Design Examples: Block Foundations 101 Wm(MACH. WT.) 56270 ce. oF mack. BS: AND FTG. AXIS OF ROTATION be = 1-0" | at ‘bs Figure 6-5. Foundation layout for centrifugal machine example problem. e rie 63 Dynamie Analysis (Three Modes of Oscillation are Possible) See Parmeter tea Vee acon osu eon Racing Onn 1 Baar nai Tate =a Parcs T= ane 2 Mag soda a=W matinee m= RNa 4 aang = ae Fo 1y = imi 4 ee | Bemee 3 Maneatis ates eo ay = 008 4 $e aie ‘aes 26H ao el ler saa elie Neetie Dye ~ 0088 i} 5 Sia ett Feet fas ten ous ayo 5 Haha ie Tet hens rmBe/e hey HOTT a hea BIC i 2 Nau eee fe ee fra = 10809 90 Ina” 809 fag = 1580800 . St asa ot pie Ine = LEB. Ing = MR | * fat oe wane = 00s 4 ® Vy= 4H 0, ergs io 19) Vien amptade ‘aes za asex ure xin y= 0s 10m 10) Capp edie ta ei i creation hash x ioe a2 tts x re) 4 He Ae abe Sait 4 1160 aa vaton nw 400 fea vane Zea uae, y > Sen 2 2 bee Bice Draven meet Fritts. Fi Wiha PRS Hines |102 6. Transmissibility factor (usually applied only to high-frequency spring-mounted machines). The value cof transmissibility is calculated by equations of Table 1-4 and should normally be less than 1 for spring- mounted machines having an inertia block, In the ex- ample, T; is less than 1 indicating that dynamic forces are not amplified. Possible Vibration Modes 1 and 2, Vertical oscillation or horizontal translation are possible modes as the force acts in either direction. 3. Rocking oscillation is possible since the point of horizontal force application is above the foundation mass cs. 4, Torsional oscillation. Since horizontal forces do not form a couple in the horizontal plane, this mode is not possible. 5. Coupled modes, ‘The horizontal translation and rocking oscillation are usually coupled. The coupled ‘modes may be considered as in example 3 which follows. Fatigue Failures 1. Machine components, Follow limits in Figure 3-4 and/or Table 3-2. 2. Connections. Same as (1) but check stresses using AISC code (ref. 13 of Chapter 3) when connectors are bolts or welds. 3. Supporting structures. Use (2) for structural steel For conerete footing, if reversal, of stresses takes place ‘and the amplitude is very high (such that the peak stress reversal is over 50% of the allowable stress), the main and the shear reinforcement (if any) should be designed for the stress reversal condition. In this example the amplitude of the dynamic forces is not large enough to produce any significant stress increase over the stresses caused only by the static Toads. Environmental Demands 1. Physiological effects on persons. If the-machine is located in a building, use the procedure given in condi- tion Enviromental Demands under “Limiting Dynamic Conditions”, and use the limits from Figure 34. Tn the example, Figure 3-4 indicates no discomfort to people. 2, Psychological effects on persons. Use same pro- cedures as (1). If the facility is located close to people not ¢onnected with machine operations, use acoustic barriers. In the example, the machine is located away from habitable areas. 3. Damage to structures, Use limits in Figure $4 or 3.5. Example check shows no danger. ‘4, Resomarice of structural’ components (superstruc- tures above the footing). Avoid resonance with lowest natural structural frequency by keeping the frequency Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines ratio either less than 0.5 or greater than 1.5. In this ‘example, no structural components are involved. ‘Thus, the trial design is acceptable and may be used to support the machine ‘Nomenclature—Example 2: A= Dynamic amplitude a, = Width of section i, ft B= Length of rectangular foundation block, ft Bz, Be, Bys Bs = Mass (or inertia) ratio; vertical, hori- zontal, rocking and torsional vibration, modes b, = Depth of section i, ft Damping ratio Damping ratios; vertical, horizontal, rocking and torsional modes Internal damping ratio = Eccentricity of unbalanced mass to axis of rotation at operating speed, in. Eccentricity of the machine's unbal- anced mas, in F = Excitation force F, = Amplitude of excitation force Ibs. Operating speed of the machine, rpm Je= Critical speed of the machine, rpm fa= Natural frequency, rpm ja= Resonant frequency for constant force- amplitude excitation, rpm Jur = Resonant frequency for rotating mass type excitation, rpm jax = Resonant frequency in the horizontal dlizection, rpra foy = Resonant frequency in the rocking di- rection, rpm Shear modulus, psi Acceleration of gravity, ft/sec? H.,= Dynamic horizontal force, Ibs. Mass moment of inertia, Ibs.sec*-ft Segment (1, 2, -) ing constant = Distance from center of rotor axis to footing, ft k= Distance from center of mass to base of footing for segment i, ft es Feu kyo bea = Equivalent spring constants; vertical, horizontal, rocking and torsional modes L= Width at base of machine foundation block, ft Magnification factor Maximusm’ magnification factor "Mf = Dynamic magnification factor ‘m= Total mass, Ib-sect/ft De, Dey Dox Ds D,inbalanced mass Mass of segment i Number of segments ‘orce thansmitted through spring Ratio of operating frequency to natural frequency, fife quivalent radius for rectangular foot- ing, ft Horizontal distance from center to edge of footing, ft R, = Vertical distance from base to center of rotor axis, ft Allowable soil bearing capacity, ksf Unbalanced torque, ft-lbs. ransmissibility factor Dynamic vertical force, Ibs. ‘otal weight of machine plus footing, Ibs. ase plate weight, Ibs. We= Compressor weight, bs. Weight of footing, Ibs. ‘otal machine weigh Wey Ibs Rotor weight, Ibs, Turbine weight, Ibs Total displacement response in the horizontal x-direction, in, ‘Total displacement response in the ver- tical z-direction, in. Spring coefficients; vertical, horizontal rocking modes oil density, pet Poisson's ratio Mass density = y/g Ibs.-sect/ftt ‘requency of excitation force, rad /sec Natural circular frequency, rad/sec Wot Wet Example 3: Foundation Design for Centrifugal Machines with Different Operating Frequencies and Supported on an Inertia Block In some plant facilities, due to environmental con- siderations or poor soil conditions, it becomes necessary to limit the propagation and amplitude of the machine vibrations transmitted to the foundation (ref. 3). In those circumstances, the’ use of an inertia block sup- ported on springs is recommended as a vibration isolator; see Figure 6.6. This type of supporting system requires _ that the piping which is connected to the machines jointed with exible couplings in order to absorb out distrest the resulting large movements of the “vinertia block. This movement may be caused either Design Examples: Block Foundations 103 due to a sudden surge condition during the operation of the centrifugal machine or when a resonance condi- tion occurs temporarily at start-up or shutdown of the machine. ‘The latter condition generally is more severe since .an inertia block spring system generally has negligible damping resistance. ‘The inertia block spring suspended foundation is not recommended for heavy machines with large unbalanced forces. However, this type of system may be used when ‘the machines are located on an elevated steel-framed structure, In this example problem, a foundation system for a gas turbine/generator set is investigated, ie, the ma- chine consists of an electric generator powered by a gas turbine. Both machines run at different operating fre- quencies and the step-down from the higher to the Tower frequency is accomplished through a gear box. Foundations for this type of machine have been dis- cussed in Chapter 2, and the various steps required to complete the dynamic analysis are given below: A. Machine Parameter 1, Generator: Weight (Wx) 28,150 Ibs. Rotor Weight (Ws) 9,460 Ibs. Operating Speed (f) = 1,800 rpm « 188.5 rad /sec Critical Speed fe 2,200 rpm Eccentricity of Unbalanced Mass, ¢ = 001 in. (Table 3-1) Centrifugal Force Fy=(Wn/g) €ot= 871 Ibs. 2. Turbine: Weight (Ws) 6,305 Ibs. Rotor Weight (Wn) ‘567 Ibs. Operating Speed (f) 8,990 rpm ° 141.43 rad /sec Critical Speed. (fe) = Ist ~ 2,885 pm 2nd ~ 11,670 pm. Eccentricity of Unbalanced Mas. at Operating Speed, e = 0.5 v/12,00078,950 mil (see Table 3-1) 00057 in. Centrifugal force Fy (867/386) x .00057 x (94143)? 742 Ibs. 3. Gear Box Weight (We) = 13,045 Ibs. Unbalanced forces generated by gear box and cou- plings are assumed negligible, Total Machine weight (W) = Wat Wr + We = 57,500 Ibs. ‘A layout of the equipment is shown in Figure 6-6.404 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines CG OF TOTAL EQUIPMENT GEAR BOX 13,045 Ibs ‘SPRINGS GENERATOR 28,150 Ibs. | sgt | TURBINE 16,035 Ibs. | Se! id @ SHAFT. a (A) PLAN — EQUIPMENT LAYOUT Zp |-ComBINED CG. OF EQUIPMENT AND 92.500" INERTIA BLOCK CG. EQUIPMENT FCG. INERTIA BLOCK 57,500" 35,000" 7 (B) FOUNDATION AND EQUIPMENT LOADSDesign Examples: Block Foundations 105 FOUNDATION C.G, EQUIPMENT, INERTIA BLOCK AND FOOTING COINCIDES VW25 G TURBINE E1063", & SENTR— CONNECTION TO HAVE NEOPRENE BEARING PAD AND BOLT HOLES SLOTTED IN VERTICAL DIRECTION LATERAL RESTRAINT W6x20 (TWO EACH SIDE) e (C) DETAIL LATERAL RESTRAINT Figure 6-6. Foundation configuration for centrifugal machine with an inertla block 4, Center of Gravity of Unbalanced Forces: 2000 ‘The unbalanced forces generated by the equipment 1800 arin nash + 742 sm salar are assumed to be acting at the center of gravity of the 200 APPROX.» 8 wn ‘machine loads and perpendicular to their shaft axis, ‘The shaft axes are shown in Figure 6-68. The forces of the two machines, when combined, are given by P(t) = 871 sin 188.5¢ + 742 sin 941.41 ‘The plot of individual force functions, as well as the 400) combination of the individual force functions, is given in Bigue 67 veo FC fio B. Soil and Foundation Parameter = + (tie Se Sy iy 2000, a OF TuRBINe WoTiCn | Sheer Mone (c= 5,500 psi _____trevoue or cenenaron wonton Poisson's ratio (») = 0.35 ie, Figure 6-7. Plot of unbalanced centrifugal force. Soil Internal Damping Ratio, (Djs) Static allowable bearing capacity (Seu406 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines Settlement of soil for a 14 ft by 28 ft footing at 1 ksf bearing pressure = 0.125 in Water table fluctuates and is 3 ft below grade at cer- tain times of the year. ©. Selection of a Foundation Configuration The guidelines listed under Trial Sizing of a Block Foundation in Chapter 3 are followed in selecting an initial configuration. Because the water table is 3 ft below grade, it is recommended that the footing be located at a shallow depth in order to avoid construction complications and a relatively large contact surface area be used. In order to achieve uniform settlement, it is necessary that the center of gravity of the equipment plus the inertia block coincide with the center of gravity of the footing, A trial proportioning of the inertia block and the footing is shown in Figure 6-6. 1. Inertia Block Trial Outline (Figure 664) : Center of gravity of total equipment (p-direction) 16,305 (14.0833) + 13,045 (7.2917) 16,305 + 15,08 + 28,15 1608 ft =5 ft — 7% in, from centerline generator, or 11 ft ~ 2% in. from the left edge of the inertia block. Center of gravity of total equipment (x- direction) 16,305 (2.0) + 13,045 (1.0) = 76305 F 15,045 + 26,150 0.7940 ft =9¥/4 in, from centerline generator, “The inertia block has a uniform thickness of 8 in. (100 psf) and an additional thicknest of 8 in. (100 psf) of dimension 10 ft X 10 ft in the region under the turbine. The center of gravity of inertia block (y-direction) 10 10 x 100 (20.0) + 25 x 10 100 (12.5) = Bx 10x 100F 0X 10x 100 = 14.6429 fe = 14 ft 7% in, (from left edge of inertia block) The center of gravity of inertia block (x-direction) =5 ft—0 in, (from bottom edge of inertia block) From Figure 6-6B, C, Combined C.G. of equipment and inertia block, 37,500 (11.2292) + 35,000 (14.6429) ~~ 37,500 + 35,000 = = 12 ft—6 in, from left edge of the inertia block. Combined ©.G. of equipment and inertia block, (e-direction) =5 ft 0 in. from bottom edge of inertia block. 2. Footing Trial Outline ‘The footing plan dimensions should be larger than the inertia block in order to accommodate the support- (p-direction) ing springs of the inertia block and its lateral supports. Also, the resultant bearing pressure on the soil should be Jess than 50% of the allowable soil bearing pressure in order to minimize posible foundation settlements. A trial concrete slab size 14 ft wide by 28 ft long and 2 ft thick is then analyzed. The footing center of gravity is made to coincide with the combined center of gravity ‘of the equipment and the inertia block. Weight of the footing (Wp) = 117,600 Ibs. Total static load (W) = equipment weight + inertia block + footing weight = 210,100 Ibs ‘Actual soil pressure = 210,100/14(28) = 534 psf ‘Thus, area of footing is OK. 05 Sas D. Dynamic Analysis ‘A mathematical model of this foundation was pre- viously discussed as Model 3 of Chapter 2. We have the following parameter calculations Selection of Springs for Inertia Block 1, Vertical Direction. Try for transmissibility factor (7) =.02. From the transmissibility equation of Table 1-4, and assuming damping to be negligible in the springs, D then the resulting equation is 002 = 1/)1— | of = fffn=70 1800 mpm, fs 14 rpm 1990 rpm, f, = 1284.29 rpm dea! tegen fh) 237 lb sed sine a igher tatu eqn wl reguie lage mabe Sige Sinai) of neta Mock + equipment $1500: 3900 = 29064 tn sen Teal ping costar () BEI x2 064 =15760 jn Try Bing a spring constant fr ah rs sping 1B There it commrciiyaaile ring of 80 fo fr sin deecion "Te dines tte Cig et hohe 50 iy th 3.8 in gh 2G ES anu ded 10012 or 11 Bhi dfesen the 2 apa oor n= 176000 in ‘Then, fe = (60/2) \/176,000/239.64 = 258.8 rpm. 2 Hontnad Dieelon (gue 680), Lae Te wtp by W520 vera posto om = 8,688.1 Ibs,/in.each side. The posts are fully fixed at their bottom and a Be Bre par ot fed holes in the vertical direction so that the oscil- lation of the vertical springs is not effected. A neoprene bearing pad layer is inserted in the connection in order to absorb high-frequency vibrations. The spring constant in the lateral direction is given by: sELe/ where Ip = 4 X 41.5 = 166 ins 1=21.0in, E= 30 X 10° psi sket = 1.6132 X 10° lbs, fin. Mass (my) of the inertia block and equipment 289.64 Ibs-sec f= (60/25) V1STS200/RIGB = 703.5 rpm 3: Rocking Oxcilation about Point 0 (Figure 6-6C) Two rows of springs, each containing ten springs, are located at a distance of 60 in, on either side of an ani pasting through point‘0. Due to thit arrangement, the inertia block is capable of rocking about that axis. The spring constant for the rocking exilation y is thus 2 function of the vertical spring constant and is given by: fy = het where i spring constant of each row (10 X 8, 88,000 Ibe/in.), ¢ is the distance from the axis to the (=60 in)” y= 2 X 89,000 % 80 X 60 633.6 X 10° Ibn, /rad. In order to calculate the natural frequency, the mas moment of inertia for the inertia block and equipment ust be calculated and is given by: Te = Dome kt Machines = (57,500/386) (60) Inertia block = (25,000/386) (12)* 60/2) (633.8 X 10%) 755 22.4 rpen Therefore, the natural frequencies of the inertia block: equipment-spring system are 258.8, 783.5, and 322.4 rpm in the vertical, lateral, and rocking modes. Table 6-4 lists all computations for the single-degree-of-freedom system, E, Dynamic Analysis as a Multi-Mass System Design Examples: Block Foundations 107 a= a[ ba FES) tm ‘The terms with subscript 1 stand for inertia block plus equipment, and 2 for the footing, The calculations for the footing only (14" x 28° block) is performed in Table 6-5 1. Vertical Oxcillation: kay = 176,000 Ibs/in, rm, = 299.64 Ibs-sect/in, key = 3.07 X 10° Ibs.Jin rma = 304.35 lbssct/in where y(Table6-5) and m, are the spring constant and mass Of the foundation block, respectively. ot = 691.85 oF fay = 251.2 pm or? = 10,307.98 or fas = 988.2 spm 2: Horizontal Oxillation: ay = 1.6132 X 108 bs.fin, 2.888 X 10" Ibs./in, me 3.19331, f= 5345 rpm 6647.57, foe = 12821 rpm 39.64 Tbs.-sect/in, 304.35 Ibssec* F. Discussion of Dynamic Analysis 1, Natural frequencies. ‘The values calculated for a single-mass model and a two-mass model reveal that for the vertical mode there is no difference in the calculated frequency when either model is used. This is because the natural frequency of the model, including the inertia block, has a natural frequency of less than half the natural frequency of the footing in the vertical mode (258.8 vs. 717.5 rpm, Table 6-5, respectively). Therefore, the fundamental frequency ofthe coupled model hasa small difference with the lowest frequency caleulated asindividual uncoupled models (251.2 rpm vs. 258.8 rpm, respectively). ‘This fact can be demonstrated by using Southwell-Dunker- ley’ formula, substituting, f= 2588, fe= 7175, then, j= 249.5 mpm, which differs les than 3.296 from the calculated coupled model frequency and 6.3% from the calculated single mass frequency. Similarly, for the rocking mode, the fundamental frequency calculated by using f,= S224 and f,= 883.2 into the Southwell-Dunkerleys formula will be 30285 rpm, which difers by 65% from the caleulated frequency of the single mass model, Ifthe coupled equations of horizontal and rocking modes are solved, then the lowest frequency is found to be clove to 250 rpm. Therefore, due to the significant difference in408 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines Table 6-4 Dynamic Analyse of Single-Deree-o Freedom System (lachine pas Inert. lock On - Tenia Toreoneat a Parameter Sources meen eas, Le sewatrenmer, S/F asesion a sate EC co ar (f= 800 = oo0t = 0018 ta a anos 0 ee oaer ene me Ror gEe rir gun = 10 ‘420 Perret og Ea as es) 7 ee Tier Trimax pe aR ane xn pin scio# y= 00 x 102 (in) (radians) 5 Congest tens 7 ition { 3 Reais gain yA Bc = nia Qh, A To Pennie cos Fo Tube aT 5 go = Oaat T= OSs, Py = BOR Ty = 68, = RE carat nats ‘Total 1004 (ibe) 1. (F = 8,900) = 001 Os O74 Ty = 0.008, Py = 594 T, = 0.001, P= the natural periods of the two mass elements, it is per rmissible to assume that the individual elements act inde- pendently of each other, ic., in the vertical and rocking modes the inertia block and the bottom footing masses can be analyzed on the basis of an equivalent one-degree~ of-freedom or uncoupled system. However, in the horizontal mode, both mass ele- ments have nearly equal natural frequency; the inertia block has a natural frequency of 783.5 xpm, and the footing has 2 natural frequency of 628.9 rpm. The fre- ‘quencies of the two-mass coupled mode are 584.5 and ~ 1,282.0 xpm for the inertia block and the footing, respec tively. From Dunkerley's formula, the lowest frequency js 490.5 rpm, which is quite low compared to 783.5 rpm obtained by considering the inertia block plus the ma- chine as an individual element. Therefore, a coupled model investigation is justified in the lateral direction, 2, Response cileulations: Because the equations motion of Model 3 for these foundations are linear, dynamic response generated by each of the two cx ponents 871 sin 188.51 and 742 sin 944.4 of the exctat force can be combined using the principle of superp tion. This procedure has been used in Steps 4 to 6 Table 6-4. However, in that table, the inertia bl clement was considered to be acting independent of footing. This uncoupling was found to be justified the vertical and rocking modes, but for the horizo: mode, an analysis based on coupling of m; and m required. The following equations give the respo values and consider the effects described above: th) m ) Fein te) my (a — oh) ( — 08) ae Design Examples: Block Foundations 109. Table 6-5 Dynamic Analysis of Footing Only (14° x 28" X 2-0") Step Vertical Horizontal Rocking Nor Parameter Source Excitation Excitation Excitation 1. Equivalents Tables T= 0, v= HLT radius re B= 280" res WLIT it Wie W = 210,100 tbs Te(Machine) = 107,441.0 2, Mass and 1, (Inertia block) = “27.028°8 ‘ase moment A mm = 210,100/82.2 1 (Footing) = 04,5218 of inertia Ty = Bion(ar? + 02) “— = 55288 (Summation) 2fy 198,686,4 2 Baste /fe Toscsec¥tt + mb Mass ratio Table 43 B, = 0233, 2. -0a77 By = 0.188 Geometric] Table as D, = 0.900 = 547 Dy = 0214 damping rao { = 020 imeraal —f scildata, Negtiible De = 0.080 damping 5 Spring Figure 41 B= 240 By = 040 6. Equivalent Table 4-1 8684 10° yy = 2830 X 10 hy, = 1,702.12 x 108 spring Ths./te Ibe Tbscte/rad constant 1 Natural (00/22) VE 17.50 rpm = 628.90 rpm fag = 889.20 rpm frequency fe 8 Resonance, Table 1 Resonance not far = 982.40rpm fag = 954,00 rpm Frequency fax possible a = eH Rain (ot = 9) Comparing the amplitudes of x; (¢) with the values of : mim (oF — oF) Ce x in Step 4 of Table 6-4, it'may be observed that the In these equations, w (operating speeds) = 188.5 and 941.4 rad/see. os? (square of the mass m, circular frequency) 3,193.31 ex! (square of the mass m, circular frequency) 16,647.57 ‘my (total mass of inertia block and equipment) = 230,64 Ibs.sect in. ‘ms (mass of the footing) = 304.45 Ibs.sec*/in. ky (horizontal spting constant between m and ms) a, = 1.6132. X 10* Ibs fin. ke (horizontal spring constant of soil) = kee 2.8575 X 10° tbs./in. F (amplitude of the dynamic forces) = 871 and TEA e 742 Ts. ‘x and gs are phase difference