An Alternating Frequency/Time Domain Method For Calculating The Steady-State Response of Nonlinear Dynamic Systems
An Alternating Frequency/Time Domain Method For Calculating The Steady-State Response of Nonlinear Dynamic Systems
An Alternating Frequency/Time Domain Method For Calculating The Steady-State Response of Nonlinear Dynamic Systems
----r:rhe DF approach has been extended to allow two input frequencies in the
case of odd, memoryless (nonhysteretic) nonlinearities (Gelb and VanderVelde,
1968, Chapter 5 and Appendix D), but the nonlinear force and the system
response are described only in terms of the two input frequencies.
system. However, there are also significant disadvantages to time domains. A fast Fourier transform 2 algorithm makes this
the IHB method. cost reasonable, especially in obtaining steady-state solutions
Computationally the IHB method is no more efficient than to periodically excited systems.
numerical integration, at least for the discontinuous friction Consider a nonlinear dynamic system in which the terms
damping problem (cf., Pierre et a!., 1985, "Conclusions"), containing nonlinearities are grouped on the right hand side of
and the computational effort grows geometrically with the the equation with the external forcing term. The equation of
number of harmonics considered. As currently implemented, motion for this system may be represented by:
the frequencies are integer multiples of the excitation frequen- (1)
L(x(t)J =f(t) +Nj(X,X)
cy, which will hide the subharmonic resonances that may oc-
cur in nonlinear systems. Another disadvantage of the IHB where L is the differential operator representing the linear
method is the amount of analytical work required. Functions terms, f(t) is the external forcing term, Nj( ) represents the
in the equation are expanded in a first order Taylor series nonlinear force terms, and x(t) is the desired system response.
(which may be difficult to obtain for discontinuous functions) These are vector functions for multi-degree-of-freedom (mdf)
and substituted into the original equation to obtain a linear systems, or scalar functions for sdf systems. Taking the
"incrementalized" equation. The incrementalized equation is Fourier transform (FT) of both sides yields:
solved by the Galerkin method, which requires further expan- A(w)X(w)=F(w)+1j(w,X(w)) (2)
sions and integrations. Finally, although the approach is
general, the expansions are specialized, so each new dynamic where A(w), the transform of L, is a (matrix) function of the
system requires its own formulation and implementation. frequency, w, F(w) is the transform of f(t), 1j(w,X(w)) is the
Other numerical methods, using techniques similar to those transform of Nj(), and X(w) is the transform of x(t). In the
in the AFT method, describe functions in both the frequency transform domain the nonlinear forces depend only on w and
and time domains. In computational fluid dynamics, "Spec- X(w) because derivatives of x(t) transform into linearly scaled
tral'' and "Pseudo-Spectral" methods (cf., Zang and Hus- forms of X(w): 3
saini, 1985) use Fourier transform techniques to expand func- x(t) #X(w)
tions into (trigonometric or Chebyshev) polynomials. This
x(t)#-jwX(w)
permits derivatives and other operations on those functions to
be performed with higher order accuracy than finite difference x(t) # -w 2 X(w) (3)
methods achieve for similar effort. Cesari (1963) appears to be (" # " denotes a Fourier Transform pair).
the first to obtain steady-state solutions to nonlinear dynamic
equations by using a trigonometric polynomial expansion, Since an FFT will be used to compute and represent the fre-
which is equivalent to a truncated Fourier series or a discrete quency dependent functions, (2) is required to hold at the
Fourier transform. Urabe (1965) expands Cesari's results and discrete frequencies, wk, introduced by the FFT. Thus, (2)
(Urabe and Reiter, 1966) shows how the Fourier coefficients becomes a system of nonlinear algebraic equations 4 :
may be computed at each iteration with a discrete Fourier A(w)X(w) =F(w) + 1j (w,X(w)) (4)
transform, once the nonlinear functions have been evaluated
in the time domain. Urabe identifies this approach as an ap- where
plication of the Galerkin method. Ling and Wu (1987) use a w=(wd (5)
fast Fourier transform (FFT) to implement Urabe's approach, and
calling it the "Fast Galerkin" (FG) method. Although there 27rk N
1 .
