U04522: Engineering Dynamics 1

A Study of Single Degree of Freedom Vibrating

Systems
Written by:
Kilian Mayr – 06012549
06012549@brookes.ac.uk
For the attention of:
Dr. Anand Thite

WORD COUNT:
(Excluding: Headings, Reference, Appendix)
1496
 1 Introduction

1.1 Abstract
This report covers a experiment carried out to evaluate the response of a single degree of
freedom (SDOF) Spring/Mass model with grounded damping which is excited by a base
motion. Thereby this report is split into two sections.
Part 1 (Theory) reports how the response has been expected to be and how this has been
evaluated.
Part 2 ( Procedure) reports how the experimental procedure has been carried out.
After these topics, the results are going to be critically compared in the discussion chapter.
All the outcome derived from the discussion chapter will be summarised in the conclusion
chapter.

1.2 Objective
Following objectives have to be met in order to be able to compare the results.

Part 1
1. Deriving Equation Of Motion (EOM)
2. Transforming EOM (differential equation) to exponential form
3. Obtaining Graphs of: amplitude ratio Vs. Frequency Ratio & Phase Shift Vs.
Frequency Ratio
4. Establishing a graph of Amplitude Vs. Frequency & Phase Shift Vs. Frequency by
using model parameter of the experimental equipment
Part 2
1. Estimating damping coefficient
2. Measuring and establishing a graph of amplitude Ratio Vs. Frequency Ratio & Phase
shift Vs. Frequency Ratio

2 Part 1 (Theory)

2.1 Equation Of Motion

The first step is to establish the EOM, which describes the forces acting on the vibrating mass.
In order to do so, the system configuration has to be known. The following illustration show the
schematic system configuration:

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 2 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 Figure 1: Schematic Model Configuration
From this illustration it can be seen, how forces are fed into the mass. Therefore it is possible
to draw a Free Body Diagram (FBD).

Figure 2: Free Body Diagram

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 3 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

From this Free body diagram following equations can be derived to achieve a force
equilibrium:

∑ F =2⋅k  y− x−c ẋ -Equation 1

As ∑ F =m ẋ , EOM is: m ẍc ẋ2 k x=2 k y -Equation 2

2.2 Complex expression

Using Euler's expression and complex algebra is the simplest way of obtaining the desired
steady state amplitude ratio and phase shift.

In order to do so, following Euler's equations have to be substituted into the EOM (Equation 2):

x= X⋅e j t
ẋ= j⋅⋅X⋅e j  t
ẍ=− 2⋅X⋅e j  t
y=Y⋅e j t
Hence, 2
−m⋅ ⋅X⋅e
jt
c⋅ j⋅⋅X⋅e
j t
2 k⋅X⋅e
jt
=2 k⋅Y⋅e
jt -Equation 3


By cancelling out the e j t term, substituting amplitude ratio r= & damping ratio
n
c
= , the EOM can be rearranged to the amplitude ratio:
2⋅m⋅ n

X 1
=
Y 1−r 2⋅⋅r⋅j
2
-Equation 4

As the amplitude ratio contains a complex component, it can be expressed in the polar from.
The magnitude thereby represents the amplitude ratio and the angle the phase shift.

X 1
Amplitude Ratio=∣ ∣=
Y 1−r  2⋅⋅r 2
2 2
-Equation 5

2⋅⋅r
Phase shift==0−atan  
1−r 2 -Equation 6

Using these formulae, the two charts 1 & 2 shown in the Results chapter has been obtained.

The absolute values of the amplitude of the mass can be obtained by re arranging equation 5
for X only, and substituting the amplitude ratio back. The natural frequency thereby can be

obtained by substituting c with 0 in equation 3  n=

 2⋅k
m
.

Therefore the response of the mass is determined by:

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 4 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 X Y
Amplitude Ratio=∣ ∣=
Y


 22  2 -Equation 7
1−   2⋅⋅ 

 2⋅k
m
2⋅k
m 

2⋅⋅


Phase shift==0−atan 
2⋅k
m
 2
  -Equation 8

1− 
2⋅k
m 
3 Procedure(Part 2)
The experiment has been carried out to verify the theoretical calculations. Therefore the first
step was to establish the damping ratio. This has been achieved by dropping the damped
mass from its highest position. This system then behaves as a free damped vibration. Using
the theory of logarithmic decrement, the damping ratio was able to be determined by the
following equation:
x1
ln  
x2
= -Equation 9

 2 x1 2
 2 cot  ln  
x2
Once the damping ratio is obtained, the theoretical calculations has been carried out. At 9
different speeds ranging from 110 to 413 RPM with two different damper settings has been
recorded. Thereby the input frequency has been measured by a optical measuring device on
the fly wheel. The Amplitudes of the input and out put has been recorded by potentiometers
and displayed on a oscilloscope. The phase shift has been measured and displayed by a
phase meter, which is fed by the same source as the oscilloscope. All raw data has been
attached in the appendix.

4 Results
Please Note: the tables of the results are attached at the end of this report.

Please note that these tables are simplified, as the tables used to plot the graphs uses beyond
100 rows to achieve a high resolution of the graph.

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 5 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 Chart 1: Amplitude Ratio Vs. Frequency Ratio

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 6 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 Chart 2: Phase Shift Vs. Frequency Ratio
Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 7 / 17 Vibration Lab Report
 Chart 3: Amplitude Vs. Frequency

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 8 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 Chart 4: Phase Shift Vs. Frequency
Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 9 / 17 Vibration Lab Report
 Chart 5: Amplitude Comparison
Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 10 / 17 Vibration Lab Report
 Chart 6: Phase Shift Comparison

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 11 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 5 Analysis/Discussion

5.1 Part 1

5.1.1 Chart 1
From the Chart 1 it can be seen that at a frequency ratio close to 1 is the resonance
frequency. From calculation and the graph it can be seen, that the damping ratio has not just
an effect on the amplitude. It also shifts the point where the maximum amplitude (resonance
point) is reached. For example for a damping coefficient of 0.01 the max. amplitude is at
r max = 0.9998≈0.9998999949995 . To contrast, at a damping coefficient of 0.4, the
resonance is reached at r max = 0.68≈0.824621125123532 . This phenomenon can be

observed until the damping coefficient reaches a value of =

 1 . From damping
2
coefficients above this value, there will be no “peak” or amplification any more. To visualise
this behaviour, this graph has been inserted as the yellow dotted line. A further information
that could be gained from the table is the various regions where each component influences
the amplitude ration. At low frequency ratios ( 0.2 ), the amplification is close to one.
This region called the stiffness controlled region, as the spring rate of the system contribute
the response. Surprisingly the damping coefficient has a impact on the range of the stiffness
controlled region. Extreme damping values (either high or low) will reduce the stiffness

controlled region, while a damping ratio around =

 1
2
seems to have the longest region

where the amplitude ratio amount to one. At frequency ratio close to one, the system response
is mainly determined by the damping ratio, as it has been mentioned earlier, hence this region
is called the damping controlled region. The point onwards where all amplitude ratios merges
together( 2.5 ) is called the mass controlled region, as the inertia of the mass does not
allow the system to vibrate at high amplitudes.

5.1.2 Chart 2
This chart shows the phase shift for different damping ratios across the frequency ratio range.
The most eye catching detail is that at a Frequency Ratio of 1 all plots crosses 90° phase shift.

5.1.3 Chart 3
From this chart it can be seen that the resonance frequency of the experiment is going to be
expected at a frequency ratio of 0.992387740068976 (22.6 rad/s = 3.61 Hz) for =0.09
and 0.969880991002984 (22.14 rad/s = 33.52Hz) for =0.17 . Thereby the amplitude is
expected to be 5.76 units for =0.09 and 2.95 units for =0.17 at a 1 unit input.

5.1.4 Chart 4
The phase shift is expected to occur early and stays virtually constant (@0°) throughout the
rest of the region. The level 1 setting is expected to have a very sudden phase shift, while the
level 8 setting starts to phase shift earlier but remains a higher phase shift after resonance
frequency until it merges with the level 1 plot.

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 12 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

5.2 Part 2
The damping ratio has been determined to be =0.09 for the level 1 setting and
=0.17 for the level 8 setting. This will equal to a damping coefficient of
−1 −1
c=16.78 N⋅s⋅m and c=33.19 N⋅s⋅m .

5.2.1 Amplitude Ratio (Chart 5)

Level 1
• Actual max. Amplitude ratio reached earlier then predicted.

• Estimated Amplitude ratio lower then actual Amplitude Ratio (14.29% in respect to
measured value)

• Over estimated Amplitude Ratio in the stiffness controlled region.

• Very high compliance between the results in the mass controlled region .

Level 2
• max. Amplitude Ratio reached at the same point

• Theoretical results over estimate amplitude ratio throughout the region.

• Results merges closer at elevated amplitude ratio

5.2.2 Phase Shift (Chart6)

Level 1
• Very high compliance of results up to a Frequency Ratio of 1.1

• Almost constant deviation of 20° between the results from a frequency ratio above 1.4

• Phase shift very close to 90° even at unstable resonance frequency

Level 2
• Very high compliance of results up to a Frequency Ratio of 1

• High non constant deviation from frequency Ratio 1 onwards

• Measured result has a outstanding “step” between 1.2 &1.4

From the measured values it can be seen, that the increased damping coefficient (hence,
damping ratio) has a positive effect on limiting the amplification of the input at and near the
resonance frequency.
The Level 8 has a higher amplification then the Level 1 Setting in the lower frequencies. The
increased damping coefficient of Level 8 successfully reduces the peak amplification but for
the expense of the stiffness controlled region.

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 13 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 6 Conclusion
The theoretical part (Part1) can concluded to be satisfactory. It was able to visualise the
amplification and how it is affected by the damping ratio (max amplitude shift & amplitude
decrease).
Similar, the experiment (Part2) can be considered to be successful. Some deviation was
present, especially at resonance frequencies. As stated earlier, at resonance a very high
amplitude amplification is to be expected. The variance can be explained by the very violent
oscillation which will be disturbed by the friction in the rail, imperfect spring and other effects,
which are not taken into account in the theoretical calculation. Also the system is very
sensitive at resonance and small disturbance can have a significant impact. Taken the
imperfect testing condition into account and the fact that the the measuring equipment is also
subjected to inaccuracies, the results is satisfactory. Therefore the expected behaviour
(Amplification & Phase Shift) are close enough to the measured results to be able to explain
the difference in result by the measuring and testing limitations.

7 Reference
1. Thomson, W. T. and Dillon Dahleh, M. (1998). Theory of Vibration with Applications 5th
ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

2. Tongue, B. H. (2002). Principles of Vibration 2th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

8 Appendix

8.1 Sample Calculations

For a Damping Ratio of 0.4 at a frequency ratio of 2

X 1
Amplitude Ratio=∣ ∣=
Y 1−r  2⋅⋅r 2
2 2
-Equation 5

X 1
∣ ∣= =0.29
Y 1−2  2⋅0.4⋅22
2 2

2⋅⋅r
Phase shift==0−atan  
1−r 2 -Equation 6

2⋅0.4⋅2
=0−atan 2
=28.07 °
1−2

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 14 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

8.2 Tables

Appendix 1: Measured Data

Appendix 2: Amplitude Ratio / Used for Chart 1

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 15 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 Appendix 3: Phase Shift / Used for Chart 2

Appendix 4: Amplitude / Used

for Chart 3 Appendix 5: Phase Shift / Used
for Chart 4

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 16 / 17 Vibration Lab Report

 Appendix 6: Comparison Table Level 1/ Used for Chart 5 & 6

Appendix 7: Comparison Table Level 8 / Used for Chart 5 & 6

Written by: Kilian Mayr – 06012549 17 / 17 Vibration Lab Report