Page 1

, LS ONS A : TERI ECTI M O FR T MA REFL NT R WS DE NE SMA .I., STU S TS S R A N . E L E B MU PAP EV R O , F AL EWS C I HN RY N C TE UST D IN

30 EIS ENGINEERING INTEGRITY FEBRUARY 2011

JOURNAL OF THE ENGINEERING INTEGRITY SOCIETY

paper on: • The Telescopic Cantilever Beam: Part 1 - Deflection Analysis

EIS Website: www.e-i-s.org.uk


Roads to every testing destination

SignalCalc

Dynamic Signal Analyzers

SignalStar

Vibration Control Systems

SignalForce

Shakers & Amplifiers

Solutions to Test and Measurement challenges from people who are driven by them. Powered by LE Ling Electronics Now there is one trusted name you can turn to for proven test and measurement solutions. For over 20 years, Data Physics has been driven by its customer needs to develop, internally and through acquisition, a full range of powerful technologies for noise and vibration applications.

Corporation

Gearing & Watson (Electronics) Ltd.


Engineering Integrity Society INSTRUMENTATION, ANALYSIS & TESTING EXHIBITION THE JIMMY BROWN CENTRE, SILVERSTONE RACE TRACK TUESDAY 8th MARCH 2011, 10.00-16.00 Entrance to the exhibition and the technical activities are free, with complementary refreshments and buffet lunch provided.

Exhibition: This provides the opportunity for visitors to view and discuss, in an informal atmosphere, the latest developments in instrumentation, analysis and test facilities. The exhibition will be of interest to engineers from wide ranging industries. Technical Activities: Morning: two technical presentations and several 30-minute duration instrumentation workshops. Afternoon: an open forum entitled ‘Seven posters - Is that three too many?’ supported by F1, automotive and test equipment companies and universities. Special Events: enjoy the atmosphere at Silverstone with potential special events planned, such as a speed trial test in a Caterham sports car, which visitors can book at modest cost. For more information, or to pre-register for the presentations, workshops, afternoon forum, or one of the special events, please contact the EIS secretariat at: instrumentation@e-i-s.org.uk or visit the EIS website at www.e-i-s.org.uk


CPD dynamics Analysing Experimental Data? PRACTICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING Milton Keynes 16-17 March 2011 This short course covers techniques, applications and avoidable pitfalls in analysis procedures. It offers a basic practical understanding for those involved with the acquisition of dynamic experimental data. The course is not sponsored by, or dependent upon, any product manufacturer. This independence enables a free and open discussion of the key features and relative merits of spectrum analysers and techniques in an unbiased and objective way.

INDEX TO ADVERTISEMENTS Amber Instruments ..................................................... 2 Bruel & Kjaer ............................................... Back cover CPD Dynamics ........................................................... 2 Data Physics ..................................... Inside front cover Ixthus Instrumentation ............................................. 36 Kemo ................................................ Inside back cover M+P International .............................. Inside back cover Micro Movements ...................................................... 36

For other short courses in dynamics and environmental testing, contact:

Team Corporation ............................ Inside back cover

Andy Tomlinson, CPD Dynamics Ltd.

Techni Measure ........................................................ 36

Email: andy@cpd-dynamics.co.uk www.cpd-dynamics.co.uk


 Index to Advertisements ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 Editorial ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Technical Paper: The Telescopic Cantilever Beam: Part 1 - Deflection Analysis ............................................................. 6 Diary of Events ................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Corporate Sponsorship ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 Seminar/Exhibition programme: Technologies for Low Carbon Transportation in New Sound Environments ............. 17 Instrumentation, Analysis & Testing Exhibition, 8 March .................................................................................................. 18 Report on ‘EIS 3rd Durability and Fatigue Advances in Wind, Wave and Tidal Energy’ event ......................................... 20 Industry News .................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Reflection ........................................................................................................................................................................... 26 News on Smart Materials and Structures ......................................................................................................................... 28 News from British Standards ............................................................................................................................................ 29 “Open access” technical information ................................................................................................................................ 30 News from Formula Student ............................................................................................................................................. 31 Group News ...................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Personal Membership ...................................................................................................................................................... 33 Committee Members ........................................................................................................................................................ 34 Sponsor Companies ......................................................................................................................................................... 35

Front cover: Wind turbines. Courtesy of JR Dynamics Ltd.

FORUM FOR APPLIED MECHANICS (FAM) The EIS is a sponsor member of the Forum for Applied Mechanics (FAM), which provides an interaction between a number of organisations in the UK where there is an interest in applied mechanics, both experimental and theoretical. Current sponsor members of FAM are the EIS, NAFEMS, IMechE, BSSM, IoP and the BGA (British Gear Association). The FAM website contains details of events being held by the sponsor members, together with a direct link to the sponsor members’ websites. Some of these events may be of interest to you or your colleagues. Access to the FAM website can be gained either directly www.appliedmechanics.org or via the EIS website ‘Links’ page.


HONORARY EDITOR: Dr Karen Perkins MANAGING EDITOR: Mrs Catherine Pinder Anchor House, Mill Road, Stokesby Great Yarmouth, NR29 3EY Tel: 07979 270998 E-mail: catherine@cpinder.com EDITORIAL BOARD: Paul Armstrong Brian Griffiths Dr Fabrizio Scarpa Dr Frank Sherratt Norman Thornton EIS Secretariat: Engineering Integrity Society 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ Tel & Fax: +44 (0)2476 730126 E-mail: eis@e-i-s.org.uk WWW: http://www.e-i-s.org.uk

‘Engineering Integrity’ is published twice a year ADVERTISING RATES & DATA Black and White Full Page Half Page Quarter Page

Engineering Integrity contains various items of information of interest to, or directly generated by, the Engineering Integrity Society. The items of information

2 inserts £460 annual £285 annual £175 annual

1 insert £445 £278 £160

2 inserts £800 annual £500 annual £290 annual

Full Colour Full Page Half Page Quarter Page

Type Page Size Full Page Half Page Quarter Page

EDITORIAL POLICY:

1 insert £255 £158 £92

A4 (plus 3mm bleed where required) 255mm (depth) x 86mm (width) or 125mm (depth) x 180mm (width) 125mm (depth) x 86mm (width)

Extra charges are applicable to supplementary process work. Cancellation - 14 days prior to copy dates. A copy of the latest issue of ‘Engineering Integrity’ is published on the website and includes all advertisements

can be approximately subdivided into three general categories: technical papers, topical discussion

Loose Inserts

£150 per A4 sheet (up to 160 gsm)

pieces and news items. The items labelled in the journal as technical papers are peer reviewed by a minimum of two reviewers in the normal manner of academic journals, following a standard protocol. The items of information labelled as topical discussions and the news items have been reviewed by the journal editorial staff and found to conform

PRINCIPAL ACTIVITY OF THE

to the legal and professional standards of the Engineering Integrity Society. COPYRIGHT Copyright of the technical papers included in this issue is held by the Engineering Integrity Society unless otherwise stated. Photographic contributions for the front cover are welcomed.

ENGINEERING INTEGRITY SOCIETY

The principal activity of the Engineering Integrity Society, is the arrangement of conferences, seminars, exhibitions and workshops to advance the education of persons working in the field of engineering. This is achieved by providing a forum for the interchange of ideas and information on engineering practice. The Society is particularly committed

ISSN 1365-4101/2011

to promoting projects which support professional development and attract young people into the profession.

The Engineering Integrity Society (EIS) Incorporated under the Companies Act 1985. ‘Engineering Integrity’, the Journal of the Engineering Registered No. 1959979 Registered Office: 35 Wilkinson Street, Sheffield, S10 2GB, UK

Charity No: 327121

Integrity Society is published twice a year.


 I hope everyone had a good holiday and not too many of you spent Christmas stuck at train stations or airports looking at the snow. The literal freeze of the preChristmas weather may have eased, but the figurative chill winds of financial austerity are still blowing. It has been another interesting 6 months in the world of academia. With swinging cuts in teaching budgets and dramatic increases in tuition fees, it is clear that the government will be spending less on higher education and the students considerably more, yet the net effect on University budgets is far from certain. If we hope to charge 9K per year for teaching our students then we need to provide facilities that justify the student’s investment, for both smaller and larger classes. While expecting a high standard of provision is totally reasonable, there is always the concern that some students will think that they are buying the degree itself, rather than the opportunity to study for it. Combined with the growing influence of student satisfaction surveys it is a brave department that doesn’t meet all the students’ demands. Unfortunately this can make it difficult to wean students off poor practises that prevent them from really understanding the material. The reliance on an endless supply of model answers to learn parrot fashion is one by-product of the current A-level system that is particularly hard for some student to break. Another area that has created some discussion here recently is the need to provide comprehensive feedback. Students get feedback all the time, they just don’t recognize it. In my day a tick meant you got it right and a cross meant it was wrong. The mark at the top of the page told you how you did overall, example classes discussed the questions and if you wanted to know any more you could go and see the lecturer concerned. As for examination feedback, those who pass won’t care, there will be those who fail and don’t care and those who fail and do care would be the ones who would go and see the lecturer anyway. The thought that a piece of documentation will tell future students what the previous years’ students did wrong will be of any benefit is optimistic. I write a list of do’s and don’ts on the board for my students about this very topic and they still make the same mistakes. At the end of the day the most important message that students need feedback on is to turn up to lectures and to take responsibility for their own effort and performance.

Maybe it will make students think twice about what they will study at university if paying off their student debts requires them to take a subject that firstly gets them a job and secondly a job that pays well: possibly a good thing for engineering and science, not so good for media studies! The Industry news column in this edition notes an interesting discovery: 10am on a Tuesday is the most stressful time of the week. I wonder if my first year tutorial group were surveyed – we meet on Tuesdays at 10. It is interesting to note that more than one article mentions new postgraduate degree schemes. The well established EngD degree schemes have proved to be a very productive arrangement for both the students and the sponsoring companies. They allow students to study advanced courses and undertake cutting edge research. The students are normally accommodated by the sponsoring company, which not only provides them with a unique insight into the company itself, but also allows them to partake in additional work related to their research, all whilst producing original research with economic and commercial impact in addition to its fundamental scientific value. Commercial interests aren’t always perfectly aligned with purely scientific ones. Frank Sherratt’s column on open access publications highlights the tension between academic openness and the commercial interests of the journal publishers. The commercial sensitivity of the results of collaborative research with industry can also lead to tensions over publication. While many companies have well established procedures for approving journal publications, student theses have not traditionally been a cause for concern, scattered as they were in the vaults of University libraries around the country. However, with the digitisation of theses through the EThoS project, the data hidden in those dusty corridors will soon be available at the touch of a button. The EIS calendar is quite active again this year. We have the annual ‘instrumentation, analysis and testing exhibition’, and ‘technologies for low carbon transportation in new sound environments’ over the next few months. The ‘Advances in wind, wave and tidal energy’ meeting was obviously well attended and will provide many publications for the journal (see report from durability and fatigue) This issue also provides us with the first part of a lengthy technical paper on the telescopic cantilever beam, with the second part to be published in the next edition. Karen Perkins Honorary Editor


ISSN 1365-4101/2011

ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

  J. Abraham, S. Sivaloganathan and D. W. A. Rees, School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH Abstract A Tip Reaction Model is proposed to provide the deflection of a telescopic cantilever beam. The model uses the reactions at the tips of the overlapping portions as the mechanism of transfer of the external loads between sections. A generalised, three-section, telescopic beam is analysed in which the direct integration method is applied repeatedly to provide deflection. The theory is developed then adapted to a convenient ‘C’ program listed here. The program is applied to provide deflections under end-loading in a model beam consisting of three hollow, thin-walled sections. The accuracy in the model’s end-deflection is checked from a further finite element analysis of the beam. The fact that the two deflections compare validates the tip reaction model of end-deflection arising from selfweight and external loading in a telescopic cantilever. A linear structural response between load and deflection appears consistently from both predictions. Linearity of telescoping structures implies that a superposition principle may be employed to simplify tip reaction analyses of more general loading conditions. 1.0 Introduction In general, the application of external loads to structures is balanced by an internal resistance offered by their chosen materials. For example, beams when subjected to transverse loads generate resisting moments to counter the external moments. This method of transferring external loading to its internal effect is fundamental to the prevailing analytical methods [1 - 4]. However, the use of a resisting moment to transfer the effects of external loads cannot be used in telescopic beams because of the material discontinuity that exists between overlapping lengths. The problem has relevance now that telescopic cantilever beams have increasing applications within masts, fishing rods, palette loaders, cranes, access platforms and extendable roofs [5, 6]. Such beams are required to support continuous gravitational loading (self-weight) and external loading that may be concentrated at various points or distributed over a surface area. It is common that deflections at particular positions are specified among the criteria adopted for optimising design and material selection. Having available a convenient mathematical prediction of deflection is an effective way to assist with this design requirement. Furthermore, a prediction of the deflected shape would allow control over the geometry to give the stiffness required. Beam deflections provided by the methods of Mohr and Macaulay [1 - 3] apply to a continuous beam and not a telescopic

assembly. It will be seen that these two theories place a different interpretation upon the successive integration required of their common, underlying flexure equation. In Mohr’s moment-area method the area of the bending moment diagram and its moment provide the slope and deflection of the beam. Macaulay’s method provides each of these through a step function which admits the discontinuities that arise in bending moments between loads. In building further upon the underlying equation, the present paper outlines a new, direct integration method for supplying slope and deflection of a telescopic cantilever beam. This method provides the deflection at any position in the length of a 3-section, cantilever beam carrying a concentrated load applied to its free-end in addition to its distributed self-weight. The accuracy of this method is proven from its application to a model, 3section beam in which displacement predictions are seen to compare well with those found by the finite element method. 2.0 Existing Theory A beam refers to a structural member whose crosssection dimensions are usually small in comparison to its length. Generally, beams are supported horizontally when carrying transverse loading but cantilevers may also be mounted vertically to bear horizontal forces. The loading is often idealised within concentrated forces whereas in practice they would bear upon a certain surface area. For example, the end-load considered here would represent, say, the platform which carries two men and the equipment that they require to work upon overhead cables. The safety required of the crane dictates that steel is the chosen material for its telescoping tubes. Consequently, the influence of its weight upon the deflection must also be considered. Reasonably, this weight is assumed to be uniformly distributed, allowing for the changes to the section area within each length and in the overlaps. The method of determining the deflection (in this Part 1 study) and stress (in Part 2) under the combined loading begins with the construction of its bending moment and shear force diagrams [1 - 4]. These diagrams express the internal reaction of a beam to its external loading by the following scheme. 2.1 Resisting Moments and Forces Firstly, it is explained how the material in a continuous beam resists the external transverse loads applied to it [4]. Consider the simply supported beam with negligible weight, subjected to four transverse loads, shown in Figure 1.


ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

parts of Eq. 3 lead to the flexure equation given that the radius of curvature is inversely proportional to the second displacement derivative d2y/dx2 [1, 2]. In what follows the flexure equation will be seen to underlie all within this Part 1 investigation into displacements. The remaining, third part of Eq. 1 will be used to estimate the bending stress f in a telescopic beam in an accompanying (Part 2) investigation [7].

Figure 1: Moment of resistance for a beam [4] The applied loads bend the beam creating a compressive resistance in the top part of the cross-section and tensile resistance in its bottom part. In Figure 1, MN represents the unstressed neutral plane dividing the two parts, i.e. compression above and tension below. The equivalent compressive force acting on the upper half-area MEFN is given by ‘C’. Similarly the equivalent tensile force acting on the lower half-area MHGN is given by ‘T’. The external loads applied and the effective shear force ‘S’ acting on the section EFGH are assumed to be concentrated on the vertical plane of symmetry, as shown in Figure 1. The forces that act over the length AX of the beam are, therefore: i. ii. iii. iv. v.

Vertical reaction RA at A External loads W1 and W2 Shear force S offered by section EFGH Compressive resistance C and Tensile resistance T

The magnitudes of C and T are equal and since they act in the opposite directions and with a separation h, they form the beam’s moment of resistance:

MR= Ch = Th

(1)

Now, taking moments about O gives the moment applied to the transverse section EFGH from the external loading

M R = R A x − W1 ( x − a) − W2 ( x − a − b)

(2)

For the beam to be in equilibrium it follows that the moments in Eqs 1 and 2 are equal. In general, this moment equilibrium condition holds under any external loading when: ‘Bending moment at a section = Moment of resistance at that section’. The well-known equation of bending is based on this principle [1 - 3]:

M E f = = I R y

(3)

where I is the second moment of area for the section and E is the elasticity modulus for the beam material. The first two

While such investigations are routine in engineering design it should be emphasised here that they would normally be applied to continuous beams. However, an entirely similar approach cannot be applied to telescopic beams where there are discontinuities within the overlaps. The effect is likely to be most pronounced where a gap exists along the overlapping lengths. Section 3 describes the modifications that the telescopic design imposes upon the deflection theory. 2.2 Deflection Analyses Design of cantilever beams for their many applications often requires estimates of deflections at various length positions. The development of analytical methods for estimating deflection and stress for beams in bending were developed in the 18th century by Euler and Bernouli and are described in many textbooks [1-4]. The beam deflection y is found by four common methods: (i) direct integration [1-4], (ii) Macaulay’s step function [8, 9], (iii) Mohr’s theorems [1-4] and (iv) strain energy [10]. Both (i) and (ii) are based on the flexure equation, which follows from Eq. 3 as:

M ( x ) = ± EI

d2 y dx 2

(4)

The product EI is the flexural rigidity which is constant in a uniform cross-section. The sign in Eq. 4 refers to the sign convention for moments: sagging positive and hogging negative. The moment function, M(x) in Eq. 4, is the bending moment expressed in term of the length position x. The direct integration method (i) adopts successive integrations of Eq. 4 leading to the slope dy/dx and then the displacement y. Method (i) is restricted to relatively simple loading, including that considered here, which does not lead to discontinuous M(x) expressions. Macaulay’s technique (ii) is used where moment discontinuities do arise at span positions where additional concentrated load are applied and also, for a uniform loading that does not extend to the full length. Mohr placed a geometrical interpretation upon the bending-moment diagram when integrating Eq. 4 for slope and deflection. When A and B are separate points on the deflection curve y = y(x), for which B is a point of zero slope, then Mohr’s two theorems (iii) state: Slope at A

=

1 × Area of the M-diagram between A and B EI


ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

Deflection of A relative to B

=

1 × First moment of area EI

the M-diagram between B and A about A. When strain energy methods (iv) are used to estimate beam deflection the energy stored through an internal stress and strain is equated to the work done by external forces and moments. Two useful interpretations of this approach, adopted in FE analyses, lie in the theorems of Castigliano and the principle of virtual work [2].

3.1 Tip Reactions The tip reactions identified here facilitate the load transfer between the three beams. To show this, consider the beam assembly shown in Figure 2b. Since a part of beam CD lies inside beam AB it will produce an upward reaction at C in beam AB and a downward reaction at B in beam AB. The applied forces and moments acting upon the fixed-end beam AB are as shown in Figure 3.

Despite uniform section beams being well-served by the classical theory they are less often used for deflection analyses of variable section beams including tapered, stepped and telescopic designs [11, 12]. Here, it is more likely that FE is adopted to ensue that a given deflection allowance is not exceeded. 3.0 Telescopic Beam Theory In a telescopic cantilever beam one or more beams are stacked inside an outer beam which is fixed at one end to support the entire beam assembly. The inner pieces move out when application needs the full span. Generally, the assembly will have three types of beam: (a) one with end fixed, (b) one with end free and (c) those connecting (a) and (b). It follows that a beam of three lengths (see Fig. 2a), which includes (a), (b) and (c), is sufficiently general for the present analysis. Thus, Figure 2b shows, schematically, a telescoping cantilever with overlapping lengths a1 and a2 between beams with lengths l1, l2 and l3. The loading shown is a combination of the beams’ self-weights w1, w2 and w3 and a concentrated, applied end-load W.

Figure 3: Fixed-end beam loading

These include: the tip forces RB and RC, the self-weight loading w1, the fixing reaction RD and its moment M. Similarly, when beam CD is considered, at C there will be a downward reaction and at B there will be an upward reaction, due to its contacts with beam AB. Moreover, beam EF will impose reactions on CD. There will be an upward reaction at E and a downward reaction at D. Thus the forces upon CD will be those shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Middle beam loading

The tip reactions RD and RE follow from applying moment and force equilibrium equations Fig. 4. Taking moment about C gives

RB × α1l2 = RD × l2 + w2l2 ×

l2 − RE (l2 − α 2l3 ) 2

And from force balance

RC = RB + RE − RD − w2l2 Figure 2: Three-section, telescopic cantilever

Correspondingly the loads acting upon the end length EF are shown in Figure 5.


ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

sample analysis given in Appendix A2 applies to fixed-end portion AC in Fig. 3. This shows that the deflected shape of AC (not including the overlap BC) may be expressed as a polynomial:

y1 = t14 x 4 + t13 x 3 + t12 x 2 + t11 x + t10

Figure 5: Free-end beam loading Taking moments about E gives

RD × a2 = W × l3 + w3l3 × But

l3 2

a2 = α 2l3

From the above equations

in which the coefficients t10 . . t14 are required to match the boundary conditions. Here, as both the slope and deflection are zero at the fixing, where x = 0, then t10 and t11 are both zero. The remaining coefficients are seen to depend upon the length, the loading, and the flexural rigidity EI. A further polynomial describes the deflection for the portion of this beam which extends into the overlap CB

y2 = t 24 x 4 + t23 x 3 + t22 x 2 + t21 x + t20

W+ RD =

w3l3 2

α2

Finally, taking moments about D gives

l RE × l3α 2 = W × (1 − α 2 )l3 + w3l3 × ( 3 − α 2l3 ) 2

(5)

(6)

Equation 6 must match the slope and deflection imposed by the adjacent beam before it (AC). This requirement also applies to a further polynomial that describes the deflection in the same overlap CB from within the middle beam

y3 = t34 x 4 + t33 x 3 + t32 x 2 + t31 x + t30

(7)

Hence

(1 − 2α 2 )   W (1 − α 2 ) + w3l3  2 RE =   α2     Thus, in the proposed ‘Tip Reaction Model’ the internal reactions are used to transmit the forces. The effects of the external loads applied to the telescopic cantilever beam can then be calculated using tip reactions instead of the bending moment or, moment of resistance, used in the continuous beam, as described in section 2.1. This technique allows the equilibrium and compatibility requirements for each beam to be considered separately as the free-body diagrams given in Figs 3 - 5. In this way the normal tip reactions at the beginning and end of each overlap, are established. Once the reactions are known, the deflection of each beam can be calculated in the following way. 3.2 Deflection Analysis The deflected shape of each portion of the beam is then provided by successive integration of Eq. 4. The first integration gives the slope dy/dx and the second integration provides the deflection expression y = y(x). Constants of integration are introduced to ensure compatibility within the overlapping lengths as a similar integration process is applied to each separately and in sequence. The full analysis is lengthy for which full details are given elsewhere [7]. The

The appended sections A.2.2, A.2.3 and A.2.4 show how such compatibility is ensured between the t-coefficients in Eqs (5) – (7) for these three portions of the length ACB. This leads to the respective equation sets 1, 2 and 3 which contribute to the eventual determination of the overall tip deflection. The complete analysis requires additional equation sets given in [7] for the remaining beam sections. The sample set of Eqs (5) - (7) given here are sufficient to show how they are programmed to admit a specific geometry and material. The program is then applied to predict the end-deflection of a model telescopic cantilever. 3.3 The ‘C’ Program The ‘C’ programme marries each polynomial description of deflection within the three beam sections. Table 1 shows the steps leading to the overall tip deflection. The program is able to calculate tip deflection under various applied loadings with different combinations of overlaps. To do this it requires the geometric parameters of the telescopic beam assembly entered interactively to find specific solutions defined by the seven sets of equations defined in Appendix A2. Specifically, it applies the acquired parameters to equation set (1) to obtain the tip reactions. The shape of AC is provided by equation set (2) from which it calculates boundary conditions to define the shape of overlap CB between beams AB and CD. This recursive process continues until the deflected shape of every portion is defined. Finally, the shape of DF is used to estimate the value for the tip deflection.


ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

Table 1: Flow Chart of the ‘C’ program to calculate tip deflection

Wear pad 1 of 0.5 mm thickness and 5 mm wide is glued to the inner side of the free end of beam 1 as shown in Figure 6. Similarly wear pad 2 of thickness 0.5 mm and 5 mm wide is glued to the outside of beam 2. Wear pad 3 is glued to the inner end of beam 2 and wear pad 4 is glued to outside of beam 3 as shown in Figure 6. The beam assembly slides on these wear pads. Table 2 shows the finite element analysis process carried out by ABAQUS. The left-hand side shows the flow chart and the right-hand side gives detailed explanations. This FEA procedure was applied repeatedly to each tip load thereby providing the end displacement required. Note that while both the analytical model and FEA are capable of providing respective predictions to the deflected shape in full, here only the end-deflection was taken as the validation measure for the analytical technique. 3.6. Case Study In this study a model telescopic cantilever beam assembly is used. It consists of three, 1 mm thick square tubes, with outer dimensions 25 mm, 22 mm and 19 mm, having respective fixed, middle and end lengths of 1 m, 1.2 m and 1.2 m. Referring the model to Fig. 2, beam CD and AB have an overlap of 400 mm and beams CD and EF have an overlap of 300 mm. The second moment of area about the neutral axis for the beams AB, CD and EF are 9232 mm4, 6188 mm4 and 3900 mm4 respectively. The self-weight per unit length: w = W/L =ρ A for the beams AB, CD and EF are: w1 = 0.007488 N/mm, w2 = 0.006594 N/mm and w 3 = 0.005652 N/mm respectively [7]. In addition, the model beam assembly was subjected to an increasing, concentrated tip loading. 4.0 Results and Discussion

3.5 Finite Element Analysis Using ABAQUS The geometric model submitted to ABAQUS for a FE analysis shown in Figure 6. Four wear pads were introduced to make the tip reaction model comparable to the FEA.

