Identification of Elastic Properties of Materials by

Experimental Resonance Frequencies and using an

Updating Methodology
Marco Dourado1, a, Jos Meireles1,b
1

Mechanical Engineering Department, Azurm Campus, 4800-058 Guimares, Portugal

a

mdourado@dem.uminho.pt, bmeireles@dem.uminho.pt

ABSTRACT

The common method being used to determine elastic properties of materials, namely Yuongs
modulus and Poisson ratio, is the tensile testing method. However, there are other methods for
determining these properties, as for example the experimental vibrations testing. Such tests have
the advantage of being applied to materials or components that cant be destroyed. The
knowledge of resonance frequencies, allows, via analytical methods, to determine this elastic
properties. However, there are components for which is difficult to establish a mathematical
relationship between resonance frequencies and its physical properties. In this paper we propose
a different methodology to determine Yuongs modulus and Poisson ratio values in anisotropic
materials. For this purpose we use a finite element model updating methodology to estimate
Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio of two different materials type, based on reference
resonance frequencies. It is shown that Yuongs modulus and Poisson ratio values are obtained
with high reliability. To validate the method efficiency, the Yuongs modulus and Poisson ratio
values are also obtained by tensile testing and determined by analytical via using the theory of
natural frequencies in beams.

Keywords: Elastic Properties, Finite Element Model Updating Methodology, Resonance

Frequencies, Modal Analysis

1 Introduction

The knowledge of the elastic properties of materials, before their application, it is essential to
ensure the intended mechanical behaviour of these materials under conditions of use. These
properties are usually determined by tensile testing method. However, such tests has some
disadvantages, namely: are destructives; in anisotropic materials must be measured more than
one direction; expensive and time consuming to prepare samples; strain gauges become
unusable after the test [1].
Non-destructive tests, as vibration testing, allow overcomes these disadvantages, because can be
performed directly on the sample or structural components without destroying them. Some
experimental works, for measurement of elastic properties based on kind of tests, were done by
Caracciolo et al. [2, 3, 4, 5]. The authors present experimental methods for determining the
Poisson ratio and the dynamic Youngs modulus in beams subject to external excitation at
different temperatures in a broad frequency range. Indeed, resonance frequencies can be related
with the elastic properties of materials by means of mathematical equations, through
assumptions of Euler-Bernoulli beam [6], or some theories, as for example the high-order plate

element theory [7], Pickett theory [8], Rayleigh principle [9], and the torsional vibration for a
beam of non-circular cross section theory [10].
However these equations can only be applied to simple geometries, such as beams or plates. For
structures or components with complex geometry these equations can not be applied.
In this paper we propose the application of a Finite Element Model updating methodology to
overcome this limitation. The updating process is based on iterative indirect methods. By
successive iterations, the elastic properties of material are estimated based on experimental
resonance frequencies. Therefore, this automatized process is independent of any direct
calculation, allowing be applied to any complex structure or component, since the dynamic
response of the system it is known.

An interesting work was developed by Zhou and Farquhar [11]. The authors developed a
process to determine the mechanical properties of a living wheat stem. The mechanical
properties were estimated by obtaining the analytical updated stiffness matrix of the structure.
Should also be referred the work of Rahmani et al. [12]. The authors use the Regularized Model
Updating method in alternative to the Finite Element Model Updating method, for accurate
identification of mechanical properties of composite structures.
A brief description of the methodology carried out in this study, is following presented.
Samples with rectangular shape, of aluminium and steel material, are submitted to experimental
modal analyses, in order to known its dynamic response (reference response) natural
frequencies and mode shapes. Numerical models, representative of the rectangular samples, are
modelled in finite element ANSYS code. An updating process is used to update the Youngs
modulus and Poisson ratio of the numerical models. The updated Youngs modulus and Poisson
ratio values are obtained when an objective function, explained in section 5, is minimized. It is
means that the physical (reference samples with rectangular shape) and numerical models are
correlated. In this study, is taken into account the anisotropy of the materials. Therefore,
Youngs modulus in the parallel (Eyy) and perpendicular (Exx) direction to the forming process of
the material are updated. Similarly Poisson ratio xy and yx are also updated. Note that:
xy is the Poisson ratio, the ratio between the strain obtained in the parallel direction to
the forming process (y) and perpendicular direction to the forming process (x), when
applying a stress in x direction.
yx is the Poisson ratio, the ratio between the strain obtained in the perpendicular
direction to the forming process (x) and parallel direction to the forming process (y),
when applying a stress in y direction.
Tensile tests are performed in order to get Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio values of the two
materials, in the parallel and perpendicular direction to the forming process.
Theory of natural frequencies in beams and plates is explained in section 2 and applied in order
to determine Eyy and Exx values based on reference resonance frequencies of the samples and its

physical properties. The analytical values are compared with the values obtained by updating
process to confirm the reliability of the proposed methodology.
2 Theory of natural frequencies in beams

In this section we present the theories used in this work to calculate natural frequencies in
beams and plates.

2.1 - Euler-Bernoulli beam

The dynamic response of a structure depends on its physical properties as, elastic properties,
geometry and material density.
The expression for calculating the natural frequency of bending modes of continuous systems
based on assumptions of Euler-Bernoulli beam is given by [6],

f =

Kn
E I

2
m l 3

(1)

where, f is the natural frequency, Kn is a factor that depends of boundary conditions, E is the
Youngs modulus related with parallel direction to the forming process (Eyy), I is the second
area moment of inertia, m is the mass, and l is the length. The first five Kn values for a free-free
beam conditions are given in table 1.
Table 1 First five Kn values for a free-free beam conditions.

Mode
1
2
3
4
5

Kn value
22.3733
61.6728
120.9034
199.8594
298.5555

Transforming Equation (1), the Youngs modulus Eyy, can be calculated by,

E yy

2 f
=
Kn

m l 3

I

(2)

By other hand, the natural frequency of torsion modes are directly related with shear modulus
G, which allows calculate the Youngs modulus in the perpendicular direction to the forming
process Exx. This relationship is given by some theories as, high-order plate element theory,
Pickett theory, Rayleigh principle, and torsional vibration for a beam of non-circular cross
section theory, following, presented.

2.2 High-order plate element theory

The high-order plate element is an element of 4 nodes with four degrees of freedom (DOF) by
each one: one lateral displacement w, two rotations x and y, and twist xy. The element of 16
DOF is shown in figure 1, adapted from [7].

Figure 1 High-order plate element with 16 DOF.

The stiffness coefficients kij of the element stiffness matrix Ke can be expressed in general form
by [7]

b

E h3
l

l b
1
2
3
4
2
12 l b (1 ) l
b

k ij =

(3)

where, l is the lenght, h is the thickness, b is the width, and constants 1, 2,..., 6 are given in
table 2 for displacement i = 1 and node j = 1 [8]. Displacement i = 1 corresponds to the lateral
displacement w in node j = 1. For torsion mode shape, the displacment w in node 1 can be also
considered as bending in x-axis direction. Bending behaviour in x-axis direction can be
relationed with Youngs modulus Exx.
Table 2 i Constants.

156/35 156/35 72/25

Poisson ratio is given by,

= xy yx

(4)

in that xy and yx values, are the values average obtained from tensile testing. By other hand, the
stiffness constant kij can be expressed by,

k ij = 2 m

(5)

or

k ij = (2 f

)2 m

(6)

Replacing Equation (5) in Equation (3), the Youngs modulus Exx can be calculated by,

(2 f )2 m

E xx =

12 a b (1 xy

2
b

a
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 xy yx a 5 b 6
yx ) a
b

(7)

2.3 Pickett theory

The relationship between shear modulus G and natural frequency of torsion mode is given in
general form by Pickett equation [8],

G = B f 2 m

(8)

where, B is given by,

B=

4 l I p

(9)

n 2 a K

where, Ip is the polar moment of inertia, n is the order of mode, a is the cross section and K is
the shape factor for same cross section.
Knowing that,

G xy =

E xx E yy
+ E yy + 2 E xx

E xx

(10)

and, substituting Equation (4) and Equation (8) in Equation (10), we can write Exx equation as,

E xx =

E yy

1 + 2 xy yx

2.4 Rayleigh principle

n 2 a K E yy

4l I p f 2 m

(11)

By Hearmon equations [13] we can make the relationship between the elastic constant D4 for
orthotropic materials and shear modulus Gxy [9] by,

D4 =

G xy

(12)

However, Rayleigh principle give us the following relationship,

D4

0.274 f 2 l 2 b 2

h2

(13)

Replacing Equation (13) and Equation (10) in Equation (12), we can write Exx equation as,

E yy

E xx =

1 + 2 xy yx

h 2 E yy

3 0.274 f 2 l 2 b 2

(14)

where, is the material density.

2.5 Beam of non-circular cross section theory

The natural frequency of torsion mode can be also calculated considering beam of non-circular
cross section theory. By [10] we know that, waves velocity, or also called by phase velocity is
given by,

cT =

kt

(15)

where, kt for a free-free beam boundary conditions is,

kT =

n
, with n = 1
l

(16)

So, Equation (15) can write as follows,

cT =

l
n

Being = 2 f , equation (17) is now,

(17)

cT =

2 f l
n

(18)

By other hand the torsional phase velocity is write as,

cT =

G
I p

(19)

where, is the torsional constant of the cross section.

Replacing Equation (18) in Equation (19), the shear modulus comes,

2 f l
I p

G=

(20)

Replacing Equation (20) in Equation (10), we express Exx equation as,

E xx =

E yy

1 + 2 xy yx

(n )2 E yy

(21)

I p (2 f l )2

3 Experimental procedure

In this section it is explained the samples for experimental tests, and the experimental
procedures are described. Two test types were performed: tensile testing and experimental
modal analysis. Tensile testing are performed to determine the Youngs modulus and Poisson
ratio values through parallel and perpendicular direction to the forming process of the material,
to take into account the material anisotropy. Experimental modal analysis is carried out to
identify the dynamic response of the rectangular plate samples. The samples for tensile testing
and experimental modal analysis were obtained from aluminium and steel sheets by laser
cutting process. In table 3 are presented the geometrical properties of experimental modal
analysis samples.

Table 3 Geometrical properties of experimental modal analysis samples.

Property

Symbol

Thickness

Length

Width

Cross section area

Second area moment of inertia

Polar moment of inertia

Ip

Torsional constant of the cross section

Shape factor

Unit

m2

m4

Material
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel
Aluminium
Steel

Value
1.97x10-3
3.91x10-3
297x10-3
47.7x10-3
9.397x10-4
1.865x10-4
3.039x10-11
2.376x10-11
1.785x10-8
3.560x10-8
1.184x10-10
9.014x10-10
1.216x10-10
9.503x10-10

3.1 Tensile Test

The tensile testing sample, with standard dimensions, is shown in figure 2a. For each material
type are performed tensile tests on six samples. Three samples in the parallel direction to the
forming process and three samples in the perpendicular direction to the forming process. The
tests were performed at room temperature, about 20 C, on a servo-hydraulic tensile testing
machine.
In tensile testing the sample is subjected to an increasing tensile stress, suffering a progressive
deformation. At the same time, force and displacement values are registered by the equipment
software. Strain values are read using strain gauges applied directly in the sample, as shown in
figure 2b, and registered by a data acquisition system.

Figure 2 (a) Sample for tensile testing and (b) sample with strain gauge submitted to tensile test.

3.2 Experimental Modal Analysis

The experimental modal analysis samples have rectangular shape and dimensions as shown in
figure 3a. For each material type are performed experimental tests on three samples. The tests
were performed at room temperature, about 20 C, using a frequency spectrum analyzer
equipment. The samples are tested in free-free boundary conditions, suspending them in two
points by a nylon yarn of sufficient length (350 mm) so as not to cause interference in the test,
as shown in figure 3b. The tests are performed using an impact hammer to input the impact
force in point P1, and the response measured with laser Doppler interferometer in eight points,
P1 to P8, as shown in figure 3c.

Figure 3 (a) Sample schematic representation; (b) sample subject to experimental modal analysis; (c)
location of the measured points.

The selected eight points are the minimum to represent the first eight mode shapes of the
sample. The data is collected in the time domain (amplitude vs. time) and processed in the LMS
modal analysis software to convert to the Frequency Response Function (FRF) domain.

4 Numerical models
Numerical models to update are built using the commercial finite element ANSYS code, with
same geometrical properties (presented in table 3) of the experimental samples. The initial
elastic properties and material density are presented in table 4. The initial Youngs modulus and
Poisson ratio values are based on normal values for the respective materials. The density values
are based on mass and dimensions of the samples. The rectangular plates are modeled with shell
(shell 63) elements.
Table 4 Elastic properties and density of the numerical models to update.

Material

Aluminium

Property
Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus
Poisson Ratio
Density
Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus

Steel

Poisson Ratio
Density

Symbol Units Model 1

Exx
Pa
70.0x109
Eyy
Pa
70.0x109
xy
0.31
yx
0.31

kg/m3
2712
Pa
200.0x109
Exx
Eyy
Pa
200.0x109
xy
0.26
yx
0.26

kg/m3
7826

Model 2
70.0x109
70.0x109
0.31
0.31
2702
200.0x109
200.0x109
0.26
0.26
7812

Model 3
70.0x109
70.0x109
0.31
0.31
2709
200.0x109
200.0x109
0.26
0.26
7772

Table 5 presents the parameters to update with their initial values, and lower and upper bounds.
Table 5 Parameters to update.

Material

Property

Variable

Units

Aluminium

Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus

Exx
Eyy
xy
yx
Exx
Eyy
xy
yx

Pa
Pa
Pa
Pa
-

Poisson Ratio
Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus

Steel

Poisson Ratio

Initial
Value
70.0x109
70.0x109
0.31
0.31
200.0x109
200.0x109
0.26
0.26

Lower
bound
60.0x109
60.0x109
0.30
0.30
160.0x109
160.0x109
0.23
0.23

Upper
bound
80.0x109
80.0x109
0.32
0.32
240.0x109
240.0x109
0.29
0.29

The aim is to find the optimal value of the referred parameters. These values are found when
resonance frequencies and mode shapes of numerical and experimental model are correlated.

5 Updating process

The finite element model updating methodology use an optimization technique explained in [14,
15, 167] to find the Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio value. The optimization problem
consists in minimization of an objective function defined by a sum of three specific functions as
described below,

f (x) = f C (x ) + f U (x ) + f (x )

(22)

The f C function represents the quantification of the difference between numerical and
reference correlated mode pairs. N C is the number of correlated mode pairs values, of the
diagonal MAC matrix, to sum. f C is given by,

f C (x) = Ni
i

NC
=1

MAC ii (x )

MAC ii (x 0 )
=1

(23)

where,

MAC ij =

((

((

Ref T
i

) )
)(( )

Ref T
i
Ref
i

Num
j

Num T
j

Num
j

(24)

Num
where, iRef is the i th reference mode shape and j
is the j th numerical mode shape [17].

The f U function represents the quantification of the difference between numerical and
reference uncorrelated mode pairs. N U is the number of uncorrelated mode pairs values,
outside of the diagonal MAC matrix, to sum. f U is given by,

=1 MAC ij (x )
1
1
N
f U (x) =
NU
U
0
N U j =1 i =1 MAC ij x

j ij
NU

NU

=1

( )

j 1

(25)

The f function represents the quantification of the difference between numerical and reference
frequencies. N is the number of eigenvalues corresponding to the correlated mode pairs.

f is given by,
N
ij (i j (x))

f (x) =

=1
=1

(
N
i =1
j =1

( ))

j x0

(26)

where,
Ref
i = 2

(27)

is the reference frequency and,

Num
j = 2

(28)

is the numerical frequency. Ref is the reference eigenvalue and Num is the numerical
eigenvalue. Quadratic term is used to accelerate the convergence of Equation (26) and to obtain
only positive differences between the frequencies of the two models. The denominator is used to
obtain the normalized difference. x is the vector with the updating Youngs modulus and
Poisson ratio parameters used in the numerical model updating. Numerical mode shapes NUM
and numerical eigenvalues NUM are function of these updating parameters, and can be
expressed as,

NUM

, NUM = f (x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ,..., x p )

(29)

where, p is the number of updating parameters. x 0 is the vector with the initial updating
Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio parameters. Updating parameters x are subject to lower
and upper bounds inequality constraints defined as,

x LB x x UB

(30)

The updated Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio value are obtained when objective function f
is minimized. It is means that the modes are correlated. However, the minimal objective
function value is different for all updated models, and therefore cant be considered as direct

reference to evaluate the reliability of the updated values. The minimal objective function value
only indicates that the Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio optimal value was found. Then, the
reliability evaluation is made by the average difference defined as,
N
ij (i jfinal )

Average Difference =

=1
=1

N i

100

(31)

where, jfinal is the numerical final frequency obtained after updating. Multiply by 100 to
obtain the average percentage difference.
The updating routine is built in MATLAB, using some tools from your Toolbox. The routine is
prepared to interact with the finite element ANSYS program. The main steps of the updating
process are the following:
1.

Starts the ANSYS program with a given numerical model input file to update, with
updating parameters assigned in x 0 ;

2.

Reads the output file of the ANSYS program and processes it in order to build the
objective function f

and constraints, defined as x LB x x UB , used for the

optimization process;
3.

Stops the calculation process if an optimal value on the updating process has been
achieved, or goes to the next step on the updating process;

4.

Obtains the new parameters x defined by the optimization algorithm, through

MATLAB;

5.

Modifies the finite element model input file with the new parameters x ;

6.

Starts a new analysis by going to Step 1 with the new input file.

The interaction algorithm flowchart between updating process in MATLAB and ANSYS is
presented in figure 4.

Figure 4 Interaction flowchart between Matlab and Ansys.

6 Results and discussion

In this section the results and respective discussion are presented.
6.1 - Tensile tests results
In this section are presented the tensile tests results.
Figure 5 and 6 present, respectively, the stress-strain graphs (-) for aluminium material
samples in the parallel direction and perpendicular direction to the forming process. Figure 7
and 8 present, respectively, the stress-strain graphs (-) for steel material samples in the
parallel direction and perpendicular direction to the forming process.

Figure 5 Stress-strain graph for aluminium material samples in the parallel direction to the forming
process.

Figure 6 Stress-strain graph for aluminium material samples in the perpendicular direction to the
forming process.

Figure 7 Stress-strain graph for steel material samples in the parallel direction to the forming process.

Figure 8 Stress-strain graph for steel material samples in the perpendicular direction to the forming
process.

The compilation of the tensile testing results is presented in table 6. For aluminium material, the
obtained Exx and Eyy values present a range of, respectively, 5x109 Pa and 2.4x109 Pa. For steel
material, the obtained Exx and Eyy values present a range of, respectively, 9.3x109 Pa and 7.4x109
Pa. The obtained Poisson ratio (xy and yx) values, shown high consistency for both materials.

Table 6 - Elastic properties compilation from tensile tests.

Material
Aluminium

Property
Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus
Poisson Ratio

Steel

Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus
Poisson Ratio

Symbol
Exx
Eyy
xy
yx
Exx
Eyy
xy
yx

Units Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Pa
67.5x109 63.4x109 68.4x109
Pa
73.7x109 76.1x109 73.9x109
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
Pa
191.3x109 198.9x109 200.6x109
Pa
227.1x109 229.8x109 234.5x109
0.26
0.24
0.25
0.27
0.27
0.27

6.2 Updating results

In this section is shown the results after updating to the aluminium and steel material numerical
models.

