ME 370: Dynamic Response of Engine Belt: Prof. Mockensturm

0
2014
ME 370: Dynamic
Response of Engine Belt
PROF. MOCKENSTURM
CHRISTIAN GOBERT
Page 1
Table of Contents
1. Baseline System changes
1.1 Baseline system Frequencies..2
1.2 Modulus Adjustment.2
1.3 Spring Tension Adjustment..3
2. Pulley Radius Adjustment4
3. Pulley Position Adjustment ..8
4. Parameter Optimization ..15
5. Designed System Response 16
6. Observations and Discussion.17
7. Appendices18-25
Page 2
1.1 Frequencies of Baseline System (Code in Appendix A.1)
[434.5486e+000 2.0255e+003
12.1825e+003] RPM
2.8193e+003
5.2255e+003
7.1117e+003 10.2453e+003
1.2 Modulus Adjustment Plot
An increase in the EA value increases the stiffness of the belt as K=EA/L; therefore the belt stiffness
increases which leads to less stretching of the belt and increases the natural frequency. The opposite
occurs when the EA decreases, leading to smaller stiffness and more stretching of the belt.
Code in A.2 represents the for loop used to implement the various value changes of EA and the graphing
of the results, which replaced the necessary code in A.2.
Page 3
1.3 Kt Adjustment Plot
By examination of the plot above there is a direct relationship between natural frequency of the system
and the Kt value. Unfortunately, the trend which occurs with the change of Kt by 10% had little influence
affecting the systems natural frequency by only a few decimal places. This miniscule impact of the
differentiating Kt value is because the stiffness created by both belt spans dominates the response of the
Tensioner. Essentially the value of Kt is far less than the belt stiffness value, creating a situation where a
nominal percentage change in belt stiffness has a drastic effect of the systems natural frequency and
where the same nominal percentage change in Kt has little effect.
The coding for changing Kt values is identical to A.2 code except the for loop changes Kt values, not EA
values.
Page 4
2. Pulley Radius Change
Three conditions present themselves in regards to changing pulley radius by -1cm or +.5cm;
where pulleys one, two, four and five exhibit the same phenomenon with pulleys three and six enacting
their own effects on the system.
For the group of the four pulleys, an increase in pulley radius is directly proportional to an
increasing natural frequency. When the radius changes for a pulley the belt span is affected as well
which in turn affects the stiffness of the belt. When pulley radius increases, the span length between its
adjacent pulleys decreases, increasing the belt stiffness which just like in section 1.2 increases the
natural frequency of the system. Each pulley though affects the systems natural frequencies to a
different degree, based off the original baseline radii for that pulley. As each pulley is
increased/decreased by the same amount the larger baseline pulleys radii do not get affect as much as
the smaller baseline radii pulleys. The pulley with the greatest effect on the system frequencies is
number four which has the smallest of the radii compared to pulleys one, two and fie which had much
larger baseline radii.
Pulley number three has an effect opposite of the group of pulleys which were just mentioned.
This relates to the back wrapping of the pulley to where the increasing radius of pulley three actually
increases the belt span. The changing inertia of pulley three did incur changes as well but worked in
conjunction with the changing of radius.
Pulley number six was also back wrapped but incurred the same effect on the system just as the
group of pulleys one, two, four and five. In fact the changing radius affected the belt span in the same
way as pulley three did, but the accompanying mass change of the tensioner had an overbearing impact.
The mass change influenced the response more because this affects the forces acting upon the
tensioner via the two belt spans and spring tensioner.
The code use to implement pulley one radius change is represented in A.3 and was adjusted
accordingly for the remaining pulleys two through six; with pulley three having a dependent inertia
based upon its radius and pulley six having a mass and inertia dependent on pulley radius.
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
3. Pulley Position change
The differentiation of the pulley position and the varying effect on the natural frequency is
related to the initial positions of the neighboring pulleys and the direction in which the pulley is moved.
The significance of the directional change is related to span length changing between pulleys. If the
pulley position is altered to where the span length increases, then the natural frequency will drop and
vice versa, just as in previous cases of altering span length. The degree to which the frequency is
affected by the changing position depends on the baseline span length between its neighboring pulleys.
If the original span length was small then a change of position for a pulley will have a greater change on
belt stiffness than if the original span length was larger; the change in position is nominal and not a
percentage so large baseline spans are not affected as much as smaller ones. This frequency change
described applies to the pulleys one through four where both the first and second natural frequency
increase or decrease together under the same position change, illustrated by their graph all have the
same general plane trend.
For pulleys five and six the frequency planes have non-agreeing slopes with each other, as for
each pulley position change the first and second natural frequency response is in a different direction.
This is due to the tensioner spring acting on the tensioner pulley. With each position change of pulley
five there is greater or lesser force acting on the tensioner spring due to the belt stiffness values altering
because of span length. For pulley six the position change affects the starting position of tensioner
spring as well, changing its initial force it applies to the tensioner pulley. This effect on the tensioner
spring force due to position change only overcomes the span length trend seen in pulleys one through
five when the position of the pulley and frequency create the optimum condition to do so, which is
evident in the graphs for pulleys five in six which unlike the graphs for pulleys one through four, have
disagreeing trends between Wn1 and Wn2.
Position changes could only be made in 1cm in the x or y directions with any combination of x
and y changes. The code represented in A.4 graphs every possible change for each pulley using a for
loop and mesh matrix to store frequencies at various indexes corresponding to x and y positions,
graphing the results using mesh grid.
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
4. Optimization of Parameters
During the individual parameter tests it was shown that the positions of pulleys was in some
cases, pulley five and six, could have unpredictable outcomes for natural frequencies. In order to
optimize the design the remaining parameters EA, Kt, and pulley radius were split into two groups
according to whether or not they raised or lowered the natural frequency. With these parameters set
every possible combination of position change was tested in order to see which produced the greatest
change in natural frequency for each group. In addition position change was a function of pulley radius,
to where if the pulley radius was decreased then the pulley had a greater range of movement and vice
versa, which had to be taken into consideration.
In searching for the greatest natural frequencies changes, attention was given to primarily to
Wn2, as it is more crucial to change as it is closer to the cruising speed which is used more than the
idling speed. This generated two cases that were optimal in altering only the Wn2 frequency and not the
Wn1 frequency. This generated two case where one case raised the natural frequencies and one
lowered the natural frequencies. The most drastic change came in lowering the natural frequencies,
with final values of 263 and 1493 RPM. The determination of that being the best case was decided by
the weighted distance each one created between the frequencies of the baseline system, in the
equation below.
(
The chosen design parameters are displayed below. Code placed in A.5 test every possible
position change with the accompanied position change using a multi-dimensional matrix with indices
being that of the x and y coordinates of each pulley.
Parameter set-up to achieve low end difference

Parameter Change
EA 90%
Kt 90%
Radius 1(-.01)
Radius 2(-.01)
Radius 3 (.005)
Radius 4(-.01)
Radius 5(-.01)
Radius 6(-.01)
Parameter Value
58500
8406
.0545
.0606
-.04615
.02
.0575
-.02381
Pulley (x,y) final position location (m) for low end difference
Pulley Number
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
X position
0
.2815
.272
.0853
.106
-.02
.148
Y position
0
.04
.254
.2461
.374
.1475
.141
Page 16
Page 17
5. Design system amplitude response
For the desired system chosen in section 4, the amplitude response without damping, followed
by the plot where the system had damping, was plotted over the desired range of 0 to 7000 RPM with
spikes at the natural frequencies of 263 and 1493 RPM. In both cases the resonance response is large,
but with damping applied the response at resonance is more spread out and not as intense. The spikes
without damping are large but only at the resonance frequency while for the damping case the spikes
amplitude is damped and spread out around the resonance frequency. Code for which is in A.6
Page 18
6. Other design considerations
The optimization of the system by lowering the frequencies has is consequences. In the analysis
only the first two natural frequencies were observed which left the other frequencies being ignored.