Table 3 gives the tip theory predictions to the end-deflection from the C-program. Also shown are the end deflections provided by applying the FEA procedure repeatedly to each tip load.

Table 3: End load versus deflection predictions

Figure 6: Telescope beam assembly for FEA




ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

Table 2: FEA procedure using ABAQUS

self-weight. The linear response of the structure to increasing endloading, as revealed by both the analytical solution and FE is consistent with the principle of superposition [2]. Thus, for an elastic loading of a telescopic cantilever the end-deflection may be taken as the sum of the deflections that arise when the distributed load and the concentrated load act separately. This important observation offers a means of extending the theory to complex loading patterns applied to telescoping structures that do not facilitate a successive integration so readily. Here the tip-reaction concept may be extended conveniently by isolating each load in turn to find the deflection. Superimposing the loads, allows the deflection to be found as a sum when all loads act together upon the structure. 5.0 Conclusions The underlying principle of bending cantilever beams has been revisited in which the moment of resistance is identified as the mechanism for transferring the effects of external loads within continuous beams. Since this cannot be used as the mechanism for discontinuous telescopic beams an alternative ‘Tip Reaction Model’ is proposed in which the external loading is reacted at the tips of the overlaps. The model enables a deflection

It appears that the agreement between the analytical and numerical solutions is acceptable. Both techniques reveal a comparable stiffness for this beam, which is identified with the gradients in Fig. 7, these having a mean value 0.26 kN/m. A graphical plot between these results reveals an interesting feature of the beam’s behaviour by either approach. Thus Figure 7 shows each load versus deflection prediction graphically for the model beam assembly considered here. When each plot is extrapolated to a zero end-load they both reveal a significant, initial, 26 mm end-deflection due to

Figure 7: Tip load versus deflection from theory and FEA




ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

analysis using direct integration method. The latter provides polynomial expressions for the deflected shape of a threesection cantilever which are convenient for programming. The deflections predicted analytically are accurate according to a validation provided by an alternative numerical finite element solution. Both predictions revealed that the telescopic structure was Hookean in which the end-load versus deflection plot was linear. The latter reveals that the deflection contributions to the end-deflection from self-weight and external loading may be separated. Consequently, when finding deflection of telescoping structures in general under complex loading, a load separation is proposed to simplify analyses. A load superposition would allow the required deflection to be found as a sum of contributing deflections from each load acting alone. In this way the tip reaction analysis may be applied to loadings that do not facilitate the successive integration method adopted here quite so readily. References

APPENDIX A – Deflection Analyses Deflection of the assembly is considered as the combination of deflection in the three beams AB, CD and EF in a threesection, telescopic cantilever beam. The deflected shapes of the different beams however are assumed to be the same in the overlapped regions. Consider the beams shown in Figure 6. Beam AB has two deflected portions AC’ and C’B’. Beam CD has three deflected portions C’B’, B’E’ and E’D’. Similarly, beam EF has two deflected portions E’D’ and D’F’. The equations of the deflected shapes of the beams can be derived by integrating the flexure equation twice. There are seven different lengths having different bending moments in this assembly. They are identified within Fig. A1 as follows i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii.

AC in beam AB CB in beam AB CB in beam CD BE in beam CD ED in beam CD ED in beam EF DF in beam EF

1. Benham, P. P. and Crawford, R. J. Mechanics of Engineering Materials, English Language Book Society/ Longman Group Limited, Essex, England, 1987. 2. Rees, D. W. A. Mechanics of Solids and Structures, World Scientific, 2000. 3. Gere, J. M. and Timoshenko, S. P. Mechanics of Materials, Van Nostrand, 1984. 4. Ramamrutham, S. and Narayan, R. Strength of Materials, Eleventh Edition, Dhanpatrai & Sons, Dehli, 1992. 5. ESAB Welding Products, TELBO - The Telescopic Boom Brochure, 322 High Holborn, London WC1V 7PB. 6. Niftylift, Access Platform Catalogue, 2010, Milton Keynes, MK40, UK. 7. Abraham, J. Estimating deflection and stress in a telescopic cantilever beam Figure A.1: Deflected shapes of the telescoping beams using the tip reaction model, Ph.D. Interim Report, School of Engineering and Design, The reactions at points C, B, E, D and F have been Brunel University, November, 2010. 8. Stephen, N. S. Macaulay’s Method for Timoshenko established earlier using static equilibrium conditions. Beam, Int Jl of Mechanical Engineering Education, Equations describing the bent shape equations of the seven Volume 35, No 4, 2007, pp. 285-292 d2y 9. Punmia, B. C., Jain, Ashok Kumar and Jain, Arun Kumar, segments are derived by integrating EI = − M twice, dx 2 Mechanics of Materials, Laxmi Publications, New Delhi, India, 2005. where M is the sagging bending moment. The integration 10. Rhodes, J. Virtual Work and Energy Concepts, Chatto starts with AC with integration constants found from the and Windus Ltd, London, 1975. known boundary condition at A. Using the equation so 11. Gaafar, M. L. A. Large deflection analysis of a thin-walled derived the slope and deflection at C are calculated. These channel section cantilever beam, Int Jl Mech Sci, 22(12), then become the boundary conditions for the overlap CB in 1980, pp. 755-766. beam AB. This process of matching the individual equations 12. Tatham, R. and Price, H. L. Deflection of tapered beams, to the boundary conditions calculated from the adjoining Aircraft Eng, 17 (201), 1945, pp. 312-316. section is continued to establish the full beam’s deflection curve AC’B’E’D’F’ in Fig. A1.




ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

A.1 Boundary Conditions C1 = 0 because when Here we restrict the analysis to beam lengths listed in i – iii above, for which the following relationships refer to both the slope and deflection:

Those at B estimated from CB in AB = Those at B estimated from CB in CD = Those at B estimated from BE in CD

dy = 0 . Integrating dx

the slope

again

y=

Those at C estimated from AC in AB = Those at C estimated from CB in AB = Those at C estimated from CB in CD

x=0

1  l x 2 x3 (l − a ) x 2 x 3 w1 2 x 2 x3 x 4   RB × ( 1 − ) − Rc × [ 1 1 − ] + (l1 − l1 +  + +C1 x + C2 EI1  2 6 2 6 2 2 3 12 

Here C 2 = 0 since y = 0 when x = 0 . Thus, if the deflection equation for the length AC in the beam AB is written as

y1 = t14 x 4 + t13 x 3 + t12 x 2 + t11 x + t10 It follows that the coefficients t10 - t14 are

A.2 Deflection of AC within beam AB

  t11 = C1 = 0    l2    RC l1  (1 − α 1    2  l1 1  R B × l1    w1 l1  t12 = + −  EI 1  2 4         1  − R B RC w1 l1  t13 = + −  EI 1  6 6 6    1  w1  t14 =    EI  24   t10 = C 2 = 0

Figure A.2: Reference position x in AC Consider the length AC as shown in Figure A.2. The bending moment at distance x from A is

M = − RB × (l1 − x) + RC × (l1 − a1 − x) − w1 × (l1 − x) ×

(l1 − x) 2

AC

for

0 ≤ x ≤ (l1 − a1 ) where sagging moments are positive.

Let

2

Now

EI1

d y = −M dx 2

for the beam portion AC in which

 dy    = g1  dx  C

section AC at C and

Equation set (1)

AC

 dy     dx C

where

means the slope of

∴ x = (l1 − a1 )

I1

is its uniform second moment of area. Integrating this twice gives

−M dx.dx + C1 x + C2 y =  EI1 To find C1 and C 2 substitute the boundary conditions at A: dy =0 when x = 0, y = 0 and also the slope dx y=

Also let

y CAC = d 1

yCAC means

where

the deflection of

section AC at C. 3

2

g 1 = 4 × t14 × k1 + 3 × t13 × k1 + 2 × t12 × k1 4

3

d1 = t14 × k1 + t13 × k1 + t12 × k1

1 (l − x) RB × (l1 − x) − RC × (l1 − a1 − x) + w1 × (l1 − x) × 1 dx dx EI1   2

dy 1  x2 x2 w x3   RB × (l1 x − ) − Rc × [(l1 − a1 ) x − ] + 1 (l12 x − l1 x 2 + )  + C1 = dx EI1  2 2 2 3 

2

A.3 Deflection curve for the overlap CB in AB Consider the length CB shown in Figure A.3. The slope and deflection are found in a similar manner to AC except that the boundary conditions must match those at C, these having provided g1 and d1 earlier in section A.2.




ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

Thus, the deflection equation for CB is given by

y2 = t 24 x 4 + t23 x 3 + t22 x 2 + t21 x + t20 Where the coefficients t20 - t24 are

  t21 = C3  1  RB × l1 w1l12   t 22 = + EI1  2 4    1  − RB w1l1   Equation set (2) t 23 = − EI1  6 4    1  t 24 =   w1  EI1     24   t 20 = C4

Figure A.3: Reference position x in CB The bending moment at position x from A in Figure A.3 becomes.

M = − RB × (l1 − x) − w1 × (l1 − x ) ×

(l1 − x ) 2

for

l1 − a ≤ x ≤ l1 But

EI1

d2y = −M dx 2

A.4 Deflection curve for the overlap CB in CD

Integrating this twice gives

y = 

−M dx.dx + C3 x + C 4 EI1

w dy 1  x2 x3   RB × (l1 x − ) + 1 (l12 x − l1 x 2 + )  + C3 = dx EI1  2 2 3  Where

x = l1 − a1 = k1 slope

dy = g1 dx

  k12  RB × [l1k1 − ]  1  2  C 3 = g1 − 3   EI1 w k  + 1 [l12 k1 − l1k12 + 1 ]  3   2 Integrating again

y=

1  l x 2 x3 w x2 x3 x 4   RB × ( 1 − ) + 1 (l12 − l1 + )  + C3 x + C4 EI1  2 6 2 2 3 12  When

x = (l1 − a1 ) = k1 y = d1

  l k2 k3  RB × ( 1 1 − 1 )  1  2 6 −C k C 4 = d1 − 3 1 2 2 3 4   EI1 w1 l1 k1 l1k1 k1 − + ) + ( 2 3 12   2



Figure A.4: Deflection of beams AB and CD When in Fig. A4a, the same overlap CB, lying within both AB and CD is considered, the known slope and deflection ( g1 and d1 ) must again apply to C. The bending moment is from Figure A.5b:

M = − RC × ( x − l1 + a1 ) − w2 × ( x − l1 + a1 ) × for

l1 − a1 ≤ x ≤ l1

Substituting

x:

( x − l1 + a1 ) 2

(l1 − a1 ) = k1 gives the range for

k1 ≤ x ≤ l1 .

Here

d2y EI 2 2 = − M dx

where

I 2 is

the

uniform second moment of area of beam CBD. Integrating once gives the slope


ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, VOLUME 30, FEBRUARY 2011 pp.6-15.

w 1  x2 x3  dy  RC × [−k1 x + ] + 2 [k12 x − k1 x 2 +  + C5 = dx EI 2  2 2 3

Differentiating this gives the slope g2 at B:  k x 2 x3 w k 2 x2 k x3 x4   RC × [− 1 + ] + 2 [ 1 − 1 +  + C5 x + C6 2 6 2 2 3 12   3 2

1 EI 2

x = (l1 − a1 ) = k1 ,

When

1 EI 2

g1 =

g 2 = 4t34l1 + 3t33l1 + 2t32l1 + t31

dy = g1 , which give: dx

In turn, d2 and g2 become the boundary conditions for the free-end length remaining [7]

 − k 2 w  k3   RC × 1 + 2  1   + C5  2 2  3   

C 5 = g1 −

When

1 EI 2

2   RC × − k1 + w2  2 2 

x = (l1 − a1 ) = k1

Part 2 of this study will be published in the September edition of ‘Engineering Integrity’.

 k13        3 

y = d1 and

when

x = l1

y = d 2 (see Figure A4a). d1 =

x = l1 gives the deflection d 2 at B:

d 2 = t34l14 + t33l13 + t32l12 + t31l1 + t30

Integrating again gives the deflection

y=

Setting

1 EI 2

3 3 4 4 4  −k k w k k k   RC × [ 1 + 1 ] + 2 [ 1 − 1 + 1 ]  + C5 k1 + C6  2 6 2 2 3 12  

  Are you just starting out on an engineering

 − k13  w2  k14   1    +    − C5 k1 × C6 = d1 − R C EI 2  3   2  4 

career or currently studying for a postgraduate degree. Would you like to tell us about your research? What is the hot topic at the moment?

