Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

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

Approximation to the dynamics of transported parts in a vibratory

bowl feeder
J.A. Vilán Vilán a, A. Segade Robleda a, P.J. García Nieto b,*, C. Casqueiro Placer a
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Vigo, Campus de Lagoas-Marcosende, 36200 Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain
b
Department of Mathematics, University of Oviedo, C/Calvo Sotelo s/n, 33007 Oviedo (Asturias), Spain

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

Article history: The most typical procedure for creating flows of parts aimed at feeding a production unit is
Received 25 January 2008 to use a vibratory bowl feeder. Feed rate and the capacity to move parts and to modify
Received in revised form 1 April 2009 operational status in these feeders depend on a wide range of parameters, which, nonethe-
Accepted 7 July 2009
less, can be classified as one of three types: dynamic, geometric and electromagnetic. This
Available online 4 August 2009
work describes an approximate model for predicting the behaviour of a part in a vibratory
bowl following a modification of parameters in any of the above three groups. The analysis
Keywords:
is simplified by using numerical solutions obtained using a simple spreadsheet, which
Feeding
Theoretical and numerical modelling
makes the procedure accessible to a wide range of users. Our results are presented in
Dynamics the form of a dynamic simulation using specific software. Finally, conclusions of this study
Vibration are exposed.
Orientation Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Production processes that need to receive specifically positioned parts from one or more feeder flows are common. These
feeder flows are created by what are known as dynamic feeders, which are typically vibrating or electromechanical systems
that first position parts, then channel them into a production process. Dynamic feeders are key elements in production pro-
cesses, whose main aim is to enhance profitability by performing repetitive tasks. The most common design for dynamic
feeders is a bowl with a spiral track driven by electromagnetic vibration [1]. The parts are forced up the spiral track from
the base of the bowl. En route the parts meet with obstacles that cause parts travelling in a certain position to fall back into
the bowl.
A number of studies have endeavoured to optimise knowledge in relation to vibratory bowl feeders, based on approaches
that use a range of perspectives. Some of these studies describe algorithms based on the geometry of the part and physical
parameters that computationally analyse part behaviour in the feeder. Such studies include those by Sudsang and Kavraki
[2], Mirtich et al. [3], Berretty et al. [4,6], and Berretty [5].
There are also a number of studies of classical dynamic analyses of vibratory movement. This group—within which this
article corresponds—includes publications by Reznik et al. [7], Huang and Mason [8], Baksys and Puodziuniene [9], Wolfste-
iner and Pfeiffer [10], Lim [11], Paleta Hernández [12], Moll and Erdmann [13], and Han and Lee [14]. The best known ap-
proach in classical dynamics is a PhD Thesis [12]. This work only studies numerical solution for differential equations,
with a smaller number of variables. The analytical solution of the governing differential equations is a novel contribution
of our work. The article endeavours to provide a few simple expressions that incorporate—in addition to dynamic and

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 985 103417; fax: +34 985 103354.
E-mail address: lato@orion.ciencias.uniovi.es (P.J. García Nieto).

0094-114X/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2009.07.004
2218 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

Nomenclature

a mean electromagnet length

AJ, BJ Fourier coefficients
B helical pitch
a track slope
FA damping force
FE elastic force
FM magnetic force
Fm magnetic force per unit mass
FR frictional force
/ phase-shift angle
g gravity acceleration (9.81 m/s2)
c spring rotation angle
c0 spring at-rest angle
H unit at-rest height
Ix, Iy inertia momenta in x and y directions, respectively
/ drive rotation angle
K spring elastic constant
L electromagnet part maximum separation
M mass of bowl + parts + tools
Mp mass of a part
l0 air magnetic permeability
lr relative permeability
lf friction coefficient
N normal reaction
Ne number of spires
O reference system origin
xn system natural frequency
x power supply frequency
Q degree of damping
R damping
Rb coil resistance
Rc critical damping
Rp track radius
Rr spring radius
S magnet cross-section
t time
T period for Fourier analysis
u electromagnet part separation
V0 maximum voltage supply
Z vibration amplitude

geometric parameters for the parts and bowl—both electromagnetic parameters and the geometric parameters that charac-
terise the electromagnetic drive.
Although there are other ways to produce vibration (such as the piezoceramic actuator proposed by Choi and Lee [15]),
the most typical approach is to use an electromagnet. We demonstrate the characteristic parameters of an electromagnet
and calculate force in accordance with Fair and Bolton [16] and Kim et al. [17]. Note that the other basic element of the elec-
tromagnetic actuator, namely, the leaf spring [18,19], will be assumed to be an elastic constant for the purposes of this
research.
Feeding a workstation also presupposes certain additional conditions requiring complementary equipment. A system
concept based on different configurations and several items of interrelated equipment (Fig. 1) is the ideal formula for
responding to all kinds of demands. This article, however, focuses exclusively on the bowl and drive.

2. Vibration

A vibratory action system is based on the operational principle of generating vibration—normally spiral—in the direction
of the route to be followed by parts inside a bowl. The drive is basically composed of an electromagnet and leaf springs. The
electromagnet has a fixed part, a moving part, an electrical circuit and a coil. The fixed part of the electromagnet is attached
to the base of the system, the moving part is attached to the bowl support, and the base and support are joined by elastic
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2219

Fig. 1. Dynamic feeder system.

elements. Electrical current passing through the coil in the fixed part of the electromagnet creates a magnetic flow. By cre-
ating a magnetic field in the air, this flow causes an attraction between the fixed and moving parts of the electromagnet.

2.1. Spiral motion

The electromagnet generates linear vibration, whereas spiral movement is required. A helix is composed of circular move-
ment and linear movement, as can be appreciated in the equations:
8
< X ¼ Rr  cosð/Þ
>
Y ¼ Rr  sinð/Þ ð1Þ
>
:
Z ¼B/
The elastic elements transform the linear movement of the electromagnet into a combined circular–linear movement. This
transformation is achieved thanks to the angle formed between the springs and the vertical direction (Fig. 2).
For the purpose of our calculations it is assumed that the springs move like a fixed rod articulated at the base. This
assumption is based on the fact that there is no point in taking spring bending and torsion into consideration as they are
minimal, and would only would complicate the analysis without significantly improving the results.

Fig. 2. Springs at rest forming an angle c0 with the vertical.

2220 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

Fig. 3. Spring’s typical parameters.

In the drive resting position, an angle c0 is formed between the springs and the vertical, and a separation H exists between
the bowl base and bowl support (Fig. 3). Electrical current circulating through the coil creates a magnetic field and the two
parts of the electromagnet are attracted to each other. The springs rotate through an angle c with respect to the resting posi-
tion, and height H is reduced by a value Z. Maximum displacement is produced when the fixed and moving parts come into
contact. When the springs rotate with respect to the vertical, the bowl support rotates an angle u in the horizontal plane with
respect to the resting position—or, what amounts to the same, with respect to the base. Even at its maximum value, this an-
gle u is very small, since the separation between the electromagnet parts is also very small (even for larger units it does not
generally exceed 3 mm). Hence, the arch depicted by this angle can be approximated through the chord, and so we can ex-
press the cathetus opposite the angle c0 + c as the sum of the chord of u and of the cathetus in the resting position.
The cathetus C0 at rest is calculated from c0 and H:
C 0 ¼ H  tgðc0 Þ ð2Þ
Thus, the cathetus C, for a rotated angle c is:
C ¼ H  tgðc0 Þ þ Rr  u ð3Þ
where Rr is the radius to the point at which the springs are attached to the bowl support.
The tangent of the angle c0 + c can be calculated as:
H  tgðc0 Þ þ Rr  u
tgðc0 þ cÞ ¼ ð4Þ
HZ
Thus, a value for u is obtained by means of:
tgðc0 þ cÞ  ðH  ZÞ  H  tgðc0 Þ
u¼ ð5Þ
Rr
The angle c can also be expressed in terms of the vertical displacement Z by considering the angle and the resting height. This
work is developed on the assumption that the dimension h is preserved during the movement of the springs. The value of h is
as follows:
H
h¼ ð6Þ
cos c0
Once the springs have rotated through an angle c and the bowl support has lowered a distance Z, the following relationship
can be established:
H
H  Z ¼ h  cosðc0 þ cÞ ¼  cosðc0 þ cÞ ð7Þ
cos c0
Obtaining the value for c and substituting it in Eq. (5), the equation for the helix is obtained:
  
c0 Þ
tg arc cos ðHZÞcosð
H
 ðH  ZÞ  H  tgðc0 Þ
u¼ ðRadÞ ð8Þ
Rr
A simplified expression can be used given that the angles c and u and the displacement Z are very small. Assuming that c0 is
zero, because of practical values are small, Eq. (5) can be reduced. Substituting the value for c, the following expression is
obtained with a lower degree of approximation for the angle u:
   
c0 Þ
tg arccos ðHZÞcosð
H
 c0  ðH  ZÞ
u¼ ðRadÞ ð9Þ
Rr
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2221

To check the goodness-of-fit of this approximation, the angle u can be calculated using the two proposed forms. The differ-
ence between results is perfectly acceptable.

2.2. Magnetic force

To this point only the spiral movement that takes place in the unit is described; however, this movement needs to be
vibratory. Analysing the magnetic force generated in the electromagnet that is the origin of the movement, the force of
attraction between the parts of the electromagnet can be calculated. Magnetic force is calculated by means of the derivative
of the magnetic energy of the system.

N2e  S  l0  ðV 0  sinðx  tÞÞ2

FM ¼  2 ð10Þ
2  R2b  la þ u
r

where x = 2pf, and where f is the network frequency (50 Hz in Europe, and 60 Hz in USA and its area of influence). The force
of the electromagnet can be controlled by varying the values of the different terms that appear in the above expression.

2.3. Vibration

Once the excitation force is known, we can obtain an approximate model of the vibration that takes place in a vibratory
drive unit. The idea is to obtain a qualitative perspective on the movement experienced by the bowl so as to understand the
movement of the parts within the bowl. In order to perform this analysis, a diagram of the system is created (Fig. 4).
The mass M represents the bowl, the parts inside the bowl, the bowl support and any other mass resting on the springs.
The springs are characterised by an elastic constant K. The configuration of these springs—formed of a series of laminates
that produce friction—would indicate the suitability of considering a damping coefficient R. The separation between the elec-
tromagnet parts, denominated L, corresponds to the maximum amplitude of the vibration. Also represented is the origin of
the variable Z, which will be used in the positive sense.
Three forces are also represented—but not gravity, which is cancelled by the equilibrium resulting from the elastic force
arising from the initial deformation of the springs. These forces are listed as follows:

 Magnetic force: The value for this force is as calculated in Eq. (10) and its sense is always the positive sense defined for Z.
According to the diagram above, the distance between the electromagnet parts is L  Z. Consequently, the expression for
magnetic force is:

N2e  S  l0  ðV 0  sinðx  tÞÞ2

FM ¼  2 ð11Þ
2  R2b  la þ L  Z
r

 Elastic force: This force resulting from the deformation of the springs is proportional to the deformation. It may be positive
or negative in sense, depending on whether the deformation is negative or positive, respectively.

FE ¼ K  Z ð12Þ

 Damping force: damping is considered proportional to velocity, and occurs in the opposite direction to velocity. Since
velocity sense may be positive or negative, damping can also be positive or negative.

Fig. 4. Drive unit.

