0
Research Papers

# On Vibration Suppression and Energy Dissipation Using Tuned Mass Particle Damper

[+] Author and Article Information
Shilong Li

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Connecticut,
191 Auditorium Road, Unit 3139,
Storrs, CT 06269

J. Tang

Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Connecticut,
191 Auditorium Road, Unit 3139,
Storrs, CT 06269
e-mail: jtang@engr.uconn.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Technical Committee on Vibration and Sound of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF VIBRATION AND ACOUSTICS. Manuscript received March 21, 2016; final manuscript received September 14, 2016; published online October 27, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Mahmoud Hussein.

J. Vib. Acoust 139(1), 011008 (Oct 27, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: VIB-16-1133; doi: 10.1115/1.4034777 History: Received March 21, 2016; Revised September 14, 2016

## Abstract

Particle damping has the promising potential for attenuating unwanted vibrations in harsh environments especially under high temperatures where conventional damping materials would not be functional. Nevertheless, a limitation of simple particle damper (PD) configuration is that the damping effect is insignificant if the local displacement/acceleration is low. In this research, we investigate the performance of a tuned mass particle damper (TMPD) in which the particle damping mechanism is integrated into a tuned mass damper (TMD) configuration. The essential idea is to combine the respective advantages of these two damping concepts and in particular to utilize the tuned mass damper configuration as a motion magnifier to amplify the energy dissipation capability of particle damper when the local displacement/acceleration of the host structure is low. We formulate a first-principle-based dynamic model of the integrated system and analyze the particle motion by using the discrete element method (DEM). We perform systematic parametric studies to elucidate the damping effect and energy dissipation mechanism of a TMPD. We demonstrate that a TMPD can provide significant vibration suppression capability, essentially outperforming conventional particle damper.

Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

## Figures

Fig. 1

Schematic of primary beam structure integrated with the TMPD

Fig. 2

First two mode shapes of the segmented beam: (a) analytical result (f1=5.93 Hz and f2=10.30 Hz) and (b) finite element result (f1=5.99 Hz and f2=10.47 Hz)

Fig. 3

Sketch of spring, dashpot, and slider model for contact force

Fig. 4

Flowchart for the iterative numerical procedure

Fig. 5

Experimental setup: (a) schematic of the experiment and (b) prototype

Fig. 6

Schematics of (a) conventional PD and (b) TMPD

Fig. 7

Frequency responses when G = 0.15 m/s2. : No damper (experiment); : no damper (simulation); : with damper (experiment); and : with damper (simulation). (a) PD and (b) TMPD.

Fig. 8

Frequency responses when G = 0.25 m/s2. : No damper (experiment); : no damper (simulation); : with damper (experiment); and : with damper (simulation). (a) PD and (b) TMPD.

Fig. 9

Frequency responses when G = 0.30 m/s2. : No damper (experiment); : no damper (simulation); : with damper (experiment); and : with damper (simulation). (a) PD and (b) TMPD.

Fig. 10

Comparison of frequency responses of four configurations when A = 0.11 N. : Configuration 1 (baseline); : configuration 2 (PD); : configuration 3 (undamped absorber); and : configuration 4 (TMPD)

Fig. 11

Comparison of vibration suppression performances of four configurations under different excitation levels. : Configuration 1 (baseline); : configuration 2 (PD); : configuration 3 (undamped absorber); and : configuration 4 (TMPD). (a) first mode and (b) second mode.

Fig. 12

Cumulative energies (A = 0.11 N) under the PD: (A) work done by external force, (B) interparticle interaction, (C) particle-to-ceiling/floor impact, (D) particle-to-wall friction, (E) inherent damping dissipation, and (F) remaining energy of the primary structure

Fig. 13

Cumulative energies (A = 0.11 N) under the TMPD: (A) work done by external forces, (B) interparticle interaction, (C) particle-to-ceiling/floor impact, (D) particle-to-wall friction, (E) inherent damping dissipation, and (F) remaining energy of the primary structure. (a) First mode and (b) second mode.

Fig. 14

Influence of enclosure geometry to the damping effect of TMPD under different excitation levels. : 0.20 N; : 0.24 N; and : 0.30 N. (a) First mode and (b) second mode.

Fig. 15

Influence of volumetric filling ratio to the damping performance of TMPD under different excitation levels. : 0.20 N; : 0.24 N; and : 0.30 N. (a) First mode and (b) second mode.

## Discussions

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 Proceedings Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections