DYNAMIC CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DEGREE-

OF-FREEDOM EQUIPMENT-STRUCTURE SYSTEMS

By Takeru Igusa1 and Armen Der Kiureghian,2
Associate Members, ASCE
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ABSTRACT: A two-degree-of-freedom equipment-structure system is studied to

find its intrinsic properties which are needed for analysis of more general sec-
ondary systems. Perturbation theory is used to find closed form expressions
for the modal properties of the system in terms of the properties of the indi-
vidual subsystems. Three important characteristics of the system are identified:
tuning, interaction, and nonclassical damping. Mathematical expressions are
defined for each of these characteristics and criteria are developed to measure
their influences on the response of the equipment. The expressions for the modal
properties and the criteria for tuning, interaction, and nonclassical damping are
new results for the two-degree-of-freedom system. These results form the bases
for analysis of multiply supported multi-degree-of-freedom secondary systems.

INTRODUCTION

The two-degree-of-freedom (2-DOF) system shown in Fig. 1 has been

the subject of many studies in order to gain insight into the dynamic
behavior of more general multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) systems. Curtis
and Boykin (4) examined the root-mean-square responses of such sys-
tems to white-noise stationary excitation, and Crandall and Mark (3) ob-
tained general, closed form expressions for such response quantities. Masri
(9) considered nonstationary input and derived analytic expressions for
the time-varying root-mean-square response. In the above works para-
metric studies were conducted to examine the relationships between the
parameters of the system and the resulting response.
Researchers have also investigated 2-DOF equipment-structure, sys-
tems where the mass of the second oscillator is small in relation to that
of the first. Sackman and Kelly (12) used a perturbation approach to find
the dynamic properties of the system and subsequently applied the re-
sults to analyze the responses of more general equipment-structure sys-
tems to short duration base excitations. Ruzicka and Robinson (11) used
a similar approach employing a Fourier transform description of the in-
put and the response.
The present paper and its companion (8) are outcomes of a compre-
hensive analytical study of the dynamic characteristics of general pri-
mary-secondary systems (6). The depth and detail of the analysis in that
study provide a more complete mathematical description and a better
understanding of the physical behavior of such systems than heretofore
available. Emphasis is placed on deriving closed-form results that ac-
'Asst. Research Engr., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
2
Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
Note.—Discussion open until June 1, 1985. Separate discussions should be
submitted for the individual papers in this symposium. To extend the closing
date one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Jour-
nals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible pub-
lication on February 29, 1984. This paper is part of the Journal of Engineering
Mechanics, Vol. Ill, No. 1, January, 1985. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9399/85/0001-0001/
$01.00. Paper No. 19398.
1

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

cp= 2£pcupmp c s = 2£ s a> s m 5

FIG. 1.—Two-Degree-of-Freedom System

curately characterize the dynamic behavior and are simple enough to

facilitate their practical implementation.
In this paper, a thorough analysis of the 2-DOF equipment-structure
system is presented with the following objectives: (1) To identify the
main dynamic properties of the system and to derive mathematical
expressions to characterize them; and (2) to formulate an approach and
to provide a framework for the analysis of general primary-secondary
systems in the companion paper (8).
Utilizing the fact that the equipment is much lighter than the struc-
ture, perturbation techniques are used to derive closed form expressions
for the modal properties, i.e., mode shapes, natural frequencies, and
damping ratios of the 2-DOF equipment-structure system in terms of the
properties of the individual oscillators. Three important characteristics
of the system are identified: Tuning, interaction, and nonclassical damping.
Parameters representing these characteristics are introduced. Using re-
sponse to white-noise base input, mathematical criteria are derived which
measure the influences of the above three characteristics on the response
of the equipment.
The three criteria developed in this paper provide valuable insight into
the dynamic behavior of equipment-structure systems. The perturbation
method developed presents a novel approach for the analysis of such
systems. These results form the basis for the analysis of general MDOF
primary-secondary systems in the companion paper (8).

PARAMETERS OF THE SYSTEM

Consider a single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) equipment attached to a

SDOF structure, as shown in Fig. 1. The mass, natural frequency, damp-
ing ratio, and displacement relative to the base of each oscillator are
denoted mv, &>p, £p, and xv, respectively, for the structure and m3, cos,
{s, and xs, respectively, for the equipment. The p and s subscripts de-
note primary and secondary subsystems, respectively.
The conventional method of analysis of equipment response is based
on a cascaded-system approach, where interaction between the equipment
2

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 and the structure is ignored. Herein, the effect of interaction is retained
by using a composite-system approach where the equipment and the struc-
ture are considered together as a single dynamic unit. Thus, the system
in Fig. 1 is analyzed as a 2-DOF system with displacement vector x =
[xp xs]T. The mass, M, damping, C, and stiffness, K, matrices of the com-
posite system corresponding to these displacements are:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

mv 0 ipo)pmp + lsv>sms -£ s w s m s
M= C = 2
0 m. -£ s co s m s tswsms
copmp + u>2sms -oi2sm
K= ~oi2ms u>2ms (1)

As subsequently shown, the composite equipment-structure system

possesses three main dynamic characteristics which significantly affect
the response of the equipment. These are: Tuning—which is the coin-
cidence of the frequencies of the equipment and structure; Interaction—
which is the feedback effect between motions of the two oscillators; Non-
classical damping—which occurs when the damping characteristics of the
two oscillators are different. In the latter case the damping matrix of the
composite system cannot be diagonalized by the free vibration mode
shapes and, as a result, the composite system has complex mode shapes
and possess nonclassical damping character. The following three param-
eters are introduced to represent the aforementioned characteristics:

• tuning parameter (2a)

ms
7 = — = interaction parameter (2b)
mp

( L
0)p \ Wp
£s — = nonclassical d a m p i n g parameter
<os / cos
(2c)

0)„ + <l)s
in which u>„ = — = average frequency (2d)
It is also useful to define
t + is
ia = — = average damping (3a)
=
id = iv ~ is damping difference (3b)
As stated in the introduction, the key to the analysis of equipment-
structure systems is the use of perturbation methods. Only the most
elementary techniques of perturbation theory are necessary in this study
and a review of these techniques is given in Appendix I.
In order to utilize perturbation principles, the relative order of mag-
nitude of the parameters of the system must be established. The system
in Fig. 1 is defined to be an equipment-structure system if the param-
eters ia and 7 are small. It is assumed that V7 and £„ are of the same
order of magnitude, i.e.
0« a ) = 0(Vy) : (4)
3

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 in which O(-) denotes the order of magnitude of the term inside the
parenthesis. The system is tuned if |p| is also of the same order of mag-
nitude as V7 and £„, i.e.
0 0 ) = O(V^) = 0 ( U (5)
Otherwise, the system is detuned. A precise analytical definition of tun-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ing will be developed later in this paper.

MODAL PROPERTIES OF COMPOSITE SYSTEM

The 2-DOF composite system has two modes, one associated with the
equipment and the other associated with the structure. The superscript
asterisk is used to denote properties of the composite system and the
subscript i = 1 is used for the structure mode and i = 2 is used for the
equipment mode. The mode shapes, <&*, frequencies, of, and damping
ratios, if, of the composite system are obtained from
T(sf )*f = [sfM + sf C + K]$f = 0 (6)
in which s = Laplace transform parameter and

w-l™ '?] <~>

G(s) = mv[s2 + 2apGop + 7£scos) s + (wj + 7©?)] (7b)
2
g(s) = m5[s + 2£su>ss + a>?] (7c)
f(s) = ~ms[2t,suss + wj] (7d)
The eigenvalues sfare the roots of the composite system which are re-
lated to the frequencies cofand damping ratios £*of the system through
s? = icofVl - t,f - afff (8)
where i = V ^ l . Similarly, the roots of the individual oscillators can be
written as
sp = iwpVl - i2p - co^p (9a)

ss = iw s Vl - i2s ~ e>sL (9b)

From Eq. 6, there are a total of four solutions for s*. However, only
those two with positive imaginary parts are needed; the remaining two
solutions are their conjugate pairs. The mode shapes $f are in general
complex-valued, indicating the non-classical damping nature of the com-
•posite system.
The roots sfare found by solving the characteristic equation
d(sf) - G(sf)g(sf) - f(sf) = 0 (10)
in which d(s) = characteristic polynomial. Consider first the case where
the system is detuned, i.e., |p| is large. In that case, the second term
above is of smaller order than the first, and the characteristic equation
reduces to
G(sf)g(sf) = 0 _ (11)

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 which is equivalent to
G(sf) = 0 or g(s?) = 0 (12)
The solutions of the aforementioned are, to lowest order
sf = sp and sf = ss (13)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Thus, for detuned systems, the frequencies and damping ratios of the
composite system are unchanged from those of the two oscillators, in-
dicating that the effect of interaction is negligible. This result is expected
and has been obtained before (12).
For tuned systems where |p| is small, the second term in Eq. 10 cannot
be neglected, and the characteristic equation becomes a quartic. A
straightforward method of solving this quartic is by the classical Ferrari's
method (1); however the required calculations are extensive and the final
results are complicated. Sackman and Kelly (12) solved this equation us-
ing perturbation techniques. Their solution, however, is asymmetric and
lacks the generality required for the subsequent derivation of the mode
shapes. In this paper, alternate expressions for the roots are derived uti-
lizing the inherent symmetry of the problem leading to equivalent, yet
algebraically simpler results.
The roots of the 2-DOF system are perturbed from those of the two
oscillators. To measure this perturbation, a dimensionless variable \x is
defined as

H = - (s - s„) (14a)

where s„ is the average

s„ + s,

The average values s„ and coa are used to maintain symmetry. Refor-
mulating Eqs. 7b-d in terms of |x and retaining only lowest order terms,
the new expressions are
G(s) = -<o> p (-p - itd + 2(1) (15a)
2
g(s) = -a> ms(P + ' & + 2n) (15b)
2
/(s) = -w ms (15c)
Substitution of the aforementioned into the characteristic equation, Eq.
10, yields
d(s?) = coXm s [(-p - it, + 2fx)(p + iU + 2|x) - 7]
= <oimpm$W2 - (0 + i U 2 - 7] = 0 (16)
The usefulness of the perturbation analysis becomes clear: The original
quartic polynomial d(s) has been reduced to a simple quadratic poly-
nomial in terms of (JL. Denoting the solutions for \x. by |x*, the lowest
order results are

|i? = + ^ V 7 + (i^ + P)2 '• (17)

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 where the upper sign is for i = 1 and the lower sign is for i = 2. This
convention will be used throughout the paper. It follows from Eq. 14a
that the first-order solutions for sf are

i-L±^sgn(P)V7 + (iCd + P)2 (18)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

in which sgn (P) is the algebraic sign of p. This notation assures that
mode 1 is associated with the structure for all values of p. The expres-
sions for the frequencies and damping ratios are found from Eq. 8

1 ± - sgn 0 ) Re V 7 + (it, + P)2 (19)

{? = • t, ± - sgn (p) Im V 7 + (i& + P)2 (20)

f>i

The previous solutions are accurate up to first order. These solutions are
equivalent, yet considerably simpler than solutions given in Ref. 12.
The exact values of sf computed by numerically solving Eq. 10 are
compared with the expression in Eq. 18 for various values of the system
parameters and are plotted in Laplace transform space in Figs. 2(a-c).
From Eq. 8, it can be seen that the real axis represents the product -a>f
if and the imaginary axis represents the damped frequency tofVl - if.
Fig. 2(a) represents a general illustration of the behavior of the frequen-
cies. The natural frequencies and damping ratios of the two oscillators
are chosen to be unequal, and the location of these roots on the complex
plane are indicated by the solid squares. Then, for several values of the
mass ratio 7, the corresponding pairs of roots of the composite system
are plotted and labeled by the letters A-D. Figs. 2{b) and 2(c) are similar,
except in the former the frequencies u>p and cos are chosen to be equal,
and in the latter the damping ratios iv and £s are equal. It can be seen
in all cases in Figs. 2(a-c) that the perturbation results closely agree With
the exact results.
It is instructive to explore the expression for sf using the Laplace
transform space. The following are the important characteristics of the
roots, sf.

1. The roots of the composite system are located symmetrically with

respect to the average s„ [Fig. 2(a-c)]. This indicates that the choice of
the perturbation variable in Eq. 14a is the natural one.
2. For very small values of 7, the roots sf nearly coincide with the
roots sp and ss of the two subsystems, and as 7 becomes larger the roots
sf diverge from sp and ss. This illustrates the effect of interation on the
composite system [Fig. 2(a-c)].
3. For systems that are perfectly tuned, i.e., P = 0, the roots of the
composite system can be in one of two configurations.
a. If £| < y, then the roots from Eq. 18 are
s
* = a>„ ni + ^ V T ^ ia (21a)

which on the complex plane lie above and below the average at a dis-
6

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 (a) AOA
A
B
y
y
=
=
0.01
0.003
STRUCTURE C y = 0.001
MODE D y = 0.0003 1.03
D
c B&>

