Acta Mechanica

, Volume 223, Issue 12, pp 2549–2563 | Cite as

Application of the proper orthogonal decomposition for linear and nonlinear structures under transient excitations

  • F. Bamer
  • C. Bucher


Model reduction has become very important in order to save calculation time. In particular, in structural dynamics, computations become very time-consuming when the critical time step of explicit integrators becomes very small. The main focus of this paper is on the application of the Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) method to a structure subjected to transient earthquake loading. It is shown that based on the information of only a small portion of the transient excitation and the structure (“snapshots”), it is possible to assemble a reduced-order model, which yields a very accurate and time-saving approximation of the response to the entire earthquake. The POD reduction method is applied not only to linear, but also to nonlinear structures under earthquake loading. In the linear case, the POD results can be compared to those obtained by the classical method of modal truncation. In the nonlinear case, base isolation systems (friction pendulum systems) are integrated in the structure. Error estimations are applied in order to assess the solution of the POD-reduced system of the linear and the nonlinear systems. The POD can be applied successfully if the snapshots within the chosen time interval describe the main behavior of the system well. In both the linear and nonlinear cases, the approximation of the system as reduced by the POD is very accurate even if only a few POD modes are used. The advantage over the method of Modal Truncation is not only the optimality of the POD modes concerning their associated energy, but also its applicability to nonlinear systems.


Proper Orthogonal Decomposition Model Order Reduction Proper Orthogonal Decomposition Mode Earthquake Excitation Modal Truncation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bathe K.J.: Finite Element Procedures. 1st edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bienkiewicz B., Tamura Y., Ham H.J., Ueda H., Hibi K.: Proper orthogonal decomposition and reconstruction of multi-channel roof pressure. Wind Eng. Indust. Aerodyn. 54-55, 369–381 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bronstein I., Semendjajew K., Musiol G., Mühlig H.: Taschenbuch der Mathematik. Harri Deutsch, Zürich (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bucher C.: Stabilization of explicit time integration by modal reduction. In: Wall, W.A., Bletzinger, K.U., Schweizerhof, K. (eds) Trends in Computational Structural Mechanics, pp. 429–437. CIMNE, Spain (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bucher C.: Probability-based optimal design of friction-based seismic isolation devices. Struct. Safety 31, 500–507 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chatterjee A.: An introduction to the proper orthogonal decomposition. Curr. Sci. 78(7), 808–817 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chopra A.K.: Dynamics of Structures, Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cusumano J., Sharkady M., Kimble B.: Spatial coherence measurements of a chaotic flexible-beam impact oscillator. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. Aerospace Div. (Publication) AD 33, 13–22 (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feeny B.F., Kappagantu R.: On the physical interpretation of proper orthogonal modes in vibrations. J. Sound Vib. 211(4), 607–616 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geschwindner L.F.: Nonlinear dynamic analysis by modal superposition. J. Struct. Div. 107(12), 2325–2336 (1981)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holmes P., Lumley J.L., Berkooz G.: Turbulence, Coherent Structures, Dynamical Systems and Symmetry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kappagantu R., Feeny B.: An “optimal” modal reduction of a system with frictional excitation. J. Sound Vib. 224(5), 863–877 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kappagantu R., Feeny B.: Part 1: Dynamical characterization of a frictionally excited beam. Nonlinar Dyn. 22, 317–333 (2000a)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kappagantu R., Feeny B.: Part 2: Proper orthogonal modal modeling of a frictionally excited beam. Nonlinear Dyn. 23, 1–11 (2000b)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kerschen G., Golinval J.C.: Physical interpretation of the proper orthogonal modes using the singular value decomposition. J. Sound Vib. 249(5), 849–865 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kerschen G., Golinval J.C.: A model updating strategy of non-linear vibrating structures. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 60, 2147–2164 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kikitsu H., Okuda Y., Ohashi M., Kanda J.: Pod analysis of wind velocity field in the wake region behind vibrating three-dimensional square prism. Wind Eng. Indust. Aerodyn. 96, 2093–2103 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liang Y.C., Lee H.P., Lim S.P., Lin W.Z., Lee K.H., Wu C.G.: Proper orthogonal decomposition and its applications—part 1: theory. J. Sound Vib. 252(3), 527–544 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nicholson D.: On stable numerical integration methods of maximum time step. Acta Mechanica 38, 191–198 (1981)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Qu Z.Q.: Model Order Reduction Techniques with Application in Finite Element Analysis. Springer-Verlag London Limited, London (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rega G., Troga H.: Dimension reduction of dynamical systems: methods, dimension reduction of dynamical systems: methods, models, applications. Nonlinar Dyn. 41(1), 1–15 (2005)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ritto, T., Buezas, F., Sampaio, R.: A new measure of efficiency for model reduction: application to a vibroimpact system. J. Sound Vib. 1977–1984 (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tubino F., Carassale L., Solari G.: Seismic response of multi-supported structures by proper orthogonal decomposition. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 32, 1639–1654 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Volkwein, S.: Model Reduction Using Proper Orthogonal Decomposition. Karl-Franzens-Universitaet Graz, Institut für Mathematik und Wissenschaftliches Rechnen (2008a)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Volkwein, S.: Proper Orthogonal Decomposition and Singular Value Decomposition. Karl-Franzens-Universitaet Graz, Institut für Mathematik und Wissenschaftliches Rechnen (2008b)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang L., Wang Y., L Z., Zhang Y.: Estimation of the vortex shedding frequency of a 2-d building using correlation and the pod methods. Wind Eng. Indust. Aerodyn. 98, 895–902 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Center of Mechanics and Structural DynamicsVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations