MONITORING AND MITIGATING VIBRATIONS

IN INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION SITES

B.M. Pacheco, W.T. Tanzo, R.G. Solis, and R.E.R. Aquino
Vibrametrics, Inc.

ABSTRACT: Several cases are presented of actual sites and structures in the Philippines where
vibrations were deemed to be potentially excessive, and rational mitigation measures were
possibly called for. In each case, vibration measurements were made during ambient conditions
and also during regular activities of the industrial process or the construction. Comparing such
sets of measured data, the incremental effect of the industrial or construction activities could be
quantified and could be compared with standards. Where it was found unacceptably large, the
vibration effects could be controlled through structural redesign or other methods.

KEYWORDS: vibrations, baseline survey, monitoring, characterization, mitigation, Philippines

1. INTRODUCTION
Vibrations occur almost everywhere there are human activities, but the vibrations that
are more felt on a more regular basis are at industrial facilities or construction sites, rather
than vibrations due to wind or earthquake.
Industrial facilities include different kinds of power plants, food processing and
similar manufacturing plants, and electronics or semiconductor manufacturing plants.
They use different kinds of machines: diesel generators, turbines, vibration conveyors,
surface-mount technology (SMT) assembly equipment, etc. These machines may either
cause vibrations, which is the usual case, or they may be sensitive to vibrations.
Industrial facilities may be at an isolated location, or beside other industrial facilities, or
beside non-industrial facilities such as offices, or residences.
In construction, particularly of large-scale structures, an increasing number of
construction equipment now do the work that men used to do. Some of these
construction equipment include on-site power generators, pile driving equipment, bored
piling equipment, sheet piling, drilling, jackhammers, blasting (say, for demolition),
trenchers, dynamic compactors, vibratory rollers, vibroflotation equipment, heavy trucks
and other vehicles, etc. All these are obvious sources of vibration. [Dowding, 1996]

1/15
 The paper presents twelve different case reports in the Philippines where vibrations
were deemed to be potentially excessive, and for many cases, rational mitigation
measures were called for. A summary of the case reports is shown in Tables 1 and 2.
The cases are grouped into three: (a) baseline survey of vibrations, wherein vibration
measurements were conducted before full construction or industrial operation; (b)
monitoring of vibrations, wherein vibration measurements were conducted during a
construction activity or during operation of an industrial plant; and (c) characterization of
lively supporting structures, wherein vibration measurements were conducted after
construction of the structure, or installation of industrial equipment. These three groups
of cases are discussed in three sections below.
In order to quantify the vibrations that may need to be mitigated, different techniques
of vibration measurements can be conducted. Prior to the cases, however, the techniques
of vibration measurements are discussed in the following section.

2. TECHNIQUES OF VIBRATION MEASUREMENTS

To perform vibration measurements that would yield results that could help in
mitigation design, it is imperative to first recognize different types of vibrations. First of
all, vibrations could be forcing vibrations or excitations, or they could be the response of
a site or structure due to dynamic excitations. The response of a site or structure
generally follows the type of motion of the excitation. However, after an initial
displacement or velocity, a site or structure would tend to vibrate in its natural modes and
frequencies.
The vibration response of sites or structures could also be grouped according to the
temporal (time) variation of motion. Most vibrations are generally random in time, such
as ambient vibrations. Due to mechanical oscillations, vibrations could occur regularly in
time, such as periodic or harmonic (sinusoidal periodic) vibrations. There could be one
or a series of impulses within a window of time, due mostly to impact excitations, which
is the case for transient vibrations. The response of a site or structure due to earthquake
or due to gust winds is a good example of transient vibrations. Vibrations could also be a
combination of these different types.
Moreover, to determine the appropriate technique of vibration measurement to be
conducted, engineers involved should consider the schedule of vibration measurements
relative to the construction project or industrial operation, and the type of information

2/15
(and correspondingly, the type of data processing) that is needed to be extracted from the
measurement data in order to be useful in mitigation design.
A matrix with different time schedules (in rows) and different types of extractable
information (in columns) is presented in Table 3. The case reports discussed in this
paper could thus be grouped within cells of this matrix as shown in Table 3. For
example, a vibration baseline survey intending to establish baseline vibration levels such
as RMS & peak velocities and accelerations prior to regular landfill site operations in an
industrial park (e.g. CASE #1) might fall within the first row and first two columns of the
matrix. A short-term vibration monitoring program during pile driving of test piles (e.g.
in CASE #7) might fall within the second row, first two columns of the matrix. The floor
inside a large commercial building might require dynamic characterization to determine
its vibration properties (e.g. CASE #8), and the measurement might fall within the second
row, third to fourth columns of the matrix.
In the cases presented here, the velocity or acceleration response of the site or
structure was measured using a single, portable system of vibration measurement
equipment. Data processing routines such as filtering, superimposition, and identification
were done either on- or off-site to obtain information from the measurement data.

3. BASELINE SURVEY OF VIBRATIONS

3.1 Overview on Baseline Surveys
The first four (4) case reports are cases wherein vibration measurements were
conducted before any construction activity took place, or before sensitive equipment were
to be installed. The vibration measurements are termed baseline surveys, because there
are no previous measurements of the actual, prevailing conditions at the site or structure,
which could potentially affect future operations. Baseline information provides a basis
for possible mitigation measures (such as by re-planning or re-designing) even before
future activities.
3.2 Case Reports of Baseline Surveys
CASE #1 involved baseline survey of ground vibrations that is to be included in an
environmental impact assessment (EIA) study for a proposed landfill site. In CASE #3, a
proposed expansion plant of an electronics production plant is to be constructed adjacent
to an airport runway that could affect sensitive equipment to be installed on its production
floor (ground floor slab-on-grade). In the last case in this group, CASE #4, the existing

3/15
second floor of a factory building is proposed to be the new location for sensitive
equipment of another electronics manufacturing company.
3.3 Spotlight Case of Baseline Survey
CASE #2 involved baseline measurements of ground vibrations at locations around a
diesel power plant in full operation, prior to the conduct of Up-hole PS Logging (part of
Soil Investigation works) at the adjacent property.
In Up-hole PS Logging, seismic waves are generated by the impact of the soil
sampler at the bottom of the borehole and initiated by the drop of hammer during SPT
(standard penetration test), travel up the hole, and are recorded with the use of sensitive
accelerometers or geophones on the ground surface.
At larger depths, these seismic wave signals (transient vibrations) become weaker at
the surface, and it is possible that they may not be detectable if the ambient ground
vibrations (with the power plant in operation) at the surface are sufficiently large.
To check the quality of PS logging data considering vibrations due to power plant
operations, the testing team, using the same equipment, conducted measurements of
ground vibrations at locations around the plant (Figure 1) prior to conducting the PS
logging. The team found out that plant vibrations sufficiently diminished away from the
plant: the recorded peak velocities during PS logging for deep soil layers were shown to
be larger than peak velocities at the surface due to the plant (Table 4).
To further ensure that vibrations due to power plant operations do not affect the PS
logging data, additional processing was performed by filtering out those frequencies
associated with the plant operations as previously determined by the baseline survey.

4. MONITORING OF VIBRATIONS
4.1 Overview on Monitoring
In the previous group of four cases, vibration measurements were made before a
future event. In this group, three cases are presented wherein vibration measurements
were made during construction activities (specifically during pile driving for CASE #5
and bored piling for CASE #6), or during an industrial plants operations.
Obviously, there is always a concern about excessive vibrations when there is pile
driving, bored piling, or a neighboring power plant with large diesel engines. These
vibrations are expectedly large especially at points near the source. However, there may
not necessarily be a problem, and vibration monitoring could confirm this.

