Luis TaPia 6 Foundation design for vibrating machines Dynamic loading caused by large vibrating machines must be calculated along with static loading. Here’s a tep-by-step example and a checklist ‘guide Suresh C. Arya and Roland P, Drewyer, ‘The Lummus Co., Houston, George Pincus, University of Houston, Houston Founparions surroxrinc vibrating machinery must be designed for both static and dynamic loading conditions. The former includes static bearing capacity of the soil ~gnd static settlement. The dynamic loading design condi- Hons include the calculation of vibration amplitude, |] __lecity'sind acceleration as well as magnification factor, ‘dynamic load factor and transmissibility factor. All modes of vibration should be checked for possible resonance with the operating frequency and critical speeds of the machine. ‘These modes may include vertical oscillation, horizontal translation, rocking oscillation, torsional oscillation and the coupled modes. ‘The dynamic design of the machine foundation must also consider possible fatigue failure of the machine com- ponents, the connections and the supporting structure. ‘There are environmental demands placed on the over-all structure and these may include physiological effects on persons, possible undesirable effects on adjacent sensitive equipment, damage to the structure or resonance of the individual structural members with the machine frequency, that is, individual response of beams and columns. ‘These design conditions and procedures are listed in the example problem. Section E of the example problem may serve as a chechlist for the design of foundations sup- porting vibrating machinery. A number of references which include the derivation of the required mathematical expressions as well as the Syorocanson Paocessine November 1975 procedures necessary to calculate the static and dynamic factors are given. Information required. Specific data are required design a dynamically loaded foundation for a particular ‘machine. These data include machine and soil parameters and environmental. conditions. The required ‘machine parameters are: outline drawing of machine assembly; ‘machine fumctions; weight of machine and its rotor com= ponent; location of center of gravity, both vertical and horizontal; machine speed ranges and components or fre- ‘quency of unbalanced primary and secondary forces; mag- nitude and direction of unbalanced forces both vertical and horizontal and their points of applicationss_ limits imposed on the foundation with respect to. differential deflection between points on the plan area of foundation, and foundation requirements. This information is gener~ ally supplied by the machine vendor and somtimes is obtainable“from a machine catalog oF from engineering handbooks. Foundation soil parameters. The soil formation and its representative properties are required for static and dy- namic analysis. For sand/clay formations, the information is obtained from field borings and laboratory tests, which are usvally supplied by soil consultants. The soil parame- TABLE 1—Equivalent damping ratio for rigid circular and rectangular footings' 273,FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR VIBRATING MACHINES Also proton Fig. 2—Coelficients fs, Ax and fy for rectaunglar footings, ters that are generally required include: density of soi,y; poison’s’ratiow,; shear modulus of soil, G; coefficient of subgrade reaction of soil, f, if the above parameters are “hot accurately available; the foundation depth at which above parameters are applicable, and other informa- tion required for the static design of the footing. In addition to the above information, the design engi- neer cither by himself or with the help of the soil con- sultant should establish the layout for the foundation structure, There are two common types of foundations used: (1) Concrete spread footing placed direetly on the soil or rock, and (2) Conerete footing supported by piles cor caissons. The preference of one system over the other should be decided by taking into consideration: relative economy; settlement; bearing capacity of soil; vibrati isolation, and the underground water table level, Pile or caisson supported footings are the exception and are used where poor soil conditions are found. Environmental conditions. Several situations may de- velop where a machine installation is in the vicinity of vibration sourees such as vehicular traffic, construction pile driving or the location is in a continental zone where seismic occurrence is possible. The design engineer must then establish the severity of the situation and if required, should seck the help of a vibration measurement con- sultant. The information desired should include the char- acter of the vibration and the attenuation at the installa- 974, Dynamic analysis shows three possible oscillation modes: vertical and horizontal ex- citation, rocking oscillation tion site. The effects of seismic forces can be determined through information and procedures described in Refer- ences # through 6. Solving a dynamic problem. Foundation motion and the machine it supports must be sufficiently low so that no structural damage occurs to the machine and its various connections, In addition, the energy transmitted: by the vibrating machinery through the fourdation structur into the soil may alter the soils internal structure, resit- ing in progressive settlement of the surface. Also, the foun dation of the adjacent machinery may be set into scilla- tion, which further increases their settlement, or the transmitted energy may set building or other personnel enclosures into oscillation which may be noticeable, tin- comfortable or intolerable to the occupants. Final form for the dynamie solution, Dynamic prob- Jems are described by equations of moti Gbich give the bask Infoncation on the respon Of & mani yon ‘There are other vseful derivations which are-of great interest to the engineer, Some of the significant factors and these useful expressions are explained as follows: Dynamic magnification factor, M, represents the ratio of the dynamic amplitude of the mast at a given frequency to the deflection that would be obtained if the dynamic force were applied as a static load. For a given excitation force P= Fy Sin ot which barra conwtant Srp and acts with a frequency s, the expreision ia: 2°" A 1) «= Fa Veer a hast A= dynamic amplitude ‘op = natural frequency D = damping ratio (combined total of Tables 1 and 2) ‘= spring constant (Table 3) Note: {/fa=a/an For a dynamic system in which the excitation force is created by a rotating member with unbalarced masses, the amplitude of the force is a function of the frequency and is given by: @ 2) In this expression, me ¢ «isthe centrifugal force of the unbalanced mass mg, and me ¢ a Sin tis the component of this foree in the direction of motion. The magnification factor for this type of excitation force is given by: P= meet Sint aTABLE 2—Typical values of internal damping In soils? Equlvatent Di Sir 20 # ieee t TABLE 3—Equivalent spring constant for rigid circular and rectangular footings! mee V1 = (elon) *]*+ [2D (olen) (ofan)? M (3) free amplitude ratio of unbalanced mass to total mase = eccentricity of unbalanced mass to the axis of rotation ‘M = dynamic magnification factor for the con- stant-force-amplitude case, Resonance frequency, fay is used when a forcing fune- tion of a sinusoidal nature is acting on a damped system. This defined asthe frequency at which the maximum amp- Z cccurs, and isles than the undannped natural fre- LL Hency for constant-force-amplitude, and greater for the utating mass type excitation. The expression for fu for these type of forces and the relative value of dynamic ‘magnification are as follows: Resonance frequency fu = feV1 = 2D" ‘Dyn. magnification factor Maas =1/(2D VI= BD?) ) Dynamic Force Resonance Frequency F = me ea? Sin at for = fa/V1—2D* Dyn. Magnification Factor My mer =1/(2D V1= DY ) Transmissibility factor, TR. Machines are often ‘mounted on springs to minimize the transmission of forces to the foundation. ‘The force transmitted to the foundation is the sum of the spring force and the damping force. The ratio of the amplitude of the force transmitted to that of the impressed force is called the transmissibility factor and is giveh for sinusoidal loads as follows: ‘Hyprocanson Processine November 1975 ee HORIZONTAL AMPLITUDE OF VBRATIONS—ME4sURED oN BEARING, SNOLE AMPLITUDES DANGEROUS. SHUT T DOun NOW DAWA 1D FAURE is NEAFeCOmECT WaT ©. FAULT. connect wl :DAYS1 3 tok FAULTS comRecrOn A NOFAULTS.TYPGaL NEW EDUPNER Fig. 3—Vibration performance of rotating machines.* Force type ‘Transmisibility factor F=FSinwt ppaPe ”y F= meat Sin ot in which, Py ig the force transmitted through the springs and ro/oe. The valve of TR for other than sintodal force is calclated in Reference 8 Example. Design of foundation block for a con frifegel machine. ‘A. Machine parameters. Machine characterises are supplied by the manufacturer. The following basic data are required for designing the machine foundation (all terms are defined where they first occur): Compressor: Weight (H) Rotor weight (Wx) 35,270 Ibs. 2,100 Ibs. Operating speed (7) = 6949: 7S e= 727 rad fee: Critical speed (f.) = Ist ~ 3,400 mpm / 2nd ~ 9,000 rpm Eccentricity of unbalanced .0015 inches (assumed) 215FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR VIBRATING. MACHINES Eccentricity at operating speed, z 7 = SGT = 20004 72inches Centrifugal force, Fe= (We/g) €a* = 1,359 Ibs. Weight (Wr) = 16,000 lbs. 45 Ibs. 949 rpm ‘Turbine: Rotor weight (Wx) Operating speed (f) w= 727-7 rad. fsec, Gritical speed (f.) = Ist ~ 2,000 rpm 2nd ~ 9,020 rpm Eccentricity of unbalanced mass, 2= 0.0015 inches (assumed) Eccentricity at operating 0015 speed, ¢= p76, 915/ 00D} A] = 0:0001354 inches Centrifugal force, Fe = 101 lbs, Total centrifugal force, Fy = 1,959 + 101 = 1,460 Ibs. Base plate: weight (Wx) = 5,000 Ibs. Total machine weight (Wy) = We+ Wr Wa 56,270 Ibs. B, Soil and foundation parameter. The required soil parameters are obtained from the soil report and plot plans. These parameters are: [Blane ade EL 100-08. Pen ee aor Recommended foundation base, Bl. 9.0" Soil strata is medium firm clay Soll density, (7) 125 pet Shear modulus, (G) 6,500 psi Poissons ratio (v) 0.45 List Allowable bearing capacity, (S11 Settlement of soil (negligible) G. Selection of a foundation configuration. Try for a shallow and wide footing such that the center of gravity of the machines coincides with the center of gravity of the foundation block (see Fig. 1). Concrete footing trial outline Weight of the footing (17+) = 105,000 Ibs. Total static load (W’) = machine weight + Weight of footing = 161,270 Its. essit 161,270 ‘Actual soil pressure 323 a0) = O45 ps. < 0.5 (Saas) = 750 pal ‘Thus, area of footing is O.K. A dynamic analysis check is then performed on the trial foundation, The 12 steps in this procedure are shown in Section D table below. E. Check of design criteria Static conditions & (a)” Static Beating capacity, Proportion of oting area {61 50 percent of allowable soil presrare, From “C” above, 645 < 750 psf. OK. D. Dynamic analysis (throe modes of oxcillation are possible) septa |= Penne Some Yr Ea ein Onn 1 [eet Thi Perc ata era mh Pero 7, mah ek = 7 ‘aaa 2 ase ‘ a ta E [Bertint aa] fein : - tl Tem nea aaa Pay aya =} eee te Ta) De= 088 Do ear D5 Oa ire conte Tae Nia see Dy, = 00 7 [ear Feo % ow ie eat ae Tae HOSS | es aR | y= Rema RE 7 ‘Natural trequescy, aE a In = 8 Tar = 88 opm 7 ies me Tor= Tar = iis EE er Tet @ aoe we Soe Sonia T= Kagnige Dress a ab ai Wa _| Wena mato =o zane T= ean x wa 710 | Sapp eine Sethe = ish x roe 02s) Stow TO | Bag vinon Tore fe = fos 2 | Trani =e Bes, Feast Faia Foie, awh Arita fea, 7, )(b) Static setlement must be uniform; C.G. of footing and machine loads should be within 5 percent of each linear dimension. C.G. of machine loads and foundation coincide. OK. (©), Bearing capacity: static plus dynamic loads. The ‘magnification factor (Equation 1) should preferably be less than 1.5. The sum of static and modified dynamic load should not create bearing pressures greater than 75 percent of the allowable soil pressure given for the static load condition = 645 + 409/(12.5 x 20) = 647 psf < 0.75 (1,500) pst. OK. (a) Settlement: static plus repeated dynamic loads. ‘The combined C.G. of the dynamic loads and the static loads should be within six inches of the footing C.G. For rocking motion, the axis of rocking should coincide with the principal axis of the footing. ‘The magnitude of the resulting settlement should be less than the permissible deflecting capability of the connected piping system. In this example, dynamic forces are small compared to static loads, therefore settlement caused by dynamic loads will be negligible. Limiting dynamic conditions (a) Vibration amplitude at operating frequency. The maximum amplitude of motion for the foundation system should lie in zone ‘A’ or 'B’ of Fig. 3 for the given acting frequency. Vibration amplitude (vertical), Ze = 0.000018 in, at 6,949 rpm, From Fig. 3, this amplitude is within the safe allowable limits. Vibration amplitude (horizontal) at center of bearing area, X; = 0.000018 in. at 6,949 rpm. ‘From Fig. 3, the amplitude falls in zone ‘A’ and is there- fore acceptable. (b). Velocity equals 2xf (cps) X displacement X am- plitude as calculated in (a) above. Compare with the limiting values in Table 4 and Fig. 3 at least for the “good” condition. Velocity equals 727. 0.0131 in/see. From Table 4 this vel “Smooth operation” range and is therefore acceptable. (©) Acceleration equals 4x/* (displacement amplitude as calculated in (2) above). Should be tested for zone ‘B’ in Fig. 3. Note: This check is not necessary if conditions “p) and (b) are satisfied which they were in this example. (€) Magnification factor (applicable to machines gen- erating unbalanced forces). The calculated values of Mf and M, (Equations 1 and 3) should be less than’ 1.5 at resonance frequency. In the example, M in all modes is less than 1.5. (c), Resonance. The acting frequencies of the machine should have at least a difference of =+ 20 percent with the resonance frequency of Equations 4 and 5. (0.8 far =f 12 fry). Tn this example, there is no resonance fre- quency in the vertical mode. In the horizontal mode: ABLE 4—General machinery-\ severity data*' ——a Machine operstion ee E> Aer Baste a Berd Gt, Hyprocarzow Processine November 1975 2 Faia false oe) (oreADY stave Vena 3 HOLE (188) (CUE 10 ASTIN) Fig. 4—General limits of vibration amplitude for: a particular freaenoys 1,689 < 0.8 (6,949). In the rocking mode: 1,695 < 0.8 (6,949). Therefore, resonance condition does not occur. (1), Transmisibility factor (usually applied to high fre- quency spring mounted machines). The value of transmis sibility is calculated by Equations 6 and 7 and should be less than 3 percent. In the example, TR is les than 1 indicating that dynamic forces are not amplified. Possible vibration modes (a) and (b) Vertical oscillation or horizontal transla- tion are possible modes as the force acts in either direction. (c) Rocking oscillation is possible since the point of horizontal force application is above the foufdation mass C.G, (2) Torsional oscillation. Since horizontal forces do not form a couple in the horizontal plane, this mode is not possible, (e) Coupled modes. The horizontal translation _and rocking oscillation are usually coupled. If Vfau? F Iny?/ Jocfa® = 2/37 then the coupling effect is to be ignored, the two modes of conditions (b) and (c) can be treated alone and the results can be combined. This is the case in the example above. Fatigue failures {a) Machine components. Follow limits in Fig. 4 and/or Table 4. (b) Connections. Same as (a) but check streses using AISC code with connectors are bolts or welds. (c) Supporting structures. Use (b) for structural stec. For concrete footing, if reversal of stresses takes place and 27FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR VIBRATING MACHINES the amplitude is very high (such that the peak stress re- versal is over 50 percent of the allowable stress) the main ‘and the shear reinforcement (if any) should be designed for the stress reversal condition. In the example, the amplitude of the dynamie forces is not large enough to produee any significant stress in- crease over the stresses caused only by the static loads. Environmental demands (a) Physiological effects on persons. If the machine is located in a building, use the procedure given in condition, (f) “limiting dynamic condition,” and use the limits from Fig. 4. In the example, Fig. 4 indicates no discomfort to people. (b) Peychological effects on persons. Use same pro- cedures as (a). If the facility is located close to people not connected with machine operations, use acoustic bar- tiers. In the example, the machine is located away from habitable areas. (c) Damage to structures. Use limits in Fig. 4. Example check shows no danger. (a) Resonance of structural components (superstruc- ture above the footing). Avoid resonance with lowest natural frequency by keeping frequency ratio either less than 0.5 or greater than 1.5. In the example, no structural components are involed. About the authors Dx. Suxesn C. ARYA ia a onior dynamics ‘specialist with The Lummus Con Hous ton. He is responsible for all vibration and dynanics tnalysis of structures und Jewnations made & Lammas! Houston Engineering ofiee. He holds « BS. de- gree from the Case Institute of Tech- nology ond a PhD. degree from The University of Texas. De. Arya has 15 years professional experience im struce ural and dynamice analyste for the petrochemical industry, nuclear power plants and marine terminals, He is a member of ASCE and fe a registered pro- fessional engineer in Ohio ond Texas, ROtAND P. Daewyen is manager of the Cheil Structural Group, The Lammas Co. Houston. He ts responsible for all civil and structural engineering and Grafting accomplished in the Houston Office. He holds a BS.C.B. degree from The University of Texas, Mr. Drewyer has 18 years experience in engineering ‘and management related to. the petro chemical and highway construction. in: ddustries. He is a member of ASCE. Dx. Gonan Prncus isa professor of civil engineering with The University of Houston. He teaches undergraduate and {graduate courses in structural engincor- ing) and directs graduate student re- search in the area of structural me- ‘chanics and structural analysis design, land he supervises full-scale laboratory testing, He holde a B.C-E. degree and on MSC. degree from Georgia Institute of Technology, a PhD. degree from Cor- nell University and an MBA. degree =a" from The University of Houston. He ts a member of ASCB, ACI, ASEE and is a registered profeesional engineer in Teans, Kentucky, Florida, West Virginia and New Mexico. 278 ‘Thus, the trial design is acceptable and may be used t6 support the machine. ¥. onrnccrons 4. Dri ms 4 ies tt 1 Leno cori din Hc, By, icon ft es een, ig 4, Bowtie 3 Demin re 2, Py Dy Dr Damp ar; wee, btwal, rong and venee ‘© Becratcty of wobslaned mst to di fcoaton at oper ating sped, S| Eectny of he uchin's tae ma in ‘Alita a excitation forests (peatng sped of the machin, tm Chteal speed of she chine, re Natal requeney, spat Resonant Trequency for comtant foreamplide extn, ‘ng, Reon tegen for retin masse exis rm 4 Aeeceation of gravity, fee Bh, Dyamic heron trae 1p, Mass moment offeror Bef Semen 2) 2 Spring eomtant b, Dutance fom center of rote ani o beef ooo, KL Dintoce tor center of man to tnt of feta fr sement je te Basin spo cone 1. Wid tte of machine foundation Hock, 1M, Momifeates actor ap My sat Msimem mussiiaton factor Dr ee 2) SET at wey wee samt gecay ee aie nea r,t ee a ap Sa Seles ae a tg 5 3 veda pete ae ee! sg Albeo od barog page “FE Treaty ter bn sett (ened sng pees ta Dye ere fc, Plato ef fonda, Wf, seem ae ae one ee me Wea ee Fat nces de yh by ee we Tene ei 1 Synge wr, hen snd ecg med 1 Ratio of unbalanced mass to total mass = m,/ae » Poisson ratio nF 4b Meade yt Frequency exbtstionfocy Rad ee, ol egy, Ra Ji bea Bay i of tt Pt ae i procedures fr, dynam Chat ond Foundatons Dis ee ae Saar iene E Retset nawas me EEC EE ac bn fn Wn Ee REN, tess ee Dnt, eves Peers s Tithbotrng, GP Fotdatons, Retaining and Barth Srtars, Mei Hil Book Gx, Sew’ Yorks 1978 . November 1975 aera ees) «Lage el Lovee Vv Stepwise solution to vibrating equipment foundation design mt , Here's a step-by-step approach to foundation design that bridges the gap between simple solutions with limited restrictions and! complicated solutions too tapractica ‘or gener:i use. H.G. Sallenbao::, Norther Natural Gas Co Liberal, Kans: SINCE ADEQUATE FOUNDATIONS fue vibrating. cquipe ment is 4 continuing problem, there is a nesl for 4n accurate, but workable solution to such problems. This atticle provides such a solution by using w step-by-step “cook-book” method. Theinformation provided herein comes from several articles 2nd textbooks and is an efort to comple all the basi falormation rquired for the engincer make 8 |g, 4— rotadagon mad of motin covnplete vibration analysis. 1. provides or Eguttins to detenisine primary and seconcary exivg compressors it is imporiant tobe se to deter inertia forces and moments for reci;sueating machines, inte what th sew inert Yosees will be and how tliry Te eay mers Lorees for rotating wichings, il effect th: existing foviadation. Thc inesis Tone Thescarethedyusicforces vhicheause vibationandd which ats in the ditecinn of piston movermena re Senge determined by the eayineer without waiting for expressed mathematiallyasa Fouerserieg se false endor studies. F = 0.000284 sr: (cos dw cos 2 4 D> Genial soils data which can be used if soil test boos 4h.) » informscion is not :ailable. For foundation design we need only consider the Ton ARP PY step detailed solution to determine vic primary and secondary forces anit note ther a we ee fon amplitudes at any point on the toundation or Fourth order forces and above have high frequencies quipment snd in any lnceion. ‘The solution can be whic are geneviiy out ok ve with foun fr uged overall ranges ol requis and for ilies ‘hence ae sce not eomslesed Re eee of soil, e =a ce culy the large compressor forces arc considered. Elec . . eee fate WiC and gas drivers sisitally have a small effect on the sian Ey ee een et ceatoane: Eres ps tee ually as ove Met consiered. vPration severity based on allowable amplitnde les breaking: apart the Fourier series uation, th varot ven primary inertia force F, ancl the seeontlary inertia fosee sori standaeds ot severity measurementinelude — PRAEY a soil loading due to the tynaruics F, 0.0000284 wri? cos A (ar operating rpm) (2) isting recipro- Fy = 0,0000284 wri? (r/f) cos 24 (at 9 tines operatins 1pm) r maximus joitial priniwey and secondary inertia force. and monrents for each eylinder, they become: ge, co et ;esandinsiractons, isavailabieforsa5 | F, -= 0,00002%4 (w + w) rN” (au from: BG. Sallanbach, 1 Daha Lata, Ligon cae operating rpm) sas 907, mye = O.OODUEE W, + N° (54/12) as - 7 operating rps © HYDROCARSOM PROCESSIIG MARCH jen0 ‘ 934 different crai TABLE 1— Unbalanced forces and couples for ink arrangements! Crank Arrangements Secondary Fi withow counter ingle can sights ome None She cank A eel fn i : counrerveights, Swe cranks at 1 2 > Fido | ine opt A o omer None 4 ‘arene Opps! cinders & o o 5 il 0707) Fad a (141) Fy withour seine ; ; counternsight cmnterweighs two cranks 90° (orn ean ® 035) Fa fad counterweight. vith i vurcerweights es 7 withon Wo elinders on ‘outers, one cu a 7 nF: Nit Cylinders ae 90% V 0 with : nnterweigh | af 7 " 2 witha | | so efinders nn i | courier gs, | one erm aha 6 None s | Opporet -yinders T Fy with a iets a : f a6) Fa T | Ct Mrerenntinte | A ‘ 9 esiterwelghes. | ahstn a A | [0.78 Ft | ssi eieeights : - “t | 0 iti Ad ° iho Ccnterweig | | army ° fit courses. a | o o 1 > crank easy ting connect rd ange tiny i 4 ofindercemer distance tay = Tech taf one eyo J Fy = conungngy rw ry Jae paes WARCH 1980 HyonocaNsoN PROCESSWamoe = F; (.5d/12) (at operating rpm) 6) Fy = 0.000284 w r N? (ri) (at 3 times operating rpm) @ mp = 0 ®) may = Fy (5a/12) (at 2 times operating rpm) (9) ‘This notation is based on a unit with horizontal crank: shaft and cylinders and shows the relationship between, forces and accompanying moments. Note that the forces act in the direction of piston motion, Pitching Moment acts about an axis parallel to piston motion ‘Twisting moment acts about an axis perpendicular to piston motion. Ifthe cylindersare raised onan angle,or are vertical, the axis for these moments rotate accord. ingly. Also if the cylinders are on an angle, resulting forcesand moments must be broken into horizontaland vertical components Note that the rotating weight does not contribute to the secondary forces or moments. “Table 11 is 2 churt showiny: unbalanced inertia for and couples ior different rank arriingements. » that with ‘oy eranks a1 150 degrees, tie primaty forces Caneel, bic the secorsliry forces are additive Forsatating machines®, the incrtia force which acts cconmsidugally about the rotating shaft, is ~ 12, @ The sum of static phis dynamic loads should not Foundations should rest on sndisturbed soil, (Never place it partislly on soil ane! pardally ox sock} D> Make the fovvaciation wile and low. Only place i asdlecpas necessisy For frost or other covsiieratons low foundation reduces rocking and jiching motion, be Try to limit static oil pressin.s wy approtinately 40 percrt of the woramally allowable static soil pres it combined static ant dynamic suil prestures voximately 63 percent of the norynally allowab Static soil pressures. Low soil pressures increne the equivalciit spring coustant arte! reduce vibration amplitutes, > Design fornilitions to balanee the cquipment weightand achieve a uniform soilloadiny, Chis reduces excentric loading which causes uneven settlement B- Keep piping low aud close to the unit to reduce vibration, Example Problem: ‘The two “identical units in this supple are existing units that had lew modified by installing larger compressor cylinders. The muililic. tion caused vibration problems. Upon analysis, i was discovered that the vibrations were second order Ire qqeacies which inilicated secondlary inertia forces Fit and fourth order vibrations were nor noticeable act pulsations were smooth, Each unit was operating at 350 rpm with four come pressor cylinders at 180." The soil was moist clay neae the plastic limit. ‘The physical arrangement was ey shown in Fig. 4. Compressor and soil data areas fellows = Gin, ! = 30in..N = 350 Compressor: w= 530th, rpm, ~ 20 ft, W"= 171,503 Ih, Soil: ¥ = 110 Ibi. p = 3.42 Ih, sec.¥ft, v » 045, 0 00 psi, Allowable soil stress = 1,500 Ib/tie, MARCH 1980, HyDRAPananN ReneeTotal stati 914.87 Ibs Checking Table 1, for unbalanced force arrange: ments, itis seen that if the eylinders are balanced, there should be no primary forces. However, the secondary forces are addlitive and thus suspected to he a problem Galeulating the secondary force by using the operating, speed of the unit we have: Fy = 0.000284 (530)(5)(350)" (6/30) (4) = 8850 Ib, Primary and secondary moments equal zero for this particular crank arrangement. Now, with this force which has a frequency of 2 (350) = 700 rpm and the information fromn the sketch in Fig. 4, the steps in Table Bare calculated. The results are listed in Table 6, Note that only horizontal and rocking are considered since there are no vertical forces and twisting is minimized due to the cylinder arrangements Step 13 of the data indicates that the center of the foundation base is expected to move horizontally soil pressure 00298 ‘ches and rocate 31 06 radians. At the compressor eybincici, 81.0 inches above the base and 99.9 inches to sec right of Ue base cente: line, the « seted horisoial motion '59.00298 + (51) (00005 12) = 0.00715 jiches ane! rhc expected yeitical moti: is 99 (00005 12%) = 0.0859; inches La the analysiiy ampliuictes were chevked at fon points on each unit. Sine» te theory in ticates no bt ing, motion should be iwiform along the unit length Table 7 compares predicted amplitudes with actual measured amplitudes at each cud of each unit. Note that the measured amplicuces indicate more motion st ‘one end thit thi other, and less rockin‘ iiuan Iso note ht there ate siconsistencics between tual amplituries of che tw» “identical” tuits as well: .ctua and predicted amplitudes. Hecause of the complex compressor sys tencies will always exist and perfect acturacy is not ox ected. Hosscven in reviewing the overall average oi the Predicted! amplitudes in this examiple, we fin! they are only 26 perccat larger thin the averse actuat ainplitudes. {is recommended that the engineer select eritical ints on thi unit and plo: dhese msi nium amptiticies on Fig. 3 19 determine the vibration perform « By plowing the nyaiaum valies for this eximple on Fig.'5, it is seen thai both prevlicted and! ariual valves show the unit to be ina necr failure on. Additional checks are as follows: 1. Magnification factors are less than 1.5 as reeome mended. 2a. Forcing fecqueney is above 1.2 times horizontal Fesonarice (requency ss recommen led, b, Forcing [requeney is below .8 tines rocking re anes Liequency 15 recommend. 3. a. Statie soilstress is 61 percent of allowable soil steess which is higher than We recommended 40 percent b, Dynamic plus static soil stress is 78 percent of the allowable soil stress which is higher than the rece ommended 65 percent, Analysis indicates that these fourutations are in an unacceptable range of vibration. Gominuous oper. ion of these wsuits at 850 rpin will likely result nt sere ous Failure HYDACCARBON PROCESSING MANICH 1990 TABLE 4 — Values of n, and m, for various values of Z, and Z,. Bee Se TABLE § — Typical values of internal damping in soils * (Di) Sa Secs a Sa sores on 5 4 10cm ‘ zh beitrom ‘an are i oa we Sab > 12 ¢ox TABLE 7 — Comparison of predictou amplituctos 9 actual me sured ary; oeab “4 Avy dy Ags das AL » a San io Fs fa Sabo Las fae Bilan tas Th fasting ia ag, Higgs May MM gs Sty 100 Gansta dvewinel by Be io Are fn a A ini pad er, bsiane sai phn hs FEE bases fl “ Uta dre ne ise tema dlsnce um sto Enhance nats ce Uatinte beteeneinder Sting Hines ideo Typ ales of era aaping in ac al Bhnping at, venta, ovina Ercemidy of inne mas toans eh retin-a open ape ‘emtncfo jhe mnehins ial iOOTS in) Freques'y of inertia force, primary, fecal. pen Chat tregteney of yachine, fr acura friccy, vert, seo si rueking, ichig, eng un Hesonanetequensy, ver al hore seep sth fed a Sector gy 3 ey Teal depth GP fulton emis ee anion jament V3) jal mats ni of inert of mae gti mf mion fT reek ng, pitting. tating’, oc Eqitatert spew enitint, vertical, Wiese Ie eben name tsistting, (Lbs, it . nt rock. ‘alin ings gen aun tar btances "yx of obs e pes appropriate inl seen india tt ee hin el ¥ inter of Segmcaus pcg Ershie s Gert pee chin, cpm, tak i (Cra ais, i, Ratio OF secondary inertia farce free Nerul, Hatizanta, fo Area son modules about the x ‘Atva tection moles about the nani, misibiliey fetor, verde wel orion rk eight nf reiroet Pri end crooshead ‘cit of machine Weiglit of compressor’ end of mac Wet of engine end of maching, tb Wet of etion ib Weight of rotor, or roiatin feo Pat 2) Nght oF mine Ad fot = nial axis of pitching ae foinlae Horizont isance from Morteosial distance print of intrest Cotal horizontal amplitude of a ertical axis of twisting at foundation Vertical distance from horitomtal iner- tia Fore tg zis to determin Vertical disiance fram z-axis to ingerestta determine hottest jeal ampli of a point in Lngitadinal disice from verial oF ine pitehia ve ovitigg poe Fy ba by Bay Spring svefficient, x ev Aug patching. Clg. 3) ‘eons embedme Poston exank in de DROCARHOW PROCESS!N88 Move! Craei ves Foundation design for reciprocating compressors Compressor operating frequencies are close fo foundation natural frequencies which create resonant conditions. Use this design method to avoid operating problems Surests ©. Arya and Roland P. Dsssvyer, The CE-Lummus C,, Houston, 1: George Pincus, | niversity of Iouston, How-ton agminele at low opoayting fe.ngiee Tho upset Krniencit usally ie wa lsat whe Rabie inten of the foundation in the vaviais vibrating motes 1 he magni atively teavy pices of suhutantial © of vibration amplitucls at resonatien sondi, ng criteria bncause of th closeness Ling and natural frequencies, Therefare, inclusion Of tis effets of internal and geometrical damping dieing excllation becuraes an imporiant consideration Sod ae Trees ecomplised by using the elasticshaltxpace theory. In the past, foundation blocks for eel eating Gpmbressors have tren proportiond using the uoncept of dynamic subgratt» reaction? In that th loaded fipectte testing on the soil is assumed to seston a set of iependent elistic springs which represent the supmot prowided by the sol. These springs provide an equivclont rene esate in response to the displaceraent, One impor, sae advantage in the application of the dynarci subgrade reaction theory has biven the distigand ofdamp. ing effects on the respons: of the vibrating aysten fe Gprer wort, eantrary to the elastie-hal-space throes the dynamic subgrade reaction theory sovs not provide ern Results on the amplitude of motion at freqiscies sey Ryumance. Tn aduion, the evaluation ol the dynam subgrade reaction of the soit requites actual testing of wodel footing t0 obtain csliable res expensive and time consuming. This is genceally Blesticchalf-spoco theory. [0 this theory ‘summed to rst on the surface of the whatic holy id to have simple geannwieal areas n{ eomae Gircular, but other sazes such as © Strip ear also be hiciilod with half-space itself ie sssumed to ie semiciativite body? wh sastcrhatl- space.” Thi theory includes. the dist con SLaenerey theoughows the half-space by “yenearied Gaming! and allows calculation of a finite anpliade at wibravion at the “resonant fienuency.” “The mrethed °o ne simplificati 2h is often called simply tn a homoge Tyomiernuos Proctssee Mio 1937, an analytical procedure which provides a rational means Pr gvaluating the spring und damping constants fe incorporation into luinped-parameter, massspring-dashpot sporating systems, This method of approach hae beret jhe, ,eurtent stateoFthe-art for the dynamic analyas or footings resting on soils* Reciprocating machines. M mechaaismas stich as pistons internal-combastion engines compressors aad pum, vod pumps produee reel sting forees. «single eylncler engine is initerently ws cae faced, howver, in mutlicylinder enyeins and com p-oasans Hi Pale to select ie sie of cyinders and in arrange them in auch a manner that the resulting sinbaieees {iiget age mininsced, Unbalsced forees st couples & Serene er mngernienis but of ext eplinder tases dnd SGK6 ire give tn "Table 74 HToncever, it shin be Rated thac in addition to the prin.cry frequency, either {he vertical or horizontal forces and couples may generate 4 secondary frequeney which depends upon the orien ou of the ma: Resign criteria, A. Vibration modes. A rid block foundation supportinyy a vibrating machine ci expos Fae iP t9 si modes of vibration as shown in Fig’ t thie modes arc translatory: the vertical, literal “and {pnsitudinal modes and three modes are rotational, wane ing (Yawing), rocking and pitching (rolling) modes, The seta and sitting vibration modes are usually indepen: Gens, However, if rocking oscillation of the foundation ty Possible, then the vertical and twisting motions ar cvenmcat S&S ae TWISTING On YAWN Fis, 1 Six vibration modes of a bloek-typo loundatton (Franee [stone mods: veriea enmadeen ates unaaton ‘wasting. “rekng pleteFOUNDATION DESIGN Fe o He, ee (@ woRtzonraL, TION VERTICAL ‘Exeirarion’ i ) fonstona, sxctrarion gaan thu at sO uN Ss seria =) ) mH 5
L2 Jaw In his eunple, resiiauee eannoe occur in the vestical and hhovizontal modes (due to che laege amos of dampiny in those directions). In the rocking mode; OB fy = 0.6FOUNDATION DESIGN POS oma) BR XN \ \ norm! Lb "00a 509) Sn Frtoutis cr senou nescn wou racy arate een 7 eingdger eh ettapy grave waramons) 3 Genel 00) OUE TS 0 ae 93th bration =:vpliiude for = pertcutar (1,353.1) primary and secondary machine frequencies are 505 rpin 1082.5 rpm, 1.2 fy = 1,623.7 rpm since the and 1179 rpm, no resonance will aceur in the rocking more ac the primary operating fiequency. Even though Fests appear critical at the secondary operating fr timeney, ies O. fy < 1170, design ix judued accep! oh 4 the pitching made: 0.2 8 (14755) = Tian rpm and 1.2 fy = 12 (1475.5) = 17706 rpm. The rity and secondary machine frequencies ator fall one side of these ranges and therefore, no resonance conditions ans possible £ Transwsscibility faclo (usually eoasidered for high Frequency siachines mounted on springs). The teausmnisch bility factors should fs Tess than i. In the example, the TR values are yees:er than 1 indicating that the dynamic fooces are amplified. Possible vibration mies, Vertical and horizautal escillatinn ae possible mecles since the force may act in those directions. Reching (#) oscillation is alin possible finer the horivantal forces ave above the CG. of # foundation. Pitching (4) cceillation must also. be dered in this example since unbaked moments are Provided by the marhine manufaccivier. Howevrs, twist ing er yawing os ‘onsidered since the Horiccatal forees «la not form a couple in the horisnntn! pune. The horizontal tenuslation and th: rocking moves need not be coupled if: nt foe Ins & BS TABLE 7—Unbalanced forces and couples for different crank arrangements! Cote Cac Ananamens inary | Semi Seco ine | Hoe = [zeae | ‘epee ese See wires Poe ntedctnden el) wee sou erat | oro arn FE core mental demauds. 1, Physiological effects on Pertons. If the machine is located ina lnilding, we Fig. 7 to test the adequacy of the installation, yy Cssople, Fig, 7 indicates vibrations to be “barely int Able to prisons” at the operating ferqueney of 50% epm for a masimurn vibration amyplitids of 0.000701 tn, 2. Psychological ffeets on pexsons. Use the stme proe people not co When the saachine is lovated close to nected witls cnachine operations, an acous. Heal barrier may be necessary, 2 Damage to strecture, Use te limits given in Fig 6, The example check shows no danger #. Resoxauee of structical components (superstrrire above the footing). Avoid resonance with the lowest Ratural Gequency’ by keeping the ratio of operating frequency 10 nativt frequency less than 0.5 ut grentes iia 1.5, No other structural cuimponents are involved ia Conclusion. ‘The for an arveptable maunes. The static and the dyeuie anal, ysis confirm the adrquaey of thn: proposed fixsulatian eon Figuraiion and therefore, the design + proposed, veceptable ition is pedicted to perlorm in May 1977 Heonocanten Paacrssan(COME. VERT. FORCE, Fe = 1909 005 ui 553 COS Pat ‘COMB. VERT. MOMENTS, Ta = {000 COS at + 12389 COS ut Venr FORGE, Fi) = 1s20G08a VERT. MOMENTS, Ta (P) = 54000 COS wt Vent. FORGE, Fs) = 559 COS at VERT. MOMENT" Ta (8) — 12560 C03 2 ut ORZ. FORCE, .(P) 725 SiN ak | HOR MOMENT ROCKING), TAP) = ime si a sprreniey FONCES, Las. 5-1) lanoed ve | and horizse:| foroas ane mainents in tbe system Feyvation 3¢b) I occur vw! 1d its absolis & Sinfat vale is ov by: o maximum dynamic displaces ude ‘at ampli Fije= deflection of the spring-anass system the action of a steady-state force applica statically at zero frequency, D=c/se= damping ratio jan = ratio of frequency af dynamic force to the natural {rejuency of the system, Other cxpressions may be derived! from the svevly-state sponse term of Equation f These inelide che magni fetion factors ao the transmissibility factors at the stead y= ale and at hie resonines frequencies, The expresions for these fnovors are Feoqueney Magoilivation Facies, M Cperating Frequency f UTE RB 6a) Resonance frequesnsy JV BD VYervizBh wy voansmissbilty Pactor, T Operating Frequency J VIF E/T EET 0) Resonair* requeney = f= bVE> 120 {tid} where = eens pat} =} l | MOW NS, FTALBS The moyuilication factor is defines! as the ratio of che dynamic mplitude of che mass ai given freq icey to the dilection that sould be obtaivd if the dyrisiaie force is spplied as a static load; ani the transmissibility factor s uefined as thy eatio of the simplieude of vie tragsmivad force to that of the improved force, EXAMPLE: fesign of foundatics: block For: reciprow ag compres srs A. Machine parameters The following informaiion was supslied by the ma- chine vodor: L. Vertical evc'pcocating conspressor (four cylinders Xf auxiliary weight: Compressor 28,115 lbs, Gas eooiers 4,350 ths. Snubs 710 ts Motor 18,000 (rotor weight ~ 6,000 Ibs.) otal machine sight =57,475 lbs, Dynasnis forces 1, Compressor sued, primary 585 epm, s:condary = 1,70 rpm Max. Vert Primary Moree Pe 1,29 ths, Max. Veri gy Fore # 553 ths Max. Hore Primary Foree F. 2 ts, Max. Rocking Primary Moment Ty = 11,308 Tbft Mas, Pitching Primary Moment Ty = 4000 thafe Max. Pitching Secondary Moment f4 ~ 12,350 th. 2. Motoe speed = 585 rpm, Motup dynamic forces are neglivible, Is Soil and foundation parameters. The required and foundation parameters are oblate Grom the report and plat plans Plant Grade 1. = 1007-0” Top of Found:uion El. = 100.6" Recommended Foundation Base El. = 957-6"