试验模态分析最佳测试点选取方法的优化

荣双龙; 李传日; 徐飞; 马甜

doi:10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2013.0292

试验模态分析最佳测试点选取方法的优化

doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2013.0292

北京航空航太大学可靠性与系统工程学院, 北京 100191

详细信息

作者简介:
荣双龙（1988- ），男，辽宁东港人，硕士生，rongshuanglong@yahoo.cn.

中图分类号: TP306⁺.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 1600
- HTML全文浏览量: 137
- PDF下载量: 607
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2013-05-27
- 网络出版日期: 2014-04-20

Method optimization of optimum measurement point selection in experiential modal analysis

School of Reliability and System Engineering, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing 100191, China

摘要

摘要: 作为有限元模型修正的重要依据，试验模态分析的结果受多方面因素的影响，其中很重要的一方面就是测试点的选取.基于目前试验模态分析中最常用的两种测试点选择方法——有效独立法（EI，Effective Independent）和模态动能法（MKE，Modal Kinetic Energy），提出了一种新的测试点优化选择方法——有效独立-模态动能变异系数法（EI-CVMKE，Effective Independent-Coefficient Variance of Modal Kinetic Energy）.并提出了一种新的评估测试点选择方法优劣的准则——模态动能变异系数准则（CVMKE）.运用模态置信准则（MAC，Modal Assurance Criterion）、CVMKE和奇异值分解比（SVD ration，Singular Value Decomposition ratio）评价并比较了EI，MKE和EI-CVMKE的测试点优化结果.以印刷电路板作为算例，并通过实物模态试验验证，结果表明EI-CVMKE选取的测试点在考虑了截断模态线性独立的同时又具有较高的模态动能，有较强的抗噪声性能，在3种方法中最佳.
- 测试点选取 /
- 模态分析 /
- 有效独立 /
- 模态动能 /
- 准则 /
- 优化
Abstract: As an important basis of the validation of the finite element model, the result of experimental modal analysis is influenced by various aspects, one significant aspect is the measurement point selection. A new optimal measurement point selection method, namely effective independent-coefficient variance of modal kinetic energy (EI-CVMKE) method was proposed based on the effective independent (EI) method and the modal kinetic energy (MKE) method. Besides, a new criterion called the coefficient variance of modal kinetic energy (CVMKE) was presented. The obtained optimal measurement points using the new method were compared with those gained by EI method and MKE method. The advantage and disadvantage of those three methods were demonstrated by three evaluation criteria which are CVMKE, modal assurance criterion (MAC) and singular value decomposition ratio (SVD ratio). A computational simulation and a modal test on an aluminum alloy plate were carried out to demonstrate the feasibility of the optimal measurement point selection method. The result shows that EI-CVMKE method can not only make the truncated mode shapes as linearly as possible but also enable the measured MKE to maintain the maximum value. The new method is most feasible in the three methods.
- measurement point selection /
- modal analysis /
- effective independence /
- modal kinetic energy /
- criterion /
- optimization

HTML全文

参考文献(20)

[1]	Ewins D J.Modal testing:theory, practice, and application[M].London:Research Studies Press, 2000:118-123
[2]	Heylen W, Lammens S, Sas P.Modal analysis theory and testing[M].Heverlee:Universiteit Leuven, 1997:119-120
[3]	Friswell M I, Mottershead J E.Finite element model updating in structural dynamics[M].Netherlands:Springer, 1995:78-97
[4]	Penny J E T, Friswell M I, Garvey S D.Automatic choice of measurement locations for dynamic testing[J].AIAA Journal, 1994, 32(2):407-414
[5]	Papadopoulos M, Garcia E.Sensor placement methodologies for dynamic testing[J].AIAA Journal, 1998, 36(2):256-263
[6]	Kammer D C.Sensor set expansion for modal vibration testing[J].Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2005, 19(4):700-713
[7]	Meo M, Zumpano G.On the optimal sensor placement techniques for a bridge structure[J].Engineering Structures, 2005, 27(10):1488-1497
[8]	Peck J, Torres I.A DMAP program for the selection of accelerometer locations in MSC/NASTRAN[C]//The 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference.Palm Springs:American Inst Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc, 2004, 1:281-289
[9]	Hemez F M.Theoretical and experimental correlation between finite element models and modal tests in the context of large flexible space structures[D].Denver:University of Colorado, 1993
[10]	Larson C B, Zimmerman D C, Marek E L.A comparison of modal test planning techniques:excitation and sensor placement using the NASA 8-bay truss[C]//Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference (IMAC).Bellingham, WA:Society for Experimental Mechanics Inc, 1994:205-211
[11]	Li D S, Fritzen C P, Li H N.Extended minmac algorithm and comparison of sensor placement methods[C]//Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series.New York:Springer, 2008:78-95
[12]	Li D S, Li H N, Fritzen C P.The connection between effective independence and modal kinetic energy methods for sensor placement[J].Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2007, 305(4/5):945-955
[13]	Li Z N, Tang J, Li Q S.Optimal sensor locations for structural vibration measurements[J].Applied Acoustics, 2004, 65(8):807-818
[14]	Papadimitriou C.Optimal sensor placement methodology for parametric identification of structural systems[J].Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2004, 278(4):923-947
[15]	Kammer D C.Sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space structures[J].Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 1991, 14(2):251-259
[16]	Kammer D C.Effect of model error on sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification of large space structures[J].Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 1992, 15(2):334-341
[17]	Kammer D C.Effect of noise on sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space structures[J].Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control-Transactions of ASME, 1992, 114(3):436-443
[18]	Li D.Sensor placement methods and evaluation criteria in structural health monitoring[D].Siegen:Universitat Siegen, 2011
[19]	Allemang R J, Brown D L.A correlation coefficient for modal vector analysis[C]//Proceedings of the International Modal Analysis Conference & Exhibit.Schenectad:Union Coll, 1982:110-116
[20]	Imamovic N.Model validation of large finite element model using test data[D].London:Imperial College, 1998