×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Structural Dynamics

Structural Dynamics

Structural Dynamics

(OP)
Why can changing the dt= time step, effect the non-linear time history results for x-displacements?

I hope someone can provide insight.

Thanks,
tre

RE: Structural Dynamics

Sounds like basic calculus to me.  The smaller the increment taken, the better the estimate.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

RE: Structural Dynamics

I think you will have to define the problem a little more clearly than that.  Is this a general question or are you addressing a real situation?

BA

RE: Structural Dynamics

(OP)
This is just a general question. When doing a non-linear time history analysis, changing the time step drastically changed the results. For instance a time step was used of 0.002 was changed to 0.005 which seem to produce more realistic results.

RE: Structural Dynamics

teckert,

Take a very basic example - suppose we have a structure which is vibrating with simple harmonic (sinusoidal) motion, with period of 1 second, and zero phase shift.

Sample the response function at 1 second intervals, starting at t = 0.0 seconds, and every time step will return a value of precisely "0". Sample it again at half-second intervals, and you will STILL get "0" at every sample. This might lead you to think (erroneously) that there is no response - after all, you've reduced your time interval, and the solution shows no more convergence!

Now sample at 1/4 second intervals - you will get a saw-tooth function, which is a much better fit to the true sinusoidal function, but still not very good. Sample at 1/100th or 1/1000th second intervals, and you will start to get a good approximation of the real behaviour.

Bottom line - your time step must be "small enough" to capture the time variability of the forcing function AND the response of the system. This typically means that your time step must be rather smaller than the period of the highest natural frequency which is "of interest".

Hope this helps!

RE: Structural Dynamics

2*(highest freq. of interest)=dt ... Nyquist frequency is the standard.  

peace
Fe

RE: Structural Dynamics

You mean 1 over that, right?

I have to admit that this is one of the most amusing threads I've ever read around here.

RE: Structural Dynamics

(OP)
Why is this amusing?

RE: Structural Dynamics

Yes, 271828, what exactly do you find so amusing?   

BA

RE: Structural Dynamics

YES. 1 over that...
bigears
hahahahah... (im laughing at the big ears)

peace
Fe

RE: Structural Dynamics

I guess im not anal enough here. This is more of a leisure interest to get away from my extremely anal self during the day.
laser hammer

peace
Fe

RE: Structural Dynamics

I hope it's amusing now. smile
(no offense to the OP)

peace
Fe

RE: Structural Dynamics

Not really.  Maybe you are trying too hard.

BA

RE: Structural Dynamics

Excuse me. I had a long day. smile

peace
Fe

RE: Structural Dynamics

I recall from my antique numerical methods book that if you make the time step too small, you get overcome by roundoff errors.

RE: Structural Dynamics

What's amusing?  Greg's "short" reply and subsequent replies.  No offense to the OP, of course.  MEs sleep with vibrations books under their pillows, LOL.

RE: Structural Dynamics

Who's Greg?

RE: Structural Dynamics

HAHAHAHA!!  I have the wrong thread.  There was another thread about vibrations in which the guy modified the EOM to be something like m*x'' + c*(x')^2 + k*x = f(t) and Greg Locock jumped all over him for squaring the velocity and not realizing that doing this prevents decay.  I must've read one right after the other.

RE: Structural Dynamics

lmao. now its funny... smile

peace
Fe

RE: Structural Dynamics

I agree.  Now it is funny, not really funny but a little bit funny.  You guys ought to work on your routines a bit more and we would all be rolling in the aisles laughing 'til the tears rolled down our cheeks.

BA

RE: Structural Dynamics

btw, who needs the pillow when you can directly sleep on the vibrations text. (common undergrad student)

Hartog => too squishy
Inman => too hard
Rao => just right

I wonder if anyone padded their cover's....maybe the fluid mechanics text somehow acted as a water-bed type pillow?
{plz ignore me if im "on cr$ck", I just finished writing a shit load of code} smile

peace
Fe

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources