Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Mathematical Modelling

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apm

Stability control for a huge excavator for surface excavation

Ioan Ciresß a, Viorel-Mihai Nani b,c,⇑
a
SC PRO ATLAS ING SRL Timisoara, Linistei Street, First Room, Timisoara 300288, Romania
b
University Polytechnic of Timisoara, Research Institute for Renewable Energy, G. Muzicescu Street, no. 138, Timisoara 300774, Romania
c
University ‘‘Ioan Slavici’’ Timisoara, Faculty of Engineering, Paunescu Podeanu Street, no. 144, Timisoara 300568, Romania

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study, we present an algorithm for the dynamic modeling of an excavator equipped
Received 12 April 2014 with bucket wheels, which is used for surface mining activities. To develop a dynamic
Received in revised form 23 March 2015 model of the excavator while working, we used data from the design theme, which
Accepted 24 April 2015
described the mass distribution and elasticity of the technological system. During techno-
Available online 15 June 2015
logical tests, the signals for vibrations and mechanical stresses were recorded in critical
areas of the excavator structure. These records contained some modal information, which
Keywords:
was also used to develop a simplified dynamic model. We also measured the elasticity of
Bucket-wheel excavator
Elasticity
the thrust ball bearing, which is an oscillatory bearing and one of the most heavily loaded
Reaction effort components in the excavator’s structure. Finally, using the dynamic model, we calculated
Thrust ball bearing the natural frequencies for the principal subassemblies of excavator, where the modal
Variable load frequencies obtained by the sensors while the excavator was running confirmed the good
approximation of the model.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Excavators with bucket-wheels are huge machines used in excavations, especially for lignite, bauxite, and phosphate
extraction, as well as for digging irrigation channels. Excavators with bucket-wheels are also used in surface mining activities
[1] where they are huge mechanical structures, which are heavy, oversized and complex. In general, they comprise a com-
pact crawler unit with a rotor bearing cups, and they are usually equipped with two or more conveyors for the supply and/or
extraction of the excavated material.
These machines are immense, but they have flexible structures [2], which may lead to the occurrence of resonance effects
when the excavator is working.
A dynamic model of a bucket-wheel excavator equipped with wheels bearing cups to excavate an inhomogeneous mate-
rial (coal mixed with soil and stone, etc.) is difficult to conceive [3,4] even using known and established methods. The con-
struction of this type of model using the finite elements (FE) method is not appropriate [2,5] because the variable efforts of
the mechanical structure, especially the heavy ball thrust bearing, lead to difficult problems in normal operating conditions.
Thus, additional permanent active control of the fatigue strength is required as well as regular updates of the initial data.

⇑ Corresponding author at: University ‘‘Ioan Slavici’’ Timisoara, Faculty of Engineering, Paunescu Podeanu Street, no. 144, Timisoara 300568, Romania.
E-mail addresses: proatlasing@yahoo.com (I. Ciresß), viorel.nani@upt.ro, viorelnani@yahoo.com (V.-M. Nani).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2015.04.056
0307-904X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397 389

2. Structure and functionality of a huge excavator

An excavator with bucket-wheels (Fig. 1) used in surface mining operations comprises a chassis 1 mounted on a crawler
unit 2 via a support 3 (as a tripod) and a heavy thrust bearing 4. A rotating ensemble is mounted on the chassis which can
rotate about a vertical axis OZ, which comprises a tower 5 and a support arm 6. The support arm is articulated at one end
relative to the tower at O1, and a vast wheel bearing buckets 7 is suspended at the other end. The arm 6 is supported by a
winch with a double steel cable mechanism, which comprises a block unit 8 with four movable pulleys (articulated at O3)
and another similar block 9 assembled on a mast 10. In the vertical position, the angle of the wheel with buckets 7 is deter-
mined by the two cables 11, which are assembled in tandem on a cable drum 12.
The cable drum 12 is rotated by an electric drive system with an induction electric motor 13, which has 275 kW power
and a speed rating of 1000 rev/min, a reduction gear 14 with a reducing-ratio of 1:14.75, and a transmission mechanism 15
with a ratio of 1:9.05. The safety position of the arm 6 is maintained by brakes 16 and 17, as well as two clamps 18, which
fast tightly to provide added protection, where two discs 19 are welded to the cable drum 12.
In order to ensure the structural stability of the excavator [6], the center of gravity G maintained by the circular trajectory
Tt of the rotating ensemble must to be located at the interior perimeter of the thrust ball bearing 4. This can be achieved with
an experimental method [2] using a transducer strain gauge-type deck TER mounted on the support beam 20 of the shaft,
which connects a pair of crawler units on the mechanism 2 (Fig. 1). The critical section of these beams is located at the mid-
dle of the distance between the crawlers of a single subassembly, which corresponds to the contact areas 21 with tripod sup-
port 3. This section allows loading onto the points A, B, and C, with the reaction forces RA, RB, and RC, respectively. As a result,
the thrust ball bearing 4 is subjected to a resultant dynamic loading [6], RA þ RB þ RC ¼ mr xg, where mr is the total mass of
the rotating assembly. The transducer signal determined by the strain gauge-type deck TER is proportional to the forces RA,
RB, and RC, which are used via digital processing to correct the counterweight 23 according to the dynamic balancing of the
support arm 6. In addition, the mast 10 is anchored by two rods 22 between articulations 04 and 06 to allow the dynamic
balancing of the arm 50 to counterbalance the tower 5 (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Construction and functional scheme of the excavator with bucket-wheels.

390 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397

3. Dynamic modeling of a bucket-wheels excavator

Based on experimental studies undertaken in real operating conditions with several different types of bucket-wheel exca-
vators [2,7,8], dangerous levels of vibration were observed during the excavation process, which were distributed principally
on the rotating structure of the whole excavator, where the most critical area was the oscillating bearing 4.
A simplified dynamic model of a bucket-wheels excavator can be approximated in the vertical plane of the motion by
considering four main subassemblies, as follows:

– A fixed subassembly comprising the frame chassis 1, the tripod support 3, and the crawler assembly unit 2.
– A mobile rigid subassembly denoted by S1, which comprises the tower 5, the counterbalancing arm 50 , the actuating sys-
tem components from 12 to 19, and the balancing mass 23 (Fig. 1). The subassembly S1 is mounted on the thrust bearing
4, which allows the tower 5 to make angular movements by balancing u(t) relative to the axis 0X (with elastic constant
ku).
– A dynamic rigid subassembly denoted by S2, which comprises the support arm 6 and the wheel with buckets 7. This sub-
assembly is articulated at 01 relative to the subassembly S1.
– An elastic subassembly denoted by S3, which comprises the mobile block 8 and the fixed block 9 from the winch compo-
sition, as well as the mast 10, which is articulated at the point 02 relative to the subassembly S1.

The size-related displacements of the three subassemblies S1, S2, and S3 are determined by the elasticity of the steel cables
from winch and the elasticity of the two rods 22. Thus, the instantaneous positions at time t of the three subassemblies S1, S2,
and S3 are given by u(t) for S1, a1 + u1(t) for S2 and a2 + u2(t) for S3, where a1 and a2 are the given geometric positions and
u(t), u1(t), and u2(t) represent angular deformations. For the dynamic model of the overall bucket crane structure [2,3,8,9],
we can apply Lagrange’s equations:
!
d @Ec @Ec @Ed @Ep @Edsp
 þ þ þ ¼ fQ ðtÞg; ð1Þ
_ T
dt @fqg @fqg T
@fqg T
@fqg T
_ T
@fqg

where

fqg ¼ fuðtÞu1 ðtÞu2 ðtÞgT ð2Þ

and where Ec is the kinetic energy, Ed is the strain energy, Ep is the potential energy, Edis is the dissipation energy, and Q(t) is
the column vector’s matrix of generalized forces.
The kinetic energy is the sum of the kinetic energies of the three subassemblies:

Ec ¼ Ec1 þ Ec2 þ Ec3 ; ð3Þ

where the kinetic energy of subassembly S1 is:

1
Ec1 ¼ J ðuðtÞÞ2 ð4Þ
2 0
and where J0 is the inertial moment of the subassembly S1 around a horizontal axis passing through the point 0.
The kinetic energy of subassembly S2 is
1 1
Ec2 ¼ J u_ 2 þ J2 u
_ 21 þ u
_u_ 1 Ms201 ðY 1 cosða1 þ u1  uÞ þ Z 1 ðsinða1 þ u1  uÞÞ; ð5Þ
2 21 2
where

J2 1 ¼ m2 ðY 21 þ Z 21 Þ ð6Þ
and where m2 is the mass of subassembly S2, Ms01 is the static moment of mass for subassembly S2 around articulation 01,
and Y1 and Z1 are the coordinates of articulation 01 in the reference system OXYZ.
Similarly, for subassembly S3, we can write
1 1
Ec3 ¼ J u_ 2 þ J3 u
_ 22 þ u
_u_ 2 Ms302 ðY 2 cosða2 þ u2  uÞ þ Z 2 sinða2 þ u2  uÞÞ ð7Þ
2 31 2
and

J3 1 ¼ m3 ðY 22 þ Z 22 Þ: ð8Þ
The strain energy is given by the sum of the deformation energies for the thrust ball bearing, winch, and rods:

Ed ¼ Edber þ Edpt þ Edtr ; ð9Þ

 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397 391

where
1
Edber ¼ ku u2 ð10Þ
2
is the strain energy of the thrust ball bearing and ku is the equivalent elastic constant around the point 0.
The strain energy of the pulley system (winch) Edpt is given by the elasticity of the steel cables, which depends on the
instantaneous variation in the distance between articulations 03 and 04 [10,11]:

DL3 4 ¼ j03 04 jðtÞ  j03 04 jð0Þ ; ð11Þ

where j03 04 jðtÞ is the distance to time t and j03 04 jð0Þ is the same distance to the ‘‘unloaded state’’ of the winch.
Thus, the strain energy of the pulley system (winch) can be written as:
1
Edpt ¼ kpt ðDL3 4 Þ2 ; ð12Þ
2
where kpt is the equivalent elastic constant of the winch.
The distance at time t for small angular variations of u(t), u1(t), and u2(t) can be expressed as a Taylor series development
[11–13], as follows:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
j03 04 jðtÞ ¼ ðDy3 4 Þ2 þ ðDz3 4 Þ2 : ð13Þ

The two components Dy3_4 and Dz3_4 in the coordinate rectangular of system OXZY are determined by:
       
Dy 3 4 cos u  sin u Y2 Y 1 cosða2 þ u2 Þ  sinða2 þ u2 Þ Y4
¼ þ
Dz 3 4 sin u cos u Z 2 Z 1 sinða2 þ u2 Þ cosða2 þ u2 Þ Z4
   ð14Þ
cosða1 þ u1 Þ  sinða1 þ u1 Þ Y3
 ;
sinða1 þ u1 Þ cosða1 þ u1 Þ Z3
where Y3 and Z3 are the local coordinates of point 03 relative to S2, and Y4 and Z4 are the local coordinates of point 04 relative
to S3.
Using an approximation of the Taylor series, we obtain the distance variation:
DL3 4 ðu; u1 ; u2 Þ ¼ e0 ða1 ÞuðtÞ þ e1 ða1 Þu1 ðtÞ þ e2 ða1 Þu2 ðtÞ þ    ; ð15Þ
where the parameters
! ! !
@j03 04 j @j03 04 j @j03 04 j
e0 ða1 Þ ¼ ; e1 ða1 Þ ¼ ; e2 ða1 Þ ¼ ð16Þ
@u @ u1 @ u2
ðu¼u1 ¼u2 ¼0Þ ðu¼u1 ¼u2 ¼0Þ ðu¼u1 ¼u2 ¼0Þ

are variables representing the angular position a1 of arm 6, but the angular position a2 of mast 10 is constant.
The equivalent elastic constant kpt of the winch can be calculated by considering the total length Lt of the cable 11
between the starting points A0 and B0 of the cable drum 12 and the end points (clamping) A1 and B1, which are found on
the axis 0404.

Lt ¼ j05 04 j þ j03 04 j þ 8pRp : ð17Þ

Throughout its length, the cable is stretched to the same tension T, which causes an elastic deformation:

T
DLt ¼ ; ð18Þ
kc
where ikc is the elastic constant of the cable given by:

Ec Ac
kc ¼ ; ð19Þ
Lt
where Ec is the elasticity module (Young’s modulus; for the steel cable Ec = 3/8  E, E = 2.1  1011 N/m2) and Ac is the
cross-section of the cable with a diameter of dc = 40 mm (Ac = 12.57 cm2).
The cable deformation DLt is equal to the distance variation between the points 03 and 04:
DL t
Dj03 04 j ¼ DL3 4 ¼ ; ð20Þ
8
which support the loads

