ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Optimization of multiple tuned mass dampers to suppress machine

tool chatter
Y. Yang a, J. Muñoa b, Y. Altintas c,n
a
School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ideko-Danobat Group, Elgoibar 20870, Spain
c
Manufacturing Automation Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of British Columbia, 2054-6250 Applied Science Lane,
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4

a r t i c l e in f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Chatter is more detrimental to machining due to its instability than forced vibrations. This paper
Received 13 August 2009 presents design and optimal tuning of multiple tuned mass dampers (TMDs) to increase chatter
Received in revised form resistance of machine tool structures. Chatter free critical depth of cut of a machine is inversely
9 March 2010
proportional to the negative real part of frequency response function (FRF) at the tool–workpiece
Accepted 22 April 2010
Available online 26 May 2010
interface. Instead of targeting reduction of magnitude, the negative real part of FRF of the machine is
reduced by designing single and multiple TMD systems. The TMDs are designed to have equal masses,
Keywords: and their damping and stiffness values are optimized to improve chatter resistance using minimax
Damping numerical optimization algorithm. It is shown that multiple TMDs need more accurate tuning of
Chatter
stiffness and natural frequency of each TMD, but are more robust to uncertainties in damping and input
Machine tool
dynamic parameters in comparison with single TMD applications. The proposed tuned damper design
and optimization strategy is experimentally illustrated to increase chatter free depth of cuts.
& 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The use of tuned mass damper (TMD) is a classical solution to
increase damping of machine tool structures because of its
simplicity and lower cost compared with active damping systems
[1]. The traditional analytical methods [2] to tune parameters of a
single damper are applicable only when the structure is
undamped, and considerable efforts have been devoted to address
the problem for the case of damped structure with analytical and
numerical methods [3–5]. A number of various passive damping
systems such as a single TMD with multiple degrees of freedom
(MDOF) [6] and multiple TMDs (MTMDs) [7] have been developed
to damp a single mode in recent years. It has been demonstrated
that multiple TMDs, where each is tuned to damp a specific mode,
are more effective than a single TMD solution having the same
mass ratio [8]. However, it is difficult to optimize parameters of
tuned dampers analytically when the DOFs of TMDs increase. As a
result, numerical methods are used, but usually by assuming
some restrictions on the design of stiffness or damping ratio of
each TMD [8]. Recently, Zuo and Nayfeh [9] proposed to optimize
individual stiffness and damping elements of multiple TMDs by
applying the principles of a decentralized H2 control method in
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: altintas@mech.ubc.ca (Y. Altintas).
order to minimize the root mean squared (RMS) response of the
main structure. Li and Ni [10] were able to optimize the MTMDs
numerically in order to minimize vibration amplitude without
imposing restrictions on design parameters of the TMDs. These
methods aimed to minimize RMS value of frequency response
when excitation force is random [8,9] or when excitation force is
harmonic [10].
However, the tuning requirements of chatter suppression are
quite different in machining. Chatter is a self-excited vibration
problem that causes poor surface finish and large dynamic loads
on the spindle. Tobias and Fishwick [11] and Tlusty and Polacek
[12] related absolute stability of the cutting process to the
minimum real part of tool point frequency response function
(FRF). Although stability of metal cutting is a complex problem,
there are many cases where stability does not depend directly on
oriented real part of FRF [1]. However, stability of general
machining operations like turning, boring, or milling with one
dominant mode can be predicted reasonably using Tlusty’s
method [12] by orienting real part of FRF in the direction of chip
regeneration [1].
Some experimental studies have been reported about the
application of TMDs on machine tools for chatter suppression.
Rivin and Kang [13] used a tuned damper to improve available
length-to-diameter ratio in boring. Tarng et al. [14] and Rashid
and Nicolescu [15] tuned damper’s natural frequency to match
with natural frequency of the structure’s target mode, which

0890-6955/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2010.04.011
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842 835

needs to be damped. However, optimal tuning strategies to only the case of positive a will be discussed here. While the
suppress chatter by considering stability of metal cutting systems objective is to reduce magnitude of FRF in forced vibration cases,
have not been studied except by Sims [16]. Sims tuned a single the focus is to shrink the negative real part of FRF in chatter
TMD to push the negative real part of main structure’s FRF avoidance as proposed by Sims [16].
analytically. Saffury and Altus [17] also tuned parameters of a
viscoelastic cantilever beam by maximizing the most negative
real part of FRF. However, the listed methods have considered the 3. Optimal identification of TMD parameters
tuning of only a single TMD to reduce chatter.
This paper presents optimal tuning of both single and multiple The objective of multiple TMDs is to damp the dominant
TMDs to suppress chatter in machining. The experimentally structural mode described by its mass (m0), stiffness (k0), and
validated optimization strategy allows evaluation of multiple damping constant (c0). A mechanical system with multiple TMDs
dampers on chatter stability without increasing damper’s mass. attached to the structure that needs to be damped is shown in
Henceforth, the paper is organized as follows. The chatter stability Fig. 2. Each TMD has a single degree of freedom (DOF) with mass
law is turned into an objective function to reduce unstable mj connected to the main structure with a spring kj and a damper
vibrations in machining in Section 2. Optimal identifications of cj (j¼1, y, N).
frequency and damping ratios of TMDs are presented in Section 3. The equations of motion for main mass (m0) and TMD mass
Sensitivity of the objective function, i.e. chatter stability law, to (mj) in xj direction are
tuning parameters is discussed in Section 4. The performances of 9
XN
>
single and multiple TMDs in reducing chatter are presented in m0 x€ 0 þ c0 x_ 0 þ k0 x0 þ ½cj ðx_ 0 x_ j Þ þ kj ðx0 xj Þ ¼ F sin ot >
=
Section 5. The paper is concluded in Section 6. j¼1 ð2Þ
>
>
€ _ _
m x c ðx x Þk ðx x Þ ¼ 0 ;
j j j 0 j j 0 j

2. Chatter stability objective where j¼1, y, N is the TMD index and F sin(ot) is the harmonic
excitation force acting on the main structure. Transforming the
The regenerative effect of chatter can be explained as in Fig. 1. equations of motion into Laplace domain, the transfer function
Chip thickness starts deviating dynamically from its static value between the vibration of main mass and external force can be
(h0), i.e. feed per revolution in orthogonal cutting, when the expressed as
system experiences vibrations. Dynamic chip thickness, which is X0 1
the root cause of regenerative chatter, oscillates due to vibration F0 ðsÞ ¼ ¼ : ð3Þ
F P
N
marks left during the previous cuts y(t  T) and current cuts y(t), m0 s2 þc0 s þ k0 þ ðcj s þ kj Þmj s2 =mj s2 þ cj sþ kj
j¼1
which in turn causes cutting force to oscillate. Depending on
phase shift e between the inner y(t  T) and outer y(t) waves, Introducing non-dimensional terms as listed in Table 1 and
dynamic chip thickness (h(t)) may grow exponentially and cause switching to frequency domain (s¼io), the frequency response
the cutting system to become unstable and experience chatter. function can be represented as a function of excitation frequency
Stability of this system depends not only on dynamic properties ratio (b ¼ o/o0), mass ratio (mj ¼mj/m0), damping ratio (xj), and
like mass, damping, and stiffness but also delay between natural frequency ratio (fj ¼ oj/o0) of tuned dampers:
vibrations, which is important as well. Mathematically, this fact
1 1
drives real part dependent stability [11,12,18]. Stability charts F0 ðbÞ ¼ , ð4Þ
k0 gðbÞ þ hðbÞUi
that show critically stable depth of cut (alim) at each spindle speed
(n) can be evaluated using the following stability law proposed by where
Tobias and Fishwick [11] and Tlusty and Polacek [12]: 2 2
2 2
X
n fj2 =b 1 þ 4xj
1 9 gðbÞ ¼ 1b b mj ,
2
alim ¼ >
> ðfj =bb=fj Þ2 þ 4xj
2aKf GðoÞ = j¼1
  ð1Þ X
n
2xj b=fj
o >
> hðbÞ ¼ 2bx0 þ b
2
mj :
n ¼ 60 ; 2
2kp þ e j¼1 ðfj =bb=fj Þ2 þ 4xj

where a is the directional factor, Kf the cutting force coefficient,
G(o) the real part of relative FRF between tool and workpiece, and
o the chatter frequency. Depending on the sign of a, critical depth
of cut is determined by the minimum negative real part (G(o)) of
FRF or the maximum positive real part. Without loss of generality,
The real part of F0(b) can be expressed as
1 gðbÞ
G0 ðbÞ ¼ : ð5Þ
k0 gðbÞ2 þ hðbÞ2
The objective of chatter suppression is to maximize the
minimum of G0(b). All TMDs are designed with identical mass,
and mass ratio m is usually given prior to designing a TMD

m1 mj mN
xj
k1 c1 kj cj kN cN

m0

x0

k0 F sin ω t c0

Fig. 1. Regenerative chatter effect in turning. Fig. 2. SDOF structure with multiple TMDs.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
836 Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842

Table 1
Definition of non-dimensional parameters.

TMD (j¼1, y, N) Main structure

Mass ratio Damping ratio Frequency ratio Natural frequency Frequency ratio Damping ratio Natural frequency

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

mj ¼ mj/m0 xj ¼ cj =2 kj mj fj ¼ oj/o0 oj ¼ kj =mj b ¼ o/o0 x0 ¼ c0 =2 k0 m0 o0 ¼ k0 =m0

Fig. 3. Comparison of objective function (J) among real part based, magnitude based (HN), and H2 tuning for a single TMD system with m ¼ 5%. (a) Damping ¼0%,
(b) damping¼ 10%.

Fig. 4. Plot of J as a function of fj and xj with m ¼ 5% and x0 ¼0 (N ¼ 1). Fig. 5. Minimum of optimum J using the real part based tuning for different x0
(x0 ¼ 0%, 2%, 5%, 10%).

because of space restriction for added mass on the machine. The

parameters that remain to be optimized are frequency (i.e.
stiffness kj of each TMD since m1 ¼ m2 ¼    ¼ mj ) and damping
ratios of each TMD (i.e. x1, y, xj, y, xn, j ¼1, 2, y, N). The objec-
tive function J can be defined proportional to G0(b),
gðbÞ
Jðb,VÞ ¼ , ð6Þ
gðbÞ2 þ hðbÞ2
where, V ¼{f1, x1,y, fj, xj,y, fN, xN }, j ¼1, 2, y, N.
The task of optimization is to shrink the negative real part of
FRF for chatter resistance, i.e. maximize the minimum of the
objective function J. The minimax numerical method as proposed
by Zuo and Nayfeh [19] is employed to identify stiffness and
damping ratio of each TMD through maximizing the minimum
real part instead of minimizing the magnitude of FRF for chatter
avoidance. Details of the minimax method can be found in [20],
and only its brief application to tuning of dampers is given as
follows.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842 837

The following algorithm of minimax pushes J towards zero
(J-0), identifies the optimal frequency ratios and damping ratios
of N TMDs. Hence there are 2N variables.
Objective: max{min(J(b, V))} (i.e. push the negative real part of
FRF towards zero)
Design variables: V¼{f1, x1, y, fj, xj, y, fN, xN}, j ¼1, 2, y, N
(1) Choose initial values V0 ¼{(fj)0, (xj)0}, j¼ 1, 2,yN, which are
selected to be the same for all TMDs. The initial values can
be selected by tuning stiffness and damping of a single TMD
to achieve the maximum real part of FRF as suggested by
Sims [16].
(2) Search direction: discretize J (Eq. (6)) by varying excitation
frequency ratio b around resonance, as the TMDs
influence J only in this narrow zone. Identify dl at which
J(dl, Vl) are close to the minimum of J within a given
tolerance e:
Ie ¼ fl9ðJðdl ,Vl ÞminJðb,Vl ÞÞ r e, l A Ig:
Compute gradient rJ with respect to xj and fj for all
points in Ie and create a convex hull conv(rJ). Solve a
constrained linear least square problem to obtain the search
direction
S ¼ arg min:d:, d A convðrJÞ:

Table 2
The effect of number of TMDs on objective function J with m ¼5% for an undamped main structure (x0 ¼ 0).