.00
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

O EXACT
o a"
A APPROXIMATE
* > B C D
• ROOTS OF INDIVIDUAL 0.97
EQUIPMENT
OSCILLATORS
AOA MODE ,

0.94

(b) AOA
STRUCTURE - 1.03
MODE
BCA
D C
o OP 1.00 -^
C D
AOB e
EQUIPMENT
MODE - 0.97

AOA

0.94
—1 1.06
(C) O A A
STRUCTURE
MODE OA B

- 1.00

EQUIPMENT
ZD C
MODE
AOB - 0.97

AOA
I I
-0.06 -0.04 -0.02
Re(s*)

FIG. 2.—Roots of the Composite System on the Complex Plane, I, = 0.03, mr,
1.0 rad/sec: (a) General, 0 = 0.02, &, = 0.04; (ft) Perfect Tuning, 0 = 0.0, {d
0.04; (c) Equal Damping, 0 = 0.02, £, = 0.0

tance of V 7 - {2d. The damping ratios in this case are both equal to £„,
whereas the natural frequencies are unequal,
b. If £jj > 7, then the roots from Eq. 18 are

ia±\\/-i + {yj (21b)

which on the complex plane lie to the left and right of the average at a
distance V - 7 + £jj. In this case, the frequencies are both equal to coa
and the damping ratios are unequal.
These characteristics are apparent in Fig. 2(b): For points A and B, Eq.
21a applies, and for points C and D, Eq. 21b applies.

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 0.04 EXACT
(a )
MATCHED EXPRESSION
TUNED EXPRESSION
DETUNED EXPRESSION
0.02
N^

****^c ^ _ W
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

P
•"-"-~—SS« ~-—~-
u
= = = = =
^= a
S ^ -<"*
u
£ -0.02

i 1 1 1 1

<!
«
z
0.02

0.2 0.3 0.4

TUNING PARAMETER - /3

FIG. 3.—Comparison of Formulas for the Natural Frequency and Damping Ratio,
lr = 0.05, £5 = 0.01, and 7 = 0.005

4. If the damping ratios £p and £s are equal, then the roots from Eq.
18 are

s* = <o„ i(i±±V7T^)- L (22)

Thus £«*= gp = £s for i = 1, 2 and the frequencies cof differ by V 7 + B2,

as shown in Fig. 2(c).

In the aforementioned, two expressions for the roots of the composite

IT!? W !v e d f i v e d : ° n e f o r t u n e d systems which is valid for small |S|
ana me other for detuned systems which is valid for large |S|. Neither
or xnese expressions are valid for all values of B. This can be seen in Fie.
anSf™ f 3 n d d 6 t U n e d e x P r e ^ i o n s for the natural frequencies
a r e COm a ed W i t h e x a c t v a l u e
noses T S I P. ,f * - *°t Practical pur-
poses, a single expression valid for all values of p is desirable. Such an

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 expression can be obtained by using the method of matching (10).
The basic idea behind matching is to make modifications in two
expressions obtained for extreme values of a parameter such that they
are in agreement for a given range of the parameter. In the present case,
expressions are obtained for large values of |p| (i.e., the detuned system)
and for small values of |p| (i.e., the tuned system). Using the concept
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of matching, |p| is considered to be large, and the tuned expression for

the roots is modified to agree with the detuned expression. For large
|p|, 7 is small with respect to |(3|, and the tuned expression, Eq. 18, can
be reduced to

(oa i - la ± ; (ifc + »
i(o„ - <ofl£„ i = l
(23)
i = 2
The aforementioned is nearly in agreement with the detuned expression
in Eq. 13; the only modifications necessary are to

replace iv by iv (24a)

replace {s by £. (24b)

Note that for tuned cases the ratios (o„/(ofl and cos/(»a are near unity and
the tuned expression would remain essentially unchanged. Introducing
the previous modifications into the tuned expressions, the final general
expressions for the frequencies and damping ratios are

to," = (*.\ 1 ± ~2 sgn (P) Re 7 + : (25)

&,--M + P

(0„ (0,
if ^£„ + -£s±sgn(P)Im 7+ U+P (26)
2(0,*

The aforementioned expressions are plotted in Fig. 3 and their accuracy

and consistency are shown for all values of p.
The detuned and tuned solutions for the roots are used to obtain the
mode shapes, <!>*, of the composite 2-DOF system. Using the notation
<&* = [fl; l ] r , the solutions for a, are computed from Eq. 6

g(sf) = S,*2 + 2k(0sS* + qg

flf = (27)
f(sf) co2
Substituting the detuned expression for s* from Eqs. 9 and 13, the so-
lutions for flf are

«i; (28a)

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 2

«2 = ~T~ (28b)

These expressions are real, indicating that detuned systems are essen-
tially classically damped. For mode 1, the motion of the structure pro-
duces an amplified motion of the equipment as in cascaded systems. For
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

mode 2, the equipment motion induces a very small motion of the struc-
ture. These properties show that interaction is negligible for detuned
systems.
For tuned systems, the expression from Eq. 18 for s* is substituted
into Eq. 27 to obtain

«r -P - it, + sgn (p) Vy + (i£„ + P)2 (29)

In this case, the imaginary component is significant even for small dif-
ference of damping ratios, t , . Thus, tuned systems are markedly non-
classically damped if £,, ^ 0. Other properties of tuned mode shapes are
illustrated in Figs. 4(a-c) where the exact values for A,, computed by
numerically solving Eq. 6, are compared with the approximate values
obtained from Eq. 29. These plots are for the same values of the param-
eters as used in Figs. 2(a-c). The key relationships between the mode
shapes <I>* and the system parameters are:

1. As the mass ratio y becomes smaller, a2 approaches zero [Figs. 4(a-

c)], and the second mode shape <I>* is dominated by the equipment mo-
tion. For the structure mode, «i is approximately equal to -2(p+ i£d).
2. If the system is perfectly tuned, i.e. p = 0, and £j < y, then ax and
a2 are given by

«< = - & + V? - 6 (30)

which have the same absolute values. In this case, the characteristics of
the two subsystems are distributed equally between the two modes. This
is shown in Fig. 4(b) for points A and B, where the coordinates a, lie to
each side of the imaginary axis at a distance of V7 - {d • If id > y, then
fli and a2 are pure imaginary and the motions of the equipment and the
structure are out of phase by 90°.
3. The mode shapes are real-valued only when {d = 0. This follows
since the damping matrix in that case is proportional to the stiffness
matrix to lowest order terms, and the system possesses classical damp-
ing. This can be observed in Fig. 4(c), where the imaginary components
of a, are negligible.

A single expression for a, valid for all values of p is obtained by match-

ing, as was done for the roots s*. The final results are
2 \ 2

«i=--p-i-S-sgn(0) A /7+ i^S +- p (31a)

<os we V V a,, <o?

«2 = — j P - i8 + sgn (P) -. y + I iS + — p (31b)

0)7 (i>;

10

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 (a) DO
CO EQUIPMENT
M0DE
Bg
-0.02

-0.05 O EXACT
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

A APPROXIMATE
STRUCTURE c A y = 0.01
-0.07 • MODE *> B y = 0.003
/©D C y = 0.001
D y = 0.0003
-0.10 I I I
0
r (b) DQ
C
° EQUIPMENT
— -0.02 - MODE
B A
0AA 6B 8 ^
-0.05 - STRUCTURE
MODE .
£>C
-0.07 4DD

-0.10 1

0.05
(c)

STRUCTURE EQUIPMENT
MODE MODE
- C» Oil OO
A BCD DC B A

_L _L
-0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0 0.05 0.10 0.15
Re (a,)

FIG. 4.—Mode Shape Component a, on Complex Plane for L = 0.03, u>„ = 1.0 rad/
sec: (a) General, 0 = 0.02, t,d = 0.04; (b) Perfect Tuning, p = 0.0, {d = 0.04; (c)
Equal Damping, p = 0.02, ^ = 0.0

in which 8 = nonclassical damping parameter defined in Eq. 2c. Observe

that the mode shapes are in general complex if 8 is not zero. This in-
dicates that the system is in general nonclassically damped.

CHARACTERIZATION OF EQUIPMENT RESPONSE

The equipment response is influenced by tuning, interaction, and

nonclassical damping characteristics of the composite system. In order
to measure these influences, the response of the composite system to a
"standard" input is considered. In view of applications in earthquake
engineering, and with the objective of obtaining simple and closed form
results, a stationary white-noise base acceleration is considered. After
deriving expressions for the mean-square response, in the subsequent
sections mathematical criteria are developed to characterize the effects
11

