# PTDM implementation

**URL:** <https://forums.nlr.gov/t/ptdm-implementation/4543>\
**Category:** Structural Analysis\
**Created:** [February 20, 2023, 11:00pm UTC](https://forums.nlr.gov/t/ptdm-implementation/4543 "2023-02-20T23:00:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 15

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Emanuel.Rergis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/51bf81/32.png) [@Emanuel.Rergis](https://forums.nlr.gov/u/Emanuel.Rergis)\
**Post date:** [March 17, 2023, 11:34am UTC](https://forums.nlr.gov/t/ptdm-implementation/4543/15 "2023-03-17T11:34:10Z")

</div>

Dear Dr @Jason.Jonkman:

Thanks one more time for your reply. I changed the value of StC\_P\_Z= 1.5 m and reduced the glue code time step (DT) to almost 100 times its original value. Apparently, the simulation runs fine. How can I detect this kind of problem in the future? Is this because of the stiffness and damping values I chose? I’m trying to follow what **M.A Lackner** proposed in his paper to study the contribution of the TMD to reducing the tower tip fore-aft and side-to-side displacements.

Kind regards,  
Emanuel M. Rergis

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.nlr.gov/t/ptdm-implementation/4543)._