Decanter

Noise reduction applied to a decanter
centrifuge
A.J. van Engelen
DCT2009.069
Research report, research performed at University of Canterbury, New Zealand
New Zealand Supervisor: Dr. J.R. Pearse

University of Canterbury
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Supervisor: Prof.dr. H. Nijmeijer

Eindhoven University of Technology
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dynamics and Control
Christchurch (New Zealand), April 2009

ii
Summary
Structural vibrations can be problematic for a (part of a) machine. They contribute to

the wear of the machine, but can also produce a high noise level. In this report a noise
and vibration survey has been performed on an existing design of a gearbox cover of a
decanter centrifuge. A finite element model of this gearbox cover is developed to pre-
dict the structural vibrations, which has been verified by measurements. A boundary
element model is used to predict the sound power level produced by this vibrating struc-
ture. By adapting this model with respect to material properties the noise reduction is
forecasted. It can be concluded that if a 2 mm thick steel gearbox cover is replaced by
a 4 mm thick ultra high molecular weight polyethylene one, that the sound production
will increase with 9 dB for frequencies up to 400 Hz and will decrease with 4 dB for
frequencies in the range of 400 to 540 Hz.
iii
iv Summary
Contents
Summary iii
1 Introduction 1
2 Decanter Centrifuge 3
2.1 Main parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Working principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations 7

3.1 Experimental setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2 Running tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3 Eigenfrequency and mode shape extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3.1 Numerical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Noise radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4.1 Boundary Element Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.4.2 Radiation Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.4.3 Radiated Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4 Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model 15

4.1 Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.1.1 Static impact test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.1.3 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
v
vi Contents
4.1.4 Comparison between numerical and experimental results . . . . . 19

4.2 Running mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.2.1 Measurement of the forces acting on the gearbox cover . . . . . . 22
4.2.3 Numerical results for the response in running mode . . . . . . . . 25
4.3 Noise radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.3.2 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5 Design changes 31
5.1 Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.2 Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.2.1 Modal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2.2 Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2.3 Harmonic response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.2.4 Noise radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
6 Conclusion and Recommendations 39

6.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Bibliography 41
A Decanter Layout and technical data 43
B Matlab Code to import measurement data from PULSE 45
C Ansys input code for the structural dynamic analysis 49
D Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with

static impact tests 55
Contents vii
E Results of the forced response of the gearbox guard made out of

UHMWPE without damping 59
viii Contents
Chapter 1
Introduction
G-Tech is a Christchurch based manufacturer of centrifuges. To comply with the de-

mands of their costumers their products should produce a minimum amount of noise.
So the vibrations that contribute to the radiated noise should be minimized. The sub-
ject is to identify the primary modes of vibrations and the contributions of these to
the radiated noise field of one of their products, the G-Tech 1456. The main objective
is to identify the primary modes of vibration and their contribution to the radiated
sound field. Moreover, using numerical models the influence of design changes can be
predicted. Because of the complex geometry of the machine, in this study only the
gearbox cover is examined.
The objective is to collect data for impact excitation of the gearbox cover in both
the operating (with the machine switched on) and non-operating (static) state. In the
operating state the cover will be excited due to vibrations that are generated by the
rotating parts, in the static case the cover is excited with a rubber hammer, i.e. after
an impact. Measurements in the frequency domain are made with an accelerometer to
identify the most dominant frequencies. The gearbox cover is modeled in SolidWorks
so the model can be imported to a finite element modeling package to carry out a
numerical study. With a modal analysis the eigenfrequencies and corresponding mode
shapes can be calculated. The accuracy of this model can be determined by comparing
the numerical results with the measurements after the impact excitation. Moreover,
the numerically calculated vibrations can be used to compute the radiated sound power
using boundary element method.
The report is organized as follows. In Chapter 2 the working principle of the decanter
centrifuge (like the G-tech 1456) is explained. Moreover, the principal components
are described in detail. In Chapter 3 the response of the main parts after an impact
excitation are investigated. Also the theory used for the experiments and numerical
model is described. For the gearbox cover in particular in Chapter 4 it is described how
a numerical model is implemented and verified by measurements. The most dominant
vibrational frequencies using static impact excitations are listed and compared with
1
2 Chapter 1. Introduction
a modal analysis of a finite element model. Next the sound power radiated by the
gearbox cover is calculated using boundary element method. In Chapter 5 the model is
changed with respect to material properties to investigate if it is worthwhile to replace
the gearbox cover by a cover made of a different material. Finally in Chapter 6 the
conclusions and recommendations will be presented.
Chapter 2
Decanter Centrifuge
In this report the G-Tech 1456 decanter centrifuge is under investigation. Before going
into detail about the process of noise reduction, the working principle and the main
parts of the centrifuge are described.
2.1 Main parts
In Figure 2.1 a cross-section of the decanter with the main parts is presented (see
Appendix A for a larger one). The bowl, conical and conveyor are supported by two
main bearings that are mounted on the base. Two electric motors (main and back-
drive) are coupled to the rotating assembly through v-belt drives. The screw conveyor
is connected through a spline coupling to a gearbox, which makes it possible to rotate
the conveyor slightly slower than the bowl. Throughout this work the rotating speed of
the bowl is 3250 RPM. More technical data can be found in Appendix A.
2.2 Working principle
The decanter centrifuge is a piece of machinery that is used to separate different liquids
or solids from liquids. It uses centrifugal forces that enforce the liquid (or solid) with
the highest density to be near the surface of the bowl while the liquid with the lower
density is floating on this layer (at a smaller radial position). Due to the slightly
different rotational speed of the conveyor with respect to the bowl (4 to 48 RPM) the
high density fluid is conveyed upwards into the conical and will finally exit the decanter
at the solids discharge. At the conical a beach will be formed, see Figure 2.2. On the
opposite side (in axial direction) of this beach the fluid with a lower density will overflow
in the liquids discharge.
3
4 Chapter 2. Decanter Centrifuge
Clutch Gearbox Main bearing 1 Bowl Conveyor Conical Main Bearing 2 Feed pipe
Base
Liquids End Solids End
Figure 2.1: Cross section of the G-tech 1456 decanter centrifuge.
Figure 2.2: Visualization of the separation process.

2.2. Working principle 5
The decanter centrifuge has the advantage that it discharges continuously. In addi-
tion it is able to separate fluids with small density difference. Gravity sedimentation,
like large-tank clarifiers, have to run an uneconomically long time in this case. Besides
the decanter can handle a wide range of feed slurry concentrations and produces drier
solids than other centrifuges. These are the main reasons that decanter centrifuges are
widely used. Disadvantages are the high power consumption and high wear of the screw
conveyor. Examples of applications are found in the chemical industry, waste sludge
processing, minerals extracting and processing [Rec01].
At G-Tech the decanter centrifuge is completely modeled with the 3D Computer
Aided Design (CAD) software SolidWorks. The focus is set on the production process.
The development of new products starts with improving their recent products. The
company does not use any model for the vibration analysis for this product.
6 Chapter 2. Decanter Centrifuge
Chapter 3
Measuring and modeling noise

and vibrations
A decanter centrifuge produces a lot of noise while it is in operating mode. To un-

derstand the underlying principles of the sound production, first the vibrations of the
machine are investigated. These vibrations are measured using a tri-axial accelerome-
ter. Next a numerical model is used to identify the shape of the vibrating structure.
Finally the model is used to calculate the sound production of the structure. Moreover,
the effects of changes in the design are predicted.
3.1 Experimental setup
For the vibrational experiments a tri-axial accelerometer and a Brüel & Kjær PULSE
system are used. The tri-axial accelerometer is put on the surface of several parts of
the decanter centrifuge using some wax. The accelerometer is positioned such that the
z-axis represents the axial axis of the centrifuge, the y-axis is pointing upwards and the
x-axis sidewards. The three generated signals are amplified and processed in the PULSE
system and visualized on a laptop. From these signals a Fast Fourier Transformation
(FFT) is made to investigate which frequencies are dominant in the response. The
Fourier transform G(jω) of a time signal g(t) is given by [Bro85] as
R∞ RT
G(jω) = 0 g(t)e−jωt dt ≈ 0 g(t)e−jωt dt, (3.1)
with T the (large enough) time span of the data and ω the angular frequency. Using
digital signal processing equipment, like the PULSE system, this time signal will not be
continuous, but consists of N discrete samples. When the frequency range of interest
goes from 0 − W Hz, a sampling frequency of at least 2W should be used to prevent
1
aliasing, [Bro85]. This implies a maximal sample time of 2W and a total time span of
7
8 Chapter 3. Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations
N
T = 2W . The discrete Fourier transform is approximated by
PN −1 n
−j2πk N
Gk ≈ k=0 gk e . (3.2)
Both static and running measurements have been performed. In case of the static
measurements the main parts are excited with a rubber hammer and the response of the
part is measured. The number of samples is set to N = 213 = 8192, with a frequency
span of 2 Hz. In this way frequencies up to 16384 Hz will be measured. To prevent
aliasing a sampling frequency of 32765 Hz (two times the highest frequency of interest)
is used. A trigger is set to 13.6 m/s2 so that the measurement starts after the impact
and a Hanning window with maximum overlap is used to get the best results without
losing too much of the original signal. Only one average is taken in the static tests,
because the amplitude of the response is decaying fast after the impact.
For the running tests, i.e. with the bowl and conveyor rotating, a FFT of the signals
is made as well. In this case a trigger has not been used, but the measurements are
done in a free run. Because the decanter is vibrating continuously an average of 400
samples is taken to obtain reliable results.
3.2 Running tests
To get a first idea of the dominating vibrations that can cause the produced noise a
running test is performed. A hose is attached to the decanter to simulate a processing
situation, see Figure 3.1. The rotational speed of the bowl is set to 3250 RPM (54 Hz).
The tri-axial accelerometer is glued to the main parts of the decanter to obtain the
acceleration response of these main parts. Several points are used for each part. The
results of the running tests are saved in a .txt file that is imported into Matlab. The
data contains the amplitudes of the acceleration at each frequency of the FFT analysis,
so 8192 amplitudes for one channel. To investigate which frequencies are dominating the
response, the data is sorted by descending amplitudes, see Appendix B for the Matlab
file used. For each part the first 3 dominating frequencies are listed in Table 3.1. As
can be seen most of the dominating frequencies are a multiplication of the rotational
frequency (54 Hz). This is due to the unbalance of the rotating parts. For example, the
gearbox cover is vibrating with the highest amplitude at a frequency of 270 Hz, which
is the 5th harmonic frequency of the rotational frequency of the bowl.
Because of the complex geometry of the decanter, the choice is made to do the noise
and vibration analysis on some parts separately. In this report the gearbox cover is
analyzed. The gearbox cover is chosen, because this cover is vibrating with the highest
amplitude (measured with a tri-axial accelerometer) of all measured parts, with the
decanter centrifuge in operating mode. Besides, the experience is that the connection
points of the cover to the base fail relatively fast.
The analysis exists of both a measurement of the response after a static impact
and a modal analysis of the gearbox cover with the finite element package Ansys. The
3.2. Running tests 9
Part Frequency Harmonic freq. w.r.t. Amplitude perc. of highest

[Hz] rotational freq. [-] [m/s2 ] amplitude [%]
Gearbox Cover 270 5 115.43 100
216 4 59.08 51
432 8 42.44 37
Grey lid 378 7 15.80 100
324 6 14.37 91
216 4 10.38 66
Hopper 108 2 10.49 100
54 1 9.35 89
216 4 8.36 80
Main Bearing 2 54 1 9.15 100
10856 6.92 76
162 3 6.53 71
Base 54 1 9.14 100
378 7 5.74 63
270 5 5.51 60
Backdrive guard 732 4.90 100
144 4.57 93
54 1 2.79 57
Solid end cover 108 2 1.89 100
3320 1.88 99
2978 1.58 84
Base frame 54 1 0.72 100
3320 0.42 58
108 2 0.37 51
Table 3.1: Most dominant frequencies of some main parts with the decanter running at
3250 RPM.
Water hose Solids end cover Lid Hopper Base Base frame Gearbox cover
Solids end Liquids end
Figure 3.1: A water hose was attached to the decanter to perform a running test. The
flow was set to 4 m3 /s.
results of the static impact test are used to obtain the eigenfrequencies and the results
of the modal analysis are used to identify the corresponding mode shapes. Moreover,
the results of the computer model of the gearbox cover can be compared with the
measurements.
3.3 Eigenfrequency and mode shape extraction
To extract the eigenfrequencies of the main parts a static impact test is performed.
With a rubber hammer the part is excited. After an impact in the normal direction
of a surface, the part will start vibrating in the same direction (out of plane). Due
to this impulse the part is excited in all frequencies of interest. By positioning the
accelerometer at different positions on this surface (the same positions as in the running
test) all eigenmodes within the frequency range of interest can be extracted. When only
one position would be used, the chance exists that the accelerometer is on a nodal line
of a mode.
3.4. Noise radiation 11
3.3.1 Numerical implementation
To identify the mode shapes that correspond with the eigenfrequencies a finite element
(FE) model is used. G-Tech provided Computer Aided Design (CAD) part files that are
created with SolidWorks software. These files can be exported as IGES files, which can
be imported in the commercial FE software package Ansys. Within Ansys the model is
meshed. Moreover the material properties and boundary conditions are assigned.
As the main parts are made of steel, damping is not taken into account in the
numerical analysis. The structural dynamics of an undamped system are given by the
equations of motion [Ans07]:
Mü + Ku = 0, (3.3)
with u the column with degrees of freedom and M and K the mass and stiffness matrices
respectively. The eigenvalue problem corresponding to this free vibrating undamped
system is given by:
(−ω 2 M + K)u = 0. (3.4)
The values for ω for which the determinant of the matrix [−ω 2 M+K] equals zero are the
eigenvalues. The modal analysis function in Ansys solves this eigenvalue problem and
stores the eigenvalues λ = ω 2 in a diagonal matrix λi . The corresponding eigenvectors
φi satisfy:
(K − λi M)φi = 0. (3.5)
Physically the eigenvalues and eigenvectors represent the undamped eigenfrequencies
[rad/s] and the corresponding mode shapes respectively.
3.4 Noise radiation
With the results of a vibrational analysis it is possible to compute acoustic pressures

in the surrounded fluid by a structure using the Helmholtz differential equation. Only
the surface of a vibrating structure in contact with the fluid, also called wetted surface,
is able to transfer energy to the fluid. Therefore the Helmholtz differential equation
can be reduced to an integral equation that covers only the boundary surface S. The
complete derivation can be found in [Vis04]:
H ³ ´
α(~x)p(~x) = S ∂G(r)
∂ny p(~
y ) + iωρ0 G(r)v ny (~
y ) dS + pin (~x). (3.6)
In (3.6) the acoustic pressure and normal velocity are related to the radiated pressure
field in the fluid domain. The term α(~x) is a geometry related coefficient, ~y is a point
on the boundary surface S and ~x is a field point in the fluid domain. The unit normal
to the surface at source point ~y , denoted as ~ny , is pointed into the fluid domain. The
distance r is the length of vector ~r that is directed from the source point ~y to the field
point ~x : r = ||~x − ~y ||. The term pin represents the incident acoustic wave in the case
of a scattering analysis and G(r) is the Green’s function, which represents the effect
observed at point ~x created by a unit source located at point ~y .
In order to solve the Helmholtz integral equation (3.6) for a field point ~x the normal
velocity and pressure at the surface S should be known. If only the normal velocities
are known, first the pressures at the surface have to be calculated by replacing ~x = ~y
in (3.6). Secondly the pressures at the field points can be calculated.
3.4.1 Boundary Element Method
The analysis of vibrations and the resulting radiated sound can be done with the use
of sophisticated computer software, e.g. for calculating the dynamics of a practical
structure a Finite Element (FE) Model with appropriate boundary conditions can be
used. This demands a discretization of the structure into a number of finite elements.
If the structural dynamics are of interest all elements, interior and boundary, are to
be accounted for, as they are a measure of the total mass and stiffness of the system.
For the total radiated sound power however, only the elements on the boundary have
a contribution. Only these elements are in contact with the fluid to which energy
is transferred. For the purpose of determining the radiated sound by a structure a
Boundary Element (BE) model will suffice. The advantage of a BE model is that less
equations are to be solved, as in general there are less nodes in a BE model compared
with a FE model. In this report Ansys is used for the FE analysis and LMS Virtual.Lab,
together with SYSNOISE, for the BE analysis.
From the structural vibration data at the nodes the acoustic pressures at the surface
can be calculated with the Helmholtz integral equation (3.6). This requires a discretiza-
tion of this continuous equation, see [Vis04], giving
Ap = Bv, (3.7)
where the matrices A and B are the influence matrices. These matrices are dependent
on the geometry of the structure and comply with the Helmholtz integral equation (3.6).
So with the velocities from the structural vibration data the sound pressure at each node
can be calculated.
3.4.2 Radiation Efficiency
A useful measure of the effectiveness of sound radiation by a vibrating surface is the

total radiated sound power normalized with respect to the specific acoustic impedance
of the fluid medium, the structure area and the velocity of the surface vibration, which
is defined as the radiation efficiency. A commonly used measure of the surface vibration
is the space-average value of the time-averaged squared vibration velocity defined by
R ³ RT ´
vn2 = S1 S T1 0 vn2 y (~y )dt dS, (3.8)
where T is a suitable period of time over which to estimate the mean square velocity
vn2 y at a point ~y and S extends over the total vibrating surface.
The radiation efficiency is defined by reference to the acoustical power radiated by
a uniformly vibrating baffled piston at a frequency for which the piston circumference
greatly exceeds the acoustic wavelength k: ka À 1. For the radiated power of a baffled
piston the following relation holds:
P = 21 ρ0 cSvn2 . (3.9)
The definition of the radiation efficiency is thus:
σ = P /ρ0 cSvn2 . (3.10)
3.4.3 Radiated Power
In the case of a structure modeled within a FE software package the structural vibration
of this structure with R elements can be calculated with FE method. In this way it is
possible to obtain a column vector of complex velocities at each element center caused
by a harmonic point force. The velocities are grouped in a column vector, like:
£ ¤T
ve = ve1 ve2 . . . veR . (3.11)
With the calculated velocities the sound pressure and radiated sound power can be
calculated within a BEM package. The obtained sound pressure at each element is also
grouped in a column vector:
£ ¤T
pe = pe1 pe2 . . . peR . (3.12)
From a BE model the relation between the elemental velocities and sound pressures can
be found. As a result of (3.7) the sound pressures can be denoted as
pe = A−1 Bve (3.13)
Analytical equations for the radiated sound power [Fah87] give the relationship between
the velocities and sound pressures as in
P
R
1 ∗ S H
P (ω) = 2 Ae Re(ver per ) = 2R Re(ve pe ),
(3.14)
r=1
where Ae and S are respectively the areas of each element and of the whole structure.
Substituting (3.13) into (3.14) result in
S H −1
P (ω) = 2R Re(ve A Bve ). (3.15)
3.5 Summary
To compute the radiated sound field by a vibrating structure a computer model can be
used. First the dynamics of the structure should be identified. The eigenfrequencies and
corresponding mode shapes extracted by a numerical software program are compared
with physical measurements of the excited structure after an impact. This comparison
of the eigenfrequencies gives an indication of the accuracy of the model. The vibrations
that contribute to the radiated sound field can be computed by solving the Helmholtz
integral equation for a certain frequency domain. By this equation the harmonic veloc-
ities of the vibrating structure are related to the resulting acoustical pressures at the
surface. The radiated sound power can be computed from this acoustical impedance.
Chapter 4
Implementation, verification and

results of a numerical model
A numerical model is used to compute the forced harmonic response of the gearbox
cover. Consequently this harmonic response is used to compute the radiated sound
field. Experiments are made to investigate the accuracy of the finite element model.
4.1 Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction
4.1.1 Static impact test
The measured accelerations during the static impact test performed on the gearbox
cover can be found in Figure 4.1. Note that the amplitudes are normalized so that the
highest response has an amplitude of 1 sm2 . Moreover, in Table 4.1 the first 10 frequencies
that correspond with these accelerations are listed. Some peaks are close to each other,
e.g. peaks can be found at 36 and 38 Hz. This is due to the fact that the spectrum
is an average of multiple measurements at different positions and that an interval of 2
Hz is used during the measurements. These peaks are listed in Table 4.1 as being one
natural frequency, that belongs to the highest peak.
To identify the mode shapes that correspond with the eigenfrequencies a finite element
(FE) model is used. The provided CAD file of the gearbox guard existed of an assembly
containing the back drive belt guard and gearbox cover, see Figure 4.2. Basically the
gearbox cover is only connected to the backdrive belt guard with four bolts through
the small holes in the sides. To simplify the model as much as possible it is decided
to leave the backdrive belt guard out the analysis and to apply constraints to the four
15
16 Chapter 4. Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model
1
X
0.9 Y
Z
0.8
0.7
Acceleration [m/s2]
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 4.1: The dominating frequency responses of the gearbox cover during static
impact test.
Frequency [Hz]
X Y Z
122 540 490
192 350 1322
234 570 442
362 114 354
350 666 434
36 362 728
114 562 114
296 1008 1176
680 462 542
438 442 454
Table 4.1: Most dominant frequencies of the gearbox cover during a static impact test.
4.1. Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction 17
Figure 4.2: CAD file of the assembled gearbox guard, provided by G-Tech.
(a) Gearbox cover, originally. (b) Gearbox cover, adapted with front
plate.
Figure 4.3: The original and adapted gearbox cover, without backdrive belt guard.
connection points. Because the model does not contain the front panel, this plate is
modeled additionally in SolidWorks, see Figure 4.3.
The next step is to save this CAD file as an IGES file that can be imported into
Ansys. Because the gearbox cover is made of 2 mm thick steel, shell elements can be
used. This requires Ansys to import only areas instead of a (solid) volume. The choice
is made to keep only the outside areas, that subsequently are meshed with 8 node shell
elements. These elements use quadratic shape functions that are more accurate than 4
node shell elements, with linear shape functions. Special attention is paid to the back
panel with the ventilation holes in it. Around these holes a finer mesh is used compared
to the other areas. The result is an element size of 20 mm for the large areas and a mesh
size of 3 mm around the small holes. In total the model has 9803 elements and 34067
nodes with 6 degrees of freedom (DOF). The mesh used is presented in Figure 4.4. The
model would be less accurate when larger elements would be used as can be seen in
a plot of the eigenfrequency versus the mode number in Figure 4.5. In this figure the
1
ELEMENTS
APR 3 2009
14:22:15
Y
X
Z
Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard
Figure 4.4: The finite element mesh of the gearbox cover.
Property Value
Youngs Modulus [GPa] 207
Poisson ratio [-] 0.3
Density [kg/m3 ] 7800
Table 4.2: Material properties of low carbon mild steel.
element sizes correspond with the default element sizes of the larger areas, like the side
and top panels.
The gearbox cover is made of low carbon mild steel, the material properties are
listed in Table 4.2, [Hea97] [Ger99]. In Ansys the linear isotropic elastic material model
is selected. The static impact test is performed with the gearbox cover mounted on the
decanter, so boundary conditions are needed to represent the same situation. Therefore
the translational DOF’s in Y and X direction of the nodes that are attached to the
machine are deleted. Moreover all DOF’s, except for the translational degree of freedom
in X direction, at the nodes around the small holes in both sides are deleted to represent
the situation that the cover is bolted to the backdrive belt guard.
4.1.3 Numerical results
The first 12 mode shapes calculated with Ansys are presented in Figure 4.6. As can
be seen the modes consist of panels (back, front and side) vibrating out of plane. The
4.1. Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction 19
1800
20 mm
1600 40 mm
60 mm
80 mm
1400
1200
Frequency [Hz]
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 50 100 150 200
Mode nr [−]
Figure 4.5: Eigenfrequency versus mode number for different default element sizes.
back-panel has the lowest stiffness (due to the holes) and consequently starts resonating
at the lowest eigenfrequency.
4.1.4 Comparison between numerical and experimental results
The results of the static impact measurements contain the dominant frequencies in X, Y
and Z directions. The different panels of the gearbox cover will vibrate out of plane. This
implies that the dominant frequencies in X direction are generated by the side panels.
Even so, the response in the Y-direction is generated by the top panel and the response
in Z direction by the back panel. To identify the corresponding mode shape from
the modal analysis one needs to check the mode shape that occurs at a corresponding
frequency from the measurements. If the direction (X, Y or Z) corresponds with the out
of plane movement of the right panel, this will indicate that the Finite Element Model
complies with the measurement.
In Table 4.3 the numerically determined eigenfrequencies that correspond with the
dominating frequencies from the static impact test are listed. Sometimes it is impossible
to identify the mode shape that corresponds with a peak in the static impact test. In
that case a - is denoted for the eigenfrequency calculated with the modal analysis. The
numerically calculated mode shapes that correspond with the lowest eigenfrequencies in
X, Y and Z direction determined during the static impact test can be found in Figure 4.7.
Mode shapes for higher frequencies can be found in Appendix D. The relative large
error between the numerical and experimental result for the first eigenfrequency is due
to the applied boundary conditions at the holes where the cover is bolted to the back
1 1 1
NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION
STEP=1 STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =1 SUB =2 SUB =3
FREQ=42.711 APR 5 2009 FREQ=50.445 APR 5 2009 FREQ=54.337 APR 5 2009
USUM (AVG) 14:58:47 USUM (AVG) 15:09:29 USUM (AVG) 15:10:14
RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1
DMX =1.184 DMX =.871962 DMX =.899207
SMN =.226E-05 SMN =.639E-03 SMN =.547E-04
SMX =1.184 SMX =.871962 SMX =.899207
Y
Z
X
Y Y
X X
Z Z
MN
MX
MN
MX
MX
MN
.226E-05 .263008 .526014 .78902 1.052 .639E-03 .194266 .387894 .581521 .775148 .547E-04 .199866 .399678 .59949 .799301
.131505 .394511 .657517 .920523 1.184 .097453 .29108 .484707 .678335 .871962 .09996 .299772 .499584 .699395 .899207
Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard
(a) Mode 1 @ 43 Hz (b) Mode 2 @ 50 Hz (c) Mode 3 @ 54 Hz

1 1 1
DMX =1.43 DMX =1.263 DMX =1.428
SMN =.251E-03 SMN =.002337 SMN =.179E-03
SMX =1.43 SMX =1.263 SMX =1.428
Y Y
Z Z
X X
MN
X
Z
MX
MX
MN
MX MN
.251E-03 .318002 .635753 .953504 1.271 .002337 .282506 .562674 .842843 1.123 .179E-03 .317547 .634915 .952283 1.27
.159127 .476878 .794629 1.112 1.43 .142421 .42259 .702759 .982928 1.263 .158863 .476231 .793599 1.111 1.428
(d) Mode 4 @ 69 Hz (e) Mode 5 @ 74 Hz (f) Mode 6 @ 89 Hz

1 1 1
DMX =1.287 DMX =1.833 DMX =2.22
SMN =.809E-03 SMN =.258E-03 SMN =.001895
SMX =1.287 SMX =1.833 SMX =2.22
Y Y Y
Z Z Z
X X X
MX
MX
MN
MN
MX
MN
.809E-03 .28665 .572492 .858333 1.144 .258E-03 .407442 .814627 1.222 1.629 .001895 .494747 .987598 1.48 1.973
.14373 .429571 .715413 1.001 1.287 .20385 .611034 1.018 1.425 1.833 .248321 .741172 1.234 1.727 2.22
(g) Mode 7 @ 89 Hz (h) Mode 8 @ 91 Hz (i) Mode 9 @ 112 Hz

1 1 1
SUB =10 SUB =11 SUB =12
DMX =1.442 DMX =1.155 DMX =.720916
SMN =.230E-03 SMN =.527E-03 SMN =.860E-04
SMX =1.442 SMX =1.155 SMX =.720916
MX
MN
MN
Y Y Y MX
MN X X X
Z Z Z
MX
.230E-03 .320517 .640803 .96109 1.281 .527E-03 .257124 .513722 .77032 1.027 .860E-04 .16027 .320455 .480639 .640824
.160373 .48066 .800947 1.121 1.442 .128826 .385423 .642021 .898618 1.155 .080178 .240363 .400547 .560732 .720916
(j) Mode 10 @ 115 Hz (k) Mode 11 @ 115 Hz (l) Mode 12 @ 129 Hz
Figure 4.6: First 12 structural modes of the Gearbox Guard.

4.2. Running mode 21
Direction Eigenfreq. static Eigenfreq. modal Rel. error

impact test [Hz] analysis [Hz] [%]
X 36 50 38.9
(X,Y),Z 114 (-,-), 115 (-,-), 0.9
X 122 129 5.7
X 192 184 -4.2
X 234 239 2.1
X 296 302 2.0
X 350 356 1.7
Y 350 350 0.0
Z 354 356 0.6
Y 362 379 4.7
Z 434 437 0.7
X 438 - -
Z 442 438 -0.9
Y 442 442 0.0
Z 454 464 2.2
Y 462 - -
Z 490 494 0.8
Y 540 553 2.4
Z 542 551 1.7
Y 562 560 -0.4
Y 570 - -
Y 666 661 -0.8
X 680 - -
Table 4.3: Comparison between the eigenfrequencies determined in a static impact test
and a modal analysis in Ansys.
drive guard, that is not infinitely stiff in reality. At low frequencies this will result in a
larger error than at high frequencies, where the displacements are smaller. NB due to
the high modal density of the numerical model it is not always possible to make a fair
comparison, especially for high frequencies.
4.2 Running mode
When the G-Tech decanter is running the whole structure is vibrating, due to the
unbalanced rotating mass. To predict the sound radiated by the gearbox cover, first
the structural vibrations need to be calculated. In Ansys the forces acting on the
gearbox cover, transmitted by the connection points with the frame, need to be assigned.
Therefore the accelerations at the connection points are measured using the tri-axial
accelerometer.
1 1 1
DMX =.871962 DMX =1.296 DMX =1.442
SMN =.639E-03 SMN =.567E-03 SMN =.230E-03
SMX =.871962 SMX =1.296 SMX =1.442
MX
Y
Z
X
Y
Y
MN X
X Z
Z
MX
MN
MX
MN
.639E-03 .194266 .387894 .581521 .775148 .567E-03 .288543 .576518 .864494 1.152 .230E-03 .320517 .640803 .96109 1.281
.097453 .29108 .484707 .678335 .871962 .144555 .432531 .720506 1.008 1.296 .160373 .48066 .800947 1.121 1.442
(a) Mode shape @ 50 Hz, side (b) Mode shape @ 350 Hz, top (c) Mode shape @ 115 Hz, back
panel is vibrating in X direction panel is vibrating in Y direction panel is vibrating in Z direction
Figure 4.7: Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with the static
impact test measurement.
4.2.1 Measurement of the forces acting on the gearbox cover
The acceleration at the four connection points (two on each side) are measured using a
tri-axial accelerometer. For each point three measurements (FFT’s) are made which are
averaged. Also the standard deviation between the different measurements is calculated
to see if the measurements are repeatable. In Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9 the results for
the complete frequency region and a zoomed version up to 1000 Hz are shown. As can
be seen the highest responses occur at harmonic frequencies of 54 Hz (up to the 10th
harmonic of 540 Hz) and in the high frequency region of 5 to 12 kHz. The forces that
are involved with these accelerations can be determined easily by applying Newton’s
second law
F = ma, (4.1)
with m and a the mass (5.4 grams) and acceleration of the accelerometer respectively.
With the measured forces applied to the numerical model of the gearbox cover it is pos-
sible to calculate the structural response for the running mode. Because the amplitudes
of the forces are different for each frequency, separate loadcases need to be defined in
Ansys. These loadcases contain the average amplitudes of the harmonic forces in X, Y
and Z direction as measured during the running test and are applied to the nodes at the
vertical edges at the front of the gearbox cover, see Figure 4.10. It is chosen to use only
the first 10 harmonics of the running frequency of 54 Hz in the simulation. The high
frequency responses have a large standard deviation and therefore they are not taken
into account in the numerical simulation. NB these frequencies could be dominant in
the radiated sound field and should be investigated in more detail. See Table 4.4 for
the input forces used.
The dynamic response to the harmonic forces listed in Table 4.4 is calculated within
Ansys. To reduce the calculation time, the analysis type is set to modal superposition,
4.2. Running mode 23
2.5
X
Average acc. [m/s2]

2 Y
1.5 Z
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]
Standard deviation [m/s2]
4
X
3 Y
Z
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 4.8: Average accelerations and standard deviation measured at the connection
points of the gearbox cover.
1
X
Average acc. [m/s2]
0.8 Y
0.6 Z
0.4
0.2
0
1 2 3
10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]
Standard deviation [m/s2]
1
X
0.8 Y
0.6 Z
0.4
0.2
0
1 2 3
10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 4.9: Zoomed, average accelerations and standard deviation measured at the
connection points of the gearbox cover.
Figure 4.10: The harmonic loads and constraints used for the running simulation.
Frequency |Fx |10−3 |Fy |10−3 |Fz |10−3

[Hz] [N] [N] [N]
54 5.3 2.1 0.4
108 5.0 2.7 1.3
162 2.2 2.0 2.7
216 1.5 1.3 0.6
270 2.6 5.0 5.3
324 0.5 0.4 1.7
378 1.0 0.7 0.8
432 1.0 0.1 0.6
486 0.06 0.05 0.02
540 0.1 0.1 0.1
Table 4.4: Amplitudes of forces in X, Y and Z direction used in Ansys for the running
mode analysis.
which means that the response is based on the preceding modal analysis. For this modal
analysis the boundary conditions at the connection points as mentioned in Section 4.1.2
are deleted. The undamped equations of motion (3.5) become [Ans07]
φj T Mφj y¨j + φj T Kφj yj = φj T F, (4.2)
Pn
with φj the j-th mode shape and yj a set of modal coordinates, such that u = j=1 φj yj ,
with n the number of modes on which the superposition is based. As a rule of thumb
the number of modes n should contain at least 50% of the eigenfrequencies more than
the highest frequency of interest in the harmonic response analysis case [Ans07]. This
implies that the eigenfrequency of the highest mode in the mode superposition analysis
should be at least 810 Hz for accurate results. 200 Modes are selected in the mode
superposition analysis case, with the highest mode shape and eigenfrequency at 1309
Hz. The complete input file used in Ansys, for both the modal and forced response
analysis, can be found in Appendix C.
4.2.3 Numerical results for the response in running mode
The deformed shape of the gearbox cover due to the harmonic forces, as mentioned in
Table 4.4, is presented in Figure 4.11 for each frequency of excitation. The displacements
are the highest for the low frequencies with a maximum of 5.1e−3 mm in X-direction at
54 Hz at the lowest connection points, see Figure 4.11(a).
4.3 Noise radiation
The structural (harmonic) displacements calculated within Ansys can be used in a

Boundary Element (BE) analysis to predict the radiated sound power.
The results of the harmonic response analysis case in Ansys are stored in a .rst file that
is imported into LMS Virtual.Lab. First a Load Vector Set is created that contains the
displacement vector for every node of the gearbox cover mesh. Next step is to create
a surrogate acoustic mesh on which this structural data is projected. For an acoustical
analysis less elements and nodes can be used than for a structural dynamic analysis case.
Therefore a coarse mesh is created in Ansys consisting of larger 4 node quadrilateral
shell elements, see Figure 4.12 for both meshes. This coarse mesh consisted of 4902
elements and 5360 nodes. The mesh used in the structural analysis consists of 9803
elements and 34067 nodes respectively. So the number of equations to be solved is
reduced by 84%.
To set up the acoustical analysis in LMS Virtual.Lab first the Harmonic BEM
Toolbox is activated. Next the model type definition is set to BEM Direct, exterior, as
1 1
NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =1 SUB =2
FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=108 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:35:51 USUM (AVG) 16:36:07
RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1 RSYS=0 PLOT NO. 1
DMX =.005079 DMX =.001571
MN
SMN =.439E-05 SMN =.135E-06
SMX =.005079 SMX =.001571
Y Y
Z Z
X X
MX
MN
MX
.439E-05 .001132 .00226 .003388 .004516 .135E-06 .349E-03 .699E-03 .001048 .001397
.568E-03 .001696 .002824 .003952 .005079 .175E-03 .524E-03 .873E-03 .001222 .001571
Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard
(a) Deformed shape @ 54 Hz (b) Deformed shape @ 108 Hz

1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =3 SUB =4
FREQ=162 APR 27 2009 FREQ=216 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:36:29 USUM (AVG) 16:36:44
DMX =.519E-03 DMX =.138E-03
SMN =.155E-06 SMN =.415E-06
SMX =.519E-03 SMX =.138E-03
MX
MX
Y Y
X X
Z Z
MN
MN
.155E-06 .116E-03 .231E-03 .346E-03 .462E-03 .415E-06 .310E-04 .616E-04 .921E-04 .123E-03
.579E-04 .173E-03 .289E-03 .404E-03 .519E-03 .157E-04 .463E-04 .769E-04 .107E-03 .138E-03
(c) Deformed shape @ 162 Hz (d) Deformed shape @ 216 Hz

1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =5 SUB =6
FREQ=270 APR 27 2009 FREQ=324 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:41:09 USUM (AVG) 16:41:59
DMX =.170E-03 DMX =.226E-04
SMN =.709E-06 SMN =.141E-07
SMX =.170E-03 SMX =.226E-04
MN
MN Y Y
MX
X X
Z Z
MX
.709E-06 .383E-04 .758E-04 .113E-03 .151E-03 .141E-07 .504E-05 .101E-04 .151E-04 .201E-04
.195E-04 .570E-04 .946E-04 .132E-03 .170E-03 .253E-05 .755E-05 .126E-04 .176E-04 .226E-04
(e) Deformed shape @ 270 Hz (f) Deformed shape @ 324 Hz

1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =7 SUB =8
FREQ=378 APR 27 2009 FREQ=432 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:42:45 USUM (AVG) 16:43:43
DMX =.120E-03 DMX =.158E-03
SMN =.936E-07 SMN =.482E-06
SMX =.120E-03 SMX =.158E-03 MN
MX
Y Y
MX
X X
Z Z
MN
.936E-07 .268E-04 .535E-04 .801E-04 .107E-03 .482E-06 .356E-04 .707E-04 .106E-03 .141E-03
.134E-04 .401E-04 .668E-04 .935E-04 .120E-03 .180E-04 .531E-04 .882E-04 .123E-03 .158E-03
(g) Deformed shape @ 378 Hz (h) Deformed shape @ 432 Hz

1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =9 SUB =10
FREQ=486 APR 27 2009 FREQ=540 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:44:44 USUM (AVG) 16:45:38
DMX =.161E-04 DMX =.224E-05
SMN =.290E-07 SMN =.289E-08
SMX =.161E-04 SMX =.224E-05
MN
Y Y
X X
Z Z
MX
MX
MN
.290E-07 .360E-05 .716E-05 .107E-04 .143E-04 .289E-08 .501E-06 .998E-06 .150E-05 .199E-05
.181E-05 .538E-05 .895E-05 .125E-04 .161E-04 .252E-06 .750E-06 .125E-05 .175E-05 .224E-05
(i) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz (j) Deformed shape @ 540 Hz
Figure 4.11: Nodal displacements of the gearbox cover for different frequencies of exci-
tation.
(a) Fine structural mesh (b) Coarse acoustical mesh
Figure 4.12: For the acoustical analysis a coarser mesh is used than for the structural
analysis.
only the exterior problem is to be solved. Now a Mesh Preprocessing Set can be defined
for the coarse acoustical mesh, to ensure that all normal directions to the structure
are set consistently. A new Material and Material Property are assigned to the wetted
surface and the properties are set for air (density of 1.225 kg/m3 and speed of sound of
340 m/s).
The Load Vector Set is now ready to be transferred to the coarser acoustical mesh.
This is done using a Transfer Vector Set. The MaxDistance method is selected and 8
influencing nodes and a distance of 12 mm are selected. After the projection is calculated
a picture of the deformed acoustical mesh is made to be sure that the projection is
properly done. To compute the acoustic pressures at the surface of the gearbox cover
the velocities at the nodes are needed. These velocities are calculated by differentiating
the displacements that were calculated in the harmonic loadcase in Ansys.
The Transfer Vector Set can now be used as an acoustical boundary condition. A
Boundary Condition and Source Set is defined and the Transfer Vector Set is added as
a source.
Finally the Acoustical Response Set can be defined and the Boundary Condition and
Source Set is assigned to it. Now the simulation can be started and once it is finished
the acoustical power can be displayed in a graph. The total setup in LMS Virtual.Lab
can be seen in Figure 4.13.
Figure 4.13: Acoustical simulation in LMS Virtual.Lab.
4.3.2 Numerical results
The total radiated sound power (re 10−12 W) and radiation efficiency are plotted in
a graph, see Figure 4.14. Note that the lines between the circular data points do not
represent any prediction on the sound power, as the amplitudes of the forces for these
frequencies are much lower. The value of the radiated sound power is dependant on
both the amplitude of the velocities and the radiation efficiency. The velocities will be
high when the structure is excited with high forces or near an eigenfrequency. Also, in
general, the velocities are higher for low frequencies.
4.4 Summary
A numerical model of the gearbox cover has been developed to compute the structural
vibrations due to a forced harmonic response. The finite element model used to compute
these vibrations is verified by measurements. The error between the eigenfrequencies
determined with measurements and the numerical model is for most frequencies small
(smaller than 6 %), however due to the high modal density of the model a fair comparison
cannot be made for all frequencies.
The structural vibrations that are computed with finite element method are used
in a boundary element model to compute the radiated sound field. For frequencies up
to 550 Hz the maximal acoustic power level is 42 dB (re 10−12 W).
4.4. Summary 29
50
Acoustic Power [dB]
40
30
20
10
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Frequency [Hz]
0.06
Radiation efficiency [−]
0.04
0.02
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 4.14: Radiated sound power (re 10−12 W) and radiation efficiency.
Chapter 5
Design changes
In general there are four methods to control noise and vibrations [Ren]: (1) absorption,
(2) use of barriers and enclosures, (3) structural damping and (4) vibration isolation.
In case of the gearbox cover, damping is investigated.
5.1 Damping
The gearbox cover is made of low carbon mild steel. The material damping of steel is
assumed to be negligible. This results in an infinite high response at the eigenfrequen-
cies obtained in the modal analysis. To reduce the amplitudes of the response at the
eigenfrequency, (material) damping should be included in the model.
Within Ansys the harmonic response is calculated using a modal superposition
method, see (4.2). To include damping in the model, several damping inputs can be
given in Ansys, resulting in a total modal damping factor ξj of [Ans07]:
α βωj
ξj = 2ωj + 2 + ξ + ξjm , (5.1)
with α and β the Rayleigh damping multipliers for mass and stiffness respectively, ξ a
constant damping ratio and ξjm a modal damping ratio. As modal damping has only an
effect near the eigenfrequencies, the mass and stiffness of the system should be changed
to get a better results at other frequencies.
5.2 Material
The model of the gearbox cover can be adapted easily to investigate the effect of a
change of material. The main function of the gearbox cover is to protect the rotating
parts from external influences, so mechanical properties such as Young’s Modulus are
31
32 Chapter 5. Design changes
Property Value
Youngs Modulus [GPa] 1.3
Poisson ratio [-] 0.4
Density [kg/m3 ] 930
Table 5.1: Material properties of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene.
1400
Steel (2 mm)
UHMWPE (4 mm)
1200
1000
Frequency [Hz]
800
600
400
200
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Mode nr [−]
Figure 5.1: Eigenfrequency versus mode number for both the steel and UHMWPE
gearbox cover.
not so important. Therefore it is investigated what the effect is on the response of the
gearbox cover, if it would be made out of 4 mm thick polyethylene. This material has
a high (compared with steel) material damping and is cost efficient.
5.2.1 Modal analysis
The material properties in Ansys are replaced by the properties of ultra high molecular
weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) [War71], see Table 5.1. Also the thickness of the shell
elements is increased to 4 mm.
After changing the material properties a modal analysis is done. Due to the changes
in the material properties the eigenfrequencies will be lower compared to the gearbox
cover made out of steel. This implies that more modes are needed in a modal super-
position harmonic response analysis case, see Figure 5.1. To comply with the rule of
thumb [Ans07] to use at least a number of modes such that the highest eigenfrequency
is 50% higher than the highest frequency of interest, 300 modes are extracted.
5.2.2 Damping
Because of the visco-elastic (time dependant) material behavior of plastics, the material
damping of UHMWPE will be frequency dependant. The damping for high frequencies
will be higher than for low frequencies. From the options available in Ansys it is chosen
5.2. Material 33
β(e−5 ) Damping ratio @ 100 Hz

3.183 0.01
6.366 0.02
9.549 0.03
Table 5.2: Different values for the Rayleigh damping coefficient β that are used in the
harmonic simulation.
to model the damping characteristics of the UHMWPE with Rayleigh damping based
on the stiffness matrix, so the modal damping factor becomes
βωj
ξj = 2 .
(5.2)
The value for β in this linear equation will determine the modal damping for the com-
plete frequency domain. However, no literature is found to verify this model of the
damping characteristics. Consequently, it would be good practice to perform mea-
surements to get insight in the real damping characteristics of this polymer. For the
moment different values for β are used to obtain a first idea of how damping influences
the response, see Table 5.2. The corresponding damping ratio at 100 Hz is also denoted.
5.2.3 Harmonic response
To predict the harmonic response of the gearbox cover with this new material, the
forced response analysis case is repeated. The damping is added with values for β as
in Table 5.2. The maximum displacements due to the harmonic forces are presented
in Table 5.3. As can be seen the maximum displacements for the UHMWPE gearbox
cover are higher than the displacements for the steel gearbox cover, especially for low
frequencies. Damping has a high influence at frequencies near the eigenfrequencies of
the system. This influence can be clearly seen at excitation frequencies of 162, 216 and
270 Hz. For the other frequencies the damping has less influence, as the gearbox cover
is not excited near the eigenfrequency.
In Figure 5.2 the results of the deformed shape of the gearbox guard made out of
UHMWPE without damping are compared with the results of the steel gearbox guard.
This clearly shows that the UHMWPE one has a higher modal density. The results of
the deformed shape of the gearbox guard made out of UHMWPE without damping for
higher frequencies are presented in Appendix E. The effect of Rayleigh damping, with
β = 9.549e−5 , for excitation frequencies of 54 and 486 Hz, is presented in Figure 5.3.
As can be seen the amplitudes of the forced harmonic response are lower when damping
is applied.
Maximum displacement [µm]

Frequency Steel Plastic Plastic Plastic Plastic
[Hz] β=0 β = 0 β = 3e−5 β = 6e−5 β = 9e−5
54 5.1 42.5 41.4 38.6 35.1
108 1.6 13.4 11.4 8.0 5.5
162 0.5 39.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
216 0.1 64.9 0.8 0.7 0.6
270 0.2 4.7 0.7 0.6 0.5
324 0.02 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1
378 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1
432 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1
486 0.02 0.06 7.010−3 6.510−3 6.610−3
540 2.210−3 0.08 1.110−3 9.810−3 9.510−3
Table 5.3: Maximum displacements for the running mode analysis for steel and
UHMWPE material properties and different values for the Rayleigh damping.
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =1 SUB =1
FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=54 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:35:51 USUM (AVG) 16:55:12
DMX =.005079 DMX =.042505
MN
SMN =.439E-05 SMN =.381E-04
SMX =.005079 SMX =.042505
MN
Y
Z
X
Y
MX
X
Z
MX
.439E-05 .001132 .00226 .003388 .004516 .381E-04 .009475 .018912 .028349 .037786
.568E-03 .001696 .002824 .003952 .005079 .004757 .014194 .023631 .033068 .042505
Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard
(a) Steel: Deformed shape @ 54 Hz. (b) UHMWPE: Deformed shape @

54 Hz.
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =2 SUB =2
FREQ=108 APR 27 2009 FREQ=108 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:36:07 USUM (AVG) 16:57:19
DMX =.001571 DMX =.013363
SMN =.135E-06 SMN =.895E-04
SMX =.001571 SMX =.013363
Y Y
Z Z
X X
MN
MX MX
MN
.135E-06 .349E-03 .699E-03 .001048 .001397 .895E-04 .003039 .005989 .008939 .011888
.175E-03 .524E-03 .873E-03 .001222 .001571 .001564 .004514 .007464 .010413 .013363
Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard
(c) Steel: Deformed shape @ 108 Hz. (d) UHMWPE: Deformed shape @
108 Hz.
Figure 5.2: Nodal displacements of the forced response of the gearbox cover made out
of steel and UHMWPE.
5.2. Material 35
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =1 SUB =1
FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=54 APR 29 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:55:12 USUM (AVG) 13:30:02
DMX =.042505 DMX =.035139
SMN =.381E-04 SMN =.163E-04
SMX =.042505 SMX =.035139
MN
Y Y
MX
MX
X X
Z Z
MN
.381E-04 .009475 .018912 .028349 .037786 .163E-04 .007821 .015627 .023432 .031237
.004757 .014194 .023631 .033068 .042505 .003919 .011724 .019529 .027334 .035139
Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard Modalanalysis of Plastic Gearbox Guard
(a) Deformed shape @ 54 Hz without damp- (b) Deformed shape @ 54 Hz with β =

ing. 9.549e−5
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =9 SUB =9
FREQ=486 APR 27 2009 FREQ=486 APR 29 2009
USUM (AVG) 17:05:29 USUM (AVG) 13:44:21
DMX =.615E-04 DMX =.660E-05
SMN =.860E-07 SMN =.141E-07
SMX =.615E-04 SMX =.660E-05
MX
MN
MN
Y Y
MX
X X
Z Z
.860E-07 .137E-04 .274E-04 .410E-04 .547E-04 .141E-07 .148E-05 .294E-05 .441E-05 .587E-05
.691E-05 .206E-04 .342E-04 .479E-04 .615E-04 .746E-06 .221E-05 .367E-05 .514E-05 .660E-05
(c) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz without damp- (d) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz with β =
ing. 9.549e−5
Figure 5.3: The influence of Rayleigh damping on the deformed shape of the plastic
gearbox cover.
80
steel, β = 0
plastic, β = 0
70 −5
plastic, β = 3.183 10
plastic, β = 6.366 10−5
60 plastic, β = 9.549 10−5
Acoustic Power [dB]
50
40
30
20
10
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 5.4: Radiated sound power for the gearbox cover made out of UHMWPE for
different damping values.
5.2.4 Noise radiation
With the harmonic response information for the plastic gearbox cover the radiated sound
power can be predicted in the same way as for the steel gearbox cover. In Figure 5.4
the radiated sound powers can be found for the gearbox cover made out of UHMWPE
for different damping values. Also the radiated sound power for the steel gearbox cover
is shown for reference.
As can be seen in Figure 5.4 the damping has a high influence on the radiated
sound power at frequencies near the eigenfrequencies of the gearbox cover. For low
frequencies however, the radiated sound power is higher for the gearbox cover made out
of rotational molded plastic compared to the steel one. The shift point is at 378 Hz,
for higher frequencies the radiated power is lower in case of a plastic cover. When the
average difference in acoustical power is calculated for low frequencies (below 378 Hz)
and the high frequencies (378 Hz and higher), it is found that the plastic cover radiates
sound with a power of 9 dB more in the low frequency region and has a reduction of 4
dB in the high frequency region.
To verify the results for the radiated power by the steel cover, it is recommended
to perform a sound intensity scan. However, when the decanter is running, sound will
be transmitted by the rotating parts within the gearbox cover, which will have a con-
tribution in the measurement as the gearbox cover is not a closed enclosure. Therefore
it would be good practice to excite the gearbox cover with a shaker with a known
frequency and amplitude to verify the used model.
5.3. Summary 37
5.3 Summary
The numerical model of the gearbox cover has been changed with respect to the material
properties of the cover. The material properties are changed to ultra high molecular
weight polyethylene. Also the thickness of the cover is increased to 4 mm (was 2 mm for
the steel one). This plastic has a high material damping, so damping is included in the
model. For different choices for this damping model the sound production is computed.
Compared with the steel gearbox cover in general the sound production of the plastic
gearbox cover will increase with 9 dB in the frequency range to 400 Hz and decrease
with 4 dB for higher frequencies to 550 Hz.
Chapter 6
Conclusion and
Recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
This report contains a noise and vibration survey of the G-Tech 1456 gearbox cover. The
vibration survey measurements are done using a tri-axial accelerometer that is mounted
on the cover. For both the operational and non-operational state the main vibrations
are measured. In the non-operational state the eigenfrequencies are extracted and using
the modal analysis toolbox in the finite element package Ansys, the corresponding mode
shapes are identified. Moreover, the eigenfrequencies obtained with the modal analysis
are compared with the measurements. In the operational mode the forces acting on the
gearbox cover are measured and modeled in Ansys. In this way it is possible to simulate
the operational mode. As the decanter centrifuge is rotating at a frequency of 54 Hz,
the harmonic input forces are all an integer multiple of this frequency (harmonics up to
540 Hz).
In the non-operation mode the results for the numerical model are comparable
(except for the first eigenfrequency) with the experimental results. The largest error is
5.7%. However, due to the high modal density of the numerical model, it is not always
possible to make a fair comparison.
In the frequency range up to 540 Hz the dominant frequency in the operational mode
is 270 Hz. However, the responses at 54 and 108 Hz show the biggest displacements.
The acoustical response show the biggest response at 432 Hz due to a relative high
radiation efficiency for that mode.
When the gearbox cover would be made from 4 mm thick high molecular weight
polyethylene the structural vibrations will have a bigger amplitude compared to the
steel one. The acoustical response for high frequencies (above 378 Hz) however can be
reduced by approximately 4 dB. For lower frequencies the radiated power will be on
39
40 Chapter 6. Conclusion and Recommendations
average 9 dB higher. This result is only valid when the damping characteristics that
are used in the model (Rayleigh damping, with β = 9.54910−5 ) is realistic.
6.2 Recommendations
To verify the acoustic results it is recommended to perform a sound intensity scan of the
gearbox cover when it is excited by a shaker. In this way background noise is avoided.
A general remark has to be made about the frequency domain that is used. As can be
seen from the measurements the gearbox cover is also excited with higher frequencies (at
about 6000 Hz) than used in this analysis. These frequencies can have a big contribution
in the radiated sound field. Therefore these high frequencies should be taken into
account in the simulation to be able to compare the steel and plastic gearbox cover in
the complete audible frequency domain. It is expected that the high material damping
of plastic has a larger advantage in this frequency region.
Bibliography
[Ans07] Release 11.0 documentation for ansys. 2007.
[Bro85] R.G. Brown and P.Y.C. Brown. Introduction to random signals and applied
Kalman filtering, volume 2. J. Wiley, New York, 1985.
[Fah87] F. Fahy and P. Gardonio. Sound and Structural Vibration, Radiation, Trans-
mission and Response, volume 2. Elsevier Acadamic, Amsterdam/London,
1987.
[Ger99] J.M. Gere and S.P. Timoshenko. Mechanics of materials 4th SI edition, vol-
ume 4. Stanley Thornes, Cheltenham, 1999.
[Hea97] E.J. Hearn. Mechanics of materials 2, volume 3. 1997.
[Rec01] A. Records and K. Sutherland. Decanter Centrifuge Handbook, volume 1. El-

sevier Advanced Technologies, Oxford, 2001.
[Ren] J Renninger. Understanding damping techniques for noise and vibration con-
trol. www.earsc.com.
[Vis04] R. Vissers. A boundary element approach to acoustic radiation and source

identification, volume 1. 2004.
[War71] I.M. Ward and J. Sweeney. The mechanical properties of solid polymers, vol-
ume 2. J. Wiley, New York, 1971.
41
42 Bibliography
Appendix A
Decanter Layout and technical

data
In Figure A.1 a cross-section of the G-Tech 1456 decanter centrifuge is shown. Table A.1
is a list of the technical data of this decanter centrifuge.
Technical data
Max. Bowl Speed 4000 RPM
Centrifugal Force 3150 G’s
Differential Speed 4-48 RPM
Run Up time 2-3 minutes
Bowl Dimensions 14” (355 mm) Diameter x 56” (1420 mm) Long
Gross Weight 2150 kg
Shipping Volume 6 m3
Wetted Parts 316 Stainless Steel
Base Assembly Cast Iron
Main Drive 18-37 kW 230/460 VAC @ 50/60 Hz
Back Drive 4-7.5 kW 230/460 VAC @ 50/60 Hz
Table A.1: Technical data of the G-Tech 1456 decanter centrifuge.
43
44 Appendix A. Decanter Layout and technical data
Feed pipe
Main Bearing 2
Solids End
Conical
Conveyor
Bowl
Liquids End
Main bearing 1
Gearbox
Base
Clutch
Figure A.1: Cross section of the G-tech 1456 decanter centrifuge.

Appendix B
Matlab Code to import

measurement data from PULSE
The Matlab function file that is used to import the measurement response data obtained
with a tri-axial accelerometer and a Brüel & Kjær PULSE system is listed below.
function [max_freq,max_resp] = read_the_data(filename)
%read the data and save them in cell arrays

fid = fopen(filename, ’r’);
spectrum_Y = textscan(fid, ’%f %f %f’ , 8192, ’headerlines’, 83);
spectrum_X = textscan(fid, ’%f %f %f’ , 8192, ’headerlines’, 83+8192+93);
spectrum_Z = textscan(fid, ’%f %f %f’ , 8192, ’headerlines’, 83+8192+93+8192+93);
%convert the cell arrays in arrays

Freq = spectrum_X{1,2};
spec_X = spectrum_X{1,3};
spec_Y = spectrum_Y{1,3};
spec_Z = spectrum_Z{1,3};
%calculating the first 20 frequencies with the maximum response

[max_X,pos_X] = sort(spec_X,’descend’);
max_X = max_X(1:20);
pos_X = pos_X(1:20);
freq_X = Freq(pos_X);
[max_Y,pos_Y] = sort(spec_Y,’descend’);
max_Y = max_Y(1:20);
pos_Y = pos_Y(1:20);
freq_Y = Freq(pos_Y);
[max_Z,pos_Z] = sort(spec_Z,’descend’);
max_Z = max_Z(1:20);
pos_Z = pos_Z(1:20);
freq_Z = Freq(pos_Z);
%combining the results for the X-Y-Z direction

max_freq = [freq_X freq_Y freq_Z];
45
46 Appendix B. Matlab Code to import measurement data from PULSE
max_resp = [max_X max_Y max_Z];

%max_resp = max_resp./max(max(max_resp)); % scaling wrt the highest response
The m-file to create a frequency response plot of the 20 most dominating responses
is listed below.
clear all
close all
clc
%%%%%% text files with the data
% gearbox cover (liquid end)

filename = [’21_S.txt’; ’22_S.txt’; ’23_S.txt’; ’24_S.txt’; ’25_S.txt’;’26_S.txt’; ’27_S.txt’; ’28_S.txt’; ’29_S.txt’];
% blue base logo

