scroll86
Guest
Hi.
we are performing a modal analysis on a telescopic arm; we approached the problem with the direct method so we launched the calculation after having assigned the frequency range in which to go to calculate the own ways and how many to identify (in our case 0-120 hz and 6 ways to locate)
the model is well bound because we previously conducted a non-linear analysis with gap elements that converges to a plausible result in terms of deformations and stress; inizally had problems with the gaps that misdigested modal analysis presenting non plausible movements of part of the structure with consequent compnetrations, in fact we had to remove and replace them with well placed equivalences; after the equivalence hm provides a solution but I do not know how correct it can be because the frequencies that it detects are very low from 3 to 26 hz that for a structure like ours seem unrealistic (we expected them much higher). . .
So, if we are wrong, what are we wrong with
?
we are performing a modal analysis on a telescopic arm; we approached the problem with the direct method so we launched the calculation after having assigned the frequency range in which to go to calculate the own ways and how many to identify (in our case 0-120 hz and 6 ways to locate)
the model is well bound because we previously conducted a non-linear analysis with gap elements that converges to a plausible result in terms of deformations and stress; inizally had problems with the gaps that misdigested modal analysis presenting non plausible movements of part of the structure with consequent compnetrations, in fact we had to remove and replace them with well placed equivalences; after the equivalence hm provides a solution but I do not know how correct it can be because the frequencies that it detects are very low from 3 to 26 hz that for a structure like ours seem unrealistic (we expected them much higher). . .
So, if we are wrong, what are we wrong with
?