Number of TMDs N 1 2 3 5 10 30 50

Minimum J  2.703  2.348  2.202  2.073  1.956  1.861  1.836

Improvement against single TMD — 13% 19% 23% 28% 31% 32%

Fig. 6. Robustness analysis of the multiple TMD system for m ¼5% and x0 ¼0. Uncertainties are assumed to be independent and to satisfy a normal distribution. (a) Effect of
the TMDs stiffness uncertainties (mean value 0, standard deviation 15%), (b) effect of the TMDs stiffness uncertainties (mean value 0, standard deviation 7.5%), (c) effect of
the TMDs damping uncertainties (mean value 0, standard deviation 15%) and (d) effect of the input parameter uncertainties (mean value 0, standard deviation 15%).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
838 Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842

For an arbitrary set GCI, the convex hull can be defined having an objective function approaching zero (J-0), which
as [20] indicates infinite rigidity.
8 9
< X
r X
r =
convðGÞ ¼ X ¼ aj Xj 9Xj A G; aj Z 0, aj ¼ 1,r ¼ 1,2,. . . : 4.1. Single TMD design results
: ;
j¼1 j¼1

(3) If 99S99 is small enough, terminate the optimization algo-
rithm. Otherwise continue with the next step.
(4) Increase the variables by g, and solve a one-dimensional
optimization to determine the optimum g that maximizes
the function
minJðd,Vl þ gSÞ:
(5) Let Vl + 1 ¼Vl + gS, l ¼l +1, go to (2).
4. Non-dimensional sensitivity analysis of TMD parameters
There are several design principles that improve damping of a
flexible mode through tuned mass dampers. The traditional
approach is to reduce magnitude of FRF at resonance frequency,
but the minimum real part of the mode is targeted here to reduce
chatter. The most optimal chatter resistance corresponds to
Using the non-dimensional parameters listed in Table 1, perfor-
mance of tuning by targeting real part of FRF against its magnitude
(HN) and H2 is compared in Fig. 3. The objective function is 34% and
27% larger in the real part based optimization in comparison with
magnitude based tuning (x0 ¼0% and x0 ¼10%), which yields higher
chatter free axial depth of cut as indicated by Eq. (1).
The sensitivities of TMD performance to additional design
parameters are also investigated using non-dimensional analysis.
The sensitivities of frequency and damping ratios of the TMD on
objective function are shown in Fig. 4. The tuned damper can be
designed to have damping ratio between 2% and 20% in practice.
Natural frequency of the tuned damper is never equal to the
mode’s resonance frequency, but it is always greater in order to
shrink real part of FRF. This is achieved by creating positive real
part for TMD at a frequency where the structure’s real part is
negative minimum. However, when multiple TMDs are used,
natural frequencies of the TMDs may spread above and below the

Fig. 7. Experimental set-up and structural mode to be damped (o0 ¼ 315 Hz, x0 ¼2.76%, k0 ¼ 59.5 N/mm, m0 ¼ 15.2 kg) ( undeformed shape). (a) Experimental
fixture mounted on a lathe turret, (b) measured FRF at the tool tip in feed direction and (c) mode shape of 315 Hz.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842 839

Fig. 8. Experimental comparison of a single TMD and three TMDs applied: (a) magnitude of the FRF and (b) real part of the FRF.

natural mode of the structure. Optimal values of damping ratio Table 3

and frequency ratio (i.e. stiffness) of a single TMD are coupled to Optimum fj and xj of three TMDs for damping 315 Hz mode (j¼ 1, 2, 3).
achieve optimum objective function.
TMD 1 TMD 2 TMD 3
Simulations indicate that increased mass of the TMD does not
affect objective function proportionally, and a typical mass ratio fj 0.987 1.077 1.184
range m E1–5% is sufficient regardless of main structure’s xj 6.29% 6.76% 7.24%
damping ratio (x0), see Fig. 5. Furthermore, adding larger mass
to the machine tool structure is not desirable in practice.

Table 4
4.2. Effect of number of dampers Cutting conditions for the chatter stability simulation.

It is assumed that all tuned dampers have the same mass, but Insert Workpiece
tunable stiffness and damping values. The effect of number of
Material Carbide Material Steel AISI 1045
TMDs is shown in Table 2 for a sample undamped structure. Total Nose radius 0.0315 mm Diameter 41 mm
mass of the tuned dampers is set to 5% of structure’s modal mass. Inclination angle 51 Overhang 90 mm
It is shown that objective function improves as N increases, but it Rake angle 51 Tangential cutting 2766 MPa
is not significantly affected after adding three or more TMDs. force coefficient
Cutting edge angle 951 Radial cutting force 1544 MPa
Therefore, selection of the best number of TMDs involves
coefficient
choosing a good balance between cost and gained chatter
resistance while keeping added total mass always the same.

4.3. Robustness of the TMD design

Since it is impossible to manufacture a TMD to match the

design exactly, robustness of damping is simulated with indepen-
dent parameter uncertainties on all TMDs and input parameters.
The uncertainties are assumed to satisfy a normal distribution in
order to make the simulation more realistic. As tuning of stiffness
and damping could be implemented independently, robustnesses
against TMD stiffness error, TMD damping ratio error, and input
target mode parameter error are analyzed separately; 10,000
simulations are run for each case (N¼1, 2, 5, 10), and robustness
curves are represented by cumulative distribution functions,
which denote probability of the event that J is larger than or
equal to the value on X-axis. It is found that J is very sensitive to
stiffness variations when TMDs are employed (Fig. 6(a) and (b)),
while J is less sensitive to uncertainties in damping ratio (Fig. 6(c)).
Robustness against stiffness variations starts to reduce fast after
N¼5. Fig. 6(d) shows that multiple dampers are more robust to
changes in input dynamic parameters. In short, multiple TMDs
need more accurate tuning of stiffness and natural frequency of
each TMD, and the system is more robust to changes in damping
and input dynamic parameters after fulfilling this condition. Fig. 9. Stability chart comparison for different tunings.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
840 Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842

5. Experimental verification
Performances of single and multiple TMDs are verified on a
specially designed fixture of a CNC turning machine (Fig. 7).
Measured FRF at the tool tip exhibits three distinct modes at 107
and 233 Hz, which originate from the machine tool structure, and
315 Hz contributed by the fixture. Unlike the 107 Hz suspension
mode, the 315 Hz mode with 15.2 kg modal mass contributes to
relative vibrations between the workpiece and tool in the feed (i.e.
regenerative chip) direction; hence it is selected as a target mode
to be damped. Fig. 8
Three identical, single DOF TMDs are designed with a total
mass ratio of 4.2%. The TMD contains a high density mass block
cantilevered to the fixture with a slender beam. The mass can be

Fig. 10. Vibrations of the tool in the feed rate direction for the cutting condition a¼ 1 mm, n ¼2000 rpm, and f ¼0.1 mm/rev: (a) cutting test without TMD, (b) cutting test
with a single TMD and (c) cutting test with three TMDs.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842
moved along the beam to adjust stiffness, and damping is varied
by changing screw resistance at the mass–cantilever beam
connection. The TMDs are placed at the fixture and along the
direction of vibration, where the mode has the highest amplitude.
5.1. Effect of TMD parameters
A single TMD is designed with a mass ratio of 1.4% (m1 ¼0.213
kg). The damping and frequency ratios are identified as x1 ¼7.80%
and f1 ¼1.051 (i.e. o1 ¼1.051  315E331 Hz) by applying the
minimax optimization procedure. The magnitude of FRF is
reduced from 0.313 to 0.156 mm/N, which corresponds to
doubling of dynamic stiffness and reduction of the forced
vibrations. The negative peak of real part of FRF is increased from
G0 ¼  0.181 mm/N to G0 ¼ 0.077 mm/N, which corresponds to
2.4 fold increase in chatter free axial depth of cuts.
Next, three TMDs are designed, each having a mass ratio of
1.4% (mj ¼0.213 kg) and a total added mass of 4.2% (0.639 kg). The
optimum frequency (fj) and damping (xj) ratios for each TMD have
been identified as listed in Table 3. Magnitude of the target mode
is further reduced from 0.313 to 0.098 mm/N, and the minimum
Fig. 11. Vibrations of the tool in the feed rate direction for the cutting condition a ¼4 mm, n¼ 2000 rpm, and f ¼0.1 mm/rev: (a) cutting test with a single TMD and (b)
cutting test with three TMDs.
841
real part of the target mode is increased from G0 ¼ 0.181 mm/N
to G0 ¼  0.041 mm/N, which corresponds to 4.4 fold increase in
chatter free depth of cuts to the target mode of 315 Hz.
5.2. Chatter stability tests
Chatter stability is predicted in turning AISI 1045 steel with a
tool and cutting force coefficients as listed in Table 4. Stability
lobes consider only the 315 Hz mode in order to illustrate the
effect of TMDs on chatter resistance. Four stability lobes are
plotted by considering undamped fixture, damped with single
TMD of m ¼1.4%, damped with single TMD of m ¼4.2% and three
TMDs in Fig. 9, where the case of single TMD with m ¼4.2% is
simulated. The minimum depth of cut is increased from 1.0 to
2.5 mm with a single TMD of m ¼1.4%, 3.9 mm with a single TMD
of m ¼4.2%, and 4.6 mm can be reached when three TMDs are
used.
Series of turning tests have been conducted to validate the
performance of TMDs on chatter stability. The overhang of the
AISI 1045 workpiece bar is kept short in order to keep it
significantly rigid against the modes at the tool tip. In order to
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
842 Y. Yang et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 50 (2010) 834–842
avoid exciting the 107 and 233 Hz modes, which became more
flexible after damping of the 315 Hz mode by TMDs, cutting
conditions are selected to excite the 315 Hz mode only. Vibrations
are measured with an accelerometer attached to the fixture.
Cutting test results conducted at a¼1 mm depth of cut, n ¼2000
rpm spindle speed, and f¼0.1 mm/rev feed rate are shown in
Fig. 10. The system chattered severely when the fixture was not
damped at 326 Hz with a vibration amplitude of 2.0g. The chatter
disappeared when turning under the same cutting condition with
a single TMD and three TMDs. Vibration amplitude was reduced
from 2.0g to 0.14g with a single TMD. Vibration amplitude was
reduced to almost air cutting (0.1g) when three TMDs were used.
Additional cutting tests have been conducted by increasing
depth of cut from a¼1 mm to a¼4 mm at the same spindle speed
(n¼2000 rpm) and feed rate (f¼ 0.1 mm/rev)). The single TMD case
experienced chatter, whereas the fixture damped with three TMDs
was chatter free as shown in Fig. 11. Other dominant modes of the
machine, which became more flexible after damping the fixture
mode, can also be damped with the proposed damping strategy.
6. Conclusions
Machine tools are generally damped using mass dampers
tuned to natural frequency of dominant modes aligned with the
principal direction of cutting. Such a strategy reduces magnitude
of FRFs at natural frequency, which also reduces forced vibrations.