R03 ¼ R04 ¼ 16T; ð21Þ

392 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397

so the equivalent elastic constant of the winch becomes

E c Ac
kpt ða1 Þ ¼ 128 ; ð22Þ
j05 04 j þ 8j03 04 j þ 8pRp
which is variable according to the angular positions of u(t), u1(t), and u2(t).
Based on the relationship used to calculate the strain energy (9), we can determine the elastic constant of the rods 22
between the points 06 (on the mast 10) and 07 (off the counterbalancing arm 50 ):
1
Edtr ¼ ktr ðDL6 7 Þ2 ; ð23Þ
2
where

DL6 7 ¼ j06 07 jðtÞ  j06 07 jð0Þ ; ð24Þ

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
j06 07 jðtÞ ¼ ðDy6 7 Þ2 þ ðDz6 7 Þ2 ; ð25Þ
       
Dy6 7 cos u  sin u Y2 Y 6 cosða2 þ u2 Þ  sinða2 þ u2 Þ Y7
¼ þ ð26Þ
Dz 6 7 sin u cos u Z2 Z 6 sinða2 þ u2 Þ cosða2 þ u2 Þ Z7
and by a linear approximation
DL6 7 ðu; u2 Þ ¼ f 0 uðtÞ þ f 2 uðt2 Þ þ . . . ; ð27Þ
where
! !
@j06 07 j @j06 07 j
f0 ¼ ; f2 ¼ ð28Þ
@u @ u2
ðu¼u2 ¼0Þ ðu¼u2 ¼0Þ

and thus we can obtain the elastic constant of a rod

Ec Atr
ktr ¼ ; ð29Þ
j06 97 jð0Þ

where Atr is the rod area (steel cable), with a cross-section diameter of dtr = 87.00 mm (Atr = 59.45 cm2).
The potential energy Ep comprises three terms:
Ep ¼ m1 gzc1 þ m2 gzc2 þ m3 gzc3 ; ð30Þ

where m1, m2, and m3 are the masses of the three subassemblies S1, S2, and S3, and zc1, zc2, and zc3 are the vertical coordinates
of the gravity centers C1, C2, and C3, as follows:

zc1 ¼ Y c1 sin u  Z c1 cos u;

zc2 ¼ Y 1 sin u  Z 1 cos u þ Y c1 sinða1 þ u1 Þ  Z c1 cosða1 þ u1 Þ; ð31Þ
zc3 ¼ Y 2 sin u  Z 2 cos u þ Y c3 sinða2 þ u2 Þ  Z c3 cosða2 þ u2 Þ:
In general, the dissipative energy is difficult to quantify, but in the case of the simplified model based on proportional
damping, we can use the proportionality coefficients approximated by experimental data.
The generalized forces are given by the excavation forces Fey and Fez, which depend on many factors [9], such as the
mechanical characteristics of the excavated material, heterogeneity of the cutting layer, and the cumulative deformations
of the excavator structure at point Pe, by applying the forces Fey and Fez.
The mechanical work for the excavation forces can be defined by the equation:
dLF ¼ F ey dyPe  F ez dzPe ; ð32Þ
where
yPe ¼ Y 1 cos u  Z 1 sin u þ Lb cosða1 þ u1 Þ þ Re cosða1 þ u1 þ bÞ;
ð33Þ
zPe ¼ Y 1 sin u þ Z 1 cos u þ Lb sinða1 þ u1 Þ þ Re sinða1 þ u1 þ bÞ

and where Lb ¼ j01 0r j is the length of the support arm 6 and Re is the excavation radius of the wheel with buckets 7.
By considering the relationships defined above, where the angular deformations of u(t), u1(t), and u2(t) are small values
in practice, i.e., usually elongations of less than 5°, then from the final forms of Lagrange’s equations, we obtain the system of
differential equations [3,7]:
 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397 393

8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9
<u
> € ðtÞ >= <u
> _ ðtÞ >
= < uðtÞ >
> < M Fe u ðtÞ >
= > < Mg u >
= > =
½J u€ 1 ðtÞ þ ½D u_ 1 ðtÞ þ ½K u1 ðtÞ ¼ MFe u1 ðtÞ þ Mg u1 ; ð34Þ
>
:€ > > > > > > > > >
u2 ðtÞ ; : _
u2 ðtÞ ; :
u2 ðtÞ ; : MFe u2 ðtÞ ; : Mg u2 ;
where the inertial mass matrix is given by
2 3
J0 þ J2 1 þ J3 1 Að1Þ Að2Þ
6 ð1Þ 7
½Jða1 Þ ¼ 4 A J2 0 5 ð35Þ
ð2Þ
A 0 J3
with the notations