6.2.1 Aluminium material numerical models

Table 7 present the updated elastic properties for aluminium material numerical models.
Table 7 Updated elastic properties for aluminium material numerical models.

Property
Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus

Symbol Units
Exx
Pa
Eyy
Pa
xy
yx
-

Poisson Ratio

Model 1
65.7x109
71.2x109
0.31
0.31

Model 2
66.8x10e9
70.4x109
0.31
0.31

Model 3
66.6x10e9
71.2x109
0.31
0.31

For aluminium material, Exx and Eyy present a range of, respectively, 1.1x109 Pa and 0.8x109 Pa
in the updated values. The Poisson ratio (xy and yx) values are equals to the values obtained by
tensile testing method. Therefore, updating method reveals more consistency and lower
dispersion in the results than tensile testing method.
Table 8, 9 and 10 show, respectively, the dynamic behaviour evolution for aluminium material
numerical model 1, 2 and 3.

Table 8 Dynamic behavior evolution of aluminium material numerical model 1.

Mode

Ref. Freq.
(Hz)

Num.
initial Freq.
(Hz)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

117.758
326.148
435.699
641.552
888.119
1064.620
1366.728
1594.797

116.817
323.244
439.066
636.489
893.742
1056.671
1378.696
1584.378

Difference
before
Updating
(%)
0.799
0.890
0.773
0.789
0.633
0.747
0.876
0.653

Num.
final Freq.
(Hz)
117.768
325.828
435.703
641.438
887.208
1064.620
1369.362
1595.881

Difference
after
Updating
(%)
0.008
0.098
0.001
0.018
0.103
0.000
0.193
0.068

Initial
MAC

Final
MAC

0.992
0.982
0.983
0.997
0.996
0.984
0.992
0.986

0.992
0.982
0.983
0.997
0.996
0.984
0.992
0.986

Table 9 Dynamic behavior evolution of aluminium material numerical model 2.

Mode

Ref. Freq.
(Hz)

Num.
initial Freq.
(Hz)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

117.410
325.175
435.571
639.594
890.388
1061.718
1371.459
1590.901

117.050
323.887
439.938
637.754
895.518
1058.771
1381.436
1587.527

Difference
before
Updating
(%)
0.307
0.396
1.003
0.288
0.576
0.278
0.727
0.212

Num.
final Freq.
(Hz)
117.410
324.861
436.466
639.597
888.682
1061.681
1371.440
1591.648

Difference
after
Updating
(%)
0.000
0.097
0.205
0.001
0.192
0.003
0.001
0.047

Initial
MAC

Final
MAC

0.987
0.988
0.881
0.995
0.998
0.995
0.991
0.929

0.987
0.988
0.881
0.995
0.998
0.995
0.991
0.929

Table 10 Dynamic behavior evolution of aluminium material numerical model 3.

Mode

Ref. Freq.
(Hz)

Num.
initial Freq.
(Hz)

1
2

117.886
326.272

116.895
323.458

Difference
before
Updating
(%)
0.841
0.862

Num.
final Freq.
(Hz)
117.923
326.239

Difference
after
Updating
(%)
0.032
0.010

Initial
MAC

Final
MAC

0.993
0.990

0.993
0.990

3
4
5
6
7
8

437.973
642.520
891.611
1065.127
1375.429
1597.642

439.356
636.910
894.333
1057.370
1379.607
1585.425

0.316
0.873
0.305
0.728
0.304
0.765

437.926
642.208
891.610
1065.838
1375.862
1597.638

0.011
0.049
0.000
0.067
0.031
0.000

0.988
0.977
0.995
0.988
0.989
0.966

0.988
0.977
0.995
0.988
0.989
0.967

Dynamic behaviour evolution shows that elastic properties values are updated with high
reliability. The mean percentage difference, obtained by application of Equation (31), between
resonance frequencies of the numerical and experimental model is very closer to zero: 0.061%
for model 1, 0.068% for model 2 and 0.025% for model 3. By other hand, the fact of initial and
final MAC values are very close to 1, show that mode shapes of numerical and experimental
model are correlated.

6.2.2 Steel material numerical models

Table 11 present the updated elastic properties for steel material numerical models.
Table 11 Updated elastic properties for aluminium material numerical models.

Property
Youngs modulus
Youngs modulus
Poisson Ratio
Poisson Ratio

Symbol Units
Exx
Pa
Eyy
Pa
xy
yx
-

Model 1
167.4x109
215.6x10e9
0.25
0.27

Model 2
165.6x10e9
214.7x109
0.25
0.27

Model 3
163.3x109
211.5x109
0.25
0.27

For steel material, both Exx and Eyy present a range of 4.1x109 Pa in the updated values. The
Poisson ratio (xy and yx) values are very similar to the values obtained in tensile testing method.
Therefore, updating method reveals more consistency and lower dispersion in the results than
tensile testing method.
Table 12, 13 and 14 show, respectively, the dynamic behaviour evolution for steel material
numerical model 1, 2 and 3.
Table 12 Dynamic behavior evolution of steel material numerical model 1.

