Verification of Rayleigh damping options with direct integration and modal superposition

This example verifies the Rayleigh damping options in Abaqus for direct integration and modal superposition procedures. The Abaqus results are compared with an exact solution for a simple problem.

This page discusses:

ProductsAbaqus/Standard

For direct integration Rayleigh damping is defined with damping in the material definition for those elements in which mass and stiffness proportional damping is desired. In a SIM-based modal dynamic analysis Rayleigh damping can be introduced in the material definition (same as for direct integration) and as modal damping in the step definition. If the SIM architecture is not used, only modal damping can be used in a modal dynamic analysis. In this example only the latter form of damping is represented. For direct integration analysis Rayleigh damping can be introduced in any stress-based element, but it is not available for spring elements; dashpot elements should be used in parallel with spring elements for this purpose (see Free and forced vibrations with damping). Elements with nonhomogeneous material damping properties are dealt with by taking a volume average of the damping coefficients. Stiffness proportional damping in nonlinear analysis is discussed in Material Damping.

The example is the simplest dynamic system: a massless truss connecting a point mass to ground. The mass is obtained by giving the material in the truss a density so that the lumped mass of the truss gives the correct point mass at the free end of the truss. The truss is initially stretched and then let go so that it undergoes vibrations of small amplitude. This is a linear problem; consequently, the response can be predicted using either the direct integration or modal dynamic procedures. These solutions are compared with each other and to the exact solution of the equation of motion.

Problem description

Figure 1 shows the geometry. The model consists of a single truss element, type T3D2, constrained at one node and free to move only in the x-direction at its other node. The truss's mass matrix is lumped so that the system is equivalent to a spring and a lumped mass. The cross-sectional area of the truss is 645 mm2 (1 in2), and its length is 254 mm (10 in). It is made of linear elastic material, with Young's modulus 69 GPa (107 lb/in2). The density of the truss provides a lumped mass at the unrestrained end of 2.777 × 105 kg (1585 lb-s2/in).

In each case the mass is displaced by 25.4 mm (1 in) in an initial static step. It is then released in the dynamic (or modal dynamic) step, and the displacement response history is saved on a file for postprocessing. The time histories are plotted; and the logarithmic decrement, δ, of the peak response is calculated graphically and compared with the theoretical value.

Results and discussion

The equation of motion for the system is

mu¨+cu˙+ku=0,

where m is the mass, c the damping, k the stiffness, and u the displacement.

Rayleigh damping defines the damping as c=αm+βk, where α is the mass damping factor and β is the stiffness damping factor.

Assuming a solution of the form u(t)=u0expλt, we have

λ=-c2m±(c2m)2-ωu2,

where ωu=k/m is the undamped frequency of vibration (25.118 rad/sec for the parameters of this example). Critical damping occurs when the value of c causes the discriminant of this equation to be zero, so

cc=2mωu=2km.

We define the damping ratio, ξ, as the ratio of damping to critical damping:

ξ=ccc=α2ωu+βωu2.

The relationships in this equation are often used as a basis for choosing α and β.

The equation defining λ can be rewritten

λ=ωu(-ξ±ξ2-1).

We choose the damping in this case to be less than critical, so ξ<1 and the system can vibrate. The initial conditions are u(0)= 1 and u˙(0)= 0, so the dynamic part of the motion is

u(t)=exp(-ξωut)(ξ1-ξ2sinωdt+cosωdt),

where ωd=ωu1-ξ2 is the damped frequency of the system.

The amplitudes of this oscillatory equation before and after one period of vibration, T=2π/ωd, have the ratio

u(t)u(t+2π/ωd)=exp(2πξωuωd),

so the logarithmic decrement over n cycles of response is

δ=1nln(u(t)u(t+nT))=(2πξωuωd).

Table 1 shows the values of δ calculated from Abaqus for the various test cases examined, together with their corresponding exact solution. A sample time history from which the logarithmic decrements are calculated is shown in Figure 2. All the Abaqus runs use fixed time increments of .01 seconds. The integrator used in the modal method is exact, so the results of that analysis are exact. The integrator used in the direct integration method is not exact; however, since the period of the system is 0.25 seconds, the time increment chosen gives 25 increments per cycle, so those results are also quite accurate.

Input files

rayleighdamping_direct_alpha.inp

Direct integration analysis, α= 1.00472, β= 0.0.

rayleighdamping_modal_alpha.inp

Modal superposition analysis, α= 1.00472, β= 0.0.

rayleighdamping_direct_beta.inp

Direct integration analysis, α= 0.0, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_modal_beta.inp

Modal superposition analysis, α= 0.0, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_direct.inp

Direct integration analysis, α= 1.00472, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_modal.inp

Modal superposition analysis, α= 1.00472, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_beam_alpha.inp

Direct integration analysis using BEAM GENERAL SECTION, α= 1.00472, β= 0.0.

rayleighdamping_beam_beta.inp

Direct integration analysis using BEAM GENERAL SECTION, α= 0.0, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_beam.inp

Direct integration analysis using BEAM GENERAL SECTION, α= 1.00472, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_shell_alpha.inp

Direct integration analysis using SHELL GENERAL SECTION, α= 1.00472, β= 0.0.

rayleighdamping_shell_beta.inp

Direct integration analysis using SHELL GENERAL SECTION, α= 0.0, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_shell_.inp

Direct integration analysis using SHELL GENERAL SECTION, α= 1.00472, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_substr_alpha.inp

Direct integration analysis using substructures, α= 1.00472, β= 0.0.

rayleighdamping_substr_alpha_gen1.inp

Substructure generation referenced in the analysesrayleighdamping_substr_alpha.inp and rayleighdamping_overide.inp.

rayleighdamping_substr_beta.inp

Direct integration analysis using substructures, α= 0.0, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_substr_beta_gen1.inp

Substructure generation referenced in the analysis rayleighdamping_substr_beta.inp.

rayleighdamping_substr.inp

Direct integration analysis using substructures, α= 1.00472, β= 1.59248 × 10−3.

rayleighdamping_substr_gen1.inp

Substructure generation referenced in the analysis rayleighdamping_substr.inp.

rayleighdamping_override.inp

Tests override of damping properties on the SUBSTRUCTURE PROPERTY option.

rayleighdamping_usr_element.inp

Uses Rayleigh damping with user elements in direct integration dynamics (DYNAMIC).

Tables

Table 1. Exact versus graphical logarithmic decrements.
Damping parameters Damping ratio, ξ Logarithmic decrement
Mass Stiffness Exact Direct integration Modal superposition
α β
1.00472 0.0 0.02 0.1257 0.1253 0.1257
0.0 1.59248 × 10−3 0.02 0.1257 0.1253 0.1257
1.00472 1.59248 × 10−3 0.04 0.2514 0.2499 0.2514

Figures

Figure 1. Truss-mass vibration system.

Figure 2. Sample time history.