A comparison of structural-acoustic coupled reduced order models ({ROMS}): Modal coupling and implicit moment matching via Arnoldi

The calculation of the coupled response of a structure with an enclosed acoustic cavity is of great interest, with many practical applications in the automotive and aerospace industries. Traditional methods such as a fully coupled fluid-structure interaction finite element calculation can be very computationally expensive, and methods have been proposed that reduce this computational burden and make it possible to include iteration and optimisation in the design process. This paper compares the performance of two such reduced order model (ROM) methods, a traditional modal coupling technique and an implicit moment matching method via Arnoldi, with a fully coupled finite element calculation. A simple model, a square simply supported steel plate backed by a rigid walled cavity is used as an example, and the accuracy of each method is examined for both damped and undamped cases. It was found that Arnoldi gave excellent agreement with the fully coupled calculation, and that while modal coupling gave excellent agreement near resonance, the performance off resonance was dependent on the number of modes retained.

[1]  A. Craggs.  The transient response of a coupled plate- acoustic system using plate and acoustic finite elements , 1971 .

[2]  Karen Willcox,et al.  Reduced-order aerodynamic models for aeroelastic control of turbomachines , 1999 .

[3]  E. Dowell,et al.  Acoustoelasticity - General theory, acoustic natural modes and forced response to sinusoidal excitation, including comparisons with experiment , 1977 .

[4]  F. Fahy.  Vibration of containing structures by sound in the contained fluid , 1969 .

[5]  Z. Bai.  Krylov subspace techniques for reduced-order modeling of large-scale dynamical systems , 2002 .

[6]  Eric James Grimme,et al.  Krylov Projection Methods for Model Reduction , 1997 .

[7]  S. Marburg.  Developments in structural-acoustic optimization for passive noise control , 2002 .

[8]  L. D. Pope.  On the Transmission of Sound Through Finite, Closed Shells: Statistical Energy Analysis, Modal Coupling, and Non‐resonant Transmission , 1971 .

[9]  F. Fahy,et al.  Sound and Structural Vibration: Radiation, Transmission and Response , 1987 .

[10]  Steven A. Lane,et al.  Vibro‐acoustic launch protection experiment (VALPE) , 2003 .

[11]  J. Korvink,et al.  Dynamic electro-thermal simulation of microsystems—a review , 2005 .

[12]  R. Lyon,et al.  Power Flow between Linearly Coupled Oscillators , 1962 .

[13]  R. S. Puri,et al.  Krylov subspace techniques for low frequency structural acoustic analysis and optimization , 2006 .

[14]  R. Freund.  Krylov-subspace methods for reduced-order modeling in circuit simulation , 2000 .

[15]  Guillaume Lassaux,et al.  High-fidelity reduced-order aerodynamic models : application to active control of engine inlets , 2002 .

[16]  Benjamin Seth Cazzolato,et al.  Sensing systems for active control of sound transmission into cavities , 1999 .

[17]  Athanasios C. Antoulas,et al.  Approximation of Large-Scale Dynamical Systems , 2005, Advances in Design and Control.

[18]  Roy R. Craig,et al.  Krylov model reduction algorithm for undamped structural dynamics systems , 1991 .