% filename = [’30_S.txt’; ’31_S.txt’; ’32_S.txt’; ’33_S.txt’; ’34_S.txt’; ’35_S.txt’;’36_S.txt’; ’37_S.txt’;’38_S.txt’; ’39_
%%%%%% Extracting the maximum responses with the corresponding frequencies
l = length(filename(:,1)) % number of positions used to measure the response
% defining the 20 frequencies with the max responses

max_freq = zeros(20,3*l);
max_resp = zeros(20,3*l);
% import the measurement data using read_the_data_run.m

for i = 1:l
[max_freq(:,i:l:i+2*l),max_resp(:,i:l:i+2*l)] = read_the_data(filename(i,:));
end
% getting the max and min frequencies in X Y and Z direction

min_freqX = min(min(max_freq(:,1:l)));
max_freqX = max(max(max_freq(:,1:l)));
min_freqY = min(min(max_freq(:,l+1:2*l)));
max_freqY = max(max(max_freq(:,l+1:2*l)));
min_freqZ = min(min(max_freq(:,2*1+1:3*l)));
max_freqZ = max(max(max_freq(:,2*1+1:3*l)));
freqX = [];
respX = [];
freqY = [];
respY = [];
freqZ = [];
respZ = [];
% Sorting the max response and averaging them

q = 1;
for i = min_freqX:2:max_freqX % data captured with freq_span = 2 Hz
[rowX,colX] = find(max_freq(:,1:l) == i); % finding freq between min and max freq (of the 20 frequencies)
s = length(rowX);
if s > 0 % if the frequency is found in the max_freq matrix
freqX(q,1) = i;
respX(q,1) = mean(mean(max_resp(rowX,colX),2)); %average over the number of measurements (@ diff positions)
q = q+1;
end
end
47
[respX,pos] = sort(respX,’descend’); % sort with highest response on top

freqX = freqX(pos);
q = 1;
for i = min_freqY:2:max_freqY
[rowY,colY] = find(max_freq(:,l+1:2*l) == i);
s = length(rowY);
if s > 0
freqY(q,1) = i;
respY(q,1) = mean(mean(max_resp(rowY,l+colY),2));
q = q+1;
end
end
[respY,pos] = sort(respY,’descend’);
freqY = freqY(pos);
q = 1;
for i = min_freqZ:2:max_freqZ
[rowZ,colZ] = find(max_freq(:,2*l+1:3*l) == i);
s = length(rowZ);
if s > 0
freqZ(q,1) = i;
respZ(q,1) = mean(mean(max_resp(rowZ,2*l+colZ),2));
q = q+1;
end
end
[respZ,pos] = sort(respZ,’descend’);
freqZ = freqZ(pos);
%figure with the max (averaged) responses, including bar plots

figure(’name’,’averaged’)
semilogx(freqX,respX,’x’,freqY,respY,’o’,freqZ,respZ,’>’,’MarkerSize’,6,’LineWidth’,2)
hold on
bar(freqX,respX,’k’)
bar(freqY,respY,’k’)
bar(freqZ,respZ,’k’)
xlabel(’Frequency [Hz]’)
ylabel(’Acceleration [m/s^2]’)
legend(’X’,’Y’,’Z’)
grid
48 Appendix B. Matlab Code to import measurement data from PULSE
Appendix C
Ansys input code for the

structural dynamic analysis
The input file for Ansys in the structural dynamic analysis is listed below. In this file
the gearbox cover made out of steel is analyzed. The material properties can be easily
adapted when the simulation with plastic material properties has to be done. The lines
starting with an exclamation mark are comments. The loadcases for 108 up to 486
Hz are not listed as they are the same as for 54 Hz, only with an other frequency and
amplitude input.
finish
/clear
/CWD,’S:\all scratch\Arjan\Gtech\ANSYS_files’ !change working directory
/title, Gearbox Guard
!***************Input Data********
! Low carbon mild steel used as material
E=207e6 !youngs modulus [kg mm/s/mm2]
v=0.3 !poisson ratio [-]
rho=7800e-9 !Density [kg/mm^3]
!************Importing gearbox guard model from IGES file into ansys**************

/AUX15
IOPTN,MERG,YES !merging of keypoints
IOPTN,SOLID,NO !creating of a solid/volume
IOPTN,GTOLER,DEFA !tolerance of IGES import
IOPTN,SMALL,YES !delete small areas
IGESIN,’GT150A Gearbox Guard wf2’,’IGS’!import the IGES file with geometry

finish
!**************preprocessor**********************
/prep7 !starting preprocessor for defining the material and cleaning up the model for a good mesh
nummrg,all !merge alle coincident lines and points
et,1,shell93 !using 8node shell elements
49
50 Appendix C. Ansys input code for the structural dynamic analysis
MP,EX,1,E !material property, Modulus

MP,PRXY,1,v !material property, poisson ratio
MP,DENS,1,rho !material property, density
!************meshing the geomertry***************

ALLSEL,all
ASEL,S,area,,1287,1290 !Select the areas to keep
ASEL,A,area,,1296
ASEL,A,area,,1300,1304
ASEL,A,area,,1725
ASEL,A,area,,1731
BOPTN, KEEP, YES !boolean operator to delete the inside areas
!LPLOT !Plot the lines
LESIZE,all, 20.0, , , , 1, , , 0!Subdivide different lines
ALLSEL,all
ASEL,S,area,,1722,1725,3 !select the areas on top

ASEL,A,area,,1296
SMRTSIZE,OFF
MSHKEY,2
DESIZE, 3, 1, 1, , ,2 ,20 , ,
mopt,aorder,on
mopt,expnd,1
mopt,trans,2
amesh,all !mesh the areas on top
ALLSEL,all
LSEL,S,line,,4964
LSEL,A,line,,5190
LSEL,A,line,,4976
LSEL,A,line,,5178
LSEL,A,line,,8
LSEL,A,line,,13770
LSEL,A,line,,32
LSEL,A,line,,13730
LSEL,A,line,,5010
LSEL,A,line,,11992
LESIZE,all, 5, , , , 1, , , 0 !Subdivide different lines
ALLSEL,all
ASEL,S,area,,1720,1731,11 !select the areas at sides
SMRTSIZE,OFF
MSHKEY,2
DESIZE, 3, 1, 1, , ,2 ,20 , ,
mopt,aorder,on
mopt,expnd,1
mopt,trans,1.4
amesh,all
ALLSEL,all
51
LSEL,all
LSEL,U,line,,10304
LESIZE,all, 3, , , , 1, , , 0 !Subdivide remaining lines
SMRTSIZE,OFF
MSHKEY,2
DESIZE, 3, 1, 1, , ,2 ,20 , ,
mopt,aorder,on
mopt,expnd,1
mopt,trans,1.4
amesh,1721 !mesh the areas at back
!************BOUNDARY CONDITIONS**********
!Set all dof=0 except UX, at small holes in side
ALLSEL,all
NSEL,S,node,,3856
NSEL,A,node,,3857,3863,2
NSEL,A,node,,3866,3870,2
NSEL,A,node,,3840
NSEL,A,node,,3841,3847,2
NSEL,A,node,,3850,3854,2
NSEL,A,node,,5663
NSEL,A,node,,5664,5670,2
NSEL,A,node,,5673,5677,2
NSEL,A,node,,5647
NSEL,A,node,,5648,5654,2
NSEL,A,node,,5657,5661,2
D,ALL,UY,0
D,ALL,UZ,0
D,ALL,ROTX,0
D,ALL,ROTY,0
D,ALL,ROTZ,0
ALLSEL,ALL
!************OBTAIN SOLUTION MODAL ANALYSIS**************
/solu
antype,2 !set modal analysis

MODOPT,lanb,200 !method used is block lanczos, 200 modes expand
RESVEC,ON !Calculate residual vector
EQSLV,FRONT
MXPAND,200 !200 modes expanded
solve
finish
!************HARMONIC ANALYSIS @ 54 HZ**************
ALLSEL,ALL
/solu
LSCLEAR,all !start with no loadsteps
NSEL,U,node,,all !Select nodes where harmonic input will be given
NSEL,S,node,,5515,5539,2
NSEL,A,node,,5514
NSEL,A,node,,3813,3837,2
NSEL,A,node,,3763
antype,3 !set harmonic analysis

NSUBST,1 !number of subsets in this loadcase
HARFRQ, 54 !Frequency of excitation
HROPT, MSUP,200,1
BETAD,1*3.1831E-5 !Set stiffness damping
F, all, FX, 5.3 !Force in X-direction
F, all, FY, 2.1 !Force in Y-direction
F, all, FZ, 0.4 !Force in Z-direction
KBC,1 !stepped loads

OUTRES,NSOL !write only the nodal dof solution
OUTPR,NSOL !solution printout = dof solu
ALLSEL,all
LSWRITE
.......
!************HARMONIC ANALYSIS @ 540 HZ**************
ALLSEL,ALL
/solu
NSEL,U,node,,all !Select nodes where harmonic input will be given
NSEL,S,node,,5515,5539,2
NSEL,A,node,,5514
NSEL,A,node,,3813,3837,2
NSEL,A,node,,3763
antype,3 !set harmonic analysis

NSUBST, 1
HARFRQ, 540 !Frequency of excitation
HROPT, MSUP,200,1
BETAD,1*3.1831E-5 !Set stiffness damping
F, all, FX, 0.1 !Force in X-direction
F, all, FY, 0.1 !Force in Y-direction
F, all, FZ, 0.0 !Force in Z-direction
KBC,1 !stepped loads

OUTRES,NSOL !write only the nodal dof solution
OUTPR,NSOL !solution printout = dof solu
ALLSEL,all
LSWRITE
finish
/solu
LSSOLVE,1,10,1
finish
/solu
ALLSEL,ALL
EXPASS,on
53
NUMEXP,all,54,540
!BETAD,1*3.1831E-5 !Set stiffness damping
OUTPR,nsol,all
solve
Appendix D
Structural eigenmodes of the

