence of nonlinear system....12
Figure 3-1: a) Lumped mass structure system b) Force system.....15
Figure 3-2: 2 DOF model with rotary inertia.....16
Figure 3-3: Roscher Theoretical Model.....19
Figure 3-4: FRFs and Coherences for Case 1...20
Figure 3-5: Comparison of Coherence and CCOH for Case 1......21
Figure 3-6: FRFs and Coherences for Case 2...21
Figure 3-7: Comparison of Coherence and MCCOH for Case 2...22
Figure 3-8: Line diagram of Doug Coombs model ...23
Figure 3-9: Theoretical 4 DOF lumped model..............................................................25
Figure 3-10: Comparison of Analytical and Simulation Results...28
Figure 4-1: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.1.1........................................31
Figure 4-2: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.1.2....32
Figure 4-3: FRFs and Coherences of Case 4.2.1..... .. . ..... .35
Figure 4-4: Coherence and CCOH of Case 4.2.1.. ... ....36
Figure 4-5: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.2.2....37
Figure 4-6: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.2.3....38
Figure 4-7: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.2.4....39
Figure 4-8: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.2.5....40
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
10/114
IV
Figure 4-9: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.2.6....41
Figure 4-10: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.1...45
Figure 4-11: FRFs and Coherences of Case 4.3.246
Figure 4-12: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.2...46
Figure 4-13: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.3...47
Figure 4-14: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.4...48
Figure 4-15: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.5.. 49
Figure 4-16: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.6.. 50
Figure 4-17: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.1...53Figure 4-18: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.2...54
Figure 4-19: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.3.. 55
Figure 4-20: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.4...56
Figure 4-21: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.5...57
Figure 4-22: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.6.. 58
Figure 4-23: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.1.. 61
Figure 4-24: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.2.. 62
Figure 4-25: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.3.. 63
Figure 4-26: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.4.. 64
Figure 4-27: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.6.. 65
Figure 4-28: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.1...68
Figure 4-29: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.2...69
Figure 4-29: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.3...70
Figure 4-30: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.4...71
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
11/114
V
Figure 4-31: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.5.. 72
Figure 4-32: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.6...73
Figure 4-33: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.1...76
Figure 4-34: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.2...77
Figure 4-35: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.3...78
Figure 4-36: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.4...79
Figure 4-37: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.5...80
Figure 4-38: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.6...81
Figure 4-39: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.1...84Figure 4-40: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.2...85
Figure 4-41: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.3...86
Figure 4-42: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.4...87
Figure 4-43: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.5...88
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
12/114
VI
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Sample test cases of combined coherence applied to Roscher model..19
Table 4-1: MIMO situations for different force exciting levels30
Table 4-2: System with Dynamic Coupling SIMO situations...33
Table 4-3: MIMO situations of system with Dynamic Coupling..43
Table 4-4: MIMO situations of system with no Dynamic Coupling.51
Table 4-5: MIMO situations to study effect of Path of Energy.59
Table 4-6: MIMO situations to study effect of Mass Distribution66
Table 4-7: MIMO situations to study effect of Spatial Densities of Masses.74
Table 4-8: MIMO situations to study effect of Scaling of Motions..82
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
13/114
VII
NOMENCLATURE
NOTATION
m MassM Mass Matrix
k Stiffness
K Stiffness Matrix
c Viscous Damping
C Damping Matrix
q Input Location
p Output Location
H pq Frequency Response Function at output p and input q
)(..
t x Acceleration
)(.
t x Velocity
)(t x Displacement
F Force input in frequency domain
)(t f Force input in time domain
2,1 Eigen Value
Circular Frequency
Noise on output
Noise on input
X`( ) Measured input of the system
F`() Measured output of the system
)(2 pq Coherence Function
)( qpGFX Cross Power Spectrum of Input q and output p
)( qqGFF Input Power Spectrum at input q
)( ppGXX Output Power Spectrum at output p
Non-linear Scaling Factor
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
14/114
VIII
j Rotary Inertia
r Radius
t Sample time
ABBREVIATION
DOF Degree of Freedom
SIMO Single Input Multiple Output
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
SDOF Single Degree of Freedom
COH Coherence Function
MCOH Multiple Coherence Function
CCOH Combined Coherence
MCCOH Multiple Combined Coherence
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
15/114
1
1. Introduction
Experimental modal analysis is often used for checking the accuracy of an analytical
approach such as finite element analysis and verification/correction of the results of the
analytical approach (model updating). During the modal analysis procedure, there are
four basic assumptions (linearity, time invariance, reciprocity and observability) made
concerning any structure. Because these assumptions are assumed to be valid, errors
accumulate at the modal parameter estimation phase. Among these errors are the errors
due to nonlinearities in the structure and the errors due to digital signal processing. The
errors due to nonlinearities are visible in the measured data as slight distortions in the
frequency response function (FRF) plots, but they are also responsible for significant
discrepancies in the modal analysis process. Some of the algorithms used to extract
modal parameters can be surprisingly sensitive to the small deviations (from linear
characteristics), which accompany the presence of slightly nonlinear elements in the
structures. Understanding these effects and detecting their presence, means that
alternative test procedures can be used so that the nonlinear effects are not only prevented
from contaminating the measurement and analysis processes but can actually be
quantified and included in the model. In this thesis, a further study is done on the
Combined Coherence Method, which is a frequency domain method of detecting
structural nonlinearities. It is the method of detecting the presence of nonlinearities
between degrees of freedom by separating the errors due to digital signal processing and
nonlinearities. It is a quick and efficient method to detect structural nonlinearities
between the degrees of freedom from the data taken during the modal test. Thomas
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
16/114
2
Roscher applied combined coherence to the theoretical data generated from lumped mass
model [1] and Doug Coombs applied combined coherence to the data measured from a
practical nonlinear structure [2]. Combined coherence was able to locate the
nonlinearities in the first case for theoretical lumped model whereas in the second case it
could not locate the nonlinearities spatially. In this thesis, further study is done on
theoretical data generated from a lumped model with dynamic coupling similar to the real
world system used by Doug Coombs. A study is done on how different parameters such
as mass distribution, spatial density, forcing level, location of forcing function, path of
energy and the dynamic coupling effects the combined coherence. The second chapter inthis thesis gives an introduction to non-linear vibration and methods in detecting the
nonlinearities. Chapter 3 gives introduction to combined coherence method, its derivation
and the previous work of Roscher and Coombs. In Chapter 4 combined coherence is
applied to a non-linear model and effects on combined coherence are discussed for the
following cases.
Effect of varying the force input.
Effect of dynamic coupling
Effect of location of input and path of energy
Effect of mass distribution
Effect of spatial density of masses
Effect of scaling of motionsSummary and conclusions are given in Chapter 5.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
17/114
3
2. Theoretical Background
2.1 Linear Systems
A clear understanding of the concept of a degree of freedom is required for understanding
the concept of modal analysis. The number of degrees of freedom is the minimum
number of coordinates required to specify completely the motion of a mechanical system .
There exist six degrees of freedom at each point, the motion in each direction and the
rotational motion of each axis. A mechanical system has an infinite number of degrees of
freedom, because the system is continuous. The observed degrees of freedom are in
reality, of course, a finite number, limited by different physical causes. The following
parameters reduce the effective number of degrees of freedom: the frequency range of
interest and physical points of interest.
There are four assumptions made during the modal analysis procedure [11]. The first
basic assumption is that the structure is linear. This means that the structure obeys the
superposition principle, which states that the response of the system to a combination of
forces applied simultaneously is equal to the sum of the responses due to the individual
forces. The second assumption is that the structure is time invariant. This means that the
properties of the system such as mass, stiffness and damping do not change with time
(i.e., they remain unchanged for any two different testing times). The third assumption is
that the structure obeys Maxwell reciprocity. This principle states that the response of the
function at a degree of freedom q due to the input at p is equal to the response at p
due to the input at q i.e., H pq = H qp. The fourth assumption is that the structure is
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
18/114
4
observable. The response points are chosen such that the complete structure is observed.
For example, structures with loose components, which have degrees of freedom that
cannot be measured, are not completely observable.
2.2 SDOF Mechanical System
Simple systems can be modeled as a mass-damper-spring system at a single point in a
single direction. These are referred as single degree of freedom (SDOF) systems. A
SDOF mechanical system is described by Newtons equation as shown in equation
below.
)()()()(...
t f t kxt xct xm =++ (2.1)
Figure 2-1: SDOF
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
19/114
5
This equation has two solutions, a transient solution and a steady state solution. The
equation can be solved using the Laplace transform, assuming initial conditions to be
zero. The equation of the above system can be written as
Ms 2 X(s) + csX(s) + kX(s) = F(s) (2.2)
where: s is a complex-valued frequency variable (Laplace variable).
The above equation can be rewritten as
1/(ms 2+cs+k)=X(s)/F(s) = H(s) (2.3)
and finally the homogeneous equation is solved using f (t) = 0 which yields the natural
frequencies as
mk
mc
mc = 22,1 )2
(2
(2.4)
2.3 Frequency Response Function
The relation between the input to the system and its response is determined by the
frequency response of the system, which is a characteristic feature of the system. The
response of a system to an output is completely determined by its frequency response
function.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
20/114
6
Consider a single input system shown below:
Figure 2-2: Single Input System
Ideally the frequency response of the system is calculated by
H () = X ( )/F ( ) (2.5)
where: H ( ) = Frequency response function of the system
F () = Frequency Domain information of the input signal with no noise on signal
X ( ) = Frequency Domain information of the output signal with no noise on the
signal
But, due to measurement errors, the actual frequency response function is given by
X` ( ) - = (F` ( ) -) H ( ) (2.6)
where: = Noise on the input signal.
= Noise on the output signal.
F` () = Measured input of the system.
X` ( ) = Measured output of the system.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
21/114
7
The three most common types of frequency response algorithms are based on the least
squares model: the H 1 algorithm which minimizes the noise on the output, the H 2
algorithm which minimizes the noise on the input and H v algorithm which minimizes the
noise on both the input and output. In this thesis, the H 1 algorithm is used.
2.4 THEORY OF COHERENCE
Ordinary and Multiple Coherence :The ordinary coherence function (COH) is computed as [11]:
)()(
)()(
)()(
|)(|)()(
22
ppqq
qp pq
ppqq
pq pq pq GXX GFF
GFX GXF
GXX GFF
GXF COH === (2.7)
This function is frequency dependent and is a real value between zero and one. The value
1 indicates that the measured response power is totally correlated with the measured input
power. The value zero indicates the output is totally correlated with the sources other
than the measured input. A coherence value less than unity at any frequency is due to
variance and bias errors. The low coherence due to a variance error like random noise can
be significant provided sufficient averaging had occurred. Since coherence is a statistical
indicator, the more ensembles averaged, the more reliable is the result (smaller standard
deviation). The bias errors can be broadly classified into two categories, digital signal
processing errors and the errors due to nonlinearities. All errors causing drops in the
coherence fall into one of these two categories. The frequencies where the coherence is
low are often the same frequencies where the FRF is maxima in magnitude (resonance) or
minima in magnitude (anti-resonance), which may be an indication of leakage. The drop
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
22/114
8
in coherence at any other frequency is more clearly due to other errors such as noise or
nonlinearities. Multiple inputs are often desired during testing so that the energy is more
evenly distributed throughout a structure and as a result the vibratory amplitudes across
the structure will be more uniform, with a consequent decrease in the effect of
nonlinearities. Coherence is not an appropriate measure of linear dependency between
input and output when there is more than one input. The multiple coherence function
(MCOH) that determines the linear dependency of input and output is computed as [12]
= =
=i i N
q
N
t pp
pt qt pq p GXX
H GFF H MCOH
1 1
*
)(
)()()()(
(2.6)
The value of MCOH varies between zero and one. A value of one indicates an output is
correlated with all known inputs, while a value less than unity indicates unknown
contributions such as measurement noise and nonlinearities.
2.5 Excitation Techniques
For a linear system the dynamic characteristics will not vary according to the choice of
the excitation technique used to measure them. However, the effects of most kinds of
nonlinearities, encountered in structural dynamics are generally found to vary with the
external excitation. Hence, the first problem of a nonlinearity investigation is to decide
the type of excitation so that the nonlinearity is exposed and identified. There are
currently many types of excitation methods widely used in vibration study practice.
These excitation techniques are broadly classified as sinusoidal, transient and random
excitation. Sinusoidal excitation is widely regarded as the best excitation technique for
the identification of nonlinearities. The advantage of a sinusoidal excitation is, it is easy
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
23/114
9
to accurately control the input signal level and hence, enables a high input force to be fed
into the structure. However, the drawback of this type of excitation is, it is relatively slow
compared to many of the other techniques used in practice. Since the excitation is
performed frequency by frequency and at each step, time is required for the system to
settle to its steady-state value, sinusoidal methods are very time consuming. On the other
hand, with the random excitation technique, the system can be excited at every frequency
simultaneously within the range of interest. This wide frequency band excitation enables
it to be much faster than the sinusoidal excitation. Also, random excitation in general
linearizes the nonlinear structure due to randomness of input force amplitude. Thistechnique is the best match for modal analysis, as most of the modal parameter estimation
methods are based on linearity. Due to the above stated factors, random excitation is very
commonly used in actual testing conditions. Hence, test engineers need a nonlinear
detection method that is compatible with normal modal analysis methods employing
random excitation. Therefore, in this thesis, random excitation is used in detecting the
structural nonlinearities using combined coherence method.
2.6 Overview of Non-linearity
Most practical engineering structures exhibit a certain degree of nonlinearity due to
nonlinear dynamic characteristics of structural joints, nonlinear boundary conditions and
nonlinear material properties. For practical purposes, in many cases, they are regarded as
linear structures because the degree of nonlinearity is small and therefore, insignificant in
the response range of interest. Most theories, upon which structural dynamic analysis is
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
24/114
10
founded, rely heavily on this assumption of linearity (superposition principle). The
superposition principle states that, the deflection due to two or more simultaneously
applied loads is equal to the sum of the deflections caused, when the loads are applied
individually. But for some cases, the effect of nonlinearity may become so significant
that it has to be taken into account in the analysis of dynamic characteristics of the
structure. The present thesis focuses on the location of nonlinearity based on the
measurement of input and output using combined coherence function.
Nonlinear structures are often divided into three main types: zero memory, finite memoryand infinite memory systems. The zero memory type of system is the most simple of the
three types, as it only applies the nonlinear operator at system input, whereas the infinite
memory type of system applies nonlinearity to the system response as well. A typical
infinite memory type of system for a MDOF system can be written as [12] [3]
[M ] x(t ) +[ C ] x(t ) +[ K ] x(t ) +[ K n] x3(t ) = f (t ) (2.7)
The common types of nonlinearities are displacement type nonlinearities (hardening,
softening, hardening/softening and dead zone) and velocity related nonlinearities
(quadratic damping, softening/hardening damping and coulomb friction). In this study
the effect of a cubic stiffness non-linearity on the combined coherence is studied by
applying it to the MDOF system. The mathematical model of a cubic stiffness element
can be expressed as
f(x) = k( x+ x3) (2.8)
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
25/114
11
where the coefficient k represents spring stiffness, and the coefficient represents the
degree of nonlinearity. The Figure 2.3 below represents both the linear and the nonlinear
behavior of a cubic stiffness element. It can be seen that the overall stiffness changes with
the displacement x, while the stiffness coefficients k and remain constant.
Figure 2-3: Cubic Stiffness
Cubic stiffness is applied to the simulation model used in this study to observe its
nonlinear characteristics by exciting the system at five forcing levels. The FRF and
coherences of a nonlinear system can be seen in the Figure 2.4. It can be seen from the
FRF and COH function plots that the anti-resonances and resonances are changed as the
excitation force level changes and thus it can be assumed that the system is non-linear.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
26/114
12
Figure 2-4: FRF and Coherence of nonlinear system
2.7 Non-linear detection techniques
A linear time-invariant system is relatively well understood and theoretically well
developed. The same is not true for the case of a nonlinear system. In most of the
situations, it is necessary to first detect the presence of nonlinearity. A lot of work is done
in this direction and quite a number of procedures are suggested. A brief review of some
of the detection methods is presented here.
M. Simon and G. R. Tomlinson [4] proposed a Hilbert transform technique to detect and
quantify structural nonlinearities. The basis that the Hilbert transform technique can be
used to identify nonlinearity is due to the fact that for a linear structure, the real and
imaginary parts of a measured FRF constitute a Hilbert transform pair, whereas for the
FRF of a nonlinear structure, the Hilbert transform relationships do not hold. By
calculating the Hilbert transform of the real part (or the imaginary part) of a measured
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
27/114
13
FRF and comparing it with the corresponding imaginary part (or real part), the existence
of nonlinearity can be identified based on the difference of the transform pair.
M. Mertens, H.Vander, P. Vanherck, R. Snoeys [6] proposed a complex stiffness method,
which is based on the mapping of different estimates of stiffness and damping for each
measured frequency as a function of magnitude of displacement and the velocity
respectively. The equivalent stiffness and damping of a linear system are constant while
for a nonlinear system stiffness and/or damping vary. This method gives an idea of
degree and type of nonlinearity.
He J. and D.J. Ewins [7] proposed Inverse Receptance method in which nonlinearity is
detected as whether it exists in the stiffness or damping, by displaying the FRF data in
inverse form. For a linear system a plot of real part of inverse FRF against 2 and the
imaginary part against yields a straight lines while for non-linear systems the plots are
not straight lines. The nonlinearities associated with stiffness show up in the real part
while in the imaginary part the nonlinearities due to damping show up.
Vanhoenacker K., T. Dobrowiecki, J. Schouskens [8] proposed a multisine excitation
method to detect nonlinearities. In this method, the system is excited at only a few chosen
set of frequency lines. It is shown that by exciting the system only at a selected set of
frequency lines, the even nonlinear disturbances can be determined at the even frequency
lines while at unexcited odd frequency lines the odd nonlinear distortions can be
determined.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
28/114
14
Kim W-J and Y-S Park [10] proposed non-causal power ratio (NPR) method. It is a
causality check method that quantifies the non-linearity. The NPR value grows with the
increase in nonlinearity and is a function of excitation amplitude. NPR function detects
the non-linearity and also the type of nonlinearity by examining the variation of the NPR
values with excitation force. The advantages of this method are
1. It takes less computation time
2. This method does not require prior information of the system
3.
It can be applied without any limitations to the nonlinearities
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
29/114
15
3. Non-linear Detection Method (Combined Coherence
Function)
In this chapter the theory of the combined coherence is discussed and mathematical
equations for both the ordinary and multiple combined coherence (MCCOH) are derived.
3.1 THEORY OF COMBINED COHERENCE
In general structures are represented by assuming lumped masses as node elements with
mass and no stiffness, and are connected by stiffness and damping terms. The distribution
of mass is important in dynamic analysis. The general representation of the structure and
the force system is shown in figure below [1].
Figure 3-1: a) Lumped mass structure system b) Force system
At any node point if Newtons law is applied and an equation of motion is developed,
then the acceleration is the sum of both the internal force terms caused by stiffness and
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
30/114
16
damping terms, and the external force terms. Considering a 2 DOF model shown in the
Figure 3-2, the equations of motion can be written as
Figure 3-2: 2 DOF model with rotary inertia
121212012012
.
121
.
201201
..
22
22
..
12
221 )()()/()/( f xk xk k k xc xccc xr j xr jm +++++++=+
(3.1)
2112220121
.
122
.
2012
..
12
22
..
22
222 )()()/()/( f xk xk k xc xcc xr j xr jm +++++=+ (3.2)
When motions of two degrees of freedom are combined under the condition of equal
mass i.e., (m 1 = m 2), the contribution of motions due to internal forces between degrees
of freedom will disappear. The equation obtained by combining the motions of DOF is
m f f xk xk m xc xcm x x /][][/1][/1 211012201.
012
.
20
..
2
..
1 +++=+ (3.3)
If a coherence function is calculated for a virtual coordinate created by combining the
motions between these DOFs, the drops in coherence due to non-linearity would go
away but the low coherence values due to digital signal processing errors would not
improve. The critical condition for this method is the equality of masses between the
degrees of freedom between which the motions are combined. If the masses are not equal,
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
31/114
17
the detection method can still be applied, if the motions are scaled according to the mass
ratio. In this thesis, a test case is run to see if scaling the masses would improve the
combined coherence in detecting the nonlinearities.
3.2 Development of Ordinary and Multiple Combined Coherence functions [2]:
The standard equation for ordinary coherence function is given by
)()(
)()(
)()(
|)(|)()(
22
ppqq
qp pq
ppqq
pq pq pq GXX GFF
GFX GXF
GXX GFF
GXF COH === (3.4)
Since the CCOH function is based on the sum of the motion between two DOFs.
Substituting X p + X r for X p we get
**
**
)( ))((
)()(
pr pr qq
q pr q pr q pr X X X X F F
F X X F X X CCOH
++++
= (3.5)
)(
))((*****
***
)( p pr p pr r r qq
q pqr q pqr q pr X X X X X X X X F F
F X F X F X F X CCOH
+++++
= (3.6)
)(
|| 2
)( pp pr rprr qq
rq pqq pr GXX GXX GXX GXX GFF
GXF GXF CCOH
++++
= (3.7)
The standard equation for multiple coherence function is given by [11]
= =
=i i N
q
N
t pp
pt qt pq p GXX
H GFF H MCOH
1 1
*
)(
)()()()(
(3.8)
after following the similar steps as for CCOH, MCCOH can be derived as
= =
+ +++++
=i i N
s
N
t rr rp pr pp
rt pt qt rs psr p GXX GXX GXX GXX
H H GFF H H MCCOH
1 1 )()()()(
*))()()(())()(()(
(3.9)
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
32/114
18
3.3 Applying CCOH formulation to the Roscher Theoretical Model
Roscher applied the combined coherence function to the data generated from the
theoretical lumped parameter (M, K, C) model with static coupling. The model used by
the Roscher is shown in the Figure 3.3. Roscher had applied the combined coherence
formulation for various testing conditions for different types of displacement and velocity
related nonlinearities. There was complete improvement in the combined coherence for
some of the cases and in some cases, for some frequency ranges, the combined coherence
did not show improvement. Only a few cases were tested for different kinds of nonlinearities. The mass distribution, which is a critical parameter for combined
coherence in determining the nonlinearities, was not extensively studied. In this thesis, a
study is done on how the mass distribution affects the combined coherence by simulating
cases with mass equality between the DOFs.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
33/114
19
Figure 3-3: Roscher Theoretical Model
A few cases simulated by Roscher are shown in the Table 1-1. As it can be seen from the
combined coherence (CCOH) plot, it is not improved completely. There is a drop in
CCOH in the range of 16 to 18 Hz and this can be due to the nonlinear motion entering
through other paths. This drop in CCOH still needs to be studied, before CCOH can be
applied to any real world structure.
Case Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M 1, M 2, M3
and M 4 (Kg)
1 1 and 3 F 3 = 30 N 12, 7, 9 and 14 50000
2 1 and 3 F 1 = 50 N and F 3 = 50 N 12, 7, 9 and 14 50000
Table 1-1: Sample test cases of combined coherence applied to Roscher model
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
34/114
20
Figure 3-4: FRF and Coherence for Case 1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
35/114
21
Figure 3-5: Comparison of Coherence and CCOH for Case 1
Figure 3-6: FRF and Coherence for Case 2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
36/114
22
Figure 3-7: Comparison of Coherence and MCCOH for Case 2
3.4 Application of CCOH to Real world structure
Doug Coombs applied combined coherence to a real world structure. The system
consisted of an H-frame with (2x6x0.25) with another square frame (2x2x0.125) steel
tubing. These two frames were connected at 4 discrete points giving various options for
linear/non-linear conditions. Two shakers were connected in a skew direction at an angle
of 45 0 in order to get energy in all three directions. The following testing scenarios were
examined to check the ability of combined coherence to spatially locate nonlinearities.
The line diagram of testing structure is shown below in Figure 3.8.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
37/114
23
Figure 3-8: Line diagram of Doug Coombs model
Different testing cases such as
Cases with and without leakage errors Varying the number of spectral averages
Reducing the number of nonlinear paths
Varying the input force locations
Changing the spatial density of the responses
on combined coherence were studied. For a nominal linear connection between the
connections, the improvement in combined coherence was near the resonances instead at
the anti-resonances raising a question if leakage is affecting the combined coherence. For
many of the testing cases the improvement in the combined coherence was small when
compared to multiple coherence. In one case, when the combined coherence is examined
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
38/114
24
by changing the location of input to the square frame, the previous large improvements in
the combined coherence away from the input locations were not seen.
In this thesis, a study is done on a theoretical model with dynamic coupling similar to the
real world system used by Coombs to study the behavior of combined coherence for
various testing conditions.
3.5 Theoretical Model used to study Combined Coherence
A 4 DOF model with rotary inertia is used to study combined coherence. Figure 3.9shows a near real time 4 DOF model, similar to that used by Doug Coombs, which is
dynamically coupled. The mi, cij, and k ij variables denote the mass, linear viscous
damping, and linear stiffness parameters; the f i variables denote the applied external
forces. The independent coordinates, xi, are defined with respect to an absolute
coordinate system. The idea of this type of model is to study the effect on combined
coherence when the path of energy is across the boundary and to get dynamic coupling
between the degrees of freedom. As can be seen from the equations of motion, degrees of
freedom 1, 2 and 3, 4 are dynamically coupled.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
39/114
25
Figure 3-9: Theoretical 4 DOF lumped model
The equations of motion of the model are expressed in terms of a set of coordinates that
are defined with respect to the unique static equilibrium point of the linear system:
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
40/114
26
=
+++++++++
+
+++++++++
+
++
++
)(
)(
)(
)(
)(
)(
)(
)(
)(
)(
)()(
)(
)(
)(
)(
//00
//00
00//
00//
4
3
2
1
4
3
2
1
04342414342414
343423132313
242324231212
14131214131201
4
3
2
1
04342414342414
343423132313
242324231212
14131214131201
4
3
2
1
4444
444
444
4443
2222
222
222
2221
t f
t f
t f
t f
t x
t x
t x
t x
k k k k k k k
k k k k k k
k k k k k k
k k k k k k k
t x
t x
t xt x
ccccccc
cccccc
ccccccccccccc
t x
t x
t x
t x
r jmr j
r jr jm
r jmr j
r jr jm
&&&&
&&&&&&&&
(3.10)
Frequency response function and coherence are evaluated using the dynamic stiffness
method, where the FRF matrix was computed by inverting the system impedance matrix
at each frequency of interest. This provided a means of checking the simulink model,
which used time domain integration to obtain the responses. It can be seen from the FRF
plots below that the dynamic stiffness method results matched the results obtained
through simulink model perfectly. Figure 3-10 below shows the FRFs of all 4 DOFs for
an input applied at DOF 1.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
41/114
27
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
42/114
28
Figure 3-10: Comparison of Analytical and Simulation Results
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
43/114
29
4. Application of Combined Coherence to Analytical model
In this chapter, the simulation results obtained for various cases from a 4 DOF system
MATLAB Simulink model are presented. The 5 th order fixed-step Dormand-Prince ODE
method is used. The sample time, t, is set at 0.005 seconds and 2 16 time steps are
computed, resulting in 327.68 seconds of signal for each simulation. Data is processed in
the Fourier frequency domain and FRFs are determined for each simulation using the H 1
FRF calculation [11] with F jk ( ) as the input and X ik ( ) as the output. The H 1 calculation
seeks to minimize noise on the output.
4.1 Effects of Varying the Force Input
In this section, simulations are done to verify whether the system is linear or non-linear,
by exciting the system with five different force-exciting levels. Further, the effect on the
combined coherence in detecting the structural non-linearities, for different exciting
levels is studied. The following MIMO cases shown in Table 4-1 are simulated.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
44/114
30
Table 4-1: MIMO situations for different force exciting levels
It can be seen from the FRF and coherence function plots (Figures 4-1 and 4-2), that the
anti-resonances and resonances are changed as the excitation force level changes. Thus, it
can be assumed that the system is non-linear. The drops in coherence can be attributed to
digital signal processing errors as well as to the non-linearity. For example, from the
coherence plot (coherence 1) of case 4.1.1, it can seen that the drop in coherence value at
3 Hz is due to digital signal processing error and drops at 8 11 Hz, 14 19 Hz, 21 25
Hz are due to non-linear motion.
It can be seen from the MCCOH of case 4.1.1 (Figure 4-1), at lower forcing levels the
MCCOH showed improvement while at higher forcing levels it still showed improvement
but with more distortion. The distortion at a forcing level of 70 N is more when compared
to a forcing level of 30 N. Hence, it can be concluded that the nature of the improvement
in the MCCOH is inversely proportional to the forcing level, i.e., at lower force levels the
Case Location of
Non-Linearity
Force (Increased in steps
of 10 N)
M 1, M 2, M 3 &
M 4 (Kg)
4.1.1 1 & 3 F 1 = 30 to 70 N &
F3 = 20 to 60 N
12, 10, 8 &14 100000
4.1.2 2 & 4 F 1 = 30 to 70 N &
F3 = 20 to 60 N
12, 10, 8 & 14 100000
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
45/114
31
ability of the MCCOH to detect non-linearities is greater when compared to higher force
levels.
Figure 4-1: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.1.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
46/114
32
Figure 4-2: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.1.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
47/114
33
4.2 SIMO Situations for a system with Dynamic Coupling
In this section, the following cases shown in Table 4-2 are simulated for a system close to
the real world testing conditions where the mass distribution between the DOF is uneven
and also, there is mass coupling between the degrees of freedom.
Case Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M1 M2 M3 M4
4.2.1 1 and 2 F1 = 50 N 12 10 8 14 100000
4.2.2 1 and 3 F3 = 50 N 12 10 8 14 100000
4.2.3 1 and 4 F1 = 50 N 12 10 8 14 100000
4.2.4 2 and 3 F3 = 50 N 12 10 8 14 100000
4.2.5 2 and 4 F2 = 50 N 12 10 8 14 100000
4.2.6 3 and 4 F4 = 50 N 12 10 8 14 100000
Table 4-2: System with Dynamic Coupling SIMO situations
It can be seen from the FRF plots that there are distortions at both resonances and anti-
resonances. From the coherence function plots, it can be seen that the drops in the
coherence value can be attributed to digital signal processing errors as well as to the non-
linearity. In the coherence function plot of Case 4.2.1, one could see the drops between 5
to 6 Hz and 10 to 14 Hz which are not associated with either resonance or anti-resonance
but are due to non-linearity. Also, one could see the drops at 3.5, 6 and 8 Hz that are at
resonances or anti-resonances and the drops in the higher frequency range (above 20 Hz).
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
48/114
34
As a next step, the CCOH for responses 1 and 2 is compared with ordinary coherence. It
can be seen that the drops in the higher frequency range and the drops associated with
non-linearity (5-6 Hz) are completely eliminated and one could only see the drops at
resonances. The drop in coherence over the frequency range of 10 to 14 Hz is not
completely eliminated but has shown improvement over the ordinary coherence. The
complete clear up of the CCOH is not seen because of one or a combination of three
factors:
1.
Dynamic coupling2. Due to the non-linear motion entering the system from other paths
3. Mass difference between the DOFs between which the CCOH has been
computed
Similar results have been observed for all other combination of cases i.e., when the non-
linearity is located between DOFs 1 and 3, 1 and 4, 2 and 3, 2 and 4, and 3 and 4 that
there are drops in coherences due to non-linearity, leakage and at higher frequencies.
CCOH has shown improvement at anti-resonances but not at resonances and complete
clear up the CCOH has not been registered.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
49/114
35
Figure 4-3: FRFs and Coherences of Case 4.2.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
50/114
36
Figure 4-4: Coherence and CCOH of Case 4.2.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
51/114
37
Figure 4-5: FRFs, Coherence and CCOH for Case 4.2.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
52/114
38
Figure 4-6: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH for Case 4.2.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
53/114
39
Figure 4-7: FRFs, Coherences and CCOH for Case 4.2.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
54/114
40
Figure 4-8: FRFs, Coherences and CCOH for Case 4.2.5
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
55/114
41
Figure 4-9: FRFs, Coherences and CCOH for Case 4.2.6
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
56/114
42
4.3 MIMO Situations for a system with Dynamic Coupling
In this section, the MIMO situations shown in the Table 4-3 below are simulated. The
testing conditions, severity of non-linearity, locations of non-linearity, mass and all other
conditions are similar to that of the previous case (4.2) except for the input given at two
DOFs between which the non-linearity is located. Multiple inputs determine if the
structure responds in a non-linear regime. More often, most modal analysis procedures
involve the application of multiple inputs in order to get more uniform energydistribution. Whereas, the SIMO situation induces non-linear behavior in the vicinity of
the input location and structure might not be excited well at remote points, therefore,
further study is done only for MIMO situations.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
57/114
43
Case Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M1 M2 M3 M4
4.3.1 1 & 2 F1 = 50 N &
F2 = 40 N
12 10 8 14 100000
4.3.2 1 & 3 F1 = 50 &
F3 = 40N
12 10 8 14 100000
4.3.3 1 & 4 F1 = 50N &
F4 = 40 N
12 10 8 14 100000
4.3.4 2 & 3 F2 = 50 N &
F3 = 40 N
12 10 8 14 100000
4.3.5 2 & 4 F2 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
12 10 8 14 100000
4.3.6 3 & 4 F3 = 50 N & F4 =
40 N
12 10 8 14 100000
Table 4-3: MIMO situations of system with Dynamic Coupling
The FRF estimation, the MCOH and the MCCOH obtained are as shown in the Figures
(4-10 to 4-16) below. As seen from the plots below, the results obtained in this case are
similar to that of the previous case. There are frequency shifts in the FRFs at resonances
and anti-resonances. Also, there are low coherence values due to non-linearity and digital
signal processing errors, like leakage at resonances and anti-resonances. One can see the
complete improvement of the MCCOH values at higher frequencies and at anti-
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
58/114
44
resonances. At some frequencies, the MCCOH has not registered complete improvement.
In the coherence plot of Case 4.3.1, one can see the drop in coherence over the frequency
range of 5 7 Hz, which is at anti-resonance, is completely improved. The drop over the
frequency range of 10 14 Hz, which is near the resonance, is not improved. It can be
concluded from this observation that the MCCOH is sensitive to anti-resonance.
Similar results have been observed for all other combination of cases i.e., when the non-
linearity is located between DOFs 1 and 3, 1 and 4, 2 and 3, 2 and 4, and 3 and 4 that
there are drops in coherences due to non-linearity, leakage and at higher frequencies.MCCOH has shown improvement at anti-resonances, but not at resonances, and complete
improvement of the MCCOH has not been registered.
It can be seen from the figures that the MCCOH has shown improvement over the
MCOH in all of the above situations but for some frequency ranges the complete
improvement in the MCCOH is not accomplished. As mentioned in the previous SIMO
situations, this can be due to one or combinations of the three factors:
1. Dynamic coupling.
2. Due to the non-linear motion entering the system from other paths.
3. Mass difference between the DOFs between which the MCCOH has been
computed.
But, it is not clear from this case whether the incomplete improvement in the MCCOH is
due to either dynamic coupling or due to the mass difference or because of the non-linear
motion entering from other paths.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
59/114
45
Figure 4-10: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
60/114
46
Figure 4-11: FRFs and Coherences of Case 4.3.2
Figure 4-12: Coherence and MCCOH of Case 4.3.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
61/114
47
Figure 4-13: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
62/114
48
Figure 4-14: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
63/114
49
Figure 4-15: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.5
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
64/114
50
Figure 4-16: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.3.6
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
65/114
51
4.4 Effect of Dynamic Coupling on Combined Coherence
In the previous cases, it is seen that the complete improvement of the combined
coherence is not observed and reasons for it are attributed to dynamic coupling, mass
difference and/or path of energy. In this section, the following cases are simulated to
study the effect of dynamic coupling on the MCCOH. The rotary inertia term has been
reduced by 100 times (i.e., making the dynamic coupling between DOFs negligible.)
Sl. No. Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M 1, M 2, M 3
& M 4
J 2, J 4
4.4.1 1 and 2 F 1 = 50 N &
F2 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 &14 J 2=M*R 22
/200
J4=M*R 42/200
100000
4.4.2 1 and 3 F 1 = 50 &
F3 = 40N
12, 10, 8 & 14 J 2=M*R 22/200
J4=M*R 42/200
100000
4.4.3 1 and 4 F 1 = 50N &
F4 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 & 14 J 2=M*R 22/200
J4=M*R 42/200
100000
4.4.4 2 and 3 F 2 = 50 N &
F3 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 & 14 J 2=M*R 22/200
J4=M*R 42/200
100000
4.4.5 2 and 4 F 2 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 & 14 J 2=M*R 22/200
J4=M*R 42/200
100000
4.4.6 3 and 4 F 3 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 & 14 J 2=M*R 22/200
J4=M*R 42
/200
100000
Table 4-4: MIMO situations of system with no Dynamic Coupling
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
66/114
52
The FRF estimation, the MCOH and the MCCOH obtained are shown in Figures (4-17 to
4-22) below. It is concluded from last case that dynamic coupling is one of the reasons
why the MCCOH has not shown complete improvement. Therefore, it is expected from
this case, that the MCCOH will show improvement, as the dynamic coupling is made
negligible. It can be seen from the MCCOH plot of Case 4.4.1 the improvement in
MCCOH is complete whereas in all other cases (4.4.2 to 4.4.6) there is not complete
improvement in MCCOH. In the MCCOH plot of Case 4.4.2, it can be seen that over the
frequency range of 15 18 Hz, the MCCOH has not shown improvement. Though, the
effect of dynamic coupling is made negligible, the MCCOH has not shown completeimprovement in all the cases. Therefore, it can be concluded from this case that the
dynamic coupling has no effect on the MCCOH. So, the incomplete improvement of
MCCOH might be due to either the mass difference or the non-linear motion entering
from other paths.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
67/114
53
Figure 4-17: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
68/114
54
Figure 4-18: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
69/114
55
Figure 4-19: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
70/114
56
Figure 4-20: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
71/114
57
Figure 4-21: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.5
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
72/114
58
Figure 4-22: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.4.6
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
73/114
59
4.5 Effect of Location of Input and Path of Energy on Combined Coherence
This case is simulated for the MIMO situations as above but the forcing function is not
placed directly on the DOF that is associated with the non-linearity. These cases are
simulated to study the ability of the combined coherence to detect the non-linearity when
the energy comes from the linear path and also when input is placed some distance away
from the DOFs between which non-linearity is present.
Sl. No. Location of Non-
Linearity
Force M 1, M 2, M 3 &
M 4
4.5.1 1 & 2 F 3 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 and 14 100000
4.5.2 1 & 3 F 2 = 50 &
F4 = 40N
12, 10, 8 and 14 100000
4.5.3 1 & 4 F 2 = 50N &
F3 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 and 14 100000
4.5.4 2 & 3 F 1 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 and 14 100000
4.5.5 2 & 4 F 1 = 50 N &
F3 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 and 14 100000
4.5.6 3 & 4 F 1 = 50 N &
F2 = 40 N
12, 10, 8 and 14 100000
Table 4-5: MIMO situations to study effect of Path of Energy
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
74/114
60
The FRF estimation, the MCOH, and the MCCOH obtained are shown in Figures (4-23
to 4-28) below. It can be seen that for Cases 4.5.1 and 4.5.6 where the forcing function is
away from the DOFs between which the non-linearity is located, the MCCOH has
registered a drastic improvement. For these cases, when compared with Cases 4.3.1 and
4.3.6 respectively for the same level of excitation, the FRFs and coherence functions are
not distorted as much as when the forcing function is directly placed at the DOFs where
the non-linearity is located. Whereas in Cases 4.5.2 to 4.5.5 the result is reversed, the
FRF and MCCOH are distorted more than Cases 4.5.1 and 4.5.6 and also there is notcomplete clear up of the MCCOH function. The improvement in the MCCOH in Cases
4.5.1 and 4.5.2 can be because the forcing function is away from the DOF where the non-
linearity is being located and the energy is entering through a more linear path. However,
it has been concluded in the previous case that the dynamic coupling has no affect on the
MCCOH, so from this case it can be concluded that the location of inputs and energy
path are critical in determining the ability of the MCCOH in detecting the non-linearities.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
75/114
61
Figure 4-23: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
76/114
62
Figure 4-24: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
77/114
63
Figure 4-25: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
78/114
64
Figure 4-26: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
79/114
65
Figure 4-27: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.5.6
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
80/114
66
4.6 Effect of Mass Distribution on Combined Coherence
In this section, MIMO situations are simulated by considering equal mass at all DOFs.
This is to see how the mass difference of the DOFs between which the non-linearity is
associated, affects the MCCOH. The masses at all the DOFs are made equal. The
following cases have been simulated.
Sl. No. Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M 1, M 2, M 3 &
M 4
4.6.1 1 & 2 F 1 = 50 N &
F2 = 40 N
15,15,15 & 15 100000
4.6.2 1 & 3 F 1 = 50 &
F3 = 40N
15,15,15 & 15 100000
4.6.3 1 & 4 F 1 = 50N &
F4 = 40 N
15,15,15 & 15 100000
4.6.4 2 & 3 F 2 = 50 N &
F3 = 40 N
15,15,15 & 15 100000
4.6.5 2 & 4 F 2 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
15,15,15 & 15 100000
4.6.6 3 & 4 F 3 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
15,15,15 & 15 100000
Table 4-6: MIMO situations to study effect of Mass Distribution
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
81/114
67
It can be seen from the plots of the MCCOH, that it has shown complete improvement in
Case 4.6.6 and in all other cases from 4.6.1 to 4.6.5, the MCCOH is improved but still
exhibits drops over some frequency ranges. For example, from the MCCOH plot of Case
4.6.2, it can be seen that over the frequency ranges of 7 8 Hz and 13 18 Hz there is no
complete improvement in the MCCOH. By comparing the MCCOH of Case 4.6.6 and
Case 4.3.6 it can be concluded that the mass inequality between the DOFs can be a
possibility for the MCCOH to detect non-linearities. Even though the mass difference
between the degrees of freedom 3 and 4 in Case 4.3.6 is small (6 kg, this difference is
significant when compared to original masses of 14 kg and 8 kg), by eliminating thismass difference, the MCCOH has shown great improvement. In all other cases, the
MCCOH has shown improvement when compared to Cases 4.3.1 to 4.3.6 but of much
smaller values. It is expected that when the mass inequality between the degrees of
freedom is eliminated, the combined coherence should show greater improvement. But
from these cases, it can be concluded that besides the mass inequality, the path of energy
is also critical in detecting the non-linearities. This can be seen from Cases 4.6.1 to 4.6.5,
in which the improvement in the MCCOH is not complete.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
82/114
68
Figure 4-28: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
83/114
69
Figure 4-29: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
84/114
70
Figure 4-29: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
85/114
71
Figure 4-30: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
86/114
72
Figure 4-31: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.5
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
87/114
73
Figure 4-32: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.6.6
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
88/114
74
4.7 Effect of Spatial Density of Masses on Combined Coherence
In this section, MIMO situations similar to the real world testing situations, where the
system consists of more than one component, with a difference in mass densities are
simulated. As an example, it can be seen from the Doug Coombs model there are two
frames, one being lighter than the other.
Case Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M 1, M 2, M 3 and
M 4
4.7.1 1 & 2 F 1 = 50 N &
F2 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.7.2 1 & 3 F 1 = 50 &
F3 = 40N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.7.3 1 & 4 F 1 = 50N &
F4 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.7.4 2 & 3 F 2 = 50 N &
F3 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.7.5 2 & 4 F 2 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.7.6 3 & 4 F 3 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
Table 4-7: MIMO situations to study effect of Spatial Densities of Masses
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
89/114
75
It can be seen from the MCCOH plots of Cases 4.7.1 and 4.7.6 that the MCCOH has
shown improvement where the mass difference between the DOFs for which the
MCCOH is computed is negligible. In other cases, the MCCOH has not shown any
improvement at all due to the huge mass difference between the DOFs. In Cases 4.7.1 to
4.7.6, the improvement in the MCCOH is not complete due to the relative motion
entering from other paths.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
90/114
76
Figure 4-33: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
91/114
77
Figure 4-34: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
92/114
78
Figure 4-35: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
93/114
79
Figure 4-36: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
94/114
80
Figure 4-37: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.5
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
95/114
81
Figure 4-38: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.7.6
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
96/114
82
Cases 4.8: Effect of Scaling of Motions of DOF on Combined Coherence
In this section, MIMO situations are simulated by scaling the motions at the DOFs at
which the non-linearity is located. The crucial condition for the combined coherence
technique in determining the location of the non-linearity is the mass equality; however
in real world testing conditions, mass equality between the DOFs is not achieved. This
case is tested for MIMO situations to study if scaling the motions would improve the
ability of the combined coherence in determining the structural non-linearities spatially.
The following MIMO cases are simulated.
Sl. No. Location of
Non-Linearity
Force M 1, M 2, M 3 &
M 4
4.8.1 1 & 3 F 1 = 50 N &
F3 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.8.2 1& 4 F 1 = 50 &
F4 = 40N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.8.3 2 & 3 F 2 = 50N &
F3 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.8.4 2 & 4 F 2 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
4.8.5 3 & 4 F 3 = 50 N &
F4 = 40 N
100, 80, 10 & 14 100000
Table 4-8: MIMO situations to study effect of Scaling of Motions
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
97/114
83
It can be seen from the MCCOH plots that the MCCOH has shown improvement over the
ordinary coherence, but not improved completely. The complete improvement in the
MCCOH is not seen as it can be affected by non-linear motion entering from other paths.
Case 4.8.5 is simulated similar to Case 4.3.6 and it can be seen from the MCCOH of case
4.8.5 that there is not much improvement when compared to Case 4.3.6. From this
comparison, it can be concluded that non-linear motion entering from other paths has an
effect on the combined coherence in detecting the non-linearities.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
98/114
84
Figure 4-39: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.1
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
99/114
85
Figure 4-40: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
100/114
86
Figure 4-41: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
101/114
87
Figure 4-42: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
102/114
88
Figure 4-43: FRFs, Coherences and MCCOH of Case 4.8.5
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
103/114
89
5. Conclusions
It is observed from all of the situations simulated above that, the combined coherence is
able to separate the nonlinearities from digital signal processing errors but that there is no
complete improvement in the combined coherence over some frequency ranges. The first
case is simulated for MIMO situations to study how the increase in the force affects the
combined coherence. It is concluded from this case that the nature of the improvement in
the MCCOH is inversely proportional to the force level, i.e., at lower force levels the
ability of the MCCOH to detect non-linearities is more when compared to that of higher
force levels.
The second and third cases are simulated for SIMO and MIMO situations respectively to
study the nature of the improvement of the combined coherence. It is concluded from
these cases that it is unclear whether the incomplete improvement of the combined
coherence is due to dynamic coupling, mass inequality and/or path of energy. The fourth
case is simulated to study the effect of dynamic coupling on the combined coherence by
making it negligible. This case has showed that the dynamic coupling has no effect on the
combined coherence in detecting nonlinearity. The fifth case is simulated for MIMO
situations to study the path of energy. The combined coherence has shown complete
improvement when the location of input is away from the DOFs between which
nonlinearity is located. It is concluded from this case that the path of energy is critical in
detecting the nonlinearities. The sixth case is simulated for the MIMO situations with
equal masses. It was expected from this case that the combined coherence would improve
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
104/114
90
significantly over the Case 3, which is simulated with the same testing conditions except
for the difference in masses at DOFs. However, the results obtained have not shown the
complete improvement over Case 3. It is concluded that besides the mass inequality, the
path of energy is also critical in detecting the non-linearities.
The seventh case is simulated for MIMO situations similar to real world testing
conditions with a difference in the mass distribution, i.e., with one of the masses lighter
than the other. The combined coherence has not shown improvement when the
nonlinearity is located between the DOFs with large mass differences. The eighth caseis studied for MIMO situations by scaling the motions of the DOFs that are associated
with nonlinearity. Scaling the motions of the DOFs that are associated with nonlinearity
has shown improvement over the same cases where no scaling of motion is done. Scaling
the motions did not completely improve the combined coherence and that can be due to
the nonlinear motion entering from other paths.
It can be concluded from the above discussion that the dynamic coupling has no effect on
combined coherence in detecting the nonlinearities. The equality of mass, which is a
crucial condition, and the path of energy are the primary elements affecting the ability of
the combined coherence in detecting the non-linearity. Scaling the masses can improve
the combined coherence, but even when the scaling is done, because of the nonlinear
motion entering from other paths, combined coherence could not improve completely.
Because the equality of mass between degrees of freedom cannot be achieved in the real
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
105/114
91
world systems and also energy can enter through non-linear paths, it is difficult to detect
non-linearities in the real world structures using combined coherence.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
106/114
92
6. Future Work
Though the combined coherence, in all the cases studied, is able to separate the
nonlinearity from the digital signal processing errors, drops are observed over some
frequency ranges. Work still need to be done to study the ability of combined coherence
in detecting the structural nonlinearities in the following areas.
1. It was observed that, in most of the situations high frequency distortions in the
multiple combined coherence were improved over the ordinary combined
coherence. Work can be done to study whether this improvement of high
frequency distortions can be used to detect the structural nonlinearities.
2. The system with single location of nonlinearity was studied, whereas in real
structures nonlinearities are located at more than one location. Therefore, this
work can be extended to study the effect of multiple locations of non-linearity in
the system.
3. Location of input and path of energy are critical in detecting the structural
nonlinearities using combined coherence, so a theoretical model with more
number of connections would give better picture of these effects on combined
coherence.
4. Other area can be the study on the ability of combined coherence in detecting
non-linearities in the presence of measurement noise.
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
107/114
93
7. References
[1] Detection of Structural Non-Linearities using the Frequency Response andCoherence Functions, Masters Thesis,T. Roscher, University of Cincinnati, 2000
[2] Detection of Structural Non-Linearities using Combined Coherence, MastersThesisDouglas M. Coombs, University of Cincinnati, 2003
[3] Nonlinear Systems Techniques and ApplicationsJulius S. BendantJohn Wiley and Sons Inc, 1998
[4] Use of Hilbert transform in modal analysis of linear and non-linear structuresM. Simon and G. R. Tomlinson
Journal of Sound and Vibration, volume 96, Issue 4, 22 October 1984, Pages 421-436
[5] Introduction to the Theory of Fourier IntegralsTitchmarsh, W.C.Oxford, The Clarendon Press [1948]
[6] The complex stiffness method to detect and identify non-linear dynamic behavior of SDOF systemsMertens M., H. Van Der Auweraer, P. Vanherck and R.SnoeysMechanical Systems and Signal Processing 3 (1), pp37-54
[7] A simple method of interpretation for the modal analysis of nonlinear systemsHe J. and D.J. Ewins: 1987,Proceedings of the 5th International Modal Analysis Conference, London(England), pp 626-634
[8] An explanation of the cause of the distribution in the transfer function of aduffing oscillator subject to sine excitationStorer D.M. and G.R. Tomlinson: 1991,Proceedings of the 9th International Modal Analysis Conference, pp.1197-1205
[9] Recent developments in the measurement and interpretation of higher order transfer functions from non-linear structuresStorer D.M. and G.R. Tomlinson: 1993,Mechanical Systems and Signal Procession 7(2), pp173-179
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
108/114
94
[10] Non-linearity identification and quantification using an inverse Fourier TransformKim W-J and Y-S Park: 1993,Fourier Transform, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 3, pp 239-255
[11] Vibrations: Experimental Modal AnalysisR.J. AllemangUniversity of Cincinnati, 1999
[12] Non-linear Vibrations: Course LiteratureR. J. AllemangUniversity of Cincinnati, 2000
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
109/114
95
8. Appendix
8.1 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 1 and 2
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
110/114
96
8.2 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 1 and 3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
111/114
97
8.3 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 1 and 4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
112/114
98
8.4 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 2 and 3
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
113/114
99
8.5 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 2 and 4
8/8/2019 CHENNAGOWNI SURESH BABU
114/114
8.6 Simulink Model when the non-linearity is between DOFs 3 and 4