Walter D’Ambrogio and Annalisa Fregolent Fig. 20 shows the predicted rotational mobility of unknown subsystemA obtained using non collocated approach with compatibility at DoFs θ1 and θ5 and equilibrium at DoFs θ4 and θ5. Figure 21 is obtained by exchanging compatibility and equilibrium DoFs. The second option seems to give slightly better results. Fig. 20 Rotational mobility at the coupling DoF of subsystem A: true (—), computed from fitted perturbed FRF (∗∗∗) with compatibility at DoFs θ1 and θ5 and equilibrium at DoFs θ4 and θ5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 10−5 100 105 Frequency [Hz] Magnitude [rad s−1/(N m)] 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 −4 −2 0 2 4 Frequency [Hz] Phase [rad] Fig. 21 Rotational mobility at the coupling DoF of subsystem A: true (—), computed from fitted perturbed FRF (∗∗∗) with compatibility at DoFs θ4 and θ5 and equilibrium at DoFs θ1 and θ5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 10−5 100 105 Frequency [Hz] Magnitude [rad s−1/(N m)] 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 −4 −2 0 2 4 Frequency [Hz] Phase [rad] Fig. 22 shows the predicted rotational mobility of unknown subsystemA obtained using non collocated approach with compatibility at DoFs θ3 and θ5 and equilibrium at DoFs θ4 and θ5. Figure 23 is obtained by exchanging compatibility and equilibrium DoFs. The second option seems to give the best results. 72
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTMzNzEzMQ==