Le 17/06/2015 22:18, Carrico, Paul a écrit :
> Dear All
>
> Thanks for the answers.
>
> To give more information's on what I'm doing (That's quite new I confess), 
> I'm performing  a (basic) finite element calculation with beams using sparse 
> matrix (stiffness matrix K and mass matrix M).
> [u,v] = 
> eigs(K((ddl_elem+1):$,(ddl_elem+1):$),M((ddl_elem+1):$,(ddl_elem+1):$),n,"SM");
>
> Nota: ddl means dof
>
> I'm calculated first the natural frequencies using (K - omega^2.M).x=0 ... 
> the pulse (or circular frequencies)  are no more and no less than the 
> eigenvalues of the above system (u = omega^2).
>
> Just a "mechanical" remark: since the beam is clamped in one side (and free 
> on the tip),  it is absolutely normal that you find twice the same natural 
> frequency (1rst mode in one direction, the second one in a new direction at 
> 90°) .... I've been really surprised to find it, but happy at the same time 
> ...
>
> The origin of my question was: since it obvious that the results are strongly 
> sensitive to the "units" (i.e. the numbers), I'm wondering if there is a way 
> to control the accuracy of the eigenvalues calculation using eigs keywords 
> ... 
There is no way to improve accurary with an option. In general the
numerical algorithms try to return the best solution.
But it should be possible to improve accuracy by a well suited
normalisation (unit change for example!)

The condition number of u gives a measure of the numerical difficulty to
solve the problem


Note that as stated the eigenvalue computation may be a ill conditionned
problem in particular when there are clusters of eigenvalues

Please find below a little script which illustrate a typicall case
A=zeros(10,10)+diag(ones(1,9),1);A(10,1)=%eps;
s=spec(A);
clf;plot(real(s),imag(s),'+');

Serge Steer
> In any way, thanks for the debate
>
> Paul

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to