Vibration and Stability of a Shallow Arch Under a Moving Mass-Dashpot-Spring System

[+] Author and Article Information
Jen-San Chen

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 10617jschen@ccms.ntu.edu.tw

Min-Ray Yang

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 10617

J. Vib. Acoust 129(1), 66-72 (May 21, 2006) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2345673 History: Received December 26, 2004; Revised May 21, 2006

In this paper we study the dynamic behavior of a shallow arch under a moving load system containing two masses, a dashpot, and a suspension spring. It is assumed that the masses in the load system are under the action of gravity. This paper is an extension of a previous publication in which the arch is loaded by a moving point force. The emphasis of the paper is placed on finding out how the inertia effect of the load system affects the dynamic response of the arch. It is found that the point-force model is a good approximation only when the arch is slender and the moving speed of the load system is low. The boundary of a dangerous speed zone is defined based on the comparison of the total energy gained by the arch and an energy barrier. It is observed that the suspension model predicts a considerably different dangerous speed zone from the one predicted by the point-force model, especially in the high-speed range.

Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

(a) Schematic diagram of a shallow arch under a moving mass-dashpot-spring system. (b) The free body diagram of the load system.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

The crosshatched area represents the dangerous speed zone for an arch with h=20 and μ=0.001

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Convergence test on (a)α1, (b)Harch. The parameters of the arch-mass system are h=20, Qg=40, ε=1000, and v=0.5. The corresponding mass parameter m1=1.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

External force F as a function of load position e for the arch-mass system in Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Effects of slenderness ratio ε on α1(e) for arches with h=20, v=0.5. (a)Qg=40, (b)Qg=50.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Components of total energy for an arch-mass system with h=20, v=0.5, Qg=50, and ε=2154(m1=0.1). (1) Kinetic energy and (2) strain energy of the arch. (3) Kinetic energy and (4) potential energy of the mass m1.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Vertical component Q(e) of the dynamic force applied by the load system on the arch with h=20, Qg=40, ε=1000, and v=0.5

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Effects of moving speed v on α1(e) for an arch with h=20 and m1=0.5. (a)Qg=40, (b)Qg=50.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Effects of suspension (with critical damping) on the total energy of the arch for v=0.5. (a)Qg=40. (b)Qg=50. Other parameters are h=20, m=0.5(ε=1000).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Effects of suspension (with critical damping) on the total energy of the arch for v=1. (a)Qg=40. (b)Qg=50. Other parameters are h=20, m=0.5(ε=1000).




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In