Mode

Ref. Freq.
(Hz)

Num.
initial Freq.
(Hz)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

240.194
662.650
870.4540
1299.687
1771.660
2149.142
2727.595
3207.203

230.599
637.285
884.728
1252.997
1798.512
2077.129
2768.903
3110.443

Mode

Ref. Freq.
(Hz)

Difference
before
Updating
(%)
3.995
3.828
1.640
3.592
1.516
3.351
1.514
3.017

Num.
final Freq.
(Hz)
239.399
661.362
870.454
1299.68
1771.596
2153.294
2732.564
3222.688

Difference
after
Updating
(%)
0.331
0.194
0.000
0.001
0.004
0.193
0.182
0.483

Initial
MAC

Final
MAC

0.997
0.999
0.992
0.997
0.971
0.985
0.988
0.991

0.997
0.999
0.992
0.997
0.971
0.985
0.989
0.991

Table 13 Dynamic behavior evolution of steel material numerical model 2.

Num.
initial Freq.

Difference
before

Num.
final Freq.

Difference
after

Initial
MAC

Final
MAC

(Hz)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

239.867
661.742
868.362
1298.117
1766.966
2145.847
2720.872
3203.205

230.812
637.874
885.546
1254.155
1800.174
2079.048
2771.462
3113.317

Updating
(%)
3.775
3.607
1.979
3.387
1.879
3.113
1.859
2.806

(Hz)
239.116
660.575
868.149
1298.115
1766.966
2150.672
2725.573
3218.721

Updating
(%)
0.313
0.176
0.025
0.000
0.000
0.225
0.173
0.484

1.000
0.999
0.993
0.999
0.994
0.998
0.993
0.992

1.000
0.999
0.993
0.999
0.994
0.998
0.992
0.992

Table 14 Dynamic behavior evolution of steel material numerical model 3.

Mode

Ref. Freq.
(Hz)

Num.
initial Freq.
(Hz)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

238.519
658.648
864.263
1291.660
1758.733
2135.699
2708.713
3187.893

231.401
639.501
887.805
1257.356
1804.768
2084.353
2778.534
3121.262

Difference
before
Updating
(%)
2.984
2.907
2.724
2.656
2.618
2.404
2.578
2.090

Num.
final Freq.
(Hz)
237.927
657.285
864.116
1291.64
1758.733
2139.929
2712.814
3202.623

Difference
after
Updating
(%)
0.248
0.207
0.017
0.001
0.000
0.198
0.151
0.462

Initial
MAC

Final
MAC

0.999
0.999
0.999
0.998
0.998
0.993
0.998
0.997

0.999
0.999
0.999
0.998
0.998
0.993
0.998
0.997

Dynamic behaviour evolution shows that elastic properties values are updated with high
reliability. The mean percentage difference, obtained by application of Equation (10), between
resonance frequencies of the numerical and experimental model is very low: 0.174% for model
1, 0.175% for model 2 and 0.161% for model 3. By other hand, the fact of initial and final MAC
values are very close to 1, show that mode shapes of numerical and experimental model are
correlated.

6.3 Analytical method

In this section is shown the obtained results based on analytical theories presented in section 2.

6.3.1 Analytical results for Eyy

Considering the eight first mode shapes extracted from experimental modal analysis: modes 1, 2,
4, 6 and 8 are bending shapes; mode 3 is torsion shape; modes 5 and 7 are mixed shapes.
Note that in table 1 (first five Kn values for a free-free beam conditions), mode 1 corresponds to
the experimental mode 1, mode 2 corresponds to the experimental mode 2, mode 3 corresponds
to the experimental mode 4, mode 4 corresponds to the experimental mode 6 and mode 5
corresponds to the experimental mode 8. Youngs modulus Eyy value can be calculated using
any one of five modes. However, the lowest error in Eyy value is obtained using the first mode.
Using Equation (2) and replacing f and m variables by reference experimental values, presented

in table 15 for respective sample, we calculate Eyy values of aluminium and steel material. See
table 3 for the values of geometrical variables. Analytical Eyy values are presented in table 16.
Table 15 Values of f (bending mode shape) and m variables for aluminium and steel material.

Variable
f1
f2
f4
f6
f8
m

Aluminium material
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
117.758
117.410
117.886
326.148
325.175
326.272
641.552
639.594
642.520
1064.620 1061.718 1065.127
1594.797 1590.901 1597.642
0.0757
0.0754
0.0756

Units

(Hz)

(Kg)

Sample 1
240.194
662.650
1299.687
2149.142
3207.203
0.4335

Steel material
Sample 2
239.867
661.742
1298.117
2145.847
3203.205
0.4327

Sample 3

238.519
658.648
1291.660
2135.699
3187.893
0.4305

Table 16 Eyy Values using five experimental bending mode shapes.

