Reducing and controlling vibration on a production machine can be frustrating. Excessive vibration can cause premature failures of bearings, seals, couplings, piping, and gears. In addition, it can cause degradation of functioning instruments and product quality. The five basic causes of the excessive vibration are poor machine function, faulty design, manufacturing defects, improper installation, and wear and abuse. The forces that cause vibration are sometimes part of the function of the machine. However many machines generate excessive forces when operated out of their design range; e.g., a pump that is operated off its best efficiency point. Designs that are subject to resonant behavior or have flexible members are sensitive to any type of forcing function. Loose tolerances in manufacturing can cause excessive mass unbalance and subject components to failure as a result of stress. Internal and external misalignments create forces on bearings and couplings. Loose bolts and inadequate foundations can increase vibration levels. Finally wear and abuse degrade machine function and can lead to premature failures. The problem has to be identified before a method for vibration reduction is chosen. The five basic methods available to reduce and control unwanted mechanical vibration include force reduction, tuning, mass addition, isolation, and damping. Force reduction can take many different forms: balancing, alignment, repair, and restricted operational parameters. However in the case of reciprocating machines force reduction is normally not an option. When resonance is a problem, most analysts use tuning; that is, changing the natural frequency or the forcing frequency of the machine. If the two frequencies are close to each other, the solution can be difficult. It might be necessary to change frequencies as much as 15%. The forcing frequency is typically tied to machine performance or the speed of the driver, so that changes are not simple. It is therefore necessary to change the natural frequency. The natural frequency is related to [k/m]
. It is thus the square root of the
stiffness and mass that is important. Most analysts stiffen the structure when possible, but, if the natural frequency is below the forcing frequency, mass addition might be useful. Stiffeners add weight, which is counterproductive to raising the natural frequency. For example, horizontal beams are not an effective stiffener. Figure 1 shows the key to effective tuning: a non- dimensional plot of amplification versus frequency ratio for various damping ratios (damping/critical damping). Critical damping is the amount of damping in the system that will not allow vibration. A rule-of- thumb for changes in the frequency ratio is 15%. From Figure 1 it can be seen that, for a frequency ratio change of 15%, large amplification reductions (up to 75%) are available for lightly-damped systems (C\Cc = 0.04). Most rolling-element mounted machines fall into this range. The bad news is that raising the natural frequency with an increase in stiffness is difficult because its impact on the natural frequency is only the square root of the stiffness. The other problem is that stiffness will tend to decrease in time as a result of joint deterioration and structural degradation. On the other hand, when mass is increased to lower the natural frequency, its effect is permanent. However, static strength may be compromised. Figure 1 does show that, even for small changes in natural frequency, an excellent reduction in amplification can be achieved. Mass addition to the foundation is usually used in reciprocating machine installations. The idea is to make the forcing function move more mass. Newtons 2 nd Law says that F = Ma. Thus, a = F/M. Adding mass lowers the acceleration. Some Thoughts on Vibration Reduction Ronald L. Eshleman Vibration Institute Willowbrook, Illinois C a s e H i s t o r y Figure 1. Vibration Amplification. 2 Vibrations Vol 27 No 4 December 2010 Isolation rearranges the natural frequency so that the force is out of phase with the vibration and works against the system mass. This is accomplished by using isolators (e.g., springs, rubber mounts). Isolation applications involve protecting the environment from a vibrating machine and protecting an instrument or machine from a vibrating environment. In either case the system natural frequency must be positioned less than 0.707 times the forcing frequency (Figure 2). This is accomplished by mounting the machine on an inertia block mounted on isolators. Figure 2 shows that the greater the frequency ratio the greater the isolation. This process does not eliminate vibration energy; rather, it manages the energy to protect the mounted item or the environment. The final method of vibration reduction and probably most difficult to implement is damping. It is the only mechanism that eliminates vibration by changing it to heat. The other vibration control mechanisms are often incorrectly referred to as damping. Damping is usually quantified as percent of critical damping where one is perfect, and zero means no damping. Figure 2 shows the role of damping in vibration control. Damping is most valuable at resonance, and that is exactly where a machine should not operate. As shown in Figure 2 damping reduces the effective isolation. However, the machine must always pass through the natural frequency to reach operating speed. This is sometimes accomplished in lightly-damped systems with stops that restrict motion at resonance. Except for fluid-film bearings damping is difficult to implement in a system. Some rubber mounts can be effective dampers but may have restrictions on achieving a required stiffness. Figure 2. Transmissibility.
Safety Critical Systems Handbook: A Straight forward Guide to Functional Safety, IEC 61508 (2010 EDITION) and Related Standards, Including Process IEC 61511 and Machinery IEC 62061 and ISO 13849