Using The Pseudo Velocity Shock Spectrum For Shock Damage Potential Part 2
Dr. Howard Gaberson, MFPT Society/SAVIAC


Abstract:
To defend PVSS on 4CP I show computations to illustrate pseudo velocity compared to relative velocity shock spectra indicating pitfalls for relative velocity.  The difficult relative velocity low frequency problem and lack of asymptotes.  Next I go into details of experimental failure tests to determine which transient motion analysis method is the best indicator of damage potential.  Evaluation of shocks of failing blowers exposed to six different violent loadings.  Failure data time histories are analyzed into peak g levels, time histories, Fourier transform magnitudes on 4CP, PVSS on 4CP, and acceleration shock spectra.  The best damage potential analysis is the damped PVSS on 4CP, but damping is essential.  Next we consider shaker generated shocks and  analyze examples of synthesized shocks to meet an acceleration SRS, and pre and post pulse simple shocks that can be shaker generated.  They lack low frequency content.  The rebound on a drop table simple shock reduces low frequency content.  Next we analyze shock isolation and consider the equipment lowest mode natural frequency and the equipment fragility.  Most shock isolation literature is wrong because it is based on peak acceleration.  Theoretical and experimental shock isolation.  Explosive PVSS, Pyro shock PVSS.  We show how to apply PVSS on lumped MDOF systems and continuous systems (beams, roods , plates).  We consider use of damping.  Heavy damping is needed to show polarity or positive and negative spectra.  Damping precludes swept sines spectrum generation; it makes a kind of broccoli spectrum.  Deceptive SS calculation at sparse selected frequencies.  Finally some calculation issues: mean removal and detrending.  Illustrate with the El Centro earthquake; Calc SS of a trend; Add a trend to adjust net displacement

 

To return to the Program, use the back button above