Tuned Vibration Absorbers:

Analysis, Visualization, Experimentation, and Design

Dr. R.E. Kielb, Dr. H.P. Gavin, C.J. Dillenbeck

Pratt School of Engineering

Duke University
Durham NC 27708

Robert.Kielb@Duke.edu , Henri.Gavin@Duke.edu
November 9, 2005

Abstract
A tuned vibration absorber is a relatively small spring-mass oscillator that sup-
presses the response of a relatively large, primary spring-mass oscillator at a partic-
ular frequency. The mass of the tuned vibration absorber is typically a few percent
of the mass of the primary mass, but the motion of the tuned vibration absorber
is allowed to be much greater than the expected motion of the primary mass. The
natural freuqency of the tuned vibration absorber is tuned to be the same as the
frequency of excitation. Tuned vibration absorbers are particularly effective when
the excitation frequency is close to the natural frequency of the primary system.
In this web-based experiment, you will use the basic concepts involved in the
analysis and design of a tuned vibration absorber to:
• predict the behavior of an experimental tuned vibration absorber,
• modify your mathematical model baesd on observed behavior of the tuned
vibration absorber,
• use your updated mathematical model for the tuned vibration absorber to
design a better tuned vibration absorber, and
• test your re-designed system to verify the re-designed absorber.
All computations for analysis and design can be easily accomplished in Matlab
and all measurements will be accomplished using Duke’s Web-based Educational
framework for Analysis, Visualization and Experimentation at
http://weave.duke.edu/weave/ .

1
1 Purpose
The purpose of this lesson is to provide experiences in:

1. calculating and measuring natural frequencies and frequency response functions of

1 and 2 degree-of-freedom systems.

2. experimentally determining damping of 1 degree-of-freedom systems

3. designing and testing a tuned, lightly-damped vibration absorber

2 Physical Model
The physical model (shown in Figures 1 and 2) utilizes two beams and two lumped
masses, M and m, to simulate a 2 degree-of-freedom (2dof) oscillator. The masses of the
beams are small as compared to the lumped masses and can be ignored. The length of
the secondary beam, l, can be adjusted from 0 cm to 29 cm. In the retracted position,
l = 0 cm, this model simulates a single degree-of-freedom oscillator with the stiffness of
the primary beam and a mass of (M + m). The upper support is assumed to have infinite
stiffness. Additional properties are listed in Table 1.
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 




 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  





















 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


..
X 


 X(t) X(t)
M

 
F(t)
l
..
x(t)
x x(t)
m
FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW DEFORMED VIEW

Figure 1: Physical lay-out of the tuned vibration absorber experiment.

The stiffness of the primary beam,

3
1 tp

K = Ebp ,
4 L

2
 Figure 2: Photograph of the physical lay-out.

Table 1: Physical properties of the tuned vibration absorber experiment.

Property Primary Absorber Units
Mass 2.0 0.5 kg
Length 91.44 variable cm
Thickness, t 0.635 0.159 cm
Width, b 5.08 2.54 cm
Modulus, E 73.1 73.1 GPa
Mass density 2768 2768 kg/m3

3
relates the static force F to the static displacement X, F = KX. The stiffness of the
secondary beam ,
 3
1 ts
k = Ebs ,
4 l
relates forces applied to the absorber mass to the deflection of the absorber beam, (x−X).
In the experiment, dynamic forcing is applied to the primary mass (M ) of the experi-
mental model using a voice-coil actuator. A voice-coil actuator is made from a permanent
magnet and a cylindrical coil of magnet wire with N turns of diameter D. The constant
magnetic flux, B from the permanent magnet passes in the radial direction through the
cylindrical coil of magnet wire. When a controlled electrical current, i(t), is applied to
the coil, a force F (t) is induced in the coil, according to

F (t) = N πDBi(t) .

The motion of the primary mass, M , and the secondary mass, m, are measured using
micro-electro-mechanical-sensing (MEMS) accelerometers. The accelerometers transduce
their acceleration to a voltage signal, which is proportional to the accelerations, Ẍ(t) and
ẍ(t).

3 Types of Excitation
There are three common types of excitation used for controlled vibration testing:
1. sinusoidal with a single frequency or slowly varying frequency;

2. impulsive; or

3. random with many many frequencies acting at the same time.

This WEAVE experiment utilizes excitation of the first type.

4 Theory of Vibrations
4.1 Single Degree of Freedom
The equations of motion of a 1 dof oscillator (see Figure 3), says that the forces due to
inertia, mẍ(t), plus the forces due to viscous energy dissipation, cẋ(t), plus the forces due
to the structural stiffness, kx(t), must be in equilibrium with the external force, F (t).

mẍ(t) + cẋ(t) + kx(t) = F (t)

Dividing both sides of this equation by m, all terms in the equation have units of accel-
eration,
c k 1
ẍ(t) + ẋ(t) + x(t) = F (t) .
m m m

4





 k m

























 





 F























 c
x
Figure 3: A single degree of freedom spring-mass-damper oscillator, with dynamic forcing,
F (t) and dynamic reponse x(t).

