Proceedings of RIT 2013 Vibrations Technical Conference

RIT/VTC 2013
December 16, 2013, Rochester, NY, USA

VTC2013-1
ECCENTRIC MASS DYNAMIC VIBRATION ABSORBER

Timothy G. Southerton, Brian T. Grosso, Kyle J. Lasher

Kate Gleason College of Engineering
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, New York, 14623
Email: tgs5800@ rit.edu, btg9033@rit.edu, kjl9989@rit.edu

ABSTRACT variety of solutions ranging widely in price. For this we chose

A physical model used to demonstrate the use of a passive
dynamic vibration absorber (DVA) to cancel out resonance of a
classic mass spring damper system was developed for this
project. It incorporates an eccentric mass as a rotational
unbalance to generate movement with two degrees of freedom
(DOF). The excitation frequency can be manually controlled to
demonstrate discussed phenomena of a two mass system.
In this paper, a vibratory model of a mass-spring-damper
system is developed and compared with experimental results
measured from the physical model. From this it is concluded
that the theoretical model accurately reflects the real world
results with minimal deviations. These differences are due to
broad assumptions made in the theoretical development, so we
can conclude that the model is valid.
an available middle ground that allowed for reasonable data
collection, but significant improvements could be made to the
experimental setup by using linear bearings and precision
mounted slides.
This paper focuses on comparing the theoretical results of
the methods developed in class for a 2DOF DVA model to the
data measured from the physical model to identify the validity
of the development. Budget and time constrained fabrication
and testing, but we were able to develop a reasonably robust
first prototype of this system and to record relatively accurate
displacement amplitudes for comparison. There is much that
could be done to this design in the future to further characterize
or improve the system performance, but this is outside of the
scope we have developed.

INTRODUCTION PHYSICAL MODEL

Dynamic vibration absorbers are very fundamental devices
when it comes to vibration management in systems, and their
effects are interesting to even those outside of the field of
engineering. The concept behind these passive components is
simply to add a spring and mass that have a natural frequency
tuned to that of the resonant excitation frequency of the system.
Doing so transfers all of the resonance energy of the system to
the DVA, leaving the original system undisturbed.
However, the classic model of the vertical 2DOF spring-
mass-damper system with a DVA is not widely available to
demonstrate this phenomenon, so this project targeted creating
this system with low-cost components as a demonstration for
the Introduction to Engineering Vibrations class. Due to the
availability of electronic components from other coursework, it
was decided that an electric motor with an unbalanced mass is
the most effective way to generate a periodic applied force in
the system so that the excitation frequency can be controlled.
The biggest challenge in making a physical model of this
2DOF system is constraining the motion, for which there are a
For this project, a physical model of the system was
developed using available materials, as can be seen in Fig. 1.
The frame is 12" x 21.5" and is made from a 1x2x8 furring strip
[1]. A Jameco ReliaPro 161382 geared motor that was
salvaged from a previous project is used to provide the periodic
input force [2]. The eccentric and DVA masses are machined
pieces of brass stock which we were given for free from the
RIT machine shop. For the platform a machined aluminum bar
is used that has four #8-32 clearance holes drilled at each
corner, in which eye bolts are mounted [3]. A tapped #8-32
hole on the bottom in the center of the platform provides the
mounting location for the eye bolt from which the DVA is
suspended. Motor clamping to the platform is accomplished
using two 2" #8-32 cap screws from the machine shop in
tapped holes. A Lexan motor mount was made and sanded to
give a frosted texture after being recycled from a previous
project. The DVA mass is constrained similarly using a Lexan
piece with two 5/16" holes for the motion constraining rods,
and is connected to the DVA mass using a #8-32 eye bolt. 1/4"
steel tubes that are mounted through the furring strips at the top
and bottom of the frame are used as constraining rods for
system motion. To reduce pitching of the platform, 2" pieces Spring Stiffness
of 3/8" copper tubing were secured through holes in the
platform using adhesive. These work as minimal friction slides 1.4
Spring
on the steel constraining bars which do not bind. Four 1.2
extension springs are attached to eye hooks in the top of the LB
1.0

Force (N)
frame and are used to hang the platform [4, 5]. A spring that is
LF
slightly less stiff is used to hang the DVA from the platform. 0.8
RF
The electrical drive for the motor is a custom-built voltage 0.6
regulator circuit connected to the motor with very light speaker 0.4 RB
wire to reduce unwanted constraints on the system motion.
0.2 DVA
This unregulated DC power supply is 12VDC and 600mA,
which feeds a LM317 regulator with heat sink through the 0.0
circuit given in the datasheet. The regulator supplies from 1.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
to 11.75V to the motor with up to 1.5A of current [6].
Spring Stretch (m)

FIGURE 3. SPRING STIFFNESS PLOTS

MODEL DEVELOPMENT

FIGURE 1. DAMPER TEST STAND

FIGURE 4. SYSTEM SCHEMATIC
SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION
In order to characterize our model, data was taken on the Assumptions
system components using a triple beam balance from the 1 Degree of motion, 2 degree of freedom system
Systems lab along with hanging masses. Every spring was o No platform pitch, roll, yaw, horizontal
measured individually using four mass increments so that trend motion etc...
lines could be fit to calculate each stiffness value. Each Frictionless, undamped motion
component used for the platform and DVA assemblies was also Motor spins at a constant speed
weighed individually. The resulting system characterization o Ignore effect of gravity on spinning mass
values can be seen in Fig. 2. Spring stiffness graphs proved
Linear range of spring operation
reasonably similar and linear, which can be seen in Fig. 3.
o Not bottoming out or over-stretching
Variable Item Value Units Frame is rigid and does not vibrate
m1 Platform mass 361.5 g From the system schematic in Fig. 4 and using the
m2 Absorber mass 82.8 g assumptions above, the system equation in Eq. 1 can be
m0 Eccentric mass 68.5 g derived, which characterizes the vibratory system [7].
e Eccentricity 22.8 mm
kLB Left back spring stiffness 9.95 N/m 1 0 1 ( + 2 ) 2 1 sin()
[ ]( )+ [ 1 ]( ) = ( 0 ) (1)
kLF Left front spring stiffness 9.64 N/m 0 2 2 2 2 2 0
kRF Right back spring stiffness 9.59 N/m
kRB Right back spring stiffness 9.68 N/m Using the complex method, the global frequency response
k1 Eq. platform spring stiffness 38.86 N/m function (FRF) can be calculated directly, as in Eq. 2 and 3.
k2 Absorber spring stiffness 8.91 N/m
FIGURE 2. SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION VALUES
 1
[] = [2 [] + []]=
1 Motor Voltage vs.
2 1 + 1 + 2 2 25
[ ] =
2 2 2 + 2 20
2
1 2 + 2 2
[ ] (2)
2 2 1 + 1 + 2 15

(rad/s)
10
= (2 1 + 1 + 2 )(2 2 + 2 ) 22 (3)
5
The amplitude of the displacements of the platform and 0
DVA predicted by this model can be found directly from the 0 5 10 15
global FRF as in Eq. 4 and 5.
y = 1.7869x - 0.6166 Applied Voltage (V)
11 = |11 ()|0 = |11 ()|0 2 R = 0.9995

(2 2 +2 )0 2
FIGURE 5. MOTOR VOLTAGE VS. ROTATIONAL
11 = |(2 | (4) SPEED PLOT
1 +1 +2 )(2 2 +2 )22

21 = |21 ()|0 = |21 ()|0 2 Static deflections of the platform alone, the platform with
the DVA, and the DVA were first recorded as reference points.
(2 )0 2 The voltage was then first swept over the range of available
21 = |(2 | (5)
1 +1 +2 )(2 2 +2 )22 values (1.25-11.75V) in increments and the displacement
amplitude of the platform alone were taken by holding a ruler
These equations can be used to produce the displacement parallel to the base and stopping it at the point where the mass
amplitude response with respect to excitation frequency for the stopped contacting, which was marked and measured on the
vibratory system. frame. This provided the experimental reference data for the
Also worth calculating directly are the system natural 1DOF system that we attempted to stop at resonance.
frequencies, which can also be established graphically from the The DVA was then connected and the process was
global FRF. From Fig. 2, the platform and absorber natural repeated, recording both platform and DVA amplitudes.
frequencies are calculated using Eq. 6 and 7, respectively. Multiple points where then taken later at voltage values around
the points of resonance to provide more clarity for the system's
1
11 = = 10.4 rad/s (6) real world response.
1