4/15
4.2 Case Reports of Monitoring
In CASE #5, vibration monitoring was conducted inside an existing power plant
during pile driving of two test piles at the adjacent property. Results inside the plant
showed that vibrations due to the power plants diesel engines overshadowed the effect of
the pile driving.
4.3 Spotlight Cases of Monitoring
CASE #6 involved vibration monitoring on an existing dike during bored piling
activities within its immediate vicinity (Figure 2).
For the duration of the bored piling schedule, vibrations of the existing dike due to the
said construction activity were monitored, and hourly reports were submitted to the dike
owner. In the end, the measurements showed that peak velocities on the dike did not
exceed the threshold for any potential risk of damage to the dike. (Figure 3) With the
vibration monitoring data showing that vibrations were perceptible but not excessive, the
dike owner certainly became confident that the structural integrity of the dike was not
being compromised.
In CASE #7, a power plant was constructed adjacent to an existing clothing factory
with offices on its second floor about 150 meters away. Vibration monitoring was
conducted while the generators were running to capture simultaneous recordings: on top
of the machine foundation blocks; just outside the power house; at a location between the
office and the power house; on the ground floor below the office; and at the second floor
office (Figure 4).
The measured vibrations at the foundation blocks were found to be below tolerance
limits; there was no manifestation of any foundation damage. The machines (engines and
generators) were shown to have a primary operating frequency of 514 rpm (8.6 Hz).
(Figure 5)
The measurements show that there is a steady decline in vibration levels at locations
on the ground, going farther away from the power plant. However, vertical vibrations at
the second floor office were much higher than on the ground floor right below (Table 5).
With the power plant in very minimal operation, ambient vibration test was
conducted at the second floor office. Vibration levels were found to be about three (3)
times lower than when the machines were in full operation. Further processing of the
AVT data revealed also that the first three fundamental natural frequencies of the second
floor are between 7 and 8 Hz (Figure 6). Results of heel-impact testing, where a person
stomps his heel on the floor to create an impact load and thereby causing the floor to

5/15
freely vibrate, confirmed the measured natural frequencies from the ambient vibration
test. It was concluded that the second floor vibrations were being amplified due to a
near-resonance phenomenon with the machine excitations.
Various mitigation schemes were explored and presented, that targeted reducing
vibrations at the source, or to cut-off the path of vibration transmission on the ground to
the factory office. One scheme, which involved the design and installation of Tuned
Mass Dampers (TMDs), was highly recommended and later selected by the two parties
involved, due to its efficiency in mitigating vibrations of a consistent frequency (e.g., at
8.6 Hz), and also being the least interruption to the operations at both the power plant and
the factory.

5. CHARACTERIZATION OF LIVELY SUPPORTING STRUCTURES

5.1 Overview on Characterization
In some cases, a project is already finished or just near completion, and it is then
when vibration problems start to manifest. Through characterization tests, the dynamic
properties of these lively structures are measured, and design of mitigation measures
are optimized.
5.2 Case Reports of Characterization
In CASE #8, floor vibrations on the suspended floor of a shopping mall were already
quite noticeable when construction workers walk on it even prior to architectural
finishing. CASE #9 involved the construction of a cantilever-like steel sculpture,
vibrating under regular, ambient winds just prior to artistic finishing works. In CASE
#10, a newly constructed food processing plant houses three vibration conveyors critical
to its operations, but affecting its supporting suspended floor slab. In CASE #12, huge,
fan-type machines mounted on foundation blocks inside an industrial plant were vibrating
as expected, but unexpected cracks became visible at many locations around one of the
foundation blocks.
CASE #10 is actually similar to CASE #7, wherein there is a problem of near-
resonance of the floor natural frequency with the excitation frequency of the machines,
but this time, the vibration source is internal.
5.3 Spotlight Case of Characterization
In CASE #11, an electronics manufacturing plant intends to install new, sensitive
SMT (surface-mount-technology) assembly equipment on the (suspended) second floor
of its building. Meanwhile, there are already other equipment installed on the floor,

6/15
causing quite noticeable vibrations. Floor vibration rating was then recommended to rate
the floor against known vibration criterion based on ISO standard. (See Figure 7 for
sample output.)
Based on the results of the tests conducted, it was found that a near-resonance
phenomenon occurs at some floor locations, and that at these locations the appropriate
vibration criterion (e.g., the ISO-OT criterion) was not met. To mitigate vibration
effects, it was recommended that machine isolation be used for the SMT assembly
equipment. In addition, inspection during installation, and vibration monitoring before
and immediately after the installation of machine isolation were called for. Another
recommended measure was to locate the new equipment elsewhere on the floor,
specifically where the floor vibration rating satisfies the said vibration criterion.

6. SUMMARY
The cases presented show how portable sensors are easily deployed for different types
of vibration tests, for a wide range of applications at industrial facilities and construction
sites. With these sensors and tests as tools, engineers come up with a better assessment
of the problem-at-hand and a more attuned mitigation approach.

REFERENCES
Bachmann, H., and W. Ammann (1987). Structural Engineering Documents 3e: Vibrations in
Structures Induced by Man and Machines. IABSE, AIPC, IVBH.
Chopra, A.K. (2000). Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake
nd
Engineering. 2 Ed. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, USA.
Dowding, C.H. (1996). Construction Vibrations. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, USA.
Pacheco, B.M. (2000). Diagnosis and Monitoring Using Dynamic Tests. Proc. ASEP-PICE LNM
Chapter Seminar on Diagnosis, Strengthening and Retrofitting of Existing Structures, Quezon
City, Philippines.
Pacheco, B.M. (2001). The Natural Heartbeat of 100 Buildings in Metro Manila. Proc. 2nd
Japan-Philippines Workshop on Safety and Stability of Infrastructure against Environmental
Impacts, Quezon City, Philippines.
Pacheco, B.M., W.T. Tanzo, and D.C. Peckley (2002). Addressing Both Concerns of Safety and
Comfort on Floors with Vibrations due to Walking Excitation. Proc. ASEP 2002 Conference
on Safety and Reliability of Built Structures, Manila, Philippines.

7/15
 ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Benito M. Pacheco, PhD, PE, F.ASEP, F.PICE, is president and co-founder of Vibrametrics,
Inc. Vibrametrics provides vibration testing and other non-destructive tests for full-scale existing
structures. The group performs: site & structure assessment; testing & monitoring; earthquake
risk management solutions; mitigation design; specialized studies; and training.
Dr. Pacheco is a former ASEP president, a former PICE national PRO, and the current
chairman of the PICE Committee on DMAPS and DQRP.
He is a licensed civil engineer in the Philippines and registered professional engineer in the
USA. He is a professorial lecturer in structural engineering at UP Diliman, special lecturer at
PUP for the program in master of earthquake engineering, and former associate professor of civil
engineering at the University of Tokyo in Japan.
William T. Tanzo, D.Eng, is vice-president and co-founder of Vibrametrics, Inc. He is a
former associate professor of civil engineering at UP Los Baos, special lecturer at PUP and
DLSU, and former associate professor of civil engineering at Saitama University in Japan.
Romeo G. Solis, M.Eng, is director and co-founder of Vibrametrics, Inc. He is an associate
professor of electrical engineering at UP Diliman, and former director of the Advanced Science
and Technology Institute (ASTI) of the Department of Science and Technology.
Ronwaldo Ronjie Aquino, A.ASEP, is a structural performance engineer at Vibrametrics,
Inc. and is a member of the PICE Committee on DMAPS and DQRP. He is currently finishing
his thesis for M.S. in Civil Engineering degree at UP Diliman.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge Luis Villanueva and Sheryl Evangelista for helping put together
this manuscript. The case reports were taken from projects undertaken by Vibrametrics, Inc.

8/15
 Table 1. Summary of case reports of vibration measurements at industrial facilities or construction sites
MAINLY BASELINE SURVEY OF VIBRATIONS
Case Site or Structure Concerns Occasion of Measurements
1 Proposed landfill site in industrial park Future dump trucks passing could cause during quiet conditions
vibrations and other environmental concerns in during passing of trucks
industrial park
2 PS logging/soil investigation site adjacent Power plant vibrations could mix with PS during regular operation at the power plant
to power plant logging data
3 Electronics production floor adjacent to Vibrations due to aircraft take-off and landing during aircraft take-off and landing
airport runway could affect sensitive equipment during regular operations at the plant
4 Sensitive electronics equipment on Second floor might not meet vibration criteria during quiet conditions
proposed second floor location for sensitive equipment during AHU operation
MAINLY MONITORING OF VIBRATIONS
Case Site or Structure Concerns Occasion of Measurements
5 Power plant adjacent to pile driving Pile driving could trip power plant, which during pile driving
services one whole province during power plant operation only
6 Dike adjacent to bored piling Bored piling could affect the structural integrity during bored piling
of existing dike during quiet conditions
7 Office on suspended floor adjacent to Power plant reported to cause vibrations on during machine operation
power plant suspended floor of adjacent building during quiet conditions
MAINLY CHARACTERIZATION OF LIVELY SUPPORTING STRUCTURES
Case Site or Structure Concerns Occasion of Measurements
8 Suspended mall floor subjected to Construction workers walking on suspended during simulated walking
walking excitations floor caused perceptible vibrations, prior to during quiet conditions
architectural finishing
9 Cantilever sculpture subjected to wind Ambient wind caused visible vibration of under ambient/regular wind
structural steel frame of sculpture, prior to under free vibration
finishing/cladding
10 Suspended floor for conveyor machines Test run of machines caused vibrations on during machine operation
of food processing plant suspended floor during quiet conditions
11 Suspended floor for proposed sensitive Service equipment causing vibrations, could during machine operation
equipment at electronics plant affect proposed sensitive equipment during quiet conditions
12 Foundation block for engine Foundation block was damaged during machine operation
during quiet conditions

9/15
 Table 2. Excitation source and recommended mitigation measures at industrial facilities or construction sites
MAINLY BASELINE SURVEY OF VIBRATIONS
Case Site or Structure Internal (I) or External (E) Source Recommended Mitigation Measures
1 Proposed landfill site in industrial park (I) ambient ground vibrations None; data used only for baseline survey as part of
(E) trucks passing EIA
2 PS logging/soil investigation site adjacent to (E) power plant generators None; PS logging vibrations were larger than power
power plant (I) seismic waves from SPT hammer plant vibrations
3 Electronics production floor adjacent to airport (E) aircraft landing or take-off Machine Isolation (MI)
runway (I) production equipment Underground cistern as wave barrier
Granular Backfill Material
4 Sensitive electronics equipment on proposed (E) ambient vibrations, AHU operation None; data used only for baseline survey as
second floor location reference for future locators
MAINLY MONITORING OF VIBRATIONS
Case Site or Structure Internal (I) or External (E) Source Recommended Mitigation Measures
5 Power plant adjacent to pile driving (E) pile driving None; power plant vibrations inside the plant were
(I) power plant diesel engines larger than pile driving vibrations
6 Dike adjacent to bored piling (E) bored piling None; bored piling vibrations were within threshold
for possible risk of damage
7 Office on suspended floor adjacent to power (E) power plant diesel engines Trench as wave barrier
plant Frequency Detuning using adjustable struts
Modified mounting; Dynamic absorbers
Tuned Mass Damper (TMD) was most
recommended, and selected
MAINLY CHARACTERIZATION OF LIVELY SUPPORTING STRUCTURES
Case Site or Structure Internal (I) or External (E) Source Recommended Mitigation Measures
8 Suspended mall floor subjected to walking (I) human walking excitation Frequency Detuning by floor stiffening
excitations
9 Cantilever sculpture subjected to wind (E) wind Frequency Detuning by frame stiffening
10 Suspended floor for conveyor machines of food (I) machines on suspended floor MI and TMD were recommended
processing plant TMD was selected
11 Suspended floor for proposed sensitive (I) machines on suspended floor MI
equipment at electronics plant VM before and immediately after installation
12 Foundation block for engine (I) machine on foundation block Frequency Detuning by foundation stiffening
(repair cracks, increase foundation size)

10/15
 Table 3. Matrix of measurement schedule and vibration information
for selecting appropriate type of vibration measurement
a
showing case reports presented in this paper
Info Levels Dominant Natural Mode Shear Wave
(RMS, Peak) Frequencies Frequencies Shapes Velocity
Schedule (Soil Layers)
Before 8
Project 1, 2, 3, 4, 6b 2c
Commences
9
Within 5, 7
One
Mobilization 10 , 11 , 12
Period
less than 6
6 months
Period
greater than
6 months
a b
Refer to Tables 1 and 2. Baseline survey was conducted prior to main objective of monitoring.
c
Applicable to PS logging.

Table 4. Comparison of peak radial velocities under ambient conditions (with power plant
operations) and during PS logging
Approximate Peak Radial Velocities Average Peak Radial Velocities
due to Power Plant Operations during PS Logging
(micro-m/s) (micro-m/s)
J K B E H B E H
26 5 11 11 7 39 50 8

Table 5. Summary of maximum RMS accelerations during vibration monitoring at power

plant & adjacent office (with power plant operation)
Points on Points on Point on Point on Points on
Foundation Foundation Ground Ground Second
Blocks of Blocks of Slab, near Floor Slab Floor Slab
3 Small 6 Large Main below at
Engines at Engines at Entrance at Factory Factory
Power Plant Power Plant Power Plant Office Office
Vertical
RMS 6 17 5 1 4
(milli-g)
Transverse
RMS 24 55 2 0.7 0.8
(milli-g)
Longitudinal
RMS 21 70 3 - -
(milli-g)

11/15
 PROPOSED
POWER PLANT EXISTING
EXTENSION POWER PLANT
COMPOUND

H Power Plant
PS Logging
Location &
Monitoring Generator
Point B K J
PS Logging
Location &
Monitoring Monitoring
Monitoring
Point Point
E Point
PS Logging
Location &
Monitoring
Point
Figure 1. Location plan of monitoring points at PS logging locations and at power plant

BORED
PILE
LOCATIONS

A
EXISTING DIKE
B C

Figure 2. Location plan of monitoring points at existing dike

12/15
Figure 3. Sample hourly report of vibration monitoring during construction activity
(corresponding to maximum peak velocity recorded)

13/15
 Factory Factory
Office
(Second
Floor)

~75 m

Power Plant
~75 m 1 point 8 points on 8
midway 2nd floor
9 points on 9 between panels;
machine office and 1 point on
1 point just ground floor
foundation power plant
outside main
blocks
entrance of
power house
building

Figure 4. Location plan of monitoring points at power plant & adjacent office

PA7-P13: Amplitude Spectra

0.035
Location: PA Direction: Longitudinal RMS Acc.= 57.8 milli-g
Location: PA Direction: Vertical RMS Acc.= 14.3 milli-g
Location: PA Direction: Transverse RMS Acc.= 56.6 milli-g

0.03

0.025

0.02
Acceleration (g)

0.015

0.01

0.005

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 3b. Amplitude Spectra: PA7-P13

Figure 5. Sample amplitude spectra from 0 to 80 Hz of machine vibrations

on top of machine foundation block

14/15
 - A6C6B2-A1: Amplitude Spectra
x 10 5
2.5
Location: A Direction: Vertical RMS Acc. = 0.3 milli-g
Location: C Direction: Vertical RMS Acc. = 0.3 milli-g
Location: B Direction: Vertical RMS Acc. = 0.4 milli-g

1.5
Acceleration (g)

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Frequency (Hz)

Figure 6. Sample amplitude spectra from 0 to 15 Hz of ambient vertical vibration

at office on suspended floor

Figure 7. Floor vibration rating for one test point at electronics plant

15/15