ASSESSMENT AND INTERNAL VERIFICATION FRONT SHEET (Individual Criteria)

Course Lecturer Name

B. Eng in Mechanical Engineering (Plant & Manufacturing) Ms. Mariella Cortis
Title & Surname

Unit Number & Title ETMEC-606-1522 Vibrations

Assignment Number, Title Assignment 1: Free SDOF Vibratory Systems and Use of FEA – HBA
/ Type
Deadline
Date Set 01/11/23 06/12/23
Date
Student Class / ME-MEP-6.3A &
Glen Buttigieg ID Number
Name Group ME-MEM-6.3A

Maximum Mark
Assessment Criteria

Criteria 1.3: Describe the various parameters that define a vibration associated with a particular
5
mechanism
Criteria 2.1: Construct models that represent the generation of different types of vibrations 5

Criteria 2.3: Interpret the measurements of vibrations 5

Criteria 3.3: Analyse vibrations’ systems and provide time-domain solutions 5

Criteria 4.1: Examine dynamic vibrations system 5

Criteria 4.2: Use appropriate software to analyse vibrations systems 5

Criteria 4.3: Be familiar with mathematical modelling tools such as FEA to define and solve vibrations
5
problems
Total Mark – 35% 35

Notes to Students:

 This assignment brief has been approved and released by the Internal Verifier through Classter.

 Assessment marks and feedback by the lecturer will be available online via Classter (Http://mcast.classter.com) following
release by the Internal Verifier

 Students submitting their assignment on Moodle/Unicheck will be requested to confirm online the following statements:

Student’s declaration prior to handing-in of assignment

 I certify that the work submitted for this assignment is my own and that I have read and understood the respective
Plagiarism Policy

Student’s declaration on assessment special arrangements

 I certify that adequate support was given to me during the assignment through the Institute and/or the Inclusive
Education Unit.
 I declare that I refused the special support offered by the Institute.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
MCAST Controlled and approved document Unauthorised copying or communication strictly prohibited
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3

Vibrations

Glen Buttigieg
6.3 MEP Yr. 3

1
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3

Contents
List of Figures....................................................................................................................................... 3
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Question 1……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4
Question 2 ..........................................................................................................................................10
Question 3 – Laboratory .................................................................................................................... 12
Title................................................................................................................................................ 12
Objective ....................................................................................................................................... 12
Apparatus ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Method.......................................................................................................................................... 12
Precautions and sources of error ................................................................................................... 13
Results ........................................................................................................................................... 13
Conclusions.................................................................................................................................... 14
Reference List .................................................................................................................................... 15

2
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
List of Figures
Figure 1: Mode 8 @ 226.13 Hz ................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 2: Mode 9 @ 418.89 Hz ................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 3: Mode 7 @ 182.17 Hz .............................................................................................................. 10
Figure 4: Mode 8 @ 198.72 Hz .............................................................................................................. 10
Figure 5: Mode 8 @ 146.62 Hz .............................................................................................................. 10
Figure 6: Mode 10 @ 311.72 Hz ............................................................................................................ 10
Figure 7: Comparison of Natural Frequencies ....................................................................................... 11
Figure 8: Apparatus diagram ................................................................................................................. 12

List of Tables
Table 1: Material Properties .................................................................................................................... 9
Table 2: Results ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 3: Results ..................................................................................................................................... 13

3
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
Question 1

4
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3

5
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3

6
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3

7
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3

8
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
Time Angular Displacement Angular Velocity
0 0.07 1.7E-05
1 0.0119 -8.5E-02
2 -0.0421 -7.6E-03
3 -0.0111 5.2E-02
4 0.0249 9.3E-03
5 0.0091 -3.1E-02
6 -0.0145 -8.5E-03
7 -0.0069 1.8E-02
8 0.0083 6.9E-03
9 0.0050 -1.1E-02
10 -0.0047 -5.2E-03
11 -0.0035 6.1E-03
12 0.0026 3.7E-03
13 0.0024 -3.5E-03
14 -0.0014 -2.6E-03
15 -0.0016 1.9E-03

Graph of Angular Displacement Against Time

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
-0.02

-0.04

-0.06

-0.08

Graph of Angular Velocity Against Time

9.0E-02
7.0E-02

5.0E-02

3.0E-02

1.0E-02
-1.0E-02 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
-3.0E-02

-5.0E-02
-7.0E-02

-9.0E-02

9
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
Question 2
Introduction

FEA Based Vibration Characteristic Analysis of Conventional and Composite Material Single Piece
Drive Shaft.

Truck driveshafts are commonly made of metal and in a two-piece configuration consisting of
universal joints with jaw couplings. All these things make the drive shafts heavy which effect the fuel
efficiency of the trucks. Truck driveshafts are subjected to shear stress, torsion, lateral and torsional
vibrations. The purpose of the research is to find the effect of using different materials and a single
piece’s design and still having the strength of the two-piece steel driveshaft. These materials are
Steel SM45, HS Carbon Epoxy Composite and E Glass Polyester Resin Composite. A free vibration
study was performed to evaluate the natural frequency of the and vibration mode to prevent
resonance. One of the key features that a composite material offers is damping properties and helps
to reduce noise and vibrations. From research it was found that the whirling speed of a heavy truck
two-piece driveshaft is in the range of (2400 – 4000) rpm.

Finite Element Analysis

The driveshafts were designed in Solid Edge and Pro-E software and the FEA was done using ANSYS.
The driveshafts have a length of 1250 mm, diameter of 90 mmm and an inner diameter of 83.36
mm. The mechanical properties were used for the FEA analysis:

Material Young Modulus (Pa) Material Density (kg/m3) Poisson’s Ratio

Steel SM45 C 2.07 * 1011 7600 0.3
HS Carbon Epoxy 2.1 * 1011 1600 0.3
E Glass Polyester Resin 3.4 * 1010 2100 0.366
Table 1: Material Properties

When evaluating the FEA results of the free vibration analysis the inertia and damping effects were
not considered for the analysis, and the rotational and moments values were applied in terms of
loading. Driveshafts are subjected to torque transmission, so no direct load value will act on it so
rotational and moment effect will cause it to fail, therefore they were only considered.

Figure 1: Mode 8 @ 226.13 Hz

Figure 2: Mode 9 @ 418.89 Hz

10
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
The figures above show the results of how the Steel SM45 driveshaft is affected at certain
frequencies and what type of vibrations these are. In Mode 7 it shows that the driveshaft reaches its
critical speed at 4797 rpm and will vibrate at a frequency of 79.966 Hz, which can result in the
driveshaft failing. At critical speed, the shaft is mostly deformed at the transmission side. In Mode 8
the driveshaft reaches its critical speed of 13567 rpm, and it will cause lateral vibrations at a
frequency of 226.13 Hz which will cause a bending effect on the driveshaft. At mode 9 the driveshaft
is subjected to torsional vibrations at a frequency of 418.89 Hz.

Figure 3: Mode 7 @ 182.17 Hz

Figure 4: Mode 8 @ 198.72 Hz

The figures above show the FEA results of the HS Carbon Epoxy driveshaft. In mode 7 the driveshaft
reaches a critical speed of 10930 rpm at which it vibrates at a frequency of 182.17 Hz. In mode 8 the
driveshaft bends in the middle because of axial bending vibration. In Mode 10 the driveshaft started
to deform at the ends due to torsional vibrations that occurred at a frequency of 919.64 Hz.

Figure 5: Mode 8 @ 146.62 Hz

Figure 6: Mode 10 @ 311.72 Hz

11
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
The figures above show the FEA analysis for the Polyester resin composite driveshaft. The driveshaft
reaches a critical speed of 2887 rpm and has whirling vibrations at a rate of 48.127 Hz. In mode 8 the
driveshaft has a high deformation in the middle part, and in mode 10 the driveshaft reaches a critical
speed of 18703 rpm and has a small deformation when vibrating at a rate of 311.72 Hz.

Results

Mode Steel SM 45 C HS-Carbon Epoxy Glass Polyester Resin

1 79.966 182.17 48.127
2 226.13 498.72 146.62
3 418.89 919.53 288.09
4 498.72 919.64 311.72
Table 2: Results

Figure 7: Comparison of Natural Frequencies

Conclusion

The results of this research it was found that a two-piece driveshaft for a heavy vehicle truck is to be
made from HS Carbon Epoxy. This is due to the driveshaft having a maximum deflection of 0.1 mm at
a critical speed of 10930 rpm and a natural frequency of 182.17 Hz, which is more than the whirling
vibration critical speed of 2400 – 4000 rpm.