2222 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

F A ¼ R  Z_ ð13Þ
Applying the Newton’s Second Law and substituting the force values the differential equation for vertical vibration is ob-
tained as follows:

N2  S  l0  ðV 0  sinðx  tÞÞ2
M  Z€ þ R  Z_ þ K  Z ¼ e  2 ð14Þ
2  R2b  la þ L  Z
r

The following values are considered:

2 K
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi xn ¼ M.
 Natural frequency of the system:
 Critical damping: Rc ¼ 2  K  M .
 Degree of damping: Q ¼ RRc .

A new expression is obtained:

2 2
N  S  l0  ðV 0  sinðx  tÞÞ
Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼ e  2 ð15Þ
M  2  R2b  la þ L  Z
r

A simpler relationship is then obtained:

N2e  S  l0  V 20 2 2
F m ðZÞ ¼  2  ðsinðx  tÞÞ ¼ F 0 ðZÞ  ðsinðx  tÞÞ ð16Þ
2 a
M  2  Rb  l þ L  Z
r

This gives rise to the expression:

Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼ F 0 ðZÞ  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2 ð17Þ

This is the best known differential equation form for vibration, except that F0 is dependent on Z. We describe an approxima-
tion to the solution for this equation in two stages—firstly, the solution for an equation of the same type but without force
dependence with respect to Z will be obtained and then the values for Z that satisfy the complete solution will be found.
Let the following be the value for F0:

N2e  S  l0  V 20
F0 ¼ ð18Þ
M  2  R2b
The equation is resolved thus:

Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼ F 0  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2 ð19Þ

The solution is composed of the solution for the homogeneous equation plus a particular solution for the complete equation.
The homogenous equation is obtained by setting the second term to zero:

Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼ 0 ð20Þ

This is an equation for free oscillation with damping whose solution is known and has been described in any number of
manuals:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
ðQ  Z 0  xn þ Z_ 0 Þ2 þ Z 20  x2n  ð1  Q 2 Þ Q x t
Zh ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi e n
 sin xn  1  Q 2  t þ /
xn  1  Q 2 ð21Þ
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z 0  xn  1  Q 2
/ ¼ arctg
Q  Z 0  xn
The initial position—and also the phase-shift—will be considered to be Z0 = 0, and so the homogenous solution is:
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
Z_ 0
Zh ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  eQxn t  sin xn  1  Q 2  t ð22Þ
xn  1  Q 2
As this is a solution that tends to zero as t increases, it is a transient event that bridges the vibration amplitude when the unit
is started up. We now describe the particular solution for the complete equation.
The force produced by the vibration—which is periodic—varies according to the square of a sine. The frequency value is
50 Hz, representing the electrical network frequency. To obtain the solution to this equation, periodic force is decomposed in
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2223

sines using the Fourier series. The solution for this equation when the force is harmonic is well known, and so all that is re-
quired is to superimpose the solutions for each term in the series. The Fourier series takes the following form:
    
A0 X t t
FðtÞ ¼ F 0  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2 ¼ þ AK  cos 2  p  K  þ BK  sin 2  p  K  ð23Þ
2 K
T T

where the coefficients AK and BK are:

Z T   Z 0:02  
2 t 2 t
AJ ¼  FðtÞ  cos 2  p  J   dt ¼  F 0  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2  cos 2  p  J   dt
T0 T 0:02 0 T
Z T   Z 0:02   ð24Þ
2 t 2 t
BJ ¼  FðtÞ  sin 2  p  J   dt ¼  F 0  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2  sin 2  p  J   dt
T 0 T 0:02 0 T

Calculating these coefficients, it is found that only A0 and A2 are different from zero. Their values are:

F0
A0 ¼ F 0 ; A2 ¼  ð25Þ
2
The following Fourier series for the function are obtained:
 
F0 F0 t
FðtÞ ¼ F 0  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2 ¼   cos 2  p  2  ð26Þ
2 2 T
Taking into account that the inverse of the period is the frequency, that x = 2pf, and that the cosine is equal to the sine with a
phase-shift of p/2 radians, this expression can be written in terms of angular velocity as follows:
F0 F0  p
FðtÞ ¼ F 0  ðsinðx  tÞÞ2 ¼   sin 2  x  t þ ð27Þ
2 2 2
Therefore, it is formed of a constant element and of an harmonic element that vary according to double the power frequency.
Hence, the equation to be resolved is:
F0 F0  p
Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼   sin 2  x  t þ ð28Þ
2 2 2
The solution required is the result of superimposing the solutions for the two equations that follow:
F0
Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼
2 ð29Þ
F0  p
Z€ þ 2  Q  xn  Z_ þ x2n  Z ¼   sin 2  x  t þ
2 2
The solution for the first equation should be a constant, given that it represents a spring subject to the action of a constant
force. The derivatives of Z will therefore be null.
Incorporated in the differential equation, a solution is obtained as follows:
F0 F0
x2n  Z 1 ¼ ) Z1 ¼ ð30Þ
2 2  x2n
The second equation in (29) refers to forced and dampened oscillation with an harmonic excitation force. Its solution is
known:

F0  p 
Z2 ¼  ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
s
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
 2 2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn
ð31Þ
2  Q  2xxn
/¼  2
1  2xxn

The solution is the sum of Z1 and Z2:

F0 F0  p 
Z¼  s
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð32Þ
2  x2n  2 2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn

Vibration frequency is double the network frequency. The homogeneous solution disappears after a period of time, leaving
the particular solution, and so from now on this paper will focus on the latter.
2224 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

At this point we need to take account of the influence of the separation between the electromagnet parts on the magnetic
force. In the above solution, therefore, force dependency with respect to Z is introduced, and at the very least, an approxi-
mation to the variation in this variable Z is obtained:

F0 F0  p 
Z¼  2  s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  / ð33Þ
 2 2 h i2  2 2
2  x2n  la þ L  Z
r 2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn  la þ L  Z
r

This is an approximation that aims to solve the equation symbolically. The assumed error will be discussed below, when
dynamic tests using specific software will be performed in order to confirm the accuracy of the results. From the above,
the following third degree equation is obtained:

Z 3  2  A  Z 2 þ A2  Z  T ¼ 0 ð34Þ
based on the following notation:
F0 F0  p 
T¼ 
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
s
2  x2n  2 2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn
ð35Þ
 
a
A¼ þL
lr
This equation has three solutions: one always real and the other two real or complex depending on the value taken by T, a
value that varies with t. As an approximation to the solution, a variation in Z can be assumed, and a numerical method can be
used in order to locate the roots of the equation that approximates this assumption. In this way a combination of the three
solutions is obtained. As an initial approximation to the iterative process, the following equation will be used:
F0
Z 00 ¼ L  ½sinð2  x  t  /Þ2 ! FðZÞ ¼  2
a
lr þLZ
FðZÞ FðZÞ  p 
! Z0 ¼ 
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
s ð36Þ
2  x2n  2 2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn

Attributing values to t, this initial approximation is represented in Table 1.

2.4. Numerical solution

Using Newton’s method for obtaining the solution for a function, we look for the solution closest to the proposed approx-
imation. The function for which solutions are sought is:

F0 F0  p 
f ðZÞ ¼ Z   2 þ ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
s
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  / ¼ 0
 2 2 h i2  2 2
2  x2n  la þ L  Z
r 2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn  la þ L  Z
r

ð37Þ
The Newton-Raphson iterative process starts with the proposed value Z0, with the values for Zi calculated as follows:

f ðZ i1 Þ
Z i ¼ Z i1  ð38Þ
f 0 ðZ i1 Þ
The process ends when the following condition is satisfied, that is to say, when the difference between:
jZ i  Z i1 j  e ðstop criterionÞ ð39Þ

Table 1
Initial approximation calculations.

t Z00 F(Z) Z0
0 0.00100 312.719723 0.00034
0.0001 0.00099 311.2641202 0.00030
Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2225

Table 2
Iterative process.
0
t Z0 f(Z0) f (Z0) Z1 Z0  Z1 Etc.
0 0.00034 0.0002548 0.871194 0.000047 0.000292 Etc.
0.0001 0.00030 0.0002263 0.896163 0.000044 0.000252 Etc.
Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.

where e is the maximum permissible error or stopping tolerance. Normally, a stopping tolerance of 104 is enough to reach
the wished accuracy.
This process is programmed in a spreadsheet, as illustrated in Table 2, with permissible error established as:
Convergence is obtained for i = 7 iterations. The solution is depicted in Fig. 5 using the values from Table 3.
This solution qualitatively approximates the vibration produced in a drive unit, with an amplitude that, in general, is sim-
ilar to a sine, although sharper, with the transit from Z = 0 to L faster than if this were a true sine. Since frequency of the
vibration is double that of the power supply, to avoid resonance problems we need to focus on double the network fre-
quency, which should be at one remove from the natural frequency.
The variation in magnetic force can be obtained that varies with the amplitude of the vibration. Once an approximation to
amplitude is obtained, the velocity and the acceleration resulting from this amplitude can be obtained by calculating the
temporal derivatives of the following expression:
FðZÞ FðZÞ  p 
Z¼  s
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð40Þ
2  x2n  2 2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn

Once the variation of Z is known, the value for F(Z) for a series of values of t can be calculated. Attributing t with the pertinent
values, F(Z) is obtained and, thus, velocity and acceleration.

3. Part dynamics

The part is the main element in a dynamic feeder system, and its correct displacement is directly dependent on the meth-
od used to move the part. This section analyses how a part behaves within a bowl when under the influence of the kind of
vibration described in the previous section. Although it may not seem likely that, a priori, a part will move just in one direc-
tion, this is, in fact, precisely what happens.

0.0012

0.0010
Vibration amplitude Z (m)

0.0008

0.0006

0.0004

0.0002

0.0000

-0.0002
0 0.0025 0.005 0.0075 0.01 0.0125 0.015 0.0175 0.02
Time t (s)

Fig. 5. Vibration amplitude.

Table 3
Values used in Fig. 5.

Ne = 1500 x = 2pf f = 50 Hz xn = 2pfn fn = 102 Hz Q = 0.31477

S = 0.0025 m2 I0 ¼ VR0 ¼ 4:4 A m = 50 kg L = 0.001 m a
l ¼ 0:0021 m
r
2226 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

Fig. 6. Reference systems and forces acting on a part, and coordinates of the moving system’s origin.

In order to observe the behaviour of a part a dynamic analysis is performed with respect to a reference moving system
linked to a stretch of the bowl track, and the movement of the part with respect to this moving system is analysed. A fixed
reference system, X  Y, and a mobile reference system, X0  Y0, linked to a stretch of the bowl track (Fig. 6) are considered.
Considering the part as initially positioned at the start of the moving system, the following hypotheses are posed:

 Aerodynamic forces are ignored.

 Inelastic collisions are considered.
 Only lengthways friction is considered.

Thus, the forces that act on the part are its weight, friction, and the normal reaction (Fig. 6).
Newton’s Second Law equations for the moving system—including the inertia forces deriving from the movement of the
stretch of track as a consequence of being joined to the bowl—are as follows:

€ mobile;X
M P  €x0 ¼ F r  M P  g  sinðaÞ  M P  O 0
ð41Þ
MP  y €0 ¼ N  M P  g  cosðaÞ  M P  O € mobile;Y
0

The term O€ mobile represents acceleration of the origin of the coordinates from the moving system observed by the fixed sys-
tem. The subscripts indicate that these ones are decomposed in the X0 and Y0 directions. The subscript P is introduced in the
mass to indicate the part and to differentiate it from the total mass.
The behaviour of the forces—variable in time—featuring in the above equations is now analysed.

3.1. Inertia forces

Inertia forces arise from the acceleration transmitted by the drive unit to the bowl. The drive unit produces, as mentioned
previously, a vertical movement Z and a rotational movement u within the bowl. The approximate expression for the rela-
tionship between these two movements is given above in Eq. (9).
The Z coordinate in Eq. (9) coincides with the negative sense of the Y coordinate for the systems described, and so the sign
for Z is modified and substituted with Y. Moreover, c and c0 also have opposite signs, given that, for the slope of the track
under consideration, the springs are tilted in the opposite direction to the direction used to calculate this angle.
   
c0 Þ
tg arc cos ðHþyÞcosð
H
þ c0  ðH þ yÞ
u¼ ð42Þ
Rr
For this movement of the bowl, taking into account that both Z and u are very small, the X and Y coordinates for a given time
t of the origin of the coordinates of the moving system (Fig. 6) are:

tgðcÞ  ðH þ yÞ RP RP
x ¼ u  RP ¼  RP ¼  H  tgðcÞ þ  y  tgðcÞ
Rr Rr Rr ð43Þ
y¼y
where RP is the radius from the centre of the bowl to the track on which the part is travelling, and Rr is the radius to the point
where the springs are attached.
Deriving these coordinates obtains twice the acceleration of the origin of the coordinates of the moving system observed
by the fixed system. The components for these accelerations in the X0 and Y0 directions are now calculated:
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2227

 
R R
O €  sinðaÞ ¼ P  tgðcÞ  y
€ mov il;X ¼ €x  cosðaÞ þ y €  cosðaÞ þ y€  sinðaÞ ¼ y€  sinðaÞ þ P  tgðcÞ  cosðaÞ
0
Rr Rr
  ð44Þ
R R
€ mov il;Y ¼ €x  sinðaÞ þ y
O €  cosðaÞ ¼  P  tgðcÞ  y€  sinðaÞ þ y €  cosðaÞ  P  tgðcÞ  sinðaÞ
€  cosðaÞ ¼ y
0
Rr Rr

The variation in y is the vibration that has already been calculated in Eq. (40) with its sign changed. The values for y are
known from the previous section; alternatively, they can be calculated in a spreadsheet as previously described. Using
the same parameters as in Table 3, but Q will be 0.2646 instead of 0.31477. From the values for y the values for F(y) can
be calculated, as follows

N 2e Sl0 V 20
M2R2b
FðyÞ ¼  2 ð45Þ
a
lr þLþy

The mass M that appears in this expression refers to the whole mass that has to be moved by the drive, i.e. the bowl, all the
parts in the bowl, the tools, etc. The acceleration of the origin of the moving system for the fixed observer is:

FðyÞ  p   Rp

€ mobile;X ¼ 2x2 
O rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  sin 2x t þ  /  sin a þ  tg c  cos a
0 h   i2 h i2 2 Rr
x2n 1  2xx 2 þ 2Q 2xxn
  
€ mobile;Y FðyÞ p  RP ð46Þ
O ¼ 2x2  s ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  sin 2 x t þ  /  cos a   tg c  sin a
0
 2
2 h i2 2 Rr
x2n  1  2xxn þ 2Q 2xxn

Multiplying these accelerations by the mass for the part and changing the sign, we obtain the values for the inertia forces as:

€ mobile;X
I X 0 ¼ M P  O 0
ð47Þ
IY ¼ M P  O € mobile;Y
0 0

3.2. Frictional forces and normal reaction force

Friction and normal reaction are both reactions against the forces that produce them. The maximum friction value is the
product of the friction coefficient multiplied by the normal reaction. The normal reaction force opposes the sum of the grav-
ity component in the direction Y0 plus the inertia force in the same direction. When the inertia force is negative, the part is
pushed against the track and the normal reaction is greater than the part’s weight component; when the inertia force is po-
sitive, the normal reaction is less than the part’s weight component (zero if the inertia is greater than the weight compo-
nent). If inertia is null, then the normal reaction is equal to the weight of the part in the direction Y0. Normal reaction
can thus be expressed as follows:

If IY 0  MP  g  cosðaÞ ) N ¼ 0
ð48Þ
If IY 0 < MP  g  cosðaÞ ) N ¼ MP  g  cosðaÞ  IY 0

Frictional force opposes the sum of the gravity component in the direction X0 plus the inertia force in the same direction. It is
null if there is no contact between the part and the track, i.e. when normal reaction is zero. When there is contact between
the part and the track, the frictional force takes a maximum value equal to the product of the friction coefficient multiplied
by the normal reaction provided the sum of the inertia and the weight component in the direction X0 is greater that
this product. This is when the part moves. If the sum of the inertia plus the weight is less than the maximum frictional
force, however, this takes the value of this sum and the part does not move. Frictional force can therefore be expressed
as follows:

If N ¼ 0 ) F r ¼ 0
If N – 0 and jIX 0  M p  g  sinðaÞj < lf ) F r ¼ ðIX 0  M p  g  sinðaÞÞ ð49Þ
If N – 0 and jIX 0  M p  g  sinðaÞj  lf  N ) F r ¼ lf  N  signðIX0  Mp  g  sinðaÞÞ

3.3. Movement of the axis X0

Now that the variation in the forces involved is known, the movement of the part in the X0 direction of the moving system
can be analysed. From Eq. (41) the value for €x0 is obtained. Substituting the value for IX 0 :
2228 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

  
FR FðyÞ p  RP
€x0 ¼  g  sinðaÞ þ 2  x2  sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /  sinð aÞ þ  tgð cÞ  cosð aÞ
MP  2
2 h i2 2 Rr
x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn

ð50Þ
Integrating this expression twice, we obtain:


1 FR FðyÞ p 
x0 ¼   g  sinðaÞ  t 2  s ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 MP   2
2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn
 
RP
 sinðaÞ þ  tgðcÞ  cosðaÞ þ C 1  t þ C 2 ð51Þ
Rr

In order to calculate the integration constants, boundary conditions are introduced.

Given that the forces that cause the movement are periodic—with each period equal to half of the network voltage—the
constants for one semi-period are calculated, as these will be repeated in subsequent semi-periods. The interval is:
0 < 2xt < p
The semi-period is deliberately chosen so as not to coincide with system start-up but is chosen, rather, after the system has
been running for some time. This instant is taken as the origin of our reference system and as the origin of the times. For zero
time x0 the value will be zero, but velocity will not be zero.
The part will be immobile when the result of the forces acting on it is null. Therefore, from the sum of the forces in the
direction X0 the second boundary condition is obtained. Excluded from the sum is frictional force, because this is a reaction to
the other two forces; what we need is an instant of null velocity and not an interval imposed by friction.
X
F X 0 ¼ IX 0  M p  g  sinðaÞ ð52Þ

Imposing the boundary conditions we obtain:

Fð0Þ p   RP

t ¼ 0 ) x0 ¼ 0 ) C 2 ¼ s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

ffi  sin  /  sinðaÞ þ  tgðcð0ÞÞ  cosðaÞ ð53Þ
 2 2 h i2 2 Rr
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn

X
F X 0 ¼ 0 ) x_ 0 ¼ 0 ) C 1
8 P P    P  
F ðt ð F X ¼ 0ÞÞ
>
< x  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 ffi  cosð2  x  t F X0 ¼ 0 þ p2  /Þ  sinðaÞ þ RRPr  Tg c F X0 ¼ 0  cosðaÞ
 2
¼ 1ð2 x 2 þ 2Q 2x 2 ð54Þ
x2n  xn Þ ½ xn 
>
: P
ðg  cosðaÞÞ  tð F X 0 ¼ 0Þ

The constant will change signs to compensate for the sine change in signs, and so the signs will be as follows:

p p
0<2xt < )þ <2xt >p) ð55Þ
2 2

Hence, x0 takes the following form:


1 Fr FðyÞ p 
x0 ¼   g  sinðaÞ  t 2  s ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

2 MP  2 2 h i2 2
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn
 
RP
 sinðaÞ þ  tgðcÞ  cosðaÞ þ C 1  t þ C 2 ð56Þ
Rr
Taking into account the influence of friction, x0 is expressed as follows:

If F r ¼ 0 ) xi ¼ x0 ðt i Þ
If F r – 0 and F r ¼ lf  N ) xi ¼ x0 ðti Þ ð57Þ
If F r – 0 and F r < lf  N ) x_ 0 ¼ 0 ) xi ¼ x0 ðt i1 Þ

Eq. (57) can be interpreted as follows. If frictional force is null, the part moves according to Eq. (56), substituting Fr with zero.
Alternatively, if frictional force is not null, two possible situations arise:
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2229

Table 4
Values taken in Fig. 7.

c = 15° a = 2° RP = 0.25 m lf = 0.7

Rr = 0.20 m H = 0.4 m MP = 100 g

1. Frictional force is equal to the maximum possible, i.e. to the product of the friction coefficient multiplied by normal reac-
tion. In this case the remaining inertia force IX 0 and the weight component are sufficient to overcome the friction between
the part and the track. The part will move, therefore, in accordance with Eq. (48).
2. Frictional force is less than the maximum. In this case the remaining inertia force IX 0 and the weight component are insuf-
ficient to overcome the friction force and the part does not move. This is the implication of the statement that X0 is the
same for an instant i as for a previous instant.
3. Taking the values given in Table 4, the graph depicted in Fig. 7 represents the sum of the forces in the X0 direction, the
frictional force, and the variation in x0 multiplied by a thousand.
P
When F X 0 is positive, frictional force is null and the part undergoes considerable movement in the positive direction. On
P
the other hand, when F X 0 is negative frictional force is not only not null but is equal to the sum of forces and lower than
the maximum possible frictional force, then the part does not move. As can be observed, friction has a great bearing on the
movement of the parts. Also of interest is velocity in the X0 direction, which is expressed as:

  
FR FðyÞ p  RP
x_ 0 ¼  g  sinðaÞ  t  s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /  sinð aÞ þ  tgð cÞ  cosð aÞ  C1
MP  2
2 h i2 2 Rr
2x 2x
2  xn 
2 1  xn þ 2  Q  xn

ð58Þ
Taking into account frictional action:
If F r ¼ 0 ) x_ i ¼ x_ 0 ðt i Þ
If F r – 0 and F r ¼ lf  N ) x_ i ¼ x_ 0 ðt i Þ ð59Þ
If F r – 0 and F r < lf  N ) x_ i ¼ 0

An expression for movement perpendicular to the track can be obtained in an analogous manner. In this case the boundary
conditions are:

Fð0Þ p   RP

t ¼ 0 ) y0 ¼ 0 ) C 2 ¼ s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  sin  /  cosð aÞ   tgð cð0ÞÞ  sinð aÞ
 2
2 h i2 2 Rr
2  x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn
X X  ð60Þ
F Y 0 ¼ max ) y_ 0 ¼ 0 ) C 1 ¼ ðg  cosðaÞÞ  t F Y 0 ¼ max
p p
0<2xt < ) <2xt >p)þ
2 2

0.250
X
0.200
Fr iction a n d S u m ofForces(N)

Sum Fx
0.150 Fr

0.100
MovementX (mm)

0.050

0.000

-0.050

-0.100

-0.150

-0.200

-0.250
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Time t (s)

Fig. 7. Movement: friction and sum of forces.

2230 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

and so y0 takes the following form:


1 N FðyÞ p 
y0 ¼   g  sinðaÞ  t2  s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  sin 2  x  t þ /
2 MP  2
2 h i2 2
2x 2x
2  xn 
2 1  xn þ 2  Q  xn
 
RP
 cosðaÞ   tgðcÞ  sinðaÞ þ C 1 t þ C 2 ð61Þ
Rr
Taking into account the influence of normal reaction, y0 is expressed as follows:
If N ¼ 0 ) yi ¼ y0 ðti Þ
ð62Þ
If N – 0 ) yi ¼ 0
Eq. (62) can be interpreted as follows: if normal reaction is null, the part moves according to Eq. (61), substituting N with
zero; alternatively, if normal reaction is not null, this means that there is contact between the part and the track, and so
the value for y0 remains at zero. The graph depicted in Fig. 8 maps the sum of the forces in the Y0 direction, the normal reac-
tion, and the variation in y0 multiplied by a thousand.
Movement in Y0 is limited to two microjumps of the supply current per period. During the microjumps, the sum of the
forces is greater than zero and so the part jumps from the bowl. When normal reaction is zero and frictional force is zero, an
advance is produced in the X0 direction. When the sum of forces is less than zero, the track reacts with an equal force. Veloc-
ity in the Y0 direction is expressed as:

 
N FðyÞ p
y_ 0 ¼  g  sinðaÞ  t  s ffi  sin 2  x  t þ  /
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

MP  2 2 h i2 2
x2n  1  2xxn þ 2  Q  2xxn
  X 
RP
 cosðaÞ   tgðcÞ  sinðaÞ  ðg  cosðaÞÞ  t F Y 0 ¼ max ð63Þ
Rr
Taking into account frictional action:
If N ¼ 0 ) y_ i ¼ y_ 0 ðti Þ
ð64Þ
If N – 0 ) y_ i ¼ 0

4. Examples and simulations

Using the expressions developed above, the behaviour of parts in a feeder can be defined by modifying parameters and
thereby developing design criteria.

4.1. Example 1

In order to reduce the noise produced by vibratory bowls, these are either coated with a material that absorbs noise or are
constructed using special soundproofing synthetic materials. Tables 5 and 6 below describe the characteristics of two of
these materials. Fig. 9 compares the effects of the difference in friction coefficients, assuming all other parameters to be

4.000
Normalreaction and Sum ofForces(N)

3.000
Movement Yo (mm)

2.000

1.000

0.000

-1.000
Y0
-2.000 Sum Fy
N
-3.000
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Timet (s)

Fig. 8. Movement: normal reaction and sum of forces.

 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2231

Table 5
Values taken in Fig. 9.

Rp = 0.25 m Rr = 0.2 m C0 = 15° a = 8.8° H0 = 0.4 m Mp = 0.01 kg

Table 6
Bowl material characteristics.

Polyamide – Nylon 6 UHMW

Synthetic material used for bowl construction Soundproof coating used for bowls
Friction coefficient 0.2–0.3 0.1–0.2
Tensile modulus (GPa) 2.6–3.0 0.2–1.2
Poisson’s ratio 0.39 0.46
Tensile strength (MPa) 78 20–40

Fig. 9. Movement in a polyamide and a UHMW-finished bowl.

equal. The graphs use real commercial feeder values and the equations obtained are programmed in a spreadsheet. Graph
amplitude is multiplied by a thousand.
In the first case, friction prevents the part from moving in reverse. In the second case, friction is insufficient and the part
tends to move in reverse and, in consequence, a lesser distance is covered in a period. In this situation, from an efficiency
point of view, the bowl constructed in the synthetic material functions best.

4.2. Example 2

In this other example (Figs. 10 and 11) the influence of increasing track slope can be verified using the parameters given
in Table 7.
2232 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

0.2500
X
0.2000

Friction and Sum ofForces(N)

Sum Fx
Fr
0.1500

MovementX (mm)
0.1000

0.0500

0.0000

-0.0500

-0.1000

-0.1500
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Time t (s)

Fig. 10. Part’s movement for a track slope of a = 9.5°.

0.80
X
Friction and Sum ofForces(N)

Sum Fx
0.60
Fr
MovementX (mm)

0.40

0.20

0.00

-0.20

-0.40
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Time t (s)

Fig. 11. Part’s movement for a track slope of a = 11°.

Table 7
Values taken in Figs. 10 and 11.

Rp = 0.25 m Rr = 0.2 m c0 = 15° lr = 0.18 H0 = 0.4 m MP = 0.01 kg

Increasing track slope causes an increase in both the weight component and the inertia forces, but as long as their sum is
less than the maximum value for frictional force, the advance in a period is greater. Further increases in track slope lead to
the maximum frictional force being surpassed on occasion; consequently, movement in reverse occurs and the advance in a
period is less. For steeper slopes the part fails to advance.

4.3. Example 3

This example (Figs. 12 and 13) analyses the effects of regulating network voltage, which could be useful in order to estab-
lish a control regulation interval. For this example, the same parameters as given in Table 7 are used, but a is 10° and lf is 0.3
instead of 0.18.
Initially the voltage is insufficient to move the parts because inertia is too low. Increased voltage leads to greater inertia
and the part advances further in each period. Typical voltage control regulation is 30% to 98% of the nominal voltage.
The absence of comparison with experimental results is due to the difficulty of measuring the required parameters. The
small size of the parts and their low weight makes it impossible to incorporate sensors to track accurately the movement. In
exchange, we compared with numerical simulations. Simulations have given results very close to the analytical, demonstrat-
ing the validity of the proposed equations.
With a view to comparing the results obtained, a dynamic simulation using the MSC visual Nastran program was run.
Experimental test in order to compare results are ruled out due to many practical difficulties. The small size of the parts,
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2233

0.10
X
0.08

Friction and Sum ofForces(N)

Sum Fx
Fr
0.06

MovementX (mm)
0.04

0.02

0.00

-0.02

-0.04

-0.06

-0.08
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Time t (s)

Fig. 12. Part’s movement for a 100 V power supply.

0.25
X
Friction and Sum ofForces (N)

0.20 Sum Fx
Fr
0.15
MovementX (mm)

0.10

0.05

0.00

-0.05

-0.10

-0.15
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Time t (s)

Fig. 13. Part’s movement for a 150 V power supply.

Fig. 14. Simulation model.

their low weight and the necessity of no-contact technologies would make the work really hard and complex. A three-
dimensional model of the bowl was constructed and simulated as described above. A rectangular part was dropped into
the bowl and its behaviour was observed. The simulation was performed using two different friction coefficients (Fig. 14).
The simulation data were then exported to the rotation of the part with respect to the vertical—corresponding to move-
ment along the track—and were represented in a spreadsheet (Fig. 15).
2234 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235

Fig. 15. Simulation of different friction effects.

The results were as anticipated. Thus, following an initial transitional instant, the part advanced along the track, experi-
encing only slight reverses. Simulation with a smaller friction coefficient (0.5) led to a forward movement of the part that
was less than for the first simulation.
The error between results for the spreadsheet and for the dynamic tests could be estimated less than 10% for the third
example, and this level of error is assumable for a theoretical study that would predict part behaviour on the basis of the
function parameters. Note that predicting part behaviour in dynamic feeders is more important than precisely determining
travelling speed. Agreement between analytical and dynamic results confirms that the hypotheses and approximations
developed during the resolution were acceptable.

5. Conclusions

In this paper vibration in an electromagnetic drive unit, of the kind typically used for vibratory part feeders, is modelled.
The results obtained were used to analyse the dynamic behaviour of a part moving along the spiral track of a vibratory bowl
feeder. This analysis led to a series of analytical results covering dynamic, geometric and electromagnetic parameters. What
marks this research as different from previous works is the analytical evaluation of the effects of the electromagnetic param-
eters and associated geometric parameters.
The main interest in the results obtained here is the possibility of using analytical results in order to predict part behav-
iour and select a feeder adapted to particular needs, as well as to optimise the design of a vibratory bowl feeder and its drive
unit. As a demonstration of this potential, we numerically simulated the effects of certain of the parameters featuring in the
expressions that resulted from our analysis. Likewise, in order to reinforce the consistency of the numerical results, the
behaviour of a part was simulated, using the visual Nastran program, for two different bowl friction coefficients, obtaining
results that were entirely congruent. Future lines of research will include a study of the analytical resolution of the complete
equation and the verification of these results by real tests.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express the sincere thanks to the Department of Mathematics at University of Oviedo and to the
Department of Mechanical Engineering at University of Vigo for its computational support and useful help. This research
work was partially supported by the Funds of Scientific and Technological Research (FICYT) of Asturias under the Grant
PC-06-34 and by the Funds of University of Vigo under the Grant PGIDIT07DPI011E.

References

[1] G. Boothroyd, Assembly Automation and Product Design, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1992.
[2] A. Sudsang, L.E. Kavraki, A geometric approach to designing a programmable force field with a unique stable equilibrium for parts in the plane, in:
Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Seoul (Korea), May 21–26, 2001.
[3] B. Mirtich, Y. Zhuangt, K. Goldbergt, J. Craig, R. Zanutta, B. Carlisle, J. Canny, Estimating pose statistics for robotic part feeders, in: Proceedings of IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis (Minnesota), USA, April 1996.
[4] R.-P. Berrety, K. Goldberg, M.H. Overmars, A.F. Van der Stappen, Geometric algorithms for trap design, in: Symposium on Computational Geometry,
Miami Beach (Florida), USA, 1999.
[5] R.-P. Berrety, Geometric Design of Part Feeders, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utrecht, Department of Computer Science, 2000.
[6] R.-P. Berrety, K. Goldberg, L. Cheung, M.H.B. Overmars, Trap design for vibratory bowl feeders, in: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation, Detroit (Michigan), USA, May 1999.
[7] D. Reznik, J. Canny, K. Goldberg, Analysis of part motion on a longitudinally vibrating plate, in: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 1, September 7–11 1997, pp. 421-427.
 J.A. Vilán Vilán et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 44 (2009) 2217–2235 2235

[8] W.H. Huang, M.T. Mason, Mechanics for vibratory manipulation, in: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation,
Alburquerque (New Mexico), USA, April 1997.
[9] B. Baksys, N. Puodziuniene, Modeling of vibrational non-impact motion of mobile-based body, Int. J. Non-linear Mech. 40 (2005) 861–873.
[10] P. Wolfsteiner, F. Pfeiffer, Modeling, simulation, and verification of the transportation process in vibratory feeders, Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 80 (1) (2000)
35–48.
[11] G.H. Lim, On the conveying velocity of a vibratory feeder, Computers & Structures 62 (1) (1997) 197–203.
[12] O. Paleta Hernández, Theoretical Analysis of a Vibratory Transport, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Las Americas, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Puebla (Mexico), May 2003.
[13] M. Moll, M. Erdmann, Uncertainty reduction using dynamics, in: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, April 2000.
[14] I. Han, Y. Lee, Chaotic dynamics of repeated impacts in vibratory bowl feeders, Journal of Sound and Vibration 249 (3) (2002) 529–541.
[15] S.B. Choi, D.H. Lee, Modal analysis and control of a bowl parts feeder activated by piezoceramic actuators, J. Sound Vibr. 275 (2004) 452–458.
[16] R. Fair, H.R. Bolton, Analysis and design of electromagnetic moving-coil vibration generators, in: Proceedings of IEEE sixth International Conference on
Electrical Machines and Drives, Paper 10A3, Oxford (United Kingdom), September 1993.
[17] W. Kim, J.E. Kim, Y.Y. Kim, Coil configuration design for the Lorenz force maximization by the topology optimization method: applications to optical
pickup coil design, Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 221–229.
[18] M.A. Osipenko, Y.I. Nyashin, R.N. Rudakov, A contact problem in the theory of leaf spring bending, Int. J. Solid Struct. 40 (2003) 3129–3136.
[19] W. Van Paepegem, J. Degrieck, Simulating damage and permanent strain in composites under inplane fatigue loading, Comput. Struct. 83 (2005) 1930–
1942.