Static Analysis of Uncertain Structures

dormant epitome of Uncertain StructuresStatic Analysis of Uncertain Structures apply Interval Eigenvalue Decomposition1Mehdi Mod ars and 2Robert L. Mullen1Department of Civil and Environmental engine room Tufts University Medford, MA, 02155 2Department of Civil Engineering Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH, 44106 Abstract Static analysis is an essential purpose to design a structure. use dormant analysis, the structures repartee to the applied external forces is obtained. This response includes internal forces/moments and internal stresses that is utilise in the design process. However, the mechanical characteristics of the structure possess uncertainties which alter the structures response. one(a) order to quantify the aim of these uncertainties is separation or unknown-but- leap variables.In this feat a freshly method is developed to obtain the leap on structures unruffled response victimization detachment eigenvalue decomposition of the badness gr ound substance. The bound of eigen descend argon obtained victimisation monotonic behavior of eigenvalues for a isobilateral ground substance subjected to non-negative clear dislocations. Moreover, the edge of eigen senders ar obtained using perturbation of invariable subspaces for symmetric matrices. Comparisons with other separation finite broker final result methods are dedicateed. Using this method, it has repointn that obtaining the bound on nonmoving response of an uncertain structure does not require a combinatorial or Monte-Carlo simulation procedure.Keywords Statics, Analysis, Interval, precariousness 2008 by authors. Printed in USA. REC 2008 Modares and MullenIn design of structures, the per melodyance of the structure must be guaranteed over its lifetime. Moreover, atmospheric static analysis is a fundamental procedure for innovation reliable structure that are subjected to static or quasi-static forces induced by various loading conditions and patterns .However, in current procedures for static analysis of morphologic carcasss, the humanity of unbelief in either mechanical properties of the constitution or the characteristics of forcing function is generally not considered. These uncertainties butt be attributed to physical imperfections, stamp inaccuracies and system complexities.Although, in a design process, uncertainty is accounted for by a combination of load amplification and strength reduction factors that are establish on probabilistic models of historic data, consideration of the effects of uncertainty has been upstage from current static analysis of geomorphologic systems.In this drub, a new method is developed to perform static analysis of a structural system in the presence of uncertainty in the systems mechanical properties as well as uncertainty in the magnitude of loads. The presence of these uncertainties is quantified using detachment or unknownbut-bounded variables.This method obtains the leaping on str uctures static response using separation eigenvalue decomposition of the ungracefulness intercellular substance. The bounds of eigenvalues are obtained using the imagination of monotonic behavior of eigenvalues for a symmetric intercellular substance subjected to non-negative definite perturbations. Furthermore, the bounds of eigentransmitters are obtained using perturbation of invariant subspaces for symmetric matrices. Using this method, it has shown that obtaining the bound on static response of an uncertain structure does not require a combinatorial or MonteCarlo simulation procedure.The equating of symmetricalness for a multiple degree of freedom structure is defined as a bilinear system of equations asKU=P (1)where, Kis the inclementness hyaloplasm, Uis the vector of unknown nodal displacement reactions, and P is the vector of nodal forces. The solvent to this system of equation isU = K1P (2)The concept of interval verse has been originally applied in the illusion analysis associated with digital computing. Quantification of the uncertainties introduced by truncation of true numbers in numerical methods was the primary masking of interval methods (Moore 1966).A in truth interval is a closed dress circle defined by extreme values as (Figure 1)l ,zu =z zl z zu (3)Z = zx = a,bFigure 1. An interval variable.In this work, the token () represents an interval quantity. One interpretation of an interval number is a stochastic variable whose probability density function is unknown but non-zero provided in the range of interval.Another interpretation of an interval number includes intervals of sureness for -cuts of fuzzy sets. The interval representation transforms the point values in the settled system to inclusive set values in the system with bounded uncertainty.Considering the presence of interval uncertainty in stiffness and force properties, the system of equilibrium equations, Eq.(1), is modified as an interval system of equilibrium equation asKU=P (4)where, Kis the interval stiffness hyaloplasm, Uis the vector of unknown nodal displacements, and P is the vector of interval nodal forces. In development of interval stiffness hyaloplasm, the physical and mathematical characteristics of the stiffness matrix must be preserves.This system of interval equations is mainly solved using computationally repetitive procedures (Muhanna et al 2007) and (Neumaier and Pownuk 2007). The present method proposes a computationally efficient procedure with nearly sharp results using interval eigenvalue decomposition of stiffness matrix. patch the external force can also create uncertainties, in this work only jobs with interval stiffness properties are addressed. However, for functional independent variations for twain stiffness matrix and external force vector, the extension of the proposed work is straightforward.3.1. settled EIGENVALUE radioactive decayThe settled symmetric stiffness matrix can be decomposed usin g matrix eigenvalue decomposition asK = T (5)where, is the matrix of eigenvectors, and is the coloured matrix of eigenvalues. Equivalently,NK =iiiT (6)i=1where, the values of i is the eigenvalues and the vectorsiare their correspondingeigenvectors. Therefore, the eigenvalue decomposition of the reverse of the stiffness matrix isequivalently,K1 =1T (7)N 1TK 1 = ii (8)i=1 iSubstituting Eq.(8) in the origin for the deterministic linear system of equation, Eq.(2), the solution for response is shown asU= ( N 1 iiT )P (9)3.2. INTERVAL EIGENVALUE DECOMPOSITIONSimilarly, the solution to interval system of equilibrium equations, Eq.(4), isU= (N 1 iT )P (10) ii=1 i are their where, the values of i is the interval eigenvalues and, the vectors icorresponding interval eigenvectors that are to be determined.4.1. BACKGROUNDThe research in interval eigenvalue line began to emerge as its applicability in science and engineering was realized. Hollot and bartlett pear (1987) studied the sp ectra of eigenvalues of an interval matrix family which are found to depend on the spectrum of its extreme sets. Dief (1991) presented a method for computing interval eigenvalues of an interval matrix found on an assumption of invariance properties of eigenvectors.In structural self-propellings, Modares and Mullen (2004) have introduced a method for the solution of the interval eigenvalue worry which determines the diminutive bounds of the natural frequencies of a system using Interval mortal component part formulation.4.2. DEFINITIONThe eigenvalue paradoxs for matrices containing interval values are known as the interval nn ) and A is a piece of the eigenvalue problems. If A is an interval real matrix (Ainterval matrix (AA) , the interval eigenvalue problem is shown as4.2.1. Solution for EigenvaluesThe solution of interest to the real interval eigenvalue problem for bounds on individually eigenvalue isdefined as an inclusive set of real values () such that for any member of the interval matrix, the eigenvalue solution to the problem is a member of the solution set. Therefore, the solution to the interval eigenvalue problem for distributively eigenvalue can be mathematically uttered asl ,u AA (AI)x = 0 (12)= 4.2.2. Solution for Eigenvectors The solution of interest to the real interval eigenvalue problem for bounds on each(prenominal) eigenvector is defined as an inclusive set of real values of vector x such that for any member of the interval matrix, the eigenvector solution to the problem is a member of the solution set. Thus, the solution to the interval eigenvalue problem for each eigenvector is4.3. INTERVAL STIFFNESS MATRIXThe systems globular stiffness can be viewed as a summation of the element contributions to the global stiffness matrixni=1where Li is the element Boolean connectivity matrix and Ki is the element stiffness matrix in the global coordinate system. Considering the presence of uncertainty in the stiffness properties, the n on-deterministic element elastic stiffness matrix is expressed asin which, li ,ui is an interval number that pre-multiplies the deterministic element stiffness matrix. This procedure preserves the physical and mathematical characteristics of the stiffness matrix.Therefore, the systems global stiffness matrix in the presence of any uncertainty is the linear summation of the contributions of non-deterministic interval element stiffness matrices,ui )Li Ki Li =i=1i=1in which, Ki is the deterministic element elastic stiffness contribution to the global stiffness matrix.4.4. INTERVAL EIGENVALUE PROBLEM FOR STATICSThe interval eigenvalue problem for a structure with stiffness properties expressed as interval values isK = () (17)Substituting Eq.(16) in Eq.(17)) = ()i=1This interval eigenvalue problem can be transformed to a pseudo-deterministic eigenvalue problem subjected to a matrix perturbation. Introducing the primeval and radial (perturbation) stiffness matrices asi 1 KR =i=n1 (i )(ui 2li )Ki , i =1,1 (20)Using Eqs. (19,20), the non-deterministic interval eigenpair problem, Eq.(18), becomesHence, the determination of bounds on eigenvalues and bounds on eigenvectors of a stiffness matrix in the presence of uncertainty is mathematically interpreted as an eigenvalue problem on a central stiffness matrix (KC ) that is subjected to a radial perturbation stiffness matrix (KR ).This perturbation is in fact, a linear summation of non-negative definite deterministic element stiffness contribution matrices that are scaled with bounded real numbers(i ) .5. Solution 5.1. BOUNDS ON EIGENVALUESThe following concepts must be considered in order to bound the non-deterministic interval eigenvalue problem, Eq.(21). The classical linear eigenpair problem for a symmetric matrix iswith the solution of real eigenvalues (1 2 n ) and corresponding eigenvectors( x1, x2,, xn ). This equation can be transformed into a ratio of quadratics known as the Rayleigh quotientR(x) = (23)Th e Rayleigh quotient for a symmetric matrix is bounded between the smallest and the largest eigenvalues (Bellman 1960 and Strang 1976). (24)Thus, the first eigenvalue (1) can be obtained by performing an free minimization on the scalar-valued function of Rayleigh quotient ( (25)xFor finding the next eigenvalues, the concept of maximin characterization can be used. This concept obtains the kth eigenvalue by imposing (k-1) constraints on the minimization of the Rayleigh quotient (Bellman 1960 and Strang 1976)k = maxminR(x)(subject to constrains(xT zi = 0),i =1,k 1,k 2 ) (26)5.1.1. reverberateing the Eigenvalues for StaticsUsing the concepts of minimum and maximin characterizations of eigenvalues for symmetric matrices, the solution to the interval eigenvalue problem for the eigenvalues of a system with uncertainty in the stiffness characteristics (Eq.(21)) for the first eigenvalue can be shown asnxRnxT xfor the next eigenvaluesxT KxxT (K +K )x5.1.2. Deterministic Eigenvalue Problems for Bounding Eigenvalues in StaticsSubstituting and expanding the right hand side terms of Eqs. (27,28)T K xui(li +ux(29)Since the matrix Ki is non-negative definite, the term () is non-negative.Therefore, using the monotonic behavior of eigenvalues for symmetric matrices, the upper bounds on the eigenvalues in Eqs.(19,20) are obtained by considering supreme values of interval coefficients of uncertainty (i = 1,1), ((i )max = 1), for all elements in the radial perturbation matrix.Similarly, the lower bounds on the eigenvalues are obtained by considering minimum values of those coefficients, ((i )min =1) , for all elements in the radial perturbation matrix. Also, it can be observed that any other element stiffness selected from the interval set will yield eigenvalues between the upper and lower bounds. This imonotonic behavior of eigenvalues can also be used for parameterization purposes.Using these concepts, the deterministic eigenvalue problems corresponding to the maximum and minimum eigenvalues are obtained (Modares and Mullen 2004) asnn5.2. BOUNDS ON EIGENVECTORS5.2.1. perpetual SubspaceThe subspace is defined to be an invariant subspace of matrix A ifA(32)Equivalently, if is an invariant subspace of Ann and also, columns of X1nm form a stem for, then there is a eccentric matrix L1mm such thatThe matrix L1 is the representation of A on with respect to the basis X1 and the eigenvalues of L1 are a subset of eigenvalues of A. Therefore, for the invariant subspace,(v,) is an eigenpair of L1 if and only if (X1v,) is an eigenpair of A.5.2.2. Theorem of Invariant SubspacesFor a real symmetric matrix A, considering the subspace with the linearly independent columns of X1 forming a basis for and the linearly independent columns of X2 spanning the complementary subspace , then, is an invariant subspace of A iffTherefore, invoking this condition and postulating the comment of invariant subspaces, the symmetric matrix A can be reduced to a diagonalize d form using a unitary similarity transformation asX1X2T AX1X2 = X1TTAAXX11X2where Li =Xi T AXi , i =1,2.5.2.3. Simple Invariant SubspaceX1T AX2 L1 X2T AX2= 00 L2(35)An invariant subspace is simple if the eigenvalues of its representation L1 are distinct from other eigenvalues of A. Thus, using the reduced form of A with respect to the unitary matrixX1X2, is a simple invariant subspace if the eigenvalues of L1 and L2 are distinct5.2.4. Perturbed EigenvectorConsidering the column spaces of X1 and X2 to span two complementary simple invariant subspaces, the perturbed orthogonal subspaces are defined asX1 =X1+X 2 P(37)X 2 =X 2X1PT(38)in which P is a matrix to be determined.Thus, each perturbed subspace is defined as a summation of the shoot subspace and the contribution of the complementary subspace. Considering a symmetric perturbationE , the perturbed matrix is defined asApplying the theorem of invariant subspaces for perturbed matrix and perturbed subspaces, and linearizing due to a small perturbation compared to the tranquil matrix, Eq.(34) is rewritten asThis perturbation problem is an equation for unknown P in the form of a Sylvesters equation in which, the uniqueness of the solution is guaranteed by the existence of simple perturbed invariant subspaces.Finally, specializing the result for one eigenvector and solving the above equation, the perturbed eigenvector is (Stewart and solarize 1990)x1 = x1+X 2 (1IL2 )1X 2 T Ex15.2.5 Bounding Eigenvectors for Statics For the perturbed eigenvalue problem for statics, Eq.(21), the error matrix is(41)nu E = KR = ((i )( i li )Ki )(42)i=12Using the error matrix in eigenvector perturbation equation for the first eigenvector, Eq.(33) the perturbed eigenvector isin which, 1is the first eigenvector, (1) is the first eigenvalue, 2 is the matrix of remaining eigenvectors and 2 is the diagonal matrix of remaining eigenvalues obtained from the deterministic eigenvalue problem. Eq.(30,31 and 43) is used to calculate th e bounds on interval eigenvalues and interval eigenvectors in the response equation, Eq.(9).In order to procure sharper results, the functional dependency of intervals in direct interval multiplications in Eq.(9) is considered. Also, input intervals are subdivided and the union of responses of subset results is obtained.6. Numerical Example Problem The bounds on the static response for a 2-D statically indeterminate truss with interval uncertainty present in the modulus of elasticity of each element are determined (Figure 2). The crosssectional area A, the length for horizontal and vertical members L , the Youngs moduli E for allelements are E = (0.99,1.01)E .Figure 2. The structure of 2-D trussThe problem is solved using the method presented in this work. The functional dependency of intervals in the response equation is considered. A hundred-segment subdivision of input intervals is performed and the union of responses is obtained. For comparison, an carry combinatorial analysis has performed which considers lower and upper values of uncertainty for each element i.e. solving (2n = 210 =1024 ) deterministic problems.The static analysis results obtained by the present method and the brute force combination solution for the vertical displacement of the top nodes in are summarized Table (1).Lower Bound largess MethodLower BoundCombination Method Upper BoundCombination Method Upper BoundPresent Method mistake%U PL AE -1.6265-1.6244-1.5859-1.5838% 0.12Table1. Bounds on Vertical Displacement of Top NodesThe results show that the proposed robust method yields nearly sharp results in a computationally efficient manner as well as preserving the systems physics.4.Conclusions A finite-element based method for static analysis of structural systems with interval uncertainty in mechanical properties is presented.This method proposes an interval eigenvalue decomposition of stiffness matrix. By obtaining the exact bounds on the eigenvalues and nearly sharp bounds on the eigenvectors, the proposed method is capable to obtain the nearly sharp bounds on the structures static response.Some conservative overestimation in response occurs that can be attributed to the linearization in formation of bounds of eigenvectors and also, the functional dependency of intervals in the dynamic response formulation.This method is computationally feasible and it shows that the bounds on the static response can be obtained without combinatorial or Monte-Carlo simulation procedures.This computational efficiency of the proposed method makes it attractive to introduce uncertainty into structural static analysis and design. While this methodology is shown for structural systems, its extension to various mechanism problems is straightforward.References Bellman, R. Introduction to Matrix Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York 1960.Dief, A., Advanced Matrix theory for Scientists and Engineers, pp.262-281. Abacus bear on 1991.Hollot, C. and A. Bartlett. On the eigenvalues of interva l matrices, Technical Report, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 1987.Modares, M. and R. L. Mullen. Free Vibration of Structures with Interval Uncertainty. 9th ASCE Specialty Conference on probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability 2004.Moore, R. E. Interval Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood, NJ 1966.Muhanna, R. L. and R. L. Mullen. Uncertainty in Mechanics Problems-Interval-Based Approach. Journal of Engineering Mechanics June-2001, pp.557-566 2001.Muhanna, R. L., Zhang H. and R. L. Mullen. Interval Finite Element as a Basis for Generalized Models of Uncertainty in Engineering Mechanics, honest Computing, Vol. 13, pp. 173-194, 2007.Neumaier, A. Interval Methods for Systems of Equations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1990.Neumaier, A. and A. Pownuk. Linear Systems with Large Uncertainties, with Applications to Truss Structures, Reliable Computing, Vol. 13, pp. 149-172, 2007.Strang, G. Linear Algebra and its A pplications, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1976.Stewart, G.W. and J. Sun. Matrix perturbation theory, Chapter 5. Academic Press, Boston, MA 1990.