Improved Estimation of Frequency Response Covariance

Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

In high-consequence systems, critical decisions are made based on analytically predicted system response. In order to have confidence in the predictions, analytical models must be validated, and the effects of uncertainty on system response must be well understood. In systems with high modal density, modal based model validation is often problematic. It becomes more convenient to validate a model by directly using its response in the frequency domain. This then requires a corresponding frequency response based uncertainty quantification and propagation analysis. Covariance propagation is often used to propagate uncertainty and compute second order response statistics. However, linear covariance propagation applied to frequency response is inaccurate at resonances due to nonlinearity. A method is proposed that provides an improved estimate of the first two moments of frequency response uncertainty in the vicinity of resonances. It assumes that the uncertainty is small enough relative to damping such that an impedance based matrix inverse can be approximated using a finite number of terms. The method then propagates higher order moments of modal impedance uncertainty to approximate this inverse. The proposed approach can fit directly into a straightforward covariance propagation approach, and is applicable to substructured systems.

Keywords

Uncertainty propagation Covariance Frequency response 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This material is based on work supported by Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia is a multi-program laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration.

References

  1. 1.
    DOD (1999) Test requirements for launch, upper stage, and space vehicles, applications and guidelines, vol II. DOD Handbook-340A (USAF)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hemez FM, Doebling SW, Anderson MC (2004) A brief tutorial on verification and validation. In: 22nd international modal analysis conference, DearbornGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    ASME (2006) Guide for verification and validation in computational solid mechanics. ASMEGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paez TL (2009) Introduction to model validation. In: 27th international modal analysis conference, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hasselman TK, Coppolino RN, Zimmerman DC (2000) Criteria for modeling accuracy: a state-of-the-practice survey. In: 18th international modal analysis conference, San AntonioGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rebba R, Huang S, Liu Y, Mahadevan S (2006) Statistical validation of simulation models. Int J Mater Prod Technol 25(1):164–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hemez FM, Rutherford AC, Maupin RD (2006) Uncertainty analysis of test data shock responses. In: 24th international modal analysis conference, Saint LouisGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Basseville M, Benveniste A (2006) Handling uncertainties in identification and model validation: a statistical approach. In: 24th international modal analysis conference, Saint LouisGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hasselman TK (2001) Quantification of uncertainty in structural dynamic models. J Aerosp Eng 14:158–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bergman E, Allen MS, Kammer DC, Mayes RL (2010) Probabilistic investigation of sensitivities of advanced test-analysis model correlation methods. J Sound Vib 329(13):2516–2531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mace BR, Shorter PJ (2001) A local modal/perturbation for estimating frequency response statistics of built-up structures with uncertain properties. J Sound Vib 242:793–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hinke L, Dohnal F, Mace BR, Waters TP, Ferguson NS (2009) Component mode synthesis as a framework for uncertainty analysis. J Sound Vib 324:161–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hasselman TK, Chrowstowski JD (1994) Propagation of modeling uncertainty through structural dynamic models. In: 35th AIAA structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, Hilton Head, pp 72–83Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kammer DC, Krattiger D (2013) Propagation of uncertainty in substructured spacecraft using frequency response. AIAA J 51(2):353–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schultz T, Sheplak M, Cattafesta LN (2007) Application of multivariate uncertainty analysis to frequency response function estimates. J Sound Vib 305:116–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Michalowicz JV, Nichols JM, Bucholtz F, Olson CC (2009) An Isserlis’ theorem for mixed Gaussian variables: application to the auto-bispectral density. J Stat Phys 136(1):89–102CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Engineering PhysicsUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations