Sei sulla pagina 1di 72

March 2005

TAE 955

Aeroelastic Analysis of Propellers

Part 2 - “Flutter” Analysis

By

Y. Yadykin, V. Tenetov, I. Weissberg and A. Rosen

March 2005

Aeroelastic Analysis of Propellers Part 2 - “Flutter” Analysis

By

Y. Yadykin, V. Tenetov and A. Rosen

Faculty of Aerospace Engineering Technion – Israel Institute of Technology Haifa 32000, Israel

I. Weissberg

Aero Design & Development LTD Park Rehovot, P.O.B 565 Rehovot

TAE NO. 955

2

Abstract

This document presents a theoretical model and an associated computer program, that are used to predict flutter of a propeller blade, operating in a subsonic incoming flow. The model is based on a two-dimensional unsteady strip theory in conjunction with a finite element structural model of the blade. A FEM structural software is used. The generalized aerodynamic forces are based on the two-dimensional subsonic theory of Theodorsen, and are applied in a strip theory manner with appropriate modifications Parametric studies are presented, illustrating the effects on flutter of the rotational speed, cruise Mach number and structural damping. The analysis is applied to the SR2- EC propeller. This propeller includes eight straight blades and it was designed for a high Mach number cruise, up to Mach 0.8. The SR2-EC blade is characterized by large twist angles (between the root and the tip sections) and thin airfoil sections (especially at the tip of the blade).

3

List of Contents

Subject

Abstract

List of Symbols List of Tables List of Figures

1. Introduction

2. Finite Element Model

2.1 The FEM Coordinate System

2.2 A Finite Element Modeling of the Blade

3. Aeroelastic Model

3.1

Equations of the Motion

3.2

Linearization of the Equations

3.4

Generalized Aerodynamic Forces

4. Flutter Analysis

5. Computer Code

5.1.

Calculation of the Mode Shapes

5.2

Calculation of the Generalized Mass

5.3.

Calculation of the Lift-Curve Slope

6. Results and Discussions

6.1.

The SR2-EC Propeller

6.2

Results and Discussion

7. Conclusions

References Appendix A: Explanation of Nonlinearities in the Basic Equation A.1. Introduction to Nonlinearities A.2. Stress Stiffening A.3. Spin Softening Appendix B: Matrices Appendix C: Aerodynamic Forces and Moments Acting on an Oscillating Airfoil

Appendix D: Calculating the matrix [H]

Appendix E: Calculating the matrix [ Appendix F: Calculating the matrix [

P

A

T

0

]

]

4

Page

3

5

9

9

11

13

13

13

15

15

16

23

28

31

33

33

34

35

35

38

50

51

52

52

52

53

54

56

61

68

71

List of Symbols

[ Α

g,0

A

m

c

]

,

[

Α

g,1

]

,

[

Α

g,2

]

generalized aerodynamic matrices

coefficient of the distribution of the aerodynamic loads

a

distance between the mid-chord and the point where h is measured

b

semi-chord

[

[

C ,

C

d

1

][

]

C L

C

2

][

,

[ ] C n CL d c c/d D ∆ D d dC dα L
[
]
C
n
CL d
c
c/d
D
∆ D
d
dC
L
F ( σ )
{F ( u, u ,u
) }
{ }
F
CF
{ ∆F
}
CF
{
}
F GR
{
∆F
}
GR
{ ∆ F
( u
0 ,∆
u ,

[H ]

{h }

h

0

n

[Ι ]

Ι

J

hh

, Ι

h

α

,

Ι

α

h

,

C

3

]

t ) }

Ι

αα

aerodynamic matrices defined in Appendix C

viscous damping matrix lift coefficient

matrix of the coefficients of a transformation

design lift coefficient

chord, c=2b chord ratio of a blade cross-section drag force per unit span of the blade perturbation of the drag force

propeller diameter

lift curve-slope Theodorsen’s function, F(σ) = Θ(σ) + iG(σ ) aerodynamic cross-sectional loads vector

centrifugal force vector

perturbation of the centrifugal force vector

gyroscopic force vector

perturbation of the gyroscopic force vector

perturbation of the aerodynamic loads vector

reduced modal matrix plunging displacement vector

amplitude of the plunging motion

identity matrix

unsteady aerodynamic coefficients, defined in Appendix C

total number of degrees of freedom of the FEM model of the blade

J

0

advance ratio, J

0 =

60 V N d

60 V N d

K

total number of degrees of freedom per each node

k

index of degree of freedom,1 k K

[

[

[

K

K

K

0

L

]

]

CF

]

[K({u})]

[

K

L

0

g

]

stiffness matrix for the steady-state position

linear elastic stiffness matrix

centrifugal (spin) "softening" matrix in physical coordinates

nonlinear stiffness matrix in physical coordinates

generalized stiffness matrix

total number of nodes of the blade

5

i

index of degrees of freedom of the FEM model, 1 i P

L

l

n

aerodynamic lift force per unit span of the blade

strip length along the reference line

[

M

0

]

physical mass matrix, see Appendix B

[

M

g

]

generalized mass matrix

M

 

aerodynamic moment per unit span of the blade

M

c

num ber of finite elements in the chordwise direction

 

m

c

index of elements in the chordwise direction, 1 m

c

N

 

speed of propeller rotation, rpm

M

c

[

P

M

]

m )

n

{P({u,u ,

{

P

( {

u

0

m

c

u })}

})}

P

n

, Q

n

, R

{Q }

{

Q

g

{t}}

{q}

n

, S

n

parameter representing a distribution of the aerodynamic loads

number of nodes per a finite element

index of considered nodes of the finite element,

total number of strips along the blade

1 n

m

N

m

index of strips along the blade, 1 n N

number of degrees of freedom of the FE model of the blade

matrix of the distribution of the aerodynamic loads over the blade

matrix of the distribution of the aerodynamic loads over the strip

aerodynamic nodal force vector steady-state aerodynamic nodal force vector

unsteady aerodynamic force coefficients acting on the n th strip vector of the aerodynamic loads generalized aerodynamic force vector

vector of the generalized coordinates

s

q

R

u

0

0

amplitude of the motion described using the generalized coordinates

radius of the propeller

steady-state blade deflection at the grid points

r

S

s

[T( u ) ] 0 [ T M ] n [ T F ] m
[T(
u
) ]
0
[ T
M ]
n
[ T
F ]
m
c
[
T
]
n
e
t
t
c
0
V
~
~
~
~
1
~
2
~
3
w
, w
,
w
~
~
~
~
4
~
5
~
6
w
, w
, w

radial coordinate along the reference line

total number of modes used in the analysis

index of modes s=1, 2, 3, …,S

general transformation matrix, usually [ T (

transformation matrix for the n th strip of the blade, see Appendix F

u

0

)]

is denoted [

T

0

]

transformation matrix for the

transformation for n

time

c th finite element, see Appendix F

m

e th node, see Appendix F

thickness ratio of a blade cross-section.

aircraft velocity

linear displacements at the finite element node

rotational displacements at the finite element node

6

XYZ

global coordinates system

xyz

blade fixed coordinates system

x = r R Greek Symbols
x = r R
Greek Symbols

α

{α}

α

β

0

0

n

,β ,β

1

2

β 0.75R

dimensionless radial coordinate of the blade cross-section

effective angle of attack rotation deflections vector

amplitude of the rotation perturbation

Euler's angles of transformation

blade pitch angle at the three-quarter radius of the blade

µ

real part of an eigenvalue

ν

imaginary part of an eigenvalue

L

perturbation

of the aerodynamic lift force

M

perturbation of the aerodynamic moment

{

{u(t)}

P

(

u

0

,

u

,t)}

perturbation of the aerodynamic nodal force vector

vector of the perturbation of vibratory deflections

E 0

ζ

λ

λ

s

0

Young’s modulus

modal damping

frequency of the blade oscillations

reference frequency

π

constant, 3.14159

ρ

air density

ρ

o

blade material density

σ

[Φ ]

{φ}

ϕ

[Ψ ]

[

Ψ

ω

[

ω

s

n,0

2

]

] ,[

Ψ

n,1

]

[

, Ψ

n,2

]

reduced frequency,

modal matrix of the FEM

eigenvector

phase angle matrix of the aerodynamic forces acting on the blade

strip aerodynamic matrices

eigenvalue matrix.

angular speed, =2πN/60 (rad/sec)

σ = b λ / V

frequency of the s th mode

Subscripts

0

steady state value

CF

centrifugal

RG

gyroscopic

g

generalized (modal)

L

linear

n

n th strip of the blade

7

n

m

m

c

s

st

Superscripts

G

(

) Τ

n m th node of the finite element

m c th finite element along the chord

s th mode of the blade perturbations

stiffness

global system coordinates

transpose

8

List of Tables

Table 1. The geometry of a blade of the SR2-EC propeller

37

Table 2. Equivalent material properties of the SR2-EC blade

37

List of Figures

Figure

1a. Coordinates System for a blade

14

Figure 1b.Section A-A showing rigid plunging (h) and pitching (α ) motions for a strip

14

Figure 2. Flow Chart

32

Figure 3 .Global coordinate system for the SR2 blade

36

Figure 4. The geometry of a blade of the SR2-EC propeller

38

Figure 5. Mode shapes calculated with respect to the blade coordinates system:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg, =6000 rpm.

40

Figure 6. Variation of the angle of attack along the blade for various rotational speeds:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg, Mach number M=0.

41

Figure 7. Variation of the lift-curve slope along the blade for various rotational speeds:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg, Mach number M=0.

42

Figure 8. Variation of damping and frequency vs. the rotational speed:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg., ξ=0.

43

Figure 9. Variation of damping and frequency vs. the rotational speed:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg., ξ=0,002.

44

Figure 10. Variation of damping and frequency vs. the rotational speed β 0.75R =55.4 deg., ξ=0,02.

45

Figure 11. Variation of damping and frequency vs. the rotational speed:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg., ξ=0,2.

46

Figure 12. Variation of the angle of attack along the blade for various Mach numbers: β 0.75R =55.4 deg, =6000 rpm

47

Figure 13. Variation of the lift-curve slope along the blade for various Mach numbers: β 0.75R =55.4 deg, =6000 rpm.

48

Figure 14. Variation of damping and frequency vs. the free-stream Mach number:

 

β 0.75R =55.4 deg., ξ=0.2.

49

9

Figure D1. 3D quadratic shell element

63

Figure D.2. Matrix [Φ] Components

67

Figure E.1. The scheme of the numbering of the nodes of the finite element

69

10

1. Introduction

This document describes an extension of the static aeroelastic analysis of propeller blades that was described in Ref. 1

The major goals of propeller design are to maximize aerodynamic efficiency, minimize noise and assure structural integrity. Often aerodynamic and acoustic requirements result in designs with thin, swept, and twisted blades, having low aspect ratio and high solidity, compared to conventional propellers [2]. These blades operate in subsonic, transonic, and possibly supersonic flows.

The above described properties of advanced blades add complexity to the understanding of aeroelastic phenomena and the development of appropriate aeroelastic models. Since the blades are thin and flexible, the influence of deflections due to centrifugal and aerodynamic loads cannot be ignored. The aeroelastic problem is inherently nonlinear, requiring the application of a geometric nonlinear theory of elasticity. As indicated above these blades have large sweep and twist, that couple blade's bending and torsion deflections. These structures are plate-like structures because of their low aspect ratio. These characteristics lead to using a finite element structural model that accounts for centrifugal softening/stiffening effects and possibly for Coriolis effects [3- 6]. The centrifugal softening terms are important because of the large blade sweep and flexibility. Because of these unique features, it is impossible to use directly existing aeroelastic analyses of conventional propellers or helicopter blades.