Að1Þ ¼ Ms201 ðY 1 cos a1 þ Z 1 sin a1 Þ;

Að2Þ ¼ Ms302 ðY 2 cos a2 þ Z 2 sin a2 Þ:

The matrix of elastic constants [K] is a sum:
½K ¼ ½K tb  þ ½K pt  þ ½K tr  þ ½K g ; ð36Þ
where the matrix of the elastic constant for the heavy thrust bearing 4 is:
2 3
kp 0 0
6 7
½K tb  ¼ 4 0 0 0 5; ð37Þ
0 0 0
but due to its variable elasticity, ku is determined from experimental data.
The matrix of the elastic constant for the winch is given by
2 3
E21 E2 E2
6 7
½K pt ða1 Þ ¼ 2kpt ða1 Þ  4 E2 E21 E4 5 ð38Þ
E3 E4 E21
with the notations:
E1 ¼ e0 ða1 Þ;
E2 ¼ e0 ða1 Þe1 ða1 Þ;
E3 ¼ e0 ða1 Þe2 ða1 Þ;
E4 ¼ e1 ða1 Þe2 ða1 Þ;
respectively, for the rods 22, as follows:
2 2
3
f0 f 0f 1 f 0f 2
6 7
½K tr  ¼ 2ktr 6
4 f 0f 1
2
f1 f 1f 2 7
5: ð39Þ
2
f 0f 2 f 1f 2 f2
From the potential energy of the overturned structure, the final matrix from Eq. (36) derives:
2 3
m1 Z c1 þ m2 Z 1 þ m3 Z 2 0 0
6 7
½K g ða1 Þ ¼ g 4 0 m2 kg2 0 5 ð40Þ
0 0 m3 kg3
with the notations:
kg2 ¼ Y c2 sin a1 þ Z c2 cos a1
kg3 ¼ Y c2 sin a2 þ Z c2 cos a2 :
The other terms derived from the potential energy are the static loads, which are given by the following column vector
matrix:
8 9 8 9
< Mg u >
> = < m1 Y c1 þ m2 Y 1 þ m3 Y 2 >
> =
M g u1 ¼ g m2 ðY c2 cos a1 þ Z c2 sin a1 Þ : ð41Þ
>
: >
; >
: >
;
M g u2 m3 ðY c3 cos a2 þ Z c3 sin a2 Þ
394 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397

The static deformations us, u1_s, and u2_s due to the loads corresponding to the weights g  m1, g  m2, and g  m3 are
determined as follows:
8 9 8 9
< us >
> = < Mg u >
> =
1
u1 s ¼ ½K M g u1 : ð42Þ
>
: > > >
u2 s ; :
M g u2
;

The dynamic stresses to which the bucket crane is subjected are given by the variations in the cutting forces at excavation
Fey and Fez, which are expressed by the column vector matrix:
8 9 8 9
< MFe u ðtÞ >
> = >
< F ey Z 1  F ez Y 1 >
=
MFe u1 ðtÞ ¼ F ey ðLb cos h  Re sin hÞ  F ez ðLb sin h þ Re cos hÞ ; ð43Þ
>
: >
; >
: >
;
MFe u2 ðtÞ 0

where h ¼ a1 þ b.
The two components of the excavation forces, Fey and Fez, are difficult to model, so their values were determined
experimentally.
One of the dangerous loadings to which the bucket crane structure is subjected is caused by the dynamics of the actuating
mechanism from the winch. The law of angular movement h(t) for the cable drum 12 around the axis 0505 is given by the
differential equation:
2
d hðtÞ _
J rt 2
¼ Mrt ðhðtÞÞ  2Tða1 ÞRt  M b ; ð44Þ
dt
where Jrt is the moment of inertia for the cable drum axis 12, which accumulates both its own moment of inertia, but also all
those of the components of the actuating system, reduction gear, and transmission mechanism from the engine 13 to drum
12, where the total reduction ratio has the value it = 133.5.
_
The engine torque for the cable drum axis M rt ðhðtÞÞ depends on the instantaneous torque M m ðxÞ of the induction electric
motor 13 relative to the rotational speed x(t), which is approximated by the relation:
2M cr
Mm ðxðtÞÞ ¼ xn xðtÞ x x ; ð45Þ
xn xcr  xn xðtÞ
rt cr

where Mcr is the critical torque at the critical velocity xcr and xn is the nominal speed at the nominal moment Mn:
Pn
Mn ¼ ; ð46Þ
xn
where Pn = 275 kW is the nominal power of the induction electric motor 13 at a rotational speed of n = 1000 rev/min
(xn = p  n/30).
Thus, from the speed conditions, we obtain the engine torque at the cable drum axis 12 as follows:
_
Mrt ðhðtÞÞ ¼ it M m ðxðtÞÞ: ð47Þ
The tension T developed in the bundle of cables 11 wound on the drum 12, with radius R, depends on the loading on the
support arm 6 at a given angular position a1:

kpt ða1 Þ kpt ða1 Þ

T¼ DL3 4 ðu; u1 ; u2 Þ ¼ ½e0 ða1 ÞuðtÞ þ e1 ða1 Þu1 ðtÞ þ e2 ða1 Þu2 ðtÞ; ð48Þ
16 16
while the winding peripheral speed of the cable on the drum is:

dh dLt d  d
v c ¼ Rt ¼ ¼ j05 04 j þ 8j03 04 j þ 8pRp ¼ 8 j03 04 ða1 ðtÞ; u1 ðtÞ; u2 ðtÞÞj ð49Þ
dt dt dt dt
which indicates that there is a dynamic connection between the time variables: h(t), a1(t), u(t), u1(t), and u2(t).

4. Experimental analysis

Experimental analyses were performed for a bucket-wheels excavator located in a mining area during the excavation pro-
cess. The experimental installation is represented schematically in Fig. 2.
In order to validate the dynamic simplified model described in the previous section, we first studied the design documen-
tation according to the following data: m1 = 5.59  105 kg; m2 = 2.46  105 kg; m3 = 433  104 kg; J1 = 3.1  108 kg m2;
J2 = 1.665  108 kg m2; J3 = 5.24  106 kg m2; ktr = 1.25  107 N m/rad.
The elastic constant of the winch depends on the angular position a1 of support arm 6. The variations in the elastic con-
stant obtained from experimental analyses depending on the position of the support arm are shown in Fig. 3.
 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397 395

Fig. 2. Schematic of the experimental installation.

Fig. 3. Variations in the elastic constant of winch depending on the position of the support arm.

The elastic constant ku of the thrust ball bearing 4 was determined experimentally using the installation shown in Fig. 2.
We mounted a force sensor Sr on the hoisting hook of a hoist tackle Pl with manual actuation established between point H1
on the support arm and point H2 on a crawler auxiliary tractor. By uploading this assembly with a variable force Fe between
20 000 and 30 000 N, the subassembly tower 5 inclined with an angle ue, which was measured with a clinometer Cl, and thus
the approximate elasticity of the heavy thrust bearing: ku  Fe x Le/ue, where Le is the length of the arm between the appli-
cation point for the force Fe and the axis of the thrust ball bearing 4. This system was loaded to measure the bearing pressure
(reaction force) RA using a strain gauge deck fixed on the beam’s axis, which connected a pair of excavator crawlers on the
ensemble 2.
After determining the right-hand side of equation system (33), we then calculated the natural pulsations toward the sup-
port arm for different positions of a1 [12]. The variations in the three natural pulses are represented graphically in Fig. 4 [2]:
f1(a1)/f1(a1 = 0), f2(a1)/f2(a1 = 0), and f3(a1)/f3(a1 = 0), f1(a1). These values represent the first three pulsation modes of the
bucket crane structure with different positions of a1. Thus, we obtained the following values: f1(a1 = 0) = 0.425 Hz at
a1 = 0 (arm in horizontal position) for the first mode of vibration, f2(a1 = 0) = 1.15 Hz for the second mode of vibration,
and f3(a1 = 0) = 5.280 Hz for the third mode of vibration.
396 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397

Fig. 4. Variations in the elastic constant of the winch for the first, second, and third pulsation modes.

Fig. 5. Diagram of the RA bearing pressure at point A during the lifting of the support arm at a1 = 0.

Fig. 6. Signal spectrum of the frequencies obtained from Fig. 5.

The RA bearing pressure onto support point A for the thrust bearing 4 was measured by processing the signal from the
strain gauge deck TER in the transit period when lifting the support arm 6 at a1 = 0. The variation in this signal is shown
in Fig. 5 in an amortized vibration form.
The effective values measured for the modal frequencies during the lifting of the support arm 6 are shown in Fig. 6.
Corresponding to the time graph’s shape for the RA bearing pressure on the mounting point of the strain gauge deck TER,
the following values were obtained: f1(a1 = 0) = 0.450 Hz at a1 = 0 for the first mode of vibration, f2(a1 = 0) = 1.25 Hz for
the second mode of vibration, and f3(a1 = 0) = 5.00 Hz for the third mode of vibration.
It should be noted that the experimentally obtained values exhibited small deviations compared with the simplified
dynamic model presented in this study. The proposed dynamic model has practical importance because it can be analyzed
more easily and it is more applicable compared with the FE method, which requires a huge amount of data processing. In real
operating conditions, the behavior of the structure in the low frequency range was considered dangerous for the bucket
crane ensemble, i.e., values ranging from 0 to 10 Hz.

5. Conclusions

Based on our experimental research conducted in normal operating conditions with a bucket-wheels excavator, the fol-
lowing conclusions can be made:

– Experimental analyses confirmed the good approximation obtained by the dynamic model proposed in this study.
 I. Ciresß, V.-M. Nani / Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 388–397 397

– We validated the sizing calculation breviary for the strength structure in critical areas of the bucket crane.
– We determined the parameters for the dynamic stability of the excavator.
– The mathematical model developed in this study and confirmed in practice provides a favorable basis for:
– defining parameters for monitoring the regime based on the optimal functioning of the bucket-wheels excavator;
– determining values of the maximum allowable elastic deformations that ensure the optimal functioning of the
bucket-wheels excavator, as well as overcoming these values to determine the excavator’s withdrawal from dynamic
loading and stopping;
– facilitating the control and maintenance program for the excavator, as well as judicious planning of periods for current
repairs and overhauls.

The research method proposed in this study suggests new possibilities for studying, monitoring, and controlling the
regime parameters for excavators, where the bucket-wheels excavator is subject to mechanical stresses, which vary in dura-
tion, magnitude, and direction.
Another actual objective for researchers is designing a new ensemble comprising an actuator engine, gear reducer, and
support arm with a lighter structure. Based on our experimental research, the results may be adapted to produce a flexible
construction structure with the same maximum operating load.

References

[1] A. Pop, I. Rotunjeanu, V. Arad, I. Gaf-Deac, Mining Operations, Didactic and Pedagogical Publishing House, Bucharest, 1993.
[2] T.Gh. Cioara, I. Cires, I. Nicolae, D. Cristea, A. Tirdea, L. Timar, A simplified dynamic model for a surface mining excavator using design and experimental
data, in: Proceedings of the IMAC – XXVII, February 9–12, 2009, Orlando, Florida USA, Society for Experimental Mechanics Inc., 2009.
[3] Y.N. Pan, J. Chen, X.L. Li, Bearing performance degradation assessment based on lifting wavelet packet decomposition and fuzzy c-means, Mech. Syst.
Signal Process. 24 (2010) 559–566.
[4] R. Schweighoffer, D. Fodor, Technologies for exploitation complex ornamental rocks, Technical Publishing House, Bucharest, 1986.
[5] R.B. Randall, J. Antoni, Rolling element bearing diagnostics – a tutorial, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 25 (2011) 485–520.
[6] M. Geradin, D. Rixon, Mechanical Vibrations: Theory and Application to Structural Dynamics, second ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1997.
[7] J.D. Achenbach, Wave Propagation in Elastic Solids, North Holland, New York, 1984.
[8] C.F. Beards, Engineering Vibration Analysis with Application to Control systems, Edward Arnold, London, 1995.
[9] R.R. Craig, A. Kurdila, Fundamentals of Structural Dynamics, John Wiley and Sons, 2006.
[10] M. Hussey, Fundamentals of Mechanical Vibrations, Mac Milan Press Ltd., 1983.
[11] Gh. Silasß, Mechanical Vibration, Didactic and Pedagogical Publishing House, Bucharest, 1968.
[12] R.D. Blevins, Formulas for Natural Frequency and Mode Shape, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1979.
[13] M. Radesß, Mechanical Vibration, Printech Ed., Bucharest, 2008.