Table 8 Example comparison of GVT... | Emerald Publishing

Table 8

Example comparison of GVT frequencies and FEM frequencies before and after the optimization

Mode	Ground vibration test		FEM
			Before optimizing		After optimizing
	f [Hz	Mode shape	f [Hz]	Difference (%)	f [Hz]	Difference (%)
1	9.90	Symmetric wing first bending	10.20	−3.13	9.82	0.77
2	14.35	Tail roll	–	100.00	14.81	−3.21
3	17.97	Fuselage first lateral bending; tail roll	–	100.00	16.28	9.43
4	23.82	Symmetric wing first in-plane bending	26.5	−11.25	23.55	1.13
5	25.78	Antisymmetric elevator rotation; rudder rotation	–	100.00	24.26	5.90
6	29.66	Antisymmetric wing first bending (+ anti-symmetric wing first benfding − due to fuselage torsion)	29.33	1.10	28.80	2.90
7	33.84	Vertical stabilizer bending and fuselage lateral bending	–	100.00	33.52	0.95
8	34.52	Symmetric wing second bending and torsion	38.87	−12.59	33.52	2.91
9	38.63	Anti-symmetric wing second bending and torsion	43.31	−12.13	38.64	−0.04

Mode	Ground vibration test		FEM
			Before optimizing		After optimizing
	f [Hz	Mode shape	f [Hz]	Difference (%)	f [Hz]	Difference (%)
1	9.90	Symmetric wing first bending	10.20	−3.13	9.82	0.77
2	14.35	Tail roll	–	100.00	14.81	−3.21
3	17.97	Fuselage first lateral bending; tail roll	–	100.00	16.28	9.43
4	23.82	Symmetric wing first in-plane bending	26.5	−11.25	23.55	1.13
5	25.78	Antisymmetric elevator rotation; rudder rotation	–	100.00	24.26	5.90
6	29.66	Antisymmetric wing first bending (+ anti-symmetric wing first benfding − due to fuselage torsion)	29.33	1.10	28.80	2.90
7	33.84	Vertical stabilizer bending and fuselage lateral bending	–	100.00	33.52	0.95
8	34.52	Symmetric wing second bending and torsion	38.87	−12.59	33.52	2.91
9	38.63	Anti-symmetric wing second bending and torsion	43.31	−12.13	38.64	−0.04

Note(s):

Not paring mode

Source(s): Table created by authors