2004 Book ModelOrderReductionTechniques PDF

Model Order Reduction Techniques
Springer-Verlag London Ltd.

Zu-QingQu
Model Order Reduction

Techniques
with Applications in Finite Element Analysis
With 75 Figures
Springer
Zu-Qing Qu, PhD
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701
qu@engr.uarkedu
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Qu,Zu-Qing
Model order reduction techniques : with applications in
finite element analysis
1. Computer simulation 2. Finite element method
I. Title
003.3
ISBN 978-1-84996-924-6
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Qu, Zu-Qing.
Model order reduction techniques : with applications in finite
element analysis / Zu-Qing Qu.
p.cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-84996-924-6 ISBN 978-1-4471-3827-3 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-3827-3
1. Finite element method. I. Title
TA347.F5Q342004
S18'.25--dc22 2004041726
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted
under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in
the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright
Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms should be sent to the publishers.
ISBN 978-1-84996-924-6
springeronline.com
© Springer-Verlag London 2004

Originally published by Springer-Verlag London Berlin Heidelberg in 2004
Softcover reprint ofthe hardcover Ist edition 2004
The use of registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a
specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant laws and regulations and therefore free
for general use.
The publisher makes no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy of the information
contained in this book and cannot accept any legal responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions
that may be made.
Typeset by Techset Composition Limited, Salisbury, UK
69/3830-543210 Printed on acid-free paper SPIN 10946718

Preface
Although the computer speed and memory capacity continue to double every 18
months (Moore's law), the phenomenon that the demand of computer storage and
speed will always exceed existing capabilities has been consistently demonstrated in
finite element analysis during the past half century. Modern supercomputers, for
example, are capable of solving problems involving more than 1,000,000 equations
with 1,000,000 unknowns, but they are still not enough to satisfy the needs of some
engineers. Furthermore, the latest supercomputers are usually not available for most
researchers and engineers.
The development of increasing complex structures and mechanical systems, micro-
electromechanical systems (MEMS) and nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS), for
example, demands sophisticated simulation techniques for design, control, and opti-
mization. These systems typically involve multiple coupled energy domains and media
(mechanical, electrical, magnetically, etc.) and inherent nonlinearities of electrostat-
ics actuation forces, geometric nonlinearities caused by large deformation, material
nonlinearities, and other nonlinearities exist. Due to the complex nature of these sys-
tems, the size of discrete models resulting from the finite element method is usually
very large. Even though modern supercomputers might be able to handle that size of
engineering problem, the simulations would be extremely computationally intensive
and time-consuming if the full model were directly used.
These limitations on the hardware (computer storage and speed) and computa-
tional cost and time tell us one truth: The computational technique is as important as
the computer technique. Efficient computational techniques may significantly reduce
the computer storage and time required. It is well known that the computational
effort of finite element analysis is approximately proportional to the cubic of the size
of a problem. The computational work could be reduced drastically if the size of the
problem is reduced. Therefore, the development of efficient model reduction methods
for creating accurate low-order dynamic models has recently become a major goal of
simulation and modeling research. This is one of the motivations of the development
of model reduction technique.
Great progress has been made on the theory and applications of the finite element
method during the past several decades. Many commercial codes such as ADINA,
ANSYS, IDEAS, and NASTRAN are available for finite element modeling and analysis.
However, due to the fuzziness and uncertainty of the original parameters, boundary
and connection, the accuracy and reliability of finite element modeling have received
much attention. Generally, the experimental results from a modal test are used to
verify and modify a finite element model in the stage of design and analysis. Because
of the complexity of practical structural systems and limitation of the testing tech-
nique, the measured data from a modal test are incomplete. The most important
v
vi Preface
incompleteness is the insufficiency of the measured degrees of freedom. Generally,

the number of measured degrees of freedom is much smaller than that of the total
degrees of freedom in the finite element model. This incompatibility between two
models may be solved either by reducing the finite element model to the size of the
test model or by expanding the test model to the size of the finite element model.
In both ways, the model reduction technique is necessary. This is the second
motivation of using model reduction techniques.
Other motivations can be found in the active control, interaction problems, etc.
In the active control, for example, the size of a control model is usually very limited
due to the complexity and cost of the design of a control system. Thus, the reduced
order model control is very popular in control engineering.
Many techniques have been proposed to reduce the size of a large-sized model
before a detailed analysis is performed. Some popular examples are component
mode synthesis, dynamic condensation, dynamic substructure, and the Ritz vector
approach. With the application of model reduction technique, the size of a full model
may be reduced significantly. However, due to the truncated errors, the reduced
model cannot retain all features of the full model. Even for the features within an
interested frequency range, they may not be exactly kept in the reduced model result-
ing from most of the model reduction techniques. Therefore, there is a tradeoff
between the size of the model and its accuracy. The crux of model reduction is to
pursue a smallest model that contains the highest degree of information of the full
model.
Dynamic condensation as an efficient method for model reduction was proposed
in 1965. In this technique, the total degrees of freedom are first divided into the
master and slave degrees of freedom. Then, the relationship, called dynamic conden-
sation matrix, of the responses or mode shapes between these two sets of degrees
of freedom is defined by dynamic condensation schemes. Using the dynamic con-
densation matrix, the system matrices of a full model can be condensed to the
size spanned only by the master degrees of freedom. Also, the measured data
from a modal test can be expanded to the size of the full finite element model.
Compared to other model reduction techniques, the reduced model resulting from
dynamic condensation is defined in the subspace of the full displacement space.
Each coordinate has its physical meaning. This feature is very important in some
applications.
This monograph sets out to explain the principles and applications of the model
reduction techniques, mainly the dynamic condensation technique. It covers all the
potentially useful condensation methods including static condensation, exact con-
densation, dynamic condensation, SEREP, and iterative dynamic condensation. The
effects of the selection of master degrees of freedom and the frequency shifting
technique on the accuracy and application of dynamic condensation technique are
described in detail in this monograph. Both undamped models and nonclassically
damped models are covered. The applications of these methods to the finite element
analyses and test-analysis model correlation are demonstrated through several exam-
ples. The theory of modal analysis for undamped, proportionally, and nonclassically
damped models is also provided. The book has been written so that the level of math-
ematics required for the reader is a little more than that covered at the first-degree
level in engineering. Numerical examples are interspersed throughout the text to
illustrate and highlight various points made in the text. The examples can be easily
replicated by the novice in order to reinforce understanding. This book can be used as
a research text for the researcher who decides to do further work in the related fields,
Preface vii
as an educational text for the graduate student who wants to learn the basic theory of
model reduction, modal analysis, and finite element analysis, and as a guide text for
the engineer who hopes to get acquainted and use these techniques in finite element
analysis.
Zu-QingQu
Texas, USA, 2003
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to publishers for the permission to use parts of the papers
published in the following journals:
Qu, Z-Q (1998) A multi-step method for matrix condensation of finite element
models. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 214(5):965-971. Copyright ©1998 by
Elsevier Science Ltd.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2000) Dynamic superelement modeling method for
compound dynamic systems. AIAA Journal, 38(6):1078-1083. Copyright ©2000
by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (2000) An iterative method for dynamic condensation of
structural matrices. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 14(4):667-678.
Copyright ©2000 by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2001) Dynamic superelement for dynamic systems with
local nonlinearities. Proceedings of the 42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ASC Struc-
tures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Seattle, Washington),
AIAA, Reston, VA: 3548-3557, AIAAOI-25355. Copyright ©2001 by the American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2001) Two-step methods for dynamic condensation.
Proceedings of the 42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ASC Structures, Structural Dynam-
ics, and Materials Conference (Seattle, Washington), AIAA, Reston, VA: 373-383,
AIAAOI-25039. Copyright ©2001 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Inc.
Qu, Z-Q (2001) An efficient modeling method for laminated composite plates with
piezoelectric sensors and actuators. Smart Materials and Structures, 10 (4) :807-818.
Copyright ©200 1 by the Institute of Physics Publishing Limited.
Qu, Z-Q (2002) Model reduction for dynamical systems with local nonlineaities.
AIAA Journal, 40(2):327-333. Copyright ©2002 by the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2002) Efficient method for dynamic condensation of
nonclassically damped vibration systems. AIAA Journal, 40 (2) :368-375. Copyright
©2002 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
Qu, Z-Q, Jung, Y and Selvam, RP (2003) Model condensation for non-classically
damped systems-Part I: static condensation. Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing, 17(5):1003-1016. Copyright ©2002 by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Qu, Z-Q, Selvam, RP and Jung, Y (2003) Model condensation for non-classically
damped systems-Part II: iterative schemes for dynamic condensation. Mechanical
Systems and Signal Processing, 17(5):1017-1032. Copyright ©2003 by Elsevier
Science Ltd.
ix
Contents
1 Introduction to Dynamic Model Reduction Techniques ........... 1

1.1 Model Order Reduction Techniques ..................... 1
1.1.1 Physical Coordinate Reduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.2 Generalized Coordinate Reduction ................ 2
1.1.3 Hybrid Reduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Dynamic Condensation Technique ...................... 3
1.2.1 Guyan Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.2 Single-Mode, Multimode, and Response-Dependent
Dynamic Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.3 Physical-Type, Modal-Type, and Hybrid
Dynamic Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.4 Single-Step, Two-Step, and Iterative Dynamic Condensation 7
1.2.5 Undamped and Damped Dynamic Condensation . . . . . . 8
1.3 Organization of This Monograph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10
2 Finite Element Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13

2.1 Finite Element Method in General Form .................. 13
2.1.1 Fundamental Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13
2.1.2 Stress and Strain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15
2.1.3 Strain- and Stress-Displacement Relationships ........ 18
2.1.4 Virtual Work Principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18
2.1.5 Dynamic Equations of Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21
2.2 General Steps of Finite Element Modeling ................. 23
2.2.1 Discretization and Selection of Element Types. . . . . . . .. 23
2.2.2 Selection of Displacement Function. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24
2.2.3 Determination of Relationships Between Stresses, Strains,
and Nodal Displacements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24
2.2.4 Derivation of Element Matrices and Equations . . . . . . .. 24
2.2.5 Coordinate Transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25
2.2.6 Assemblage of Element Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25
2.2.7 Solution of Equations ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 26
2.3 Use of Symmetry .................................. 26
2.3.1 Modal Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 26
2.3.2 Dynamic Response Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 30
xi
xii Contents
3 Theory of Modal Analysis ................................ 31

3.1 Modal Theory of Undamped Systems .................... 31
3.1.1 Undamped Free Vibration and Eigenvalue Problem. . . .. 31
3.1.2 Modal Orthogonality and Normal Coordinates . . . . . . .. 32
3.1.3 Mode Superposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 34
3.2 Power Series Expansion of Dynamic Flexible Matrix .......... 36
3.3 Modal Theory of Proportionally Damped Systems. . . . . . . . . . .. 37
3.4 Modal Theory of Nondassically Damped Systems . . . . . . . . . . .. 38
3.4.1 Dynamic Equations of Motion in the State Space. . . . . .. 38
3.4.2 Free Vibration and Eigenvalue Problem . . . . . . . . . . . .. 40
3.4.3 Complex Mode Orthogonality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42
3.4.4 Complex Mode Superposition ................... 45
3.5 Summary....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 45
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 45
4 Static Condensation .................................... 47

4.1 Guyan Condensation for Static Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 47
4.1.1 Definitions of Reduced Static Model ............... 47
4.1.2 Guass-Jordan Elimination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 49
4.1.3 Numerical Demonstrations ..................... 50
4.2 Guyan Condensation for Dynamic Problems ............... 52
4.2.1 Definitions of the Reduced Dynamic Model . . . . . . . . .. 52
4.2.2 Condensation of Massless Coordinates. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53
4.3 Guyan Condensation for Eigenproblems .................. 56
4.3.1 Definitions of Reduced Eigenproblems. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 56
4.3.2 Mode Expansion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 57
4.4 Generalized Guyan Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 62
4.5 Quasistatic Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 64
4.6 Static Condensation Using the Flexibility Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . .. 67
4.7 Summary................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 68
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 69
5 Dynamic Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71
5.1 Exact Condensation ................................ 71
5.1.1 Direct Back-Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71
5.1.2 Coordinate Transformation ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 74
5.1.3 Power Series Expansion of Dynamic Flexible Matrix .... 75
5.1.4 State Space Method for High-Order Eigenproblem ..... 77
5.2 Classical Dynamic Condensation ....................... 79
5.3 Further Discussions on Guyan Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 80
5.3.1 Valid Frequency Range of Guyan Condensation. . . . . . .. 80
5.3.2 Higher-Order Guyan Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82
5.3.3 Error Analysis of Guyan Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 83
5.4 Dynamic Sub structuring Scheme ....................... 84
5.5 Solution Schemes for Nonlinear Eigenproblems ............. 86
5.5.1 Iterative Scheme I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 87
5.5.2 Iterative Scheme II ........................... 89
5.5.3 Iterative Scheme III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 90
Contents xiii

5.5.5 Some Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 95
5.6 Modal-Type Dynamic Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 96
5.6.1 Dynamic Condensation Matrix. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 96
5.6.2 Reduced System Matrices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 100
5.6.3 Reduced Eigenvalue Problem .................... 102
5.6.4 Hybrid-Type Condensation ..................... 103
5.7 Comparisons and Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 104
References ........................................... , 108
6 Iterative Methods for Dynamic Condensation .................. III

6.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. III
6.2 Two-Step Methods ................................. 114
6.2.1 Common Inverse ............................ 114
6.2.2 Generalized Inverse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 115
6.3 Governing Equations of Dynamic Condensation Matrix. . . . . . .. 119
6.3.1 Single-Mode-Dependent Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . .. 119
6.3.2 Multimode-Dependent Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 120
6.3.3 Response-Dependent Condensation ............... 123
6.3.4 Comments on These Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 124
6.4 Iterative Schemes for Dynamic Condensation Matrix. . . . . . . . .. 125
6.4.1 Iterative Scheme I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 126
6.4.2 Iterative Scheme II ........................... 127
6.4.4 Further Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 131
6.5 Generalized Iterative Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 132
6.5.1 Governing Equation of the Dynamic
Condensation Matrix ......................... , 132
6.6 Iterative Method Using Subspace Iteration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 134
6.6.1 Subspace Iteration Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 135
6.6.2 Governing Equation of Dynamic Condensation Matrix .. 136
6.6.3 Solution Schemes for Dynamic Condensation Matrix. . .. 137
6.6.4 Proof of Convergence ......................... 138
6.7 Frequency Shift Technique. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 143
6.7.1 Governing Equation of Dynamic Condensation Matrix .. 143
6.7.2 Selection of Frequency Shift Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 144
6.8 Summary......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 147
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 148
7 Selection of Master Degrees of Freedom ...................... 151

7.1 Physical-Type Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 151
7.1.1 Qualitative Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 152
7.1.2 Quantitative Algorithms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 152
7.2 Modal-Type Condensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 155
7.2.1 Selection of Masters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 155
7.2.2 Assessment of Completeness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 156
xiv Contents
7.3 Other Considerations ............................... 157

7.3.1 Symmetry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 157
7.3.2 Practicality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 159
7.4 Number of Master Degrees of Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 159
7.5 Summary...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 160
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 161
8 Dynamic Condensation of Nonclassically Damped Models . . . . . . . .. 163

8.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 163
8.2 Static Condensation ................................ 165
8.2.1 Static Condensation in Displacement Space (SCDS) . . . .. 165
8.2.2 Static Condensation in State Space I-SCSS(I) ........ 167
8.2.3 Static Condensation in State Space II-SCSS(II) . . . . . .. 169
8.2.4 Comparisons of These Methods ....... . . . . . . . . . .. 170
8.3 Dynamic Condensation Methods in Displacement Space . . . . . .. 178
8.3.1 Condensation with Damping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 178
8.3.2 Condensation Without Damping ................. 180
8.4 Modal-Type Condensation Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 181
8.4.1 Dynamic Condensation Matrix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 181
8.4.2 Conversion of Complex Operation into Real Operation .. 183
8.5 Iterative Methods in State Space (I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 185
8.5.1 Governing Equations of the Dynamic
Condensation Matrix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 185
8.5.2 Iterative Scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 188
8.5.3 Models with an Unsymmetric Matrix. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 188
8.6 Iterative Methods in State Space (II) ..................... 190
8.7 Iterative Methods in State Space (III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 191
8.7.1 Governing Equations of Dynamic Condensation Matrix.. 191
8.8 Iterative Method Using Subspace Iteration in State Space . . . . . .. 203
8.8.1 Subspace Iteration Method for Complex Eigenproblems .. 203
8.8.2 Governing Equations of Dynamic Condensation Matrix.. 204
8.8.3 Iterative Schemes ............................ 206
8.8.4 Discussion on the Convergence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 209
8.9 Summary.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 215
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 216
9 Application I: Model Reduction on System Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 217

9.1 Introduction ..................................... 217
9.2 Active Vibration Control ............................. 219
9.2.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 219
9.2.2 Full Order Control ........................... 221
9.2.3 Reduced Order Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 224
9.2.4 Numerical Simulations ........................ 225
9.3 Finite Element Modeling of Smart Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 229
9.3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 229
9.3.2 Theory of Laminated Composite Plates ....... . . . . .. 230
Contents xv
9.3.3 Theory of Sensors and Actuators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 234

9.3.4 Finite Element Formulations and Reduction. . . . . . . . .. 237
9.4 Structural Systems with Local Nonlinearities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 243
9.4.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 243
9.4.2 Model Reduction ............................ 244
9.5 Summary........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 250
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 251
10 Application II: Model Reduction on Component Level-Superelement

Modeling Technique .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 255
10.1 Introduction ..................................... 255
10.2 Concepts of Superelement Modeling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 257
10.3 Static Superelement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 262
10.3.1 Construction of a Superelement .... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 262
10.3.2 Beam Superelement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 264
10.3.3 Higher-Order Element. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 267
10.3.4 Frame Superelement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 269
10.4 Exact Superelement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 272
10.5 Dynamic Superelement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 276
10.5.1 Theory of Dynamic Superelement Modeling. . . . . . . . .. 276
10.5.2 Rigid Modes of Superelement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 278
10.6 Modeling of Compound Systems with Local Nonlinearities ..... 282
10.6.1 Linear Compound Systems ...................... 282
10.6.2 Compound Systems with Local Nonlinearities. . . . . . . .. 284
10.7 Multilevel Superelement ............................. 288
10.8 Global-Local and Multiscale Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 289
10.9 Summary........................................ 292
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 293
11 Applications III: Modal Testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 295

11.1 Introduction ..................................... 295
11.2 Selection of Measurement Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 297
11.3 Test-Analysis Model Correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 298
11.3.1 Accuracy and Robustness of TAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 298
11.3.2 TAM Mass Matrix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 300
11.4 Mode Expansion and Data Recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 306
11.5 Summary ........................................ 310
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 311
12 Summary of Other Model Order Reduction Techniques ........... 313

12.1 Modal Coordinate Reduction .......................... 313
12.1.1 Low-Frequency Reduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 314
12.1.2 Middle-Frequency Reduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 316
12.2 Ritz Vector Methods ................................ 316
12.2.1 Introduction ................................ 316
12.2.2 Static Ritz Vector Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 318
12.2.3 Quasistatic Ritz Vector Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 319
xvi Contents
12.3 Component Mode Synthesis ......................... " 321

12.3.1 Fixed Interface Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 322
12.3.2 Craig-Bampton TAM ......................... 325
12.3.3 FreeInterface Methods ........................ 327
12.4 Proper Orthogonal Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 330
12.5 Balanced Realization Reduction ........................ 332
12.6 Condensation Model Reduction ...................... " 334
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 337
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 341
Index . ................................................. 363

Introduction to Dynamic Model Reduction
Techniques
1.1 Model Order Reduction Techniques

In the structural dynamics community, model order reduction techniques have been
widely used in global-local analysis, reanalysis and structural dynamic optimization,
eigenvalue problem, structural vibration and buckling, sensitivity studies and control
parameters design, model update, and damage detection. Different nonstructural
problems related to heat transfer, fluid-structure interaction, and other linear and
nonlinear steady-state boundary-value problems have also been analyzed using a
reduced order model. A detailed review on model order reduction techniques can be
found in Noor (Noor, 1994). Van Woerkom (1990) carried out an elaborate survey of
model order reduction methods for application in flexible spacecraft dynamics.
In structural dynamic analyses, the dynamic equations of equilibrium is generally
written as a set oflinear second-order differential equations:
Mi(t) + CX(t) + KX(t) = F(t) (1)
in which M, C, and K E Rnxn are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the
full order model, simply full model; i, X, and X E R n are the acceleration, velocity,
and displacement response vectors, respectively, of the full model under the external
loads. The vector X is also referred to as the full order coordinates; FERn is the
equivalent force vector acting on the model; n denotes the number of degrees of
freedom of the full model. Since the number n is generally very large for a practical
structural problem, dynamic analyses, simulations, and design require very expensive
computational efforts. Thus, model reduction technique is usually introduced to
reduce the size of the full model and leads to a reduced order model.
Many model reduction schemes involve the form of coordinate transformation:
X(t) = TZ(t) (2)
where T E R nxm is the coordinate transformation matrix and Z E Rm is the reduced

order coordinates. Since the transformation matrix T is generally time-invariant, the
differentiation of Eq. (2) with respect to time gives
X(t) = TZ(t) (3)

i(t) = Ti(t) (4)
2 Model Order Reduction Techniques
Introducing Eq. (2) through (4) into Eq. (1) and premultiplying both sides by the
transpose of transformation matrix T leads to
(5)
where M R, C R, and K R E R m x m are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices, respec-
tively, of the reduced order model or simply reduced model, and FR is the equivalent
force vector acting on the reduced model. Clearly, they are defined as
(6)
Equation (5) is the reduced dynamic equations of equilibrium. Although the size of
the reduced model (m) is much smaller than that of the full model (n), that is, m « n,
the dynamic characteristics of the full model within the interested frequency range
may be retained in the reduced model. Therefore, the reduced model is very useful
in further dynamic analyses, particularly when repeated computation is required and
significant research has been conducted in this area.
Based on the type of coordinates retained as the reduced order coordinates, the
existing model order reduction methods fall into three basic categories: physical coor-
dinate reduction, generalized coordinate reduction, and hybrid coordinate reduction.
Each category may include several subcategories.
1.1.1 Physical Coordinate Reduction

In the physical coordinate model reduction, the reduced model is obtained by remov-
ing part of the physical coordinates of the full model. Thus, the coordinates of
the reduced model actually belong to a subset of the full model. This is the most
straightforward model reduction among the three categories. The physical coordi-
nate reduction is usually called dynamic condensation and its coordinate transformation
matrix takes the form
(7)
in which I is an identity matrix of order m; R is the dynamic condensation matrix.
1.1.2 Generalized Coordinate Reduction

All the coordinates that are not physical coordinates are generally referred to as gen-
eralized coordinates. The modal coordinate and the Ritz coordinate are two types
of frequently used generalized coordinates. Modal coordinate reduction (see Chap-
ter 12), is one of the classical methods of the generalized coordinate reduction. The
dynamic responses of an n degree-of-freedom model in the physical space X can be
expressed in terms of the modal coordinates in modal space qm' that is,
(8)
<Pm E Rnxm is the eigenvector matrix of the full model. Each column of the matrix
is an eigenvector or mode shape. Depending on the frequency spectral of exciting
Introduction to Dynamic Model Reduction Techniques 3
forces, the m modes may be taken from the lowest frequency range or any interested
frequency range or any interested modes of the full modeL Substituting Eq. (8) in
Eq. (1) and premultiplying it by the transpose of the eigenvector matrix gives
(9)
where M" en and Kr are, respectively, the modal mass matrix, modal damping
matrix, and modal stiffness matrix. The modal mass and stiffness matrices are diag-
onal matrices for this linear model. The modal damping matrix might be diagonal,
depending on the type of damping matrix. If the eigenvector matrix is <I> m normalized
with respect to the mass matrix, the modal mass and stiffness matrices become the
identity matrix and eigenvalue matrix of the full model. Therefore, these m equations
in Eq. (9) are usually uncoupled in the modal space and can be viewed as m single
degree-of-freedom models. This procedure is also referred to as mode superposition
or modal superposition.
Actually, it is not always necessary to employ the eigenvectors of the full model
in the transformation from the physical coordinates to the generalized coordinates
(modal coordinates in mode superposition). If the loads are known, for example, the
approximately chosen Ritz vectors can be used as a good representation of the eigen-
vectors. This substitution may eliminate the costly eigenvalue analysis and increase
the accuracy in some cases where exact eigenvectors are not the best choice. Therefore,
Ritz vector methods can be regarded as a generalized mode superposition approach
in which the exact eigenvectors are replaced by more generally defined Ritz vectors
(Gu, 2000).
The Ritz vector method has the similar transformation as modal reduction in
Eq. (8). The generalized coordinates in the Ritz vector method are referred to as Ritz
coordinates. The construction of the Ritz vectors is generally more computationally
efficient than the exact eigenvectors. However, the dynamic equations of motion of
the reduced model obtained from Ritz vector methods are generally coupled while
they are usually uncoupled in the modal coordinate reduction.
1.1.3 Hybrid Reduction

Fixed interface component mode synthesis is a typical hybrid reduction because the
coordinates of the reduced model consist of some physical coordinates of the full
model and part of the modal coordinates of the model with interface degrees of
freedom fixed. The coordinate transformation of this technique has the form
T <I>N
eMS =[ 0 (10)
Many other hybrid coordinate reduction schemes are available in the literature.
1.2 Dynamic Condensation Technique

1.2.1 Guyan Condensation
Probably, the condensation technique for the deletion of unwanted degrees of freedom
was first proposed by Guyan (Guyan, 1965) and Irons (Irons, 1965). Because the
dynamic effect is ignored in the condensation, this method is usually referred to as

static condensation and is only exact for static problems. Since its initial proposal, this
technique has been widely used in many static and dynamic problems. Two typical
examples of the applications are the component mode synthesis and eigenproblem
analysis of large models. This approach has been included in many textbooks and
commercial codes in the areas of structural dynamics and mechanical vibrations.
Today, it is still one of the most popular condensation methods.
Guyan condensation is actually the initial approximation of exact dynamic con-
densation. Its valid frequency range is [0, we). We is called the cut frequency and is
equal to the lowest frequency of the full model with all its master degrees of freedom
grounded. This model is referred to as the slave model. Because the frequencies of the
full model will increase if some of its degrees of freedom are fixed, the frequencies
in the lowest frequency range of the full model are usually smaller than the lowest
frequency of the slave model, that is, the cut frequency. This is the reason why Guyan
condensation is generally valid in the lowest frequency range of the full model and the
corresponding results have reasonable accuracy within this range. The error in Guyan
condensation depends upon the ratio of cut frequency to the interested frequency.
The higher the ratio, the more accurate the reduced model.
Based on the fundamental features of Guyan condensation, its accuracy may be
improved from the ways listed below besides the partial and full inclusion of inertia
effects:
Optimal selection of master degrees of freedom. From the definition of a slave model,
we know that different master degrees of freedom result in a different slave model
with a different lowest frequency. Therefore, optimal selection of these degrees of
freedom may increase the lowest frequency, that is, the cut frequency. As a result,
the ratio will be increased.
Increase of the number of master degrees of freedom. The lowest frequency of the
slave model may be increasing significantly by increasing the number of master
degrees of freedom. This is the reason why this scheme is usually much more
efficient than the preceding scheme.
Inclusion of the lowest modes of the slave model. If several lowest modes of the slave
model are included in the condensation matrix, the cut frequency becomes the
lowest frequency that is not included. As a result, the cut frequency is increased.
Consideration of higher orders of approximation. If the higher order of approxima-
tion is considered in the condensation matrix, the ratio becomes (w~/w2)P+l in
t+
which p is the order of approximation. Clearly, if W < We, (w~ / w2 1 > W~ / w2.
Use of frequency shift technique. After the frequency shift technique is introduced,
the ratio becomes (W~ - q) / (w 2 - q) and is greater than w~ / w2.
1.2.2 Single-Mode, Multimode, and Response-Dependent

Dynamic Condensation
The dynamic condensation is fully dependent upon the dynamic condensation
matrix. There are three types of definitions for the dynamic condensation matrix.
They are single-mode-dependent, multimode-dependent, and response-dependent
dynamic condensation matrices.
The single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation matrix is defined as the

relation of an eigenvector between the master and slave degrees of freedom, that is,
(1)
where ({Jm and ({Js are the subvectors of the eigenvector at the master and slave degrees
of freedom. According to this definition, the computational expression can be directly
obtained from the eigenvalue equation of the full model, that is,
(2)
Clearly, the dynamic condensation matrix depends on the mode. Different modes
may have different dynamic condensation matrix and, as a result, a different reduced
model. Therefore, the dynamic condensation is called single-mode-dependent
dynamic condensation. Because the reduced model is frequency-dependent, a special
eigenvalue solver is generally required.
The multimode-dependent dynamic condensation matrix is defined as the relations
of the multi-eigenvectors, p, for example, between the master and slave degrees of
freedom, that is,
(3)
Using this definition, the dynamic condensation matrix may be directly obtained if
these eigenvectors of the full model are available, that is,
(4)
This dynamic condensation matrix is actually the same as that defined by modal
reduction (Kammer, 1987) or system equivalent reduction expansion process
(SEREP) (O'Callahan et aI., 1989). The governing equation of the multimode-
dependent dynamic condensation matrix may be derived from the matrix form of
the eigenvalue problem of the full model.
The response-dependent dynamic condensation matrix is defined as the relations
ofresponses between the master and slave degrees offreedom (Qu, 1998), that is,
(5)
where Xm and Xs are the response vectors at the master and slave degrees of free-
dom. The dynamic condensation matrix may possibly be obtained directly from this
definition. In this procedure, the system responses are simulated using any accurate
time integration scheme. The displacement response vector at all degrees of freedom
is then sampled at a series of different times during the simulation. The dynamic con-
densation matrix is computed from these sampled response vectors. To improve the
features of the reduced model, these sampled vectors should be orthogonalized. Based
on the mode superposition theory, the response-dependent dynamic condensation is
actually full-mode dependent.
The governing equation of the single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation
matrix could be converted into the multimode-dependent form by the introduction of
the eigenproblem of the reduced model, which is valid for all the modes retained in the
reduced model. From the definition of response-dependent dynamic condensation
matrix, the same governing equation as that from the multimode-dependent dynamic
condensation may be obtained by the introduction of the free vibration equations
of the reduced model. Because the reduced model only has rn degrees of freedom,
the equation only represents the contributions from the rn modes. As a result, the
relation between the master and slave degrees of freedom is approximate even though
the reduced model is exact.
1.2.3 Physical-Type, Modal-Type, and Hybrid Dynamic

Condensation
Based on the types of information required to compute the dynamic condensa-
tion matrix, the dynamic condensation methods can be categorized as physical-type
dynamic condensation, modal-type dynamic condensation, and hybrid -type dynamic
condensation. In the physical-type dynamic condensation methods, only the system
matrices, stiffness and mass matrices, for example, of the full model are directly
required in the computation. If the modal parameters, particularly the mode shapes
of full model, are included in the dynamic condensation matrix, the method is
called modal-type dynamic condensation. In hybrid-type dynamic condensation
approaches, both the physical parameters and the mode shapes of the full model
or slave model are used.
The physical-type dynamic condensation is generally more computationally effi-
cient than the other two. The reduced model usually has good qualities. This type
of approach may be implemented into the eigenvalue analysis of a large-size model.
However, the accuracy or convergent rate depends on what and how many degrees
of freedom are selected as the master degrees of freedom. Although the accuracy of
the reduced model obtained from iterative dynamic condensation approaches is not
dependent on the selection, the proper selection of master degrees of freedom does
accelerate the convergence.
The reduced model resulting from the modal-type dynamic condensation preserves
all the modes selected. These modes may be at any frequency range of the full model
or totally arbitrary. Because this reduction is exact, the selection of master degrees
of freedom does not affect the accuracy of reduced model provided that the selected
modes are observable at master degrees of freedom. Generally, the number of the
selected modes is smaller than that of master degrees of freedom. These approaches
are usually used in test-analysis model correlation.
Several disadvantages limit the usage of this method:
1. The eigenvectors of the full model should be available before the reduction is
performed. This is computationally expensive.
2. When the number of the selected modes (p) is equal to the number of master
degrees of freedom (rn) and these modes are all observable, the reduced system
matrices have good properties. However, this will be a very heavy burden to
obtain that number of modes of a full model because the number is generally
large.
3. When the number of the selected modes is less than the number of master
degrees of freedom, the reduced system matrices defined by SEREP are rank-
deficient and the other rn - p modes of the reduced model are undetermined.
This leads to difficulties in further dynamic analyses using the reduced model.
The reduced model resulting from the physical-type dynamic condensation
approaches usually contains m modes although the accuracy of the m - p higher

modes might be low.
The hybrid dynamic condensation is supposed to overcome some of the shortcom-
ings of physical-type and modal-type dynamic condensation. Unfortunately, most
hybrid dynamic condensation approaches available in the literature do not have good
performance.
1.2.4 Single-Step, Two-Step, and Iterative Dynamic Condensation

In the single-step method, the dynamic condensation matrix is explicitly defined
by either the system matrices or the modal matrix or both of a full model. The
corresponding reduced model can also be explicitly defined. Guyan condensation
and most of its variants are single-step methods. Most modal-type and hybrid-type
dynamic condensation methods fall into this category.
There is a special type of single-step dynamic condensation (Leung, 1978).
Although the dynamic condensation matrix is explicitly defined by the system matri-
ces, the reduced model is frequency-dependent and a special eigensolver is required.
Generally, four ways are available in the literature for solving the nonlinear eigenvalue
problem. They are
1. Approximately linearized method. In this scheme, the nonlinear terms, higher
order of matrix with respect to an unknown eigenvalue, is viewed as a correction
term of Guyan condensation and linearized within the interested frequency range.
Thus, the nonlinear eigenvalue problem becomes a classical eigenvalue problem
after the linearization. The strength of this scheme is obvious. However, the
frequency range for the linearization is usually very narrow and needs to be
selected with great care.
2. State space method. The state space method and its variants are valid for the non-
linear eigenvalue problems, which can be expressed as a power series in term of
the unknown frequency or eigenvalue. It is valid when the interested eigenvalues
are smaller than the lowest eigenvalue of the slave model. Furthermore, the size
of the eigenvalue problem will be N times the size of the reduced mode in which
N is the order of nonlinearity.
3. Perturbation method. In the perturbation approach, all the higher orders of
terms are viewed as a perturbation of the reduced mass matrix defined by Guyan
condensation. An iterative scheme may also be implemented to increase the
accuracy. Similar to the state space method, this scheme is usually feasible in the
valid frequency range.
4. Direct iteration method. The direct iteration approach is actually a combina-
tion of the eigenvalue shift (spectrum shift) and any classical eigensolver such
as inverse iteration and Jacobi transformation. In this scheme it is quite diffi-
cult to match approximate frequencies with the real, unknown frequencies. If
they are not properly matched, the iteration may be divergent. Some interested
frequencies may be missed even though the convergence is obtained.
In the two-step dynamic condensation, the results computed from the single-step
condensation methods are usually considered as an initial prediction (O'Callahan,
1989). These values definitely have relatively high errors. Correction will be made
in the second step. For this reason, the two-step method is also referred to as the
prediction-correction method. Generally:the following four successive steps are used

in the two-step condensation methods. They are
1. Anticipate the frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes at the mas-
ter degrees of freedom (that is, the eigensolution of the reduced model)
using Guyan/Irons condensation method (or other physical-type condensation
approaches) or compute the initial approximation of dynamic condensation
matrix using the corresponding condensation methods.
2. Compute the mode shapes at the slave degrees of freedom using the mode expan-
sion expressions in which the inertia effects are considered partially or fully, or
directly formulate the improved dynamic condensation matrix.
3. Construct a new subspace using the mode shapes at the master and slave degrees
of freedom, or directly using the improved dynamic condensation matrix and an
identity matrix.
4. Formulate the system matrices of reduced model for the second time using the
new subspace, and then compute the eigenpairs of the new reduced model if
necessary.
The iterative dynamic condensation originated from two different concepts. The
first concept is the extension of the two-step method. After the reduced model is
obtained from the second step, it is used to estimate the dynamic condensation
matrix in the next step. This process is repeated successively until the reduced model
with required accuracy is obtained (Friswell et al., 1995). In the second concept, the
governing equations for the dynamic condensation matrix are directly derived (Singh
and Suarez, 1992; Qu, 1998). Due to the nonlinearity of these equations, iterative
schemes are introduced.
The advantage of iterative approaches is that the reduced model can be updated
repeatedly until the prescribed accuracy is satisfied. Therefore, the selection of master
degrees of freedom does not have much effect on the final accuracy of the reduced
model although it affects the convergence rate. No further matrix inverse or decompo-
sition/elimination is necessary during iteration. Therefore, the extra computational
work is not expensive with the implementation of iteration while the accuracy of the
reduced model could be increased significantly.
There are several differences between the iterative schemes used in the special
one-step dynamic condensation and iterative dynamic condensation:
All the interested modes can be computed from the reduced model simultaneously in
the latter while they should be calculated one by one in the former.
The convergence of the latter is guaranteed while the convergence of the for-
mer strongly depends on the selection of the initial approximation and the
approximation for the next mode.
The reduced model computed from the latter is very useful in further dynamic analyses
due to the multimode-dependent features.
The speed of convergence of the latter is generally slower than that of the former.
1.2.5 Undamped and Damped Dynamic Condensation

The dynamic condensation of undamped models is performed in the displacement
space. As a result, the reduced model is also defined in the displacement space with
the explicit form of reduced stiffness and mass matrices. The dynamic condensation
matrix computed from the undamped model can be simply used in the dynamic mod-
els with proportional damping in which the damping matrix is a linear combination
of mass and stiffness matrices.
For a discrete model with non proportional damping, the dynamic condensation
matrix obtained from the corresponding undamped model may be utilized to reduce
its size. However, the dynamic properties of the reduced model will not converge to
those of the full model (Qu and Selvam, 2000). Therefore, the dynamic condensation
is performed in the state space if the damping has an important effect on the dynamic
features of full model. Many of the iterative dynamic condensation approaches of
the undamped model defined in the displacement space may be extended to the
state space for the damped model (Qu and Selvam, 2004). The reduced model may
approach the full model with iterations. However, the system matrices of the reduced
model are defined in the state space and fully populated. It is really difficult to get the
explicit mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the reduced model defined in the
displacement space. These explicit matrices are very useful in many dynamic analyses.
1.3 Organization of This Monograph

This monograph begins with the theories of finite element modeling and modal anal-
ysis. Besides the real modal analysis, the complex modal analysis for the systems with
nonclassical damping are also discussed in detail. These theories are used extensively
in the following chapters.
The first topic of this monograph is the static condensation, Guyan condensa-
tion, proposed more than three decades ago. This is the simplest and most popular
condensation approach and has been widely used for a large number of engineering
problems and implemented into many commercial finite element analysis codes.
Due to the ignorance of the inertia effect, the accuracy of static condensation is usu-
ally very low and highly depends on the selection of master degrees of freedom. Many
schemes had been proposed to improve its accuracy during the next two decades.
The research on these ideas and approaches is the second topic of this monograph.
This topic covers the exact condensation, classical dynamic condensation, high-order
Guyan condensation, error analysis of Guyan condensation, dynamic substructuring
schemes, modal-type condensation, hybrid-type condensation, and the solution of
the frequency-dependent eigenvalue problems.
The next topic is the iterative dynamic condensation methods. In these iterative
schemes, the dynamic condensation matrix is updated repeatedly until the convergent
values are obtained. Thus, the selection of master degrees of freedom does not have
much effect on the final accuracy of the reduced model.
The choice of master degrees of freedom will affect the accuracy of the reduced
model or the convergence rate of the iterative approaches. This selection includes
what and how many degrees of freedom should be chosen. Besides this, the eigenvalue
shifting also has influence on the accuracy of the reduced model or the convergence
rate. By the use of shift, the reduced model may represent the full model in any given
frequency range.
The fifth topic is the dynamic condensation for nonclassically damped models.
Due to the inclusion of this kind of damping, the condensation becomes much more
complex and the state space formulations are introduced. Under this topic, one static
condensations defined in the displacement space and two static condensation defined
in the state space will be described. The reduced stiffness and damping matrixes
computed from these three methods are the same and there is only some difference
among the reduced mass matrices. To get the explicit mass, damping, and mass
matrices of the reduced model, two more dynamic condensation schemes defined in
the displacement are to be provided. Similar tv the modal reduction defined in the
displacement space, its variant in the state space will be given. Due to the complex
nature of the eigenvector matrix, a transform from complex arithmetic operations to
the real is provided. The major part of this topic is the iterative dynamic condensation
methods defined in state space. Two types of iterative methods are described. It will
show that the reduced model defined by these iterative schemes has very high accuracy.
The demonstration of the applications of the dynamic condensation technique
in the structural dynamics community, particular finite element modeling, is the
next topic. Three examples are provided to show the implementation of dynamic
condensation technique into the reduced order modeling of active vibration control
system, finite element modeling of smart structures, and finite element modeling of
structural systems with local nonlinearities. Besides the model order reduction at the
system level, the dynamic condensation technique may be utilized at the substructural
level. Under this topic, static superelement, exact superelement, and iterative dynamic
superelement modeling schemes are provided.
Another important application of the dynamic condensation technique can be
found in the experimental modal analysis. Due to the incompleteness of degrees of
freedom in the modal test, the correlation of the test model and analytical model
becomes difficult. With the application of dynamic condensation approaches, the full
size of the analytical model may be reduced to the space spanned only by the test
degrees of freedom, or alternatively the test mode shapes may be expanded to the size
of the full model.
At the end of this monograph, other model reduction schemes frequently encoun-
tered in the structural dynamic analyses and finite element modeling are summarized.
These schemes include modal coordinate reduction, Ritz vector method, component
mode synthesis, proper orthogonal decomposition, balanced realization reduction,
and condensation model reduction.
References
Friswell, MI, Garvey, so, and Penny, JET (1995) Model reduction using dynamic and iterative
IRS technique. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 186(2):311-323.
Gu, J (2000). Efficient model reduction methods for structural dynamics analyses.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Michigan.
Guyan, RJ (1965) Reduction of stiffness and mass matrices. AIAA Journal, 3(2):380.
Irons, BM (1965) Structural eigenvalue problems - elimination of unwanted variables. AIAA Journal,
3(5):961-962.
Kammer, DC (1987) Test-analysis model development using an exact modal reduction. The International
Journal of Analytical and Experimental Modal Analysis, 2(4):174-179.
Leung, AYT (1978) An accurate method of dynamic condensation in structural analysis. International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 12( 11): 1705-1715.
Noor, AK (1994) Recent advances and applications of reduction methods. Applied Mechanics Reviews,
47(5):125-146.
O'Callahan, JC (1989) A procedure for an improved reduced system (IRS) model. Proceedings of the 7th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, Nevada), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 17-21.
O'Callahan, JC,Avitabile, P, and Riemer, R (1989) System equivalent reduction expansion process (SEREP).
Proceedings of the 7th International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, Nevada), Union College,
Schenectady, NY: 29-37.
Qu, Z-Q (1998) Structural Dynamic Condensation Techniques: Theory and Applications. Ph.D. Disser-
tation, State Key Laboratory of Vibration, Shock and Noise, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai,
China.
Qu, Z-Q, and Selvam, RP (2000) Dynamic condensation methods for damped models. Proceedings of
the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, Texas), Society for Experimental
Mechanics, Bethel, CT, 2000, pp. 1752-1757.
Qu, Z-Q, and Selvam, RP (2004) Insight into dynamic condensation matrix of nondassically damped
models. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 272(3-5):581-606.
Singh, MP, and Suarez, LE (1992) Dynamic Condensation with Synthesis of Substructure Eigenproperties.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 159(1):139-155.
Van Woerkom, PThLM (1990) Mathematical models of flexible spacecraft dynamics: A survey of order
reduction approaches. Control Theory Adv. Technol, 4:609-632.
2 Finite Element Modeling
Many structures of practical importance are too complex to be analyzed by classical,

analytical techniques and, hence, numerical analysis is generally used. The finite
element method is the most widely used numerical technique for structural and
system analyses.
The basic concept of the finite element method is to divide a continuum into
a series but finite number of smaller regions, called finite elements, which should
neither overlap nor have a gap between each other. Each element has a number of key
points, called nodes, that control the behavior of the element. These elements usually
have simpler geometries, load conditions, boundary conditions, etc. than the original
problem. This ensures that the stresses and displacements within each element vary
monotonically. Thus, the deformation within each element can be approximated by
displacement functions. By making the displacements or stresses at any point in an
element dependent on those at the nodes, we need only write a finite number of
differential equations of motion for such nodes. This approach enables us to convert
a problem with an infinite number of degrees of freedom to one with a finite number,
thereby simplifying the solution process.
This finite element method has a number of advantages that have made it very
popular. It is the most convenient and accurate method for the analysis oflarge-scale
structural systems with complex geometry, load conditions, material combinations,
boundary conditions, and geometrical and material nonlinearities. Even though the
finite element method was initially used for structural analysis, it has been adapted to
many other disciplines in engineering and mathematical physics, such as fluid flow,
heat transfer, electromagnetic potentials, diffusion, soil mechanics, acoustics, and
many other phenomena.
2.1 Finite Element Method in General Form

2.1.1 Fundamental Definitions
Consider a general three-dimensional solid or structure of volume V that is enclosed
by a surface S as shown in Figure 2.1. 0 - XYZ are the global coordinates, also
called structural coordinates or system coordinates, to which the structure as a whole
is referred. There is only one global coordinate system in a particular analysis. It
is usually aligned with the supports of the structure. The external forces acting on
the structure might be the body force, surface forces, concentrated forces, or their
13
Figure 2.1 General three-dimensional solid or structure.
combinations. These forces have the general form
(1)
The displacements at any point of the structure resulting from the external forces are
denoted by
(2)
where U, V, and W represent displacements in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions,

respectively. They are defined in the global coordinates.
Suppose the three-dimensional structure is divided into NE elements and NN
nodes when the finite element method is applied. Each element has one set of local
coordinates 0 - xyz as shown in Figure 2.1. These coordinates are aligned with the
geometry of the finite element and are also called element coordinates. The external
I;: I
forces can be replaced by an equivalent nodal force vector that has the form
(3)
F =
F~N
Similarly, the nodal displacement vector X of the structure is given by
(4)
Finite Element Modeling 15
In Eqs. (3) and (4), F i and Xi are vectors that depend on the number of the degrees
of freedom at each node.
Let's consider an element in the structure. Similarly, the forces acting on this
element may be the body force, surface forces, concentrated forces, or their
combinations. These forces have the general form
(5)
The displacements at any point within the three-dimensional element can be

represented by the column vector
(6)
in which u, v, and w denote the displacements in the x-, y-, and z-directions,
respectively. They are defined in the local coordinates.
If this element has nn nodes, the equivalent nodal force vector f is given by
f = I;: I (7)
fnn
in which the force vector at each node has the general form
(i = 1,2, ... , nn) (8)
I
and m denotes the moment.
I
Similarly, the nodal displacement x of this element is defined as
X2
Xl
X= (9)
X~n
where
(i = 1,2, ... ,nn) (10)
and () represents rotation.
2.1.2 Stress and Strain

When the structure is excited by external loads, various types of internal stresses
and strains occur, depending on the nature of the problem. Figure 2.2 shows the
y,v
dy
x,u
dx
Figure 2.2 Stresses on an infinitesimal element.
general case of an infinitesimal element (dx x dy x dz) within a three-dimensional

solid. Appearing in the figure are three components of normal stresses (<1x , <1y , and
<1z ) whose subscripts indicate the coordinate directions and six components of shear
stresses (ixy, iyz, etc.) whose first subscripts indicate the face of the element on which
it faces and the second subscripts indicate the coordinate direction. The shear stresses
are not all independent, and they have the following relationships:
iyz = i zy , Tzx = Txz (11)
Consequently, only six independent components of stress need be considered.

Corresponding to the normal stresses are three normal strains (£x, By, and £z). For
small strains, they are defined as
£x= - ,
au £y= - ,
av £z=-
aw (12)
ax ay az
The three independent shear strains (Yxy, yyz, and Yzx), corresponding to the three
independent shear stresses, are defined in terms of the derivatives of the translational
displacements as
au av av aw aw au
yxy = yyx = -ay +-,
ax yyz = Yzy = -az + -,
ay Yzx = Yxz = -ax + -az
(13)
For convenience, the six independent stresses and the corresponding strains are
represented by the column vectors. Thus,
al ax el ex
a2 ay e2 ey
a3 az e3 ez (14)
0'= e=
a4 Txy e4 Yxy
as Tyz es Yyz
a6 Tzx e6 Yzx
These vectors and their associated coordinate axes constitute a complete description
of the state of stress and strain at any point in a three-dimensional structure.
In a linear elastic isotropic material, the strain-stress relationships are written as
1 Txy
ex = - (ax - yay - vaz ), Yxy= - (15a)
E G
1 Tyz
ey = B(ay - vaz - vax), Yyz = - (15b)
G
1 Tzx
ez = -(az - vax - yay), Yzx = - (l5c)
E G
The constant E denotes Young's modulus of elasticity; the constant G is the shear
modulus of elasticity and is given by
E
G=--- (16)
2(1 + v)
v represents Poisson's ratio.

Solving for the stresses from Eq. (15), the stress-strain relationships (generalized
Hooke's law) commonly used in the finite element can be obtained as
0' = Ee (17)
where the stress-strain matrix is defined as
I-v v v 0 0 0
v I-v v 0 0 0
v v I-v 0 0 0
E 1- 2v
E= 0 0 0 0 0 (18)
(l + v)(1 - 2v) 2
1- 2v
o o o 0 --- 0
2
1 - 2v
o o o 0 0
2
The size and details of the matrix E depend on the conditions of the element in the
structure.
2.1.3 Strain- and Stress-Displacement Relationships

In the finite element method, the displacements u at any point of the element are
usually expressed in terms of the nodal displacements x using the displacement shape
functions as follows:
u=Nx (19)
In this expression the symbol N denotes a rectangular matrix containing the geometric
functions that make u completely dependent upon x.
The strain-displacement relationships are obtained by introducing Eq. (19) into
Eqs. (12) and (13). Thus,
e= Cu (20)
The linear differential operator matrix C expresses the strain vector e in terms of
displacements in the vector u and is defined as
a 0 0
ax a
0 0
ay
0
a0
C= a a az0 (21)
ay ax
0
a a
az ay
a 0 a
az ax
Substitution of Eq. (19) into Eq. (20) yields the strain-displacement relationships
e=Bx (22)
where the strain-displacement matrix B is given by
B=CN (23)
It is an array of derivatives of the shape functions.

Introducing Eq. (22) into Eq. (17), we obtain the stress-displacement relationships as
(1 = EBx (24)
in which the matrix product EB gives the stresses at any point within the element due
to unit values of nodal displacements.
2.1.4 Virtual Work Principle

It is well known that the principle of virtual work plays a vital role in the analysis
of discretized continua by finite elements. According to this principle, the total work
done by internal (stresses) and external forces on any compatible, infinitesimal virtual
displacements 8 U is zero, that is,
8W = 8Wint - 8Wext = 0 (25)
The internal virtual work is equal to the actual stresses u going through the virtual
strains 8£ (corresponding to the imposed virtual displacements 8U).
8Wint = Iv 8£T udV (26)
where V denotes the volume of the solid. The external work is equal to the actual
body forces QB dV, surface forces QS dS, concentrated forces QC, and inertia body
forces -pU dV going through the virtual displacement 8U, that is,
8Wext = { BU T QB dV + {8Ur QS dS +L BuT Qf - { BU T pU dV (27)

lv is i lv
The subscript S denotes the virtual surface displacements where the surface forces
QS locate and the subscript i denotes the virtual displacements at the position where
force Qf is applied. The damping effects in the structure are ignored temporarily due
to its complexity.
Equations (26) and (27) can be rewritten as a sum integration over the volume and
areas of all finite elements, that is,
NE NE
8Wint =L 8Wint =L 18£TU dv (28)
m=1 m=1 v
where m denotes the mth element. It is important to note that the integration in
Eqs. (28) and (29) are performed over the element volumes v and surfaces s and that
for convenience we may use different element coordinate systems in the calculations.
Indeed, this is basically the reason why each of the integrals can be evaluated very
effectively in general element assemblages.
Substituting Eqs. (22) and (24) into Eq. (28), we have
8Wint = ENE
[18xTBTEBXdv] (30)
Introduction ofEq. (19) into Eq. (29) yields
8Wext = E
NE
[18xTNT qB dv + i 8x TN TqS ds
+ ~,.TNTqf - f. ,.TNTPNidV] (31)

Using Eqs. (30) and (31), we can express Eq. (25) as
NE
~ [8xT 1 BTEBxdv + 18xTNT PNXdV]
= ~8xT [1 NTldv+ [NTqSdS+ ~NTqf] (32)
Considering the virtual displacements' characteristic and the relationships between

the element displacements and structural displacements, we have
= 8X T~ [1 NT qB dv + [NT qS ds + ~NT qf] (33)
NE NE
~[lBTEBdv]x+ ~[lpNTNdv]x
= ~ [1 NTqBdv+ [NTqSdS+ ~NTqf] (34)
Equation (34) is the equilibrium equations of the structure corresponding to the

nodal displacement. It can be rewritten in a concise form as
(35)
The structural mass and stiffness matrices, M and K, have this form
NE NE
M= L1PNTNdv= LMm (36)
m=! m=!
(37)
and M m and K m are the element mass and stiffness matrices with respect to the global
coordinates. The corresponding matrices in element coordinates are given by
(38)
The equivalent force vector F includes the effects of the element body forces, surface
forces, and concentrated forces, namely
(39)
and they are defined as
(40)
(41)
(42)
The stresses and strains considered in the above derivation are due only to the nodal
displacements. If initial strains So exist, the stress vector can be expressed as
(1 = E(s - so) (43)
When this expression is used in place of (1 in Eq. (28), the equivalent force F becomes
(44)
and the effect of the element initial strains is given by
(45)
It can be seen that the assumed displacement field of the element is used to define the
acceleration field (the inertia forces). This is the most commonly used formulation
for the mass matrix in the finite element formulation and is called the consistent mass
formulation. The corresponding mass matrix is called the consistent mass matrix. The
resulting mass matrix is often nondiagonal and positive definite.
Another commonly used mass formulation in the finite element method is the
lumped mass formulation. In this formulation, the element mass matrix is obtained
by lumping the element mass at the nodal points. One way of using the lumped mass
approach is to describe the inertia of the element by concentrated masses that have
zero moment of inertia about their centers. The resulting mass matrix, referred to as
a lumped mass matrix, is singular for the bending beam, plate, and so on because no
inertia is assigned to the rotational degrees of freedom.
2.1.5 Dynamic Equations of Motion

The damping effects were not included in Eq. (35). As we know, most of the structures
or systems possess the property of energy dissipation. Under certain circumstances,
the effects of damping upon the dynamic responses can be ignored. One common
example is the short-time responses of a structure with a small amount of damping
excited by a short-duration shock. When the frequency of a periodic excitation is far
away from the resonance frequencies of the system, the damping effects on the steady
state response can also be ignored. However, when the exciting frequency is close to
the natural frequencies, the effects become significant and the damping should be
included in the dynamic analysis.
Generally, the formulation of mathematical expressions for the energy dissipation
is quite complicated. Thus, simplified models have been developed that, in many
cases, have been found to be adequate. There are three commonly used damping
models: viscous damping, structural damping, and internal damping.
Viscous damping occurs when a structure is moving in a fluid medium. The corre-
sponding damping force is a function of the moving velocity. In the simplified viscous
damping model, the damping force is assumed to be linearly proportional to the veloc-
ity of a particle moving in fluid. Structural damping is caused by relative motions
between components in a structure that has common points of contact, joints, or
supports. Internal damping or material damping results from various microscopic
and macroscopic processes in material.
If the linear viscous damping model is used to include the energy dissipation in the
system, Eq. (35) can be modified and takes the form
MX(t) + CX(t) + KX(t) = P(t) (46)
I I
X(t), X(t), and X(t) are the acceleration response vector, velocity response vector,
and displacement response vector, respectively. pet) is the vector of applied forces.
I I
These vectors are defined as
XI (t) XI (t)
.. X2 (t) . X2(t)
I
= . ' X(t) = . '
I
X(t)
I I
Xn(t) Xn(t) (47)
XI(t)
X2(t) f 1 (t)
x(t) = : ' f(t) = h~t)
Xn(t) fn(t)
Time t in parentheses denotes that the acceleration, velocity, displacement responses,

and external forces are time-dependent. C is the damping matrix whose elements,
called damping coefficients, are defined as the forces required by unit velocities.
Equation (46) is the general form of the dynamic equations of motion (or dynamic
equations of equilibrium). For structural systems, the mass, damping, and stiffness
matrices resulting from the finite element method are symmetrical and highly banded.
The mass matrix is usually positive definite, and the damping matrix is semidefinite.
The stiffness matrix is positive definite for the system without a rigid mode and semi-
positive definite for the system with a rigid mode. In general, Eq. (46) represents a set
of n simultaneous linear second-order ordinary differential equations with constant
coefficients.
Suppose that all the components of vectors X (t) and F (t) are Fourier transformable
and theirtransformations areX(w) and F(w), respectively, and thatX(t) = X(t) = 0
for t = o. The Fourier transformation of Eq. (46) is given by
(K + jwC - uiM)X(w) = F(w) (48)
where w is the circular frequency of exciting forces. j = R. The vector X(w) is

called the frequency response vector, which can be expressed as
X(w) = H(w)F(w) (49)
The matrix H (w) is defined as
(50)
The element of the matrix H(w) is referred to as the frequency response function. It is
one of the very important parameters in modal analysis.
2.2 General Steps of Finite Element Modeling

Although the finite element procedure for structural analyses can be found in many
textbooks, this procedure, along with explanations necessary for formulating the
dynamic equations of motion of an engineering structure or system by using the
finite element method, is iterated below. This procedure is referred to as finite element
modeling.
2.2.1 Discretization and Selection of Element Types

This step involves dividing a structure into an equivalent system of finite elements with
associated nodes and choosing the most appropriate element type. These elements
are assumed to be interconnected only at a discrete number of modes situated on the
boundaries although interior nodes are also permitted. The total number of elements
used and their variation in size and type within a given structure are primarily matters
of engineering judgment. The elements should be small enough to give usable results
and yet large enough to reduce computational effort. The finite elements used in a
domain need not be of the same type, and the properties can also vary. Small elements
(and possibly higher-order elements) are generally desirable where the results are
changing rapidly, whereas large elements can be used where results are relatively
constant.
The choice of elements used in a finite element modeling depends on the physical
makeup of the structure under actual loading conditions and on how close to the
actual behavior the analyst wants the results to be. Judgment concerning the appro-
priateness of one-, two-, or, three-dimensional idealizations is necessary. Moreover,
the choice of the most appropriate element for a particular problem is one of the
major tasks that the designer or analyst must carry out.
2.2.2 Selection of Displacement Function

This step involves choosing a displacement function within each element. The func-
tion is defined using the nodal values of the element so that the displacements,
velocities, and accelerations at any point within the element are dependent on nodal
values. The displacement function is generally approximate and the accuracy of the
final result depends, to a great extent, on these functions. Simple polynomial and
interpolation functions are two common types of displacement functions.
Linear, quadratic, cubic polynomials and their combinations are frequently used
because they are simple to work with in finite element formulations. Interpolation
functions are usually osculatory polynomials (for one-dimensional elements) or pro-
ducts of osculatory polynomials (for two- and three-dimensional elements), yielding
the unit value of the displacement or its partial derivatives at the relevant node but
zero values at all other nodes in the element. In effect, the function gives the shape of
the displacement field within the element due to a unit displacement (slope) at the
relevant node.
2.2.3 Determination of Relationships Between Stresses, Strains,

and Nodal Displacements
Strain-displacement and stress-strain relationships are necessary for deriving the
equations of each finite element. In the case of one-dimensional deformation, say, in
the x-direction, we have strain ex related to displacement u by ex = du/ dx for small
strain. In addition, the stresses must be related to the strains through the stress-strain
law - generally called the constitutive law. The ability to define the material behavior
accurately is most important in obtaining acceptable results. The simplest of stress-
strain laws, Hooke's law, often used in stress analysis, is given by ax = Eex in which
ax is stress in the x-direction, and E is the modulus of elasticity.
2.2.4 Derivation of Element Matrices and Equations

To develop the element matrices and equations for a finite element, it is quite easy
to apply a work or energy method. The principle of virtual work (using virtual dis-
placements), the principle of minimum potential energy, and Castigliano's theorem
are methods frequently used for derivation of element equations. The principle of
virtual work outlined in the preceding section is applicable for any material behavior,
whereas the principle of minimum potential energy and Castigliano's theorem are
applicable only to elastic materials. Furthermore, the principle of virtual work can
be used even when a potential function does not exist. However, all three principles
yield identical element equations for linear-elastic materials; thus the method to be
used for this kind of material in structural analysis is largely a matter of convenience
and personal preference.
The methods of weighted residuals are useful for developing the element equa-
tions - particularly popular is Galerkin's method. These methods yield the same
results as energy methods, wherever the energy methods are applicable. They are
particularly useful when a function such as potential energy is not readily available.
The weighted residual methods allow the finite element method to be applied directly
to any differential equation.
Using any of the methods just outlined will produce the equations to describe the
behavior of an element. These equations are written conveniently in matrix form as
mll m12 m13 mIn xl kll k12 k13 kIn Xl /J

m21 m22 m23 m2n X2 k21 k22 k23 k2n X2 h
m31 m32 m33 m3n X3 + k31 k32 k33 k3n X3 !3
mnl mn2 m n3 mnn Xn knl kn2 kn3 k nn Xn In

(1)
or in compact matrix form as

mx+kx=f (2)
where f is the vector of element nodal forces, m and k are the element mass and
stiffness matrices, and x and x are the vector of unknowns element nodal degrees
of freedom or generalized displacements and accelerations. Here, the generalized
displacements may include actual displacements, slopes, or even curvatures.
2.2.5 Coordinate Transformation

It is obvious that if we have more than one element modeling a continuum or struc-
ture, we have more than one set of local coordinate axes. However, there is only
one set of global coordinate axes, and most of the data is defined in this coordinate
system. Hence, it is often required to transform the formulations defined in local
coordinate systems to the global system. The matrices for coordinate transformation
have the special property of being orthogonal, and such a property simplifies the
transformation procedure. Usually, there are three kinds of coordinate transforma-
tion matrices, that is, (1) a two-dimensional coordinate transformation matrix, (2) a
two-dimensional coordinate transformation matrix for axial-flexural beam element,
and (3) a three-dimensional coordinate matrix.
2.2.6 Assemblage of Element Equations

The individual element equations generated above can now be added together using
a method of superposition (called the direct stiffness method), whose basis is nodal
equilibrium, to obtain the global equations for the whole structure. Implicit in the
direct stiffness method is the concept of continuity, or compatibility, which requires
that the structure remains together and that no tears occur anywhere in the structure.
The same way can also be used to obtain the global mass matrix. If the damping
effects are considered, the damping matrix needs to be formulated using the proper
simplified model. The final assembled or global equations written in matrix form are
given in Eq. (2.1-46).
The stiffness matrix obtained from above is usually singular because its determinant
is equal to zero and it has rigid degree(s) of freedom. To remove this singularity
problem, we must invoke certain boundary conditions (or constraints or supports)
so that the structure remains in place instead of moving as a rigid body. There are
at least two different formal procedures for applying these boundary constraints.
And there are three common boundary conditions. Further details and methods of
invoking boundary conditions can be found in any book on finite elements.
2.2.7 Solution of Equations

The dynamic equations of equilibrium may be solved in time domain and frequency
domain. The natural properties of the structure, including natural frequencies and
the corresponding mode shapes, modal damping, etc., may be obtained from the
modal analysis of the dynamic equations. Direct integration schemes and mode
superposition approaches may be utilized to compute the responses in the time
domain.
It should be noted that approximations are introduced at many stages of the finite
element modeling. The sources of error are mainly the approximation of the element
boundaries in step 0); the assumption of shape functions in step (2); the differenti-
ations and integrations in steps (3) and (4); and lastly, the solution of equations in
step (7) due to floating-point arithmetic. Although it seems impossible to eliminate
all the errors mentioned above, it can be minimized by choosing suitable displace-
ment shape functions, using isoparametric elements to model irregular boundaries,
adopting modern computational methods to solve the equations, and, last but not
least, exercising sound engineering judgment.
2.3 Use of Symmetry

Many objects have some kind of symmetry. Any symmetric properties in an analysis
should be exploited to the fullest if at all possible, as it can drastically reduce solution
time and, hence, facilitate more effective use of resources. The use of symmetry will
not have a loss of accuracy.
If all the respects (geometry, loads, constraints, and material properties) of a
structural system exhibit one or more planes of symmetry, this condition is usually
called reflective symmetry. This is the most common type of symmetry found in finite
element models. We may take advantage of this fact to reduce the size and scope of
the finite element model in the dynamic analysis. When a portion of the original
structural system is used, the symmetric and/or anti symmetric artificial constraints
should be introduced to all edges or surfaces newly created.
2.3.1 Modal Analysis

When a structural system exhibits the symmetry mentioned above, the vibration
modes will be both symmetric and antisymmetric with respect to the symmetric
planes. For this type of structure, only one portion is necessary to be included in the
modal analysis.
Figure 2.3 shows a uniform, simply supported beam. Its lowest four vibration
modes are plotted in Figure 2.4. As shown in this figure, the first (n = 1) and the third
modes (n = 3) are symmetric with respect to the axis through the midpoint C of
the beam, while the second (n = 2) and the fourth modes (n = 4) are antisymmetric
with respect to that axis.
Thus, these vibration modes and the corresponding natural frequencies may be
calculated using an idealization of half the beam, as shown in Figure 2.5(a). The
Figure 2.3 Full model of a simply supported beam.
n=1,~
LV
(a) (b)
n=3~
V
n=4/\
(c) (d)
Figure 2.4 Lowest four vibration modes of the beam.
8c =0
A Ji;r---C---i~ A Ji;1r-_ _
vc ---ilC
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 2.5 Half model and boundary conditions: (a) half model; (b) symmetric boundary; (c) anti-
symmetric boundary.
condition of zero rotation (}c = 0 is applied at the point C for symmetry modes
and the zero vertical displacement Vc = 0 for antisymmetry modes as indicated by
Figures 2.S(b) and 2.S( c), respectively.
Generally, if a structure has two axis or planes of symmetry, it is only necessary to
idealize one quarter and apply four combinations of symmetric and antisymmetric
boundary conditions on the two axes or planes. For example, the bending plate
shown in Figure 2.6 has two symmetric axes, the x- and y-axes. One quarter is usually
used to compute the modal parameters. The corresponding four combinations of the
boundary conditions are shown in Figure 2.7.
Figure 2.6 Rectangular bending plate.
Figure 2.7 One quarter of the plate and boundary conditions.
Figure 2.8 Three-dimensional solid (three symmetric planes).
Similarly, if the structure has three planes of symmetry, for example in Figure 2.8,
the modes can be calculated by idealizing one-eighth and applying eight combinations
of symmetric and antisymmetric boundary conditions.
2.3.2 Dynamic Response Analysis

As mentioned, the vibration modes will be both symmetric and antisymmetric with
respect to the symmetric axes or planes when the geometry, material properties, and
boundary conditions exhibit symmetry. If the applied loads are further symmetric
with respect to the same axes or planes, the dynamic responses resulting from these
loads are also symmetric. For this case, the contributions of the antisymmetric modes
to the responses are zero, which can be explained from the mode superposition
method to be discussed in Chapter 3. Similarly, the antisymmetrically applied loads
lead to the antisymmetric dynamic responses. For either case, one part of the structure
is required for the dynamic responses analysis. If the applied loads on the symmetric
structure are asymmetric, it can sometimes be converted into the combinations of
symmetric and antisymmetric cases. To illustrate this, a simply supported beam is
considered.
As shown in part I of Figure 2.9, a simply supported beam is excited by a concen-
trated load P at point A. Clearly, the load is not symmetric and the symmetry scheme
cannot be directly applied. However, the asymmetric load P can be represented by
the sum of symmetric loads P/2 and antisymmetric loads P/2 at points A and B,
respectively, as indicated in part II. Using the similar logic in the modal analysis, the
dynamic responses of the beam can be computed from one half of the beam with
symmetric and antisymmetric boundary conditions as shown in part II of Figure 2.9.
Let Vs and Os, respectively, be the translational and rotational dynamic responses of
the symmetric case, and Va and Oa from the antisymmetric case. The final dynamic
responses at the left half of the beam are Vs + Va and Os + Oa. Those at the right half
of the beam are Vs - Va and -Os + Oa.
Generally, the component of nodal translation normal to a plane of symmetry and
the components of rotation in the plane must be prevented in order to enforce a
symmetric pattern of distortion. Similarly, the components of nodal translation in a
plane of symmetry and the component of rotation to the plane must be prevented to
P
C
I e
1+---- L
.- .. n ..... !t------
---~
---------~
p12CPI2~ 3p12CPI2~B
fa 3 ealS?fa eal
A B A
II
_._._._._._._._._.~_._._._._._._._._o_._._._._~_._._._0_._.
III ~
S?~c=o
Figure 2.9 Use of symmetry for the asymmetric loads.
give a pattern of distortion that is antisymmetric with respect to the plane (Weaver,
1987).
Several other types of symmetry commonly found in the structural systems are
axisymmetry, cyclic symmetry, and repetitive symmetry (Monaghan,). If a shape can
be defined by rotating a cross section about a line, it is said to be axisymmetric or
rotational symmetric. If the loads and boundary conditions are also axisymmetric
in nature, then an axisymmetric analysis may be carried out. Cyclic symmetry is
the geometric repetition in the form of cyclic sectors. The structure is composed of a
series of identical sectors that are arranged circumferentially to form a ring. Repetitive
symmetry is a symmetry condition that is seen to repeat along the length of a body. For
this type of structural systems, the dynamic sub structuring or dynamic superelement
can be used to significantly reduce the size of model. The details on how to use the
symmetry in the finite element modeling can be found in the manuals of commercial
finite element software.
References
Bathe, KJ (1982) Finite element procedures in engineering analysis. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Cheung, YK, Lo, SH, and Leung, AYT (1996) Finite element implementation. Blackwell
Science Ltd, Oxford.
Monaghan, D Exploitation of symmetry in FEA models. http://www.dermotmonaghan.com/.
Petyt, M (1990) Introduction to finite element vibration analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Weaver Jr, Wand Johnson, PR (1987) Structural dynamics by finite elements. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey.
Cheung, YK and Leung, AYT (1991) Finite element methods in dynamics. Science Press, Hong Kong,
Beijing.
3 Theory of Modal Analysis
As shown in the preceding chapter, the motion of a dynamic structure or system

may be represented by a set of simultaneous differential equations using some dis-
cretization scheme, such as the finite element method, if necessary. The dynamic
characteristics (dynamic responses, strains, stresses, etc.) of the system can be obtained
from these equations using the direct integration methods (finite difference method,
Newmark method, for example) in the time domain. Alternatively, these coupled
equations of motion may be solved by transforming them into a set of indepen-
dent (uncoupled) equations by means of a modal matrix. This procedure is the
classic meaning of modal analysis. Actually, the procedure of determining the sys-
tem's modal parameters, including natural frequency, natural mode, damping factor,
modal scaling, etc., is also referred to as modal analysis. The determination of these
modal parameters may be by the way of either a theoretical (analytical or numerical)
approach or an experimental approach and termed theoretical modal analysis and
experimental modal analysis, respectively.
Theoretical modal analysis was developed during the 19th century. At that stage, the
analytical approaches were used to solve differential equations to determine the modal
parameters. During the last century, the theoretical modal analysis for the complex
and large systems made great progress with the fast development of the discretization
technique (finite element method) and computer techniques. Since then, numerical
rather than analytical methods have been commonly used in the modal analysis, called
numerical modal analysis.
Experimental modal analysis started in the early 1900s. Its core is the system identi-
fication and, hence, it was nourished by the development of electrical engineering. The
landmark of the experimental modal analysis is the invention of the fast Fourier trans-
form (FFT) algorithm by Cooly and Tukey in 1965. Today, modal analysis has entered
many fields of engineering and science. Applications range from automotive engi-
neering, aeronautical and astronautical engineering to bioengineering, medicine, and
science. Numerical (finite element) and experimental modal analyses have become
two pillars in structural dynamics (He and Fu, 2001).
3.1 Modal Theory of Undamped Systems

3.1.1 Undamped Free Vibration and Eigenvalue Problem
In the absence of damping and external forces, Eq. (2.1-46) reduces to
MX(t) + KX(t) = 0 (1)
31
which is referred to as undamped free vibration. Equation (1) is a set of n simultaneous

homogeneous differential equations. Generally, the solution ofEq. (1) has the form
x(t) = qJsin(wt + ¢) (2)
where qJ is the vector of amplitudes, w is the frequency of harmonic response, and ¢

is the phase angle. Differentiation of Eq. (2) twice with respect to time produces
X(f) = -w 2 qJsin(wt + ¢) (3)
Substituting Eqs. (2) and (3) into Eq. (1) and rearranging it results in
(4)
Now, the n simultaneous homogeneous differential equations are reduced to a set of

n homogeneous algebraic equations. Equation (4) has the form of an algebraic eigen-
value problem. It is usually simply termed as an eigenproblem. Nontrivial solutions
exist only if the determinant of the coefficient matrix is equal to zero, that is,
(5)
The above equation leads to a polynomial of order n in w 2 that possesses, in general,

n distinct roots. These roots, denoted by wi, w~, ... , w~ or AI, A2, ... , An, are called
eigenvalues. Their square roots are called natural frequencies. Associated with each
eigenvalue w;, there is an n-dimensional vector qJi whose elements are real numbers.
The vector can be obtained by using Eq. (4) as follows:
(6)
The vector qJi(i = 1,2, ... , n) is known as an eigenvector or modal vector and has the
form
(7)
Because the eigenvector represents the shape of vibration, it is also referred to as

mode shape or natural mode. Many approaches (Bertolini, 1998) are available for the
solution of the eigenvalue problem shown in Eq. (4).
It is necessary to note that all the components of the mode shape are real numbers
with only a sign and amplitude difference between any two of them. The phase
relationships are either in phase or out-of-phase in 180 degrees. Thus, these mode
shapes are also called real modes. All points on the structure pass through their
equilibrium positions simultaneously. Therefore, undamped modes have well-defined
modal points or lines.
3.1.2 Modal Orthogonality and Normal Coordinates

An important feature of modes is orthogonality. In order to study the relation-
ships among the natural modes, let us consider two distinct modes rand s of the
eigenproblem as follows:
(K - w;M)qJr = 0 (8)
(K - w;M)qJs =0 (9)
Theory of Modal Analysis 33
Premultiplication of Eq. (8) by ({J; and postmultiplication of the transpose of Eq. (9)
by ({Jr yields
(10)
(11)
Subtraction of Eq. (10) from Eq. (11) produces
(12)
Generally, the rth frequency is not equal to the 5th (r oj= 5) (nonrepeated root case),
namely, w; w;.
oj= Therefore, Eq. (12) leads to
T
({Js M({Jr = ({JrTM ({Js = 0, roj=s (13)
Introducing Eq. (13) into Eq. (10) or (11) results in
roj=s (14)
For the case of r = 5, the following relationship can be obtained from Eq. (10) or (11):
(15)
in which
(16)
kr and mr are referred to as the rth modal stiffness and modal mass. Clearly, they highly
depend upon the mode and how the mode is normalized.
The expressions in Eqs. (13) through (16) represent the orthogonal conditions
between the mode shapes ({Jr and ({Js. These expressions show that the eigenvec-
tors are orthogonal with respect to the mass matrix M and stiffness matrix K. This
orthogonality indicates that all the eigenvectors are linearly independent.
Because the eigenvector may be scaled arbitrarily, it is often convenient to choose
the magnitude of the eigenvector so as to reduce the corresponding modal mass to
unity, which automatically reduces the modal stiffness to eigenvalue as shown in
Eq. (15). This process is known as normalization of eigenvectors with respect to mass
matrix. Using this process, we have
(17)
where the scaled eigenvector ({J~ is said to be orthonormal with respect to the mass
matrix. The corresponding mode is called the normal mode. For convenience, this
indication n in the superscript will be omitted in the following.
For operational efficiency, an n x n eigenvector matrix or normal modal matrix is
defined by placing all of the eigenvectors columnwise in this matrix with the form
(18)
Using this matrix, the compact form of the eigenproblem shown in Eq. (4) is given by
(19)
where the eigenvalue matrix A is defined as
A = diag()q,A2, ... ,An) (20)
It is an n X n diagonal matrix whose diagonal elements are the eigenvalues of the

model. This matrix is also referred to as a spectral matrix. The orthogonal conditions
of the eigenvector matrix with respect to the mass and stiffness matrices are given by
(21)
(22)
In the theory of vibration, the space spanned by these modal vectors is called principal
space. The corresponding coordinates are called principal coordinates. The space and
coordinates associated with the normal modal matrix are called normal space or modal
space and normal coordinates or modal coordinates. Of course, these modal vectors are
orthogonal in the modal space. Similarly, we have the relation
(23)
in which the matrix (K - AM) is called the dynamic stiffness matrix.
3.1.3 Mode Superposition

As known from the theory of vibration, the responses may be expressed as a linear
combination of all the responses in the normal space if the system is time-invariant.
This procedure is called mode superposition or modal superposition. For example, the
response on the lth degree of freedom may be given by
n
xz(t) = ({lllql (t) + ({lZ2q2(t) + ... + ({lZnqn(t) = L ({lZrqr(t) (24)
r=1
in which ({lZr is the lth component of the rth eigenvector. Similarly, the whole response
vector X(t) may be w~itten as
n
X(t) = .q(t) = L ({Jrqr(t) (25)
r=1
where the vector
(26)
is identified as the normal coordinates or modal coordinates of the model. It represents

the responses in the normal space.
Introducing Eq. (25) into Eq. (1) and premultiplying it by the transpose of the
eigenvector matrix tP results in
ij(t) + Aq(t) = tPTp(t) (27)

Because the eigenvalue matrix is a diagonal matrix, the dynamic equilibrium in
Eq. (27) is uncoupled in the modal space. This means that the n differential equations
can be solved separately in the modal space. Many methods such as Duhamel's integral
are available for solving the single differential equation.
It can be seen from Eq. (25) that all the modes are included to compute the
responses. It is well known that the finite element model of a practical structure
or system usually has a very large size, thousands through millions of degrees of
freedom, for example. On one hand, it is impossible to compute all the modes of such
a size of a model. On the other hand, the high order of modes, the five thousandth
and higher of a 10,000 degree-of-freedom finite element model for instance, usually
have very large errors with respect to the real modes. In fact, the contribution of
each mode to the responses is different, which highly depends upon the frequency
content (frequency or spectral) of the exciting forces and the natural frequency of
this model. If the exciting forces have a frequency close to a natural frequency, the
corresponding mode of vibration will be excited and has a significant effect on the
dynamic responses of the model. Often, the frequency content of exciting forces has
an upper limit. Accordingly, the modes whose frequencies are much higher than this
upper limit will not be well excited and will have a very small contribution to the
responses. Therefore, these contributions are generally ignored without having much
loss of accuracy. This means that only a small part of the modes is retained in the
mode superposition. This scheme is generally termed modal truncation.
A large amount of computational work can be saved using modal truncation. Thus,
it has been widely used in engineering. Suppose the lowest L modes are included in
the mode superposition; Eq. (25) can then be rewritten as
L
X(t) = tPLqL(t) = L ({Jrqr(t) (28)
r=1
In some cases (structural acoustics problems, etc.), the frequency spectral of exciting
forces falls in the middle frequency range of the model. If the above modal truncation
scheme is used, the number L will be very large. For these cases, the low modes as
well as the high modes usually have less contribution to the responses. Hence, these
modes may be ignored. This scheme is referred to as the low-high modal truncation
scheme (Qu, 2000). Using this scheme, Eq. (25) becomes
L2
X(t) = L ((Jrqr(t) (29)
r=L\
in which the LIth through Lzth modes are retained. For comparison, the modal
truncation scheme used in Eq. (28) is called the middle-high modal truncation scheme
(Qu,2000).
Of course, errors will be introduced using the modal truncation scheme, especially
the low-high modal truncation scheme. These errors are called modal truncation
errors and can be reduced significantly using the mode acceleration method (Qu,
2000).
3.2 Power Series Expansion of Dynamic Flexible Matrix

As mentioned above, all eigenvectors are linearly independent. Hence, the eigenvector
matrix is fully ranked and invertible. Premultiplication and postmultiplication of
Eq. (3.1-22) by the inverse of ~T and ~,respectively, leads to
(1)
Thus, the inverse of the stiffness matrix may be expressed in terms of the modal
parameters as
(2)
K- 1 is usually called the flexible matrix. The inverse of the mass matrix can also be
written in terms of the modal parameters as
(3)
Similarly, the dynamic flexible matrix (K - AM)-l may be rewritten in terms of the
modal parameters as
(4)
The ith (i = 1,2, ... , n) diagonal component of the diagonal matrix (A - AI)-l is
(Ai - A) -1 and Ai is the ith eigenvalue of the model. This component can be expanded
as a power series as
-1- - -1 [ 1+-+
Ai - A - Ai
A ( -A
Ai Ai
)2 + ... + - )H
(A
Ai
+ 1
1 - (A/Ai)
-
(A
Ai
)H+1] (5)
where H = 0, 1,2, .... H = -1 represents no series expansion applied. Since the

convergence of the power series depends upon the value A/Ai, the residual of the
series is also provided. Equation (5) may be rewritten in a compact form as
(6)
Because all the diagonal elements in matrix (A - AI)-l have the same form as that
in Eq. (6), the power series expansion of this matrix is given by
H
(A - AI)-l = A -1 ~)AA -l)h + (AA -1)H+1(A - AI)-l (7)
h=o
Introduction of Eq. (7) into Eq. (4) leads to
H
(K - AM)-l = ~A -1 L(AA -l)h~T + ~(AA -1)H+1(A - AI)-l~T (8)
h=O
Using Eq. (2), the matrix K-1p..MK-1)h may be expressed as
Considering the orthogonality of the eigenvector matrix, Eq. (9) can be simplified as
(10)
Substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (8), the power series form of the dynamic flexible matrix
is given by
H
(K - )'M)-l = K- 1 L()'MK-1)h + ).H+l~A -(H+l)(A - U)-l~T (11)
h=O
The second term on the right-hand side ofEq. (11) is the residual of the power series.
It is expressed in terms of the modal parameters. Alternatively, this term may be
expressed in terms of physical parameters, and as a result Eq. (11) may be rewritten as
H
(K - )'M)-l = K- 1 L()'MK-1)h + ).H+l (K-1M)H+l (K - )'M)-l (12)
h=O
Equation (12) is the power series expansion of the dynamic flexible matrix in terms
of the system physical matrices.
3.3 Modal Theory of Proportionally Damped Systems

In the previous sections, the damping matrix was not included in the modal analysis.
Actually, there is some form of damping in any dynamic system. Proper modeling
of that damping is sometimes very important for a dynamic system. However, if the
damping is included, the matrix ~T C~ is generally not a diagonal matrix. Conse-
quently, the use of the undamped modal coordinates does not lead to a system of
independent differential equations. To use the advantage of the undamped modal
coordinates, a special case of equivalent damping, in which the damping matrix is
proportional to the mass and stiffness matrices, is widely used in the structural sys-
tem community. Under this condition, a system of uncoupled differential equations
expressed in terms of the modal coordinates can be obtained.
If the transformed damping matrix ~ T C~ is a diagonal matrix, the corresponding
viscous damping is calledproportional damping (or classical damping). In the propor-
tionally damped model, the damping matrix is assumed to be a linear combination
of the stiffness and mass matrices, that is,
C = exM + f3K (1)
where ex and f3 are constants. Using this expression, one has
(2)
Because both the identity matrix I and the eigenvalue matrix A are diagonal, the eigen-
vector matrix defined in Eq. (3.1-18) is orthogonal with respect to the proportional
damping matrix defined in Eq. (1).
Inserting Eq. (1) into Eq. (2.1-46) leads to the dynamic equations of motion in the
physical space, that is,
MX(t) + (aM + j3K)X(t) + KX(t) = pet) (3)
The corresponding equations in the modal space can be obtained by substituting

Eq. (3.1-25) into Eq. (3) and premultiplying it by the matrix 4»T, namely,
q(t) + (al + j3A)qJt) + Aq(t) = 4»Tp(t) (4)
Therefore, the ith equation of motion in the modal space is expressed as
q(t) + Ciq(t) + wrq(t) = fiCt) (5)
in which the modal damping Ci for the ith normal mode is given by
Ci = 2Wi~i = a + j3wr (6)
and Wi is the natural frequency of the undamped model. ~i represents the correspond-
ing modal damping ratio. Clearly, the proportionally damped dynamic equations of
motion are uncoupled in the undamped modal space.
3.4 Modal Theory of Nonclassically Damped Systems

3.4.1 Dynamic Equations of Motion in the State Space
The proportional damping assumption used in Section 3.3 enables us to uncouple
the equations of motion using the undamped modal matrix. Thus, each of these
uncoupled equations can be treated as a viscously damped single degree-of-freedom
system. However, most real-world structures and mechanical systems have locally
concentrated damping sources such as dampers, vibration absorbers, jointing damp-
ing, etc. These damping sources are not as continuously distributed as the mass and
stiffness. As a result, the assumption of proportional damping is invalid. Therefore,
for the systems with general viscous damping (also called nonclassical damping), the
damping matrix cannot be diagonalized simultaneously with the mass and stiffness
matrices.
Introduce the supplemental identity equations for Eq. (2.1-46) as follows:
(1)
Equations (2.1-46).and (1) may be rewritten in a matrix form as
(2)
If we introduce another supplement identity equations for Eq. (2.1-46), that is,
KX-KX=O (3)
the matrix equation of Eqs. (2.1-46) and (3) is given by
(4)
Define a 2n-dimensional vector Y as
Y= I~l (5)
Y is referred to as the state vector because it includes both the displacement and
velocity, and it completely represents the state of a system. The corresponding
space spanned by the state vector is recognized as state space. For comparison, the
n-dimensional space spanned by the displacement vector X is called the displacement
space. Clearly, Eqs. (2) and (4) are defined in the state space. Using the state vector,
these two equations can be rewritten as
(6)
in which the system matrices A, B E R2nx2n and force vector F E R 2n in the state
space are given by
F= I~l (7)
or
(8)
The system matrices A and B are real symmetric if the mass, damping, and stiffness
matrices are. Equation (6) is usually called the state equation.
In vibration control engineering, another form of state equation is commonly used.
Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (4) by the inverse of matrix
and rearranging it lead to

Y(t) = AY(t) + B(t) (9)
where the system matrix A and the load vector B are given by
(10)
Clearly, the system matrix A is unsymmetrical.

3.4.2 Free Vibration and Eigenvalue Problem

Let f (t) = 0 in Eq. (2.1-46); the free vibration of the damped model that results is
MX(t) + CX(t) + KX(t) = 0 (11)
The solution of the free vibration has the form

X = lj!e At (12)
where n-dimensionallj! is the vector of amplitudes, and A is the complex frequency
of the response. Differentiation of Eq. (12) with respect to time twice gives
(13)
Inserting Eqs. (12) and (13) into Eq. (11) results in
(A 2M + AC + K)lj! = 0 (14)
Equation (14) is the eigenvalue problem of the damped model. It is a quadratic
eigenproblem or nonlinear eigenproblem and defined in the displacement space.
The solutions of Eq. (14) have the general form Ai = [ti + jf3i in which [ti and
f3iare real numbers. Depending upon the values of [ti and f3i , the system may have
different types of responses, which are listed in Table 3.1. It is necessary to note that
the "unstable" mentioned in this table is based on the linear assumption of the system.
In fact, with the increase of the amplitude of responses, the nonlinear effects become
more and more significant and the linear assumption becomes invalid. Since case 5 is
the most common case in practice, the discussions in the following are concentrated
on this case.
Because it is quite difficult to solve Eq. (14) in the displacement space, the com-
monly used scheme for this quadratic eigenproblem is to transform it from the
displacement space into the state space.
Using Eqs. (12) and (13), the state vector Y in Eq. (5) may be expressed as
(15)
Its derivative with respect to time t is given by
(16)
Table 3.1 Different types of modal responses
Case aj Pi Modal respGDSeI
I >0 =0 UIIItIbIc apooential growth

2 <0 =0 Critially or ovadamped exponential decay
3 =0 Conjupte pUn Undamped harmonic motion
4 >0 Conjupre pUn Unstable, amplitude inaeasing oscillatory motion
5 <0 Conjupte pUn Exponentially decaying oscillatory motion
Introducing Eqs. (15) and (16) into the damped free vibration equations of motion
defined in the state space, that is,
AY+BY =0 (17)
results in
(A+AB)~ =0 ( 18)
in which
(19)
Equation (18) is referred to as the eigenvalue problem of the nonclassically damped

model in the state space. It doubles the size of the matrix. Actually, eigenproblem (18)
can be directly derived from Eq. (14) when the vector in Eq. (19) is used. It will be
shown in Chapter 5 that any higher order of nonlinear eigenproblem, which can be
expressed as a power series with respect to the eigenvalue, can be transformed into
the linear eigenproblem in the state space.
For the nonclassically underdamped models, the solutions of Eq. (18) consist of
2n complex eigenvalues (in complex conjugate pairs), also called complex frequencies,
and 2n complex eigenvectors (also in complex conjugate pairs). They are denoted by
where the superscript * denotes the complex conjugate. Usually, the ith complex
eigenvalue and its complex conjugate, called one complex conjugate pair, have the
form
Ai = ai + jf3i, (20)
Using the modal data, they are expressed as
(21)
where undamped natural frequency Wi, modal damping ratio ~j, and damped frequency
Wd are given by
Wi = Jar + f31 (22)
~. _ -aj -aj
1- ja; + f31 wi
(23)
Wd=WiJ1-~l (24)
It is necessary to note that the undamped natural frequency given in Eq. (22) is not
equal to that obtained from the corresponding undamped model (C = 0) (Lallement
and Inman, 1995).
Similarly, the rth complex eigenvector and its complex conjugate eigenvector, called
one complex conjugate pair, can be expressed as
(25)
where superscripts R and I represent the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvector,
respectively. Vector Vr~ and Vr;
are real vectors. In fact, the complex eigenvector has
an arbitrary amplitude scaling and an arbitrary phase angle scaling. The difference of
phase angle may be any angle between 0 and 180 Thus, the complex modes for the
0
•
nonclassically damping model do not have stationary nodal line or mode shapes.
3.4.3 Complex Mode Orthogonality

In order to study the relationships among the modes of vibration, let us consider the
modes rand 5 of the complex eigenvalue problem as follows:
(A + ArB)Vrr = 0 (26)
(A + AsB)Vrs = 0 (27)
Premultiplication of Eq. (26) by Vrt and postmultiplication of the transpose of

Eq. (27) by Vrr yields
(28)
(29)
Subtraction ofEq. (29) from Eq. (28) produces
(30)
For the case of Ar =1= As, we have

-T - -T-
0/ Bo/r
5 = o/r Bo/s = 0, r =1= 5 (31)
Introducing Eq. (31) into Eq. (28) or (29) gives
r =1= 5 (32)
For the case of r = 5, the following relationship can be obtained from Eq. (28) or (29):
(33)
in which
(34)
Generally, a r and br are complex numbers and highly depend upon the mode and
how the mode is normalized.
The expressions in Eqs. (31) through (34) represent the orthogonal conditions
between the complex eigenvectors 1/Ir and 1/15' These expressions show that the
eigenvectors are orthogonal with respect to the matrices A and B.
Because the complex eigenvector (amplitude and phase) may be scaled arbitrarily,
ar and br are dependent upon the normalization scheme applied on the eigenvector.
The most commonly used method of normalization is to set each br to unity, that is,
br = 1. Using this condition, we have
(35)
where the scaled eigenvector 1/1;is said to be normalized with respect to the B matrix.
For convenience, this indication n in the superscript will be omitted in the following.
For concise purpose, a 2n x 2n eigenvector matrix is defined by placing all of the
eigenvectors columnwise with the form
(36)
Using this matrix, the eigenvalue problem and the orthogonal conditions are given by
A-q, = B-q,Q (37)
-q,T B-q, = I (38)
-q,T A-q, = Q (39)
In these equations, the matrix Q is defined as
(40)
Clearly, it is a 2n x 2n diagonal matrix whose diagonal elements are the eigenvalues of

the model. This matrix is also referred to as the complex eigenvalue matrix or complex
frequency matrix. In the theory of vibration, the space spanned by the normalized
modal vectors is called complex modal space. The corresponding coordinates are
called complex modal coordinates. Due to the properties of the complex eigenvalue
matrix and eigenvector matrix, they can also be expressed as
- [Qo
Q= -
\11= [ \II
\IIQ
\11* ]
\II*Q*
(41)
in which 0 is the null matrix of n x n.