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 of tuning, interaction, and non-classical damping on the equipment re-
sponse.
Modal decomposition methods for nonclassically damped systems (7,13)
can be applied directly to the results in Eqs. 25, 26, and 31a, 31b to obtain
the mean-square response. The method developed by the authors (7) is
in a form suitable for obtaining closed form analytical expressions. Using
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

that method, the mean-square response of the equipment is

2 2
£
[*?] = 2 2 {QRe*o.* - D j I m X y + Eg Re X^} (32)
i = i y=i

in which Xm,,y are cross-spectral m o m e n t s given b y

K,ij = Go comH,(co) Hj(-(o) dto, m = 0, 1, 2 (33)

in which H,(w) = (o>*2 - oo2 + 2i£f cof w) - 1 is the frequency response func-
tion of mode z, and G0 is a constant denoting the white-noise one-sided
power spectral density. C,y, D,y, a n d E,y are in terms of the modal p r o p -
erties and are defined as (7):
Qj = ataj Dq =fl,c;-- a;C; E,y = ctCj (34a)
in which at a n d c, are generalized modal participation factors given b y
fl, = 2 Re (biS?) c,• = 2 Re &,• (34b)
r r
sf(q 4>*)(** Mr)
in which b, = (34c)
. s f 2 * ? r M $ ? - 3»f T K*f
In the aforementioned, r is the influence vector relating the base input
to the absolute displacements of the structure and equipment and q is
a vector of constants such that q r x gives the response quantity of inter-
est. For the present case, r = [1 l ] r and q = [0 1]T.
Using the expressions derived for sf and <&*in Eqs. 13 and 28a, 28b,
the detuned expression for the mean-square response is
ITG 0 £p(Op + £ s co 3
E[xs J detuned (35)
4£sco3 2
(Op -
2
CO, L<4
Also, using Eqs. 18 and 29, the tuned expression is given by
TTG0 babs
ELXsJtuned
2 2 3
(36)
4Lws3 ,£pL(4£ + p ) + 7 g2co .
The general expression for the mean-square response, applicable for all
values of (3, is obtained by matching and is
irG 0
E[xs2]
bobs (IpWp + O i ) Wp
3 2
(37)
4L" MsiHi + P ) + ? £ 4i>*
In the previous three expressions, the first quotient on the right-hand
side may be regarded as the response of the equipment oscillator to white-
noise base acceleration, without presence of the primary oscillator.
Therefore, the second terms inside brackets are amplification factors for
12

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 40

DETUNED
EXPRESSION
O
30
o
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

< \
fe--»7-\ EXACT
\
O
(_ 20 \
< \
o \
MATCHED N
EXPRESSION %_ \
\
TUNED '
EXPRESSION

0.1 0.2 0.3

TUNING PARAMETER, /3

FIG. 5.—Comparison of Formulas for Amplification Factor of Equipment Re-

sponse, l„ = 0.04, L = 0.02, 7 = 0.01

the equipment response due to the filtering of the base motion through
the primary oscillator. The three expressions for the amplification factors
are compared in Fig. 5 with values obtained using exact expressions given
in Ref. 3 for general 2-DOF systems.
Tuning Criterion.—For systems with large values of |p|, the detuned
expression for the response in Eq. 35 is in close agreement with the
general expression in Eq. 37. However, systems with sufficiently small
|p| are characterized by tuning and E[x2]detuned is always greater than E[x2].
If the relative error tolerance is e, then the detuned approximation is
unacceptable when the difference between E[x2]detuned and E[xs2] is greater
than e, i.e.
—
, . E[XS ]detuned E[Xs J
relative error = >e (3o)
E[x2]
Substituting Eqs. 35 and 37 into the aforementioned equation yields
?a(Hpl + 7)
relative error = >e (39)
LLP'
This error is plotted in Fig. 6; clearly in the vicinity of perfect tuning (p
= 0) the error becomes very large. Rewriting the above in terms of p
yields

P 2 < - (4 + —) e - (40)

13

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 300 r
y = 0.01
y = 0.003
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

200

z,
u
100-

O.I 0.2 0.3

TUNING PARAMETER - /3

FIG. 6.—Error from Neglecting Tuning, £p = 0.04,1, = 0.02

The previous inequality can be considered as a criterion for tuning: A

2-DOF equipment-structure system is considered tuned if the above in-
equality is. satisfied; otherwise, it is considered to be a detuned system.
Interaction Criterion.—Results derived this far correctly account for
the effect of interaction between the structure and the equipment. These
results can be modified to ignore interaction simply by letting the mass-
ratio 7 -» 0. In that case, the expression for the mean-square response,
Eq. 37, simplifies to
TTG0 L (t,P<4 + ^ 3 s ) <t>p
(41)
£L*s Jnoninteraction
{,(4g + p2)
4£scos3 4£,<aJ
Note that the noninteraction expression tends to overestimate the true
value for E[xs2], particularly for tuned systems, due to the absence of the
7 term in the denominator of Eq. 41. The relative error can be written
as
^ L^- s J noninteraction *H* s J
relative error = (42)

