The successful operation of proposed precision spacecraft will require finite element models that are accurate to much higher frequencies than the standard application. The hallmark of this mid-frequency range, between low-frequency modal analysis and high-frequency statistical energy analysis, is high modal density. The modal density is so high, and the sensitivity of the modes with respect to modeling errors and uncertainty is so great that test/analysis correlation and model updating based on traditional modal techniques no longer work. This paper presents an output error approach for finite element model updating that uses a new test/analysis correlation metric that maintains a direct connection to physical response. The optimization is gradient based. The metric is based on frequency band averaging of the output power spectral densities with the central frequency of the band running over the complete frequency range of interest. The results of this computation can be interpreted in several different ways, but the immediate physical connection is that it produces the mean-square response, or energy, of the system to random input limited to the averaging frequency band. The use of spectral densities has several advantages over using frequency response directly, such as the ability to easily include data from all inputs at once, and the fact that the metric is real. It is shown that the averaging process reduces the sensitivity of the optimization due to resonances that plague many output error model updating approaches.

1.
Hemez
,
F. M.
,
Doebling
,
S. W.
, and
Anderson
,
M. C.
, 2004, “
A Brief Tutorial on Verification and Validation
,”
22nd International Modal Analysis Conference
, Dearborn, MI.
2.
Hemez
,
F. M.
,
Rutherford
,
A. C.
, and
Maupin
,
R. D.
, 2006, “
Uncertainty Analysis of Test Data Shock Responses
,”
24th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Saint Louis, MO.
3.
Hasselman
,
T. K.
,
Coppolino
,
R. N.
, and
Zimmerman
,
D. C.
, 2000, “
Criteria for Modeling Accuracy: A State-of-the-Practice Survey
,”
18th International Modal Analysis Conference
, San Antonio, TX.
4.
NASA
, 1996, “
Loads Analyses of Spacecraft and Payloads
,”
NASA
Report No. STD-5002.
5.
DoD
, 1999, “
Test Requirements for Launch, Upper Stage, and Space Vehicle
s,”
DoD Handbook-340 A (USAF)
, Vol.
II
.
6.
Sarkar
,
A.
, and
Ghanem
,
R.
, 2002, “
Mid-Frequency Structural Dynamics With Parameter Uncertainty
,”
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
0045-7825,
191
, pp.
5499
5513
.
7.
Sarkar
,
A.
, and
Ghanem
,
R.
, 2003, “
A Substructure Approach for the Midfrequency Vibration of Stochastic Systems
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
0001-4966,
113
(
4
), pp.
1922
1934
.
8.
Hasselman
,
T.
,
Anderson
,
M.
, and
Lai
,
Y. C.
, 1998, “
Linking FEA and SEA by Principal Components Analysis
,”
16th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Santa Barbara, CA, pp.
1285
1291
.
9.
Larsson
,
P. -O.
, and
Sas
,
P.
, 1992, “
Model Updating Based on Forced Vibration Testing Using Numerically Stable Formulations
,”
Tenth International Modal Analysis Conference
, San Diego, CA, pp.
966
974
.
10.
Gordis
,
J. H.
, 1993, “
Spatial, Frequency Domain Updating of Linear, Structural Dynamic Models
,”
34th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference
, pp.
3050
3058
.
11.
Schultz
,
M. J.
,
Pai
,
P. F.
, and
Abdelnaser
,
A. S.
, 1996, “
Frequency Response Function Assignment Technique for Structural Damage Identification
,”
14th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Dearborn, MI, pp.
105
111
.
12.
Rad
,
S. Z.
, 1997, “
Methods for Updating Numerical Models in Structural Dynamics
,” Ph.D. thesis, University of London, London, UK.
13.
Thyagarajan
,
S. K.
,
Schulz
,
M. J.
, and
Pai
,
P. F.
, 1998, “
Detecting Structural Damage Using Frequency Response Functions
,”
J. Sound Vib.
0022-460X,
210
, pp.
162
170
.
14.
Zimmerman
,
D. C.
,
Simmermacher
,
T.
, and
Kaouk
,
M.
, 1995, “
Structural Damage Detection Using Frequency Response Functions
,”
13th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Nashville, TN, pp.
179
184
.
15.
Nauerz
,
A.
, and
Fritzen
,
C.
, 2001, “
Model Based Damage Identification Using Output Spectral Densities
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
0022-0434,
123
, pp.
691
698
.
16.
Balmes
,
E.
, 1993, “
A Finite Element Updating Procedure Using Frequency Response Functions, Applications to the MIT/SERC Interferometer Testbed
,”
11th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Kissimmee, FL, pp.
176
182
.
17.
Herendeen
,
D. L.
,
Woo
,
L.
,
Hasselman
,
T. K.
, and
Zimmerman
,
D. C.
, 1998, “
Analysis-Test Correlation and Model Updating of Dynamic Systems Using MDO Software Tools
,”
Seventh AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization
, St. Louis, MO, pp.
170
179
.
18.
Dascotte
,
E.
, and
Strobbe
,
J.
, 1999, “
Updating Finite Element Models Using FRF Correlation Functions
,”
17th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Kissimmee, FL, pp.
1169
1174
.
19.
Babuska
,
V.
,
Carter
,
D.
,
Lane
,
S.
, and
Lacy
,
S.
, 2005, “
FRF Correlation and Error Metrics for Plant Identification
,”
46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference
, Austin, TX, pp.
2005
2012
.
20.
Kammer
,
D. C.
, and
Nimityongskul
,
S.
, 2008, “
An Energy Based Approach for Comparing Test and Analysis Response in the Frequency Domain
,”
26th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Orlando, FL.
21.
Lyon
,
R. H.
, and
DeJong
,
R. G.
, 1995,
Theory and Application of Statistical Energy Analysis
,
Butterworth-Heinemann
,
Boston, MA
.
22.
Kammer
,
D. C.
, and
Nimityongskul
,
S.
, 2009, “
Finite Element Model Updating Using Frequency Band Averaging of Spectral Densities
,”
27th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Orlando, FL.
23.
Kozak
,
M. T.
,
Comert
,
M. D.
, and
Ozguven
,
H. N.
, 2007, “
A Model Updating Routine on the Minimization of a New Frequency Response Based Index for Error Localization
,”
25th International Modal Analysis Conference
, Orlando, FL.
You do not currently have access to this content.