12
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
Question 3 – Laboratory
Title: Free Vibrations in a Bending Beam
Objective:
To determine the natural frequency of a bending beam while considering only free vibrations.

Apparatus:
• Frame
• Bending Bar
• Clamping Fixture
• Length Rule
• Strain Gauge
• Oscilloscope
Diagram

Figure 8: Apparatus diagram

Method:
1. The natural frequency was determined with the bending bar securely clamped on one
side and following the given parameters: a. Bending bar length = 600 mm b. Deflection
of 50 mm c. Clamping distance of 510 mm d. The testing was first conducted without
additional mass, and then was done by adding 290 grams of additional mass and
repeated with an additional 300 grams.
2. The fixture holding the bending bar was fitted on the upper side of the frame with the
use of the toggle screw.
3. The bending bar was fixed in the holder with two hexagonal socket screws. With the
steel rule it was verified that the length of the bar was correct, by measuring from the
clamping point to the center of the hole in the mass attachment.
4. Changes were made to the additional mass on the bending bar, as necessary.
5. The measuring amplifier was connected to the connector of the strain gauge.
6. The measured signals were connected to an oscilloscope.
7. The measuring amplifier was connected to the electricity mains and switched on.

13
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
8. The output signal of the measuring amplifier was calibrated to zero using the 10-level
potentiometer. It was ensured that the bending bar was in a resting state during the
calibration.
9. The oscilloscope was adjusted and then it was prepared for triggering.
10. The bending bar was deflected by 50 mm at a distance of 510 mm from the clamping
point and was allowed to vibrate.
11. The vibration duration and frequency that were measured by the oscilloscope were
noted.

Precautions and sources of error:

Sources of Error
• Electrical noise effecting graph on oscilloscope.
• External vibrations such as people walking and wind.

Precautions Taken
• Measurement readings taken accurately.
• Be careful not to make a lot of vibrations so the results are not affected.

Results
No.: 1 No.: 2 No.: 3
Clamping point Top Top Top
Bending bar length (mm) 600 600 600
Additional mass (g) - 290 390
Deflection (mm) when I = 510 50 50 50
Vibration duration T (ms) 164.1 498 557
Natural frequency (Hz) 6.09 2.0 1.79

No.: 4 No.: 5 No.: 6

Clamping point Bottom Bottom Bottom
Bending bar length (mm) 600 600 600
Additional mass (g) - 290 390
Deflection (mm) when I = 510 50 50 50
Vibration duration T (ms) 161 567 663
Natural frequency (Hz) 6.21 1.76 1.51

No.: 7 No.: 8 No.: 9

Clamping point Right Right Right
Bending bar length (mm) 600 600 600
Additional mass (g) - 290 390
Deflection (mm) when I = 510 50 50 50
Vibration duration T (ms) 165 524 591
Natural frequency (Hz) 6.06 1.91 1.69

* Fastening weight = 90 g
Table 3: Results

14
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
Conclusions:
The results show that when changing the position of the bending bar the natural frequency and
vibration duration change a bit when weight is applied to the bar. When comparing the results with
no additional weight the vibration duration and natural frequency are almost the same. On the other
hand, when adding 290 grams of weight there is more difference between the natural frequency.
The duration of the vibration was a lot longer when the bending bar was at the bottom and shorter
when it was at the top and when the bending bar was on the right side of the fixture, the duration is
between of the other results. When the 390 grams of weight were added the differences between
the natural frequency is similar to the other results with less weight and no weights. Similarly, in the
experiment of the 290 grams vibration duration is the least when the bar is in the top position and
the most when in the bottom position, but the difference is greater between the three positions. It
can also be noted that when the weights were added the natural frequency drastically increased
and the vibration duration drastically increased.

15
Glen Buttigieg Vibrations B. Eng MEP 6.3
Reference List

[1] FEA based vibration characteristic analysis of conventional and ...,

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353417095_FEA_based_Vibration_Character
istic_Analysis_of_Conventional_and_Composite_Material_Single_Piece_Drive_Shaft
(accessed Nov. 19, 2023).

16