Mode
f1
f2
f4
f6
f8
f1
f2
f4
f6
f8

Material

Property

Symbol

Units

Youngs
Aluminium
modulus

Eyy

Pa

Youngs
modulus

Eyy

Pa

Steel

Sample 1

Sample 2

71.3x109

70.6x109

72.0x109
72.5x109
73.0x109
73.4x109
217.3x109
217.6x109
217.8x109
218.0x109
217.5x109

71.3x109
71.7x109
72.3x109
72.8x109
216.3x109
216.6x109
216.9x109
216.9x109
216.6x109

Sample 3
71.4x109
71.9x109
72.6x109
73.0x109
73.8x109
212.8x109
213.5x109
213.7x109
213.8x109
213.4x109

Table 17 shows the comparison between tensile testing, updating and analytical method. For
this comparison only are used Eyy values calculated from f1 mode.

Table 17 Comparison of Eyy values using the three methods.

Sample
1
2
3
1
2
3

Material

Property

Symbol

Units

Aluminium

Youngs
modulus

Eyy

Pa

Steel

Youngs
modulus

Eyy

Pa

Updating

Analytical

71.2x109
70.4x109
71.2x109
215.6x10e9
214.7x109
211.5x109

71.3x109
70.6x109
71.4x109
217.3x109
216.3x109
212.8x109

Tensile
Testing
73.7x109
76.1x109
73.9x109
227.1x109
229.8x109
234.5x109

The results show that analytical values for Youngs Modulus Eyy are very similar with the
results obtained by updating method. Both methods allow obtain values more consistent and
reliable than tensile testing method.

6.3.2 Analytical results for Exx

Using equation (7) we calculate Exx values based on high-order plate element theory. The xy and
yx values for both materials, are presented in table 6. Replacing f and m variables by reference

experimental values, presented in table 18 for respective sample, we calculate Exx values for
aluminium and steel material. See table 3 for the values of geometrical variables. The analytical
Exx values are presented in table 19.
Table 18 Values of f (torsion mode shape) and m variables for aluminium and steel material.

Variable

Units

f3
m

(HZ)
(Kg)

Aluminium material
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
435.699
435.571
437.973
0.0757
0.0754
0.0756

Sample 1
870.454
0.4335

Steel material
Sample 2 Sample 3
868.362
864.263
0.4327
0.4305

Using equation (11) we calculate Exx values based on Picket theory. Replacing f and m variables
by reference experimental values, presented in table 18 for respective sample, we calculate Exx
values for aluminium and steel material. Eyy is given by values calculated in section 6.3.1
through first mode. See table 3 for the values of geometrical variables. Eyy is given by values
calculated in section 6.3.1 through first mode. The analytical Exx values are presented in table
19.

Using equation (14) we calculate Exx values based on Rayleigh principle. Replacing f and m
variables by reference experimental values, presented in table 18 for respective sample, we
calculate Exx values for aluminium and steel material. See respectively, table 3 and 4 for the
values of geometrical variables and values of material density. Eyy is given by values calculated
in section 6.3.1 through first mode. The analytical Exx values are presented in table 19.
Using equation (21) we calculate Exx values based on torsional vibration for beam of noncircular cross section theory. Replacing f and m variables by reference experimental values,
presented in table 18 for respective sample, we calculate Exx values for aluminium and steel
material. See respectively, table 3 and 4 for the values of geometrical variables and values of
material density. Eyy is given by values calculated in section 6.3.1 through first mode. The
analytical Exx values are presented in table 19.
Table 19 Exx values obtained using plate theories.

Theory
High-order
plate
element
Picket
Rayleigh
Beam of
noncircular
cross
section
High-order

Material

Aluminium

Steel

Property

Youngs
modulus

Youngs

Symbol

Exx

Exx

Units

Pa

Pa

Sample 1

Sample 2

Sample 3

64.6x109

64.3x109

65.2x109

67.7x109
43.5x109

68.0x109
43.6x109

69.2x109
44.3x109

72.5x109

72.8x109

74.2x109

195.0x109

193.7x109

190.9x109

plate
element
Picket
Rayleigh
Beam of
noncircular
cross
section

modulus
172.8x109
115.5x109

171.2x109
114.6x109

169.1x109
113.1x109

194.9x109

193.1x109

190.7x109

With High-order plate element and Picket theory we obtain very similar Exx values for
aluminium material, and are closer to the values obtained by updating method. The Exx values
obtained by Rayleigh principle are lower than expected. The values obtained by torsional
vibration for beam of no-circular cross section theory are higher than expected. For steel
material the Picket theory gives Exx values closest to the obtained by updating method. The
values obtained by Rayleigh principle are lower than expected. The values obtained by Highorder plate element and torsional vibration for beam of no-circular cross section theory are
higher than expected.
The high-order plate element theory it is more effective than smaller is the thickness, when the
width keeps constant. This justifies the fact of the Exx values obtained by high-order plate
element theory, for steel material, are more distant of the values obtained by updating for the
same material. In steel material samples the thickness is about 12 times smaller than the width
dimension, while in aluminium material samples this ratio is approximately 24 times. Therefore
Exx values for aluminium material obtained from this theory are very close to the values
obtained by updating method.
Table 20 shows the comparison between the results obtained by tensile testing, updating and
analytical method for Exx values. The analytical Exx values used for aluminium material are the
obtained by high-order plate element theory. The analytical Exx values used for steel material are
the obtained by Picket theory.
Table 20 Comparison of Exx values using the three methods.