With the system optimized to reduce the frequencies, by reducing all of the natural frequencies
coincidently, the 3rd natural frequency was lowered to around 2000 RPM, right around the cruising
speed of the system which could result in a failure; in the damping case though this 3rd natural
frequency resonance was reduced significantly.
The optimization of the design relied heavily on the each parameters effect primarily on belt
length span. In this instance the overall span length was ignored, but in a situation where there was a
maximum total belt length span, optimization would have been much different. The stiffness of the belt
was also altered without design considerations taken into account, for example with too high or too low
of stiffness there might be instances that belt slippage might occur, resulting in failure.
The benchmarking function takes both natural frequency changes into account but weights the
cruising speed natural frequency more heavily as the engine is a majority of the time at this speed. In
addition the search for the lowest frequencies was based on the cruising speed as well, so there is
another parameter setup where the idling frequency was changed more.
Page 19
Appendices
A.1
%%
format shorteng
%Given Variables
%radius
r0=.08125;
r1=.06450;
r2=.07060;
r3=-.04115;
r4=.03000;
r5=.06750;
r6=-.03810;
%x coordinates
x0=0;
x1=.2615;
x2=.252;
x3=.0903;
x4=.086;
x5=0;
x6=.128;
%y coordinates
y0=0;
y1=.060;
y2=.234;
y3=.2511;
y4=.354;
y5=.1675;
y6=.126;
%Length equations between each
La=((x0-x1)^(2)+(y0-y1)^(2)-(r0-r1)^(2))^(1/2);
Lb=((x1-x2)^(2)+(y1-y2)^(2)-(r1-r2)^(2))^(1/2);
Lc=((x2-x3)^(2)+(y2-y3)^(2)-(r2-r3)^(2))^(1/2);
Ld=((x3-x4)^(2)+(y3-y4)^(2)-(r3-r4)^(2))^(1/2);
Le=((x4-x5)^(2)+(y4-y5)^(2)-(r4-r5)^(2))^(1/2);
Lf=((x5-x6)^(2)+(y5-y6)^(2)-(r5-r6)^(2))^(1/2);
Lg=((x6-x0)^(2)+(y6-y0)^(2)-(r6-r0)^(2))^(1/2);
EA=65000;
kt=9340;
% equations for each k value of the belts between pulleys
ka=EA/La;
kb=EA/Lb;
kc=EA/Lc;
kd=EA/Ld;
ke=EA/Le;
kf=EA/Lf;
kg=EA/Lg;
%Each row in the stiffness matrix
krow1=[(ka+kb)*r1^2, -kb*r1*r2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
krow2=[-kb*r1*r2, (kb+kc)*r2^2, kc*r2*r3, 0, 0, 0, 0];
krow3=[0, kc*r2*r3, (kc+kd)*r3^2, kd*r3*r4, 0, 0, 0];
krow4=[0, 0, kd*r3*r4, (kd+ke)*r4^2, -ke*r4*r5, 0, 0];
krow5=[0, 0, 0, -ke*r4*r5, (ke+kf)*r5^2, kf*r5*r6, kf*r5/Lf*(x5-x6)];
krow6=[0, 0, 0, 0, kf*r5*r6, (kf+kg)*r6^2, kf*r6/Lf*(x5-x6)+kg*r6/Lg*(x6-x0)];
krow7=[0, 0, 0, 0, kf*(x5-x6)*r5/Lf, (kg*(x6-x0)*r6/Lg)+(kf*(x5-x6)*r6/Lf), kt+kf*(x5x6)^2/(Lf^2)+kg*(x6-x0)^2/(Lg^2)];
stiffnessmatrix=[krow1;krow2;krow3;krow4;krow5;krow6;krow7] ;
j1=41.5/10000;
j2=13.1/10000;
j3=2.63/10000;
j4=42.1/10000;
j5=17.6/10000;
j6=2.08/10000;
m6=.2633;
%mass matrix set up
mrow1=[j1,0,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow2=[0,j2,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow3=[0,0,j3,0,0,0,0];
Page 20
mrow4=[0,0,0,j4,0,0,0];
mrow5=[0,0,0,0,j5,0,0];
mrow6=[0,0,0,0,0,j6,0];
mrow7=[0,0,0,0,0,0,m6];
massmatrix=[mrow1;mrow2;mrow3;mrow4;mrow5;mrow6;mrow7];
%setting damping matrix to zero
dampingmatrix=zeros(7);
%using polyeig to find the modes and natural frequencies
[modes,naturalfrequencies]=polyeig(stiffnessmatrix,dampingmatrix,massmatrix);
%computes the rpm when it is an imaginary number
Naturalrpm=sqrt((real(naturalfrequencies)).^2+(imag(naturalfrequencies)).^2)*60/(2*pi)/3;
%sorts the matrix of resonances
Resonances=sort(Naturalrpm);
totalbeltlength=La+Lb+Lc+Ld+Le+Lf+Lg;
wn(1)=Resonances(1);%spits out the lowest rpm;
wn(2)=Resonances(3);%spits out the second lowest rpm
wn(3)=Resonances(5);
wn %spits out all the resonance
A.2
% for loop which calculates the frequencies for every EA value between 90%
% and 110% of the baseline EA Value
count=0
for npercent=[.9:.01:1.1]
EA=65000
EA=65000*npercent
count=count+1
ka=EA/La;
kb=EA/Lb;
kc=EA/Lc;
kd=EA/Ld;
ke=EA/Le;
kf=EA/Lf;
kg=EA/Lg;
kt=9340;
krow1=[(ka+kb)*r1^2, -kb*r1*r2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
j1=41.5/10000;
j2=13.1/10000;
j3=2.63/10000;
j4=42.1/10000;
j5=17.6/10000;
j6=2.08/10000;
m6=.2633;
mrow1=[j1,0,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow2=[0,j2,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow3=[0,0,j3,0,0,0,0];
mrow4=[0,0,0,j4,0,0,0];
mrow5=[0,0,0,0,j5,0,0];
mrow6=[0,0,0,0,0,j6,0];
mrow7=[0,0,0,0,0,0,m6];
dampingmatrix=zeros(7);[modes,naturalfrequencies]=polyeig(stiffnessmatrix,dampingmatrix,massmatri
x);
Page 21
wn1(count)=Resonances(1);%spits out the lowest rpm;
wn2(count)=Resonances(3);%spits out the second lowest rpm
end
%%
%Plots the change of Ea verse wn
EApercentchange=[90:1:110];
[axes,linewn1,linewn2]=plotyy(EApercentchange,wn1,EApercentchange,wn2);
xlabel('Percent of Baseline EA value (%)')
title('Percent Change of EA verse Wn1 and Wn2')
set(linewn1,'LineWidth',3)
ylabel(axes(1),'1st Natural Frequency (RPM)')
ylabel(axes(2),'2nd Natural Frequency (RPM)')
A.3
format shorteng
%Given Variables
%radius
r0=.08125;
r1=.06450;
r2=.07060;
r3=-.04115;
r4=.03000;
r5=.06750;
r6=-.03810;
%x coordinates
x0=0;
x1=.2615;
x2=.252;
x3=.0903;
x4=.086;
x5=0;
x6=.128;
%y coordinates
y0=0;
y1=.060;
y2=.234;
y3=.2511;
y4=.354;
y5=.1675;
y6=.126;
%EA value for the belts
EA=65000;
countr1=0
for r1change=[-.01:.001:.005]
r1=.0654
countr1=countr1+1
r1=r1+r1change
La=((x0-x1)^(2)+(y0-y1)^(2)-(r0-r1)^(2))^(1/2);
Lb=((x1-x2)^(2)+(y1-y2)^(2)-(r1-r2)^(2))^(1/2);
Lc=((x2-x3)^(2)+(y2-y3)^(2)-(r2-r3)^(2))^(1/2);
Ld=((x3-x4)^(2)+(y3-y4)^(2)-(r3-r4)^(2))^(1/2);
Le=((x4-x5)^(2)+(y4-y5)^(2)-(r4-r5)^(2))^(1/2);
Lf=((x5-x6)^(2)+(y5-y6)^(2)-(r5-r6)^(2))^(1/2);
Lg=((x6-x0)^(2)+(y6-y0)^(2)-(r6-r0)^(2))^(1/2);
ka=EA/La;
kb=EA/Lb;
kc=EA/Lc;
kd=EA/Ld;
ke=EA/Le;
kf=EA/Lf;
Page 22
kg=EA/Lg;
kt=9340;
krow1=[(ka+kb)*r1^2, -kb*r1*r2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
j1=41.5/10000;
j2=13.1/10000;
j3=2.63/10000;
j4=42.1/10000;
j5=17.6/10000;
j6=2.08/10000;
m6=.2633;
mrow1=[j1,0,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow2=[0,j2,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow3=[0,0,j3,0,0,0,0];
mrow4=[0,0,0,j4,0,0,0];
mrow5=[0,0,0,0,j5,0,0];
mrow6=[0,0,0,0,0,j6,0];
mrow7=[0,0,0,0,0,0,m6];
x);
wn1(countr1)=Resonances(1);
wn2(countr1)=Resonances(3);
end
r1change=[-.01:.001:.005]
[axes,linewn1,linewn2]=plotyy(r1change,wn1,r1change,wn2);
xlabel('Change of Pulley 1 Radius (m)')
title('Change of Pulley Radius 1 verse Natural Frequency')
ylabel(axes(1),'1st Natural Frequency (RPM)')
ylabel(axes(2),'2nd Natural Frequency (RPM)')
A.4
clear
clc
%%
format shorteng
%Given Variables
%radius
r0=.08125;
r1=.06450;
r2=.07060;
r3=-.04115;
r4=.03000;
r5=.06750;
r6=-.03810;
%x coordinates
x0=0;
x2=.252;
x3=.0903;
x4=.086;
x5=0;
x6=.128;
%y coordinates
Page 23
y0=0;
y2=.234;
y3=.2511;
y4=.354;
y5=.1675;
y6=.126;
%EA value for the belts
EA=65000;
count1x=0;
count1y=0;
for x1=[ .2515 .2565 .2615 .2665 .2715]
count1x=count1x+1;
count1y=0;
for y1=[.050 .055 .060 .065 .070]
count1y=count1y+1;
La=((x0-x1)^(2)+(y0-y1)^(2)-(r0-r1)^(2))^(1/2);
Lb=((x1-x2)^(2)+(y1-y2)^(2)-(r1-r2)^(2))^(1/2);
Lc=((x2-x3)^(2)+(y2-y3)^(2)-(r2-r3)^(2))^(1/2);
Ld=((x3-x4)^(2)+(y3-y4)^(2)-(r3-r4)^(2))^(1/2);
Le=((x4-x5)^(2)+(y4-y5)^(2)-(r4-r5)^(2))^(1/2);
Lf=((x5-x6)^(2)+(y5-y6)^(2)-(r5-r6)^(2))^(1/2);
Lg=((x6-x0)^(2)+(y6-y0)^(2)-(r6-r0)^(2))^(1/2);
ka=EA/La;
kb=EA/Lb;
kc=EA/Lc;
kd=EA/Ld;
ke=EA/Le;
kf=EA/Lf;
kg=EA/Lg;
kt=9340;
krow1=[(ka+kb)*r1^2, -kb*r1*r2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
j1=41.5/10000;
j2=13.1/10000;
j3=2.63/10000;
j4=42.1/10000;
j5=17.6/10000;
j6=2.08/10000;
m6=.2633;
