Damping of a beam subjected to free and forced vibration.

Name:

Registration number:

Nomenclature

c damping coefficient

F force

k spring stiffness

m, M mass

𝑟 𝜔⁄𝜔𝑛 .
R Radius

𝑥, X amplitude

Greek Symbols

 logarithmic decrement

 damping ratio

 standard deviation

d 1 period of a vibration (s)

 frequency, angular velocity

Subscripts

c critical

d natural frequency under damped conditions

n natural frequency under free cinditions

Introduction

A single degree of freedom (SDOF) system can often be used to approximate more complex
structures if the resonances are well separated. If the system is undamped its preferred vibration
frequency is the natural frequency.
Systems can be examined in both free and forced vibration situations.
Free vibration response

It is usually possible to obtain the damping of a SDOF system from the free vibration response.
Shown in Figure 1 is a typical free vibrational response of a damped system

The damping is found by comparing the magnitude of successive oscillations following an initial
impulse excitation. The logarithmic decrement is defined as,
𝑥𝑖 (1)
𝛿 = 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑒 ( )
𝑥𝑖+1
where 𝑥𝑖 and 𝑥𝑖+1 are any two consecutive amplitudes of the response separated one period (𝜏𝑑 ) as
shown in Figure 1 . For harmonic motion 𝛿 can be obtained from displacement, velocity or
acceleration measurements as the ratio between successive cycles is the same.

The damping coefficient, 𝜁, is related to the logarithmic decrement. When 𝜁 < 0.05, this can be
approximated by
𝛿 (2)
𝜁=
2𝜋

The natural frequency of the undamped system can be obtained using,

𝜔𝑑 (3)
𝜔𝑛 = .
√1 − 𝜁 2

Forced vibration resulting from a rotating eccentric mass

Shown Figure 2 is a SDOF system with mass m supported by a spring of stiffness k. Between the mass
and ground there is also a viscous damper with coefficient c. The system is excited by the action of a
point mass M which rotates at a distance R about an axis with an angular velocity of  rad/s.
The vertical force produced on mass m by the rotation of mass M at any instant during the vibration
is
𝐹 = 𝑀𝑅𝜔2 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜔𝑡). (4)
The amplitude X of the steady state response is given by,
𝑀𝑅𝜔2 (5)
𝑋=
𝑘 − 𝜔 2 𝑚 + 𝑗𝜔𝑐
Equation 5 can be rewritten in terms of the undamped natural frequency 𝜔𝑛 , the damping ratio 𝜁
and the critical damping 𝑐𝑐 where: 𝜔𝑛 = √𝑘⁄𝑚, 𝜁 = 𝑐⁄𝑐𝑐 , 𝑐𝑐 = 2√𝑘𝑚 = 2𝑚𝜔𝑛 .
𝑀𝑅 𝑟2 (6)
𝑋=( ) 2
𝑚 1 − 𝑟 + 𝑗2𝜁𝑟
where 𝑟 = 𝜔⁄𝜔𝑛 . Damping affects the response near the natural frequency as illustrated in
Figure 3.

The response is maximised at resonance when,

𝜔𝑛 (7)
𝜔𝑟 =
√1 − 2𝜁 2
where 𝜔𝑟 is the resonance frequency. Damping can be estimated from the frequency response using
the Half Power method. This approach estimates the damping ratio 𝜁 with
𝜔2 − 𝜔1 (8)
𝜁=
2𝜔𝑟
where 𝜔1 and 𝜔2 are points on the response curve at either side of the resonance at which the
amplitude is 0.707 times the peak response. Theoretical studies have shown that for 𝜁 < 0.1,
Equation 8 is accurate to 5%.
In this lab the system of interest was a horizontal steel beam supported by bearings at each end.
The forced vibration was created by a motor rotating an unbalanced disk located on the centre of
the beam. Damping was created using a viscous dashpot damper which can be attached to the
beam. Experiments were performed under both free and forced vibration with and without
damping.

The objectives were:

 To measure the free vibration response of the system following an impulse.
 To measure the steady-state frequency response of the system when excited by rotating
unbalance.
 To compare estimates of natural frequency and damping obtained from free and forced
responses.
 Determine the damper damping coefficient.

Experimental

The SDOF system used in the experiment consisted of a horizontal steel beam supported by bearings
at each end as shown in Figure 4. The stiffness of the beam in the vertical direction was k = 2930 ±
200 N/m. The centre of the beam had a loading which consisted of the mass of the motor, disk
assembly, sensors and cables. The vibrating mass for each rig was nominally 0.689 ± 0.026 kg. The
beam centre was also the attachment point of a viscous dashpot damper.

The force excitation to the system was provided by an eccentrically positioned mass on the disk
which was rotated using a variable speed motor. The motor speed was measured using an encoder.
A piezoelectric accelerometer which measured the acceleration at the midpoint of the beam was
fitted to top of the motor assembly.

The beam vertical acceleration and motor rotational speed signals are acquired using a data
acquisition card and were displayed using LabView™ software.

Measurements were performed under both free and forced vibration. Under free vibration the
beam was set vibrating by pulling it and then releasing it. The DAC as activated and response
captured. Using the displayed accelerometer response the log decrement 𝛿 and the period of
oscillation, 𝜏𝑑 were recorded. Using this data the damping ratio 𝜁 and undamped natural frequency
𝜔𝑛 were calculated. For forced vibration the motor speed was set and controlled using the computer
software. The accelerometer response was displayed and maximum acceleration for each motor
speed recorded. The maximum amplitude (resulting from resonance) was found and measurements
taken around this to resolve the frequency response curve. The damping ratio was then calculated
using the method described above (Equation 8). Experiments were repeated with the damper
connected to the beam.

Results

Shown in Tables 1 to 4 are the measured results for vibration tests; undamped and damped also free
and motored. The frequency response curve for both the motored tests is shown in Figure 5.
Indicated on this figure are 𝜔1 and 𝜔2 the points on the response curve at either side of the
resonance at which the amplitude was 0.707 times the peak response. These were used to
determine the damping ratio using Equation 8.

The determined values of , n and c are given in Table 5 with associated errors and uncertainties
also reported. The calculation of the errors are detailed in the Experimental Uncertainty.

Table 1. Measured data form the undamped free vibration tests

Test Peak Time d d Acceleration   n

No. No. (ms) (ms) (Hz) (m/s²) (Hz)

1 0 26.6 8.368
1 127.8 101.2 9.881 7.943 0.052128 0.0082964 9.882
2 221.5 93.7 10.672 7.534 0.052902 0.0084197 10.673
3 321.5 100 10.000 7.360 0.023254 0.0037009 10.000
4 424.1 102.6 9.747 7.046 0.043716 0.0069575 9.747
5 516.5 92.4 10.823 6.668 0.055112 0.0087714 10.823

2 0 436.7 17.199
1 539.2 102.5 9.756 16.443 0.044928 0.0071504 9.756
2 631.6 92.4 10.823 15.939 0.031118 0.0049526 10.823
3 731.6 100 10.000 15.719 0.013917 0.0022150 10.000
4 831.6 100 10.000 15.231 0.031537 0.0050193 10.000
5 929.1 97.5 10.256 14.476 0.050882 0.0080981 10.257

3 0 369.6 9.328
1 469.6 100 10.000 8.919 0.044867 0.0071408 10.000
2 563.3 93.7 10.672 8.541 0.043284 0.0068888 10.673
3 665.8 102.5 9.756 8.226 0.037558 0.0059775 9.756
4 765.8 100 10.000 7.833 0.049022 0.0078022 10.000
5 858.2 92.4 10.823 7.471 0.047326 0.0075322 10.823

AVERAGES: 0.041436676 0.0065949 10.214

STANDARD DEVIATIONS: 0.011814738 0.0018804 0.4234
 Table 2. Measured data form the undamped forced vibration tests

