will be the basis for the discussion of the various patterns that can be observe in the frequency response functions and the effect of resonances on servo stability.
Three different types of intersection pattern can be found in the amplitude plot as shown in Figure [25](#figure--fig:rankers98-frf-effect-alpha).
Depending on the absolute value of \\(\alpha\\) one can observe:
- \\(|\alpha| < 1\\): two intersections
- \\(|\alpha| = 1\\): one intersection and asymptotic approach at high frequencies
- \\(|\alpha| > 1\\): one intersection
The interaction between the rigid body motion and the additional mode will not only depend on \\(|\alpha|\\) but also on the **sign** of \\(\alpha\\), which determined the **phase relation between the two contributions**.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_frf_effect_alpha.png" caption="Figure 25: Contribution of rigid-body motion and modal dynamics to the amplitude and phase of FRF for various values of \\(\alpha\\)" >}}
The general shape of the overall FRF can be constructed for all cases (Figure [26](#figure--fig:rankers98-final-frf-alpha)).
Interesting points are the interaction of the two parts at the frequency that corresponds to an intersection in the amplitude plot.
At this frequency the magnitudes are equal, so it depends on the phase of the two contributions whether they cancel each other, thus leading to a zero, or just add up.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_final_frf_alpha.png" caption="Figure 26: Bode diagram of final FRF (\\(x\_{\text{servo}}/F\_{\text{servo}}\\)) for six values of \\(\alpha\\)" >}}
When analyzing the plots of Figure [26](#figure--fig:rankers98-final-frf-alpha), four different types of FRF can be found:
- -2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope (\\(\alpha > 0\\))
- -2 slope / pole / zero / -2 slope (\\(-1 < \alpha < 0\\))
- -2 slope / pole / -4 slope (\\(\alpha = -1\\))
- -2 slope / pole / -2 slope (\\(\alpha < -1\\))
All cases are shown in Figure [27](#figure--fig:rankers98-interaction-shapes).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_interaction_shapes.png" caption="Figure 27: Bode plot of the different types of FRF" >}}
### Destabilising Effect of Modes {#destabilising-effect-of-modes}
In this section the effect of each basic mechanical FRF on the stability of the control loop will be discussed.
A PID controller with additional second order low pass filter will be the basis for the discussion of stability.
Typical crossover frequencies for a PID controller with second order low pass filtering are:
\begin{align\*}
f\_i &= f\_b/10 \\\\
f\_d &= f\_b/3 \\\\
f\_{lp} &= 4 \cdot f\_b
\end{align\*}
with \\(f\_b\\) the bandwidth frequency.
The asymptotic amplitude plot is shown in Figure [28](#figure--fig:rankers98-pid-amplitude).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pid_amplitude.png" caption="Figure 28: Typical crossover frequencies of a PID controller with 2nd order low pass filtering" >}}
With these settings, the open loop response of the position loop (controller + mechanics) looks like Figure [29](#figure--fig:rankers98-ideal-frf-pid).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_ideal_frf_pid.png" caption="Figure 29: Ideal open loop FRF of a position servo without mechanical resonances (\\(f\_b = 30\text{ Hz}\\))" >}}
Conclusions are:
- A "-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope" characteristic leads to a phase lead, and is therefore potentially destabilizing in the low frequency (Figure [30](#figure--fig:rankers98-zero-pole-low-freq)) and high frequency (Figure [32](#figure--fig:rankers98-zero-pole-high-freq)) regions.
In the medium frequency region (Figure [31](#figure--fig:rankers98-zero-pole-medium-freq)), it adds an extra phase lead to the already existing margin, which does not harm the stability.
- A "-2 slope / pole / zero / -2 slope" combination has the reverse effect.
It is potentially destabilizing in the medium frequency range (Figure [34](#figure--fig:rankers98-pole-zero-medium-freq)) and is harmless in the low (Figure [33](#figure--fig:rankers98-pole-zero-low-freq)) and high frequency (Figure [35](#figure--fig:rankers98-pole-zero-high-freq)) ranges.