are fundamental similarities in the concepts underlying the FG wk k=0, ... , (6)
and AFT methods, there are differences in how the methods ATN
are formulated and implemented. These differences are Here, AT is the sampling period and N is the number of
discussed later. samples in the FFT of each time domain function. In general,
A is a matrix whose components are functions of the indepen-
dent variable (wk), while X, F, and 7l are vector functions of
wk. For example, at a given frequency, say w4 , there will be
3 An Alternating Frequency /Time (AFT) Method X 1 (w 4 ), , Xm(w 4 ) if there are m degrees-of-freedom.
Therefore, the length of X(w) is the product of the number of
3.1 Fundamental Concepts. Frequency domain methods frequencies in the FFT (N/2+ 1) times the number of degrees-
have long been used to analyze linear systems because the fre- of-freedom (m). To minimize the bandwidth of L, the equa-
quency content of a signal is often of greater interest than the tions should be ordered so that X(w) appears as {X1 (w 0 ),
time history and because convolution- a convenient solution X2(wo), . .. 'Xm (wo), Xl(wl), . . . 'Xm (wl), . . . 'Xl(wNn),
method- is more efficiently accomplished in the frequency Xm(wNn )J.
domain . In general, nonlinear forces are nonlinear functions Various iterative methods are available for solving
of the past and present states of the system. Since they are not nonlinear algebraic equations, like (4). One problem facing
linear functions of the states or explicit functions of time, they any method is evaluation of the nonlinear term 1j(w, X (w)). To
cannot be transformed directly into the frequency domain. add it directly to F (w) this term must be known explicitly in
This makes nonlinear systems difficult to analyze in the fre- terms of w, as 7l (w), but this form is difficult to determine in
quency domain, as evidenced by the complicated expansions
required in the frequency domain methods discussed previous- ~Fast Fourier transform" refers to a class of algorithms used to calculate the
ly. Nonlinear forces are easy to evaluate in the time domain, discrete Fourier transform (OFT- cf., Jackson, 1986, Chapter 7; and Op-
penheim and Schafer, 1975, Chapter 3). The notation "FFT" will be used here
however, since the state history of the system is readily to refer to the OFT as well as its implementation. The authors use an FFT
available. This is evidenced by the ease of implementation and subroutine from Press, et al. (1986) .
greater complexity allowed by numerical integration. Th.e
AFT method employs the advantages of both domains by per-
3 The Fourier Transform definition used here
YJ(l!) Converged''
Yes
degrees-of-freedom) which for most methods is unwieldy, ex-
cept for small values of N. The computational effort of the
direct iteration method, O[mN(m + log(N)] multiplications
FFT per iteration, is much less affected by "N' than Newton-
Raphson, which has O[(mN) 2 log(N)] multiplications per
iteration. In the approach used here, rather than limiting N,
which would greatly reduce the number of frequencies con-
sidered in the solution, the direct iteration approach is used
first to estimate which frequency components are significant.
Then, if Newton-Raphson is employed, equation (4) is im-
Fig. 1 Direct iteration implementation of the AFT method plemented only for those values of k for which X(') (wk) is a
significant component in the last estimate of the solution
the frequency domain. However, if N1 ( o) can be expressed as vector obtained from the direct iteration method,
an explicit function of time, N 1 ( t), then it can be transformed (_x{O (w 0 ), , _x(l) (wN12 )). This is discussed further in Sec-
to provide 77(w). To find N 1 (t), the most recent estimate of tion 5. This approach, by solving only the significant frequen-
X(w) is inverse transformed to provide an estimate of x(t). cy components, keeps the number of equations and unknowns
Equation (3)- or the analogous FFT relationships- may be at a minimum while still allowing a full spectrum of frequen-
used to obtain other state variables so that N/ o) may be cies to be considered in the solution.
evaluated as N 1 (t), and transformed to 77(w). For There are two types of error that may corrupt FFT values.
nonlinearities that involve products of time domain functions Aliasing error arises when the FT is nonzero for frequencies
this avoids frequency domain convolution. For history- above the maximum frequency considered by the FFT
dependent nonlinearities, this procedure allows the nonlineari- (wmax = 1r I !J.T). Power at the higher frequencies is aliased or
ty to be evaluated directly from the state history as long as the folded back and added to the FFT values for w < 1r/!J.T.
time period used in the analysis is longer than the ''term of Leakage error occurs when the frequency values of the FFT
memory" of the nonlinearity. With short term memory (k!J.w, or wk) do not coincide precisely with each frequency in
nonlinearities, values of the nonlinear terms at the beginning the FT that has nonzero power. Power at a frequency not
of the period may be obtained from periodicity requirements. represented in the FFT is leaked to frequencies that are
Another problem for nonlinear equation solvers is obtain- represented. Leakage can only be eliminated if the sampled
ing an initial estimate of the solution. An initial estimate time signal is periodic.