mrow1=[j1,0,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow2=[0,j2,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow3=[0,0,j3,0,0,0,0];
mrow4=[0,0,0,j4,0,0,0];
mrow5=[0,0,0,0,j5,0,0];
mrow6=[0,0,0,0,0,j6,0];
mrow7=[0,0,0,0,0,0,m6];
x);
wn1(count1x,count1y)=Resonances(1);%spits out the lowest rpm;
wn2(count1x,count1y)=Resonances(3);%spits out the second lowest rpm
end
end
%%
figure
Page 24
xchange=[-.01 -.005 0 .005 .01];
ychange=[-.01 -.005 0 .005 .01];
[nxchange,nychange]=meshgrid(xchange,ychange);
mesh(nxchange,nychange,wn1);
surf(nxchange,nychange,wn1,'FaceColor','blue','EdgeColor','black');
alpha(.4);
hold on
plot3(nxchange,nychange,wn1,'.','MarkerSize',20)
xlabel('Change in X-Position (cm)');
ylabel('Change in Y-Position (cm)');
zlabel('1st Natural Frequency (RPM)');
title('1st Natural Frequency response vs change in X and Y of Pulley 1');
hold off
figure
xchange=[-.01 -.005 0 .005 .01];
ychange=[-.01 -.005 0 .005 .01];
[nxchange,nychange]=meshgrid(xchange,ychange);
mesh(nxchange,nychange,wn2);
surf(nxchange,nychange,wn2,'FaceColor','blue','EdgeColor','black');
alpha(.4);
hold on
plot3(nxchange,nychange,wn2,'.','MarkerSize',20)
xlabel('Change in X-Position (cm)');
ylabel('Change in Y-Position (cm)');
zlabel('Natural Frequency (RPM)');
title('2nd Natural Frequency response vs change in X and Y of Pulley 1');
hold off
A.5
clear
clc
%% looks for the overall lowest freqeucies
x0=0;
y0=0;
r0=.08125;
r1=.0645-.01; %radiius becomes smaller
r3=-.04115-.005; %radius becomes larger
r6=-.03810+.01; %radius becomes smaller
count1x=0; %starts the count for the index of of x1
EA=65000*.9; %adjusted value
kt=9340*.9; %adjusted value
j3=.5*5839.24*(r3/10)^2*(r3)^2*pi;%adjusted value
m6=58.39*(r6)^2*pi;%adjusted value
j6=.5*m6*(r6/10)^2*(r6)^2*pi*1.076;%adjusted value
% for loop that calculates every possible frequenciy according to positions
% of the pulleys at the max displacements, in addition the frequency gets
% stored in a matrix which has 12 dimensions, each dimension being based
% off a count per loop that identifies the values of the x and y positions
% of each pulley that correlaltes to the calculated frequency
for x1=[.2415 .2815]
count1x=count1x+1;
count1y=0;
for y1=[.040 .080]
count1y=count1y+1;
count2x=0;
for x2=[.232 .272]
count2x=count2x+1;
count2y=0;
for y2=[.214 .254]
count2y=count2y+1;
count3x=0;
Page 25
for x3=[.0853 .0953]
count3x=count3x+1;
count3y=0;
for y3=[.2461 .2561]
count3y=count3y+1;
count4x=0;
for x4=[.066 .106]
count4x=count4x+1;
count4y=0;
