How does NODYNRSP do its thing?

Does anyone know how the NODYNRSP option of the RESVEC command do what it does?

I haven't been able to find any documentation on this detail.

My (wild) guess is a low pass frequency dependent damping is applied to the modes associated with residual vectors to allow them to be suppressed at high frequency but allowed to responded at low frequencies...

Second question on this topic (which is likely related to the first) is why the NODYNRSP option embedded into the RESVEC call. It seems like it could/should be a separate option on top of the RESVEC command.

Parents

0 anthony.carlson over 5 years ago

Don

In another thread on the topic of residual vectors you linked to a paper by Ted Rose from 1991 on the subject. There Ted presents the development of residual vectors in the context of fixed boundary CMS. I guess that's why I was asking about the reduced boundary mass matrix in my previous question.

With what you said in your previous reply I'll rephrase/extend my previous question.

Assume residual vectors were calculated during a fixed boundary EXTSEOUT run. Lets say 10 retained fixed boundary modes and 6 inertial resvecs so the q-set has a size of 16. The RESVEC call had the option NODYNRSP.

This superelement is then used alone in a SOL 112 run. In this case I think the assembled M^0_gg matrix should be essentially the same as the M^1_aa matrix as there is no residual structure and a single super element is considered.

At this point similar question as before; are the terms you are discussing zeroing out of the M^0_gg matrix those that correspond to the 6 resvec dofs in M^1_qt partition of M^1_aa or the M^1_qq partition of M^1_aa, or both?

In my example above the residual vectors were created during the superelement generation. For the downstream use of this superelement in the SOL 112 run it seems they don't need to be recalculated to be utilized, right? If this is the case how is the NODYNRSP setting communicated to the SOL 112 run. If the residual vectors must be recalculated in the SOL 112 run then is there any benefit from ever calculating them upstream in the superelement generation step?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Reply

0 anthony.carlson over 5 years ago

Don

In another thread on the topic of residual vectors you linked to a paper by Ted Rose from 1991 on the subject. There Ted presents the development of residual vectors in the context of fixed boundary CMS. I guess that's why I was asking about the reduced boundary mass matrix in my previous question.

With what you said in your previous reply I'll rephrase/extend my previous question.

Assume residual vectors were calculated during a fixed boundary EXTSEOUT run. Lets say 10 retained fixed boundary modes and 6 inertial resvecs so the q-set has a size of 16. The RESVEC call had the option NODYNRSP.

This superelement is then used alone in a SOL 112 run. In this case I think the assembled M^0_gg matrix should be essentially the same as the M^1_aa matrix as there is no residual structure and a single super element is considered.

At this point similar question as before; are the terms you are discussing zeroing out of the M^0_gg matrix those that correspond to the 6 resvec dofs in M^1_qt partition of M^1_aa or the M^1_qq partition of M^1_aa, or both?

In my example above the residual vectors were created during the superelement generation. For the downstream use of this superelement in the SOL 112 run it seems they don't need to be recalculated to be utilized, right? If this is the case how is the NODYNRSP setting communicated to the SOL 112 run. If the residual vectors must be recalculated in the SOL 112 run then is there any benefit from ever calculating them upstream in the superelement generation step?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Children

No Data