Because we are aware that the eigenvector of a nonclassically damped model can be
complex, it may be of interest to examine the orthogonality properties with respect
to the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvector. Let us consider the rth and sth
eigenvectors, which can be written as
(42)
(43)
Introducing them into Eq. (32) results in
l(lfr~)TAlfr: - (lfr;)Alfr; J+ j l(lfr~)TAlfr; + (lfr;)TAlfr:J = 0 (44)
Clearly, the real and imaginary parts of Eq. (44) must separately be equal to zero,
that is,
(lfr~)TAlfr: - (lfr;)TAlfr; = 0 (45a)
(lfr~)TAlfr; + (lfr;)T Alfr: =0 (45b)

As mentioned above, the eigenvectors of a nonclassically damped model occur in
complex conjugate pairs. Hence, if lfrT = lfr~ + jlfr; is an eigenvector, its complex
conjugate vector lfr; = lfr~ - jlfr; is also an eigenvector of the model. Using the
eigenvectors lfr; and lfr; in Eq. (32), we obtain
(lfr~) TAlfr: + (lfr;) TAlfr; = 0 (46a)
(lfr~) TAlfr; - (lfr;) TAlfr: = 0 (46b)

Summation and subtraction of Eqs. (45a) and (46a) give
(lfr~) TAlfr: = 0 (47)
(lfr;) T A lfr; = 0 (48)

Equations (47) and (48) tell us that the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvector
are parallel-orthogonal with respect to the matrix A. Similarly, the following two
equations may be obtained from Eqs. (45b) and (46b), that is,
(lfr~)TAlfr; = 0 (49)
(lfr;) TAlfr: = 0 (50)

Equations (49) and (50) show that the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvectors
are cross-orthogonal with respect to the matrix A. Therefore, we say that the real
and imaginary parts of the eigenvectors ofa nonclassically damped model are all
orthogonal with respect to the system matrix A in. the state space. Similarly, we can
prove that this feature is also valid for the matrix B.
Because all the eigenvectors are linearly independent, the eigenvector matrix is fully
ranked. Premultiplication and postmultiplication of Eq. (39) by the inverse of ~T
and ~,respectively, lead to
(51)
Hence, the inverse of matrix A may be expressed in terms of the modal parameters as
(52)
Similarly, the inverse of matrix B is given in terms of the modal parameters as
B- 1 = ~~T (53)
Equations (52) and (53) will be used in Chapter 8.
3.4.4 Complex Mode Superposition

For the state vector Y, the coordinate transformation can be expressed as
Y(t) = .q(t) (54)
in which ij(t) is complex modal coordinates. Introducing Eq. (54) into Eq. (6) and
premultiplying it by the transpose of the eigenvector matrix. results in
• - - T
q(t) + Qq(t) = \II F(t) (55)
Because the eigenvalue matrix is a diagonal matrix, the dynamic equilibrium equation
(55) is uncoupled in the complex modal space. This means that the 2n differential
equations can be solved separately in the modal space.
It is necessary to Iiote that there are some differences between the real modal
analysis and the complex modal analysis. In the mode vibration of the complex model,
the phrase angles are different at different points while the difference is 0 or 7f in the
real mode. Therefore, the shape of the complex mode is meaningless.
3.5 Summary
The modal theory of undamped models has been described. It is shown that an n
degree-of-freedom model usually has n modes and they are orthogonal with respect
to the corresponding stiffness and mass matrices. Using the modal orthogonality, the
coupled differential equations in the physical space may be uncoupled in the modal
space.
In fact, most engineering structures and systems have damping. The most com-
monly used damping model is viscous damping. The proportional damping is the
simplest viscous damping model, which is a linear combination of the stiffness and
mass matrices. It is shown that the modal matrix of undamped model can directly
uncouple the proportionally damped differential equations.
There are many situations in which the assumption of proportional damping is
invalid. For these cases, the dynamic equations of motion usually cannot be uncoupled
in the displacement space and the state space is commonly used. The modes resulting
from these models are generally complex. The orthogonalities of the complex modes
and the complex mode superposition are provided.
References
Bertolini, AF (1998) Review of eigensolution procedures for linear dynamic finite element
analysis. Applied Mechanics Review, 51(2):155-172.
De Silva, CW (2000) Vibration fundamentals and practice. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
He, J and Fu, Z-F (200 I). Modal Analysis. Boston: Butterworth -Heinemann.
Imregun, M and Ewins, DJ (1995). Complex modes-{)rigins and limits. Proceedings of
the 13th International Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Inc., Bethel, CT: 496-506.
Lallement, G and Inman, DJ (1995). A tutorial on complex eigenvalues. Proceedings of the 13th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 490-495.
Li, D (1987). On some general concepts of complex mode theory. Proceedings of the 5th International
Modal Analysis Conference (London, England), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 862-867.
Meirovich, L (1986). Elements of Vibration Analysis. McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York: 157-197.
Mitchell, LD (1990). Complex modes: A review. Proceedings of the 8th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Kissimmee, Florida), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 891-899.
Qu, Z-Q (2000). Hybrid expansion method for frequency responses and their sensitivities, Part I:
Undamped systems. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 231 (1): 175-193.
Shabana, AA (1990). Theory of Vibration (II): Discrete and Continuous Systems. Springer-Vedag, New
York.
Weaver Jr, W and Johnson, PR (1987). Structural Dynamics by Finite Elements. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Static Condensation
The condensation technique for the deletion of unwanted degrees of freedom was
first proposed by Guyan (1965) and Irons (1965) in 1965. Because the dynamic
effect is ignored in the condensation, this method is usually referred to as static
condensation. Since the late 1960s, this technique has been widely used in many static
and dynamic problems. Several examples of the applications are the component mode
synthesis, eigenproblem analysis of large models, and experimental mode expansion.
This approach has been included in many textbooks in the areas of structural dyna-
mics and mechanical vibrations (Weaver and Johnston, 1987; Argyris and Mlejnek,
1991; Petyt, 1990; Bathe, 1996). Today, it is still one of the most popular condensation
methods.
In this chapter, the Guyan condensation matrix will be derived from the static
response problem, dynamic response problem, and eigenproblem, respectively. Two
modifications to improve the accuracy of Guyan condensation will be provided. One
is the generalized Guyan condensation, which is Guyan condensation combined with
the generalized inverse of stiffness matrix. The other is the quasistatic condensation,
which is a combination of Guyan condensation and the eigenvalue or frequency
shifted technique.
4.1 Guyan Condensation for Static Problems

4.1.1 Definitions of Reduced Static Model
The static equations of equilibrium, that is,
KX=P (1)
was used in the derivation of Guyan condensation. For convenience, the discrete
model without using condensation is called the full order model or simply full model.
Assume that the total degrees of freedom of the full model are categorized as the master
degrees offreedom (primary degrees offreedom, or kept degrees offreedom) and the slave
degrees of freedom (secondary degrees of freedom or deleted degrees of freedom). They
are simply referred to as the masters and slaves and indicated by m and s, respectively.
With this arrangement, the static Eq. (1) may be partitioned as
[Kmm KmsJ (Xm)

Ksm Kss Xs
= (Pm)
Ps
(2)
47
Xs E R S is the displacement vector corresponding to the slaves, which are to be con-

densed, and Xm E R m is the vector corresponding to the masters, which are to be
retained. A simple multiplication of the matrices on the left-hand side of Eq. (2)
expands this equation into two equations, namely,
KmmXm + KmsXs = Pm (3)

KsmXm + KssXs = Ps (4)
From Eq. (4), the Xs may be expressed in terms of Xm as
Xs = -K;lKsmXm + K; lps (5)
Clearly, the displacements at the slaves consist of two parts due to the linearity of this
model. One part results from the displacements at the masters and is called attached
displacements. Another part results from the external forces acting on the slaves and
is called relative displacements. Introducing Eq. (5) into Eq. (3) results in
(6)
where KR E R mxm is the stiffness matrix corresponding to the masters; PR E R m is

the equivalent force vector acting on the masters. They are defined as
KR =Kmm -KmsK;lKsm (7)
PR = Pm - KmsK;lps (8)
Equation (6) is the static equations of equilibrium corresponding to the masters.

In the derivation, the external forces at the slaves were assumed to be zero by Guyan
(1965), that is, Ps = O. Actually, this assumption is only necessary for deriving the
=
relation of the displacements between the masters and slaves. Letting Ps 0 on the
right-hand side of Eq. (4) or (5) leads to
Xs =RGXm (9)
RG E R sxm is called the condensation matrix and is defined as
RG = -K;lKsm. (10)
Equation (9) is the relations of displacements between the masters and slaves. The
corresponding condensation matrix is a load-independent matrix because the exter-
nal forces at the slaves were ignored in the derivation. This condensation method
was first proposed by Guyan and is usually referred to as Guyan condensation. The
condensation matrix in Eq. (10) is called the Guyan condensation matrix. Due to the
ignorance of dynamic effects in the condensation matrix, Guyan condensation is also
referred to as static condensation. The Guyan condensation matrix provides the means
to reduce the stiffness matrix. This condensation is usually used in the static problem
to eliminate unwanted degrees of freedom such as the internal degrees of freedom of
an element used in the finite element method.
Using the condensation matrix in Eq. (9), the displacement vector X may be
expressed as
(11)
Static Condensation 49
where the coordinate transformation matrix or global mapping matrix TG E R nxm

relates the responses at all the degrees of freedom to those at the masters and is
defined as
(12)
1 is an m x m identity matrix. Substituting Eq. (11) into Eq. (1) and premultiplying
both sides by the transpose of T G result in
(13)
in which KG E Rmxm is the stiffness matrix of the reduced model and is referred to
as the reduced stiffness matrix; FGERm is the equivalent force vector acting at the
masters. They are defined as
KG = T'{;KTG (14)
FG = T'{;F (15)
Using the submatrices of the stiffness matrix and the subvectors of the force vector,
Eqs. (14) and (I5) can be rewritten as .
KG = Kmm - KmsK;;lKsm (16)
FG = Fm +R'{;Fs = Fm - KmsK;;lFs (17)
They are the same as the definitions in Eqs. (7) and (8), respectively. Equation (13)
is the static equations of equilibrium of the reduced order model or simply reduced
model, which denotes the model after condensation. Clearly, the reduced model has
m degrees of freedom, which are usually much less than those of the full model.
For convenience, the coordinates used to define the full model and reduced model
are, respectively, referred to as full order coordinates and reduced order coordinates.
After the displacements at the masters are obtained, Eq. (5) rather than (9) is used to
compute the displacements at the slaves.
4.1.2 Guass-Jordan Elimination

As shown in Eqs. (10), (16), and (17), the calculation of the condensation matrix, the
stiffness matrix, and the equivalent force vector of the reduced model requires the
inconvenient calculation of the inverse matrix K;l. Actually, .this inverse procedure
is not mandatory. If the standard Gauss-Jordan elimination process is applied sys-
tematically on the static equations of equilibrium of the full model, these matrices
and vector may be directly obtained (Paz, 1983, 1991).
It is well known that each step of the Gauss-Jordan elimination process is alge-
braically equivalent to a premultiplication of the stiffness matrix by an elementary
matrix. Let the products of these elementary matrices be of the following form:
E= [1 El] (18)
o E2
Assume that the product of the elementary matrix and the stiffness matrix has the
form
.[1o El]
E2
[Kmm
Ksm
Kms] =
Kss
[AB 10] (19)
which is equivalent to the following four equations:
Kmm + EIKsm = A
Kms + EIKss = 0
(20)
E2Ksm = B
E2Kss =1
Equation (20) gives the results
A = Kmm - KmsK;;lKsm == KR
B = K;;IKsm == -RG
El = -KmsK;;l == R~ (21)
E2 = K;;l
If the same premultiplication of the elementary matrix is performed on the force
I ~~}
vector of the full model, we have
[1
o
El]
E2
IFm} = IFm +EIFs} = IFm ~~~Fs} =
Fs E2 Fs Kss Fs Kss Fs
(22)
Therefore, if the standard Gauss-Jordan elimination process is applied on the static

Eq. (2) of the full model to eliminate the slaves, this equation will be reduced to
(23)
Clearly, the static condensation matrix, the stiffness matrix, and the equivalent force
vector of the reduced model may be obtained directly from Eq. (23).
4.1.3 Numerical Demonstrations

For darity, a 3-degree-of-freedom mass-stiffness system shown in Figure 4.1, for
which it is normally unnecessary to apply any condensation procedure, is consid-
ered. Suppose m = 1 kg, c = 1 N . slm, and k = 103 N/m for simplicity. With this
assumption the stiffness and mass matrices of this system can be easily obtained as
Figure 4.1 Three·degree-of-freedom system.
Let il = h = h = 1N for the static case. Hence, the force vector of the full model is
given by
The static displacements at these three degrees of freedom are 0.003 m, 0.005 m, and
0.006 m, respectively.
Assume the first and the second degrees of freedom, XI and X2, are selected as the
masters when Guyan condensation is applied to the full model. Using Eqs. (10), (16),
and (17), the Guyan condensation matrix, the stiffness matrix, and the equivalent
force vector of the reduced model may be obtained as
Rg) = -K;;IKsm = -[1]-1[0 -11 = [0 11

Kg) = Kmm - KmsK;;IKsm = I[~l ~lJ - [~l}l]-I[O -11) x 103
=[~l ~lJX103
Pg) = Pm + (Rg»)Tp = [~J + [~J [1] = [~J
From the static equilibrium of reduced model, that is,
the displacements at the first and the second degrees of freedom may be computed as
0.003 m and 0.005 m, respectively. The displacement at the slave, X3, may be obtained
from Eq. (5) if necessary. Definitely, it is 0.006 m.
Now, let's select the second and the third degrees of freedom, X2 and X3, as the
masters. The corresponding Guyan condensation matrix, the stiffness matrix, and
the equivalent force vector of the reduced model are given by
The displacements may be computed from the static equilibrium. They are 0.005 m
and 0.006 m, and the displacement at the first degree of freedom is 0.003 m. They are
exactly the same as those from the full model.
4.2 Guyan Condensation for Dynamic Problems

4.2.1 Definitions of the Reduced Dynamic Model
The dynamic equations of equilibrium of the full model without damping are given by
MX(t) + KX(t) = F(t) (1)
or in a partitioned form as
[ Mmm Mms] {~m(t)} + [Kmm Kms] {Xm(t)} = {Fm(t)} (2)

Msm Mss Xs(t) Ksm Kss Xs(t) Fs(t)
where ME R nxn is the mass matrix of the full model and positive definite; X(t) is
the acceleration vector. The second equation ofEq. (2) is expressed as
(3)
In Eq. (3), Fs(t) = 0 is assumed, which is similar to the static problem. Letting
(4)
in Eq. (3), the relation of displacements between the masters and slaves is obtained.
It is the same as that in Eq. (4.1-9).
Because the coordinate transformation matrix T G is independent of time,
differentiating both sides of Eq. (4.1-11) with respect to time t twice leads to
(5)
Introducing Eqs. (4.1-11) and (5) into Eq. (2) and premultiplying it by the transpose
of matrix T G result in
(6)
in which the mass and stiffness matrices of the reduced model, called the reduced
mass matrix and reduced stiffness matrix, respectively, and the equivalent force vector
are defined as
(7)
They may be rewritten as
KG = Kmm - KmsK:;;l Ksm

MG = Mmm + KmsK:;;l MssK:;;l Ksm - KmsK:;;l Msm - MmsK:;;l Ksm (8)
FcCt) = Fm(t) + R~Fs(t) = Fm(t) - KmsK:;;lFs(t)
Equation (6) is the dynamic equations of equilibrium of the reduced model. It is a

little difficult to anticipate the acceleration responses at the slaves from those at the
masters if the force vector on the slaves is not zero. Therefore, we usually keep the
degrees of freedom at which the responses are of interest in the set of masters.
It can be seen from Eq. (4) that the Guyan condensation matrix may be obtained
from the dynamic equations when the dynamic effects are ignored. Hence, error is
introduced when the dynamic problem is considered. The magnitude of these errors
depends on the natural properties of the full model and how many and what degrees
of freedom are selected as the masters. This is to be demonstrated in the numerical
example.
The potential elastic energy V and the kinetic energy K of the full model may be
written as
(9)
Introduction of the transformation Eq. (4.1-11) into the above equations results in
(10)
With the consideration of Eqs. (7), Eqs. (10) become
(ll)
Equation (ll) is the expression of potential energy and kinetic energy in terms of
the masters. Therefore, KG and M G are called the stiffness and mass matrices of
the reduced model defined only by the masters. By this definition, the potential and
kinetic energy of the full model will be fully retained in the reduced model.
4.2.2 Condensation of Massless Coordinates

Usually, the mass matrix used in dynamic analyses is positive definite. However,
the mass matrix formulation for many structural dynamic problems only includes
inertia terms corresponding to translational degrees of freedom, while a more general-

ized formulation for the stiffness matrix including terms corresponding to rotational
degrees of freedom is often employed. One popular example of the mass matrix
resulting from these formulations is a lumped mass matrix with some zero diagonal
elements. This kind of mass matrix is easy to be formulated and could save a lot of
computer storage and time. However, this discretization of inertia leads to a number
of massless degrees offreedom. As a consequence, the mass matrix becomes nonpositive
definite and it is very difficult to perform some dynamic analyses directly. Therefore,
the condensation approach is usually necessary to delete those degrees of freedom at
which the masses are zero.
Another popular example of the use of the mass matrix with massless coordinates
can be found in the finite element modeling of structures with smart materials. Both
mechanical and electric degrees of freedom are usually used in solid and shell finite
elements. Because the mass pertaining to the electric degrees of freedom is zero,
Guyan condensation may be utilized to condense these degrees of freedom from the
dynamic equations (Ha et al., 1992; Tzou and Ye, 1996).
If we keep all the degrees of freedom at which the inertia is not considered in the
slave set, we haveM ms = M~s = 0 andMss = O. Thus, the second equation ofEq. (2)
is the same as Eq. (4.1-4). The relation of displacements between the masters and slaves
is expressed by the Guyan condensation matrix. Using the same transformation of
the mass matrix from the full displacement space to the reduced displacement space,
the reduced mass matrix is given by
MR =Mmm (12)
The reduced stiffness matrix and force vector are the same as above. Of course, the
reduced mass matrix in Eq. (12) is positive definite. Clearly, the Guyan condensation
method in this case does not alter the original problem. Thus, no error is introduced
to the reduced model.

The mass-spring system in Figure 4.1 is considered again. Assume the forces acting on
the three masses are given by fl (t) = h (t) = h (t) = 1 N. The displacement responses
resulting from the full model are plotted in Figure 4.2, in which 1,2, and 3 denote the
displacements at the first, second, and third degrees of freedom, respectively.
Similarly, the two schemes for the selection of masters used in Section 4.1 are
considered for this dynamic problem. The mass matrices resulting from these two
schemes are given by
[5/4 OJ
°
M(2) = (a)
G 1
The displacement responses computed from the reduced model are shown in
Figures 4.3 and 4.4. The solid and dash curves denote the displacements resulting
0.015 ---------------------------
0.010
g
-
cCI)
ECI)
0.005
U
III
Q.
III
0 0.000
Time (s)
Figure 4.2 Displacements obtained from the full model.
0.015
0.010
g
-
U
III
C
CI)
E
CI)
0.005
III
a.
III
0 0.000
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Time (s)
Figure 4.3 Displacements at the first and second degrees of freedom.
from the full model and the reduced model, respectively. Generally, the displacements
obtained from the reduced model are close to those from the full model. However,
there are some errors. The errors in the first scheme are much greater than those in
the second scheme. This means that the selection of the first and the second degrees
of freedom as the masters is better than the selection of the second and third degrees
of freedom.
0.015 r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
0.010
-
E
Jc!
CD 0.005
E
~
t
II)
is 0.000
-0.005 L......J.........--&.--L........--'---'-....L..................."'"'--...L...""'--......."--L......J.........--&.----'
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Time (5)
Figure 4.4 Displacements at the second and third degrees of freedom.
4.3 Guyan Condensation for Eigenproblems

4.3.1 Definitions of Reduced Eigenproblems
Usually, the general eigenproblem of a full model, referred to as the full eigenproblem,
is given by
(K -AM)lfI = 0 (1)
where A and lfI are the eigenvalue (square of frequency) and the corresponding eigen-
vector (mode shape) of the full model, respectively. Using the same division of the
total degrees of freedom in Section 4.1, Eq. (1) may be rewritten in a partitioned
form as
A[Mmm {OJ
([ Kmm
Ksm
KmsJ -
Kss Msm
MmsJ) {lfImJ =
Mss lfIs ° (2)
where the subscripts m and s indicate the parameters corresponding to the masters
and slaves. A simple multiplication of the matrix on the left-hand side of Eq. (2)
expands this equation into two equations, namely,
(Kmm - AMmm)lfIm + (Kms - AMms)lfIs =° (3a)

(Ksm - AMsm)lfIm + (Kss - AMss)qJs = 0 (3b)
The relation of the eigenvector between the masters and slaves may be obtained from
Eq. (3b) as
(4)
where R(A) E R sxrn is called the condensation matrix and is defined as
R(A) = -(Kss - AMss)-l(Ksrn - AMsrn) (5)
Although the expression for the computation of the condensation matrix is given
explicitly in Eq. (5), it is a nonlinear function of the unknown eigenvalue A. Letting
A = 0 in Eq. (5) leads to the Guyan condensation matrix as shown in Eq. (4.1-10).
Hence, the eigenvector of the full model may be expressed in terms of the eigenvector
at the masters as
(6)
TG is the coordinate transformation matrix and is defined in Eq. (4.1-12). Simi-

larly, introducing Eq. (6) into Eq. (2) and premultiplying it by the transpose of the
coordinate transformation result in
(7)
KG and M G are the reduced stiffness and mass matrices and are defined in Eq. (4.2-7)
or (4.2-8). Equation (7) is the eigenproblem of the reduced model and is referred to as
the reduced eigenproblem. During the derivation of the Guyan condensation matrix,
the eigenvalue is set to zero. This means that the dynamic effect is ignored in the
condensation matrix. Therefore, Guyan condensation is a static condensation. As the
eigenvalue increases, the ignored effects become more significant.
4.3.2 Mode Expansion

As mentioned above, the relation of eigenvector between the masters and slaves may
be expressed by the condensation matrix in Eq. (4), namely,
(8)
Clearly, if the eigenvector at the masters is determined from the reduced model defined
by Guyan condensation, the eigenvector at the slaves may be computed using Eq. (8).
Because the relation is expressed exactly in Eq. (8), it is usually referred to as the exact
mode expansion expression. The inertia effect is considered fully by using this mode
expansion.
The dynamic flexible matrix in Eq. (8) may be expanded as a power series as shown
in Chapter 3. Letting H = 1 in Eq. (3.2-11) and dropping the residual term result in
(9)
Introducing Eq. (9) into Eq. (8) leads to
(10)
This expression was first used by Kidder (1973) to estimate the eigenvector at the
slaves. Hence, it is referred to as the Kidder's mode expansion.
Expanding the right-hand side of Eq. (10) and dropping the term containing the
quadratic of eigenvalue A yield
CPs ~ _[K,;;l Ksrn + A( _K,;;l Msrn + K,;;l MssK,;;l Ksrn)]CPrn (11)

The expression in Eq. (11) .was first proposed by Miller (1980) in 1980 and is referred
to as Miller's mode expansion expression.
As will be described in Chapter 5, Guyan condensation is the first-order approxima-
tion of the exact reduced eigenproblem defined in Eq. (5.1-6). Hence, the eigenvalue
and the corresponding eigenvector resulting from Guyan condensation are also the
first-order approximation of the exact values. In the exact mode expansion expres-
sion, the ignored effect is fully considered. Of course, it is not consistent with these
approximate eigenvalues and eigenvectors at the masters. Therefore, the inertia might
be considered overly and the accuracy will become worse if the exact mode expansion
expression is used to estimate the eigenvector on the slaves. Furthermore, the solu-
tion of Eq. (8) is required, which is usually very time-consuming. In Kidder's mode
expansion expression, although the first -order approximation of the dynamic flexible
matrix is considered as shown in Eq. (9), the second-order approximation is partially
included in the final expression (10). It is also inconsistent with the results from
Guyan condensation. However, the inconsistency is much slighter than that of the
exact mode expansion expression. Miller's expression is the first-order approximation
and, hence, consistent with Guyan condensation.
Eigenproblems
A two-story 4 m x 4 m plane frame, shown in Figure 4.5, is considered. The structure
is modeled as a two-dimensional frame using the finite element method. It has a
total of 32 nodes, with the first node grounded and the second node constrained in
the vertical direction. The structure has a total of 96 degrees of freedom including
the four fixed ones. For all the beams, the modulus of elasticity is 2 x 1011 N/m2,
mass density 7, 800 kg/m 3 , area moment of inertia 8 x 10-9 m4, cross-sectional area
25 6 27 28 29 30 3.1
24 32
22 23
20 21
18 19
10 11 13 14 15 16
J-
9 17
x
7 8
5 6
3 4
2
Figure 4.5 Schematic of a two-dimensional frame.

Table 4.1 Lowest 15 natural frequencies (rad/s)
Mode frequency Mode frequency Mode Frequency
I 6.2379 6 79.322 II 176.05

2 14.427 7 M.99C 12 1M.84
3 27.7M 8 108.40 13 :ZO!J.49
4 29.934 9 137.40 14 ~2
5 35.132 10 148.02 15 334.32
2.4 X 10- 4 m 2 . The lowest 15 natural frequencies resulting from the full model are
listed in Table 4.1. They are considered as the exact values for comparison.
The natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes are selected to check
the accuracy of the reduced model in the following sections and chapters. If the
eigenpairs (eigenvalue or the square of frequency and the corresponding eigenvector
or mode shape) of the reduced model are close to those of the full model, we may say
that the reduced model is close to the full model at that frequency range. Hence, the
comparison of the natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes between
the reduced model and the full model is necessary. During the comparison, the
following two parameters will be used. One is the percent error of natural frequency,
namely,
(12)
Wj and w?) are the exact and the ith approximation of the jth (j = 1,2, ... , m) fre-
quency, respectively. The other is the correlated coefficient for modal vector (CCFMV)
value, that is,
T (i)
CCFMV( <fJ~}) = _{ _ _ _ _<fJ_m--"[i_'_<fJ_m-'--j ---]-}---:]:-=/2 (13)

[~j '<fJmj'
] (i»)T (i)
(<fJmj . <fJmj
where, <fJmj and <fJ~ are the exact and the ith approximation of the jth (j = 1,2, .. , , m)
eigenvector, respectively. A CCFMV value close to 1 suggests that the two modes or
vectors are well correlated, and a value close to 0 indicates uncorrelated modes.
The first two cases for the selection of masters, shown in Table 4.2, will be consid-
ered. The natural frequencies and their percent errors of the reduced model are listed
in Tables 4.3 and 4.4 for the two cases, respectively. The CCFMV values of the mode
shapes are also listed.
The first frequency and the corresponding mode shape in the first case, shown in
Table 4.3, have a high accuracy and are usually acceptable. However, the accuracy of
the higher modes is very low, especially for the fifth frequency and mode shape. The
CCFMV value of the fifth mode is 0.00144, which indicates that the two mode shapes
are strongly uncorrelated, Generally, the frequencies and mode shapes resulting from
the second case have higher accuracy than the first case. For the three higher order
of frequencies, the errors are reduced to one sixth through one sixtieth. Therefore,
Table 4.2 Cases for the selection of masters
1 x-direc:tioa: nodes 20 _ 21;y-direc:tioa: nodes 11. 15. ancI26

2 x-direc:tioa: nodes 2. 17._ 20; y4rec:doD: nodes 13 met 28
~ x-clbec:doa: 2. 17. 20, 21'Y-cIirectioa: 11. 15. 26. 28
Table 4.3 Accuracy of the frequencies and mode shapes resulted from
Guyan condensation (Case 1)
Mode I . . .2 Mode 3 Mode. Mode 5

luqam.:, (nidi.) 6.3078 20.053 3SJMS S3S1S 97.536
PItaDt_(~) 1.1076 38.9N 26.086 80.350 177.63
<XBofV 1.00000 0JI8202 0.12720 o.3f213 0.00144
Mode Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS

lftqqeac:f (nidi.) 6.342S 14.999 29.020 33.048 36.169
Pm:eat emil' (96) 1.6769 3.9623 4.4088 10.406 2.9517
CCPMV 0.99997 0.99894 0.72599 0.88082 0.97124
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS

(mdIa) 6.28U 14.661 28.991 30.987 36.282
0.74311 1.6206 4.3039 3.5188 3.2737
1.00000 0.99976 0.829M 0.95039 0.99621
although Guyan condensation is exact for static problems, its accuracy is usually
very low for dynamic problems. The accuracy highly depends on the selection of
masters. If only the accuracy is considered, the masters in Case 2 are better than those
in Case 1. The frequencies resulting from the reduced model are higher than those
from the full model. This means that the reduced model is stiffer than the full model.
Generally, the lower orders of frequencies have higher accuracy than the higher orders
of frequencies. This will be explained in Chapter 5. This phenomenon is not clear for
the mode shapes because the accuracy of the reduced model is very low.
As seen above, the optimal selection of masters may increase the accuracy of the
reduced model. For given eigenpairs, increasing the number of masters can also
increase their accuracy. To demonstrate it, three more degrees of freedom for Case 1
are selected as the masters and called Case 3 in Table 4.2. The lowest five frequencies,
their errors, and the CCFMV values of the corresponding mode shapes resulting from
the reduced model are listed in Table 4.5. It can be seen that the accuracy of the lowest
five frequencies and mode shapes has been increased substantially. For example, the
error of the fifth frequency in Table 4.3 (five master degrees of freedom) is 177.63%,
while it reduces to 3.2737% when three more degrees of freedom are kept.
The way to slightly increase the number of masters is feasible in practice although
the computational effort may be increased. Generally, a finite element model of a
practical structure has a minimum of tens of thousands degrees of freedom. Of course,
the full model has tens of thousands of modes. However, tens of them are usually
enough for the dynamic analysis of this model. After the slight increase of the number
of masters, the reduced model only has a total of ten of degrees of freedom. The size of
the reduced model is still much smaller than that of the full model, while the accuracy
of the reduced model in that frequency range may be increased significantly.
Mode Shape Expansion
Three cases for the selection of masters shown in Table 4.2 are used. The CCFMV
values of the full mode shapes based on the three expansion expressions are listed in
Tables 4.6 through 4.8, respectively. The frequencies and the CCFMV values of the
Table 4.6 Accuracy of different expansions (Case 1)
Mode 4 ModeS
6.3G5 14.999 WM8 36.1.
~ 0.998H 0.88082 G.97l24
8.:99999 0.99216 OJ5974 o.585l2 G.93316
0.99999 o.tM03 0.83505 0,790S3 0.90328
0.99999 G.9HOI 0.83519 0.78980 0.90031
",
Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode .. ModeS
PteqIMDq(ndIa) 6.2842 14.661 28JJ91 30.987 36.282
CCFMV (GupD) 1.00000 0.99976 G.829H 0.95039 o.9!I621
OCPMV~) 1.00000 0.99925 0.89657 0.80!100 0.74875
OCPMV (Kidder) 1.00000 0.99942 0.19703 G.89MO 03P177
CCJIMV (Miller) 1.00000 0.99938 0.89713 o.8983S 03Pl31
corresponding mode shapes resulting from Guyan condensation are also listed for
comparison purposes. The CCFMV values of the full mode shapes resulting from
Kidder's and Miller's expansions are very close. They are generally much higher than
those resulting from the exact expansion.
4.4 Generalized Guyan Condensation

In Guyan condensation, only the under part of the stiffness matrix, that is Ksm and
K ss ' is used in the condensation matrix. This means that the condensation matrix is
independent of the stiffness concerning the masters. The generalized Guyan conden-
sation, defined as Guyan condensation using the generalized inverse of the submatrix,
implements all elements of the stiffness matrix into the condensation matrix.
Letting
Km = [Kmm] , Ks = [Kms] (1)

Ksm Kss
in Eq. (4.1-2), we have

(2)
Based on the definition, the generalized Guyan condensation matrix Rc is obtained

from Eq. (2) as
(3)
where the superscript + denotes the generalized inverse of the matrix and is defined
as
(4)
Using Eq. (1), we have
(5)
Letting A = KssKss, X = K sm , C = I, and Y = Kms in the commonly used equation

in matrix theory, namely,
(6)
we have
(7)
Hence, the generalized inverse of the submatrix Ks and the generalized Guyan
condensation matrix are given by
K; = [PRe p] (8)
Rc = P(RcKmm + Ksm) (9)

Using the generalized Guyan condensation matrix, the stiffness and mass matrices of
the reduced model may be obtained as
A AT A AT A
Ke = Krnrn + ReKsrn + KrnsRe + ReKssRe (lOa)
A AT A AT A
Me = Mrnrn + ReMsrn + MrnsRe + ReMssRe (lOb)
and the reduced eigenproblem is given by
(11)
The two-story frame used in Section 4.3 will be used. The first two cases for the
selection of masters are to be considered. The natural frequencies of the reduced
model resulted from the generalized Guyan condensation are listed in Tables 4.9 and
4.10, respectively. The percent errors of frequencies and the CCFMV values of mode
shapes are also listed for comparison.
The frequencies resulting from the reduced model are higher than those from the
full model. This means that the reduced model is stiffer than the full model. Generally,
the lower frequencies have higher accuracy than the higher ones. That is to say, the
more the frequency closes to zero, the higher accuracy the frequency has. These
phenomena are similar to those of Guyan condensation. Comparing these results
with those in Section 4.3, we find that the generalized Guyan condensation usually
has much higher accuracy than Guyan condensation. The error of the first frequency,
for example, is reduced to about three hundredths by replacing Guyan condensation
with the generalized one. For the higher modes, the improvement of accuracy is also
significant. Further research shows that the generalized Guyan condensation may
sometimes have lower accuracy than Guyan condensation.
the generalized Guyan condensation (Case I)
Mode Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
Frequency (radii) 6.2381 14.618 30.405 33.476 38.179

Percent error (%) 0.00363 1.3214 9.3909 11.836 8.6714
CCFMV 1.00000 O.998n 0.68042 0.69869 0.90404
the generalized Guyan condensation (Case 2)
Frequency (radii) 6.2381 14.470 28.002 30.373 35.621

Percent error (%) 0.00337 0.29645 0.74666 1.4673 1.3916
CCFMV 1.00000 0.99999 O.994n 0.99530 0.99499
4.5 Quasistatic Condensation

The eigenvalue shift technique (or frequency shift technique) has been applied to many
dynamic problems. Generally, this technique has two functions in the condensation.
One is to improve the accuracy of the reduced model. The other is to make the reduced
model close to the full model in any given frequency range.
If an eigenvalue shift is applied to the general eigenproblem of Eq. (4.3-1), we have
(K - XM)<fJ = ° (1)
where the dynamic stiffness matrix and eigenvalue with shift are given by
K = (K -qM), A=A-q (2)
q is the value of the eigenvalue shift. With the same division of the total degrees of
freedom, Eq. (1) is partitioned as
([~mm ~ms] _ X [Mmm

Ksm Kss Msm
Mms]) {<fJ m )
Mss <fJs
= {OJ
° (3)
The second equation leads to
(4)
Hence, the force-independent condensation matrix is obtained by letting X = 0 in

Eq.(4)as
- --1- -1
RG = -Kss Ksm = -(Kss - qMss) (Ksm - qMsm) (5)
The corresponding coordinate transformation matrix TG is given by
(6)
Therefore, the stiffness and mass matrices of the reduced model based on the
condensation matrix in Eq. (5) are given by
- -T - -T - -T -
MG = T GMTG = Mmm + RGMsm + MmsRG + RGMssRG
KG = T~KT G = K mm + R~Ksm + K msRG + R~KssRG (7)
- -T
Fdt) = Fm(t) + RGFs(t)
The condensation described above is referred to as quasistatic condensation, and the

matrix defined in Eq. (5) is called the quasistatic condensation matrix. Clearly, the
dynamic effect at the frequency (j) = ..fii is included exactly in the condensation
matrix. The dynamic equations of equilibrium and the general eigenproblem of the
reduced model are given by
MGXm(t) + KGXm(t) = FG(t) (8)
(KG - AMG)<fJ m = ° (9)

If we set the eigenvalue shifting value q = 0 in Eq. (5), the classical Guyan con-
densation discussed in Section 4.1 will be obtained. Because the dynamic influence
is considered in the condensation matrix, this condensation is actually a dynamic
condensation.
Similarly, the eigenvalue shifting technique may also be implemented into the
generalized Guyan condensation matrix defined in Eq. (4.4-3). With this application,
the condensation matrix is given by
(10)
or
(11)
where
-
P = (Kss - qMss )
-I -
[I - Rc(I + Rc
-T- -I-T
Rc ) Rc] (12)
For convenience, Eq. (10) or (11) is called the generalized quasistatic static condensation
matrix, and the method is called generalized quasistatic Guyan condensation.
The two-story frame and the first case for the selection of masters in Section 4.3 will
be used. The quasistatic condensation and the generalized quasi static condensation
schemes are to be considered. The eigenvalue shifting value is q = 35. The results
obtained from the reduced model are listed in Tables 4.11 and 4.12.
Clearly, the accuracy of both the frequencies and the mode shapes is improved after
the application of the eigenvalue shift. The percent error of the first frequency resulting
from Guyan condensation without shift (in Table 4.3) is, for example, 1.1076%, while
it becomes 0.01175% after the implementation of the eigenvalue shift (in Table 4.11).
The latter is about one hundredth of the former. For the second through fifth frequen-
cies, the errors reduce very slightly after the implementation. Similar phenomenon
may be found by comparing the results in Tables 4.9 and 4.12. Generally, the more
the eigenvalue closes the shifting value q, the more accurate the mode is.
the quasi static condensation (q = 35)
Iftquenc:y (nd/ ) 6.2386 18.894 34.816 52.357 96.485

Patml error (%) 0.01175 30.963 25.261 74.909 174.64
CCPMV 1.00000 0.98747 0.14380 0.34942 0.G0543
the generalized quasistatic condensation (q = 35)
Prequenc:y (nd/s) 6.2379 14.551 30.288 32.920 37.713

Perceut error (%) 0.00006 0.85457 8.9698 9.9780 7.3475
CCPMV 1.00000 0.99912 0.71133 0.13041 0.93334
Now, we want to significantly improve the accuracy of the second mode, whose
frequency is 14.427 radis. According to the discussion above, we may let the shifting
value close to the square of the frequency, namely, q ~ w~. Similarly, Guyan con den -
sation and the generalized Guyan condensation are considered and the shifting value
q = 200 is selected. The frequencies and their errors as well as the CCFMV values of
the reduced model are listed in Tables 4.13 and 4.14.
The errors of the second frequency resulting from Guyan condensation and the
generalized Guyan condensation without shift are 38.996% and 1.3214%, respectively.
After the application of the shift q = 200, they, respectively, reduce to 0.12196% and
0.00152%. Clearly, the improvement of the accuracy is significant. There is some
reduction of the errors of the third through the fifth modes, although this reduction
is very small. However, the accuracy of the first mode is substantially reduced in both
methods. The reason is that the first eigenvalue is much farther away from q = 200
than q = 0 (no shift). These results are further evidence that the more the eigenvalue
closes the shifting value q, the more accurate the mode is.
We can increase the eigenvalue shifting value again and make it close to a further
higher eigenvalue, 10 for example. According to the feature discussed above, the
tenth eigenvalue will have the highest accuracy and then other eigenvalues close to it.
However, the total number of degrees of freedom of the reduced model is only five.
This means that the maximum number of modes provided by the reduced model
should be five. Hence, these five modes of the reduced model will not close to the
lowest five modes of the full model again. This is to be demonstrated in the following.
Let q = 32,400, which falls between the llth and the 12th eigenvalue of the full
model. The frequencies, their percent errors, and the CCFMV values of the corre-
sponding modes are listed in Tables 4.15 and 4.16. Clearly, the modes of the reduced
models resulting from both approaches with the shift q = 32,400 are close to the 9th
through the 13th modes rather than the lowest five modes of the full model. This fea-
ture is very useful for some applications such as structural sound analysis and control.
The dynamic characteristics of the systems in the middle- or high-frequency range are
much more important than those in the low-frequency range in these applications.
...
the quasistatic condensation (q = 200)
PnIIpIIq (mdIt)
Mode 1
7.6490
Mode 2
14.445
Mode 3
33.712
Mode 4
46.216
ModeS
90.223
Paaat enor(~) 22.621 0.12196 '21.289 SU95 156.81
OCPMV 0.99631 1.00000 0.24199 0.34417 0.35037
...
the generalized quasistatic condensation (q = 200)
.... 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS
III... aI C)' ('nIM ) 6.2711 14..G8 29.491 30.830 36.425

~enar(") 0.65656 0.00152 6.1055 2.9938 3.6806
1<Xl'MV 0."'" 1.00000 0.90936 0.77898 0.98246
Table 4.15 Accuracy of the frequencies and mode shapes resulted from the
quasistatic condensation (q = 32,400)
Mode Mode 9 Mode 10 Mode 11 Mode 12 Mode 13
Frequency (radla) 122.11 128.23 175.60 189.83 200.94

Percent error ('MI) -11.125 -13.370 -0.25689 -2.5721 -4.0836
CCFMV 0.75151 0.94383 0.99998 0.98732 0.96259
Table 4.16 Accuracy of the frequencies and mode shapes resulted from the
generalized quasistatic condensation (q = 32,400)
Mode Mode 9 Mode 10 Modell Mode 12 Mode 13
Frequency (radls) 139.11 147.89 176.07 194.97 209.88

Percent error ('MI) 1.2458 -0.09138 0.00867 0.C168S8 0.18404
CCFMV 0.92530 0.96440 0.99983 0.99935 0.99737
Furthermore, the results show that the mode closest to the shifting value has the
highest accuracy. Therefore, the conclusion that the more the eigenvalue closes the
shifting value q, the more accurate the mode will be is still right. However, the percent
errors of the frequencies are not always greater than zero, which is different from the
phenomenon above.
4.6 Static Condensation Using the Flexibility Matrix

The static condensation using the flexibility matrix was proposed by Kaufman and
Hall (1968) and Ramsden and Stoker (1969) and improved by Sowers (1978) to
include the consideration of rigid body modes. Although this approach is not
as common as Guyan condensation, it does have some advantages under some
circumstances.
For the model with nonsingular stiffness, the flexibility matrix is an inverse of the
stiffness matrix, that is,
KE=I (1)
with the division of total degrees of freedom, the partitioned form of Eq. (1) is given
by
[ K mm
Ksm
K ms] [Emm
Kss Esm
Ems]
Ess
= [I 0]
0 1
(2)
Expanding Eq. (2) produces
(3)
which leads to the relation
(4)
Therefore, the static condensation matrix may be expressed in term of the flexibility
matrix as
(5)
Equation (5) is valid for the model without rigid modes.

For the model with rigid modes, Eq. (1) is invalid. Let 4»r and X r, be a rigid mode
matrix and rigid degrees of freedom, respectively. We have the relation (Sowers, 1978):
(6)
with this assumption Fs = o. Equation (6) IS equivalent to the following two

equations:
Xm = EmmFm + 4»mrXr (7)

Xs = EsmFm + 4»srXr (8)
Solving for Fm from Eq. (7) and substituting it into Eq. (8) gives
(9)
Therefore, the relation of the coordinates are expressed as
The reduced system matrices may be computed using the coordinate transformation
matrix defined above.
4.7 Summary
Three static condensation approaches, Guyan condensation, generalized Guyan con-
densation, and quasistatic condensation, have been provided. The static response
problem, dynamic response problem, and eigenproblem have been considered. Sev-
eral numerical examples are provided to demonstrate the features of these approaches.
Guyan condensation is the simplest approach to eliminate the unwanted degrees
of freedom. It has been broadly applied to a large number of practical problems.
However, because the inertia effects are ignored in the Guyan condensation matrix, it
is exact for static problems. For the dynamic problems in which the masses on some
degrees of freedom are ignored, Guyan condensation is also exact when only the
massless degrees of freedom are selected as the slaves. For other dynamic problems
the error will be introduced by Guyan condensation into the reduced model and the
accuracy of the reduced model highly depends on what and how many degrees of
freedom are kept in the masters.
If the standard Gauss-Jordan elimination process is applied systematically on the
static equation of equilibrium of the full model to eliminate the slaves, the Guyan
condensation matrix, the reduced stiffness matrix, and the equivalent force vector are
directly obtained from the eliminated equation.
The frequencies of the reduced model resulting from Guyan condensation are
always higher than those obtained from the full model. This means that the reduced
model is stiffer than the full model in that frequency range. The lower mode usually has
higher accuracy than the higher mode in Guyan condensation. After the eigenvector
on the masters is determined, the eigenvector on the slaves may be computed using
three expressions, that is, the exact, Kidder's, and Miller's mode expansion expressions.
Among them, the Miller's mode expansion is consistent with the eigenvector from
Guyan condensation.
The reduced model resulted from the generalized Guyan condensation usually
has higher accuracy than Guyan condensation. However, the computational work
of the former is higher than the latter. The eigenvalue or frequency shifting tech-
nique may increase the accuracy of Guyan condensation or make the reduced model
be close to the full model within any given frequency range. The more the eigenvalue
closes to the shifting value, the higher accuracy the corresponding mode generally
has. To do this, the masters should be carefully selected to make the interested modes
observable at these degrees of freedom.
The condensation matrix defined by Guyan condensation is independent of the
submatrix K mm of the stiffness matrix. Similarly, the condensation matrix given
by the quasistatic condensation method is independent of the submatrices K mm of
the stiffness matrix and M mm of the mass matrix. Therefore, any changes within
these submatrices do not change the condensation matrix. This feature is, on one
hand, very useful in the structural optimization, modification, and reanalysis (Lin
and Lim, 1995). By selecting all the degrees of freedom on which changes will occur
during optimization or modification as masters, it is unnecessary to recompute the
condensation matrix although the repeated structural re-analyses are required. On
the other hand, this feature is one important reason that these two static condensation
methods have low accuracy.
References
Argyris, JH and Mlejnek, H-P (1991) Dynamics of structures. North-Holland, New York:
172-186.
Bathe, KJ (1996) Finite element procedures. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: 717- 726.
Guyan, RJ (1965) Reduction of stiffness and mass matrices. AIAA Journal, 3(2):380.
Ha, SK, Keilers, C, and Chang, FK (1992) Finite element analysis of composite structures
containing distributed piezoelectric sensors and actuators. AIAA Journal, 30(3):772-780.
Irons, BM (1965) Structural eigenvalue problems - elimination of unwanted variables. AIAA Journal,
3(5):961-962.
Kaufman, S and Hall, DB (1968). Reduction of mass and loading matrices. AIAA Journal, 6(3):550
Kidder, RL (1973) Reduction of structural frequency equations. AIAA Journal, 11 (6):892.
Lin, RM and Lim, MK (1995) Structural sensitivity analysis via reduced-order analytical model. Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 121{1-4):345-359.
Miller, CA (1980) Dynamic reduction of structural models. Journal of the Structural Division,
106(STlO):2097-2108.
Paz, M (1983) Practical reduction of structural eigenproblems. Journal of Structural Engineering,
109(11):2591-2599.
Paz, M (1991) Structural dynamics: Theory and computation, Third Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
Petyt, M (1990) Introduction to finite element vibration analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York:
364--369.
Ramsden, JN and Stoker, JR (1969). Mass condensation: A semi-automatic method for reducing the size
of vibration problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1(4):333-349
Sowers, JD (1978). Condensation of free body mass matrices using flexibility coefficients. AIAA Journal,
16(3):272-273.
Tzou, HS and Ye, R (1996) Analysis of piezoelectric systems with laminated piezoelectric triangular shell
elements. AIAA Journal, 34(1):110-115.
Weaver Jr., Wand Johnston, PR (1987) Structural dynamics by finite elements. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: 282-299.
5 Dynamic Condensation
The static condensation technique has been described extensively in the preceding
chapter. Because the inertia effects are ignored in this condensation, the accuracy of
the resulting reduced model is generally very low for dynamic problems. To achieve
reasonably accurate results, the masters must be chosen with great care and the num-
ber of masters should be greater than the number of modes interested. To alleviate the
limitations, the inertia effects could be partially or fully included in the condensation.
The corresponding condensation approaches are generally called dynamic condensa-
tion. In this chapter, exact condensation, classical dynamic condensation, high-order
Guyan condensation, dynamic sub structuring scheme, and modal-type condensation
will be provided.
5.1 Exact Condensation

5.1.1 Dired Back-Substitution
The general eigenproblem of a full model is given by
(K - AM)qJ = ° (1)
Using the same division of the total degrees of freedom as that in Section 4.1, Eq. (1)
may be rewritten in a partitioned form as
([ Kmm
Ksm
KmsJ _ A [Mmm
Kss Msm
MmsJ) {qJm} =
Mss qJs
{o}° (2)
A simple multiplication of the matrix on the left-hand side of Eq. (2) expands this
equation into two equations, namely,
(Kmm - AMmm)qJm + (Kms - AMms)qJs = 0 (3a)

(Ksm - AMsm)qJm + (Kss - AMss)qJs = 0 (3b)
The relation of the eigenvector between the masters and slaves may be obtained from
Eq. (3b) as
(4)
71
where R(A) E R sxm is condensation matrix and is defined as
(5)
Because the inertia effect is considered in this condensation matrix, it is a dynamic

condensation matrix. Clearly, the dynamic condensation matrix defined in Eq. (5)
is a nonlinear function of the unknown eigenvalue A. Different modes may have
different dynamic condensation matrices and, hence, this condensation is single-mode
dependent.
Back-substituting Eq. (4) into Eq. (3a), the general eigenvalue problem of the
reduced model we obtain is
(6)
The reduced dynamic stiffness matrix DR E Rmxm is defined as
Clearly, the eigenvalue problem of the reduced model is also nonlinear with respect
to the unknown eigenvalue. Because no error is introduced during the derivation
of the condensation matrix in Eq. (5) and the reduced eigenproblem in Eq. (6), the
condensation matrix is usually referred to as the exact condensation matrix and the
corresponding method is called exact dynamic condensation or exact condensation.
Therefore, the accuracy of the reduced model does not depend on the selection of
masters except in the rare case when the energy of the system does not contribute
to the whole set of masters at all, a situation referred to as partial vibrations (Leung,
1978). Even for this case, convergence to all the modes of interest is guaranteed by
inherent Sturm sequence properties of the dynamic system.
If the stiffness and mass matrices of a system are denoted by K* and M*, the
corresponding dynamic stiffness matrix is given by
D*(A) = K* - AM* (8)
According to Leung's theorem (Leung, 1978), the following equation may be used to
exactly compute the stiffness and mass matrices from the dynamic stiffness matrix:
* aD*(A) aD*(A)
M ----
- aA'
K* = D*(A) + AM* = D*(A) - A--
aA
(9)
Therefore, the stiffness and mass matrices of the reduced model defined in Eq. (7) are
respectively given by
M (A) = _ aDR(A) (10)

R aA
KR(A) = DR(A) + AMR (11)
Introducing Eq. (7) into Eq. (10), we have
aDR(A)
Dynamic Condensation 73
in which the submatrices are defined as
Dpq = Kpq - AMpq (p,q = m,s) (13)
According to matrix theory, the derivative of the inverse of matrix Dss can be
expressed as
(14)
With the introduction ofEq. (14) into Eq. (12), the reduced mass matrix is given by
The reduced stiffness matrix KR may be obtained from Eqs. (11) and (15) as
Clearly, the reduced stiffness and mass matrices are functions of the unknown eigen-
value. These matrices at a specific eigenvalue, AO' for example, may be obtained by
substituting AO for A in Eqs. (15) and (16). Particularly, the stiffness and mass matrices
at A = 0 are given by
The reduced system matrices defined in Eqs. (17) and (18) are the same as
those defined by Guyan condensation, as shown in Section 4.2. Therefore, Guyan
condensation is a static condensation and only exact at zero eigenvalue (frequency).
Although the reduced stiffness and mass matrices given in Eqs. (15) and (16)
are exact, they are eigenvalue- or frequency-dependent. The differential form of the
reduced system matrices can be replaced by the difference form if the frequency range
considered is narrow. The difference form of the reduced system matrices within the
eigenvalue range [AI> A2] are given by (Mokeyev, 1998)
(19)
The physical meaning of these three definitions of the reduced system matrices are
shown in Figure 5.1 in which dR(A), mR(O), mR(A), and mR(A1,2) denote the elements
of the dynamic stiffness matrix and mass matrices of the static form, differential form,
and difference form, respectively.
Actually, the accuracy of the reduced system matrices as well as the eigenvalue
problem resulting from the difference form depends substantially on the choice of
the step length of difference. Different systems may require different step lengths.
o
Figure 5.1 Explanation of three forms of reduced mass matrices.
Hence, an optimum length should be found to avoid the reduction of significant

figures before this difference scheme is used.
5.1.2 Coordinate Transformation

In the preceding section, the reduced system matrices (stiffness, mass, and dynamic
stiffness matrices) were derived by the direct back-substitution, the relation among
these three matrices is shown in Eqs. (10) and (11). Alternatively, these reduced system
matrices may be obtained from coordinate transformation.
Using the exact condensation matrix defined in Eq. (4), the eigenvector of a full
model may be expressed as
C{J =\:: 1= T(A)C{Jm

(20)
in which the coordinate transformation matrix T(A) E R nxm is defined as
T(A) = [ I ] = [ I ] (21)
R(A) -(Kss - AMss)-l(K sm - AMsm)
Substituting Eq. (20) into the left-hand side of Eq. (2) and premultiplying the
transpose of matrix T(A) gives
(22)
where the system matrices of the reduced model are given by
(23)
or, in terms of the exact condensation matrix, as
It can be seen that the reduced mass and stiffness matrices defined in Eq. (24) are
the same as those defined in Eqs. (15) and (16). Therefore, the same reduced model
will result from the direct back-substitution and coordinate transformation if the
definition in Eq. (9) is used.
Research shows that the reduced model resulting from the coordinates transforma-
tion generally has higher accuracy than that from direct back-substitution if the same
dynamic condensation matrix is used in both cases and the condensation matrix is
not exact. Such improvement of coordinate transformation is attributed to Rayleigh's
principle that a first-order error in mode shape gives only a second-order error in the
estimated frequency.
Equation (22) is the eigenvalue problem of the reduced model. Because the dynamic
condensation matrix is a function of the unknown eigenvalue A, the stiffness and
mass matrices of the reduced model are frequency-dependent. The corresponding
eigenproblem of the reduced model is nonlinear, called a nonlinear eigenproblem, with
respect to the eigenvalue A. A special approach is required to solve this eigenproblem.
The details of the solution schemes are discussed in Section 5.5.
5.1.3 Power Series Expansion of Dynamic Flexible Matrix

The full model with all its masters grounded is referred to as the slave model. The slave
model is defined in the subspace spanned by all the slaves. Using the denotation in
the previous sections, the stiffness and mass matrices of the slave model are denoted
by Kss and Mss. The corresponding general eigenvalue equations may be expressed as
(25)
and the orthogonal conditions are given by
(26)
where I E R SXS is an identity matrix; cf, and A E R SXS are the complete eigenvector
and eigenvalue matrices of the slave model. From the orthogonal equations, the
inverse of the stiffness and mass matrices may be expressed as
-1 - - -1 - T
Kss = ~A ~, (27)
Similarly, the dynamic flexible matrix on the right-hand side of Eq. (7) may be
expressed in terms of the modal parameters as
-1 - - -1 - T
(Kss - AMss) = ~(A - AI) ~ (28)
where (Ass - A1 ss )-1 is a diagonal matrix. Using the power series expansion in
Section 3.2, the dynamic flexible matrix may be expanded as a power series, that is,
H
(Kss - AMss)-1 = K;;I L(AMssK;;I)h + AH+1cj,A -(H+ll(A - AI)-Icj,T (29)
h=O
or
H
(Kss - AMss)-1 = K;;I L(AMssK;;I)h + AH+ 1(K;;IMss)H+I (Kss - AMss)-1
h=o
(30)
Using the power series, the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (7) may be
rewritten as
- (Kms - AMms)(Kss - AMss)-I(K sm - AMsm)

= DI (A) + D2(A) + D3(A) + D4(A) (31)
where
DI (A) = -Kms(Kss - AMss)-1 Ksm (32)

D 2 (A) = AKms(Kss - AMss)-IMsm (33)
D3(A) = AMms(Kss - AMss)-IKsm (34)
D4(A) = -A2Mms(Kss - AMss)-IMsm (35)
Letting H = 1 in Eq. (29) and substituting it into Eq. (32), we have
-I - T]
DI (A) = -Kms [Kss-I + AKss-I MssKss-I + cI>A
- 2 -
(A - AI) cI> Ksm
= -KmsK;;IKsm - AKmsK;;IMssK;;IKsm
- 2 - -2 - 1- T
- KmscI>A A (A - AI)- cI> Ksm (36)
Letting H = 0 in Eq. (29) and substituting it into Eq. (33) and (34), respectively, yield
-I - - -1 - -1 - T
D2(A) = AKms[Kss + cI>AA (A - AI) cI> ]Msm
-I - - -I - -I - T
= AKmsKss Msm + AKmscI>AA (A - AI) cI> Msm (37)
D3(A) = AMms[Kss
-I
+ cI>AA
- - -1 -
(A - AI)
-1 - T
cI> ]Ksm
= AMmsKss-1 Ksm + AMmscI>AA

- - -1 -
(A - AI)
-1 - T
cI> Ksm (38)
Introducing Eqs. (35) through (38) into Eq. (31) and then substituting the resulting
equation into Eq. (7), we have
(39)
or in a power series as
DR()..) = KG - )"MG - )..2GA -1 G T - )..3GA -2 GT
_ ... _ )..H+2GA-(H+1)GT _ )..H+3GA -(H+1) (A _ AI)-1GT (40)
Many investigators consider Eq. (39) as a standard equation (Berkkan and Dokainish,
1990; Zhang and Wang, 1993; Rothe and Voss, 1994; Qu, 1998) to develop efficient
eigensolvers.
Equations (39) and (40) may be rewritten in terms of the physical parameters as
DR()..) = KG - )"MG - )..2P(Kss - AMss)-1pT (41)

DRO.) = KG - )"MG - )..2PK-;;tpT - )..3p(K;/Mss)K;;1pT
_ ... _ )..H+2P(K;;1Mss)HK;;1pT
_ )..H+3p(K- 1
ss M 55 )H+1(KSS -)..MSS )-1pT (42)
The matrices KG, MG, G, and P are defined as
KG = Kmm - KmsK;;1Ksm (43)

MG = Mmm + KmsK;; 1MssK;; 1Ksm - KmsK;;1Msm - MmsK;;1Ksm (44)
- - --1
G = Mms. - Kms.A (45)
P = Mms - KmsK;;1Mss (46)
Equations (40) and (42) are the power series expansion of the dynamic stiffness matrix
of the reduced model.
Again, the stiffness matrix KG and mass matrix M G defined in Eqs. (43) and (44)
are identical to those resulting from Guyan condensation. Thus, the reduced system
matrices defined by Guyan condensation may be viewed as an initial approximation
ofEq. (40) or (42).
No approximation was introduced in the derivation of the expression in equation
(40). Therefore, the expression on the right-hand side of Eq. (40) is exactly equal
to that on the right-hand side of Eq. (7). Clearly, the power series in Eq. (40) is
conditionally convergent. The condition is).. < ).. 1 in which).. 1 is the lowest eigenvalue
of the slave model.
5.1.4 State Space Method for High-Order Eigenproblem

If we drop all the terms containing the higher powers of).. in Eq. (40) or (42), the
eigenvalue problem resulting from Guyan condensation is obtained. Similarly, if all
the terms containing).. to higher powers than quadratic are dropped, the quadratic
eigenproblem will be resulted. The state space method (Moler and Stewart, 1973;
Fricker, 1983a, 1983b; Zhang and Wang, 1993; Qu and Change, 1997; Qu and Fu,
1998), also called the extended order method or the block companion matrices method,
may be easily used to solve the nonlinear eigenvalue problem, which.can be expressed
as a power series with respect to the unknown eigenvalue.
When A < Ac> the dynamic stiffness matrix may be expanded in a power series,
that is,
(47)
where
(p = 2,3, ... ) (48)
Substituting the former p + 1 terms into Eq. (6) results in
(49)
Introducing
(i = 0,1,2, ... ,p) (50)
into Eq. (49) produces
DOqJ~ - Dl qJ~ - DZqJ~ - ... - Dpf/Jfn = 0 (51)
Define the state space as
AUp = {(qJ~)T (qJ~)T ... (f/Jfn)T} T

(52)
The eigenvalue Eq. (51) may be rewritten in the state space as
(53)
where
Do 0 0 0 Dl Dz Dp-l Dp
0 Dz D3 Dp D2 D3 Dp 0
Ep = Fp =
0 Dp- 1 Dp 0 Dp- 1 Dp 0 0
0 Dp 0 0 Dp 0 0 0
(54)
Clearly, the order of the eigenvalue Eq. (53) in the state space is pm x pm. Using
the state space vector, the high-order eigenproblem is linearized. Eq. (53) is a clas-
sical eigenvalue problem. It can be solved using most classical techniques, and all
eigensolutions may be obtained simultaneously.
No approximation was introduced from Eq. (49) to Eq. (54). These two eigen-
value equations are, hence, equivalent. However, the size of the eigenvalue problem in
Eq. (53) is increased. Fortunately, several terms are usually enough for accuracy pur-
poses and, as a result, pm is still much smaller than n. Furthermore, schemes (Fricker,
1983a, 1983b) are available to accelerate the convergence of subspace iteration and
to reduce the computational effort for solving the equivalent linearized eigenvalue
problem (53).
Specifically, the quadratic and cubic eigenproblems may be, respectively, expressed
as
(55)
and
(56)
With the introduction of the approximate relation
(57)
in the valid eigenvalue range [0, Ac), Eq. (56) may be simplified as (Bouhaddi and
Fillod, 1996)
(58)
Clearly, the size is 2p rather than 3p.
5.2 Classical Dynamic Condensation

As seen from Section 5.1, if we ignore the inertia effects in the exact condensation
matrix, simply let A = 0 in Eq. (5.1-5) and Guyan condensation results. If we want to
include the inertia effects at the chosen frequency Wo into the condensation matrix,
just let A = w6
in Eq. (5.1-5); we'll get
(1)
Clearly, it is the quasistatic condensation given in Section 4.5. Since the inertia effects
are included in the condensation matrix R(wo), it is usually referred to as the dynamic
condensation matrix in the literature. To tell the difference between this method
and the dynamic condensation method with general meaning, it is referred to as
classical dynamic condensation in this book. Because the frequency Wo is prescribed,
the dynamic condensation matrix in Eq. (1) is a constant matrix and independent
of the unknown eigenvalues. The reduced stiffness matrix KR(WO) and mass matrix
MR(WO) based on this dynamic condensation matrix can be similarly computed from
Eq. (5.1-24), that is,
{
MR(WO) = Mmm + MmsR(wo) + RT (wo)Msm + RT (wo)MssR(wo) (2)
KR(WO) = Kmm + KmsR(wo) +RT(Wo)Ksm +RT(wo)KssR(wo)
One important feature of the classical dynamic condensation approach is that the
relation of responses or eigenvectors between the masters and slaves is exact at the
prescribed frequency. As a result, the corresponding reduced model exactly represents

the full model at that frequency.
Similar to the discussion in Section 4.1, if the standard Gauss-Jordan elimination
process is applied on the dynamic equations of equilibrium undergoing a harmonic
excitation with the frequency wo, i.e.,
to eliminate the slaves, these equations will be reduced to (Paz, 1984, 1991)
(4)
in whichR(wo) is the dynamic condensation matrix at frequencywo shown inEq. (1).

DR(WO) is the dynamic stiffness matrix of the reduced model and is given by
(5)
where
(p,q = m,s) (6)
The reduced mass matrix may be obtained from the first equation ofEq. (2), and the
reduced stiffness matrix is computed from the relation
(7)
The reduced model defined above is useful for the system under a harmonic excita-
tion or a periodical excitation whose frequency spectral is very close to the specific
frequency Wo because the reduced model is exact for the harmonic excitation and
highly accurate for the periodical excitation.
5.3 Further Discussions on Guyan Condensation

5.3.1 Valid Frequency Range of Guyan Condensation
Let H = 0 in Eq. (5.1-29); then the inverse ·of the dynamic stiffness matrix in
Eq. (5.1-5) may be expressed as
(Kss - AMss)-l = K:;;l + AiA -\A - H)-liT (1)
and the exact dynamic condensation matrix is rewritten as
(2)
where the matrix G(A) is defined in Eq. (5.1-45). The second term on the right-hand
side of Eq. (2) denotes the error of the power series. Clearly, the Guyah condensation
matrix may be viewed as the initial approximation of the exact condensqtion matrix
and the error is represented by the second term. The errors in the condensation matrix
can be rewritten as
---Aq J-s ] G T (A)

As - A .
- 1 - ] G T (A)
qJs
As/A - 1
(3)
where).j and cPj(i = 1,2, ... ,5) denote the ith eigenvalue and eigenvector of the slave
model. Clearly, if the computed eigenvalue A is much smaller than the first eigen-
value). 1 of the slave model, the sum of the error effectively has a small contribution
and Guyan condeJ?sation will be generally valid. Therefore, the valid eigenvalue (fre-
quency) range of Guyan condensation is 1..< Ae =).1 or W < We = WI in which Ae
and We are usually called cut eigenvalue or cut frequency. To guarantee that this con-
densation has enough accuracy, A < 0.31.." is usually selected (Bouhaddi and Fillod,
1996). For A ~ Ae, the results of Guyan condensation can be totally erroneous.
Similarly, the error resulting from the quasistatic condensation is given by
i' i - ] GT (A)
[
= fl_i iPl ~qJs
AS - A
1 _ 1 _
[ 1 -] G T (A)
= (i l - q)/(A _ q) _ 1 qJI -
(A2 - q) / (A - q) - 1
qJ2 -
(AS - q) / (A - q) - 1
qJs
(4)
Clearly, the valid eigenvalue range or frequency range is identical to that of Guyan
condensation.
As defined above, the slave model is the full model with all its masters grounded.
The frequencies of the full model will increase if some of its degrees of freedom are
fixed (that is, the slave model). Hence, the eigenvalues in the lowest frequency range
of the full model are usually smaller than the first eigenvalue of the slave model, that
is, the cut eigenvalue. This is the reason why Guyan condensation is generally valid
in the lowest frequency range of the full model and the corresponding results have
reasonable accuracy within that range.
The errors in the Guyan condensation matrix, shown in Eq. (3), indicate that
these errors depend on the ratio AdJ.... The bigger the ratio, the more accurate the
reduced model. Similarly, the ratio Ae - q/A - q affects the errors in the quasistatic
condensation matrix as shown in Eq. (4), This ratio may be greater than AdA if the
shifting value is selected properly. This is why the quasistatic condensation sometimes
has higher accuracy than Guyan condensation, as shown in Section 4.5. Furthermore,
the more the eigenvalue shifting value q approaches the eigenvalue A, the greater the
ratio Ae - q/A - q is, the fewer errors the condensation matrix has, and the higher
accuracy this eigenvalue is. Consequently, the accuracy of Guyan condensation may
be improved by increasing the ratio of AdA.
From the definition of a slave model we know that different masters result in
different slave models as well as a different lowest eigenvalue. This means that the
lowest eigenvalue of the slave model-that is, the cut eigenvalue-depends on the
choice of masters. Therefore, optimal selection of masters may increase the ratio
}..d}.. and, as a result, the accuracy of Guyan condensation. On the other hand, the
lowest eigenvalue (cut eigenvalue) may also be increased significantly by increasing
the number of the masters (constraint degrees of freedom). Consequently, what and
how many degrees of freedom are retained in the master set have significant influence
on the accuracy of Guyan condensation. The details on this topic can be found in
Chapter 7.
5.3.2 Higher-Order Guyan Condensation

A simple multiplication of the matrices on the right-hand side of Eq. (5.1-5) expands
this equation into two terms, namely,
(5)
The flexible matrix in Eq. (5) may be expanded in a power series. Substituting the
power series with If for the first dynamic flexible matrix on the right side of Eq. (5)
and the power series with If - 1 for the second dynamic flexible matrix, we have
R()") =- [t()"K;/ Mss)h] K;;lKsm - ),.H+liA -(H+l) (A _ H)-liT Ksm

h=O
+).. ["I:
h=O
(}"K;;lMss)h] K;;lMsm + }..H+liX -H (A - }..I)-li TMsm (6)
Equation (6) may be rearranged as
H H
R()") = RG + L [),.\K;;lMss)h-l] K;;lMssRG + L [),.h(K;;lMss)h-l] K;;lMsm
h=l h=l
_ ),.H+liA -H (A _ AI)-l A -liT Ksm +),.H+liA-H(A - H)-liTMsm
(7)
or in a simplified form as
H
R()") = RG + L [),. \K;;l Mss)h-l] K;;l (Msm + MssRG)
h=l
+),.H+liA-H(A _H)-lG T (8)
where G is defined in Eq. (5.1-45). Equation (8) is the general expression of the
high-order Guyan condensation. The last term on the right side of Eq. (8) denotes
the residual of the power series because the expansion is conditionally convergent.
The former three terms, H = 3, in the power series were considered by Chen and Pan
( 1988) when discussing the features of Guyan condensation.
Similar to Eq. (3), the error denoted by the third term on the right side of Eq. (8)
may be expressed as
AH+1iX -H(X _ll)-lG T
[
AH+l -(I) )..H+1 -(2) )..H+l -(5)] GT
= ~{'(~I_A)fIIs ~r(~2_)..)fIIs W(~s_A)fIIs
[
1 -(1) 1 -(2) 1 -(5)] G T
= (~l/)..)H(~I/A _ 1) fPS (~2/A)H(~2/A -1) fils (~sIA)H(isl).. _ 1) fils
(9)
It can be seen immediately that the valid eigenvalue range or frequency range of
the high-order Guyan condensation is the same as that of Guyan condensation. The
errors in the high-order Guyan condensation matrix, Eq. (9), depend upon the ratio
O. .clA)H. Since the ratio (AclA)H is greater than AdA in the valid frequency range.
the high-order Guyan condensation has higher accuracy than Guyan condensation.
However, if the eigenvalue is out of the valid range, the error may be exaggerated.
Furthermore, the computational effort of the higher-order Guyan condensation is
much more expensive than Guyan condensation due to the frequency-dependent
terms.
5.3.3 Error Analysis of Guyan Condensation

The errors of the Guyan condensation matrix are shown in Eq. (5.3-2). The readers
may ask a much more relevant question about how much influence of the errors on
the natural frequency or eigenvalue result from Guyan condensation. This is the topic
in this subsection.
The errors in the eigenvalue or natural frequency computed from Guyan conden-
sation have been investigated by several researchers (Flax, 1975; Johnson et al., 1980;
Fox, 1981; Thomas, 1982; Chen and Pan, 1988). The perturbation theory was usually
used to estimate the errors. Using Eq. (5.1-39), the eigenvalue problem of a reduced
model is given by
[KG - A(MG + AM)]qlm 0 = (10)
where
(11)
«
When the eigenvalue A Ao AM is much smaller than M G in some measure and
can be viewed as a perturbation of the latter.
The perturbation matrix AM defined in Eq. (11) is exact and independent of the
condition A «Ac. The approximate values were used by investigators. For example,
Johnson etal. (1980), Thomas (I982), and Fox (I981) used the first-order approxima-
tion of the diagonal matrix (A - AI) -1 and finally AGA -1 G T • Furthermore, Thomas
omitted the effect of M ms to simplify the derivation. Chen and Pan (1988) considered
the quasi-third order of approximation.
Define the eigenvalue and mode shape using the perturbation form as
A =AG+AA (12)
qlm = qlmG + Aqlm (13)

where AG and CfJmG are the eigenvalue and eigenvector resulting from Guyan conden-
sation. Substituting Eqs. (12) and (13) into Eq. (10), ignoring the higher-order small
number, and considering
K GCfJmG = AGM GCfJmG (14)
we have
Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (15) by CfJ ~G and considering Eq. (14) again results in
(16)
Hence, the relative error of the eigenvalue is given by
I:!..A AG T
S = T = -TCfJmGI:!..MCfJmG (17)
Substituting Eq. (12) into the right-hand side ofEq. (17) and assuming I:!..A is a small
number compared with AG, we have
(18)
where
(19)
By introducing some assumption, the up bound of the error may be obtained as

(Thomas, 1982)
or (20)
in which the subscript i denotes the ith eigenvalue; ASl is the first eigenvalue of
the slave model. Acs is the lowest constrained eigenvalue encountered during the
automatic elimination of the slaves using Henshell and Ong's scheme (Henshell and
Ong, 1975). The details can be found in Chapter 7.
The error bound given by Eq. (20) is conditionally right. The condition is that the
computed eigenvalue is much smaller than the cut eigenvalue, that is, A « Ac. If not
this condition, the perturbation of the reduced mass matrix M G used by investigators
(Flax, 1975; Johnson et al., 1980; Thomas, 1982; Chen and Pan, 1988) is not right.
The matrix I:!..M shown in Eq. (11) may not be viewed as a perturbation because it is
not higher-order smaller than the reduced mass matrix MG.
5.4 Dynamic Substruduring Scheme

From the discussion in Section 5.3 we know that the accuracy of Guyan condensation
may be improved by increasing the ratio AdA. One way is provided in that section. It
is to increase the lowest eigenvalue of the slave model and as a result the cut eigenvalue.
If the effects of the modes at the lowest frequency range of the slave model are included
in the condensation, the cut eigenvalue will change from the lowest eigenvalue to the
higher-order eigenvalue. This is another way to increase the cut eigenvalue, and the
logic of the dynamic substructuring scheme is to be discussed in this section.
One feature of this method is that it employs a "mixed" function base that consists
of two different classes of shape functions, namely, (1) static response functions and
(2) admissible functions that are linearly independent of the functions of class one
(Bouhaddi and Fillod, 1996). Of course, the mode shape of the slave model satisfies
the requirement and is a good selection. The Guyan condensation matrix may be used
for the function base of class one. In order to take into account the contribution of the
slaves, a second class of admissible shape functions associated with a finite number p
(p « s) of additional coordinates can be introduced. In the particular case that the
modal admissible function (p is defined by Eq. (5.1-25), the transformation of slave
coordinates CfJ s to the modal coordinate takes the following form:
(1)
where the matrix (,p E RSxP consists of the lowest p mode shapes of the slave model;
a E RP is the modal coordinate. The eigenvector of the full model may thus be
expressed as
(2)
Introducing Eq. (2) into Eq. (5.1-2) and premultiplying it by the transpose of matrix
Ta result in
o ] _ A [MG (3)
App GJ
in which the matrix
(4)
expresses the dynamic coupling between CfJ s and CfJm. It can be seen that if all modes
of the slave model are included in Eq. (1), the relation of eigenvector between the
masters and slaves is exact. The condensed eigenvalue problem (3) is usually used in
the substructure synthesis and retains both CfJ m and a in the reduced model (Craig
and Bampton, 1968; Hale and Meirovitch, 1982).
In the dynamic condensation and dynamic substructuring method, only the physical
degrees of freedom, the masters, are retained. The expression for the modal coordinate
a in terms of the physical coordinate CfJm may be obtained from the under part of
Eq. (3) as
- -1 T
a = ACApp - AI) Gp CfJ m (5)
Finally, the relation of eigenvector between the masters and slaves is defined by
introducing Eq. (5) into Eq. (1), namely,
(6)
The corresponding eigenproblem of the reduced model is given by
(7)
where
(8)
The mass correction matrix is symmetric and takes into account the dynamic effect
of slaves.
Actually, the condensation matrix defined in Eq. (6) may be obtained directly from
Eq. (5.3-8). As we know, if let H = 0 in Eq. (5.3-8) and drop the residual term,
the Guyan condensation matrix results. In order to increase the accuracy of Guyan
condensation, some part of the residual term, the contribution of the lowest p modes
of the slave model, for example, may be included in Guyan condensation. That is the
condensation matrix defined in Eq. (6).
5.5 Solution Schemes for Nonlinear Eigenproblems

As indicated in Section 5.1, although the reduced model obtained from the exact con-
densation is exact, this model is frequency-dependent. Thus, most classical eigenvalue
solvers are invalid for this problem and a special scheme becomes necessary.
Generally, four ways are available in the literature for solving the nonlinear eigen-
value problem. They are the approximately linearized method (Arduini, 1984; Roozen
et al., 1989; Bouhaddi and Fillod, 1992), the state space method, the perturbation
method (Chen and Pan, 1988; Hu and Zheng, 1989; Ramani'and Knight, 1997; Lin
and Xia, 2003), and the direct iteration method (Leung, 1978; Johnson et al., 1980;
Miller, 1980; Paz, 1984, 1991; Berkkan and Dokainish, 1990; Hou and Chen, 1997;
Zhang and Sainsbury, 1999). Other special schemes, Rothe and Voss (1994) and Yang
and Kim (1998), for example, are also available for the solution of the nonlinear
eigenproblems.
In the linearized approach (Bouhaddi and Fillod, 1992) matrix -AGA.(A-
U)-lG T in Eq. (5.1-39) is viewed as a correction term of Guyan condensation and
linearized as
-
-AGA(A - U)- 1G T = tJ.KG - AtJ.MG (1)
within the interested frequency range. Using this approximate linearization, Eq. (5.1-
39) becomes
(2)
The nonlinear eigenvalue problem (5.1-6) becomes a classical eigenvalue problem.

The strength of this scheme is obvious. However, the frequency range valid for the
linearization is usually very narrow and needs to be selected with great care. Another
linearization scheme (Arduini, 1984; Roozen et al., 1989), which is called spectral
condensation by Arduini, directly linearizes the frequency-dependent eigenproblem
within an interested, narrow frequency range.
The state space method and its variants are valid for the nonlinear eigenvalue prob-
lems that can be expressed as a power series in the unknown frequency or eigenvalue.
The details of this scheme have been described in Section 5.1. In the perturbation
approach, all or part of the higher orders of terms are viewed as a perturbation of
the reduced mass matrix defined by Guyan condensation. The iterative scheme may
also be implemented into the perturbation approach to increase the accuracy (Lin
and Xia, 2003). The above two algorithms are generally feasible for the eigenvalue in
the valid range A < Ac. The direct iteration approach is actually a combination of the
eigenvalue shift (spectrum shift) and any classical eigensolver such as inverse iteration
and Jacobi transformation. In this section, three schemes based on the direct iteration
will be provided.
5.5.1 Iterative Scheme I
This iterative scheme begins with the selection of the initial approximation of the ith
eigenvalue AiO) or frequency wiD) and follows by four major steps.
1. Set the initial approximate eigenvalue as the eigenvalue shift and compute the
dynamic condensation matrix using Eq. (5.2-1).
2. Compute the reduced mass and stiffness matrices using Eq. (5.2-2).
3. Solve for the reduced eigenvalue problem using any classical eigensolver such as
inverse iteration and Jacobi transformation and find the current approximation
of the ith eigenvalue.
4. Check the convergence of the eigenvalue or frequency. If it does not converge, go
back to step 1.
The basic computational steps for the ith mode (i = 1,2, ... , m) are as follows:
1. Select the initial approximation of the ith eigenvalue AiO) or frequency wiD) .
2. For j = 1, 2, ... , begin the iteration:
2.1 Formulate matrix D(A;j-l)) = K - A;j-l) M or
K - (wY-l))2M and partition
D= [Dmm Dms] , M= [Mmm Mms] (a)

Dsm Dss Msm Mss
2.2 Solve for the R(j) from the linear equation:
(b)
2.3 Compute the reduced mass and stiffness matrices using the following matrix
operations:
A(j) = MmsR(j) , (c)
M~) = Mmm + (A(j))T +A(j) + (R(j))TMssR(j) (d)
K~) = Kmm + (n(j))T + n(j) + (R(j))TKssR(j) (e)
2.4 Solve for the reduced eigenproblem:
or (f)
2.5 Find the jth approximation of the ith eigenvalue A;j) or frequency wj j ) from
those resulted from Eq. (f).
2.6 Check the convergence:
or (g)
where 8 is the prescribed error tolerance. If the iteration does not converge,
go back to step 2.1.
2.7 Compute the mode on the slaves if necessary:
(h)
The proper selection of the approximate eigenvalue is required twice in this iterative
scheme. One is the initial approximation in step 1 and the other is the jth approxima-
tion from current iteration in step 2.5. If the approximate eigenvalues are not selected
properly, the convergence of these eigenvalues to the required is not guaranteed.
Several ways may be used for the selection of the initial approximation of the
ith eigenvalue or frequency. The approximate eigenvalues or frequencies could be
obtained from Guyan condensation (Hou and Chen, 1997) or by having the interval
of frequency, i.e., bisection, incorporate with the Sturm sequence properties (Wittrick
and Williams, 1971) of the dynamic stiffness matrix (Leung, 1978; Miller, 1980) or
from modal test (Hou and Chen, 1997) or from the eigenvalue of reduced model
next to the currently converged eigenvalue or frequency (zero for the first eigenvalue)
(Leung, 1978; Paz, 1984, 1991).
As we know, the accuracy of eigenvalues resulting from Guyan condensation is
usually very low. Hence, these eigenvalues are usually not good approximations, espe-
cially for the higher order of modes. Some eigenpairs may be lost using this selection.
The latter three selecting schemes are better than the first. Of course, the approximate
eigenvalues from modal test usually have very high accuracy. However, the experi-
mental results are usually unavailable and very costly for a large size of structures or
systems. The approximate eigenvalues of the reduced model may also be obtained
by isolating them in closed intervals using the Sturm theorem as mentioned above.
In order to make the intervals as small as possible, a large number of bisections
are usually required. Since the Gauss elimination process is required to triangularize
the dynamic stiffness matrix of the full model for each trial value, the computa-
tional work used in these bisections will be very expensive. Fortunately, the number
of bisections can be reduced using the subpolynomial interpolation (Berkkan and
Dokainish, 1990). This iteration method was originally proposed by Iyers (1981) for
the solution of large linear eigenproblems but can be more efficiently employed for
the frequency-dependent eigenproblems. No extra computational effort is necessary
in Paz's scheme because the solution of the eigenvalue problem of the reduced model
is required anyway.
It is quite difficult to find the eigenvalue for the current approximation in step
2.5. Paz (1984, 1991) believed that the order of the currently interested eigenvalue
should not change during iterations. This means the ith eigenvalue (eigenvector) of
the full model should come from the ith eigenvalue (eigenvector) of the reduced
model. Therefore, the ith eigenvalue resulting from the reduced eigenproblem (0 is
the current approximation. Generally, this is not right. As described above, the modes
in the reduced model approach to those of the full model in a specific frequency
range rather than the low-frequency range because the dynamic condensation at each
of the iterations is actually the quasistatic condensation. Therefore, the order of the
currendy interested mode is usually not the same order of the modes in the reduced
model. This will be demonstrated in Example 5.1.
It has been shown and will be shown later that an eigenvalue calculated for
any mode in the iteration process should converge monotonically from above
to the exact eigenvalue. Thus, the exact value of the next eigenvalue falls between
the currendy converged eigenvalue and the approximate eigenvalue next to it in
the reduced model. Unfortunately, this is not right if the high modes rather than the
lowest modes are retained in the reduced model due to the shift. This problem
has not been properly solved up to now. In Example 5.1, it will be shown that
this problem can be circumvented by increasing the accuracy of the quasistatic
condensation.
5.5.2 Iterative Scheme II

If paz's scheme in Section 5.2 is used, the basic computational steps for the ith mode
(i = 1,2, ... , m) become
1. Select the initial approximation of the ith eigenvalue A~O) or frequency wrO);
2. For j = 1,2, ... , begin the iteration:
2.1 Formulate the partitioned dynamic stiffness matrix:
(j-l) (j-1)
D
( ~-1») =
AI
[ Kmm - \
(j-l)
Mmm Kms - Ai
(j-l)
M ms]
(a)
Ksm - \ Msm Kss - \ Mss
2.2 Reduce the dynamic stiffness matrix (a) by Gauss-Jordan elimination of the
slaves to
~] (b)
2.3 Construct the coordinate transformation matrix T(j):
T(j) = [ I ] (c)
R(j)
2.4 Compute the mass and stiffness matrices of the reduced model:
M~) = (T(j)f MT(j) and K~) =D~) +A?-l)M~) (d)
r
K~) ({)C;;; = A(j) M~) ({)C;;; or K~) ({)C;;; = (w (j) M~) ({)C;;; (e)
2.6 Find the jth approximation of the ith eigenvalue A~) from those resulting
from equation (e) I
or (f)
where E is the prescribed error tolerance. If the iteration does not converge,
go back to step 2.1.
(g)
The solution of the linear equations (b) in Schemel is replaced by the Gauss-Jordan
elimination of the slaves in Scheme II. Also, the reduced stiffness matrix is directly
computed from the reduced dynamic stiffness matrix. Therefore, the transformation
process of the stiffness matrix from the full physical space to the reduced space is
avoided.
However, the explicit transformation process of the mass matrix from the full
physical space to the reduced space is still required at each iteration as shown in
equation (d) in Scheme II. This transformation involves the multiplication of three
matrices of dimensions equal to the total number of degrees of freedom in the
full model. mn 2 + m 2 n multiplications and mn 2 + (m 2 - m)n - m 2 additions are
required in this transformation. Thus, if the number of the total degrees of freedom,
n, is large, this process may take some time. A modification, proposed by Paz (1989),
obviates such numerical operations. This modification consists of calculating the
reduced stiffness matrix K R only once by simple elimination of the slaves from the
full matrix after setting the initial approximation of eigenvalue zero. The reduced
mass matrix for any mode i is calculated as
(1)
where K R is independent of the order of eigenvalue and iteration; D~) is provided in

expression (b) in Scheme II.
As can be seen, the modified algorithm only requires, for each eigenvalue calculated,
the application of the Gauss-Jordan process to eliminate the slaves from the linear
equations at every iteration. However, because the reduced stiffness does not change
for all iterations and all eigenvalues, this modification will reduce the accuracy of the
original approach.
5.5.3 Iterative Scheme III

The iterative Scheme I may also be rewritten in an incremental form. Suppose we
are interested in the eigenvalue whose approximate value AD is known. Using this
assumption, the real eigenvalue may be expressed as
A = AD + ~A (2)
where !l).. is the difference between the approximate and the exact eigenvalues. The
corresponding eigenvalue problem in the incremental form is given by
(3)
Because)..o is prescribed, matrix DR ()..o) is a constant.

The basic computational steps for the ith mode (i = 1,2, ... , m) are as follows:
1. Select the initial approximation of the ith eigenvalue )..~o) ,

2. For j = I, 2, ... , begin the iteration:
2.1 Formulate matrix D()..Y- 1» = K - )..Y-l) M and partition
D = [Dmm Dms], M= [Mmm Mms] (a)

Dsm Dss Msm Mss
2.2 Solve for the R(j) from the linear equation:
DssR (j) = -Dsm (b)
2.3 Compute the reduced mass and dynamic stiffness matrices using the
following matrix operations:
A(j) = MmsR(j) (c)
M~) = Mmm + (A(j)f +A(j) + (R(j)f MssR(j) (d)
R -- D mm
D(j) + D ms R(j) (e)
(£)
2.5 Find the jth approximate increment !l)..Y) of the ith eigenvalue )..Y) from
those resulting from equation (£),
(g)
where e is the prescribed error tolerance; ),Y)

= A.~j-l) + !lA.~j). If the
iteration does not converge, go back to step 2.1.
(h)
Similarly, the convergence of the modes of interest may be safeguarded by the Sturm
theorem associated with the dynamic stiffness matrix (Leung, 1978). Let sD denote
the Sturm number of the matrix D, that is the number of negative elements on the
diagonal of the triangularized form of D by Gauss elimination without interchanges,
then the Sturm sequence properties of D ensure that the number of natural modes
below AO is equal to SD(AO). It can be shown that
sD = sDss + SDR (4)
where sDss and SDR may be obtained in steps 2.2 and 2.4 of the algorithm when the
matrices are decomposed.
In step 2.5, Leung (1978) suggested that the jth approximate increment /).A7)
of the ith eigenvalue A7) is the lowest absolute eigenvalue from the eigenproblem
equation (f), while the lowest positive eigenvalue was suggested by Zhang and Sains-
bury (1999). Sometimes, both are not right because the selection highly depends
on the accuracy of the initial approximation of this eigenvalue. The details for the
selection of the initial approximation and the jth approximation of the ith eigenvalue
have been previously discussed.

The two-story frame used in Section 4.3 will be considered. Because the features of
the three iterative schemes are essentially similar, only Scheme I will be used in this
example. Case 1 in Table 4.2 for the selection of masters is used first, Zero is assigned
to the initial approximation of the first eigenvalue. At this moment, no iteration is
implemented. The former five frequencies, their percent errors, and the CCFMV
values of the corresponding eigenvectors are listed in Table 5.l.
Because the first mode in Tables 5.1 and 4.3 both result from Guyan condensation,
they are exactly the same. However, the accuracy of the high order of eigenpairs
obtained from the current method is generally lower than Guyan condensation. The
percent error of the fourth frequency, for example, is 226.19% in the current approach,
while it is 80.350% in Guyan condensation. This may be explained from the step-
by-step results listed in Table 5.2. The underlined results are the final frequencies
in the solution scheme and the italic numbers are the initial approximation of the
next frequency. Because the initial approximation of the first eigenvalue is zero, no
eigenvalue shift is included and the results from the first condensation are the same as
those from Guyan condensation as indicated by the frequencies in row 1 of Table 5.2.
For the next condensation, the interested mode is two and 20.053 is assigned to the
initial approximation of the second frequency. Thus, the eigenvalue shift with q =
20.053 2 is used. Since this value is not very close to the square of the second frequency,
there is not much benefit for the accuracy of the second mode. However, the accuracy
Table 5.1 Accuracy of frequencies and mode shapes without iteration (Case 1)
Mode. Mode 5
!J7MO 136.68
226.19 289.G3
0.18370 0.G9736
Table 5.2 Frequencies of reduced model without iteration (Case 1)
Intaatecl mode Preqaenda of the recIucaI mocIeI

1 2 3 4 5
1 §.B .2O.OSJ 35M5 53S1S 97.536

2 lUt1 Am .uMD 44M5 79.012
3 25.M2 30.020 ~ n4ll 83,0,1
4 46.084 78.407 82.018 tza JJUS
5 . 82.555 95.651 105M l0U2 lH8
Table 5.3 Frequencies of reduced model without iteration (Case 2)
1 2
1 ~
2 8.7611
3 14.151
15.018
5 1&.9'13
of the three higher orders of modes is increased. Of course, the accuracy of the first
mode is reduced. Therefore, this selection of the initial approximation of the second
frequency may be fine. Unfortunately, 32.640 is absolutely not a good approximation
for the third frequency (27.794) because this value falls between the fourth and
the fifth exact frequencies as shown in Table 4.1. Of course, this condensation is
much worse than the second condensation concerning to the accuracy. Similarly,
the approximation of the fourth and fifth frequencies is much closer to the sixth
and the eighth frequencies, respectively, rather than themselves. As a consequence,
the accuracy of the reduced model is getting worse and worse. This phenomenon
also happens when the second case for the selection of the masters in Table 4.2 is
considered as shown in Table 5.3. Fortunately, the deterioration of accuracy is not as
serious as that in Table 5.1.
Next, Scheme I, in which the first eigenvalue resulting from Guyan condensation
is assigned to the initial approximation of the first eigenvalue, is used. Similarly,
no iteration is implemented. The natural frequencies, their errors, and the CCFMV
values of the corresponding mode shapes resulting from this solution scheme are
listed in Tables 5.4 and 5.5. Cases 1 and 2 for the selection of masters are used. Clearly,
there is not much improvement for the accuracy in both cases.
Now, let's consider Scheme I with iteration. Both Case 1 and Case 2 for the selection
of the masters are used. The error tolerance is set at £ = 10- 4 . The results are listed
in Tables 5.6 and 5.7. It can be seen that the modes converge to the exact after several
iterations. Unfortunately, they are not convergent to the modes that we want. In
Table 5.6, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th, and 13th orders of frequencies and mode shapes are
obtained, and the results in Table 5.7 converge to the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 13th
MocIe2 Mode 4
35.012 98.ti7
2S.967 227..51
G.56B Utili
" MocIeS
Table 5.6 Accuracy of frequencies and mode shapes with iteration (Case 1)
20Ut
212 3 7
LOII08O 1.l10080 UIGOOO UIOOIIO 1
modes of the full model. Several lower modes interested are lost. The reason is the
improper selection of the initial approximation and the following approximations for
the currently interested frequencies. Therefore, the noniterative and iterative scheme
for the solution of the frequency-dependent reduced eigenproblem, which results
from the exact dynamic condensation, strongly depends on the accuracy of Guyan
condensation if paz's scheme for the selection of approximate frequencies is used.
If the accuracy of Guyan condensation or quasistatic static condensation is low, the
lower modes interested may be lost although the iteration can converge.
This problem may be solved by selecting several more degrees of freedom as the
masters. Case 3, in which three more degrees of freedom are selected compared to
Case 1, is finally considered. The iterative scheme is run again with the same error
tolerance. The results are listed in Table 5.8. The results excellently agree with the
Mode Mode I Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode of Mode 5

Frequency (radls) 6.2379 1..... 27 27.794 29.934 35.132
Iteration 2 I 2 I I
CCFMV 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000
Table 5.9 Frequencies of reduced model with iteration (Case 3)
Intaated .Iteration Frequencies of the reduced model

mode
2 3 of 5
0 6.2842 14.661 28.991 30.987 36.282

1 6.2379 14.583 21.908 30.869 36.211
1 2 §.m2 J4.584 28.909 30.810 36.212
2 0 7.1998 J4.427 28.541 30.474
7.1519 ~ 28.550 30.483
0 13.713 20.539 17.804 29.943
3 13.598 19.630 17.794 29.955
3 2 13. • 19.618 ~ 29.955
..
4 0 14.085 22.330 27.900 29.934
14.080 .22.302 27.897 ~
5 0 15.376 26.333 29.740 32.762
5 15.348 26.318 29.734 32.602
exact values of the first five modes after one or two iterations. The frequencies of
the reduced model during iterations are listed in Table 5.9. The underlined numbers
are the final frequencies in the solution scheme and the italic numbers are the initial
approximation of the next frequency. The initial approximations for the lower five
frequencies used in the iterative scheme are 6.2842, 14.584,28.550,29.955, and 35.230.
The errors of these approximations are 0.74311 %, 1.0851 %,2.7191 %,0.07174%, and
0.27811 %, respectively. Clearly, they are already very close to the exact frequencies.
Therefore, the highly accurate approximation is absolutely necessary in this iterative
scheme. For the system with close frequencies, the requirement of the accuracy of
initial approximation will be much higher. Consequently, Leung, Hou and Chen
suggested two schemes for the selection of initial approximation. In these schemes,
the initial approximations usually have reasonable high accuracy.
5.5.5 Some Improvements

The most time-consuming step in these iterative schemes is the solution of equa-
tion (b) or its equivalence. Because this solution is required at every iteration,
equation (b) will be solved p x q times if p eigenvalues are of interest and q iterations
are on average required for each eigenvalue. Furthermore, the size of the matrix is
very close to the full model although the band nature of the dynamic stiffness matrix
may be taken into account.
The series expansion of the inverse of dynamic stiffness matrix (Kss - AMss) may
be used (Leung, 1988). Letting H = 1 in Eq. (5.1-29) leads to
(Kss - AMsJ
-1 -1
= Kss + AKss-1 MssKss-1 + A2 <l»A
- - -2 -
(A - AI)
-I - T
<I» (5)
Since it is impossible to obtain all the modes of the slave model, only the first several
modes, p for example, are considered. With this consideration, Eq. (5) becomes
where the computation of the matrix K;; 1 or its equivalence is required by all the
condensation methods. Although only several modes are included in the expansion,
the results usually have a high accuracy. In practice, the computation of K;; 1K sm
instead of the explicit inverse K;;I, (K;;IKsm)TMssK;;IKsm instead of the explicit
product K;; 1M ssK;; 1 are performed. This may be accomplished by any equation
solver that takes advantage of the sparsity of the matrix Kss.
Although the computational work may be reduced somewhat using the series
expansion, the series is conditionally convergent. Special care should be taken when
using it. Furthermore, the lower modes of the slave model are required, which is also
very time-consuming. A lot of matrix multiplication processes also introduced using
this power series. It will be shown in Chapter 6 that the repeated computation of the
inverse of the dynamic stiffness matrix or its equivalence as well as the modes of the
slave model is unnecessary.
5.6 Modal-Type Dynamic Condensation

If only the modal parameters of a full model or slave model are used in the dynamic
condensation matrix, the approach is called modal-type dynamic condensation. Two
typical modal-type dynamic condensation schemes are frequently used in the liter-
ature. They are modal reduction developed by Kammer (1987), which is also called
least square model reduction by Chiao (1992, 1996), and System Equivalent Reduction
Expansion Process (SEREP) developed by O'Callahan, Avitabile, and Riemer (1989).
The basic concepts of these two methods are essential the same. It will be shown later
that the difference is only at the construction of the coordinate transformation or
mapping matrix.
SEREP was originally formulated as a global mapping technique used to estimate
rotational degrees of freedom as well as unmeasured translational degrees of freedom
in experimental data (O'Callahan et aI., 1986). It will be shown that this approach
may be obtained simply from the definition of a dynamic condensation matrix.
5.6.1 Dynamic Condensation Matrix

The dynamic equations of equilibrium for an undamped n degrees-of-freedom model
are usually given by
MX(t) + KX(t) = P(t) (1)
where X(t) and X(t)are the acceleration and displacement response vectors, respec-
tively. Using the mode superposition method, the displacement response vector in
Eq. (1) may be expressed as
X(t) = «I»q(t) (2)
in which «I» E Rnxnis the complete eigenvector matrix of the full model; q(t)E R n is
modal coordinates. It is well known that the computation of the complete eigenvec-
tor matrix is unnecessary and impossible for a large-size model. Therefore, modal
truncation is usually used in mode superposition. If p eigenvectors of the full model
are used in the mode superposition, Eq. (2) is rewritten as
(3)
Because the modal coordinate is p-dimension as, the modal displacement vector qp (t)
has p components. The eigenvector matrix «I»p E RnxP only consists of p eigenvectors
of the full model. These p eigenvectors may be selected from the lowest frequency
range, or any interested frequency range, or totally arbitrarily, which depends upon
the requirement of the reduced model. Since the eigenvectors in the matrix are linearly
independent, the rank of the eigenvector is p.
With the arrangement of the total degrees of freedom, Eq. (3) may be partitioned as
(4)
which is equivalent to two equations, namely,
Xm(t) = «I»mpqp(t) (5)
Xs(t) = «I»spqp(t) (6)
Equation (5) is a description of the displacement responses at masters in terms of the

eigenvector matrix at these masters. The submatrix «I»mp E Rmxp is generally not a
square matrix. There are three possible situations: m = p; m > p; and m < p. Solving
Eq. (5) for the displacement vector qp(t) in the modal coordinate in terms of the
displacement vector Xm(t) in the physical coordinate requires a generalized inverse
of matrix «I»mp for the latter two cases.
Case A: m = p
This is the simplest case. If the mode shapes (eigenvectors) selected are all observed at
the masters, matrix «I»mm is full-column rank, nonsingular, and invertible. Therefore,
qp(t) can be solved from Eq. (5) as
(7)
CaseB: m > p
Since the number of equations is greater than the number of unknowns, Eq. (5) can
be put into a normal form by projecting this equation as
(8)
Introducing Eq. (5) into Eq. (8) produces
(9)
in which 9.p(t) implies an approximate solution of qp(t) (O'Callahan et al., 1989).

Although the square coefficient matrix of qp(t) will, in general, be fully ranked such
that it possesses an inverse, the standard inverse of this matrix may have some difficulty
and the singular-value decomposition solution is usually required. Symbolically,9.p(t)
could be solved from Eq. (9) as
(10)
Substituting Eq. (8) into (10) produces the general form of the solution of the
modal coordinates in terms of physical coordinates and modal matrix as
(ll)
where +~p (m > p) is the generalized inverse of matrix +mp and is defined as
(m > p) (12)
Equation (ll) represents the "best" solution of the p variables given in Eq. (5). It
is important to note that Eq. (ll) can alternatively be obtained by using a least-
square solution if the minimization of the error squared between Xm(t) (exact) and
+mpqpCt) (approximate) is performed. For this reason, the modal reduction is called
the least-square model reduction by Chiao (1992, 1996).
CaseC: m < p
In the case that the number of equations is less than the number of unknowns, the best
solution of Eq. (5) is an average solution of the equations. If the system matrices are
formed for this condition, they are row-rank m and are, therefore, not rank-deficient.
But the system modal variables p have been put into m equations, thus producing an
average of the system variables.
Finding the solution for this condition requires a set of m variables be projected to
the p system variables as .
(13)
where qm (t) is the approximate solution set. The opposite of this statement implies
that the p system variables will be averaged into the m system equations. Substituting
it into Eq. (5) produces
(14)
which, in turn, can be used to solve for the qm(t). The coefficient matrix in Eq. (14)
can be shown to be of proper rank to possess a standard inverse such that
qm(t) = (4)mp4>;;IP) -I Xm(t) (15)
Introducing Eq. (15) into Eq. (l3) produces the general form of the average solution
(O'Callahan et aI., 1989) as
qp(t) = 4>~pXm(t) (16)
The generalized inverse 4>~p(m < p) in Eq. (16) is given by
(m < p) (17)
Equation (16) represents an average solution of an under specified set of equations

containing p system variables. Therefore, it is not of practical use.
In practical applications, to make the selected p modes observable at the m masters,
the number of masters generally needs to be greater than the number of modes,
that is, m > p. Thus, the solution in Case B will be considered in the following. For
convenience, the solution qp(t) of Eq. (5) is approximately replaced by qp(t), that is,
qp(t) = 4>~pXm(t) (18)
Substituting Eq. (18) into Eq. (6) leads to
Xs(t) = 4>sp4>~pXm(t) (19)
According to the definition of the dynamic condensation matrix, we have
R = 4>sp4>~p (20)
Equation (20) is the dynamic condensation matrix defined in modal reduction and
SEREP. Actually, Eq. (20) may be directly obtained from the definition equation of
dynamic condensation matrix, namely, 4>sp = R4>mp.
As stated above, the coefficient matrices in Eq. (9) can be inverted safely using the
singular value decomposition (SVD) process. The procedure is also used to determine
the rank of a matrix since the number of singular values (that is, those values that are
above a threshold value of the machine zero) represents the rank of the matrix.
Any matrix A of order (n x m) can be decomposed into its orthonormal matrices
and singular values as
A = Ul:V T (21)
In Eq. (21), U is an orthonormal matrix of order (n x n) whose columns are the eigen-
vectors of matrixAA T; V is an orthonormal matrix of order (m x m) whose columns
are the eigenvectors of matrix ATA; 1: is the matrix of order (n x m) containing the
singular values as
(22)
The upper left partition of matrix 1: is a diagonal matrix of order r x r containing

the singular values of matrix A. The order of matrix (1 rr is the rank of the matrix A.
5.6.2 Reduced System Matrices

When the dynamic condensation matrix is available, the coordinate transformation
matrix T may be given by (Kammer, 1987)
The reduced system matrices have the same form as those in Eq. (5.1-23).
In SEREP (O'Callahan et al., 1989), the coordinate transformation matrix is obtained
by substituting Eq. (18) into Eq. (4), namely,
(24)
in which
T = • •+ =
p mp \••cI»++}
•
mp mp
sp mp
(25)
Using the coordinate transformation in Eq. (25), the reduced system matrices and
equivalent force vector are given by
(26)
The corresponding dynamic equations of equilibrium and eigenproblem are given by
MRXm(t) + KRXm(t) = FR(t) (27)

(KR - )"MR) ({)m = 0 (28)
Clearly, the coordinate transformation matrices defined in Eq. (23) and (25) are
different. Consequently, the resulting reduced system matrices are also different.
Introducing Eq. (23) into Eq. (26) gives
K~ = Kmm + KmsR + RTKsm + RTKssR (29a)
M~ = M mm + M msR + RT Msm + RT MssR (29b)

Similarly, substituting Eq. (25) into Eq. (26) leads to
(30)
where App is the eigenvalue matrix consisting of the p eigenvalues of the full model.
Using the reduced stiffness matrix in Eq. (29), we have
4)~pK~4)mp = 4)~p (Kmm + KmsR + RTKsm + RTKssR) 4)mp (31)
Considering 4)sp = R4)mp, Eq. (31) may be rewritten as
4)~pK~4)mp = 4)~pKmm4)mp + 4)~pKms4)sp + 4)~Ksm4)mp + 4)~Kss4)sp (32)
or in a simplified form as
(33)
Similarly, the reduced mass matrix in Eq. (29) satisfies
(34)
Equations (33) and (34) show that the reduced stiffness and mass matrices defined in
Eq. (29) are bothorthonormalized with respect to the eigenvector matrix consisting
of the p eigenvectors at masters. This means that the p modes are retained in the
reduced modes exactly. Similarly, one can easily verify that
(35)
Although the reduced system matrices K~ and M1 or K~ and M~ preserve the

selected modes of the full model, these reduced matrices are generally rank-deficient.
A special scheme is required in further analyses.
Using SVD, 4)mp (for the case of m > p) can be decomposed into
(36)
Because the matrix 4)mp is partitioned from the matrix 4)p, which contains p linearly
independent vectors by column, it is not very difficult to make the column vectors of
matrix 4)mp linearly independent by the proper selection of masters (see Chapter 7).
Thus, the singular-value matrix has the form
(37)
with the rank of p. The generalized inverse of matrix 4)mp is given by
(38)
where
(39)
Substituting Eqs. (38) and (39) into Eq. (30) produces
K~ = U[(1;+)T yT Appy~+]UT (40)
where the terms with the square brackets can be reduced using SVD to
(41)
in which
(42)
Equations (40) through (42) show that the rank of K~ is p, which is less than the
order m of the matrix. Therefore, the reduced stiffness matrix K~ is rank-deficient
(O'Callahan et aI., 1989). In a similar fashion, introducing Eqs. (38) and (39) into the
expression for M~ in Eq (30) yields
(43)
where the m x m order matrix
(44)
Thus, the reduced mass matrix is also rank-deficient at rank p (O'Callahan et aI.,
1989).
For the case of p = m, the coordinate transformation matrices resulting from the
two definitions, modal reduction and SEREP, are the same. The reduced system
matrices are, thus, identical and full ranked. However, the calculation of these m
modes of the full model will be a very heavy burden because m is generally several
hundreds or thousands for a large-sized model.
5.6.3 Reduced Eigenvalue Problem

The eigenvalue problem of the reduced model is given by Eq. (28). Introducing
Eqs. (40), (43), and (39) into this equation results in (O'Callahan et aI., 1989)
which can be rewritten as
-lyTA Y -I ,-2
U [ (1pp pp o(1pp - A(1pp
o ] U T CfJ m = 0 (46)
O-AO
Equation (46) can be further reduced to
+)1 0] [A PPO- AI 0_0]

[( ·mp 0 CfJ m = 0
),0 [.~p] (47)
or simply
(48)
It is shown in Eqs. (46) and (47) that the reduced eigenvalue problem contains two
groups of eigenvalues. The first group defined in the upper partition is the group of
eigenvalues of the full model. The second group results from the fact that the system
matrices of the reduced model are rank-deficient and therefore are in determinant.
These values are considered as null values of the eigenproblem.
As discussed above, the reduced model resulting from the modal-type reduction
exactly preserves all the modes selected from the full model although the reduced
system matrices are rank-deficient. These modes of interest may be at any frequency
range of the full model or totally arbitrary. Hence, the accuracy of the reduced
model is generally independent of the selection of masters provided that the selected
modes are observable at these masters. Therefore, this method is very useful for the
modal expansion of the measured modes and test-analysis model correlation. The
disadvantages are that the interested modes of the full model should be computed
before the reduction and that the special scheme is required to remove the null values
of the reduced model before eigenanalysis is performed.
An iterative SEREP was developed by Sastry, Mahapatra, and Sopalakrishnan et al.,
(2003) for high-frequency responses based on Sturm sequence check. The method
uses eigenvalue separation properties on the excitation frequency band to identify the
optimal number of the eigenpairs required to capture the accurate responses.
5.6.4 Hybrid-Type Condensation

To overcome these weaknesses of modal-type dynamic condensation, several
approaches have been proposed. Examples of these approaches are hybrid reduction
developed by Kammer (1991) and complete mode reduction developed by Zhang and
Wei (1995). Since both modal matrix and system matrices are explicitly included in
the condensation matrix, they are categorized as hybrid-type condensation.
Hybrid reduction is essentially a combination of Guyan condensation and modal
reduction. For the kept p modes, it is equivalent to modal reduction, and for the next
(m - p) it is equivalent to Guyan condensation. Some details of this approach are
described in Chapter 11.
With the implementation of complete mode space theory, complete mode reduction
was derived by Zhang and Wei. In this method all the truncation (n - p) modes are
replaced by the modes in the complete mode space. After orthogonalization of these
(n - p) modes with respect to the selected p modes and themselves, these modes are
combined with the selected modes to form a complete modal matrix. If the (n - p)
modes are denoted by Wh, the complete modal matrix is given by and portioned as
(49)
The dynamic condensation matrix derived from this complete modal matrix is
expressed as (Zhang and Wei, 1995)
Rzw = ( 4>sm + 4>ssRG) ( 4>mm + 4>msRG)-1 (50)
in which the matrix RG is the generalized Guyan condensation matrix, which is given
in Section 4.4. Clearly, if RG is a null matrix, the complete mode condensation is
identical to modal reduction.
5.7 Comparisons and Summary

Approaches for the dynamic condensation of a large size of finite element models
have been discussed in this chapter. These methods are summarized in Table 5.10. For
comparison purposes, various static condensation approaches presented in Chapter 4
Table 5.10 Comparisons of reduction methods
{ ....
..,
} =[ I ] ..
-IC;;IIC,.. ..
No
{ .... }_[ I ] .. No
.., -ICiIC. . . .
{::}-[-k;~ J. . No
QUIIiIIIIdc
..........ioD
(::) - [_ I Jt'. No
I!Dct
""""'''"M' t::J -[- I ] t'•

•) I (<<. - UI,.)
t::) -[ I
Ya
t::) -[ No
t::} -[- +~IP} Ya
{....., } -[-IC;I,,_
, ,J ft'.. ).. -l(A,. - A.l)-IGJ... Ya
No
Table 5.10 Continued
Preqaeocy
depeDrIeoce
~",k (:}-[_ :'1:_ r:](::).r..-•• + .~.. No
~au,.a (:) - [_ :. :J I::}·

{:}-[- .~ - ;]{:-}
{ ,,_}_[ I ]~
fl. ..,• . , . .
I::} = [:::t],,·
Hybrid reduction {::} ... To.,. + (T.....w - Taa,.)PTf'. No
redlXfiDDlJIJOIX I::} = [c•. + •.iG)C;_+ • ..!G)-I]"- No
I::} -Lac;+I:t.I[l'C I _+M.ac;)]"

* : (Kss - AMss)-ls expressed in Eq. (5.5-6).
and other similar reduction schemes such as general dynamic reduction (O'Callahan,
1990), extended Guyan condensation (Conti, 1989), dynamic substructure (Cheung
and Leung, 1991), and Craig-Bampton method (Craig and Bampton, 1968) are also
listed. It is necessary to note that the coordinate transformation matrix listed in this
table can also be used for responses. The important features of these methods are
summarized below.
Type of Condensation
All the condensation methods provided in Chapters 4 and 5 can be generally divided
into three categorizes and referred to as physical-type, modal-type, and hybrid-type
dynamic condensation. If only the system matrices, stiffness and mass matrices, of the
full model are required directly in the computation of dynamic or static condensation
matrix, this approach is called physical-type condensation. Guyan condensatiqn, gen-
eralized Guyan condensation, quasistatic condensation, generalized quasistatic Guyan
condensation, exact condensation, and classical dynamic condensation fall into this
category. In the modal-type condensation, a given number of modes of the full model
are required to compute the dynamic condensation matrix. Modal reduction and
SEREP belong to this type. Ifboth the system matrices and the modal data of the full
model or slave model are used to estimate the dynamic condensation, this method
is defined as hybrid-type condensation. Examples of hybrid condensation methods

are exact condensation (1), high-order Guyan condensation, dynamic substructuring,
hybrid reduction, and complete model reduction.
Exact Condensation
As the name says, the dynamic condensation matrix and the system matrices of
the reduced model resulting from the exact condensation are exact. However, these
matrices are functions of the unknown eigenvalues. The reduced eigenproblem
is frequency-dependent, and a special scheme is required for the solution of the
eigenproblem.
For the case that the dynamic stiffness matrix of the reduced model can be expanded
into a power series, the state space approach or its equivalent may be used to solve for
the nonlinear eigenvalue problem. In the linearization approaches, all the high orders
of terms are linearized within a narrow, interested frequency range. Alternatively, these
high orders of terms may be viewed as a perturbation of the reduced mass matrix
defined by Guyan condensation. The direct iterative scheme is the simplest approach
for solving the frequency-dependent eigenvalue problem. However, proper selection
of the initial approximation and the approximate values for the next round of iteration
are required. In the latter two schemes, the eigenpairs are usually computed one by
one. The matrix inverse of the dynamic stiffness matrix or its equivalent is required
at each iteration in the direct iterative methods. This is usually very time-consuming.
In the modified scheme I of exact condensation, the inverse of the dynamic stiffness
matrix is replaced by a power series with the first two terms and some of the residual
considered. Therefore, the matrix inverse is unnecessary during the iteration. How-
ever, the first several modes of the slave model are required. The condensation matrix
is not exact anymore due to the truncated errors of the high modes of the slave model.
Improvement of Guyan Condensation
Classical dynamic condensation can be looked as a variant of Guyan condensation in

which the inertia forces at the specific frequency are considered. This condensation is
good for the model under harmonic excitations.
The valid eigenvalue range of Guyan condensation is A < Ac and the accuracy
depends on the ratio Ac I A. The bigger the ratio is, the higher accuracy the reduced
mode has. Besides the classical dynamic condensation, three ways may be used to
increase the accuracy of Guyan condensation:
1. Consideration of high order of approximations: The accuracy of high-order
Guyan condensation depends upon the ratio (AclA)H. This ratio is generally
much greater than the ratio Ac I A in Guyan condensation in the valid eigenvalue
range. Thus, high-order Guyan condensation has much higher accuracy than
Guyan condensation in this range. Because the same power series is used in
both approaches, their valid eigenvalue ranges are the same. Of course, the
computational work of the high-order Guyan condensation is more expensive
than Guyan condensation.
2. Increase of the lowest eigenvalue of the slave model: The selection of masters will
affect the lowest eigenvalue of the slave model and, as a result, the cut eigenvalue.
Therefore, optimal choice of masters may increase the cut eigenvalue and the
ratio Ac / A. Furthermore, increasing the number of masters may increase the cut
eigenvalue significantly.
3. Inclusion of the lowest modes of the slave model: In the dynamic substruc-
turing scheme, since the effect of the several lowest modes are included in the
condensation matrix, the cut eigenvalue increases from the first eigenvalue to
the lowest eigenvalue that the corresponding modes do not consider in the
condensation matrix. Thus, its accuracy is higher than Guyan condensation.
However, a special eigensolver for the reduced eigenproblem is required due
to the frequency-dependent system matrices of reduced model. Of course, the
dynamic substructuring scheme may also be implemented into the high-order
Guyan condensation, dynamic condensation, etc.
Modal- Type Condensation

The reduced model resulting from the modal-type reduction preserves all the modes
selected from the full model. These modes may be at any frequency range of the full
model or totally arbitrary. Because this reduction is exact, the selection of masters
does not affect the accuracy of the reduced model provided that the selected modes
are observable at masters. Generally, the number of the selected modes is smaller than
that of masters. This approach is generally used in experimental mode expansion and
test -analysis model correlation.
Several disadvantages of modal-type dynamic condensation limit its usage. (1) The
eigenvectors of full model should be available before the reduction is performed. (2)
When the number of kept modes is equal to the number of masters and these modes
are all observable at masters, the reduced system matrices have good properties.
However, it will be a very heavy burden to obtain that number of modes of the
full model. (3) When the number of the selected modes is less than the number of
masters, the reduced system matrices are rank-deficient. Special schemes are required
for further analyses using the reduced model.
Generalized Coordinates
The form of transformation between the full model coordinates and the reduced
model coordinates defined by the Craig-Bampton method, general dynamic reduc-
tion, extended Guyan reduction, and Ritz vector method are essentially the same.
The only difference among these is the selection of generalized coordinates and the
corresponding transformation. In the Craig-Bampton formulation, for example, the
transformation matrix concerning the generalized coordinates are selected from the
mode shapes of the slave model. In extended Guyan condensation, the transforma~
tion is mass-weighted static shape vectors associated with slaves when the masters are
constrained.
Other Schemes
The version of the substructure synthesis provided in Table 5.10 is in fact similar to the
dynamic substructuring method in formulation. The difference between them is the
solution sequence. The substructure synthesis method retains the master coordinates
(/Jmand the general coordinates a in the final equation while the dynamic substructure
method retains only the master coordinates.
The transformation matrix of the Ritz vector method is very similar to those of the
substructure synthesis approach and the dynamic substructure approach. The Ritz
vectors Y and Ritz coordinates yare used in the former while the mode shapes of the
slave model and the modal coordinates are used in the latter two.
References
Arduini, C (1984) Spectral condensation: A new concept in numerical structural dynamic
analysis. ESA Journal, 8(1):27-36.
Berkkan, K and Dokainish, MA (1990) Accuracy of condensed eigenvalue solution. AIAA
Journal, 28(7):1324-1325.
Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1992). Substructuring using a linearized dynamic condensation
method. Computers and Structures, 45( 4):679-683.
Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1996) Model reduction by a simplified variant of dynamic condensation.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 191 (2):233-250.
Chen, S-H and Pan, HH (1988) Guyan condensation. Communications in Applied Numerical Methods,
4(4):549-556.
Cheung, YK and Leung, AYT (1991) Finite Element Methods in Dynamics. Science Press, Hong Kong,
China:223-234.
Chiao, K-P (1992) Least square model reduction for vibration control of complex mechanical systems.
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Maryland.
Chiao, K-P (1996) A systematic coupling procedure for component mode synthesis with least square model
reduction. Proceedings of the 14th International Modal Analysis Conference (Dearborn, Michigan),
Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:648-654.
Conti, P (1989) A higher order generalization of the Guyan reduction method. Proceedings of the 7th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, Nevada), Union College, Schenectady, NY:529-532.
Craig, RR, Jr and Bampton, MCC (1968). Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses. AIAA Journal,
6(7):1313-1319.
Flax, AH (1975) Comment on "reduction of structural frequency equations." AIAA Journal, 13(5):701-702.
Fricker, AJ (l983a) A new approach to the dynamic analysis of structures using fixed frequency dynamic
stiffness matrices. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 19(8): 1111-1129.
Fricker, AI (I 983b ) A method for solving high-order real symmetric eigenvalue problems. International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 19(8):1131-1138.
Fox, GL (1981) A method for estimating the error induced by the Guyan reduction. Shock and Vibration
Bulletin, 51 (I): 19-24.
Hale, AL and Meirovitch, L (1982) General procedure for improving substructures representation in
dynamic synthesis. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 84(2):269- 287.
Henshell, RD and Ong, JH (1975) Automatic masters for eigenvalue economization. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 3(4):375-383.
Hou, Z and Chen, S (1997) Iterated dynamic condensation technique and its applications in modal testing.
Shock and Vibration, 4(3):143-151.
Hu, Y and Zheng, Z-C (1989) Improving the accuracy of Guyan reduction by the perturbation technique.
Schenectady, NY:988-99I .
Iyer, MS (1981) Eigensolution using Lagrangian interpolation. International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering, 17(10):1443-1453.
Johnson, CP, Craig Jr, RR and Yargicoglu, A (1980) Quadratic reduction for the eigenproblem. International
Kammer, DC (1987) Test-analysis model development using an exact modal reduction. International
Journal of Analytical and Experimental Modal Analysis, 2( 4): 174-179.
Kammer, DC (1991) A hybrid approach to test-analysis-model development for large space structures.
Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 113(3):325-332.
Leung, AYT (1978) An accurate method of dynamic condensation in structural analysis. International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 12(11): 1705-1715.
Leung, AYT (1988) A simplified dynamic substructure method. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, 16(6):827-837.
Lin, Rand Xia, Y (2003) A new eigensolution of structures via dynamic condensation. Journal of Sound
and Vibration, 266(1):93-106.
106(STlO):2097-2108.
Mokeyev, VV (1998) A frequency condensation method for the eigenvalue problem. Communications in
Numerical Methods in Engineering, 14(1):1-8.
Moler, CB and Stewart, GW (1973) An algorithm for generalized matrix eigenvalue problems. SIAM
Journal of Numerical Analysis, 1O( 2):241-256.
O'Callahan, JC, Avitabile, P, Lieu, 1-W, and Madden, R (1986) An efficient method of determining rotational
degrees of freedom from analytical and experimental modal data. Proceedings of the 4th International
Modal Analysis Conference (Los Angeles, CAl, Union College, Schenectady, NY: 50-58.
O'Callahan, JC,Avitabile, P, and Riemer, R (1989) System equivalent reduction expansion process (SEREP).
O'Callahan, J (1990) Comparison of reduced model concepts. Proceedings of the 8th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, Florida), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 422-430.
Paz, M (1984) Dynamic condensation. AIAA Journal, 22(5):724-727.
Paz, M (1989) Modified dynamic condensation method. Journal of Structural Engineering, 115(1):
234-238.
Paz, M (1991) Structural Dynamics: Theory and Computation, Third Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York: 273-299.
Qu, Z-Q and Chang, W-J (1997) An extended order method (EOM) for nonlinear eigenvalue problems.
Mechanics and Practice, 19( 6):25-26.
Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998) Extended order method for eigenproblem and its sensitivity of frequency-
dependent systems. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University, 32( 4):23-26.
Ramani, A and Knight, CE (1997) A solution method for some nonlinear eigenproblems in structural
dynamics. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, Florida), Society
for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1952-1958.
Rothe, K and Voss, H (1994) Improving condensation methods for eigenvalue problems via Rayleigh
functions. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 111(1-2):169--183.
Roozen, NB, de Kraker, A, Kriens, RFC, and van Campen, DH (1989) Foundation and application
of the spectral condensation technique for dynamic analysis of large structures. Proceedings of the
7th International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, Nevada), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
233-242.
Sastry, CVC, Mahapatra, DR, Sopalakrishnan, S, and Ramamurthy, TS (2003) An iterative system equivalent
reduction expansion process for extraction of high frequency response from reduced order finite element
model. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 192 ( 15): 1821-1840.
Thomas, DL (1982) Errors in natural frequency calculations using eigenvalue economization. International
Wittrick, WH and Williams, FW (1971) A general algorithm for computing natural frequencies of elastic
structures. Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, 24(3):263-284.
Yang, K-Tand Kim, H-S (1998) An alternative approach to modeling of structures using dynamic stiffness
matrices. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, California),
Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 674-680.
Zhang, DW and Wei, FS (1995) Complete mode-type reduction (CMR) for structural dynamic system.
Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville, Tennessee), Society for
Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 616--622.
Zhang, QJ and Sainsbury, MG (1999) On the exact reduction and eigensolution for the Galerkin element
method. Computers and Structures, 71(4):413-422.
Zhang, Y-Q and Wang, W-L (1993) A new method for dynamic reduction. Proceedings of the 11th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, Florida), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
6 Iterative Methods for Dynamic Condensation
6.1 Introdudion
Various dynamic condensation approaches have been described in the preceding
chapter. Generally, they can significantly improve the accuracy of static condensation.
Unfortunately, these methods have one or more disadvantages:
1. The reduced model is frequency-dependent, and a special eigensolver is required

to solve the reduced eigenproblem. Furthermore, it is difficult to use this reduced
model in further dynamic analyses.
2. The eigenpairs of the reduced model have to be computed one by one.
3. A given number of eigenvectors of the full model or slave model should be
available in modal-type and hybrid-type dynamic condensation methods before
the condensation is performed.
Alternatively, the prediction-correction scheme, in which the prediction is usually

defined by the reduced model computed from static condensation, may be utilized to
increase the accuracy of static condensation. In the correction stage, the exact mode
expansion (Kidder, 1973), Kidder's mode expansion (Kidder, 1973), and Miller's
mode expansion (Miller, 1980) are frequently used to estimate the mode shapes at
slaves with the partial or full consideration of ignored inertia. This scheme is also
called the two-step method.
The basic concept of the two-step methods consists of the following four successive
steps (Qu and Selvam, 2001):
1. Anticipate frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes at masters, that

is, the eigensolution of the reduced model, using the Guyan condensation
method (or other physical-type condensation approaches) or compute the initial
approximation of dynamic condensation 'matrix using the related condensation
methods.
2. Compute the mode shapes at the slaves using the mode expansion expressions
in which the inertia effects are considered partially or fully, or formulate the
improved dynamic condensation matrix.
111
3. Construct a new subspace using the mode shapes at the masters and slaves, or
directly using the improved dynamic condensation matrix and an identity matrix.
4. Formulate the system matrices of the reduced model for the second time using
the new subspace, and then compute the eigenpairs of the reduced model if
necessary.
Although the inertia is considered partially or fully in the exact, the Kidder, and
the Miller mode expansions, the new mode shapes computed from these expansions
had not been used to perform a second stage of model reduction for quite a long
time. According to Rayleigh's principle, a first-order error in mode shape gives only a
second-order error in the estimated frequency, so the accuracy of the reduced model
could be increased if the coordinate transformation is defined properly.
Based on the exact, the Kidder, and the Miller mode expansions, two versions
of two-step approaches, SEREP-Guyan condensation and SEREP-IRS (improved
reduced system), were proposed by Papadopoulos and Garcia (1996). The advantage
of these schemes is that several eigenpairs may be obtained simultaneously. However,
it can be proven that the SEREP procedure used does not have any effect on the
accuracy of the reduced model. Research (Qu and Fu, 1998c) shows that the SEREP-
Guyan scheme based on the exact and the Kidder mode expansions may improve
the accuracy of Guyan condensation only when the accuracy of Guyan condensation
is very high. It can be proven that the SEREP-Guyan scheme based on the Miller
mode expansion is equivalent to the improved reduction system method, which will
be described later. In 1998, Mokeyev (1998) proposed a two-step scheme based on
the exact mode expansion. Similarly, the accuracy of this scheme is usually lower
than Guyan condensation. Furthermore, only one eigenpair can be computed once.
The computational effort is very expensive due to the inclusion of iteration. By the
introduction of the generalized inverse technique, the two-step methods based on
the exact, the Kidder, and the Miller mode expansions were extended and three vari-
ants were developed byQu and Selvam (2001). The results show that the new variants
may improve the accuracy of the reduced model. However, the computational effort is
expensive due to the matrix manipulation required in the computation of generalized
mverse.
In 1989, an improved reduced system (IRS) was proposed by O'Callaham (1989)
based on the concept of the two-step condensation schemes. This method has a very
important impact on the development of iterative dynamic condensation technique.
In this scheme, the parameters of the reduced model resulting from Guyan conden-
sation were used to represent the inertia effect in the dynamic condensation matrix.
Hence, the ignored inertia in Guyan condensation is considered partially. It is well
known that the accuracy of the reduced model computed from IRS is much higher
than that from Guyan condensation.
The concept in the two-step methods may be extended in a successive manner. This
leads to many iterative approaches. Sauer (1989) proposed a successively approaching
scheme. The eigenvalue is updated during iterations. Because the mode shapes at the
masters resulting from Guyan condensation never changes, this scheme is usually not
convergent. It will not converge to the exact value even though it might converge in
some cases.
Two modifications were proposed by Blair (Blair et aI., 1991) for the Sauer's scheme:
(1) The eigenvalue as well as the eigenvector are updated simultaneously during
iterations. (2) All the eigenpairs are computed simultaneously from the reduced
Iterative Methods for Dynamic Condensation 113
model. In this method, the Miller mode expansion is successively used to improve
the accuracy of the reduced model. The initial, first, and second approximations
of this method are equivalent to Guyan condensation, IRS, and SEREP-IRS based on
the Miller mode expansion, respectively. Only the relation between the accelerations
and the displacements at masters are updated successively in this scheme, while the
static relation RG is kept for the relation between the masters and slaves. Thus, this
scheme might converge. However, it will not converge to the exact values.
Based on the successive theory, an iterative scheme was developed by Zhang (Zhang,
1994; Zhang and Li, 1995). Two assumptions were used in this scheme. (l) The
stiffness matrix resulting from Guyan condensation is exact and it is unnecessary
to update during iteration. (2) The mass matrix of the reduced model is defined as
M~) = T~MT(i). Compared to the Blair scheme, the dynamic condensation matrix
is updated in this scheme during iterations. However, the system matrices of the
reduced model are not updated fully. This scheme does not converge.
The IRS method was correctly extended to produce an iterative algorithm, referred
to as iterative IRS, by Friswell, Garvey, and Penny (1995, 1997). Because the corrective
term is updated iteratively using the current best estimation of the reduced model,
numerical examples and full proof of the convergence (Friswell et al., 1998) showed
that the eigenpairs of the reduced model could converge to those of the full model.
Based on the generalized inverse of the sub matrices of system matrices, a succes-
sive approach was proposed by Zhang (1996) and then improved by Qu, Fu, and Hua
(l999). The convergence rate of this approach is higher than iterative IRS. Unfor-
tunately, the generalized inverse of the system matrix should be calculated before
iteration. This makes the approach computationally expensive.
A governing equation of dynamic condensation matrix was first derived from the
eigenvalue equation of the full model by Suarez and Singh (Suarez and Singh, 1992;
Singh and Suarez, 1992). Due to the nonlinearity of the governing equation, an
iterative scheme was proposed in which Guyan condensation is selected as an initial
approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix. This method is based on the
standard eigenvalue problem. For general eigenproblems, a Cholesky decomposition
of the mass matrix is required to transfer the general eigenproblem into the standard
one. This scheme was successfully extended to the general eigenproblem by Qu and Fu
(1998a). Because the method is directly derived from the general eigenproblem, the
transformation from the general to the standard eigenproblems becomes unnecessary.
To accelerate the convergence of the iteration, one modification was proposed by Qu
and Fu (l998b). Numerical examples show that this modification may accelerate the
convergence. However, the initial computational effort becomes more expensive.
A hybrid dynamic condensation for eigenproblems was derived by Kim (l995, 1996).
It is a combination of the dynamic condensation, modified inverse iteration, and
modal reduction. An iterative dynamic condensation approach was developed by Qu
(Qu, 1998; Qu and Fu, 2000) by the introduction of classical subspace iteration. This
method has three advantages: (1) The convergence is much faster than all the methods
stated above, especially when the eigenpairs of the reduced model are close to those of
the full model; (2) it is much more computationally efficient than those approaches,
because it is unnecessary to calculate the stiffness and mass matrices as well as the
eigenpairs of the reduced model within every iteration; (3) the convergence can be
proven simply.
In this chapter, several two-step methods will be described at first. Then, three
iterative approaches for the dynamic condensation will be provided. It will be shown
that the accuracy of the reduced model computed from the iterative approaches is
much higher than that obtained from static condensation and some of the dynamic
condensation methods in Chapter 5. All the eigenpairs of the reduced model may be
computed simultaneously in these algorithms.
6.2 Two-Step Methods

6.2.1 Common Inverse
Assume that the m eigeiwalues Ai and the corresponding eigenvectors ({lim(i =
1,2, ... , m) at the masters are computed; then eigenvectors at the slaves ({lis can
be obtained using any of the exact, the Kidder, and the Miller mode expansion
expressions, that is,
({lis = -(Kss - AiMss)-I(Ksm - AiMsm)({lim (4.3-8)
({lis ~ _(K;;l + AiK;;!MssK;;!) (Ksm - AiMsm)({lim (4.3-10)
({lis ~ -[K;;! Ksm + Ai( -K;;! Msm + K;;! MssK;;1 Ksm)]({lim (4.3-11)
The details of these three mode expansion schemes may be found in Section 4.3.
Therefore, the eigenvector matrix constructed by these m eigenvectors is given by
~= [({l1m ({lZm (1)

({lIs ({lzs
According to the physical meaning of the dynamic condensation matrix, we have
(2)
Thus, the coordinate transformation matrix T is expressed as
(3)
Finally, the system matrices and eigenproblem of the reduced model are given by
KR = TTKT, MR = TTMT (4)

(KR - AMR)({lm = 0 (5)
After the eigenvectors at the masters are determined, the eigenvectors at the slaves
may be computed using these mode expansions again.
When the exact expansion is used in the mode expansion, it is required to cal-
culate the inverse of matrix (Kss - AiMss) or its equivalent repeatedly for m times.
Since s is very close to n, this expansion procedure is quite computationally expen-
sive. In Kidder's and Miller's expansions, there is no extraordinary inverting process.
However, the coefficient matrices
and
_[K.;;lKsm + Ai(-K.;;lMsm + K.;;lMssK.;;lKsm)]
should be calculated repeatedly.
The eigenproblem of the reduced model defined by Guyan condensation is usually
given by
(6)
Because the reduced mass matrix is positive definite, premultiplying both sides of
Eq. (6) by the inverse of the reduced mass matrix M G leads to
Me; 1K G({Im = A({Im (7)
Introducing Eq. (7) into the right-hand side of Eq. (4.3-11) results in
({Is ~ [-K.;;lK sm + K.;;l(Msm - MssK.;;lKsm)Me;lKG]({Im (8)

Therefore, the dynamic condensation matrix defined by Miller's expansion is
given by
(9)
The dynamic condensation matrix in Eq. (9) was named the improved reduced system
by O'Callahan (O'Callahan, 1989). Compared to all the condensation approaches
discussed up to now, there are several important advantages of this dynamic con-
densation method. They are
It will be shown that the accuracy of the reduced model defined by this dynamic
condensation matrix is much higher than that by Guyan condensation.
Not much extra computational effort is required to formulate this dynamic conden-
sation matrix because the inverse or its equivalent of the stiffness matrix of the
slave model is required by all other approaches anyway.
The dynamic condensation is independent of the eigenvalue. Hence, the reduced
model is also independent of the eigenvalue, that is, eigenvalue-independent. Stan-
dard methods may be used to solve the reduced eigenproblem. As we know, many
dynamic condensation approaches provided in Chapter 4 are frequency-dependent,
and a special solution scheme is required.
6.2.2 Generalized Inverse

The eigenproblem in Eq. (4.3-2) may be rewritten as
(10)
where the submatrices are given by
Km = [KmmJ'
Ksm
Ks = [KmsJ,
Kss
Mm = [MmmJ,
Msm
Ms = [MmsJ
Mss
(11)
Equation (10) is equivalent to the following equation:

(Km - AMm)({Jm + (Ks - AMs)({Js =0 (12)
The relation of eigenvectors between the masters and slaves may be obtained from
Eq. (12) as
(l3)
The superscript" +" denotes the generalized inverse of a matrix, which is defined as
(Ks - AMs)+ = [(Ks - AMs)T (Ks - AMs)]-1(Ks - AMs)T (14)
Letting A = 0 in Eq. (l3), we may obtain the generalized Guyan condensation matrix
defined in Section 4.4.
It can be proven that the matrix (Ks - AMs)+ in Eq. (l3) can be expanded in a
power series as
(15)
All terms containing higher powers of A than quadratic are dropped in Eq. (15) and
substituting it into Eq. (l3) leads to
({Js = (K; + AK;MsK;)(Km - AMm)({Jm (16)
Expanding Eq. (16) and once again dropping the terms that contain higher powers of
A yield
(17)
Equations (13), (16), and (17) are the three mode expansions based on the generalized
inverse (Qu and Selvam, 2001) and, for convenience, referred to as generalized exact
mode expansion, generalized Kidder's mode expansion, and generalized Miller's mode
expansion, respectively.
After the eigenvectors at the masters are determined from generalized Guyan con-
densation, the corresponding eigenvectors at slaves can be computed from any of
these three mode expansions. Then, the procedure shown in Eqs. (1) through (4) may
be used to obtain the reduced model.
As shown in Section 4.4, the eigenproblem of the reduced model defined by the
generalized Guyan condensation is given by
(18)
Because the reduced mass matrix is positive definite, premultiplying both sides of
Eq. (18) by the inverse of the reduced mass matrixMG leads to
-1
= AqJm
h h
MG KG({Jm (19)
Introducing Eq. (19) into the right-hand side ofEq. (17) results in
({Js = L-Kss-1 Ksm + Kss-1 (Msm - -1

MssKss Ksm)MG KGJ({Jm
h -1 h
(20)
Therefore, the dynamic condensation matrix defined by the third expansion is
given by
-1 -1
+ Kss + MssRG)MG
.... A A A A
R = RG L(Msm KGJ (21)


The two-dimensional frame used in Chapters 4 and 5 will be used. Cases 1 and 2,
shown in Table 4.2, for the selection of masters are considered. The natural frequen-
cies, their percent errors, and the CCFMV values of the mode shapes resulting from
the two types of two-step methods are listed in Tables 6.1 through 6.4, respectively.
For comparison purpose, the results computed from Guyan condensation and the
generalized Guyan condensation are also listed in these tables.
The natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes resulting from the
two-step methods based on Kidder's and Miller's expansions are very close. Their
accuracy is much higher than Guyan condensation in both cases. Further research
Table 6.1 Comparison of different mode expansions (common inverse, Case 1)
....... 1Cbema Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS

1'Iequeaq (ndl ) 6.3070 2O.OS3 35.045 53.985 97.536
leRaItenor (9ft) 1.1076 38.996 26.086 80.350 177.63
1.00000 0.98202 0.12710 0.34213 0.00144
Eact 1IJequeDq (ndIa) ~ 22.540 32.6OP 61.036 106.42
. . . . enar(..) 0.00123 56.234 17.321 103.90 202.91
1.00000 0.71262 0.11821 G.287'M 0.22878
~79 1'-"7 28.990 30.711 35.914
o.ooD07 o.UGl 4:29'99 2.SNI 2.22S3
1.00000 o..999SP 0.93920 0.85602 0.98735
61379 140447 28.99f 30.,.,. 35.919
OJIOOOI 0.13710 '-3152 2.5872 2.2397
1.00000 0.99958 0.93994 o.BS883 0.98708
Table 6.2 Comparison of different mode expansions (common inverse, Case 2)
JbcpNuioa IdIemcs Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS
GaJ'IIl Plequeacy (ndl.) 6.342S 14.999 29.020 33.048 36.169

Fenzat amr (9ft) 1.6769 3.9623 '-4088 10._ 2.9517
CQIMV 0.99997 0.99894 0.72S9t 0.88082 0.97124
,.......,,(ndl} 6.2379 1'-440 29.317 35.oe 68.049
Ptn:IDt mar (9fI) 0.00086 0JI8878 5.73OJ 17.090 t3.695
1.00000 0.99996 0.32596 0.197Z6 0.31581
lIdcI« 6.2379 14.428 Z7.81l 29.955 35.138
G.OOOO3 0.00155 0.05796 G.0634O 0.01806
1.00000 1.00000 0.99991 0Jl99M G.99998
PJrequerJiq (ndl ) 6.2379 14.428 Z7.810 29351 35.138
PeIaId enor (9ft) 0.00003 0.00170 0.05490 G.05793 0.01554
CCJIMV 1.00000 1.00000 0.99992 O.999M 0.99998
lIS Model Order Reduction Techniques
Table 6.3 Comparison of different mode expansions (generalized inverse, Case I)
EIpIDIioD ICbemea Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS

Guyan Frequency (radl ) 6.2381 14.618 30.405 33.476 38.179
Pen:cnt error (%) 0.00363 1.3214 9.3909 11.836 8.6714
CCFMV 1.00000 0.99877 0.68042 0.69869 0.90404
EDct Preqaeacy (radla) 6.2379 14.432 29.786 30.918 36.7S4
Paaat error (%l G.OOOO7 0.03381 7. 1M2 3.2903 4.6175
CCFMV 1.00000 0.99994 0.78117 0.23934 0.98130
ICidcIer Fftqueacy (radial 6.2379 14.448 2&.490 30.099 35.34S
Patent error (%) 0.00016 0.14523 2.5013 0.55143 G.60586
CCPMV 1.00000 0.99959 0.98395 0.98550 0.99772
MiDer JIrequmcy (radii) 6.2379 14M7 28.493 30.071 35.356
Pen:cnt error (") 0.00018 0.13634 2.5131 0.46030 CI.63602
CCPMV 1.00000 0.99962 0.98414 0.98794 0.99769
Table 6.4 Comparison of different mode expansions (generalized inverse, Case 2)
Expansion ICbemea Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS

Guyan Frequcncy (radl ) 6.2381 14.470 28.002 30.373 35.621
Pertau error (") G.OO337 0.29645 0.74666 1.4673 1.3916
CCPMV 1.00000 0.99999 0.99477 0.99530 0.99499
I!Dct Frequency (nell ) 6.2379 14.427 27.797 29.937 35.135
Pertau error (") 0.0000o 0.00046 0.01075 0.01088 0.00957
CCPMV 1.00000 1.00000 0.99999 0.99999 0.99999
KicIcIer PnqaeDcy (radIa) 6.2379 14.427 27.795 29.934 35.133
Pen:eDt error (%) 0.00000 0.00019 0.00322 0.00304 0.00246
CCFMV 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000
MIler ~(radll) 6.2379 14.427 27.795 29.935 35.134
Perc:eat error (") 0.0000o 0.00016 G.OO363 0.00489 0.00461
CCFMV 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.99999
shows the same phenomena occur even if the accuracy of the corresponding Guyan
condensation is very low. This means that these two two-step methods may increase
the accuracy of the reduced model defined by Guyan condensation even if the masters
are improperly selected.
Generally, the accuracy of the frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes
computed from the two-step method based on the exact expansion is much lower
than that of Guyan condensation. In Case 2, in which the masters were properly
selected, the percent error of the fifth frequency resulting from Guyan condensation
and the exact expansions are, for example, 2.9517% and 93.695%. The latter is much
bigger than the former. Only the accuracy of the first and third modes in Case 1 and
the first two modes in Case 2 is increased after the application of the exact expansion.
Furthermore, the computational effort of the exact expansion is much more expensive
than Kidder's and Miller's expansions.
The two-step methods based on the generalized exact, the generalized Kidder, and
the generalized Miller expansions have very similar features as those of the two-step
methods based on the exact, the Kidder, and the Miller expansions. This is verified
easily by the results in Tables 6.3 and 6.4. Generally, the reduced models computed
from the generalized inverse-based two-step methods have higher accuracy than those
from the common inverse-based two-steps methods. However, the computational
efforts required in the former methods are usually more expensive than the latter
methods due to the computation of generalized inverse.
6.3 Governing Equations of Dynamic

Condensation Matrix
6.3.1 Single-Mode-Dependent Condensation
It can be seen from Section 5.1 that the dynamic condensation matrix is defined as
the relations of an eigenvector between the masters and slaves, that is,
(5.1-4)
in which the dynamic condensation matrix is explicitly given by
(5.1-5)
In Eqs. (5.1-4) and (5.1-5), A and qJ (qJm and qJs) are the eigenvalue and eigenvector
of the full model. Clearly, the dynamic condensation matrix as well as the reduced
model is a function of the unknown eigenvalue. Different modes may have a different
dynamic condensation matrix and as a result a different reduced model. Therefore,
the dynamic condensation is called single-mode-dependent condensation.
The dynamic flexible matrix in Eq. (5.1-5) may be rewritten as
(Kss - AMss)-1 = K;;l + AK;; IMss (Kss - AMss)-l (1)
Introducing it into Eq. (5.1-5) results in
R(A) = -LK;;I + AK;;1Mss(Kss -AMss)-IJ(Ksm -AMsm )

(2)
= -K;;lKsm + AK;;lMsm - AK;;IMss(Kss - AMss)-I(Ksm - AMsm)
Using the expression of dynamic condensation matrix on the right-hand side of

Eq. (2) gives
R(A) = K;; 1 [A(Msm + MssR(A» - Ksml (3)
Postmultiplying both sides of Eq. (3) by qJm results in
qJs = RqJm = K;; 1 (Msm + MssR)AqJm - K;; 1KsmqJm (4)
Considering the eigenproblem of reduced model, i.e.,
(5)
we have
(6)
(7)
With the consideration of the definition of the dynamic condensation matrix in

Eq. (5.1-4), we have
(8)
or
(9)
Equation (8) or (9) is the governing equation of the dynamic condensation matrix.
No explicit unknown eigenvalue and mode of slave model is included. Therefore, all
the modes of interest may be computed simultaneously.
6.3.2 Multimode-Dependent Condensation

The general eigenproblem and the corresponding orthogonal equations of a dynamic
model are given in a matrix form by
KcI»=McI»A (10)
cI»TKcI»=A (11)
cI»TMcI» =1 (12)
where cI» and A E R nxn are, respectively, the eigenvector and eigenvalue matrices of
the full model; IE R nxn is an identity matrix. If the total degrees of freedom are
divided into the masters and slaves, the partitioned form ofEq. (10) is given by
(13)
If only m eigenpairs are considered, Eq. (13) is rewritten as
A simple multiplication of the matrix in Eq. (14) expands this equation into two
equations, namely,
KmmcI»mm + KmscI»sm = MmmcI»mmAmm + MmscI»smAmm (15)

KsmcI»mm + KsscI»sm = MsmcI»mmAmm + MsscI»smAmm (16)
Using Eq. (16), the submatrix of the eigenvector matrix on the slaves may be expressed
in terms of itself and that on the masters as
As the name says, the dynamic condensation matrix in the multimode-dependent

condensation is defined as the relation of multi-eigenevctors between the masters and
slaves, that is,
(18)
Introducing this definition of dynamic condensation matrix into Eq. (17) leads to
(19)
If the submatrix of eigenvector matrix at masters is a full rank matrix, Eq. (19) can
be rewritten as
(20)
or
(21)
Equation (20) or (21) is the governing equation of the dynamic condensation matrix.
The aforementioned derivation for the governing equation of the dynamic conden-
sation matrix is used by Qu and Fu (1998a) for the dynamic models with the general
form of the mass matrix. It is an extension of the scheme used by Suarez and Singh
(1992) in which a standard eigenproblem was considered. For the general eigenprob-
lem the Cholesky decomposition was suggested to transfer it into the standard form
before the method (Suarez and Singh, 1992) is applied. If the mass matrix is diagonal,
the transformation is simple. For consistent mass formulations, however, the prelimi-
nary procedure for the transformation can be a significant burden. Furthermore, this
transformation is inconvenient in the response analyses for a dynamic model.
It will be shown later that the reduced model defined by the dynamic condensation
matrix in Eq. (20) or (21) approaches the full model at the lowest frequency range.
Another dynamic condensation matrix and its governing equation may be obtained
using the similar derivation. The corresponding reduced model could approach the
full model at the highest frequency range (Suarez and Singh, 1992). Because this
situation rarely happens in the finite element analysis, it will not be described herein.
The partitioned form of Eq. (11) may be written as
(22)
Here, the ascending order of the eigenvalues in matrix A is not required. Therefore,
the eigenvectors in the eigenvector submatrix may be selected randomly. Matrix c)mm,
for example, may be constructed by the lowest m eigenvectors, or the m eigenvectors
within any given frequency range, or totally random m eigenvectors. For a model with
r repeated eigenvalues, the r modes generally should be included in the submatrix as
a whole if any of them is included. Expanding Eq. (22) leads to the following four
equations, namely,
+~mKmm+mm + +;mKsm+mm + +~mKms+sm + +;mKss+sm = Amm (23)
+~mKmm+ms + +;mKsm+ms + +~mKms+ss + +;mKss+ss = 0 (24)
+~sKmm+mm + +~Ksm+mm + +~sKms+sm + +~Kss+sm = 0 (25)
+~sKmm+ms + +~Ksm+ms + +~sKms+ss + +~Kss+ss = Ass (26)
Introducing Eq. (18) into Eq. (23) results in
+~m(Kmm + RTKsm + KmsR + RTKssR)+mm = Amm (27)
Assume the stiffness and mass matrices of the reduced model are K Rand MR. Accord-
ing to the requirement of the dynamic condensation, they should satisfy the following
eigenvalue equations and orthogonal conditions:
KR+mm = MR+mmAmm (28)
+~mKR+mm = Amm (29)
+~mMR+mm = Imm (30)
Comparing Eq. (29) with Eq. (27) leads to the reduced stiffness matrix, namely,
(31)
Similarly, the reduced mass matrix may be derived from Eqs. (12) and (30) as
(32)
The definition of the reduced stiffness and mass matrices in Eqs. (31) and (32) has
the same form as that in Section 5.1.
Up to now, three schemes for the derivation of the reduced system matrices have
been presented: (1) direct substitution (Section 5.1.1); (2) coordinate transformation
(Section 5.1.2); and (3) the orthogonal requirement of reduced system matrices.
The first scheme is valid for the single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation and
the latter two are valid for the single-mode- and multimode-dependent dynamic
condensation.
Clearly, the eigenvector and eigenvalue matrices of the reduced model are included
in governing Eqs. (20) and (21). If an iterative scheme is used to solve the equation,
the computation of them is required at every iteration. Furthermore, the inverse of
the eigenvector matrix is necessary. Thus, two modifications (Qu and Fu, 1998a) may
be introduced to improve the features of the governing equations.
Postmultiplying by the inverse of eigenvector matrix +mm on both sides ofEq. (29)
results in
(33)
Inserting Eq. (33) into the governing Eq. (20) or (21) gives
R = K;;ll(Msm + MssR)+mm+~mKR - KsmJ (34)

or
(35)
Clearly, the inverse procedure of the eigenvector matrix becomes unnecessary in the
governing Eq. (34) or (35).
Premultiplying by the inverse of the reduced mass matrix on both sides ofEq. (28)
leads to
(36)
Introducing Eq. (36) into the right-hand side ofEq. (20) or (21), the governing equa-
tion defined in Eq. (8) or (9) results. It can be seen that the eigenvalue and eigenvector
matrices of the reduced model are not included in the governing equation. Therefore,
the corresponding computation is unnecessary during iteration. The reduced stiffness
and mass matrices are necessary to be computed at every iteration anyway.
6.3.3 Response-Dependent Condensation

The dynamic equations of equilibrium of a full model without damping is given by
MX(t) + KX(t) = F(t) (37)
Its partitioned form is written as
Expanding Eq. (38) results in two equations, namely,
MmmXm(t) + MmsXs(t) + KmmXm(t) + KmsXs(t) = Fm(t) (39)

MsmXm(t) + MssXs(t) + KsmXm(t) + KssXs(t) = Fs(t) (40)
Let Fs(t) = 0 in Eq. (40) and rewrite it as
Assuming Xm(t) = 0 and Xs(t) = 0 in Eq. (41), the Guyan condensation matrix
results.
Define the dynamic condensation matrix as
(42)
Clearly, the dynamic condensation matrix is response-dependent and the correspond-

ing condensation is referred to as response-dependent condensation. Using this matrix,
the coordinate transformation matrix is defined as
X(t) = {Xm(t)j = [1] Xm(t) = TXm(t) (43)

Xs(t) R
Because the dynamic condensation matrix is independent of time, differentiating

both sides ofEq. (43) with respect to time leads to
..
X(t)
IXm(t)} =
=..
Xs(t)
[1]..
R
Xm(t)
.
= TXm(t) (44)
Introducing Eqs. (43) and (44) into Eq. (38) and premultiplying it by the transpose
of T produces
(45)
The corresponding equation of free vibration is given by
(46)
from which the relation between the acceleration and displacement responses at the
masters is obtained as
.. -1
Xm(t) = -MR KRXm(t) (47)
Inserting Eqs. (42), (44), and (47) into Eq. (41) results in
Xs(t) = K~1[(Msm + M ss R)MJi.1 KR - Ksm]Xm(t) (48)
The governing equation of the dynamic condensation matrix may be obtained from
the above equation, which is the same as that given in Eq. (8).
6.3.4 Comments on These Definitions

In the single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation, the dynamic condensation
matrix is defined as the relations of an eigenvector between the masters and
slaves as shown in Eq. (5.1-4). According to this definition, the governing equa-
tion can be directly obtained from the eigenvalue equation of a full model. It
is an explicit equation. However, a special eigenvalue solver is generally required
because the computational equation is frequency-dependent. The governing equa-
tion for the single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation matrix could be converted
into the multimode-dependent form shown in Eq. (8) or (9) by the introduction of
the approximate expression in Eq. (5), which is valid for all modes retained in the
reduced model.
The dynamic condensation matrix of the multimode-dependent dynamic conden-
sation is defined as the relations of the multi-eigenvectors between the masters and
slaves as shown in Eq. (18). Using this definition, the dynamic condensation matrix
may be directly obtained if the multi-eigenvectors of the full model are available.
The resulting method is actually the same as that defined by modal reduction or
SEREP provided in Chapter 5. The governing equation of the multimode-dependent
dynamic condensation matrix may be derived from the matrix form of the eigenvalue
problem of the full model.
As shown in Eq. (42), the dynamic condensation matrix in the response-dependent
condensation is defined as the relations of responses between the masters and slaves.
The dynamic condensation matrix may possibly be obtained directly from this defi-
nition. In this procedure, the system responses are simulated using any accurate time
integration scheme. The displacement response vector X (t) at all degrees of freedom
is then sampled at a series of different times during the simulation. The dynamic con-
densation matrix is then computed from these sampled response vectors. To improve
the features of the reduced model, these sampled vectors should be orthogonalized.
From the definition of response-dependent dynamic condensation matrix, the
same governing equation as those from the multimode-dependent dynamic conden-
sation may be obtained by the introduction of the relation between the displacement
and acceleration responses at masters shown in Eq. (47). Because the reduced model
has only m degrees of freedom, the equation represents the relation of responses con-
tributed by m modes. As a result, this relation is approximate even when the reduced
model is exact.
It is well known that the displacement responses in time domain X(t) may be
expressed using the mode superposition as
X(t) = ~q(t) (49)
I I [~mnJ
where q(t) ERn is a modal coordinate. The partitioned form ofEq. (49) is given by
Xm(t) = q(t) (50)

Xs(t) ~sn
in which ~mn E R mxn and ~sn E R sxn . Substituting Eq. (50) into Eq. (42) gives
(51)
Because the displacement response vector q(t) is time-dependent, the following

equation may be obtained from Eq. (51):
~sn = R~mn (52)
Clearly, the definition of dynamic condensation matrix in Eq. (42) is equivalent to

that in Eq. (52), which is based on all eigenvectors of the full model. Therefore, the
response-dependent dynamic condensation is actually all modes-dependent.
6.4 Iterative Schemes for Dynamic Condensation Matrix

It can be seen from Eqs. (6.3-21), (6.3-35), and (6.3-9) thatthese governing equations
are nonlinear with respect to the dynamic condensation matrix. Therefore, an iterative
scheme is necessary to find the solution. To save computational effort, the latter two
versions of governing equations will be used in the following. The iterative form of
the governing Eqs. (6.3-35) and (6.3-9) is given by
j R(i) = RG + K;;!(Msm + MssR(i-!»~~~!)(~~;;/»TK~-l)

R(O) = RG = -K;;! Ksm
(i = 1,2, ... )
(1)
jR(i) = RG +K;;l(Msm
R(O) = RG = _K;;l Ksm

+MssR(i-!»(Mt!»-lK~-l) (i = 1,2, ... ) (2)
Clearly, the initial approximation (i = 0) of the dynamic condensation matrix is the

Guyan condensation matrix. Letting i = 1 in any of the two equations, Eq. (2) for
example, leads to the dynamic condensation matrix defined in IRS. It can be simply
to verify that the iterative Eq. (2) is equivalent to that used in the iterated IRS (Friswell
et al., 1995). Therefore, all the iterative schemes described in this section are referred
to as iterative IRS for convenience. Research shows that the iteration defined in Eq. (1)
or (2) converges monotonically from the statically reduced model to the SEREP or
modal reduction model in which the number of kept modes is equal to that of masters.
Although Eq. (1) or (2) is convergent, the full proof of convergence (Friswell et al.,
1998) is extremely complex and will not be given herein.
6.4.1 Iterative Scheme I

The main logic for the iterative Eq. (1) is listed below:
1. Partition the full stiffness and mass matrices and construct the corresponding
submatrices.
2. Factorize the stiffness matrix of the slave model using modified Cholesky
decomposition:
Kss = LDL T (a)
3. Compute the initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix:
LDLTR(O) = -Ksm (b)
4. Compute the initial approximation of the reduced stiffness and mass matrices:
(O) - K
KA R(O)
-ms,
M(O) - M
A-ms,
R(O) M(O) - M R(O)
B-SS
(c)
(O) -
KR -
K
mm
+ K(O)
A (d)
M~) = Mmm + (M~)T + M~) + (R(O)TM~O) (e)

5. Solve for the eigenproblem of the reduced model:
K(O)c)(O) = M(O)c)(O) A (0) (f)
R mm R mm mm
6. For i = 1,2, ... , begin the iteration:
6.1 Compute the ith approximation of dynamic condensation matrix:
LDLT ll.R(i) = (Msm +M~-l)c)~~l)(c)~~l)TK~-l) (g)
~=~+Mm W
6.2 Calculate the ith approximation of the reduced system matrices:
K(i) - K
A- ms,
R(i) M(i) -
A-
M ms R(i) ,
(i) - K R(i)
KB -ss,
M(i) -
B-
M ss R(i) (i)
K~) = Kmm + (K~)T + K~) + (R(i)TK~) (j)

(k)
K(i) cI»(i)
R mm
= M(i) cI»(i) A (i)
R mm mm (1)
6.4 Check convergence:
<8 (j = 1,2, ... ,p =:: m) (m)
where 8 is a prescribed error tolerance; and w?-l) w?)

are the (i - 1)th and
the ith approximations of the jth frequency of the reduced model. If the
iteration converges, exit the iteration loop.
7. Obtain the system matrices of the reduced model: KR = K~), MR = M~) and
the corresponding eigenpairs is necessary.
Only the major logic of the iteration is listed in this scheme. For a practical finite
element model, further collaboration of these steps is necessary to save computational
effort. The banded form of system matrices, for example, should be considered for
a large-size model. In this iterative scheme, the computation of the reduced system
matrices as well as the corresponding eigenproblem is required at each iteration.
When the number of masters is large, the repeated computational work is usually a
little expensive.
6.4.2 Iterative Scheme II

The main logic for the iterative Eq. (2) is as follows:
Steps 1 through 5 are the same as those in Scheme 1.
6. For i = k, 2k, . .. (k 2: 1), begin the iteration:
6.1 Perform the computation:
and those in Eqs. (h) through (k) for k times to obtain the ith approximation
of the dynamic condensation matrix.
6.2 Solve the reduced eigenproblem shown in Eq. (1).
6.3 Check convergence:
(i) (i-k)
Wj -wj
(i)
<8 (j = l,2, ... ,p =:: m) (0)
w·]
WJi-k) is the (i - k )th approximation of the jth frequency of reduced model.

If the iteration converges, exit the iteration loop.
7. Obtain the reduced system matrices: K R = KW, M R = M~) and the correspond-
ing eigenpairs if necessary.
In this iterative scheme, the computation of the reduced system matrices and the
inverse of the reduced mass matrix is required at every iteration. The solution of the
reduced eigenproblem is required every k iterations. If the check of convergence is
required at every iteration, iterative Scheme I is recommended. However, the conver-
gence is usually very slow when the modes of the reduced model are close to those
of the full model, as will be shown in the numerical example. For this case, it is
unnecessary to check the convergence at every iteration and iterative Scheme II, in
which k is greater than 1, may be used.

Two-Dimensional Frame
The two-dimensional frame used in Section 4.3 is considered again. The degrees of
freedom listed in Case 1 in Table 4.2 are selected as masters. The percent errors of nat-
ural frequencies and the CCFMV values of the corresponding mode shapes of reduced
model are listed in Tables 6.5 and 6.6 in the first 10 iterations. Iterative Scheme I is
implemented to show the convergence of the present iterative method.
Because Guyan condensation is used as the initial approximation, the results of the
initial approximation in Tables 6.5 and 6.6 are the same as those shown in Table 4.3.
As mentioned, the first approximation of the present iterative method is equivalent
to IRS. Therefore, the results of the first approximation are equal to those in Table 6.1
with Miller's expansion.
With the increase of the number of iteration, all the natural frequencies of the
reduced model converge to the exact monotonically. The percent error of the fifth fre-
quency, for example, is 177.63% in the initial approximation. It reduces to 0.36613%
after five iterations. The accuracy increases by nearly 500 times. All the errors of
natural frequencies are positive. This means the reduced model approaches the full
model from above. Usually, the lower modes converge faster and have higher accu-
racy than the higher modes. However, this is not always right. As shown by the results
in Table 6.5, the accuracy of modes 4 and 5 is higher than mode 3 at iterations 1
Table 6.5 Convergence of natural frequencies (Frame, Case 1)
Iteration Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS
0 1.1076 38.996 26.086 80.350 177.63

1 0.00008 0.13710 4.3152 2.5872 2.2397
2 0.00004 0.07749 2.7173 1.0586 1.0700
3 0.00003 0.05082 1.969S 0.66873 0.69894
4 0.00002 0.03474 1.4964 0.47054 0.49360
5 0.00001 0.02452 J.J766 0.35124 0.36613
6 0.00001 0.01778 0.94939 0.27271 0.28133
7 0.00001 0.01319 0.78174 0.21794 0.22215
8 0.00001 0.00999 0.65421 0.17810 0.17933
9 0.00001 0.00771 0.55483 0.14817 0.14744
\0 0.00001 0.00606 0.47580 0.12510 0.12312
Table 6.6 Convergence of mode shapes (Frame, Case 1)
Iteration Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
0 1.0000 0.98202 0.12720 0.34213 0.00144

I 1.0000 0.99958 0.93994 0.85883 0.98708
2 1.0000 0.99973 0.97496 0.96538 0.99504
3 1.0000 0.99981 0.98442 0.98442 0.99708
4 1.0000 0.99987 0.98904 0.99146 0.99807
5 1.0000 0.99990 0.99178 0.99472 0.99863
6' 1.0000 0.99993 0.99358 0.99646 0.99899
7 1.0000 0.99995 0.99484 0.99750 0.99922
8 1.0000 0.99996 0.99577 0.99815 0.99939
9 1.0000 0.99997 0.99647 0.99859 0.99950
(10 1.0000 0.99997 0.99702 0.99889 G.99959
through 10. Generally, the CCFMV values of mode shapes increase with the increase
of the number of iterations. The accuracy of the natural frequencies and mode shapes
increases significantly at the first several iterations, especially at the first iteration.
However, the convergence slows down when the reduced model is close to the full
model. Therefore, iterative Scheme II is necessary.
Cantilever Plate
The cantilever plate shown in Fig. 6.1 is considered for iterative Scheme I. The length,
width, and thickness of the plate are 3.0 m, 2.0 m, and 0.02 m, respectively. The
modulus is 2 x 1011 N/m2, mass density is 7,800kg/m 3 , and the Poisson ratio is
0.3. The plate is discretized by the finite element method using a thin rectangular
plate element as shown in Fig. 6.1. The discretized model has a total of 49 nodes
and 147 degrees of freedom (three degrees of freedom at each node). The lowest 15
natural frequencies of the full model are listed in Table 6.7 and considered as the exact
~ 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
~ 42 41 40 39 38 37 36
~ 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
~ 28 27 26 25 24 23 22
~ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
~ 14 13 12 II 10 9 8
~I 2 3 4 5 6 7
j
Figure 6.1 Cantilever plate and its finite element model.
Table 6.7 Lowest 15 natural frequencies of cantilever plate
Mode Freq. Mode Frcq. Mode Fmj.
11.763 6 211.43 11 468.80

2 39.726 7 273.47 12 488.72
3 73.376 8 285.66 13 565.44
4 134.10 9 412.96 14 655.89
5 182..04 10 444.97 15 689.34
Table 6.8 Convergence of natural frequencies (Plate)
IIendoa Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS
0 0.87158 12.S06 98.171 29.188 90.952

1 0.00001 o..orJ767 0.IJ6279 4.4659 39.894
2 0.0000o 0.00139 0.02464 1.3887 19.187
3 8.00800 G.OOO81 0.01584 0.58725 9.2287
4 0.0000o o.ooos2 0.01031 0.30588 5.6443
5 0.0000o 0JI0034 O.OO6n 0.18322 4.016ti
6 0.0000o o..cJOO23 0.00448 0.12186 3.0811
7 0.00000 0.00016 0.00298 0.08n5 2.4701
8 0.00000 0.00011 0.00200 0.06699 2.040~
9 0.00000 0.00008 0.00135 0.05334 1.7221

10 0.00000 0.00006 0.00092 0.04378 1.47~
Table 6.9 Convergence of mode shapes (Plate)
Iteration Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
0 1.0000 0.99006 0.74809 0.93873 0.43837

I 1.0000 1.0000 0.99995 0.98942 0.20261
2 1.0000 1.0000 0.99997 0.99565 0.20481
3 1.0000 1.0000 0.99998 0.99782 0.56n5
4 1.0000 1.0000 0.99999 0.99869 0.74339
5 1.0000 1.0000 0.99999 0.99911 0.82858
6 1.0000 1.0000 0.99999 0.99935 0.87604
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99950 0.90548
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99960 0.92517
9 1.0000 1.0000 LOOOO 0.99967 0.93907
10 1.0000 UI800 1.0000 0.99972 0.94929
value for comparison. The translations at nodes 3, 18, 24, 37, and 49 are chosen as
masters.
The percent errors of natural frequencies and the CCFMV values of the corre-
sponding mode shapes of the reduced model are listed in Tables 6.8 and 6.9 in the
first 10 iterations. Clearly, the natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes
of the reduced model converge to the exact after sufficient iterations. Similarly, the
lower modes usually converge more quickly than the higher modes. After several
iterations, the convergence becomes slow.
6.4.4 Further Comments

Further research (Suarez and Singh, 1992; Friswell et al., 1995; Qu and Fu, 1998a,
1998b) gives the following several comments on the iterative method:
The selection of masters is not as crucial for the accuracy of iterative method herein
as for many other physical-type condensation methods, although it may affect
the number of iterations required to achieve the convergent values. This selec-
tion should make all the interested modes observable at masters. Otherwise, the
unobservable modes will not be retained in the reduced model. This is particularly
important for the models with closed frequencies or repeated frequencies. The
details on the chosen of masters will be described in Chapter 7.
No further matrix inverse or its equivalent is necessary in the iterative scheme. Com-
pared to Guyan condensation, its variants, and several dynamic condensation
methods, the extra computational work of the present iterative scheme is not
expensive with the implementation of iteration while the accuracy of the reduced
model could be increased significantly.
The dynamic condensation matrix and the corresponding reduced model resulting
from the present method are multimode-dependent. Therefore, all the interested
modes can be computed from the reduced model simultaneously while they should
be calculated one by one in the exact dynamic condensation and its variants. The
convergence of the present iterative method is guaranteed, while the convergence
of the exact method and its variants strongly depends on the selection of the initial
approximation and the approximation for the next mode. The present reduced
model is very useful in further dynamic analyses due to the multimode-dependent
features. The speed of convergence of the present method is generally slower than
that of the methods aforementioned.
The present iterative method converges monotonically from the statically reduced
model to the SEREP or modal reduction model in which the number of kept modes
is equal to that of masters. All the interested eigenvectors should be available before
the condensation is performed in SEREP while they are bypro ducts of the present
method. When the number of interested modes (p) is less than the number of
masters (m), the reduced system matrices obtained from SEREP are rank-deficient
and the other (m - p) modes of the reduced model are undetermined. This leads
to difficulties in further dynamic analyses using the reduced model. The reduced
model resulted from the present method contains m modes although the accu-
racy of the (m - p) higher modes might be low. Choosing masters for which a
low mode is not observable leads to difficulties in SEREP. In the present iterative
method the modes that are not observable simply do not contain in the reduced
model.
The convergence of the present iterative method may be accelerated (Qu and Fu,
1998b). Due to the expensive computation of the modified stiffness matrix, this
method will not be described herein.
6.5 Generalized Iterative Method

6.5.1 Governing Equation of the Dynamic Condensation Matrix
Any of the three schemes for deriving the governing equation of the dynamic con-
densation matrix may be utilized herein. Only the second is considered in the
following.
The eigenproblem of the full model shown in Eq. (6.3-14) may be rewritten as
(1)
where the matrices K m, K s' M m, and Ms are defined in Eq. (6.2-11). A simple
multiplication of the matrix in Eq. (1) leads to
(2)
Because the number of equations (n) is a little greater than the number of slaves, there
is no exact solution in Eq. (2). Generally, the coefficient matrixK s is full-column rank.
The least-square solution of Eq. (2) is given by
(3)
Based on the definition of dynamic condensation matrix, the governing equation is

obtained from Eq. (3) as
(4)
Similarly, two other governing equations are given by
R = K;[(Mm + MsR).mm.~mKR - Kml (5)
R= K;[(Mm + MsR)M;l KR - Kml (6)
The iterative schemes in Section 6.4 may be used to solve the governing Eq. (5) or
(6). The initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix is the generalized
Guyan condensation matrix. This iterative method was first developed by Zhang
(1996) and improved by Qu and Fu (1999). Because the basic concept of this method
is very similar to the iterative IRS, it is referred to as the generalized iterative IRS for
convemence.

The two examples used in Section 6.4 are considered. The percent errors of the
natural frequencies and the CCFMV values of the corresponding mode shapes of
the reduced model are listed in Tables 6.10 through 6.13 for the first 10 iterations.
Table 6.10 Convergence of natural frequencies (Frame, Case I)
0 0.00363 1.3214 9.3909 11.836 8.6714

I 0.00019 0.13633 2.5131 0.46029 0.6360
2 0.00007 0.04823 0.97809 0.12037 0.1799(J
3 0.00003 0.02212 0.47193 0.04959 0.07328
4 0.00002 0.01148 0.25473 0.02516 0.03691l
5 0.00001 0.00641 0.14707 0.01419 0.02()9.4
6 0.00000 0.00375 0.08878 0.008SO 0.0127
7 0.00000 0.00227 0.05529 0.00529 0.00804
8 0.00000 0.00141 0.03523 0.00338 0.0052
9 0.00000 0.00089 0.02285 0.00220 0.00345
10 0.00000 0.00057 0.01 SOl 0.00145 0.00231
Iteration Model Mode 2 Mod 3 Mode 4 ModeS
0 1.0000 0.998n 0.68042 0.69870 0.90405

I 1.0000 0.99962 0.98415 0.98794 0.99769
2 1.0000 0.99986 0.99500 0.99851 0.99947
3 1.0000 0.99993 0.99768 0.99960 0.99980
4 1.0000 0.99997 0.99876 0.99984 0.99990
5 1.0000 0.99998 0.99928 0.99992 0.99994
6 1.0000 0.99999 0.99957 0.99996 0.99996
7 1.0000 0.99999 0.99973 0.99998 0.99998
8 1.0000 1.0000 0.99983 0.99999 0.99999
9 1.0000 1.0000 0.99989 0.99999 0.99999
10 1.0000 1.0000 0.99993 0.99999 0.99999
0 0.10080 0.81404 8.3700 20.462 78.623

I 0.00537 0.01302 0.21739 2.6244 28.648
2 0.00059 0.00249 0.02145 0.83912 13.212
3 0.00021 0.00100 0.00345 0.41526 7.1227
4 0.00011 0.00052 0.00069 0.24917 4.5490
5 0.00007 0.00032 0.00018 0.16737 3.2036
6 0.00004 0.00021 0.00006 0.12092 2.3984
7 0.00003 0.00015 0.00003 0.09171 1.8728
8 0.00002 0.00011 0.00002 0.07196 1.5082
9 0.00002 0.00008 0.00002 0.05787 1.2434
10 0.00001 0.00006 0.00001 0.04741 1.0441
flleration Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
0 1.0000 0.99999 0.99692 0.96843 0.43517

1 1.0000 1.0000 0.999 2 0.99145 0.08138
2 1.0000 1.0000 0.99997 0.99601 0.51490
3 1.0000 1.0000 0.99999 0.99766 0.73255
4 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99846 0.83228
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99891 0.88456
6 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99919 0.91538
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99937 0.93516
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99951 0.94867
9 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99960 0.95835
10 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99967 0.96552
Iterative Scheme I is implemented to show the convergence of the present iterative

method.
Because the generalized Guyan condensation is used as the initial approximation,
the results of the initial approximation in Tables 6.10 and 6.11 are the same as those in
Table 4.9. With the increase of the number of iterations, all the natural frequencies and
mode shapes of the reduced model converge to the exact monotonically. The percent
error of the fifth frequency is, for example, 8.6714% in the initial approximation.
It reduces to 0.02094% after five iterations. The accuracy increases by about 400
times. All the errors of natural frequencies are positive. This means that the reduced
model approaches the full model from above. Usually, the lower modes converge
faster and have higher accuracy than the higher modes. This is to be shown clearly
in the next example. However, this is not always right. As shown by the results in
Table 6.10, the accuracy of modes 4 and 5 is higher than mode 3 at iterations 1
through 10. Generally, the CCFMV values of mode shapes increase with the increase
of the number of iterations. The accuracy of natural frequencies and mode shapes
increases significantly in the first several iterations, especially in the first iteration.
However, the convergence slows down when the reduced model is close to the full
model. Therefore, iterative Scheme II is necessary.
Comparing the results in Tables 6.10 through 6.13 with those in Tables 6.5, 6.6,
6.8, and 6.9, we can see that the convergence of the iterative method based on the
generalized inverse is generally faster than the approach based on the common inverse.
As to the two-dimensional frame, the percent errors of natural frequencies resulting
from these two methods after five iterations are 0.00001,0.00641,0.14707,0.01419,
0.02094 and 0.00001, 0.02452, 1.1766,0.35124, and 0.36613, respectively. Clearly, the
former is more accurate than the latter.
6.6 Iterative Method Using Subspace Iteration

Two iterative methods for dynamic condensation have been presented in Sections 6.4
and 6.5, respectively. The rate of convergence of these methods could be accelerated
(Qu and Fu, 1998b). The speed of convergence of these three algorithms is only fast at
the first several iterations. After these iterations, the convergence becomes very slow,
especially when the dynamic properties, frequencies, and the corresponding mode
shapes, for example, of the reduced model are dose to those of the full model. In
this section, an iterative approach based on subspace iteration is to be presented. This
approach was first proposed by Qu (1998) and improved byQu and Fu (2000). It will
be shown that, as to the rate of convergence, this method is much faster than those
three approaches.
6.6.1 Subspace Iteration Method

The subspace iteration method is one of the most efficient approaches for the compu-
tation of a few smallest eigenvalues and the corresponding eigenvectors of large-size,
sparse, banded eigenproblems. The standard subspace iteration method, which was
developed by Bathe and Wilson (1972), is a direct iterative method for symmetric
matrices. It combines a simultaneous inverse iteration and a Rayleigh-Ritz procedure.
Choose a set of (m) linearly independent n-dimensional vectors and construct
a subspace .~) in which the columns are occupied by the vectors. This subspace
is considered as an initial approximation of the eigenvectors. For i = 1,2, ... , the
following two steps are applied to solve for the (i + 1)th approximation of eigenvalues
and eigenvectors:
l. A set of new subspace X~+I) is obtained by the simultaneous inverse iteration,

f.e.,
(1)
If the iterations proceeded using X~+I) as the next estimation of the subspace,
the subspace would collapse to a subspace of dimension 1 and only contain the
eigenvector corresponding to the lowest eigenvalue. Therefore, the Rayleigh-Ritz
procedure is adopted.
2. Compute the projections of the stiffness matrix K and mass matrix M in the
(,+1)
subspace spanned by X r:z :
K(i+I) = (X(i+I»)TKX(i+I) M(i+1J = (X(i+I»)TMX(i+I) (2)

P m m' P m m
Then, solve for the projected eigenproblem given by
(3)
where Q(i+I) and A (i+1) are the eigenvector and eigenvalue matrices of the
(i + l)th approximately projected model. Finally, the (i + l)th approximate
eigenvector matrix is given by
.(i+I)
m
= X(i+I)Q(i+l)
m (4)
Because Q(i+I) is the eigenvector matrix of the projected model in the subspace
and orthonormalized with respect to the projected mass matrix, the matrix .~+I)
is orthonormal with respect to the mass matrix M, that is,
(.~+I)TM.~+I) = (Q(i+l)T (X~+I)TMX~+I)Q(i+l)
= (Q(i+l)TMpQ(i+l) = I
Therefore, .~+l) is used to calculate the next approximate eigenvalues and

eigenvectors until they converge.
6.6.2 Governing Equation of Dynamic Condensation Matrix

With the arrangement of the total degrees of freedom, Eq. (4) can be rewritten in a
partitioned form as
.(i+l)]
.(i+l) = [ mm = [X(i+l)Q(i+l)]
mm (5)
m .... (i+l) X(i+l)Q(i+l)
"'sm sm
Using the definition of dynamic condensation matrix in Eq. (6.2-2), we have
R(i+l) = .(i+l)(.(i+l)-l (6)

sm mm
Introducing Eq. (5) into Eq. (6) yields
R(i+l) = X(i+l)(X(i+l)-l (7)

sm mm
Equation (1) can be rewritten as
(8)
in which
(9)
Using the definition of dynamic condensation matrix, the ith approximate eigenvector
may be expressed as
(10)
Introducing Eq. (10) into Eq. (8) gives
[X~;;'l)]
X (i+l)
_[CCmm
-
Cms] [ I ] .(i)
C ss R(i) mm
(11)
sm sm
Simple expansion of Eq. (11) results in
(i+l) = (C
X mm mm
+ C ms R(i)).(i)
mm (12)
X(i+l)
sm
= (C sm + Css R(i)).(i)
mm (13)
Substituting Eqs. (12) and (13) into Eq. (7) leads to
(14)
Assuming R( -I) is a zero matrix and substituting it into the right-hand side ofEq. (14),
an initial approximation of dynamic condensation matrix is defined as
R(O) = C sm C-
mm
I (15)
Equations (14) and (15) are the governing equations of the dynamic condensation
matrixR.
From the above derivation, we can see that although the Rayleigh-Ritz procedure
is very important for the subspace iteration method, it has no effect on the dynamic
condensation matrLx and that since no parameters of the reduced model are included
in the iterative Eq. (14), it is unnecessary to calculate the system matrices (stiffness and
mass matrices) and eigensolutions of the reduced model at every iteration. Therefore,
a lot of computational work may be saved.
6.6.3 Solution Schemes for Dynamic Condensation Matrix

Scheme I
l. Formulate the matrix C and its submatrices C mm ' Cms, C sm , and C ss :
C = [Cmm Cms]
C sm C ss
2. Calculate the initial approximation of dynamic condensation matrix using

Eq. (15).
3. For i = 0, k, 2k, 3k, ... (k :::: 1), begin the iteration:
3.1 Calculate the (i + k)th approximate dynamic condensation matrix R(i+k)
by iterating Eq. (14) k times.
3.2 Compute the condensed stiffness and mass matrices:
K~+k) = Kmm + (R(i+k))T Ksm + KmsR(i+k) + (R(i+k))TKssR(i+k)

M~+k) = Mmm + (R(i+k))T Msm + MmsR(i+k) + (R(i+k)TMssR(i+k)
3.3 Solve for the eigenproblem of the condensed model:
3.4 Check convergence using the convergent criterion:
)'y+ k) _ A(i)
J J
< £1 (j = 1,2, .. . ,p::::: m) (16)
)'y+k )
J
where )..?) and)..ji+k) denote the ith and the (i + k)th approximations of the
jth eigenvalue. 81 is an error tolerance. If the former p eigenvalues converge,
exit the loop.
. (i+k)i+k)
4. Output the results: R = R(l+k), KR = K k ,MR = Mk and stop.
Since the Rayleigh-Ritz procedure has no effect on the iteration, the value k in this
iterative scheme can be any integers such as 1,2,3 and so on. When the value k is greater
than 1, k - 1 Rayleigh-Ritz procedures are avoided. This makes the present iterative
scheme computationally more efficient, especially when the number of masters is
large.
Scheme II
Steps 1 and 2 are the same as those in Scheme 1.
3. For i = 1,2, ... , begin the iteration:

3.1 Calculate the (i + l)th approximate condensation matrix using Eq. (14).
3.2 Check convergence using criterion:
(j = 1,2, ... , m) (17)
where r?) and r?+I) are the ith and the (i + l)th approximations of the
jth column vectors of dynamic condensation matrix, respectively. If the m
column vectors converge, exit this loop.
4. Calculate the stiffness and mass matrices of the reduced model.
5. Solve for the reduced eigenproblem if necessary.
7. Output the results: R = R(i+l), KR = K~+I),MR = M~+I) and stop.
In Scheme II, the stiffness and mass matrices as well as the eigenproblem of the
reduced model are computed only after the dynamic condensation matrix converges.
This makes the scheme more computationally efficient than iterative Scheme 1.
6.6.4 Proof of Convergence

The iterative scheme II is reproduced below in a form that would be convenient for
the proof of convergence of the proposed method.
1. Assume the dynamic condensation matrix is a zero matrix and construct subspace
Xm:
(18)
2. Calculate the initially approximate dynamic condensation matrix using the

following two equations:
X(O) _
(0)] _ K- 1MX
[Xmm (19)
m - X(O) - m
sm
R(O) = X(O) (X(O) )-1 (20)
sm mm
3. For i = 1,2,3, ... , begin the iteration:

3.1 Compute the (i + l)th approximate dynamic condensation matrix using
Eq. (7) and
(21)
The next steps are similar to those in Scheme II and are omitted. Clearly, this
modification will not affect the results.
Proof It is given that the subspace Xm can be expressed as

(22)
in which G E R nxm is the coefficient matrix. IntroducingEq. (22) into Eq. (19) results
m
(23)
Considering K- 1 = • A-I. T, Eq. (23) becomes
(24)
or in a partitioned form as
[X~~]
Xsm
_[.mm
(0)
.sm
- (25)
Expanding Eq. (25) leads to two equations:

A-I G ..... A- 1 G
X (O) _.....
mm - "Vmm mm mm + "Vms sm
55 (26)
_..... A-I G ..... A- G
- "Vsm mm mm + "Vss
X sm
(O) 1
55 sm (27)
Substituting Eqs. (26) and (27) into Eq. (20) gives
R(O) = (.smA;~Gmm + .ssA;IGsm)(.mmA;~Gmm + .msA;IGsm)-1 (28)
Introducing Eq. (23) into the right-hand side ofEq. (21) for i = 0, we have
(29)
Similarly, the ith approximate subspace is given by
X~ = (K- 1M)i+l.G (30)

Using the similar derivation above, we have
R(i) = -(i+l)G mm + + ss A ss-(i+I)G sm )

(+ sm A rnm
x (+ mm A -(i+l)G
mm rnm
+ + ms A ss-(i+l)Gsm )-1 (31)
Since the diagonal elements in matrix Ass are greater than those in matrix Amm,
Eq. (31) may converge, namely,
R(i) ........-+ (+ sm A -(i+I)G

mm mm
)(+ mrn A mm
-(i+l)G mm )-1 ) (i ........-+ 00) (32)
Equation (32) can be simplified as
R (i) --+ 'I'

.... ....-1
sm 'I' mm) (i........-+ 00) (33)
+sm+;;;~ is the exact value of the dynamic condensation matrix. Therefore, the iter-
ative approach for the dynamic condensation proposed in this section is convergent.
The convergent value is +sm+;;;~.

The two examples used in Section 6.4 are utilized again. Since the convergence of this
approach is to be shown, iterative Scheme I with k = 1 is used. The percent errors
IIaIIiao Model Mode 2 Mode] Mode. ModeS

0
1
0sm9
0JI0007
"'1
o.1SS10
24.855
4.3032
174.41
2.2090
2 o.oaaoo OJIiGll o..osal G.02563
] o.GOOjIO .o.oooao f).OQQ2('
•
S
0.0l1OOO
0.00000
o.oooao
Q.OIIOOO
Q.A!f!IIO
t..OQOIID
Table 6.15 Convergence of mode shapes (Frame, Case I)
Iteration
0
Molle 1
1.0000
" ModeS
G.55J58
1 1.0000 .."". 0JI5246 0.98732
2 1.0000 1.0000 G.99995 0.99992
] 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
4 1.0000 1.0000 l.obOO 1.0000 1.0000
S 1.0000 1.0000 UlllOO 1.0000 1.0000
Iteration Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
0 0.699t5 10S11 6U84 22.395 78.272

I 0.00001 o.cJ069O 0.CM524 4.2IJ77 43.385
2 0.0000o 0.00001 0.00011 0.76401 19.116
3 0.0000o 0.0000o 0.0000o 0.10594 4.8728
4 0.00000 0.0000o 0.0000o 0.01407 0.98133
5 . 0.0000o 0.00000 0.0000o o.cmo7 o.J9471
Iteration Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
0 1.0000 0.99195 0.91027 0.95551 0.41306

1.0000 1.0000 0.99997 0.98964 0.22433
2 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99750 G.30528
3 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99967 0.84446
4 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99997 0.97418
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.99518
of the natural frequencies and the CCFMV values of the corresponding mode shapes
resulted from the reduced model are listed in Tables 6.14 through 6.17 for the former
five iterations due to the fast convergence.
The iterative method based on the subspace iteration is convergent. As shown in
Table 6.14, the relative errors of the natural frequencies resulting from the reduced
model with initial approximation are 0.98739%, 38.431 %, 24.855%, 77.314%, and
174.417%, respectively. The accuracy increases very quickly with the application of
iterations. After five iterations, these relatively errors are all less than 10- 5 . The
accuracy of the corresponding mode shapes is excellent after three iterations. The
convergence offrequencies and mode shapes of the plate, shown in Tables 6.16 and
6.17, is a little slower. However, the lower four frequencies and mode shapes are very
close to the exact after five iterations. Even for the fifth frequency the relative error
reduces to less than one 400th after five iterations.
All errors of natural frequencies are greater than zero. This means that the natural
frequencies are always higher than the real and the reduced model approaches the full
model from above. Generally, the lower modes have higher accuracy than the higher
modes for the same iteration. In these two examples, the CCFMV values increase with
the number of iterations.
To check the convergence of the dynamic condensation matrix, the ej-values,
defined in Eq. (17), during the iteration are plotted in Figs. 6.2 and 6.3 for the
two examples respectively. It is shown in Fig. 6.2 that the value ej reduces very fast
and steadily with the implementation of iterations. After five iterations, they are all
less than 10- 7 . In the second example, the convergence of the dynamic condensation
matrix is much slower than the first example. All the ej-values are less than 10- 5 after
100
10.1 --j=1
10.2 -.-j=2
10-3
-e-j=3
-"-j=4
10"" -T-j=5
·--.10-8
CI)
10-8
10.7
10"
10-9
10.10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Iteration
Figure 6.2 Convergence of dynamic condensation matrix (frame).
10 iterations. Under these iterations the frequencies and mode shapes have very high
accuracy. The convergence is not steady at the be~inning of the iteration although it
becomes consistent after the values are small, 10- for example. Therefore, although
the iterative Scheme II is computationally more efficient than Scheme I, the use of the
convergent criterion, Eq. (17), should be careful.
1~r-----------------------~====~~
--j=1
-.-j=2
-e-j=3
-"-j=4
~ -.-j=5
~~
a;--'
10-3
10""
10-8~--~--~--~----~--~--~--~~~~~~
~
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Iteration
Figure 6.3 Convergence of dynamic condensation matrix (plate).
6.7 Frequency Shift Technique

6.7.1 Governing Equation of Dynamic Condensation Matrix
Frequency shift technique, also called eigenvalue shift technique, may increase the
convergence of the iterative dynamic condensation methods or make the dynamic
characteristics of the reduced model close to the full model within any given fre-
quency range. To demonstrate these properties of eigenvalue shift technique, the
iterative method presented in Section 6.4 will be considered.
If an eigenvalue shift q is applied to eigenproblem equation (6.3-10), the equation
becomes
(1)
in which the dynamic stiffness matrix and the shifted eigenvalue matrix are given by
D=K-qM (2)
A= A -qI (3)
Using the same division of the total degrees of freedom, Eq. (1) may be partitioned as
(4)
If only m modes are considered, we have
(5)
The second equation of (5) is given by
(6)
which can be rewritten as
(7)
Introducing the definition of dynamic condensation in Eq. (6.3-18) into Eq. (7) leads
to
(8)
Therefore, the governing equation of the dynamic condensation matrix is given by
(9)
Similarly, if the same eigenvalue shift is applied to the eigenvalue problem, the
orthogonality condition of the reduced modelin Eqs. (6.3-28) and (6.3-29) produces
DR'Pmm = MR'PmmAmm (10)

T -
'PmmDR'Pmm = Amm (11)
in which
DR =KR -qMR (12)
Postmultiplying both sides of Eq. (11) by the inverse of matrix 'Pmm gives
T
'PmmDR = Amm'Pmm
--1
(13)
Using the relations in Eq. (13), the governing Eq. (9) can be expressed as
R = D;1[(Msm + MssR)'Pmm'P~mDR - Dsml (14)
Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (10) by the inverse of matrix MR and then
postmultiplying it by the inverse of matrix 'Pmm produces
Mil DR = 'PmmAmm'P;;;~ (15)
Introducing Eq. (15) into Eq. (9), we have
R = D;1 L(Msm + MssR)Mi 1DR - DsmJ (16)
matrix with the eigenvalue shift technique. Clearly, it is very difficult to directly solve
for the dynamic condensation matrix from these two equations, and an iterative
scheme is generally required. The iterative forms of these two equations are given by
{
R(i+1) = D;1[(Msm + MssR(i»'P~m('P~m)TDg) - Dsml (i = 0, 1,2, ... )
RCO) = _D;1 Dsm
(17)
(i = 0, 1,2, ... )
(18)
The similar iterative schemes in Section 6.4 may be applied to solve Eqs. (17) and
(18).
6.7.2 Selection of Frequency Shift Value

As mentioned above, the eigenvalue shift technique has two functions: (1) accelerating
the convergence and (2) making the reduced model dose to the full model within any
given frequency range. For the first function, the shift value satisfies
(19)
in which AI is the lowest eigenvalue of the full model. The shift value in the second
case can be found from this relation:
or (20)
In Eq. (20), Wmin and W max are the under and upper boundary of the frequency
range within which the dynamic characteristics are required to be kept in the reduced
model; W is the frequency around which the dynamic characteristics are interested.

The two examples used in Section 6.4 will be considered. Three cases listed in
Table 6.18 are utilized. The accuracy of the frequencies and mode shapes resulting
from the reduced model are listed in Tables 6.19 through 6.24. For concise purposes,
only the results from the first five iterations are provided.
Table 6.18 Cases for eigenvalue shifting technique
Case Structura MasterDOPs q
I 2DPrame x-direction: nodes 20 and 21;y-d.irection: nodes II. 15. and 26 35

2 2DPrame x-direction: nodes 20 and 21;y-d.irection: nodes 11. 15. and 26 32.400
3 Plate liansIatioDli displacements at nodes 3.18.24.37. and 49 40,000
Table 6.19 Convergence of natural frequencies (Frame, Case I)
0 0.01175 30.963 25.261 74.909 174.64

0.00000 0.06755 3.8083 2.1399 1.9725
2 0.00000 0.03749 2.3901 0.91455 0.96726
3 0.00000 0.02413 1.7357 0.58822 0.63429
4 0.00000 0.01622 1.3202 0.41741 0.44829
5 0.00000 0.01128 1.0384 0.31309 0.33268
Table 6.20 Convergence of mode shapes (Frame, Case I)
0 1.0000 0.98747 0.14380 0.34942 0.00543

I 1.0000 0.99978 0.95318 0.90073 0.98937
2 1.0000 0.99987 0.97938 0.97362 0.99565
3 1.0000 0.99991 0.98680 0.98755 0.99741
4 1.0000 0.99994 0.99061 0.99298 0.99828
5 1.0000 0.99995 0.99292 0.99559 0.99878
Iteration Mode 9 Mode 10 Mode II Mode 12 Model]
0 -11.125 -13.370 -0.25689 -2.SnJ -4.C1836

I -6.9346 -5.5614 -0.00140 -0.14419 -1.1136
2 -3.2733 -2.0196 -0.00010 -G.09546 -0.74919
3 -un4 -0.93746 -0.00001 -o.GS867 -o.76n7
4 -0.93236 -0.49036 -0.00000 -0.03705 -o.9S023
5
. -0.55541 -0.28029 -0.0000o -G.02382 -1.23116
Iteration Mode 9 MocIeIO Modell MocIe12 Model]
0 0.75151 0.9C83 0.99998 0.91732 0.96259

I 0.tJTTr1 0.96548 1.0000 0.99811 0.99738
2 0.M044 0.9!IOM 1.0000 0.99976 G.99406
3 0.96785 0.99S0S 1.0000 0.99161 0.99770
4 0.98137 0.99634 1.0000 0.99980 0.99036
5 0.98858 0.99785 1.0000 0.99905 0.99403
Table 6.23 Convergence of natural frequencies (Plate, Case 3)
ltentioa Mode 4 Mode 5 Mode 6 Mode 7 Mode 8

0 1.6060 -3.4009 -0.40809 7.5981 61.219
1 -4.7624 -0.31164 ~5 -22.30] -2.34S0
2 -2.0969 -G.04335 -o.OOOZI 13128 43.848
3 -0.96221 ...:..o.OO6M 0.00010 -7.1780 -2.7114
4 -0.46298 -o..cJOOoM 0.00001 0.01471 -2.4367
5 -0.22232 -0.00015 -0.00000 0.39388 -2.6006
Table 6.24 Convergence of mode shapes (Plate, Case 3)
1tention MOde 4 ModeS Mode 6 Mode 7 Mode 8
0.98368 039077 0.99993 0JII484

0.98856 0.99500 0.92241 0.74569
0.99547 D.99952 0.99999 0.98989
G.99786 0.99990 1.0000 0.18134
0.99895 0.99997 1.0000 0.85205
5 0.99944 0.99999 1.0000 0.94451
The shift value of 35 in Case 1 satisfies the requirement in Eq. (19). Thus, it may
increase the rate of convergence. For the reduced model obtained from the same
iteration, the accuracy of the dynamic condensation with eigenvalue shift should be
higher than the condensation without shift. This can be seen clearly by comparing
the results in Tables 6.19 and 6.20 with those in Tables 6.5 and 6.6. This type of shift
has more effects on the lower modes than higher modes. Further researches show that
this shift technique is good for the models with close frequencies.
In many practical problems, we may require that the reduced model be close to
the full model within a given frequency range or around a given frequency. The shift
value given by Eq. (20) may be used. In Case 2 and Case 3, the given frequencies are
180 rad/s and 200 rad/s, respectively.
The results in Tables 6.21 and 6.22 show that, with the iterations, the modes of
reduced model approach to the 9th through 13th modes of the full model rather than
the lowest five modes. After five iterations, the maximum error is -1.2386%. This
accuracy is generally enough in engineering. The third mode of the reduced model,
which corresponds to the 11 th mode of the full model, has the highest accuracy
because the square of this frequency is the closest to the shift value.
Similarly, the modes obtained from the reduced model in Case 3 approach to the
4th through 8th modes of the full model as shown in Tables 6.23 and 6.24. The results
in Case 2 and Case 3 show that the percent errors of the natural frequencies are not
all positive anymore. Furthermore, small oscillations occur during iteration although
the iteration is generally convergent.
The two functions of the eigenvalue shift technique are also valid for the other two
iterative methods. For concise purposes, the discussion on this topic is omitted.
6.8 Summary
Three two-step methods for dynamic condensation have been provided based on the
exact, Kidder's and Miller's mode expansion expressions. The reduced models result-
ing from the two-step methods based on Kidder's and Miller's expansions have very
close accuracy. Their accuracy is much higher than that of Guyan condensation even
if the latter has very low accuracy when the masters are improperly selected. Gener-
ally, the accuracy of the reduced model computed from the two-step method based
on the exact expansion is much lower than that of Guyan condensation. These three
approaches have been extended and three variants presented using the generalized
inverse technique. They have very similar features as the methods based on common
mverse.
Three iterative methods for the dynamic condensation have been described. Several
numerical examples have also been provided to show the features of these conden-
sation approaches. A detailed comparison of these iterative methods and other four
iterative approaches can be found in Ye and Qu (2000).
The dynamic condensation methods can be broadly classified into three categories:
single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation; multimode-dependent dynamic
condensation; and response-dependent dynamic condensation. In these dynamic
condensation approaches, the dynamic condensation matrix is, respectively, defined
as the relations of single eigenvector, multi-eigenvectors, and displacement response
between the masters and slaves. The exact dynamic condensation method and the
SEREP can be directly obtained from the former two definitions. The same governing
equations for the dynamic condensation matrix may be obtained from these defini-
tions after the introduction of an assumption for the response-dependent dynamic
condensation. The response-dependent dynamic condensation is actually equivalent
to all-mode-dependent dynamic condensation and, hence, the former two categories
may be viewed as the special cases of the response-dependent dynamic condensation.
Three types of governing equations of dynamic condensation matrix have been
derived based on the common inverse. Two iterative schemes for two of the governing
equations are provided in Section 6.4. The dynamic condensation matrix in these
schemes converges monotonically from the static condensation matrix through IRS
condensation matrix to the SEREP matrix in which the number of kept modes is
equal to that of masters.
The selection of masters is not as crucial for the accuracy of the iterative method as
for many other physical-type condensation methods, although it may still affect the
number of iterations required to achieve the convergence. Compared with Guyan con-
densation, the extra computational work during the iteration is not expensive while
the accuracy of the reduced model could be increased significantly. The dynamic
condensation matrix and the corresponding reduced model resulting from the iter-
ative method are multimode-dependent and, therefore, the resulting reduced model
contains all the modes interested. This feature is very useful in the applications.
Furthermore, the convergence of the iterative schemes is guaranteed.
Based on the generalized inverse, one variant of the iterative dynamic condensation
method has been derived. The resulting reduced model generally has higher accuracy
than the method based on common inverse. However, the computational work in the
former approach is higher than the latter.
For the method based on the subspace iteration, no information of the red-
uced model, such as reduced stiffness and mass matrices, reduced eigenpairs, etc.,
is included in the governing equation of the dynamic condensation matrix. Thus, it
is unnecessary to compute these parameters during iteration. A lot of computational
effort may be saved. The convergent rate of this approach is much faster than the two
methods in Sections 6.4 and 6.5, especially when the reduced model is close to the
full model.
The eigenvalue shift technique may accelerate the convergence of iterative dynamic
condensation or make the reduced model close to the full model within any frequency
range. This technique is very efficient for the models with close frequencies.
References
Bathe, KJ and Wilson, EL (1972) Large eigenvalue problems in dynamic analysis. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics Division, 98(EM6): 1471-1485.
Blair, MA, Camino, TS, and Dickens, JM (1991) An iterative approach to a reduced mass
matrix. Proceedings of the 9th International Modal Analysis Conference (Centro Affari,
Firenze, Italy), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 621-626.
Friswell, MI, Garvey, SD, and Penny, JET (1995) Model reduction using dynamic and iterative IRS
technique. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 186(2):311-323.
Friswell, MI, Garvey, SD, and Penny, JET (1997) Using iterated IRS model reduction techniques to calculate
eigensolutions. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, Florida),
Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1537-1543.
Friswell, MI, Garvey, SD, and Penny, JET (1998) The convergence of the iterated IRS methods. Journal of
Sound and Vibration, 211(1):123-132.
Kidder, RL (1973) Reduction of structural frequency equations. AlAA Journal, 11(6):892.
Kim, K-O (1995) Hybrid dynamic condensation for eigenproblems. Computers and Structures,
56(1):105-112.
Kim, K-O (1996) Improved hybrid dynamic condensation for eigenproblems. Proceedings of the 37th
AIANASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Salt Lake
City, UT): 756-765.
106(STlO):2097-2108.
Mokeyev, VV (1998) A frequency condensation method for the eigenvalue problem. Communications in
O'Caliahan, JC (1989) A procedure for an improved reduced system (IRS) model. Proceedings of the 7th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, Nevada), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 17-2l.
Papadopoulos, M and Garcia, E (1996) Improvement in model reduction schemes using the system
equivalent reduction expansion process. AIAA Journal, 34(10):2217-2219.
Qu, Z and Fu, Z (1998a) An iterative method for dynamic condensation of finite element models, part I:
Basic method. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (English Edition), E-3(1):83-88.
Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998b) New structural dynamic condensation method for finite element models.
AlAA Journal, 36(7):1320-1324.
Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998c) Comment on improvement in model reduction schemes using the system
equivalent reduction expansion process. AIAA Journal, 36(10):194l.
Qu, Z-Q (1998) A multi-step method for matrix condensation of finite element models. Journal of Sound
and Vibration, 214(5):965-971.
Qu, Z, Fu, Z, and Hua, H (1999) A shifted iterative method of dynamic condensation for finite element
models. Chinese Journal of Applied Mechanics: 61-67.
Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (2000) An iterative method for dynamic condensation of structural matrices.
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 14(4):667-678.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2001) Two-step methods for dynamic condensation. Proceedings of the
42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Seattle,
Washington), AIAA, Reston, VA: 373-383.
Sauer, G (1989) Iterative improvement of eigensolution from reduced matrices. Communications in
Applied Numerical Methods, 5:329-335.
Singh, MP and Suarez, LE (1992) Dynamic Condensation with Synthesis of Substructure Eigenproperties.
Suarez, LE and Singh, MP (1992) Dynamic condensation method for structural eigenvalue analysis. AIAA
Journal, 30(4):1046-1054.
Ye, Y and Qu, Z-Q (2000) Iterative methods for dynamic condensation of structural matrices. Proceed-
ings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference & Exhibit (San Antonio, Texas), Society for
Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 1776-1782.
Zhang, D (1994) Succession-level approximate reduction technique (SART) in structural dynamic analysis.
Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica, 15(4):360-364.
Zhang, D-W and Li, S (1995) Succession-level approximate reduction (SAR) technique for struc-
tural dynamic model. Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville,
Tennessee), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 435--44l.
Zhang, D (1996) An improved Guyan reduction and successive reduction procedure of dynamic model.
Chinese Journal of Computational Structural Mechanics and Applications, 13( 1):90-94.
Selection of Master Degrees of Freedom
In the dynamic condensation the total degrees of freedom of a full model need to be
divided into masters and slaves. Therefore, the selection of masters generally plays
an important role in the condensation technique. Which and how many degrees of
freedom should be kept as masters are the crux of the selection.
In this chapter, the selection rules for masters will be described separately for the
physical-type and modal-type dynamic condensation approaches. These rules are
mainly for accuracy and completeness purposes, respectively. Other considerations,
such as the symmetry of a structure and the practicality, will also be discussed.
7.1 Physical-Type Condensation

It is stated in Chapter 4 that the valid eigenvalue range of Guyan condensation is
(0, Ac) in which Ac is the lowest eigenvalue of the slave model. Because the slave
model is defined as the full model with its masters constrained, the selection of
masters will affect the eigenvalue Ac as well as the valid eigenvalue range. It can be
seen from Eq. (5.3-20) that the approximate error of the eigenvalues resulting from
Guyan condensation is inversely proportional to the eigenvalue Ac. This means that
the bigger the eigenvalue A[) the more accurate the Guyan condensation. Therefore,
the fundamental requirement for the selection is to maximize the first eigenvalue or
natural frequency of the slave model. In fact, this requirement is very similar to a
type of structural dynamic optimization or design based on adding and/or changing
the support positions (Akesson and Olhoff, 1988; Son and Kwak, 1993; Pitarresi
and Di Edwardo, 1993; Won and Park, 1998). Therefore, many schemes used in this
optimization may be introduced to select the masters.
Although this fundamental requirement is dedicated to Guyan condensation, it is
also valid for its variants, which include the generalized Guyan condensation (Sec-
tion 4.4), quasistatic condensation (Section 4.5), and classical dynamic condensation
(Section 5.2). The exact condensation seems to be independent of the valid eigen-
value. However, the iterative scheme, which is used to solve for the resultant nonlinear
eigenvalue problem, is usually based on Guyancondensation or its variants. Although
the convergence of the iterative methods in Chapter 6 is independent of the selection,
the choice affects the rate of convergence. Consequently, the basic requirement for the
selection of masters is valid for all physical-type dynamic condensation methods.
Based on this requirement, qualitative rules and quantitative rules have been pro-
posed for the optimal selection of masters. Most of these guidelines were proposed
151
for Guyan condensation although they also could be used in other dynamic conden-
sation methods. It is necessary to note that all the rules are based on the viewpoint of
accuracy of condensation.
7.1.1 Qualitative Guidelines

Guidance on the choice of masters initially set down by Levy (1971) is to (1) select
the degrees of freedom that have the largest entries in the mass matrix and (2) select
the degrees of freedom that have the largest movements in the modes of interest.
Ramsden and Stocker (1969) selected the masters on those areas of the structure
that are associated with the larger concentrations of mass and are, at the same time,
reasonably flexible relative to other mass concentrations and fixed constraints.
Downs (1980) believed that the selected masters should always be displacements
rather than rotations. In the case of complex assemblies, there is a clear need to
concentrate the selected masters in those regions of the assembly that are most flexible
in relation to their inertia content. Popplewell et al. (1973) proposed a guideline from
the viewpoint of energy. The selected masters should conserve the greatest possible
strain energy information. These masters should contribute to the whole sum of the
energies relating to the inertial (kinetic energy) and external forces.
Clearly, the qualitative guidelines might be followed for simple structural systems
such as beam, plate, plane frame, etc. However, it requires either prior knowledge
of the solution or clairvoyance to follow these guidelines if the structural system is a
little complex.
7.1.2 Quantitative Algorithms

The quantitative rules for the selection of masters overcome the implementation dif-
ficulties of the qualitative guidelines. These algorithms can generally be programmed
on a computer for an automatic selection of masters.
Some quantitative schemes are based on the ratio of the diagonal elements of
stiffness matrix and mass matrix, that is, kii/mii. An algorithm was presented by
Henshell and Ong (1975) and Ong (1987) to eliminate one slave at a time. The
remainder is chosen as masters after a successive elimination. This procedure was
previously implemented to eliminate slaves stepwise using a frontal approach with
modifications to allow for mass matrices (Anderson et al., 1968; Irons, 1970). Using
such a technique, it is unnecessary to set up the full stiffness and mass matrices
for the structural system. A very similar selecting scheme was proposed by Shah
and Raymond (1982) in which the slaves are condensed out one by one directly
from the full stiffness and mass matrices. Matta (1987) suggested selecting the m
degrees of freedom that have the smallest ratio kii/mii as masters. The influence
of the deleted part of stiffness and mass matrices on the remainder of these two
matrices was considered in this approach. A detailed comparison of Shah's and Matta's
selecting schemes was performed by Suarez and Singh (1992), they concluded that
Shah's selecting scheme is better than Matta's although the former is slightly more
computationally expensive than the latter.
Research shows that the algorithms based on the ratio kii/mii is well adapted to
structures whose geometry and mechanical characteristics are relatively uniform.
If the mass distribution is irregular, these criteria risk concentrating all the master
Selection of Master Degrees of Freedom 153
degrees of freedom in the regions having significant masses (Bouhaddi and Fillod,
1992; Bouhaddi et aI., 1992).
Based on the modal energies associated with the degrees of freedom in the mode
shapes of a structural system, an analytical method for the selection of masters was
proposed by Kim and Choi (2000). Because the mode shapes are usually not available
before the selection, Ritz vectors computed from the stiffness and mass matrices are
used to estimate the energy distribution. It was shown that the usual rule of choosing
translational degrees of freedom is appropriate only for the lowest several modes. For
the higher modes, some of the rotational degrees of freedom should be selected.
The modal energy method has also been used by Li (2003) to develop an automatic
selecting scheme, which is called the modal energy selection method. In this method
the individual modal energy gradients are estimated from a newly defined basis in
the neighborhood of the original natural space. In case the energy variation of a
degree of freedom tends to increase in this neighborhood, that degree of freedom
is classified as a slave since it relatively has a tendency to provide the energy to the
nodes nearby. On the other hand, if the energy variation is decreasing, then it is a
master. All the classification criteria are finally mapped to one parameter, which is
called the index of classification. By examining the magnitude of these indices, one
is able to determine the masters and slaves. Clearly, the approximate mode shapes or
Ritz vectors are required in the above two energy-based approaches, which makes this
scheme computationally expensive.
Matta's Scheme
Suppose the approximate eigenvector of full model is q. The Rayleigh minimum

principle is given by
A = minQ(q) (1)
where the minimum is taken over all possible vectors q; Q(q) is the Rayleigh quotient
qTKq
Q(q) = TM (2)
q q
For a basis vector, we have
(3)
The terms ki;/mii in Eq. (3) are the least dependent on the approximate eigenvectors
selected. Hence, in the selection of degrees of freedom, the higher the values of ki i / mii
of the slaves, the lower the error introduced during the condensation. Therefore, the
selection of masters could be executed as follow (Matta, 1987):
1. Compute the basic stiffness and mass matrices K and M.
2. Divide the diagonal terms of the stiffness matrix by the corresponding diagonal
terms of the mass matrix to obtain the nodal ratio ri = kii / mii.
3. In order to obtain the effect of an eliminated degrees of freedom of the order j

on the reduced mass and stiffness matrices, the kij and mij terms should modify
the diagonal terms after each reduction as follows:
(4a)
(4b)
To simplify the selection process, all the ri, i = 1,2, ... , n, are divided by the lowest r
and are listed in ascending order. In case there are equal nodal ratios, the geometric
flexibility of the corresponding nodes should be considered. Only selected numbers
of these nodes should be used if these nodes are located in the same region of the
structure.
Shah and Raymund's Scheme
Let )"1 :s A2 :s ... :s An be the eigenvalue of a full model and We be a cutoff fre-
quency that is higher than all the significant frequencies. As suggested by Shah and
Raymund (1982), the cutoff frequency should be approximately three times the high-
est significant frequency, so that all the significant mode shapes are preserved in the
reduced model obtained from Guyan condensation. Find a degree of freedom for
which the ratio rr = kidmii is the highest. This degree of freedom is eliminated as a
slave provided rl > We. The reduced eigenproblem is of size (n - 1) x (n - 1). Let
All :s A12 :s ... :s AI(n-l) be the eigenvalues of the reduced model. Then we have
The eigenvalue Ali is an upper bound to Ai and the accuracy of this approximation
will decrease as the subscript i increases.
The above-described process to eliminate a slave is repeated again, but this time it is
applied to the reduced eigenvalue problem. This process is stopped after eliminating
j slaves if rI+
1 is smaller than w;. At this point, all the (n -
j) degrees of freedom
associated with the reduced eigenvalue problem are selected as masters.
The procedure to select masters is briefly described by the following steps (Shah
and Raymund, 1982):
1. Find a degree of freedom for which the ratio kid mii is the largest. If several
degrees of freedom have the same ratio, then the one with the smallest index is
considered in the next step.
2. w;,
If this ratio is greater than eliminate this degree of freedom from mass and
stiffness matrices by the Guyan condensation method.
3. Apply steps 1 and 2 to the reduced matrices obtained in step 2.
4. Repeat steps 1-3 until the largest ratio found in step 1 is less than or equal to
w;. At this point, the degrees of freedom associated with the resultant reduced
matrices represent the selected masters.
7.2 Modal-Type Condensation

The guidelines in the preceding section are based on the accuracy purposes for Guyan
condensation. They are not necessary for the modal-type condensation methods,
SEREP for example, because these methods are generally exact and their accuracy is
independent of the chosen. However, the selection of masters does have influence on
the properties of a reduced model. If a kept mode is not observable at the selected
masters, this mode will miss in the reduced model and the selection is considered
to be incomplete for this kept mode. The completeness of selection requires that any
eigenvector of the reduced model, consisting of the elements of a full eigenvector
at masters, within the interested frequency range can be distinguished or linearly
independent of each other.
Several criteria, such as participation factor (Qi, 1990), weighted average magnitude
of eigenvectors (LMS, 1991), effective independence distribution vector (Kammer,
1991, 1992a, 1992b), absolute singularity factor (Oh and Aprk, 1994), etc., can be
used to select masters for modal-type condensation. In the scheme of weighted average
magnitude of eigenvectors, the coordinates with the largest "weighted average" values
in the analytical mode shapes are chosen as masters. The objective of the effective
independence distribution vector method is to select masters that make the mode
shapes of interest at these masters as linearly independent as possible. The absolute
singularity factor, which is based on the singular values of the modal matrix of a
reduced model, uses the estimation error of the full degrees of freedom as a criterion
to select the best set of masters. Only the effective independence distribution vector
method is provided in the following.
7.2.1 Selection of Masters

The effective independence distribution vector procedure removes the degrees of free-
dom with the least significance one at a time. It begins by forming the Fisher
information matrix A
A = 4lrp4lap (1)
where .ap E RaxP is the reduced modal matrix; p and a denote the number of modes
of interest and the number of degrees of freedom selected, respectively. Clearly, this
matrix contains only the modes of interest at the selected degrees of freedom. The
matrix E is then formed by
(2)
Matrix E is an idempotent matrix with the property that its trace equals its rank. Thus,
terms on the diagonal of E represent the fractional distribution of each degree of
freedom to the rank of E and hence to the independence of the chosen modes. Matrix
E will only be full rank if all of the modes of interest are linearly independent. The
selection procedure is to examine the elements of the diagonal of E. Since the smallest
element relates to the degrees of freedom contributes least to the independence of the
chosen modes, this degree of freedom is removed. The matrix E is then recomputed
and the process is repeated. When the process is stopped, the remaining degrees of
freedom serve as the masters. The reduced modal matrix. ap is the eigenvector matrix
used in SEREP and modal reduction.
7.2.2 Assessment of Completeness

After the initial selection of masters, it is desirable to assess the quality of the master
set. Two commonly used criteria are provided in the following. The analytical mode
shapes at masters are required in both methods.
Modal Assurance Criterion

Possibly, the modal assurance criterion (MAC) (Allemang and Brown, 1982) is the
easiest way to check the linear dependence of mode shapes. Often the MAC is used
to check the correlation between the experimental and analytical mode shapes. Here,
only the analytical mode shapes at the chosen masters are used. If Ui and Uj are the
two vectors to be checked, the MAC value is defined as
(3)
A MAC value close to 1 suggests that the two modes or vectors are well correlated, and
a value close to 0 indicates un correlated modes. For the eigenvector matrix, the MAC
is a matrix and its diagonal elements are unity. Usually, the off-diagonal terms are not
zero because the eigenvectors are orthogonal with respect to the mass and stiffness
matrices and the MAC includes no such weightings.
The logic to check the completeness is very simple: (1) Compute the MAC matrix
using the interested analytical eigenvector matrix at masters. (2) Check the off-
diagonal terms of the MAC matrix. The larger the off-diagonal terms, the more
dependent the mode shape vectors. To obtain an average measure of the dependence
of the vectors, the RMS value of the off-diagonal entries in the MAC matrix may be
calculated (Penny et aI., 1994).
Singular- Value Decomposition

A singular-value decomposition of the eigenvector matrix at masters may be used to
determine the suitability of the masters. The method simply evaluates the ratio of the
largest to the smallest singular value of the eigenvector matrix. If the mode shapes are
orthogonal, all of the singular values of the modal matrix are equal. If the vectors are
linearly dependent, then at least one singular value is zero. Therefore, if the ratio is
close to unity, then the choice of the masters is good. The larger the ratio, the worse
the choice (Penny et aI., 1992).
Actually, the completeness of masters on the modes of interest is also required by
the physical-type condensation. However, for this case, the completeness concerns
the question as to how many modes of a full model could be possibly retained in the
reduced model for a given number of masters. Suppose that the number of masters
or the size of reduced model is m. If the reduced model resulting from the iterative
dynamic condensation methods preserves m modes of the full model within a given
frequency range, or if these m modes of the full model are observable at the m degrees
of freedom, the selection of masters is called completeness. Otherwise, the selection
is incomplete.
7.3 Other Considerations

7.3.1 Symmetry
It is shown in Chapter 2 that one part of a structure may be used to perform the
eigenvalue analysis if the structure exhibits one or more planes of symmetry. This
scheme can reduce the size of the problem. However, the combination of the sym-
metric and antisymmetric conditions should be imposed properly. There is another
type of symmetry in which the properties in one direction are identical to those in the
other direction. Many structural systems with this symmetry have repeated frequen-
cies. For these structural models, the symmetry feature should be considered in the
section of masters. Otherwise, the features related to these repeated frequencies will
not be kept in the reduced model if some errors are retained in the reduced model.
Let us consider a simply supported square plate given in Figure 7.l. Clearly, the
properties in the x-direction are identical to these in the y-direction. Its natural
frequencies can be obtained analytically, that is,
(l)
and
(2)
where E, p, h, v represent Young's modulus, mass density, thickness, and the Poisson
of the plate; m and n denote the number of half-waves in the x- and y-directions,
respectively. Using this formulation, the lowest 10 natural frequencies are calculated
and listed in the third column of Table 7.1. There are four groups of repeated natural
frequencies.
The finite element method is used to discretize the square plate. Its finite element
mesh is shown in Figure 7.2. There are 64 elements and 81 nodes. The total number
of degrees of freedom is 175. The lowest 10 natural frequencies computed from this
finite element model are listed in the fourth column of Table 7.l. Although there is
some difference in the frequencies, the repeated feature of natural frequencies is kept.
Two cases for the selection of masters are considered. The translational degrees
of freedom at nodes 21, 23, 25, 39, 41, 43, 57, 59, and 61 are selected as masters in
Figure 7.1 Simply supported square plate.

Table 7.1 Natural frequencies of the full model

of plate (rad/s)
Mode (m.If) PEM

1 (1,1) 30.247 30.002
2 (1,2) 75.618 74.684
3 (2,1) 75.618 74.684
4 (2.2) 120.989 117.377
5 (1.) lSl.236 149.381
6 ().I) 151.236 149.381
7 (2.3) 196.607 189
8 (3,2) 196.307
9 (1,4) 257.102
10 257.102
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63
46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Figure 7.2 Finite element model of a simply supported square plate.
the first case and those at nodes 21, 23, 25, 39,41,43,48, SO, and 52 are selected in
the second case. Clearly, the degrees of freedom in the former case keeps the same
symmetry property of the full model (referred to as the symmetrical case) while the
latter case does not (referred to as the unsymmetrical case). The iterative method in
Section 6.4 is implemented to compute the reduced model and its natural frequencies.
The frequencies resulted from the initial, first, second, third, 10th approximations are
listed in Tables 7.2 and 7.3, respectively.
In the symmetrical case shown in Table 7.2, these repeated frequencies of the
full model are retained in the reduced model even though these frequencies are
higher than the exact. However, these repeated frequencies are not retained in the
reduced model before the iteration converges in the unsymmetrical case as shown
in Table 7.3. Therefore, it will be dangerous to use the reduced model before all the
Table 7.2 Natural frequencies of the reduced model of

plate (rad/s) (symmetry)
Mode laitial Pint Second 1bint Teatb

30.090 30.002 30.002 30.002 30.002
2 76.286 74.684 74.684 74.684
3 76.286 74.684 74.684 74.684
4 124.138 117.385 117.377 117.377
5 164.955 149.588 149.394 149.382
6 164.955 149.588 149.394 149.382
7 218.515 189.755 189.131 189.062
8 218.515 189.755 189.313 189.062
9 316.458 261.008 257.2n 256.529
Table 7.3 Natural frequenci es of the reduced model of

plate (rad/s) (unsymmetry)
Mode IDitiaI FU'It Second 1bint Teatb

I 30.160 30.002 30.002 30.002 30.002
2 76.874 74.689 74.684 74.684 74.684
3 78.957 74.706 74.685 74.684 74.684
4 130.560 117.570 117.402 117.384 117.377
5 166.325 149.752 149.429 149.394 149.381
6 195.292 150.707 149.677 149.470 149.381
7 230.037 191.157 189.528 189.225 189.053
8 266.697 192.375 190.045 189.456 189.053
~ 391.902 268.477 260.519 258.363 256.318
repeated frequencies converge if the masters are not selected symmetrically. This is
the requirement of the selection of masters for the systems with repeated frequency.
7.3.2 Practicality
Many guidelines and rules have been provided in preceding sections in this chapter.
In many situations, however, some degrees of freedom must be kept as masters for
practicality purposes whether or not they satisfy these rules. These degrees of freedom
usually include those at which external forces locate, at which the displacements are
prescribed, and at which the responses are of interest. Thus, the selection of these
degrees of freedom will not follow the criteria mentioned in Sections 7.1 and 7.2.
7.4 Number of Master Degrees of Freedom

How many degrees of freedom should be retained in the master set, that is the size
of the master set, is another topic on the selection of masters? Generally, the size of
the master set is described by the ratio of the number of masters to the number of
accurate modes in the solution.
Two factors need to be considered when deciding the size of the master set. The
first is the accuracy of condensation. For a given number of modes of interest, the
more the number of degrees of freedom are retained in the master set, the higher
accuracy the dynamic condensation approaches (except the SEREP and its equiva-
lence) have. The reason is clear. With the increase of the number of masters, the
number of constraints imposed on the full model to obtain the slave model increases
and, as a result, the frequencies of the slave model increase. Accordingly, the lowest
frequency of the slave model as well as the cutoff frequency of Guyan condensation
increase. Therefore, the accuracy of Guyan condensation and other dynamic conden-
sation approaches that are based on Guyan condensation will increase. The second is
the computational work involved. Clearly, the size of a reduced model increases with
the increase of the number of masters. More computational effort is required for the
reduced model with a larger size. Therefore, there has to be a tradeoff between the
accuracy and computational work for determining the size of the master set.
Levy (1971) quotes a rule of thumb to the essential size of reduced matrix: "the
ratio of the number of degrees of freedom in the model to the number of accurate
modes in the solution is between 2 and 3." Ramsden and Stoker (1969) recommend
the ratio as 3.5 when no prior knowledge of the solution is available. These ratios
are based on Guyan condensation. If the iterative methods are used, the ratio can be
reduced significantly. Suarez and Singh (1992) suggest a value of 1.4 after surveying
several numerical simulations.
After investigating six numerical examples, Henshell and Ong (1975) proposed an
empirical formula to estimate the percentage errors of Guyan condensation in terms
of ratio, that is,
30
percentage error = - - ' - 2 (1)
(ratIo)
In many situations, all the modes within a given frequency range are of interest.
However, we do not know the number of these modes before the eigenproblem is
solved. Under these situations, a cutoff frequency, which should be higher than all the
significant frequencies, recommended by Shah and Raymond (1982) may be used to
decide how many degrees of freedom should be selected as the masters. The details
are described in Section 7.1.
7.5 Summary
Two topics-what and how many degrees of freedom should be included in masters-
need to be considered in the selection of masters. Accuracy, completeness, symmetry,
and practicality are four major requirements in the selection. Physical-type con-
densation and modal-type condensation methods have different rules on each
requirement.
The selection of masters generally has a significant influence on the accuracy of
physical-type condensation approaches. Thus, the accuracy of a reduced model is
a major consideration when selecting masters. This means that the selection should
make the reduced model as accurate as possible. With the increase of the ratio, the
dynamic characteristics computed from the reduced model approach those of the full
model steadily. However, a large ratio will lead to expensive computational effort.
Therefore, a tradeoff is required between them. Since the modal-type condensation

methods are generally exact, the masters could be chosen arbitrarily in theory.
The completeness requirement is very important in the modal-type condensation
methods because the selection of masters at which a low mode is not observable leads
to difficulties in this type of condensation. In the physical-type condensation, the
modes that are not observable simply are not contained in the reduced model.
For the models with repeated frequencies, the masters should be selected symmet-
rically when the physical-type condensation methods are utilized to compute reduced
models. This requirement is unimportant in the modal-type condensation.
The practicality requirement has the highest priority in the selection of masters in
all condensation approaches.
References
Akesson, Band Olhoff, N (1998) Minimum stiffness of optimally located supports for
maximum value of beam eigenfrequencies. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 120(3):
457--463.
Allemang, RJ and Brown, DL (1982) A correlation coefficient for modal vector analysis.
Proceeding of the 1st International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Union
College, Schenectady, NY: 110-116.
Anderson, RG, Irons, B, and Zienkiewicz, OC (1968) Vibration and stability of plates using finite elements.
International Journal of Solids and Structures, 4: 1031 - 1055.
Bouhaddi, N, Cogan, S, and Fillod, R (1992) Dynamic substructuring by Guyan condensation selection
of the master DOE Proceedi ngs of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CAl,
Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1992). A method for selecting master DOF in dynamic substructuring using
the Guyan condensation method. Computers and Structures, 45(5/6):941-946.
Downs, B (1980) Accurate reduction of stiffness and mass matrices for vibration analysis and a rationale
for selecting master degrees of freedom. Journal of Mechanical Design, 102(2):412--416.
Henshell, RD and Ong, JH (1975) Automatic masters for eigenvalue economization. Earthquake
Irons, BM (1970) A frontal solution program for finite element analysis. International Journal for
Kammer, DC (1991) Sensor placements for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space
structures. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 14(2):251-259.
Kammer, DC (1992a) Effect of noise on sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation
of large space structures. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, 114(3):436--443.
Kammer, DC (1992b) Effect of model error on sensor for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of
large space structures. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 15(2):334-341.
Kim, K-O and Choi, Y-J (2000) Energy method for selection of degrees of freedom in condensation. AIAA
Journal, 38(7):1253-1259.
Levy, R (1971) Guyan reduction solutions recycled for improved accuracy. NASTRAN Users Experiences:
201-220.
LMS International (1991) Large-scale modal testing of a space frame structure - from pretest analysis to
FEA model validation. Sound and Vibration: 6-16.
Li, W (2003) A degree selection method of matrix condensations for eigenvalue problems. Journal of
Sound and Vibration, 259(2):409--425.
Matta, KW (1987) Selection of degrees of freedom for dynamic analysis. Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, 109(1):65-69.
Oh, D and Park, Y (1994). Order reduction based on singular values of a modal matrix. Mechanical Systems
and Signal Processing, 8(1 ):63-79.
Ong, JH (1987) Improved automatic masters for eigenvalue economization. Finite Element Analysis in
Analysis and Design, 3(2):149-160.
Penny, JET, Friswell, MI, and Garvey, SD (1992) The automatic choice of measurement locations for
dynamic testing. Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CAl,
Penny, JET, Friswell, MI, and Garvey, SD (1994). Automated choice of measurement locations for dynamic
testing. AIAA Journal, 32(2):407-414.
Pitarresi, JM and Di Edwardo, AV (1993) A design approach for the systematic improvement of support
locations for vibrating circuit cards. Journal of Electronic Packaging, 115(1):118-123.
Popplewell, N, Bertels, AWM, and Arya, B (1973) A critical appraisal of the eliminating technique. Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 31(2):213-233.
Qi, Y (1990) Selection of master degrees of freedom in model reduction techniques. Master Thesis,
Department of Mechanical Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ.
Ramsden, JN and Stoker, JR (1969) Mass condensation - a semi-automatic method for reducing the size
of vibration problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1(4):333-349.
Shah, VN and Raymund, M (1982) Analytical selection of masters for the reduced eigenvalue problem.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 18(1):89-98.
Son, JH and Kwak, BM (1993) Optimization of boundary conditions for maximum fundamental frequency
of vibrating structures. AIAA Journal, 31 (12):2351-2357.
Suarez, LE and Singh, MP (1992) Dynamic condensation method for structural eigenvalue analysis. AIAA
Journal, 30(4): 1046-1 054.
Won, K-M and Park, Y-S (1998) Optimal support positions for a structure to maximize its fundamental
natural frequency. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 213( 5):801-812.
Dynamic Condensation of Nonclassically
Damped Models
8.1 Introduction
The static and dynamic condensation methods for undamped models have been
described in Chapters 4, 5, and 6. These methods are also valid for proportionally
or classically damped models because the proportional damping does not affect the
normal modes of the undamped models. However, for many real-world structures
and systems the proportional damping assumption is invalid. Examples of such cases
are the structures made up of materials with different damping characteristics in dif-
ferent parts, structures equipped with passive (such as concentrated dampers) and
active control systems, structures with layers of damping materials (such as smart
structures), and structures with rotating parts (such as a rotor). For these struc-
tural systems, the normal modes with real values resulting from the corresponding
undamped models cannot be used to uncouple the dynamic equations of the nonclas-
sically damped model, the state vectors defined in state space are, hence, commonly
used. The size of the system matrices in the state space will be doubled automati-
cally compared to those defined in the displacement space. Therefore, the dynamic
condensation technique becomes very important.
Generally, we may perform the model reduction for the non classically damped
models both in the displacement space and in the state space (Qu and Selvam, 2000).
One advantage of the methods performed in the displacement space is that the result-
ing reduced model is also defined in the displacement space. The explicit form of mass,
damping, and stiffness matrices may be easily obtained. This makes it convenient in
some dynamic analyses where the explicit system matrices are required.
The simplest approach for the nonclassically damped models is the extension of
Guyan condensation in which the Guyan condensation matrix is directly used to
reduce the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the full model (Rouch and
Kao, 1980; Reddy and Sharan, 1986; Qu et al., 2003a). Of course, both the inertia
and the damping effects are ignored in this approach. Therefore, the accuracy of
reduced model is usually low, especially for the models with high frequency and
damping.
An exact dynamic condensation method for nonclassically damped models, which is
essentially an extension of the exact dynamic condensation of undamped models, was
developed by Huang and Gu (1993). The resulting dynamic condensation matrix and
the system matrices of the reduced model generally have complex values. The further
163
analysis of the reduced model, hence, becomes very complex. To overcome this
drawback, Huang and Gu (1993) expanded the dynamic flexible matrix of the slave
model into a power series. With the assumption that the norms of the damping and
mass matrices of the slave model are much smaller than that of the stiffness matrix, the
first order of approximation was considered in the dynamic condensation matrix. The
resulting system matrices of the reduced model are all real and symmetric. However,
the accuracy of the reduced model is usually low.
The iterative dynamic condensation algorithms presented in Sections 6.4 and 6.6
were used by Qu and Selvam (2000) to reduce the size of nonclassically damped mod-
els. Unfortunately, it is difficult to include the influence of nonclassical damping into
the dynamic condensation matrix. Therefore, the reduced model may be convergent.
However, it will not converge to the full model in the interested frequency range.
Due to these difficulties, the dynamic condensation of non classically damped
models is usually performed in the state space. One merit of this scheme is that the
nonclassical damping can be easily considered in the dynamic condensation matrix.
Two static condensation approaches performed in the state space were developed
by Qu (1998) and by Qu, Jung, and Selvam (2003). They were compared with the
static condensation in the displacement space from the viewpoints of assumptions,
condensation matrices, computational work, and reduced system matrices. The com-
parison shows that the reduced stiffness and damping matrices computed from these
three methods are the same and only the reduced mass matrices are different. With
the introduction of the concept of generalized inverse, a third static condensation was
also developed. One advantage of the former two methods is that the reduced system
matrices in the state space can be easily converted into the mass, damping, and stiff-
ness matrices in the displacement space. It will be shown later that these approaches
are not exactly static again.
Based on the modal reduction method for undamped models, an extended modal
reduction method for nonclassically damped models was proposed by Kane and Torby
(1991) and applied to the rotor dynamic problems. In this method the interested
eigenvectors of the full model should be available before the dynamic condensation is
performed. Due to the complex nature of the eigenvectors, the operations of complex
values were used to compute the dynamic condensation matrix. It was shown by Qu
and Selvam (2004) that these complex operations could be avoided using a properly
defined transformation.
Similar to the iterative methods for undamped models, several iterative dynamic
condensation schemes were developed by Rivera, Singh, and Suarez (1999), Qu and
Selvam (2000), and Qu, Selvam, and Jung (2003b). They are all defined in the state
space. The main ideas of these three approaches are very similar. The governing
equations for the dynamic condensation matrix defined in the state space are derived
from the general eigenproblems in the state space. Due to the nonlinearity of the
governing equations, iterative schemes were proposed to solve for the dynamic con-
densation matrix. The initial approximations of the dynamic condensation matrix
used in these three papers are different. The form of the system matrices in the state
space used by the former two approaches is different from that in the third approach.
Research shows that the reduced model computed from these iterative schemes has
much higher accuracy than those from static condensation. These reduced models
may accurately represent the full model within an interested frequency range after suf-
ficient iterations. Based on the dynamic equations of equilibrium in the state space,
a governing equation for the dynamic condensation matrix was derived by Qu and
Chang (2000). This governing equation is the same as those defined by Rivera, Singh,
Dynamic Condensation of Nonclassically Damped Models 165
and Suarez (1999), and by Qu and Selvam (2000) if only the former m eigenpairs are
used to compute the dynamic responses.
The iterative dynamic condensation approaches (Rivera et aI., 1999; Qu and Chang,
2000) were successfully extended to the systems with unsymmetric system matrices
by Rao (2002). The merits of the two methods were kept and the demerits were aban-
doned in the new iterative approach. Due to the unsymmetric nature of matrices, two
condensation matrices were defined to relate the masters and slaves. Furthermore,
with the combination of substructure synthesis technique, this dynamic condensation
method was utilized to obtain the reduced order models of complicated unsymmetric
systems. However, the conception that the reduced system matrices in the state space
have the same forms as those of the full system matrices may not be used in the
systems with symmetrical matrices (Qu, 2003).
Based on the complex subspace iteration, a governing equation for the dynamic
condensation matrix defined in the state space was derived by Qu and Selvam (2000,
2002). Two iterative schemes were proposed to solve the governing equation. This
method has three advantages.
l. The convergence is much faster than the iterative methods aforementioned, espe-
cially when the approximate values of reduced model are close to those of full
model.
2. A full proof of the convergence can be made simply.
3. Because there is not any parameter of the reduced model in the governing equa-
tion of the dynamic condensation matrix, it is unnecessary to calculate them
in every iteration. This makes the iterative scheme much more computationally
efficient, especially when the number of the masters is large.
The merit of the iterative dynamic methods is that the accuracy of the reduced model
is much higher than those computed from static condensation schemes. However, the
reduced system matrices defined by iterative dynamic condensation schemes are gen-
erally fully populated. It is very difficult to convert them into the stiffness, damping,
and mass matrices defined in displacement space.
8.2 Static Condensation

8.2.1 Static Condensation in Displacement Space (SCDS)
The dynamic equations of equilibrium of a nonclassically damped system can be
expressed in a matrix form as
MX(t) + CX(t) + KX(t) = J(t) (1)
where, M, C, and K E Rnxn are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the full
model. They are assumed to be positive definite, positive semidefinite, and positive
semidefinite, respectively.J(t) E R n is an external force vector. X(t),X(t), andX(t) E
R n are the displacement, velocity, and acceleration response vectors of the system.
They are functions of time t. For simplicity, this indication of time is omitted in the
following. Assume that the total degrees of freedom (n) of the full model are divided
into the masters and slaves. With this division, Eq. (1) can be rewritten in a partitioned
form as
[ Mmm
Msm
Mms]
Mss
I~mj
Xs
+ [C mm
Csm
Cms]
Css
I~mj
Xs
+ [Kmm
Ksm
Kms]
Kss
IXmj
Xs
= Ifmj
fs
(2)
where M mm , C mm , Kmm E Rmxm; M ms , Cms, Kms E R mxs ; M sm , Csm , Ksm E Rsxm ;
M ss , Css , Kss E RSxs ; X m, X m, X m, f m E Rm; X S, X s, X s' fs E RS. Expanding the
second equation of the partitioned Eq. (2) produces
MsmXm + MssXs + CsmXm + CssXs + KsmXm + KssXs = fs (3)
Since the condensation matrix is load-independent, the external force vector fs in
Eq. (3) can be set to zero for simplicity and, hence, this equation becomes
-1 .. .. '. .
Xs = -Kss (MsmXm + MssXs + CsmXm + CssXs + KsmXm) (4)
Letting
(5)
in Eq. (4), we have
(6)
where RD E Rsxm is defined as
(7)
RD is the condensation matrix of nonclassically damped systems in displacement space.
It is identical to the Guyan condensation matrix. This is a static condensation method
because the inertia and damping effect on the condensation matrix are omitted, as
shown in Eq. (5).
Clearly, the condensation matrix defined in Eq. (7) is independent of time t.
Differentiating both sides of Eq. (6) with respect to time t twice yields
(8)
Substituting Eqs. (6) and (8) into Eq. (2), and then premultiplying both sides of the
equation by matrix [I RJ], where I E R mxm is an identity matrix, results in
(9)
The mass matrix MR E R mxm , damping matrix CR E R mxm , stiffness matrix KR E
R mxm , and force vector f R E R m of the reduced model are given by
MR = Mmm - KmsK;;1Msm - MmsK;;1Ksm + KmsK;; 1MssK;; 1Ksm (lOa)
CR = C mm - KmsK;; 1C sm - CmsK;;1Ksm + KmsK;;1CssK;;1Ksm (lOb)
KR = Kmm - KmsK ;;1 Ksm (lOc)
fR = f m - KmsK ;;1fs (lOd)

Because the number of masters is much smaller than that of total degrees of freedom,
i.e., m « n, the dimension of the reduced model (MR, CR, KR) is much smaller than
that of the full model (M, C, K). Furthermore, the dynamic properties of the reduced
model are close to those of the full model in the low-frequency range. Therefore, the
reduced model is very useful for further dynamic analyses.
8.2.2 Static Condensation in State Space I-SCSS(I)

Because the damping in Eq. (1) is nonclassical, the normal modes of the correspond-
ing undamped model cannot be used to uncouple Eq. (1). For modal analysis of such
systems, the state vector defined in the state space is commonly used. Equation (1)
can be rewritten in state space as
(11)
where the system matrices AI, BI E R2nx2n, state vectors Y, Y, pI E R2n are given by
AI = [Ko 0
-M
J, BI = [-C
-M -:l
Y = {~) , Y = {~)I pI = {~) (12)
With the same division of the total degrees of freedom, Eq. (11) can be partitioned as
[A~m A~J {Ym) [B~m

Aim Ais Ys Bim
B;sJ
Bss
{~m) =
Ys
{p;)
Ps
(13)
AI = [Kmm AI = (AI )T = [Kms

mm 0 ms sm 0
AI = [Kss (14a)
ss 0
BI = [-Cmm BI = (BI )T = [-Cms

mm -Mmm ms sm -Mms
BI = [-Css (14b)
ss -Mss
(14c)
Expanding the second equation ofEq. (13) and ignoring the force vector pi leads to
I I I· I .
Asm Y m + AssYs - Bsm Y m - BssYs = 0 (15)
The relation between Y m and Y s is obtained from Eq. (15) as

I -1 I · I . I
Y s = (Ass) (Bsm Y m + BssYs - Asm Y m) (16)
Setting
Ym =0, (17)
in Eq. (16) leads to

(18)
Hence, the condensation matrix R~ E R2sx2m of the nonclassically damped system

defined in the state space is given by
(19)
Because the vectors Ym and Ys are set to zero when deriving the condensation matrix,
this method is referred to as the static condensation in state space. However, it is
different from the static condensation defined in the displacement space as shown in
Eq. (7) because the inertia effect is partially included in the condensation matrix in
Eq. (19). Hence, it is not exactly a static condensation anymore.
Differentiating both sides ofEq. (18) with respect to time once results in
. I .
Y s = RsYm (20)
Substituting Eqs. (18) and (20) into Eq. (13), and then premultiplying it by the matrix
[1 (R~)T], where 1 E R2mx2m is an identity matrix, yields
(21)
The system matrices A1, B1 E R2mx2m and force vector F1 E R2m of the reduced
model are defined as
A1 = A~m + (R~)T A;m +A~s~ + (R~)TA;sR~ (22a)

I BI (RI)TBI BI RI (~l)TBI ~T
BR = mm + 5 sm + ms 5 + 1<"5 ssl<S (22b)
F1 = F~ + (~)TF! (22c)
Introducing Eqs. (14) and (19) into Eq. (22) leads to
A1 = [~1 0
-MR
1 ], (23)
where
M1 = Mmm - MmsM;1Msm (24a)

c1 = Cmm - KmsK;1Csm - CmsK;1Ksm + KmsK;1Css K;; 1Ksm (24b)
K1 = Kmm - KmsK;1Ksm (24c)
11 =1m - KmsK ;;1/s (24d)
M1, c1,and K1 E R mxm are the corresponding mass, damping, and stiffness matrices
of the reduced model defined in displacement space.
8.2.3 Static Condensation in State Space II-SCSS(II)

Equation (1) can also be rewritten in another form in state space' as
Ally _ BlIy = plI (25)
where
(26)
Using the same division of the total degrees of freedom, Eq. (25) can be partitioned
as
B~]
Bll
{~mJ
y
= {p~J
pll
(27)
ss s s
in which the sub matrices are defined as
All = [ 0 All = (All )T = [ 0 Kms] ,

mm Kmm ms sm Kms Cms
All
ss
= [Kss
0 (28a)
B!.Imm = [Kmm
0
BII =
ms (B!.Ism )T = [Kms
0
(28b)
(28e)
Based on the same assumption in Eq. (17) and derivation in preceding subsection,
the condensation matrix is obtained from the under part of Eq. (27) as
(29)
Substituting for A~~ andA~~ in Eq. (29) using Eq. (28a) yields
Jtf = _ [-K;;ICssKss
K;;l
K;;l]
0
[0 Ksm
Ksm]
Csm
= [-K;;IKsm K;;lCssK;;I~:m - K;;lCsm] (30)

o -Kss Ksm
Similar to the condensation matrix in Eq. (19), the condensation matrix defined in
Eq. (30) is referred to as the static condensation matrix in state space, which is different
from the static condensation in the displacement space. The corresponding method
is called static condensation in state space. The damping effect is partially included in
the condensation matrix, as shown in Eq. (30).
The corresponding dynamic equations of the reduced model are given by
A lly
R m _ BIIy·
R m- - pII
R (31)
The system matrices and force vector of the reduced model are defined as
(32a)
(32b)
pII = pII
R m
+ (RII)T
S
pII
5
(32c)
Substituting Eqs. (28) and (30) into Eq. (32) leads to
o II] ,
-MR PRII II
= f~
0 (33)
where
M~ = Mmm - KmsK;;lMsm - MmsK;;lKsm + KmsK;;lMssK;;lKsm + t:.MR

(34a)
C~ = C mm - KmsK;;lC sm - CmsK;;lKsm + KmsK;;IC ss K;;lKsm (34b)

K~ = Kmm - KmsK;;lKsm (34c)
f~ = f m - KmsK;;lfs (34d)
and
(35)
(36)
M~, C~, and K~ E R mxm are the corresponding mass, damping, and stiffness
matrices of the reduced model defined in the displacement space.
8.2.4 Comparisons of These Methods

Based on the dynamic equations of equilibrium defined in the displacement space and
the state space, three static condensation methods for nonclassically damped models
have been described in this section. They are compared briefly in the following.
Assumption
The assumption of the SCDS is Eq. (5) in which the velocities and accelerations of
the full model are assumed to be zero. The assumptions of SCSS(I) and SCSS(I1)
are Eq. (17). Substituting Eq. (14c) into Eq. (17), we will find that the assumptions
used by the three approaches are identical. This means the inertia forces of the full
model are ignored in the condensation matrices of the three algorithms. However, it
is not true for the velocities or damping forces. From the assumption Eq. (17), we can
see that the velocities are required to be zero in the static condensation. The velocity
vector is also included in the state vector Y m and Y s , which are not required to be
zeros. Therefore, the requirement that velocities should be zero is incomplete in the
static condensation defined in the state space.
Condensation Matrix
As mentioned above, the condensation matrix is defined as the relation of the dis-
placements, velocities, and accelerations between masters and slaves. For SCDS the
relations of displacements, velocities, and accelerations are given by
(37)
Clearly, the displacements, velocities, and accelerations associated with the masters
and slaves have the same relations.
Substituting Eqs. (19) and (14c) into Eq. (18), we have
(38)
Introducing Eqs. (19) and (14c) into Eq. (20) yields
(39)
Similarly, the relationships for SCSS(II) are given by

• -1'
Xs = -Kss KsmXm
(40)
.. -1"
Xs = -Kss KsmXm
(41)
Compared to SCDS, two differences need to be noted for the SCSS(I) and SCSS(II):
I. The relationships of displacements, velocities, and accelerations between masters
and slaves are different. The relation matrix between Xs and X m, for example, is
_K;;l K sm , while it is -M;;lMsm for velocities as shown in Eq. (38).
2. The relations of velocities between the masters and slaves are contradictive. For
example, they are _M;;l Msm and _K;;l Ksm in Eqs. (38) and (39), respectively.
As one knows, the norm of the damping matrix is usually much smaller than that of
the stiffness matrix, which leads to
(42)
Hence, the inconsistency and contradiction ofSCSS(II) are much lighter than SCSS(I).
Moreover, if the damping matrix is proportional to the stiffness matrix, SCSS(II) is
identical to SCDS. .
If we assume the mass matrix is diagonal, Eqs. (38) and (39) become
Xs=O (43)
Clearly, the assumptions in Eq. (43) are unreasonable. Consequently, for reasonable
reasons, the assumption of SCDS is a little better than SCSS(II). The latter is much
better than SCSS(I). The numerical examples will show that the accuracy of SCSS(II)
is close to SCDS. However, the accuracy of SCSS(I) is much lower than SCDS and
SCSS(II).
Computational Work
Comparing Eqs. (10), (24), and (34), we can easily find that the computational efforts
for the stiffness matrix, damping matrix, and force vector of the reduced model are the
same. The only difference among them comes from the computation of the reduced
mass matrix. The computational efforts for computing the reduced stiffness, mass,
and damping matrices using the three schemes are listed in Table 8.1. As we know,
multiplication is usually faster than division. However, the speed difference between
them on computers using numerical coprocessors is small. Moreover, multiplication
has been optimized to the point where it is as fast as addition and subtraction on
supercomputers. Consequently, only the total arithmetic operations are given for
each case. The symmetrical feature of the physical matrices has not been considered
in the results in Table 8.1. For example, the total number of arithmetic operations for
the Gauss-Jordan algorithm in the inversion of an 5 x 5 matrix is taken as 45 3 - 25 2
(Carroll, 1999).
For a large model, the number of total degrees of freedom is usually very large. This
leads to 5 ~ n » m. Consequently, the computational work for SCSS(I) and SCSS(II)
is approximately twice that of SCDS when the consistent mass matrix is considered.
The number of arithmetic operations for SCSS(I) will reduced by half if the mass
matrix is diagonal.
Table 8.1 Computational efforts of the reduced system matrices
SCDS PuB 4s' + (61ft - 2~ + (lW - 3111). + bfiJ

DiIpII 4s' + (4111- 2~ + (W - III). +"".
SCSS(I) PuR as' + (61ft - 4~ + c.W - 'III). + "".
DiIpII 4s' + (4111- 2); + (W - 2m). + "".
SCSS(D) PuB as' + (161ft - 4~ + (14m" - 6Ift)s + "".
Diaaonal as' + (14111- 4),1 + (lbfiJ - 4m)s
Reduced System Matrices
Since the system matrices A~, A~, B~, and B~ of the reduced model in the state
space have the same forms of the matrices AI, AIl, B I , and BII , respectively, we
can easily convert them into the reduced stiffness, mass, and damping matrices in
the displacement space. Furthermore, the dynamic equilibrium Eqs. (21) and (31)
defined in the state space can be rewritten in the displacement space as
(44)
(45)
Comparing the system matrices and force vectors of the reduced model resulting from
the three approaches, we find
MRiM~iM~,
KR=K1=K~, (46)
This means that the damping matrices, stiffness matrices, and force vectors obtained
from the three methods are the same. There is only some difference among the mass
matrices.
Of course, the three static condensation methods provided above may be extended
using the generalized inverse of submatrix. Research shows (Qu, 1998; Qu, lung,
and Selvam, 2003) that the accuracy of the reduced model may be increased slightly.
However, the computational work will be increased due to the matrix process of
generalized inverse.

3-DOF System
In order to list the stiffness, mass, and damping matrices of the reduced model explic-
itly, the first example considered is a 3-degree-of-freedom mass-damper-stiffness
system shown in Figure 8.1, for which it is unnecessary to apply any condensation
procedure. Suppose m = c = k = 1; the stiffness, mass, and damping matrices of this
system can be easily obtained as
[10 01 0]0 ,
-1
2 M=
-1 001
Assume the first degree of freedom, Xl, is selected as the master when the three
static condensation methods are applied to the full model. The stiffness, mass, and
damping matrices of the reduced models obtained from SCDS, SCSS(I), and SCSS(II)
Figure S.1 3-Degree-of-freedom system.
are given by
KR = I, MR=3, CR = 1
Kk = I, Mk = I, Ck = 1
KIIR = I, M~ =3, C~ = 1
respectively. If the third degree of freedom is selected as the master, the stiffness, mass,
and damping matrices of the reduced models obtained from the three methods are
KR = 1/3, MR = 14/9, CR = 1/9

Kk = 1/3, Mk = I, Ck = 1/9
KRII = 1/ 3, M~ = 40/27, C~ = 1/9
respectively.
The complex frequencies or called complex eigenvalues of the reduced models for
the two cases are listed in Table 8.2. The first frequency of the full model is also listed in
the table for comparison purposes. Generally, the frequencies of the reduced models
are very low due to the ignorance of the inertia and damping effects. Particularly, the
real parts on which the damping ratios are based have much higher errors than those
of the imaginary parts. Because these algorithms are static, the selection of the master
has a great effect on the accuracy of the reduced model, which can be seen clearly
from Table 8.2. The selection of master in Case 2, for example, is much better than
that in Case 1. SCDS and SCSS(II) have very similar accuracy.
Table S.2 Frequencies of the reduced models of 3-DOF

system (rad/s)
2cW(MDOP)
0.46153
0.57467
0.47286
0.45488
Floating-Raft Isolation System
A floating-raft isolation system, which has been developed during the past 20 years, is
an efficient equipment for vibration isolation and noise reduction. It can effectively
isolate the vibrations of the host and auxiliary machines and reduce the structural
noise of ships and submarines. The floating-raft isolation system will protect the
equipment in ships or submarines from damage and let them work normally when
the ships or submarines are subjected to strong external loads or shocks.
The schematic of a floating-raft isolation system is shown in Figure 8.2. ml =
100 kg and m2 = 120 kg denote the machines whose vibrations are to be isolated.
A and B are rectangular plates and denote the raft frame and base, respectively.
The length, width, and thickness of them are 1.2 m, 0.8 m, 0.02 m and 2.8 m, 0.8 m,
0.04 m, respectively. Their modulus of elasticity = 2.0 x 1011 N/m2, mass density =
7,800 kg/m 3 . The two short sides of plate B are simply supported and two long sides are
free. The four sides of plate A are all free. kl = 1.0 X 105 N/m, k2 = 5.0 X 105 N/m,
ci = 100 n.s/m 2 , c2 = 200 n.s/m 2 •
The finite element mesh of the raft frame is shown in Figure 8.3. The model has
24 rectangular elements, 35 nodes, and 105 degrees of freedom. The nodes, which
are connected with spring and damper I, kl and c], are 17 and 19. The nodes that are
connected with spring and damper II are 1,3,5,7,15,17, 19,21,29,31,33,and35. The
finite element grid of the base is shown in Figure 8.4. The model has 14 rectangular
elements, 24 nodes, and 72 degrees of freedom. The nodes that are connected with
spring and damper II are 7,12,13,18,8,11,14,17,9,10,15, and 16. The isolation
A
C2
B
~-----LA------~
~------------L.~------------~
Figure 8.2 Schematic of a floating-raft isolation system.
29 30 31 32 33 34 35
28 27 26 25 24 23 22
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
14 13 12 11 10 9 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Figure 8.3 Finite element model of the raft frame.

9 10 15 16 21 22
2 5 8 III 14 17 20 23
I 6 7 12 13 18 19 24
Figure 8.4 Finite element model of the base.
Table 8.3 Lowest 15 frequencies of the raft system (rad/s)
Mode Frequencies Mode Prequencies Mode Frequencies
Real ImIg. Real Jma&. Real (mag.

I -0.3343 27.478 6 -6.7276 238.642 11 -2.3138 698.030
2 -G.4541 30.727 7 -7.4929 335.931 12 -6.1036 783.472
3 -0.3217 67.4.(,7 8 -12.9449 418.319 13 -25.038 1651.912
4 -6.4/,48 226.759 9 -17.8871 533.934 14 -25.790 1124.936
5 -9.7675 227.902 10 -16.4082 542.827 15 -1.2243 1244.855
Table 8.4-1 Real parts of frequencies of the

reduced models with 10 DOFs (rad/s)
Mode SCDS SCSS(I) SCSS{U)

I -0.3357 -0.3529 -0.3357
2 -0.4549 -0.4603 -0.4549
3 -0.3811 -42.6293 -0.3811
4 -7.8046 -245.G448 -7.8045
5 -9.0765 -281.9898 -9.0870
6 -11.4774 -165.9169 -1l.5017
7 -8.8387 -617.5594 -8.8829
8 -18.3804 -589.8281 -18.4124
9 -17.1922 -978.4370 -17.2214
10 -16.6982 -277.5493 -16.7330
system has a total of 179 degrees of freedom. The lowest 15 complex frequencies are
listed in Table 8.3. They are considered as exact for comparison purposes.
The degrees of freedom associated with the two machines and the translational
degrees of freedom at nodes 2, 4, 8, 9, 14, 22 in raft and at nodes 6, 21 in base are
selected as masters when condensation is applied. All the eigenvalues of the reduced
model resulting from these static methods are listed in Table 8.4 (including 8.4-1
and 8.4-2).
The two lowest frequencies of the reduced model resulted from SCSS(I) are very
close to the exact. However, the third through the tenth eigenvalues are much higher
than the exact. Many of them are more than 10 times the exact. Hence, the correspond·
ing reduced model cannot represent the full model in any kind of meaning. The reason
Table 8.4-2 Imaginary parts of frequencies

of the reduced models with 10 DOFs (rad/s)
Mode SCDS SCSS(I) SCSS(D)

1 27.482 27.703 27.483
2 30.729 30.822 30.729
3 71.(168 648.039 70.068
4 237.780 I,30U04 237.854
5 263.117 1.783.214 263.364
6 356.735 2,147.303 357.287
7 416.709 2,568.928 416.944
8 668.915 3,541.745 669.433
9 768.747 4,999.021 769.664
10 1.943.713 6,493.006 1.945.081
is that the relations of the velocities between masters and slaves are contradictive. This
has been explained clearly in Section 8.2.4.
There is little difference between the results obtained from the SCDS and SCSS(II).
They have a much higher accuracy than those from SCSS(I). Unfortunately, the errors
are still a little high, especially for the higher modes.
As discussed in preceding chapters, there are two ways to improve the accuracy of
the reduced model. One is to optimally select the masters. The other is to increase
the number of the masters. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. Only the
latter is considered here.
The degrees of freedom associated with the two machines and the translational
degrees of freedom at nodes 1,7, IS, 17, 19,21,29,35 in raft and at nodes 7, 8, 9,10,
IS, 16 in base are selected as the masters. There is a total of 16 masters. The former
10 complex frequencies resulting from the three methods are listed in Table 8.5-
1. Although the errors of the frequencies resulted from SCSS(I) reduce when the
number of masters increases, they are still very big and cannot satisfy the requirement
of engineering applications. Due to this, this approach is impractical. The accuracy
of the reduced model obtained from other two approaches improves a lot, especially
for the high modes.
Table 8.5-1 Real parts of frequencies of the

reduced models with 16 DOFs (rad/s)
Mode SCDS SCSS(I) SCSS(D)

-0.3344 -0.3524 -0.3344
2 -0.4541 -0.4601 -0.4541
3 -0.3367 -3.7740 -0.3367
"5 -7.4375
-9.5545
-162.2806
-5.8857
-7.4361
-9.5629
6 -7.6065 -388.0041 -7.6022
7 -9.4333 -95.009 -9.4370
8 -12.5972 -1.898.321 -12.6483
9 -18.5966 -536.9111 -18.5976
10 -26.4526 -33.5575 -26.4607
Table 8.5-2 Imaginary parts of

frequencies of the reduced models with 16
DOFs (rad/s)
Mode SCDS SCSS(I) SCSS(U)
1 27.479 27.696 27.479
2 3O.n7 30.818 3O.n7
3 67.977 291.234 67.977
4 229.559 1,()22.433 229.603
5 238.146 1,1)47.328 238.197
6 261.189 1,506.635 261.267
7 377.540 1,880.537 377.596
8 !i08.894 2,707.324 509.207
9 573.511 2,806.817 573.607
10 584.837 3,642.630 584.927
8.3 Dynamic Condensation Methods in

Displacement Space
8.3.1 Condensation with Damping
The eigenproblem corresponding to Eq. (8.2-1) may be expressed in the displacement
space as
(K + iwC - w 2M)q> = ° (1)
where w is the complex frequency of the damped model, i =R .

With the
arrangement of the total degrees of freedom, Eq. (1) may be partitioned as
Kmm + iwC mm - w2Mmm Kms + iwC ms - w2MmsJ Iq» 1°) (2)

[
Ksm + iwCsm - w2Msm Kss + iwC ss - w2Mss q>7 = °
The dynamic condensation matrix, defined as the relation of the eigenvector (mode
shape) between masters and slaves, may be obtained from the second equation of
Eq. (2) as
q>s = -(Kss + iwCss - w2Mss)-I(Ksm + iwCsm - w2Msm)q>m == Rq>m (3)
Back-substitution of Eq. (3) into the first equation of Eq. (2) leads to
(4)
Equation (4) is the eigenproblem of the reduced model in terms of the dynamic
stiffness matrix DR, which is defined as
DR(W) = (Kmm + iwC mm - w2Mmm) - (Kms + iwC ms - w2Mms)

x (Kss + iwC ss - w2Mss)-I(Ksm + iwCsm - w2Msm) (5)
The reduced stiffness, damping, and mass matrices may be expressed in terms of the
coordinate transformation matrix as
(6)
or in terms of the dynamic condensation matrix as
KR = Kmm + RTKsm + KmsR + RTKssR (7a)
CR = C mm + RT C sm + CmsR + RT CssR (7b)
MR = Mmm + RTMsm + MmsR + RTMssR (7c)
The corresponding eigenproblem in terms of the reduced stiffness, damping, and

mass matrices are written as
(8)
Because no error is introduced into the dynamic condensation matrix defined in

Eq. (3), this matrix is referred to as the exact dynamic condensation matrix, and the
corresponding method is called exact dynamic condensation of nondassically damped
models. Clearly, the condensation matrix has the order of s x m and its size is one
fourth of the dynamic condensation matrix defined in the state space. However,
its elements are generally complex. The corresponding dynamic stiffness, stiffness,
damping, and mass matrices of reduced model, given in Eq. (6) or (7), are com-
plex matrices while they are real matrices in the full model. Inconvenience will be
introduced using these complex matrices.
Similar to the series expansion of the flexible matrix of undamped models as shown
in Eq. (5.1-30), the matrix (Kss + iwCss - w2Mss)-1 in Eqs. (3) and (5) may also be
expanded in a series. If the norms of matrices Mss and C ss are much smaller than
that of K ss, the power series with respect to {J} is convergent. If the terms with order
higher than two are ignored, the dynamic condensation matrix defined in Eq. (3) can
be written as (Huang and Gu, 1993)
Similarly, the power series of (Kss + iwCss - w2Mss)-1 may be introduced into
Eq. (4). Assume that the eigenproblem equation of the reduced model has the same
form as the one shown in Eq. (8) and that all the system matrices of the reduced
model are independent of frequency w. Comparing the coefficients matrices of the
terms with wO, wI, and w 2 from the expanded version ofEq. (4) and Eq. (8), we have
(Huang and Gu, 1993)
KR = Kmm + KmsRc
CR = Cmm + CmsRc + R'[;Csm + R'[;CssRc
Clearly, the reduced mass, damping, and stiffness matrices defined in Eq. (10) are real
and symmetric. It can be simply proven that the reduced system matrices given in
Eq. (10) are the same as those given in Eq. (8.2-34).
8.3.2 Condensation Without Damping

Several iterative approaches for the dynamic condensation of undamped models are
described in Chapter 6. Because the damping is not considered in the dynamic con-
densation matrix, they are valid for undamped models and proportionally damped
models. Error will be introduced if the same dynamic condensation matrix is used to
reduce the nonclassically damped models. However, the error will be very small for
the weakly damped models.
Using the dynamic condensation matrix computed from these iterative schemes,
the reduced system matrices may be obtained using Eq. (7). The eigenproblem of the
reduced model in the state space is, hence, given by
(11)
where
(12)
Actually, the dynamic condensation matrix resulting from any approach for
undamped models can be used in Eq. (7). Of course, the reduced model may converge
if the iterative methods are implemented. However, it will not converge to the exact.

The three-degree-of-freedom discrete system used above is considered. Only the
iterative scheme in Section 6.3 is implemented to compute the dynamic condensa-
tion matrix and the corresponding reduced model because other approaches have
similar phenomena. The first and third degrees of freedom are selected as masters,
respectively. The complex frequencies of the reduced models are listed in Table 8.6.
Table 8.6 Frequencies of the reduced models (rad/s)

Iteration MDOF: Pint DO' MDOF: Tbird DOF
Real IJIIII. Real Jma&.
0 -0.166667 o.ss2771 -0.035714 0.461530
I -0.064286 0M2569 -O.OS099I 0.442380
2 -0.058442 0.441618 -0.053259 0.441853
3 -0.056039 0.441602 -o.os3684 0.441793
4 -0.054916 0.441667 -0.053767 0.441782
5 -0.054363 0.441716 -0.053783 0.441780
6 -0.054083 0.441745 -0.053786 0.441780
7 -0.053940 0.441761 -0.053787 0.441780
Euct -0.054190 0.454876 -0.054190 0.454876
Dynamic Condensation of NondassicaIIy Damped Models 181
It can be seen that the frequencies resulting from the iterative approach do not
converge to the exact values even though they are convergent. The reason is that the
dynamic condensation matrix does not include the effect of damping. The results in
the first approximation are much better than those in the initial approximation.
8.4 Modal-Type Condensation Method

8.4.1 Dynamic Condensation Matrix
Because the modal condensation method is rather straightforward, the more general
case in which the damping matrix is unsymmetric is considered. Due to the unsym-
metric damping matrix, the system matrix A or B defined in either Eq. (8.2-12) or
(8.2-28) is not symmetric. Therefore, aright-and left-hand eigenvector must be intro-
duced for the eigenproblem. For the ith complex eigenvalue and right-side eigenvector,
litf, the eigenproblem is written as
(1)
7,
where Wi is the ith complex eigenvalue. The left-side eigenvector, lit is defined through
the transpose of (A - wiB) from Eq. (1), i.e.,
(2)
-R -L -R
For unsymmetricA or B, ti does not equal ti and for symmetric A and B, t i equals
lit7· These eigenvalues and eigenvectors may be computed from Eqs. (1) and (2).
Once the eigenvalues and eigenvectors are computed, the full model can be reduced
using these eigenvectors. In the reduction, the masters and the retained modes must
be properly chosen. The selection of masters has been described in Chapter 7. In
determining which mode is to be kept, it is usually desirable to retain the lowest
modes of the full model although it is not necessary to do so. The number of retained
modes should be equal to or less than the number of masters.
With the rearrangement of the total degrees of freedom, the system matrices A,
B, and the eigenvector matrix may be rewritten in a partitioned form. Assume that
the right-side eigenvector matrix i;
E C2nx2P and the left-side eigenvector matrix
it E c2n x 2P consist of the P complex conjugate right-side and left -side eigenvectors,
respectively. The partitioned forms of them are given by
-L -
\IIp -
[i~pJ
-L (3)
\lisP
Using the complex mode superposition, the displacement vector Y defined in

Eq. (8.2-12) can be expressed in terms of the truncated and partitioned right-side
eigenvector matrix and the associated modal coordinates q (displacements in normal
coordinates), namely,
(4)
Hence, the displacements at the masters and slaves are given by
-R
Y m = \IImpq (5)
-R
Y s = \IIspq (6)
Because the matrix i~p is generally not a square matrix, the displacements in the
normal coordinates may not be expressed exactly in terms of the displacements at
the masters and the eigenvector matrix i~p. Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (5) by
the transpose of the matrix i~p gives
(7)
Equation (7) is the normal equation of (5). The generalized inverse may now be used
to solve for q, that is,
(8)
(9)
RR is the dynamic condensation matrix based on the right -side eigenvector. Similarly,
the dynamic condensation matrix based on the left-side eigenvector is derived as
(10)
where
(ll)
After the dynamic condensation matrix is computed, the coordinate transformation

matrices may be defined as
(12)
or
(13)
Finally, the reduced system matrices are given by
(14)
When the number of the retained modes is equal to the number of masters, the right-
and left-hand dynamic condensation matrices can be simply expressed as
(15)
The coordinate transformation matrices associated with those defined in Eqs. (12)
and (13) are the same and are given by
(16)
It can be seen from the definitions of the dynamic condensation matrices that the
arithmetic operation for the complex values is required because the eigenvector matri-
ces are generally complex. In fact, the complex arithmetic operation is unnecessary for
the construction of the dynamic condensation matrix. Furthermore, it can be proven
that the right- and left-side dynamic condensation matrices as well as the reduced
system matrices are all real (Qu and Selvam, 2004).
8.4.2 Conversion of Complex Operation into Real Operation
The complex eigenvector matrix ~ has the form of
-
\11= [ \II \11*]
\II*Q* =
[A\II (17)
\IIQ
where l{t E C 2nxn is given by
(18)
The complex matrix l{t can be expressed in terms of two real matrices U and V E
R 2nxn as
l{t = U + iV (19)
Hence, the conjugate matrix l{t * is given by

A*
\II = U - iV (20)
and the whole eigenvector is expressed as
(21)
If only the P modes are considered, Eq. (21) may be rewritten as
(22)
Define the complex unitary transformation] E C2Px2P as
(23)
in which] _ and]+ E C PxP are diagonal matrices and are defined as
]_=I-iI, (24)
I E RPxP is an identity matrix. Clearly, the inverse of the] matrix is given by
(25)
Define matrix i P with the order of 2n x 2P as
i p = i p r 1 (26)
Introducing Eqs. (22) and (25) into Eq. (26) gives
ip=[Up-Vp Up + Vp] (27)
Clearly, i p is a real matrix. Therefore, the complex conjugate eigenvector matrix i p

may be expressed as the product of a real matrix and a unitary transformation matrix,
namely,
(28)
If the same division of the total degrees of freedom is applied to Eq. (28), we have
imP = imP] (29a)
isp = isp] (29b)

(i~p)+ = [(i~p)Ti~p r\i~p)T = rl[(.~p)T i~p r\.~p)T

= rl(.~p)+ (30)
Hence, the right-hand dynamic condensation matrix is given by
-R -R + -R -R +
RR = (lsp«(lmP) = c»mp(c))mp) (31)
Clearly, the right-hand dynamic condensation matrix is real. Similarly, the left-hand
dynamic condensation matrix is also a real matrix and is given by
(32)
Therefore, the coordinate transformation matrix, the system matrices of the reduced
model are all real. A numerical example provided by Kane and Torby (1991) can also
verify this conclusion.
8.5 Iterative Methods in State Space (I)

8.5.1 Governing Equations of the Dynamic Condensation Matrix
The eigenvalue problem corresponding to Eq. (8.2-11) can be written in the state
space as
(1)
The complex conjugate eigenvector matrix ~ E C2nx2n and eigenvalue or spectral

matrix Si E C2nx2n have the forms
-
(1= [ (I
(12
(1* ]
(1*2* '
- [2o
2= (2)
The superscript "*,, denotes the complex conjugation. The orthogonalities of the
model are given by
(3)
where I E R2nx2n is an identity matrix. If only the m groups of eigenpairs are

considered, Eq. (1) can be rewritten as
(4)
Based on the same division of the masters and slaves, Eq. (4) can be expressed in a
partitioned form as
(5)
where the submatrices A~m' A~s' Aim> Ais' B~m' B~s' Bim> and B;s are given in
Eq. (8.2-14) and
-
(lmm = [(lmm -
(Ism = [(Ism
(lmm 2 mm (lsm 2 mm
Si mm = [2mm
o n*
0]
~r.mm
(6)
The second equation of Eq. (5) is equivalent to the following equation:
(7)
which leads to
According to the definition of dynamic condensation matrix of undamped models,

the dynamic condensation matrix of nonclassically damped models is given by
(9)
The order of dynamic condensation matrix RI is 2s x 2m. Substituting Eq. (9) into
both sides of Eq. (8) and then postmultiplying both sides by the inverse of the matrix
i mm , the dynamic condensation matrix is obtained as .
(10)
Equation (10) is a governing equation of dynamic condensation matrix. Although

- - --I
the matrices \II mm, Qmm, and \II mm have complex values, it will be shown later than
- - --I
the product of \II mm Q mm \II mm has real values. Therefore, the dynamic condensation
matrix defined in Eq. (10) is real and its size is 2s x 2m.
The eigenvalue equation and the orthogonality equations of the reduced model
can be expressed in the state space as
(lla,b)
where the reduced system matrices are defined as
I = AImm
AR + RITAsm
I + AImsRr + RTAI
r ssRI (12a)
B~ = B~m + RJ B!m + B~sRI + RJ B!sRI (12b)
Postmultiplying both sides of Eq. (lIb) by the inverse of matrix i mm results in
(13)
Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (lla) by the inverse of matrix B~s and then
postmultiplying it by the inverse of matrix i mm , we obtain
I -I r - - --I
(B R) AR = \IImmQmm\llmm (14)
Using Eqs. (13) and (14), the governing Equation (10) can be rewritten as
RI = (Ass) I -I [I I - - I -AsmI]
(Bsm + BssRI)\IImm\IImmAR
T (15)
RI = CAis) -I [ CBim + BisRI )(B~) -I A~ - Aim] (16)
Equations (15) and ( 16) are also the governing equations of the dynamic condensation
matrix. Because the governing equations (10), (15), and (16) are nonlinear with
respect to the dynamic condensation matrix, it is difficult to solve them directly. The
iterative forms of these three equations are given by
R(i) = (AI )-llCBI

I 5S 5m
+ BI55R(i-J)i(i-IJQ(i-I)Ci(i-I)-1
I mm mm mm
- AI
5m
J (17)
R(i) = CAl )-llCBI

I S5 5m
+ BI5S R(i-l)i(i-I)Ci(i-I»TCA
I mm mm
I )(i-I) -
R
AI
5m
J (18)
Rji) = CA;5)-1 [CB!m + B!5Rji-I»CCB~)(i-1)-ICA~)(i-I) - A!m] (19)

where i = 1,2, .... The initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix is
given by
(20)
which has been explained earlier. The same governing equation as Eq. (19) for the
dynamic condensation matrix was developed by Qu and Change (2000) in which
the dynamic condensation matrix is defined as the relation of displacements between
masters and slaves in the state space. It was shown that this definition of dynamic
condensation matrix is equivalent to the definition in this section if only the lowest
m eigenpairs are considered for computing the displacement responses.
It can be seen from Eq. (20) that the initial approximation of the dynamic conden-
sation matrix is real. Hence, the corresponding reduced system matrices (A1)(O) and
(B1)(O) are real, as shown in Eq. (12). Thus, the first approximation of the dynamic
condensation matrix, given in Eq. (19) for i = 1, is also real. Similarly, we can conclude
that the dynamic condensation matrix resulting from Eq. (19) and the correspond-
- - --1
ing reduced system matrices are all real. Therefore, the product \II mm S2 mm \llmm is
real, as shown in Eq. (14). So is the product l)mm.q,~mA1. However, this does not
mean that each part in these products is real. Actually, l)mm and Qmm are generally
complex. Consequently, the computation of complex values is required in the gov-
erning Equations (17) and (18). This is inconvenient even though the final results are
real.
An alternative initial estimation of the dynamic condensation matrix RjO) was used
by Rivera, Singh, and Suarez (1999). The matrix is defined as
(21)
This alternative definition of RjO) has the advantage that the calculation of the inverse
of matrix Mss is avoided. In addition, several numerical trials carried out using
Eqs. (20) and (21) have shown that the latter leads to better initial values. Actually, the
alternative estimation is identical to the Guyan condensation defined in displacement
space, which has been explained clearly in Section 8.2.
Clearly, when an iterative scheme is utilized to solve Eq. (17), the system matrices
as well as the eigenvalue matrix, eigenvector matrix, and its inverse of the reduced
model should be calculated at every iteration. Because the eigenvalue analysis of the
nonclassically damped model is usually very time-consuming, the solution time used
in the iteration will rise rapidly as the dimension of the reduced model increases.
Furthermore, the operation of the complex values is required. The governing equa-
tion (18) is a little better than Eq. (17) because there is not any inverting processing.
To reduce the computational work, an alternative governing equation is given in
Eq. (19). Since there is no eigenvector and eigenvalue of the reduced model included
in this governing equation, it is unnecessary to compute the reduced eigenproblem
during each iteration. Also, no complex value operation is required in this governing
equation.
8.5.2 Iterative Scheme

The major iterative steps for the governing equation (19) are listed below. For
simplicity, the superscript "I" is omitted.
1. Rearrange the matrices A and B according to the division of the masters and
slaves; or formulate the submatrices A mm , A ms , Ass, Bmm, Bms, and Bss according
to Eq. (8.2-14).
2. Factorize the matrix Ass: Ass = WLT, where L is a low triangular matrix with all
diagonal elements equal to zero; D is a diagonal matrix.
3. Calculate the initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix R] using
Eq. (20) or alternatively Eq. (21).
4. Calculate the initial approximation of the system matrices A~) and B~) of the
·· . .i,(O) nCO)
red uced mo d eI and Its elgenpalrs '1" mm' ~c.mm'
5. For i = 0, k, 2k, ... (k 2:: 1), begin the iteration as follows:
(a) Iterate the following equation k times and obtain the matrix Rji+k):
R(i+l) =A-1l(B T +B R(i)(B(i)-lA(i) _AT

] 55 ms 55] R R ms
J (a)
(b) Calculate the reduced system matrices A~+k) and B~+k) and the correspond-
ing eigenpairs.
(b)
(c) Check the convergence of the iteration using the criterion
a jU+k) -aj(i)
(j = 1,2, ... ,p:::: m) (22)
a~i+k)
J
where a denotes the real and imaginary parts of the complex frequencies,
respectively. The frequencies are the diagonal elements of the matrices 2~m
and n(i+k) . 1 .. 1
~C.mm respectIve y. 8 IS a gIVen error to erance.
If th '
e gIVen p frequenCles
.
are convergent, exit the loop.
6. Output the results R] = Rji+k), AR = A~+k), BR = B~+k) and stop.
In this iterative scheme, when the integer k is larger than 1, k - 1 times calculation of
the reduced eigenvalue problems is avoided.
8.5.3 Models with an Unsymmetric Matrix·

The above method is based on the assumption that the system matrices are symmetric.
If they are unsymmetric, a similar governing equation and iterative scheme may be
developed using the similar derivation procedure aforementioned.
The state space formulation corresponding to Eq. (8.2-1) may be given by
(23)
Dynamic Condensation of Nondassically Damped Models 189
in which the system matrices in the state space are given by
-- [-CM
B- - If}
-MJO O ,F- (24)
Since the system matrices are unsymmetric, the eigenvalue problem corresponding
to Eq. (23) may be expressed as
--R --R-
A\II = B\II n (25)
and
-T-L -T-L-
A \II =B \lin (26)
l)-R and l)-L are the right-side eigenvector matrix and left-side eigenvector matrix,
respectively; Q is eigenvalue or complex frequency matrix and it is diagonal. The
orthogonality of the two eigenvector matrices are expressed as
(27)
Similar to Eq. (5), the partitioned form of Eq. (25) in which only the former m
eigenpairs are considered may be given by
(28)
Define the right-side dynamic condensation matrix as

-R R-R
\115m = R \II mm (29)
Based on the similar derivation as above, the governing equation for the right dynamic
condensation matrix is obtained as
(30)
The other two forms of governing equation are given by
--ll- + -
R R = Ass (Bsm BssRR)\IImm(\II
-R -L )T- -
mm AR - Asm
J (31)
RR = A~l [(B sm + BssRR)B;IAR - Asm] (32)
Equations (30), (31), and (32) are the governing equations of the right-side dynamic
condensation matrix. They are implicit and, hence, an iterative scheme is required
to solve for the condensation matrix. For example, the iterative form of Eq. (32) is
expressed as
Define the left-side dynamic condensation matrix as
- L L - L
\{Ism = R \{I mm (34)
Using the same derivation, the governing equations of the left-side dynamic conden-
sation matrix may be obtained as
(35)
(36)
(37)
The iterative form of Eq. (37) is given by
In Eqs. (31), (32), (36), and (37), the reduced system matrices in the state space are
given by
- - -
AR = Amm + (R L) Y-Asm + AmsR R
+ (R L) Y-AssRR (39a)
Bmm + (R ) Bsm + BmsR + (R ) BssR

- - L Y- - R L Y- R
BR = (39b)
The iterative scheme in Section 8.5.2 may be used to solve for the left-side and
right-side dynamic condensation. It is necessary to note that these two dynamic
condensation matrices should be computed at the same time.
8.6 Iterative Methods in State Space (II)

The eigenvalue problem corresponding to Eq. (8.2-25) can be written in the state
space as
(1)
If only the m eigenpairs are considered, the partitioned form of the eigenproblem
equations may be written as
A;;'S]
A ll
[~mm]
;i.
= [B;;,m
BIl
(2)
ss 'l'sm sm
h
were .
t h e submatnces AlI
mm' Allms' AlI
sm' All
ss' BIl
mm' BII sm' an d BII
ms' BII .
ss are gIven
in Eq. (8.2-28). Based on the similar derivation above, the iterative forms of the
governing equations of the dynamic condensation matrix are given by
R(i) = (A II )-ll(BIl
IT ss sm
+ BIIss R(i-1»~(i-l)
II mm
Q(i-1)(~(i-l»_1
mm mm
- AIl
sm
J (3)
R(i) = (AIl)-ll(B II +BIlR(i-l)~(i-l)(~(i-l»T(AII)(i-l) _All

II 55 sm ss II mm mm R sm
J (4)
Ri~) = (A;;)-ll (B;~ + B;;Rj~-1»«B~)(i-1)-1(A~)(i-1) - A;~J (5)
The initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix is given by
(6)
which has been discussed in Section 8.2. Of course, Eq. (8.5-21) may be used as the
initial approximation. As shown in Section 8.2, the accuracy of the condensation
matrices resulting from Eq. (6) and (8.5-21) is very close. Therefore, we usually use
Eq. (6) as the initial approximation because the corresponding computational work
is required in the iteration anyway. A similar iterative scheme in Section 8.5.2 may be
used to solve for the dynamic condensation matrix from Eq. (5). When the dynamic
condensation matrix is computed, the reduced system matrices are given by
8.7 Iterative Methods in State Space (III)

8.7.1 Governing Equations of Dynamic Condensation Matrix
The eigenvalue problem of a nonclassically damped model may also be written as
(1)
in which the state matrices are given by
(2)
If only the former m groups of eigenpairs are considered, Eq. (1) can be rewritten as
(3)
The partitioned form of Eq. (3) is expressed as
[A IIl
mm AIll]
ms [,..
T'mm ] = [BIll
mm
(4)
A III AIII ,.. BIII
Stn ss 'f!srn sm
where the submatrices are defined as
AIII =[ 0 Kmml AIII

ms
= (AIII)T
sm
= [ Kms
0 Kmsl
mm Kmm C mm Cms
AIII =[ 0 Kss] (Sa)

ss Kss Css
BIII = _ [ C mm M;m], BIII = (BIII)T = _ [ Cms Moms] ,

mm Mmm ms sm Mms
BIII
S5
= _ [ Css
M55 ~ss] (Sb)
(Sc)
Expanding the second equation in the partitioned Eq. (4) produces
(6)
Equation (6) leads to
Substituting Eq. (8.5-9) into both sides ofEq. (7) and then postmultiplying both sides
by the inverse of matrix ljt :~, the dynamic condensation matrix is obtained as
(8)
Equation (8) is the basic version of the governing equation of the dynamic conden-
sation matrix.
Using the dynamic condensation matrix, the eigenvector matrix ljtm of the full
model may be expressed as
(9)
where TIII E R2nx2m is referred to as the coordinate transformation matrix. Introduc-

ing Eq. (9) into both sides of Eq. (4) and premultiplying it by the transpose of the
transformation matrix T III lead to
(10)
Dynamic Condensation of Nondassically Damped Models 193
AW, BW E R2mx2m are the state matrices of the reduced model. They are given by
A III
R mm + RT
= TTIIIAIIITIII = AlII sm + AIIIR
III AlII ms III + RT
III AIIIR
ss III (lla)
B~I = TEIBIII TIII = B~~ + REIBi~ + B~~RIII + REIB~1 RIII (lIb)
Equation (10) is the eigenvalue equations of the reduced model. The corresponding
orthogonality equations can be expressed in the state space as
(12a,b)
Equations (10) and (12) show that the reduced model (AW,BW) computed
from Eq. (11) may exactly keep the given m eigenpairs of the full model if the
dynamic condensation matrix, as a result the coordinate transformation matrix, is
exact.
Similarly, if the transformation defined in Eq. (9) is, respectively, performed on
both sides of Eqs. (8.5-5) and (8.6-2), we have
(13)
(14)
in which the state matrices of the reduced model may be computed by analogy with
Eq. (11), that is,
A~ = TEIAI Tm = A~m + REIA;m + A~sRm + REIA;sRm (1Sa)

B~ = TEIBITIII = B~m + REIB;m + B~sRIII + REIB;sRIII (1Sb)
and
A ll
R = TTIII AlITIII = Allmm + RTIII Allsm + Allms RIII + RTIII AIIR
ss III (l6a)
B~ = TEIBII TIll = B~m + REIB;~ + B~sRIII + REIB;;Rm (l6b)
The orthogonality equations for these two reduced models are given by
(17a,b)
(l8a,b)
Postmultiplying both sides of Eq. (12a) by the inverse of matrix l)mm results in
(19)
Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (10) by the inverse of matrix BW and then post-
multiplying by the inverse of matrix l)mm, we obtain
(20)
Using Eqs. (19) and (20), the governing Equation (8) can be rewritten as
III )-1 [CBIII

R = (A ss sm + BIlI q,T AIII _
ss R)q, mmmmR AIII]
sm (21)
R= (A!!I)-I[CB!~ + Bi!IR )(BW)-IAW -A!~] (22)
Equations (21) and (22) are also the governing equations of dynamic condensation
matrix. Only the third form of the state matrices AIII and BIII are included in these
two equations.
Postmultiplying both sides ofEq. (17a) by the inverse of matrix q,mm results in
(23)
Premultiplying both sides of Eq. (13) by A1(B1)-1 and with consideration for this
equation, we have
I I -1 I - I - - I - - 2
AR(BR) AR\IImm = AR\IImmQmm = BR\IImmQmm (24)
Thus, we have the relation
(25)
Introducing Eqs. (23) and (25) into Eq. (8) produces
(26)
(27)
Equations (26) and (27) are two governing equations based on the first and third
forms of the state matrices. Two forms of the state matrices are used in each of these
two governing equations. Thus, they are referred to as hybrid governing equations
of dynamic condensation matrix. Similarly, another two hybrid governing equations
using the second and third forms of the state matrices are given by
III-l[ III
RIII = (Ass) . (Bsm
- Qmm
+ BssIII Rm ) \IImm - \II-TmmARII - Asm
III] (28)
RIII = (A!iI)-I[(B!~ +B;;IRIII)«B~)-IA~)2 -A;~] (29)
in which the state matrices A~ and B~ E R2mx2m of the reduced model may be
computed from Eq. (16).
The iterative forms of governing Equations (8), (21), and (22) are given by
R(i) = (AIII )-1 [(BIII

III 55 sm
+ BIII R(i-1l)q,(i-I)(Q(i-I)2(q,(i-I)-1
55 III mm mm mm
_ AIII]
sm
(30)
R(i)
III
= (AIII)-1 [CBIII
55 sm
+ BIll R(i_l)q,(i-l)
55 III mm
(q,(i-I)TCAIII)(i-l)
mm R
_ AIII]
sm
(31)
R(i) = (AIII)-1 [(B III

III 55 sm
+ BIII R(i-I)«B
55 III
III )(i- ll )-1 (AIII)(i-I)
R R
_ AIII]
sm
(32)
A similar scheme may be used to solve for the dynamic condensation matrix from
Eq. (31) or (32). where i = 1,2,3, .... The initial approximation of the dynamic
condensation matrix is given by
(33)

Building with TMD
The iterative methods given in Sections 8.5, 8.6, and 8.7 will be demonstrated by a
40-story-tall building with tuned mass damper (TMD) (Wu et aI., 1998) shown in
Figure 8.5. Each story unit of the building is identically constructed with a story height
of4m,massmj = I,290tons,stiffnesskj = I0 6 kN/m,anddampingcj = I4260kN·
slm for i = 1,2, ... ,40. The building is symmetric in both lateral directions and
the mass center coincides with the elastic center, so that there is no coupled lateral-
torsional motions. Only one directional motion will be considered. The mass of
the damper is 258 tons, which is 20% of a floor mass. The stiffness and damping
coefficient of the damper are 300.9 kN/m and S3.592 kN . slm, respectively. The
lowest five damping ratios and damped frequencies resulting from the full model are
listed in Table 8.7. In this example and the examples that follow, if the frequencies
and eigenvectors (mode shapes) resulting from the reduced model are close to those
of the full model, we will say that the reduced model is close to the full model within
that frequency range.
Six cases, shown in Table 8.S, for the dynamic condensation will be considered
in this example. The numbers in the parentheses represent the equations used. In
Case 1, for example, Eqs. (S.5-IS) and (S.5-20) or (S.5-I9) and (8.5-20) are used to
Figure 8.5 Tall building with TMD.

compute the dynamic condensation matrix, while Eq. (8.5-12) is utilized to calculate
the reduced state matrices from which the corresponding eigenpairs are obtained.
The degrees of freedom pertaining to the 10th, 20th, 30th, and 40th floors and
the TMD are selected as masters when the dynamic condensation approaches are
applied to the tall building. The relative errors of the five damping ratios and damped
frequencies of the reduced models are listed in Tables 8.9 through 8.18. Contrasted to
the relative errors defined in Eq. (8.5-22), those currently used are easy to show the
convergence of the iteration and how the reduced model approaches the full model
during the iteration. Ten iterations are considered for the reduced model. "-" in these
tables indicates that the relative error is less than 5 x 10- 6 . The convergent features of
Table 8.7 Lowest five damping ratios and damped frequencies (rad/s)
Mode Model Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 ModeS

Damping ratio 0.02740 0.13041 0.02368 0.03875 0.05394
Damped frequency 1.07187 1.07709 3.23865 5.38783 7.52560
Table 8.8 Six cases dynamic condensation
Cases Condensation matrix Reduced state matrices

(8.5-18)+(8.5-20) or (8.5-19)+(8.5-20) (8.5-12)
2 (8.5-18)+(8.5-21) (8.5-12)
3 (8.6-4)+(8.6-6) or (8.6-5)+(8.6-6) (8.6-7)
4 (31)+(33) or (32)+(33) (Ill
5 (31)+(33) or (32)+(33) (IS)
6 (3J)+(33) or (32)+{33) (I6)
Table 8.9 Relative errors of the first damped frequency
Iteration Case I Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Cases Case 6

0 0.00942 0.00412 0.00412 0.00696 0.00412 0.00412
I 0.00412 0.00002 0.00004
2 0.00002 0.00001
3 0.00001 0.00001
4 0.00001
5
Table 8.10 Relative errors of the second damped frequency
Iteration Case I Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6

0 1.85339 0.00207 0.00207 0.00075 0.00207 0.00207
1 0.00207 0.00002
2
Table 8.11 Relative errors of the third damped frequency

0 1.71425 0.05433 0.05433 0.05433 0.05433 0.05433
0.05433 0.00176 0.00205 0.00009 0.00008 0.00010
2 0.00176 0.00067 0.00040
3 0.00067 0.00047 0.00003
4 0.00047 0.00035
5 0.00035 0.00026
6 0.00026 0.00020
7 0.00020 0.00015
8 0.00015 0.00012
9 0.00012 0.00009
10 0.00009 0.00007
Table 8.12 Relative errors of the fourth damped frequency

0 1.49221 0.13902 0.13902 0.13902 0.13902 0.13902
0.13902 0.01816 0.02009 0.00362 0.00331 0.00394
2 0.01816 0.00680 0.00839 0.00039 0.00032 0.00046
3 0.00680 0.00378 0.00231 0.00005 0.00004 0.00007
4 0.00378 0.00249 0.00068 0.00001 0.00001 0.00001
5 0.00249 0.00176 0.00021
6 0.00176 0.00128 0.00006
7 0.00128 0.00095 0.00002
8 0.00095 0.00072 0.00001
9 0.00072 0.00055
10 0.00055 0.00042
Table 8.13 Relative errors of the fifth damped frequency

0 1.18343 0.16483 0. 16483 0.16483 0. 16483 0.16483
1 0.16483 0.05496 0.05854 0.03288 0.03189 0.03385
2 0.05496 0.03587 0.03986 0.01426 0.01322 0.01528
3 0.03587 0.02412 0.02581 0.00652 0.00577 0.00726
4 0.02412 0.01644 0.01729 0.00314 0.00269 0.00360
5 0.01644 0.01155 0.01161 0.00158 0.00131 0.00185
6 0.01155 0.00829 0.00784 0.00082 0.00067 0.00097
7 0.00829 0.00609 0.00534 0.00043 0.00035 0.00052
8 0.00609 0.00456 0.00367 0.00023 0.00018 0.00028
9 0.00456 0.00346 0.00254 0.00013 0.00010 0.00015
10 0.00346 0.00266 0.00178 0.00007 0.00005 0.00008
Table 8.14 Relative errors of the first damping ratio
Iteration Case I Case 2 Case 3 _~o;e4 Case 5 Case 6

0 4.35952 3.72752 3.72752 0.03491 3.72752 3.72752
3.72752 0.00013 0.00371 0.00001 0.00002
2 0.00013 0.00006 0.00002
3 0.00006 0.00004
4 0.00004 0.00003
5 0.00003 0.00003
6 0.00003 0.00002
7 0.00002 0.00002
8 0.00002 0.00001
9 0.00001 0.00001
10 0.00001 0.00001
Table 8.15 Relative errors of the second damping ratio
Iteration Case I Cas.: 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6

0 0.78947 0.78254 0.78254 0.00662 0.78254 0.78254
0.78254 0.00002 0.00005
2 0.00002 0.00001
3 0.00001 0.00001
4 0.00001 0.00001
5 0.00001
6
Table 8.16 Relative errors of the third damping ratio
It~ration Case I Case 2 Case 3 Cas.: 4 Case 5 Case 6

0 1.70258 0.05672 0.05672 0.05672 0.05672 0.05672
1 0.05672 0.00170 0.10333 0.00330 0.00005 0.00665
2 0.00170 0.00012 0.00426 0.00008 0.00016
3 0.00012 0.00010 0.00044
4 0.00010 0.00010 0.00005
5 0.00010 0.00008
6 0.00008 0.00006
7 0.00006 0.00005
8 0.00005 0.00004
9 0.00004 0.00003
10 0.00003 0.00002
the eigenvectors are not shown because they are very similar to those of the damped
frequencies and this takes lots of space.
The reduced models obtained from all four iterative approaches are convergent
to the full model after sufficient iterations. Several iterations are enough to com-
pute the lower order of eigenpairs. For example, the first and second orders of
Table 8.17 Relative errors of the fourth damping ratio
Iteration Case 1 Case 2 Case) Case 4 Cases Case 6

0 1.49350 0.14210 0.14210 0.14210 D.l4210 0.14210
1 0.14210 0.01735 0.23383 0.D2711 0.00259 0.05589
2 0.01735 0.00616 0.02546 CLOO471 o.oDOO2 0.00941
3 0.00616 0.00339 0.01005 0JI0016 o.oooot 0.00148
4 0.00339 0.00185 0.00362 0.00013 0.00001 0.00024
5 0.00185 0.00108 0.00137 0.00002 - 0.D0004
6 0.00108 0.00069 0.00051 - - 0.00001
7 0.00069 0.00048 0.00019 - - -
8 0.00048 0.00035 0.00007 - - -
9 0.00035 0.00026 0.00003 - - -
10 0.00026 0.00020 0.00001 - - -
Table 8.18 Relative errors of the fifth damping ratio
Iteration Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Cases Case 6

0 1.18903 0.16744 0.16744 0.16744 D.l6744 D.l6744
1 0.16744 0.05G 0.16806 0.01446 0.03050 o.os722
2 0.05400 0.01575 0.01988 0.02146 o.ooB38 0.05012
3 0.01575 0.00393 0.D2155 0.01494 0.00008 0.D2956
4 0.00393 D.OO463 0.01907 0JI0902 0.00205 0.01588
5 0.00463 0.00803 0.01576 o.oos34 0.00214 0.00850
6 0.00803 0.00896 0.01225 0.00316 0.00171 0.0D460
7 0.00896 0.00817 0.00963 0.00187 0.00123 0.00252
8 0.00817 0.00697 0.00758 0.00111 0.00084 0.00139
9 0.00697 0.00567 O.ClO6OO 0JI0066 0.00055 0.00078
10 0.00567 0.00455 0.00472 0.00039 0.00035 0.00044
damped frequencies from the first approximation are accurate enough for engineer-
ing applications. One or two iterations are also enough for the accuracy of these two
damping ratios.
Due to the contradiction in the initial approximation of the dynamic condensa-
tion matrix used in Case 1, the accuracy is generally very low. Most of the relative
errors are greater than one as shown clearly in Tables 8.9 through 8.18. They are
reduced significantly after the first or second iteration. The results in these tables
show that this iterative scheme converges although the accuracy of the initial approx-
imation is very low. This means that the accuracy of the initial approximation will
not affect the convergence of the iterative scheme, although it may reduce the speed
of convergence.
The accuracy of the initial approximation based on Guyan condensation matrix is
much higher than that in Case 1, especially for the second through fifth damped fre-
quencies and the third through fifth damping ratios. However, the difference reduces
with the increase of the number of iterations. After several iterations, the accuracy of
the reduced models resulting from these two iterative methods, shown in Eqs. (8.5-18)
and (8.5-20) or (8.5-18) and (8.5-21), is very close.
The relative errors of the initially approximate eigenpairs in Case 3 are the same as
those in Case 2 because the damping matrix in this example is almost proportional to
the stiffness matrix. Generally, the iterative approach in Case 3 converges faster than
the approach in Case 2. However, this is not right for the fifth damping ratio of the
reduced model, as shown in Table 8.18.
The iterative method in this section converges much faster than the other three
iterative schemes in Cases 1 through 3. The relative errors of the eigenpairs resulting
from the former are generally less than one tenth of those resulting from the latter
three methods. As anticipated, the accuracy of the reduced models in Cases 4, 5, and
6 are very close. Due to this, the latter two cases will not be considered in the second
example.
The floating-raft isolation system used in Section 8.2 is considered again. The lowest
15 complex frequencies are listed in Table 8.19. They are considered as exact for
comparison purpose.
The lowest 10 eigenpairs are of interest. The ratio of the number of masters to the
number of modes interested is selected as loS, that is, the number of masters is 15. The
degrees of freedom associated with the two machines and the translational degrees
of freedom at nodes 1,7, IS, 17, 19,21,29,35 in raft and at nodes 7, 8, 9,10,16 in
base are selected as the masters. The former four cases in Table 8.8 are considered in
this example. They are denoted by A, B, C, and D, respectively. Since higher modes
generally converge more slowly than the lower, only the higher five damping ratios
and damped frequencies are considered to show the convergence. The relative errors
of the damping ratios and damped frequencies of the reduced models resulted from
these four iterative schemes are plotted in Figures 8.6 and 8.7.
The damped frequencies of the reduced models approach those of the full model
steadily with the implementation of iteration as shown in Figure 8.6. The convergence
is very fast at the first several iterations. After that, the convergence becomes much
slower. Particularly, the relative errors of the damped frequencies computed from
Cases A and B reduce very slowly after several iterations-five, for example. The
error curves A and B are almost horizontal after these iterations. Therefore, very
small error tolerance for the damped frequency is required in the iterative methods
in Section 8.5. It could be slightly big in the iterative method in Section 8.6. For both
Table 8.19 Lowest 15 damping ratios and damped frequencies of the isolation system (rad/s)
Mode Damping Damped Mode Damping Damped Mode Damping Damped

ratio freq. ratio freq. ratio freq.
1 0.01216 27.4784 6 0.02818 238.643 11 0.00331 698.030
2 0.01478 30.7270 7 0.02230 335.931 12 0.00779 783.472
3 O.OO4n 67.4671 8 0.03093 418.320 13 0.02380 1051.91
4 0.02850 226.759 9 0.03348 533.934 14 0.02292 1124.94
5 0.04282 227.902 10 0.03021 542.827 15 0.00098 1244.86
10'..-----------------c=="
--~
§
--c
-y-D
10"'
~
10"'
10"' 0 10· OL-...........~-":-~4'---=-5~B'---=-7~8:---=-9---:'10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
iteration Iteration
(a) (b)
10' ~---------- -- - _... ---~------
--~
§ --c
-y-D
101 -------~-----
§__ 6
--c
-y-D
A
3 4 5 B 7 8 9 10 10 0t--:---:---73-=4==;5~B=7~::;8=9~10
4
Iteration iteration
(c) (d)
10'
§ --6
--c
-y-D
A
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Iteration
(e)
Figure 8.6 Comparison of relative errors of damped frequencies: (a) 6th damped frequency; (b) 7th
damped frequency; (c) 8th damped frequency; (d) 9th damped frequency; (e) 10th
damped frequency.
iterative schemes, a large number of iterations is usually necessary if the accuracy of

interest is high. These problems do not happen in Cases C and D.
Although the relative errors of the damped frequencies of the reduced model
resulting from Case B are much smaller than those from Case A at the first several
iterations, they are very close in the following iterations. The reason is that both
iterative approaches are based on the same governing equations of the dynamic con-
densation matrix. The initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix
may make the two schemes different at the first several iterations. However, the final
results should be very close.
10' 10'
~ 10~ ---;t
1~ ~
10.0 10~ 0
3 4 5 6 9 10 2 4 5 6 9 10
Iteration Iteration
(a) (b)
I--A
10'
-+-8
-6.-C
1""'-0
~
! 10·
1r
1~0
----- 1~0
4 5 6 9 10 2 4 5 6 7 9 10
Iteration Iteration
(C) (d)
10'
~
~
w 10'
10'
10. 0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Iteration
(e)
Figure 8.7 Comparison of relative errors of damping ratios: (a) 6th damping ratio; (b) 7th damping
ratio; (c) 8th damping ratio; (d) 9th damping ratio; (e) 10th damping ratio.
The accuracy of the damped frequencies obtained from Case C is higher than
that of Cases A and B after several iterations. This means that the advantages of
the iterative method in Case C can only be shown after these iterations. Except for
the initial approximation, the method presented in this section has a much higher
accuracy than these three iterative approaches.
The convergent properties of the damping ratios shown in Figure 8.7 are not as clear
as those of damped frequencies, although they are generally similar. Therefore, it is
better to select the damped frequency as the major parameter to check the convergence
and the damping ratio as the minor.
8.8 Iterative Method Using Subspace Iteration in

State Space
8.8.1 Subspace Iteration Method for Complex Eigenproblems
The subspace iteration method is widely used for the computation of a few smallest
eigenvalues and the corresponding eigenvectors oflarge eigenproblems. The standard
subspace iteration method, developed by Bathe and Wilson (1972), is a direct iterative
method for symmetric matrices. It combines a simultaneous inverse iteration and a
Rayleigh-Ritz procedure. This standard method is extended to evaluate the eigenpairs
of nonclassically damped systems in what follows. For convenience this extended
version is referred to as the complex subspace iteration method.
Choose a set of linearly independent 2n-dimensional vectors, and construct a sub-
space ~~) in which the columns are occupied by the vectors. This subspace is usually
considered as an initial approximation of the eigenvectors. For i = 1,2, ... , the fol-
lowing two steps are applied to solve for the (i + l)th approximation of eigenvalues
and eigenvectors.
1. A set of new subspaceX~+1) is obtained by simultaneous inverse iteration, that is,
AX(i+1) = B~(i) (1)

m m
where the matrices A and B may beAl andBl in Eq. (8.2-12), respectively, or AIl
and BII in Eq. (8.2-26), respectively. If the iterations proceeded using X~+l) as
the next estimation of the subspace, the subspace would collapse to a subspace
of dimension 1 and only contain the eigenvector corresponding to the lowest
eigenvalue. Therefore, the Rayleigh-Ritz procedure is adopted.
2. Compute the projections of matrices A and B in the subspace spanned by X~+ 1):
A(i+1) = CX(i+1»T AX(i+1) (2)

P m m'
Then, solve for the projected eigenproblem given by
A~+1)(t+1) = B~+l)(t+1) A(i+1) (3)
h
were -(i+1) an dA-(i+1) are t h e C't + 1)t h approXImate
Q .. eIgenvector and'
elgenvalue
matrices of the projected model. Finally, the (i + l)th approximate eigenvector
matrix is given by
~(i+1) = X(i+1)Q-(i+1) (4)
m m
·
EIgenvector . .i/i+1).
matrIX ... m IS used to cal cul ate t h e next approXImate
.. elgenvalues
and eigenvectors until they converge, that is,
jAji+1) _ AY)I
(j = 1,2, ... ,p::s m) (5)
jAji+1) I
If the first p eigenvalues converge, exit the loop.

Because the ith approximation of the eigenvector matrix used in Eq. (1) is a complex
matrix, the corresponding subspace X~+I) is also a complex matrix. This may lead to
the complex reduced system matrices A and B, and the eigenproblem of the reduced
model becomes very computationally expensive.
8.8.2 Governing Equations of Dynamic Condensation Matrix

If the total degrees of freedom of the full model are divided into masters and slaves
as aforementioned, Eq. (4) can be rewritten in a partitioned form as
(6)
. - (HI) - (i+l)
where submatnces \II mm (2m x 2m) and \115m (25 X 2m) are defined as
(i+I)
- (i+l) [ \II mm
\II mm = ,T.(i+ 1) n(i+ I)
"t'mm ~~mm
(i+I)
-(i+I) [ \115m
\115m = ,T.(i+ 1) n(i+ I)
(7)
"t'sm ~~mm
According to the definition of the dynamic condensation matrix in Eq. (8.5-9), we have
(8)
Introducing Eq. (6) into Eq. (8) yields
(9)
which can be expressed in a concise form as
R(i+I) = X(i+I)
sm
(X(i+I»-1
mm (10)
It shows dearly in Eq. (10) that the Rayleigh-Ritz procedure does not affect the
dynamic condensation matrix.
Equation (1) can be rewritten as
(11)
in which matrix G is defined as

(12)
Introducing Eq. (8.2-12) or (8.2-26) into Eq. (12) leads to
(13)
and
F = -K- 1M (14)
I and O(n x n) are the unity and null matrices, respectively. Clearly, both forms of
the system matrices result in the same matrix G. Based on the division of the degrees
of freedom, Eq. (11) may be expressed in a partitioned form as
[XX~~I)] = [Gll (15)

(i+l) G
sm 21
where the submatrices Gll (2m x 2m), G12(2m x 25), G21 (25 x 2m), and G22(25 x
25) are defined as
- [Emm
G ll-
Imm
Fmm] ,
0
G12 = GT21 = [Ems
0
Fms]
0' G22 = [Ess
0 Iss
FSS]
(16)
Using the definition of the dynamic condensation matrix in Eq. (8.5-9), we have
(17)
By introducing Eq. (17) into (15), we have
(i+l)]
[X mm [G II
(18)
X~::l) - G21
Equation (18) is equivalent to the following two equations:
mm = (G 11
X(i+l) + G12R(i»l)(i)
mm (l9a)
sm =
X(i+l) (G21 + Gn R(i»l)(i)
mm (19b)
Substituting Eq. (19) into (10) results in
R(i+l) = (G21 + G22 R (i»(Gll + G12 R (i»-1 (20)
If we let i = -1 andR(-I) = 0 in Eq. (20), we have

R (O) - G G- 1 (21)
- 21 II
matrix. It can be seen dearly that the dynamic condensation matrix is independent of
the system matrices and eigenpairs of the reduced model. Therefore, it is unnecessary
to calculate them during iteration, which makes this method very computationally
efficient.
After the dynamic condensation matrix is obtained, the reduced system matrices
AR and BR in the state space may be computed using Eq. (8.2-12) or alternatively
AR = TT AT, BR = TTBT (22)
in which the coordinate transformation matrix T E R2nx2m is given by
(23)
and I E R2mx2m is an identity matrix. The corresponding eigenproblem of the

reduced model is given by
(24)
Using the coordinate transformation matrix, the subspace X~+I) in Eq. (1) can be
expressed as
X(i+1)
m
= {X~~l)l
(i+1)
= T(i+!)X(i+1)
mm (25)
Xsm
Introducing Eq. (24) itlto Eq~ (2) leads to
A (i+1) = (X(i+1»)T(T(i+l»)T AT(i+!) X(i+l)
p mm mm
= (X(i+l»)T
mm
A (i+l) X(i+l)
R mm
(26a)
B(i+l) _ (X(Hl»)T(T(i+l»)TBT(i+l) X(i+l) _ (X(i+l»)T B(i+l) X(i+l) (26b)

p -mm mm-mm R mm
The relation between the model (Ap, Bp) and the model (AR, BR) is clearly shown in
Eq. (26). Therefore, both models have the same eigenvalue matrix, and the relation
of the (i + l)th approximate eigenvector matrix is given by
\it(i+!) = X(i+l)Q- (i+!)
(27)
mm mm
The eigenvector matrix resulting from the model (AR, BR) is what we want while
a transformation is required for the eigenvector matrix resulting from the model
(Ap,Bp).
8.8.3 Iterative Schemes

Classical Iterative Scheme
The main steps are listed below:
1. Choose the masters and construct all the sub matrices to be used in the following.
2. Calculate the initial approximation of the dynamic condensation R(O) by using
Eq. (21).
3. For i = 0, 1,2,3, ... , begin the iteration:
3.1 Calculate the (i + l)th approximate dynamic condensation matrix R(i+l)
using Eq. (20).
3.2 Compute the system matrices of the reduced model using Eq. (8.2-12) or
(22).
Dynamic Condensation of NoncJassically Damped Models 207
3.3 Solve for the eigenproblem of the reduced model:

A (i+1)i(i+I)
R mm
= B(iH)i(i+I)
R mmmm
g(iH)
3.4 Check the convergence for the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvalues
using the criterion
Iaj(i+I) - aj(i) I
I I .: :
a?+I)
81 (j = 1,2, ... ,p.:::: m) (28)
where a denotes the real and imaginary parts of the complex eigenvalues,
respectively. If the first p eigenvalues converge, exit the loop.
4. Output the dynamic condensation matrixR(i+l) and system matricesA~+l) and
B~+ I) of the reduced model.
Clearly, there are three types of major computational work within each iteration. They
are to evaluate the (i + I)th approximate dynamic condensation matrix R(i+1), to
construct the (i + I )th approximate system matrices A ~+ I) and B~+ 1) of the reduced
model, and to solve for the eigenproblem of the reduced model. Assume the compu-
tational work for these three types are WI, W2, W3, respectively. The total work for
one iteration is WI + W2 + W3 and k(WI + W2 + W3) for k iterations.
As shown in Eq. (12), since the matrix G is defined by the system matrices of the
full model, the dynamic condensation matrix is only dependent on itself, as shown
in Eq. (20). This means the system matrices as well as the eigenpairs of the reduced
model have no effect on the iteration. We do not have to compute them within every
iteration. Therefore, the following iterative scheme is presented.
Iterative Scheme I
I. Choose the masters and construct all the submatrices to be used in the following.
2. Calculate the initial approximation of the dynamic condensation R(O) by using
Eq. (21).
3. For i = 0, k, 2k, 3k, . .. (k > 1), begin the iteration:
3.1 Calculate the (i + k)th approximate dynamic condensation matrix R(i+k)
by iterating Eq. (20) k times.
3.2 Calculate the system matrices of the reduced model using Eq. (8.2-12) or
(22).
3.3 Solve for the eigenproblem of the reduced model:
A (i+k) i(i+k)
R mm
= B(i+k)
R
i(i+k) g (i+k)
mm mm
3.4 Check the convergence for the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvalues
using the criterion
la?+k) - ay) I
Jaji+k) I .: : 81 (j = 1,2, .. ·,P:::: m) (29)
If the first p eigenvalues converge, exit the loop.

4. Output the dynamic condensation matrix R(i+k) and system matrices A~+k) and
B~+k) of the reduced model.
Clearly, the iterative scheme I becomes the classical iterative scheme if k = 1. Since
the computation of the system matrices of the reduced model and the corresponding
eigenproblem does not affect the dynamic condensation matrix, the dynamic con-
densation matrix R(i+k) and the system matrices A~+k) and B~+k) of the reduced
model resulting from the two schemes should be identical.
As mentioned earlier, the major computational work for obtaining the reduced
model (A~+k) and B~+k)) using the classical iterative scheme is k(Wl + W2 + W3).
It is kWl + W2 + W3 if the iterative scheme I is used. Clearly, (k - 1)(W2 + W3)
computational work may be saved for k iterations and (k - 1)(W2 + W3) /k for one
iteration. Here, W3 denotes the computation of the eigenproblem of the reduced
model in state space. As we know, the computation of the eigenpairs is usually very
expensive, especially when the size of the reduced model or the number of the masters
is a little large. Therefore, the computational effort required in iterative scheme I is
much less than the classical iterative scheme if k > 1 and the size of the reduced model
is big.
In iterative scheme I, the system matrices of the reduced model and the
corresponding eigenpairs are still to be computed after a couple of iterations.
Iterative Scheme II
Steps 1 and 2 are similar to those in Scheme 1.
3. For i = 0, 1,2,3 ... , begin the iteration:

3.1 Calculate the (i + l)th approximate dynamic condensation matrix R(i+l)
by using Eq. (20).
3.2 Check the convergence using the criterion
(j= 1,2, ... ,m) (30)
where ry) and ry+l) are the jth column vectors of the ith and (i + l)th
approximate dynamic condensation matrix, respectively. If the m column
vectors converge, exit the loop.
4. Calculate the system matrices of the reduced model.
5. Solve for the eigenproblem of the reduced model if necessary.
6. Output the dynamic condensation matrix and system matrices.
In this scheme, the system matrices of the reduced model are only to be calculated
after the dynamic condensation matrix converges. The eigenpairs are to be computed
only when it is necessary. Therefore, this scheme is a little more computationally
efficient than Scheme I.
8.8.4 Discussion on the Convergence

Scheme II is reproduced below in a form that would be convenient for the discussion
of the convergence.
1. Suppose the dynamic condensation matrix is a zero matrix, and construct
subspace Xm as
(31)
2. Calculate the initially approximate dynamic condensation matrix using the

X(O) -
m -
[ (0)]
Xmm
X(O)
-
-
A-1BX
m (32)
sm
R(O) = X(O)
sm
(X(O) )-1
mm (33)
3. For i = 0,1,2, ... , begin the iteration:

3.1 According to Eq. (10), the (i + l)th approximate condensation matrix can
be obtained from the following two equations:
(34)
R(i+l) = X(i+l)(X(i+l»-l (35)
sm mm
The following steps are similar to those in Scheme II. Clearly, Eqs. (33) and
(35) are equivalent to Eqs. (21) and (20).
Suppose the subspace X m can be expressed as
(36)
where D is a coefficient matrix of 2n x 2m. Introducing Eq. (36) into (32) results in
(37)
When the orthogonalities of the eigenvector matrix with respect to matrix A, shown
in Eq. (8.5-3), are considered, we have
1 ---I-T
A- = \IIQ \II (38)
Introducing Eq. (38) into Eq. (37) and using Eq. (8.5-3) again leads to
X(O) -
m - 1tQ -I D (39)
Equation (39) can be partitioned as
(0) ] _ [ 'IImm
Xmm -
[ (0) - - (40)
Xsm '115m
which is equivalent to the following two equations:
(41a)
(41b)
R
(0)
= «(lsmQmmDmm
- - -I
+ 'IIssQ
-
ss Dsm)('IImmQmmDmm +, 'IIms Q ss Dsm)
- -I - - -I - - -I
(42)
Based on the same derivative procedure, the ith approximation of the dynamic
condensation matrix is given by
(i) - - -i-I - - -i-I - - -i-I - - -i-I -I
R = ('IIsmQmm Dmm + 'IIssQ ss Dsm)('IImmQmm Dmm + 'IIms Q ss Dsm)
(43)
Because the moduli of all the diagonal elements in matrix Qss are greater than those
in matrix Qmm, we have
(i -* (0) (44)
i.e.,
(') - --I
R I -* 'IIsm'llmm (i -* (0) (45)
in which 1tsm 1t:~ is the exact value of the dynamic condensation matrix.

Two factors affect the efficiency of an iterative method. One is the computational
effort at each iteration, and the other is the convergent rate of each iteration. As
discussed in the preceding section, (k - 1)(W2 + W3)/k computational work may
be saved for each iteration if the iterative Scheme I rather than the classical iterative
scheme is used. The computational work of the iterative scheme II is a little less than
Scheme I. For the first factor, the iterative scheme in this section is, therefore, superior
to the schemes in Section 8.5. The remainder is the second factor. Because it is very
difficult to discuss this factor theoretically, two numerical examples are included in
the following. We will compare the results of the reduced models obtained from
different condensation approaches for each iteration. Therefore, only the classical
iterative scheme will be applied.
Mass- Damper-Stiffness System

A discrete mass-dam per-spring system, shown in Figure 8.8, is first considered. In
this system, mi = 1.0 kg, Ci = O.5i N . s/m, ki = 200i N/m (i = 1,2, ... ,20). It has a
total of 20 degrees of freedom. The lowest four complex eigenvalues are -0.017635 ±
j3.75602, -0.093032 ±j8.62651, -0.229146 ± j13.5375, and -0.426827 ± jI8.4737.
The 1st, 6th, 11 th, and 16th degrees of freedom are selected as the masters.
The relative errors of the eigenvalues (complex frequencies) of the reduced model
in the former 10 iterations are listed in Table 8.20. In the table and the tables that
follow, the expressed "present method" denotes the method described in this section.
The error is defined as
error = (Q)i) - aJ)/aJ, j = 1,2, ... ,m
in which aji) and aJ are the real/imaginary parts of the ith approximate and exact
eigenvalues, respectively. The subscript denotes the jth eigenvalue. Here, the eigen-
values are just used to demonstrate how the reduced model closes the full model and
not for eigenvalues themselves.
As shown clearly from the results in Table 8.20, the errors of the initial approxi-
mations are very large, especially for the real parts of eigenvalues. All the errors of
the real parts are greater than 100%. Clearly, the corresponding eigenvalues or the
Figure 8.8 Schematic of a mass-dam ping-spring system.
Table 8.20 Relative errors of the eigenvalues of reduced model (present method)
o
I
2
4
5
6
7
•
9
10 0.0000001 0 _
Table 8.21 Relative errors of the eigenvalues of reduced model (Scheme A)
Iter. £iamvalue 1 £iaamlue2 Eigenvalue 3

Imq.
o 2.1838096 0.7842803 1.7100118 0.6460477 2.7415020 0.9335364 3.7014501 1.1661395
1 0.0401281 0.0198662 0.0816702 0.0400288 0.2000310 0.0954278 0.8787399 0.3703498
2 0.0010520 0.0005277 0.0100792 0.0050451 0.0316698 0.0158046 0.4238226 0.1936800
3 -0.0001706 0.0001661 -0.0016805 0.0016146 0.0073571 0.0091645 0.2004699 0.1397557
4 0.0000087 0.0000939 -0.0007934 0.0007919 0.0041386 0.0062445 0.1254392 0.1085293
5 0.0000280 0.0000S94 -0.0002532 0.0004676 0.002S620 0.0044749 0.0793301 0.0868355
6 0.0000240 0.0000392 -0.0000509 0.0003051 0.0017376 0.0032970 0.0549462 0.0712837
7 0.0000183 0.0000264 0.0000148 0.0002105 0.0012408 0.0024765 0.0400760 0.0594741
8 0.0000136 0.0000181 0.0000345 0.0001507 0.0009278 0.0018912 0.0309810 0.0503048
9 0.0000104 0.0000127 0.l1000388 0.0001109 0.0007208 0.0014663 0.0247807 0.0430165
10 0.0000079 0.0000090 0.0000376 0.0000834 0.0005791 0.0011532 0.0204588 0.0371398
reduced model is meaningless. The real parts of the eigenvalues resulting from the
reduced model quickly converge to the exact when iteration is implemented. After 10
iterations, the errors reduce to less than one 1000th of the initial approximation. The
imaginary parts of the eigenvalues converge to the exact results consistently during
iterating. These errors are all larger than zero, which means the complex frequencies
of the reduced model are larger than the exact and the reduced model approaches the
full model from above. After 10 iterations, the reduced model AR and BR, which is
described by the 1st, 6th, 11 th, and 16th degrees of freedom, can accurately represent
the full model in the lowest frequency range with the highest error 0.5%. Therefore,
it can be used directly in the test-analysis model correlation, active vibration control,
and so on.
For comparison purposes, the errors resulted from Scheme A, defined as Case 1
in Table 8.8, are listed in Table 8.21. Although there is little difference between the
errors of the initial approximations resulting from the two kinds of methods, the
errors obtained from the present method reduce much more quickly than those from
SchemeA.
The damping matrix in this example is proportional to the stiffness matrix because
of the particular selection of the damping matrix. As mentioned, the dynamic con-
densation method for undamped systems can be used to solve the problem directly.
Here, we want to show that the dynamic condensation approaches for non classically
damped systems can also be applied to proportionally damped models.
The floating-raft isolation system is considered as the second example. The degrees of
freedom associated with the two machines, and the translational degrees of freedom
at nodes 2, 4,8,9, 14,22 in raft and at nodes 9, 14 in base, are selected as masters when
the dynamic condensation is applied. All the complex frequencies of the reduced
model at the first 12 iterations are listed in Tables 8.22 and 8.23. The results obtained
Table 8.22 Real parts of the complex frequencies of reduced model (present method)
Iter. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 BIllet
Iftq.l -0.351257 -0.334284 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283 -o.33G83
1ftq.2 -0.459752 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.454051 -o.~1
1ftq.3 -3.35444 -0.322134 -0.321728 -0.321728 -0.321728 -0.321728 -0.321728 -0.321728
Preq.4 -20.2196 -631912 -6.48547 -6.46571 -6.46483 -6.46483 -6.46483 -6.46483
Preq.S -29.4092 -10.3897 -9.77570 -9.76763 -9.76748 -9.76748 -9.76748 -9.76748
Preq.6 -16.2522 -7.67117 -6.77129 -6.72992 -6.72766 -6.72764 -6.72764 -6.72764
Preq.7 -5f.9616 -711M12 -7.50688 -7.46009 -7.49449 -7.493CM -7.49290 -7.49290
Preq.8 -57.6414 -19.8781 -18.1923 -12.5756 -13.3257 -12.9869 -12.9500 -12.9449
PIeq.9 -154.475 -21,5751 -16.3887 -17.9246 -17.8943 -17.8887 -17.8875 -17.8871
lPreq.l0 -6UOO6 -37.6786 4.99675 -17.3053 -16.4704 -16.4175 -16.4105 -16.4082
Table 8.23 Imaginary parts of the com plex frequencies of reduced model (present
method, radfs)
Iter. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Exact
Preq.l 27.6811 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784
Freq.2 30.8131 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270
Preq.5 193.028 67.4832 67.4671 67.4671 67.4671 67.4671 67.4671 67.4671
Preq.4 362.290 227.711 226.81Z 226.761 226.759 226.759 226.759 226.759
Preq.5 510.015 231.199 2TI.m 227.90Z 2TI.902 227.902 227.902 227.902
Preq.6 673-'" 242.2SO 238.m 238.649 238.642 238.642 238.642 238.642
PNq.7 732.313 347.848 340.J25 337.011 335.960 335.931 335.931 335.931
1ftq.8 1076.46 555.324 534.822 491.904 420.814 418.423 418.327 418.319
Preq.9 1922.65 565.686 542.570 533.991 533.940 533.935 533.934 533.934
iPreq.l0 2986.84 1326.30 978.800 546.799 542.968 542.839 542.828 542.827
Table 8.24 Real parts of the complex frequencies of reduced model (Scheme A)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 I!Dct
-0.3529t6 -G.334284 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283 -0.334283
-o.4Ii0291 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.454051 -0.4540S1 -0.454051 -0.454051
-42.6293 -o.m148 -0.321539 -0.321560 -0.321574 -0.321587 -0.321597 ,.-0.321728
-KSMS -6M264 -6.50874 -6.47890 -6.47562 -6.f7423 -6.'47518 -6.46483
-28L91O 1UGZ5 -9.76172 -9.75627 -9.75746 -9.75834 -9.75(189 -936748
-165.917 -7..,154 -6.76654 -6.73457 -6.73192 -6.73122 -6.73066 ,...6.72764
-1.16662 -7.52963 -7.42061 -7.43290 -7-""2 -7A5915O -7.49290
-19.2819 -18.G1164 -13.0259 -13A1361 -13.G567 -.3.G879 -l2.M49
-22.4687 -16.3650 -17.9903 -17.9497 -17.9459 -17.M2I -17.8871
-34.6759 5.53147 -18.7647 -16.6137 -16.5342 -16.5134 -16.4082
Table 8.25 Imaginary parts of the complex frequencies of reduced model (Scheme A, rad/s)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
27.7031 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784 27.4784
30.8217 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270 30.7270
6A039 67.4935 67.489 67.4688 67.4688 67.46811 67.4688 67.4671
13OL90 228.193 226.932 226.842 226.831 226.82S 226.821 226.759
178).21 233.059 228.368 228.288 22IL26l 228.24S 228.230 227.902
2147.30 242.776 238.978 238.850 2S8.828 238.817 238.809 238.642
2S68.93 • 355.506 343.999 339.298 351.788 357.463 337.271 335.931
3541.74 559.382 537.682 524.S40 441.77. 436.950 433.454 418.319
4999.02 566.196 544.449 536.245 535.780 535.571 535.445 533.934
6493.01 1291.61 998.693 554.278 S44.407 S44.OM 543.985 542.827
,0'
~
'0'
j '0' 1'0'
,0'
,0'
"r'
'0' ,0'
- -
'0' ,0'
,0'0 l
,o"a
(a) (b)
Figure 8.9 Errors of the ninth complex frequency for the four cases: (a) Real parts; (b) imaginary parts.
,0' ,0'
to' to'
'0'
,.., to-
j '0' j
'0"
'0'
~
,0' ,0'
,.'
I.-
-
'0"
-
10'
,0'0 10"'.
(a) (b)
Figure 8.10 Errors of the 10th complex frequency for thefour cases: (a) Real parts; (b) imaginary parts.
from the method in Scheme A defined above are listed in Tables 8.24 and 8.25 for
comparison purposes. The "Exact" indicates the results obtained from the full model.
Because the reduced model is derived from the full model, it is reasonable to consider
the full model as exact. Again, the results show that the method in this section is
more efficient for nonclassically damped systems. Although the reduced model has
only 10 degrees of freedom, which is about one 18th of the full model, it is a good
representation of the full model in frequency range (0, 500) rad/s after 10 iterations.
Since the lower order of complex frequencies usually converge much faster than the
higher order, the 9th and 10th frequencies of the reduced model are considered. The
errors of these two frequencies computed from four cases are shown in Figures 8.9
and 8.10, respectively. In these figures, Case A denotes the results obtained from
Scheme A. Cases B, C, and D are the presented method with k = 1,2 and 3, respec-
tively. Clearly, the convergence of the current method is much faster than Scheme A.
It becomes faster and faster with the increase of k.
8.9 Summary
Three static condensation methods for nonclassically damped models have been
described. One is defined in the displacement space and the other two are defined
in the state space. The former is actually equivalent to Guyan condensation and the
latter two are not exactly static condensation because the inertia or damping effect is
partially included in the condensation matrix. The reduced stiffness, damping matri-
ces, and equivalent force vector resulting from these three approaches are identical.
There is only some difference among the reduced mass matrices. The accuracy of the
reduced model computed from SCDS and SCSS(II) is very close and higher than that
from SCSS(I).
The exact dynamic condensation for a nonclassically damped model is provided.
Unfortunately, both the dynamic condensation matrix and the reduced system matri-
ces are complex. It is very inconvenient if the reduced model is utilized in further
analyses. The dynamic condensation matrix obtained from the undamped model
may also be used to reduce the size of the nonclassically damped models. However,
the reduced model usually has low accuracy and will not converge to the full model
if the iterative schemes are implemented.
One modal-type dynamic condensation for the nonclassically damped model is
described in this chapter. Its advantage is that the reduced model could exactly retain
the interested modes of the full model. However, the interested eigenpairs of the full
model should be available before the condensation is performed. It has been proven
that the dynamic condensation matrix and the reduced system matrices resulting
from the modal-type condensation are all real. Furthermore, the complex numerical
operation is unnecessary during the condensation.
Three versions of iterative algorithms for the dynamic condensation of nonclas-
sically damped models are presented. They are defined in the state space and have
similar iterative forms. The third method is better than the second, which is better
than the first. Generally, the rate of convergence at the first several iterations is very
fast. It becomes very slow after these iterations, especially for the first iterative method.
An iterative method based on the inverse iteration in the state space is presented.
The computation of the reduced system matrices as well as the reduced eigenproblem
is unnecessary during the iteration. Hence, much computational work could be saved.
Generally, the speed of convergence of this method is faster than the three iterative
methods in Sections 5, 6, and 7.
References
Bathe, KJ and Wilson, EL (1972) Large eigenvalue problems in dynamic analysis. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics Division, 98(EM6):1471-1485.
Carroll, WF (1999) A primer for finite elements in elastic structures. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., New York, NY.
Huang, F and Gu, S (1993) A new approach for model reduction. Proceedings of the lIth
International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, Florida), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 1572-1575.
Kane, K and Torby, BJ (1991) The extended modal reduction method applied to rotor dynamic problems.
Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 113( II ):79-84.
Qu, Z-Q (1998) Structural dynamic condensation techniques: Theory and applications. Ph.D. Dissertation,
State Key Laboratory of Vibration, Shock and Noise, Shanghai hao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2000) Dynamic condensation methods for viscously damped models. Proceed-
ings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference, (San Antonio, Texas), Society for Experimental
Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1752-1757.
Qu, Z-Q and Chang, W (2000) Dynamic condensation method for viscous damped vibration systems in
engineering. Engineering Structures, 22(11): 1426-1432.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2002) Efficient method for dynamic condensation of nonclassically damped
vibration systems. AIAA Journal, 40(2):368-375.
Qu, Z-Q, Jung, Y, and Selvam, RP (2003) Model condensation for nonclassically damped systems- Part I:
Static condensation. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(5):1003-1016.
Qu, Z-Q, Selvam, RP, and Jung, Y (2003) Model condensation for non classically damped systems-Part
II: Iterative schemes for dynamic condensation. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(5):1017-
1032.
Qu, Z-Q (2003) Discussion on dynamic condensation and synthesis of unsymmetric structural systems.
Journal of Applied Mechanics, 70(5):784.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2004) Insight into dynamic condensation matrix of nonclassically damped
models. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 272(3-5):581-606.
Rao, GV (2002) Dynamic condensation and synthesis of unsymmetric structural systems. Journal of
Applied Mechanics, 69(5):610-616.
Reddy, VR and Sharan, AM (1986) The static and dynamic analysis of machine tools using dynamic matrix
reduction technique. Proceedings of the 4th International Modal Analysis Conference (Los Angeles,
CAl, Union College, Schenectady, NY: 1104-1109.
Rivera, MA, Singh, MP, and Suarez, LE (1999) Dynamic condensation approach for nonclassically damped
structures. AIAA Journal, 37(5):564-571.
Rouch, KE and Kao, JS (1980) Dynamic reduction in rotor dynamics by finite element method. Journal of
Mecbanical Design, 102(2):360-368.
Wu, JC, Yang, JN, and Schmitendorf, WE (1998) Reduced-order H oo and LQR control for wind-excited
tall buildings. Engineering Structures, 20(3 ): 222-236.
9 Application I: Model Reduction on System Level
9.1 Introdudion
Various approaches for the dynamic condensation of large size of discrete models
have been presented in preceding chapters. When a new method for dynamic con-
densation is proposed, natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes are
generally utilized to check the accuracy of the new approach. If the differences of
natural frequencies and mode shapes between the full model and the reduced model
obtained from the new condensation method are less than the prescribed tolerance,
the new development is considered to be successful. Using this comparison, it can be
guaranteed that the dynamic characteristics of the reduced model are close to those
of the full model within the frequency range of interest. Thus, the reduced model can
represent the full model within that frequency range. For this reason, all the dynamic
condensation methods may be implemented into the eigenvalue analysis oflarge-size
models. This is the traditional and widely acknowledged application and has been
well demonstrated in preceding chapters.
Besides the direct implementation of dynamic condensation technique into eigen-
value problem analysis, this technique has been incorporated with other eigenvalue
solvers to improve the convergence of iteration. For instance, the transformation
matrices obtained from Guyan condensation (Cheu et aI., 1986), dynamic conden-
sation (O'Callahan et al., 1986), and the quadratic condensation (Cheu et al., 1986)
(a variant of exact condensation) were used as the starting vector of subspace iteration
method. Although computation time is required for the retrieval of starting vectors
from Guyan condensation and quadratic condensation, research shows that the total
computer time required for the subspace iteration using the new starting vectors is
less than that required using the traditional starting vectors.
It is shown in preceding chapters that the size of the reduced finite element model
is much smaller than that of the full finite element model after the implementation of
dynamic condensation technique, while the important dynamic characteristics of the
full model are accurately retained in the reduced model. Therefore, the reduced model
is very useful in structural dynamic analyses, structural simulations, and structural
control.
The dynamic condensation technique may be directly utilized to reduce the global
finite element model of a structural system. To this end, the finite element model
should be, at first, formulated for the whole or major part of structural system. Then,
the full model is reduced using the dynamic condensation technique. The implemen-
tation is quite simple and has been well demonstrated in preceding chapters. Due to
217
Table 9.1 Applications of dynamic condensation technique on system level

Guyan condensation Rouch and Kao (1980); tclean and Hahn (1983); Gangadharan et aI.
(1990); Ha. Keilers. and Chang (1992); Lin and Lim (1995); TlOU
and Ye (1996); Mills and Ing (1996); Fri well. Penny. and Garvey
( 1995); Brahmi. Bouhaddi. and Fillod (1995); Geradin and Chen
(1995); Gaudenzi et aI. (1998); Moulin and Karpel (I998);
Sowmianarayanan and Pradeep (1999); lames III and Zimmerman
(2000); Lopez and Zimmerman (2000); Abdalla. Grigoriadis. and
Zimmerman (2000); Qu and Selvam (2001); Qu (2002); Chen
and Rong (2002); Yang and Lian (2002)
~Iassical dynamic Kim (1985); Friswell. Penny. and Garvey (1995)
condensation
Exact condensation Kim (1985); Kishor et aI. (2001); Yang and Lian (2002)
(including its variant)
IRS Friswell. Penny. and Garvey (1995); Friswell. Penny. and Garvey (1996);
Qu and Sdvam (2001); Qu (2002)
SEREP Friswdl. Penny. and Garvey (1995); FrisweU. Penny. and Garvey (1996)
Iterative IRS Qu and Sdvam (2001); Qu (2002)
Damped modd reduction
Modal reduction Friswdl. Penny. and Garvey (1996)
Modal coordinate Leger (1989); ((hulld' and Mohiuddin (1997); Henchi et al. (1998);
reduction Bunon. Farrar. and Doebling (1998); Zhengand HaseN (1999)
Balanced realization Friswdl. Penny. and Garvey (1996)
the large number of published materials on this topic, the applications of dynamic
condensation approaches on the system level are concisely listed in Table 9.1 for ref-
erence purposes. All the papers referred to in this table are listed in the bibliography
at the end of this book.
In this chapter the implementation of dynamic condensation technique to the
primary-secondary system, which consists of one primary subsystem and one or more
secondary subsystems, will be demonstrated. Examples of this kind of systems are
the structure with its active vibration control system (Qu et al., 2001), bridge-vehicle
interaction system (Henchi et aI., 1998), and aircraft-ship interaction system (Tong
and Qu, 2000). These systems have several common features:
The primary subsystem is generally very complex. The finite element method is
usually utilized to generate the discrete model for the primary subsystem. Due to
the complexity, the size of the finite element model is very big.
The secondary subsystem is quite simple and any dynamic condensation approach
seems to be unnecessary.
The physical parameters of the secondary subsystems change repeatedly during the
design stage and, hence, it is inconvenient to use any dynamic condensation.
Furthermore, the implementation of dynamic condensation into the secondary
subsystems is sometimes very difficult due to nonlinearities.
For this kind of systems, the full finite element model of the primary subsystem is
first reduced in physical space using the dynamic condensation technique. Then, the
reduced model is assembled with the full models of the secondary subsystems and
other connections to formulate the reduced global model. For illustration purposes,
the schematic of reduced finite element modeling of primary-secondary systems
Application I: Model Reduction on System Level 219
Secondary
.Jj7
Full Model
Design r - - ___
I
0_____
Full Model I
~ O ~ Oi
'1!'<-'~""~~"1 ~ 1
~nectlo
c.o..n I I ijillili ~ Il lm ll l!
Primary FE Full Model I FE Reduced Model
l..- ___ _______ . .:
Reduces! Global Mode!
Figure 9.1 Schematic of reduced finite element modeling of primary-secondary system.
is shown in Figure 9.1. One major advantage of this modeling scheme is that the
reduced model of the primary subsystem needs to be generated only once although the
parameters of secondary subsystems may change repeatedly. Whenever the physical
properties of the secondary subsystems are given, the global finite element model may
be obtained by assembling the models of the secondary subsystems and the reduced
model of the primary subsystem. This modeling scheme has been successfully applied
to aircraft-ship interaction systems (Tong and Qu, 2000), active vibration control
systems (Qu et aI., 2001), finite element modeling of structures with smart material
(Qu, 2001), dynamic systems with local nonlinearities (Rouch and Kao, 1980; Shiau
and Jean, 1990, 1991; Friswell et aI., 1995, 1996; Burton et aI., 2000; Qu and Selvam,
2001; Qu, 2002; Meyer and Link, 2003), and responses of secondary systems under
seismic excitation (Bernal, 1999), and so on.
9.2 Active Vibration Control

9.2.1 Introduction
With the increase of the requirements of dynamic characteristics and the complex-
ity of structural systems, the size of the discrete model to be controlled increases
drastically. Nowadays, the finite element model of a structural system with tens of
thousands of degrees of freedom is very common. For the viewpoint of practicality
and economy, it is unnecessary and impossible to install sensors or controllers on
every degree of freedom to measure or control the full-state vector. As a result, the
output feedback controllers, which use only the measured information from a limited
number of sensors installed at strategic locations, are highly desired (Wu et aI., 1998).
Furthermore, the dynamic output feedback controller based on the full order model,
referred to as full order control, may introduce a significant time delay because time is
required to process measured information, perform online computation, and execute
the control forces with a large dimension. The time delay will cause un synchronized
application of control fo rces, and this unsynchronization can not only render inef-
fective control, but also cause instability in the system (Zhang et al., 1993). The large
size of the controlled model will also make the simulation difficult. Therefore, the
full control model has to be reduced before a control law is synthesized. This control
design based on the reduced order model is referred to as reduced order control.
In the reduced order control, controllers are designed based on the reduced order
model that has much fewer degrees of freedom than the original model referred to as
full order model. The block diagram of the reduced order control, as well as the full
order control, is shown in Figure 9.2. Likewise, it is much easier to design the output
feedback controller for the reduced order model than for the full order model.
For the reduced order control, a reduced order model needs to be constructed from
the full order model of the structural system using system reduction schemes. The
resulting reduced order model should retain the important dominant characteristics
of the full order model, such as the important modes to be controlled, as much as pos-
sible. Many kinds of system reduction methods are available in the literature. Several
examples are the cost analysis (Skelton and Hughes, 1980), the optimal projection
(Wilson, 1974; Hyland and Bernstein, 1984), the balanced reduction (Moore, 1981),
the critical mode reduction (Yang and Liu, 1982), and Guyan condensation (Guyan,
1965).
One of the advantages of the condensation method over other approaches already
mentioned is that the corresponding reduced order model is defined in the subspace
of the full order model. Thus, each coordinate has a specific physical meaning and
can be used in the measurement directly. Using the dynamic condensation technique,
the number of nodes of the finite element model as well as the number of degrees of
freedom at each node can be reduced significantly. Up to now, the simplest conden-
sation method-Guyan condensation-has been broadly implemented into active
vibration control systems such as journal bearing (Sun et al., 1994), spacecraft solar
array (Sowmianarayanan and Pradeep, 1999), and flexible payloads (Gaudenzi et al.,
1999; Mills and lng, 1996).
Due to the ignorance of dynamic effects in Guyan condensation, it is only exact
for static problems. For dynamic problems, the accuracy is usually low and fully
depends on the selection of masters. If the masters are properly selected and the ratio
of number of masters to the number of modes of interest is high, the reduced order
model resulting from Guyan condensation will generally have necessary accuracy.
However, the degrees of freedom on which the actuators and sensors are mounted
and on which the displacements (velocities and accelerations) are interested should
be selected as masters in active vibration control. Furthermore, the size of the reduced
model cannot be comparatively high. Therefore, we do not have much freedom to
Reduced
Order antral
Z Full Order
Control
Figure 9.2 Block diagram of reduced and full order model control.
choose masters, and highly accurate dynamic condensation approaches therefore

become necessary.
In this section, the reduced order control using the dynamic condensation tech-
nique is to be presented systematically through a high building with an active tuned
mass damper. Guyan condensation and the iterative IRS will be used to construct
the reduced order model. Only the linear quadratic regulator control algorithm is
considered to check the accuracy of the reduced order control.
9.2.2 Full Order Control

The response of tall buildings under strong wind turbulence or earthquake has a
severe influence on the structural safety and comfort of occupants. Hence a variety of
control algorithms have been developed to control the displacement and acceleration
responses. Among them, the active vibration control has received considerable atten-
tion by a lot of researchers. Different active control devices have been investigated and
constructed in the United States, Japan, and elsewhere during the last two decades
(Soong et al., 1994; Abiru et al., 1994).
The mass dampers, which include tuned mass dampers (TMDs) and active tuned
mass dampers (ATMDs), are additional large weights added to the structure or iso-
lated from the main structural system. They can absorb energy transferred from the
main structure through their large movement. Their action is similar to increasing
the damping in the main structure. The advantage of this type of system is that it
does not require major intrusion in the structural system. Therefore, it is suitable for
retrofit cases. Although the performance ofTMDs has been demonstrated to be quite
effective, passive dampers may not achieve satisfactory performance for some struc-
tures with space and physical limitations, and hence ATMDs are necessary (Ankireddi
and Yang, 1996).
A tall building with an ATMD, shown in Figure 9.3, is considered. The forces acting
on the active control system are shown in Figure 9.4. Xn and Xn + Xd are the absolute
displacements of the top story and ATMD, respectively. fc (t) is an active control force
acting on the ATMD. It is an internal force of the system. Thus, the top story will be
subjected to a reactive force.
Supposing that the tall building has n degrees of freedom, the dynamic equations
of motion of this system are given by
{
MX(t) + CX(t) + KX(t) = F(t) + D!d(t) - Dfc(t)
(1)
md[xd(t) + xn(t)] + !d(t) = fc(t)
where M, C, and K are the mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the building,
respectively. Only the proportional damping, that is, C = cxK + 13M, is considered
herein. If the damping is viscous, the dynamic condensation methods in Chapter 8
may be implemented to reduce the full order model of the building. F(t) is a loading
vector. Force !d(t) and the force distribution vector D are expressed as
!d(t) = CdXd(t) + kdXd(t) (2)
DT={~I} n-1
(3)
Figure 9.3 Tall building with an ATMD.
fdU)
~i
fAt) !
feU)
I fcCtL
I
I
I
I
I
I
Top floor :_ _ _ _ _ _ _X_

..
Figure 9.4 Forces acting on the active control system.
Using matrix form, Eqs. (1), (2) and (3) can be rewritten as
.. .
M X(t) + C X(t) + K X(t) = F(t) + Dfc(t) (4)
in which the matrices At, C, K E R(n+l)x(n+l) and vectors X, D, FE R(n+l) are

defined as follows:
- [M
M=
Md :J, - [c C=
0
Cd]'
Cd
K= [K
o
Kd]
kd
(Sa)
Xl (t) 0
X(t) =
X2(t)
xn(t)
D= 0
-1
F(t) = {F~t) I (Sb)
Xd(t) 1
In Eq. (5),0 is an n-dimensional column or row null vector. The n-dimensional row
vector Md, column vectors Cd and Kd are given by
Md = {O CJ = {O ... 0 -Cd}'
KJ = {O (6)
Equation (4) can be rewritten in the state space as
Z(t) = AZ(t) + Bfc(t) + Vet) (7)
where system matrix A E R 2 (n+I)x2(n+I), control vector BE R 2 (n+l), load vector

Vet) E R 2(n+1), and state vector Z(t) E R 2(n+1) are, respectively, defined as
A = [
-M
_0_ 1 -
K -M
_1_ 1 -J,
C
Vet) OJ ,
= [ _-1- Z(t) = IX(t)j
!. (8)
M F(t) X(t)
The linear quadratic regulator (LQR) is considered herein for the control algorithm.
The regulator problem is defined as (Meirovitch, 1990) the problem of designing a
control input so as to drive the structures from some initial state to the zero state.
The linear regulator problem is the one in which the control is a linear function of
the state. According to the definition of the LQR, we have
Vet) =0 (9)
The object of the LQR is to determine an optimal control minimizing the quadratic
performance measure
1 (tt)SZ(tt)
J = _ZT + -1 lot! [zt (t)Q(t)Z(t) + !c(t)U(t)!c(t) ]dt (10)
2 2 0
where the weighting matrices Sand Q of state variable are real, symmetric, positive,
and semidefinite. U is usually a real, symmetric, positive, and definite matrix. How-
ever, it is a positive variable for the control model considered here. tt is the end of
integration time. A minimization of the performance index J in (10) subject to the
constraint of (7) results in the well-known LQR controller (Meirovitch, 1990),
(11)
in which P is the Riccati matrix satisfying the algebraic Riccati equation:
(12)
It can be proven that Eq. (12) has a unique, positive, definite solution as long as
(A, Q) is observable. r is the state feedback matrix. The dynamic equation of the
corresponding closed-loop control system is given by
(13)
9.2.3 Reduced Order Control

In the following, the full order model of a building is reduced using the dynamic
condensation technique. The reduced order control model is constructed using the
ATMD and the reduced order model of the building. Therefore, only several vari-
ables are to be modified when the parameters of ATMD change. This makes it very
convenient and efficient to optimize the parameters of the ATMD.
Suppose that the masters have been selected. As mentioned, the degrees of freedom
on which the active control devices are mounted and on which the responses are of
interest should be included in the masters. Using the mass and stiffness matrices of
the building, the Guyan condensation matrix, the IRS condensation matrix, and the
iterative IRS dynamic condensation matrix can be obtained. Because the damping
is assumed to be proportional, the condensation matrix may be used to reduce the
damping matrix directly. Finally, the reduced order mass, damping, and stiffness
matrices of the tall building are given by
MR =Mmm +RTMsm +MmsR+RTMssR

KR = Kmm + RTKsm + KmsR + RTKssR (14)
CR = aKR + f3MR
in which R E Rsxm is the condensation matrix. Therefore, the dynamic equations of
the reduced order model are written as
where matrices MR, CR, KR E R(m+l)x(m+l) and vectors Xm(t), FR(t) and DR E
R(m+l) of the reduced order model are defined as
-
MR= [MR
MRd :J, -
CR= [CR
0
CRd] ,
Cd
KR = [KR
o
KRd]
kd
(16a)
DR = 0 FR(t) ~ {FR~t) 1 (16b)

-1
1
In Eq. (16), 0 is an m-dimensional column or row null vector. The m-dimensional

row vector MRd, column vectors CRd andKRd are given by
MRd = {O o md}' C~d = {O ... 0 -Cd}'
K~d = {O o -kd} (17)
Equation (15) can be rewritten in the state space as
(18)
The system matrix AR E R 2 (m+l)x2(m+1), control vector B E R 2(m+1), force vector

vet) E R 2(m+l), and state vector Zm(t) E R 2(m+l) are defined as
Similarly, we have the following equations by using the LQR control technique:
(20)
(21)
(22)
Because the number of masters is much less than that of the total degrees of freedom,
the size of the reduced order model is much smaller than that of the full order model.
Thus, a much smaller size of matrix manipulation is required in the reduced order
control.
9.2.4 Numerical Simulations

The reduced order control using the dynamic condensation technique has been tested
on a 40-storey-tall building with one ATMD (Wu et aI., 1998) shown in Fig. 9.3. Each
storey unit of the building is identically constructed with a storey height of 4 m,
mass mi = 1,290 tons, stiffness ki = 106 kN/m, and damping Ci = 14,260 kN . slm
for i = 1,2, ... ,40. Thus, the damping matrix is proportional to the stiffness matrix.
The building is symmetric in both lateral directions, and the mass center coincides
with the elastic center. Thus, there is no coupled lateral-torsional motion. Only one
directional motion will be considered. The mass of the damper is 258 tons, which
is 20% of a floor mass. The stiffness and damping coefficient of the damper are
300.9 kN/m and 83.592 kN . slm, respectively.
Suppose that the degrees of freedom concerning the 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 25th,
30th, 35th, and 40th floors are selected as masters when the dynamic condensation
method is applied to the tall building. Weighting matrices Q and QR are diagonal.
All the diagonal elements corresponding to the masters are 1 and the rest are zero.
U = UR = 10- 11 .
The building without the TMD is considered at first. The reduction scheme on
the system level is used and the reduced order model has a total of eight degrees of
freedom. The complex frequencies of the reduced order model and the lowest eight
complex frequencies of the full order model are listed in Table 9.2. In this table and
the tables that follow, ROM and FOM represent the full order model and the reduced
order model, respectively. The accuracy of the reduced order model obtained from
the initial approximation, static condensation, or Guyan condensation is very low.
Only the lowest two or three frequencies are close to the exact. The differences of
the complex frequencies between the reduced order model and the full order model
reduce steadily with the increase of iteration. The frequencies of the reduced order
Table 9.2(a) Real parts of the frequencies of the tall building (rad/s)
Mode POM ROM (i = 0, Guyan) ROM (i = I,IRS) ROM (; = 2)

1 -0.0083 -0.0083 -0.0083 -0.0083
2 -0.0747 -0.0767 -0.0747 -0.0747
3 -«U072 -0.2226 -0.2072 -0.2072
4 -0.4049 -0.4639 -0.4052 -0.4049
5 -0.6667 -0.8230 -0.6691 -0.6668
6 -0.9909 -1.3079 -1.0067 -0.9934
7 -\-3756 -1.8594 -1.4433 -1.3960
8 -1.8186 -2.3006 -1.9327 -1.8910
Table 9.2(b) Imaginary parts of the frequencies of the tall building (rad/s)
Mode POM ROM(i ... o.~) ROM (i = I,IRS) ROM(;=2)

1 1.0798 1,0814 1.0798 1.0798
~ 3.2369 3.2796 3.2369 3.2369
3 5.3869 5.5131 5.3871 5.3869
. 7.5250 8.0525 7.5273 7.5251
5 9I6I6S 10.7124 9.6642 9.6479
Ii 11.7469 13.41104 11.8400 11.7618
7 13.8217 16.0413 14.1543 13.9227
8 15.8666 17.8151 16.3503 16.1755
model are all very close to the full order model after two or three iterations. Hence,
the reduced order model can accurately represent the dynamic characteristics of the
full order model in the low-frequency range after several iterations.
Now let us consider the building with TMD and ATMD. Similarly, the dynamic
condensation approaches are used to reduce the model of building before the con-
trol devices are assembled. The reduced order control model has nine degrees of
freedom among which eight are from the building and one from the TMD or
ATMD. The lowest eight complex frequencies of the reduced order model and the
full order model are listed in Tables 9.3 and 9.4 for the building with TMD and
ATMD, respectively.
As shown in these four tables, the second complex frequency concerns the TMD or
ATMD, and the other seven frequencies pertain to the vibration of the building. The
damping ratio of the first mode of the building is 0.0077. After the implementation
of the TMD and ATMD, the corresponding damping ratio increased to 0.0274 and
0.0745, respectively. Therefore, the displacement responses significantly resulting
from the first mode of the building will be reduced substantially, which will be shown
later.
The use of different dynamic condensation approaches does not have much effect
on the accuracy of the second mode. In the case of TMD, for example, the errors
of damping ratio and frequency are, respectively, 0.14% and -0.018% when Guyan
condensation is applied to the building. The reason is that this mode concerns the
vibration of the TMD and ATMD, respectively, on which the model reduction is
Table 9.3(a) Real parts of the frequencies of the tall building with TMD (rad/s)
Mode FOM ROM (; = O. Guyan) ROM (; = 1. IRS) ROM (; = 2)
1 -0.0294 -0.0297 -0.0294 -0.0294

2 -0.1418 - 0.141b -0.1419 -0.1419
3 - 0.0768 - 0.0788 -0.0767 -0.0767
4 -0.2090 -0.2246 -0.2089 -0.2089
5 -0.4066 -0.4660 -0.4068 -0.4066
6 -0.6683 -0.8255 -0.6708 -0.6685
7 -0.9925 -1.3106 -1.0086 -0.9951
8 -1.~772 -1.8620 -1.4455 -1.3979
Table 9.3(b) Imaginary parts of the frequencies of the tall building with TMD (rad/s)
Mode FOM ROM (i = O.Guyan) ROM (; = I. IRS) ROM(i=2)
1.0719 1.0737 1.0719 1.0719

2 1.0771 1.0769 1.0771 1.0771
3 3.2386 3.2814 3.2387 3.2387
4 5.3878 5.5841 5.3880 5.3878
5 7.5256 8.0532 7.5279 7.5257
6 9.6469 10.7129 9.6646 9.6434
7 11.7472 13.4808 11.8403 11.7621
8 13.8219 16.0416 14.1546 13.9230
Table 9.4(a) Real parts of the frequencies of the tall building with ATMD (rad/s)
Mode FOM ROM (; = O. Guyan) ROM (i = I. IRS) ROM(i=2)
-0.0789 -0.0806 -0.0788 -0.0788

2 -0.1249 -0.1235 -0.1251 -0.1251
3 -0.0782 -0.0804 -0.0782 -0.0782
4 -0.2094 -0.2251 -0.2094 -0.2094
5 -0.4068 -0.4663 -0.4070 -0.4068
6 -0.6684 -0.8257 -0.6709 -0.6686
7 -0.9925 -1.3108 -1.0087 -0.9952
8 -1.3772 -1.8622 -1.4456 -1.3980
Table 9.4(b) Imaginary parts of the frequencies of the tall building with ATMD (rad/s)
Mode FOM ROM Ii = O.Guyan) ROM (; = I. IRS) ROM(i =2)
I 1.0563 1.0578 1.0563 1.0563

2 1.0926 1.0927 1.0927 1.0927
3 3.2386 3.2814 3.2386 3.2386
4 5.3878 5.5841 5.3880 5.3878
5 7.5256 8.0532 7.5279 7.5257
6 9.6469 10.7129 9.6646 9.6483
7 11.7472 13.4807 11.8403 11.7621
8 13.8220 16.0415 14.1545 13.9229
not performed. The results in Tables 9.3 and 9.4 show that the first mode has a much
higher error than the second mode. The errors of the damping ratio and the frequency
of the first mode resulting from Guyan condensation in the case of TMD, for example,
are -l.02% and 0.17%, which are almost 10 times the second mode. The reason is
that this mode pertains to the building on which the condensation method is applied.
The accuracy of the reduced order model resulting from Guyan condensation is
very low. With the iteration, the complex frequencies of the reduced order model
approach steadily those of the full order model. The reduced order model can accu-
rately represent the full order model in the low-frequency range after two or three
iterations. Since the reduced order model only has nine degrees of freedom, which is
much smaller than that of the full order model, much computational effort can be
saved during the design of the control system and simulation.
Assume that a unit step load is acted on the top floor of the building. The responses
of the top floor of the building with TMD and ATMD obtained from the reduced
order model and the full order model are plotted in Figures 9.5 and 9.6, respectively.
1.0x10·7 r---------;:=========;-]
- - . Full MO-del-~
8.0xW8
[ . - - Reduced Mo~=~ ~::?~ I
Reduced Model (i=1~ I
E
~ 6.0xW 8
~ \ -=-~.'""'" """"'-"J
!fNlfMIMN
OJ
E
OJ
g 4.0x11J8
n.
\ II
VJ
D
2.0xWB
0.0 w.....~w..............J~-'-'-'~'-'-'-~'-'-'-~'-'-'-~.........~.........~-'-'-~.w
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (5)
Figure 9.S Responses of building with TMD under step load.
1.0x11J7
- - Full Model
8.0x11JB Reduced Model (i=O)
Reduced Model (i= 1)
E Reduced Model (i=2)
~
~ 6.0x11J8
OJ
E
OJ
()
ro 4.0xW8
n.
\1
VJ
D
~
2.0xW8
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (5)
Figure 9.6 Responses of building with ATMD under step load.

Clearly, there is a little difference between the initial approximation and the exact,
while the responses of the first and second approximations are very close to the exact
and it is very difficult to distinguish them from these figures.
9.3 Finite Element Modeling of Smart Structures

9.3.1 Introduction
Structures with the ability to sense and actuate and, as a result, to control their
own dynamic characteristics due to the distributed sensors and actuators made of
smart materials are often termed smart structures or intelligent structures. The term
"smart" or "intelligent" usually means that the structures have self-monitoring and
self-adaptive capabilities. Since the intelligent structure has several distinct advantages
over conventional actively controlled structures, it has received increasing attention.
The research and application of the intelligent structures have experienced tremen-
dous growth during the past decade, as shown approximately in Figure 9.7. During the
last several years, several review papers and bibliographies on smart structures have
appeared in the open literature (Rao and Sunar, 1994; Chee et aI., 1998; Benjeddou,
2000; Mackerle, 2000).
In the smart structures, the sensors made of smart materials are to measure
variables such as displacements, strains, accelerations or other mechanical changes
of the structures and generate voltage in response to the changes. This voltage
is multiplied by some gain according to the control law implemented and is fed
back to the actuators. The actuators made of smart materials react to the voltage
and generate mechanical changes. Using the changes from actuators, the vibra-
tion or other dynamic characteristics will be controlled. For a complex structure,
it is unnecessary and very expensive to implement the smart materials all over the
1400
1200
1000
I!!
8.
co 800
..
Q.
'5
G)
600
.Q
E
:s 400
Z
200
o+-,-~=r-.-.-r-r-r-r~~~~~~~~~~
80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Year
Figure 9.7 Journal papers abstracted in E1 with the keyword "piezoelectric';

structure. Hence, the sensors and actuators are usually discretely distributed on the
structure.
The finite element method is a powerful numerical technique that provides solu-
tions to many complicated engineering problems. It was directly applied to the smart
materials and structures by the later 1980s (Tzou, 1989). After that, the finite ele-
ment modeling of smart structures attracted numerous researchers and became a
major area of research. Various types of formulations have been proposed for one-,
two-, and three-dimensional elements. For the plates, the elements with and with-
out electric degrees of freedom have been developed. Most of the elements without
the electric degrees of freedom used an equivalent single-layer model for multilayer
piezoelectric plates. Hwang et al. (1993) used classical laminated plate theory with
the induced strain actuation and Hamilton's principle to formulate the equations of
motion. The first-order shear deformation laminated plate theory was implemented
by Chandrashekhara and Agarwal (1993) into laminated composite plates, which is
applicable for both thin and moderately thick plates. This model takes into account
the mass and stiffness of the piezoelectric patches. A detailed survey and discussion
of the advances and trends in the formulations and application of the finite element
modeling of adaptive structural elements has been presented by Benjeddou (2000)
recently.
Although the finite element method is valid for almost any complex structures and
the dynamic characteristics obtained from the model can accurately approach the
real within a wide frequency range, to make sure that the results have the necessary
accuracy, the finite element model is usually very large for complex structures. More-
over, the mechanical and electric responses are coupled due to the inclusion of the
smart sensors and actuators. This makes the computation very expensive. Actually,
only a small portion of degrees of freedom of the structure is coupled with the electric
responses in a discretely distributed smart structure as mentioned above. If we can
delete or omit most of the degrees of freedom that have nothing to do with the sensors
and actuators, a lot of computational time and space can be saved.
The model reduction for the finite element model with electric degrees of freedom
has been mentioned in Chapter 4. Because the mass concerning the electric degrees of
freedom is zero, Guyan condensation can exactly delete the electric degrees of freedom
from the governing equations of motion. In this section, the general case for the model
reduction of the finite element model of smart structures will be demonstrated.
9.3.2 Theory of Laminated Composite Plates

Strain-Displacement Relationship
Consider a fiber- reinforced laminate composite plate containing discretely distributed
piezoelectric patches as sensors and actuators that can be either bonded on the surface
or embedded inside the plate. Let the x-y-plane coincide with the mid-plane of the
plate, with the z-axis being normal to the mid-plane as shown in Figure 9.8.
Based on the first-order shear deformation plate theory (FSDT) (Owen and Hinton,
1980), the displacements at any point within the composite plate can be written as
(1)
z(w)
8y
I------Ah~::...... y(v)
x (u)
Figure 9.8 Laminated composite plate with its coordinates.
where u, v, and ware the displacements in the x-, y-, and z-directions; 8x and 8y
are the rotations of a transverse normal about the x- and y-axes, respectively. In
Eq. (1), the displacements in the mid-plane are not considered. In the FSDT, the
straight lines originally normal to the mid-plane will remain straight, but they will
not remain normal to the mid-plane during bending. Instead, they will rotate through
angular displacements 8x and 8Y' independent of the transverse displacement w or its
derivatives W,x and W,y' This allows transverse shear strains and stresses to develop
during bending.
If there is no initial strain, the strain-displacement relationship in a Cartesian
coordinate system is given by
Ex u,x
Ey V,y
€=!~·l= Yxy
Yyz
U,y+v,x
'~:y':"':f(
(2)
Yxz W,x + 8y
! I
where, the subscripts "f" and "s" denote the strains corresponding to the flexural and
shear. Using Eq. (1), we can write the flexural strain in Eq. (2) as
€f ==
ZK Z
8y,x
-8x ,y (3)
8y ,y - 8x ,x
where the vector K is called the bending curvature.
Constitutive Relations
A laminated composite plate usually consists of a finite number, N, of thin layers

oriented at an arbitrary angle 8k with respect to the laminate coordinate axes. Here,
the number of layers includes the layers of the sensors and actuators. The lamina
coordinate or material coordinate denoted by the XI-X2-x3-axes can be obtained from
(x, y, z) by rotating the x-y-plane counterclockwise by an angle 8k about the z-axis.
For a fiber-reinforced composite lamina, the Xl -axis is defined parallel to the fibers,
and the X3 -axis is defined normal to the plane. For a piezoelectric layer, the Xl -axis
is defined as the stretching (rolling) direction for uniaxially stretched PVDF films
(biaxially stretched PVDF films and piezoceramics behave isotropically in the Xl-X2-
plane), and the x3-axis is the poling axis. In either case, the x2-axis is determined
according to the right-hand rule (Chandrashekhara and Tenneti, 1995).
The constitutive relations for the kth orthotropic lamina in the principal material
coordinates (Xl-X2-X3) of the lamina are given by (Reddy, 1997)
a-k = Qke k (4)
where a-k and ek are the stress and strain vectors; Qk is the elastic stiffness matrix. In
the FSDT, the stresses and strains are usually divided into two groups that concern
the flexure and shear, respectively. Based on this, Eq. (4) can be rewritten as
Us
0 0]
[ a-~kj ) = [ Qj Qk [e~kj )
s Es
(5)
p; r
where
~k
uJ =
I:.J Q12
ej =
Yl2
~k --
Us [T23) ,
T13
e~ = [Y23)
Y13
Qj= [Q"
~2 Q22 o] , Qk =
s
[Q44
0 Q~5] (6)
0 Q66
The elastic stiffness Qij can be defined in terms of the engineering constants as shown
in Reddy (1997).
In practice, most of the polymer-based composites are constructed by stacking thin
plies made of unidirectional fibers bound by the matrix. Each ply or lamina may have
a different orientation to the others, and it is necessary to consider the stresses and
strains in the laminate coordinate. Define the stress and strain vectors in the laminate
coordinate as
uj = I::]k,
Txy
U} = [Tyz)k,
Txz
Ej = I::
Yxy
]k, E} = [yyz)k
Yxz
(7)
The transformations of the stresses and strains between the material and laminate
coordinates are defined as
k = Tksus
~k
EJ = (k)
T J TEJk, ~k
Es = (k) Tk
Ts Es'
k Tk ~k
u J = JUJ' US
~k
(8)
where
-2mn]
:]
n2
T k=
J
[m'
n2 m2 2mn , T} =[m (9)
-n
mn -mn m2 _ n2
and m = cos e, n = sin e. The stress-strain relationship in laminate coordinate

becomes
(10)
where the transformed elastic stiffness matrices 0.;

and 0.:
corresponding to the
flexure and shear are given in terms of the elastic stiffness matrix Q~ and the Qj,
transformation matrices by
(11)
Principle of Virtual Work

According to the principle of virtual work, the total work done by internal (stresses)
and external forces on any compatible, infinitesimal virtual displacements od is zero,
that is,
oW = oWint - oWext = 0 (12)
The internal virtual work is equal to the actual stresses 0' going through the virtual
strains oe (that corresponding to the imposed virtual displacements). Because the
plate has N layers of laminae, internal virtual work should be the summation of the
virtual work of each layer, that is,
(13)
where V k is the volume of the kth layer of the plate. Considering Eq. (6), we can
rewrite the above equation as
(14)
Introducing Eq. (3) into the above equation, we have
(15)
A is the area. Df and Ds are the flexural and shear stiffness matrix of an anisotropic
plate and are expressed as
L lz0 z2-Qfk dz , L lz0 Qsdz

N I N I _ k
Df = Ds =f.1, (16)
i=1 Zj-J i=1 Zj-J
where /-L is the shear correction coefficient due to the fact that the transverse shear
strains are assumed to be a constant through the laminate thickness (Reddy, 1997).
The elements of the two matrices are given by
N N
(Dij)f = ~ L (Oij);(z~ - zLl)' (Dij)s = /-L L (Oij);(Zk - Zk-l) (17)
k=l k=l
Zk in the above two equations is the vertical distance from the plate mid-plane, Z = 0,
to the upper surface of the kth lamina.
The external virtual work is equal to the actual distributed forces fd, concentrated
forces f', and inertia body forces - pu dV going through the virtual displacement ad,
that is,
9.3.3 Theory of Sensors and Aduators

In developing the model of sensors and actuators, the piezoelectric elements are
assumed to be perfectly bonded to the structure with zero glue thickness. This implies
strain continuity at the interface. While a finite bonding layer will be encountered in
practice, the negative effect of the shear lag losses will be compensated to some extent
by the increase in net moment loading as the shear stresses induced by the actuators
are displaced from the neutral surface of the plate (Chandrashekhara and Tenneti,
1995).
The linear piezoelectric constitutive equations coupling the elastic field and the elec-
tric field can be expressed by the direct piezoelectric equations and converse piezoelectric
equations (Reddy, 1997) as follows:
! ~f!s
C1
= [Qf
0
0]
Qs
!~f!_
Es
[e!]E
es
(converse effect) (19)
b=[ef esJ!i!+EE (direct effect) (20)
where b and E are the electric displacements (charge/area) and electric fields
(volt/length); ef and es are the piezoelectric moduli matrices corresponding to the
p
flexure and shear; E is the dielectric constant matrix. They are defined as (Reddy, 1997)
ef~
e31
0
0
e32
0]
o ,
e36
e, ~ [~4 e~5] (21)
[Ell 0
E:,]
E= 0 E22 (22)
0 0
The piezoelectric moduli matrix can be expressed in another form as
(23)
in which the piezoelectric strain constant matrices are defined as
o
00,
0] (24)
d32 0
Using Eq. (23), Eqs. (19) and (20) become
I~~) = [~ ~J (I i )- [1;] E) (converse effect) (25)
b = [dfQf dsQs] I~ ) +EE (direct effect) (26)
Induced Stresses in the Actuators

The strain in the actuators can be derived from the converse piezoelectric equa-
tion (25). When there is no stress field to be applied to the actuator layer, the strains
developed by the electric field on the actuator layer are given by
(27)
where eA denotes the induced strains in the kth actuator layer. The corresponding
stresses are given by
(28)
In the laminate coordinate, Eq. (28) becomes
(29)
The transformed piezoelectric strain constant matrices are given by

- -1 - -1
df = TEdfTf ' ds = TEdsTs (30)
where
~J
-n
= TE ~ ,
U
EA TE = m (31)
0
When the voltage VA is applied to the actuator of the thickness tA in the thickness
direction only, the electric fields are expressed as
(32)
Substituting Eq. (32) into Eq. (29) results in
(33)
where
(34)
Charge in the Piezoelectric Sensor

The direct piezoelectric equation (26) is used to calculate the output charge induced
by the strains. Since no external electric field is applied to the sensor layer, the electric
displacement developed on the sensor surface is directly proportional to the strain
acting on the sensor. Equation (26) can be rewritten in the laminate coordinates as
(35)
If the poling direction is z, the z-component of electric displacement can be derived

from Eq. (35):
(36)
The total charge developed on the sensor is given by (Lee, 1990)
(37)
where A is the effective surface electrode of the patch. The effective electrode is
the portion of the patch covered by electrodes on both sides. The electric charge
generated due to the external mechanical disturbance will be detected only if the
charge is collected through the effective surface electrode. In the present analysis,
it will be assumed that the entire piezoelectric patch serves as the effective surface
electrode. Substituting Eq. (36) into Eq. (37) and using Eq. (3) results in
(38)
in which zg is the vertical distance from the mid-plane of the laminate to the mid-plane
of the sensor.
Feedback Control
The actuator and sensor equations have been developed separately. For an improved
system performance, they have to be used in conjunction to form a closed-loop control
system. When piezoelectric sensors are used as strain rate sensors, the output charge
can be transformed to voltage as follows. The current on the surface of a sensor can
be obtained by differentiating the charge with respect to time, that is, i(t) = dq( t) / dt.
The current is converted into sensor voltage Vs by
. dq(t)
Vs = Rt(t) = R----;{t (39)
where R is the gain of current amplifier. If negative velocity feedback control is applied,
the sensor voltage is fed back to the actuator multiplied by feedback gain G, that is,
dq(t)
VA = GVs = GR--
dt
(40)
Virtual Work
The virtual work done by the active stresses in the actuator can be expressed as
(41)
where VA is the volume of the actuator. Substituting Eq. (33) into Eq. (41) and using
Eqs. (40), (38), and (3) results in
(42)
in which ~ is the vertical distance from the mid-plane of the laminate to the mid-
plane of the actuator;
(43)
9.3.4 Finite Element Formulations and Reduction

Eight-node serendipity isoparametric elements with three degrees of freedom at each
node are used in the following. The nodal displacement vector is defined as
(44)
in which
(i = 1,8) (45)
The displacements at any point within the element are defined as the sum of the
products of the shape functions and their corresponding nodal displacements:
(46)
where N is the shape function matrix. Based on the physical meaning of the shape
function, the Ni can be easily derived (Owen and Hinton, 1980; Carroll, 1999).
Introducing Eq. (46) into Eq. (2), we can express the flexural and shear strains as
(47)
where Bf and Bs are the strain-displacement matrices for flexure and shear and
defined as
Bs = [BSI Bs2 ... BS8] (48)
in which the submatrices are given by
Bsi = [Nl,y (49)

Ni,x
Substituting Eq. (47) into Eqs. (15) and (42) leads to
8Wint = 8d T [1 (BJ DfBf + B; DsBs) dA] d (50)
8W~t = 8d T[GRzgz~ r aT dA r adA] d (51)

lAA lAS
where the matrix a is defined as
(52)
Introducing Eq. (46) into Eq. (18) results in
Using Eqs. (50), (51), and (53), the dynamic equilibrium equations of the element
with or without sensors/actuators can be obtained from Eq. (12) as
(54)
where the mass, damping, stiffness matrices, and force vector are defined as
N
m= L { NTpkNdV (55)
k=! lVk
c= GRzg4 { aT dA { adA (56)
lAA lAS
k = 1 BJDfBfdA+ 1B;DsBsdA (57)
f= {NTfddA+ LNTfi (58)

lA j
Assembling all these element matrices and vector will result in the dynamic
equilibrium equations for the whole system,
(59)
where M, C, and K are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the whole
structure; X, ie, and X are the displacement, velocity, and acceleration vector under
the external force vector F.
In the dynamic condensation, the masters usually include (1) the degrees of free-
dom on which the responses are interested and (2) those that are coupled with the
degrees of freedom of the sensors and actuators. Based on this division, Eq. (59) can
be rewritten in a partitioned form as
[ Mmm
Msm
Mms]
Mss
{~m}
Xs
+ [Cmm
Csm
Cms]
Css
{~m}
Xs
+ [Kmm
Ksm
Kms] {Xm} = {Fm}
Kss Xs Fs
(60)
Since all the degrees of freedom associated with the sensors and actuators are selected
as masters, the submatrices Cms, Csm , and Css are zeros. Thus, the second equation of
Eq. (60) can be rewritten as
(61)
which leads to the governing equation of the dynamic condensation matrix, namely,
(62)
Equation (62) is identical to the governing equation in Section 6.3. Thus, the same
iterative schemes may be used to compute the dynamic condensation matrix R. When
this matrix is available, the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the reduced model
are defined as
MR = Mmm +RTMsm +MmsR+RTMssR

KR = Kmm + RTKsm + KmsR + RTKssR (63)
CR = Cmm + RT Csm + CmsR + RT CssR = Cmm

Finally, the dynamic equations of equilibrium of the reduced model are given by
(64)
Because all the degrees of freedom of the sensors and actuators are selected as masters,
the dynamic condensation matrix resulting from the second equation of Eq. (60) is
independent of the damping caused by the smart materials. This feature is very useful
in the design of smart structures. When the parameters of the sensors and actuators,
such as gains, piezoelectric strain constants, change, we do not need to recalculate the
reduced model if the position of the sensors and actuators is fixed.

A square laminated composite plate with collocated sensors and actuators, shown
in Figure 9.9, is considered. Its four sides are simply supported. The properties of
the plate, AS/3501-6 graphite/epoxy, are as follows (Chandrashekhara and Agarwal,
1993):
= 144.23 GPa, E2 = 9.65 GPa,

El
Gl2 = Gl3 = 4.14 GPa, G23 = 3.45 GPa
Ul2 = 0.3, p = 1389.23 kg/m 3
,
,,
A-- _nnmn_nm+_+__\nnnmnm -n A
Section A- A
o Sensor • Actuator
Figure 9.9 Simply supported plate with sensor and actuator.

The piezoceramic PZT G 1195 with the following properties is used:
E = 63.0 GPa, v = 0.28, p = 7,600 kg/m3,

d31 = d32 = 180.0 x 10- 12 mN
The side length of the plate is 1.0 m. Its thickness is 0.01 m. The thickness of the piezo-
ceramic patch is taken as 0.001 m. The composite plate composes by four symmetric
cross-ply layers [0/90/90/0J. An 8 x 8 mesh, shown in Figure 9.10, is used. Therefore,
the number of the total degrees of freedom of the plate is 675. All degrees of freedom
at nodes 85 through 89, 99 through 101, III through 115, 125 through 127, 137
through 141 and the translational degrees of freedom at nodes 57, 65, 161, 169 are
selected as the kept degrees of freedom. The number of them is 21 x 3 + 4 = 67. It is
about one tenth of the full model.
The dynamic equations of the full model, Eq. (59), and the reduced model, Eq. (64),
in the frequency domain may be rewritten as
(k - uiM + jwC)X(w) = F(w) (65)
where j = R. Assume a distributed load, q = 1.0 N /m2, is acting on the area

where the sensor is located. The gains of the amplifier R and feedback control G are
set as 100 and 500. The transverse frequency responses computed from the full and
reduced models are plotted in Figure 9.11. Clearly, the frequency responses obtained
from the reduced model with the initial approximation is very close to the exact
when the frequency is lower than 500 rad/s. The accuracy decreases rapidly with the
-
,
, ~
0 57 2 1 58 2 2 59 2 3 60 2 4 61 2 '5 62 2 6 63 2 7 64 2 8
4 49 1 5 50 1 (; 51 1 7 52 1 8 53 1 9 54 1 0 55 1 1 56 1
" 3
8 41 1 9 42 1 0 43 11 44 1 2 45 1 3 46 1 4 47 1 5 48 1
'"" b" -- '" - -

2 33 1 3 34 1 4 35 1 5 36 1 6 37 1 7 38 1 8 39 1 9 40 1 o
, 0
1
- 25 9 26 g~ 27 9 28 1 a 29 11 30 1 2 31 1 3 32 1
0' o·
": 0' n, '0
7 17 7 18 7~ 19 7 20 "
21 7 22 7 23 71 24 7
- ", '"
,n o· o. 0,
9 4p 10 4~ 11 4 12 13 4 14 5 15 5 16 5
0-
-= 00 0, ," 00
* 2~
1 1 1~ 2 2P 3 2 4 5 2 6 7 8 2
- - 1
Figure 9.10 Finite element grid of the composite plate.

1E4y----------------------------------,
fE-5 --Exact
----- ;=0
! 1E-6 ·········;=1
-.-..... ;=2
i 1E-7
j~
ri' 1£-'9
!l
IT 1E-10
I!!
II-
1E-11
1E-12+-~~~____r~~~~.__~~~__r~~~_r_i
o 1000 .2000 3000 4000
Frequency (rad/s)
(a)
1£~.---------------------------------__,
1E-5 --Exact
----- ;=0
! 16-6 ·········;=1
-.-.-.-. ;=2
'm
31c:
!'E-8
!
ri' 1E-9
,,
c:
AI ','
W1E-10
II-
1E-11
1E-12+-~~~____r~~~~.__~~~__r~~~~
o 1000 2000 3000 4000
Frequency (radls)
(b)
'figure9." Transverse frequency responses: (a) at central point (0.5,0.5); (b) at point (0.25,0.25).
increase of frequency. When the iterative IRS is applied, the accuracy increases very
fast. For the case where i = 1, there is only a litde·difference for the frequency higher
than 3;000 rad/s. The responses are very close to the exact within the frequency range
(0, 4,000)rad/s if i = 2 is used. This indicates that two iterations are enough for the
accuracy of the frequency responses.
When we derive the dynamic condensation matrix, we ignore the forces on the
-slaves because the external forces do not .affect the condensation matrix. If there is
force 'on the slaves, the equivalent force vector of the reduced modd becomes
(66)
Suppose a distributed load, q = 1 N/m2, is acting on all areas of the plate. The
frequency responses resulting from both the full model and the reduced model are
l--Exact -I
1-E·5 ----- i=O I
g - - --i=1
-------- i =2
1/1 1E·6
CII
1/1
C
~
CII
1E-7
"g 1E-8
,
,,
CI>
~ .'.,,
1E·9 '.,
II.
'.
1000 2000 3000 4000
Frequency (rad/s)
(a)
1e4 ---~-~----------:l
'--Exact I
1E·5
----- i=O
g ---------i=1
I'
1/1 ------- i=2

1E·6
$
8. 1E·7
~
~
i
..".
1e·8
~ ,
r:r
I!!
II. 110·9
."",,
"
1E.10
0 1000 2000 3000
Frequency (radls)
(b)
Figure 9.12 Transverse frequency responses with forces at slaves: (a) at central point (0.5,0.5); (b) at
point (0.25,0.25).
plotted in Figure 9.12. The accuracy resulting from the initial approximation is very
low while two iterations make the results very close to the exact.
9.4 Structural Systems with Local Nonlinearities

9.4.1 Introduction
There are many kinds of nonlinear engineering systems that have a large number
of degrees of freedom but nonlinear components are spatially localized. Examples
of such systems are rotating mechanical systems with nonlinear bearing supports,
mechanical systems with dry friction and backlash phenomena in certain connections,
vibration control systems with local nonlinear springs and/or dampers, etc. The
nonlinearities in these models are generally local in the sense that the force in the
nonlinear components may be determined by a small number of degrees of freedom.
From a spatial point of view, although the local nonlinearities constitute only a small
part of the mechanical system, the dynamic behavior of the system is wholly nonlinear.
The numerical analysis of the dynamic behavior of these kinds of models generally
needs more computing time and may cause computational problems. How to treat
such systems is an important problem for nonlinear analysis (Fey et al., 1996).
The simplest method is directly to solve the large order of dynamic model using
direct integration with iteration in time domain. Obviously, this method is very
computationally expensive. Recently, several reduction methods have been proposed
to solve this problem. In these methods, the nonlinear equations of motion are
transformed into a set of condensed simultaneous nonlinear algebraic equations.
If the number of these coordinates is very small compared to that of the entire system,
a substantial reduction of computational work will be expected.
Feyet aI., (1996) studied the long-term behavior of the mechanical system with local
nonlinearity using component mode synthesis technique. This method was also used
by Nataraj and Nelson, 1989). A modal transformation method was used by Zheng
and Hasebe (1999) to reduce the number of degrees of freedom of the linear subset.
These works not only save computing time but also avoid the convergence difficulty
in numerical calculation. However, the reduced models obtained from these methods
are defined in general coordinates or modal coordinates, and the calculation of the
eigenvalues and eigenvectors are required before using these approaches.
Rouch and Kao (1980) and Subbiah et al. (1989) implemented Guyan/static reduc-
tion method into rotor dynamics to arrive at a reduced size model. Mclean and Hahn
(1983) proposed a solution technique with a static reduction to evaluate the response
of the system. Shiau and Jean (1990) developed a reduction technique, which is sim-
ilar to Guyan reduction, to link the harmonic balance method for investigating the
periodic synchronous and nonsynchronous response of large-order nonlinear rotor
dynamic systems.
Static condensation, Paz's dynamic condensation, IRS, and SEREP were imple-
mented into the dynamic systems with local nonlineartities by Friswell, Penny, and
Garvey (1995). Shortly after, they utilized IRS, SEREP, modal reduction, and balanced
realization method to the same problem (1996). Static condensation, IRS, especially
the iterative IRS, were implemented into the structural systems with local nonlinear-
ities by Qu and Selvam (2001) and Qu (2002). These model reduction schemes were
performed both on the system level and on the substructure level.
9.4.2 Model Reduction

The dynamic equations of equilibrium of a locally nonlinear system with n .degrees
of freedom can be expressed as
MX + ex + (KL + KN)X = F (1)
where the nonlinear stiffness matrix KN is usually a function of displacements.

e is assumed to be the proportional damping matrix. For convenience, Eq. (1)
is sometimes rewritten as (Zheng and Hasebe, 1999)
MX+CX +KLX =F+G(X) (2)
The nonlinear force vector G(X) is related to the nonlinear components of the system.
It can be expressed as a nonlinear function of the displacements at positions associated
with the nonlinear components, that is,
(3)
If the total degrees of freedom of the full model are divided into masters and slaves,
Eq. (1) can be partitioned as
(4)
As shown in Section 6.3, the relation of the displacements between the masters and
slaves is defined by the dynamic condensation matrix. Using this condensation matrix,
the following transformation is defined:
(5)
where R is the dynamic condensation matrix. Since the dynamic condensation matrix
is independent of time, we have
(6)
Introducing Eqs. (5) and (6) into Eq. (4) and premultiplying it by the transpose of
matrix T leads to
.. • L N
MRXm + CRXm + KRXm + KRXm = FR (7)
The reduced system matrices and force vector in Eq. (7) are defined as
MR = TTMT =Mmm +RTMsm +MmsR+RTMssR (8a)
K~ = TTKLT = K~m + RTK;m + K~sR + RTK;R (8b)
CR = aMR + ,8K~ (8c)
KZX = TTKNT = K~m +RTK! +K~sR+RTK~R (8d)

FR = TTF = Fm +RTFs (8e)
Generally, the masters include those degrees of freedom on which the dynamic char-
acteristics are directly interested. For the nonlinear model, the masters should also
include those on which the nonlinear force vector G is directly dependent. This means
that all the degrees of freedom that are important to specify the nonlinearities should
be kept as masters. Since the nonlinearities are lm;ally populated, the number of these
degrees of freedom is comparatively small. Based on this selection, we have
N
Kms = (N)T
Ksm = 0, (9)
Consequently, the nonlinear stiffness matrix of the reduced model defined in Eq. (8d)
becomes
(10)
Equation (10) indicates that the nonlinear part of the reduced model is independent
of the dynamic condensation matrix and Can be obtained directly from the full model,
The major steps for the model reduction of structural systems with local
nonlinearities at the system level are listed as follows.
L Construct the mass, damping, linear stiffness matrices, and external force vector,
2. Compute the dynamic condensation matrix using the iterative method described
in Section 6.4.
3. Formulate the mass, damping, linear stiffness matrices, and force vector of the
reduced model using Eq. (8).
4. Assemble the nonlinear components into the reduced system matrices to
construct the reduced global model of the whole system.
It should be noticed that the effect of the nonlinear properties on the dynamic
condensation matrix is not considered. When the nonlineartities are locally located
or do not have much effect on the global properties, this approximation is accept-
able. Consequently, the present approach is usually valid for the system with local
nonlinearities.

Beam-Spring System
A simple system shown in Figure 9.13 will be considered at first. It consists of two
identical beams connected by six springs. The properties of the two beams are total
length L = 2.0 m, area of the cross section A == 2.4 X 10- 4 m 2, area moment of inertia
=
of the section I == 8.9 X 10-9 m\ modulus of elasticity E 2.0 X lOll N/m2, mass
density p = 7,800 kg/m3. The linear stiffness of the springs is k = 2.0 X 105 N/m.
Also, the six sErings are assumed to be nonlinear with a cubic stiffening nonlinearity
=
B 2.0 x 10 4 N/m 3. This means that the spring forcefor an absolute displacement
x is f =kx + Bx 3 • The two beams are both discretized by the finite element method.
Each beam has a total of 20 elements, 21 nodes, and 42 degrees of freedom. Therefore,
the full global model has a total of 82 degrees of freedom.
Many methods can be implemented to solve the nonlinear dynamic equations (l)
and (7) in the frequency domain. Some typical versions are the perturbation method,
Ritz, Galerkin, and harmonic balance methods. The detailed information about these
methods can be found in Lewandowski (1997). The harmonic balance method is used
to solve the nonlinear equations herein.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
k B k: ~B k· ~B k: B k B k: ~B
22 42
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41A
Figure 9.13 Schematic of a beam-spring compound system,
Assume that the excitations have the form of F :::;: Fo sin(wt), If only the periodic
motions are considered, the steady state response is expressed as
m
Xi :::;: I>ij cos(jwt) + bij sin(jwt) (11)
j=!
For simplicity, only the first two terms, which have the same harmonic with the
excitation, are considered to calculate the response, that is,
Xi :::;: ai cos(wt) + bi sin(wt) (12)
The corresponding amplitude is given by
IXil : :;: Jat +bt (13)
Introducing Eq. (12) into Eqs. (1) or (7) gives a set of simultaneous polynomials in
the constant aj and hi. These nonlinear polynomial equations can be solved using the
Newton-Raphson method.
Assume a unit force is acted on node 9 at the transverse direction. The amplitude~
frequency relation curves (backbone curves) at nodes 9 and 30 resulting from the
full global model are plotted in Figure 9.14 and indicated by "N." "9" and "30" are
node numbers. For simplicity, the jumps of the amplitudes are kept in these curves.
Therefore, they are not exact backbone curves. Although they are approximate, they
will serve the purpose to check the accuracy of the reduced model. The transverse
frequency responses at nodes 9 and 30 for the system without nonlinear springs,
indicated by "L;' are also plotted in Figure 9 .14 for comparison, In these four curves,
the proportional damping, C:::;: 2 x lO-sK, is assumed for the two beams. For con-
venience, the amplitude-frequency curves of the nonlinear system are also called
frequency responses.
The transverse degrees of freedom at nodes 1,5,9, 13, 17,21,7, 15 in the upper
beam .and those at nodes 22, 26, 30, 34,38,42, 28, 36 in the under beam are selected as
the masters when the dynamic condensation method is applied. Hence, the reduced
model has 16 degrees of freedom including the two fixed oneS. After the linearly
reduced model is available, the nonlinear springs are directly assembled to formulate
the reduced global model. Again, the harmonic balance method is used to solve the
nonlinear equations of the reduced model.
The frequency responses of the reduced model at nodes 9 and 30 in the transverse
directions are plotted in Fig. 9.15, respectively. The exact results are also plotted
in the figures for comparison. The accuracy of the frequency responses resulting
from the initial approximation of the reduced model is very low, especially for the
10°
10-1 --L9
----- L30
10.2 --N9
----- N30
10.3
LI. 10-4
0:::
LI.
10.5
10.6
10.7
10-8
0 300 600 900 1200 1500
Frequency (rad/s)
Figure 9.14 Frequency responses with and without nonlinear springs.
frequency responses at a high-frequency range. With the increase of the number of

iterations, the frequency responses approach the exact solution quickly. The frequency
responses resulting from the second approximation, for example, are very close to the
exact except at the jump around 1,000 rad/s. The reason for the discrepancy at this
jump is that these curves are not exact backbone curves. Actually, the difference of
the approximate responses between i = 2 and the exact is very small.
For the second example, the floating-raft isolation system used in Section 8.2 is
considered. It contains springs, dampers, machines to be isolated, a raft frame, and a
base. It is very difficult to construct a reasonable dynamic model by using multirigid
body method or elastic wave analysis method when the raft frame and the base are
a little complex, when their elasticity is to be considered, and when there are local
nonlinearities (Qu, 1998).
One spring with cubic stiffening nonlinearity, B = 5 x 10 1O N/m 3 , is mounted
under masses 1 and 2, respectively. For both plates, the damping is considered to be
proportional to their stiffness matrices and the ratio is 0.0003. The other parameters
are the same as those in Section 8.2. The base and the raft are discretized by the finite
element method. The base has 14 rectangular elements, 24 nodes, and 72 degrees of
freedom. The raft has 24 rectangular elements, 35 nodes, and 105 degrees of freedom.
Therefore, the full global model has a total of 167 degrees of freedom except the fixed.
Select the translational degrees of freedom at m] and node 11 on the base as the input
and output degrees of freedom, respectively. The frequency responses obtained from
the full global finite element model are plotted in Figure 9.16. They are considered as
the exact for comparison purpose.
§J
1~r---------------------------------'
ct
10" ...••. ;=0
....... ;=1
......... /=2
300 600 900 1200 1500

Frequency (rad/s)
(a)
10.1
--Exact
10"
······;=0
......... ;=1
10" •...•.•.. ;=2
u.
IX
u. 10'"
10"
10.7
300 600 900 1200 1500

Frequency (radls)
(b)
Figure 9.15 Frequency responses of reduced model: (a) node 9; (b) node 30.
The translational displacements in the z·direction at nodes 1,3,5,7,15,17,19,21,

29,31,33,35 on the raft, at nodes 7,12,13,18,8,11,14,17,9,10,15,16 on the base,
and at masses 1 and 2 are selected as the masters. The frequency responses resulting
from the initial approximation of the reduced global model are shown in Figure 9.16
and indicated by "SY': The relative errors of the frequency responses obtained from
the reduced global models with different approximations are plotted in Figure 9.17.
Clearly, the accuracy of frequency responses resulting from the initial approximation
is very low. Most errors are higher than 10%. When the iteration is applied, the errors
reduce very quickly. The maximum errors, for example, reduce to 11.7%,4.1%, and
1.9% after 1,2, and 3 iterations are implemented.
10"
10·'
10-6
10.7
10-6
La. 10.9
a:::
La.
10.10
10.11
10.12
10.13
10.14
0 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 9.16 Frequency responses of the floating-raft isolation system.
10°
10.1
10.2
...
e... 10-3
w
10"
10-6
10-6
0 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 9.17 Error of the frequency responses of reduced model.
9.5 Summary
The implementation of dynamic condensation technique to the primary-secondary
systems has been demonstrated in this chapter using three numerical examples. They
are active vibration control of high building with an active tuned mass damper, finite
element modeling of composite plate with distributed piezoelectric materials, and

finite element modeling of systems with local nonlinearities. It has been shown that
the size of the global model is reduced significantly by using the dynamic condensation
techniques while the dynamic properties of the full global model are kept accurately
in the reduced global model.
References
Abiru, H, Fujishiro, M, and Matsumoto, T (1994) Tuned active dampers installed in the
Yokokama Landmark Tower. JSME International Journal, Series C: Dynamics, Control,
Robotics, Design and Manufacturing, 37(3):450-455.
Ankireddi, S and Yang, HTY (1996) Simple ATMD control methodology for tall buildings
s\lbject to wind loads. Journal of Structural Engineering, 122(1):83-91.
Benjeddou, A (2000) Advances in piezoelectric finite element modeling of adaptive structural elements:
A survey. Computers and Structures, 76(1-3):347-363.
Bernal, D (1999) A dynamic stiffness formulation for the analysis of secondary systems. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28( II): 1295-1308.
Burton, TD, Hemez, FM, and Rhee, W (2000) A combined model reduction/SVD approach to nonlinear
model updating. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference, (San Antonio, Texas),
Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 116-123.
Carroll, WF (1999) A primer for finite elements in elastic structures. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Chandrashekhara, K and Agarwal, AN (1993) Active vibration control oflaminated composite plates using
piezoelectric devices: A finite element approach. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures,
4(4):496-508.
Chandrashekhara, K and Tenneti, R (1995) Thermally induced vibration suppression of laminated plates
with piezoelectric sensors and actuators. Smart Materials and Structures, 4(4):281-290.
Chee, CYK, Tong, L, and Steven, GP (1998) A review on the modeling of piezoelectric sensors and actuators
incorporated in intelligent structures. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 9(1):
3-19.
Cheu, TC, Johnson, CP, and Craig Jr, RR (1986) Selection of initial vectors for subspace iteration method.
Proceedings of the 4th International Modal Analysis Conference (Los Angeles, CAl, Union College,
Fey, RHB, van Campen, DH, and de Kraker, A (1996) Long-term structural dynamics of mechanical systems
with local nonlinearities. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 118(2):147-153.
Friswell, MI, Penny, JET, and Garvey, SD (1995) Using linear model reduction to investigate the dynamics
of structures with local non-linearities. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 8(3):317-328.
Friswell, MI, Penny, JET, and Garvey, SD (1996) The application of IRS and balanced realization methods
to obtain reduced model of structures with local non-linearities. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
196(4):453-468.
Gaudenzi, P, Giarda, D, and Morganti, F (1999) Active microvibration control of an optical payload installed
on the ARTEMIS spacecraft. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 9(9):740-748.
Guyan, RJ (1965) Reduction of stiffness and mass matrix. AIAA Journal, 3(2):380.
Henchi, K, Fafard, M, Talbot, M, and Dhatt, G (1998) An efficient algorithm for dynamic analysis of bridges
under moving vehicle using a coupled modal and physical components approach. Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 212(4):663-683.
Hyland, BC and Bernstein, DS (1984) The optimal projection equation for fixed order dynamic
condensation. IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 29(11):1034-1037.
Hwang, WS, Park, HC, and Hwang, W (1993) Vibration control of a laminated plate with piezoelectric
sensor/actuator: Finite element formulation and modal analysis. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems
and Structures, 4(3):317-329.
Lee, CK (1990) Theory of laminated piezoelectric plates for the design of distributed sensors/actuators,
Part I: Governing equations and reciprocal relationships. Journal of Acoustics Society of American,
87: 1144-1158.
Lewandowski, B (1997) Computational formulation for periodic vibration of geometrically nonlin-
ear structures-Part 1: Theoretical background. International Journal of Solids and Structures,
34(15):1925-1947.
Mackerle, J (2000) Smart materials and structures: FEM and BEM simulations: A bibliography (1997-
1999). Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 37(1):71-83.
Meirovitch, L (1990) Dynamics and Control of Structures. Wiley, New York.
Mclean, LJ and Hahn, EJ (1983) Unbalance behavior of squeeze film damped multi-mass flexible rotor
bearing systems. Journal of Lubrication Technology, 105(1):22-28.
Meyer, S and Link, M (2003) Modeling and updating of local non-linearities using frequency response
residuals. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17 (1) :219-226.
Mills, JK and lng, JGL (1996) Dynamic modeling and control of a multi-robot system for assem-
bly of flexible payloads with applications to automotive body assembly. Journal of Robotic Systems,
13(12):817-836.
Moore, BC (1981) Principal component analysis in linear system: Controllability, observability, and model
reduction. IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 26(1): 17-32.
Nataraj, C and Nelson, HD (1989) Periodic of solutions in rotor dynamic systems with nonlinear sup-
ports: A general approach. Journal of Vibration, Acoustics, Stress, and Reliability in Design, 111(2):
187-193.
O'Caliahan, JC, Koung, RTF, and Chou, C-M (1986) Improved starting vectors for subspace iteration eigen-
solution using dynamic condensation. Proceedings of the 4th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Los Angeles, CAl, Union College, Schenectady, NY: 858-863.
Owen, DRJ and Hinton, E (1980) Finite Elements in Plasticity: Theory and Practice. Swansea, U.K.:
Pineridge Press.
Qu, Z-Q (1998) Structural Dynamic Condensation Techniques: Theory and Applications. Ph.D. Disser-
tation, State Key Laboratory of Vibration, Shock and Noise, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai,
China.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2001) Dynamic superelement for dynamic systems with local nonlineari-
ties. Proceedings of the 42nd AIAAI ASMEIASCEI ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials
Conference (Seattle, WA), AIAA, Reston, VA: 3548-3557.
Qu, Z-Q, Shi, Y, and Hua, H (2001) A reduced order modeling technique for tall buildings with active
tuned mass damper. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 30(3):349-362.
Qu, Z-Q (2001) An efficient modeling method for laminated composite plates with piezoelectric sensors
and actuators. Smart Materials and Structures, 10(4):807-818.
Qu, Z-Q (2002) Model reduction for dynamical systems with local nonlinearities. AIAA Journal,
40(2):327-333.
Rao, SS and Sunar, M (1994) Piezoelectricity and its use in disturbance sensing and control of flexible
structures: A survey. Applied Mechanics Reviews, 47 (4): 113-123.
Reddy, JN (1997) Mechanics of Laminated Composite Plates. New York: CRC Press, Inc.
Rouch, KE and Kao, JS (1980) Dynamic reduction in rotor dynamics by finite element method. Journal of
Mechanical Design, 102(2):360-368.
Shiau, T-N and Jean, A-N (1990) Prediction of periodic response of flexible mechanical systems with
nonlinear characteristics. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 112(3):501-507.
Shiau, TN and Jean, AN (1991) Nonlinear transient analysis of large rotordynamic systems. Journal of
Applied Mechanics, 58(2):596-598.
Skelton, RE and Hughes, PC (1980) Model cost analysis for linear matrix second order systems. Journal of
Dynamic System, Measurement and Control, 102(1):151-158.
Sowmianarayanan, Sand Pradeep, S (1999) Vibration suppression of a spacecraft solar array using on -off
thrusters. Proceedings of the 40th AIAAI ASMEIASCEIAHSIASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and
Materials Conference and Exhibit (St. Louis, MO): 3097-3106.
Soong, TT, Reinhorn, AM, Aizawa, S, and Higashino, M (1994) Recent structural applications of active
control technology. Journal Structural Control, 1(2):15-21.
Subbiah, R, Bhat, RB, and Sankar, TS (1989) Dynamic responses of rotors using modal reduction
techniques. Journal of Vibration, Acoustics, Stress, and Reliability in Design, III (4):360-365.
Sun, L, Krodkiewski, JM, Janusz, M, and Zhang, N (1994) Modeling and analysis of the dynamic behavior
of an active journal bearing. Proceedings of the International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress
and Exposition, ASME New York: 1-6.
Tong, Land Qu, Z-Q (2000) Landing loads of an aircraft on moving ships. Proceedings of the 18th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference & Exhibit (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Bethel, CT: 1745-1747.
Tzou, HS (1989) Integrated distributed sensing and active vibration suppression of flexible manipulators
using distributed piezoeiectrics. Journal of Robotic Systems, 6(5):745-767.
Wilson, DA (1974) Model reduction for multivariable systems. International Journal of Control,
20(1):57-64.
WU, JC, Yang, IN, and Schmitendorf, WE (1998) Reduced-order H oo and LQR control for wind-excited
tall buildings. Engineering Structures, 20(3):222-236.
Yang, IN and Liu, MJ (1982) Optimal critical-mode control of building under seismic load. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, 108(EM6): 1167-1185.
Zhang, L, Yang, CY, Chajes, MJ, and Cheng, AHD (1993) Stability of active tendon structural control with
time delay. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 119(5): 10 17-1024.
Zheng, T and Hasebe, N (1999) An efficient analysis of high-order dynamical system with local nonlinearity.
10 Application II: Model Reduction on Component
Level-Superelement Modeling Technique
10.1 Introduction
In the preceding chapter, the application of the dynamic condensation technique in
model reduction of large size of discrete models on the system level is demonstrated
by three examples. The results show that the computational effort could be reduced
significantly after the implementation of the dynamic condensation technique.
The dynamic condensation technique may also be implemented to reduce the size
of the finite element model at the substructure or component level (Leung, 1979, 1988;
Bouhaddi and Fillod, 1992; Qu and Selvam, 2000). This is, actually, a combination
of the dynamic substructure technique and dynamic condensation technique. Due
to the large number of published materials on this topic, some of them are listed in
Table 10.1 for reference purposes. All the papers referred to in this table are listed in
the bibliography at the end of this book.
Table 10.1 Applications of dynamic condensation techniques at component level
J!&dInclmelArllcben (1974); Subbiah. Bhat, and Sudw (1989); Cardona

melGeridin (1992); Hemcz (l997a); Go, Lin. Lin, and Wu (1998); Peide
mel Xing (l998);)anal.,.. and ICaIcinm (2000); Qu and Sclwm (2000);
Qu IDCI SeIvam (2001); Kim (2003); Qu (2002)
Cusical cIyDamic Yana mel Lin (1995)
CYlIIdcnM'ion
EDct ClOadenatioD KubIr and Stahle (1974); Leuna (1979); Lcuos (1988); Boubaddi and PiIIod
(indwliDa i vviaats) (1992); BeIyi (1993); Bema1 (1999)
IRS FIanipn (1991); Qu and SeIvam (2000); Qu aad SeIvun (2001); Qu (2002)
Iterative IRS Qu and SeIvam (2000); Qu aad SeIvam (2001); Qu (2002)
Modal reduction Gblaim aad Martin (1984); Kammer aad FIanipn (1991); Subbiah, Bhat.
SEREP aad Sudw (1989); Clliao (1992. 1996)
Modal coordinate Lu et at. (1990)
reduction
255
Full Global Mode!
Figure 10.1 Schematic of reduced finite element modeling on the component level.
There are a large number of structural systems, referred to as compound systems,

that consist of one or more flexible components or substructures. Several examples of
these systems are machines together with their isolation system such as floating-raft
isolation systems (Qu, 1998; Li et al., 1997), vehicle-bridge systems (Yang and Lin,
1995), and rotor dynamic systems (Shiau and Jean, 1990). For these systems, the finite
element method is usually used to discretize these flexible components at first. Then,
these full finite element models are assembled together with the springs, dampers, and
concentrated masses to formulate the global model of the whole system. This is the
most accurate modeling approach for these kinds of complex systems. However, to
guarantee the accuracy of the final model, these finite element models of substructures
can be quite large. This leads to a very large-size global model of the whole system.
The dynamic condensation technique may be implemented to reduce the full
models of these components before assembling. Generally, four major steps are
required in the implementation:
1. Divide a structural system into flexible substructures and other components such
as connections.
2. Formulate the full finite element model for each flexible substructure.
3. Construct the reduced finite element model for each substructure using the
dynamic condensation technique.
4. Construct the global model by assembling the reduced models of all the flexible
substructures and other components.
The schematic of the implementation of dynamic condensation technique on the

component level is shown in Figure 10.1, only two components are considered for
simplicity.
As shown in this figure, the full global model is obtained by assembling the full
finite element models of all components and the connections. This procedure is
denoted by the full-full modeling scheme for brevity. Similarly, the assemblage of the
reduced finite element models of all components results in the reduced global model,
and this procedure is called the reduced-reduced modeling scheme. Depending upon
the model reduction schemes utilized to generate the reduced model, various sys-
tem modeling approaches are available for the compound systems (Avitabile et aI.,
1997).
Application II: Model Reduction on Component Level-Superelement Modeling Technique 257
The model reduction schemes on the system level and on the component level both
have strengths and weaknesses. Usually, the accuracy of the former is higher than the
latter because some useful information might be lost if the condensation approach is
not properly utilized at the component level.
Because the number of the degrees of freedom of each substructure is much smaller
than that of the global model, the computation of the dynamic condensation matrix
on the substructure level is much more efficient than on the system level. If there
are identical substructures, the corresponding reduced models are only required to
construct once and, hence, much computational work can be saved. The model
reduction on the component level makes hybrid modeling possible. This means that
different modeling approaches, including analytical modeling (finite element method,
finite difference method, boundary element method, etc.) and experimental modeling
may be utilized for different components. Different components may be modeled
and analyzed at different places and different times. Furthermore, the components
with nonlinearities will not affect the dynamic condensation performed on the linear
components.
10.2 Concepts of Superelement Modeling

A superelement is a group of finite elements in which part of the degrees of freedom
is condensed out for computational and modeling purposes. Generally, the regular
finite element has very simple shapes, e.g., triangular, rectangular, quadrilateral, etc.
Using the superelement technique, several such regular finite elements are combined
to form a superelement that may have an arbitrary shape, size, and material properties.
Due to this feature, the superelement is very useful in local analysis of structures
with complex local geometry. Two popular examples of such a case are the stress
concentration problem (De Langhe et al., 1997) and crack analysis (Go, 1998; van
Vroonhoven and de Borst, 1999).
A random assortment of elements does not necessarily make up a superelement.
To be considered as a superelement, the element group must meet certain physical
and mathematical conditions (Felippa, 2002). Physically, the group of finite elements
may form a structural component on their own. Mathematically, these assembled
elements should be rank-sufficient.
Several terms such as macroelement, substructure, subdomain, and macromodel
may be frequently encountered in the literature. Their concepts overlap in many
respects (Felippa, 2002). The macroelement is a superelement assembled with a few
primitive elements and presented to program users as an individual element. The
substructure is a part of a complete structural system that may consist of one or more
physical components of the system. The subdomain is a group of finite elements
that are entirely motivated by computational considerations, particularly, parallel
computation. Subdomains are subdivisions of the finite element model done more
or less automatically by domain decomposition. Macromodel is frequently used in
multiphysics modeling such as microelectromechanical system (MEMS). It is essen-
tially a reduced order model of a complex model which is able to accurately capture
multi-energy-domain physics of the system.
The term "superelement" is used deliberately in this book instead of "substructure"
in order to emphasize the fact that the superelement can be treated in the same way
as a regular finite element. Also, a superelement does not need to represent a clearly
limited structural unit, which is normally understood by the term "substructure." For
example, one superelement may cover the region surrounding the fillet in a crank
shaft having a much finer element mesh than the superelements on each side of the
fillet. The former superelement is capable of reproducing the stress concentration
and the others the correct stiffness properties and boundary conditions (Egeland and
Araldsen, 1974; De Langhe et al., 1997).
Dynamic condensation is the most frequently used technique to formulate the
superelement although many other schemes are also available in the literature (Law
et al., 2001a, 2001b). The superelement modeling method generally consists of three
principal stages. At first a complete structure is decomposed into two or more sub-
structures. These substructures may have different geometries. However, it is better to
make them as identical as possible. As shown in Figure 10.2, the shear wall is divided
into three substructures. These substructures have the same shape. Thus, only one
substructure needs to be considered to formulate the superelement.
The next stage is to construct a superelement for each substructure. Generally,
the finite element method is utilized to discretize the substructures and construct
the corresponding full finite element models. For each substructure the nodes that
are common to adjoining substructures are categorized as boundary nodes, as shown
in Figure 10.3. The degrees of freedom on these nodes are called boundary degrees
of freedom. Those nodes that are not at the boundary of a substructure are catego-
rized as interior nodes. The associated degrees of freedom are called interior degrees
of freedom. In this stage, the substructure is usually finely meshed to capture some
important information. For the shear wall, because each substructure is a combi-
nation of beams, columns, shear walls, and slabs, the connectivity difficulty will
happen if a coarse grid is used in the finite element modeling. To solve this prob-
lem, the substructure should be finely meshed, which leads to a relatively large-size
model.
These full finite element models of substructures may be directly assembled to
formulate the global finite element model of the complete structure. This can simplify
the modeling process for complex structures, particularly when these structures have
identical components. However, there is not any benefit for computational purposes.
Figure 10.2 Two-dimensional shear wall and substructures.

D D
c Boundary Nodes
• Internal Nodes
Figure 10.3 Formulation of superelement.
Figure 10.4 Assemblage of superelements.
Therefore, schemes such as condensation methods are usually used to remove part
or all of the internal degrees of freedom before the assemblage. The resulting model
of each substructure has many fewer degrees of freedom than that of the full model.
The reduced model can be treated as a large finite element with its own set of discrete
shape functions and is, hence, called a superelement.
At last, all superelements are assembled to formulate the reduced global model
of the complete structure just as the common finite elements would be, as shown
in Figure IDA. The size of the reduced global model obtained from this technique is
usually much smaller than that of the full global model directly derived from the finite
element method, as indicated in Figure 10.5. Any static and dynamic analyses could
be directly performed on the reduced global model. The back-substitution based on
the condensation matrix may be used when the information on the interior degrees
of freedom of any substructure is required.
Another group of superelements is also available in the literature (Koko and Olson,
1991; Jiang and Olson, 1993a, 1993b, 1994; Nurse, 2001; Ahmadian and Zangeneh,
2003). The formulation of these superelements is mainly for the modeling of spe-
cial problems. Thus, the model reduction may not necessarily be applied to the
components. In the development of the superelement for stiffened plates and shells,
~ ///////'///
Figure 10.5 Full finite element model of a shear wall.
for example, the usual polynomials are augmented by specially chosen analytical
functions so that only one shell element per panel bay and one beam element per
span are needed to achieve engineering design-level accuracy. As a consequence,
the structural modeling is relatively simple and requires less data manipulation and
computational time. The discussion on this topic is beyond the scope of this book.
Interested readers may find the details from the references.
The superelement modeling technique has been frequently utilized in the finite
element modeling of complex structural systems. Using this technique, the size of
finite element models may be reduced to the manageable size before a complete
model is formulated. Although the size of the reduced model is much smaller than the
regular finite element model, some detailed information may be retained as required.
The advantage of superelement modeling technique is even more salient for identical
substructures because the method requires the handling of just one representative
substructure. Since the features of a superelement are similar to those of a regular
finite element, the superelement modeling formulation can be easily incorporated
into a standard, general-purpose finite element code to perform further analyses
of large complex structures using the program's original solution capabilities. This
technique has been incorporated into many commercial finite element analysis codes
such as ANSYS and MSC-NASTRAN.
One popular example of the usage of the superelement modeling technique may
be found in the finite element modeling of flexible multibody systems. Numerous
large, complex mechanical systems consist of interconnected rigid and flexible sub-
structures, e.g., heavy machinery, wheeled/tracked military land vehicles, machine
tools, rotorcraft, weapon systems, etc. For simplicity, these flexible substructures are
assumed to be rigid bodies during the analysis and simulation. The corresponding
model usually has a maximum of tens of degrees of freedom. Due to the efficiency,
this model has been broadly used in the simulation. Because the flexible substructures
are considered as rigid bodies, significant errors may be introduced in some severe
cases such as firing. To improve the accuracy, the finite element method can be used
to discretize the flexible components.
It is well known that multibody dynamics problems are inherently highly non-
linear. The nonlinearities are mainly due to the large relative rotations between
bodies (Cardona and Geradin, 1992). In fact, in many cases, the deformation effects
inside the flexible body are small enough to consider that the elastic behavior of
each body remains linear in a local frame that follows its overall motion. There-
fore, a linear finite element model is generally used for each individual elastic body.
The finite element models of flexible components have many more degrees of free-
dom than rigid-body models; the size of the global model obtained from the finite
element method, therefore, becomes very large. Numerical analysis and dynamic
simulation are very expensive and may cause computational problems if the full
model is directly used. In the superelement modeling technique, each flexible body
is viewed as a substructure. These substructures are discretized using the finite ele-
ment method by themselves with the interconnecting nodes (boundary nodes) to
each other. Before assembling, these discretized finite element models are replaced by
the corresponding superelements, which have many fewer degrees of freedom than
the full models.
Another example using the superelement modeling technique is the modeling of
a high-rise box-type building. Recently, many high apartment buildings have been
constructed, especially in Asian regions, using the box system that consists only of
reinforced concrete walls and slabs. The shear walls in a box system structure may have
openings for windows, doors, and duct spaces for functional reasons. The number,
location, and size of openings affect the behavior of a structure as well as stresses in the
shear wall. Most of the related research has been focused on the development of the
approximate stiffness of shear wall with openings. However, high stress concentrations
at corners of an opening could not be obtained by these analysis methods (Kim and
Lee, 2003). It is, therefore, necessary to use a finely meshed finite element model
for an accurate analysis of a shear wall with openings. Unfortunately, if an entire
apartment building structure were divided into a finer mesh with a large number of
elements, it would require a significant amount of computational time and memory.
Because some of the high-rise buildings adopt the box system, which has a repeated
arrangement of residential units with the same architectural plan on each floor, the
superelement modeling becomes very convenient for this type of structure.
Most condensation methods mentioned in preceding chapters may be utilized
to formulate a superelement. For example, if the superelement is constructed by
the static condensation approach, the superelement is referred to as a static super-
element. Similarly, exact, dynamic superelements may be defined. Among them, the
superelement formulated by static condensation, exact condensation, and iterative
IRS methods will be described in the following sections.
Other model reduction schemes may also be implemented to formulate a
superelement. The standard fixed interface component mode approach described
in Chapter 12, for example, was adopted by Shu and Chu (1984) and Cardona and
Geradin (1992) to formulate superelement models. The resulting degrees of freedom
of the superelement are the boundary degrees of freedom of the substructure and a
given number of modal coordinates concerning the slave model. This superelement
formulation was successfully implemented into the general-purpose finite element
code (Shu and Chu, 1984) and the multibody systems with large rotations (Cardona
and Geradin, 1992).
Because the superelement formulated by the dynamic condensation technique is

defined in the physical space, it has several advantages over many other types of
superelements in which the generalized coordinates are usually used.
The synthesis procedure is very simple because the superelement may be viewed as a
regular element in the stage of assembling.
The synthesis procedure is very efficient because no extra computation work is
required for extra coordinates transformation.
This superelement can be very conveniently used in the situation where some other
components or substructures are to be added to a complex structure in the design
stage. One just adds another module for the new components into the program
without changing the original whole program. However, if the generalized coor-
dinates are used in the superelement, each time a new component is added, the
whole computer program must be redeveloped.
10.3 Static Superelement

10.3.1 Construction of a Superelement
In the static superelement, the static condensation (Guyan condensation) is utilized
to reduce the size of the full finite element model of each substructure. Suppose
that a complete structure is divided into N substructures. The dynamic equations of
equilibrium of the ith substructure may be expressed as
(1)
M(i) and K(i) are the mass and stiffness matrices of the ith substructure; X(i) and XU)
are, respectively, the acceleration and displacement response vectors; pU) is the force
vector acting on the substructure. It includes the external forces originally applied
on the substructure E p(i) and the internal forces on the interface I p(i) due to the
subdivision. Therefore, the force vector can be written as
pO) = E p(i) + I p(i) (2)
Assume that this substructure is discretized by the finite element method, which leads
to a finite element model with ni degrees of freedom.
According to the requirement in the dynamic condensation, the total degrees of
freedom are divided into the masters and slaves. These numbers are represented by
mi and Si. It is necessary to note that the masters should include all the degrees of
freedom at the interface that are connecting to other substructures and those on which
the external forces apply. Using this division, the internal and external force vectors
I I
become
Ep(t). _ (Ep(i)
m _ (EP(i)
m
(3)
- Ep~i) - 0 '
Therefore, the partitioned form of the dynamic equations can be expressed as
[M~m
M(i)
(4)
sm
After the static condensation is performed on the above equation, the dynamic
equations of the reduced model are given by
M(j) XU)
Rm
+ K(j)
Rm
X(j) = p(i)
m
= E p(i)
m
+ I p(i)
m (5)
Equation (5) has a similar format to Eq. (1). During further. analyses, the reduced
model of the substructure can be viewed as a sl!-rerelement. M~) and K~) are the mass
and stiffness matrices of the superelement; X~ and x}fl are the acceleration and dis-
placement response vectors; p}fl is the force vector applied to the superelement. The
superelement has most features that a regular finite element has. These superelements,
for example, may be directly assembled to formulate the global model of a complete
structure. There are several advantages of the superelement over the regular element
during the modeling. The superelement generally contains much more information
than a regular element because it is constructed from a group of elements. Further-
more, the superelement is valid for a comparative complex component, while the
regular element cannot.
Suppose that two superelements A and B have the same coordinates; their dynamic
equations of equilibrium may be given by
M(A) X(A)
R m
+ KCA)
R
X(A) =
m
EpeA)
m
+ I peA)
m (6)
M(B) x(B)
R m
+ K(B)
R
X(B)
m
= E p(B)
m
+ I pCB)
m (7)
•• CA) •• (B) CA) (B) I (A) I (B)

BecauseX m =X m ' Xm and Pm = - Pm ,theabovetwoequationsare
=Xm
equivalent to the following equation:
(8)
Equation (8) is the dynamic equation of equilibrium of the reduced global model.
X m and X m are the displacement and acceleration responses at the coordinates of the
superelement. The mass matrix, stiffness matrix, and force vector are given by
M R -- M(A)
R
+ M(B)
R '
K -
R -
K(A)
R
+ K(B)
R '
Equation (9) is valid for two superelements having the same masters. This actually
seldom happens. More generally, the system mass matrix, stiffness matrix, and force
vector of the .reduced global model of a complete structure may be symbolically
written as
N
Pm = LEp~ (10)
i=1
Clearly, they have the same form as that of the regular finite element method.
Therefore, each superelement may be treated as a regular finite element during the
assemblage.
The static superelement modeling scheme given above has been widely implemented
into various problems such as dynamic analyses of cracked plates (Go et al., 1998),
railway passenger car (Peide and Xing, 1998), topology optimization (Yang and Lu,
1996), regular meshing patterns exploitation (Liu and Lam, 1995), nonlinear analysis
of a rotating paper machine (Jarvenpaa and Keskinen, 2000), parallel mesh partition-
ing optimization (Yang and Hsieh, 2002), stability analysis of thin-walled members
(Chin et aI., 1992), and so on. Because the inertia terms are ignored in Guyan con-
densation, the superelement is only exact for static problems. For dynamic problems,
the accuracy is usually very low and highly dependent on the selection of masters.
Improper masters or an insufficient number of them would result in serious errors.
10.3.2 Beam Superelement

Let us consider a segment of a two-dimensional Euler-Bernoulli beam with length
I shown in Figure 10.6. If this segment is discretized by one beam element and the
displacement vector is selected as
(11)
the element stiffness and mass matrices are given by
k ~ 2EI [
[3
:1
-6
31
212
-31
-6
-31
6
31
12 ]
-31 '
m = pAl
420
[ 156
221
54
221
412
l31
54
131
156
-13]
-312
-221
31 12 -31 212 .' -l31 -312 -221 4[2
(12)
where
A = area of cross section

E = Young's modulus of elasticity
VI v2
.... ....
1 )0, 2 O2
~ ~
Figure 10.6 Segment with one beam element.

I = moment of inertia (second moment of area) of the cross section with respect to
the neutral axis
p = mass density
For simplicity, the shear effects on the mass matrix is not considered in Eq. (12).
Suppose this part of the beam consists of two identical beam elements, as shown
in Figure 10.7. A static superelement with two nodes at the two ends and four degrees
of freedom is to be formulated in the following.
If the displacement vector of the full model of this segment is given by
(l3)
the mass and stiffness matrices can be simply obtained by assembling these two beam
elements as
156 225 54 -l3s 0 0

225 45 2 l3s -35 2 0 0
pAs 54 l3s 312 0 54 -l3s
m=-- (l4a)
420 -l3s -35 2 0 85 2 l3s -35 2
0 0 54 l3s 156 -225
0 0 -l3s -35 2 -225 45 2
6 35 -6 35 0 0
35 25 2 -35 52 0 0
k = 2EI -6 -35 12 0 -6 35
(l4b)
53 35 52 0 45 2 -35 52
0 0 -6 -35 6 -35
0 0 35 52 -35 25 2
in which 5 = 1/2. According to the requirement of the superelement, the four degrees
of freedom at nodes 1 and 3 are selected as the masters. Based on this selection, the
VI v2
.... .... ....
) 2 )
-
1 3
(}I
V2 -1(}2 -
I
Figure 10.7 Segment with two beam elements.

sub matrices of mass and stiffness matrices are given by
[56
-L} l -13'l
225 0
m _ pA5 225 45 2 0 m = mT = pA5 54
135 -35 2
mm - 420 0 0 156 ms sm 420 54 135 '
0 0 -225 45 2 -135 -35 2
m _ pA5 [312
ss - 420 0 8~2] (1Sa)
-q, l-6 l
35 0
k mm -- m
53 l:' 0
25 2
0
0
6
k
ms
= esm = 2EI
3
5
-35
-6
52
3,
-35 '
0 0 -35 25 2 35 52
k ms = 2EI
53
[12
0 4~2 ]
(1Sb)
The static condensation matrix may be computed by
R = -k-1ksm
ss
=_ [12
0
0
45 2
]-1 [-6
35
-6
-35
[3 -~ 5
_ _ 2 4 2
- (16)
1 3
45 4 4s iJ
Therefore, the stiffness matrix of the superelement is given by
-q
35 0
ks = k mm + kmsR =
2EI
-3-
5
l6
35
0
25 2
0
0
6
0 0 -35 25 2
[-6 3'][ 1 5
!]
2 --
_ 2EI -35 5 2 4 2
53 -6 -35 3 1 3
-
52 45 4 45 (17)
35
3 3 3 3
-5 -5
4 4 4 4
3 3 1 2
-5 52 --5 -5
2EI 4 4 2
53 3 3 3 3
--5 --5
4 4 4 4
3 1 2 3
-5 -5 --5 52
4 2 4
With the introduction of s = 1/2 into Eq. (17), we have
[:1
31 -6
212 -31 31
[2 ]
k = 2EI (18)
5 [3 -6 -31 6 -31
31 12 -31 212
Similarly, the mass matrix of this superelement may be computed and given by
~
156 54 -131
ms = pAl
420
221
54
131
156
-312
-221
J (19)
-131 -221 412
Clearly, they are exactly the same as those from the single element as shown in Eq. (12).
It was reported (Corn et aI., 1997) that the Timoshenko beam has the same feature.
It can be simply verified that the static superelement of a uniform beam is identical
to the regular finite element if they have the same degrees of freedom. This means
that by subdividing the beam while keeping the same degrees of freedom, there is
no change of the stiffness and mass matrices. The bar or truss element has the same
feature. It will be shown later that the frame structure also has a similar feature.
10.3.3 Higher-Order Element

While the use of higher-order elements leads to an increase in the dimensions of the
element matrices and, consequently, a larger number of calculations are required, it
has the advantages that fewer higher-order elements are needed in order to obtain
the same accuracy. Furthermore, the use of a higher order of element produces more
accurate results where the gradient of the displacements cannot be approximated by
low-order polynomials.
Let us consider a bar element shown in Figure 10.8. The element has three nodes,
and each node has one degree of freedom. The third node is assumed to be centrally
located between the two end nodes. Since this element has three degrees of freedom,
a quadratic interpolating polynomial with three coefficients is used. The polynomial
can be written as
(20)
3...-.U 3
1/2
.1
Figure 10.8 Three-node bar element.

or in another form as
(21)
The coefficients ab a2, and a3 in Eqs. (20) and (21) can be determined using the
conditions
UX=O = Ul
/ Ux =I/2 = U3 (22)
Ux=l = U2
Back-substitution of these coefficients into Eq. (21) leads to
o
-1/1
0] [u!]
4/1 u2 (23)
2/12 -4/1 2 u3
Finally, the displacement within this element can be expressed as
in which the shape functions are given by
jN!
N2
= (1 - 2~)(l -~)
= -~(l - 2~) (25)
N3 = 4~(l -~)
and ~ = x/I. Using the formula in Chapter 2, the element mass and stiffness matrices
may be obtained as
M~ :0 [~I ~l -1
4
2 16
k~EA[;
31
-8
1
7
-8
-8]
-8
16
(26)
n
Finally, the dynamic equations of equilibrium of the element are given by
:0 [~I
-1
4
2
22
16
Jr'J
U2
U3
+ 31
EA [71
-8
1
7
-8
-8]{"'\
-8
16
U2
U3
= h
h
(27)
Application II: Model Reduction on Component Level-5uperelement Modeling Technique 269
Now, let us select the first and second degrees of freedom as masters. The static
condensation is performed on the three-node bar element. It can be simply verified
that the mass and stiffness matrices of the static superelement are the same as those
of the two-node bar element. Therefore, the static superelement resulting from the
three-node higher-order bar element is identical to the regular two-node bar element.
Actually, a beam element has the same phenomenon. Because Guyan condensation
is based on static deformation and the static deformation of a beam is a third-order
polynomial, all interpolations of order 3 or higher lead to the same condensed system
matrices (Corn et al., 1997).
10.3.4 Frame Superelement

Let us consider a two-dimensional frame shown in Figure 1O.9(a). The frame has
three layers with l.O-m height and l.O-m width for each layer. The properties of each
beam in the frame arethefollowing: modulus of elasticity E = 2.0 X 1011 N/m 2 ; mass
density p = 7,SOOkglm3 ; area of cross section A = 2.4 x 10-4 m 2 ; and area moment
of inertia I = S.O X 10-9 m4.
This is a very simple structure and the superelement modeling technique is gener-
ally unnecessary. However, several important features of superelement modeling will
be shown clearly using this simple example. Since the frame has three identical layers,
it is divided into three identical substructures, as shown in Figure 1O.9(b), before the
finite element method is used to discretize the frame. Due to the identity, only one
substructure is considered.
Two cases for the discretization of the substructure are considered for comparison
purposes. The substructure is discretized into 12 elements, 13 nodes as shown in
(a) (b)
Figure 10.9 A two-dimensional frame: (a) frame; (b) substructures.

(a) (b)
Figure 10.10 Construction of superelement (case 1): (a) substructure; (b) superelement.
(a) (b)
Figure 10.11 Construction of superelement (case 2): (a) substructure; (b) superelement.
Figure 1O.1O(a) in the first case and 24 elements, 25 nodes in the second case, as
shown in Figure 10.11(a). Thus, the full models of the substructures have a total of39
and 75 degrees of freedom, respectively. Clearly, the four corner nodes are boundary
nodes and all others are interior nodes. During the formulation of the superelement,
only the boundary nodes or degrees of freedom are kept in the superelement as shown
in Figures 1O.1O(b) and 10.11 (b). The stiffness and mass matrices of the superelement
may be computed using the static condensation.
When the stiffness and mass matrices of the superelement are available, they can
be assembled to formulate the global stiffness and mass matrices as shown in Fig-
ure 10.12. Therefore, the reduced global model has 8 nodes and 24 degrees of freedom.
The former 12 natural frequencies computed from the reduced global models are
listed in the second and third columns of Table 10.2.
For comparison, the natural frequencies computed from the full models are
given in columns 4 through 6. Here, three discretization patterns are considered.
In Case I, the finite element model has a total of 36 elements and 105 degrees
of freedom, as shown in Figure 10.13. In the second and third finite element
models, 18 elements with 51 degrees of freedom and 9 elements with 24 degrees
of freedom are used. The lowest 12 frequencies of the reduced model computed
from Guyan condensation are listed in the last column of Table 10.2. During the
static condensation, the finite element model I of the complete structure is con-
sidered as the full model and the nodes at each corner, 8 in total, are selected as
masters.
The comparison of the results in Table 10.2 gives the following three phenomena:
1. The frequencies computed from the full finite element model with 36 elements,
shown in the fourth column of Table 10.2, have the highest accuracy. The next
(a) (b)
Figure 10.12 Assemblage of superelements: (a) superelements; (b) global model.
Table 10.2 Frequencies of different models (rad/s)
Mode uperl Super2 FuU 1 Full 2 PuU3 Guyan
1 13.06534 13.06534 13.06420 13.06427 13.06534 13.06534

2 56.15206 56.15206 56.06201 56.06804 56.15206 56.15206
3 95.34403 95.34403 95.04309 95.07079 95.34403 95.34403
4 158.90121 158.90121 158.29917 158.39020 158.90121 158.90121
5 331.09490 331.09490 297.43725 298.58445 331.09490 331.09490
6 414.84513 414.84513 355.42976 357.33539 414.84513 414.84513
7 523.18120 523.18120 423.99964 427.03274 523.18120 523.18120
8 618.91940 618.91940 468.43923 472.46959 618.91940 618.91940
9 731.50954 731.50954 538.45863 543.92n2 731.50954 731.50954
10 970.47257 970.47257 622.87883 628.79806 970.47257 970.47257
11 1.248.6080 1 1.248.6080 1 653.37952 663.08198 1,248.60801 1,248.6080 I
12 1.563.85332 1.563.85332 654.38927 664.11231 1,563.85332 1,563.85332
is the full model with 18 elements. The full model with nine elements has the
lowest accuracy. This is the common sense of the finite element method.
2. Although two different meshes were used in the construction of the superelement,
the resulting frequencies of the two reduced global models are identical. They are
exactly equal to those computed from the full model with nine elements. Fur-
ther research shows that the superelements formulated from the two meshes are
identical to the finite element model with three regular elements. This indicates
that the system matrices of a superelement do not depend upon the mesh.
Figure 10.13 Finite element model of the complete structure.
3. If the complete frame is viewed as a substructure with 36 elements, as shown

in Figure 10.13, the reduced model defined by Guyan condensation is actually
a static superelement. The results in the last two columns of Table 10.2 indicate
that this superelement is identical to the finite element model with nine elements.
The latter two phenomena show that the conclusion in Section 10.3.2 is also valid
for frames with uniform sections. Therefore, there is usually not benefit if the static
superelement modeling approach is utilized in simple structures.
10.4 Exact Superelement

The exact superelement modeling or dynamic substructure method was first developed
by Leung (1978). In the exact superelement, the exact condensation is utilized to
reduce the size of the full finite element model of substructures. The procedure for
formulating the exact superelement is similar to the static superelement. However,
due to the frequency-dependent feature of the exact dynamic condensation, the exact
superelement modeling is generally performed in the frequency domain.
Similar to the static superelement modeling, suppose that the complete structure
is divided into N substructures. The dynamic equations of equilibrium of the ith
substructure in the frequency domain may be expressed as
(1)
in which the force vector may be written as
(2)
w is the unknown natural frequency of the substructure. Based on the division of total
degrees of freedom, the partitioned form of the dynamic equations can be expressed as
[K~m
K
-w2M~m
2M
(i) _ (i)
sm W sm
After the exact condensation is performed on the above equation, the dynamic
equations of the reduced model, that is, the exact superelement, are given by
(4)
or simply
(5)
Kg), Mg), andDg) are, respectively, the stiffness, mass, and dynamic stiffness matrices
of the exact superelement. These matrices are given by
K(i)
R
= K(i) _ K(i)
mm ms
(D(i»)-ID(i)
ss sm
_ D(i)
ms
(D(i»)-l
ss
K(i)
sm
+ D(i)
ms
(D(i»)-l
ss
K(i) (D(i))-l D(i)
ss ss sm (6)
M(i) = M(i) _ M(i) (D(i»)-l D(i) _ D(i) (D(i»)-l M(i)
R mm ms ss sm ms ss sm
+ D(i)
ms
(D(i») -I M(i) (D(i)) -I D(i)
ss ss ss sm (7)
D(i) = D(i) _ D(i) (D(i»)-I D(i) (8)
R mm ms ss sm
In the three equations, the submatrices are defined as
D (i) - K(i) _ 2M(i)

(p,q = m,s) (9)
pq - pq W pq'
Similarly, the dynamic equations of equilibrium of the complete structure using the
exact superelement modeling may be given by
(10)
or
(1 I)
in which the mass matrix, stiffness matrix, dynamic stiffness matrix, and force vector
are respectively defined as
i=l
(12)
It is clear that the system matrices of the reduced global model are frequency-
dependent after the assemblage. Therefore, a special solution scheme is generally
required. The details of these methods may be found in Chapter 5. The reduced
global model obtained from the exact superelement modeling can exactly keep the
dynamic properties of the full global model. turthermore, the reduced global model
can predict more global modes than its number of degrees of freedom if a proper
solution scheme is used.
Other versions of exact condensation schemes mentioned in Chapter 5 can be
used to co:nstruct the superelement. For example, the inverse of the dynamic stiffness
matrixD~:) was replaced by the expression in Eq. (5.5-6) by Leung (1988) to construct
the superelement. This replacement can accelerate the convergence of iteration as
reported. Another example is the use of the dynamic stiffness matrix in Eq. (5.1-39)
(Leung, 1979). In these two variants, some modes of the slave model are required.
Furthermore, the reduced model is also frequency-dependent and a special solution
scheme is generally required.
The simplest way to make Eq. (5.1-39) frequency-independent is to replace the
unknown by one specific value at each frequency of interest (Belyi, 1993). Based
on the linearization of Eq. (5.1-39), a simplified dynamic condensation method was
developed by Lu (1988) to construct a superelement. The simplified dynamic con-
densation can take into account some dynamic effects on the slaves of substructures.
The accuracy of this superelement is higher than the static. However, the linearization
is only valid in a very limited frequency range. Another disadvantage of this method
is that the eigenproblems of all slave models should be solved.
Consider the space frame (Leung, 1993) shown in Figure lO.14. All the beams
have the same squared cross section with size 0.02 m x 0.02 m. They have the
(a) (b)
Figure 10.14 Space frame: Ca) side view; Cb) overview.

f+-1.3 + 1.3
...- -......- - -.. S
~
Figure 10.15 Substructure and superelement of space frame.
following properties: Young's modulus E = 69 x 109 N/m 2 ; shear modulus G =

26 x 109 N/m 2 ; mass density p = 2.7 X 103 kglm3 ; shear factor f = 1.2. Other
geometry is shown in Figure 10.15 in which the length is in meters.
Clearly, the space frame is a collection of three identical parts and centrally sym-
metrical. In the superelement modeling, the full structure is divided into three
substructures. Because these three substructures are identical, only one is consid-
ered to formulate the superelement. As shown in Figure 10.15, the full finite element
model of the substructure has 24 free nodes and 4 fixed nodes. Thus, the total degrees
of freedom of the full model are 144. During the construction of the superelement,
the four nodes indicated by A, B, C, and D are considered as masters and all others are
slaves. As a result, the superelement has a total of 24 degrees of freedom. Because the
three superelements share the same masters, the assembled reduced global model has
only 24 degrees of freedom while the full model of the complete structure has 198.
Therefore, the size of the reduced global model is much smaller than the full global
model. However, the reduced global model is frequency-dependent and a special
solution is required.
Both the static superelement and the exact superelement are utilized in the
superelement modeling. The iterative scheme given in Chapter 5 is used to solve
the frequency-dependent model. The natural frequencies resulting from the reduced
global models are listed in Table 10.3. The details on how to reduce the arithmetic
operations may be found in Leung (1993).
Table 10.3 Natural frequencies computed from reduced global models
Mode Static Exact PuB Mode SIatic !act Pull

1 6.32 6.30* 6.30* 8 100.71 38.03* 38.03*
2 7.37 7.32 7.32 9 10291 39.45 39.4S
3 18.49 17.1~ 17.1~ 10 125.72 ~ 42.20*
4 24.91 21.15- 21.IS* 11 141.91 C.12 C.12
5 46.90 21.56 21.56 12 18U6 47.56* 47.56*
6 . 47.40 24.10 24.10 13 186.98 47.79 47.79
7 60.51 29.79* 29.79* 14 192.95 52.49* 52.49*
* Repeated natural frequencies of order 2.
The natural frequencies computed from the reduced global model based on the
exact superelement are exact as indicated in Table 10.3. The accuracy of the static
superelement modeling is very low. Only the lowest several natural frequencies are
close to the exact. One disadvantage of the exact superelement modeling is that the
computational cost is much higher than the static due to the frequency-dependent
feature. Essentially, the total computational cost of the static superelement analysis is
approximately equal to that of one iteration of the exact superelement analysis for one
natural frequency. A detailed comparison of the numerical operations required by the
static and exact superelement methods was reported by Leung (1993). Furthermore,
the exact superelement modeling is generally used in frequency domain or harmonic
excitation problems in time domain. Due to these limitations, the exact superelement
modeling is much less popular than the static superelement.
10.5 Dynamic Superelement

10.5.1 Theory of Dynamic Superelement Modeling
The dynamic superelement modeling scheme is based on the dynamic condensation,
particularly in this book, the iterative IRS. Suppose the dynamic equations of the jth
substructure are given by
(1)
Because the forces on the interface resulting from subdivision will not go to the
assembled equations, only the external forces are included in the force vector p(j).
For simplicity, only the proportional damping is considered. If the total degrees of
freedom (n) of the full model are divided into the masters and slaves, Eq. (1) can be
I
rewritten in a partitioned form as
[M~~
M Cj)
sm
c(j)] IX(j)
ms
C ssC;)
m.
X· (;)
s
+ [K(j)
m!1l
K(;)
sm
K~l] Ix~)
K D(;)
l-Ip~)
XC;) - p(;)
s s
I
(2)
Usually, the masters should include (1) boundary degrees of freedom, (2) those
degrees of freedom on which the exciting forces locate, and (3) those in which the
displacements are interested.
As described in Chapter 6, the relation of responses between the masters and slaves
given by the iterative dynamic condensation is expressed as
X 5(j) -- R(j)x(j)
m) (3)
in which R(j) is the dynamic condensation matrix and governed by the following
equation:
(4)
M~j) and K~j) are the mass and stiffness matrices of the jth superelement. Of course,
Eq. (4) is nonlinear, and iterative schemes listed in Chapter 6 may be utilized to solve
for the dynamic condensation matrix. The coordinate transformation matrix T(j)
corresponding to the dynamic condensation matrix is defined as
(5)
Therefore, the displacement, velocity, and acceleration vectors of the full model may
be expressed as
X· (j) -- T(j) X(j)

m' (6)
Introducing Eq. (6) into Eq. (1) and premultiplying both sides of the equation by the
transpose of matrix T(j) , we have
(7)
where K~j) , cV) and MV) are, respectively, the stiffness, damping, and mass matrices
of the jth dynamic superelement. They are defined as
cV) = aKV) + fJM~j)

(8)
It is shown in Eq. (4) that an inversion of matrix K~P or its equivalent is required
for the condensation matrix. When the number of rigid degrees of freedom of a
substructure is larger than the number of masters, the matrix is singular and cannot
be inverted directly. Hence, an eigenvalue shifting technique is needed and Eq. (4)
becomes
(9)
where
(j) - _(D(j»)-lD(j)
RDG- ss sm (10)
D ss(j) -- K(j)
ss
+ qM(j)
ss,
D(j) - K(j)
sm- sm
+ qM(j)
sm (11)
(12)
In Eqs. (11) and (12), q is an eigenvalue shift. Usually, it is a small, positive number.
When q = 0, Eq. (9) reduces to Eq. (4).
The iterative scheme for the dynamic superelement modeling of compound systems
is listed below:
1. Divide the complete structural system into substructures and other connect-
ing components such as springs and dampers, if any, according to the system's
inherent feature.
2. Discretize the substructures using the finite element method if necessary.
3. For i = 0, 1,2, ... , enter the iteration loop:
3.1 Construct the ith approximate dynamic superelement for the substructures
for which dynamic superelement modeling is required. This includes (a)
compute the ith approximation of dynamic condensation matrix using the
iterative scheme and (b) construct the ith approximate system matrices
of the superelement. If there are more than one physically identical sub-
structures, the corresponding superelement only needs to be constructed
once.
3.2 Assemble all the superelements and other components to formulate the
global model of the complete structural system.
3.3 Calculate the ith approximate natural frequencies w?)
(j = 1,2, ... , p) from
the reduced global model. Check the convergence using the criterion.
(j = 1,2, ... ,p) (13)
where B is an error tolerance. If the given p frequencies converge, exit the

iteration loop.
4. Output the system matrices of the reduced global model, system matrices of each
superelement, dynamic condensation matrices of each substructure if necessary.
Since the natural frequencies are used to check the convergence of the dynamic
superelement modeling, they are computed at each iteration. However, the pur-
pose of the present scheme is not to compute these frequencies but to get the reduced
global model, dynamic superelements, and the corresponding dynamic condensation
matrices. Of course, other parameters may be used to check the convergence.
10.5.2 Rigid Modes of Superelement

Because the substructure isolated from the whole structure is usually free and has rigid
mode shape( s) when it vibrates, it is very important that the superelement retains the
rigid mode shape(s) of the full model during iteration.
Suppose the full finite element model of a substructure has rigid mode shape qJ,
that is,
KqJ = 0 (14)
or in a partitioned form
[ Kmm
Ksm
KmsJ {CPm}
Kss CPs =
{o}° (IS)
For convenience, the superscript j is omitted. Equation (IS) is equivalent to the

(l6a)
KsmCPm + KssCPs = ° (16b)
From Eq. (16b), we have

(17)
Introducing Eq. (17) into Eq. (l6a) leads to
(Kmm - Kms K 55-Ksm

l ) CPm = KS(0) CPm = ° (18)
Equation (18) indicates that the superelement obtained from the initial approxima-
tion of the dynamic condensation, Guyan condensation, can retain the rigid mode
shape of the full model.
The iterative form of Eq. (4) is rewritten as
(19)
where
Using Eq. (19), the (i + l)th approximation of the stiffness matrix of the superelement
becomes
K~+l) = Kmm + (R(O»)T Ksm + KmsR(O) + (R(O»)T KssR(O)

+ (ilR(i+l))T Ksm + KmsilR(i+l) + (R(O»)T KssilR(i+l) (21)
+ (ilR(i+l){ KssR(O) + (ilR(i+l))T KssilR(i+l)

Considering
(22)
Eq. (21) can be simplified as
(23)
The following three steps are used to prove the conclusion:
1. For the initial approximation, the stiffness matrix of the superelement is K~O) •
From Eq. (18), we know that it retains the rigid mode shape of the full model.
2. Suppose the ith approximate stiffness matrix contains the rigid mode shape (/1m'
that is
(24)
3. Let's consider the (i + l)th approximate stiffness matrix of the superelement.

Substituting Eq. (20) into Eq. (23), we have
(25)
Using Eqs. (18) and (24), we have
K(i+l)tn
S
- K(O)rIJ
't'm - S 't'm
+ (K(i»)T(E(i»)T
S
K E(i)K(i)rIJ -
ss S 't'm -
0 (26)
Equation (26) shows that the (i + l)th approximate stiffness matrix K~+l) also
contains the same rigid mode shape of the full model.
Based on the statements in (1) through (3), we conclude that the superelement con-
tains the rigid mode shape of the full model during iteration. Hence, the present
method is valid when the substructure is free or there is rigid mode shape in the
substructure.
To explain this conclusion clearly, a three-degree-of-freedom mass-stiffness system,
shown in Figure 10.16, is considered. The system has one rigid-body mode shape.
The mass and stiffness matrices are given by
-k
2k
-k
m m m
k k
Figure 10.16 Vibration system with one rigid mode shape.

Let k = 1 N/m and m = 1 kg. The frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes
are given by
WI = Orad/s, W2 = 1 rad/s, W3 = ..(j rad/ s
fPI = {0/3 0/3 0/3}T

fP2 = {-.Ji/ 2 0 .Ji/2 } T
lP3 = {-./6/6 ./6/3 -./6/6} T
The first mode shape is a rigid-body mode.
If the first and second degrees of freedom, Xl and Xz, are selected as masters,
the initial approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix, Guyan condensation
matrix, is given by
The corresponding mass and stiffness matrices of the reduced model are
K(O) =[ k -k] M(O) = [m0 0]

R -k k ' R 2m
The frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes of this approximation are
(0)
WI = OradIs, wiO) = 1.5 rad/s
fP~~ = {0/3 v'3/ 3 } T
fPi~ = {./6/3 -./6/6} T
The first mode shape is a rigid-body mode and the same as the full model. The second
frequency, 1.5 rad/s, is higher than the exact, 1 rad/s. The accuracy is very low.
The first approximation of the dynamic condensation matrix and the correspond-
ing mass, stiffness matrices are
R(l) = [-0.5 1.5 ]
K(l) = [ 5k/4 -5k/4]

R -5k/4 5k/4
M~) = [5m/4 -3m/4]

-3m/4 13m/4
The frequencies and mode shapes are given by
ev~l) = 0 rad/s, evil) = 1.0714 rad/s
q1~~ = {vIJ/3 vIJ/3}T

q1;~ = {0.7715 -0.1543} T
Clearly, it contains the rigid-body mode, and the accuracy of the reduced model is
much higher than the initial approximation.
With the increase in the number of iterations, the accuracy improves quickly. The
exact dynamic condensation matrix, mass, and stiffness matrices of the superelement
are given by
R=[-1 2]
= [2k
KR
-2k -2k]
2k , MR = [2m -2m]
-2m 5m
The frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes of the superelement are identical
to the first two modes of the full model.
10.6 Modeling of Compound Systems with

Local Nonlinearities
10.6.1 Linear Compound Systems
A simplified floating-raft isolation system, shown in Figure 8.2, is considered to
demonstrate the superelement modeling schemes. The physical properties of the
isolation system are listed in Section 8.2. The damping is not considered.
In the following, the raft frame and base are, respectively, considered as one sub-
structure. The finite element models of them are shown in Figures 8.3 and 8.4. The
displacements in the z-direction at the nodes that are connected to the spring-damper
II are selected as masters for the raft frame and base, respectively. Several more degrees
of freedom can be selected if it is necessary. Assume that the stiffness and mass matri-
ces of the superelements obtained from the iterative dynamic condensation method
are KA, MA for the raft frame and KB, MB for the base.
After the superelements of the raft frame and base are formulated, they can be
assembled into the global stiffness and mass matrices of the floating-raft isolation
system directly, that is,
KA 0 0 0] MA 0 0 0]
K= [ 0 KB 0 0 + Kc, M= .[ 0 MB 0 0 +Mc
o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
K c and M c are the stiffness and mass matrices pertaining to the springs and machines.
....
Table 10.4 Twenty lowest frequencies of the global model (Hz)
Mode Preq. Mode Preq. Mode Mode Iftq.
4.3746 6 31.947 11 lUIS

l' 2101.35
, ...,.
2 4.89U 7 53.555 12 12U1 17 203.48
.S IG
..
3 IG.756 8 235.94
36.054 K947 14 295.76
5 36.3CW 10 86.401 15 .9I.lS 297.41
The full global model of the floating-raft isolation system has a total of 179 degrees
of freedom. However, the reduced global model constructed using the dynamic
superelement modeling has 26 degrees of freedom, which is much less than those
of the full global model. The lowest 20 natural frequencies of the full global model
are listed in Table 10.4. They are considered as exact for comparison purposes. The
lowest 20 natural frequencies of the reduced global model are also calculated. The
errors, defined as, Error = (Wreduced - Wexact) / Wexact, are shown in Figure 10.17. In
this figure, A, B, C, and D denote the four cases: initial approximation (Guyan con-
densation), the first approximation (IRS), the second approximation, and the third
approximation, respectively.
The accuracy of the lowest five natural frequencies computed from the reduced
global model with the initial approximation is very high. Their errors are all less than
0.6%. However, the errors become larger and larger with the increase of the order
of frequency. The error of the 20th frequency, for example, is 22.4%. Generally, the
accuracy of the reduced global model increases with the increase of iterations. The
errors of the 20th frequencies based on the initial, first, second, and third approxima-
tions are 22.4%, 3.76%, 0.804%, and 0.221%, respectively. The error reduces to one
hundredth after three iterations.
1<f
10"
10'2
g
w
1<fl
[d
1<r
-- - B
1(J5 ..... C
_._.- 0
1<r 0
5 10 15 20
Order
Figure 10.17 Errors of the frequencies of reduced models.

UJ
1U5
1U6
- - - B
1U7 ...... C
--_.- D
1U8
10.9
U. 1U1O
0:::
U. 111U
1U12
1U 13
1U14 "II
I
1U15
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 10.18 FRFs of different cases.
When iteration is applied, the accuracy of the middle and high frequencies of the
reduced global model improves quickly. However, this does not have much effect
on the accuracy of the lowest frequencies. Particularly, the accuracy of three lowest
frequencies reduces when iterations are adopted. Fortunately, the errors of these
frequencies are less than 0.04% and have little effect on the accuracy of responses.
The errors of the low and middle frequencies of the reduced global model are
less than 1% when only several iterations, two or three for example, are applied.
This accuracy is enough in engineering analyses. All the errors of the frequencies are
positive. This means that the reduced global model approaches the full global model
from above.
The frequency response functions (FRFs) for the four cases are plotted in Figure
10.18. The exciting force locates on ml in the z-direction and the response is the
displacement at node 11 in base in this direction. For convenience, only the absolute
values ofFRFs are shown in the figure. In Figure 10.18, curve A denotes the exact FRFs
that are calculated using the full global model. Curves B, C, and D denote the FRFs
obtained from the reduced global model when the iteration numbers are 0, 1, and 2,
respectively. Clearly, the errors of the FRFs computed from the initial approximation
are very large. The first approximation improves the accuracy quickly. The FRFs
from the second approximation are very close to the exact. These results show that
iterations can efficiently improve the accuracy of the reduced global model resulting
from the static superelement.
10.6.2 Compound Systems with Local Nonlinearities

Let us first consider the beam-spring system used in Section 9.4. The two beams
are selected as the flexible substructures when the dynamic superelement modeling
scheme is used. The same masters as those in Section 9.4 are used for each beam.
Since the two beams are identical, only one superelement is constructed using the
dynamic condensation technique. The reduced global model has a total of 14 degrees
of freedom. The harmonic balance method is used to solve the nonlinear equations.
Similarly, the FRFs of the reduced global model at nodes 9 and 30 in the transverse
directions are plotted in Figure 10.19. The exact results are also plotted in the figures
for comparison. Similarly, if the FRFs obtained from the reduced global model are
very close to those from the full global model, we will say that the reduced model
may accurately represent the full model at that frequency range. The accuracy of
the initial approximation is low, especially for the FRFs at the high-frequency range.
10-' . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
--Exact
10"
------i=O
--------. i=1
--------- i=2
10-7
10"
0 300 600 900 1200 1500
Frequency (rad/s)
(a)
10-'
--Exact
10"
------i=O
--- .. --.- i=1
10"
--------- i=2
10-4
LL.
~
LL. 10"
10"
10-7
10"
0 300 600 900 1200 1500
Frequency (radls)
(b)
Figure 10.19 FRFs ofreduced models: (a) node 9; (b) node 30.
With the increase of the number of iterations, the FRFs approach the exact solution
quickly. The first approximation, for example, is much more accurate than the initial
approximation.
For this example, 751 time steps are used to simulate the FRFs of the full global
model and the reduced global model. The code is run on a Sun 4500 computer with
a 400-MHz CPU and 4-GB memory. The computer time of the full global model
and the reduced global model are 2,999 seconds and 25 seconds, respectively. Clearly,
the reduced global model is much more computationally efficient than the full global
model.
Now, the floating-raft isolation system used in Section 9.4 is considered. The two
plates in the system are viewed as two flexible substructures. The same degrees of free-
dom on the two plates as those used in Section 9.4 are selected as masters. Each of the
two reduced models of plates has 12 degrees of freedom. Therefore, the reduced global
model has 26 degrees of freedom. The FRFs resulting from the initially approximate
reduced global model are shown in Figure 10.20 and are indicated by su. The FRFs
computed from the full global model are also provided for comparison. The errors
of the FRFs obtained from the reduced global models with different approximations
are plotted in Figure 10.21. Clearly, the errors of the initial approximate FRFs are very
big. These errors reduce when the number of iteration increases, especially for the
FRFs at the high-frequency range.
For this example, 2,501 time steps are used to simulate the FRFs of the full global
model and the reduced global model. The code is run in the same computer as above.
The computer time for the two models is 1,452 seconds and 6 seconds, respectively.
Clearly, the reduced global model is much more computationally efficient than the
full global model. The computer time of this example is shorter than that in the first
example although the number of degrees of freedom of the former is about double
that of the latter. The reason is that the nonlinearity in this example is much more
10"
10·'
10"
10.7
10"
u..
a::: 10"
u.. 10. •
'
10.11
10.,2
10.13
10."
0 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 10.20 FRFs of floating-raft isolation system.

10°
10.1
10" I
....
w
~ 10""
10"
10-15
r
10"
0 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 10.21 Error of the FRFs of reduced global models.
localized than that in the first example. Consequently, more iterations are required in
the first example.
The errors of the FRFs computed from the reduced global models defined on the
system level, described in Section 9.4, and defined on the component level, described
in this section, for i = 1 and 3 are plotted in Figure 10.22. The "SY" and "SU" indicate
these two cases, respectively. Clearly, the accuracy of the model reduction defined on
the system level is much higher than the one defined on the component level.
10°
10.1
10"
.g 10""
.. '
".'
'
w .'
10"
- - i=1(SY)
---- -- i=3(SY)
10-15 ......... i=1(SU)
.. _._._.. i=3(SU)
1r ~~~-,~~~~~~.-~~~~~~
o 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 10.22 Errors of FRFs from the two model reduction schemes.
10.7 Multilevel Superelement

The decomposition of substructure may continue hierarchically through additional
levels and lead to multilevel superelement. The multilevel superelement modeling
scheme is particularly useful for complex structural systems. The implementation of
this technique into the general-purpose finite element program, Super Element Struc-
tural Analysis program Modules (SESAM), was reported by Egeland and Araldsen
(1974). A database system (ICES) for the programming of the multilevel superelement
modeling technique was investigated by Jacobsen (1983).
Multilevel superelement modeling consists of two opposite steps, e.g., division and
assembly. In the stage of division the complete structure is first divided into two
or more first-level substructures based on its geometry feature. Then, some of the
first-level substructures may be divided into two or more second-level substructures.
This process continues until all the substructures become as simple as required. This
is a top-down scheme. For illustration purposes, a simple space frame shown in Figure
1O.23(a) is considered. According to the geometry feature of the complete frame, it
is divided into three first-level substructures as shown in Figure 1O.23(b). Substruc-
tures I and II may be further divided into second-level substructures as indicated in
Figure 1O.23(c).
......... .........
=:n
III
~ ~ .:::: :.........
~
V\
r:,..::: ::-"., II
\
V\
r:,..::: ::-".,
\
~
V\ t:;;.<C ~
\
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 10.23 Space frame and its substructures: (a) complete structure; (b) first-level substructures;
(c) second-level substructures.
In the stage of assembly, superelements are formulated and assembled level by

level. The first-level superelement is built up of basic finite elements, while the
higher-level superelements are built up of superelements from lower levels. This
is a bottom-up scheme. The three second-level substructures of substructure I in this
example are identical, and only one superelement needs to be formulated. Simi-
larly, the two second-level substructures of substructure II are identical and only one
needs to be considered. The finite element models of these substructures are given
in Figure 10.24(a). Clearly, these models consist of only space beam elements. The
corresponding first-level superelements may be formulated using the condensation
technique as shown in FigurelO.24(b). These superelements are assembled and the
second-level superelements are formulated. Finally, the two second-level superele-
ments and one first-level superelement are assembled into the global model of the
complete structure as shown in Figure 1O.24(e).
Guyan condensation can be conveniently implemented into multilevel super-
element modeling, and the scheme is referred to as multilevel static superelement
modeling. When using this method, however, the coordinates of each superelement
need to be carefully selected. Furthermore, it is not recommended to use this modeling
approach for simple structures.
The superelement formulated by the Craig-Bampton scheme (see Chapter 12),
is ready to be used in multilevel superelement modeling. With the introduction of
the modal coordinates, the modal synthesis does not have a strict limitation on the
selection of coordinates of each superelement. However, there is a strict limitation
on the number of modal coordinates if the complete structure is divided into many
substructures.
The exact superelement and some of its variants can be extended to multilevel mod-
eling (Leung, 1993); this scheme is called multilevel exact superelement modeling. This
approach does not have the problems mentioned earlier. However, the superelements
and, as a result, the global model of the complete structure is frequency-dependent.
A special scheme is required for the eigenvalue problem. Furthermore, difficulty
will be encountered if the dynamic analyses are performed in the time domain. The
linearized version of multilevel exact superelement (Lu, 1988) may alleviate this lim-
itation even though this linearization model is usually valid within a very narrow
frequency range. Other schemes for formulating the multilevel superelement are also
available in the literature (Lu et al., 1989, 1990).
10.8 Global-Local and Multiscale Analyses

A related technique called global-local analysis is frequently used in finite element
analysis. In the global-local analysis, the whole structural system is first analyzed as a
whole. All the local details that do not have much effect on the overall behavior are
ignored in this stage. The local details are then analyzed using the results from the
global analysis as boundary conditions. This process can be continued until all the
local details are obtained. Alternatively, the local detailed model can be embedded into
the global model using the transition region on the boundary. Indeed, the assembled
model can then be used to determine a solution.
The global-local analysis has been successfully used in many practical complex
structural systems. It is especially useful in the stress concentration analysis (De
Langhe et aI., 1997), the simulation of crack propagation (Go et al., 1998), etc.
The dynamic elastoplastic behaviors of the flight deck under the landing load of
N
'"o
=:IJ~=:Il "
rrtl~rrtl~ c:::::::> c:::::::>
rrtl~rrtl~ ~ ~
fTTl~fTTl~
o
s:::
c:::::::> 1~7k ~ 0-
fTTl ~ fTTl ~ l--" "~ !!..
o
a.~
~
0-
:::
~
fTTl~fTTl~ 0'
;:l
(a) (b) (e) (d) (e) i;l
8-
;:l
Figure 10.24 Multilevel superelement modeling: (a) finite element model; (b) first-level superelement; (e) assembly of first-level $
:::
superelements; (d) second-level superelement; (e) assembly of different-level suerpelements, ~
aircraft are, for example, interested in the nonlinear dynamic analyses of the coupled
system of the flight deck and a landing aircraft (Tong and Qu, 2000). Definitely, the
deformations and motions of the ship, as a whole, playa very important role on
the dynamic responses of the flight deck. Due to the high complexity of the ship
structure, we could not perform a full finite element simulation for the whole ship
under different sea conditions. Therefore, the global-local analysis was introduced in
the analysis.
In the global analysis, the ship is considered as a Timoshenko beam. Since the size
of the model is very small, it is very efficient to simulate the dynamic behaviors of the
ship as a whole, including global deformations and motions, under the hydrodynamic
loads in wave. Although the weight and location of an aircraft may theoretically affect
these global responses, this effect is too minor to be ignored in this stage. Based on
these global deformations and motions, the displacements and forces at the boundary
of the portion of flight deck isolated from the ship, as shown in Figure 10.25, may be
obtained.
The next stage is local analysis. Because this portion of the light deck is much
simpler than the whole ship, the refined finite element model may be used to model
the coupled system. The key ingredient for the local analysis is the application of
boundary conditions on the refined finite element model. The displacements at the
boundary nodes need to be interpolated from the global deformations and motions
and the stresses at the boundary need to be converted into the nodal forces.
Of course, the global-local analysis scheme can be extended to more than two levels,
in which case it receives the more encompassing name multiscale analysis (Felippa,
2002). Although this generation is still largely in the realm of research, it has been
receiving increasing attention from various science and engineering communities
for complex products such as microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and nano-
electromechanical systems (NEMS) in which the multiphysics phenomena should be
considered. The multiscale analysis is based on the fact that continuum and atomistic
analysis methods are complementary. At the meso-scale, the continuum analyses start
to break down and atomistic analyses begin to reach their inherent time and length-
scale limitations. Mesoscope simulation approaches are currently used to bridge the
critical gap in between the extremes length scales,
Central Line of
I-+--+-I-+--+--I--+---+--I--+--+-+-+=-'-.f,-,- Oblique Deck
- --- --- --
26 m ,_,1--,_-1,r,-_-+,-,_-,-1--,_-1,1-,-_-+,-,-_+,-,_-+-,_+--+-1-,_-1_-,-_+_-,-_+-_-,_+-_-1,
__ ,_, Central Line of
Straight Deck
45m
Figure 10.25 Computational schematic of the flight deck.

10.9 Summary
The implementation of the dynamic condensation technique on the component
level, particularly the superelement modeling technique, has been described and
demonstrated in this chapter. The dynamic superelement modeling technique is very
efficient for the complex structural systems with identical components or substruc-
tures. Many of the dynamic condensation approaches provided in preceding chapters
may be implemented to generate the corresponding superelement.
Static superelement modeling is the simplest superelement modeling approach and

has been widely utilized in many practical problems. Because the inertia terms
are ignored in Guyan condensation, the superelement is only exact for static
problems. For dynamic problems, the accuracy is usually very low and highly
dependent on the selection of masters. The static superelement of a uniform bar,
beam, or frame is, respectively, identical to the regular bar, beam, or frame ele-
ment if they have the· same degrees of freedom. Because Guyan condensation is
based on static deformation and the static deformation of a bar element is a first-
order polynomial, all interpolations of order 1 or higher lead to the same static
bar superelement. Similarly, the static deformation of a beam element is a third-
order polynomial, all interpolations of order 3 or higher lead to the same static
beam superelement. The multilevel scheme may be implemented into the static
superelement modeling.
The exact superelement is constructed by exact dynamic condensation. Thus, the
reduced global model obtained from the exact superelement modeling can exactly
keep the dynamic properties of the full global model. Furthermore, the reduced
global model can predict more global modes than its number of degrees of freedom
if a proper solution scheme is used. However, because the reduced global model is
frequency-dependent, difficulty may be encountered in the further dynamic anal-
yses. Other versions of exact condensation schemes can also be used to construct
the superelement. The simplest way to make the reduced global model frequency-
independent is to replace the unknown by a specific value at each frequency of
interest. More generally, the reduced global model may be linearized within the
frequency range of interest. The multilevel scheme may be implemented into the
exact dynamic superelement modeling.
The dynamic superelement modeling based on the iterative IRS has much higher
accuracy than the static superelement modeling. However, because it does not sat-
isfy the static completeness, it is generally used in the compound structural system
in which each component is considered as a superelement.
The superelement formulated by the Craig-Bampton scheme has higher accuracy
than the static superelement due to the introduction of modal coordinates. Fur-
thermore, it does not have a strict limitation on the selection of coordinates of each
superelement. The Craig-Bampton superelement is ready to be used in multilevel
superelement modeling.
These superelement modeling schemes may be efficiently implemented into the
dynamic systems with local nonlinearities. Because the dynamic condensation is
only performed at the linear part, the nonlinearity does not have any effect on the
condensation.
Two modeling schemes with the multilevel features, global-local analysis and multi-
scale analysis, are also summarized. The former is very useful in the stress
concentration analysis and the simulation of crack propagation, and the latter
is generally used in the MEMS and NEMS.
References
Ahmadian, MT and Zangeneh, MS (2003) Application of super elements to free vibration
analysis of laminated stiffened plates. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 259(5):1243-1252.
Avitabile, P, Piergentili, F, Parziale, P, and Crompton, D (1997) Comparison of some system
modeling approaches. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Orlando, Florida), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1043-1052.
Belyi, MV (1993) Superelement method for transient dynamic analysis of structural systems. International
Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1992) Substructuring using a linearized dynamic condensation method.
Computers and Structures, 45(4):679-683.
Cardona, A and Geradin, M (1992) A superelement formulation for mechanism analysis. Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 100(1):1-29.
Chin, CK, AI-Bermani, FGA, and Kitipornchai, S (l992) Stability of thin-walled members having arbitrary
flange shape and flexible web. Engineering Structures, 14(2):121-132.
Corn, S, Bouhaddi, N, and Pi randa, J (l997) Transverse vibrations of short beams: Finite element models
obtained by a condensation method. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 201 (3):353-363.
De Langhe, K, Vandepitte, D, and Sas, P (l997) A combined dynamic-static finite element model for the
calculation of dynamic stresses at critical locations. Computers and Structures, 65(2):241-254.
Egeland, 0 and Araldsen, PO (1974) SESAM-69-a general-purpose finite element method program.
Felippa, C (2002) Introduction to Finite Element Methods (class notes) . Department of Aerospace Engi-
neering Sciences, University of Colorado at Boulder, http://caswww.colorado.edu j courses.djIFEM.dj.
Go, CG, Lin, C, Lin, YS, and Wu, SH (1998) Formulation of a super-element for the dynamic problem of a
cracked plate. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering, 14(12):1143-1154.
Jacobsen, KP (1983) Fully integrated superelements: A database approach to finite element analysis.
Computers and Structures, 16{1-4):307-315.
Jarvenpaa, V-M and Keskinen, EK (2000) Finite element model for rotating paper machine roll. Proceedings
of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental
Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 536-542.
Jiang, J and Olson, MD (l993a) A super element model for nonlinear analysis of stiffened box structures.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 36:2203-2217.
Jiang, J and Olson, MD (I 993b) Application of a super element model for nonlinear analysis of stiffened
box structures. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 36:2219-2243.
Jiang, J and Olson, MD {l994} Nonlinear analysis of orthogonally stiffened cylindrical shells by a super
element approach. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 18{1-3):99-11O.
Kim, H-S and Lee, D-G (2003) Analysis of shear wall with openings using super elements. Engineering
Structures, 25(8):981-991.
Koko, TS and Olson, MD (1991) Nonlinear transient response of stiffened plates to air blast loading by a
superelement approach. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 90(1-3):737-760.
Law, SS, Chan, THT, and Wu, D (200Ia) Superelement with semi-rigid joints in model updating. Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 239(1): 19-39.
Law, SS, Chan, THT, and Wu, D (2001b) Efficient numerical model for the damage detection of large scale
structure. 23(5):436-451.
Leung, AYT (l978) An accurate method of dynamic condensation in structural analysis. International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 12(11): 1705-1715.
Leung, AYT (1979) An accurate method of dynamic substructuring with simplified computation.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 14(8):1241-1256.
Leung, AYT (1988) A simplified dynamic substructure method. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, 16(6):827-837.
Leung, AYT (1993) Dynamic Stiffuess and Substructures. Springer-Verlag, London, UK.
Li, TY, Zhang, XM, Zuo, Yr, and Xu, MB (1997) Structural power flow analysis for a floating raft isolation
system consisting of constrained damped beams. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 202( I ):47-54.
Liu, X-L and Lam, YC (1995) Condensation algorithms for the regular mesh substructuring. International
Journal for Numerical Method in engineering, 38(4):469-488.
Lu, X (1988) Simplified dynamic condensation in multi-substructure systems. Computers and Structures,
30(4):851-854.
Lu, X, Lin, J, and Zhong, W (1989) Subspace iteration method in multi-level substructure systems.
Lu, X, Zhong, W, and Lin, J (1990) Dynamic superelement substructure method in forced vibration analysis.
Computers and Structures, 37(5):737-74l.
Nurse, AD (2001) New superelements for singular derivative problems of arbitrary order. International
Peide, S and Xing, JW (1998) Calculation of a railway passenger car body using macroelement methods.
Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barb;ua, CAl, Society for
Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1479-1485.
Qu, Z-Q (1998) Structural Dynamic Condensation Technique: Theory and Application. State Key
Laboratory of Vibration, Shock and Noise, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2000) Dynamic superelement modeling method for compound dynamic systems.
AIAA Journal, 38(6):1078-1083.
Shiau, T-N and Jean, A-N (1990) Prediction of periodic responses of flexible mechanical systems with
nonlinear characteristics. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 112(4):501-507.
Shu, C-F and Chu, F-H (1984) A general superelement approach by the component mode synthesis
method. Proceedings of the 2nd International Modal Analysis Conference and Exhibit (Orlando, FL),
Union College, Schenectady, NY: 676-682.
Tong, Land Qu, Z-Q (2000) Landing loads of an aircraft on moving ships. Proceedings of the 18th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference & Exhibit (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Bethel, CT: 1745-1747.
van Vroonhoven, JCW and de Borst, R (1999) Combination of fracture and damage mechanics for
numerical failure analysis. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 36: 1169-1191.
Yang, RJ and Lu, CM (1996) Topology optimization with superelements. AIAA Journal, 34(7):1533-1535.
Yang, Y-B and Lin, B-H (1995) Vehicle-bridge interaction analysis by dynamic condensation method.
Journal of Structural Engineering, 121 (11): 1636-1643.
Yang, Y-S and Hsieh, S-H (2002) Iterative mesh partitioning optimization for parallel nonlinear dynamic
finite element analysis with direct substructuring. Computational Mechanics, 28( 6):456-468.
11 Applications III: Modal Testing
11.1 Introduction
Modal testing has been employed in many engineering disciplines to determine the
vibration characteristics of a system including natural frequencies, mode shapes, fre-
quency responses, and so on. With the development of hardware and software, the
modal testing technique has become more and more efficient, reliable, and accurate
and has been widely adopted in industry. However, for large, complex structures,
the test is usually costly and time-consuming, especially when mode shapes are con-
cerned. Furthermore, highly accurate experimental data are generally not easy to be
obtained for a complex structural system because many concerns, such as the overall
system properties, test setup, instrumentation, digital signal processing, frequency
response function formulation, excitation, and modal parameter estimation, should
be considered carefully in the test (Avitabile, 1998). Any carelessness may result in
errors in the test data.
On the other hand, the finite element method has become a powerful tool for
engineering structural analysis. However, applications of the method depend, in
many cases, on how the mathematical model appropriately represents the real physical
system. Due to the complexity of real engineering structures, the analytical finite
element model generally contains modeling errors and could not represent the real
structures perfectly, especially for the features at the middle- and high-frequency
range and the feature's close boundary.
Many efforts have been devoted to bridge the gap between these two techniques. The
test analysis correlation, as an efficient and popular technique, is frequently utilized to
resolve this problem. It is achieved by the comparison of modal parameters derived
from modal or vibration test data with the corresponding modal data predicted by the
analytical finite element model. If the test-analysis correlation is unsatisfactory, either
finite element model updating or modification technique is used to update the finite
element model until some criterion is satisfied (Friswell and Mottershead, 1995),
or the modal test needs to be redone. Since the test data are generally much more
reliable than analytical data, any differences between them are usually considered as
the errors of the analytical finite element model. Therefore, a modal test is usually
used to validate the analytical finite element model.
In the validation of the analytical finite element model, modal parameters including
modal frequencies and mode shapes are used. It is quite a simple task to check
the accuracy of frequencies. However, it is much more difficult to determine the
295
accuracy of mode shapes due to the incompleteness of the mode shapes obtained
from experimental analysis.
Two types of incompleteness of the data from experimental modal analysis fre-
quently occurs in the validation (Gysin, 1990): (1) The number of degrees of freedom
to be used in test is generally one or more orders of magnitude smaller than that to be
used in the finite element model; and (2) the number of modes that can be identified
from a modal test is usually extremely smaller than that the finite element model can
provide. The two cases of incompleteness are referred to as coordinate incompleteness
and mode incompleteness, respectively. It has been proven (Fissette et al., 1988; Ojalvo
and Pilon, 1988) that the mode incompleteness is not severe because approaches
are available to validate the finite element model using just one complete mode.
While it appears that full-scale tests are including more and more accelerometers, the
level of detail in the finite element model is increasing even faster. This problem is
not likely to cure itself. Therefore, the coordinate incompleteness is a big issue in the
validation of the finite element model.
Most correlation techniques require a one-to-one correspondence between the test
data and analytical data. Thus, the coordinate incompleteness must be properly solved
before any correlation is performed. Model reduction and mode expansion are two
opposite ways used to cope with this incompleteness. The former reduces a finite
element model from the full model space, spanned by all the degrees of freedom of
the full model, to the reduced model space, spanned by all the degrees of freedom of the
reduced model or experimental model. Mode expansion expands the experimental
mode shape from the reduced model space to the full model space. Both algorithms
have strengths and weaknesses. The selection of them highly depends on the objectives
of the test analysis correlation. Actually, it can be simply verified that if the same
transformation matrix is used for reduction and expansion, the numerical results will
be identical.
The correlation at the reduced model space has several advantages. It is usually more
convenient and computationally efficient to reduce the full order of mass and stiffness
matrix. It also reduces the volume of data to be stored and used in the correlation.
Furthermore, the model reduction can be performed before the modal test. It could
help to identify the test locations. Therefore, if the objective is to assess the degree
of correlation between the experimental and theoretical models, a reduction of the
analytical finite element model from the full model space to the reduced model space
is probably the wisest routine.
However, the correlation based on the reduced model has weaknesses. As shown by
Berman and Nagy (1983) and He and Ewins (1991), the connectivity ofthe original
finite element model will be destroyed when the reduction technique is implemented
to produce the reduced model. The inverse quality of the stiffness matrix of the
slave model propagates the potential modeling errors to every entry of the reduced
system matrices. Since one fundamental issue of test -analysis correlation is to identify
the modeling errors, there should be as little masking of the original finite element
model connectivity and inverse spreading of modeling errors as possible to facilitate
the localization of discrepancies between the test data and the analytical data (Hemez
and Farhat, 1994). The mode expansion could resolve this problem properly. Since
no modification is performed on the original matrices of the finite element model
in the correlation based on mode expansion, there is no change of the connectivity
and modeling errors. However, the correlation based on the expanded mode shapes
has a severe drawback. Errors in the finite element model, which are to be identified,
are introduced into the expanded test mode shapes, which are assumed to reflect the
real structure, by mode expansion technique. This corruption of the test data will
Applications III: Modal Testing 297
generally lead to errors in the model validation process. Therefore, if the objective is
to update the finite element model or to recover the data on the untested locations
such as the rotational degrees of freedom, the mode expansion is a prerequisite.
The model reduction technique has been playing a very important role in exper-
imental modal analysis and test-analysis model correlation. The schemes for the
optimal selection of masters may help identify measurement locations in modal test-
ing. The reduced mass and stiffness matrices computed from the model reduction
technique may be used to compare the analytical and experimental modes through
orthogonality checks. The transformation inherent in the model reduction schemes
may also be used to expand the measured mode shapes to the full size of the finite
element model, and these mode shapes may then be used in test-analysis correlation
or model updating.
11.2 Selection of Measurement Locations

In modal testing the choice of the number and locations of sensors and actuators
has a major influence on the quality of results. From the measurement standpoint,
the selection of locations should be carefully chosen based on the availability of
testing facilities, feasibility of implementation, algorithms for extracting test data,
and so forth. From the viewpoint of test objective, the dynamic properties of the
structural system-modes interested, for example-should be considered. If the test
degrees of freedom are not selected properly, some modes may be completely missed
in extreme cases. For simple structures, the experienced engineer is able to make a
reasonable selection of the locations. For complex structures, however, the choice is
often difficult. Therefore, an automatic selection procedure that could be capable of
giving an optimal or near-optimal selection is highly desirable (Penny et aI., 1994).
One procedure, called the weighted average magnitude of eigenvectors (LMS, 1991),
has been incorporated into the widely used modal testing software-Leuven Mea-
surement Systems (LMS). In this procedure the coordinates with the largest "weighted
average" values in the analytical mode shapes are chosen as the measurement loca-
tions. Let Wi be the ith natural frequency. Suppose the engineer wants to measure
p mode shapes; then the average driving point residue (ADPR) for coordinate j is
computed as
P q;2.
ADPRj = "" J:.. (1)
Lw'
i=! I
q;ji is the jth element of the ith mode shape. Here, the mode shapes are assumed to be
real. The coordinates with largest ADPRs are chosen as measurement locations. This
procedure appears to work well in many instances; there are some models for which
this averaging process leads to some modes being poorly observed (Penny et aI., 1992).
The purpose of Guyan condensation, as mentioned in Chapter 4, is to reduce the
number of degrees of freedom in a large finite element model and produce a manage-
able reduced model. So far we have described the application of Guyan condensation
to a large finite element model for the purpose of generating a reduced model that
accurately maintains the characteristics of the original model at a lower frequency
range. In many respects the criterion for choosing the measurement locations in a
large system is the same, that is, we measure the lower-frequency modes accurately
(Penny et aI., 1994). It is reasonable to postulate that the master coordinates of a
finite element model can also serve as the measurement locations in modal testing.
Therefore, the selection schemes for the masters in Guyan condensation have been
used for selecting the locations of modal measurement (Penny et al., 1992, 1994).
In practice we determine the measurement locations as follows (Pennyet al., 1994).
We will begin with a finite element model that has many more degrees of freedom
than those that could be measured realistically. Before the automatic selection pro-
cedure begins, coordinates in the finite element model that cannot readily serve as
measurement locations are removed. They normally include most rotational degrees
of freedom and inaccessible degrees of freedom. Furthermore, the degrees of freedom
that may not be measured as accurately as others should be removed because use of
these less accurately measured degrees of freedom may tend to degrade the orthogo-
nality check (Avitabile et al., 1994). The automatic selection procedure (see Chapter 7)
is then used to reduce the number of master coordinates in the finite element model
to the number required for measurement purposes. Note that at each stage of the
reduction process, a reduced mass and stiffness matrix is generated. At the end of the
process these matrices generated could be used in test-analysis correlation.
11.3 Test-Analysis Model Correlation

In the model reduction technique, the analytical finite element model is reduced to
a reduced model, which only contains the test degrees of freedom, using a trans-
formation. The transformation matrix is defined as the relations of responses or
eigenvectors between the total degrees of freedom (n) and the test degrees of freedom
(m), that is,
(1)
or
(2)
Using this transformation matrix, we may obtain the stiffness and mass matrices of
the reduced model, referred to as the test-analysis model (TAM), defined only by test
degrees of freedom, as
(3)
These two matrices are, respectively, called the TAM stiffness matrix and TAM mass
matrix. Generally, the mass matrix represents the inertia of a system and is more
accurate than the stiffness matrix that models the elasticity of the system. Therefore,
the mass matrix is usually used as a weighting matrix in test-analysis mode shape
correlation computations such as orthogonality and cross-orthogonality checks.
11.3.1 Accuracy and Robustness of TAM

To ensure the TAM is indeed a proper representation of the test article, two primary
concerns have been defined (Freed and Flanigan, 1990; Gordis, 1994) as follows:
1. TAM accuracy: a measure of a TAM's ability to predict the dynamic characteristics,
including modal frequencies and mode shapes, of the finite element model within
a frequency range.
2. TAM robustness: a measure of a TAM's ability to show orthogonality of test modes

when discrepancies between the finite element model and test model exist. The
discrepancies could be the inaccuracies in the analytical finite element model or
in the test results, or both.
The robustness is of particular importance because showing orthogonality of test
modes is a commonly used requirement to determine the success of the test -analysis
model correlation.
Many criteria (O'Callahan, 1998; Heylen and Avitabile, 1998) have been devel-
oped to assess the quality of measured data and the correlation between analytical
predictions and test results. Only three commonly used criteria are listed herein.
Modal Assurance Criteria
The modal assurance criteria (Allemang and Brown, 1982) (see Section 7.2) is a
simple scheme to check the correlation of two modes. It was originally developed
to evaluate the consistency of experimental modal vectors obtained from different
modal tests. It can be extended to check the modal confidence between the analytical
and experimental modal vectors. The MAC is defined as
(4)
where CPA and cP B are the mode shapes of models A and B, respectively. A MAC value
close to 1 suggests that the two modes or vectors are well correlated, and a value close
to 0 indicates uncorrelated modes.
The main advantage of MAC is that no mass matrix is required for the determi-
nation of vector correlation. The MAC provides useful information when sufficient
degrees of freedom are used to spatially identify modal vectors. The major disad-
vantage of the MAC is that the larger modal coefficients dominate the MAC results
and the contributions from smaller amplitude modal coefficients are not effectively
evaluated very well (Avitabile et aI., 1992). Therefore, the MAC is usually performed
to determine the first level of correlation that exists between the analytical and experi-
mental modal data before any detailed orthogonality checks are performed (Avitabile
et aI., 1994).
Orthogonality
The orthogonality of test modes c)TEST with respect to the TAM mass matrix MTAM
in the reduced model space or TAM space is defined (Kammer, 1991) as
(5)
in which TOM is referred to as the test orthogonality matrix. If the TAM mass matrix
is an exact representation of the real structural mass distribution, and if the test
modes have been normalized with respect to mass matrix, TOM will be an identity
matrix with 1 on the diagonal and 0 on the off-diagonal. This would indicate perfect
orthogonality of the test modes with respect to the TAM mass matrix. Unfortunately,
various inaccuracies always occur in the analytical finite element model, as a result
the TAM, and in the test mode shapes. Therefore, the off-diagonal terms in TOM will
not be o. It is common practice to classify the orthogonality level as acceptable if all
the off-diagonal terms are less than 0.10.
Cross Orthogonality
Test and analysis mode shapes may also be directly compared using the TAM mass
matrix in a cross-orthogonality or pseudo-orthogonality check. The resulting cross-
generalized mass matrix (CGM) is given by (Kammer, 1991)
(6)
where both the test modes and the TAM modes 4>TAM have been normalized with
respect to mass. If the test and analysis mode shapes are identical, CGM will be an iden-
tity matrix. It is also common practice to state that an acceptable level of agreement
exists if the diagonal terms are larger than or equal to 0.90 and the off-diagonal-
diagonal terms are less than 0.10. If both the orthogonality and cross-orthogonality
conditions are met, and if the difference of test and analysis frequencies is within
5.0%, the analytical finite model is usually considered to be test-validated.
11.3.2 TAM Mass Matrix

Theoretically, most condensation methods presented in preceding chapters may be
used to develop the TAM mass matrix. Guyan condensation, IRS, iterative IRS,
modal reduction, SEREP, and hybrid reduction methods are several of the com-
monly used or promising model reduction schemes in the literature. Except the
hybrid reduction, the accuracy of other schemes has been investigated in preced-
ing chapters. The corresponding conclusions on their accuracy has received good
acknowledgement.
Comprehensive research (Freed and Flanigan, 1990; Avitabile et al., 1992; Tan,
1993; Gordis, 1994; Chung, 1998; Flanigan, 1998; Kammer, 1998) has been performed
to investigate the robustness of these model reduction methods. The investigations
show that the robustness of these model reduction methods is highly problem-
dependent. Generally, Guyan condensation has good robustness although its accuracy
is usually low.
Two practical engineering structural systems were utilized by Freed and Flanigan
(1990) to study the accuracy and robustness of four of the above-mentioned methods,
that is, Guyan condensation, IRS, modal reduction, and hybrid reduction. The first
example is a simple finite element model of a generic spacecraft (1,150 degrees of
freedom) with simulated test data, and the second example is a pretest finite element
model of a large aerospace structure with the corresponding modal survey results. It
was shown that the quality of these four reduction methods is problem-dependent
and none of them is clearly superior to the others. The robustness of static TAM is
much better than the other three.
Gordis (1994) utilized the NASA/Langley 10-bay generic space truss finite element
model to investigate the robustness of Guyan condensation and IRS. The results show
that the static TAM mass matrix has satisfactory robustness while the IRS TAM fails
to provide orthogonality checks for some cases.
Guyan condensation, IRS, modal reduction, and hybrid reduction were inves-
tigated by Tan (1993) using the NASA/Langley 10-bay truss. The results indicate
that Guyan TAM exhibits reasonable robustness and IRS has the best overall results
among the four methods. The robustness of modal reduction and hybrid reduction
is highly dependent upon the fidelity of the finite element model to the test model
and significantly poorer than either Guyan condensation or IRS.
Five model reduction methods-Guyan condensation, IRS, modal reduction,
hybrid reduction, and Craig-Bampton reduction-were investigated by Chung
(1998) using three space station hardware modal survey data. It was reported that
Guyan condensation has better robustness and less sensitivity to test-analysis errors
than the other four approaches.
Most investigations on the quality of TAM are based on the assumption that the
test data are absolutely accurate. As mentioned, highly accurate experimental data
are generally not easy to obtain from a complex structural system. The omission of
these inaccuracies in tests may lead to improper conclusions of the assessment of
model reduction methods.
GuyanlStatic TAM
The simplest TAM uses Guyan condensation method and is referred to as Guyan
TAM or static TAM. The transformation matrix T defined by Guyan condensation is
given by
Tcuyan = [ I ] = [ I ] (7)
RCuyan -K:;;I Ksm
Introducing Eq. (7) into Eq. (3) gives the Guyan TAM mass matrix, that is,
MCuyan = Mmm + R6uyanMsm + MmsRCuyan + R6uyanMssRcuyan (8)
The major advantages of Guyan condensation are that it is computationally efficient

and easy to implement. Guyan condensation is a standard option in many commercial
FEA programs including NASTRAN, ANSYS, and SDRC I-DEAS. The method has
been used for many years and is widely accepted in the testing community. Guyan
condensation has sufficient accuracy for many systems as long as the accelerometer
set is well selected. Therefore, besides the use of the proper selection schemes shown
in Chapter 7, it is suggested that the ratio of the number of masters with respect to
the number of interested modes be greater than two.
However, it is well known that Guyan condensation is a static condensation
and is only exact for static problems due to the ignorance of inertia. Its accuracy
will be very low if the test degrees of freedom are selected improperly. For some
special systems where the kinetic energy of vibration is spread out over a large
portion of the structure and the systems have high mass stiffness ratios, Guyan con-
densation is unacceptable. As shown in the example used by Freed and Flanigan
(1990), even though the number of masters is 225, Guyan condensation method
has difficulty predicting the 30th mode. Another example given by Flanigan and
Botos (1997) is Centaur upper stage containing a substantial mass of fluid. Since
accelerometers could not be placed directly on the fluid, the static TAM had dif-
ficulties accurately representing modes that had significant fluid mass or slosh
participation.
Although Guyan condensation generally has lower accuracy than other advanced
model reduction approaches such as IRS, modal reduction, hybrid reduction, research
shows that (Freed and Flanigan, 1990; Kammer, 1991; Chung, 1998) it has better
robustness than most advanced approaches.
IRS TAM
The transformation matrix defined in IRS may be expressed as
TIRS = [1] [
RIRS
=
RGuyan + K;;
1
[(Msm
1 -I
+ MssRGuyan)MGuyanKGuyan]
] (9)
in which KGuyan and MGuyan are the reduced stiffness and mass matrices resulting
from Guyan condensation. The TAM resulting from the IRS is called IRS TAM, and
the corresponding mass matrix may be obtained by substituting Eq. (9) into Eq. (3).
It is well acknowledged that IRS has higher accuracy than Guyan condensation due
to partial consideration of inertia ignored in Guyan condensation. This approach is
also not difficult to implement. However, it has been reported by many researchers
(Gordis, 1992, 1994; Kammer, 1991; Chung, 1998; Flanigan, 1998) that the IRS TAM
mass matrix lacks robustness in the orthogonality and cross-orthogonality checks.
The examination of the theory of IRS TAM was initiated by Gordis (1992). It was
found that if the modes of the slave model approach the frequency range of the IRS
TAM, the IRS TAM mass matrix would be poorly conditioned. An improvement in
the robustness of the IRS TAM mass matrix can be achieved by increasing the lowest
frequency of the slave model and thereby decreasing the overlap of spectrum of slave
model and IRS TAM.
Iterative IRS TAM
In the iterative IRS TAM, the transformation matrix is obtained by an iterative scheme
!
given by
R (i)
IIRS = RGuyan -
-I
Kss
[(M
sm + Mss R(i-l))
!IRS
(M(i-l))-IK(i-I)]
R R (i=1,2, ... )
(0)
R IIRS = RGuyan
(10)
and
(i)
T IIRS = [1]
R(i)
IIRS
(11)
As shown in Chapter 6, the initial and the first orders of approximations of the
transformation matrix computed from the iterative scheme are, respectively, identical
to Guyan condensation and IRS. The iterative IRS has much higher accuracy than
Guyan condensation and IRS. However, it is inconvenient to implement this scheme
due to the iteration. The investigation on its robustness has not been reported in
literature.
Modal TAM
Modal TAM, derived from modal reduction, uses the analytical mode shapes to reduce
the finite element model. In this method, the transformation matrix takes the form
T Modal =[ ~ I~+
sk mk
]=[ ~ (~T ~I
sk mk mk
)-l~T ]
mk
(12)
The subscript k denotes the kept modes. The numbers of the kept modes and the
test degrees of freedom are represented by nk and n m . The transformation matrix in
Eq. (12) will be numerically exact if the generalized inverse exists and is well condi-
tioned. This requires that there be sufficient test degrees of freedom to make the modes
linearly independent and observable at these degrees of freedom. In theory, a modal
reduction could be performed using as few as one accelerometer per mode (Freed
and Flanigan, 1990). However, practical usage requires a more generous selection of
accelerometers in order to obtain good numerical conditioning of the generalized
inverse. When the number of modes used to form a modal transformation matrix is
equal to the number of test degrees of freedom (nk = n m ), the reduced mass matrix
(TAM mass matrix) and stiffness matrix contain an exact description of the full finite
element model's dynamics for the modes of interest. However, when the former is
less than the latter (nk < n m ), although the transformation matrix concerning the
selected modes is exact, the transformation matrix with respect to those nonselected
modes has big errors.
Modal TAM has very high accuracy because the exact mode shapes of the analytical
finite element model are used to formulate the transformation matrix. It has been
successfully applied to test analysis correlation for several large structures (Kammer
et al., 1989; Kammer and Flanigan, 1991). However, when the test modes are notice-
ably different from those predicted by the finite element model or when the finite
element model has noticeable errors, the use of a modal TAM in test-analysis orthog-
onality and cross-orthogonality computations can result in larger off-diagonal terms
than the corresponding values produced by a much less accurate static TAM (Freed
and Flanigan, 1990; Kammer, 1991; Chung, 1998). This means that modal reduction
is more sensitive to the differences between the test and analysis models than Guyan
condensation.
In general, the test mode shapes contain measurement noise from the sensors. In
addition, each test mode also contains noise due to corruption from other modes.
Methods for extracting mode shapes from test data are not perfect; therefore, each
resulting test mode is actually a linear combination of many modes. Many of these
corrupting mode shapes are residual modes that are not included in the modal reduc-
tion. Lack of sensors resources prohibits the inclusion of all the residual modes in the
modal TAM generation process within the frequency range of interest. It is believed
that the modal TAM's poor representation of these residual modes makes it extra
sensitive to residual corruption of the test data and model error (Kammer, 1991).
Chung (1998) believed that the low robustness of modal TAM resulted from the
implementation of analytical mode shapes in generating the transformation matrix.
These mode shapes are generally deteriorated due to the errors in the modeling of the
finite element model.
SEREPTAM
The SEREP was developed to reduce a finite element model down to an exact model
at the reduced model space, which correctly preserves the eigenvalues and eigen-
vectors at the reduced set of test degrees of freedom for a specific set of modes.
The transformation matrix is formed from the analytical mode shapes, that is,
TSEREP = cpkcp~k = [CPmk(CP;kCPmk)~llCP;k] (13)

cp sk ( cp mk cp mk ) cp mk
This transformation matrix has very similar features as those in modal TAM. The
TAM based on this transformation is referred to as SEREP TAM.
There are two differences between SEREP and modal reduction (Kammer, 1998).
The first difference is how to handle the transformation of analytical or test mode
shapes at the masters from the TAM level to the full finite element model level. Modal
reduction does not make any change in the transformation. In contrast, the SEREP
uses the relation cp mk cp ~k' If this transformation is utilized to transfer the test mode
shapes from TAM level to full finite element model level, it tends to smooth the test
data that might be desirable sometimes due to noise and other errors in test data.
Another important distinction is that the transformation used by modal reduction
is full column rank, n m , while the SEREP transformation has rank corresponding to
the number of kept modes, nk. Therefore, the system matrices of modal TAM are
generally positive definite and this model can predict the residual modes although
the corresponding accuracy is extremely low. The reduced system matrices computed
from SEREP are generally rank-deficient. It may cause many problems in further
dynamic analyses. The details have been described in Chapter 5.
When the number of modes used to form a SEREP transformation matrix is equal
to the number of test degrees of freedom, the reduced mass matrix (TAM mass matrix)
and stiffness matrix contain an exact description of the full finite element model's
dynamics for the modes of interest. However, when the former is less than the latter,
the reduced system matrices will be of rank deficiency although the transformation
concerning the selected modes is exact. The transformation matrix with respect to
those nons elected modes is meaningless. Therefore, this approach is generally utilized
in test-analysis correlation.
Hybrid TAM
To overcome the low robustness of modal reduction, a hybrid reduction was developed
by Kammer (1991) that combines the accuracy of the modal TAM with the robustness
of Guyan condensation. The reduced model computed from the hybrid reduction is
referred to as hybrid TAM. In this technique, the responses of the full model are
defined as the summation of the contribution by the kept modes indicated by k and
by the residual modes indicated by r (the number is n r ), that is,
(14)
The kept responses are expanded using the modal reduction transformation in
Eq. (12), and the residual responses are approximated by the static condensation.
Using this assumption, Eq. (14) becomes
(15)
Assume an idempotent projector, PT, exists such that a space can be divided into two
complementary subspaces. Define
(16)
(17)
where PN is the complement of PT and I is an identity matrix. A projector PT can

be constructed such that
X~ =PTXm (18)
X:;" = PNX m = (I - PT)X m (19)
Introduction of Eqs. (18) and (19) into Eq. (15) gives
(20)
in which T Hybrid is the coordinate transformation matrix of hybrid reduction. It is

given by
(21)
PT is an oblique projector matrix that is formed using the analytical finite element
mode shapes, the transformation matrix from modal TAM, and the analytical mass
matrix:
(22)
With the substitution of Eq. (21) into Eq. (3), the hybrid TAM mass matrix is
obtained as
MHybrid = PiMModalPT + piT~TMTGuyanPN + P'k T 6uyan MT mTPT

+ P'kMGuyanPT (23)
It can be simply verified that all the kept modes are orthogonal with the hybrid
TAM and the hybrid TAM null space dynamics come exclusively from the static TAM
representation.
Research (Kammer, 1991) shows that the hybrid TAM usually has a significant
improvement in the representation of the residual dynamics of the system compared
to the modal TAM representation. This improved residual representation results in
reduced sensitivity of test-analysis correlation to model error and contamination of
the test data by residual dynamics. Although the hybrid TAM shows some improve-
ment over the modal TAM, it still has some problems (Freed and Flanigan, 1990;
Chung, 1998). It is more sensitive to the error in the analytical finite element model
than Guyan condensation in some cases.
It is necessary to note that when the number of test degrees of freedom is equal to
the number of kept modes, the modal reduction, SEREP, and hybrid reduction are
exactly the same.
Craig-Bampton TAM
The Craig-Bampton method (Craig and Bampton, 1968), commonly employed

in the component mode synthesis, transforms the dynamic degrees of freedom
into the combination of boundary degrees of freedom and the modal coordi-
nates. For structural systems that have a large number of degrees of freedom or
have components designed by different groups or organizations, the method has
been proven to be accurate, efficient, and economical.· However, in the modal
testing, the accelerometers cannot be mounted on these modal coordinates. There-
fore, a transformation matrix is required to convert the modal coordinates back
to the physical coordinates. The resulting model is referred to as Craig-Bampton
TAM and only has physical coordinates. The details of this model can be found in
Chapter 12.
Actually, if a reasonable set of masters is selected, most of the model reduction
approaches will tend to provide the same results. Therefore, for the pretest consid-
erations, the analytical model, if it is available, should be used to choose the masters
so that all the model reduction methods give similar results (Avitabile et al., 1992).
Fortheviewpoint of TAM correlation, Guyan condensation is generally the best selec-
tion. When Guyan condensation is inadequate or infeasible, advanced methods may
be used (Flanigan and Hunt, 1993).
11.4 Mode Expansion and Data Recovery

As mentioned earlier, the correlation studies between analytical finite element model
and test model may be performed both at the reduced model space or TAM space
using reduced system matrices (TAM matrices) or at the full model space using
the analytical full system matrices. Generally, it is more efficient to perform the
test-analysis correlation at the reduced model space. However, in some cases, the
correlation at full space shows many advantages.
When the degrees of freedom with large mass stiffness ratio could not be selected
as masters, the correlation at full model space shows great advantages. One example is
the structure system containing substantial mass of fluid (Flanigan and Botos, 1997).
Since accelerometers could not be placed directly on fluid, these locations may not be
used in the test.
The orthogonality check at reduced model space may not necessarily provide a
good indication of vector correlation between finite element modes and experimental
modes if all degrees of freedom for all mode shapes are used. This may be due
to difficulties in selecting an appropriate set of test locations that are good for all
modes considered or due to error associated with certain degrees of freedom. This
situation occurs especially when degrees of freedom are at or near nodes of mode
shapes. Correlation studies are most likely to produce the best results if the modes
are expanded in sets using an optimum set of test degrees of freedom for each set
of modes independent of other modes. Each set of modes contains well-measured
degrees of freedom. Then, the orthogonality check performed at full model space
rather than at reduced model space should produce a better indication of the true
vector correlation (Avitabile et aI., 1994).
Due to the incompleteness of test degrees of freedom, mode expansion is required
to get the mode shapes at the full model space. Extensive investigations have been
performed on this topic. Reviews and comparisons of various expansion techniques

have been performed by Gysin (1990), Hemez and Farhat (1994), O'Callahan and Li
(1996), and Balmes (2000).
The expansion techniques fall into three basic categories (Imregun and Ewins,
1993; Hemez and Farhat, 1994): the geometrical methods; the projection algorithm;
and the subspace rotation algorithm. Geometrical methods are based on interpo-
lation and extrapolation algorithms rather than structural dynamics. Essentially,
Bessel-Hermite, Spline-Hermite, and higher-order Spline schemes may be used for
predicting the nonmeasured components of the modal vectors. Only the measured
data are used in these approaches. However, there are only few applications to struc-
tural dynamics due to the problems associated with complex spatial descriptions
and sudden changes of geometry. In the projection algorithm, a projection matrix
or transformation matrix is defined between the measured modes and the analytical
modes.
The subspace rotation algorithm relies on the assumption that the measured modes
can be expressed as linear combinations of the analytical modes. Usually, the problem
is overdetermined and, therefore, best formulated by writing the minimization of a
residual (Hemez and Farhat, 1994):
(1)
The various algorithms differ by the choice of the norm 1111, by the choice of a sym-
metric, positive definite weighting matrix W, and by the adjunction of orthogonality
constraints on rotation matrix R such as
(2)
A typical choice of norm is the Frobenius (or Euclidean) norm because it facilitates
the derivation of closed-form formulae. It can be simply verified that the SEREP
can be obtained from Eq. (1) when the weighting matrix is set as identity matrix.
Therefore, the subspace rotation algorithm overlaps with the projection algorithm to
some extent.
The details on the geometrical methods and subspace rotation algorithms are
beyond the scope of this book and may be found from the references. Only the
projection algorithms will be discussed in the following.
The mode expansion usually takes the form of a matrix transformation:
lPExp = TlPTest (3)
where the subscript Exp denotes the expanded mode shape. T is the transformation
matrix as defined in the preceding section. Mode expansion could be used when
there are insufficient numbers of test degrees of freedom to produce a good
TAM. Theoretically, mode expansion can provide good results using only one
accelerometer.
After the test mode shapes are expanded from the reduced model space to the
full model space, the aforementioned criteria may be utilized to validate the finite
element model if required. Even if the MAC can be performed at the reduced
model space, the results may not be satisfactory due to the limited spatial quali-
ties of the reduced space. Since this approach is a spatial correlation method, it is
important that the degrees of freedom used in comparison be proper and sufficient.
Therefore, the implementation of MAC at full model space generally shows good
performance.
The orthogonality check performed at the full model space using the fully expanded
mode shapes takes the form
(4)
and the cross orthogonality has the form
(5)
Definitely, the orthogonality checks at the full model space are more computationally
expensive than those at the reduced model space.
Because the mode expansion is actually an inverse process of model reduction,
most model reduction approaches mentioned in preceding chapters may be imple-
mented in the mode expansion. Several commonly used and promising approaches
are Guyan expansion, IRS expansion, iterative IRS expansion, modal expan-
sion, SEREP expansion, exact expansion, modified exact expansion, and Kidder's
expansion.
The Guyan condensation method is the simplest scheme in the mode expansion.
Theoretically, the modeling errors localized in the test degrees of freedom does not
have any effect on the mode expansion matrix although it is practically difficult to
make it. Other strengths and weaknesses of Guyan expansion are the same as Guyan
condensation.
Exact Expansion
The mode expansion matrix corresponding to the exact expansion has the form
Texact = [-(Kss - (j)

2
Mss)
I
-1
(Ksm -
]
Msm)
(j)
2 (6)
in which (j) can be the frequency either from modal test or from analytical model.
The exact expansion method may drastically improve orthogonality and cross-
orthogonality results for selected problems (Flanigan and Freymiller, 1994; Flanigan
and Botos, 1997).
Modified Exact Expansion
Modified exact expansion was proposed by Gysin (1990) to include all the elements of
system matrices into the transformation matrix:
(7)
The above two mode expansion schemes have the advantage of explicitly using the
available test frequencies. The expansion matrices have high accuracy if the errors in
the analytical stiffness and mass matrices are small and the test frequency has enough
accuracy.
However, it is clearly shown in Eqs. (6) and (7) that the transformation matrices of
exact expansion and modified exact expansion methods are mode-dependent. Thus,
all tested mode shapes have to be expanded one by one. This means that Eq. (6) or
(7) must be solved uniquely for each mode. For a large size of models, the expansion
process can be extremely time-consuming.
Furthermore, it is believed (Qu and Fu, 1998; Qu and Selvam, 2001) that the
exact expansion could give very good results when the analytical modes are close
to test modes. However, this expansion will significantly deteriorate the accuracy of
the expanded mode if the difference between the analytical modes and test modes is
relatively large.
Kidder's Expansion
The mode expansion matrix in Kidder's expansion is given by
TKidder = I
[-(Kss-1 + w 2Kss-1 MssKss
-1 ] 2
)(Ksm - w Msm)
(9)
where w can be the frequency either from the modal test or from the analytical
model. It is believed that (Qu and Fu, 1998; Qu and Selvam, 2001) this expansion is
less sensitive to the difference between the analytical modes and test modes.
These mode expansion approaches have also been broadly implemented into the
expansion of measured frequency response functions (Choudhury and He, 1996;
Avitabile and O'Callahan, 2003) and the data recovery (Pang, 1996, 2002). In
engineering the responses or mode shapes at the nonmeasured degrees of free-
dom are sometimes of interest. One example is structure control. Usually only
a small number of sensors are used for a feedback control algorithm. The mode
expansion technique may be utilized to predict these responses at nonmeasured
locations.
In model recovery technique, the same parameters as those in test-analysis model
correlation must be considered to prove that the structure's characteristics are accu-
rately recovered. A detailed investigation of four model reduction methods, Guyan
condensation, IRS, iterative IRS, and SEREP, on the quality of model recovery was
performed by Pang (1996, 2002) through a highway bridge. It was reported that the
masters on a structure were critical for a model recovery. If the masters are uniformly
picked up on a structure and the number of degrees of freedom is enough to reflect
structure dynamic characteristics, the information will be well recovered. If the mas-
ters are chosen on a concentrated location, the mode shapes and some responses of
full model close to the location of masters could be successfully recovered. However,
the recovered responses far away from the concentrated masters have significant error.
Among the four reduction methods, the recovered model from the iterative IRS has
the highest accuracy.
11.5 Summary
In modal testing it is impossible to mount sensors on all degrees of freedom that
are used in the analytical finite element model. Hence, the choice of locations to be
tested has a major influence on the quality of results. In many respects the criteria
for choosing measurement locations in a large system are the same as those for
selecting masters in model reduction. Therefore, many selection schemes for the
masters in model reduction approaches may be implemented to choose measurement
locations.
The test -analysis correlation technique has been widely used in the validation of
analytical finite element model using the data from a modal test. Due to the incom-
pleteness of data from experiment, the model reduction technique is commonly used
to reduce the full finite element model to the reduced model space or expand the test
mode shape to the full model space. Therefore, with the model reduction technique,
the test analysis correlation may be performed either at the reduced model space or
at the full model space. If the objective of the test analysis correlation is to assess the
degree of correlation between the experimental and theoretical models, a reduction
of the analytical finite element model from the full model space to the reduced model
space is probably the wisest routine. If the objective is to update the finite element
model or to recover the data on the untested locations, the mode expansion is a
prerequisite.
Guyan condensation, IRS, iterative IRS, modal reduction, SEREP, and hybrid
reduction are the frequently used or promising model reduction approaches in gener-
ating the test-analysis model. Although Guyan condensation has the lowest accuracy
among these approaches, it is the simplest, most widely acknowledged approach.
It is less sensitive to the errors in analytical finite element model than all advanced
schemes. IRS has higher accuracy than Guyan condensation due to the partial con-
sideration of inertia ignored in the latter. However, it shows less robustness in some
cases. Iterative IRS has much higher accuracy than Guyan condensation and IRS. The
investigation on its robustness is still underway. Modal reduction, SEREP, and hybrid
reduction are exact for the mode shapes selected. However, for the un selected modes,
the modes predicted by modal reduction and SEREP have very big errors and are
meaningless, respectively. The robustness of these three approaches still has problems
10 some cases.
Guyan expansion, IRS expansion, iterative IRS expansion, modal expansion, SEREP
expansion, exact expansion, modified exact expansion, and Kidder's expansion are
frequently used or are promising mode expansion approaches in the literature. Exact
expansion and modified exact expansion schemes have the advantage of explicitly
using the available test frequencies. The expansion matrices have high accuracy if the
errors in the analytical stiffness and mass matrices are small and the test frequency has
enough accuracy. However, they are very sensitive to the errors in the finite element
model. It is believed that Kidder's expansion is less sensitive to the difference between
the analytical modes and test modes.
Since the robustness of all advanced model reduction techniques is highly problem-
dependent, it is better to use several schemes for the same problem in the test-analysis
correlation. Generally, all the schemes tend to give close results if the analytical finite
element model is close to the test model.
References
A1lemang, RJ and Brown, DL (1982) A correlation coefficient for modal vector analysis.
Proceedings of the 1st International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for
Avitabile, P, Pechinsky, F, and O'Callahan, J (1992) Study of modal vector correlation
using various techniques for model reduction. Proceedings of the 10th International Modal
Analysis Conference (San Diego, CAl, Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 572-583.
Avitabile, P, Foster, T, and O'Callahan, J (1994) Comparison ofreduction vs expansion for orthogonality
checks. Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society for
Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 225-231 .
Avitabile, P (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 3: Experimental modal testing considerations for finite
element model correlation. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa
Barbara, CAl, Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 185-196.
Avitabile, P and O'Callahan, J (2003) Frequency response function expansion for unmeasured translation
and rotation dofs for impedance modeling applications. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
17(4):723-745.
Balmes, E (2000) Review and evaluation of shape expansion methods. Proceedings of the 18th International
Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 555-
561.
Berman, A and Nagy, EJ (1983) Improvement of large analytical model using test data. AIAA Journal,
21 (8): 1168-1173.
Choudhury, AR and He, J (1996) Structural damage location using expanded measured frequency response
function data. Proceedings of the 14th International Modal Analysis Conference (Dearborn, MI), Society
Craig, RR, Jr and Bampton, MCC (1968) Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses. AlAA Journal,
6(7):1313-1319.
Chung, YT (1998) Evaluation of model reduction methods using modal test data. Proceedings of the 16th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CAl, Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Fissette, E, Ibrahim, SR, and Stavrinidis, C (1988) Error location and updating of analytical dynamic
models using a force balance method. Proceedings of the 6th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Kissimmee, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 1063-1070.
Flanigan, CC and Hunt, DL (1993) Integration of pretest analysis and model correlation methods for modal
surveys. Proceedings of the II th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for
Flanigan, CC and Freymiller, JE (1994) Using dynamic expansion to improve test -analysis correlation. Pro-
ceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society for Experimental
Flanigan, CC and Botos, CD (1997) Improvement of the centaur modal survey test correlation using
dynamic expansion. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL),
Flanigan, CC (1998) Model reduction using Guyan, IRS, and dynamic methods. Proceedings of the 16th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Freed, AM and Flanigan, CC (1990) A comparison of test-analysis model reduction methods. Proceedings
of the 8th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
1344-1351.
Friswell, MI and Mottershead, JE (I995) Finite Element Model Updating in Structural Dynamics. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, New York.
Gordis, JH (1992) An analysis of the improved reduced system (IRS) model reduction procedure. Proceed-
ings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for Experimental
Gordis, JH (1994) An analysis of the Improved Reduced System (IRS) model reduction procedure. Modal
Analysis, 9(4):269-285.
Gysin, H (1990) Comparison of expansion methods for FE modeling error localization. Proceedings of
the 8th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
195-204.
He, J and Ewins, DJ (1991) Compatibility of measured and predicted vibration modes in model
improvement studies. AIAA Journal, 29(5):798-803.
Hemez, FM and Farhat, C (1994) Comparing mode shape expansion methods for test-analysis corre-
lation. Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society for
Heylen, Wand Avitabile, P (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 5: Degree of freedom correlation
technique. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CAl,
Imregun, M and Ewins, DJ (1993) An investigation into mode shape expansion techniques. Proceedings of
the 11 th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Kammer, DC, Jensen, BM, and Mason, DR (1989) Test -analysis correlation of the space shuttle solid rocket
motor center segment. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 26(4):266-273.
Kammer, DC and Flanigan, CC (1991) Development of test -analysis models for large space structures
using substructure representation. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 28(2):244-250.
Kammer, DC (1991) A hybrid approach to test-analysis-model development for large space structures.
Kammer, DC (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 2: Model reduction using modal, SEREP, and hybrid.
Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CAl, Society for
LMS International (1991) Large-scale modal testing of a space frame structure-from pretest analysis to
FEA model validation. Sound and Vibration: 6-16.
O'Cailahan, J and Li, P (1996) SEREP expansion. Proceedings of the 14th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Dearborn, MI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1258-1264.
O'Caliahan, J (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 4: Modal vector correlation techniques. Proceedings
of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CAl, Society for Experimental
Ojalvo, IV and Pilon, D (1988) Diagnostics for geometrically locating structural math model errors from
modal test data structures. Proceedings of the 29th Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials
Conference (Orlando, FL): 1174-1186.
Pang, J (1996) Modeling and Experimental Modal Analysis of Highway Bridge. Ph.D. Dissertation, Center
of Structural Control, The University of Oklahoma.
Pang, J, Dukkipati, R, and Patten, WN (2002) Model recovery technique from reduced model. International
Journal of Vehicle Design, 29(4):317-333.
Penny, JET, Friswell, MI, and Garvey, SD (1992) The automatic choice of measurement locations for
dynamic testing. Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CAl,
Penny, JET, Friswell, MI, and Garvey, SD (1994) Automated choice of measurement locations for dynamic
testing. AIAA Journal, 32(2):407-414.
Qu, ZQ and Fu, ZF (1998) Comment on improvement in model reduction schemes using the system
equivalent reduction expansion process. AIAA Journal, 36(10):1941.
Qu, ZQ and Selvam, RP (2001) Two-step methods for dynamic condensation. Proceedings of the 42nd
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Seattle, WA),
AIAA, Reston, VA: 373-383.
Tan, MK (1993) Evaluation of reduced model concepts for the 1O-bay CST truss modal test. Proceedings of
the 11 th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Inc., Bethel, CT: 1493-1501.
12 Summary of Other Model Order Reduction
Techniques
Besides the dynamic condensation technique described in preceding chapters, many

other techniques are available in the literature for the model reduction in the area
of structural dynamics and vibrations. Several popular techniques among them will
be summarized in this chapter. They are modal coordinate reduction, Ritz vector
method, component mode synthesis, proper orthogonal decomposition, balanced
realization reduction, and condensation model reduction.
12.1 Modal Coordinate Reduction

Modal coordinate reduction is one of the most widely used model reduction tech-
niques for linear and weakly nonlinear structural dynamic systems. It is actually a
combination of mode superposition and modal truncation methods. Mode supposi-
tion method transforms the full, large size of the finite element model from physical
coordinates in physical space to modal coordinates in modal space using the eigen-
vector matrix of this system. The modal truncation scheme removes those modal
coordinates or modes that have unimportant contributions to the system responses.
Generally, only a few modes have a significant effect on the system dynamic char-
acteristics within the frequency range of interest; the number of modal coordinates
retained is, thus, much smaller than that of physical coordinates. This is the concept of
modal coordinate reduction, as shown in Figure 12.1. In this figure the modal coordi-
nate reduction is divided into two stages, mode superposition and modal truncation,
only for demonstration purposes. In practice, the mode superposition and modal
truncation are always performed together for large-size models. The term "modal
coordinate reduction" is used herein deliberately instead of modal reduction, which
is frequently referred to in the literature, in order to emphasize the difference between
this method and the modal reduction described in Section 5.6.
Because the theory of modal coordinate reduction is classical and quite simple and
the number of publications on this topic is quite large, only several papers on hand
will be cited herein. The modal coordinate reduction for linear structural dynamic
problems may be found in many textbooks in this area. Generally, this technique
may be implemented both at the system level and at the component level (Vethecan
and Subic, 2002). Although the modal coordinate reduction is derived from the
linear dynamic model, it has been widely utilized into the dynamic systems with
nonlinearities (Bathe and Gracewsky, 1981; Xue, 1991; Zheng and Hasebe, 1999).
313
Full Model with n Physical DOFs
[-I III Irrll rI-I rrll fIII I'III III -[

------------n----------- J
Mode Superposition
~
Full Model with n Modal OOFs
------------------------,
,,,
: I I I n I' ,,
,
'k ,
,
, I ,
,
------------n----------- J
Modal Truncation
~
------------------------,
Reduced Model with m Modal DOFs
I ',
,,
: I I I m
,
:k e e ek :
,
, 1
________________________ J
m
,
,
Figure 12.1 Schematic of modal coordinate reduction.
A concise review of the applications of real and complex modal coordinate reduction
into rotor dynamics was performed by Khulief and Mohiuddin (1997).
For completeness the dynamic equations of equilibrium of a structural dynamic
system is rewritten herein as
MX(t) + CX(t) + K X(t) = F(t) (1)
in which the damping matrix is considered to be proportional. In the modal coor-

dinate reduction the dynamic responses in physical space are approximated by a
linear combination of m normal modes in which m «n. Depending upon the
frequency range on which the dynamic characteristics are interested, the modal coor-
dinate reduction can be divided into low-frequency reduction and middle-frequency
reduction.
12.1.1 Low-Frequency Redudion

In the low-frequency reduction scheme, we are interested in the dynamic characteristics
of the model at its low-frequency range. Therefore, only the modes at that range are
kept and all higher-order modes are truncated. Suppose that the lowest m normal
modes are available and denoted by ~m E Rnxm, the dynamic responses X E R n in
Summary of Other Model Order Reduction Techniques 315
physical space may be expressed in terms of the m modal coordinates qm E R m as

m
X(t) = .mqm(t) = L qif{Ji (2)

i=1
Substituting Eq. (2) in Eq. (1) and premultiplying it by the transpose of the eigenvector
matrix give
(3)
C mm is a diagonal modal damping matrix for proportional damping; Amm is the

eigenvalue matrix of the full model. The m equations in Eq. (3) are uncoupled in
the modal space and can be looked as a set of single-degree-of-freedom models.
This procedure is generally referred to as the mode superposition method or mode
displacement method.
To ensure that the dynamic responses computed from the mode superposition
method have enough accuracy, all the modes whose frequencies are up to at least two
or three times the highest exciting frequency should be retained in the summation.
Therefore, the number of modes required to be included in the mode superposition
is usually big, which leads to a very expensive computational effort in the eigenvalue
analysis. Consequently, the mode acceleration method was proposed to accelerate the
convergence (Akgun, 1993; Gu, 2000; Qu, 2000, 2001).
The dynamic equations (1) can be rewritten as
X(t) = K- 1(F(t) - C.X(t) - MX(t» (4)
Introduction of Eq. (2) into Eq. (4) gives
(5)
Considering K- 1 = .A -l.T and the orthogonality of normal modes, Eq. (5) is

expressed as
X(t) = K- 1F(t) - .mA;;;~[Cmmqm(t) + qm(t)] (6)
X(t) = K- 1 F(t) - .mA;;;~.~F(t) + .mqm(t) (7)
or in a more popular form
(8)
The first term at the right-hand side ofEq. (8) is the same as that in mode superposi-
tion as shown in Eq. (2). The second term represents the static correction of truncated
modes. With the introduction of the correction term, the number of normal modes
required in the mode superposition is significantly reduced if the same accuracy of
responses is required. The convergent condition of the mode acceleration is that the
smallest frequency of the truncated modes is greater than the upper boundary value
of the exciting frequencies (Ou, 2000, 2001). Actually, Eq. (8) is the first order of
mode acceleration, the more general cases of low-frequency mode acceleration method,
whose specific form for transient response is also called force derivative method, are
available in the literature for undamped models (Akgun, 1993; Ou, 2000), propor-
tionally damped models (Ou, 2001), and nonproportionally damped models (Ou
and Selvam, 2000).
12.1.2 Middle-Frequency Reduction

In many situations the dynamic characteristics at the middle-frequency range of a
model are of interest. If the same mode supposition method as above is utilized, the
number of modes required will be very big. This is a heavy burden on the eigen-
value analysis of the model. Therefore, the middle-frequency reduction for the modal
coordinate reduction is developed.
The difference of two modal coordinate reduction approaches is the selection of
kept modes. In the middle-frequency reduction, the m modes at the middle-frequency
range of the structural model are selected. The frequencies of these m modes should
cover the exciting frequency range. To ensure enough accuracy of the method, the
normal frequency range need to be at least two or three times wider than the exciting
frequency range.
Similarly, the convergence of middle-frequency reduction can be accelerated by
mode acceleration schemes in which a frequency or spectral shift is required. The
corresponding middle-frequency mode acceleration method for undamped models
(Ou, 2000), proportionally damped models (Ou and Selvam, 2000), and nonpropor-
tionally damped models (Ou, 2001) are available in the literature. Interested readers
may find details in these references.
12.2 Ritz Vector Methods

12.2.1 Introduction
Ritz vector methods have long been used as a model reduction technique to reduce
the size of large-scale finite element models. They are an attractive alternative of
mode superposition method when a model is subjected to fixed spatial distribution
of dynamic loads and the eigenvectors of the model are not the best choice of basis, e.g.,
eignvectors that are orthogonal to the loading are not excited even if their frequencies
are contained in the loading frequency bandwidth. In addition, Ritz vectors are
employed within some eigenvalue solvers because a properly generated set of Ritz
vectors can significantly accelerate the iteration process of an eigenvalue solver (Leger,
1989; Gu et al., 2000).
Load-dependent Ritz vectors (LDRVs) are a particular and efficient class of Ritz vec-
tors in which loading information on the structure is used to generate the vectors. In
the LDRV method, the first Ritz vector is the static deformation of a structure due to a
particular applied load pattern. Additional orthogonal vectors can be computed using
inverse iteration and Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization. The Ritz vectors generated
by this scheme automatically include static correction. The generation of LDRVs is
usually less expensive than the computation of eigenvectors. Because the Ritz vectors
are created based on a specific load pattern, few Ritz vectors are typically needed to
achieve the same level of accuracy in response analysis under that excitation. How-
ever, the Ritz vectors have to be regenerated if the load pattern changes. Therefore, the
reduced model obtained from the Ritz vector method is load-dependent. Different
load-patterns have different reduced models. This is a weakness of the LDRV method.
The LDRV method was probably first developed by Wilson, Yuan, and Dickens
(1982) and improved by Nour-Omid and Clough (1984, 1985) and by Leger, Wilson,
and Clough (1986). These schemes employ static recurrence procedures to generate
the LDRVs. They are best suited for low-frequency problems. For high frequency, or
banded-frequency, problems, they may engender large set of Ritz vectors to span the
configuration space associated with high frequencies.
To overcome this limitation, a new LDRV method, called the quasistatic Ritz vector
method, was proposed by Gu, Ma, and Hulbert (2000) that employs a quasistatic
recurrence procedure. The introduction of a tuning parameter, designated as the
centering frequency, into the quasistatic recurrence procedure enables the quasistatic
Ritz vector method to achieve a good set of Ritz vectors. It was reported (Gu et aI.,
2000) that the quasistatic Ritz vector method is more efficient (in terms of num-
ber of recurrence steps or LDRVs employed), more accurate (in terms of response
errors), and more stable (in terms of the orthogonality of the Ritz vectors) than other
LDRV methods. The quasistatic Ritz vector method can include multiple centering
frequencies and accommodate multiple loading cases.
In structural dynamics the dynamic equations of equilibrium of a system with
damping are usually given by
MX(t) + CX(t) + K X(t) = F(t) (1)
The external load vector F(t) is often represented by a superposition of the spatial
matrix G (loading patterns) and the time-dependent vector H (t), i. e.,
k
F(t) = GH(t) = L:gjhj(t) (2)
j=1
where
G- r_
-1..81 H(t) = {hi (t) (3)
and k denotes the total number of loading patterns. For many types of loading, the
number of loading patterns is small.
Assume that the Ritz vectors are obtained as V m with the order of n x m. The
physical coordinates X(t) may be represented by the generalized coordinates qm(t),
referred to as Ritz coordinates, with the Ritz vectors V m as
(4)
qm(t) is a vector with m elements. Introducing this coordinate transformation into

Eq. (1) and premultiplying the resultant equation by the transpose of V m gives
(5)
or
(6)
in which the system matrices of the reduced model are defined as
MR = V~MV m, CR = V~CV m,
FR = V~F, GR = V~G (7)
Equation (5) or (6) is the dynamic equations of equilibrium of the reduced model.
Clearly, they are dependent on the Ritz vectors V m. In the following, only the case
of a single loading pattern will be described. The corresponding spatial matrix G is
a vector, and the time-dependent vector H(t) is a scalar function. The details on the
multiple load patterns may be found in Gu, Ma, and Hulbert (2000).
12.2.2 Static Ritz Vector Methods

The LDRV method developed by Wilson, Yuan, and Dickens (1982) employs a special
Krylov sequence. It starts with the static solution of Eq. (1) for a given load pattern:
VI
A
= K- I g (8)
This vector is mass normalized by
(9)
The inertia term neglected is considered in the successive steps to generate new Ritz
vectors:
(i = 2,3, ... ,m) (IO)
The Gram-Schmidt mass orthogonalization and normalization are employed for these
vectors.
i-I
M-Orthogonalization: Vi = Vi - L (VJMVi}Vj (11)
j=I
M -Normalization: (12)
This process is repeated until enough Ritz vectors have been generated, or no more
independent Ritz vector can be generated by the process, or some threshold is satisfied.
The LDRVs generated using the above procedure are referred to as WYD vectors. As
noted in the introduction, the static completeness condition for the generated Ritz
vector set is satisfied automatically.
To determine how many LDRVs are necessary for a given problem, a participation
factor Pi may be used to measure the significance of one particular Ritz vector Vi in
vT
the total response, that is, Pi = g. This participation factor is computed for each
Ritz vector and is used to terminate the vector generation process provided its value
drops below some threshold.
In the WYD's algorithm the full orthogonalization, shown in Eqs. (11) and (12), is
utilized. To save computational effort, a set of Ritz vectors, known as Lanczos vectors,
was developed by Nour-Omid and Clough (1984) based on the same Krylov sequence
as that used in the WYD's scheme. The orthogonalization procedure utilized in the
Lanczos vectors is only applied to the previous two vectors.
(13)
in which the coefficients are given by
i = 2,3, .. . ,m
i = 3,4, . .. ,m (14)
The same normalization condition as Eq. (12) is employed by the Lanczos algorithm.
Although the full orthogonalization procedure is not necessary in the Lanczos algo-
rithm, it is still used in practice due to the possible roundoff error in numerical
computation.
The LDRVs generated by the above two schemes generally work fine. However,
when the number of the Ritz vectors becomes large, the orthogonality among these
vectors might be lost due to the roundoff errors from numerical computation. This
leads to difficulty when solving the reduced system equations (5) or (6). To alleviate
this difficulty, a more stable Ritz vector generation procedure that uses an additional
set of temporary vectors Uj and orthogonalization procedure was proposed by Leger,
Wilson, and Clough (1986). In this algorithm, the Ritz vectors are generated using
(15)
where Ul is the static mode shape due to the loading patterns g, i.e.,
Ul = K- 1g (16)
For i :::: 2, the vector Uj is mass orthogonalized before being introduced into Eq. (15):
(i = 2,3, ... , m) (17)
Likewise, the standard Ritz vector orthonormalization (11) and (12) are used for each
recurrence step (Gu et al., 2000).
12.2.3 Quasistatic Ritz Vector Methods

The quasistatic Ritz vector method extends the above LDRV methods by employing a
quasistatic procedure. The basic idea is to let the Ritz vectors span the configuration
space at a desired frequency or frequencies and to efficiently capture possible dynamic
deformations for the desired frequency range. In details, the first quasistatic Ritz vector
is chosen as a quasistatic mode corresponding to the loading patterns g by solving the
following quasistatic equilibrium equation (Gu et aI., 2000):
(18)
where We is denoted as the centering frequency, since it usually is chosen at the

midpoint of the frequency range of interest or excitation frequencies. Applying
normalization, the first quasistatic Ritz vector is given by
(19)
For i = 2, 3, ... , m, the quasistatic recurrence procedure is given by
(20)
i-I
Vi = Vi - L (VJMVi}Vj (21)
j=1
(22)
Physically, the starting quasistatic Ritz vector VI represents a normalized frequency

response deformation mode, at the centering frequency w" of the undamped system
under the loading pattern g. That is, by using a quasistatic solution, the dynamic effect
of the loading or the inertia term neglected in the static solution of (8), is included.
If We is the only frequency content of the external load, then VI should describe the
exact steady state deformation mode of the structure. In general, assuming We is a
major frequency component in the frequency domain of interest, and then VI gives
the most likely deformation shape for the dynamic response of the structure. The
next Ritz vector, V2, represents the frequency response deformation mode shape due
to the inertial force M v 1. After mass orthonormalization, the new Ritz vector set,
including VI and V2, spans a wider configuration space for the dynamic repose of the
structure. This quasistatic recurrence is continued until a given criterion is satisfied.
Note that if We = 0, then the quasistatic Ritz vector algorithm reduces to the WYD
algorithm. Thus, the tuning parameter, We, extends the flexibility and generality of the
LDRV methods, which allows the Ritz vectors to best represent both the deformation
shape and the frequency content of the dynamic response. As a result, improved
computational efficiency and response accuracy are expected. If the frequency range
of distributed loading is wide, more than one centering frequency can be employed
in the quasistatic Ritz vector algorithm (Gu et al., 2000).
Similarly, the participation factor for the quasistatic Ritz vector is given by (Gu et al.,
2000)
(23)
where
(24)
w
is the frequency response due to the loading pattern g, and is a specified frequency.
At the maximum value of 1, the Ritz vector exactly matches the frequency response
deformation shape, while the minimum value of zero denotes that the Ritz vector
is orthogonal to the frequency responses deformation and, hence, not likely to con-
tribute significantly to the reduced model response. The frequency parameter, iV, is
chosen to represent a dominant frequency of the loading pattern. Clearly, if iV = We>
S becomes the initial Ritz vector V1. This indicates that the first vector usually appears
to be more important or have greater contribution than the others.
12.3 Component Mode Synthesis

Component mode synthesis (CMS) is one of the popular model reduction techniques
for large structural models. Generally, this technique involves the following four
major steps. At first, the complete structure is divided into a number of separate
components or substructures. Then, the finite element method or other schemes are
utilized to formulate a discrete model for each component. In this stage each model
is represented by a reduced size of model that consists of partial physical coordinates
of the full model and a set of generalized coordinates. Next, all the reduced models
are assembled to formulate a global model for the complete structure. In this way,
the global model has a much smaller size than the model directly obtained from the
finite element method. All the structural analyses may be performed on the reduced
global model. At last, the responses in the physical coordinates may be computed
using back-substitution.
The component mode synthesis may be classified as a fixed-interface method
(Hurty, 1965; Craig and Bampton, 1968), free-interface method (Goldman, 1969;
Hou, 1969), and hybrid method (MacNeal, 1971) depending upon whether the mode
shapes, used to define substructure coordinates, are obtained with masters fixed, free,
or a combination thereof. One feature of component mode synthesis is that partial
modal coordinates are used in place of the physical coordinates to represent the sub-
structures. These modal coordinates must be transformed to physical coordinates in
order to assemble the substructure matrices into global matrices by means of equi-
librium and compatibility conditions. Comprehensive research has been performed
during the past four decades, and a large number of component mode synthesis
methods have been developed (Craig, 1995,2000).
The component mode synthesis has several advantages:
l. The computational effort and computer storage can be saved significantly. With
the application of the component mode synthesis, a large-size dynamic problem
can be divided into several smaller-size dynamic problems.
2. The component mode synthesis technique makes it possible that different com-
ponents of a structural system may be analyzed by different groups, at different
places, and at different times. This feature is especially important for a large size
of structural systems such the as space station.
3. The structural dynamic modification and optimization become easier. Usually
the dynamic modification of a structure is local. These local modifications only
have an effect on the corresponding components. The repeated computation of
other components can be avoided.
4. The technique allows a hybrid modeling scheme to be implemented. In some
situations some components of a structural system are too complex to be mod-
eled using any analytical method. For these components an experimental-based
method may be used. Using the component mode synthesis we can obtain the
global model by assembling all the models from different modeling schemes.
12.3.1 Fixed Interface Methods

The fixed interface component mode synthesis was first proposed by Hurty (1965).
Shortly after, a popular simplification was made by Craig-Bampton (1968) and is
referred to as the Craig-Bampton method.
For convenience, suppose that a structural system, shown in Figure 12.2(a), is
divided into two components, A and B, as shown in Figure 12.2(b). These two compo-
nents are discretized by the finite element method. Each component has the boundary
nodes connecting to other component(s) and internal nodes independent of other
component(s). The corresponding degrees of freedom of each component are called
boundary degrees of freedom and internal degrees of freedom, respectively.
The dynamic equations of motion of component A may be expressed as
(1)
where the superscript A indicates component A. For simplicity, the damping is not
included for the time being. The force vector on the component should not include the
forces on the interfaces because they are internal forces. Let nA , n~, and n1 represent
the numbers of total, boundary, and internal degrees of freedom, respectively. Clearly,
we have the relation nA = n~ + n1. Based on the division of the total degrees of
freedom of the component, the dynamic equations may be partitioned as
(2)
The subscripts B and I refer to boundary and internal degrees of freedom, respectively.
In order to reduce the size of the component, the following transformation is
applied:
pA are the coordinates of the reduced model of component A. They consist of the
boundary degrees of freedom of the component and generalized coordinates p»
c:{? I-'a
iii'
(a) (b)
Figure 12.2 Division of one structure into two components with fixed interface: (a) complete structure;
(b) components.
which relate to the mode shapes of the component. • c is the matrix of constraint
modes of the component and given by
.c = [ -(K~~-lK1J (4)
Clearly, the constraint mode matrix represents the static deflections of a substructure
due to successive unit displacement at interface degrees of freedom, while the remain-
ing interface degrees of freedom are constrained and the interior degrees of freedom
are free. By this definition the set of constraint modes is statically complete, i.e., a
superposition of the constraint modes is sufficient to determine the static response of
the component subjects to external forces applied only on the interface (Gu, 2000) .
• N is called component normal modes and may be obtained from the eigenproblem
.N
(5)
Because the columns of matrix are the mode shapes of the component with
interface degrees of freedom fixed, they are also referred to as fixed interface modes.
In general, the normal mode matrix is incomplete and the higher-order modes are
truncated. This is based on the assumption that only the first few lower modes, nt,
of the component contribute significantly to the modes of the complete structure.
Substitution ofEq. (3) into Eq. (2) and premultiplication of the result by T~p yields
m:ixedpA + I4ixedr = f:ixed (6)

where the reduced mass and stiffness matrices and the equivalent force vector of the
component are defined by
~N]
",ANN
(7)
14N] (8)
KirN
f: ixed = T~pFA = I~l} (9)
The sub matrices of the reduced mass matrix are given by
mj}B = M~B + .[M1B +M~I.c + .JM~.c (lOa)
mj}N = (~B)T = M~I.N + .JM~.N (lOb)
m1m = .~M~.N = rtm (lOc)

Similarly, the submatrices of the reduced stiffness matrix are
14B = K~B + .JKfB (lIa)
14N = (i4B)T = K~I.N + .JK~.N = 0 (lIb)
i4N = .~K~.N = A'im (Uc)

where ANN is the submatrix of eigenvalue matrix AIl shown in Eq. (5). It consists
matrix .N.
of the eigenvalues that the corresponding eigenvectors are kept in the normal mode
The subvectors of the force vector are
(12a)
(12b)
Introduction of Eqs. (7) through (12) into Eq. (6) gives
[ n4B (13)
~B
Clearly, only the mass is coupled between the boundary coordinates and the modal
coordinates. Submatrix n4N
represents the dynamic coupling terms. The dynamic
equations of the reduced model of substructure B may be similarly obtained as
(14)
Add the contributions from the two substructures A and B, and we have
-- { f~fA+f~}
N (15)
f~
•• "A "B
in whichXB = X B = X B • Equation (15) is the final dynamic equation of the complete
structure. Clearly, the size of the reduced global model is nB + n~ + n~, and the full
n1
global model is nB + + nf. Since n~ « n1
and n~ « nf, the size of the reduced
global model is much smaller than that of the full global model.
Generally, three types of damping are considered in the component mode synthesis:
modal damping, proportional damping, and nonproportional damping. If the modal
damping is applied, Eq. (13) may be rewritten as
where the diagonal matrix c1m is given by

(17)
gN and w~ are, respectively, the modal damping ratio and natural frequency of the
component with interface fixed. The proportional damping is simple because it is a
combination of the mass and stiffness matrix. The same combination can be used to
get the reduced damping matrix from the reduced mass and stiffness matrices. The
nonproportional damping is generally quite difficult and state space formulation is
required.
The dynamic responses at the boundary coordinates and modal coordinates may
be computed from Eq. (15). The responses at the internal degrees of freedom can be
obtained using the back-substitution transformation in Eq. (3).
Actually, the fixed interface component mode synthesis may be viewed as an exten-
sion of the Guyan condensation method. If the boundary degrees of freedom are
selected as masters in Guyan condensation, it can be simply verified from the following
relations:
T4B = K~uyan' f~=F~ (18)
Because only the physical degrees of freedom are retained in the reduced model,
the accuracy of Guyan condensation is generally very low and highly depends on
the selection of masters. As shown in Chapter 5, one way to increase its accuracy is
to include the effect of the eigenvectors of slave model. However, because no extra
coordinates are used, the reduced model becomes frequency-dependent.
The fixed interface component mode synthesis has very good convergence prop-
erties as the number of component modes is increased. However, the reduced global
model may still have a large number of coordinates if too many components are used.
Therefore, a second-level model reduction may be further used to eliminate part of
these degrees of freedom.
12.3.2 Craig-Bampton TAM

For structural systems that have a large number of degrees of freedom or have com-
ponents designed by different groups or organizations, the Craig-Bampton method
has been proven to be accurate, efficient, and economical. However, in the modal
testing, the accelerometers cannot be mounted on these modal coordinates. There-
fore, a transformation matrix is required to convert the modal coordinates back to
the physical coordinates. The resulted model is referred to as Craig-Bampton TAM
and only has physical coordinates.
The simplest way (Yee, 1990) is to consider the reduced global model formulated
from the fixed interface component mode synthesis as the regular finite element
model, and the modal reduction approach is employed to reduce the global model.
During the reduction, referred to as the second reduction, only the test degrees of
freedom are selected as masters and all the nonmeasured physical and generalized
degrees of freedom are kept as slaves. Clearly, the second reduction is performed at
the global model and the global modal matrix is required.
It is well known that all interface coordinates and some of the generalized coor-
dinates of a component are selected as the coordinates of the reduced model of this
component in the regular, fixed interface component mode synthesis. These interface
coordinates may not necessairly include all the test coordinates. Therefore, before
the use of the above approach, a slight modification needs to be made to the fixed
interface component mode synthesis. Besides the interface and generalized coordi-
nates aforementioned, the test coordinates at that component should also be kept
even though they might be interior coordinates.
Alternatively, we may condense the generalized coordinates at the component level,

before assemblage, using modal reduction. Since the condensation is performed at
the component level, all the interface degrees of freedom should be kept for each
component for connection purposes. Therefore, the masters of each component
should include the measured and interface degrees of freedom. Under this category,
two different schemes are available in the literature depending upon the modes utilized
in the reduction.
In the global mode-dependent reduction (Kammer and Flanigan, 1991), the global
modes at the coordinates of each component are employed in the modal reduction.
This procedure has a severe drawback. In the modal reduction the matrix .~k.mk
should be nonsingular. This condition is very restrictive when modal reduction is
performed at the component level while the global modes are used. Actually, this con-
dition cannot be satisfied in most cases no matter how many sensors are placed within
the offending substructure. For example, system modes that are of a local nature and
contained entirely within a single substructure absolutely cannot be identified by
sensors within other substructures.
In the component modes-based reduction, the fixed interface modes (Kammer and
Flanigan, 1991) or both the fixed interface modes and constraint modes (Blades and
Craig, 1997) are generally employed in the modal reduction. In the following the
latter will be discussed since it usually has a higher quality than the former.
According to the requirement, the interior degrees of freedom are further divided
into the measured, indicated by "a;' and nonmeasured degrees of freedom, indicated
by "0;' that is,
XAI = Ix:j
XA
o
(19)
Based on this division, Eq. (3) may be rewritten as
(20)
The modal coordinates can be solved from the second partition of Eq. (20):
(21)
Introduction of Eq. (21) into Eq. (20), the transformation matrix from the Craig-
Bampton coordinates to the physical coordinates may be given by
(22)
A similar transformation was developed by Kammer and Flanigan (1991). However,

the contribution of the constraint modes to the transformation matrix T CP2 was not
considered.
Using the two coordinate transformation matrices, the mass and stiffness matrices
of each component may be given by
A
m TAM = TTCP2 TTCP MAT CP TCP2 = T TCP2 mFixed
A
T CP2 (23a)
k~AM = T~P2T~pKATcpTCP2 = T~P214ixedTCP2 (23b)
The system matrices of the global model are obtained by synthesizing all of the
substructure TAMs. Clearly, the global model contains all of the interface degrees of
freedom from each of the upstream substructures. They are not, in general, selected as
measurement locations. Therefore, the global model needs further modal reduction
to produce a model that only has test degrees of freedom.
12.3.3 Free Interface Methods

Assume the complete structure is divided into two components with free interface as
shown in Figure 12.3. In the free interface component mode synthesis, the number of
coordinates of component is reduced using the transformation
(24)
where the columns of matrix C)Jt are the normalized eigenvectors of the component
with interface degrees of freedom free. They are obtained from the eigenproblem:
(25)
Again C)Jt is incomplete and only the first few mode shapes selected from matrix c)A
are kept. If a component is completely free, the rigid-body modes are treated as modes
with zero frequency.
Substitution of Eq. (24) into Eq. (1) and premultiplication of the result by the
transpose of .Jt.
yields
FreePN =f Free
+ k A....A
A ··A A
m FreePN (26)
A B~
(a) (b)
Figure 12.3 Division of one structure into two components with free interface: (a) complete structure;
(b) components.
where
(27)
(28)
(29)
Thus, the dynamic equations of the reduced model of component A are given by
(30)
Similarly, the dynamic equations of component Bare
··B
PN + ANNPN
B B
= fBFree (31)
I
Adding the contributions of the two components together gives
..A + [AANN
{PN
··B
PN 0 A~TN
o ] {P'iv I I
p~ - f~ree
{f:ree (32)
or simply
(33)
The next step is to apply the displacement constraints between the two components.
These constraints may be expressed in physical coordinates as
x~=xj (34)
Using the transformation in Eq. (24), Eq. (34) becomes
c1J~NP1v = c1JjNP~ (35)
c1J~N and c1JjN are the submatrices of eigenvector matrices related to the interface
degrees of freedom.
Assume the number of kept modes n1v is greater than the number of boundary
degrees of freedom n~ in component A; the matrix c1J~N can be partitioned as
(36)
c1J~R E R~xnJi in which nJ1 = n1v - ~. Introduction ofEq. (36) into Eq. (35) gives
.....A 'l."BR
['l."BB ..... A] {~I =
~
c1JBBN pBN (37)
Solving for ~ results in
(38)
Define the generalized coordinates of the reduced global model as
(39)
Thus, the relations between the generalized coordinates PN and q may be given by
(40)
in which the transformation matrix is defined as

)-1 cl) ABR
•..)-1~ ·BN
A
- ( cl) BB ( A B ]
TFree = [
I (41)
o
Introducing the coordinate transformation into Eq. (33), the dynamic equations of
the reduced global model can be expressed as
(42)
in which the reduced mass, stiffness matrices, and equivalent force vector are defined
as
M Free = T ~ree T Free (43)
KFree = T~reekFreeTFree (44)
FFree = T~reefFree (45)
The dynamic responses at the generalized coordinates may be computed from

Eq. (42). The responses at the physical degrees of freedom can be obtained using
the back-substitution transformation in Eqs. (24) and (40), that is,
(46)
The advantage of the free interface component mode synthesis is that the interface
degrees of freedom do not appear in the final equations of motion. The number of
coordinates in the reduced global model is ~ + n~. Another advantage is that if
a particular component is difficult to model using the finite element technique, its
modal representation can be determined experimentally and included in the synthesis.
In this case it is simpler to test the component with interface degrees of freedom free
rather than fixed. The main disadvantage of this method is that the convergence is
weak. This can be overcome by including a low-frequency approximation, residual
flexibility, for the neglected high-frequency modes.
12.4 Proper Orthogonal Decomposition

The proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) is a powerful and elegant method for
data analysis aimed at obtaining a low-dimensional approximate description of a
high-dimensional process. The POD provides a basis for the modal decomposition
of an ensemble of functions, such as data obtained in the course of experiments
or numerical simulations. Its properties suggest that it is the preferred basis to use
in various applications. The basis functions it yields are commonly called empirical
eigenfunctions, empirical basis functions, empirical orthogonal functions, proper
orthogonal modes, or basis vectors (Liang et al., 2002a). The most striking feature
of the POD is its optimality. It provides the most efficient way of capturing the
dominant components of an infinite-dimensional process with only a finite number
of "modes;' and often surprisingly few "modes" (Chatterjee, 2000). In general, there
are two different interpretations of the POD (Liang, 2002a). The first interpretation
regards the POD as the Karhunen-Loeve decomposition (KLD), and the second one
considers that the POD consists of three methods: the KLD; the principal component
analysis (PCA); and the singular-value decomposition (SVD). In recent years, there
have been many reported applications of the POD methods in engineering fields,
particularly in structural dynamics and vibrations (Feeny and Kappagantu, 1998;
Georgiou et al., 1999; Azeez and Vakakis, 2001; Han and Feeny, 2003; Kerschen,
Feeny, and Golinval, 2003) and micro electromechanical systems (MEMS) (Hung and
Senturia, 1999; Liang et al., 2002b).
The main idea of POD is a little similar to that of mode superposition and Ritz
vectors superposition although the solution scheme is totally different. It is to find
a set of ordered orthonormal basis vectors in a subspace (without loss of generality,
denoting the subspace as Rn) where a random vector takes its values, such that the
samples in the sample space can be expressed optimally using the selected first I basis
vectors (Liang et al., 2002a). The mean square error can be used as a measure for the
optimal problem, i.e.,
(1)
where x(l) is the approximate expression of a random vector x using the first I
basis vectors of the undetermined set of orthonormal basis vectors, and x(l) is the
approximate expressions of x using arbitrary I basis vectors in Rn.
The problem can be stated as follows. Assume that x E R n is a random vector
and ({Ji(i = 1, ... , n) is a set of arbitrary orthonormal basis vectors: Then x can be
expressed as
n
X = LYi({Ji = cI»y (2)
i=!
where
cI» = [({J! ({J2 ({In]

y = {y"yz, . .. ,Yn} T , Yi =
T
({Ji x (i = 1,2, ... , n)
The objective of the POD is to find a set of basis vectors that satisfies the following
extreme-value problem:
(i,j = 1,2, ... ,n) (3)
where
I
x(l) = I,>iIPi (l ::: n)
i=1
As mentioned, any of the KLD, PCA, and SVD schemes can realize the POD. The
details of these three schemes are described by Liang et al. (2002a). A summary of the
equivalence of the three POD methods was also made, and the connections among
them is demonstrated in this paper. The realization of POD based on SVD will be
considered.
The SVD can be viewed as the extension of the eigenvalue decomposition for non-
square matrices. As far as the proper decomposition is concerned, the SVD can also
be seen as an extension for asymmetric matrices. Because the SVD is much more gen-
eral than the eigenvalue decomposition and intimately relates to the matrix rank and
reduced-rank least-squares approximation, it is a very important and fundamental
working tool in many areas such as matrix theory, linear system, statistics, and signal
analysis (Liang et aI., 2002a).
The SVD uses the singular-value decomposition to find the basis vec~ors satisfying
the POD requirement in the sample space. Assume a total of N sample vectors Ui
in the subspace are selected and denoted by the matrix U. According to the theory,
the requirement of POD can be accomplished quite simply by taking the SVD of the
matrix U (Hung and Senturia, 1999). The SVD of U is given as
(4)
where 1: = diag(<TI' <T2, ... ,<TN) and <TI :::: <T2 :::: ... :::: <TN :::: 0, V and Ware
orthonormal matrices. Then, the proper orthogonal basis IPi can be chosen as IPi = Vi
for i = 1,2, ... , I in which the vectors Vi are the columns of V. The basis vectors are
usually referred to as proper orthogonal modes. The corresponding proper orthogonal
values are the squares of the singular values <T/.
Clearly, the columns of V are the eigenvectors of matrix UU T and the columns of
Ware the eigenvectors of matrix U T U. Thus, the standard formulation of the proper
orthogonal decomposition is equivalent to explicitly computing the eigenvalues and
eigenvectors of U T U along with substitution back into a matrix multiplication in
order to find the basis vectors. However, there are algorithms for computing the
SVD of U, and they are numerically more robust than computing the U T U product
directly. Therefore, it has been suggested (Hung and Senturia, 1999) that the compu-
tation of the SVD of U is a preferred approach, in practice, for generating the basis
vectors.
In the structural dynamics and vibrations, the sample vectors can be generated
experimentally and analytically. In the analytical scheme the large size of discrete
model, finite element model, or finite difference model, for example, is simulated
using an accurate scheme in time domain. The dynamic responses are sampled at a
series of N different times during the simulation. The sampled vectors may be written
in a matrix form U E R nxN in which n is the number of degrees of freedom of the
model. Each vector of the matrix is actually a "snapshot" of the system's responses
in time. The experimental scheme is very similar to the analytical scheme. In the
experimental scheme, the n sampled locations in the structural system need to be
selected. The samples are taken from the sensed, actual structural responses.
12.5 Balanced Realization Redudion

The balanced realization method was proposed by Moore (1981) based on the
observability and controllability of a system. The concepts of observability and con-
trollability originated in control engineering. In simple terms, a system is observable
if the states of the system may be deduced from the output. Similarly, a system is con-
trollable if an input exists that enables the states of the system to attain any arbitrary
value. The observability and controllability measures provide a numerical indication
of how much each state is observable and controllable. The states that are least observ-
able and controllable may be deleted from the system since they contribute the least to
the desirable system behavior. The resulting balanced model is in a form that is con-
venient for model order reduction in control engineering. Recently, this method has
been successfully implemented to the finite element model with local nonlinearities
(Friswell et aI., 1996).
The dynamic equations of equilibrium of a structural system may be expressed as
MX(t) + CX(t) + K X(t) = Fu(t) (1)
where M, C, and K are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices with order n x nj
F is the input distribution matrix and u is an input vector. The input distribution
matrix describes how the input is distributed throughout the structure. It is easy to
construct the matrix for finite element model when the locations of the actuators are
given. Equation (1) is a set of second-order differential equations. However, control
design typically works with first-order differential equations in state space and they
have the forms:
yet) = AY(t) + lBu(t) (2)

yet) = CY(t) + ][))u(t) (3)
Equations (2) and (3) are, respectively, referred to as input and output equations. In
these two equations:
A(2n x 2n): System matrix or plant matrix that is constructed by the mass,
damping, and stiffness matrices of the system
lB(2n x s): Input matrix or control matrix with s being the number of system
input
ceq x 2n): Output matrix with q being the number of system output
][))(q x s): Feedthrough matrix or transfer matrixj usually ][)) = 0 (zero matrix)
Y(t)(2n xl): State vector
y(t)(q x 1): Output vector
The relations of the system matrices or vector in state space with those in
displacement space are given by
lffi= [ 0]
M- 1p
, yet) = {~(t)l
X(t)
(4)
For linear, stable, time-invariant systems, the controllability and observability

grammians are defined as
(5)
Wo = 1 00
eA.TtcTCeAt dt (6)
These two grammians are conveniently calculated from the algebraic Lyapunov
equations (Laub, 1980; Moore, 1981):
AWe + WeAT+lffilffiT=0 (7)
ATWo + WoA + CTC = 0 (8)

If the system is controllable, observable, stable, and
Wo = We = diag{a1 az ... a2n) (9)
in which aj > aj for i < j, the system is called a balanced system.

Generally, the requirements in Eq. (9) are very difficult to satisfy. A balanced
transformation was introduced by Moore (1981) to make the controllability and
observability grammians diagonal and equal, as shown in Eq. (9). The balanced
transformation takes the form
(10)
in which yet) is referred to as balanced coordinates. Using this transformation, Eqs. (2)
and (3) become
yet) = AY(t) + ju(t) (11)
yet) = CY(t) + lDlu(t) (12)

in which the matrices are given by
- -1
lffi = Tb lffi, (13)
Rearrange the balanced coordinates as two groups Ymet) and Ys(t). They are, respec-
tively, concerning the coordinates with smaller and bigger singular values. Based on
this division, Eqs. (11) and (12) may be rewritten as
(14)
(15)
Since the controllable and observable grammians represent how an individual state
contributes to the system's controllability and observability, if the singular values
ai = 0, the corresponding state is uncontrollable or unobservable. The ignorance of
this state will not affect the input-output properties. Therefore, after the omission of
the states with smaller ai in the balanced coordinates, the input-output properties
of the reduced model is approximately equal to those of the original system. Based on
this, the input and output equations of the reduced model in balanced coordinates
are given by (Gu, 1997)
Y m(t) = Amm Y m(t) + Emu(t) (16)

y(t) = emy m(t) + ][))u(t) (17)
Rather than the direct removal of the states with smaller contributions to controlla-
bility and observability, Friswell et aI., (1996) suggested using the transformation
(18)
which is similar to Guyan condensation used in the displacement space. Using

this transformation, input and output equations of the reduced model in balanced
coordinates become
Ym(t) = (Amm - AmsA~1 Asm)Y m(t) + (Em - AmsA~IEs)u(t) (19)
y(t) = (em - esA~1 Ams)Y m(t) + ][))u(t) (20)
How to obtain the balanced transformation is a key step in balanced realization

method. For controllable, observable, stable system, the following scheme may be
used to determine the transformation matrix (Laub, 1980):
1. Compute the controllability and observability grammians using Eqs. (5) and (6)
respectively.
2. Perform Cholesky decomposition on controllability grammian: We = LeLf in
which Le is under triangle matrix,
3. ComputeLfWoLo
4. Solve for the eigenvalues and normal eigenvectors of matrix Lf WoLe :
LfWoLeUco = UcoAo
5. Compute the balanced transformation matrix: Tb = Lc U co A 1/2,
Computational schemes (Tse et aI., 1978; Santiago and Jamshidi, 1985) are also
available in the literature for computing the balanced transformation of other systems.
12.6 Condensation Model Reduction

Dynamic condensation model reduction (CMR) was developed by Flippen (1992a,
1992b, 1992c, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c) in a series of papers. The CMR method is an
operator-based approach that places no restrictions on the matrices of the second-
order differential equation in time. A general damping matrix is allowed, as are
asymmetric matrices. Recently, this method was implemented into a linear, two-
dimensional, transient finite element environment (Dyka et aI., 1996). In the following
the CMR is reproduced in a convenient way for finite element modeling.
Consider the dynamic equations of equilibrium in the form of second-order
differentiation, that is,
d 2X(t) dX(t)
M-- + c-- + K X(t) = f(t) (1)
dt 2 dt
where the mass, stiffness, and damping matrices might be symmetric or asymmetric.
Equation (1) may be expressed in operator form as
LX(t) = f(t) (2)
in which the operator is defined as
d2 d
L=M-+C-+K (3)
dt 2 dt
Similar to the dynamic condensation technique, the total degrees of freedom of the
full model are divided into the masters and slaves in CMR. Based on this division,
Eq. (2) may be partitioned as
(4)
Define the relations of responses between the masters and slaves as
(5)
or
X(t) = [ ~JXm(t) = TXm(t) (6)
They have the same form as those used in the dynamic condensation technique. In
CMR, one assumption is adopted for the relations ofloads on the masters and slaves
(Dyka et al., 1996), that is,
f(t) = [IJ
a
f m(t) = [f m(t)
af/t)
J (7)
Introduction of Eqs. (6) and (7) into Eq. (4) produces
(8)
which is equivalent to the following two equations:
(Lmm + LmsR)Xm(t) = f m(t) (9a)

(Lsm + LssR)Xm(t) = af m(t) (9b)
Equation (9) gives the relation
(10)
Since the Xm(t) is a time-dependent vector, Eq. (10) leads to
(11)
or
(12)
Using the definition of operator .c in Eq. (3), Eq. (12) becomes

d 2R dR
(Mss - aMms) dt 2 + (Css - aCms)dtl + (Kss - aKms)R
d2 d
= (aMmm - Msm) dt 2 + (aCmm - CSm ) dt + (aKmm - Ksm) (13)
Equation (13) is the differential equations with respect to the condensation matrix R.
In CMR, the condensation matrix is expressed in a series up to second order (Dyka
et aI., 1996) as
(14)
in which the matrix Bb k = 0, 1,2, is assumed to be constant in time. In general,

higher-order terms can be included in Eq. (14). However, the derivation will be
significantly complex and has not yet been reported in the literature. Introducing
Eq. (14) into Eq. (13) and solving the resulting equation for Bk yield (Dyka et aI.,
1996)
Bo = (Kss - aKms)-l(aK mm - Ksm) (15a)

Bl = (Kss - aKms)-l[(aC mm - C Sm ) - (C ss - aCms)Bo] (15b)
B2 = (Kss - aKms)-l[(aM mm - Msm) - (C ss - aCms)Bl
- (Mss - aMms)Bo] (15c)
Introducting Eq. (15) into Eq. (14) and the resulting equation into Eq. (13), we have
(16)
in which the load on the slaves is assumed to be zero. The reduced operator in Eq. (16)
is given by
d2 d
CCMR = MCMR dt 2 + CCMR dt + K CMR (17)
and the reduced mass matrix MCMR, damping matrix CCMR, and stiffness matrix
KCMR are given (Dyka et aI., 1996) by
MCMR = Mmm + MmsBo + CmsBI + KmsB2 (18a)

CCMR = Cmm + CmsBo + KmsB I (I8b)
KCMR = Kmm + KmsBo (18c)
Any time integration scheme may be used to solve for the responses from Eq. (16).
After the responses at masters are computed, the displacements and velocities at slaves
may be computed as
Xs(t) = B2Mc~J met) + (B1 - B2Mc~RCCMR)Xm(t)

+ (Bo - B2Mc~RKCMR)Xm(t) (19)
. 1
Xs(t) = B1 M CMJ m(t) + (Bo - 1).
B1 M CMRCCMR Xm(t)
+ B1MC~RKCMRXm(t) (20)
Assume the system matrices are symmetric and a = o. The reduced system matrices
defined by CMR become
MCMR = MGuyan + (C ms - KmsK;ICss )Bb CCMR = CGuyan, KCMR = KGuyan

(21)
Furthermore, for the undamped system, we have
MCMR = MGuyan, CCMR = CGuyan, K CMR = K Guyan (22)
Research shows that the CMR is at most as accurate as Guyan condensation. However,
it offers a new way for dynamic condensation of the finite element model because
it is based on projection operators. Further development is necessary before the
implementation of this approach in finite element model reduction.
References
Akgun, MA (1993) A new family of mode superposition methods for response calculations.
Azeez, MFA and Vakakis, AF (2001) Proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) of a class of
vibroimpact oscillations. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 240(5):859-889.
Bathe, KJ and Gracewsky, S (1981) On nonlinear dynamic analysis using mode superposition
and substructuring. Computers and Structures, 13(5-6):699-707.
Blades, EL and Craig Jr, RR (1997) A Craig-Bampton test -analysis model. Proceedings of the 15th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 1386-139l.
Chatterjee, A (2000) An introduction to the proper orthogonal decomposition. Current Science,
78:808-817.
Craig RR, Jr and Bampton, MCC (1968) Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses. AIAA Journal,
6(7):1313-1319.
Craig RR, Jr (1995) Substructure methods in vibration. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics,
117(Special):207-213.
Craig RR, Jr (2000) A brief tutorial on substructure analysis and testing. Proceedings of the 18th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 899-908.
Dyka, CT, Ingel, RP, and Flippen, LD (1996) A new approach to dynamic condensation for FEM. Computers
and Structures, 61(4):765-773.
Feeny, BF and Kappagantu, R (1998) On the physical imerpretation of proper orthogonal modes in
vibrations. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 211(4):607-616.
Flippen Jr, LD (1992a) Abstract zwanzig model reduction theory with application to discretized linear
systems. Mathematical and Computer Modeling, 16(10):121-134.
Flippen Jr, LD (1992b) Fundamental law preservation in model reduction. Mathematical and Computer
Modeling, 16(11):171-182.
Flippen Jr, LD (1992c) Polynomial-basis model reduction. Mathematical and Computer Modeling,
16(12):121-132.
Flippen Jr, LD (1994a) A theory of condensation model reduction. Computers & Mathematics with
Applications, 27(2):9-40.
Flippen Jr, LD (1994b) Constitutive-operator smoothing by condensation. Computers & Mathematics
with Applications, 27( 6):5-18.
Flippen Jr, LD (1994c) Current dynamic substructuring methods as approximations to condensation model
reduction. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 27(12):17-29.
Friswell, MI, Penny, JET, and Garvey, SD (1996) The application ofIRS and balanced realization methods
to obtain reduced model of structures with local non-linearities. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
196(4):453-468.
Georgiou, IT, Schwartz, IB, Emaci, E, and Vakakis, AF (1999) Interaction between slow and fast oscillations
in an infinite degree-of-freedom linear system coupled to a nonlinear subsystem: Theory and experiment.
Journal of Applied Mechanics, 66(2):448-459.
Goldman, RL (1969) Vibration analysis by dynamic partitioning. AIAA Journal, 7: 1152-1154.
Gu, J (2000) Efficient Model Reduction Methods for Structural Dynamics Analysis. Department of
Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Michigan.
Gu, J, Ma, Z-D, and Hulbert, GM (2000) A new load-dependent Ritz vector method for structural dynamics
analyses: Quasi-static Ritz vectors. Finite Element in Analysis and Design, 36(3-4):261-278.
Gu, ZQ (1997) Active Vibration Control. Defense Industry Publisher, Beijing, China.
Han, S and Feeny, B (2003) Application of proper orthogonal decomposition to structural vibration
analysis. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(5):989-1001.
Hou, SN (1969) Review of modal synthesis techniques and a new approach. Shock and Vibration Bulletin,
40(4):25-39.
Hung, ES and Senturia, SD (1999) Generating efficient dynamical models for microelectromechani-
cal systems from a few finite element simulation runs. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems,
8(3):280-289.
Hurty, WC (1965) Dynamic analysis of structural system using component modes. AIAA Journal,
3(4):678-685.
Kammer, DC and Flanigan, CC (1991) Development of test-analysis models for large space structures
using substructure representation. Journal of Spacecraft and Rocket, 28(2):244-250.
Kerschen, G, Feeny, BF, and Golinval, J-C (2003) On the exploitation of chaos to build reduced-order
models. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 192( 13): 1785-1795.
Khulief, YA and Mohiuddin, MA (1997) On the dynamic analysis of rotors using modal reduction. Finite
Elements in Analysis and Design, 26(1):41-55.
Laub, AJ (1980) Computation of "balancing" transformation. Proceedings of American Control
Conference, paper FA8-E.
Leger, P (1989) Coordinate reduction procedures for seismic analysis of dam-foundation-reservoir systems.
Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 5(1):73-85.
Leger, P, Wilson, EL, and Clough, RW (1986) The use ofload dependent vectors for dynamic and earth-
quake analyses. Earthquake Engineering Research Center report, University of California, Berkeley,
UCB/EERC-86/04.
Liang, YC, Lee, HP, Lim, SP et al. (2002a) Proper orthogonal decomposition and its applications - Part I:
Theory. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 252(3):527-544.
Liang, YC, Lin, WZ, Lee, HP et al. (2002b) Proper orthogonal decomposition and its applications - Part
II: Model reduction for MEMS dynamical analysis. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 256(3):515-532.
MacNeal, RH (1971) A hybrid method for component mode synthesis. Computers and Structures,
1(4):582-601.
Moore, BC (1981) Principal component analysis in linear systems: Controllability, observability, and model
reduction. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 26(1):17-32.
Nour-Omid, B and Clough, RW (1984) Dynamic analysis of structures using Lanczos coordinates.
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 12(4):565-577.
Nour-Omid, B and Clough, RW (1985) Block Lanczos method for dynamic analysis of structures.
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 13(2):271-275.
Petyt, M (1990) Introduction to Finite Element Vibration Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press:
369-370.
Qu, Z-Q (2000) Hybrid expansion method for frequency responses and their sensitivities, Part I: Undamped
systems. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 231 (1): 175-193.
Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2000) Hybrid expansion method for frequency responses and their sensitivities,
Part II: Viscously damped systems. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 238(3):369-388.
Qu, Z-Q (2001) Accurate methods for frequency responses and their sensitivities of proportionally damped
systems. Computers and Structures, 79( 1):87-96.
Santiago, JM and Jamshidi, M (1985) Some extension of the open-loop balanced approach for model
reduction. Proceedings of American Control Conference: 1005-1009.
Tse, EC, Medanic, J, and Perkins, WR (1978) Generalized Hessenberg transformations for reduced order
modeling of large scale systems. International Journal of Control, 27(4):493-512.
Vethecan, JK and Subic, A (2002) Recursive identification of modal participation in substructuring
applications. Computers & Structures, 80(7-8):591-603.
Wilson, EL, Yuan, MW, and Dickens, JM (1982) Dynamic analysis by direct superposition of Ritz vectors.
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 1O:813-82l.
Xue, DY (1991) Finite element frequency domain solution of nonlinear panel flutter with tempera-
ture effects and fatigue life analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Engineering Mechanics, Old
Dominion University, Norfolk, VA.
Yee, V (1990) Reduction of component mode synthesis formulated matrices for correlation studies. AIAA
Journal,28(6):1142-1143.
Zheng, T and Hasebe, N (1999) An efficient analysis of high-order dynamical system with local nonlinearity.
Bibliography
Book
1. Cheung, YK and Leung, AYT (1991) Finite Element Methods in Dynamics.
Science Press, Hong Kong, China: 223-234.
2. Leung, AYT (1993) Dynamic Stiffness and Substructures. Springer-Verlag,
London, UK.
3. Paz, M (1991) Structural Dynamics: Theory and Computation, Third Edition.
Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York: 273-299.
Dissertation/Thesis (After 1980)

4. Anderson, LR (1982) Order reduction of stractural eigenvalue problems.
Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, VT, USA.
5. Blando, GD (1998) Accurate Stress Approximation and Design Sensitivities
Using Combined Direct and Adjoint Reduced Order Solutions. Master Thesis,
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, The University of Washington,
Seattle, WA.
6. Bouhaddi, N (1992) Substructuring Using a Linearized Dynamic Condensa-
tion Method. Ph.D. Dissertation, Applied Mechanics Laboratory R. Chaleat,
Besancon, France, 1992.
7. Chen, SL (1995) Linear and Nonlinear Dynamics of Drillstrings. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Univeristy of Liege, Belgium.
8. Cheu, TC (1982) Computational Aspects of Eigenproblems of Large Structural
Systems Using a Nested Dissection Numbering Scheme and Subspace Iteration
Method. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, TX.
9. Chiao, K-P (1992) Least square model reduction for vibration control of
complex mechanical systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Maryland.
10. Choudhury, R (1997) Structural Damage Detection Using Measured FRF
Data. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Victoria
University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
11. Collins, D (1998) Comparison of Four Common Model Reduction Techniques
Using a Cantilever Beam Model. Master Thesis, Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering, Clarkson University.
341
12. Foster, T (1993) Evaluation of DOF Selection for Modal Vector Correlation
and Expansion Studies. Master Thesis, University of Massachusetts Lowell,
Lowell,MA.
13. Gu, J (2000) Efficient Model Reduction Methods for Structural Dynamics
Analysis. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI.
14. Gordis, JH (1990) On Structural Synthesis and Identification in the Frequency
Domain. Doctoral Dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
15. Kim, KO (1983) Nonlinear inverse perturbation method in dynamic redesign.
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
16. Lee, KO (1996) Model Reduction in Linear and Nonlinear Structural Dyna-
mics. Master Thesis, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering,
Washington State University, WA.
17. Luo, Z (1997) The dynamic analyses and design of complex structures. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Department of Engineering Mechanics, Nanjing Unversity of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China.
18. Malpartida, CA (1983) Dynamic Condensation of Structural Eigenproblems.
Master Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Louisville, KY.
19. Pang, J (1996) Modeling and Experimental Modal Analysis of Highway Bridge.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Center of Structural Control, The University of Oklahoma,
Oklahoma.
20. Qi, Y (1990) Selection of master degrees of freedom in model reduction tech-
niques. Master Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, New Jersey
Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ.
21. Qu, Z-Q (1998) Structural Dynamic Condensation Techniques: Theory and
Applications. Ph.D. Dissertation, State Key Laboratory of Vibration, Shock and
Noise, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
22. Rivera, MA (1997) Seismic Response of Structures with Flexible Floor Slabs
by a Dynamic Condensation Approach. Ph.D. Dissertation, Engineering Sci-
ence and Mechanics Department, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blacksburg, VA.
23. Yong, ME (1994) Exact Model Reduction in Structural Dynamics. Ph.D. Dis-
sertation, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Washington
State University.
24. Zimmerman, CF (1983) Application of the dynamic condensation to gen-
eral structural problems. Department of Civil engineering, University of
Louisville, KY.
Journal Papers
25. Arduini, C (1984) Spectral condensation: A new concept in numerical
structural dynamic analysis. ESA Journal, 8(1):27-36.
26. Avitabile, P (2001) A comparison of some common system-modeling
approaches. Shock and Vibration Digest, 33(4):281-291.
27. Avitabile, P and O'Callahan, J (2003) Frequency response function expan-
sion for unmeasured translation and rotation dofs for impedance modeling
applications. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(4):723-745.
Bibliography 343
28. Belyi, MV (1993) Superelement method for transient dynamic analysis

of structural systems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 36( 13) :2263-2286.
29. Bernal, D (1999) A dynamic stiffness formulation for the analysis of secondary
systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28 ( 11 ): 1295-1308.
30. Berkkan, K and Dokainish, MA (1990) Accuracy of condensed eigenvalue
solution. AlAA Journal, 28(7): 1324-1325.
31. Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1992) Sub structuring using a linearized dynamic
condensation method. Computers and Structures, 45( 4):679-683.
32. Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1992) A method for selecting master DOF in
dynamic substructuring using the Guyan condensation method. Computers
and Structures, 45(5/6):941-946.
33. Bouhaddi, Nand Fillod, R (1996) Model reduction by a simplified variant of
dynamic condensation. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 191 (2):233-250.
34. Cardona, A and Geradin, M (1992) A superelement formulation for mech-
anism analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering,
100(1):1-29.
35. Chen, G and Soong, TT (1994) Energy-based dynamic analysis of secondary
systems. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 120(3 ):514-535.
36. Chen, S-H and Pan, HH (1988) Guyan condensation. Communications in
Applied Numerical Methods, 4(4):549-556.
37. Chen, SH and Rong, F (2002) A new method of structural modal reanalysis
for topological modifications. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 38(11):
1015-1028.
38. Chen, SL and Geradin, M (1994) An exact and direct modeling technique for
rotor-bearing systems with arbitrary selected degrees of freedom. Shock and
Vibration, 1(6):497-506.
39. Chen, SL, Geradin, M, and Lamine, E (1994) An improved dynamic stiffness
method with application to vibration analysis of linear drillstrings. Machine
Vibration, 3(1):1-9.
40. Chen, SL and Geradin M (1997) Exact model reduction procedure for mechan-
ical systems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering,
143(1-2):69-78.
41. Chen, SY and Tsuei, YG (1995) Estimation of system matrices by dynamic
condensation and application to structural modification. AlAA Journal,
33(11):2199-2204.
42. Chin, CK, Al-Bermani, FGA, and Kitipornchai, S (1992) Stability of thin-
walled members having arbitrary flange shape and flexible web. Engineering
Structures, 14(2):121-132.
43. Corn, S, Bouhaddi, N, and Piranda, J (1997) Transverse vibrations of short
beams: Finite element models obtained by a condensation method. Journal of
44. De Langhe, K, Vandepitte, D, and Sas, P (1997) A combined dynamic-static
finite element model for the calculation of dynamic stresses at critical locations.
45. Dyka, CT, Ingel, RP, and Flippen, LD (1996) A new approach to dynamic
condensation for FEM. Computers and Structures, 61(4):765-773.
46. Downs, B (1980) Accurate reduction of stiffness and mass matrices for vibra-
tion analysis and a rationale for selecting master degrees of freedom. Journal
of Mechanical Design, 102(2):412-416.
47. Dubigeon, S and Peseux, B (1994) Dynamic condensation: The 'free mode'
method. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
37(20):3521-3543.
48. Ebner, R and Zenger, C (1999) Distributed functional framework for recursive
finite element simulations. Parallel Computing, 25(7):813-826.
49. Egeland, 0 and Araldsen, PO (1974) SESAM-69-a general-purpose finite
element method program. Computers and Structures, 4(1):41-68.
50. Flax, AH (1975) Comment on "reduction of structural frequency equations."
AIAA Journal, 13(5):701-702.
51. Flax, AH (1981) Discussion on "dynamic reduction of structural models."
Journal of Structural Division, 107(7):1393-1394.
52. Flax, AH (1985) Comment on "dynamic condensation." AIAA Journal,
23(11):1841-1843.
53. Fricker, AJ (1983a) A new approach to the dynamic analysis of structures
using fixed frequency dynamic stiffness matrices. International Journal for
54. Fricker, AJ (1983b) A method for solving high-order real symmetric eigen-
value problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
19(8):1131-1138.
55. Fried, I (1972) Condensation of finite element eigenproblem. AIAA Journal,
10(11):1529-1530.
56. Friswell, MI, Garvey SD, and Penny, JET (1995) Model reduction using
dynamic and iterative IRS technique. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
186(2):311-323.
57. Friswell, MI, Penny, JET, and Garvey, SD (1995) Using linear model reduction
to investigate the dynamics of structures with local non-linearities. Mechanical
Systems and Signal Processing, 8(3):317-328.
58. Friswell, MI, Penny, JET, and Garvey, SD (1996) The application ofIRS and
balanced realization methods to obtain reduced model of structures with local
non-linearities. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 196(4):453-468.
59. Friswell, MI, Garvey, SD, and Penny, JET ( 1998) The convergence of the iterated
IRS methods. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 211(1):123-132.
60. Fox, GL (1981) A method for estimating the error induced by the Guyan
reduction. Shock and Vibration Bulletin, 51(1):19-24.
61. Gangadharan, SN, Haftka, RT, and Nikolaidis, E (1990) An easily implemented
static condensation method for structural sensitivity analysis. Communica-
tions in Applied Numerical Methods, 6(3):161-171.
62. Gaudenzi, P, Giarda, D, and Morganti, F (1998) Active microvibration con-
trol of an optical payload installed on the ARTEMIS spacecraft. Journal of
Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 9(9):740-748.
63. Geradin, M and Chen, SL (1995) An exact model reduction technique for beam
structures: Combination of transfer and dynamic stiffness matrices. Journal of
Bibliography 345
64. Go, CG, Lin, C, Lin, YS, and Wu, SH (1998) Formulation of a super-element
for the dynamic problem of a cracked plate. Communications in Numerical
65. Gopalakrishnan, S and Doyle, JF (1995) Spectral super-elements for wave
propagation in structures with local non-uniformities. Computer Methods in
Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 121(1-4):77-90.
66. Gordis, JH (1994) An analysis of the Improved Reduced System (IRS) model
reduction procedure. Modal Analysis, 9(4):269-285.
67. Gordis, JH (1996) Omitted coordinate systems and artificial constraints in
spatially incomplete identification. Modal Analysis, 11 (1-2):83-95.
68. Guyan, RJ (1965) Reduction of stiffness and mass matrices. AIAA Journal,
3(2):380.
69. Ha, SK, Keilers, C, and Chang, FK (1992) Finite element analysis of composite
structures containing distributed piezoelectric sensors and actuators. AIAA
Journal,30(3):772-780.
70. Henchi, K, Fafard, M, Talbot, M, and Dhatt, G (1998) An efficient algorithm
for dynamic analysis of bridges under moving vehicle using a coupled modal
and physical components approach. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 212(4):
663-683.
7l. Henshell, RD and Ong, JH (1975) Automatic masters for eigenvalue
economization. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 3(4):
375-383.
72. Hitziger, T, Mackens, W, and Voss, H (1995) Condensation-projection method
for the generalized eigenvalue problem. High-Performance Computing in
Engineering, 1(95-20):239.
73. Hou, Z and Chen, S (1997) Iterated dynamic condensation technique and its
applications in modal testing. Shock and Vibration, 4(3):143-15l.
74. Hung, ES, and Senturia, SD (1999) Generating efficient dynamical models for
microelectromechanical systems from a few finite element simulation runs.
Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 8(3):280-289.
75. Irons, BM (1965) Structural eigenvalue problems-elimination of unwanted
variables. AIAA Journal, 3(5):961-962.
76. Jacobsen, KP (1983) Fully integrated superelements: A database approach to
finite element analysis. Computers and Structures, 16(1-4):307-315.
77. Jiang, J and Olson, MD (1993a) A super element model for nonlinear analysis
of stiffened box structures. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 36(13):2203-2217.
78. Jiang, J and Olson, MD (1993b) Application of a super element model for non-
linear analysis of stiffened box structures. International Journal for Numerical
79. Jiang, J and Olson, MD (1994) Nonlinear analysis of orthogonally stiffened
cylindrical shells by a super element approach. Finite Elements in Analysis and
Design, 18(1-3):99-110.
80. Johnson CP, Craig Jr, RR, and Yargicoglu, A (1980) Quadratic reduction for the
eigenproblem. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
15(6}:911-923.
81. Kammer, DC (1987) Test-analysis model development using an exact modal

reduction. The International Journal of Analytical and Experimental Modal
Analysis, 2(4):174-179.
82. Kammer, DC (1991a) Sensor placements for on-orbit modal identification
and correlation of large space structures. Journal of Guidance, Control, and
Dynamics, 14(2):251-259.
83. Kammer, DC (1991b) A hybrid approach to test-analysis-model development
for large space structures. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 113 (3):325-332.
84. Kammer, DC (1992a) Effect of noise on sensor placement for on-orbit modal
identification and correlation of large space structures. Journal of Dynamic
Systems, Measurement and Control, 114(3):436-443.
85. Kammer, DC (1992b) Effect of model error on sensor for on-orbit modal
identification and correlation of large space structures. Journal of Guidance,
Control, and Dynamics, 15(2):334-341.
86. Kammer, DC and Flanigan, CC (1991) Development of test -analysis models for
large space structures using substructure representation. Journal of Spacecraft
and Rocket, 28(2):244-250.
87. Kane, K and Torby, BJ (1991) The extended modal reduction method applied to
rotor dynamic problems. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 113(11):79-84.
88. Kaufman, S and Hall, DB (1968) Reduction of mass and loading matrices.
AIAA Journal, 6(3):550-551.
89. Kerschen, G, Feeny, BF, and Golinval, J-C (2003) On the exploitation of chaos
to build reduced-order models. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
Engineering, 192(13):1785-1795.
90. Khulief, YA and Mohiuddin, MA (1997) On the dynamic analysis of rotors
using modal reduction. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 26(1):
41-55.
91. Kidder, RL (1973) Reduction of structural frequency equations. AIAA Journal,
11(6):892.
92. Kidder, RL (1975) Reply by author to Flax, AH. AIAA Journal, 13(5):702-703.
93. Kim, HM and Bartkowicz, TJ (2001) An experimental study for da-
mage detection using a hexagonal truss. Computers and Structures, 79(2):
173-182.
94. Kim, K-0, and Anderson, WJ (1984) Generalized dynamic reduction in finite
element dynamic optimization. AIAA Journal, 22(11):1616--1617.
95. Kim, K-O (1985) Dynamic condensation for structural redesign. AIAA Journal,
23(11):1830-1832.
96. Kim, K-O (1995) Hybrid dynamic condensation for eigenproblems. Comput-
ers and Structures, 56(1):105-112.
97. Kim, K-O (1998) Perturbation method for condensation of eigenproblems.
AIAA Journal, 36(9):1537-1543.
98. Kim, K-O and Choi, Y-J (2000) Energy method for selection of degrees of
freedom in condensation. AIAA Journal, 38(7):1253-1259.
99. Kim, K-O and Kang, M-K (2001) Convergence acceleration of iterative modal
reduction methods. AIAA Journal, 39(1):134-140.
100. Kim, H-S and Lee, D-G (2003) Analysis of shear wall with openings using
super elements. Engineering Structures, 25(8):981-991.
Bibliography 347
101. Kishor, S, Sujatha, C; and Padmanabhan, C (2001) Dynamic analysis of a

heavy vehicle using a condensation technique. Heavy Vehicle Systems, 8 (3/4):
301-315.
102. Kohno, K, Tsunada, T, Seto, H, and Tanaka, M (1991) Hybrid stress analysis of
boundary and finite elements by a super-element method. Finite Elements in
Analysis and Design, 7(4):279-290.
103. Koko, TS and Olson MD (1991a) Nonlinear transient response of stiffened
plates to air blast loading by a superelement approach. Computer Methods in
Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 90(1-3):737-760.
104. Koko, TS and Olson, MD (1991b) Non-linear analysis of stiffened plates using
super elements. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
31(2):319-343.
105. Koko, TS and Olson MD (1992) Vibration analysis of stiffened plates by super
elements. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 158(1):149-167.
106. Kuhar, EJ and Stahle, CV (1974) Dynamic transformation method for modal
synthesis. AIAA Journal, 12(5):672-678.
107. Law, SS, Chan, THT, and Wu, D (2001a) Superelement with semi-rigid joints
in model updating. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 239(1):19-39.
108. Law, SS, Chan, THT, and Wu, D (2001 b) Efficient numerical model for the dam-
age detection oflarge scale structure. Engineering Structures, 23(5):436-451.
109. Leger, P (1989) Coordinate reduction procedures for seismic analysis of dam-
foundation-reservoir systems. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 5(1):
73-85.
1l0. Leung, AYT (1978) An accurate method of dynamic condensation in struc-
tural analysis. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
12(11):1705-17l5.
111. Leung, AYT (1979) An accurate method of dynamic substructuring with
simplified computation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 14(8):1241-1256.
112. Leung, AYT (1988) A simplified dynamic substructure method. Earthquake
113. Li, W (2003) A degree selection method of matrix condensations for eigenvalue
problems. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 259(2):409-425.
114. Liang, YC, Lee, HP, Lim, SP, et al. (2002a) Proper orthogonal decomposition
and its applications-Part I: Theory. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 252(3):
527-544.
115. Liang, YC, Lin, WZ, Lee, HP, et al. (2002b) Proper orthogonal decomposition
and its applications-Part II: Model reduction for MEMS dynamical analysis.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 256(3 ):515-532.
116. Lin, RM and Lim, MK (1995) Structural sensitivity analysis via reduced-order
analytical model. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering,
121 (1-4):345-359.
117. Lin, Rand Xia, Y (2003) A new eigensolution of structures via dynamic
condensation. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 266(1 ):93-106.
118. Liu, X (1997) A perturbation method for reduction of eigenvalue analysis of
structures with large stiffnesses and small masses. International Journal for
119. Lu, X (1988) Simplified dynamic condensation in multi-substructure systems.

120. Lu, X, Lin, J, and Zhong, W (1989) Subspace iteration method in multi-level
substructure systems. Computers and Structures, 33(2):459-462.
121. Lu, X Zhong, W, and Lin, J (1990) Dynamic superelement substructure method
in forced vibration analysis. Computers and Structures, 37(5):737-741.
122. Mackens, W and Voss, H (1999) General masters in parallel condensation of
eigenvalue problems. Parallel Computing, 25(7):893-903.
123. Matta, KW (1987) Selection of degrees of freedom for dynamic analysis.
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 109( 1):65-69.
124. McLean, LJ and Hahn, EJ (1983) Unbalance behavior of squeeze file damped
multi-mass flexible rotor bearing systems. Journal of Lubrication Technology,
105(1):22-28.
125. Meyer, S and Link, M (2003) Modeling and updating of local non-linearities
using frequency response residuals. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
17(1):219-226.
126. Miller, CA (1980) Dynamic reduction of structural models. Journal of the
Structural Division, 106(STlO):2097-2108.
127. Mills, JK and lng, JGL (1996) Dynamic modeling and control of a multi-robot
system for assembly of flexible payloads with applications to automotive body
assembly. Journal of Robotic Systems, 13(12):817-836.
128. Moler, CB and Stewart, GW (1973) An algorithm for generalized matrix
eigenvalue problems. SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, 10(2):241-256.
129. Mokeyev, VV (1998) A frequency condensation method for the eigenvalue
problem. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering, 14(1):1-8.
130. Moulin, B and Karpel, M (1998) Static condensation in modal-based structural
optimization. Structural Optimization, 15(3-4):275-283.
131. Noor, AK (1994) Recent advances and applications of reduction methods.
Applied Mechanics Reviews, 47(5):125-146.
132. Nurse, AD (2001) New superelements for singular derivative problems of
arbitrary order. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
50(1):135-146.
133. Oh, D and Park, Y (1994) Order reduction based on singular values of a modal
matrix. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 8(1):63-79.
134. Ojalvo, IU and Newman, M (1970) Vibration modes of large structures by an
automatic matrix reduction method. AIAA Journal, 8(7):1234-1239.
135. Ong, JH (1987) Improved automatic masters for eigenvalue economization.
Finite Element Analysis in Analysis and Design, 3(2):149-160. .
136. Pang, J, Dukkipati, R, and Patten, WN (2002) Model recovery technique from
reduced model. International Journal of Vehicle Design, 29(4):317-333.
137. Papadopoulos, M and Garcia, E (1996) Improvement in model reduction
schemes using the system equivalent reduction expansion process. AIAA
Journal,34(10):2217-2219.
138. Papadopoulos, M and Garcia, E (1998) Reply to Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F. AIAA
Journal, 36(10):1941,1942.
Bibliography 349
139. Paz, M (1983) Practical reduction of structural eigenproblems. Journal of

Structural Engineering, 109(11):2591-2599.
140. Paz, M (1984) Dynamic condensation. AIAA Journal, 22(5):724-727.
141. Paz, M (1985) Reply by author to Flax, AB. AIAA Journal, 23(11):1843.
142. Paz, M (1989) Modified dynamic condensation method. Journal of Structural
Engineering, 115(1):234-238.
143. Penny, JET, Friswell, MI, and Garvey, SD (1994) Automated choice of
measurement locations for dynamic testing. AIAA Journal, 32(2):407-414.
144. Popplewell, N, Bertels, AWM, and Arya, B (1973) A critical appraisal of the
eliminating technique. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 31(2):213-233.
145. Qu, Z-Q and Chang, W-J (1997) An extended order method (EOM) for
nonlinear eigenvalue problems. Mechanics and Practice, 19(6):25-26.
146. Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998a) Extended order method for eigenproblem and
its sensitivity of frequency-dependent systems. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong
University, 32(4):23-26.
147. Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998b) An iterative method for dynamic condensation
of finite element models, Part I: Basic method. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong
University (English edition), E-3( 1):83-88.
148. Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998c) New structural dynamic condensation method
for finite element models. AIAA Journal, 36(7):1320-1324.
149. Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (1998d) Comment on improvement in model reduc-
tion schemes using the system equivalent reduction expansion process. AIAA
Journal,36(10):1941.
150. Qu, Z-Q (1998) A multi-step method for matrix condensation of finite element
models. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 214(5):965-971.
151. Qu, Z, Fu, Z, and Hua, H (1999) A shifted iterative method of dynamic conden-
sation for finite element models. Chinese Journal of Applied Mechanics: 61-67.
152. Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2000) Dynamic superelement modeling method for
compound dynamic systems. AIAA Journal, 38(6):1078-1083.
153. Qu, Z-Q and Fu, Z-F (2000) An iterative method for dynamic condensa-
tion of structural matrices. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 14(4):
667-678.
154. Qu, Z-Q and Chang, W (2000) Dynamic condensation method for viscous
damped vibration systems in engineering. Engineering Structures, 22(11):
1426-1432.
155. Qu, Z-Q, Shi, Y, and Hua, H (2001) A reduced-order modeling technique for
tall buildings with active tuned mass damper. Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics, 30(3):349-362.
156. Qu, Z-Q (2001) An efficient modeling method for laminated composite plates
with piezoelectric sensors and actuators. Smart Materials and Structures,
1O( 4):807-818.
157. Qu, Z-Q (2002) Model reduction for dynamical systems with local nonlin-
eaities. AIAA Journal, 40(2):327-333.
158. Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2002) Efficient method for dynamic condensation
of nondassically damped vibration systems. AIAA Journal, 40(2):368-375.
159. Qu, Z-Q, Jung, Y, and Selvam, RP (2003) Model condensation for non-
classically damped systems-Part I: Static condensation. Mechanical Systems
and Signal Processing, 17(5):1003-1016.
160. Qu, Z-Q, Selvam, RP, and Jung, Y (2003) Model condensation for non-
classically damped systems-Part II: Iterative schemes for dynamic conden-
sation. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(5):1017-1032.
161. Qu, Z-Q (2003) Discussion on dynamic condensation and synthesis of
unsymmetric structural systems. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 70(5):784.
162. Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2004) Insight into dynamic condensation
matrix of nonclassically damped models. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
272(3-5):581-606.
163. Ramsden, JN and Stoker, JR (1969) Mass condensation-a semi-automatic
method for reducing the size of vibration problems. International Journal for
164. Rao, GV (2002) Dynamic condensation and synthesis of unsymmetric
structural systems. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 69(5):610-616.
165. Rivera, MA, Singh, MP, and Suarez, LE (1999) Dynamic condensation approach
for nonclassically damped structures. AIAA Journal, 37(5):564-571.
166. Robinson,AR and Chen, C-C (1993) Improved time-history analysis for struc-
tural dynamics. II: Reduction of effective number of degrees of freedom.
Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 119(12):2514-2530.
167. Rohde, H (1972) Frequency-dependent condensation for structural dynamic
problems. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 20(3):4l3-416.
168. Rothe, K and Voss, H (1994) Improving condensation methods for eigenvalue
problems via Rayleigh functions. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics
and Engineering, 111(1-2):169-183.
169. Rothe, K and Voss, H ( 1995) Fully parallel condensation method for generalized
eigenvalue problems on distributed memory computers. Parallel Computing,
21(6):907-921.
170. Rouch, KE and Kao, JS (1980) Dynamic reduction in rotor dynamics by finite
element method. Journal of Mechanical Design, 102(2):360-368.
171. Sastry, CVC, Mahapatra, DR, Sopalakrishnan, S, and Ramamurthy, TS
(2003) An iterative system equivalent reduction expansion process for
extraction of high frequency response from reduced order finite element
model. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 192(15):
1821-1840.
172. Shah, VN and Raymond, M (1982) Analytical selection of masters for the
reduced eigenvalue problem. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 18(1):89-98.
173. Shiau, T-N and Jean, A-N (1990) Prediction of periodic response of flexible
mechanical systems with nonlinear characteristics. Journal of Vibration and
Acoustics, 112(3):501-507.
174. Shiau, TN and Jean, AN (1991) Nonlinear transient analysis of large
rotordynamic systems. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 58(2):596-598.
175. Singh, MP and Suarez, LE (1992) Dynamic condensation with synthesis of sub-
structure eigenproperties. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 159(1):l39-155.
Bibliography 351
176. Sowers, JD (1978) Condensation of free body mass matrices using flexibility
coefficients. AIAA Journal, 16(3):272-273.
177. Suarez, LE and Singh, MP (1992) Dynamic condensation method for structural
eigenvalue analysis. AlAA Journal, 30(4):1046-1054.
178. Subbiah, R, Bhat, RB, and Sankar, TS (1989) Dynamic responses of rotors
using modal reduction techniques. Journal of Vibration, Acoustics, Stress, and
Reliability in Design, 11(4):360-365.
179. Takewaki, I and U etani, K (1999) Efficient redesign of damped large structural
systems via domain decomposition with exact dynamic condensation. Com-
puter Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 178(3/4):367-382.
180. Thomas, DL (1982) Errors in natural frequency calculations using eigenvalue
economization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
18(10): 1521-1527.
181. Tzou, HS and Ye, R (1996) Analysis of piezoelectric systems with laminated
piezoelectric triangular shell elements. AlAA Journal, 34(1):110-115.
182. van Vroonhoven, JCW and de Borst, R (1999) Combination of fracture and
damage mechanics for numerical failure analysis. International Journal of
Solids and Structures, 36(8):1169-1191.
183. Wilson, EI (1974) The static condensation algorithm. International Journal for
184. Wittrick, WH and Williams, FW (1971) A general algorithm for computing
natural frequencies of elastic structures. Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and
Applied Mathematics, 24(3):263-284.
185. Won, K-M and Park, Y-S (1998) Optimal support positions for a structure to
maximize its fundamental natural frequency. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
213(5):801-812.
186. Wright, GC and Miles, GA (1971) An economical method for determin-
ing the smallest eigenvalues of large linear systems. International Journal for
187. Yang, X and Lian, H (2002) Hybrid reanalysis method for eigenproblems of
topological modifications. AIAA Journal, 40(6):1244-1246.
188. Yang, Y-B and Lin, B-H (1995) Vehicle-bridge interaction analysis by dynamic
condensation method. Journal of Structural Engineering, 121 (11): 1636-1643.
189. Yang, Y-S and Hsieh, S-H (2002) Iterative mesh partitioning optimization for
parallel nonlinear dynamic finite element analysis with direct substructuring.
Computational Mechanics, 28( 6):456-468.
190. Zhang, D (1994) Succession-level approximate reduction technique (SART) in
structural dynamic analysis. Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica, 15(4):360-364.
191. Zhang, D (1996) An improved Guyan reduction and successive reduction
procedure of dynamic model. Chinese Journal of Computational Structural
Mechanics and Applications, 13 (1) :90-94.
192. Zhang, N (1995) Dynamic condensation of mass and stiffness matrices. Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 188(4):601--615.
193. Zhang, QJ and Sainsbury, M G (1999) On the exact reduction and eigensolution
for the Galerkin element method. Computers and Structures, 71(4):413-422.
194. Harichandran, RS and Zhang, Y (1989) Eigenproperties of nonclassically

damped MDOF composite systems. Journal of Engineering Mechanics,
115(7):1527-1542.
195. Zhang, Wand Hou, Z (1981) Dynamic condensation iteration method for gen-
eralized eigenvalue problem of large systems. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica
Sinica, 2(3 ):55-61.
196. Zheng, T and Hasebe, N (1999) An efficient analysis of high-order dynamical
system with local nonlinearity. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 121(3):
408--416.
Conference Papers
197. Abdalla, M, Grigoriadis, K, and Zimmerman, D (2000) LMI hybrid expansion-
reduction damage detection method. Proceedings of the 18th International
Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental
198. Abdelhamid, MK and Chiang, S-S (1990) Evaluation methods of reduced
models. Proceedings of the 8th International Modal Analysis Conference
199. Alvin, K and Hemez, F (2000) Dynamic mode shapes expansion using mass
orthogonality constraints. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Anal-
ysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 1496-1502.
200. Avitabile, P, O'Callahan, JC, Chou, CM, and Kalkunte, V (1987) Expansion of
rotational degrees of freedom for structural dynamic modifications. Proceed-
ings of the 5th International Modal Analysis Conference (London, England),
201. Avitabile, P, O'Callahan, J, Milani, J, and Pan, ED-R (1989) System model devel-
opment using analytically enhanced experimental data. Proceedings of the 7th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union College,
202. Avitabile, P, O'Callahan, J, and Pan, ED-R (1989) Various model reduction
techniques on computed system response. Proceedings of the 7th International
Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
777-785.
203. Avitabile, P, O'Callahan, J, and Milani, J (1989) Comparison of system char-
acteristics using various model reduction techniques. Proceedings of the 7th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union College,
204. Avitabile, P, Pechinsky, F, and O'Callahan, J (1992) Study of modal vector
correlation using various techniques for model reduction. Proceedings of the
10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for
205. Avitabile, P, Li, P, and Foster, T (1993) Effects ofDOF selection on orthogonality
using reduced system matrices. Proceedings of the 11 th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Inc., Bethel, CT: 1073-1078.
Bibliography 353
206. Avitabile, P and Foster, T (1993) DOF selection for smoothing expansion of
measured data. Proceedings of the 11 th International Modal Analysis Confer-
ence (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
1486-1489.
207. Avitabile, P, Foster, T, and O'Callahan, J (1994) Comparison of reduction
vs expansion for orthogonality checks. Proceedings of the 12th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society for Experimental
Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 225-23l.
208. Avitabile, P and O'Callahan, JC (1995) Mass and stiffness orthogonality checks
without a mass or stiffness matrix. Proceedings of the 13th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 1515-1519.
209. Avitabile, P and Foster, TJ (1996) Evaluation of degree of freedom based vector
correlation methods. Proceedings of the 14th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Dearborn, MI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 1048-1056.
210. Avitabile, P, Piergentili, F, Parziale, P, and Crompton, D (1997) Comparison
of some system modeling approaches. Proceedings of the 15th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental
211. Avitabile, P, Piergentili, F, and Lown, K (1997) Application of hybrid modeling
techniques for computer related equipment. Proceedings of the 15th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental
212. Avitabile, P and O'Callahan, J (2001) Dynamic expansion of frequency
response functions for the full FRF matrix. Proceedings of the 19th Inter-
2l3. Balmes, E (1995) Parametric families of reduced finite element models: The-
ory and applications. Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 307-314.
214. Balmes, E (1996) Use of generalized interface degrees of freedom in component
mode synthesis. Proceedings of the 14th International Modal Analysis Con-
ference (Dearborn, MI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
204-210.
215. Balmes, E (1999) Sensors, degrees of freedom, and generalized modeshape
expansion methods. Proceedings of the 17th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 628-634.
216. Balmes, E (2000) Review and evaluation of shape expansion methods. Pro-
ceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference, (San Antonio,
TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 555-56l.
217. Bennighof, JK, Kaplanm MF, and Muller, MB (1997) Frequency response anal-
ysis using adaptive multi-level substructuring. Proceedings of the 15th Inter-
218. Bennighof, JK, Kaplan, MF, and Muller, MB (1999) Reducing NVH analy-
sis burden using automated multi-level substructuring. Proceedings of the
17th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for
219. Bhat, SP and Bernstein, DS (1995) Second-order systems with singular mass
matrix and an extension of Guyan condensation. 15th Biennial Conference on
Mechanical Vibration and Noise (Boston, MA): 943-948.
220. Bhatia, SS and Allemang, BJ (1995) A test-analysis-matrix (TAM) with
improved dynamic characteristics. Proceedings of the 13th International
Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental Mechan-
ics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1506-1514.
221. Bjorndahl, 0 and Ahlin, K (1994) Verification of FEM models by means of
measurements: A case study on a real cylindrical shell structure. Proceedings
of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society
222. Blades, EL and Craig Jr, RR (1997) A Craig-Bampton test-analysis model.
Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando,
FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 1386-1391.
223. Blair, MA, Camino, TS, and Dickens, JM (1991) An iterative approach to a
reduced mass matrix. Proceedings of the 9th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Centro Affari, Firenze, Italy), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
621-626.
224. Brahmi, K, Bouhaddi, N, and Fillod, R (1995) Reduction of junction degrees
of freedom in certain methods of dynamic substructure synthesis. Proceedings
of the 13th International Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society
225. Bouhaddi, N, Cogan, S, and Fillod, R (1992) Dynamic substructuring by Guyan
condensation selection of the master DOE Proceedings of the 10th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for Experimental
226. Brahmi, K and Bouhaddi, N (1997) Improved component mode synthesis
based on double condensation method. Proceedings of the 15th Interna-
227. Burton, TD, Farrar, CR, and Doebling, SW (1998) Two methods for model
updating using damage Ritz vectors. Proceedings of the 16th International
Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental
228. Burton, TD and Yong, ME (1994) Model reduction and nonlinear normal
modes in structural dynamics. International Mechanical Engineering Congress
and Exposition (Chicago, IL) ASME, NY: 9-16.
229. Burton, TD, Hemez, FM, and Rhee, W (2000) A combined model
reduction/SVD approach to nonlinear model updating. Proceedings of the
18th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for
230. Chen, SY and Tsuei, YG (1996) System identification and structural modifica-
tion. Proceedings of the 14th International Modal Analysis Conference (Dear-
born, MI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 655-664.
Bibliography 355
231. Cheu, TC, Johnson, CP, and Craig Jr, RR (1984) A quadratic reduction method
for eigenvalue problems. Proceedings of the 2nd International Modal Analy-
sis Conference and Exhibit (Orlando, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
667-675.
232. Cheu, TC, Johnson, CP, and Craig Jr, RR (1986) Selection of initial vectors for
subspace iteration method. Proceedings of the 4th International Modal Anal-
ysis Conference (Los Angeles, CA), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 44-49.
233. Chiao, K-P (1996) A systematic coupling procedure for component mode
synthesis with least square model reduction. Proceedings of the 14th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (Dearborn, MI), Society for Experimental
234. Choudhury, AR and He, J (1996) Structural damage location using expanded
measured frequency response function data. Proceedings of the 14th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (Dearborn, MI), Society for Experimental
235. Chung, YT (1998) Evaluation of model reduction methods using modal
test data. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
660-666.
236. Conti, P (1989) A higher order generalization of the Guyan reduction method.
Proceedings of the 7th International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas,
NV), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 529-532.
237. D'Ambrogio, Wand Sestieri, A (2000) Models for accounting/eliminating
rotational DOFs in distributed structural modification. Proceedings of the
18th International Modal Analysis Conference, (San Antonio, TX), Society for
238. Deiters, TA and Smith, KS (1999) Faster, easier finite element model reduction.
Proceedings of the 17th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee,
239. Dobson, BJ and Lee, HG (1991) Comparing measured and predicted spatial
properties. Proceedings of the 9th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Centro Affari, Firenze, Italy), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 555-562.
240. Flanigan, CC (1991) Development of the IRS component dynamic
reduction method for substructure analysis. Proceedings of the 32nd
AIAA/ ASME/ASCE/AHS / ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Mate-
rials Conference (Baltimore, MD): 2504-2509.
241. Flanigan, CC and Botos, CD (1992) Automated selection of accelerometer
locations for modal survey tests. Proceedings of the 10th International Modal
Analysis Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Inc., Bethel, CT: 1205-1208.
242. Flanigan, CC and Hunt, DL (1993) Integration of pretest analysis and model
correlation methods for modal surveys. Proceedings of the lIth Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental
243. Flanigan, CC and Freymiller, JE (1994) Using dynamic expansion to improve
test -analysis correlation. Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 198-204.
244. Flanigan, CC and Botos, CD (1997) Improvement of the centaur modal survey
test correlation using dynamic expansion. Proceedings of the 15th Interna-
245. Flanigan, CC (1998) Model reduction using Guyan, IRS, and dynamic meth-
ods. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis Conference (Santa
Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 172-176.
246. Freed, AM and Flanigan, CC (1990) A comparison of test-analysis model
reduction methods. Proceedings of the 8th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY: l344-l35l.
247. Friswell, MI, Garvey, SD, and Penny, JET (1997) Using iterated IRS model
reduction techniques to calculate eigensolutions. Proceedings of the 15th Inter-
248. Ghlaim, KH and Martin, KF (1984) Reduced component modes in a damped
system. Proceedings of the 2nd International Modal Analysis Conference and
Exhibit (Orlando, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 683-689.
249. Gloth, G (2000) Using mode shape expansion techniques for pretest analysis
and correlation. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Confer-
ence (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
1237-1243.
250. Gysin, H (1990) Comparison of expansion methods for FE modeling error
localization. Proceedings of the 8th International Modal Analysis Conference
25l. Gordis, JH (1992) An analysis of the improved reduced system (IRS) model
reduction procedure. Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis
Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 471-479.
252. Gordis, JH (1997) Artificial boundary conditions for model updating and
damage detection. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Con-
ference (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
1256-1262.
253. Guo, SJ and Hemingway; NG (1991) Improvement of a finite element model
with dynamic reduction using test data. Proceedings of the 9th International
Modal Analysis Conference (Centro Affari, Firenze, Italy), Union College,
254. Hemez, FM and Farhat, C (1994) Comparing mode shape expansion meth-
ods for test-analysis correlation. Proceedings of the 12th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 1560-1567.
255. Hemez, FM (1997a) Finite element updating of substructured models. Pro-
ceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL),
Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 565-57l.
256. Hemez, FM (1997b) Structural damage detection with very large dimensional
finite element models. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 1117-1123.
Bibliography 357
257. Heylen, Wand Avitabile, P (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 5: Degree

of freedom correlation technique. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
258. Hu, Y and Zheng, Z-C (1989) Improving the accuracy of Guyan reduction by
the perturbation technique. Proceedings of the 7th International Modal Anal-
ysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 988-991.
259. Huang, F and Gu, S (1993) A new approach for model reduction. Proceedings
of the lIth International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society
260. Imregun, M and Ewins, DJ (1993) An investigation into mode shape expansion
techniques. Proceedings of the 11th International Modal Analysis Confe-
rence (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
168-175.
261. James III, GH and Zimmerman, DC (1997) Reduction/Expansion studies
for damage identification of continuous aerospace structures. Proceedings of
the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for
262. James III, GH, Zimmerman, DC, Lopez, FP, and Cao, TT (2000) Model-
based damage detection of the space shuttle VSA data set. Proceedings of
the ·18th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society
for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 12l3-1217.
263. Jara-Almonte, J and Mitchell, LD (1989) A proposed method for enhanced
eigenpair extraction using finite element methods, Part I: Theory. Proceedings
of the 7th International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union
College, Schenectady, NY: 2l3-219.
264. Jara-Almonte, J and Mitchell, LD (1989) A proposed method for enhanced
eigenpair extraction using finite element methods, Part II: Applications. Pro-
ceedings of the 7th International Modal Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV),
265. Jarvenpaa, V-M and Keskinen, EK (2000) Finite element model for rotating
paper machine roll. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Con-
ference, (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT:
536-542.
266. Kammer, DC (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 2: Model reduction using
modal, SEREP, and hybrid. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analy-
sis Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 177-184.
267. Kim, K-O (1996) Improved hybrid dynamic condensation for eigenproblems.
Proceedings of the 37th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural
Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Salt Lake City, UT): 756-765.
268. Kim, K-O (1998) Perturbation method in condensation for eigenproblems.
Proceedings of the 39th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural
Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Long Beach, CA), AIAA, VA: 2601-2608.
269. Kim, K-O, Yoo, H-S, and Choi, Y-J (2001) Optimal sensor placement
for dynamic testing of large structures. Proceedings of the 42nd AIAA/
ASMEjASCEjAHSjASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials

Conference and Exhibit (Seattle, WA),AIAA, VA: 391-399.
270. Lallement, G, Cogan, S, and Andriambololona, H (1991) Optimal selection of
the measured degrees of freedom and application to a method of parametric
correction. Proceedings of the 9th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Centro Affari, Firenze, Italy), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 369-375.
271. Levine-West, M, Kissil, A, and Milman, M (1994) Evaluation of mode shape
expansion techniques on the micro-precision interferometer truss. Proceed-
ings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference (Honolulu, HI),
272. Lieven, NAJ and Ewins, DJ (1990) Expansion of modal data for correlation.
FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 605-609.
273. Lopez, FP and Zimmerman, DC (2000) Stiffness perturbation analysis of
reduced models. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Con-
ference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel,
CT: 1232-1236.
274. Myklebust, LI, Skallerud, B, and Haugen, B (2003) Model reduction in large dis-
placement dynamical problems. Proceedings of the 21st International Modal
Inc., Bethel, CT.
275. Nalitolela, NG, Penny, JET, and Friswell, MI (1990) Updating structural param-
eters of a finite element model by adding mass or stiffness to the system.
FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 836-842.
276. O'Callahan, JC, Avitabile, P, Lieu, I-W, and Madden, R (1986) An efficient
method of determining rotational degrees of freedom from analytical and
experimental modal data. Proceedings of the 4th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Los Angeles, CA), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 50-58.
277. O'Callahan, JC, Koung, RTF, and Chou, C-M (1986) Improved starting vectors
for subspace iteration eigensolution using dynamic condensation. Proceedings
of the 4th International Modal Analysis Conference (Los Angeles, CA), Union
278. O'Callahan, JC (1989) A procedure for an improved reduced system (IRS)
model. Proceedings of the 7th International Modal Analysis Conference (Las
Vegas, NV), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 17-21.
279. O'Callahan, JC, Avitabile, P, and Riemer, R (1989) System equivalent reduc-
tion expansion process (SEREP). Proceedings of the 7th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
29-37.
280. O'Callahan, J (1990) Comparison of reduced model concepts. Proceedings
of the 8th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Union
281. O'Callahan, J and Li, P (1994a) A non smoothing SEREP process for modal
expansion. Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Confer-
ence (Honolulu, HI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
232-238.
Bibliography 359
282. O'Callahan, J and Li, P (1994b) An automatic selection of reduced degrees

of freedom. Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Confer-
ence (Honolulu, HI), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
481-485.
283. O'Callahan, J and Li, P (1995) The effect of modal vector expansion on finite
element model updating. Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis
CT: 599-607.
284. O'Callahan, J and Li, P (1996) SEREP expansion. Proceedings of the 14th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference (Dearborn, MI), Society for Experimental
285. O'Callahan, J (1998) Correlation considerations, Part 4: Modal vector cor-
relation techniques. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT:197-206.
286. O'Caliahan, J (2000) Reduced model concepts. Proceedings of the 18th
International Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for
287. Paz, M (1985) Modal analysis using dynamic condensation method. Proceed-
ings of the 3rd International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Union
288. Peide, S and Xing, JW (1998) Calculation of a railway passenger car body using
macroelement methods. Proceedings of the 16th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 1479-1485.
289. Peng, C-Y and Tsuha, W (2000) SRTM modal survey and hybrid Guyan
expansion. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference
(San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
1281-1287.
290. Penny, JET, Friswell, MI, and Garvey, SD (1992) The automatic choice of
measurement locations for dynamic testing. Proceedings of the 10th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for Experimental
291. Piergentili, F, Avitabile, P, and O'Caliahan, J (1999) Dynamic expansion of
frequency response functions. Proceedings of the 17th International Modal
292. Qu, Z-Q, Hua, H-X, and Fu, Z-F (1999) Finite element modeling for floating
raft isolation systems. Proceedings of the 17th International Modal Analy-
sis Conference & Exhibit (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Bethel, CT: 1570-1575.
293. Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2000) Dynamic condensation methods for damped
models. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Confer-
ence, (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT:
1752-1757.
294. Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2001a) Dynamic superelement for dynamic systems
with local nonlinearities. Proceedings of the 42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ASC
Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Seattle, WA),

AIAA, Reston, VA: 3548-3557.
295. Qu, Z-Q and Selvam, RP (2001b) Two-step methods for dynamic condensa-
tion. Proceedings of the 42nd AIAAjASMEj ASCEj ASC Structures, Structural
Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Seattle, WA), AIAA, Reston, VA:
373-383.
296. Jung, Y and Qu, Z-Q (2003) An alternative subspace iteration method using
dynamic condensation matrix. Proceeding of the 21st International Modal
Inc., Bethel, CT.
297. Ramani, A and Knight, CE (1997) A solution method for some nonlinear eigen-
problems in structural dynamics. Proceedings of the 15th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,
Bethel, CT: 1952-1958.
298. Razzaque, A (1992) The Irons-Guyan reduction method with iterations.
Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego,
CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 137-145.
299. Reddy, VR and Sharan, AM (1986) The static and dynamic analysis of machine
tools using dynamic matrix reduction technique. Proceedings of the 4th
International Modal Analysis Conference (Los Angeles, CA), Union College,
Schenectady, NY: 1104-11 09.
300. Roozen, NB, de Kraker, A, Kriens, RFC, and van Campen, DH (1989) Foun-
dation and application of the spectral condensation technique for dynamic
analysis oflarge structures. Proceedings of the 7th International Modal Analysis
Conference (Las Vegas, NV), Union College, Schenectady, NY: 233-242.
301. Roy, NA, Girard, A, and Bugeat, LP (1997) Dynamic reduction of finite ele-
ment models using standard finite element capabilities. Proceedings of the
15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for
302. Sergent, P, Crowley, S, and Capobianco, M (1991) A procedure for the
integrated development of test-analysis models. Proceedings of the 9th Inter-
national Modal Analysis Conference (Centro Affari, Firenze, Italy), Union
303. Shu, C-F and Chu, F-H (1984) A general superelement approach by the com-
ponent mode synthesis method. Proceedings of the 2nd International Modal
Analysis Conference and Exhibit (Orlando, FL), Union College, Schenectady,
NY: 676-682.
304. Sowmianarayanan, Sand Pradeep, S (1999) Vibration suppression of a space-
craft solar array using on-off thrusters. Proceedings of the 40th AIAAj
ASMEjASCEjAHSjASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials
Conference (St. Louis, MO): 3097-3106.
305. Tan, MK (1993) Evaluation of reduced model concepts for the 10 bay CST
truss modal test. Proceedings of the 11th International Modal Analysis Con-
ference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
1493-1501.
306. Tinker, ML (1998) Accelerometer placement for the international space sta-
tion node modal test. Proceedings of the 39th AIAA/ASM/ASCE/AHS/ASC
Bibliography 361
Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference and Exhibit (Long

Beach, CA): 1489-1494.
307. Tison, T, Lallemand, B, Plessis, G, and Level, P (2000) Behaviour of modal
expansion methods towards imprecise data. Proceedings of the 18th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental
308. Tong, Land Qu, Z-Q (2000) Landing loads of an aircraft on moving
ships. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference &
Exhibit (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT:
1745-1747.
309. Tranxuan, D, He, J, and Choudhury, R (1997) Damage detection of truss
structures using measured frequency response function data. Proceedings of
the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando, FL), Society for
310. Tsuei, YG and Chen, SY (1997) Dynamic condensation and its interpretation.
Proceedings of the 15th International Modal Analysis Conference (Orlando,
311. Urgueira, A, Lieven, NAJ, and Ewins, DJ (1990) A generalized reduction
method for modal testing. Proceedings of the 8th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Union College, Schenectady, NY:
22-27.
312. Urgueira, APY, Maia, NMM, and Almeida, RAB (1999) On the dynamic
properties of reduced systems in structural coupling. Proceedings of the
17th International Modal Analysis Conference (Kissimmee, FL), Society for
313. Wilson, AM and Josefson, BL (1996) Mechanical intensity fields in reduced
structures. Proceedings of the 1996 37th AIAA/ASM/ASCE/AHS/ASC Struc-
tures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (Salt Lake City, UT):
1585-1593.
314. Yang, K-T and Kim, H-S (1998) An alternative approach to modeling of struc-
tures using dynamic stiffness matrices. Proceedings of the 16th International
Modal Analysis Conference (Santa Barbara, CA), Society for Experimental
Mechanics, Bethel, CT: 674-680.
315. Ye, Y and Qu, Z-Q (2000) Iterative methods for dynamic condensation of
structural matrices. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis
Conference & Exhibit (San Antonio, TX), Society for Experimental Mechanics,
Bethel, CT: 1776-1782.
316. Zimmerman, D, Simmermacher, T, and Kaouk, M (1995) Structural damage
detection using FRE Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis
CT: 179-184.
317. Zhang, D-W and Li, S (1995) Succession-level approximate reduction (SAR)
technique for structural dynamic model. Proceedings of the 13th Interna-
tional Modal Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental
Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT: 435-44l.
318. Zhang, DW and Wei, FS (1995) Complete mode-type reduction (CMR)
for structural dynamic system. Proceedings of the 13th International Modal
Analysis Conference (Nashville, TN), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.,

Bethel, CT: 616-622.
319. Zhang, Y-Q and Wang, W-L (1993) A new method for dynamic reduc-
tion. Proceedings of the 11th International Modal Analysis Conference
(Kissimmee, FL), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
513-515.
320. Zhu, J and Xue, H (1992) Transient analysis of geometrically linear and non-
linear structures by a combined finite element-Riccati transfer substructure
method. Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference
(San Diego, CA), Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc., Bethel, CT:
346--350.
321. Zhu, J and Xue, H (1992) A combined element-Riccati transfer substructure
method for steady-state response analysis of structures. Proceedings of the
10th International Modal Analysis Conference (San Diego, CA), Society for
Index
A component normal modes 323

active tuned mass dampers 221 condensation
ATMDs 221 hybrid-type condensation 103; 106
average driving point residue 297 modal-type condensation 105
axisymmetric 30 modal-type dynamic condensation 96
multi-mode dependent condensation
121
B physical-type condensation 105
balanced coordinates 333 response dependent condensation 123
balanced realization method 332 single-mode dependent condensation
balanced system 333 72; 119
balanced transformation 333 condensation matrix 116; 166
bending curvature 231
condensation model reduction 334
block companion matrices method 77
consistent mass formulation 21
bottom-up scheme 289
consistent mass matrix 21
boundary degrees of freedom 258
constitutive relations 232
boundary nodes 258
constraint modes 323
controllability 332
C converse piezoelectric equations 234
circular frequency 23 coordinate
classical damping 37 balanced coordinates 333
classical dynamic condensation 79 complex modal coordinates 43; 45
CMR 334 coordinate incompleteness 296
CMS 321 coordinate transformation matrix 1; 2;
complete mode reduction 103 49;74; 100; 114; 123; 182; 192;305
complex element coordinates 14
complex conjugate pair 41; 42 full order coordinates 1; 49
complex eigenvalue matrix 43 generalized coordinates 2
complex eigenvalues 41 global coordinates 13
complex eigenvectors 41 lamina coordinate 231
complex frequencies 41 laminate coordinate 231
complex frequency matrix 43 local coordinates 14
complex modal analysis 45 material coordinate 231
complex modal coordinates 43; 45 modal coordinates 34
complex modal space 43 normal coordinates 34
complex subspace iteration 203 principal coordinates 34
complex unitary transformation 184 reduced order coordinates 1; 49
component mode synthesis 321 Ritz coordinates 317
fixed interface 322 structural coordinates 13
free interface 327 system coordinates 13
363
364 Index
Craig-Bampton method 322 least square model reduction 96

Craig-Bampton TAM 306; 325 modal reduction 96
cross generalized mass matrix 300 SEREP-Guyan condensation 112
cross-orthogonal 44 SEREP-IRS 112
cross orthogonality 300 spectral condensation 86
cubic eigenproblem 79 subspace iteration 135
cut eigenvalue 81 system equivalent reduction expansion
cut frequency 81 process 96
cyclic symmetry 30 two-step method III
dynamic condensation matrix 182; 186
exact condensation matrix 72
D
left side dynamic condensation
damped free vibration 41 matrix 190
damped frequency 41 right side dynamic condensation
damping matrix 189
classical damping 37 dynamic coupling 324
damping coefficients 22 dynamic flexible matrix 36
general viscous damping 38 dynamic stiffness matrix 34; 64; 178
internal damping 22 dynamic substructuring 85
material damping 22 dynamic superelement modeling 276
modal damping 38
nonclassical damping 38
proportional damping 37 E
structural damping 22 effective independence distribution
viscous damping 22 vector 155
degrees of freedom eigenproblem 32
boundary degrees of freedom 258 cubic eigenproblem 79
deleted degrees of freedom 47 full eigenproblem 56
interior degrees of freedom 258 nonlinear eigenproblem 40; 75
kept degrees of freedom 47 quadratic eigenproblem 40; 77
massless degrees of freedom 54 reduced eigenproblem 57
master degrees of freedom 47 eigenvalue
primary degrees of freedom 47 complex eigenvalues 41
secondary degrees of freedom 47 cut eigenvalue 81
slave degrees of freedom 47 eigenvalue matrix 34
deleted degrees of freedom 47 eigenvalue problem 32; 40; 41; 43
dielectric constant matrix 234 eigenvalue shift technique 64; 143
direct piezoelectric equations 234 eigenvalues 32
displacement shape functions 18 eigenvector 32
displacement space 39 complex eigenvectors 41
domain decomposition 257 left side eigenvector 181
dynamic right side eigenvector 181
dynamic characteristics 31 eigenvector matrix 33; 43
dynamic condensation 2; 71 left side eigenvector matrix 189
classical dynamic condensation 79 right side eigenvector matrix 189
complete mode reduction 103 elastic stiffness matrix 232
exact condensation 72 electric displacements 234
exact dynamic condensation 72; electric fields 234
163; 179 element
generalized iterative IRS 132 element coordinates 14
high order Guyan condensation 82 finite elements 13
hybrid dynamic condensation 113 superelement 257
hybrid reduction 3; 103; 304 exact
improved reduction system 112; 115 exact condensation 72
iterative IRS 113; 126 exact condensation matrix 72
Index 365
exact dynamic condensation 72; generalized iterative IRS 132

163; 179 generalized Kidder's mode
exact expansion 308 expansion 116
exact mode expansion 57 generalized Miller's mode expansion 116
exact superelement 272 generalized quasi-static condensation 65
exact superelement modeling 273 generalized quasi-static condensation
expansion matrix 65
exact expansion 308 geometrical methods 307
Kidder's expansion 309 global
modifieq exact expansion 308 global coordinates 13
experimental modal analysis 31 global-local analysis 289
extended modal reduction 164 global mapping matrix 49
extended order method 77 Gram-Schmidt mass orthogonalization
external forces 13 318
Guyan condensation 48; 163
F generalized Guyan condensation 62
fiber-reinforced composite 231 generalized Guyan condensation
finite element modeling 23 matrix 62
finite elements 13 Guyan condensation matrix 48
first-order shear deformation plate high order Guyan condensation 82
theory 230 Guyan TAM 301
fisher information matrix 155
fixed interface modes 323
flexible matrix 36 H
floating raft isolation system 175 harmonic balance method 246
force derivative method 316 higher order elements 267
Fourier transformation 23 high order Guyan condensation 82
frequency Hooke's law 17
circular frequency 23 hybrid
complex frequencies 41 hybrid dynamic condensation 113
cut frequency 81 hybrid modeling 257
damped frequency 41 hybrid reduction 3; lO3; 304
frequency response function 23 hybrid TAM 304
frequency response vector 23 hybrid-type condensation lO3; lO6
frequency shift technique 64; 143
natural frequencies 32
undamped natural frequency 41 I
FSDT 230 idempotent matrix 155
full eigenproblem 56 improved reduction system 112; 115
full model 1; 47 intelligent structures 229
full model space 296 interior degrees of freedom 258
full order control 219 interior nodes 258
full order coordinates 1; 49 internal damping 22
full order model 1; 47 interpolation functions 24
IRS 112
G IRSTAM 302
general viscous damping 38 iterative IRS 113; 126
generalized iterative IRS TAM 302
generalized coordinates 2
generalized exact mode expansion 116
generalized Guyan condensation 62 K
generalized Guyan condensation kept degrees of freedom 47
matrix 62 KIdder's expansion 309
generalized inverse 62; 98; 99; 116 Kidder's mode expansion 57
366 Index
L modal-type dynamic condensation 96

lamina coordinate 231 modal vector 32
laminate coordinate 231 modal analysis
Lanczos vectors 319 complex modal analysis 45
LDRVs 316 experimental modal analysis 31
least square model reduction 96 numerical modal analysis 31
left side dynamic condensation matrix 190 real modal analysis 45
left side eigenvector 181 theoretical modal analysis 31
left side eigenvector matrix 189 modal coordinate reduction 313
Leung's theorem 72 low frequency reduction 314
linear piezoelectric constitutive equations middle frequency reduction 316
234 modal truncation
linear quadratic regulator 223 low-high modal truncation 35
linearized approach 86 middle-high modal truncation 35
load dependent Ritz vectors 316 mode
local coordinates 14 component normal modes 323
low-high modal truncation 35 constraint modes 323
LQR 223 fixed interface modes 323
lumped mass formulation 21 mode acceleration 35; 315
lumped mass matrix 21 mode expansion 307
mode incompleteness 296
M mode shape 32
MAC 156 mode superposition 34
macroelement 257 natural mode 32
macromodel 257 normal mode 33
mass matrix real modes 32
consistent mass matrix 21 mode acceleration
lumped mass matrix 21 force derivative method 316
reduced mass matrix 53 low frequency 316
massless degrees of freedom 54 middle frequency 316
master degrees of freedom 47 mode expansion
masters 47 exact mode expansion 57
material coordinate 231 generalized exact mode expansion 116
material damping 22 generalized Kidder's mode expansion
middle-high modal truncation 35 116
Miller's mode expansion 58 generalized Miller's mode expansion 116
modal Kidder's mode expansion 57
modal analysis 31 Miller's mode expansion 58
modal assurance criterion 156; 299 model
modal condensation 181 full model 1; 47
modal coordinate reduction 313 full order model 1; 47
modal coordinates 34 model recovery 309
modal damping 38 reduced model 2; 49
modal damping ratio 38; 41 reduced order model 2; 49
modal energies 153 slave model 75
modal mass 33 test analysis model 298
modal parameters 31 modeling
modal reduction 96 dynamic superelement modeling 276
modal space 34 exact superelement modeling 273
modal stiffness 33 hybrid modeling 257
modal superposition 34 multi-level exact superelement
modal TAM 303 modeling 289
modal truncation 35 multi-level static superelement
modal-type condensation 105 modeling 289
Index 367
multi-level superelement modeling 288 prediction-correction scheme 111

static superelement modeling 264 primary degrees of freedom 47
superelement modeling 258 primary-secondary system 218
modified exact expansion 308 principal coordinates 34
modulus principal space 34
shear modulus 17 principle of virtual work 18; 233
Young's modulus 17 projection algorithm 307
Multi-level proper orthogonal decomposition 330
multi-level exact superelement proper orthogonal modes 331
modeling 289 proper orthogonal values 331
multi-level static superelement proportional damping 37
modeling 289 pseudo orthogonality 300
multi-level superelement 288
multi-level superelement modeling 288
multi-mode dependent condensation 121 Q
multiscale analysis 291 quadratic eigenproblem 40; 77
quasi-
N quasi-static condensation 64
natural frequencies 32 quasi-static condensation matrix 64
natural mode 32 quasi-static Ritz vector 317
nodes 13 quasi-static Ritz vector method 319
boundary nodes 258
interior nodes 258
nonclassical damping 38 R
nonlinear eigenproblem 40; 75 rank deficient 102
normal Rayleigh quotient 153
normal coordinates 34 Rayleigh's principle 75; 112
normal modal matrix 33 real modal analysis 45
normal mode 33 real modes 32
normal space 34 reduced
normal strains 16 reduced dynamic stiffness matrix 72
normal stresses 16 reduced eigenproblem 57
normalization 33; 43 reduced mass matrix 53
numerical modal analysis 31 reduced model 2; 49
reduced model space 296
reduced order control 219
o reduced order coordinates 1; 49
observability 332 reduced order model 2; 49
orthogonal conditions 33; 34; 43 reduced stiffness matrix 49; 53
orthogonality 299
reduced system matrices 74
cross orthogonality 300
reflective symmetry 26
pseudo orthogonality 300
repetitive symmetry 30
orthonormal 33; 99
response dependent condensation 123
Riccati equation 223
p Riccati matrix 223
parallel-orthogonal 44 right side dynamic condensation
participation factor 318; 320 matrix 189
perturbation approach 86 right side eigenvetor 181
physical-type condensation 105 right side eigenvector matrix 189
piezoelectric moduli matrices 234 Ritz coordinates 317
POD 330 Ritz vector methods 316
Poisson's ratio 17 Ritz vectors 317
power series 37 Lanczos vectors 319
power series expansion 77 load dependent Ritz vectors 316
368 Index
Ritz vectors (Contd.) static superelement 262

quasi -static Ritz vector 317 static superelement modeling 264
WYD vectors 318 static TAM 301
rotational symmetric 30 strain
normal strains 16
shear strains 16
S
strain-displacement relationships 18;
secondary degrees of freedom 47
23;231
selection of masters
strain-stress relationships 17
accuracy 152
stress
completeness 155
normal stresses 16
practicality 159
shear stresses 16
symmetry 157
stress-displacement relationships 18
SEREP 96
stress-strain relationships 17; 233
SEREP-Guyan condensation 112
structural coordinates 13
SEREP-IRS 112
structural damping 22
SEREP TAM 304
subdomain 257
shear modulus 17
subspace iteration 135
shear strains 16
subspace rotation algorithm 307
shear stresses 16
substructure 257
single-mode dependent condensation
superelement 257
72;119
dynamic superelement modeling 276
singular value decomposition 99; 156
exact superelement 272
singular values 99
exact superelement modeling 273
slave degrees of freedom 47
multi-level exact superelement
slave model 75
modeling 289
slaves 47
multi-level static superelement
smart structures 229
modeling 289
space
multi-level superelement 288
complex modal space 43
multi-level superelement modeling 288
displacement space 39 static superelement 262
full model space 296
static superelement modeling 264
modal space 34
superelement modeling 258
normal space 34
SVD 99
principal space 34
symmetry
reduced model space 296
axisymmetric 30
state space 39; 78
cycle symmetry 30
TAM space 299 reflective symmetry 26
spectral condensation 86
repetitive symmetry 30
spectral matrix 34
rotational symmetric 30
state
system coordinates 13
state equation 39
system equivalent reduction expansion
state space 39; 78
process 96
state space method 77
state vector"· 39
static condensation 48; 164; 166; 168; 170 T
generalized Guyan condensation 62 TAM 298
generalized quasi-static condensation 65 Craig-Bampton TAM 306; 325
Guyan condensation 48; 163 Guyan TAM 301
quasi-static condensation 64 hybrid TAM 304
static condensation matrix IRS TAM 302
generalized quasi-static condensation iterative IRS TAM 302
matrix 65 modal TAM 303
Guyan condensation matrix 48 SEREP TAM 304
quasi-static condensation matrix 64 static TAM 301
Index 369
TAM accuracy 298 V

TAM mass matrix 298 vector
TAM Robustness 299 Lanczos vectors 319
TAM space 299 modal vector 32
TAM stiffness matrix 298 Ritz vectors 317
test analysis correlation 295 state vector 39
test analysis model 298 WYD vectors 318
test orthogonality matrix 299 viscous damping 22
theoretical modal analysis 31
time delay 219
TMDs 221
top-down scheme 288 W
transition region 289 weighted average magnitude of eigenvectors
tuned mass dampers 221 297
two-step method 111 WYD vectors 318
U
undamped free vibration 32 Y
undamped natural frequency 41 Young's modulus 17

2004 Book ModelOrderReductionTechniques PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2004 Book ModelOrderReductionTechniques PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Model Order Reduction Techniques

Springer-Verlag London Ltd.

Model Order Reduction

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

© Springer-Verlag London 2004

Typeset by Techset Composition Limited, Salisbury, UK

69/3830-543210 Printed on acid-free paper SPIN 10946718

incompleteness is the insufficiency of the measured degrees of freedom. Generally,

1 Introduction to Dynamic Model Reduction Techniques ........... 1

2 Finite Element Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13

3 Theory of Modal Analysis ................................ 31

4 Static Condensation .................................... 47

5.5.4 Numerical Demonstrations ..................... 92

6 Iterative Methods for Dynamic Condensation .................. III

7 Selection of Master Degrees of Freedom ...................... 151

7.3 Other Considerations ............................... 157

8 Dynamic Condensation of Nonclassically Damped Models . . . . . . . .. 163

9 Application I: Model Reduction on System Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 217

9.3.3 Theory of Sensors and Actuators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 234

10 Application II: Model Reduction on Component Level-Superelement

11 Applications III: Modal Testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 295

12 Summary of Other Model Order Reduction Techniques ........... 313

12.3 Component Mode Synthesis ......................... " 321

Index . ................................................. 363

1.1 Model Order Reduction Techniques

Mi(t) + CX(t) + KX(t) = F(t) (1)

X(t) = TZ(t) (2)

where T E R nxm is the coordinate transformation matrix and Z E Rm is the reduced

X(t) = TZ(t) (3)

1.1.1 Physical Coordinate Reduction

in which I is an identity matrix of order m; R is the dynamic condensation matrix.

1.1.2 Generalized Coordinate Reduction

1.1.3 Hybrid Reduction

1.2 Dynamic Condensation Technique

dynamic effect is ignored in the condensation, this method is usually referred to as

1.2.2 Single-Mode, Multimode, and Response-Dependent

The single-mode-dependent dynamic condensation matrix is defined as the

1.2.3 Physical-Type, Modal-Type, and Hybrid Dynamic

approaches usually contains m modes although the accuracy of the m - p higher

1.2.4 Single-Step, Two-Step, and Iterative Dynamic Condensation

prediction-correction method. Generally:the following four successive steps are used

1.2.5 Undamped and Damped Dynamic Condensation

1.3 Organization of This Monograph

Many structures of practical importance are too complex to be analyzed by classical,

2.1 Finite Element Method in General Form

Figure 2.1 General three-dimensional solid or structure.

combinations. These forces have the general form

where U, V, and W represent displacements in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions,

The displacements at any point within the three-dimensional element can be

(i = 1,2, ... , nn) (8)

and () represents rotation.

2.1.2 Stress and Strain

Figure 2.2 Stresses on an infinitesimal element.

general case of an infinitesimal element (dx x dy x dz) within a three-dimensional

iyz = i zy , Tzx = Txz (11)

Consequently, only six independent components of stress need be considered.

v represents Poisson's ratio.

where the stress-strain matrix is defined as

2.1.3 Strain- and Stress-Displacement Relationships

where the strain-displacement matrix B is given by

It is an array of derivatives of the shape functions.

2.1.4 Virtual Work Principle

8Wint = Iv 8£T udV (26)