Substituting Eqs. 37 and 41, and letting e be the error tolerance, the
criterion for interaction is
y&
relative error = • >e (43)
(4£ + p2) U.
2

or equivalently
14

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 +
y>V ^) Ws (44)

Thus, a 2-DOF equipment-structure system must be considered as an

interacting system if the above inequality is satisfied. Otherwise, the sys-
tem can be considered as a cascaded, noninteracting system. For de-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tuned systems where |(3| is large, the above condition will not be satisfied
and £ [^noninteraction will be a good approximation for E[x]] as was stated
earlier. However, for tuned systems, ||J| is small, and Eq. 44 will be sat-
isfied even for relatively small values of 7. A conservative lower bound
for 7 is made by setting p = 0, in which case Eq. 44 simplifies to
7 > 4£PLe (45)
The relationship between the error in noninteraction analysis and the
size of the mass ratio 7 is illustrated in Fig. 7.
Nonclassical Damping Criterion for Tuned Systems.—It was shown
that the 2-DOF system is nonclassically damped if 8 # 0. To indicate the
influence of nonclassical damping, the spectral moment E[Xs]ciassicai is cal-
culated without accounting for the effect of nonclassical damping and
compared with the exact expression for E[x]\. The response E[Xs]dassical
is obtained by using free vibration mode shapes and neglecting off-di-
agonal terms of the damping matrix. It has been shown (2) that largest
errors due to neglecting nonclassical damping occur at slight detuning
where |p| is a small, nonzero number. However, the resulting expres-
sions are too cumbersome for developing a useful criterion. For this rea-

INTERACTION PARAMETER - y

FIG. 7.—Error from Neglecting Interaction, ip = 0.04, L = 0.02

15

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 son, the criterion here is developed for the case of perfect tuning where
(3 = 0.
The classical damping expression for the response at perfect tuning
is (5)
TTG0 £.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

i^lXs Jclassical (46)

L&,(4£jj + 7) 2<o3.
Since £2 — iPL for all values of {v and £s, it follows that the aforemen-
tioned is always smaller than the exact result including nonclassical
damping. Given an error tolerance e, the classically-damped approxi-
mation is unacceptable if the difference between E[x2]ciasstcai a n d E[xf] is
greater than e, i.e.
t . ^L-^sJ ^H^-s Jclassical
relative error = > e (47)
Elxft
Substituting Eqs. 37 and 46 into the aforementioned yields
82
relative error : >e (48)
4£ + 7
The error increases with increasing 8, as shown in Fig. 8. Rewriting the
aforementioned in terms of 8 yields
82 > e(4£ + 7 ) (49)
The previous inequality can be considered as a criterion for nonclassical

lOOr

y = 0.01
y = 0.003
y = 0.001

0.02 0.04 0.06

NON-CLASSICAL DAMPING PARAMETER - 8
FIG. 8.—Error from Neglecting Nonclassical Damping, £„ = 0.03, p = 0.0
16

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 damping: A 2-DOF tuned equipment-structure system must be analyzed
as a nonclassically damped system if the previous inequality is satisfied.

SUMMARY

A thorough study of the 2-DOF equipment-structure system is made.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Accurate closed form solutions for the mode shapes and frequencies are
derived using perturbation theory and a composite-system approach.
Three main characteristics of the 2-DOF system are identified: tuning,
interaction, and nonclassical damping. Parameters are defined to mea-
sure these characteristics and criteria are developed to determine their
influence on the response of the equipment.
The modal properties, criteria, and characteristics of the 2-DOF equip-
ment-structure system and the methods of analysis that are developed
herein are extended and generalized for MDOF secondary systems sup-
ported on MDOF primary systems in the companion paper (8).

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This research work is sponsored by the National Science Foundation

under Grant No. CEE-8217800, which support is gratefully acknowl-
edged. The authors wish to thank Professor J. L. Sackman of University
of California, Berkeley, for many resourceful and enlightening discus-
sions during the course of this study.

APPENDIX I.—REVIEW OF PERTURBATION METHODS

A nondimensional parameter p is defined to be small if its absolute

value is much smaller than 1; this is written symbolically as
IPI « 1 (50)
For example, the damping ratios in structural systems are generally small
parameters. Similarly, a parameter P! is defined to be of a smaller order
of magnitude than another parameter p2 if they satisfy the relation
|Pi|«|p2| (51)
Finally, two parameters PJ and p2 are defined to be of the same order
of magnitude if neither
|Pi| « |p 2 | nor |p 2 | « |pi| (52a)
are true. This is written symbolically as
Pi = 0(p 2 ) or p2 = O(P0 (52b)
in which O(P) denotes a term of the order of magnitude of the parameter
p. Note that the previous relationship does not imply equality. For ex-
ample, if the damping ratios are £p = 0.05 and £s = 0.02, they are not
close to equality, yet they are considered to be of the same order of
magnitude.
As an example of perturbation approximations, consider the three per-
turbation variables p, 7, and £„ which satisfy the order relationships in
Eq. 5. Then, an expression such as
17

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 P
+ V ^ = V ^ + P(l - la + ll - • • •) (53fl)
1 + ta
can be approximated to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

+ Vy = Vy + P(l - la + ll) second order (53b)

1 + L
= V 7 + P(l - Q first order (53c)
= Vy + P lowest order (53d)
Since this is a study for engineering applications, a high level of accuracy
is not required and simple, manageable results are sought; therefore lowest
order approximations are used. Occasionally first and second order
expressions are derived for obtaining intermediate results.
In some situations t h e order relationships in Eq. 5 m a y n o t a p p e a r to
be valid. For instance, the parameter p m a y h a p p e n to be exactly 0, in
which case p would be smaller t h a n V 7 a n d £„. Consequently, the low-
est order approximation for t h e expression in Eq. 53a w o u l d simply b e
Vy. However, t h e expression in Eq. 53d is m o r e general since it is valid
for p = 0 as well as p satisfying Eq. 5. Thus, in order to obtain the most
general results, the order relationships in Eq. 5 are used.

APPENDIX II.—REFERENCES

1. Aleksandrov, A. D., Mathematics: Its Content, Methods, and Meaning, I, Mas-

sachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1963.
2. Asfura, A., and Der Kiureghian, A., "A New Floor Response Spectrum Method
for Seismic Analysis of Multiply Supported Secondary Systems," Report No.
UCBIEERC-84/04, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of
California, Berkeley, Calif., June, 1984.
3. Crandall, S. H., and Mark, W. D., Random Vibration of Mechanical Systems,
Academic Press, New York, N.Y., 1963.
4. Curtis, A. F., and Boykin, T. R., "Response of Two-Degree-of-Freedom Sys-
tems to White-Noise Base Excitation," Journal of the Acoustical Society of Amer-
ica, Vol. 33, 1961, pp. 655-663.
5. Der Kiureghian, A., Sackman, J. L., and Nour-Omid, B., "Dynamic Analysis
of Light Equipment in Structures: Response to Stochastic Input," Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. EMI, Feb., 1983, pp. 90-110.
6. Igusa, T., and Der Kiureghian, A., "Dynamic Analysis of Multiply Tuned
and Arbitrarily Supported Secondary Systems," Report No. UCB/EERC-83/
07, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California,
Berkeley, Calif., July, 1983.
7. Igusa, T., Der Kiureghian, A., and Sackman, J. L., "Modal Decomposition
Method for Stationary Response of Nonclassically Damped Systems," Earth-
quake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1984, pp. 121-136.
8. Igusa, T., and Der Kiureghian, A., "Dynamic Response of Multiply Sup-
ported MDOF Secondary Systems," Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE,
Vol. I l l , No. 1, Jan., 1985.
9. Masri, S. F., "Response of a Multi-Degree-of-Freedom System to Nonsta-
tionary Random Excitation," Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 45, No. 3, Sept.,
1978, pp. 649-656.
10. Nayfeh, A. H., Perturbation Methods, Wiley, New York, N.Y., 1973.
11. Ruzicka, G. C , and Robinson, A. R., "Dynamic Response of Tuned Sec-
ondary Systems," Report Number UILU-ENG-80-2020, Department of Civil En-

18

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.

 gineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111., Nov., 1980.
12. Sackman, J. L., and Kelly, J. M., "Seismic Analysis of Internal Equipment
and Components in Structures," Engineering Structures, Vol. 1, No. 4, July,
1979, pp. 179-190.
13. Singh, M. P., "Seismic Response by SRSS for Nonproportional Damping,"
Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol. 106, No. EM6, Dec,
1980, pp. 1405-1419.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Mississippi on 01/19/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

19

J. Eng. Mech. 1985.111:1-19.