Dynamic Analysis of Machine Foundation
1 like481 views
This document analyzes methods to reduce vibrations transmitted from machines to foundations. It examines a frame foundation model supported by springs, hard rock basalt layers, and soft rubber layers beneath the foundation. Dynamic analysis was conducted to determine the foundation's natural frequency and plot transmissibility curves. Results show that a soft rubber layer is most effective at isolating vibrations, with support reaction decreasing significantly as stiffness increases, indicating better vibration control compared to spring or hard rock basalt supports. The document concludes with recommendations for machine foundation design to minimize vibration transfer.
![International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 550
Chart -15: Time period v/s support reaction
Chart -16: stiffness v/s support reaction
Table -3: Data for support reaction
v/s stiffness
6. FINAL COMPARISON AND CONCLUSION
(1) From the above list of tables, we can conclude that the
support reactions are considerably reduced when the Rock-
Basalt material is laid as a bed in number of layers belowthe
frame foundation
(2) Support reaction by using rock basalt is reduced by 106
kN when compared to the reactions by using a rubber
material and also by 148 kN when springs are used
(3) Therefore, a hard material such as rock prevents the
vibrations better from being transmitted from machine to
the soil below the foundation when compared with rubber
and springs as a isolation material.
7. REFERENCES
[1] Bhatia, K. G., Foundation for Industrial Machines,
Handbook for Practical Engineers, D-CAD Publisher, New
Delhi, 2009, ISBN: 978-81-906032-2-5
[2] Gazetas, G., Foundation vibrations, Foundation
Engineering Handbook, (H.Y. Fang, editor), Van Nostrand
Reinhold, New York, 1991
[3] Králik, J. Králik, J. jr., Probability and Sensitivity Analysis
of Machine Foundation and Soil Interaction. Applied and
Computational Mechanics
[4] Gazetas, G., Analysis of Machine Foundations, Stateof the
Art of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,Volume 2,
1983
[5] Arora, K.R., Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
4th ed. Delhi Standard
[6] Rirchart, F.E., Foundation Vibration, in Foundation
Engineering Hand Book
[7] Foundations for vibrating machines’ by Shamsher
Prakash (USA):
[8] Vibration analysis and design of block type machine
foundation interacting with the soil’ by Mulugeta 2003
[9] Dynamic analysis of machine foundation – National
conference 2014
[10] Sensitivity analysis of soil-foundation-machine
interaction on layered soil’ by Karlik 2013
[11] Behavior of machine foundation subjected to vertical
dynamic loading’ by Silipus 2015
[12] Dynamic analysis of machine foundation supporting
rotary machine’ by S. Patel 2015
[13] Economical methods of reducing vibrations of machine
foundation’ by Attar 2014
[14] Vibration analysis of roto dynamic madel’Nikhil 2016
Stiffness
(kN/m)
Support reaction
(KN)
5000 301.1
10000 654.7
15000 678.5
20000 656.7
25000 691.5
30000 712.3
35000 725.6
40000 734.3
45000 740.2
50000 744.2
55000 747.1
60000 749.1](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/irjet-v4i899-170918053501/85/Dynamic-Analysis-of-Machine-Foundation-6-320.jpg)
Dynamic Analysis of Machine Foundation
- 1. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 545 Dynamic Analysis of Machine Foundation Manohar.D1, B.K. Raghu Prasad2, Dr.K. Amarnath3 1Student, The oxford College of Engineering, Bangalore, Karnataka, India 2Former Professor, The Oxford College of Engineering, Bangalore, Karnataka, India 3HOD, Civil Department, The Oxford College of Engineering, Bangalore, Karnataka, India ---------------------------------------------------------------------***--------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract –The analysis of MachineFoundation involves not only static loads but also the dynamic loads which are caused due to the working of the machine. Therefore, the machine foundation should survive these loads. Therefore, it becomes vital to reduce the natural frequency of soil beneath the foundation. One such treatment is to prepare a layered soil beneath the foundation by trenching the soil and placing different types of isolation materials. Key Words: Frame foundation, Sinusoidal load, Rubber, Rock basalt, Springs, etc 1. INTRODUCTION The dynamic loads that act on the machine foundations may be caused due to various reasons such as vibrations of machines while in running conditions, due to the vehicles moving on top of the foundations, incaseofimpactmachines due to the impact of hammers, nuclear blasts in the vicinity, shock waves etc. Therefore, as a designer one should be thorough with the ways with which these dynamic loads can be transmitted from machines to the soil beneath the foundation which can either be done by providing an elastic support such as rubber or a spring underneath the foundation in order to reduce the vibrations. 2.0 RECENT STUDIES AND OBJECTIVE Shamsher Prakash (2006) discusses the method for determining the responses of foundations subjected to vibrating loads. Here the soil-foundation system is assumed as spring mass – dashpot model.Heretheblock foundationis considered. Mulugeta (2003) aims at incorporating impedance function by using expressionsanddimensionless graphs for determining the dynamic stiffness and dashpot coefficients. In the paper by Piyush K (2014) reciprocating machines are installed on a block foundation on the ground surface as well as placed at different depths. Here the values of frequency and amplitude in different modes of vibration are compared. Karlik (2013) has presented on the sensitivityandreliability analysis of machine foundation depending on the soil stiffness. Silipus (2015) has discussed the analytical and numerical models as how complex have to be in order to model the vertical dynamic response of machine foundation system. S. Patel has studiedthefoundationsupporting rotary type of machines. There two types of rotary machines under consideration in his paper Attar (2016) has presented methods to reduce vibrationsbydifferentisolationmaterials which are placed between the block foundation and the machinery. Nikhil (2016) presents the test sample for a roto dynamic model at variousspeed.Italsodiscussesthevarious types of foundation which produces min vibration for a particular type of machine. 2.1 Objective In design of machine foundation, it is vital to reduce the natural frequency of the soil beneath the foundation, which by doing so the vibrations produced can be easily dealtwith. One such treatment is to prepare a layered soil beneath by trenching the soil and prepare a layered soil by proper combination of different types. In this thesis, an attempt is made to reduce the vibrations transferred from machinesto the foundations (frame type) by using layered soil medium underneath the foundation. 3.VIBRATION ISOLATION FOR MACHINE FOUNDATION Even if the machines are rigidly connected to the floor ,the vibrations created by these machines get transmitted through the floor and to the soil below the foundation which will be large,even at long distances the transmitted vibrations create harmful effects. Also when these machine foundations are provided with elastic material there is a danger of creating resonance condition due to elasticity of the material 3.1 Following steps will help to reduce the vibrations upto a certain extent (i) Selection of sites for the foundations : The machinery and the foundation should be located as far as possible from the foundations of adjacent structures in order to reduce the vibrations felt by the adjacent structures. (ii) Dynamic loads should be well balanced: The machine should be so balanced that even after the dynamic loads are applied it should be nullified without causing any harmful effects.
- 2. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 546 (iii) Providing Suitable foundations :Depending on the type of machine ,the load coming on the foundation ,its operating freequency ,the designer should design the foundationinsucha manner so as to reduce the vibrations being transmitted from machine to the soil below the foundation (iv) Providing proper isolation: When machine foundations are unavoidably very close to the adjoining structures, the care should be taken to properly isolate the other structures from machine foundation by proving isolation material such as rubber or wood below the machine foundation. 4. ANALYTICAL STUDY Frame Foundation Frame type machine foundations usually consists of structural members such as beams, columns and slabs. The slabs are placed at the top in ordertosupportthemachinery. These structural members are constructed either in RCC or composite materials. Section properties Column section– 200mmX450mm Beam section -200mmx300mm Slab 200mm Loading Dead load of machine -2000 kg Operating frequency – 1500 rpm – 25 cycles/sec Fig -1: STAAD model 4.1 Determining the natural freequency of the system and plotting frequency response curves Considering that the columns are infinitely rigid, the slab stifness can be detemined using the slab deflection formula: Ymax =0.0454x(qo x a4) / (Eh3) Here q = Load a = slab dimensions = 5m E = Young’s modulus of concrete = 40Gpa h = thickness of the slab = 0.2m considering Ymax as unity we get load as 11.27 kN/m,thisis also the stiffness of the slab. On comparing the slab stiffness with the stiffness of the spring we can neglect the slab stiffness since it is very small. 1/Keff = (1/11.27) + (1/15000) Therefore Keff = 11.26 kN/ m Frequency = 1/2π (sqrt (k/m)) = 0.37 Hz Chart -1: For K = 15000 kN/ m Chart -2: For K = 20000 kN/ m
- 3. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 547 Chart -3: For K = 25000 kN/ m Chart -4: For K = 30000 kN/ m Chart -5: For K = 35000 kN/ m Chart -6: For K = 40000 kN/ m Chart -7: For K = 45000 kN/ m Chart -8: For K = 50000 kN/ m
- 4. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 548 Chart -9: For K = 55000 kN/ m Chart -10: For K = 60000 kN/ m 4.2 Plotting transmissibility curves It is the ratio of maximum amplitude i.e., the force transmitted to the foundation to the amplitude of applied force is known as transmissibility of the support system. Fig -1: Transmissibility curve 5.1 Machine foundation with spring supports In this model the frame foundation is supported by a spring support as shown below. Some of the practical examples of machine foundations supported by spring supports Here an attempt is made to try and reduse the vibration trnsmitted from machine to the soil beneath the foundation by providing spring supports Chart -11: stiffness v/s support reaction Chart -12: Time period v/s support reaction
- 5. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 549 Table -1: Data for support reaction v/s stiffness 5.2 Machine foundation provided with a hard material (Rock basalt) below the framefoundation Material properties assigned in stadd model Young’s modulus – 1.96^107 Poisson’s ratio – 0.15 Frequency – 25 Cycles/sec In this model the frame foundation is supported by layers of hard material such as rock basalt with the following materrial properties as listed above. Chart -13: Time period v/s support reaction Chart -14: stiffness v/s support reaction Table -2: Data for support reaction v/s stiffness 5.3 Machine foundation provided with a soft material (Rubber) under the foundation Material properties assigned in stadd model Young’s modulus -50000 kN/m2 Poisons ratio -0.48 Shear modulus-20000 kN/m2 Stiffness – 25000 kN/m STIFNESS (kN/m) SUPPORT REACTION (KN) 5000 515.5 10000 683.3 15000 676.7 20000 746.2 25000 780 30000 794 35000 799 40000 799.5 45000 798.5 50000 796.5 55000 794.4 60000 792 STIFNESS (kN/m) SUPPORT REACTION (KN) 5000 597.7 10000 707 15000 698.4 20000 684.2 25000 673.4 30000 665.4 35000 659.3 40000 654.7 45000 651 50000 648 55000 646 60000 643.4
- 6. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 04 Issue: 08 | Aug -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 550 Chart -15: Time period v/s support reaction Chart -16: stiffness v/s support reaction Table -3: Data for support reaction v/s stiffness 6. FINAL COMPARISON AND CONCLUSION (1) From the above list of tables, we can conclude that the support reactions are considerably reduced when the Rock- Basalt material is laid as a bed in number of layers belowthe frame foundation (2) Support reaction by using rock basalt is reduced by 106 kN when compared to the reactions by using a rubber material and also by 148 kN when springs are used (3) Therefore, a hard material such as rock prevents the vibrations better from being transmitted from machine to the soil below the foundation when compared with rubber and springs as a isolation material. 7. REFERENCES [1] Bhatia, K. G., Foundation for Industrial Machines, Handbook for Practical Engineers, D-CAD Publisher, New Delhi, 2009, ISBN: 978-81-906032-2-5 [2] Gazetas, G., Foundation vibrations, Foundation Engineering Handbook, (H.Y. Fang, editor), Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1991 [3] Králik, J. Králik, J. jr., Probability and Sensitivity Analysis of Machine Foundation and Soil Interaction. Applied and Computational Mechanics [4] Gazetas, G., Analysis of Machine Foundations, Stateof the Art of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,Volume 2, 1983 [5] Arora, K.R., Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 4th ed. Delhi Standard [6] Rirchart, F.E., Foundation Vibration, in Foundation Engineering Hand Book [7] Foundations for vibrating machines’ by Shamsher Prakash (USA): [8] Vibration analysis and design of block type machine foundation interacting with the soil’ by Mulugeta 2003 [9] Dynamic analysis of machine foundation – National conference 2014 [10] Sensitivity analysis of soil-foundation-machine interaction on layered soil’ by Karlik 2013 [11] Behavior of machine foundation subjected to vertical dynamic loading’ by Silipus 2015 [12] Dynamic analysis of machine foundation supporting rotary machine’ by S. Patel 2015 [13] Economical methods of reducing vibrations of machine foundation’ by Attar 2014 [14] Vibration analysis of roto dynamic madel’Nikhil 2016 Stiffness (kN/m) Support reaction (KN) 5000 301.1 10000 654.7 15000 678.5 20000 656.7 25000 691.5 30000 712.3 35000 725.6 40000 734.3 45000 740.2 50000 744.2 55000 747.1 60000 749.1