176 A.S. Mohammed and A. Pavic Fig. 21.7 Fractiles of measured and simulated vibration responses for TS1 using MF-Sh model for pacing frequencies (a) 1.90 Hz and (b) 2.05Hz Table 21.2 Average ratio of simulated/measured fractiles of vibration responses Pacing frequency Test subjects Non-interactive models Interactive models Force function Measured force Force function Measured force Silva [8] Alonso [6] Shahabpoor [7] Silva [8] Toso [9] Van Nimmen [10] Zhang [11] 1.9 Hz TS1 1.84 1.33 1.44 0.94 0.88 1.06 1.08 0.80 1.09 TS2 1.40 1.31 1.10 0.88 0.77 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.87 TS3 2.03 1.66 1.60 1.09 1.02 1.23 1.24 0.99 1.26 TS4 2.08 1.17 1.62 0.89 0.88 0.96 1.03 0.78 1.06 2.05 Hz TS1 1.29 1.20 1.08 1.06 1.06 1.02 1.03 1.01 1.01 TS2 1.35 1.24 1.21 0.96 0.92 1.02 0.94 0.98 1.01 TS3 1.76 1.15 1.38 0.94 0.95 0.98 0.96 0.90 0.99 TS4 1.31 1.23 1.14 0.99 0.95 1.02 1.04 0.98 1.06 Average difference 0.633 0.286 0.321 0.069 0.091 0.061 0.076 0.085 0.079 Blue and red cells refer to overestimated and underestimated responses, respectively Fig. 21.8 Measured and simulated vibration responses for TS1 using MF-Sh model for pacing frequency 1.90 Hz
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTMzNzEzMQ==