6 Mass Impacting Beam | Mass | Kinetic Energy

Clay Mass Impacting a Beam

Prof. Raul G. Longoria Fall 2011
ME 144L – Prof. R.G. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin

ME 144L – Prof. • Find the mass. R. h. m.Objectives Dropping a clay mass from a height. • Determine the energy dissipated in the impact. onto a beam sensor provides an opportunity to study at least two different problems. and drop height. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .G. h.

R.G.Use an energy-based analysis An energy analysis assumes the mass released from rest and considers energy dissipated during impact. Ed. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin . U h = mgh 2 U x = 1 kbeam xmax 2 mg (h + xmax ) = mgxmax + Ed ME 144L – Prof.

G.Estimating the drop height • Assume the steady-state value from the beam sensor allows determining the mass • Beam stiffness presumed measured from static measurements 1 1 2  2 kbeam xmax − mgxmax + Ed  hest =  mg  Energy dissipation term is not known. R. ME 144L – Prof. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .

Ed = mg (h + xmax ) − k 1 2 2 beam max x Does this make sense? ME 144L – Prof. R. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .Estimating the impact energy An energy analysis can be used to find Ed.G.

To be clear: Any model for the energy dissipated has to be informed by experiments. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin . R.G. ME 144L – Prof.

G.Dissipated energy The loss or dissipation of energy is the difference in kinetic coenergy. R. Ed = Initial KE − Final KE =  mV + m V  −  mV + m V      1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1a 1 2 2 2 2a Can we estimate these terms? ME 144L – Prof. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .

R. V1 = 2 gh V2 = 0 But what is the mass after impact? ME 144L – Prof. we know. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .G. is dropped on a ‘fixed’ beam.For starters… If a mass. m1.

Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin . R. initial momentum = m1V1 + m2V2 post-impact = (m1 + m2 )Va m1V1 + m2V2 Va = (m1 + m2 ) How does this help? ME 144L – Prof.G. the velocity after impact is found from.Assume we have inelastic impact For an inelastic impact.

• Subtle: what is the mass? • One approximation suggests one-third of the beam mass gives a good estimate of the ‘natural frequency’.What is the mass after impact? • With a lumped mass attached on a flexible beam. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .G. R. the entire system can be modeled as a mass-spring-damper system. kbeam ωn = m + 1 mbeam 3 ME 144L – Prof.

G. R.So what do we have? ME 144L – Prof. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .

 m2  Ed ≅   m1 gh  m1 + m2  Or.With all the pieces given… You should be able to show that. ME 144L – Prof. R. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin .G. Ed ∝ h So test this model in the laboratory.

Wrap up • Once you have the energy dissipation model. we’ve been able to estimate mass and height to within 5%. Longoria Dynamic Systems and Controls Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin . you should be able to build a beam sensor ‘instrument’ that can estimate the mass and drop height. but for a reasonable range of model-clay masses. • There are a lot of assumptions required and approximations made.G. ME 144L – Prof. R.