and = 0, » Substituting the above parameters, x (2) = 1.336 X 10-*sin 188.51 +3.521 x 10% sin 941.4¢ in. 4 (4) = 2.682 X 10-* sin 188.5¢ +0.0022 X 10° sin 94144 in, response values do not change significantly, using either ‘of the two assumptions. Therefore, the assumption of independent behavior of the inertia block in all modes of ‘oscillation is a valid step. Furthermore, in Figure 6-7, which shows the plot of the total centrifugal force, itis found that the total forcing function follows approxi mately the path of the curve: sin 188.5¢, and has an amplitude of 1615 lbs. Using this function in the response equations, x(t) = 2474 X 10- sin 188.5¢ in, x(t) =5.831 X 10-* sin 188.5¢ in. ‘The above values are much higher than the response values calculated by the summation of the individual forcing functions. Therefore, the analysis of Table 6-4 gives more accurate results Another point worth discussing is the exclusion of the damping term when solving the coupled equations of ‘motion of Model 3, Since the natural frequencies of the modes, f. = 5345 and 1,232.1 rpm are quite different from the operating frequencies, f= 1,800 and 8,990 rpm, the influence of damping on the response. values is neg- ligible for all practical purposes.410 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines 3, Transmissibility factor: From the foregoing dis- cussion, it can be stated that the factors calculated in Table 6-4, considering the footing as a stiff support for the inertia block, is a valid assumption. Transmissbility factors were not calculated for the footing because the forces transmitted: from’ the inertia block were of very ‘small magnitude. However, for design purposes the values ‘obtained for the inertia block are asumed to be trans ‘mitted to'the soil without any amplification or reduction. G. Check of Design Criteria (as listed in Chapter 3) 1. Static Conditions: (a). Static bearing capacity. Proportion footing area for 50% of allowable soil pressure, From C above, 534 psf ~ 500 psf (allowable) (b). Static settlement must be uniform; C.G. of footing, inertia block and machine loads coin- cides, and thus settlement will be uniform. (c). Bearing capacity: static plus dynamic loads. ‘po = 534+ [19/14 (28) ] (1770/12) 6/28 (i4)*] = 535 psf < 0.75 (1000) pst is OK. (d). Settlement: static plus repeated dynamic loads, The increase in pressure due to dynamic loads is less than 1 psf and thus would not create uneven settlement, 2, Limiting Dynamic Conditions (refer to Table 6-4) (a). Vibration amplitude at operating frequency. Inertia block: Z, (vertical vibration ampli- tube) = .00028 in. at f = 1800 rmp. From Figure 3-3, this falls within the safe allowable limits. x; (horizontal vibration at centerline of bearings) = .00030 in. at / = 1800 rpm. From Figure 3-3, the amplitude falls in zone A and, therefore, is acceptable. Footing: The dynamic forces transmitted through the inertia block are very small and thus vibration amplitude is also negligible. (b). Velocity equals 2rf (cps) X displacement amplitude as calculated in (a) above. Veloc- ity = 2x (1800) (1/60) 0.0003 = 0.0565 in./ sec. From Table 3-2 this velocity falls in the “good operation” range and is, therefore, acceptable. ‘Velocity check by RMS (root mean square) method, when response involves more than cone frequency: Using response values of ms ‘of Model 3, Velocity ViIBaS K 1356 K IOVS (SEK SD KIO 0.0254 < 0.0565 in./see. calculated above, thus is OK. (c). Acceleration: 4% (30)? (0.0003) = 10.66 in,/sect. (a). Magnification factor: From Table 6-4 this value is Jess than 1.5 for all modes of oscil. Tation and, thus, is acceptable. (e). Resonance condition: The natural frequen- cies (Table 6-4) in all modes of oscillations for the inertia block and footing are less than 0.8(1800). Therefore, no resonance condition, ‘occurs at the lower operating speed. This ratio is also true for the critical speed of the machine rotor. Thus, the foundation is class= ified as Iow-tuned or under-tuned. (£).‘Transmissiblity factor: This factor is less than 590 in the vertical and rocking modes of the inertia block and, thus, meets the normal limitation. However, in the horizontal mode when acted on by the lower frequency (f = 1800), T, was found to be 1.234 > 0.05 normally used. This happened due to the use of a structural member (W6 X 20) asa vibra tion isolator. Use of structural member as a lateral restraint is a required feature in this type of system in order to maintain the sta bility of the inertia block in case of failure of the springs, In any case, the lateral force transmitted to the footing is small and can ‘easily be absorbed by the lateral soil in contact with the footing, 3, Possible Vibration Modes: (a) and (b). Vertical oscillation or horizontal translation is a possible mode as the force acts in either direction. (c). Rocking oscillation is possible since the point of horizontal force application is above the foundation mass C.G. (4). Torsional oscillation is possible as the forces generated by the two machines are of different frequencies. However, it is estimated that the natural frequency of this mode would be too low compared to the acting frequency such that the response values would not be of much significance. In case an analysis is required, then the following steps are given: (1). Mass moment of inertia about the ver~ tical axis through center of gravity. Machines: (16,305/386) [(85.5)* +. (14.5)*] “+ (28,150/386) [(83.5)* + (9.5)'I + (13,045/386) ((2.5)" + (4)*] = 833,475.0 Ibs. in. sec*san 10> 109, a0» 99 Torin e300 (180% 120 800 0) e . 10.009 gy cin, et + 14.00 coy — 773.9160 1b Jy = 833,475.0 + 773,316.0 1,606,791.0 Ibs.-in. sec? (2). Spring constant of vertical posts (W6 X 20) using the weak axis, 3Eby by @ posts) = =? . 3X30X10°X213.3 en = 258,503 Ibs./in. ky = he! = 2 X 258,503 (60) = 1.8612 X 10° lbs.-in./rad (e = 60in.) 1, = 00, BBIEX is = Qe V1.6068 X 10" of the generator which is in phase with ‘the peaks of the turbine’s centrifugal force at f= 1,800 rpm will not form any significant torque couple, The other peaks of the turbine force will form a torque couple; ie., four out of six peaks (Figure 6-7). Conservatively, it may be assumed that the turbine centrifugal force will form a torsional moment and may be given as: T. = 742 X 60 sin 941.42 = 44,520 sin 941.4 Ibs.-in, (4). Magnification factor M = 1/(r* — 1) = 0.0013, (5). Transmissibility factor T, = 0.0013, (6).-Response value of inertia block (longi- tudinal direction) M (Ti/a) ¢ = 0.0013 X [44,520/ (1.8612 x 10°)] x 60 = 187 X 107 in, (negligible) Design Examples: Block Foundations 111 (7). Force transmitted to the foregoing: (TeX T)/e (44,520 x 0.0013)/ 2 (60) = 0.482 Ibs. (negligible) ‘Therefore, torsional mode oscillations are not significant. (c). Coupled modes: The degrees of freedom for each of the masses were found to be acting independent of each other. Because of the lineatity in the equations of motion, the prin- ciple of superposition is used to find the total response. Possible fatigue failure checks and environmental demands are also found to be satisfactory and the foundation js judged to be adequate. Nomenclature—Example 3: A= Dynamic amplitude a; = Width of section i, ft B= Length of rectangular foundation block, ft ‘Mass (or inertia) ratio: vertical mode, horizontal, rocking, and torsional vibra- tion modes b, = Depth of section i, ft D=Damping ratio By Br By Be Dz, De, Dy, De= Damping ratios: vertical, horizontal, rocking, and torsional modes Dy = Internal damping ratio @ = Eccentricity of unbalanced mass to axis of rotation at operating speed, in. or half the distance between the vertical springs for calculating the equivalent value of ky and ke E-= Modulus of elasticity, psi F = Excitation force, Ibs. F.= Amplitude of excitation force, Ibs Operating speed of the machine, rpm Gritical speed of the machine, rpm ‘quivalent fundamental frequency, rpm Resonant frequency for constant force- amplitude excitation, rpm Juss furs fay = Resonant frequency in horizontal (x) vertical (2), and rocking (g) modes. Natural frequency, 1pm Natural frequencies of masses m:, ms fr tou fra in coupled model, spm fuofa= Natural frequencies of masses m, ms in uncoupled model, zpm112 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines G= Shear modulus, psi £= Acceleration of gravity, ft/sect H,= Dynamic horizontal force, Is. In,I,= Moment of Inertia of vertical post of strong axis (x) and weak axis (y), in Iy, To = Mass moment of inertia of inertia block in rocking (J) and torsional (8) modes, bs-insect Segment (1, 2, .) Spring constant Distance from center of rotor axis to base of footing, ft ‘k,= Distance from center of mass to base of footing for segment i ft bey ken ges Fox = Equivalent spring constants: vertical, horizontal, rocking, and torsional modes L= Width at base of machine foundation block, ft = Height of vertical post, in. -M, = Magnification factor hy Mynax= Maximum magnification factor ‘M = Dynamic magnification factor ‘m= Total mass ‘m= Unbalanced mass mj = Mass of segment i Number of segments Py,Py = Force transmitted through springs in horizontal (x), vertical (2) directions, Ibs. Py = Moment transmitted to springs in rock- ing oscillation (y), Ibs-in. Force transmitted through spring mounts, Ibs, Ry = Horizontal distance from center to edge of footing, ft Ry = Vertical distance from base to center of rotor axis, ft Ratio of operating frequency to natural frequency, f/f quivalent radius for rectangular foot ing, f Sy = Allowable soil beating capacity, kt torque, ft-lbs ransmissblity factor V9= Dynamic vertical force, Ibs W= Total weight of machine plus footing Ibs. Wa = Weight of gear box, Ibs. Wa = Weight of generator, Ibs. W,= Weight of turbine, Ibs. W, = Total weight of machines, Ib. Wy = Weight of rotor, lbs. X,Z,9= Displacement amplitude in horizont: (x), vertical (2), and rocking (y modes X,,Z:= Total vibration amplitude in horizont (x) direction at machine axis level an in vertical (z) direction at footing leve Y,, Yo= Displacement response of masses ms, 1 in coupled mode, in Pu Bes Pp = Spring coefficients: vertical horizont and rocking modes Soil Density, pet Ratio of unbalanced mass to total me ‘maim = Poisson's ratio p= Mass density = 7/g, Ibs.-sect/ftt e= Frequency of excitation force, rad/s fatural frequency, rad /sec y » References 1. Arya, Suresh C., Drewyer, Roland P., and Pincus, € “Foundation Design for Reciprocating Compressor: Hydrocarbon Processing, Vol. 56, No. 5, May 1977. 2.Arya, Suresh C., Drewyer, Roland P., Pincus, ¢ “Foundation Design for Vibrating Machines,” Hydr carbon Processing, Vel. 54, No. 11, November 197! 3, Winterkorn, Hans F., Fang, Hsai-Yang, Foundati Engineering Handbook, New York: Van Nostra Reinhold, 1975. 4,Richatt, F. E,, Jr Hall, J. R,, Jr. and Woods, R. 1 Vibrations of Soils and Foundations, Englewo Giiffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1970. 5. Newcomb, W. K., “Principals of Foundation Desi for Engines and Comprestors,” Transactions, A.S.M, Vol. 73, pp. 307-318, 1951.7|\Computer Analysis and Applications: Elevated Foundation The availability of electronic digital computers having speed coupled with large costs have made the rule-of- great calculating speed and analytical power has re- thumb approach and hand computation either unsafe sulted in substantial advancement in the engineering or too conservative for many structures. Modem ¢om- art of analysis and design of structures supporting puter programs yield, among other factors, the natural dynamic machines. Increasing machine weight and frequencies, the deformations, and the forces in the Table Top Compressor Unit. Courtesy of Big Three Industries, Inc., Channelview, Texas, Photo by Engineering Media Center, University of Houston. 113114 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines structure (ref, 1). These quantities were either ignored, conservatively assumed, or calculated in a simplified approximate way in precomputer times, For example, an ‘equivalent static strength analysis of a structure sup- porting a centrifugal machine is usually made for the following loading conditions: 1, Total vertical load plus 0.5 of the full load acting in the vertical direction, 2. Total vertical load plus 0.3 of the full lead acting in the transverse direction, 3. Total vertical load plus 0.1 of the full load acting in the longitudinal direction. These approximate machine load factors (0.5, 0.3, 0.1) are fairly accurate for an equivalent static analysis when the ratio of machine acting frequency to natural frequency 1 in the specified direction is less than 1, greater than 1, and much greater than 1, respectively, as shown in Figure 1-36, However, the factors 0.5, 0.3, and 0.1 ate derived for a machine with an acting fre- quency of 1,800 rpm and considered very stiff in the longitudinal direction. The selected ratios of 0.5, 0.3, and 0.1 are generally consistent with a highest rigidity in the vertical direction, a not-sochigh rigidity in the transverse direction, and no dynamic load component jn the longitudial direction, Even though the ratios 0.5, 0.3 and 0.1 are approximate, they are useful in that being conservative, a safe structure will result. Since the strength is usually not a controlling design factor, many designers have traditionally used equivalent static loads in their strength check. A dynamic analysis, coupled with the help of the computer, will give the true dynamic forces that act on the structure in addition to the natural frequencies and displacements Tn many cases, the structure or soil parameters are known only within certain limits. For example, the shear modulus of the soil may vary by 25% or more at péints below the foundation as described in Chapter 4. The effect of these variations may be. studied by making additional computer runs and varying the parameter in question. Thus; the behavior of the struc- ture may be predicted for probable ranges of parameter values. This feature of computer use'is important since the possible variation of some parameters may be rather wide and strongly affect the results. ‘Computer coding and software applications for the solution of structures supporting dynamic loads are con- sidered in this chapter. An analysis of a dynamically loaded structure is performed toobtain the following information: 1. Forces and deflections in members and joints for all static loading conditions. This will determine if the structure is statically safe or if deformations exceed tolerable limits, For structures supporting dynamic machines, the members are usually v lange and massive and the stresses and deflect will be well within tolerable limits. This staat is-a direct result of inital trial sizing of the str ture where the mass of the supporting struct is made several times the mass of the machine described in the section on Trial Sizing of Eleva Foundations (Table Tops) of Chapter 3. 2. A dynamic analysis is also performed to determ the natural froquencies or eigenvalies of the str ture, the mode shapes or eigenvectors, and the « placements and member forest at a number time intervals ‘The dynamic analysis technique used in most ce puter programs is called a normal mode (or mod technique which results in the calculation of the 4 quencies and mode shapes whieh in turn are used the response calculations. ‘The method is termed nore because the equations of motion (one per dynamic gree of freedom) are transformed to a new coordin system called normal coordinates, resulting in uncoup Tinear equations leading to a relatively efficient solut process. ‘The primary purpose of the dynamic analysis is ascertain possible resonance concitions, that is, 19 det, mine if any of the structure natural frequencies coine with the machine acting frequency or any ofits cri speeds. A true dynamic analysis is sometimes replai by a static analysis by using the Rayleigh method calculate the lowest natural frequencies. The cale., tion of the Raleigh frequencies is very simple and expensive feature when used with a computer ste analysis, and some designers will only perform a ste computer analysis with Rayleigh natural frequen calculation. However, only a complete dynamic anal will provide the necessary information for predicting behavior of a structure supporting time-dependent loz Example Problem ‘An example of computer coding for the solution an elevated foundation is given in the following pai ‘This example has been selected to illustrate the use the popular computer software package, STRU! (Structural Design Language, part of the MIT-dey oped Integrated Civil Engineering System, ICES) plied to the analysis of an elevated foundation (2 called a table top). ‘The structure shown in Figure 7-1 is analyzed us the software package mentioned above. The struct trial dimensions are selected to meet certain prelimin criteria as described in Chapter 3 under Trial Siz of Elevated Foundations (Table Tops),Computer Analysis and Applications: Example 115 Figure 7-1. Typical elevated pedestal foundation (table top). ‘A. Machine Parameters ‘Total machine weight = 150,000 Ibs. ‘Turbine speed = 6.949 rpm or w = 727.7 rad/sec Compressor speed = 6,949 rpm or » = 727.7 rad/see Turbine rotor weight = 159 Ibs, Amplitude of turbine force = (W¥/g) = [159/(82.2 x 12)] X (1.0V'12,00076,949/1,000) x (727.7)? = 286 Ibs where ¢ is obtained from Table 3-1 Compressor rotor weight = 4,328 Ibs. Amplitude of compressor force = (W//g) eat = {4,32 /(82.2x12)]x (1.0 v/12,000/6,949/1,000) x (2.7) 7,794 Ibs. =. B, Soil Parameters Shear modulus at the expected bearing pressure, see Chapter 4, Shear Modulus, G Poisson's ratio, v Coefficient of subgrade reaction, ky Soil density y Allowable bearing capacity Predicted static settlement = 6,500 psi 045 20 Ibs. fin 115 pet 9,000 pat 2 in. at 2,000 pe ©. Selection of Foundation Configuration Selection of a trial configuration is accomplished by following the guidelines described under Trial Sizing of Elevated Foundation (Table Tops) of Chapter 3: 1, Machine and piping requirements dictate the plan arrangement of the top of the foundation, as shown in Figure 7- 2. A mat foundation is recommended by the soil consultant, The column spans are 12 ft and 8 ft; thus, the mat thickness is at least 07 (10) = 1.51 fe ‘Try a 3-ft mat. The thickness of the mat will also be at least one tenth of its largest dimension to assure rigid behavior. The relative stiffness dimension, Equation (5-1), is a Ee 0.28 “=(aaae ! ‘The modulus of elasticity of concrete is 3,122,000 psi, and its Poisson’s ratio is 0.17; therefore, 3,122,000 x (36)*7]°* 12 (T— 0.17%) 120 01.0 in. B42 fe16 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines A flexible mat is one whose outside dimensions exceed 31, or 25.3 ft in each direction and is loaded over a small area, as described in Chapter 5. Therefore, a 24 ft by 30 ft by 3 ft mat may be considered as rigid since the load is spread ‘out over most of the mat. 3-5, The crose-sectional dimensions of columns and beams are selected according to these guidelines 6. The ratio of mass of structure to mass of max chine is 423,000/ 150,000 = 2.82 ~ 3 O.K. 7. The mass of the top half of the structure is 0.8 times the mass of the machine (the ratio should preferably exceed 1.0) 8, The maximum static pressure is (423,000 + 150,000) /(24 x 30) $05 X 2,000 psf OK. 9. The center of resistance of the soil js found to coincide with the centroid of all superimposed loads (structure plus machine) 10. The center of column resistance found as shown in Figure 3-2 coincides with the center of gravity of the equipment plus the top half of the struc ture. 11, Column and beam deflections are checked in the computer analysis that follows. 96 psf 12. Column resonance check shows no column re nance with the acting machine frequency (6,9 rpm). For example, for all the colurnns, p= 44.34 psi = 168 in. (clear height of columns) fx = 44,800 (3,000) 924) V4ESE X 168 3,8424pm ‘Thus, the trial design is judged satisfactory and « dynamic analysis for the proposed configuration then performed, ‘The idealized computer model is shown in Figure where numbered joints have been located at mem! intersections and at other points of interest such loading points. The structure is idealized as a Mo 6 type D described in Chapter 2. The global coo: axes are selected according to the right-hand rule w axis ¥ being vertical; each member is also numbe: (numbers within circle in Figure 7-2), and springs placed at joints in contact with the soil in the verti and horizontal directions. These springs represent resistance that the supporting soil offers to displa ment, and the equivalent spring stiffness is calcula using soil properties as described in 4 below. ‘A flow chart of the steps that occur during the ce puter analysis is given in Figure 7-3 and represent typical analysis regardless of the software package be Figure 7-2. Computer model of elevated pedestal foundation.Computer Analysis and Applications: Example ‘Computer command ===} y 117 Explanation ‘Type of Computer Program Definition of Structure Description of Structure Geometry Description of Structure Stiffness Elastic Constants Static Loading Conditions Print Input Data Static Analysis, Print Static Analysis Results Description of Dynamic Masses of the Model Lumped at Joints Description of Masses Participating In Motion and Types of Motion Type of Dynamic Forces Acting Print Dynamic Input Data Results of Structural Analysis due to Dynamic Forces Calculate and List Natural Frequencies of All Mode Shapes Calculate and List Mode Shapes Normalized to Unit’ Maximum Amplitude Termination of the Output Figure 7-3. Computer program flow chart.118 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines used, The chart lists the specific stages in an ICES- STRUDL analysis, and these are described in detail, ‘Other software packages would. include similar stages, but the exact commands and their order would be different. Example—STRUDL Coding STRUDL is a command structured language where the user can describe the structure in simple, almost conversational statements. The commands are given in logical order, that is, the geometry of the structure, the topology or connectivity, the member properties, the material constants, and the loads are described prior to the analysis, A fixed format is not required in either the exact order of the commands or in a precise align- rent on a computer card. ‘A summary of STRUDL commands is given in Ape pendix B, and the reader is referred to the ICES STRUDL user's manuals for additional information (ref, 2 and 3). The steps in coding a problem for STRUDL solution are given below (lines in capital Ietters are actual commands-one per computer card) ‘These steps are noted in the printout on pages 121-157. 1, Computer program and structure definition STRUDL ‘EXAMPLE’ ‘STATIC AND DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF At TABLE TOP'} ‘TYPE SPACE FRAME 2. Geometry of the structure (Figures 7-1 and 7-2). Units are defined since the default internal units are inches and pounds. Each joint is described by its num- ber and its x y 2 coordinates. Numbering of joints should be selected so that the difference in joint number at each end of all members is a minimum, The term SUPPORT identifies the joint as a support. Note that support joints have been identified under each column and midway across the slab edge and transverse equiv- alent “beams.” UNITS FEET IPS JOINT COORDINATES i rr) 09 0.0 SUPPORT 2 00 0.0 100 SUPPORT 3 80 00 0.0 SUPPORT 4 80 0.0 10.0 SUPPORT 13 80 170 5.0 16 BO 170) | 100) 2% 200 00 5.0 SUPPORT 3. Structure topology which indicates the connect of the members in the structure. Each command the form IJK and means that member I goes from start joint J to the end joint K. The positive sens the forces acting on the member follows the right-b rule when the first (axial) axis is oriented from stay ‘end of member. MEMBER INCIDENCES 1 1 9 2 A. 8 3 14 Orn 4, Restraint conditions at the joints. Since a ported joint is assumed rigidly supported (fixed), necessary to release these restraints and describe stiffness (force per unit displacement) of spring: tached to the joints. The spring stiffness is a func of the supporting soil properties and the bearing around the joint that acts against the soil for this : mat as described above during trial sizing of the s! ture. Chapter 5 gives procedures for calculating spring constants of rigid or flexible mats. For ample, at joints 1 and 2, the contact area is (2.5 4 ft along Z times (5 + 4) ft along X = 85.5 sq ft. total foundation contact area is 24 ft times 30 ft = sq ft. The total foundation spring stiffness in the ver direction (see Chapter 4) is ke = GPx VBL me/(1—») 8,500 X M44 X 2.2.x V9E XS _ he (1 — .45) X 1,000 100,462 kiyy where the terms G, ¥, and qe (equal to unity in example) are defined in Chapter 4. Therefore, for 1 A and 2, ky = hye = 100,462 x 85.5/720 = 11,930} ft, Note that the ¥ direction in the computer examp. Figure 7-2 is the vertical soil direction previously noted as the Z-direction in the soilspring con equations of Chapter 4. At the risk of some confu the Y-direction is selected vertical in the computer + ysis due to certain globallocal axes advantages. rotational restraints are assumed to be non-existent they are generally negligible, Further discussion o! caleulation of the spring constants in the case of I flexible mats is presented in Chapter 5, "The symbol t denotes continuation of the previous line single earUNITS KIPS FEET JOINT RELEASES: 1,2 MOMENT X Y Z KFX 8649. KFY 11930, KFZ 8649.1 25 MOMENT X Y ZKFX 4046, KFY 5581 KFZ 4046.4 ‘The third command listed above means that joints 1 and 2 have X, Y, and Z rotational freedom and linear springs with 8,649 kips/ft in the global X- and Z-direc~ tions (horizontal) and 11,930 kips/ft in the ¥-global direction (vertical). The horizontal springs are placed at exterior joints although equivalent horizontal springs could have also been distributed among all joints in contact with the soil. No significant difference would be detected in the results. 5. Cross-sectional properties for the member. The crost-sectional area and the moments of inertia for each. member about its own local coordinate axis are given. ‘The local x-axis is always directed along the member while the local z-axis is parallel to the global Z-axis for columns and is horizontal for beams, provided that the global Y-axis is set vertical. For further details on localglobal axes relationships, the reader is referred to the MIT STRUDL User's Manual, Volume I (ref. 2). Modifications are necessary if the local Z- and Y- axes are not parallel to the global axes. The areas AY ‘and AZ are disregarded and the analysis will, therefore, assume the members to have no shear stiffness. For frames consisting of relatively long and shallow mem- ‘bers, no significant difference can be detected by neglect ing the shear stiffness of the members MEMBER PROPERTIES 1,2 PRIS AX 60 IX 47 IY 45 1Z 20 35, 36,37 PRIS AX 125 IX 17.9 I¥ 26. 12 65 The second command means that members 1 and 2 are prismatic, have cross-sectional areas of 6 sq it, torsional moments of inertia of 4.7 ftt, moments of inertia around the local y-axis of 4.5 ft!, and moments fof inertia of 2 ft* around the local z-axis. Note that for these 3 ft X 2 ft columns the local z-axis is parallel to F the global Z-axis and, therefore, Je=3 X 2/12= 20 et 6, Material Properties. The material properties ine Selude the modulus of elasticity B, the shear modulus of| {felasticiry G, Poisson's ratio, and the material density. These constants are 3,122 ksi, 1,394 ks, 0.17, and 0.0868 Computer Analysis and Applications: Example 119 for convenience; however, some STRUDL packages treat density as mass density, and units and magnitude of mass density must be entered. UNITS KIPS INCHES CONSTANTS E 3122, ALL G 1334, ALL POISSON O17 ALL UNITS _ POUNDS, INCHES CONSTANTS DENSITY 0.0868 ALL 7. Static Loadings. A number of basic loading condi- tions and combinations of the basic loadings are con- sidered. UNITS KIPS FEET. LOADING 1 ‘FULL LOAD ACTING IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION’ JOINT LOADS 12 FORCE ¥ 384 25 FORCE Y = 150 (other loadings and combinations follow) RAYLEIGH LOADING 3 FULL LOAD ACTING, IN THE TRANSVERSE DIRECTION't JOINT LOADS 12 FORCE Z 384 5 FORCE Z 150 A loading for which the RAYLEIGH frequency is to be calculated is denoted as shown above for loading 3, This loading includes the weights of the structure adjacent to each joint and the weight of the machine applied in the direction of the desired vibration mode, in this case, the transverse of Z-global direction. Thus, the analysis will includé a Rayleigh-Ritz calculation of, the natural frequency for the structure in the transverse direction. Leading combinations as follows would be added by some designers in a static check as discussed previously. These loadings are quasi-static, that is, con- servative equivalent static loadings which may be used for design check of deffections and member forces, ‘Total vertical load + 0.3 X total load acting in the transverse direction (Z) ‘Total vertical load + 0.1 X total load acting in the longitudinal direction (X) ‘Total vertical load + 0.5 X total load acting in’ the vertical direction (Y)120 Design of Structures and Foundations for Vibrating Machines ‘These are denoted Loading Combinations 4 through 6, respectively, in the computer printout. LOADING COMBINATION 4 ‘FULL VERTICAL LOAD PLUS 0+ FULL TRANSVERSE LOAD’ —+ COMBINE 1 1.0303 LOADING COMBINATION 6 ‘FULL VERTICAL LOAD PLUS 0.5¢ FULL VERTICAL LOAD’ —+ COMBINE 1 1.0105 ‘The first command specifies that loading combination 4 consists of loading 1 times 1 plus loading 3 times 0.3, 8, Listing of all data. A printout of all internal data is requested with the command PRINT DATA ALL. 9. Geometry plotting. Structure geometry plots are requested as a further check of the input data. 10. Static Analysis. The following command is used to build and invert the structural stiffness matrix and to solve the problem for all loadings STIFFNESS ANALYSIS (REDUCE BAND ROOT) ‘The command within parentheses is optional and gen- erally results in a more efficient algorithm for large problems. 11, Output of results, Results are printed by using the LIST commands, such as UNITS KIPS INCHES CYCLES SECONDS LIST RAYLEIGH OUTPUT BY MEMBER LOADING LIST 4, 5, 6 LIST FORCES DISPLACEMENTS REACTIONS ALLt Results for loadings 4 through 6 are requested. This step completes the static analysis. The dynamic analysis includes the following additional steps 12. Mass acting at each joint. The structure's mass and the machine mass are taken to act at the structural joints in the three linear directions only. Inclusion of rotational inertia has a negligible effect on the results, ‘The structure mass may be computed internally and automatically lumped at each joint and the machine ‘mass is then added at the machine support joints UNITS POUNDS _ INCHES NERTIA OF JOINTS LUMPED INERTIA OF JOINT ADD 9, 1 LINEAR ALL 69.88¢ INERTIA OF JOINT ADD 15 LINEAR ALL 1775+ INERTIA OF JOINT ADD 17, 18 LINEAR ALL 28.47¢ INERTIA OF JOINT ADD 20 LINEAR ALL 73, Note that the added machine mass at joints 9 and is 27,000/(32.2 x 12) = 69.88 Ibs.sec*/in,, and sit larly for joints 15, 17, 18, and 20, see Figures 7-1 a 7.2. The structural mass is included through 1 INERTIA OF JOINTS LUMPED command. 13. Dynamic degrees of freedom—only translati modes are considered. The commands that accompl this are DYNAMIC DEGREES OF FREEDOM JOINT 1 TO 25 DISPLACEMENT X YZ 14. Damping ratio. The damping ratio for each « ‘gree of freedom is given by DAMPING RATIO 0.10 75 Where total average damping of 0.10 has been spe fied for the X, ¥, Z translatory degrees of freedom each of the 25 joints, or 3X 25 = 75 times. Note th realistically, those degrees of freedom associated wi foundation movement have a damping ratio in t 0.15-0.20 range, whereas damping for the remaink degrees of freedom may only be in the 0.05-0.10 rang Therefore, 0.10 is used throughout as.an average vali Chapter 5 gives a further discussion on the choice soil damping ratios. 15. Dynamic forcing function. Forcing functions the vertical (Y-direction) and in the transverse ( direction) are applied at the joints where they occt ‘These forcing functions include a force amplitude equ to the unbalanced machine force, a frequency given the acting machine frequency (in radians) and a pha angle of 1.5707 radians (90°) for the transverse fun tions, Le, the transverse function is 90° out of phase the vertical function in this centrifugal machine. T) dynamic forcing functions are applied at the centerli of the centrifugal machine shaft, joints 10, 15, and 2 One half of the turbine force acts at joint 10 or 0.5 286 sin 727.7t, one half of the turbine and compress forces act at joint 15 or 0.5 X 286 sin 727.7¢ + 05 7,794 sin 727.7, and one half of the compressor for acts at joint 20 or 0.5 X 7,794 sin 727.74, UNITS RADIANS SECONDS POUNDS INCHES? DYNAMIC LOADING 7 ‘CENTRIFUGAL FORCES JOINT 10 LOAD FORCE ¥ FUN SIN AMPL 143 FREQ 727.71JOINT 10 LOAD FORCEZ FUN SIN AMPL 143. FREQ 727.7 PHASE 15707t JOINT 15 LOAD FORCE Y FUN SIN AMPL 4040. FREQ 7277+ JOINT 15 LOAD FORCE Z FUN SIN AMPL. ‘ 4040. FREQ 727.7 PHASE 1.5707t = JOINT 20 LOAD FORCE Y FUN SIN AMPL. Q 3897. FREQ. 727.74 = JOINT 20 LOAD FORCE Z FUN SIN AMPL 3897. FREQ 727.7 PHASE 1.5707¢ 16. Time Periods. The time span and time incre- _£ ments for the dynamic analysis must be specified. The ‘© integration time periods should include, as a minimum, 12 steps per single complete operating frequency cycle, in order to achieve a 59% accuracy in the results (ref. 4), that is, for a frequency of 727.7 radians/sec, the integration time periods should not be greater than T (one cycle) = 27/727.7 = 0.00863 sec; then, At = T/12 = 0.00863/ 12 = 0.0007194 sec The following command includes 10 complete cycles of machine operation with 12 steps in each cycle. However, 3 complete cycles of operation may be sufficient to study the response of the structure, INTEGRATE FROM 0.0 to 0.0863 AT 0.007194 Computer Printout in ICES-STRUDL SsrRupe *EaNeLE® 2 me staverunas oeston Lanouase 2 SkaSETTS INeritore or aremouoy “as ase 930suPeoRT—— SSTATIC ANO DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF & TASLE-TOP* Computer Analysis and Applications: Example 121 17, Listing of dynamic data. A printout of all dy- namie data is obtained with the command PRINT DYNAMIC DATA ALL 18. Dynamic analysis, The actual dynamic analysis is obtained with the following command with the part within parentheses being optional. Only the first 20 ‘modes are included in the analysis to reduce computing time with negligible loss of accuracy. DYNAMIC ANALYSIS MODAL (REDUCE BAND ROOT) 20+ 19, Output of dynamic analysis. The natural fre- quencies, the modes (normalized), the displacements, and forces for each time increment are requested with this command. The first 20 modes are requested to con= serve paper but more may be printed UNITS KIPS INCHES CYCLES LIST DYNAMIC EIGENVALUES 20 NORMALIZE EIGENVECTORS LIST DYNAMIC EIGENVECTORS 20 LIST DYNAMIC DISPLACEMENTS ALL. LIST DYNAMIC FORCES ALL ‘SECONDS 20. End of analysis. The last command in the job is FINISH (text continued on page 157) @