(designated .XO(w)) may be obtained from the linear system, ig- For the following sample problem aliasing is insignificant
noring 77( o ), or from a known solution corresponding to a (as verified by taking smaller time steps), and both the excita-
closely related state. For example, consider a sdf system with tion on the system and the system response are periodic, so no
f(t) =A cos(w.t) where a parametric study of the effect of A leakage will occur. Most nonlinear forces are periodic when
on the system response is desired. Once the solution, X(w), is subject to a periodic input, so the assumption of a periodic
obtained for one value of A, it may be used as the initial response to a periodic excitation is typically valid. Discussions
estimate for a neighboring case with a slightly different value of the DFT, FFT algorithms, aliasing, and leakage may be
of A. found in Jackson (1986), Oppenheim and Schafer (1975), and
Press et a!. ( 1986).
3.2 Implementation Considerations. The authors
presently use two methods to solve (4). The first method,
direct iteration, is an iterative implementation of (4):
4 Sample Problem
A(w)o_x{O(w) =F(w) + 17(w,XU- 1 (w)). (7)
In many mechanical applications the most significant source
A(w) 5 and F(w) are fixed by the system and the external forcing of vibrational damping is provided by friction. For example,
function, respectively, once the w/s are selected. New genera- friction damping occurs naturally at joints in fabricated struc-
tions of XUl (w) may be found by evaluating 77( ), as described tures, friction damping is used to control the earthquake
previously, adding it to F(w), and multiplying by A - 1 Since A response of buildings, and friction dampers are used in high
is a constant matrix representing the linear part of the system, speed turbomachinery to reduce resonant stresses in blades.
it may be inverted once and saved. A flow chart of the direct An elastic/perfectly-plastic friction model may also be used to
iteration approach is shown in Fig. 1. analyze the elasto-plastic behavior of materials. Interest in
The second approach used by the authors for solving (4) is these applications has motivated considerable research into
the Newton-Raphson method (cf., Stoer and Bulirsch, 1980), how friction affects the dynamic response of structures (cf.,
with a difference quotient approximation of the Jacobian. For Plunkett's review of friction damping research, 1980).
the example problem in this paper, Newton-Raphson is more In the problem considered the nonlinear element consists of
robust than direct ithation (it converges at times that direct a spring in series with a friction constraint (Fig. 2). The fric-
iteration fails) and it converges in fewer iterations. However, tion contact is assumed to exhibit simple Coulomb-type
when both methods converge, computation time is greater for behavior, i.e., when slip occurs the force is constant in
Newton-Raphson than for direct iteration because of the ef- magnitude and directed to oppose relative motion. Since the
fort required to recompute the Jacobian at each iteration. damper force in this model depends on the history of the
Newton-Raphson is also more difficult to implement. In some response, it is easiest to illustrate the damper force by exam-
cases Newton-Raphson fails to converge, so more robust ple. In Fig. 2 (b), for instance, the damper force exhibits
methods (cf., Wolfe, 1959; Broyden, 1969; Stoer and bilinear hysteresis, which occurs when the input to the damper
Bulirsch, 1980; Shacham, 1986) may be required if a solution is harmonic. For more complicated motion the damper force
is desired for all regions of the parameter space. could take on any value within a similar hysteresis loop, where
the upper and lower limits of the input, which represent the ex-
treme amplitudes of motion, need not be symmetric about
---sp;ofessor Alok Sinha of Pennsylvania State University has pointed out that
in the absence of damping A may be singular. This may be remedied by adding a
zero. In the sample problem the equations have been nor-
linear damping term to both sides of any equation at fault. The damping term malized so that the friction force, 11-C1 , is unity and does not
may be lumped with the nonlinear term(s) on the right-hand side of an equation. appear explicitly.
Input x(t), x(t) 2.0
R-K
1.5 AFf
1.0
Contact Force, Cr
0.5
x(t) 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
(a)
Output Force -1.5
-2.0
725 730 735 740 745 750 755
time
Fig. 4 Amplitude and phase comparison between AFT method and
fourth-order RungeKutta solutions lor three frequency excitation
103
_j
I X(ro) I
10- 2
" ~"
10-3
10" 4
10-5
10"
.I
(0
10 " " 100