RESULTS COMPARISON

22 = 2 = 10.4 rad/s (7) Data collected was plotted in MATLAB along with
2 theoretical model displacement amplitude response with respect
to excitation frequency using the MATLAB code found in
For comparison purposes, the system can be modeled Appendix A of this paper and the recorded Excel data found in
without the DVA, which is a simple 1DOF rotating unbalance Appendix B. The resulting platform displacement amplitude
system with no damping. The resulting displacement amplitude plot of the experimental vs. theoretical results for the 1DOF
response equation with respect to excitation frequency can be system overlaid on the results for the 2DOF system can be seen
seen in Eq. 8, with r = / n. in Fig. 6. Similarly, the resulting DVA displacement amplitude
2
plot of the experimental vs. theoretical results for the 2DOF
0
0 = (1 2) (8) system can be seen in Fig. 7.

DATA COLLECTION
Using the access hatch on the regulator enclosure, the
wires for the motor were disconnected from the power
connector and a voltmeter was hooked up in parallel with the
motor to record voltage values while testing. Rotational speeds
in rev/s were calculated from time values taken by using a
stopwatch to time 20 revolutions of the eccentric mass at lower
rotational speeds. Videos were taken of the system at higher
rotational speeds and the time taken for each revolution of the
mass was established by stepping frame-by-frame through the
video and averaging three sample revolutions. These sample
points were used to establish a voltage vs. rotational speed
trend from which the excitation frequency was calculated for
different voltage values. This can be seen in Fig. 5.
FIGURE 6. DISPLACEMENT AMPLITUDE RESPONSE
VS. FREQUENCY FOR SYSTEM PLATFORM

FIGURE 7. DISPLACEMENT AMPLITUDE RESPONSE
VS. FREQUENCY FOR SYSTEM DVA
CONCLUSIONS
As can be seen in Fig. 6, the experimental data for the
platform matches very well with the theoretical calculations for
the 1DOF system. We were limited in the precision of the
excitation frequency adjustment due to the potentiometer used,
so it is reasonable to assume that the experimental and
theoretical values are the same at the natural frequency of the
platform (10.4 rad/s). For higher excitation frequencies in the
1DOF system, the displacement measured is slightly lower than
predicted, which we attribute to errors in our amplitude
measurements. However, the amplitude values still trend as
predicted by the model. Similarly, at low excitation
frequencies, the motion was so small that we could not measure
movement accurately, but it was very nearly zero as predicted.
For the 2DOF results in Fig. 6, the same effects as noted in
the 1DOF system can be seen at the new resonances. Notably
here, at the second resonance the motion of the system was so
chaotic that the DVA would sometimes hit the bottom of the rig
and completely unload the DVA spring. These sort of effects
led to the use of estimated values for the platform and DVA
amplitudes at the second natural frequency, which can be seen
as outliers in the figures. For the frequency at which 1DOF
resonance occurs, the 2DOF experimental setup showed the
predicted attenuation. At the first 2DOF natural frequency, the
resonance amplitude is small due mainly to the variable speed
of the motor. This variable speed is due to the increased torque
required to raise the eccentric mass vs. lowering it, which is
more notable at lower excitation frequencies (when there is less
rotational inertia).
From Fig. 7, we can see that the discussed effects on the
platform are translated directly to the DVA, which shows the
same trends. The experimental results compare favorably with
the model for the DVA amplitudes, which adds even more
merit to the validity of the model.
Overall, the experimental results were influenced by the
unavoidable existence of friction (or dissipative losses) in the
system and the ability of the platform to pitch from side to side.
This pitching is due to wide clearances between the copper
sleeves and the steel rods to prevent binding, which was a
budgetary constraint for the project. The rig also seems to pitch
more on the left side of the platform than the right, which could
be due to positioning of the motor or slight differences in spring
stiffnesses. The rig also exhibits some vibratory effects as it is
not perfectly rigid, which is also a budgetary constraint and
adds to error in the experimental values.
However, we can see from the results comparison that the
accumulation of errors due to the differences between the real
world model and our assumptions in the theoretical model still
produce favorable agreement. From this we can conclude that
the physical model is an accurate representation of the system
targeted, and that the theoretical model produces valid results.
REFERENCES
[1] 1 x 2 x 8 Furring Strip. (n.d.). www.homedepot.com.
Retrieved December 4, 2013, from
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Unbranded-1-x-2-x-8-
Furring-Strip-160954/100075477?cm_sp=BazVoice-_-
RLP-_-100075477-_-x#.Up_LrcRDuSo
[2] Jameco Electronics. (n.d.). Jameco ReliaPro. Retrieved
December 4, 2013, from http://www.jameco.com/webapp/
wcs/stores/servlet/Product_10001_10001_161382_-1
[3] #8-32 x 1-5/8 in. Zinc-Plated Steel Eye Bolts with Nuts (2-
Pack). (n.d.). www.homedepot.com. Retrieved December 4,
2013, from http://www.homedepot.com/p/Unbranded-8-
32-x-1-5-8-in-Zinc-Plated-Steel-Eye-Bolts-with-Nuts-2-
Pack-14331/202704409#.Up_MocRDuSo
[4] Everbilt 5/32 in. x 2-1/2 in. and 1/4 in. x 2-1/2 in. Zinc
Plated Extension Springs (4-Pack). (n.d.).
www.homedepot.com. Retrieved December 4, 2013, from
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-5-32-in-x-2-1-2-in-
and-1-4-in-x-2-1-2-in-Zinc-Plated-Extension-Springs-4-
Pack-16080/202045471?keyword=760804#
.Up_NnsRDuSo
[5] #6 Zinc-Plated Screw Hooks (25-Pack). (n.d.).
www.homedepot.com. Retrieved December 4, 2013, from
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Unbranded-6-Zinc-Plated-
Screw-Hooks-25-Pack-
14092/100338097#.Up_OE8RDuSo
[6] KA317 / LM317 3-Terminal Positive Adjustable
Regulator. (n.d.). Fairchild Semiconductor. Retrieved
December 4, 2013, from
http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/LM/LM317.pdf
[7] Inman, D. J. (2014). Engineering Vibration (4 ed.). Upper
Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Education, Inc.
Appendix A - MATLAB Code

function UnbalancedDynamicAbsorber
close all
oneDOF = xlsread('C:\Users\Tim\Documents\Dropbox\Vibes
Project\vibsproject2.xlsx','1DOF');
twoDOF = xlsread('C:\Users\Tim\Documents\Dropbox\Vibes
Project\vibsproject2.xlsx','2DOF');
k1 = 38.86; %%(N/m) four spings in parallel
k2 = 8.91; %%(N/m)
m1 = 0.3615; %%(kg)
m2 = 0.0828; %%(kg)
M = [m1 0;0 m2];
K = [k1+k2 -k2;-k2 k2];
m0 = 0.0685; %%unbalanced mass(kg)
ecc = 0.0228; %%eccentricity(m)
w = linspace(0,30,1000);
h(1000,3) = 0;
x(1000,3) = 0;
for i = 1:1000
H = (-w(i)^2*M+K)^-1;%%frequency response
h(i,1) = H(1,1);
h(i,2) = H(1,2);
h(i,3) = H(2,2);
f = [m0*ecc*w(i)^2;0];%%unbalanced force
X = H*f;
x(i,1) = X(1);%%x_1
x(i,2) = X(2);%%x_2
r = w(i)/sqrt(k1/m1);
x(i,3) = r^2/abs(1-r^2)*m0*ecc/m1;%%1DOF
end
%%Platform displacement
figure;
hold on
plot(w,abs(x(:,3)),'r-',oneDOF(:,1),oneDOF(:,2),'kO-',w,abs(x(:,1)),'b-
',twoDOF(:,1),twoDOF(:,2),'gO-')
axis([0 20 -0.01 0.08])%%for x-axis
line([0 20],[0 0],'Color',[0 0 0])
legend('Theo. 1DOF','Exp. 1DOF','Theo. 2DOF','Exp.
2DOF','Location','NorthWest')
title('Platform Displacement Amplitude (x_1_1)')
xlabel('Excitation Frequency (rad/s)');
ylabel('Displacement Amplitude (m)');
hold off
%%Absorber displacement
figure;
hold on
plot(w,abs(x(:,2)),twoDOF(:,1),twoDOF(:,3),'O-')
axis([0 20 -0.01 0.08])
line([0 20],[0 0],'Color',[0 0 0])%%for x-axis
legend('Theo.','Exp.','Location','NorthWest')
title('Absorber Displacement Amplitude (x_2_1)')
xlabel('Excitation Frequency (rad/s)');
ylabel('Displacement Amplitude(m)');
hold off
end
Appendix B - Excel Data