Thus, the deflection equation for CB is

1 y= EI 2

 k x 2 x3 w k 2 x 2 k x3 x 4   RC × [− 1 + ] + 2 [ 1 − 1 +  + C5 x + C6 2 6 2 2 3 12  

which is written as

y3 = t34 x 4 + t33 x 3 + t32 x 2 + t31 x + t30 where the coefficients t30 – t34 are

  t31 = C5  1  − RC × k1 w2 k12   t32 = + 2 4   EI 2   Equation set (3) 1  RC w2 k1   t33 = − 6   EI 2  6  1  w1   t34 =  EI 2  24  t30 = C6

We have many industrial readers who would be extremely interested in hearing about your research, both what it involves and its background. Articles of up to 850 words (approx 1 A4 page) can be published under our new ‘Research of the Younger Engineer’ in the journal, presenting a great opportunity to make industry aware of your work. Send your articles to the Editor: Dr Karen Perkins Materials Research Centre School of Engineering Swansea University SA2 8PP




 Tuesday 8 March 2011

Future Events:

Instrumentation, Analysis & Testing Exhibition Jimmy Brown Centre

Events the EIS are planning for the future: Cost Benefit Through Failure Avoidance Living with Ageing Plant Thermo Mechanical Fatigue Corrosion Fatigue in Nuclear Power Aerospace Materials in Rapid Prototyping

Silverstone Race Track

Tuesday 29 March 2011 Technologies for low Carbon Transportation in New Sound Environments

If you are interested in receiving information on any of these events please email: events@e-i-s.org.uk

University of Warwick

ENGINEERING INTEGRITY SOCIETY

CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP APPLICATION FORM Corporate Sponsorship for 2011 is £400+VAT (pro rata). All Corporate members receive discounts at seminars, training course and exhibitions and advance notice where booking is required. They receive FREE copies of the EIS Journal and get priority booking in Exhibitions when space is limited. We would like to join the EIS as a Corporate Sponsor. Contact Information: Company: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mailing Address: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Phone: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fax: ------------------------------------------------Email: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sponsor’s Representative: Name: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Title: -----------------Please keep our representative informed of the activities of the: (i) (ii) (iii)

DURABILITY AND FATIGUE GROUP SIMULATION, TEST AND MEASUREMENT GROUP NOISE, VIBRATION AND PRODUCT PERCEPTION GROUP

We enclose a cheque for £....................................... made payable to ‘Engineering Integrity Society’. Please invoice us using purchase order number .............................................. (Terms 30 days). We further authorise that information declared on this document may be stored on the EIS Data Retrieval System. Signed: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: --------------------------------------------How to join: You can email lmansfield@e-i-s.org.uk for further information or mail the above form with a cheque to: Engineering Integrity Society, 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ. Registered in England No. 1959979



Registered Office: 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, CV12 9AJ

VAT No. GB 443 7696 18

Registered Charity No. 327121


 Technologies for Low Carbon Transportation in New Sound Environments Tuesday, 29 March 2011 International Digital Laboratory, WMG, University of Warwick A joint EIS & Warwick WMG seminar & exhibition. Many automotive manufactures have launched new low carbon Hybrid and Electric Vehicles. Although these quieter powertrains offer the prospect for enhanced vehicle refinement, problems concerning the driver experience and pedestrian safety have been also introduced. Resolving these issues will therefore call for new skills to be developed and new knowledge to be explored. This year’s EIS seminar will provide opportunity to discuss these new concerns. Here the most recent research by academia and industry will be presented, whilst the latest technological developments will be on show during the exhibition. Programme: 08:30 - 09:20 09:20—09:30 09:30—10:00 10:00—10:30

10:30—11:00

11:00—11:30 11:30—12:00 12:00—12:30 12:30—14:00 14:00—14:30 14:30 - 15.00 15:00 - 15:30 15:30—15:45 15:45—16:30

16:30

Registration & Coffee Opening Address “Green Noise: Electric Vehicle Sound Quality” Mr Sebastiano Giudice—Warwick Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre (Host) “Using an Exterior Sound Simulator to develop appropriate Warning Sounds for a Luxury Electric vehicle” Mr Ashley Gilllibrand - Jaguar Land Rover, Mr Roger Williams—Sound Evaluations Limited “Moulding the Modal Map: Opportunities For a Rethink in Low Frequency Strategy Afforded by In-Wheel Motors” Mr Damian Harty & Mr Andy Watts - Protean Electric Ltd Coffee in Exhibition Area “ NVH Simulation Solutions for Lightweight Vehicles and Novel Powertrain Concepts” Dr Jez Smith - ESI Applications of Electronic Sound Synthesis in Hybrid and Electric Vehicles Mr Colin Peachey – Lotus Engineering Lunch & Exhibition NVH development of a range extender module integrated in a pure electric vehicle Mr Bernhard Graf, Dr. Alfred Rust, Dr. Franz Brandl , AVL List GmbH Enhancing noise and vibration comfort of hybrid/electric vehicles using transfer path models Mr Philipp Sellerbeck, Dr. Christian Nettelbeck HEAD acoustics GmbH Electric vehicle sound design – Just wishful thinking? Dr. Georg Eisele, Dr. Peter Genender, Mr Klaus Wolff FEV Motoren technik GmbH Coffee Break “Expert Panel Session” Delegates have a chance to raise topical issues related to the seminar theme, led by an Expert Panel, which will include the presenters. Close

TARIFF (All prices include parking tariif) Delegate Students Leaflet Insert in delegate pack Sponsorship of Event Personal membership of EIS

EIS Member £100+VAT £25+VAT £35+VAT £250+VAT £25 (UK)

Non Member £140+VAT £25+VAT £50+VAT £250+VAT £30(Overseas)

For reservations please contact: Engineering Integrity Society, 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ Tel: (0)2476 730 126 Email: sound@e-i-s.org.uk




 Instrumentation, Analysis & Testing Exhibition Tuesday 8 March 2011 Silverstone Race Track 10:00 to 16:00 Entrance to the exhibition, parking, and the technical activities throughout the day are free to visitors, with complementary refreshments and buffet lunch. Exhibition: Now in its 28th year, the exhibition continues to grow and provides the opportunity for visitors to network, and view and discuss in an informal atmosphere the latest developments in instrumentation, analysis and test facilities. The exhibition will be of interest to engineers in the automotive, transport, aerospace, off-highway vehicles, power generation, medical and research industries. List of Current Exhibitors: AcSoft

Adept Scientific

Bruel & Kjaer

Carl Zeiss Group

Dantec Dynamics

Data Acquisition & Testing Services

Data Physics

Dewetron

Doosan Babcock

GE Sensing

GOM UK

HBM

Instrumentation Direct

Interface Force Measurements

Kemo

Kistler

Lake Image Systems

Laser Optical Engineering

LMS

m + p International UK

Meggitt Sensing Systems

Michell Instruments

Moog

National Instruments

PC Environmental

PhotoSonics

Polytec

Product Assessment & Reliability Centre

Safe Technology

ServoTest

Society of Environmental Engineers

Strainsense

Techni Measure

TIAB

TRaC

Vaisala

Variohm

Zwick Roell

Technical Activities: There will be three technical presentations during the morning: 1)

Pantograph Damage Monitoring System – instrumentation and data automation (J Rosinski, D Smurthwaite, Transmission Dynamics)

2)

How to Calculate Measurement Uncertainty in Precision Torque Applications (HBM United Kingdom Limited)

3)

MIRA CarDur Update European Car Durability Schedule & Target – MIRA Updated VPG. (D Ensor, MIRA) (Title to be confirmed)

together with a number of free one hour hands-on training courses: Measurement Fundamentals for Computer-Based Data Acquisition. This is a one hour introductory session that covers some of the fundamental issues in signal and data acquisition that any scientist or engineer needs to understand if they are using or building computer-based measurement systems. These issues include range, resolution, sampling rate, aliasing, noise reduction and filtering. Attendees will explore these concepts with actual signals via hands-on exercises using USB-based data acquisition hardware and ready-to-run software examples. Attendees need to have a basic understanding of measurement and be able to operate PC running Windows. No programming experience is required.




Afternoon: Of major interest during the afternoon will be an open forum supported by F1 teams, automotive companies, test equipment manufacturers and universities entitled: Seven Poster Rigs – Is that three too many? “Free body“ six, seven and eight post vehicle test rigs have been experimented with and are a deviation from the fixed body rigs of sixteen to twenty four axes. What are the pros and cons of these different variations and what direction is this technology moving today? Our Guest panel is:

Dave Hamer Bruce Oliver Dr David Purdy Bernard Steeples TBA

Subjects covered will include: • • • • • •

Lotus Renault GP Lola Cars International Defence Academy Ford Simulation

What are the advantages of the different fixed and free body rigs? Have six, seven or eight poster free body rigs made a significant cost-effective impact? What part are computer simulations playing? Is it valid to use a non-rolling tyre? Can free body rigs achieve realistic inertia and aeroloading? What direction is the full vehicle laboratory testing taking today?

Also present on the day to give their views will be representatives from: Formula1

Willams F1 Renault F1 Mercedes GP Force India Virgin Racing

Test House

MIRA Millbrook GKN

Consultancy

Lola Cars International

Automotive

Lotus Cars Bentley Motors Nissan Ford

University

University of Bath Defence Academy of the UK Oxford Brookes University of Huddersfield

Supplier

Tiab Ltd MTS Instron Servotest

There will be two short presentations:

N Posters in the UK by Colin Dodds, Dodds Associates

7 Poster aero-loader control by Chris Lamming, University of Bath

All attendees will get a chance to ask questions either during the forum or in the exhibition hall afterwards. The forum will have limited places. A free lunch and refreshments are provided, so please ensure you register. Please go to the EIS website for further details:

http://www.e-i-s.org.uk

or e-mail:

lmansfield@e-i-s.org.uk




 ‘EIS 3rd Durability and Fatigue Advances in Wind, Wave and Tidal Energy’ BAWA Bristol, UK – 30th September 2010 Event report This third EIS biannual meeting brought together technical experts to discuss and share recent advances in fatigue and durability assessment for renewable structures, building on the success of the previous two events held in 2006 and 2008. The relevance of this event has been highlighted in a recent economic valuation for offshore renewable energy (May 2010), which claimed that sufficient resources exist to meet UK demands and generate the same amount of electricity as is currently achieved by North Sea oil and gas production. It postulates that by 2050 the UK could export some of its renewable electricity and produce clean electricity equivalent to one billion barrels of oil annually through the installation of 169GW of capacity. This may seem ambitious compared to the current plan for 30GW offshore windfarms. Nonetheless, the current accelerated plan requires new objectives for the implementation of an integrated structural integrity approach to be used in future far-offshore technologies. This includes the development of reliable advanced and modern lifing tools for offshore renewable energy. There is a need to develop an integrated validation process which involves maintenance and includes health monitoring, testing of coupons, components and systems, and which correlates with comprehensive analytical analysis. Finally, there is a need for fast track innovation in areas of damage detection, smart materials and design optimization. The event had 11 presentations drawn



from a wide variety of expertise in this field: 4 academics, 2 from research institutes and 5 from specialised companies including speakers from Germany. The presentations were on advances in different aspects of this fast developing field and included some innovative ideas in terms of concept technology, monitoring and design. The event was sponsored by 6 exhibitions from the following companies: Data Physics, Dantec Dynamic, HBM, Safe Technology and Moog. The opening speaker was Lewis Lack from Xanthus energy who presented the concept of a reliable cost e f f e c t i v e ‘farshore’ wind farm foundation (Fig 1), highlighting pro and cons of the current structure Fig 1 used in ‘nearshore’ farms. The next presenter was Jarek Rosinski f r o m Transmission Dynamics: He challenged the current type testing for large turbines gearboxes. Showing that the reliability of future wind turbines can be improved through a better understanding of dynamic system behaviour, to be gained by a proposed systematic approach to the measurement of key parameters relating to rotating components during comprehensive type testing. Adding to this issue, Graham Penning from David Brown commented that the failure of bearings account for a significant proportion of current wind turbine down time, which results in poor efficiency and increased

operating costs. These costs are much more substantial with offshore systems. He detailed a plan to build a test rig that can be configured in either a three or four bearing test configuration, running at variable loads and at a fixed speed. The next presenter was Feargal Brennan from Cranfield. He illustrated very clearly the limitations of current welded structures in offshore wind farms and the lack of structural integrity knowledge in the offshore gas and oil industries. He concluded that the offshore wind industry cannot afford “over design” and needs to use up to date materials and structural analysis with inspections and i m p r o v e d methods. Philip Thies from the University of Exeter described the details of PRIMaRE Marine component testing facility for marine energy converters. He has shown details for a new Dynamic Marine Component test rig (DMaC) and has concluded that large uncertainties due to lack of data for new application require early failure rate identification based on sea trials. The diversity between wave energy concepts was presented by Jamie Grimwade from NAREC. He specified the challenges regarding forces, properties, irregularities, survivability and operation with typical wave energy conversion types. Moving on to the aspect of advanced


monitoring, Holger Huhn and KarlHeinz Haase from Germany’s Franhaufer Institute and HBM covered in detail the benefits of fiber optical sensor technology in structural testing and monitoring explaining the current nearshore monitoring in the North sea. A finite element model of composite failure applied to tidal turbine blade design was presented by Paul Harper from Bristol University. This involves combining a Paris Law crack growth model with interface elements to simulate crack growth between composite plies (Fig 2). It was concluded that a similar approach could be used for wind turbine blades.

engineering leap such as this can both generate a major UK wind turbine industry and deliver secure low-cost energy to the UK consumer. Back to the advanced monitoring topic, Nick Hudson from Moog Insensys presented an approach that uses fibre optics real time monitoring to optimise wind turbine performance loads and power efficiency. This has been applied to main components such as bladespitch control and drive-train torque. The programme ended with a presentation from Ian Godfrey from IT power on how to avoid fatigue in tidal energy systems. He has shown practical solutions for several tidal design systems and suggested several.

Fig 2

The day ended with a lively discussion regarding the possible direction and trends of renewable systems and whether or not, for example, the wind energy turbine capacity has reached its limit or if larger diameter are still a potential in the future. It was a very successful full day and the organisers wish to thank the presenters and all the participants for their contributions.

Next, Seamus Garvey from the University of Nottingham delivered an intriguing presentation arguing that from several different perspectives it was clearly time to contemplate radical changes in the design of offshore wind turbines. The rationale was based on assessments of Fig 3 the total ‘Structural Capacity’ required per MW rated and on the considerable emerging need for mass energy storage to complement wind power. He proposed a completely new type of turbine (Fig 3) and opined that only an

Event Convenors: Robert Cawte Giora Shatil

Prof. S. D. Garvey presented on the subject of “Structural Capacity and Scaling Up Renewables”. He put forward the provocative view that future offshore wind turbine designs are likely to look very different from the current machines and based this view on the premise that with the present designs, many major components of cost now scale with the third (or higher) powers of blade tip diameter, D, whilst the power output scales only with Dsquared. The wind turbine manufacturers know this already and yet have strong motivations to develop even larger machines. Garvey argues that the optimum design for any machine does depend on scale and that when some critical scale limit is reached, it will be time to consider a radical redesign of the offshore wind turbine. His particular suggestion is for machines of 232m in diameter (and larger) in which power is converted internally within the rotor by allowing gravity to move masses relative to the rotor. The power emerges as compressed air – a form intrinsically compatible with energy storage. The questions to this presentation were both many and animated. Several felt that we should regard the existing designs for offshore wind turbines as “mature”. However there was broad acceptance that (a) individual offshore wind turbines will indeed become significantly larger than they are at present and that (b) optimum design does indeed depend on scale. Readers wishing to respond may send their comments by email to: ww3@e-i-s.org.uk




 Welcome to the Industry News section of the journal. Thank you to everyone for their submissions, of which we received nearly 700 press releases. The nominal limit for entry is 200 words, which should be sent to eis@amberinstruments.com or posted to EIS, c/o Amber Instruments Ltd, Dunston House, Dunston Road, Chesterfield, S41 9QD. We would appreciate you not sending entries by fax. Paul Armstrong

EIC partners with EDT to support Business/Education links The EIC, the leading trade association for UK companies supplying goods and services to the energy industries worldwide is teaming up with educational charity EDT in recognition that more needs to be done to encourage students to move into science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) careers. Alarmed by the skills gaps which have opened in these skills in the UK, EIC is convinced by the EDT approach of building business/education links which enable students to see the possibilities of STEM careers and therefore to make better informed career choices. The partnership will see EIC working with EDT to build links between its members and schools and other educational institutions. EDT is hopeful that it will be able to establish similar arrangements with other associations in STEM based industries. To contact EDT for more information, go to www.etrust.org.uk or contact Penny Tysoe on 01707 871 528 or p.tysoe@etrust.org.uk.

Shock GDP contraction reinforces need for investment in growth The Association for Consultancy and



Engineering responded to the recent shock GDP growth estimate by calling for a renewed focus on encouraging investment in infrastructure. GDP growth for the entire economy shrank by 0.5% in the fourth quarter of 2010. However, GDP for the construction sector shrank by 3.3%, compared with growth of 3.9% in the previous quarter. Nelson Ogunshakin OBE, ACE chief executive, said: “While the unusually cold weather in December inevitably had an effect on the economy, today’s news reinforces the fragile nature of the recovery. We would encourage the Chancellor to use his forthcoming Budget to place an urgent focus on driving greater private sector investment and in supporting businesses, particularly small businesses. Transport, water and energy infrastructure are all crucial to the economic, environmental and social health of the UK. Facilitating greater private sector investment in these areas should be a top priority for government, particularly as we seek to rebalance the economy.”

AMRC launches Industrial Doctorate Centre A new Industrial Doctorate Centre (IDC) aimed at helping the brightest engineering postgraduates work with industry to develop new technologies and skills, has been launched by the University of Sheffield Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (AMRC) with Boeing. The new centre, to be operated jointly by the AMRC and the University’s Department of Mechanical Engineering, will provide engineering doctorate (EngD) training with a focus on machining science. EngD is a wellestablished programme for talented postgraduate engineers who want a career in industry, providing a

vocationally-oriented alternative to the traditional PhD. The industrial doctorate combines taught modules to bring students up to best industrial practice, with original research based on real business problems, brought together under a common theme. The Sheffield IDC will be based at the AMRC’s facilities on the Advanced Manufacturing Park. It will take in an initial five postgraduate students per year for four years, with each studying for four years of fully-funded research. Once the centre is established, it will be able to take up to 20 students per year. The Sheffield centre is one of five nationwide to secure stimulus funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). The research council is providing £1.25 million towards launch costs, with the remainder coming from the universities and industrial partners.

Don’t talk to me at 10am on a Tuesday– I can’t handle it! According to a new survey by Michael Page we hit melting point on a Tuesday. The survey reveals not only what day of the week us Brits find most stressful, but that it is at 10am exactly that we reach our stress limit. A third of Engineering and Manufacturing professionals are finding a heavy workload as the biggest contributor to stress in their jobs and as a result, 1 in 3 have shouted at a colleague. Furthermore, it’s starting to have an effect outside the work place with 40% of Engineering and Manufacturing professionals feeling so stressed from their jobs, they go home and have a drink every now and then, or worse, 1 in 5 have called in sick to work, just to avoid going in. The research also revealed that if they felt they had something better to go to,


42% of employees would walk out the door today. That’s not to say they have not been trying with a third of Engineering and Manufacturing professionals planning to leave their job within the next 1-3 months. The results come as Michael Page launch their new iPhone app to support ongoing career progression and take the stress out of finding a job. Just like the online service, the Michael Page Jobs app includes a small but perfectly formed version of the job search function. Significantly, and perhaps most importantly, unlike similar apps the Michael Page Jobs app allows you to apply for jobs wherever and whenever you are, straight from your iPhone. Another unique feature includes ‘Face the Panel’ where you can spin a panel of experts to get some interview practice before the big day. There are over 70 questions broken down into three key competencies: managing business, managing others and managing yourself. The Michael Page Jobs app is available for download via the App Store.

Aston Martin joins top companies at design conference Aston Martin design director, Marek Reichman, is the latest name to sign up for national design conference ‘Design Means Business’ to be staged on March 15th and 16th.

opportunity to listen, learn and be inspired by experts from leading companies, design led businesses and design agencies. Covering a range of design topics, delegates will also be able to take part in interactive workshops, meet exhibiting companies and network with industry leaders and designers from across the UK. The ERDF programme is bringing over £250m into the North East to support innovation, enterprise and business support across the region. To see the full conference programme and find out more about Design Means Business visit: www.designnetworknorth.org, email enquiries@designnetworknorth.org or call 0191 5164400.

NAFEMS World Congress 2011 The NAFEMS World Congress 2011, being held in Boston, MA, USA from May 23rd-26th 2011, will be the only independent, international conference focusing on all aspects of simulation technology and their impacts on society and industry as a whole. Visit the Congress website www.nafems.org/congress

at

Bosch tackles skills crisis with search for future engineers

Held at The Sage Gateshead, he will join Sir Richard Needham from Dyson and other key speakers on design from, Herman Miller, King of Shaves, Hasbro, and Nissan.

The Bosch Technology Horizons Award, which aims to help close the engineering skills gap by encouraging young people to opt for a career in engineering is open for entries.

Over 250 people from industry and the design community are expected at the two day conference, which is being organised by Design Network North and business services firm RTC North.

The essay writing competition is split into two age groups with cash prizes for the winners and paid work placements at a Bosch site in the UK.

Supported by The Design Council, Design Means Business is an

In the 14-18 age group, the first prize is £700 and two weeks of paid work experience. In the 18-24 age group,

the first prize is £1,000 and the opportunity to undertake six months’ paid work experience at a Bosch site in the UK. Winners in both age groups will receive an invitation for two people to attend the Royal Academy of Engineering Awards Dinner in June 2011. Entries can be submitted online at http:/ / w w w. b o s c h . c o . u k / t e c h n o l o g y horizons/ and the closing date is March 18th 2011.

New centre will train industrial research leaders of tomorrow A new specialist training centre at The University of Nottingham will help to keep the UK at the forefront of engineering excellence. The Engineering Doctoral Centre will train dozens of the brightest postgraduate students to address key challenges in advanced manufacturing engineering. An intensive four-year research programme, in partnership with industry, will ensure students are well placed to become the industrial research leaders of tomorrow. The Centre has funding of £1.25m from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). The University of Nottingham was selected by EPSRC because of its reputation for excellence in manufacturing engineering, and its strong track record of working in partnership with industry. The Engineering Doctorate (EngD) is an alternative to the traditional PhD, being more closely related to the needs of industry and providing a more vocationally orientated doctorate degree, with the student spending a significant proportion of their time working in industry. The four-year award provides postgraduate engineers with an intensive, broad-based research programme incorporating a taught




 component undertaken in partnership with industry. The Nottingham centre is one of five Industrial Doctorate Training Centres announced by the Government. The other four are based at the Universities of Strathclyde, Swansea, Sheffield and Warwick. EPSRC will provide a quarter of the costs for each training centre — £1.25m of ‘stimulus’ funding — with the remainder coming from industry and from the universities themselves.

SWIGZ® Electric Superbike makes history on its global racing debut Chip Yates and his SWIGZ Racing team have achieved the seemingly impossible, with two podium finishes for their electric superbike on its global racing debut, competing against a competitive field of highly-developed gasoline-powered race machines. The privately owned and developed machine recently exceeded all expectations at Auto Club Speedway in California. Yates achieved third place in the premier WERA Heavyweight Twins Superbike race having started on the third row of the grid, and went one better in the WERA Heavyweight Twins Superstock race to finish second and post the fastest lap of the race at a 1:39.792. The all-electric machine was recorded at 158 mph on the straight and appeared visibly quicker to spectators, compared to even the 1,000cc Japanese superbikes from the other top WERA superbike classes. Yates said: “The bike has been developed with all new technology and software, in less than one year, and after extensive simulation testing, worked right out of the box from day one to beat bikes made by the world’s best known Italian and Japanese manufacturers.“ “We have to thank WERA Motorcycle Roadracing and Evelyne Clarke for their



graciousness and vision in welcoming our electric superbike to their nationwide gasoline race series. Out of courtesy to the regular WERA racers, we forfeited the championship points we accumulated today so as not to interfere with the gasoline bike season results and a lot of those racers visited our pits to voice their support of our program!”

Independent Lab Simulations Indicate Scuderi Engine Consumes up to 36 Percent Less Fuel Than a Conventional Engine West Springfield, Mass. - Jan. 17, 2011 – Scuderi Group, an engine development company that is reengineering the conventional fourstroke engine to advance fuel-efficient engine design, today announced strong preliminary results from vehicle simulations conducted on the Scuderi™ split-cycle engine at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI). Computer models showed that a base, naturally aspirated Scuderi™ engine operating in a 2004 Chevrolet Cavalier consumes 25 percent less fuel, and that a naturally aspirated Scuderi™ AirHybrid consumes 30-36 percent less fuel under similar drive conditions. Findings are based on projections generated from simulations of the Scuderi engine by the independent laboratory. The Scuderi split-cycle is the first engine design in over 130 years to apply a new thermodynamic process to the internal combustion engine. Using the unique combustion process of firing after top dead center, Scuderi’s engine maximizes power output while minimizing fuel consumption. The preliminary projections from the Chevy Cavalier simulation is evidence that Scuderi’s unique cycle holds significant promise. A report that outlines the findings of the engine’s simulation program is expected to be available later this year.

U.S. policy makers have made landmark decisions recently to help tighten fuel efficiency mandates. Cars produced and sold in the U.S. automotive market by 2016 model year are expected to average about 39 MPG while trucks are expected to get an average of 30 MPG – nearly a 30 percent increase from current standards. The Scuderi engine is a viable option for automakers to meet these impending new rules because of its significant efficiency. And because the complexity of the engine is low, minimal retooling is needed to produce vehicles based on a Scuderi engine design. A fascinating podcast on these new findings can be heard here: http:// www.scuderiengine.com/a-scuderi-ina-chevy/

Cambridge launches Nuclear Energy MPhil A masters degree course designed to train the next generation of nuclear scientists both in the UK and abroad has been announced by the University of Cambridge. The MPhil degree course in Nuclear Energy will be based in the University’s Department of Engineering, and will commence in October 2011. In the UK, three groups are planning to invest, collectively, at least £30 billion in new reactors over the next 15 years, which could supply 30% of the country’s electricity demand per annum by 2030. Though based in the Department of Engineering, it will be run in partnership with the Judge Business School and the Departments of Materials Science and Metallurgy, and Earth Sciences, at the University of Cambridge. The core topics covered will include reactor physics, reactor engineering and thermo-hydraulics, the fuel cycle, waste and decommissioning, nuclear fuels and materials, systems, and safety. The Judge Business School will also provide teaching on nuclear policy


and business. There will be an option to continue research training on completion of the course by entering a follow-on PhD programme. Potential students will need a good degree in engineering or a related science subject and be aiming to build their career in the energy and nuclear sectors. More information, including application details, can be found by writing to: nuclear-mphil-enquiries@cam.ac.uk

Engineers Working in the .NET Environment Can Now Incorporate Rigorously Tested Numerical Routines —NAG Library for .NET (www.nag.com, www.nag.co.uk, www.nag-gc.com, www.nag-j.co.jp ) Engineers who develop applications in the Microsoft® .NET environment and program in C#, Visual Basic, Visual C++ or F# can now incorporate the methods from one of the most extensively tested and comprehensively documented numerical libraries in the world, the NAG Library, by using a new version developed specifically for that environment (http://www.nag.com/ numeric/DT/DTdescription.asp) The NAG Library for .NET provides the algorithms developed by the Numerical Algorithm Group (NAG) in areas such as optimization, curve and surface fitting, FFTs, interpolation, linear algebra, wavelet transforms, quadrature, correlation and regression analysis, random number generators and time series analysis. The Library also incorporates extensive documentation and references, and makes this available from the Visual Studio help systems, to enable users to fully understand the usage of the methods and to guide them to the most appropriate method for the solution of their problem. For a complete listing of methods included in the NAG Library for .NET see (http://www.nag.com/numeric/DT/ DTdescription.asp )

NAG Library for .NET is available for Microsoft Windows 32-bit and 64-bit systems. Trials of the NAG Library are available from http://www.nag.com/downloads/ trial_request.asp

EAL Managing Director questions depth of the Government’s commitment to the skills sector Ann Watson, Managing Director of specialist awarding organisation EAL (EMTA Awards Limited) has applauded the commitment to skills following the announcement of a joint initiative between BIS and the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) but voices her concerns that this commitment may be a short sighted. Watson said: “On the surface of the issue, the Government is appearing to boost the skills sector, but scratch a bit deeper and it is offering vague promises of putting unemployed people on training courses. While this may go some way to counteract the unemployment crisis, this not going to boost our economy in the long term. Instead, or perhaps in addition, the Government should be supporting businesses in the skilled industries to enable them to take on and train apprentices. We need to look at apprenticeship funding in more detail – there is still nothing available for people over the age of 25 who want change career or get back into employment and undertake an apprenticeship. We need to see a concrete commitment and coherent strategy from the Government towards apprenticeships, not vague soundbites about the importance of skills. Yes, skills have a huge role to play in economic recovery, but it’s about quality skills for industries that will drive the UK forward.” EAL (EMTA Awards Limited) is a leading UK Awarding Organisation for vocational qualifications in the

Engineering, Manufacturing and Building Services Engineering Sectors. With more than 40 years experience, EAL’s qualifications are recognised as representing the highest standard of practical achievement. For more information, visit the website at: www.eal.org.uk.

Business owners so frustrated by tax laws, they would pay to have them simplified Some small business owners are so frustrated with the complexity of the UK tax system that they would pay more just to see it simplified, new research has found. Well over half (57%) of business owners surveyed by the Forum of Private Business said they would be willing to pay more tax in exchange for a simplified system – providing the system led to greater rewards. Meanwhile, 50% said they would be prepared to pay more under a simplified system if that system cut down on tax avoidance among their competitors. Tax avoidance is typically carried out by bigger businesses with the resources to exploit geographic loopholes. And 45% of business owners on the Forum’s Tax and Budget member panel said they would tolerate a higher tax bill under a simplified system if it was accompanied by a general reduction in legislative red tape. These and other key findings come after the Coalition Government announced the creation of the Office for Tax Simplification last summer. The Office is a Treasury department which is currently working on tax simplification proposals ahead of the March budget. In response to the panel findings, the Forum plans to investigate the possibility of a radical overhaul to the tax system.




 The following article outlines a process used globally by companies that have the necessary equipment and resources to implement it. We invite you to discuss what is required to validate and improve the process, and also the need to develop simple, affordable economic tests. Please send your comments and a description of what you would like to discuss to: validate@e-i-s.org.uk Fatigue in Automotive Structures Dr. Andrew Halfpenny Chief Technologist, HBM-nCode Products

concentrating on the most extreme loading events and then concatenating them one after the other. A typical proving ground is divided into several terrain surfaces. For example: asphalt, washboard, gravel, Belgium block, potholes, offroad, cross-country, etc. Each surface represents a portion of the real road; however, the severity is increased so damage can be accumulated much more quickly than under ordinary usage. The engineer must determine the optimal mix of surfaces, vehicle weight conditions and vehicle speed, to best represent the real usage profile of the customer. An analysis technique known as ‘proving ground optimization’ (or ‘endcustomer correlation’) uses advanced non-linear optimization routines to determine this optimal mix.

Summary Automotive components typically suffer vibration from two sources, these are: 1. terrain-induced vibration – which influences the low frequency range between 0 – 32Hz 2. powertrain-induced vibration – which influences the mid frequency range between 10 – 500Hz. Terrain-induced vibration is effected by the ground surface profile, the tyre (or caterpillar track) profile, wheel imbalance and the suspension system. These vibration levels give rise to fatigue damage on various components on the vehicle. Fatigue and durability qualification is assessed by proving ground test or a lab-based road simulator rig. This article discusses these two test methods and describes how the tests can be accelerated and calibrated to real vehicle usage. It also discusses how virtual tests can be simulated using the Finite Element Method (FEM) to ensure that components pass the qualification tests first time. Powertrain-induced vibration is typically Gaussian random in nature with evidence of strong sinusoidal harmonics in some components sited close to the gearbox or rotating shafts. Fatigue and durability qualification of structural powertrain components is assessed using dynamometers, whereas electro-dynamic shaker tables are used to qualify other non-structural components which are affected by the vibrations. This article discusses the shaker tests and describes how tests can be accelerated and damage calibrated to real vehicle usage. It also describes a relatively new technique to determine the fatigue damage directly from PSD which are suitable for FEM simulation of the test. 1

1.2 Accelerated testing using road simulator rigs Road simulator rigs include 4-post servo-hydraulic rigs, 12/ 16 channel spindle couple rigs, or 4-channel rigs operating on one corner of the vehicle. These rigs are perfectly adept at replaying proving ground data through a full (or partial) vehicle in the laboratory. If wheel spindle loads are measured directly on the proving ground then these can be replayed directly on the rig. The rig determines an appropriate input signal based on an iterative control loop such as the popular ‘RPC (Remote Parameter Control)’ algorithm offered by MTS. This algorithm takes the multi-channel responses measured on the proving ground and determines an appropriate set of inputs which yield the same (or very similar) responses. This algorithm allows other proving ground measurements such as vehicle accelerations or even specific strain measurements to be included in the iterative control loop.

Terrain-induced vibration

1.1 Accelerated testing using an optimized Proving Ground schedule Proving grounds accelerate damage accumulation by



The most common question arising from proving ground optimization is: “what is the acceleration factor of the proving ground schedule”, or “what’s the ratio of proving ground miles to equivalent road miles?” This is not an easy question to answer because the rate of damage accumulation is different for different components. Therefore, some components are under-tested by the proving ground while others are over-tested. In most cases the engineers tend to optimize the schedule using generic acceleration inputs, such as 3-axis wheel spindle acceleration or centre-of-gravity acceleration values. The question therefore demanded is: to what extent is any particular component over- or underrepresented by the proving ground test? Information on these issues is given by Halfpenny (1).

Tests are optimized initially by using the optimized proving ground schedule discussed in section 1.1. Further significant optimization is also possible by processing the recorded proving ground measurements to remove any nondamaging segments. These algorithms calculate the fatigue


damage based on the measured response and remove segments which contribute low (or no) damage. The remaining segments are then spliced back together to create a much shorter time signal which maintains the same damage content. Care is needed to maintain amplitude, frequency and phase interaction between the channels. Edited drive signals run more quickly and also offer greater reliability against convergence failure of the control loop. The approach is described in some detail by Halfpenny (2). 1.3 Virtual proving ground simulation using FEM Terrain-induced damage sources can be split into two categories, these are: stochastic and deterministic. Stochastic events include most continuous road surfaces like asphalt, Belgium block and gravel. The load profile for these can be described in terms of a steady state time signal or a PSD. This leads to highly efficient FE simulation using modal superposition or modal frequency response. Deterministic events include potholes, curb strikes and cross-country surfaces. Most critical load events are transient in nature and require a full transient dynamic analysis. However, in some cases the low frequency of the loading coupled with the relatively stiff nature of the component will allow a very efficient quasi-static FEM solution. If a full transient analysis is required then the input signal needs to be edited very aggressively to consider the very smallest representative segment. Halfpenny (2) considers this type of fatigue editing. 2

Powertrain-induced vibration

2.1 Dynamometer test and FEM simulation Structural powertrain components are usually very stiff and vibration-induced resonance is not usually an issue. Failure is usually attributable to: fatigue, wear and high amplitude impulsive shock loads. Structural tests are performed using dynamometers which simulate the torque cycles on the powertrain system. FEM simulation is possible for most failure modes, but fatigue analysis of gear teeth is usually performed by simple empirically-derived SN (or TN [torquecycle]) curves. A good account of this analysis is given by Yung-Li (3).

random. Modern vibration controllers also offer ‘kurtosis’ simulation which allows more realistic simulation of ground vehicle loading. Test profiles are determined based on ‘Fatigue Damage Spectra (FDS)’. These represent a plot of fatigue damage vs. frequency. The aim of accelerated testing is to derive test vibration spectra with the same FDS as the real usage profile. Whereas fatigue editing of signals for structural components relies on removing non-damaging segments from a time history of response, vibration fatigue editing increases the amplitude content of the random signal to just below the maximum design levels. This ensures that the test runs at the maximum permitted levels for most of the time. The damage rate of the test is therefore accelerated because real-life vibrations only reach these design levels occasionally. This topic is discussed in more detail by Halfpenny (4). 2.3 Virtual shaker simulation using FEM Recent advances in PSD-based rainflow cycle counting algorithms have led to very accurate FEM simulation of shaker table tests. These use a highly efficient modal frequency (or harmonic) response analysis. The approach is discussed by Halfpenny (5). REFERENCES 1. Halfpenny A, Pompetzki M. Proving Ground Optimization and Damage Correlation with Customer Usage. SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-0359, 2011. 2. Halfpenny, A. Accelerated Loading for Fatigue Analysis and Rig Testing. Fatigue 2007 Conference. Cambridge, UK : s.n., 2007. 3. Yung-Li Lee, Jwo Pan, Richard Hathaway, Mark Barkey. Fatigue Testing and Analysis - Theory and Practice. s.l. : Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005. ISBN 0-75067719-8. 4. Halfpenny, A, Kihm, F. Mission Profiling and Test Synthesis Based on Fatigue Damage Spectrum. Fatigue 2006 Conference. Atlanta, USA : Elsevier, 2006. Oral/Poster Reference: FT 342. 5. Halfpenny, A. Kihm, F. Rainflow Cycle Counting and Acoustic Fatigue Analysis Techniques for Random Loading. Recent Advances in Structural Dynamics. Southampton, UK : s.n., 2010. Paper 005.

2.2 Accelerated component testing using electrodynamic shakers PLEASE SEND YOUR VIEWS TO: Many ancillary components are affected by powertraininduced vibration – e.g. engine management control systems, sensors, actuators, pipe work, etc. These can be tested using electro-dynamic shaker tables. The acceleration input is usually specified as; Sine sweep and dwell, PSD random, Sine on random, or Sine-sweep on

verification@e-i-s.org.uk




 Welcome to our column on Smart Materials and structures. I will focus (as usual) on some of the major t e c h n i c a l developments that I have observed in the field during the latest months. Smart materials and miniaturised sensors have found a natural application case in Micro Aerial Vehicles (MAVs). According to the Defence Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), a MAV is a small aircraft with maximum 15 cm of wingspan, or equivalent rotor disk in case of micro helicopters. However, the actual dimensions may vary from different manufacturers and mission profiles. Aside for military applications, MAVs are increasingly popular also for optical inspection of railways and transport/structural infrastructure, because of their small dimensions and manoeuvrability. A noteworthy new MAV prototype with on-board artificial intelligence capabilities for vision recognition is the PIXHAWK developed by Lorenz Meier, Friedrich Fraundorfer, and Marc Pollefeys at ETH Zurich (http://spie.org/x43653.xml? A r t i c l e I D = x 4 3 6 5 3 ) . The novelty of this micro-helicopterintegrated sensor is the fusion of optical and inertial data which allows the aircraft to always know its position, and to see and avoid potential barriers in its path, with no need of intervention from a ground operator. Human staff is only needed to postprocess the data acquired during the mission profile – be them optical, or IR images. A significant piece of engineering, which in its first prototype has won the 2009



European Micro Air Vehicle Conference and Flight Competition. In past editions of this column, we have described some exciting cutting edge technologies using smart and nanomaterials to increase the soundproofing capabilities of panels and linings. However, Ford is taking a quite different approach, planning to line up the 2012 edition of the Focus with 100 % post-consumer recycled cotton – including also your discarded jeans. Well, that puts technology in perspective I suppose … For more details see http://www.ecouterre.com/2012-fordfocus-to-use-post-consumerrecycled-jeans-for-soundproofing/. Shape memory plastics (SMP) has been hailed during these years as a potential breakthrough in the field of smart materials. Recently, 3D morphing touchscreens have been patented by Microsoft (http:// preview.tinyurl.com/22t83f8). Their design are based on SMP patches having pixel sizes, which can be placed over a large touchscreen that “morphs” based on the ultraviolet scattering between the user’s fingertips and back light from the screen. The different UV wavelengths induce variable stiffness states in the SMP pixels, giving also a texture effect. A most interesting development in the field of shape memory polymers. For more structural-oriented applications, Fraunhofer IFAM in Bremen, Germany has recently developed a new polymer-metal material with self-monitoring capabilities (http://preview.tinyurl. com/5uo5xyf). The Fraunhofer researchers have developed a particular plastic-metal blend (with up to 90 % of metal filler in case),

that changes significantly its electric conductivity under mechanical loading. The polymer-metal composite can be processed using normal thermoplastics manufacturing tools (extruders, injection moulding), and has been designed for large surface panels and components. Possible applications for energy harvesting should be on the horizon. Much has been written in the press about the Manchester Nobel Prizes Geim and Novoselov, and their wonder material named as graphene. Just to highlight the potential that this one-atom thick layer of carbon can have for next generations of sensors, a new concept of strain gauge is being currently developed in Berkeley (http:/ /physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/ 43367). The design is based on graphene nanobubbles, where the electrons inhabit discrete energy levels that would be present only if the electrons were moving in circles in extremely high magnetic field (300 T …). When the nanobubble is mechanically deformed, the electronic state would have a very significant and remarkable change, making it an ideal material for strain gauges (but also for “straintronics”, electronics which is straindependent). In a recent speech at Exeter University, Kostia Novoselov has also announced similar initiatives in developing graphenebased strain gauges in Manchester. We shall see. Fabrizio Scarpa The University of Bristol


 Raising Standards

the

Brian Griffiths has written, in this journal, about the development of the current Technical P r o d u c t Specification s t a n d a r d s , expressed in BS8888, and the ways in which these can be linked to the whole life cycles of products and their recovery and re-use in further product cycles, in the BS8887 series. As this series was evolving, it became clear that there were wider issues to be considered in the use of TPS documents. I chair a new committee, Documentation Management, which has been established to explore these issues and produce some guidance. The catalyst for this was a conversation Brian and I had with another colleague with considerable experience in standards work. He had been asked to design a new attachment for an existing piece of equipment, which had been manufactured for some years but had recently gone out of production. The design department hadn’t worked on it for a long time, so their records were lost. The works had stopped making it, so their drawings had been binned. The equipment had to be reverse engineered to get the information needed to design the new attachment. We realized that there was a case for keeping a selected archive of TPS for a variety of reasons. The manufacturing documents, particularly drawings, are effectively the “end product” of the design process, but they are not a complete record of that process. Other records of analysis, prototype testing and certification are usually kept for a while, but eventually “weeded” from the files to make room for the next set. Electronic copies are kept until the software to read them has been superseded. Even the people who worked on a design project are soon scattered to other projects or

move on. It is very rare to find a record of the reasons why design decisions were made, other options were rejected, or plan B never saw the light of day. Each design represents a learning process and an investment of time money and effort. Although it has an immediate effect on the product in question, the longer term value of the exploration of materials, processes and alternative options can only be realized if the information is retained. In Japan, it has long been the policy to catalogue these learning experiences. Rejected, but still promising design options are often followed up to complete the learning process. Later projects benefit from the tried and tested ideas from earlier work saving considerable effort in not having to repeat the same processes, provided appropriate records have been kept. We put forward a case to BSI to explore the need for a guidance document, and the new committee was formed. We live in a changing world. More than twenty years ago, consumer protection legislation made designers personally responsible for any safety related consequences of their design decisions. This could theoretically include a charge of manslaughter should a design fault result in a death. This could even happen after a product had been in service for some years, provided it had been used and maintained appropriately. More recently, other legislation has given similar definition to corporate responsibility for faulty products. Neither of these pieces of legislation has yet been fully tested in court, but the need to keep full records of the design process would seem prudent. Less onerous requirements, such as guarantee/warrantee problems and insurance claims, reinforce that need. Add on to that, the potential for a new version of an older product, or add-on equipment, as in the case above, give more reasons.

kept for future benefit. So far we are only exploring to get a better feel for the scale of the challenge. It is clear that many documents are produced such as records of meetings, reports with analytical calculations, and computer records of 3-D modelling and simulations. Once the design is complete, most of these records are rarely kept for long. However, if new uses for the product are proposed or new versions are needed, much of that work will have to be repeated. This can be particularly important if the product has to go through some form of certification or testing when a new overseas market requires the product to meet different standards. A major change will be the need to record the reasoning, which leads to any design decisions, as they are made. Historically, the premier engineers of the nineteenth century routinely kept daybooks, diaries of their meetings, the decisions made and perhaps their expenses and other details. At a time when product cycles were measured in decades, such records allowed later decisions to be made in confidence with a full knowledge of the decisions taken at earlier stages. We have fallen out of the habit. With short product cycles, much design information may be lost before the first products even reach their market. Our committee will benefit from the work already done by Brian’s committee, where the options for endof-life processing have revealed some of the paths a product might take, and the need for information to make appropriate decisions. With a huge range of engineering activity to cover, it is impossible for us to produce more than general guidance, but it is an investment we can only hope will pay off in the long term. Colin Ledsome Vice President of the Institute of Industrial Designers

We hope to provide some guidance to the records which should be made and




 In the last decade or so there have been substantial changes in the way professional people access information. For example, in 2007 we published an article giving information about how to download high quality teaching material to a workstation, without membership of any organisation and without payment. The copyright conditions were liberal enough to make the downloaded items useful. That was only one indication of large-scale changes which are taking place in publishing practices. I am going to try in the next few issues to write a series of short notes about these changes, drawn from my own experience. That experience is made up of a career as a university teacher, followed by more recent use of on-line searches using free public-domain sources. I’ll start with a short piece about “Repositories”. Go to www.opendoar.org and you will find a list of about one thousand eight hundred institutions, located in many countries, which now maintain on-line repositories. The list includes many universities and research establishments. Go to the home page of one of these repositories and you will be offered a search facility which leads to details of items which have mostly been produced by employees of the institution. These include many reports which have either been published in one of the recognised scholarly journals or have been sent to one with a request for publication. The role of the item in the repository then needs to be clarified. By including it the institution maintaining the website is presumably implying that certain conventions have been observed about the integrity of the information it contains. If the item reports research, these conventions are very precise, for reasons which are quite logical. Different institutions have adopted different policies about repositories though, and this affects the service any particular site provides. Taking an arbitrary sample, I know that



Sheffield University are active in fatigue research so I went to Google and typed in “Sheffield University Repository”. The screen became the home page of the White Rose Repository, with a box for a “Quick Search”. Entering “materials fatigue” gave me 93 hits, covering activities at Sheffield, Leeds and York Universities. This was, though, only a list of references. My objective in this case was to find out what followed, so I clicked on each reference in turn, expecting to be given one of the following:-

institution repositories. The authors will normally have been required to assign some form of copyright authority to the publishers before any link could be claimed. The categories are then based on the use of pre-prints and post-prints. The most significant difference is that post-prints will have been submitted by the publisher to referees, who will only advise publication if they approve of the content. Classes are:•

Green publishers - allow archiving of both pre-prints and post-prints

Blue publishers - allow archiving of post-prints but not pre-prints (the EIS is a blue publisher)

Yellow publishers - allow archiving of pre-prints but not post-prints

White publishers – allow no archiving

(a) An abstract indicating the content. (b) An abstract followed by referral to a site which offered to registered users an immediate electronic download of the full text, and to nonregistered users the same service for a fee. (c) An abstract followed by an offer to all users of an immediate download of the full text, without charge. All 93 of the references gave an abstract immediately. All except one gave the full text immediately (option (c)), The single exception used option (b), the fee being $42. Some of the documents were published by units within the universities, who presumably owned the copyright and could choose how to control the distribution. Many, though, were linked to papers in journals managed by commercial publishers. The text downloaded was then usually described as ‘Author provided’. This is where differences between the sites become significant. A lot of work has been put into developing agreed practices in this field since electronic transmission became dominant. If you want to read about this go to Google and type “Sherpa Romeo.” This leads to a database which classifies publishers according to the conditions they lay down for authors when they use facilities like

One consequence is that an item listed as ‘Author provided’ which also gives a journal reference may not be exactly the version which was approved by referees for inclusion in the journal. The general content, though, will normally be the same. The ‘Author provided’ version may be adequate for your objectives, and may be a convenient option. If you were not aware of the existence of the site www.opendoar.org and you do sometimes need specialist information, I recommend you to find time to look at it. Using it to superficially sample other sites, though, I generally found a lower proportion of author provided texts than I did in the example above. Frank Sherratt Engineering Consultant


 Are electric cars the cars of the future? Low carbon transport is probably the most exciting challenge that the current and next generation of engineers and scientists have ever faced. The rewards for success will be enormous. Reductions in transport CO 2 emissions however, represent tough technical challenges, but they are not impossible. In our Low Carbon Vehicle Report we urge Government to lead the nation by example as it is itself a major purchaser of vehicles. We would like to see the new Government adopt a policy of purchasing low carbon vehicles where there are clear emission gains to be had and this purchasing power could well help stimulate demand for these technologies and encourage further research and development. What is the bigger picture? The existing UK Government target is for new fleet emissions to be down to 100g/km average by 2020, but that is not enough. We have to strive for larger reductions, particularly as we do not know how much natural CO2 absorption will increase as levels in the atmosphere rise. If we take into account population growth, and 50% more people worldwide seeking affordable and comfortable personal transport, we need to get to an overall level of even less than 30g/km; in itself an 80% reduction in car CO 2 emissions from 1990. It will be possible only if the chosen powertrain technology makes appropriate use of biofuels and our national energy supply comes from more renewable sources or nuclear.Taking a step back in time to 1904 when there were more battery vehicles in Detroit than internal

combustion engines. It was the development of effective clutches, transmissions and starters that led to the change we see today. It continues to be the case however that multiple technologies will compete across a market that has different demands for different applications. In 2008 Teslar launched an electric sports car that uses 6,800 Li-ion laptop batteries. It is an expensive vehicle at £89,000 (over three times the price of an equivalent petrol sports car) and is over 500kg heavier. The Teslar has a range of 220 miles per charge and a battery life of five years/100,000 miles, but at such a price it is unlikely to become a serious high-volume vehicle. The facts are that whilst the recession has caused a drop in overall car sales of 30%, there has been a drop of 50% in sales of electric cars in the UK, mainly due to the cost difference. The main weaknesses of battery technology are their limited energy storage capacity and their long recharging times. They can also be heavy. There are however already tried and tested examples of plug in charging infrastructures based on the national grid, but these systems still require significant investment. They are designed to operate at relatively low power levels and hence enshrine the need for long charging times. An alternative is to have a network of battery changing stations. Standardising batteries and connections would not be difficult and re-charging could be co-ordinated with the energy companies. There is also the potential for the charging stations, with their banks of charged batteries, to act as suppliers back to the Grid when demand is high or renewable generation is in short supply.

grids and hence becomes zero carbon as the grids themselves become zero carbon. The potential reward for being first to market with breakthrough battery technology is clear. The USA for example has recently announced a new molecular technology that claims a full recharge in five minutes – on a par with the time taken to re-fuel a car. Competing Technologies There is not a single dominant technology or solution to the problem of reducing carbon emissions from transport. There are a range of technologies that can meet the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 30g/km ‘well to wheel’ emission target. The most promising existing technologies are vehicle lightweighting, advances in petrol and diesel engines, hybrid drive systems, fuel cells and hydrogen. Each will have its place. The Institution believes affordable technology will be the key driver. If the industry is to get to below even 70g/ km, we need all the technologies available and utilised in the next generation of vehicles. In the short term we are likely to be driving stop/ start hybrid vehicles with the increased use of biofuels to minimise the CO2 emissions. Part of the challenge will be demonstrating to consumers the advantage of low CO2 vehicles, so that CO2 becomes a major part of the purchasing decision, just as NCAP did for safety ten years ago. Stephen Tetlow Chief Executive, The Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Overall, battery technology is still in its infancy and most countries are engaged in research. This research is driven by the great attraction of electric traction in that it uses existing




    

activities of the EIS within Europe, with

have to contend with in the new

plans for presentations by members

environment, to scaling up existing

of the DVM at EIS events, and vice-versa.

technology for the larger devices off

The September 2010 Journal has

shore. David Brown Gear Systems are

already included a paper from

making a return to the wind turbine

members of the DVM.

industry now that larger devices are needed, having been one of the early

A great deal of work

The STMG group provides a friendly

pioneers. Just to prove that nothing is

by the STMG group members has been

resource. We draw on members and

really new, some comparisons were

put into the annual Instrumentation

contacts in all industries to assist with

drawn to off-shore oil platforms and

Exhibition to be held at Silverstone on

any engineering queries – if you have

lessons learnt in the North Sea over

Tuesday 8 March this year.

The

any, then contact us. We help solve

the last forty or so years; while the latter

exhibition will have the now well-

problems by providing the environment

have a large number of people on board

established 30 minute training

for engineers to talk informally, face-to-

unlike energy convertors, they do have

workshops available during the

face with people of diverse expertise

to survive in the same conditions. Prof

morning together with two technical

and from many industries. Our

Brennan encouraged engineers to look

presentations. In the afternoon a forum

particularly interest is to assist in the

further than the simple design

to discuss the merits of four versus 7

solution of product structural integrity

standards and consider fracture

post simulators will be held, which is

problems, in conjunction with the other

mechanics in conjunction with NDT,

being supported widely by the F1,

EIS groups.

while Prof Garvey threw down the gauntlet to suggest that much much

automotive industries, equipment suppliers and academia. Entrance to

Conway Young

bigger devices should be possible if

the exhibition, workshops, technical

Group Chairman

we think laterally (more of that

presentations and the afternoon forum

elsewhere in this journal) although

remains free to visitors.

sadly there are many patents out there

We are developing the training workshops following the success of the ‘Basis of Instrumentation Data

  

achieve them, which does spoil the fun a bit. I hope we can generate some wider discussion on some of the topics raised. Topics for the future include

Collection’ workshops. The planned workshops and seminars include the

The D&FG

corrosion fatigue in the nuclear industry,

fundamentals of hydraulic test systems

ran another

now that the future trends seem clearer

and the use of transducers to obtain

seminar in

and we will be revisiting some case

product service data and the factors

our

bi-

study orientated seminars before long

that affect the validity of the data

annual series on renewable energy

as it is never too late to learn from

obtained. The work on developing the

generation. In the last two years there

other’s misfortune.

seminars to cover the use of digital

has been an increase in the size of

data available on vehicles of various

wind turbines, in particular as they move

Robert Cawte

types also continues.

off-shore, and a significant increase in

Group Chairman

activity for the wave and tidal flow



waiting for someone to work out how to

The group has established links with

devices. The topics ranged from

the DVM in Germany to broaden the

fundamentals of what loading do we


The Engineering Integrity Society is an independent charitable organisation, supported and sponsored by industry. The Society is committed to promoting events and publications, providing a forum for experienced engineers and new graduates to discuss current issues and new technologies. We aim for both company and personal development and to inspire newly qualified engineers to develop their chosen profession. Events run provide an ideal opportunity for engineers to meet others who operate in similar fields of activity over coffee and lunch. All of our events enable engineers to establish and renew an excellent ‘contact’ base while keeping up to date with new technology and developments in their field of interest. We are involved in a wide range of Industrial sectors including Automotive, Aerospace, Civil, Petrochemical etc and continue to be interested in new members from all sectors. None of the above can be done without your continued support! Act now and become an EIS Member today. Benefits: EIS members receive a subscription to ‘Engineering Integrity’, mailed direct to your office or private address. Discounts to EIS events. CDs with all the information the Society holds on file of presentations and overheads from conferences past to present. Plus access to Task Groups, to take part, or to receive information and recommendations. I would like to join the EIS for an annual fee of £25 I am already a Society member and would like to give the following additional amount to support the Society’s activities (Please specify amount) _____________ If you are a UK tax payer we are able to reclaim approximately 28% of your subscription if you check the box (Remember to notify us if you no longer pay an amount of income tax and/or capital gains tax equal to the tax we reclaim on your donations)

Your Contact Information: Name: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Company: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Address: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Phone: ---------------------------------------------- Fax: -------------------------------------------- Email: -----------------------------------------------------How to join: You can email membership@e-i-s.org.uk or mail the above form with a cheque made payable to ‘Engineering Integrity Society’ to: Engineering Integrity Society, 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ. If your membership has expired or you are unsure if your membership is current, contact:

lmansfield@e-i-s.org.uk

Thank you for becoming a member of the Engineering Integrity Society. Registered in England No. 1959979

Registered Office: 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, CV12 9AJ

VAT No. GB 443 7696 18

Registered Charity No. 327121


   Chairman Peter Blackmore, Jaguar Land Rover ........................................................................................................... 01926 Vice Chairman Trevor Margereson, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................... 07881 Treasurer Khaled Owais, TRaC Environmental & Analysis .......................................................................................... 01926 Company Secretary Trevor Margereson, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................... 07881 EIS Secretariat Lisa Mansfield ............................................................................................................................................... 02476 Communications Sub Committee – ‘Engineering Integrity’ Journal of the EIS Honorary Editor Karen Perkins, Swansea University ............................................................................................................. 01792 Managing Editor Catherine Pinder ........................................................................................................................................... 07979

646757 802410 478614 802410 730126

295666 270998

 Chairman Robert Cawte, HBM United Kingdom .......................................................................................................... 0121 733 1837 Secretary Khaled Owais, TRaC Environmental & Analysis .......................................................................................... 01926 478614 Members John Atkinson, Sheffield Hallam University .................................................................................................. 0114 2252014 Martin Bache, Swansea University ................................................................................................................ 01792 295287 Peter Blackmore, Jaguar Land Rover ........................................................................................................... 01926 646757 Feargal Brennan, Cranfield University .......................................................................................................... 01234 758249 Emanuele Cannizzaro, Atkins Aerospace ..................................................................................................... 01454 284242 John Draper, Safe Technology ..................................................................................................................... 0114 255 5919 Steve Hughes, Bodycote ............................................................................................................................... 01524 841070 Karl Johnson, Zwick Roell Group ................................................................................................................. 0777957 8913 Davood Sarchamy, British Aerospace Airbus ................................................................................................. 0117 936 861 Giora Shatil, Darwind ........................................................................................................................... +31 (0)30 6623987 Frank Sherratt, Engineering Consultant ....................................................................................................... 01788 832059 James Trainor, TRW Conekt Engineering Services ................................................................................... 0121 627 4244 John Yates, University of Sheffield ............................................................................................................... 0114 222 7748

 Acting Chairman John Wilkinson, Millbrook Proving Ground ................................................................................................... 01525 408239 Members Marco Ajovalasit, Brunel University ............................................................................................................... 01895 267 134 Alan Bennetts, Bay Systems ......................................................................................................................... 01458 860393 Dave Boast, Avon Rubber .............................................................................................................................. 01373 863064 Peter Clark, Proscon Environmental ............................................................................................................. 01489 891853 Gary Dunne, Jaguar Land Rover ................................................................................................................... 02476 206573 Raymond Farnell, Perkins Engines Company ............................................................................................. 01733 583441 Maria Franco Jorge, MIRA ............................................................................................................................ 024 7635 5000




Joe Giacomin, Brunel University ................................................................................................................... 01895 265340 Henrietta Howarth, Southampton University ................................................................................... 023 8059 4963/2277 Paul Jennings, Warwick University ..............................................................................................................02476 523646 Rick Johnson, Sound & Vibration Technology ............................................................................................. 01525 408502 Chris Knowles, JCB .................................................................................................................................... 01889 59 3900 Colin Mercer, Prosig ...................................................................................................................................... 01329 239925 Jon Richards, Honda UK ..............................................................................................................................01793 417238 Nick Pattie, Ford ....................................................................................................................................................................

 Chairman Conway Young, Tiab .....................................................................................................................................01295 714046 Members Paul Armstrong, Amber Instruments ............................................................................................................. 01246 260250 Ian Bell, National Instruments ...................................................................................................................... 01635 572409 Steve Coe, Data Physics (UK) .......................................................................................................................01323 846464 Colin Dodds, Dodds & Associates ............................................................................................................... 07880 554590 Dave Ensor, MIRA .......................................................................................................................................... 02476 355295 Graham Hemmings, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................ 0121 520 3838 Neil Hay, Napier University ........................................................................................................................... 0131 455 2200 Richard Hobson, Serco Technical & Assurance Services ............................................................................ 01332 263534 Trevor Margereson, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................... 07881 802410 Ray Pountney, Engineering Consultant ........................................................................................................ 01245 320751 Tim Powell, MTS Systems ............................................................................................................................ 01285 648800 Mike Reeves, Engineering Consultant ......................................................................................................... 01189 691870 Gordon Reid, Engineering Consultant ......................................................................................................... 01634 230400 Nick Richardson, Servotest ...........................................................................................................................01784 274428 Paul Roberts, HBM United Kingdom ............................................................................................................ 0785 2945988 Jarek Rosinski, Transmission Dynamics .................................................................................................... 0191 5800058 Geoff Rowlands, Product Life Associates .................................................................................................... 01543 304233 Frank Sherratt, Engineering Consultant ....................................................................................................... 01788 832059 Bernard Steeples, Engineering Consultant .................................................................................................. 01621 828312 Marcus Teague, LDS Test & Measurement ................................................................................................. 01763 255 255 Norman Thornton, Engineering Consultant ................................................................................................. 07866 815200 Jeremy Yarnall, Consultant Engineer ........................................................................................................... 01332 875450

 The following companies are SPONSORS of the Engineering Integrity Society. We thank them for their continued support which helps the Society to run its wide-ranging events throughout the year. Adept Scientific AWE Aldermaston

MOOG

Bruel & Kjaer

MTS Systems

GOM UK Ltd

Mueller BBM

HBM United Kingdom

National Instruments

Instron

Polytec

Kemo

Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

Kistler Instrumemts

ServoTest

LMS UK

TechniMeasure

Millbrook Proving Ground

TRaC Environmental & Analysis

MIRA

Transmissions Dynamics




Clevis Pin, Miniature Loadcell, Pancake Loadcell, Bolt or Stud Straingauged, Load Washer, Tension Link

Force Measurement IXTHUS have the solution!!! Production and Assembly Machinery... Aerospace...Automotive...Autosport... Military...Mining...Food...Medical...

Tel: 01327 353437 E: sales@ixthus.co.uk Web: www.ixthus.co.uk

• • • • • • • • •

1N to 20,000KN Custom C t D Designs i (U (Undertaken) d t k ) Full Calibration Fatigue Rated Down Hole Straingauged Proof Load Testing Amplier and Interfaces Excellent Environmental Protection Subsea to Space


Compact – Portable – Rugged – Silent With the multi-channel VibPilot, m+p international sets a new standard for affordable performance in dynamic signal analysis. Using the latest DSP and analog technology VibPilot provides market leading dynamic range and outstanding real-time performance via high-speed USB interfacing. With a complete range of integrated applications and analysis solutions using our SO Analyzer software for: �

General data acquisition and Spectrum analysis

Time history recording

Structural dynamics including full Modal analysis

Rotational dynamics

Acoustics and Sound Quality

Environmental noise and vibration testing

Vehicle pass-by-noise

AZ m+p #1 5-09.indd 1

can Multiple units ized on hr nc sy be nels for more chan

m+p international (UK) Ltd Mead House Bentley, Hampshire GU10 5HY, United Kingdom Phone: (+44) (0)1420 521222 Fax: (+44) (0)1420 521223 sales.uk@mpihome.com www.mpihome.com 27.05.2009 8:56:03 Uhr


PULSE ARRAY ACOUSTICS FOR NOISE SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

LOCATE, QUANTIFY AND RANK NOISE SOURCES ACCURATELY AND RAPIDLY

All from one PARTNER Brüel & Kjær has the world’s most comprehensive range of sound and vibration test and measurement systems

Noise source identification (NSI) solutions for every application Whether you deal with hearing aids, trains or wind turbines, the Array Acoustics Suite from Brüel & Kjær can provide you with all the tools necessary for accurate, rapid and reliable noise source identification, outdoors, indoors, and in wind tunnels. The Array Acoustics Suite offers all the main NSI applications such as acoustic holography (STSF, SONAH*), beamforming and spherical beamforming, together with a broad range of options (transient, conformal and sound quality metrics calculations). * patent pending

Innovative array designs coupled with efficient algorithms makes Brüel & Kjær the world’s leading supplier of array acoustics solutions.

United Kingdom: Bruel & Kjaer UK Ltd. · Jarman Way · Royston · Herts · SG8 5BQ Tel: +44 (0) 1763 255 780 · Fax: +44 (0) 1763 255 789 · Web: www.bksv.co.uk · Email: ukinfo@bksv.com HEADQUARTERS: Brüel & Kjær Sound & Vibration Measurement A/S · DK-2850 Nærum · Denmark Telephone: +45 77 41 20 00 · Fax: +45 45 80 14 05 · www.bksv.com · info@bksv.com Local representatives and service organisations worldwide

www.bksv.com/nsiArray

BN  0934 – 11

A trusted partner

Engineering Integrity Issue 30  

Engineering Integrity Society Journal Issue 30

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you