Vehicle System Dynamics: Publication Details, Including Instructions For Authors and Subscription Information

This article was downloaded by: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network]
On: 23 June 2010

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 918588849]
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Vehicle System Dynamics

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713659010
Practical Frequency and Time Optimal Design of Passive Linear Vibration

Isolation Mounts
G. Nakhaie Jazar; A. Narimani; M. F. Golnaraghi; D. A. Swanson
To cite this Article Jazar, G. Nakhaie , Narimani, A. , Golnaraghi, M. F. and Swanson, D. A.(2003) 'Practical Frequency and
Time Optimal Design of Passive Linear Vibration Isolation Mounts', Vehicle System Dynamics, 39: 6, 437 — 466
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1076/vesd.39.6.437.14595
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/vesd.39.6.437.14595
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Vehicle System Dynamics 0042-3114/03/3906-437$16.00
2003, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 437–466 # Swets & Zeitlinger
Practical Frequency and Time Optimal Design

of Passive Linear Vibration Isolation Mounts
G. NAKHAIE JAZAR1, A. NARIMANI2, M.F. GOLNARAGHI2,3

AND D.A. SWANSON4
SUMMARY
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 18:41 23 June 2010
In this paper we examine a linear one-degree of freedom vibration isolator mount. The linearity of the
system allows us to analyze its frequency and time response characteristics analytically. Optimal damping
and stiffness values for the isolator are obtained by minimizing certain cost functions, which are the Root
Mean Square (RMS) of the absolute acceleration and the relative displacement. These RMS cost functions
are used to create a design chart for the isolator parameters. This is very useful particularly in the presence
of physical constraints such as a limit in relative displacement. The time response of the system for a unit
step input is also considered to gain an insight into the transient characteristics of the system. We obtain an
optimal value for the damping ratio of the system in order to minimize the transmitted acceleration.
Combining the frequency and time response analyses leads to an optimal value for the mount natural
frequency and damping ratio satisfying both time and frequency domains. The results are verified
numerically using measured acceleration as input.
NOMENCLATURE
€ /Yj
a ¼ jX mass absolute acceleration
c linear damping
f cost function
fn ¼ o2pn natural frequency [Hz]
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
i ¼ 1 imaginary unit
k linear stiffness
m mass of engine
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, North Dakota State University, Fargo,
ND 58105, U.S.A. Tel.: þ1 701 231 8303; Fax: þ1 701 231 8913; E-mail: Reza.N.Jazar@ndsu.nodak.edu
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W., Waterloo, Ont.,
Canada N2L 3G1. Fax: þ1 519 888 6197.
3
Address correspondence to: Professor M.F. Golnaraghi, Canada Research Chair, Intelligent Mechatronics
and Materials Systems, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University
Ave. W., Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1. Tel.: (519) 888 4567 (x4753); Fax: (519) 888 6197; E-mail:
mfgolnar@uwaterloo.ca
4
Applications Development, Lord Corporation, Cary, NC, U.S.A.
438 G. NAKHAIE JAZAR ET AL.
r ¼ o/on excitation frequency ratio

R absolute acceleration RMS of mount
t time
x mass displacement [m]
xr ¼ x y mass-base relative displacement [m]
X displacement amplitude
y base displacement
Y base harmonic displacement excitation amplitude [m]
g ¼ jX/Yj mass transmissibility
Z relative displacement RMS of mount
l ¼ j(X Y)/Yj mass relative displacement transmissibility
x ¼ 2pcffiffiffiffi damping ratio

pkmffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
on ¼ k/m natural frequency [rad/s]
1. INTRODUCTION
The function of an isolator is to reduce the magnitude of motion transmitted from a

vibrating foundation to the equipment, or to reduce the magnitude of force transmitted
from the equipment to its foundation, both in time and frequency domain [1]. In this
paper, first we show that the optimization based on frequency analysis can result a
good behavior to a white noise and measured acceleration input. Second, we study the
behavior of the system in time domain for a unit step input and optimize its response
by reducing the peak value of the acceleration. To do this, we define a new method
using the absolute acceleration and the relative displacement, and then we create a
design chart to select the optimum natural frequency on and damping ratio x.
In the simplest approach to the problem, as depicted in Figure 1 the parameters m, k,
and c are considered constant and independent of the excitation frequency or behavior of
Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of a base excited vibrating system, with a linear mount.
DESIGN CHART FOR OPTIMAL LINEAR MOUNT 439
the foundation. This assumption is equivalent to consider the foundation infinitely stiff
and massive [2]. Even though, we know that for rubber mounts, the damping coefficient
usually decreases, and the stiffness coefficient increases with frequency [3]. Moreover
engines cannot be assumed a rigid body at high frequencies. Also, foundation structures
are neither infinitely stiff nor massive and a wave effect occurs in the mounts [4].
The governing equation of a linear isolator with harmonic base excitation can be
found in mechanical vibration texts such as Den Hartog’s [5]. The nondimensional-
ized equation of motion for the system is:
€xr þ 2xon x_ r þ o2n xr ¼ Yo2 sin ðotÞ ð1Þ
where the parameters of equation are related to the physical parameters of the system by:
rffiffiffiffi
c k
x ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi on ¼ ¼ 2pfn xr ¼ x y ð2Þ
2 km m
The most important transfer functions for the system are: absolute displacement g,
relative displacement l and absolute acceleration a. These transfer functions are
defined as follow assuming r ¼ o/on (see Figs. 2 and 3)
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

X 1 þ ð2xrÞ2
g ¼ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð3Þ
Y
ð1 r 2 Þ2 þ ð2xrÞ2
Fig. 2. The frequency response for the relative displacement of linear one DOF base excited system.
Fig. 3. The frequency response for the absolute acceleration of linear one DOF base excited system.

X Y r2
l ¼ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi ð4Þ
Y

€
X o2 1 þ ð2xrÞ2
a ¼ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð5Þ
Y
2. OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM
The reduction of the absolute acceleration since it represents the transmitted force is the
most important goal in optimization of suspensions. A vibration isolator reduces
absolute acceleration by permitting deflection of the isolator [5]. The relative deflection
is a measure of the clearance known as working space in the isolator. The clearance
should be minimized due to the physical constraints in the mechanical design.
There is a tradeoff between the acceleration and relative motion, which we want to
achieve for optimal isolation. Figure 4 illustrates this tradeoff. The ratio of the Root
Mean Square (RMS) of the absolute acceleration to the RMS of the relative
Fig. 4. The tradeoff between the RMS of the absolute acceleration and the RMS of the relative
displacement.
displacement is a monotonically increasing function of on and x. Figure 4 shows

keeping the relative displacement RMS constant then the acceleration RMS will
increase by increasing both on and x. However, keeping the acceleration RMS constant
then the relative displacement RMS will decrease by increasing on and x. Hence, the
acceleration RMS and relative displacement RMS have opposite behaviors. This
behavior, along with considering Figures 2 and 3 shows on ¼ 0 and x ¼ 0 is the trivial
solution which is not practical. To avoid this difficulty we need to define a constraint
objective function, but for most of the introduced constrained objective functions the
optimum design lies on the boundary of the constraint domains [1].
From a procedural point of view, new design methods are required to improve the
trial designs systematically so that the optimum parameters are realized with an
acceptable expenditure of effort [6].
3. OPTIMIZATION COMBINATIONS
For transient response optimization, it is of special interest to see if we can reduce the
peak accelerations and/or displacements. The favorable combinations of elements to
produce the minimax responses (although not truly optimum in a mathematical

sense), are near optimum within the range of parameters investigated.
For frequency response, first we need to define the domain of the working
frequencies. Optimum stiffness and damping should work at any excitation frequency
from 0–20 Hz. Hence, the optimum passive damping and stiffness may be found by
using an averaged cost function in the frequency domain.
There are various approaches to optimization depending on the application. Hence
there is not a universally accepted method for every application. Optimization of
vibration isolation systems has been the subject of a vast attention among of
researchers in the past and present century [7, 8]. We summarize and compare
mathematically the more traditional methods in linear mount optimization. Then, we
introduce a new applied method.

Considerable attention has been given in the literature to the minimization of the
absolute displacement, known as the main transmissibility, but the choice of the cost
function is paramount, since it determines which isolation system is optimum. The
choice of constraints on the other hand, restricts the possibilities of candidate cost
function. The choice of both cost function and constraints are dependent on the
practical consideration. They can be expressed in terms of the design parameters of
the system. This will always be the case where the cost function and constraints are
the prescribed functions of the state variables, and related to the design parameters
through the equations of motion.
For our problem, the cost function may include any state variable such as the
absolute acceleration or relative displacement, which is related to the design
parameters x and on, using Equation (1). Other constraints may manipulate design
parameters as prescribed by the upper and lower bounds on x and on. The problem is
even more complex if we include an overall consideration of the system such as
weight, cost, maintainability, and reliability. If we optimize the system, it can always
be optimum from a mathematical point of view. Instead, the designer is obligated to
consider alternative isolation concepts, each optimized with respect to same cost
function or equivalent constrains. Then, on the basis of considerations that may not
explicitly enter the analysis, the designer decides which is best for the required
application.
For the system shown in Figure 1 it is generally desired to select x and on such that
the absolute acceleration (or relative displacement) of the system is minimized and
the relative displacement (or the absolute acceleration) does not exceed a prescribed
level. An obvious solution is to set up a matrix of the admissible values of x and on
and solve the equation of motion [Equation (1)] for the isolated mass to determine
both the maximum acceleration and relative displacement. The maximum value of
important states of the system is checked to see if it satisfies the constraint. If it does,
the associated pair of (x, on) is admissible. This procedure is repeated for all the
matrix pairs of (x, on). Finally, the candidate pair that is the best is selected.
Hereafter, when we discuss acceleration and displacement, we mean the averaged

value of them over a frequency range. As mentioned, we use the RMS as the average
over the frequency domain of 0–20 Hz. In order to calculate the RMS of the
acceleration and the relative displacement of the isolator, we calculate the RMS of
the functions a and l for any pair of x and on. The integral of the square of a and l are
calculated as follows:

Z tan 1 poffiffiffiffiffi Z tan1 poffiffiffiffiffi Z19
1 Z18 16 Z21
a2 do ¼ Z14 o þ Z15 o3 þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð6Þ
3 Z17 Z18 Z20 Z21

Z tan1 ffiffiffiffiffi
po Z8 tan1 poffiffiffiffiffi Z11
Z10 Z13
l2 do ¼ Z7 o pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffi ffi ð7Þ
Z9 Z10 Z12 Z13
where the parameters Z1 through Z21 are introduced in the Appendix. Therefore, the
RMS of a and l would be:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z 40p
1
R¼ a2 do ð8Þ
40p 0
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z 40p
1
Z¼ l2 do ð9Þ
40p 0
Figures 5 and 6 show the absolute acceleration versus x and on, respectively. Relative
displacement is also shown in Figures 7 and 8. Note that the dashed lines in these
figures show how the maxima and minima change.
Time or frequency averaged statistics; such as acceleration RMS and deflection
RMS are often used in suspension design [9]. Following what we mentioned in
introduction, the most important defined optimization methods applicable to our
system are as follows [10]:
1. Minimax Absolute Acceleration for Specified Relative Displacement:
Specify the allowable relative displacement, and then find the minimax absolute
acceleration:
@R @R
¼0 ¼0 Z ¼ Z0 ð10Þ
@on @x
There is no guarantee to exist a unique and global absolute minimum for these
conditions. Specifically for our system, there is no solution for @R/@x ¼ 0 if
on > 12 Hz, and there is no solution for @R/@on ¼ 0 if on < 18 Hz; so there is no
common domain of solution.
Fig. 5. The RMS absolute acceleration for a linear vibration isolator versus the damping ratio for various
natural frequencies.
2. Minimax Relative Displacement for Specified Absolute Acceleration:

Specify the allowable absolute acceleration, and then find the minimax relative
displacement:
@Z @Z
¼0 ¼0 R ¼ R0 ð11Þ
@on @x
For the system under consideration, there is no solution for @Z/@x ¼ 0 at all, and there
is no solution for @x/@on ¼ 0 if on > 18 Hz. The required condition R ¼ R0 does not
match with @x/@on ¼ 0, and there is no optimal solution using these solutions.
3. Minimum Sum of Maximum Absolute Acceleration: Find the minimum sum
of maximum absolute acceleration, varying both the damping ratio and the natural
frequency:
@f @f
¼0 ¼0 ð12Þ
@on @x
Fig. 6. The RMS absolute acceleration for linear vibration isolator versus natural frequencies for various
damping ratios.
where
Z Z
f ¼ R1 don þ R2 dx
and
R1 ¼ Extremum of R with respect to on
R2 ¼ Extremum of R with respect to x
Because of different domain of solution for R1 and R2, application of the Condition
(12) falls in the domain of solution for R1, which is related to less values of R. Hence,
there is no advantage in applying the Condition (12) for the linear mount system.
4. Minimum Sum of Maximum Absolute Acceleration and Maximum Relative
Displacement: Find the minimum sum of the maximum absolute acceleration and the
associated relative displacements having equal importance:
@f @f
¼0 ¼0 ð13Þ
@on @x
Fig. 7. The RMS relative displacement for a linear vibration isolator versus damping ratio for various
natural frequencies.
where
Z Z Z Z
f ¼ R1 don þ R2 dx þ Z1 don þ Z2 dx
and
R1 ¼ Extremum of R with respect to on
R2 ¼ Maximum of R with respect to x
Z1 ¼ Maximum of Z with respect to on
Z2 ¼ Maximum of Z with respect to x
R1 is a monotonically increasing curve starting at zero and approaches to one
asymptotically, and R2 is a monotonically decreasing curve starting at infinity for
x ¼ 0 and approaches to one asymptotically. There is no Z1, and Z2 to be a
monotonically increasing curve starting at one for on ¼ 0 and approaches to infinity
for x ¼ 0. It means there is no common domain of solutions for both conditions of
Equation (13).
Fig. 8. The RMS relative displacement for linear vibration isolator versus natural frequencies for various
damping ratios.
Although these methods were originally introduced for the simple frequency
responses illustrated in Figures 2 and 3 [10] without any special success, they can
also be applied for the RMS frequency responses depicted in Figures 5–8, as well.
Figures 5 and 6 show that there is no common point for the curves @R/@on ¼ 0
and @R/@x ¼ 0. Figures 7 and 8 also indicate that there is no solution for equation
@Z/@x ¼ 0, and no common point for the curves @Z/@on ¼ 0 and @Z/@x ¼ 0 could
be achieved.
If we choose a certain value for Z, the corresponding horizontal line in Figure 8
indicates a value for x on the curve @Z/@on ¼ 0. Now, a vertical line in Figure 5
associated to the value of x, indicates a value for on at the intersection with the curve
@R/@x ¼ 0. Hence, a modified first method works for RMS frequency response.
Using a modified second method, we find an optimal value for on at the
intersection of the horizontal line in Figure 5, indicating the specific value of the
acceleration with curve @R/@x ¼ 0. Then, at the intersection of the associated vertical
line in Figure 8 with curve @Z/@on ¼ 0, we introduce the optimum x. The result of the
third method is close to the results of first method. Similarly, the result of the fourth
method is close to the average of first and second methods. Although a modification in
Methods 1–4 reveals an optimal design in some sense, they require a restriction (as a
constraint equation) on the maximum acceleration or relative displacement. If the
constraint value is unknown, then we find the optimum design on the boundary of the
physical domain for natural frequency and damping ratio.
4. OPTIMIZATION PROCEDURE
Our analyses show that we may define the acceleration R as a function of the relative
displacement Z, using on and x as parameters. A plot of the absolute acceleration
against the relative displacement for the different design parameter pair (on, x) results
in a four dimensional surface. It appears that the function R ¼ R(Z) has a minimum for
constant on, and has a maximum for constant x. The points of minima introduce an
optimal curve on the R-Z plane that may be used for the optimization of the linear
vibration isolator. The sensitivity of acceleration with respect to relative displacement
is minimum at any point of the optimal curve. Now we define a new optimization
method.
5. Minimum RMS of Absolute Acceleration with respect to RMS of Relative
Displacement: Find the minimum absolute acceleration with respect to the relative
displacement. The result is an optimal curve on the R-Z plane. Select a desired value
Fig. 9. Illustration of the optimal curve on the surface g2, the acceleration RMS, R, for a linear mount, as a
function of relative displacement RMS, Z, and natural frequency on.
for relative displacement as the traveling space (or the absolute acceleration), and find
the associated values for x and on at the intersection of the associated vertical
(horizontal) line with the optimal curve. Mathematically it is equivalent to the
following constrained minimization:
@R @2R
¼0 >0 ð14Þ
@Z @Z2
The RMS of the absolute acceleration R and the RMS of the relative displacement Z
are functions of two variables on and x as indicated in Equations (6) through (9):
R ¼ h1 ðon ; xÞ ð15Þ
Z ¼ h2 ðon ; xÞ: ð16Þ
Hence, a pair of (on, x), uniquely determines R and Z. Theoretically, we may change
the variables to define anyone of these four parameters R, Z, x, and on as a function of
Fig. 10. Contour curves for the function R ¼ R(Z, x).

the other two parameters. Consequently R, can be considered as a surface in (Z, on)
space and (Z, x) as:
R ¼ g1 ðZ; xÞ ð17Þ
R ¼ g2 ðZ; on Þ ð18Þ
The functions h1, and h2, or g1, and g2 determine the dynamical behavior of the
system. There is no extremum on the functions h1, h2, g1, and g2, but we may find a
curve on the surface g2, passing through the minimum of intersection of g2, and the
planes indicated by on. We define this space curve, the optimal curve. The optimal
curve is shown in Figure 9, which depicts a relationship between on and x that makes
R minimum with respect to Z, when on is given. More specifically, for any specific
value of on there is a solution for @g2/@Z ¼ 0 that @ 2g2/@Z2 > 0.
If in Figure 9, êZ ; êon ; êR are the unit vectors along the axes Z, on, and R,
respectively, and rg2 is the gradient of the surface g2, then the optimal curve is
defined by:
rg2 êZ ¼ 0 ð19Þ
Fig. 11. Contour curves for the function R ¼ R(Z, fn).

Fig. 12a. Contour curves for the function R ¼ R(Z).
Fig. 12b. Contour curves x for the function R ¼ R(Z) when Z approaches zero.
and shows that the gradient of g2 has no component on Z axes. On the optimal curve,
R is just a variable of on, and is not sensitive to small changes in Z. Since Z is a
measure of working space, this property is much important in physical working
conditions. Now, using the optimal curve we make R a one variable function, with this
information that it is the minimum value available for a given relative displacement
RMS, Z.
Figure 10 shows a two-dimensional illustration of contour curves of the surface
R ¼ R(Z, x) and Figure 11 shows the contour curves of the surface R ¼ R(Z, fn). It is
seen that there is a minimum in Figure 10 for some domains of the natural frequency,
and there is a maximum in Figure 11 for some domains of the damping ratio. Figure
12(a) portrays the overlapping plots of Figures 10 and 11. The limit point (1, 0)
indicates a soft suspension, corresponding to the disconnection case of k ¼ 0 and

c ¼ 0. The other limit approaches the point (0, 7000) until Z ¼ 0.1, indicates the other
extreme case, a hard mount. Hard mount refers to the rigid connection k ¼ 1 and
c ¼ 1. The behavior of R ¼ R(Z) when Z approaches zero, is more complicated.
Figure 12(b) shows the behavior of R ¼ R(Z) when Z approaches zero.
The line of minima is the desired optimum curve that satisfies the condition in
Equation (14). It shows that at optimum conditions, increasing the natural
Fig. 13. The line of the optimum design for a base excited linear passive vibration isolator in the R-Z plane.
frequency should be followed by increasing the damping ratio, and vise versa. The
level of acceleration for the optimum mount always lies below the level of
acceleration for the hard mount, which is desirable. Its level of relative
displacement may be less or greater than a soft mount. Although, the level of R
changes very little for 0 < Z < 1, it changes faster for Z > 1. In other words, at high
natural frequencies, the optimum RMS acceleration becomes insensitive to the
value of damping. If we know the limit value of the RMS of the relative
displacement (or acceleration), then the intersection of the corresponding vertical
(horizontal) line with the line of optimum indicates the optimum value of x, fn, and
the corresponding level of acceleration (relative displacement). Figure 13 illustrates
a better view of the optimal domain of Figure 12. We have re-plotted Figure 12 in
Figure 14 using x and fn as Cartesian coordinates, and R and Z as parameters for

the contour curves. The corresponding line of optimum is also illustrated. It may
now be easier to pinpoint the values of R and Z for the parameters of a given
mount. It is obvious that there is no optimum mount out of the region 0 < Z < 1.48,
and 0 < R < 7000.
Fig. 14. The line of the optimum design for a base excited linear passive vibration isolator in the xfn,
plane.
5. OPTIMIZATION EXAMPLE
Verification of the optimization result could be examined by studying the behavior of

the system for the optimal parameters. Let us start with an odd mount, from the
possible optimum domain. The nominal parameter values of the mount are:
m ¼ 340:5 kg c ¼ 10215 Ns=m k ¼ 3:405 MN=m
The dimensionless parameters of the mount, designated by number 1 in Figure 12,

are:
fn ¼ 10 Hz x ¼ 0:15
Figure 12 shows that it is possible to reduce the RMS of the transmitted acceleration
of the mount by lowering fn or increasing x. Figures 7 and 8 indicate that for the
nominal values of x and fn, the RMS of relative displacement of the mount is very
high. Figures A1 and A2 in Appendix A show that the RMS of absolute displacement
of the mount is also very high at the nominal values.
Fig. 15. The acceleration frequency response for systems 1, 2 and 3.

Fig. 16. The relative displacement frequency response for systems 1, 2 and 3.
Depending on the capability of the system and the physical situation, we find
points 2 or 3 by increasing x or decreasing fn. The parameter of the optimum mount
at point 2 and 3 are:
fn ¼ 10 Hz x ¼ 0:4
and
fn ¼ 4:9 Hz x ¼ 0:15
respectively. The acceleration and relative displacement frequency responses for

point 1 through 3 are plotted in Figures 15 and 16. Figure 15 shows that the system has
better overall acceleration frequency response performance at point 3; Figure 16
shows that the system 2 has better relative displacement frequency response.
In order to compare the system at points 1, 2 and 3, we observe the behavior of the
system for a transient time input, a white noise random input, and a measured
experimental random input.
Fig. 17. A base excitation profile for a sine square bump transient displacement input.
Fig. 18. The relative displacement time response to a sine square bump input, for three systems.
Fig. 19. The transmitted force for a sine square bump input, for three systems.
5.1. Transient Input

The analysis of the time response is a good measure for comparing the mount
parameters in order to find the effect of the frequency optimized parameters on the
transient response. We apply a sine square bump input as shown in Figure 17. The
time response performance of the system at points 1, 2, and 3 to the sine square bump
input is shown in Figures 18 and 19.
System 3 has a lower relative displacement peak value (see Fig. 18), and a lower
absolute acceleration peak value (see Fig. 19), but it takes more time to settle down.
5.2. White Noise Random Input

The performance of the isolator for a unity white noise base excitation has also been
studied, (see Figs. 20 and 21). Figure 20 shows the power spectral density of the
isolator acceleration for points 1 through 3. According to this figure, system 3 has
the best response to a white noise. Figure 21 shows the power spectral density of the
isolator relative displacement for the points of concern. In this case, system 2 has a
superior behavior. The performance of systems 2 and 3 are more compatible with the
Fig. 20. The acceleration PSD for a unity white noise for systems 1, 2, and 3.
predicted behavior indicated in the Figure 12. We expect that system 2 to will have a
better relative displacement characteristics, and system 3 have a better acceleration
behavior.
5.3. Experimental Random Input

A measured acceleration input, shown in Figure 22, is used as the input to the model.
This acceleration corresponds to the front cab mount input for a typically heavy truck.
To analyze our measured data we use the SAE Recommended Practice for
measurement and presentation of truck ride vibration [11]. This standard details a
uniform method for measurements of ride vibration of Class 7 and 8 commercial
vehicles, including both combination vehicles and straight trucks. It presents several
utilized methods analyzing the measured accelerations, such as g(rms), weighted
g(rms), 1/3 Octave Peak g(rms), and ISO 1/3 Octave Peak.
According to [9], since the ride vibrations are limited, between 1 to 25 Hz range, all
measured data is analyzed within this pass-band. Hence, the square root of the mean
square value of the ride vibration data is frequency weighted by factors described in
Table 1. This frequency weighted ride vibration data is called the SAE Weighted
g(rms).
Fig. 21. The relative displacement PSD for a unity white noise for systems 1, 2, and 3.
Figure 23 represents the SAE weighted acceleration response of the mount for
points 1, 2, and 3. The system at points 2 and 3 have a better response, but the behavior
of the mount for the system 3 appears to be the best.
6. TIME DOMAIN ANALYSIS
Time domain analysis is important for studying the transient characteristics of the
system. In the present section the transient response of the system for a unit step input
is considered. Using the analytical solution describing the dynamics to a step input,
the maximum acceleration values are obtained and then minimized.
The response of the mass m to a unit step input has a well-known solution:
1A 1A
xðtÞ ¼ 1 expðAon tÞ þ on tÞ
expðA ð20Þ
2 ib 2 ib
where the traditional notations are used:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
a¼x b ¼ 1 x2 A ¼ a þ ib ¼ a ib
A ð21Þ
Fig. 22. The measured front cab mount acceleration input.
Table 1. The g(rms) spectrum weighted factors [8].
Frequency Vertical
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
1.0–4.0 Hz f /4
4.0–8.0 Hz 1.0
8.0–25.0 Hz 8/f
The corresponding acceleration obtained from Equation (21) is as follows:

1 A3 o2n 1A 3 o2
€xðtÞ ¼ expðAon tÞ þ n on tÞ
expðA ð22Þ
2 ib 2 ib
The peak value of the relative displacement is:

xcos 1 ð2x2 1Þ
xp ¼ exp pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð23Þ
1 x2
Fig. 23. The SDOF isolator response to the truck input for three different parameters.
which occurs when x_ ðtÞ ¼ 0 at time:

cos 1 ð2x2 1Þ
t1 ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð24Þ
on 1 x2
The peak value of the absolute acceleration is therefore:

2 2cos 1 ð2x2 1Þ p
ap ¼ on exp x pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð25Þ
1 x2
which occurs at beginning of the excitation, t ¼ 0 or at the time instant when €xðtÞ ¼ 0
at time:
2cos 1 ð2x2 1Þ p
t2 ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð26Þ
on 1 x2
Figure 24 is a plot of the peak values of acceleration to a step input versus the peak
values of the relative displacement for different natural frequency and damping ratio
Fig. 24. The peak value of absolute acceleration with respect to peak value of relative displacement.
values (note: on ¼ 2pfn). From Equations (23) and (25) it is observed that, these peak
values depend on the natural frequency on and the damping ratio x of the mount.
The optimal damping ratio may next be obtained upon minimization of the
equation resulting from substitution of Equation (26) into (25). This optimal value
x ¼ 0.4 is obtained by solving the following transcendental equation:
2xcos 1 ð2x2 1Þ p 4x 1 x2 ¼ 0 ð27Þ
From Equation (27) it is interesting to note that the minimum peak value of the
absolute acceleration with respect to relative displacement is independent of the value
of natural frequency on [rad/s] or fn [Hz].
This value of damping suggests that the point (x ¼ 0.4, fn ¼ 10) on the optimal
curve in Figure 13, as the time-frequency optimal damping ratio and natural
frequency values for the linear isolator under base excitation.
7. CONCLUSION
Mathematically, the result of an optimal design of a system depends on the definition

of the cost function and the performance index. There is no universally accepted cost
function for isolation of mechanical vibration systems even for a simple linear base
excited one DOF vibration isolator.
In this paper we have found formulas for the RMS of the acceleration and relative
displacement. We further have shown analytically that the tradeoff between the
absolute acceleration and the relative displacement also applies to the RMS values.
The optimal natural frequency and damping ratio values of the mount lie on a curve
connecting the minimum of RMS absolute acceleration with respect to the RMS
relative displacement. This optimum curve demonstrates that the physical parameter
optimal values do not lie on the boundaries of constraints, and depicts that there is a
relation between damping ratio and natural frequency for optimal isolation.
Finally we have shown that the time response analysis of the system to step input
may be used to identify a specific point of the above mentioned optimal curve, as both
time and frequency optimum. This optimal mount parameter values are examined
numerically and using actual road experimental data.
REFERENCES
1. Hariss, C.H.: Shock and Vibration Handbook. McGraw Hill, New York, 1996.
2. Den Hartog, J.P.: Mechanical Vibrations. 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1956.
3. Sykes, A.O.: Isolation Provided by Vibration Mounts. SAE Transaction 66, 1958, pp. 532–548.
4. Ashrafiuon, H. and Nataraj, C.: Dynamic Analysis of Engine Mount Systems. J. Vib. Acoustic 114
(1992), pp. 79–83.
5. Snowden, J.C.: Vibration Isolation: Use and Characterization. J. Accos. Soc. Amer. 66(5) (1979),
pp. 1245–1274.
6. Sevin, E. and Pilkey, W.D.: Optimization of Shock Isolation System. SAE Paper No. 680749, 1968.
7. Nelson, F.C.: Vibration Isolation: A Review, I. Sinusoidal and Random Excitations. Shock and
Vibration 1(5) (1994), pp. 485–493.
8. Nakhaie Jazar, G. and Golnaraghi, M.F.: Engine Mounts for Automotive Applications: A Survey. The
Shock and Vibration Digest 34 (2002), pp. 363–379.
9. Chalasani, R.M.: Ride Performance Potential of Active Suspension Systems. Part I: Simplified
Analysis Based on Quarter-Car Models. ASME Symposium on Simulation of Ground Vehicles and
Transport Systems, ASME, Anaheim, CA, 1986.
10. Kemper, J.D. and Ayre, R.S.: Optimum Damping and Stiffness in a Nonlinear Four-Degree-of-
Freedom System Subject to Shock Load. J. Appl. Mech. 38 (1971), pp. 135–142.
11. Report of the Truck and Bus Cab Occupant and Environment Committee: Measurement and
Presentation of Truck Ride Vibrations. SAE Recommendation Practice 34 J1490 JAN 87, 1987,
pp. 319–330.
APPENDIX
Integral of the Transfer Functions

The transfer functions g, l, a, for the vibration isolator are presented in Equations (3)
to (5). In order to use their RMS values in optimization methods, we need to find the
integral of their square function. Their integrals are as follows:

Z tan1 poffiffiffiffi Z1 tan1 poffiffiffiffi Z4
Z Z6
g2 do ¼
3
pffiffiffiffiffi þ pffiffiffiffiffi ðA1Þ
Z2 Z3 Z5 Z6

Z tan1 ffiffiffiffiffi
po Z8 tan1 poffiffiffiffiffi Z11
Z10 Z13
l2 do ¼ Z7 o pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffi ffi ðA2Þ
Z9 Z10 Z12 Z13

Z tan1 poffiffiffiffiffi Z16 tan1 poffiffiffiffiffi Z19
1 Z Z
a2 do ¼ Z14 o þ Z15 o3 þ
18 21
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðA3Þ
3 Z17 Z18 Z20 Z21
where the parameters Z1 to Z21 are denoted in Equations (A4) to (A24).
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z1 ¼ o2n 8x6 þ 8x4 þ ð8x4 4x2 1Þx 1 þ x2 ðA4Þ
Z2 ¼ 4x2 ðx2 1Þ ðA5Þ

2
Z3 ¼ o2n ð1 2x Þ þ 2o2n x x2 1 ðA6Þ
Z4 ¼ o2n 8x6 8x4 þ ð8x4 4x2 1Þx 1 þ x2 ðA7Þ
Z5 ¼ Z2 ¼ 4x2 ðx2 1Þ ðA8Þ

Z6 ¼ o2n ð1 2x2 Þ þ 2o2n x2 ðx2 1Þ ðA9Þ
Z7 ¼ 1 ðA10Þ
Z8 ¼ o2n 8x6 12x4 þ 4x2 þ ð8x4 þ 8x2 1Þx 1 þ x2 ðA11Þ
Z9 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 Þ ðA12Þ

Z10 ¼ o2n 1 þ 2x2 2x 1 þ x2 ðA13Þ
Z11 ¼ o2n 8x6 12x4 þ 4x2 þ ð8x4 8x2 þ 1Þx 1 þ x2 ðA14Þ

Z12 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 ðA15Þ
Z13 ¼ o2n 1 þ 2x2 þ 2x 1 þ x2 ðA16Þ
Z14 ¼ o4n ð1 þ 8x2 16x4 Þ ðA17Þ

Z15 ¼ 4o2n x2 ðA18Þ

Z16 ¼ o6n 128x10 256x8 þ 144x6 12x4 4x2
þ ð128x8 þ 192x6 64x4 4x2 þ 1Þx 1 þ x2 ðA19Þ
Fig. A1. A two-dimensional illustration of the absolute displacement RMS for linear vibration isolator
versus damping ratio for different natural frequencies.
Fig. A2. A two-dimensional illustration of the absolute displacement RMS for the linear vibration the
isolator versus natural frequencies for different damping ratios.
Z17 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 Þ ðA20Þ
Z18 ¼ o2n 1 þ 2x 2x 1 þ x2
2
ðA21Þ

Z19 ¼ o6n 128x10 256x8 þ 144x6 12x4 4x2
þ ð128x8 192x6 þ 64x4 þ 4x2 1Þx 1 þ x2 ðA22Þ
Z20 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 Þ ðA23Þ
Z21 ¼ o2n 1 þ 2x2 þ 2x 1 þ x2 ðA24Þ
A graphical representation of the absolute acceleration RMS and relative dis-

placement RMS is shown in Figures 5–8. Here we plot the absolute displacement
RMS in Figures A1 and A2.

Vehicle System Dynamics: Publication Details, Including Instructions For Authors and Subscription Information

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vehicle System Dynamics: Publication Details, Including Instructions For Authors and Subscription Information

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network]

On: 23 June 2010

Vehicle System Dynamics

Practical Frequency and Time Optimal Design of Passive Linear Vibration

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Practical Frequency and Time Optimal Design

G. NAKHAIE JAZAR1, A. NARIMANI2, M.F. GOLNARAGHI2,3

r ¼ o/on excitation frequency ratio

x ¼ 2pcffiffiffiffi damping ratio

The function of an isolator is to reduce the magnitude of motion transmitted from a

displacement is a monotonically increasing function of on and x. Figure 4 shows

produce the minimax responses (although not truly optimum in a mathematical

introduce a new applied method.

Hereafter, when we discuss acceleration and displacement, we mean the averaged

2. Minimax Relative Displacement for Specified Absolute Acceleration:

Z ¼ h2 ðon ; xÞ: ð16Þ

Fig. 10. Contour curves for the function R ¼ R(Z, x).

Fig. 11. Contour curves for the function R ¼ R(Z, fn).

Fig. 12a. Contour curves for the function R ¼ R(Z).

indicates a soft suspension, corresponding to the disconnection case of k ¼ 0 and

Figure 14 using x and fn as Cartesian coordinates, and R and Z as parameters for

Verification of the optimization result could be examined by studying the behavior of

m ¼ 340:5 kg c ¼ 10215 Ns=m k ¼ 3:405 MN=m

The dimensionless parameters of the mount, designated by number 1 in Figure 12,

Fig. 15. The acceleration frequency response for systems 1, 2 and 3.

respectively. The acceleration and relative displacement frequency responses for

5.1. Transient Input

5.2. White Noise Random Input

5.3. Experimental Random Input

6. TIME DOMAIN ANALYSIS

Fig. 22. The measured front cab mount acceleration input.

Table 1. The g(rms) spectrum weighted factors [8].

The corresponding acceleration obtained from Equation (21) is as follows:

which occurs when x_ ðtÞ ¼ 0 at time:

Mathematically, the result of an optimal design of a system depends on the definition

Integral of the Transfer Functions

Z2 ¼ 4x2 ðx2 1Þ ðA5Þ

Z5 ¼ Z2 ¼ 4x2 ðx2 1Þ ðA8Þ

Z9 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 Þ ðA12Þ

Z14 ¼ o4n ð1 þ 8x2 16x4 Þ ðA17Þ

Z15 ¼ 4o2n x2 ðA18Þ

Z17 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 Þ ðA20Þ

Z20 ¼ 4x2 ð1 þ x2 Þ ðA23Þ

A graphical representation of the absolute acceleration RMS and relative dis-

You might also like