‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﺮﺥ‬

‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺟﺒﺎﺭﺯﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺼﻴﻞ ﮐﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﺍﺭﺷﺪ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﺣﺴﻴﻨﯽ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩﻳﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻣﺪﻳﺮ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺷﺮﻳﺎﻧﻬﺎﯼ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﯽ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺼﻮﺭ ﺿﻴﺎﺋﯽ ﻓﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩﻳﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻣﺪﻳﺮ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮏ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬

‫‪ -۲‬ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬ ‫‪ -۱‬ﭼﮑﻴﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻣـﺮﻭﺯﻩ ﺭﻭﺷﻬـﺎﯼ ﺗﺤﻠﻴـﻠﯽ ﻣﺘـﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺟﺮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻋﻀـﺎﯼ‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪ )ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺟﺮﻡ ﻣﺘﻤﺮﮐﺰ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺟﺮﻡ‬
‫ﺳــﺎﺯﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑــﻪ ﺍﺟــﺰﺍﯼ ﮐــﻮﭼــﮑﺘــﺮ ﺗﻘـﺴﻴــﻢ ﻣﯽ ﮐـﻨـﻨـﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ( ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ‬
‫ﻓـﺮﻣـﻮﻝ ﺑـﻨﺪﯼ ﺳﺨـﺘﯽ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺍﺟـﺰﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺑـﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﯽ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺟﺮﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﯽ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺟﺮﻡ ﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ )‪(Consistant Mass Matrix‬‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﮐﺮﻧﺸﻬﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺸﺘﻘﺎﺕ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺟﺮﻡ ﻣﺘﻤﺮﮐﺰ)‪ (Lumped Mass Matrix‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﯽﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺧﻄﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﯽﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﯼ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺟﺪﺍﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﺀ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﯽ ﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﯽ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﯼ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺴﯽ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴـﺐ‪ ،‬ﺗـﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺟـﺮﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﻔـﺎﺩﻩ ﺷـﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳـﮏ ﺗـﻮﺯﻳﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺗﻘـﺮﻳﺒﯽ ﻭ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬﺎﯼ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﯼ ﺧﻄﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ‪ ،‬ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺑـﺎﺷﻨﺪ؛ ﺍﻣــﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔـﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺗـﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨـﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‬ ‫ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻣﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫)‪ (Dynamic Stiffness Matrix‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺘﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﺭﻭﺷﻬﺎﯼ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻧﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳﺞ ﻭ ﮐﻮﺑﻪ ﻣﺸـﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘـﺎﻟـﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔـﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺑـﺮﻧـﺎﻣـﻪ ﺍﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﻣﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫‪ (Wave Propagation in Structures) WPS‬ﮐــﻪ ﺑـﺮ ﺍﺳــﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﭘﻴـﻮﺳﺘﺔ ﺟــﺮﻡ ﺭﻭﯼ ﺍﻋﻀـﺎ‪ ،‬ﺧﻄــﺎﯼ ﻧــﺎﺷﯽ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪ ﺟﺮﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﯽ ﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﺩﻗﺖ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﺭﻳﻪ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻌﺪﯼ ﻭ‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬـﺎ ﻧﺴـﺒﺖ ﺑـﻪ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺍﻋﻀﺎ ﻭ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﺗﺤـﺮﻳﮏ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻧﮕﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺗﺪﻭﻳﻦ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺣﺬﻑ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺪ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺧﻄﺎﯼ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳﺨـﺘﯽ ﺩﻳـﻨﺎﻣﻴـﮑﯽ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑـﺘـﺪﺍ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﮐﻮﻟﻮﺳﮏ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻬﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻭﺍﻳــﻞ ﺩﻫــﺔ ‪ ۱۹۴۰‬ﺑﺴـﻂ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷـﺪ ]‪ [۱‬ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺘ ﹰﺎ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﯼ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬـﺎﯼ ﺍﺭﺗﻌـﺎﺷـﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺗﻴﺮﯼ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‪-‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ -‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺁﺳﻴﺐ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﯼ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺑﻬﺒﻮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪﮔﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻧﺎﺷﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﮐﻤﮏ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﻝ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﯽ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ‬
‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﯽ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﯼ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎﻥ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪ ]‪ ۱‬ﺍﻟﯽ ‪.[۹‬‬
‫ﮐﻠﻴﺪﻭﺍﮊﻩ ﻫﺎ‪ :‬ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‪ ،‬ﻧﺮﺥ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻳﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻥ ]‪ ۵ ،۴‬ﻭ ‪ [۶‬ﺑﻪ ﮐﻤﮏ ﺟﻮﺍﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ‬
‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‪.‬‬
‫‪۱۱‬‬
‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‬
 ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺷﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﯼ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﻮﺗﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺝ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺑـﺮ ﺣـﺮﮐـﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﮐﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺩﺍﻻﻣﺒﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻞ ﮐﺎﺭ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﯼ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﻻﮔﺮﺍﻧﮋ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺻﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺴﯽ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺭﺗﻌﺎﺵ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻠﺘﻮﻥ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﯼ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‪-‬‬ ‫ﺍﻋﻀﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻓﻮﺭﻳﺔ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎﺯﯼ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎ‬
‫ﮐﺮﺩ ]‪.[۱۳‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺴﯽ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺷﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﯽ ﺭﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺠﻢ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴـﮑﯽ ﻫﻤﺎﻧـﻨﺪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﻌﻴـﻴﻦ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﯽ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻠﯽ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺍﺣﻞ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ‪-‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﺍﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ‪ Matlab 5.3‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ‪WPS‬‬
‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳـﺲ ﺳﺨﺘـﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴـﮑﯽ ﮐﻞ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻬﻴﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺧﻄﯽ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎﯼ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﯼ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﺳـﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺑﻌﺪﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺑـﺎﺭﮔـﺬﺍﺭﻳﻬـﺎﯼ ﭼﻨـﺪ ﺗﮑـﻴﻪ ﮔﺎﻫﯽ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻳﮏ ﻋﻀﻮ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﮕﻮﺭﻳﺘﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ]‪ [۱۰‬ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪ (۱‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪(۲‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘـﻔـﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﻧـﺮﻡ ﺍﻓـﺰﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑـﺮ ﮐﻨﺘـﺮﻝ ﺩﻗﺖ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬
‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ]‪:[۱۴‬‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ‬
‫‪∂ 2u‬‬ ‫‪∂ 2u‬‬ ‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺳـﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﻣﮑـﺎﻥ ﭘـﺬﻳـﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪EA‬‬ ‫‪− ρA‬‬ ‫‪=0‬‬ ‫)‪(۱‬‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫‪∂x‬‬ ‫‪∂t 2‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺑﻪ‬
‫) ‪­ F1 ½ EA kL ªCos (kL‬‬ ‫½ ‪- 1 º ­u 1‬‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺭﻭﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ‬
‫=¾ ®‬
‫‪F‬‬
‫¿‪¯ 2‬‬ ‫‪L‬‬ ‫‪Sin‬‬ ‫(‬‫‪kL‬‬ ‫)‬ ‫«‬
‫¬‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪1‬‬ ‫‪Cos‬‬ ‫¿¾ ‪(kL )»¼ ®¯u2‬‬
‫)‪(۲‬‬ ‫ﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﯼ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻟﯽ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﻧــﺎﺷﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ‬
‫) ‪EA (kL ) ªCos (kL‬‬ ‫‪−1 º‬‬ ‫‪ρA‬‬
‫= ‪KD‬‬ ‫«‬ ‫‪», k = ω‬‬
‫‪L sin (kL ) ¬ − 1‬‬ ‫¼) ‪Cos (kL‬‬ ‫‪EA‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺣﺎﺋﺰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ )‪ (۱‬ﻭ )‪ L ، A, E , ρ ،(۲‬ﻭ ‪ u‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﭼﮕﺎﻟﯽ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﯽ ﺩﻭ ﻋﻀﻮ ﻣﻴﻠﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻴـﺮ ﺑـﺎ‬
‫ﺟﺮﻣﯽ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻴﺴﻴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﻣﻴﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻃـﻮﻝ ﻣﻴﻠـﻪ‬ ‫ﻓـﺮﻣـﻮﻝ ﺑـﻨﺪﯼ ﺳﺨـﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻭ ﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻭ ﺟــﺎ ﺑــﻪ ﺟــﺎﻳﯽ ﻣﺤـﻮﺭﯼ ﻣﻴﻠﻪ‪ F1 ،‬ﻭ ‪ F2‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﯼ ﮔﺮﻫﯽ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻳﻬﺎﯼ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﯽ‬
‫)ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ،۱‬ﺍﻟﻒ(‪ u1 ،‬ﻭ ‪ u2‬ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﮔﺮﻫﯽ ﻭ ‪ k‬ﻋﺪﺩ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺳﻪ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻭ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺗﺤـﺖ ﺗﺤـﺮﻳﮏ ﻳﮏ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻣﺜﻠﺜﯽ ﺷﺒـﻪ ﺳﻴﻨـﻮﺳﯽ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺗـﺮﻳـﺲ ﺳـﺨـﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨـﺎﻣﻴـﮑﯽ ﺗﻴـﺮ ﺧـﻤﺸﯽ ﺑـﺎ ﻣﻌـﺎﺩﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺍﻭﻟﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪ (۳‬ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪(۴‬‬ ‫‪ WPS‬ﺑﺎ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ANSYS 5.4‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﯽ ﺁﻳﺪ]‪:[۹‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﺮﺥ‬
‫‪∂4v‬‬ ‫‪∂ 2v‬‬ ‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ‬
‫‪EI‬‬ ‫‪− ρA‬‬ ‫‪=0‬‬ ‫)‪( ۳‬‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫‪∂x‬‬ ‫‪∂t 2‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺳﻪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﺯﻟـﺰﻟﻪ ﻧـﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳـﺞ ﮐﻪ‬
‫)‪(۴‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ]‪ ۱۱‬ﻭ ‪[۱۲‬‬
‫½ ‪­ F1‬‬ ‫‪ª a‬‬ ‫‪γL‬‬ ‫‪−a‬‬ ‫½ ‪γL º ­ v1‬‬ ‫‪1‬‬
‫‪°‬‬ ‫‪°‬‬ ‫«‬ ‫‪»° °‬‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﯼ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻟﯽ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﻧﺎﺷﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ‬
‫« ‪° 1 ° EI‬‬
‫‪M‬‬ ‫‪βL2‬‬ ‫‪− γL β L2 » °φ1 °‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪ρA‬‬
‫®‬ ‫« ‪¾= 3‬‬ ‫‪® ¾, k = ω‬‬
‫« ‪° F2 ° L‬‬ ‫‪a‬‬ ‫‪− γ L» °v2 °‬‬ ‫‪EI‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫»‬
‫‪°‬‬
‫‪¯M 2 °‬‬
‫¿‬ ‫‪«¬ S ym‬‬ ‫¿‪βL2 »¼ °¯φ 2 °‬‬

‫ﮐﻪ‪:‬‬ ‫‪ -۳‬ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‬

‫ﻣـﺮﺣـﻠﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺑـﻪ ﺩﺳـﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﻣـﺎﺗـﺮﻳـﺲ ﺳـﺨﺘﯽ‬
‫‪α = (CSh + SCh )(kL )3 / det, α = (S + Sh )(kL )3 / det‬‬
‫‪β = (− CSh + SCh )(kL ) / det, β = (− S + Sh )(kL ) / det‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑـﯽ ﻳـﮏ ﻋﻀـﻮ ﺳـﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﯼ‪ ،‬ﻓـﺮﻣﻮﻝ ﺑﻨـﺪﯼ ﻣﻌـﺎﺩﻻﺕ‬
‫‪γ = (− C + Ch )(kL)2 / det, γ = (S .Sh )(kL )2 / det‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﺍﺭﺗﻌﺎﺵ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺳﺎﻝ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺴﺘﺎﻥ ‪۸۰‬‬ ‫‪۱۲‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﯽ ﺭﻏﻢ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﮑﺎﻡ ﮐﺸﺸﯽ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﯽ‬ ‫) ‪det = 1 − C .Ch , C = Cos (kL ), S = Sin (kL ), Ch = Cos (kL‬‬
‫)‪(۵‬‬
‫) ‪Sh = Sin h (kL‬‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﻻﻳﯽ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‪-‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪ I ،(۴‬ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﺳﯽ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ‪ M 1 ،‬ﻭ ‪ M 2‬ﻟﻨﮕﺮﻫﺎﯼ‬
‫ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﮔﺮﻫﯽ‪ v1 ،‬ﻭ ‪ v2‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻣﮑﺎﻧﻬــﺎﯼ ﺟــﺎﻧﺒﯽ ﮔــﺮﻫﯽ ﻭ ‪ φ1‬ﻭ ‪φ 2‬‬

‫ﭼﺮﺧﺸﻬﺎﯼ ﮔﺮﻫﯽ ﻭ ‪ V1‬ﻭ ‪ V2‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺮﺷﯽ ﮔﺮﻫﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‬

‫)ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ،۱‬ﺏ(‪ .‬ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻴﻠﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ‪-‬‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ‪ ،‬ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻳﮏ‬
‫ﻋﻀﻮ ﺗﻴﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﻣﻮﺝ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬

‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )‪ :(١‬ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦﺗﺮﮎ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﮔﯽ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺟﺎﻥ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ]‪ ۱۱‬ﻭ‪[۱۲‬‬

‫ﮐﺎﺭﻣﻦ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻭﺯ ]‪ [۱۸‬ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﻓﻠﺰﺍﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﯼ‬ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۱‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﯼ ﮔﺮﻫﯽ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﯼ ]‪[۱‬‬

‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻫﯽ ﺭﻭﯼ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻣﺴﯽ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻫﯽ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﯼ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﺑﻊ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﺑﯽ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻭ ﺷﮑﻞ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﮐﺸﺶ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ (۲‬ﺩﻳﺪﻩ‪-‬‬ ‫ﻣﺪﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﺤـﺪﻭﺩﯼ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺠﻬﻮﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺟﺮﻡ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺷﮑﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﺧﻤﻴﺮﯼ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﻭ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺍﻋﻀﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎﺯﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﻼﺳﺘﻴﮏ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﺗﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -۴‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻬﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ‬
‫ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﻬﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﯼ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﻣﺨﺘﻠـﻔﯽ ﻣﺎﻧﻨـﺪ ﺩﻣـﺎ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺟـﺔ ﺧﻠﻮﺹ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﺷﺘﯽ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﯼ ﺩﺍﻧﻪ ﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺗﻨﺸﻬﺎﯼ‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(٢‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻣﺴﯽ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻬﺎﯼ‬ ‫ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﯼ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﻞ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺿﺮﺑﻪ )ﻣﺘﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ( ]‪[۱۸‬‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﺭﺯ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻤﺎﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﺔ ﻧﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳﺞ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﻗﺪﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺿﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺷﮑﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﭘﻼﺳﺘﻴﮏ‬ ‫ﺁﻣـﺮﻳﮑـﺎ ﺍﺗﻔـﺎﻕ ﺍﻓﺘـﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳـﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼـﻮﻳـﺮ )‪ (۱‬ﺷﮑـﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺻﺖ ﮐﻤﺘﺮﯼ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﮐﻮﭼﮑﺘﺮﯼ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺷﮑﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﺧﻤﻴﺮﯼ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﺪ ]‪ ۱۱‬ﻭ ‪.[۱۲‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺮﮊﯼ ﺟﺬﺏ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻫﯽ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﯼ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ‬
‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﺪ )ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻋـﺖ ﺑﺎﺭﮔـﺬﺍﺭﯼ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺤﻨـﯽ ﺗﻨﺶ‪-‬ﮐـﺮﻧﺶ‪ ،‬ﺭﺷـﺪ ﻣﯽ ﮐـﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺛﺮﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﻣﺎ ﺣﺎﺩﺙ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﮑﺎﻣﯽ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ]‪ ۱۶ ،۱۵‬ﻭ ‪.[۱۷‬‬
‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‪۱۳‬‬
‫ﺳﻮﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻪ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ‪ ۰/۱ ،۱‬ﻭ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ )‪ ۱۰ ،۱‬ﻭ‬
‫‪ ۵۰‬ﻫﺮﺗﺰ( ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪) ANSYS 5.4‬ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮏ ﻭ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ( ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ‬
‫ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ،۳‬ﭖ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﯼ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺩﻭ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻋﻀﻮ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻗﺖ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﺬﺍﺭﻧﺪ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﻣﻮﺝ‬
‫ﻋﺒﻮﺭﯼ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﭘـﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘـﺮﻫﺎ ﺑـﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻭﻳـﮋﻩ ﺍﯼ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ؛ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺍﻋﻀﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺸﮑﻠﯽ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺣﺬﻑ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻ )ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﻭ‬
‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ( ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﯽ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ ANSYS 5.4‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ‬
‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺟﺎﻧﺒﯽ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ A‬ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr3-1‬ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻠﻬﺎﯼ )‪ ۴‬ﺗﺎ ‪(۶‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺧﻮﺑﯽ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬﺎﯼ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻭ‬
‫ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ ‪ ANSYS‬ﺗﺎ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺍﻣــﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑــﺎ‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۴‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ﻳﮏ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ‬
‫ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ANSYS‬‬
‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻣﺪﻝ ﻳﮏ ﻭ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ‬
‫ﺑـﺎ ﻣـﺪﻝ ‪ WPS‬ﺧـﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸـﺎﻥ ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ‬
‫ﺟـﺎ ﺑـﻪ ﺟـﺎﻳـﯽ ﺑـﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﻳـﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻟـﺰﻟﻪ ﻫﺎ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺻﺤﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ‬
‫‪ -۵‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺳﻪ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻭ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﮐﻤﮏ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﺗﺤﺖ ﻳﮏ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻣﺜﻠﺜﯽ ﺷﺒﻪ ﺳﻴﻨﻮﺳﯽ‬
‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ ANSYS 5.4‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﮐﻤﮏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﺻﺤﺖ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﯼ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﺔ‬
‫‪ WPS‬ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬﺎ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻭ ﺳﻪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﺯﻟـﺰﻟـﺔ ﻧـﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳـﺞ ﺍﻧﺠـﺎﻡ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺰﺗﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ‬
‫ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﯽ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -۱-۵‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﺔ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ ANSYS 5.4‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺏ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﺳﻪ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺏ ﺳﻪ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻭ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﺔ ‪) fr3-1‬ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ،۳‬ﺍﻟﻒ( ﺗﺤﺖ‬
‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﻣﺜﻠﺜﯽ ﺷﺒﻪ ﺳﻴﻨﻮﺳﯽ )ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ،۳‬ﺏ( ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۳‬ﻗﺎﺏ ﺳﻪ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮏ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻣﺜﻠﺜﯽ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ‪ ، dt‬ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﺑﻪ ‪ ۱۰۰‬ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﮐﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﺟﻮﺍﺑﻬﺎ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺟــﺎﻧﺒﯽ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ A‬ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ‬
‫ﺳﺎﻝ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺴﺘﺎﻥ ‪۸۰‬‬ ‫‪۱۴‬‬
 ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﯽ ﻣﺪﻝ ﻳﮏ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ ﻭ ﺣﺘﯽ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﻘـﺎﻝ ﭘـﺎﻟـﺲ ﻫﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﺔ‬
‫ﮐـﺮﻧـﺶ ﻫـﺎﯼ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳـﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮑﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ )ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪(A‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺳﻮﻡ )ﺷﮑﻠﻬﺎﯼ ‪ ۷‬ﺗﺎ ‪ (۹‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﺪ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻠـﯽ ﺭﻏـﻢ ﺗﻄـﺎﺑـﻖ ﭘـﺎﺳـﺦ ﺟـﺎ ﺑـﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺗﺎ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺪﻝ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻭ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ ‪ ANSYS‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ )ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ‬
‫‪ ۱۰‬ﻫﺮﺗﺰ( ﻭ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻓﺎﺣﺸﯽ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﮏ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﻣﻮﺝ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ‪ WPS‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪-‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻭ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻧﻤﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﯽ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﯼ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‬
‫ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ )ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﮐﻠﯽ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻻ( ﻳﮏ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺝ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﺑﺎﻻ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۶‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻭ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻋﻀﻮﯼ ﺭﺷﺪ‬
‫ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ANSYS 5.4‬‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩﯼ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ‬
‫ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﯽ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ‪ ،‬ﻟﺰﻭﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺘﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ؛ ﺯﻳﺮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻄﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪-‬‬
‫ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۷‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ﻳﮏ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ANSYS 5.4‬‬

‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﯼ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺴﯽ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻬﺎﯼ‬

‫ﺟـﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟـﺎﻳﯽ ﺯﻟـﺰﻟﻪ ﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ‪ ۵‬ﺗﺎ ‪ ۱۰‬ﻫﺮﺗﺰ )ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۲‬ﺗﺎ ‪۰/۱‬‬
‫ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ( ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯽ ﺭﺳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺪﻝ‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۵‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ‬
‫ﻳـﮏ ﻋﻀـﻮﯼ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤـﻠﻴـﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫـﺎ ﻣﯽﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺐ‬ ‫ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ANSYS 5.4‬‬

‫ﮐﺎﻓﯽ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬

‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‪۱۵‬‬

‫‪ -۲-۵‬ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐـﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻳﮏ ﻗـﺎﺏ ﺧﻤـﺸﯽ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬﺎﯼ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺻــﺎﺩﻕ ﺍﺳـﺖ؛ ﺍﻣﺎ‬
‫ﻫﺸﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻤـﺎﻥ ﮔـﻮﻧﻪ ﮐـﻪ ﻣﺸـﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺷـﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻣـﻮﺭﺩ ﮐﺮﻧﺸﻬﺎﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﯼ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﻘﺎﺕ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻧﺎﭼﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻬﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﯼ‬ ‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺻﺤﺖ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ؛ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﮐﺎﺭﺁﻣﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﯼ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﺗﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺗﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﯽﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻗﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻳﻬﺎﯼ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺎﻃﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﯽ ﮐﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﻳﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﯼ‬
‫ﺍﻋﻀـﺎ )ﺗﻴـﺮ ﻳـﺎ ﺳﺘـﻮﻥ( ﻣﻘـﺎﺩﻳـﺮ ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜـﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ؛‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺍﻋﻀﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﯽ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ‪ WPS‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮏ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ‬
‫ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﻧﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳﺞ ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ (۱۰‬ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻂ ﻭﺳﻂ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺭﻥ‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﯼ‬
‫ﺗﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺳﺘﻮﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻫﻢ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ‪:‬‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۸‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ‬
‫‪ -‬ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻴﺮﻫﺎﯼ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻗﺒﻞ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ANSYS 5.4‬‬
‫ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﺖ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺑـﺎﻻ ﺭﺍ ﻣﯽ ﺗـﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﻌﮑـﺎﺱ ﻣﻮﺝ ﻋﺒﻮﺭﯼ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﯼ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺏ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﮐﺮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﺓ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻳﮏ ﺗﻴﺮ ﻳﮑﺴﺮ‬
‫ﮔﻴﺮﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -‬ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺘﻮﻧﻬﺎﯼ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻻ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻗﺒﻞ ﺁﺧﺮ ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺎﻃﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻧﯽ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﯽ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ )ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻳﮏ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﻭ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻳﮏ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﺗﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪.‬‬

‫‪ -۶‬ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ‬

‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ‪-‬‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻠﯽ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺑﺰﺭﮒ ﺑـﻮﺩﻥ ﻳـﺎ ﮐـﻮﭼـﮏ ﺑـﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﻋﻀــﺎ ﻭ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ‬ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۹‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﭘﺮﻳﻮﺩ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ‪ WPS‬ﻭ ‪ANSYS 5.4‬‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﯽ ﻣﺪﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﯼ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻭ ﻳــﺎ‬
‫ﺳﺎﻝ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺴﺘﺎﻥ ‪۸۰‬‬ ‫‪۱۶‬‬
 ‫ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤـﻞ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ )ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﮐﻒ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺩﻭﻡ(‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۱۱‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ )‪(fr4-4‬‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۱۰‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬

‫ﺣﺘﯽ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﮕﺎﺷــﺖ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﻣﯽ ﺗــﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ‬

‫ﻣﺆﺛﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺳﻪ ﻗﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۱۲‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ )‪(fr4-2‬‬
‫ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﻓﻮﻻﺩﯼ ﺭﺍ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫)ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ،(۱۱‬ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ )ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ (۱۲‬ﻭ ﻳﮏ‬
‫ﻳﮏ ﺟﻬﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺏ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ )ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ (۱۳‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ‪ WPS‬ﻣﺪﻝ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﺔ ﻧﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳﺞ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺩ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻳﮏ ﻗﺎﺏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ]‪[١١‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﯽ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ (١٤‬ﺍﻟﮕﻮﯼ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻝ ﺗﻴﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ‪-‬‬
‫ﺗﻴﺮ )ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻳﮏ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺗﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ( ﺗﺸﮑﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻃﻊ‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻼﻣﺖ ﺗﻮﭘﺮ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺗﺮﮎ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﮔﯽ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻞ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺏ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﺎﺕ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﮑﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺑﻬﺎﯼ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻝ ﺗﻴﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﮑﺮﺭﹰﺍ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺑﺨﺶ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﮑﺴﺘﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺳﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻻ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺠﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻻ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺗﻴﺮﻫﺎﯼ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻭ ﺳﺘﻮﻧﻬﺎﯼ ﻃﺒﻘﺎﺕ ﺁﺧﺮ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴــﻞ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-4‬ﻭ ‪ fr4-2‬ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬

‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‪۱۷‬‬

‫ﺳﺘﻮﻧﻬﺎﯼ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ(‪ .‬ﻧﮑﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﮑﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪﻫﺎﯼ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺳﺘﻮﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ )ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ﹰﺎ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ(‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﯼ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﺎﻻﻳﯽ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﯽﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﯽ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺗﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﮕﯽ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﮐﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺭﺙ ﺭﻳﺞ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ‪.(۲‬‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ )‪ :(۱‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺩﻭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-2‬ﻭ ‪fr4-4‬‬

‫ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ )‪(Hz‬‬ ‫ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(۱۳‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻗﺎﺏ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ )‪(fr4-B‬‬
‫‪fr4-4‬‬ ‫‪fr4-2‬‬ ‫ﻣﺪ‬
‫‪۱/۴۵‬‬ ‫‪۱/۸۵‬‬ ‫‪۱‬‬
‫‪۳/۹۰‬‬ ‫‪۴/۷۸‬‬ ‫‪۲‬‬
‫‪۶/۰۲‬‬ ‫‪۷/۰۷‬‬ ‫‪۳‬‬
‫‪۷/۶۹‬‬ ‫‪۷/۱۳‬‬ ‫‪۴‬‬
‫‪۱۳/۲۵‬‬ ‫‪۷/۶۲‬‬ ‫‪۵‬‬
‫‪۱۵/۱۹‬‬ ‫‪۷/۸۸‬‬ ‫‪۶‬‬
‫‪۱۹/۶۹‬‬ ‫‪۷/۹۳‬‬ ‫‪۷‬‬
‫‪۲۰/۲۷‬‬ ‫‪۹/۰۹‬‬ ‫‪۸‬‬
‫‪۲۰/۶۰‬‬ ‫‪۹/۳۱‬‬ ‫‪۹‬‬
‫‪۲۰/۸۳‬‬ ‫‪۹/۴۱‬‬ ‫‪۱۰‬‬

‫ﮐﻠﻴﺔ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﯽ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‬ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ :(١٤‬ﺍﻟﮕﻮﯼ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺗﻴﺮﻫﺎﯼ ﻗﺎﺏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ]‪[۱۱‬‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺑﺎ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ؛ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺁﻳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺎﺭﻣﻮﻧﻴﮏ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺗﺸﮑﻴﻞ ﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ‬ ‫ﻧﮑﺘﻪ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﻭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-2‬ﻭ ‪ fr4-4‬ﺭﺷﺪ‬
‫ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺪﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺸﺪﻳﺪ‪-‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-2‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪ fr4-4‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷـﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻳـﺎ ﻗـﺎﺑﻠـﻴﺖ ﻧﻤـﺎﻳﺶ ﭼﻨـﻴﻦ ﻣـﺆﻟﻔـﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﯽ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺧﺮﻭﺟﯽ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭘﺎﻟﺲ ﮐﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻣﺪﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ‪-‬‬
‫ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﺸﮑﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺴﯽ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺴﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﺷﻮﺩ ‪ ۱۲/۵‬ﻫﺮﺗﺰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﺏ‬
‫ﮐﻮﭼﮏ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﯼ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫‪ fr4-4‬ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﯽ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺩﻭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-2‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ؟ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ )‪ (۲‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺩﻭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬ ‫‪ fr4-4‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ )‪ (۱‬ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ‪ ۰/۰۲‬ﻭ ‪ ۰/۰۰۲‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻋﻀﻮ ‪ A‬ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪fr4-4‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ )‪ (۱۴‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-B‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‪-‬‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ .(۱۱‬ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪﻫﺎ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺘﻮﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺮﺥ‬
‫ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎ ﺗﺎ ‪ %۲۰‬ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺧﻤﺸﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ )ﺑﺠﺰ‬

‫‪ ۱۸‬ﺳﺎﻝ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺴﺘﺎﻥ ‪۸۰‬‬

‫ﺑﻪ ﮐﻤﮏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻧﺤﻮﻩ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺎﻃﯽ ﺭﺍ ﮐﻪ ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺧﻄﺮ ﺁﺳﻴﺐ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﯽ ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﯽ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﻣﯽ ﺗــﻮﺍﻧﻨــﺪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻧﺮﺥ‬
‫ﮐـﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺳـﺎﺯﻩ ﺷـﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑـﺎ ﺗﻮﺟـﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘـﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻧﮑﺎﺕ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺣﺎﺋﺰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -‬ﺑـﺎ ﺗـﻮﺟـﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻘـﺮﻳﺒـﻬـﺎﻳﯽ ﮐـﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤـﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎﯼ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﯼ ﻋﻀﻮ ﺑﻪ‪-‬‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﯽ ﺁﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﻳﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎﺯﯼ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﻋﻀﻮ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‪-‬‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮏ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﮑﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﺓ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )‪ :(۲‬ﮔﺴﻴﺨﺘﮕﯽ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺟﻮﺷﯽ ﺑﺎﺩﺑﻨﺪ ]‪[۱۰‬‬

‫‪ -‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ﺑﻨﺪﯼ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ )‪ :(۲‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺩﻭ ﻗﺎﺏ ‪ fr4-2‬ﻭ ‪fr4-4‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎﺯﯼ‬
‫ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻉ‬ ‫ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻋﻀﺎﯼ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻳﮏ‬
‫ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻮﺭﯼ‬ ‫ﺧﻤﺸﯽ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ‬
‫ﻋﻀﻮ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﮔﺮﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﯽ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎﺯﯼ‪،‬‬
‫‪۰/۱۱۶۷‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۰۶۴۱‬‬ ‫‪۰/۱۱۶۳‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻗﺖ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪۰/۱۳۹۵‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۱۵۹۷‬‬ ‫‪۰/۱۳۳۸‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۰۲‬‬
‫‪ -‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯽ ﺭﺳﺪ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﺗﺮ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﯼ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺴﯽ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑـﺮ ﻣﻌﻴـﺎﺭﻫـﺎﯼ ﮐﻨـﺘﺮﻝ ﮐـﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺗـﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﮐـﺮﻧﺶ ﻭ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﯼ ﻧﻤﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﺎ ‪ dt = 0.002‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻧﺮﺥ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻋﻀﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﯽ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﮏ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﮐﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﮐﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺒﺎﻁ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩﯼ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺗﺮ ﺁﺳﻴﺐ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻓﻮﻻﺩﯼ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ‬ ‫‪ -‬ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻫﺎﯼ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ‬
‫ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎ ﻭ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﻣﻘﺎﻃﻌﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺧﻄﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﮔﻴﺮﯼ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺭﻳﺰ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ؛‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺗﺮﺩ ﻓﻮﻻﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﯼ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺐ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﯽ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻫﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺲ ﻣﺪﻫﺎﯼ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﮐﻮﭼﮏ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‬ ‫‪ -۷‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﻴﺮﯼ‬

‫ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﺮﮐﺎﻧﺴﯽ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮏ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ‬
‫ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ‬
‫ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﯽ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -‬ﭼﻨﺎﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻮﭼﮏ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﻧﺮﺧﻬﺎﯼ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﯼ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ‪-‬‬
‫ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺩﻗﺖ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻬﺎﻳﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﺓ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ‬
‫ﺭﻳﺰﺗﺮﯼ ﺛﺒﺖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪۱۹‬‬
‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﻣﺪﻟﯽ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎﯼ‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﺑﻌـﺪﯼ ﺍﺭﺍﺋـﻪ ﺷـﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳـﻦ ﻣـﺪﻝ ﻋـﻼﻭﻩ ﺑـﺮ ﮐﻨﺘـﺮﻝ ﻧـﺘﺎﻳﺞ‬
‫ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﯼ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﺿﻌﻒ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﻟﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻳﻬﺎﯼ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭﯼ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺍﯼ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻋﻀﻮ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎﺯﯼ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﯼ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻩ ﻫﺎﯼ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻌﺪﯼ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺲ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ‬
‫ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬،‫ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﮐﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﺍﺭﺷﺪ‬،"‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ‬
.۱۳۷۹ ،‫ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻠﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﺯﻟﺰﻟﻪ‬
11.“Northridge Earthquake Reconnaissance Report”,
Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 2, pp.25-47, 1996.
12.Bertro, V. V., Anderson, J. C. and Krawinkler, H.,
“Performance of Steel Building Structures During
the Northridge Earthquake”, UCB/EERC, 94-09.
13.Banerjee, J. R., “Dynamic Stiffness Formulation for
Structural Elements: A General Approach”,
Computer & Structures, pp. 101-103, 1997.
14.Azimi, S., “Dynamic Analysis of Structures Using
Finite Dynamic Element Formulation Methodology”,
Report of IIEES, 1996.
،"‫ "ﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﯽ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﺹ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﻴﮑﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﺩ‬.‫ ﻣﺎﻟﻮﻳﻦ‬،‫ ﺁﻳﺰﺷﺘﺎﺕ‬-۱۵
‫ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﻧﺸﺮ‬:‫ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‬،‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺣﺎﺋﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺭﺩﮐﺎﻧﯽ‬
.۱۳۷۲ ،‫ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﯽ‬
16.Element of Matrerial Science & Engineering,
Vanvlack, Addison-Wesley, 1980.
17.Francois, D., Pineau, A., and Zaoui, A., “Mechanical
Behaviour of Materials”, KAP, 1998.
18.Vonkarman, T., Duwez, P., “The Propagation of
Plastic Deformation in Solids”, J., Appl. Phys, pp.
987-994, 1950.
‫ ﻣﺮﺍﺟﻊ‬-۸
1.Kolousek, V., Butter Worths, “Dynamic in
Engineering”, 1973.
2.Williams, F.W., Wittrick, W.H., “An Automatic
Computational Procedure for Calculation of Natural
Frequencies of Skeletal Structures”, Int. J. Mech. Sci.,
pp. 781-791, 1970.
3.Richards, T.H., Leung, Y.T.,.“An Accurate Method in
Structural Vibration Analysis”, J. Sound and
Vibration, pp. 363-376, 1977.
4.Doyle, J.F.“Wave Propagation in Structures”, Springer-
Verlag, 1989.
5.Martin, M., Gopalakrishnan, S., Doyle, J.F., “Wave
Propagation in Multiply Connected Deep
Waveguides”, J. Sound and Vibration, pp. 521-538,
1994.
6.Gopalakrishnan, S. and Doyle, J. F., “Wave
Propagation in Connected Waveguide”, J. Sound and
Vibration, pp. 347-363, 1994.
7.Banerjee, J. R., Guo, S. and Howson, W.P., “Exact
Dynamic Stiffness Matrix of a Bending-Torsion
Coupled Beam Including Warping”, Computers &
Structures, pp. 613-621, 1996.
8.Banerjee, J. R., Williams, F.W., “Coupled Bending-
Torsional Dynamic Stiffness Matrix for Timoshenko
Beam Elements”, Computers & Structures, pp. 301-
310, 1992.
9. Clough, R.W., Penzien, J., “Dynamic of Structures”,
Mc Grew-Hill, 1975.
‫ "ﺑﺮﺭﺳﯽ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﻣﻮﺝ ﺩﺭ‬.‫ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ‬،‫ ﺟﺒﺎﺭﺯﺍﺩﻩ‬-۱۰
۸۰ ‫ ﺯﻣﺴﺘﺎﻥ‬،‫ ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‬،‫ﺳﺎﻝ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‬ ۲۰