√
Substituting ωn2 = k/m, and ζ = c/(2 mk),
1
ẍ(t) + 2ζωn ẋ(t) + ωn2 x(t) = F (t) .
m
If the external forcing is harmonic (sinusoidal), then F (t) = F̄ cos(ωt) where ω is the
frequency of the external forcing. The forcing frequency is not necessarily equal to the
natural frequency, ωn . The natural frequency depends on the structural mass and stiffness
while the forcing frequency is independent of the structural properties.
When linear elastic structures are sinusoidally excited, they tend to respond sinu-
soidally at the same frequency as the excitation frequency, ω. See Figure 4.

x(t) = x̄(ω) cos(ωt − φ(ω))

where φ(ω) is the phases shift between the excitation, F (t) and the response, x(t). The

x(t) 2π/ω
x
F
t

F(t)
2π/ω φ/ω

Figure 4: Sinusoidal forcing, F (t), and sinusoidal response, x(t), tend to have the same
frequency, ω, but different amplitudes (x̄ and F̄ ) and a phase difference φ. The amplitude
ratio x̄/F̄ and the phase difference φ both depend on the frequency of forcing, ω.

amplitude of the response is proportional to the amplitude of the forcing, and also depends
on the frequency of the forcing.
1/k
x̄(ω) = q F̄ ,
(1 − Ω2 )2 + (2ζΩ)2

5
where Ω = ω/ωn is the frequency ratio. Note that if the forcing frequency is zero, then
the resulting displacement would be static, xst = F̄ /k. The phase shift if given by the
formula, !
2ζΩ
φ(ω) = tan −1
.
1 − Ω2

10
9
magnitude ratio

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
phase (degrees)

135

90

45

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
frequency ratio

Figure 5: Frequency response functions of a single degree of freedom spring-mass-damper

system. Damping ratios are 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, and 0.25. Top: magnitude amplification.
Bottom: phase shift.

Note that when the forcing frequency is close to the resonant frequency, Ω ≈ 1, and
the damping is small, ζ  1, the response can become extremely large. The maximum
dynamic amplification, x̄(ω)/xst or Q, is
1
Q= √
2ζ 1 − ζ 2
For low levels of damping, Q ≈ 2ζ1 . Therefore, by knowing the value of the peak am-
plification, Q, the damping ratio may be estimated, ζ ≈ 2Q. A second way to estimate
damping in lightly damped structures is via the half-power-bandwidth method. If ω 1 and
ω2 are frequencies below and above ωn at which x̄(ω)/xst = Q/sqrt2, then the damping
ratio is approximately (ω2 − ω1 )/(ω1 + ω2 ).
If the forcing frequency is known be a particular value, then tuned vibration absorbers
can effectively reduct the dynamic response of the system to be essentially zero. The

6
design of tuned vibration absorbers requires an understanding of two-degree-of-freedom
systems.

4.2 Two Degree of Freedom: Primary and Absorber Systems

For the primary and absorber system shown in Figure 1, two dynamic equations of motion
describe the motion of the primary mass M and the absorber mass m,

M Ẍ(t) + C Ẋ(t) − cẋ(t) + KX(t) − kx(t) = F (t),

and
mẍ(t) + c(ẋ(t) − Ẋ(t)) + k(x(t) − X(t)) = 0 .
These two equations may be written in matrix form as follows.
" #" # " #" # " #" # " #
M 0 Ẍ(t) C + c −c Ẋ(t) K + k −k X(t) 1
+ + = F (t) .
0 m ẍ(t) −c c ẋ(t) −k k x(t) 0

If F (t) is sinusoidal,
F (t) = F̄ cos(ωt) ,
then the response tends also to be sinusoidal ,
" # " #
X(t) X̄ cos(ωt − Φ(ω))
=
x(t) x̄ cos(ωt − φ(ω))

Substituting F (t) = F̄ eiωt , X(t) = X̄eiωt , and x(t) = x̄eiωt , into the equation above, and
solving for the complex amplitudes, X̄ and x̄, leads to the following expressions

−mω 2 + ciω + k
X̄ = F̄ ,
(−M ω 2 + (C + c)iω + (K + k))(−mω 2 + ciω + k) − (ciω + k)2

and
ciω + k
x̄ = F̄ ,
(−M ω 2 + (C + c)iω + (K + k))(−mω 2 + ciω + k) − (ciω + k)2
which you should be able to derive.
If c is small, then, in order to make the amplitude of motion of the primary mass, X̄
equal to zero, it is sufficientqto set −mω 2 + k equal to zero. In other words, if the natural
frequency of the absorber, k/m equals the forcing frequency, ω, then the motion of the
primary mass will tend to zero.
Figure 6 shows the frequency response function for a particular
q set of numerical values
for the masses, stiffnesses and damping rates. Note that k/m/2/π ≈ 2.5 Hz, and that
the motion of the primary mass at 2.5 Hz (solid line) is practically zero.

7
 35
30
magnitude 25
20
15
10
5
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
phase (degrees)

270

180

90

0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
frequency (Hertz)

Figure 6: Frequency response functions of a tuned vibration absorber system, solid line =
primary mass, X̄; dashed line = absorber mass, x̄. K=5000 N; C=1 N/m/s; M =10 kg;
k=500 N/m; c=2 N/m/s; m=2 kg

5 Tutorial Flow
The following flow-charts will lead you through a set of steps required for conducting your
WEAVE experiment. These flow-charts provide information with which you will make
calculations and will perform experiments. You will then use your calculations to design
a tuned vibration absorber, which you will then be able to test.

5.1 Pre-test analysis

1. Single degree of freedom oscillator, The secondary beam length, l is zero and the
mass is M + m.

(a) Calculate the stiffness of the primary beam, K;

q
(b) Calculate what you would expect the natural frequency to be, ωp = K/(M + m)
(rad/sec) given values for the stiffness and masses; and
(c) Make a plot of the amplitude and phase of the frequency response function
from F (t) to Ẍ(t).

2. Oscillator with a tuned vibration absorber. The secondary beam length, l is 18 cm.

8
 (a) Calculate the stiffness of the secondary beam, k;
(b) Calculate
q what you would expect the absorber natural frequency to be, ω a =
k/m (rad/sec) given values for the stiffness and masses;
(c) Calculate what you would expect the natural frequencies to be, given values
for the stiffness and masses (note that this is an eigen-value problem);
(d) Make a plot of the amplitude and phase of the frequency response function
from F (t) to Ẋ(t), assuming light damping; and
(e) Make a plot of the amplitude and phase of the frequency response function
from F (t) to ẋ(t), assuming light damping.

5.2 Run WEAVE experiments to confirm the pre-test analysis

These experiments will be conducted on-line through the web-site http://weave.duke.edu/weave/.
Each experiment will take about 30 seconds to 50 seconds to execute. Visual display of
the experimental data and a digital data downloads for post-test analysis are possible.

1. Single degree of freedom oscillator, The secondary beam length, l is zero and the
mass is M + m.
(a) Run an experiment with sinusoidal forcing starting at 0.5 Hz and ending at 10
Hz.
(b) Determine the frequency at which the response is the maximum. Does this
correspond to the previously predicted value? If not, then modify the value for
the primary system stiffness, K, in order to match the experimentally-derived
frequency. Is the experimental value for K larger or smaller than the one used
to predict the natural frequency? What would explain this difference?
(c) Using the half-power-bandwidth method, determine the damping ratio of the
primary system. From this damping ratio, determine C.
(d) Make a plot of the amplitude and phase of the frequency response function
from F (t) to Ẍ(t) using the experimentally-derived values of C and K. How
does this compare to the predicted frequency response function?
2. Oscillator with a tuned vibration absorber. The secondary beam length, l is 18 cm.
(a) Run an experiment with sinusoidal forcing starting at 0.5 Hz and ending at 10
Hz. Print out the plot of the experimental results.
(b) Determine the frequency at which the response of the primary mass is the
minimum. Does this correspond to the previously predicted value? If not,
then modify the value for the absorber system stiffness, k, in order to match
the experimentally-derived frequency. Is the experimental value for K larger
or smaller than the one used to predict the natural frequency? What would
explain this difference?

9
 (c) Find the damping ratio of the absorber system using the half-power bandwidth
method. Use this value to approximate the damping constant of the absorber,
c.
(d) Make a plot of the amplitude and phase of the frequency response function
from F (t) to Ẋ(t), using the experimentally-derived values. How does this
compare to the predicted frequency response function?
(e) Make a plot of the amplitude and phase of the frequency response function from
F (t) to ẋ(t), using the experimentally-derived values. How does this compare
to the predicted frequency response function?

5.3 Re-design the tuned vibration absorber.

Given the information developed in the first two steps above, try to predict the length of
the absorber beam, l, required to suppress the primary mass motion at a frequency that
is 125 percent of the absorber frequency found in the previous analysis. Show your work.

5.4 Re-test the re-designed tuned vibration absorber.

Again, using the web-based experiment, set the length of the absorber beam to the value
found in the previous step. Run an experiment and determine the frequency at which
the tuned vibration absorber resulted in minimal motion of the primary mass. Print out
the plot of the experimental results. Was this frequency close to the one you designed
for? What would explain the difference between the actual absorber frequency and your
designed absorber frequency?

10