Approximation of structural damping and input excitation force

  • Mohammad SalavatiEmail author
Research Article


Structural dynamic characteristics are the most significant parameters that play a decisive role in structural damage assessment. The more sensitive parameter to the damage is the damping behavior of the structure. The complexity of structural damping mechanisms has made this parameter to be one of the ongoing research topics. Despite all the difficulties in the modeling of damping, there are some approaches like as linear and nonlinear models which are described as the energy dissipation throughout viscous, material or structural hysteretic and frictional damping mechanisms. In the presence of a mathematical model of the damping mechanisms, it is possible to estimate the damping ratio from the theoretical comparison of the damped and un-damped systems. On the other hand, solving the inverse problem of the input force estimation and its distribution to each SDOFs, from the measured structural responses plays an important role in structural identification process. In this paper model-based damping approximation method and a model-less structural input estimation are considered. The effectiveness of proposed methods has been carried out through analytical and numerical simulation of the lumped mass system and the results are compared with reference data. Consequently, high convergence of the comparison results illustrates the satisfactory of proposed approximation methods.


structural modal parameters damping identification method input excitation force identification Inverse problem 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The author gratefully acknowledges the Institute of Structural Mechanics, Civil Engineering Faculty of Bauhaus University Weimar in Germany.


  1. 1.
    Nanthakumar S S, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Zic G, Rabczuk T. Detection of material interfaces using a regularized level set method in piezoelectric structures. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 2016, 24(1): 153–176MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nanthakumar S S, Valizadeh N, Park H S, Rabczuk T. Surface effects on shape and topology optimization of nanostructures. Computational Mechanics, 2015, 56(1): 97–112MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nanthakumar S S, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Detection of multiple flaws in piezoelectric structures using XFEM and level sets. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2014, 275: 98–112MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nanthakumar S S, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Detection of flaws in piezoelectric structures using extended FEM. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2013, 96(6): 373–389MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J, Stempniewski L. Simulation of high velocity concrete fragmentation using SPH/MLSPH. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2003, 56(10): 1421–1444zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. A three dimensional large deformation meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(29–30): 2777–2799MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A simple and robust three-dimensional cracking-particle method without enrichment. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(37–40): 2437–2455zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Cracking particles: a simplied meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2004, 61(13): 2316–2343zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zi G, Rabczuk T, Wall WA. Extended meshfree methods without branch enrichment for cohesive cracks. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 40(2): 367–382zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Zi G. A three-dimensional meshfree method for continuous multiple crack initiation, nucleation and propagation in statics and dynamics. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 40(3): 473–495zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A geometrically nonlinear three dimensional cohesive crack method for reinforced concrete structures. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008, 75(16): 4740–4758Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Zi G. On three-dimensional modelling of crack growth using partition of unity methods. Computers & Structures, 2010, 88(23–24): 1391–1411Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G. A meshfree method based on the local partition of unity for cohesive cracks. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 39(6): 743–760zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rabczuk T., Eibl J.: Numerical analysis of prestressed concrete beams using a coupled element free Galerkin/nite element method, International Journal of Solids andStructures, 2004, 41 (3-4), 1061–1080zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rabczuk T, Akkermann J, Eibl J. A numerical model for reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2005, 42(5–6): 1327–1354zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Application of particle methods to static fracture of reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Fracture, 2006, 137(1–4): 19–49zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J. Modeling dynamic failure of concrete with meshfree particle methods. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2006, 32(11): 1878–1897Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Juang J N, Pappa R S. Eigen-system realization algorithm for modal parameter identification and model reduction. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 1985, 8(5): 620–627zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mohanty P, Rixen D J. Identifying mode shapes and modal frequencies by operational modal analysis in the presence of harmonic excitation. Experimental Mechanics, 2005, 45(3): 213–220Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moaveni B, Barbosa A, Conte J P, Hemez FM. Uncertainty analysis of modal parameters obtained from three system identification methods. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Modal Analysis Conference (IMAC-XXV). Orlando, USA, 2007Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amani M G, Riera J, Curadelli O. Identification of changes in the stiffness and damping matrices of linear structures through ambient vibrations. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2007, 14(8): 1155–1169Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yang Y B, Chen Y J. A new direct method for updating structural models based on measured modal data. Engineering Structures, 2009, 31(1): 32–42Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fan W, Qiao P Z. Vibration-based damage identification methods: a review and comparative study. Structural Health Monitoring, 2011, 10(1): 83–111Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ozcelik O, Salavati M. Variability of modal parameter estimations using two different output-only system identification methods. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 2013, 41(6): 20120361Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Doebling S W, Farrar Ch, Prime M B, Shevitz D W. Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and mechanical systems from changes in their vibration characteristics: A Literature Review. Los Alamos National Laboratory Report. LA-13070-MS. UC900, 1996Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Salawu O S. Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: A review. Engineering Structures, 1997, 19(9): 718–723Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Modena C, Sonda D, Zonta D. Damage localization in reinforced concrete structures by using damping measurements, damage assessment of structures. In: Proceedings of the international conference on damage assessment of structures. DAMAS 99, 1999, 132–141Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kawiecki G. Modal damping measurements for damage detection. In: European COST F3 conference on system identification and structural health monitoring. Madrid, Spain, 2000, 651–658Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zonta D, Modena C, Bursi OS. Analysis of dispersive phenomena in damaged structures. In: European COST F3 conference on system identification and structural health monitoring. Madrid, Spain, 2000, 801–810Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zou Y, Tong L, Steven G P. Vibration-based model-dependent damage (delamination) identification and health monitoring for composite structures–a review. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2000, 230(2): 357–378Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Curadelli R O, Riera J D, Ambrosini D, Amani M G. Damage detection by means of structural damping identification. Engineering Structures, 2008, 30(12): 3497–3504Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gomaa F R, Nasser A A, Ahmed Sh O. Sensitivity of modal parameters to detect damage through theoretical and experimental correlation. International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, 2014, 4(1): 172–181Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wang M L, Kreitinger T J. Kreitinger, Identification of force from response data of a nonlinear system. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 1994, 13(4): 267–280Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ma C K, Lin D C. Input forces estimation of a cantilever beam. Inverse Problems in Engineering, 2000, 8(6): 511–528Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Steltzner A D, Kammer D C. Input Force Estimation Using an Inverse Structural Filter. IMAC XVII, 1999Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ma C K, Chang J M, Lin D C. Input forces estimation of beam structures by an inverse method. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2003, 259(2): 387–407Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ekke J Oosterhuis, Wouter B Eidhof, Peter J. M. van der Hoogt, de Boer A. Force prediction via the inverse FRF using experimental and numerical data from demonstrator with tunable nonlinearities. In: Proceedings of the 13th international congress on sound and vibration. Vienna, Austria, 2006Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hisham. A. Al-Khazali. Calculations of frequency response functions (FRF) using computer smart office software and nyquist plot under gyroscopic effect rotation. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology & Security, 2011, 1 (2): 90–97Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Foss G, Niezrecki C. Special topics in structural dynamics volume 6. In: Proceeding of the 32nd IMAC. A conference and exposition of structural dynamics, 2014Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Unavane T V, Panse Dr M S. New method for online frequency response function estimation using circular queue. International Journal for research in emerging science and technology, 2015, 2(6): 134–137Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rayleigh L. Theory of Sound (two volumes). New York: Dover Publications, 1897Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lee J H, Kim J. Direct identification of damping parameters from FRF and its application to compressor engineering. In: Proceedings of International Compressor Conference at Purdue University. 2000, 869–876Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yamaguchi H, Adhikari R. Energy-Based evaluation of modal damping in structural cables with and without damping treatment. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1995, 181(1): 71–83Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xu B, Wu Z, Chen G, Yokoyama K. Direct identification of structural parameters from dynamic responses with neural networks. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2004, 17(8): 931–943Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Slavic J, Simonovski I, Boltezar M. damping identification using a continuous wavelet transform: application to real data. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2003, 262(2): 291–307Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Min C, Park H, Park S, PARK H, PARK S. Direct identification of non-proportional modal damping matrix for lumped mass system using modal parameters. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 2012, 26(4): 993–1002Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Arora V. Direct structural damping identification method using complex FRFs. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2015, 339: 304–323Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pan Y, Wang Y. Iterative method for exponential damping identification. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 2015, 30(3): 229–243Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kimball A. Vibration Damping, Including the Case of Solid Damping, Trans. ASME, APM51–52, 1929Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Thomson W T. Theory of Vibration with Applications. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1972Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lazan B J. Damping of Materials and Members in Structural Mechanics. Oxford: Pergamom Press, 1968Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Frizzarin M, Feng M Q, Franchetti P, Soyoz S, Modena C. Damage detection based on damping analysis of ambient vibration data. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2010, 17: 368-385Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Montalvão D, Silva J M M. An alternative method to the identification of the modal damping factor based on the dissipated energy. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2015, 54–55: 108–123Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    O’Callahan J, Piergentili F. Force estimation using operational data. In: International Modal Analysis Conference 1996. Dearborn, USA, 1996Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Hong L L, Hwang W L. Empirical formula for fundamental vibration periods of reinforced concrete buildings in Taiwan. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2000, 29(3): 327–337Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ma C K, Chang J M, Lin D C. Input forces estimation of beam structures by an inverse method. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2003, 259(2): 387–407Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Suwała G, Jankowski Ł. A model-less method for added mass identification. Diffusion and Defect Data, Solid State Data. Part B, Solid State Phenomena, 2009, 147–149: 570–575Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Khoo S Y, Ismail Z, Kong K K, Ong Z C, Noroozi S, Chong W T, Rahman A G A. Impact force identification with pseudo-inverse method on a light weight structure for under-determined, evendetermined and over-determined cases. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2014, 63: 52–62Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rajkumar S, Dewan A, Bhagat Sujatha C, Narayanan S. Comparison of various techniques used for estimation of input force and computation of frequency response function (FRF) from measured response data. In: the 22nd International Congress on Sound and Vibration-ICSV22. Florence, Italy, 12–16, July, 2015Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Chopra A K. Dynamics of structures. 3rd ed. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 2007Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Structural Mechanics, Faculty of Civil EngineeringBauhaus University WeimarWeimarGermany

Personalised recommendations