ME 411

EXPERIMENT 1

TIME-DOMAIN DYNAMICS OF
TORSIONAL MECHANICAL
SYSTEMS

Caleb Kreeger
Abstract
Time domain analysis of mechanical systems are important when studying the varying effects of different Drive
functions on the position of a mass system. The purpose of this experiment is to see how varying mass set ups and
drive inputs affect the various parameters of the system. This report goes in detail about the various configurations
and the similarities and differences between the drive inputs.

Nomenclature
Polar area moment of inertia J

Mass m Damping constant b

Effective torsional spring constant k

Angle of rotation 𝜃

Angular velocity 𝜃̇

Angular acceleration 𝜃̈

Shear modulus G

Length L

Natural frequency 𝜔

Damping ratio ζ

Torque T
Introduction

Many aspects of this experiment deal with the study of the time-domain dynamics of torsional mechanical systems.
The setup can be divided into three portions:

The electromechanical plant, which is made up of a tower torsional mechanism, sensors, and an actuator. It has a
brushless DC servomotor with Hall-effect commutation for a drive input, three high-resolution optical incremental
encoders, and three adjustable inertias.

A real-time controller & I/O, which has a digital signal processor like a real-time controller, servo/actuator
interfaces, servo amplifiers and auxiliary power supplies.

The ECP Dynamic Executive 32-bit Version 5.1 software.

The inertia contribution is controlled through 2 half disks connected by a hub with 4 loading slots. The 500 gram
masses are loaded into the slots and can be adjusted from the center to the outer edge in increments of 1-cm. On the
electromechanical plant, there are 3 disks that are on 3 levels each with loading slots. These disks and masses can be
arranged in 3 different configurations to conduct this experiment and those configurations are divided into 4 cases.
Configuration 1 simulates 2nd order underdamped torsional mechanical systems. Case 1 is the free response of the
system and case 2 is the forced response of the system under step, impulse and ramp torque inputs.
Procedure

Questions

The major components of this configurations contributing to J are the 4 masses.

The minor components of the configurations that contribute to J are the mass of the disks.

Using the Parallel axis theorem, you can sum all the mass moments of inertia of the system rotating about the center
axis as 𝐽𝑠ys = 𝐽̅̅̅̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅̅̅ 2
𝑠haft + 𝐽disk + 4(𝐽𝑚ass + 𝐴𝑚ass 𝑥 )

Where x is the distance of the center of mass to the axis of rotation and A is the area of the mass. Since the shaft and
disk are rotating through its center of mass their moments of inertia are:

4
𝑚𝑠haft 𝐷𝑠haft
𝐽𝑠haft =
32

4
𝑚disk 𝐷disk
𝐽disk =
32
4
𝑚mass 𝐷mas
𝐽mass =
32
The results are as follows:

Shaft Disk Mass(centro Mass(shaft) System

id)
J(kg/m^ 0.0750550222314 1.87615 9.79492187 0.00452613544921 0.0931783255282
2) 037 e-05 5e-08 875 787

Other rotational contributions to the system include the hub going into the disk. These contributions are negligible
due to the low mass of the hub relative to the rest of its components.
Next a calculation for the polar moment of inertia of the shaft is necessary to calculate the effective torsional spring
constant which can be calculated by:
4
𝜋𝐷𝑠haft
𝐽𝑃olar shaft =
32
𝐺𝑠haft
𝑘𝑟 =
𝐿1→2

And 1→2 is the distance from the base of the machine to the disk. The value of was calculated to be:
𝑘𝑟 𝐺𝑠haft 𝐽polar shaft
.4133509838067156 143 .00102943

The incidental damping constant will follow the line of linear viscous damping due to the friction in the air, contact
friction without the introduction of additional driving force outside of the initial step input.

Case 1 Free Response of a 2nd Order Under Damped Torsional

Dynamic System:
The equation of the position of the encoder is listed as:

Where 𝜃(𝑡) is the angular position with respect to time of disk 1, 𝜃0 is the initial value, J, br, kr are the effective
mass moment of inertia, effective rotational spring constant and effective rotational damping constant of this system.

We used the ECP Dynamics Executive software to simulate and collect data of the system. To collect the data a few
settings, need to be adjusted to get accurate results. The units of position were set to degrees starting from position 0.
The system scaling factor was set to 17.1*10^-3. Afterwards it is important to set the driving function to step and
unidirectional moves. Afterwards we configured the step input to use the following values:
Where we collect data every 1 servo cycle, approximately every .004425seconds. The data collected is from encoder
position 1 and encoder position 2 vs time. It was necessary to zero the position of the encoders and reenable the
driving function to get the most accurate results. When executing this case, we had to set the position to 20 degrees
as a step input. Afterwards, we plotted our data, shown below.

Case 2 Forced Response of a 2nd Order Under Damped Torsional

Dynamic System:
This case also uses the configuration 1 and therefor follows the same 2nd order equation as case 1:
The difference is that the system will initiate 3 different driving torque inputs
Step input 𝑇𝑠1 (𝑡)

Impulse input 𝑇𝛿 𝛿(𝑡)

Ramp input 𝑇𝑠1t (𝑡)

Step Response

The setup is identical to case 1 however the step input configuration is as follows:

The data used is still the Drive Input Encoder 1 Position and Encoder 2 Position, but the graph is now also plotting
Drive Input on the left axis. Since the system is creating the forced response there was no other user input required
aside other than zeroing the position of the disk.
Impulse Response
The setup to this scenario is like that of part A, the difference being that the driving function must now be set to
Impulse with configuration:

The data graphed is also the same as that of part A:

Ramp Response

Like parts A and B, the setup is the same with a different driving function. For this case, the driving function must
be set to Ramp with the following configuration:
The same data used for the previous cases are graphed for this scenario:

Case 3: Step Response of a 1st Order Torsional Dynamic System

This asked us to use the setup of configuration 2 to study the step response of a 1st order torsional system.
The system obeys the following equation:

Where 𝜔(𝑡) is the angular velocity with respect to time of disk 1, 𝜔0 is the initial value, and j, br, Ts are the
effective mass moment of inertia, effective rotational spring constant and step size of the torque input and 1(t) step
function of this system.
The setup of this case is like that of case 1 and 2, except the drive input is set back to step and configured to:

Next the data acquired for the first graph are of Drive Input, Encoder Position 1, Encoder Position 2, and

Encoder Position 3. The first graph of this data is with position vs time vs drive input:
The next graph is of the velocity vs time vs drive input:
Case 4: Step Response of a 2nd Order Underdamped Torsional Dynamic
System (Base Rotation)

This case asked us to use the setup of configuration 3 to study the base-excited step response of a 2nd order torsional
system. The system obeys the following equation:

For this setup, the Driving function is of type Base Position and Normal Type. The Drive input step is a step with
the following configuration
The data acquired is the same Case 2 and when graphed sets Position vs Time vs Drive Input:
Results and Post-Experiment Analysis:

Case1:

Using the data, it’s found that the period is equal to T = .376 seconds. Using the equation:
2𝜋
𝜔𝑑 = = 15.643 rad/s
𝑇

Next I used logarithmic-Decrement to find the damping ratio. I selected the top of the first wave and the 5th wave as
my x0 and xn to get:

𝛿
𝜁= = .04544
√4𝜋2 +𝛿 2

The natural frequency was found sing

𝜔
𝜔𝑛 = 𝑑 2=15.4334 rad/s
√1−𝜁

The settling time was found using

5
𝑇𝑆 = = 7.6564 seconds
𝜁𝜔𝑛

Case 2:

Part 1
Using the data, it’s found that the period is equal to T = .376 seconds. Using the equation:
2𝜋
𝜔𝑑 = = 15.9699 rad/s
𝑇

Next I used log-Dec to find the damping ratio. I selected the top of the first wave and the 5th wave as my x0 and xn
to get:

𝛿
𝜁= = .05323
√4𝜋 2 + 𝛿2
The natural frequency was found using
𝜔𝑑
𝜔𝑛 = = 15.535 rad/s
√1 − 𝜁 2

The maximum over shoot percent is found by:

−𝜋𝜁
𝑀𝑝 = *100% = 87.493 %
ⅇ√1−𝜁 2

The peak time is found by:

𝜋
𝑡𝑝 = = .187 s
𝜔𝑑

The 0 to 100% rise time is found by:

𝑡𝑟 = 𝜋 − tan-1 (-𝜁√1 − 𝜁)/𝜔𝑑 = .24045 s

The 0 to 90% rise time is found by:

.8+2.5𝜁
= 6.7843 seconds
𝜔𝑛
The settling time is then found by:
5
𝑇𝑠 = = 7.46 seconds
𝜁𝜔𝑛

Part 2
Using the data, it’s found that the period is equal to T = .376 seconds. Using the equation:
2𝜋
𝜔𝑑 = = 7.547 rad/s
𝑇

Next I used log-Dec to find the damping ratio. I selected the top of the first wave and the 5th wave as my x0 and xn
to get:

𝛿
𝜁= = .033563
√4𝜋 2 + 𝛿 2
The natural frequency was found using
𝜔𝑑
𝜔𝑛 = = 15.636 rad/s
√1 − 𝜁 2

The settling time is then found by:

5
𝑇𝑠 = = 7.246 seconds
𝜁𝜔𝑛

The damping ratio and settling time are a bit off but this can be due to systematic or data processing error.

Part 3

No 𝜁 or 𝜔𝑛 exist because it never reaches its full cycle and the amplitude doesn’t fluctuate.
Case 3:

Using linear interpolation, I found that t (98%) = 8134535.4 rad/s at time 32.424 s dividing that time by 5 gives a
settling time of ts = 6.245s.

Case 4:

Using the data, it’s found that the period is equal to T = .376 seconds. Using the equation:
2𝜋
𝜔𝑑 = = 15.9699 rad/s
𝑇

Next I used log-Dec to find the damping ratio. I selected the top of the first wave and the 5th wave as my x0 and xn
to get:

𝛿
𝜁= = .05323
√4𝜋 2 + 𝛿2

The natural frequency was found using

𝜔𝑑
𝜔𝑛 = = 15.535 rad/s
√1 − 𝜁 2

The maximum over shoot percent is found by:

−𝜋𝜁
𝑀𝑝 = *100% = 87.493 %
ⅇ√1−𝜁 2

The peak time is found by:

𝜋
𝑡𝑝 = = .187 s
𝜔𝑑

The 0 to 100% rise time is found by:

𝑡𝑟 = 𝜋 − tan-1 (-𝜁√1 − 𝜁)/𝜔𝑑 = .24045 s

The 0 to 90% rise time is found by:

.8+2.5𝜁
= 6.7843 seconds
𝜔𝑛
The settling time is then found by:
5
𝑇𝑠 = = 7.46 seconds
𝜁𝜔𝑛

The damping ratio and settling time are very off, this could be due to the internal values of the system getting
skewed due to mechanical or systematic error. Additionally, the exported values from the program were extremely
off. This may be due to a user error when exporting the values or a data processing error.

The two rise are times are close in value bit differ because one damping ratio is larger than the other. The maximum
overshoot has a large difference due to the lower damping ratio.
Conclusion
When rotational systems are exposed to natural elements, they begin to dampen which can be graphed and charted to
model the system. This report attempted to outline the key outcomes of systems under step, impulse, ramp and base
drive functions. The different results present the engineering reality and highlight key aspects of time domain
analysis. The experiment may have been improved by using a clearer systematic process and a less complex
procedure
References

Andres, D. L. (2016). Examples for Prediction of the Transiet Response of 1DOF Mechanical Systems.

Retrieved from rotorlab.tamu.edu:

http://rotorlab.tamu.edu/me617/ME617_Examples_1DOF_transient_response.pdf

Liaw. (2016, November 30). EXPERIMENT 1: TIME-DOMAIN DYNAMICS OF. Retrieved from BlackBoard:

https://bbhosted.cuny.edu/

Moore, J. (2016). Composite Parts for Moments of Inertia and the Parallel Axis Theorem. Retrieved from

adaptive.ma.psu.edu:

http://adaptivemap.ma.psu.edu/websites/moment_intergrals/parallel_axis_theorem/parallelax

istheorem.html