928.

Identification of parameter matrices using

estimated FRF variation
Jin Bong Kim, Hee-Chang Eun
928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

Jin Bong Kim1, Hee-Chang Eun2

1, 2Departmentof Architectural Engineering, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Korea
2
Corresponding author
E-mail: 1jb1340@[Link], 2heechang@[Link]
(Received 10 September 2012; accepted 28 February 2013)

Abstract. This study presents an analytical method to predict the dynamic parameters of actual
structure from measured FRF (Frequency Response Function) data. The inconsistency due to
modeling errors between the actual structure and the finite element model exists. The number of
measured data is less than the one of a full set of dofs and should be expanded to estimate the
parameters. Considering that the stiffness and mass matrices are related with the real part of the
expanded FRF data and the damping matrix with the imaginary part, the variation in the
parameter matrices is evaluated. A numerical example evaluates the appropriateness of the
proposed method.
Keywords: FRF, damping matrix, parameter identification, finite element analysis, modeling.

1. Introduction

The FRFs have been used directly to update condensed analytical models for obtaining the
proper model. A single FRF measured at several frequencies, along with a correlated analytical
model of the structure in its original state, is used for updating structural parameters. However,
it’s impossible to get the data of a full set of dofs and the sparse data should be expanded to get
the information of the whole system.
There have been many attempts to update the unknown physical parameters directly from the
FRFs [1]. It has been reported [2] that FRF data provide more information than modal data, as
the latter are extracted from a very limited frequency range related to resonance. Friswell and
Penny [3] proposed an approach to reduce the model order so that the stated estimation process
reduces to a least squares problem based on the FRFs. Fanning and Carden [4] presented a
method for detecting added mass in structural systems from a single FRF measured at several
frequencies in an identification algorithm. Cha and Tuck-Lee [5] developed approaches to
update mass and stiffness matrices based on two sets of measured frequency response data.
Kwon and Lin [6] proposed a frequency selection method for efficient FRF-based model
updating. Lin and Zhu [7] developed model updating methods to identify mass, stiffness, and
damping matrices of a damaged dynamic system based on the FRF method. Phani and
Woodhouse [8] identified parameter matrices of viscous damping models based on measured
FRFs. They compared matrix methods using a measured FRF matrix and modal methods using
modal parameters. Inverting the FRF matrix to the dynamic stiffness matrix and comparing their
real and imaginary parts with parameter matrices, Lee and Kim [9] identified damping
characteristics of the system in matrix forms directly from its measured FRFs. Fritzen [10]
proposed an analytical method to describe the parameter matrices by minimizing the error of a
dynamic stiffness matrix and its inverse, and an identity matrix. Utilizing FRF data measured at
specific positions, with dofs less than that of the system, as constraints to describe a damaged
system, Rahmatalla et al. [11] predicted parameter matrices such as mass, stiffness and damping
matrices of the system, and provided a damage identification method from their variations.
Changes of FRF of a structure are correlated to changes of the stiffness and mass through
damage sensitivity equations which have been derived using the change of eigenvectors and
measured natural frequencies of damaged structures. Pascual et al. [12] presented a model
updating method to avoid the numerical difficulties induced by the discontinuities in the FRFs.
Esfandiari et al. [13], [14] provided a structural model updating technique using measured FRF

124 ” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

data and measured natural frequencies of the damaged structure without any expansion of the
measured data or reduction of the finite element model. When solving damage sensitivity
equations by the least square method, they estimated the mass, stiffness and damping properties.
This study begins with the expansion of a few measured FRF data to a full set of dofs and
presents the mathematical form of the updated FRF matrix. And this work presents an analytical
method to estimate the dynamic parameters from the FRF variation between the actual system
and the finite element model. The parameters include the stiffness, mass and damping matrices
and are estimated from the variation in the real and imaginary parts of the expanded FRFs. A
numerical example illustrates the appropriateness of the proposed method.

2. Formulation

2.1. Expansion of FRF data

Structures can be modeled as discrete systems with the assumption of homogeneous and
uniform systems without any defect. And the finite element analysis can be used to approximate
the dynamic behavior of the systems. Using the finite element method, the dynamic equation for
a damped dynamic system is a system of second-order differential equations. The dynamic
response of a structure in the time-domain which is assumed to be linear and approximately
discretized for ݊ dofs can be described by the equations of motion:

‫ܝۻ‬ሷ ൅ ۱‫ܝ‬ሶ ൅ ۹‫ ܝ‬ൌ ܎ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻǡ (1)

where ‫ ۻ‬, ۱ , and ۹ denote the ݊ ൈ ݊ analytical mass, damping, and stiffness matrices,
respectively, ‫ ܝ‬ൌ ሾ‫ݑ‬ଵ ‫ݑ‬ଶ ‫ݑ ڮ‬௡ ሿ୘ ǡ and ܎ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ is the ݊ ൈ ͳ excitation vector.
In the frequency-domain methods each component is described by frequency-dependent data.
A relationship between FRF and modal parameters for successful modal testing is established by
inserting ‫ ܝ‬ൌ ‫ ݁܃‬௝ఆ௧ and ܎ ൌ ۴݁ ௝ఆ௧ into Eqn. (1). Then expressing it in the frequency-domain, it
follows that:

ሺ۹ െ ߗଶ ‫ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱ሻ‫܃‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۴ሺߗሻǡ (2a)

where ߗ denotes the excitation frequency, ۴ is an external force vector with an element being
unit and all other elements zeros, and ݆ ൌ ξെͳ. The relation of Eqn. (2a) for the actual structure
can be written by:

ሺ۹ ‫ כ‬െ ߗଶ ‫ כ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱‫ כ‬ሻ‫ כ܃‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۴ሺߗሻǡ (2b)

where ‫ כ ۻ‬, ۱‫ כ‬and ۹ ‫ כ‬represent the mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the actual structure,
respectively, and ‫ כ܃‬is the modal displacement vector of the actual structure. Using the FRF
matrix, the responses of the structure, described by ‫܃‬ሺߗሻ and ‫ כ ܃‬ሺߗሻ to an external excitation,
described by ۴ሺߗሻ, are given by:

‫܃‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۶ሺߗሻ۴ሺߗሻǡ (3a)

‫ כ܃‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ۴ሺߗሻǡ (3b)

where ۶ሺߗሻ ൌ ሺ۹ െ ߗଶ ‫ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱ሻିଵ is the FRF matrix of the finite element model, whose
elements can be the receptances. And ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ሺ۹ ‫ כ‬െ ߗଶ ‫ כ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱ ‫ כ‬ሻିଵ is the FRF matrix of the
actual structure.
Expressing the FRF variation between the actual system and the finite element model by ߂۶ǡ
the actual FRF matrix ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ can be established as:

” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716 125
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۶ሺߗሻ ൅ ߂۶Ǥ (4)

The elements in the FRF matrix are derived as follows. Equations (2) can be transformed as:

ሺെߗଶ ൅ ʹ݆ߦ௜ ߱௜ ߗ ൅ ߱௜ଶ ሻ‫܃‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۴ሺߗሻǡ ݅ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ ‫ ڮ‬ǡ ݊ǡ (5a)

ሺെߗଶ ൅ ʹ݆ߦ௜‫߱ כ‬௜‫ ߗ כ‬൅ ߱௜‫כ‬ଶ ሻ‫ כ܃‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ۴ሺߗሻǡ ݅ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ ‫ ڮ‬ǡ ݊ǡ (5b)

where ߱௜ and ߦ௜ denote circular natural frequency and damping ratio corresponding to the i-th
mode, respectively. And ߱௜‫ כ‬and ߦ௜‫ כ‬denote circular natural frequency and damping ratio of the
actual structure, respectively. Applying modal transformation, the real eigenvalues and
eigenvectors lead to the representation of the FRF matrices for an excitation frequency ߗ:
௡
૎௜ ૎்௜
۶ሺߗሻ ൌ ෍ ǡ (6a)
߱௜ଶ െ ߗଶ ൅ ʹ݆ߦ௜ ߱௜ ߗ
௜ୀଵ
௡
૎‫כ‬௜ ૎‫כ‬୘
௜
۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ෍ ǡ (6b)
߱௜‫ כ‬െ ߗଶ ൅ ʹ݆ߦ௜‫߱ כ‬௜‫ߗ כ‬
௜ୀଵ

where ૎௜ and ૎‫כ‬௜ are the i-th mode shape vectors of the finite element model and actual structure,
respectively. For the case of a displacement response at station ‫ ݌‬and a disturbing force at station
‫ݍ‬, the numerical frequency response can be constructed as:
௡
߶௜ǡ௣ ߶௜ǡ௤
‫ܪ‬௣ǡ௤ ሺߗሻ ൌ ෍ ǡ (7a)
߱ଶ െ ߗଶ ൅ ʹ݆ߦ௜ ߱௜ ߗ
௜ୀଵ ௜
௡ ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬
‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ
߶௜ǡ௣ ߶௜ǡ௤
‫ܪ‬௣ǡ௤ ൌ෍ ǡ (7b)
߱௜‫כ‬ଶ െ ߗଶ ൅ ʹ݆ߦ௜‫߱ כ‬௜‫ߗ כ‬
௜ୀଵ

where ߶௜ǡ௣ denotes the pth element of the vector ߶௜ .

It is impossible to experimentally collect all FRF data corresponding to the full dofs and to
explicitly match the actual structure with the analytical model. It indicates that the physical
parameters should be corrected to describe the actual system. To update the parameters it is
necessary to expand the measured data or to reduce the dofs of the dynamic system.
Assume that the FRFs of the system were measured at ݉ሺ݉ ൏ ݊ሻ different positions of the
‫ݎ‬ሺ‫ ݎ‬൏ ݊ሻ set of unitary excitations. The measured ݉ ൈ ݊ FRF matrix and the response vector
have the relationship of:
‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ
‫܃‬ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ۴ሺߗሻǡ
ൌ ‫ כ ܃ۯ‬ൌ ۶ (8)

where ‫ ۯ‬is an ݉ ൈ ݊ Boolean matrix to define the measured locations. The subscripts m and u
‫כ‬
represent the measured and unmeasured dofs, respectively, and ‫܃‬m and ‫܃‬u‫ כ‬represent the ݉ ൈ ‫ݎ‬
and ሺ݊ െ ݉ሻ ൈ ‫ ݎ‬measured and unmeasured displacement matrices, respectively, and 
‫כ܃‬
‫ כ܃‬ൌ ൤ m‫ כ‬൨ . ۴ is the ݊ ൈ ‫ ݎ‬excitation matrix, ۴ ൌ ሾ۴ଵ ۴ଶ ‫ ڮ‬۴௥ ሿ where ۴௜ denotes the i-th
‫܃‬u ௡ൈ௥
۴
unitary vector of excitation, and ۴ ൌ ൤ m ൨ . And ۴m and ۴u are the ݉ ൈ ‫ ݎ‬and ሺ݊ െ ݉ሻ ൈ ‫ݎ‬
۴u ௡ൈ௥
‫כ‬
force matrices corresponding to the measured and unmeasured locations. ۶m ሺߗሻ denotes the
݉ ൈ ݊ measured FRF matrix corresponding to the ݉ rows in the FRF matrix.
The measured FRF matrix relation of Eqn. (8) can be regarded as constraint conditions to
describe the FRF matrix of the whole system. Utilizing the generalized inverse method shown in

126 ” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

Ref. [15], the updated dynamic equation of Eqn. (3b) can be explicitly derived. The updated
response vector ‫ כ܃‬is derived as:

‫ כ܃‬ൌ ‫ ܃‬൅ ߂‫܃‬ǡ (9)

ା
߂‫ ܃‬ൌ ቂ۶ ଵΤଶ ൫‫ۯ‬۶ ଵΤଶ ൯ ሺ۶m
‫כ‬
െ ‫ۯ‬۶ሻቃ ۴ǡ (10)

where the superscript ‘+’ indicates the Moore-Penrose inverse. ߂‫ ܃‬indicates the variation in the
displacement. The dynamic parameters can be grasped by investigating the displacement
variation. And the updated FRF matrix can be written in the form of Eqn. (4) and the variation in
the FRF matrix can be predicted by:
ା
߂۶ ൌ ቂ۶ ଵΤଶ ൫‫ۯ‬۶ ଵΤଶ ൯ ሺ۶
‫כ‬
െ ‫ۯ‬۶ሻቃǤ (11)

The variation in the parameter matrices can be explained by the FRF variation of Eqn. (11).
The updated FRF matrix obtained from a few measured FRF data can be written by:
ା
۶ ‫ כ‬ൌ ۶ ൅ ۶ ଵΤଶ ൫‫ۯ‬۶ ଵΤଶ ൯ ሺ۶௠
‫כ‬
െ ‫ۯ‬۶ሻǤ (12)

The accuracy of the FRF matrix depends on the number of measured FRF data. The FRF
variation ߂۶ will be more accurately calculated with the increase in the number. Its
effectiveness will be investigated by establishing the updated parameter matrices.