Speed Frequency Frequency Acceleration Displacement

(rpm) (Hz) (rad/s) (m/s²) (m)
611.0 10.2146 64.180 49.23950000 0.01195392
601.3 10.0219 62.969 15.77 0.00397719
603.9 10.0656 63.244 21.77 0.00544232
604.6 10.0765 63.313 24.81 0.00618936
606.6 10.1093 63.519 36.96 0.00916031
612.5 10.2077 64.137 40.54 0.00985441
615.7 10.2623 64.480 30.57 0.00735276
618.4 10.3060 64.755 23.86 0.00569005
590.0 9.8333 61.785 7.39 0.00193633
595.0 9.9167 62.308 9.47 0.00243867
600.0 10.0000 62.832 13.63 0.00345282
620.0 10.3333 64.926 20.82 0.00493842
625.0 10.4167 65.450 14.88 0.00347281
630.0 10.5000 65.973 11.27 0.00258932
580.0 9.6667 60.737 4.62 0.00125230
650.0 10.8333 68.068 6.30 0.00135900
 Table 3. Measured data form the damped free vibration tests

Test Peak Time d d Acceleration   n

No. No. (ms) (ms) (Hz) (m/s²) (Hz)
1 0 434.2 8.494
1 536.7 102.5 9.756 7.896 0.073029 0.0116229 9.757
2 635.4 98.7 10.132 7.376 0.068057 0.0108316 10.132
3 730.4 95 10.526 6.542 0.120033 0.0191038 10.528
4 826.6 96.2 10.395 6.321 0.034269 0.0054540 10.395
5 929.1 102.5 9.756 5.645 0.113255 0.0180251 9.758

2 0 275.9 7.628
1 377.2 101.3 9.872 7.234 0.052969 0.0084303 9.872
2 472.2 95 10.526 6.510 0.105463 0.0167850 10.528
3 568.4 96.2 10.395 6.070 0.070103 0.0111572 10.396
4 668.4 100 10.000 5.645 0.072598 0.0115543 10.001
5 767.1 98.7 10.132 5.251 0.072270 0.0115022 10.132

3 0 358.5 12.130
1 458.4 99.9 10.010 11.406 0.061551 0.0097961 10.010
2 557 98.6 10.142 10.587 0.074466 0.0118517 10.143
3 650.4 93.4 10.707 9.832 0.074047 0.0117849 10.707
4 750.3 99.9 10.010 9.202 0.066186 0.0105339 10.011
5 851.5 101.2 9.881 8.431 0.087544 0.0139330 9.882

Table 4. Measured data form the damped forced vibration tests

Speed (rpm) Frequency (Hz) Frequency (rad/s) Acceleration Displacement (m)

(m/s²)
609.1 10.1517 63.785 24.7529 0.00608405
600 10.0000 62.832 14.4297 0.00365509
605 10.0833 63.355 21.0076 0.00523370
570 9.5000 59.690 3.51331 0.00098607
580 9.6667 60.737 4.9094 0.00133081
590 9.8333 61.785 7.39163 0.00193633
595 9.9167 62.308 10.5399 0.00271485
607 10.1167 63.565 22.7186 0.00562273
610 10.1667 63.879 24.2395 0.00594028
612.5 10.2083 64.141 23.0989 0.00561464
617 10.2833 64.612 17.4144 0.00417139
620 10.3333 64.926 14.4392 0.00342533
630 10.5000 65.973 9.0875 0.00208788
635 10.5833 66.497 7.64259 0.00172837
650 10.8333 68.068 5.60459 0.00120965
 Frequency Response - Undamped Forced
Vibration
0.01400000

0.01200000

0.01000000
Displacement (m)

0.00800000

0.00600000

0.00400000

0.00200000

0.00000000
7.0000 7.5000 8.0000 8.5000 9.0000 9.5000 10.0000 10.5000 11.0000 11.5000
Frequency (rad/s)

Frequency Response - Damped Forced

Vibration
0.00700000

0.00600000

0.00500000
Displacement (m)

0.00400000

0.00300000

0.00200000

0.00100000

0.00000000
7.0000 7.5000 8.0000 8.5000 9.0000 9.5000 10.0000 10.5000 11.0000 11.5000
Frequency (rad/s)

Figure 5. Measured displacement plotted against motor frequency for the motored vibration tests.
 Table 5. Determined values of , n and c with associated errors and uncertainties.

Free vibration  error d n Error in d

(Hz) (Hz)

Undamped 0.006594852 0.003760748 10.214 10.21416458 0.84688508

Damped 0.012157725 0.00713859 10.149 10.15014625 0.59413192
Forced vibration  error d n Error in 𝑟
(Hz) (Hz)

Undamped 0.007342457152 0.002814599999 10.2146 10.2140493 0.0001

Damped 0.009850568786 0.004186491029 10.1517 10.1507149 0.0001
Damper damping coefficient
Ns/m
C 0.5832261538 0.3368046 Say if based on free or forced results
Experimental Uncertainty:
A vital aspect of any experiment involves understanding the errors involved. Measurement
errors take three forms: Systematic, Random, and Resolution. Errors can affect both the
precision and the accuracy of a measurement. Accuracy is a measure of how close the
measurement is to the correct answer. Precision is how consistent the measurements are to
each other

Systematic errors are the result of inaccuracy that is inherent in the system, measurement
device, or person doing the measurement. These errors can appear in the data as an offset
(axis shift), scaling factor (slope error), or nonlinear adjustment. Unfortunately these errors
affect the accuracy of our measurement are difficult to detect

To understand the error in the system parameters we have to understand how the errors
in measurements propogate through an equation. This topic is called “Differential Error
Analysis”. Recall from calculus that a function of one independent variable y = f(x) can be
expressed as a Taylor series

. y = y0 + df(x) dx ∆x + ...

To find the change in y, ∆y, the value y0 is moved to the left hand side of the equation. ∆y =
y − y0 = df(x) dx ∆x + ...

So there will be always an errors arising from different sources we can minimize the errors
in the damped frequency and damping ratio by putting the intial condition in the above
equation.

Uncertainty and Errors in Damper damping Co-efficent:

The Errors in damping coefficient is large compare to the other error it is because of the
internal friction of fluid and walls of the cylinder,also the viscosity of the fluid we take a
constant value which decrease or increase with temperature so to minimize the error we
should take an appropriate value or error free value instead of a constant value.
Discussion
Results of Free and Forced vibration:

From the measured data we can see that some results are same while some results are
different

The natural and the damped frequency for both Forced and Free vibrations are amost the
same mostly for the same peak no and goes to increase till peak no 3 and than decreases
from 3 to 5.

The acceleration of the system for both free and forced vibration gradually decrease
successively as the peak no go from 1 to 5.

While the values of the damping ratio and lograthmatic decrement behave the same( I,e
their values are different but the way it increase or decrese are almost the same)

The results of Free and forced Vibration cannot be the same values of the damping
Frequency the results of Damping ration ratios are different Free vibration have less
damping ratio while the damping ratio of Forced vibration(Damped ,undamped) are
greater than the Free vibration (Damped, Undamped) Because there is an external exciation
of motor in forced vibration increses the damping ratio .

While the Behaviour of Lograthmatic decrement is higher for Free vibration because of
successive decrement of consecutive frequencies resulting high decrement ratio, while for
forced vibration the decrement is very less mostly and negligible.

Resonance Frequency For both damped and Undamped system:

The resonance frequency for both damped and undamped system can be the same but the
displacement valve will be different there is high displacement against resonance frequency
for undamped forced system while for damped forced system the value of displacement
will be 4 to 5 time less than undamped system system because damping absorb the
exciation of the system successively.