akshay 3
-
Upload
akshay-kumar -
Category
Documents
-
view
222 -
download
0
Transcript of akshay 3
![Page 1: akshay 3](https://reader037.fdocument.pub/reader037/viewer/2022100314/577cbfc01a28aba7118df973/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
8/9/2019 akshay 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/akshay-3 1/6
Structural Dynamics Lab.
Experiment No.-03Vibration Characteristics of 3 DOF system by Accelerometer
I.I.T DELHI
Experiment Report
Submitted by : Akshay Kumar
2014CES2027
![Page 2: akshay 3](https://reader037.fdocument.pub/reader037/viewer/2022100314/577cbfc01a28aba7118df973/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
8/9/2019 akshay 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/akshay-3 2/6
EXPERIMENT 3 – Vibration Characteristics of 3 dof system by Accelerometer
OBJECTIVE:
To study the vibration characteristics of 3 degree of freedom system consisting of shear wall using
accelerometer. Also comparison is done between natural frequencies obtained theoretically and thoseobtained experimentally. The response of the structure is also plotted at the first natural frequency.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP:
The setup consists of a 3 storey frame model with shear wall (all made of Perspex). The geometric
and material properties of the model is observed and given below. In this model, it is assumed
that beams are rigid with columns supplying all the stiffness for the system and mass lumped at
story level. The frame is modeled as system with three degree of freedom.
Two accelerometers were attached to the structure, one to measure the force and the other tomeasure the acceleration responses which are used to get the response of the structure. The
accelerometers are connected to the Data Acquisition System.
Fig (1): Experimental setup
THEORY:
Damping is inherent property. It is an effect that reduces the amplitude of oscillations in an
oscillatory system. If the physical properties of the system are such that its motion can be described by
Accelerometer
Force sensor
Columns
Shear wall
![Page 3: akshay 3](https://reader037.fdocument.pub/reader037/viewer/2022100314/577cbfc01a28aba7118df973/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
8/9/2019 akshay 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/akshay-3 3/6
a single coordinate and no other motion is possible, then it actually is a SDOF system and the solution of
the equation provides the exact dynamic response. On the other hand, if the structure actually has more
than one possible mode of displacement and it is reduced mathematically to a SDOF approximation by
assuming its deformed shape, the solution of the equation of motion is only an approximation of the
true dynamic behavior. This necessitates the development of dynamic models which consider multiple
degrees of freedom (MDOF).
Fig.(2): Characteristic figure to represent 3 DOF system
The equations of motion can therefore be expressed as:
11 + 11 − 22 − 1 − 1 = 0,
22 + 2(2 − 1) − 33 − 2 − 2 = 0,
33 + 33 − 2 − 3 = 0
In matrix notation, the equation in written as:
Where; [ M ] and [ K ] denote mass and stiffness matrices written as follows:
(Here we are taking the undamped case; hence the damping matrix becomes zero.)
For finding out the natural frequencies the eigen value method is used, putting
− 2 = 0
The flexural stiffness is given by the expression:
=123
![Page 4: akshay 3](https://reader037.fdocument.pub/reader037/viewer/2022100314/577cbfc01a28aba7118df973/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
8/9/2019 akshay 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/akshay-3 4/6
The shear stiffness is given by:
K =GA
L
Where,
E - Modulus of elasticity of members
I - Moment of inertia of the section in bending direction
L-Length of member
G-Modulus of rigidity
A-Area of the section
PROCEDURE:
1. Measure the dimensions with the help of vernier calliper.
2. Accelerometer is attached to the third storey only and one force sensor is also attached
to the same storey near the vibrator.
3.
These accelerometers are connected to data acquisition system, with the help of labview software further analysis is done.
4. Using LabView software the input signal is selected and the accelerometer is selected as
we are using accelerometer to measure the acceleration in the beam.
5. The input data is placed in the software regarding the no. of samples, sensitivity of the
instrument, rate of samples, the maximum and minimum range for the accelerometer
used and plots are obtained by changing RPM values.
6. The data is exported to the MS excel and the graph is plotted in frequency domain.
OBSERVATION AND CALCULATIONS:Density = 1200 kg/m3
Modulus of elasticity E = 3210 MPa
Poisson’s Ratio = µ = 0.39
Modulus of rigidity G = 1155 MPa
Lumped masses of the system in each storey
m1 = 0.484 kg m2 = 0.614 kg m3 = 0.614 kg
Width
(mm)
Depth
(mm)
Length
(mm)
Flexural stiffness
(x106
N/m)
Shear stiffness
(x106 N/m)
Column 12.16 19.1 155 0.1461 -
Shear Wall 12.28 75 155 4.466 6.863
![Page 5: akshay 3](https://reader037.fdocument.pub/reader037/viewer/2022100314/577cbfc01a28aba7118df973/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
8/9/2019 akshay 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/akshay-3 5/6
Total stiffness in each floor = (Flexural stiffness of columns + flexural stiffness of shear wall +
Shear stiffness of shear wall)
= (0.1461 + 4.466 +6.863) x 106 N/m = 11.475 x 10
6 N/m
The mass matrix of the system, M = 0.484 0 0
0 0.614 0
0 0 0.614
The mass matrix of the system, M = 0.484 0 0
0 0.614 0
0 0 0.614
The stiffness matrix of the system, K = − 0− 2 −0
− 2
= 11.59 −11.59 0−11.59 23.18 −11.59
0
−11.59 23.18
× 106
To find the natural frequencies, solve the following characteristic equation (Eigen value
problem),
Det
Solving the above equation we get,
ω1 = 2052.62 rad/s ; f 1 = 325.28 Hz
ω2 = 5659.95 rad/s ; f 2 = 901.31 Hz
ω3 = 7950.08 rad/s ; f 3 = 1264.8 Hz
Forcing frequencies have been considered in the range from 30 to 110 Hz. Hence the
experiment shall be further extended near to the values of Theoretical frequencies.
Figure: Observed natural frequency calculation
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
A c c e l e r a t i o n ( m i l i g )
Frequency (Hz)
Fig.(2) : Force vs Frequency graph
![Page 6: akshay 3](https://reader037.fdocument.pub/reader037/viewer/2022100314/577cbfc01a28aba7118df973/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
8/9/2019 akshay 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/akshay-3 6/6
Table (1): Observed acceleration vs frequrncy (Hz)
Frequency (Hz) Absolute maximum response (mili g)
30 2.2532
40 4.5846
50 9.2558
55 9.5
57 10.2
59 10.5
60 10.616
61 10.8
62 10.6
65 10.5
70 10.414
80 9
90 7.4
100 7.2
RESULTS:
1. The theoretical frequency = 322.28 Hz, 901.31 Hz, 1264.8 Hz.
2. The experimental frequency = 61 Hz for fundamental frequency/ first natural frequency.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:
1. Frequencies are varied only in the range of 30 to 110 Hz. The experiment should be
further extended up to the theoretical frequency.
2.
From the experimental data we found that the theoretical fundamental natural
frequency of the structure and the experimental fundamental natural frequency of the
structure are far apart. The difference in the theoretical and experimental fundamental
natural frequency can be due to following reasons:
The accelerometer and the wires become a part of the vibrating system and may cause
significant interference and their effect have not been considered in the calculations.
We assume supports are exactly fixed in theoretical calculations, but in practice
supports are not exactly rigid.
Lumped mass approximation.
The effect of shear wall and unavailability of an accurate expression for its stiffess is also
a source of approximation.
REFERENCES:1) Structural Dynamics: Theory and Computations, 2nd Ed, Paz, M (2004), CBS Publishers
and Distributors, New Delhi.
2) Dynamics of Structures by Ray W. Clough and J. Penzien, Computers & Structures Inc.,
Berkeley, USA.