Classical flutter of propellers occurred, unexpectedly, during wind tunnel tests of a model (designated SR-5) with ten highly swept titanium blades [2]. Reference 2 presents experimental data of the SR-5 model and correlation of the data with theory.

In the analysis of Ref. 3, the aerodynamic model is based on a two-dimensional unsteady theory, with a correction for blade sweep, while the structural model is an idealized swept beam. In Ref. 5, the model of Ref. 3 is improved by using blade normal modes, calculated using a finite-element plate model of the blade. The analytical results are compared with the data of the SR-5 model. The correlation between theory and experiment, in Refs.3-5, is varied between poor to good.

Additional subsonic wind tunnel flutter results, obtained during the tests of another composite blade model, SR3C-X2, are presented in Ref. 7. A two-dimensional steady and unsteady aerodynamic theory for a blade having a subsonic leading edge, are presented in Ref. 8, and the theory is used for predicting the flutter speed of the wind tunnel model, reported in Ref. 7.

The specific objectives of the research are:

(1)

To develop a flutter analysis method that uses a two-dimensional aerodynamic model.

(2)

To conduct parametric studies in order to understand the effect of steady airloads on the: frequencies, mode shapes and flutter speed. Also to study the effect of blade pitch angle and blade structural damping - on the flutter speeds.

(3)

To validate the analytical model by correlating calculated and measured flutter speeds.

(4)

To examine the limitations of a two-dimensional unsteady aerodynamic theory for the analysis of propellers.

11

In the present approach the unsteady flow is modeled as a small perturbation superimposed on a uniform steady flow. The unsteady non-linear aerodynamic equations are linearized about the steady flow [8], resulting in linear unsteady aerodynamic equations, that include the effects of the steady inertia and aerodynamic loading.

The flutter analysis presented herein is based on the method of Ref. 4. It uses the elastic modes in conjunction with a two-dimensional aerodynamic theory in a stripwise manner. The flutter analysis is carried out in three steps:

(1)

A geometric nonlinear structural analysis of the rotating blade is performed using a finite element model. This analysis provides the steady-state deformed configuration of the propeller blade.

(2)

The natural frequencies and mode shapes of the blade, in its deformed state, are calculated, based on the results of step (1).

(3)

The unsteady aerodynamic loads and the stability characteristics of the propeller blade are calculated.

To achieve the objectives, a computer program is developed. The computer code combines both, structural and aerodynamic models. The code is used to analyze a straight bladed propeller (SR-2), designed to operate at high Mach numbers.

12

2. Finite Element Model

The structural analysis is based on the use of a Finite Element Model (FEM) to determine the blade structural behavior. The blades experience deflections due to the action of centrifugal and aerodynamic loads. The blade FEM model is built by using three dimensional shell or other elements, and equivalent material properties in the case of composite materials. The computer program, which was developed during this study, builds the FEM of the blade.

2.1 The FEM Coordinates System

A global coordinates system, shown in Fig. 1, is used for the description of the blade geometry and the calculations of the loads. This is a right-hand Cartesian coordinates system, where; The Z-axis is co-linear with the propeller axis of rotation and is positive in the direction of incoming flow. The Y-axis is in the plane of rotation. The X-axis is collinear with the pitch change axis, lies in the plane of rotation and points towards the blade tip. The blade pitch angle is denoted, β 0 , and it can be varied by rotating the blade about its pitch change axis. The angle β 0 is usually specified at the tree quarters radius section. The propeller rotates about the Z axis with an angular speed

2.2 A Finite Element Modeling of the Blade

The blade is represented by its mid surface. Boundary conditions are defined at the blade root. The blade if affected by two types of loads: the inertia and aerodynamic loads. The inertia forces are treated directly by the FEM software. The aerodynamic loads are calculated using a two-dimensional aerodynamic theory in a strip-wise manner. A more detailed description of the aerodynamic model appears in what follows.

13

Figure1 a. Coordinates System for a Blade Section A-A Figure1b. Section A-A showing ri gid

Figure1a. Coordinates System for a Blade

Figure1 a. Coordinates System for a Blade Section A-A Figure1b. Section A-A showing ri gid plunging

Section A-A

Figure1b. Section A-A showing rigid plunging (h) and pitching ( α ) motions for a strip

14

3. Aeroelastic Model

Aeroelasticity deals with the interaction between the structural and aerodynamic behavior. The purpose of an aeroelastic analysis is to combine the formulation of the structural dynamics and aerodynamic models, in a consistent manner, in order to study the combined aeroelastic behavior. Two-dimensional aerodynamic strip theory is used in the present study in order to calculate the aerodynamic loads. The unsteady, two- dimensional, aerodynamic loads in subsonic flow are obtained by using the theory of Ref. 8.

3.1. Equations of Motion The right hand Cartesian coordinates system used for deriving the equations of motion of a rotating propeller blade, is shown in Fig.1. The propeller rotates about the Z-axis which is aligned with the freestream direction. The X–axis is aligned along the blade pitch-axis and the Y- axis is perpendicular to the Z-X plane.

The structural model of the blade is presented by a FEM, as described in the previous section.

The aeroelastic equations of motion of the blade can be written as [10]:

[

M

0

]{u

}+ [

C

d

]{u

}+

[[K

L

][K

CF

]+ [K ({u })]]{u }=

=

{F

CF

}

{F

GR

} {P ({u,u,u })}

+

(1)

{u } represents the blade deflections at the grid points of the finite-element model,

the viscous damping matrix,

the centrifugal (spin) "softening"

matrix, and [ K ({u })] the nonlinear geometrical (stress) stiffness contribution.

,u })} are the force vectors related to the centrifugal,

gyroscopic and aerodynamic loads, respectively.

and

[

{

M

K

0

L

F

CF

]

is the symmetric inertia matrix [9-11], , [

the linear elastic stiffness matrix, [

} ,

{

F

GR

}

and {P ({u,u

K

CF

]

C

Note, that [

K

CF

]

and {

F

CF

}

are functions of

2

d

]

[

]

[see Eqs. B.2 - B.4], [

K

L

]

[

K

CF

]

are symmetric matrices [9], [

K

L

]

is positive definite in nature [9].

In what follows, for clarity,{u }, {u }, and {u } will be replaced by u , u , and u , respectively.

The vector of aerodynamic loads can be expressed as:

{P (u,u

)}

 

[T ( u ) ]

,u

=

[P

A

] {F ( u,u

,u

) }

(2)

[T ( u ) ] is the a transformation matrix that rotates the aerodynamic loads to the

directions of the FE model, namely the rotation between the aerodynamic and global

coordinates systems. [

) } is the aerodynamic

cross-sectional loads vector, which is a function of the displacement vector u and its

time derivatives, u

cross-sectional aerodynamic loads over the blade. {F ( u, u

is the matrix that describes the distribution of the resultant

P A ]

,u

and u .

15

At

each

cross-section,

, and

M

vector,

M

n

( u, u

L

n , per unit span of the blade. These loads are functions of

n,

u

,u )

there

and

.

is

its

a

lift

force,

n

,

drag

u

and

force, D ,

n

u ,

D

n

and

( u, u

an

,u )

,

aerodynamic moment,

the

displacement

time

derivatives

L

n

( u,u ,u )

The vector {F ( u, u

) } is defined as:

,u

{

F (

)

u,u,u

}

Τ

=

{

D ,L ,M , ,D

1

1

1

n

,L ,M

n

n

, ,D

N

s

,L

N

s

,M

N

s

}

(3)

where

In general, because of relatively large deflections, there is a need to use the geometric nonlinear theory of elasticity. Thus the strain and displacement relations are nonlinear. The stiffness matrix is a function of nodal displacements and, hence, is nonlinear. The level of the geometric nonlinear theory of elasticity that will be used here, as well as in the FEM software, is the one in which elongations and shears are negligible compared with unity. This explicit consideration of the geometric nonlinear theory of elasticity provides the additional geometric differential stiffness due to centrifugal stiffening terms. The displacement dependent centrifugal "softening"

terms are included in the matrix[

N

s

is the number of strip elements along blade ( 1 n N ).

s

K CF

] , which is linear [9].

3.2. Linearization of the Equations

Equation (1) is nonlinear and is used to calculate the: steady-state deflections, frequencies, mode shapes and flutter speed. An appropriate solution method includes

a direct integration of the equations in the time domain, but it is computationally inefficient. Common practice is to perturb the equations about a steady state configuration.

Consider the case of a propeller where the shaft rotates at a constant angular velocity ( = 0 ) and the incoming flow is in the opposite Z direction. As a result of loads acting on it, the blade deforms. This deformation is described by the vector u .

The applied loads are steady, thus

derive the equations for small vibrations superimposed on these predeformations. If the small vibrations are described by the vector u(t), the resultant deformation vector, u(t), equals:

0

u

0 is not a function of time. The purpose now is to

u()t

=

u

0

+

u()t

(4)

It is assumed that the perturbations are small and so nonlinear terms of perturbations

are neglected. Thus the nonlinear terms of Eq. (1) can be presented as:

(u)]u

[

[

K

T

(u )]

=

[

[

T

K

(u

(u )]u

0

0

+

[[

0

)]

[

+ T

(u

K

(u

0

,u

0

)]

)]

+

[

K

16

(u )]]u

0

(5)

(6)

{F (u,u,u )}{F =

( u

0

)

{

P

(

u, u

, u

)}

=

{

P

(

u

0

)}

}

+

+

{

{

F

P

(u

0

(

u

0

,u, t)}

,

u ,

t)}

Substituting Eqs. (6) and (7) into Eq. (2) and linearization, result in:

{

(

P u,u,u

)}=

[[

T

()]+

u

0

[

T

(

+

u

[

0

,

T

u

(

u

0

)]][

P

A

]{

F

)][

P

A

]{

F

(

(

u

0

u

0

,

) }+

,t) }

u

The steady state vector of the aerodynamic loads, is:

{

P

(

u

0

)}

=

[T()][P ]{F(

u

0

A

u

0

) }

The perturbation vector of the aerodynamic loads, is:

{

P

(

u

0

,

u

,t)}([

T

u

0

,

u

)][

P

A

]{

F

(

+

[T (

u

u

0

0

) }+

)][P

A

]{ F (

u

0

,

 

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

u

,t )}

(11)

In the present analysis, the term [

will be neglected. This term is important in the case of divergence [1].

T

(

u ,u

0

)][

P

A

]{

F

(

u

0

)}

in the equation (11)

Based on the above assumptions, Eq. (11) may be written as:

{

P

(

u

0

,

u

,t)}

=

[

T

(

u

0

)][

P

A

]{

F

(

u

0

,

u ,

t )

}

where

the

perturbation

of

the

aerodynamic

cross-sectional

{

F (u

{

F

(

u

0

0

,u ,t )

,

u

,t )

} , is defined as follows:

}

Τ

=

{

D ,L ,M ,D ,L ,M

1

1

1

2

2

2

,

,D

N

s

,L

loads

N

s

,M

(12)

vector,

N

s

}

(13)

Substituting Eqs. (4)-(9) into Eq. (1), leads to two sets of equations: Equations for

the basic state,

[[

K

L

and:

]

[]

K

CF

u

+

0 , and another set of equations for the perturbation , u :

[

K

(

u

0

)]]

u

0

=

{

F

CF

}

+

{

P

(

17

u

0

)}

(14)

[]u + []u + [[

M

0

C

d

K

L

][

K

=

CF

{

]+ [

K

(u

0

)]+

P

(

u ,u,t

0

)}

[

+

{

K

F

(u

0

CF

}

)]]u =

{

F

GR

}

(15)

The elements of the matrices [

M

0

] ,

[

K

L

]

[

T

(

u

0

)]

are constants [9]. The matrices [

M

,

0

]

[

,

K

CF

]

,

[

K

CF

[

]

,

K

(

u

0

{

F

CF

}

)]

[ K

GR

(

u

0

)]

,

,

,{ F

}

, and [ T

and

(

u

0

)]

are described in Appendices B and F. In what follows, for the sake of simplicity, the

matrix[

and

T

will be neglected

(

u

0

)]

will be denoted [

T

0

]

. In the present analysis, the terms {

F

CF

}

{

F

GR

}

The steady state solution, for a given rotational speed and Mach number, is obtained by solving Eq.(14). This solution was discussed in Ref.1.

Once the steady state deflections are known, the natural frequencies and mode shapes are calculated by solving the homogeneous part of Eq. (15), assuming: that there are no damping and external forces. The equation of motion of an undamped system, expressed in a matrix form, using the above assumptions, is:

[M

0

]u + []K

0

u = 0

(16)

The stiffness matrix [

K

0 ]

includes the regular elastic stiffness, differential stiffness

due to centrifugal stiffening loads and steady-state aerodynamic loads:

[ ]

K

0

=

[[

K

L

][

K

CF

]

+

[

K

(

u

0

)]

+

[

K

(

u

0

)]]

(17)

For a linear system, that has J degrees of freedom, there are in general J natural modes and J natural frequencies. Since the system is undamped, the vibrations are harmonic. Thus, the solution of Eq. (16) is of the form:

u

s

=

{

φ

}

s e

i

ω

s

t

,

( s=1, 2, 3,

, J )

(18)

ω is the natural circular frequency (radians per unit time) of the s th mode, t is the

s

time and

i =

time) of the s t h mode, t is the s time and i = −

1 . The vector {

φ }

s represents the corresponding mode shape.

That is:

{

φ

}

Τ

s

=

φ

1,s

,φ

2,s

,φ

3,s

,

,φ

J,s

(19)

Substitution of Eq. (18) into Eq. (16) produces a set of homogeneous algebraic equations:

18

([K

0

]

− ω

2

s

[M

0

]){

φ

}

s

=

{0}

(20)

For a nontrivial solution of Eq. (20), the following condition should exist, that yields the characteristic equation of the free vibrations:

det

[[K

0

]

− ω

2

s

[M

0

]]

= 0

(21)

Expansion of this determinant yields a polynominal in which the term of highest

order

eigenvalues, while {

known, the eigenvectors, namely mode shapes, may be calculated from the homogeneous algebraic equations (20). Because there are J eigenvalues, there will also be, in general, J corresponding eigenvectors. The eigenvectors are defined up to a factor that multiplies all the elements of the vector. For the eigenvectors (modes) the following relations exist [12]:

s are the eigenvectors. If the eigenvalues of a system are

the

is

(

ω

2

s

)

J

. Equation

φ }

(21)

presents

an

eigenvalue

problem.

ω

s

are

and:

{

{

φ

φ

}

Τ

s2

}

Τ

s1

[M

[K

0

0

]

]

{

{

φ

φ

}

}

s1

s2

= 0

s2 s1

(22)

= 0

s1s2

(23)

Equations (22) and (23) represent orthogonality conditions of the natural modes of vibration. From Eq. (22) we see that the eigenvectors are orthogonal with respect to

[

M

0

]

, and Eq. (23) indicates that they are also orthogonal with respect to [

K

0

]

.