for y4=[.334 .374]
count4y=count4y+1;
count5x=0;
for x5=[-.02 .02]
count5x=count5x+1;
count5y=0;
for y5=[.1475 .1875]
count5y=count5y+1;
count6x=0;
for x6=[.108 .148]
count6x=count6x+1;
count6y=0;
for y6=[.101 .141]
count6y=count6y+1;
La=((x0-x1)^(2)+(y0-y1)^(2)-(r0-r1)^(2))^(1/2);
Lb=((x1-x2)^(2)+(y1-y2)^(2)-(r1-r2)^(2))^(1/2);
Lc=((x2-x3)^(2)+(y2-y3)^(2)-(r2-r3)^(2))^(1/2);
Ld=((x3-x4)^(2)+(y3-y4)^(2)-(r3-r4)^(2))^(1/2);
Le=((x4-x5)^(2)+(y4-y5)^(2)-(r4-r5)^(2))^(1/2);
Lf=((x5-x6)^(2)+(y5-y6)^(2)-(r5-r6)^(2))^(1/2);
Lg=((x6-x0)^(2)+(y6-y0)^(2)-(r6-r0)^(2))^(1/2);
totalbelt=La+Lb+Lc+Ld+Le+Lf+Lg;
realbeltlength=sqrt((real(totalbelt))^2+(imag(totalbelt)^2));
Beltvalues(count1x,count1y,count2x,count2y,count3x,count3y,count4x,count4y,count5x,count5y,count6
x,count6y)=realbeltlength;
ka=EA/La;
kb=EA/Lb;
kc=EA/Lc;
kd=EA/Ld;
ke=EA/Le;
kf=EA/Lf;
kg=EA/Lg;
krow1=[(ka+kb)*r1^2, -kb*r1*r2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
stiffnessmatrix=[krow1;krow2;krow3;krow4;krow5;krow6;krow7];
j1=41.5/10000;
j2=13.1/10000;
j3=2.63/10000;
j4=42.1/10000;
j5=17.6/10000;
mrow1=[j1,0,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow2=[0,j2,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow3=[0,0,j3,0,0,0,0];
mrow4=[0,0,0,j4,0,0,0];
mrow5=[0,0,0,0,j5,0,0];
mrow6=[0,0,0,0,0,j6,0];
mrow7=[0,0,0,0,0,0,m6];
wn1(count1x,count1y,count2x,count2y,count3x,count3y,count4x,count4y,count5x,count5y,count6x,count
6y)=Resonances(1);
Page 26
wn2(count1x,count1y,count2x,count2y,count3x,count3y,count4x,count4y,count5x,count5y,count6x,count
6y)=Resonances(3);
end
end
end
end
end
end
end
end
end
end
end
end
%% just resets the x and y values in order to use the indexs from the loop
x1=[.2415 .2815];
y1=[.040 .080];
x2=[.232 .272];
y2=[.214 .254];
x3=[.0853 .0953];
y3=[.2461 .2561];
x4=[.066 .106];
y4=[.334 .374];
x5=[-.02 .02];
y5=[.1475 .1875];
x6=[.108 .148];
y6=[.101 .141];
%% finds the minimum value of the second frequency in the matrix stored during the loop and as
well extracts the index at which it exists
[minvaluewn2,positionmin]=min(wn2(:));
[max1count,may1count,max2count,may2count,max3count,may3count,max4count,may4count,max5count,may5co
unt,max6count,may6count]=ind2sub(size(wn2),positionmin);
minpulleypositions(:,1)=[0,x1(max1count),x2(max2count),x3(max3count),x4(max4count),x5(max5count),
x6(max6count)];
minpulleypositions(:,2)=[0,y1(may1count),y2(may2count),y3(may3count),y4(may4count),y5(may5count),
y6(may6count)];
minpulleypositions
frequency2=minvaluewn2
frequency1=wn1(max1count,may1count,max2count,may2count,max3count,may3count,max4count,may4count,ma
x5count,may5count,max6count,may6count)
A.6
% Response without damper analysis
clc
clear
%%
format shorteng
%Given Variables
%radius
r0=.08125;
r3=-.04115-.005; %radius becomes larger
r6=-.03810+.01; %radius becomes smaller
%x coordinates
x0=0;
x1=.2815;
x2=.272;
x3=.0853;
x4=.106;
x5=-.020;
x6=.148;
%y coordinates
Page 27
y0=0;
y1=.04;
y2=.254;
y3=.2461;
y4=.374;
y5=.1475;
y6=.141;
La=((x0-x1)^(2)+(y0-y1)^(2)-(r0-r1)^(2))^(1/2);
Lb=((x1-x2)^(2)+(y1-y2)^(2)-(r1-r2)^(2))^(1/2);
Lc=((x2-x3)^(2)+(y2-y3)^(2)-(r2-r3)^(2))^(1/2);
Ld=((x3-x4)^(2)+(y3-y4)^(2)-(r3-r4)^(2))^(1/2);
Le=((x4-x5)^(2)+(y4-y5)^(2)-(r4-r5)^(2))^(1/2);
Lf=((x5-x6)^(2)+(y5-y6)^(2)-(r5-r6)^(2))^(1/2);
Lg=((x6-x0)^(2)+(y6-y0)^(2)-(r6-r0)^(2))^(1/2);
EA=65000*.9;
kt=9340*.9;
ka=EA/La;
kb=EA/Lb;
kc=EA/Lc;
kd=EA/Ld;
ke=EA/Le;
kf=EA/Lf;
kg=EA/Lg;
krow1=[(ka+kb)*r1^2, -kb*r1*r2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
j1=41.5/10000;
j2=13.1/10000;
j3=.5*5839.24*(r3/10)^2*(r3)^2*pi;
j4=42.1/10000;
j5=17.6/10000;
m6=58.39*(r6)^2*pi;
j6=.5*m6*(r6/10)^2*(r6)^2*pi*1.076;
mrow1=[j1,0,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow2=[0,j2,0,0,0,0,0];
mrow3=[0,0,j3,0,0,0,0];
mrow4=[0,0,0,j4,0,0,0];
mrow5=[0,0,0,0,j5,0,0];
mrow6=[0,0,0,0,0,j6,0];
mrow7=[0,0,0,0,0,0,m6];
wn(1)=Resonances(1);%spits out the lowest rpm;
wn(2)=Resonances(3);%spits out the second lowest rpm
matrixforce=[ka*r0*r1;0;0;0;0;kg*r6*r0;-kg*(x6-x0)/Lg*r0];
count=0;
for n=[1:.1:7000]
freqforce=n*2*pi/60;
count=count+1;
amplitude(:,count)=(inv(freqforce^2*massmatrix+i*freqforce*dampingmatrix+stiffnessmatrix))*matrixforce;
end
Page 28
RPM=[1:.1:7000]/3;
realamplitude=sqrt((real(amplitude)).^2+(imag(amplitude)).^2);
RPMamplitude=realamplitude*60/(2*pi)/3;
plot(RPM,RPMamplitude(1,:),RPM,RPMamplitude(2,:),RPM,RPMamplitude(3,:),RPM,RPMamplitude(4,:),RPM,
RPMamplitude(5,:),RPM,RPMamplitude(6,:))
legend('Response of Pulley 1','Response of Pulley 2','Response of Pulley 3','Response of Pulley
4','Response of Pulley 5','Response of Pulley 6')
xlabel('RPM')
title('Amplitude Response verse RPM without Damping')
ylabel('Amplitude')

ME 370: Dynamic Response of Engine Belt: Prof. Mockensturm

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

ME 370: Dynamic Response of Engine Belt: Prof. Mockensturm

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

0

1.2 Modulus Adjustment Plot

1.3 Kt Adjustment Plot

Parameter set-up to achieve low end difference

Anda mungkin juga menyukai