0
Research Papers

A Preliminary Experimental Study About Two-Sided Impacting SDOF Oscillator Under Harmonic Excitation

[+] Author and Article Information
Ugo Andreaus

Department of Structural and
Geotechnical Engineering,
Faculty of Civil and Industrial Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Via Eudossiana 18,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: ugo.andreaus@uniroma1.it

Paolo Baragatti

Department of Structural and
Geotechnical Engineering,
Faculty of Civil and Industrial Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Via Eudossiana 18,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: paolo.baragatti@studiobaragatti.eu

Maurizio De Angelis

Department of Structural and
Geotechnical Engineering,
Faculty of Civil and Industrial Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Via Eudossiana 18,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: maurizio.deangelis@uniroma1.it

Salvatore Perno

Department of Structural and
Geotechnical Engineering,
Faculty of Civil and Industrial Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Via Eudossiana 18,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: salvatore.perno@uniroma1.it

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS. Manuscript received November 25, 2016; final manuscript received May 4, 2017; published online xx xx, xxxx. Assoc. Editor: Przemyslaw Perlikowski.

J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam 12(6), 061010 (Sep 07, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: CND-16-1580; doi: 10.1115/1.4036816 History: Received November 25, 2016; Revised May 04, 2017

Shaking table tests have been carried out to investigate the pounding phenomenon between a mass and two-sided shock absorbers, subject to sinusoidal excitations. In an effort to investigate the effectiveness of such an impact mitigation measure, preliminary tests were carried out: first, the dynamic response was recorded without pounding, and second, the test structure was placed with gap separation and pounding was induced. Absolute acceleration, relative excursion, mean contact force, coefficient of restitution, and dissipated energy were recorded at steady state and the excitation frequency range for pounding occurrences was determined. Numerical predictions were made by using a contact model for the simulation of impacts, able to appropriately describe the behavior of rubber under impact loading. Good agreement between the experimental and the numerical results was achieved.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Experimental setup for impact testing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

D-shaped bumper profile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Comparison of static and dynamic tests of the bumper at various frequencies

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

NBs—pseudo frequency response functions (FRFs): (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

YBs—pseudo FRFs: (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

YBs—α and η versus aG: (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

YBs—aG = 0.05, 0.075, 0.1—inertia force versus relative displacement at resonance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

YBs—pseudo FRFs: (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

NBs versus YBs: α and η versus aG: (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Mean force and contact time in terms of table acceleration: (a) mean force and (b) contact time

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Dissipated energy and restitution coefficient in terms of table acceleration: (a) dissipated energy and (b) restitution coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

SDOF oscillator and double-side end stops

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Trilinear constitutive law of damper

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

YBs, aG = 0.05 (solid line: experimental results, dashed line: numerical results): (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

YBs, aG = 0.05 (solid line: experimental results, dashed line: numerical results)—inertia force versus relative displacement at resonance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

NBs (line with circle indicators) and YBs (line with star indicators) in terms of frequency: (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

NBs (line with circle indicators) versus YBs (line with star indicators) in terms of table acceleration: (a) acceleration and (b) excursion

Tables

Errata

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 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