- The "-2 slope / pole / -4 slope" behavior always has a devastating effect on the stability of the loop if located in the low of medium frequency ranges.
These conclusions may differ for different mass ratio \\(\alpha\\).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_zero_pole_low_freq.png" caption="Figure 30: Open Loop FRF of type \"-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope\" with low frequency resonance" >}}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_zero_pole_medium_freq.png" caption="Figure 31: Open Loop FRF of type \"-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope\" with medium frequency resonance" >}}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_zero_pole_high_freq.png" caption="Figure 32: Open Loop FRF of type \"-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope\" with high frequency resonance" >}}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pole_zero_low_freq.png" caption="Figure 33: Open Loop FRF of type \"-2 slope / pole / zero / -2 slope\" with low frequency resonance" >}}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pole_zero_medium_freq.png" caption="Figure 34: Open Loop FRF of type \"-2 slope / pole / zero / -2 slope\" with medium frequency resonance" >}}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pole_zero_high_freq.png" caption="Figure 35: Open Loop FRF of type \"-2 slope / pole / zero / -2 slope\" with high frequency resonance" >}}
### Design for Stability {#design-for-stability}
#### Actuator Flexibility {#actuator-flexibility}
Figure [36](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-actuator-flexibility) shows the schematic representation of a system with a certain compliance between the motor and the load.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_actuator_flexibility.png" caption="Figure 36: Servo system with actuator flexibility - Schematic representation" >}}
The corresponding modes are shown in Figure [37](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-modes-act-flex).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_modes_act_flex.png" caption="Figure 37: Servo System with Actuator Flexibility - Modes" >}}
Assuming first that the **servo position is measured at the motor**.
The following transfer function must be considered:
\begin{align}
\frac{x\_1}{F\_{\text{servo}}} &= \frac{1}{m\_{\text{eff},11} s^2} + \frac{1}{m\_{\text{eff,21}}s^2 + \omega\_2^2 m\_{\text{eff},21}} \\\\
&= \frac{1}{m\_1 + m\_2} \left( \frac{1}{s^2} + \frac{\alpha}{s^2 + \omega\_2^2} \right)
\end{align}
with \\(\alpha = m\_2/m\_1\\) (mass ratio) relates the "mass" of the additional modal contribution to the mass of the rigid body motion.
The resulting FRF exhibit a "-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope" (Figure [38](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-act-flex-frf)).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_act_flex_frf.png" caption="Figure 38: Mechanical FRF of a system with actuator flexibility and position measurement at motor" >}}
The asymptotes at low and high frequencies are:
\begin{align}
\left( \frac{x\_1}{F\_{\text{servo}}} \right)\_{s \to 0} &= \frac{1}{(m\_1 + m\_2) s^2} \\\\
\left( \frac{x\_1}{F\_{\text{servo}}} \right)\_{s \to \infty} &= \frac{1}{(m\_1 + m\_2) s^2} + \frac{1}{m\_1/m\_2(m\_1 + m\_2) s^2} = \frac{1}{m\_1 s^2}
\end{align}
which corresponds to the engineering feeling that at very low frequencies the two masses move as one single mass, whereas at very high frequencies the mass \\(m\_2\\) of the load is completely decoupled such that the servo system only "feels and sees" the motion of the motor mass \\(m\_1\\).
Guideline in presence of actuator flexibility with measurement at the motor position:
- The motor inertia should be one to three times to inertial of the load
- The resonance frequency should either be near the bandwidth frequency or much above
Now assume that the **servo position is measured at the load**.
Now we are interested by the following transfer function:
\begin{equation}
\frac{x\_2}{F\_{\text{servo}}} = = \frac{1}{m\_1 + m\_2} \left( \frac{1}{s^2} - \frac{1}{s^2 + \omega\_2^2} \right)
\end{equation}
The mass ratio \\(\alpha\\) equal -1, and thus the FRF will be of type "-2 slope / pole / -4 slope" (Figure [39](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-act-flex-meas-load-frf)).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_act_flex_meas_load_frf.png" caption="Figure 39: FRF \\(k\_p \cdot (x\_{\text{servo}}/F\_{\text{servo}})\\) of a system with actuator flexibility and position measurement at the load" >}}
Guideline in presence of actuator flexibility with measurement at the load position:
- Resonance frequency larger than 5 to 10 times the wanted bandwidth
#### Guiding System Flexibility {#guiding-system-flexibility}
Here, the influence of a limited guiding stiffness (Figure [40](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-guiding-flex)) on the FRF of such an actuator system will be analyzed.
The servo force \\(F\_{\text{servo}}\\) acts at a certain distance \\(a\_F\\) with respect to the center of gravity, and the servo position is measured at a distance \\(a\_s\\) with respect to the center of gravity.
Due to the symmetry of the system, the Y motion is decoupled from the X and \\(\phi\\) motions and can therefore be omitted in this analysis.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_guiding_flex.png" caption="Figure 40: 2DoF rigid body model of actuator with flexibility of the guiding system" >}}
Considering the two relevant modes (Figures [41](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-guiding-flex-x-mode) and [42](#figure--fig:rankers98-2dof-guiding-flex-rock-mode)), the resulting transfer function \\(x\_{\text{servo}}/F\_{\text{servo}}\\) can be constructed from the contributions of the individual modes:
\begin{equation}
\frac{x\_{\text{servo}}}{F\_{\text{servo}}} = \frac{1}{ms^2} + \frac{a\_s a\_F}{Js^2 + 2cb^2}
\end{equation}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_guiding_flex_x_mode.png" caption="Figure 41: Graphical representation of desired X-motion" >}}
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_2dof_guiding_flex_rock_mode.png" caption="Figure 42: Graphical representation of parasitic rocking mode" >}}
The two distances \\(a\_F\\) and \\(a\_s\\) have a significant influence on the contribution of the rocking mode on the open loop characteristics.
Note that it is the product of these two distance and not the individual value that are important, so exchanging the position of the sensor and the force does not affect the response.
By introducing the "gyration radius" \\(\rho\\) such that \\(J = m \cdot \rho^2\\), the following mass ratio is obtained:
\begin{equation}
\alpha = \frac{a\_s a\_F}{\rho^2}
\end{equation}
As the location of the sensor and the actuator can be chosen anywhere above or below the center of gravity, \\(a\_s\\) and \\(a\_F\\), and consequently \\(\alpha\\), can become any position or negative value, and the resulting FRF can have any of the discussed characteristics.
As long as the actuating force and sensor are located on the same side of the center of gravity, \\(\alpha\\) will be positive and the overall FRF will display a "-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope" behaviour.
When the force and sensor are located at opposite sides of the center of gravity, one of the other three characteristics shapes will be found, depending on the exact values of \\(a\_s\\) and \\(a\_F\\).
Guidelines for system with guiding flexibility:
1. Driving force at Center of Mass (Best practice)
2. Locate sensor at Center of Mass (Second best)
3. If none of the above can be achieved, one should aim at location sensors and driving force as close as possible to the Center of Mass.
Furthermore, it is generally better if the location of the sensor and that of the driving force are at the same side of the Center of Mass.
The best way to avoid any dynamic problems is to drive the system at its center of mass.
By doing so the rocking mode is not excited, which is not only favorable from a stability point of view, but also results in good set-point behaviour.
When it is impossible to apply the forces at the correct location, one can eliminate the destabilizing effect of the rocking mode by locating the sensor at the height of the center of mass.
As this point, the resonance will not be present in the FRF.
#### Limited Mass and Stiffness of Stationary Machine Part {#limited-mass-and-stiffness-of-stationary-machine-part}
Figure [43](#figure--fig:rankers98-frame-dynamics-2dof) shows a simple model of a translational direct drive motion on a frame with limited mass and stiffness, and in which the control system operates on the measured position \\(x\_{\text{servo}} = x\_2 - x\_1\\).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_frame_dynamics_2dof.png" caption="Figure 43: Model of a servo system including frame dynamics" >}}
The transfer function \\(x\_{\text{servo}}/F\_{\text{servo}}\\) is:
\begin{equation}
\frac{x\_2 - x\_1}{F\_{\text{servo}}} = \frac{1}{m\_2 s^2} + \frac{m\_2/m\_1}{m\_2s^2 + c(m\_2/m\_1)}
\end{equation}
The mass ratio \\(\alpha\\) equal \\(m\_2/m\_1\\) and is therefore always positive.
Consequently, the resulting transfer function is of type "-2 slope / zero / pole / -2 slope".
The asymptotes at low and high frequencies are:
\begin{align}
\left( \frac{x\_{\text{servo}}}{F\_{\text{servo}}} \right)\_{x \to 0} &= \frac{1}{m\_2 s^2} \\\\
\left( \frac{x\_{\text{servo}}}{F\_{\text{servo}}} \right)\_{x \to \infty} &= \frac{m\_1 + m\_2}{m\_1 m\_2 s^2}
\end{align}
Guidelines regarding frame motion:
- frame inertia larger than load inertia in order to limit the increase of high frequency gain.
- frame inertia larger than fifty times the load inertia if additional flexible structures are attached to the frame.
#### General Guidelines {#general-guidelines}
The amount of contribution of a certain mode (Figure [44](#figure--fig:rankers98-mode-representation-guideline)) to the open loop response and its interaction with the desired motion is determined by the modal mass and stiffness, but also by the location of the driving force and the location of the response DoF.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_mode_representation_guideline.png" caption="
Figure 44: Graphical representation of mode i" >}}
This observation leads to the idea that an undesired contribution of a mode to the response can be eliminated by one of the following two approaches:
1. **Mode should not be excited**, which implies that the total moment acting on the modal lever should be equal to zero:
- Locate driving force at a node of the mode
- Modify mode shape such that the location of the driving force becomes a node of the mode
- Apply additional excitation forces such that the overall moment acting on the modal lever is equal to zero
2. **Output of response DoF should be zero**:
- Shift response DoF (sensor) towards node of mode
- Modify structural system such that the sensor location becomes a node of the mode
- Add additional sensors and combine the outputs such that the contribution of the mode to the new response signal is equal to zero.
It can be shown that these two approaches are closely related to the terms "(un)controllability" and "(un)observability" that are frequently used in modern control theory.
From control theory, it is known that only those modes can be influenced of modified by the feedback loop which are observable and controllable.
If such a modification is not required and the modes are not excited by some other mechanism, it can be very effective to use uncontrollability and unobservability in a positive way in order to eliminate unwanted resonances that could endanger stability.
## Predictive Modelling {#predictive-modelling}
### Steps in a Modelling Activity {#steps-in-a-modelling-activity}
One can distinguish at least four steps in any modelling activity (Figure [45](#figure--fig:rankers98-steps-modelling)).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_steps_modelling.png" caption="Figure 45: Steps in a modelling activity" >}}
1. The first step consists of a translation of the real structure or initial design drawing of a structure in a **physical model**.
Such a physical model is a simplification of the reality, but contains all relations that are considered to be important to describe the investigated phenomenon.
This step requires experience and engineering judgment in order to determine which simplifications are valid.
See for example Figure [46](#figure--fig:rankers98-illustration-first-two-steps).
2. Once a physical model has been derived, the second step consists of translating this physical model into a **mathematical model**.
The real world is now represented by a set of differential equations.
This step is fairly straightforward, because it is based and existing approaches and rules (Example in Figure [46](#figure--fig:rankers98-illustration-first-two-steps)).
3. The third step consists of actuator **simulation run**, the outcome of which is the value of some quantity (for instance stress of some part, resonance frequency, FRF, etc.).
4. The final step is the **interpretation** of results.
Here, the calculated results and previously defined specifications are compared.
On the basis of this comparison, design decisions are taken.
It is important to realize that the design decisions taken in this step are the actual outcome of the modelling process.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_illustration_first_two_steps.png" caption="Figure 46: Illustration of the first two steps in the modelling process" >}}
Modelling and simulation can only have an impact on the design process when the last step is properly done.
Often, a lot of time and energy is wasted because extended modelling and simulations is done with great enthusiasm only to find out at the end that nobody is capable of interpreting the results and to take design decisions on the basis of the obtained results.
**It is therefore recommended to start any modelling process by specifying the criteria that will be used in the interpretation and evaluation phase.**
### Step-wise Refined Modelling {#step-wise-refined-modelling}
Modelling and simulations can have three main applications:
- **Decision support**
- **Design optimization**
- **Trouble shooting** (help to better understand unexpected problems and help to find solutions)
Two aspects are crucial for the success of modelling and simulation as a tool in the product creation process, mainly the usefulness of results and the speed.
The analysis program must be capable of providing **useful results**, that is to say the answers to the proper questions.
Simply stating that the first resonance frequency of a machine lies at 150 Hz does not satisfy the needs of the control engineer who wants to know whether the machine dynamics could endanger the stability of the servo system.
The results of the simulations could be presented as Bode or Nyquist diagrams.
The second critical success factor is the **speed** with which is simulation results are obtained.
The decision making process can only be affected if the analysis results are available on time.
A **three step modelling approach** is proposed:
1. **Concept evaluation**: one checks whether a concept would work in uni-axial on the basis of a limited number of lumped masses connected by springs.
2. **System evaluation**: one checks whether it still works in 3D, again assuming rigid components connected by springs.
3. **Component evaluation**: one checks the deformation of the individual components, and how this affects the overall behaviour.
Opponents of computer simulation often doubt the predictive value of these simulations, especially is the models are very elementary, and therefore do not carry out these simulations.
One must agree that successful simulations based on a 2DoF lumped mass model of a compact disc player are no guarantee that the final product will work according to specifications.
However, if these simulations, based on an elementary model of the product, show that the specifications are not met, then chances are extremely small that the final product will perform according to specifications.
Therefore, computer simulations should be regarded as a means to guide the design process by supporting the design choices and to detect unfit design concepts at a very early state in the design process.
This three step modelling approach is now illustrated by the example of a fast and accurate pattern generator in which an optical unit has to move in X and Y directions with respect to a work piece (Figure [47](#figure--fig:rankers98-pattern-generator)).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pattern_generator.png" caption="
Figure 47: The basic elements of the pattern generator" >}}
The basic elements of this machine are the work-piece and the optical unit.
The relative motion of these two elements in X and Y direction enables the generation of any pattern on the work-piece.
Based on the required throughput of the machine, an acceleration level of \\(1m/s^2\\) is required, whereas the positioning accuracy is \\(1\mu m\\) or better.
#### Specifications {#specifications}
One of the most crucial step in the modelling process is the **definition of proper criteria on the basis of which the simulation results can be judged**.
In most cases, this implies that functional system-specifications in combination with **assumed imperfections and disturbances** need to be translated into **dynamics and control specifications** (Figure [48](#figure--fig:rankers98-system-performance-spec)).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_system_performance_spec.png" caption="Figure 48: System performance specifications need to be translated into criteria on the basis of which simulation results can be judged" >}}
In a first step one needs to make some initial **estimation about the required bandwidth** of the controlled system, because this is a prerequisite for evaluating the influence of the dynamics of the mechanical system on servo stability.
Based on some analysis, disturbance (mainly friction) forces are foreseen to be in the order of 10N.
With the wanted accuracy is \\(1 \mu m\\), the initial estimate of the required servo stiffness \\(k\_p\\) is:
\begin{equation}
k\_p = \frac{10 N}{10^{-6} m} = 10^7 N/m
\end{equation}
Neglecting the effect of the derivative action of the controller, one can obtain a first estimate of the required bandwidth \\(f\_b\\):
\begin{equation}
f\_b \approx \frac{1}{2\pi}\sqrt{\frac{k\_p}{m}} \approx 50Hz
\end{equation}
with \\(m = 100kg\\) is the total moving mass.
Having derived this estimate of the required bandwidth on the basis of the necessary disturbance rejection, one has to consider whether this bandwidth can be achieved without introducing stability problems and what the consequences are for the mechanical design.
Dynamic properties of the various designs can be now be evaluated.
#### Concept evaluation {#concept-evaluation}
In the initial stage of the development a number of different concepts will be considered.
The designer will generally use his experience and engineering judgment to select one of these concepts.
In this stage, the designer only has a rough idea about the outlines of the machine, and the feasibility of this idea can be judged on the basis of very elementary calculations.
One of the potential concepts for this machine consists of a stationary work piece with an optical unit that moves in both the X and Y directions (Figure [49](#figure--fig:rankers98-pattern-generator-concept)).
In the X direction, two driving forces are applied to the slides, whereas the position is measured by two linear encoders mounted between the slide and the granite frame.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pattern_generator_concept.png" caption="
Figure 49: One of the possible concepts of the pattern generator" >}}
In this stage of the design, a simple model of the dynamic effects in the X direction could consist of the base, the slides, the guiding rail, the optical housing and intermediate flexibility (Figure [50](#figure--fig:rankers98-concept-1dof-evaluation)).
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_concept_1dof_evaluation.png" caption="
Figure 50: Simple 1D model for the analysis of the dynamic behaviour in the X direction" >}}
By using this fast and simple method of analysis, potential risks associated with the different concepts can be evaluated.
#### System Evaluation {#system-evaluation}
Once the concept of the machine has been chosen, first rough three dimensional sketches become available and one can add extra spatial information to the simulations such as:
- mass and mass moment of inertia of the different components
- location of the center of mass
- location of connecting stiffness
- location of driving forces
- location of sensors
Typically, such a model contains 5-10 rigid bodies connected by suitable connectors that incorporate flexibility, whereas damping is in most cases added in the form of modal damping (1% relative damping is in most cases a good first estimate).
Figure [51](#figure--fig:rankers98-pattern-generator-rigid-body) shows such a 3D model of a different concept for the pattern generator.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_pattern_generator_rigid_body.png" caption="
Figure 51: Rigid body model of a concept based on a movement of the work-piece in X direction, and a movement of the optical unit in Y direction" >}}
#### Component Evaluation {#component-evaluation}
On the basis of previous analyses, experimental evaluation of previous designs, or engineering judgment, it is generally possible to identify **critical components** in the design.
These components will then need to be analyzed in more detail using FEM.
Sometimes it is possible to judge the influence of the internal dynamics of such a component on the performance of the total system, based on a separate analysis of the component.
However, this approach requires serious consideration of the boundary conditions and is not always feasible.
When a separate analysis of a component is not feasible, the detailed FEM description of the component can be used to replace for former rigid body description that has been used in the "system evaluation".
Such a step normally required the use of so-called "**sub-structuring**" techniques.
In the patter generator it is very important that the connection between the linear motor module and the work piece is sufficiently stiff.
The reason lies in the fact that due to accuracy specifications the position is measured at the work piece and not at the motor.
Consequently, one has to ensure that the internal stiffness of the actuator is high enough to avoid stability problems.
FE model of this part can be used for such purpose.
#### Final remarks {#final-remarks}
For the industrial application of "predictive modelling" it is essential that the amount of detail in a simulation model corresponds to the current phase in the design process.
A design team profits from the application of simulation tools only if a proper balance is found between detail and accuracy on one hand, and the total throughput time of the analysis on the other hand.
### Practical Modelling Issues {#practical-modelling-issues}
In the "component evaluation" stage, detailed FE models of critical components need to be created and analyzed.
Sometimes, components can be evaluated individually against component specifications, which are often defined in terms of lower internal natural frequencies.
In other cases, such a separate analysis of a component is not sufficient to judge the impact of its dynamics on the overall system, and one is forced to combine these detailed component-models into a detailed model of the entire system.
Due to the complexity of the structures it is normally not very practical to build one, single, huge, FE model of the entire device:
- Building one huge model of a machine tends to be very error-prone
- It is not feasible to work on one huge model with a group of people
- The resulting mass and stiffness matrices can easily have many thousands degrees of freedom, which puts high demands on the required computing capacity.
A technique which overcomes these disadvantages is the co-called **sub-structuring technique**.
In this approach, illustrated in Figure [52](#figure--fig:rankers98-substructuring-technique), the system is divided into substructures or components, which are analyzed separately.
Then, the (reduced) models of the components are assembled to form the overall system.
By doing so, the size of the final system model is significantly reduced.
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/rankers98_substructuring_technique.png" caption="Figure 52: Steps in the creation of an overall system model based on detailed FE models of the components" >}}
The process involves the following steps:
- In the first step, the entire system is sub-divided into components
- In the second step, a detailed FE model of each component is generated, resulting in a component mass and stiffness matrix
- In the step three, a reduced model of the component is generated by applying a "component reduction" technique to the original model.
The intention of this step is to reduce the size of the matrices that describe the behaviour of the component, yet retain its main dynamic characteristics.
- Finally, the reduced models are assembled into one overall system
## Conclusions {#conclusions}
Machine dynamics, and the interaction with the control system, plays a dominant role in the performance of fast and accurate servo-controlled positioning devices such as compact disc, wafer-steppers, and component-mounters.
**Modal analysis** is a numerical and experimental tool that can be very profitable in understanding the nature of complicated mechanical resonances.
The mathematics of a single decoupled "modal" equation of motion can be translated into a graphical representation including all relevant data, which simplifies the understanding and creative use of the modal concept.
The introduction of the terms "effective" modal mass and stiffness enables a unique link between the modal and the physical domain.
From a servo stability point of view it is essential to investigate the mechanical FRF (\\(x/F\\)) which characterizes the dynamic properties of the mechanical system.
Once the dynamics of the one individual mode is fully understood it is straightforward to construct this FRF and the interaction between the desired rigid body motion and the contribution of one additional mode.
A closer investigation of this interaction reveals that only four interaction patterns exists.
The destabilizing effect of a mechanical resonance depends not only on the resulting typical interaction pattern in the FRF, but also on its frequency in relation to the intended bandwidth frequency of the control loop.
On the basis of these stability considerations, **design guidelines** for the mechanics of a servo positioning devices are derived, so as to minimize the effect of mechanical vibrations on the stability of the controlled system.
In view of its importance to the overall performance, the effect of machine dynamics should be monitored during the entire design process through the use of **modelling and simulation** techniques.
However, it is vital for the success of modelling and simulation as a tool to support design decisions, that analysis data are translated into useful information, and that this information is available on time.
This requires a proper balance between accuracy and speed that can best be achieved by a top-down analysis process, which is closely linked to the phases in the design process, and in which the simulation models are step-wise refined.
When many parts of the mechanical system need to be modelled in great detail it is not advisable to build one, single, huge FE model but rather to apply a so-called "**sub-structuring**" techniques.
The Craig-Bampton approach, which is a component mode technique based on a combination of all boundary constraint modes plus a limited number of fixed interface normal modes, was found to be favorable.
It has static solution capacity, and the frequency of the highest fixed-interface normal mode gives a good indication of the frequency range up to which the overall system results are valid.
## Bibliography {#bibliography}
Rankers, Adrian Mathias. 1998. “Machine Dynamics in Mechatronic Systems: An Engineering Approach.” University of Twente.