'Simulation Lab\r'

'Simulation Lab gathering #5 Dynamic Systems 1, ME3211 David Cramer Percentage of Work_______________________________________ Cory Spelman Percentage of Work_______________________________________ evade of Contents Objective Calculations experimentation Results App stamp outices Objective The documental of this lab was to understand how to use the Working beat 2D software and to apply this knowledge to make up a cycle absorber. Part 1 was to forthright up a demo file and snap the cart vs. cadence of the piston. Part 2 was to micturate a vibration absorber.\r\nThe reason for creating the vibration absorber was to encumber the motion of a punch press. This press causes uncalled-for vibrations that affect nearby equipment during operation. The vibration of this press was to be dissipated development a push-down storage and restrict sized appropriately for the size of the press and its motion. Calculations The reciprocatory motion of the press was given by equality 1: RPM=440+5* convention trespassic? (1) where group number was 5 and RPM is the common motion of the press in revolutions per minute. This motion was transposeed to radians per back by victimization Equation 2: ? RPM*2? 60 (2) where (2? )/(60) was employ to convert the revolutions per minute to radians per second. The atomic pile of the press and display panel go through was given as 320kg. The mass for the vibration absorber, ma, was metrical using Equation 3: kama=? 2 (3) where ? was embed based on Equation 2 and ka was ground using Equation 4: ka=(4450+50*group number) (4) where group number was 5 and ka was piece in units of Newtons per meter.\r\nThese hold dear were used to construct a mass run arranging suspended from the slacken spend with mass ma and spring ka. Another mass spring system was created with a mass fin times larger than the previous mass and an alike spring necessary to satisfy Equation 3. The values found from the calculations are summarize d to a lower place in send back 1 and the calculations are attached in addendum A. | accede 1: Calculations| | ? (rad/s)| ka (N/m)| ma (kg)| 1| 15. 5| 4700| 19. 6| 2| 15. 5| 23545| 98| Experimentation For Part 1 the demo file Piston2. m2d was used to analyze the military strengths on a piston on a crank moving at ergocalciferol and 6500 RPM. The animation step was changed from the default value to 0. 001 seconds to cede more data points to be plan. The plot displayed force in X-direction vs. time that was provided by the Working nonplus simulation and also a second gravel of data points for the theoretical force that was calculated using the mass of the piston and its X-acceleration. The objective of Part 2 of this lab was to create a mass spring constituent to dampen the vibrations of a punch press.\r\nFor this relegate the gravity was turned off so that the shift of the press accede caused by the forcing function could be analyzed without the effect of gravity. The pu nch press table was sculpted in Working Model as a rectangle with a mass of 320kg which was given. The dickens legs were each(prenominal) computer simulationed as a spring silencer system with stiffness and damping given as 15N/mm and 500kg/s respectively. The sinusoidal motion of the press was modeled as a force in the Y-direction with the value given by Equation 5: F=-150sin(? t) (5) where F was the force in Newtons and ? was the value found using Equation 2. The force was applied to the magnetic core of the press table. The simulation was run on the system and a plot of the supplanting of the table vs. time was created. A spring with stiffness ka found using Equation 4 was attached to the bottom of the touch on of the table and mass ma found using Equation 3 was attached to the other end of the spring to act as a vibration damper. The displacement of the table top vs. ime was again plotted as well as the displacement of ma vs. time. The test procedure was repeated using a ma value 5 times larger than the previous ma value and a several(predicate) ka value sized accordingly. The values for displacement for this setup were also plotted. All data series for the displacement of ma were imposed on the analogous graph to allow comparison amidst the three tests. The model used for this simulation can be seen below in cipher 1: flesh 1, [ ] Results victimisation demo file Piston2. wm2d a crank with a running speed of 500 RPM, was analyzed in the program for three seconds.\r\nafter looking at the calculations, calculate the theoretical force by fetching the mass multiplied by the acceleration. ensure 2 below shows the theoretical force compared to the actual force. Figure 1 The calculated theoretical force is alike(p) to the actual force relative to time barely differs in the directional force by beingness less than what the actual value really is. changing the railway locomotive speed to 6500 RPM and repeating the wreak as mentioned above is the next sectionalization. Figure 3 shows the theoretical force compared to the actual force with an locomotive engine speed of 6500 RPM. Figure 3\r\nThe difference between the theoretical and actual force for 6500 RPM is the same as for the speed of 500 RPM. The theoretical force doesn’t have as much directional force as the actual. As predicted, the 6500 RPM engine moved at a much fleet rate than the 500 RPM for the three seconds tested. It created umteen more data points and more values to compare. For part two of the experiment, a mass spring element to dampen the vibrations of a punch press was created. After calculating the ka and ma values as shown in Table 1,the mass was to be multiplied by five and the spring eonian must invent the ass calculated which is also shown in Table 1. A plot was created to show the displacement of the table and displacement of ma after the addition of the absorber for twain sets of masses.. Figure 4 below shows the top without dampe ring, the top with a damper of 19. 6 kg , and a top with a damper of 98 kg. Figure 4 Comparing the three different table top displacements, the second absorber clearly works the best. ground on figure 4, it shows to be more unending and steadily goes towards zero at a speedy rate than the top without dampering and the top with a damper of 19. 6 kg.\r\nThe displacement of the top with the damper of 19. 6 kg and the top with the damper of 98 kg was plotted based on its displacement of ma. Figure 5 below shows the comparison between the two table tops with different dampering. Figure 5 Based on the given information from the graph, the second absorber works better yet again. The ma of the 19. 6 absorber isn’t as constant and dispersed over while the ma of the 98 absorber is more constant and has a steady range for the seconds that it was tested. References 1 project Simulation Technologies. (2007). Working Model 2D [Computer program]\r\n'