You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Sensors
  • Review
  • Open Access

19 December 2020

A Critical Review of Nonlinear Damping Identification in Structural Dynamics: Methods, Applications, and Challenges

,
,
,
and
1
Department of Engineering Mechanics, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
2
Jiangxi Provincial Key Laboratory of Environmental Geotechnical Engineering and Disaster Control, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China
3
Nantong Ocean and Coastal Engineering Research Institute, Hohai University, Nantong 226000, China
4
College of Mechanics and Materials, Hohai University, Nanjing 211100, China
This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensing Technology and Data Interpretation in Machine Diagnosis and Systems Condition Monitoring

Abstract

In recent decades, nonlinear damping identification (NDI) in structural dynamics has attracted wide research interests and intensive studies. Different NDI strategies, from conventional to more advanced, have been developed for a variety of structural types. With apparent advantages over classical linear methods, these strategies are able to quantify the nonlinear damping characteristics, providing powerful tools for the analysis and design of complex engineering structures. Since the current trend in many applications tends to more advanced and sophisticated applications, it is of great necessity to work on developing these methods to keep pace with this progress. Moreover, NDI can provide an effective and promising tool for structural damage detection purposes, where the changes in the dynamic features of structures can be correlated with damage levels. This review paper provides an overview of NDI methods by explaining the fundamental challenges and potentials of these methods based on the available literature. Furthermore, this research offers a comprehensive survey of different applications and future research trends of NDI. For potential development and application work for nonlinear damping methods, the anticipated results and recommendations of the current paper can assist researchers and developers worldwide to find out the gaps and unsolved issues in the field of NDI.

1. Introduction

In recent decades, a huge number of engineering structures such as various civil structures (e.g., bridges, dams, buildings, etc.), rotating machines, aircraft, etc., have been designed and widely used in real life-services [1]. Such structures, with either simple or complex geometric or material properties, are subjected to different levels of vibrations from numerous sources, including earthquakes, wind loads, vehicle motions, imbalance of rotating machines, etc. [2]. Excessive levels of vibrations largely affect the performance, health condition, and serviceability of structures and even lead to structural instability and failures [3].
In general, structural damping is a preferable dynamic characteristic able to reduce the degree of system vibrations to an acceptable level [4]. Damping and its variation occur due to the continuous dissipation of energy [5], both internally and externally, linked with factors such as material degradation, geometrical changes, boundary conditions, etc. [6]. With complex mechanisms, structural damping is commonly classified into three types. First, the fluid damping, which originates from hydrodynamic or aerodynamic forces surrounding the structures [7]. Second, the material damping, which appears due to complex atomic-molecular interactions inside materials [8]. Third, the structural damping, resulting from Coulomb friction between parts within a structural system [9]. For damping characterization, several simplified models have been suggested; for instance, viscous damping, hysteretic damping, and Coulomb frictional damping models [10]. In real applications, equivalent viscous damping is commonly used to model the overall behavior of damped systems [11].
Most structural systems show a certain extent of nonlinearity associated with different sources [12,13]. However, neglecting the nonlinearity is acceptable in many cases for the sake of simplification of analysis [14,15]. In other cases, nonlinear behavior plays a dominant role. Nonlinearity neglection should be prevented in such cases, as it may lead to erroneous predictions of system behaviors [16]. Among the causes of system nonlinearity, nonlinear damping [17,18] is often regarded as the most influential; this complexity of which makes it challenging to perform system identification [19]. Moreover, to better accommodate the development of advanced material with strong nonlinear behavior, research on the impact of nonlinear damping is of increasing importance [20,21,22].
Some damping identification approaches, theoretical and experimental, have been developed [23]. Experimental techniques for damping estimation show advantages in accuracy and reliability. Damping identification approaches provide straightforward explanations for damping properties as compared with theoretical approaches [24]. The enhancement technique of engineering structures is carried out by measuring inputs and outputs during the experiment of real structures. This enhancement technique is made to avoid unwanted behavior of the system subject to damping effects [25].
Several hypotheses can be used for linear and nonlinear damping of low-damping systems [26,27,28]. High-damping systems usually involve structural damage [29]; however, nonlinear effects on vibrating systems cannot be neglected because of their significant impact on dynamic behaviors [30,31]. Linear damping approaches can provide precise structural numerical predictions [32,33]. Nevertheless, in numerous modern applications, the effectiveness of these methods cannot be guaranteed, especially when the structures are complex, e.g., composed of composite materials or operating in a hostile environment [34,35]. Therefore, linear methods should be limited to identifying damping in specific simple structures that operate under normal conditions [36]. These drawbacks have, in the last decade, contributed to the rapid development of nonlinear damping methods [37,38].
Damping identification is a challenging task [39] performed by developing a variety of analytical [40,41,42] and experimental methods of linear and nonlinear systems [43,44,45]. Moreover, NDI is a practical aspect being conducted to prevent structural failure and tragic events caused by structural damages [46,47]. In addition to enhancing the safety and maintenance of key structures, it also contributes to the control of systems and predicting structural systems responses under nonlinear damping properly [48,49].
NDI for dynamic systems can be classified into seven categories: Linearization methods, time-domain methods, frequency-domain methods, time-frequency methods, modal methods, black-box modeling, and model updating methods [1]. Classification can also be made from other perspectives, for example, parametric and non-parametric [50,51]. An example of linearization methods is the equivalent linearization approximation (ELA), which is a common method used in applications such as a spring-suspended sectional model system. ELA is utilized for bridges and aeroelastic systems and dampers and shock absorbers used in control systems [52].
The time-domain methods are well-known methods such as the log decrement method used in lightly damped systems and aeroelastic systems [53,54]. In addition, the Hilbert transform (HT) is used to analyze vibration systems [55], heat exchangers, and damage detection of reinforced concrete (RC) structures and composite materials [56,57]. The frequency-domain methods are known by their mathematical simplicity and ability to provide insightful interpretation [58]. For example, harmonic balance nonlinearity identification (HBNID) was employed in systems such as civil engineering, actuators, bioengineering devices, sensors, and robotics [59]. Furthermore, the frequency response functions (FRFs) have been widely utilized to study nonlinear damping in adhesive joints [60,61].
Time-frequency methods, e.g., those based on continuous wavelet transform (CWT), are powerful tools used in applications such as vibration absorbers that are broadly used in naval architecture, rotor-bearing systems, and constructions [62]. In addition, HT was employed in applications such as unbalance of rotating machines, ship movement control, and damage detection of RC beams based on free vibration measurements for nonlinear damping determination [63]. Modal methods are considered particularly useful in the field of structural dynamics and damage identification. The resonant decay method (RDM) was applied to investigate the nonlinear damping in civil, aircraft, and various types of dampers [23]. The wavelet transform (WT) was used in instantaneous damping coefficient identification for damage detection in concrete, automotive, aerospace, and simple built-up structures comprising two bolted beams [64]. Black-box modeling (BBM) is an accurate and efficient method in describing the dynamic behaviors of structures. For example, a fuzzy wavelet neural network (FWNN) was used for nonlinear identification in systems such as vehicle magnetorheological (MR) fluid dampers, aeroelastic systems, modern industries, control systems, and military and defense equipment [65].
Model updating methods include, for instance, the identification of structural damping using the FRF-based model updating method and damping identification for accurate prediction of the measured FRFs using finite element updated models of the mechanical system [66,67]. Recently, several studies were conducted on dynamic systems. These studies showed the high feasibility of the NDI methods compared to the linear methods because they give more reliable results despite their difficulty [1]. The nonlinear research focuses primarily on the development of efficient and functional methods for reacting to nonlinear structural damping as a fundamental scientific and technological problem. A survey of available research in the engineering community has provided many studies of nonlinear damping, as shown in Figure 1. It is expected that interest from researchers in this field will continue.
Figure 1. The number of publications for nonlinear damping studies (According to the Scopus engine system in the duration from January 1999 to November 2020).
To summarize, NDI methods are essential and emerging methods leverage on their importance in structural dynamics in general. Such methods are able to provide crucial aspects and useful tools to track structural changes and dynamic alterations. Moreover, this can deliver potential future research in the field of structural dynamics as well as damage identification.
This review paper discusses the progress of NDI methods based on available literature in terms of surveying possible methods and applications. Section 2 offers a critical review of the recent nonlinear damping methods based on previous studies to identify the role and placement of NDI methods. Nonlinear damping methods are also discussed using their theoretical principles and schematic diagram. The second section is followed by an overview of possible applications of nonlinear damping methods in many different fields. At the end of this work, a summary and concluding remarks are presented.

2. Nonlinear Damping Identification Methods

The early study on the identification of nonlinearity of structural models can be traced back to 1970s [1]. The objective of this section is to survey the NDI methods that evolved over the last few years as a result of the development of novel industrial materials and structures [68]. Various nonlinear factors have led to different systems’ behaviors, which means that each system has unique behavior and therefore requires a different approach [69]. Relevant studies were first focused on single-degree of freedom (SDOF) systems [70]. Then, with the advancement of computational techniques, studies were extended to more complex, multi-degree of freedom (MDOF) systems [71,72,73]. Specific structural types under investigation include bridges, tall buildings, aircraft, etc. [74]. Apart from previous review articles that are mainly about nonlinear system identification [1,2,23], the focus of this study resides on the development of various NDI methods. The methods can be classified into seven categories, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Nonlinear damping identification methods.

2.1. Linearization Methods

The linearization method is a process whose objective is to approximate a nonlinear system that is described by a nonlinear differential equation with a linear one for ease of processing. Equivalent linearization (EL) is a widely used approximation method for dynamic system analysis [75]. Krylov and Bogoliuboff introduced the first linearization process of deterministic systems. The stochastic systems approach was then extended by Caughey. Then, some expanded versions of the equivalent linearization method have been established. The Equivalent Linearization method is considered the most accessible tool extensively used for analyzing nonlinear stochastic problems, but its accuracy depends on the averaging process [76]. Other classical methods include the Fokker-Planck equation, moment closure, stochastic averaging, perturbation, etc. However, they are limited to relatively straightforward and specific nonlinear systems, and some of them are computationally expensive, mainly when applied in MDOF systems [77].
Wang and Low [78] proposed a reliable EL method to predict the response of nonlinear systems with viscous damping subject to impact. Moreover, the influences of nonlinearity and viscous damping on the safety of packaged products were discussed. Additionally, coefficients such as the damping ratio in the cushion system were investigated. According to their analysis, both the nonlinear properties and viscous damping afforded are proven to be positive factors able to minimize the rigid impact to some extent. Bajrić and Høgsberg [79] presented an approach for output-only system identification. This method is effective for analyzing the random responses with SDOF oscillators under hysteretic damping. The Bouc-Wen model was used to take advantage of the restoring force to derive the model of an equivalent linear relaxation. The identification was carried out in the state space, where the derived linear relaxation damping model replaced the hysteretic system model. The equivalent linear model proposed that the response motion is harmonic with a slow variation of phase and amplitude, and thus the method was restricted to tackle narrow band response. To study a spring-suspended sectional model system of bridges, Gao et al. [80] developed an EL approach to improving the precision of measuring self-excited force in the sectional model test. The effect of added damping and stiffness on the free decay response at zero wind speed state was explored. Based on their findings, the nonlinear characteristics associated with the influence of the added damping influences are much more significant than that associated with the influence of the added stiffness. In another work, Gao and Zhu [81] proposed an approach where the spring-suspended sectional models (SSSM) were used to evaluate the equivalent amplitude-dependent damping ratio and frequency. The equations of the ELA are derived by applying a multiple-scale method to represent the mechanical nonlinearities in the first-order approximate sense. The proposed ELA and nonlinear system identification methods are then found to be accurate enough to model the mechanical nonlinearities of the proposed system. Figure 3 shows a comparison of identified equivalent amplitude-dependent damping and natural frequency of the SSSM under bending and torsional modes. The nonlinear behavior of damping ratios originates from complicated energy-dissipative mechanisms, such as material damping, Coulomb friction, viscous damping, and nonlinear damping caused by additional SSSM system dampers. In an ELA, weak nonlinear response of a SDOF system is considered as a perturbation on the responses of undamped oscillators, so a nonlinear motion equation that governs the free decay response of the system is presented as follows:
q ¨ + ε f q ˙ ,   q + ω 0 2 q = 0
where q is the displacement; q ˙ is the velocity; q ¨ is the acceleration of the sectional model; ω 0 is the circular frequency; ε f q ˙ ,   q is the generalized nonlinear force; and ε is a small factor showing that the previous term is a small quantity; ω 0 2 q is the linear restoring force. Equation (1) can be solved based on the Krylov–Bogoliubov averaging approach. An ELA method was then applied to model the physical nonlinearity of a weak nonlinear system by using a damping coefficient D(A) and a restoring force coefficient S(A),
q ¨ + D a q ˙ + K a q = 0   ε 2
and by inserting the equivalent viscous damping ratio and frequency, Equation (2) can be represented as:
q ¨ + 2 ω e ξ e a q ˙ + ω e 2 a q = 0   ε 2        
where ξ e a is the equivalent amplitude-dependent damping ratio; ω e a is the equivalent circular frequency.
Figure 3. Comparison of identified equivalent amplitude-dependent damping and natural frequency of the spring-suspended sectional models. (a) Bending mode; (b) torsional mode [81].
Both nonlinear damping and frequency depend on amplitude and are accurate in modeling the physical nonlinearity of a weakly nonlinear spring-suspension system.
Recently, Chen and Tse [82] proposed an enhanced method to determine the physical nonlinearity of weakly nonlinear spring suspension systems. The method was effectively implemented in hybrid aeroelastic pressure balance (HAPB) systems. In the HAPB system, the frequency and damping associated with a linear model are constant and cause major differences in predictions of response due to ignorance of the system’s slowly changing characteristics. The solution of a proposed system is obtained by deriving the averaging method of Krylov–Bogoliubov and the ELA method, as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. A diagram for nonlinearity identification of weakly nonlinear systems [82].

2.2. Time-Domain Methods

In time-domain methods, analyzed data are in the form of time-series during the identification process [83]. The benefit is the simplicity in data analysis without much cost of time and effort since the time history of data can always be acquired directly [84].
Typical work is introduced by Jacobson et al. [85], where they evaluated the damping identification methods using time-domain simulation based on an aeroelastic system for the applications of flutter constraints to gradient-based optimization. Several time-domain methods were applied with CFD-based methodology. The matrix pencil method was demonstrated to be the most effective approach in estimating damping over a set of input signals. In another study of heat exchanger tube arrays, Eret and Meskell [86] investigated the validity of two identification methods applied in a SDOF fluid elastic system by using experimental data. The free vibration analysis (FREEVIB) method was used to identify nonlinearity and was then compared with the nonlinear decrement method. According to the results, the nonlinear decrement method produced more accurate results. Nevertheless, its deficiency was that the functional form of the system needs to be predetermined. Meskell [87] presented a technique for simultaneously evaluating different types of nonlinear damping and viscous damping. This technique relies on successive peak decrements in the transient system. The study was restricted to SDOF systems. This technique was optimized based on the consideration that the system was weakly nonlinear, lightly damped subject to linear, and cube damping. The accuracy of this method was demonstrated using simulated responses. It was concluded that the method was promising for a lightly damped system using experimental data, particularly in fluid elastic systems. Frizzarin et al. [88] developed an approach for damage detection in a concrete structure. The approach relies on the analysis of nonlinear damping extracted from structural vibration responses. The feasibility of the approach was demonstrated using a large-scale concrete bridge model suffering from seismic damage caused during shaking table tests. Nonlinear damping was successfully identified by random decrement signature approach based on its ambient vibration responses. The results showed that the magnitude of nonlinear damping increased along with an increasing degree of seismic damage. Strong correlation between increasing nonlinear damping and degrading structural stiffness was also found.
A method of nonlinear damping analysis using ambient vibration data was developed for baseline-free damage detection in RC structures. Viscous and friction damping models were combined to obtain the envelope of free vibration response of the structure, as shown in Equation (4):
a t =   x 0 1 + γ ζ e ζ ω t γ ζ
where x 0 is the initial amplitude; ω is the natural frequency; ζ and γ are the damping ratios for viscous and friction damping, respectively.
Another time-domain method was proposed by Wu et al. [89] to enable simultaneous identification of nonlinear damping and Coulomb friction in mechanical systems. A moving rectangular window method was introduced based on nonlinear damping properties. Different models of nonlinear damping in a SDOF system were studied, with a constant amount of Coulomb friction. The simulation results showed that the proposed identification technique was efficient and applicable. Furthermore, the identification precision of nonlinear damping was higher than that of the force of Coulomb friction. Figure 5 presents the nonlinear relationship between the damping ratios and amplitudes in terms of exponential and quadratic functions, respectively. The accuracy of determining the quadratic damping is the highest compared to that of determining other types of nonlinear viscous damping. In the quantification of unwanted effects on the overall measured damping of steel alloys, Vanwalleghem et al. [90] identified external damping sources in damped material by applying transient time-domain methods and introducing an effective damping test setup configuration. The results showed that the value of damping was dependent on both the specimen size and level of excitation. In addition, damping will increase with enlarged response amplitudes regardless of the sample sizes, as illustrated in Figure 6. Moreover, the damping capacity differed from one steel alloy to another. Therefore, one type cannot be generalized to others. In another related work, Baştürk et al. [91] studied the nonlinear dynamic response of hybrid laminated composite plates under the influence of blast load with damping involved. The effects of factors such as damping ratio, aspect ratio, and various values of peak pressures were studied. The thermal effect of the blast wave was avoided throughout the analysis. The results showed that the amplitude of the damping ratio played a significant role in the deflection of the plate and the frequencies. The vibration amplitude decreased in a short time due to the damping effect. Recently, Feldman and Braun [92] presented promising experimental methods for the identification of nonlinear damping and stiffness in a vibration system. The methods were based on measuring inputs and outputs in the time-domain and the implementation of the Hilbert transform of the measured signals under free and forced vibration states. Based on their findings, the approach of nonlinear characteristics representation was accurate and efficient.
Figure 5. Curves of damping ratio versus amplitude. (a) Exponent relationship; (b) quadratic relationship [89].
Figure 6. Damping ratio as a function of (a) specimen response amplitude (first mode shape); (b) specimen response amplitude (second mode shape) for three specimen sizes [90].

2.3. Frequency-Domain Methods

The frequency domain-method is featured by handling data in the form of spectra or FRFs throughout the identification process [93]. Some frequency-domain methods have been reviewed in technical literature in the past years [94,95]. These methods show advantages such as ease of computation and the ability to give some explanations of nonlinear systems [96]. Unlike time-series signals, the data processed in the frequency domain could take various forms, such as Fourier spectra, power spectra, or any other form [97,98]. Since data analysis in the frequency domain only focuses on a specific frequency range, the computational burden can be reduced, and a large number of nonlinear parameters can be calculated precisely and effectively [23].
Sun et al. [99] presented a modified method for damping identification for a nonlinear stiffness structure based on the well-known half-power bandwidth method. The formula was verified by using numerical simulation. The procedure has been validated by applying a hard coating specimen with soft nonlinearity, and the damping parameters of the structure were acquired under various exciting levels. Thothadri et al. [100] extended a nonlinear system identification method named harmonic balance nonlinearity identification (HBNID) to the MDOF fluid-structure systems. Two theoretical models were examined using this extended method. The results showed that HBNID worked well in determining unknown parameters if the model structure was identified. In another related study, Balasubramanian et al. [101] conducted experimental and numerical investigations to determine the increase in damping with the amplitude of the vibration of a rubber plate using three different dissipation models. The nonlinear responses were measured utilizing a laser Doppler vibrometer. According to the results, the increase of damping was around 60% when the vibration amplitude is 1.6 times the plate thickness. The dissipation determined from various models was examined as it confirms the predominant nonlinear nature of damping as a function of the amplitude of vibration, as shown in Figure 7. To reduce the vibration in vehicles for the comfort of occupants, Ho et al. [102] investigated, experimentally and numerically, the vibration isolation using the nonlinear damping performed by a MR damper. The frequency-domain technique was adopted, as the efficiency of the isolation system could be assessed over a wide range of frequencies. Experimental and numerical results showed that a good effect of vibration isolation around resonance regions and high frequencies was achieved, and hence significantly improved conventional dampers’ performance.
Figure 7. Changes of damping ratio with respect to the amplitude of vibration (a) using model 1, (b) using model 2 [101].
The equation of motion representing the nonlinear viscous damping of a SDOF vibration isolation system can be expressed as:
M y ¨ t + K y t + F c = M u ¨ t
where y t = x t u t   ; M is the mass; K is the spring stiffness; F c is the nonlinear damping force given by
F c = sign y ˙ t C n y ˙ t n
where C n is the constant of the nonlinear damping; 0 < n 1 , is the damping exponent; u t is a sinusoidal input displacement specified by u t = A   sin 2 π f t with frequency f and amplitude A .
Pazand and Nobari [103] investigated the effects of damage on the effective damping of viscoelastic adhesives using the inverse-eigen sensitivity identification method for adhesive behavior in the linear and nonlinear regions. Results showed that the adhesive damping decreased when frequency decreased. Additionally, debonding damage had an adverse influence on adhesive damping, and the reduction (softening) became more important as the rate of damage increased. Figure 8 shows that the effective adhesive damping decreases with increasing frequency in both linear and nonlinear regions. In addition, the reduction pattern is different for various modes such as bending and shearing modes. Cherif et al. [104] presented a damping loss factor assessment approach for two-dimensional structures based on the measurement of the displacement field by using a laser vibrometer. This approach was then compared with the other three approaches: i.e., half-power bandwidth method, decay rate method, and steady-state power input method. From the results, the proposed inverse wave approach was accurate and reliable for the evaluation of the wavenumber and damping loss factor. Figure 9 shows that at mid frequencies, the three methods agree well, but at low frequencies about (100–300) Hz, the power input method shows some discrepancy compared to other methods. The explanation is that these frequencies have a low number of modes. At high frequencies, the damping loss factor evaluated by both the decay rate and the inverse wave methods was in good agreement. Roncen et al. [105] experimentally and numerically analyzed the nonlinear rubber isolator, which was subjected to two random excitations, i.e., the harmonic and broadband excitations. The relation between the stiffness and the damping versus the amplitude of the relative displacement of the rubber isolator was investigated. Nonlinear vibration prediction of the beam exposed to random excitation was conducted by adopting the harmonic balance method and shooting method. According to the comparison between the experimental and numerical investigations, it was observed that there were functional correlations between harmonic and broadband random excitations. This demonstrates the validity and efficacy of the rubber isolator modeling as well as the proposed nonlinear methodology. Recently, Colin et al. [106] investigated many nonlinear quadratic damping features of cantilever beams under harmonic base excitations. The frequency-domain identification techniques were used to identify the linear and nonlinear modal damping coefficients.
Figure 8. Identified effective damping coefficients for linear and nonlinear areas, for the intact and damaged bonds (a,b) with bending modes, (c,d) with shear modes [103].
Figure 9. Effect of frequency on experimental damping loss factor of (a) a thin composite panel, (b) a thick composite panel [104].

2.4. Time-Frequency Methods

Recently, applications of time-frequency domain methods have become more frequent and widespread than time-domain and frequency-domain methods [107]. These methods detect damping through common temporal and frequency characteristics of the responses of the vibrating structures resulting from the analysis using time-frequency methods [108,109]. Several methods have recently been presented to perform time-frequency analysis [110,111,112]. One of the most robust approaches is the continuous wavelet transform, which has been progressively utilized for NDI in different applications. A common property of nonlinear vibrations is that, according to the form of nonlinearity, both instantaneous natural frequency and damping coefficient may become time functions [113].
In the field of ships and floating bodies, Kim and Park [114] predicted the nonlinear damping and restoring coefficient of a floating production system via the Hilbert transform of free decay signal obtained by a free-roll decay experiment. A comparison was made between the present method and the traditional logarithmic decrement method in the performance of damping coefficient identification. The damping and restoring moment’s nonlinear coefficients were successfully obtained. Figure 10 shows some fluctuations at a small roll angle; however, damping can only be approximated using a quadratic model within a roll angle range of around 6 rad; beyond this range, the damping coefficient decreases. This is owing to the vortex memory effect nearby the bilge keel. The presented technique shows greater accuracy than the logarithmic decrement, especially when the nonlinear terms are combined in the restoring term.
Figure 10. The floating production storage and offloading identified dynamic parameters with respect to the roll angle. (a) Damping coefficient; (b) restoring moment [114].
Franchetti and Modena [115] developed a damage detection technique for precast Prestressed reinforced concrete (PRC) structural members based on free vibration experiments and NDI. Three precast specimens of the PRC beam were tested. The dynamic responses were analyzed by using various methods, including the multi-input multi-output (MIMO) curve fitting and the HT method. The actual energy dissipation mechanism of the PRC beams was represented by a proposed nonlinear quadratic damping factor associated with actual damage levels. The results revealed that the quadratic damping factor could be used efficiently to detect damage due to its high sensitivity. However, the effectiveness of this approach might be constrained by the difficulty of obtaining a free structural vibration response. The pure viscous damping and polynomial damping are combined in the proposed model, as displayed in Figure 11. The most popular form of the force of polynomial damping is quadratic:
F d = d · x ˙ · x ˙
where d is a constant, and the value of the absolute velocity is added to ensure that the force is at all times velocity opposed.
Figure 11. The combined damping model [115].
The equation of motion of the combined viscous and quadratic system can then be represented as follows:
m x ¨ + c x ˙ + d x ˙ x ˙ + k x = 0
where m is the mass, c is the viscous damping coefficient, and k is the stiffness,
a t = a 0 c 1   ·   e c 1   · t c 1 + a 0 c 2   1 e c 1   · t
where a is the amplitude of oscillation, a0 is the initial amplitude, c1 and c2 are constants, and t is the time. The exact solution of pure viscous damping ( c 2 = 0   ) is formulated as follows:
a t = a 0 ·   e c 1   · t = a 0 ·   e ξ ω t
Tang et al. [116] experimentally investigated the assessment of the nonlinear vibration absorber parameters from free vibration tests. HT was utilized to estimate both instantaneous amplitude and damped natural frequency. Then the stiffness and damping were determined for a nonlinear vibration absorber. By comparing the present method and Restoring Force Surface (RFS) method, it was shown that there was a difference of only about 13%. Chandra and Sekhar [117] presented a nonlinear damping estimation approach in a rotor-bearing system using the CWT based method. Two different nonlinear damping models were examined. The free vibration signal envelope was obtained by employing the wavelet-based approach. The validity and applicability of the proposed method were reported using the acquired signals from the experimental results. Joseph and Minh-Nghi [118] used wavelet transform in the identification and quantification of damping in a nonlinear oscillator based on free decay response. Two methods based on wavelet transform have been used; firstly, the cross-section of the wavelet transform, secondly, the ridge and skeleton of the wavelet transform. The proposed method herein was used to study a nonlinear SDOF oscillator exclusively. Numerical results showed that the method is accurate in the estimation of natural frequency and damping coefficient, even with noisy data.
Curadelli et al. [119] introduced a new scheme for structural damage detection using the instantaneous damping coefficient identification via wavelet transform. Based on their findings, the damping of various structures is significantly affected by the existence of damage. Evidence for damage effects on the dynamic characteristics of the RC frame has been provided. Therefore, the structural damping parameters can be used as damage indicators due to their high sensitivity to damage existence. It has also been shown that the wavelet transform can be used to determine the damping through a structural response to free vibration.
In another related work, Heller et al. [120] experimentally analyzed the influence of mechanical joints and their functional parameters on the dynamic behavior of built-up structures. The equivalent modal parameters based on the application of wavelet transformation used to the free-decay response were adopted to describe the expected nonlinear dynamic behavior. Experimental results demonstrated that the frictional joints are the major sources of energy dissipation during the relative motion of substructures in the built-up structure. Furthermore, the negative damping capacity can be significantly increased by widening the interface area.
Recently, Dziedziech et al. [121] examined the dynamics of a tuned liquid column damper (TLCD), where the time-varying characteristics of nonlinear damping and other properties were identified. CWT was used for mode separation, and then the recognition of the instantaneous damping ratio of the first mode of vibration was conducted. The findings showed that the damping ratio was nonlinear, time-varying, and based on the level of vibration. The introduced model can be employed to represent the dissipative behavior of the first mode of vibration of the tuned liquid column damper. The time-varying damping was successfully recognized utilizing the combined envelope analysis, curve fitting, and logarithmic decrement, as shown in Figure 12.
Figure 12. The first mode identification results of vibration of the analyzed tuned liquid column damper (TLCD): (a) Natural frequency, (b) vibration response, (c) damping ratio [121].

2.5. Modal Methods

Modal characteristics are considered highly important in the process of designing linear engineering structures [122]. Typical structural modal parameters are natural frequencies, mode shapes, and damping [123]. It is a beneficial tool used in the study of the dynamic behavior of various structures around their resonance state. This linear approach is considered to be mature and widely used [124]. On the contrary, methods for identifying nonlinear modal are in one of the promising directions of recent research in the field of structural dynamics [125,126]. Some related approaches have been introduced in the surveys in 2006 and 2016 [1,23]. Noteworthy progress has been made over the past two decades, so nonlinear modal identification is a very active field of study [23].
In order to improve engineering designs, reliability, and performance of structures, Mezghani et al. [127] investigated the dynamic characteristics of an isolator consisting of stiffness and damping elements. The investigations were performed under various excitations to promote the minimization of the vibration transmissions using modal methods. The proposed nonlinear identification method allows designers to predict nonlinear dynamic behavior via experimental data. Results revealed that the present technique is valid and applicable in determining the nonlinear parameters of a metal mesh isolator. The nonlinear damping may also be suppressed as the base excitation amplitude increases. Naylor et al. [128] introduced the resonant decay method to estimate the MDOF nonproportional damped systems. Though there were some imperfections, the method performed well and produced an acceptable modal damping matrix. The results indicate that there were small errors in the estimation process. Londoño et al. [129] introduced a method to extract the backbone curves of the lightly damped nonlinear systems utilizing a modified resonance decay method. The experimental and numerical results show that the proposed procedure can offer an accurate estimation of damping ratios. Moreover, results indicate that the small damping ratio lower than 5% does not influence the estimated instantaneous frequency of the nonlinear system, as shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13. The estimated skeleton curves from the experiment: (a) Frequency (Hz); (b) damping ratio (%) [129].
By analyzing the envelope of decaying response, the dissipation properties of the system can be evaluated. For a classic, well-known SDOF system with a common equation
x ¨ + 2 ξ ω n x ˙ + ω n 2 x = 0
where x ¨ is the acceleration; x ˙ is the velocity, x is the displacement, ξ is the damping ratio, ω n is the natural frequency.
In terms of system parameters and initial conditions, the envelope of the free vibration response can be represented as
A t = A 0 e ξ ω n t
It should be noted that the operation of damping is accounted for by the exponential term. This expression can be generalized to enable the change of instantaneous frequency and damping, which would occur in a nonlinear system by modifying Equation (12) to be
A t = A 0 e ξ t ω 0 t t
The effective damping then could be determined by
ξ t i o = 1 ω 0 t i o t i o ln ( A 0 ln A t i o
where ω 0 t i o = 2 π f t i o denotes the instantaneous angular frequency. Therefore, the effective damping ratio ξ can be assessed from the envelope tangent slope of the decaying response represented in a semi-logarithmic scale with respect to time.
Krack et al. [130] developed a novel reduced order model (ROM) method for numerical calculation of nonlinear modes of mechanical systems. The study included some types of nonlinearity, such as dissipative and strong and non-smooth nonlinearities. The nonlinear modal characteristics were utilized to evaluate the forced and self-excited vibration. The obtained results were in very good agreement with results obtained by conventional approaches. In another related work, Krack [131] proposed an identification method of the nonlinear modes of nonconservative systems. Two methods for nonlinear modal analysis were presented: The harmonic balance method and the shooting method. The results show that the proposed method provides accurate predictions for a broad range of working conditions. However, it is limited to the isolated nonlinear modes and low modal damping ratios as it is also restricted to periodic motions. Peter et al. [132] numerically and experimentally proposed a new technique for the nonlinear modal analysis of non-smooth mechanical systems. The numerical technique was found based on two combined methods. They are the harmonic balance method and the shooting method generating a time-frequency representation. In comparison, the experimental technique relies on a nonlinear phase resonance method. It was found that the numerical results were in good agreement with results obtained by experiments. Scheel et al. [133] developed a new technique based on an experimental procedure for nonlinear modal testing for modern turbine blades. The technique allows the experimental extraction of modal damping ratios in addition to both natural frequencies and deflection shapes as a function of the vibration level. It is simple and more time-effective as its validity and accuracy have been proved through comparison to other methods. It also has high resistance against measurement noise and does not require much prior knowledge of the tested systems or special equipment. In another related work, Scheel et al. [134] designed a new test rig named rubbing beam resonator for experimental nonlinear modal analysis. The proposed method performs the analysis based on the concept of the extended periodic motion in order to obtain the modal characteristics. The results show that the modal damping ratio increases by about 15%, while the frequency decreases by 36% for the first mode of vibration. Recently, Karaağaçlı and Özgüven [135] proposed a nonlinear experimental modal analysis procedure called response-controlled stepped-sine testing (RCT) to extract the nonlinear modal parameters. Many nonlinearities at different places were investigated numerically and experimentally. The numerical and experimental results showed that the proposed identification procedure was efficient and applicable to many applications.

2.6. Black-Box Modeling

Nonlinear black-box is a typical model used to characterize nonlinear dynamic behaviors of systems only based on data. Nonlinear black-box modeling is a mapping from past observed data to a regressor space pursued by a nonlinear function expansion type, mapping to the space of the outputs of the system [136]. Nonlinear mapping can be performed by several methods, e.g., wavelet networks, artificial neural networks, and neuro-fuzzy models [137].
Witters and Swevers [138] discussed the black box identification of an electro-hydraulic semi-active damper for a vehicle suspension. For the representation of the complex nonlinear damper dynamics, a neural network-based output error structure has been chosen. It has been shown that a model described using single optimal testing can adequately describe the nonlinear dynamic behavior of the damper throughout its entire working period. Truong and Ahn [139] introduced a nonlinear black-box model and an inverse black-box model to study the magneto-rheological fluid damper. A fuzzy mapping system is used for the identification of the damper properties. A neural network method was used to improve the accuracy of the model by decreasing the modeling error function. A series of investigations were performed to verify the effectiveness of the models on two systems using the same damper. Khalid et al. [140] investigated a small-scale MR damper model with the valve mode mechanism using a dynamic recurrent neural network modeling method to generate its hysteretic nonlinear response. The modified model of Bouc-Wen was used to generate the training data to construct the numerical model. The results show that the proposed model is effectively capable of accurately predicting the MR damper response over a wide range of operating conditions. Recently, Dou et al. [141] investigated a nonlinear identification method based on a fuzzy wavelet neural network for a nonlinear aeroelastic system. Nonlinear damping was considered in the aeroelastic system identification, and a new FWNN structure was introduced. Numerical simulation shows that the fuzzy wavelet neural network attained a high level of accuracy and effectiveness.

2.7. Model Updating Methods

Finite element (FE) model updating is an operation intended to calibrate the FE model of a structure for matching the experimental and numerical results [142,143]. This process aimed to obtain an accurate model that is able to reproduce the measured data [144,145,146]. Despite the rapid development of computer-aided methods, numerical models still need to be compared with empirical data to update them in order to improve their accuracy and reliability [147].
Arora et al. [148] proposed a new scheme for damped FE model updating to improve the FRF compatibility based on the implementation of the damping identification method. Two steps are carried out, the first is the updating of mass and stiffness matrices using the response function method, and the second is the identification of the damping matrix following the first step. The results show that the updated model is able to predict the measured FRFs.
First, the eigenvalue problem related to a viscously damped system written as
M   λ i 2 + C λ i + K Φ i = 0
where M, C, and K are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices, respectively; λ i and Φ are the complex eigenvectors.
Furthermore, the damping matrix can be assessed using the following relation
C = M Φ Λ 2 Φ T + Φ Λ 2 Φ T ¯ M
where Λ is the diagonal matrix of complex eigenvalues, and the overall bar refers to complex conjugations. The complex eigenvectors are standardized as
Φ i T M λ i 2 K Φ i = λ i
The updated mass and stiffness obtained in the preceding part are exploited to normalize complex eigenvectors.
Recently, Arora [149] introduced a new technique for the identification of structural damping. It is a direct and explicit identification method. The updated matrices of mass and stiffness were used for the identification of the structural damping matrix. Some instances were provided, illustrating the performance of the proposed technique. According to the results, the current technique was accurately proficient in predicting the experimental FRFs of the system with all damping levels. Table 1 summarizes the NDI methods in several application areas, with some strengths and weaknesses of these methods based on previous studies. It also provides a useful means for researchers to compare the different studies and facilitate understanding of the NDI methods.
Table 1. Literature survey of nonlinear damping identification methods.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.A.-h. and M.C.; methodology, M.C., B.S. and N.F.A.; formal analysis, T.A.-h., M.C. and H.X.; investigation, T.A.-h., M.C. and B.S.; resources, M.C.; writing—original draft preparation, T.A.-h.; writing—review and editing, M.C., B.S., N.F.A. and H.X.; visualization, T.A.-h., N.F.A. and H.X.; supervision, M.C.; project administration, M.C.; funding acquisition, M.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by Nantong Science and Technology Plan Project (No. MS22019016), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2020T130170), and the Transportation Science Research Project of Jiangsu Province (No. 2019Z02).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this paper:
BBMBlack-box modeling
CFDComputational fluid dynamics
CHGBCompliantly damped hybrid gas bearings
CWTContinuous wavelet transform
ELEquivalent linearization
ELAEquivalent linearization approximation
FEFinite element
FREEVIBFree vibration analysis
FRFsFrequency response functions
FWNNFuzzy wavelet neural network
HAPBHybrid aeroelastic pressure balance
HBNIDHarmonic balance nonlinearity identification
HTHilbert transforms
MDOFMulti-degree of freedom
MIMOMulti-input multi-output
MRMagnetorheological
NDINonlinear damping identification
PRCPrestressed reinforced concrete
RCReinforced concrete
RCTResponse-controlled stepped-sine testing
RDMResonant decay method
RDTRandom decrement technique
RFSRestoring force surface
R-KRunge-Kutta
ROMReduced-order model
SDOFSingle-degree of freedom
SSSMSpring-suspended sectional models
TLCDTuned liquid column damper
WTWavelet transform

References

  1. Kerschen, G.; Worden, K.; Vakakis, A.F.; Golinval, J.C. Past, present and future of nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2006, 20, 505–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cao, M.S.; Sha, G.G.; Gao, Y.F.; Ostachowicz, W. Structural damage identification using damping: A compendium of uses and features. Smart Mater. Struct. 2017, 26, 043001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Blackwell, C.; Palazotto, A.; George, T.J.; Cross, C.J. The evaluation of the damping characteristics of a hard coating on titanium. Shock Vib. 2007, 14, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Eichler, A.; Moser, J.; Chaste, J.; Zdrojek, M.; Wilson-Rae, I.; Bachtold, A. Nonlinear damping in mechanical resonators made from carbon nanotubes and graphene. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2011, 6, 339–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Liang, J.W.; Feeny, B.F. Identifying Coulomb and viscous friction in forced dual-damped oscillators. J. Vib. Acoust. Trans. ASME 2004, 126, 118–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mevada, H.; Patel, D. Experimental Determination of Structural Damping of Different Materials. Proc. Eng. 2016, 144, 110–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, X.; Du, X.; Brownjohn, J. Frequency modulated empirical mode decomposition method for the identification of instantaneous modal parameters of aeroelastic systems. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2012, 101, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kulkarni, P.; Bhattacharjee, A.; Nanda, B.K. Study of damping in composite beams. Mater. Today Proc. 2018, 5, 7061–7067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Chatterjee, A.; Chintha, H.P. Identification and parameter estimation of cubic nonlinear damping using harmonic probing and volterra series. Int. J. Non. Linear. Mech. 2020, 125, 103518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dou, C.; Fan, J.; Li, C.; Cao, J.; Gao, M. On discontinuous dynamics of a class of friction-influenced oscillators with nonlinear damping under bilateral rigid constraints. Mech. Mach. Theory 2020, 147, 103750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Heitz, T.; Giry, C.; Richard, B.; Ragueneau, F. Identification of an equivalent viscous damping function depending on engineering demand parameters. Eng. Struct. 2019, 188, 637–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ghiringhelli, G.L.; Terraneo, M. Analytically driven experimental characterisation of damping in viscoelastic materials. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2015, 40, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Amabili, M. Nonlinear damping in nonlinear vibrations of rectangular plates: Derivation from viscoelasticity and experimental validation. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2018, 118, 275–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Anastasio, D.; Marchesiello, S.; Kerschen, G.; Noël, J.P. Experimental identification of distributed nonlinearities in the modal domain. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 458, 426–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Moradi, H.; Vossoughi, G.; Movahhedy, M.R. Experimental dynamic modelling of peripheral milling with process damping, structural and cutting force nonlinearities. J. Sound Vib. 2013, 332, 4709–4731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Olejnik, P.; Awrejcewicz, J. Coupled oscillators in identification of nonlinear damping of a real parametric pendulum. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2018, 98, 91–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ciang, C.C.; Lee, J.R.; Bang, H.J. Structural health monitoring for a wind turbine system: A review of damage detection methods. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2008, 19, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kouris, L.A.S.; Penna, A.; Magenes, G. Seismic damage diagnosis of a masonry building using short-term damping measurements. J. Sound Vib. 2017, 394, 366–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ji, H.; Qiu, J.; Zhu, K.; Badel, A. Two-mode vibration control of a beam using nonlinear synchronized switching damping based on the maximization of converted energy. J. Sound Vib. 2010, 329, 2751–2767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Shariyat, M.; Jahangiri, M. Nonlinear impact and damping investigations of viscoporoelastic functionally graded plates with in-plane diffusion and partial supports. Compos. Struct. 2020, 245, 112345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Peters, R.D. Nonlinear Damping of the ‘Linear’ Pendulum. arXiv 2003, arXiv:physics/0306081. [Google Scholar]
  22. Zaitsev, S.; Shtempluck, O.; Buks, E. Nonlinear damping in a micromechanical oscillator. Nonlinear Dyn. 2012, 67, 859–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Noël, J.P.; Kerschen, G. 10 years of advances in nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics: A review. In Proceedings of the ISMA 2016-International Conference on Noise and Vibration Engineering, Leuven, Belgium, 19–21 September 2016. [Google Scholar]
  24. Karaağaçlı, T.; Özgüven, H.N. A frequency domain nonparametric identification method for nonlinear structures: Describing surface method. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2020, 144, 106872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Boltežar, M.; Slavič, J. Enhancements to the continuous wavelet transform for damping identifications on short signals. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2004, 18, 1065–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Heaney, P.S.; Bilgen, O. System identification of lumped parameter models for weakly nonlinear systems. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 450, 78–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Li, A.; Ma, L.; Keene, D.; Klingel, J.; Payne, M.; Wang, X. Forced oscillations with linear and nonlinear damping. Am. J. Phys. 2016, 84, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lamarque, C.H.; Savadkoohi, A.T.; Charlemagne, S. Experimental results on the vibratory energy exchanges between a linear system and a chain of nonlinear oscillators. J. Sound Vib. 2018, 437, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Nguyen, Q.T.; Tinard, V.; Fond, C. The modelling of nonlinear rheological behaviour and Mullins effect in High Damping Rubber. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2015, 75–76, 235–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Haghdoust, P.; Conte, A.L.; Cinquemani, S.; Lecis, N. A numerical method to model non-linear damping behaviour of martensitic shape memory alloys. Materials 2018, 11, 2178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yuan, D.N. Dynamic modeling and analysis of an elastic mechanism with a nonlinear damping model. JVC/J. Vib. Control 2013, 19, 508–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Phani, A.S.; Woodhouse, J. Viscous damping identification in linear vibration. J. Sound Vib. 2007, 303, 475–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Prandina, M.; Mottershead, J.E.; Bonisoli, E. An assessment of damping identification methods. J. Sound Vib. 2009, 323, 662–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Botelho, E.C.; Campos, A.N.; de Barros, E.; Pardini, L.C.; Rezende, M.C. Damping behavior of continuous fiber/metal composite materials by the free vibration method. Compos. Part B Eng. 2005, 37, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Berthelot, J.M.; Assarar, M.; Sefrani, Y.; el Mahi, A. Damping analysis of composite materials and structures. Compos. Struct. 2008, 85, 189–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Guo, Z.; Sheng, M.; Ma, J.; Zhang, W. Damping identification in frequency domain using integral method. J. Sound Vib. 2015, 338, 237–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jeong, B.; Cho, H.; Yu, M.F.; Vakakis, A.F.; McFarland, D.M.; Bergman, L.A. Modeling and measurement of geometrically nonlinear damping in a microcantilever-nanotube system. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 8547–8553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ruderman, M.S. Nonlinear damped standing slow waves in hot coronal magnetic loops. Astron. Astrophys. 2013, 553, A23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Noël, J.P.; Renson, L.; Kerschen, G. Complex dynamics of a nonlinear aerospace structure: Experimental identification and modal interactions. J. Sound Vib. 2014, 333, 2588–2607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ahmadi, K. Analytical investigation of machining chatter by considering the nonlinearity of process damping. J. Sound Vib. 2017, 393, 252–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Saarenheimo, A.; Borgerhoff, M.; Calonius, K.; Darraba, A.; Hamelin, A.; Ghadimi Khasraghy, S.; Karbassi, A.; Schneeberger, C.; Stadler, M.; Tuomala, M.; et al. Numerical studies on vibration propagation and damping test V1. Raken. Mek. 2018, 51, 55–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Cai, J.; Zhang, H. Efficient schemes for the damped nonlinear Schrödinger equation in high dimensions. Appl. Math. Lett. 2020, 102, 106158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lisitano, D.; Bonisoli, E. Direct identification of nonlinear damping: Application to a magnetic damped system. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2020, 146, 107038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Srikantha Phani, A.; Woodhouse, J. Experimental identification of viscous damping in linear vibration. J. Sound Vib. 2009, 319, 832–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Singh, V.; Shevchuk, O.; Blanter, Y.M.; Steele, G.A. Negative nonlinear damping of a multilayer graphene mechanical resonator. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 93, 245407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xu, B.; He, J.; Dyke, S.J. Model-free nonlinear restoring force identification for SMA dampers with double Chebyshev polynomials: Approach and validation. Nonlinear Dyn. 2015, 82, 1507–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Bian, J.; Jing, X. Superior nonlinear passive damping characteristics of the bio-inspired limb-like or X-shaped structure. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2019, 125, 21–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Yan, B.; Ma, H.; Yu, N.; Zhang, L.; Wu, C. Theoretical modeling and experimental analysis of nonlinear electromagnetic shunt damping. J. Sound Vib. 2020, 471, 115184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yan, B.; Ma, H.; Zhang, L.; Zheng, W.; Wang, K.; Wu, C. A bistable vibration isolator with nonlinear electromagnetic shunt damping. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2020, 136, 106504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Masri, S.F.; Caughey, T.K. A nonparametric identification technique for nonlinear dynamic problems. J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME 1979, 46, 433–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lisitano, D.; Bonisoli, E.; Mottershead, J.E. Experimental direct spatial damping identification by the Stabilised Layers Method. J. Sound Vib. 2018, 437, 325–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lumori, M.L.D.; Schoukens, J.; Lataire, J. Identification and quantification of nonlinear stiffness and nonlinear damping in resonant circuits. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2010, 24, 3205–3219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. McNamara, J.J.; Friedmann, P.P. Flutter-boundary identification for time-domain computational aeroelasticity. AIAA J. 2007, 45, 1546–1555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sainsbury, M.G.; Ho, Y.K. Application of the time domain Fourier filter output (TDFFO) method to the identification of a lightly damped non-linear system with an odd-spring characteristic. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2001, 15, 357–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Boz, U.; Eriten, M. Nonlinear system identification of soft materials based on Hilbert transform. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 447, 205–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Abramovich, H.; Govich, D.; Grunwald, A. Damping measurements of laminated composite materials and aluminum using the hysteresis loop method. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2015, 78, 8–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Qu, H.; Li, T.; Chen, G. Multiple analytical mode decompositions (M-AMD) for high accuracy parameter identification of nonlinear oscillators from free vibration. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2019, 117, 483–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ruzzene, M.; Fasana, A.; Garibaldi, L.; Piombo, B. Natural frequencies and dampings identification using wavelet transform: Application to real data. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 1997, 11, 207–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Thothadri, M.; Moon, F.C. Nonlinear system identification of systems with periodic limit-cycle response. Nonlinear Dyn. 2005, 39, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ben, B.S.; Ben, B.A.; Vikram, K.A. Damping measurement in composite materials using combined finite element and frequency response method. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Invent. 2013, 2, 89–97. [Google Scholar]
  61. Naraghi, T.; Nobari, A.S. Identification of the dynamic characteristics of a viscoelastic, nonlinear adhesive joint. J. Sound Vib. 2015, 352, 92–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ta, M.N.; Lardis, J. Identification of weak nonlinearities on damping and stiffness by the continuous wavelet transform. J. Sound Vib. 2006, 293, 16–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Feldman, M.; Bucher, I.; Rotberg, J. Experimental identification of nonlinearities under free and forced vibration using the Hilbert transform. JVC/J. Vib. Control 2009, 15, 1563–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, S.; Li, J.; Luo, H.; Zhu, H. Damage identification in underground tunnel structures with wavelet based residual force vector. Eng. Struct. 2019, 178, 506–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ebrahimi, Z.; Asemani, M.H.; Safavi, A.A. Observer-based controller design for uncertain disturbed Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy systems: A fuzzy wavelet neural network approach. Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Tang, X.; Peng, F.; Yan, R.; Zhu, Z.; Li, Z.; Xin, S. Nonlinear process damping identification using finite amplitude stability and the influence analysis on five-axis milling stability. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2020, 190, 106008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Imregun, M.; Sanliturk, K.Y.; Ewins, D.J. Finite element model updating using frequency response function data—II. case study on a medium-size finite element model. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 1995, 9, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chung, D.D.L. Review: Materials for vibration damping. J. Mater. Sci. 2001, 36, 5733–5737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kurt, M.; Eriten, M.; McFarland, D.M.; Bergman, L.A.; Vakakis, A.F. Strongly nonlinear beats in the dynamics of an elastic system with a strong local stiffness nonlinearity: Analysis and identification. J. Sound Vib. 2014, 333, 2054–2072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Fujimura, M.; Maeda, J.; Morimoto, Y. Aerodynamic damping properties of transmission tower estimated by combining several identification methods. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2010, 74, 1949–1955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  71. Zhang, W. The Spectral Density of the Nonlinear Damping Model: Single DOF Case. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 1990, 35, 1320–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. StaszewskI, W.J. Identification of Damping in Mdof Systems Using Time-Scale Decomposition. J. Sound Vib. 1997, 203, 283–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wierschem, N.E.; Quinn, D.D.; Hubbard, S.A.; Al-Shudeifat, M.A.; McFarland, D.M.; Luo, J.; Fahnestock, L.A.; Spencer, B.F.; Vakakis, A.F.; Bergman, L.A. Passive damping enhancement of a two-degree-of-freedom system through a strongly nonlinear two-degree-of-freedom attachment. J. Sound Vib. 2012, 331, 5393–5407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wu, Y.; Chen, X. Identification of nonlinear aerodynamic damping from stochastic crosswind response of tall buildings using unscented Kalman filter technique. Eng. Struct. 2020, 220, 110791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Elliott, S.J.; Tehrani, M.G.; Langley, R.S. Nonlinear damping and quasi-linear modelling. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2015, 373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Hieu, D.V.; Hai, N.Q.; Hung, D.T. The Equivalent Linearization Method with a Weighted Averaging for Solving Undamped Nonlinear Oscillators. J. Appl. Math. 2018, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Zoghaib, L.; Mattei, P.O. Damping analysis of a free aluminum plate. JVC/J. Vib. Control 2015, 21, 2083–2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Wang, Y.; Low, K.H. Damped response analysis of nonlinear cushion systems by a linearization method. Comput. Struct. 2005, 83, 1584–1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Bajrić, A.; Høgsberg, J. Estimation of hysteretic damping of structures by stochastic subspace identification. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2018, 105, 36–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Gao, G.-Z.; Zhu, L.-D.; Ding, Q.-S. Identification of nonlinear damping and stiffness of spring-suspended sectional model. In Proceedings of the Eighth Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, Chennai, India, 10–14 December 2013; pp. 263–272. [Google Scholar]
  81. Gao, G.; Zhu, L. Nonlinearity of mechanical damping and stiffness of a spring-suspended sectional model system for wind tunnel tests. J. Sound Vib. 2015, 355, 369–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Chen, Z.; Tse, K.T. Identification of physical nonlinearities of a hybrid aeroelastic–pressure balance. Nonlinear Dyn. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Jin, M.; Brake, M.R.W.; Song, H. Comparison of nonlinear system identification methods for free decay measurements with application to jointed structures. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 453, 268–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Jang, T.S. A method for simultaneous identification of the full nonlinear damping and the phase shift and amplitude of the external harmonic excitation in a forced nonlinear oscillator. Comput. Struct. 2013, 120, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Jacobson, K.E.; Kiviaho, J.F.; Kennedy, G.J.; Smith, M.J. Evaluation of time-domain damping identification methods for flutter-constrained optimization. J. Fluids Struct. 2019, 87, 174–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Eret, P.; Meskell, C. A practical approach to parameter identification for a lightly damped, weakly nonlinear system. J. Sound Vib. 2008, 310, 829–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  87. Meskell, C. A decrement method for quantifying nonlinear and linear damping parameters. J. Sound Vib. 2006, 296, 643–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Frizzarin, M.; Feng, M.Q.; Franchetti, P.; Soyoz, S.; Modena, C. Damage detection based on damping analysis of ambient vibration data. Struct. Control Health Monit. 2010, 742–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wu, Z.; Liu, H.; Liu, L.; Yuan, D. Identification of nonlinear viscous damping and Coulomb friction from the free response data. J. Sound Vib. 2007, 304, 407–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Vanwalleghem, J.; De Baere, I.; Loccufier, M.; Van Paepegem, W. External damping losses in measuring the vibration damping properties in lightly damped specimens using transient time-domain methods. J. Sound Vib. 2014, 333, 1596–1611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  91. Baştürk, S.; Uyanik, H.; Kazanci, Z. Nonlinear damped vibrations of a hybrid laminated composite plate subjected to blast load. Procedia Eng. 2014, 88, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  92. Feldman, M.; Braun, S. Nonlinear vibrating system identification via Hilbert decomposition. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2017, 84, 65–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Parrinello, A.; Ghiringhelli, G.L. Evaluation of damping loss factor of flat laminates by sound transmission. J. Sound Vib. 2018, 424, 112–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Schoukens, J.; Ljung, L. Nonlinear System Identification: A User-Oriented Roadmap. IEEE Control Syst. 2019, 39, 28–99. [Google Scholar]
  95. Xu, L. The damping iterative parameter identification method for dynamical systems based on the sine signal measurement. Signal Process. 2016, 120, 660–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Sun, X.; Xu, J.; Wang, F.; Cheng, L. Design and experiment of nonlinear absorber for equal-peak and de-nonlinearity. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 449, 274–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Hamdaoui, M.; Ledi, K.S.; Robin, G.; Daya, E.M. Identification of frequency-dependent viscoelastic damped structures using an adjoint method. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 453, 237–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Amabili, M. Nonlinear damping in large-amplitude vibrations: Modelling and experiments. Nonlinear Dyn. 2018, 93, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Sun, W.; Li, H.; Ying, L. Damping identification for the nonlinear stiffness structure. J. Vibroeng. 2014, 16, 770–780. [Google Scholar]
  100. Thothadri, M.; Casas, R.A.; Moon, F.C.; D’Andrea, R.; Johnson, C.R. Nonlinear system identification of multi-degree-of-freedom systems. Nonlinear Dyn. 2003, 32, 307–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Balasubramanian, P.; Ferrari, G.; Amabili, M. Identification of the viscoelastic response and nonlinear damping of a rubber plate in nonlinear vibration regime. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2018, 111, 376–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Ho, C.; Lang, Z.Q.; Sapiński, B.; Billings, S.A. Vibration isolation using nonlinear damping implemented by a feedback-controlled MR damper. Smart Mater. Struct. 2013, 22, 105010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Pazand, K.; Nobari, A.S. Identification of the effect of debonding on the linear and nonlinear effective damping of an adhesive joint. J. Sound Vib. 2016, 380, 267–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Cherif, R.; Chazot, J.D.; Atalla, N. Damping loss factor estimation of two-dimensional orthotropic structures from a displacement field measurement. J. Sound Vib. 2015, 356, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Roncen, T.; Sinou, J.J.; Lambelin, J.P. Experiments and nonlinear simulations of a rubber isolator subjected to harmonic and random vibrations. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 451, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Colin, M.; Thomas, O.; Grondel, S.; Cattan, É. Very large amplitude vibrations of flexible structures: Experimental identification and validation of a quadratic drag damping model. J. Fluids Struct. 2020, 97, 103056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Pai, F.P.; Huang, L.; Hu, J.; Langewisch, D.R. Time-frequency method for nonlinear system identification and damage detection. Struct. Health Monit. 2008, 7, 103–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Mojahed, A.; Moore, K.; Bergman, L.A.; Vakakis, A.F. Strong geometric softening–hardening nonlinearities in an oscillator composed of linear stiffness and damping elements. Int. J. Non. Linear. Mech. 2018, 107, 94–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Mihalec, M.; Slavič, J.; Boltežar, M. Synchrosqueezed wavelet transform for damping identification. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2016, 80, 324–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Staszewski, W.J.; Robertson, A.N. Time-frequency and time-scale analyses for structural health monitoring. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2007, 365, 449–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Bellizzi, S.; Guillemain, P.; Kronland-Martinet, R. Identification of coupled non-linear modes from free vibration using time-frequency representations. J. Sound Vib. 2001, 243, 191–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Yang, Y.; Peng, Z.K.; Dong, X.J.; Zhang, W.M.; Meng, G. Nonlinear time-varying vibration system identification using parametric time–frequency transform with spline kernel. Nonlinear Dyn. 2016, 85, 1679–1694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Li, H.; Wang, Z.; Lv, H.; Zhou, Z.; Han, Q.; Liu, J.; Qin, Z. Nonlinear vibration analysis of fiber reinforced composite cylindrical shells with partial constrained layer damping treatment. Thin-Walled Struct. 2020, 157, 107000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Kim, Y.; Park, M.J. Identification of the nonlinear roll damping and restoring moment of a FPSO using Hilbert transform. Ocean Eng. 2015, 109, 381–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Franchetti, P.; Modena, C. Nonlinear Damping Identification in Precast Prestressed Reinforced Concrete Beams. Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2009, 24, 577–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Tang, B.; Brennan, M.J.; Gatti, G.; Ferguson, N.S. Experimental characterization of a nonlinear vibration absorber using free vibration. J. Sound Vib. 2016, 367, 159–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Chandra, N.H.; Sekhar, A.S. Nonlinear damping identification in rotors using wavelet transform. Mech. Mach. Theory 2016, 100, 170–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Joseph, L.; Minh-Nghi, T. A wavelet-based approach for the identification of damping in non-linear oscillators. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2005, 47, 1262–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Curadelli, R.O.; Riera, J.D.; Ambrosini, D.; Amani, M.G. Damage detection by means of structural damping identification. Eng. Struct. 2008, 30, 3497–3504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Heller, L.; Foltête, E.; Piranda, J. Experimental identification of nonlinear dynamic properties of built-up structures. J. Sound Vib. 2009, 327, 183–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Dziedziech, K.; Ghosh, A.; Iwaniec, J.; Basu, B.; Staszewski, W.J.; Uhl, T. Analysis of tuned liquid column damper nonlinearities. Eng. Struct. 2018, 171, 1027–1033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Dien, N. Damping identification using the wavelet-based demodulation method: Application to Gearbox signals. Tech. Mech. 2007, 3, 324–333. [Google Scholar]
  123. Chakraborty, A.; Basu, B.; Mitra, M. Identification of modal parameters of a mdof system by modified L-P wavelet packets. J. Sound Vib. 2006, 295, 827–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Kerschen, G.; Worden, K.; Vakakis, A.F.; Golinval, J.C. Nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics: Current status and future directions. In Proceedings of the 25th International Modal Analysis Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 19–22 February 2007. [Google Scholar]
  125. Raze, G.; Kerschen, G. Multimodal vibration damping of nonlinear structures using multiple nonlinear absorbers. Int. J. Non. Linear. Mech. 2020, 119, 103308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Moore, K.J. Characteristic nonlinear system identification: A data-driven approach for local nonlinear attachments. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2019, 131, 335–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Mezghani, F.; Del Rincón, A.F.; Souf, M.A.B.; Fernandez, P.G.; Chaari, F.; Viadero Rueda, F.; Haddar, M. Identification of nonlinear anti-vibration isolator properties. Comptes Rendus Mec. 2017, 345, 386–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Naylor, S.; Platten, M.F.; Wright, J.R.; Cooper, J.E. Identification of multi-degree of freedom systems with nonproportional damping using the resonant decay method. J. Vib. Acoust. Trans. ASME 2004, 126, 298–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Londoño, J.M.; Neild, S.A.; Cooper, J.E. Identification of backbone curves of nonlinear systems from resonance decay responses. J. Sound Vib. 2015, 348, 224–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Krack, M.; Panning-Von Scheidt, L.; Wallaschek, J. A method for nonlinear modal analysis and synthesis: Application to harmonically forced and self-excited mechanical systems. J. Sound Vib. 2013, 332, 6798–6814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Krack, M. Nonlinear modal analysis of nonconservative systems: Extension of the periodic motion concept. Comput. Struct. 2015, 154, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Peter, S.; Schreyer, F.; Leine, R.I. A method for numerical and experimental nonlinear modal analysis of nonsmooth systems. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2019, 120, 793–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Scheel, M.; Peter, S.; Leine, R.I.; Krack, M. A phase resonance approach for modal testing of structures with nonlinear dissipation. J. Sound Vib. 2018, 435, 56–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Scheel, M.; Weigele, T.; Krack, M. Challenging an experimental nonlinear modal analysis method with a new strongly friction-damped structure. J. Sound Vib. 2020, 485, 115580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Karaağaçlı, T.; Özgüven, H.N. Experimental modal analysis of nonlinear systems by using response-controlled stepped-sine testing. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2021, 146, 107023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Juditsky, A.; Hjalmarsson, H.; Benveniste, A.; Delyon, B.; Sjoberg, J.; Zhang, Q. Nonlinear Black-Box Models in System Identifiaction. Neural Netw. 1995, 30, 1–44. [Google Scholar]
  137. Babuška, R.; Verbruggen, H. Neuro-fuzzy methods for nonlinear system identification. Annu. Rev. Control 2003, 27, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Witters, M.; Swevers, J. Black-box model identification for a continuously variable, electro-hydraulic semi-active damper. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2010, 24, 4–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Truong, D.Q.; Ahn, K.K. Nonlinear black-box models and force-sensorless damping control for damping systems using magneto-rheological fluid dampers. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2011, 167, 556–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Khalid, M.; Yusof, R.; Joshani, M.; Selamat, H.; Joshani, M. Nonlinear identification of a magneto-rheological damper based on dynamic neural networks. Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2014, 29, 221–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Dou, L.; Ji, R.; Gao, J. Identification of nonlinear aeroelastic system using fuzzy wavelet neural network. Neurocomputing 2016, 214, 935–943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Lin, R.M.; Zhu, J. Model updating of damped structures using FRF data. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2006, 20, 2200–2218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Michon, G.; Almajid, A.; Aridon, G. Soft hollow particle damping identification in honeycomb structures. J. Sound Vib. 2013, 332, 536–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Pradhan, S.; Modak, S.V. A method for damping matrix identification using frequency response data. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2012, 33, 69–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. García-Palencia, A.J.; Santini-Bell, E. A two-step model updating algorithm for parameter identification of linear elastic damped structures. Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2013, 28, 509–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Meruane, V. Model updating using antiresonant frequencies identified from transmissibility functions. J. Sound Vib. 2013, 332, 807–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Arora, V.; Singh, S.P.; Kundra, T.K. Damped model updating using complex updating parameters. J. Sound Vib. 2009, 320, 438–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Arora, V.; Singh, S.P.; Kundra, T.K. Finite element model updating with damping identification. J. Sound Vib. 2009, 324, 1111–1123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Arora, V. Direct structural damping identification method using complex FRFs. J. Sound Vib. 2014, 339, 304–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Delannoy, J.; Painter, B.; Matthews, B.; Karazis, K. Identification of non-linear damping of nuclear reactor components in case of one-to-one internal resonance. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. 2016, 50541, V04AT05A039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Saleh, B.; Jiang, J.; Fathi, R.; Al-hababi, T.; Xu, Q.; Wang, L.; Ma, A. 30 Years of functionally graded materials: An overview of manufacturing methods, Applications and Future Challenges. Compos Part B Eng. 2020, 201, 108376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Zhu, H.; Yang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Feng, X. A novel air spring dynamic model with pneumatic thermodynamics, effective friction and viscoelastic damping. J. Sound Vib. 2017, 408, 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Worden, K.; Hickey, D.; Haroon, M.; Adams, D.E. Nonlinear system identification of automotive dampers: A time and frequency-domain analysis. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2009, 23, 104–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Metered, H.; Bonello, P.; Oyadiji, S.O. The experimental identification of magnetorheological dampers and evaluation of their controllers. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2010, 24, 976–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Salton, A.T.; Eckhard, D.; Flores, J.V.; Fernandes, G.; Azevedo, G. Disturbance observer and nonlinear damping control for fast tracking quadrotor vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Conference on Control Applications (CCA), Buenos Aires, Argentina, 19–22 September 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Bonisoli, E.; Lisitano, D.; Vigliani, A. Damping identification and localisation via Layer Method: Experimental application to a vehicle chassis focused on shock absorbers effects. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2019, 116, 194–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Maldonado, D.J.G.; Karev, A.; Hagedorn, P.; Ritto, T.G.; Sampaio, R. Analysis of a rotordynamic system with anisotropy and nonlinearity using the Floquet theory and the method of normal forms. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 453, 201–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Jith, J.; Sarkar, S. A model order reduction technique for systems with nonlinear frequency dependent damping. Appl. Math. Model. 2020, 77, 1662–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Gary, K.; Ertas, B. Experimental Rotordynamic Force Coefficients for a Diffusion Bonded Compliant Hybrid Journal Gas Bearing Utilizing Fluid-Filled Hermetic Dampers. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 2020, 142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Lubell, D.R.; Wade, J.L.; Chauhan, N.S.; Nourse, J.G. Identification and correction of rotor instability in an oil-free gas turbine. Proc. ASME Turbo Expo 2008, 5, 961–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Tasker, F.; Chopra, I. Nonlinear damping estimation from rotor stability data using time and frequency domain techniques. AIAA J. 1992, 30, 1383–1391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Zhang, J.X.; Roberts, J.B. A frequency domain parametric identification method for studying the non-linear performance of squeeze-film dampers. J. Sound Vib. 1996, 189, 173–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Smith, C.B.; Wereley, N.M. Linear and nonlinear damping identification in helicopter rotor systems. Collect. Tech. Pap. AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Struct. Struct. Dyn. Mater. Conf. 1998, 4, 2473–2485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Smith, C.B.; Wereley, N.M. Nonlinear damping identification from transient data. AIAA J. 1999, 37, 1625–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Yan, S.; Dowell, E.H.; Lin, B. Effects of nonlinear damping suspension on nonperiodic motions of a flexible rotor in journal bearings. Nonlinear Dyn. 2014, 78, 1435–1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Yu, M.; Hahn, E.J.; Liu, J.; Lu, Z. A quasi-modal parameter based system identification procedure with non-proportional hysteretic damping. J. Sound Vib. 2016, 382, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Yamada, H.; Taura, H.; Kaneko, S. Numerical and Experimental Analyses of the Dynamic Characteristics of Journal Bearings with Square Dimples. J. Tribol. 2018, 140, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Delgado, A.; Ertas, B. Dynamic Characterization of a Novel Externally Pressurized Compliantly Damped Gas-Lubricated Bearing with Hermetically Sealed Squeeze Film Damper Modules. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 2019, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Gao, G.; Zhu, L.; Li, J.; Han, W. Modelling nonlinear aerodynamic damping during transverse aerodynamic instabilities for slender rectangular prisms with typical side ratios. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2020, 197, 104064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Wang, C.; Xiao, J.; Wang, C.; Zhang, C. Nonlinear damping and nonlinear responses of recycled aggregate concrete frames under earthquake loading. Eng. Struct. 2019, 201, 109575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Zarafshan, A.; Ansari, F.; Taylor, T. Field tests and verification of damping calculation methods for operating highway bridges. J. Civ. Struct. Health Monit. 2014, 4, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Dammika, A.J.; Yamaguchi, H.; Kawarai, K.; Yoshioka, T.; Matsumoto, Y. Energy-based damping estimation of steel bridges and its applicability to damage detection. In Proceedings of the The Thirteenth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction (EASEC-13), Sapporo, Japan, 11–13 September 2013. [Google Scholar]
  173. Dammika, A.J.; Kawarai, K.; Yamaguchi, H.; Matsumoto, Y.; Yoshioka, T. Analytical damping evaluation complementary to experimental structural health monitoring of bridges. J. Bridg. Eng. 2015, 20, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Avci, O. Nonlinear damping in floor vibrations serviceability: Verification on a laboratory structure. Conf. Proc. Soc. Exp. Mech. Ser. 2017, 2 Part F2, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Demarie, G.V.; Sabia, D. Non-linear Damping and Frequency Identification in a Progressively Damaged, R.C. Element. Exp. Mech. 2011, 51, 229–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Hajj, M.R.; Fung, J.; Nayfeh, A.H.; O’f Fahey, S. Damping identification using perturbation techniques and higher-order spectra. Nonlinear Dyn. 2000, 23, 189–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Magalhães, F.; Cunha, Á.; Caetano, E.; Brincker, R. Damping estimation using free decays and ambient vibration tests. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2010, 24, 1274–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Venanzi, I.; Ierimonti, L.; Ubertini, F. An enhanced nonlinear damping approach accounting for system constraints in active mass dampers. J. Sound Vib. 2015, 357, 2–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Publications, T. Damage Localization in Reinforced Concrete Structures by using Damping Measurements. Key Eng. Mater. Vols. 167-168 1999, 168, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Liao, X.; Zhang, J. Energy balancing method to identify nonlinear damping of bolted-joint interface. Key Eng. Mater. 2016, 693, 318–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Ling, X.; Haldar, A. Element level system identification with unknown input with Rayleigh damping. J. Eng. Mech. 2004, 130, 877–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Kareem, A.; Gurley, K. Damping in structures: Its evaluation and treatment of uncertainty. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 1996, 59, 131–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Huang, Z.; Gu, M. Envelope Random Decrement Technique for Identification of Nonlinear Damping of Tall Buildings. J. Struct. Eng. (United States) 2016, 142, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Béliveau, J.G. Identification of viscous damping in structures from modal information. J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME 1976, 43, 335–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Mimura, T.; Mita, A. Automatic Estimation of Natural Frequencies and Damping Ratios of Building Structures. Procedia Eng. 2017, 188, 163–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Hou, X.R.; Zou, Z.J. Parameter identification of nonlinear roll motion equation for floating structures in irregular waves. Appl. Ocean Res. 2016, 55, 66–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Yu, L.; Ma, N.; Wang, S. Parametric roll prediction of the KCS containership in head waves with emphasis on the roll damping and nonlinear restoring moment. Ocean Eng. 2019, 188, 106298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Han, S.L.; Kinoshita, T. Stochastic inverse identification of nonlinear roll damping moment of a ship moving at nonzero-forward speeds. Math. Probl. Eng. 2012, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Jang, T.S.; Choi, H.S.; Han, S.L. A new method for detecting non-linear damping and restoring forces in non-linear oscillation systems from transient data. Int. J. Non. Linear. Mech. 2009, 44, 801–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Asgari, P.; Fernandes, A.C.; Low, Y.M. Most often instantaneous rotation center (MOIRC) for roll damping assessment in the free decay test of a FPSO. Appl. Ocean Res. 2020, 95, 102014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Mirri, D.; Iuculano, G.; Filicori, F.; Pasini, G.; Vannini, G.; Gualtieri, G.P. A modified Volterra series approach for nonlinear dynamic systems modeling. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Fundam. Theory Appl. 2002, 49, 1118–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Golding, B.; Ross, A.; Fossen, T.I. Identification of Nonlinear Viscous Damping for Marine Vessels. IFAC Proc. Vol. 2006, 39, 332–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Jang, T.S.; Son, J.W.; Han, S.L.; Sung, H.G.; Lee, S.K.; Shin, S.C. A Numerical Investigation on Nonparametric Identification of Nonlinear Roll Damping Moment of a Ship from Transient Response. Open Ocean Eng. J. 2010, 3, 100–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Jang, T.S.; Kwon, S.H.; Lee, J.H. Recovering the functional form of the nonlinear roll damping of ships from a free-roll decay experiment: An inverse formulism. Ocean Eng. 2010, 37, 1337–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Jang, T.S. Non-parametric simultaneous identification of both the nonlinear damping and restoring characteristics of nonlinear systems whose dampings depend on velocity alone. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2011, 25, 1159–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Han, S.L.; Kinoshita, T. Nonlinear damping identification in nonlinear dynamic system based on stochastic inverse approach. Math. Probl. Eng. 2012, 2012, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Sathyaseelan, D.; Hariharan, G.; Kannan, K. Parameter identification for nonlinear damping coefficient from large-amplitude ship roll motion using wavelets. Beni-Suef Univ. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2017, 6, 138–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.