However, chatter stability is most sensitive to the minimum
negative real part of FRF, which is located above natural frequency
of the machine. This paper confirms that chatter free axial depth
of cuts can be improved by several folds using mass dampers
tuned to maximize negative real part of FRFs as suggested by Sims
[16]. It is shown that further significant gains can be achieved
using more but identical TMDs without increasing total mass of
the dampers noticeably. Optimum identification of TMD stiffness
and damping parameters have been carried out with a numerical
minimax method, which is more robust to initial conditions than
commonly used gradient methods. The proposed damping
strategy can be extended to milling operations by considering
the chatter stability law of periodic systems [21].
Acknowledgements
The tuned dampers were designed by Dr. Wang Min from
Beijing University of Technology. This research is supported by
NSERC Discovery Grant.
References
[1] Y. Altintas, M. Weck, Chatter stability in metal cutting and grinding, Annals of
CIRP 53 (2) (2004) 619–642 (Key Note Paper of STC-M).
[2] J.P. Den Hartog, in: Mechanical Vibrations, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New
York and London, 1934.
[3] T. Asami, O. Nishihara, A.M. Baz, Analytical solutions to HN and H2
optimization of dynamic vibration absorbers attached to damped linear
systems, Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 124 (2002) 284–295.
[4] G.B. Warburton, E.O. Ayorinde, Optimum absorber parameters for simple
systems, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 8 (1980) 197–217.
[5] R. Rana, T.T. Soong, Parametric study and simplified design of tuned mass
dampers, Engineering Structures 20 (3) (1998) 193–204.
[6] L. Zuo, S.A. Nayfeh, The two-degree-of-freedom tuned-mass damper for
suppression of single-mode vibration under random and harmonic excitation,
Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 128 (2006) 56–65.
[7] T. Igusa, K. Xu, Vibration control using multiple tuned mass dampers, Journal
of Sound and Vibration 175 (4) (1994) 491–503.
[8] A.S. Joshi, R.S. Jangid, Optimum parameters of multiple tuned mass dampers
for base-excited damped systems, Journal of Sound and Vibration 202 (5)
(1997) 657–667.
[9] L. Zuo, S.A. Nayfeh, Optimization of the individual stiffness and damping
parameters in multiple-tuned-mass-damper Systems, Journal of Vibration
and Acoustics 127 (2005) 77–83.
[10] H.N. Li, X.L. Ni, Optimization of non-uniformly distributed multiple tuned
mass damper, Journal of Sound and Vibration 308 (2007) 80–97.
[11] S.A. Tobias, W. Fishwick, Theory of Regenerative Chatter, The Engineer,
London, 1958.
[12] J. Tlusty, M. Polacek, The stability of machine tools against self excited
vibrations in machining, in: Proceedings of the International Research in
Production Engineering, ASME, 1963, pp. 465–474.
[13] E.I. Rivin, H.L. Kang, Enhancement of dynamic stability of cantilever tooling
structures, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 32 (1992)
539–561.
[14] Y.S. Tarng, J.Y. Kao, E.C. Lee, Chatter suppression in turning operations with a
tuned vibration absorber, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 105 (1)
(2000) 55–60.
[15] A. Rashid, C.M. Nicolescu, Design and implementation of tuned viscoelastic
dampers for vibration control in milling, International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 48 (2008) 1036–1053.
[16] N.D. Sims, Vibration absorbers for chatter suppression: a new analytical
tuning methodology, Journal of Sound and Vibration 301 (2007) 592–607.
[17] J. Saffury, E. Altus, Optimized chatter resistance of viscoelastic turning bars,
Journal of Sound and Vibration 324 (2009) 26–39.
[18] Y. Altintas, in: Manufacturing Automation, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 2000.
[19] L. Zuo, S.A. Nayfeh, Minimax optimization of multi-degree-of-freedom tuned-
mass dampers, Journal of Sound and Vibration 272 (2004) 893–908.
[20] V.F. Dem’yanov, V.N. Malozemov, in: Introduction to Minimax, John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd., New York, 1974.
[21] Y. Altintas, E. Budak, Analytical prediction of chatter stability lobes in milling,
Annals of CIRP 44 (1) (1995) 357–362.