gearbox guard that correspond
with static impact tests
A static impact test is performed to identify the eigenfrequencies of the gearbox guard.
In Table 4.3 the numerically determined eigenfrequencies that correspond with the dom-
inant frequencies from this static impact test are listed. The corresponding mode shapes
(first 6) can be found in Figures D.1, D.2 and D.3.
55
56Appendix D. Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with static impact tests
1 1 1
DMX =.871962 DMX =.720916 DMX =1.547
SMN =.639E-03 SMN =.860E-04 SMN =.984E-03
SMX =.871962 SMX =.720916 SMX =1.547
Y
Z
X
MN
Y MX Y
X X
Z Z
MX
MX MN
MN
.639E-03 .194266 .387894 .581521 .775148 .860E-04 .16027 .320455 .480639 .640824 .984E-03 .344492 .687999 1.032 1.375
.097453 .29108 .484707 .678335 .871962 .080178 .240363 .400547 .560732 .720916 .172738 .516246 .859753 1.203 1.547
(a) Mode shape @ 50 Hz (b) Mode shape @ 129 Hz (c) Mode shape @ 184 Hz
1 1 1
SUB =24 SUB =33 SUB =38
DMX =.89198 DMX =1.064 DMX =.854781
SMN =.001207 SMN =.139E-03 SMN =.539E-03
SMX =.89198 SMX =1.064 SMX =.854781
MN
Y Y Y
MN X X X
Z ZMX Z
MX
MX
MN
.001207 .199157 .397106 .595056 .793005 .139E-03 .236561 .472983 .709406 .945828 .539E-03 .190371 .380202 .570034 .759866
.100182 .298131 .496081 .694031 .89198 .11835 .354772 .591195 .827617 1.064 .095455 .285286 .475118 .66495 .854781
(d) Mode shape @ 239 Hz (e) Mode shape @ 302 Hz (f) Mode shape @ 356 Hz
Figure D.1: Structural eigenmodes of the Gearbox Guard that correspond with the
static impact test measurement for X-directions.
1 1 1
SUB =37 SUB =41 SUB =54
DMX =1.296 DMX =.903021 DMX =1.024
SMN =.567E-03 SMN =.004804 SMN =.485E-03
SMX =1.296 SMX =.903021 SMX =1.024 MX
MX
Y Y Y
X X X
Z Z Z
MX
MN
MN
MN
.567E-03 .288543 .576518 .864494 1.152 .004804 .204408 .404011 .603615 .803219 .485E-03 .227944 .455403 .682862 .910321
.144555 .432531 .720506 1.008 1.296 .104606 .304209 .503813 .703417 .903021 .114214 .341673 .569132 .796591 1.024
1 1 1
SUB =70 SUB =71 SUB =88
DMX =1.105 DMX =.830626 DMX =1.021 MX
SMN =.987E-03 SMN =.833E-04 SMN =.010398
SMX =1.105 SMX =.830626 SMX =1.021
MX
MX
Y Y Y
X X X
Z Z Z
MN
MN
MN
.987E-03 .246307 .491627 .736947 .982267 .833E-04 .184648 .369213 .553779 .738344 .010398 .23502 .459642 .684264 .908886
.123647 .368967 .614287 .859607 1.105 .092366 .276931 .461496 .646061 .830626 .122709 .347331 .571953 .796575 1.021
static impact test measurement for Y-directions.
57
1 1 1
SUB =10 SUB =38 SUB =51
DMX =1.442 DMX =.854781 DMX =1.11
SMN =.230E-03 SMN =.539E-03 SMN =.001213
SMX =1.442 SMX =.854781 SMX =1.11
MN
MN
Y Y Y
MN X X X
Z Z Z
MX
MX
MX
.230E-03 .320517 .640803 .96109 1.281 .539E-03 .190371 .380202 .570034 .759866 .001213 .247707 .4942 .740694 .987187
.160373 .48066 .800947 1.121 1.442 .095455 .285286 .475118 .66495 .854781 .12446 .370953 .617447 .86394 1.11
1 1 1
SUB =52 SUB =55 SUB =58
DMX =.677231 DMX =1.051 DMX =2.378
SMN =.911E-03 SMN =.002212 SMN =.008121
SMX =.677231 SMX =1.051 SMX =2.378
Y
MN
Z
X
MX
Y Y
MX
X X
Z Z
MX
MN
MN
.911E-03 .151204 .301498 .451791 .602085 .002212 .235321 .46843 .701539 .934648 .008121 .534852 1.062 1.588 2.115
.076058 .226351 .376645 .526938 .677231 .118767 .351876 .584985 .818093 1.051 .271486 .798218 1.325 1.852 2.378
static impact test measurement for Z-directions.
58Appendix D. Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with static impact tests
Appendix E
Results of the forced response of

the gearbox guard made out of
UHMWPE without damping
The results of the deformed shape of the gearbox guard made out of UHMWPE without
damping due to applied harmonic forces are presented in Figure E.1.
59
60Appendix E. Results of the forced response of the gearbox guard made out of UHMWPE without damping
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =1 SUB =2
FREQ=54 APR 27 2009 FREQ=108 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:55:12 USUM (AVG) 16:57:19
DMX =.042505 DMX =.013363
SMN =.381E-04 SMN =.895E-04
SMX =.042505 SMX =.013363
MN
Y
Z
X
Y
MX
X MN
Z MX
.381E-04 .009475 .018912 .028349 .037786 .895E-04 .003039 .005989 .008939 .011888
.004757 .014194 .023631 .033068 .042505 .001564 .004514 .007464 .010413 .013363
(a) Deformed shape @ 54 Hz. (b) Deformed shape @ 108 Hz.

1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =3 SUB =4
FREQ=162 APR 27 2009 FREQ=216 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 16:59:22 USUM (AVG) 17:00:33
DMX =.039233 DMX =.064853
SMN =.803E-04 SMN =.340E-04
SMX =.039233 SMX =.064853
MN
Y Y
X X
Z MN Z
MX MX
.803E-04 .008781 .017481 .026182 .034883 .340E-04 .014438 .028842 .043247 .057651
.004431 .013131 .021832 .030532 .039233 .007236 .02164 .036045 .050449 .064853
(c) Deformed shape @ 162 Hz. (d) Deformed shape @ 216 Hz.
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =5 SUB =6
FREQ=270 APR 27 2009 FREQ=324 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 17:01:25 USUM (AVG) 17:02:18
DMX =.004693 DMX =.450E-03
SMN =.507E-05 SMN =.278E-05
SMX =.004693 SMX =.450E-03
Y Y
X X
MX Z Z
MN
MX
MN
.507E-05 .001047 .002088 .00313 .004172 .278E-05 .102E-03 .201E-03 .301E-03 .400E-03
.526E-03 .001568 .002609 .003651 .004693 .524E-04 .152E-03 .251E-03 .350E-03 .450E-03
(e) Deformed shape @ 270 Hz. (f) Deformed shape @ 324 Hz.
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =7 SUB =8
FREQ=378 APR 27 2009 FREQ=432 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 17:03:25 USUM (AVG) 17:04:36
DMX =.609E-03 DMX =.611E-03
SMN =.656E-06 SMN =.224E-05
SMX =.609E-03 SMX =.611E-03
MN
MX
Y Y
X X
Z Z
MX
MN
.656E-06 .136E-03 .271E-03 .406E-03 .541E-03 .224E-05 .138E-03 .273E-03 .408E-03 .543E-03
.682E-04 .203E-03 .338E-03 .473E-03 .609E-03 .699E-04 .205E-03 .341E-03 .476E-03 .611E-03
(g) Deformed shape @ 378 Hz. (h) Deformed shape @ 432 Hz.
1 1
STEP=1 STEP=1
SUB =9 SUB =10
FREQ=486 APR 27 2009 FREQ=540 APR 27 2009
USUM (AVG) 17:05:29 USUM (AVG) 17:07:04
DMX =.615E-04 DMX =.834E-04 MN
SMN =.860E-07 SMN =.206E-06
SMX =.615E-04 SMX =.834E-04
MX
MN
Y Y
X X MX
Z Z
.860E-07 .137E-04 .274E-04 .410E-04 .547E-04 .206E-06 .187E-04 .372E-04 .557E-04 .742E-04
.691E-05 .206E-04 .342E-04 .479E-04 .615E-04 .945E-05 .279E-04 .464E-04 .649E-04 .834E-04
(i) Deformed shape @ 486 Hz. (j) Deformed shape @ 540 Hz.
Figure E.1: Nodal displacements of the gearbox cover for different frequencies of exci-
tation.

Decanter

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Decanter

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Noise reduction applied to a decanter

A.J. van Engelen

Research report, research performed at University of Canterbury, New Zealand

New Zealand Supervisor: Dr. J.R. Pearse

Supervisor: Prof.dr. H. Nijmeijer

Christchurch (New Zealand), April 2009

Structural vibrations can be problematic for a (part of a) machine. They contribute to

3 Measuring and modeling noise and vibrations 7

4 Implementation, verification and results of a numerical model 15

4.1.4 Comparison between numerical and experimental results . . . . . 19

6 Conclusion and Recommendations 39

A Decanter Layout and technical data 43

B Matlab Code to import measurement data from PULSE 45

C Ansys input code for the structural dynamic analysis 49

D Structural eigenmodes of the gearbox guard that correspond with

E Results of the forced response of the gearbox guard made out of

G-Tech is a Christchurch based manufacturer of centrifuges. To comply with the de-

2.1 Main parts

2.2 Working principle

Liquids End Solids End

Figure 2.1: Cross section of the G-tech 1456 decanter centrifuge.

Figure 2.2: Visualization of the separation process.

Measuring and modeling noise

A decanter centrifuge produces a lot of noise while it is in operating mode. To un-

3.1 Experimental setup

3.2 Running tests

Part Frequency Harmonic freq. w.r.t. Amplitude perc. of highest

Solids end Liquids end

3.3 Eigenfrequency and mode shape extraction

3.3.1 Numerical implementation

3.4 Noise radiation

With the results of a vibrational analysis it is possible to compute acoustic pressures

3.4.1 Boundary Element Method

3.4.2 Radiation Efficiency

A useful measure of the effectiveness of sound radiation by a vibrating surface is the

The definition of the radiation efficiency is thus:

σ = P /ρ0 cSvn2 . (3.10)

3.4.3 Radiated Power

pe = A−1 Bve (3.13)

Implementation, verification and

4.1 Eigenfrequencies and mode shapes extraction

4.1.1 Static impact test

4.1.2 Numerical implementation

Modalanalysis of Gearbox Guard

Figure 4.4: The finite element mesh of the gearbox cover.

Table 4.2: Material properties of low carbon mild steel.

4.1.3 Numerical results

4.1.4 Comparison between numerical and experimental results

(a) Mode 1 @ 43 Hz (b) Mode 2 @ 50 Hz (c) Mode 3 @ 54 Hz

(d) Mode 4 @ 69 Hz (e) Mode 5 @ 74 Hz (f) Mode 6 @ 89 Hz

(g) Mode 7 @ 89 Hz (h) Mode 8 @ 91 Hz (i) Mode 9 @ 112 Hz

(j) Mode 10 @ 115 Hz (k) Mode 11 @ 115 Hz (l) Mode 12 @ 129 Hz

Figure 4.6: First 12 structural modes of the Gearbox Guard.

Direction Eigenfreq. static Eigenfreq. modal Rel. error

4.2 Running mode

4.2.1 Measurement of the forces acting on the gearbox cover

4.2.2 Numerical implementation

Average acc. [m/s2]

Frequency |Fx |10−3 |Fy |10−3 |Fz |10−3

4.2.3 Numerical results for the response in running mode

4.3 Noise radiation

The structural (harmonic) displacements calculated within Ansys can be used in a

!Importing gearbox guard model from IGES file into ansys**

!meshing the geomertry***

!OBTAIN SOLUTION MODAL ANALYSIS**

!HARMONIC ANALYSIS @ 54 HZ**

!HARMONIC ANALYSIS @ 540 HZ**