Vibration Study of a

Sprocket
EM 406- Mechanical Vibrations

11/12/2014

Overview of Presentation
Testing

Test Setup
RT Pro Settings

Results

Reciprocity
Sample Data & Plots
Mode Shapes

Analysis

Comparison of Modes
Lessons Learned
Discussion & Conclusion

Modal analysis was performed on a

sprocket

Accelerometer placement on the sprocket

Data collection was performed by using a hammer

and two accelerometers that were linked together
Accelerometers on sprocket, Hammer, data
through a data acquisition unit.
acquisition unit, and computer running RT Pro

Details of Test Setup (RT Pro Settings)

Coherence
1.2

Test Setup Details

1

Analysis Settings

Frequency Range

2048
0 2000 Hz

Lines

800

Frames

Multiple

Windowing

None

Averages

Trigger Level

2%

Physical Test Settings

Hammer Tip

Nylon

Test Points

88

0.6

0.4

0.2

500

1000
1500
Frequency (Hz)

2000

2500

Settings were changed until

at least 5 peaks were detected

Acceleration from accelerometer

20
15
10

Acceleration(gn)

Measurement
Points

Coherence

0.8

5
0
-5
-10

No window was necessary

as the acceleration decayed enough

-15
-20

0.05

0.1

0.15
0.2
0.25
Time (seconds)

0.3

0.35

0.4

Confirmation of linearity in the sprocket

through a reciprocity test
10

Magnitude (gn/lbf)

10

10

10

10

10

10

Reciprocity

FRF 1
FRF 2

-1

-2

500

1000
1500
2000
Frequency (Hz)

2500

3000

Layout of the points

39
40
34
29

35

30

31

36
37
32

27 28
25

26
13

43

41
42

15

14

44

49

45

50

1
88
85

86

54

53
56

51

47

52 20
21
9
19
8
7
65
64
70
69
79

83

78

82

77

81

76

80

75

55
24

23

46

33
18
17
6
16
5
84
4

2
87

38

48

22
10

58 57
60

63
68

62
67

72
74
73

12

11

71

66

61

59

Sample plots from data collection in RT

Pro
Acceleration from Accelerometer 1

Hammer Force

FRF

20

25

10

15

20

10

Acceleration(gn)

10

5
0
-5

10

10

-10
-1

10

-20

0.05

0.1

0.15
0.2
0.25
Time (seconds)

0.3

0.35

0.4

-2

0.05

0.1

0.15
0.2
0.25
Time (seconds)

0.3

0.35

10

0.4

500

Acceleration from Accelerometer 2

1000
1500
Frequency (Hz)

2000

2500

2000

2500

Coherence

100

1.2

80
1

60
40

0.8

20
Coherence

-5

-15

Acceleration (gn)

Force (lbf)

15

Magnitude (gn/lbf)

10

0
-20

0.6

0.4

-40
-60

0.2

-80
-100

0.05

0.1

0.15
0.2
0.25
Time (seconds)

0.3

0.35

0.4

500

1000
1500
Frequency (Hz)

Sample CMIF

Mode 1: f = 460.0 Hz, = 0.0025

Mode 2: f = 665.0 Hz, = 0.0025

Mode 3: f= 947.5 Hz, = 0.0014

Mode 4: f = 1067.5 Hz, = 0.0013

Mode 5: f = 1650.0 Hz, = 0.0071

Mode 6: f = 1757.5 Hz, = 0.0014

Comparison of the different mode

shapes, frequencies, and damping
Mode

# Description

Frequency
(Hz)

Damping
(%)

Mode

# Description

Frequency
(Hz)

Damping
(%)

Bending

460

0.0025

Wave,
Twisting

1067.5

0.0013

Bending

665

0.0025

Bending,
Twisting,
Wave

1650

0.0071

Bending
Wave

947.5

0.0014

Twisting,
Bending,
Wave

1757.5

0.0014

ANSYS Mode 1: f = 503.5 Hz, 503.77 Hz

% =

% =

503.77 460.0
460.0

100% =

100%=9.52%

503.5 460.0
460.0

100%=9.46%

ANSYS Mode 2: f = 703 Hz

% =

703.0 665.0
665.0

100%=5.71%

ANSYS Mode 3: f = 1091.1 Hz

% =

1091.1 947.5
947.5

100%=15.16%

ANSYS Mode 4: f = 1218 Hz

% =

1218.0 1067.5
1067.5

100%=14.10%

ANSYS Mode 5: f = 1755.7 Hz, 1763.8

Hz

% =

1755.7 1650.0
1650.0

100%=6.41%

% =

1763.8 1650.0
1650.0

100%=6.90%

ANSYS Mode 6: f = 2055.7 Hz

% =

2055.7 1757.5
1757.5

100%=16.97%

What we learned
A radially symmetrical object can have multiple mode shapes at
nearly the same frequency
Hammer strike technique has a large affect on the accuracy of data
collection
A quick hammer strike reduces hammer bounce and leads to better
data

What makes our project awesome

The sprocket geometry led to interesting mode shapes
Sprockets have neat applications