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


Random response analysis - Nastran

Random response analysis - Nastran

Random response analysis - Nastran


This may be a basic question, but I found no obvious answer on the web or the Nastran Dynamic analysis User's guide.

As stated in the Nastran Dynamic analysis user's guide the Random analysis is treated as a data reduction procedure that is applied to the results of a frequency response analysis.

Is there a rule of thumb for selecting the frequency increments for the preceding frequency response analysis?

Let's say I have a structure that has 20 natural frequencies in the 0-1000 Hz range for which I need to perform base excitation using PSD input.
Is it enough to select the natural frequencies? Do we also need to add the input PSD break points? Any other ?

I noticed that the results are sensitive to what frequency increments are selected for solutioning..

Any reply is very appreciated.
Any thoughts?

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

It depends on the complexity of your model

with a large model, if you select many frequency steps, your simulation can last "forever", because you will have too many integration points

if your model is simple-ish, it is a compromise between computational cost and results accuracy

if you have a considerably complex model, it is recommended to have as many steps around the natural frequencies as you can, lets say 5 freq. steps around each natural frequency. If you include the natural frequencies, you are catching the peaks, and your integration will be better, therefore better results.

Depending on the size of your model you may find that 5 freq steps spaced aroud each nat. frequency is too much (20x5* model size...=100* model size...)and will have to reduce to 4 or 3 steps, or only nat. frequencies only...
If the simulation time is quick enough, you can gradually increase the freq. steps until you are happy with your results, i.e. until your resutls don't change much when increasing the frequency steps (aim for 5% difference

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

Hi Filipe,

Thank you very much for your reply.
I still don't have a feel for this.
I am currently doing a study on a simple beam structure (hexa meshed)to try and figure out some optimum frequency increments to select.
Also I am comparing the results with Ansys which seems to have a different approach for this analysis.
I will let know the outcome. Maybe you can give me some feedback.

Another issue I have is with the output size (.op2). Actually I am only interested in the maximum RMS stress in the structure, but it looks like regardless of the output options I am using the results file (.op2) always contains 2 sets of results :

1. the stress results at each frequency for the preceding frequency response analysis
2. the PSD stress at each frequency + RMS over the frequencies.
Is there any way to keep only the RMS over the frequencies in the .op2 file?

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran


Yes please let me know. If you want you can send me the beam geometrical characteristics, the material and the load environment and I can provide a quick crosscheck

When requesting the RMS stress output, in your nastran file, use this:
and you will have only the RMS values when importing the op2 file into your postprocessor
then you can check the maximum RMS value and its location

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

Thanks again. Please see below the problem specs and also the stress results for one of the iterations I am doing. The stress seems to be stabilizing around this value (209 MPa).
Also in the attached sheet I played with different frequency steps and recorded the max stress results.
Please let me know your opinion.

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

Not sure if the attachment went thru. See below..

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

Also the diameter is 40 mm..

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

I guess the material density you provided is not correct. I guess you meant 7.83e-3 instead of 7.83e-9 ?

I don't get you mode #5, what are your boundary conditions? I guess it is fixed at one tip and free at the other, i.e. cantilever beam...?

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran


I am using tone/mm^3 for the density units. This is why it is 7.83e-9...
The BC's are cantilever beam indeed.
The mode #5 is a torsional mode (see below). Are you using CBEAM/CBAR ? Maybe this is why you are not capturing that mode..

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran


Sorry for the late reply. I am using a RBE2 spider which grabs the nodes highlighted below.
The acceleration is applied at the center node.

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

Also I am ignoring the first 2 element rows (near to the spider) when plotting the stress.

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

better to post your bdf/dat file

too much confusion with the units and boundary conditions.. should have asked you this in the first place indeed

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

I am actually running in Optistruct which is very similar to Nastran. (more confusion)
Only the header part is a bit different. I can prepare an equivalent Nastran file.
In the mean time please find attached the Optistruct deck which you can use to see the dimensions and boundary conditions.


RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

now, by checking the model, the material units seem consistent with the geometry dimensions and applied load

I did run the random analysis with a different frequency function generated in another preprocessor - see below

FREQ 269.7130369.7293873.5859873.6032377.4589377.4770981.33187+
+ 81.3509485.2048285.22479431.2041431.4025455.1599455.3693479.1157+
+ 479.3361503.0715503.3029527.0272527.26971167.9121183.4091184.042+
+ 1232.7961249.1541249.822 1297.681314.8991315.6021362.5641380.644+
+ 1381.3821427.4481446.3891447.162

With exact same conditions as yours, appart from the frequency function, the maximum RMS stress obtained was 234MPa
in x-direction. if this is your objective I think your results are good enough

you are enforcing displacement, not acceleration, while your input PSD is in g2/Hz.
With this you have very large von Mises RMS stresses, in the order of GPa...
Replacing enforced displacement by acceleration you have much lower RMS von Mises stresses.

hope it helps

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

Thank you very much!

Seems to be close to my results. I wonder what preprocessor you are using and also what is the logic it is using to generate the Frequency function? The increments seem to be clustered around the natural frequencies?

Not sure why you say I am enforcing displacement
I am using the below cards:
RLOAD1 7 15 3 0 ACCE
SPCD 15 1 1 9807.

RE: Random response analysis - Nastran

OK. Can you please send me your model ? (the one that gives 234 MPa)

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! Already a Member? Login


White Paper – Data Security and Know-How Protection
Our data is constantly exposed to the danger of being intercepted or stolen as it wends its way over global data networks. Data security measures and measures for protecting intellectual property should not, however, first be implemented when data is exchanged – companies must lay the foundation for these measures within their own organization. Download Now
White Paper – Collaboration in the PLM Context
The influence exerted by the Internet of Things (IoT) means that there is a steadily growing need for collaboration in industry. Partners from new industries and areas of application need to be integrated in cross-company business processes to ensure that the lifecycle of smart, connected products can be managed from end to end. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close