809 vues

Transféré par ali25199

- Westfalia Separator Ecod Decanters
- Decanter Centrifuges
- Sizing Decanters
- Decanter Centrifuges
- P&ID Symbols
- Centrifugal Decanters Ppt
- Decanter Theory
- decanter centrifuge
- Coulson& Richardson - Cap.10 Liquid-Liquid Separation
- Chemical Engineering Design
- Liquid Liquid Separators
- ALDEC G2-95 Decanter & Controls Operation and Maintenance Manual
- Ethyl Acetate Process and Plant Design Presentation
- Non Electrical Quantities
- Design of Decanter Fssafas
- Decanter Centrifuge
- Modal anlysis of composite propeller for ship applications.doc
- centrifuge
- Decanter Alfa LAval ALDEC 30
- Basic Understanding of P&ID

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 68

centrifuge

DCT2009.069

University of Canterbury

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Eindhoven University of Technology

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Dynamics and Control

ii

Summary

the wear of the machine, but can also produce a high noise level. In this report a noise

and vibration survey has been performed on an existing design of a gearbox cover of a

decanter centrifuge. A finite element model of this gearbox cover is developed to pre-

dict the structural vibrations, which has been verified by measurements. A boundary

element model is used to predict the sound power level produced by this vibrating struc-

ture. By adapting this model with respect to material properties the noise reduction is

forecasted. It can be concluded that if a 2 mm thick steel gearbox cover is replaced by

a 4 mm thick ultra high molecular weight polyethylene one, that the sound production

will increase with 9 dB for frequencies up to 400 Hz and will decrease with 4 dB for

frequencies in the range of 400 to 540 Hz.

iii

iv Summary

Contents

Summary iii

1 Introduction 1

2 Decanter Centrifuge 3

2.1 Main parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2.2 Working principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.1 Experimental setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.2 Running tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3.3 Eigenfrequency and mode shape extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3.3.1 Numerical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.4 Noise radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.4.1 Boundary Element Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.4.2 Radiation Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.4.3 Radiated Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4.1 Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4.1.1 Static impact test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4.1.2 Numerical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4.1.3 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

v

vi Contents

4.2 Running mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.2.1 Measurement of the forces acting on the gearbox cover . . . . . . 22

4.2.2 Numerical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.2.3 Numerical results for the response in running mode . . . . . . . . 25

4.3 Noise radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.3.1 Numerical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.3.2 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

5 Design changes 31

5.1 Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5.2 Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5.2.1 Modal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

5.2.2 Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

5.2.3 Harmonic response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

5.2.4 Noise radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

5.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

6.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

6.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Bibliography 41

static impact tests 55

Contents vii

UHMWPE without damping 59

viii Contents

Chapter 1

Introduction

mands of their costumers their products should produce a minimum amount of noise.

So the vibrations that contribute to the radiated noise should be minimized. The sub-

ject is to identify the primary modes of vibrations and the contributions of these to

the radiated noise field of one of their products, the G-Tech 1456. The main objective

is to identify the primary modes of vibration and their contribution to the radiated

sound field. Moreover, using numerical models the influence of design changes can be

predicted. Because of the complex geometry of the machine, in this study only the

gearbox cover is examined.

The objective is to collect data for impact excitation of the gearbox cover in both

the operating (with the machine switched on) and non-operating (static) state. In the

operating state the cover will be excited due to vibrations that are generated by the

rotating parts, in the static case the cover is excited with a rubber hammer, i.e. after

an impact. Measurements in the frequency domain are made with an accelerometer to

identify the most dominant frequencies. The gearbox cover is modeled in SolidWorks

so the model can be imported to a finite element modeling package to carry out a

numerical study. With a modal analysis the eigenfrequencies and corresponding mode

shapes can be calculated. The accuracy of this model can be determined by comparing

the numerical results with the measurements after the impact excitation. Moreover,

the numerically calculated vibrations can be used to compute the radiated sound power

using boundary element method.

The report is organized as follows. In Chapter 2 the working principle of the decanter

centrifuge (like the G-tech 1456) is explained. Moreover, the principal components

are described in detail. In Chapter 3 the response of the main parts after an impact

excitation are investigated. Also the theory used for the experiments and numerical

model is described. For the gearbox cover in particular in Chapter 4 it is described how

a numerical model is implemented and verified by measurements. The most dominant

vibrational frequencies using static impact excitations are listed and compared with

1

2 Chapter 1. Introduction

a modal analysis of a finite element model. Next the sound power radiated by the

gearbox cover is calculated using boundary element method. In Chapter 5 the model is

changed with respect to material properties to investigate if it is worthwhile to replace

the gearbox cover by a cover made of a different material. Finally in Chapter 6 the

conclusions and recommendations will be presented.

Chapter 2

Decanter Centrifuge

In this report the G-Tech 1456 decanter centrifuge is under investigation. Before going

into detail about the process of noise reduction, the working principle and the main

parts of the centrifuge are described.

In Figure 2.1 a cross-section of the decanter with the main parts is presented (see

Appendix A for a larger one). The bowl, conical and conveyor are supported by two

main bearings that are mounted on the base. Two electric motors (main and back-

drive) are coupled to the rotating assembly through v-belt drives. The screw conveyor

is connected through a spline coupling to a gearbox, which makes it possible to rotate

the conveyor slightly slower than the bowl. Throughout this work the rotating speed of

the bowl is 3250 RPM. More technical data can be found in Appendix A.

The decanter centrifuge is a piece of machinery that is used to separate different liquids

or solids from liquids. It uses centrifugal forces that enforce the liquid (or solid) with

the highest density to be near the surface of the bowl while the liquid with the lower

density is floating on this layer (at a smaller radial position). Due to the slightly

different rotational speed of the conveyor with respect to the bowl (4 to 48 RPM) the

high density fluid is conveyed upwards into the conical and will finally exit the decanter

at the solids discharge. At the conical a beach will be formed, see Figure 2.2. On the

opposite side (in axial direction) of this beach the fluid with a lower density will overflow

in the liquids discharge.

3

4 Chapter 2. Decanter Centrifuge

Clutch Gearbox Main bearing 1 Bowl Conveyor Conical Main Bearing 2 Feed pipe

Base

2.2. Working principle 5

The decanter centrifuge has the advantage that it discharges continuously. In addi-

tion it is able to separate fluids with small density difference. Gravity sedimentation,

like large-tank clarifiers, have to run an uneconomically long time in this case. Besides

the decanter can handle a wide range of feed slurry concentrations and produces drier

solids than other centrifuges. These are the main reasons that decanter centrifuges are

widely used. Disadvantages are the high power consumption and high wear of the screw

conveyor. Examples of applications are found in the chemical industry, waste sludge

processing, minerals extracting and processing [Rec01].

At G-Tech the decanter centrifuge is completely modeled with the 3D Computer

Aided Design (CAD) software SolidWorks. The focus is set on the production process.

The development of new products starts with improving their recent products. The

company does not use any model for the vibration analysis for this product.

6 Chapter 2. Decanter Centrifuge

Chapter 3

and vibrations

derstand the underlying principles of the sound production, first the vibrations of the

machine are investigated. These vibrations are measured using a tri-axial accelerome-

ter. Next a numerical model is used to identify the shape of the vibrating structure.

Finally the model is used to calculate the sound production of the structure. Moreover,

the effects of changes in the design are predicted.

For the vibrational experiments a tri-axial accelerometer and a Brüel & Kjær PULSE

system are used. The tri-axial accelerometer is put on the surface of several parts of

the decanter centrifuge using some wax. The accelerometer is positioned such that the

z-axis represents the axial axis of the centrifuge, the y-axis is pointing upwards and the

x-axis sidewards. The three generated signals are amplified and processed in the PULSE

system and visualized on a laptop. From these signals a Fast Fourier Transformation

(FFT) is made to investigate which frequencies are dominant in the response. The

Fourier transform G(jω) of a time signal g(t) is given by [Bro85] as

R∞ RT

G(jω) = 0 g(t)e−jωt dt ≈ 0 g(t)e−jωt dt, (3.1)

with T the (large enough) time span of the data and ω the angular frequency. Using

digital signal processing equipment, like the PULSE system, this time signal will not be

continuous, but consists of N discrete samples. When the frequency range of interest

goes from 0 − W Hz, a sampling frequency of at least 2W should be used to prevent

1

aliasing, [Bro85]. This implies a maximal sample time of 2W and a total time span of

7

8 Chapter 3. Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations

N

T = 2W . The discrete Fourier transform is approximated by

PN −1 n

−j2πk N

Gk ≈ k=0 gk e . (3.2)

Both static and running measurements have been performed. In case of the static

measurements the main parts are excited with a rubber hammer and the response of the

part is measured. The number of samples is set to N = 213 = 8192, with a frequency

span of 2 Hz. In this way frequencies up to 16384 Hz will be measured. To prevent

aliasing a sampling frequency of 32765 Hz (two times the highest frequency of interest)

is used. A trigger is set to 13.6 m/s2 so that the measurement starts after the impact

and a Hanning window with maximum overlap is used to get the best results without

losing too much of the original signal. Only one average is taken in the static tests,

because the amplitude of the response is decaying fast after the impact.

For the running tests, i.e. with the bowl and conveyor rotating, a FFT of the signals

is made as well. In this case a trigger has not been used, but the measurements are

done in a free run. Because the decanter is vibrating continuously an average of 400

samples is taken to obtain reliable results.

To get a first idea of the dominating vibrations that can cause the produced noise a

running test is performed. A hose is attached to the decanter to simulate a processing

situation, see Figure 3.1. The rotational speed of the bowl is set to 3250 RPM (54 Hz).

The tri-axial accelerometer is glued to the main parts of the decanter to obtain the

acceleration response of these main parts. Several points are used for each part. The

results of the running tests are saved in a .txt file that is imported into Matlab. The

data contains the amplitudes of the acceleration at each frequency of the FFT analysis,

so 8192 amplitudes for one channel. To investigate which frequencies are dominating the

response, the data is sorted by descending amplitudes, see Appendix B for the Matlab

file used. For each part the first 3 dominating frequencies are listed in Table 3.1. As

can be seen most of the dominating frequencies are a multiplication of the rotational

frequency (54 Hz). This is due to the unbalance of the rotating parts. For example, the

gearbox cover is vibrating with the highest amplitude at a frequency of 270 Hz, which

is the 5th harmonic frequency of the rotational frequency of the bowl.

Because of the complex geometry of the decanter, the choice is made to do the noise

and vibration analysis on some parts separately. In this report the gearbox cover is

analyzed. The gearbox cover is chosen, because this cover is vibrating with the highest

amplitude (measured with a tri-axial accelerometer) of all measured parts, with the

decanter centrifuge in operating mode. Besides, the experience is that the connection

points of the cover to the base fail relatively fast.

The analysis exists of both a measurement of the response after a static impact

and a modal analysis of the gearbox cover with the finite element package Ansys. The

3.2. Running tests 9

[Hz] rotational freq. [-] [m/s2 ] amplitude [%]

Gearbox Cover 270 5 115.43 100

216 4 59.08 51

432 8 42.44 37

Grey lid 378 7 15.80 100

324 6 14.37 91

216 4 10.38 66

Hopper 108 2 10.49 100

54 1 9.35 89

216 4 8.36 80

Main Bearing 2 54 1 9.15 100

10856 6.92 76

162 3 6.53 71

Base 54 1 9.14 100

378 7 5.74 63

270 5 5.51 60

Backdrive guard 732 4.90 100

144 4.57 93

54 1 2.79 57

Solid end cover 108 2 1.89 100

3320 1.88 99

2978 1.58 84

Base frame 54 1 0.72 100

3320 0.42 58

108 2 0.37 51

Table 3.1: Most dominant frequencies of some main parts with the decanter running at

3250 RPM.

10 Chapter 3. Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations

Water hose Solids end cover Lid Hopper Base Base frame Gearbox cover

Figure 3.1: A water hose was attached to the decanter to perform a running test. The

flow was set to 4 m3 /s.

results of the static impact test are used to obtain the eigenfrequencies and the results

of the modal analysis are used to identify the corresponding mode shapes. Moreover,

the results of the computer model of the gearbox cover can be compared with the

measurements.

To extract the eigenfrequencies of the main parts a static impact test is performed.

With a rubber hammer the part is excited. After an impact in the normal direction

of a surface, the part will start vibrating in the same direction (out of plane). Due

to this impulse the part is excited in all frequencies of interest. By positioning the

accelerometer at different positions on this surface (the same positions as in the running

test) all eigenmodes within the frequency range of interest can be extracted. When only

one position would be used, the chance exists that the accelerometer is on a nodal line

of a mode.

3.4. Noise radiation 11

To identify the mode shapes that correspond with the eigenfrequencies a finite element

(FE) model is used. G-Tech provided Computer Aided Design (CAD) part files that are

created with SolidWorks software. These files can be exported as IGES files, which can

be imported in the commercial FE software package Ansys. Within Ansys the model is

meshed. Moreover the material properties and boundary conditions are assigned.

As the main parts are made of steel, damping is not taken into account in the

numerical analysis. The structural dynamics of an undamped system are given by the

equations of motion [Ans07]:

Mü + Ku = 0, (3.3)

with u the column with degrees of freedom and M and K the mass and stiffness matrices

respectively. The eigenvalue problem corresponding to this free vibrating undamped

system is given by:

(−ω 2 M + K)u = 0. (3.4)

The values for ω for which the determinant of the matrix [−ω 2 M+K] equals zero are the

eigenvalues. The modal analysis function in Ansys solves this eigenvalue problem and

stores the eigenvalues λ = ω 2 in a diagonal matrix λi . The corresponding eigenvectors

φi satisfy:

(K − λi M)φi = 0. (3.5)

Physically the eigenvalues and eigenvectors represent the undamped eigenfrequencies

[rad/s] and the corresponding mode shapes respectively.

in the surrounded fluid by a structure using the Helmholtz differential equation. Only

the surface of a vibrating structure in contact with the fluid, also called wetted surface,

is able to transfer energy to the fluid. Therefore the Helmholtz differential equation

can be reduced to an integral equation that covers only the boundary surface S. The

complete derivation can be found in [Vis04]:

H ³ ´

α(~x)p(~x) = S ∂G(r)

∂ny p(~

y ) + iωρ0 G(r)v ny (~

y ) dS + pin (~x). (3.6)

In (3.6) the acoustic pressure and normal velocity are related to the radiated pressure

field in the fluid domain. The term α(~x) is a geometry related coefficient, ~y is a point

on the boundary surface S and ~x is a field point in the fluid domain. The unit normal

to the surface at source point ~y , denoted as ~ny , is pointed into the fluid domain. The

distance r is the length of vector ~r that is directed from the source point ~y to the field

point ~x : r = ||~x − ~y ||. The term pin represents the incident acoustic wave in the case

12 Chapter 3. Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations

of a scattering analysis and G(r) is the Green’s function, which represents the effect

observed at point ~x created by a unit source located at point ~y .

In order to solve the Helmholtz integral equation (3.6) for a field point ~x the normal

velocity and pressure at the surface S should be known. If only the normal velocities

are known, first the pressures at the surface have to be calculated by replacing ~x = ~y

in (3.6). Secondly the pressures at the field points can be calculated.

The analysis of vibrations and the resulting radiated sound can be done with the use

of sophisticated computer software, e.g. for calculating the dynamics of a practical

structure a Finite Element (FE) Model with appropriate boundary conditions can be

used. This demands a discretization of the structure into a number of finite elements.

If the structural dynamics are of interest all elements, interior and boundary, are to

be accounted for, as they are a measure of the total mass and stiffness of the system.

For the total radiated sound power however, only the elements on the boundary have

a contribution. Only these elements are in contact with the fluid to which energy

is transferred. For the purpose of determining the radiated sound by a structure a

Boundary Element (BE) model will suffice. The advantage of a BE model is that less

equations are to be solved, as in general there are less nodes in a BE model compared

with a FE model. In this report Ansys is used for the FE analysis and LMS Virtual.Lab,

together with SYSNOISE, for the BE analysis.

From the structural vibration data at the nodes the acoustic pressures at the surface

can be calculated with the Helmholtz integral equation (3.6). This requires a discretiza-

tion of this continuous equation, see [Vis04], giving

Ap = Bv, (3.7)

where the matrices A and B are the influence matrices. These matrices are dependent

on the geometry of the structure and comply with the Helmholtz integral equation (3.6).

So with the velocities from the structural vibration data the sound pressure at each node

can be calculated.

total radiated sound power normalized with respect to the specific acoustic impedance

of the fluid medium, the structure area and the velocity of the surface vibration, which

is defined as the radiation efficiency. A commonly used measure of the surface vibration

is the space-average value of the time-averaged squared vibration velocity defined by

R ³ RT ´

vn2 = S1 S T1 0 vn2 y (~y )dt dS, (3.8)

3.4. Noise radiation 13

where T is a suitable period of time over which to estimate the mean square velocity

vn2 y at a point ~y and S extends over the total vibrating surface.

The radiation efficiency is defined by reference to the acoustical power radiated by

a uniformly vibrating baffled piston at a frequency for which the piston circumference

greatly exceeds the acoustic wavelength k: ka À 1. For the radiated power of a baffled

piston the following relation holds:

P = 21 ρ0 cSvn2 . (3.9)

In the case of a structure modeled within a FE software package the structural vibration

of this structure with R elements can be calculated with FE method. In this way it is

possible to obtain a column vector of complex velocities at each element center caused

by a harmonic point force. The velocities are grouped in a column vector, like:

£ ¤T

ve = ve1 ve2 . . . veR . (3.11)

With the calculated velocities the sound pressure and radiated sound power can be

calculated within a BEM package. The obtained sound pressure at each element is also

grouped in a column vector:

£ ¤T

pe = pe1 pe2 . . . peR . (3.12)

From a BE model the relation between the elemental velocities and sound pressures can

be found. As a result of (3.7) the sound pressures can be denoted as

Analytical equations for the radiated sound power [Fah87] give the relationship between

the velocities and sound pressures as in

P

R

1 ∗ S H

P (ω) = 2 Ae Re(ver per ) = 2R Re(ve pe ),

(3.14)

r=1

where Ae and S are respectively the areas of each element and of the whole structure.

Substituting (3.13) into (3.14) result in

S H −1

P (ω) = 2R Re(ve A Bve ). (3.15)

14 Chapter 3. Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations

3.5 Summary

To compute the radiated sound field by a vibrating structure a computer model can be

used. First the dynamics of the structure should be identified. The eigenfrequencies and

corresponding mode shapes extracted by a numerical software program are compared

with physical measurements of the excited structure after an impact. This comparison

of the eigenfrequencies gives an indication of the accuracy of the model. The vibrations

that contribute to the radiated sound field can be computed by solving the Helmholtz

integral equation for a certain frequency domain. By this equation the harmonic veloc-

ities of the vibrating structure are related to the resulting acoustical pressures at the

surface. The radiated sound power can be computed from this acoustical impedance.

Chapter 4

results of a numerical model

A numerical model is used to compute the forced harmonic response of the gearbox

cover. Consequently this harmonic response is used to compute the radiated sound

field. Experiments are made to investigate the accuracy of the finite element model.

The measured accelerations during the static impact test performed on the gearbox

cover can be found in Figure 4.1. Note that the amplitudes are normalized so that the

highest response has an amplitude of 1 sm2 . Moreover, in Table 4.1 the first 10 frequencies

that correspond with these accelerations are listed. Some peaks are close to each other,

e.g. peaks can be found at 36 and 38 Hz. This is due to the fact that the spectrum

is an average of multiple measurements at different positions and that an interval of 2

Hz is used during the measurements. These peaks are listed in Table 4.1 as being one

natural frequency, that belongs to the highest peak.

