Help understanding modal projection in PDE with assumed solution form

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the modal projection in partial differential equations (PDEs) using a specific assumed solution form. The equation under consideration involves terms related to the coefficients A_{11e}, A_{12e}, A_{66e}, and G_2, with the proposed solutions expressed through sine functions for X(x) and Y(y). Participants analyze the derivation of coefficients K_{ij} and M_{ij} and identify discrepancies in the results obtained through integration and orthogonality conditions. The paper referenced is "Newtonian and Variational Formulations of the Vibrations of Plates With Active Constrained Layer Damping" by Chul H. Park and Amr Baz, which contains critical equations for further understanding.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of modal analysis in PDEs
  • Familiarity with orthogonality conditions in function spaces
  • Proficiency in using Mathematica for symbolic computation
  • Knowledge of vibration theory in mechanical systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of modal coefficients in PDEs using orthogonality conditions
  • Learn about the application of Fourier series in solving PDEs
  • Examine the specific equations (21, 35, 36) in the referenced paper for detailed insights
  • Explore advanced techniques in modal projection and their applications in engineering
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, graduate students, and professionals in mechanical engineering, applied mathematics, and physics who are working on modal analysis and vibration problems in complex systems.

Like Tony Stark
Messages
182
Reaction score
6
Homework Statement
Obtain mass and stiffness matrices given equation of motion
Relevant Equations
[tex] A_{11e} \frac{d^2 u_1}{dx^2} + (A_{12e} + A_{66e}) \frac{d^2 v_1}{dx,dy} + A_{66e} \frac{d^2 u_1}{dy^2} + \frac{G_2}{h_2} \left( u_3 - u_1 - d \frac{dw}{dx} \right) = (\rho_p h_p + \rho_s h_s) \frac{d^2 u_1}{dt^2} [/tex]
Hello,

This is not homework but I am trying to replicate some results I found in a paper. In short, the situation is as follows. The following equation is given:

A_{11e} \frac{d^2 u_1}{dx^2} + (A_{12e} + A_{66e}) \frac{d^2 v_1}{dxdy} + A_{66e} \frac{d^2 u_1}{dy^2} + \frac{G_2}{h_2} \left( u_3 - u_1 - d \frac{dw}{dx} \right) = (\rho_p h_p + \rho_s h_s) \frac{d^2 u_1}{dt^2}

where u_1(x,y), v_1(x,y), u_3(x,y), and w(x,y) are given by:

u_1(x,y) = \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} U_{1mn}(t) \frac{dX(x)}{dx} Y(y)

u_3(x,y) = \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} U_{3mn}(t) \frac{dX(x)}{dx} Y(y)

v_1(x,y) = \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} V_{1mn}(t) X(x) \frac{dY(y)}{dy}

w(x,y) = \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} W_{mn}(t) X(x) Y(y)

with X(x) = \sin\left( \frac{m \pi x}{a} \right) and Y(y) = \sin\left( \frac{n \pi y}{b} \right).
All other quantities are constants.

As far as I understand, the author substitutes the proposed solutions and groups terms according to the temporal variable that accompanies them.
He then rewrites the equation as:

K_{11} U_{1mn} + K_{12} V_{1mn} + K_{13} U_{3mn} + K_{15} W_{mn} + M_{11} \ddot{U}_{1mn} = 0

where (according to him):

K_{11} = -A_{11e} \left( \frac{m \pi}{a} \right)^2 - A_{66e} \left( \frac{n \pi}{b} \right)^2 - \frac{G_2}{h_2}

K_{12} = -(A_{12e} + A_{66e}) \left( \frac{m \pi}{a} \right) \left( \frac{n \pi}{b} \right)

K_{13} = \frac{G_2}{h_2}

K_{15} = -\frac{G_2 d}{h_2} \left( \frac{m \pi}{a} \right)

M_{11} = -(\rho_p h_p + \rho_s h_s)

The problem is that he doesn’t explain how these elements K_{ij} and M_{ij} are obtained.
I assume he multiplied both sides by \frac{dX(x)}{dx} Y(y) and integrated over x \in [0,a] and y \in [0,b], as if applying orthogonality conditions.
However, when I do that, I only recover some of the terms:

K_{11} = -A_{11e} \left( \frac{m \pi}{a} \right)^2 - A_{66e} \left( \frac{n \pi}{b} \right)^2 - \frac{G_2}{h_2}

K_{12} = -(A_{12e} + A_{66e}) \left( \frac{n \pi}{b} \right)^2

K_{13} = \frac{G_2}{h_2}

K_{15} = -\frac{G_2 d}{h_2}

M_{11} = -(\rho_p h_p + \rho_s h_s)

I cross-checked my results with a Mathematica script, and they seem consistent.

Does anyone have an idea of what the author might be doing differently?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you identifty exactly which of your results disagree with the author's, and show you arrived at them?

The idea seems to be to arrive at a coefficient of \cos(m\pi x/a)\sin(n\pi y/b). I would suggest using that in your calculation instead of X'(x)Y(y), etc.
 
pasmith said:
Could you identifty exactly which of your results disagree with the author's, and show you arrived at them?

The idea seems to be to arrive at a coefficient of \cos(m\pi x/a)\sin(n\pi y/b). I would suggest using that in your calculation instead of X'(x)Y(y), etc.
Hi. I'm not sure if I understood your comment correctly, but in my post I wrote both the author's results and mine. We differ in K_{12} and K_{15}.

On the other hand, what you said about using \cos\left(\frac{m\pi x}{a}\right) \sin\left(\frac{n\pi y}{b}\right) instead of X'(x)Y(y) is the same, since X(x) = \sin\left(\frac{m\pi x}{a}\right).
 
Like Tony Stark said:
Does anyone have an idea of what the author might be doing differently?
I get the same results as you. I don’t see how the author could get their result.

Is the paper available online?
 
TSny said:
I get the same results as you. I don’t see how the author could get their result.

Is the paper available online?
"Newtonian and Variational Formulations of the Vibrations of Plates With Active Constrained Layer Damping" by Chul H. Park and Amr Baz. See eqs. 21, 35, 36 and appendix.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K