2.2. Update of parameter matrices

The parameter matrices are calculated by the following process. Post-multiplying both sides
of ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗሻ ൌ ሺ۹ ‫ כ‬െ ߗଶ ‫ כ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱ ‫ כ‬ሻିଵ by ሺ۹ ‫ כ‬െ ߗଶ ‫ כ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱‫ כ‬ሻ, it can be expressed by:

۶ ‫ כ‬ሺ۹ ‫ כ‬െ ߗଶ ‫ כ ۻ‬൅ ݆ߗ۱‫ כ‬ሻ ൌ ۷ǡ (13)

‫כ‬
‫כ‬
and inserting ۶ ‫ כ‬ൌ ۶௥௘ ൅ ۶௜௠ , ۹ ‫ כ‬ൌ ۹ ൅ ߂۹, ‫ כ ۻ‬ൌ ‫ ۻ‬൅ ߂‫ ۻ‬and ۱‫ כ‬ൌ ۱ ൅ ߂۱ into Eqn. (13),
and arranging the result, the variation in the parameters can be rewritten by:

۶‫כ‬ ‫כ‬
െߗଶ ۶௥௘ ‫כ‬
െߗ۶௜௠ ߂۹ ‫כ‬
۷ െ ۶௥௘ ‫כ‬
۹ ൅ ߗଶ ۶௥௘ ‫כ‬
‫ ۻ‬൅ ߗ۶௜௠ ۱
ቈ ‫כ‬௥௘ ‫כ‬ ቉ ൥߂‫ۻ‬ ൩ ൌ ቈ ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬ ቉Ǥ (14)
۶௜௠ െߗଶ ۶௜௠ ‫כ‬
ߗ۶௥௘ െ۶௜௠ ۹ ൅ ߗଶ ۶௜௠ ‫ ۻ‬െ ߗ۶௥௘‫כ‬
۱
߂۱
Expanding Eqn. (14) in a specific frequency range of ሾߗଵ ߗଶ ‫ߗ ڮ‬௠ିଵ ߗ௠ ሿ୘ ǡ it is
expressed as:
‫כ‬ ା
۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ െߗଵଶ ۶௥௘ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ
െߗଵ ۶௜௠ ሺߗଵ ሻ
‫כ ۍ‬௥௘ ଵ ଶ ‫כ‬
ଵ
‫כ‬
‫ې‬
߂۹ ‫ ێ‬۶௜௠ ሺߗଵ ሻ െߗଵ ۶௜௠ ሺߗଵ ሻ ߗଵ ۶௥௘ ሺߗଵ ሻ ‫ۑ‬
൥߂‫ۻ‬൩ ൌ ‫ێ‬ ‫ڭ‬ ‫ڭ‬ ‫ڭ‬ ‫ۑ‬
߂۱ ‫ ێ‬۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ െߗଶ ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ െߗ ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ‫ۑ‬
‫ێ‬ ௥௘ ௠ ௠ ௥௘ ௠ ௠ ௜௠ ௠ ‫ۑ‬
‫כ‬ ଶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ
‫ۏ‬۶௜௠ ሺߗ௠ ሻ െߗ௠ ۶௜௠ ௠ ߗ௠ ۶௥௘ ௠ ‫ے‬
‫כ‬ (15)
۷ െ ۶௥௘ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ۹
ଵ ൅ ߗଵଶ ۶௥௘
‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ‫ۻ‬
ଵ ൅ ߗଵ ۶௜௠ ሺߗଵ ሻ۱
‫ۍ‬ ‫כ‬ ଶ ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬
‫ې‬
‫ ێ‬െ۶௜௠ ሺߗଵ ሻ۹ ൅ ߗଵ ۶௜௠ ሺߗଵ ሻ‫ ۻ‬െ ߗଵ ۶௥௘ ሺߗଵ ሻ۱ ‫ۑ‬
ή‫ێ‬ ‫ڭ‬ ‫ۑ‬Ǥ
‫ێ‬۷ െ ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ۹ ൅ ߗଶ ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ‫ ۻ‬൅ ߗ ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ۱‫ۑ‬
‫ێ‬ ௥௘ ௠ ௠ ௥௘ ௠ ௠ ௜௠ ௠ ‫ۑ‬
‫כ‬ ଶ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ‫ۻ‬ ‫ כ‬ሺߗ ሻ۱
‫ ۏ‬െ۶௜௠ ሺߗ௠ ሻ۹ ൅ ߗ௠ ۶௜௠ ௠ െ ߗ௠ ۶௥௘ ௠ ‫ے‬

” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716 127
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

The variation in the parameter matrices can be estimated by Eqn. (15). It can be observed
that the variation can be predicted by the expansion of a few measured FRFs and Eqn. (15). The
accurate estimation of the updated FRF matrix helps the determination of the exact parameter
matrices of the structure. It indicates that the effectiveness of the proposed method requires
enough number of measured FRF data.

3. Application

Consider the estimation of the parameter matrices of a plane truss structure model shown in
Fig. 1. The nodal points and the members are numbered as shown in the figure. The truss is
composed of 15 nodes and 33 members. Corresponding to each pair of nodal displacement
components ሺ‫ݑ‬௜ ǡ ‫ݒ‬௜ ሻ is expressed by a set of forces ሺ‫ܪ‬௜ ǡ ܸ௜ ሻ. All members have elastic modulus
of 200 GPa, cross-sectional area of 2.5×10-3 m2, and density of 7860 kg/m3.

Fig. 1. A planar truss structure

For this application, we assumed that the actual structure includes 0-23 % manufacturing
errors in all truss members. They were randomly given for this numerical experiment. The
physical parameter matrices are updated using the proposed method and measured FRF data.
Assume that the FRF matrix of the first 15 rows corresponding to the 1st to 8th node was
measured by numerical simulation. The FRF matrix was updated with the measured noise-free
FRF data in the range of 8.4-8.8 Hz in steps of 0.02 Hz. Figure 2 exhibits the difference in the
parameter matrices between before and after the correction by this proposed method. The
difference comes from the inconsistency with the actual parameter matrices that cannot be
expressed by the finite element model. The parameter update should be performed for solving
such inconsistency. The parameter should be corrected by a few measurement data only because
it is difficult to collect all measurement data on the full set of dofs. Figure 3 displays the
difference between the actual and the updated parameter matrices. The difference is due to the
neglecting of the half of FRF data, which do not provide all information on the actual truss
structure. It is shown that the proposed method rarely describes the accurate parameter matrices
and its accuracy will be improved with the increase in the number of measurements.
Table 1 compares the natural frequencies of the 1st to 5th mode. In the table, the “Initial”
represents the numerical results of the finite element model, the “Actual” is the ones of the
actual truss including the manufacturing errors and the “After correction” denotes the ones
corrected by this proposed method. It is exhibited that the proposed method properly describes
the global characteristics of the structure despite of the inconsistency of the parameters of the
truss members.

Table 1. Natural frequencies of initial, actual and corrected structure (rad./sec.)

Mode number 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Initial 54.6 161.8 224.5 412.5 569.2
Actual 54.9 163.1 225.2 411.2 571.7
After correction 54.9 163.0 225.1 411.0 570.2

128 ” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

7
x 10

Difference in stiffness matrix

4 0

Difference in mass matrix

-2
2
-4
0
-6
-2
-8

-4 -10
30 30
20 30 20 30
20 20
10 10 10 10
Column 0 0 0 0
Row Column Row
(a) (b)
5
x 10
Difference in damping matrix

-2

-4
30
20 30
20
10 10
0 0
Row Column
(c)
Fig. 2. Difference in parameter matrices between before and after correction:
(a) stiffness matrix, (b) mass matrix, (c) damping matrix

7
x 10
Difference in stiffness matrix

4 40
Difference in mass matrix

2 20

0 0

-2 -20

-4 -40
30 30
20 30 20 30
20 20
10 10 10 10
Column 0 0 Column 0 0
Row Row

(a) (b)
5
x 10
Difference in damping matrix

-2

-4
30
20 30
20
10 10
Column 0 0
Row

(c)
Fig. 3. Difference between actual and numerically derived parameter matrices:
(a) stiffness matrix, (b) mass matrix, (c) damping matrix

” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716 129
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

-7 -8
10 10

Magnitude of FRF difference(log10)

FRF magnitude(log10)

B,C.D -9
10 B-A

-8
10
A
-10
10
B-C

B-D
-9 -11
10 10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Frequency(Hz) Frequency(Hz)

(a)
-7 -8
10 10

Magnitude of FRF difference(log10)

FRF magnitude(log10)

-9
10
B,C.D B-A
-8
10
B-C
A -10
10
B-D

-9 -11
10 10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Frequency(Hz) Frequency(Hz)

(b)
Fig. 4. FRF magnitude and FRF difference: (a) ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺʹ͹ǡʹ͹ሻ (b) ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺʹͺǡʹͺሻ

Figure 4 exhibits the FRF magnitudes of ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺʹ͹ǡʹ͹ሻ and ۶ ‫ כ‬ሺʹͺǡʹͺሻ corresponding to the
horizontal and vertical components at node 13. In the plots, “A” represents the FRF of the finite
element model, “B” the actual structure, “C” the estimated FRF obtained by Eqn. (12), and “D”
the FRF rebuilt by the updated parameter matrices. The FRF figures were plotted in the range of
0.01-50 Hz in steps of 0.02 Hz. The figures exhibit some difference between the actual truss, B,
and the finite element model, A. And it is observed that the C and D plots coincide with the
actual plot B. It indicates that the proposed method properly describes the FRF curves although
it rarely provides the accurate parameter matrices. It can be overcome by increasing the number
of the measured FRF data.

4. Conclusions

This study provided the analytical method to describe the inconsistent physical parameters
between the actual structure and the finite element model. Beginning with the measured FRF for
less than the full set of dofs, this work predicted the updated FRF matrix. And the stiffness and
mass matrices were estimated from the real part of the expanded FRF data and the damping
matrix was predicted from the imaginary part. The proposed method properly describes the FRF
curves although it rarely provides the accurate parameter matrices. It can be overcome by
increasing the number of the measured FRF data.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded
by the Korea Government (MEST) (No. 2011-0012164).

References

[1] Mottershead J. E., Stanway R. Identification of structural vibration parameters by using a

frequency domain filter. Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 109, 1986, p. 495-506.

130 ” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716
 928. IDENTIFICATION OF PARAMETER MATRICES USING ESTIMATED FRF VARIATION.
JIN BONG KIM, HEE-CHANG EUN

[2] Lee U., Shin J. A frequency response function-based structural damage identification method.
Computers & Structures, Vol. 80, 2002, p. 117-132.
[3] Friswell M. I., Penny J. E. T. Updating model parameters from frequency domain data via reduced
order models. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, Vol. 4, 1990, p. 377-391.
[4] Fanning P. J., Carden E. P. Experimentally validated added mass identification algorithm based on
frequency response functions. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 130, 2004, p. 1045-1051.
[5] Cha P. D., Tuck-Lee J. P. Updating structural system parameters using frequency response data.
Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 126, 2000, p. 1240-1246.
[6] Kwon K. S., Lin R. M. Frequency selection method for FRF-based model updating. Journal of
Sound and Vibration, Vol. 278, 2004, p. 285-306.
[7] Lin R. M., Zju J. Model updating of damped structures using FRF data. Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing, Vol. 20, 2006, p. 2200-2218.
[8] Phani A. S., Woodhouse J. Viscous damping identification in linear vibration. Journal of Sound and
Vibration, Vol. 303, 2007, p. 475-500.
[9] Lee J. H., Kim J. Identification of damping matrices from measured frequency response functions.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 240, 2001, p. 545-565.
[10] Fritzen C. P. Identification of mass and stiffness matrices of mechanical systems. Journal of
Vibration and Acoustics, Vol. 108, 1986, p. 9-16.
[11] Rahmatalla S., Eun H. C., Lee E. T. Damage detection from the variation of parameter matrices
estimated by incomplete FRF data. Smart Structures and Systems, Vol. 9, 2012, p. 55-70.
[12] Pascual R., Schalchli R., Razeto M. Damping identification using a robust FRF-based model
updating technique. XXI International Modal Analysis Conference, Kissimmee, Fl., 2003.
[13] Esfandiari A., Bakhtiari-Nejad F., Sanayei M., Rahai A. Structural finite element model updating
using transfer function data. Computers & Structures, Vol. 88, 2010, p. 54-64.
[14] Esfandiari A., Bakhtiari-Nejad F., Rahai A., Sanayei M. Structural model updating using
frequency response function and quasi-linear sensitivity equation. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
Vol. 326, 2009, p. 557-573.
[15] Eun H. C., Lee E. T., Chung H. S. On the static analysis of constrained structural systems.
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 31, 2004, p. 1119-1122.

” VIBROENGINEERING. JOURNAL OF VIBROENGINEERING. MARCH 2013. VOLUME 15, ISSUE 1. ISSN 1392-8716 131