To identify the mode shapes that correspond with the eigenfrequencies a finite element

(FE) model is used. The provided CAD file of the gearbox guard existed of an assembly

containing the back drive belt guard and gearbox cover, see Figure 4.2. Basically the

gearbox cover is only connected to the backdrive belt guard with four bolts through

the small holes in the sides. To simplify the model as much as possible it is decided

to leave the backdrive belt guard out the analysis and to apply constraints to the four

15

16 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

1

X

0.9 Y

Z

0.8

0.7

Acceleration [m/s2]

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

1 2 3 4

10 10 10 10

Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.1: The dominating frequency responses of the gearbox cover during static

impact test.

Frequency [Hz]

X Y Z

122 540 490

192 350 1322

234 570 442

362 114 354

350 666 434

36 362 728

114 562 114

296 1008 1176

680 462 542

438 442 454

Table 4.1: Most dominant frequencies of the gearbox cover during a static impact test.

4.1. Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction 17

Figure 4.2: CAD file of the assembled gearbox guard, provided by G-Tech.

(a) Gearbox cover, originally. (b) Gearbox cover, adapted with front

plate.

Figure 4.3: The original and adapted gearbox cover, without backdrive belt guard.

connection points. Because the model does not contain the front panel, this plate is

modeled additionally in SolidWorks, see Figure 4.3.

The next step is to save this CAD file as an IGES file that can be imported into

Ansys. Because the gearbox cover is made of 2 mm thick steel, shell elements can be

used. This requires Ansys to import only areas instead of a (solid) volume. The choice

is made to keep only the outside areas, that subsequently are meshed with 8 node shell

elements. These elements use quadratic shape functions that are more accurate than 4

node shell elements, with linear shape functions. Special attention is paid to the back

panel with the ventilation holes in it. Around these holes a finer mesh is used compared

to the other areas. The result is an element size of 20 mm for the large areas and a mesh

size of 3 mm around the small holes. In total the model has 9803 elements and 34067

nodes with 6 degrees of freedom (DOF). The mesh used is presented in Figure 4.4. The

model would be less accurate when larger elements would be used as can be seen in

a plot of the eigenfrequency versus the mode number in Figure 4.5. In this figure the

18 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

1

ELEMENTS

APR 3 2009

14:22:15

Y

X

Z

Property Value

Youngs Modulus [GPa] 207

Poisson ratio [-] 0.3

Density [kg/m3 ] 7800

element sizes correspond with the default element sizes of the larger areas, like the side

and top panels.

The gearbox cover is made of low carbon mild steel, the material properties are

listed in Table 4.2, [Hea97] [Ger99]. In Ansys the linear isotropic elastic material model

is selected. The static impact test is performed with the gearbox cover mounted on the

decanter, so boundary conditions are needed to represent the same situation. Therefore

the translational DOF’s in Y and X direction of the nodes that are attached to the

machine are deleted. Moreover all DOF’s, except for the translational degree of freedom

in X direction, at the nodes around the small holes in both sides are deleted to represent

the situation that the cover is bolted to the backdrive belt guard.

The first 12 mode shapes calculated with Ansys are presented in Figure 4.6. As can

be seen the modes consist of panels (back, front and side) vibrating out of plane. The

4.1. Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction 19

1800

20 mm

1600 40 mm

60 mm

80 mm

1400

1200

Frequency [Hz]

1000

800

600

400

200

0

0 50 100 150 200

Mode nr [−]

Figure 4.5: Eigenfrequency versus mode number for different default element sizes.

back-panel has the lowest stiffness (due to the holes) and consequently starts resonating

at the lowest eigenfrequency.

The results of the static impact measurements contain the dominant frequencies in X, Y

and Z directions. The different panels of the gearbox cover will vibrate out of plane. This

implies that the dominant frequencies in X direction are generated by the side panels.

Even so, the response in the Y-direction is generated by the top panel and the response

in Z direction by the back panel. To identify the corresponding mode shape from

the modal analysis one needs to check the mode shape that occurs at a corresponding

frequency from the measurements. If the direction (X, Y or Z) corresponds with the out

of plane movement of the right panel, this will indicate that the Finite Element Model

complies with the measurement.

In Table 4.3 the numerically determined eigenfrequencies that correspond with the

dominating frequencies from the static impact test are listed. Sometimes it is impossible

to identify the mode shape that corresponds with a peak in the static impact test. In

that case a - is denoted for the eigenfrequency calculated with the modal analysis. The

numerically calculated mode shapes that correspond with the lowest eigenfrequencies in

X, Y and Z direction determined during the static impact test can be found in Figure 4.7.

Mode shapes for higher frequencies can be found in Appendix D. The relative large

error between the numerical and experimental result for the first eigenfrequency is due

to the applied boundary conditions at the holes where the cover is bolted to the back

20 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =1 SUB =2 SUB =3

FREQ=42.711 APR 5 2009 FREQ=50.445 APR 5 2009 FREQ=54.337 APR 5 2009

USUM (AVG) 14:58:47 USUM (AVG) 15:09:29 USUM (AVG) 15:10:14

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.184 DMX =.871962 DMX =.899207

SMN =.226E-05 SMN =.639E-03 SMN =.547E-04

SMX =1.184 SMX =.871962 SMX =.899207

Y

Z

X

Y Y

X X

Z Z

MN

MX

MN

MX

MX

MN

.226E-05 .263008 .526014 .78902 1.052 .639E-03 .194266 .387894 .581521 .775148 .547E-04 .199866 .399678 .59949 .799301

.131505 .394511 .657517 .920523 1.184 .097453 .29108 .484707 .678335 .871962 .09996 .299772 .499584 .699395 .899207

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =4 SUB =5 SUB =6

FREQ=68.924 APR 5 2009 FREQ=74.457 APR 5 2009 FREQ=88.666 APR 5 2009

USUM (AVG) 15:10:53 USUM (AVG) 15:11:40 USUM (AVG) 15:12:00

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.43 DMX =1.263 DMX =1.428

SMN =.251E-03 SMN =.002337 SMN =.179E-03

SMX =1.43 SMX =1.263 SMX =1.428

Y Y

Z Z

X X

MN

X

Z

MX

MX

MN

MX MN

.251E-03 .318002 .635753 .953504 1.271 .002337 .282506 .562674 .842843 1.123 .179E-03 .317547 .634915 .952283 1.27

.159127 .476878 .794629 1.112 1.43 .142421 .42259 .702759 .982928 1.263 .158863 .476231 .793599 1.111 1.428

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =7 SUB =8 SUB =9

FREQ=88.947 APR 5 2009 FREQ=90.91 APR 5 2009 FREQ=112.15 APR 5 2009

USUM (AVG) 15:13:30 USUM (AVG) 15:13:54 USUM (AVG) 15:14:10

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.287 DMX =1.833 DMX =2.22

SMN =.809E-03 SMN =.258E-03 SMN =.001895

SMX =1.287 SMX =1.833 SMX =2.22

Y Y Y

Z Z Z

X X X

MX

MX

MN

MN

MX

MN

.809E-03 .28665 .572492 .858333 1.144 .258E-03 .407442 .814627 1.222 1.629 .001895 .494747 .987598 1.48 1.973

.14373 .429571 .715413 1.001 1.287 .20385 .611034 1.018 1.425 1.833 .248321 .741172 1.234 1.727 2.22

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =10 SUB =11 SUB =12

FREQ=114.699 APR 5 2009 FREQ=114.841 APR 5 2009 FREQ=129.101 APR 5 2009

USUM (AVG) 15:14:35 USUM (AVG) 15:15:07 USUM (AVG) 15:15:23

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.442 DMX =1.155 DMX =.720916

SMN =.230E-03 SMN =.527E-03 SMN =.860E-04

SMX =1.442 SMX =1.155 SMX =.720916

MX

MN

MN

Y Y Y MX

MN X X X

Z Z Z

MX

.230E-03 .320517 .640803 .96109 1.281 .527E-03 .257124 .513722 .77032 1.027 .860E-04 .16027 .320455 .480639 .640824

.160373 .48066 .800947 1.121 1.442 .128826 .385423 .642021 .898618 1.155 .080178 .240363 .400547 .560732 .720916

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

4.2. Running mode 21

impact test [Hz] analysis [Hz] [%]

X 36 50 38.9

(X,Y),Z 114 (-,-), 115 (-,-), 0.9

X 122 129 5.7

X 192 184 -4.2

X 234 239 2.1

X 296 302 2.0

X 350 356 1.7

Y 350 350 0.0

Z 354 356 0.6

Y 362 379 4.7

Z 434 437 0.7

X 438 - -

Z 442 438 -0.9

Y 442 442 0.0

Z 454 464 2.2

Y 462 - -

Z 490 494 0.8

Y 540 553 2.4

Z 542 551 1.7

Y 562 560 -0.4

Y 570 - -

Y 666 661 -0.8

X 680 - -

Table 4.3: Comparison between the eigenfrequencies determined in a static impact test

and a modal analysis in Ansys.

drive guard, that is not infinitely stiff in reality. At low frequencies this will result in a

larger error than at high frequencies, where the displacements are smaller. NB due to

the high modal density of the numerical model it is not always possible to make a fair

comparison, especially for high frequencies.

When the G-Tech decanter is running the whole structure is vibrating, due to the

unbalanced rotating mass. To predict the sound radiated by the gearbox cover, first

the structural vibrations need to be calculated. In Ansys the forces acting on the

gearbox cover, transmitted by the connection points with the frame, need to be assigned.

Therefore the accelerations at the connection points are measured using the tri-axial

accelerometer.

22 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =2 SUB =37 SUB =10

FREQ=50.445 APR 5 2009 FREQ=349.503 APR 8 2009 FREQ=114.699 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 15:09:29 USUM (AVG) 10:26:06 USUM (AVG) 10:43:11

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.871962 DMX =1.296 DMX =1.442

SMN =.639E-03 SMN =.567E-03 SMN =.230E-03

SMX =.871962 SMX =1.296 SMX =1.442

MX

Y

Z

X

Y

Y

MN X

X Z

Z

MX

MN

MX

MN

.639E-03 .194266 .387894 .581521 .775148 .567E-03 .288543 .576518 .864494 1.152 .230E-03 .320517 .640803 .96109 1.281

.097453 .29108 .484707 .678335 .871962 .144555 .432531 .720506 1.008 1.296 .160373 .48066 .800947 1.121 1.442

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(a) Mode shape @ 50 Hz, side (b) Mode shape @ 350 Hz, top (c) Mode shape @ 115 Hz, back

panel is vibrating in X direction panel is vibrating in Y direction panel is vibrating in Z direction

Figure 4.7: Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with the static

impact test measurement.

The acceleration at the four connection points (two on each side) are measured using a

tri-axial accelerometer. For each point three measurements (FFT’s) are made which are

averaged. Also the standard deviation between the different measurements is calculated

to see if the measurements are repeatable. In Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9 the results for

the complete frequency region and a zoomed version up to 1000 Hz are shown. As can

be seen the highest responses occur at harmonic frequencies of 54 Hz (up to the 10th

harmonic of 540 Hz) and in the high frequency region of 5 to 12 kHz. The forces that

are involved with these accelerations can be determined easily by applying Newton’s

second law

F = ma, (4.1)

with m and a the mass (5.4 grams) and acceleration of the accelerometer respectively.

With the measured forces applied to the numerical model of the gearbox cover it is pos-

sible to calculate the structural response for the running mode. Because the amplitudes

of the forces are different for each frequency, separate loadcases need to be defined in

Ansys. These loadcases contain the average amplitudes of the harmonic forces in X, Y

and Z direction as measured during the running test and are applied to the nodes at the

vertical edges at the front of the gearbox cover, see Figure 4.10. It is chosen to use only

the first 10 harmonics of the running frequency of 54 Hz in the simulation. The high

frequency responses have a large standard deviation and therefore they are not taken

into account in the numerical simulation. NB these frequencies could be dominant in

the radiated sound field and should be investigated in more detail. See Table 4.4 for

the input forces used.

The dynamic response to the harmonic forces listed in Table 4.4 is calculated within

Ansys. To reduce the calculation time, the analysis type is set to modal superposition,

4.2. Running mode 23

2.5

X

2 Y

1.5 Z

0.5

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

10 10 10 10 10 10

Frequency [Hz]

Standard deviation [m/s2]

4

X

3 Y

Z

2

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

10 10 10 10 10 10

Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.8: Average accelerations and standard deviation measured at the connection

points of the gearbox cover.

1

X

Average acc. [m/s2]

0.8 Y

0.6 Z

0.4

0.2

0

1 2 3

10 10 10

Frequency [Hz]

Standard deviation [m/s2]

1

X

0.8 Y

0.6 Z

0.4

0.2

0

1 2 3

10 10 10

Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.9: Zoomed, average accelerations and standard deviation measured at the

connection points of the gearbox cover.

24 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

Figure 4.10: The harmonic loads and constraints used for the running simulation.

[Hz] [N] [N] [N]

54 5.3 2.1 0.4

108 5.0 2.7 1.3

162 2.2 2.0 2.7

216 1.5 1.3 0.6

270 2.6 5.0 5.3

324 0.5 0.4 1.7

378 1.0 0.7 0.8

432 1.0 0.1 0.6

486 0.06 0.05 0.02

540 0.1 0.1 0.1

Table 4.4: Amplitudes of forces in X, Y and Z direction used in Ansys for the running

mode analysis.

4.3. Noise radiation 25

which means that the response is based on the preceding modal analysis. For this modal

analysis the boundary conditions at the connection points as mentioned in Section 4.1.2

are deleted. The undamped equations of motion (3.5) become [Ans07]

φj T Mφj y¨j + φj T Kφj yj = φj T F, (4.2)

Pn

with φj the j-th mode shape and yj a set of modal coordinates, such that u = j=1 φj yj ,

with n the number of modes on which the superposition is based. As a rule of thumb

the number of modes n should contain at least 50% of the eigenfrequencies more than

the highest frequency of interest in the harmonic response analysis case [Ans07]. This

implies that the eigenfrequency of the highest mode in the mode superposition analysis

should be at least 810 Hz for accurate results. 200 Modes are selected in the mode

superposition analysis case, with the highest mode shape and eigenfrequency at 1309

Hz. The complete input file used in Ansys, for both the modal and forced response

analysis, can be found in Appendix C.

The deformed shape of the gearbox cover due to the harmonic forces, as mentioned in

Table 4.4, is presented in Figure 4.11 for each frequency of excitation. The displacements

are the highest for the low frequencies with a maximum of 5.1e−3 mm in X-direction at

54 Hz at the lowest connection points, see Figure 4.11(a).

Boundary Element (BE) analysis to predict the radiated sound power.

The results of the harmonic response analysis case in Ansys are stored in a .rst file that

is imported into LMS Virtual.Lab. First a Load Vector Set is created that contains the

displacement vector for every node of the gearbox cover mesh. Next step is to create

a surrogate acoustic mesh on which this structural data is projected. For an acoustical

analysis less elements and nodes can be used than for a structural dynamic analysis case.

Therefore a coarse mesh is created in Ansys consisting of larger 4 node quadrilateral

shell elements, see Figure 4.12 for both meshes. This coarse mesh consisted of 4902

elements and 5360 nodes. The mesh used in the structural analysis consists of 9803

elements and 34067 nodes respectively. So the number of equations to be solved is

reduced by 84%.

To set up the acoustical analysis in LMS Virtual.Lab first the Harmonic BEM

Toolbox is activated. Next the model type definition is set to BEM Direct, exterior, as

26 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =1 SUB =2

FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=108 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:35:51 USUM (AVG) 16:36:07

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.005079 DMX =.001571

MN

SMN =.439E-05 SMN =.135E-06

SMX =.005079 SMX =.001571

Y Y

Z Z

X X

MX

MN

MX

.439E-05 .001132 .00226 .003388 .004516 .135E-06 .349E-03 .699E-03 .001048 .001397

.568E-03 .001696 .002824 .003952 .005079 .175E-03 .524E-03 .873E-03 .001222 .001571

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =3 SUB =4

FREQ=162 APR 27 2009 FREQ=216 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:36:29 USUM (AVG) 16:36:44

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.519E-03 DMX =.138E-03

SMN =.155E-06 SMN =.415E-06

SMX =.519E-03 SMX =.138E-03

MX

MX

Y Y

X X

Z Z

MN

MN

.155E-06 .116E-03 .231E-03 .346E-03 .462E-03 .415E-06 .310E-04 .616E-04 .921E-04 .123E-03

.579E-04 .173E-03 .289E-03 .404E-03 .519E-03 .157E-04 .463E-04 .769E-04 .107E-03 .138E-03

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =5 SUB =6

FREQ=270 APR 27 2009 FREQ=324 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:41:09 USUM (AVG) 16:41:59

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.170E-03 DMX =.226E-04

SMN =.709E-06 SMN =.141E-07

SMX =.170E-03 SMX =.226E-04

MN

MN Y Y

MX

X X

Z Z

MX

.709E-06 .383E-04 .758E-04 .113E-03 .151E-03 .141E-07 .504E-05 .101E-04 .151E-04 .201E-04

.195E-04 .570E-04 .946E-04 .132E-03 .170E-03 .253E-05 .755E-05 .126E-04 .176E-04 .226E-04

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =7 SUB =8

FREQ=378 APR 27 2009 FREQ=432 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:42:45 USUM (AVG) 16:43:43

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.120E-03 DMX =.158E-03

SMN =.936E-07 SMN =.482E-06

SMX =.120E-03 SMX =.158E-03 MN

MX

Y Y

MX

X X

Z Z

MN

.936E-07 .268E-04 .535E-04 .801E-04 .107E-03 .482E-06 .356E-04 .707E-04 .106E-03 .141E-03

.134E-04 .401E-04 .668E-04 .935E-04 .120E-03 .180E-04 .531E-04 .882E-04 .123E-03 .158E-03

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =9 SUB =10

FREQ=486 APR 27 2009 FREQ=540 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:44:44 USUM (AVG) 16:45:38

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.161E-04 DMX =.224E-05

SMN =.290E-07 SMN =.289E-08

SMX =.161E-04 SMX =.224E-05

MN

Y Y

X X

Z Z

MX

MX

MN

.290E-07 .360E-05 .716E-05 .107E-04 .143E-04 .289E-08 .501E-06 .998E-06 .150E-05 .199E-05

.181E-05 .538E-05 .895E-05 .125E-04 .161E-04 .252E-06 .750E-06 .125E-05 .175E-05 .224E-05

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

Figure 4.11: Nodal displacements of the gearbox cover for different frequencies of exci-

tation.

4.3. Noise radiation 27

Figure 4.12: For the acoustical analysis a coarser mesh is used than for the structural

analysis.

only the exterior problem is to be solved. Now a Mesh Preprocessing Set can be defined

for the coarse acoustical mesh, to ensure that all normal directions to the structure

are set consistently. A new Material and Material Property are assigned to the wetted

surface and the properties are set for air (density of 1.225 kg/m3 and speed of sound of

340 m/s).

The Load Vector Set is now ready to be transferred to the coarser acoustical mesh.

This is done using a Transfer Vector Set. The MaxDistance method is selected and 8

influencing nodes and a distance of 12 mm are selected. After the projection is calculated

a picture of the deformed acoustical mesh is made to be sure that the projection is

properly done. To compute the acoustic pressures at the surface of the gearbox cover

the velocities at the nodes are needed. These velocities are calculated by differentiating

the displacements that were calculated in the harmonic loadcase in Ansys.

The Transfer Vector Set can now be used as an acoustical boundary condition. A

Boundary Condition and Source Set is defined and the Transfer Vector Set is added as

a source.

Finally the Acoustical Response Set can be defined and the Boundary Condition and

Source Set is assigned to it. Now the simulation can be started and once it is finished

the acoustical power can be displayed in a graph. The total setup in LMS Virtual.Lab

can be seen in Figure 4.13.

28 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

The total radiated sound power (re 10−12 W) and radiation efficiency are plotted in

a graph, see Figure 4.14. Note that the lines between the circular data points do not

represent any prediction on the sound power, as the amplitudes of the forces for these

frequencies are much lower. The value of the radiated sound power is dependant on

both the amplitude of the velocities and the radiation efficiency. The velocities will be

high when the structure is excited with high forces or near an eigenfrequency. Also, in

general, the velocities are higher for low frequencies.

4.4 Summary

A numerical model of the gearbox cover has been developed to compute the structural

vibrations due to a forced harmonic response. The finite element model used to compute

these vibrations is verified by measurements. The error between the eigenfrequencies

determined with measurements and the numerical model is for most frequencies small

(smaller than 6 %), however due to the high modal density of the model a fair comparison

cannot be made for all frequencies.

The structural vibrations that are computed with finite element method are used

in a boundary element model to compute the radiated sound field. For frequencies up

to 550 Hz the maximal acoustic power level is 42 dB (re 10−12 W).

4.4. Summary 29

50

Acoustic Power [dB]

40

30

20

10

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Frequency [Hz]

0.06

Radiation efficiency [−]

0.04

0.02

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.14: Radiated sound power (re 10−12 W) and radiation efficiency.

30 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model

Chapter 5

Design changes

In general there are four methods to control noise and vibrations [Ren]: (1) absorption,

(2) use of barriers and enclosures, (3) structural damping and (4) vibration isolation.

In case of the gearbox cover, damping is investigated.

5.1 Damping

The gearbox cover is made of low carbon mild steel. The material damping of steel is

assumed to be negligible. This results in an infinite high response at the eigenfrequen-

cies obtained in the modal analysis. To reduce the amplitudes of the response at the

eigenfrequency, (material) damping should be included in the model.

Within Ansys the harmonic response is calculated using a modal superposition

method, see (4.2). To include damping in the model, several damping inputs can be

given in Ansys, resulting in a total modal damping factor ξj of [Ans07]:

α βωj

ξj = 2ωj + 2 + ξ + ξjm , (5.1)

with α and β the Rayleigh damping multipliers for mass and stiffness respectively, ξ a

constant damping ratio and ξjm a modal damping ratio. As modal damping has only an

effect near the eigenfrequencies, the mass and stiffness of the system should be changed

to get a better results at other frequencies.

5.2 Material

The model of the gearbox cover can be adapted easily to investigate the effect of a

change of material. The main function of the gearbox cover is to protect the rotating

parts from external influences, so mechanical properties such as Young’s Modulus are

31

32 Chapter 5. Design changes

Property Value

Youngs Modulus [GPa] 1.3

Poisson ratio [-] 0.4

Density [kg/m3 ] 930

1400

Steel (2 mm)

UHMWPE (4 mm)

1200

1000

Frequency [Hz]

800

600

400

200

0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Mode nr [−]

Figure 5.1: Eigenfrequency versus mode number for both the steel and UHMWPE

gearbox cover.

not so important. Therefore it is investigated what the effect is on the response of the

gearbox cover, if it would be made out of 4 mm thick polyethylene. This material has

a high (compared with steel) material damping and is cost efficient.

The material properties in Ansys are replaced by the properties of ultra high molecular

weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) [War71], see Table 5.1. Also the thickness of the shell

elements is increased to 4 mm.

After changing the material properties a modal analysis is done. Due to the changes

in the material properties the eigenfrequencies will be lower compared to the gearbox

cover made out of steel. This implies that more modes are needed in a modal super-

position harmonic response analysis case, see Figure 5.1. To comply with the rule of

thumb [Ans07] to use at least a number of modes such that the highest eigenfrequency

is 50% higher than the highest frequency of interest, 300 modes are extracted.

5.2.2 Damping

Because of the visco-elastic (time dependant) material behavior of plastics, the material

damping of UHMWPE will be frequency dependant. The damping for high frequencies

will be higher than for low frequencies. From the options available in Ansys it is chosen

5.2. Material 33

3.183 0.01

6.366 0.02

9.549 0.03

Table 5.2: Different values for the Rayleigh damping coefficient β that are used in the

harmonic simulation.

to model the damping characteristics of the UHMWPE with Rayleigh damping based

on the stiffness matrix, so the modal damping factor becomes

βωj

ξj = 2 .

(5.2)

The value for β in this linear equation will determine the modal damping for the com-

plete frequency domain. However, no literature is found to verify this model of the

damping characteristics. Consequently, it would be good practice to perform mea-

surements to get insight in the real damping characteristics of this polymer. For the

moment different values for β are used to obtain a first idea of how damping influences

the response, see Table 5.2. The corresponding damping ratio at 100 Hz is also denoted.

To predict the harmonic response of the gearbox cover with this new material, the

forced response analysis case is repeated. The damping is added with values for β as

in Table 5.2. The maximum displacements due to the harmonic forces are presented

in Table 5.3. As can be seen the maximum displacements for the UHMWPE gearbox

cover are higher than the displacements for the steel gearbox cover, especially for low

frequencies. Damping has a high influence at frequencies near the eigenfrequencies of

the system. This influence can be clearly seen at excitation frequencies of 162, 216 and

270 Hz. For the other frequencies the damping has less influence, as the gearbox cover

is not excited near the eigenfrequency.

In Figure 5.2 the results of the deformed shape of the gearbox guard made out of

UHMWPE without damping are compared with the results of the steel gearbox guard.

This clearly shows that the UHMWPE one has a higher modal density. The results of

the deformed shape of the gearbox guard made out of UHMWPE without damping for

higher frequencies are presented in Appendix E. The effect of Rayleigh damping, with

β = 9.549e−5 , for excitation frequencies of 54 and 486 Hz, is presented in Figure 5.3.

As can be seen the amplitudes of the forced harmonic response are lower when damping

is applied.

34 Chapter 5. Design changes

Frequency Steel Plastic Plastic Plastic Plastic

[Hz] β=0 β = 0 β = 3e−5 β = 6e−5 β = 9e−5

54 5.1 42.5 41.4 38.6 35.1

108 1.6 13.4 11.4 8.0 5.5

162 0.5 39.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

216 0.1 64.9 0.8 0.7 0.6

270 0.2 4.7 0.7 0.6 0.5

324 0.02 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1

378 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1

432 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1

486 0.02 0.06 7.010−3 6.510−3 6.610−3

540 2.210−3 0.08 1.110−3 9.810−3 9.510−3

Table 5.3: Maximum displacements for the running mode analysis for steel and

UHMWPE material properties and different values for the Rayleigh damping.

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =1 SUB =1

FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=54 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:35:51 USUM (AVG) 16:55:12

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.005079 DMX =.042505

MN

SMN =.439E-05 SMN =.381E-04

SMX =.005079 SMX =.042505

MN

Y

Z

X

Y

MX

X

Z

MX

.439E-05 .001132 .00226 .003388 .004516 .381E-04 .009475 .018912 .028349 .037786

.568E-03 .001696 .002824 .003952 .005079 .004757 .014194 .023631 .033068 .042505

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

54 Hz.

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =2 SUB =2

FREQ=108 APR 27 2009 FREQ=108 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:36:07 USUM (AVG) 16:57:19

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.001571 DMX =.013363

SMN =.135E-06 SMN =.895E-04

SMX =.001571 SMX =.013363

Y Y

Z Z

X X

MN

MX MX

MN

.135E-06 .349E-03 .699E-03 .001048 .001397 .895E-04 .003039 .005989 .008939 .011888

.175E-03 .524E-03 .873E-03 .001222 .001571 .001564 .004514 .007464 .010413 .013363

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

(c) Steel: Deformed shape @ 108 Hz. (d) UHMWPE: Deformed shape @

108 Hz.

Figure 5.2: Nodal displacements of the forced response of the gearbox cover made out

of steel and UHMWPE.

5.2. Material 35

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =1 SUB =1

FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=54 APR 29 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:55:12 USUM (AVG) 13:30:02

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.042505 DMX =.035139

SMN =.381E-04 SMN =.163E-04

SMX =.042505 SMX =.035139

MN

Y Y

MX

MX

X X

Z Z

MN

.381E-04 .009475 .018912 .028349 .037786 .163E-04 .007821 .015627 .023432 .031237

.004757 .014194 .023631 .033068 .042505 .003919 .011724 .019529 .027334 .035139

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

ing. 9.549e−5

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =9 SUB =9

FREQ=486 APR 27 2009 FREQ=486 APR 29 2009

USUM (AVG) 17:05:29 USUM (AVG) 13:44:21

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.615E-04 DMX =.660E-05

SMN =.860E-07 SMN =.141E-07

SMX =.615E-04 SMX =.660E-05

MX

MN

MN

Y Y

MX

X X

Z Z

.860E-07 .137E-04 .274E-04 .410E-04 .547E-04 .141E-07 .148E-05 .294E-05 .441E-05 .587E-05

.691E-05 .206E-04 .342E-04 .479E-04 .615E-04 .746E-06 .221E-05 .367E-05 .514E-05 .660E-05

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

(c) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz without damp- (d) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz with β =

ing. 9.549e−5

Figure 5.3: The influence of Rayleigh damping on the deformed shape of the plastic

gearbox cover.

36 Chapter 5. Design changes

80

steel, β = 0

plastic, β = 0

70 −5

plastic, β = 3.183 10

plastic, β = 6.366 10−5

60 plastic, β = 9.549 10−5

Acoustic Power [dB]

50

40

30

20

10

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Frequency [Hz]

Figure 5.4: Radiated sound power for the gearbox cover made out of UHMWPE for

different damping values.

With the harmonic response information for the plastic gearbox cover the radiated sound

power can be predicted in the same way as for the steel gearbox cover. In Figure 5.4

the radiated sound powers can be found for the gearbox cover made out of UHMWPE

for different damping values. Also the radiated sound power for the steel gearbox cover

is shown for reference.

As can be seen in Figure 5.4 the damping has a high influence on the radiated

sound power at frequencies near the eigenfrequencies of the gearbox cover. For low

frequencies however, the radiated sound power is higher for the gearbox cover made out

of rotational molded plastic compared to the steel one. The shift point is at 378 Hz,

for higher frequencies the radiated power is lower in case of a plastic cover. When the

average difference in acoustical power is calculated for low frequencies (below 378 Hz)

and the high frequencies (378 Hz and higher), it is found that the plastic cover radiates

sound with a power of 9 dB more in the low frequency region and has a reduction of 4

dB in the high frequency region.

To verify the results for the radiated power by the steel cover, it is recommended

to perform a sound intensity scan. However, when the decanter is running, sound will

be transmitted by the rotating parts within the gearbox cover, which will have a con-

tribution in the measurement as the gearbox cover is not a closed enclosure. Therefore

it would be good practice to excite the gearbox cover with a shaker with a known

frequency and amplitude to verify the used model.

5.3. Summary 37

5.3 Summary

The numerical model of the gearbox cover has been changed with respect to the material

properties of the cover. The material properties are changed to ultra high molecular

weight polyethylene. Also the thickness of the cover is increased to 4 mm (was 2 mm for

the steel one). This plastic has a high material damping, so damping is included in the

model. For different choices for this damping model the sound production is computed.

Compared with the steel gearbox cover in general the sound production of the plastic

gearbox cover will increase with 9 dB in the frequency range to 400 Hz and decrease

with 4 dB for higher frequencies to 550 Hz.

38 Chapter 5. Design changes

Chapter 6

Conclusion and

Recommendations

6.1 Conclusion

This report contains a noise and vibration survey of the G-Tech 1456 gearbox cover. The

vibration survey measurements are done using a tri-axial accelerometer that is mounted

on the cover. For both the operational and non-operational state the main vibrations

are measured. In the non-operational state the eigenfrequencies are extracted and using

the modal analysis toolbox in the finite element package Ansys, the corresponding mode

shapes are identified. Moreover, the eigenfrequencies obtained with the modal analysis

are compared with the measurements. In the operational mode the forces acting on the

gearbox cover are measured and modeled in Ansys. In this way it is possible to simulate

the operational mode. As the decanter centrifuge is rotating at a frequency of 54 Hz,

the harmonic input forces are all an integer multiple of this frequency (harmonics up to

540 Hz).

In the non-operation mode the results for the numerical model are comparable

(except for the first eigenfrequency) with the experimental results. The largest error is

5.7%. However, due to the high modal density of the numerical model, it is not always

possible to make a fair comparison.

In the frequency range up to 540 Hz the dominant frequency in the operational mode

is 270 Hz. However, the responses at 54 and 108 Hz show the biggest displacements.

The acoustical response show the biggest response at 432 Hz due to a relative high

radiation efficiency for that mode.

When the gearbox cover would be made from 4 mm thick high molecular weight

polyethylene the structural vibrations will have a bigger amplitude compared to the

steel one. The acoustical response for high frequencies (above 378 Hz) however can be

reduced by approximately 4 dB. For lower frequencies the radiated power will be on

39

40 Chapter 6. Conclusion and Recommendations

average 9 dB higher. This result is only valid when the damping characteristics that

are used in the model (Rayleigh damping, with β = 9.54910−5 ) is realistic.

6.2 Recommendations

To verify the acoustic results it is recommended to perform a sound intensity scan of the

gearbox cover when it is excited by a shaker. In this way background noise is avoided.

A general remark has to be made about the frequency domain that is used. As can be

seen from the measurements the gearbox cover is also excited with higher frequencies (at

about 6000 Hz) than used in this analysis. These frequencies can have a big contribution

in the radiated sound field. Therefore these high frequencies should be taken into

account in the simulation to be able to compare the steel and plastic gearbox cover in

the complete audible frequency domain. It is expected that the high material damping

of plastic has a larger advantage in this frequency region.

Bibliography

[Bro85] R.G. Brown and P.Y.C. Brown. Introduction to random signals and applied

Kalman filtering, volume 2. J. Wiley, New York, 1985.

[Fah87] F. Fahy and P. Gardonio. Sound and Structural Vibration, Radiation, Trans-

mission and Response, volume 2. Elsevier Acadamic, Amsterdam/London,

1987.

[Ger99] J.M. Gere and S.P. Timoshenko. Mechanics of materials 4th SI edition, vol-

ume 4. Stanley Thornes, Cheltenham, 1999.

sevier Advanced Technologies, Oxford, 2001.

[Ren] J Renninger. Understanding damping techniques for noise and vibration con-

trol. www.earsc.com.

identification, volume 1. 2004.

[War71] I.M. Ward and J. Sweeney. The mechanical properties of solid polymers, vol-

ume 2. J. Wiley, New York, 1971.

41

42 Bibliography

Appendix A

data

In Figure A.1 a cross-section of the G-Tech 1456 decanter centrifuge is shown. Table A.1

is a list of the technical data of this decanter centrifuge.

Technical data

Max. Bowl Speed 4000 RPM

Centrifugal Force 3150 G’s

Differential Speed 4-48 RPM

Run Up time 2-3 minutes

Bowl Dimensions 14” (355 mm) Diameter x 56” (1420 mm) Long

Gross Weight 2150 kg

Shipping Volume 6 m3

Wetted Parts 316 Stainless Steel

Base Assembly Cast Iron

Main Drive 18-37 kW 230/460 VAC @ 50/60 Hz

Back Drive 4-7.5 kW 230/460 VAC @ 50/60 Hz

43

44 Appendix A. Decanter Layout and technical data

Feed pipe

Main Bearing 2

Solids End

Conical

Conveyor

Bowl

Liquids End

Main bearing 1

Gearbox

Base

Clutch

Appendix B

measurement data from PULSE

The Matlab function file that is used to import the measurement response data obtained

with a tri-axial accelerometer and a Brüel & Kjær PULSE system is listed below.

fid = fopen(filename, ’r’);

spectrum_Y = textscan(fid, ’%f %f %f’ , 8192, ’headerlines’, 83);

fid = fopen(filename, ’r’);

spectrum_X = textscan(fid, ’%f %f %f’ , 8192, ’headerlines’, 83+8192+93);

fid = fopen(filename, ’r’);

spectrum_Z = textscan(fid, ’%f %f %f’ , 8192, ’headerlines’, 83+8192+93+8192+93);

Freq = spectrum_X{1,2};

spec_X = spectrum_X{1,3};

spec_Y = spectrum_Y{1,3};

spec_Z = spectrum_Z{1,3};

[max_X,pos_X] = sort(spec_X,’descend’);

max_X = max_X(1:20);

pos_X = pos_X(1:20);

freq_X = Freq(pos_X);

[max_Y,pos_Y] = sort(spec_Y,’descend’);

max_Y = max_Y(1:20);

pos_Y = pos_Y(1:20);

freq_Y = Freq(pos_Y);

[max_Z,pos_Z] = sort(spec_Z,’descend’);

max_Z = max_Z(1:20);

pos_Z = pos_Z(1:20);

freq_Z = Freq(pos_Z);

max_freq = [freq_X freq_Y freq_Z];

45

46 Appendix B. Matlab Code to import measurement data from PULSE

%max_resp = max_resp./max(max(max_resp)); % scaling wrt the highest response

The m-file to create a frequency response plot of the 20 most dominating responses

is listed below.

clear all

close all

clc

filename = [’21_S.txt’; ’22_S.txt’; ’23_S.txt’; ’24_S.txt’; ’25_S.txt’;’26_S.txt’; ’27_S.txt’; ’28_S.txt’; ’29_S.txt’];

% filename = [’30_S.txt’; ’31_S.txt’; ’32_S.txt’; ’33_S.txt’; ’34_S.txt’; ’35_S.txt’;’36_S.txt’; ’37_S.txt’;’38_S.txt’; ’39_

max_freq = zeros(20,3*l);

max_resp = zeros(20,3*l);

for i = 1:l

[max_freq(:,i:l:i+2*l),max_resp(:,i:l:i+2*l)] = read_the_data(filename(i,:));

end

min_freqX = min(min(max_freq(:,1:l)));

max_freqX = max(max(max_freq(:,1:l)));

min_freqY = min(min(max_freq(:,l+1:2*l)));

max_freqY = max(max(max_freq(:,l+1:2*l)));

min_freqZ = min(min(max_freq(:,2*1+1:3*l)));

max_freqZ = max(max(max_freq(:,2*1+1:3*l)));

freqX = [];

respX = [];

freqY = [];

respY = [];

freqZ = [];

respZ = [];

q = 1;

for i = min_freqX:2:max_freqX % data captured with freq_span = 2 Hz

[rowX,colX] = find(max_freq(:,1:l) == i); % finding freq between min and max freq (of the 20 frequencies)

s = length(rowX);

if s > 0 % if the frequency is found in the max_freq matrix

freqX(q,1) = i;

respX(q,1) = mean(mean(max_resp(rowX,colX),2)); %average over the number of measurements (@ diff positions)

q = q+1;

end

end

47

freqX = freqX(pos);

q = 1;

for i = min_freqY:2:max_freqY

[rowY,colY] = find(max_freq(:,l+1:2*l) == i);

s = length(rowY);

if s > 0

freqY(q,1) = i;

respY(q,1) = mean(mean(max_resp(rowY,l+colY),2));

q = q+1;

end

end

[respY,pos] = sort(respY,’descend’);

freqY = freqY(pos);

q = 1;

for i = min_freqZ:2:max_freqZ

[rowZ,colZ] = find(max_freq(:,2*l+1:3*l) == i);

s = length(rowZ);

if s > 0

freqZ(q,1) = i;

respZ(q,1) = mean(mean(max_resp(rowZ,2*l+colZ),2));

q = q+1;

end

end

[respZ,pos] = sort(respZ,’descend’);

freqZ = freqZ(pos);

figure(’name’,’averaged’)

semilogx(freqX,respX,’x’,freqY,respY,’o’,freqZ,respZ,’>’,’MarkerSize’,6,’LineWidth’,2)

hold on

bar(freqX,respX,’k’)

bar(freqY,respY,’k’)

bar(freqZ,respZ,’k’)

xlabel(’Frequency [Hz]’)

ylabel(’Acceleration [m/s^2]’)

legend(’X’,’Y’,’Z’)

grid

48 Appendix B. Matlab Code to import measurement data from PULSE

Appendix C

structural dynamic analysis

The input file for Ansys in the structural dynamic analysis is listed below. In this file

the gearbox cover made out of steel is analyzed. The material properties can be easily

adapted when the simulation with plastic material properties has to be done. The lines

starting with an exclamation mark are comments. The loadcases for 108 up to 486

Hz are not listed as they are the same as for 54 Hz, only with an other frequency and

amplitude input.

finish

/clear

!***************Input Data********

! Low carbon mild steel used as material

E=207e6 !youngs modulus [kg mm/s/mm2]

v=0.3 !poisson ratio [-]

rho=7800e-9 !Density [kg/mm^3]

/AUX15

IOPTN,MERG,YES !merging of keypoints

IOPTN,SOLID,NO !creating of a solid/volume

IOPTN,GTOLER,DEFA !tolerance of IGES import

IOPTN,SMALL,YES !delete small areas

finish

!**************preprocessor**********************

/prep7 !starting preprocessor for defining the material and cleaning up the model for a good mesh

nummrg,all !merge alle coincident lines and points

49

50 Appendix C. Ansys input code for the structural dynamic analysis

MP,PRXY,1,v !material property, poisson ratio

MP,DENS,1,rho !material property, density

ALLSEL,all

ASEL,S,area,,1287,1290 !Select the areas to keep

ASEL,A,area,,1296

ASEL,A,area,,1300,1304

ASEL,A,area,,1720,1722

ASEL,A,area,,1725

ASEL,A,area,,1731

ALLSEL,all

ASEL,A,area,,1300,1304

ASEL,A,area,,1287,1290

ASEL,A,area,,1296

SMRTSIZE,OFF

MSHKEY,2

DESIZE, 3, 1, 1, , ,2 ,20 , ,

mopt,aorder,on

mopt,expnd,1

mopt,trans,2

amesh,all !mesh the areas on top

ALLSEL,all

LSEL,S,line,,4964

LSEL,A,line,,5190

LSEL,A,line,,4976

LSEL,A,line,,5178

LSEL,A,line,,8

LSEL,A,line,,13770

LSEL,A,line,,32

LSEL,A,line,,13730

LSEL,A,line,,5010

LSEL,A,line,,11992

ALLSEL,all

SMRTSIZE,OFF

MSHKEY,2

DESIZE, 3, 1, 1, , ,2 ,20 , ,

mopt,aorder,on

mopt,expnd,1

mopt,trans,1.4

amesh,all

ALLSEL,all

51

LSEL,all

LSEL,U,line,,10304

SMRTSIZE,OFF

MSHKEY,2

DESIZE, 3, 1, 1, , ,2 ,20 , ,

mopt,aorder,on

mopt,expnd,1

mopt,trans,1.4

amesh,1721 !mesh the areas at back

!************BOUNDARY CONDITIONS**********

ALLSEL,all

NSEL,S,node,,3856

NSEL,A,node,,3857,3863,2

NSEL,A,node,,3866,3870,2

NSEL,A,node,,3840

NSEL,A,node,,3841,3847,2

NSEL,A,node,,3850,3854,2

NSEL,A,node,,5663

NSEL,A,node,,5664,5670,2

NSEL,A,node,,5673,5677,2

NSEL,A,node,,5647

NSEL,A,node,,5648,5654,2

NSEL,A,node,,5657,5661,2

D,ALL,UY,0

D,ALL,UZ,0

D,ALL,ROTX,0

D,ALL,ROTY,0

D,ALL,ROTZ,0

ALLSEL,ALL

/solu

MODOPT,lanb,200 !method used is block lanczos, 200 modes expand

RESVEC,ON !Calculate residual vector

EQSLV,FRONT

MXPAND,200 !200 modes expanded

solve

finish

ALLSEL,ALL

/solu

LSCLEAR,all !start with no loadsteps

NSEL,S,node,,5515,5539,2

52 Appendix C. Ansys input code for the structural dynamic analysis

NSEL,A,node,,5514

NSEL,A,node,,3813,3837,2

NSEL,A,node,,3763

NSUBST,1 !number of subsets in this loadcase

HARFRQ, 54 !Frequency of excitation

HROPT, MSUP,200,1

BETAD,1*3.1831E-5 !Set stiffness damping

F, all, FX, 5.3 !Force in X-direction

F, all, FY, 2.1 !Force in Y-direction

F, all, FZ, 0.4 !Force in Z-direction

OUTRES,NSOL !write only the nodal dof solution

OUTPR,NSOL !solution printout = dof solu

ALLSEL,all

LSWRITE

.......

ALLSEL,ALL

/solu

NSEL,S,node,,5515,5539,2

NSEL,A,node,,5514

NSEL,A,node,,3813,3837,2

NSEL,A,node,,3763

NSUBST, 1

HARFRQ, 540 !Frequency of excitation

HROPT, MSUP,200,1

BETAD,1*3.1831E-5 !Set stiffness damping

F, all, FX, 0.1 !Force in X-direction

F, all, FY, 0.1 !Force in Y-direction

F, all, FZ, 0.0 !Force in Z-direction

OUTRES,NSOL !write only the nodal dof solution

OUTPR,NSOL !solution printout = dof solu

ALLSEL,all

LSWRITE

finish

/solu

LSSOLVE,1,10,1

finish

/solu

ALLSEL,ALL

EXPASS,on

53

NUMEXP,all,54,540

!BETAD,1*3.1831E-5 !Set stiffness damping

OUTPR,nsol,all

solve

54 Appendix C. Ansys input code for the structural dynamic analysis

Appendix D

gearbox guard that correspond

with static impact tests

A static impact test is performed to identify the eigenfrequencies of the gearbox guard.

In Table 4.3 the numerically determined eigenfrequencies that correspond with the dom-

inant frequencies from this static impact test are listed. The corresponding mode shapes

(first 6) can be found in Figures D.1, D.2 and D.3.

55

56Appendix D. Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with static impact tests

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =2 SUB =12 SUB =19

FREQ=50.445 APR 5 2009 FREQ=129.101 APR 5 2009 FREQ=183.62 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 15:09:29 USUM (AVG) 15:15:23 USUM (AVG) 10:08:27

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.871962 DMX =.720916 DMX =1.547

SMN =.639E-03 SMN =.860E-04 SMN =.984E-03

SMX =.871962 SMX =.720916 SMX =1.547

Y

Z

X

MN

Y MX Y

X X

Z Z

MX

MX MN

MN

.639E-03 .194266 .387894 .581521 .775148 .860E-04 .16027 .320455 .480639 .640824 .984E-03 .344492 .687999 1.032 1.375

.097453 .29108 .484707 .678335 .871962 .080178 .240363 .400547 .560732 .720916 .172738 .516246 .859753 1.203 1.547

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(a) Mode shape @ 50 Hz (b) Mode shape @ 129 Hz (c) Mode shape @ 184 Hz

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =24 SUB =33 SUB =38

FREQ=239.362 APR 8 2009 FREQ=302.378 APR 8 2009 FREQ=356.011 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 10:11:18 USUM (AVG) 10:16:23 USUM (AVG) 10:14:07

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.89198 DMX =1.064 DMX =.854781

SMN =.001207 SMN =.139E-03 SMN =.539E-03

SMX =.89198 SMX =1.064 SMX =.854781

MN

Y Y Y

MN X X X

Z ZMX Z

MX

MX

MN

.001207 .199157 .397106 .595056 .793005 .139E-03 .236561 .472983 .709406 .945828 .539E-03 .190371 .380202 .570034 .759866

.100182 .298131 .496081 .694031 .89198 .11835 .354772 .591195 .827617 1.064 .095455 .285286 .475118 .66495 .854781

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(d) Mode shape @ 239 Hz (e) Mode shape @ 302 Hz (f) Mode shape @ 356 Hz

Figure D.1: Structural eigenmodes of the Gearbox Guard that correspond with the

static impact test measurement for X-directions.

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =37 SUB =41 SUB =54

FREQ=349.503 APR 8 2009 FREQ=379.044 APR 8 2009 FREQ=442.244 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 10:26:06 USUM (AVG) 10:32:27 USUM (AVG) 10:35:18

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.296 DMX =.903021 DMX =1.024

SMN =.567E-03 SMN =.004804 SMN =.485E-03

SMX =1.296 SMX =.903021 SMX =1.024 MX

MX

Y Y Y

X X X

Z Z Z

MX

MN

MN

MN

.567E-03 .288543 .576518 .864494 1.152 .004804 .204408 .404011 .603615 .803219 .485E-03 .227944 .455403 .682862 .910321

.144555 .432531 .720506 1.008 1.296 .104606 .304209 .503813 .703417 .903021 .114214 .341673 .569132 .796591 1.024

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(a) Mode shape @ 350 Hz (b) Mode shape @ 379 Hz (c) Mode shape @ 442 Hz

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =70 SUB =71 SUB =88

FREQ=552.737 APR 8 2009 FREQ=560.413 APR 8 2009 FREQ=660.711 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 10:25:37 USUM (AVG) 10:26:51 USUM (AVG) 10:31:32

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.105 DMX =.830626 DMX =1.021 MX

SMN =.987E-03 SMN =.833E-04 SMN =.010398

SMX =1.105 SMX =.830626 SMX =1.021

MX

MX

Y Y Y

X X X

Z Z Z

MN

MN

MN

.987E-03 .246307 .491627 .736947 .982267 .833E-04 .184648 .369213 .553779 .738344 .010398 .23502 .459642 .684264 .908886

.123647 .368967 .614287 .859607 1.105 .092366 .276931 .461496 .646061 .830626 .122709 .347331 .571953 .796575 1.021

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(d) Mode shape @ 553 Hz (e) Mode shape @ 560 Hz (f) Mode shape @ 661 Hz

Figure D.2: Structural eigenmodes of the Gearbox Guard that correspond with the

static impact test measurement for Y-directions.

57

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =10 SUB =38 SUB =51

FREQ=114.699 APR 8 2009 FREQ=356.011 APR 8 2009 FREQ=436.718 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 10:43:11 USUM (AVG) 10:41:52 USUM (AVG) 10:40:37

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =1.442 DMX =.854781 DMX =1.11

SMN =.230E-03 SMN =.539E-03 SMN =.001213

SMX =1.442 SMX =.854781 SMX =1.11

MN

MN

Y Y Y

MN X X X

Z Z Z

MX

MX

MX

.230E-03 .320517 .640803 .96109 1.281 .539E-03 .190371 .380202 .570034 .759866 .001213 .247707 .4942 .740694 .987187

.160373 .48066 .800947 1.121 1.442 .095455 .285286 .475118 .66495 .854781 .12446 .370953 .617447 .86394 1.11

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(a) Mode shape @ 115 Hz (b) Mode shape @ 356 Hz (c) Mode shape @ 437 Hz

1 1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =52 SUB =55 SUB =58

FREQ=437.988 APR 8 2009 FREQ=463.503 APR 8 2009 FREQ=493.822 APR 8 2009

USUM (AVG) 10:41:00 USUM (AVG) 10:41:21 USUM (AVG) 10:37:16

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.677231 DMX =1.051 DMX =2.378

SMN =.911E-03 SMN =.002212 SMN =.008121

SMX =.677231 SMX =1.051 SMX =2.378

Y

MN

Z

X

MX

Y Y

MX

X X

Z Z

MX

MN

MN

.911E-03 .151204 .301498 .451791 .602085 .002212 .235321 .46843 .701539 .934648 .008121 .534852 1.062 1.588 2.115

.076058 .226351 .376645 .526938 .677231 .118767 .351876 .584985 .818093 1.051 .271486 .798218 1.325 1.852 2.378

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

(d) Mode shape @ 438 Hz (e) Mode shape @ 464 Hz (f) Mode shape @ 494 Hz

Figure D.3: Structural eigenmodes of the Gearbox Guard that correspond with the

static impact test measurement for Z-directions.

58Appendix D. Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with static impact tests

Appendix E

the gearbox guard made out of

UHMWPE without damping

The results of the deformed shape of the gearbox guard made out of UHMWPE without

damping due to applied harmonic forces are presented in Figure E.1.

59

60Appendix E. Results of the forced response of the gearbox guard made out of UHMWPE without damping

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =1 SUB =2

FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=108 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:55:12 USUM (AVG) 16:57:19

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.042505 DMX =.013363

SMN =.381E-04 SMN =.895E-04

SMX =.042505 SMX =.013363

MN

Y

Z

X

Y

MX

X MN

Z MX

.381E-04 .009475 .018912 .028349 .037786 .895E-04 .003039 .005989 .008939 .011888

.004757 .014194 .023631 .033068 .042505 .001564 .004514 .007464 .010413 .013363

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =3 SUB =4

FREQ=162 APR 27 2009 FREQ=216 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 16:59:22 USUM (AVG) 17:00:33

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.039233 DMX =.064853

SMN =.803E-04 SMN =.340E-04

SMX =.039233 SMX =.064853

MN

Y Y

X X

Z MN Z

MX MX

.803E-04 .008781 .017481 .026182 .034883 .340E-04 .014438 .028842 .043247 .057651

.004431 .013131 .021832 .030532 .039233 .007236 .02164 .036045 .050449 .064853

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

(c) Deformed shape @ 162 Hz. (d) Deformed shape @ 216 Hz.

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =5 SUB =6

FREQ=270 APR 27 2009 FREQ=324 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 17:01:25 USUM (AVG) 17:02:18

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.004693 DMX =.450E-03

SMN =.507E-05 SMN =.278E-05

SMX =.004693 SMX =.450E-03

Y Y

X X

MX Z Z

MN

MX

MN

.507E-05 .001047 .002088 .00313 .004172 .278E-05 .102E-03 .201E-03 .301E-03 .400E-03

.526E-03 .001568 .002609 .003651 .004693 .524E-04 .152E-03 .251E-03 .350E-03 .450E-03

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

(e) Deformed shape @ 270 Hz. (f) Deformed shape @ 324 Hz.

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =7 SUB =8

FREQ=378 APR 27 2009 FREQ=432 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 17:03:25 USUM (AVG) 17:04:36

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.609E-03 DMX =.611E-03

SMN =.656E-06 SMN =.224E-05

SMX =.609E-03 SMX =.611E-03

MN

MX

Y Y

X X

Z Z

MX

MN

.656E-06 .136E-03 .271E-03 .406E-03 .541E-03 .224E-05 .138E-03 .273E-03 .408E-03 .543E-03

.682E-04 .203E-03 .338E-03 .473E-03 .609E-03 .699E-04 .205E-03 .341E-03 .476E-03 .611E-03

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

(g) Deformed shape @ 378 Hz. (h) Deformed shape @ 432 Hz.

1 1

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=1 STEP=1

SUB =9 SUB =10

FREQ=486 APR 27 2009 FREQ=540 APR 27 2009

USUM (AVG) 17:05:29 USUM (AVG) 17:07:04

RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1

DMX =.615E-04 DMX =.834E-04 MN

SMN =.860E-07 SMN =.206E-06

SMX =.615E-04 SMX =.834E-04

MX

MN

Y Y

X X MX

Z Z

.860E-07 .137E-04 .274E-04 .410E-04 .547E-04 .206E-06 .187E-04 .372E-04 .557E-04 .742E-04

.691E-05 .206E-04 .342E-04 .479E-04 .615E-04 .945E-05 .279E-04 .464E-04 .649E-04 .834E-04

Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard

(i) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz. (j) Deformed shape @ 540 Hz.

Figure E.1: Nodal displacements of the gearbox cover for different frequencies of exci-

tation.

- Westfalia Separator Ecod DecantersTransféré parPro.Mechanic
- Decanter CentrifugesTransféré parAgnesia Afrida Pasaribu
- Sizing DecantersTransféré parSoon Kenneth
- Decanter CentrifugesTransféré parAaron Equipment
- P&ID SymbolsTransféré parerwan_exe
- Centrifugal Decanters PptTransféré parNaik Larka
- Decanter TheoryTransféré parpuracsinteses
- decanter centrifugeTransféré parwgao2010
- Coulson& Richardson - Cap.10 Liquid-Liquid SeparationTransféré parayyatullhusnaa
- Chemical Engineering DesignTransféré parJair Alberto Acosta Mongua
- Liquid Liquid SeparatorsTransféré parAjay Pratap Singh
- ALDEC G2-95 Decanter & Controls Operation and Maintenance ManualTransféré parJenny Fares
- Ethyl Acetate Process and Plant Design PresentationTransféré parLee Jian
- Non Electrical QuantitiesTransféré parJames Dorf
- Design of Decanter FssafasTransféré parDania Ahmed
- Decanter CentrifugeTransféré parGaurav Thakur
- Modal anlysis of composite propeller for ship applications.docTransféré parPavan Kishore
- centrifugeTransféré parAashi
- Decanter Alfa LAval ALDEC 30Transféré parAntonio Duarte
- Basic Understanding of P&IDTransféré parkaezzar10
- Assignment 2 2dofTransféré parAnonymous C1A51gvTw
- FFT Analyzer Bump Test Module Data SheetTransféré parReginaldo Vieira
- Structural Analysis 1 Jan 2014Transféré parPrasad C M
- CE 568 Structural Dynamics-SyllabusTransféré parAhmet Tuken
- Rotating Equipment Reliability Day1Transféré parhassaanzafar7
- Influence of Masonry Infill Panels on the Vibration and Stiffness Characteristics of RC Frame BuildingsTransféré parandrepuja
- Dynamic Experiment 1 (Vibration)Transféré parApostrophe Fareez Imprezza
- Analista Virtual de Vibraciones SKFTransféré parJuan Carlos González R.
- GATE 2018 Exam_ Theory of Machines Quiz 16 09-Sep-2017Transféré parStuart ashraf

- Growth and populationTransféré parAkhilesh Kumar
- STRUCTURE OF DISACCHARIDES & POLYSACCHARIDESTransféré parD K SRIVASTAVA
- Behavior of Structure Under Blast LoadingTransféré parramyashri inala
- SCHWARTZ_Was Kant a ‘Kantian Constructivist’Transféré parDiego Domingos
- Trapezoids Talk- A Paper by Michael KeytonTransféré parAbhi Ram
- BS 2782-11-1150ETransféré parpieremichel
- Shaft generators.pdfTransféré parbaharmarine
- Power Sys MagazineTransféré parTristan Cabatac
- Et200eco Failsafe Operating Manual en-US en-USTransféré parPaulo Santos
- lee keslerTransféré par09021982
- Prem Chowdhry CVTransféré parPrem Chowdhry
- Angle Modulation NOTESTransféré parJay Amiel Ajoc
- Power Flow Analysis Using Load Tap – ChangingTransféré parKim Keat
- Functional Programming in JavaScript - Sample ChapterTransféré parPackt Publishing
- 01-NORA_Steam Power Plant.pdfTransféré parmasriza
- H Inf Control for Descriptor Systems: A Matrix Inequalities ApproachTransféré parthgnguyen
- The Forms OfTransféré parMagnus
- Binder_bd Ed Fd Service ManualTransféré parmbevi100
- Catia v5 Basic Training English Cax 2012Transféré parSuryas Siva
- 54997729 WinCC Flexible Time Switch EnTransféré parSaid Boubker
- Dc AnswersTransféré parConor Murphy
- Handbook of Engineering MathematicsTransféré parNickMeyer
- Determination of Zero-shear Viscosity of Molten PolymersTransféré parfbahsi
- DSKP Year 6 Introduction 09 MAC 2017Transféré parHuey Yee Lee
- Chapter3&4fTransféré parLissa Hannah
- Lcd ScreenTransféré parFagner Fernandes Araujo
- FryingTransféré parromiifree
- Sample Paper Iq+PcmTransféré parBhuvnesh Kumar
- Cost-Management-2nd-Edition-Eldenburg-Test-Bank.docxTransféré paraperez1105
- Avramopoulos-2012-Architectural Innovation A Game-theoretic Approach-000.pdfTransféré parbobster124u