Sample
1
2
3
1
2
3

Material Plate

Property

Symbol

Units

Aluminium

Youngs
modulus

Exx

Pa

Steel

Youngs
modulus

Exx

Pa

Updating

Analytical

65.7x109
66.8x109
66.6x109
167.4x109
165.6x109
163.3x109

64.6x109
64.3x109
65.2x109
173.0x109
171.2x109
169.1x109

Tensile
Testing
67.5x109
63.4x109
68.4x109
191.3x109
198.9x109
205.0x109

Analytical Exx values are similar relatively to the updated Exx values. Both methods, analytical
and updating, allow obtain higher accuracy, more consistency and lower dispersion in the
results than tensile testing method.

7 CONCLUSIONS

This paper approaches a different way to estimate elastic properties of materials, namely
Youngs Modulus and Poisson Ratio, usually obtained by tensile tests. A finite element model
updating methodology is applied to practical cases and the process is validated. The estimated
values from presented updating methodology, and validated by analytical theories, reveals to be
efficient and reliable than tensile testing method. The use of resonance frequencies allow to the
updating method to be very sensitive to the slight variations in elastic properties caused by
forming process. Moreover have the advantage of be a non-destructive test and can be applied to
more complex structures and components.

8 REFERENCES

[1] D. V. Boeri, Caraterizao de materiais compostos por ultra-som, Master Thesis, Escola
Politcnica da Universidade de So Paulo, So Paulo, 2006.

[2] R. Caracciolo, M. Giovagnoni, Frequency dependence of Poisson's ratio using the method of
reduced variables, Mechanics of Materials, 24 (1996) 75-85.

[3] R. Caracciolo, A. Gaspararetto, M. Giovagnoni, Measurement of the isotropic dynamic

Youngs modulus in a seismically excited cantilever beam using a laser sensor, Journal of
Sound and Vibration, 231(5) (2000) 1339-1353.

[4] R. Caracciolo, A. Gaspararetto, M. Giovagnoni, Application of causality check and of the

reduced variables method for experimental determination of Youngs modulus of a viscoelastic
material, Mechanics of Materials 33 (2001) 693-703.

[5] R. Caracciolo, A. Gaspararetto, M. Giovagnoni, An experimental technique for complete

dynamic characterization of a viscoelastic material, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 272 (2004)
1013-1032.

[6] S. F. Almeida, J. B. Hanai, Anlise Dinmica Experimental da Rigidez de Elementos de

Concreto Submetidos Danificao Progressiva at a Ruptura, Cadernos de Engenharia de
Estruturas, So Carlos, 10(44) (2008) 49-66.

[7] R. Szilard, Theories and Applications of Plate Analysis: Classical, Numerical and
Engineering Methods, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New Jersey, 2004.

[8] S. Spinner, R. C. Valore, Jr., Comparison of Theoretical and Empirical Relations Between
the Shear Modulus and Torsional Resonance Frequencies for Bars of Rectangular Cross Section,
Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, 60(5) 1958 459-464.

[9] M. E. Mcintyre, J. Woodhouse, On Measuring the Elastic and Damping Constants of

Orthotropic Sheet Materials, Acta metal, 36(6) (1988) 1397-1416.

[10] M. Caresta, Vibrations of a free-free beam, Cambridge University.

[11] J. Zhou, T. Farquhar, Wheat stem moduli in vivo via reference basis model updating,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 285 (2005) 1109-1122.

[12] B. Rahmani, F. Mortazavi, I. Villemure, M. Levesque, A new approach to inverse

identification of mechanical properties of composite materials: Regularized model updating,
Composite Structures, 105 (2013) 1109-1122.

[13] R. F. S. Hearmon, Introduction to Applied Anisotropic Elasticity, Oxford Univ. Press,

Oxford, 1961.

[14] J. Meireles, Anlise Dinmica de Estruturas por Modelos de Elementos Finitos

Identificados Experimentalmente, Master Thesis, University of Minho, Guimares, 2007.

[15] J. Meireles, J. Ambrsio, J. Montalvo e Silva, A. Pinho, Structural Dynamic Analysis by

Finite Element Models Experimentally Identified: An Approach Using Modal Data, in: Proc.
Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures, Porto, 2007.

[16] M. Dourado, J. Meireles, A. M. A. C. Rocha, Structural Dynamic Updating Using a Global

Optimization Methodology, in Proc. 5th Int. Operational Modal Analysis Conference, Guimares,
2013, pp. 1-8.

[17] R. J. Allemang, D. L. Brown, A Correlation Coefficient for Modal Vector Analysis, in Proc.
1st Int. Conference & Exhibit Modal Analysis, Florida, 1982, pp. 110-116.