For cases where s1 = s2 , the following relationships hold [12]:

M

φ

{

and

{

{

φ

φ

}

}

Τ

s

Τ

s

[

[

M

K

0

0

]

]

{

{

φ

φ

}

}

s

s

= M

g s

=K

g s

(24)

(25)

g s

}

and

K

g s

are constants that depend upon the manner in which the eigenvectors

normalized.

s

Assume that in order to analyse the problem one decides to use only S normal modes, (1 S J ). Then the perturbation can be expressed as a superposition of these normal modes:

u = [Φ] q

19

(26)

where

[

Φ

]

P

×

S

=

⎡ φ

⎢ φ

φ

1,1

,1

P,1

φ

φ

φ

1, s

,s

P, s

φ

φ

φ

1, S

,S

P, S

,

(27)

Here, 1 P , P

which is P × S . S is the number of modes used in the analysis,

of nodes, K is the number of degrees of freedom at each node. The assembly of the elements of φ is shown in Appendix D

0 is the total number

=

L

0

×

K

, [Φ ] is the matrix of eigenvectors, the dimension of

L

q is the vector of generalized coordinates, defined as follows:

q

Τ

=

{

q ,q ,,q ,,q

1

2

s

S

}

Equation (20) can be written as:

[

Κ

0

]

[

Φ

]

=

[

M

0

]

[

Φ

]

[

ω

2

]

(28)

(29)

The matrix

[

ω

The matrix

[

ω

2 ]

in Eq. (29) is a diagonal matrix of order S:

[

ω

2

]

=

ω

2

1

0

0 0

0

0

0

0

… … …

ω

2

2

0 0

… …

0 0

2

ω

3

0

ω

2

S

2 ]

is referred to as the eigenvalue matrix.

(30)

Multiplying Eq. (29) from the left by [ (25), result in:

Φ ]

Τ and using the relationships (24) and

[][ g

K

=

M

g

]

[

ω

2

]

(31)

[

Μ

g

]

and [

K

g

]

are diagonal square matrices of order S, defined as:

20

 

[

and

 

[

Hence,

Μ

g

K

g

K

g s

]

]

=

=

M

g

K

g1

1

= M

g s

ω

2

s

M

g

K

g s

s

M

g

K

g

S

S

(32)

(33)

(34)

As indicated above, the vectors {

elements of the vector. It is convenient to choose these vectors such that:

φ }

are defined up to a factor that multiplies all the
s

[Φ ]

Τ

[

M

0

]

[Φ ]= [Ι]

(35)

where [Ι ] is an identity matrix of order S. It is clear that if Eq. (35) is satisfied, then:

[

Φ

]

Τ

[

K

0

]

[

Φ

]

=

[

ω

2

]

(36)

Damping plays a minor role in the response of a system to a periodic forcing function when the frequency of the excitation is not near a resonance [12]. However, for a periodic excitation with a frequency at or near a natural frequency, damping is of prime importance und must be taken into account. When its effects are not known in advance, damping should be included in a vibratory analysis until its importance is known. The equations of motion of our system, Eq. (15), may be written as:

[]M

0

u [C ]u [K ]u

+

d

+

0

=

{

P

(

u

0

,

u

,

t)}

(37)

Equation (37) can be expressed using principal coordinates, by the same transformation that was used for the undamped homogeneous system (29). Thus, using the principal coordinates, equation (37) becomes:

[

M

g

]

[

q + C

d

]

q +

[

K

g

]

q =

{

21

Q

g

}

(38)

where the matrices [

is defined as:

M

g

]

and [

K

g

]

are given by Eqs. (32) and (33). The vector {

Q

g

}

The symbol [

C

{Q }

g

=

[

Φ

]

Τ

{

P

(

u

0

,

u

,

t)}

g

[

]

C

in Eq. (38) represents a damping matrix:

g

]=

[Φ ][

Τ

C

d

][Φ ]

(39)

(40)

The nature of damping in physical systems is not well understood. The simplest approach [14] consists of assuming that the equations of motion of the damped system are also uncoupled. In other words, the eigenvectors are assumed to be orthogonal not

only with respect to [M ] and[ K ], but also with respect to[

C

d

]

, thus:

{

φ

}

Τ

s1

[C

d

]

{

φ

}

s2

= 0

s1s 2

(41)

For cases where s1 = s2 , the following relationship holds [12]:

C

g s

{

φ

}

Τ

s

[

C

d

]

{

φ

}

s

= C

g s